1
Reliability Assessment of Load Points Including
Solar and Wind DGs
Abstract With the increase of advanced and sophisticated loads
on the load side, consumers of electricity are demanding higher
power reliability and quality. The reinforcements of power
systems for higher reliability are costly and time-consuming. In
trending technology, the microgrid offers an alternative on-site
power system reinforcement that requires less time and cost.
Moreover, the microgrid can integrate both conventional and
unconventional distributed generations (DGs) to the system at
several load points. These DGs are used as backups to or in line
with the grid to reduce failure rates and downtimes experienced
by consumers. Some unconventional renewable sources are
intermittent in nature, and it is pertinent to quantify the effects of
such intermittency on the reliability of power systems. This paper
studies the stochastic effects of the integration of two intermittent
power sources, wind and solar, in a power system. Furthermore,
three types of consumer models were studied: residential,
commercial and industrial. The DGs were used as backups to the
grid, and the ensuing increase of the power systems reliability
was measured.
Index Terms Microgrids, Reliability, Wind Power, Solar
Power
I. INTRODUCTION
T he sophisticated interconnection of the traditional grid
system has both its advantages and disadvantages. This
interconnection helps to supply power to distant consumers,
make up for the loss of generation in a plant by other distant
plants and reduce generation reserves; hence, reduce
generation cost and increase system reliability. However, there
is a limit to the reliability of the conventional power system
based on its limited contingency design platform. This leads to
some disadvantages when a contingency limit is reached or
major events occur, such as natural disasters or accidents in
which a large number of customers are affected due to the
massive interconnection of the feeders and inherent transfer of
the effects of outages [1]. The significance and importance of
the microgrid concept and structure can help ameliorate these
system failures.
The microgrid is an interconnection of a single type or
varieties of microsources, storage systems and loads that the
macrogrid sees as a single entity [2 and 3]. Typically, the
microsources are microturbines, PV panels and fuel cells
(mostly < 500KW) situated at the load centers [2 and 4]. The
microgrid could be an AC or DC microgrid and can operate in
two modes: on-grid (non-autonomous) and islanded
(autonomous) mode [5]. In on-grid mode, the microgrid is
connected with the main grid. This enables it to deliver or
receive power from the main grid or otherwise in accordance
with the market policy [6]. Although microgrids are sought
mostly to increase supply reliability during contingencies,
microsources are slow in response and, unlike conventional
generators, have little inertia, which hampers their ability to
immediately meet sudden rises in loads, hence the need for
storage elements [7]. Storage systems, such as batteries,
flywheels and super-capacitors, are used in microgrids to meet
such unbalances between supply and load. This intervention is
required as often as the load fluctuates for a few seconds (<
100s) with the requirement that the storage system has high
charging and discharging rates in order to satisfy an immediate
response. The heart of the microgrid is an advanced power
electronics interface that controls the disconnection,
connection and exchange of power between the microgrid and
macrogrid [8]. Both power windmills and solar panels require
power electronics and energy storage systems to smoothen
their power outputs.
The sole purpose of studying the reliability of power systems
is to measure and reduce the frequency and duration of power
system failures or interruptions. Interruptions have economic
and social consequences for both the utilities providing power
and the power consumers [9]. The cost of interruptions is
usually primarily based on the durations of the interruptions
and types of customers interrupted. The more sensitive the
loads interrupted, the higher the cost; therefore, industrial and
commercial load interruptions are the most costly [7, 9].
Venkataramanan et al. connoted that distributed generation can
be used for sensitive loads [7]. Moreover, in present
dispensation, the concept of microgrids shoulders the
responsibility of improving the entire systems reliability.
Microgrids are closer to the consumers and allow easy
expansion by the plug and play feature in which a
microsource can be added at any point without the need for
central system reconfiguration [4]. The distributed generation
concept of the microgrid will facilitate the localization of the
effects of faults and maintain the supply to local loads during a
faulty grid issue, thereby increasing the reliability of the power
system. However, it is widely indicated in the literature that the
microgrid is to support the macrogrid rather than replace it. In
this paper, solar panel and wind power supplies are used to
support the main grid system to reduce the frequency and
duration of interruptions. During interruptions on the main
grid, these renewable resources are expected to supply the
loads. However, due to the unpredictable nature of wind and
sun heat supplies, these power sources are not 100% reliable
and need to be critically studied. In general, the aim of
microgrids is to increase system reliability when the solar heat
and/or wind is not available during power failures. This is a
probabilistic problem; however, reliable results are possible
after an extensive study and analysis of the trends. The two
sources are tested on residential, commercial and industrial
loads from the Roy Billinton Test System (RBTS) load profile.
II. RELIABILITY ASSESSMENT USING MONTE CARLO
SIMULATION
The conventional distribution system accounts for about
80% of interruptions experienced by consumers [10]. The
distribution system, unlike the transmission system, is less

