Solar Energy 173 (2018) 17–33

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Solar Energy
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/solener

Optimal sizing methodology for photovoltaic and wind hybrid rooftop T

generation systems in residential low voltage distribution networks
⁎
Vahid Behravesh, Asghar Akbari Foroud , Reza Keypour
Faculty of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Semnan University, Semnan, Iran

A R T I C LE I N FO A B S T R A C T

Keywords:
Photovoltaic and wind turbine hybrid rooftop
generation systems (PV-WT hybrid systems)
Residential low voltage distribution networks
(residential networks)
Voltage profile
Curtail dump power of PV-WT hybrid systems
Solar and wind energies are interminable, freely accessible and environmentally-friendly energy resources.
Nevertheless, if employed independently, due to their unstable nature, they are not completely reliable. The
amalgamation of these two types of energy resources will result in reduced fluctuations of each of them and
increase the overall energy production.
In the recent years, with the increased electrical demands of residential homes and electrical vehicles (EVs),
and due to the rapid advancements in power electronics, application of photovoltaic (PV) and wind turbine (WT)
hybrid rooftop generation systems (PV-WT hybrid systems) has been considered as the best choice to supply the
consuming loads of residential homes.
This paper proposes a novel methodology to optimize the size of PV-WT hybrid systems in residential low
voltage distribution networks (residential networks). In the presented methodology, the optimal combination of
PV-WT hybrid systems for an unbalanced three-phase four-wire low voltage residential network in a future
scenario is obtained with a concentration of single-phase distributed energy resources (DERs). This methodology
considers the measured meteorological and consuming load data within a year with a 5-min resolution. Also, the
following factors are evaluated in the DIgSILENT PowerFactory15.1.7 software environment: voltage profile,
voltage imbalance, transformer loading, and curtail dump power of PV-WT hybrid systems.
The objective of this study is to investigate the effects of different size combinations of PV and WT systems on
voltage behavior of a residential network, low voltage (LV) transformer loading, and curtail dump power of PV-
WT hybrid systems during a year. Consequently, an optimal and suitable combination of PV and WT capacities is
obtained in a PV-WT hybrid system.

1. Introduction
Owing to the rapid advancements in power electronics, power
production via solar and wind for residential applications is experien-
cing a significant growth (Campos et al., 2016; Camilo et al., 2017; Goel
and Sharma, 2017). With developments in PV-WT hybrid systems for
electrical power generation, the aim of obtaining an effective and re-
liable performance has become a complicated task. Therefore, the op-
timal sizing of the components of this system is required to obtain the
minimum cost while retaining the system reliability when supplying the
load (Escobar et al., 2013; Luna–Rubio et al., 2012). In the last decades,
using different software and optimization algorithms, some scholars
have designed cost-effective and efficient PV-WT hybrid systems (Al
Busaidi et al., 2016; Singh et al., 2016). By studying hybrid power
systems, the authors in Al Busaidi et al. (2016), Bernal–Agustín and
Dufo–Lopez (2009) and Rehman and Al–Hadhrami (2010) maintain
that not only these systems result in less operation cost, but also are
superior than single renewable energy systems from power efficiency,
reliability, and stability points of view. If utilized independently, due to
their unstable nature, solar and wind energy resources are not com-
pletely reliable. However, PV-WT hybrid systems are very appropriate
and economical replacement to supply the residential load demands,
where the weakness of each of these resources can be compensated by
the other one (Sawle et al., 2016).
The authors in Shahirinia et al. (2005) presented an optimal design
for a stand-alone multi-source hybrid power system including wind, PV,
diesel generator and battery resources. In the performed study, the
economic aspects such as the interest rate, the inflation, the capital
recovery factor, and the sinking found factor were presented for all of
the mentioned power resources. Then, an objective function for mini-
mizing the overall cost of the hybrid power system structure was solved
using a genetic algorithm. A model for size optimization of a PV-WT

⁎
Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: vahidbehravesh@semnan.ac.ir (V. Behravesh), aakbari@semnan.ac.ir (A. Akbari Foroud), rkeypour@semnan.ac.ir (R. Keypour).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.solener.2018.07.054
Received 28 April 2018; Received in revised form 2 July 2018; Accepted 20 July 2018
0038-092X/ © 2018 Published by Elsevier Ltd.
V. Behravesh et al. Solar Energy 173 (2018) 17–33

Nomenclature Symbols

Acronyms G solar irradiation on surface of the PV system array in the

current time step
AGL above ground level GSTC solar irradiation in standard test conditions
APC active power curtailment K efficiency temperature coefficient
DER distributed energy resource PEV power of electric vehicle
EV electric vehicle PFEV / PFPV − WT power factor of the inverters of EV and PV-WT hy-
HV high voltage brid system
LCE levelized cost of energy PnEV / PnPV − WT rated power of the inverters of EV and PV-WT hybrid
LPSP loss of power supply probability system
LV low voltage PnPV / PnWT rated power of PV system and wind turbine
MV medium voltage PPV / PWT power of PV system and wind turbine
NREL National Renewable Energy Laboratory QEV / QPV − WT reactive power of inverters of EV PV-WT hybrid system
OLTC on-load tap-changer QmaxEV / QmaxPV − WT maximum reactive power of the inverters of EV
POC point of connection PV-WT hybrid system
pu per unit TAPi tap positions of the transformer at times (i)
PV photovoltaic Tcell temperature of PV cell in the current time step
RES renewable energy source TSTC temperature in standard test conditions
RPC reactive power control V voltage of point of connection
R/X ratio the amount of resistance of a line divided by its reactance V2i voltage of the secondary side of transformer at times (i)
UPF unit power factor Wcutin wind speed when turbine starts to work
VIF voltage imbalance factor Wcutout the wind speed when turbine is stopped to prevent da-
WT wind turbine mages
Wn rated speed of wind turbine

hybrid system was proposed in Yang et al. (2007), which considers loss
of power supply probability (LPSP) and the levelized cost of energy
(LCE). In the proposed model, an iterative optimization technique was
employed, and LPSP and LCE were used for power reliability assess-
ment and analysis of the system cost, respectively.
A multi-criteria decision analysis optimization approach for de-
termining the optimal size of a hybrid PV and WT system was in-
troduced in Alsayed et al. (2013) to provide a specific balance between
economic, environmental, and social factors. In that paper, the authors
used the measured data related to the load, solar irradiance, tempera-
ture, and wind speed obtained during a year. In Dufo–Lopez et al.
(2016), a stochastic-heuristic methodology (combining Monte Carlo
simulation and genetic algorithm) was employed for optimizing a PV-
wind-diesel-battery stand-alone system to minimize the levelized cost of
energy. In addition, based on the minimum cost and maximum cus-
tomer satisfaction, an optimization problem using the mixed integer
linear programming was proposed in Chen et al. (2018) for a grid-
connected hybrid PV, WT, and storage battery system. In these two
mentioned studies, the one-year data related to the load, solar irra-
diance, temperature, and wind speed with one-hour resolution were
used.
For different combinations of a PV, WT, diesel generator, and bat-
tery energy storage system, Akram et al. (2018) has formulated an
optimization problem to determine the best possible combination for
effective and economical load service. In this method, the optimization
problem was solved to minimize the cost, reduce the emission of
greenhouse gases, and curtail dump energy. In Hussain et al. (2017), a
new technique known as iterative filter selection approach was used to
design a stand-alone PV–WT–battery hybrid system. The technique was
proposed to find the best acceptable configuration of the hybrid power
generation system by considering the minimum cost, maximum relia-
bility, and minimum unused excessive power. The authors of Al–Sharafi
et al. (2017) introduced a new optimization method for designing a
hybrid system consisting of PV, WT, battery bank, and diesel motor to
supply the load demand of a residential unit located in Saudi Arabia,
where the method includes both economical and environmental aspects
of the hybrid system.
The mentioned studies show that most of the hybrid power system
designs are based on cost, greenhouse gas emission, and dump energy.
However, in all of them, the effects of hybrid systems on distribution
network have not been investigated. Also, the effects of distribution
system operation parameters were not considered in the optimal sizing
of the PV-WT hybrid system components. Moreover, in many literature
carried out in this field, mostly stand-alone multi-source hybrid power
systems were studied. In Behravesh et al. (2018), the impacts of dif-
ferent influence levels of PV-WT hybrid systems with constant capa-
cities of PV and WT parts on voltage profile, voltage fluctuation, and
daily voltage imbalance of a residential network were studied. Never-
theless, the optimal proportion of PV and WT sizes of a PV-WT hybrid
system has not been specified, and the effect of the presence of EVs has
not been investigated so far.
It is expected to witness an ever-increasing development of PV-WT
hybrid systems on the light of their benefits and superiority compared
to a single PV or WT system. Thus, it is necessary to evaluate the effects
of high influential level of these systems on LV distribution networks
because the developed application of residential renewable power
generation resources will likely reverse the power flow and had some
adverse effects on distribution network, such as voltage increase or
decrease, voltage imbalance, and probability of overload in distribution
feeders (Karimi et al., 2016). The optimal sizing of PV and WT parts in a
hybrid system by taking into account the effects of this system on the
network operation indices is important as well. On the other hand, the
increased development of EV applications makes it essential to study
the status of residential LV distribution network in case of the high-level
penetration of PV-WT hybrid systems and EVs. Simulations for an un-
balanced three-phase four-wire low voltage residential network were
performed in the DIgSILENT PowerFactory15.1.7 software environ-
ment. The obtained results provide valuable information for both aca-
demia and industry to deal with the rapid growth of DERs in residential
networks.
The main contributions of this paper can be summarized as follows:
• Studying the effects of high penetration levels of PV-WT hybrid
systems on the operation of unbalanced three-phase four-wire low
voltage residential networks during a year and comparing it with
separate PV and WT systems.

