Hindawi

Complexity
Volume 2021, Article ID 9475754, 13 pages
https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/9475754

Research Article
A Loss Reduction Optimization Method for Distribution Network
Based on Combined Power Loss Reduction Strategy

Jihua Xie, Chang Chen, and Huan Long

School of Electrical Engineering, Southeast University, Nanjing 210098, China

Correspondence should be addressed to Huan Long; [email protected]

Received 11 June 2021; Accepted 13 July 2021; Published 23 July 2021

Academic Editor: Long Wang

Copyright © 2021 Jihua Xie et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License,
which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Power loss reflects the effective utilization rate of energy and the management level of power grids. In this paper, we propose a
combined power loss reduction strategy optimization framework to improve the power loss reduction effect in a distribution
network. The weak points of the distribution network are analyzed based on power flow calculation. The corresponding power loss
reduction strategies are generated considering the following three aspects: replacing distribution lines, distribution transformers,
and reactive power compensation. A combined power loss reduction strategy optimization model considering the comprehensive
benefits of power loss reduction is established. A method for solving the optimization model based on the cost-benefit ratio is also
proposed. Experiments based on the dataset from Tianjin show that the proposed loss reduction optimization method can
effectively reduce power loss and formulate a reasonable loss reduction modification scheme in the distribution network.

1. Introduction distribution network were comprehensively summarized

from two aspects of power equipment configuration and grid
Power loss rate is an essential comprehensive index to system operation. In [10], an evolutionary programming-
measure the technical management and operation man- based technique was proposed to optimize the placement of
agement levels of power supply enterprises. Since the power distributed generation units energized by wind and solar
loss of the distribution network occupies a considerable energy in a radial distribution system. In [11], based on
proportion in the whole power system, the loss reduction considering the stochastic nature of distributed generation, a
modification of the distribution network has always been the comprehensive optimization model for the simultaneous
critical work for power supply enterprises to improve their allocation of capacitor banks and distributed generation was
economic operation [1–4]. Thus, loss reduction optimization proposed, and a hybrid algorithm based on Tabu search and
for the distribution network is a vital problem for power genetic algorithms was also proposed to solve the model. In
supply enterprises. [12], on the basis of considering the uncertainty of dis-
Loss reduction strategies of a distribution network can be tributed generation, electric vehicles, and other loads, Latin
mainly divided into management and technical strategies. hypercube sampling was employed to generate random
Since the management strategies are primarily related to variables, and a bilayer optimization model was constructed.
human factors, the primary task of power supply enterprises The improved harmony search algorithm was used to realize
is to optimize the power loss management system and the dynamic reconfiguration of the distribution network. In
standardize the power loss management process [5–8]. Thus, [13], the multiobjective distribution network reconfigura-
the technical strategies of loss reduction are mainly taken tion model considering distributed power generation and
into consideration in this paper. load uncertainty was proposed, which could optimize
The current research work on the loss reduction of the multiple important goals of the distribution network and
distribution network has been studied from many aspects. In effectively reduce the power loss of the distribution network.
[9], various loss reduction technical strategies of the In [14], combining a microscopic analysis and the macro
2 Complexity