smart and has been neglected for a while. The microgrid
technology has made the distribution system gain some
attention. However, renewable energy, such as wind and solar
power sources, cannot be used as dispatchable power sources.
This is due to the unpredictable behavior of their renewable
fuels; sunlight, much like the wind, is unpredictable. Hence,
there is no assurance of the availability of power output from
these two sources, which will also hamper operational
planning.
Even when sunlight and wind are available, solar and wind
power supply systems act differently from other fossil fuel-
distributed generations. This is because the intensity of wind
and sunlight available at any period cannot be controlled and is
a continuously changing variable. Hence, the solar and wind
power supply systems have several derated states based on the
intensity of their corresponding renewable fuel supplies. It is
not proper to model the solar and wind power supply systems
as systems with two states; rather, they should be modeled as
systems with six or more states [11], making the model more
difficult to solve. Therefore, during islanding operations, the
power supply is not guaranteed to be always greater than the
load. The load may be fully or partially supplied by these
renewable sources (solar and wind) in the islanding period;
hence, load shedding is a possibility.
In this paper, wind and solar data that model the stochastic
nature of these sources are used for the reliability assessment
of the different customers in the RBTS. These types of data
were necessary to quantify the reliability impact of solar and
wind power systems as closely as possible to practical
situations. Although the intermittent nature of these supplies is
undesirable, the effects of this intermittency has to be reflected
in the measured reliability indices of the system to have a
reliable and proficient reliability assessment of the practical
system.
Hourly load data for an entire year is constructed using
weekly, daily and hourly factors that simulate load behavior.
The following equation is used to simulate the load for different
sectors, including residential, governmental and institutional,
commercial and small industrial [12]:
Load (t) = hour (h) day (d) week (w) (1)
In which Load (t) is the load value at hour t, and hour (h), day
(d) and week (w) are the load factors for hour t in the year. The
Residential Load model used is shown in Fig. 1.
Fig. 1. Residential Load Model
There is always a level of uncertainty in the availability and
operation of any element in a power system. This uncertainty
2
is quantified with several reliability indices, such as the failure
rate (), unavailability (U) and availability (A). The stochastic
simulation approach, rather than the analytic method, is used
in this paper to measure the reliability indices of the original
system without distributed generations (DGs) and when
reinforced with DG.
The microgrid can either be in operation mode when
supplying the load or in repair mode when there is a failure.
The time-to-failure and time-to-repair of the system are
exponentially distributed. The exponential distribution is
described in Equation 2, and the time the system spends in any
of the two states (t) is described in Equation 3.
() = (2)
() = 1 (3)
The is generally referred to as the rate of departure from a
state; hence, it can represent the failure rate and repair rate.
() is the probability that the system will reside in a state for
a period of time ( t) before going into another state. For the
Monte Carlo simulation, a random number generator is used in
generating (), and t is obtained through an inverse transform
method as given in Equation 4.
1
= (1 ()) (4)
In which represents a failure rate, and is referred to as the
mean-time-to-fail (MTTF) and mean-time-to-repair (MTTR)
in which represents the repair rate [14]. The flowchart
depicting the several steps and processes involved in this use
of the Monte Carlo simulation is found in Fig. 2. In this, several
simulation sequences of operatingrepair cycles are carried
out. In addition, via counting and other enumeration processes,
several reliability indices are calculated. The failure rate,
availability (A) and unavailability (U) are given in Equations 5
through 7.
= (5)
= (6)
= (7)
At the downtime of the main grid, the DG systems (wind- and
solar-based) cater to the load. The analysis is performed with
the individual DG system acting alone and with the two DG
systems combined. In addition, the fact that the DG in
operation does not meet the load does not mean the DG is
down. This is referred to as a derated state of the DG. The
effects of these derated outputs of the DG are accounted for by
the energy not supplied (ENS) index given in Equation 8.
= (8)
Start
Failure Rate ( )
Randomly
Generate ( )
 3

