This thesis/project/dissertation has been reviewed for 508 compliance.

To request enhancements,

please email lib-508Accessibility@[Link].

 ANALYSIS OF A DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM RELIABILTY

WITH DISTRIBUTED GENERATION

A Project

Presented to the faculty of the Department of Electrical and Electronic Engineering

California State University, Sacramento

Submitted in partial satisfaction of

the requirements for the degree of

MASTER OF SCIENCE

in

Electrical and Electronic Engineering

by

Gracious Nyati

FALL
2016
 ANALYSIS OF A DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM RELIABILITY

WITH DISTRIBUTED GENERATION

A Project

by

Gracious Nyati

Approved by:

__________________________________, Committee Chair

Fethi Belkhouche, Ph.D.

__________________________________, Second Reader

Preetham B. Kumar, Ph.D.

____________________________
Date

ii
Student: Gracious Nyati

I certify that this student has met the requirements for format contained in the University format

manual, and that this project is suitable for shelving in the Library and credit is to be awarded for

the project.

__________________________, Graduate Coordinator ___________________

Preetham B. Kumar, Ph.D. Date

Department of Electrical and Electronic Engineering

iii
 Abstract

of

ANALYSIS OF A DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM RELIABILITY

WITH DISTRIBUTED GENERATION

by

Gracious Nyati

Reliability analysis is believed to be one of the key features in power system design and

planning. Reliability defines the ability of a system or component to function under stated

conditions for a stated period of time. With the promotion of the concept of smart grid in

the past few years, more and more Distributed Generation (DG) units are being introduced

into the power system, which in turn may affect the operation of the networks. DGs play

an important part in many ways, the introduction of DG can significantly impact the flow

of voltage and power conditions of the system. There are many kinds of DG units classified

into two technologies: conventional and renewables. The main purpose of this project is to

study and analyze power system reliability due to the engagement of DG units in a

distribution system. A reliability analysis technique for a large scale system, with respect

to substation, reconfigurable, and electrical distribution is presented. The analysis will take

into account the average failure rate and the annual outage duration of the distribution

iv
system with and without distributed generation. Also the placement of distributed

generation and its effects on the reliability of the system is investigated and analyzed.

_______________________, Committee Chair

Fethi Belkhouche, Ph.D.

_______________________
Date

v
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

List of Tables ............................................................................................................. viii

List of Figures .............................................................................................................. ix

Chapter

1. INTRODUCTION .....................................................................................................1

1.1. Introduction .............................................................................................. 1

1.2. Distributed Generation ............................................................................. 2

1.3. Power System Reliability ......................................................................... 2

1.4. Literature Review ..................................................................................... 3

2. DISTRIBUTION RELIABILITY INDICES .............................................................5

2.1. System Average Interruption Frequency Index (SAIFI) .......................... 5

2.2. System Average Interruption Duration Index (SAIDI) ............................ 5

2.3. Customer Average Interruption Duration Index (CAIDI) ........................ 6

3. TYPES OF DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM DESIGNS..................................................7

3.1. Radial Distribution System ....................................................................... 7

3.2. Loop Distribution System ......................................................................... 8

3.3. Alternative Feed Arrangement with Distributed Generation ................... 9

4. SIMULATION.........................................................................................................11

4.1. Simulation without Distributed Generation ............................................ 12

4.2. Simulation with Distributed Generator on Sub 2B ................................. 13

vi
 4.3. Simulation with Distributed Generator on Three Sub Buses.................. 15

4.4. Simulation with Wind Turbine Generators on Three Sub Buses ........... 16

4.5. Summary of the simulation results ......................................................... 18

5. CONCLUSION........................................................................................................20

Appendix ......................................................................................................................22

References ....................................................................................................................31

vii
 LIST OF TABLES

Page

Table 4.1. Bus Input Data for the Simulated Distribution System …………………….12

Table 4.2. Results of Simulation without DG …………………………………………13

Table 4.3. Results of Simulation with a DG in Sub2B ………………………………...14

Table 4.4. Results of Simulation with Synchronous DG on three buses ………………16

Table 4.5. Results of Simulation with Wind Turbine Generators on three buses ……...17

Table 4.6. Results for the Performance Indices ………………………………………..19

viii
 LIST OF FIGURES

Page

Figure 1.1. The subdivision of System Reliability ........................................................... 3

Figure 3.1. Ideal Radial Distribution System. ................................................................... 7

Figure 3.2. Loop Distribution System ............................................................................... 9

Figure 3.3. An Alternative Feed Arrangement with Distributed Generator .................... 10

Figure 4.1. Simulation without Distributed Generator .................................................... 13

