Received: 15 August 2019 Revised: 14 November 2019 Accepted: 10 December 2019

DOI: 10.1002/2050-7038.12316

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Optimal conductor selection and capacitor placement

in radial distribution system using nonlinear AC load
flow equations and dynamic load model

Mahmoud Ali Farrag1 | Ahmed Hamdy Khalil1 | Shaimaa Omran2

1
Electrical Power and Machines
Department, Faculty of Engineering,
Summary
Cairo University, Cairo, Egypt This paper presents a mixed integer nonlinear programming (MINLP) model
2
Engineering Research Division, Systems to solve the conductor gradation optimization problem of radial distribution
and Information Department, National
systems. The conductor size selection and capacitor allocation problem are
Research Centre, El-Buhouth Street,
Dokki, Cairo, Egypt solved using exact AC load flow equations. The dynamic load characteristics
have been considered in this model. The main objective is to realize both the
Correspondence
Shaimaa Omran, Engineering Research
thermal limit constraints and the bus voltage limit constraints. This is done
Division, Systems and Information while minimizing the capital cost of the conductors, the capacitors costs, and
Department, National Research Centre, the energy loss cost of the different conductors. A 117-bus radial feeder system
El-Buhouth Street, Dokki, Cairo 12622,
Egypt.
has been considered to verify the presented nonlinear model.
Email: s.a.omran@ieee.org
KEYWORDS
Peer Review capacitor placement, distribution system optimization, mixed integer nonlinear flow analysis,
The peer review history for this article is optimal conductor size selection, power balance equations, power flow equations, radial
available at https://publons.com/publon/ distribution feeders
10.1002/2050-7038.12316.

1 | INTRODUCTION

The electrical power distribution system operates at low voltage levels which implies high losses in comparison with
other sectors of the power system. Thus, the reduction of such losses via accurate and efficient distribution system
planning will provide a positive economic impact. The distribution system planning is a complex optimization prob-
lem which minimizes the effective cost items included in the distribution system while satisfying the quality and
reliability operational constraints. The distribution system planning process includes several subproblems; one of
these subproblems is the conductor gradation problem (conductor size selection). The conductor gradation problem
searches for the optimum conductor size for each feeder section from the available set in the inventory to minimize
both capital and energy loss cost while satisfying the system operation constraints. The conductor size selection
problem is normally modelled as a mixed integer nonlinear programing problem as the power network is controlled
by nonlinear load flow equations. Several publications addressed the distribution planning problem, but the signifi-
cant subproblem of the conductor gradation requires further investigation. The conductor gradation problem has
been addressed by researchers in the literature.1-12 Reference7 presented an approach for properly selecting the dis-
tribution conductor size with the aim of maximizing the insulation thermal life. The paper investigated different
aspects affecting the proper selection of the conductor. In Ali et al,1 an analytical approach for selecting the opti-
mum conductor in a radial distribution network was proposed, and the objective was to reduce the losses and
improve the voltage profile at each bus. Franco et al3 presented a mixed integer linear programming (MILP) model
for solving a multiobjective conductor size selection optimization problem, with two objective functions for minimiz-
ing the power losses and minimizing the investment cost. Mandal and Pahwa6 introduced a method for optimal

Int Trans Electr Energ Syst. 2020;1–19. wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/etep © 2020 John Wiley & Sons Ltd 1
2 FARRAG ET AL.

selection of the distribution system conductors where different financial and engineering factors are taken into con-
sideration to minimize the capital and operating cost. Wang et al11 optimized the selection of the conductor size
using a current density-based economical method together with a heuristic index directed method. Rao and Raju9
formulated the optimization problem of the conductor size selection as a minimization problem. The objective of
the problem is to minimize the energy losses and the conductors' costs while fulfilling the voltage and current carry-
ing capacity constraints. Rao8 used the differential evolution algorithm to obtain the optimum conductor size for
each feeder. The objective function minimizes the capital investment and the energy losses subject to voltage limit
constraints and the current carrying capacity constraints.
The optimization of the conductor gradation problem and capacitor allocation problem have been solved as one
problem recently.13-18 The capacitor placement in distribution systems has been extensively researched.19-25 It is about
determining the optimum size and location of capacitor units to be deployed in the distribution system mainly to
improve the voltage profile, minimize the losses, and accordingly minimize the operation cost. Compared with the
capacitor allocation problem, there are few publications addressing the optimal conductor selection for distribution
systems.14
The following three limitations are noticed in most of the publications that addressed the conductor gradation
planning problem: (a) Linear approximations in the calculation of power loss and voltage regulation are made.
(b) Loads are modelled as a constant current or constant apparent power rather than few publications such as
Muthukumar and Jayalalitha24 where the load model dynamics is considered when planning for shunt capacitor
placement in distribution networks. The paper did not address the conductor gradation problem. (c) For MINLP
models, the heuristic and meta-heuristic methods are used to get rid of the problem complexity/complication. To
alleviate these limitations, the paper considered the power losses exact calculation as will be elaborated in the load
flow formulations; moreover, the cost function of the conductors considers the power loss cost. For the load model-
ling, the proposed model considers the dynamic characteristics of the load and presents it in the formulations as
realistic voltage-dependent load model. The conductor gradation problem is formulated here as an MINLP problem
and is solved using conventional optimization mathematical model that is capable of handling and tackling the
complexity of the problem.26
In this paper, an exact (although simple) nonlinear model has been developed for solving the conductor gradation
problem using available MINLP solvers. The main contribution of this paper is using an exact AC load flow model to
solve the problem, where the conductor gradation problem, the capacitor allocation problem, and the dynamic charac-
teristics of the loads are all considered and solved simultaneously as one problem. Moreover, when the capacitor place-
ment problem is included in the model, the capacitor cost and site are exactly considered using integer variables.
Furthermore, the voltage-dependent load dynamic model adopted in this paper is a realistic one as the majority of dis-
tribution loads demonstrate voltage-dependent behavior.
Section 2 introduces the mathematical model developed to solve the conductor gradation problem of the radial dis-
tribution system. Section 3 presents the model verification using the 117-bus distribution system, and it provides the
results and discussion of three case studies. Section 4 concludes the paper. Section 5 provides a list of the symbols used
in this paper.

