Electric Power Systems Research 142 (2017) 96–111

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Electric Power Systems Research

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/epsr

The value of conservation voltage reduction to electricity security of

supply
Manuel Castro a,∗ , Andrew Moon a , Laurence Elner a , David Roberts a , Ben Marshall b
a
EA Technology Ltd, Capenhurst Technology Park, Capenhurst, Chester CH1 6ES, United Kingdom
b
National Grid, Warwick Technology Park, Gallows Hill, Warwick CV34 6DA, United Kingdom

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: In the specific event that there is not enough electricity being produced in the power market of Great
Received 26 April 2016 Britain to meet demand, the system operator can use a set of mitigation tools to manage these supply
Received in revised form 9 September 2016 shortfalls that are outside of normal operation of the market and that are used ahead of any controlled
Accepted 11 September 2016
customer disconnections. Demand control is an emergency mitigation tool used by the system operator
that instructs distribution network operators to implement voltage reduction across the electricity dis-
Keywords:
tribution system with the intent of achieving a reduction in customer’s demand. The introduction of new
Conservation voltage reduction
low carbon generation and demand technologies in the electricity distribution networks, with funda-
Security of supply
Flexible demand
mentally different technical and operating characteristics from the incumbent technologies, is likely to
drive a dissimilar impact on the level of demand reduction that can be achieved through voltage reduc-
tion compared to those previously expected. Thus, there is a need to comprehensively understand the
effectiveness of the voltage reduction in electricity distribution networks that can be realised through
demand control events. The delivery of demand control can be achieved through conservation voltage
reduction (CVR) techniques based on the principle of lowering the supply voltage to end-use consumers
of electricity in order to reduce the energy consumption of some types of loads while maintaining cus-
tomer service voltage within statutory limits. This paper presents a methodology to quantify and assess
the value of CVR to security of supply of electricity systems. Specifically, it estimates the response of
electricity demand to demand control events in the electricity distribution system to reduce customer’s
demand during periods of significantly low supply-demand margins. The methodology is applied to a
network structure representative of the electricity distribution network of Great Britain and the value
of CVR is estimated for individual distribution network feeders and for the distribution system over an
annual load cycle. The analysis demonstrates that the response of demand to voltage reduction is rela-
tively different from substation to substation, feeder to feeder and especially load to load. The CVR factor
for the Great Britain electricity distribution network is assessed to vary on average from 0.81 in the sum-
mer season to 1.13 in the winter season. The CVR factors for the electricity distribution network of Great
Britain are expressed in the form of a look up table to provide a simple framework for network operators
to estimate the response of demand to voltage reduction/demand control events.
© 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction electricity”. Capacity margin has commonly been used as an indi-

The energy White Paper [1] of the Government of the United
Kingdom has set out a framework for energy policy that is
underpinned by three core objectives: security of supply, afford-
ability and sustainability. Security of electricity of supply has been
defined by the European Parliament and the Council [2] as “the
ability of an electricity system to supply final customers with
∗ Corresponding author.
E-mail address: manuel.castro@eatechnology.com (M. Castro).
cator of security of supply by the electric utility industry [3].
This metric estimates the average excess of available supply over
demand.
In the specific event that there is not enough electricity being
produced in the power market of Great Britain (GB) to meet
demand, the system operator (SO) can use a set of mitigation
tools to manage these supply shortfalls that are outside of normal
operation of the market and that are used ahead of any con-
trolled customer disconnections. Demand control is an emergency
mitigation tool used by the SO that instructs distribution net-
work operators (DNOs) to implement voltage reduction across the