Repair time (hr/r) 2.51666 2.18888 2.15 2.30909

ENS (pu.hr) 40.682 25.313 20.784 12.917
System availability 0.99931 0.99955 0.99960 0.99971
By Inverse Transform: System
1 0.00069 0.00045 0.00039 0.00029
= = (1 ( )) unavailability

The number of interruptions seen by the consumers is

reduced by 33.3% and 25% when wind and solar DER is
If installed, respectively, but by 54.2% when both wind and solar
Yes DGs are installed. The amount of ENS (pu.hr) reduced by
( + ) T
68.25% when both DGs are installed and by 37.8% and 28.9%
when solar- and wind-based DGs are installed, respectively.
No The availability is slightly improved, especially when both
DGs are in operation. Fig. 3 shows a graph depicting the
Randomly residential load, wind and solar power and the combined DG
Generate ( )
during a particular interruption.

GRAPH OF RESIDENTIAL LOAD, INDIVIDUAL, AND COMBINED DGs DURING INTERRUPTION

1.4
Repair Rate ( ) Residential Load
WInd Power
1.2
Solar Power
Combined DGs

By Inverse Transform: 1
1
= = (1 ( ))

PER UNIT
0.8

0.6

If 0.4

No ( + ) T
0.2

0
where: 1241.5 1242 1242.5 1243 1243.5 1244
Yes HOURS
Fig. 3. Different scenarios for the residential load during an interruption
T = Total study time period
End
B. Commercial Load
Fig. 2. Flow chart for the Monte Carlo simulation process
Table II shows that the commercial consumers are expected
III. RESULTS AND ANALYSIS to experience the least interruptions of the three types of
The study and simulation was carried out for a period of 10 consumers when the two DGs are installed (66.7% reduction).
years at a multi-scenario load point. The load point was
assumed to have three different types of loads: residential,
commercial and industrial. With each type of load, four
different simulations were undertaken without any DG, with
TABLE II
either of the DGs (solar or wind) and with the two DGs Reliability Indices for the Commercial Load
combined. The installed capacity of the wind and solar DGs is
assumed to be equal to the peak demand of the local load. Grid,
Grid Grid and Grid and
wind and
only solar wind
solar
A. Residential Load No. of failures 24 20 11 8
Table I shows the many improvements obtained through the Total downtime 60.4 48.4 26.4 18.4
addition of solar-based DG only, wind-based DG only and the Total uptime 87539.6 87551.6 87573.6 87581.6
two combined.
Failure
2.4 2 1.1 0.8
frequency (f/yr)
TABLE I
RELIABILITY INDICES FOR THE RESIDENTIAL LOAD Repair time (hr/r) 2.51666 2.42 2.4 2.3

