730
2, May 1997
Distribution Feeder Reconfiguration For Operation Cost
Qin Zhou Dariush Shirmohammadi
Consultant Shir Consultants
San Francisco, California San Ramon, California
Abstract - This paper describes a new feeder
reconfiguration algorithm for the purpose of reducing the
operating cost in the real-time operation environment. The
methodology developed is a heuristic based approach. It
emphasizes on minimizing the cost of operation over a
specified time period rather than a fixed operating point.
The practical operating concerns of feeder reconfiguration
and the coordination with other distribution automation
applications are also addressed. The developed algorithm
has been implemented as a production grade software.
Test results on PG&E distribution feeders show that the
performance of this software is efficient and robust.
Keywords: distribution automation, feeder reconfiguration,
cost reduction, optimization, heuristic rules.
I. INTRODUCTION
Feeder reconfiguration entails altering the topological
structure of distribution feeders by changing the opedclose
status of the switches in these feeders under both normal
and abnormal operating conditions. The benefits of feeder
reconfiguration include restoring power to outaged
portion(s) of a feeder in a timely manner whch improves
the value of service to customers by reducing average
outage time, relieving of overloads on feeders by s h f i n g
load in real-time to adjacent feeders which could defer
capital expansion projects, and reducing resistive line
losses which could reduce the operating cost of a
distribution system. In this paper we present a
reconfiguration algorithm for reducing the operating cost of
distribution systems.
In recent years, considerable research has been conducted
in the area of loss minimization [l]. Most of these
algorithms are developed for reducing the feeder resistive
losses and they are basically planning tools. The following
important issues have not been fully addressed in the
previously published literature:
96 SM 512-4 PWRS A paper recommended and approved by the IEEE
Power System Engineering Committee of the IEEE Power Engineering
Society for presentation at the 1996 IEEHPES Summer Meeting, July 28
- August 1, 1996, 1996, in Denver, Colorado. Manuscript submitted
January 2, 1996; made available for printing May 17, 1996.
0885-8950/97/$10.00 0 1996 IEEE
IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, Vol. 12, No.
W.-H. Edwin Liu
Pacific Gas and Electric Company
San Francisco, California
0 Application to real-time operation environment.
0 Consideration of all operating constraints, such as
limit on the number of switching operations.
Reduction of operating cost over a specified time
period, which includes ensuring that a specific set of
switching operations that reduce losses at a fixed
operating point will not raise losses at a later time.
0 Consideration of the cost of switching operations and
the sequence of implementing switching operations.
0 Consideration of protection requirements.
0 Coordination with other distribution automation
functions.
The algorithm presented in this paper focuses on providing
an operation decision support tool. It focuses on
minimizing the cost of operation over a specified time
period rather than simply reducing losses for a fixed
operating point. The practical operating concerns of feeder
reconfiguration and the coordination with other distribution
automation applications are also addressed in the paper.
We developed a production grade software, named
FlRECON, based on the algorithm presented in this paper
and have implemented it for use with PG&E distribution
systems.
In the following we first present a brief description of the
state-of-the-art feeder reconfiguration techniques for loss
reduction.
II. STATE-OF-THE-ART
TECHNIQUES
Feeder reconfiguration for loss reduction entails finding a
series of opedclose switchmg operations to reduce the
resistive losses in primary distribution feeders. There have
been many papers written in this area. They can be
classified into the following categories:
0 Composite heuristics and optimization methods: A
well known method in this category was proposed by
Merlin and Back [2] and later modified by
Shirmohammadi and Hong_[3].. It ~ uses branch-and-
bound optimization technique along with practical
heuristics to find near optimum configuration for a
. distribution system.
Heuristic based methods: The heuristic based
attempt to find the optimum switching operations one
pair at a time. Each pair of opedclose switching
operations reduces certain amount of resistive losses.
These methods use empirical formulas to assess the
loss reduction associated with each switching operation
and introduce the rules to reduce the number of

candidate switching operations. A good example is the
algorithm developed by Civanlar and Grainger [4].
They use two well founded heuristic rules to select each
switching operation; 1) loss reduction can only be
attained if there is a s i m i c a n t voltage difference
across an open switch, 2) loss reduction will be
achieved if loads on the higher voltage drop side of the
open switch are transferred to the other side. An
empirical formula is used to evaluate the loss change
due to a pair of switching operations without running a
k l l power flow. Thus, the search process is very fast
and efficient.