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.epsr.2016.09.006
0378-7796/© 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
 M. Castro et al. / Electric Power Systems Research 142 (2017) 96–111
electricity distribution system with the intent of achieving a reduc-
tion in customer’s demand (i.e. Grid Code OC6 Demand Control)
[4]. The GC0050 demand control industry workgroup carried out
the “Operation Juniper” trial to ascertain the actual reduction in
demand achievable via voltage reduction. The field trial demon-
strated significant variability on the levels of the demand reduction
attained across the different DNOs and indicated that, on average,
the implementation of 3% voltage reduction delivered around 1.5%
of demand reduction across GB [5].
The delivery of voltage reduction/demand control can be
realised through conservation voltage reduction (CVR) techniques
that have been performed by power utilities since the 1970s [6,7].
CVR represents the principle of lowering the supply voltage to
end-use consumers of electricity in order to reduce the energy
consumption of some types of loads while maintaining customer
service voltage within statutory limits [8]. The effectiveness of this
technique can be assessed through the quantification of the CVR
factor that is expressed as the ratio between the per cent reduction
of demand and the per cent reduction of voltage.
CVR has been studied in various utilities and different levels
of the effectiveness of the technique have been observed. The per
cent of voltage reduction experienced by a particular customer of
a network feeder and the overall demand reduction effect on the
feeder is mainly driven by the composition of the load, the elec-
tric design of the distribution feeder and the embedded generation
connected along the feeder. In 2005, Hydro-Quebec implemented
a pilot project to assess the effectiveness of CVR for energy savings
reporting around 0.4% reduction in energy demand for a 1% volt-
age reduction at a suburban substation [9]. In 2007, the Northwest
Energy Efficiency Alliance conducted a CVR field study involving
eleven utilities from the Pacific Northwest region, ten different
substations and thirty one feeders [10]. The study demonstrated
that 1% change in distribution line voltage provided a 0.25–1.3%
change in energy demand and that voltages could be reduced from
1% to 3.5%. In 2010, BC Hydro explored the implementation of CVR
across the distribution system observing a 1% reduction in energy
per year and a 1.1% reduction in winter peak demand, both for a
1% voltage reduction [11]. In 2014, ESB Networks conducted CVR
field trials in two rural feeders and in an urban substation com-
posed of eight outgoing feeders [12]. The trials recorded CVR factors
(dP/dV) ranging from 0.58 to 0.98. In 2015, Electricity North West
performed field trials, across fifteen substations, investigating the
voltage-demand relationship [13]. The CVR strategy consisted in
moving up and down the tap position of the primary substation
transformers one step at a time followed by a time period of no
voltage regulation, over an annual load cycle. The trials estimated
an average CVR factor (dP/dV) of 1.3 for domestic substations, 1.48
for industrial and commercial substations and 1.22 for mixed (i.e.
domestic, industrial and commercial) substations.
The transition to a low carbon economy is transforming the way
stakeholders think about, produce and use electricity. The intro-
duction of new generation (e.g. solar photovoltaic) and demand
(e.g. consumer electronics, home computing, heat pumps, elec-
tric vehicles) technologies, with fundamentally different technical
and operating characteristics from the incumbent technologies, is
likely to drive a dissimilar impact on the level of demand reduction
that can be achieved through voltage reduction/demand control
compared to that previously expected. Hence, there is a need to
comprehensively understand the present and anticipated future
composition of electricity demand in distribution networks, inves-
tigate the key drivers impacting the implementation of voltage
reduction, and assess the response of the present and future elec-
tricity demand to voltage reduction.
This paper presents an analytical methodology to quantify and
assess the value of CVR to security of supply of electricity sys-
tems. Specifically, it estimates the response of electricity demand
97
to voltage reduction/demand control events issued by the SO
and implemented by the DNOs in the electricity distribution sys-
tem to reduce customer’s demand during periods of significantly
low supply-demand margins. The methodology uses metered and
synthetic demand curves together with statistical data on load
composition to represent the composite demand for different sec-
tors of the GB economy. These end-use loads are then categorised,
based on electrical characteristics, to enable the understanding of
the behaviour of the loads to voltage reduction/demand control.
Subsequently, a ZIP load model [14] is used to describe the relation-
ship between the active and reactive power demands as a function
of the load supply voltage. The CVR factor is the metric adopted
to estimate the value of CVR to reduce demand. The methodology
is applied to a network structure representative of the electric-
ity distribution network of GB. The CVR factors are estimated for
the individual representative distribution network feeders and for
the representative distribution system over an annual load cycle
to account for seasonal and daily variability. The CVR factors for
the electricity distribution network of GB can be expressed in the
form of a look up table to provide a simple framework for network
operators to estimate the response of demand to voltage reduc-
tion/demand control events issued by the SO and implemented by
the DNOs.
2. Methodology
This section details the methodology developed to quantify and
assess the value of CVR to security of supply of electricity systems
that can be implemented through voltage reduction/demand con-
trol events issued by the SO and implemented by the DNOs.
The methodology to estimate the response of electricity demand
to voltage reduction uses metered and synthetic demand curves
together with statistical data on load composition to represent the
composite demand for different sectors of the GB economy. These
end-use loads are then categorised, based on electrical character-
istics, to enable the understanding of the behaviour of the loads
to voltage reduction/demand control. A ZIP load model is then
employed to establish the relationship between the active and reac-
tive power demands as a function of the load supply voltage. The
effectiveness of voltage reduction is assessed through the quantifi-
cation of the CVR factor that is expressed as the ratio between the
per cent reduction of demand and the per cent reduction of volt-
age. The implementation of the methodology requires three main
datasets:
• Load composition: the percentage contribution of different load
categories to the total active and/or reactive power demand of
a group of loads connected at one point of delivery for end-use
consumption of electricity.
• Load curves: the time series of active and/or reactive power
demand of the individual loads which are present in the com-
posite load (these individual load curves models are combined
with the load composition data to form the composite load); and
• ZIP load coefficients: accurate polynomial coefficients of the main
load categories to describe the analytical relationship between
the active and reactive power demands as a function of the load
supply voltage.
Fig. 1 introduces the schematic representation of the framework
developed to construct the composite electricity demand and to
assess the value of CVR techniques implemented via voltage reduc-
tion/demand control events.
The following subsections explore in greater detail the differ-
ent building blocks of the methodology and discuss the potential
98 M. Castro et al. / Electric Power Systems Research 142 (2017) 96–111
Fig. 1. Schematic representation of the framework to assess the value of CVR.
response of electricity demand to voltage reduction/demand con-
trol events.
2.1. Demand structure
The structure of demand specifies the individual load categories,
end-use load types or electrical devices and equipment that are
connected at a particular point of delivery for end-use consump-
tion of electricity. The composition of demand is the percentage
contribution of different load categories, end-use types or electrical
devices to the composite demand of that group of loads connected
at one point of electricity delivery. The curve of demand describes
the time series of the active and/or reactive power demand of
the individual load categories, end-use types or electrical devices.
A component-based demand modelling approach [14,15] is com-
bined with load-use statistics to identify the structure and quantify
the composition of demand. This approach can be described as a
‘bottom-up’ technique that constructs the composite load from
its individual load components. Fig. 2 displays the component-
based demand modelling approach for establishing the structure
and composition of the electricity demand for the domestic, com-
mercial and public service sectors in GB.
In describing the component-based approach illustrated in
Fig. 2, the following terms are defined:
• Load characteristics: a set of parameters and/or functional rela-
tionships (e.g. power factor, variation of active power with
supply voltage, etc.) describing and characterising the electri-
cal behaviour and response of a specified load. This term may
be applied to a specific load type, category, sector or composite
load.
• Load type: an individual load or a group of individual loads with
the same specific end-use application, which may have the same
or different electrical characteristics.
• Load category: a group of individual loads, typically used in the
same end-use applications, which consume active and reactive
power and respond to variations in voltage and frequency in simi-
lar manner. A load category may consist of electrical devices from
more than one load type.
• Load sector: a collection of loads from different load categories,
representing typical structures of electrical devices found in a
specific end-use application where similar activities and tasks
are performed.
 M. Castro et al. / Electric Power Systems Research 142 (2017) 96–111
Fig. 2. Component-based demand modelling approach for demand structure and composition.
10% 11% Cold
CE / ICT
Cooking
22%
25%
Wet
Water heang
7% Space heang
12%
13% Lighng
Fig. 3. Demand composition by end-use type of the domestic sector.
• Composite load: the aggregation of all the loads from the different
load sectors that are connected at one point of delivery for end-
use consumption of electricity.
2.1.1. Domestic sector
Fig. 3 presents the structure and composition of the electricity
demand for the domestic sector in GB over the year 2014 [16–18].
The electricity consumption recorded in GB for the year 2014
amounts to 303 TWh. There are approximately 27.5 million domes-
tic electricity metre points representing 36% of the total electricity
consumption in GB. Fig. 3 shows that consumer electronics / home
computing (CE/ICT) and space heating are the largest end-uses con-
tributing to the overall domestic electricity demand. The electrical
characteristics of CE/ICT loads are predominantly power electron-
ics based which are likely to provide limited flexibility to voltage
reduction/demand control. In contrast, space heating loads are
principally resistive based and therefore are likely to be flexible
for voltage reduction/demand control.
The demand curves representative of individual domestic
electricity customers are synthetically developed through the
application of the ‘Domestic Electricity Demand Model’ [19,20].
The analytical model stochastically simulates the electricity con-
sumption of a domestic dwelling based upon the activities of the
occupants and associated use of electrical appliances and light-
ing. The resulting demand curves of the individual appliances and
99
lighting technologies are consequently aggregated to form the elec-
tricity demand curve of the household. The model is deployed
several times to create stochastically different household demand
curves. The aggregation of these demand curves provides a diverse
composition of domestic customers that is representative of GB.
Fig. 4 depicts the after-diversity demand curve composition of a
domestic customer for a weekday in winter.
It can be seen in Fig. 4 that the share of power demand of
individual electrical appliances and lighting technologies presents
significant time-of-day variability that is likely to affect the
response of demand to changes in supply voltage. This compos-
ite domestic demand curve has been validated against the demand
curve of real domestic electricity customers whose electricity off-
take is categorised by the combination of the load Profile Classes
1 and 2 [21] of the electricity supply market in GB. Both curves
were found to closely follow one another for different time-of-year,
time-of-week and time-of-day.
The structure and composition of the domestic sector demand
can be combined with the demand curves of individual appliances
and lighting technologies to characterise the magnitude and shape
of the electricity demand by domestic end-use applications for dif-
ferent time-of-year, time-of-week and time-of-day. Fig. 5 details
the composite electricity demand by end-use of the domestic sector
in GB for a weekday in winter.
Fig. 5 suggests that CE/ICT loads are largely present during
peak demand times (evening peaks) where the capacity margin
between supply and demand is tighter and the likelihood of exercis-
ing voltage reduction is potentially higher. On the contrary, space
heating loads are principally resistive based and therefore are flex-
ible for voltage reduction. Nonetheless, it can be seen in Fig. 5
that space heating loads are mostly present between midnight and
06:00 h, generally coinciding with periods of wider capacity mar-
gins between supply and demand and lower likelihood of voltage
reduction/demand control requirements.
2.1.2. Commercial and public service sectors
Fig. 6, introduces the structure and composition of the electricity
demand for the commercial and public service sectors in GB over
the year 2014 [16,18,22].
The electricity consumption noted in the commercial and public
service sectors over the year 2014 accounts for 31% of the total
electricity consumption in GB. Fig. 6 indicates that lighting is the
100 M. Castro et al. / Electric Power Systems Research 142 (2017) 96–111

LED
1.0
CFL
LFL
HIL
GIL
Electric space heater
Electric storage heater
0.8 Electric shower
EIWH
DESWH
Washer dryer
Washing machine
Tumble dryer
0.6 Dishwasher
Small cooking
Load (kW)

Kele
Microwave
Electric oven
Electric hob
Receiver
0.4 DVD/VCR
TV (Plasma)
TV (LCD)
TV (CRT)
Printer
PC
0.2 Fax
Vacuum
Iron
Hifi
Phone
Clock
CD player
0.0 Answer machine
Upright freezer
Fridge
Fridge freezer
Time (hour:minute) Chest freezer

Fig. 4. After-diversity demand curve composition of a GB domestic customer for a weekday in winter.

