IEEE Transactions  on Power Delivery,  Vol.  4,  No.  2, April  1989 
1401 
NETWORK RECONFIGURATION IN DISTRIBUTION SYSTEMS 
FOR LOSS REDUCTION AND LOAD BALANCING 
M e w  E. Baran 
Felix F. Wu 
Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Sciences 
University of California, Berkeley 
Berkeley, CA 94720 
Abstract - Network reconfiguration in distribution systems is realized by 
changing the status of sectionalizing switches, and is usually done for loss 
reduction or for load balancing in the system.  In this paper, general for- 
mulation and solution methods are proposed for these problems.  In net- 
work reconfiguration for loss reduction, the solution involves a search over 
relevant radial configurations.  To aid the search, two approximate power 
flow methods with varying degree of accuracy have been developed.  The 
methods are computationally attractive  and in general give conservative 
estimates of loss reduction.  For load balancing, a load balance index is 
defined and it is shown that the proposed solution method for loss reduc- 
tion can also be used for load balancing.  Test results are included to show 
the performance of the proposed method. 
Keywords: distribution automation, distribution system operation, distri- 
bution system planning, power flow analysis, combinatorial optimization. 
I.  INTRODUCTION 
j 
In primary distribution systems, sectionalizing switches are used for 
both  protection, to isolate  a fault,  and  for configuration management, to 
reconfigure the network. Fig.1 shows a schematic diagram of a simplified 
primary  circuit  of  a  distribution  system  together  with  sectionalizing 
switches. 
'7 
CB7 
-
 
'
-
-
U -  -
U" 
1 
ss 2 
I 
Figure 1: Schematic diagram of a primary circuit of a distribution system 
In the  figure. load points, where the distribution transformers are tapped 
off from the primary circuit, is marked by dots, " 0 ". As also shown in the 
figure, there  are two  types  of  switches in the  system:  normally  closed 
switches connecting the line sections (CB1 - CB6 ), and normally  open 
switches on the tie-lines connecting either two primary feeders (CB7), or 
two substations (CB8), or loop-type laterals (CB9). 
Distribution systems are normally operated as radial networks; how- 
ever, configuration is changed during operation by changing the state of 
some sectionalizing switches.  For example, in Fig.1,  switches CB7  and 
CB8 can be closed and CB3 and CB6 can be opened to transfer load from 
one feeder to another. 
Especially with the introduction of remote control capability to the 
switches, on-line configuration management become an important part of 
A paper  recommended  and approved 
88  SM 556-3 
by  the IEEE  Transmission and Distribution Committee 
of  the IEEE  Power Engineering Society for presentat- 
ion at  the IEEE/PES  1988  Summer Meeting,  Portland, 
Oregon,  July 24 - 29,  1988. 
Manuscript  submitted 
February 1 ,   1988;  available for printing 
Xay 4,  1988. 
distribution automation.  An important operation problem in configuration 
management  is  network  reconfiguration.  As the operating  conditions 
change, the network is reconfigured for two purposes: (i) to reduce the sys- 
tem power loss, (ii) to relieve the overloads in the network.  We will refer 
to the first problem as network reconfiguration for loss reduction and the 
second  as load  balancing.  Another configuration management operation 
involves the restoration of service to as many costumers as possible during 
a restorative state following a fault.  This problem is called service restora- 
tion apd can be treated as a special load balancing problem.  The network 
reconfiguration for loss reduction can also be used in planning studies with 
a different intelpretation; namely, to decide through which feeders the new 
customers are to be supplied. 
The early studies on the network reconfiguration were directed to the 
planning stage [3-51.  In planning, the main objective is to  minimize the 
cost of construction.  An  early work on network  reconfiguration for loss 
reduction is presented by A. Merlyn [6].  His solution scheme starts with a 
meshed  distribution  system obtained by  considering all switches closed 
and  then the switches are opened successively to eliminate the loops.  An 
equivalent  linear  resistive  network  model  is  used  to  determine  the 
branches to be opened.  In a study done by  Ross et al. [7], two different 
search algorithms  are  giventor feeder  reconfiguration.  They  developed 
some indices to measure the degree of constraint violations and used them 
to obtain a feasible point when the operation point is not feasible.  These 
indices are also used to check the optimality of the solution for power loss 
reduction.  Recently,  Civanlar  et  al.  [lo] presented  a  computatiody 
attractive  solution  procedure  for power  loss reduction through network 
reconfiguration. A simple formula was derived based on some simplifying 
assumptions to calculate the loss reduction as a result of  a load transfer 
between two feeders. 
In [7], a detailed recipe for service restoration is given by using the 
indices  developed  for feasibility.  In  [8].  Castro et  al.  proposed  simple 
search techniques  for sewice restoration  and  load balancing considering 
data base and implementation requirements for on-line distribution auto- 
mation  applications.  Castro and Franca  [9] recently proposed  modified 
search  algorithms  for  service  restoration  and  for  load  balancing.  A 
modified Fast Decoupled Load Flow is used to check the operating con- 
straints.  Aoki  et al.  proposed  more detailed  search methods for service 
restoration and feeder load balancing in [ll] and  [12] respectively.  They 
consider  the capacity  and  voltage  constraints  and  use  an  approximate 
power  flow  solution  algorithm to  determine the loads  to  be  transferred 
between the two feeders/transformers. 
In this paper, we consider the network  reconfiguration problem  for 
both loss reduction and load balancing.  We follow the solution approach 
proposed  by  Civanlar et al.  However, here  we  introduce two  different 
methods, with varying degree of accuracy, to approximate power flow in 
the  system  after  a  losd  transfer  between  two  substations,  feeders,  or 
laterals.  The methods make  use  of  a  new  set of  power  flow equations 
which  have  been developed specially for radial distribution  feeders and 
used in the capacitor placement problem [13]. We use these approximate 
power Bow  methods to estimate both loss reduction and load balance  in 
the  system.  Because reactive power flows are explicitly included in the 
equations, the methods can also be used for systems that are not well com- 
pensated. 
