2 views

Uploaded by ApikShafiee

power distribution networks

- Western-Power-Distribution-Western-Power-Distribution---West-Midlands
- Umd Maryland 2004
- Integrated Supply Chain Design_models_a_survey and Future Research Directions
- Production Strategy
- Custom Moments Objectives
- Seminar Slides
- APPROXIMATION VOGELS EFFECTIVENESS METHOD (VAM) MINIMIZE COST OF TRANSPORTATION.
- Optimum Coordination of Overcurrent Relays in Distribution System
- UK-Power-Networks-UK-Power-Networks---London
- Duke-Energy-Indiana-Inc-Rate-WP---Schedule-for-Water-Pumping-and/or-Sewage-Disposal
- h2011
- Mb0048 Unit 01-Slm
- 22Vega
- Multiobjective Design Optimization of Rolling Ele
- 11072721145314408
- Moga for Reactive Power
- momga.dvi
- Mgt Sci Extra Practice
- Science
- NGPM manual v1.4.pdf

You are on page 1of 10

Research Article

increase the delivered power in radial

distribution networks

ISSN 1751-8687

Received on 30th July 2014

Revised on 20th July 2015

Accepted on 2nd August 2015

doi: 10.1049/iet-gtd.2014.1196

www.ietdl.org

GECAD - Knowledge Engineering and Decision-Support Research Center - Polytechnic of Porto (ISEP/IPP), R. Dr. Antnio Bernardino de

Almeida, 431, 4200-072 Porto, Portugal

E-mail: bruno.canizes@gmail.com

Abstract: This study proposes a new methodology to increase the power delivered to any load point in a radial distribution

network, through the identification of new investments in order to improve the repair time. This research work is

innovative and consists in proposing a full optimisation model based on mixed-integer non-linear programming

considering the Pareto front technique. The goal is to achieve a reduction in repair times of the distribution networks

components, while minimising the costs of that reduction as well as non-supplied energy costs. The optimisation

model considers the distribution network technical constraints, the substation transformer taps, and it is able to choose

the capacitor banks size. A case study based on a 33-bus distribution network is presented in order to illustrate in

detail the application of the proposed methodology.

Nomenclature

Zi (X )

m fi (X )

mdi

Zimax

Zimin

r2

r3

r

t/2

n

s

l2

l3

x21(a/2)

l

m

ij

Z1

Z2

I.R.R.

NE

Sij

lij

rij

Nm

r

Cij,m

Xij,

Cyrij,m

CijNSE

Frij

individual objective

satisfaction level of X solution with respect to the ith

objective

desire reference level of the ith objective

maximum of individual objective

minimum of individual objective

set of non-dominated solutions or plans

lower bound for real expected repair time (h)

upper bound for real expected repair time (h)

average of repair times (h)

t-distribution

quantity of repair times

standard deviation

real expected repair time (h)

lower bound for interruption rate (interruptions per

year)

upper bound for interruption rate (interruptions per

year)

chi-square distribution

interruption rate (interruption per year)

action type

component from bus i to bus j

investment objective function

non-supplied energy (NSE) objective function

internal rate of return (%)

total number of system components

power ow in component (line) ij

interruption rate of component ijth (interruption per

year)

repair time of component ijth (h)

total number of actions for repair time reduction

cost of repair time reduction in monetary units (m.u.)

for component ijth with action m

decision variable {0,1} for component ijth with action

m to reduce repair time

annual cost of repair time reduction in monetary units

(m.u.) for component ijth with action m

NSE cost in monetary units (m.u.) for component ij

nal repair time for component ij

IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., 2015, Vol. 9, Iss. 16, pp. 25652574

& The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2015

NSEFinal

NSEMax

CRF

BNF

dr

t

Pgeni

L pi

Lqi

Pi (v, )

Qi (v, )

a

Qcapvj

Wj, a

Qcapj

min

Pgen

i

max

Pgen

i

Qmin

geni

Qmax

geni

Vimin

Vi

Vimax

Sij (v, )

Sijmax

tapmin

tap

tapmax

rij

m.u.

threshold for NSE (kVAh/year)

capital recovery factor

Monetary savings

discount rate

lifetime project

generated active power at bus i

active load in bus i in p.u.

reactive load in bus i in p.u.

active power injections in bus i in p.u.

reactive power injections in bus i in p.u.

bank capacity

reactive power output by capacitor banks in bus j

binary decision variable (0, 1) to install a bank capacity

(a) in bus j

reactive power (a) installed in bus i

lower limit of generated active power in bus i

upper limit of generated active power in bus i

lower limit of generated reactive power in bus i

upper limit of generated reactive power in bus i

lower limit of voltage magnitude in bus i

voltage magnitude in bus i

upper limit of voltage magnitude in bus i

apparent power ow in line ij in p.u.

rating power limit of line ij

lower limit of transformer tap

transformer tap

upper limit of transformer tap

repair time variation for component ijth using a repair

time reduction action

monetary units

Introduction

Over the past few decades lots of efforts have been devoted to the

distribution systems reliability assessment. Reliability is the ability

to deliver electricity to all delivery points within acceptable levels

of quality, in the desired amount and at the minimum cost.

Obviously, these are conicting goals, because increasing the

2565

necessarily increase the investment cost in networks, as well as the

operation cost [1]. Network planners and operators must nd the

adequate balance taking into account the uncertainties of future

conditions. The reliability criteria can be deterministic and/or

probabilistic, however, in both cases a consistent database and an

exhaustive statistical analysis of all the available information are

needed such as interruption rates (l) and average repair times (r)

of distribution system components. Moreover, maximising the

reliability in distribution power systems involves minimising the

unserved energy, and therefore load curtailment.

There are two types of uncertainties in distribution power systems:

randomness and fuzziness [25]. It is well known that interruption

frequencies or interruption probabilities of distribution overhead

lines are related to weather conditions [2, 3, 57]. Weather

conditions are usually described in fuzzy words. Each weather

condition (rain, wind, storm etc.) can be categorised into different

degrees (such as heavy, medium or light rain) [25]. This

classication is obviously vague or fuzzy. Interruption frequencies

or interruption probabilities of distribution lines are also caused by

environments (such as tree falling or animal activities) and

operational conditions (such as load levels). It is very difcult to

distinguish exactly the effects of these conditions on the outage

data of individual components using a probability model, since

there are little or any statistics available. Some utilities do not have

enough statistical records, but they may have a good judgment on

the range of outage parameters (such as repair time). A fuzzy

approach allows obtaining adequate models for all these cases [25].

