2016 IEEE Innovative Smart Grid Technologies - Asia (ISGT-Asia)
Melbourne, Australia, Nov 28 - Dec 1, 2016
Equipment loading and voltage unbalance in the
distribution network with distributed PVs
Michael Emmanuel
School of Engineering
& Computer Science
Victoria University of Wellington
New Zealand
Student Member, IEEE.
Email: michael.emmanuel@ecs.vuw.ac.nz
Abstract—One of the value attributes of photovoltaic dis-
tributed generation (PV-DG) is the offset of feeder currents which
in turn reduces the overall feeder loading. In addition, for remote
nodes at the end of the distribution network with high voltage
unbalance tendency, PV-DG can be used to reduce this unbalance
factor and its associated adverse impacts. This paper discusses
the impact of distributed PVs on the equipment loading and
voltage unbalance factor of the distribution network. Impact
analysis has been carried out on the IEEE-13 distribution bus at
different penetration levels using the Open-source Distribution
System Simulator (OpenDSS). The results showed that for such
highly loaded distribution network, PV-DG can be used to offset
feeder current, active power demand, equipment loading and
voltage unbalance. In addition, we use typical localized average
temperature, solar irradiance and load demand profiles in this
interconnection study.
Index Terms—Photovoltaic systems, voltage unbalance, load-
ing, load profile, penetration.
I. I NTRODUCTION
Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS), and incentivization of
renewable energy sources constitute major drivers to the cur-
rent electric energy transition [1]. Moreover, various countries
all over the world have developed different forms of renewable
energy support policies such as mandates, incentives and
enabling frameworks targeted at promoting renewable energy
resources for electric power generation [2], [3]. In 2015, about
164 countries specified renewable energy targets in order to
increase eco-friendly technologies in the global energy mix
[2].
In particular, the growth of global solar photovoltaic (PV)
uptake with its market share makes this game-changing tech-
nology an important power generation paradigm for the evolv-
ing smart grid in the 21st century. In a recent report by
the International Energy Agency Photovoltaic Power System
Programme (IEA PVPS), PV generation has now achieved
more than 1% of the yearly global electric power demand
[4]. The PV technology, as an example of renewable dis-
tributed generation which now constitute 15% of the global
energy mix [5], provides an opportunity to supply clean and
sustainable energy in order to downtrend global greenhouse
gas emissions [4], [6]. In recent times, the uptake of the
978-1-5090-4303-3/16/$31.00 ©2016 IEEE
Ramesh Rayudu
School of Engineering
& Computer Science
Victoria University of Wellington
New Zealand
Senior Member, IEEE.
Email: ramesh.rayudu@ecs.vuw.ac.nz
solar PV-DG technology is increasingly becoming prominent,
and sometimes referred to as the most common distributed
generation resource within the evolving smart grid [7], [8]. As
an emerging alternative energy resource, major value attributes
of PV-DG include [9]–[12]:
• Relative high durability with low maintenance. PV mod-
ules have <1%/year degradation rate with the 25-year
commercial warranties.
• A non-rotating prime mover technology with ease of
installation and start up.
• Relatively compact, mobile and modular structures.
• High power density per unit of weight, and a tendency
of output power match with maximum load at mid-day.
As a result, PV-DG can be used to offset load demand of
an area distribution system.
Also, Weckx et al. [13] presented voltage unbalance reduction
