1061

IEEF Transactions on Power Apparatus and Systems, Vol. PAS-98, No. 3 May/June 1979
AN OPTIMIZATION MODEL FOR PLANNING RADIAL DISTRIBUTION NETWORKS
D.L. Wall G.L. Thompson J.E.D. Northcote-Green
Advanced Systems Technolgy Graduate School of Ind. Admin. Advanced Systems Technology
Westinghouse Electric Corp. Carnegie-Mellon Univ. Westinghouse Electric Corp.
East Pittsburgh, Pa. Pittsburgh, Pa. East Pittsburgh, Pa.

Abstract - A primary feeder model using small area demand INPUT OPTIMIZATION OUTPUT
locations to represent nonuniform loads, and feeder segments having
variable distribution costs and limited capacities is formulated. The
solution of problems having 1000 demand locations and 100
substations can be found in a fraction of a second by using a current
fast upper bounded transshipment code. The problem of restructuring
the solution to satisfy other kinds of constraints is also discussed.
1.0 INTRODUCTION
In recent years there have been a number of advances in the
application of mathematical programming to the solution of distri-
bution system planning models [1-51. Each of these models makes
approximations, in varying degrees of detail, to the primary feeder
network. The greatest level of detail is reached in the Adams,
Laughton paper [1] which represents each feeder line segment in
terms of capacity and linearized cost, and also considers multiple
time periods. They used the model to solve small problems (involving
a single substation, 34 feeder segments, and 24 demand locations).
Later other authors developed models [2,31 that achieved
results which involved more realistically sized problems having 10-15
substations. However, in each of these later models the feeder network
was approximated in terms of load transfer capabilities between
station service areas [2], or primary feeder service areas [3]. These
approximations thus reduced the capability of such models to reflect
the nonuniform distribution of loads within a typical system and also
the capability of the models to include feeder network variable costs
directly into the optimization process.
Two other models [3,4] recognized the importance of including
the load points to represent nonuniform load distribution and feeder
cost directly in the optimization process. However, only the Hindi,
Brameller model includes capacity limitations on feeder segments.
The present authors have devised a model that contains all the
detail of the Adams, Laughton model for a single time period except
for the fixed charges on feeder segments. A highly efficient trans-
shipment code is used to solve the model which incorporates several Figure 1
recent significant advances thereby decreasing the time of solution of
such problems. These coding advances are discussed in references This work has been made possible by funding from the Electric
[6,7,8]. Power Research Institute (Contract RP-570-1) to which the authors
wish to extend their gratitude. The present paper discusses only a
The computer model to be presented is easily capable of portion of the work on Project RP-570-1 which is to be completed
calculating a primary feeder design involving 1000 demand locations by 1979.
and 2000 primary feeder segments and 100 stations, see Section 4.
The model can be adopted to automatically restructure a feeder 2.0 MODEL AND DATA DESCRIPTION
configuration to reflect contingencies or new substation size or
location. The model to be described requires three kinds of data as
inputs: the demand locations and amounts; the feeder network
The diagram in Figure 1 outlines the general input requirements segment descriptions; and the descriptions of substations. In the case
and outputs of the model. A more detailed description of the data that the design of the distribution system is being considered, the
requirements, mathematical formulation and results is given in demands will be estimated using various statistical techniques [9].
Sections 2-4. In the case that the model is being used to control the operating of
an existing system, the demand data are given as known quantities.
These data are described in more detail next.

2.1 Demand Locations

F 78 653-8. A paper recan nded and approved by
the EE Transmissicn and Distribution Camnittee of
the I Pwer Engineering Society for presentation
at the PES Sumer Meeting, Los kAgeles, CA,
July 16-21, 1978. Manuscript submitted February 2,
1978; made available for printing April 17,
1978.
Assume that the total demand for electrical power in a small
geographical area (e.g., a quarter square mile) is represented as a
single demand location. There are two reasons for doing this: first,
the representation of the nonuniform load distribution within the
study area can be represented in sufficient detail for planning
purposes; second, because a feeder segment is denoted as an electrical
connection between a pair of demand locations, the planner can

0018-9510/79/0500-1061$00.75 i 1979 IEEE

1062
describe in a general way the geographical layout of existing as well squares. Each demand location represents a load within a one-
as possible future routes, without being specific about an actual quarter square mile area, and each line segment of the feeder network
physical route. can be one of six different line types.

