AricleCode : psd_3075

Optimum Coordination of Overcurrent Relays Using SADE Algorithm

Mojtaba Mohseni I, Amir Afroomand I, F Mohsenipour I
I Department of Electrical Engineering, Islamic Azad University of Anar, Kerman, Iran
m.mohseni83@ail.com a.afroomand@ail.com fomopo I986@hoo.com
Abstract
One of the important considerations in
designing power systems is designing their
security systems. The most common fault in
power systems is the line to ground one that
over current relays are used to protect the
system against it (as primary protection in
distribution systems and secondary protection
in transferring ones). The most important
issue in using over current relays is their
coordination. In today vast systems, using
traditional methods that are ofen based on
mathematical relations such as gradient or
experimental relations are not efcient
anymore and the solution is to utilize
intelligent methods. In this text, Self-Adaptive
Differential Evolutionary algorithm (SADE)
used for Optimum Relays Coordination
problem (ORC) and its function on 14 and 30
networks of IEEE standard bus was tested,
fnally a comparison done between SADE and
common methods of DE, also with other
evolutionary algorithms such as PSO and GA
that shows the capability of SADE to solve
nonlinear optimum problems with many local
optimums.
Keyords: Power system protection,
Coordination, Overcurrent relay, DE
algorithm, PSM, TDS
1. Introduction
Today one of the most important issues in
industry is systems controlling and security.
Basic industry of electricity not only is the
same as above but also it is more important
than others because it is the infrastructure of
any country economics.
In power systems, one of the instability
factors is the occurrence of fault that if
continues, it may lead to blackout or even
losing of some system parts. Therefore,
preventing the expansion of fault is an
essential task in controlling of power systems
and this would be practical by protective
relaying.
Because more than 80% of power system
faults is single phase to ground fault, if
grounding of system done improperly it will
be the most intensive one, so the most
important and many of a power system
relaying is over current one[I].
In relaying aspect, express and accurate
function without the interference of relays is
of challenging cases because we need for
backup for each relays as assurance and
therefore relays coordination is a hard
problem in relaying .Since 60s decade till
now there are attempts to solve the ORC
I
problem that are divided into three categories:
trial and error methods [10, 11], topology
analysis methods [12] , and optimum methods.
Optimum methods are more acceptable due to
their high speed and they are divided into two
groups: programming methods and intuition
methods. Due to the complexity of nonlinear
I Optimum Relay Coordination
optimum programming methods, the
optimum coordination of over current relays
done usually by linear programming method
which is including simplex, dual-phase
simplex, Duality simplex and some modem
methods.
In [8] the issue of coordination solved by
linear programming (dual-phase simplex)
with one difference that considering possible
variations of network load and topology, an
adaptive algorithm with support of monitoring
(SCADA) was used.In linear programing,
one of the problems is low responding speed
due to complexity of the problem that in [9] it
is tried to obtain optimum solutions without
establishing target function and just by
solving limitations equations. In this method,
at frst those limitations that make the
problem impossible are specifed and then the
complexity of the problem decreased by
decreasing the limitations. The diffculty of
this method is to accomplish all remaining
limitations otherwise the problem will be
unsolvable.
U sing planning method which is based on
mathematical and experimental relations ofen
may not lead to optimum solutions that could
be due to incapability of these methods in
moving from many directions toward the
optimum solution, and because the
coordination issue has several minimum
points, so these methods could not be effcient
enough and also whereas they are based on an
initial guess, they may get caught in local
