00 голосов за00 голосов против

12 просмотров14 стр.please upload my paper

Jun 08, 2017

© © All Rights Reserved

PDF, TXT или читайте онлайн в Scribd

please upload my paper

© All Rights Reserved

12 просмотров

00 голосов за00 голосов против

please upload my paper

© All Rights Reserved

Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 14

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ijepes

learning optimization

S. Durai , S. Subramanian, S. Ganesan

Department of Electrical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering and Technology, Annamalai University, Annamalainagar, Chidambaram 608 002, Tamil Nadu, India

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: The solution of Economic Dispatch (ED) problems mainly depends on the modelling of thermal genera-

Received 23 August 2014 tors. The physical variations such as aging and ambient temperature affect the modelling parameters and

Received in revised form 26 September are unavoidable. As these parameters are the backbone of ED solution, the periodical estimation of these

2014

characteristics coefcients is necessary for accurate dispatch. The process is formulated as an error min-

Accepted 15 November 2014

imization problem and a nature inspired algorithm namely Teaching Learning Based Optimization (TLBO)

is proposed as an estimator. This work provides a frame work for the computation of coefcients for qua-

dratic and cubic cost functions, valve point loading, piece-wise quadratic cost and emission functions. The

Keywords:

Parameter estimation

effectiveness of TLBO is demonstrated on 5 standard test systems and a practical Indian utility system,

Error estimation involving varying degree of complexity. TLBO yields better results than benchmark Least Error Square

Economy deviation (LES) method and other evolutionary algorithms. The economic deviation is also tested with existing

Non-convex function systems.

Teaching learning optimization 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Introduction tion of these coefcients helps to perform the secure and economic

operation [1,2]. Therefore, an accurate and reliable estimation

Role of parameters in ED problems technique is essential to estimate the coefcients of fuel cost and

emission functions.

Economic Dispatch (ED) ensures the economical operation of

power system that requires the accurate fuel inputoutput charac- Existing parameters estimation procedures for ED problem

teristic of generators which may be linear or non-linear. The char-

acteristics can be expressed mathematically as a linear or Parameter estimation is a crucial issue in power system opera-

quadratic or higher-order polynomial function. The emission char- tions. Various methods have been addressed and can be broadly

acteristics of thermal generators are also expressed in the same classied into two types; mathematical and heuristic. The mathe-

way. The accuracy of the ED solution depends on various factors matical approaches such as Least Error Square (LES) and Gauss

such as the selected model, the data and parameters used, as well Newton have been used to solve estimation problems in power

as the optimization tool used for solving the problem. Different systems [3]. Taylor and Huang reported a mathematical method

mathematical models are being used for the representation of using a recursive procedure to estimate the cost curve coefcients

functions such as fuel cost, fuel cost with valve point loading [4]. El-Hawary and Mansour conducted performance analysis of

effects and emission. Certain practical thermal units use different Least Square Error (LSE), Bard algorithm, Marquardt algorithm

fuels like coal, natural gas and oil, which have different heat con- and Powell regression algorithm for estimating coefcients [5].

tents and leads to piecewise quadratic cost function. The weighted least square multiple regression method has been

The inputoutput characteristics of thermal generators play an employed to obtain the coefcients of cubic cost function [6].

important role for its optimal operation and these characteristics The sequential regression technique and a method based on the

are affected by various factors such as ambient temperature and operating records of the power stations have been suggested for

aging of thermal units that alters the coefcients. The accurate fuel cost coefcients estimation [7]. The methods based on the

coefcients of these functions leads to the exact dispatch, and least absolute value approximations and curve tting techniques

the optimal ED solution can be obtained. Thus, periodical estima- have been reported for fuel cost coefcients estimation [8,9]. The

mathematical methods require high computational effort hence

Corresponding author. high computational time. These classical estimators deliver poor

E-mail address: duraiselvaraj86@gmail.com (S. Durai). performance in the presence of gross errors.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijepes.2014.11.010

0142-0615/ 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

12 S. Durai et al. / Electrical Power and Energy Systems 67 (2015) 1124

Nomenclature

Fi fuel-cost function of the ith generating unit e0i, eji emission coefcients of the ith unit

Pti power generated by the ith thermal generating unit gi, di exponential term coefcients for emission function of

(MW) the ith unit

a0i, aji cost characteristics coefcients of the ith generating rei error associated with the emission characteristics of ith

unit generating unit

ei, fi valve-point loading coefcients of the ith unit Cimin, Cimax minimum and maximum fuel-cost coefcients of the

rci error associated with the cost characteristic equation of ith unit

ith generating unit Fi actual, Fi estimated actual fuel cost and estimated fuel cost of the

N number of thermal generating units ith unit

L polynomial order Ei actual, Ei estimated actual emission and estimated emission of the

Ei emission function of the ith generating unit ith unit

The heuristic and other articial intelligence techniques have elds of engineering such as Civil Engineering [30], Mechanical

been applied in the eld of power system estimation. The heuristic Engineering [31,32] and Electrical Engineering [33,34].

techniques such as Articial Neural Network (ANN) [10,11], Fuzzy

Logic (FL) [12], ant colony optimization [14] and bacterial foraging

algorithm [17,18,22] have been used as estimators for load fore- Contributions

casting, state estimation and parameter estimation of inductor

motors respectively. Though ANN is superior when the process The most important issue in economic dispatch problem is to

model is not well dened mathematically, it requires huge amount have an accurate estimate of thermal inputoutput curve coef-

of data for training, which may not be available for some cases. The cients. The inaccurate estimate adversely affects the accuracy of

main drawbacks for fuzzy logic based method are creating the the dispatch process. Few researchers have contributed to estimate

fuzzy rules is difcult which requires much experience. the quadratic fuel cost coefcients. As the results of research, third-

Among these methods, Genetic Algorithm (GA) [13], Particle order cost function model accurately represents the practical ther-

Swarm Optimization (PSO) [15,16] and Articial Bee Colony mal generator [19,21]. But, no work has been reported in this eld.

(ABC) [23] algorithm have been applied to the chosen problem. Due to the strict environmental regulations, usage of exact emis-

The heuristic techniques outperform the mathematical methods sion coefcients has become important. These two points motivate

but their solution quality is sensitive to the algorithmic controlling us to contribute research in parameter estimation of cubic cost and

parameters like population size and number of generations. emission coefcients. A maiden attempt has been performed for

Besides common control parameters, different algorithms require estimating emission parameters and estimating fuel cost coef-

their own algorithm specic control parameters. GA uses mutation cients for thermal power plants with multiple fuel options. In addi-

rate and crossover rate, PSO uses inertia weight and social and cog- tion, comparison in terms of economy deviation has also been

nitive parameters and ABC uses limit and the proper selection of carried out.

algorithm specic parameters is a crucial factor affecting the per- The main contributions of this work in accord with GA [13], PSO

formance of the algorithms. The improper selection of these [16] and ABC [23] methods are as follows:

parameters either increases computational effort or yields to local

optimal solution. 1. Estimation of fuel cost coefcients for second and third order

models of thermal generators.