The organization of the rest of the paper is as follows.  A general for- 
mulation of the problem is given in the next section and  a general search 
algorithm is presented in  section  3.  In section 4  and  5. the  estimation 
methods for loss reduction and load balance are given respectively.  The 
proposed  methods have been programmed  and  tested and  the  results are 
given in section 6. Conclusions are given in section 7. 
0885-8977/89/04OO- 140 1 $0 1 .oO 0 1989 IEEE 
1402 
II. FORMULATION OF THE PROBLEM 
In  this section, the network reconfiguration problems for both loss 
reduction  and  load  balancing  are  formulated  and  their  similarities  are 
pointed out. 
2.1  Problem Statement 
To simplify the presentation, we will represent the system on a per 
phase  basis  and  the loads  along a  feeder  section as constant P,Q loads 
placed at the end of the lies.  We also assume that every switch is associ- 
ated with a line in the system.  For example, we assume that the system of 
Fig.1 can be translated to an equivalent network shown in Fig.2. 
ss1 m 
Figure 2: One line diagram of a small distribution system 
In the figure, solid branches represent the lines that are in service and con- 
stitute the base radial configuration. Dotted branches (branches 20,2 1,22) 
represent the lines with open switches. 
The base  network  can  be  reconfigured  by  first  closing  an  open 
branch, say branch 21 in the figux.  Since this switching will create a loop 
in the system, (composed of branches 1,2,3,21, 11, 10,9,8,7, and 15), a 
branch in the loop containing a switch has to be opened, say branch 7, to 
restore the radial structure of the system.  As a result of this switching, the 
loads between the branches 7-1 1 will be transferred from one feeder to the 
Other.  We  will use the same terminology used in [7] and call this basic 
switching operation a  brunch exchange  between branches 21 and 7. In 
general,  as  illustrated  in  the  introduction,  more  complex  switching 
schemes are possible;  we  will simulate  such cases by  applying several 
branch exchanges successively. 
The load transfer between different substations can be simulated by 
branch-exchange type switchings too. In this case, substation nodes (node 
SSI and SS2 in the figure) will be considered as a common node although 
they are not the same node.  The methods to be presented in this paper can 
handle both cases.  This is an important property of the proposed methods. 
The network rewnfiguration problems  for loss reduction and  load 
balancing involve the  same type  of  operation, namely  the load  transfer 
between the feeders or substations by changing the positions of switches. 
They  only  differ in  their objective.  Other factors,  such  as the  voltage 
profile of the system, capacities of the IinWtransformers, reliability con- 
straints can be considered as constraints. 
To  state  these  problems  as optimization  pmblems,  note  that  the 
radial configuration corresponds to a "spanning tree" of a graph represent- 
ing the network topology.  Thus, we have a so-called  minimal spanning 
tree problem  which can be stated as follows.  Given a graph, 6nd a span- 
ning tree such that the objective function is minimized while the following 
constraints are satisfied: (i) voltage constraints, (ii) capacity constrains of 
liies/transformers.  (iii) reliability constraints. 
This is  a  combinatorial  optimization  problem  since  the  solution 
involves the consideration of all possible spanning tms. 
2.2  Power Flow Equations 
To calculate the terms in optimization problem defined in the previous 
section, we will use a set of power flow equations that are structurally rich 
and  conducive  to  computationally  efficient  solution  schemes  [13].  To 
illustrate them, consider the radial network in Fig.3. 
...... T'1k..'....- 
(-* 
i+ 1 
i-1 
i 
mi 
P,.Q, 
-P;fQr-i 
i+i*Qi+i 
pn 'Qn 
PL ,Qti 
Figure 3 : One line diagram of a radial network 
We represent the lines with impedances zl = r, + jx, , and loads as constant 
power sinks, SL =PL + jQL . 
Power flow in a radial distribution network canhe described by a set of 
recursive equations, called D i s t F h  branch equatwns , that use the real 
power,  reactive  power,  and voltage  magnitude  at  the  sendhg end  of  a 
branch  -  Pi,Qi,Vi  respectively  to  express  the  same  quantities  at  the 
receiving end of the branch as follows. 
Pi,] =pi - ri - - "LI+I 
p .2+Q  2 
Vi' 
VLl = Vi2 - 2(ri Pi + xi Q i )  + (r? + x?)- 
P?+Qi' 
Viz 
(1.i) 
(1 .iii) 
Hence,  if  P o  .Qo , Vo at  the  Erst  node  of  the network  is  known  or 
estimated, then the same quantities at the other nodes can be calculated by 
applying the above branch equations successively.  We shall =fer  to this 
procedure as a forward update. 
DistFlow branch equations can be written backward too. i.e.,  by using 
the real power, reactive power, and the voltage magnitude at the receiving 
end of a branch, P i ,  Q,, Vi  to express the same quantities at the sending 
end of the branch.  The result is the following recursive equations, called 
the backward branch equations, 
Pl-l=Pl + f i T + P P ,
pl'2+Q,2 
v, 
 
(2.i) 
(2.ii) 
where, PI' = Pi + Pti  , Q; = Q, + QL; . 
Similar  to  forward update,  a  backward  update  can  be defined: start 
updating  from  the  last  node  of  the network  assuming  the  variables 
Pn , Qn , Vn at that point are given and proceed backwards calculating the 
same quantities at the other nodes by  applying Eq.(2) successively. Updat- 
ing process ends at the first node (node 0) and will provide the new esti- 
mate of the power injections into the network, PO .Qp 
Note that by  applying backward and  forward update schemes succes- 
sively one can get a power flow solution as explained in [131. 
2 3   Calculation of the Objective Terms 
. 
Having a network model, now  we  can express the power loss and 
measure the load balance in the system in terms of system variables. 
For loss reduction, the objective is to minimize the total i2r losses in 
the system, which can be calculated as follows. 
(3) 
This will be the objective function, cp of network reconfiguration for loss 
reduction. 
