International Journal of Automation and Power Engineering, 2012, 1: 10-18 - 10 -

Published Online April 2012

www.ijape.org

DG Allocation and Sizing in Distribution Network

Using Modified Shuffled Frog Leaping Algorithm
M.A.Taghikhani
Department of Engineering, Imam Khomeini International University, Qazvin, Iran
[email protected]

Abstract-- Distributed generation (DG) will have a growing role in the future of the power systems. DG reduces line losses and
improves system voltage profile. Many researchers have used evolutionary methods for finding the optimal DG placement. The
present study indicates that placing and application of DGs by modified shuffled frog leaping algorithm (MSFLA) will reduce
losses and improve voltage profile of power systems. Voltage Profile Improvement Index (VPII) and Line Loss Reduction
Index (LLRI) are analyzed in the paper. The MSFLA is simulated with MATLAB software on IEEE-70 bus radial distribution
system. Test results indicate that MSFLA method can obtain better results than the SFLA method on the 70-bus radial
distribution systems.

Keyword: Distributed Generation (DG); Line Loss Reduction Index; Modified Shuffled Frog Leaping Algorithm (MSFLA);
Voltage Profile.

voltage control to calculate the maximum allowable DG

1. INTRODUCTION capacity at a given node in the distribution network. In [9] a
A distributed power unit can be connected directly to the distributed micro-grid planning model has been presented to
consumer or to a utility's transmission or distribution system optimize the locating and the unit capacities within DG
to provide peaking services .Distributed generation provides a micro-grid, in which wind power and photovoltaic power are
multitude of services to utilities and consumers, including taken into consideration simultaneously with both Elitism
standby generation, peaks chopping capability, base load Genetic Algorithm (EGA) and PSO.
generation. A multi-objective index-based approach for optimally
The key element of this new environment is to build and determining the size and location of multi-distributed
operate several DG units near load centers instead of generation (multi-DG) units in distribution systems with
expanding the central-station power plants located far away different load models based on PSO is introduced in [10,11]
from customers to meet increasing load demand. Distributed and a combined genetic algorithm (GA)/(PSO) is presented
generation technologies can enhance the efficiency, reliability, in [12] for optimal location and sizing of DG on distribution
voltage profile, and operational benefits of the distribution systems. A population-based heuristic approach for optimal
system. DG can be powered by both conventional and location and capacity of DGs in distribution networks, with
renewable energy sources [1]. Several DG options are fast the objectives of minimization of fuel cost, power loss
becoming economically viable [2-3]. Technologies that utilize reduction, and voltage profile improvement is proposed in [13]
conventional energy sources includes gas turbines, micro that the approach employs an improved group search
turbines and else engines. Currently, the ones that show optimizer (iGSO) by incorporating PSO into group search
promises for DG applications are wind electric conversion optimizer (GSO) for optimal setting of DGs. A new hybrid
systems, geothermal systems, solar-thermal–electric method which employs discrete PSO and optimal power flow
systems, photovoltaic systems and fuel cells [4-5]. is introduced in [14] which could apply to connect distributed
A stochastic dynamic multi-objective model for integration generation systems in a distribution network choosing among
of DG in distribution networks is proposed in [6] with a a large number of potential combinations.
binary PSO algorithm. A distribution system expansion This paper presents a modified shuffled frog leaping
planning strategy encompassing renewable DG systems with algorithm (MSFLA) for Distributed Generation Allocation
schedulable and intermittent power generation patterns is and sizing to Reduce Losses and Improve Voltage Profile
presented in [7] that a solution algorithm integrating TRIBE processes. The SFLA is a meta-heuristic search method
PSO and ordinal optimization (OO) is developed to obtain inspired from the memetic evolution of a group of frogs when
optimal and near-optimal solutions for system planners. A seeking for food. It consists of a frog leaping rule for local
DG interconnection planning study framework is brought in search and a memetic shuffling rule for global information
[8] that includes a coordinated feeder reconfiguration and exchange. In this paper, a new frog leaping rule is proposed to
 - 11 -

