See

discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/278160473

Optimal location of STATCOM using chemical

reaction optimization for reactive power
dispatch problem

Article in Ain Shams Engineering Journal June 2015

DOI: 10.1016/j.asej.2015.04.013

CITATIONS READS

4 89

3 authors, including:

Provas Kumar Roy Debashis Nandi

Kalyani Government Engineering College National Institute of Technology, Durgapur
123 PUBLICATIONS 1,048 CITATIONS 36 PUBLICATIONS 76 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Debashis Nandi on 21 June 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Ain Shams Engineering Journal (2015) xxx, xxxxxx

Ain Shams University

Ain Shams Engineering Journal

www.elsevier.com/locate/asej
www.sciencedirect.com

ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING

Optimal location of STATCOM using chemical

reaction optimization for reactive power dispatch
problem
Susanta Dutta a, Provas Kumar Roy b,*
, Debashis Nandi c

a
Department of Electrical Engineering, Dr. B.C. Roy Engineering College, Durgapur, West Bengal, India
b
Department of Electrical Engineering, Jalpaiguri Government Engineering College, Jalpaiguri, West Bengal, India
c
Department of Information Technology, National Institute of Technology, Durgapur, West Bengal, India

Received 10 October 2014; revised 1 April 2015; accepted 26 April 2015

KEYWORDS Abstract Optimal reactive power dispatch (ORPD) problem has a signicant inuence on optimal
Flexible AC transmission operation of power systems. However, getting optimal solution of ORPD problem is a strenuous
system; task for the researchers. The inclusion of exible AC transmission system (FACTS) devices in
Static synchronous the power system network for solving ORPD problem adds to its complexity. This paper presents
compensator (STATCOM); the application of chemical reaction optimization (CRO) for optimal allocation of a static syn-
Optimal reactive power chronous compensator (STATCOM) to minimize the transmission loss, improve the voltage prole
dispatch (ORPD); and voltage stability in a power system. The proposed approach is carried out on IEEE 30-bus and
Chemical reaction IEEE 57-bus test systems and the simulation results are presented to validate the effectiveness of the
optimization (CRO); proposed method. The results show that the proposed approach can converge to the optimum solu-
Transmission loss
tion and obtains better solutions as compared to other methods reported in the literature.
 2015 Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of Ain Shams University. This is an open access
article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

1. Introduction transmission lines, switches and relays, active/reactive compo-

nents, and loads. Power system networks are complex systems
The electric power grid is the largest man-made machine in the that are nonlinear, non-stationary, and prone to disturbances
world. It consists of synchronous generators, transformers, and faults. Reinforcement of a power system can be accom-
plished by improving the voltage prole, increasing the trans-
mission capacity and others. Nevertheless, some of these
* Corresponding author at: Jalpaiguri Government Engineering
solutions may require considerable investment that could be
College, Jalpaiguri, 735102, West Bengal, India. Tel.: +91 9474521395;
difcult to recover. FACTS devices are an alternate solution
fax: +91 3561 256143.
E-mail address: roy_provas@yahoo.com (P.K. Roy).
to address some of those problems [1,2].
Peer review under responsibility of Ain Shams University.
Optimal reactive power dispatch (ORPD) is an important
tool for power system operators for both planning and reliable
operation in the present day power systems. The important
aspect of ORPD is to determine the optimal settings of control
Production and hosting by Elsevier variables for minimizing transmission loss, improve the
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.asej.2015.04.013
2090-4479  2015 Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of Ain Shams University.
This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
Please cite this article in press as: Dutta S et al., Optimal location of STATCOM using chemical reaction optimization for reactive power dispatch problem, Ain Shams
Eng J (2015), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.asej.2015.04.013
2 S. Dutta et al.

voltage prole and voltage stability, while satisfying various 2. Mathematical problem formulation
equality and inequality constraints. The ORPD problem is in
general non-convex and non-linear and exists many local 2.1. Static model and mathematical analysis of static
minima. synchronous compensator
Over the last two decades, many researchers performed a
lot of researches on ORPD. Various optimization techniques
Although, there are several FACTS devices for controlling
are evolved to solve ORPD problem. These algorithms are
power ow [22] and voltage prole in power system, for this
generally divided into two categories, namely, classical mathe-
study, only STATCOM device is considered to minimize the
matical optimization algorithms and intelligent optimization
transmission loss, improve the voltage prole and voltage sta-
algorithms. The classical algorithms are starting from an initial
bility of power system network. Static model of this FACTS
point, continuously improve the current solution through a
device is as described below.
certain orbit, and ultimately converging to the optimal solu-
Static synchronous compensator (STATCOM) is connected
tion. These algorithms include linear programming (LP) [3]
in parallel with the specic bus of a power system. The primary
quadratic programming (QP) [4], non-linear programming
goal of STATCOM is to enhance the reactive power compen-
(NLP) [5] and mixed integer linear programming (MILP) [6],
sation which adjusts the reactive power and voltage magnitude
and benders decomposition [7]. Though, some of these tech-
of power system network. It consists of three basic compo-
niques, have a good convergence but most of them suffer from
nents, namely, transformer, voltage source converter (VSC)
local optimality. Since ORPD is multimodal and non-linear
and capacitor. The STATCOM is modeled as a controllable
optimization problem and severely depends on the initial
voltage source (Ep) in series with an impedance [23]. The real
guess, the classical techniques are unable to produce global
part of this impedance represents the cupper losses of the cou-
optimal solution. To overcome this deciency, various intelli-
pling transformer and converter, while the imaginary part of
gent optimization algorithms known as heuristic techniques
this impedance represents the leakage reactance of the cou-
are applied to solve ORPD problem. Some of the well popular
pling transformer. STATCOM absorbs requisite amount of
optimization techniques are evolutionary programming (EP)
reactive power from the grid to keep the bus voltage within
[8], genetic algorithm (GA) [9,10], simulated annealing (SA)
reasonable range for all power system loading. Fig. 1 shows
[11,12], tabu search (TS) [13,14], differential evolution (DE)
the circuit model of a STATCOM connected to the ith bus
[15,16], particle swarm optimization (PSO) [17,18] and arti-
of a power system. The injected active and reactive power ow
cial bee colony (ABC) [19], etc. Recently, a harmony search
equation of the ith bus are given below:
algorithm (HSA) was developed by Sirjani et al. [20] for simul-
taneous minimization of total cost, the voltage stability index, Pi Gp jVi j2  jVi jjEp jjYp j cosdi  dp  hp
voltage prole and power loss of IEEE 57-bus test system N
X
using shunt capacitors, SVC and static synchronous compen- jVi jjVj jjYij j cosdi  dj  hij 1
sators (STATCOM). Saravanan et al. presented PSO [21] to j1
nd optimal settings and location TCSC, SVC and UPFC
devices for improving system load ability with minimum cost Qi Bp jVi j2  jVi jjEp jjYp j sindi  dp  hp
of installation. N
The literature survey shows that most of the population
X
jVi jjVj jjYij j sindi  dj  hij 2
based techniques successfully solved optimal located FACTS j1
based ORPD problem. However, the slow convergence toward
the optimal solution is the main concern for most of these The implementation of STATCOM in transmission system
heuristics algorithms. Furthermore, these techniques often introduces two state variables (|Ep| and dp); however, |Vi| is
produce the local optimal solution rather than global optimal known for STATCOM connected bus. It may be assumed that
solution.
In this article, a recently developed heuristic algorithm
named chemical reaction optimization (CRO) algorithm based
on the different chemical reactions on the molecular structure
of molecules, introduced by Lam et al. in 2010 is used to nd
the optimal location of STATCOM device for solving ORPD
problem. The effectiveness of the proposed CRO algorithm is
demonstrated by implementing it in two standard systems
namely IEEE 30-bus and IEEE 57-bus systems and its perfor-
mance is compared with PSO, DE and other optimization
techniques recently published in the literature.
The remaining sections of this paper are organized as fol-
lows: Section 2 describes the problem formulation of ORPD
problem. Section 3 briey describes the CRO technique and
the different steps of the proposed CRO approach. Section 4
discusses the computational procedure and analyzes the DE,
PSO and CRO results when applied to case studies of
FACTS based ORPD problem. Lastly, Section 5 outlines the
conclusions. Figure 1 Schematic static model of STATCOM.

