Distribution Automation Effects on Reliability during

Major Contingencies
Yeliz Yoldas, Ahmet Onen, Irfan Alan Robert P. Broadwater
Department of Electrical and Electronics Engineering Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering
Abdullah Gul University Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University
Kayseri, Turkey Blacksburg, VA, USA
{yeliz.yoldas, ahmet.onen, irfan.alan}@agu.edu.tr dew@edd-us.com

Abstract—Distribution automation affects reliability by Interruption Frequency Index (SAIFI), System Average
providing faster restoration ability. In this study, the effect of Interruption Duration Index (SAIDI), Customer Average
distribution automation on radial distribution circuits during Interruption Duration Index (CAIDI), and Average Service
substation failures at peak load is investigated. The ultimate goal Availability Index (ASAI) [3].
is to compare circuit automation to manual operation, where the
comparison evaluates planning criteria reliability for customer There are at least two ways to improve the reliability of a
interruption hours. The results show that distribution distribution system. The first way is to reduce the number of
automation can improve reliability measurements such as contingencies by improving or hardening the components of
SAIDI, SAIFI and CAIDI. the power system. This way involves performing regular
maintenance. The second way is to reduce the effect of
Index Terms— Distribution Automation, Power System contingencies by using distribution automation systems [4].
Reliability, System Reconfiguration. Smart grid integration with distribution automation allows
reconfiguration of power networks and thereby providing
opportunities of diverting the power flows, isolating the faults,
I. INTRODUCTION and preventing the overloading of network components [5].
Reliability of distribution systems is one of the major With smart grid automation technology, automatic switches
issues in modern power grids due to the cost of customer and monitoring systems can be added into the distribution
interruptions. According to a White House Report [1], an system with integrated control to fulfill the self-healing
estimated 679 widespread power outages occurred due to functionality such as automated fault location, isolation and
severe weather events between 2003 and 2012 in the U.S. restoration. Smart grid automation improves the efficiency and
During all these ten years, the cost of weather-related power reliability and introduces economic benefits by reducing the
outages ranged from $18 to $33 billion. An electric power service restoration time.
blackout was experienced in the Midwest and Northeast In references [6-11], authors have investigated impacts of
United States and Ontario, Canada, on August 14, 2003. The smart grid technologies on the reliability of aged infrastructure
outage affected 50 million people and 61,800 MW of electric and showed that smart grid technologies provide
load. It was estimated that the total cost of this blackout improvements to system reliability by reducing the outage
ranged between $4 billion and $10 billion (U.S. dollars) in the duration. The authors of [12] have examined the impact of
United States [2]. automatic switches on distribution system reliability using a
Given the component failure rates, reliability indices of an sequential Monte Carlo simulation method. The functions of
electric power distribution system can be determined for a distribution automation, such as fault detection, fault isolation
well-defined set of loads and components. These reliability and service restoration for smart grid systems in France have
indices are mostly mean values of probability distributions been described in [13]. The investigations in [14] show
which measure the frequency, duration and severity of different types of substation automation and demonstrate the
contingencies on the network and provide insight into the improvement of substation reliability indices and the effects of
performance of the system. Two types of reliability indices are the automated substation on distribution system reliability. In
used for distribution level reliability, customer-based references [15, 16], the positive effects of communication
reliability indices and load-based reliability indices. Load- networks on the performance of distribution automation have
based indices look at the connected kVA, and customer-based been studied. Moreover, the authors in [16] have described a
indices weigh each customer equally. The commonly used distributed multi-agent approach to analyze the performance
customer-based reliability indices are System Average of a faulty location and isolation along a distribution feeder.

