IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER SYSTEMS, VOL. 22, NO.
2, MAY 2007
Optimal Distribution System Horizon
Planning–Part I: Formulation
Robert H. Fletcher, Senior Member, IEEE, and Kai Strunz
Abstract—This paper is the first of a two-part paper on optimal
distribution system planning. The horizon distribution planning
problem and optimal distribution system model formulation
are described. The horizon planning mission is to minimize
future costs by determining optimal design parameters given
assumptions about the future. Prior work addressed short-range
and expansion planning of subsets or combinations of design
parameters. The many distribution requirements and associated
constraints inhibited an all-inclusive evaluation of total horizon
design requirements for the 20+ year period. The proposed model
and optimization formulation provides a generalized horizon
planning approach and introduce a fully functioning comprehen-
sive horizon planning model using a perspective that encompasses
all necessary parameters and constraints. Parameters include:
substation and distribution transformer capacities; number, size,
and lengths of distribution feeders and secondary conductors;
and primary voltage class. Optimal design voltage drops and
reliability indices are determined. The horizon planning optimiza-
tion application is described and solved in the second companion
paper using continuous constrained nonlinear programming
methods. The application is demonstrated with Snohomish PUD
case studies.
Index Terms—Circuit optimization, losses, minimization
methods, optimization methods, power distribution economics,
power distribution lines, power distribution planning.
I. INTRODUCTION
T HE electric power distribution industry was built with
planning practices and design standards developed over
the past 100 years that will not be adequate in the future.
Considerable change in utility environments is expected in the
next 20 to 50 years including consumer demand for services,
improved reliability, changing consumer load characteristics,
higher marginal cost of losses, and increased distributed re-
sources. The distribution utility planning mission is to provide
long-range cost effective, affordable, and reliable service, while
ensuring consumers’ service voltages and power quality are
within standard range. The key horizon strategic need is to link
short-range investment, operations, and maintenance decisions
to a long-range view of consumer comprehensive needs and
optimal design. The distribution planning function can be di-
vided into short-range (1 to 4 years), long-range (5 to 20 years),
Manuscript received March 7, 2006; revised August 11, 2006. Paper no.
TPWRS-00105–2006.
R. H. Fletcher is with Snohomish County PUD No.1, Everett, WA 98206 USA
(e-mail:rhfletcher@snopud.com).
K. Strunz is with the Department of Electrical Engineering, University of
Washington, Seattle, WA 98195 USA (e-mail:strunz@ee.washington.edu).
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/TPWRS.2007.895173
0885-8950/$25.00 © 2007 IEEE
791
and horizon-year (20+ years) planning periods. Prior research
addressed short-range and expansion planning by partitioning
the total planning problem into a set of sub-problems handled
by available methods and techniques of total cost minimization
and optimization [1].
Power distribution cost minimization research has included
optimal substation and feeder expansion planning [2]–[5],
location and size of substations and feeders [6], [7], secondary
system design [8], selection of feeder conductors [9]–[12],
feeder reconfiguration [13], substation and feeder reliability
evaluation and design [14]–[16], and primary and secondary
design [17].
Optimization methods used in short-range and long-range
planning problems have included a variety of approaches
ranging from single-period models [8], [9] to multi-period
models [2], [3]. The single-period models solve for system
parameters for a specific point in time. The multi-period models
solve a series of single-period models treating each period as an
expansion unit. The distribution planning models include linear
or nonlinear, deterministic or heuristic, continuous or discrete,
or mixed-integer mathematical techniques [1], [18].
The cited planning approaches do not include simultaneously
primary and secondary systems except as demonstrated in [17].
Furthermore, the primary voltage class is not considered a deci-
sion variable in prior planning approaches. Moreover, the final
built-out result of multi-period models is not always the lowest
cost horizon-year result. The prior model formulations require
large existing distribution data structures and geographical at-
tributes. The large data requirement and associated constraints
inhibited an all-inclusive valuation of horizon-year design pa-
rameters.
The new planning model being introduced produces an
optimal single-period horizon-year design encompassing all
distribution design requirements for primary and secondary
systems. The model uses a feeder layout viewed as a tree-like
circuit serving a circular sector of a round or hexagonal service
area of uniform load density [19]. This arrangement abridges
the input requirements. It provides an optimal horizon-year
design for a comprehensive set of parameters by minimizing
total cost per consumer given future assumptions. The opti-
mization design approach uses a direct search single-period
continuous nonlinear constrained optimization methodology,
which has been implemented in MatLab® computer software.