Unlike transmission systems, which are looped, distribution

networks are usually made up by radial feeders. The most

important consequence of radial feeders is that many customers

can be affected by the interruption of a single component. The

adequacy is represented by reliability indices such as average

interruption rate l, average outage duration r, and the annual

outage duration U. These reliability indices are load point indices

and they are of crucial importance for reliability studies. The

average outage duration and the interruption rate can be reduced

by network congurations, suitable location of substation, feeder

length, and by increasing fault avoidance and corrective repair

measures. These measures try to modify the interruption rate and

repair time of each segment, improving the system reliability.

Repair time and interruption rate modications may require

additional efforts which are associated with additional expenditures.

A technique for optimal reliability design in electrical distribution

system was developed by Chang and Wu in [8]. This technique

solved a non-linear optimisation problem based on

polynomial-time algorithm.

A value based on a probabilistic approach to design urban

distribution systems for determination of the optimal section length

for the main feeder, number and placement of feeder ties, feeder

and transformer loadings is proposed in [9]. A genetic algorithm

approach for reliability design of a distribution system is presented

in [10]. The objective function contains the investment cost, and

the system interruption cost. System interruption rate and average

outage duration at load point are considered as constraints. Louit

et al. [11] presented an algorithm for determination of optimal

interval for major maintenance actions in electrical distribution

networks. Comparative case studies for value-based distribution

system reliability planning are present in [12]. An algorithm for

optimum location of distributed generation (DG) in a distribution

system based on reliability considerations was proposed in [13].

Arya et al. [14] proposed a methodology for reliability

enhancement of radial distribution system by determining optimal

values of repair times, and interruption rates of each section. A set

of composite models for distribution system reliability evaluation

that may be applied to non-radial type networks was proposed in

[15]. In [16], a three-stage method for planning a power

distribution system is proposed in which the substation

optimisation, the number of feeders with their active route, and the

node reliability optimisation are included. Chandramohan et al.

[17] presented the minimisation of radial distribution system

operating cost in the regulated electricity market via

2566

methodology for reliability evaluation, and enhancement of

distribution system having DG. In [19], Ferreira and Bretas used a

non-linear binary programming model for reliability optimisation

of distribution systems. In [20], the authors proposed an

evolutionary algorithm for distribution feeder reconguration. The

problem consists of minimising the power loss, operation cost of

DG and non-supplied energy (NSE) simultaneously. The

considered constraints including the radial structure of the

network, line thermal limits, transformer capacities and bus

voltages are within their admissible ranges in this approach.

Canizes et al. [5] presented a methodology which aims to increase

the probability of delivering power to any load point of

distribution networks by identifying new investments in

distribution components not considering the network technical

constraints. The proposed methodology uses a fuzzy set approach

to estimate the outage parameters, and the investments aims to

reduce the components interruption rates and repair times.

The references cited above do not have considered a way to

increase the delivered power considering investments actions in

order to reduce the repair time of the distribution network

components, and all the technical network constraints.

Hence, this paper proposes a new and innovative methodology for

increasing the delivered power to any load point of the distribution

network, by identifying new investments in distribution

components, while minimising the costs of those investments, as

well as the cost of the NSE (multi-objective problem). The

investments aim to reduce the components repair time. The repair

time reduction can be obtained by increasing the operation

personnel, upgrading the automation system, improving the

communication system and so on. The proposed methodology is a

weighted AC optimisation model based on mixed-integer

non-linear programming (MINLP) using the Pareto front technique

[21, 22]. A case study based on 33-bus distribution test network

[23] is used to demonstrate the proposed methodology.

Since the presented problem is a multi-objective optimisation

problem, it requires a multi-objective method for solving. This

paper utilises a Pareto-based approach, which can obtain a set of

optimal solutions instead of one [24].

This paper is organised as follows: Section 2 introduces the fuzzy

set membership models for outage parameters. Section 3 presents the

proposed methodology to increase the delivered power by reducing

the NSE in radial distribution network. Section 4 presents the case

study and the discussion of the obtained results. Finally, the most

relevant conclusions are duly drawn in Section 6.

parameters

Each outage model is characterised by the following parameters

interruption frequency and repair time; interruption rate and repair

rate; transition rates between multiple states; unavailability or

forced outage rate; and standard deviation.

These parameters are the input data in risk evaluation, and they

can be estimated from historical interruption statistics.

Most of the data collection systems provide the interruption

frequency or the unavailability and repair time. Usually, the

interruption rate and the repair rate are not directly collected, but

they can be calculated from the interruption frequency and repair

time [25].

The repair time is a parameter that can be directly collected by a

data collection system and the expected repair time condence

interval is given by

s

r2 = r ta/2 (n 1)

n

(1)

s

r3 = r + ta/2 (n 1)

n

(2)

r2 m r3

(3)

IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., 2015, Vol. 9, Iss. 16, pp. 25652574

& The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2015

The real expected repair time () is placed between r2 and r3, the

lower and higher bounds respectively, as it can be seen in (3). With

the point and interval estimates, a triangle membership function of

repair time r (in hours per interruption) can be easily created [25].

The interruption rate l and interruption frequency f are numeric

with very close values for power system components, although

they are conceptually different. f and l are often replaced by each

other in practical engineering calculations of power system risk

evaluation. Equations (4)(6) are used to estimate the two bounds

of the interruption rate

l2 =

x21(a/2) (2 F )

2T

(4)

x2a/2 (2 F )

2T

(5)

l3 =

l2 l l3

(6)

rate can be easily created. The forced outage rate or unavailability of

system components (U ) can be determined using the interruption

frequency (interruption rate) and repair time [25]

U lr

subjective imprecise nature, thus a method to support its decision

can be necessary. Fuzzy satisfying method can be used to select

the preferred solution among non-dominated solutions obtained in

optimisation stage. To the decision maker it will be asked to

determine its imprecise goals for each objective. As a result, the

nal solution will be found. Since the trade-offs between each

objective are determined in the rst stage, one can expect a much

reasonable judgment from decision maker comparing to prior

methods [25].

After non-dominated set determination, it is desirable to obtain a

exible and realistic solution that represents a trade-off between

different objectives [26]. Fuzzy satisfying method due to

simplicity and similarity to human reasoning is of great interest.