18
V. Behravesh et al. Solar Energy 173 (2018) 17–33

• Determining the optimal size of both PV and WT parts in PV-WT C1: 185 mm2 cables with copper conductors:
hybrid systems, such that in case of a high penetration level of the Z= (0.1013 + j 0.06911504)Ω/km , Z 0 = (0.4053 + j 0.2764602)Ω/km
hybrid system, it leads to the least number of problems in the field of C2: 70 mm2 cables with copper conductors:
LV distribution networks operation. Z= (0.2694 + j 0.07225663)Ω/km , Z0 = (1.0778 + j 0.2890265)Ω/km
• Investigating the impacts of control algorithms used in the inverters C3: 70 mm2 cables with aluminum conductors:
of PV-WT hybrid systems and EVs, charge and discharge scheduling Z= (0.4435 + j0.06911504)Ω/km , Z 0 = (1.7742 + j 0.2764602)Ω/km
of EVs, and the existence of on-load tap-changer (OLTC) of LV C4: 50 mm2 cables with aluminum conductors:
transformer, on reducing the problems resulting from simultaneous Z= (0.6417 + j 0.1021018)Ω/km
high penetration levels of PV-WT hybrid systems and EVs.
• Increasing the accuracy and validity of the study results by utilizing As it was presented in Hashemi et al. (2017), LV networks are more
the measured data related to wind, solar irradiance, and the load resistive in nature, hence with higher R/X ratios (the amount of re-
with a 5-min resolution. sistance of a line divided by its reactance), which can also be observed
here. In the positive sequence of C1, C2, C3, and C4, the values of R/X
Thereby, it is possible to study different network operation pro- ratios are approximately equal to 6.3, 6.4, 3.7, and 1.5, respectively.
blems (e.g. overvoltage, under voltage, voltage imbalance, medium In this network, an OLTC maintains the voltage of phase B (the
voltage (MV) to LV transformer loading, and curtail dump power of PV- phase with maximum load and maximum voltage drop) of pole 5 (pole
WT hybrid systems) more accurately and with more details within a E) located on the secondary side of the transformer (V2 ) in a constant
year by applying the control algorithms on the PV-WT hybrid systems range as below (Behravesh et al., 2018):
and EVs, and determine the appropriate sizes of both PV and WT parts
VLB ≤ V2 ≤ VUB (1)
for a given hybrid system.
The paper is organized as follows. The modeling and measured data Here, VLB and VUB are respectively the lower and upper boundary vol-
are described in Section 2. The details of studies are given in Section 3, tages, and the local control performance of OLTC is as follows
and the results and discussions of the investigation are presented in (Behravesh et al., 2018):
Section 4. Section 5 presents the main conclusions of the work.
VLB ⩽ V2i ⩽ VUB ⇔ TAPi + 1 = TAPi (2)

This means that if the voltage is in the range of the lower

2. Approach to modeling and measured data
2.1. Test system specifications
Similar to Sunderland et al. (2016) and Pukhrem et al. (2017), this
paper also uses a three-phase four-wire low-voltage radial residential
distribution network, shown in Fig. 1, as the representative of a re-
sidential network. The network includes a part of an LV distribution
network, where the LV network itself supplies 74 residential homes
through 10 mini-pillar connections. This network is fed through a
20 kV/400 V, 500 kVA, DYN11, uK = uK0 = 6%, copperlosses = 6kW ,
noloadlosses = 1.4kW transformer. To perform studies, the MV network
is considered as a stiff network with voltage set point equal to 1 pu.
The considered network has a radial configuration, where four types
of overhead cables that are cross-linked polyethylene insulated are
utilized with the following characteristics:
(VLB = 0.95pu ) and upper (VUB = 1.05pu ) boundary voltages, then the
tap positions of the transformer in times i and i + 1 are equal. OLTC of
the LV transformer is on the LV side, where its additional voltage per
tap is 2.5% and has ± 3 taps (i.e. has 7 taps, and its middle is zero).
Also, two scenarios are considered for OLTC of the LV transformer to
analyze the simulations. In one scenario, OLTC is in Manual (0tap)
mode and in the other scenario is in Auto(7) mode.
2.2. PV-WT hybrid system model
Renewable energy sources (RESs) such as solar and wind energies
are of more importance due to their significant cost reduction and the
advances in the power electronics (Abu–Rub et al., 2014). Basically,
despite the fact that the PV and WT systems are utilized to generate
electrical energy, they suffer from some disadvantages. Solar energy is
relatively useful in summer, and wind energy is relatively useful in

Fig. 1. Three-phase four-wire low voltage residential network (Pukhrem et al., 2017).

