Reliability assessment of an automated distribution

system
S. Kazemi, M. Fotuhi-Firuzabad and R. Billinton

Abstract: Automation can greatly enhance distribution-network reliability by speeding up service

restoration and thus significantly reduce customer-outage time. The paper presents an approach to
assess quantitatively the adequacy of a particular automated distribution scheme designated as the
low interruption system (LIS). Owing to the use of a high-speed communication system and line
sensors, this automated scheme can reduce drastically the number of interruptions, the service
interruption time and also the area affected by the fault. This scheme provides a simple and cost-
effective way to automate distribution systems in which the remotely controlled switches speed up
isolation of faulted sections and the restoration of healthy sections through alternative routes. The
step-by-step calculation procedure is presented using a typical small automated distribution system.
The proposed technique is then applied to a larger distribution system to examine the effectiveness
of the technique and also to examine the level of reliability improvement achieved by automation.

1 Introduction the LIS automated scheme is expressed in terms of the

In todays competitive electricity market, utilities are
expected to provide a highly reliable power supply at the
lowest possible cost. Analysis of the customer-failure stat-
istics of most utilities indicate that the distribution system
makes the greatest individual contribution to the unavailabil-
ity of supply to a customer. Electric-power-distribution
systems face a number of challenges and opportunities such
as ageing systems, availability of improved distribution-
system technologies, demand for higher reliability, customer-
outage intolerance etc. These challenges reinforce the need to
examine quantitatively the merits of the various reinforce-
ment schemes available to system planners so as to achieve
the highest possible incremental reliability and improvement
in the system. Distribution automation is recognised as a
way to use appropriate technology intelligently to enhance
the reliability at reduced system-operation cost. Automated
operation and service restoration can eliminate the need to
perform switching operations manually and could have a sig-
nificant effect on the system reliability [13]. Installation of
remotely controlled switches on distribution feeders is an
automation function that provides significant benefits both
during normal operation and under emergencies [4, 5].
An approach is presented in this paper to assess quantitat-
ively the reliability of a specific automated distribution
system designated as the LIS automated scheme. The
technique is based on the event-tree methodology. To
demonstrate the impact of implementing the LIS automated
scheme on the distribution-network performance, com-
parative studies are conducted using a typically large
distribution reliability-test system. The worth of employing
# The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2007
doi:10.1049/iet-gtd:20050261
Paper first received 16th June 2005 and in revised form 19th January 2006
S. Kazemi and M. Fotuhi-Firuzabad are with the Department of Electrical
Engineering, Sharif University of Technology, Tehran, Iran
R. Billinton is with the Department of Electrical Engineering, University of
Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Canada
E-mail: fotuhi@sharif.edu
IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., 2007, 1, (2), pp. 223 233
degree of improvement in the reliability indexes. Customer-
interruption cost is considered to be a surrogate for the
actual worth of supply reliability and expressed in terms
of the cost per unit of unserved energy. The reduction in
the unserved energy owing to employment of the automated
scheme is referred to as the incremental cost. The reduction
in the interruption cost is then compared with the capital,
operating and maintenance costs of an automated distri-
bution scheme. This, however, is a complex procedure
and involves a number of factors and constraints, which
will be included in future work.
2 Low-interruption system
2.1 Concepts
Distribution systems are normally in the form of radial
feeders. Each feeder consists of a set of load sections with
sectionalising switches and normally open loop switches.
Any short circuit on a feeder causes the main breaker to
operate. After the fault has been detected, however, the rel-
evant sectionalising switches can be opened and the breaker
reclosed. This procedure permits the restoration of as many
disconnected load points as possible to the main supply or to
another feeder through normally open switches.
The above operations are performed automatically when
an automated scheme is employed in a distribution network.
In this case, the fault detection, isolation and service restor-
ation can be accomplished sequentially and automatically,
by controlling the automation equipment installed on the
network so as to reduce significantly the customer-outage
time. The distribution automation discussed in this paper
is restricted to the fault-isolation and service-restoration
switching operations considering the fact that the majority
of fault currents in distribution systems are not too large
and can therefore be interrupted by section switches. This
is particularly true in nonearthed and resistance-earthed
systems. Consequently, with an earth fault, service interrup-
tions on the healthy sections are prevented by interrupting
the fault current using the associated section switches.
223

Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad del Valle. Downloaded on April 23, 2009 at 20:34 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
As noted above, this paper evaluates the performance of a 2.3 Reliability modelling
typical distribution automation system, designated as LIS
automated scheme, from a reliability point of view. The An appropriate reliability model associated with the switch-
construction of this automated scheme, as well as descrip- ing actions with respect to the earth and short-circuit faults
tions of its main components, can be found in detail in the is required to evaluate the reliability of the LIS automated
works of Kato et al. [6]. scheme. The concepts of passive and active failures [7, 8]
are used to include various operating states and switching
actions, as shown in Fig. 2. The passive-failure mode
2.2 Isolation procedures of faulted sections leads to state R while the active failure mode leads to
states S1 and S2 , respectively, for the earth and short-circuit
Fig. 1a shows a small distribution system with the LIS auto- faults. The three states passive, active S1 and active S2
mated scheme in the feeder. The system consists of several can be superimposed to create the combined state space
section switches (S) installed at judicious points along the diagram shown in Fig. 2. The repair process is assumed to
main feeder. Each switch is controlled by the associated be the same for both passive and active failures.
remote terminal unit (RTU) located beside it. The RTUB The state-space diagram includes the following states:
installed at the station provides supervisory monitoring U state before the fault;
and control for circuit breaker CB. A fault detector is also
located beside the switching device and has data links to R state after isolation but before repair is completed;
the RTU to distinguish a short-circuit fault from an earth S1 state after the earth fault but before isolation; and
fault. The fault-detector data analysed at the master S2 state after the short-circuit fault but before isolation.
station is used to determine the fault location. Owing to
the high-speed communication system and the line sensor,
the fault location is identified immediately after a fault 3 Evaluation procedure
occurs. Consequently, both the service-interruption time
and the number of load points to be disconnected are con- 3.1 General concepts
siderably reduced.
When an earth fault occurs, the faulted section is isolated Reliability assessment of a complex automatic-control
by section switches in the automated distribution system system is a relatively difficult task. It contains a large
and therefore does not cause interruption of the unfaulted number of automation components and control sequential
sections, as the main circuit breaker does not operate for actions. A modular approach is used to evaluate the
this type of fault. The isolation procedure on an earth reliability of an automatic-control system incorporating
fault between S2 and S3 is shown in Fig. 1b. If, however, these characteristics. This approach divides the control
a short-circuit fault occurs, the switches cannot interrupt system into modules that can be analysed independently.
the fault current and therefore it will cause the main All the modules are then combined and analysed using the
breaker to operate. The isolation procedure on a short- event tree method [7 9]. The impacts of the communi-
circuit fault between S2 and S3 is shown in Fig. 1c. cation system on the reliability of automatic control of a

fibre optic cable

master station

supply point 1 S5 supply point 2

CB S1 S2 S3 S4
1 2 3 4 5

RTUB RTU1 RTU2 RTU3 RTU4 RTU5

6 7 8 9 10

LP1 LP2 LP3 LP4 LP5

a
CB S1 S2 S3 S4 S5
1-a shortcircuit occurs
S1 S2 S3 S4 S5 between S2 and S3
1-earth fault occurs CB fault
between S1 and S2 2-CB trips
fault
2-S5 closes 3-S2 and S3 open

3-S2 and S3 open 4-CB closes

5-S5 closes

open circuit breaker open section or loop switch

interruption area
closed circuit breaker closed section or loop switch

b c

Fig. 1 Small automated distribution system and isolation procedure for different types of fault
a Typical small automated distribution system
b Isolation procedure on an earth fault between S2 and S2
c Isolation procedure on a short-circuit fault between S2 and S3

224 IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., Vol. 1, No. 2, March 2007

Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad del Valle. Downloaded on April 23, 2009 at 20:34 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 local automation equipment including the RTUs, communi-
S2 cation systems, power supply units, switching devices, and
fault detectors. The protection relays, breaker and switching
devices are connected to the RTU.

sw
lt
e
au
t-c ilur

itc
(ii) Identify the operational procedure when an earth fault or

tf

hi
a
ui
sh ve f

n
irc
a short-circuit fault occurs. Develop the system event tree in

g
ti
ac

or
terms of the control-component modules. Identify the
passive failure sequence of events together with the associated outcomes
U R in the control procedure for the fault location, isolation
repair and service restoration. The control process, following
occurrence of a fault, involves the sequential operation
ea