The loads (KVA demand) at each demand location are obtained NODE AND ARC SETS
by first defining a grid system for the study area. The demand of each
area surrounding a grid point is then assigned as the load for that
grid point, i.e., demand location. For long range planning purposes, a
grid having coordinates every one-half mile or mile is generally
adequate. The size of the area served by a given demand location may
depend upon whether the location is rural, urban, or industrial. The
size of the area may also be varied according to the level of detail
required.
2.2 Feeder Network Descriptions
The feeder network is described by means of two data
structures. The first contains descriptions of the types of lines that can
exist in the network. The second data set gives the length and the two
demand locations connected by each line segment in the network,
and also references the first by giving the actual or potential types of
lines that are or can be installed in the line segment. When solving an
operating problem the actual line type is used; but when solving a
design problem potential line types may also be given.
2.3 Substation Descriptions
The data required for each substation are its capacity and its
location, actual or potential. The substation capacity represents the
existing or proposed total transformer capacity. In order to study the
behavior of the network under a contingency situation, the rated
capacity of the substation can be reduced to represent the emergency
such as, inadequate subtransmission supply, the loss of substation
transformers, loss of feeder segment, etc.
FEEDER NETWORK LAYOUT

MARYVALE
W) SMALL AREA LOAD POINT

3 SUBSTATION REPRESENTED WITH AN ARC FROM THE

FICTICIOUS NODE TO THE STATION NODE WITH AN
UPPER ARC LIMIT EQUAL TO THE STATION CAPACITY.

Figure 3
Figure 3 shows the nodes and directed arcs that are used in the
formulation of the transshipment model of the distribution system,
considered in Section 3.0. Each directed arc represents a possible
flow of power in the indicated direction, and becomes a variable in
the transshipment formulation of the problem. Each node of the
diagram in Figure 3 creates a constraint in the transshipment
formulation that guarantees the conservation of power flow into and
out of that node. Associated with each arc are two other quantities:
first, an upper bound on power flow through that arc, which in fact
is the maximum load carrying capability for the line type of that
arc; second, a cost coefficient which appears in the objective function
of the transshipment problem, representing (a) the physical distance
between the two end points of the arc, or (b) the electrical resistance
of the line type connecting the two end points, or (c) a linear
approximation to the cost of power losses and installation costs for
a given line type.
The linear cost approximation that is used is illustrated in
Figure 4.
Although objective functions (a) and (b) were provided for
comparative purposes only, (b) could be used for a contingency
-
266ASCR 2/OC
study in which an existing feeder network must be reconfigured to
266A 2C
serve the demand points with a minimum degradation of the system
-- 310A 4C
voltage profile.
Figure 2 3.0 THE MATHEMATICAL MODEL
2.4 Example In mathematics a graph is a set of nodes and arcs, where an
arc can be thought of as a directed line segmient connecting two of
T'he diagram of Figure 2 represents an example of a distribution the nodes. As indicated in the previous section, we can use a graph
system consisting of 41 demand locations, represented by numbered to construct a model of an electrical distribution system by treating
circular dots, and three substation locations, represented by named the sources and uses of power as nodes and the wires connecting them
 1063
CABLE COST The network model, as described can be shown to be equivalent
to the transshipment model of linear programming, to be described
next.
3.2 The Transshipment Model
Any transshipment problem with linear costs can be solved
by means of the transportation model of linear programming. The
transportation model possesses its own version of the simplex
algorithm which can be coded to run 100 to 200 times as fast as
the corresponding algorithm for solving linear programming problems.
For this reason, and others to be mentioned later, the transportation-
transshipment model appears to be the best for use in solving electrical
LINEAR COST power distribution problems.
APPROXIMIATION
In order to set up the model the following notation is
FLOW introduced:
Figure 4
as arcs. Nodes which both receive power from and send power to
other nodes are called transshipment nodes. For simplicity we treat I = { l, . . mln = source nodes (substations) (4)
all nodes as transshipment nodes, since in any solution context, it J = 11, . . . ,n = demand nodes (locations) (5)
will be clear which nodes only transmit power (the substations), N = IUJ (6)
those which both accept and transmit power (transshipment nodes), (7)
and those which only receive power (end nodes). a, = supply of node i for i e N
bj = demand of node j for j eN (8)
The problem is first described as a network model, since that c11 = "cost" of sending power from node i to node j (9)
is closest to the electrical equation statement. Then the model is where i, j e N
reformulated as an equivalent transshipment transportation model of x = amount of power sent from i to j where i, i e N (10)
linear programming. In the latter form it is possible to make use of
already developed dual variable postoptimization analysis for Ui, = upper bound on power flow from i to i where (1 )
purposes of imposing other constraints [ 1O] and to study the effects i, jeN
of alternate system designs. In (7) if i e I then a. > 0; otherwise a. = 0. In (8) if j e J then
b. > 0; otherwise bj 6. In (9) there are two special conditions
3.1 The Network Model the ci/s satisfy. First,
The notation we will use to state the network problem is the c11= 0 for all i e N
following.
that is, the "cost" of retaining excess power at node i is zero for all
i. The variable xii should be interpreted as a slack variable. Second,
P = {1, . . . p = the set of nodes if there is no arc connecting nodes i and j then c.. = oo. In fact, such
A = (1, . . . a) = the set of directed arcs (i,), for i,j e P infinite costs are never entered as data.
xk = power flow on arc k, for k e A
Uk = upper bound on power flow on arc k, for k e A The mathematical form of the transshipment transportation
problem can now be stated as:
Ck = unit "cost" of power flow on arc k, for k e A
I =
INj =
supply at node j minus the demand at node j, for i e P
set of arcs (*,) going into node j, for j e P
Minimize I
ieN
E
jeN
ciix.. (12)
(
ONj = set of arcs (j,*) going out of node j, for j e P
Subject to
The mathematical problem of distributing power from the sources
to the demand locations at least possible total cost is: z xi. = a,+KforieN (13)
leN

