International Journal of Power Electronics and Drive Systems (IJPEDS)

Vol. 14, No. 4, December 2023, pp. 2537~2545

ISSN: 2088-8694, DOI: 10.11591/ijpeds.v14.i4.pp2537-2545  2537

Multi-objective unit commitment with spinning reserve cost

using hybrid method

Rajasekhar Vatambeti, Pradyumna Kumar Dhal

Department of Electrical & Electronics Engineering, Vel Tech Rangarajan Dr Sagunthala R&D Institute of Science and Technology,
Chennai, India.

Article Info ABSTRACT

Article history: Under the generation of electrical power, fuel consumption, and emission are
emphasized in the thermal power industry. Based on this, emission and cost
Received Apr 12, 2023 were considered objectives with inequality and equality constraints. The
Revised Jun 5, 2023 spinning reserve was replenished as one of the constraints. In this paper, the
Accepted Jun 25, 2023 spinning reserve cost (SRC) was incorporated with the total cost objective
function. The hybrid technique is steered to achieve minimal value which is
the combination of the cuckoo search method and flower pollination
Keywords: algorithm. To predict the potential of the proposed technique, two systems are
considered namely a four-unit system and an IEEE thirty-nine bus system.
Cuckoo search The obtained simulation outcome shows a better improvement with the
Flower pollination proposed technique in optimal value.
Hybrid method
Spinning reserve
Unit commitment This is an open access article under the CC BY-SA license.

Corresponding Author:
Pradyumna Kumar Dhal
Department of Electrical &Electronics Engineering
Vel Tech Rangarajan Dr Sagunthala R&D Institute of Science and Technology
Avadi, Chennai-600061, India
Email: [email protected]

1. INTRODUCTION
In power systems, thermal power plants are a pivotal source in the entire world. In the modern span,
the unmatched power demand is enhancing day to day of life. In meeting the desired load demand, thermal
units are addressed with a major portion of the power demand in the power network. Based on the realization
of environmental protection and draining of fossil fuels requirements are targeted to enhance performance and
clean environment. In enhancing the requirements of operational strategies, the economy concerned with fuel
consumption and the clean air act related to the environment are added to the account at the instant of time. To
address the objectives mathematical concepts are applied that focus on the optimization problem. The
computational procedure of predicting the best solution of the objective, among all feasible solutions is termed
optimization. Optimization problems are categorized into two types mono-objective [1] and multi-objective
optimization problems [2], [3]. Over several decades research is carried out on unit commitment extensively
based on optimization. Unit commitment (UC) is used to predict optimal value by the line-up of thermal units
to increase the performance with the minimization of objectives to avoid the wastage of fuel [4]. The major
task in handling complex systems requires computational efforts in achieving the solution to a problem of
optimization. The results of the UC problem gives information, on which unit should work and which unit
turned off, and how much power to generate from each thermal unit concerned to power over a period of short
interval [5]. A committed unit is termed as the unit which is decided to be connected to the network for
contributing to load demand.

Journal homepage: http://ijpeds.iaescore.com

2538  ISSN: 2088-8694

Scheduling the on/off status of power units with a reduction in fuel cost for twenty-four hours while
maintaining all the systems constraints [6] is termed as UC. The size of the problem increases by enhancing
the objectives and constraints. There are two types of constraints namely inequality constraints and equality
constraints [7]. The more the number of constraints as consequence the more complexity of the problem
increases and becomes tedious in evaluating the optimal solution of a UC optimization problem. The criteria
of UC are to reduce the total production cost for one week or one day with many constraints like spinning
reserve, power balance, minimum downtime, minimum uptime and ramp rate limits [8]. In a mono objective
problem, the total cost is the amalgamation of fuel cost, startup cost, and shutdown cost. More than one
objective of UC is termed a multi-objective unit commitment (MOUC) optimization problem [9]. Many
strategies were applied for achieving the optimal values of UC over several decades. Still, there are further
many more paths for predicting the best optimal values.
In the literature, there are different techniques applied for solving the UC problem. Some of them are
techniques are branch bound method [10], Lagrangian relaxation method (LR) [11], dynamic programming
method (DP) [12], genetic algorithm (GA) [4], particle swarm optimization (PSO) [13], harmony search
algorithm (HAS) [14], grey wolf algorithm (GOW) [15], non-dominant sorting genetic algorithm (NSGA-II)
[16], artificial bee colony algorithm [17], Tabu search method [18], simulated annealing [19]. Since there is a
need to increase the performance to achieve a best optimal solution. The new concept of hybrid method is
proposed which is the amalgamation of two or more algorithms. Some of the literature methods of hybrid
models are Lagrangian relaxation with genetic algorithm (LR&GA) [20], genetic algorithm based artificial
neural network (GAANN) [21], simulated annealing genetic algorithm (SAGA) [22], non-dominant sorting
genetic algorithm-ii with population variant differential evolution algorithm (NSGA-II &PVDE) [23], [24],
particle swarm optimization with grey wolf optimization (PSOGWO) [25], imperialist competitive algorithm
with particle swarm optimization (ICA&PSO) [26], hybrid many objective cuckoo search algorithm (HMOCS)
[27], Lagrangian relaxation with evolutionary programming (LREP) [28], a modified hybrid method [29].
In this paper, a new hybrid technique is introduced which is the amalgamation of the cuckoo search
method with the flower pollination algorithm. The contribution of this paper, in general, the spinning reserve
is considered a constraint by many of the researchers. In this paper along with constraints, the cost of spinning
reserve is also considered and amalgamated with the total cost and applied to two test systems. The remaining
paper is as follows, the section 2 presents the formulation of two objectives minimization, the section 3 deals
with the proposed hybrid technique is a union of two algorithms, and the section 4 discusses the simulation
results which are applied to the mono and multi-objective problem and the finally, section 5 presents the
conclusion.