improve the local exploration of the SFLA. The main idea VPW
behind the new frog leaping rule is to extend the direction and VPII = DG
(4)
the length of each frog’s jump by emulating frog’s perception VPWO
and action uncertainties. The modification widens the local DG
search space, thus helps to prevent premature convergence Based on this definition, the following attributes are:
and improves the performance of the SFLA. The proposed VPII < 1, DG has improved the voltage profile of the system,
method is easy to implement and program with basic VPII = 1, DG has no impact on the system voltage profile,
mathematical and logic operations. It can also handle VPII > 1 DG has not beneficial.
objective functions with stochastic nature and does not Where, VP W/DG, VP Wo/DG are the measures of the voltage
require a good initial solution to start its iteration process. profile of the system with DG and without DG respectively.
The general expression for VP is given as,
2. APPROACH TO QUANTIFY THE N bus
BENEFITS OF DG VP = ∑ Vi − Vi ,ref (5)
i =1
In order to evaluate and quantify the benefits of distributed
generation suitable mathematical models must be employed where, is the Magnitude of voltage of bus i. is the
along with distribution system models and power flow Magnitude of voltage of bus slack for VP provides an
calculations to arrive at indices of benefits. Among the many opportunity to quantify and aggregate the importance,
benefits two major ones are considered: Voltage profile amounts, and the voltage levels at which loads are being
improvement, line loss reduction. supplied at the various load busses in the system. This
expression should be used only after making sure that the
2.1 Line Loss Reduction Index
voltages at all the load busses are within allowable minimum
Another major benefit offered by installation of DG is the and maximum limits, typically between 0.95 p.u. and 1.05p.u.
reduction in electrical line losses [15]. By installing DG line In this case all the load buses are given equal importance. In
currents can be reduced, thus helping to reduce electrical line reality, DG can be installed almost anywhere in the system.
losses. The proposed line loss reduction index (LLRI) is Therefore, VPII can be used to select the best location for DG.
defined as
3. LOAD FLOW
LLW
LLRI = DG
(1) On account of the some inherent features of distribution
LLWO systems such as; radial structure, unbalanced distributed loads,
DG large number of nodes, a wide range of R/X ratios; the
Where, LLw/DG is the total line losses in the system with conventional techniques developed for transmission systems
the employment of DG and LLwo/DG is the total line losses generally fail on the determination of optimum size and
in the system without DG and it can be location of distributed generations. In this study, the proposed
M
= 3∑ I i × R × Di
2 methodology is based on the equivalent current injection that
LLW (2) uses the Bus–Injection to Branch-Current (BIBC) and
DG i =1
Branch-Current to Bus-Voltage (BCBV) matrices which were
Where, Ii is the per unit line current in distribution line i with developed based on the topological structure of the
the employment of DG, R is the line resistance (pu/km), Di is distribution systems and is implemented for the load flow
the distribution line length (km), and M is the number of lines analysis of the distribution systems. The details of both
in the system. matrices can be found in [16].The methodology proposed
Similarly, LLwo/DG is expressed as here requires only one base case load flow to determine the
M
= 3∑ I i × R × Di
2 optimum size and location of DG. Detailed description of
LLWo (3) BIBC and BCBV matrix’s building algorithm is omitted due
DG i =1
to the lack of space and can be found in [16].
where, Ii is the per-unit line current in distribution line i
without DG. 4. THE PROPOSED MSFLA OPTIMIZATION
Based on this definition, the following attributes are: OF DG LOCATION AND CAPACITY IN A
LLRI <1, DG has reduced electrical line losses,
LLRI =1, DG has no impact on system line losses,
RADIAL DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM
LLRI >1, DG has caused more electrical line losses. 4.1 The Objective Function
This index can be used to identify the best location and sizing
The proposed work aims at minimizing the combined
to install DG to maximize the line loss reduction.
objective function designed to reduce power loss and also
2.2 Voltage Profile Improvement Index improve voltage profile system for various values of
distributed generations. The main objective function is
The inclusion of DG results in improved voltage profile at
defined as
various buses. The Voltage Profile Improvement Index (VPII)
min Ftotal = Ploss + ∑ λ p (V p )
n
quantifies the improvement in the voltage profile (VP) with 2
(6)
the inclusion of DG [15]. It is expressed as,
p =1
 - 12 -