19
V. Behravesh et al.
winter and at night time (Al–Badi and Bourdoucen, 2012). Hence, the
application of PV-WT hybrid systems is more beneficial than the sys-
tems dependent only on a single energy source. Hybrid systems can
reduce the oscillations of the single systems, increase the total energy,
and provide a more stable output power during the year (Sawle et al.,
2016; Belmili et al., 2014). The use of PV-WT hybrid systems in re-
sidential homes is expanding. As mentioned in Paska et al. (2009), due
to the meteorological changes, employing hybrid systems can increase
the efficiency and reliability of the application of RESs, and effectively
support the residential load demands.
Here a PV-WT hybrid system, as Fig. 2, is used in every residential
home.
Fig. 2 shows that at every residential home, the PV-WT hybrid
system injects its produced power to the residential home (and dis-
tribution network) through a single-phase inverter. In the performed
study, only the generated power of the inverter is important, and the DC
component of the PV-WT hybrid system is not investigated.
Since the inverter-based renewable energy sources are able to con-
trol the active and reactive power, the inverters of these sources are
allowed to vary the power factor from 0.9 lag to 0.9 lead when voltage
control strategies are employed.
2.2.1. Modeling of PV output power
With regard to the fact that the produced power of a PV system
depends on the solar radiation and the ambient temperature, and under
different operation conditions the solar radiation and temperature
differ from those of standard conditions (i.e. 1000 W/m2 irradiation,
and 25 °C), in this paper based on Fuentes et al. (2007), Eq. (3) is used
for calculation of the PV generated power.
G ⎞
PPV = PnPV ∗ ⎛ ⎜ ∗ (1 + K (Tcell−TSTC ))
⎟
G
⎝ STC ⎠ (3)
where PnPV is the rated power of the PV system (W), G expresses the
solar irradiance on the PV array in the current time step (W/m2), GSTC
states the solar irradiance in the standard test conditions
(GSTC = 1000 W/m2), Tcell is the temperature of the PV cell (°C), TSTC
denotes the temperature in the standard test conditions (TSTC = 25 °C),
and K shows the efficiency temperature coefficient, which is in the
range of −0.003 and −0.005 for crystalline silicon cells
(hereK = −0.0035 is considered).
2.2.2. Modeling of WT output power
Since the generated power of a residential wind turbine depends on
the wind speed, the operation characteristics given in Eq. (4) is used in
this paper to calculate the output power of the residential wind turbine
equipped with a permanent magnet type generator (Kanase–Patil et al.,
2011).
Fig. 2. PV-WT hybrid system in every residential home.
20
Solar Energy 173 (2018) 17–33
⎧0 if W < Wcutin, W > Wcutout
⎪ PnWT 3
⎪ (Wn3 − Wcutin3) (W ) if Wcutin < W < Wn
PWT =
⎨ − Wcutin3 (P )
⎪ (Wn3 − Wcutin3) nWT
⎪P
⎩ nWT if Wn < W < Wcutout (4)
where PWT represents the electrical power of the wind turbine (W), W is
the wind speed (m/s), Wcutin shows the wind speed when the turbine
starts operation Wcutin=2.5(m/s)), Wcut out gives the wind speed when
the turbine stops operation to prevent damages (Wcutout = 20(m/s)) , Wn
is the nominal speed of the wind turbine (Wn = 12(m/s)) , and PnWT il-
lustrates the rated power of the wind turbine system (W).
2.3. EV model
The constant advances in EVs predict a high penetration level of EVs
in the residential networks, and the load curve of the future power
systems will be completely different from that in the absence of EVs
(Sousa et al., 2012). The increased use of EVs dramatically rises the
residential house load demands, and at the same time by controlling
their charge periods EVs can improve the load demand flexibility (Wu
et al., 2017). Lithium-ion batteries are one of the most suitable batteries
with a high energy density and low self-discharging for EVs. Having this
in mind that the required time for a usual residential charging of EVs is
between 6 and 8 h, the single-phase EVs’ usual charging power
(PEV = 3.68 kVA) is used here for a charge period of 7-hour for slow
charging of lithium-ion battery (Song et al., 2011; Rodriguez–Calvo
et al., 2017).
Additionally, when a local controller in the inverter of EVs is not
available, EVs are equipped with unit power factor, and they can only
be charged with a constant power of 3.68 kVA and there are no control
actions on voltage regulation of their connection points. On the other
hand, when a local controller in the inverter of EVs is available, based
on the voltage levels of the point of connection (POC), the controller of
EVs begin to regulate the produced and consumed reactive power of the
single-phase inverter of EVs.
Additionally, when a local controller in the inverter of EVs is not
available it is assumed that the charging of EVs in residential regions is
performed once the owners of EVs return home from work around hour
17 (the battery of EVs is assumed to be completely depleted when the
EV returns home). However, in case there is a local controller in the
inverter of EVs it is possible to start charging the EVs at hour 24 (low
load condition).
2.4. Measured data
In the performed analyses, the measured data related to the solar
irradiance, temperature, and wind speed with a 5-min resolution within
V. Behravesh et al.
a one-year duration (from 01/03/2015 to 29/02/2016) obtained from
National Wind Technology Center M2 Tower in National Renewable
Energy Laboratory (NREL) are used (“NWTC M2 Tower”, 2016), and
the under-study place is located in Boulder, Colorado, USA. Also, it is
assumed that the solar irradiance, temperature, and wind speed are the
same for all residential homes.
2.4.1. Output power of PV part of PV-WT hybrid system
In the analyses, it is assumed that the PV panels are horizontally
mounted and the PV cell temperatures are simply equal to their ambient
temperature. Therefore, according to the data related to the solar ir-
radiance and ambient temperature obtained from the M2 tower with a
5-min time step during a year (from 01/03/2015 to 29/02/2016) in
Boulder, Colorado, USA (“NWTC M2 Tower”, 2016), and the per unit
(pu) generated power of the PV system calculated from Eq. (3) with a 5-
min time step during a year is presented as Fig. 3. To make the max-
imum of PPV as the maximum of PWT equal to 1 pu (to provide a better
comparisons between the optimal powers of PV and WT in the next
sections of the paper), the value of PnPV is taken into account such that
the maximum AC power delivered by PV to the network in terms of the
temperature and solar radiation during a year is equal to 1 pu, as Fig. 3
shows.
Here, the average solar irradiance and temperature with a 5-min
time step during a year in the under-study region are equal to 177 (W/
m2) and 10 °C, respectively.
2.4.2. Output power of WT part of PV-WT hybrid system
Due to the height of the residential homes and the wind turbines
located upstream the homes, the data related to the wind speed with a
5-min time step during a year (from 01/03/2015 to 29/02/2016) ob-
tained from the M2 Tower at a height of 10 m above ground level (AGL)
from this station near Boulder, Colorado (“NWTC M2 Tower”, 2016) are
used here. The average wind speed with a 5-min time step during a year
in the under-study place is equal to 3.4 m/s. Accordingly, the per unit
generated power of the WT system calculated from (4) with a 5-min
time step during a year, is shown in Fig. 4.
2.4.3. Consuming load in residential houses data
Here it is assumed that all residential homes have similar daily load
profiles with a constant power but with different peak demands.
Residential active and reactive load profiles are obtained from the load
data (active and reactive consumption loads) with a 5-min time step
within a year from a residential home located at Colorado, USA
(Hebrail and Berard, 2015). Fig. 5(a) and (b) show the per unit active
load curve and the load power factor curve of this residential home
Fig. 3. The per unit generated power curve of the PV system with a 5-min time step during a year (from 01/03/2015 to 29/02/2016) in Boulder, Colorado, USA.
21
Solar Energy 173 (2018) 17–33
with a 5-min time step within a year (from March to February), re-
spectively.
Also, Table 1 lists the peak consumption loads for all the residential
homes present in the network.
3. Details of studies
In this section, to study the effects of different sizes of PV and WT
systems related to a PV-WT hybrid system on the voltage profile, vol-
tage imbalance, the LV transformer loading, the curtail dump power of
PV-WT hybrid systems, states and scenarios have been taken into ac-
count during a year.
3.1. Study of states and scenarios
The objective of this paper is to study the effects of different PV and
WT size combinations on voltage behavior of the residential network,
the LV transformer loading, and curtail dump power of PV-WT hybrid
systems during a year to obtain an optimal and suitable combination for
PV and WT sizes in a PV-WT hybrid system. Now, given a PV-WT hybrid
system, the distributed generation power of each residential home is
obtained for a year using the superposition of PV and WT powers with a
5-min resolution (PPV − WT = PPV + PWT ). On the other hand, according
to the related standards, connecting single-phase inverters up to 10 kVA
in the residential networks level is allowed (Huda and Živanović,
2017). Hence, in the rest of this paper, 11 different states are in-
vestigated as given in Table 2.
As shown in Table 2, state 1 is related to the condition where the
residential homes are only equipped with the WT system, and state 10
represents a condition where the residential homes are only equipped to
the PV system. Other states also show different size combinations of WT
and PV systems in the residential homes.
In addition, to study the effects of 11 states, specified in Table 2, on
the voltage behavior of the residential network, the LV transformer
loading, curtail dump power of PV-WT hybrid systems during a year
under 100% penetration level of PV-WT hybrid systems and EVs (100%
penetration level shows that all residential homes have one PV-WT
hybrid system and one EV, and this penetration level represents the
future of distribution networks), four scenarios are considered as fol-
lows:
Scenario 1: Inverters of PV-WT hybrid systems and EVs in the re-
sidential homes have no controllers and operate under unit power
factor. EVs are connected to the network from hour 17 to hour 24 to
charge their batteries. OLTC of LV transformer is at Manual (0 tap)
V. Behravesh et al. Solar Energy 173 (2018) 17–33

Fig. 4. The per unit generated power curve of the WT system with a 5-min time step during a year (from 01/03/2015 to 29/02/2016) in Boulder, Colorado, USA.

mode. the network from hour 17 to hour 24 to charge their batteries. OLTC
Scenario 2: Inverters of PV-WT hybrid systems and EVs in the re- of LV transformer is at Manual (0 tap) mode.
sidential homes have Q(v) controllers (to control the voltage of Scenario 3: Inverters of PV-WT hybrid systems and EVs in the re-
connection point to the residential network). EVs are connected to sidential homes have Q(v) controllers (to control the voltage of

Fig. 5. Per unit active load (a) and load power factor (b) curves for a residential home located in Colorado, USA with a 5-min time step within a year.

