Electrical Power and Energy Systems 28 (2006) 331–338

www.elsevier.com/locate/ijepes

Reconfiguration of distribution system using

fuzzy multi-objective approach
D. Das *
Electrical Engineering Department, Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur 721302, India
Received 15 June 2004; received in revised form 17 May 2005; accepted 11 August 2005

Abstract

The paper presents an algorithm for network reconfiguration based on fuzzy multi-objective approach. Multiple objectives are considered for
load balancing among the feeders, minimum deviation of the nodes voltage, minimize the power loss and branch current constraint violation,
while subject to a radial network structure in which all loads must be energized. These objectives are modeled with fuzzy sets to evaluate their
imprecise nature and one can provide his or her anticipated value of each objective. These four objectives are first fuzzified and then a fuzzy
satisfaction objective function is formed and maximized for each tie-switch operation. Heuristic rules are also incorporated in the algorithm for
minimizing the number of tie-switch operation. The effectiveness of the proposed method is demonstrated through an example.
q 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Distribution systems; Reconfiguration; Fuzzy set theory; Multi-objectives

1. Introduction restore radial configuration. Based on the method of Merlin and

Distribution networks are configured radially. Their
configurations may be varied with manual or automatic
switching operations so that the loads are supplied at the cost
of possible minimum resistive line losses, increase system
security and enhance power quality. Reconfiguration also
relieves the overloading of the network components. The
change in network configuration is performed by open-
ing/closing of sectionalizing and tie-switches of the network.
These switchings are performed in such a way that the radiality
of the network is maintained and all the loads are energized.
Obviously, the greater the number of switches, the greater are
the possibilities for reconfiguration and better are the effects.
Considerable research has been conducted for loss
minimization in the area of network reconfiguration of
distribution systems [1]. Distribution system reconfiguration
for loss reduction was first proposed by Merlin and Back [2].
They have used a branch and bound type optimization
technique to determine the minimum loss configuration. In
this method, all network switches are first closed to form a
meshed network. The switches are then opened successively to
* Tel.: C91 3222 79507; fax: C91 3222 55303.
E-mail address: ddas@ee.iitkgp.ernet.in
0142-0615/$ - see front matter q 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.ijepes.2005.08.018
Back [2], a heuristic algorithm has been suggested by
Shirmohammadi and Hong [3]. Here also, the solution
procedure starts by closing all the network switches which
are then opened one after another so as to establish the
optimum flow pattern in the network. Many approximations of
the method of Merlin and Back have been overcome in this
algorithm. Borozan et al. [4] have presented a network
reconfiguration technique similar to that of Shirmohammadi
and Hong [3]. However, their methodology contains three main
parts: real time load estimation, effective determination of
power loss configuration and cost/benefit evaluation. Civanlar
et al. [5] made use solely of heuristics to determine a
distribution system configuration, which would reduce line
losses. Civanlar et al. made use of what is known as a ‘branch
exchange’ operation for switching operations: the opening of
any switch was required to correspond to the closure of another
switch, ensuring that the radial nature of the distribution system
would be preserved. Baran and Wu [6] have made an attempt to
improve the method of Civanlar et al. [5] by introducing two
approximation formulas for power flow in the transfer of
system loads. The power flow equations used by Baran and Wu
[6] were defined by recursive approximation of P, Q and V at
each node. Kashem et al. [7] have proposed a branch exchange
method for network reconfiguration. This is basically
an extensive search method and need to consider all the tie-
switches. Chen and Cho [8] have performed an analysis of an
hourly reconfiguration schedule. They have studied the hourly
332 D. Das / Electrical Power and Energy Systems 28 (2006) 331–338
Nomenclature
NB total number of nodes of the system
Nk total number of branches in the loop including the
tie-branch, when kth tie-switch is closed
LN total number of branches
NF total number of feeders
ntie total number of tie-switches
PLOSS0 total real power loss before network reconfiguration
PLOSS(i) total real power loss of the radial configuration of
the system when ith branch in the loop is opened
VS voltage at the substation