logic of a set of control component modules which can be

rth fail
ac
tiv

fau ure

g
in
recognised using an event tree. The isolation procedure
e

lt

itch
has been described in Section 2.2. If failure events occur

sw
in the control operating systems, e.g. a switch fails to
operate, the automation system will continue trying to
S1
restore as many load points as possible. For example,
when the control path to boundary switches fails, the
Fig. 2 State-space diagram for passive and active failures master station (MS) continues communicating with the
adjacent switches to isolate the fault and restore the discon-
nected healthy sections. For illustration purposes, assume
special automated scheme is presented in the works of He that an earth fault occurs between S2 and S3 in Fig. 1a.
et al. [9] using the concept of the event tree. The scheme An event tree can be developed for the control procedure
does not distinguish the occurrence of the earth faults in terms of its component modules, as shown in Fig. 4.
from the short-circuit faults. The LIS automated scheme The paths leading to the required outcome are first ident-
used in this paper is, however, more complicated than the ified. The probability of occurrence of each relevant path
scheme described in the works of He et al. [9]. For this is the product of the event probabilities in the path. The res-
reason, more detailed formula derivations and sensitivity toration probability of a particular load point can then be
analysis, as well as application to larger automated distri- obtained by summing the probabilities of each path
bution systems, are needed, which have been included in leading to the restoration of that load point.
this paper. (iii) Determine the contribution to the failure rate of
The system event trees are analysed according to two load point Lj by component Ci based on the concepts of
different starting points including occurrence of earth and conditional probability theory and using the restoration
short-circuit faults. When a fault occurs, the event tree is probabilities identified in step (ii)
deduced as a sequence of events involving success and
failure of the control modules. Using this approach, the
various possible outcomes of the control processes are lCi Lj fblGFCi Lj jGFCi
PGFCi c
identified and the associated outcome and restoration prob-
abilities are calculated. The average restoration time and blSFCi Lj jSFCi
PSFCi cg 1
average failure rate for the load points are calculated
using the restoration and failure probabilities. The system-
reliability indexes are then determined by aggregating the where
load-point indexes.
lCiLj overall contribution to the failure
rate of load point Lj due to earth
3.2 Steps of the evaluation procedure and short-circuit faults on com-
ponent Ci .
The procedure for reliability assessment of a LIS automated
scheme can be summarised in the following steps:
(i) Divide the automation system into modules which may MS LS5 LS2 LS1 LS3 LS4 LPs restored
contain a small or a large number of individual components.
Modules should be independent of each other, based on
S
their functional or operational features. The reliability S S
P1 = 1-2-4-5
P2 = 1-2-5
data associated with each module can be either derived by F
F
a separate reliability analysis or obtained from a data- S S P3 = 1-2
collection scheme. For illustration purposes, the control S S P4 = 1-4-5
F P5 = 1-5
system for the LIS automated scheme of Fig. 1a is S
F
F
divided into seven modules as depicted in Fig. 3. These S P6 = 1
F P7 = 4-5
modules have no shared components and are considered S
P8 = 5
F
to be independent. The local system (LS) contains the fault F
S P9 = none
F P10 = 1-2
S
F P11 = 1
master station
F
F P12 = none
P13 = none
LSB LS1 LS2 LS3 LS4 LS5
Fig. 4 Event-tree procedure when an earth fault occurs between
Fig. 3 System modules of Fig. 1 S2 and S3
LS1 LS5 local system of switches S success
LSB local system of breakers F failure

IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., Vol. 1, No. 2, March 2007 225

Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad del Valle. Downloaded on April 23, 2009 at 20:34 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
lGFCiLj and lSFCiLj contribution to the failure rate of concept of expectation
load point Lj by an earth fault or
a short-circuit fault on component

Ci , respectively. lSFCi Lj lCi jSFCi Lj
PSFCi Lj lCi jSFCi Lj
GFCi and SFCi event that an earth fault or a short- 
circuit fault occurs on component