25,000
Lighng

20,000 Space Heang

Water Heang
15,000
Load (MW)

Wet

10,000
Cooking

CE / ICT
5,000

Cold

Time (hour:minute)

Fig. 5. Composite demand by end-use of the domestic sector for a weekday in winter.

principal end-use contributor to the overall electricity demand of
the commercial and public service sectors.
The electricity demand of the commercial and public service
sectors (i.e. demand sectors) in GB can vary significantly across
different building types (i.e. demand sub-sectors) according to
the nature of the activity performed in the building, the pat-
tern of occupancy, etc. Additionally, the composition of individual
demands can also differ with the type of the building. The demand
curves representative of the commercial and public service sec-
tors are therefore developed for different types of buildings and
the composite demand of the building is distributed by the differ-
ent end-uses. Fig. 7 introduces the composition of demand for the
non-domestic buildings by sub-sector and end-use in GB for the
year 2014. The non-domestic building types considered are consis-
tent with those used for the purpose of reporting load-use statistics
in GB [22].
It can observed in Fig. 7 that the retail sub-sector (i.e. high
street shops, shopping centres, supermarkets, etc.) is the largest
consumer of electricity and the following four largest consumers
(i.e. Warehouses, Hotel & Catering, Educations and Commercial
Offices) have relatively similar energy requirements. This suggests
that realising the full potential of voltage reduction/demand control
will require action across these sub-sectors.
The demand curves representative of the non-domestic sub-
sectors are developed from real-world metered data samples for
each building type [23,24] for different time-of-day, time-of-week
 M. Castro et al. / Electric Power Systems Research 142 (2017) 96–111 101

and time-of-year. Nevertheless, the existence of metered data indi-

13% 13% Catering cating the shape of the electricity consumption by end-use is very
limited. Thus, the profiles of each load end-use are approximated
Compung assuming that each follows the profile shape of the total load of
6% a specific sub-sector. The profiles of individual load end-uses are
HVAC calculated with the constraints of maintaining: (i) the overall profile
shape of the sub-sector (i.e. sum of all end-uses); and (ii) con-
9%
Hot water sumption by load end-use (the area under the curve) [23–25]. As a
result of the application of this approach, Figs. 8 and 9 display the
after-diversity demand curve composition representative of a retail
4% Heang
building of the commercial sector and an education building of the
41%
public service sector both for a weekday in winter, respectively. It is
Lighng noted that the demand curves represent all buildings across a sub-
14%
sector. For example, the demand curve of the education building
Other type includes schools, colleges, universities etc.
It can be seen in Figs. 8 and 9 that the demand curves of differ-
Fig. 6. Demand composition by end-use type of the commercial and public service
ent types of non-domestic buildings generally have different shapes
sectors. reflecting the diverse occupancy and usage patterns of the build-
ing. Fig. 8 shows a lower diurnal variation of the retail demand
curve compared to a characteristic nine-to-five routine of the edu-
cation sub-sector in Fig. 9. In addition to revealing the overall profile
Health Catering shape of the demand curve for each sub-sector, these type demand
Other
Compung curves provide an estimate of the relative size of each load end-
HVAC use during each hour of the day. This is of particular interest as it is
Communicaon and Transport Hot water important to comprehensively understand the composition of elec-
Heang
Sport and Leisure tricity demand in order to evaluate its ability to respond to voltage
Lighng
reduction/demand control events.
Government Other
The structure and composition of the commercial and public ser-
Educaon vices sector demand can be combined with the demand curves of
Commercial Offices the individual non-domestic buildings to characterise the magni-
tude and shape of the electricity demand by non-domestic end-use
Hotel and Catering
applications for different time-of-year, time-of-week and time-of-
Warehouses day. Fig. 10 details the composite demand of the commercial and
Retail public services sector in GB for a weekday in winter.
In Fig. 10, the lighting load component may be constituted of
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
different technologies, such as general incandescent lamps (GIL),
Electricity consumprion (TWh)
compact fluorescent lamps (CFL), high intensity discharge lamps
Fig. 7. Non-domestic demand composition by sub-sector and end-use. (HID), light emitting diode (LED) light sources, etc., that have differ-
ent electrical characteristics and therefore may respond differently

6,000

Other

5,000
HVAC

4,000
Compung
Load (MW)

3,000 Catering

Hot water
2,000

Heang
1,000

Lighng

Time (hour:minute)

Fig. 8. After-diversity demand curve composition of the retail sub-sector for a weekday in winter.
102 M. Castro et al. / Electric Power Systems Research 142 (2017) 96–111

3,000

Other

HVAC

2,000
Load (MW) Compung

Catering

Hot water
1,000

Heang

Lighng

Time (hour:minute)

Fig. 9. After-diversity demand curve composition of the education sub-sector for a weekday in winter.

25,000

Other

20,000
HVAC

Compung
15,000
Load (MW)

Catering

10,000
Hot water

5,000 Heang

Lighng

Time (hour:minute)

Fig. 10. Composite demand by end-use of the commercial and public services sector for a weekday in winter.

to variations of the supply voltage. Hence, it is important to compre-
hensively understand the structure and composition of electricity
demand in GB to quantify its ability to respond to voltage reduc-
tion/demand control actions issued by the SO and implemented by
the DNO.
2.1.3. Industrial sector
The industrial electricity sector in GB is generally composed
of large electricity customers with a maximum demand of over
100 kW. These customers are equipped with metering systems
that record their electricity consumption on half-hourly time
periods. The consumption of these large customers is settled by
energy suppliers in the electricity market on the basis of that
half-hourly consumption data. As a result, published load-use
statistics detailing the magnitude, shape and composition of indus-
trial demand by time-of-day, time-of-week and time-of-year are
exceptionally scarce. Thus, it is difficult to provide a detailed quan-
tification and qualification of the response of industrial demand
to voltage reduction/demand control instructions issued by the
SO to manage situations of deficiency of available supply to meet
demand.
Furthermore, it is envisaged that a significant portion of the
accessible demand within the industrial sector in GB is already
engaged by the SO as part of the Balancing Services (e.g. Short
Term Operating Reserve) to support the continuously balancing
of electricity supply and demand ensuring the stability and secu-
rity of the electricity system. Hence, demand reduction in the
industrial sector mostly occurs as part of a commercial service
within the normal operation of the electricity market as opposed
to a demand control notification, issued by the SO outside of
normal operation of the market, as a consequence of supply
deficiencies.
 M. Castro et al. / Electric Power Systems Research 142 (2017) 96–111 103

Load Lighng Directly Drive

Power Electronics Resisve
Category (Energy Efficient) Connected Motors Controlled Motors

Load No Passive Acve Single- Three- Single- Three-

CFL LED
Subcategory PFC PFC PFC phase phase phase phase

Abbreviaons:
CFL: Compact Fluorescent Lamps RSIR CSR CSR
CP: Constant Mechanical Power
CSR: Capacitor Start-Capacitor Run
CT: Constant Torque
LED: Light Eming Diode
LT: Linear Torque CT QT LT CP
PFC: Power Factor Correcon
QT: Quadrac Torque
RSIR: Resisve Start-Inductor Run

Fig. 11. Main load categories and associated load subcategories.

