sustainability

Article
A Novel Analytical Approach for Optimal Placement and
Sizing of Distributed Generations in Radial Electrical Energy
Distribution Systems
Sasan Azad 1 , Mohammad Mehdi Amiri 1 , Morteza Nazari Heris 2, * , Ali Mosallanejad 1
and Mohammad Taghi Ameli 1

1 Faculty of Electrical Engineering, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran 0098, Iran; sa_azad@sbu.ac.ir (S.A.);
mehdi_hmf@yahoo.com (M.M.A.); a_mosallanejad@sbu.ac.ir (A.M.); mtameli@yahoo.com (M.T.A.)
2 Department of Architectural Engineering, Pennsylvania State University, State College, PA 16802, USA
* Correspondence: mun369@psu.edu

Abstract: Considering the strong influence of distributed generation (DG) in electric distribution
systems and its impact on network voltage losses and stability, a new challenge has appeared for
such systems. In this study, a novel analytical algorithm is proposed to distinguish the optimal
location and size of DGs in radial distribution networks based on a new combined index (CI) to
reduce active power losses and improve system voltage profiles. To obtain the CI, active power losses
and voltage stability indexes were used in the proposed approach. The CI index with sensitivity
analysis was effective in decreasing power losses and improving voltage stability. Optimal DG size



was determined based on a search algorithm to reduce active power losses. The considered scheme


was examined through IEEE 12-bus and 33-bus radial distribution test systems (RDTS), and the
Citation: Azad, S.; Amiri, M.M.;
obtained results were compared and validated in comparison with other available methods. The
Heris, M.N.; Mosallanejad, A.;
results and analysis verified the effectiveness of the proposed algorithm in reducing power losses
Ameli, M.T. A Novel Analytical
and improving the distribution system voltage profiles by determining the appropriate location and
Approach for Optimal Placement and
Sizing of Distributed Generations in optimal DG size. In IEEE 12 and 33 bus networks, the minimum voltage increased from 0.9434 p.u
Radial Electrical Energy Distribution and 0.9039 p.u to 0.9907 p.u and 0.9402 p.u, respectively. Additionally, the annual cost of energy
Systems. Sustainability 2021, 13, 10224. losses decreased by 78.23% and 64.37%, respectively.
https://doi.org/10.3390/
su131810224 Keywords: DG placement; voltage stability; active power losses; combined index; radial distribution
test systems
Academic Editor: Lin Li

Received: 2 August 2021

Accepted: 7 September 2021 1. Introduction
Published: 13 September 2021
Nowadays, the need for electricity consumption has increased, considering the in-
crement of domestic, industrial, commercial, and agricultural consumption due to the
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral
growth of the world’s population and economic development. By investing in power plant
with regard to jurisdictional claims in
published maps and institutional affil-
structures, the development of transmission and distribution lines can meet the demand
iations.
for electricity. However, investing in these sectors, in addition to requiring a lot of time,
imposes huge costs on governments and the electricity industry. If distributed generation
resources supply a part of consumers’ electricity, it will significantly reduce these costs.
Despite the advantages of installing distributed generation (DG) resources, their challenges
and technical barriers need to be addressed.
Copyright: © 2021 by the authors.
In addition to having advantages such as voltage profile improvement [1], reduction
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
of losses [2], increased reliability [3], and reduced overall harmonic distortion of voltage [1],
This article is an open access article
DG construction has requirements that need to be considered. By installing DG, the
distributed under the terms and
conditions of the Creative Commons
network becomes an active network, and parameters such as network voltage profile and
Attribution (CC BY) license (https://
stability should be paid more attention. One of the issues that must be mentioned is the
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ better optimization technique for DG placement in the distribution system. Putting DG
4.0/). in a non-optimal way in the distribution system may weaken voltage stability, reduce

Sustainability 2021, 13, 10224. https://doi.org/10.3390/su131810224 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability

Sustainability 2021, 13, 10224 2 of 17

power quality, and increase network losses [4]. Therefore, the best location and size for DG
installation should be selected for maximum and efficient DG installation utilization [5].
Numerous articles have so far examined the optimal location of DG. These articles are
generally divided into two types. The first type is articles that are based on mathematical-
based analytical methods, and the second type uses meta-innovative methods. In the
following section, different articles from both types are examined.

1.1. Analytical Methods

In [6], the optimal DG location was obtained using a new voltage stability index
(VSI), and its optimal size was based on the reduction of active losses. The authors also
investigated the effect of load increase on optimal DG placement. The authors in [7] used
a new methodology to optimize DG placement using continuous power flow. In this
reference, the buses with lower voltage safety levels were first identified, and the DG was
installed in place of those buses. The effect of DG location on voltage stability and loss
reduction has also been investigated. In [8], using voltage stability techniques, a method
for optimal DG placement in distribution systems was presented. The voltage stability
technique was based on modal analysis and continuous power flow. Additionally, the
objective function was to reduce the voltage stability limit and minimize network losses.
In [9], the optimal placement of DG was discussed based on increasing voltage stability and
reducing network losses simultaneously with the introduction of a new method. In this
method, the vulnerable buses are first selected in terms of voltage stability using bifurcation
analysis as suitable buses for DG installation. Then, the number of DGs is selected to place
the bus voltage within the allowable range, and finally, the optimal size of the DGs is
obtained using the dynamic programming search method. In [10], the authors used the
power stability index (PSI), a measure of voltage stability, as a benchmark for installing DG.
The optimal DG size was also selected based on the reduction of network power losses.
The use of the proposed algorithm in DG placement improved the voltage profile and
reduced power losses. The simulation results were compared with the golden section
search algorithm and validated. The optimal placement of DG units using an improved
analytical method and a loss sensitivity factor method was presented in [2]. In [11], a
new analysis index was presented to locate and determine the optimal size of DG. The
proposed index is a combination of the voltage stability index, the loss sensitivity factor,
and reliability-based factors. The DG placement index (DGPI), which is presented in this
article to select the optimal DG installation location, is expressed as the weighted sum of
the mentioned indicators. In the studied networks, each bus with the highest DGPI value
is selected as a suitable place to install DG. The optimal size of DG is also selected so that
the DGPI value has the lowest value. In [8], a DG placement problem was solved based
on voltage stability analysis as a security measure. Modal analysis and continuous power
flow were used in a hierarchal placement algorithm. Additionally, a modified equivalent
reactive compensation method was proposed to provide a priority list of DG locations for
compensating reactive power during reactive power shortages.

