IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER SYSTEMS, VOL. 19, NO.
1, FEBRUARY 2004
Online Reconfiguration Considering Variability
Demand: Applications to Real Networks
Enrique López, Hugo Opazo, Luis García, and Patrick Bastard
Abstract—This paper presents how the application of the min-
imal loss reconfiguration in distribution networks can help to eval-
uate online reconfiguration benefits, considering the time varying
nature of loads, using daily load profiles in each node of the system.
The emphasis in this evaluation is hourly reconfiguration in dis-
tribution systems, compared to fixed topologies, considering max-
imum and average demand of the system. The results of applica-
tions to two real systems show unexpectedly that hourly reconfig-
uration is not so effective, if compared to a simple maximum or
average demand reconfiguration. These conclusions are based on
the decrease of obtained losses and on the amount of commutations
involved in the hourly reconfiguration process.
Index Terms—Distribution networks, losses, reconfiguration,
variability demand.
NOMENCLATURE
Resistance of branch “b”.
Complex current in branch “b”.
i Current vector of branches.
Maximum current of branches.
I Vector of node currents.
[A] Incidence matrix.
V Node voltage.
Minimum node voltage.
Maximum node voltage.
Number of total branches.
M Branch number of radial network.
N Number of nodes.
Number of sources.
I. INTRODUCTION
D ISTRIBUTION networks reconfiguration based on min-
imal loss has a natural tendency to improve the operational
conditions. One of the first papers about this topic was presented
by Merlin and Back [1]. The discrete branch and bound opti-
mization technique was used from a meshed distribution net-
work. However, its application to real systems is not very easy
due to the required significant computer effort. Another investi-
gation line has been proposed in [2], who derived a formula in
order to estimate the loss reduction produced by open and close
Manuscript received April 23, 2003.
E. López and H. Opazo are with the Department of Electrical Engineering,
Universidad de Concepción, Casilla 160-C Correo 3 Concepción, Chile (e-mail:
elopez@die.udec.cl; hopazo@die.udec.cl).
L. García and P. Bastard are with the École Supérieure d’Électricité, Paris
91192, France (e-mail: luis.garcia@supelec.fr; patrick.bastard@supelec.fr).
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/TPWRS.2003.821447
0885-8950/04$20.00 © 2004 IEEE
549
actions on the switching elements without altering the system
radiality. Many papers proposed then modifications which im-
proved accuracy and computational efficiency of this method
[3].
There are other works proposing optimization techniques
such as expert system, modified simulated annealing, genetic
algorithms, and artificial neural networks [4]–[7]. Algorithms
of transport with quadratic costs [8] and heuristic methods have
also been proposed [9]–[14]. A survey on distribution systems
reconfiguration is presented in [15], ranging from Merlin and
Back fundamental work, to the state of art in 1993. Reference
[16] obtained loss minimization by installing capacitors and
by network reconfiguration considering load modeling impact.
An algorithm that is based on distribution network partitioning
into groups of load busses is proposed in [17]. A heuristic
constructive method for minimal losses reconfiguration is
proposed in [18]. By means of a loss incremental evaluation,
a new node is added in each stage that introduces minimal
losses. Finally, [19] presented an algorithm for minimal loss
reconfiguration, based on dynamic programming approach.
This algorithm, based on formal technique, is quite simple, and
results in a very short computing time. Therefore, it opens a
way to real time reconfiguration of networks.
The main objective of this paper is to take into account how
load varies in distribution systems, depending on the season, on
the day, and on the hour. The switching actions to reduce losses
take into account the time varying nature of loads. The load
profiles are a function of customer types and they vary from
one connection point to another one all over the network. Thus,
the load diversity is taken into account by the daily demands of
various customer types.
About reducing distribution losses through reconfiguration
on real-time operation considering load variability, [20] indi-
cated that an important loss reduction was obtained through sim-
ulations in Canadian networks on a one-year period. Reference
[21] presented algorithms to reduce losses through load estima-
tion considering load variability. Reference [22] showed hourly
reconfiguration benefits based on short- and long-term loss re-
duction. An optimal power flow model for minimal losses is
applied in [23]. This paper emphasizes results and conclusions
about hourly reconfiguration for online power operation in an
energy control center.
Most of the papers emphasize online reconfiguration advan-
tages, even if sensibility studies for online applications are not
always performed. In this paper, we apply the minimal loss re-
configuration method in real distribution systems to evaluate on-
line reconfiguration advantages. The studies are made with the
model developed in [19], including demand aspects such as the
550
model itself (P, Z, or I constant), the actual type of load (indus-
trial, commercial, residential, and mixed), and hourly variation
[24], [25]. The aim is to evaluate online reconfiguration benefit
in terms of loss reduction.