Fuzzy sets are dened by membership functions, which represent

the degree of membership in a fuzzy set using values from 0 to

1. Fig. 1 presents a linear type membership function, which will

be used in this work.

The value of the membership function indicates to what extend a

solution is satisfying the objective Zi. Decision maker is fully satised

with objective value of Zi (X ) if m fi (X ) = 1 and not satised if

m fi (X ) = 0. Equation (8) presents the model used for all objectives

min

Zi Zi (X )

m fi (X ) =

Zimax Zimin

(7)

and r. For this, the interval calculation rules for a given

membership function grade must be used [25].

The use of the centroid of the function obtained by the gravity

technique is an appropriated approach, and it is very similar to

the weighted mean used in the probability theory, used for the

defuzzication of the outage parameters. This technique nds the

balance point by calculating the weighted mean of the membership

functions.

3.1

(8)

Zi (X ) , Zimin

choose the desirable reference level (mdi ) of each objective. To

obtain the nal solution a method called minimax [27], have

been applied. Thus, the following optimisation problem is used:

max max mdi m fi (X )

X [F

Multi-objective optimisation

supporting relations or without any mathematical relation with

each other are considered, an appropriated tool like multi-objective

optimisation must be used in order to deal with this problem.

Usually it is not possible to obtain an optimum at which all such

objectives are optimised. Thus, the Pareto front method can be

used to characterise the solutions from the multi-objective

problem. Pareto front optimal method is also known as

non-inferiority or non-dominancy method [22].

Zi (X ) . Zimax

(9)

Proposed methodology

works, considers a technique to increase the delivered power, i.e.

reducing the NSE. The technique deals with investments action in

order to reduce the repair time of the distribution network

components, and all the technical network constraints based on

deterministic formulation. Thus, the proposed methodology

minimises the investment cost, as well as the NSE cost in radial

distribution networks. This methodology aims to maximise the

power availability in each load point of this network type. A

scheme of the proposed methodology is shown in Fig. 2.

The proposed methodology has ve main aspects, which are

presented in more detail as follows.

4.1

Database

of all available historical data (such as repair times, number of

interruptions, and number of repairs) are an important issue for the

proposed methodology.

4.2

distribution network. The NSE is given by the following equation:

NSE =

Fig. 1 Linear type membership function (adapted from [25])

IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., 2015, Vol. 9, Iss. 16, pp. 25652574

& The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2015

NE

(10)

ij=1

2567

4.3

operational conditions are very difcult to distinguish precisely on

the outage data of individual components using a probability

model, since there are little or any statistics available. Usually,

utilities do not have enough statistical records of outage

parameters. As a result, the fuzzy set approach allows obtaining

adequate models. Equations (1)(6) allow determining the

membership functions for repair times and interruption rates of all

distribution system components. Hence, membership function of

unavailability can be calculated by (7).

4.4

the problem turns into a multi-objective optimisation problem

which is more complicated rather than a single objective of the

optimal power ow (OPF) problem. Also, the multi-objective

optimisation problem has a greater search space than the single

objective problem.

The proposed methodology can give to the planner the possibility

to decide what objective is better for him depending on the pursued

goal. The Pareto front technique can be a useful tool helping the

planner to choose the more convenient preference. The Pareto

2568

function [28]. In the proposed methodology, the goal is to improve

reliability, minimising the NSE, which is improved by investments

in the network. Thus, conictive objectives are present (maximise

reliability and minimise investments).

An MINLP using the weighted Pareto front method is developed as

it can be seen in (11)(26). This mathematical model is applied in

order to identify the distribution network components, in which

investments allow increasing the delivered power to every load

point in the considered network. The weighted technique is used to

obtain the non-dominated solutions. A set of weights randomly

generated are used to construct a set of feasible optimisation problems.

The investment aims to achieve a reduction in repair times of

distribution networks, while minimising the costs of that reduction

as well as the minimisation of the NSE costs. Hence, a

multi-objective problem can be developed.

The repair time reduction can be achieved, for instance: by

increasing the operation personnel, by upgrading the automation

system, by communication system, among others.

Problem formulation

must be able to evaluate the load distribution among substation,

& The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2015

and technical requirements (a feasible result).

In this paper, the optimisation problem is modelled as an MINLP.

The model presented an objective function that represents the costs

of future investments in order to reduce the repair time

(minimisation of investment Z1) as well as the reliability related

costs, i.e. NSE costs (NSE costs Z2). Also, it ensures the

possibility of the optimal capacitors sizing in the network

supporting the nodes voltage (injecting reactive power) and

considers the substation transformer taps. Moreover, when this

method is compared with the state-of-the-art it considers a

multi-objective problem subjected to all technical constraints, as

well as the constraints related with the repair time reductions using

a deterministic process. Furthermore, the fuzziness uncertainty

associated to repair times and failure rates is considered. Thus, this

model represents an advantage regarding to the state-of-the-art.

Thus, the multi-objective function to be minimised is

Minimise Z1 =

Nm

NE

Cij,m

ij=1 m=1

Nm

NE

max

Qmin

geni Qgeni Qgeni

(19)

Vimin Vi Vimax

(20)

p di p

(21)

Sij (v, d) Skmax

(22)

(23)

t

1 + dr 1

Xij,m +

t

dr 1 + dr

Transformer taps limits

Cyrij,m Xij,m

(11)

ij=1 m=1

N

t

E

1 + dr 1

NSE

Minimise Z2 =

Cij lij Frij Sij

t

dr 1 + dr

ij=1

(12)

intersection method can be used for solving the multi-objective

problem. In this work, the authors have the objective to use a

simple and popular method for solving the multi-objective

problem. Thus, the weighted method (13) was chosen

MinimiseZ = w1 Z1 + w2 Z2

where w1 + w2 = 1

(13)

Frij = rij Drij Xij,m

(24)

NSEFinal NSEMax

(25)

NSE threshold

technical constraints (power balance, line capacity limits, DG

capacity limits, substation capacity limits, voltage magnitude and

angle, transformer taps) and logical constraints (integer decision

variables capacitors size and investment option).