statistics of the distribution network, an energy saving In the stage of weak point analysis of power loss, con-
modification investment planning model, constrained by the sidering that the load of distribution transformers is con-
investment and weighting factors, was developed to evaluate stantly changing during the operation of the distribution
the energy saving. In [15], the Bat algorithm was used to network, in order to make the results of loss reduction
solve the problem of reactive power source optimization for analysis more consistent with the actual situation, the
bus voltage deviation index minimization by the optimal clustering algorithm is employed to generate typical load
placement of a number of capacitor banks in the network curves for all distribution transformers to establish a typical
buses. In [16], optimal D-STATCOM placement and size loss reduction scenario. Based on the statistical analysis of
was determined based on the index vector method for radial the loss operation data through the power flow calculation,
distribution networks under a reconfigured network to re- the weak points of the power loss of the distribution network
duce the power loss. In [17], a multiobjective evolutionary feeder can be identified, including the severely aged
algorithm based on a fuzzy decision-making method was branches, the distribution transformers with low power
proposed to reduce the power loss and improve the reli- factor, and the branches with excessive power loss. In the
ability of the radial distribution system. stage of generation of loss reduction strategy, based on the
Although there are currently a large number of refer- results of the weak point analysis, the corresponding loss
ences on loss reduction strategies, they mainly focus on the reduction strategies are generated for each loss reduction
theoretical elaboration of different loss reduction strategies. object (distribution transformer, distribution line, etc.),
Previous studies are mostly focused on calculating the power considering the three aspects of replacing distribution lines,
saving amount of various specific strategies such as reactive distribution transformers, and reactive power compensa-
power compensation and power equipment replacement tion. The commonly used energy saving and loss reduction
and analyzing the effect of energy saving and loss reduction strategies are depicted in Figure 2. Finally, in the stage of
of different strategies [18]. However, there is little research combined loss reduction strategy optimization, to take into
on the selection method of loss reduction modification account the loss reduction effect and economy, a combined
scheme based on the combination of multiple loss reduction loss reduction strategy optimization model for the distri-
strategies, leading to the possibility that the loss reduction bution network is established. A novel method for solving
effect may not be the optimal situation. the above optimization model based on the cost-benefit ratio
In order to solve the abovementioned problems, a novel is proposed to optimize the solution process and formulate a
loss reduction optimization method for the distribution reasonable combined strategy for loss reduction modifica-
network is proposed in this paper based on the combined tion scheme for the distribution network.
power loss reduction strategy that is divided into three
stages: weak point analysis of power loss, generation of loss
reduction strategy, and combined loss reduction strategy 2.2. Combined Loss Reduction Strategy Optimization Model.
optimization. The weak point analysis of power loss of the The loss reduction modification scheme of the distribution
distribution network is first carried out based on power network is composed of different types of loss reduction
flow calculation. The corresponding power loss reduction strategies. Each type of loss reduction strategy has a variety
strategies are then generated considering three aspects: of specific implementation situations for choice. When
replacing distribution lines, distribution transformers, and formulating a loss reduction modification scheme, it is
reactive power compensation. A combined power loss necessary to consider the loss reduction effect of the dis-
reduction strategy optimization model considering the tribution network feeder after the loss reduction modifi-
comprehensive benefits of power loss reduction is estab- cation and to analyze the economy of the loss reduction
lished. A method for solving the optimization model based modification.
on the cost-benefit ratio is proposed. The dataset from a
power supply company in Tianjin is utilized to validate the
proposed methodology. 2.2.1. Objective Function. This paper mainly generates loss
reduction strategies from distribution transformer, distri-
bution line, and reactive power compensation of distribution
2. Methodology network. Thus, the cost of power loss, the replacement cost
2.1. The Structure of the Proposed Algorithm. Although there of distribution lines, the replacement cost of distribution
are many loss reduction technical strategies in the current transformers, and the cost of reactive power compensation
distribution network, there is little research on loss reduc- are needed to be considered. To optimize the comprehensive
tion optimization based on a combination of multiple types benefits of loss reduction, the objective function of the
of loss reduction strategies. The current loss reduction combined loss reduction strategy optimization model is
strategies are relatively simple and lack pertinence. Thus, a established as shown in the following equation:
framework of combined loss reduction strategy optimization min C � Ciloss + Civc + Cil + Cit , (1)
in the distribution network is proposed in this paper, as
shown in Figure 1, which is mainly divided into three stages: where C represents the sum of costs involved in the loss
weak point analysis of power loss, generation of loss re- reduction modification scheme with multiple strategies
duction strategy, and combined loss reduction strategy combination; Ciloss represents the power loss cost of the i-th
optimization. loss reduction modification scheme; Civc denotes the reactive
Complexity 3

Weak point analysis of power loss

Typical scenario Weak point

Load curve Power flow
generation for loss analysis of
clustering calculation
reduction power loss

Generation of loss reduction strategy

Distribution … Reactive
Distribution line
transformer compensation

Combined loss reduction strategy optimization

Cost calculation of Benefit calculation Optimization model

Cost–benefit
individual loss of individual loss solution based on
reduction strategy reduction strategy ratio
cost–benefit ratio

Figure 1: The proposed framework of combined loss reduction strategy optimization.

Replace severely aged lines

Replace bare overhead lines with insulated

Distribution line
overhead lines or cables

Increase the cross-section of the distribution

line

Replace severely aging distribution

transformer

Distribution
Retrofit high-loss distribution transformers
transformer

Use low-loss distribution transformers

Centralized substation compensation

Centralized compensation for low-voltage

side of distribution transformer
Reactive
compensation
Reactive power compensation on tower

User terminal dispersed compensation

Figure 2: Commonly used energy saving and loss reduction strategies of the distribution network.
4 Complexity