22
V. Behravesh et al. Solar Energy 173 (2018) 17–33

Table 1 response, active transformer, energy storage system, active power

The percentage of customers consuming different peak load demands at dif- curtailment (APC) and reactive power control (RPC). In RPC method, Q
ferent nodes. (v) control on DERs inverter can control reactive power as a function of
Peak Number of nodes % of total the local voltage. By injecting or absorbing reactive power, this process
load consumers controls the voltage of the connection point between DERs and the grid
demand (considering the limitation on the rated size of the inverter and Var
(S) in
bounded to PF = ± 0.9). Although in LV networks (with a higher R/X
KVA
ratio), reactive power control is not as effective as high voltage (HV)
1 3,4,5,8,10,11,12,13,14,15,17,19,21,24,25,28,30, 47.3 networks (with lower R/X ratio), reactive power management by DERs
32,33,35,37,38,40,44,47,52,56,60,61,62,66,67,70,71,72 inverters with local and central control methods is still taken into ac-
2 48,53,63 4
count as an effective solution. Due to insufficient information about
3 6,42,50,54,55,57 8.1
4 22,26,34,73 5.4
other buses, local control strategies for voltage control are not as useful
5 7,18,39,43,59 6.8 as central control methods. On the other hand, central control methods
6 1,20,36,45,46,49,58 9.4 are expensive with low reliability because of probable communication
7 16,23,29,31,41,64,65,68,74 12.2 failures.
8 2,9,27,51,69 6.8
To reduce the voltage drop of the LV network, the authors in
Leemput et al. (2015) have suggested an injection of reactive power via
EVs inverter during the time EVs are connected to the grid. Also, in
Table 2
11 different states to study the network. Hossain et al. (2016), a power factor drop control method (PF(v)) with
an allowed range from 0.9 lag to 0.9 lead was used to reduce the vol-
State 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 tage variations rate and daily tap changes of the transformer. A dis-
PV output power (KVA) 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 tributed control technique was utilized in Ranaweera et al. (2017) for
WT output power (KVA) 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 residential energy storage battery units to solve the overvoltage pro-
blems due to the excessive residential PV productions. In the mentioned
paper, an optimization algorithm was used to locally calculate the set
connection point to the residential network). EVs are connected to points of active power of one hour after of the battery storage unit. If
the network from hour 24 to hour 7 to charge their batteries. OLTC these set points are not able to maintain the voltages in the acceptable
of LV transformer is at Manual (0 tap) mode. limits in the real-time, then set points of active power are modified
Scenario 4: Inverters of PV-WT hybrid systems and EVs in the re- through a central controller or reactive power of a storage inverter is
sidential homes have Q(v) controllers (to control the voltage of used.
connection point to the residential network). EVs are connected to Moreover, in some literature to increase the effectiveness of control
the network from hour 24 to hour 7 to charge their batteries. OLTC processes on voltage condition, a combination of the mentioned
of LV transformer is at Auto (7) mode. methods is employed. For instance, the authors in Pukhrem et al.
(2017) have dealt with analyzing APC and RPC methods and concluded
3.2. Study of voltage profile that the coordinated Q(v)&P(v) algorithm is one of the best voltage
control methods in LV networks. In that method, all inverters of PVs are
In the performed analyses in this paper to study the network voltage equipped with Q(v) algorithm and when the voltage deviates its ac-
profile, ANSI C84.1 standard was used. In Table 3, the acceptable limits ceptable range and VAR backup is reached to its limitations, then the
for the voltage in LV distribution systems (1 kV or less) are given based voltage support technique changes from Q(v) to P(v). Also, once the
on ANSI C84.1 standard (Short, 2014). voltage returns back to a pre-specified range, the voltage support
technique changes from P(v) to Q(v). Of course, during the application
3.3. Study of voltage imbalance of P(v) control algorithm, a part of DER's active power production for
voltage control is lost and this is not desirable.
Furthermore, referring to Ghosh and Ledwich (2002), due to the Regarding the abovementioned comments, one objective of the
single-phase relation of the loads and RESs in residential networks, proposed paper is to present a control method that besides being ef-
voltage imbalance is a prevalent power quality problem in LV dis- fective and the maximum use of the generated power by PV-WT hybrid
tribution networks, which may lead to incorrect operation of the vol- systems, it could reduce the amount of curtail dump power of the PV-
tage regulation equipment and reduce the lifelong of the customers’ WT hybrid system. Hence, a combination of the voltage control algo-
devices in the network. Hence, in the performed studies, the voltage rithm, Q(v), that is available on all DERs inverters, with other control
imbalance factor (VIF) is calculated based on IEEE Std. 1159 (2009) and methods such as shifting of charge start time of EVs and tap-changing of
according to Eq. (5). LV transformer, a new algorithm is presented and the performance of
these combinational control methods are studied. Scenario 2 is
1− 2 3−6β |VAB |4 + |VBC |4 + |VCA |4 somehow introducing the conventional control method used in the
VIF(%) = 2 ∗100%, β =
1+ 2 3−6β (|VAB |2 + |VBC |2 + |VCA |2 )2 (5) prior literature (like Pukhrem et al., 2017). In scenarios 3 and 4 we
have mixed this conventional control method with two other control
where VAB , VBC , and VCA are line-to-line voltages between phases A -B , algorithms and compared their performance with the conventional Q(v)
B -C , and C - A , respectively. According to the standard, the acceptable control. In the proposed voltage control method (Scenario 4), local
limit for voltage imbalance in LV and MV networks is 2%. Since the controls can shift the start time of EVs charge to hour 24, and by
voltage imbalance, in fact, represents the steady-state conditions, VIFs
of the network line voltages were calculated each 5-min time step to
eliminate load transients. Table 3
Allowable voltage range for LV systems based on ANSI C84.1 standard.

