The Third GMSARN

International Conference 2008

12-14 November 2008, Kunming, China

Optimal Capacitor Placement in

Unbalanced Loading Distribution System
with Nonlinear Loads by
Adaptive Particle Swarm Technique

Suwit Auchariyament,
Somporn Sirisumrannukul
Department of Electrical Engineering,
Faculty of Engineering,
King Mongkut’s University of Technology North Bangkok
1
➢ Outline
1) Introduction
2) Problem Formulation
3) Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO)
4) Application of PSO to
Capacitor Placement Problem
5) Proposed Adaptive PSO
6) Case Study
7) Test Results
8) Conclusion

2
➢ Introduction
• Advantages from capacitor placement in
distribution system, for example, are
- power factor correction
- bus voltage regulation
- power and energy loss reduction
- feeder and system capacity release
- power quality improvement
• All these advantages are achieved when the
capacitors are installed at their optimal
locations, sizes, and, types

3
➢ Introduction
• In this work, the capacitor placement problem
in distribution systems will take into account
- the presence of nonlinear loads
- unbalanced loading in each phase
to investigate the effects of these two factors
on the optimal solutions
• The inclusion of system unbalances increase
the dimension of capacitor placement problem
because all three phases have to be considered

4
 ➢ Problem Formulation
• Objective function:
Minimize the total annual cost due to
nl
min F = ( k e,i Ti Pi ) energy loss cost
i =1
peak power
+ k p Plp loss cost
+(  cf
k cf Q j ) capacitor cost
(fixed type)
jSCf
capacitor cost
+(  k cs Q cs
j ) (switched type)
jSCs

5
 ➢ Problem Formulation
• Constraints: the objective function is subjected to
(1) Three-phase power flow equations

(2) Maximum capacitor kVAr

0  Q cj ,i  Q max
c

to be placed at each bus


2 2
(3) Bus voltage V min  V jp,i,1 +
nh
V p,h
 V max
h 1 j ,i
of each phase
(4) Voltage distortion of

nh 2
each phase V p,h
h 1 j ,i
THD jp,i (%) = 100   THD max
V jp,i,1
6
➢ Basic PSO Algorithm
• PSO’s concept:
- PSO consists of a group of particle in swarm
- Particles are referred as the candidate solutions
- Each particle is represented by its position
and velocity
- Particles change their positions to find
the better solution by updating their velocities
- Knowledge for updating the velocity is based on
 inertia component from last velocity
 previous best position of each particle
 position of the best particle in swarm
7
 ➢ Application of PSO
• Each particle represents:
- capacitor kVAr to be placed at each bus for all load levels
- dimension of each particle: m  nl
Bus Bus Bus Bus Bus Bus Bus Bus Bus
1 2 m 1 2 m 1 2 m
x11 x21 … xm1 x12 x22 … xm2 … x1nl x2nl …x mnl

load level 1 load level 2 load level nl

1 particle : dimension = m  nl

m = number of buses in the system

nl = number of load levels
xyz = capacitor kVAr at bus y for load level z

8
➢ Proposed Adaptive
PSO
• Capacitor placement problem has multimodal of
local optimal solutions scattering throughout the
search space
• If solution is detected no improvement during
computation process, it may result from:
- the solution is convergence to optimal
solution, or
- the solution is being trapped at any local
optimums
• If the solution is being trapped at any local
optimums, a PSO requires some variation to seek
for better solutions
9
➢ Proposed Adaptive
•PSO
The proposed method is to activate the particles at
proper points
• Activate means to randomly generate the position
of particles with a uniform probability distribution
• Two methods are suggested to identify the
appropriate number for activation
• Method 1: activate the solution with a fixed
number of iterations
• Method 2: activate the solution when observed no
improvement over a prespecified number of
iterations
10
➢ Proposed Adaptive
PSOInput
system data
Input
operational constraints
Input
PSO parameters

For each particle;

perform power flow and Randomly generate
harmonic power flow initial population of particles
to obtain comprising positions and velocities
Vj,i , Pi, THDj,i

Evaluate fitness value Update

for each particle each particle
by PSO algorithm
Point of activation? No
Yes Reach Yes Print
Activate all particles maximum optimal
iteration? solution
No 11
 ➢ Case Study
• Test system:
28
27 0.31
26 2.5
25 0.25
110 kVA
5
24 0.2
775 kVA
930 kVA

8
23

0.
1,550 kVA

88
22

1.
18
0.57
17 167.5 kVA
Kalasin Feeder 5
05

0.2
0.37
1.

19

80 250 16
110 kVA
A distribution system of PEA
15

(Provincial Electricity Authority)

0.

20 kVA kVA
50
6

kVA
3.3

,Thailand
22
2.

