A New Improved Voltage Stability Assessment Index-centered Integrated Planning Approach for Multiple Asset Placement in Mesh Distribution Systems

Abstract

This paper offers a new improved voltage stability assessment index (VSAI_B)-centered planning approach, aiming at the attainment of technical and cost related objectives with simultaneous multiple asset deployment in a mesh distribution systems (MDS). The assets such as multiple distributed generation (DG) and distributed static compensator (D-STATCOM) units have been utilized; aiming at voltage stabilization, loss minimization, and associated objectives. The proposed planning approach incorporates expressions of VSAI_B aiming at initial simultaneous assets placement followed by loss minimization conditions (LMC) for appropriate asset sizing, which is further utilized for performance evaluations. The VSAI_B-LMC-based integrated planning approach is applied to configured MDS models such as a 33-bus test distribution system (TDS) for detailed analysis. The performance evaluations with the presented approach have been conducted for different cases along with respective scenarios considering various technical and cost-economic performance metrics. First, three cases referring to multiple DGs sitting and sizing for various power factors have been presented, followed later by two cases of multiple DGs and D-STATCOMs with respective evaluation scenarios. Finally, benchmark analysis is conducted on a 69-bus TDS for validity demonstration of the proposed approach. The comparison of achieved results in comparison with the available literature points out toward the validity and improved performance of the proposed approach.

A Techno-Economic Centric Integrated Decision-Making Planning Approach for Optimal Assets Placement in Meshed Distribution Network Across the Load Growth

“…Also, the loads S2b, S4b, and S6b, at n2b, n4b, and n6b are considered as lumped load at bus/node m2b with a voltage magnitude of V2b, as shown in Figure 1, respectively. [30,31].…”

“…In this paper, two of the VSAI indices formulated and reported in our previous publications [30,31] have been employed along with LMC aiming at pinpointing possible alternatives in terms of asset sitting as sizing with various decision variables. Later, various MCDM techniques are further applied for sorting out the best alternatives amongst available solutions.…”

“…Later, various MCDM techniques are further applied for sorting out the best alternatives amongst available solutions. The VSAI reported in [30] is designated as VSAI_A and the other one reported in [31] is designated as VSAI_B, aiming at an optimal sitting of the asset. The procedure of LMC remains the same in both VSAIs as per their integrated planning approach.…”

“…Moreover, the replacement of TS with fault current limiter (FCL) [26], reinforcement versus looping/meshing [27,28], and optimal utilization of D-STATCOMs only in interconnected DN have also been considered [29]. In the recent works reported in [30,31], two different variants of an integrated planning approach incorporating improved voltage stability assessment indices (VSAI) along with loss minimization condition (LMC) have been employed for optimal asset optimization in MDN such as DG only and DG with D-STATCOM for VS, LM, and cost-related objectives under normal load.The optimal planning of D-STATCOM is accredited with increasing penetration of renewable generation (REG)-based DGs, VS, LM, and minimizing associated cost objectives. Like most of the ODGP-based DNPP, D-STATCOM integration has mostly been considered radiality constraint [14].…”

“…The D-STATCOM on the basis of asset placement on the same or different buses along with DGs or separately have been reported in [33][34][35], supported by relevant technical performance evaluations. The D-STATCOM placement on different load levels [36] and multiple asset sets (DG and D-STATCOM) on different buses [29][30][31][32][33][34] and the same buses [37] have been evaluated from various objectives. It is also important to mention that the works reported in [14,[32][33][34][35][36][37] have mostly aimed at RDN, centered on a single branch (two buses) model and cannot encompass the core dynamic of LDN and MDN that is usually fed by more than on sending end.From the viewpoint of MCDM, hybrid methodologies have been put forward to achieve multiple objectives or evaluation under various criteria.…”