774

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER SYSTEMS, VOL. 5 , NO. 3, AUGUST 1990

OPTIMCIL

LOSS

REDUCTION
V.

OF

DISTRIBUTION

Glamocanin, Member

NETWORKS

IEEE

U n i v e r s i t y of S k o p j e , E l e k t r o t e h n i c k i

fakultet

91000 Skopje, Yugoslavia

- A new algorithm for network reconfiguration of power distribution systems is

presented.
An optimal loss reduction is
accomplished to maintain acceptable voltage
at customer loads as well a s to assure sufficient conductor and substation current capacity to handle load requirements.
The success of the algorithm depends directly upon
the
straightforward and
highly-efficient
solution of quadratic cost
transshipment
problem.
The new'algorithm, described in
this paper, completely eliminates the need
for matrix operations and executes all operations directly on graph of the distribution
system.
Abstract

weakly meshed network to open the switch with

lowest current for the optimal flow pattern.
Planning of the feeders for a new substation
and the relocation of s o m e loads /?/ is based
also on some heuristic rules for minimum-loss
design

The generalized approach to determine

the optimal network reconf iguration i 5 based
on branch exchange procedure o r by moving
sectionalizing positions.
To evaluate each
loss-reduction move radial power flow method
has to be carried out for feeder pair.
The
existing algorithms, however,do not guarantee
global optimum of power losses.
Namely,
open switch position can not occasionally be
moved due to:

Keywords:
distribution automation ,distribution system planning,power loss reduction,
power flow method,transshipment problem.

INTRODUCTION
The optimal network reconfiguration in
distribution systems on the basis of minimal
power losses, can be done fulfilling several
operating constraints: line (transformer) capacity limit, voltage-drop limit, radiality
condition etc.
There are a number of methods
for
solving power loss minimization problem.
An
heuristic algorithm based on the branch exchange procedure is presented in / l / .
An
approximate solution algorithm based on quadratic programming method / 2 / moves an open
sectionalizing point to th9 other end of the
feeder section in order to minimize power
losses.
Losses of each feeder pair /3/ are
reduced by moving the open switch position.
A criterion for reducing the number of load
flow based candidate options is developed in
/4/.
Two loss-minimization algorithms are
developed in / 5 / using an approximate power
flow to check the operating constraints.
An
efficient heuristic method / 6 / starts repeatedly with
AC power flow solution for the

increase of power losses

voltage-drop constraints

current capacity constraints

no switch-moving options.

In this paper, the problem of optimal

network reconfiguration in power distribution
systems is formulated as transshipment problem with quadratic costs.
Based on a direct
solution of the transshipment problem, the
proposed algorithm efficiently deals with any
of the constraints that the distribution
system is subjected to.
The described algorithm has the following features :
1.

Optimal solution is obtained by

direct procedure of "creating" the
optimal solution.
The known algorithms for linear
transshipment
problem
/8/ and for
quadratic
simplex problem /9/ use the procedure of "improving" the current
basic solution.
They change the
network configuration during the
procedure searching for the optimal
soluti on.

2. Procedure of "creating" the optimal

solution easily deals with any of
the requirements that the distribution system is subjected to.
3. Radial

90 WM 017-4 FWRS A paper recommended and approved

by the IEEE Power System Engineering Committee of
the IEEE Power Engineering Society for presentation
a t t h e IEEE/PES 1990 Winter Meeting, Atlanta, Georgia,
February 4 8 , 1990. Manuscript submitted
August 23, 1989; made available for printing
November 17, 1989.

0885-8950/90/0800-0774$01.00

solution is reached by a
unique technique of the proposed
algorithm.
The known algorithms
for any simplex problem do not
always generate radial network and
an attempt must be made to open the
loops up.

4. Good starting configuration of

distribution
system
is
i mper at i ve.

0 1990 IEEE

the
not

775
Jmax G-M)
- current capacity of the
s e c t i o n G-M
RG-M J,,(G-M?
transportation
cost
f o r u n i t c u r r e n t o f s e c t i o n G-M
CM(N - t o t a l
transportation
cost
of
s e c t i o n s , s t a r t i n g f r o m source
node G
p a s s i n g t h r o u g h sink::
node N , t o 5inl:: node M ( d u r i n g
NaG)
t h e f i r s t step
CM - minimal
total
transportation
c o s t o f s e c t i o n s , s t a r t i n g from
source node G t o s i n k node M.

LINEARIZATION OF THE POWER LOSSES

The power l o s s e s o f
substation transf o r m e r s and feeder s e c t i o n s a r e second
order
f u n c t i o n o f loading.
However, i t i s necess a r y t o approximate t h e n o n l i n e a r l o s s e s by a
linearized transportation cost t o
illuminate
t h e proposed programming technique.

J2w

Power
l o s s e s as a f u n c t i o n o f t h e c u r rent
J
and conductor ( t r a n s f o r m e r ) s i z e s ,
a r e shown on Fig.1:

I 1 step
According t o
(3)
between a l l
s i n k nodgs n o t b e l o n g i n g t o s u b t r e e ES, s i n k
node
M
i s s e l e c t e d as t h e n e x t
node t o
e n t e r s u b t r e e ES.

