applied

sciences
Article
Effects of On-Site PV Generation and Residential
Demand Response on Distribution System Reliability
Sıtkı Güner 1 , Ayşe Kübra Erenoğlu 2 , İbrahim Şengör 3 , Ozan Erdinç 2 and
João P. S. Catalão 4, *
1 Department of Electrical and Electronics Engineering, Faculty of Engineering and Architecture,
Istanbul Arel University, Tepekent-Buyukcekmece, 34537 Istanbul, Turkey; [email protected]
2 Department of Electrical Engineering, Faculty of Electric-Electronics, Yildiz Technical University
Davutpasa Campus, Esenler, 34220 Istanbul, Turkey; [email protected] (A.K.E.);
[email protected] (O.E.)
3 Department of Electrical and Electronics Engineering, Faculty of Engineering and Architecture, Izmir Katip
Çelebi University, Çiğli, 35620 Izmir, Turkey; [email protected]
4 Faculty of Engineering of the University of Porto and INESC TEC, 4200-465 Porto, Portugal
* Correspondence: [email protected]




Received: 23 August 2020; Accepted: 3 October 2020; Published: 12 October 2020


Abstract: In the last few decades, there has been a strong trend towards integrating renewable-based
distributed generation systems into the power grid, and advanced management strategies have
been developed in order to provide a reliable, resilient, economic, and sustainable operation.
Moreover, demand response (DR) programs, by taking the advantage of flexible loads’ energy
reduction capabilities, have presented as a promising solution considering reliability issues. Therefore,
the impacts of combined system architecture with on-site photovoltaic (PV) generation units and
residential demand reduction strategies were taken into consideration on distribution system reliability
indices in this study. The load model of this study was created by using load data of the distribution
feeder provided by Bosphorus Electric Distribution Corporation (BEDAS). Additionally, the reliability
parameters of the feeder components were determined based on these provided data. The calculated
load point and feeder side indicators were analyzed comprehensively from technical and economic
perspectives. In order to validate the effectiveness of the proposed structure, four case studies were
carried out in both DigSILENT PowerFactory and MATLAB environments.

Keywords: distribution system; PV generation; reliability; residential demand response programs

1. Introduction

1.1. Motivation and Background

Power system reliability can be evaluated as one of the most important factors in the operation,
planning, and design process of the utility network and sometimes state-regulated area.
This complicated architecture including numerous different types of loads, transformers, substations,
switching components, and long transmission lines targets to supply hundreds of millions of
electricity consumers’ daily needs in a reliable fashion. The North American Electric Reliability
Corporation (NERC), one of the most widely-known institutions, has provided a definition for
reliability as [1] “the ability to meet the electricity needs of end-use customers even when unexpected equipment
failures or other factors reduce the amount of available electricity”. Additionally, from European energy
providers’ viewpoint, European Network of Transmission System Operators (ENTSO-E) provided
the widely-known definition as “a general term encompassing all the measures of the ability of the system,

Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 7062; doi:10.3390/app10207062 www.mdpi.com/journal/applsci

Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 7062 2 of 13

generally given as numerical indices, to deliver electricity to all points of utilization within acceptable standards
and in the amounts desired” [1].
Recently, increasing environmental concerns and growing demand paved the way for expanding
the portion of renewable-based energy systems on the generation side, ensuring reliable, sustainable,
and resilient power grid operation [2]. In order to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, there have
been great attempts and incentives within the context of signing protocols by most of the countries.
Among them, Malta and Sweden target to increase the installed renewable energy resources (RESs)
capacity respectively by 10% and 49% [3]. The European Council has agreed on the 2030 climate and
energy framework, including targets and policy objectives. Particularly, reducing greenhouse gas
emission at least by 40% compared to the level of 1990, increasing renewable energy consumption rate at
least 32%, and improving energy efficiency level by 32.5% are the key targets for 2030 [4]. According to
the Renewable Energy Roadmap (Remap) 2030 [5], the world’s biggest energy consumer, China,
is aiming to increase the share of renewables in the power sector from 20% to 40% by 2030. It is obvious
that it requires a market reform as well as significant growth in transmission and grid capacity.
There are many types of renewable energy resources in the energy sector, such as wind, solar,
hydro, and biomass [5]. Among them, photovoltaic (PV) generation is accepted as one of the most
prominent sources, and its globally installed capacity is increasing day by day considering technological
developments and economic achievements, especially for implementing at the scale of distributed
generation (DG). This green resource can be installed at a large-scale in utility facilities or at a small-scale
at the end-users’ premises with the aim of meeting the local demand. It is to be highlighted that
grid-connected units can play a key role in system operation, especially in case of failures in any part
of the system and in providing reliability improvement by decreasing unsupplied power.
From the other perspective, demand side has also witnessed spectacular changes in its architecture,
e.g., prosumers (consumers also with on-site production facilities) with flexible loads are strongly
encouraged to alter their load profiles for the purpose of accomplishing particular objectives such
as load leveling, reliability enhancement, and voltage regulation within the paradigm of smart grid.
Unlike the conventional network operation in which expanding generating capacity means to increase
reserve margin and reliability factor [6], modern structure turns its perspective from the power supply
side to the demand side. A conceptual definition of demand response (DR) by US Energy Information
Administration viewpoint is as follows: “Demand-side management (DSM) programs consist of the planning,
implementing, and monitoring activities of electric utilities which are designed to encourage consumers to modify
their level and pattern of electricity usage” [7]. It is worthy to indicate that new approaches play a critical
role in electrical system planning while considering its sophisticated structure, and the last decade has
seen a growing trend towards incorporating DR strategies into operational stages to increase network
performance and quality of services. Here, smart households that can alter their internal operation in an
optimized way, especially if a home energy management system (HEM) exists, have further capability
to enhance effective implementation of residential DR, which is an area where more implementations
have been provided recently.

