4.4 Article

Optimal PMU placement solution: graph theory and MCDM-based approach

期刊

IET GENERATION TRANSMISSION & DISTRIBUTION
卷 11, 期 13, 页码 3371-3380

出版社

INST ENGINEERING TECHNOLOGY-IET
DOI: 10.1049/iet-gtd.2017.0155

关键词

phasor measurement; analytic hierarchy process; decision trees; matrix algebra; search problems; decision making; AHP-based multi-criteria decision making approach; phasor measurement unit; PMU placement; OPP problem; decision matrix; network graph theory; priority vertex ranking; vertex search technique; zero injection buses; ZIB; single PMU loss; line outage; large scale power systems; analytical hierarchy process; MCDM-based approach; optimal PMU placement solution

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this study, a new method using graph theory and analytical hierarchy process (AHP)-based multi-criteria decision making approach has been proposed to solve optimal phasor measurement unit (PMU) placement (OPP) problem for complete network observability. The proposed approach assures maximum measurement redundancy too. A decision matrix is formed with some unique criteria from the concept of network graph theory and this helps to formulate priority vertex ranking using AHP. Candidate vertex search technique is used to enumerate the candidate PMU placement vertices from priority vertex ranking. The contribution of zero injection buses (ZIBs) in PMU placement problem has been considered. The proposed technique is further analysed for complete observability under single PMU loss or line outage cases. The proposed approach is tested on IEEE 14-bus, 24-bus, 30-bus, 57-bus, 118-bus, and New England 39-bus systems. To verify the computational efficiency and higher redundancy of solutions of the proposed method, the results are compared with some well-established methods reported in the literature. The proposed method is further applied to IEEE 300-bus, Polish 2383-bus and 3120-bus system to show the efficacy of the proposed approach in solving OPP in large scale power systems.

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