EUROPEAN TRANSACTIONS ON ELECTRICAL POWER

Euro. Trans. Electr. Power 2004; 14:331345

Published online 2 August 2004 in Wiley InterScience (www.interscience.wiley.com). DOI: 10.1002/etep.26

Load estimation for distribution systems

with minimum information
Vesna P. Borozan1*,y and Nikola L. J. Rajakovic2
1

Faculty of Electrical Engineering, University Sts. Cyril and Methodius, P.O. Box 574, 1000 Skopje, Macedonia
2
Faculty of Electrical Engineering, University of Belgrade, P.O. Box 816, 11001 Belgrade, Yugoslavia

SUMMARY
The operation of distribution systems requires a rather high number of planned or forced switching operations. In
order to prepare them, it is necessary to estimate loads at different levels in the system. This paper proposes a load
estimation method for distribution systems with minimum information available. The purpose of the load
estimation method presented in this paper is the economic and efficient use of the available remote measurements
in the distribution system considering typical measurements from the past and knowledge of load composition and
load behaviour at the distribution transformers level. The method is load-flow based, and its capability, efficiency
and accuracy are demonstrated by application on a practical distribution system. Copyright # 2004 John Wiley &
Sons, Ltd.
key words:

distribution systems; load estimation; real-time monitoring; load modelling

1. INTRODUCTION
Traditionally, distribution system operators have minimal equipment and computer support for system
monitoring and operation. The control of capacitors, switches and voltage regulators is usually
performed locally and manually. This demands an operating philosophy of running the system in a
normal configuration that may rarely be changed, except for maintenance or load restoration around
faulted equipment.
On the other hand, recently established distribution operation goals, like volt/var control, feeder
reconfiguration and restoration, require extensive substation and feeder monitoring and operation.
However, it is not always feasible for utility companies to invest in real-time monitoring and
automated switching devices all over the network. Therefore, they are forced to reach a compromise
between the potential benefits of the new control technologies and the capability of existing
equipment, by creating computer models of the distribution system and software for a quasi realtime simulation. Solving electrical power engineering problems, by using such models, makes it
possible to find feasible solutions for the operation of the distribution systems, increasing the
reliability and quality of the operators decisions.

*Correspondence to: Vesna P. Borozan, Faculty of Electrical Engineering, University Sts. Cyril and Methodius, P.O. Box 574,
1000 Skopje, Macedonia.
y
E-mail: vesnab@etf.ukim.edu.mk

Copyright # 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

332

V. P. BOROZAN AND N. L. J. RAJAKOVIC

In analyses on the optimal operation of the distribution system, information for load on feeder
sections and laterals is vital. Therefore, it is essential to devise an approach to estimate the real-time
system loads. But, in the load/state estimation literature, there are very few methods that regard the
specifics of the distribution systems. Being extensions of the conventional state estimation for power
systems, the methods [13] use the weighted least square approach to estimate the distribution system
state variables up to a high accuracy.
These methods are applicable only for distribution systems with a relatively diffused set of remote
measurement devices which provides the required initial set of real-time information. Unfortunately,
for most of the distribution systems, the only information available is the total feeder current recorded
at substations. Under such circumstances, the estimation of network load is traditionally performed by
its allocation according to the connected kVA sizes of transformers [4]. Considering this traditional
way as unsatisfactory, some authors [5,6] have implemented load forecasting techniques for solving
the estimation problem. In addition, the main focus of this paper is the development of a
computationally efficient load estimation method that will supply input to control function algorithms
for a practical distribution system with a very low level of monitoring and automation.
The proposed method for load estimation is capable of using every available remote measurement in
a distribution system in a simple and efficient manner, resulting in a corresponding increase in the
accuracy of the results. Using the property of distribution networks that can be portioned, the studies
may be performed separately on each portion of the network in which a coordination between the
available measurements is not required. The method is load-flow based like most of the analyses for
the operation of distribution systems, such as volt/var control, feeder reconfiguration and restoration.
Consequently, it is easy to fit it into the algorithms of these analyses using the same techniques for
network elements inspection, ordering and re-ordering [7]. In addition, applying some of the known
load-flow algorithms specialized for solving distribution systems [8] allows the load estimation of
weakly meshed networks, proper handling of PV buses, etc. Hence, the load-flow nature of the
proposed method significantly affects its efficiency.
Furthermore, when the load estimation is evaluated for use in precise applications, it is necessary to
consider its applicability, accuracy and, above all, the relationship between the ability of data
acquisition and method validity. The proposed load estimation method is verified by field measurements in a real-life distribution system: part of the town of Skopje distribution network.