The proposed planning model is also useful to investigate the
interplay and sensitivities between large numbers of design
variables for educational purposes.
The horizon planning problem is described in Section II. In
Section III, the horizon planning model is described including
792
formulation of planning perspective, secondary systems, con-
sumer load characteristics, voltage drop and losses, system reli-
ability, input horizon-year assumptions, decision and dependent
variables, and economic evaluation. The optimization method-
ology used by the horizon planning model is briefly described
in Section IV.
II. HORIZON PLANNING PROBLEM
The distribution utility planning mission is to provide long-
range cost effective, affordable, and reliable service, while en-
suring consumers’ service voltages and power quality are within
standard range. Moreover, the horizon planning process char-
acterizes the needs of the horizon consumer and provides the
underlying design assumptions and general guidance for short-
range planning decisions.
A. Horizon Plan Comparative Assessments
The horizon plan provides a view of the future with general-
ized characteristics given a set of assumptions about the future.
As alternative scenarios are identified for consumer load charac-
teristics, cost of energy, consumer density, and distributed gen-
eration application, the generalized impacts on the distribution
system can be observed. Because the future is uncertain, it is
necessary to evaluate horizon plans over a large number of pos-
sible futures. The proposed horizon planning model provides the
core analysis simulation used in the horizon planning process
to determine the approximate relative consumer cost and design
for each specific future scenario.
B. Spatial Forecast Evaluations
Spatial land-use forecasts prepared by municipal, county,
state governments, or regional planning agencies, provide
information about the future. With this information, long-range
spatial electric load forecasts are performed by utilities to iden-
tify the amount of power that must be delivered, and where and
when it will be needed. Most local governmental jurisdictions
routinely develop a comprehensive long-range plan which
identifies the horizon consumer types and zone densities for
each quarter mile section [20].
The horizon planning model identifies the distribution system
impact of proposed changes in spatial land-use forecasts.
Horizon planning is performed by considering generalized ho-
mogeneous assessments of medium load densities for suburban
or urban residential areas with uniform load distribution. The
consumer loads, dispersed generation, and demand side man-
agement are assumed as a combined load mix of represented
load patterns.
C. Short-Range Expansion Planning
The horizon planning model is used to test underlying de-
sign assumptions and provide general guidance and strategic
direction for short-range planning, and to assure that design
standards do not conflict with a long-range view of the future.
Horizon planning ensures that short-range decisions have con-
tinued and lasting value by supporting an optimal low cost dis-
tribution system. The horizon plan only needs enough detail to
describe the general design element attributes such as conductor
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER SYSTEMS, VOL. 22, NO. 2, MAY 2007
sizing, transformer sizing, number of feeders, primary voltage
class, and system design voltage drops.
The proposed horizon model will aid the determination of the
horizon-year design used in short-range expansion models. Sev-
eral papers have introduced short-range expansion models using
a technique that can be best described as a pseudo dynamic al-
gorithm, Sun [21], Ramirez-Rosado and Gönen [4] and Vaziri
[3]. In their distribution expansion approaches, the end expan-
sion stage identifies the set of expansion elements to be used for
the entire planning period. A series of single stage algorithms
are employed for the intermediate short-range stages. The al-
gorithm for the short-range stages is formulated to select only
elements from the end stage design i.e., conductor sizes, number
of feeders, size and location of power transformers. The horizon
planning model developed in this paper provides a comprehen-
sive set of optimal end stage design parameters that can be used
to improve the distribution short-range expansion models refer-
enced above.
III. HORIZON PLANNING MODEL
Electric utility distribution systems are composed of many
electrical elements connected in series originating from a
substation. A generalized circular approach is used to describe
a typical horizon-year substation service area. This approach
allows the solution of an optimal design with continuous
constrained nonlinear programming methods. The optimal
horizon-year design solution varies depending on assumptions
about the horizon consumer density, cost of energy, cost of
reliability impacts, and consumer load characteristics. The
proposed horizon planning model determines the optimal dis-
tance between substations, primary system voltage, substation
capacity, and number of feeders per substation. In addition, the
model determines the typical size of distribution transformer,
number of consumers, and secondary conductors per trans-
former. The inclusion of secondary systems in the optimization
model is necessary due to its impact on the total cost function
by limiting the available primary voltage drop.
Dependent variables, such as primary and secondary design
voltage drops, are derived from decision variables and horizon-