minimums; therefore, there need intelligent
algorithms which are capable of approaching
optimum solution from several directions.
Recently, due to high speed, PSO algorithm is
considered and applied for coordination issues
[7] . PSO algorithm is based on animals' social
behavior and particles theory. Each particle
(solution) directed by a speed depend on its
experiences and those of around it. Despite all
the above, this algorithm sometimes get
caught in local optimums.
In current paper, differential-evolutionary
(DE) algorithm considered for the problem of
optimum coordination. DE function is based
on mathematical functions (sum, minus,
multiply) without using derivation on vectors
that these vectors are the distance between a
point in searching space and a specifed origin
2
[2] . In comparison with evolutionary
algorithms, DE like PSO has signifcant
characteristics such as memory and
cooperation between particles that increases
its speed and accuracy. Moreover, it utilizes
mutation which causes better release from
local optimums in big problems I
comparison with PSO.
Note that mutation may cause away from
optimum solution and lead to decrease in
algorithm speed; in this paper, using feedback
an algorithm suggested for DE that is effcient
in big problems in comparison with other DE,
GA and PSO algorithms.
2. DE Algorithm
2. 1. Algorithm review
DE
2
search algorithm is one of the
newest searching methods. The theory of
algorithm improvement is emerged from
Kenneth V. Price attempts in solving the
problem of Chebyshev multi Adaptation and
DE algorithm were introduced in 1996.
The algorithm functions like PS, that is
acting on the position vector and it has
memory the same as PSO; its main difference
with PSO is its utilization of random vectors
differentiation that is the introducer of
mutation to some extent, and this causes it to
be an algorithm more capable than PSO to
pass from local optimums.
DE algorithm function stages are as follows
[2]:
a) Generating Initial Population: DE
algorithm started by generating initial
population that contains NP (Number of
Population) rows and D (Diverse)
columns.
b) Mutation: a newbor vector produced for
each parent.
c) Mapping: if necessary, newbor vector
should be in (u
min
, u
ma
).
d) Crossover: mutated vector and initial
population one produce testing vectors.
e) Selection: the produced newbor
compared with the parents and next
generation population engender. Afer the
stage of selection, calculation cycle in DE
2 Differential Evolutionary
continues until the convergence of all
vectors or occurrence of stop criteria. The
fowchart of differential-evolutionary
algorithm shown in the following fgure:
Generate initial population & evaluate ftness
Main loop (repeat NP times):
I. Mutation
2. Boundary checking
3. Cross over
No 4. Select ion
Yes
Fig.I.fowchart of DE algorithm
r 51
DE algorithm divided into 5 various strategies
from the view point of mutation [5]:
1) Best/rand strategy
2) Old/ best/rand strategy
3) Best/rand/rand strategy
4) Rand/rand strategy
5) Rand/rand/rand strategy
In the frst three methods, future generation
produced from the best parents and from the
difference of random vectors; in other two
methods, the future generation produced just
from the difference of random vectors.DE has
several reproducing methods. The following
method suggested by Price [5]:
It starts by NP solution vectors which were
selected randomly and for each i belong to (1,
NP) the mutated vector
V
i
calculated as
follows:
V
i,j [K] = Ubest[K]
+ F x
U
rl,j [K]
-
U
rz,j [K])
(1)
The Crossover agent on the mutated vector
V
i
and intial population vector U
i
is done to
obtain test vectors U'
i
.
U
i =
(U
il,
U
iZ,
U
i3,
U
i4,
U
iS
)
V
i =
(V
ii'
V
iZ,
V
i3,
V
i4,
V
iS
)
U'
-
(
e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e
)
(2) l
-
J J I I
For each part of this vector a number selected
between [0, 1] randomly and called randj. If
(Crossover Rate) 0< =CR<1 is a shortcut and
ifrandj<=CR, then U'
i,j
=
V
i,j
otherwise
3
U'
i,j
U
i,j
is selected. We call this method
as DEI. The other usual two methods are also
brought here. Another simple form of DE that
we call it DE2 is as follows [5] :
