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

net/publication/339514701

Optimal placement of electric vehicle charging station for unbalanced radial

distribution systems

Article  in  Energy Sources, Part A: Recovery, Utilization and Environmental Effects · February 2020
DOI: 10.1080/15567036.2020.1731017

CITATIONS READS

7 267

2 authors:

Satish Moupuri Selvajyothi Kamakshy

Indian Institute of Information Technology, Design & Manufacturing, Kancheepur… Indian Institute of Information Technology, Design & Manufacturing, Kancheepur…
8 PUBLICATIONS   39 CITATIONS    33 PUBLICATIONS   145 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Research work carried out as a half time research assistant. View project

Research work carried out as a supervisor at iiitdm kanvherpuram. View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Satish Moupuri on 10 August 2020.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Energy Sources, Part A: Recovery, Utilization, and
Environmental Effects

ISSN: 1556-7036 (Print) 1556-7230 (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ueso20

Optimal placement of electric vehicle charging

station for unbalanced radial distribution systems

Moupuri Satish Kumar Reddy & Kamakshy Selvajyothi

To cite this article: Moupuri Satish Kumar Reddy & Kamakshy Selvajyothi (2020):
Optimal placement of electric vehicle charging station for unbalanced radial distribution
systems, Energy Sources, Part A: Recovery, Utilization, and Environmental Effects, DOI:
10.1080/15567036.2020.1731017

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/15567036.2020.1731017

Published online: 26 Feb 2020.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 11

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=ueso20
ENERGY SOURCES, PART A: RECOVERY, UTILIZATION, AND ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
https://doi.org/10.1080/15567036.2020.1731017

Optimal placement of electric vehicle charging station for

unbalanced radial distribution systems
Moupuri Satish Kumar Reddy and Kamakshy Selvajyothi
Department of ECE, IIITDM, Kancheepuram, Chennai, India

ABSTRACT ARTICLE HISTORY

Transportation is one of the dominant applications where abundant Received 20 October 2019
fossil fuel usage can be experienced across the world. To save the Revised 12 February 2020
earth from carbon emission and depletion of conventional energy Accepted 13 February 2020
resources, alternate energy sources are to be introduced in transporta- KEYWORDS
tion which will lead to Electric Vehicles (EV) and Hybrid Electric Vehicles Charging stations;
(HEV). The infrastructure of the power system is also adaptable to the distributed generators;
changes of electrified transportation. In this research work, electric vehicle; optimal
a methodology is proposed to find the optimal placement of Electric placement; unbalanced
Vehicle Charging Station (EVCS) along with the optimal capacity of radial distribution system
charging stations for Unbalanced Radial Distribution System (URDS) by
using Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO). This paper also explains the
effect of EVCS placement in RDS w.r.t voltage profile and real power
losses. Also, the insertion of EVCS to the power system draws additional
power from the electrical grid. To make the system more self-sustainable
and reliable, this research work proposes additional distributed genera-
tors (DGs) at optimal locations to reduce the impact of EVCS on the
system by incorporating it. The proposed methodology is validated with
two standard unbalanced IEEE test cases such as IEEE 19 bus and IEEE 25
bus URDS.

Introduction
The dramatic temperature rise and abundant release of carbon due to over usage of earth’s fossil-
fuels like crude oil, coal, etc., have deteriorated the ecosystem. Global warming affects the ecology by
uneven rains, high temperatures, etc. The primary application of the crude oil is in transportation
sectors (https://www.eia.gov/outlooks/ieo/pdf/0484(2016).pdf) like automobiles, avionics, etc. So
majority of the population is looking for alternative fuel for transportation. Many countries are
promoting the battery fed transportation for reducing the pollution in their country. Electrification
in transport sector can be successfully implemented by creating a good infrastructure for reliable
electric vehicle charging. The implementation of electric vehicle charging stations (EVCS) to the
existing distribution system will require an increase in installed capacity of the grid.
The green transportation can be encouraged by erecting the EVCS at suitable locations of the
distribution system. But, the system needs to be analyzed by incorporating EVCS in all the three phases,
either with equal or unequal ratings. The impact of EVCS on the electrical grid can be studied by
modeling EVCS in an RDS (Etezadi-Amoli, Choma, and Stefani 2010). But the inclusion of EVCS to the
distribution system will draw additional power which affects the bus voltage and thermal stability of the
branches (Deb et al. 2018; Schneider et al. 2008). The limitations to the electric grid such as voltage
constraints, system losses, etc., with the transition to plug-in hybrid vehicle, are analyzed for a practical
distribution system in Ontario, Canada (Hajimiragha et al. 2010).