year assumption input variables. The dependent and decision
variables, and input variables are used to formulate the cost ob-
jective function and system constraints. The dependent variables
help functionally describe the distribution system horizon de-
sign. The coincidental sum of the primary and secondary voltage
drops is constrained by the acceptable voltage standard limit de-
scribed by ANSI Standard C84.1.
A. Planning Perspective for Distribution Feeders
The proposed planning model produces an optimal horizon
plan for a comprehensive set of design parameters, given system
constraints, by minimizing total cost per consumer given as-
sumptions about the future. The model allows flexibility in the
application to consider alternative horizon assumptions. Fig. 1
represents typical substation service areas and feeder topologies
as shown for the Snohomish County PUD City of Everett.
In utility practice, each mature substation feeder layout is
seen as a reasonable approximation of a polygon or circle.
The final saturated build-out generally includes some overlap
FLETCHER AND STRUNZ: OPTIMAL DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM HORIZON PLANNING—PART I
Fig. 1. Typical substation area topology.
Fig. 2. Horizon distribution system design topology.
of circles as well as nonserved areas. In order to reduce input
data requirements, while providing flexibility in the application
of different horizon assumptions, the model is based on an
ideal feeder layout that views feeders as being tree-like circuits
serving a circular sector of a round or polygonal service area
[19].
The horizon-year service area is defined as a circular area of
uniform load and consumers per square mile, and, henceforth,
referred to as substation area. The solution of the decision vari-
ables varies depending on horizon-year assumption input vari-
ables. The model is designed to characterize a typical substation
area in terms of its size and number of feeders. At the same time,
it includes a large number of decision variables, including sec-
ondary systems and primary voltage class.
In Fig. 2, a description of a typical four-feeder substation area
is shown. Each feeder is configured with one main. The length
of feeder mains and laterals are formulated as a function of the
radius of the substation circle and angle of feeder circular sector.
All feeders are assumed radial with laterals branching perpen-
dicular to mains.
This circular substation area arrangement allows for ease in
determining system reliability cost impacts, system operational
loss costs, element voltage drops, and equipment installation
costs. The radial arrangement will allow network configuration
and operation with adjacent like substation areas as required for
feeder and substation contingency backup.
The length of the feeder main is . The maximum lateral
length is and laterals are separated by a constant dis-
tance . The number of feeders is . Each feeder circular
sector angle is where in rad. The feeder service
793
area is a circular sector defined as . Each lateral line
is composed of both three-phase and single-phase portions with
the ratio of lengths being defined by an input variable.
The feeder main loading is, therefore, nonuniform with the
distance to the feeder main load center at ,
which is the center of gravity for a circular sector. All lateral line
loading is uniform with equally spaced distribution transformers
and represented as a rectangle load area. The lateral load center
is at one-half of the lateral length. The lowest primary voltage
approximation in the substation area is assumed to be at the end
of the longest lateral line connected at the end of the feeder main.
The area load density LD is the product of assumed consumer
density CD, consumer peak demand , and consumer coin-
cidence factor or . The substation
load is a product of load density LD and substation area
. The number of consumers per substation area is
a product of consumer density CD and substation area .
The area served by the feeder laterals can be viewed as two tri-
angular areas on either side of the feeder main. The laterals are
tracing a grid of parallel roads separated by an equal distance
. These triangular areas can be reassembled as a rectangle
area for the purpose of approximating the total length of laterals.
For an efficient design, and to avoid unnecessary overlap of
laterals, the total length of lateral lines per substation area
is only a function of substation radius , the lateral separation
distance , and independent of the number of feeders . It
is assumed that a typical lateral has a length as ex-
perienced in practice with laterals having similar lengths along a
feeder main. It is observed that if the number of laterals per main
is , then the total length of laterals per main becomes
. To avoid that the total length of lateral lines
per substation area depends on angle and so guarantee that the
total length of lateral lines is only a function of and ,
it becomes necessary to apply an adjustment to the number of
laterals per feeder as follows. Feeder service area and maximum
length of laterals are
(1)
(2)
The area served by the laterals for each main is
(3)
The adjusted number of laterals per main is then
(4)
The total adjusted lateral line length per main is then
(5)
The length of laterals per substation area is
(6)
Hence, the total length of lateral lines per substation depends
only on and .
794 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER SYSTEMS, VOL. 22, NO. 2, MAY 2007