Electrical Distribution Design and Orange & Rockland Utilities

978-1-5386-0517-2/18/$31.00 ©2018 IEEE

Authorized licensed use limited to: INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY KHARAGPUR. Downloaded on December 29,2020 at 12:05:58 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 In this paper, a pilot test system is used as a test network, approximately 21,000 customers. It can be seen that adjacent
and the effects of manual switching and automated switching circuits have normally open, automated tie breakers that will
on distribution reliability have been investigated during a automatically transfer the load on one circuit to an adjacent
station transformer failure at peak load. An integrated system circuit in the event of a bank or bus fault. For example, for
model developed in the DEW software [17] is used to perform loss of Bank 1 or the 13.2 kV bus fed from Bank 1, the feeder
the reliability analysis for the whole system. This article is breaker for circuit Feeder 5 will open and the tie breaker will
organized as follows: The system used in this study is close, automatically transferring the load to Feeder 1. Each of
described in Section 2. The reconfiguration algorithm for the other feeders served by Bank 1 will also transfer to the
contingency restoration is introduced in Section 3. The results adjacent feeder, providing the combined load of both feeders
obtained from the proposed algorithm are presented in Section does not exceed the ampacity of the limiting element, which
4 and the conclusions are given in Section 5. could be either the bus, feeder breaker, or the feeder exit.

II. THE SYSTEM USED

A total of six different models (three of which based on
manual switching and three of which based on automated Bank 2 Bank 1
switching) are used to carry out the study over the course of MR TR MR

six years (2012-2017). Changes to circuit configurations as a F1 F5

function of time resulting from planned capital system Feeder 1 SR SR SR SR Feeder 5

improvements are taken into account when building the Load Load Load Load
models. These changes take place from 2012 to 2014; TR
MR MR
therefore, the 2014 model is used for years 2014 through F2 F6
2017. Customer counts and loads are expanded according to Feeder 2 Feeder 6
SR SR SR SR
the load growth forecasts of the area.
Load Load Load Load
Automation is implemented by the use of reclosers for
three specific functions on each radial circuit. The first type of MR TR MR
F3 F7
recloser is called a midpoint recloser due to its placement
Feeder 3 Feeder 7
roughly at the midpoint of the circuit. The next type of SR SR SR SR

recloser, referred to as a tie recloser, is placed at the tie point Load Load Load Load
between the two adjacent circuits. The final recloser type is MR TR MR
the SCADA operable switch which is placed to sectionalize F4 F8
the circuit for every 250 customers. Feeder 4
SR SR SR SR
Feeder 8

Load Load Load Load

MR: Midpoint Recloser TR:Tie-breaker Recloser SR: SCADA operable Recloser

Figure 2. Pilot substation used for study

Listed in the Table I are the feeders that were equipped

with smart grid auto restoration equipment and the year the
equipment was installed in the 6 years study.

TABLE I. CIRCUITS AUTOMATED IN THE FOLLOWING ORDER

Year Automated Circuits Bank

2012 Feeder 7, Feeder 8 1
2013 Feeder 4, Feeder 1 2
2014 Feeder 3, Feeder 6, Feeder 5 1 and 2

III. RECONFIGURATION FOR CONTINGENCY RESTORATION

The objective of reconfiguration is to operate
sectionalizing devices to restore power. The reconfiguration
algorithm for restoration proposed in [18] is used for this
study. The reconfiguration algorithm is started to operate
Figure 1. System model right after following major contingencies and both automated
switch and manual switch operations needed to restore
Fig. 1 illustrates the geographical area of concern, and Fig. customer power are determined as quickly as possible. First,
2 represents the pilot substation used in the study. The the reconfiguration algorithm isolates the faulty area in a way
substation has eight (8) 13.2 kV feeders that cover an area of to make it as small as possible. When the faulty area is
roughly ten square miles and provides electrical service to