power compensation cost of the i-th loss reduction modi- Nit

fication scheme; Cil stands for the replacement cost of the Cit � 􏽘 τ it,kt , (5)
distribution line of the i-th loss reduction modification kt �1
scheme; and Cit denotes the replacement cost of the dis-
tribution transformer of the i-th loss reduction modification where Nit represents the number of distribution trans-
scheme. formers that need to be replaced in the i-th loss reduction
modification scheme and τ it,kt represents the unit con-
(1) Power Loss Cost. Power loss cost refers to the loss of struction cost of the kt-th distribution transformer to be
electricity sale cost caused by power loss, which can be replaced in the i-th loss reduction modification scheme.
calculated by multiplying the power loss quantity with the
corresponding electricity price, as shown in the following
equation: 2.2.2. Constraints
24
i,j (1) Power Loss Rate Constraint. Based on the development
Ciloss � 􏽘 Ploss · τ e · nLT , (2) goals of the electric power development plan, power supply
j�1
enterprises usually set the target value of the power loss rate
i,j after loss reduction modification, expressed in equation (6).
where Ploss represents the power loss at the j-th hour of
the i-th loss reduction modification scheme; τ e represe- For example, in the “13th Five-Year Plan for Electric Power
nts the electricity price; and nLT represents the time Development (2016–2020),” the target value of the power
frame considered for power loss cost, set as 365 in this loss rate is 6.5%.
paper.
Psup − Psales
Ploss % � × 100% < η, (6)
(2) Reactive Power Compensation Cost. In this paper, the Psup
total compensated reactive power capacity of the distribu-
tion network is used to estimate its reactive power com- where Ploss% represents the power loss rate of the distri-
pensation cost, as shown in the following equation: bution network feeder after loss reduction modification; Psup
i
represents the power supply; Psales represents the power sale
24 Nvc quantity; and η represents the target value of the power loss
i,j
Civc � 􏽘 􏽘 Qkvc · τ vc · nLT , (3) rate after loss reduction modification of the distribution
j�1 kvc �1
network feeder.
where Nivc represents the number of reactive power (2) Power Flow Constraint
compensation points of the i-th loss reduction modifi-
i,j ⎪
⎧
cation scheme; Qkvc denotes the reactive power com- ⎪
⎪ Pi � Ui 􏽘 Uj 􏼐Gij cos δij + Bij sin δij 􏼑,
pensation capacity at the j-th hour at the k-th point of the ⎪
⎨ j∈i
i-th loss reduction modification scheme; and τ vc repre- ⎪ (7)
⎪
⎪ Qi � Ui 􏽘 Uj 􏼐Gij sin δij − Bij cos δij 􏼑,
sents the unit construction cost for reactive power ⎪
⎩ j∈i
compensation.
where Pi represents the active power injected into the bus i;
(3) Replacement Cost of the Distribution Line. The replace- Qi represents the reactive power injected to the bus i; Ui
ment cost of the distribution line is related to the length and represents the voltage of bus i; δij denotes the phasor be-
type of the line, which is calculated using the following tween bus i and j; Gij denotes the conductance between bus i
equation: and j; Bij represents the susceptance between bus i and j; and
Gii + jBii represents the self-admittance of bus i.
Nil
Cil � 􏽘 Likl · τ il,kl , (4) (3) Branch Transmission Capacity Constraint. The actual
kl �1
transmission capacity of the branch usually cannot exceed
where Nil represents the number of distribution lines that the maximum transmission capacity of the branch. In order
need to be replaced in the i-th loss reduction modification to make the current operate within the normal range, the
scheme; Likl represents the length of the kl-th distribution branch transmission capacity constraint is expressed in the
line to be replaced in the i-th loss reduction modification following equation:
scheme; and τ il,kl represents the unit construction cost of the 0 ≤ Iij ≤ Imax , (8)
kl-th distribution line to be replaced in the i-th loss reduction
modification scheme. where Imax is the maximum allowable flow carrying capacity
of the branch.
(4) Replacement Cost of the Distribution Transformer. The
replacement cost of the distribution transformer is related to (4) Node Voltage Constraint. In order to make the node
the type and capacity of the distribution transformer, which voltage operate within the normal range, the node voltage
is described in the following equation: constraint is expressed as shown in the following equation:
Complexity 5

Umin ≤ Ui ≤ Umax , (9) BLR � Closs1 − Closs2 , (13)