3.0

2.5

2.0
Load (kW)

1.5

1.0

0.5

0.0

Time (hour:minute)
Fig. 12. Typical operating cycle of a washing machine.

2.1.4. Transport sector
Load-use statistics in GB [22] disaggregate the electricity con-
sumption in the transport sector by types of transport recording
that the rail transport is responsible for 98% of the consumption
of the overall sector whilst road transport is accountable for the
remaining 2%.
It is difficult to form a detailed view on the magnitude, shape and
composition of the rail transport demand (mostly supply of traction
energy to trains) by time-of-day, time-of-week and time-of-year as
publically available data on rail loads in GB is very limited. More-
over, the GB DNOs implement voltage reduction/demand control
across the distribution electricity system via actions undertaken at
primary substation level (e.g. 33/11, 33/6.6 kV, etc.) whilst alter-
nating current rail traction supplies [26] is generally established
from the 132 kV extra high voltage distribution network (e.g. volt-
age transformation station for rail traction supply 132 kV/25 kV)
instead of the 33 kV primary substation level. In consequence, GB
DNOs suggest that the ability for exercising Voltage Reduction at
rail traction substations is limited.
The electricity consumption in road transport constitutes a very
small proportion of the overall consumption of the transport sector
therefore it is expected to cause a negligible effect on the electricity
distribution system response to voltage reduction. However, the
outlook for significant uptake of electric vehicles may change this
expectation in the future.
2.2. Demand categories
The electricity demand has been structured in groups of indi-
vidual loads with the same specific end-use application to reflect
the data format of the published load-use statistics. However, this
approach cannot be directly utilised to comprehensively quantify
and assess the response of demand to voltage reduction/demand
control events as individual loads with significantly different elec-
trical characteristics may be grouped in the same end-use and their
behaviour to variations of supply voltage may be indiscernible.
Consequently, the load-use statistics and load types need be con-
verted into load categories based on the similarity of their electrical
104 M. Castro et al. / Electric Power Systems Research 142 (2017) 96–111

Resisve

CSR SPIM CT

CSR SPIM QT

PE noPFC

Time (hour:minute)
Fig. 13. Load category classification of a washing machine.

characteristics and/or circuit topologies so that their response to

variations in voltage are relatively similar. In this respect, all indi-
Washing machine
vidual load types (i.e. electrical equipment and devices) have been
grouped into the following five load categories: power electronics; 30%
32%
resistive; lighting; directly connected motors; and drive controlled
motors. Fig. 11 details the five load categories and associated sub- Washer dryer
categories [27].
The conversion process of load types into load categories is
discussed for the wet end-use as an example of this step of the
Dishwasher
methodology. The wet end-use of the domestic sector in GB gen-
erally consists of various individual load types such as: washing
machines (30% of the total electricity consumption of the wet end-
16%
use), dishwashers (22%), tumble dryers (32%) and washer dryers Tumble dryer
22%
(16%). These electrical appliances have specific operation cycles
that can vary in time and power consumption according to the
physical task being performed. Fig. 12 depicts the typical operating (a) Wet end-use by load type
cycle of a washing machine [28] and Fig. 13 displays the respective
load category classification throughout the cycle [29]. 4%
3%
The washing machine has a resistive heating element, with high Resisve
10%
rated power, to heat the water to the required temperature, a motor
to rotate the drum and a pump to draw water into the appliance
and also to flush water out. The high running torque requirements
CSR CT
to rotate the drum, are generally met through a “Capacitor Start-
Capacitor Run” (CSR) Single Phase Induction Motor (SPIM). The
motor loads will operate with constant torque (CT) despite typi-
cally having two stages of spin speed. The torque conditions for CSR QT
this type of appliance are approximately constant for the entire
wash cycle which constitutes around 90% of the standard opera-
tion. The centrifugal pump commonly used in domestic appliances
will present a quadratic torque (QT) load to the motor. The power 83% RSIR QT
demand of the electronic control system of the appliance is very
low and is assumed to include basic electronic components. It can
be treated as power electronics (PE) load. (b) Wet end-use by load category
A similar analysis has been performed for all other load types
Fig. 14. Wet end-use demand consumption by load type and load category.
of the wet end-use and the operating cycle of each wet appliance
has been into the electrical load categories. The electricity demand
contribution of the load types of the wet end-use to load categories dryers and “Resistive Start Inductor Run” (RSIR) SPIM driving the
are presented in Table 1. fan rotation in dishwashers.
Table 1 the resistive load refers to the resistive heating element The load-use statistics for the wet end-use of the domestic sec-
to heat the water or air to the required temperature. The motor tor in GB are combined with the electricity demand contribution of
load denote the SPIM driving the main process, i.e. CSR SPIM driv- each individual load type in Table 2 to quantify the overall electric-
ing drum rotation in washing machines, washer dryers and tumble ity demand composition associated with each load category of the
 M. Castro et al. / Electric Power Systems Research 142 (2017) 96–111 105

Table 1
Electricity demand contribution of different electrical wet appliances to the categories of load.

Load Resistive Motor Pump

(kWh) (%) (kWh) (%) (kWh) (%)

Washing machine 0.54 83 0.1 15 0.01 2

Tumble dryer 1 83 0.2 17 – –
Washer dryer 0.97 82 0.01 1 0.2 17
Dishwasher 1.25 85 0.21 14 0.005 1

Table 2
High voltage and low voltage representative distribution networks of Great Britain.

Network Network definition Number of networks Number of domestic customers Number of non-domestic
customers

HV1 Urban Underground Radial 5643 0 20,839

HV2 Urban Underground Meshed 2997 0 11,068
HV3 Suburban Underground Radial 3120 0 11,522
HV4 Suburban Underground Meshed 4200 0 15,510
HV5 Suburban Mixed Radial 5760 0 21,271
HV6 Rural Overhead Radial 6750 0 24,927
HV7 Rural Mixed Radial 3450 0 12,741
LV1 Central Business District 22,425 0 55,483
LV2 Dense Urban (apartments, etc.) 63,383 2,701,020 67,208
LV3 Town Centre 43,831 203,454 118,772
LV4 Business Park 82,215 0 237,315
LV5 Retail Park 16,022 0 45,305
LV6 Suburban Street (semi-detached/detached houses) 148,973 4,974,551 386,133
LV7 New Build Housing Estate 154,533 4,784,184 418,752
LV8 Terraced Street 381,404 13,627,673 883,738
LV9 Rural Village (overhead construction) 24,122 371,427 28,420
LV10 Rural Village (underground construction) 24,802 780,516 67,208
LV11 Rural Farmsteads/Small Holdings 4993 56,152 0

Total: 27,498,977 2,426,212

Voltage: Low voltage (LV ≤ 1 kV); High voltage (1 kV < HV ≤ 25 kV).