Fig. 3. Maximum number of consumers per transformer.

B. Secondary Systems C. Consumer Load Characteristics

The horizon planning model includes distribution trans- The consumer load characteristics are defined by a homoge-
formers and associated secondary lines. Since all lateral line neous uniform consumer density CD, coincidence factor ,
loading is assumed uniformly distributed with equally spaced peak load , and consumer load factor . The consumer
transformers, the typical transformer size can be included expected annual energy consumption is derived as
as a decision variable. The maximum number of consumers .
allowed for a given distribution transformer size The distribution system elements include distribution trans-
is constrained by spacing between consumers on a lateral former, secondary line, lateral line, main line, and substation
line and the maximum allowed secondary length . As the power transformer. To determine the demand loading on each
number of consumers per transformer is altered, the number particular system element, the number of consumer demands
of consumers per secondary conductor and number of served by the element are totaled, and diversified by the el-
secondaries per transformer are also impacted, and can ement’s associative coincidence factor. For a system element
be treated as decision variables. The number of consumers per serving a group of consumers , the Snohomish County
transformer is given as . PUD empirical developed element coincidence factor is
The number of consumers per each lateral is given as .
The peak demand is defined for the following six system
(7) elements: substation power transformer , main feeder
, lateral three-phase line , lateral single-phase line
The spacing between consumers on a lateral line is , distribution transformer , and secondary line
. The peak demand for each element is determined by
(8)
(9)
Consumers are assumed connected to the end of secondaries of The application of distributed generation is accomplished by
length which ensures that the maximum secondary voltage adjustment to typical consumer load characteristics and .
drop is identified. This generalization provides for a conserva- The distribution element phase current is represented as a
tive approximation of the maximum secondary voltage drop and function of element load demand and element base line-to-
secondary losses. neutral voltage .
For various secondary maximum allowed lengths, Fig. 3 The peak responsibility factors used to discount voltage
shows a typical relationship observed between the maximum drops, load factors, and loss factors can be derived for any
number of consumers per transformer, consumer separation system element. Peak responsibility factor and load
distance along laterals , and maximum secondary length factor for a given set of and are defined as
based on Snohomish PUD historical installation practices.

From data depicted in Fig. 3, the maximum number of con- (10)

sumers per distribution transformer can be represented as a con-
straint equation in the horizon model as a continuous empirical The effective element loss factor is less than load factor
function of consumer separation along laterals and max- and greater than , and is user-defined as a function
imum allowable secondary length . of load factor, i.e., [19].
FLETCHER AND STRUNZ: OPTIMAL DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM HORIZON PLANNING—PART I 795

D. Voltage Drops and Losses
Voltage drop relationships are formulated for only five dis-
tribution system elements: main feeder, lateral three-phase and
single-phase lines, distribution transformers, and secondary
lines. The voltage drop for the substation power transformer
is not considered. System loss relationships are formulated
for all six system elements including the substation power
transformer.
1) Voltage Drop Formulation: The general form of voltage
drop in Volts across the system line element when carrying
the load current can be approximated by
(11)
where and are line resistance and reactance per unit
length respectively, is the consumer load power factor angle,
and represents the system line element. The horizon planning
model assumes that the consumer reactive load and reactive
line losses are effectively compensated for reactive power at
the load centers, which is an attribute of an optimally designed
distribution system. Thus the distribution system consumer
load power factor is unity. By considering this unity power
factor design criterion for all consumer loads, the value of
is zero. Thus, resistance predominantly influences the element
voltage drop if the power factor angle is assumed negligible.
Therefore, the voltage drop across any distribution system line
element is given as
(12)
The maximum voltage drop for a distribution system element
is determined as a line-to-neutral per unit voltage drop of the
applied base primary or secondary voltage. The base voltages
used in the per unit system are either the primary line-to-neutral
voltage , or the secondary line-to-neutral voltage
In order to determine the voltage drop in each line element
for associated element phase current , it is convenient to find
the equivalent load center distance for each line element to
fairly represent the associated network topology [19]. The per
unit voltage drop across any line element then becomes
element load centers can be represented by using methods
described in [19] as
(15)
(16)
The secondary line element equivalent load center distance
is located at the load receiving end of the secondary line,
therefore, . The distribution transformer voltage
drop is similarly derived with the term replaced by
the transformer series resistance.
The total coincidental per unit voltage drop formula-
tion used by the planning model is determined as the sum of the
weighted voltage drops of the five series elements defined
in Section III-D
(17)
The primary system voltage drop is formulated as the
coincidental sum of the main and lateral voltage drops only.
The service voltage drop is formulated as the coinci-
dental sum of the distribution transformer and longest secondary
voltage drop.
2) Loss Formulation: In order to determine the peak loss in
each for the six series elements, it is necessary to find the equiv-
alent loss center distances to fairly represent the associated
network topology [19]. The general form of the peak loss of el-
ement is then
(18)
Given a triangle load area of uniform load density, the loss
. center can be represented as 8/15 of the total length from the
vertex as described in [19]. Since a circular section is closely
approximated by a triangular area, the main feeder element loss
center assuming a circular section load distribution can be ap-
proximated as
(19)