Authorized licensed use limited to: INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY KHARAGPUR. Downloaded on December 29,2020 at 12:05:58 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 isolated, the reconfiguration algorithm next generates a list of The same algorithm is operated four (4) hours after peak,
available switches to close to restore the power. If closing a where the transformer loading must not exceed the normal
switch violates any constraint, such as an overcurrent or low- rating and the more stringent voltage requirement of 114
voltage constraint, the algorithm reopens the switch and Volts applies. From the reconfiguration algorithm results,
removes that switch from the available switch list. If there are customer interruption hours are calculated for manual
no violations, then the algorithm looks to see if any additional switching scenarios only based on the times given in the
closures are available for restoring power. This process is criteria above and are added to the calculated results for the
repeated until either the outage area is fully restored or there first four (4) hours.
are no more possible switching actions that may be performed The same procedure is repeated for the second
to restore power. Finally, once the repair time is completed, transformer failure while the first transformer is working. The
the algorithm recloses the switches that implemented the annual customer interruption hours are collected, result of
isolation. The numbers of customers at each load bus are these processes, between 2012 and 2017.
included in the model, and the total numbers of hours of This procedure is then repeated on the models equipped
customer interruption are then calculated. with smart grid automation devices to determine the customer
interruption hour savings. Only after the smart grid
The planning criteria require that the load on a substation automation devices are operated, the manual switching is
transformer bank not exceed the bank’s normal rating or used to further reduce the customer interruption hours. The
appropriate planning measures must be taken to relieve the automated devices allowed to operate are as follows:
load. Additionally, in a two bank station, failure of one bank
requires that 62% of the load of the failed bank be restored by x Substation feeder breakers
transferring to the remaining bank, and through load transfers x Substation bus tie breakers
to adjacent substations via circuit ties. The remaining 38% of x Distribution electronic reclosers
the load is to be restored by the installation of a portable x Distribution SCADA operable switches
substation, and the total customer interruption hours must be
below 60,000 based on a 24 hours installation time for the Only after these devices are used to restore the power,
portable substation. Appropriate planning measures must be manually operated distribution GOAB and disconnect
taken to insure that the maximum customer interruption hours switches are used to further reduce customers affected by the
resulting from a failed substation transformer bank remains outage. Customer interruption hours are calculated as
within the 60,000 customer hour planning criteria. described above.
Assumptions made for this study include: IV. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
x One crew for switching per circuit starting at the The graph in Fig. 3 illustrates the customer interruption
moment of failure. hours per year as generated by a transformer failure of Bank
x One hour for the initial switch move and 15 minutes 1, or a failure of the 13.2 kV bus served by Bank 1, for both
for each additional move (on that circuit). the manual and automated cases. A slight increase in the
x For the four (4) hour period following the fault, manual column between 2012 and 2013 is caused by an
ANSI/IEEE C84 B ratings are used, which permit increased number of manual switching steps required due to
voltages to drop to 109 Volts minimum. Also, the increased load. This increase does not appear in the auto
station transformer Long Term Emergency (LTE) 4 column for Feeder 7 and Feeder 8, requiring more manual
hour rating of 51 MVA is used for the transformer switching steps. Both columns decrease from 2013 to 2014
banks. The remaining failure period (>4 hours) is because of a transformer capacity upgrade at the neighboring
subject to 114 Volts minimum and 42 MVA normal station in 2014 that aids backup of Feeder 5. The automation
transformer bank ratings. of Feeder 5 and Feeder 6 in 2014 eliminates all manual
x 24 hours is used as the time it would take to install a switching steps and resulting customer interruption hours.
mobile substation for emergency backup to restore The addition of smart grid automation in conjunction with
customers that could not be restored using the second capacity increases in substations results in 100% backup of
bank within the station or the circuit ties. Bank 1 and zero customer interruption hours generated by
manual switching steps. The net number of customer
At peak load, one transformer bank is failed and the interruption hours eliminated by smart grid automation on
reconfiguration algorithm is operated using the emergency Bank 1 is 8,101 hours.
voltage levels and LTE transformer ratings to maximize the The graph in Fig. 4 is a representation of the customer
restored customers. The reason to run study at peak load is interruption hours per year as generated by a transformer
assuming the worst case happening at peak load. The devices failure of Bank 2, or a failure of the 13.2 kV bus served by
permitted to operate within the Radial Reconfiguration Bank 2, for both the manual and automated cases. The
application are as follows: increased capacity at the neighboring station in 2013 provides
x Substation feeder breakers additional tie backup to Feeder 3, which accounts for the
x Substation bus tie breakers decrease in customer interruption hours between 2012 and
2013 for both manual and automated cases. Feeder 1 and
x Distribution disconnect switches
x Distribution gang-operated air break (GOAB)
switches