1.2. Meta-Innovative Methods

In [12], the particle swarm optimization (PSO) algorithm was used to optimize DG
units to reduce power losses and improve voltage profiles. In [13], the invasive weed
optimization algorithm was used for optimal DG placement. In this reference, the loss
sensitivity factor was used to create the priority list for DG installation. The whale optimiza-
tion algorithm (WOA) was used to place DG optimally as a multi-objective in [4]. Target
functions included minimizing energy losses and operating costs as well as improving
voltage profiles. In [14], the modified teaching–learning based optimization (MOTLBO)
algorithm was used to optimize the DG units. In [15], DG optimization was performed
by considering load and generation uncertainty using a genetic algorithm (GA). Load and
generation uncertainty were modeled using a fuzzy-based approach. In [16], the authors
presented a new algorithm that combined genetic and SA algorithms to optimize the
Sustainability 2021, 13, 10224 3 of 17

placement of DG. In this reference, a numerical example shows the proposed algorithm’s
superiority over the simple genetic algorithm. In [17], ant colony optimization (ACO) and
artificial bee colony (ABO) algorithms have solved locating and determining DG size. In
this paper, the problem is modeled on statistics and probabilities, and the uncertainties
in planning are taken into account. In [18], the authors suggested using the bacterial
foraging optimization (BFO) algorithm to solve the DG optimal placement problem. The
authors in [19] used quantum-inspired particle swarm optimization (Q-PSO) for the op-
timal allocation of distributed generation units. In [20], a hybrid genetic particle swarm
optimization algorithm for the optimal allocation of distributed generation was developed.
This paper aimed to reduce active and reactive power losses and voltage regulations in the
system. In [21], a new method called Harris Hawks optimization was used to optimally
locate and determine the capacity of distributed generation units in a radial distribution
network. In this method, the authors aimed to minimize lost power, and they compared
the performance of this method with similar methods of heuristic optimization. In [22], a
new hybrid method was used to locate and determine the optimal size of DG, with the aim
of reducing power losses. The combined technique was the continuous execution of both
the grasshopper optimization algorithm (GOA) and the cuckoo search (CS). In this paper,
GOA optimization behavior was improved using the CS technique. In [23], modified moth
flame optimization (MMFO) was proposed to locate and determine the optimal size of DG.
The purpose of this paper was to minimize the cost of operating the entire network by
minimizing active power losses, bus voltage deviations, the cost of operating the DG, and
the cost of emissions.
The main motivation of this work is to provide a new and simple analytical method
for the optimal placement and sizing of DG. In this paper, we have tried to present a
simple but efficient method in which voltage stability and active power loss are considered
together; hence, a voltage stability index (VSI) and an active power losses index (APLI) are
presented to specify the optimal location of DG. The VSI, from a mathematical point of view,
is obtained by considering the sensitivity of the voltage to active power. The combination
of the two proposed indicators is used as a combined index (CI) to determine the optimal
location of DG, reduce active power losses, and increase network voltage stability. By
implementing the DG units in power system buses, the bus that simultaneously impacts
the system through a reduction of active power losses and an increase in network voltage
stability has the largest CI and is selected as the candidate bus. By selecting the candidate
bus, the DG size is determined by the search algorithm in order to reduce active power
losses and observe the allowable voltage range. The proposed method is tested on IEEE 12-
bus [24] and 33-bus [25] RDTSs for unity power factor (pf), 0.9 lagging, and optimal power
factor (OPF). Then, the results of the combined power loss sensitivity (CPLS) method [26],
the VSI method [6], and the index vector (IV) method [26] are compared in unity and the
0.9 lagging power factor.
The structure of the paper is as follows. In Section 2, the formulation of the problem is
presented. In this section, a new analytical method is used for optimal DG placement. In
Section 3, the discussion and simulation results are reviewed, and, finally, in Section 4, the
paper’s overall conclusion is discussed.

2. Problem Formulation
2.1. Mathematical Model of the Proposal Indicators for Optimal DG Placement
Determining the optimal DG location requires methods that reduce distribution net-
work losses and costs while considering voltage stability and network security. To specify
the proper and optimal location placement of DG, two indicators of voltage stability assess-
ment and reduction of active losses are presented in the current work. From a mathematical
point of view, the voltage stability assessment index is obtained by considering the power
system’s voltage collapse characteristics and can provide a comprehensive assessment of
network voltage stability status.
 2.1.1. New Voltage Stability Index (NVSI)
The mathematical model of the considered VSI for DG placement is presented in this
section. The system studied is shown in Figure 1. The proposed index is obtained using
Sustainability 2021, 13, 10224 4 of 17
the transmission power in lines and a quadratic voltage equation based on the ABCD pa-
rameters of the transmission line. The line capacitor increases with increasing line length
and cannot be ignored; for this reason, in addition to the impedance of lines, the line’s
capacitance is also Stability
2.1.1. New Voltage considered in the
Index ABCD parameters. Therefore, the proposed index,
(NVSI)
considering all conditions
The mathematical of transmission
model lines,VSI
of the considered performs
for DGaplacement
voltage stability assessment.
is presented in this
The NVSI is modeled as follows:
section. The system studied is shown in Figure 1. The proposed index is obtained using
= AV R + B
the transmission power in lines andVaS quadratic voltage
IR equation based on the ABCD
parameters of the transmission line. The line capacitor increases (1)
with increasing line length
I S = CV R + DI R
and cannot be ignored; for this reason, in addition to the impedance of lines, the line’s
By representing
capacitance the above in
is also considered equations
the ABCD as aparameters.
matrix, we have:
Therefore, the proposed index,
considering all conditions of transmission lines, performs a voltage stability assessment.
 YZ 
The NVSI is modeled as 1+ Z 
V Sfollows:
  A B  V R   2 V R 
 =  I  =    (2)
I
 S   C D VS =
R AVR + BIR
Y(1 +
Y Z
) 1+
Y Z  I R 
IS = CVR + DIR2 2  (1)

SS SR V
VS δ R 0
R+jX
Y Y
2 2

Figure
Figure 1.
1. The
The two-bus
two-bus system
system studied
studied for
for modeling
modeling the
the voltage
voltage stability
stability index.
index.

If
Bywe have
representing the above equations as a matrix, we have:
  A= A ∠ θ A
, B = B ∠ θ B, C = C YZ
∠ θ C , D = D ∠ θ
D 
VS A B VR 1+ 2 Z VR
= = YZ YZ (2)
Additionally, C of
IS the values D 𝑉 and IR 𝑉 are equal
Y(1 +to:2 ) 1+ 2
IR

If we have VS =VS ∠δ,VR =VR ∠0

A=
In the following, we| A |∠θcalculate
first A , B = | B |∠ , C =at|C
theθ Bflow |∠end
the | D |∠
θC, Dof=the line:
θD