CM*

Jmaxl

= min C M ( N )

Jmax2

ES

N E

,M e

ES 3

(3)

F i g . 1 Power l o s s e s
The p a r a b o l i c c u r v e can be approximated
by a s t c a i g h t l i n e , which passes t h r o u g h t h e
origin.
The power l o s s e s
R JL
can be
t r e a t e d a p p r o x i m a t e l y as a c o s t o f " t r a n s p o r J " : (R Jma,) J
t a t i o n o f cuprent

Where

R Jmax- c o s t

of transportation of u n i t
current
-conductor r e s i s t a n c e
- c u r r e n t c a p a c i t y o f conductor.

R
Jmas

I11 step - Network s u b t r e e

E;S has t o
be
usdated by feeder s e c t i o n
N-M
(sink
node
M e n t e r s t h e s u b t r e e ES ) :

If
t h e number o f t h e s i n k nodes i n t h e
network s u b t r e e i s equal t o t h e t o t a l
number
of
load points
go t o t h e
fifth
step.
Otherwise, go t o t h e f o u r t h step.

IV

The problem o f f i n d i n g o p t i m a l
network
retonfiguration for
loss r e d u c t i o n can be
f o r m u l a t e d as a q u a d r a t i c c o s t
transshipment
problem f o r a network w i t h d i s t r i b u t i o n subs t a t i o n as a source node and t h e l o a d p o i n t s
as s i n k nodes.
The s o l u t i o n o f above problem, (see APPENDIX A ) , can be c r e a t e d i f
the
following optimality conditions are s a t i s f i e d

unit
sink

any s i n k node can b e c o n n e c t e d

to
existent
network s u b t r e e o n l y by t h e branch
f a r which t h e change i n t o t a l
power
lasses
(due t o t h e load o f connected sink node)
is
minimal

The f o l l o w i n g a l g o r i t h m ,
for
network
w i t h one source node, i s developed t o meet
t h e above c o n d i t i o n s :

I step - L e t e x i s t e n t s u b t r e e
ES o f t h e
d i s t r i b u t i o n network c o n s i s t o f a source node
The
(indexed w i t h G ) as a s t a r t i n g node.
t r a n s p o r t a t i o n c o s t o f u n i t c u r r e n t of feeder
s e c t i o n s which connect t h e source node w i t h
n e i g h b o r i n g s i n k nodes (indexed as M )
is :
CM

=cM(G)=RG-M Jmax

CM =

'

W if R G - M ~ ~

(1)

WI i f R G - M = ~

(2)

Where :

RG-M

resistance

(RG-M

not e x i s t )

step - The new change i n power l o s s e s f o r

nodes W; ( K ?k ES ) can be e s t i m a t e d
APPENDIX A):

sink:
(see

BASIC MODEL

- t o t a l t r a n s p o r t a t i o n c o s t i>f
current
f r o m t h e s o u r c e node
t o any
n o d e , m u s t be m i n i m a l

(4)

ES = ES U < N - M * ~

of
section
G-M
if s e c t i o n G-M does

APLp; (M*) =C<Ri C (ZFi PK+PK')

i

aPLK =

+ (2Qi Q K + I & ~ )

3 / V i 23 +

APL~.;(M*) < A P L K ( ~ )

APLK(M+)

i f

APLK(~)

if APLK(M*)

(6)

2.

APLK(,)

Where:
APLK(M*) - e s t i m a t e o f change i n power
l o s s e s due t o c o n n e c t i o n o f
s i n k node K t o s u b t r e e ES by
branch M*-K
AFLK(,)
o r i g i n a l e s t i m a t e o f change
i n power l o s s e s due t o connect i o n o f s i n k nods K
t o subtree:
ES / (N-M 3
AFLK
new e s t i m a t e o f change
in
power l o s s e s due t o c o n n e c t i o n
o f s i n k node K t o s u b t r e e ES
M*-K - f e e d e r s e c t i o n which
connects
s i n k node K t o s u b t r e e ES
i
- denotes f e e d e r s e c t i o n s which
connect s i n k node K
t o source
node G
R i
- r e s i s t a n c e of f e e d e r s e c t i o n i
Vi
- v o l t a g e a t t h e r e c e i v i n g end o f
feeder s e c t i o n i
P i , Q i - power f l o w i n f e e d e r s e c t i o n
i
o b t a i n e d by r a d i a l power
flow
method
(see APPENDIX B) f o r
s u b t r e e ES
PK,Qtc- power o f s i n k node K

Now,
nodes W;

t h e new minimal t o t a l c o s t f o r s i n k
( K E ES ) can be estimated:

776

If

APLK(M*)

CK = Ck;:(M*) = CM*

<

APLK:(,)

-t

RM*-K Jmax (M*-K)

,see ( 6 ) ,than:
(7)

Go to the second step.

V

step

To use
involve :

End of the algorithm.

