Sie sind auf Seite 1von 6

Self Adaptive Firefly Based Transmission Loss

Minimization Algorithm for SVC Placement


R.Selvarasu
Research Scholar, Department of EEE
JNTUH, Hyderabad, India.

M.Surya Kalavathi
Professor, Department of EEE
JNTUH, Hyderabad, India.
munagala12@yahoo.co.in

selvarasunaveen@gmail.com

Abstract-- This paper presents a new strategy for optimally

placing Static Var Compensator (SVC) in power systems


with a view to minimize the transmission loss. The
proposed strategy uses Self Adaptive Firefly Algorithm
(SAFA) and identifies the optimal locations for SVC
placement and their parameter. The SVC placement
strategy is applied on two IEEE test systems and their
results are presented to demonstrate its effectiveness.

C.Christober Asir Rajan


Associate Professor, Department of EEE
PEC, Pondicherry, India.
asir_70@pec.edu

ith generator

QGi

Reactive power generation at

PDi

Real power drawn by the load at

QDi

Reactive power drawn by the load at bus i

QGi min QGi max Minimum and Maximum reactive power


generation of

ith generator respectively

QSVC

VAR output

Optimal locations.

I SVC

Current drawn by the SVC

NOMENCLATURE

X line

Reactance of transmission line

LM

Line location of the

Keywords-- Firefly Algorithm, Loss Minimization, SVC,

SVC
FA
SAFA

BSVC
nd
N
mn
Im
m,n

Static Var Compensator


Firefly Algorithm
Self Adaptive Firefly Algorithm
Susceptance of SVC

mth firefly

Attractiveness parameter

Absorption parameter
Random movement factor

rm,n

Cartesian distance between

mth and

nth firefly
k
Ploss
nl
l
Gl

Number of iterations

Vi Vj

Voltage magnitudes at bus i and

ij

respectively
Voltage angle at bus i and

PGi

Real power generation at

Net transmission loss


Total number of transmission lines
Number of transmission of lines
Conductance of

M th SVC

I. INTRODUCTION

Number of decision variables


Maximum number of fireflies
Number of fireflies
Light intensity of the

ith bus

l th line
j

ith generator

The present day power systems are very large and


growing to meet the exponentially increasing load demand.
There is always a need for construction of new generation
facilities and transmission networks. However, they involve
huge installation cost, environment impact, political, large
displacement of population and land acquisition. One of the
simplest way is to minimize transmission loss, which is
estimated to be approximately 25% of the generated power,
rather than constructing new generation systems.
The power electronics based FACTS devices,
developed by N.G.Hingorani [1], have been effectively used
for flexible operation and control of the power system through
controlling their parameters. They have the capability to
control the various electrical parameters in transmission
network in order to achieve better system performance.
FACTS devices are divided into three categories. They are
Shunt connected, Series connected and a combination of both
[2]. The Static Var Compensator (SVC) and Static
Synchronous Compensator (STATCOM) are belongs to the
shunt connected device and are in use for a long time.
Consequently, they are variable shunt reactors which inject or
absorb reactive power in order to control the voltage at a
given bus. [3]. Thyristor Controlled Series Compensator
(TCSC) and Static Synchronous Series Compensator (SSSC)
are series connected devices. The TCSC and SSSC mainly
control the active power in a line by varying the line reactance.
They are in operation at a few places but are still in the stage

of development [4-5]. Unified Power Flow Controller (UPFC)