P − jQ R equal
Additionally, the values of VIS and P − jQ
= RVR are
R = R to: R (3)
V R* V R ∠0
VS = |VS |∠δ, VR = |VR |∠0
Using (2), the voltage at the beginning of the line can be obtained as follows:
In the following, we first calculate the flow at the end of the line:
P − jQ R
V S ∠δ = A ∠θA ×V R ∠0 + B ∠θB × I R = A ∠θA ×V R ∠0 + B ∠θB × R (4)
P − jQ P − jQ R V R ∠0
IR = R ∗ R = R (3)
V V ∠0
By multiplying the sides of (8) in 𝑉 R, we have: R
Using (2), the voltage at the beginning of2the line can be obtained as follows:
VSV R ∠δ = A∠θA ×V R + B ∠θB ×( PR − jQR ) (5)
P − jQ
VS ∠δ =
Separate A∠
the × VRimaginary
θ A and
real × IRof=(5),
∠0 + B∠θ Bparts θ A ×we
A∠and ∠0 +
VRwill ∠θ B ×in RplacingR the real
beBequal (4)
VR ∠0
parts of the sides:
By multiplying the sides of (8) in VR , we have:

VS VR ∠δ = A∠θ A × VR 2 + B∠θ B × ( PR − jQ R ) (5)

Separate the real and imaginary parts of (5), and we will be equal in placing the real
parts of the sides:

VR 2 A cos(θ A ) − VR VS cos(δ) + ( PR B cos(θ B ) + Q R B sin(θ B )) = 0 (6)

Sustainability 2021, 13, 10224 5 of 17

Voltage sensitivity to active power of the receiving side, according to (6), is equal to:

dVR −B
= cos ( ) cos(δ)
(7)
dPR θ
2VR A cos(θA) − VS cos(θ )
B B

The condition for the system to remain stable is that (11) is negative. B is always
positive, so we have:
cos(θ A ) cos(δ)
2VR A − VS >0 (8)
cos(θ B ) cos(θ B )
Therefore, according to (8), the following inequality must always be maintained to
maintain voltage stability.
2VR A cos(θ A )
>1 (9)
VS cos(δ)
Due to (9), the voltage stability index is defined as follows:

2VR A cos(θ A )
NVSI = (2 − ) (10)
VS cos(δ)

The proposed index varies between zero, which indicates the state of no-load, and one,
which indicates the state of voltage collapse. How to get the boundary values is as follows:

VS = AVR + BIR
(11)
IS = CVR + DIR

In no-load conditions, where IR = 0, we have:

VS = AVR
(12)
δ = θA

The index’s value is obtained by placing (12) in (10), NVSI = 0, which is the lower
limit of the proposed index.
To obtain the upper limit of the proposed index, the value of the index at the point
of voltage collapse is used in a way that when we approach the point of instability on the
P − V curve, the value of dV R
dP tends to infinity, then:
R

dVR
=∞ (13)
dPR

cos(θ A ) cos(δ)
2VR A − VS =0 (14)
cos(θ B ) cos(θ B )
2VR A cos(θ A ) = VS cos(δ) (15)
By placing (15) in (10), the index’s value is obtained, NVSI = 1, which is the upper
limit of the proposed index. According to (10), if we show the number of lines with j, the
value of the NVSI for each line is obtained as follows:


2VRj A j cos θ Aj
NVSIj = (2 −
) (16)
VSj cos δj

To have a comprehensive index to voltage stability assessment of the entire system,

the overall new voltage stability index (ONVSI) is defined as follows:

l
∑ NVSIj
j =1
ONVSIi = (17)
ONVSIinitial
Sustainability 2021, 13, 10224 6 of 17

where ONVSIinitial is the sum of the index values of lines without DG installation.

2.1.2. Active Power Loss Reduction Index (APLRI)

In this section, the APLRI is presented to choose and nominate buses for DG installa-
tion. To calculate the index, it is necessary to inject active power into all buses except the
slack bus. By performing power flow, the loss reduction (LR) is obtained compared to the
initial state. The active power losses index is calculated using (18):

LRi − LRmin
APLRIi = (18)
LRmax − LRmin

Buses that have higher APLI are more suitable for DG installation. This index selects
the buses that reduce network losses most by installing DG as the candidate bus.

2.1.3. Combined Index

For the distribution network to receive the most benefit from DG installation, the
DG installation’s impact on the network must first be examined with an appropriate
index. Reducing losses and increasing voltage stability are influential in determining
the DG installation location and size. APLI and NVSI are provided to assess the DG
installation location’s impact on reducing losses and improving network voltage stability
levels, respectively. In this section, a combined index is provided to determine the optimal
location of the DG installation.
APLIi
CIi = (19)
ONVSIi
Since APLI must be maximized and ONVSI must be minimized, a bus with a higher
CI value is selected to install DG. The steps for calculating CI and selecting a candidate bus
to install DG are as follows:
• Run power flow and calculate initial active power losses.
• Inject active power equal to half the active power of the entire network to all buses,
except the slack bus.
• Run power flow and calculate active power losses.
• Calculate the difference between initial active losses and active losses after DG installation.
• Calculate the maximum and minimum difference between active losses.
• Calculate the CI index for all buses except the slack bus.
• The bus with the highest CI value is selected as the candidate bus for DG installation.

2.2. Optimal DG Size

The amount of DG active power varies from 0–100% of total active power by dis-
tinguishing the optimal DG venue. Constraints (22) and (23) should be observed when
resizing DG. By selecting the optimal DG size, total active power losses and network
stability levels decrease and increase, respectively. The relationship between DG size and
active network losses follows the parabolic curve; it first decreases and then increases, so
the optimal size of DG depends on how much the active power increases at each stage. In
this paper, the rate of active power increase at each stage is 1% of the total active power.
Optimal DG size is determined by observing the following constraints:
• Power balance constraint

Psubstation + PDG = Pload + ∑ Ploss (20)

Qsubstation + Q DG = Qload + ∑ Qloss (21)

• Voltage constraint
|Vmin | ≤ |Vi | ≤ |Vmax | (22)
Sustainability 2021, 13, 10224 7 of 17

• DG size constraint

PDG ≤ Pload
(23)
Q DG ≤ Qload

2.3. The Proposed Algorithm

For the studied radial distribution network, active power is calculated for all buses,
except the slack bus and the CI value for each bus. The bus with the highest CI value
is selected as a candidate bus for DG installation. According to Section 2.2, the search
algorithm for determining the optimal DG size in the candidate bus is performed based on
the minimum amount of active power losses and compliance with limitations (22) and (23).
Sustainability 2021, 13, x FOR PEER REVIEW 8 of 18
The proposed scheme’s flowchart for defining the DG’s optimal location and size is shown
in Figure 2.
Start

Call system information

Run Power Flow

Calculate Active Power Losses(APLs) and Initial ONVSi of the Network

Bus Number i=2

As much as half the active network load, the power is injected into the bus i

Run Power Flow

Calculate and Store ONVSi and LRi Yes

i=i+1

i<=n

No

Calculate the minimum and maximum LR i

Calculate APLIi and CI i

Set the bus with the largest CI as the candidate bus (j)

Set Iteration =0 and PDG=0 in bus j

PDG<=PLoad
No

Yes

Run Power Flow and Calculate APLs

PDG=PDG+Step
Iteration=Iteration+1 Store APLs, Iteration and PDG

APLs(Iteration)<APLs(Iteration-1)
Yes &
|Vmin|<|Vi|<|Vmax|

No

PDG (Iteration-1) is set as the optimal size in bus j

End

Figure 2. Flowchart of the proposed scheme.