wet end-use. Fig. 14 introduces the annual wet end-use demand
consumption by load type and load category.
2.2.1. Domestic sector
The conversion procedure of load types / end-uses to load cate-
gories is applied to the demand curves and associated composition
of individual appliances and lighting technologies to produce the
composite electricity demand for the domestic sector in GB. Fig. 15
presents the composite electricity demand by load categories of
the domestic sector in GB across for a weekday in the winter
period.
It can be observed in Fig. 15 that resistive load is the largest con-
tributor to the composite domestic demand in GB in terms of power
and energy magnitudes. Relatively significant levels of resistive
load are present at peak demand periods (i.e. morning and evening
peaks) providing demand flexibility to voltage reduction/demand
control events. Periods of peak demand are generally characterised
by tighter capacity margin between available generation and
demand which in turn increases the likelihood of the SO exercising
demand control via voltage reduction in the electricity distribution
network. These significant levels of resistive load will assist the
SO to manage situations of insufficient available supply to meet
demand by reducing customer demand and to attain regulatory
compliance with Grid Code [4]. Resistive demand during night-
time (00.00–06.00 h) is driven by the usage of storage space
and water heaters whilst the morning peak (06.00–09.00 h) is
driven by cooking and electric shower loads and the evening peak
(16.00–20.00 h) by cooking loads and lighting.
In the motor load category, RISR SPIM CT shows a relatively
even contribution to the overall demand throughout the day that
is typical of the cold loads. The CSR SPIM CT displays a higher con-
tribution to the domestic demand over the period 09.00–21.00 h
which is in agreement with the customer’s usage of wet
appliances. The power electronics load category depicts a sig-
nificant share of overall domestic demand during evening peak
periods. This is a reflection of the direct use of the con-
sumer electronics and home computing relating to entertainment.
Nonetheless, the power electronic loads are likely to provide
limited flexibility to voltage reduction/demand control.
2.2.2. Commercial and public services sector
The conversion procedure of load types / end-uses to load cat-
egories is applied to the demand curves for non-domestic building
and respective composition to produce the composite electricity
demand for the commercial and public services sector in GB. Fig. 16
introduces composite electricity demand by load categories of the
commercial and public services sector in GB across for a weekday
in the winter period.
Fig. 16 indicates that the largest contribution to the total
demand of the commercial and public service sectors are from
resistive and LFL load categories. The presence of relatively sig-
nificant levels of resistive load is important from a demand control
perspective as it increases the potential for reducing demand via
voltage reduction.
2.3. Voltage driven demand response
The operation of the electricity system involves the continuous
real-time balancing of supply and demand to ensure the stability,
security and quality of supply of the electric power system. Achiev-
ing this balance may be challenging at times as both supply and
demand levels can change rapidly due to unforeseen outages of
generation units and network components and sudden fluctuations
in load. Thus, the GB SO has a variety of commercial services avail-
able within the normal operation of the electricity market to assist
accomplishing this real-time matching of supply and demand. For
106 M. Castro et al. / Electric Power Systems Research 142 (2017) 96–111

25,000
PE aPFC

PE pPFC
20,000
PE noPFC

RSIR SPIM CT
15,000
Load (MW)

RSIR SPIM QT

CSR SPIM CT
10,000
CSR SPIM QT

Resisve
5,000
CFL

GIL
0

Time (hour:minute)

Fig. 15. Composite demand by load category of the domestic sector for a weekday in winter.

25,000
PE aPFC

PE pPFC

20,000 PE noPFC

3PIM drive

CSR SPIM QT
15,000
Load (MW)

CSR SPIM CT

RSIR 3PIM CT

RSIR SPIM CT
10,000
Resisve

LFL
5,000 HID

CFL

GIL
0

Time (hour:minute)

Fig. 16. Composite demand by load category of the commercial and public services sector for a weekday in winter.