2. Fuel cost with valve point coefcients estimation of thermal

Parameters improvement by TLBO generators with multiple fuel options.

3. Estimation of emission coefcients for nonlinear models of

The heuristic search techniques such as GA, PSO and ABC may thermal generators.

be trapped in local optima due to premature convergence that pre- 4. Economic deviation due to the accurate estimates is also carried

vent the algorithm reaching the global optima. The solution quality out.

of these algorithms is controlled by algorithmic parameters and

they require tuning to nd the optimal control settings. Recently, The TLBO algorithm is implemented on different scale of test

Rao et al. developed an algorithm parameter free optimization systems for estimating linear and nonlinear coefcients for both

technique by inspiring teachinglearning behaviour in the class fuel cost and emission functions.

room, namely Teaching Learning Based Optimization (TLBO) [28].

Like other nature-inspired algorithms, it is also a population

based algorithm comprises Teaching Phase (TP) and Learning Organisation of the article

Phase (LP). In the TP, random ordered states of points called learn-

ers within the search space are produced. Then the most feasible Rest of the paper is structured as follows: Economic power dis-

point is considered as the teacher, who is the highly learned person patch models are detailed in Section Economic power dispatch

and shares his or her knowledge with the learners and others learn models. Mathematical formulation for parameter estimation is

signicant group information from the teacher. In the LP, the introduced in Section Parameter estimation problem. Section

learners learn by interacting between each other. TLBO is an Teaching learning optimisation presents an overview about TLBO

algorithm-specic, parameter-less algorithm that does not require algorithm which is followed by its implementation for the chosen

any algorithm-specic parameters to be tuned [29]. This algorithm problem in Section Evaluations of coefcients using TLBO. The

can nd the global solution for nonlinear constrained optimization detailed discussions about numerical results achieved are given

problems with less computation effort and high consistency [28]. in Section Results and discussions. Finally, Section Conclusion

The effectiveness of TLBO algorithm has been reported in various outlines the conclusions.

S. Durai et al. / Electrical Power and Energy Systems 67 (2015) 1124 13

Economic power dispatch models D System matrix that relates the fuel cost to power output

or emission to power output.

Fuel-cost function: Non-convex P(k) Power output for kth measurement.

Where D = [1 P(k)] for linear model.

In this model, the fuel cost curve for thermal generating unit (i) D = [1 P(k) P2(k)] for second-order model.

can be described as a polynomial function as, D = [1 P(k) P2(k) P3(k)] for third-order model.

x Parameters to estimate for fuel cost (or) emission

X

L

F i P ti aoi aji Pjti r ci i 1; 2 . . . N 1 coefcients.

j1 x a0 a1 a2 T and x e0 e1 e2 T for 2nd order fuel cost and

emission estimates respectively.

If L = 1, the model is linear. x a0 a1 a2 a3 T and x e0 e1 e2 e3 T for 3rd order of fuel

If L = 2, the fuel cost function is expressed as a second-order cost and emission estimates respectively.

polynomial as, r Error vector that relates y(k) to x.

F i P ti aoi a1i pti a2i p2ti r ci 2 There are k equations available to represent the Factual or

Eactual that form measurement matrix y(k).

If L = 3, the fuel cost function is a cubic polynomial and is TLBO is used to nd an estimate for the unknown values of

expressed as, [x]. These estimates are used to recalculate Festimated or

F i P ti aoi a1i pti a2i p2ti a3i p3ti r ci 3 Eestimated at each time step.

Then the error at each step k for generating unit i can be calcu-

Fuel-cost function: Non-smooth lated as,

rci F i actual Fi estimated 12

The valve point effects produce ripples in the inputoutput

characteristics and this effect can be included in the fuel cost func- rei Ei actual Ei estimated 13

tion by adding a sinusoid term [16] and is, Now, the problem formulation can be stated clearly to nd an

" #

X

L estimate for the parameter vector [x] for any model that minimizes

F i P ti a0i aji Pjti ei sinf i Pi;min Pti rci 4 the error vector.

j1 The objective function is minimized subject to the physical lim-

its of each coefcient that is given as,

If L 2; F i P ti a0i a1i pti a2i p2ti jei sinf i P i;min P ti j r ci 5

C min

i 6 C i 6 C max

i 14

If L 3; F i P ti a0i a1i pti a2i p2ti a3i p3ti jei sinf i P i;min Pti j r ci 6

Emission function

Teaching Learning Based Optimization (TLBO) is a nature

The pollutant emission characteristic of a thermal generator can inspired algorithm that mimics the teachinglearning process

be modelled as either linear or non-linear and is as follows [25]. between the teacher and the students in a classroom. It is a pow-

erful evolutionary algorithm that maintains a population of stu-

X

L

Ei Pti eoi eji Pjti r ei i 1; 2:::N 7 dents, where each student represents a potential solution to an

j1 optimization problem. This algorithm comprises of two phases,

namely teacher phase (learners learn from the teacher) and the

X

L learner phase (learners learn by interaction among themselves).

Ei Pti eoi eji Pjti gi expdi Pti r ei 8

j1 Teacher phase

If L 2; Ei P ti eoi e1i pti e2i p2ti rei 9 A teacher is one who brings the learners knowledge from the

initial to his or her level of knowledge. But in practice, this is not

Ei Pti eoi e1i pti e2i p2ti gi expdi Pti r ei 10 possible and a teacher can only move the mean of a class up to

some extent depending on the ability of the class. This follows a

random progression depending on many factors. Let, Mp is the

Parameter estimation problem mean and Tp be the teacher at any iteration p. Tp will try to shift

mean Mp towards its own level, so now the new mean will be Tp

Consider the vector equation describing the relationships designated as Mnew. The solution is updated according to the differ-

between the measurement values y the unknown parameters x, ence between the existing and the new mean given by,

the system matrix D, and the residual due to (noise) values r is

given by, D Meanp randM new sF M p 15

changed, and rand is a random number in the range of [0, 1]. The

The parameter estimation problem for estimating characteristic value of sF can be either 1 or 2, which is again a heuristic step

curve coefcients of thermal generator can be formulated as

and decided randomly with equal probability as,

follows:

Let, sF round1 rand0; 1 16

The existing solution can be modied based on the difference

k Number of measurements. (Eq. (15)) according to the following expression,

y(k) Measured value of the kth measurement. i.e. Fuel cost

(Factual) or emission (Eactual). Snew; p Sold; p D Meanp 17

14 S. Durai et al. / Electrical Power and Energy Systems 67 (2015) 1124

START

coefficients at the time installation, maximum number of iterations

Iter = 1

D_Meanp according to Eq. (15)

Teacher phase

Update Snew, p using (17) and fitness using (12), (13) subject to

constraints

Obtain Snew, p in leaner phase using Eqs. (18), (19) and check

for constraints

Learner phase

Calculate and compare fitness solutions and keep the best

Iter = Iter + 1

NO Is

Iter Itermax

YES

STOP

Learner phase Step 3: Check for the constraint violation using Eq. (14).