belongs to Combination of Shunt and Series devices. UPFC is
able to control active power, reactive power and voltage
magnitude simultaneously or separately [6].
Better utilization of an existing power system
capacity by installing FACTS devices has become essential in
the area of ongoing research. Recently several strategies have
been suggested by the researchers for optimally placing
FACTS devices in power systems with a view to enhance the
performance. Different Meta-heuristic algorithms such as
Genetic Algorithm (GA), Simulated annealing (SA), Ant
Colony Optimization (ACO), Bees Algorithms (BA),
Differential Evolution (DE), and Particle Swarm Optimization
(PSO) etc [7] have been applied in solving the FACTS
placement problems.
Optimal locations of multi type FACTS devices in a
power system to improve the loadability by means of Genetic
Algorithm have been successfully implemented [9]. PSO has
been applied to find the optimal location of FACTS devices
considering cost of installation and system loadability. [10].
Bees Algorithm has been proposed to determine the optimal
allocation of FACTS devices for maximizing the available
transfer capability [11].PSO has been proposed to improve the
power system stability by determining the optimal location
and controller design of STATCOM [12]. PSO has been
proposed to select the optimal location and parameter setting
of SVC and TCSC to mitigate small signal oscillations in
multi machine power system [13]. Bacterial Foraging
algorithm has been used to find the optimal location of UPFC
devices with objectives of minimizing the losses and
improving the voltage profile [14].
Firefly Algorithm has been developed by Xin-She
Yang [7-8] which is found to be superior over other
algorithms in the sense that it could handle multimodal
problems of combinational and numerical optimization more
naturally and efficiently [15]. It has been then applied by
various researchers for solving various problems, to name a
few: economic dispatch [16-17], fault identification [18],
scheduling [19], Unit commitment [20] and image
compression [21] etc. However, the improper choice of FA
parameters affects the convergence and may lead to suboptimal solutions. There is thus a need for developing better
strategies for optimally selecting the FA parameters with a
view of obtaining the global best solution besides achieving
better convergence.
In this paper, a self adaptive firefly based strategy is
proposed for SVC placement with a view of minimizing
transmission loss. The strategy identifies the optimal locations
and the SVC parameters. Simulations are performed on two
IEEE test systems using MATLAB software package and the
results are presented to demonstrate the effectiveness of the
proposed approach.
II. POWER FLOW MODEL OF SVC
The Static Var Compensator behaves like a shunt
connected variable reactance. SVC either generates or absorbs
reactive power in order to regulate the voltage magnitude at
the point of connection to the AC network. The equivalent

circuit of variable susceptance model is shown in Fig.1, Which


is used to derive the SVC non linear power equations and the
liberalized equations required by the Newtons method
The linearized equation of the Static Var
Compensator is given by the following equation, where the
total susceptance Bsvc is taken to be the state variable.
k

0
Pi
Q = 0
i

0
k
i

(1)
Qi
Bsvc

Bsvc
At the end of each iteration ( k ), the variable shunt
susceptance, Bsvc is updated
k

B k +1svc = B k svc + B k svc

(2)

Based on the equivalent circuit of SVC, the current


drawn by SVC is

I svc = jBsvcVi

(3)

Reactive power drawn by SVC, which is also reactive


power injected,

QSVC

at bus i, is

Qsvc = Qi = Vi 2 Bsvc

(4)

Bus i

Isvc
Bsvc

Fig.1.Variable Susceptance Model of SVC

III. FIREFLY ALGORITHM


A. Classical Firefly Algorithm
Firefly Algorithm is a recent nature inspired metaheuristic algorithms which has been developed by Xin She
Yang at Cambridge University in 2007 [7]. The algorithm
mimics the flashing behavior of fireflies. It is similar to other
optimization algorithms employing swarm intelligence such as
PSO. But FA is found to have superior performance in many
cases [8].It employs three ideal rules. First rule is all fireflies
are unisex which means that one firefly will be attracted to
other fireflies regardless of their sex. Second rule is the degree
of the attractiveness of a firefly is proportional to its
brightness, thus each fireflys moves towards brighter one.
More brightness means less distance between two fireflies.
However if any two flashing fireflies are having same
brightness, then they move randomly. Final rule is the
brightness of a firefly is determined by the value of the