2 | M A T H E M A T I C A L M O D E L DE V E L O P M E N T

The objective function for the selection of the optimal conductor size for each distribution feeder section from the set of
existing sizes in the inventory comprises minimizing the conductor cost and the energy losses cost. The main constraint
equations governing the power flow on the different feeder sections are the AC load flow equations. In order to obtain
realistic solutions, both the thermal limit (current carrying capacity) and the voltage limit constraints are also consid-
ered. Due to the relatively small cost of capacitors, they are included in the model as they can decrease the reactive
power flow on the different feeder sections, resulting in less conductor size selection and energy losses cost reduction.27
Also, in view of the fact that most loads have dynamic characteristics where both real and reactive load power are sensi-
tive to bus voltages, they are included in the mathematical model in order to get practical and correct solution. The
medium voltage feeders' loads are mostly connected through low-voltage distribution transformers; these loads serve
different customer sectors such as residential, commercial, and industrial. Most of these medium voltage distribution
loads demonstrate voltage-dependent behavior.26
FARRAG ET AL. 3

2.1 | Cost function

The cost function to be considered should include the capital cost of conductors and capacitors as well as the energy
losses cost, as follows:

FT = FC + FCB + FE: ð1Þ

The capital cost of the conductors is given as

X
NL X
NS
FC = Ci,j z F i,j : ð2Þ
i=1 j=1

zFi, j is a decision variable that takes the value 1 when the conductor size j is the optimum one to be used for feeder/
branch i; otherwise, when it takes the value 0, it means that size j is not the proper size to be used for this feeder.

X X
NB NCU
FCB = CBj zCi,j : ð3Þ
i=1 j=1

zCi, j takes a positive integer value which represents the number of units of capacitor bank j to be installed on bus
i. It is set as an integer value to assure that the optimum number of capacitor units installed on each selected bus is cho-
sen as a whole number (integer) not a fraction.

NL X
X NS  
FE = CE i,j Psi + Pei : ð4Þ
i=1 j=1

The power loss on any feeder section i with conductor size j is simply the summation of the real power flow at start
and end of this section.

2.2 | Nonlinear AC load flow equations

This section presents an exact simplified form of the AC load flow equations of the radial distribution feeder presented
in Figure 1.
The deduction of the exact AC load flow is basically based on the elimination of voltage phase angle in the formu-
lated equations and obtaining them in terms of the voltage magnitude only. Two main assumptions are made when
driving the AC power flow equations for the radial distribution feeders: (a) The distribution feeders are represented by
their series resistance (R) and reactance (X) neglecting the shunt susceptance. The distribution overhead line shunt sus-
ceptance is lower than that of the transmission line; this is due to the difference in operating voltage levels and in the
construction of the distribution line.28,29 (b) The bus phase angle is ignored in the AC load flow formulations; this is
due to the comparatively high (R/X) ratio of the overhead distribution lines compared with transmission lines. This
high (R/X) ratio yields a lower angular difference between the sending and receiving buses complex voltages.28,29

2.2.1 | Buses terminal voltage equations

The load flow equations are derived for a branch k of a radial distribution feeder depicted in Figure 1 having two end
buses i and j, where i is the nearest bus to the reference bus (substation bus). The active and reactive power flow equa-
tions at the start and the end of each branch are constructed starting by the apparent complex power formula in terms
of bus voltages as follows:
4 FARRAG ET AL.

F I G U R E 1 Radial feeder k
extending from bus i to bus j

!
U*i − U*j
Ssk = Ui :I*ij = Ui : : ð5Þ
Z*k

Substituting S, Z, and U as complex values,

where Zk is the impedance of branch k.
 
Psk + j Qsk :ðRk − j Xk Þ = Ui ∠δi :Ui ∠− δi −Ui ∠δi :Uj ∠− δj : ð6Þ

Then
     
Psk :Rk + Qsk :Xk − j Psk :Xk − Qsk Rk = U2i −Ui :Uj : cosδij + j sinδij , ð7Þ

where δij = δi − δj.