Step 4: If the limit is violated, then upgrade the cost coefcients

In this phase, the knowledge level of the students is enhanced of the units using the following equation

with the use of knowledge interaction. A learner interacts ran- 8 min

domly with other learner for enhancing him or her knowledge. If >

> C ; C ji < C min

> i

<

i

the other leaner has more knowledge than him or her, a leaner

C ji C max ; C ji > C min 21

can learn something new by interaction. Based on this observation, >

> i i

>

: j

randomly select two learners Sp and Sq and the equations repre- C i ; C max

i P C ji P C min

i

senting learner phase are as follows:

Step 5: Calculate Festimated and Eestimated by using Eqs. (6) and (10)

Snew; p Sold; p randSp Sq ; if f Sp < f Sq 18 respectively.

Step 6: The error associated with each measurement can be cal-

Snew; p Sold; p randSq Sp ; if f Sq < f Sp 19 culated by using Eqs. (12) and (13).

Step 7: Teacher phase: Compute difference mean using Eq. (15)

and evaluate Snew, p using Eq. (17).

Evaluations of coefcients using TLBO Step 8: If Snew, p is better than Sold, p then replaces Sold, p by Snew, p

otherwise Sold, p is preserved.

Step 1: Read the generator data, actual fuel cost (Factual), power Step 9: Update the coefcients subject to constraints.

output (P), number of variables (CG), population size (PS), max- Step 10: Leaner phase: Compute Snew, p by using Eqs. (18) and

imum number of iterations, maximum and minimum limits of (19).

fuel cost function coefcients (Cimin, Cimax). Step 11: Termination criterion: If Iter P Itermax, print the opti-

Step 2: Randomly generate fuel cost coefcients using the fol- mal results, otherwise goto step 7.

lowing equation,

Fig. 1 depicts the owchart for parameter estimation using

C ji C min

i rand C max

i C min

i i 1 .. .CG; j 1 .. .PS 20

TLBO.

S. Durai et al. / Electrical Power and Energy Systems 67 (2015) 1124 15

Table 1

Estimation of fuel-cost coefcients for second-order model using TLBO and comparison with other methods 3 unit system.

Units P (MW) Coefcients estimated by TLBO Factual (GJ/h) Festimated (GJ/h) Error

TLBO ABC [23] PSO [16] LES [16]

1 (Coal) 10 a01 96.6025 176.62 176.622 0.002 0.001 0.262 2.368

20 a11 7.588 256.40 264.922 8.522 8.513 8.365 5.568

30 a21 0.0414 361.50 361.503 0.003 0.013 0.000 2.496

40 467.60 466.363 1.237 1.259 1.038 2.240

50 579.50 579.502 0.002 0.025 0.452 1.536

Total error 9.767 9.81 10.117 14.208

2 (Oil) 10 a02 101.5800 184.75 184.779 0.029 0.015 1.150 2.442

20 a12 7.8778 268.20 276.818 8.617 8.574 7.200 5.662

30 a22 0.0442 377.70 377.697 0.003 0.047 1.300 2.442

40 488.80 487.416 1.384 1.428 2.200 2.266

50 606.00 605.975 0.025 0.069 0.000 1.690

Total error 10.058 10.133 11.850 14.464

3 (Gas) 10 a03 101.820 187.20 187.200 0.000 0.599 1.420 2.376

20 a13 8.099 272.80 281.360 8.560 8.560 6.321 5.568

30 a23 0.0439 384.30 384.300 0.000 0.001 2.278 2.568

40 497.20 496.020 1.179 1.178 2.716 2.284

50 616.50 606.520 0.019 0.023 0.007 1.420

Total error 9.759 10.361 12.742 14.216

Fig. 2. Cost coefcients of generating units and error by TLBO (practical system) (a0, a1 and a2 are the fuel cost coefcients of generators by TLBO).

Results and discussions The TLBO algorithm is applied to the following test cases and

the obtained simulation results are analysed.

To assess the feasibility of TLBO as an estimator, it is applied to Case 1: Fuel cost coefcients estimation:

various test systems including a practical Indian Utility System

(IUS). The algorithm is implemented in Matlab package and (1a) Second-order (1b) Third-order

simulation cases are carried out on a personal computer having (1c) Piecewise quadratic (1d) Non-smooth

the conguration of Intel(R) core i3 CPU and 2 GB RAM. With the

knowledge of individual generating unit characteristics, the esti-

mation process has been done separately for each unit in a plant.

Case 2: Emission coefcients estimation:

The following algorithmic parameters are chosen for all cases in

order to validate the performance of the algorithm: Population

size = 10; maximum number of iterations = 120. (2a) Second-order (2b) Second-order with exponential

16 S. Durai et al. / Electrical Power and Energy Systems 67 (2015) 1124

Table 2

Estimation of fuel cost function coefcients for third-order model using TLBO and comparison with other methods 3 unit system.

Units P (MW) Coefcients estimated by TLBO Factual (GJ/h) Festimated (GJ/h) Error

TLBO ABC [23] PSO [16] LES[16]

1 (Coal) 10 a01 124.4326 176.62 176.622 0.014499 0.0048 0.186 0.393

20 a11 3.4999 256.40 264.922 0.842196 0.7342 4.157 1.874

30 a21 0.1870 361.50 361.503 4.24431 4.4068 0.451 1.779

40 a31 0.0015 467.60 466.363 0.074983 0.1078 3.846 3.368

50 579.50 579.502 7.35e05 0.1688 0.000 2.915

Total error 5.176061 5.4224 8.641 10.329

2 (Oil) 10 a02 129.2972 184.75 184.779 0.01623 0.0109 0.674 0.449

20 a12 3.8 268.20 276.818 0.97343 0.9631 0.000 1.362

30 a22 0.1897 377.70 377.697 4.18122 4.1929 4.690 3.477

40 a32 0.0015 488.80 487.416 0.00226 0.0289 0.063 0.716

50 606.00 605.975 0.02388 0.0449 0.119 5.055

Total error 5.19702 5.2407 5.547 11.059

3 (Gas) 10 a03 129.8867 187.20 187.2141 0.014059 0.0167 0.099 0.396

20 a13 3.982732 272.80 273.5414 0.74138 1.8323 1.526 1.888

30 a23 0.19 384.30 379.8687 4.431299 3.7387 3.300 1.848

40 a33 0.0015 497.20 497.196 0.003978 0.0297 0.874 3.296

50 616.50 616.5233 0.023343 0.1593 0.000 2.720

Total error 5.214059 5.7767 5.799 10.148

Case 1: Fuel cost coefcients estimation The TLBO is applied to both test systems to estimate fuel cost

coefcients. In test system 1, generators 1, 2 and 3 are fuelled with

(1a) Second-order coal, oil and gas respectively. For each unit, the fuel costs for ve

In this study, two different test systems are used. The test system different real power outputs are specied. The estimated coef-

1 consists of 3 same rated thermal generators but are fuelled with cients by TLBO are presented in Table 1. Comparing with the Factual,

different fuels like coal, oil and gas. The second test system is a the fuel costs computed using the estimated coefcients are highly

practical IUS that consists of 19 generating units. In both test close. It is also noticed that the fuel costs for 20 MW and 40 MW

systems, thermal generator is represented as a second-order model. outputs of unit 1, 20 MW output of unit 2, 20 MW and 50 MW

The system data including the fuel cost coefcients and power for unit 3 show mismatch with the Factual. The value of total error

outputs are taken from [16,27] for test systems 1 and 2 respectively. is an indicator of the good estimate even mismatches exists. The

Table 3

Estimation of piecewise quadratic cost function coefcients using TLBO 10 unit system.