objective function. In case of maximization problem, the


brightness of each firefly is proportional to the value of the
objective function. For a minimization problem, the brightness
of each firefly is inversely proportional to the value of the
objective function.
Firefly Algorithm initially produces a swarm of
fireflies located randomly in the search space. Initial
distribution is usually produced from a uniform random
distribution and the position of each firefly in the search space
represents a potential solution of the optimization problem.
Dimension of the search space is equal to the number of
optimizing parameters in the given problem. Fitness function
takes the position of a firefly as input and produces a single
numerical output denoting how good the potential solution is.
Fitness value is assigned to each firefly. The brightness of
each firefly depends on the fitness value of that firefly. Each
one firefly is attracted by the brightness of other firefly and
tries to move towards them. The velocity or the drag a firefly
towards another firefly depends on the attractiveness. The
attractiveness of firefly depends on the relative distance
between the fireflies and it can be a function of the brightness
of the fireflies as well. In each iterative step, Firefly Algorithm
computes the brightness and the relative attractiveness of each
firefly. Based on these values, the positions of the fireflies are
updated. After a sufficient number of iterations, all fireflies
will converge to the best possible position on the search space.
The number of fireflies in the swarm is known as the
population size, N . The selection of population size depends
on the specific optimization problem. Though, typically a
population size of 20 to 50 is used for PSO and FA for most
th

applications [10, 24]. Each m firefly is denoted by a vector

xm as
xm = x1m , xm2 " , xmnd

(5)

The search space is limited by the following inequality


constraints

x v (min) x v x v (max) v = 1, 2," , nd (6)


Initially, the positions of the fireflies are generated from a
uniform distribution using the following equation

xmv = x v (min) + x v (max ) x v (min) rand

(7)

Here, rand is a random number between 0 and 1,


taken from a uniform distribution. The initial distribution does
not significantly affect the performance of the algorithm.
Every time the algorithm is executed and the optimization
process starts with a different set of initial points. However, in
each case, the algorithm searches for the optimum solution. In
the case of multiple possible sets of solutions, the proposed
algorithm may converge on different solutions each time.
Although each of those solutions will be valid as they all will
satisfy the requirement.
th

The light intensity of the m firefly,

I m = Fitness ( xm )

I m is given by
(8)

th

The attractiveness between the m

and n

th

firefly,

m,n

is

given by

m,n = (max,m,n min,m,n )exp( mrm,n2 ) + min,m,n

(9)

Where

rm,n = xm xn =

nd

( x

k
m

xnk

v =1

The value of

min

is taken as 0.2 and the value of

(10)

max

is

taken as 1. is another constant whose value is related to the


dynamic range of the solution space. The position of firefly is
updated in each iterative step. If the light intensity of
firefly is larger than the light intensity of the

nth

mth firefly, then

mth firefly moves towards the nth firefly and its motion at
th
the k iteration is denoted by the following equation:
xm(k) = xm(k1) + m,n ( xn (k1) xm (k1)) + ( rand 0.5)

the

(11)

is a constant whose value depends on the dynamic range of

the solution space. At each iterative step, the intensity and the
attractiveness of each firefly is calculated. The intensity of
each firefly is compared with all other fireflies and the
positions of the fireflies are updated using (11). After a
sufficient number of iterations, each firefly converges to the
same position in the search space and the global optimum is
achieved.
B.

Self Adaptive Firefly Algorithm

In the above narrated Firefly Algorithm, each firefly of


the swarm travel around the problem space taking into account
the results obtained by others and still applying its own
randomized moves as well. The random movement factor ( )
is very effective on the performance of Firefly Algorithm. A
large value of makes the movement to explore the solution
through the distance search space and smaller value of
tends to facilitate local search. In this paper is dynamically
tuned in each iteration. The influence of other solutions is
controlled by the value of attractiveness of (9), which can be
adjusted by modifying two parameters max and .In general
the value of

max

should be used from 0 to 1 and two limiting

cases can be defined: The algorithm performs cooperative


local search with the brightest firefly strongly determining
other fireflies positions, especially in its neighborhood, when
max = 1 and only non-cooperative distributed random search
with max = 0.
On the other hand, the value of determines the
variation of attractiveness with increasing distance from
communicated firefly. Setting as 0 corresponds to no
variation or attractiveness is constant and conversely putting

as results in attractiveness being close to zero which


again is equivalent to the complete random search. In general
in the range of 0 to 10 can be chosen for better
performance. Indeed, the choice of these parameters affects
the final solution and the convergence of the algorithm.
Each firefly with nd decision variables in the FA will
be defined to encompass nd +3. FA variables in a selfadaptive method, where the last three variables represent m ,

min,m and m .