instance, demand response provides an opportunity for end-use
consumers of electricity to play a significant role in the operation of
the electric power system by changing their electricity usage from
their normal consumption patterns in response to changes in the
price of electricity, or to incentive payments designed to induce
lower electricity use at times of high wholesale market prices or
when system reliability is jeopardised [30].
Methods of engaging customers in demand response efforts
can be classified into two main categories: incentive-based pro-
grammes and price-based programmes [31]. The incentive-based
demand response programmes are further divided into classical
and market-based. In classical demand response, participating cus-
tomers receive payments, usually as a bill credit or discount rate,
for their participation in the programme. Strategies include direct
load control and interruptible/curtailable load strategies [32,33].
The price-based demand response programmes are founded on
dynamic pricing rates that fluctuate over time to reflect the value
and cost of electricity in different time periods. These demand
response programmes, generally aim at flatten the demand curve
by offering a high price during peak periods and lower prices dur-
ing off-peak periods. Price-based demand response programmes
include time-of-use tariffs, critical-peak pricing and real-time pri-
cing [32,33].
In the specific event that there is not enough electricity
being produced in the power market to supply demand and the
commercial services available for system balancing are insuf-
ficient to manage these supply shortfalls, the GB SO can use
set of mitigation tools that are outside of normal operation of
the market (i.e. non-commercial) and that are used ahead of
any controlled disconnection of customers. Demand Control is
an emergency mitigation tool used by the GB SO that instructs
DNOs to implement Voltage Reduction across the electricity
 M. Castro et al. / Electric Power Systems Research 142 (2017) 96–111
distribution system with the intent of reducing customer’s
demand [4].
The delivery of voltage reduction/demand control is based on
the concept of Conservation Voltage Reduction that has been
explored by power utilities since the 1970s [6,7]. CVR represents the
principle of lowering the supply voltage to end-use consumers of
electricity in order to reduce the energy consumption of some load
types while maintaining customer service voltage within statutory
limits [8]. In contrast with the aforementioned demand response
strategies, CVR is a non-invasive approach to demand response as
end-use customers do not need to make any behavioural changes
as a result of its implementation.
In this work, the effectiveness of Voltage Reduction is assessed
through the quantification of the CVR factor (CVRf ) that is expressed
as the ratio between the per cent reduction of demand (D) and the
per cent reduction of voltage (V) [34]. The CVR factor is introduced
in Eq. (1).
D
CVRf =
V
A CVR factor equal to 1 suggests that the supply of customers
at a voltage 1% lower than the nominal is expected to deliver a
1% reduction in customers’ demand. In this sense, the larger the
CVR factor, the more the demand savings per percent reduction in
voltage.
The methodologies for assessing the effects of CVR can be clas-
sified into four categories: comparison-based, regression-based,
synthesis-based and simulation-based [35]. Comparison-based
methods compare load consumptions of the voltage-reduction
group (test group) and normal-voltage group (control group). The
control group can be a different feeder than the test group with
a similar load composition, or the same feeder but on a different
day with similar operating conditions [36]. The shortcoming of this
method relates to the difficulty of establishing a good control group
since there are no two physically identical feeders and associated
operating conditions. Regression-based methods use regression
techniques to model loads as a function of their impact factors (e.g.
load-to-voltage, load-to-temperature) [37]. Multivariate regres-
sion is often used to detect sensitivities of load to its impact factors.
The limitation of this method is that regression errors may bias the
CVRf , which is usually small itself. Synthesis-based methods aggre-
gate the CVR effects of different load components or customer types
based on load composition information [38]. This method may be
disadvantaged by the limited availability of accurate information
on load composition. Simulation-based methods require accurate
representation of components and circuits to simulate the over-
all behaviour of the system with and without voltage reduction
through detailed power flow analysis [39].
The synthesis-based framework developed for assessing the
response of demand to voltage reduction/demand control is under-
pinned by a ‘static load model’, conventionally used in the electric
utility industry, to represent electrical loads in steady-state power
system analysis [40]. The static load model enables the mathemati-
cal or analytical representation of the changes in active and reactive
power demand of a load as a function of the changes in supply
voltage and frequency at a particular instant in time.
A second order polynomial load model is used to represent
the load power demand characteristic as the sum of the constant
impedance (Z), constant current (I) and constant power (P) types of
loads. This ZIP model can be expressed in the following analytical
form:
  2 V   are aggregated to form the composite load for each low voltage (LV)
V
P = P0 Zp + Ip + Pp
V0 V0
107
  2 V  
V
Q = Q0 Zq + Iq + Pq (3)
V0 V0
In Eqs. (2) and (3), P and Q are the actual active and reactive
power demands of the load, V is the actual supply voltage at the
considered load bus, V0 is the nominal system voltage, P0 and Q0
are nominal active and reactive powers of the load and Zp , Ip , Pp , Zq ,
Iq , Pp are the polynomial model coefficients for active and reactive
power, respectively.
The application of the ZIP model to assess the response of
demand to Voltage Reduction requires the identification of the
ZIP coefficients so that the electrical characteristics of the mod-
elled load are represented as accurately as possible. The coefficients
of ZIP model have been extracted from load modelling work
[41,42] carried out for different load categories representative of
those present in the UK. The work developed detailed full elec-
tric circuit models of different load categories and performed a
voltage sweep of the supply voltage magnitude to establish the
relationships voltage-active power and voltage-reactive power. It
(1)
then converted the circuit-based model into a standard polyno-
mial/ZIP load model form through the application of a curve fitting
procedure to the calculated active and reactive power demands
obtained in the voltage sweep analysis. The ZIP model coefficients
were obtained as a result of fitting the ZIP load model to the
simulated data. The generic ZIP load models developed in the ref-
erenced work were able to reproduce the electrical characteristics
of the load for the voltage range Vpu ∈ [0.8; 1.2]. The ZIP mod-
els of different load categories have then been constructed from
experimental results on load behaviour under changing voltage
conditions.
3. Case study
Demand control is implemented by the DNOs in the electric-
ity distribution system and is achieved through actions carried out
at primary substation (e.g. 33/11, 33/6.6 kV, etc.) using the On-
Load Tap Changers (OLTC) of the power transformers to move the
tap position, via automatic voltage control relays, to maintain the
supply voltage on the secondary network at a specific set point.
Accordingly, the developed methodology is applied to a network
structure representative of the secondary electricity distribution
network of GB to quantify and assess the response of electricity
demand to voltage reduction/demand control events issued by the
SO and implemented by the DNOs. The GB distribution network
structure is established based on the concept of ‘representative’
network. The end-use loads are represented through a standard
ZIP load model as described in Section 2.3. The CVR factor is the
metric adopted to quantify the demand-voltage relationship.
3.1. Representative distribution networks
The representative distribution networks of GB, used in this
work, have been developed by EA Technology, as part of the Trans-
form Model® [43], for the activities undertaken in the Smart Grid
Forum co-chaired by DECC and Ofgem. The Transform Model®
has been extensively used by DNOs as a network investment and
planning tool to support the development of their business plans
for RIIO-ED1. The representation of the secondary distribution
networks in GB is introduced in Table 2.
A ‘bottom-up’ approach is used to determine the composite
load supplied by primary substations. Thus, the composition and
curves of the individual end-use loads introduced in Section 2.1
(2) feeder subject to the number and type of customers present on the
feeder. These loads are then combined according to the secondary
108 M. Castro et al. / Electric Power Systems Research 142 (2017) 96–111
8,000
6,000
Load (MW)
4,000
2,000
0 0.920
GIL
Resisve
RSIR SPIM QT
PE pPFC
Fig. 17. CVR factors for domestic customer (LV6 Suburban Street networks).
distribution network structure to form the composite load supplied
by the representative primary substations in GB.
3.2. Customer specific impact demand control
The methodology has been applied to the GB representative sec-
ondary distribution networks to quantify and assess the response
of demand to voltage reduction/demand control for different cus-
tomer compositions. For the purpose of this analysis, the following
three types of customer compositions have been considered:
• Domestic customers: primary substations largely supplying
domestic loads (e.g. LV6 Suburban Street networks),
• Non-domestic customers: primary substations largely supplying
non-domestic loads (e.g. LV1 Central Business District networks);
and
• Mixed customers: primary substations supplying a mixture
of domestic and non-domestic loads (e.g. LV3 Town Centre
networks).
The impact of voltage reduction/demand control events on the
magnitude and shape of the load composition of these customers
is depicted in Figs. 17–19 for a characteristic weekday in winter.
The figures display the composition of load curve of a specific type
of customers supplied at a voltage 1% lower than the nominal sys-
tem voltage. The ‘CVR factor’ curve translates the magnitude of the
demand-voltage reduction relationship for a 1% reduction of the
secondary voltage at the representative primary substations with
respect to the nominal system voltage.
In Fig. 17 the implementation of 1% voltage reduction results
in an overall reduction of peak demand of around 77 kW across
the ‘LV6 Suburban Street’ network feeder types in GB. The CVR
factor at time of peak demand (i.e. 17.30 h) is estimated to be
about 1.192. This indicates that 1% voltage reduction is expected to
deliver approximately 1.192% reduction in customer demand (i.e.
active power load). The ability to reduce demand through voltage
is fundamentally dependent on the composition of the demand.
In particular, resistive loads are flexible to for voltage reduc-
tion as they present a positive linear relationship to variations in
1.400
1.280
CVR factor
1.160
1.040
Time (hour:minute)
LFL CFL HID
CSR SPIM CT CSR SPIM QT RSIR SPIM CT
RSIR 3PIM CT 3PIM drive PE noPFC
PE aPFC CVR factor
voltage. Thus, it can be seen in Fig. 17 that the shape of the CVR
factor curve is relatively similar to that of the resistive load compo-
nent shown in Fig. 15. The most significant levels of resistive load
are present overnight and at peak demand periods (i.e. morning
and evening peaks) providing flexibility to reduce demand through
voltage reduction. This leads to higher CVR factors during night-
time as a result of the usage of storage space and water heaters, in
the morning peak driven by cooking and electric shower loads and
in the evening peak by cooking loads and lighting.
Fig. 18 shows the response of the non-domestic demand to a
1% reduction of the nominal voltage of the secondary distribution
network. It can be observed in Fig. 18 that the evolution of the CVR
factor over this characteristic winter weekday is significantly differ-
ent to that of Fig. 17 for domestic customers. These differences are
mostly driven by the dissimilar nature of the activities performed
in the building and the pattern of occupancy which directly impact
the composition of the demand. The CVR factor curve in Fig. 18 sug-
gests a higher responsiveness of demand to demand control events
during evening and night periods than in day periods. It can be
seen in Fig. 18 that the resistivity load dominates over other load
categories (e.g. motor, power electronic loads) during evening and
night periods increasing the ability to reduce demand through Volt-
age reduction. During day-times, the share of the motor and power
electronics load categories significantly increase diminishing the
responsiveness of load to demand control.
Fig. 19 illustrates the magnitude of the demand-voltage reduc-
tion relationship for a mixture of domestic and non-domestic
customers. It is seen in Fig. 19 that the overall shape of the demand
curve is predominantly driven by electricity consumption pat-
tern of non-domestic customers. Broadly, the magnitude of the
demand of an individual non-domestic customer is larger than
the demand of a domestic customer and the ‘LV3 Town Centre’
networks have higher numbers of non-domestic customers than
domestic as specified in Table 2. Nevertheless, it can be seen in
Fig. 19 that the shape of the CVR factor curve is similar to that of
domestic customer shown in Fig. 17. Despite the lower number
of domestic customers compared to non-domestic, the relatively
significant levels of domestic resistive load overnight and at peak
demand periods (i.e. morning and evening peaks) together with the
 M. Castro et al. / Electric Power Systems Research 142 (2017) 96–111 109

500 1.018

400 1.014

Load (MW)
300 1.010

CVR factor
200 1.006

100 1.002

0 0.998

Time (hour:minute)
GIL LFL CFL HID
Resisve CSR SPIM CT CSR SPIM QT RSIR SPIM CT
RSIR SPIM QT RSIR 3PIM CT 3PIM drive PE noPFC
PE pPFC PE aPFC CVR factor

Fig. 18. CVR factors for non-domestic customers (LV1 Central Business District networks).