P

Unit P (MW) Fuel type Coefcients estimated by TLBO Factual (GJ/h) Festimated (GJ/h) error

Min Max a0i a1i a2i ei fi Min Max Min Max TLBO ABC

1 100 196 1 29.20909 0.40261 0.002085 0.025602 3.72202 8.98 30.74 9.795786 30.4048 1.15099 3.98151

196 250 2 27.0709 0.37683 0.002056 0.014242 1.98183 32.83 61.23 32.19326 61.36292 0.76993 2.81373

2 50 114 2 24.75813 0.32459 0.001976 0.011376 0.49052 12.31 23.21 13.44119 22.52475 1.81643 3.25496

114 157 3 121.8423 1.269 0.004171 0.01184 1.269 23.38 50.29 22.63076 50.64174 1.10097 2.75457

157 230 1 0.490106 0.01988 0.001072 0.000187 0.01988 2.68 12.12 2.176908 12.15984 0.54293 2.93069

3 200 332 1 15.33609 0.1116 0.001078 0.031386 3.116 35.85 97.17 36.14554 97.13976 0.32578 1.59272

332 388 3 0.875 0.030159 0.000799 0.00188 0.317377 96.72 130.96 97.24074 131.1594 0.720146 1.27426

388 500 2 60.1284 0.529741 1.87E05 0.06396 5.615244 148.19 210.38 148.2211 209.444 0.967105 1.66413

4 99 138 1 0.64015 0.01114 0.000976 0.000198 0.1114 9.18 17.69 9.107432 17.69844 0.081011 1.15842

138 200 2 36.63337 0.4348 0.002166 0.02856 1.348 17.9 36.55 17.88792 36.35651 0.20557 0.43500

200 265 3 297.7974 2.6212 0.005948 0.289266 26.855 10.36 20.72 11.48527 21.15547 1.560746 4.91182

5 190 338 1 10.21014 0.05733 0.001032 0.001392 0.5733 36.77 108.73 36.58122 108.7596 0.218393 1.15977

338 407 2 17.57555 0.1206 0.000943 0.180047 4.206 85.34 125.45 84.55172 124.8753 1.36296 5.70216

407 490 3 13.99 0.293241 0.000381 0.01399 4.791302 168.49 221.01 168.4314 221.1317 0.180361 0.41948

6 138 200 1 12.8828 0.1348 0.001245 0.012859 1.348 17.9 36.55 17.99385 35.7427 0.901149 1.59502

85 138 2 0.908059 0.01114 0.000966 0.003842 0.1114 6.91 17.69 6.942233 17.77321 0.115441 0.91532

200 265 3 0.221648 0.01114 0.000334 0.00253 0.1114 10.36 20.72 11.3498 20.72001 0.989807 2.44408

7 200 331 1 168.7099 1.338 0.003435 0.1668 13.38 38.55 100.6 38.49493 102.1707 1.625755 2.96959

331 391 2 10.07106 0.01325 0.000903 0.00682 0.1325 104.13 143.01 104.6028 142.9262 0.556605 1.94797

391 500 3 32.37604 0.1267 0.00108 0.017307 1.267 138.44 202.98 139.5341 203.0004 1.094147 2.66318

8 99 138 1 13.35 0.0210098 0.00018 0.01335 1.883936 9.18 17.69 8.6105 17.91155 0.791051 1.15768

138 200 2 2.439954 0.01114 0.000908 0.000198 0.1114 17.9 36.55 18.20204 36.54774 0.304309 1.13761

200 265 3 62.85 0.6348 0.001795 0.046 6.348 10.36 20.72 7.68999 20.72224 2.672249 4.66804

9 213 370 1 3.39904 0.1675 0.000765 0.05853 3.675 32.44 77.64 22.46561 38.49148 1.394315 2.68979

130 213 3 14.69024 0.03514 0.007014 0.04446 0.0817 92 125.61 92.02962 125.9219 0.341567 1.07008

370 440 3 13.6392 0.00817 0.000587 0.007614 0.0817 22.29 38.42 22.46561 38.49148 0.24709 5.65214

10 200 362 1 14.84281 0.08938 0.001092 0.025083 0.7938 39.34 125.47 40.62715 125.5281 1.345273 1.87694

362 407 3 31.56548 0.1024 0.001064 0.033809 1.024 133.44 165.57 133.8806 166.1092 0.09767 1.10165

407 490 2 61.13 0.551445 4.62E05 0.06113 5.81165 170.17 220.2 170.9682 220.2415 0.839705 1.08521

S. Durai et al. / Electrical Power and Energy Systems 67 (2015) 1124 17

total error obtained by LES [16], PSO [16], ABC [23] and TLBO for

units 1, 2 and 3 are also listed in Table 1. Comparing the total error

with the earlier reports, the TLBO achieve the least errors of 9.767,

10.058 and 9.759 respectively. It is also noted that the TLBO

achieve errors close to zero around three times for each units

which shows the estimates are the accurate.

The IUS comprising of 19 thermal generators, whose inputout-

put characteristics are expressed as second-order polynomials, is

used to demonstrate how good the TLBO works for this type of

practical systems. The parameter estimation process has been car-

ried out for each unit in the system. The fuel costs are computed

using the new coefcients and are compared against the Factual.

The total error obtained by the TLBO for each unit is depicted in

Fig. 2. The obtained total errors are almost close to 1 for most of

the units except 1st, 6th, 12th and 18th generator which are below

0.5; hence the estimates are highly appreciable.

(1b) Third-order

In the ED models, the fuel cost function is chosen to be of qua-

dratic form. However, the fuel cost function becomes more non-

linear when the actual generator response is considered. In the

year 1965, Navarro and Baker [1] described the use of cubic cost

Fig. 3. % Error in emission coefcients estimation for 13 unit system.

curves in economic loading of electric power stations. Shoults

Table 4

Estimation of fuel cost coefcients with valve-point loadings for third-order model using TLBO 13 unit system.