MODIFICATIDN OF BASIC ALGORITHM

The basic algorithm does not take into

consideration the distribution system with
several substations and the optimal solution
is not subject to the line and transformer
current capacities, as well as to the voltage
drops limits. T o fulfill the mentioned constraints
several modifications must
be
implemented in the basic algorithm.
The line and transformer capacity limit
If the line and transformer current
capacities have to be satisfied, and the
solution to remain as a radial network:, the
fol.lowing check must be performed:
The connection of sink node K to node
M*
is followed by increase of the power flow
'through feeder sections, starting from source
The increment is equal
node td node t::
approximately to the load at node C:
If
this increase of power flow in feeder sections, as well as in substation transformer,
is less than current capacity limit, then the
new minimal total cost o f feeder sections to
node
K
can be calculated , using
(7).
Otherwise, the feeder section M*-t;:
should
not be considered.

The voltdqe-drop criterion

To fulfill the voltage-drop constraint
further modification should be made during
the fourth step of the algorithm.
The connection of sink: node K to node M* must be
checked for the changed voltage conditions:
- I s the voltage-drop at the
load at node t:: allowed ?

An artificial node,
representing
transmission network, is used as a
source node.
Distribution substation is treated
as a branch of the network with
capacity of its transformer.
the artificial

node

means

to

the power losses of radial subtransmission 1 ines

the power losses of distribution
substation transformer.

The optimization is
above mentioned capacity
constraints.

subject also to
and voltage-drop

EXAMPLE SYSTEM
To i 1 lustrate the performance of the
algorithm developed in the previous sections,
the 1 0 k V three phase hypothetical distribution network is considered as first example.
The power losses minimization is performed
on
a 10 node network; with 13 feeder sections.
The series impedance of the feeder
sections is (0.391 + jO.106) in ohms/km per
phase at 50 cycles, and the current capacity
is J m a x = 1 9 4 FI
The voltage-drop limit on
the study is 5.0 percent
The used data
are given in following table:

T,able I.
Section
1
1
1
3
2
3
4
8
2
2
3
6
4

Data of example system

Length
(km)

0.60

2.0
2 0
4.0
3.0
3.0
5.5
3.0
3. 0
3. 0

- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
-10
- 5
- 9
- 9
-10

Load at receiving node

(MW)
(MVAR)
0.50
0.10
0.60
1.30
1.30
0.10
0.80
0.30

0.40
0.30
0.09
0.40
1.10
1.00

0.99
0.60
0.10

t:)

2. (3
2.0
3.0

customer

Is the voltage-drop at
customer
loads (fed by feeder sections from
K
)
source node to sink node
allowed'? The mentioned feeder sections are the ones with changed
power flows, as a result of connection of node K to subtree ES.

The optimal solution is shown on

Fig.2
and optimal succeeding set ES is presented
in Table I 1

If the checked voltage-drop at the customer l o a d s does not cause voltage constraint
violation, the new minimal total cost to node
I.;:
cbuld be computgd using (7).
Otherwise,
should not be considfeeder section M -C:
ered.
More than one substation
If the distribution system consists of
more than one substation, then some definitions must be implemented:

Fig. 2 Optimal solution

777
Table 11.

5. C a p a b i l i t y

t o determine
network
c o n f i g u r a t i o n which s p e c i f i e s
the
power-loss minimum f o r d i s t r i b u t i o n
systems where branch-exchange
procedure i s non-productive.

Optimal succeeding s e t ES
~~

node M*
branch N-M
APLM* ( KW)
CM*

3
1- 3
2.7
132.9

9
3- 9
25.4
265.9

5
2- 5
16.5
265.9

node M*
6
branch N-M
2- 6
APLM* ( KW)
97.6
CM*
(RA)332.4

7
3- 7
101.5
365.6

10
4-10
4.0
465.3

8
4- 8
2.3
465.3

2
1- '2
4.1
(RA) 132.9

1- 4
0.3
265.9

I f t h e scope o f t h e network r e c o n f i g u r a t i o n i s l i m i t e d t o t h e power-losses

reduct i o n t h e numerical r e s u l t s i n d i c a t e t h a t
the
practia l g o r i t h m i s v a l i d and e f f e c t i v e f o r
c a l use.

The approximate e s t i m a t i o n o f power-loss

increase
APLM*
(due t o c o n n e c t i o n o f
new
l o a d ) produces l e s s t h a n 7% e r r o r .