U'i,j[K] = Ui,j[K]
+
K x (Ur
3
,j[K] -
Ui,j[K]) + F x (
U
r1
,
j[K] - Ur2,j[K]) (3)
Where T#F#T#j and they are natural
numbers that are selected between [l,NP]
radomly. The amount of F and K parameters
are selected between [Dl} If {j,[kJ is out of
the allowed limit
[
Ujrin, ujrax
]
, it will become
f
m
a
mi
n
IX m U
j
or U
j
.
Another method which is called DE3 is as
follows [2]:
U'iK] = Ui,j[K]
+ K X Ubestj[K]
-
U
i,j [K])
+ F x
U
rl,j [K]
-
U
rzK])
(4)
Where UbestJ[k] is j variant of the best
newbors which was produced in last
generations (Ubest).
2.2. SADE3 Algorithm
Formulation of this algorithm is as follows:
U'i,j[K] = UiK]
+
V
Ci,j [K]
+
V
Mi,j [K] (5)
Where:
VCj,[kJ is a vector that plays the role of
crossover for producing the newbor vector.
VMiJkJ is a vector that its role is begetting
mutation in present generation of population
to produce the newbor vector.
The VCiJfk] and VMiJ[k] relations are defned
as follows:
VCi,j[K] = rand x Ubestj[K]
- Ui,j[K])
+
(1 - rand) x (Ulocalj[K] - Ui,j[K]) (6)
VMi,j
[K] = F x (1 - (be
s
t
s
o far /
ave fitY2 x (
U
r1
,
j
[
K
]
- Ur2,j
[K]
) +
rand(Ube
s
tj
[K]
- Ur
3
,j
[
K
]
) + (1
-
rand) x (Ulocal[K]
- Ur
4
,j[K]) (
7
)
Where UzocazJ[k] is the amount ofjth variant
of the best one around UiJfkj.
The function of this algorithm is in fgure (2).
To increase speed, yet keeping the heuristic
being of the algorithm and preventing from
early convergence, in crossover vector we
make a balance between local and public
search using rand and (-rand) coefcients
that rand is a radom and fx number in [0,1]
range.
3 Self Ada
ptive DE
D2
a=rand(Uglobal-U)
b=(I-rand)(U global-U)
2
C 1- b
e
st/average) (Url-Ur2)
Ur4
d=rand(U global-Ur3)
e=( l-rand)(Uglobal-Ur4)
Ur3 L -
UgJobaJ
Ur2
Fig2. the fnction of SADE on particles
In the mentioned DE algorithms, controlling
the mutation is done by F and it causes
intense dependency of the algorithm on this
parameter. In SADE, mutation vector controls
the mutation effect adaptively using
feedback, so a kind of self-regulation
increases the speed and exactness of the
algorithm. The F parameter also is for manual
controlling of mutation.
3. The Problem Formulation
Overcurrent relays are divided into 4 general
groups:
1) Specifed time
2) Inverse of standard
3) Much inverse
4) Very much inverse (infnite inverse)
Relays using in a feeder are better of one
type.
To describe the behavior of over current
relays, time-current curves or mathematical
relations can be used.
In this article the following relations were
used:
PS
M =
l
sc
/
%
s
et X
l
ct
(8)
T
D
S
=
3 X T
M
S
/log
PS
M
(9)
Where :
TDS
4
: is a coefcient specifes time in which
high current relay functions.
PSM
5
: is the initial current amount of the
network in proportion to amount of relay
4 Time Dial Setting
5 Play Setting Multiplier
4
regulatory current that is transferred toward
the network.
to : time of relay operation
Isc : the least short circuit current in relay
view scope
% set : percentage of relay regulation
Ict : nominal regulatory current of relay in
proportion to initial side of the network.
PSM and TDS quantities should be specifed
for coordination of over current relays in
order to obtain the time of relays operation
from Eq. (2) .As said before, these times
should obtained in a way that in addition to
having no in-coordination between relays, we
should have the least time of operation in
order to have the least damage to the system.
In this paper TDS and % set are regaded as
the variants. As the algorithm starts, TDS and
PSM amounts are calculated in each stage and
by using Eq.(2) the operation time of main
and backup relays are calculated. Then t
obtained by following relation:
Lt = t backup - t main - eTI (10)
Where:
tb
a
ck
u
p
: operation time of backup relay
t
main
: operation time of main relay
CTI : coordination time interval
Using Lt and tmaim operation of relays can be
specifed. Negative Lt shows disorder in
function of main and backup relays; and high
Lt shows that the cover of backup relay is
inappropriate. High tmaim shows much delay of
relay in fault repulsion. The mentioned cases
are undesirable situations that should be
prevented and it is clear that the time should
be positive; thus, target function defned in