CONTACT Moupuri Satish Kumar Reddy [email protected] Department of ECE, IIITDM, Kancheepuram, Chennai,
India
© 2020 Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
2 M. S. K. REDDY AND K. SELVAJYOTHI

EVCS are not charging the EVs throughout the day, which are busier at its peak hours and
scheduled as per the consumer’s need. The impact of them in power grid is smoothly analyzed with
these tentative schedules of the charging stations in the distribution system (Xu et al. 2009). So the
infrastructure of EVCS majorly focuses on EVs charging schedule during off-peak hours of the load
curve. The infrastructure development of EVCS makes the system self-sustain with the incorporation
of EVCS (Wu et al. 2010). The various impacts of EVCS to the power grid are completely reviewed
in Deb, Kalita, and Mahanta (2017a), and the need of scheduling the EVCS for planned distribution
network is given in Deb, Kalita, and Mahanta (2019). The reliability of the distribution system is
affected by the addition of EVCS which is detailed in Deb, Kalita, and Mahanta (2017b). The
scheduled EVCS also improves the reliability and reduces its impact on the smart grid
(Dharmakeerthi and Mithulananthan 2015). The plug-in EVs affect the residential loads by means
of voltage stability (Dubey and Surya 2015) because of charging from residential utility. So there is
a need for optimal placement of EVCS in RDS. In Deb et al. (2017), Chicken Swarm optimization
and Teaching-Learning-Based Optimization (CSO-TLBO) algorithm is used for optimal placement
of EVCS in balanced RDS.
The impact of EVCS can be reduced by placing the Distributed Generators (DGs) at optimal
locations. In Ackermann, Anderson, and Söder (2001) and Pepermans et al. (2005), various small-
scale generation technologies, their issues, and benefits are discussed. The branches of distribution
network have to carry bidirectional current with the inclusion of DGs in RDS which degrades the
thermal stability of conductors (Barker and de Mello 2000; Hadjsaid, Canard, and Dumas 1999).
Addition of DGs complicates protection coordination, voltage, and flow dynamics of the feeder
planning (Willis 2000). In Rau and Wan (1994), optimal placement of renewable energy resources in
a power grid is analyzed. But, the optimal location of DGs through analytical methods is not suitable
for large distribution networks and hence, heuristic algorithms like fuzzy-Genetic algorithm (GA)
(Kim et al. 2002), Hereford Ranch algorithm (Kim et al. 1998) and Tabu search algorithm (Nara
et al. 2001) are used. So DGs are optimally placed for compensating the effect of EVCS in RDS. The
impact of both EVCS and DGs is analyzed by two-stage optimization in Ramana, Ganesh, and
Sivanagaraju (2010). The other method for reducing the effect of EVCS on the grid is by re-
configuring the topology of radial distribution network which can be applied after optimal place-
ment of EVCS (Reddy and Selvajyothi, 2019)
The successful analysis of the distribution system depends on the load flow of the system. The
losses of the balanced and unbalanced distribution systems are calculated by using the load flow
analysis. The unbalanced system is first balanced and then analyzed using the transformation matrix
(Ranjan et al. 2004). In Stott (1974), various requirements for load flow, numerical method solutions,
and their use in modern applications were discussed. Conventional load flows like Gauss, Gauss-
Siedel, Newton and Newton–Raphson method, etc., are used specifically for constant impedance load
models. To address other types of load models like constant voltage and constant current along with
constant impedance load model, F. Zhang and C.S. Cheng proposed a modified Newton load flow
(Zhang and Cheng 1997). In all the above load flows, the system takes more time to converge w.r.t
different conditions like node voltage, line current, steady-state, and ill-conditioned losses. In Rajicic
and Tamura (1988) and Tripathy et al. (1982), the authors have approximated the Jacobian matrix,
with respect to voltage and load angle for real and reactive power, respectively, to get a faster rate of
convergence. The literature discussed so far is majorly focused on balanced RDS. But, practical RDSs
are unbalanced in nature so, implementing EVCS in URDS has to be studied by modeling distribu-
tion system components like transformers, distribution branches, and loads (Visali, Reddy, and
Reddy 2014). In Huiling et al. (2018), a new type of load flow is introduced for analyzing the URDS
with branch incidence matrix.
From the literature, it is clear that researchers are concentrating onto optimizing the location of
either EVCS or DGs for balanced RDSs with forward and backward sweep load flow algorithm. But,
there is a necessity to look into the localization of this power system equipment on URDS as the
demand is dynamic in nature. To address this research gap, an initial simulation study is carried out
 ENERGY SOURCES, PART A: RECOVERY, UTILIZATION, AND ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS 3