A firefly can be represented as

xm = xm1 , xm2 " , xmnd , m , min,m , m

(12)

Each firefly possessing the solution vector, m ,

min,m and m

undergo the whole search process. During

iteration, the FA produces better off-springs through (9) and


(11) using the parameters available in the firefly of (12),
thereby enhancing the convergence of the algorithm. The
basic steps of the FA can be summarized as the pseudo code
which is depicted in Fig. 2.

The SVCs are to be installed at appropriate locations


with optimal parameters that minimize the transmission loss
for better utilization of the existing power system. This paper
aims to develop a methodology that performs SVC placement
with an objective of minimizing transmission loss.
A. Objective function
The objective is to minimize transmission loss, which can
be evaluated from the power flow solution [14], and written as
nl

G (V
l

+ V j 2 2VV
i j cos ij )

(13)

l =1

B. Problem Constraints
The equality constraints are the load flow equation
given by
PGi PDi = Pi (V , )
(14)

QGi QDi = Qi (V , )

(15)

The Inequality Constraints are

QGi min QGi QGi max for PV buses

(16)

SVC Constraints

100MVAR QSVC 100MVAR

function in any other stochastic optimization techniques.


Read the Power System Data
Select the population size Nand Maximum number of Iterations for convergence check
Generate the initial population
While (termination requirements are not met) do
for m=1: N
Alter the system data, , min and according to m-th firefly values
Run the load flow
Compute the Real power loss
Calculate Im
For n=1: N
Alter the system data according to n-th firefly values
Run the load flow
Compute the Real power loss
Calculate In
If Im< In
Compute rmn, using (10)

IV. PROPOSED STRATEGY

Min Ploss =

The Self Adaptive Firefly Algorithm searches for optimal


solution by maximizing the light intensity I m , like the fitness

(17)

The firefly of the proposed SVC placement problem


is defined as

xm ={(L,Q
1 SVC1,m, min,m,m)....(LM ,QSVCM ,m, min,m,m).......
...(LN,QSVC,N,N, min,N ,N )}
(18)

Evaluate mn, using (9)


Move mthfirefly towards nth firefly through (11)
end if
end for n
end for m
Rank the fireflies and find the current best
End while
End
Fig.2.Pseudo Code of Firefly Algorithm

The light intensity function can be obtained by transforming


the power loss function into I m function as
Max I m =

1
1 + Ploss

(19)

A population of firefly is randomly generated and


their intensity is calculated using (19). Based on the light
intensity, each firefly is moved to the optimal solution through
(11) and the iterative process continues till the algorithm
converges.
.
V. SIMULATION RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
The effectiveness of the proposed Self Adaptive
Firefly algorithm (SAFA) for optimally placing the SVC
devices to minimize the transmission loss in the power system
has been implemented and tested on IEEE-14, and IEEE-30
bus test systems using MATLAB 7.5. The line data and bus
data for the three test systems are taken from [23].
IEEE 14 bus system: The system comprises 20 transmission
lines, five generator buses (Bus No 1,2,3,6 and 8) and nine load
buses. Simulations are carried out with different numbers of

SVCs and the simulation results in terms of the locations and


the SVC parameters and the resulting loss are presented for the
three methods in Table I. The variation of real power losses
with different number of SVC placement are shown in Fig.3. It
is observed from this table that the placement of SVC,
irrespective of number of devices, attempts to reduce the loss.
When three SVC are installed, the real power loss is
considerably reduced from 13.3663 MW to 13.2451 MW.
However when another SVC is added, the loss reduction is
insignificant. It is thus concluded that three SVC devices are
adequate to achieve the desired goal of minimizing the loss.
TABLE I
OPTIMAL LOCATION, PARAMETER OF SVC AND REAL POWER
LOSS FOR IEEE 14- BUS SYSTEM
No of
SVC

Real power
loss
(MW)

0
1

13.3663
13.2882

13.2566

13.2451

Real Power Loss (MW)

13.2443

Locations
(Bus No)

Q
(MVAR)

7
13
7
7
10
13
10
13
4
7

28.876
8.617
28.314
25.889
6.021
8.155
5.962
8.172
3.704
23.572

13.38
13.36
13.34
13.32
13.3
13.28
13.26
13.24
13.22
13.2
13.18
1

A. Parameter of Adaptive Firefly Algorithm.


The population size, N for all the two IEEE test systems
are taken as 30. The maximum number of Iterations
considered as 200. The random movement factor, are tuned
during each iteration. The initial value of is set to 0.5. The

is varied from min to max .