Minimize I CkXk (1)

xXij = b.+KforjeN (14)
k eA ieN
0 <x1 S Ui for i, i eN (15)
Subject to
z Xk -
Xk =
i1, forj eP
where K is a number larger than the sum of the supplies and the sum
k e ONj k e INj of the demands. The reason for adding the number K is that the
transshipment demand at a node is not known in advance; hence the
supply and demand is made large at each node, and the excess power
is transshipped from node i back to i, via the slack variable x... The
O xk < Uk for k eA (3) slack variables are constructed automatically by the code and do
not concern the user.
Note that (1) is the minimum "cost" objective function; (2) are the Associated with the primal problem stated in (12) - (15) is the
conservation of power node constraints that state that the sum of dual problem. Both problems are solved simultaneously by the
power flow into a node equals the sum of the power flow out of the simplex method. Srinivasan and Thompson [ 10] have developed an
node; and constraints (3) state that the flow on each arc should be elaborate operator theory of parametric programming for the
non-negative and less than or equal to the rated capacity of the line transportation problem which can be applied to change simultane-
used on the arc. ously the data and the optimal primal and dual solutions to the
The problem stated in (1) (3) is a linear programming problem
modified problem. Use of the operator theory of parametric
-

and can be solved using a linear programming code. Specialized

programming permits the use of the transshipment model for answer-
network codes are also available to solve this problem.
ing many different kinds of questions discussed in point (3) of the
next section.
1064
3.3 Reasons for Using the Transshipment Model
Some mathematical and some computational reasons for using '5
the transshipment model of section 3.2 are summarized next.
(1) In coding the transportation model it is possible to use all
integer arithmetic, hence there is no roundoff error and it is faster
than floating point arithmetic. It is also possible to use the code for
solving quite large problems on minicomputers without difficulty.
(2) Recently developed primal codes [6, 7, 81 for solving the
transportation problem are very fast, perhaps 100 to 200 times as '5
fast as standard linear programming codes, and approximately 10
times as fast as the Ford-Fulkerson dual code. They also have
economical memory requirements. These two factors permit the
solution of very large problems in reasonable computation times.
(3) The operator theory of parametric programming for the
transportation problem developed in [10] can be used to take the
optimal solution to the initially stated problem and quickly and
easily modify the problem and its solution to answer the following aS
kinds of questions:
(a) What is the effect of adding or dropping a feeder
segment? is
(b) What is the effect of changing wire size on a feeder
segment?
(c) What is the effect of increasing or decreasing the 5
demand at a demand location? -j

(d) What is the effect of increasing or decreasing the Figure 5

capacity at a substation?
(e) How does the solution change if the cost coefficients
of the objective function change?
(4) The transportation problem can be used as a subroutine
in a branch and bound algorithm to impose additional constraints on
the problem such as voltage drop constraints, radial solution
constraints, contingency conditions, etc.
3.4 Implementation of Other Constraints and Objectives
Besides the network flow constraints (13) (15) there are a
-
number of other important constraints and objectives that must