II. MINIMAL LOSS PROBLEM
The minimal loss reconfiguration problem in distribution sys-
tems, through topological changes, can be written as follows [1],
[19]:
Minimize (1)
Subject to
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
Equation (2) corresponds to the balance of load currents in
each node. Equation (3) corresponds to the respect of feeders
thermal limits and the maximum capacity of substations. Equa-
tion (4) considers the voltage restriction in each node. Eventu-
ally the fourth constraint (5) is the radiality restriction in a pri-
mary distribution system.
A. General Algorithm of Reconfiguration
The minimal loss reconfiguration is solved by dynamic pro-
gramming approach with graph compression and radial load
flow. The following algorithm describes the method [19].
i) Data system: Number and rating of power substations
and feeders, topology, and switching possibilities of the
power apparatus connected to the network.
ii) Actual operation: Using fast radial load flow, evaluate
the actual system conditions as node voltage, real, and
reactive losses.
iii) Graph compression: When there is a set of nodes with
nonreconfigurable radial topology, consider an equiv-
alent node representing the load of the subsystem. So
nonvalid options for reconfiguration are eliminated.
iv) Possible node connections: The process goes from each
source node of the network (substation) forward the
final load nodes, for connecting new possible node.
v) Radial load flow: To determine voltage profile, currents,
and losses. In this case, nodes are considered according
to the load type (P, Z, or I, constant).
vi) Losses functional evaluation: In each stage, the connec-
tion of a new node that produces the lowest increment in
losses functional is added to the tree (forward process).
vii) Backtracking process: Applying a backward process the
effect of the last load connection in the structure is eval-
uated.
viii) Constraints: Verification of thermal limits in substations
and feeders, voltage profiles, and other constraints. If a
constraint is not fulfilled, a transfer of loads between
substations should be made and step iv) should be per-
formed again.
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER SYSTEMS, VOL. 19, NO. 1, FEBRUARY 2004
ix) Radial systems: The process goes on until all loads are
connected to the network; if not, they all go to iv).
x) Final loss evaluation: A fast radial load flow is applied
to determine network’s final losses.
III. DEMAND CHARACTERIZATION
It is important to consider the demand characterization, for
each node of the real distribution systems.
The demand on distribution systems depends on the time and
also on the load type as
• industrial;
• commercial;
• urban residential;
• street lighting;
• mixed load.
Modeling load patterns of various customer types requires to
take into account daily load profiles. The aim is to incorporate
these profiles in loss minimizing reconfiguration procedures.
This has been done considering a 24-h period (in a winter day).
A. Methodology
The methodology for demand characterization in real distri-
bution networks is as follows.
i) Load recognition is done for the distribution system. The
aim is to identify a typical load model for each node.
ii) Load profiles of different demand types are determined.
This information was mainly obtained by means of mon-
itoring the network presently and historically.
iii) In some nodes, when the load profile is unknown, it
is approached starting from nominal values and consid-
ering: diversity factors, demand factors, utilization fac-
tors, and recommendations of the utility personnel. The
load curves are built and typical load curves are associ-
ated, as described in [24] and [25].
iv) Once the load patterns are obtained, one builds the data-
base of an hourly system.
B. Load Curves
The types of loads considered sum up an infinity of individual
characteristics. The global behavior of the load is the result of
typical consumption cycles. The loads can be characterized by
curves, as shown in Figs. 1—4, obtained firsthand for typical
loads on a winter day, as described in [25].
IV. APPLICATIONS
Table I gives the main characteristics of the two real systems
(i.e., number of sources, nodes, lines, and power). The data in-
dicate that it is necessary to open 14 lines in the system 1 and
43 lines in the system 2, to obtain radial topology. Table II gives
the main characteristics of the load type in real systems.
From the demand behavior at each node, it is possible to per-
form a minimal loss reconfiguration hourly for both systems.
A. Operational Conditions
Operational conditions in which the losses are evaluated in
both systems are the following:
LÓPEZ et al.: ONLINE RECONFIGURATION CONSIDERING VARIABILITY DEMAND: APPLICATIONS TO REAL NETWORKS
Fig. 1. Residential load.
Fig. 2. Commercial load.
Fig. 3. Industrial load.