1.2. Literature Review

In recent years, integrating modular RESs into the power system as well as demand side
management implementations have been widely investigated in the literature to cope with reliability
issues and increase the quality of services. In this respect, Yoo et al. [6] proposed a reliability-based
DR program in which traditional DR programs such as summer vacation period DR program,
direct load control, and demand bidding were reconstructed considering the system requirements.
The presented structure consisting of consumer data management and program operation parts aided
network operation, especially in emergency conditions, by trading emergency DR resources instantly.
Wu et al. [8] examined the effect of aggregated electric water heaters (EWHs) DR capability
and their load shifting performance analysis, especially in peak hours for the purpose of achieving
reliability improvement. According to the results, it should be highlighted that the reliability indices
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 7062 3 of 13

were enhanced thanks to the provided certain amount of operating reserve by aggregated EWHs.
The optimization-based strategy also aimed to reduce end-users’ total cost while maintaining the
comfort levels. In order to improve the reliability indices in modern power systems, controllable demand
sources were taken into consideration in [9] as an alternative for extra generation (reserves). On the
other hand, DR implementation affects the generating system reliability. In [10], the short-term reliability
model of DR capacity was proposed using a multi-state continuous-time Markov chain model.
A stochastic security constrained scheduling approach integrating DR model was presented
in [11] with the objective of determining an optimal strategy for the independent system operator
considering market conditions, system security, and reliability needs as well as air pollution. Moreover,
total operational cost was also aimed to be minimized by implementing an efficient DR program
through mixed-integer linear programming. Goel et al. [12] conducted a study in which the effects
of stochastic demand side load shifting approach on electricity price volatility and reliability issues
were examined by using optimal power flow combined with some reliability evaluation techniques in
restructured power systems. Additionally, in [13], the impacts of real-time price-based DR application
on system reliability were investigated by taking into account nodal price volatility and potential
DR resources. The optimal power system operation was guaranteed within the generation and the
transmission constraints. However, no attempt was made to investigate RES-based generating unit’s
impact on the power grid reliability indices in studies [12,13].
Li et al. [14] created a model for a micro-grid including loads, distribution generators, and energy
storage systems (ESSs) combined with possible DR strategies for reliability evaluation in a distribution
system unlike the obsolete conventional methods. RES penetrations as well as charging/discharging
strategies of ESSs were taken into consideration evaluating their impacts on the operational perspective.
In order to validate the effectiveness of the proposed scheme, sequential Monte Carlo simulation and
minimal path method were used.
The effects of the DR program on the reliability assessment of a microgrid was also studied
in [15] considering its complicated architecture. The authors in [16] presented a new bus weighting
methodology with the aim of optimizing system operation, especially in case of unfavorable weather
conditions or peak demand periods. It is significant to indicate that expected interruption costs were
decreased approximately by 20% thanks to the proposed framework, in which it is possible to distribute
the total system’s DR requirement in critical loading events.
Su et al. [17] proposed a reliability assessment model considering aging period of conventional
power equipment for determining reliability of the distribution network also including PV generation.
In [18], the climate change effects were taken into account for assessing reliability of the PV integrated
power systems. Several positive and negative impacts of the roof-top PV systems on the reliability of
distribution transformers were identified in [18]. The negative impacts of the roof-top PV systems
according to penetration level were presented in [19].
Hybrid systems usually increase power system reliability, and, in this manner, Raghuwanshi and
Arya [20] studied the impacts of hybrid systems having different combinations of diesel/PV/battery
systems on power system reliability. Markov model and frequency–duration (F–D) reliability techniques
were used for assessing reliability indices, namely, loss of load probability (LOLP), expected energy
not supplied (EENS), and mean downtime (MDT). In [21], optimum restoration strategies were
generated together with the consideration of distribution system reliability assessment considering
hybrid renewable DG systems. A time-sequential Monte Carlo simulation was used for evaluating
distribution system reliability in the mentioned study.
Cao et al. [22] examined the effects of wind power integration on the reliability assessment of
power systems. The authors in [23] constructed a power system reliability model by taking highly
integrated wind farms into account and analyzed the results by an IEEE-RTS79 based case study
through Monte Carlo simulation technique. However, any types of DR programs combined with RES
integration under reliability assessment architecture were not considered in [22,23].
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 7062 4 of 13