Please cite this article in press as: Dutta S et al., Optimal location of STATCOM using chemical reaction optimization for reactive power dispatch problem, Ain Shams
Eng J (2015), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.asej.2015.04.013
Optimal location of STATCOM 3

the power consumed by the STATCOM source is zero in 2.2.2. Minimization of voltage deviation
steady state. Since bus voltage is one of the most important security and ser-
PEp realEp Ip 3 vice quality indexes of the power system, the minimization of
deviations of voltages from desired values is considered as
another objective in this study. The objective function of volt-
PEP Gp jEp j2 jEp jjVi jjYp j cosdi  dp hp 0 4 age prole improvement, i.e. voltage deviation minimization at
load buses, may be expressed as:
where Vi is the voltage at the ith bus; Yp is the admittance of !
NL 
the STATCOM; Gp , Bp are the conductance and susceptance, X 
sp 
f2 x; y min VLf  VLf  8

respectively, of the STATCOM; hij is the admittance angle of
f1
transmission line connected between the ith bus and jth bus,
respectively; dp is the voltage source angle of the where VLf is the voltage at the ith load bus; VspLf is the desired
STATCOM; Ep is the voltage sources of STATCOM voltage at the ith load bus, usually set to 1.0 p.u.
converters.
2.2.3. Minimization of L-index
2.2. Objective function It is very important to maintain constantly acceptable bus volt-
age at each bus under normal operating conditions. However,
The conventional formulation of ORPD problem determines when the system is subjected to a disturbance, the system con-
the optimal setting of control variables such as generator ter- guration is changed. The non-optimized control variables
minal voltages, transformers tap setting, reactive power of may lead to progressive and uncontrollable drop in voltage
shunt compensators, controllable voltage source of resulting in an eventual widespread voltage collapse. In this
STATCOM and its phase angle to minimize the transmission work, voltage stability enhancement is achieved through min-
loss while satisfying the operational constraints. However, in imizing the voltage stability indicator L-index. The indicator
order operate the power system in reliable and secure mode, values vary in the range between 0 and 1.
the voltage prole and voltage stability index of the power sys- The L-index of a power system is briey discussed below:
tem are also considered as the objective functions in this study. For a multi-node system, the relation among voltage and
current of load and generator buses may be expressed as
follows:
2.2.1. Minimization of total real power loss 2 3 2 32 3
Il yll ylg Vl
The objective of transmission loss minimization may be 4 54 5:4 5 9
expressed by ygl ygg
Ig Vg
NTL
By matrix inversion, the above equation may be rearranged as
X h i
f1 x; y Ploss Gk V2i V2j  2jVi jjVj j cosdi  dj 5
k1 follows:

Vl Zll Flg Il
" # " #" #
where f1 x; y is the transmission loss minimization objective
function; Ploss is the total active power loss; Gk is the conduc- : 10
Ig Kgl Ygg Vg
tance of the kth line connected between them ith and jth buses;
Vi, Vj are the voltage of the ith and jth buses, respectively; di, dj The sub-matrix Flg may be expressed as under:
are the phase angle of the ith and jth bus voltages. x is the vec-
tor of dependent variable consisting of load voltages Flg yll 1 ylg  11
(Vl1 ; . . . VlNL ), generators reactive powers (Qg1 ; . . . ; QgNG ),
The voltage stability index of the jth bus may be expressed by
transmission lines loadings (Sl1 ; . . . ; SlNTL ), controllable volt-  
Ng
age source of STATCOM (Ep1 ; . . . ; Epn ) and phase angle of  X Vi 
Lj 1  Fji  where j 1; 2; . . . ; Nl 12

STATCOM (dp1 ; . . . ; dpn ); y is the vector of independent vari-  i1
Vj 
ables consisting of generators voltages (Vg1 ; . . . ; VgNG ), trans-
formers tap settings (T1 ; . . . ; TNT ), reactive power injections where Vg ; Vl are the vectors of the bus voltage of the generator
(Qi1 ; . . . ; QiNC ) and voltage of the buses where STATCOMs and load buses, respectively; Ig ; Il are the vectors of the bus
are used (VSTATCOM1 ; . . . ; VSTATCOMn ). currents of the generator and load buses, respectively. Zll ,
Therefore, the independent and dependent vectors may be Flg , Kgl , Ygg are the sub-matrices obtained by partial inversion
expressed as of the admittance matrix, Ng ; Nl are the number of generator
h i and load buses, respectively.
x Vl1 ; .. .;VlNL ;Qg1 ;.. .QgNG ;Sl1 ;. ..; SlNTL ;Ep1 ;. ..; Epn ; dp1 ;.. .;dpn To move the system far away from the voltage collapse
point, the voltage stability index needs to minimize. The global
6 L-index indicator of the power system is expressed as follows:
  Lmax maxL1 ; L2 ; . . . ; LNl 13
y Vg1 ; . . . ; VgNG ; T1 ; . . . ; TNT ; Qi1 ; . . . ; QiNC ; VSTATCOM1 ; . . . ; VSTATCOMn
7 Therefore, to enhance the voltage stability and to move the
system far from the voltage collapse margin, the objective
where NG; NL are the number of generator and load buses; function may be represented as follows:
NTL; NT; NC are the number of transmission lines, regulating
transformers and shunt compensators, respectively. f3 x; y min Lmax 14

Please cite this article in press as: Dutta S et al., Optimal location of STATCOM using chemical reaction optimization for reactive power dispatch problem, Ain Shams
Eng J (2015), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.asej.2015.04.013
4 S. Dutta et al.

2.2.4. Constraints Any change in the atom type makes the molecules different
The ORPD incorporating STATCOM is subjected to the fol- from others. Each molecule has two kinds of energies PE
lowing constraints: (potential energy) and KE (kinetic energy). PE represents the
objective function of a molecule while the KE of a molecule
(1) Equality constraints represents its ability of escaping from a local minimum.
During the CRO [2426] process, the following four types
NB
X NB X
X NB of elementary reactions are likely to happen. These are on-
pgi  pli Vi Vj gij cos hij bij sin hij  wall ineffective collision, decomposition, inter-molecular inef-
i1 i1 j1 fective collision and synthesis. These reactions can be catego-
15
NB
X NB X
X NB rized into single molecular reactions and multiple molecular
qgi  qli  Vi Vj gij sin hij  bij cos hij  reactions. The on-wall ineffective collision and decomposition
i1 i1 j1 reactions are single molecular reactions, while the inter-
where pgi ; pli are the active power generation and demand, molecular ineffective collision and synthesis reactions are of
respectively, of the ith bus; qgi ; qli are the reactive power gener- the latter category.
ation and demand, respectively, of the ith bus; gij ; bij are the
(1) On-wall ineffective collision
conductance and susceptance, respectively, of the line con-
nected between them ith bus and jth bus and NB is number
In this reaction process each molecule hits the wall of the
of buses.
container and generates a new molecule whose molecular
structure is closed to the original one. Since, the On-wall inef-
(2) Inequality constraints
fective collision is not so severe, the resultant molecular struc-
ture is not too different from the original one. A molecule ms
vmin max
gi 6 vgi 6 vgi collides into the wall is allowed to change to another molecule
pmin max
i 1; 2; . . . ; NG 16 ms1 , if the constraint described below is satised.
gi 6 pgi 6 pgi ;

qmin 6 qgi 6 qmax PEms KEms P PEms1 23

gi gi
(2) Decomposition
vmin
li 6 vli 6 vmax
li ; i 1; 2; . . . ; NL 17 A single compound breaks down into two or more mole-
cules in the decomposition process. In this reaction, the newly
sli 6 smax
li ; i 1; 2; . . . ; NL 18 formed molecules are far away from the original molecule. As
compared with on-wall ineffective collision, the generated
tmin
i 6 ti 6 tmax
i ; i 1; 2; . . . ; NT 19 molecules have greater change in the potential energy than
the original ones. The molecule m, hits a wall of the container
qmin max
ci 6 qci 6 qci ; i 1; 2; . . . ; NC 20 and participate in decomposition reaction, to generate two
molecules ms1 and ms2 if the inequality constraint (24) holds,
Emin max
Pi 6 EPi 6 EPi ; i 1; 2; . . . ; NSTATCOM 21
KEms PEms P PEms1 PEms2 24
@ min 6 @ pi 6 @ max i 1; 2; . . . ; NSTATCOM 22 (3) Intermolecular ineffective collision
pi pi ;
This chemical reaction takes place when two different mole-
where vmin max
gi ; vgi are the voltage operating limits of the ith gen- cules react among themselves, forming two different molecules.
erator bus; pmin gi ; pmax
gi are the active power generation limits of However, in this reaction, the molecular structures of the
the ith bus; qgi ; qmax
min
are the reactive power generation limits newly generated molecules are closed to the original molecules.
gi
min max
of the ith bus; vli ; vli are the voltage limits of the ith load Therefore in this collision, the molecules react much less vigor-
bus; sli ; smax are the apparent power ow and maximum appar- ously than decomposition collusion. When two molecules, m1
li
ent power ow limit of the ith branch; tmin max and m2 , collide with each other, they may form to two new
i ; ti are the tap set-
molecules, m11 and m21 , if the following inequality holds:
ting limits of the ith regulating transformer; qmin max
ci ; qci are the
reactive power injection limits of the ith shunt compensator; KEms1 PEms1 KEms2 PEms2 P PEms1 PEms2
0 0
25
dmax min
pi ; dpi are the phase angle limits of the ith STATCOM;
Emax min (4) Synthesis
pi ; Epi are the voltage limits of the ith STATCOM;
The synthesis reaction is opposite to the decomposition
NG; NL; NTL; NT; NC are the number of generator bus, load
reaction. In this reaction two or more reactants combine
bus, transmission line, regulating transformer and shunt com-
together to form an entirely different new molecule.
pensator; respectively.
Synthesis collision allows the molecular structure to change
in a larger extent. The two molecules m11 and m21 collide with
3. Chemical reaction optimization
each other and form a new molecule m if the following condi-
tion is satised.
Chemical reaction optimization (CRO) was introduced by
0
Lam and Li in the year 2010. It is a new optimization tech- KEms1 PEms1 KEms2 PEms2 P PEms1 26
nique based on the various chemical reactions occur among
the molecules. A molecule consists of several atoms and is The kinetic energy for the newly formed molecule m is mod-
characterized by the atom type, bond length and torsion. ied as follows:

Please cite this article in press as: Dutta S et al., Optimal location of STATCOM using chemical reaction optimization for reactive power dispatch problem, Ain Shams
Eng J (2015), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.asej.2015.04.013
Optimal location of STATCOM 5
0 0
KEms1 PEms1 KEms2 PEms2  PEms1 KEms1 : 27 KEms1 rand  KEms PEms  PEms1
0
The various steps for implementing the CRO algorithm can PEms1  31
be summarized as follows:
0
KEms1 1  rand  KEms PEms
Step 1: The various input parameters of the CRO algo- 0