Figure 4.2. Simulation with Distribution Generator on Sub 2B ...................................... 14

Figure 4.3. Simulation with Distribution Generator on three buses ................................ 15

Figure 4.4. Simulation with Wind Turbine Generators on three buses ........................... 17

Figure 4.5. Comparison of Average Rate of Failure in three scenarios........................... 18

ix
 1

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1. Introduction

The primary function of a power system is to provide satisfactory electrical supply to the

customers with reasonable level of pricing and reliability. With the growing demand and

the increasing dependence on electricity, reliability of the electric power system is believed

to be critical to the economic strength and the well-being of the society. In today’s society,

the reliability of power systems is being challenged, as the substructure is aging, the

demand is always growing, and also as new operational challenges emerge which include

the integration of irregular renewable generation [1]. The monetary and social

consequences of power loss in an area can have considerable impacts on both the customers

and the utility company supplying the service. The cost of a key power outage limited to

one state can be in the range of millions of dollars, and if the outage was to affect multiple

states, the cost could be in the range of hundreds of millions to billions of dollars [2].

Maintaining reliability is vital in any power system design and operation, as the system is

susceptible to irregularities that may include failures, disturbances such as human errors or

natural cause effects like lighting, tornadoes and also situations like protection or

communication system failures. With the development of smart grid, there has also been

an influx of Distributed Generations (DGs) into the power systems, which to some degree

has had some positive and negative effects on the system [3]. This project is aimed at

analyzing and predicting the effects on reliability of a distribution system with distributed

generation.
 2

1.2. Distributed Generation

Distributed Generation (DG) also known as distributed energy or on-site generation (OSG)

is a technique that uses small-scale technologies to produce electric power close to the

load/consumer. DG technologies often consist of integrated (and sometimes renewable-

energy) generators that offer a number of possible benefits [1]. In most cases, distributed

generators are said to provide lower-cost electricity and higher power reliability and

security to the power system with fewer environmental concerns compared to the

traditional power generators. The negative side of distributed generation is that sometimes

the power quality of the system can be affected, also islanding operation and voltage

control problems may be experienced due to the inclusion of distributed generation. Even

though the concept of distributed generation is not new, the increase of power demand and

the development of smart grid applications have resulted in a large growth of distributed

generation use. Distributed generators include induction and synchronous electrical

generators as well as any type of electrical inverter capable of producing A/C power, these

include small hydro, biomass, biogas, solar power, wind power and geothermal power.

1.3. Power System Reliability

The primary objective of an electric power system is to supply and meet the satisfaction of

the customers (consumers) and the suppliers (utility companies) of electricity with

reasonable guarantee of continuity and quality. In a quick short definition, power system

reliability can be defined as a measure of the ability of a system to provide acceptable

power supply under normal and abnormal conditions [3]. The view of power system
 3

reliability is somewhat wide-ranging and covers the ability of the system to fulfill the

consumer and utilities requirements. System reliability can be subdivided into “system

adequacy” and “system security”, as shown in Figure 1.1 below [3].

SYSTEM RELIABILITY

SYSTEM ADEQUACY SYSTEM SECURITY

Figure 1.1. The Subdivision of System Reliability

System adequacy is associated with the existence of necessary facilities within the system

to fulfil the consumer load demand, these include the capabilities necessary to produce

sufficient energy and the related transmission and distribution facilities necessary to

transport the energy to the actual consumer load points. System security correlates to the

ability of the system to respond to disturbances occurring within the system.

1.4. Literature Review

Regular electric consumers believe they are supposed to have electric power at all times,

however in reality utility companies are only able to meet that requirement to about 99.99

percent of the time [4]. Electric power is known to be one of the essential elements of the

modern economy, the availability of reliable power at reasonable cost is therefore crucial

for the economic growth and development of a country. Power utilities and governments
 4

throughout the world strive to meet customer demands as economically as possible with

reasonable reliability. In 1968 a non-profit national organization called the National

Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC) was established in the United States with a

mission to assure the reliability of the bulk power system in North America [4]. NERC

develops and enforces Reliability Standards [4]. Prior to the 1960s, reliability of a projected

electric power system was often predicted by generalizing the knowledge obtained from

the existing systems and employing some rule of thumb methods to project what the

reliability of the newer systems would be.

Utilization of distributed generation in power system is projected to considerably improve

the reliability indices [5]. Distributed generation can improve the capacity of some utility

systems to operate peak load on a feeder, and can also help supply loads during

contingencies until the utility can reestablish normal delivery capacity.

