EUROPEAN TRANSACTIONS ON ELECTRICAL POWER Euro. Trans. Electr.

Power 2012; 22:391401 Published online 28 February 2011 in Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com). DOI: 10.1002/etep.580

Application of ordinal optimization on reliability centered maintenance of distribution system

Geun-Pyo Park and Yong T. Yoon*y
Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, The College of Engineering, Seoul National University, Seoul, Korea

SUMMARY The problem of distribution system maintenance has a combinatorial explosion of choices. It may not be worthwhile to solve this problem using the analytical method that require too much time and cost. Ordinal optimization is a prime candidate of stochastic optimization problem. Ordinal optimization is used to quickly narrow the search space and nd a good enough solution with reasonable condence. This paper proposes the reliability centered maintenance model of distribution systems, and the solution of this problem through the application of ordinal optimization. A numerical examples are performed to illustrate the efciency of the proposed ordinal optimization and to nd a maintenance strategy of distribution systems. Copyright # 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
key words:

distribution system; reliability centered maintenance; modied Markov chain model; maintenance strategy; ordinal optimization

1. INTRODUCTION Since reliability is a critical attribute of electrical power delivery, distribution systems must be operated to meet customer needs for reliability with the minimum cost. For this, maintenance strategies have to be proposed by considering the tradeoff between cost and reliability. As reliability improves because of sufcient maintenance, the cost of the utilities increases, but the cost to the customer decreases. In comparison, if maintenance is executed insufciently, then the maintenance cost can decrease but reliability will decrease and the total cost will be increase due to equipment failure. Thus, it is important to determine an optimal maintenance strategy that considers the tradeoff between upfront maintenance cost and the potential costs of loads loss. Reliability centered maintenance (RCM) is the preventive maintenance (PM) that maintains or improves the availability of systems. RCM is designed to balance costs and benets. The main objective of RCM is to optimize cost by focusing on the essential functions of the system and avoiding unnecessary maintenance actions [13]. In the deregulated environment, distribution companies face the requirements of considering costs and reliability. Distribution companies need to simultaneously focus on the economic and technical aspects. Conventional maintenances, such as time-based maintenance (TBM) and condition-based maintenance (CBM), are not proper for distribution companies in a deregulated environment, because such methods are not cost-effective. RCM is a method capable of formulating the maintenance of distribution systems by reecting the incentive of distribution companies. RCM is a systematic approach to identify the optimal maintenance. A number of papers focus on the relation between reliability and cost and on the models for RCM using Markov chain [37]. In Ref. [3], the authors suggest a reliability-centered asset maintenance, which provides a quantitative relationship
*Correspondence to: Yong T. Yoon, Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, The School of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, The Seoul National University, Seoul, Korea. y E-mail: ytyoon@snu.ac.kr Copyright # 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

392

G.-P. PARK AND Y. T. YOON

between PM of assets and the total maintenance cost. The model in Ref. [4] determines the maintenance interval very similarly to another maintenance method called the TBM. The model in Ref. [5] determines the inspection interval, however, within the RCM framework varying the failure rate is required for calculation at every year. The model in Ref. [6] includes various maintenance activities, but it decides the maintenance method based on only maintenance cost and the associated probability. The model in Ref. [7] is proposed for circuit breaker and transformer inspection based on the deterioration process. The electric power distribution system is a huge system that consists of various types of equipments and loads. Therefore, various factors such as equipment, equipment state, inspection interval, and maintenance decisions have to be considered for the maintenance strategy of distribution systems. The problem of maintenance strategy in distribution systems has a combinatorial explosion of choices and very large search space. Solving this problem through analytical methods requires too much time and cost because of the vast search space and uncertainty. Analytical tools fall short due to modeling and computational complexity. The stochastic simulation method becomes the general tool of choice [8]. This paper proposes a maintenance model and a method to effectively solve the problem of distribution system maintenance through stochastic simulation. Ordinal optimization that quickly narrows the search space was used to solve the problem that has a very large search space. Ordinal optimization is an approach for nding a solution to an optimization problem in which a large number of possible policies has to be considered [9]. Ordinal optimization nds a good enough solution (top n%) with high probability instead of nding the best solution. This is the proper method of a problem with large search space and large uncertainty. The RCM of distribution system can be modeled by equipment modeling and impact analysis, and this problem can be formulated by dynamic programming (DP). Because the maintenance problem is a stochastic optimization problem, ordinal optimization is a prime candidate to solve this problem.