Unit P (MW) Coefcients FActual (GJ/h) Festimated (GJ/h) Error Total error

Actual TLBO

1 0 550 550.6453 0.645271 1.517337

100 a0i 550 550.6453 1468.08 1468.474 0.393575

200 a1i 8.1 8.1 2378.62 2378.819 0.198763

300 a2i 2.8e4 0.000282 3270.22 3270.259 0.039493

400 a3i 4.10e08 4.00E08 4134.61 4134.56 0.050103

500 ei 300 299 4967.81 4967.749 0.061449

600 fi 0.035 0.035003 5770.65 5770.655 0.004579

680 6491.9 6492.024 0.124104

2, 3 0 309 308.7912 0.20877 0.739317

50 a0i 309 308.7912 888.05 888.0625 0.012453

100 a1i 8.1 8.1 1299 1299.018 0.017767

150 a2i 5.6e4 0.000561 1540.24 1540.059 0.181202

200 a3i 8.1e08 8.10E08 2122.97 2123.021 0.051457

250 ei 200 200.2505 2546.2 2546.292 0.092017

300 fi 0.042 0.042 2798.31 2798.22 0.089686

360 3412.29 3412.376 0.085965

4, 5 60 716.09 715.9214 0.168557 0.462576

6, 7 80 a0i 240 239.7143 1022.81 1022.723 0.087316

8, 9 100 a1i 7.74 7.742172 1133.86 1133.776 0.084475

120 a2i 32.4e4 0.003237 1305.04 1305.014 0.025655

140 a3i 11.2e08 1.11E07 1529.43 1529.423 0.006868

160 ei 150 150.0478 1564.32 1564.346 0.025963

180 fi 0.063 0.063003 1882.39 1882.454 0.063674

200 2003.78 2003.78 6.74E05

10, 11 40 474.56 474.3676 0.192437 1.0808320

50 a0i 126 125.6156 637.59 637.6407 0.050658

60 a1i 8.6 8.608757 751.68 751.7106 0.03058

70 a2i 28.4e4 0.002742 800.23 799.9631 0.266942

80 a3i 23.0e08 2.25E07 853.96 853.9672 0.007169

90 ei 100 100.2616 1010.33 1010.328 0.001784

100 fi 0.084 0.084067 1109.31 1108.935 0.374866

120 1241.6 1241.444 0.156396

12, 13 55 607.63 607.6352 0.005216 0.799582

65 a0i 126 126.8022 771.53 771.7307 0.200681

75 a1i 8.6 8.581582 886.48 886.6839 0.20391

85 a2i 28.4e4 0.002911 935.89 935.8477 0.042292

95 a3i 23.0e08 2.43E07 990.5 990.3283 0.171664

105 ei 100 100.3871 1147.73 1147.766 0.03575

115 fi 0.084 0.084011 1247.59 1247.576 0.013731

120 1272.62 1272.494 0.126337

18 S. Durai et al. / Electrical Power and Energy Systems 67 (2015) 1124

and Mead [6] mentioned in the year 1984 that third order model is fuel costs calculated using the estimated values are close to the

suitable for electric power industry practices. Recently, Saber et al., Factual which shows the accurate estimate. The simulation results

[19] performed sensitive study to recommend third-order model reported by using LES [16], PSO [16] and ABC [23] are compared.

for economic dispatch solution. Cubic function models more accu- The most recent report [23] has attained the total error of

rately provide the actual response of thermal generators. The 5.4224, 5.2407 and 5.7767 for units 1, 2 and 3 respectively. The

rough approximation of generator characteristic function makes TLBO algorithm achieves the total error of 5.176061, 5.19702 and

the economic dispatch solution deviated from the optimality and 5.214059 for units 1, 2 and 3 respectively. The comparison clearly

the economic dispatch solution can be improved by considering indicates that the TLBO converges at the least total error for all

cubic models [20,21]. Hence, we have considered cubic models units.

for this research.

In this case, the algorithm is implemented on the same 3-unit (1c) Piecewise quadratic

system used in case 1a. The higher order representation of The test system chosen for this case consists of 10-generating

inputoutput curve may depict the practical characteristics of gen- units in which each unit has two or three fuel options like

erators [16]. By utilizing the fuel cost corresponding to power out- coal, oil and gas. As more than one fuel is used, the generator

put particulars, the estimation is processed and the obtained inputoutput characteristic is expressed as a piecewise quadratic

coefcients are presented in Table 2. Like the previous case, the function. The valve point effects can also be included along with

Table 5

Estimation of emission function coefcients by TLBO 5 unit system.

Unit P (MW) Coefcients Eactual (kg/h) Eestimated (kg/h) Error Total error

Actual TLBO

1 10 e01 80 80.97444 85.03 85.97122 0.971216 1.29921

50 e11 0.805 0.805 991491.3 991491.5 0.18236

75 e21 0.0180 0.017685 1219711333.43 1219711333.57563 0.145634

g1 0.6550 0.655

d1 0.28460 0.2846

2 20 e02 50 48.23428 45.84 45.58126 0.258736 0.879284

75 e12 0.555 0.455 96.37 96.95994 0.58994

125 e22 0.0150 0.014 227.28 227.3106 0.030608

g2 0.5773 0.4773

d2 0.02446 0.028677

3 30 e03 60 58.14515 29.78 31.02219 1.242187 1.494093

100 e13 1.355 1.2 34.31 34.08071 0.229295

175 e23 0.0105 0.009062 170.83 170.8526 0.022611

g3 0.4968 0.306411

d3 0.02270 0.028535

4 40 e04 45 43.22837 34.86 34.69329 0.166715 0.82333

150 e14 0.600 0.5476 144.03 143.5356 0.494355

250 e24 0.0080 0.007672 458.34 458.1777 0.162261

g4 0.4860 0.492315

d4 0.01948 0.019961

5 50 e05 30 29.42958 33.67 33.3066 0.363397 0.676372

200 e15 0.555 0.555 430.94 430.929 0.011046

300 e25 0.0120 0.011898 1197.88 1198.182 0.301928

g5 0.5035 0.7

d5 0.02075 0.019781

Table 6

Average increase in objectives for IUS and 13-unit system by TLBO.

Test system Unit Average increase in cost (Rs/h) Unit Average increase in cost (Rs/h)

Indian utility system 1 0.006612 11 0.110225

2 0.066567 12 0.08871

3 0.066783 13 0.056361

4 1.266229 14 0.124864

5 0.049812 15 0.184268

6 0.014133 16 0.114246

7 0.068257 17 0.967337

8 0.043484 18 0.024943

9 0.210777 19 0.007418

10 0.250025

Test system Unit Average increase in emission (kg/h) Unit Average increase in emission (kg/h)

13-Unit system 1 0.156366 8 0.076141

2 0.040766 9 0.076141

3 0.040766 10 0.288891

4 0.076141 11 0.288891

5 0.076141 12 0.102266

6 0.076141 13 0.102266

7 0.076141

S. Durai et al. / Electrical Power and Energy Systems 67 (2015) 1124 19

this expression. The system data is available in the literature [24]. estimation process. Like previous cases, the results indicate that

The generator characteristic is expressed as a piecewise quadratic TLBO outperforms ABC. For each unit, the total error for each fuel

function including valve point effect that increases the number of is also computed and is presented in Table 3. It is observed that

variables to be estimated. Each fuel has 3 and 2 coefcients for 17 out of 29 estimate having the total error less than 1.