is taken as 0.2 and the value of max is

attractiveness parameter
The value of

min

taken as 1. The absorption parameter is taken as 1 and it is


tuned in all iteration. It is to be pointed out that the
performance of the any meta-heuristic optimization algorithms
is very dependent on the tuning of their different parameters.
A small change in the parameter may result in a large change
in the solution of these algorithms. SAFA is a powerful
algorithm which efficiently tuned all the parameters to obtain
the global or near global optimal solution.
It is very clear from the above discussions that the
proposed SAFA is able to reduce to the loss to the lowest
possible by optimally placing and determining the parameters
when compared to other optimization algorithms. In addition
the self adaptive nature of the algorithm avoids repeated runs
for fixing the optimal FA parameters by a trial and error
procedure and provides the best possible parameters values. .
TABLE II
OPTIMAL LOCATION, PARAMETER OF SVC AND
REAL POWER LOSS FOR IEEE 30- BUS SYSTEM
No of
SVC

Real power
loss
(MW)

17.5028

17.2563

17.2193

17.1881

Number of SVC

17.1779

Fig.3. Variation Real Power Loss with SVC

IEEE 30 bus system: The system has 41 transmission lines


and six generator buses (Bus No 1, 2, 5, 8, 11 and 13). The
simulation results in terms of the locations and the SVC
parameters and the resulting loss for different number of SVC
are presented in Table II. The variation of real power losses
with different number of SVC placement are shown in Fig.4.
It is seen from this table that when six SVC are installed, the
real power loss is considerably reduced from 17.5028 MW to
17.1586 MW. It is thus concluded that six SVC devices are
adequate to achieve the desired goal of minimizing the loss.

17.1586

Locations
(Bus No)

Q
(MVAR)

21
4
19
21
4
25
21
19
4
21
3
19
10
25
15
21
3
19
10
25

18.031
31.702
6.544
16.565
30.109
5.274
16.026
6.576
28.628
12.728
20.745
4.789
11.921
5.598
6.714
12.728
20.745
4.789
11.921
5.598

Real Power Loss (MW)

17.56
17.49
17.42
17.35
17.28
17.21
17.14
17.07
17
0

3
4
Number of SVC

Fig.4. Variation Real Power Loss with SVC

V. CONCLUSION
This paper made an attempt to identify the optimal
placement of SVC and their parameter with a view of
minimizing the transmission loss in the power system network
using SAFA. Simulations results are presented for two IEEE
test systems. Results have shown that the identified location of
SVC minimize the transmission loss in the power system
network. With the above proposed algorithm it is possible for
the utility to place SVC devices in transmission network such
that proper planning and operation can be achieved with
minimum system losses.
REFERENCES
[1]

N. G. Hingorani and I.Gyugyi, Understanding FACTS Concepts


and Technology of Flexible AC Transmission Systems, New
York:IEEE Press,2000.
[2] R.M.Mathur and R.K.Varma, Thyristor-based FACTS Controllers
for Electrical Transmission
Systems,
Piscataway: IEEE
Press,2002.
[3] H.Ambriz-perez,E.Achaand and C.R.Fuerte-Esquivel,Advanced
SVC models for Newton Raphson load flow and Newton optimal
power flow studies,IEEE Trans.on Power Systems,vol.15,pp.129136,2000.
[4] T.Orfanogianni, A Flexible software environment for steady state
power flow optimization with series FACTS devices,Diss. ETH
Zurich 2000.,13689.
[5] E.V.Larsen,K.Clark,S.A.Miske and J.Urbanek,Characteristic and
rating considerations of thyristor controlled series compensation,
IEEE Trans.on Power Delivery.,vol.9,pp.992-1000,1994.
[6] L.Gyugyi, Unified power flow controler concept for flexible AC
transmission system,in IEE proc., vol.139,no.4.pp.323-331, Jul.
1992.
[7] X. S. Yang,Nature-Inspired Meta-Heuristic Algorithms, 2nd ed.,
Beckington, Luniver Press,2010.
[8] X.S.Yang, Firefly algorithms for multimodal optimization,
Stochastic algorithms: Foundations and applications, SAGA 2009,
LNCS, Berlin, Germany: Springer-Verlag, 2009, vol. 5792, pp.
169-178.
[9] S.Gerbex, R.Cherkaom, and A.J.Germond, Optimal location of
multi type FACTS devices in a power systems by means of genetic
algorithms, IEEE Trans. on Power Systems.vol.16, no 3, pp.537544, 2001.
[10] M. Saravanan, S. M. R. Slochanal, P. Venkatesh and J. P. S.
Abraham, Application of particle swarm optimization technique
for optimal location of FACTS devices considering cost of