Fig. 4. Public light.
i) actual configuration—it corresponds to the hourly loss
evaluation, in a period of 24 h, using the actual network
configurations;
ii) hourly configuration—it finds optimal topology and as-
sociated losses, for each one of the 24-h intervals, in
function of the different hourly demand profiles of the
systems.
iii) configuration for maximum demand—in this case, the
optimal topology is determined for the maximum de-
mand condition of each node. Later on, maintaining this
topology, the loss behavior for the 24 h, in function of
hourly load profiles in each node is analyzed.
551
TABLE I
REAL SYSTEMS CHARACTERISTICS
TABLE II
LOAD TYPE IN REAL SYSTEMS
iv) configuration for average demand—it is similar to the
previous case, but average demand in each node is con-
sidered and for the topology obtained, the systems hourly
loss is evaluated, in a period of 24 h considering time load
variation.
For system 1, we first consider the actual operation condition
(i.e., the actual topology, then the hourly reconfiguration to min-
imal loss condition is done in the system and, finally, the hourly
operation is evaluated, but maintaining the topology obtained
considering maximum demand. For the system 2, the same oper-
ative conditions were analyzed as in the previous case; also, the
case of hourly operation system was analyzed, but maintaining
the topology obtained for average demand reconfiguration and
maximum demand reconfiguration in the system.
V. RESULTS
Results obtained for system 1 are presented in Table III. They
show hourly loss for actual operational condition, online loss,
for hourly minimal loss reconfiguration. Then, hourly losses are
evaluated for the topology obtained for maximum demand oper-
ational condition. Table III also shows loss percentage reduction
in respect to the actual configuration. Fig. 5 shows loss evolu-
tion for the system 1.
Table IV, like in the previous case, shows results for system
2. It presents hourly losses for the actual operational conditions,
losses obtained when hourly reconfiguration is applied (consid-
ering the online minimization), and hourly losses maintaining
topology obtained at maximum demand and at average demand.
Fig. 6 shows system 2, hourly loss behavior.
Table V presents the number of necessary commutations for
hourly reconfigurations in system 2. Finally, Table VI shows the
number of necessarycommutations foraverage demand reconfig-
uration and maximum demand reconfiguration in the system 2.
VI. RESULT ANALYSIS
Table III shows an important loss reduction when hourly re-
configuration is made. The maximum loss reduction is 0,0452
p.u., corresponding to 52% (0.0875 p.u. at 0.0423 p.u, hour 12)
and the minimal loss reduction is 0,0097 p.u. and corresponds to
48% (0.0204 p.u. at 0.0107 p.u, hour 3). In case of loss evalua-
tion for the topology of maximum demand, there is a loss reduc-
tion similar to the previous case (52% in hour 9), but in the case
552 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER SYSTEMS, VOL. 19, NO. 1, FEBRUARY 2004

TABLE III TABLE IV

HOURLY LOSSES IN SYSTEM 1 LOSSES TO HOURLY RECONFIGURATION AND CONSIDERING TOPOLOGIES
FOR MAXIMUM AND AVERAGE LOAD

Fig. 5. Hourly loss evaluations in system 1.

of lowest reductions, these are of 0.0114 p.u. and correspond to

46% (0.0249 p.u. at 0.0135 p.u., hour 24). Practically all hours
evaluated have minor losses in the hourly reconfiguration, as ex- Fig. 6. Hourly loss evaluations in system 2.
pected. There is also correlation in the levels of obtained losses
in some evaluated hours. In all of the cases, loss reduction levels
case and average which are reduced 7.98% and 7.37%. In Fig. 6,
are not very different for both methods of reconfiguration that
note the loss evolution in system 2.
were analyzed, as shown in Table III as well as in Fig. 5. System
Tables V and VI show the total number of commutations re-
1 presents an average loss of 0.0543 p.u., which is reduced with
quired in each level of reconfiguration of system 2. Note that in
hourly reconfiguration to 0.0272 p.u., with 49% of reduction
each interval it requires a change of 43 switches (i.e., 86 commu-
and it is reduced to maintain the maximum topology demand in
tations) of which in average only 6.6 switches must be changed in
a fixed way to 0.0280 p.u. with 47% loss reduction.
each level of loss minimization (each hour), with a total of 13.25
Table VI shows active losses for system 2. As in the previous
hourly commutations. When considering hourly reconfiguration
case, hourly reconfiguration makes losses decrease. Loss reduc-
(24h),thereexists adailytotalof318 commutations,withtherisks
tion reaches a maximum of 21.42% (hour 19), and the minimal
involved, unlike with the average topology demand or maximum,
loss reduction is 0.91% (hour 7). For optimal topology of max-
which only requires the changing of nine switches.
imum demand, the maximum loss is reduction of 20.70% (hour
19), and in less favorable condition 0.50% (hour 7). In the op-
VII. CONCLUSION
timal topology case for average demand, there are loss reduc-
tions of up to 20.60% (hour 19) and minimal loss reductions of This paper presents online reconfiguration evaluation in
0.40% (hour 7). The loss medium percentages are reduced with power networks, dealing with actual applications, considering
hourly reconfiguration of 9.75%, unlike the maximum demand different load patterns, and analyzing hourly reconfiguration.