load patterns over an interval of a year in order to define the
hourly load conditions for each season. They have used branch
and bound technique for obtaining minimum loss configur-
ation. Nara et al. [9] have proposed a method of distribution
system reconfiguration for reduction of real power loss using
genetic algorithm. Lin et al. [10] have applied refined genetic
algorithm to network reconfiguration problem for reduction of
resistive line losses. In this method, the authors have refined the
conventional crossover and mutation scheme by a competition
mechanism to avoid premature convergence. Huang [11] has
proposed one genetic algorithm based fuzzy approach for
network reconfiguration of distribution system. Although the
researchers [9–11] have demonstrated the effectiveness of
genetic algorithm for network reconfiguration but solution time
is highly prohibitive. Lin and Chin [12,13] have presented an
algorithm for distribution feeder reconfiguration. They have
used voltage index, ohmic index and decision index to
determining the switching operation. Huang and Chin [14]
have proposed an algorithm based on fuzzy operation to deal
with the feeder reconfiguration problem. Their approach tries
to minimize power loss and acquire the load balance at the
same time. Liu et al. [15], Jung et al. [16] and Auguliaro et al.
[17] have proposed artificial intelligence based applications in
a minimum loss configuration. Hsiao [18] has proposed fuzzy
multi-objective based evolution programming method for
network reconfiguration. In this method, objective function
has been formulated using fuzzy min–max principle.
In the light of the above developments, this work formulates
the network reconfiguration problem as a multiple objectives
problem subject to operational and electric constraints. The
problem formulation proposed herein consider four different
objectives related to:
1. minimization of the system’s power loss
2. minimization of the deviation of nodes voltage
3. minimization of the current constraint violation
4. load balancing among various feeders.
At the same time, a radial network structure must remain
after network reconfiguration in which all loads must be
energized. These four objectives are modeled with fuzzy sets to
evaluate their imprecise nature. Heuristic rules are also
Vi,j voltage of node j corresponding to the opening of
the ith branch in the loop
jI(i, m)j magnitude of current in branch m when ith branch
in the loop is opened
Ic(m) line capacity of branch m
IFi,j current of feeder j corresponding to the opening of
ith branch in the loop
IFavg
i average of all the feeder currents corresponding to
the opening of ith branch in the loop
W1, W2, W3, W4 weighting factors
incorporated in the proposed algorithm for minimizing the
number of tie-switch operations.
2. Optimization in fuzzy environment
In fuzzy domain, each objective is associated with a
membership function. The membership function indicates the
degree of satisfaction of the objective. In the crisp domain,
either the objective is satisfied or it is violated, implying
membership values of unity and zero, respectively. On the
contrary, fuzzy sets entertain varying degrees of membership
function values from zero to unity. Thus, fuzzy set theory is an
extension of standard set theory [19].
When there are multiple objectives to be satisfied
simultaneously, a compromise has to be made to get the best
solution. The four objectives described in the preceding text are
first fuzzified and then, dealt with by integrating them into a
fuzzy satisfaction objective function J through appropriate
weighting factors as given in Section 7.
In the proposed method for network reconfiguration, the
terms mLi, mVi, mAi and mBi indicate the membership function
for real power loss reduction, maximum node voltage
deviation, maximum branch current loading index and load
balancing of the feeders, respectively. The higher membership
value implies a greater satisfaction with the solution. The
membership function consists of a lower and upper bound
value together with a strictly monotonically decreasing and
continuous function for different objectives are described
below.
3. Membership function for real power loss reduction (mLi)
Let us define
PLOSSðiÞ
xi Z ; for i Z 1;2;.;Nk (1)
PLOSS0
Eq. (1) indicates that if xi is high, power loss reduction is low
and if xi is low, power loss reduction is high.
Membership function for real power loss reduction is given
in Fig. 1. From Fig. 1, mLi can be written as:
 D. Das / Electrical Power and Energy Systems 28 (2006) 331–338 333

jIði;mÞj
Branch current loading index Z ;
Ic ðmÞ (5)
for i Z 1;2;.;Nk ; m Z 1;2;.; LN

when maximum value of branch current loading index exceeds

unity, membership value will be lower and as long as it is less
than or equal to unity, membership value will be maximum, i.e.
unity. Let us define
Fig. 1. Membership function for power loss reduction.