2. METHODOLOGY
The basic procedure of the proposed load estimation method is demonstrated on a small radial
distribution network in Figure 1. The composition of remote measurements includes voltage
magnitude on the low-voltage side of the distribution substation (Vms) and current magnitudes (Im)
at the beginnings of the express and main feeders. The network from Figure 1 contains three portions
in which the load can be separately estimated. In this network only measurements in the express and
main feeder of the central portion should be coordinated. Each of these measurements is characterized
by its own range of measurement errors determined primarily by remote measurement devices. In
practice, these ranges of errors are very small, in comparison to the potential accuracy of the method.
Therefore, they are neglected in order to contribute to the simplicity and efficiency of the method.
As usual in solving most of the control problems, the procedure load estimation begins with
checking a real-time system model. In the literature [1] this step is referred to as configuration prescreening. The task of the configuration pre-screening is to examine the existing scheme configuration
Copyright # 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Euro. Trans. Electr. Power 2004; 14:331345

333

LOAD ESTIMATION METHOD

Figure 1. Composition of remote measurements in the distribution system.

by identifying the positions of normally open branches and by checking the availability of various
links and corresponding equipment.
This step is especially practical for load-flow based applications because, by its execution, the radial
(or weakly meshed) network is prepared for the load-flow solution.
The algorithmic solution for configuration pre-screening in this method is extended from the
network elements ordering and re-ordering algorithms presented earlier in Reference [7].
In the initial load-flow solution of the feeder, the load values of the distribution transformers are
taken from the typical diversified load curves or from load forecast data, whichever is available. This
application will result in a load flow different from the actual circuit. Therefore, the final step is to
adjust the load of the entire circuit until the simulation matches the measured values. Adjustment is
made according to the assumption of confirmed loads where individual loads change in proportion to
their peak values.
3. CONFIGURATION PRE-SCREENING
In the control analyses of distribution systems, because of the relatively frequent changes in system
configuration, it is very important to separate system topological and parameter data. In our
application, the topological information database of the related distribution system consists of a list
of distribution transformers, named as nodes, and a list of lines between two nodes, named as
branches. Nodes and branches are called by their addresses in the initial databases. Non-availability of
a distribution transformer is marked by a negative sign in front of the adequate node address. The
opened branches are also marked by a negative sign.
The ordering of network elements follows after the reading of actually available nodes and
branches. Existent loops in a weakly meshed network are being opened during the ordering by the
selection of breakpoints procedure [7], converting it into an equivalent radial network.
Furthermore, network branch ordering results in positions of branches with metered load and in an
ordered set of branches wherein load will be estimated according to each measurement. Such a set of
branches which relates to one measurement in the network is called the estimation area of that
measurement, and it is defined as a set of branches in which ending node loads flow only throughout
that measurement branch.
Copyright # 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Euro. Trans. Electr. Power 2004; 14:331345

334

V. P. BOROZAN AND N. L. J. RAJAKOVIC

Figure 2. Radial network ordered in layers.

3.1. Network branch ordering

Let us consider a radial network from Figure 2. The ordering starts from the root node. For every
branch, the node closest to the root node is defined as a starting node and the other one as an ending
node. The branch orientation is from the starting to the ending node. If the ending node of one branch is
a starting node for another branch, the first branch is the leading one and the other is the following one.
In the ordering procedure, the following branch always gets a larger number than the leading one [8].
To enhance the efficiency of the handling of the network elements, one more ordering condition is
accepted. The branches are ordered in layers away from the root node [7], as shown in Figure 2. The
numbering of the branches in one layer starts only after all of the branches in the previous layer have
been numbered.
The selection of breakpoints is a part of the ordering procedure. A breakpoint is created at the
ending node of the ordering branch if it is also the ending node of another already ordered branch. In
such a case, the ordering branch can be treated as a loop link. Its ending node becomes an artificial
network node, getting a temporary number.
3.2. Determination of estimation areas
According to the definition of the estimation area and the ordering principle, the first branch in one
measurement estimation area is the measurement branch itself. Every other branch, without an
installed measurement device, belongs to the same estimation area as its leading branch does.
In the example network of Figure 2 there are four estimation areas. The first one includes branches
1, 4, 5 and 10; the second includes 2 and 7; the third includes 6, 11, 12, 14 and 15; and the fourth one
includes 3, 8, 9 and 13.

4. DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM MODEL

4.1. Feeder parameter model
The primary feeders of the distribution system are considered to consist of three-phase line sections
(branches), which are phase-symmetrical and are represented by their
-equivalent scheme.
Copyright # 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Euro. Trans. Electr. Power 2004; 14:331345

335

LOAD ESTIMATION METHOD

We have not chosen a three-phase line and load representation because the analysis performed
previously at the distribution system under consideration [9] shows that the present system imbalances
are not great enough to significantly affect the system operators decisions.
Load is considered at the distribution transformers low-voltage level, and their parameters are also
included in the statistical information.
4.2. Load model
Being an unsolved problem, load modelling at the distribution level always arouses high interest. In
most load behaviour studies [10], the load variation is decomposed into three major components: (i)
the deterministic hourly load variation, (ii) the weather-load component and (iii) the random
fluctuations. The stochastic and random nature of the load makes its modelling difficult. For this
application, in accordance with available information and the experience of the utility company
personnel, we accepted the concept of typical load curves.
The concept of typical load curves requires classification of load into customer classes according to
the different types of consumption (residential, storage heating, commercial, light industry, etc.). The
concept also requires previous knowledge of the normalized load curves per customer class and the
fixed consumption by customer class in each distribution transformer load.
Every customer class possesses different daily and seasonal load curves. So, for each customer
class, a typical load curve has to be defined for the three representative seasons: winter, fall/spring, and
summer, and for the representative day of the week: average weekday (Monday to Friday), Saturday,
and Sunday, for each season. Different holidays should have their own typical daily load curves per
customer class.
A method for determining typical load curves for customer classes, based on detailed load
measurements in relatively few distribution transformers of the system, is adopted from Reference
[11] and implemented in our study. For illustration, the normalized typical active and reactive power
load curves for one of the customer classes determined in the study, is given in Figure 3.
The normalized diversified load curve, Xdt(t), which represents the time (t) variation of one
distribution transformers load composed on the basis of a knowledge of the consumption
cci 2 0; 1
of the different customer classes (i 1; 2; . . . ; n) in the transformer load and the

Figure 3. Normalized typical winter weekday power load curves of Residential I customer class.
Copyright # 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Euro. Trans. Electr. Power 2004; 14:331345

336

V. P. BOROZAN AND N. L. J. RAJAKOVIC

corresponding normalized typical load curves per customer class xi t xpi t jxqi t, according
to the following equation:
Xdt t cc1 x1 t cc2 x2 t    ccn xn t

Another aspect of load modelling is a voltage dependence. The most convenient way to represent
the real (P) and reactive (Q) power consumption of loads as a function of corresponding voltage
magnitude (V) is as follows:



P Pnom AP BP V CP V 2
2


Q Qnom Aq Bq V Cq V 2
3
where: Pnom and Qnom are active and reactive load power under nominal voltage; and, A; B; C 2 0; 1

are experimentally determined coefficients, which show load power dependence on voltage.
Such a representation of load voltage-dependency indicates various degrees of traditional constant
power (A 1), constant current (B 1), and constant impedance (C 1) load models. In system
analyses, the proper simulation of the system response depends significantly on the voltage
dependency factor choice. Therefore, the power coefficients in Equations (2) and (3) should be taken
as close to real values in the system under consideration as possible [12].
4.3. Power factor
The power factor is not constant along the feeder due to the mix and dispersion of customer classes
served along the feeder and their differing daily curves. A realistic situation in distribution systems is
that only an average power factor at a high-voltage side of a distribution substation can be calculated,
on the basis of measured active (kWh) and reactive (kvarh) energy over a specific time interval.
Therefore, there are two power factor modelling alternatives: the calculated average substation
value applied for all of the feeder loads, or an assumed power factor value which, for every distribution
transformer, is a mix of the power factors of its participant customer classes. The power factor for
customer classes may be variable during the day, and for any given instant in time may be
determinated with the corresponding values from the typical active and reactive load curves of that
customer class.
In this study we have chosen the second alternative because the typical load curves are determined
on the basis of wide load measurements in the system under consideration, and we assume it as a rather
precise one.
5. LOAD ESTIMATION
The main steps in the proposed algorithm are as follows:
1. Determination of initial values of the nodes load. They may be spot load values (for customers
with known demand, like an industry), distribution transformers forecasted load values or, load
values from the diversified load curves (if no others are available). In the last case, the distribution
transformers power load value, Sdt t, for the specified instant in time, t, is calculated by the
equation:
Sdt t Pdt;peak  Xdt t
Copyright # 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

4
Euro. Trans. Electr. Power 2004; 14:331345

337

LOAD ESTIMATION METHOD

2.

3.

4.
5.

where: Pdt;peak is the distribution transformers daily peak active power load.
If the daily peak load is unknown, it could be substituted with the corresponding monthly peak
load, or seasonal peak load, or yearly peak load. The deeper approximation of data is involved, and
less precise estimation can be expected.
Initial load flow solution for load values determined in Step 1 and remote measured voltage Vms
on the low-voltage side of the distribution substation (root node). This solution will approximate
current phase angles along the feeders and distribution transformer voltages.
Load summation, in a backward sweep, from the higher network layers towards the lower layers.
The procedure stops if a branch with installed remote measurement is reached, and the algorithm
continues with Step 4. Otherwise, if the root node is reached and all network branches are handled,
load summation is finished and the algorithm continues with Step 6.
Confirmation of a convergence criterion
I jIm  Ij  ". If the criterion is satisfied, the
algorithm goes back to Step 3 and continues with the load summation procedure.
Adjustment of load values for nodes that belong to the measurement estimation area. (The nodes
with known spot load values are excluded from this step.) Incremental change of the node current Ij
is calculated by the relation:

Ij
I

Pdt;peak; j

,
na
X

!
Pdt;peak; j

j1

where na is the number of nodes in the measurement estimation area.

Adjustment is made from the nodes in the highest layer of the estimation area to the ending node of
the measurement branch. Such an order of adjustment allows simultaneous correction of the
summed load values through the estimation areas branches.
6. Nodal voltage calculation, in a forward sweep, starting from the first layer and moving towards the
last layer. Continue with Step 3, until the load-flow convergence criterion is satisfied.

6. TEST RESULTS
The proposed method for load estimation in distribution systems was tested on the following test
systems:
*
*

14 node, with 3 main feeders, radial network (marked as T1) [13];

32 node, with 1 express and 3 main feeders, radial network (marked as T2) [14].

To fill in test data, typical load curves (with hourly p.u. averages representing winter weekday for
residential, commercial and light industrial customer classes) were adopted from the literature [15].
Remote measurements were basically considered at the beginning of every express and main feeder in
the test networks. Then, in order to analyse the influence of the number of remote measurements on the
method accuracy, additional remote measurements were considered on different secondary feeders.
Test cases were generated by uniform random variation of load values from the node diversified load
curves of 15%, simulating an availability of forecast data (E1), and  30%, simulating an
availability only of the typical load curves per customer class (E2). In all of the experiments, (T1
E1, T1E2, T2E1 and T2E2), the distribution substation (root node) voltage was presumed constant
during the day and fixed at a value of 1.0 p.u.
Copyright # 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Euro. Trans. Electr. Power 2004; 14:331345

338

V. P. BOROZAN AND N. L. J. RAJAKOVIC

Table I. Percentage Distribution of the estimation errors for the test network T1.
Experiment

E1

NM

E2

Int.(%)

NC

BC

NC

BC

NC

BC

NC

BC

05
510
1015
1520
2025
2530
3035
3540
4045
4550
> 50

47.7
32.3
15.1
3.7
0.9
0.2

69.1
19.8
7.8
2.7
0.5

59.8
25.7
10.7
2.7
1.6
0.1

79.0
12.8
5.3
2.1
0.5
0.1

28.2
20.4
18.8
13.1
9.7
4.2
3.0
1.9
1.0
0.7
0.1

50.8
16.4
12.6
8.3
4.6
2.7
1.8
1.2
0.8
0.6
0.2

38.0
23.1
16.9
9.8
5.3
3.4
2.0
1.1
0.5
0.6
0.4

66.5
10.7
7.8
5.2
4.3
2.6
1.1
0.6
0.2
0.2
0.4

The accuracy of the proposed method for load estimation is appraised on the basis of these
experiments. The results are given in Table I for the test network T1 and in Table II for the test network
T2. The information in Tables I and II represents distributions of percentage estimation errors. The
error of every examined case was determined as a percentage deviation of estimated load value from
the corresponding exact value. Then, the determined errors for all of the experimental cases were
grouped by their values in 5% long intervals. So, the numbers in Tables I and II represent the
percentage of examined cases in which estimation errors belong to a certain error interval. These
analyses are carried out for the node currents (NC) and for the branch currents (BC). As the data in
Tables I and II show, the branch load values can be estimated more precisely than the node load values.

Table II. Percentage distribution of the estimation errors for the test network T2.
Experiment

E1

NM

E2

Int.(%)

NC

BC

NC

BC

NC

BC

NC

BC

05
510
1015
1520
2025
2530
3035
3540
4045
4550
> 50

46.1
32.7
16.9
3.9
0.3

87.6
9.6
2.1
0.5

54.8
29.4
12.7
2.9
0.3

91.5
6.5
1.8
0.2

29.9
17.1
17.0
14.7
8.9
5.1
3.1
2.1
1.1
0.5
0.1

75.9
12.3
5.8
2.8
1.4
0.6
0.5
0.2
0.1
0.1

35.0
19.6
16.6
12.2
6.8
4.9
2.2
1.2
0.7
0.3
0.1

82.7
8.5
4.1
2.3
1.1
0.6
0.3
0.2
0.1

Copyright # 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Euro. Trans. Electr. Power 2004; 14:331345

339

LOAD ESTIMATION METHOD

Furthermore, the test analysis indicates that the availability of additional remote measurements in the
network, other than those basically considered, does not significantly increase the accuracy of load
estimation results.
To illustrate this Tables I and II contain the percentage error distribution for different numbers of
installed remote meters (NM) in the test networks.
The load estimation algorithm needs 2 to 3 iterations on average to converge to the solution.

7. STUDY SYSTEM
The study network is a portion of Skopjes 10 kV network. This network is served by 3 substations and
47 main feeders. About 79 MW of peak load, or 290 GWh energy in the year (22% of whole consumer
demand) is supplied through these 3 substations. The network is mostly underground with a total
length of 172 km and serves 313 distribution transformers. Present capacitors in the network are kept
in a fixed position.
The available remote measurements in the system are the current magnitudes at the beginning of
each main feeder and the voltage magnitude on the low-voltage side of the distribution substations.
The distribution transformers historical load data consists only of the yearly peak loads. There is no
forecasting of load at a distribution transformers level.
Using the experience of the utility companys personnel, the consumer demand in the studied
portion of the distribution system has been divided into four main customer classes: Residential I
(electrically heated homes), Residential II (non-electrically heated homes), Commercial, and
Industrial.
The typical daily load curves have been determined on the basis of the method in Reference [11].
For that purpose, intelligent meters have been installed at the sampled distribution transformer
customer voltage sides to record the real and reactive power demand at 15 minute intervals over a
season. For example, the normalized typical active and reactive load curves which are represented on
Figure 3 relate to the Residential I customer class on a winter week day.
The voltage dependence of load, in the absence of experimental results, has been modelled on the
basis of a knowledge of consumption in each of the customer classes. The load of Residential I,
Residential II and Commercial customer classes is modelled as a constant impedance, and the load of
the Industrial customer class is modelled as a constant power.

8. METHOD VERIFICATION
It is assumed that the validity of the whole project can be judged by a comparison of simulation results
with field measurements. Therefore, simultaneous measurements of currents at the distribution
transformers of two sample feeders (Feeder A and Feeder B) were carried out during winter of 95/96.
The Feeder A supplies power to 5 distribution transformers. About 85% of the feeder load is
residential with electrically heated homes. It was chosen because this type of consumption, during the
winter, causes the most exploitation problems. The simultaneous measurements of currents at the
customer side (0.4 kV) of the distribution transformers were performed at intervals of every 30
minutes over a 3 hour period (11 am2 pm).
The Feeder B supplies power to 7 distribution transformers. In this case the consumption is a mix of
about 32% of the Residential I, 60% of the Residential II and the remainder of the Commercial type of
Copyright # 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Euro. Trans. Electr. Power 2004; 14:331345

340

V. P. BOROZAN AND N. L. J. RAJAKOVIC

Table III. Some results of the measurements on Feeder A.

Hours
MC (A)
EC (A)
Error (%)

11.30
32.9
29.8
9.4

12.00
30.0
29.0
3.3

12.30
31.5
28.6
9.2

1.00
32.2
30.2
6.2

1.30
31.5
30.3
3.8

2.00
31.3
31.2
0.3

Table IV. Some results of the measurements on Feeder B.

Hours
MC (A)
EC (A)
Error (%)

8.00
34.9
35.3
1.1

8.30
32.1
36.1
12.5

9.00
37.4
37.4
0.0

9.30
37.9
38.9
2.6

10.00
34.1
36.4
6.7

10.30
32.5
36.6
12.6

load. The simultaneous measurement of currents at the customer side (0.4 kV) of the distribution
transformers were performed at every 30 minute interval over a 3 hour period (8 am11 am).
Appendix A of this paper contains the electrical parameter data and the historical load data for both
of the sample feeders. It also contains all of the field measured data and the simultaneously recorded
remote measured data. This information may be used for further test purposes.
In our study, after an off-line load estimation was done for both of the sample feeders, the proposed
method accuracy was analysed in the following way. The error of every examined case was determined
as a percentage deviation of estimated load value from the corresponding measured value.
For illustration, the calculated estimation errors for one of the feeders distribution transformers are
presented in Tables III and IV, for Feeder A and Feeder B, respectively. These tables also contain rows
with the measured (MC) and the estimated (EC) current values (reduced to 10 kV voltage level), by
which the errors were calculated. Then, as it was proceeded in the test network analyses, the errors of
all of the examined cases for both feeders were classified in 5% long intervals. Finally, the number of
estimation errors in one interval is expressed as a percentage of all examined cases. So, the information
in Figure 4 represents the distribution of the percentage estimation errors appraised on basis of the both
feeder measurements. It is evident that in 23% of the estimated load cases, the error was smaller than
5%; or, that in 59% of cases the estimation error was smaller than 15%.
The calculated errors, besides the estimation error, also contain feeders parameter errors,
measurement errors, telemetered data errors and human factor errors. It should be also noticed that
in the performed estimation a historical load data from the winter of 94/95 was used. Knowledge of the
recent distribution transformers peak powers would give better estimation results.
Such an evaluated method accuracy was appraised satisfactorily, taking into consideration the
availability of input information. For comparison, the estimation of the feeders load in the considered
cases was additionally carried out by simply allocating remote metered load according to the
connected kVA sizes of transformers. The estimation accuracy attained by this standard distribution
systems method is presented in Figure 4, in adequate form. The authors presume that an investment in
further load research and typical load curves improvement will increase the load estimation in the
studied distribution system. But, a significant increase in the results would be achieved by dealing with
the monthly average distribution transformers load values instead of their peak load values.
Copyright # 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Euro. Trans. Electr. Power 2004; 14:331345

341

LOAD ESTIMATION METHOD

Figure 4. Percentage distribution of the estimation errors for field measurements.

The distribution transformers average load value could become available by acquiring the billing
system database of the distribution utility, aggregating the information by the number of connected
customers and their monthly kWh.

9. CONCLUSIONS
Current information technology is able to provide the information about loading conditions in
distribution networks using SCADA systems. However, since the automation system requires
equipment such as communication devices, monitoring devices, etc., this may not be cost-effective
for many utility companies at the present time.
To this end, a method for load estimation in distribution systems with minimum information
available is proposed. The method is load-flow based and, hence, can be easily incorporated into most
of the feeder analyses for operation of distribution systems. The main advantages of the method are its
simplicity and its applicability on every distribution system using minimum enforcement and
equipment. The accuracy of the method is found to be satisfactory, taking the available information
into consideration.
The application results of the proposed method on a practical distribution system show that it is
capable of supporting the utility operation effectively. Prospective applications are also expected in
solving the volt/var distribution problems.
10. LIST OF SYMBOLS AND ABBREVIATIONS
Vms
Im

measured voltage
measured current

Copyright # 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Euro. Trans. Electr. Power 2004; 14:331345

342
Xdt (t)
cci
P, Q
V
Pnom, Qnom
A, B, C
Sdt (t)
Pdt, peak

I
I

Ij
na
NC
BC
NM
MC
EC

V. P. BOROZAN AND N. L. J. RAJAKOVIC

normalized diversified load curve

contribution of the customer class i in the transformer load
active and reactive power consumption of load
voltage magnitude
active and reactive load power under nominal voltage
experimentally determined coefficients, which show load dependence on voltage
distribution transformers power load
distribution transformers daily peak active power load
incremental change of feeder
calculated current
incremental change of the node current
number of nodes in the measurement estimation area
node current
branch current
number of installed remote meters in the network
measured current value
estimated current value
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The financial support given to this work by the Ministry of Science of the Republic of Macedonia is appreciated.
The authors wish to thank Skopjes utility company Elektroskopje for allowing test measurements associated
with the case studies. Especially, we wish to thank A. Sekerinski, G. Janevski and S. Ilievska for all of their
support.

APPENDIX A
Table A-I. Distribution transformers (10/0.4 kV) of Feeder A.
Transformer
Distr.
trans. mark
A1
A2
A3
A4
A5

Size (kVA)
630
630
630
400
630

uk (%)

Pfe (W)

4
4
4
4
4

1300
1300
1300
960
1170

Cust. consum. (%)

Pcu (W)
6500
6500
6500
4600
6180

Peak
power (kVA)

Res. I

550
609
522
426
801

100
90
90
60
75

Res. II Commer.
0
5
0
30
20

0
5
10
10
5

Table A-II. Line sections of Feeder A.

No.
1
2
3
4
5

Starting node
Sub. bus
A5
A2
A2
A4

Ending node
A5
A2
A1
A4
A3

Copyright # 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

R ()

X ()

0.432
0.089
0.072
0.118
0.137

0.143
0.040
0.028
0.039
0.045

B (mS)
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0

Euro. Trans. Electr. Power 2004; 14:331345

343

LOAD ESTIMATION METHOD

Table A-III. Measured values on Feeder A.

Hours
Substat.volt.(kV)
Feed.(1phase)(A)

11.30
10.2
102
350
420
430
480
500
400
280
280
300
380
380
360
500
500
470

C
A
B
B
C
A
C
A
B
A
B
C
B
C
A

A1 (A)
A2 (A)
A3 (A)
A4 (A)
A5 (A)

12.00
10.2
106
390
400
328
400
460
400
290
270
300
420
380
340
500
520
480

12.30
10.2
98
410
420
320
420
440
460
280
290
270
380
380
400
420
460
440

1.00
10.2
105
420
420
480
520
450
380
280
250
250
440
360
400
500
480
480

1.30
10.2
110
420
440
530
510
460
390
300
290
280
400
320
400
580
560
540

2.00
10.3
108
460
390
560
440
460
400
300
270
300
400
350
380
520
500
520

Table A-IV. Distribution transformers (10/0.4 kV) of Feeder B.

Transformer
Distr.
trans. mark
B1
B2
B3
B4
B5
B6
B7

Cust. consum. (%)

Size (kVA)

uk (%)

Pfe (W)

Pcu (W)

630
630
630
630
630
630
630

4
4
4
4
4
4
4

1300
1300
1300
1300
1170
1300
1300

6500
6500
6500
6500
6180
6500
6500

Peak
power (kVA)
35
296
312
299
618
519
501

Res. I
0
50
70
0
10
10
85

Res. II Commer.
95
40
20
95
80
80
10

5
10
10
5
10
10
5

Table A-V. Line sections of Feeder B.

No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7

Starting node

Ending node

R (!)

X (!)

B (mS)

B7
B6
B1
B5
B3
B4
B2

0.177
0.103
0.103
0.025
0.078
0.040
0.062

0.056
0.034
0.034
0.008
0.026
0.013
0.020

0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0

Sub. bus
B7
B6
B1
B5
B3
B4

Copyright # 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Euro. Trans. Electr. Power 2004; 14:331345

344

V. P. BOROZAN AND N. L. J. RAJAKOVIC

Table A-VI. Measured values on Feeder B.

