Advertisement

Comparison of Intelligent Algorithms with FACTS Devices for Minimization of Total Power Losses

  • Shohreh MonshizadehEmail author
  • Gunne John Hegglid
  • Svein Thore Hagen
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 926)

Abstract

Optimal power flow plays a vital role in providing secure, economic, and reliable operation of electrical power system. This paper presents a comparison of two types of intelligent algorithms for solving optimal power flow problems, incorporating Flexible AC transmission systems (FACTS) devices. Particle Swarm optimization (PSO) and imperialist competitive algorithm (ICA) have been analyzed and simulated with MATLAB software in order to reduce the total power losses of the network with three types of FACTS devices: unified power flow controller (UPFC), Static Var Compensators (SVC), and Thyristor Controlled Series Capacitor (TCSC). The proposed approach is simulated in IEEE-30 buses in MATLAB software and the results are compared with several tables and diagrams. It is observed that PSO algorithm with UPFC as the FACTS devices can reduce more active and reactive power losses than the other types of the FACTS devices and intelligent algorithms. IEEE 30 buses is used to illustrate the effectiveness of proposed FACTS devices and intelligent algorithm for solving optimal power flow problem. The proposed method is simulated with MATLAB programming and the results are compared with several tables and figures.

Keywords

Optimal power flow Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO) Imperialist Competitive Algorithm (ICA) FACTS controllers (TCSC, UPFC, SVC) Active and reactive power losses 

References

  1. 1.
    Joseph, S.P., Dineshbalaji, C.: Transmission loss minimization using optimization technique based on PSO. IOSR J. Electr. Electron. Eng. (IOSR-JEEE) 6(1), 1–5 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Jothi Swaroopan, N.M., Somasundarant, P.: Optimal power flow for security enhancement using fuzzified particle swarm optimization. In: IEEE International Conference on Sustainable Energy and Intelligent System, pp. 20–22 (2011). ISBN 978-9-38043-000-3Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Amarnath, R.V., Ramana, N.V.: State of art in optimal power flow solution methodologies. J. Theor. Appl. Inf. Technol. 30(2), 128–154 (2011)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Albatsh, F.M., Mekhilef, S., Ahmad, S., Mokhlis, H.: Enhancing power transfer capability through flexible AC transmission system devices. Front. Inf. Technol. Electron. Eng. 16(8), 658–678 (2015). ISSN 2095-9184CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ma, R., Yan, H.: Multi objective optimal dispatch in power system with TCSC and load voltage characteristic using fuzzy sets theory. In: 6th World Congress on Intelligent Control and Automation, pp. 7562–7566 (2006)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Nachimuthu Deepa, S., Basha Rizwana, J.: Imperialist competitive algorithm for minimization of losses by optimally location FACTS controllers in power system. Istanbul Univ. J. Electr. Electron. Eng. (IU-JEEE) 15, 1889–1896 (2015)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Gopinath, B., Rubiya, S.: Comparative analysis of optimization algorithms for solving optimal power flow using IPFC. Int. J. Sci. Technol. Eng. 2(11), 435–441 (2016)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Immanuel, A., Chengaiah, C.: Optimal power flow with UPFC using fuzzy-PSO with non-smooth fuel cost function. Int. J. Eng. Res. Appl. 5(5), 01–06 (2015)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Leeton, U., Uthitsunthorn, D., Kwannetr, A., Sinsuphun, N., Kulworawanichpong, T.: Power loss minimization using optimal power flow based on particle swarm optimization. In: International Conference on Electrical Engineering/Electronics, Computer, Telecommunications and Information Technology (ECTI-CON 2010). IEEE (2010)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Nanadakumar, E., Dhanasekaran, R., Senapathi, N.K.: Optimal location of UPFC by BFO, MSFL and ICA algorithms. IOSR J. Electr. Electron. Eng. (IOSR-JEEE) 10(2), 25–33 (2015)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Gaur, D., Mathew, L.: Optimal placement of FACTS devices using optimization techniques. In: 3rd International Conference on communication Systems, pp. 1–15. IOP Publishing (2018)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ravi Kumar, G., Kameswara Rao, R., Tulasi Ram, S.S.: Power flow control and transmission loss minimization model with TCSC and SVC for improving system stability and security. In: IEEE Third International Conference on Industrial and Information Systems (2008). ISSN 2164-7011Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Tiwari, A., Swarnkar, K.K., Wadhwani, S., Wadhwani, A.K.: Optimal power flow with FACTS devices using genetic algorithm. Int. J. Power Syst. Oper. Energy Manag. 1(2), 66–72 (2011)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Alizadeh, M., Ghazizadeh Ehsaee, M., Shahbazi Ghareghavini, M.M.: Reducing the power loss in presence of TCSC based on optimal power flow with intelligent algorithm. In: 4th National Conference and 2nd International Conference Applied Research in Electrical, Mechanical and Mechatronic Engineering, pp. 1–11 (2016)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Smita, P., Vaidya, B.N.: Optimal power flow by particle swarm optimization for reactive loss minimization. Int. J. Sci. Technol. Res. 1(1), 1–6 (2012)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Saebi, J., Mashhadi, H.R.: Imperialist competitive algorithm for reactive power dispatch problem in electricity market. International Trans. Electr. Energy Syst., 858–874 (2013)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  • Shohreh Monshizadeh
    • 1
    Email author
  • Gunne John Hegglid
    • 1
  • Svein Thore Hagen
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Electrical Engineering, Information Technology, and CyberneticsUniversity College of Southeast NorwayPorsgrunnNorway

Personalised recommendations