,4rtificial intelligence (AI) based methods: In recent
years the AI techniques such as artificial neural
inetworks (ANN), genetic algorithms (GA) and expert
systems have been used to determine the distribution
system reconfiguration [5], [6], and [7]. The ANN is a
potential candidate for on-line applications because of
iits fast computational performance. The major
drawback is that it requires substantial amount of
accurate data for training and the training has to be
(conducted for each distribution network and the
;subsequent changes in the network must be accounted
€or, The GA methods can provide the solution which
is independent from the initial system configuration
lbut the computation speed is too slow to apply to large
!distribution systems. Expert system based approaches
'basically work similar to the heuristic based methods.
Although there have been extensive research work on the
issue: of loss minimization, it is still a rare practice to
operate switches in real-time purely for reducing network
resistive losses. This is because many important real-time
operation considerations, described earlier, are not fully
addressed by any of the family of methods described above.
In order to account for all considerations necessary for real-
time operating environment, we made the following choices
in thLe development of cost reduction algorithm:
Only consider the operation of remote-controlled
switches.
Consider all the relevant operating constraints such as
limit on the number of switching operations.
Aim for minimizing the cost of system operation over a
time period rather than minimizing resistive losses for
a fixed operating point.
0 Verm the solution by a real-time relay coordination
program to ensure proper protection for the new
configuration.
III. METHODOLOGY
Cost reduction due to an operdclose switching operation for
the time period T can be calculated as,
AC = -jc"(t)AP(t)dt-(CSo
0 +CS,) (1)
73 1
AC : cost change due to an opedclose switching
operation ($)
ckwh( t ): cost of energy ($/kwh) for time t
T: time period defined by the operator during which
no further switching operations will be carried out
(hour)
AP( t ): loss change (kw) for time t
CSo: operating cost of closing an open switch ($)
CS, : operating cost of opening a closed switch ($)
The discrete version of (1) is:
N
AC = - 2 C j k W h h p j - (CS, + CS,) (2)
j=1
Herej means the j t h time interval.
According to reference [4] the loss change, A P ( t ) , due to
an opedclose switching operation can be estimated as,
D set of nodes that are disconnected from one feeder
and connected to another feeder
Rloop sum of the resistance in the path of the loop
formed when the normally open switch is closed
4 nodal current injection of ith node
m starting node number of normally open switch
n end node number of normally open switch
E, component of resistive node voltage drop at node
m
E, component of resistive node voltage drop at node n
w.1, *, 1.1
real part, complex conjugate, and magnitude
operators, respectively
The resistive node voltage drop is obtained as,
E=RI (4)
Where,
E is the vector of resistive node voltage drops
I is the vector of nodal current injections
R is the real part of node impedance matrix
Thus, the loss change at any time intemal j, A P j , will be,
(5)
where AT is the length of time interval. By substituting
( 5 ) into (2) we can calculate the cost change due to an
opedclose switching operation for the time period T.
Overall Cost Reduction Algorithm:
The framework of cost reduction module consists of the
following steps. In a distribution feeder system consisting
many normally closed and normally open switches:
1. Check the limit on the number of switching operations
for each switch. If the number of switching operations
of switch k carried out in the last H hours (where H is
specified by the operator) has reached the limit of
~
732
switching operations for that switch discard this switch
from further consideration.
2. Perform some topology processing:
0 I d e n m normally closed switches "correlated" to
each normally open switch (here "correlated"
means that those closed switches are in the loop(s)
formed by closing a normally open switch).
0 Determine the capacity margin of each normally
open switch.
3. Select one candidate opedclose switching operation.
The selection of opedclose switching operation
involves four steps:
a) Identlfy normally open switch candidates for
closing:
0 Divide the time period T into N equivalent
intervals AT and run power flow for each
interval based on the load forecast
information.
0 For each normally open switch k and each
time interval j Q=1,2, ..., N), calculate resistive
node voltage drops EA and E,' based on (4).
0 Sum resistive node voltage drops of open
switch k over these N intervals as follows:
then ignore this normally open switch k from
further consideration. E, is the tolerance
defined by operator. (See Appendix B for
heuristic rules applied for the above
elimination.)
Evaluate maximum possible cost saving for
each remaining normally open switch
candidate: The approximate maximum loss
reduction corresponding to switch k in time
interval j could be derived from (5) whch is
(see Appendix A for derivation):
"loop
The minimum switching cost of open switch k
and its correlated closed switch is:
CSo, + MinCSc (7)
CSek is the switching cost of the normally
open switch k and MinCSc is the minimum
switching cost of those closed switches which
are in the loop formed by closing the normally
open switch k. Substituting (6) and (7) into
(2), the maximum cost reduction
corresponding to this normally open switch k
is:
AC"k
N
= -CcjhhAPjm"k - (CSOt+ hfincs,) (8)
i for operating constraints violation for every time
If ACm"r I0, ignore this open switch k
Repeat above steps for all normally open switches
to narrow down the selection of normally open
switch candidates. All remaining normally open
switches are candidates for closing. If all normally
open switches are eliminated at this stage, then go
to step 7.