Authorized licensed use limited to: INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY KHARAGPUR. Downloaded on December 29,2020 at 12:05:58 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 BANK 1 FAILURE RESULTS BANK 2 FAILURE RESULTS
14000
Manual 60000 Manual
Auto Auto

12000

50000

10000

Customer Interruption Hours

Customer Interruption Hours

40000

8000

30000

6000

20000

4000

10000
2000

0 0
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
Year of Failure Year of Failure

Figure 3. Bank 1 results Figure 4. Bank 2 results

Feeder 4 in 2013 are the cause for the difference between the smart grid automation on Bank 2 is 4,850 hours.
manual and automated columns, with most of the savings Table II shows the reliability improvement results. The
generated by the elimination of manual switching steps on reliability indices SAIDI, CAIDI and SAIFI are also shown in
Feeder 1. Feeder 4, lightly loaded in comparison, requires Table II. It should be noted that data in Table II is the result
less manual switching steps due to the automated station bus of a substation bank failure. As a result of the study, it can be
transfer and abundant backup from the neighboring station. observed that the automation of the substation yielded a
The automation of Feeder 3 in 2014 yields additional customer interruption hour decreases when compared to the
decreases in interruption hours. The increase in the manual manual switching results. The reduction of crew switching
column in 2015 is due to load growth, requiring more manual time in the automated scenario is the reason for the decrease.
switching steps. The majority of the customer interruption By automating circuits, with their respective adjacent ties, it
hours comes from the prolonged outage (>4 hrs) of Feeder 2, is possible to eliminate or reduce customer interruption hours
which requires mobile substation deployment for restoration. resulting from manual switching operations.
The net number of customer interruption hours eliminated by

TABLE II. RELIABILITY RESULTS FROM STUDY

Metric 2012 (Base line) 2017 (After project completion)

Manual Auto Manual Auto

Bank 1 Bank 2 Bank 1 Bank 2 Bank 1 Bank 2 Bank 1 Bank 2

Total Number of Customers

7037 7328 3192 7328 5825 7328 0.00 7328
Interrupted
Customers Interruption
8.75 50.75 5.50 50.75 8.00 50.25 0.00 28.00
Durations (hours)
Total Number of Customers
7037 8883 7037 8883 6098 9299 6098 9299
Served
SAIDI 0.001243 0.005713 0.000782 0.005713 0.001312 0.005404 0.000000 0.003011

CAIDI 0.001243 0.006925 0.001723 0.006925 0.001373 0.006857 0.000000 0.003821

SAIFI 1.000000 0.824947 0.453602 0.824947 0.955243 0.788024 0.000000 0.788024

V. CONCLUSIONS
evaluate the reliability improvement with automation.
Smart grid automation for improving reliability by Assumptions involving number of crews available and crew
replacing manual switches with automated ones has been switching operation times are presented. By using a radial
investigated in a particular case study. In the case study seven reconfiguration algorithm that determines how both
feeders fed by two distribution substations are used to automated and manual switches should be operated to restore
power, it has been demonstrated that customer hours of