3.4. Study of controlling algorithm Minimum Maximum

Range A (Normal Condition) −5% +5%

To regulate the voltage of network in the presence of DERs, the Range B (Emergency Condition) −8.3% +5.8%
following methods can be employed: grid reinforcement, demand

23
V. Behravesh et al.
reactive power control of the inverter of PV-WT hybrid systems and EVs
make an effort to maintain the voltage of POC in an acceptable voltage
range at each time step. However, if the local controllers could not
maintain the voltage in its acceptable range, then the central controller
with a control command to the OLTC tries to do this task.
At first, all inverters of PV-WT hybrid systems and EVs are at UPF
(unity power factor) state and the transformer is adjusted to tap zero.
Local controls of EVs only allow the EVs charging from hour 24, and
load flow is carried out at each time step according to the power data of
residential loads, PV-WT hybrid systems and EVs. Then, the local con-
trollers start to adjust the generated and consumed reactive powers of
Fig. 6. Load flow simulation script.
24
Solar Energy 173 (2018) 17–33
single-phase inverters of PV-WT hybrid systems and EVs based on the
voltage levels of POC. Also, if the local controllers have reached to their
reactive power limits and are not able to keep the voltages of network
poles in their acceptable limits, the central controller adjusts the
transformer tap by analyzing the voltage of phase B at pole 5. This
process continues until 288 samples are simulated during a day (si-
mulation is executed with a 5-min time step).
In the PV-WT hybrid system’s inverter, the extended Q(v) algorithm
is used as Eq. (6) (Pukhrem et al., 2017):
V. Behravesh et al. Solar Energy 173 (2018) 17–33

⎧QmaxPV − WT V ≤ Vmin2 adverse effects on the operation of distribution networks, where voltage
⎪Q regulation, voltage imbalance, and distribution transformer loading are
(
V − Vmin1
⎪ maxPV − WT Vmin2 − Vmin1
⎪
) Vmin2 < V < Vmin1
main issues to discuss on. In this section, simulations are performed for
QPV − WT (V ) = 0 Vmin1 ≤ V ≤ Vmax1 each of 11 states described in Table 2 with respect to all four scenarios
⎨
⎪ (
⎪− QmaxPV − WT V − Vmax1
Vmax 2 − Vmax1 ) Vmax1 < V < Vmax 2 presented in Section 3 of the paper.
⎪− QmaxPV − WT Vmax 2 ≤ V (6)
⎩
4.1. Voltage profile
where V is the voltage of POC, and QPV − WT expresses the reactive power
of the PV-WT hybrid system’s inverter, the maximum value of which, As a consequence of the increased penetration level of PV-WT hy-
QmaxPV − WT , is calculated according to Eq. (7) (Pukhrem et al., 2017). brid systems in residential networks, the network loading conditions
change. Also, due to the oscillations in the produced power of RESs
QmaxPV − WT = PnPV − WT (1/ PFPV − WT 2)−1 (7) caused by meteorological conditions, overvoltages and under-voltages
Here PnPV − WT is the rated power of the PV-WT hybrid system’s inverter occur in the residential network (Huda and Živanović, 2017).
(PnPV − WT = 10kW ), and PFPV − WT is the power factor of the PV-WT hy- To study the LV feeder voltage, the data obtained from the load and
brid system’s inverter (PFPV − WT = 0.9). Thereby, the maximum reactive the produced power of PV-WT hybrid systems within a year were used
power of the PV-WT hybrid system’s inverter is set equal to 4.84 kVar. for the simulation objectives. With regard to the fact that the data of
Also, the values of Vmin1, Vmin2, Vmax1, and Vmax2 are inherently chosen one year with a 5-min resolution have been employed,
as 0.95 pu, 0.93 pu, 1.05 pu, and 1.07 pu, respectively. 288 × 366 = 105,408 samples (288 samples per day) of a year were
Also, in the EV’s inverter, the extended Q(v) algorithm is used as Eq. used for simulation and analysis of all 11 states described in Table 2
(8) (Pukhrem et al., 2017): with respect to all four scenarios given in Section 3. According to the
obtained results, one can easily observe that the lowest voltage level at
⎧QmaxEV V ≤ Vmin2
the beginning of the feeder (pole 1) is equal to 0.9494 pu which belongs
⎪Q
(
V − Vmin1
⎪ maxEV Vmin2 − Vmin1
⎪
) Vmin2 < V < Vmin1 to phase B in scenario 4 of state 1, and the highest voltage at the same
point (pole 1) is equal to 1.0405 pu which belongs to phase A in sce-
QEV (V ) = 0 Vmin1 ≤ V ≤ Vmax1
⎨ nario 4 of state 11, where both values are within the acceptable voltage
⎪− QmaxEV
⎪ (
V − Vmax1
Vmax 2 − Vmax1 ) Vmax1 < V < Vmax 2 limits of LV networks. As a result, for the states listed in Table 2, there is
⎪− QmaxEV Vmax 2 ≤ V (8) no voltage problem at the beginning of the feeder for all four scenarios.
⎩
However, after evaluating the boxplots of phases A, B, and C at the end
where V is the voltage of POC, and QEV expresses the reactive power of of the feeder (pole 10) in 11 states during a year for scenarios 1, 2, 3
the EV’s inverter, the maximum value of which, QmaxEV , is calculated and 4, shown in Figs. 7–9, it is seen that the voltage limits in scenario 2
according to Eq. (9) (Pukhrem et al., 2017). have been improved with respect to scenario 1, and in the scenario 3
have been improved with respect to scenario 2. The voltage limits in
QmaxEV = PnEV (1/ PFEV 2)−1 (9)
scenario 4 also have significantly been improved compared to the other
Here, PnEV is the rated power of the EVs’s inverter (PnEV = 3.68 kW), and two scenarios.
PFEV is the power factor of the EV’s inverter (PFEV = 0.9). Thereby, It is noted from Fig. 7 that the voltage limits of phase A at pole 10
QmaxEV is assumed to be 1.782 kVar. Also, the values of Vmin1, Vmin2, respectively in states 9, 8 and 7 for all four scenarios are closer to the
Vmax1, and Vmax2 are inherently chosen as 0.95 pu, 0.93 pu, 1.05 pu, acceptable voltage limits. Also, the minimum voltage of phase A at pole
and 1.07 pu, respectively. 10 in states 9, 8 and 7 for scenario 4 (the best conditions) is equal to
The whole control process is shown as the flowchart of Fig. 6. 0.9704 pu and the maximum voltage of phase A at pole 10 in states 9, 8
and 7 for scenario 4 (the best conditions) is equal to 1.0336 pu, 1.0358
4. Results and discussion pu, and 1.0383 pu, respectively.
It is noted from Fig. 8 that the voltage limits of phase B at pole 10
The increase in penetration level of RESs and EVs leads to some for scenario 1 respectively in states 8, 7 and 9, and for scenarios 2, 3

Fig. 7. Boxplot of phase A voltage at pole 10 during a year for 11 states in the conditions of four scenarios.