 PEms1 PEms1  32
rithm are initialized. The molecular structures of
the molecules are generated randomly. The molecu- Step 6: To enhance the search space, the inter-molecular
lar structures of the molecules represent various ineffective collision is applied on each molecule to
feasible solution vectors. update its molecular structure. The inter-
Step 2: The value of the objective function of the individual molecular ineffective collision occurs when two
feasible solution set represents the potential energy molecules collide and then produce two new mole-
(PE) of the individual molecule. An initial kinetic cules. To perform this reaction, two molecules ms1
energy (KE) is assigned to all the molecules. and ms2 from the population are selected and two
Step 3: Depending upon the PE values, sort the population new molecules ms01 and ms02 are generated by per-
and in order to retain the best solutions intact, few forming the crossover operation of DE. The origi-
best molecules are kept as elite molecules. nal molecules ms1 and ms2 are replaced by the
Step 4: To allow the algorithm to escape from a local min- new molecules ms01 and ms02 if the newly generated
imum, the on-wall ineffective collision operations molecules have better tness value (PE). The KE
are performed on non-elite molecules. In this pro- of the molecules ms1 and ms2 are modied using
cess, one molecule ms is selected randomly from (33) and (34)
the population and one molecule ms1 is generated
using mutation operation as described below 0
KEms1 rand  PEms1 KEms1 PEms2
0 0

KEms2  PEms1 PEms2 33
msi;j k;j m;j n;j


2 ms1 F  ms1  ms1 i 1; 2; . . . ; NP
28 0
KEms2 1  rand  PEms1 KEms1 PEms2
0 0

msk;j m;j n;j
1 ; ms1 and ms1 are the jth components of three different KEms2  PEms1 PEms2 34
molecules chosen randomly from the current population.
Step 7: Lastly, the molecules participate in synthesis colli-
If there is enough energy for the new molecule to be gener-
sion operation to update their molecular structure.
ated, i.e. if criterion (29) is satised, replace the original mole-
Two molecules ms1 and ms2 are selected randomly
cule with the new one, and update the relevant KE using (30).
from the population set and one molecule ms01 is
KEms PEms P PEms1 29 generated by performing the crossover operation.
  If the newly generated molecule gives better func-
1 1
KEms rand  KEms PEms  PEms 30 tion value (PE), the new molecule is included and
the original molecules are excluded. The new mole-
Step 5: For each decomposition operation, two molecules cule ms01 updates its KE using (35)
are selected from the population and two molecules
0
are generated by performing the crossover opera- KEms1 rand  KEms1 PEms1 KEms2
tion of DE. Afterward, they are tested against the 0
0 PEms2  PEms1 35
synthesis criterion: KEms PEms P PEms1 PEms1 .
If this criterion is satised by the selected mole- Step 8: The feasibility of each solution is checked by satis-
cules, replace the original molecules by the newly fying its operational constraints.
generated molecules and update the KE of the Step 9: Sort the solutions from best to worst and replace
new molecules using (31) and (32). the worst solution by the best elite solutions.

Table 1 Transmission loss for different input parameters of IEEE 30-bus system with STATCOM.
Input parameter Input parameter Input parameter
KEloss_rate KEinitial TL KEloss_rate KEinitial TL KEloss_rate KEinitial TL
0.05 5000 4.5494 0.15 5000 4.5399 0.25 5000 4.5412
0.05 7500 4.5431 0.15 7500 4.5372 0.25 7500 4.5378
0.05 10,000 4.5386 0.15 10,000 4.5328 0.25 10,000 4.5337
0.05 12,500 4.5417 0.15 12,500 4.5381 0.25 12,500 4.5390
0.05 15,000 4.5462 0.15 15,000 4.5405 0.25 15,000 4.5418
0.10 5000 4.5423 0.20 5000 4.5367 0.30 5000 4.5477
0.10 7500 4.5395 0.20 7500 4.5314 0.30 7500 4.5416
0.10 10,000 4.5346 0.20 10,000 4.5297 0.30 10,000 4.5369
0.10 12,500 4.5402 0.20 12,500 4.5326 0.30 12,500 4.5420
0.10 15,000 4.5447 0.20 15,000 4.5373 0.30 15,000 4.5448

Please cite this article in press as: Dutta S et al., Optimal location of STATCOM using chemical reaction optimization for reactive power dispatch problem, Ain Shams
Eng J (2015), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.asej.2015.04.013
6 S. Dutta et al.

Table 2 Comparison of simulation results obtained by different algorithms without STATCOM.

Control variables Real power loss minimization Voltage deviation minimization Voltage stability index minimization
PSO DE CRO PSO DE CRO PSO DE CRO
V1 (p.u.) 1.0904 1.0972 1.0998 1.0212 1.0089 1.0092 1.0897 1.0867 1.0916
V2 (p.u.) 1.0826 1.0869 1.0939 1.0181 1.0044 1.0050 1.0807 1.0811 1.0901
V5 (p.u.) 1.0617 1.0640 1.0743 1.0177 1.0218 1.0195 1.0929 1.0919 1.0846
V8 (p.u.) 1.0631 1.0686 1.0762 1.0064 1.0041 1.0031 1.0573 1.0568 1.0697
V11 (p.u.) 1.0984 1.0990 1.0997 1.0121 1.0027 1.0390 1.0994 1.0991 1.0992
V13 (p.u.) 1.0998 1.0981 1.0999 1.0092 1.0284 1.0144 1.0959 1.0988 1.0972
T69 0.9920 1.0290 1.0380 0.9765 1.0142 1.0551 0.9471 0.9396 0.9646
T610 0.9386 0.9034 0.9011 0.9574 0.9004 0.9001 0.9078 0.9011 0.9003
T412 0.9688 0.9730 0.9727 0.9748 1.0136 0.9937 0.9241 0.9361 0.9327
T2728 0.9555 0.9612 0.9636 0.9546 0.9667 0.9663 0.9055 0.9001 0.9067
Qi10 (p.u.) 0.0496 0.0497 0.0499 0.0491 0.0500 0.0499 0.0494 0.0468 0.0440
Qi12 (p.u.) 0.0498 0.0484 0.0499 0.0025 0.0199 0.0424 0.0123 0.0466 0.0246
Qi15 (p.u.) 0.0491 0.0495 0.0499 0.0490 0.0498 0.0500 0.0466 0.0499 0.0496
Qi17 (p.u.) 0.0500 0.0466 0.0499 0.0018 0.0000 0.0000 0.0442 0.0492 0.0464
Qi20 (p.u.) 0.0439 0.0423 0.0422 0.0497 0.0500 0.0500 0.0482 0.0499 0.0453
Qi21 (p.u.) 0.0482 0.0490 0.0499 0.0463 0.0499 0.0500 0.0482 0.0485 0.0434
Qi23 (p.u.) 0.0275 0.0255 0.0263 0.0479 0.0500 0.0500 0.0423 0.0499 0.0489
Qi24 (p.u.) 0.0499 0.0493 0.0500 0.0485 0.0500 0.0500 0.0486 0.0498 0.0451
Qi29 (p.u.) 0.0236 0.0277 0.0228 0.0106 0.0497 0.0258 0.0486 0.0498 0.0484
SVD (p.u.) 1.9660 1.9878 2.0888 0.1086 0.1029 0.0849 2.5601 2.6716 2.6503
TL (MW) 4.6096 4.5749 4.5322 5.5634 5.8973 5.8067 5.1374 5.1380 4.8617
L-index 0.1264 0.1262 0.1253 0.1479 0.1478 0.1490 0.1210 0.1198 0.1156

5.5 adaptive inertia weight (PSO-w) [27], PSO with a constriction

DE factor (PSO-cf) [27], the comprehensive learning particle
PSO swarm optimizer (CLPSO) [27], the standard version of PSO
Transmission Loss (MW)

CRO (SPSO) [27], local search DE with self-adapting control param-

eters (L-SACP-DE) [27], seeker optimization algorithm (SOA)
[27], gravitational search algorithm (GSA) [28], teaching learn-
ing based optimization (TLBO) [29], quasi-oppositional TLBO
5
(QOTLBO) [29], strength pareto evolutionary algorithm
(SPEA) [30], GA-1 [31] and GA-2 [32], multi-objective PSO
(MOPSO-1) [33], DE-1 [34], oppositional GSA (OGSA) [35],
multi-objective PSO (MOPSO-2) [36], multi-objective
improved PSO (MOIPSO) [36], multi-objective chaotic
improved PSO (MOCIPSO) [36] available in the literature.
4.5
Since the performance of any algorithm depends on its input
0 20 40 60 80 100 parameters, they should be carefully chosen. After several
Generation Cycles runs, the following input parameters are found to be the best
for the optimal performance of the DE and PSO algorithms.
Figure 2 Convergence characteristics of different algorithms for
DE: Scaling factor (F) = 0.7; crossover probability
transmission loss without STATCOM (IEEE 30-bus system).
(CR) = 0.2.
PSO: C1 = C2 = 2.05; xmax = 0.9; xmin = 0.4.
Step 10: The CRO algorithm is terminated when the termi- For CRO, the average value of the transmission loss over
nation criterion is met. Otherwise go to Step 3. 25 different trials of IEEE 30-bus system with STATCOM
for different values of KEloss_rate and KEinitial is listed in
Table 1. It is clearly observed from Table 1 that the optimal
4. Simulation results and discussions settings of these input parameters for the optimal performance
of the proposed CRO algorithm are as follows:
KEloss_rate = 0.2; KEinitial for each molecule = 10,000.
In this paper, to assess the efciency of the proposed CRO
approach, two case studies (IEEE 30 bus and IEEE 57-bus sys-
4.1. IEEE 30-bus system
tems) of ORPD problems are used in the simulation study. All
the programs are written in Matlab 7.0 and run on a PC with
core i3 processor, 2.50 GHz, 4 GB RAM. The results of the Firstly, the standard IEEE 30-bus system is used to evaluate
ORPD problem obtained by CRO are compared with those the correctness and the relative performance of the proposed
obtained by DE, PSO and other techniques such as canonical CRO method. This system consists of 6 generators, 4 regulat-
GA (CGA) [27], the adaptive GA (AGA) [27], PSO with ing transformers, 9 shunt compensators and 41 transmission