to optimize the location of EVCS on an URDS. Incorporation of EVCS into the distribution system
has drawn additional real power from the grid, which increases the losses associated with this system.
Hence, DGs will be designed with renewable resources and placed at suitable locations in the
distribution system for compensating the system losses. Here in this work, PSO is used to locate
a constant capacity EVCS along with DG.

Problem statement and formulation

It is clear from the literature study that till now, no research work is reported to optimize the location of
EVCS on an existing unbalanced distribution system. Placement of EVCS increases the power require-
ment. Hence, a proper solution is needed to optimize the power consumption from the grid. In this work,
the problem is formulated using load flow and modeling the EVCS placed on an URDS. Before applying
load flow to the unbalanced system, it is mandatory to convert an unbalanced system to a balanced
system (Visali, Reddy, and Reddy 2014). This has been achieved through the modeling of distribution
lines, transformers, and loads in the distribution system. After modeling the unbalanced system, load
flow can be applied to the balanced RDS. The work analyzes the unbalanced system along with the
optimal placement of EVCS and determines the impact of system performance with losses and voltage
profile. This work proposes a new load flow based on branch incidence matrix for the unbalanced system.

Branch incidence matrix

The calculation of load flow starts with the construction of a branch incidence matrix which,
depends on the number of branches per phase of the system. Generally, a RDS has branches between
two buses. So the number of branches is always less than the total number of buses in the system.
The radial nature of the system will make the elements of the off-diagonal matrix unity for single-
phase and identity matrix I for three-phase distribution systems. The elements below the diagonal
elements are zeros for single-phase and null matrix N for three-phase RDSs. The elements above the
diagonal matrix depend on the actual connections between the buses. The algorithm for the
construction of incidence matrix of a sample 6 bus URDS (Figure 1) is illustrated in Figure 2. The
resulting B-matrix is shown in Table 1.

Branch incidence matrix-based load flow

The branch current Ibr can be calculated from the bus current Ib (Reddy and Selvajyothi 2019) using
(1) mentioned.

Figure 1. Sample 6 bus URDS.

4 M. S. K. REDDY AND K. SELVAJYOTHI

Figure 2. Flowchart for construction of incidence matrix (B-matrix).

Table 1. Branch incidence matrix.

Branch 1 2 3 4 5
1 I -I N N -I
2 N I -I -I N
3 N N I N N
4 N N N I N
5 N N N N I

Ibr ¼ B1 Ib (1)

The complex branch powers and bus powers are used to bring the relationship between branch
currents and bus currents using B matrix. The branch power losses Lbr of the system make dissimilar
voltages at sending and receiving ends of the bus. The relationship between branch powers and bus
powers is established in the same way as that of bus/branch currents.

Sb ¼ B½Sbr  Lbr  (2)

Sbr ¼ B1 Sb þ Lbr (3)

where
Sbr is the branch apparent power.
Sb is the bus apparent power.
B is the bus incidence matrix.
Lbr is the branch losses.
The power flow equations are complex quadratic equations. A new variable βlm is introduced for
a branch connecting lth bus and mth bus as in (4).
 ENERGY SOURCES, PART A: RECOVERY, UTILIZATION, AND ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS 5


βlm ¼ Vl Vl  Vm (4)
where
Vl is the lth bus voltage.
V *l is the voltage conjugate of the lth bus.
The branch power of the ‘lm’th element is expressed in terms of βlm as in (5).