1.3. Contributions and Organization of the Paper

A mathematical model for reliability indices improvement in power system architecture including
on-site PV generation and efficient DR strategies is proposed in this study. The main objective of the
propounded concept is to increase system reliability performances by reducing the impact of failures
on end-users’ power supply during the critical day periods. The contributions of the study can be
detailed as follows:

• Both the management of DR and DG penetration are crucial tasks for the improvement of
distribution system reliability; hence, this paper presents the contribution of both methods in
terms of reliability level of the system.
• The results of this study by modeling the distribution system and the PV generation unit with
real data may provide guidance for more effective integration of PV generation from reliability
enhancement perspective.

The rest of paper is organized as follows: the relevant basic mathematical background of reliability
indices is detailed in Section 2. Afterwards, Section 3 provides the declarations of case studies and the
discussion of results. Finally, concluding remarks and future work are presented in Section 4.

2. Reliability Assessment Approach

This part discusses the generally known facts regarding the reliability assessment for the sake of a
complete problem overview. One of the main targets of distribution system operators is to supply
end-users’ demand with acceptable continuation and power quality. However, it is sometimes possible
to interrupt large parts of the load point’s electrical demand due to small-scale faults in any equipment
such as lines, cables, transformers, breakers, switches, busbars, and relays.
Therefore, the measurements of outage rates and power interruption duration should be taken
into account in this sophisticated architecture to determine reliability performance standards [24].
Load point indices and system reliability indices are frequently used parameters [25] in the literature
that are essential in planning, management, and operation stages from the master controller’s viewpoint.
The fundamental below-mentioned criteria to calculate reliability performance of distribution feeder at
the load point are as follows [26]:

• Load point failure rate (λ)

• The average outage time (r)
• Average annual unavailability or outage (U)

The basic reliability parameters of a distribution system are described in Equations (1)–(3) in
which i shows the index of the components that are assumed to be connected in series between the
source and the load point, in terms of failure.
X
λs = λi (1)
i
X
Us  λi ri (2)
i

λi ri
P
Us
rs =  Pi (3)
λs i λi
It is to be highlighted that load point indices have importance for individual end-users’ perspective
but are not sufficient for evaluating the whole system performance. Therefore, system reliability
indices are additionally used in this study by taking into account the number and the load of end-users
connected at each load point in the system [27,28]. The most commonly used criteria for measuring
distribution system reliability performances are categorized into two parts as follows:
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 7062 5 of 13

2.1. Interruption Indices

System Average Interruption Frequency Index (SAIFI) and System Average Interruption Duration
Index (SAIDI) are the most widely used indices by utility companies in order to reach their targets in
terms of customer satisfaction, service restoration, and quality of services [29]. Throughout this study,
these mentioned indicators are used for assessing the reliability improvements.
SAIFI gives the average number of interruptions per end-user per year in the system and can be
decreased by reducing outages at the load points [27]. SAIFI is represented as given in Equation (4)
where i indicates load point, while Ni is the total number of end-users served.
SAIDI index is expressed in Equation (5) that means the average interruption duration per end-user
experienced during the year [30]. It is possible to achieve improvements in SAIDI by reducing failure
restoration times with effective crew management strategies.

λ i Ni
P
SAIFI = Pi (4)
i Ni
P
i Ui Ni
SAIDI = P (5)
i Ni

2.2. Energy Oriented Indices

The most commonly used load-energy-oriented reliability criterion is the annual total energy not
supplied (ENS). There are also energy-oriented indices such as average energy not supplied (AENS)
and average customer curtailment index (ACCI), but ENS is used to determine loss of load capacity of
the distribution system in this study. This reliability indicator is formulated as in Equation (6), where Li
indicates the demand at ith load point.
X
ENS = Ui Li (6)
i