Separating real and imaginary parts in Equation (7)
 
Ui :Uj :cosδij = U2i − Psk :Rk + Qsk :Xk , ð8Þ

Ui :Uj :sinδij = Psk :Xk −Qsk :Rk : ð9Þ

Squaring Equations (8) and (9)

 
U2i :U2j :cos2 δij = U4i − 2:U2i : Psk :Rk + Qsk :Xk + Psk 2 :R2k + Qsk 2 :X2k + 2:Psk :Rk :Qsk :Xk , ð10Þ

U2i :U2j :sin2 δij = Qsk 2 :R2k + Psk 2 :X2k − 2:Psk :Rk :Qsk :Xk : ð11Þ

Adding Equations (10) and (11)

 
U2i :U2j = U4i − 2:U2i : Psk :Rk + Qsk :Xk + Psk 2 :R2k + Qsk 2 :X2k + Qsk 2 R2k + Psk 2 :X2k : ð12Þ

Rearrange Equation (12) and divide by U2i

  
Psk 2 + Qsk 2 : R2k + X2k  
U2j = U2i + − 2: Psk :Rk + Qsk :Xk : ð13Þ
U2i

Perform the same procedures referencing from Uj

 
Uj :Ui :cosδji = U2j − Pek :Rk + Qek :Xk , ð14Þ
FARRAG ET AL. 5

Uj :Ui :sinδji = Pek :Xk −Qek :Rk : ð15Þ

Substituting Equations (15) into (8) taking into consideration that (cosδij = cosδji)
   
U2j − Pek :Rk + Qek :Xk = U2i − Psk :Rk + Qsk :Xk : ð16Þ

Rearranging Equation (16) as follows:

   
U2i −U2j = Rk : Psk −Pek + Xk Qsk −Qek : ð17Þ

To obtain relation with losses in the feeders,

k = 3:I :Rk ,
Psk + Pek = Ploss ð18Þ
2

k = 3:I :Xk :
Qsk + Qek = Qloss ð19Þ
2

Divide both Equations (18) and (19),

Psk + Pek 3:I2 :Rk

= , ð20Þ
Qsk + Qek 3:I2 :Xk

   
Xk : Psk + Pek = Rk : Qsk + Qek : ð21Þ

2.2.2 | Power balance equations at bus j

Power balance equations at bus j shown in Figure 2 are

X
Pek + Plj + Psx = 0, ð22Þ
8x∈Λk

X
Qek + Qlj + Qsx = 0: ð23Þ
8x∈Λk

Λk: set of all subfeeders originated from bus j of feeder k, that is, feeder m, n, … etc.

FIGURE 2 Bus j connecting several radial buses and load Sj

6 FARRAG ET AL.

From the above derivation, it is observed that the exact solution for the distribution radial system can be represented
by six equations: (8), (9), (17), (21), (22), and (23) for each branch k as follows:
 
Ui :Uj :cosδij = U2i − Psk :Rk + Qsk :Xk , ð24Þ

Ui :Uj :sinδij = Psk :Xk −Qsk :Rk , ð25Þ

   
U2i −U2j = Rk : Psk −Pek + Xk Qsk −Qek , ð26Þ

   
Xk : Psk + Pek = Rk : Qsk + Qek , ð27Þ

X
Pek + Plj + Psx = 0, ð28Þ
8x∈Λk

X
Qek + Qlj + Qsx = 0: ð29Þ
8x∈Λk

If there is no interest in getting the value of δij (which is a small negligble value as elaborated earlier), we can
replace Equations (8) and (9) by Equation (13), then the radial system can be represented using only five Equations (30)
to (34) as follows:
  
Psk 2 + Qsk 2 : R2k + X2k  
U2j = U2i + 2 − 2: Psk :Rk + Qsk :Xk , ð30Þ
Ui

   
U2i −U2j = Rk : Psk −Pek + Xk Qsk −Qek , ð31Þ

   
Xk : Psk + Pek = Rk : Qsk + Qek , ð32Þ

X
Pek + Plj + Psx = 0, ð33Þ
8x∈Λk

X
Qek + Qlj + Qsx = 0: ð34Þ
8x∈Λk

2.2.3 | Modification of AC load flow equations for the optimization problem

Due to the fact that the best conductor size to be erected on the feeder section k is not yet known, the three Equa-
tions (30) to (32) for line k should be modified as shown in (35) to (37) to fit for the optimization problem constraints:

  2 
Psk 2 + Qsk 2 : R0 k + X0 k
2
 
U2j = U2i + − 2: Psk :R0k + Qsk :X0k , ð35Þ
U2i

   
U2i −U2j = R0k : Psk −Pek + X0k Qsk −Qek , ð36Þ

   
X0k : Psk + Pek = R0k : Qsk + Qek , ð37Þ
FARRAG ET AL. 7

where the R0k and X0k values should reflect the properties of the set of conductors used. This is done by using binary
variable which correlate each section with one cable size selected from the available set of cables as follows:

X
NS
R0 k = Rk,i z2ptF k,i , ð38Þ
i=1

X
NS
X0 k = Xk,i zptF k,i , ð39Þ
i=1

X
NS
z F k,i = 1, ð40Þ
i=1

where Rk, i is the resistance of feeder k with conductor size i and Xk, i is the reactance of feeder k with conductor
size i.
With respect to selected capacitors used, the reactive power balance Equation (34) is to be modified as follows:
X
Qek + Qlj + Qsx = QC j , ð41Þ
8x∈Λk

and
P
Λk
QC j = QC:zC i,j , (42)
i=1 i

QC j ≤ QMAX j × z0j , ð43Þ

X
NB
z0 j ≤ NC max : ð44Þ
j=1

z0 j takes the value 1 when the capacitor units are to be installed on bus j to obtain the optimal solution and takes
the value 0 when the capacitor units are not to be placed at bus j. NCmax is set to 5, which implies that the number of
sites to place the capacitor units is less than or equal to 5.
With respect to the dynamic characteristics of the load, loads are presented in the formulations as voltage-
dependent loads. The load characteristics in terms of voltage are represented by the following exponential model:
 α
U
P = Po : , ð45Þ
Uo

 β
U
Q = Qo : : ð46Þ
Uo

Thus, Equations (33) and (41) should be modified as follows to consider the dynamic characteristics of the load:
 α X
o Uj
Pek + Plj × + Psx = 0, ð47Þ
Uo 8x∈Λk

 β X
o Uj
Qek + Qlj × + Qsx = QCj : ð48Þ
Uo 8x∈Λk
8 FARRAG ET AL.

2.3 | Limit constraints

The limit constraints are given as follows:

a. Voltage limit constraints

For bus i,

U max ≥U i ≥U min , ð49Þ

where the maximum and minimum bus voltage limits are set here as 1.05 and 0.95 p.u., respectively.

b. Thermal limits constraints

For line k,

 s 2  s 2 X
NS
P k + Qk ≤ SM k,j 2 × zF k,j , ð50Þ
j=1

where SMi, j is the maximum apparent power limit for line k of size j. The thermal limit of the conductors is commonly
calculated using the current carrying capacity limit (ampacity) of the conductor in amperes and the derating factor (Ith.
limit = I × derating factor). It is assumed here that the source voltage is 1 p.u.; thus, the thermal limit can be represented
by the apparent power, as the apparent power is the current multiplied by the voltage which is assumed unity here (ie,
Sth. limit = Ith. limit × V and V ≈ 1 p.u.). Thus, in Equation (50), the thermal limit is represented in terms of powers, and
as the real, reactive, and apparent power are all scalar quantities, so they are presented as squared values
(S2 = P2 + Q2). The current carrying capacity values in amperes for the six cable sizes (35, 50, 70, 95, 240, 400 mm2)
used in this paper are presented in Table 1.

3 | MODEL VERIFICATION

The developed mathematical model proposed for solving the radial distribution system conductor gradation problem
has been tested through its application to the 117-bus radial feeder shown in Figure 3, where the feeder sections lengths
and loads considered are presented in Table A1. This proposed model is depicted in the flowchart of Figure 4.
Three cases are adopted and solved using the proposed model. The first case solves the conductor gradation optimi-
zation problem without considering the addition of the capacitor units and without considering the load dynamics char-
acteristics. The second case considered the optimization of the capacitors allocation while solving the conductor
gradation optimization problem but did not consider the dynamics of the loads. The third case optimized the capacitor
placement and considered the dynamics of the loads when solving the conductor gradation optimization problem
model proposed in Section 2.
The objective function which is the cost function presented in Equations (1) to (4) is minimized subject to a set of
constraints. This set of constraints differs from one case to the other, as will be elaborated in the explanation of each
case in the following subsections and as depicted in the flowchart in Figure 4.
The mathematical model has been tested considering the following parameters:

1. Source voltage is 1 p.u.

2. Minimum and maximum bus voltage values are 0.95 and 1.05 p.u. respectively.
3. Conductor sizes considered are 35, 50, 70, 95, 240, and 400 mm2.
4. Planning period: 25 years.
5. Interest rate: 10%.
6. Loss factor: 0.4.
7. Cost of unit energy: 0.45 L.E./kWh.
FARRAG ET AL. 9

8. Line voltage: 11 kV.

9. Substation voltage = 100% (1 p.u.) at bus 149.
10. Base power: 4 MVA.
11. There are four sizes of capacitor units considered in the study : 50, 150, 300, and 450 kVAr.
12. The load model utilized in this study is represented by the exponential model as elaborated in Section 2 in Equa-
tions (45) to (48), where α and β values for different classes of loads are given in Table 2, and division of load buses
into classes is shown in Figure 3.

3.1 | Neglecting the capacitor bank addition and load dynamic characteristics

In this case, only the selection of the optimum conductors' sizes is considered. The objective function is optimized sub-
ject to load flow and power balance constraints presented in Equations (33) to (37) and limit constraints presented in
Equations (49) and (50). The optimum solution obtained for the mathematical model is

a. Minimum voltage = 0.951 at bus 85.

b. Active power losses = 270.0 kW.
c. Costs:
Losses cost = 3 863 906.0 L.E.
Conductor cost = 16 232 910.0 L.E.
Total cost = 20 096 816.0 L.E.

T A B L E 1 Current carrying Conductor Size, mm2 Ampacity, amp

capacity (ampacity) in amperes for the
six different conductor sizes 35 146
50 173
70 212
95 253
240 422
400 541

F I G U R E 3 The 117-bus
radial distribution system with
different load classes
10 FARRAG ET AL.