be imposed to obtain practical solutions. We discuss two of these
here, namely, the radial network constraints, and fixed plus variable
feeder segment costs.
3.4.1 Radial Network Constraints.
Since this model was developed for use in conjunction with
demand locations that represent areas of load rather than specific
customers our definition of a radial solution has been correspondingly
adapted and is presented next.
Figure 5 shows a solution to the transshipment model of the
network problem of Figures 3 and 4. Note that the demand at every
point is served from a single substation except for demand point 19
marked by an X in Figure 5. An expanded version of node 19 and
the arcs leading into it is given in Figure 6(a). Note that the local
demand of 1904 is greater than one of the power inputs of 437,
hence it is possible to set the feeder switches within the area
represented by node 19 so that the entire 437 units goes to supply
part of the local demand; the other 1467 units of local demand is
taken from the other power input of 3683 units; finally the remaining
2216 power units is transshipped to another demand node. Thus the
solution of Figure 6(a) can be radialized by setting the local feeder
switches. Therefore it is called a radial solution.
On the other hand the solution shown in Figure 6(b) is not
radial at node 19 because the local power demand of 1604 is exceeded
by both the power inputs to node 19 of 2070 and 2050, so that
there is no way to set the local switches so that the solution becomes
radial.
Non-radial solution nodes have appeared rather rarely in the
authors' examples. So far only a heuristic decision rule for radializing
the transslhipment solution has been implemented in the code.
The heuristic rule deletes the arc carrying the smallest load, and
recomputes the solution.
3683 2050
2216 2216
DEMAND
437 2070
RADIAL SOLUTION NONRADIAL SOLUTION
(a) (b)
Figure 6
3.4.2 Fixed Charges on Feeder Segments
The true cost of a feeder connecting two demand locations
involves a fixed cost as well as a variable operating cost. So far the
model in this paper has used a linear approximation to these fixed
and variable costs because it was felt that the fixed costs associated
with substations were much more important than feeder fixed costs.
In order to include them it would be necessary to devise a branch
and bound search strategy, which incorporates the feeder model as
a subroutine.
4.0 OUTPUT AND COMPUTATIONAL RESULTS
The output derived from the model consists of tabular summaries
by demand location, substation and system of power flow, feeder
costs of losses and construction and voltage drops in percent. In
addition a printer plot of the substation service areas is provided and a
graphical display of the feeder layouts can also be obtained. The
 1065
diagram in Figure 7 illustrates the optimal feeder layout for the the small computational times and the ability of the model to auto-
largest test problem which involved 22 substation, 981 demand matically structure a distribution network involving many stations
location and about 1500 feeder segments. This test system was it is possible to use this feeder model as a planning tool for contin-
obtained from the Salt River Project in Phoenix, Arizona and gency analysis or for long term expansion design of feeder routes.
represents the 1977 Western Division of that system. The code for the model can also be embedded in branch and bound
codes to solve other problems.

6.0 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The authors would also like to thank the Salt River Project,
Phoenix, Arizona for making data available for the test problems.