3. Test and Results

3.1. Input Data of Distribution System

The network topology of the distribution system consisting of approximately 40% residential and
60% commercial load is depicted in Figure 1. In this modified framework, daily load curves were
obtained from Bosphorus Electric Distribution Corporation (BEDAS) in which the feeder included
nine load-points each having different consumption and transformers as 34.5/0.4 kV. There were 3503
consumers included in the feeder. The connection between utility grid and feeder was also provided by
154/34.5 kV transformer. In order to make realistic assumptions and observe the effect of PV power plant
on the reliability improvement, a prosumer (factory with on-site PV generation) was taken into account
as in LP9. The used real radiation data for PV generation were obtained from the National Renewable
Energy Laboratory (NREL) [31] by considering the latitude of the region and were normalized in
accordance with the ambient temperature. The evaluated radiation data are demonstrated in Figure 2
and validated by comparison of those data with the relevant literature in [32,33]. It should be noted
that the radiation data may have changed according to the weather condition based on whether it was
a cloudy day or a sunny day. The power demand of load points was procured by both utility grid and
PV energy supply unit for providing a reliable and sustainable network.
 households oriented concepts on system reliability improvement. The system reliability indices were
calculated in DigSILENT PowerFactory and MATLAB environments by using the given parameters
of distribution system components, as indicated in Table 1. In addition, load point interruption
frequency (LPIF), load point interruption time (LPID), and load point energy not supplied (LPENS)
Appl. Sci. 2020,
criteria were10,also
7062analyzed to evaluate the effects of PV based generation unit and DR on reliability
6 of 13
from end-user standpoint.

Figure 1. General overview of the distribution system model for the test cases.
Figure1.
Figure 1. General
General overview
overview of
of the
the distribution
distribution system
systemmodel
modelfor
forthe
thetest
testcases.
cases.

900
900
800

800 700

600
Radiation [w/m2]

700
500

600
Radiation [w/m2]

400

300
500 200

100
400
0

300
5:00

6:00

7:00

8:00

9:00

10:00

11:00

12:00

13:00

14:00

15:00

16:00

17:00

18:00

19:00

Time of the day

200
Figure
100 2. The used radiation data taken from National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL).

0 100
5:00

6:00

7:00

8:00

9:00

10:00

11:00

12:00

13:00

14:00

15:00

16:00

17:00

18:00

19:00

90
80
70
Time of the day
60
Loading (%)

50
Figure 2. The used radiation
40 data taken from National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL).
Figure 2. The used radiation data taken from National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL)
30

The daily load curve 20of the distribution feeder was obtained by using provided one year hourly
10
energy consumption
100 data 0from the distribution company. According to these raw data, the loading
1:00
2:00
3:00
4:00
5:00
6:00
7:00
8:00
9:00
10:00
11:00
12:00
13:00
14:00
15:00
16:00
17:00
18:00
19:00
20:00
21:00
22:00
23:00
0:00

pattern of every season on hourly basis was acquired. The peak values of the load curves were
90
3.52 MVA, 2.93 MVA, and 2.40 MVA for winter, spring, and summer, respectively. The highest amount
Time of the period
80
of consumption occurred in winter periods, and its characteristic was accordingly used in this study
Figure 3. Daily load curve of the distribution feeder for winter.
70
for modeling the loads, as shown in Figure 3.
60 study was carried out on the above mentioned radial distribution feeder for investigating
A detailed
Loading (%)

the impacts50of both incorporated PV plant and DR programs, including smart households oriented
concepts on40 system reliability improvement. The system reliability indices were calculated in
DigSILENT30PowerFactory and MATLAB environments by using the given parameters of distribution
system components,
20 as indicated in Table 1. In addition, load point interruption frequency (LPIF),
load point interruption time (LPID), and load point energy not supplied (LPENS) criteria were
10
0
1:00
2:00
3:00
4:00
5:00
6:00
7:00
8:00
9:00
10:00
11:00
12:00
13:00
14:00
15:00
16:00
17:00
18:00
19:00
20:00
21:00
22:00
23:00
0:00

Time of the period

 200

100

5:00

6:00

7:00

8:00

9:00

10:00

11:00

12:00

13:00

14:00

15:00

16:00

17:00

18:00

19:00
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 7062 7 of 13
Time of the day

also analyzed to evaluate the effects of PV based generation unit and DR on reliability from
Figure 2. Theend-user
used standpoint.
radiation data taken from National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL).

100
90
80
70
60
Loading (%)

50
40
30
20
10
0
1:00
2:00
3:00
4:00
5:00
6:00
7:00
8:00
9:00
10:00
11:00
12:00
13:00
14:00
15:00
16:00
17:00
18:00
19:00
20:00
21:00
22:00
23:00
0:00
Time of the period

Figure 3. Daily load curve of the distribution feeder for winter.