APPENDIX A
UNCAPACITATED TRANSSHIPMENT PROBLEM

I t i s i n t e r e s t i n g t o be noted t h a t
the
branch exchange procedure can n o t be a p p l i e d
t o t h e base c o n f i g u r a t i o n o f example system,
d e s c r i b e d by f i r s t
9 feeder s e c t i o n s o f
Table
I
The f a i l u r e
of
the
branch
exchange procedure f o r t h e base c o n f i g u r a t i o n
i s caused by:

any s i n g l e branch exchange can

be performed due t o i n c r e a s e o f
power l o s s e s

not
the

The mathematical
s t a t e d as f o l l o w s :

An a l g o r i t h m f o r o p t i m a l network
reconf i g u r a t i o n o f d i s t r i b u t i o n systems
i s presented.
The s i m p l i c i t y
of
t h e proposed
use on
methodology makes i t s u i t a b l e f o r
p e r s o n a l computer p r o v i d i n g t h e o p e r a t i o n and
p l a n n i n g e n g i n e e r s w i t h u s e f u l and e f f i c i e n t
tool.
The main a l g o r i t h m advantages are:

1 . Conceptually, i t i s s t r a i g h t f o r w a r d
procedure o f " c r e a t i n g " t h e o p t i m a l
s o l u t i on.
network i s h e l d d u r i n g
ent ir e procedure.

the

3. The a l g o r i t h m e a s i l y d e a l s w i t h t h e
c a p a c i t y and voltage-drop
4.

criteria.

No s t a r t i n g s o l u t i o n i s needed.

(al)

(a2)

20

(a3)
Where
z - objective function,
m
t o t a l number o f s i n k nodes,
n - t o t a l number o f branches fn>m),
c
matrix ( l x n )
of
transportation
c o s t ( f o r u n i t f l o w ) o f branches,
x - m a t r i x ( n x l ) o f branch f l o w s ,
b - matrix ( m x l )
of
node
variable
(+bM f o r source node M,
-bM
f o r s i n k node M ) ,
t m a t r i x ( mxn ) :
-1 branch
j i s oriented
I,
towards node
1 branch
j
i s oriented
f r o m node
I,
0 branch
j and node I a r e
not incident.

CONCLUSIONS

be

subject to:

To check t h e performance o f t h e p r e s e n t ed a l g o r i t h m i n t h i s paper t h e p a r t o f

downtown a r e a of t h e c i t y o f Skopje was t h e n e x t
example system
The 10 kV d i s t r i b u t i o n
system c o n s i s t s o f 239 nodes, 285 l i n e sections,
3 d i s t r i b u t i o n substations
(two o f
them a r e 110/10 k V and one i s 35/10 KV
subs t a t i o n ) and 5 conductor s i z e s .

2. R a d i a l

z = c x

branch exchange o f t h e s e c t i o n s : 3-5

with
2-5; 8-9 w i t h 3-9
and
8-9
with
6-9
violates
l i n e capacity
limit.

The o b t a i n e d o p t i m a l s o l u t i o n has
7%
power
loss reduction with
decent
voltage
profile
improvement i n comparison
with
the
base o p e r a t i n g c o n f i g u r a t i o n .

can

minim iz e the o b j e c t i v e function:

A x = b

branch exchange o f t h e sections:2-10

8-9 w i t h 3-9; 2-6 w i t h
w i t h 4-10;
9-6
and
8-9 w i t h 6-9 v i o l a t e s
v o l t a g e drop l i m i t

formulation

The o p t i m a l s o l u t i o n o f t h e above l i n e a r
problem would be a r a d i a l s o l u t i o n ,
i f
the
constraints
(a2)
a r e associated
with
the
s i n k nodes.

For a g i v e n b a s i c f e a s i b l e s o l u t i o n l e &
x
be p a r t i t i o n e d t o b a s i c
variables
x
( m x l ) and nonbasic v a r i a b l e s x" ( (n-m)xl
)
: x"=0
Let matrix
B ( mxm ) ,
det(B)fO
and
N ( mu(n-m) )
be o b t a i n e d by a r r a n g i n g
columns o f
A t o match t h e elements o f
ieeand xn :

A =

B N

(a4)

c i n terms o f
By r e a r r a n g i n g m a t r i x
b a s i c and nonbasic v a r i a b l e s , t h e above problem can be p u t i n t o t h e f o l l o w i n g form:
m i n i m i ze

tpe objective function:

z = cb xb +

C"

xn

subject to:
B x b + N x " = b
x b r O

(ab)
(a-?)

x n = O

(a8)

The basic variables

from (ab) :

xb

can

be

found

B-l b - B-l N xn

xb =

of 1 inear problem.
This assumption suggests
that the fol 1 owing requirement must be met:

From (a3) follows that:

(a9)

The new definition of the linear probb

lem can be achieved by substitution for
x
from (a9) into (as) ,(ab) and (a7) :

Finally, if the basic feasible

solution

is the optimal one, then:

mini mi z e the objecti ve function:

c'

subject to:

(XM-N

Let the matrix

(3

(a19)

Consider oriented nonbasic branches

E x") and N-M
(XN-M E x " ) :

c' be created as:

(a13)

Fig.A Nonbasic branches

Where
c'

Y' I

matrix
(
l:.:(n-m)
)
of
loop
costs. The loop is obtained by
entering of nonbasic
variable
(branch)
into basic
feasible
solution.
A
loop is
always
formed by entering of nonbasi c
branch into radial basic feasible
solution.
The loop cost consists of the transportation costs
(for unit flow) of branches which
belong to the loop.
The orientation of the loop is achieved by
the orientation of the entering
nonbasic branch.
incident matrix ( m:.:(n-m) 1
of
basic branches and loops:
-1 the
flow
of
basic
branch
j is oriented
opposite to loop i ,
Yj,i= 1 the
flow
of
basic
branch j is oriented as
loop
i is,
(3 basic branch j and
loop
i are not incident,
incident matrix ( nx(n-m)
)
of
all branches (basic and nonbasic)
and loops,
unit matrix ( (n-m)x(n-m) )