2. MAINTENANCE MODELING OF RELIABILITY CENTERED MAINTENANCE In this section, we describe the maintenance modeling of distribution system through RCM. Maintenance modeling consists of an equipment model and impact analysis. This maintenance modeling can be formulated by DP.

2.1. Equipment model Maintenance has to be performed to reduce outages and maintain system reliability in RCM. Maintenance decisions are determined by considering the effect of equipment failure to the system. We proposed the equipment modeling through modied Markov chain [10] that is suitable for the concept of RCM. This model describes the deterioration process, inspection, and maintenance. Figure 1 shows the equipment model.

Figure 1. Basic modied Markov chain model.

Copyright # 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Euro. Trans. Electr. Power 2012; 22:391401 DOI: 10.1002/etep

APPLICATION OF ORDINAL OPTIMIZATION

393

The model in Figure 1 is a probabilistic model describing the deterioration process of equipment. If there is no maintenance, then the equipment ages as time goes by and nally loses its functionality because due to deterioration. To decrease the functional failures of equipment and outages of loads, we have to inspect the equipment and decide whether or not doing maintenance is needed. These are modeled in Figure 1 using Markov chain. The deterioration process of equipment is described in the upper part of the gure and maintenance after inspection is described in the lower part. In Figure 1, the state N is the normal state that equipment operates normally. The states D1 and D2 are the deterioration states that equipment ages as time goes by. Since the deterioration process may be different depending on the equipment, the deterioration state can be varied according to the equipment. The state F is a failure state in which the equipment does not adequately perform its function. Scheduled inspection is performed at every regular interval. If state is determined to be in the D1 or D2 at inspection time, then the inspector can determine whether or not this equipment needs maintenance. Decisions of d12 and d22 refer to performing equipment maintenance. Decisions of d11 and d21 refer to delaying equipment maintenance. We assume that state goes back to being normal once maintenance is performed. The decisions are made toward minimizing the total expected cost that is the sum of customer interruption cost, maintenance cost, and inspection cost. The equipment state and impact of equipment to the system have to be considered in making maintenance decisions. This is a key point of this model. Maintenance decisions are determined based on evaluating the impact of equipment failure on the system. To analyze the impact of equipment fault, we have to evaluate the system wide effect. When an equipment fault occurs, we have to know which load point or section experiences the outage. The cost of interruption to the customer can then be calculated based on this impact analysis. Customer interruption cost is the criterion of maintenance decisions. 2.2. Impact analysis To analyze the impact of an equipment fault in the radial distribution system, we have to evaluate the system-wide effect in terms of three different aspects, which are self-effect, downstream effect, and upstream effect. First, the self-effect of the faulted section is considered. If an equipment fault occurs, then all load points adjacent to the faulted section will not be supplied until the faulted section is repaired. Second, the downstream effect of a faulted section is considered. If an equipment fault occurs, then all the load points downstream from the faulted section will not be supplied until the faulted section is repaired. If the circuit breaker is installed, then we should consider the switching effect in order to analyze the fault effect. Switching time is generally shorter than the repair time of the faulted section. The partial load points between the faulted section and the section where any nearby isolating switch that is present downstream from the faulted section will not be supplied until after the isolating switch is operational. After isolating the faulted section, loads that would otherwise have been left disconnected until repairs have been completed can now be transferred to another part of the system. That is, the outage time of downstream loads is the switching time. Third, the upstream effect of the faulted section is considered. If an equipment fault occurs, then a fault can have an impact on the upstream load points from the faulted section. The upstream load points will experience outage during the switching time needed to isolate the faulted section. The impact of an equipment fault can be evaluated in terms of the three aspects above. The customer interruption cost can be calculated based on this impact analysis. When transition occurs from the second deterioration state to the failure state, customer interruption cost is used as transition cost. 2.3. Dynamic programming formulation The objective is to nd an optimal maintenance strategy that minimizes the total expected cost. The total expected cost is the sum of inspection cost, maintenance cost, repair cost, and customer interruption cost. Because this problem deals with situations where decisions are made in stages, the problem can be formulated by DP [11]. Time is broken into a series of stages, and a decision can be determined at the time stage of inspection.
Copyright # 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Euro. Trans. Electr. Power 2012; 22:391401 DOI: 10.1002/etep