where Umin and Umax are the minimum and maximum where Closs1 represents the power loss cost of the distribution
values of the node voltage, respectively. network feeder before the loss reduction modification and
Closs2 denotes the power loss cost after the loss reduction
(5) Reactive Power Compensation Capacity Constraint. The modification.
constraint of reactive power compensation capacity is shown The solution process of the combined loss reduction
in the following equation: strategy optimization model based on the cost-benefit ratio
Qi, min ≤ Qi ≤ Qi, max , (10) is shown in Figure 3. The specific steps are described as
follows:
where Qi, min and Qi, max represent the minimum and Step 1: based on the loss reduction strategies generated
maximum values of reactive power compensation capacity at by the results of power loss weak point analysis, the loss
bus i, respectively. reduction strategies that meet the constraints (power
flow constraint, branch transmission capacity con-
straint, node voltage constraint, and reactive power
2.2.3. Solution Method Based on Cost-Benefit Ratio. The compensation capacity constraint) are selected through
purpose of solving the combined loss reduction strategy power flow calculation. Then, the loss reduction cost,
optimization model is to optimize the set of multiple loss loss reduction benefit, and cost-benefit ratio when each
reduction modification schemes composed of different loss loss reduction strategy is implemented separately are
reduction strategies for all loss reduction objects (distri- calculated.
bution lines, distribution transformers, etc.), formulating a
loss reduction modification scheme with the best compre- Step 2: according to the order of cost-benefit ratio, the
hensive benefit of loss reduction, considering both the effect loss reduction strategies with the lowest cost-benefit
of loss reduction and the economy of loss reduction. The ratio of each loss reduction object are selected and
current research generally solves the combined loss re- determined as the individual optimal loss reduction
duction strategy optimization model through the enumer- strategy corresponding to the loss reduction object.
ation method. For the alternative loss reduction Step 3: based on the individual optimal loss reduction
modification schemes that meet the constraints, the objec- strategies determined in Step 2, a set of alternative
tive function values are directly compared to determine the strategies for the loss reduction modification scheme
final loss reduction modification scheme with the best are constructed according to the order of the cost-
comprehensive benefit of loss reduction. benefit ratio from low to high.
However, the number of alternative loss reduction Step 4: the number of loss reduction strategies in the
modification schemes is closely related to the number of loss loss reduction modification scheme, r, is set to 1.
reduction objects determined by power loss weak point Step 5: the first r alternative loss reduction strategies are
analysis results and the number of corresponding loss re- combined to construct a loss reduction modification
duction strategies. Thus, there may be a huge number of scheme, and a loss reduction cost-benefit analysis is
alternative loss reduction modification schemes, which will conducted based on the power flow calculation.
inevitably lead to a large amount of calculation, resulting in
low solution efficiency of the optimization model. A solution Step 6: if the termination condition is not met, then
method based on the cost-benefit ratio is proposed in this r � r + 1, continue to Step 5; if the termination condi-
paper to solve the above problem. tion is met, the current loss reduction modification
In this paper, the cost-benefit ratio, μLR, represents the scheme is determined as the final distribution network
ratio of the cost of loss reduction, CLR, to the benefit of loss loss reduction modification scheme. The termination
reduction, BLR, as shown in equation (11). CLR consists of the condition in this paper is that Ploss% < η.
replacement cost of distribution lines, the replacement cost It is worth noting that if the loss reduction modification
of distribution transformers, and the cost of reactive power scheme combines all the alternative strategies and cannot be
compensation, described in equation (12). BLR is the cost less than the target power loss rate, it is necessary to re-
corresponding to the loss reduction electricity after the loss generate loss reduction strategies with better loss reduction
reduction modification in equation (13). It can be seen that effects based on the power loss weak points.
when CLR is lower and BLR is higher, the corresponding μLR
is smaller, which means that the corresponding loss re-
duction strategy should be selected. 3. Case Study
CLR In this section, the data used in the experiment are first
μLR � , (11)
BLR described. The loss reduction result of the selected feeder of
the distribution network is displayed in the remaining
CLR � Cvc + Cl + Ct , (12) sections.
6 Complexity

Build a set of alternative

loss reduction strategies

Loss reduction strategies based on weak point Alternative loss Cost–benefit

reduction strategy 1 ratio
Distribution Distribution Reactive
line transformer compensation Alternative loss Low
reduction strategy 2
Loss

…
reduction L1 … Ll T1 … Tt C1 … Cc High
Alternative loss
object
reduction strategy Nmul
… … …

Corresponding NLl NTt NCc

loss loss loss loss r=1
reduction reduction reduction reduction
measures strategies strategies strategies
Combine the previous r
r=r+1
loss reduction strategies
Power flow calculation

Calculate the cost–benefit ratio Construct a loss

reduction modification
Cost–benefit ratio order scheme
Determine the individual optimal Power flow calculation
loss reduction strategy for each loss
reduction object rp < raim

Yes
Construct a final loss No
reduction modification
scheme

Figure 3: The solution process of the combined loss reduction strategy optimization model based on the cost-benefit ratio.