2. PROBLEM FORMULATION
The mathematical expression for minimization of total cost is given as:

𝑚𝑖𝑛 ∑𝑇𝑣=1 ∑𝑀
𝑢=1[𝐹𝑢 (𝑃𝑔𝑢 (𝑣)) + 𝑆𝑈𝐶𝑢 (1 − 𝑈𝑢 (𝑣 − 1))]𝑈𝑢 (𝑣)+𝑆𝑅𝐶(𝑣) (1)

𝑆𝑅𝐶(𝑣) = 𝑆𝑅(𝑣) ∗ 𝑃𝑣 (2)

𝑃𝑔𝑢 (𝑣) is the active power of uth power unit at ‘𝑣’ hour, 𝑆𝑈𝐶 is the start-up cost, M indicates the total no of
units, T for 24 hours, 𝑈𝑢 prescribes the status of the uth thermal unit. SRC is spinning reserve cost, 𝑃𝑣 is the
unit cost of spinning reserve at an hour ‘v’. 𝐹𝑢 represent the cost function which is represented in (3). .

Fu (𝑃𝑔𝑢 (𝑣)) = 𝑎𝑢 + 𝑏𝑢 𝑃𝑔𝑢 (𝑣) + 𝑐𝑢 𝑃𝑔𝑢2 (𝑣) (3)

Where 𝑎𝑢 , 𝑏𝑢 , 𝑐𝑢 is the cost coefficient of thermal unit ‘u’.

𝐸 = ∑𝑇𝑣=1 ∑𝑀
𝑢=1 𝐸𝐹𝑢 (𝑃𝑔𝑢 (𝑣)) ∗ 𝑈𝑢 (𝑣) (4)

EF represents the emission function which is represented in quadratic form as follows:

𝐸𝐹𝑢 (𝑃𝑔𝑢 (𝑣)) = 𝑢 + 𝛽𝑢 𝑃𝑔𝑢 (𝑣) + 𝛾𝑢 𝑃𝑔𝑢2 (5)

𝑢 , 𝛽𝑢 , 𝛾𝑢 represent emission coefficients. The startup cost is expressed in terms of hot startup cost or cold
startup cost is presented in (6).

Int J Pow Elec & Dri Syst, Vol. 14, No. 4, December 2023: 2537-2545
Int J Pow Elec & Dri Syst ISSN: 2088-8694  2539

𝐻𝐶(𝑢), 𝑖𝑓𝑀𝐷(𝑢, 𝑣) ≤ 𝑇𝐶(𝑢) ≤ 𝑀𝐷𝑣𝑜

𝑆𝑈𝐶(𝑢) = { (6)
𝐶𝑆𝐶(𝑢), 𝑖𝑓𝑇𝐶(𝑢) > 𝑀𝐷𝑣𝑜
𝑀𝐷𝑣𝑜 = 𝑀𝐷(𝑢, 𝑣) + 𝐶𝑆𝑇(𝑢)

𝐶𝑆𝐶(𝑢), 𝐻𝑆𝐶(𝑢)are termed as cold and hot start-up cost of uth thermal unit. TC(u) represents the online status
of unit u. 𝑀𝐷(𝑢, 𝑣) represents the minimum downtime of thermal unit 𝑢 at hour 𝑣.The constraits are as follows.

2.1. Balanced power constraints:

This constraint in which the sum of generated power must meet the demand at hour𝑣. The
mathematical expression is presented as (7).

∑𝑀
𝑢=1 𝑃𝑔𝑢 (𝑣). 𝑈𝑢 (𝑣) = 𝑑𝑜 (𝑣) (7)

𝑑𝑜 (𝑣) represents the demand at hour 𝑣.

2.2. Spinning reserve (SR)

Spinning reserve is considered and maintained at each time interval of one hour and is mathematically
expressed as (8).