394

G.-P. PARK AND Y. T. YOON

The algorithm of nding the optimum policy can be expressed by follows: JN xN gN xN Jk xk min E fgk xk ; uk ; wk Jk1 xk1 g
uk 2U wk

(1) (2)

where gk xk ; uk ; wk is the cost, gN xN is the terminal cost, and Jk xk is the optimal expected cost that begins at time stage k. The DP algorithm starts with nding the optimal cost-to-go for the last stage and then iterates backward to calculate Jk xk from Jk1 xk1 that is already calculated. Iteration continues until the time stage 0. In this problem, the iteration can be divided into two parts because the decisions only take place when the time stage is at the inspection time. In other words, if time stage k is not a multiple of the inspection interval, then the cost is calculated from the transition cost and probability. On the other hand, if time stage k is a multiple of inspection interval, then the cost is calculated from maintenance decisions that minimize the cost. Thus, the procedure of calculation can be expressed as follows: (i) time stage k is not a multiple of t Jk t; xi ECi;j Jk1 t; xj X pi;j Ci;j Jk1 t; xj
j

(3)

(ii) time stage k is a multiple of t Jk t; xi Cins minCi;j xj ; uj Jk1 t; xj

u

(4)

where xi is state of equipment, t is inspection interval, pi,j is transition probability, Ci,j is transition cost, Cins is inspection cost, u is maintenance decision, and Jk t; xi is accumulated cost at stage k. Transition costs include customer interruption cost, maintenance cost, and repair cost. The state transitions from the deterioration state to the failure state incur customer interruption costs, state transitions from the failure state to the normal state incur repair costs, and state transitions by decision of performing maintenance incur maintenance costs. Other transitions, such as that from the normal state to the deterioration state, do not incur any costs. From Equations (3) and (4), we make the inspection interval and maintenance decisions that minimize the total expected cost. From this formulation and equipment modeling, we can evaluate the quantitative assessment of maintenance strategies.

3. APPLICATION OF ORDINAL OPTIMIZATION TO RELIABILITY CENTERED MAINTENANCE The characteristic of ordinal optimization is goal softening [8]. That is, although it is desirable to nd the best solution, it may be impossible or not worthwhile to examine every possible solution out of a billion candidates. It is more effective and practical to nd a good enough solution within the top n% by reducing the search space. In this section, we describe the application of ordinal optimization to RCM of the distribution system. 3.1. Ordinal optimization Consider the problem of stochastic optimization, J u ELxt; u; j (5)

where, u is the design parameter, L is performance functional of the sample path of a discrete event dynamic system (DEDS), and j is all random parameter. It is a difcult problem because the analytical or numerical evaluation of J(u) is only available for a limited class of DEDS. This leaves simulation as
Copyright # 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Euro. Trans. Electr. Power 2012; 22:391401 DOI: 10.1002/etep