8 jIði;mÞj
> ðxmax Kxi Þ zi Z max ; for i Z 1;2;.;Nk ;
>
> for xmin ! xi ! xmax Ic ðmÞ (6)
>
> ðx
< max Kxmin Þ
mLi Z 1 (2) m Z 1;2;.; LN
> for xi % xmin
>
>
>
> Membership function for maximum branch current loading
:
0 for xi R xmax index is shown in Fig. 3. From Fig. 3, we can write
8
In the present work, it has been assumed that xminZ0.5 and >
> ðzmax Kzi Þ
>
> for zmin ! zi ! zmax
xmaxZ1.0. > ðz
< max Kzmin Þ
mAi Z 1 for zi % zmin (7)
>
>
4. Membership function for maximum node voltage >
>
>
:
deviation (mVi) 0:0 for zi R zmax

Basic purpose of this membership function is that the In this work, z minZ1.0 and z max Z1.15 have been
deviation of nodes voltage should be less. considered.
Let us define
6. Membership function for feeder load balancing (mBi)
yi ZmaxjVS KVi;j j; for i Z1;2;.;Nk ; j Z 1;2;.;NB (3)
If maximum value of nodes voltage deviation is less, then a Load balancing is one of the major objectives of network
higher membership value is assigned and if deviation is more, reconfiguration. An effective strategy to increase the loading
then a lower membership value is assigned. margin of heavily loaded feeders is to transfer part of their
Fig. 2 shows the membership function for maximum node loads to lightly loaded feeders. Feeder load balancing index
voltage deviation. From Fig. 2, we can write may be given as
8
> ðymax Kyi Þ ðIFi;j KIFavg
i Þ
>
> for ymin ! yi ! ymax Fi;j Z for i Z 1;2;.;Nk ; j Z1;2;.; NF (8)
>
> IFavg
ðy
< max Kymin Þ i
mVi Z 1 for yi % ymin (4) where
>
>
>
>
>
:
0:0 for yi R ymax 1 XNF
IFavg
i Z IF (9)
NF jZ1 i;j
In the present work, yminZ0.05 and ymaxZ0.10 have been
considered. Let us define
ui ZmaxjFi;j j; for i Z1;2;.;Nk ; j Z1;2;.;NF (10)
5. Membership function for maximum branch current
loading index (mAi) Eq. (10) indicates that a better load balancing can be achieved
if the value of ui is low. Therefore, for lower ui, higher
Basic purpose for this membership function is that to membership grade is assigned and for higher ui lower
minimize the branch current constraint violation. Let us define

Fig. 2. Membership function for maximum node voltage deviation. Fig. 3. Membership function for maximum branch current loading index.
334 D. Das / Electrical Power and Energy Systems 28 (2006) 331–338

If, in any iteration, this maximum voltage difference is less

than the specified value (3) then this tie-switch operation is
discarded and automatically other switching options are
discarded because voltage difference across all other open
tie-switches are less than 3.