LÓPEZ et al.: ONLINE RECONFIGURATION CONSIDERING VARIABILITY DEMAND: APPLICATIONS TO REAL NETWORKS
TABLE V
TOTAL COMMUTATIONS ASSOCIATED TO HOURLY RECONFIGURATION
TABLE VI
TOTAL COMMUTATIONS ASSOCIATED TO MAXIMUM AND AVERAGE
RECONFIGURATION
Online reconfiguration has been compared with optimal topolo-
gies obtained for maximum demand and average demand.
The results show that a loss reduction appears when the net-
work is reconfigured hourly. Nevertheless, this reduction is as-
sociated with an important number of commutations necessary
to modify the system topology. Even if losses are lower, this
reduction may be not relevant when compared with losses ob-
tained with a fixed topology optimized for maximum or average
demand. It depends mainly on the cost of the commutation de-
vices compared to the actual benefit of online reconfiguration. It
is not sure that a general response can be given: a specific study
should certainly be carried out for any given network. More-
over, online reconfiguration can lead to overvoltage transients,
which can decrease the system reliability. In conclusion, online
reconfiguration must be carefully evaluated, considering load
variability, and fixed topologies determined from maximum or
average demand could be more efficient.
REFERENCES
[1] A. Merlin and G. Back, “Search for minimum-loss operational spanning
tree configuration for an urban power distribution system,” in Proc. 5th
Power Syst. Conf., Cambridge, U.K., Sept. 1975, pp. 1–18.
[2] S. Civanlar, J. Grainger, H. Yin, and S. Lee, “Distribution feeder recon-
figuration for loss reduction,” IEEE Trans. Power Delivery, vol. 3, pp.
1217–1223, July 1988.
[3] D. Shirmohammadi and H. W. Hong, “Reconfiguration of electric distri-
bution networks for resistive line losses reduction,” IEEE Trans. Power
Delivery, vol. 4, pp. 1492–1498, Apr. 1989.
[4] H. Chiang and R. Jean-Jumeau, “Optimal network reconfigurations in
distribution system: part 1: a new formulation and solution method-
ology,” IEEE Trans. Power Delivery, vol. 5, pp. 1902–1909, Oct. 1990.
[5] , “Optimal network reconfigurations in distribution system: part 2:
solution algorithms and numerical results,” IEEE Trans. Power Delivery,
vol. 5, pp. 1568–1574, Oct. 1990.
[6] K. Nara, A. Shiose, M. Kitagawa, and T. Ishihara, “Implementation of
genetic algorithm for distribution systems loss minimum re-configura-
tion,” IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 7, pp. 1044–1051, Aug. 1992.
[7] H. Kim, Y. Ko, and K.-H. Jung, “Artificial neural-network based feeder
reconfiguration for loss reduction in distribution systems,” IEEE Trans.
Power Delivery, vol. 8, pp. 1356–1366, July 1993.
[8] V. Glamocanin, “Optimal loss reduction of distribution networks,” IEEE
Trans. Power Syst., vol. 5, pp. 774–781, Aug. 1990.
[9] R. Bacher and H. Glavitsch, “Loss reduction by network switching,”
IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 3, pp. 447–453, May 1988.
[10] T. Taylor and D. Lubkeman, “Implementation of heuristic search strate-
gies for distribution feeder reconfiguration,” IEEE Trans. Power De-
livery, vol. 5, pp. 239–246, Jan. 1990.
[11] I. Roytelman, V. Melnik, S. Lee, and R. Lugu, “Multi objective feeder re-
configuration by distribution management system,” IEEE Trans. Power
Syst., vol. 11, pp. 661–667, Apr. 1996.
553
[12] V. Borazan, D. Rajicic, and R. Ackovski, “Minimum loss reconfigura-
tion of unbalanced distribution networks,” IEEE Trans. Power Delivery,
vol. 12, pp. 435–441, Jan. 1997.
[13] Q.Qin Zhou, D. Shirmohammadi, and W. Edwin Liu, “Distribution
feeder reconfiguration for operation cost reduction,” IEEE Trans.