 5

2. DISTRIBUTION RELIABILITY INDICES

There are several indices used to compute system’s reliability. The acknowledged

reliability indices are defined in the Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineering

(IEEE) standard number P1366 [6]. A wide range of performance indices have been

suggested. The most common distribution indices are discussed in the following section.

2.1. System Average Interruption Frequency Index (SAIFI)

SAIFI is designed to give information about the average frequency of sustained

interruptions per customer over a predefined area. It is given by:

or

= the number of interrupted customers

= the total number of customers served for the area being indexed

2.2. System Average Interruption Duration Index (SAIDI)

SAIDI is the most commonly used performance index for a sustained interruption. It

measures the total duration of an interruption for the average customer on a given period

either daily, monthly, or yearly. It is given by:

N
= Totail number of customer interruptions
SAIFI =
SAIFI
N Ti NTT otal number of customers served
 6

Σr Ni
S
SA DI= i Customer
AIIDI interruption durations
ri TNota
T l number of customers served

2.3. Customer Average Interruption Duration Index (CAIDI)

Once some outage occurs, the average time to restore service is found from CAIDI. CAIDI

is the index used to calculate the average time required to restore service to the average

customer per sustained interruption. It is given by:

or

= the number of interrupted customers

= the restoration time for each interruption event

 rN Customer interruption durations

CAIDI = i i
ri ota
T Nil number of customer interruptions
 7

3. TYPES OF DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM DESIGNS

Basic understanding of distribution system design principles is essential in the operation

of electric power systems. This chapter briefly describes and defines the basics of electric

power distribution system design. A distribution system may be classified on the basis of:

A. Nature of current, where the distribution system can be classified as either AC or

DC distribution system.

B. Type of construction, distribution system can be classified as an overhead or an

underground system.

C. Scheme of operation, the distribution system may be classified as a radial delivery

network, ring main system or interconnected system.

3.1. Radial Distribution System

Figure 3.1. Ideal Radial Distribution System.

When a distribution system is connected to substation on one end only with the help of

feeder, the system is called “radial distribution system”. The feeders, distributors and

service mains are radiating away from the substation therefore the name radial system is

given to this type of system. There are combinations of one distributor and one feeder,
 8

connecting the distributor to the substation. In a radial system like the one shown in figure

3.1, if the fault occurs either on a feeder or a distributor, all consumers connected to that

distributor will be affected.

Advantages of a radial system

a. Simple as the source feeding the system is at only one end.

b. The initial cost is low.

c. Convenient when the generation is at low voltage.

d. Preferred when the station is located at the center of the load.

Disadvantages of a radial system

a. The end of distributor near to the substation gets heavily loaded.

b. When the load on the distributor changes, the consumers at the distant end of the

distributor face serious voltage fluctuations.

c. As consumers are dependent on single feeder and distributor, a fault on any of these

two causes interruption in supply to all consumers connected to that distributor.

3.2. Loop Distribution System

The loop distribution system loops through the service area and returns to the point of

origin. This type of placement of switches allows the distribution system to supply power

to its customers from either direction. If one power source fails, switches are opened or

closed to obtain power source from the other source in the system. Loop systems provide

better service continuity than radial systems, with only short service interruptions during
 9

switching [3]. However, they are more expensive than radial systems because of the

additional switching equipment requirements. As a result, loop systems are usually built to

serve commercial, light industrial buildings and shopping malls, where power outages are

more likely to endanger human lives or result in property losses. Reliability and service

quality can be considerably improved at even higher cost with a multiple parallel circuit

arrangement [2]. In these systems, two or more circuits are tapped at each substation. The

circuits can be radial or end in a second bulk power source and these interconnections allow

each circuit to be supplied by many different substations.

Figure 3.2. Loop Distribution System [3]

3.3. Alternative Feed Arrangement with Distributed Generation

In order to improve system reliability, distributed generation unit can be added into the

system as shown in figure 3.3 below. In such a system, if a failure occurs between Source

#1 and Switch #1, the operator can open Switch #1 to isolate the failure and close Switch
 10

#4 to incorporate the Distributed Generator to compensate for Source #1. Without the

Distributed Generator, the whole system would be drawing all the power from Source #2

which might cause system constraints violations or lower the power quality of the system.

If this happens during peak time, the system might experience high demand with less

supply which could be detrimental to the whole system and the customer.