∑𝑀 𝑚𝑎𝑥 (𝑣).
𝑢=1 𝑃𝑔𝑢 𝑈𝑢 (𝑣) ≥ 𝑑𝑜 (𝑣) + 𝑆𝑅(𝑣) (8)

𝑆𝑅(𝑣) presents the spinning reserve at hour ‘𝑣’.

2.3. Real power range

The real power generation from the thermal units lie in the range of minimum and maximum power
which indicate the inequality constraints.

𝑃𝑔𝑢,𝑚𝑖𝑛 ≤ 𝑃𝑔 ≤ 𝑃𝑔𝑢,𝑚𝑎𝑥 (9)

𝑃𝑔𝑢,𝑚𝑖𝑛 , 𝑃𝑔𝑢,𝑚𝑎𝑥 are the low and high-power generation limits of thermal unit ‘u’.

2.4. Minimum uptime and downtime

Based on the de-commitment and commitment of the thermal unit there will be associated minimum
times with each unit for commitment and de-commitment.

𝑇𝐶𝑢,𝑜𝑛 ≥ 𝑀𝑈𝑇𝑢 (10)

𝑇𝐶𝑢,𝑜𝑓𝑓 ≥ 𝑀𝐷𝑇𝑢 (11)

MUT, MDT is the minimum up-time and downtime.

3. METHODOLOGY
The combination of cuckoo search and flower pollination technique is implemented for solving
optimization problem of UC.

3.1. Cuckoo search algorithm (CSA)

CSA is a meta-heuristic algorithm and it is a nature-inspired one, found on the cuckoo species
behavior. This species lay its egg in the nest of host bird's. There is a probability of 0.1 percent of identifying
the other species egg by the host bird. There are two chances to be done by the host bird after predicting the
cuckoo’s egg. The host bird may throw off the cuckoo’s egg or it may abandoned the nest by replacing the new
one. In CSA the egg is the solution and the host nest is the concern to the population whose size is fixed. The
CS is endured with three major basic rules [30].
i) Individual cuckoo bird lay only egg and places it in the host bird's nest stochastically.
ii) Host bird nest with superior quality eggs is taken for the next production.
iii) The chances of detecting egg of the cuckoo by host bird is considered as Pb Є (0, 1).
CS commences with an initial population that represents cuckoos. These cuckoo’s lay eggs in the host bird’s
nests. The egg is analogous to host bird’s egg there will be more probability to grow as the young chick
otherwise the egg is thrown. The area where more cuckoo's eggs survive the area is more profitable. After the
Multi-objective unit commitment with spinning reserve cost using hybrid method (Rajasekhar Vatambeti)
2540  ISSN: 2088-8694

cuckoo chicks hatch from the eggs and grow as adults, groups and communities are formed. Each group has
its own identity of habitat. Among all the groups the best habitat will be considered as the next location and
migrate towards it.
The current location of habitat is prescribed as {y 1^g,y2^g,y3^g,y4^g,…yn^g} where n represents the no
of host bird nests and ‘g’ is the no of generations. By using the Levy flight, the random walk of the cuckoo’s
bird for the new solution is given by:

(𝑔+1)
= 𝑦𝑖 +  ⊕ 𝐿𝑒𝑣𝑦(⋋)
𝑔
𝑦𝑖 (12)

⊕ is the entry-wise multiplication, 𝐿𝑒𝑣𝑦(⋋) is the stochastic number taken from 𝐿𝑒𝑣𝑦 distribution.  is the
step size and is evaluated using (13).

 = 𝑜𝑜 *(𝑦𝑖𝑔 − 𝑦𝑏𝑒𝑠𝑡

𝑔
) (13)

The scaling factor is represented as 𝑜𝑜 and present the best solution prescribed as 𝑢𝑏𝑒𝑠𝑡 . The 𝐿𝑒𝑣𝑦(⋋) value
𝑔

is predicted by a procedure [31].

𝑥
𝑙= 1 (14)
𝑧

𝑙 presents the value of 𝐿𝑒𝑣𝑦(⋋) after simulation. The x and zare the numbers selected randomly from the
normal distribution with a mean zero.  is the parameter of Levy distribution.

𝜋𝜌 1/𝜌
Γ(1+𝜌)sin ( 2 )
𝜎𝑥 = { 1+𝜌 (𝜌−1)/2 } , 𝜎𝑧 = 1 (15)
Γ[ ]2 𝜌
2

The random walk based on the local is given by (16).

𝑔 𝑔 𝑔
(𝑔+1) 𝑦𝑖 + 𝑟𝑎(𝑦𝑚 − 𝑦𝑛 ) 𝑖𝑓 𝑟𝑎ˈ > 𝑃
𝑦𝑖 ={ 𝑔 (16)
𝑦𝑖 𝑜𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑟𝑤𝑖𝑠𝑒
𝑔 𝑔
𝑦𝑚 , 𝑦𝑛 are selected randomly from the given population and 𝑟𝑎ˈ , 𝑟𝑎 are the arbitrarily number between (0,1).
The best value is sort-out for each iteration process. CSA is mainly focused on the minimization of an
optimization problem.