quadratic function and valve point term respectively. In this test

system, the generator 1 has two fuel option and the remaining (1d) Non-smooth model

units have three fuel options. It is specied that the fuel 2 is uneco- The algorithm is implemented on a test system consisting of 13

nomical for generator 9. The TLBO attains new values for coef- generating units. The generators are represented as a third order

cients and are presented in Table 3. For a generator, each fuel polynomial. The inclusion of valve point loading adds a sinusoidal

has minimum and maximum generation levels, thus two fuel costs term in its characteristic equation. It is difcult to nd the optimal

are available. The estimation process has been performed for each dispatch in the solution space as the sinusoidal term generates

generation level. Hence, two results of Factual and Festimated are pre- multiple minima in the search space. Further, the use of inaccurate

sented for each fuel type in Table 3. A maiden attempt has been coefcients, deviate the ED solution from the optimality. Hence the

made to estimate the coefcients for this kind of characteristic accurate estimate of coefcients is necessary to determine the

curves. The ABC and TLBO algorithms are applied for parameter optimal output of each generating units. The parameter estimation

Fig. 4. Convergence characteristics for second order systems using TLBO, (a) 3 unit system, (b) 5 unit system, (c) 10 unit system fuel 1, (d) 10 unit system Fuel 2, (e) 10 unit

system Fuel 3, (f) 13 unit system, and (g) 19 unit system.

20 S. Durai et al. / Electrical Power and Energy Systems 67 (2015) 1124

is processed using TLBO. The estimated coefcients and the error In the chosen test system, limited data is available. If the number

associated with the estimates are given in Table 4. It is observed of measurements is more; then the more accurate estimate may

that the total error is greater than 1 for units 1, 11, 12 and 13 be obtained for units 1, 10 and 11. The obtained parameters are

and is less than 1 for the remaining generating units. This shows compared with the values at the time installation and the compar-

that the estimates are highly closer to actual values. Since, the ison indicates a slight deviation in each parameter. The estimation

physical generation limits of generating units are also used in the shows the actual emission characteristic of each generator. The

estimation process. The minimum generation capacity limits of actual characteristics can help to operate the system within the

1st, 2nd and 3rd generators is 0 MW, hence the value of P is taken emission limits.

as 0 MW whereas in the remaining generators (4th13th), the min-

imum values are 60 MW (Generators 49), 40 MW (Generators 10,

(2b) Second-order model with exponential characteristic

11) and 55 MW (Generators 12, 13).

In this case, a test system is chosen that having 5 thermal units.

The test system data is taken from [25]. The emission characteristic

Case 2: Emission coefcients estimation

of each generator is expressed as a second-order polynomial along

with an exponential term which includes the non-linearity in the

Further, the TLBO is applied to estimate the emission function

emission characteristic. The algorithm is executed to nd the emis-

coefcients of thermal generating units. The generator models

sion coefcients for each unit. The new values of coefcients and

such as second-order and quadratic with exponential term are cho-

their allied total error are presented in Table 5. It is seen that the

sen for estimation.

TLBO settled at the error which is less than 1 for all specied

outputs of generating units. Like previous cases, the minimum

(2a) Second-order model

total error indicates the accurate estimation. The estimated values

The TLBO algorithm is used to estimate the emission function

give the actual emission characteristics of the system. By these

coefcients of a test system contains 13 generating units. The sys-

coefcients, the system can be operated optimally while satisfying

tem specics are available in [26]. The second-order model is

the emission norms.

adopted and the pollutant emission characteristic is represented

as a quadratic equation. The algorithm is executed for each unit

to nd its accurate characteristic coefcients. The % total error Solution quality

obtained by TLBO for each unit is depicted in Fig. 3 and the

unit names are embedded inside the corresponding part. The Though the TLBO algorithm does not require specic parameter

estimation process has been made with the specied data. For tuning, several trials have been conducted by varying the

the accurate estimate, number of measurements should be more. population size. It is viewed that there is no large difference in

Fig. 5. Performance characteristics for third order systems using TLBO. Convergence characteristics: (a) 3 unit system and (b) 13 unit system with valve point. Robustness curve:

(c) 3 unit system and (d) 13 unit system with valve point.

S. Durai et al. / Electrical Power and Energy Systems 67 (2015) 1124 21

the average tness value above the population size of 10. Hence a better estimate with least margin. The TLBO achieves the best

this parameter is chosen for all estimation. The obtained simula- estimate within the comparing methods. It is also worth to point

tion results are compared with the mathematical approach LES out that the developed methodology attains around 50% of total

and the most recent reports like PSO and ABC. In a few cases, the error obtained by LES in all cases and for some cases (units 1 and

research is not well progressed and the obtained values are 2 in Table 1; unit 2 in Table 2) close to the estimate of ABC. The

compared against the specied coefcients. The numerical results simulations are performed to estimate the quadratic and valve

presented in Table 1 prove the effectiveness of the method by point coefcients of fuel cost functions, the coefcients of piece-

detailing the solution qualities as well as performance comparison wise quadratic cost function and the emission coefcients and

with other methods such as LES, PSO and ABC. for these cases the coefcients at the time of installation are only

Obviously, the TLBO provides better estimate than LES. In addi- available, hence the comparison has been made with only these

tion, the TLBO outperforms other heuristic search based estimators values. The comparisons of total error in each case clearly indicate

such as PSO and ABC. The LES method attains the highest total that the TLBO provides the best estimate of coefcients hence the

error in all estimations. Among PSO and ABC, the latter provides accurate estimate.

Fig. 6. Robustness characteristics for second order systems using TLBO. (a) 3 unit system, (b) 5 unit system, (c) 10 unit system Fuel 1, (d) 10 unit system Fuel 2, (e) 10 unit

system Fuel 3, (f) 13 unit system, and (g) 19 unit system.

22 S. Durai et al. / Electrical Power and Energy Systems 67 (2015) 1124

Table 7

Performance indices by TLBO for various test systems.

Test system Units Minimum Mean Worst Epsilon Iter Solution iter Standard deviation