Figure 2. Flowchart of the proposed scheme.
Sustainability 2021, 13, 10224 8 of 17

2.4. Energy Losses and DG Cost

For both energy losses and operating costs of DG, we have:
• Cost of energy losses: annual energy loss cost is obtained by (28):

Cost = TAPL × EP × T
EP = EnergyPrice ($/Kwh) (24)
T = Period of Time (h)

where T = 8760 h and EP = 0.05($/Kwh).

• DG cost function
The specifications of the active power cost function for the DG used are shown in
(25) [27]:
2
C ( PDG ) = αPDG + βPDG + ω (25)
where α = 0, β = 15, and ω = 0.002.
The specifications of the reactive power cost function for DG are as follows [28]:

C ( Q DG ) = α00 Q2DG + β00 Q DG + ω 00 (26)

where the coefficients of the cost function depend on the PF and are as follows:

α00 = α sin2 (θ ), β00 = β sin(θ ), ω 00 = ω, θ = cos ( PF )−1

3. Results and Discussion

The authors of the paper have considered two RDTSs, including 12 and 33 buses, to
implement the proposed method. Based on the proposed CI method, DGs were studied
in networks to increase the voltage stability margin and reduce power losses. The output
results were calculated using the presented algorithm, in which the results were also
compared with CPLS, VSI, and IV methods. The results were obtained for unity and 0.9
lagging power factor, with the apparent power and base voltage of 100 MV and 12.66 kV.
Note that Y = 0 in the distribution network because of the low length of the lines. It
should be noted that in this paper, the problem under study was examined over a period
of one year.

3.1. Results of the IEEE 12-Bus RDTS Test System Based on the Proposed CI Method
For the IEEE 12-bus radial distribution test system, the losses of active and reactive
power in DG mode were 207,136 and 80,411 kW, respectively. In this case, the power
received from the upstream network was 4,553,366 and 4,130,411 kW. According to the
proposed algorithm, APLI, ONVSI, and CI were obtained first to select the candidate points
for DG installation. Figure 3 shows the values of these indicators for different buses. An
examination of Figure 3 shows that Bus 9 has the lowest ONVSI value, the highest APLI
value, and the highest CI value. Therefore, Bus 9 was the most suitable in terms of voltage
stability levels and active network losses for DG installation. By placing DG in Bus 9 and
injecting active power into the network with a step of 1% of total active load, the changes
in active power losses to the DG capacity ratio were obtained. The changes in active power
losses are shown in Figure 4 by changing the DG size for a unit power factor and 0.9
lagging. The optimal DG size for the unit power factor and 0.9 lagging is 235.3 kW and
302.33 kVA, respectively. In this case, the minimum active network losses for the unity
power factor is 10.7744 kW, and the power factor of which is 0.9 lagging, 4.4929 kW. By
installing DG with a unity power factor and 0.9 lagging, respectively, the active and reactive
power received from the upstream network is reduced to 210.0974 and 409.1256 kW as well
as 167.396 and 274.8582 kW. To observe the effect of DG injection power in the network on
bus voltage, a bus voltage profile for DG installation, with the unit power factor, variable
capacity between 0 and 235 kV, and a 5 kV step, is shown in Figure 5. As DG injection
 kVA, respectively. In this case, the minimum active network losses for the unity pow
factor is 10.7744 kW, and the power factor of which is 0.9 lagging, 4.4929 kW. By installin
DG with a unity power factor and 0.9 lagging, respectively, the active and reactive pow
received from the upstream network is reduced to 210.0974 and 409.1256 kW as well
167.396 and 274.8582 kW. To observe the effect of DG injection power in the network o
Sustainability 2021, 13, 10224 9 of 17
bus voltage, a bus voltage profile for DG installation, with the unit power factor, variab
capacity between 0 and 235 kV, and a 5 kV step, is shown in Figure 5. As DG injectio
capacity increases to 235 kW, the voltage profile improves so that the best voltage profi
in Figure
capacity increases to5235
is for
kW,the
thehighest
voltageDG capacity,
profile in this
improves socase, 235best
that the kW.voltage profile in
Figure 5 is for the highest DG capacity, in this case, 235 kW.

Sustainability
Sustainability2021,
2021,13,
13,xxFOR
FORPEER
PEERREVIEW
REVIEW 1010ofof1818

Figure 3.Figure 3. Thefor

The values values for ONVSI,
ONVSI, APLI,
APLI, and andthe
CI for CIIEEE
for the IEEERDTS.
12-bus 12-bus RDTS.

Figure
Figure4. Changes ininDG-sized with active power losses in the IEEE 12-bus RDTS.
Figure 4.4.Changes
Changesin DG-sizedwith
DG-sized with active
active power
power losses
losses inin the
the IEEE
IEEE 12-bus
12-bus RDTS.
RDTS.
Voltage(p.u)
Voltage(p.u)

Figure
Figure5. The effect ofofDG injection power on the voltage profile.
Figure 5.5.The
Theeffect
effectof DGDGinjection
injection power
power onon the
the voltage
voltage profile.
profile.

The
The12-bus
12-busvoltage
voltageprofile
profileisisshown
shownininDG-installed
DG-installedmode
modeandandDG DGwith
withaaunity
unitypower
power
factor
factor and 0.9 lagging in Figure 6. For DG with a power factor of 0.9 lagging,the
and 0.9 lagging in Figure 6. For DG with a power factor of 0.9 lagging, thevoltage
voltage
profile
profilephase
phaseisismore
moredesirable
desirablethan
thanwith
withthe
theunit
unitpower
powerfactor.
factor.The
Theminimum
minimumgridgridvoltage
voltage
in the two modes with and without DG, with unit power factor and 0.9 phases, are 0.9434,
Sustainability 2021, 13, 10224 10 of 17

The 12-bus voltage profile is shown in DG-installed mode and DG with a unity power
factor and 0.9 lagging in Figure 6. For DG with a power factor of 0.9 lagging, the voltage
profile phase is more desirable than with the unit power factor. The minimum grid voltage
in the two modes with and without DG, with unit power factor and 0.9 phases, are 0.9434,
Sustainability 2021, 13, x FOR PEER REVIEW 11 of 18
0.9835, and 0.9912 p.u., respectively. The ONVSI, which was introduced as a voltage level
indicator, changed from 1 to 0.5422 and 0.2718 with the installation of DG with unit and 0.9
lagging power factors, which indicates an increase in the voltage stability level.

Sustainability 2021, 13, x FOR PEER REVIEW 11 of 18

Voltage(p.u)
Voltage(p.u)

Figure 6. The IEEE 12-bus RDTS test system voltage profile.

