IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER SYSTEMS, VOL. 24, NO.

2, MAY 2009

705

Distribution Transformer Losses Evaluation: A New Analytical Methodology and Articial Neural Network Approach
Adriano Galindo Leal, Member, IEEE, Jos Antonio Jardini, Fellow, IEEE, Luiz Carlos Magrini, and Se Un Ahn
AbstractThe aim of this paper is to propose an analytical methodology and discuss some alternatives of articial neural network models in order to evaluate losses in distribution systems, particularly in distribution transformers. The procedure can also be extended to other components of the distribution system (secondary and primary network and HV/MV transformers). This is accomplished by using the utilitys database such as the consumers monthly energy consumption and the typical load curves of each class of consumption and type of activity developed. Index TermsInformation systems, neural networks, power distribution, power transformer losses.

I. INTRODUCTION

OMMONLY, distribution system losses are estimated because of the unavailability of suitable metering systems. For billing purposes, only energy meters are installed at the consumers residence or commerce rather than demand meters, which have a high cost when compared to the consumers bill. For losses estimation many proposals were put forward. All of them, including ours, have a lack of accuracy mainly because the consumer load proles are different on weekends and even during the weekdays as appliances are turned on/off in a random way [1]. These inaccuracies have always been present, even in the procedures described in this paper; although it showed signicant progress in the treatment of the random variation. In [2] and [3], the primary feeders, the distribution transformers and the secondary network for three-phase load ow calculation are modeled. The consumers load proles are represented on an hourly basis for power and then the losses are calculated. Several calculations were done varying the load level (FL), the transformer capacity (XFCAP), and the total conductor length (CL). The results were then used for training an articial neural network (ANN) to thereafter estimate the losses in actual feeders considering its proper FL, XFCAP, and CL. This is an improvement of other methods, because it uses the consumers daily load prole, and avoids the use of loss

Manuscript received October 14, 2007; revised August 15, 2008. First published February 27, 2009; current version published April 22, 2009. Paper no. TPWRS-00728-2007. A. G. Leal is with Elucid Solutions, So Paulo, Brazil (e-mail: leal@ieee.org). J. A. Jardini is with EPUSP-PEA, So Paulo, Brazil (e-mail: jardini@pea. usp.br). L. C. Magrini is with UNIP, So Paulo, Brazil (e-mail: magrini@pea.usp.br). S. U. Ahn is with CPFLCompanhia Piratininga de Forca e Luz, Campinas, Brazil (e-mail: seun@cp.com.br). Digital Object Identier 10.1109/TPWRS.2008.2012178

and diversity factors. Although, as in all methods inaccuracies still exist. Three-phase load ow is a suitable tool for the calculation of unbalanced load/lines conditions; nevertheless, the authors here consider this unnecessarily complex to be used, on account of the inaccuracies existing in the load prole. In fact, at least in tropical countries, the load proles of the weekdays are different and there is no time correlation among the consumers loading, which makes the task of setting up the load ow a source of error. The measurements of the consumers daily load proles reand stanported in [1] led to the evaluation of the mean proles in several type of consumers and dard deviation distribution transformers using sets of 15 to 30 measured daily values of various type of consumers (resload proles. The idential, small/medium size commercial and industrial) were of , which clearly indicates a large variathe same size as tion of the load at any time of the day. This is because the total consumer load is composed of energy uses of almost equal size and they are not turned on/off at the same time every day. On the other hand, the measurements carried in distribution transof about 20% of . However, for formers indicated an large consumers such as shopping malls, medium/heavy size inare very low [4]. dustries the values of In [5], measurements in selected feeders were carried out. These results were then extrapolated to other feeders using properties like the installed capacity of the distribution transformers and the feeders length. A similar procedure was adopted by [6] and [7], where instead of measurements, load ow modeling was used for the calculation of selected feeders. Their extrapolation to other feeders followed a similar approach to that presented in [5]. As discussed above, the load prole variation was not considered in all these methods. Analyses to establish load proles for engineering studies, supported by ANN, wavelets theory and clustering processes were conducted in [8] and [9]. In this paper, a method that includes the load variability aimed at obtaining improvements for the estimation of distribution losses is presented. The organization of this paper is as follows: initially, a procedure to obtain the transformer daily load prole, based on the consumers data, is described. Then, the losses calculation regarding the load variability is presented. Finally, a method considering the ANN technique as an alternative procedure is also presented.