For each open switch candidate, eliminate
undesirable closed switches from consideration:
For each normally open switch candidate k
identified in step 3a:
then ignore the closed switches on the nth
node side of switch k.
then ignore the closed switches on the mth
node side of switch k.
(See Appendix B for heuristic rules applied for the
above elimination.) The remaining closed
switches will be the candidates for opening when
we close normally open switch k.
Identlfy and rank all remaining opedclose options
in reducing value of AC: For all available
opedclose switching options consisting of the
combinations of all candidates of open switches
identifed in 3a and their correlated candidates oi
closed switches identlfied in 3b:
Calculate loss reduction for each time
interval via (5);
Calculate cost reduction AC over the entire
time period T via (2);
Rank all open/close options in reducing value
of AC.
If all AC values of these opedclose switching
options are negative, then there is no more cost
reduction and go to step 7.
Select the opedclose switching option with
maximum cost reduction:
Select the opedclose switching option with
maximum cost reduction from the list
identlfied in 3c:
AC"" = max(AC,,AC?, ..., AC,, ...) (9)
0 Check for capacity constraints violations: For
the selected opedclose switching option, if the
total load being transferred is bigger than the
capacity margin of the selected open switch,
then discard this switching option and select
the switching option with next highest cost
4.
. reduction.
If no switch option is available, go to step 7.
Run power flow for new system configuration tocheck
~

interval. If operating constraints violations exist, go to
step 6.
5 . Check the limit on the total number of switching
operations. Mathematically they can be shown as,
CLrLm?
k
C L the total number of switching operations.
k
Lm the limit of the overall number of switching
operations.
If the answer is yes, then no more switching operation
is allowed, go to step 7; otherwise go to step 2.
6. Discard the selected switching option and go to step 3d
to pick up the opedclose switching option
corresponding to the next highest cost reduction.
7. Optimal solution achieved. The total cost reduction of
next T hours after completing all switching operations
is:
N 0
ACtotal = - C C J h h P J
J=1
- csk
k EM
(10)
Where,
M: Set of switches whose status should be altered
CS, : cost of operating switch k
: loss reduction for time interval j (it is the
difference between the resistive losses of new
system configuration after completing all
switching operations and the losses of original
system configuration. It is calculated by
running power flow for each time interval j.)
T, N and cihh are defined as before.
N.NUMERICAL RESULTS
The cost reduction algorithm presented here was used to
develop production grade FRECON program which was
successfully tested on many PG&E’s distribution systems.
The following is only one example of the test results.
733
cost reduction 24.89 !$
Selected opedclose operation No. 2:
loss reduction 110.57 kwh
cost reduction 6.85 $
Selected opedclose operation No. 3 :
No opcdclose option can reduce the system operation
cost ! !
Final optimal solution:
total loss reduction : 446.75 kwh
total cost reduction : 3 1.74 $
The test results show that,
Cost reduction can be achieved by two pairs of
switching operations and no more switching pair can
reduce the cost any further.
The total loss reduction is 446.75 kwh after conducting
the switching operations recommended by the cost
reduction program. The total loss reduction is 8.66%
which is significant.
0 The cost reduction value for this test system is only
$31.74 for the 24 hours period. However, the size of
test feeders are relatively small. Considering that there
are around three thousand feeders in PG&E
distribution systems, the total cost reduction by
conducting the feeder reconfiguration could be
significant.
0 The developed algorithm is computationally efficient.
For the test system above, it took less than 15 seconds
on a SUN SPARClO workstation to find the solution.
This elapsed time includes the I/O time, solution
search and repeatedly running power flow for all the
24 hours after implementing each pair of switching
operations.
V. IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES

Sequence of Implementing the Switching Operations

The test system consists of two 12kv feeders with 920 line
After cost reduction program determines the optimal
sec1:ions and 55 switches, which can be operated for the cost
solution, which is a set of opedclose switching operations,
reduction purpose, with peak load of 4.85MVA over a 24
it is necessary to find a sequence for implementing the
houw period. The cost reduction algorithm picks up the
switching operations. This is necessary since at any
opedclose switching pairs one by one based on the
intermediate step of switching implementation we must
heuristic rules described in section 111. The limit of overall
guarantee that there are no major operating constraints
number of switching operations is 6 over the 24 hour time
violations. The answer is definitely not trivial. We have
period. The cost reduction values were evaluated based on
developed an algorithm to deal with this problem. The
the assumption that the cost of energy is $0.08 per kilowatt
objective of this algorithm is to find the sequence of
hour and the cost of performing switching operation is
switching operations for implementing the optimal solution
$1.00 per switching operation (remember that only remote-
of cost reduction program. The principles we used for
controlled switches are considered here). The test results
developing this algorithm are:
of running the cost reduction program for this 2 feeder
0 Always close an open switch first then open a closed
systems are shown as follows:
switch to ensure continued service during the
implementation of switching operations.