REFERENCES
[11 R.N. Adams and M.A. Laughton, "Optimal Planning of Power
Networks Using Mixed-Integer Programming," Proc. IEE, Vol.
1300 121, No. 2, pp. 139-148, Feb. 1974.
1100
[2] E. Masud, "An Interactive Procedure for Sizing and Timing
Distribution Substations Using Optimization Techniques," IEEE
Transactions on Power Apparatus and Systems, pp. 1281-1286,

'i00L Sept. 1974.

[3] M.J. Juricek, A. Fukutome, and M. Chen, "Transportation
Analysis of an Electric Power Distribution System," Presented
at IEEE PES Winter Meeting, Jan. 1976.

[4] D.M. Crawford and S.B. Holt, Jr., "A Mathematical Optimiza-
tion Technique for Locating and Sizing Distribution Substations,
and Deriving Their Optimal Service Areas," IEEE Transactions
on PAS, pp. 230-235, Mar. 1975.
0 100 3oo 300 o00 0oo *00 0oo lo0 to 1100

Figure 7 [5] K.S. Hindi and A. Bramellar, "Design of Low-Voltage Distribu-

tion Networks: A Mathematical Programming Method," Proc.
The computational results of this model are very promising and IEE, Vol. 124, pp. 54-58, Jan. 1977.
are summarized in Table I.
[6] G.H. Bradley, G.G. Brown, and G.W. Graves, "Design and
Table I Computational Results Implementation of Large Scale Primal Transshipment Algorithms
Algorithms," Management Science, Vol. 24, pp. 1-34, 1977.
'7] F. Glover, D. Karney, D. Klingman, and A. Napier, "A Compu-
Feeder tational Study on Start Procedures, Basis Change Criteria and
Demand Segments Optimization Solution Algorithms for Transportation Problems," Management
Locations (approximate) Substations Time* Science, Vol. 20, pp. 793-813, 1974.
184 275 3 .106 [8] V. Srinivasan and G.L. Thompson, "Benefit-Cost Analysis of
381 560 5 .324 Coding Techniques for the Primal Transportation Algorithm,"
981 1376 22 .662 Journal of the Association for Computing Machinery, Vol. 20,
pp. 194-213, 1973.
*Optimization times are measured in CPU seconds on a CDC 7600
Computer [9] V.F. Wilreker, R.W. Long, and M.G. Strintzis, "Spatially
Regressive Small Area Electric Load Forecasting," Presented at
5.0 CONCLUSION the 1977 Joint Automatic Control Conference, San Francisco,
June 1977.
A transshipment feeder model using small area demand locations
and upper bounded feeder segments was solved for data from realistic [10 V. Srinivasan and G.L. Thompson, "An Operator Theory of
size problems using a current fast transportation code. The sizes of Parametric Programming for the Transportation Problem, I and
problems solved are much larger and computation times much smaller II," Naval Research Logistics Quarterly, Vol. 19, pp. 205-252,
than those reported for similar problems in the literature. Because of 1972.
1066
Douglas L. Wall (M'71) was born in Erie, Penn-
sylvania, November 26, 1949. He received a
BSEE degree from Case Western Reserve
University in 1971, and a MSEE degree from the
University of Pittsburgh in 1975.
He joined Westinghouse in 1971 in Advanc-
ed Systems Technology working in the
Transmission Planning Group. He later worked
in the Generation Planning Group where he was
involved with generation studies and optimiza-
tion models applied to long-range generation
system planning. He next became involved in the Distribution Group of
AST where he was primarily responsible for the development and
maintenance of extensive computer programs for use in distribution
system planning.
Currently he is involved with and EPRI research contract to
develop an overall set of planning models for distribution systems. He is
pursuing a Ph.D. at Carnegie-Mellon University where he is studying
the application of optimization techniques for computer aided distribu-
tion system design.
Mr. Wall coauthored technical papers on distribution planning. He
is a member of Eta Kappa Nu, IEEE Power Society, Software
Engineering Society, and Operation Research Society of America. He is
a Registered Professional Engineer in the Commonwealth of Penn-
sylvania.
Gerald L. Thompson was born in Rolfe, Iowa,
on *November 25, 1923. He received his BS
degree in electrical engineering from Iowa State
University, Ames, his S. M. degree in
mathematics from Massachusetts Institute of
Technology, Cambridge, and his Ph.D. degree
in mathematics from the University of
Michigan, Ann Arbor, in 1944, 1948, and 1953,
respectively.
He has taught at the University of Michigan
(1948-51), Princeton University (1951-53),
Dartmouth College (1953-58), Ohio Wesleyan University (1958-59) and
Carnegie-Mellon University (1959- )where he is currently a Professor of
Applied Mathematics and Industrial Administration. He is the author
and co-author of 11 books and numerous papers in mathematics,
operations research, mathematical economics, and other topics.