The basic variables (flows in the basic

branches) and the objective function for the
basic feasible solution are:

B-l

(xb)*

*
z

b B-l

= c

= z*

M
M-N

and

N-M

Let form the set of basic branches

TN=(T-U,...
,O-N>
and the set
of
basic
The total loop
branches TM=<T-Y,
W-M)
cost must not be negative as stated in (a19):

...,

The transportation cost (for unit flow)

of each branch is same in both directions
CM-N'CN-M
, which yields:

Eq.
(a221
shows that for an optimal
solution the total transportation cost of the
branches (for unit flow) from the source node
to sink node N is minimal if the path is
formed of the basic branches of set
TN.
The same conclusion could be stated for sink
node M , as well as for any sink node.

The following optimality condition is

direct consequence of the above property:
The t o t a l t r a n s p o r t a t i o n cost

(far

unit

fli.>w.) o f t h e branches f r o m t h e s o u r c e node t o

(a14)

any s i n k node

(alJ)

The desired result can be achieved by

gradually adding branches one by one to the
network subtree, always satisfying the above
condition as well as the radiality condition.

Using (a15) and (a13),

function can be written as :
min

M-N

c#x"

the

objective

(al6)

must h e minimal.

The derived optimality condition

serves
transshipment problem with quadratic costs to be
presented in the next section.
It is also
noteworthy that transportation cost for unit
flow (established on Fig.1) R Jmax is a
similar base as the one obtained in /6/ for
optimal flow pattern.
as the mathematical foundation of the

Interpretation o+ t h e optimal soluti on

Let
feasible
solution,
baijic
the
described with ( x ) be the optimal solution

Where:

Transshipment problem w i t h q u a d r a t i c costs

Since t h e power 1osses a r e q u a d r a t i c
function
of
t h e branch c u r r e n t ,
a rigid
linear
a p p r o x i m a t i o n does n o t guarantee t h e
g l o b a l optimum.
To e l i m i n a t e t h e e f f e c t s of
f o l 1owing
the
approximated
costs
the
c r i t e r i o n f o r p o t e n t i a l connection o f
each
sink
node t o e x i s t e n t s u b t r e e has t o be
f u l f i1l e d :

Any
s i n k n u d e c a n be c o n n e c t e d t o e x i s tent
n e t w o r k s u b t r e e o n l y b y t h e b r a n c h far
w h i c h t h e c h a n g e i n t o t a l p o w e r loS5es
(due
t u t h e load o f connected s i n k node) i s a i n i mal.
The change
i n power l o s s e s o f
entire
s u b t r e e due t o t h e l o a d o f
connected s i n k
node can be estimated:

* -

SK

PK + jQK

l o a d a t s i n k node

= complex v o l t a g e a t s i n k node
K during i t e r a t i o n
(i-1)

VK(~-')

.
,

Let
t h e c u r r e n t i n each branch
k
d u r i n g i t e r a t i o n ( i ) has t h e s t a r t i n g value:

Jk(i)

= 0

(b2)

S t a r t i n g f r o m each l a s t
node
T and
moving towards s u b s t a t i o n , c u r r e n t
i n each
branch k i s updated as f o l l o w s :
Jt(i)

Jkfi)
p r e c i s e l y , by r a d i a l power f l o w method
or approximately
by t h e f o r m u l a
der i v e d i n QPPENDIX B.

complex c o n j u g a t e o p e r a t o r

= It(i)
= Jk

(i)

(b3)
(i)
(i)
Jm
+ IK

(b4)

IK(i)
E 0

(b5)

To o b t a i n
t h e path from l a s t
node t o
substation,
f o r each s i n k node M i s s u f f i c i e n t t o know:

CIPPENDIX B
RCIDIAL POWER FLOW METHOD

The r a d i a l
power f l o w method used i n
this
paper
i s based on
application
of
Kirchoff's
c u r r e n t and v o l t a g e
lows d u r i n g
t h e backward and f o r w a r d
t r a c e procedure.
Power f l o w method i s d e s c r i b e d i n /10,11,12/.
The method used i n t h i s paper does n o t
need any numbering scheme and i t i s a p p l i c a b l e t o t h e a l g o r i t h m f o r power l o s s r e d u c t i o n
devel oped i n t h i s paper.
N o t a t i on5
s u b s t a t i o n transformer
0 - s i n k node
0 - l a s t ( s i n k ) node
( l i n e section)
m - branch
M - r e c e i v i n g node o f branch m
k - i s a branch which f o l l o w s t h e branch
m on t h e way f r o m t h e l a s t node
T
t o the substation
node o f
branch m
K - sending
and
r e c e i v i n g node o f branch k
T - l a s t node and r e c e i v i n g node of
branch t
Q - substation

U-

branch
branch

m
m

M is

receiving

node

of

sending node

o f branch

Forward update
The
voltages
at
nodes a r e
updated
employing a f o r w a r d t r a c e procedure based on
t h e knowledge o f f o l l o w i n g data:

the
voltage a t substation
specified

node

is

t h e p a t h f r o m each l a s t node t o t h e
s u b s t a t i o n i s found d u r i n g t h e backward update.