PSFCi Lj lCi jSFCi Lj
PSFCi Lj
Ci , respectively.
P(GFCi) and P(SFCi) probability that an earth fault or a
3
short-circuit fault occurs on com-
ponent Ci , respectively. where:
SFCiLj and P(SFCiLj) event that the automation system
If an earth fault on component Ci does not affect load point can successfully remove the
Lj , then lGFCiLj zero. Otherwise, the following three effect on load point Lj of a short
different cases may occur based on the operation procedure circuit fault on component Ci
described in Section 2.2 and step (ii): and its associated probability,
respectively.
(a) The automation system can successfully remove the
SF Ci Lj and P(SF Ci Lj ) event that the automation system
effect on load point Lj of an earth fault on component Ci .
fails but the effect on load point
This condition has no effect on load point Lj .
Lj of a short-circuit fault on com-
(b) The automation system fails but the effect on load point
ponent Ci is removed by switch-
Lj of an earth fault on component Ci is removed by switch-
ing action and its associated
ing action. This condition affects load point Lj by the
probability, respectively.
average failure rate of component Ci .
(c) The effect on load point Lj of an earth fault on com- SF Ci Lj and P(SF Ci Lj ) event that the effect on load point
ponent Ci cannot be removed by the automation system or Lj of a short circuit fault on com-
switching action. This condition affects load point Lj by ponent Ci cannot be removed by
average failure rate of component Ci . the automation system or switch-
ing action and its associated prob-
The above cases are then weighted by their probabilities ability, respectively.
identified in step (ii) as shown below using the concepts This integrates the effects of each failure mode on the
of expectation outcome probabilities.
(iv) Determine the restoration time for each load point.

 Once a fault occurs, the affected load points can either be
lGFCi Lj 0jGFCi Lj
PGFCi Lj lCi jGFCi Lj restored by switching action or they have to remain isolated
until the failed component is repaired. For the former load
 points, two different possibilities can be considered:

PGFCi Lj lCi jGFCi Lj
PGFCi Lj
(a) the control system is available, and switching is
achieved automatically; or
2
(b) the control system is not available, and switching
should be performed manually.
where
The restoration time for a LIS can therefore be determined
GFCiLj and P(GFCiLj) event that the automation system using the concepts of expectation:
can successfully remove the
effect on load point Lj of an rCi Lj fbrGFCi Lj jGFCi
PGFCi c
earth fault on component Ci
brSFCi Lj jSFCi
PSFCi cg 4
and its associated probability,
respectively.
where
GF Ci Lj and P(GF Ci Lj ) event that the automation system
fails but the effect on load point rCiLj overall outage time of load point
Lj of an earth fault on com- Lj due to earth and short-circuit
ponent Ci is removed by switch- faults of component Ci .
ing action and its associated rGFCiLj and rSFCiLj outage time of load point Lj due to
probability, respectively. an earth fault or a short-circuit
GF Ci Lj and P(GF Ci Lj ) event that the effect on load fault of component Ci ,
point Lj of an earth fault on com- respectively.
ponent Ci cannot be removed by If an earth fault on component Ci does not affect load point
the automation system or Lj , then rGFCiLj zero. Otherwise, the following three
switching action and its associ- different cases may occur based on the operation procedure
ated probability, respectively. described in Section 2.2 and step (ii):
lCi average failure rate of com-
ponent Ci . (a) The automation system can successfully remove the
effect on load point Lj of an earth fault on component Ci .
Also, if a short-circuit fault on component Ci does not This condition does not affect load point Lj .
affect load point Lj , then lSFCiLj zero. Otherwise, as in (b) The automation system fails but the effect on load point
(2), the average value of lSFCiLj is determined using the Lj of an earth fault on component Ci is removed by
226 IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., Vol. 1, No. 2, March 2007

Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad del Valle. Downloaded on April 23, 2009 at 20:34 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
switching action. This condition affects load point Lj by 4 Study results
manual switching time.
(c) The effect on load point Lj of an earth fault on com- The application of the proposed technique to a multiload
ponent Ci cannot be removed by automation system or point distribution system is illustrated using the system
switching action. This condition affects load point Lj by described in the works of Allan et al. [10]. The test
average repair time of component Ci . system is the distribution system connected to bus 2 of
the RBTS [10]. It is a relatively large distribution
In the following equation, the above conditions are system and consists of 22 load points. The required
weighted by their probabilities identified in step (ii) using reliability data are given in the works of Allan et al.
the concept of conditional probability theory [10]. A computer program has been developed to
perform the necessary computations. In the studies

 presented in this paper, only the 11 kV feeders are con-
rGFCi Lj 0jGFCi Lj
PGFCi Lj TMSW jGFCi Lj sidered and any failures in the 33 kV system, the 33/
11 kV substation, fuses, section and loop switches are
 ignored. They assume that the 11 kV source breakers

PGFCi Lj rCi jGFCi Lj
PGFCi Lj 5 operate successfully when required to do so. Section
switches are assumed to open whenever possible to
isolate a fault. If possible, the load points that have
been disconnected are recovered using relevant section
where switches. It is also assumed that a spare transformer is
rCi average repair time of component Ci available for the low voltage transformer to reduce the
TMSW manual switching time. effect of transformer failure. In this case, a failed trans-
former can be replaced by the spare one within the instal-
Also, rSFCiLj is equal to zero if a short-circuit fault on com- lation time rather than leaving the load point
ponent Ci does not affect load point Lj . Otherwise, as in (5), disconnected for the repair time of the failed one.
the average value of rSFCiLj is determined as shown below When employing the LIS automated scheme for the test
system, it is assumed that breakers and each section and

 loop switch have an individual local system, and that they
rSFCi Lj TASW jSFCi Lj
PSFCi Lj TMSW jSFCi Lj are supervised and controlled by a local system of the
master station.