direction of realization of three goals:
1) Decrease of tmaim
2) Decrease of Lt
3) Positive being of Lt
4) Positive being of the times
Therefore the following taget function was
used:
OP = Kl '((tmain)4 + (tmain -
Itmainl)2) + K2 '(Lt4 +
K3
(Lt - ILtI)2)
(11)
The fowchart of solving the problem is as
follows:
Tmain ,Tbackup, lt
Determine parameters & Generate initial
population
Evaluate ftness & determine the bests
No
4. Si
Fig.3.fowchart of solving ORC by SADE
Two networks of 14 and 30 bus IEEE
standard system were used to dismount ORC
problem. Considering network topology, 30
relays were applied for 14-bus network and
67 relays for 30-bus network that are shown
in Fig. (4), Table (1) and Fig. (13), Table (4)
respectively. Two variants of TDS and %set
were considered for each relay; totally, 60
variants for 14-bus network and 134 variants
for 30-bus network were considered. Results
of load fow and short circuit calculations are
in Tables (2) and (5). The ORC problem for
the mentioned networks also with mentioned
DE algorithms and PSO and GA were solved
and fnally a comparison done between all
algorithms.
It is noticeable that SADE only has one
controlling parameter (F) and this causes to
regulate it simply. In this paper F considered
dynamic.
We specifed the limitations of variants as
0.05<TDS<0.5, 0.25<%set<1.25 and
CTI=0.05 and also we set paraeters of target
function as K1 =100, K2=1000 and K3=10
respectively.
4. 1. Application of SADE algorithm to the
IEEE 14-bus network
Notice that for relays with same backup, we
should consider the least current as backup
current in order to proper operation of relay;
and also for a relay with several backups, we
consider the backup of relay with more
current in order to increase the operation
speed of backup and have a smaller tback up
The network data are in Tables (1) and (2).
Table (1) . The data of main and backup relays of 14-
bus network
main backup main backup main backup
7 11 13 21 18
2 12 5 22 29
3 7 13 12 23 26
4 14 24 26
5 15 28 25 23
6 1 16 19 26 29
7 8 17 30 27 29
8 7 18 16 28 22
9 5 19 21 29 15
10 6 20 18 30 28
Table (2) . The data of load fow and short circuit of 14-bus network
Relay
lsc
main
Isc
number backup
1 1130.0354 998.2275
2 2124.7652 1130.0354
3 6890.5987 998.2275
4 2568.5517 1130.0354
5 2544.7814 1130.0354
6 2793.9404 1130.0354
7 2243.2455 509.4930
8 1127.4909 998.2275
9 4094.1097 2544.7814
10 1134.9435 1424.0243
Nominal
relay
current
(let)
1130
548.66
1130
308.066
405.425
529.799
548.661
308.066
469.425
179.330
Relay
number
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
'sc
main
581.6292
2313.9009
920.5197
2570.1793
1262.5450
2063.8119
491.8041
1161.2896
738.2956
618.6154
5
Nominal
Isc
relay Relay
backup current number
(let)
920.5197 529.799 21
1950.3579 179.330 22
507.7441 405.425 23
1950.3579 469.425 24
393.3920 74.630 25
738.2956 61.947 26
316.6048 61.947 27
1215.1064 24.202 28
762.1676 24.202 29
636.8597 50.176 30
'sc
main
1250.0504
1601.3872
1149.6666
53.1331
372.9341
847.3937
342.9417
818.7561
543.9036
316.6048
Isc
backup
1161.2896
543.9036
847.3937
78.7692
411.7452
319.5078
319.5078
746.8002
620.3936
393.3920
Nominal
relay
current
(let)
50.176
138.870
55.928
55.928
11.292
11.292
138.870
41.327
41.327
74.630
Fig. 4. single-line diagram of IEEE 14-bus network [13]
The average results of applying SADE during
50 times implementation (NP=50 and 100
iterations) on the above mentioned network is
as follows:
4
"
o
3
20
Average Best so far SADE
40 60
iteration
80 100
Fig. 5. average best so far of 14-bus network
As seen in fg. (5), average best so fa of
SADE which shows the speed and exactness
of the algorithm, moves toward the OP
minimum quickly. Figures (6-8) show that the
algorithm managed to keep the time periods
small and their differences positive to
possible range that is to realize the target
function.
5 10 15 20 25 30 35
relay number
Fig. 6. average t
main
of 14-bus network
0. 8r- --.----
O.
o.
u o.
-0.
15 20 35
relay number
Fig. 7. average tbackup of 14-bus network
-0.1
0 5 15 20 30 35
relay number
Fig. 8. average At of 14-bus network
Table (3) . the results of a lying SAOE algorithm to 1 4bus network
%se
PS
PSM %se
PS
PSM
Relay M
tmai tbacku