S t a r t i n g from t h e s u b s t a t i o n node,
or
from t h e l a s t node w i t h e s t i m a t e d v o l t a g e , on
each p a t h f r o m t h e s u b s t a t i o n t o t h e
last
and moving towards each l a s t
node
node
the
voltage a t
nodes on t h e p a t h
are
e s t i m a t e d as f o l l o w s :

VM(i)
= vK(i) (i)
- *m Jm

(b6)

Where :

Zm

i s t h e s e r i e s impedance o f branch
m .

Note t h a t (see Fi9.B) t h e p a t h o f

last
c o n s i s t o f nodes Q,K,M and T,
and
node T
the
p a t h o f l a s t node U c o n s i s t o f
nodes
A,K,M,N
and U.
Fig.B

I f v o l t a g e s a t t h e nodes o f t h e p a t h o f
then
t h e l a s t node T a r e e s t i m a t e d a t f i r s t ,
the
above r e c u r s i v e e q u a t i o n i s a p p l i e d on
t h e nodes K, M and T s u c c e s s i v e l y .

D i s t r i b u t i o n network

Backward update
Load c u r r e n t i n j e c t i o n 1 ~ ' ~a t) each
node K
d u r i n g i t e r a t i o n (i) i s c a l c u l a t ed as f o l l o w s :

(bl)

Ift h e v o l t a g e s a t nodes o f t h e p a t h o f
the
l a s t node U a r e n e x t t o
be e s t i m a t e d ,
t h e n t h e backward t r a c e procedure s t a r t s f r o m
t h e node M as t h e l a s t node w i t h e s t i m a t e d
v o l t a g e on t h e p a t h Q,K,M,N
and U.

780

Radial
power f l o w method when a
added to network s u b t r e e

branch

REFERENCES

i s

,.

When a branch is added to the existent

subtree of the distribution network, the
following procedure can be applied:
Let branch w be added to the subtree
shown on Fi9.B
Starting with original
values for node voltages of the syBfreetO)and
assuming the initial estimate Vw
=VT
9
new voltages can be found using the radial
power flow procedure described in
previous
section.
The procedure is applied only for
the feeder the? new sink node W is connected
to.
It is interesting to be noted that the
procedure converges only in one iteration as
a result of good starting estimates for
voltages.

Power
l o s s i n c r e a s e due
branch t o network s u b t r e e

to

connection

of

Consider a feeder of subtree

ES (see
Fi9.B) with known set of voltages V=CVA, Vy,,
VM,VT> and set of power flows S = C S k , S,, St).
When a sink node W with constant load Sw=Pw+
jaw is added to the feeder, the changes in
voltages, in power flows as well as in power
losses will be produced.
New power losses PLn for feeder with
added load SW approximately can be estimated
as follows:
PLn = Rk[(Pk+p~)~+ fak+a~)~]/Vy,'

. ..+

Rw CPwL+QwL3 /VT

D. W. Ross, J. Patton,A. I. Cohen and M. Carson :

"New Methods for Evaluating Distribution
Automation and Control System Benefits",
IEEE Trans. on PAS,Vol.PAS-l00,No. 6,
June 1 9 8 1 , pp.2978-2986.

/ 2 / K.Aoki,

T. Ichimori and M.Kanezashi:"Normal

State Optimal Load Allocation in Distribution Systems",IEEE Tran on Power Delivery,
Vol.PWRD-2,No.l,pp. 147-155,Jan.1987.

/ 3 / C.C.Liu,S. J.Lee and S. S. Venkata,

"An Expert System Operational Aid for Hestoration and Loss Reduction of Distribution
Systems" , IEEE Trans. on Power Systems ,
Vol. 3,No. 2,May 1988,pp.619-626.

/4/ S.Civanlar, J.J.Grainger, H.Yin and S.S.

H. Lee'IDistribution Feeder Reconf igurati on
for Loss Reduction",IEEE Trans. on Power
Delivery,Vol.3, No.3, July 1988, pp.12171223.
/ 5 / C.C.Liu,S. J.Lee and K. Vu, "Loss Minimization of Distribution Feeders : Optimality

and Algorithms " ,SEEE Trans. on Power

Delivery,Vol.4, No.2, April 1989,pp.12811289.

, H. W.Hong"Reconfiguration
of Electric Distribution Networks for
Line Losses
Reduc t i on "E
Hesi st i ve
Trans. on Power Delivery, Vol. 4, No. 2,
April 1989, pp.1492-1498.

/6/ D.Shirmohammadi

, "An Expert System

for
Load Allocation in
Distribution
Expansion Planning",IEEE Trans,. on Power
Delivery,Vol. 4,No. 3, July 1989,pp. 19101918.