with PV inverters in three-phase four-wire distribution grids.
However, the traditional distribution power system was not
originally designed to operate as an active circuit with gener-
ating sources creating a bi-directional flow of power contrary
to the conventional power flow paradigm [14]. Apart from
the inherent intermittency causing emergent behaviours, PV-
DG integration issues include reverse power during minimum
load condition, voltage violations and spatial distribution of
PV systems [15], [16]. In addition, depending on the feeder
characteristics, the feeder loading at high PV-DG penetration
could be higher than the basecase condition [17]. Also, voltage
unbalance is a function of the location and size of the PV-DG
on the distribution grid [18].
This transition makes utilities and Authorities Having Juris-
diction (AHJs) over the grid show serious concern in hosting
this variable energy resource. The utility is therefore, faced
with the challenge of balancing the diverse possibilities with
PV-DG and providing technical solution to mitigate adverse
impacts of this game-changing technology [16]. These in-
tegration constraints have led to the adoption of standards
and guidelines such as IEEE-1547 and UL 1741 by utility
companies as recommended practice for the interconnection
of PV-DG with electric power systems.
9
 This paper presents the impact of PV-DG on feeder equip- Also, the reactive power supply, QP V,m , is calculated as:
ment loading such as the power delivery element (e.g., lines
|Vm |
and transformers) loading, and voltage unbalance factor in the QP V,m = ∗ [|VP V,m | ∗ cos(φ) − |Vm |] (4)
distribution network. In order to capture systemwide and local L
impacts, results of analysis carried out for different penetration The current, i(t), injected from the PV-DG to distribution
levels are shown and discussed. grid is given as:
II. D ISTRIBUTION N ETWORK M ODEL AND P OWER FLOW 
VP V,m (t) − Vm (t)dt
A NALYSIS i(t) = (5)
L
A. Distribution Network Model
III. PV-DG IMPACTS ON THE DISTRIBUTION NETWORK
The IEEE 13 distribution test feeder, which is a 4.16 kV
highly loaded feeder, is used in this study as a distribution A. Equipment overloading
network model. This is an unbalanced feeder with shunt The shift from conventional centralized to distributed gen-
capacitor banks, in-line transformer, spot and distributed loads eration reduces the risk of higher voltages towards the end-use
[19], [20]. In addition, it has one substation wye connected loads and overload at these voltages. Equipment overload and
voltage regulator with three single-phase units [19], [20]. Also, losses in electric power system depend on the rms value of the
the load buses are modelled as constant power (PQ), constant current [22]. As a current injection source, the PV-DG can be
impedance (Z) and constant current (PV) models [19], [20]. used to offset the magnitude of current flow in a distribution
However, for this distribution system analysis, the load buses feeder and consequently the overall feeder loading [23].
where the PV systems are connected are modelled as PV buses. From power loss perspective, assuming a constant value
B. Power flow Analysis of resistance per unit length across the entire feeder, total
power loss without PV generation over all the feeder branches
Consider a PV-DG with an inductively coupled inverter used
integrated over time, Ploss,W OP V , can be calculated as [22]:
to interface the PV system to the distribution network. Fig. 1
shows the interaction of the inverter as a current source with n 
 T
the stiff grid voltage via an inductance filter [10], [21], [22]. Ploss,W OP V = [Ia (t)]2 dt (6)
a=1 0