Relay M
tmai tbacku
numbe
t
numbe
t
TO
mai
backu n p
TO
mai
backu n p
r
S
r
S
n
p
n
p
o.os 0.2S 0.88 -0.03 0.138 16 o.os 0.2S 33.3 11.92 0.38 O.S14
2 o.os 0.2S 3.87 2.06 0.42 0.673 17 o.s 0.2S 7.94 S.11 0.631 0.77
3 o.os 0.2S 6.1 0.88 0.1 S S 0.137 18 o.os 1.2S 47.98 SO.21 0.377 0.371
4 o.os 0.2S 8.34 3.67 0.3S4 0.S19 19 o.s 1.2S 30.S 31.49 o.sos O.SOI
S 0.14 0.2S 6.28 2.8 0.417 0.627 20 o.os 0.2S 12.33 12.7 o.sss 0.S49
6 o.os 0.2S S.27 2.13 0.324 0.617 21 o.os 0.2S 24.91 23.14 O.S13 0.S24
7 0.13 1.2S 4.1 0.91 0.247 0.S37 22 o.s 1.2S I1.S3 3.92 0.449 0.723
8 o.os 0.2S 3.66 3.24 0.63 0.684 23 o.s 0.2S 20.S4 1 S.14 0.369 0.40S
6
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
0.15
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.5
0.95
1.25
1.25
0.25
1.25
1.25
0.25
8.72
6.33
1.1
12.9
2.27
5.47
16.92
5.42
7.94
1.74
10.86
1.25
4.15
5.3
0.55
0.467
0.31
0.505
0.449
0.61
0.494
0.664
0.425
0.228
0.535
0.672
0.717
0.791
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
Notice: In the above table PSM defned in form of Isc/In.
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
4. 1. Application of SADE algorithm to IEEE 30-bus network
The network data are in Tables (4) and (5).
Table (4) The data of main and backup relays of 30-bus
network
main
1
2
3
4
6
7
8
9
10
backup
2
10
7
6
14
4
8
4
4
17
main backup main backup
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
52
29
41
29
2S
31
37
28
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
38
50
24
47
49
23
51
58
33 55 51
32 56 59
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
8
18
6
18
13
6
18
11
11
11
62
19
24
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.84
1.25
0.25
0.63
0.95
33
75
2.1
19.8
13.16
4.24
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
1.41
36.46
28.29
2.3
18
15
5.27
36
33
32
46
53
42
42
40
45
41
43
26
39
Table (5) The data ofIoad fow and short circuit of 30-bus network
Relay
num.
1
2
3
4
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
Isc
main
2925.757
1277.69
7042.897
2615.881
2836.321
2598
2931.887
3484.958
3982.821
1110.92
3952.277
619.8
1698.44
2025.35
1061
2542.43
877.5
3641.05
4848
4025.28
220.1
980.75
966.2
Isc
backup
1277.69
1110.918
2931.887
1417.25
2025.353
1707.362
1469.24
1707.362
1707.362
877.5013
2747.947
556.7861
1417.25
556.7861
1152.756
1417.25
556.7861
2232.877
2232.877
2232.877
140.3919
1048.555
1505.755
Nominal
relay
current
(let)
596.96
1277.69
1277.69
333.721
603.484
449.711
596.96
579.054
579.054
333.721
540.051
603.484
137.153
137.153
281.091
540.051
449.711
281.091
222.409
142.707
222.409
4.487
63.911
Relay
num.
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
Isc
main
1832.58
2151.678
1525.694
475.85
1147.8
768.98
565.43
1372.67
1449.64
1187.8
108.76
361
940.1
483.3
1239.24
478.26
1183.36
862.8
896.7
691
296.8
1266.5
492.14
Isc
backup
1262.501
533.5021
736.5271
533.5021
1205.415
789.212
483.2824
1147.801
390.2497
454.8083
133.7007
390.2497
454.8083
336.5337
876.4076
490.031
490.031
876.8993
942.5116
736.5271
277.2429
1276.371
478.2578
Nominal
relay
current
(
let)
134.567
50.194
70.352
50.194
28.508
28.508
56.991
56.991
137.298
58.885
58.885
12.658
12.658
137.298
42.453
45.67
45.67
21.286
21.286
53.33
70.352
53.33
42.453
Relay
num.
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
Isc
main
646.1
192.15
1396.93
140.77
1263.52
1262.5
876.4
611.89
909.13
890.42
638.78
526.64
917.9
590.21
778
140.4
790.4
47.28
403.53
283
53.8
0.308
0.537
0.35
0.578
0.436
0.595
0.419
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
Isc
backup
664.7524
140.7704
1505.755
168.0671
728.5325
709.2658
608.4984
355.5337
608.4984
453.6153
666.1492
453.6153
909.1313
416.9261
330.1477
220.1055
750.7279
53.809
416.9261
326.314
47.2768
0.218
0.524
0.436
0.621
0.447
0.569
0.381
55
59
55
61
57
21
20
67
61
60
64
Nominal
relay
current
(
let)
16.125
134.567
18.079
63.911
46.198
18.079
16.125
46.198
15.415
31.558
36.652
15.415
36.652
53.809
47.277
142.707
4.487
47.277
28.349
28.349
53.809
The average results of dismounting SADE during 50 times implementation (NP=50 and 100
iterations) on the above mentioned network are shown in fgure (9).
Fig. (9) the same as fg. (5) shows that SADE algorithm has high convergence speed.
7
,
5