9. Explanation of the proposed method

Fig. 4. Membership function for load balancing index. For the purpose of explanation, consider the sample radial
distribution system as shown in Fig. 5. It is assumed that every
membership grade is assigned. Fig. 4 shows the membership branch has a sectionalizing switch. This system has four tie-
function for ui. From Fig. 4, we can write branches and four tie-switches (Fig. 5). Initially, run the load
8
>
> ðumax Kui Þ flow program for radial distribution networks. Now compute
>
> for umin !ui !umax the voltage difference across all the open tie-switches and
> ðu
< max Kumin Þ
mBi Z 1:0 (11) detect the open tie-switch across which the voltage difference
> for ui %umin is maximum. Say, out of these four open tie-switches, voltage
>
>
>
> difference across the open tie-switch, tie-4 (Fig. 5) is
:
0 for ui Rumax maximum. Now, check whether this voltage difference is
In the present work, uminZ0.10 and umaxZ0.50 have been greater than some specified value (say 3) or not. Say this
considered. voltage difference is greater than 3, therefore, this tie-switch
(tie-4) will be considered first.
7. Fuzzy multi-objective formulation Now if tie-4 is closed, a loop will be formed (Fig. 6) and
total number of branches including tie-branch (24–13) in this
The four objectives described in the previous sections are loop is 10. These branches are 13–12, 12–11, 11–10, 10–26,
first fuzzified, and then, dealt with by integrating them into a 27–18, 18–19, 19–22, 22–23, 23–24 and 24–13. Opening of
fuzzy satisfaction objective function J through appropriate each branch in this loop is an option. Therefore, one branch at a
weighting factors as given below: time in the loop is opened (radial structure is retained) and
membership value of each objective is evaluated.
Max Ji Z W1 mLi C W2 mVi C W3 mAi C W4 mBi ; Say in this loop, first open the sectionalizing switch of
(12) branch 13–12 (radial structure is retained), and run radial
for i Z 1;2;.;Nk
distribution load flow program. After that compute mL1, mV1,
The proper weighting factors used are W1ZW2ZW3Z mA1 and mB1 using Eqs. (2), (4), (7) and (11), respectively.
W4Z0.25 in which these four objectives are assumed to be Now, compute J1 using Eq. (12).
equally important. The weighting factors can be varied Similarly, now close the sectionalizing switch of branch 13–
according to the preferences of different operators. 12 and open the sectionalizing switch of branch 12–11 and run
the load flow program. After that compute mL2, mV2, mA2 and
8. Heuristic rules for minimizing the number of tie-switch mB2 using Eqs. (2), (4), (7) and (11), respectively, and then
operations compute J2 using Eq. (12). Similarly, J3, J4,., J10 have to be
computed. Optimal solution (OS1) for this tie-switch (tie-4)
The optimal switching strategies for network reconfigura- operation is maximum for all such values of J. Therefore,
tion proposed by most of the researchers need to consider every optimal solution for this tie-switch (tie-4) operation can be
candidate switch to evaluate the effectiveness of loss reduction
and extensive numerical computation is often required. In the
present paper, heuristic rules are considered which minimize
the number of tie-switch operations. These heuristic rules are
explained below.
In the first iteration, compute the voltage difference across
all the open tie-switches and detect the open tie-switch across
which the voltage difference is maximum. If this maximum
voltage difference is greater than some specified value (3) then
this tie-switch is considered first. It is expected that because of
largest voltage difference, this switching will cause maximum
loss reduction, minimum nodes voltage deviation, minimum
branch current constraint violation and better load balancing.
In the next iteration, same procedure is repeated for remaining
tie-switches and so on. Fig. 5. Sample distribution networks with four tie-branches.
 D. Das / Electrical Power and Energy Systems 28 (2006) 331–338
Fig. 6. Distribution network with single loop.
given as:
OS1 Z maxfJ1 ;J2 ;.;J10 g
Say, OS1ZJ2, which means optimal solution for this tie-
switch (tie-4) operation can be obtained by opening the
sectionalizing switch of branch 12–11 and closing the open tie-
switch (tie-4) of the tie-branch 24–13 and radial structure of the
network is retained. Fig. 7 shows the radial configuration of the
network after first switching operation.
Again run the load flow program and voltage difference
across the remaining open tie-switches (i.e. tie-1, tie-2, and tie-
3) are computed and say voltage difference across tie-switch,
tie-1, is maximum. Now, check whether the voltage difference
across tie-1 is greater than 3 or not. Say, this is greater than 3
and this tie-switch (tie-1) is closed to form a loop (Fig. 8) in this
system and similar procedure is repeated as mentioned above.
Say optimal solution for this tie-switch (tie-1) operation
suggests to open the sectionalizing switch of branch 13–14 and
close the tie-switch (tie-1) of the tie-branch 14–6. Therefore,
sectionalizing switch of branch 13–14 must be opened and the
tie-switch (tie-1) of the tie-branch 14–6 must be closed. Fig. 9
shows the radial configuration of this network after second
switching operation.
Now, Fig. 9 consists of two tie-switches (tie-2 and tie-3).
Again run the load flow program and the voltage difference
across these two tie-switches are computed and say voltage
difference across tie-3 is maximum and it is checked whether
this voltage difference is greater than 3 or not. Suppose this is
less than 3, then this switching option is discarded and
Fig. 7. Radial configuration after first switching operation.
335
Fig. 8. Distribution network with single loop (tie-1 is closed).
automatically other switching options are discarded because
voltage difference across all other open tie-switches are less
(13) than 3. Fig. 10 shows the final radial configuration. Author has
tested few examples and it was found that a value of 3Z0.01
gives satisfactory results. In the present work, a load flow
algorithm [20] for solving radial distribution networks has been
used. A complete algorithm for the whole network reconfigura-
tion process is given below.
9.1. Algorithm
Step 1: Read system data.
Step 2: Run the load flow program for radial distribution
networks.
Step 3: Compute the voltage difference across the open tie-
switches, i.e. DVtie(i) for iZ1, 2,., ntie.
Step 4: Identify the open tie-switch across which the
voltage difference is maximum and its code k, i.e.
DVtie,maxZDVtie(k).
Step 5: If DVtie,maxO3, go to Step 6. Otherwise go to Step
10.
Step 6: Select the tie-switch ‘k’ and identify the total
number (Nk) of loop branches including the tie-
branch when the tie-switch ‘k’ is closed.
Step 7: Open one branch at a time in the loop and evaluate
the membership value for each objective, i.e. for iZ
1 to Nk compute mLi, mVi, mAi and mBi using Eqs.
Fig. 9. Radial configuration after second switching operation.
336 D. Das / Electrical Power and Energy Systems 28 (2006) 331–338