However, with PV generation present, total power loss,

Ploss,W P V , becomes:
n 
 T
Ploss,W P V = [Ia (t) − Ia,P V (t)]2 dt (7)
a=1 0

Subtracting (7) from (6) leads to power losses reduction,

Figure. 1. PV inverter connection to grid given as:
n  T
For power system with grid voltage Vm at node m given as: ΔPloss = Ia,P V (t)[2Ia (t) − Ia,P V (t)]dt (8)
a=1 0
Vm (t) = |Vm |sin(ωt) (1)
where:
where ω is the grid voltage angular frequency

The inverter output voltage, VP V,m (t), is given as: n = number of branches
Ia = branch “a” current magnitude
VP V,m (t) = |VP V,m |sin(ωt + φ) + Σvhc (2) Ia,P V = PV current injection at branch “a”
where φ = power angle by which VP V,m (t) leads Vm (t) ΔPloss = power loss reduction

Σvhc = summation of voltage output harmonic components.

As a result of the current reduction, PV-DG can be used to
Neglecting resistance, the active power supply from the PV- relieve the capacity of the power deliver system (equipment)
DG, PP V,m , is given as: through current injections at various penetration levels.
Also, considering a branch j on a radial network with active
|VP V,m ||Vm |sin(φ)
PP V,m = (3) power flow only, the total power flow at that location before
L PV-DG connection is [22]:
where L is the addition of the inductance filter and leakage
inductance of the interconnecting distribution transformer. Pj (t) = Pjdem (t) − Pjgen (t) (9)

10
 To avoid an overload condition after PV-DG connection the
following criterion must be satisfied:
Pjpvmax (t) < Pjdem (t) (10)
This implies that the maximum power flow after PV system
connection should be less than before to avoid an overload of
the power delivery element [22].
where:
Figure. 2. A typical normalized load profile of daily energy
Pj (t) - total active power flow through branch j use in Wellington
Pjdem (t) - total downstream active power demand at
branch j
Pjgen (t) - total downstream active power generation
at branch j
Pjpvmax (t) - PV total downstream active power gener- Qm (t) = Qlm (t) ∗ Vmxq (t) (14)
ation at branch j
where Pm and Qm are the active and reactive power
B. Voltage unbalance injections respectively at bus m, Plm and Qlm are the active
IEEE Standard Test Procedure for Polyphase Induction and reactive load at bus m with reference to the nominal
Motors and Generators defines Voltage unbalance, Vunb , as voltage, Vm is the bus m voltage, xp and xq are the active and
[24]: reactive load voltage exponents respectively . The values of xp
and xq for residential loads are 0.92 and 4.04 respectively [28],
[29].
max voltage deviation from the average voltage
Vunb = .100
average voltage
(11) B. PV renewable resource modelling
The Vunb can still exist even if the voltage limit specified by 1) Solar irradiance modelling: The intermittency of PV is
ANSI C84.1-2006 has not been violated [25]. The integration modelled using the probability density function (pdf) of the
of single-phase PV-DGs with the distribution network can Beta distribution as described in [30].
either increase or decrease the voltage unbalance depending
on the location and size of PV units [18]. ⎧
In addition, Vunb tends to be more severe at the end of ⎨ Γ(α + β) g α−1 (1 − g)β−1 0 ≤ g ≤ 1, α, β ≥ 0
the feeder than the beginning of the feeder [13], [18], which fb (g) = Γ(α)Γ(β)
⎩
posses a serious operational problem for three-phase utilization 0 otherwise
devices such as large chiller compressors [10], [18]. Therefore, (15)
for remote buses such as bus 675, which is one of the weakest where fb (g) is the Beta distribution function of g, g is the
buses in the IEEE-13 distribution feeder as presented in [25], random variable of solar irradiance (kW/m2 ), α and β are
the PV-DG can be used to offset the voltage unbalance of this shape parameters of the Beta distribution function.
bus. The PV output power PP V (g), at a given irradiance value
is evaluated as [30]:
IV. L OAD AND PV MODELLING
A. Load modelling PP V (g) = V (g)I(g) (16)
The load demand of the system considered in this study
follows a typical normalized residential load pattern obtained Therefore, the total power output, PP V,t , of the PV is given
from [26], as shown in Fig. 2. It depicts the average daily load as [30]:
profile for electrical energy usage in Wellington, New Zealand.  1
The load factor (LF) is defined as the ratio of the area under PP V,t = P (g)fb (g)dg (17)
the load curve in p.u. to the total period [27]. The LF for this 0
scenario is 0.762.
Additionally, considering temperature factor, the PV maximum
24 power output, PP V,max (kW), is estimated as [31]:
p.u.load demand (t)
LF = (12)
t=1
24
PP V,max (kW ) = Pmpp ∗ g ∗ FT (18)
Also, the time-varying and voltage dependent load model as
given in [28], [29] is expressed as: where Pmpp is the maximum power point at 1kW/m2
irradiance and temperature (250 C), FT is the temperature de-
Pm (t) = Plm (t) ∗ Vmxp (t) (13) rating factor.