F I G U R E 4 Flowchart of
the proposed planning model for
radial distribution systems

Type of Load α β
T A B L E 2 The α and β values for
different classes of load for the 117-bus
Residential(heating and nonheating) 1.3 2.7 radial feeder
Commercial(heating and nonheating) 0.6 2.5
Industrial(alum, mills, and power 0.1 0.6
plants)
Agriculture and pumping 1.4 1.4

d. Conductor sizes selected are presented in Table 3.

e. Figure 5 depicts the optimum network obtained.
FARRAG ET AL. 11

T A B L E 3 The optimum conductor

Conductor Size, mm2 Number of Conductors/Cables
sizes selected for the 117-bus radial
feeder without installing capacitor 35 82
banks and neglecting the dynamic 50 4
characteristics of the load 70 0
95 9
240 10
400 12

FIGURE 5 Conductor size

selection results without
capacitor bank installation and
neglecting the dynamic
characteristics of the load

3.2 | Adding the capacitor banks and neglecting the load dynamics

In this case study, the loads are assumed to be of fixed power and the location and size of capacitor units are to be opti-
mized. This means the objective function is optimized subject to load flow constraints presented in Equations (35) to
(37), power balance constraints presented in Equations (33) and (41), and limit constraints presented in Equations (49)
and (50). The results obtained from solving the mathematical model are

a. Minimum voltage = 0.952 p.u. at bus 96.

b. Active power losses = 259.9 kW.
c. Cost:
Capacitor bank cost = 121 364.9 L.E.
Losses cost = 3 719 653.0 L.E.
Conductor cost = 13 379 180.0 L.E.
Total cost =17 220 197.9 L.E.

d. Conductor sizes selected are depicted in Table 4.

e. Capacitor sizes selected are given in Table 5.
f. Figure 6 demonstrates the optimum network obtained.

3.3 | Adding the capacitor banks and considering the load dynamic characteristics

Solving the mathematical model with the above parameters, the following results were obtained:
12 FARRAG ET AL.

T A B L E 4 The optimum conductor

Conductor Size, mm2 Number of Conductors/Cables
sizes selected for the 117-bus radial
35 96 feeder considering capacitor bank
50 4 installation and neglecting the load
70 1 dynamics

95 4
240 3
400 9

T A B L E 5 Capacitor bank sizes

CB SizeBus 300 kVar 450 kVar
and location selected for the 117-bus
50 0 2 radial feeder considering capacitor bank
65 1 0 installation and neglecting the load
58 0 1 dynamics

93 0 1
114 0 1

F I G U R E 6 Optimum
conductor sizes and capacitor
locations selected considering
capacitor banks installation and
neglecting the dynamic
characteristics of the load

a. Minimum voltage is 0.95 at bus 85.

b. Total active power losses = 271.2 kW.
c. Cost:
Losses cost = 3 881 300.0 L.E.
Conductor cost = 12 397 830.0L.E.
Capacitor bank cost = 126 072.0 L.E.
Total cost = 16 405 202.0 L.E.
d. Conductor sizes selected are shown in Table 6.
e. Capacitor sizes selected are presented in Table 7.
f. Figure 7 depicts the optimum network obtained.

A comparison between the results of the three cases adopted for solving the suggested mathematical model for opti-
mum planning of the 117-bus radial distribution feeder is given in Table 8.
From the comparison in Table 8, it is observed that
FARRAG ET AL. 13

T A B L E 6 The optimum conductor

Conductor Size, mm2 Number of Conductors/Cables
sizes selected for the 117-bus radial
feeder considering capacitor bank 35 96
installation and the load dynamics 50 5
70 1
95 4
240 6
400 5

T A B L E 7 Capacitor bank sizes

CB SizeBus 50 kVar 150 kVar 300 kVar 450 kVar
and location selected for the 117-bus
radial feeder considering capacitor bank 50 0 1 0 1
installation and the load dynamics 66 0 0 0 1
80 2 0 1 0
95 0 0 0 1
113 0 0 0 1

F I G U R E 7 Optimum
conductor sizes and capacitor
locations selected considering
capacitor banks installation and
using voltage-dependent load
models

TABLE 8 A comparison between the results of the three cases used for optimal planning of the 117-bus radial distribution feeder

Conductor, Capacitor, Conductor, Capacitor, Conductor, No Capacitor,

Dynamic Load Fixed Load Fixed Load
Active power losses, 271.2 259.9 270.0
kW
Loss cost, L.E. 3 881 300.0 3 719 653.0 3 863 906.0
Conductor cost, L.E. 12 397 830.0 13 379 180.0 16 232 910.0
Capacitor cost, L.E. 126 072.0 121 364.9 0.0
Total cost, L.E. 16 405 202.0 17 220 197.9 20 096 816.0

a. The least total cost has been obtained when dynamic load models are considered in addition to using capacitor
banks in the planning process in case 3 as depicted in Figure 8.
b. Using conductor sizes selection only in the planning process yields the highest planning cost. Using the capacitor
banks has resulted in significant savings in the planning cost.
14 FARRAG ET AL.