Thus, the model is subjected to:

Active and reactive power ow equations

Pgeni L pi Pi (v, d) = 0

(14)

Qgeni Lqi Qi (v, d) + Qcapvj W j, a = 0 j [ i

(15)

d

W j, a 1 j [ i

(16)

a=1

Qcapvj = Qcapj W j, a Vj2

j[i

(17)

Upper and lower power output limits (active and reactive powers)

of the substation and distributed generator units

min

max

Pgeni Pgen

Pgen

i

i

(18)

IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., 2015, Vol. 9, Iss. 16, pp. 25652574

2569

Bus

out

Bus

in

r, h

Number of

interruptions

Time period,

years

interruptions/year

Unavailability U,

h/year

30.200

26.700

25.100

11.900

9.500

12.100

25.600

8.600

11.700

29.300

9.700

12.100

9.200

12.100

10.100

8.300

13.800

29.800

8.900

20.300

12. 000

25.500

25.000

11.000

9.400

9.300

9.300

27.000

20.600

11.800

9.500

9.300

3

11

9

21

21

12

14

17

21

11

29

12

26

21

12

8

8

12

30

17

15

14

11

21

17

14

16

21

25

16

26

14

10

10

10

10

10

10

10

10

10

10

10

10

10

10

10

10

10

10

10

10

10

10

10

10

10

10

10

10

10

10

10

10

0.300

1.100

0.900

2.100

2.100

1.200

1.400

1.700

2.100

1.100

2.900

1.200

2.600

2.100

1.200

0.800

0.800

1.200

3.000

1.700

1.500

1.400

1.100

2.100

1.700

1.400

1.600

2.100

2.500

1.600

2.600

1.400

9.060

29.370

22.590

24.990

19.950

14.520

35.840

14.620

24.570

32.230

28.130

14.520

23.920

25.410

12.120

6.640

11.040

35.760

26.700

34.510

18.000

35.700

27.500

23.100

15.980

13.020

14.880

56.700

51.500

18.880

24.700

13.020

Lines or cables

33

1

1

2

1

18

2

3

2

22

3

4

4

5

5

6

5

25

6

7

7

8

8

9

9

10

10

11

11

12

12

13

13

14

14

15

15

16

16

17

18

19

19

20

20

21

22

23

23

24

25

26

26

27

27

28

28

29

29

30

30

31

31

32

Only one investment option (action) can be picked for repair time

Nm

NE

Xij,m 1

(26)

ij=1 m=1

studies that aim to improve the reliability of distribution network.

The reliability increase can be achieved by reducing the

components repair time. The goal of these studies is to know

which reduction of repair time is possible to obtain for each

component. By selecting the given repair time reduction actions,

the network operator have the associated cost for each component.

Case study

from [23]. This test system is a hypothetical 12.66 kV system with

two feeders, one substation, 33 buses, and 32 load points. The

total substation load for this case study is 4549 kVA. Some

adaptations were made in this network two DGs units with 500 kW,

250 kVAr in buses 11 and 27; four capacitors sizes with 150, 300,

450, and 600 kVAr can be installed in buses 5 and 10; the

substation transformer has a continuous value tap (5%).

The 33-bus distribution network (Fig. 3) does not have an outage

database associated, thus the authors created an outage database

(Table 1) in order to apply the proposed methodology.

Table 2 Initial data for 33-bus distribution network

Network active load, kW

Network reactive load, kVAr

Initial NSE, kVAh/year

Initial NSE cost, m.u./year

2570

3715.000

2300.000

545060.000

1090121.000

For this case study only lines and cables were considered for the

analysis, and it is assumed that the substation and DG units have

100% of availability.

The actions that the system operator can apply to reduce the repair

time are the increase the operation personal (IOP), automation

system upgrade (ASU), and communications upgrade (CUp).

Each one of these actions has a cost and results in a repair time

reduction for each system component.

The NSE cost is 2 m/kVAh. A set of 1000 random weights is

determined. A 10-year lifetime project with a 1.75% discount rate,

which leads to a 0.110 capital recovery factor, is considered for

the NSE cost and investment in repair time reduction cost.

GAMS, with DICOPT solver, has been used to develop the

weighted AC optimisation that uses MINLP. The MATLAB

software has been linked with GAMS in order to solve the model

to all 1000 weights. The way used to link GAMS to MATLAB

can be found in [29]. For this case study, a computer with one

processor Intel Xeon E3-1225 3.20 GHz with four cores, 4 GB of

random-access-memory (RAM), and Windows 8 Professional

64-bit operating system was used.

The initial network data considered in this case study are presented

in Table 2. The initial losses are obtained running a power ow for

distribution networks based on the algorithm of Thukaram et al.

[30]. Tables 3 and 4 present the network data and reduction times

per action with cost, respectively.

Twenty-nine non-dominated solutions or plans were obtained by

the weighted AC optimisation. The algorithm took around 4954 s

(1.38 h) to compute the set of 1000 weighted solutions. Table 5

presents the obtained non-dominated solutions, and the economic

evaluation for each of those solutions. The signal minus in the

values of NSE benet and nal benet represents the benet for

system operator. It is important to note that without any

investment the value of NSE cost at the end of 10 years (lifetime

project) would be 9,920,103 m.u.

Fig. 4 presents the set of non-dominated solutions (plans), which

are plotted as NSE cost versus investment cost.

The fuzzy satisfying decision method is used to select the

preferred solution among non-dominated solutions obtained in

& The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2015

Bus out

33

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

1

18

19

20

2

22

23

5

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

Bus in

R,

X,

Active load, kW

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

0.0922

0.4930

0.3660

0.3811

0.8190

0.1872

0.7114

1.0300

1.0440

0.1966

0.3744

1.4680

0.5416

0.5910

0.7463

1.2890

0.7320

0.1640

1.5042

0.4095

0.7089

0.4512

0.8980

0.8960

0.2030

0.2842

1.0590

0.8042

0.5075

0.9744

0.3105

0.3410

0.0470

0.2511

0.1864

0.1941

0.7070

0.6188

0.2351

0.7400

0.7400

0.0650

0.1238

1.1550

0.7129

0.5260

0.5450

1.7210

0.5740

0.1565

1.3554

0.4784

0.9373

0.3083

0.7091

0.7011

0.1034

0.1447

0.9337

0.7006

0.2585

0.9630

0.3619

0.5302

100.0

90.0

120.0

60.0

60.0

200.0

200.0

60.0

60.0

45.0

60.0

60.0

120.0

60.0

60.0

60.0

90.0

90.0

90.0

90.0

90.0

90.0

420.0

420.0

60.0

60.0

60.0

120.0

200.0

150.0

210.0

60.0

60.0

40.0

80.0

30.0

20.0

100.0

100.0

20.0

20.0

30.0

35.0

35.0

80.0

10.0

20.0

20.0

40.0

40.0

40.0

40.0

40.0

50.0

200.0

200.0

25.0

25.0

20.0

70.0

600.0

70.0

100.0

40.0

116.619

98.489

144.222

67.082

63.246

223.607

223.607

63.246

63.246

54.083

69.462

69.462

144.222

60.828

63.246

63.246

98.489

98.489

98.489

98.489

98.489

102.956

465.188

465.188

65.000

65.000

63.246

138.924

632.456

165.529

232.594

72.111

450

450

450

329

450

329

329

329

329

329

329

329

329

329

229

329

329

329

329

329

450

450

450

450

450

329

329

329

329

329

329

329

the desirable reference levels are presented in Table 6.