Slm ¼ Plm þ jQlm ¼ βlm Ylm (5)

βlm ¼ Slm Zlm (6)

βlm
Vm ¼ Vl  (7)
Vl
  
βlm
Ilm ¼ Ylm (8)
Vl
The detailed flowchart is shown in Figure 3.
Slm ¼ Sml  Llm (9)
X
Llm ¼ Lrlm (10)
specr 1 
Lrlm ¼ Sm  Vmr1 Im (11)

br ¼ Sbr  Lloss
Srec send
(12)


Max Lrlm  0:01 (13)
where
r is the iteration count.
Llm is lm branch losses.
Smspec is specified apparent power at mth bus.
Vm is mth bus voltage.
Im is mth bus current.
The limitations of the algorithm are being investigated in view of voltage stability limit (Ramana,
Ganesh, and Sivanagaraju 2010). The algorithm will perform faster for systems having lesser
transmission losses. The convergence criteria are that the rth iteration of the transmission loss of
each element should be less than the tolerance value.

Methodology
Modeling of EVCS
The charging current for the EV battery is supplied by EVCS. The capacity of an EV battery is
specified in kWh and Ah. The modeling of EVCS is based on the assumption that it supplies only
required real current (Deb et al. 2018) to EV battery and hence, when EVCS is connected to any bus
corresponding real power is increased. Therefore, it is important to locate the EVCS at suitable
locations where the branch currents are minimum. Figure 4 illustrates a portion of the RDS in which
EVCS is placed optimally at bus d and draws a real power in addition to the power drawn by an
existing load.
The main objective of this paper is to optimize the losses of the system after the placement of
EVCS. The real power losses are calculated using load flow analysis by including EVCS at optimal
locations. The location of EVCS can be optimized by using PSO. The algorithm for the proposed
method is detailed in the succeeding section and the flowchart is shown in Figure 5.
6 M. S. K. REDDY AND K. SELVAJYOTHI

Figure 3. Flowchart of branch incidence matrix-based load flow.

Figure 4. EVCS connected to the bus of RDS.

 ENERGY SOURCES, PART A: RECOVERY, UTILIZATION, AND ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS 7

Figure 5. Flowchart of optimal placement of EVCS and DGs using PSO.

Algorithm:

Step-1: Read the line data and load data of the desired radial distribution bus system.

Step-2: Calculate the losses in the branches and bus voltages for the three phases using unbalanced
load flow (Etezadi-Amoli, Choma, and Stefani 2010).

Step-3: Generate random values which point the location of EVCS and number of charging stations
as per [X] shown below.
First column and second column of [X] in (14) indicate the locations of the EVCS. Third and
fourth columns represent the number of charging units corresponding to the first and second
column locations.
8 M. S. K. REDDY AND K. SELVAJYOTHI

2 3
x11 x12 n11 n12
6 x21 x22 n21 n22 7
6 7
X¼6
6     7 7 (14)
4     5
xcs1 xcs2 nnc1 nnc2
Step 4: Calculate the losses in all the branches of the system at every population (p) after placing
EVCS w.r.t to distance from substation and number of units to decide its capacity as per [X].
Step 5: Increment the population by one and assign [X] entries to the load flow and calculate the
losses of the system along with EVCS with required number of charging units.
Assume minimum power loss at p = 1. i.e. Pmin = Ploss (1)
Step 6: if Ploss (p) < Ploss (p + 1)
Pmin = Ploss(p)
then
Pmin = Ploss(p + 1)
Calculate the losses for all the assumed number of generations. Choose the best population and
generation based on minimum losses as Pbest and Gbest. Assume C1 = 2.2, C2 = 2.3.

Step 7: Now, update the X particle using

XðUpdateÞ¼ W  XþC1 randð1ÞðPbest XÞþC2 randð1ÞðGbest XÞ
where, weight of the particle
ðWmax  Wmin Þ
W ¼ Wmax   ðiter  1Þ
ðng  1Þ
ng number of generations
iter number of iterations
Step 8: Repeat step 4 to 7 for every generation.

Step 9: Display the losses, bus voltages and EVCS locations along with number of charging units.

A similar process is required to optimally place the DG for compensating the losses introduced by
the placement of EVCS.

Results and discussion

The methodology for optimizing the location and capacity of EVCS along with the best placement of
distribution generator in an unbalanced distribution system is illustrated by choosing two test
systems: IEEE 19 bus and IEEE 25 bus URDS.