Figure 3. Daily load curve of the distribution feeder for winter.
Table 1. Failure rate and mean time to repair parameters of distribution feeder components.

Distribution Transformer
External Network Bus and Circuit Breaker Cable
(34.5/0.4 kV)
λ (1/year) 0.1 0.5 0.25 0.75
r (hr/year) 8.7 3 4 4

3.2. Case Studies and Results

In order to validate the effectiveness of the proposed model, four different case studies were
conducted in this study as follows:

• Case-1: LP9 was only considered as load, i.e., PV based generation unit and DR were out of concept.
Additionally, it was used as the reference base case for showing the reliability improvement of
other cases.
• Case-2: PV system was incorporated as DG for backup power supply.
• Case-3: In addition to PV based generation unit, 10% demand reduction was also implemented
through DR program.
• Case-4: In addition to PV based generation unit, 20% demand reduction was also implemented
through DR program.

In Case-1, PV based generation unit and demand reduction were not taken into consideration,
i.e., the load demand of LP9 was supplied by only external grid. Thus, the other case studies could be
analyzed thoroughly in terms of reliability improvement based on the reference condition. The feeder
reliability indices (SAIFI, SAIDI, ENS) and the load point reliability indices (LPIF, LPID, LPENS)
were calculated in MATLAB environment for base case, as indicated in Table 2.
The feeder reliability indices (SAIFI, SAIDI, ENS) and the load point reliability indices (LPIF,
LPID, LPENS) were calculated in MATLAB environment for Case-2, as indicated in Table 3. The impacts
of DG power supply can be clearly examined in terms of improvement in indicators, as stated in Table 4.
In total, 7.02% and more improvement was achieved in SAIFI and SAIDI indices, while 13.72% was
achieved in ENS. On the other hand, higher load reliability indices were obtained for the points near
the LP9. For example, LPIF improvement was 17.71% at LP7, while it was 52.10% at LP9. It is worth
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 7062 8 of 13

noting that PV based generation units can even supply energy needs of end-users in case of any failure,
and they may also aid to provide a sustainable and reliable electrical grid in general if some rare cases
are neglected for a properly monitored and managed grid structure.

Table 2. Calculated reliability indices for Case-1.

Feeder Load Point Load Points

Reliability Reliability
LP1 LP2 LP3 LP4 LP5 LP6 LP7 LP8 LP9
Indices Indices
SAIFI f
f 5.84 LPIF ( c−y ) 2.92 3.92 4.92 5.92 6.92 7.92 8.92 9.92 11.17
( c−y )
SAIDI h
h 23.32 LPID ( c−y ) 11.64 15.64 19.64 23.64 27.64 31.64 35.64 39.64 44.64
( c−y )
ENS
63.64 LPENS ( MWs
y ) 1.06 17.74 3.27 8.78 2.32 2.68 10.10 9.74 5.80
( MWs
y )
SAIFI: System Average Interruption Frequency Index; SAIDI: System Average Interruption Duration Index;
ENS: energy not supplied; LPIF: load point interruption frequency; LPID: load point interruption time;
LPENS: load point energy not supplied.

Table 3. Calculated reliability indices for Case-2.

Feeder Load Point Load Points

Reliability Reliability
LP1 LP2 LP3 LP4 LP5 LP6 LP7 LP8 LP9
Indices Indices
SAIFI f
f 5.43 LPIF ( c−y ) 2.92 3.92 4.92 5.92 6.92 7.92 7.34 5.88 5.35
( c−y )
SAIDI h
h 21.69 LPID ( c−y ) 11.64 15.64 19.64 23.64 27.64 31.64 29.34 23.50 21.39
( c−y )
ENS
54.91 LPENS ( MWs
y ) 1.06 17.74 3.27 8.78 2.32 2.68 8.22 5.69 3.20
( MWs
y )

Table 4. Feeder and load point reliability indices improvement for Case-2.

Load Points
LP1 LP2 LP3 LP4 LP5 LP6 LP7 LP8 LP9
SAIFI (%) 5.43 LPIF (%) 0 0 0 0 0 0 17.71 40.73 52.10
SAIDI (%) 21.69 LPID (%) 0 0 0 0 0 0 17.68 40.72 52.08
ENS (%) 54.91 LPENS (%) 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.61 41.58 44.83

In order to investigate the combined effects of DR implementation and on-site PV generation on

reliability improvement, Case-3 and Case-4 were carried out in which the demand reduction capabilities
of flexible load by 10% and 20% were considered from system and end-user standpoints. Herein,
especially for obtaining this DR-based demand reduction from residential end-users, the mentioned
households were considered as HEM equipped and therefore could respond to the DR based reduction
signals from the system operator automatically. The feeder reliability indices (SAIFI, SAIDI, ENS)
and the load point reliability indices (LPIF, LPID, LPENS) were calculated in MATLAB environment for
Case-3 and Case-4, as indicated in Tables 5 and 6, respectively. Additionally, the impacts of combined
DR implementation and PV generation on feeder and load point reliability indices are shown in Tables 7
and 8, respectively.
The interaction between the bus based reduction signal and the response of each residential
end-user was not considered in detail in this current concept but will be the main topic of a near
future optimization-oriented study, similar to a previous study of the authors that did not consider the
reliability point-of-view [34].
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 7062 9 of 13

Table 5. Calculated reliability indices for Case-3.