For load balancing,  we  will use  the  ratio of complex power at the 
sending end of a branch, SI  over its kVA capacity, Si""  as a measure of 
how much that branch is loaded.  The branch can be a transformer. a tie- 
line with a sectionaliiing switch or simply a line section.  Then we define 
the load 'balance index for the whole system as the sum of these measures, 
i.e., 
This will be the objective function, cb  of load balancing. 
As noted before, the two problems are similar.  They both require the 
same  data  (system  parameters  and  load)  and  load  flow  calculation  to 
evaluate the objectives for a given network topology. 
III. A SEARCH METHOD USING BRANCH EXCHANGES 
The radial distribution network reconfiguration problems are formu- 
lated  as combinatorial,  nonlinear optimization  problems  in the previous 
section.  The solution involves the selection, among all possible m s ,  of 
the best feasible one (i.e.,  the one that has an operating point satisfying the 
constraints and minimizing the objective).  Of course, a search examining 
all possible spanning trees will give the solution, but it would be computa- 
tionally formidable; since, for one thing, the number of possible spanning 
trees  that  can  be  generated by  branch exchanges will  be  exhaustive  for 
practical size problems, and another, examining a spanning tree requires a 
power  flow  solution  of  the  corresponding  system  to  determine 
the associated objective.  Therefore, an efficient search scheme needs to be 
developed.  In  this  section,  we  introduce  a  simple,  heuristic  solution 
method  to  search over relevant  spanning trees systematically  by  using 
branch exchanges. 
As  exemplified in  the  previous  section, branch  exchanges can  be 
used to create relevant spanning trees starting from a base spanning tree. 
In general, given a spanning tree To. we associate a loop with every open 
branch in the network by considering as if the branch were closed.  Fig.4 
shows  such  a  loop  associated with  open  branch  b  . Branch exchange 
creates a new tree by closing an open branch, @ranch b in the figure) and 
by opening a closed branch in the loop (say branch m in the figure). 
Figure 4: The loop associated with open branch b 
The basic idea of  the  search scheme using branch exchanges is to 
start with a (feasible) tree and then create new ones successively by imple- 
menting  one  branch-exchange  at  a  time.  At  each  level,  the  branch- 
exchange to be implemented is chosen to be the “best one“ (the one that 
improves the  objective  function the  most  without  any  constraint  viola- 
tions) among all the possible trees (children) that can be generated f ”  
the current  incumbent spanning tree (parent)  by branch exchanges.  The 
method can be described as an algorithm with the following steps. 
Step 1: Given a feasible tree To (parent), 
run a Power Flow to determine the operating point. 
Step 2: Examine all the children of the parent as follows. 
For each open branch b 
- find  a new candidate tree, T by 
- identifying the loop 
- deciding on the branch, m to  be removed 
- for the candidate W. T 
- calculate the reduction in objective, Aq,,,, 
Step 3: Sort the children (trees examined) by using Ach  ‘s 
Step 4: Find the tree T* which has the greatest Ach  z 0 
Step 5: If there is such a T’ , 
and satisfies the feasibility constraints. 
then choose T’ as To and go to step 1;  else stop. 
We note the following comments about the search. 
0  This search does not examine all the possible mes and hence the solu- 
tion will be locally optimal. 
0  Computational efficiency of this algorithm hinges on two things; the 
selection  of  branch n  to  be  opened,  since  it eventually  effects the 
number of searches to be performed, and the calculation of objective 
terms, AC’S , for each calculation requires a new power flow solution. 
Although  the  power  flow  solution  can  be  obtained  by  DiszFfow 
efficiently, nevertheless, it is desirable to be able to estimate the power 
flows  faster  without  actually  running  a  DistFlow  for  each  branch 
exchange considered.  This will reduce the DistFlow solutions to one 
for each search level (iteration). 
0  The estimated power flows a~ used in ranking open branches.  There- 
fore. emrs in estimated figures may lead to a different search than that 
of using an exact power flow. 
In the next section, two different power flow approximation methods, 
with varying degree of accuracy, ye given for loss reduction.  In section 5, 
it is shown that these methods can also be used for load balancing. 
1403 
IV.  APPROXIMATE POWER FLOW METHODS 
FOR POWER LOSS ESTIMATION 
In this section, we present two methods to determine the power flow in 
a radial distribution system approximately.  The methods will be used to 
estimate the power loss reduction due to a branch exchange. 
4.1  Method 1: Simplified DistFlow Method 
Estimation of Power Flow 
We can simplify the DistFlow branch equations, Eq.(l) by noting that 
the quadratic terms in the  equations represent the losses on the branches 
and hence they  much smaller than the branch power terms Pi  and Qi . 
Therefore, by dropping these second order terms we can get a new set of 
branch equations of the following form. 
Pi+l =Pi - PG+l 
Q i + l =   Q, - QG+I 
V&  = Vi2 - 2(ri Pi +xi Qi) 
(5.i) 
(5.ii) 
(5.iii) 
Since the network is radial, the solution for the simplified D i m o w  q u a -  
tions  can be  obtained easily;  for a radial  network of the type shown in 
Fig.3, the solution is of the following form. 
n 
Q i + l =  
QLk 
(6.i) 
(6.ii) 
k=’+2 
Vi:l  = Vi2 - 2(ri Pi  +xi Qi) 
(6.iii) 
We  will call  Eq.(6)  simplifred DistFlaw  equations  and  use them  in this 
section for power flow solution of a given network configuration. 
The power loss on a branch can now be approximated as 
where, we have used the fact that Vi2 = 1 p.u. Then the total system loss is 
simply the sum of all branch losses, i.e., 
n-1 
0 = 
ri(P?+Q?) 
p.u. 