3.1. Dataset. The dataset utilized in this paper was collected 3.3. Generation of Loss Reduction Strategy. Based on the
from the Tianjin Electric Power Company in China. A 10 kV typical loss reduction scenario, the result of the power flow
feeder of the distribution network is selected to conduct loss calculation is that the power loss rate of the feeder in
reduction, the topology of which is shown in Figure 4. The Figure 4 is 6.4%, and its average power factor is 0.9 when no
data, covering from January 1, 2019, to December 31, 2019, loss reduction strategies are selected in this typical scenario.
include the topology parameters, the parameters of power The power factor of each public transformer is shown in
equipment, and load. Figure 7.
Compared with normal feeders, the feeders in the dis- In order to generate targeted loss reduction strategies,
tribution network that need loss reduction generally have a according to the power flow calculation results and the
higher power loss rate with a part of aged power equipment. power equipment parameters set above, the loss reduction
Thus, in order to simulate the aging situation, the relevant strategies for each loss reduction object are proposed from
parameters of the distribution lines, distribution trans- the three aspects of distribution lines, transformers, and
formers, and loads are modified to a certain extent. The reactive power compensation. The details of the specific loss
specific modification is shown in Table 1. The parameter reduction strategies presented in this section are shown in
modification method of the aged transformer and the aged Tables 2–4, the specific new type numbers of which are
lines is to change their resistance parameters. In this paper, shown in Tables S1–S3 in Supplementary Material, re-
their resistance parameters are increased to 1.04∼1.14 times spectively. The main ideas for generating loss reduction
of the original values [19]. strategies in this paper are as follows:
(1) Distribution line: for severely aged lines or bare
overhead conductors, replace them with new con-
3.2. Typical Scenario Generation for Loss Reduction. In order
ductors or build new overhead insulated conductors/
to generate a typical loss reduction scenario, the daily load
cables with the same cross-section according to
curves sampled every 15 minutes of each distribution
actual conditions. The conductors can also be ex-
transformer in Figure 4 are clustered based on K-means
panded accordingly considering the development
[20,21]. Taking transformer T1 as an example, the load
requirements of the load;
clustering results of transformer is shown in Figure 5.
Figure 6 shows the center curves of the three clusters with (2) Distribution transformers: replace S7 series and
the largest number of samples of part of distribution other high-loss old transformers with S11, S13, or
transformers. The cluster center of the cluster with the amorphous alloy-type distribution transformers;
largest number of samples for each distribution transformer (3) Reactive power compensation: select the distribution
is taken as the typical load curve of each distribution transformer with a power factor less than 0.85 to
transformer in a typical loss reduction scenario. select reactive power compensation strategies,
Complexity 7

T11

SH16-M-630/10

T10

SCB10-630/10
T8
T9

SBH16-M-400/10 SCB10-630/10

Substation
T1

T2
S11-M-315/10
S11-M-315/10
T3
S11-M-315/10 T5 T6 T7

S11-M-315/10 SBH16-M-400/10
SBH15-M-400/10

T4

SBH15-M-315/10

Public transformer

Private transformer

Figure 4: The selected feeder topology for loss reduction.

Table 1: Parameter modification details of transformers and lines.

Equipment Head node of branch Tail node of branch Parameter modification details
13 14
Change the equipment type to type 11
16 17
18 19
Change the equipment type to type 11 and set a certain degree of aging
Transformer 27 28
51 52
51 53 Change the equipment type to type 7
55 56
12 13
18 20
21 22
22 23
Line Set a certain degree of aging
26 27
34 35
35 37
41 42
8 Complexity

80 120 50
100 200
40

Load (kW)
Load (kW)

60

Load (kW)
Load (kW)
80 30 150
40 60 20 100
20 40 10 50
20
20 40 60 80 20 40 60 80 20 40 60 80 20 40 60 80
Time (15min) Time (15 min) Time (15 min) Time (15 min)

(a) (b) (c) (d)

150 50 120
100 60
Load (kW)

Load (kW)

Load (kW)
40
Load (kW)

100 80 40
30
60
20 20
40
50 10 20
0
20 40 60 80 20 40 60 80 20 40 60 80 20 40 60 80
Time (15min) Time (15 min) Time (15 min) Time (15 min)

(e) (f ) (g) (h)

120 200 80
100
100
Load (kW)

Load (kW)
Load (kW)

Load (kW)

150 80 60
80
60 60 40
100
40 40
20
20 50
20
20 40 60 80 20 40 60 80 20 40 60 80 20 40 60 80
Time (15min) Time (15 min) Time (15 min) Time (15 min)

(i) (j) (k) (l)

Figure 5: Load clustering results of transformer T1.

T1 T2 T3 T4 T5
120 120 120 120 120
100 100 100 100 100
80 80 80 80 80
Load (kW)

Load (kW)

Load (kW)

Load (kW)

Load (kW)

60 60 60 60 60
40 40 40 40 40
20 20 20 20 20
0 0 0 0 0
0 50 100 0 50 100 0 50 100 0 50 100 0 50 100
Time (15 min) Time (15min) Time (15min) Time (15min) Time (15min)

(a) (b) (c) (d) (e)

T6 T7 T8 T9 T10
120 120 120 120 120
100 100 100 100 100
Load (kW)

Load (kW)

Load (kW)

Load (kW)

Load (kW)

80 80 80 80 80
60 60 60 60 60
40 40 40 40 40
20 20 20 20 20
0 0 0 0 0
0 50 100 0 50 100 0 50 100 0 50 100 0 50 100
Time (15 min) Time (15min) Time (15min) Time (15min) Time (15min)

(f ) (g) (h) (i) (j)

Figure 6: The center curves of the three clusters with the largest number of samples of part of distribution transformers.
Complexity 9

0.95

Power factor
0.9

0.85
Power factor = 0.85

0.8

0 2 4 6 8 10 12
Transformer number
Figure 7: The power factor of each public transformer.