Grid Grid, wind ENS (pu.hr) 40.121 20.6047 20.5896 10.6069

Grid Grid and
and and
only wind System availability 0.99931 0.99945 0.99970 0.99979
solar solar
No. of failures 24 18 16 11 System
0.00068 0.00055 0.0003 0.00021
Total downtime 60.4 39.4 34.4 25.4 unavailability
Total uptime 87539.6 87560.6 87565.6 87574.6
Failure The amount of ENS was significantly reduced by 73.6%
2.4 1.8 1.6 1.1
frequency (f/yr)
when both DGs are installed and by about 48.6% when a solar-
 4

or wind-based DG is installed. Similarly, the total downtime

was significantly reduced by the wind-based DG. In Fig. 4, an GRAPH OF INDUSTRIAL LOAD AND COMBINED DGs DURING INTERRUPTION

interruption period is graphed depicting the interaction of the

commercial load, wind and solar power, and their combined 1
power output.
0.8
GRAPH OF COMMERCIAL LOAD AND COMBINED DGs DURING INTERRUPTION Industrial Load

PER UNIT
1.4 Wind Power
0.6
Solar Power
1.2 Combined DGs
0.4

1
0.2
PER UNIT

0.8
0
2.25 2.25 2.25 2.2501 2.2502
0.6 HOURS 4
x 10
Fig. 5. Different scenarios for the industrial load during an interruption period
0.4
Commercial Load
Wind Power
A comparison of the effectiveness of each DG in regard to
0.2
Solar Power the amount of downtime is depicted in the bar graphs shown in
Combined DGs
Figs. 6 and 7.
0
6366.5 6367 6367.5 6368 6368.5 6369 6369.5 6370
HOURS
Fig. 4. Different scenarios for the commercial load during an interruption
period

C. Industrial Load
Table III shows the results for the industrial load. The sum
of all the downtime incurred despite the installation of the DGs
being the highest of the three loads. It has the least
improvement in availability. The installation of solar has no
significant effect on the number of interruptions seen by the
industrial load. However, the amount of ENS was significantly
reduced by 65.64% when both DGs are installed, by 46.7%
when wind turbines are installed and by 36.2% when solar
panels are installed. An interruption period is depicted in Fig.
5 in which the industrial load cannot be supplied by an
individual DG but was satisfied by the combined DGs. Fig. 6. Comparison of the ENS of each network.

TABLE III
Reliability Indices for the Industrial Load
Grid,
Grid Grid and Grid and
wind and
only solar wind
solar
No. of failures 24 23 17 13
Total downtime 60.4 52.4 38.4 28.4
Total uptime 87539.6 87547.6 87561.6 87571.6
Failure
2.4 2.3 1.7 1.3
frequency (f/yr)
Repair time (hr/r) 2.51666 2.27826 2.25882 2.18461 Fig. 7. Comparison of total downtime of the networks

ENS (pu.hr) 55.0096 35.1053 29.2962 18.9024

D. Study of the Impact of DG Size Variation
System availability 0.99931 0.99940 0.99956 0.99967
The reliability impact of variations in the sizes of the several
System
unavailability
0.00069 0.00060 0.00044 0.00032 DG supplies was carried out. Each DG size was varied from
0.5 to 2.5 per unit of the maximum load in the network (i.e.,
the industrial peak load); however, individual loads were kept
in their normal status.
Fig. 8 shows a graph of the amount of downtime
experienced by the residential customers as the size of
 5

individual and combined DG supplies varies. However, it main grid fails and the switching time of the DERs is not taken
depicts that there is a minimum amount of downtime that can into consideration. Conclusively, the study can serve as a
be achieved as the size of each DG increases, and this reference for other studies.
minimum is about 11 hours. Figs. 9 and 10 depict similar
effects of DG size variations on the downtime experienced by REFERENCES
commercial and industrial consumers, respectively. [1] R. E. Brow, J. Pan, X. Feng, and K. Koutlev, "Sitting distributed generation
to defer T&D expansion," in IEEE PES Transmission and Distribution
Graph of Total DownTime with Varying DG Size
conference, 2001.
60 [2] R. Lasseter, A. Akhil, C. Marnay, J. Stephens, J.Dagle, R. Guttromson, A.
Grid and Wind S. Meliopoulous, R. Yinger and J. Eto, "White paper on integration of
Grid and Solar distributed energy resources, the CERTS MICROGRID concept," Berkeley,
50 Grid,Wind and Solar
CA , April 2002.
DOWNTIME(HOURS)