PSFCi Lj rCi jSFCi Lj
PSFCi Lj 6
4.1 Comparative studies

where TASW is automatic switching time. To examine the reliability benefits of employing the auto-
(v) Deduce reliability indexes. The load-point and mated distribution scheme, several different comparative
system-reliability indexes can be obtained by analysing studies were conducted. An overall brief description of
the contribution associated with each failure event. For a various case studies is as follows:
given load point Lj , the reliability indexes are determined
by aggregating the calculated lCiLj and rCiLj . Cases 1 and 2: The automated scheme is not used and the
The load-point indexes are calculated as follows manual switching time is equal to 1 h and 3 h, respectively.
Cases 3 and 4: The automated scheme is used, the manual
switching time is equal to 1 h and 70% and 20% of the
X
NC failure events are assumed to be earth faults, respectively.
lLj lCi Lj 7 Cases 5 and 6: The automated scheme is used, the
i1 manual switching time is equal to 3 h and 70% and 20%
PNC of the failure events are assumed to be earth faults,
i1 lCi Lj rCi Lj
rLj PNC 8 respectively.
i1 lCi Lj
Descriptions of these case studies has been tabulated in
ULj lLj rLj 9 Table 1.
Tables 2 7 show the reliability indexes associated with
ENSLj ULj Laj 10 a selected number of load points in each feeder of the test
system. Overall system-reliability indexes are shown in
Table 8. Automation features are not included in the
where study results presented for cases 1 and 2. Table 2 (case
lLj average failure rate of load point Lj failure/year 1) shows the reliability indexes assuming the total iso-
lation and switching time to be 1 h. This is the time
rLj average outage time of load point Lj in (h)
required to restore the interrupted load points between
ULj average annual outage time of load point Lj in the supply point and the point of isolation before the
(h/year) repair process has been completed. The reliability
Laj average load connected to load point Lj in (kW) indexes are modified as this time is increased to 3 h, as
ENSLj average energy not supplied of load point Lj in shown in Table 3. In this case, the energy not supplied
(kWh/year) is increased from 6% for load point 8 to 22% for load
points 10 and 15. This can be seen clearly by comparing
NC number of components. the results shown in Tables 2 and 3. Impacts of employing
The system indexes such as SAIFI, SAIDI, CAIDI, AENS automation features are illustrated in Tables 4 7 in which
and ASAI are calculated using the load-point indexes [8]. the availability of the local systems for the master station,
IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., Vol. 1, No. 2, March 2007 227

Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad del Valle. Downloaded on April 23, 2009 at 20:34 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 Table 1: Description of various case studies

Case Automation system MST , hrs Probability of

Not used Used Earth fault P(GFCi) Short-circuit fault
P(SFCi) 1 2 P(GFCi)

1 X 1
2 X 3
3 X 1 0.7 0.3
4 X 1 0.2 0.8
5 X 3 0.7 0.3
6 X 3 0.2 0.8


MST: manual switching time in hours

Table 2: Load-point reliability indexes for case 1

Load point l (failures/year) r, h U, h/year ENS, kWh/year

1 0.22425 5.5753 1.2503 668.88

5 0.23225 6.4166 1.4902 843.48
7 0.23225 6.2487 1.4512 658.87
8 0.11975 10.378 1.2427 1242.7
9 0.11975 10.052 1.2037 1384.3
10 0.22750 5.5099 1.2535 670.62
13 0.23350 5.9722 1.3945 789.29
15 0.22750 5.5099 1.2535 569.09
16 0.23350 6.1949 1.4465 656.71
20 0.23550 6.3418 1.4935 845.32
22 0.23550 6.1762 1.4545 660.34