Switch #1 Switch #2 Switch #3

Q4

Source #1 DG Source #2

Figure 3.3. An Alternative Feed Arrangement with Distributed Generator

 11

4. SIMULATION

Distribution system reliability assessment is needed to evaluate the availability and quality

of power supply at each customer service entrance. Analysis of customer failure statistics

has shown that, compared to other parts of electrical power system, distribution system

failures are known to contribute as much as 90% towards the unavailability of power

supply to a load [7]. These statistics show the importance of reliability evaluation of

distribution systems. The basic reliability indices used to predict or measure the reliability

of this distribution system consist of the following indices:

 Average failure rate at load point (f/yr)

 Average outage duration (hr)

 Annual outage duration at load point (hr/yr)

Indices consisting of the Expected Energy Not Supplied (EENS), Expected Interruption

Cost (ECOST), and Interruption Energy Assessment Rule (IEAR) can be used particularly

for each load point or for the whole system. These indices can be used to approximate the

reliability of an existing distribution system and to convey beneficial planning information

concerning improvements or design of new distribution system [8]. Also, in order to study

the sensitivity of a reliability index EENS or ECOST with respect to failure rate of different

elements, element contribution to that index and their standings can be used.

The indices and rankings given above can be evaluated using the ETAP Reliability

Analysis module. This module provides the best tool to efficiently model various power

system elements and devices to include their effects on the distribution system reliability.
 12

This module is relevant for reliability analysis of large-scale system’s over-all

configurations. By using this module, we can evaluate the distribution system reliability,

and the values of different reinforcement patterns available to the planner that can be

quantitatively assessed to warrant that limited capital resources are used to achieve the

greatest possible improvement in system reliability [8]. Below in table 4.1 is the bus input

data of the distribution system simulated in ETAP.

BUS ID kV λA (f/yr) MTTR (hr) Switch Time

(hr)
Bus 1 0.480 0.001 2.00 2.00
Bus 2 0.480 0.001 2.00 2.00
LV Bus 0.480 0.001 2.00 2.00
Main Bus 34.500 0.001 2.00 2.00
MCC1 0.480 0.001 2.00 2.00
Sub2A 13.800 0.001 2.00 2.00
Sub2B 13.800 0.001 2.00 2.00
Sub 3 4.160 0.001 2.00 2.00
Sub3 Swgr 4.160 0.001 2.00 2.00
Sub 22 3.450 0.001 2.00 2.00
Sub 23 3.450 0.001 2.00 2.00
Table 4.1. Bus Input Data for the Simulated Distribution System

4.1. Simulation without Distributed Generation

The system is simulated without any distributed generation, the system is radial and the

source is at the utility grid point through the main bus. As seen in figure 4.1, we see the

average failure rate and the annual outage duration at buses and load points as listed. We

focus on the 5 buses shown in the figure 4.1 for which the results are shown in table 4.2

and later compared with other simulated scenarios.

 13

Figure 4.1. Simulation without Distributed Generator

BUS ID Av. Failure Rate Av. Outage Duration (hr)

(f/yr)
Main Bus 0.014 171.7
Sub2A 0.066 191.0
Sub2B 0.069 191.4
Sub 3 0.072 191.8
Bus 1 0.115 193.1
Table 4.2. Results of Simulation without DG

Table 4.2 shows the results of the average rate of failure and the average outage duration

of the system at 5 bus stations selected for analysis without any distributed generation in

the system.

4.2. Simulation with Distributed Generator on Sub2B

In this section, the simulation of the system was performed with DG on Sub2B, the logic

here was to analyze the system when the DG is placed in the middle of system. The
 14

objective is to evaluate the effects of the DG to the surrounding bus loads in the whole

system while positioned in the middle of the system.

Figure 4.2. Simulation with Distribution Generator on Sub2B

BUS ID Av. Failure Rate Av. Outage Duration Ave. Rate Failure
(f/yr) (hr) Improvement (%)
Main Bus 0.01 180.2 28.57
Sub2A 0.062 193.0 6.06
Sub2B 0.013 184.8 81.16
Sub 3 0.055 196.4 23.61
Bus 1 0.098 196.0 14.78
Table 4.3. Results of Simulation with a DG in Sub2B

Table 4.3 shows the results of the average failure rate, the average outage duration and the

average failure rate improvement percentage of the system compared to previous case

(without any distributed generation). Only the average failure rate is compared for different
 15

scenarios to give an idea on the reliability improvement. The results above also indicate

that when a DG unit is placed under one bus, it has some effects on the surrounding loads

but most effect is felt on the bus or load closest to it. In this particular simulation we can

see that we get the most improvement on Sub2B with highest improvements percentage

when compared with system without DG.