APPLICATION OF ORDINAL OPTIMIZATION

395

the only general tool for evaluating the performance [12,13]. However, the simulation is a costly and time consuming method. Ordinal optimization is an approach to the stochastic optimization problem and departs in two ways. The rst is to nd good or better designs by attempting to nd designs of the top n% (typically 5%) of all designs. The second is determining which design is better than another. That is, we primarily deal with ordinal rather than cardinal optimization, such as gradients and value. Ordinal optimization has several advantages [12]. Once the burden of accurate estimation of performance measures is lifted, considerable simulation work reduction can be gained. Estimation and comparison can be done based on very short observations. The ordinal optimization is inherently a global optimization method. It is possible to solve the problems which have the large search space by reducing the search space through ordinal optimization. The key of ordinal optimization is to decide the selected subset with acceptable probability to be an element of the good enough subset. Hence, the problem of (1) can be changed to decide a selected subset that has at least k solutions of the top n% in the entire set. Here, k is the alignment level. The measure of goodness of the selected subset is the alignment probability. The alignment level and the alignment probability are chosen by the system planner. The alignment probability can be expressed as follows: Pa PfjG\Sj ! kg (6)

The size of the selected subset can be estimated from the ordered performance curve (OPC). OPC is obtained by plotting the performance of each policy, in order from the lowest to the highest. OPC has ve standard patterns that are at, neutral, U-shaped, bell, and steep. A at curve implies that there are lots of good designs. A neutral curve implies equally distributed good, bad, and intermediate designs. A U-shaped curve implies lots of good and bad designs, but few intermediate designs. A bell curve implies lots of intermediate designs, but few good and bad designs. A steep curve implies lots of bad designs. These ve patterns are sufciently representative of all OPCs [14]. The OPCs are used to estimate the size of the selected subset with a given alignment probability and alignment level. The size of subset can be determined as follows Z k ; g e Z0 k r g g h (7)

where the coefcients Z0, r; g ; h are constants depending on the OPC types. The coefcients are shown in Ref. [14] for different OPC patterns. Ordinal optimization may be performed for a given problem using a basic three-step procedure [9]. First, a sample of K policies out of all possible choices is selected, using uniform random sampling. Usually, the size of K is 1000. Although higher values of K improve the possibility of nding a good solution, higher values of sample size require a heavy computation of large samples, which is contrary to the concept of ordinal optimization. Second, a subset of s elements is drawn from the sample of K policies. For most problems, the elements chosen are the s policies that have the lowest cost after all K sample policies are simulated using a Monte Carlo approach. Finally, the policies of the selected subset may then be evaluated more thoroughly to determine which one achieves the best performance. 3.2. Application of ordinal optimization The problem of maintenance strategy in a distribution system has a combinatorial explosion of choices and very large search space. The cases of maintenance decisions are four cases from the equipment model in Figure 1. If the number of equipment of distribution system is n, then the cases of maintenance decisions are 4n. As the number of equipment increases, the search space may increase exponentially. That is, the problem has NP-hard limitation. On the other hand, this problem has large uncertainties that are originated from the transition probabilities and noise of evaluation. Large search space and uncertainties are the characteristics of the stochastic optimization problem. Ordinal optimization is a prime candidate for the stochastic optimization problem. Ordinal optimization can be implemented by starting from specifying the policies of the problem. Policies of the maintenance problem are the combination of inspection interval (t) and maintenance
Copyright # 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Euro. Trans. Electr. Power 2012; 22:391401 DOI: 10.1002/etep

396

G.-P. PARK AND Y. T. YOON

Figure 2. Simulated OPC of maintenance policies.