F I G U R E 8 Costs of the three case studies for the 117-bus

radial distribution system. CN, conductor; CP, capacitor; DL,
dynamic load; FL, fixed load

F I G U R E 9 Total costs and active power losses for the three case studies of the
117-bus radial distribution system

T A B L E 9 The optimum conductor

Conductor Size, mm2 Number of Conductors/Cables
sizes selected for the 117-bus radial
35 82 feeder in phase 1
50 4
70 0
95 9
240 10
400 12

c. Although the least total cost is obtained when dynamic load models are considered in addition to using capacitor
banks, the least active power losses are obtained when the fixed load models are considered in addition to using
capacitor bank as shown in Figure 9.

Afterwards, another case study is deployed where the optimization of capacitor banks units is done after the con-
ductor size selection. In this case, the optimization problem of conductor gradation and capacitor placement is solved
in two separate phases.
First, the gradation problem is optimized to get optimal conductor size for each feeder section. Based on the output
of this phase, the capacitor allocation problem is optimized to decrease energy loss cost of the optimum feeder obtained
from phase one.
The final output of these two phases is:

a. Minimum voltage = 96.03% at bus 450.

b. Active losses = 220.8 kW.
c. Costs:
Loss Cost = 3 160 066.0 LE.
Conductor Cost = 16 232 910.0 LE.
Capacitor Cost = 151 721.0 LE.
Total Cost =19 544 697.0 LE
FARRAG ET AL. 15

T A B L E 1 0 Capacitor bank sizes

CB SizeBus 50 kVar 150 kVar 300 kVar 450 kVar
and location selected for the 117-bus
radial feeder in phase 2 250 0 2 0 0
47 0 0 0 2
65 3 1 1 0
79 2 0 0 1
114 0 0 0 1

F I G U R E 1 0 Optimum
conductor sizes and capacitor
locations selected for the two
phases procedure

d. Conductor sizes selected in phase one are depicted in Table 9.

e. Capacitor sizes selected are presented in Table 10.
f. Figure 10 illustrates the optimum network obtained.

It is noticed that the two-phase procedure yields higher costs when compared with case 2, where the optimum con-
ductor sizes selection and the optimum capacitors sizes and locations selection are done simultaneously.

4 | C ON C L U S I ON

This paper presents a nonlinear model to obtain both the optimum conductor size for each feeder section and the opti-
mum capacitors sizes and locations. This model minimizes the capital cost of the conductors, the capacitors cost, and
the energy losses cost while satisfying the AC load flow, the thermal limit constraints, and the voltage limit constraints.
Moreover, the model considers the dynamic nature of the loads as most of the loads consume different power values
when the applied voltage changes.
The results obtained show that an optimum solution is got when both the conductors' sizes selection and the capaci-
tor bank placement problems are solved as a one problem. Also, the consideration of the dynamic nature of loads can
give better realistic results.

NO MEN CLAT URE

NB Number of buses
NL Number of lines
NS Number of types (sizes) of conductors considered in the study
NCU Number of capacitor units considered in the study
zFi, j Zero-one variable associated with feeder section i and size j
zCi, j Integer variable associated with capacitor unit j selected at bus i
16 FARRAG ET AL.

z 0 j: Zero-one integer variable associated with erection of capacitor banks at bus j

FC Capital cost of all conductor sizes selected at all feeders sections
FCB Capital cost of all capacitor banks erected at all buses
FE Present worth value of energy losses cost of all feeder sections
Ci, j Capital cost of conductor size j if constructed at feeder section i
CBj Capital cost of capacitor unit of size j
CEi, j Present worth value of energy loss cost per unit power loss of conductor size j constructed at feeder section i
Psk Real active power at the start bus of the feeder k
Qsk Reactive power at the start bus of feeder k
Pek Real active power at the end bus of the feeder k
Qek Reactive power at the end bus of feeder k
Ssk Apparent power flow at start of branch k
Slj Apparent load power at bus j
Plj Active load power at bus j
Qlj Reactive load power at bus j
Ui Voltage magnitude of bus i
δi Voltage angle of bus i
Rk Resistance of feeder section k if its conductor size is known
Xk Reactance of feeder section k if its conductor size is known
R0k Resistance of feeder section k with optimum size selected
X 0k Reactance of feeder section k with optimum size selected
Ui Voltage magnitude of bus i
Λk Set of all subfeeders originated from bus j of feeder k, that is, feeder m, n, etc
QCj Injected capacitive power at bus j
i
QC Size of capacitor unit i in MVA
QMAXj Maximum capacitive power injected at bus j
NCmax Maximum number of buses at which capacitors can be erected

CONFLICT OF INTEREST
No conflict of interest to declare.