Feeder Load Point Load Points

Reliability Reliability
LP1 LP2 LP3 LP4 LP5 LP6 LP7 LP8 LP9
Indices Indices
SAIFI f
f 7.02 LPIF ( c−y ) 2.92 3.92 4.92 5.92 6.92 7.92 7.11 5.84 5.35
( c−y )
SAIDI h
h 6.99 LPID ( c−y ) 11.64 15.64 19.64 23.64 27.64 31.64 28.42 23.35 21.39
( c−y )
ENS
13.72 LPENS ( MWs
y ) 1.04 17.32 3.19 8.58 2.27 2.62 7.83 5.64 3.20
( MWs
y )

Table 6. Calculated reliability indices for Case-4.

Feeder Load Point Load Points

Reliability Reliability
LP1 LP2 LP3 LP4 LP5 LP6 LP7 LP8 LP9
Indices Indices
SAIFI f
f 5.13 LPIF ( c−y ) 2.92 3.92 4.92 5.92 6.92 7.69 6.90 5.80 5.35
( c−y )
SAIDI h
h 20.48 LPID ( c−y ) 11.64 15.64 19.64 23.64 27.64 30.71 27.58 23.18 21.39
( c−y )
ENS
48.54 LPENS ( MWs
y ) 1.02 16.91 3.12 8.37 2.22 2.48 7.51 5.60 3.20
( MWs
y )

Table 7. Feeder and load point reliability indices improvement for Case-3.

Load Points
LP1 LP2 LP3 LP4 LP5 LP6 LP7 LP8 LP9
SAIFI (%) 9.42 LPIF (%) 0 0 0 0 0 0 20.29 41.13 52.10
SAIDI (%) 9.52 LPID (%) 0 0 0 0 0 0 20.26 41.09 52.08
ENS (%) 18.73 LPENS (%) 1.89 2.37 2.45 2.28 2.16 2.24 22.48 42.09 44.83

Table 8. Feeder and load point reliability indices improvement for Case-4.

Load Points
LP1 LP2 LP3 LP4 LP5 LP6 LP7 LP8 LP9
SAIFI (%) 12.16 LPIF (%) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.90 22.65 41.53 52.10
SAIDI (%) 12.18 LPID (%) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.94 22.62 41.52 52.08
ENS (%) 23.73 LPENS (%) 3.77 4.68 4.59 4.67 4.31 7.46 25.64 42.51 44.83

As a result of Case-3 and Case-4, it is seen that this combined structure helped to achieve
a significant amount of contributions into the distribution system operation through increasing
reliability indices. It is evident that the improvement was achieved even at LP1 point in LPIF, LPID,
and LPENS as shown in Figures 4–6, respectively. The results show that the improvements depended
on the location of the load points and on the capacity of the transformer. As a conclusion, it can
be said that a respectable reliability improvement was achieved with DG availability and effective
DR strategies.
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 7062 10 of 13

Figure 4. LPIF improvement in load points for case studies compared to Case-1.

Figure 5. LPID improvement in load points for case studies compared to Case-1.

Figure 6. LPENS improvement in load points for case studies compared to Case-1.
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 7062 11 of 13

4. Conclusions
In this study, the effects of a combined architecture of on-site PV generation and residential DR
applications on distribution system reliability were taken into account from system operator and
end-user points of view. It should be highlighted that the real data of the distribution feeder were
provided by BEDAS, and one of the most widely used reliability parameters was also integrated
into DigSILENT PowerFactory and MATLAB programs. Unlike the other valuable literature studies,
the proposed structure considered the DG and the DR impacts on reliability simultaneously for the
first time in the literature to the best knowledge of the authors.
As it can be seen in this study, the obtained results were reasonable, and the most important thing
was that the backup power supply as well as the demand reduction strategies played a key role in terms
of reliability improvement in case of any failure at feeder or some other components. According to
the case studies, feeder reliability indices were improved by approximately 24%, while load point
indices were increased nearly 53% thanks to the combined structure. As a future study, it is aimed to
implement an optimization-based framework to determine and apply the appropriate DR strategies in
a distribution system structure including a PV generation unit.