/7/ J.L.Chen and Y.Y.Hsu

+ (at+PW)21/VT2 +

fit[ (Pt+PW)'

I /,

(b7)

Power lass increase APLw due to load

of added sink node W to the feeder, can be
estimated as follows:

/8/ A. Orden : "The Transshipment Problem",

Manaqement Science,2,276-285, 1956.
/9/ W.L.Zangwill:"The

Convex Simplex Method",

Management Science, 14, 3,221-238,1967.

/10/W. H. Eersting, D. L. Mendive: " A n Appl ication o f Ladder Network Theory to the
Solution of Three Phase Radial Load-flow
Problems",IEEE PAS Winter Meeting, New
York, 1976, IEEE Paper No. A 7 6 044-8.
/11/D.I. Sun, S. Abe, R.R. Shoultz, M.S.Chen,
P. Ei chenberger ,D, Farr i s:"Calcul at ion
of
Energy Losses in a Distribution System",
IEEE Trans. ,PAS-99, July/August
1980,
pp. 1347-1356.

/lZ/D. Shi rmohammadi ,H.W. Hong ,A. Seml yen,G. LUO:

Compensation-Based Power Flow Method
for Weakly Meshed Distribution and Transmission Networks",IEEE Trans. on Power
Systems, Vol. 3 , No. 2, May 1988, pp.753A

w - node

which is added
to
the
existent subtree
w - branch which connects the node
W
to the existent subtree
T - sending node of branch w
i - denotes each feeder section on the
way from substation to added node
W.
Vi voltage at the receiving node of
section i

762.

781

Discussion
Ross Baldick, University of California, Berkeley, CA 94720. AS
noted in [A], the search technique suggested in this paper is basically a greedy algorithm. For the linearized loss model initially treated, the objective will be minimized by the greedy algorithm [B]; however, there is no guarantee that the more accurate
quadratic approximation nor the actual losses will be minimized
by a greedy procedure. Although greedy algorithms often perform
well in practice, in general they are not optimal. The addition of
voltage constraints exacerbates this problem. I therefore contest
point 1 made in the introduction to this paper.
To reinforce this theoretical observation, consider the example systems in the paper. The stated approximation error in power
loss in the first system is given as 7%, presumably as a proportion
of the total losses; I assume that the author believes that this loss
estimate applies generally. In the second system, the improvement in losses is quoted as 7%, presumably as a proportion of
total initial losses: the error estimate is so large that we cannot
be confident that the optimum has been achieved by the algorithm. Without checking the result against an algorithm, such as
explicit search or branch-and-bound, that is guaranteed to find
the minimum, no claim of optimality is possible.
The following example demonstrates that the algorithm can
produce suboptimal results if there are compensating elements
such as shunt capacitors in the system. Consider the elementary
distribution network shown in figure 1, which has resistive lines,
a resistive and a resistive-inductive load, and a shunt capacitor.
For ease of calculation the loads are specified as current sinks,
although the same qualitative results could be obtained using
the equations in appendix B of the paper with loads specified
as power and reactive power. Furthermore, we assume that the
voltage constraints are not binding.
Substation

Figure 1: Elementary distribution system.

Initially we envisage all feeder sections, 1-2, 1-3, 2 4 , and 34, to be disconnected. The subtree consists of just the substation,

node 1. Following the algorithm, either line section 1-2 or 1-3

can be added to the tree: adding 1-2 increases losses by 0.25 kW;
adding 1-3 increases losses by 2 kW, so line section 1-2 is added,
increasing losses by 0.25 kW. Next, either sections 2 4 or 1-3
can be added: adding 2 4 increases losses by 5 kW; adding 1-3
increases losses by 2 kW, so line section 1-3 is added. Finally,
either 2-4 or 3 4 can be added: adding 2 4 will increase losses
by 5 kW; adding 3 4 will increase losses by 4 kW, so line section
3 4 is added, for a total of 6.25 kW losses for the network created
by the algorithm. However, consider the configuration with line
sections 1-2,24, and 3 4 closed and 1-3 open: the total losses are
5.25 kW, which is lower than obtained with the algorithm. The
algorithm is clearly suboptimal in this case, although in practice
it might often give reasonably good results; the claims for the
algorithm should be adjusted accordingly.
References

[A] Hsiao-Dong Chiang and Rent5 Jean-Jumeau. Optimal Network

Reconfigurations in Distribution Systems, Part 1: A New Formulation and A Solution Methodology. Paper 90 WM 164-4 PWRD
presented at the IEEE Power Engineering Society 1990 Summer
Meeting, Atlanta, Georgia, February 4-8, 1990.
[B] Eugene L. Lawler. Combinatorial Optimization: Networks
and Matroids. Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1976.