(8) 
(7) 
1 4  
Estimation of Power Loss Reduction due to a Branch Exchange 
Now  consider  the branch  exchange  between  branches  b  (onginally 
open) and  m (originally closed) in Fig.4.  As a result of  the simplifying 
assumptions  made  above, power flow  will  change only  in the branches 
constituting the loop shown in the figure.  Let the branches in the loop that 
extends between nodes 0 ,  . . . , k-1  and k be denoted by the set L  and the 
ones on the other side ( 0 , .  . . ,n-1.n  and k )by the the set R. Then.  as 
shown in Appendix A, power loss reduction due to this branch exchange 
can be calculated as 
U ,  -  = 2p,(CrlPI - C . r ~ P ~ ) + 2 Q m ( ~ r ~ Q l  
- Cr1Ql) 
IcR 
(9) 
I s R  
I P L  
leL 
-(P,’+Q:)[  C.  r~ 1 
I e R U  
Eq.(9) is a quadratic function of the power transfer P,,, , Q,,, , i.e., 
U-h(P,,,,Q,,J  = 2drp.P,,, + 2drq.Qm - tr. (P,’  + Q,’) 
(10) 
where, the coefficients drp , drq , tr  are independent of the branch m con- 
sidered  and  can be  calculated  by  using only the original branch  flows, 
PI , Ql. The relationship between the loss reduction ALP  and the power 
transfer @,Q) is illustrated in Fig.5  assuming P and Q are continuous vari- 
ables.  In the figure, the circle defined by ALP-b  = 0 divides th?  P-Q plane 
 (P ,Q) > 0 
into  two  regions  such  that  for any  point  inside  circle  m b
(positive loss reduction, i.e. losses are reduced), and for any points outside 
the  circle  U - b ( P , Q )  c 0  (negative  loss  reduction,  i.e.  losses  are 
increased). 
1404 
Figure 5 : Loss reduction as a function of power transfer 
This property of Eq.(lO)  can be used to avoid checking every branch 
around the  loop for branch  exchange.  Let  us  first consider the branch 
exchange  between  branches  b  and k  in  Fig.4.  and  call it  the nominal 
branch exchange.  The corresponding power transfer will be 9. Qk  and 
let this point (Pk ,Qk) be inside the circle on the P,Q plane in Fig.5.  Then 
the points corresponding to the other branch exchanges p i e  (Pk-1,Qk-I) 
in the figure) will be funher away from the origin on the P-Q plane than 
(Pk ,e,)  Since 9 - 1  > P k  and 
Qk . Therefore, We  have the following 
conclusions. 
O E F i k  c o then 
ALPM < O  
didate for branch exchange. 
. I f W i k   > O   then 
there is a branch in L  that can be a candidate for branch exchange and 
the branch to be opened should be the one that optimizes ALP-.  This 
can be checked by  star$g 
from branch k and searching the branches 
backward in L  until ALP*, is maximum. 
I  E L  andhencethertisnobranchinL thatcanbeacan- 
We have the following comments about the method. 
0  This method  is  efficient  computationally.  Both  the  calculation  of 
power loss terms. ALP and identification of branches to be exchanged 
I.equires only simple calculations. 
0  Accuracy  analysis of  the method  in  Appendix B shows that  a  weak 
bound  on  the  error  in  estimating  loss  reduction  around  the  loop, 
ep =ALP -ALP  is 
U-  0  + ALP - U- I O  ).  However, when the loss reduction 
where. fii and 6; denote the power losses on the branches in R and 
L  respectively after the branch exchange. 
The e m r  bounds inEq(l1) indicate that the estimate is conservative in 
the sense that when the loss reduction is large (ALP- 3 0). e m r  will 
tend to be positive, (i.e.,  ALP- > 0  --).  ALP -ALP- 2 0 ).  Similarly 
when the loss reduction is negative, e m r  will tend to be negative, (i.e., 
figures are small, the e m r  will be two sided.  This e m r  analysis shows 
that there may be some "misses," (i.e.,  a branch e x c h g e  with positive 
loss reduction may be identified as the one with negative loss reduc- 
tion)  and there may  be  some "mislabeling," (i.e.,  a branch exchange 
with negative loss reduction may be identified as the one with positive 
loss reduction). 
4.2  Method 2: Backward and Forward Update of DistFlow 
Power Flow Update 
The second method makes use of the backward and forward updates of 
DistFlow, introduced in section 2. to update power flow around the loop of 
a branch exchange.  For the nominal branch exchange b-k  of Fig.4.  the 
method comprises the following steps. 
Step 1: Backward Update 
Update the power flow mund  the loop by backward update starting 
from the nodes C  and n of the loop and by canying out the power and 
voltage updates separately (i.e.,  use Eq(2.i)  and Eq(2ii) with original 
voltages, Vi  to update the powers, and use Eq42.iii) to update the vol- 
tages).  Let the updated powers be 
and the voltage updates at the common node be $: 
and $; 
Step 2  Forward Update 
Compare the voltage differences at node o (difference between V,  and 
rid,, $;). 
If  the  voltage  difference  is  too  large  (larger  than  a 
predefined value. Emu), go through a forward update to ducf,the>mr 
as 
(this  time starting from the common node o and using V,  , P d ,  P, 
initial, given values and applying the forward update).  Let the updated 
powers be 
pi".di", i=ok+l,. . . ,k  ; pii",Q,", i=on+l,. . . ,n 
(13) 
Step 3: Correct the Power Estimate at the Coqmo?,Node 
P k  , P,  and P k  , FR" as power 
use the difference b e t w ~ ?  the 
mismatches and c o m t  P,  and Pok  by adding them the mismatches. 
i.e., 
1" P& =  + (p; -PJ 
.." 
;  P,  4;  + (P,  - P,  ) 
Details of development of this algorithm is given in Appendix C. 
Note  that  backward  and  forward  update  constitutes an itemtion  of 
power flow  solution using DistFlow branch equations. Here., we exploit 
the method by localizing it to the loop of branch exchange and performing 
a special iteration.  Therefore: 
(14) 
L" 
A. 
the method is computationally more. efficient than a full power flow, 
0  accuracy of the method will mainly depend on load transfer P k  , Qk . 