Please cite this article in press as: Dutta S et al., Optimal location of STATCOM using chemical reaction optimization for reactive power dispatch problem, Ain Shams
Eng J (2015), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.asej.2015.04.013
Optimal location of STATCOM 7

Table 3 Statistical comparison (50 trials) among various algorithms for IEEE 30-bus without STATCOM.
Real power loss minimization
Techniques TLBO [29] QOTLBO [29] SPEA [30] GA-1 [31] GA-2 [32] PSO DE CRO
Best loss (MW) 4.5629 4.5594 5.1170 4.5800 4.5550 4.6096 4.5749 4.5322
Mean loss (MW) 4.5695 4.5601 NA NA NA 4.6503 4.6414 4.5413
Worst loss (MW) 4.5748 4.5617 NA NA NA 4.7831 4.7328 4.5476

Voltage deviation minimization

Techniques TLBO [29] QOTLBO [29] MOPSO-1 [33] DE-1 [34] PSO DE CRO
Best VD 0.0913 0.0856 0.2424 0.0911 0.1086 0.1029 0.0849
Mean VD 0.0934 0.0872 NA NA 0.1132 0.1083 0.0863
Worst VD 0.0988 0.0907 NA NA 0.1254 0.1176 0.0898

Voltage stability index minimization

Techniques TLBO [29] QOTLBO [29] SPEA [30] DE-1 [34] PSO DE CRO
Best L index 0.1252 0.1242 0.1397 0.1246 0.1210 0.1198 0.1156
Mean L index 0.1254 0.1245 NA NA 0.1256 0.1221 0.1163
Worst L index 0.1258 0.1247 NA NA 0.1304 0.1283 0.1172

Table 4 Comparison of simulation results obtained by different algorithms with STATCOM.

Control variables Power loss minimization Voltage deviation minimization Voltage stability index minimization
PSO DE CRO PSO DE CRO PSO DE CRO
V1 (p.u.) 1.0999 1.0999 1.1000 1.0186 1.0291 1.0293 1.0540 1.0997 1.0829
V2 (p.u.) 1.0939 1.0942 1.0943 1.0153 1.0281 1.0272 1.0401 1.0869 1.0675
V5 (p.u.) 1.0747 1.0747 1.0748 1.0245 1.0232 1.0220 1.0350 1.0817 1.0333
V8 (p.u.) 1.0763 1.0766 1.0767 0.9936 0.9900 0.9997 1.0131 1.0370 1.0378
V11 (p.u.) 1.0884 1.1000 1.0997 1.0235 1.0494 0.9983 1.0994 1.0996 1.0967
V13 (p.u.) 1.0769 1.0953 1.0951 1.0271 0.9973 1.0177 1.0786 1.0901 1.0968
T69 1.0056 1.0387 1.0393 1.0224 1.0063 0.9773 0.9272 0.9119 0.9052
T610 1.0482 0.9000 0.9000 0.9023 0.9405 0.9341 0.9069 0.9248 0.9330
T412 1.0297 0.9724 0.9725 1.0195 0.9696 0.9808 0.9156 0.9361 0.9161
T2728 1.0009 0.9628 0.9629 0.9433 0.9446 0.9564 0.9148 0.9007 0.9010
Qi10 (p.u.) 0.0498 0.0500 0.0500 0.0464 0.0412 0.0284 0.0358 0.0493 0.0230
Qi12 (p.u.) 0.0339 0.0500 0.0500 0.0273 0.0416 0.0000 0.0055 0.0475 0.0487
Qi15 (p.u.) 0.0416 0.0500 0.0500 0.0489 0.0484 0.0425 0.0015 0.0497 0.0447
Qi17 (p.u.) 0.0500 0.0500 0.0500 0.0003 0.0012 0.0109 0.0372 0.0352 0.0479
Qi20 (p.u.) 0.0390 0.0416 0.0419 0.0497 0.0499 0.0454 0.0295 0.0339 0.0497
Qi21 (p.u.) 0.0500 0.0500 0.0500 0.0349 0.0350 0.0459 0.0494 0.0377 0.0489
Qi23 (p.u.) 0.0162 0.0258 0.0261 0.0493 0.0488 0.0437 0.0376 0.0497 0.0471
Qi24 (p.u.) 0.0500 0.0499 0.0500 0.0484 0.0493 0.0457 0.0324 0.0500 0.0481
Qi29 (p.u.) 0.0222 0.0225 0.0223 0.0040 0.0063 0.0209 0.0485 0.0495 0.0499
Optimal location 29 23 30 21 23 22 26 26 3
EP (p.u.) 1.0874 1.0454 1.0790 1.0542 1.0553 1.0408 1.0949 1.0775 1.0943
dP (deg.) 10.0146 9.0631 10.7025 7.9223 7.6357 6.0648 8.5471 7.6930 7.2975
VSTATCOM (p.u.) 1.0871 1.0445 1.0797 1.0328 1.0295 1.0377 1.0916 1.0689 1.0692
SVD (p.u.) 1.3094 2.0648 2.0869 0.1013 0.0928 0.0803 2.1389 2.5639 2.3004
TL (MW) 4.5802 4.5493 4.5297 6.2937 5.8911 6.1345 6.0047 5.9364 5.8097
L-index 0.1239 0.1247 0.1268 0.1432 0.1468 0.1451 0.1183 0.1162 0.1148

lines. The generator and transmission-line data adopted from STATCOM are taken as 1.10 p.u. and 0.9 p.u., respectively.
[37] are illustrated in Tables A1A3. The maximum and mini- The limits of phase angle of STATCOM are taken as
mum voltage limits at all the buses are taken as 1.10 p.u. and 200 6 dp 6 00 . The resistance and reactance of equivalent
0.95 p.u., respectively. The upper and lower tap settings limits STATCOM converter is 0.01 p.u. and 0.1 p.u., respectively.
of regulating transformers are taken as 1.10 p.u. and 0.9 p.u., The performance of the proposed CRO method is demon-
respectively. The upper and lower voltage limits of strated by applying it in conventional ORPD problem (Case

Please cite this article in press as: Dutta S et al., Optimal location of STATCOM using chemical reaction optimization for reactive power dispatch problem, Ain Shams
Eng J (2015), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.asej.2015.04.013
8 S. Dutta et al.

1) and ORPD with STATCOM (Case 2) and its results are

5.6 DE compared with those of other methods.
PSO
Transmission Loss (MW)

5.4
CRO Case A: Transmission loss minimization
(i) ORPD without STATCOM device
5.2
The effectiveness of the proposed CRO method along with
PSO and DE is initially veried by applying it to minimize
5
transmission loss of IEEE 30-bus system without any
STATCOM. The transmission loss and the optimal settings
4.8
of control variables obtained by PSO, DE and CRO algo-
rithms are reported in Table 2. The results show that the trans-
4.6 mission loss found by the proposed CRO method is lower than
0 20 40 60 80 100 PSO, and DE. Fig. 2 shows the variation of real power loss
Generation Cycles against the number of iterations for the CRO, DE and PSO
algorithms. Moreover, 50 trials with different initial popula-
Figure 3 Convergence characteristics of different algorithms for tions are carried out to test the robustness of the CRO algo-
transmission loss with STATCOM (IEEE 30-bus system). rithm and its statistical results are compared with those of

Table 5 Statistical comparison (50 trials) among various algorithms for IEEE 30-bus with STATCOM.
Techniques Real power loss Voltage deviation Voltage stability index
PSO DE CRO PSO DE CRO PSO DE CRO
Best 4.5802 4.5493 4.5297 0.1013 0.0928 0.0803 0.1183 0.1162 0.1148
Mean 4.6347 4.6106 4.5304 0.1054 0.0997 0.0816 0.1206 0.1195 0.1153
Worst 4.7480 4.7061 4.5332 0.1141 0.1080 0.0852 0.1243 0.1218 0.1162

Table 6 Comparison of simulation results obtained by different algorithms without STATCOM.