IEEE 19 bus unbalanced RDS

The single line diagram of IEEE 19 bus URDS is shown in Figure 6. The line data and load data of
this system are given in Etezadi-Amoli, Choma, and Stefani (2010). The base kV and base MVA of
the system are considered as 11 kV and 1 MVA, respectively. The total real and reactive power
demands of this system are 1219.8 kW and 590.9 kVAR, respectively. The real and reactive power
losses of the system at each phase are (4.454 kW, 1.9405 kVAR), (4.453 kW, 1.896 kVAR), and
(4.567 kW, 1.958 kVAR), respectively. The optimal placement of EVCS is at bus 2 with 9 charging
units each of size 50 kW along with the optimal location of DG at 12th bus as shown in Figure 9 with
size 42.11 kW, 38.7 kW, and 41.09 kW for three phases, respectively. But, real power losses and
 ENERGY SOURCES, PART A: RECOVERY, UTILIZATION, AND ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS 9

Figure 6. Single line diagram of IEEE 19 bus URDS with one EVCS.

reactive power losses are increased. The values are (6.12 kW, 2.64 kVAR), (5.95 kW, 2.58 kVAR),
and (6.13 kW, 2.60 kVAR), respectively, for the three phases. The effect of EVCS on the distribution
system is reduced by including and placing the DG of required capacity at optimal locations. The
methodology further continues to find the number of DGs to reduce the losses due to EVCS on the
system.
In order to validate the methodology, five different cases are addressed in this study. The cases are
as mentioned below:

Case 1: URDS with existing loads (i.e., before placement of EVCS) – The real power losses and
voltages at each bus are considered as the reference value.
Case 2: URDS with one EVCS – Addition of EVCS increases the losses and decreases voltage
profile deteriorating the URDS (Figure 6).
Case 3: URDS with one EVCS and one DG – To enhance URDS, DG is added which will ensure
improvement in losses and voltage profile (Figure 7).
Case 4: URDS with one EVCS and two DGs – Further addition of DG improves the losses and
voltage profile (Figure 8).
Case 5: URDS with one EVCS and three DGs – The increase in the number of DGs is limited to
the losses and voltage profile of the system as in case 1 (Figure 9).

The total losses with placement of EVCS to the URDS are reduced by incorporating three DGs
with 450 kW capacity compared to case1. But, the losses at phase B are higher even after considering
three DGs in case 4 compared to case 1. The size of DGs at three buses corresponding to phase B is
less than the other two phases. So the size of the DG is not enough to compensate the effect of EVCS
at phase B. The inclusion of DG for each case increases the branch currents at the B-phase. So in the
B-phase DGs fail to compensate real power losses. Table 2 illustrates the comparative analysis of total
real power losses for five different cases considered in this study.
10 M. S. K. REDDY AND K. SELVAJYOTHI

Figure 7. Single line diagram of IEEE 19 bus URDS with one EVCS and one DG.

Figure 8. Single line diagram of IEEE 19 bus URDS with one EVCS and two DGs.
 ENERGY SOURCES, PART A: RECOVERY, UTILIZATION, AND ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS 11

Figure 9. Single line diagram of IEEE 19 bus URDS with one EVCS and three DGs.

Table 2. Comparative analysis of losses of IEEE 19 bus system for different cases considered.
S. Location of Size of EVCS (kW) at Location of Size of DG at each Real power losses at each
No. Cases EVCS each phase DGs phase, kW phase, kW
1 Without EVCS – – – 4.454(A)
– 4.453(B)
– 4.567(C)
2 With one EVCS 2 150 – – 9.6055(A)
150 9.2412(B)
150 9.6062(C)
3 With one EVCS and 2 150 12 42.11(A) 6.112(A)
one DG 150 38.76(B) 5.955(B)
150 41.09(C) 6.134(C)
4 With one EVCS and 2 150 15 42.11(A) 5.047(A)
two DGs 38.76(B)
150 41.09(C) 4.920(B)
19 42.11(A)
150 38.76(B) 5.024(C)
41.09(C)
5 With one EVCS and 2 150 13 42.11(A) 4.355(A)
three DGs 38.78(B)
40.00(C)
150 19 36.00(A) 4.766(B)
22.00(B)
41.09(C)
150 14 42.11(A) 4.122(C)
30.00(B)
35.00(C)
12 M. S. K. REDDY AND K. SELVAJYOTHI

Figure 10. Single line diagram of IEEE 25 bus URDS with one EVCS.