The maximum cost value for investment objective was

determined considering the weight of investment equal to one

and the weight of NSE equal to zero. The minimum value is

Bus

out

1

1

2

2

3

4

5

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

18

19

20

22

23

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

33

Bus

in

IOP,

h

ASU,

h

CUp,

h

IOP, m.u.

ASU, m.u.

CUp, m.u.

2

18

3

22

4

5

6

25

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

19

20

21

23

24

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

1

8.00

7.50

3.60

2.90

3.60

7.70

2.60

3.50

8.80

2.90

3.60

2.70

3.60

3.00

2.50

4.10

8.90

2.70

6.10

3.60

7.70

7.50

3.30

2.80

2.80

2.80

8.10

6.20

3.50

2.90

2.80

9.10

16.00

15.10

7.10

5.70

7.30

15.30

5.20

7.00

17.60

5.80

7.20

5.50

7.30

6.10

5.00

8.30

17.90

5.30

12.20

7.20

15.30

15.00

6.60

5.60

5.60

5.60

16.20

12.40

7.10

5.70

5.60

18.10

21.40

20.10

9.50

7.60

9.70

20.50

6.90

9.40

23.40

7.70

9.70

7.30

9.70

8.10

6.70

11.00

23.80

7.10

16.30

9.60

20.40

20.00

8.80

7.50

7.50

7.50

21.60

16.50

9.40

7.60

7.40

24.20

76,000

6400

56,400

18,000

53,600

52,400

20,400

37,600

16,400

12,400

11,600

10,800

9600

8000

6800

3600

3200

2400

1600

4800

3200

1600

16,000

8000

36,400

35,600

34,800

32,400

8400

5600

1600

84,800

114,000

9600

84,600

27,000

80,400

78,600

30,600

56,400

24,600

18,600

17,400

16,200

14,400

12,000

10,200

5400

4800

3600

2400

7200

4800

2400

24,000

12,000

54,600

53,400

52,200

48,600

12,600

8400

2400

127,200

152,000

12,800

112,800

36,000

107,200

104,800

40,800

75,200

32,800

24,800

23,200

21,600

19,200

16,000

13,600

7200

6400

4800

3200

9600

6400

3200

32,000

16,000

72,800

71,200

69,600

64,800

16,800

11,200

3200

169,600

& The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2015

network. Regarding to the NSE the maximum value is equal to

the NSE value for the 10 years lifetime project without any

investment. The minimum value is that one which corresponds

to the weight equal to zero.

To specify the reference levels for each objective the trade-offs

shown in Fig. 4 can help the decision maker to choose reasonable

reference values. For instance, in the investment objective, it is

considered the last value where it is yet possible to obtain an I.R.

R. positive, i.e. 6,999,804 m.u. (plan 18) and also the minimum

value of investment in the network, i.e, 5,495,616 m.u. Thus, it is

obtained(6, 999, 804 5, 495, 616)/(6, 999, 804 0) = 0.21. In the

NSE objective, it is considered the maximum cost value

(3,634,406 m.u.), which corresponds to the minimum value of

investment in the trade-off curve, and also the minimum cost

(1,782,840 m.u.) in the same curve. So, it is obtained(9, 920, 103

3, 634, 406)/(9, 920, 103 1, 782, 840) = 0.77. Taking into

account these values the reference levels for each objective are set

to the ones presented in Table 4.

Applying the optimisation problem from (9) it is selected the

solution of plan 1 (see Table 5).

Plan 1 presents the higher benet (monetary units m.u.) for the

system operator (790,082 m.u.). The objective function value is of

9,130,022 m.u. for 10 years of project lifetime. Considering this

plan, the payback presents a value of 7.96 years and the internal

rate of return a value of 14.38%.

The values for nal repair times can be found in Table 7. The zero

in unavailability reduction means that the respective components do

not have any investment action (in repair time).

Table 8 presents the optimised value for NSE when plan 1 is

considered. The proposed methodology leads to a 36.6% reduction

in the NSE value. For the considered plan only bus 5 has a

capacitor bank with 600 kVAr. Regarding to the substation

transformer tap, the obtained value is of 1.001 p.u.

Table 9 shows the chosen actions to be applied in the network

components. The symbol denotes that the respective action

was chosen. It is possible to see that the automation system

upgrade action was chosen for two components, while

communications upgrade was chosen for 22 components.