1,200 1.100

1,000 1.082

800 1.063
Load (MW)

CVR factor
600 1.045

400 1.027

200 1.008

0 0.990

Time (hour:minute)
GIL LFL CFL HID
Resisve CSR SPIM CT CSR SPIM QT RSIR SPIM CT
RSIR SPIM QT RSIR 3PIM CT 3PIM drive PE noPFC
PE pPFC PE aPFC CVR factor

Fig. 19. CVR factors for mixed customers (LV3 Town Centre networks).

increase of non-domestic resistive load during evening and night-
times lead to an overall shape of the CVR factor curve analogous to
that of the domestic customers in Fig. 17. Fig. 19 shows that the
implementation of 1% voltage reduction through demand con-
trol results in a variable but relatively small reduction of demand
throughout the day ranging on average from 5 kW to 10 kW.
3.3. Network specific impact of demand control
The methodology has been applied to the GB representative sec-
ondary distribution networks over an annual load cycle to explore
the demand-voltage reduction relationship for different time-of-
day, time-of-week and time-of-year. Based on these wide range of
studies performed, the demand-voltage reduction relationship can
be generalised through the use of a look up table that can be readily
available to network operators. Table 3 presents look up table con-
taining the magnitude of demand-voltage reduction relationship
(i.e. CVR factor) for different seasons of the year and representative
LV distribution networks.
Table 3 shows that the LV distribution network average CVR
factor is estimated to range from 0.81 in the summer season to
1.13 in the winter season. For instance, for the winter season, it
110 M. Castro et al. / Electric Power Systems Research 142 (2017) 96–111

Table 3
Look up table for the demand-voltage reduction relationship.

Network Network definition Winter Spring Summer Autumn

Min Max Avg Min Max Avg Min Max Avg Min Max Avg

LV1 Central business district 1.01 1.02 1.01 0.87 0.89 0.88 0.68 0.70 0.69 0.75 0.77 0.76
LV2 Dense urban 0.88 1.43 1.23 0.84 1.37 1.14 0.69 0.98 0.84 0.77 1.25 1.08
LV3 Town centre 0.99 1.10 1.06 0.87 0.97 0.93 0.68 1.16 0.96 0.76 0.87 0.82
LV4 Business park 1.01 1.02 1.01 0.87 0.89 0.88 0.68 1.09 0.90 0.75 0.77 0.76
LV5 Retail park 1.01 1.02 1.01 0.87 0.89 0.88 0.68 0.78 0.73 0.75 0.77 0.76
LV6 Suburban street 0.93 1.33 1.17 0.85 1.23 1.07 0.68 0.70 0.69 0.77 1.10 0.99
LV7 New build housing estate 0.93 1.31 1.16 0.85 1.21 1.06 0.68 0.70 0.69 0.77 1.08 0.97
LV8 Terraced street 0.92 1.35 1.18 0.85 1.26 1.08 0.68 0.99 0.84 0.77 1.12 1.00
LV9 Rural village (overhead construction) 0.93 1.32 1.17 0.86 1.23 1.07 0.68 0.98 0.84 0.77 1.09 0.99
LV10 Rural village (underground construction) 0.94 1.31 1.16 0.86 1.21 1.06 0.68 1.01 0.85 0.77 1.08 0.97
LV11 Rural farmsteads/small holdings 0.83 1.51 1.27 0.82 1.49 1.20 0.69 0.99 0.85 0.77 1.41 1.17

Network average 1.13 1.02 0.81 0.93

can be inferred from Table 3 that 1% voltage reduction is esti-
mated to deliver on average around 1.13% of demand reduction
(i.e. active power). The look up table displayed in Table 3 provides a
simple framework for network operators to estimate the response
of demand to voltage reduction notices issued by the SO and imple-
mented by the DNOs.
The demand-voltage reduction relationship presented in Table 3
has been compared to that inferred from the real-world field
trials conducted in the Customer Load Active System Services
(CLASS) project. The “trial 1: load modelling” of the CLASS project
explored the voltage-demand relationship from a total of 15 pri-
mary substations across the Electricity North West’s licence area.
The voltage-demand relationship estimated by the CLASS project,
over an annual load cycle, can be summarised [13] as follows:
• For domestic substations (5 primary substations monitored), 1%
voltage reduction is expected to deliver on average around 1.3%
demand reduction (i.e. active power) for a weekday.
• For mainly industrial and commercial substations (5 primary sub-
stations monitored), 1% voltage reduction is expected to deliver
on average around 1.48% demand reduction (i.e. active power)
for a weekday.
• For mixed-type substations (5 primary substations monitored),
1% voltage reduction is expected to deliver on average around
1.22% demand reduction (i.e. active power) for a weekday.
The response of demand to voltage reduction estimated in this
work is consistent with the demand-voltage relationship identified
in the real-world field trials of the CLASS project.
4. Conclusions
The methodology has been applied to a network structure
representative of the electricity distribution network of GB.
The CVR factors are estimated for the individual representative
distribution network feeders and for the representative distribu-
tion system over an annual load cycle to account for seasonal and
daily variability.
The response of demand to voltage reduction/demand control
is assessed to be relatively different from substation to substation,
feeder to feeder, and especially load to load. The variation of the CVR
factor from feeder to feeder of the GB distribution networks is esti-
mated to range on average from 1.01 to 1.27 in the winter season
and on average from 0.69 to 0.96 in the summer season. Further-
more, the demand-voltage reduction relationship presents relative
variability for different time-of-day, time-of-week and time-of-
year. The CVR factor for the GB electricity distribution network is
assessed to vary on average from 0.81 in the summer season to 1.13
in the winter season.
The CVR factors for the electricity distribution network of GB
have been expressed in the form of a look up table to provide a
simple framework for network operators to estimate the response
of demand to voltage reduction/demand control events issued by
the SO and implemented by the DNOs.
Acknowledgements
The authors gratefully acknowledge National Grid Electric-
ity Transmission for the financial support to the project “DNO
Investigation into Voltage Interaction and Dependency Expectation
(DIVIDE)” under the Network Innovation Allowance [grant number
NIA NGET0156].