He is a member of the American Mathematical Society,
Mathematics Association of America, Society for Industrial and Ap-
plied Mathematics, the Operations Research Society of America, and
the Institute of Management Sciences.
James E. D. Northcote-Green (M'70) was born
in Penang, Malayasia on August 20, 1940. He
received the DFH from Faraday House
Engineering College, London, in 1962, the
MScE in Power Systems Engineering from the
University of New Brunswick, Canada, in 1968.
In 1976 he received the MBA from McMaster
University, Canada.
After completing a graduate apprenticeship
at the English Electric Company in England, he
moved to Westinghouse Canada in 1964 as
Customer Project Engineer for metalclad switchgear. In 1967 he was
employed by the Canadian Government in the Department of Supply
engaged in improving cost estimating and procurement procedures. He
returned to Westinghouse Canada in 1969 as Utility Systems Engineer
where he was responsible for power systems planning studies.
He has been Manager of Distribution Planning in the Advanced
Systems Technology Division of Westinghouse Electric Corporation
since 1976.
Mr. Northcote-Green is a registered Professional Engineer in the
Province of Ontario.
Discussion
K. S. Hindi (Polytechnic of the South Bank, London, England) and A.
Brameller (University of Manchester, Institute of Science and
Technology, Manchester, England): It seems that the authors' model
and our own are closely related. In fact if the fixed charges on feeder
segments are set to zero and the radiality requirement is neglected, our
model reduces to that of the authors'.
Looked at from another viewpoint, the authors' model seems to
correspond to the low bound tran-shipment problem solved at each
node of the decision tree of our branch and bound search procedure. It
can, therefore, be seen that the authors are quite correct in maintaining
that including fixed charges would necessitate devising a branch and
bound search strategy, that incorporates the feeder model as a
subroutine. In view of these striking similarities between the two
models, would the authors elaborate on the differences between them?
The authors state that non-radial solution nodes have appeared
rather rarely in the authors' examples. Our experience points to the con-
trary. Has the authors' experience with more problems, since the time
of writing, corroborated their conclusion?
The heuristic rule for radialising the trans-shipment solution the
authors propose would of course lead to a sub-optimal solution. Arriv-
ing at an optimal radial solution would again necessitate a branch and
bound search procedure.
Manuscript received September 12, 1978.
R. N. Adams (Queen Mary College, University of London, London,
England): The true cost of a feeder connecting two locations consists of
a fixed charge to cover installation and other overheads plus a load-
related cost which is largely due to the 12R losses. The ratio of the fixed
costs to loss costs depends on the conductor cross-sectional area, and so
for a sequence of standard conductors a family of quadratic curves is
obtained which the Authors illustrate in figure 4. Now if a feeder cost
can be separated from any reference to a specific conductor size, the
lower boundary of the family of curves can be approximated by a
straight line which may or may not pass close to the origin, depending
on the relative costs of energy and materials. If the straight line does
pass through the origin the problem is a straightforward transportation
problem which can be solved accurately and efficiently by the Authors
technique; if not, then the problem becomes a fixed-cost transportation
problem which must be solved by an integer optimisation method such
as the branch and bound approach described in reference 1.
The Authors appear to gloss over the problem of fixed costs,
dismissing them as being insignificant compared with substation costs
in order to justify the linear approximation. But there is a more formal
justification of this crucial approximation as follows.
Balinski (reference A) showed that in the case of fixed-cost
transportation where the cost function is of the form
C = Xfjd, + exj, for all routes j (1)
and 0 6 xj< Mjd.
where Mj is the maximum capacity of route j
fj is the fixed cost on route j
6j is a zero-one integer variable
ej is the unit cost on route i
and xj is the flow on route j
a good feasible assignment could be achieved by linearising the cost
function to
C = [ej + (fj/M,)] xj (2)
In figure A this is shown as the linear cost function (c) rather than the
fixed-cost function (a) + (b).
coSt
units M
Figure A. Balinski's Cost Functiontrnptd