Figure 6. The IEEE 12-bus RDTS test system voltage profile.

To further examine the effect of DG installation on increasing network voltage stability

levels, the P-V diagram for Bus 9 in Figure 7 was plotted. With DG installation, network
load and network voltage stability margins are significantly increased. Installing DG with
a 0.9 lagging
Figure pf has
6. The IEEE a more
12-bus RDTSremarkable impactprofile.
test system voltage on the level of network voltage stability,
which shows the importance of reactive power and attention to power factor optimization.

Figure 7. The effect of DG installation on increasing loading capacity and system voltage stability.

By installing DG, the studied network becomes an active network. In fact, by in-
stalling DG, the active and reactive power passing through the lines is reduced, increasing
voltage stability and reducing active and reactive network losses. Reducing losses de-
creases the
Figure cost ofofannual system active power lossescapacity
so thatand thesystem
cost ofvoltage
annual energy
Figure 7.7. The
The effect
effect of DG
DG installation
installation on
on increasing
increasing loading
loading capacity and system voltage stability.
stability.
losses by installing DG with a unity power factor and 0.9 lagging rises from USD 9072.6
to USD
By 4719.2
installing
By installing and USD
DG,
DG, the 1967.2.
the By
studied
studied comparing
network
network the yearly
becomes
becomes an cost
active
an active of energy In losses
network.
network. Inby
fact, before
fact, by and
in-
installing
afterthe
stalling
DG, installing
DG,
active DG,
theand
active it and
is bereactive
reactive foundpassing
power that installing
power passing DG
throughthrough withthe
the lines a reduced,
is unity
lines ispower
reduced,factor
increasing and 0.9
increasing
voltage
lagging stability
voltage
stability saves USDand4353.4
and reducing reducing
activeandandUSD
active 7105.4 in distribution
and network
reactive reactive network
losses. network
losses. costs,
Reducing lossesrespectively.
Reducing losses the
decreases A
de-
summary
creases the of the
cost DG
of simulation
annual systemresults
active is shown
power in Table
losses so 1, with
that
cost of annual system active power losses so that the cost of annual energy losses by the
the installation
cost of annual of DG for
energy
the IEEE
losses by 12-bus
installing DG with RDTS.
installing DG For
withunit
a unity power
a unity
power factor
power
factor and and
factor aand
power
0.9 lagging factor
0.9 rises
lagging ofrises
from 0.9-lag,
USD from the
USD
9072.6 minimum
to9072.6
USD
voltage
to USDand
4719.2 increases
4719.2USD and by 4.2%
USD 1967.2.
1967.2. and 5%, respectively.
By comparing
By comparing Additionally,
the yearly
the yearly cost ofcost
energy the annual
of energy
losseslossescost of
beforebefore
and energy
and
after
lossesinstalling
after is reduced
installing isby
DG, itDG, beit47.95%
found and
that 78.32%,
is be found installing respectively.
that installing
DG with DGa unity
with apowerunity factor
powerand factor and 0.9
0.9 lagging
lagging saves USD 4353.4 and USD 7105.4 in distribution network costs, respectively. A
Table 1. The
summary ofresults
the DG ofsimulation
the IEEE 12-bus RDTS.
results is shown in Table 1, with the installation of DG for
the IEEE 12-bus RDTS. For unit power factor and a power DGfactor
PF of 0.9-lag, the minimum
Items by 4.2% and 5%,
voltage increases Base Case
respectively. Additionally, the annual cost of energy
Unit 0.9 lag
losses is reduced by 47.95% and 78.32%, respectively.
Sustainability 2021, 13, 10224 11 of 17

saves USD 4353.4 and USD 7105.4 in distribution network costs, respectively. A summary
of the DG simulation results is shown in Table 1, with the installation of DG for the IEEE
12-bus RDTS. For unit power factor and a power factor of 0.9-lag, the minimum voltage
increases by 4.2% and 5%, respectively. Additionally, the annual cost of energy losses is
reduced by 47.95% and 78.32%, respectively.

Table 1. The results of the IEEE 12-bus RDTS.

DG PF
Items Base Case
Unit 0.9 lag
Location - 9 9
Size (kVA) - 235.3 314.38
Sustainability 2021, 13, x FOR PEER REVIEW 12 of 18
Active power losses
20.7136 10.7744 4.4929
(kw)

3.2. Results of the IEEE 33-Bus RDTS Based on the Proposed CI Method Method
In the IEEE
IEEE 33-bus
33-busRDTS RDTStest testsystem
systemwithout
withoutDG DGimplementation,
implementation, thethe
active
activeandandre-
active power
reactive powerlosses
lossesare
are210.58
210.58and and142.99
142.99kW,kW,respectively.
respectively. Additionally,
Additionally, in this case,case, the
the
amount of power received from the upstream network is 3922.2 and 2442.99 kW. kW. Figure
Figure 88
shows the value of ONVSI, APLI, and CI for the the 33-bus
33-bus network.
network. Bus 29 is defineddefined as as the
the
nominated bus
nominated busforforDGDGinstallation
installationbecausebecause it it
has has
thethe highest
highest CI CI value.
value. A study
A study of ONVSI
of ONVSI for
for Bus
Bus 29 shows
29 shows that that this has
this bus busthe haslowest
the lowest
ONVSI ONVSI
valuevalue after30.
after Bus Bus 30. Additionally,
Additionally, in terms in
of APLI,
terms this bus
of APLI, thisisbus
oneisof onetheofmost suitable
the most suitablebuses for installing
buses for installingDG.DG.After determining
After determin-
Bus 29 as
ing Bus 29the candidate
as the candidate for for
DGDG installation,
installation, thethenext step
next is to
step is determine
to determine thethe
appropriate
appropri-
DG size to reduce energy loss costs. By injecting active power
ate DG size to reduce energy loss costs. By injecting active power into Bus 29 with into Bus 29 with a 1% astep
1%
of theofnetwork’s
step the network’stotal total
active power,
active changes
power, changesin active losses
in active relative
losses to the
relative to DG
the DGsize size
are
obtained
are obtained with a unit
with power
a unit power factor
factorand 0.90.9
and lagging.
lagging.Figure
Figure9 9shows
showsthethenetwork’s
network’s active
active
loss changes to DG size. The optimal DG size for the unity power factor is 1646.1 kW, kW, and
and
for the 0.9 lagging pf, 2028 kVA. kVA. The The total
total active
active network
network losses
losses for
for DG
DG with
with aa unit
unit power
power
factor
factor and
and 0.9 lagging are
0.9 lagging are 1,229,849
1,229,849 and and 75,026
75,026 kW.kW. The
The active
active and reactive power
and reactive power received
received
from the upstream network for DG with a unit power
from the upstream network for DG with a unit power factor are 2190.1 and 2388.8 factor are 2190.1 and 2388.8 kW,kW,
and
and for DG with a power factor of 0.9 lagging, 1963.2 and 1474.8 kW. As shown in the
for DG with a power factor of 0.9 lagging, 1963.2 and 1474.8 kW. As shown in the
previous
previous section,
section, the
the effect
effect of of DG
DG resizing
resizing on on the
the bus
bus voltage
voltage profile
profile of
of the
the IEEE
IEEE 33-bus
33-bus
RDTS
RDTS system,
system, thethe voltage
voltage profile
profile of of different
different busesbuses for
for DG
DG installation
installation with
with aa unit
unit power
power
factor
factor and DG resizing from 0 to 1640 kV, with 40 kW step, is depicted in Figure 10. The
and DG resizing from 0 to 1640 kV, with 40 kW step, is depicted in Figure 10. The
best
best voltage
voltage profile
profile isis for
for injecting
injecting an an active
active power
power of of 1640
1640 kW.kW.