Authorized licensed use limited to: INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY KHARAGPUR. Downloaded on December 29,2020 at 12:05:58 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 interruption can be significantly reduced by employing Control and Unreliable Communication," IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron.,
automated switches. The case study results showed that vol. 62, pp. 2612-2619, Apr. 2015.
[17] DEW/ISM. Available: http://www.edd-us.com/dewism/
distribution automation improves reliability for the [18] D. L. Cheng, A. Onen, D. Zhu, D. Kleppinger, R. Arghandeh, R. P.
contingencies evaluated. In terms of reliability indices, after Broadwater, et al., "Automation Effects on Reliability and Operation
completion of project in 2017, while SAIDI, SAIFI and Costs in Storm Restoration," Electric Power Components and Systems,
CAIDI indices improve up to 100% for Bank 1, the vol. 43, pp. 656-664, Apr. 2015.
improvement of SAIDI and CAIDI for Bank 2 will be
obtained as 44.27%. But SAIFI indices for Bank 2 will
remain same value, so that there will be no improvement.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The authors would like to thank Electrical Distribution
Design and Orange & Rockland Utilities for providing data,
and technical assistance.
REFERENCES
[1] Executive Office of the President, "Economic benefits of increasing
electric grid resilience to weather outages," The White House, U.S.,
Rep., Aug. 2013.
[2] U.S.-Canada Power System Outage Task Force, "Final Report on the
August 14, 2003 Blackout in the United States and Canada: Causes and
Recommendations," Rep., Apr. 2004.
[3] R. E. Brown, "Reliability Metrics and Indices " in Electric Power
Distribution Reliability, 2nd ed: CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group,
2009, pp. 41-105.
[4] F. T. Asr and A. Kazemi, "Modeling the Impact of an Automated and
Control on the Reliability Distribution System," in 2008 IEEE
Electrical Power and Energy Conf., pp. 390-396.
[5] R. J. W. de Groot, J. Morren, and J. G. Slootweg, "Smart Integration of
Distribution Automation Applications," in 2012 IEEE PES Innovative
Smart Grid Technologies Conf., pp. 1-7.
[6] N. Balijepalli, S. S. Venkata, and R. D. Christie, "Modeling and
analysis of distribution reliability indices," IEEE Trans. Power Del.,
vol. 19, pp. 1950-1955, Oct. 2004.
[7] P. P. Subban and K. O. Awodele, "Reliability Impact of Different
Smart Grid Techniques on a Power Distribution System," in 2013 IEEE
PES Conf. on Innovative Smart Grid Technologies pp. 1-8.
[8] D. Gomes, R. Colunga, P. Gupta, and A. Balasubramanian,
"Distribution Automation Case Study: Rapid Fault Detection, Isolation,
and Power Restoration for a Reliable Underground Distribution
System," in 2015 Annual Conf. for Protective Relay Engineers, pp.
325-334.
[9] H. Biyawerwala, V. Terziysky, and A. Rajan, "Distribution
Automation: Multiple Scheme Complexity & Benefits An overview of
the benefits in implementing schemes with multiple reclosers," in 2014
IEEE PES T&D Conf. and Exposition, pp. 1-5.
[10] A. Masembe, "Reliability benefit of smart grid technologies : A case
for South Africa," J. Energy South. Afr., vol. 26, pp. 2-9, Aug. 2015.
[11] C. V. S. S. Sailaja and D. P. V. N. Prasad, "Modeling the impact of
automation failure on distribution system reliability," JEE, vol. 16, pp.
31-37, 2016.
[12] H. Zheng, Y. Cheng, B. Gou, D. Frank, A. Bern, and W. E. Muston,
"Impact of automatic switches on power distribution system reliability,"
Electr Pow Syst Res, vol. 83, pp. 51-57, Feb. 2012.
[13] X. Mamo, S. Mallet, T. Coste, and S. Grenard, "Distribution
automation: the cornerstone for Smart Grid development strategy," in
2009 IEEE PES General Meeting, pp. 1771-1776.
[14] H. Hajian-Hoseinabadi, M. Hasanianfar, and M. E. H. Golshan,
"Quantitative Reliability Assessment of Various Automated Industrial
Substations and Their Impacts on Distribution Reliability," IEEE Trans.
Power Del., vol. 27, pp. 1223-1233, Jul. 2012.
[15] R. Greer, W. Allen, J. Schnegg, and A. Dulmage, "Distribution
Automation Systems With Advanced Features," in 2011 IEEE Rural
Electric Power Conf., pp. 1-15.
[16] N. Kashyap, C. W. Yang, S. Sierla, and P. G. Flikkema, "Automated
Fault Location and Isolation in Distribution Grids With Distributed

Authorized licensed use limited to: INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY KHARAGPUR. Downloaded on December 29,2020 at 12:05:58 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.