(13) The three-phase and single-phase lateral element loss centers

can be formulated as a function of . For example, the lat-
where is the line-to-neutral base voltage or eral single-phase line element loss center assuming a rectan-
. The main feeder line element load center distance is gular load area of uniform load density is given by
represented as the center of gravity of a circular section where
the radius is and arc angle is and given as (20)

(14) The secondary loss center is represented as . The

distribution transformer loss demand is similarly derived with
the term replaced by the transformer series resistance.
The horizon planning model assumes that lateral line elements
are composed of three-phase and single-phase sub-elements
E. System Reliability
connected in series. The factor is the ratio of the length
of three-phase lateral line element to total lateral line length Reliability assessment methods fall into two classes: simula-
. For the lateral line sub-element three-phase line cur- tion and analytical [22]. Simulation is the most flexible method,
rent and single-phase line current , the lateral but suffers in computation time and uncertainty of precision.
796
TABLE I
DECISION VARIABLES WITH EXAMPLE BOUNDS
Analytical methods can be further divided into network mod-
eling and Markov modeling. The horizon planning model ap-
plies a network modeling approach [23].
Network modeling has been the most popular technique
for distribution system reliability analysis from the first EPRI
programs to programs recently developed and used by major
utilities. This popularity stems from the generalization of the
method, and the natural similarities between the network mod-
eling and the distribution system topology. Network modeling
can handle basic dependent events such as fault isolation and
load restoration required with horizon planning.
The optimal horizon model includes traditional generalized
radial network modeling. The design of the horizon model pro-
vides a framework to determine the optimal level of reliability
for a chosen protection and fault isolation scheme, and assump-
tions about consumer sustained interruption costs of frequency
and duration.
The substation area reliability indices for sustained outages
SAIFI “System Average Interruption Frequency Index” and
SAIDI “…Duration Index” [24] are a function of the substation
circular arrangement. For most utilities, these two indices can
adequately represent reliability for sustainable interruptions.
The horizon model objective cost function includes the net
present value of interruption costs per consumer. The annual
cost of interruption frequency and durations is a function of
the number of consumers , the reliability indices, and
user defined reliability impact costs [25]. The reliability indices
SAIFI and SAIDI are formulated as a continuous function of
user defined element annual failure rates, repair rates, and
manual/automatic sectionalizing times.
The feeder layout shown in Fig. 2 is assumed with laterals
protected with a single fuse or recloser at the connection with
the main. Protection devices may be added in the main line.
Manually or automatically operated switches are located on
the main line adjacent to each lateral connection, immediately
downstream of each lateral connection, which provides a
two-stage switching restoration capability [26]. Each main is
assumed to have a normally open tie switch for backup from
a similar adjacent substation main. All protection devices are
operated as nonreclose. The main backup tie switch can be
either enabled or disabled to assess reliability impacts. Feeder
fault isolation automation can be assessed by reducing main
sectionalizing or backup tie switch operating times to zero. The
following is the SAIFI formulation of the radial feeder layout
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER SYSTEMS, VOL. 22, NO. 2, MAY 2007
used by the model without any protection devices installed
along the main feeders. Given that is the main failures per
year per mile and is lateral failures per year per mile, then
for a typical lateral , the annual interruptions are given as a
continuous function by
(21)
The substation area annual consumer-interruptions is
(22)
The substation area SAIFI per year is then
(23)
The horizon model assumes a similar derivation for SAIDI
using a network modeling approach assuming a radial feeder
configuration with main fault isolation and with or without
a backup tie switch [19], [23]. Depending on the number of
main feeder protection devices and feeder backup capability,
the SAIDI formulation is a function of , , ,
, , failure rates, fault repair times, and switch op-
eration durations. Network modeling formulations are derived
assuming fault isolation and main feeder backup from adjacent
like feeders served from adjacent substations. Alternate distri-
bution feeder arrangements can be formulated and evaluated as
needed depending on type of service area and utility’s system
protection standard practices [27]. All reliability formulations
are continuous.
F. Decision Variables
The selection of distribution system elements represented by
the proposed horizon planning model is adequate to define a fu-
ture standard design. These elements are termed decision vari-
ables and represented as vector , and listed in Table I. Included
are the example bound limits for each of the variables.
G. Horizon Planning Model Assumptions
The horizon planning model allows some generalizations
with which to characterize a typical horizon substation area.
These generalizations enable the inclusion of a large number of
decision variables. The decision variables, dependent variables,
and input variables have a clear relationship. The circle perspec-
tive allows for a horizon abstraction of costs and distribution
design standards. All of the decision variables are assumed
continuous, which aids sensitivity analyses as detailed in [28].
The model assumptions are listed in Table II.
H. Horizon-Year Assumption Input Variables
The proposed planning model is capable of a wide range of
utility applications for a variety of future assumptions. Modifi-
cations of fixed and variable cost functions must be performed to
represent each utility’s own particular cost drivers and assump-
tions about the future. The assumptions about the future include
comprehensive land use consumer load densities consumer and
FLETCHER AND STRUNZ: OPTIMAL DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM HORIZON PLANNING—PART I 797

