4.4 Article

Optimal placement of protective devices and switches in a radial distribution system with distributed generation

期刊

IET GENERATION TRANSMISSION & DISTRIBUTION
卷 14, 期 21, 页码 4847-4858

出版社

INST ENGINEERING TECHNOLOGY-IET
DOI: 10.1049/iet-gtd.2019.1945

关键词

power distribution reliability; electric fuses; power distribution planning; distributed power generation; genetic algorithms; busbars; power generation reliability; optimal placement; protective devices; protective switches; radial distribution system; distributed generation; system reliability; bi-directional analytical model; optimal number; fuse-blow fuses; system data uncertainties; failure rates; repair rates; 69-bus distribution system; reliability busbar test system; genetic algorithm; optimisation technique

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Optimal placement of protective devices and switches in the distribution system improves the system reliability at the cost of increased investment. In this study, a new bi-directional analytical model has been developed to solve the problem of optimal placement of protective devices and switches in various zones of a distribution system with distributed generation (DG). The model determines the optimal number and locations of reclosers, switches, 'fuse-save fuses' and 'fuse-blow fuses' for increasing the system reliability while reducing the investment and outage costs, considering system data uncertainties. For considering uncertainties in load data, failure rates (temporary and permanent) and repair rates, the model utilises three-point estimate method. The formulated problem has been solved for 69-bus distribution system and radial distribution system connected to bus 4 of the reliability busbar test system, using genetic algorithm optimisation technique. After analysing the test results, it is concluded that considerable profit to the utility is achieved by optimal placement of protective devices and switches in various zones of the distribution system with DG units.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据