ORCID
Shaimaa Omran https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4896-9385

R EF E RE N C E S
1. Ali H, Ullah S, Sami I, Ahmad N, Khan F. Economic loss minimization of a distribution feeder and selection of optimum conductor for
voltage profile improvement. 2018 International Conference on Power Generation Systems and Renewable Energy Technologies (PGSRET);
2018:1-6.
2. Cossent R, Olmos L, Gómez T, Mateo C, Frías P. Distribution network costs under different penetration levels of distributed generation.
Eur T Electr Power. 2011;21:1869-1888.
3. Franco JF, Rider MJ, Lavorato M, Romero R. Optimal conductor size selection and reconductoring in radial distribution systems using a
mixed-integer LP approach. IEEE Trans Power Syst. 2012;28:10-20.
4. Ismael SM, Aleem SHA, Abdelaziz AY, Zobaa AF. Practical considerations for optimal conductor reinforcement and hosting capacity
enhancement in radial distribution systems. IEEE Access. 2018;6:27268-27277.
5. Kaur D, Sharma J. Optimal conductor sizing in radial distribution systems planning. International Journal of Electrical Power & Energy
Systems. 2008;30:261-271.
6. Mandal S, Pahwa A. Optimal selection of conductors for distribution feeders. IEEE Trans Power Syst. 2002;17:192-197.
7. Meier BR, Chowdhury B. A simple approach to conductor sizing and prolonging the thermal life of electrical cables below 1000 V for
industrial and commercial applications. IEEE Transactions on Industry Applications. 2019;55:4507-4514.
8. Rao R. Optimal conductor selection for loss reduction in radial distribution systems using differential evolution. Int J Eng Sci Technol.
2010;2:2829-2838.
9. Rao P, Raju SS. Optimal conductor selection in radial distribution system using plant growth simulation algorithm. International Journal
of Engineering Studies. 2009;1:229-240.
10. Rastgou A, Bahramara S, Moshtagh J. Flexible and robust distribution network expansion planning in the presence of distributed gener-
ators. International Transactions on Electrical Energy Systems. 2018;28:e2637.
FARRAG ET AL. 17

11. Wang Z, Liu H, Yu DC, Wang X, Song H. A practical approach to the conductor size selection in planning radial distribution systems.
IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery. 2000;15:350-354.
12. Wen X, Yu Y, Xu Z, Zhao J, Li J. Optimal distributed energy storage investment scheme for distribution network accommodating high
renewable penetration. International Transactions on Electrical Energy Systems. 2019;29:e12002.
13. Kasturi K, Nayak MR. Techno-economic analysis of conductor & capacitor allocation in RDS using ICSA. 2017 2nd International Confer-
ence on Man and Machine Interfacing (MAMI). Odisha, India: C.V. Raman College of Engineering; 2017:1-6.
14. T. M. Khalil and A. V. Gorpinich, “Optimal conductor selection and capacitor placement for loss reduction of radial distribution systems
by selective particle swarm optimization,” in 2012 Seventh International Conference on Computer Engineering & Systems (ICCES),
pp. 215–220.
15. Samal P, Mohanty S, Ganguly S. Simultaneous capacitor allocation and conductor sizing in unbalanced radial distribution systems
using differential evolution algorithm. 2016 National Power Systems Conference (NPSC). India: School of Electrical Sciences; 2016:
1-6.
16. M. Vahid, A. A. Hossein, and M. Kazem, “Maximum loss reduction applying combination of optimal conductor selection and capacitor
placement in distribution systems with nonlinear loads,” in 2008 43rd International Universities Power Engineering Conference, 2008,
pp. 1–5.
17. M. Vahid, N. Manouchehr, A. Jamaleddin, and S. D. Hossein, “Combination of optimal conductor selection and capacitor placement
in radial distribution systems for maximum loss reduction,” in 2009 IEEE International Conference on Industrial Technology,
pp. 1–5.
18. Youssef A-R, Kamel S, Ebeed M, Yu J. Optimal capacitor allocation in radial distribution networks using a combined optimization
approach. Electric Power Components and Systems. 2018;46:2084-2102.
19. Abdelaziz A, Ali E, Elazim SA. Flower pollination algorithm and loss sensitivity factors for optimal sizing and placement of capacitors
in radial distribution systems. International Journal of Electrical Power & Energy Systems. 2016;78:207-214.
20. Abdelaziz A, Ali E, Elazim SA. Optimal sizing and locations of capacitors in radial distribution systems via flower pollination optimiza-
tion algorithm and power loss index. Engineering Science and Technology, an International Journal. 2016;19:610-618.
21. Lee C-S, Ayala HVH, dos Santos Coelho L. Capacitor placement of distribution systems using particle swarm optimization approaches.
International Journal of Electrical Power & Energy Systems. 2015;64:839-851.
22. Mohkami H, Hooshmand R, Khodabakhshian A. Fuzzy optimal placement of capacitors in the presence of nonlinear loads in unbal-
anced distribution networks using BF-PSO algorithm. Appl Soft Comput. 2011;11:3634-3642.
23. Murty V, Kumar A. Capacitor allocation in unbalanced distribution system under unbalances and loading conditions. Energy Procedia.
2014;54:47-74.
24. Muthukumar K, Jayalalitha S. Multiobjective hybrid evolutionary approach for optimal planning of shunt capacitors in radial distribu-
tion systems with load models. Ain Shams Eng J. 2018;2017:1975-1988.
25. Tamilselvan V, Jayabarathi T, Raghunathan T, Yang X-S. Optimal capacitor placement in radial distribution systems using flower polli-
nation algorithm. Alex Eng J. 2018;57:2775-2786.
26. Padilha-Feltrin A, Rodezno DAQ, Mantovani JRS. Volt-VAR multiobjective optimization to peak-load relief and energy efficiency in dis-
tribution networks. IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery. 2014;30:618-626.
27. Kasztenny B, Schaefer J, Clark E. Fundamentals of Adaptive Protection of Large Capacitor Banks,” in 2007 Power Systems Conference:
Advanced Metering, Protection. Control: Communication, and Distributed Resources; 2007:154-186.
28. B. Blazic and I. Papic, “Voltage profile support in distribution networks—influence of the network R/X ratio,” in 13th International
Power Electronics and Motion Control Conference, 2008, pp. 2510–2515.
29. Sarkar T, Dan AK, Ghosh S. Effect of X/R ratio on low voltage distribution system connected with constant speed wind turbine. 2016
2nd International Conference on Control, Instrumentation, Energy & Communication (CIEC); 2016:417-421.