11
C. Case Study
The IEEE-13 distribution test feeder used in this paper has a
peak demand of 3466 kW and 2120 kVAr [19], [20] following
the load curve as shown in Fig. 2. The operating voltage
constraint is between 0.95 and 1.05 p.u [10]. Three distributed
PV units at unity power factor operating as negative loads [32]
are connected to nodes 652 (1-phase, wye), 675 (3-phase, wye)
and 671 (3-phase, delta) as shown in Fig. 3.
In addition, all the load buses connecting PV systems are
modelled as PV buses, and the size of the PV is relative to the
size of the load on the same bus (i.e., PV size cannot exceed
the load bus size).
Figure. 4. A typical normalized solar irradiance for Wellington
during summer

Therefore, the inverter to PV array ratio is 1.1 [35]. With the

PV inverter deployed as an interfacing technology for grid-
connected PV, the associated impacts and time series analysis
are discussed in the following sections.
V. S IMULATION AND T EST R ESULTS
A 24-hour time series power flow is performed in OpenDSS
with varying load demands and PV-DG on the IEEE-13
distribution test feeder. Impacts of spatially distributed PV
generations integrated with the distribution network are pre-
sented below.
A. Solar generation
The resulting solar PV generation profiles at bus 671 and
various penetration levels are shown in Fig. 5. The profiles
Figure. 3. IEEE 13-node test feeder with PV units
show PV generation as negative load, which increases as the
The total active power of the nodes considered are 128 PV penetration increases from 10% to 60%.
kW (652), 843 kW (675) and 1115 kW (671). Also, we have
considered various PV penetration levels which ranged from
10% to 60%. The load considered is modelled by (13) which
combines the time-varying and voltage dependent demand
pattern for residential loads. The normalized daily irradiance
data for Wellington, in New Zealand (used in this study) was
obtained from the National Institute of Water and Atmospheric
Research’s (NIWA) SolarView [33] as shown in Fig. 4.
The penetration level, PL , is defined as [23], [34]:
n
Pk,P V
PL = k=1 (19)
Pf dr,peak
where: Figure. 5. Solar PV generation profile

n = total number of PV units on the feeder
Pk,P V = power rating (DC) of kth PV unit connected
to the feeder
Pf dr,peak = peak active load on the feeder
In order to ensure maximum active power injection from
the PV array, the PV inverter is usually oversized by 10%.
This reverse power flow has the capacity to offset the feeder
current, load and equipment loading as shown in the following
sections.
1) Feeder current offset: As a current injection source,
the PV-DG can be used to reduce the current flowing by
(7) through the distribution test feeder as shown in Fig. 6.
Also, Fig. 6 shows the feeder current offset in all phases of
the distribution network as a result of PV-DG. For instance,
phase A experiences a current reduction from 0.87 (basecase)