C
o
3

Average Best so far SADE

iteration
1.
O

go
"
u
'
: o.
o.
Fig.9.average best so far of 30-bus network
Fig.II. average tbackup of 30-bus network
mi[ WINDING TRASFRMER [QUYAlENfS
HANCk
I
12
13
4
F
l
O
II
6
O.
L
0

(
B
10 20 30 40 50 60
relay number
Fig.IO. average tmain
of 30-bus network
10 20 30 40 50 60
relay number
Fig.I2. average t of 30-bus network
Fig.I3. single-line diagram of IEEE 30-bus network[ 13]
8
70
70
4.2. Comparing SADE results with other
algorithms
4.2.1. Comparing with mentioned DE
algorithms:
In this section we compare SADE fnction
with DEI, DE2 and DE3 algorithms.
-- eveegebea|ac|et5AD5
eveegebea|ac|etD5!
eveegebea|ac|etD52
~~eve|e bea|ac|etD53
q .=...... ...................................................
o
2 + 8
iteration
Fig.14. average best so far of SADE for 14-bus
network comparing with DE
0
C
8
`
1"

I
-~averagebes|so|arSADE
averagebes|so|arDF!
averagebes|so|arDE2
averagebes|so|arDE3


z: :

~
:

|!6|d!|0
Fig.IS. average best so far of SADE for 30-bus
network comparing with DE
As seen in fg. (14) and (15), in situations that
other DE algorithms trapped in local
optimums, SADE continues its movement by
fx convergence speed. This shows that SADE
is very capable to pass through local
optimums. The enlarged for of fg.(15) is in
fg. (16) and 7).
::,
o

,
l
.
i
|
!
|
|
|
q_L...
@
...........
__
..........
__
...........
__
...........

iteration
Fig.16. bigger view of Fig.( IS)
U
O
0
|teraI|on
Fig.17. bigger view of Fig.( 16)
V
4.2.2. Comparing with PSO algorithm:
In this paper initial PSO algorithm was used
that in [7] it used for ORC problem.
|
|
-

I
|

z .