IEEE 25 bus unbalanced radial distribution system

The single line diagram of IEEE 25 bus URDS is shown in Figure 10. The line data and load data of
this system are referred from Etezadi-Amoli, Choma, and Stefani (2010). The real and reactive power
loss of the system at each phase is 52.7 kW, 55.4102 kW, and 41.828 kW, respectively, and
58.204 KVAR, 53.269 KVAR, and 55.671 KVAR, respectively. The optimal placement of EVCS is
at bus 2 with the 9 charging units of size 50 kW each along with the optimal location of DG at 12th
bus with the size of 357.76 kW, 361.10 kW, and 361.10 kW for three phases, respectively. The single
line diagram of IEEE 25 bus URDS with incorporation of one EVCS and one DG along with their
sizes at three phases is shown in FIgure 11. The real power losses are reduced to 46.053 kW, 48.356
kW, and 36.069 kW at three phases, respectively, and reactive power losses are reduced to 48.682
KVAR, 44.45 KVAR, and 46.65 KVAR at three phases, respectively. The comparative analysis of
losses for the different cases is shown in Table 3.

Conclusion
EVs are the future of transportation to reduce the carbon emission and hence, the EVCS becomes an
inevitable part of the distribution grid. Any practical distribution grid is unbalanced in nature. In
this paper, a study is attempted to analyze the effect of adding EVCS into IEEE URDS using branch
incidence matrix-based load flow. But, during the charging of EVs, URDS draws extra power from
the grid which increases the line/branch losses. But the extra power which is used for EVCS is not
 ENERGY SOURCES, PART A: RECOVERY, UTILIZATION, AND ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS 13

Figure 11. Single line diagram of IEEE 25 bus URDS with one EVCS and one DG.

Table 3. Comparative analysis of losses of IEEE 25 bus system for different cases considered.
S. Location Size of EVCS at Location Size of DG at each Real power losses at
No. Cases of EVCS each phase of DG phase, kW each phase, kW
1 Without EVCS and DG – – – – 52.70 (A)
55.41 (B)
41.82 (C)
2 With one EVCS and one DG 2 150 12 357.667 46.053 (A)
150 361.109 48.356 (B)
150 361.109 36.099 (C)

supplied from commercial generating stations like thermal, nuclear, etc., which will spoil the
intention of green transportation. So solar- and wind-based DGs should be used at the distribution
level. In this paper type one DG is used, which compensates only real power of the system.
So there is a need for reducing the losses of the URDS while charging EVs by introducing additional
energy sources in the form of DGs. Now, to minimize the branch/line losses, a heuristic algorithm, PSO
is used for optimal placement of EVCS and DGs. The effectiveness of the proposed algorithm is tested
on two IEEE URDS systems, namely IEEE 19 bus and IEEE 25 bus. In addition to the constraints on
voltage and current profiles, number of EVCS is fixed constant and to reduce the branch losses required
number of DGs is included in the system. The difference in the size of the EVCS and total load of the
system motivate power engineers for selecting the number of DGs to compensate the effect of EVCS. In
IEEE 19 bus, the number of DGs required in the URDS is more to increase the performance of the
system whereas, in IEEE 25 bus URDS, only one DG is sufficient to compensate the effect of EVCS. The
optimized number and location of DGs for an EVCS added into URDS are addressed by the PSO
algorithm. The number of EVCS is decided based on the thermal constraints of the conductors and
14 M. S. K. REDDY AND K. SELVAJYOTHI

voltage constraints of the buses in the existing URDS. The number of DGs can be increased until the
losses of compensated system are less than or equal to the original system.
The proposed work can be extended further through the reconfiguration of the unbalanced
system along with EVCS and DGs. The work can also be extended with the optimal and simulta-
neous placement of EVCS and DGs, which are compensating real power, reactive power, and
apparent power, respectively, of the load. Demand side management techniques like valley filling
and peak clipping of load curve can also be applied by proper management of EVCS, for flattening
the load curve of the system.