Figure 8.
Figure 8. The amount of
The amount of ONVSI,
ONVSI, APLI,
APLI, and
and CI
CI for
for the
the IEEE
IEEE 33-bus
33-bus RDTS.
RDTS.
Sustainability 2021, 13, 10224 12 of 17

Figure 8. The amount of ONVSI, APLI, and CI for the IEEE 33-bus RDTS.

Sustainability 2021, 13, x FOR PEER REVIEW 13 of 18

Figure9.9.Changes
Figure ChangesininDG-sized
DG-sizedactive
activepower
powerlosses
lossesininthe
theIEEE
IEEE33-bus
33-busRDTS.
RDTS.
Voltage(p.u)

Figure
Figure10.
10.The
Theeffect
effectof
ofDG
DGinjection
injectionpower
power on
on the
the voltage
voltage profile.
profile.

The voltage
The voltageprofile
profile of
of the
the IEEE
IEEE 33-bus
33-bus RDTS
RDTS is is shown
shown for for the
the two
two modes,
modes, with
with and
and
withoutDGs,
without DGs,ininFigure
Figure11.11.InIn this
this case,
case, thethe installation
installation of DG
of DG withwith
a unita unit
power power
factorfactor
and
andlagging
0.9 0.9 lagging
causescauses the minimum
the minimum network
network voltagevoltage to increase
to increase from from
0.90390.9039 to 0.9288
to 0.9288 and
and 0.9402
0.9402 p.u.
p.u. In thisInpaper,
this paper,
ONVSI ONVSI is defined
is defined as anas an indicator
indicator for assessing
for assessing the level
the level of
of net-
network voltage stability. The installation of DG with unity and 0.9 lagging
work voltage stability. The installation of DG with unity and 0.9 lagging pfs will cause the pfs will cause
the ONVSI
ONVSI valuevalue to increase
to increase fromfrom 1 to 0.7094
1 to 0.7094 and and 0.7153,
0.7153, increasing
increasing the network
the network voltagevoltage
sta-
stability margin. To examine the effect of DG’s presence on increasing
bility margin. To examine the effect of DG’s presence on increasing the voltage stability the voltage stability
margin and
margin and network
network voltage
voltage stability
stability level,
level, the
the P-V
P-V diagram
diagram for for Bus
Bus 18,
18, which
which hashas the
the
lowestvoltage
lowest voltageamong
amongthe thevarious
variousgridgridbuses,
buses,isis shown
shown in in Figure
Figure 12.12. Studying
Studying Figure
Figure 1212
shows the effect of reactive power on increasing network load and voltage
shows the effect of reactive power on increasing network load and voltage stability mar- stability margins.
TheseThese
gins. results highlight
results the importance
highlight the importanceof optimizing the DG
of optimizing thepower
DG power factor.factor.
Another issue in the discussion of DG optimization is the reduction of network energy
losses costs. With optimal DG deployment, the active and reactive power in the transmis-
sion network lines changes, and the cost of losses is reduced. With the implementation of
DG with a unit power factor and 0.9 lagging, the annual cost of casualties drops from USD
92,234 to USD 53,867 and USD 32,861. In general, with the installation of DG, USD 38,367
and USD 59,373 of energy savings are saved annually. Table 2 summarizes the results of
this section for the 33-bus RDTS. For a unit power factor and a power factor of 0.9-lag, the
minimum voltage increases by 2.6% and 4%, respectively. Additionally, the annual cost of
energy losses is reduced by 41.6% and 64.37%, respectively.
 ONVSI value to increase from 1 to 0.7094 and 0.7153, increasing the network voltage sta-
bility margin. To examine the effect of DG’s presence on increasing the voltage stability
margin and network voltage stability level, the P-V diagram for Bus 18, which has the
lowest voltage among the various grid buses, is shown in Figure 12. Studying Figure 12
Sustainability 2021, 13, 10224 shows the effect of reactive power on increasing network load and voltage stability13mar-
of 17
gins. These results highlight the importance of optimizing the DG power factor.

Sustainability 2021, 13, x FOR PEER REVIEW 14 of 18

Figure 11. The IEEE 33-bus RDTS system voltage profile.

Figure 11. The IEEE 33-bus RDTS system voltage profile.
Voltage(p.u)

Figure 12.
Figure 12. The effect of
The effect of DG
DG installation
installation on
on increasing
increasing load
load and
and voltage
voltage stability.
stability.

Another issue in the discussion of DG optimization is the reduction of network en-

Table 2. The results of the IEEE 33-bus RDTS.
ergy losses costs. With optimal DG deployment, the active and reactive power in the trans-
mission network lines changes, and the cost of losses is reduced. With the DGimplementation
PF
Items Base Case
of DG with a unit power factor and 0.9 lagging, the annual costUnit of casualties drops
0.9 lag from
USD 92,234 to USD 53,867 and USD 32,861. In general, with the installation of DG, USD
Location - 29 29
38,367 and USD Size59,373 of energy savings are saved
(kVA) - annually. Table
1646.12 summarizes2028the re-
sults of this section
Active powerforlosses
the 33-bus
(kw) RDTS. For a unit power factor122.98
210.58 and a power factor
75.03of 0.9-
lag, the Reactive
minimum voltage
power lossesincreases
(kVAr) by 2.6% and 4%, respectively.
142.99 88.84 Additionally, the an-
58.88
nual costMinimum
of energybus voltage
losses (p.u)
is reduced 0.9039
by 41.6% and 0.9288
64.37%, respectively. 0.9402
Active power from the upstream (kw) 3922.2 2190.1 1963.1
Reactive power from the upstream (kVAR)
Table 2. The results of the IEEE 33-bus RDTS. 442.99 2388.8 1474.8
Cost of energy losses ($) 92,234 53,867 32,861
Net savings ($) - 38,367
DG PF 59,373
%savings - 41.6 64.37
Items
C(PDG) ($/h) Base Case -
Unit24.6205 27.382
0.9 lag
C(QDG) ($/h) - - 5.7838
Location - 29 29
Size (kVA) - 1646.1 2028
Active power losses (kw) 210.58 122.98 75.03
Reactive power losses (kVAr) 142.99 88.84 58.88
Minimum bus voltage (p.u) 0.9039 0.9288 0.9402
Active power from the up-
3922.2 2190.1 1963.1
stream (kw)
Reactive power from the up-
442.99 2388.8 1474.8
stream (kVAR)
Sustainability 2021, 13, 10224 14 of 17