Fig. 10. Final radial configuration.

(2), (4), (7) and (11), respectively. Also compute Ji

using Eq. (12).
Step 8: Obtain the optimal solution for the operation of tie-
switch ‘k’, i.e. OSkZmax{Ji}, for iZ1, 2,., Nk.
Step 9: ntieZntieK1 and rearrange the coding of the rest of
the tie-switches and go to Step 2.
Step 10: Print output results.
Step 11: Stop.

Fig. 12. Final radial configuration.

10. Example

The tested system is a 11 kV radial distribution system

Fig. 11. Tested radial distribution system.
having two substations, four feeders, 70 nodes and 78 branches
(including tie-branches) as shown in Fig. 11. Tie-switches of
this system are open in normal condition. Data for this system
are given in Appendix A. The proposed method has been
implemented on Pentium IV computer.
Before network reconfiguration, total real power loss of this
system is 337.45 kW and minimum voltage is VminZV67Z
0.88389 p.u.
Fig. 12 shows the final radial configuration after network
reconfiguration. After network reconfiguration total real power
loss of this system is 302.05 kW and minimum voltage is
VminZV29Z0.91214 p.u. It is to be noted here that during the
iterative process, proposed algorithm has considered only four
out of eight tie-switches (i.e. tie-1, tie-3, tie-4 and tie-7) and
remaining tie-switches have been discarded. After network
reconfiguration, real power loss reduction is 10.49% and
minimum voltage of the system has improved from 0.88389 to
0.91214 p.u. Table 1 shows the feeders current before and after
network reconfiguration. From Table 1, it is seen that the
feeders current are more balanced after reconfiguration.
The main advantage of the proposed method as compared
to some other existing methods [11–13,18] is that it
 D. Das / Electrical Power and Energy Systems 28 (2006) 331–338 337