Control variables Real power loss minimization Voltage deviation minimization Voltage stability index minimization
PSO DE CRO PSO DE CRO PSO DE CRO
V1 (p.u.) 1.0437 1.0475 1.0600 1.0338 1.0182 1.0183 1.0366 1.0586 1.0594
V2 (p.u.) 1.0261 1.0333 1.0485 1.0073 0.9927 1.0032 1.0086 1.0448 1.0491
V3 (p.u.) 1.0109 1.0152 1.0365 0.9949 0.9968 1.0034 1.0022 1.0350 1.0527
V6 (p.u.) 1.0094 1.0043 1.0300 0.9918 0.9985 1.0009 1.0114 1.0349 1.0416
V8 (p.u.) 1.0333 1.0279 1.0504 1.0217 1.0229 1.0232 1.0494 1.0578 1.0597
V9 (p.u.) 1.0139 1.0092 1.0321 1.0305 1.0140 1.0167 1.0596 1.0599 1.0592
V12 (p.u.) 1.0139 1.0094 1.0295 0.9982 1.0058 1.0056 1.0600 1.0598 1.0597
T418 0.9388 1.0185 0.9870 1.0151 1.0112 0.9610 0.9022 0.9029 0.9022
T418 0.9540 0.9003 0.9560 0.9498 0.9737 1.0174 0.9000 0.9031 0.9016
T2120 1.0006 1.0040 1.0097 0.9750 0.9767 0.9743 1.0990 1.0979 1.1000
T2426 0.9993 1.0024 1.0099 1.0563 1.0401 1.0476 1.0994 1.0967 1.0992
T729 0.9484 0.9428 0.9646 0.9485 0.9579 0.9540 0.9013 0.9004 0.9003
T3432 0.9716 0.9777 0.9727 0.9127 0.9027 0.9040 0.9001 0.9005 0.9009
T1141 0.9009 0.9004 0.9005 0.9013 0.9002 0.9005 0.9005 0.9013 0.9005
T1545 0.9411 0.9446 0.9635 0.9646 0.9078 0.9194 0.9000 0.9005 0.9002
T1446 0.9323 0.9321 0.9445 0.9326 0.9631 0.9644 0.9006 0.9002 0.9002
T1051 0.9497 0.9431 0.9572 0.9968 0.9993 1.0004 0.9005 0.9025 0.9009
T1349 0.9059 0.9032 0.9172 0.9029 0.9029 0.9015 0.9001 0.9018 0.9018
T1143 0.9339 0.9298 0.9541 0.9463 0.9546 0.9587 0.9000 0.9012 0.9001
T4056 0.9939 1.0163 0.9977 1.0480 1.0011 0.9984 1.1000 1.0954 1.0998
T3957 0.9650 0.9705 0.9678 0.9057 0.9023 0.9030 1.0994 1.0998 1.0960
T955 0.9487 0.9465 0.9657 0.9958 0.9808 0.9858 0.9020 0.9040 0.9017
Qi18 (p.u.) 0.0972 0.0976 0.0953 0.0499 0.0986 0.0737 0.0618 0.0995 0.0989
QCi25 (p.u.) 0.0590 0.0588 0.0590 0.0582 0.0590 0.0590 0.0590 0.0578 0.0585
QCi53 (p.u.) 0.0630 0.0630 0.0630 0.0569 0.0630 0.0629 0.0630 0.0629 0.0629
SVD (p.u.) 1.1796 1.2007 1.4323 0.7135 0.6919 0.6724 4.3014 5.0365 5.3439
TL (MW) 25.3584 25.1201 24.3835 27.7848 27.8573 27.3553 28.2831 25.1395 24.8609
L-index 0.5836 0.5965 0.5788 0.2980 0.2988 0.2982 0.2387 0.2316 0.2286

Please cite this article in press as: Dutta S et al., Optimal location of STATCOM using chemical reaction optimization for reactive power dispatch problem, Ain Shams
Eng J (2015), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.asej.2015.04.013
Optimal location of STATCOM 9

Table 7 Statistical comparison (50 trials) among various algorithms for IEEE 57-bus without STATCOM.
Real power loss minimization
Techniques PSO PSO-w PSO-cf CLPSO SPSO CGA AGA DE L-SACP-DE SOA GSA CRO
Best loss p.u.) 0.2536 0.2597 0.2479 0.2580 0.2742 0.2671 0.2581 0.2512 0.2732 0.2462 0.2444 0.2438
Mean loss (p.u.) 0.2635 0.2839 0.2971 0.2733 0.3070 0.3232 0.2967 0.2618 0.3434 0.2574 0.2483 0.2443
Worst loss (p.u.) 0.2774 0.3249 0.3932 0.3400 0.3862 0.4197 0.3698 0.2730 0.4439 0.2875 0.2816 0.2451

Voltage deviation minimization

Techniques OGSA [35] PSO DE CRO
Best VD 0.6982 0.7135 0.6919 0.6724
Mean VD NA 0.7206 0.7047 0.6793
Worst VD NA 0.7375 0.7133 0.6738

Voltage stability index minimization

Techniques MOPSO-2 [36] MOIPSO [36] MOCIPSO [36] PSO DE CRO
Best L index 0.28834 0.24087 0.23291 0.2387 0.2316 0.2286
Mean L index NA NA NA 0.2422 0.2388 0.2293
Worst L index NA NA NA 0.2498 0.2414 0.2317

Table 8 Comparison of simulation results obtained by different algorithms with STATCOM.

Control variables Real power loss minimization Voltage deviation minimization Voltage stability index minimization
PSO DE CRO PSO DE CRO PSO DE CRO
V1 (p.u.) 1.0277 1.0543 1.0561 1.0141 1.0162 1.0284 1.0255 1.0247 1.0304
V2 (p.u.) 1.0114 1.0415 1.0438 0.9906 1.0016 1.0193 1.0106 1.0092 1.0099
V3 (p.u.) 0.9927 1.0277 1.0362 0.9963 0.9939 1.0157 1.0007 1.0007 1.0025
V6 (p.u.) 0.9873 1.0168 1.0284 0.9906 0.9910 1.0107 1.0115 1.0128 1.0108
V8 (p.u.) 1.0092 1.0368 1.0513 1.0247 1.0224 1.0399 1.0519 1.0494 1.0494
V9 (p.u.) 0.9872 1.0167 1.0322 1.0248 1.0008 1.0134 1.0500 1.0592 1.0588
V12 (p.u.) 0.9868 1.0158 1.0274 1.0178 1.0113 1.0127 1.0570 1.0520 1.0579
T418 0.9097 0.9773 0.9001 1.0767 0.9739 1.0805 0.9019 0.9004 0.9038
T418 0.9490 0.9462 0.9003 0.9088 0.9923 0.9329 0.9033 0.9003 0.9055
T2120 1.0117 1.0030 0.9898 0.9717 0.9788 0.9749 1.0934 1.0995 1.0993
T2426 1.0057 1.0030 0.9888 1.0697 1.0712 1.0456 1.0999 1.0971 1.0970
T729 0.9258 0.9527 0.9022 0.9419 0.9416 0.9698 0.9027 0.9022 0.9010
T3432 0.9677 0.9745 0.9749 0.9136 0.9205 0.9070 0.9017 0.9032 0.9010
T1141 0.9006 0.9367 0.9001 0.9006 0.9006 0.9001 0.9004 0.9051 0.9040
T1545 0.9260 0.9531 0.9010 0.9557 0.9263 0.9334 0.9023 0.9052 0.9029
T1446 0.9079 0.9447 0.9006 0.9555 0.9439 0.9833 0.9013 0.9025 0.9060
T1051 0.9264 0.9520 0.9097 1.0078 0.9945 0.9897 0.9085 0.9044 0.9009
T1349 0.9002 0.9104 0.9008 0.9021 0.9029 0.9001 0.9012 0.9033 0.9003
T1143 0.9075 0.9339 0.9000 0.9434 0.9370 0.9378 0.9013 0.9037 0.9061
T4056 1.0027 1.0172 1.0154 1.0436 1.0312 1.0412 1.0982 1.0996 1.0986
T3957 0.9710 0.9771 0.9833 0.9221 0.9048 0.9133 1.0993 1.0989 1.0940
T955 0.9255 0.9511 0.9030 0.9940 0.9657 0.9813 0.9108 0.9144 0.9007
Qi18 (p.u.) 0.0998 0.0939 0.0985 0.0342 0.0776 0.0399 0.0903 0.0834 0.0983
QCi25 (p.u.) 0.0590 0.0590 0.0589 0.0589 0.0587 0.0590 0.0589 0.0572 0.0583
QCi53 (p.u.) 0.0628 0.0630 0.0630 0.0514 0.0353 0.0630 0.0617 0.0629 0.0627
Optimal location 31 33 45 38 37 37 42 27 29
Ep (p.u.) 1.0536 1.0488 1.0522 1.0645 1.0592 1.0537 1.0862 1.0695 1.0738
dp (deg) 8.2736 11.2892 10.1368 9.8017 8.3640 11.1346 9.0046 10.1862 11.1782
VSTATCOM (p.u.) 1.0483 1.0445 1.0497 1.0603 1.0486 1.0479 1.0764 1.0611 1.0685
SVD (p.u.) 1.1682 1.2012 2.1365 0.7008 0.6803 0.6533 3.9981 4.0867 4.1256
TL (MW) 24.4341 24.2316 23.8378 27.9103 27.1392 26.5963 28.1346 27.3458 27.8906
L-index 0.5784 0.5618 0.5901 0.2933 0.2983 0.2947 0.2297 0.2242 0.2193

TLBO [29], QOTLBO [29], SPEA [30], GA-1 [31] and GA-2 about the same and the variation is negligible. These facts
[32]. The statistical results reported in Table 3 show that the strongly demonstrate the robustness of the proposed CRO
best, worst and the average results obtained by CRO are near for the conventional ORPD problem. The worst and mean loss

Please cite this article in press as: Dutta S et al., Optimal location of STATCOM using chemical reaction optimization for reactive power dispatch problem, Ain Shams
Eng J (2015), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.asej.2015.04.013
10 S. Dutta et al.