25
V. Behravesh et al.
Fig. 8. Boxplot of phase B voltage at pole 10 during a year for 11 states in the conditions of four scenarios.
and 4 respectively in states 9, 8 and 7 are closer to the acceptable
voltage limits. Also, the minimum voltage of phase B at pole 10 in states
9, 8 and 7 for scenario 4 (the best conditions) is equal to 0.9538 pu, and
the maximum voltage of phase B at pole 10 in states 9, 8 and 7 for
scenario 4 (the best conditions) is equal to 1.0460 pu, 1.0475 pu, and
1.0494 pu, respectively.
It is noted from Fig. 9 that the voltage limits of phase C at pole 10
for scenarios 1 and 4 respectively in states 8, 7 and 9, and for scenarios
2 and 3 respectively in states 9, 8 and 7 are closer to the acceptable
voltage limits. Also, the minimum voltage of phase C at pole 10 in states
8, 7 and 9 for scenario 4 (the best conditions) is equal to 0.9759 pu, and
the maximum voltage of phase C at pole 10 in states 8, 7 and 9 for
scenario 4 (the best conditions) is equal to 1.0380 pu, 1.0396 pu, and
1.0397 pu, respectively.
Fig. 10 shows the number of times when the phase voltages at 10
poles in 11 states for all four scenarios go under 0.95 pu during a year.
As can be seen, the maximum number of times the voltages are smaller
than 0.95 pu occurs for scenarios 1, 2, 3 and 4, respectively. Based on
the obtained results, the minimum number of times the voltages go
under 0.95 pu in scenario 1 belongs to state 1 with a number of 98,292
Fig. 9. Boxplot of phase C voltage at pole 10 during a year for 11 states in the conditions of four scenarios.
26
Solar Energy 173 (2018) 17–33
times/year, in scenario 2 belongs to state 1 with 41,289 times/year, and
in scenario 3 belongs to state 4 with 14,516 times/year. Moreover, in
scenario 4, in all states except state 1, voltage reduction to smaller than
0.95 pu has never occurred. According to Fig. 10 one can see that
among states 7, 8 and 9 in scenario 3 the number of times the voltage is
reduced to a value smaller than 0.95 pu occurs in states 7, 8 and 9,
respectively, with 14,786, 15,074, and 15,559 times/year.
Fig. 11 shows the curve for the number of times the phase voltages
at 10 poles in 11 state for scenarios 1, 2, 3 and 4 have become greater
than 1.05 pu during a year. As seen, the maximum number of times the
voltages have exceeded 1.05 pu occurs for scenarios 1, 2, 3 and 4, re-
spectively. One can see from the obtained results that the minimum
number of times the voltages are higher than 1.05 pu belongs to sce-
nario 1 of state 6 with 31,729 times/year and scenarios 2 and 3 of state
7 with 2730 and 2731 times/year, respectively. Also, in scenario 4 of
states 7, 8 and 9 no overvoltages greater than 1.05 pu have been re-
ported. Furthermore, as seen in Fig. 11, in scenario 3 the least number
of times the voltages have exceeded 1.05 pu belong to states 7, 6 and 8
with 2731, 3285, and 5791 times/year, respectively.
Since phase B at pole 10 has the worst voltage condition and state 7
V. Behravesh et al.
Fig. 10. The curve for the number of times when the phase voltages at 10 poles during a year for 11 states in the four scenarios go under 0.95 pu.
is the best state, the curves of phase B voltage at pole 10 during a year
for state 7 are shown in Fig. 12 to do the temporal analysis for four
scenarios presented in Section 3 of the paper. According to Fig. 12 one
can see that the voltage ranges with respect to the proposed voltage
control in this paper (scenario 4) has considerably improved compared
to the conventional voltage controls (scenario 2) and was able to
maintain the voltage in its allowed limits during a year.
4.2. Voltage imbalance
In unbalanced three-phase four-wire low voltage residential net-
works, the presence of single-phase PV-WT hybrid systems and different
loads may cause an imbalance on the residential network (Karimi et al.,
2016; Huda and Živanović, 2017). In this section, 11 states described in
Table 2 are used for evaluating three-phase voltage imbalance during a
year (105408 samples) for all four scenarios proposed in Section 3 of
the paper. According to the provided results, phase VIFs become higher
as we approach the end-point of the feeder. For all the considered
conditions, phase VIFs at the beginning of the feeder are less than
0.65%, hence with respect to the states given in Table 2, there is no
problem at the beginning of the feeder for all four scenarios proposed.
Despite this, by investigating the boxplot of phase VIFs at the end of the
feeder (pole 10) during a year for 11 states in the conditions of sce-
narios 1, 2, 3 and 4, shown in Fig. 13, it is demonstrated that the phase
VIFs in scenarios 2, 3 and 4 are very smaller than that of scenario 1.
Consequently, it can be inferred that with respect to scenarios 2, 3 and 4
27
Solar Energy 173 (2018) 17–33
in all the conditions during a year, there are no phase voltage im-
balances in the presented network.
Since the phase VIF at the end of the feeder (pole 10) is great, the
curves of the phase VIF at pole 10 during a year for state 7 are shown in
Fig. 14 to do the temporal analysis for four scenarios presented in
Section 3 of the paper. As seen in Fig. 14, for all voltage controls
(scenarios 2, 3 and 4), the phase VIF at pole 10 is maintained in its
allowed range.
4.3. Transformer loading
In LV distribution networks with a high penetration level of RESs,
the oscillations of RESs produced power and as a result, the consider-
able difference between the supply and demand sides may lead to the
reverse power flow and transformer overloading (Shah et al., 2015).
Provided the transformer loading is larger than 100% of its rated
power, then the transformer is overloaded and this may cause it some
damages. Once the transformer loading exceeds the rated power of
transformer due to a large difference between the supply and demand
sides or even because of the reverse power flow, then congestion pro-
blems in MV/LV transformers may occur (Su et al., 2017; Haque et al.,
2017). In this section, in order to study the LV transformer loading
during a year (105,408 samples) for all scenarios proposed in Section 3,
11 states as described in Table 2 are taken into account. After studying
the boxplot of the transformer loading percentage during a year for 11
states in scenarios 1, 2, 3 and 4, as shown in Fig. 15, it is seen that the
V. Behravesh et al. Solar Energy 173 (2018) 17–33

Fig. 11. The curve for the number of times when the phase voltages at 10 poles during a year for 11 states in scenarios 1, 2, 3 and 4 are greater than 1.05 pu.

Fig. 12. The curves of phase B voltage at pole 10 during a year for state 7.

lowest maximum transformer loading percentage, equal to 133%, oc-
curs in scenario 1 with respect to the states 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10,
whereas the value in scenario 2, equal to 128%, happens in states 7, 8
and 9. Also, the same quantity in scenarios 3 and 4, respectively equal
to 118% and 119%, occur in state 9.
It is noted from Fig. 15 that the lowest maximum transformer
loading percentage for scenarios 2, 3 and 4 occurs in states 9, 8 and 7,
respectively, and are more suitable for the transformer.
Fig. 16 shows the curve for the number of times during a year for 11
states and in the conditions of scenarios 1, 2, 3 and 4, the transformer
load has exceeded 100%. As observed, the maximum number of times
the transformer has exceeded 100% occurs for scenarios 1, 2, 3 and 4,
respectively. One can see from the obtained results that the minimum
number of times the transformer load is beyond 100% belongs to sce-
narios 1, 2, 3 and 4 of state 7, with 1740, 1100, 150, 230 times/year,
respectively. Moreover, according to Fig. 16, it is observed that the

28
V. Behravesh et al.
Fig. 13. Boxplot of phase VIFs at pole 10 during a year for 11 states in the conditions of scenarios 1, 2, 3 and 4.
Fig. 14. The curves of phase VIF at pole 10 during a year for state 7.
minimum number of times the transformer load is higher than 100%
occurred for each of four scenarios in states 7, 8 and 6, respectively.
Fig. 17 shows the transformer loading during a year for state 7 re-
lated to the temporal analysis of four scenarios presented in Section 3.
According to this figure, it is seen that during a year, the proposed
voltage control in this paper (scenario 4) leads to the least transformer
loading during a year compared to the conventional control (scenario
2).
4.4. Curtail dump power of PV-WT hybrid systems
In a residential network with a high penetration level of PV-WT
hybrid systems, when the voltage of the connection point of the PV-WT
hybrid system to the distribution network is higher than 1.05 pu (after
operation of voltage controllers), the power generation outage of these
systems should be applied in order to prevent the occurrence of over-
voltages in the network. In this section, in order to study the curtail
dump power of PV-WT hybrid systems during a year (105408 samples)
for each of the four scenarios proposed in Section 3 states described in
Table 2 are taken into account. After studying the mentioned quantity
for 11 states in the conditions of scenarios 1, 2, 3 and 4, as in Fig. 18, it
is seen that the minimum power outage occurs in scenario 1 for state 6,
29
Solar Energy 173 (2018) 17–33
in scenario 2 for state 7, in scenario 3 for state 7, and in scenario 4 for
state 9 with amounts of 585,669 kW, 80,151 kW, 80,170 kW, and 0 kW,
respectively.
Referring to Fig. 18 makes it clear that curtail dump power of PV-
WT hybrid systems has the minimum value in scenario 1 for states 6, 5
and 7, in scenarios 2 and 3 for states 7, 6 and 8, and in scenario 4 for
states 9, 8 and 7, respectively, and this is more optimal.
Furthermore, the curtail dump power of PV-WT hybrid systems
during a year for state 7 for temporal analysis is shown in Fig. 19 for
four scenarios presented in Section 3. Based on Fig. 19 it is observed
that the curtail dump power of PV-WT hybrid systems with respect to
the proposed voltage control in this paper (scenario 4) has the
minimum value compared to other conventional voltage controls
(scenarios 2 and 3). Also, the proposed voltage control was able to
maintain the network voltage in its limits with minimum curtail dump
power of PV-WT hybrid systems during a year.
5. Conclusions
With increased penetration level of single-phase DERs in a re-
sidential network, the probability of occurrence of overvoltage, under
voltage, high voltage imbalance, overloading of LV transformer, and
V. Behravesh et al.
Fig. 15. Boxplot for the transformer loading percentage during a year for 11 states in the conditions of scenarios 1, 2, 3 and 4.
Fig. 16. The curve for the number of times that transformer loading during a year for 11 states in the conditions of scenarios 1, 2, 3 and 4 has exceeded 100%
curtail dump power of PV-WT hybrid systems is unavoidable. However,
using suitable size combinations for PV and WT it is possible to ap-
propriately manage these events.
In this paper, the effects of different size combinations of PV and WT
on voltage behavior of residential networks, LV transformer loading
and curtail dump power of PV-WT hybrid systems have been evaluated
during a year to obtain a desired and optimal combination of PV and
WT sizes in a PV-WT hybrid system. The data used in this paper are
extracted from the measured data related to the load of residential
homes, wind speed, solar irradiance, temperature with a 5-min re-
solution, and also the real data of DERs equipment in order to obtain
actual and reliable results.
At first, 11 states are presented considering different size combi-
nations for PV and WT from 0 kVA up to 10 kVA. Then, the voltage
behavior of residential networks, LV transformer loading and curtail
dump power of PV-WT hybrid systems for 11 states and four scenarios,
proposed in Section 3, are simulated and studied under 100% pene-
tration level of PV-WT hybrid systems and EVs (the future scenario with
30
Solar Energy 173 (2018) 17–33
a high accumulation of DERs) using DIgSILENT PowerFactory15.1.7.
According to the studies, the following conclusions are specified,
which provide valuable information for both academia and industry
sections regarding the optimal and suitable combination of PV and WT
sizes in a PV-WT hybrid system:
1. In order to maintain the LV feeder voltages in the acceptable limits,
the inverter of PV-WT hybrid systems and EVs in residential homes
must have a Q(v) controller (to control the voltage of their con-
nection point to the LV network). Also, the battery of EVs should be
charged by a controller from hour 24 to hour 7 and the LV trans-
former must be equipped with an OLTC (scenario 4).
2. The phase voltages in the LV feeder for those scenarios that the
inverter of PV-WT hybrid systems and EVs in residential homes
have a Q(v) controller (scenarios 2, 3 and 4), are closer to the ac-
ceptable voltage limits in states 9, 8 and 7, respectively.
3. In scenario 4 and for all states except state 1, no undervoltages less
than 0.95 pu have occurred. Among the states 7, 8 and 9 in scenario
V. Behravesh et al. Solar Energy 173 (2018) 17–33