2571

Plan

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

Payback, years

I.R.R., %

5,495,616

5,515,920

5,524,380

5,531,148

5,551,452

5,566,680

5,600,520

5,620,824

5,627,592

5,839,092

5,859,396

5,866,164

6,043,824

6,077,664

6,097,968

6,104,736

6,740,928

6,999,804

7,086,096

7,201,152

7,358,508

7,410,960

8,091,144

8,317,872

9,752,688

10,355,040

10,970,928

11,349,936

11,512,368

3,634,406

3,622,558

3,619,442

3,611,348

3,596,553

3,585,344

3,563,654

3,553,364

3,550,057

3,435,065

3,424,776

3,421,469

3,339,754

3,318,066

3,307,777

3,304,470

3,012,588

2,910,635

2,877,304

2,835,734

2,778,242

2,759,358

2,573,350

2,511,792

2,137,593

1,982,614

1,837,392

1,788,978

1,782,840

6,285,698

6,297,546

6,300,662

6,308,755

6,323,550

6,334,760

6,356,450

6,366,739

6,370,046

6,485,038

6,495,328

6,498,635

6,580,349

6,602,037

6,612,326

6,615,634

6,907,516

7,009,469

7,042,800

7,084,370

7,141,862

7,160,746

7,346,753

7,408,311

7,782,510

7,937,490

8,082,711

8,131,126

8,137,264

790,082

781,626

776,282

777,607

772,098

768,080

755,930

745,915

742,454

645,946

635,932

632,471

536,525

524,373

514,358

510,898

166,588

9665

43,296

116,782

216,646

250,214

744,391

909,561

1,970,178

2,417,550

2,888,217

3,218,810

3,375,104

7.96

7.97

7.98

7.98

7.99

8.00

8.02

8.03

8.04

8.19

8.21

8.21

8.36

8.38

8.39

8.40

8.88

9.09

9.16

9.25

9.38

9.42

10.02

10.22

11.40

11.87

12.35

12.70

12.87

14.38

14.17

14.05

14.06

13.91

13.80

13.50

13.27

13.19

11.06

10.85

10.78

8.88

8.63

8.43

8.37

2.47

0.14

0.61

1.62

2.94

3.38

9.20

10.94

20.20

23.35

26.33

28.36

29.32

minimum cost, m.u.

reference level

Investment

NSE

11,512,500

0

0.2

9,920,103

1,782,902

0.7

Conclusions

network by identifying new investments is proposed in order to

reduce the repair time in network components. To estimate the

network outage parameter (which is a very important issue in the

proposed method) a fuzzy set approach was used.

2572

MINLP was developed considering the Pareto front technique

(weighted method) to achieve a reduction in repair times of

distribution networks components, while minimising the costs of

that reduction, as well as the NSE costs. The optimisation model

proposed in this paper identies the actions to be taken, as well

as the components in which the system operator must invest at

minimum cost. The model also considers the distribution

network technical constraints, and it is able to consider the

substation transformer taps and to choose the size of capacitor

banks.

Regarding all the obtained plans (non-dominated solutions) the

system operator can carry out an analysis in order to choose a

solution preference. Through the obtained results the proposed

method proves to be adequate to support the distribution network

operator to plan future network investment actions.

& The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2015

Bus

out

Bus

in

Lines or cables

33

1

1

2

1

18

2

3

2

22

3

4

4

5

5

6

5

25

6

7

7

8

8

9

9

10

10

11

11

12

12

13

13

14

14

15

15

16

16

17

18

19

19

20

20

21

22

23

23

24

25

26

26

27

27

28

28

29

29

30

30

31

31

32

Fr, h

Interruption rate l,

interruption/year

Final unavailability U,

h/year

Unavailability reduction U,

h/year

Unavailability

reduction, %

30.200

5.300

5.000

11.900

1.900

12.100

5.100

3.400

11.700

5.900

9.700

12.100

9.200

12.100

2.000

3.300

2.800

6.000

1.800

4.000

2.400

5.100

5.000

2.200

1.900

9.300

9.300

5.400

4.100

2.400

1.900

1.900

0.300

1.100

0.900

2.100

2.100

1.200

1.400

1.700

2.100

1.100

2.900

1.200

2.600

2.100

1.200

0.800

0.800

1.200

3.000

1.700

1.500

1.400

1.100

2.100

1.700

1.400

1.600

2.100

2.500

1.600

2.600

1.400

9.060

5.830

4.500

24.990

3.990

14.520

7.140

5.780

24.570

6.490

28.130

14.520

23.920

25.410

2.400

2.640

2.240

7.200

5.400

6.800

3.600

7.140

5.500

4.620

3.230

13.020

14.880

11.340

10.250

3.840

4.940

2.660

0.000

23.540

18.090

0.000

15.960

0.000

28.700

8.840

0.000

25.740

0.000

0.000

0.000

0.000

9.720

4.000

8.800

28.560

21.300

27.710

14.400

28.560

22.000

18.480

12.750

0.000

0.000

45.360

41.250

15.040

19.760

10.360

0.000

80.150

80.080

0.000

80.000

0.000

80.078

60.465

0.000

79.863

0.000

0.000

0.000

0.000

80.198

60.241

79.710

79.866

79.775

80.296

80.000

80.000

80.000

80.000

79.787

0.000

0.000

80.000

80.097

79.661

80.000

79.570

NSE, kVAh/year

Initial value

Threshold value

Obtained value

545060.000

200000.000

199690.000

Bus out

33

1

1

2

2

3

4

5

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

18

19

20

22

23

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

Bus in

IOP

ASU

Cup

1

2

18

3

22

4

5

6

25

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

19

20

21

23

24

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

& The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2015

Acknowledgments

program and by National Funds through FCT under the projects

FCOMP-01-0124-FEDER: UID/EEA/00760/2013, and PTDC/

SEN-ENR/122174/2010, and by the GID-MicroRede, project no.

34086, co-funded by COMPETE under FEDER via QREN

Programme, and by the SASGER-MeC, project no.

NORTE-07-0162-FEDER-000101, co-funded by COMPETE

under FEDER Programme. The present work also developed under

the EUREKA ITEA2 Project SEAS with project number 12004.

References

1 Zheng, H., Cheng, Y., Gou, B., et al.: Impact of automatic switches on power

distribution system reliability, Electr. Power Syst. Res., 2012, 83, (1), pp. 5157

2 Canizes, B., Soares, J., Vale, Z., et al.: Hybrid fuzzy Monte Carlo technique for

reliability assessment in transmission power systems, Energy, 2012, 45, (1),

pp. 10071017

3 Canizes, B., Vale, Z.A., Soares, J.P., et al.: Fuzzy Monte Carlo mathematical

model for load curtailment minimization in transmission power systems. 17th

Power Systems Computation Conf. (PSCC11), 2011

4 Wenyuan, L., Jiaqi, Z., Kaigui, X., et al.: Power system risk assessment using a

hybrid method of fuzzy set and Monte Carlo simulation, IEEE Trans. Power

Syst., 2008, 23, (2), pp. 336343

5 Canizes, B., Soares, J., Vale, Z., et al.: Increase of the delivered energy probability

in des using a fuzzy probabilistic modeling. 3rd IEEE PES Innovative Smart Grid

Technologies (ISGT) Europe Conf., 2012

6 IEEE: Electric Delivery System Reliability Evaluation, IEEE Tutorial Course

Textbook No. 05TP175, 2005

7 Billinton, R., Li, W.: A novel method for incorporating weather effects in

composite system adequacy evaluation, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., 1991, 6, (3),

pp. 11541160

8 Chang, W.F., Wu, Y.C.: Optimal reliability design in an electrical distribution

system via a polynomial-time algorithm, Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst.,