Selected opedclose operation No. 1:
loss reduction 336.18 kwh
~
734
0 The open switch that is to be closed next should create
the lowest possible loop current (should have the
lowest voltage difference across its terminals). This
will ensure minimum disturbance during the switching
operations sequence.
0 Since no temporary outages are allowed during the
reconfiguration, the final sequence of switchmg
operations may be a subset of operations determined in
the original optimal solution. Also the cost of
operating bypass switches, if there are any, must be
accounted for. Thus, the final cost reduction value
after implementing the sequence of switching
operations may be less than the expected one from the
original optimal solution.
The following are the major steps of the algorithm for
implementing the switching operations:
s1. Input the selected switching operations as determined
by the cost reduction algorithm.
s2. Select an openklose switch pair based on the following
logic;
0 The switch to be closed should result in lowest
possible loop current;
0 The switch to be opened should create no
operating constraints violations.
s3. Simulate the switch closing for the selected switch pair
and check for constraints violations. There are two
kinds of constraints that should be specifically checked,
0 Overloads in the loop formed by the switch
closing;
0 Load break capability of the switch that should be
opened.
s4. Identify the bypass switch candidates if constraints
violations exist in step S3.
s5. Select the bypass switch if selected closed switch
cannot be opened due to the lack of load break
capability. The selected bypass switch must be able to
0 relieve the constraints violations generated in step
s3;
0 ensure no new constraints violations are generated
due to the switching operations of the bypass
switch.
S6. Go to step S2 to select next switch pair or finish the
sequence search. The sequence search will be
terminated if
0 all selected switching operations as determined by
the cost reduction algorithm have been accounted
for, or;
0 no switching operations can be further considered
because of the constraints violations.
Protection Considerations
From system protection point of view the viability of new
network configuration recommended by cost reduction
program must be verified to assure that the new
configuration can be fully protected by the relay devices.
The following are the major steps in the coordination of
cost reduction program with relay coordination program
[lo]:
P1. Send the following data to relay coordination program:
0 List of recommended switchmg operations.
0 Power flow outputs of the recommended new
system configuration.
P2. Request from the relay coordination program whether
the recommended switching operations are acceptable
from protection point of view:
0 If the recommended switching operations are
acceptable, the cost reduction program has
achieved the final solution and it shall pass the
results to operator for his action.
If the recommended switching operations are not
acceptable, the cost reduction program should
discard the selected solution and start a new
solution iteration at the next time interval.
VL CONCLUSIONS
A new feeder reconfiguration algorithm for cost reduction
has been developed and tested as part of the distribution
automation systems in PG&E. It provides an operating
decision support tool for the real-time operation
environment but could also be used as a planning tool. Its
function is to find a series of opedclose switching
operations to reduce the resistive losses in primary
distribution feeders and hence reduce the cost of system
operation. The methodology used for cost reduction is
heuristic. The algorithm emphasizes timely finding of the
solution with as small a number of switching operations as
possible. Most practical operating concerns for changing
the configuration of the feeder as well as coordination with
other distribution automation applications such as relay
coordination are also addressed. The test results show that
the performance of the developed algorithm is efficient and
robust.
VU. ACKNOWLE
The authors would like to thank Dr. Carol Cheng and Mr.
Ken Lau of PG&E for their useful comments in the
development and implementation of t h s software package.
PG&E’s R&D department funded the development of the
proposed algorithms and the FRECON software program.
VIE. NCES
R.J. S d i , M.M.A. Salama, A.Y. Chakani, “A survey of the
state of the art in distribution system reconfiguration for
system loss reduction,” Electric Power Systems Research 3 1
(1994), pp. 61-70.
A. Merlin, H. Back, “Search for a Minimal-Loss Operating
Tree Configuration for an Urban Power Dishbution
System,” Proc. ofPSCC. Cambridge 1975, Paper 1.2/6.