Notes on contributors
Moupuri Satish Kumar Reddy studied at Vaagdevi Institute of technology and Sciences, Proddatur, India and received
the B.Tech degree (2007) in Electrical and Electronics Engineering from JNTU Hyderabad, India. Received M.E degree
(2014) in Electrical Power Systems from JNTUACEP, Pulivendula,India. He worked as Assistant Professor in SEE at
SASTRA University. Currently he is pursuing Ph.D in Indian Institute of Information Technology Design and
Manufacturing, Kancheepuram, India. Areas of interest are Power system, Optimization and Control and
Instrumentation Engineering.

Kamakshy Selvajyothi studied at Thangal Kunju Musaliar College of Engineering, Kollam, India and received the B.
Tech degree (1995) in Electrical and Electronics Engineering from Kerala University, India. Received M.E degree
(2004) in Power Electronics and Industrial Drives from Sathyabama Institute of Science and Technology, Chennai,
India. Received Ph.D degree in Electrical Engineering from the Indian Institute of Technology, Madras in
2009. Currently she is an Assistant Professor in Electrical Engineering, Indian Institute of Information Technology
Design and Manufacturing, Kancheepuram, India. Areas of interest are Control and Instrumentation Engineering,
Power Electronics and Drives.

References
Ackermann, T., G. Anderson, and L. Söder. 2001. Distributed generation: A definition. Electrical Power System
Research 57:195–204. doi:10.1016/S0378-7796(01)00101-8.
Barker, P. P., and R. W. de Mello. 2000. Determining the impact of distributed generation on power systems part 1 -
radial distribution systems. IEEE Power & Energy Society Summer Meeting 3:1645–56.
Deb, S., K. Kalita, X. Z. Gao, K. Tammi, and P. Mahanta. November, 2017. Optimal placement of charging stations
using CSO-TLBO algorithm. Proceedings of IEEE Third International Conference on Research in Computational
Intelligence and Communication Networks (ICRCICN), Kolkata, India, 84–89.
Deb, S., K. Kalita, and P. Mahanta. December, 2017a. Review of impact of electric vehicle charging station on the
power grid. Proceedings of IEEE Conference on Technological Advancements in Power and Energy (TAP Energy),
Kollam, India.
Deb, S., K. Kalita, and P. Mahanta. December, 2017b. Impact of electric vehicle charging station load on reliability of
distribution network. Proceedings of IEEE Conference on Technological Advancements in Power and Energy (TAP
Energy), Kollam, India.
Deb, S., K. Kalita, and P. Mahanta. 2019. Distribution network planning considering the impact of electric vehicle
charging station load. Smart Power Distribution Systems, Academic Press, 529–53. doi:10.1016/B978-0-12-812154-
2.00022-5.
Deb, S., K. Tammi, K. Kalita, and P. Mahanta. Aug, 2018. Impact of electric vehicle charging station load on
distribution network. Energies, MDPI 178:2–25.
Dharmakeerthi, C. H., and N. Mithulananthan. 2015. PEV load and its impact on static voltage stability. Proceedings
of Plug In Electric Vehicles in Smart Grids, Singapore, Springer, 221–48.
Dubey, A., and S. Surya. 2015. Electric vehicle charging on residential distribution systems: Impacts and mitigations.
IEEE Access 3:1871–93. doi:10.1109/ACCESS.2015.2476996.
Etezadi-Amoli, M., K. Choma, and J. Stefani. Jul, 2010. Rapid-charge electric-vehicle stations. IEEE Transactions on
Power Delivery 25(3):1883–87. doi: 10.1109/TPWRD.2010.2047874.
Hadjsaid, N., J. F. Canard, and F. Dumas. 1999. Dispersed generation impact on distribution networks. IEEE Computer
Application in Power System 12:22–28. doi:10.1109/67.755642.
Hajimiragha, A., C. A. Caizares, M. W. Fowler, and A. Elkamel. Feb, 2010. Optimal transition to plug-in hybrid
electric vehicles in Ontario, Canada, considering the electricity-grid limitations. IEEE Transactions on Industrial
Electronics 57(2):690–701. doi: 10.1109/TIE.2009.2025711.
 ENERGY SOURCES, PART A: RECOVERY, UTILIZATION, AND ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS 15