4.3. Simulation with Distributed Generator on Three Sub Buses

For this section of the simulation, three conventional synchronous generators were added

to the distribution system on the three sub buses Sub2A, Sub2B and Sub3. The results of

the average rate failure and the average outage duration are shown in table 4.4

Figure 4.3. Simulation with Distribution Generator on Three Buses

 16

BUS ID Av. Failure Rate Av. Outage Duration Ave. Rate Failure
(f/yr) (hr) Improvement (%)
Main Bus 0.010 180.2 28.57
Sub2A 0.011 193.0 83.33
Sub2B 0.013 184.8 81.16
Sub 3 0.014 196.4 80.55
Bus 1 0.057 196.0 50.43
Table 4.4. Results of Simulation with Synchronous DG on Three Buses

Table 4.4 shows the results of the average failure rate, the average outage duration and the

average failure rate improvement percentage of the system compared to the system without

any distributed generation. In this system three conventional synchronous generators are

placed on Sub2A, Sub2B and Sub 3, based on the results of table 4.4 we can see that adding

more DGs to the system results in higher reliability improvement. The DGs turn to share

the responsibility of the loads on the system and thereby improving the reliability of the

system.

4.4. Simulation with Wind Turbine Generators on Three Sub Buses

For this part of the simulation, we incorporated the wind turbine generators as the

distribution generators to analyze and compare the effects of different types of DGs. In

order to compare and analyze the results, the three wind turbine generators are connected

into the three buses similar to the previous simulation in section 4.3. Wind Turbine

Generators are classified as renewable generators and therefore we incorporated them in

this system to compare their effect on reliability with conventional generators.

 17

Figure 4.4. Simulation with Wind Turbine Generators on Three Buses

BUS ID Av. Failure Rate Av. Outage Duration Ave. Failure Rate
(f/yr) (hr) Improvement (%)
Main Bus 0.010 180.2 28.57
Sub2A 0.013 193.0 83.33
Sub2B 0.013 184.8 81.16
Sub 3 0.016 196.4 77.78
Bus 1 0.059 196.0 48.70
Table 4.5. Results of Simulation with Wind Turbine Generators on Three Buses

The results on table 4.5 show the average failure rate, the average outage duration and the

average failure rate improvement percentage of the system compared to the system without

any distributed generation. In this system, three turbine generators are connected in three

buses similar to section 4.3. The results show that the system had high improvements

compared to a system without DGs, however slightly lower results when compared to
 18

system with conventional generators. Comparing the average failure rate improvement of

renewable generator to the conventional generators in same position shows there was very

slight changes in some buses which gives lower improvements.

4.5. Summary of the simulation results

0.14

0.12

0.1

0.08

0.06

0.04

0.02

0
Main Bus Sub2A Sub2B Sub3 Bus 1
Without DG With 3 Sych. Gen With 3 Wind Turbines

Figure 4.5. Comparison of Average Rate of Failure in three scenarios.

The chart in figure 4.5 gives a comparison of three scenarios simulated in this distribution

system without any DG in the system, with three conventional synchronous DGs connected

in buses Sub2A, Sub2B and Sub3, and finally with three Wind Turbine Generators

connected in the same buses. Looking at the average rate of failure for the system, we can

see that without DGs, the rate is higher making it less reliable compared to the ones with

DGs. Also comparing the system with added conventional synchronous DGs with the one

with Wind Turbine Generators, we can conclude that the system with added conventional
 19

synchronous generators is slightly more reliable than the wind turbine one. Below is a table

for the average performance indices, which gives us the results of the three scenarios

discussed above.

Performance Without 3 Conventional DGs at 3 Wind Turbine DGs

Indices DG Buses at Buses
SAIFI 0.1108 0.1012 0.1052
SAIDI 20.3554 10.2041 14.0323
CAIDI 183.722 177.23 179.04
ASAI 0.9977 0.9994 0.9982
ASUI 0.00232 0.00195 0.00207

Table 4.6. Results for the Performance Indices

Table 4.6 presents a summary of performance indices for three scenarios in order to

compare the effects of the DG in different scenarios. In the first scenario without DG in

the system, we can see that reliability is the lowest, however in the second scenario, (the

system with three conventional DGs) the reliability of the system is the highest compared

to all three scenarios analyzed. The third scenario with three wind turbine generators we

can realize that the reliability is higher than without any DG but less than with conventional

DGs.
 20

5. CONCLUSION

The environmental concerns, economic considerations, technological developments and

deregulation of power systems are some of the factors that have accelerated the applications

of distributed generation in the past few decades. Distributed generators have specific

characteristics which distinguish them from traditional generating units. The use of

distributed generation in power system is considered to greatly improve the reliability of

the system [9]. In this project, using ETAP software we analyzed four different ways of

using distributed generation and their effects on the average failure rate and the annual

outage duration of the system.