This paper has presented an analytical methodology to quan- References

tify and assess the value of CVR to security of supply of electricity
systems. Specifically, it has estimated the response of electricity
demand to voltage reduction/demand control events issued by the
SO and implemented by the DNOs in the electricity distribution sys-
tem to reduce customer’s demand during periods of significantly
low supply-demand margins.
The methodology uses metered and synthetic demand curves
together with statistical data on load composition to represent the
composite demand for different sectors of the GB economy. These
end-use loads are then categorised, based on electrical character-
istics, to enable the understanding of the behaviour of the loads to
voltage reduction/demand control. Subsequently, a ZIP load model
is used to describe the relationship between the active and reactive
power demands as a function of the load supply voltage. The CVR
factor is the metric adopted to estimate the value of CVR to reduce
demand.
[1] DECC, “Planning Our Electric Future: A White Paper for Secure, Affordable
and Low-carbon Electricity,” Policy Report, Department of Energy & Climate
Change, UK, 2011, July.
[2] European Parliament and Council Directive 2005/89/EC concerning measures
to safeguard security of electricity supply and infrastructure investment [2006]
OJ L 33/22, art 2, par (b).
[3] Ofgem, Electricity Security of Supply – A Commentary on National Grid’s Future
Energy Scenarios for the Next Three Winters, Office of Gas and Electricity Mar-
kets, UK, 2015, July.
[4] NG, “The Grid Code – Operating Code No. 6 – Demand Control,” Grid Code Issue
5, Revision 12, National Grid, UK, 2014, November.
[5] NG, GC0050 Demand Control and OC6, National Grid, UK, 2014, April.
[6] P.L. Wheeler, A.H. Dickenson, T.J. Gibbs, The effects of voltage reduction on
distribution system loads, in: Conference Paper A-78-542-3, IEEE Power Engi-
neering Society 1978 Summer Meeting, July 16–21, Los Angeles, USA, 1978.
[7] R.F. Preiss, V.J. Warnock, Impact of voltage reduction on energy and demand,
IEEE Trans. Power Appar. Syst. 97 (5) (September, 1978) 1665–1671.
[8] British Standard EN 50160:2010+A1:2015, Voltage Characteristics of Electricity
Supplied by Public Electricity Networks, British Standards Institution, London,
UK, 2015, July.
 M. Castro et al. / Electric Power Systems Research 142 (2017) 96–111
[9] S. Lefebvre, G. Gaba, A. Ba, D. Asber, A. Ricard, C. Perreault, D. Chartrand,
Measuring the efficiency of voltage reduction at Hydro-Québec distribution,
in: IEEE Power Engineering Society 2008 General Meeting – Converse and
Delivery Electrical Energy in the 21st Century, July 20–24, Pittsburgh, USA,
2008.
[10] NEEA, Distribution Efficiency Initiative, Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance,
Portland, Oregon, USA, 2007, December.
[11] V. Dabic, S. Cheong, J. Peralta, D. Acebedo, BC hydro’s experience on voltage
VAR optimization in distribution system, in: IEEE Power Energy Society 2010
Transmission and Distribution Conference and Exposition, April 19–22, New
Orleans, USA, 2010.
[12] E. Diskin, T. Fallon, G. O’Mahony, C. Power, Conservation Voltage Reduction and
Voltage Optimisation on IRISH Distribution Networks, in: CIRED Workshop,
May 29–30, 2012, Lisbon, Portugal, Paper No. 0264, 2012.
[13] ENWL, “Offline Demand Response Capability Assessment”, Technical Report,
Customer Load Active System Services (CLASS) Project, Electricity North West
Limited, UK, 2015, September.
[14] IEEE task force on load representation for dynamic performance. “Load rep-
resentation for dynamic performance analysis,”, IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 8 (2)
(1993, May) 472–482.
[15] W. Price, K. Wirgau, A. Murdoch, J. Mitsche, E. Vaahedi, M. El-Kady, Load mod-
elling for power flow and transient stability computer studies, IEEE Trans.
Power Syst. 3 (1) (1988, February) 180–187.
[16] DECC, Digest of United Kingdom Energy Statistics 2015, A National Statis-
tics Publication, Department of Energy & Climate Change, London, UK, 2015,
July.
[17] DECC, “Energy Consumption in the UK (2015) – Domestic Energy Consumption
in the UK between 1970 and 2014,” Energy Statistics, Department of Energy &
Climate Change, London, UK, 2015, July.
[18] DECC, Energy Trends, Energy Statistics, Department of Energy & Climate
Change, London, UK, 2015.
[19] I. Richardson, M. Thomson, Domestic Electricity Demand Model – Simulation
Example, Loughborough University, Loughborough, UK, 2010, January.
[20] I. Richardson, Integrated High-Resolution Modelling of Domestic Electric-
ity Demand and Low Voltage Electricity Distribution Networks (PhD thesis),
Loughborough University, Loughborough, UK, 2010, September.
[21] ELEXON, “Load Profiles and Their Use in Electricity Settlement,” Guidance
Report, ELEXON, London, UK, 2013, November.
[22] DECC, Energy Consumption in the UK (2015) – Service Sector Energy Consump-
tion in the UK between 1970 and 2014, Energy Statistics, Department of Energy
& Climate Change, London, UK, 2015, July.
[23] EE and DMU, “Demand Side Response in the Non-domestic Sector,” Technical
Report, Element Energy and De Montfort University, Cambridge, UK, 2012, July.
[24] BRE, “The Impact of Changing Energy Use Patterns in Buildings on Peak
Electricity Demand in the UK,” Technical Report 243 752, Building Research
Establishment, Garston, UK, 2008, October.
[25] SF, “GB Electricity Demand – 2010 and 2025,” Paper 2, Sustainability First,
London, UK, 2012, February.
111
[26] EA, “A.C. Traction Supplies to British Rail,” Engineering Recommendation P24,
Electricity Association, London, UK, 1984.
[27] A. Collin, I. Hernando-Gil, J. Acosta, S. Djokic, An 11 kV steady state residential
aggregate load model. Part 1: Aggregation methodology, in: IEEE PowerTech
2011 Conference, June 19–23, Trondheim, Norway, 2011.
[28] R. Stamminger, “Smart Domestic Appliances in Sustainable Energy Systems,”
Technical Report D2.3, Smart-A Project, OekoInstitut, Freiburg, Germany, 2008,
November.
[29] G. Tsagarakis, A. Collin, A. Kiprakis, Statistical Review of UK Residential Sec-
tor Electrical Loads, Institute for Energy Systems, The University of Edinburgh,
Edinburgh, UK, 2013, June.
[30] FERC, Assessment of Demand Response and Advanced Metering, Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, Staff Report, 2012, December.
[31] U.S. Department of Energy, “Benefits of Demand Response in Electricity Mar-
kets and Recommendations for Achieving Them,” Report to the United States
Congress Pursuant to Section 1252 of the Energy Policy Act of 2005, 2006,
February.
[32] M.H. Albadi, E.F. El-Saadany, A summary of demand response in electricity
markets, J. Electric Power Syst. Res. 78 (May) (2008) 1989–1996.
[33] F. Shariatzadeh, P. Mandal, A.K. Srivastava, Demand response for sustainable
energy systems: a review, application and implementation strategy, J. Renew.
Sustain. Energy Rev. 45 (May) (2015) 343–350.
[34] R. Singh, F. Tuffner, J. Fuller, K. Schneider, Effects of distributed energy resources
on Conservation Voltage Reduction (CVR), in: IEEE Power and Energy Society
General Meeting, July 24–29, Detroit Michigan, USA, 2011.
[35] Z. Wang, J. Wang, Review on implementation and assessment of Conservation
Voltage Reduction, IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 29 (3) (May 2014) 1306–1315.
[36] B. Kennedy, R. Fletcher, Conservation Voltage Reduction (CVR) at Snohomish
County PUD, IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 6 (August (3)) (1991) 986–998.
[37] T.A. Short, R.W. Mee, Voltage reduction field trials on distribution circuits, in:
IEEE Power Energy Society 2012 Transmission and Distribution Conference and
Exposition, May 7–10, Orlando, FL, USA, 2012.
[38] W. Ellens, A. Berry, S. West, A Quantification of the energy savings by Conser-
vation Voltage Reduction, in: IEEE International Conference on Power System
Technology (POWERCON), October 30–November 2, Auckland, New Zealand,
2012.
[39] C.S. Chen, T.H. Wu, C.C. Lee, Y.M. Tzeng, The Application of load models of
electric appliances to distribution system analysis, IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 10
(August (3)) (1995) 1376–1382.
[40] CIGRE, “Modelling and Aggregation of Loads in Flexible Power Networks,” Tech-
nical Report, CIGRE Working Group C4.605, 2014, February.
[41] A.J. Collin, Advanced Load Modelling for Power System Studies (PhD thesis),
The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK, 2013, November.
[42] C. Cresswell, Steady-State Load Models for Power System Studies (PhD thesis),
The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK, 2009, May.
[43] EA Technology, et al., “Assessing the Impact of Low Carbon Technologies on
Great Britain’s Power Distribution Networks,” Technical Report 82530, EA Tech-
nology, Chester, UK, 2012, July.