Table 9 Statistical comparison (50 trials) among various methods for IEEE 57-bus with STATCOM.
Techniques Real power loss minimization Voltage deviation minimization Voltage stability index minimization
PSO DE CRO PSO DE CRO PSO DE CRO
Best 24.4341 24.2316 23.8378 0.7008 0.6803 0.6533 0.2297 0.2242 0.2193
Mean 25.9073 25.6371 23.8904 0.7075 0.6891 0.6541 0.2378 0.2316 0.2204
Worst 27.0068 26.9117 23.9655 0.7183 0.7011 0.6586 0.2405 0.2480 0.2237

of SPEA, GA-I and GA-2 are not available (NA) in the 34

DE
literature.
PSO

Transmission Loss (MW)

32
CRO
(ii) ORPD with STATCOM
30
In order to check the feasibility of the proposed method for
complicated network, it is applied to solve ORPD with 28
STATCOM of the same test system. The simulation results
of transmission loss, the controlled variables, optimal position 26
of STATCOM and its voltage rating obtained by PSO, DE
and CRO are shown in Table 4. The simulation results show
24
that using STATCOM the transmission loss has substantially
reduced for all the algorithms. Moreover, the results indicate 0 20 40 60 80 100
that the proposed CRO algorithm gives more reduction in loss Generation Cycles
(4.5297 MW) compared to PSO (4.5802 MW) and DE
(4.5493 MW). The convergence of minimal transmission loss Figure 4 Convergence characteristics of different algorithms for
with evolution generations shown in Fig. 3 certies the results transmission loss with STATCOM (IEEE 57-bus system).
of Table 4 vividly. Especially, CRO algorithm can not only
maintain the diversity of the objective function solutions at 0.36
the beginning of searching but also converge in the best solu- DE
0.34
tion at the later searching. The statistical results of CRO, PSO
Voltage Stability Index

DE and PSO are reported in Table 5. From Table 5 it is very 0.32 CRO
evident that CRO not only has found the highest quality
results among the all algorithms compared, but also possesses 0.3
the highest probability of nding the better solution for the
0.28
problem under consideration.
0.26
Case B: Voltage deviation minimization
0.24
The results obtained for this objective function by PSO, DE
and CRO without and with STATCOM devices are reported 0.22
in 5th, 6th and 7th columns of Tables 2 and 4, respectively. 0 20 40 60 80 100
It is observed from the simulation results that voltage devia- Generation Cycles
tion is improved by incorporating STATCOM from
0.1086 p.u. to 0.1013 p.u. by PSO, from 0.1029 p.u. to Figure 5 Convergence characteristics of different algorithms for
0.0928 p.u. by DE and from 0.0849 p.u. to 0.0803 p.u. by voltage stability index with STATCOM (IEEE 57-bus system).
CRO method. Moreover, it is observed that voltage deviation
using proposed CRO is better as compared to that obtained by
PSO and DE algorithms. The statistical results for voltage index minimization objective, before using FACTS devices in
deviation minimization objective illustrated in Tables 3 and the transmission network, the L-index obtained using PSO,
5, show the superiority of the proposed CRO method over DE and CRO was 0.1210 p.u., 0.1198 p.u. and 0.1156 p.u.,
other approaches. respectively. However, after installing STATCOM with opti-
mal settings in the optimized location using PSO, DE and
Case C: Minimization of L-index voltage stability CRO, the voltage stability index in the different buses is signif-
icantly reduced. However, the best L-index is obtained using
To further investigate the efciency of the proposed CRO CRO method for both the cases (i.e. without and with
method, it is applied on the same IEEE 30-bus system to min- STATCOM).
imize voltage stability index. The 8th10th columns of Tables 2
and 4 show the optimal settings of control variables, optimal 4.2. IEEE 57-bus system
locations and optimal parameter setting of STATCOM
obtained by applying PSO, DE and CRO techniques for nor- In order to assess the effectiveness and robustness of the pro-
mal and FACTs based ORPD problem. For voltage stability posed CRO method, a larger test system consisting of 57 buses

Please cite this article in press as: Dutta S et al., Optimal location of STATCOM using chemical reaction optimization for reactive power dispatch problem, Ain Shams
Eng J (2015), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.asej.2015.04.013
Optimal location of STATCOM 11

with and without STATCOM is considered to solve ORPD algorithm, simulations are carried out for conventional
problem. This system (IEEE 57-bus) consists of seven genera- ORPF problem and STATCOM based ORPD problems.
tor buses (the bus 1 is the slack bus and buses 2, 3, 6, 8, 9 and
12 are PV buses), fty load buses and 80 branches, in which Case A: Transmission loss minimization
branches (412, 2021, 2426, 729, 3234, 1141, 1545, (i) ORPD without STATCOM device
1446, 1051, 1349, 1143, 4056, 3957, and 955) are tap
changing transformers. In addition, buses 8, 25 and 53 are The optimal settings of control variables obtained by CRO,
selected as shunt compensation buses. The base load of the sys- PSO and DE for this case are illustrated in Table 6. It is noted
tem is 1272 MW and 298 MVAR. The full system data that all the state variables and control variables are in their
adopted from [38] are listed in Tables A4A6. The voltage specied limits. To assess the potential of the proposed
magnitude limits of all buses are set to 0.94 p.u. for lower approach, a comparison among the results obtained by the
bound and to 1.06 p.u. for upper bound. In this study, the CRO, DE, PSO approaches and those reported in the litera-
allowed steps for tap changers are between 0.9 and 1.1 p.u., ture are carried out. The results of this comparison are given
the allowed voltage changes are between 0.95 and 1.05. In in Table 7. It is worth mentioning that the comparison is car-
order to test and validate the robustness of the proposed ried out with the same control variable limits, and other system

Table A1 Transmission line data of IEEE 30 bus system.

Bus no. R (p.u.) X (p.u.) B/2 (p.u.) Bus no. R (p.u.) X (p.u.) B/2 (p.u.)
From To From To
1 2 0.0192 0.0575 0.0264 15 18 0.1073 0.2185 0.0000
1 3 0.0452 0.1852 0.0204 18 19 0.0639 0.1292 0.0000
2 4 0.057 0.1737 0.0184 19 20 0.0340 0.0680 0.0000
3 4 0.0132 0.0379 0.0042 10 20 0.0936 0.2090 0.0000
2 5 0.0472 0.1983 0.0209 10 17 0.0324 0.0845 0.0000
2 6 0.0581 0.1763 0.0187 10 21 0.0348 0.0749 0.0000
4 6 0.0119 0.0414 0.0045 10 22 0.0727 0.1499 0.0000
5 7 0.0460 0.1160 0.0102 21 22 0.0116 0.0236 0.0000
6 7 0.0267 0.0820 0.0085 15 23 0.1000 0.2020 0.0000
6 8 0.0120 0.0420 0.0045 22 24 0.1150 0.1790 0.0000
6 9 0.0000 0.2080 0.000 23 24 0.1320 0.2700 0.0000
6 10 0.0000 0.5560 0.000 24 25 0.1885 0.3292 0.0000
9 11 0.0000 0.2080 0.000 25 26 0.2544 0.3800 0.0000
9 10 0.0000 0.1100 0.000 25 27 0.1093 0.2087 0.0000
4 12 0.0000 0.2560 0.000 28 27 0.0000 0.3960 0.0000
12 13 0.0000 0.1400 0.000 27 29 0.2198 0.4153 0.0000
12 14 0.1231 0.2559 0.000 27 30 0.3202 0.6027 0.0000
12 15 0.0662 0.1304 0.000 29 30 0.2399 0.4533 0.0000
12 16 0.0945 0.1987 0.000 8 28 0.0636 0.2000 0.0214
14 15 0.2210 0.1997 0.000 6 28 0.0169 0.0599 0.0065
16 17 0.0524 0.1923 0.000

Table A2 Load data of IEEE 30 bus system.

Bus Load (p.u.) Bus Load (p.u.) Bus Load (p.u.)
no. no. no.
Active load Reactive load Active load Reactive load Active load Reactive load
(p.u.) (p.u.) (p.u.) (p.u.) (p.u.) (p.u.)
1 0 0 11 0.0000 0.0000 21 0.1750 0.1120
2 0.2170 0.1270 12 0.1120 0.0750 22 0.0000 0.0000
3 0.0240 0.0120 13 0.0000 0.0000 23 0.0320 0.0160
4 0.0760 0.0160 14 0.0620 0.0160 24 0.0870 0.0670
5 0.9420 0.1900 15 0.0820 0.0250 25 0.0000 0.0000
6 0.0000 0.0000 16 0.0350 0.0180 26 0.0350 0.0230
7 0.2280 0.1090 17 0.0900 0.0580 27 0.0000 0.0000
8 0.3000 0.3000 18 0.0320 0.0090 28 0.0000 0.0000
9 0.0000 0.0000 19 0.0950 0.0340 29 0.0240 0.0090
10 0.0580 0.0200 20 0.0220 0.0070 30 0.1060 0.0190

Please cite this article in press as: Dutta S et al., Optimal location of STATCOM using chemical reaction optimization for reactive power dispatch problem, Ain Shams
Eng J (2015), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.asej.2015.04.013
12 S. Dutta et al.

to minimize transmission loss STATCOM based power system

Table A3 Generators input data of IEEE 30 bus system.
network. The detailed simulation results of CRO, PSO and DE
Bus no. Pint (MW) Qmin (Mvar) Qmax (Mvar) are illustrated in Table 8. It is found that the active power
1 Slack power 0.00 10.0 losses achieved by the proposed CRO algorithm is equal
2 80.0 40.0 50.0 23.8378 MW while it is equal to 24.2316 MW and
5 50.0 40.0 40.0 24.4341 MW for DE and PSO methods, respectively. As can
8 20.0 10.0 40.0 be derived from the results, the proposed algorithm gives the
11 20.0 6.0 24.0 best performance in comparison with the PSO and DE meth-
13 20.0 6.0 24.0 ods. Moreover, to verify the robustness, the CRO, DE and
PSO algorithms are executed for 50 trials with different start-
data. Table 7 clearly shows that the CRO technique outper- ing points. Table 9 presents the minimum, maximum and aver-
forms PSO, PSO-w, PSO-cf, CLPSO, SPSO, CGA, AGA, age transmission loss produced by the proposed algorithm
DE, L-SACP-DE, SOA and GSA. comparing with the other reported results. It is worth mention-
ing that the best, mean and the worst loss obtained by the pro-
(ii) ORPD with STATCOM device posed CRO method are better than those obtained by the DE
and PSO methods, which clearly suggest the robustness of the
The effectiveness of the CRO method is further evaluated proposed CRO method. The convergence of optimal solution
by implementing the proposed method on IEEE 57-bus system using DE, PSO and CRO is shown in Fig. 4. It is found from

Table A4 Transmission line data of IEEE 57 bus system.