3.2. Flower pollination algorithm

Flowers have played a pivotal role in the development of flowering plants over the past years that is
impossible to imagine without them. Through pollination, there will be subsequent reproduction with the
purpose of the flower. Pollen is usually transferred when flowers are pollinated and this transfer is frequently
attributed to pollinators like birds, insects, bats, and other animals. Two categories of pollination exist namely
biotic and abiotic [32]. Figure 1 shows the hybrid technique flowchart.
The majority of flowering plants are related to pollination of biotic which is approximately about
90%. Cross-pollination occurs from the pollen of a flower with a various plant. Abiotic pollination which
doesn’t requires any pollinators it’s about approximately 10%. Self-pollination is when pollen of the same or
different flowers of the similar plant is considered for fertilization. Pollen carriers are also termed pollinators,
which are wide in variety. Almost 2 lakhs of different pollinators exist in nature. The following rules are applied
for pollinator behaviour and flower consistency.
- Global pollination process in which cross-pollination takes place where pollinators with pollen perform
levy fights.
- Local pollination process where self-pollination takes place.
- When two flowers are involved, flower constancy can be thought of as the reproduction chance being
proportional to the resemblance of two flowers.
- Switching probability controls the global and local pollination.
𝜋𝜆
𝜆Γ(𝜆)sin ( 2 ) 1
𝐿~ (17)
𝜋 𝑞 1+𝜆

Int J Pow Elec & Dri Syst, Vol. 14, No. 4, December 2023: 2537-2545
Int J Pow Elec & Dri Syst ISSN: 2088-8694  2541

L is the Levy distribution which represents the pollination strength. Γ(𝜆) is the function of gamma
which is applicable for large step sizes q>0. There is the existence of global and local pollination. Both global
scale and local scale is taken place in the flower pollination and are controlled by switching probability.

Figure 1. Hybrid technique flowchart

4. SIMULATION RESULTS DISCUSSION

The mono objective and multi-objective problem related to UC is solved using a hybrid method which
is the amalgamation of two meta-heuristic methods. The cuckoo search method and flower pollination method
are amalgamated to form a hybrid method. Two test systems are considered to predict the potential of the
proposed technique i.e. four unit system and IEEE 39 bus system.
- Case (i)
In this case, a four-unit system is implemented. The initial parameters of are cuckoo search algorithm
is initialized. The population was considered as 40, the number of iterations is 20, the cost coefficients,
minimum and maximum power limits, start-up cost, minimum uptime and downtime, and a number of decision
variables are initialized [33].
The on/off status of the thermal units is shown in Table 1. The scheduling of thermal units and their
startup cost, fuel cost, and total cost value is shown in Table 2. The comparison of total cost value without
spinning reserve cost is shown in Table 3 and with spinning, the reserve is shown in Table 4.

Table 1. Four thermal units for Table 2. Scheduling of thermal unit

eight-hour status TU1(MW) TU2(MW) TU3(MW) SUC Cost ($) Total
TU1 TU2 TU3 TU4 TU4(MW) ($) cost($)
1 1 0 0 300 150 0 0 0 9145.360 9145.36
1 1 0 0 300 230 0 0 0 10629.04 10629.04
1 1 1 0 300 250 50 0 150 12262.86 12412.86
1 1 1 0 300 215 25 0 0 11079.38 11079.38
1 0 1 1 300 0 80 20 0.02 8531.82 8531.84
1 0 1 0 255 0 25 0 0 5845.56 5845.56
1 0 0 0 290 0 0 0 0 5742.05 5742.05
1 1 0 0 300 200 0 0 0 10066.36 10066.36
150.02 73,302.43 73,452.45

Multi-objective unit commitment with spinning reserve cost using hybrid method (Rajasekhar Vatambeti)
2542  ISSN: 2088-8694

- Case (ii)
In this case, the multiobjective problem is considered in which cost and emission are considered as
two clash objectives. The test case IEEE 39 bus with 10 units is considered to find the effectiveness of the
proposed technique. The optimization problem is subjected to constraints.
The respective data of the IEEE thirty-nine bus with 10 units is considered [34]–[38]. The initial
parameters are assigned the same as in a single objective problem. The spinning reserve was considered as 10
percent. The commitment status of the ten thermal units is illustrated in Table 5 and the corresponding sharing
of load demand for twenty-four hours among ten units is shown in Table 6. Figure 2 shows the load curve for
twenty-four hours.