Table 2: Individual loss reduction strategies (distribution line).

Strategy Head node of Tail node of New type Strategy Head node of Tail node of New type
number branch branch number number branch branch number
1 12 13 9 18 34 35 11
2 12 13 10 19 34 35 17
3 12 13 17 20 35 37 10
4 12 13 6 21 35 37 11
5 18 20 10 22 35 37 17
6 18 20 11 23 41 42 10
7 18 20 17 24 41 42 11
8 21 22 10 25 41 42 17
9 21 22 11 26 30 31 10
10 21 22 17 27 30 31 11
11 22 23 10 28 30 31 17
12 22 23 11 29 31 32 10
13 22 23 17 30 31 32 11
14 26 27 10 31 31 32 17
15 26 27 11 32 42 43 10
16 26 27 17 33 42 43 11
17 34 35 10 34 42 43 17

Table 3: Individual loss reduction strategies (distribution transformer).

Strategy Head node of Tail node of New type Strategy Head node of Tail node of New type
number branch branch number number branch branch number
1 18 19 11 5 51 53 12
2 27 28 11 6 51 53 20
3 51 52 12 7 55 56 12
4 51 52 20 8 55 56 20

Table 4: Individual loss reduction strategies (reactive power compensation).

Strategy number Load compensation node Target power factor Strategy number Load compensation node Target power factor
1 24 0.9 16 24 0.95
2 19 0.9 17 19 0.95
3 14 0.9 18 14 0.95
4 24 0.91 19 24 0.96
5 19 0.91 20 19 0.96
6 14 0.91 21 14 0.96
7 24 0.92 22 24 0.97
8 19 0.92 23 19 0.97
10 Complexity

Table 4: Continued.
Strategy number Load compensation node Target power factor Strategy number Load compensation node Target power factor
9 14 0.92 24 14 0.97
10 24 0.93 25 24 0.98
11 19 0.93 26 19 0.98
12 14 0.93 27 14 0.98
13 24 0.94 28 24 0.99
14 19 0.94 29 19 0.99
15 14 0.94 30 14 0.99

Table 5: Unit construction cost of related power equipment.

Equipment Type Unit construction cost Unit
YJV22-3 ∗ 50 11.5 ×104¥/km
YJV22-3 ∗ 70 40 ×104¥/km
Line YJV22-3 ∗ 120 60 ×104¥/km
JKLYJ-70 16 ×104¥/km
JkLYJ-120 24 ×104¥/km
S11-315 9 ×104¥
Transformer S11-630 13 ×104¥
S13-630 15 ×104¥
Reactive compensation — 80 ¥/kVar

Table 6: Cost-benefit calculation results of individual loss reduction strategies (distribution transformers).
Strategy number Loss reduction rate (%) Loss reduction benefit (×104¥) Loss reduction cost (×104¥) Cost-benefit ratio
1 0.028 144.2885 9 0.062
2 0.006 144.2496 9 0.062
3 0.006 144.2499 13 0.090
4 0.006 144.2499 15 0.104
5 0.020 144.2742 13 0.090
6 0.020 144.2742 15 0.104
7 0.006 144.2498 13 0.090
8 0.006 144.2498 15 0.104
Loss reduction

0.2
rate (%)

0.1

0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Strategy number
(a)
benefit (×104¥)
Loss reduction

144.5

144
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Strategy number
(b)
0.5
Cost–benefit
ratio

0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Strategy number
(c)

Figure 8: Cost-benefit calculation results of individual loss reduction strategies (distribution lines).
Complexity 11

Loss reduction
0.5

rate (%)
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Strategy number
(a)
benefit (×104¥)
Loss reduction

145

144.5

144
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Strategy number
(b)
0.4
Cost–benefit
ratio

0.2

0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Strategy number
(c)

Figure 9: Cost-benefit calculation results of individual loss reduction strategies (reactive power compensation).