782

VLRSTIMIR GLAMOCANIN.
T t i e ilLlti)<.,r w o u l d 1 I k ( 7
to thank Mr. Raldick for his discussion of the
paper.
1. Mr. Baldick points out the question
of approximation error of 7 % a s a portion of
the total losses in the first system presented
in the paper.
That is incorrect because, the
use of
(5)
in estimation of the change in
power losses, acc,ording to the paper, produces
less than
7%
error,in comparison with the
change in power losses obtained by exact
radial powpr flow method.
However, one may question whether or not
an approximated load flow algorithm, in this
case ( 5 ) , should be used.
To answer, let us
consider a sink node which does not belong to
the current network subtree:
- If there is not any branch which could
connect the sink node to the subtree - that is
a trivial case.
- If there is only one branch which connects
the sink node to the subtree - that is also a
trivial case: second optimality condition ( 6 )
does not need to be fulfilled.
- If there are two or more branches which
connect the sink node with subtree - the
change in power losses should be estimated
preliminary by ( 5 ) . If the estimates have the
values which are not separable (with respect
of the expected error approximation), the
exact estimation of the change in power losses
should be performed by radial flow method
given in Appendix B . The purpose in pointing
out the value of error tolerance is to provide
an information - when ( 5 ) could be used.
2. Question has been raised regarding
the validity of the proposed algorithm applied
to the networks with compensating elements.
The
discussor's observations
contain
two
improper premises:
The discussor's sugestion to solve the
problem of optimal network reconfiguration and
the
problem
of
capacitor
placement
is
understandable, but i t Is the author's opinion
that he would n o t recomend to solve them
simultaneously.
An earlier work t 1 A l has
shown that to avoid biasing the solution, the
capacitors should be
removed during
the
process of optimal network reconfiguration.
The additional
loss and voltage profile
improvement could be obtained by applying
capacitors
(determining their
number
and
locations) to the reconfigured network .
Mr. Baldick in his discussion shows
that i f
only
second optimality condition
(6)
is used, the suboptimal result would be
obtained.
In this regard the discussor is
reffered to the basic model of the paper which
b.~
oth
first
explicitly
states
that
optimality
condition
(3)
and
second

f?ptIlllal!ty C!OIldltlf?ll
( 6 ) ! i l i O l l l ( j bQ G a t i f l f l O d
i n o r d e r t o o b t a i n an o p t i i n a l : ~ o l u t l o i i .
For completeness, tlie propouod a l y u i l ~ I I I I I
will he applied to tho e l e i n n n t a r y distribution
network wlth t h o cnnctraiiitt: and the d a t a
provided by the discussor.
I step:
Tritlally the s u b t r e e ES consists of
node 1 a s a souree node: ES = [ 1-11.
Using
( 1 ) and (2) the transportation cost of unit
current of line sections can be estimated:
c =R
J
=R
=O. 1
. Because the
2
1-2 max( 1-2)
1-2
is not
current capacity of line sections J
max
provided by the discussor i t is assumed that
the same conductor is used for each
line
segment:
c =R
=O. 2 ;
c
.
3
1-3
4
I1 step:
To satisfy first optimality
condition the selection of the node which will
enter the subtree is performed using
(3) :
c = min [ c = 0 . 1 ; c =0.2 i c4='? i
2
2
3
I11 step:Network subtree ES has to be updated
by section 1-2 : ES = ES (-1 1 1 - 2 1 = [ 1 - 1 ; 1 - 2 1 .
Because there is only o n e section which
4 with s u b t r e e ES , second
connects node
optimality condition ( 6 ) is not applied.
Therefore, the minimal total cost of node
4
could be calculated using ( 7 )
:c =c t R
4 2 2-4
The value of minimal total
=O.ltO.l =0.2
cost of node 3 remains as before.
I1 step:
c = min I c = 0 . 2 ; c = 0 . 2 1
4
3
4
111 step: ES = ES 'U (2-41 = 1 1 - 1 ; 5 - 2 ; 2 - 4 1 .
The obtained network is the optimal
configuration of the network with removed
shunt capacitor
(node 3 is treated as a
transshipment node).
However, the author does not see any
problems in applying the proposed algorithm on
the network with shunt capacitor at node 3 :
IV step:
Node 3 could be connected to the
current subtree with two sections 1-3 and 4-3.
Applying second optimality condition to node
3 the following approximated change in power
losses is obtained: L P L 3 ( 1 ) = 2 k W ; dPL3(4)=OkW.
= x i

, node 3
3(4) < "L 3 ( 1 )
a s the last node of the network should be
connected by line section 4-3:
ES =ES (-1 ( 4 - 3 1 = [ 1 - 1 ; 1 - 2 ; 2 - 4 ; 4 - 3 1
The obtained solution is exactly the
same as the one advocated by the discussor.
In fact, i t is realized fully by the proposed
algorithm ( hPL
=OkW 1 that the additional
111 step:

Because APL

3(4)

savings could not be obtained by applying the

shunt capacitor at node 3 .
References
ClAl R.E.Lee and C.L.Brooks, "A Method and its
Application to Evaluate Automated Distribution
Control", I A E E Trans. on P o w e r Delivery, Vol.
3 , No. 3 , July 1 9 8 8 , pp. 1 2 3 2 - 1 2 3 0 .