where, λp is the penalty factor of bus voltages and is like method.To ensure global exploration, after a defined
heuristically taken as 1,Ploss is the real power loss obtained number of memeplex evolution steps (i.e. local search
from the load flow solution at the base case, VP is the voltage iterations), the virtual frogs are shuffled and reorganized into
profile of the buses. new memeplexes in a technique similar to that used in the
shuffled complex evolution algorithm. In addition, to provide
4.2. Constraints
the opportunity for random generation of improved
The constraints are listed as follows: information, random virtual frogs are generated and
• Distribution line absolute power limits substituted in the population if the local search cannot find
better solutions. The local searches and the shuffling
≤ pij . max
Line Line
Pij (7) processes continue until defined convergence criteria are
Line Line satisfied. The flowchart of the SFLA is illustrated in Fig.1.
Pij and pij ,max are the absolute power and its The local search block in the flowchart is shown later in
corresponding maximum allowable value flowing over the Fig. 5. The SFLA is described in details as follows. First, an
distribution line between the nodes i and j, respectively. initial population of N frogs P {X1,X2,...,XN} is created
• Bus voltage limit Bus voltage amplitudes are limited as randomly. For S-dimensional problems (S variables), the
Vmin Vi Vmax (8) position of a frog ith in the search space is represented as
Where Vmin and Vmax are the minimum and maximum values Xi [x1,x2,…,xiS]T.A fitness function is defined to evaluate
of bus voltage amplitudes, respectively. the frog’s position. For minimization problems, the frog’s
fitness can be defined as,
• Radial structure of the network fitness 1/[ f (X ) C] , (12)
M Nbus Nf (9)
Where M is the number of branches, Nbus is the number of Begin
nodes and Nf is the number of sources.
• Power limits of DG
Initialize:
≤ QDGi ≤ QDGi
min max
QDGi - Population size (N)
- Number of memeplexes (m)
- Number of evolution step within
and
each memeplex( Jmax)
≤ PDGi ≤ PDGi
min max
PDGi (10)
Generate population (P) randomly
Where Pi and Qi are the injected active and reactive power of
DG components at the ith bus.
Evaluate the fitness of (P)
• Subject to power balance constraints
N sc N SC

∑ PDGi =∑ PDi + PL
i =1 i =1
(11) Sort (P) in descending order

Where: N sc is total number of sections, PL is the real power Partition (P) into m memeplexes
loss in the system, PDGi is the real power generation DG at
Local search
bus i, PDi is the power demand at bus i.
Iterative updating the
worst frog of each memeplex
4.3 Modified Shuffled Frog Leaping Algorithm
4.3.1 Shuffled frog-leaping algorithm
The SFLA is a meta-heuristic optimization method that Shuffle the memeplexes
mimics the memetic evolution of a group of frogs when
seeking for the location that has the maximum amount of
Convergence NO
available food. The algorithm contains elements of local criteria satisfied ?
search and global information exchange ([17], [18]). The
SFLA involves a population of possible solutions defined by Yes
a set of virtual frogs that is partitioned into subsets referred to Determine the best solution
as memeplexes. Within each memeplex, the individual frog
holds ideas that can be influenced by the ideas of other frogs,
and the ideas can evolve through a process of memetic End
evolution.
The SFLA performs simultaneously an independent local Figure 1: Flowchart of the SFLA
search in each memeplex using a particle swarm optimization
 - 13 -

and for maximization problem, the frog’s fitness can be The calculations continue for a predefined number of
simply defined as, memetic evolutionary steps within each memeplex, and then
fitness f (X ) C , (13) the whole population is mixed together in the shuffling
process. The local evolution and global shuffling continue
Where f(X) is the cost function to be optimized, and C is a
until convergence criteria are satisfied. Usually, the
constant chosen to ensure that the fitness value is positive.
convergence criteria can be defined as follows:
Afterwards, the frogs are sorted in a descending order
according to their fitness. Then, the entire population is
i. The relative change in the fitness of the best frog within a
divided into m memeplexes, each containing n frogs (i.e.N number of consecutive shuffling iterations is less than a pre-
m n ), in such a way that the first frog goes to the first specified tolerance;
memeplex, the second frog goes to the second memeplex, the
mth frog goes to the mth memeplex, and the (m+1)th frog goes ii. The maximum user-specified number shuffling iterations is
back to the first memeplex, etc.Fig. 2 illustrate this memeplex reached.
partitioning process. The SFLA will stop when one of the above criteria is arrived
first.