Table 1 Appendix A
Feeders current before and after reconfiguration

Feeders current (A) Table A1

Before reconfiguration After reconfiguration Line and load data
IF1Z121.0 IF1Z142.0 Branch Sending Receiving R (U) X (U) PL(IR(i)) QL(IR(i))
IF2Z132.3 IF2Z159.9 no. (i) end node end node (kW) (kV A)
IF3Z197.2 IF3Z162.2 IS(i) IR(i)
IF4Z181.5 IF4Z163.9
1 1 2 1.097 1.074 120.0 108.0
2 2 3 1.463 1.432 72.0 48.0
3 3 4 0.731 0.716 180.0 156.0
4 4 5 0.366 0.358 90.0 60.0
5 5 6 1.828 1.790 21.60 13.0
Table 2 6 6 7 1.097 1.074 21.6.0 17.0
Comparison of the results 7 7 8 0.731 0.716 15.60 12.0
8 8 9 0.731 0.716 19.0 13.0
CPU time (s) 9 4 10 1.080 0.734 24.0 12.0
10 10 11 1.620 1.101 19.20 11.0
Proposed method 2.0
11 11 12 1.080 0.734 60.0 48.0
Method proposed in [11] 11.5
12 12 13 1.350 0.917 126.0 108.0
Method proposed in [12,13] 3.24
13 13 14 0.810 0.550 30.0 18.0
Method proposed in [18] 15.6
14 14 15 1.944 1.321 48.0 30.0
15 7 68 1.080 0.734 120.0 72.0
16 68 69 1.620 1.101 48.0 36.0
17 1 16 1.097 1.074 72.0 36.0
18 16 17 0.366 0.358 48.0 30.0
19 17 18 1.463 1.432 18.0 11.0
minimizes the number of tie-switch operations based on 20 18 19 0.914 0.895 15.6.0 8.4.0
heuristic rules and for each tie-switch operation, it 21 19 20 0.804 0.787 36.0 24.0
maximizes the fuzzy satisfaction objective function J for 22 20 21 1.133 1.110 108.0 60.0
obtaining optimum reconfiguration results. Hence, compu- 23 21 22 0.475 0.465 60.0 36.0
24 17 23 2.214 1.505 72.0 48.0
tational burden of the proposed method is less. Whereas 25 23 24 1.620 1.110 120.0 96.0
methods proposed in [12,13] have used fuzzy min–max 26 24 25 1.080 0.734 96.0 78.0
principle for obtaining optimum reconfiguration results. 27 25 26 0.540 0.367 120.0 72.0
Method proposed in [11] has maximized the fuzzy 28 26 27 0.540 0.367 120.0 66.0
satisfaction objective function J using genetic algorithm for 29 27 28 1.080 0.734 144.0 84.0
30 28 29 1.080 0.734 126.0 84.0
obtaining optimum reconfiguration results and the method 31 70 30 0.366 0.358 96.0 60.0
proposed in [18] has formulated the objective function using 32 30 31 0.731 0.716 72.0 48.0
fuzzy min–max principle and then evolution programming 33 31 32 0.731 0.716 15.60 9.6.0
technique has been used for obtaining optimum reconfigura- 34 32 33 0.804 0.787 19.20 11.80
tion results. Comparisons of the results of the proposed 35 33 34 1.170 1.145 60.0 36.0
36 34 35 0.768 0.752 48.0 33.60
method and the methods proposed in [11–13,18] are given in 37 35 36 0.731 0.716 72.0 48.0
Table 2. From Table 2, it is seen that the proposed method is 38 36 37 1.097 1.074 48.0 36.0
much faster than the other existing methods [11–13,18]. 39 37 38 1.463 1.432 36.0 30.0
40 32 39 1.080 0.734 180.0 120.0
41 39 40 0.540 0.367 72.0 42.0
42 40 41 1.080 0.734 144.0 84.0
43 41 42 1.836 1.248 108.0 72.0
11. Conclusions 44 42 43 1.296 0.881 21.60 12.0
45 40 44 1.188 0.807 19.20 12.0
In the present work, an algorithm based on heuristic rules 46 44 45 0.540 0.367 120.0 60.0
47 42 46 1.080 0.734 72.0 48.0
and fuzzy multi-objective approach has been proposed to
48 35 47 0.540 0.367 108.0 84.0
solve the network reconfiguration problem in a radial 49 47 48 1.080 0.734 122.40 79.20
distribution system. The objectives considered attempt to 50 48 49 1.080 0.734 120.0 84.0
maximize the fuzzy satisfaction of the load balancing among 51 49 50 1.080 0.734 168.0 108.0
the feeders, minimization of power loss, deviation of nodes 52 70 51 0.366 0.358 72.0 48.0
53 51 52 1.463 1.432 24.0 13.20
voltage and branch current constraint violation subject to
54 52 53 1.463 1.432 48.0 36.0
radial network structure in which all loads must be 55 53 54 0.914 0.895 43.20 28.80
energized. Another advantage of the proposed algorithm is 56 54 55 1.097 1.074 36.0 24.0
that it minimizes the number of tie-switch operations. The 57 55 56 1.097 1.074 51.60 36.0
effectiveness of the proposed method has been demonstrated 58 52 57 0.270 0.183 96.0 60.0
through an example. (continued on next page)
338 D. Das / Electrical Power and Energy Systems 28 (2006) 331–338