If P is the original problem as represented by the cost function of
equation (1) and has optimal solution C., and if P is the derived linearis-
ed problem represented by equation (2) with optimal solution Co, then
C. is a lower bound on the solution of P since it is the solution of P with
integer constraints ignored as found in the linear transportation pro-
cedure. Furthermore, a feasible integer solution C'O is obtained by
taking C. and rounding up all the integer variables which are taking
non-integral values. C'. can be taken as an initial upper bound on CO
and so we have
-Co < Co< CIO
In the terms of the Authors' solution, C. is the cost indicated by
the transportation algorithm, C'O is the actual network cost after in-
cluding feeder fixed costs, and CO is the cost of the network true op-
timum.
Balinski's conclusion that C'O is a good approximation to CO does
not necessarily hold unless the fixed costs are relatively small, but con-
sideration of the difference between the upper bound CO and the lower
bound CO would in any case indicate whether a significantly better solu-
tion were likely to exist. This is what happens in a branch and bound
search, where the bounding process develops until current upper and
lower bounds converge at the true optimum. At any point in the tree
search there is a current lower bound on the optimum which can be used
to decide whether it is worthwhile continuing the search and also in
which part of the tree the improved solutions are likely to be found.
I would, therefore, suggest to the Authors that they could use the
strategy of comparing C'o with C. to indicate the "goodness" of their
solution and whether it is worth expending effort to find a better one.
Finally, a note about actual cost levels. The cost function for 415
volt cables used in reference I was of the order fI + f6 x per unit
load, where I p.u. load was the maximum rating of the largest cable
available. But these were 1971 prices, and since then certain changes
have taken place in the prices of energy and cable materials. A rough
estimate of this cost function in 1978 is #2 +,30 x per unit load, i.e. a
straight line which almost passes through the origin, thus rendering
redundant all of the foregoing development of the bounding argument!
REFERENCES
1. as for reference 1 of discussed paper
A. Balinski, M. L.: "Fixed cost transportation problems", Naval
Research Logistics Quarterly, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1961, pp. 41-54.
Manuscript received July 18, 1978.
Enver Masud (Department of Energy, Washington, DC): The authors
have taken an idea [1] conceived in 1969 and made it into an extremely
useful tool for power system planning and operation. Their primary
contribution, and a significant one, appears to be the addition of
capacity constraints and development of efficient optimization codes.
They also have chosen to utilize load densities versus point loads. The
former being much easier to forecast were also recommended by this
writer.
The paper is also interesting since it marks the point at which an
idea conceived nine years ago becomes commercially available. It will
be interesting to note how many years will go by before the models
penetrate the market in sufficient volume to realize significant
economies in distribution design, and faster restoration of distribution
service.
REFERENCE
[1] Enver Masud, "Computer Homes Substation Development,'
Electric Light and Power, pp. 78-81, May 1970.
Manuscript received June 16, 1978.
L. Roy (Dept. of Electrical Eng., I.I.T., Kharagpur, India): The
distribution network planning is very important for ensuring proper
and balanced distribution voltage, low distribution loss and reliable
supply. Often, the distribution system is not well planned resulting in
the poor performance. The model proposed by the authors provides a
means for optimal planning of the large distribution networks. The
model involves use of the linear programming technique. The LP
technique is known to be very efficient and effective for the large size
problems. The authors have rendered invaluable service to the power in-
1067
dustries by developing and testing an economical and efficient distribu-
tion planning model capable of solving large size problems. They have
done good work and ought to be commended.
The authors' opinion on the following points would be ap-
preciated:
1. The distribution planning problem is being solved using the
minimum cost maximum flow technique also. How does their model
compare with this technique?