S UP PO RT ING IN FOR MAT ION

Additional supporting information may be found online in the Supporting Information section at the end of this article.

How to cite this article: Farrag MA, Khalil AH, Omran S. Optimal conductor selection and capacitor
placement in radial distribution system using nonlinear AC load flow equations and dynamic load model. Int
Trans Electr Energ Syst. 2020;1–19. https://doi.org/10.1002/2050-7038.12316

A P P EN D I X A .
 18

TABLE A1 . The 117-bus radial feeder sections length and load considered

Send Receive Length, Power, Power, Send Receive Length, Power, Power, Send Receive Length, Power, Power
Bus Bus m kW kVAR Bus Bus m kW kVAR Bus Bus m kW kVAR
149 1 732 60 30 36 38 457.8 30 15 76 77 732 60 30
1 2 320.4 30 15 38 39 595.2 30 15 76 86 1281 30 15
1 3 457.8 60 30 40 41 595.2 30 15 77 78 183 60 30
1 7 549 30 15 40 42 457.8 30 15 78 79 412.2 60 30
3 4 366 60 30 42 43 915 60 30 78 80 869.4 60 30
3 5 595.2 30 15 42 44 366 60 30 80 81 869.4 60 30
5 6 457.8 60 30 44 45 366 30 15 81 82 457.8 60 30
7 8 366 60 30 44 47 457.8 157.5 112.5 81 84 1235.4 30 15
8 12 412.2 30 15 45 46 549 30 15 82 83 457.8 30 15
8 9 412.2 60 30 47 48 274.8 315 225 84 85 869.4 60 30
8 13 549 60 30 47 49 457.8 210 142.5 86 87 823.8 60 30
9 14 778.2 60 30 49 50 457.8 60 30 87 88 320.4 60 30
13 34 274.8 60 30 50 51 457.8 30 15 87 89 503.4 60 30
13 18 1510.2 60 30 13 52 732 60 30 89 90 412.2 60 30
14 11 457.8 60 30 52 53 366 60 30 89 91 412.2 60 30
14 10 457.8 30 15 53 54 229.2 60 30 91 92 549 60 30
15 16 686.4 60 30 54 55 503.4 30 15 91 93 412.2 60 30
15 17 640.8 30 15 55 56 503.4 30 15 93 94 503.4 60 30
18 19 457.8 60 30 54 57 640.8 60 30 93 95 549 30 15
18 21 549 60 30 57 58 457.8 30 15 95 96 366 30 15
19 20 595.2 60 30 58 59 457.8 30 15 97 98 503.4 60 30
21 22 961.2 60 30 57 60 1372.8 30 15 98 99 1006.8 60 30
21 23 457.8 60 30 60 61 1006.8 60 30 99 100 549 60 30
23 24 1006.8 60 30 60 62 457.8 60 30 100 450 1464 60 30
23 25 503.4 60 30 62 63 320.4 60 30 101 102 412.2 30 15
25 26 640.8 60 30 63 64 640.8 112.5 52.5 101 105 503.4 60 30
25 28 366 60 30 64 65 778.2 210 150 102 103 595.2 60 30
26 27 503.4 60 30 65 66 595.2 112.5 52.5 103 104 1281 60 30
26 31 412.2 30 15 60 67 640.8 60 30 105 106 412.2 60 30
27 33 915 60 30 67 68 366 30 15 106 107 1052.4 60 30
FARRAG ET AL.

(Continues)
TABLE A1 (Continued)

Send Receive Length, Power, Power, Send Receive Length, Power, Power, Send Receive Length, Power, Power
Bus Bus m kW kVAR Bus Bus m kW kVAR Bus Bus m kW kVAR
FARRAG ET AL.

28 29 549 60 30 67 72 503.4 60 30 97 101 457.8 60 30

29 30 640.8 60 30 67 97 457.8 60 30 105 108 595.2 60 30
30 250 366 60 30 68 69 503.4 60 30 108 109 823.8 60 30
31 32 549 30 15 69 70 595.2 30 15 108 300 1830 60 30
34 15 183 60 30 70 71 503.4 60 30 109 110 549 60 30
18 35 686.4 60 30 72 73 503.4 60 30 110 111 1052.4 30 15
35 36 1189.8 60 30 72 76 366 367.5 270 110 112 229.2 30 15
35 40 457.8 60 30 73 74 640.8 60 30 112 113 961.2 60 30
36 37 549 60 30 74 75 732 60 30 113 114 595.2 30 15
19