Calculation of Power Loss Reduction 
For power loss estimation, note that 
P o k  -Fo; = w k  + w L   ;  P, 
(15) 
where, ALPp and ALPL represent the power loss reductions on the R and 
L  sides of the loop respectively.  Therefore, the total power loss reduction 
can be approximated as 
L
 = (Pok  - Pok)  + (P,  - F:) 
A d  = U
-Pon  =-@k 
+ u R  
 + U
(16) 
A " 
L n 
0 
R
V.  LOAD BALANCING WITH BRANCH EXCHANGES 
When the general search algorithm introduced in section 3 is used for 
load balancing, the calculations will be similar to that of the loss reduction 
case. The only difference will be in the calculation of the objective; for 
load balancing.  we need to estimate the value of the new objective, load 
balance index, cb for every branch exchange considered during the search. 
The objective, given by Eq.(4), can however be calculated by using 
the two  approximate  p w e r  flow  methods  introduced  in  Sec.IV  -  the 
simplified DistFlow method and the forward and backwardupdate method, 
because both of the methods give the approximate power flows in the sys- 
tem  following  a  branch  exchange.  Once  the new  power  flow  in  the 
branches, P,' , Qi are estimated then  the new load balance  index can be 
computed by employing Eq.(4), i.e., 
P?  + Q? 
Cb  =z- 
s,-Z 
When the two methods are compared for load balancing, simplified 
DistFlow methad seems more attractive because of the following reasons. 
0 Since the  index of load balance  is relative, the accuracy of  simplified 
DistFlow method should be ade@mte. 
0 Simplified DistFlow provides a quick and c ~ d e  estimate of the power 
flows without requiring data on network parameters. 
W. TESTRESULTS 
The proposed solution method Bas been implemented in Fo~tran-77. 
The  approximate  power  flow  methods  described  in  k . W ,   (M1)  - 
simplified DistFlow.  and (M2) - backward and forward updates of Dist- 
Flaw. are used to guide the search  In addition, exact power flow method, 
DistFlow is also used  as another method (M3), to check the accuracy of 
M1 andM2.  The test d t s  for loss reduction will be presented here to 
illustrate the performance of the proposed method. 
The test system is a hypothetical 12.66 kV system with a 2 feeder subs- 
tation, 32 busses.  and 5 looping branches (tie lines).  Me system data is 
given in Table 1 together with the voltage profile of the base configuration. 
The total substation loads for the base configuration  5084.26 kW and 
2547.32  kvar. The system  is not well-compensated  and lossy (the total 
loss is about 8% of the total load).  A lossy system is selected because the 
loss reduction is expected to be appreciable. 
In the test runs, the constraints mentioned in Sec.II are not imposed. 
In fact, the voltage profile of the base system configuration is lower than 
the usual lower limit of 0.9  pa.;  which shows that the system is not well 
configured.  Also, it is assumed that every branch in the system is avail- 
able for branch-exchange. 
A summary of the test run is given in Table 2.  In the table, each row 
cormponds to a branch exchange.  Branch exchanges are d e w  by a pair 
of numbem in second column.  The other columns labeled, M1. M2. M3 
correspond to searches guided by methods M1.  M2. M3 respectively.  The 
row after a search level, row six for example. shows the branch-exchange 
chosen based on the ordering of the loss reduction figures obtained in that 
search level. 
1 
1 
35-11 
35-11 
35-11 
37-28 
brex 
1 
1 
loss redudon in kW 
M3 
84.23 
06.79 
83.43 
02.36 
73.17 
Table 2 Test Results 
33-6 
-01.71 
f.6. 
05.08 
08.35 
33-6 
-02.05 
05.92 
17.82 
03.00 
05.12 
33-6 
-02.67 
06.00 
18.30 
03.06 
05.22 
lscarch  I branch  I 
level 
M1 
67.70 
05.34 
66.30 
01.6  I 
61.31 
M2 
77.89 
06.64 
77.25 
02.32  I 
70.15 
bout 
33-6 
34-14 
35-7 
I  36-32  I 
37-28 
br-tx 
6-7 
34-14 
1 1 1 i3 1 
1 ;I. 1 37r 
1 
1 
1 
1 ;I. 1 37r 
1 
I  11-10  1  m:76 I  -W:90  I  -01.04 
I 
/!!I 
34-14 
11-10 
36-31 
37-28 
br-ex 
6-7 
34-14 
-05.19 
-00.65 
-00.16 
11.76 
08.35 
-06.42 
-00.80 
-00.19 
13.63 
05.12 
I  4 
-05.02 
-05.02 
-01.35 
-01.35 
-01.58 
-01.14 
-01.11 
-0044 
-01.33 
-01 12 
1 
1 
-05.16 
-05.16 
-01.42 
-01.42 
o7.m 
o7.m 
-07.07 
m.82 
-00.22 
15.77 
0522 
01.39 
01.39 
36-31 
36-31 
36-31 
37-28 
37-28 
1
6
 
28-27 
40.92 
-03.93 
i.  In the Erst search level, the loss reductions are big. they satisfy the con- 
servative property discussed in Sec.IIl and the e m m  in estimations are 
small enough so that the same branch exchange is chosen by all three 
methods.  However, as we go down the search levels, the loss reduc- 
tions get smaller and the difference between the two estimated values 
becomes  more.  visible;  while  estimation  figures  of  M 2  consistently 
satisfy  the conservative  property  and  get  closer to the  exact values, 
accuracy  and  conservative  property  of  M1  weakens  (estimation 
becomes two sided).  This is particularly true for estimates of branch 
exchange 37-28. 
1405 
ii.  The thnx methods lead to the same searches at the upper levels (up to 
level 4).  At level 4, while the searches with M2 and M3 converge to a 
local optimum as expected, the search with M1, which uses less accu- 
rate loss reduction figures, mislabels brancli exchange 37-28 (i.e.,  esti- 
mates  a negative loss reduction as positive), and performs two more 
searches leading to the global optimum point.  However, the two solu- 
tion points  have  close objective  values  (total loss reductions  at the 
solution points of M1 and M2. M3 are 125 kW and 118 kW  respec- 
tivel y). 
iii.  Branch exchanges occur on the lower voltage side of the loop. 
iv. The voltage  profile of the system increases as the loss is minimized. 