0885-8950/$25.00 2009 IEEE

Authorized licensed use limited to: UNIVERSIDADE DE SAO PAULO. Downloaded on March 10,2010 at 11:42:57 EST from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.

706

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER SYSTEMS, VOL. 24, NO. 2, MAY 2009

This work started out by using the contributions presented in [1] and [10][16]. The consumer and transformer daily load proles (active power) were represented by their average (M) and standard deviation (S) proles. It should be noted that nearly all calculations in a distribution system present inaccuracies as they are based on the best data available, which may be imprecise and incomplete, and statistical behavior. In order to ll in the incomplete data, some simplications and assumptions are made. In this case, for instance, losses in the transformer are evaluated using active power load proles instead of apparent load proles, which must be adjusted by using a certain factor. In addition, the proles of the consumers are chosen from a statistic subset of representative consumers, the weekend and working day proles are in general different, thus including another source of inaccuracy. Because of that, errors in the losses calculation, even at the level of 25% may be considered acceptable. Another source of error comes from the billed energy metering that has some inaccuracies due to measuring transformers and metering, which are in the order of 0.5% to 1.0%. This is nearly at the same level of the transformer total rated losses (1% to 2%). II. TRANSFORMER LOADING The methodology used in this paper to dene the transformer loading is based on the mean and standard deviation load proles, a procedure described in [1] and partially summarized herein. Studies characterizing the consumers daily load proles were reported in [1] and [10][12]. In these references, the demand measurements of several types of consumers (residential, commercial, and low voltage industrial consumers) were carried out. The consumers daily load proles were set up so as to record 96 points (i.e., active power was recorded for each minute and then averaged at intervals of 15 min). For each consumer and distribution transformer about 15 and standard daily proles were considered. The mean proles were determined and set to characterize deviation the consumer and the distribution transformers. For ease of manipulation, the demand values were normalized (per unit) by the monthly average demand Dav (i.e., monthly energy, , divided by the number of hours/month, ). Fig. 1 shows the mean and average proles of a distribution transformer (in p.u.). and For an th consumer , where and are the mean values of the demand at time , in p.u. of the monthly average demand and are (Davi) and in kW, respectively. Similarly, the standard deviation in p.u. and real values, respectively. A procedure to aggregate (add) the consumers demand in a distribution transformer was also developed [1]. If it is considered a distribution transformer with an number of consumers of the type and of the type, the aggregated demand values (in kW) can be calculated using the following:

Fig. 1. Mean and standard deviation daily curve of a transformer (p.u.).

Fig. 2. Transformers daily load curve stratied in 11 curves.

(1) are the mean demand of the consumers where aggregation, and of the p, q consumers, respectively. Similarly, are the standard deviations. Both mean and standard deviation of the aggregated values may be translated into p.u. by simply dividing the real (kW) values by the transformers rated power. The demand value within an interval is assumed to follow a Gaussian distribution, so the gure with a certain non-exceeding probability can be calculated through

(2) is a constant that denes the probability in a Normal where 90% of the Distribution [18]. For example, for values will be below and 10% above. Fig. 2 shows a set of 11 proles (in p.u.) with probabilities %, and %, re(from bottom to top) % % % spectively. These sets of proles were used in [10] to evaluate the distribution transformers loss of life due to loading. The same set of proles is used here to evaluate the losses in distribution transformers.

Authorized licensed use limited to: UNIVERSIDADE DE SAO PAULO. Downloaded on March 10,2010 at 11:42:57 EST from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.

LEAL et al.: DISTRIBUTION TRANSFORMER LOSSES EVALUATION

707

TABLE I STRATIFICATION PROFILES

Fig. 3. Load losses calculation. Analytical procedure.