D. Shirmohammadi, H. Wayne Hong, “Reconfiguration of
electric distribution networks for resistive losses reduction,”
 735
IEEE Transaction on Power Delivery, April 1989, pp. 1402-
1498. Appendix A Derivation of Equation (6)
[4] S. Civanlar, J.J. Grainger, H. Yin, S.S. Lee, “Distribution In equation (9,assume E l i is a continuous real variable, and
itD
feeder reconfiguration for loss reduction,” IEEE Trans.
E n ,Em are real numbers, we have,
Power Delivery, 3 (1988), pp. 1217-1223.
[5] K. Kim, Y. KO and K. H. Hung, “Artificial neural network
based feeder reconfiguration for loss reduction in distribution
systems,” IEEE Trans. Power Delivery, 8 (1993) 1356-1366.
[6] K. Nara, T. Satoh and M. Kitagawa, “Distribution system
Take the derivative of AP with respect to Ii and let it equal to
ED
loss minimum re-configuration by genetic algorithm,” proc. zero, then
3rd Symp. Expert systems application to Power System
(ESAPS).Tokyo and Kobe, Japan, 1991, pp. 724-730. XIi = -_E, _
-E._
i d
[7] T. Taylor and D. Lubkeman, “Implementation of heuristic Rim,
search strategies for distribution feeder reconfiguration,” Substitute (A2)into (Al), the maximum loss change of AP is:
IEEE Trans. Power Delivery, 5 (1990) 239-246.
[SI Mesut E. Baran, F. F. Wu, ‘Wetwork reconfguralion in (A31
distribution systems for loss reduction and load balancing,”
IEEE Trans. Power Delivery, 4 (1989) 1401-1407. Rk“
[9] J.C. Wang, H. D. Chiang, G. R. Darling, “ An efficient which is equation (6).
algorithm for real-time network reconfiguration in large scale
unbalanced distribution systems,” PICA 1995, pp. 510-516. Appendix B
[lo] FSoudi and J. Yee,“How distribution automation and According to reference [3], loss change, h P ( t ) , due to an
protection systems can complement each other,” proceeding opedclose switching operation can be calculated as,
of the 21st annual western protective relay conference,
Spokane, WA, Oct. 1994.
Based on this equation, heuristic rules may be developed for
Qin Zhou (M’92) received his B.S. and M.S. in Electrical
selecting most suitable switching operations. For example, two
Engineering from Tsinghua University in Beijing, China in 1983
heuristic rules can be applied for identifyingnormally open switch
and 1986 respectively, his Ph.D. in Electrical Engineering from
candidates and eliminating undesired closed switches from
the Iowa State University in 1992. Between 1986 and 1989, he
consideration for each open switch candidate. These two heuristic
work.ed as a lecturer in the Dept. of Electrical Engineering,
rules are:
Tsinjghua University. Since 1992 he works as a consultant at If for an open switch candidate E, and En are close to each
Pacilic Gas and Electric Company (PG&E). Qin Zhou is a
other at all time intervals in the time period T, then any
member of the Tau Beta Pi Honor Society.
opedclose switching operation associated with this open
switch may not result in a significant loss reduction due to
Dariush Shirmohammadi (SM89) is the principal consultant
the domination of the second item of equation (Bl). Thus,
and founder of Shir Consultants. He received his B.Sc. in
we can remove this normally open switch from further
Eleciincal Engineering from Sharif University of Technology in
considerations.
1975’and M.A.Sc. and Ph.D. in Electrical Engineering from the
The loss reduction can be obtained only by transferring loads
University of Toronto in 1978 and 1982 respectively. Between
from the side of the normally open switch with higher
1977‘and 1979, he worked in Hydro Quebec Institute of Research
resistive node voltage drop to the side of the switch with
(IREQ) on the subject of external insulation. Between 1982 and
lower resistive node voltage drop because only in this case
1985, he worked in Ontario Hydro on the development and
the change in losses could be negative. Thus, we do not need
implementation of the EMTP. Between 1985 and 1995 he
to consider those closed switches on the side of open switch
worked in the Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) where
with lower resistive node voltage drop.
his last position was the Director of Energy Systems Automation
group responsible for developing and implementing distribution
automation technologies. Dariush is a registered Professional
Engineer in the Province of Ontario, Canada.

Wemi-hsiung Edwin Liu (SM’94) received his B.S. degree from

National Taiwan University in 1981. He received his M.S. degree
in 1’384 and Ph.D. degree in 1987 both from the University of
California, Berkeley, in Electrical Engineering and Computer
Scieinces. From 1987 to 1991, he worked for Empros Systems
International. He has been with PG&E since July 1991 where he
is responsible for several R&D projects. Dr. Liu also taught
graduate courses in San Francisco State University.