1st frog
1st memeplex
2nd frog
mth frog
(m+1)th frog
(m+2)th frog
2nd memeplex
(2m)th frog

Figure. 3. The original frog leaping rule

((n-1).m+1)th frog 4.3.2 Modification of the frog leaping rule

mth memeplex
th In the natural memetic evolution of a frog population, the
((n-1).m+2) frog
ideas of the worse frogs are influenced by the ideas of the
(n.m)th frog better frogs, and the worse frogs tend to jump toward the
better ones for the possibility of having more foods. The frog
sorted population leaping rule in the SFLA is inspired from this social imitation,
Figure.2: Memeplex partitioning process but it performs only the jump of the worst frog toward the
best one. According to the original frog leaping rule presented
Let Mk is the set of frogs in the kth memeplex, this dividing above, the possible new position of the worst frog is restricted
process can be described by the following expression: in the line segment between its current position and the best
frog’s position, and the worst frog will never jump over the
Mk {X K+m(l-1) P|1 l n}, (1 k m) (14) best one (see Fig. 3). Clearly, this frog leaping rule limits the
local search space in each memetic evolution step. This
Within each memeplex, the frogs with the best and the worst limitation might not only slow down the convergence speed,
fitness are identified as Xb and Xw, respectively. Also, the but also cause premature convergence. In nature, because of
frog with the global best fitness is identified as Xg. During imperfect perception, the worst frog cannot locate exactly the
memeplex evolution, the worst frog Xw leaps toward the best best frog’s position, and because of inexact action, the worst
frog Xb. According to the original frog leaping rule, the frog cannot jump right to its target position. Considering
position of the worst frog is updated as follows: these uncertainties, we argue that the worst frog’s new
D = r.(Xb - Xw ) , (15) position is not necessary restricted in the line connecting its
current position and the best frog’s position. Furthermore, the
Xw (new) = Xw + D,( |D| Dmax ) , (16) worst frog could jump over the best one. This idea leads to a
Where r is a random number between 0 and 1; and Dmax is new frog leaping rule that extends the local search space as
the maximum allowed change of frog’s position in one jump. illustrated in Fig. 4 (for 2-dimensional problems). The new
Fig. 3 demonstrates the original frog leaping rule. If this frog leaping rule is expressed as:
leaping produces a better solution, it replaces the worst frog.
Otherwise, the calculations in (15) and (16) are repeated but
respect to the global best frog (i.e. Xg replaces Xb). If no
improvement becomes possible in this case, the worst frog is
deleted and a new frog is randomly generated to replace it.
 - 14 -

D = r.c(Xb Xw ) + W , (17)

W = [r1w1,max , r2w2,max ,…, rSwS ,max ]T , (18)

(19)