Huiling, T. A. N. G., W. U. Jiekang, W. U. Zhijiang, and C. H. E. N. Lingmin. 2018. Two-stage optimization method for
power loss and voltage profile control in distribution systems with DGs and EVs using stochastic second-order cone
programming. Turkish Journal of Electrical Engineering & Computer Sciences 26:501–17. doi:10.3906/elk-1602-65.
Kim, J. O., S. W. Nam, S. K. Park, and C. Singh. 1998. Dispersed generation planning using improved Hereford Ranch
algorithm. Electrical Power System Research 47:47–55. doi:10.1016/S0378-7796(98)00038-8.
Kim, K. H., Y. J. Lee, S. B. Rhee, S. K. Lee, and S.-K. You. 2002. Dispersed generator placement using fuzzy-GA in
distribution systems. IEEE Power & Energy Society Summer Meeting 3:1148–53.
Nara, K., Y. Hayashi, K. Ikeda, and T. Ashizawa. 2001. Application of tabu search to optimal placement of distributed
generators. IEEE Power & Energy Society Winter Meeting 2:918–23.
Pepermans, G., J. Driesen, D. Haeseldonckx, R. Belmans, and W. D’haeseleer. 2005. Distributed generation: Definition,
benefits and issues. Energy Policy 33:787–98. doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2003.10.004.
Rajicic, D., and Y. Tamura. 1988. A modification to fast de-coupled power flow for network with high R/X ratios. IEEE
Transactions on Power Systems 3:743–46.
Ramana, T., V. Ganesh, and S. Sivanagaraju. 2010. Distributed generator placement and sizing in unbalanced radial
distribution system. Cogeneration & Distributed Generation Journal 25 (1):52–71. doi:10.1080/
15453661009709862.
Ranjan, R., B. Venkatesh, A. Chaturvedi, and D. Das. 2004. Power flow solution of three phase unbalanced radial
distribution network. Electric Power Components and Systems 32 (4):421–33. doi:10.1080/15325000490217452.
Rau, S., and Y. H. Wan. 1994. Optimum location of resources in distributed planning. IEEE Transactions in Power
System 9:2014–20. doi:10.1109/59.331463.
Reddy, M. S. K., and K. Selvajyothi. July, 2019. Optimal placement of electric vehicle charging stations in radial
distribution system along with reconfiguration. IEEE 1st International Conference on Energy, Systems and
Information Processing (ICESIP), Chennai, India, 1–6.
Schneider, K., C. Gerkensmeyer, M. Kintner-Meyer, and R. Fletcher. July, 2008. Impact assessment of plug-in hybrid
vehicles on pacific north west distribution systems. IEEE power and energy society general meeting-conversion and
delivery of electrical energy in the 21st century, Pittsburgh, PA, 1–6.
Stott, B. July, 1974. Review of load flow calculation methods. Proceedings of the IEEE 62(7):916–29. doi: 10.1109/
PROC.1974.9544.
Tripathy, S. C., D. Prasad, O. P. Malik, and G. S. Hope. 1982. Load flow solution for ill conditioned power systems by
Newton like method. IEEE Transactions on Power Apparatus and Systems 101:3684–3657.
Visali, N., M. S. Reddy, and M. S. Reddy. 2014. A modified unbalanced load flow solution using branch incidence
matrix. I-manager’s Journal on Electrical Engineering 7 (3):27–34. doi:10.26634/jee.7.3.2706.
Willis, H. L. 2000. Analytical methods and rules of thumb for modeling DG distribution interaction. IEEE Power &
Energy Society Summer Meeting 3:1643–44.
Wu, C. Y., C. B. Li, L. Du, and Y. J. Cao. Dec, 2010. A method for electric vehicle charging infrastructure planning.
Automation of Electric Power Systems 34(24):36–39.
Xu, F., G. Q. Yu, L. F. Gu, and H. Zhang. Oct, 2009. Tentative analysis of layout of electrical vehicle charging stations.
Proceeding of East China Electric Power 37(10):1677–82.
Zhang, F., and C. S. Cheng. Feb, 1997. A modified Newton method for radial distribution systems power flow analysis.
IEEE Transactions on Power Systems 12(1):389–97. doi: 10.1109/59.575728.

View publication stats