12

Figure. 6. Normalized feeder current offset at the substation
(1 p.u. = 600 A)
to 0.51 p.u. at 60% penetration level at 11 a.m. Also, the active
power demand reduces from 0.95 (basecase) to 0.6 p.u. at 60
% penetration at 11 a.m. as depicted in Fig. 7.
Figure. 7. Normalized feeder load demand offset at the sub-
station (1 p.u. = 3.5 MW)
2) Equipment loading impact: As a result of the current
reduction by (7), the equipment loading capacity has been
relieved with the integration of PV-DG as shown in Fig. 8.
In addition, Fig. 8 illustrate the fact that with increase in the
penetration level, the amount of power flow and overloading of
equipments reduces significantly during the insolation period.
13
Figure. 8. Feeder equipment overloading (1 p.u. = 1 MWh)
3) Voltage unbalance: The voltage unbalance factor for
the remote 675 bus (with three single-phase units) has been
evaluated with the result shown in Fig. 9. Vunb becomes
significant for values between 2.5 to 3% or more and this could
adversely affect the operation three-phase induction motors
[10]. Under the basecase condition (without PV-DG), the Vunb
is unacceptably high during peak periods as shown in Fig.
9. As the PV-DG penetration level increases, Vunb decreases
drastically from 5.25% (basecase) to 2.4% (60% penetration)
at 10 a.m.
Figure. 9. Voltage unbalance at bus 675
VI. C ONCLUSION
This paper has presented analysis of distributed PV systems
operating at unity power factor installed on the IEEE 13-bus
distribution feeder using average data of daily demand load
profile, temperature and irradiance data of Wellington, New
Zealand. This study has investigated the impact of PV-DG on
feeder current, equipment loading and voltage unbalance at
different penetration levels.
The results showed a significant reduction of feeder cur-
rents, active power demand and equipment loading at various
penetration levels for such a relative highly loaded feeder. In
addition, for remote and weak buses such as node 675 on the
distribution feeder, PV-DG can be used to reduce the voltage
unbalance experienced by such a node.
Acknowledgment The authors gratefully acknowledge the
support of Victoria University for this work through the VUW
Research Trust.
 R EFERENCES [27] D. Q. Hung, N. Mithulananthan, and R. Bansal, “Analytical strategies
for renewable distributed generation integration considering energy loss
[1] J. R. Agüero and S. J. Steffel, “Integration challenges of photovoltaic minimization,” Applied Energy, vol. 105, pp. 75–85, 2013.
distributed generation on power distribution systems,” in Power and [28] R. W. B. H.-D. C. C. C. J. V. S. C. W. T. E. V. S. G. Casper, C.
Energy Society General Meeting, 2011 IEEE. IEEE, 2011, pp. 1–6. O. Nwankpa and G. Wu, “Bibliography on load models for power flow
[2] “Renewables 2015 Global Status Report, http://www.ren21.net/wp- and dynamic performance simulation,” Power Systems, IEEE Transac-
content/uploads/2015/07/REN12-GSR2015 Onlinebook low1.pdf.” tions on, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 523–538, 1995.
[3] J. R. Aguero and S. J. Steffel, “Integration challenges of photovoltaic [29] D. Q. Hung, N. Mithulananthan, and K. Y. Lee, “Determining PV
distributed generation on power distribution systems,” in Power and penetration for distribution systems with time-varying load models,”
Energy Society General Meeting, 2011 IEEE. IEEE, 2011, pp. 1–6. Power Systems, IEEE Transactions on, vol. 29, no. 6, pp. 3048–3057,
[4] “Photovoltaic Power Systems Programme, Annual Report (2014),” In- 2014.
ternational Energy Agency, Tech. Rep. [30] Z. Salameh, B. Borowy, and A. Amin, “Photovoltaic module-site
[5] “Sustainable Energy for All, http://www.se4all.org/our-vision our- matching based on the capacity factors,” Energy Conversion, IEEE
objectives renewable-energy .” Transactions on, vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 326–332, 1995.
[6] D. Akinyele, R. Rayudu, and N. Nair, “Global progress in photovoltaic [31] “EPRI OpenDSS PVSystem Element Model.” [On-
technologies and the scenario of development of solar panel plant and line]. Available: http://ehc.ac/p/electricdss/code/HEAD/tree/trunk/Doc/
module performance estimation- Application in Nigeria,” Renewable and OpenDSS20PVSystem20Model.doc