where r is a random number between 0 and 1; c is a

constant chosen in the range between 1and 2; ri (1 i S) are
random numbers between 1 and 1; wi,max (1 i S) are the
maximum allowed perception and action uncertainties in the
ith dimension of the search space; and Dmax is the maximum
Figure. 4. The new frog leaping r allowed distance of one jump. The flow chart of the local
memetic evolution using the proposed frog leaping rule is
Begin illustrated in Fig. 5.
The new frog leaping rule extends the local search space in
each memetic evolution step; as a result it might improve the
First memeplex: i = 1 algorithm in term of convergence rate and solution
performance provided that the vector Wmax=[w1,max, … ,
wS,max]T is appropriately chosen. However, if |Wmax| is too
First iteration: j = 1 large, the frog leaping rule will loss its directional
characteristic, and the algorithm will becomes more or less
random search. Therefore, choosing a proper maximum
Determine Xg, Xb, and Xw uncertainty vector is an issue to be considered for each
particular optimization problem.
Apply equations (17), (18) and (19) 4.3.3 MSFL algorithm for optimizing DG location and
capacity for reduce losses and voltage profile
Yes Is Xw(new) The sequential steps are as follows:
better than Xw? 1. Begin;
NO 2. Generate random population of P solutions (frogs);
3. For each individual i P: calculate fitness (i);
Apply equations (17), (18) and (19)
with replacing Xb by Xg 4. Sort the population P in descending order of their
fitness;
Yes 5. Divide P into m memeplexes;
Is Xw(new) 6. For each memeplex;
better than Xw ? 7. Determine the best and worst frogs;
No 8. Improve the worst frog position using Eqs. (17) ,
Generate a new frog randomly (18)and(19);
9. Repeat for a specific number of iterations;
10. End;
Replace the worst frog Xw
11. Combine the evolved memeplexes;
12. Sort the population P in descending order of their
Next jump: j = j +1 fitness;
Yes 13. Check if termination true;
j ≤ Jmax ? 14. End;
No
5. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS OF
Next memeplex: i = i +1
STANDARD IEEE 70 BUS SYSTEM
Yes
i≤m? The tested system is a 11-kV radial distribution system
No having two substations, four feeders, 70 nodes, and 69
branches as shown in Fig.6. The load data and branch data are
End
given in Table1.Data for this system are given in the
Figure. 5. Flow chart of the local search using the new frog Appendix [19].
leaping rule
 - 15 -

S/S - 1 22 20 21 1.133 1.110 90 50

1 23 21 22 0.475 0.465 50 30
F1 F2 24 17 23 2.214 1.505 60 40
•2 • 16 25 23 24 1.620 1.110 70 65
•3 • 17 23 26 24 25 1.080 0.734 75 65
27 25 26 0.540 0.367 75 60
• 4 •10 11 • 18 • 24 28 26 27 0.540 0.367 80 55
• • 25 29 27 28 1.080 0.734 85 70
•5 •19 •
• 12 • 26 30 28 29 1.080 0.734 95 70
•6 • 20 31 70 30 0.366 0.358 70 50
• 13 • 27 32 30 31 0.731 0.716 60 40
•7 21 •
33 31 32 0.731 0.716 13 8
•
68 • 14 • 28
•8 34 32 33 0.804 0.787 16 9
69 •
• 22 •
9 29 35 33 34 1.170 1.145 50 30
• • 15 67 • 36 34 35 0.768 0.752 40 28
50 •
• 38
•
66
37 35 36 0.731 0.716 60 40
38 36 37 1.097 1.074 40 30
• • 37
• 39 37 38 1.463 1.432 30 25
49 62 64
• • • • 40 32 39 1.080 0.734 75 45
65•
48 36 • 41 39 40 0.540 0.367 60 35
• • 43
•• 62 56 42 40 41 1.080 0.734 65 50
47 35 •
46
• 61 43 41 42 1.836 1.248 60 30
• • 55
34 42 44 42 43 1.296 0.881 18 10
• • • 45
• 54 45 40 44 1.188 0.807 16 10
33 41 • • • 46 44 45 0.540 0.367 80 50
• • 32 • 44 60 53 47 42 46 1.080 0.734 60 40
• 39 40 • • 57 52 48 35 47 0.540 0.367 80 65
31 • • 49 47 48 1.080 0.734 65 40
•
• 30 59 58 51 50 48 49 1.080 0.734 75 60
F3 F4 51 49 50 1.080 0.734 70 45
70
S/S- 2 52 70 51 0.366 0.358 60 40
53 51 52 1.463 1.432 20 11
Figure 6. Standard IEEE 70 bus system 54 52 53 1.463 1.432 40 30
55 53 54 0.914 0.895 36 24
Table 1: Line and load data 56 54 55 0.914 0.895 30 20
Line To 57 55 56 1.097 1.074 43 30
From
no bus 58 52 57 0.270 0.183 80 50
bus R ohm X ohm PLKW QLKVAR
59 57 58 0.270 0.183 85 60
1 1 2 1.097 1.074 100 90 60 58 59 0.810 0.550 65 45
2 2 3 1.463 1.423 60 40 61 59 60 1.296 0.881 25 10
3 3 4 0.731 0.716 150 130 62 55 62 1.118 0.807 10 5
4 4 5 0.366 0.358 75 50 63 61 62 1.118 0.807 90 60
5 5 6 1.828 1.790 15 9 64 62 63 0.810 0.550 125 110
6 6 7 1.097 1.074 18 14 65 63 64 1.620 1.101 30 20
7 7 8 0.731 0.716 13 10 66 64 65 1.080 0.734 130 120
8 8 9 0.731 0.716 16 11 67 65 66 0.540 0.367 75 60
9 4 10 1.080 0.734 20 10 68 66 67 1.080 0.734 25 15
10 10 11 1.620 1.101 16 9 69 9 50 0.908 0.726 - -
11 11 12 1.080 0.734 50 40 70 9 38 0.381 0.244 - -
12 12 13 1.350 0.917 75 60
13 13 14 0.810 0.550 25 15
14 14 15 1.944 1.321 40 25 5.1 Optimal allocation and sizing of distributed generation
15 7 68 1.080 0.734 80 50 Tables 2 shows the 70 bus radial systems optimal allocation
16 68 69 1.620 1.101 40 30 and sizing of distributed generation by SFLA and proposed
17 1 16 1.097 1.074 60 30 method (MSFLA) .For MSFLA and SFLA population size is
18 16 17 0.366 0.358 40 25 300. The maximum iteration for the MSFL algorithm is 5.
19 17 18 1.463 1.432 15 9 The number of memplexes is 15. The number of frogs in
20 18 19 0.914 0.895 13 7 memplex is 20. The Local iteration number in each
21 19 20 0.804 0.787 30 20
 - 16 -