installation and system loadability, Electrical Power System


Research, vol.77, pp. 276-283, 2007.
[11] Hirotaka Yoshida, Kenichi Kawata and Yoshikazu Fukuyama,A
Particle swarm optimization for reactive power and voltage control
considering voltage security assessment, IEEE Trans. on Power
Systems, vol.15,no.4, pp.1232-1239, Nov. 2001,
[12] Siddhartha Panda and Narayana Prasad Padhy, Optimal Location
and controller design of STATCOM for power system stability
improvement using PSO, Journal of the Franklin Institute,
vol.345, pp. 166181, Mar. 2008,
[13] D. Mondal, A. Chakrabarti and A. Sengupta, Optimal placement
and parameter setting of SVC and TCSC using PSO to mitigate
small signal stability problem, International Journal of Electrical
Power & Energy Systems, vol.42,no.1,pp. 334340, Nov. 2012.
[14] M.Senthil Kumar and P Renuga., Application of UPFC for
enhancement of voltage profile and minimization of losses using
fast voltage stability index(FVSI), Journal of Archives of
Electrical Engineering, vol.61, no.2, pp 239-250, Jun. 2012.
[15] X.S. Yang, Firefly algorithm stochastic test functions and design
optimization, International Journal of Bio-inspired Computation,
vol. 2, pp. 78-84, 2010.
[16] T. Apostolopoulos, and A. Vlachos, Application of the Firefly
algorithm for solving the economic emissions load dispatch
problem, International Journal of Combinatorics, vol.2011,
no.523806, p.23, 2011.
[17] XS. Yang, S.S. Hosseini, and AH. Gandomi, Firefly algorithm for
solving non-convex economic dispatch problems with valve
loading effect, Applied Soft Computing, vol. 12, Issue 3, pp.1801186, Mar. 2012.
[18] R Falcon, M Almeida, and A. Nayak, Fault identification with
binary adaptive fireflies in parallel and distributed systems, in
proc. IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation, Jun.
2011.pp.1359-1366.
[19] K Chandrasekaran and S. P. Simon, Demand response scheduling
in SCUC problem for solar integrated thermal system using firefly
algorithm, in proc. iET Conference on Renewable Power
Generation (RPG 2011), 2011, pp 1-8.
[20] K Chandrasekaran and S. P. Simon, Network and reliability
constrained unit commitment problem using binary real coded
firefly algorithm, International Journal of Electrical Power &
Energy Systems, vol.43, Issue1, pp. 921932, Dec.2012.
[21] M.-H. Homg and R -J Liou, Multilevel minimum cross entropy
threshold selection based on the firefly algorithm, Expert Systems
with Applications, vol. 38, Issue 12, pp. 14805-14811, 2011.
[22] E.Acha, C.R.Fuerte-Esquivel, Hugo Ambriz-perz and C.AugelessCameto, FACTS Modeling and simulation in power network, 1st ed.
New York: John Wiley & Sons Ltd, 2004.
[23] Power Systems Test Case, The University of Washington Archive,
[Online].Available: http://www.ee.washington.edu/research/pstca/,
2000.
[24] Taher Niknam, Rasoul Azizipanah-Abarghooee, and Alireza
Roosta, Reserve Constrained Dynamic Economic Dispatch: A
New Fast Self- Adaptive Modified Firefly Algorithm, IEEE
System Journal, vol.6, no.4, Dec. 2012.

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen