Improvement of the distribution network state estimation with increase of accurate information and using a two-step method

Distribution networks (DNs) are gradually changing and this makes their control and utilization complicated. State estimation (SE) plays a significant role in active distribution networks. The performance of the energy management center in modern distribution networks is highly dependent on the results obtained from the SE. In the present study, considering the shortage of measurements in the DN, a two-step state estimation method with a new network reduction process (NRP) is proposed. In the proposed method, a new NRP is used in a two-step state estimation method to improve the performance of SE in a DN. Obtaining accurate initial information on the network condition improves the performance of SE. The initial SE is performed using a new NRP process to obtain accurate initial data. This information is used as the measurement to improve the performance of secondary SE. This method resolves the shortage of accurate measurements and redundancy measurements, and it improves network SE accuracy without adding any real-time measurement. Moreover, the proposed method is economically affordable. Simulations are performed on the 18-bus UK radial feeder and the IEEE 69-bus distribution network in MATLAB software to guarantee valid operation of the proposed style.

PDF

___

1] Baran ME, Kelley AW. A branch-current-based state estimation method for distribution systems. IEEE Transactions on Power Systems 1995; 10 (1): 483-491. doi: 10.1109/59.373974
2] Pau M, Pegoraro PA, Sulis S. Efficient branch-current-based distribution system state estimation including syn- chronized measurements. IEEE Transactions on Instrumentation and Measurement 2013; 62 (9): 2419-2429. doi: 10.1109/TIM.2013.2272397
[3] Ranković A, Maksimović BM, Sarić AT. A three-phase state estimation in active distribution networks. International Journal of Electrical Power & Energy Systems 2014; 54: 154-162. doi: 10.1016/j.ijepes.2013.07.001
[4] Korres GN, Hatziargyriou ND, Katsikas PJ. State estimation in multi-microgrids. European Transactions on Electrical Power 2011; 21 (2): 1178-1199. doi: 10.1002/etep.442.q
[5] Mehrdad TH, Mehdi AJ. A robust method for state estimation of power system with UPFC. Turkish Journal of Electrical Engineering & Computer Sciences 2010; 18 (4) 571-596. doi: 10.3906/elk-0906-90
[6] Roytelman I, Shahidehpour SM. State estimation for electric power distribution systems in quasi real-time condi- tions. IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery 1993; 8 (4): 2009-2015. doi: 10.1109/61.248315
[7] Muscas C, Pau M, Pegoraro PA, Sulis S. Uncertainty of voltage profile in PMU-based distribution sys- tem state estimation. IEEE Transactions on Instrumentation and Measurement 2016; 65 (5): 988-998. doi: 10.1109/TIM.2015.2494619
[8] Singh R, Pal BC, Vinter RB. Measurement placement in distribution system state estimation. IEEE Transactions on Power Systems 2009; 24 (2): 668-675. doi: 10.1109/TIM.2015.2494619
[9] Lu CN, Teng JH, Liu WH. Distribution system state estimation. IEEE Transactions on Power Systems 1995; 10 (1): 229-240. doi: 10.1109/59.373946
[10] Baran ME, Kelley AW. State estimation for real-time monitoring of distribution systems. IEEE Transactions on Power Systems 1994; 9 (3): 1601-1609. doi: 10.1109/59.336098
[11] Baran ME, Jung J, McDermott TE. Including voltage measurements in branch current state estimation for distri- bution systems. In: IEEE 2009 Power & Energy Society General Meeting; Calgary, Canada; 2009. pp. 1-5.
[12] Wang H, Schulz NN. A revised branch current-based distribution system state estimation algorithm and meter placement impact. IEEE Transactions on Power Systems 2004; 19 (1): 207-213. doi: 10.1109/TPWRS.2003.821426
[13] Zhu J, Abur A. Effect of phasor measurements on the choice of reference bus for state estimation. In: IEEE 2007 Power Engineering Society General Meeting; Tampa, FL, USA; 2007. pp. 1-5.
[14] Zhou M, Centeno VA, Thorp JS, Phadke AG. An alternative for including phasor measurements in state estimators. IEEE Transactions on Power Systems 2006; 21 (4): 1930-1937. doi: 10.1109/TPWRS.2006.881112
[15] Karimi M, Mokhlis H, Bakar A, Shahriari A, Faradonbeh MA et al. Impact of load modeling in distribution state estimation. In: 2012 IEEE Power Engineering and Optimization Conference; Melaka, Malaysia; 2012. pp. 67-71.
[16] Liu J, Tang J, Ponci F, Monti A, Muscas C et al. Trade-offs in PMU deployment for state estimation in active distribution grids. IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid 2012; 3(2): 915-924. doi: 10.1109/TSG.2012.2191578
[17] Muscas C, Pau M, Pegoraro PA, Sulis S. Effects of measurements and pseudo-measurements correlation in distribu- tion system state estimation. IEEE Transactions on Instrumentation and Measurement 2014; 63 (12): 2813-2823. doi: 10.1109/TIM.2014.2318391
[18] Muscas C, Sulis S, Angioni A, Ponic F, Monti A. Impact of different uncertainty sources on a three-phase state estimator for distribution networks. IEEE Transactions on Instrumentation and Measurement 2014; 63 (9): 2200- 2209. doi: 10.1109/TIM.2014.2308352
[19] Alimardani A, Therrien F, Atanackovic D, Jatskevich J, Vaahedi E. Distribution system state estimation based on nonsynchronized smart meters. IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid 2015; 6 (6): 2919-2928. doi: 10.1109/TSG.2015.2429640
[20] Zhuang P, Deng R, Liang H. False data injection attacks against state estimation in multiphase and unbalanced smart distribution systems. IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid 2019; 10: 2871–2881. doi: 10.1109/TSG.2019.2895306
21] Liu Y, Ning P, Reiter MK. False data injection attacks against state estimation in electric power grids. ACM Transactions on Information and System Security 2011; 14 (1): 13. doi: 10.1145/1952982.1952995
[22] Deng R, Xiao G, Lu R, Liang H, Vasilakos AV. False data injection on state estimation in power systems— attacks, impacts, and defense: a survey. IEEE Transactions on Industrial Informatics 2017: 13 (2): 411–423. doi: 10.1109/TII.2016.2614396
[23] Liu X, Li Z. Local topology attacks in smart grids. IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid 2017: 8 (6): 2617–2626. doi: 10.1109/TSG.2016.2532347
[24] Fardad N, Soleymani S, Faghihi F. Reduction of PMUs via hybrid PMU-RTU communication changeover in the case of cyberattack on vulnerable power transmission lines. Turkish Journal of Electrical Engineering & Computer Sciences 2018; 26 (4): 1833-1846.
[25] Isozaki Y, Yoshizawa S, Fujimoto Y, Ishii H, Ono I et al. Detection of cyber attacks against voltage con- trol in distribution power grids with PVs. IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid 2015; 7 (4): 1824-1835. doi: 10.1109/TSG.2015.2427380
[26] Parvania M, Koutsandria G, Muthukumary V, Peisert S, McParland C et al. Hybrid control network intrusion detection systems for automated power distribution systems. In: 2014 44th Annual IEEE/IFIP International Conference on Dependable Systems and Networks; Budapest, Hungary; 2014. pp. 774-779. doi: 10.1109/DSN.2014.81
[27] Papaemmanouil A, Andersson G. On the reduction of large power system models for power market simulations. In: 17th Power Systems Computation Conference; Stockholm, Sweden; 2011. pp. 1308-1313.
[28] Ashraf SM, Rathore B, Chakrabarti S. Performance analysis of static network reduction methods commonly used in power systems. In: 2014 IEEE Eighteenth National Power Systems Conference; India; 2014. pp. 1-6.
[29] Wang H, Zhang W, Liu Y. A robust measurement placement method for active distribution system state es- timation considering network reconfiguration. IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid 2016; 9 (3): 2108-2117. doi: 10.1109/TSG.2016.2606700
[30] Singh R, Pal BC, Vinter RB. Measurement placement in distribution system state estimation. IEEE Transactions on Power Systems 2009; 24 (2) 668-675. doi: 10.1109/TPWRS.2009.2016457
[31] Zonkoly AEl, Safty SE, Maher R. Optimal placement of PMUs using improved tabu searched for complete observ- ability and out-of-step prediction. Turkish Journal of Electrical Engineering & Computer Sciences 2013; 21 (5): 1376-1393. doi: 10.3906/elk-1105-51