decisions at each deterioration state. In the case of a system that has two equipments, for example, a policy may be dened as [100; 1 1; 0 1]. This means that the inspection interval is 100 days, doing maintenance at all deterioration states for the rst equipment and doing maintenance at only D2 state for second equipment. Assume that the maintenance decisions are performing maintenance at D1 state and no maintenance at D2 state. It is an unreasonable decision because D2 state is more deteriorated state than D1. Therefore, if maintenance is determined at a less deteriorated state, then maintenance has to be determined at a more deteriorated state. After specifying the policies, we determine a uniform sample of K policies out of all possible policies. A random policy can be determined by drawing K (1000) random numbers. After drawing random policies, the performance of each policy is evaluated by a Monte Carlo simulation. An OPC for the problem of distribution system maintenance is shown in Figure 2. The OPC of maintenance problem is the at class of ve classes. We can guess that there are lots of good designs in the search space. If the rst choice is impractical or difcult to apply, maintenance planners may choose the second best solution. Because there are lots of good solutions and the difference between the best and second best solution is small, it is rational to choose the second best solution if the best solution is difcult to apply. The subset of s is drawn from sample policies by Equation (6). From Ref. [14] the parameters in Equation (6) are Z0 8.1378, r 0.8974, g 1.2058, and h 6. To obtain one of the top 5% policies with 95% probability, 37 (Z (1,50) 37) policies are sufcient. Finally, the selected subset is evaluated thoroughly, and we can then choose the policy that has the minimum performance. This policy is the optimal maintenance strategy for the system. 4. NUMERICAL EXAMPLE We compared the ops, which are the number of operations, between the DP and ordinal optimization depending on number of equipment. The system is radial system and consists of only one kind of equipment. The comparison of ops between two algorithms is shown in Table I.
Table I. Comparison of ops between algorithms. Number of equipments DP 2 3 4
Copyright # 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Flops OO 2.91 108 3.69 108 4.53 108

2.14 108 3.37 109 5.36 1010

Euro. Trans. Electr. Power 2012; 22:391401 DOI: 10.1002/etep

APPLICATION OF ORDINAL OPTIMIZATION

397

Table II. Comparison of total expected cost between algorithms. Number of equipments DP 2 3 4 3659.9 5200.9 5232.9 Total expected cost ($/year) OO 3694.1 5306.4 5573.8 Error (%) 1.3 2.0 6.5

When we solve the maintenance problem of the system that has two equipments, the DP nds the solution in fewer calculations than ordinal optimization. However, the ordinal optimization algorithm nds the solution in fewer calculations than the DP in the case of three or four equipments. As the size of system increases, the policies and states at each time stage increase explosively. Because the DP found the solutions by examining all the possible policies, DP needs heavy computation to nd the solution as the number of equipment increases. On the other hand, since ordinal optimization found the

Figure 3. Distribution system of RBTS bus 2.

Copyright # 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Euro. Trans. Electr. Power 2012; 22:391401 DOI: 10.1002/etep

398

G.-P. PARK AND Y. T. YOON

solution in the reduced search space, it needs fewer calculations than the DP as the number of equipment increases. Table II shows a comparison of the total expected cost. The differences of values are 1.3%, 2.0%, and 6.5% for 2, 3, and 4 equipments, respectively. From the results of Tables I and II, we know that the ordinal optimization can nd a solution in shorter time than the DP and that the solution is close to the best solution. Although ordinal optimization does not nd the best solution, it is possible to nd a good enough solution by reducing the search space. The proposed method is applied to an example of distribution system to make a maintenance strategy. RBTS bus 2 is used for the case study. Figure 3 shows the distribution system for RBTS bus 2. RBTS is the distribution system that contains the main elements found in practical systems but which are sufciently small and it also contains all the basic data needed to perform analysis in Ref. [15]. In RBTS, residential, commercial, and government/institution loads are metered on the low voltage side, and the small user loads are metered on the high voltage side. The feeders are operated as radial feeders but connected as a mesh through normally open sectionalizing points. Following a fault on a

Table III. Failure rate and repair time of equipments. Equipment Overhead line Cable Circuit breaker l1 0.1 0.2 0.012 l2 0.2 0.2 0.012 l Transformer COS 0.002 0.0005 l3 0.1 0.1 0.012 l4 0.018 r (hour/f) 1 2 1 r (hour/f) 2 3

Table IV. Customer interruption cost ($/kW). Customer type 1 (min) Residential Commercial Ofce building Industrial 0.021 0.881 4.778 1.625 20 (min) 0.093 2.969 9.878 3.868 Duration of interruption 1 (hour) 0.482 8.522 21.06 9.085 4 (hour) 4.914 31.32 68.83 25.16 8 (hour) 15.69 83.01 119.2 55.81