memeplexes is 5. The Global iteration number of algorithm is Table 5 and Table 6 indicates that for the SFLA and MSFLA
5. The number of DG (DG is capable of supplying only real methods considered, the values of the voltage profile of the
power) for Optimal allocation and sizing is 13 (thirteen). The system have improved considerably by connecting a DG of
maximum real power of DG is 50kw. 50 kw capacities. The voltage profile of the base case was
calculated to be 0.5157kv. When a DG rating of 50 kw were
Table 2: Optimal DG allocation and sizing for DG
connected for case study by SFLA and MSFLA . The voltage
By MSFLA By SFLA profile of the system has improved which clearly indicates the
Bus Bus need of a DG. The percentage of voltage profile improvement
DGsize(kw) DGsize(kw) is by means of (VPII) and a improvement of 6.61 % is
no no
26 48.7225 54 42.7448 obtained with SFLA and a reduction of 7.09 % with MSFLA
67 38.0563 14 41.5201 respectively.
44 29.1158 68 15.0686 Table 5. Voltage profile improvements for a DG rating of 50
59 44.6827 6 45.6470 kw by SFLA
28 41.7856 45 35.9678
68 25.0144 16 45.5061 DG rating of 50 kw
39 47.9189 18 49.1392
64 42.6504 27 43.1954 Method Improvement
50 47.0747 35 43.4727 VP(kv) VPII
33 47.3473 66 27.9072 (%)
61 38.2382 25 46.9886 Base case 0.5157 - -
14 46.4518 40 39.8541
27 41.3904 43 44.4546 SFLA 0.4816 0.9338 6.61
5.2 Results of power Loss Reduction and Improvement in
Voltage Profile of the system Table 6. Voltage profile improvements for a DG rating of 50
kw by MSFLA
The reduction power loss is obvious after connecting thirteen
DG as shown in Table 3 and Table 4. It indicates the DG rating of 50 kw
reduction power losses with installation of DG for rating of
Method Improvement
50 kw. The power loss for the base case without DG
VP(kv) VPII
installation is calculated by load flow solutions and is found (%)
to be 205.0669 kw. For DG rating of 50 kw the values of
power loss considerably reduces as indicated in Table 3 and Base case 0.5157 - -
Table 4.The percentage of power loss reduction is by means MSFLA 0.4791 0.9290 7.09
of (LLRI) and a reduction of 17.91 % is obtained with SFLA
and a reduction of 18.35 % with MSFLA respectively.
Figure 7 and Figure 8 shows variation of improvement in
Table 3. Power losses reduction results for a DG rating of 50 voltage profile at bus 70 for a DG rating of 50 kw.
kw by SFLA
11.1
DG rating of 50 kw after DG installing by SFLA
11 base case
Method Power losses Reduction
LLRI 10.9
(kw) (%)
10.8
Base case 205.0669 - -
voltage profile