Power Syst., vol. 12, pp. 730–735, Apr. 1997.
[14] V. Borozan, D. Rajicic, and R. Ackovski, “Improved method for loss
minimization in distribution networks,” IEEE Trans. Power App. Syst.,
vol. 10, pp. 1420–1424, Aug. 1995.
[15] R. Sarfi, M. Salama, and A. Chikhani, “A survey of the state of the art
in distribution system reconfiguration for system loss reduction,” Elect.
Power Syst. Res., pp. 61–70, 1994.
[16] G. Peponis, M. Papadopoulos, and N. Hatziargyriou, “Optimal operation
of distribution networks,” IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 11, pp. 59–67,
Feb. 1996.
[17] R. Sárfi, M. Salama, and Y. Chikhani, “Distribution system reconfig-
uration for loss reduction: an algorithm based on network partitioning
theory,” IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 11, pp. 504–510, Feb. 1996.
[18] T. McDermott, I. Drezga, and R. Broadwatwer, “A heuristic nonlinear
constructive method for distribution system reconfiguration,” IEEE
Trans. Power Syst., vol. 14, pp. 478–483, May 1999.
[19] E. López, H. Opazo, L. García, and M. Poloujadoff, “Minimal loss re-
configuration based on dynamic programming approach: application to
real systems,” Power Components Syst., vol. 30, no. 7, pp. 693–704, July
2002.
[20] T. Wagner, A. Chikhani, and R. Hackman, “Feeder reconfiguration for
loss reduction: an application of distribution automation,” IEEE Trans.
Power Delivery, vol. 6, pp. 1922–1933, Oct. 1991.
[21] R. Broadwater, A. Khan, H. Shalan, and R. Lee, “Time varying load anal-
ysis to reduce distribution losses though reconfiguration,” IEEE Trans.
Power Delivery, vol. 8, pp. 294–300, Jan. 1993.
[22] C. S. Chen and M. Y. Cho, “Energy loss reduction by critical switches,”
IEEE Trans. Power Delivery, vol. 8, pp. 1246–1253, July 1993.
[23] B. C.Brian C. Shin, “Development of the loss minimization function for
real time power system operations: a new tool,” IEEE Trans. Power Syst.,
vol. 9, pp. 2028–2034, Oct. 1994.
[24] A. L. Shenkman, “Energy loss computation by using statistical tech-
niques,” IEEE Trans. Power Delivery, vol. 5, pp. 254–258, Jan. 1990.
[25] R. Taleski and D. Rajicic, “Distribution networks reconfiguration for
energy loss reduction,” IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 12, pp. 398–406,
Feb. 1997.
Enrique López was born in Lota, Chile. He received the electrical engineer
degree from the Universidad Técnica del Estado, Chile, and the Ph.D. degree
in electrical engineering from Institut National Polytechnique de Grenoble
(INPG), Grenoble, France.
Currently, he is an Associate Professor in the Electrical Engineering Depart-
ment at the Universidad de Concepción, Concepción, Chile. His interest areas
are planning, optimization, control, reliability, and quality of the electrical sys-
tems.
Hugo Opazo was born in Lota, Concepción, 1963. He received the electrical
engineering and M.S.E.E. degrees from the Universidad de Concepción, Con-
cepción, Chile, in 1989 and 2001, respectively. He is currently pursuing the
Ph.D. degree at the Universidad de Concepción.
Currently, he is Assistant Professor in the Electrical Engineering Department
of the Universidad de Concepción, where he has been since 1992. He was with
Compañia Manufacturera de Papeles y Cartones in Spanish (CMPC), Celulosa,
Chile, from 1989 to 1992. His research interests include distribution and power
systems, optimization, and power systems protection.
Luis García was born in Concepción, Chile. He received the electrical engineer
degree from the Universidad de Concepción, Concepción. He is currently pur-
suing the Ph.D. degree in electrical engineering at the Université Pierre et Marie
Curie, Paris, France, and École Supérieure d’Électricité Supelec, Paris, France.
Currently, he is an Instructor Professor in the Electrical Engineering Depart-
ment at the Universidad de Concepción. His areas of interest are the optimization
of operation and exploitation of the electrical systems.
Patrick Bastard was born in Pont-Auderner, France. He graduated from
Supélec, Gif-sur-Yvette, France, in 1988. He received the Ph.D. degree in
electrical engineering from the University of Paris XI, Paris, France, in 1992.
Currently, he is a Professor in Supélec, France, where he manages a research
group about power systems. From 1989 to 1992, he was a Research Engineer
with Group Schneider, Grenoble, France, in the field of power system relays.