Table V. Optimal maintenance strategy for feeder 1. Optimal inspection interval (months) Total expected cost (1000 $/year) Maintenance cost (1000 $/year) Component CB 1 CB 2 CB 3 CB 4 Cable Line 1 Line 2 Line 3 SAIFI SAIDI D1 D1 D1 D1 N N N N N Optimal decisions D2 N N N N N N N N 0.2333 0.1811 59.6 11,282 4215

D3 N N N N

Copyright # 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Euro. Trans. Electr. Power 2012; 22:391401 DOI: 10.1002/etep

APPLICATION OF ORDINAL OPTIMIZATION

399

feeder, the main units permit customers to be supplied from an alternative supply. Data of equipments failure and repair time are shown in Table III. Each load point is connected to a feeder through a transformer and cut out switch (COS). The feeders connected to bus (1, 6, 16, and 26) are assumed as cables and others are overhead lines. One convenient way to display customer interruption costs is in the form of customer damage functions [16]. Table IV shows a series of sector customer damage function expressed in kilowatts
Table VI. Optimal maintenance strategy for feeder 2. Optimal inspection interval (months) Total expected cost (1000 $/year) Maintenance cost (1000 $/year) Component CB 1 CB 2 Cable Line SAIFI SAIDI D1 N D1 D1 N Optimal decisions D2 N D2 D2 N 0.0626 0.0502 60.7 2722 1425

D3 N N

Table VII. Optimal maintenance strategy for feeder 3. Optimal inspection interval (months) Total expected cost (1000 $/year) Maintenance cost (1000 $/year) Component CB 1 CB 2 CB 3 CB 4 Cable Line 1 Line 2 Line 3 SAIFI SAIDI D1 D1 N D1 D1 D1 N D1 N Optimal decisions D2 N N D2 D2 N N N N 0.1739 0.1330 59.9 7171 2501

D3 N N N N

Table VIII. Optimal maintenance strategy for feeder 4. Optimal inspection interval (months) Total expected cost (1000 $/year) Maintenance cost (1000 $/year) Component CB 1 CB 2 CB 3 CB 4 Cable Line 1 Line 2 Line 3 SAIFI SAIDI D1 N D1 N N N N N D1 Optimal decisions D2 N N N N N N N N 0.2067 0.1578 60.8 8434 2493

D3 N N N N

Copyright # 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Euro. Trans. Electr. Power 2012; 22:391401 DOI: 10.1002/etep

400

G.-P. PARK AND Y. T. YOON

of annual peak demand. These values were obtained from the Canadian survey [17]. These values were used in the case study. Tables VVIII show the results of maintenance strategies for each feeder by applying the ordinal optimization. Optimal maintenance strategies, total expected costs, and reliability indices are presented in the Tables. For feeder 1, the inspection interval is 59.6 months and circuit breakers have to be maintained at states D2 and D3 except for circuit breaker 4 which is maintained at all deteriorations. The overhead lines and cable are maintained at all deteriorations. The total expected maintenance cost is about 11 million dollars per year under this optimal maintenance strategy. 5. CONCLUSION The problem of large search space has the curse of dimension. It is not worthwhile to nd a solution through the analytical method. Ordinal optimization is a prime candidate for the problem of huge search space. Ordinal optimization attempts to nd a good enough solution with reasonable condence. The maintenance problem of distribution system is an optimization problem that has a large search space and large uncertainties. This paper investigates the application of ordinal optimization on reliability centered maintenance of distribution systems. A numerical example shows that the application of ordinal optimization is more efcient because it nds the solution that is close to the best solution, in a fewer numbers of operations. The proposed RCM model can determine the maintenance strategy minimizing the total expected cost by applying the ordinal optimization. 6. LIST OF SYMBOLS, SUBSCRIPTS, AND ABBREVIATIONS 6.1. Symbols N D1 D2 F Ins M1 M2 d11,d21 d12,d22 x t p J Ci;J Cins u Pa G S Z s normal state deterioration state 1 deterioration state 2 failure state inspection maintenance 1 maintenance 2 decisions of performing maintenance decisions of performing nothing equipment state inspection interval pransition probability expected cost transition cost inspection cost maintenance decision alignment probability good enough subset selected subset the minimum size of the selected subset required to an Pa element of selected subset