Author Contributions: S.G.: Conceptualization, Software, Data curation; A.K.E.: Writing—Original draft preparation,
Visualization, Investigation; İ.Ş.: Conceptualization, Investigation; O.E.: Methodology, Software Validation,
Writing—Reviewing and Editing; J.P.S.C.: Supervision, Writing—Reviewing and Editing. All authors have read
and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: J.P.S.C. acknowledges the support by FEDER funds through COMPETE 2020 and by Portuguese funds
through FCT, under POCI-01-0145-FEDER-029803 (02/SAICT/2017).
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References
1. Bompard, E.; Huang, T.; Wu, Y.; Cremenescu, M. Classification and trend analysis of threats origins to the
security of power systems. Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst. 2013, 50, 50–64. [CrossRef]
2. Strasser, T.; Andrén, F.; Kathan, J.; Cecati, C.; Buccella, C.; Siano, P.; Leitão, P.; Zhabelova, G.; Vyatkin, V.;
Vrba, P.; et al. A Review of Architectures and Concepts for Intelligence in Future Electric Energy Systems.
IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 2015, 62, 2424–2438. [CrossRef]
3. European Commission: Renewable Energy. Available online: http://ec.europa.eu/energy/en/topics/renewable-
energy (accessed on 14 June 2020).
4. 2030 Climate & Energy Framework. Available online: https://ec.europa.eu/clima/policies/strategies/2030_en
(accessed on 1 October 2020).
5. Renewable Energy Prospects: China. IRENA, Remap 2030. November 2014. Available online:
https://www.irena.org/-/media/Files/IRENA/Agency/Publication/2014/Nov/IRENA_REmap_China_
summary_2014_EN.ashx?la=en&hash=807F1019E27CA5C3D36FBA445EC48F150D58A6B5 (accessed on 2
October 2020).
6. Yoo, T.H.; Kwon, H.-G.; Lee, H.C.; Rhee, C.-H.; Yoon, Y.T.; Park, J.-K. Development of reliability based
Demand response program in Korea. ISGT 2011. [CrossRef]
7. US Energy Information Administration—Electric Utility Demand Side Management Archive. Available online:
https://www.eia.gov/electricity/data/eia861/dsm/ (accessed on 2 October 2020).
8. Wu, Q.; Wang, L.; Li, B. An optimized demand response strategy for electric water heaters and the associated
impact on power system operational reliability. In Proceedings of the 2017 International Smart Cities
Conference (ISC2), Wuxi, China, 14–17 September 2017; pp. 1–6. [CrossRef]
9. Gaspar, C.; Gomes, A. A contribution of demand response for the reliability of a power system. In Proceedings
of the 2016 IEEE 16th International Conference on Environment and Electrical Engineering (EEEIC), Florence,
Italy, 7–10 June 2016; pp. 1–6.
10. Qi, X.; Ji, Z.; Wu, H.; Zhang, J.; Wang, L. Short-term reliability assessment of generating systems considering
demand response reliability. IEEE Access 2020, 8, 74371–74384. [CrossRef]
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 7062 12 of 13