First we analyzed the system without any distributed generation to give us the reliability

base of the system and then we added one DG to see what kind of improvement we could

achieve, and as shown in section 4 there was some improvement. We then analyzed the

effects caused by putting more DGs in the system and we proved that reliability went up

significantly with more DGs. Also we analyzed and compared the concept of using

conventional generators versus using renewables in the form of wind turbine generators.

Comparing renewable and conventional DGs we realized that there was much stable higher

improvement on the conventional DGs than renewable ones, this is contributed by the

consistency of generation. The conventional generators always produce constant supply of

power except at times when they have problems that need to be fixed. On the other hand,

renewables have different effects associated with their supply, for example wind turbine

DGs used in this simulation have to take into account the weather conditions. When there
 21

is less wind, the generators will not be producing to their maximum capabilities and this

would have an effect on the system’s reliability. With more wind, the generators are able

to produce more power and increase the reliability of the system.

Incorporating distributed generation in power systems is not the only way to improve

reliability, there are also some steps that we can take into consideration for example proper

maintenance of the power system. In this project we have shown how distributed

generation can improve the reliability of a system. Also in this project it is assumed that

the load in the system remains unchanged in all scenarios, however in real life loads

continuously change. For future improvement of this work it is recommended to

incorporate more load modeling approaches and consider the variation of the renewables.
 22

Appendix

Reliability Analysis

Loading Category (1): Design

Load Diversity Factor: None

Total
Number of Buses: 11

XFMR2 XFMR3 Reactor Line/Cable Impedance Tie PD SPDT Total

Number of Branches: 6 1 0 2 0 1 0 10

Synchronous Power
Grid Inverter Total
Generator

Number of Sources: 1 1 1 3

Synchronous Induction Static Lumped

Motor Machines Load Load Total

Number of Loads: 2 2 3 13
6

System Frequency: 60 Hz
Unit System: English
Project Filename: EXAMPLE
 23

Bus Input Data

Replacement
Switch
Bus A MTTR Time Avail. Time
ID kV f / yr hour hour Yes/No hour

Bus1 0.480 0.0010 2.00 2.00 No 10.00

Bus2 0.480 0.0010 2.00 2.00 No 10.00
LVBus 0.480 0.0010 2.00 2.00 No 10.00
Main Bus 34.500 0.0010 2.00 2.00 No 10.00
MCC1 0.480 0.0010 2.00 2.00 No 10.00
Sub2A 13.800 0.0010 2.00 2.00 No 10.00
Sub2B 13.800 0.0010 2.00 2.00 No 10.00
Sub 3 4.160 0.0010 2.00 2.00 No 10.00
Sub3 Swgr 4.160 0.0010 2.00 2.00 No 10.00
Sub22 3.450 0.0010 2.00 2.00 No 10.00
Sub23 3.450 0.0010 2.00 2.00 No 10.00
 24

Load Input Data

Load Load Load No. of A MTTR

ID Type Connected Bus ID kW Sector Loads f / yr hour

UPS-1 UPS Bus2 222.22 None 1 0.0200 50.00

LUMP5 LumpLd Sub23 425.00 Govt. & Inst. 1 0.0200 50.00
LUMP2 LumpLd Sub22 3085.64 Residential 1 0.0200 50.00
LUMP1 LumpLd LVBus 196.50 None 1 0.0200 50.00
Mtr6 Ind. Mtr. MCC1 97.61 None 2 0.0200 50.00
Mtr4 Ind. Mtr. MCC1 100.77 None 1 0.0200 50.00
Mtr3 Ind. Mtr. MCC1 60.47 None 1 0.0200 50.00
Mtr5 Ind. Mtr. MCC1 40.98 None 1 0.0200 50.00
Pump 1 Ind. Mtr. Sub3 Swgr 407.45 None 1 0.0200 50.00
Mtr2 Ind. Mtr. Sub2B 1907.88 None 1 0.0200 50.00
Syn2 Syn. Mtr. LVBus 121.59 Agricultural 1 0.0200 50.00
Syn1 Syn. Mtr. Sub2A 997.66 Industrial 1 0.0200 50.00
Load1 St Load LVBus 248.56 None 1 0.0200 50.00
LTG Load St Load MCC1 100.00 None 1 0.0200 50.00
CAP1 St Load Sub 3 0.00 Industrial 1 0.0200 50.00
MOV1 MOV LVBus 0.00 None 1 0.0200 50.00
Panel1 Panel MCC1 83.20 None 1 0.0000 0.00
Charger1 Charger Bus2 425.00 None 1 0.0200 50.00
 25