(the minimum bus voltage of the system raises f ”  0.88  p.u.  to 0.92 
P.U.). 
The last two observations were used as heuristic rules in the search in [7] 
and [lo].  However, the observations may  not always be true; a counter- 
example is given in Fig.6,  where branch exchange 7-3 is a switching on 
the higher side and results in a positive loss reduction. 
v:=1 
V i  = .897 
z , = ( r + j x )   ohms 
sL  =pL + jQL  WA 
figure 6: Example of a branch exchange on the higher voltage side 
From  these  observations.  we  have  the  following  suggestions  to 
impme computational and convergence characteristics of the method. 
0 In general backward and forward update method is more reliable than the 
simplified DistFlow method in estimating the power loss reduction due to 
a  branch exchange, especially  as the loss reduction  figures  get  smaller. 
Therefore. the decision as to which method to choose should be made by 
considering the magnitude of loss reduction figures.  A scheme comprom- 
izing  between  accuracy  and  computation  would  be  to  start  with  the 
simplified  D i m o w  method  and then switch to  backward  and  forward 
update method as the loss reduction figures get smaller. 
0 The search scheme gives acceptable solution for practical purposes since 
even  if  the  solution  converges to a  local  optimal  point,  the  difference 
between the local solution and the global solution will be small.  Further- 
more, the convergence characteristics of  the search can be improved  by 
checking the locality of the solution.  A possible scheme would be to do 
another quick search implementing more than one branch exchange with 
big loss reduction at each search leveL  Then the  two  solutions  can be 
compared to see if they converge to the same point. 
M. CONCLUSIONS 
In  this  paper  a  general  formulation  of  the feeder reconfiguration 
problem for loss reduction and load balancing is given and a new solution 
method is presented.  The solution employs a search over different radial 
configurations created by considering branch exchange type switchings. 
 Pm.-  - Sn. Node - 
 Pm.-  __ Sn. Node - 
------ 
Table 1: Network data of the test system 
r
.
Br. Rc.  Sn. B
NO  Nd. Nd.  r(ohm]  x(ohm)  PL(kW) QL(kvar)IVI**2 
1
1
0
2
2
1
3
3
2
4
4
3
5
5
4
6
6
5
7
7
6
8
8
7
9
8
9
10 
9  10 
11  10  11 
12  11  12 
13  12  13 
14  13  14 
15  14  15 
16  15  16 
17  16  17 
0.0470 
0.2511 
0.1864 
0.1941 
0.7070 
0.6188 
0.2351 
0.7400 
0.7400 
0.0650 
0.1238 
1.1550 
0.7129 
0.5260 
0.5450 
1.7210 
0.5740 
 
0.0922 
 
0.4930 
 
0.3660 
 
0.3811 
0.8190 
 
 
0.1872 
0.7114 
 
 
1.0300 
1.0440 
 
0.1966 
0.3744 
1.4680 
0.5416 
0.5910 
0.7463 
1.2890 
0.7320 
100.00 
90.00 
120.00 
60.00 
60.00 
200.00 
200.00 
60.00 
60.00 
45.00 
60.00 
60.00 
120.00 
60.00 
60.00 
60.00 
90.00 
60.00 
40.00 
80.00 
30.00 
20.00 
100.00 
100.00 
20.00 
20.00 
30.00 
35.00 
35.00 
80.00 
10.00 
20.00 
20.00 
40.00 
0.9927 
0.9574 
0.9374 
0.9176 
0.8707 
0.8641 
0.8550 
0.8432 
0.8324 
0.8308 
0.8280 
0.8161 
0.8125 
0.8099 
0.8074 
0.8037 
0.8026 
.
r
Br. Rc.  Sn. B
NO  Nd.  Nd.  r(ohm)  X(0hm)  PL(kW) QL(kvar)IVI**2 
0.9916 
18  1  18 
0.9845 
19  18  19 
0.9831 
20  19  20 
0.9818 
21  20  21 
22  2  22 
23  22  23 
24  23  24 
0.1640 
1.5042 
0.4095 
0.7089 
0.1565 
1.3554 
0.4784 
0.9373 
40.00 
40.00 
40.00 
40.00 
90.00 
90.00 
90.00 
90.00 
0.9504 
0.9373 
0.9309 
0.4512 
0.8980 
0.8960 
0.3083 
0.7091 
0.7011 
90.00 
420.00 
420.00 
TIE LINES ------ 
- Prm.- 
Br. 
r (ohm) 
2.0000 
2.0000 
2.0000 
0.5000 
0.5000 
x (ohm) 
2.0000 
2.0000 
2.0000 
0.5000 
0.5000 
Br. Rc.  Sn. 
No  Nd. Nd. 
33  7  20 
8  14 
34 
35  11  21 
36  17  32 
31  24  28 
25 
5  25 
26  25  26 
27  26  27 
28  21  28 
29  28  29 
30  29  30 
31  30  31 
32  31  32 
0.2030 
0.2842 
1.0590 
0.8042 
0.5075 
0.9744 
0.3105 
0.3410 
0.1034 
0.1447 
0.9337 
0.7006 
0.2585 
0.9630 
0.3619 
0.5302 
60.00 
60.00 
60.00 
120.00 
200.00 
150.00 
210.00 
60.00 
50.00 
200.00 
200 .oo 
25.00 
25.00 
20.00 
10.00 
600.00 
70.00 
100.00 
40.00 
0.8643 
0 .E557 
0.8201 
0.7945 
0.7816 
0.7739 
0.7723 
0.7717 
1406 
To  guide  the  search,  two  different  power  flow  approximation 
methods with varying degree of accuracy have been developed and tested. 
The methods are used to calculate the new power flow in the system after a 
branch-exchange  and  they  make  use  of  the  power  flow  equations 
developed for radial distribution systems. 