2. How does the linear approximation of the fixed and variable
costs affect the results? Have the authors calculated the magnitude of
error involved using the other methods, and if so, what are the find-
ings?
Manuscript received August 14, 1978.
D. L. Wall, G. L. Thompson and J. E. D. Northcote-Green: The
authors wish to thank the discussants for their comments and wish to
begin by reviewing the history of optimization methods and their ap-
plication to distribution system planning. The first published paper that
we know of in the area of optimization methods applied to distribution
is that of U. G. Knight (1) in 1960. His continued work in this area
culminated in his thesis (2) in 1967, and later in his book (3) in 1972. In
his book, he discusses briefly linear and mixed integer models for power
distribution and substation configurations. Only the more recent
publications in this area are given in the references (1-5) of our paper.
Another line of research started in the mathematical programming
literature in the late 1960's concerning the development of efficient
coding techniques for transportation problem algorithms. Very great
advances in this area were achieved. One of the purposes of our paper is
to bring these advances to the attention of the Electrical Engineering
audience.
IN RESPONSE TO PROFESSORS HINDI AND BRAMELLER,
the significant difference between our models is the above coding ad-
vances which they may wish to introduce into their transshipment code
and see what improvements in efficiency and problem size are possible
in their branch and bound algorithm. Regarding their comment on the
effect of fixed costs, we regard the substation fixed costs as being much
more important than the effects of including feeder segment fixed costs
in the problem. We would like to thank Dr. Adams for his lucid
description of that question and his corroborating opinion.
We also regard the fixed costs of stations as having a more impor-
tant effect on the problem than the effects of obtaining radial solutions.
In addition, keep in mind that our model was designed for long range
planning where load is forecasted on a small area basis. As pointed out
in the paper, our model allows for splitting of some small areas to
alleviate nonradial solutions which the discussants' model does not. We
feel that this is why we have not found this to be a serious problem.
We are currently writing a paper on the substation location prob-
lem which will illuminate the points mentioned in the previous
paragraphs.
REGARDING MR. MASUD'S DISCUSSION, we find the reference in
his discussion to be virtually the same as his paper in our reference (2).
This paper was a valuable contribution for the time, but it approaches
only the problem of optimal sizing of substations. The discussant did
not represent in his model any actual or potential feeder network with
its associated power distribution costs and capacity limitations. Mr.
Masud does use small area loads as we use, however, he assumes the
distribution patterns and substation loads are fixed and then solves for
the optimum substation size and then assigns any station overloads to
stations with excess capacity with a transfer model. We determine the
optimum substation loads and distribution patterns given small area
loads and both feeder and substation capacities. While these two prob-
lems are related, they are far from being identical.
IN RESPONSE TO PROFESSOR ROY, the Ford Fulkerson dual
method (minimum cost maximal flow technique) can be used to solve
the transshipment problem instead of the primal method we employed
in the paper. However, the numerical experience reported in references
(7) and (8) of our paper indicates that the primal method is several times
faster than any known implementation of the dual method.
As far as the comparison between the linear approximation and
true variable feeder segment costs, we refer to the discussion by Dr.
Adams given above.
We again wish to thank the discussants for their remarks, as well as
for their previous work in this area which formed the basis for our own.
1068
the Planning, Design and Operation of Electric Supply
REFERENCES Networks," Ph.D. Thesis, London University, 1967.
Inicht
I I C.wo5.
P r vetVmc F oi0i4iP nn/3 ithCmnthrc
(1) Knight, U. G., "The Logical Design of Electrical Networks Using "'X ruilgi1L, U. U., x wt ayste 1972. Ig/Ct St&6 UtU iviUmemClicy,
Lienar Programming Methods," Proc. IEE, Vol. 33 A, (1960). Pergamon Press, New York,
(2) Knight, U. G., "Linear and Dynamic Programming Methods in Manuscript received October 2, 1978.