3.3. Optimal Power Factor (OPF)

In this section, the effect of OPF [2] on reducing network losses is investigated. In
power systems, to minimize energy losses costs, the DG power factor must be equal to the
load power factor:
Pload
PFDG = PFload = q (27)
2
Pload + Q2load

In Sections 3.1 and 3.2, the power factor value for DG 0.9 was assumed to be lagging,
and the losses of Networks 12 and 33 of the bus, as well as the resulting costs, were obtained.
In this section, with the help of Equation (27), the OPF for DG is obtained, and the results
are compared with the power factor of 0.9 lagging. For the 12-bus and 33-bus networks,
the OPF is 0.7319 and 0.85 lagging. Table 3 and Table 4 show the comparison of the results
for the optimal and unity pfs. An examination of the results shows a decline in the cost of
energy losses with an OPF.

Table 3. The results of the IEEE 12-bus RDTS for OPF.

DG PF
Items Base Case
Unit 0.7319 lag
Location - 9 9
Size (kVA) - 235.3 314.38
Active power losses (kw) 20.7136 10.7744 3.1577
Reactive power losses (kVAr) 8.0411 4.1256 1.1093
Minimum bus voltage (p.u) 0.9434 0.9835 0.9907
Active power from the upstream (kw) 455.3366 210.0974 208.06
Reactive power from the upstream (kVAR) 413.0411 409.1256 191.88
Cost of energy losses ($) 9072.6 4719.2 1383.1
Net savings ($) - 4353.4 7689.5
%savings - 47.95 84.76
C(PDG) ($/h) - 3.5334 3.4555
C(QDG) ($/h) - - 1.602

Table 4. The results of the IEEE 33-bus RDTS for OPF.

DG PF
Items Base Case
Unit 0.85 lag
Location - 29 29
Size (kVA) - 1646.1 2097.7
Active power losses (kw) 210.58 122.98 72.56
Reactive power losses (kVAr) 142.99 88.84 55.77
Minimum bus voltage (p.u) 0.9039 0.9288 0.9417
Active power from the upstream (kw) 3922.2 2190.1 1954.5
Reactive power from the upstream (kVAR) 442.99 2388.8 1418
Cost of energy losses ($) 92,234 53,867 31,781
Net savings ($) - 38,367 60,453
%savings - 41.6 65.54
C(PDG) ($/h) - 24.6205 26.746
C(QDG) ($/h) - - 8.73

3.4. Comparing the Results with Other Available Methods

This section compares the fruitfulness of the considered algorithm in selecting the
optimal location and size of the DG as well as improving the voltage profile and reducing
the cost of energy losses. The results for the 12-bus and 33-bus RDTSs with a DG presence,
with a unity power factor and 0.9 lagging, are shown in Table 5 and Table 6, respectively.
Examining the results shows the proposed algorithm’s proper performance in selecting the
optimal location and determining the DG size.
Sustainability 2021, 13, 10224 15 of 17

Table 5. Comparing the obtained results for a unity PF (IEEE 12-bus RDTS).

Items IV [21] CPLS [21] VSI [24] Proposed Method

Location 9 9 9 9
Size (kVA) 232.14 231.69 235 235.3
Active power losses (kw) 10.775 10.776 10.7739 10.7744
Reactive power losses (kVAr) 4.1301 4.1329 4.1259 4.1256
Minimum bus voltage (p.u) 0.98312 0.98307 0.98349 0.9835

Table 6. Comparing the results for a 0.9 PF lag (IEEE 33-bus RDTS).

Items IV [21] CPLS [21] VSI [24] Proposed Method

Location 30 8 33 29
Size (kVA) 1950 2100 1570.8 2028
Active power losses (kw) 78.4 84.5 96.6 75
Reactive power losses (kVAr) 58.9 62.1 77.26 58.88
Minimum bus voltage (p.u) 0.9391 0.9534 0.9322 0.9402

The comparison shows that for the 12-bus RDTS, the four methods examined have
provided similar results, which could confirm the presented method’s performance. In the
33-bus RDTS, the considered method performs better than the other methods in reducing
losses. In fact, by defining the indices used in the proposed algorithm and using the CI in-
dex, the optimal location has been selected appropriately and has reduced network losses.

4. Conclusions
In the presented work, a new CI analytical method for specifying the optimal DG
location is presented. The voltage stability index is obtained from a mathematical point of
view using the voltage collapse feature, which is of great importance. Using CI to determine
the optimal DG location reduces active power losses and improves the voltage profile and
stability margin. CI index with sensitivity analysis is effective in improving the voltage
profile and reducing the distribution network’s active power losses, which determines the
optimal location for DG installation. Then, the optimal size of DG is determined with the
aim of active power loss reduction by a search algorithm. Determination of the optimal
location and size of DG for three types of DG with unit PF, 0.9 PF lag, and OPF was done.
The proposed algorithm was tested on the 12-bus and 33-bus IEEE RDTSs, and the results
were analyzed. For IEEE 12- and 33-bus networks, the optimal DG installation location
was obtained as Buses 9 and 29, respectively. Additionally, the optimal DG size for these
networks with a power factor of 0.9-lag was 314.38 and 2028 kVAr, respectively. The use
of the considered algorithm to define the suitable location and size of DG improved the
voltage profile and stability margin and reduced active power losses and the resulting
costs. Finally, the presented algorithm was compared and validated with IV, VSI, and
CPLS methods. Comparing the results shows the effectiveness of the proposed method
in reducing active power losses and the resulting costs, as well as improving the network
voltage profile. The annual cost of losses for IEEE 12- and 33-bus networks decreased by
78.23% and 64.37%, respectively, which is significant.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, S.A. and M.M.A.; software, S.A.; validation, A.M.,
M.T.A. and M.N.H.; formal analysis, M.M.A.; writing—original draft preparation, M.M.A.; writing—
review and editing, M.N.H., A.M. and M.T.A., visualization, S.A.; supervision, A.M., M.N.H. and
M.T.A.; project administration, M.T.A. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of
the manuscript.
Funding: This research received no external funding.
Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable.
Informed Consent Statement: Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.
Sustainability 2021, 13, 10224 16 of 17

Data Availability Statement: Data is generated during the study.

Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Nomenclature

VS Voltage at bus S
VR Voltage at bus R
δ Phase angle difference between S and R buses
IS Current sent from bus S
IR Current received in bus R
A, B, C, D Line parameters
R Line e resistance
X Line reactance
Z Line impedance
Y Line charging
PR Active power received in bus R
QR Reactive power received in bus R
j Number of lines
i Bus number

References
1. Al Abri, R.S.; El-Saadany, E.F.; Atwa, Y.M. Optimal placement and sizing method to improve the voltage stability margin in a
distribution system using distributed generation. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 2012, 28, 326–334. [CrossRef]
2. Hung, D.Q.; Mithulananthan, N. Multiple distributed generator placement in primary distribution networks for loss reduction.
IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 2011, 60, 1700–1708. [CrossRef]
3. Celli, G.; Pilo, F. Optimal distributed generation allocation in MV distribution networks. In PICA 2001, Innovative Computing for
Power-Electric Energy Meets the Market, Proceedings of the 22nd IEEE Power Engineering Society, International Conference on Power
Industry Computer Applications, 20–24 May 2001, Sydney, Australia; (Cat. No. 01CH37195); IEEE: Piscataway, NJ, USA, 2001.
4. Prakash, D.; Lakshminarayana, C. Multiple DG placements in radial distribution system for multi objectives using Whale
Optimization Algorithm. Alex. Eng. J. 2018, 57, 2797–2806. [CrossRef]
5. Kayal, P.; Chanda, C.K. Placement of wind and solar based DGs in distribution system for power loss minimization and voltage
stability improvement. Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst. 2013, 53, 795–809. [CrossRef]
6. Murty, V.V.S.N.; Kumar, A. Optimal placement of DG in radial distribution systems based on new voltage stability index under
load growth. Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst. 2015, 69, 246–256. [CrossRef]
7. Hedayati, H.; Nabaviniaki, S.A.; Akbarimajd, A. A method for placement of DG units in distribution networks. IEEE Trans. Power
Deliv. 2008, 23, 1620–1628. [CrossRef]
8. Ettehadi, M.; Ghasemi, H.; Vaez-Zadeh, S. Voltage stability-based DG placement in distribution networks. IEEE Trans. Power
Deliv. 2012, 28, 171–178. [CrossRef]
9. Esmaili, M.; Firozjaee, E.C.; Shayanfar, H.A. Optimal placement of distributed generations considering voltage stability and
power losses with observing voltage-related constraints. Appl. Energy 2014, 113, 1252–1260. [CrossRef]
10. Aman, M.; Jasmon, G.; Mokhlis, H.; Bakar, A. Optimal placement and sizing of a DG based on a new power stability index and
line losses. Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst. 2012, 43, 1296–1304. [CrossRef]
11. Memarzadeh, G.; Keynia, F. A new index-based method for optimal DG placement in distribution networks. Eng. Rep. 2020,
2, e12243. [CrossRef]
12. Prakash, D.B.; Lakshminarayana, C. Multiple DG placements in distribution system for power loss reduction using PSO
Algorithm. Procedia Technol. 2016, 25, 785–792. [CrossRef]
13. Prabha, D.R.; Jayabarathi, T. Optimal placement and sizing of multiple distributed generating units in distribution networks by
invasive weed optimization algorithm. Ain Shams Eng. J. 2016, 7, 683–694. [CrossRef]
14. Taheri, S.I.; Salles, M.B.C. A New Modification for TLBO Algorithm to Placement of Distributed Generation. In Proceedings of
the 2019 International Conference on Clean Electrical Power (ICCEP), Otranto, Italy, 2–4 July 2019.
15. Ganguly, S.; Samajpati, D. Distributed generation allocation on radial distribution networks under uncertainties of load and
generation using genetic algorithm. IEEE Trans. Sustain. Energy 2015, 6, 688–697. [CrossRef]
16. Gandomkar, M.; Vakilian, M.; Ehsan, M. A combination of genetic algorithm and simulated annealing for optimal DG allocation
in distribution networks. In Proceedings of the Canadian Conference on Electrical and Computer Engineering, Saskatoon, SK,
Canada, 1–4 May 2005.
17. Kefayat, M.; Ara, A.L.; Niaki, S.N. A hybrid of ant colony optimization and artificial bee colony algorithm for probabilistic
optimal placement and sizing of distributed energy resources. Energy Convers. Manag. 2015, 92, 149–161. [CrossRef]
Sustainability 2021, 13, 10224 17 of 17

18. Kowsalya, M. Optimal size and siting of multiple distributed generators in distribution system using bacterial foraging optimiza-
tion. Swarm Evol. Comput. 2014, 15, 58–65.
19. Nazari-Heris, M.; Madadi, S.; Hajiabbas, M.P.; Mohammadi-Ivatloo, B. Optimal distributed generation allocation using quantum
inspired particle swarm optimization. In Quantum Computing: An Environment for Intelligent Large Scale Real Application; Springer:
Cham, Switzerland, 2018; pp. 419–432.
20. Pesaran, H.A.M.; Nazari-Heris, M.; Mohammadi-Ivatloo, B.; Seyedi, H. A hybrid genetic particle swarm optimization for
distributed generation allocation in power distribution networks. Energy 2020, 209, 118218. [CrossRef]
21. Selim, A.; Kamel, S.; Alghamdi, A.S.; Jurado, F. Optimal Placement of DGs in Distribution System Using an Improved Harris
Hawks Optimizer Based on Single-and Multi-Objective Approaches. IEEE Access 2020, 8, 52815–52829. [CrossRef]
22. Suresh, M.C.V.; Edward, J.B. A hybrid algorithm based optimal placement of DG units for loss reduction in the distribution
system. Appl. Soft Comput. 2020, 91, 106191. [CrossRef]
23. Elattar, E.E.; Elsayed, S.K. Elsayed. Optimal location and sizing of distributed generators based on renewable energy sources
using modified moth flame optimization technique. IEEE Access 2020, 8, 109625–109638. [CrossRef]
24. Das, D.; Nagi, H.S.; Kothari, D.P. Novel method for solving radial distribution networks. IEE Proc.-Gener. Transm. Distrib. 1994,
141, 291–298. [CrossRef]
25. Baran, M.; Wu, F.F. Optimal sizing of capacitors placed on a radial distribution system. IEEE Trans. Power Deliv. 1989, 4, 735–743.
[CrossRef]
26. Murthy, V.V.S.N.; Kumar, A. Comparison of optimal DG allocation methods in radial distribution systems based on sensitivity
approaches. Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst. 2013, 53, 450–467. [CrossRef]
27. Gautam, D.; Mithulananthan, N. Optimal DG placement in deregulated electricity market. Electr. Power Syst. Res. 2007, 77,
1627–1636. [CrossRef]
28. Hasanpour, S.; Ghazi, R.; Javidi, H. A new approach for cost allocation and reactive power pricing in a deregulated environment.
Electr. Eng. 2009, 91, 27. [CrossRef]