Bus no. R (p.u.) X (p.u.) B/2 (p.u.) Bus no. R (p.u.) X (p.u.) B/2 (p.u.)
From To From To
1 2 0.0083 0.028 0.129 7 29 0 0.0648 0
2 3 0.0298 0.085 0.0818 25 30 0.135 0.202 0
3 4 0.0112 0.0366 0.038 30 31 0.326 0.497 0
4 5 0.0625 0.132 0.0258 31 32 0.507 0.755 0
4 6 0.043 0.148 0.0348 32 33 0.0392 0.036 0
6 7 0.02 0.102 0.0276 34 32 0 0.953 0
6 8 0.0339 0.173 0.047 34 35 0.052 0.078 0.0032
8 9 0.0099 0.0505 0.0548 35 36 0.043 0.0537 0.0016
9 10 0.0369 0.1679 0.044 36 37 0.029 0.0366 0
9 11 0.0258 0.0848 0.0218 37 38 0.0651 0.1009 0.002
9 12 0.0648 0.295 0.0772 37 39 0.0239 0.0379 0
9 13 0.0481 0.158 0.0406 36 40 0.03 0.0466 0
13 14 0.0132 0.04340 0.011 22 38 0.0192 0.0295 0
13 15 0.0269 0.0869 0.023 11 41 0 0.749 0
1 15 0.0178 0.091 0.0988 41 42 0.207 0.352 0
1 16 0.0454 0.206 0.0546 41 43 0 0.412 0
1 17 0.0238 0.108 0.0286 38 44 0.0289 0.0585 0.002
3 15 0.0162 0.053 0.0544 15 45 0 0.1042 0
4 18 0 0.555 0 14 46 0 0.0735 0
4 18 0 0.43 0 46 47 0.023 0.068 0.0032
5 6 0.0302 0.0641 0.0124 47 48 0.0182 0.0233 0
7 8 0.0139 0.0712 0.0194 48 49 0.0834 0.129 0.0048
10 12 0.0277 0.1262 0.0328 49 50 0.0801 0.128 0
11 13 0.0223 0.0732 0.0188 50 51 0.1386 0.22 0
12 13 0.0178 0.058 0.0604 10 51 0 0.0712 0
12 16 0.018 0.0813 0.0216 13 49 0 0.191 0
12 17 0.0397 0.179 0.0476 29 52 0 0.1442 0.187
14 15 0.0171 0.0547 0.0148 52 53 0.0762 0.0984 0
18 19 0.461 0.685 0 53 54 0.1878 0.232 0
19 20 0.283 0.434 0 54 55 0.1732 0.2265 0
21 20 0 0.7767 0 11 43 0 0.153 0
21 22 0.0736 0.117 0 44 45 0.0624 0.1242 0.004
22 23 0.0099 0.0152 0 40 56 0 1.195 0
23 24 0.166 0.256 0.0084 56 41 0.553 0.549 0
24 25 0 1.182 0 56 42 0.2125 0.354 0
24 25 0 1.23 0 39 57 0 1.355 0
24 26 0 0.0473 0 57 56 0.174 0.26 0
26 27 0.165 0.254 0 38 49 0.115 0.177 0.003
27 28 0.0618 0.0954 0 38 48 0.0312 0.0482 0
28 29 0.0418 0.0587 0 9 55 0 0.1205 0

Please cite this article in press as: Dutta S et al., Optimal location of STATCOM using chemical reaction optimization for reactive power dispatch problem, Ain Shams
Eng J (2015), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.asej.2015.04.013
Optimal location of STATCOM 13

the convergence graphs that for CRO only about 45 iterations demonstrate that the L-index reduction accomplished using
are needed to nd the optimal solution. However, for both DE the CRO approach is better than that obtained by the other
and PSO, almost 85 iterations are required to achieve optimal approaches. Hence, the conclusion can be drawn that CRO
results. is better than all the other listed algorithms in terms of global
search capacity and local search precision. Furthermore, it can
Case B: Voltage deviation minimization be seen that all the control variables optimized by the various
discussed methods are acceptably kept within the limits. Fig. 5
Here, PSO, DE and CRO approaches are applied on the shows the convergence performance of algorithms with the
same test system with the objective of voltage deviation mini- evolution process. It shows that, compared with PSO, and
mization without and with STATCOM devices. The corre- DE, CRO has faster convergence speed and needs lesser itera-
sponding results obtained by the different methods are listed tion cycles to achieve the optimal L-index level. The statistical
in the 5th7th columns of Tables 6 and 8. The voltage devia- results of L-index minimization objective for normal and
tion value obtained by PSO, DE and CRO methods is STATCOM based ORPD problem are illustrated in the last
0.7135 p.u., 0.6919 p.u. and 0.6724 p.u., respectively, for three columns of Tables 7 and 9, respectively. The statistical
ORPD without FACTS. After incorporating the results clearly suggest the robustness of the proposed methods
STATCOM, voltage deviation value obtained by PSO, DE over other discussed methods.
and CRO methods is 0.7008 p.u., 0.6803 p.u. and 0.6533
p.u., respectively. This clearly suggests that voltage deviation 5. Conclusion
has been signicantly reduced by incorporating STATCOM
in optimal location. However, the simulation results indicate Chemical reaction optimization (CRO) has proven to be an
that reduction of voltage deviation obtained by CRO is best efcient nonlinear optimization technique for solving different
among all the discussed algorithms for both normal ORPD types of real world problems of various eld of engineering. In
and FACTS based ORPD problems. This fact clearly suggests this article CRO is used to nd the optimal location of
that CRO outperforms PSO and DE in terms of solution STATCOM for solving optimal reactive power dispatch
quality. (ORPD) problem. Minimization of the transmission loss,
improvement of the voltage prole and voltage stability are
Case C: Minimization of L-index voltage stability considered as the objective function to evaluate the system per-
formance. It is observed that the STATCOM can reduce the
Finally, PSO, DE and CRO techniques are applied for L- transmission loss, voltage deviation and voltage stability index
index minimization on IEEE 57-bus system to test the superi- of a power system network effectively. Moreover, for all the
ority of the proposed CRO approach. The optimal control three different objectives, CRO produces better solutions than
variables, TL, VD, and L-index values obtained using PSO, so far best known results by any other method. Furthermore,
DE and CRO approaches in the IEEE 57-bus power system from the statistical comparative results, it is found that the
for L-index minimization objective of normal ORPD and proposed CRO algorithm is robust and suitable for sizing
STATCOM based ORPD are elaborated in the columns 8th and locating STATCOM devices in power system transmission
10th of Tables 6 and 8, respectively. The results clearly system. Considering all these results of the study for ORPD

Table A5 Load data of IEEE 57 bus system.

Bus Load (p.u.) Bus Load (p.u.) Bus Load (p.u.)
no. no. no.
Active load Reactive load Active load Active load Active load Reactive load
(p.u.) (p.u.) (p.u.) (p.u.) (p.u.) (p.u.)
1 0.55 0.17 20 0.023 0.01 39 0.00 0.00
2 0.03 0.88 21 0.00 0.00 40 0.00 0.00
3 0.41 0.21 22 0.00 0.00 41 0.063 0.03
4 0.00 0.00 23 0.063 0.021 42 0.071 0.044
5 0.13 0.04 24 0.00 0.00 43 0.02 0.01
6 0.75 0.02 25 0.063 0.032 44 0.12 0.018
7 0.00 0.00 26 0.00 0.00 45 0.00 0.00
8 1.50 0.22 27 0.093 0.005 46 0.00 0.00
9 1.21 0.26 28 0.046 0.023 47 0.297 0.116
10 0.05 0.02 29 0.17 0.026 48 0.00 0.00
11 0.00 0.00 30 0.036 0.018 49 0.18 0.085
12 3.77 0.24 31 0.056 0.029 50 0.21 0.105
13 0.18 0.023 32 0.016 0.008 51 0.18 0.053
14 0.105 0.053 33 0.038 0.019 52 0.049 0.022
15 0.22 0.05 34 0.00 0.00 53 0.20 0.10
16 0.43 0.03 35 0.06 0.03 54 0.041 0.014
17 0.42 0.08 36 0.00 0.00 55 0.068 0.034
18 0.272 0.098 37 0.00 0.00 56 0.076 0.022
19 0.033 0.06 38 0.14 0.07 57 0.067 0.02

Please cite this article in press as: Dutta S et al., Optimal location of STATCOM using chemical reaction optimization for reactive power dispatch problem, Ain Shams
Eng J (2015), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.asej.2015.04.013
14 S. Dutta et al.