Fig. 17. The curves of transformer loading during a year for state 7.

3, the minimum number of times the voltages become smaller than
0.95 pu occur in states 7, 8 and 9, respectively.
4. In scenario 4 of states 7, 8 and 9 no overvoltages higher than 1.05
pu have occurred. Also, in scenario 3 the minimum number of times
the voltages have exceeded 1.05 pu occurs for states 7, 6 and 8,
respectively.
5. For the scenarios where the inverter of PV-WT hybrid systems and
EVs in residential homes are equipped with a Q(v) controller, the
phase VIFs in the LV feeder are around the standard value and there
are no problems regarding the phase VIFs in the LV feeder.
6. The maximum transformer loading percentages in scenarios 2, 3
and 4 are the minimum values for states 9, 8 and 7, respectively.
7. The minimum number of times the transformer load exceeds 100%
happens for all four scenarios in states 7, 8 and 6, respectively.

Fig. 18. Curtail dump power of PV-WT hybrid systems in one year (KW).

31
V. Behravesh et al.
Fig. 19. The curves of curtail dump power of PV-WT hybrid systems during a year for state 7.
8. The minimum amount of curtail dump power of PV-WT hybrid
systems for scenario 1 occurs in states 6, 5 and 7, respectively, and
the same happens for scenarios 2 and 3 in states 7, 6 and 8, and for
scenario 4 in states 9, 8 and 7, respectively.
9. According to the results of the temporal analysis, it is seen that the
voltage boundaries with respect to the proposed voltage control in
this paper (scenario 4) are maintained more in their acceptable
ranges compared to the conventional controls (scenario 2).
10. Based on the results of temporal analysis one can easily see that the
phase VIF in all poles is in its allowed range with respect to all
voltage controls (scenarios 2, 3 and 4).
11. Based on the results of temporal analysis it can be seen that the
proposed voltage control in this paper (scenario 4) leads to the
minimum transformer loading compared to the conventional vol-
tage controls (scenario 2).
12. Based on the results of temporal analysis it is observed that the
curtail dump power of PV-WT hybrid systems with respect to the
proposed voltage control in this paper (scenario 4) has the
minimum value compared to the conventional voltage controls
(scenarios 2 and 3) in maintaining the network voltage at it's ac-
ceptable range.
One can vividly see from the obtained results that the selection of
size combinations for PV and WT systems have an outstanding effect on
the voltage behavior of distribution networks, the LV transformer
loading and curtail dump power of PV-WT hybrid systems. Hence, it is
essential to employ the proposed methodology in this paper for the
optimal selection of PV and WT sizes in PV-WT hybrid systems. As il-
lustrated in the paper, when the inverter of PV-WT hybrid systems and
EVs in residential homes has a Q(v) controller and the batteries of EVs
are charges by a controller from hour 24 to hour 7. and the LV trans-
former is equipped with an OLTC (in the scenarios where a voltage
controller is used), the optimal and suitable size combination of PV and
WT in a PV-WT hybrid system is suggested as PV = 6 kVA, WT = 4 kVA
(state 7) and/or PV = 7 kVA, WT = 3 kVA (state 8) for the specified
geographical location and the presented network.
Also, to develop the implemented work for the future works, dy-
namic analysis of combined controllers can be taken into account and
analyze other optimal combined controllers as well.
References
Abu-Rub, H., Malinowski, M., Al-Haddad, K., 2014. Power Electronics for Renewable
Energy Systems, Transportation and Industrial Applications. John Wiley & Sons.
Akram, U., Khalid, M., Shafiq, S., 2018. An improved optimal sizing methodology for
future autonomous residential smart power systems. IEEE Access, vol. 3536, 2018.
32
Solar Energy 173 (2018) 17–33
Al Busaidi, A.S., Kazem, H.A., Al-Badi, A.H., Khan, M.F., 2016. A review of optimum
sizing of hybrid PV–Wind renewable energy systems in Oman. Renew. Sustain.
Energy Rev. 53, 185–193.
Al-Badi, A.H., Bourdoucen, H., 2012. Feasibility analysis of renewable hybrid energy
supply options for Masirah Island. Int. J. Sustain. Eng. 5 (3), 244–251.
Alsayed, M., Cacciato, M., Scarcella, G., Scelba, G., 2013. Multicriteria optimal sizing of
photovoltaic-wind turbine grid connected systems. IEEE Trans. Energy Convers. 28
(2), 370–379.
Al-Sharafi, A., Yilbas, B.S., Sahin, A.Z., Ayar, T., 2017. Performance assessment of hybrid
power generation systems: economic and environmental impacts. Energy Convers.
Manage. 132, 418–431.
Behravesh, V., Keypour, R., Foroud, A.A., 2018. Stochastic analysis of solar and wind
hybrid rooftop generation systems and their impact on voltage behavior in low vol-
tage distribution systems. Sol. Energy 166, 317–333.
Belmili, H., Haddadi, M., Bacha, S., Almi, M.F., Bendib, B., Fayçal, M., 2014. Sizing stand-
alone photovoltaic–wind hybrid system: techno-economic analysis and optimization.
Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 30, 821–832.
Bernal-Agustín, J.L., Dufo-Lopez, R., 2009. Simulation and optimization of stand-alone
hybrid renewable energy systems. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 13 (8), 2111–2118.
Camilo, F.M., Castro, R., Almeida, M.E., Pires, V.F., 2017. Economic assessment of re-
sidential PV systems with self-consumption and storage in Portugal. Sol. Energy 150,
353–362.
Campos, P., Troncoso, L., Lund, P.D., Cuevas, C., Fissore, A., Garcia, R., 2016. Potential of
distributed photovoltaics in urban Chile. Sol. Energy 135, 43–49.
Chen, J., Zhang, W., Li, J., Zhang, W., Liu, Y., Zhao, B., Zhang, Y., 2018. Optimal sizing
for grid-tied microgrids with consideration of joint optimization of planning and
operation. IEEE Trans. Sustain. Energy 9 (1), 237–248.
Dufo-Lopez, R., Cristobal-Monreal, I.R., Yusta, J.M.J.M., Dufo-López, R., Cristóbal-
Monreal, I.R., Yusta, J.M.J.M., Dufo-Lopez, R., Cristobal-Monreal, I.R., Yusta,
J.M.J.M., 2016. Stochastic-heuristic methodology for the optimisation of components
and control variables of PV-wind-diesel-battery stand-alone systems. Renew. Energy
99, 919–935.