III. DISTRIBUTION TRANSFORMER LOSSES CALCULATIONGENERAL APPROACH A. Main Equations Used in the Approach It is well established that losses in a distribution transformer are produced when the current ows through the coils. They also appear whenever a magnetic eld circulates around the core. So, they can be classied into on-load losses and no-load losses [9], [17]. do not vary according to the transformer No-load losses loading but according to the voltage; thus, it may be considered constant for losses calculation purposes. vary according to the transformer On-load losses loading and are responsible for the largest part of the load losses. This work will mainly focus on such losses. represents the transformer loading at the interval of As one prole, then, the series losses can be written as [14], [15]

In (4), 96 multiplication operations are needed to evaluate the term, 11 more multiplications to consider , to evaluate the series losses in and one multiplication one single transformer. This gives an idea of the computation time required in the whole process. being The total losses of the distribution transformer and the above composed by both the no-load losses on-load losses

(5)

B. Data Handling From the Distribution Utility database the following information was used: and characteristic prole (in p.u. of the monthly average demand) of the representative type of consumers (see upper box in Fig. 3); the transformer parameters (rated power, series and no-load rated losses; left box at bottom of Fig. 3), the consumers type and energy consumption per connected to each transformer (bottom box in the month middle of Fig. 3). and proles (in kW) of each consumer (in a transThe and values (in former) are calculated by multiplying the p.u.), that represent the type of consumer, by its average demand ; see Section II). The and proles of the transformer are obtained through (1), hence the 11 proles depicted in Fig. 2 (right box in the middle of Fig. 3). Finally, the load losses can be evaluated using (4). Fig. 3, shows the procedure used here termed Analytical Procedure.

(3) where is the transformer winding resistance and represents . Should more precision the series losses of the rated power be needed, this value will have to be corrected with the variation of the transformers internal temperature (this may be of particular interest in countries were the transformers are loaded above their rated capacity). Equation (3) can be applied to all 11 proles . For instance, if %, then this prole can be the representative of all the proles with probability 15% to 25%, which represents a . participation factor (kpf) of 10% , the reNotice in Table I that nine proles have maining two having proles with . can be expressed Thus, the total average series losses as

C. Application The seven-day load proles of the 57 distribution transformers at CPFL (a Brazilian Distribution Utility) were recorded. The average series losses for each load prole, as well as their average values, were also determined . Next, the and curves of each transformer were also determined. This was obtained using the same seven-day load prole curves. On the other hand, the series losses for the 57 transwere determined using (4). formers The error distribution between those two calculations is shown in Fig. 4. As it can be seen, the

(4)

Authorized licensed use limited to: UNIVERSIDADE DE SAO PAULO. Downloaded on March 10,2010 at 11:42:57 EST from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.

708

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER SYSTEMS, VOL. 24, NO. 2, MAY 2009

Fig. 4. Error distribution.

Fig. 5. Result of Cluster 2 (commercial and industrial consumers).

errors are small having a mean value of 0.3%, which means that the analytical procedure led to right results. IV. DISTRIBUTION TRANSFORMER SERIES LOSSES CALCULATIONBASIC ANN APPROACH A. ANN Model ANN is a useful technology often used to get interpolated results. It is suitable in many situations such as when the mathematical relationship among variables is unknown, or when there are few input data for interpolation. It can improve the time computation efciency and simplicity while manipulating data. Aside of improving the computation efciency, the accuracy of the results is reduced, a trade off to be searched. Therefore, an initial ANN model was developed using the same input data of the analytical procedure. In such a model, there is no gain expectation neither in accuracy nor in computation efciency; thus, alternative ANN models were developed to improve the process, of course using the experience of previous models. As mentioned, the inputs for the ANN model used are the transformers and proles, the output being the series losses . The number of neurons and layers were dened by trial and error tests in the MLP (multilayer perception) model. The supervisioned and back propagation training types were also chosen. The calculations presented in Section III (analytical procedure) were performed for a set of 61 485 transformers of the distribution utility. The losses were regarded as true values mainly because the measurements of the losses were not available. Part of these calculated values (losses) were used during the training stage and part of them for testing the training efciency. The system where the distribution transformers are located has 608 primary feeders, 2.2 million consumers and supplies around 9 TWh/yr. B. Clustering The set of 61 485 transformers daily proles ( and ) obtained through (1) and normalized in p.u. by the transformers rated power, were put under cluster analysis. The number of clusters specied, which followed the Euclidian distance criterion, was equal to 10.

Fig. 6. Result of Cluster 9 (residential consumers).

Note: Actually, several tests considering a different number of clusters (up to 30 clusters) were carried out. It was continuously determined the largest distance from one curve to the center of the cluster and also the distance among clusters. These distances indicated that it would be necessary to have 30 clusters to get them well grouped. However, many of these clusters had a small number of transformers; thus, they were discarded. Those transformers within the discarded clusters were transferred to other clusters. At the end, a number of ten clusters whose mean values were kept for subsequent calculations were adopted. This means that transformers with similar proles are assigned to the same cluster box. Figs. 5 and 6 show the average curves of two different clusters. It can be seen that the mean proles differ because one pertains to typical commercial/industrial loads (Fig. 5) whereas the other shows the characteristic peak (at 20:00 h) of a residential load (Fig. 6). Table II, shows the characteristic parameters of each cluster. The shape of Clusters 1 through 6 looked like Fig. 5, whereas Clusters 7 through 10 resembled to the curve shown in Fig. 6. The prole patterns of the ten clusters correspond to the two load types previously mentioned. The difference in clusters is mainly due to the peak value. Since the proles are normalized by the transformers rated power, apart from the shape, the main characteristic of the cluster will be its loading state.

Authorized licensed use limited to: UNIVERSIDADE DE SAO PAULO. Downloaded on March 10,2010 at 11:42:57 EST from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.

LEAL et al.: DISTRIBUTION TRANSFORMER LOSSES EVALUATION

709

TABLE II CHARACTERISTICS OF THE CLUSTERS

TABLE III TRANSFORMERS DISTRIBUTION WITHIN THE TEST AND TRAINING VECTORS

TABLE IV PERCENTAGE OF TRANSFORMERS WITH ERROR LESS THAN 10%

The objective of the clustering process was to evaluate whether better results are obtained by training one ANN for each cluster or only one for all the transformers. From the clustering process it can be concluded that: 42.5% of the transformers, represented by cluster 1, are operating under extremely low loading levels. This cluster represents transformers having commercial and/or residential loads and which could be used for future reallocation during the systems expansion program; 46.2% of the transformers have typical load conditions of areas with residential consumers (Clusters 7 through 10); 1.1% of the transformers, those pertaining to Clusters 5 and 8, are much more loaded. C. Results The training vector, as well as the test vector, are formed by a certain group of inputs and one output, constituted by: 24 points of the transformer curve (in p.u., 1 point per hour); 24 points of the transformer curve (in p.u., 1 point per hour); term, calculated through the method de the scribed in Section III, constitutes the output variable. The parameters used in all the simulations of the ANN model, will be described next. Table III shows the amount of elements in both the training and test vectors used. 1) Architecture: The ANN architecture is composed by: four layers, the input-layer having 48 neurons, the second and third layers having 35 and 24 neurons, respectively; and the output layer having only one neuron. 2) Training Process: The ANN model used was set up to perform nine internal iterations and a total of 9000 iterations. The training process nishes when the tolerance is below 0.15% (or when the total number of iterations is reached).

The errors in each cluster as well as the percent of cases with errors below 10%, here called error index were also evaluated. The error indexes in all clusters are shown in Table IV. It can be observed that when the E000 training is used (which would be preferred due to its simplicity) the accuracy is not good, except for clusters with a small number of transformers. The error in around 92.5% of the transformers (for the ANN trained specifically for each cluster) was below 10%. This leaves 7.5% with an error greater or equal to 10%. It is also shown (Table IV) the breakdown of the clusters and the total (all transformers). It should be noted that for all transformers 4.2% is within 10 to 30%, 2.3% is within 30 to 100% and 1% was greater than 100%. The global error (sum of all 61 485 transformers) regarding the analytical procedure as reference was 9.7%. Although the results can be considered as satisfactory, the procedure involved lots of multiplying operations, due mainly to the number of layers and neurons: 48*35 (input to 2nd layer); 35*24 (2nd to 3rd layer), and 35*1 (3rd layer to output layer) products. Therefore, the calculation being more time consuming than the analytical procedure (see Section III-A). In the next section, some ANN alternative architectures aimed at reducing the computation time (although not strictly necessary as todays microcomputer can handle this task), though at the expense of reducing the accuracy, are presented. The rst

Authorized licensed use limited to: UNIVERSIDADE DE SAO PAULO. Downloaded on March 10,2010 at 11:42:57 EST from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.

710

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER SYSTEMS, VOL. 24, NO. 2, MAY 2009

attempt is to reduce the input data and then reduce also the intermediate calculations. Now, it is important to know the computation time involved for the 61 485 transformers. In the analytical procedure [with 96 points for (4)], it took 15.1 min to process (1) and 5 min to process (4), giving a total time of 20.1 min. If instead of 96 intervals it would be considered 24 points, then, the time needed to process (4) would be 1.3 min. With the ANN procedure it took also 15.1 min to process (1), 1.5 min to obtain the transformers clustering process. and 13 s for the losses calculation (note that for the ANN procedure the prole was scaled back from 15 min to 1 h, so the latter term of the computational time would become worse if the full 96 points were considered.) The total time being 16.6 min. It should be noted that the training process needed 1.1 h in each cluster. The losses calculations by most of the distribution utilities are carried out on a monthly basis; conversely, there is no need to update the training process at that same basis (once a year would be adequate). V. LESS TIME CONSUMING ANN APPROACH Two other architectures aiming at improving the calculation time (efciency), are put forward in this paper. A. Alternative 1Reduction of the Input Data The training and the test vector are now formed by a group of inputs and one output, constituted by: prole at around 03:00, four inputs of the transformer 14:00, 19:00, and 21:00; two inputs of the prole at 12:00 and 18:00; the value of constitutes the output variable. The parameters used in all the simulations of the ANN model are the same as those used previously, except that the layer neurons are 6 for the rst layer, 18 and 10 for the hidden layers, and 1 for the output layer. The same clusterization result of the initial approach was used. In addition, for comparison purposes, the same amount of elements in the training and test vectors was used (see Table III). Now, from the total estimations 83.2% were obtained with errors below 15%. The results, here considered poor indicate that probably, at least from the authors viewpoint, a new clusterization process should be done to improve the whole process. The global error (for all the 61 485 transformers) was 25.9%. The results of the analytical procedure were again taken as the reference. The computation time was 1.5 min to process (1), 0.3 s to calculate both losses and cluster process, making a total time of 1.8 min. B. Alternative 2Reduction of the Intermediate Calculations In this approach, all consumers were classied into four types (Figs. 710). This classication enabled us to calculate (in the database) the amount of each type of consumer connected to the transformer and its total energy consumption. In this approach, the training vector and the test vector are formed by a group of inputs and one output, constituted by:

Fig. 7. Consumers daily load curves Type 1 (residential).

Fig. 8. Consumers daily load curves Type 2 (industrial).

Fig. 9. Consumers daily load curves Type 3 (at).

eight inputs representing the number of consumers and the mean consumption of each consumers type; one input representing the transformer rated power; also constitutes the output variable. the value of Again, the parameters used in all the simulations of the ANN model are the same as before, except that the layer neurons are 9 for the rst layer, 16 and 8 for the hidden layers, and 1 for the output layer. A new clusterization process whose results are presented in Table V, was performed. Here, Qty is the mean value of the

Authorized licensed use limited to: UNIVERSIDADE DE SAO PAULO. Downloaded on March 10,2010 at 11:42:57 EST from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.

LEAL et al.: DISTRIBUTION TRANSFORMER LOSSES EVALUATION

711

TABLE VI COMPARISON OF RESULTS

Fig. 10. Consumers daily load curves Type 4 (commercial).

TABLE V CHARACTERISTICS OF THE CLUSTERS

VII. COMPARISON OF THE PERFORMANCESRESULTS

consumer type, considering all transformers within a cluster; whereas kWh represents, similarly, the mean consumption of the consumer. The global error (for all the 61 485 transformers) regarding the analytical procedure as reference was 22.8%. The computation time of the losses was 2 s whereas the clustering process 0.9 min. The calculation time [15.1 min, using (1)] was eliminated. In this procedure the accuracy may be improved by considering more than four types of consumers, of course at the expense of increasing the computation time. VI. EXTENSION TO OTHER PARTS OF THE DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM The same procedure used for the distribution transformers is also applicable to evaluate the series losses in the secondary and primary network, as well as for the HV/MV transformers. For and curves instance, for a section of a primary feeder, the of the transformers, beyond this section can be aggregated using (1). A specic ANN and test procedure shall be carried out to train and calculate the primary feeder losses. This methodology could be incorporated into a Geographical Information System (GIS) so as to turn its calculation procedure more independent from the user interaction.

Table VI shows the global loss values of all the distribution transformers. From the analysis presented it can be concluded that: as the load curve was better represented, the initial ANN architecture should be the best one obtained. The errors were less than 10%. The disadvantage of this method is that the amount of mathematical operations, necessary to obtain this result, is greater than that needed in the analytical procedure; the second and third architectures showed global errors of 25.9% and 22.8, respectively. They were less accurate; however, their processing times were reduced as those architectures required less mathematical operations; it should be emphasized the fact that the analytical method was assumed to lead to the correct results (true values). The use of the third architecture together with the measured values of losses may constitute a method with reasonable precision and adequate processing time. The Alternative 2 model offered a global accuracy as good as the second one. Another advantage is that it dispenses and curves of both conwith the calculation of the sumers and transformers. Through the present ANN application, in terms of accuracy and time computation, a reasonable estimation of the losses in a distribution system can be achieved. However, it must be pointed out that the parameters used to train the ANN have not been exhaustively optimized, as that was not the main objective on this work. Therefore, there still are some improvements possible on the accuracy. The Alternative 2 ANN Architecture is even faster than the other two options, as it does not need to calculate the consumer proles and the aggregation of the distribution transformers. Another advantage, aside of the calculation speed, is that the utility does not need to perform measurements to evaluate the load prole for all the type of consumers, which is a costly operation.

Authorized licensed use limited to: UNIVERSIDADE DE SAO PAULO. Downloaded on March 10,2010 at 11:42:57 EST from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.

712

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER SYSTEMS, VOL. 24, NO. 2, MAY 2009

REFERENCES
[1] J. A. Jardini, C. M. V. Tahan, M. R. Gouvea, S. U. Ahn, and F. M. Figueiredo, Daily load proles for residential, commercial and industrial low voltage consumers, IEEE Trans. Power Del., vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 375380, Jan. 2000. [2] M. S. Kang, C. S. Chen, C. H. Lin, C. W. Huang, and M. F. Kao, A systematic loss analysis of Taipower distribution system, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 21, no. 3, pp. 10621068, Aug. 2006. [3] C. S. Chen, C. H. Lin, M. Y. Huang, H. D. Chem, M. S. Kang, and C. F. Huang, Development of distribution feeder loss models by articial neural networks, IEEE Power App. Syst., vol. PAS-1, pp. 164170, Jun. 2005. [4] C. S. Chen, J. C. Hwang, Y. M. Tzeng, C. W. Huang, and M. Y. Chao, Determination of customer load characteristics by load survey system at Taipower, IEEE Trans. Power Del., vol. II, no. 3, pp. 14301436, Jul. 1006. [5] P. S. Nagendra Rao and R. Deekshit, Energy loss estimation in distribution feeders, IEEE Trans. Power Del., vol. 21, no. 3, pp. 10921100, Jul. 2006. [6] M. Poveda, A new method to calculate power distribution losses in an environment of high unregistered loads, in Proc. IEEE Transmission and Distribution Conf., Apr. 1116, 1999, vol. 2, pp. 609614, Vol. 2. [7] C. A. Dortolina and R. Nadira, The loss that, is no loss at all: A top-down/bottom-up approach for estimating distribution losses, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 20, no. 2, pp. 11191125, May 2005. [8] D. Gerbec, S. Gasperic, I. Smon, and F. Gubina, Allocation of the load proles to consumers using probabilistic neural networks, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 20, no. 2, pp. 548555, May 2005. [9] C. Q. Zhang and T. Wang, Clustering analysis of electric power user based on the similarity degree of load curve, in Proc. Int. Conf. Machine Learning and Cybernetics, Aug. 1821, 2005, vol. 3, pp. 15131517, Vol. 3. [10] J. A. Jardini, C. M. V. Tahan, S. U. Ahn, and S. L. S. Cabral, Determination of the typical daily load curve for residential area based on eld measurements, in Proc. IEEE T&D, 1994, Chicago. v. 2. [11] J. A. Jardini, H. P. Schmidt, C. M. V. Tahan, C. C. B. Oliveira, and S. U. Ahn, Distribution transformer loss of life evaluation: A novel approach based on daily load proles, IEEE Trans. Power Del., vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 361366, Jan. 2000. [12] J. A. Jardini, C. M. V. Tahan, S. U. Ahn, R. P. Casolari, and F. M. Figueiredo, Daily load curvesData base established on eld measurements, in Proc. Int. Conf. Exhib. Electricity Distribution, Buenos Aires, Argentina, 1996. [13] A. G. Leal, J. A. Jardini, L. C. Magrini, S. U. Ahn, and D. Battani, Management system of distribution transformer loading, in Proc. Transmission and Distribution 2002, So Paulo, Brazil. [14] A. G. Leal, A system for the determination of losses in distribution networks using typical demand curves of consumers and articial neural networks, Ph.D. dissertation, Polytechnic School, Univ. So Paulo, So Paulo, Brazil, 2006, 158 pp., in Portuguese. [15] A. G. Leal, J. A. Jardini, L. C. Magrini, S. U. Ahn, H. P. Schmidt, and R. P. Casolari, Distribution system losses evaluation by ANN approach, in Proc. 2006 IEEE PES Power Systems Conf. Expo., Atlanta, GA, 2006. [16] S. U. Ahn, H. P. Schmidt, and D. Battani, Fast evaluation of technical losses: The concept of equivalent current, in Proc. Int. Conf. Electricity Distribution, Barcelona, Spain, 2003.

[17] B. C. Degeneff, Power Transformers, in The Electrical Engineering Handbook, W.K. Chen, Ed. New York: Elsevier, 2004, pp. 715720. [18] M. Abramowitz and I. A. Stegun, Handbook of Mathematical Functions. New York: Dover. Adriano Galindo Leal (M06) was born in So Paulo, Brazil, on September 19, 1971. He received the B.Sc. degree in electrical engineering and the M.Sc. and Ph.D. degrees from Polytechnic School at University of So Paulo in 1996, 1999, and 2006, respectively. For 11 years, he worked as a R&D Engineer for the GAGTD research group in the Polytechnic School at University of So Paulo, where was responsible for the study and development of automation and information systems in the elds of generation, transmission, and distribution of electricity. Since April 2007, he has been a Research and Development Coordinator for Electrical Engineering and Business Intelligence Projects at Elucid Solutions, a consulting and TI company for several utilities companies in Brazil. His main research interests are power transformers, distribution system losses, remote terminal units, project management, geographical information systems, cloud computing, decision support systems, business intelligence, and articial intelligent solutions for operation and maintenance of electric power systems.

Jos Antonio Jardini (M66SM78F90) was born in So Paulo, Brazil, on March 27, 1941. He received the Electrical Engineering, M.Sc., and Ph.D. degrees from the Polytechnic School at University of So Paulo in 1963, 1971, and 1973, respectively. For 25 years, he worked at Themag Engenharia Ltda., a leading consulting company in Brazil, where he conducted many power systems studies and participated in major power system projects such as the Itaipu hydroelectric plant. He is currently a Professor in the Polytechnic School at So Paulo University, where he teaches power system analysis and digital automation. There he also leads the GAGTD group, which is responsible for the study and development of automation systems in the elds of generation, transmission, and distribution of electricity. Dr. Jardini represented Brazil in the SC-38 of CIGR and is a Distinguished Lecturer of IAS/IEEE.

Luiz Carlos Magrini was born in So Paulo, Brazil, on May 3, 1954. He received the Electrical Engineering, M.Sc., and Ph.D. degrees from the Polytechnic School at University of So Paulo in 1977, 1995, and 1999, respectively. For 17 years, he worked at Themag Engenharia Ltda, a leading consulting company in Brazil. He is currently a researcher in the GAGTD group in the Polytechnic School at So Paulo University.

Se Un Ahn was born in Inchon, South Korea, in 1957. He received the B.Sc. degree from the Mackenzie Engineering School, So Paulo, Brazil, in 1981 and the M.Sc. and Dr. degrees in electrical engineering from the Polytechnic School at the University of So Paulo in 1993 and 1997, respectively. He has worked since 1986 as a research engineer in distribution systems at the Piratininga CPFL company (former Eletropaulo and Bandeirantes), all of them being power concessionaries. His professional activities include load curves use of expansion planning of the electric system.

Authorized licensed use limited to: UNIVERSIDADE DE SAO PAULO. Downloaded on March 10,2010 at 11:42:57 EST from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.