Table 3: Load-point reliability indexes for case 2

Load point l (failures/year) r, h U, h/year ENS, kWh/year

1 0.22425 6.7926 1.5233 814.94

5 0.23225 7.5920 1.7632 998.00
7 0.23225 7.5081 1.7437 791.66
8 0.11975 11.029 1.3207 1320.7
9 0.11975 10.866 1.3013 1496.4
10 0.22750 6.7385 1.5330 820.15
13 0.23350 7.2527 1.6935 958.52
15 0.22750 6.7385 1.5330 695.98
16 0.23350 7.3640 1.7195 780.65
20 0.23550 7.5287 1.7730 1003.5
22 0.23550 7.4459 1.7535 796.09

Table 4: Load-point reliability indexes for case 3

Load point l (failures/year) r, h U, h/year ENS, kWh/year

1 0.13518 8.2687 1.1178 598.01

5 0.14764 9.2120 1.3600 769.78
7 0.14155 9.2647 1.3115 595.40
8 0.09511 12.673 1.2054 1205.4
9 0.09057 12.783 1.1578 1331.5
10 0.13636 8.1980 1.1179 598.08
13 0.14078 8.8927 1.2519 708.56
15 0.14061 7.9635 1.1198 508.37
16 0.14443 9.0979 1.3140 596.57
20 0.14884 9.1385 1.3602 769.85
22 0.14274 9.1885 1.3116 595.45

228 IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., Vol. 1, No. 2, March 2007

Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad del Valle. Downloaded on April 23, 2009 at 20:34 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 Table 5: Load-point reliability indexes for case 4

Load point l (failures/year) r (h) U (h/year) ENS (kWh/year)

1 0.19880 5.6644 1.1261 602.46

5 0.20807 6.5766 1.3684 774.53
7 0.20634 6.3942 1.3194 598.99
8 0.11271 10.719 1.2082 1208.2
9 0.11141 10.421 1.1610 1335.1
10 0.20146 5.5914 1.1264 602.65
13 0.20701 6.0925 1.2612 713.83
15 0.20267 5.5616 1.1272 511.75
16 0.20805 6.3558 1.3223 600.34
20 0.21074 6.4948 1.3687 774.69
22 0.20900 6.3141 1.3196 599.11

Table 6: Load-point reliability indexes for case 5

Load point l (failures/year) r, h U, h/year ENS, kWh/year

1 0.13518 8.3268 1.1256 602.22

5 0.14764 9.2957 1.3724 776.77
7 0.14155 9.3541 1.3241 601.15
8 0.09512 12.706 1.2086 1208.6
9 0.09057 12.845 1.1634 1337.9
10 0.13636 8.2574 1.1260 602.42
13 0.14078 8.9887 1.2654 716.21
15 0.14061 8.0474 1.1316 513.73
16 0.14443 9.1523 1.3219 600.14
20 0.14884 9.2231 1.3727 776.97
22 0.14274 9.2789 1.3245 601.31

Table 7: Load-point reliability indexes for case 6

Load point l (failures/year) r, h U, h/year ENS, kWh/year

1 0.19880 5.7820 1.1495 614.97

5 0.20807 6.7113 1.3965 790.40
7 0.20634 6.5265 1.3467 611.38
8 0.11271 10.795 1.2167 1216.7
9 0.11141 10.524 1.1725 1348.4
10 0.20146 5.7108 1.1505 615.52
13 0.20701 6.2419 1.2921 731.34
15 0.20267 5.6875 1.1527 523.33
16 0.20805 6.4682 1.3457 610.96
20 0.21074 6.6303 1.3973 790.86
22 0.20900 6.4472 1.3475 611.74

Table 8: System-reliability indexes for different cases

Case SAIFI (interruption/ SAIDI CAIDI (h/customer AENS ASAI

customer year) (h/customer year) interruption) (kWh/customer year)

1 0.230541 1.3840 6.0034 8.811 0.9998420

2 0.230541 1.6592 7.1972 10.40 0.9998106
3 0.142522 1.2514 8.7808 8.047 0.9998571
4 0.205392 1.2601 6.1350 8.096 0.9998562
5 0.142522 1.2613 8.8498 8.112 0.9998560
6 0.205392 1.2860 6.2614 8.251 0.9998532

IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., Vol. 1, No. 2, March 2007 229

Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad del Valle. Downloaded on April 23, 2009 at 20:34 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
section switches, loop switches and breakers are assumed
to be 0.95.
Tables 4 and 5 show the study results associated with
cases 3 and 4, respectively. Switching time is assumed
to be 1 h for both cases. It can be seen that the reliability
indexes are improved for all the load points, although
the amount of improvement is not the same for different
load points in the system. This can clearly be seen by
comparing the results shown in Tables 4 and 5 with
those shown in Table 2. In addition, for a given load
point this improvement is lower for the results shown in
Table 5 than for those shown in Table 4. The reason for
this is that the degree of reliability improvement through
employing the automation system is higher for the case
when the earth-fault probability is more than that of a
short-circuit fault. In other words, the automation system
can prove to be more effective when earth-fault probability
is high. As can seen from Table 1, the earth-fault probabil-
ties P(GFCi) for cases 3 and 4 are 0.7 and 0.2,
respectively.
Tables 6 and 7 show the study results associated
with cases 5 and 6, respectively. Switching time is
assumed to be 3 h for both cases. It can be seen from
the results that the reliability indexes are considerably
improved for all the load points. This is obvious, if the
results presented in Tables 6 and 7 are compared with
those shown in Table 3. The following concluding
remarks can be made by comparing the results presented
in Tables 2 8:
(a) Employment of the automated distribution scheme will
considerably improve the load point and system reliability if
the earth-fault probability is high.
(b) Employment of the automated distribution scheme will
considerably improve the load-point and system reliability
if the manual switching time is high.
4.2 Sensitivity analysis
In the results presented in Section 4.1, it was assumed that
the availabilities of the local systems for the master
station, section switches, loop switches and breakers are
0.95. It is important to perform sensitivity studies and to
consider the impacts on system and load-point indexes
of automation-system-component availabilities. This is

Fig. 5 Effects of different sensitivity analysis on the failure rate of load point 20
a Effects of availability of the local system breakers on the failure rate of load point 20
b Effects of availability of the local system master station on the failure rate of load point 20
c Effects of availability of the local system loop switches on the failure rate of load point 20
d Effects of availability of the local system section switches on the failure rate of load point 20