TABLE II TABLE III

HORIZON PLANNING MODEL ASSUMPTIONS INPUT VARIABLES WITH EXAMPLE VALUES

load characteristics, costs of energy and consumer interruptions,

system parameters, transformer characteristics, load multipliers, TABLE IV
DEPENDENT VARIABLES AND FUNCTIONAL RELATIONSHIPS
economic factors, and reliability factors. Loading multipliers are
used to define the system element maximum loading constraint.
For example, the distribution transformer loading upper limit is
the transformer size times the load multiplier factor .
Table III lists horizon assumption data used to represent a dis-
tribution system urban area.

I. Dependent Variables
Dependent variables are derived from decision variables and
horizon-year assumption input variables. The dependent vari-
ables, decision variables, and input variables are used to formu-
late the cost objective function and system constraints. The de-
pendent variables functionally describe the distribution system
horizon design. Table IV lists significant dependent variables
derived with the functional relationships.

J. Net Present Value and Discounting the Future

Adequate planning can ensure that the future consumer cost
of service is minimized. Fixed and annual costs are represented
as a net present value (NPV) of life-cycle investment costs and
variable costs respectively. Annual costs are expenditures repre-
sented by system loss cost and consumer reliability cost impacts
[25]. The NPV factor is a function of the assumed net dis-
count rate and equipment life-cycle duration in years and is
represented by a uniform series present value factor [29] which
is found in engineering economy textbooks
(24)
A critical component of the net present value analysis is the
assumed annual investment rate and inflation rates. A gen-
798
eral inflation rate is applied to equipment life-cycle replace-
ment, and annual reliability cost impacts. Annual maintenance
is not addressed, and is assumed to be a constant fixed charge.
A separate inflation rate is applied to the marginal cost of en-
ergy. The effective discount rate is the investment rate
minus inflation rate or .
IV. OPTIMIZATION METHODOLOGY
The optimal design parameters are determined using a
direct search single-period continuous nonlinear constrained
optimization methodology [18], [30], which has been imple-
mented in MatLab® computer software. The solution requires
minimization of a single cost objective function relating infra-
structure installations and operation cost as a function of the
decision variables and user supplied service area characteris-
tics. The horizon-year system consists of nonlinear inequality
constraints, such as voltage limits, primary and secondary
conductor ampacity, and transformer loading limits. All of
the decision and dependent variables, objective function, and
constraint equations are formulated as continuous. The cost
objective function is divided into two main parts: fixed invest-
ment and variable operation. The constraint equations describe
system element limits for loading, total system voltage drop,
and physical constraints.
V. CONCLUSIONS
In this, the first of a two-paper series, the horizon planning
model formulation and optimization approach is described. The
value of horizon planning is the ability to identify the general
electrical power needs of the future consumer and approximate
the lowest cost distribution system infrastructure design re-
quired to serve the future consumer. Distribution horizon plans
provide the underlying design assumptions and general guid-
ance for short-range planning decisions. The horizon planning
model approach will enable determination of a complete set of
optimal minimum cost future designs.
The main scientific contributions of the horizon planning
model are shown to be three-fold. First, the advantages of
adopting a horizon planning philosophy and embracing the
need to identify long-range distribution system impacts are
given. Second, the model provides both engineering formula-
tion and economic evaluation approach of a circular substation
area perspective. By allowing generalizations, the model can
facilitate the solution of a comprehensive set of horizon-year
decision variables that include design parameters for primary
and secondary lines, and substation and distribution trans-
formers. This comprehensiveness uniquely distinguishes it
from prior formulations. Third, the formulation is such that the
model is compatible with continuous nonlinear gradient search
methods. The horizon planning model approach can lead to a
more efficient utilization of the distribution system in the long
term.
REFERENCES
[1] S. K. Khator and L. C. Leung, “Power distribution planning: A review
of models and issues,” IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 12, no. 3, pp.
1151–1159, Aug. 1997.
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER SYSTEMS, VOL. 22, NO. 2, MAY 2007