Hours
Substat.volt.(kV)
Feed.(1phase)(A)
B1 (A)
B2 (A)
B3 (A)
B4 (A)
B5 (A)
B6 (A)
B7 (A)

A
B
C
A
B
C
A
B
C
A
B
C
A
B
C
C
A
B
B
C
A

8.00
10.4
108.5
45
50
35
210
300
200
300
340
340
220
215
200
600
500
500
840
760
560
460
500
500

8.30
10.3
109.5
45
35
35
250
300
270
360
320
380
300
235
210
800
640
540
520
620
580
500
420
420

9.00
10.2
112.5
40
43
45
280
300
270
280
300
360
275
245
210
780
580
600
640
500
620
500
580
500

9.30
10.2
120.0
50
65
35
230
250
260
300
400
400
290
240
245
800
600
600
680
540
700
500
580
520

10.00
10.2
112.5
48
50
45
260
240
280
300
360
300
250
310
270
800
600
640
520
580
640
460
540
440

10.30
10.2
112.5
46
52
45
280
340
340
300
300
300
250
300
250
720
520
600
600
680
680
460
460
450

REFERENCES
1. Roytelman I, Shahidehpour SM. State estimation for electric power distribution systems in quasi real-time conditions. IEEE
Transactions on Power Delivery 1993; 8:20092015.
2. Baran ME, Kelley AW. State estimation for real-time monitoring of distribution systems. IEEE Transactions on Power
Systems 1994; 9:16011609.
3. Baran ME, Kelley AW. A branch-current-based state estimation method for distribution systems. IEEE Transactions on
Power Systems 1995; 10:483491.
4. Kuo HC, Hsu YY. Distribution system load estimation and service restoration using a fuzzy set approach. IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery 1993; 8:19501957.
5. Broadwater RP, Khan AH, Shaalan HE, Lee RE. Time varying load analysis to reduce distribution losses through reconfiguration. IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery 1993; 8:294300.
6. Ghosh AK, Lubkeman DL, Downey MJ, Jones RH. Distribution circuit state estimation using a probabilistic approach.
IEEE Transactions on Power Systems 1997; 12:4551.
7. Borozan V, Rajicic D, Ackovski R. Improved method for loss minimization in distribution networks. IEEE Transactions on
Power Systems 1995; 10:14201425.
8. Luo GX, Semlyen A. Efficient load flow for large weakly meshed networks. IEEE Transactions on Power Systems 1990;
5:13091316.
9. Borozan V, Rajicic D, Ackovski R. Minimum loss reconfiguration of unbalanced distribution networks. IEEE Transactions
on Power Delivery 1997; 12:435442.
10. Civanlar S, Grainger JJ. Forecasting distribution feeder loads: modeling and application to volt/var control. IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery 1988; 3:255264.
11. Handschin E, Dornemann Ch. Bus Load Modelling and Forecasting. PICA 87, Montreal, Quebec, 1987.
12. Ritzy DT, Lowler JS, Patton JB, Fortson NH. Distribution automation application software for the Athens Utilites Board.
IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery 1989; 4:715723.
13. Civanlar S, Grainger JJ, Yin H, Lee SSH. Distribution feeder reconfiguration for loss reduction. IEEE Transactions on
Power Delivery 1988; 3:12171223.

Copyright # 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Euro. Trans. Electr. Power 2004; 14:331345

LOAD ESTIMATION METHOD

345

14. Baran M, Wu FF. Network reconfiguration in distribution systems for loss reduction and load balancing. IEEE Transactions
on Power Delivery 1989; 4:14011407.
15. Shenkman AL. Energy loss computation by using statistical techniques. IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery 1990;
5:254258.

AUTHORS BIOGRAPHIES

Vesna P. Borozan (born in 1962) received her doctoral degree in 1996, from the University
of Belgrade, Yugoslavia. Presently she is an Assistant Professor in Power Systems at
the Faculty of Electrical Engineering, University Sts. Cyril and Methodius, Skopje,
Macedonia. Her subjects of interest are distribution system analysis and planning and
distribution automation, as well as integration of dispersed generation into the grid. She is a
senior member of IEEE and a member of CIGRE.

Nikola L. J. Rajakovic (born in 1952) received the Dipl.-Ing. degree in 1974, and the master
of science and doctoral degrees in 1977 and 1983, respectively, from the University of
Belgrade, Yugoslavia. Presently he is a full professor at the same University. He has
published over seventy papers (15 in refereed journals), and three textbooks. He has also
worked in numerous power system projects. His research interests include steady-state
analysis of power systems, power system optimization and harmonic modeling. He is a senior
member of IEEE, a member of CIGRE and chairman of the PES Chapter in Yugoslavia.

Copyright # 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Euro. Trans. Electr. Power 2004; 14:331345