[go: up one dir, main page]
More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/
Next Article in Journal
Performance Simulation and Benefit Analysis of Ammonia Absorption Cooling and Heating Dual-Supply System Based on Off-Peak Electricity Heat Storage
Next Article in Special Issue
Harmonic Stability Analysis for Multi-Parallel Inverter-Based Grid-Connected Renewable Power System Using Global Admittance
Previous Article in Journal
A Forecast Model for the Level of Engineering Maturity Impact on Contractor’s Procurement and Construction Costs for Offshore EPC Megaprojects
Previous Article in Special Issue
Suggestion of a New Protection Scheme for a Transmission System Equipped with a Thyristor-Controlled Series Capacitor
You seem to have javascript disabled. Please note that many of the page functionalities won't work as expected without javascript enabled.
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Energies
Volume 12
Issue 12
10.3390/en12122297
energies-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Nature-Inspired Whale Optimization Algorithm for Optimal Coordination of Directional Overcurrent Relays in Power Systems

by
Abdul Wadood
†,
Tahir Khurshaid
†,
Saeid Gholami Farkoush
,
Jiangtao Yu
,
Chang-Hwan Kim
and
Sang-Bong Rhee
*
Department of Electrical Engineering, Yeungnam University, 280 Daehak-Ro, Gyeongsan, Gyeongsangbuk-do 38541, Korea
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
†
These authors contributed equally to this work and considered as co-first author.
Energies 2019, 12(12), 2297; https://doi.org/10.3390/en12122297
Submission received: 14 May 2019 / Revised: 10 June 2019 / Accepted: 12 June 2019 / Published: 16 June 2019
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Electric Power Systems Research 2019)
Browse Figures
Figure 1
<p>Schematic outline for DOCR coordination in an electrical power network.</p> "> Figure 2
<p>The flowchart of whale optimization algorithm (WOA).</p> "> Figure 3
<p>The IEEE three-bus system.</p> "> Figure 4
<p>Convergence characteristic of WOA for Case I.</p> "> Figure 5
<p>The IEEE eight-bus system.</p> "> Figure 6
<p>Convergence characteristic of WOA for case 2.</p> "> Figure 7
<p>The IEEE nine-bus system.</p> "> Figure 8
<p>Convergence characteristic of WOA for Case 3.</p> "> Figure 9
<p>Diagram of the IEEE 15-bus system.</p> "> Figure 10
<p>Convergence characteristic of WOA for Case 4.</p> "> Figure 11
<p>Diagram of the IEEE 30-bus system.</p> "> Figure 12
<p>Convergence characteristic of WOA for Case 5.</p> "> Figure 13
<p>Diagram of the IEEE 14-bus system.</p> "> Figure 14
<p>Convergence characteristic of WOA for the IEEE-14 bus system.</p> ">
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
In power systems protection, the optimal coordination of directional overcurrent relays (DOCRs) is of paramount importance. The coordination of DOCRs in a multi-loop power system is formulated as an optimization problem. The main objective of this paper is to develop the whale optimization algorithm (WOA) for the optimal coordination of DOCRs and minimize the sum of the operating times of all primary relays. The WOA is inspired by the bubble-net hunting strategy of humpback whales which leads toward global minima. The proposed algorithm has been applied to six IEEE test systems including the IEEE three-bus, eight-bus, nine-bus, 14-bus, 15-bus, and 30-bus test systems. Furthermore, the results obtained using the proposed WOA are compared with those obtained by other up-to-date algorithms. The obtained results show the effectiveness of the proposed WOA to minimize the relay operating time for the optimal coordination of DOCRs.