230 IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., Vol. 1, No. 2, March 2007

Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad del Valle. Downloaded on April 23, 2009 at 20:34 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
Fig. 6 Effects of different sensitivity analyses on the average energy not supplied at load point 20
a Effects of availability of the local system breakers on the ENS of load point 20
b Effects of availability of the local system master station on the ENS of load point 20
c Effects of availability of the local system loop switches on the ENS of load point 20
d Effects of availability of the local system section switches on the ENS of load point 20
illustrated in this Section by varying the availabilities of
these components and determining their effects on load-
point and system indexes. All the sensitivity analyses are
conducted for the six case studies described in Table 1.
Figs. 5 and 6, respectively, show the effects on the
average failure rate and energy not supplied indices at
Load point 20 of the variation in the availabilities of the
local systems for the master station, section switches,
loop switches and breakers. Similar sensitivity analyses
have been conducted to illustrate the effects of local-
system availability on the system indexes. The results for
SAIFI and SAIDI are shown in Figs. 7 and 8. In these
analyses, when the availability of a given local system is
changed, the other local systems are assumed to be 95%
available. The results shown in Figs. 58 clearly demon-
strate the reliability enhancement of the load point and
system indexes of employing the LIS automated scheme.
From the results shown in Figs. 5 and 7, it can be seen
that SAIFI and average failure rate of load point 20 decrease
as the availabilities associated with local systems of master
station, section and loop switches are increased. For a given
local-system availability, SAIFI and the average failure rate
decrease as the earth-fault probability is increased (compare
IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., Vol. 1, No. 2, March 2007
Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad del Valle. Downloaded on April 23, 2009 at 20:34 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
cases 3 and 5 with cases 4 and 6). The availability of the
local system of breakers has no effect on SAIFI and the
failure rate of the load points, as it has been assumed that
circuit breakers operate successfully when required to do
so. It can also be seen that SAIFI and the load-point
failure rate are more sensitive to the availability of the
local systems of the master station and the section switches
than the availability of the local systems of loop switches or
breakers.
Fig. 8 shows the variation of SAIDI with respect to the
availability of the local systems. It can be seen from
Fig. 8 that, for a large value of manual switching time
(cases 5 and 6), SAIDI decreases as the availability of
the local systems is increased. SAIDI is not so sensitive
to the availability of the local systems when the manual
switching time is small (cases 3 and 4). The values of
earth- and short-circuit-fault probabilities have little
effect on SAIDI compared with their effects on SAIFI.
It can also be seen from Fig. 8 that the set of results
associated with cases 1, 3, 4, 5 and 6 almost converges
at large values of local-system availability. The reason
for this is that, at large values of local-system availability,
system unreliability (here SAIDI) is low irrespective of
231
Fig. 7 Effects of different sensitivity analyses on the system average interruption frequency index SAIFI
a Effects of availability of the local system breakers on SAIFI
b Effects of availability of the local system master station on SAIFI
c Effects of availability of the local system loop switches on SAIFI
d Effects of availability of the local system section switches on SAIFI
the amount of manual switching time or the earth- and
short-circuit-fault probabilities. As in Figs. 5 and 7, the
availability of the local systems of the master station
and section switches have more effect on SAIDI than
that of the availability of the local systems of loop
switches or breakers.
Other system indexes, i.e. CAIDI, AENS and ASAI, can
be calculated for the above cases. Overall, the following
concluding remarks can be made from the results presented
in Figs. 5 8 in conjunction with employment of the LIS
automated scheme:
(i) Load-point-failure rates and SAIFI decrease, especially
when the majority of failure events are earth faults.
(ii) Average down time and average energy not supplied of
the load points and the overall system decrease, especially
when the value of the manual switching time is significantly
high.
(iii) The availability of the local systems of the master
station and section switches have more effect on the
load-point and overall-system-reliability indexes, than the
availability of the local systems of the loop switches or
breakers.
232
Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad del Valle. Downloaded on April 23, 2009 at 20:34 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
5 Conclusions
This paper presents an approach for reliability assessment
of a specific automated distribution system designated the
LIS. The technique is based on the event-tree method-
ology in which the impacts of earth- and short-circuit-fault
probabilities, different values of manual switching time
and local-systems availability are included in the analyses.
The proposed technique is examined using a typical distri-
bution system. Comparative studies were conducted to
illustrate the benefits of employing the automated
scheme using a distribution network. The study results
presented in this paper indicate that the load-point and
system reliability indexes are improved significantly by
implementing this scheme. A sensitivity analysis is per-
formed to illustrate the impacts on the reliability indexes
of varying the availability of the local systems of the
master station, section switches, loop switches and break-
ers. The results show clearly that short-circuit faults have
more negative impacts on system reliability than do earth
faults. The effects of the automated scheme on the
reliability indexes is particularly obvious when the value
of manual switching time is significant.
IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., Vol. 1, No. 2, March 2007
Fig. 8 Effects of different sensitivity analyses on the system average interruption duration index SAIDI
a Effects of availability of the local system breakers on SAIDI
b Effects of availability of the local system master station on SAIDI
c Effects of availability of the local system loop switches on SAIDI
d Effects of availability of the local system section switches on SAIDI
6 References
1 Atwell, E., Gamvrelis, T., Kearns, D., and Landman, R.: Automated
distribution scheme speeds service restoration, IEEE Comput. Appl.
Power, 1996, 9, (1), pp. 3337
2 Kendrew, T.J., and Marks, J.A.: Automated distribution comes of
age, IEEE Comput. Appl. Power, 1989, 2, (1), pp. 7 10
3 Rigler, D.M., Hodgkins, W.R., and Allan, R.N.: Quantitative
reliability analysis of distribution system: automation, Power Eng.
J., 1999, 13, (4), pp. 201 204
4 Pahwa, A.: Role of distribution automation in restoration of
distribution systems after emergencies. Transmission and
Distribution Conf. Exp., IEEE/PES, 2001, vol. 2, pp. 1204 1205
5 Hager, G.E., Bear, R.N.M., and Baum, A.S.: Automated distribution
fault location system, IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl., 1996, 32, (3),
pp. 704708
IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., Vol. 1, No. 2, March 2007
Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad del Valle. Downloaded on April 23, 2009 at 20:34 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
6 Kato, K., Nagasaka, H., Okimoto, A., Kunieda, T., and
Nakamura, T.: Distribution automation systems for high
quality power supply, IEEE Trans. Power Deliv., 1991, 6, (3),
pp. 11961204
7 Billinton, R., and Allan, R.N.: Reliability evaluation of engineering
systems (Plenum Press, 1992, 2nd edn.)
8 Bilinton, R., and Allan, R.N.: Reliability evaluation of power
systems (Plenum Press, 1996, 2nd edn.)
9 He, Y., Soder, L., and Allan, R.N.: Distribution automation: impact of
communication system on reliability of automatic control. Proc.
Power Tech., 2001, Porto, vol. 3
10 Allan, R.N., Billinton, R., Sjarief, I., Goel, L., and So, K.S.: A
reliability test system for educational purposes basic distribution
system data and results, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., 1991, 6, (2),
pp. 813 820
233