Table 3. Comparison of total cost value with the proposed method

Method Total Cost($) Method Total Cost($)
ILR [35] 75,231 BDE [37] 74,676
B. SMP [36] 74,812 Proposed Method 73,452
LRPSO [35] 74,808

Table 4. Scheduling of thermal units with spinning reserve cost of four unit system
TU1(MW) TU2(MW) TU3(MW) TU4(MW) SUC ($) S.R Cost($) Cost ($) Total cost($)
300 150 0 0 0 33.30 9145.360 9178.66
300 230 0 0 0 39.22 10629.04 10668.26
300 250 50 0 150 44.40 12262.86 12307.26
300 215 25 0 0 39.96 11079.38 11119.34
300 0 80 20 0.02 29.60 8531.82 8561.42
255 0 25 0 0 20.72 5845.56 5866.28
290 0 0 0 0 27.55 5742.05 5769.6
300 200 0 0 0 47.50 10066.36 10113.86
150.02 282.25 73,302.43 73,584.68

Table 5. Scheduling of ten-unit system of Table 6. Dispatching of load demand among thermal units
IEEE 39 bus system of IEEE 39 bus system
T T T T T T T T T T TU TU TU TU TU TU TU TU TU TU1
U U U U U U U U U U 1(M 2(M 3(M 4(M 5(M 6(M 7(M 8(M 9(M 0(M
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 W) W) W) W) W) W) W) W) W) W)
1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 455 245 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 455 295 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 455 370 0 0 25 0 0 0 0 0
1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 455 455 0 0 40 0 0 0 0 0
1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 455 390 130 0 25 0 0 0 0 0
1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 455 360 130 130 2 0 0 0 0 0
1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 455 410 130 130 25 0 0 0 0 0
1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 455 455 130 130 30 0 0 0 0 0
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 455 455 130 130 85 20 25 0 0 0
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 455 455 130 130 162 33 25 10 0 0
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 455 455 130 130 162 73 25 10 10 0
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 455 455 130 130 162 80 25 43 10 10
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 455 455 130 130 162 33 25 10 0 0
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 455 455 130 130 85 20 25 0 0 0
1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 455 455 130 130 30 0 0 0 0 0
1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 455 310 130 130 25 0 0 0 0 0
1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 455 260 130 130 25 0 0 0 0 0
1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 455 360 130 130 25 0 0 0 0 0
1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 455 455 130 130 30 0 0 0 0 0
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 455 455 130 130 162 33 25 10 0 0
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 455 455 130 130 85 20 25 0 0 0
1 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 455 455 0 0 145 20 25 0 0 0
1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 455 420 0 0 25 0 0 0 0 0
1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 455 345 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

The respective startup cost, total cost, fuel cost and emission are illustrated in Table 7. The total cost
is the addition of operating cost and startup cost. From Table 7 it can be illustrated that the total cost was
5,64,018 ($) and the emission value is 20,267.69 (lb). With the observation of Table 8 the optimal values are
better that other existing methods.
The total cost with the incorporation of the spinning reserve cost can be illustrated in Table 9 (see in
Appendix). The total spinning reserve cost for different load demands of twenty-four hours is 24,033 ($). The

Int J Pow Elec & Dri Syst, Vol. 14, No. 4, December 2023: 2537-2545
Int J Pow Elec & Dri Syst ISSN: 2088-8694  2543

total cost is the sum of the startup cost, spinning reserve cost, and operating cost. With the incorporation of
SRC the total cost is enhanced but there is a miniature reduction in the value of emission.

Figure 2. Load curve with respect to time

Table 7. Total cost and emission of IEEE 39 bus system without SRC
S.No Load (MW) SUC ($) COST ($) Total Cost ($) Emission (lb)
1 700 0 13683.12 13683.12 613.97
2 750 0 14554.49 14554.49 714.84
3 850 900 16809.44 17709.44 651.42
4 950 0 18597.66 18597.66 857.23
5 1000 550 20051.16 20601.16 753.24
6 1100 1120 22387.04 23507.04 758.87
7 1150 0 23261.97 23261.97 856.31
8 1200 0 24150.34 24150.34 961.56
9 1300 860 27251.05 28111.05 883.20
10 1400 60 30057.55 30117.55 1001.07
11 1450 60 31916.06 31976.06 1017.83
12 1500 60 33890.16 33950.16 1035.64
13 1400 0 30057.55 30057.55 1001.07
14 1300 0 27251.05 27251.05 883.20
15 1200 0 24150.34 24150.34 961.56
16 1050 0 21513.65 21513.65 669.22
17 1000 0 20641.82 20641.82 587.38
18 1100 0 22387.04 22387.04 758.87
19 1200 0 24150.34 24150.34 961.56
20 1400 490 30057.55 30547.55 1001.07
21 1300 0 27251.05 27251.05 883.20
22 1100 0 22735.52 22735.52 881.31
23 900 0 17684.69 17684.69 750.43
24 800 0 15427.41 15427.41 823.52
4100 5,59,918.1 5,64,018.12 20,267.69