25 15
21 kVA
0
1.4

25 kVA x = Bus number

12
14 y = Feeder length (km)
4
0.4

9
13 50 kVA 5 11

1.5
8 9
3. 4 6 7
27 0.26 10
0.12 1.1
2.07 0.91 2.6
7
0.8
150
3 0.37 160
111.803 50 kVA
50 kVA 25
3. kVA kVA 35
9 2 kVA kVA kVA

2 1.48 Substation Kalasin

1
Feeder 5
12
 ➢ Case Study
• Conditions
 Base voltage 22 kV
 Base power 100 MVA
 Power factor of all load points 0.85
 Harmonic orders of interest 5, 7, 11, 13, 17, 19, 23, and 25
 Standard bank size of capacitor three-phase 300 kVAr

• Load duration data:

Load level Per unit load Duration (hr)
off-peak period 1.0 4,015
peak period 1.2 4,745

13
 ➢ Case Study
• Operational constraints and cost data:
 V min 0.95 p.u.  k e,off peak- 1.1154 Baht/kWh
 V max 1.05 p.u.  k e,peak 2.9278 Baht/kWh
 THD max 5%  k cf 32,000 Baht/300 kVar
 Q C max 1,500 kVAr  k cs 43,200 Baht/300 kVar
Note: cost of peak power loss (kp) is not considered
since PEA is not obliged to pay the cost of peak demand

• PSO parameters:
 Number of particles in swarm 100
 Maximum number of iteration 300
 Activation point iteration 150
w linearly decrease from 0.9 to 0.4
 c1 , c 2 2.0
14
 ➢ Test Results
• Case study • Fifteen cases with different values
Case %UB %NL of unbalanced loading and percent
1 0 0
nonlinearity of load are studied
2 0 15
3 0 30
4 5 0 • %UB = %Unbalanced loading
5 5 15 i.e. 5%UB means load in phase A
6 5 30 is 5% higher than that of
7 10 0 phase B but lower than that in
8 10 15
phase C by the same amount
9 10 30
10 15 0
11 15 15 • %NL = %Nonlinearity of load
12 15 30
13 20 0
i.e. 15%NL means 15% of load are
14 20 15 assumed to be nonlinear
15 20 30 15
➢ Test Results
• Test results before capacitor placement
1.00

0.95
Voltage (p.u.)

0.8767
0.8732

0.8739

0.8691
0.8661
0.8654
0.90

0.8613
0.8581
0.8547

0.8532
0.8500
0.8491

0.8450
0.8415
0.8407
0.85

0.80
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Case No.

• Bus voltages found in any phase of all buses at any load

levels are lower than the minimum limit (0.95 p.u.)
16
➢ Test Results
• Test results before capacitor placement
15

10.10
9.83
9.55
9.26
8.96
10
THD (%)

4.50
4.39
4.28
4.17
4.05

5
0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00
0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Case No.

• Voltage distortions are presented in the system in the

cases with nonlinear loads
• THDs are violated the maximum permissible limit (5%)
only in the cases with 30% nonlinearity of load 17
 ➢ Test Results
• Test results before capacitor placement
1,450
NL 0% NL 15% NL 30%
1,400
Total Loss (kW)

1,350

1,300

1,250
0% 5% 10% 15% 20%
Unbalance d loading

• The more total losses are introduced due to an increase in

unbalanced loading
• A change of load nonlinearity in the same value of unbalanced
loading results in slight difference in the total loss 18
➢ Test Results
• Test results after capacitor placement
Min. voltage Max. voltage Max. THD Max. cap at
Case
(p.u.) (p.u.) (%) any bus (kVAr)
1 0.9546 1.0000 0.00 1,200
2 0.9541 1.0012 3.43 1,500
3 0.9750 1.0060 4.81 1,500
4 0.9504 1.0000 0.00 1,500
5 0.9546 1.0009 4.11 1,200
6 0.9695 1.0125 4.99 1,500
7 0.9505 1.0009 0.00 1,500
8 0.9519 1.0055 3.96 1,200
9 0.9648 1.0178 4.99 1,500
10 0.9503 1.0061 0.00 1,500
11 0.9521 1.0123 3.18 1,500
12 0.9633 1.0238 4.88 1,500
13 0.9501 1.0099 0.00 1,500
14 0.9502 1.0121 3.24 1,500
15 0.9676 1.0231 4.75 1,500
• The obtained optimal solutions of 15 cases derived from
adaptive PSO satisfy all the constraints 19
➢ Test Results
• Test results after capacitor placement
20,000
NL 0% NL 15% NL 30%
Total capacitor (kVAr)

17,500

15,000

12,500

10,000
0% 5% 10% 15% 20%
Unbalance d loading

• The increasing of unbalanced loading and nonlinearity of

loads gives the more total capacitor kVAr required for
reactive power compensation
20
➢ Test Results
• Test results after capacitor placement
50
NL 0% NL 15% NL 30%
Reduction in total loss (%)

40

30

20

10
0% 5% 10% 15% 20%
Unbalance d loading

• The percentage of reduction in total loss is slightly

different regard to the variation of unbalanced loading and
nonlinearity of load
21
➢ Test Results
• Test results after capacitor placement
50
NL 0% NL 15% NL 30%
Reduction in total cost (%)

40

30

20

10
0% 5% 10% 15% 20%
Unbalance d loading

• The percentage of reduction in total cost is decreased with

increased unbalanced loading and nonlinearity of load
22
➢ Conclusion
• The optimal solutions obtained from adaptive
PSO give a saving in total cost while satisfying
all the specified constraints
• Total loss in the network and capacitor kVAr
required for reactive power compensation are
increased when unbalanced loading and load
nonlinearity are increased
• whereas the saving in total cost is decreased
owing to the more investment cost for
capacitors

23
Thank you for your attention 24