Both accuracy analysis and the test results show that: 
0 Estimation  methods  axe  computationally very  efficient  and  in  general 
give consenfative results.  They also consider both real and reactive power 
flows.  Therefore. they can be used in searches to reconfigure a given sys- 
tem even if the system is not well compensated and reconfiguring involves 
load transfer between different subtations. 
.The  search method introduced in this paper, as well as in [7], [lo], [ll]. 
has the following appealing properties:  it is not exhaustive, it is of order 
m 2  (m  is the number of  open switches), and it involves about m power 
flow solutions.  Its convergence characteristics is acceptable although it 
does  not  guarantee  convergepce  to  the  global  optimum.  However, 
modifications to this basic search is proposed to improve its computational 
and convergence characteristics whenever it is needed. 
For load balancing, a load balance index is defined and it is shown 
that  the search and power flow estimation methods developed for power 
loss reduction can also be used for load balancing since the two problems 
are similar.  Between the two estimation methods, the second - simplified 
DistFlow  method,  seems  to  be  more  appropriate  for  load  balancing 
because of the relative nature of load balancing concept. 
Acknowledgements 
This research is supported by TUBlTAK-TURKEY and by National 
Science Foundation under grant ECS-8715132. 
REFERENCES 
Distribution Systems, Westinghouse Electric  Corp.,  East Pittsburg, 
PA, 1965. 
"Bibliography on htribution  Automation" IEEE  Transactions on 
Power Apparatus and Systems, vol.  PAS 103. June 1984, pp.  1176- 
1182. 
T.  Gonen, A.  A.  Mahmoud  and  H.  W.  Golbum, "Bibliography of 
Power Distribution System Planning", IEEE Transactions on Power 
Apparatus andSystems, vol. PAS 102, June 1983, pp. 1178-1787. 
D.  I.  Sun, D.  R.  Fanis et al., "Optimal Distribution Substation and 
Primary  Feeder Planning via  the  Fixed  Charge Network Formula- 
tion",  IEEE  Transactions on  Power  Apparatus  and  System, vol. 
PAS 101, March 1982. pp. 602-609. 
E.  Lakervi  and  J.  Partenen,  "Linear Voltage Regulation  and  Loss 
Calculation Methods for Low Voltage Network Design", IEEE Tran- 
sactions  on  Power  Apparatus  ~ n d  Systems,  vol.  PAS  103, Aug. 
1984, pp. 2249-2253, 
A. Merlin and H. Back, "Search for a Minimal-Loss Operating Span- 
ning  Tree  Configuration  in  Urban  Power  Distribution  Systems", 
Proc. of5 th  Power Systems Comp. Con., Cambridge, U.K.,  Sept. 
1-5,1975. 
D. W. Ross, M. Carson, A.  Cohen, et al., "Development of Advanced 
Methods for Planning Electric Energy Distribution Systems", DE0 
final report  no SCI-5263, Feb 1980. 
C.  H.  Castro,  J.  B. Bunch,  and  T.  M.  Topka,  "Generalized Algo- 
rithms  for  Distribution  Feeder  Dep1oyn;ent  and  Sectionaliiing", 
IEEE  Transactions on Power Apparatus and System, vol.  PAS 99, 
MarCh/April1980, pp. 549-557. 
C. A.  Castro Jr. and A. L. M. Franca, "Automatic Power Distribution 
Reconfiguration Algorithm  Including Operating Constraints", Proc. 
of IFAC on Electric Energy Systems, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 1985. 
[lo]  S. Civanlar,  J.  J.  Grain&r,-and  S.  H.  Lee.  "Distribution Feeder 
Reconfiguration for Loss Reduction", IEEE  PES  Winter Meeting, 
Feb. 1987, paper no:  87WM 140-7. 
111 J  K. Aoki, H.  Kuwabara, T. Satoh, and M. Kanezashi.  "An Efficient 
Algorithm  for  Load  Balancing  of  Transformers  and  Feeders  by 
Switch Operation in Large Scale Distribution Systems", IEEE PES 
Summer Meeting, 1987, paper no: 87SM 543-2 
[12]  K.  Aoki, T. Satoh, M.  Itoh, et al.,  "Voltage Drop Constrained Res- 
toration  of  Supply by  Switch Operation in  Distribution  Systems", 
IEEE PES Summer Meeting, 1987, paper no: 87SM 544-0 
[13]  M. E. Baran, and F. F. Wu, "Optimal Sizing of Capacitors Placed on 
a Radial Distribution System", presented at IEEE PES Winter Meet- 
i n g ,  Feb. 1-6,1988, paper no 8 8 W M  065-5 
A.  Estimation of Power Loss Reduction due to a Branch Exchange 
by Simplified DistFlow Method 
APPENDIX 
TO  calculate the power loss reduction due to a branch exchange, we 
need  to estimate new  branch  flows after the  switching around the  loop 
which  is  defined by  the  branch  exchange.  Note  that  the branch  flows 
before. the switching are known. 
First consider the nominal branch exchange between branch b (on@- 
nally  open)  and  k  (originally closed) of  Fig.4.  By simplified  DistFlow 
equation  of  (6).  branch  flows  around  the  loop, Pi  ,Qi  will  change  by 
Pk  , Qk amount, i.e.. 
P:=Pi  -P& 
P ; = P i + P k  
Q ; = Q ~ - Q ~  i c L  
Q,'=Qi+Qk 
i e R  
(a1.i) 
(a.13) 
For the general case - branch exchange between branches b and m, it 
can easily be verified that the branch flows around the loop will change by 
P ,   , Q,  , i.e., 
P,'=P~-P,,, 
P;=Pi+P,,, 
Q ; = Q ~ - Q ,  
Q;=Qi+Q,,, 
(a.2.i) 
(a2.ii) 
Now  we can calculate the real power loss reduction due to branch 
exchange b-m  as follows.  By Eq.(8), the original total power loss on L 
and R  sides of the loop will be 
i c L  
i e R  
OL = B d P ? + Q t 2 )   OR = CrdP?+Q?l 
ISL 
I
d
 
(a.3) 
These  terms  can  be  updated  after  the  branch  exchange  by  using  the 
updated  power  flows. P(  , Q;.  Let  the updated loss terms be L F ~  ,G;. 