Table 7: Details of the individual optimal loss reduction strategies after sorting.
Number Equipment Corresponding strategy number Number Equipment Corresponding strategy number
1 Transformer 1 11 Line 28
2 Transformer 2 12 Line 31
3 Line 1 13 Line 34
4 Transformer 5 14 Line 10
5 Transformer 3 15 Line 19
6 Transformer 7 16 Line 25
7 Reactive power compensation 2 17 Line 13
8 Reactive power compensation 3 18 Line 16
9 Reactive power compensation 1 19 Line 22
10 Line 7

making its power factor reach the target value each loss reduction object can be determined. Table 7 and
0.9∼0.99. Figure 10 show the details of the individual optimal loss
reduction strategies after sorting and the corresponding loss
reduction rate, loss reduction benefit, and cost-benefit ratio,
3.4. Cost-Benefit Analysis of Individual Loss Reduction
respectively.
Strategy. Table 5 lists the unit construction cost of power
The cost-benefit ratio of replacing the transformer type
equipment related to the loss reduction strategy selected in
or reactive power compensation is lower. Thus, their
this paper.
comprehensive loss reduction benefit after considering the
From Tables 2 to 5, in the typical loss reduction scenario,
investment cost and the extent of loss reduction is better.
the loss reduction rate, loss reduction benefit, and the
This is because the distribution feeder has a relatively high
corresponding cost-benefit ratio of each individual loss
cable rate. Most of the bare overhead conductors to be
reduction strategy compared to the case where no loss re-
renovated are basically not on the main trunk. Therefore,
duction strategies can be calculated. The calculation results
when an individual loss reduction strategy is selected, the
are shown in Table 6 and Figures 8 and 9.
corresponding loss reduction rate is relatively small.
According to the sequence of the individual optimal loss
3.5. Combined Loss Reduction Strategy Optimization. reduction strategies listed in Table 7, the alternative loss
Based on the cost-benefit calculation results of each indi- reduction strategy is combined in sequence starting from the
vidual loss reduction strategy, the cost-benefit ratio order first one. The power flow calculation is used to determine
can be obtained by sorting the cost-benefit ratio from low to whether the target power loss rate value 6% is met. Figure 11
high, and the individual optimal loss reduction strategies for shows the result of the power loss rate after a combination of
12 Complexity

Loss reduction
0.2 –4
×10

rate (%)
6
0.1 4
2
14 16 18 20
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
Strategy number
(a)
benefit (×104¥)
Loss reduction

144.5

144
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
Strategy number
(b)
0.2
Cost–benefit
ratio

0.1

0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
Strategy number
(c)

Figure 10: The cost-benefit calculation result of the individual optimal loss reduction strategy based on the cost-benefit ratio ranking.

points was obtained. To achieve the purpose of targeted loss

6.6
reduction, the corresponding power loss reduction strategies
6.4 were generated considering three aspects of replacing dis-
Power loss rate (%)

tribution lines, distribution transformers, and reactive

6.2 power compensation. The corresponding power loss re-
duction strategies were generated considering three aspects:
Power loss rate = 6% replacing distribution lines, distribution transformers, and
6
reactive power compensation. A combined power loss re-
5.8 duction strategy optimization model considering the com-
prehensive benefits of power loss reduction was established.
5.6 In order to solve the problem that the enumeration methods
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18
Number of strategies
were generally used in most of the existing research to solve
the above model, which caused a low efficiency of power loss
Figure 11: The result of the power loss rate after a combination of reduction, a method for solving the optimization model
multiple strategies. based on the cost-benefit ratio was proposed. The result of
the case study suggested that the proposed loss reduction
multiple strategies. It can be seen that when the top 9 kinds optimization method could effectively formulate a reason-
of loss reduction strategies are combined, the power loss rate able loss modification scheme in the distribution network.
of the feeder is already less than 6% at this time. After the loss
reduction, the average power factor is 0.93, the loss re- Data Availability
duction benefit is 1.4499 million yuan, and the loss reduction
cost is 1.152 million yuan. The data used to support the findings of this study are in-
cluded within the article.

4. Conclusions Conflicts of Interest

In this paper, a framework of combined power loss re- The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest
duction strategy optimization is proposed to improve the regarding the publication of this paper.
power loss reduction effect in the distribution network,
containing three stages: weak point analysis of power loss, Acknowledgments
generation of loss reduction strategy, and combined loss
reduction strategy optimization. This work was supported in part by National Natural Science
Experiments were conducted using the dataset from the Foundation of China under Grant 51807023 and Natural
Tianjin Electric Power Company in China. Based on the Science Foundation of Jiangsu Province under Grant
power flow calculation, the analysis result of power loss weak BK20180382.
Complexity 13