6.2. Abbreviations RCM DP DEDS OPC reliability centered maintenance dynamic programming discrete event dynamic system ordered performance curve
Euro. Trans. Electr. Power 2012; 22:391401 DOI: 10.1002/etep

Copyright # 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

APPLICATION OF ORDINAL OPTIMIZATION ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

401

This work was supported by KESRI (Korea Electrical Engineering and Science Institute) which is funded by MKE (Ministry of Knowledge and Economy).
REFERENCES 1. Rausand M. Reliability centered maintenance. Reliability Engineering and System Safety 1998; 60:121132. 2. Brauer DC, Brauer GD. Reliability-centered maintenance. IEEE Transaction on Reliability 1987; R-36(1):1724. 3. Bertling L, Allan R, Eriksson R. A reliability-centered asset maintenance method for assessing the impact of maintenance in power distribution system. IEEE Transactions on Power Systems 2005; 20(1):7582. 4. Siqueira IP. Optimum reliability-centered maintenance task frequencies for power system equipments. 8th International Conference on PMAPS 2004. 5. Kuntz PA, Christie RD, Venkata SS. A reliability centered optimal visual inspection model for distribution feeders. IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery 2001; 16(4):718723. 6. Endrenyi J, Anders GJ, Leite da Silva AM. Probabilistic evaluation of the effect of maintenance on reliability an application. IEEE Transactions on Power Systems 1998; 13(2):576583. 7. Natti S, Jirutitijaroen P, Kezunovic M, Singh C. Circuit breaker and transformer inspection and maintenance: probabilistic model. 8th International Conference on PMAPS 2004. 8. Ho YC, Cassandras CG, Chen CH, Dai L. Ordinal optimization and simulation. Journal of Operational Research Society 2000; 51(4):490500. M. Price-Based Commitment Decisions in the Electricity Market. Springer, London, 1999. 9. Allen E, Ilic 10. Park GP, Heo JH, Lee SS, Yoon YT. Generalized reliability centered maintenance modeling through modied semiMarkov chain in power system. Journal of Electrical Engineering and Technology 2011; 6(1):2531. 11. Bertsekas DP. Dynamic Programming and Optimal Control, Vol. I. Athena Scientic, Belmont, MA, 1995. 12. Ho YC, Sreenivas RS, Vakili P. Ordinal optimization of DEDS. Discrete Event Dynamic Systems: Theory and Applications 1992; 2(1):6188. 13. Lin SY, Ho YC, Lin CH. An ordinal optimization theory-based algorithm for solving the optimal power ow problem with discrete control variables. IEEE Transactions on Power Systems 2004; 10(1):276286. 14. Edward Lau TW, Ho YC. Universal alignment probabilities and subset selection for ordinal optimization. Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications 1997; 93(3):455489. 15. Allan RN, Billinton R, Sjarief I, Goel L, So KS. A reliability test system for educational purposes-basic distribution system data and results. IEEE Transactions on Power Systems 1991; 6(2):813820. 16. Billinton R, Li W. Reliability Assessment of Electric Power Systems Using Monte Carlo Methods. Plenum Press, New York, 1994. 17. Tollefson G, Billinton R, Wacker G, Chan E, Aweya J. A Canadian customer survey to assess power system reliability worth. IEEE Transactions on Power Systems 1994; 9(1):443450.

Copyright # 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Euro. Trans. Electr. Power 2012; 22:391401 DOI: 10.1002/etep