Branch Connections

CKT/Branch Connected Bus ID

ID Type From Bus To Bus

Cable2 Cable Sub 3 Sub3 Swgr

Cable14 Cable Bus1 Bus2

T22 2W XFMR Sub2A Sub22

T23 2W XFMR Sub2B Sub23

T3 2W XFMR Sub3 Swgr LVBus

XFMR 3 2W XFMR Sub3 Swgr MCC1

T2 2W XFMR Main Bus Sub2A

T4 2W XFMR Sub 3 Bus1

T1 3W XFMR Main Bus Sub2B

Main Bus Sub 3

Cable20 EquipCable Sub3 Swgr Pump 1

Cable18 EquipCable Sub2B Mtr2

Cable12 EquipCable LVBus Syn2

Cable7 EquipCable Sub2A Syn1

Cable13 EquipCable LVBus Load1

Cable21 EquipCable LVBus MOV1

 26

Load Point Output Report

Average Average Annual
Interrupting Outage Outage
Bus Rate Duration Duration EENS ECOST
ID Load Sector Connected Bus ID f / yr hour hr / yr MWhr / yr $ / yr

Bus1 N/A 0.0980 195.96 19.2040 0.0000 0.00

Bus2 N/A 0.1170 189.93 22.2304 14.3880 0.00

LVBus N/A 0.1268 185.07 23.4601 13.2936 1466.34

Main Bus N/A 0.0100 180.20 1.8020 0.0000 0.00

MCC1 N/A 0.1298 185.41 24.0601 11.6216 0.00

Sub2A N/A 0.0620 193.61 12.0040 11.9759 91436.24

Sub2B N/A 0.0130 184.77 2.4020 4.5827 0.00

Sub 3 N/A 0.0550 196.40 10.8020 0.0000 0.00

Sub3 Swgr N/A 0.0748 177.33 13.2581 5.4021 0.00

Sub22 N/A 0.1220 170.54 20.8060 64.1998 170766.30

Sub23 N/A 0.0730 153.48 11.2040 4.7617 22796.26

LUMP5 Govt. & Inst. Sub23 0.0730 153.48 11.2040 4.7617 22796.26

LUMP2 Residential Sub22 0.1220 170.54 20.8060 64.1998 170766.30

LUMP1 None LVBus 0.1498 167.33 25.0601 4.9244 0.00

Mtr6 None MCC1 0.1528 167.97 25.6601 2.5046 0.00

Mtr4 None MCC1 0.1528 167.97 25.6601 2.5857 0.00

Mtr3 None MCC1 0.1528 167.97 25.6601 1.5518 0.00

Mtr5 None MCC1 0.1528 167.97 25.6601 1.0515 0.00

Pump 1 None Sub3 Swgr 0.1236 131.23 16.2166 6.6075 0.00

Mtr2 None Sub2B 0.0543 76.41 4.1483 7.9145 0.00

Syn2 Agricultural LVBus 0.1516 165.44 25.0745 3.0488 1567.26

Syn1 Industrial Sub2A 0.1231 112.99 13.9088 13.8762 105662.90

Load1 None LVBus 0.1518 165.18 25.0765 6.2330 0.00

LTG Load None MCC1 0.1528 167.97 25.6601 2.5660 0.00

CAP1 Industrial Sub 3 0.0840 161.93 13.6020 0.0000 0.00

MOV1 None LVBus 0.1569 160.06 25.1174 0.0000 0.00

Panel1 None MCC1 0.1298 185.41 24.0601 2.0018 0.00

UPS-1 None Bus2 0.1400 170.16 23.8304 5.2956 0.00

Charger1 None Bus2 0.1400 170.16 23.8304 10.1279 0.00

Gen1 None Sub2B 0.0040 150.50 0.6020 0.0000 0.00

Utility None Main Bus 0.0040 150.50 0.6020 0.0000 0.00

 27

Expected Interrupting Cost (ECOST)

Sensitivity Analysis

System/Bus/Load Point Contributing Element ECOST

ID Type ID Type $ / yr

System .................................................. ......................... 286465.10

T2 Xfmr2 95036.68

T22 Xfmr2 49333.65

CB11 PD 19007.34

CB2 PD 19007.34

Fuse1 PD 19007.34

CB12 PD 14437.03

CB21 PD 14073.97

T23 Xfmr2 12254.99

CB27 PD 9866.73

Bus1 Bus .................................................. .........................

LVBus Bus .................................................. ......................... 1466.34

T1 Xfmr3 187.50

T1 Xfmr3 187.50

T3 Xfmr2 187.50

T3 Xfmr2 187.50

CB44 PD 37.50

CB18 PD 37.50

CB43 PD 37.50

CB41 PD 37.50

CB13 PD 37.50

CB42 PD 37.50

Main Bus Bus .................................................. .........................