Supplementary Materials [14] Y. J. Zhang, X. T. Zhang, Q. H. Li, L. Ran, and Z. X. Cai, “Gray
theory based energy saving potential evaluation and planning
Table S1: line types. Table S2: transformer types. Table S3: for distribution networks,” International Journal of Electrical
branch information of the 10 kV feeder in the actual dis- Power & Energy Systems, vol. 57, pp. 298–303, 2014.
tribution network. (Supplementary Materials) [15] B. C. Neagu, O. Ivanov, and G. Georgescu, “Reactive power
compensation in distribution networks using the bat algo-
rithm,” in Prceedings of the 2016 International Conference and
References Exposition on Electrical and Power Engineering (EPE), Iasi,
Romania, October 2016.
[1] J. B. Leite and J. R. S. Mantovani, “Detecting and locating non- [16] A. R. Gupta and A. Kumar, “Energy saving using D-STAT-
technical losses in modern distribution networks,” IEEE COM placement in radial distribution system under recon-
Transactions on Smart Grid, vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 1023–1032, 2018. figured network,” Energy Procedia, vol. 90, pp. 124–136, 2016.
[2] J. Jun Wang, Z. Jiangping Yu, and J. Yu, “Practical calculation [17] S. A. Nowdeh, I. F. Davoudkhani, M. J. H. Moghaddam et al.,
method of theoretical line loss in 10 kV power distribution “Fuzzy multi-objective placement of renewable energy
network based on Dscada,” in Proceedings of the 2008 China sources in distribution system with objective of loss reduction
International Conference on Electricity Distribution, and reliability improvement using a novel hybrid method,”
Guangzhou, China, December 2008. Applied Soft Computing, vol. 77, pp. 761–779, 2019.
[3] C. M. P. Dos Santos, “Determination of electric power losses [18] W. Huang, J. Jiang, W. Chen et al., “Study on differentiated
in distribution systems,” in Proceedings of the 2006 IEEE/PES energy saving and loss reduction countermeasures for me-
Transmission & Distribution Conference and Exposition: Latin dium-voltage and low-voltage distribution network,” Power
America, Caracas, Venezuela, August 2006. Capacitor & Reactive Power Compensation, vol. 41, no. 5,
[4] S. Zhang, X. Dong, Y. Xing, and Y. Wang, “Analysis of pp. 0164–0170, 2020.
influencing factors of transmission line loss based on GBDT [19] L. Ding, “Research on the influence of aging and high re-
algorithm,” in Proceedings of the 2019 International Confer- sistance grounding fault on 10 kV line,” Jiangxi Electric Power,
ence on Communications, Information System and Computer vol. 44, no. 8, pp. 35–38, 2020.
Engineering (CISCE), Haikou, China, July 2019. [20] J. A. H. A. Wong, “Algorithm as 136: a K-means clustering
[5] J. F. Manirakiza and A. O. Ekwue, “Technical losses reduction algorithm,” Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, vol. 28,
strategies in a transmission network,” in Proceedings of the no. 1, pp. 100–108, 1979.
2019 IEEE Africon, Accra, Ghana, September 2019. [21] M. Ester, H.-P. Kriegel, J. Sander, and X. Xu, “A density-based
[6] M. Kundu, S. Jadhav, and K. Bagdia, “Technical loss reduction algorithm for discovering clusters in large spatial databases
through active repair of distribution transformers: results with noise,” in Proceedings of the Second International Con-
from the field,” in Proceedings of the 2017 7th International ference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, Portland,
Conference on Power Systems (ICPS), Pune, India, December OR, USA, August 1996.
2017.
[7] D.-S. He, W. Lin, and Z.-Q. Liang, “The Energy efficiency
diagnosis research of regional power grid loss reduction,” in
Proceedings of the 2014 China International Conference on
Electricity Distribution (CICED), Shenzhen, Chinadoi, Sep-
tember 2014.
[8] M. T. Au, T. M. Anthony, and M. Mohamad, “Strategies in
technical loss reduction and it’s impact on harmonic per-
formance of distribution network,” in in Proceedings of the
2009 IEEE Bucharest PowerTech, Bucharest, Romania, June
2009.
[9] L. Ying, M. Liu, L. Deng et al., “A comprehensive review of the
loss reduction in distribution network,” Power System Pro-
tection and Control, vol. 45, no. 19, pp. 162–169, 2017.
[10] D. K. Khatod, V. Pant, and J. Sharma, “Evolutionary pro-
gramming based optimal placement of renewable distributed
generators,” IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, vol. 28,
no. 2, pp. 683–695, 2013.
[11] B. R. Pereira, G. R. M. Martins da Costa, J. Contreras, and
J. R. S. Mantovani, “Optimal distributed generation and re-
active power allocation in electrical distribution systems,”
IEEE Transactions on Sustainable Energy, vol. 7, no. 3,
pp. 975–984, 2016.
[12] L. Xie, Z. Tang, X. Huang et al., “Bi-layer dynamic reconfi-
guration of a distribution network considering the uncer-
tainty of distributed generation and electric vehicles,” Power
System Protection and Control, vol. 48, no. 10, pp. 1–11, 2020.
[13] X. Wang, Z. Wei, G. Sun et al., “Multi-objective distribution
network reconfiguration considering uncertainties of dis-
tributed generation and load,” Electric Power Automation
Equipment, vol. 36, no. 6, pp. 116–121, 2016.