10.7
SFLA 168.3249 0.8208 17.91
10.6

Table 4. power losses reduction results for a DG rating of 50 10.5

kw by MSFLA
10.4
DG rating of 50 kw
10.3
Method Power losses Reduction
LLRI 10.2
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
(kw) (%) Bus Number

Base case 205.0669 - - Figure 7.Voltage profile improvement results by SFLA

MSFLA 167.4329 0.8164 18.35
 - 17 -

Table 7 shows the reduce in maximum objective function of

11.1 the system after connecting DG at buses using the modified
after DG installing by MSFLA
11 base case shuffled frog leaping algorithm.

10.9 6. CONCLUSION
10.8 The Distributed Generation (DG) in a distribution system
offers several benefits such as relieved transmission and
voltage profile

10.7 distribution congestion, voltage profile improvement, line

10.6
loss reduction, improvement in system, and enhanced utility
system reliability. The proposed work has presented an
10.5 approach to quantity some of the benefits of DG namely, real
power loss reduction and voltage profile improvement of
10.4
system.
10.3 The results of the proposed method as applied to IEEE-70 bus
system clearly show that DG can improve the voltage profile
10.2
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 and reduce real power losses. Both ratings and locations of
Bus Number DG have to be considered together very carefully to capture
Figure 8. Voltage profile improvement results by the maximum benefits of DG. In this study shows The better
MSFLA capability of modified shuffled frog leaping algorithm
(MSFLA) scale in shuffled frog leaping algorithm(SFLA) is
Before Optimal placement and sizing of distributed to reduce the objective function by optimizing the DG
generation, the minimum bus voltage is Vmin=V35=10.2001kv allocation and capacity.
= 0.9272p.u. After Optimal placement and sizing of
APPENDIX
distributed generation by SFLA and MSFLA, the minimum
bus voltage of the system has improved 10.2924kv=0.9356p.u. Other data: current carrying capacity of all tie branches are
and 10.3106kv=0.9373 p.u respectively. 234.0 A. The current carrying capacity of branches 1 to 8, 17
to 23, 31 to 39, and 52 to 57 is 270 A. For branches 9 to 16,
5.3 Comparison of objective function of SFLA and
24 to 30, 40 to 51, and 58 to 68, it is 208 A (see Table 1).
MSFLA
The problem is to determine allocation and size of the DGs REFERENCES
which minimizes the distribution power losses and improve [1] R.Ramakumar, P.Chiradeja; “Distributed generation and
the voltage profile for a fixed number of DGs and specific renewable energy systems”, 37th Intersociety Energy
total capacity of the DGs. Therefore, in this paper the Conversion Engineering Conference (IECEC), pp.716-
objective function for the optimal placement and sizing of DG 724, 2002.
in distribution network problem is to minimize the real power [2] P. Chiradeja , R. Ramakumar; “A review of distributed
losses and improve the voltage profile. The reduction generation and storage”, 31th Annual Frontiers of Power
objective function is evident after connecting thirteen DG by Conf., Stillwater, UK, pp. 1–11, 1998.
SFLA and proposed method (MSFLA) as shown in Table7. It [3] S. Rahman; “Fuel cell as a distributed generation
indicates the reduction objective function with installation of technology”, IEEE Power Engineering Society Summer
DG for rating of 50 kw. The objective function for the base Meeting, July 2001, Vol. 1, pp. 551–552.
case without DG installation is calculated by load flow [4] T. Hoff , D. S. Shugar; “The value of grid support
solutions and is found to be 102.7913kw.The percentage of photovoltaic in reducing distribution system losses”;
objective function reduction of 12.76 % is obtained with IEEE Transactions on Energy Conversion, 1995, Vol. 10,
SFLA and a reduction of 16.25% with MSFLA respectively. pp. 569–576.
Table 7. Comparison objective function results by SFLA [5] W. El-Khattam, M.M.A.Salama; “Distributed generation
and MSFLA technologies, definitions and benefits”, Electric Power
Systems Research, 2004, Vol.71, pp119-128.
After optimal allocation and sizing of DG [6] Soroudi, M.Afrasiab; "Binary PSO-Based Dynamic
Method Multi-Objective Model for Distributed Generation
F total Reduction Planning under Uncertainty", IET Renewable Power
(kw) Generation, 2012, Vol.6, No. 2, pp. 67 - 78.
(%) [7] Kai Zou, A.P.Agalgaonkar, K.M.Muttaqi, S.Perera;
Base case 102.7913 - "Distribution System Planning with Incorporating DG
0T