At Max Residential Load of 0.86 PU [3] P. Piagi and R. H. Lasseter, "Autonomous control of microgrids," in IEEE
40 PES Meeting, Montreal, 2006.
[4] R.H.Lasseter, "MicroGrids," in Power Engineering Society Winter
Meeting, 2002. IEEE (Volume:1 ), USA, 2002.
30 [5] W. HL and S. WG, Distributed Power Generation: Planning Evaluation,
CRC Press ,2000.
20 [6] B. Hartono, Y. Budiyanto and R. Setiabudy, "Review of microgrid
technology," in International Conference on QiR (Quality in Research),
Yogyakarta, 2013.
10
0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5
[7] G. Venkataramanan and M. Illindala, "Microgrids and sensitive loads," in
DG Supply in PU Power Engineering Society Winter Meeting, IEEE, Wisconsin, 2002.
Fig. 8. Total residential downtime with varying loads [8] C. Marnay, F. J. Rubio and A. S. Siddiqui, "Shape of the microgrid," in
Power Engineering Society Winter Meeting, IEEE, Colombus, OH, 2001.
GRAPH OF TOTAL COMMERCIAL DOWNTIME WITH VARYING DG SIZE [9] Y. Attwa and E. El-Saadany, "Reliability based analysis for optimum
70 allocation of DG," in IEEE Canada Electrical Power Conference, 2007. EPC
Grid and Wind
2007, Montreal, 2007.
60 Grid and Solar
Grid,Wind and Solar
[10] A. Chowdhury and D. Kova, Power Distribution System Reliability:
50
Practical Methods and Applications, Wiley-IEEE Press, May 2009.
DOWNTIME(HOURS)

With Peak Commercial Load of 1.00 PU

[11] M. Fotuhi-Firuzabad and A. Rajabi-Ghahnavie, "An analytical method to
40 consider DG impacts on distribution system reliability," in Transmission and
Distribution Conference and Exhibition: Asia and Pacific, Dalian, 2005.
30 [12] R.N.Allan, R.Billinton, I.Sjarief, L.Goel, and K.S.So, A reliability test
system for educational purposes basic distribution system data and results,
20
IEE Transactions on Power Systems, Vo1.6, No. 2, May 1991.
10
[13] R. Billinton and R. N. Allan, Reliability Evaluation of Engineering
Systems, New York: Plenum Publishing Corporation, 1992.
0
0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5
DG SUPPLY in PU
Fig. 9. Total commercial downtime with varying DG size
GRAPH OF TOTAL INDUSTRIAL DOWNTIME WITH VARYING DG SIZE
70
Grid and Wind
60 Grid and Solar
Grid,Wind and Solar
50
DOWNTIME(HOURS)

With Peak Industrial Load of 1.00 PU

40

30

20

10

0
0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5
DG SUPPLY in PU
Fig. 10. Total industrial downtime with varying DG sizes

IV. CONCLUSION
This paper studied the impact of integrating two types of
renewable energies (solar and wind DGs) with intermittent
nature, at load points in a power system. The study is important
as a visibility study to serve as a selection guide for future
expansion possibilities and integration of renewables. From
the study, it is obvious that solar energy has less impact than
wind energy. The study can be improved by adding several
considerations. For instance, excess energy produced by the
DER can be stored in a battery and supplied in derated states.
In this study, it is assumed the DERs are used only when the