[2] M. Vaziri, K. Tomsovic, A. Bose, and T. Gönen, “Distribution ex-
pansion problem: Formulation and practicality for a multistage glob-
ally optimal solution,” in Proc. IEEE Power Engineering Soc. Winter
Meeting Conf., Feb. 2001, vol. 3, pp. 1461–1466.
[3] M. Vaziri, K. Tomsovic, and A. Bose, “A directed graph formulation
of the multistage distribution expansion problem,” IEEE Trans. Power
Delivery, vol. 19, no. 3, pp. 1335–1341, Jul. 2004.
[4] I. J. Ramirez-Rosado and T. Gönen, “Pseudo-dynamic planning for
expansion of power distribution systems,” IEEE Trans. Power Syst.,
vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 245–254, Feb. 1991.
[5] M. Blanchard, L. Delorme, C. Simard, and Y. Nadeau, “Experience
with optimization software for distribution system planning,” IEEE
Trans. Power Syst., vol. 11, no. 4, pp. 1891–1898, Nov. 1996.
[6] V. Parada, J. A. Ferland, M. Arias, and K. Daniels, “Optimization of
electric distribution feeders using simulated annealing,” IEEE Trans
Power Delivery, vol. 19, pp. 1135–1141, Jul. 2004.
[7] M. S. Carneiro, P. M. Franca, and P. D. Silverira, “Long-range planning
of power distribution systems: Primary networks,” Elect. Power Syst.
Res., vol. 27, no. 3, pp. 233–231, Aug. 1993.
[8] ——, “Long-range planning of power distribution systems: Secondary
networks,” Comput. Elect. Eng., vol. 22, no. 3, pp. 179–191, May 1996.
[9] S. Manda and A. Pahwa, “Optimal selection of conductors for distri-
bution feeders,” IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 17, no. 1, pp. 192–197,
Feb. 2002.
[10] H. N. Tram and D. L. Wall, “Optimal conductor selection in planning
radial distribution systems,” IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 3, no. 1, pp.
200–206, Feb. 1988.
[11] R. Ranjan, A. Chaturvedi, P. S. Solanki, and D. Das, “Optimal
conductor selection of radial distribution feeders using evolution pro-
gramming,” in Proc. TENCON 2003 Conf. Convergent Technologies
for Asia-Pacific Region, Oct. 2003, vol. 1, pp. 456–459.
[12] Z. Wang, H. Liu, D. C. Yu, X. Wang, and H. Song, “A practical ap-
proach to the conductor size selection in planning radial distribution
system,” IEEE Trans. Power Delivery, vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 350–354, Jan.
2000.
[13] E. Diaz-Dorado, J. Cidrás, and E. Miguez, “Application of evolutionary
algorithms for the planning of urban distribution networks of medium
voltage,” IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 17, no. 3, pp. 879–884, Aug.
2002.
[14] Y. Tang, “Power distribution system planning with reliability mod-
eling and optimization,” IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 11, no. 1, pp.
181–189, Feb. 1996.
[15] L. Goel and R. Billinton, “Determination of reliability worth for dis-
tribution system planning,” IEEE Trans. Power Delivery, vol. 9, no. 3,
pp. 1577–1583, Jul. 1994.
[16] R. Billinton, “Economic cost of non-supply,” in Proc. Power Eng. Soc.
Winter Meeting Conf., Feb. 2002, vol. 2, pp. 959–962.
[17] P. C. Paiva, H. M. Khodr, J. A. Domínguez-Navarro, J. M. Yusta, and
A. J. Urdaneta, “Integral planning of primary – Secondary distribution
system using mixed integer linear programming,” IEEE Trans. Power
Syst., vol. 20, no. 2, pp. 1134–1143, May 2004.
[18] N. S. Rau, Practical Optimization Methods. New York: IEEE Press/
Wiley, 2003.
[19] T. Gönen, Electric Power Distribution System Engineering. New
York: McGraw-Hill, Inc., 1986.
[20] 10 Year Update Comprehensive Plan Snohomish County, WA, 2005,
The Future Long-Range Map [Online]. Available: www.co.sno-
homish.wa.us
[21] D. I. Sun, E. R. Farris, P. J. Cote, R. R. Shoults, and M. S. Chen, “Op-
timal distribution substation and primary feeder planning via the fixed
charge network formulation,” IEEE Trans. Power Apparat. Syst., vol.
101, no. 3, pp. 602–609, Mar. 1982.
[22] R. E. Brown, S. Gupta, R. D. Christie, S. S. Venkata, and R. Fletcher,
“Distribution system reliability assessment using hierarchical Markov
modeling,” IEEE Trans. Power Delivery, vol. 11, no. 4, pp. 1929–1934,
Oct. 1996.
[23] R. N. Allan, E. N. Dialynas, and I. R. Homer, “Modeling and evaluating
the reliability of distribution systems,” IEEE Trans. Power Apparat.
Syst., vol. 98, no. 6, pp. 2181–2189, Dec. 1979.
[24] IEEE Guide for Electric Power Distribution Reliability Indices, , May
2004, IEEE Standard 1366-2003.
[25] R. F. Ghajar and R. Billinton, “Economic costs of power interruptions:
A consistent model and methodology,” J. Elect. Power Energy Syst.,
vol. 28, no. 1, pp. 29–35, Jan. 2006.
[26] R. E. Brown and A. P. Hanson, “Impact of two-stage service restoration
on distribution reliability,” IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 16, no. 4, pp.
624–629, Nov. 2001.
FLETCHER AND STRUNZ: OPTIMAL DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM HORIZON PLANNING—PART I 799