11. Ribeiro, M.F.; Shafie-Khah, M.; Osório, G.J.; Hajibandeh, N.; Catalão, J.P.S. Optimal demand response scheme
for power systems including renewable energy resources considering system reliability and air pollution.
In Proceedings of the 2017 IEEE International Conference on Environment and Electrical Engineering
and 2017 IEEE Industrial and Commercial Power Systems Europe (EEEIC/I&CPS Europe), Milan, Italy,
6–9 June 2017; pp. 1–6.
12. Goel, L.; Wu, Q.; Wang, P. Reliability enhancement and nodal price volatility reduction of restructured power
systems with Stochastic demand side load shift. In Proceedings of the 2007 IEEE Power Engineering Society
General Meeting, Tampa, FL, USA, 24–28 June 2007; pp. 1–8.
13. Song, M.; Amelin, M.; Shayesteh, E.; Hilber, P. Impacts of flexible demand on the reliability of power systems.
In Proceedings of the 2018 IEEE Power & Energy Society Innovative Smart Grid Technologies
Conference (ISGT), Washington, DC, USA, 19–22 February 2018; pp. 1–5.
14. Li, G.; Bie, Z.; Hua, B.; Wang, X. Reliability evaluation of distribution systems including micro-grids
considering demand response and energy storage. In Proceedings of the 2012 47th International Universities
Power Engineering Conference (UPEC), London, UK, 4–7 September 2012; pp. 1–6.
15. Zhou, P.; Chen, Z.; Yang, H.; Wen, L.; Liu, Y.; Hu, B.; Ma, Y.; Xia, Y.; Xiao, R.; Li, B. Reliability evaluation of
grid-connected micro-grid considering demand response. In Proceedings of the 2016 International Conference
on Probabilistic Methods Applied to Power Systems (PMAPS), Beijing, China, 16–20 October 2016; pp. 1–5.
16. Abogaleela, M.; Kopsidas, K. Reliability enhancements from demand response considering interrupted
energy assessment rates. In Proceedings of the 2016 Eighteenth International Middle East Power Systems
Conference (MEPCON), Cairo, Egypt, 27–29 December 2016; pp. 330–335.
17. Su, S.; Hu, Y.; He, L.; Yamashita, K.; Wang, S. An assessment procedure of distribution network reliability
considering photovoltaic power integration. IEEE Access 2019, 7, 60171–60185. [CrossRef]
18. Altamimi, A.; Jayaweera, D. Reliability of power systems with climate change impacts on hierarchical levels
of PV systems. Electr. Power Syst. Res. 2020, 190, 106830. [CrossRef]
19. Hamzeh, M.; Vahidi, B. Reliability evaluation of distribution transformers considering the negative and
positive effects of rooftop photovoltaics. IET Gener. Transm. Distrib. 2020, 14, 3063–3069. [CrossRef]
20. Raghuwanshi, S.S.; Arya, R. Reliability evaluation of stand-alone hybrid photovoltaic energy system for
rural healthcare centre. Sustain. Energy Technol. Assess. 2020, 37, 100624. [CrossRef]
21. Zou, K.; Mohy-Ud-Din, G.; Agalgaonkar, A.P.; Muttaqi, K.M.; Perera, S. Distribution System Restoration With
Renewable Resources for Reliability Improvement Under System Uncertainties. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron.
2020, 67, 8438–8449. [CrossRef]
22. Shi, S.; Lo, K.L. Reliability assessment of power system considering the impact of wind energy.
In Proceedings of the 2012 47th International Universities Power Engineering Conference (UPEC), London,
UK, 4–7 September 2012; pp. 1–6.
23. Fang, C.; Xiang, G.; Junwei, Y. Study on reliability assessment of composite generation and transmission
system integrated wind farm. In Proceedings of the 2012 IEEE International Conference on Power System
Technology (POWERCON), Auckland, New Zealand, 30 October–2 November 2012; pp. 1–5.
24. Manandhar, S. Reliability Assessment of Smart Distribution System and Analysis of Automatic Line Switches.
Master’s Thesis, The University of Tennessee, Chattanooga, TN, USA, 2013.
25. Distribution System Reliability Evaluation Services. Chapter 4. Available online: https://shodhganga.
inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/10247/9/09_chapter%204.pdf (accessed on 2 October 2020).
26. Mohagheghi, S.; Yang, F.; Falahati, B. Impact of demand response on distribution system reliability.
In Proceedings of the 2011 IEEE Power and Energy Society General Meeting, Detroit, MI, USA, 24–28 July 2011;
pp. 1–7.
27. Billinton, R.; Allan, R.N.; Snaith, E.R. Book Review of ‘Reliability Evaluation of Power Systems’; Springer:
New York, NY, USA, 1996.
28. Billinton, R.; Allan, R.N. Reliability Assessment of Large Electric Power Systems; Springer Science and Business
Media LLC: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 1988.
29. Balijepalli, N.; Venkata, S.; Richter, C.; Christie, R.; Longo, V. Distribution System Reliability Assessment Due
to Lightning Storms. IEEE Trans. Power Deliv. 2005, 20, 2153–2159. [CrossRef]
30. Brown, R.E. Reliability Metrices and Indices. In Electric Power Distribution Reliability; CRC Press: New York,
NY, USA, 2009; pp. 41–102.
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 7062 13 of 13

31. National Renewable Energy Laboratory—Measurement and Instrumentation Data Center. Available online:
https://midcdmz.nrel.gov/ (accessed on 12 June 2020).
32. Topcu, S.; Dilmac, S.; Aslan, Z. Study of hourly solar radiation data in Istanbul. Renew. Energy 1995, 6,
171–174. [CrossRef]
33. Bulut, H. Generation of typical solar radiation data for Istanbul, Turkey. Int. J. Energy Res. 2003, 27,
847–855. [CrossRef]
34. Paterakis, N.G.; Santos, S.F.; Catalão, J.P.S.; Erdinç, O.; Bakirtzis, A.G. Coordination of smart-household
activities for the efficient operation of intelligent distribution systems. In Proceedings of the IEEE PES
Innovative Smart Grid Technologies (ISGT) European 2014 Conference, Istanbul, Turkey, 12–15 October 2014;
pp. 1–6.

© 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).