Then the real power loss reduction.  ALP-b,  due to branch exchange b-m 
will be 
 ALP-^  = ALP~+AL& = (OL-O~)+(LJsI-O~) 
(a.4) 
When the loss terms QL  .OR are substituted in above equation and the 
terms are rearranged, power loss reduction can be written only in terms of 
original branch flows, Pi  .Qi  as in Eq.(9). 
B. Accuracy Analysis of Simplified DistFlow Method 
We will derive the relation between the actual loss reduction, ALP and 
the estimated value, ALP- due to a branch exchange by simplified DistFlow 
method in two steps; first power loss reduction along a radial network will 
be studied, then these results will be used to evaluate the power loss reduc- 
tion around the loop of a branch exchange. 
Power Loss Reduction on a Radial Network 
Consider the radial network shown in Fig.3.  As noted before, such a 
network represents one side, say side R , of the loop of a branch exchange. 
Let the power change at the end of the network due to branch exchange be 
w,, , AQ,,  > 0. 
Lets first comider the change in voltage profile as a result of change of 
power at the end node n, Af, , AQ,,.  A good esdmate can be obtained by 
using the simplified DistFlow equations of (6).  From Eq.(6), the change in 
branch power will be 
U. 1 - p : - p .  
i =O, ..JI  0.1) 
AQi  = Q / - Q i   =AQ. 
=Af n 
-  t 
Assuming V i  = V, , change in voltages can be obtained by Eq.(6.iii)  as 
k=o 
kco 
0.2) 
Therefore, the voltage profile along the network will drop with an increas- 
ing magnitude towards the end of the network, i.e., 
'AV. SAV,,-lS  ... 
where,  ALPi-,,,  = ALPi,, 
(pi + P~)' + (e! + QLi12 
(pi + pli12 + (ei + e,)* 
+ri[ 
1 
The last term in 0.6) is due to the loss reduction on branch i , ALPi . Con- 
sequently, the terms - ALP;,, , - ALQi,  represent the actual loss reduction 
between nodes i  and n  and have the following property. 
Vi2 
Vi2 
0.6) 
0 d ALP,,-l,  S . . . S ALP.,. 
These terms are of second order, i.e., 
; 0 5 ALQ,-l,,  5  . . . 5 ALQ,, 
0.7) 
l A P m l >   lALf';,,I 
;  IAQe.l~IALQi,,I  i = O J  ,..., n-1  0.8) 
Now consider the loss reduction on the network.  Power loss reduction 
 ALPl can be calculated as 
on line I ,
ALP1  =LP,-LP; 
=r, -- v: 
f'? + Q? 
(PI + U n  + -I,)' 
r' 
+ @I + AQn  + MQ1.m 1' 
V;2 
0.9) 
The simplified DistFlow method estimates this quantity as 
U I  =PI -P;= rl  (f'? + Q?) - rt  [(PI + APn)z+ (Q, + AQ.)2]  0.10) 
Combining Eq.0.9) and Eq.0.10) will give 
ALP1 = 
1 
Vl 
- -LP1'+  &PI 
1 
Vl2 
r1  [(Pl+AP,$+ (Ql+AQm)'] 
1 
where,  &!PI = -{ 
Vi 
--  71 [(Pt+dp,+ALPt,,)2+  (QI+AQ.+ALQ~,)~I)  5 0  
1 
V? 
0.12) 
Eq(b.12)  indicates  that  6Lpl  represents the  extra loss reduction due to 
correction  terms  ALPI,  and  ALQl,,  and  it  is  of  second  order,  i.e., 
16Lpl I  <<  IALPI I .   Dropping these second order terms, Eq.0.11)  can be 
bounded as 
Since the  total loss on the  section  is the  sum  of  branch losses,  the 
bound for the whole section will be 
where, f? and fz represent aggregated voltages, i.e.. 
Therefore, 
By letting 
V,2Sf.  as a  result  of  a  power 
change at the end of the network, AP,, , AQ.  > 0, by using simplified Dist- 
Flow equations in two different ways.  Fist, as it is done in the Appendix 
B. by  assuming that Vi = V,  and by  using the simplified forward voltage 
equation  of  Eq.(6.iii).  Then  the  voltage  drop  can  be  calculated  as 
Second, by assuming Vi = V,,  and by using the simplified 
(AV:-.)f 
backward  equations  V,ll  = V:  + 2(r,P,'+ x, Q,'),  and  calculating 
the 
comsponding  voltage  change  as (AV,'-)b 
It can be  shown that 
these two estimates are equal to each other, Le, 
=AV,'. 
=-AV:. 
= 
(AV,'-,,,,' 
6.3) 
The results indicate that a good estimate of voltage change at the ter- 
minal nodes n  and k can be obtained by canying out the voltage update 
separately from the power update, while performing the backward update 
and comparing the voltage difference at node o (difference between V,  and 
the updated  Vb).  If the difference is too large ( larger than a predefined 
value, PX), one may go through a forward update to reduce the e m r  (this 
time  starring from  the common node o and using  V.,@L,&,  as initial, 
given values and applying the forward update). 
We use scheme 3 as the second method of updating the power flows 
around the loop of a branch exchange. 
Mesut E. Baran received his B.S.  and M.S. form Middle East Technical 
University, Turkey.  He is currently a Ph.D.  student at the University of 
Califomia, Berkeley.  His research interests include distribution and power 
systems, optimization, system theory, and control theory. 
Felix  F.  Wu received  his B.S.  from  National Taiwan  University. M.S. 
from the University of Pittsburgh, and Ph.D.  from the University of Cali- 
fornia, Bekeley.  He  is a Professor of  Electrical Engineering and  Com- 
puter Sciences at the University of California, Berkeley.