Escobar, B., Hernández, J., Barbosa, R., Verde-Gómez, Y., 2013. Analytical model as a tool
for the sizing of a hydrogen production system based on renewable energy: the
Mexican Caribbean as a case of study. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 38 (28),
12562–12569.
Fuentes, M., Nofuentes, G., Aguilera, J., Talavera, D.L., Castro, M., 2007. Application and
validation of algebraic methods to predict the behaviour of crystalline silicon PV
modules in Mediterranean climates. Sol. Energy 81 (11), 1396–1408.
Ghosh, Arindam, Ledwich, G., 2002. Power Quality Enhancement Using Custom Power
Devices. Kluwer Academic.
Goel, S., Sharma, R., 2017. Performance evaluation of stand alone, grid connected and
hybrid renewable energy systems for rural application: a comparative review. Renew.
Sustain. Energy Rev. 78(October), 1378–1389.
Haque, A.N.M.M., Nguyen, P.H., Vo, T.H., Bliek, F.W., 2017. Agent-based unified ap-
proach for thermal and voltage constraint management in LV distribution network.
Electr. Power Syst. Res. 143, 462–473.
Hashemi, S., Østergaard, J., Degner, T., Brandl, R., Heckmann, W., 2017. Efficient control
of active transformers for increasing the pv hosting capacity of lv grids. IEEE Trans.
Ind. Informatics 13 (1), 270–277.
Hebrail, G., Berard, A., 2015. UCI Machine Learning Repository, Individual household
electric power consumption Data Set. [Online]. Available: https://archive.ics.uci.
edu/ml/datasets/individual+household+electric+power+consumption (accessed:
14-Dec-2016).
Hossain, M.I., Yan, R., Saha, T.K., 2016. Investigation of the interaction between step
voltage regulators and large-scale photovoltaic systems regarding voltage regulation
and unbalance. IET Renew. Power Gener. 10 (3), 299–309.
Huda, A.S.N., Živanović, R., 2017. Large-scale integration of distributed generation into
distribution networks: study objectives, review of models and computational tools.
V. Behravesh et al.
Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 76, 974–988.
Hussain, S., Al-ammari, R., Iqbal, A., Jafar, M., Padmanaban, S., 2017. Optimisation of
hybrid renewable energy system using iterative filter selection approach. IET Renew.
Power Gener. 11 (11), 1440–1445.
“IEEE Std 1159, 2009. IEEE Recommended Practice for Monitoring Electric Power
Quality,” IEEE.
Kanase-Patil, A.B., Saini, R.P., Sharma, M.P., 2011. Sizing of integrated renewable energy
system based on load profiles and reliability index for the state of Uttarakhand in
India. Renew. Energy 36 (11), 2809–2821.
Karimi, M., Mokhlis, H., Naidu, K., Uddin, S., Bakar, A.H.A.A., 2016. Photovoltaic pe-
netration issues and impacts in distribution network–a review. Renew. Sustain.
Energy Rev. 53, 594–605.
Leemput, N., Geth, F., Van Roy, J., Büscher, J., Driesen, J., 2015. Reactive power support
in residential LV distribution grids through electric vehicle charging. Sustain. Energy
Grids Networks 3, 24–35.
Luna-Rubio, R., Trejo-Perea, M., Vargas-Vázquez, D., Ríos-Moreno, G.J., 2012. Optimal
sizing of renewable hybrids energy systems: a review of methodologies. Sol. Energy
86 (4), 1077–1088.
“NWTC M2 Tower,” 2016. [Online]. Available: https://www.nrel.gov/midc/nwtc_m2/
(accessed: 14-Dec-2016).
Paska, J., Biczel, P., Kłos, M., 2009. Hybrid power systems–an effective way of utilising
primary energy sources. Renew. Energy 34 (11), 2414–2421.
Pukhrem, S., Basu, M., Conlon, M.F., Sunderland, K., 2017. Enhanced network voltage
management techniques under the proliferation of rooftop solar PV installation in
low-voltage distribution network. IEEE J. Emerg. Sel. Top. Power Electron. 5 (2),
681–694.
Ranaweera, I., Midtgård, O.-M., Korpås, M., 2017. Distributed control scheme for re-
sidential battery energy storage units coupled with PV systems. Renew. Energy.
Rehman, S., Al-Hadhrami, L.M., 2010. Study of a solar PV–diesel–battery hybrid power
system for a remotely located population near Rafha, Saudi Arabia. Energy 35 (12),
4986–4995.
33
Solar Energy 173 (2018) 17–33
Rodriguez-Calvo, A., Cossent, R., Frías, P., 2017. Integration of PV and EVs in unbalanced
residential LV networks and implications for the smart grid and advanced metering
infrastructure deployment. Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst. 91, 121–134.
Sawle, Y., Gupta, S.C., Bohre, A.K., Kumar Bohre, A., 2016. PV-wind hybrid system: a
review with case study. Cogent Eng. 3 (1), 1–31.
Shah, R., Mithulananthan, N., Bansal, R.C., Ramachandaramurthy, V.K., 2015. A review
of key power system stability challenges for large-scale PV integration. Renew.
Sustain. Energy Rev. 41, 1423–1436.
Shahirinia, A.H., Tafreshi, S.M.M., Gastaj, A.H., Moghaddomjoo, A.R., 2005. Optimal
sizing of hybrid power system using genetic algorithm. In: International Conference
on Future Power Systems, 2005, p. 6–pp.
Short, T.A., 2014. Electric Power Distribution Handbook. CRC Press.
Singh, S., Singh, M., Kaushik, S.C., 2016. A review on optimization techniques for sizing
of solar-wind hybrid energy systems. Int. J. Green Energy 13 (15), 1564–1578.
Song, Y., Yang, Y., Hu, Z., 2011. Present status and development trend of batteries for
electric vehicles. Power Syst. Technol. 4, 2.
Sousa, T., Morais, H., Vale, Z., Faria, P., Soares, J., 2012. Intelligent energy resource
management considering vehicle-to-grid: a simulated annealing approach. IEEE
Trans. Smart Grid 3 (1), 535–542.
Su, C.-L., Pu, Y.-C., Ching, H.-M., Kuo, C.-L., Kuo, J.-H., 2017. Design of transformer load
monitoring systems by utilizing smart meter data. In: IEEE 26th International
Symposium on Industrial Electronics (ISIE), 2017, 2017, pp. 88–92.
Sunderland, K., Coppo, M., Conlon, M., Turri, R., 2016. A correction current injection
method for power flow analysis of unbalanced multiple-grounded 4-wire distribution
networks. Electr. Power Syst. Res. 132, 30–38.
Wu, X., Hu, X., Teng, Y., Qian, S., Cheng, R., 2017. Optimal integration of a hybrid solar-
battery power source into smart home nanogrid with plug-in electric vehicle. J.
Power Sources 363, 277–283.
Yang, H., Lu, L., Zhou, W., 2007. A novel optimization sizing model for hybrid solar-wind
power generation system. Sol. energy 81 (1), 76–84.