1. Undergraduate: Runsha Long Mentor: Hantao Cui Professor: Fran Li
Minimize Total Power Loss in Distribution Network Reconfiguration Considering PEV Charging Strategy
Undergraduate: Runsha Long
Mentor: Hantao Cui
Professor: Fran Li

2. Outline
PEV Introduction
Data Collection
Minimizing Power Loss

3. PEV Plug-in Electric Vehicles Electricity instead of gasoline
Modeled after Nissan Leaf
Specifications:
Range: ~84 miles
Battery Capacity: 24 kWh
Efficiency = 3.5 miles/kWh

4. PEV Charging Three levels of charging Level 1: 120V/15A
Level 3: 480V/60A (not used)

5. Data Collection
Daily Travel Data
PEV Load Data
Base Load Characteristics
% PEV Penetration Characteristics

6. Daily Travel Data
National Household Transportation Survey - nhts.ornl.gov
10,000 samples
Start Time
End Time
Trip Duration
Distance Traveled

7. End Times

8. PEV Load Data Estimated the percentage of Levels 1 & 2 charging
Charging assumed to start immediately upon arrival

9. Sample PEV Load Curve

10. Base Load Characteristics
NYISO load characteristic
Scaled load curve to a population size to 180,000 – about the size of Knoxville

11. Base Load Curve

12. Base Load + PEV

13. Base Load + PEV

14. Minimizing Power Loss
Reconfiguration Model
Delay Strategy

15. Network Reconfiguration
Distribution network are typically constructed with sectionalizing switches
Interconnecting lines can be switched on/off
Lines are configured radially outward from the perspective of a substation
IEEE 33-Bus Distribution System

16. Power Loss Power loss in power lines exist based on P= 𝐼 2 𝑅
As the amount of load on a node increases, so does the current → Greater power loss

17. Delayed Charging Strategy
Delay charging PEV until after a certain period of time
Benefits:
Reduced peak load
Valley-filling

18. Improved Network Reconfiguration
One-time optimization model reformulated to minimize over a period of time
Enables the calculation of total power loss during that period
Additional PEV delay constraint added to allow PEV charge scheduling

19. Model

20. Model (contd.)

21. Testing Phase
Optimization model is input into GAMS
Testing carried out on the 33-bus distribution system with 10%, 20% and 40% PEV penetration
PEV split into 8 groups
Maximum delay allowed: 5 hours

22. PEV Set Up

23. Results Total Power Loss No PEV/Base (kWh) Pen. Level No Delay (kWh)
Reduction (%)
1095.8
10%
1513.8
1480.9
2.17
20%
2083.3
2024.6
2.81
40%
3680
3451.2
6.22
Delay (in hours)
Group 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

24. 10% PEV Reconfiguration

25. Analysis
Network configuration remains the same for delayed charging and unmanaged charging
Power loss reduction difference between ‘no delay’ and ‘with delay’ increases as penetration level increases

26. 10% Penetration Load Curve

27. With the addition of a delayed charging strategy:
Conclusion
With the addition of a delayed charging strategy:
Peak load is reduced by shifting PEV charging to later hours
Total power loss is reduced in the system
There is no configuration difference between unmanaged and delayed charging