Table 8. Comparison of emission and total cost values with the hybrid technique
Method Total cost($) Emission(lb)
IBPSO 599,782.0 ----
Particle swarm optimization 581,450 ----
Hybrid PSO-SQP 568,032 ----
Proposed method 5,64,018.12 20,267.69

5. CONCLUSION
The single and multi-objective optimization problem related to UC is solved using the hybrid method.
The amalgamation of cuckoo’s search and flower pollination techniques is applied as a hybrid method. Two
conflicting objectives cost and emission is considered. In addition to the cost, the spinning reserve cost is also
amalgamated. The two systems are implemented to predict the potential of the proposed technique. The
outcome of the two systems shows better optimal values in comparison with the other existing methods. Total
cost and emission get modified with the effect of spinning reserve cost.

Multi-objective unit commitment with spinning reserve cost using hybrid method (Rajasekhar Vatambeti)
2544  ISSN: 2088-8694

APPENDIX

Table 9. Total cost and emission of IEEE 39 bus system with SRC
S.No Load (MW) SUC ($) S.R COST($) COST ($) Total cost ($) Emission (lb)
1 700 0 518 13683.12 14201.12 613.97
2 750 0 555 14554.49 15109.49 714.84
3 850 560 629 16892.15 18081.15 716.54
4 950 900 703 19145.70 20748.7 658.92
5 1000 0 740 20020.01 20760.01 753.24
6 1100 1100 814 22387.04 24301.04 758.87
7 1150 0 1092.50 23261.97 24354.47 856.31
8 1200 0 1140 24150.34 25290.34 961.56
9 1300 860 1235 27251.05 29346.05 883.20
10 1400 60 1330 30057.55 31447.55 1001.07
11 1450 60 1377.50 31916.06 33353.56 1017.83
12 1500 60 1425 33890.16 35375.16 1035.64
13 1400 0 1330 30057.55 31387.55 1001.07
14 1300 0 1235 27251.05 28486.05 883.20
15 1200 0 1140 24150.34 25290.34 961.56
16 1050 0 997.50 21513.65 22511.15 669.22
17 1000 0 950 20641.82 21591.82 587.38
18 1100 0 1045 22387.04 23432.04 758.87
19 1200 0 1140 24150.34 25290.34 961.56
20 1400 490 1330 30057.55 31877.55 1001.07
21 1300 0 1235 27251.05 28486.05 883.20
22 1100 0 814 22735.52 23549.52 881.31
23 900 0 666 17684.69 18350.69 750.43
24 800 0 592 15427.41 16019.41 823.52
4090 24,033.5 5,60,517.7 5,88,641.2 20,134.38