[27] Y. Mao and K. N. Miu, “Switch placement to improve system relia- Kai Strunz received the Dipl.-Ing. degree from the
bility for radial distribution systems with distributed generation,” IEEE University of Saarland, Saarbrucken, Germany, in
Trans. Power Syst., vol. 18, no. 4, pp. 1346–1352, Nov. 2003. 1996, and the Dr.-Ing. degree with (summa cum
[28] R. H. Fletcher and K. Strunz, “Optimal distribution system horizon laude) from the same university in 2001.
planning part II: Application,” IEEE Trans. Power Syst., 2006. Currently, he is an Assistant Professor with the
[29] D. E. Grant and W. G. Ireson, Principles of Engineering Economy, 4th University of Washington, Seattle. He has pur-
ed. New York: Ronald Press, 1960. sued research at Brunel University, London, U.K.,
[30] Optimization Toolbox for Use with MATLAB® The Math Works, Inc., working with the National Grid Company in the
Natick, MA, 2004 [Online]. Available: http://www.mathworks.com fields of power system stabilization, electromechan-
ical transients, and power system modeling. He was
Robert H. Fletcher (M’79–SM’04) received the with the Division Recherche et Developpement of
B.Sc., M.Sc., and Ph.D. degrees in electrical engi- Electricite de France (EDF), Paris, France, where his main research work was
neering from the University of Washington, Seattle. the creation of efficient numerical methods for real time digital simulation.
He is a Principal Engineer in System Planning Dr. Strunz received the national Science Foundation CAREER award in 2003
and Protection with Snohomish County Public and the Outstanding Teaching Award of the Department of Electrical Engi-
Utility District No.1, Everett, WA. He has over 38 neering at University of Washington in 2004.
years of electric utility industry experience as an
Electrical Engineer. He is an author or co-author of
several papers on the subject of distribution system
efficiency and reliability. He is currently engaged
in conservation voltage regulation and system effi-
ciency research. He is Technical Chair of the Distribution System Efficiency
Initiative (DSEI) conducted by the Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance
involving 20 electric utilities.
Mr. Fletcher is a member of the IEEE PSACE Committee, RRPA Subcom-
mittee, and Chair of the PSPI Distribution Planning WG. He is a registered Pro-
fessional Engineer in the States of Washington and Oregon.