Reactive Capability and System Uncertainties" ,IEEE

0T

SFLA 89.6709 12.76 Transactions on Sustainable Energy, 2012, Vol.3 , No.1,

0T 0T 0T 0T

pp. 112 – 123.

MSFLA 86.0798 16.25 [8] Sheng-Yi Su, Chan-Nan Lu, Rung-Fang Chang, G.
Gutiérrez-Alcaraz; "Distributed
0T Generation
Interconnection Planning: A Wind Power Case Study ", 0T
 - 18 -

IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid, 2011, Vol.2 , No.1,

0T 0T 0T 0T

pp. 181 – 189.

[9] Ruifeng Shi, Can Cui, Kai Su, Zaharn Zain;
"Comparison Study of Two Meta-heuristic Algorithms
0T

with their Applications to Distributed Generation

Planning", Energy Procedia, 2011, Vol. 12, pp. 245-252.
0T

[10] A.M. El-Zonkoly; "Optimal Placement of Multi-

0T

Distributed Generation Units Including Different Load

Models using Particle Swarm Optimization", Swarm and 0T

Evolutionary Computation, 2011, Vol.1, No.1, pp. 50-59.

[11] M.R. AlRashidi, M.F. AlHajri; "Optimal Planning of
0T

Multiple Distributed Generation Sources in Distribution

Networks: A New Approach", Energy Conversion and
0T

Management, 2011, Vol. 52, No. 11, pp. 3301-3308.

[12] M.H. Moradi, M. Abedini; "A Combination of Genetic
0T

Algorithm and Particle Swarm Optimization for Optimal

DG Location and Sizing in Distribution Systems", 0T

International Journal of Electrical Power & Energy

Systems, 2012, Vol.34, No.1, pp. 66-74.
[13] Qi Kang, Tian Lan, Yong Yan, Lei Wang, Qidi Wu;
"Group Search Optimizer Based Optimal Location and
0T

Capacity of Distributed Generations", Neurocomputing, 0T

2012, Vol.78, No.1, pp. 55-63.

[14] M. Gomez-Gonzalez, A. López, F. Jurado;
"Optimization of Distributed Generation Systems using
0T

a New Discrete PSO and OPF", Electric Power Systems

0T

Research, 2012, Vol.84, No.1, pp. 174-180.

[15] G.Pepermans, J.Driesen, D.Haeseldonckx, R.Belmans,
W.D.haeseleer; “Distributed generation: definitions,
benefits and issues”, Energy Policy, 2005, Vol. 33,
pp.787-798.
[16] J.H. Teng; “A Network-Topology-Based Three-Phase
Load Flow for Distribution Systems”, Proc Natl. Sci.
Counc. ROC(A), 2000, Vol. 24, No. 4, pp.259-262.
[17] M. M. Eusuff and K. E. Lansey; “Optimization of water
distribution network design using the shuffled frog
leaping algorithm”, J. Water Resources Planning &
Management, 2003, Vol. 129, No.3, pp. 210–225.
[18] M. M. Eusuff, K. Lansey, F. Pasha; “Shuffled frog-
leaping algorithm: a memetic meta-heuristic for discrete
optimization”, Engineering Optimization, 2006, Vol. 38,
No. 2, pp.129–154.
[19] D. Das; “A Fuzzy Multiobjective Approach for Network
Reconfiguration of Distribution Systems”, IEEE
Transactions on Power Delivery, 2006, Vol. 21, pp. 202-
209.