4.7 Article Proceedings Paper

Optimal allocation for combined heat and power system with respect to maximum allowable capacity for reduced losses and improved voltage profile and reliability of microgrids considering loading condition

期刊

ENERGY
卷 196, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.energy.2020.117124

关键词

Microgrid; Loss reduction; Maximum allowable; Combined heat and power; Improving voltage profile; Reliability; Particle swarm optimization

资金

  1. Universiti Teknologi Malaysia [04E54, 4B379, 01M44, 05G88]
  2. Villum Investigator grant [999730]
  3. Villum Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This paper presents a method that uses particle swarm optimization to select the optimal allocation of a combined heat and power system that considers the maximum allowable capacity with the aim of reducing losses, improving the voltage profile and reliability of microgrids considering networks loading condition. Decision variables are optimal location and capacity of the combined heat and power systems. The location and maximum capacity of the combined heat and power system were specified in a way to reduce losses, improve the voltage profile, reliability improvement as energy not supplied reduction and maintain the operating constraints. The method is applied to 84- and 32-bus standard microgrids. Capability of the proposed method is proved in obtained results which demonstrated a significant enhancement in voltage profile and a decrease in power losses and customer's energy not supplied as reliability improvement. Minimum microgrid losses can be achieved with considering these constraints. The power loss, minimum voltage and reliability is improved 43.9%, 3,4% and 80.31% for 84 bus network and 72%, 6.2% and 83.6% for 32 us network, respectively by optimal combined heat and power systems allocation. Also, the superiority of the particle swarm optimization is confirmed in comparison with the genetic algorithm. (C) 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据