Second-order

3-Unit Coal 9.767 11.95933 9.968 10.117 5 18 8.6777

Oil 10.058 13.28001 11.254 11.850 4 16 7.3140

Gas 9.759 10.99072 10.998 12.742 10 17 6.6055

5-Unit 1 1.29921 3.73786 1.4102 1.5127 6 13 2.3732

2 0.879284 4.627544 0.9932 1.11124 9 25 3.5952

3 1.494093 7.312233 1.5001 1.69129 3 7 4.5642

4 0.82333 15.1612 1.0009 1.09711 11 24 8.5193

5 0.676372 12.97662 0.8547 1.06881 38 54 9.3114

10-Unit 1 1.15099 9.657846 1.6897 2.2164 8 17 6.8656

0.76993 8.712287 0.8255 0.9548 17 21 5.2301

2 0.54293 7.90688 0.9874 1.27022 15 33 4.4858

1.81643 7.88428 1.9387 2.10325 16 21 4.6935

1.10097 9.145168 1.1874 1.23154 9 18 5.6406

3 0.32578 8.510824 1.6325 2.68742 7 10 6.9730

0.003979 8.824971 0.1874 0.272248 77 88 6.9102

1.85981 7.533577 1.9147 1.98654 17 25 4.3356

4 0.081011 9.139696 0.2854 0.434723 3 9 6.5030

0.20557 8.83436 0.5102 0.63587 24 53 5.8859

1.570052 9.809413 1.6998 1.7724 7 10 6.2815

5 0.218393 5.867897 0.257477 0.281658 18 33 4.6557

1.36296 7.993594 1.39851 1.40931 5 7 4.7511

0.180361 9.220367 0.197802 0.202886 28 48 6.6440

6 0.901149 9.779851 1.00871 1.08832 15 35 6.6733

0.115441 9.690017 0.18546 0.309154 6 10 6.0900

0.989807 8.923714 1.10245 1.00448 14 37 6.9824

7 1.625755 8.869472 2.27845 2.31407 11 31 7.7003

0.556605 9.140136 0.75842 0.93248 3 5 5.3204

1.094147 9.79939 1.28751 1.3026 16 55 6.6153

8 0.791051 10.98859 0.99847 1.11474 44 90 6.5973

0.304309 10.04755 0.59874 0.656397 17 74 6.6450

2.672249 10.71169 2.7852 2.9555 24 30 6.2276

9 1.394315 10.80483 1.5468 1.6325 11 14 6.1036

1.089412 10.16556 1.1187 1.28457 4 6 6.7453

0.24709 8.000195 0.8523 0.9523 6 8 4.5475

10 1.345273 10.55648 1.4477 1.51884 12 22 7.2977

0.139076 9.100437 0.14145 0.153215 20 25 6.5648

0.979767 10.12807 1.3321 1.5100 8 10 7.3787

19-Unit 1 0.326519 9.851096 0.6975 0.7553 35 50 6.4120

2 1.199224 10.53093 2.2285 2.5478 5 7 5.8303

3 1.517037 10.86282 1.5471 1.56583 9 33 5.9283

4 0.973492 10.82302 1.2639 1.35952 7 10 6.0671

5 1.025822 10.45528 1.44213 1.55238 8 15 5.6725

6 0.318719 10.79376 0.7865 0.936093 7 11 6.3473

7 1.322914 10.01637 1.8216 2.04764 15 17 5.5629

8 1.080195 10.85585 1.28975 1.52613 20 43 6.0568

9 1.38627 10.63793 1.4163 1.48517 22 64 5.8794

10 0.726798 9.508921 0.963247 1.10877 7 10 5.8373

11 0.859004 10.68346 1.42583 1.5874 55 68 5.9010

12 0.378324 10.48525 0.39852 0.409379 12 68 6.0802

13 0.566082 10.83514 0.81572 0.887714 9 17 6.0869

14 0.671458 11.27158 1.08576 1.18564 5 27 6.2812

15 1.055816 10.07697 1.11287 1.17694 6 46 6.0687

16 1.060355 10.47012 1.09891 1.11122 10 22 5.9471

17 0.914931 11.64532 1.09854 1.11458 8 12 5.9402

18 0.305246 9.624216 0.32879 0.35376 29 71 6.7785

19 0.606911 10.76255 1.49856 1.5864 28 65 6.2478

Third-order

3-Unit Coal 5.176061 21.19643 7.8956 8.641 6 34 5.5191

Oil 5.19702 20.23232 5.2287 5.547 9 28 6.2390

Gas 5.29460 18.37185 5.6932 5.799 7 25 5.2777

13-Unit 1 1.517337 20.57539 2.0089 2.17214 8 12 14.4867

2, 3 0.739317 9.021742 1.0985 1.1254 7 12 6.0620

4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 0.462576 10.0358 1.6857 1.8000 15 27 7.3585

10, 11 1.0808320 13.75784 1.4120 1.58505 4 19 11.0019

12, 13 0.799582 10.96235 0.9632 1.02932 15 36 9.1698

S. Durai et al. / Electrical Power and Energy Systems 67 (2015) 1124 23

Economy deviation obtained from the test systems, the following observations are in

order:

The TLBO accurately estimates the characteristic parameters of

any model of thermal generators. Further, from the utility point of 1. The TLBO provides the global solution satisfying the constraints

view, it is important to perform an evaluation in the economy with a high probability for smooth and non-smooth cost

aspect. The fuel cost and pollutant emission is computed for each functions.

generator by using the estimated values. The estimated values pro- 2. A set of quasi-optimums are obtained for the system with mul-

vide the fuel cost and pollutant emission for the generator output. tiple fuel options.

The deviations from the specied values are calculated. Table 6 3. In addition to this, the comparison of the results with ABC, PSO

shows the impacts of accurate coefcients values in the power sys- and LES strategies proves that the TLBO method is effective in

tem operation. The average increase in the fuel cost of each gener- giving quality solutions consistently for parameter estimation

ator in the IUS is computed and is presented in Table 6. The same problems.

procedure is adopted to realize the increases in the pollutant emis- 4. Economy deviations from values at the time of installation are

sions in the 13-unit test system. The computed values are also pre- also carried out.

sented in Table 6. The accurate coefcients are enforced for any

model in order to perform the optimal operation. From all the ndings, it is concluded that the TLBO strategy per-

form well for the entire test systems selected, even though power-

Convergence characteristic ful methods are set as the benchmark. Therefore the TLBO is

suggested as a powerful optimization tool for parameter estima-

The convergence characteristic depicts the searching ability of tion problems and thus provide accurate results for the economic

the algorithm. The TLBO is implemented on different scale of test dispatch and optimal power ow calculations. The present analysis

systems. For all cases, the convergence characteristics of the algo- is useful for power companies to update the characteristics coef-

rithm are plotted and are presented in Figs. 4 and 5. Referring all cients and the utility can solve dispatch problems, either for

these gures, it is clear that with the TLBO accurate estimate is achieving a minimum cost or to meet a prescribed pollution level.

achieved within 100 iterations. It also indicates that the system Further investigations are currently being performed to estimate

size and number of variables does not affect performance of the the transmission line parameters.

algorithm and the solution accuracy.

Acknowledgement

Robustness test

The authors gratefully acknowledge the authorities of Annama-

The consistency of the algorithm to provide the optimal solu- lai University, Annamalainagar, Tamilnadu, India, for providing

tion can be viewed by the robustness characteristics. The algorithm facilities to carry out this research work.

is executed for 50 trails and the obtained objective function values

are presented in Figs. 5 and 6. This characteristic also shows the

performance of the algorithm in nding the optimal solution. In References

all cases, the average value of objective functions is computed

which is also close to the optimal value. This characteristic clears [1] Navarro SO, Baker AD. The use of cubic cost curves in the economic loading

of electric power systems. IEEE Trans Power Apparat Syst 1965;84(6):

that the TLBO provides great searching ability, higher solution

43945.

quality and the best estimate. [2] Daycock C, Desjardins R, Fennell S. Generation cost forecasting using online

thermodynamic models. Electr Power 2004;1:19.

[3] Chen HYK, Postel CE. On-line parameter identication of inputoutput curves

Statistical analysis for thermal units. IEEE Trans Power Apparat Syst 1986;PWRS-1:2214.