Table A1 (continued) [4] Borozan V, Rajicic D, Ackovski R. Improved method for loss
minimization in distribution networks. IEEE Trans Power Syst 1995;10:
Sending Receiving 1420–5.
Branch end node end node PL(IR(i)) QL(IR(i)) [5] Civanlar S, Grainger JJ, Yin H, Lee SSH. Distribution feeder
no. (i) IS(i) IR(i) R (U) X (U) (kW) (kV A) reconfiguration for loss reduction. IEEE Trans Power Deliv 1988;3:
1217–23.
59 57 58 0.270 0.183 288.0 144.0
[6] Baran ME, Wu FF. Network reconfiguration in distribution systems for
60 58 59 0.810 0.550 150.0 132.0
loss reduction and load balancing. IEEE Trans Power Deliv 1989;4:
61 59 60 1.296 0.881 30.0 12.0
1401–7.
62 55 61 1.188 0.807 12.0 6.0
[7] Kashem MA, Ganapathy V, Jasmon GB. Network reconfiguration for
63 61 62 1.188 0.807 180.0 156.0
enhancement of voltage stability in distribution networks. IEE Proc Gener
64 62 63 0.810 0.550 60.0 36.0
Transm Distrib 2000;147(3):171–5.
65 63 64 1.620 1.101 36.0 24.0
[8] Chen CS, Cho MY. Energy loss reduction by critical switches. IEEE
66 62 65 1.080 0.734 156.0 144.0
Trans Power Deliv 1993;8:1246–53.
67 65 66 0.540 0.367 180.0 156.0
[9] Nara K, Satoh T, Kitagawa M. Distribution system loss minimum
68 66 67 1.080 0.734 30.0 18.0
reconfiguration by genetic algorithm. Proceedings of the third symposium
Tie-
expert systems application to power systems (ESAPS), Tokyo and Kobe,
branch
Japan; 1991. p. 724–30.
69 22 67 0.381 0.2445 – –
[10] Lin WM, Cheng FS, Tsay MT. Distribution feeder reconfiguration with
70 67 15 0.454 0.3630 – –
refined genetic algorithm. IEE Proc Gener Transm Distrib 2000;147(6):
71 21 27 0.254 0.2030 – –
349–54.
72 9 50 0.681 0.5445 – –
[11] Huang YC. Enhanced genetic algorithm-based fuzzy multi-objective
73 29 64 0.681 0.5445 – –
approach to distribution network reconfiguration. IEE Proc Gener Transm
74 45 60 0.254 0.2030 – –
Distrib 2002;149(5):615–20.
75 43 38 0.254 0.2030 – –
[12] Lin WM, Chin HC. A new approach for distribution feeder reconfigura-
76 9 15 0.454 0.3630 – –
tion for loss reduction and service restoration. IEEE Trans Power Deliv
1998;13:870–5.
[13] Lin Whei-Min, Chin HC, Yu Gyne-Jong. An effective algorithm for
Other data. Current carrying capacity of all tie-branches are distribution feeder loss reduction. IEEE Int Conf Power Syst Technol
234.0 A. Current carrying capacity of branches 1–8, 17–23, 1998;1:228–32.
31–39 and 52–57 is 270.0 A, for branches 9–16, 24–30, 40–51 [14] Huang KY, Chin HC. Distribution feeder energy conservation by using
and 58–68 is 208.0 A. heuristics fuzzy approach. Int J Electr Power Energy Syst 2002;24:
439–45.
[15] Liu CC, Lee SJ, Venkata SS. An expert system operational aid for
restoration and loss reduction of distribution systems. IEEE Trans Power
References Syst 1988;3:619–26.
[16] Jung KH, Kim H, Ko Y. Network reconfiguration algorithm for automated
[1] Sarfi RJ, Salama MMA, Chikhani AY. A survey of the state of the art in distribution system based on artificial intelligence approach. IEEE Trans
distribution system reconfiguration for system loss reduction. Electr Power Deliv 1993;8:1933–41.
Power Syst Res 1994;31:61–70. [17] Auguliaro A, Dusonchet L, Ippolito M, Sanseverino ER. Minimum losses
[2] Merlin A, Back H. Search for a minimal-loss operating spanning tree reconfiguration of MV distribution networks through local control of tie-
configuration in an urban power distribution system. Proceedings of the switches. IEEE Trans Power Deliv 2003;18:762–71.
fifth power system computation conference (PSCC), Cambridge, UK; [18] Hsiao Ying-Tung. Multi-objective evolution programming method for
1975. p. 1–18. feeder reconfiguration. IEEE Trans Power Syst 2004;19:594–600.
[3] Shirmohammdai D, Hong HW. Reconfiguration for electric distribution [19] Zadeh L. Fuzzy sets. Inf Control 1965;8:338–53.
networks for resistive line loss reduction. IEEE Trans Power Deliv 1989; [20] Ghosh S, Das D. Method for load-flow solution of radial distribution
4:1910–8. networks. Proc IEE Gener Transm Distrib 1999;November:641–8.