 28

System/Bus/Load Point Contributing Element ECOST

ID Type ID Type $ / yr

Sub22 Bus .................................................. ......................... 170766.30

T2 Xfmr2 24666.83

T2 Xfmr2 24666.83

T22 Xfmr2 24666.83

T22 Xfmr2 24666.83

LUMP2 LumpLd 7950.95

CB21 PD 4933.37

CB10 PD 4933.37

CB11 PD 4933.37

CB11 PD 4933.37

CB2 PD 4933.37

Sub23 Bus .................................................. ......................... 22796.26

T23 Xfmr2 6127.50

T23 Xfmr2 6127.50

LUMP5 LumpLd 1960.11

CB6 PD 1225.50

CB5 PD 1225.50

CB26 PD 1225.50

CB26 PD 1225.50

CB24 PD 1225.50

CB24 PD 1225.50

CB4 PD 1225.50

LUMP5 LumpLd .................................................. ......................... 22796.26

T23 Xfmr2 6127.50

T23 Xfmr2 6127.50

LUMP5 LumpLd 1960.11

CB6 PD 1225.50

CB5 PD 1225.50

CB26 PD 1225.50

CB26 PD 1225.50

CB24 PD 1225.50

CB24 PD 1225.50

CB4 PD 1225.50
 29

System/Bus/Load Point Contributing Element ECOST

ID Type ID Type $ / yr

Syn2 Syn. Mtr. .................................................. ......................... 1567.26

T1 Xfmr3 187.50

T1 Xfmr3 187.50

T3 Xfmr2 187.50

T3 Xfmr2 187.50

Syn2 Syn. Mtr. 62.52

CB44 PD 37.50

CB18 PD 37.50

CB43 PD 37.50

CB41 PD 37.50

CB41 PD 37.50

Syn1 Syn. Mtr. .................................................. ......................... 105662.90

T2 Xfmr2 22851.51

T2 Xfmr2 22851.51

Syn1 Syn. Mtr. 7535.01

CB21 PD 4570.30

CB21 PD 4570.30

CB10 PD 4570.30

CB11 PD 4570.30

CB11 PD 4570.30

CB2 PD 4570.30

CB2 PD 4570.30

LTG Load St Load .................................................. .........................

CB18 PD 0.00

Fuse2 PD 0.00

Fuse2 PD 0.00

CB13 PD 0.00

CB16 PD 0.00

CB7 PD 0.00

CB15 PD 0.00

CB17 PD 0.00

CB8 PD 0.00

CB8 PD 0.00

CAP1 St Load .................................................. .........................

MOV1 MOV .................................................. .........................

 30

SUMMARY

System Indexes

SAIFI 0.1108 f / [Link]

SAIDI 20.3554 hr / [Link]

CAIDI 183.722 hr / customer interruption

ASAI 0.9977 pu

ASUI 0.00232 pu

EENS 130.226 MW hr / yr

ECOST 286,465.10 $ / yr

AENS 7.2347 MW hr / [Link]

IEAR 2.200 $ / kW hr

SAIFI System Average Interruption Frequency Index

SAIDI System Average Interruption Duration Index
CAIDI Customer Average Interruption Duration Index
ASAI Average service Availability Index
ASUI Average Service Unavailability Index
EENS Expected Energy Not Supplied
ECOST Expected Interruption Cost
AENS Average Energy Not Supplied
IEAR Interruption Energy Assessment Rate
 31

References

[1] P. D. M. R. Barker, "Determining the impact of distributed generation on power

systems," in IEEE Power Engineering Society Summer Meeting, 16-20 July 2000.

[2] R. B. Standler, "Liability of Electric Utility in the USA for Outage and Blackout,"

[Link]/outage, 2011.

[3] V. Lackovic, "Basic Reliability Analysis of Electrical Power Systems," Continuing

Education and Development, Inc..

[4] N. B. o. Trustees, "NERC," North American Electric Reliability Corporation,

[Online]. Available: [Link] [Accessed 10th October 2016].

[5] T. Gonen, Electrical Power Distribution System Engineering, CRC Press, 2008.

[6] L. Layton, "Electric System Reliability Indices," [Link], 2004.

[7] W. X. Lin Jikeng, "Reliability Evaluation for Distribution System with Distributed

Generation," in IEEE, Tianjin, 2010.

[8] I. Operation Technology, "Distribution reliability Assessment," Etap Corporate,

2016. [Online]. Available: [Link] [Accessed 10th October 2016].

[9] G. T. Mohammad Al-Mahaini, "Evaluating Future Power Distribution System

Reliability Including Distributed Generation," in IEEE, 2013.