REFERENCES
[1] Q. Zhai, X. Guan, and J. Cui, “Unit commitment with identical units: Successive subproblem solving method based on Lagrangian
relaxation,” IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, vol. 17, no. 4, pp. 1250–1257, 2002, doi: 10.1109/TPWRS.2002.805003.
[2] M. A. Abido, “Environmental/Economic Power Dispatch Using Multiobjective Evolutionary Algorithms,” IEEE Transactions on
Power Systems, vol. 18, no. 4, pp. 1529–1537, 2003, doi: 10.1109/TPWRS.2003.818693.
[3] R. Yokoyama, S. H. Bae, T. Morita, and H. Sasaki, “Multiobjective optimal generation dispatch based on probability security
criteria,” IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 317–324, 1988, doi: 10.1109/59.43217.
[4] S. A. Kazarlis, A. G. Bakirtzis, and V. Petridis, “A genetic algorithm solution to the unit commitment problem,” IEEE Transactions
on Power Systems, vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 83–92, 1996, doi: 10.1109/59.485989.
[5] K. A. Juste, “An evolutionary programming solution to the unit commitment problem,” IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, vol.
14, no. 4, pp. 1452–1459, 1999, doi: 10.1109/59.801925.
[6] T. Senjyu, Kai Shimabukuro, K. Uezato, and T. Funabashi, “A fast technique for unit commitment problem by extended priority
list,” IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, vol. 18, no. 2, pp. 882–888, May 2003, doi: 10.1109/TPWRS.2003.811000.
[7] I. G. Damousis, A. G. Bakirtzis, and P. S. Dokopoulos, “A Solution to the Unit-Commitment Problem Using Integer-Coded Genetic
Algorithm,” IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, vol. 19, no. 2, pp. 1165–1172, May 2004, doi: 10.1109/TPWRS.2003.821625.
[8] K. Rajesh, N. Visali, and N. Sreenivasulu, “Optimal load scheduling of thermal power plants by genetic algorithm,” Lecture Notes
in Electrical Engineering, vol. 569, pp. 397–409, 2020, doi: 10.1007/978-981-13-8942-9_33.
[9] A. Shukla and S. N. Singh, “Multi‐objective unit commitment using search space‐based crazy particle swarm optimisation and
normal boundary intersection technique,” IET Generation, Transmission & Distribution, vol. 10, no. 5, pp. 1222–1231, Apr. 2016,
doi: 10.1049/iet-gtd.2015.0806.
[10] C. L. Chen and S. C. Wang, “Branch-and-bound scheduling for thermal generating units,” IEEE Transactions on Energy
Conversion, vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 184–189, 1993, doi: 10.1109/60.222703.
[11] J. D. Dillon, M. P. Walsh, and M. J. O’Malley, “Initialisation of the augmented Hopfield network for improved generator scheduling,”
IEE Proceedings: Generation, Transmission and Distribution, vol. 149, no. 5, pp. 593–599, 2002, doi: 10.1049/ip-gtd:20020460.
[12] P. G. Lowery, “Generating Unit Commitment by Dynamic Programming,” IEEE Transactions on Power Apparatus and Systems,
vol. PAS-85, no. 5, pp. 422–426, 1966, doi: 10.1109/TPAS.1966.291679.
[13] X. Yu and X. Zhang, “Unit commitment using Lagrangian relaxation and particle swarm optimization,” International Journal of
Electrical Power and Energy Systems, vol. 61, pp. 510–522, 2014, doi: 10.1016/j.ijepes.2014.03.061.
[14] Y. Pourjamal and S. Najafi Ravadanegh, “HSA based solution to the UC problem,” International Journal of Electrical Power and
Energy Systems, vol. 46, no. 1, pp. 211–220, 2013, doi: 10.1016/j.ijepes.2012.10.042.
[15] S. Mirjalili, S. M. Mirjalili, and A. Lewis, “Grey Wolf Optimizer,” Advances in Engineering Software, vol. 69, pp. 46–61, Mar.
2014, doi: 10.1016/j.advengsoft.2013.12.007.
[16] R. Vempalle and P. K. Dhal, “Loss Minimization by Reconfiguration along with Distributed Generator Placement at Radial
Distribution System with Hybrid Optimization Techniques,” Technology and Economics of Smart Grids and Sustainable Energy,
vol. 5, no. 1, 2020, doi: 10.1007/s40866-020-00088-2.
[17] K. Chandrasekaran, S. Hemamalini, S. P. Simon, and N. P. Padhy, “Thermal unit commitment using binary/real coded artificial bee
colony algorithm,” Electric Power Systems Research, vol. 84, no. 1, pp. 109–119, 2012, doi: 10.1016/j.epsr.2011.09.022.
[18] A. H. Mantawy, S. A. Soliman, and M. E. El-Hawary, “A new tabu search algorithm for the long-term hydro scheduling problem,”
in LESCOPE 2002 - 2002 Large Engineering Systems Conference on Power Engineering: Energy for the Future, Conference
Proceedings, 2002, pp. 29–34, doi: 10.1109/LESCPE.2002.1020663.

Int J Pow Elec & Dri Syst, Vol. 14, No. 4, December 2023: 2537-2545
Int J Pow Elec & Dri Syst ISSN: 2088-8694  2545