[4] Taylor FJ, Huang CH. Recursive estimation of incremental cost curves. Comput

Electr Eng 1977;4:297307.

The consistency and effectiveness of the algorithm in nding [5] El-Hawary ME, Mansour SY. Performance evaluation of parameter estimation

the optimal solution can also be viewed by performing statistical algorithms for economic operation of power systems. IEEE Trans Power

analysis which is presented in Table 7. The standard statistical Apparat Syst 1982;PAS-101:57482.

[6] Shoults RR, Mead MM. Optimal estimation of piece-wise linear incremental

parameters such as best and worst values of objective functions, cost curves for EDC. IEEE Trans Power Apparat Syst 1984;PAS-103:14328.

mean, and standard deviation are used. Further, iter, soliter, epsi- [7] El-Shibini M, Osman ZH. A novel technique to estimate the fuel cost functions

lon, etc. are used. The obtained mean value is close the optimal for economic operation of power systems. Electr Power Energy Syst 1989;11:

10914.

value for all cases. This shows the consistency of the algorithm in

[8] Soliman SA, Emam SEA, Christensen GS. Optimization of the optimal

nding the optimal solution. The standard deviation is also small coefcients of non-monotonically increasing incremental cost curves. Electr

value that indicates the accuracy of estimate. The parameters such Power Syst Res 1991;21:99106.

[9] Liang ZX, Glover JD. Improved cost functions for economic dispatch

as iter, soliter helps to view the statistical performance of the TLBO.

computations. IEEE Trans Power Syst 1991;6:8219.

The algorithm takes a few iterations (usually within 100 iteration) [10] Sinha AK, Mandal JK. Hierarchical dynamic state estimator using ANN-based

to converge with the optimal solution. dynamic load prediction. IET Gener Transm Distrib 1999;146:5419.

[11] Kumar DMV, Srivastava SC. Power system state forecasting using articial

neural networks. Electr Mach Power Syst 1999;27:65364.

[12] Lin JM, Huang SJ, Shih KR. Application of sliding surface enhanced fuzzy

Conclusion control for dynamic state estimation of a power system. IEEE Trans Power Syst

2003;18:5707.

This paper proposes a TLBO based approach to estimate the [13] Al-Kandari AM, El-Naggar KM. A genetic-based algorithm for optimal

estimation of inputoutput curve parameters of thermal power plants. Electr

accurate parameters of the inputoutput characteristics of thermal

Eng 2006;89:58590.

units which is realized by minimizing the difference between the [14] Bhuvaneswari R, Subramanian S, Madhu A. A novel state estimation based on

actual and estimated fuel cost. The formulated optimization prob- minimum errors between measurements using ant colony optimization

lem is tested using different mathematical models involving con- technique. Int J Electr Eng 2008;15(6):457568.

[15] El-Naggar KM, Alrashidi MR, Al-Othman AK. Estimating the inputoutput

vex, non-convex with second and third order polynomials, parameters of thermal power plants using PSO. Eng Convers Manage

multiple fuel and exponential functions. Considering the results 2009;50:176772.

24 S. Durai et al. / Electrical Power and Energy Systems 67 (2015) 1124

[16] Alrashidi MR, El-Naggar KM, Al-Othman AK. Particle swarm optimization [25] Basu M. Evolutionary programming-based goal-attainment method for

based approach for estimating the fuel-cost function parameters of thermal economic emission load dispatch with non-smooth fuel cost and emission

power plants with valve loading effects. Electr Power Compon Syst level functions. IE (I) J EL 2005;86:959.

2009;37:121930. [26] Hooshmand Rahmat-Allah, Parastegari Moien, Morshed Mohammad Javad.

[17] Sakthivel VP, Bhuvaneswari R, Subramanian S. Design optimization of three- Emission, reserve and economic load dispatch problem with non-smooth and

phase energy efcient induction motor using adaptive bacterial foraging non convex cost functions using the hybrid bacterial foraging-NelderMead

algorithm. Int J Comput Math Electr 2010;29(3):699726. algorithm. Appl Energy 2012;89:44353.

[18] Sakthivel VP, Bhuvaneswari R, Subramanian S. Non-intrusive efciency [27] Data of 62 bus Indian utility system. Tamilnadu electricity board statistics at a

estimation method for energy auditing and management of in-service glance; 19992000.

induction motor using bacterial foraging algorithm. IET Electr Power Appl [28] Rao RV, Savsani VJ, Vakharia DP. Teachinglearning-based optimization: a

2010;4(8):57990. novel method for mechanical design optimization problems. Comput-Aided

[19] Saber Ahmed Yousuf, Chakraborty Shantanu, Abdur Razzak SM, Seniyu Des 2011;43:30315.

Tomonobu. Optimization of economic load dispatch of higher order general [29] Rao RV, Savsani VJ, Vakharia DP. Teachinglearning-based optimization: an

cost polynomials and its sensitivity using modied particle swarm optimization method for continuous non-linear large scale problems. Inf Sci

optimization. Electr Power Syst Res 2009;79:98106. 2012;183:115.

[20] Moon YH, Park JD, Kook HJ, Lee YH. A new economic dispatch algorithm [30] Togan V. Design of planar steel frames using teachinglearning based

considering any higher order generation cost functions. Electr Power Energy optimization. Eng Struct 2012;34:22532.

Syst 2001;23:1138. [31] Rao RV, Kalyankar VD. Multi-pass turning process parameter optimization

[21] Theerthamalai Adhinarayanan, Maheswarapu Sydulu. An effective non- using teachinglearning-based optimization algorithm. Sci Iran 2013;20(3):

iterative, k logic based algorithm for economic dispatch of generators with 96774.

cubic fuel cost function. Electr Power Energy Syst 2010;32:53942. [32] Rao RV, Kalyankar VD. Parameter optimization of modern machining

[22] Sakthivel VP, Bhuvaneswari R, Subramanian S. An accurate and economical processes using teachinglearning-based optimization algorithm. Eng Appl

approach for induction motor eld efciency estimation using bacterial Artif Intell 2013;26(1):52431.

foraging algorithm. Measurement 2011;446:67484. [33] Roy Provas Kumar. Teaching learning based optimization for short-term

[23] Sonmez Yusuf. Estimation of fuel cost curve parameters for thermal power hydrothermal scheduling problem considering valve point effect and

plants using the ABC algorithm. Turk J Electr Eng Comput Sci 2013;21: prohibited discharge constraint. Electr Power Energy Syst 2013;53:109.

182741. [34] Sultana Sneha, Kumar Roy Provas. Optimal capacitor placement in radial

[24] Chiang Chao-Lung. Improved genetic algorithm for power economic dispatch distribution systems using teaching learning based optimization. Electr Power

of units with valve-point effects and multiple fuels. IEEE Trans Power Syst Energy Syst 2014;54:38798.

2005;20(4):16909.

## Гораздо больше, чем просто документы.

Откройте для себя все, что может предложить Scribd, включая книги и аудиокниги от крупных издательств.

Отменить можно в любой момент.