2003, 25, (8), pp. 659666

9 Chowdhury, A.A., Custer, D.E.: A value-based probabilistic approach to

designing urban distribution systems, Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst., 2005,

27, (910), pp. 647655

10 Su, C.T., Lii, G.R.: Reliability design of distribution systems using modied

genetic algorithms, Electr. Power Syst. Res., 2002, 60, (3), pp. 201206

2573

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

Louit, D., Pascual, R., Banjevic, D.: Optimal interval for major maintenance

actions in electricity distribution networks, Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst.,

2009, 31, (78), pp. 396401

Tsao, T.F., Chang, H.C.: Comparative case studies for value-based distribution

system reliability planning, Electr. Power Syst. Res., 2004, 68, (3), pp. 229237

Banerjee, B., Islam, S.M.: Reliability based optimum location of distributed

generation, Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst., 2011, 33, (8), pp. 14701478

Arya, L.D., Choube, S.C., Arya, R.: Differential evolution applied for reliability

optimization of radial distribution systems, Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst.,

2011, 33, (2), pp. 271277

Tsao, T.F., Chang, H.C.: Composite reliability evaluation model for different types

of distribution systems, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., 2003, 18, (2), pp. 924930

Bhowmik, S., Goswami, S.K., Bhattacherjee, P.K.: A new power distribution

system planning through reliability evaluation technique, Electr. Power Syst.

Res., 2000, 54, (3), pp. 169179

Chandramohan, S., Atturulu, N., Devi, R.P.K., et al.: Operating cost minimization

of a radial distribution system in a deregulated electricity market through

reconguration using Nsga method, Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst., 2010,

32, (2), pp. 126132

Arya, R., Choube, S.C., Arya, L.D.: Reliability evaluation and enhancement of

distribution systems in the presence of distributed generation based on standby

mode, Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst., 2012, 43, (1), pp. 607616

Ferreira, G.D., Bretas, A.S.: A nonlinear binary programming model for electric

distribution systems reliability optimization, Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst.,

2012, 43, (1), pp. 384392

Narimani, M.R., Vahed, A.A., Azizipanah-Abarghooee, R., et al.: Enhanced

gravitational search algorithm for multi-objective distribution feeder

reconguration considering reliability, loss and operational cost, IET Gener.,

Transm. Distrib., 2014, 8, (1), pp. 5569

2574

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

algorithms for solving multi-objective problems (Springer, 2007, 2nd edn.)

Bernal-Agustin, J.L., Dufo-Lopez, R.: Multi-objective design and control of

hybrid systems minimizing costs and unmet load, Electr. Power Syst. Res.,

2009, 79, (1), pp. 170180

Baran, M.E., Wu, F.F.: Network reconguration in distribution-systems for loss

reduction and load balancing, IEEE Trans. Power Deliv., 1989, 4, (2),

pp. 14011407

Narimani, M.R., Azizipanah-Abarghooee, R., Zoghdar-Moghadam-Shahrekohne,

B., et al.: A novel approach to multi-objective optimal power ow by a new

hybrid optimization algorithm considering generator constraints and multi-fuel

type, Energy, 2013, 49, (1), pp. 119136

Maghouli, P., Hosseini, S.H., Buygi, M.O., et al.: A multi-objective framework for

transmission expansion planning in deregulated environments, IEEE Trans. Power

Syst., 2009, 24, (2), pp. 10511061

Hajri-Gabouj, S.: A fuzzy genetic multiobjective optimization algorithm for a

multilevel generalized assignment problem, IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern.t C,

Appl. Rev., 2003, 33, (2), pp. 214224

Sakawa, M., Yano, H.: An interactive fuzzy satiscing method for multiobjective

nonlinear programming problems with fuzzy parameters, Fuzzy Sets Syst., 1989,

30, (3), pp. 221238

Dias, F.M., Canizes, B., Khodr, H., et al.: Distribution networks planning using

decomposition optimisation technique, IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., 2015. doi:

10.1049/iet-gtd.2014.0860

http://www.research.cs.wisc.edu/math-prog/matlab.html, accessed December 2014

Thukaram, D., Banda, H.M.W., Jerome, J.: A robust three phase power ow

algorithm for radial distribution systems, Electr. Power Syst. Res., 1999, 50, (3),

pp. 227236

& The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2015

- Western-Power-Distribution-Western-Power-Distribution---West-MidlandsUploaded byGenability
- Umd Maryland 2004Uploaded bysebascian
- Integrated Supply Chain Design_models_a_survey and Future Research DirectionsUploaded byapi-3701815
- Production StrategyUploaded byJD_04
- Custom Moments ObjectivesUploaded byatrader123
- Seminar SlidesUploaded byAparna Menon
- APPROXIMATION VOGELS EFFECTIVENESS METHOD (VAM) MINIMIZE COST OF TRANSPORTATION.Uploaded byIJAR Journal
- Optimum Coordination of Overcurrent Relays in Distribution SystemUploaded byAbhishek Kumar
- UK-Power-Networks-UK-Power-Networks---LondonUploaded byGenability
- Duke-Energy-Indiana-Inc-Rate-WP---Schedule-for-Water-Pumping-and/or-Sewage-DisposalUploaded byGenability
- h2011Uploaded byDrVikas Singh Bhadoria
- Mb0048 Unit 01-SlmUploaded byNimma Avanthi
- 22VegaUploaded byOlha Sharhorodska
- Multiobjective Design Optimization of Rolling EleUploaded byAshok Kumar
- 11072721145314408Uploaded byMostafa Akhlaghi
- Moga for Reactive PowerUploaded byNithya Satish
- momga.dviUploaded byHisham Basky
- Mgt Sci Extra PracticeUploaded bySidra Ashfaq
- ScienceUploaded bySivasubramani Shanmugavelu
- NGPM manual v1.4.pdfUploaded byShiba Narayan Sahu
- Multiobjective Reliability RedundancyUploaded bygkgj
- 16.RamazanUploaded byAnonymous PsEz5kGVae
- Alireza2014Uploaded byAmirKhan
- Can for a 2015 Multi Objective Gggg GgggUploaded byachint
- Reconfiguration - 2014 - Mohamed ImranUploaded byiraj
- GREEN1.pdfUploaded byCesario Gillas
- 07A80805-OPTIMIZATIONOFCHEMICALPROCESSESUploaded bySharanya Thirichinapalli
- Reviewer MGNTUploaded byJv Chiu
- 1_3_teza_licentaUploaded byRotaru Natalia
- AbstractUploaded byAmir Khan