[19] U. D. Annakkage, T. Nummonda, and N. C. Pahalawaththa, “Unit commitment by parallel simulated annealing,” IEE Proceedings:
Generation, Transmission and Distribution, vol. 142, no. 6, pp. 595–600, 1995, doi: 10.1049/ip-gtd:19952215.
[20] T. A. A. Victoire and A. E. Jeyakumar, “Hybrid PSO-SQP for economic dispatch with valve-point effect,” Electric Power Systems
Research, vol. 71, no. 1, pp. 51–59, 2004, doi: 10.1016/j.epsr.2003.12.017.
[21] Shyh-Jier-Huang and Ching-Lien Huang, “Application of genetic-based neural networks to thermal unit commitment,” IEEE
Transactions on Power Systems, vol. 12, no. 2, pp. 654–660, May 1997, doi: 10.1109/59.589634.
[22] C.-P. Cheng, C.-W. Liu, and C.-C. Liu, “Unit commitment by annealing-genetic algorithm,” International Journal of Electrical
Power & Energy Systems, vol. 24, no. 2, pp. 149–158, Feb. 2002, doi: 10.1016/S0142-0615(01)00024-2.
[23] H. Singh and A. Papalexopoulos, “Competitive procurement of ancillary services by an independent system operator,” IEEE
Transactions on Power Systems, vol. 14, no. 2, pp. 498–504, 1999, doi: 10.1109/59.761872.
[24] K. Rajesh and N. Visali, “Aggregation of Unit Commitment with Demand Side Management,” Journal of Electrical Engineering
and Technology, vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 783–796, 2021, doi: 10.1007/s42835-020-00637-w.
[25] V. K. Kamboj, “A novel hybrid PSO–GWO approach for unit commitment problem,” Neural Computing and Applications, vol. 27,
no. 6, pp. 1643–1655, 2016, doi: 10.1007/s00521-015-1962-4.
[26] J. Chen and H. Imani Marrani, “An Efficient New Hybrid ICA-PSO Approach for Solving Large Scale Non-convex Multi Area
Economic Dispatch Problems,” Journal of Electrical Engineering and Technology, vol. 15, no. 3, pp. 1127–1145, 2020, doi:
10.1007/s42835-020-00416-7.
[27] Z. Cui, M. Zhang, H. Wang, X. Cai, and W. Zhang, “A hybrid many-objective cuckoo search algorithm,” Soft Computing, vol. 23,
no. 21, pp. 10681–10697, 2019, doi: 10.1007/s00500-019-04004-4.
[28] P. Attaviriyanupap, H. Kita, E. Tanaka, and Jun Hasegawa, “A hybrid LR-EP for solving new profit-based UC problem under competitive
environment,” IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 229–237, Feb. 2003, doi: 10.1109/TPWRS.2002.807080.
[29] R. Vempalle and P. K. Dhal, “Optimal analysis of time varying load radial distribution system with photovoltaic and wind generating system
using novel hybrid optimization technique,” Renewable Energy Focus, vol. 41, pp. 246–257, 2022, doi: 10.1016/j.ref.2022.03.004.
[30] J. Zhao, S. Liu, M. C. Zhou, X. Guo, and L. Qi, “An Improved Binary Cuckoo Search Algorithm for Solving Unit Commitment
Problems: Methodological Description,” IEEE Access, vol. 6, pp. 43535–43545, 2018, doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2018.2861319.
[31] R. N. Mantegna, “Fast, accurate algorithm for numerical simulation of Lévy stable stochastic processes,” Physical Review E, vol.
49, no. 5, pp. 4677–4683, 1994, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevE.49.4677.
[32] P. E. Mergos and X. S. Yang, “Flower pollination algorithm parameters tuning,” Soft Computing, vol. 25, no. 22, pp. 14429–14447,
2021, doi: 10.1007/s00500-021-06230-1.
[33] J. J. Grefenstette, “Optimization of Control Parameters for Genetic Algorithms,” IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and
Cybernetics, vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 122–128, 1986, doi: 10.1109/TSMC.1986.289288.
[34] P. Sriyanyong and Y. H. Song, “Unit commitment using particle swarm optimization combined with lagrange relaxation,” 2005
IEEE Power Engineering Society General Meeting, vol. 3, pp. 2752–2759, 2005, doi: 10.1109/pes.2005.1489390.
[35] S. Khanmohammadi, M. Amiri, and M. T. Haque, “A new three-stage method for solving unit commitment problem,” Energy, vol.
35, no. 7, pp. 3072–3080, 2010, doi: 10.1016/j.energy.2010.03.049.
[36] J. Samanes, A. Urtasun, E. Gubia, and A. Petri, “Robust multisampled capacitor voltage active damping for grid-connected power
converters,” International Journal of Electrical Power and Energy Systems, vol. 105, pp. 741–752, 2019, doi: 10.1016/j.ijepes.2018.09.014.
[37] A. Sakhrieh, J. Al Asfar, and N. A. Shuaib, “An optimized off-grid hybrid system for power generation in rural areas,” International
Journal of Power Electronics and Drive Systems, vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 865–872, 2022, doi: 10.11591/ijpeds.v13.i2.pp865-872.
[38] D. Selvaraj and D. Rangasamy, “Roof top PV for charging the EV using hybrid GWO-CSA,” International Journal of Power
Electronics and Drive Systems, vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 1186–1194, 2022, doi: 10.11591/ijpeds.v13.i2.pp1186-1194.

BIOGRAPHIES OF AUTHORS

Rajasekhar Vatambeti is a Research scholar in Electrical and Electronics

Engineering Department at Vel Tech Rangarajan Dr. Sagunthala R&D Institute of Science and
Technology Chennai, India. He received his B.Tech. M.Tech. Degrees in Electrical and
Electronics Engineering and Power Systems from university of Jawaharlal Nehru Technology
Anantapuram.His research area of interest is power systems, renewable energy systems, and
power electronics applications. He can be contacted at email: [email protected].

Pradyumna Kumar Dhal received his M.E. degree power systems from
Thiagarajar College of Engineering under Madurai Kamaraj University, Madurai. He received
his Ph.D degree in power systems from Sathyabama University, Chennai. He is currently
working as professor in Electrical & Electronics Engineering Department at Vel Tech
Rangarajan Dr.Sagunthala R&D Institute of Science and Technology, Chennai. He published
technical papers in International & National Journals and Conferences. His area of interest is
power stability, power quality and optimization techniques in power system. He is member in
ISTE & IEEE. He can be contacted at email: [email protected].

Multi-objective unit commitment with spinning reserve cost using hybrid method (Rajasekhar Vatambeti)