[12] Guo L, Ding X, Chen G, Song J, Cui Q, Liu W. A combination

Table A6 Generators input data of IEEE 57 bus system. strategy for reactive power optimization based on model of soft
Bus no. Pint (MW) Qmin (Mvar) Qmax (Mvar) constrain considered interior point method and genetic simu-
lated annealing algorithm. In: International conference on infor-
1 Slack 20 150
mation science and management engineering (ISME), vol. 2; 2010.
2 0 17 50
p. 1514.
3 40 10 60
[13] Wennan L, Yihua L, Xingtao X, Maojun I. Reactive power
6 0 8 25
optimization in area power grid based on improved Tabu search
8 45 140 20
algorithm. In: Third international conference on electric utility
9 0 3 9
deregulation and restructuring and power technologies, DRPT;
12 31 150 155
2008. p. 147277.
[14] Zou Y. Optimal reactive power planning based on improved Tabu
search algorithm. In: International Conference on Electrical and
problems with different characteristics, dimensions, and con- Control Engineering (ICECE); 2010. p. 39458.
straints it can be concluded that CRO performs better, at least [15] Shaheen HI, Rashed GI, Cheng SJ. Application of differential
matching many of the previously reported methods. evolution algorithm for optimal location and parameters setting
of UPFC considering power system security. Eur Trans Electr
Power 2009;19(7):91132.
[16] Chao-Ming H, Shin-Ju C, Yann-Chang H, Sung-Pei Y. Optimal
Appendix A active-reactive power dispatch using an enhanced differential
evolution algorithm. In: 6th IEEE Conference on Industrial
Electronics and Applications (ICIEA); 2011. p. 186974.
See Tables A1A6. [17] Zhao B, Guo CX, Cao YJ. A multiagent-based particle swarm
optimization approach for optimal reactive power dispatch. IEEE
References Trans Power Syst 2005;20(2):10708.
[18] Niknam T, Narimani MR, Jabbari M. Dynamic optimal power
[1] Hingorani NG, Gyugyi L. Understanding FACTS: concepts and ow using hybrid particle swarm optimization and simulated
technology of exible AC transmission systems. New York: IEEE annealing. Int Trans Electr Energy Syst 2013;23(7):9751001.
Press; 2001. [19] Karaboga D, Basturk B. A powerful and efcient algorithm for
[2] Galiana FD, Almeida K, Toussaint M, Grifn J, Atanackovic D, numerical function optimization: articial bee colony (ABC)
Ooi BT, McGillis DT. Assessment and control of the impact of algorithm. J Global Optim 2007;39(3):45971.
FACTS devices on power system performance. IEEE Trans Power [20] Sirjani R, Mohamed A, Shareef H. Optimal allocation of shunt
Syst 1996;11(4):19316. Var compensators in power systems using a novel global harmony
[3] Urdaneta AJ, Gomez JF, Sorrentino E, Flores L, Diaz R. A search algorithm. Int J Electr Power Energy Syst 2012;
hybrid genetic algorithm for optimal reactive power planning 43(1):56272.
based upon successive linear programming. IEEE Trans Power [21] Saravanan M, Raja M, Slochanal SMR, Venkatesh P, Abraham
Syst 1999;14(4):12928. JPS. Application of particle swarm optimization technique for
[4] Grudinin N. Reactive power optimization using successive optimal location of FACTS devices considering cost of installa-
quadratic programming method. IEEE Trans Power Syst tion and system loadability. Electr Pow Syst Res 2007;
1998;13(4):121925. 77(3):27683.
[5] Lai LL, Ma JT. Application of evolutionary programming to [22] Xiao Y, Song YH. Power ow studies of a large practical power
reactive power planning-comparison with nonlinear programming network with embedded facts devices using improved optimal
approach. IEEE Trans Power Syst 1997;12(1):198206. multiplier NewtonRaphson method. Eur Trans Electr Power
[6] Kim DH, Lee JH, Hong SH, Kim SR. A mixed-integer 2001;11(4):24756.
programming approach for the linearized reactive power and [23] Ghadir R, Reshma SR. Power ow model/calculation for power
voltage control-comparison with gradient projection approach. systems with multiple FACTS controllers. Electr Power Syst Res
In: International conference on energy management and power 2007;77:152131.
delivery, proceed of EMPD, vol. 1; 1998. p. 6772. [24] Lam AYS, Li VOK. Chemical-reaction-inspired metaheuristic for
[7] Amjady N, Ansari MR. Non-convex security constrained optimal optimization. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 2010;14(3):38199.
power ow by a new solution method composed of Benders [25] Li JQ, Pan QK. Chemical-reaction optimization for exible job-
decomposition and special ordered sets. Int Trans Electr Energy shop scheduling problems with maintenance activity. Appl Soft
Syst 2014;24(6):84257. Comput 2012;12(9):2896912.
[8] Venkatesh P, Gnanadas R, Padhy NP. Comparison and applica- [26] Szeto WY, Wang Y, Wong SC. The chemical reaction optimiza-
tion of evolutionary programming techniques to combined tion approach to solving the environmentally sustainable network
economic emission dispatch with line ow constrained. IEEE design problem. Comput-Aided Civil Inf Eng; 2013.
Trans Power Syst 2003;18:68897. [27] Dai C, Chen W, Zhu Y, Zhang X. Reactive power dispatch
[9] Wei Y, Fang L, Chung CY, Wong KP. A hybrid genetic considering voltage stability with seeker optimization algorithm.
algorithm-interior point method for optimal reactive power ow. Electric Power Syst Res 2009;79:146271.
IEEE Trans Power Syst 2006;21(3):11639. [28] Roy PK, Mandal B, Bhattacharya K. Gravitational search
[10] Zhihuan L, Yinhong L, Xianzhong D. Non-dominated algorithm based optimal reactive power dispatch for voltage
sorting genetic algorithm-II for robust multi-objective opti- stability enhancement. Electr Power Compon Syst 2012;40:
mal reactive power dispatch. IET Gener Transm Distrib 95676.
2010;4(9):10008. [29] Mandal B, Roy PK. Optimal reactive power dispatch using quasi-
[11] Keyan L, Wanxing S, Yunhua L. Research on reactive power oppositional teaching learning based optimization. Int J Electr
optimization based on adaptive genetic simulated annealing Power Energy Syst 2013;53:12334.
algorithm. In: International conference on power system tech, [30] Abido MA. Multiobjective optimal VAR dispatch using strength
Power Con; 2006. p. 16. pareto evolutionary algorithm. Vancouver, BC, Canada: IEEE
Congress on Evolutionary Computation; 2006.

Please cite this article in press as: Dutta S et al., Optimal location of STATCOM using chemical reaction optimization for reactive power dispatch problem, Ain Shams
Eng J (2015), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.asej.2015.04.013
Optimal location of STATCOM 15

[31] Subburaj P, Sudha N, Rajeswari K, Ramar K, Ganesan L. Dr. Provas Kumar Roy was born in 1973 at
Optimum reactive power dispatch using genetic algorithm. Acad Mejia, Bankura, West Bengal, India. He
Open Internet J 2007:21. received the BE degree in Electrical
[32] Devaraj D, Roselyn JP. Genetic algorithm based reactive power Engineering from R.E. College, Durgapur,
dispatch for voltage stability improvement. Int J Electr Power Burdwan, India in 1997; ME degree in
Energy Syst 2010;32(10):11516. Electrical Machine from Jadavpur University,
[33] Duraira S, Kannan PS, Devaraj D. Multi-objective VAR dispatch Kolkata, India in 2001 and PhD from NIT
using particle swarm optimization. Emerg Electr Power Syst Durgapur in 2011. Presently he is working as
2005;4(1). Professor in the department of Electrical
[34] Abou El Ela AA, Abido MA, Spea SR. Differential evolution Engineering, Dr. B.C. Roy Engineering
algorithm for optimal reactive power dispatch. Electr Power Syst College, Durgapur, India. He has published
Res 2011;81(2):45864. more than 15 research papers in international journals. His eld of
[35] Shaw B, Mukherjee V, Ghoshal SP. Solution of reactive power research interest includes Economic Load Dispatch, Optimal Power
dispatch of power systems by an opposition-based gravitational ow, FACTS, Unit Commitment, Automatic Generation Control,
search algorithm. Int J Electr Power Energy Syst 2014;55:2940. Power System Stabilizer and Evolutionary computing techniques.
[36] Chen G, Liu L, Song P, Du Y. Chaotic improved PSO-based
multi-objective optimization for minimization of power losses and
L index in power systems. Energy Convers Manage 2014;86: Dr. Debashis Nandi received his B.E. degree in
54860. Electronics and Communication Engineering
[37] Basu M. Optimal power ow with FACTS devices using differ- from R.E. College, Durgapur (University of
ential evolution. Int J Electr Power Energy Syst 2008;30(2):1506. Burdwan), India, in 1994 and M. Tech.
[38] Zimmerman RD, Murillo-Sanchez CE, Gan D. Matlab power Degree from Burdwan University on
system simulation package (version 3.1b2) 2006 <http://www. Microwave Engineering in 1997. He received
pserc.cornell.edu/matpower/>. his Ph.D degree from IIT, Kharagpur, India
on Medical Imaging Technology in 2012. His
area of research includes Computer security
Susanta Dutta was born in 1976 at Bankura, and cryptography, Secure chaotic communi-
West Bengal, India. He received the BE degree cation, Image processing, Medical imaging,
in Electrical Engineering from Dr. B.C. Roy Video coding. He has published more than 10 research papers in
Engineering College, Durgapur, Burdwan, national and international journals and two patents. He is an Associate
India in 2004; ME degree from NIT Professor in the Department of Information Technology, National
Durgapur, India in 2007. Presently he is Institute of Technology, Durgapur, India. E-mail: debashisn2@
working as Assistant Professor in the depart- gmail.com
ment of Electrical Engineering, Dr. B.C. Roy
Engineering College, Durgapur, India. His
eld of research interest includes Economic
Load Dispatch, Optimal Power ow, FACTS,
Automatic Generation Control, Evolutionary computing techniques.

Please cite this article in press as: Dutta S et al., Optimal location of STATCOM using chemical reaction optimization for reactive power dispatch problem, Ain Shams
Eng J (2015), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.asej.2015.04.013
View publication stats