Sustainable Energy Reviews, vol. 48, pp. 112–139, 2015. [32] J. Jung, H. Asgeirsson, T. Basso, J. Hambrick, M. Dilek, R. Seguin, and
[7] “Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI), http://dpv.epri.com/.” R. Broadwater, “Evaluation of DER adoption in the presence of new load
growth and energy storage technologies,” in Power and Energy Society
[8] D. Akinyele, R. Rayudu, and R. H. Tan, “Comparative Study of
General Meeting, 2011 IEEE. IEEE, 2011, pp. 1–8.
Photovoltaic Technologies Based on Performance, Cost and Space
[33] “National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research.” [Online].
Requirement: Strategy for Selection and Application,” International
Available: http://www.niwa.co.nz/our-services/online-services/solarview
Journal of Green Energy, 2015.
[34] M. Ropp, J. Newmiller, C. Whitaker, and B. Norris, “Review of potential
[9] S. Darie, “Guidelines for large photovoltaic system integration,” in
problems and utility concerns arising from high penetration levels of
Transmission and Distribution Conference and Exposition (T&D), 2012
photovoltaics in distribution systems,” in 2008 33rd IEEE Photovolatic
IEEE PES. IEEE, 2012, pp. 1–6.
Specialists Conference, 2008.
[10] “IEEE Application Guide for IEEE Std 1547TM, IEEE Standard for [35] Y. Liu, J. Bebic, B. Kroposki, J. De Bedout, and W. Ren, “Distribution
Interconnecting Distributed Resources with Electric Power Systems ,” system voltage performance analysis for high-penetration PV,” in Energy
2008. 2030 Conference, 2008. ENERGY 2008. IEEE. IEEE, 2008, pp. 1–8.
[11] D. C. Jordan and S. R. Kurtz, “Photovoltaic degradation rates—an an-
alytical review,” Progress in photovoltaics: Research and Applications,
vol. 21, no. 1, pp. 12–29, 2013.
[12] D. Akinyele and R. Rayudu, “Community-based hybrid electricity
supply system: A practical and comparative approach,” Applied Energy,
vol. 171, pp. 608–628, 2016.
[13] S. Weckx, C. Gonzalez, and J. Driesen, “Reducing grid losses and volt-
age unbalance with PV inverters,” in PES General Meeting— Conference
& Exposition, 2014 IEEE. IEEE, 2014, pp. 1–5.
[14] R. Walling, R. Saint, R. Dugan, J. Burke, and L. Kojovic, “Summary
of Distributed Resources Impact on Power Delivery Systems,” Power
Delivery, IEEE Transactions on, vol. 23, no. 3, pp. 1636–1644, 2008.
[15] M. Emmanuel, R. Rayudu, and W. Seah, “Dispatchable distributed
energy resources for seamless integration into the smart grid,” IEEE
Smart Grid Newsletter, 2016.
[16] S. Solanki, V. Ramachandran, and J. Solanki, “Steady state analysis of
high penetration PV on utility distribution feeder,” in Transmission and
Distribution Conference and Exposition (T&amp;D), 2012 IEEE PES.
IEEE, 2012, pp. 1–6.
[17] F. Katiraei and J. Aguero, “Solar PV Integration Challenges,” Power
and Energy Magazine, IEEE, vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 62–71, 2011.
[18] F. Shahnia, R. Majumder, A. Ghosh, G. Ledwich, and F. Zare, “Sensitiv-
ity analysis of voltage imbalance in distribution networks with rooftop
PVs,” in Power and Energy Society General Meeting, 2010 IEEE. IEEE,
2010, pp. 1–8.
[19] W. Kersting, “Radial distribution test feeders,” Power Systems, IEEE
Transactions on, vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 975–985, 1991.
[20] W. H. Kersting, “Radial distribution test feeders,” in Power Engineering
Society Winter Meeting, 2001. IEEE, vol. 2. IEEE, 2001, pp. 908–912.
[21] R. Dugan, T. S. Key, and G. Ball, “Distributed resources standards,”
Industry Applications Magazine, IEEE, vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 27–34, 2006.
[22] M. H. Bollen and F. Hassan, Integration of distributed generation in the
power system. John wiley & sons, 2011, vol. 80.
[23] M. Begovic, I. Kim, D. Novosel, J. R. Aguero, and A. Rohatgi, “Inte-
gration of Photovoltaic Distributed Generation in the Power Distribution
Grid.” IEEE Computer Society, 2012, pp. 1977–1986.
[24] “IEEE Standard Test Procedure for Polyphase Induction Motors and
Generators ,” 2008.
[25] P. Juanuwattanakul and M. A. Masoum, “Analysis and comparison of
bus ranking indices for balanced and unbalanced three-phase distribution
networks,” in Universities Power Engineering Conference (AUPEC),
2011 21st Australasian. IEEE, 2011, pp. 1–5.
[26] “Transpower System Operator.” [Online]. Available: http://www.
systemoperator.co.nz/system-operations/published-data/load-graphs

14