.
-.....,.._.,.
0 0
iteration
)0
Fig.IS. average best so far of SADE for 14-bus
network comparing with PSO algorithm during SO
times implementation.
o
O
-m. __ e.me.e.=._.e.e.a.a.a__. . .. . _- . ..._
iteration
Fig.19. average best so far of SADE for 30-bus
network comparing with DE algorithms during SO
times implementation.
4.2.3. Comparing with GA algorithm:
!
` .
!
!
'
Z
'

t
'
!

!
..__ ~~~~
Z 4 D 'J
iteration
Fig.20. average best so far of SADE for 14-bus
network comparing with GA algorithm during SO times
implementation.
.
.
z-
|
z
|
.
L
`
-
|
.
|
'

- \
-

...__......._.....a._....

..... ..
)
iteration
Fig.2l. average best so far of SADE for 30-bus
network comparing with GA algorithm during SO times
implementation.
Fig. (18-21) are also have same results with
(14) and (15) fgures and especially it is vivid
in fg. (20) and (21) that GA trapped in a local
optimum quickly. Of course, in this part we
applied real GA with selecting SUS and one
cut point mutation and other current methods
of GA also had no different results. As seen,
for bigger network (30) the SADE operation
is more signifcant.
5. Conclusions
In this article for the problem of coordination
of over current relays, SADE algorithm was
suggested and it was tested on IEEE standard
14-bus and 30-bus networks and it showed
that it is a noticeable algorithm. In
comparison with results from DE, PSO and
GA algorithms, SADE algorithm can achieve
better solution with lower iteration; this
shows its speed and exactness in optimization
issues with big dimensions and several local
optimums (especially in 30-bus network that
the differences were more vivid); also
considering the its simplicity of crossover and
selection, this algorithm needs lesser time to
achieve optimum solution. DE is a robust
algorithm that is in several implementations,
it has same results to some extent, and this
case is more evident in SADE algorithm.
References
[1] C. R. Mason, "the art and science of
protective relaying", John Wiley & sons
[2] K. Price, R. Stor, J. Lampinen,
"Differential Evolution - A Practical
Approach to Global Optimization"
(Springer, ISBN: 3-540-20950-6)
[3] L Hewitson, M. Brown, B. Ramesh,
"Practical Power Systems Protection",
Elsevier Publications
[4] X. Yao, Y. Liu, and G. Lin,
"Evolutionary Programming Made
Faster", 82 IEEE transaction on
evolutionary computation, vol. 3, no. 2,
JULY 1999
[5] J. Lampinen, "A bibliography of
differential evolution algorithm",
Available at
http://ww .lut. f/jlampine/debiblio.htm
[6] C. H. Liang, C.Y. Chung, K. P. Wong,
X.Z. Duan and C.T. Tse, "Study of
10
differential evolution for optimalreactive
power fow", IET 2007
[7] H. H. Zeineldin, E.F. El-Saadany, M.M.A.
Salama, "Optimal coordination of
overcurrent relays using a modifed
particle swarm optimization", Electric
Power Systems Research 76 (2006) 988-
995
[8] A.Y. Abdelaziz, H.E. A. Talaat, A.I.
Nosseir, Ammar A. Hajjar, "An adaptive
protection scheme for optimal
coordination of overcurrent relays",
Electric Power Systems Research 61
(2002) 1-9
[9] H. Kazemi Karegar, H. Askarian
Abyaneh, V. Ohis, M. Meshkin , "Pre
processing of the optimal coordination of
overcurrent relays", Electric Power
Systems Research 75 (2005) 134-141
[10] H. A. Abyaneh, F. Razavi, M. AI
Dabbagh, H. Sedeghi , H. Kazemikargar,
"A comprehensive method for break
points fnding based on expert system for
protection coordination in power
systems",
Electric Power Systems Research 77 (2007)
660-672
[11] R. E. Albrecht, M.J. Nisja, W.E. Feero,
G. D. Rockefeller, c.L. Wagner, "Digital
computer protective device coordination
program-I-general program
description", IEEE Trans. PAS 8 (4)
(1964) 402-410
[12] L. Jenkines, H. Khincha, S.
Shivakumar, P. Dash, "An application of
functional dependencies to the
topological analysis of protection
schemes", IEEE Trans. Power Delivery 7
(1)(1992)
[13] http://ww.ee. washington.edulresearc
hipstca/