- A Novel Clock Synchronizer for Low-Voltage Clock Distribution NetworkUploaded byApikShafiee
- Staggered Latch Bus a Reliable Offset Switched Architecture for Long on-Chip InterconnectUploaded byApikShafiee
- Airgap Interconnects Modeling, Optimization, And Benchmarking for Backplane, PCB, And Interposer ApplicationsUploaded byApikShafiee
- Signal Integrity Characterization of High-Speed 10 in 3D Chip-Package SystemUploaded byApikShafiee
- Signal-Power Integrity Co-Simulations of High Speed Systems via Chip-Package-PCB Co-Analysis MethodologyUploaded byApikShafiee
- Skewing-based Method for Reduction of Functional Crosstalk and Power Supply Noise Caused by on-chip BusesUploaded byApikShafiee
- Passive Delay-Based Macromodels for Signal Integrity Verification of Multi-Chip LinksUploaded byApikShafiee
- S-Parameter-Based IC Interconnect Transmission Line CharacterizationUploaded byRGinanjar Nur Rahmat
- Signal Integrity Analysis of Carbon-Based on-chip Nano-InterconnectsUploaded byApikShafiee
- Signal-Power Integrity and EMI Analysis for SingleChip and Multi-Chip-Module ApplicationsUploaded byApikShafiee
- Signal Integrity Verification of Coplanar Structures for Shielded on-Chip Interconnect LinesUploaded byApikShafiee
- Full-Chip Signal Integrity Analysis and Optimization of 3-D ICsUploaded byApikShafiee
- High Speed Interconnect ModelingUploaded byApikShafiee
- Signal Integrity Analysis for High Speed on - Chip Interconnects Using Differential Evolution AlgorithmUploaded byApikShafiee
- Modeling Crosstalk Effects in CNT Bus ArchitecturesUploaded byApikShafiee
- Modeling and Analysis of Crosstalk Noise in Coupled RLC InterconnectsUploaded byApikShafiee
- Modeling of Interconnect Capacitance, Delay, And Crosstalk in VLSIUploaded byApikShafiee
- Design and Experimental Verification of on-chip Signal Integrity Analyzer (OSIA) Scheme for Eye Diagram Monitoring of a High-speed Serial LinkUploaded byApikShafiee
- A Simple Lumped Port S-Parameter de-Embedding Method for on-Package-Interconnect and Packaging Component High-Frequency ModelingUploaded byApikShafiee
- Kron–Branin Modeling of Y-Y-Tree Interconnects for the PCB Signal Integrity AnalysisUploaded byApikShafiee
- Complex Shaped on-Wafer Interconnects ModelingUploaded byApikShafiee
- Dynamic Power and Signal Integrity Analysis for Chip-Package-Board Co-Design and Co-SimulationUploaded byApikShafiee
- Compact Distributed RLC Interconnect Models—Part IV Unified Models for Time Delay, Crosstalk, And Repeater InsertionUploaded byApikShafiee
- Analytic Models for Clrosstalk Delay and Pulse Analysis Under Non-Ideal InputsUploaded byApikShafiee
- Crosstalk Modeling for Coupled RLC Interconnects With Application to Shield InsertionUploaded byApikShafiee
- A High-level Signal Integrity Fault Model and Test Methodology for Long on-Chip InterconnectionsUploaded byApikShafiee
- 00-Davis-IIUploaded byKadour Habita
- A Multiparameter Moment-Matching Model-Reduction Approach for Generating Geometrically Parameterized Interconnect Performance ModelsUploaded byApikShafiee
- A High-Speed Dual-Phase Processing Pipelined Domino Circuit Design With a Built-In Performance Adjusting MechanismUploaded byApikShafiee

- Non-exhaustive Guide for Graduate Engineers-Rev1Uploaded bydenisjay
- Create an Advanced Search View Using Wizard in sap crmUploaded byswamy_yalamanchili
- ESR Meter SpecificationsUploaded byrichardp3
- Petroleum Filling Station Inspection Audit Report v2.11Uploaded byAmiibah
- HANA Transition Road Map Summary.pdfUploaded byCleo Alves Machado Filho
- Dominion-Virginia-Power-Schedule-GS-4-Large-General-Service-Primary-VoltageUploaded byGenability
- 623567_d45782ed1dbb7897e9a2439ff2eda929Uploaded byMarcus Drago
- iso_13485_medical_devices_2016.pdfUploaded byDito Priyambodo
- EOQ Sample Calculation.Uploaded byMagoiga SN
- 48415_American Society of Heating_OCRUploaded byM Refaat Fath
- Reliance need to followUploaded bychandhrupgdm
- 153 ERP607 BB ConfigGuide en KR - Smart FormsUploaded byCristiana Sousa
- Al Femah Contracting Company - Abu Dhabi - Contractor BrochureUploaded byureachanit
- SANS CISO Mind Map by Rafeeq Rehman v1.1Uploaded byZ Franco
- BOMBA GARDNER DENVER TEEUploaded byjulioramca
- ASSIGNMENT.docxUploaded byhimanshu
- Tugas B InggrisUploaded byklarasr
- Bd-t0040-Pipet Tips Biologix ResearchUploaded bymarcelobelmonte
- Introduction CbUploaded byहुडदंग हास्य कवि सम्मलेन
- HR_Freight_Container_Lifting_Standards.pdfUploaded byArgonauta_navegador
- IO Data Cable Data SheetUploaded byadiamiru
- El-BAHITH REVIEW Number 05 _ University Of Ouargla AlgeriaUploaded byrcogx2013
- b16.10Uploaded byGustavo Fama
- X+TERRAUploaded byBradyalan
- SR22T G3 POH - Cirrus PerspectiveUploaded byPreston Bakic
- lib-ushistory-consumer-economy-radio-1920s-31355-article onlyUploaded byapi-346299352
- 032 Aeroplane Performance (JAA ATPL Theory)Uploaded bydforceman
- Enovia Vplm Vpm NavigatorUploaded byAsker Ali TP
- products-20061341Uploaded byMariscia Yunalia
- Africa on Shortwave .Uploaded byKasi Xswl