1. Introduction

1.1. Motivation and Incitement

In an electrical power system, the protection strategy is an essential prerequisite for the proper functioning of the electrical system in a consistent manner. A worthy protection strategy clears a fault as soon as possible to preserve the supply of power to the healthy parts of the system unaffected by the fault. Every device of an electrical power network is safeguarded by two types of protection, i.e., primary and backup protection. For a robust configuration of an electrical power network, the primary protection for a fault should respond as quickly as possible to isolate the faulty area from the rest of the system. However, if the primary network defense is unsuccessful in clearing the fault, the secondary protection should take over the responsibility for clearing the fault. This should be the preferred scenario of any defensive strategy because the primary defense isolates only the affected area whereas, whenever the secondary reinforcement functions, a greater portion of the network has to suffer needlessly from power outages. For guaranteeing that only the affected section of the system is isolated in this manner while reducing the probability of undesirable blackouts, a reliable and effective management of the protection equipment is required. An effective and profitable protection strategy for a multi-loop electrical power network requires the inclusion of directional overcurrent relays (DOCRs). The functionality and configuration of DOCRs is determined by two constraints: time dial setting (TDS) and plug setting (PS). As a result of the appropriate coordination of DOCRs, the TDS and PS of the DOCRs are controlled such that the extent of the fault is removed by the primary protection as consistently and quickly as possible. Moreover, the mutual setup of any DOCRs should be managed appropriately with other DOCRs to protect the neighboring devices As a result of this scheme, the coordination problem can become significantly complicated.

1.2. Literature Review

To clarify this complicated issue, numerous techniques have been established in the literature. In [1], the curve intersection methodology was used to solve the coordination problem of overcurrent relays. In [2], the setting of relays was determined with a graphical selection process. In [3], an expert system was used that utilizes the minimum break point set. Other techniques include sequential programming [4] and linear theory [5].
Recently, nature-inspired optimization methods have been developed in the literature to explain the complex problems within the electrical power network, including the DOCR coordination problem [6,7,8,9,10]. In [11,12], the optimal DOCR design was determined with respect to the changing topological arrangement of the system. In [13,14], a hybrid genetic algorithm for DOCR coordination was applied to reveal the optimum TDS and PS values of DOCRs considering the line or generation unit outage contingencies. The outages of any line or generator is considered as an N-1 contingency according to NERC reliability standards [15]. In [16,17], N−1 contingency analysis has been widely considered in power system planning studies. In [18,19], the DOCRs problem was solved in a multi-loop transmission system deliberating all promising system topologies generating from single line outage contingencies. In [20], the optimal protection coordination was solved by considering the maximum DG penetration level. However these alterations in the network configuration might cause improper operation of the protection scheme. In [21], the protection coordination problem was solved by fault current limiters accommodating both grid-connected and islanded modes of operation without considering line or DG outage. In [22], the protection coordination problem was solved for micro-grids by incorporating a new set of coordination constraints that correspond to line, substation, and DG outages, as well as micro-grid operation modes. Moreover all of these network topologies lead to the complexity of the problem, as well as result in mis-coordination of DOCRs, constantly leading to contingencies. To overcome this issue and reduce the power outages it has been highly recommended for the relay settings to be determined optimally considering only the main system configuration [23,24,25,26]. In [27], the coordination of DOCRs was determined by a linear method. In [28,29], the coordination issue is expressed as a mixed integer nonlinear programming (MINLP) issue, and was solved using different population-based optimization algorithms. In [30,31], several bio-inspired algorithms were developed to solve the DOCR coordination issue by designing a linear formulation. In [32,33,34,35,36], a different version of particle swarm optimization (PSO) was used to determine the optimum values for DOCRs. A different version of the differential algorithm was reported in [37] to solve the DOCR coordination problem to point out the superiority of modified differential evolution algorithms. In [38], the grey wolf optimizer (GWO) algorithm was suggested to solve the optimum DOCR coordination problem. In [39], a teaching learning-based optimization (TLBO) algorithm was suggested for DOCR coordination. In [40], biogeography-based optimization (BBO) was used. In [41], back tracking algorithm was used for DOCR coordination problem. A mixed integer linear programming (MILP) approach was used in [42]. In [43], the firefly (FA) metaheuristic and [44] modified electromagnetic field optimization (MEFO) optimizations were used for DOCR coordination. In [45], a modified form of teaching-based optimization was used. In [46], an analytic approach was used to address the DOCR problem. In [47], an improved group search was used in relay coordination. In [48], a comparative study of different metaheuristic algorithms was performed to address the DOCR problem. In [49], multiple embedded crossover PSO was used for DOCR coordination. The DOCR problem in a multisource network could be illustrated as an optimization issue in electrical power systems. The drawback of the previous optimization techniques, as well as the metaheuristic optimizations, is the prospect of merging standards that may not be optimal in all instances, but instead are confined to a local optimal value. To comprehend this problem, a WOA algorithm strategy is inspected in this investigation to determine the precise and optimal DOCR coordination in relation to other up-to-date algorithms.

1.3. Contribution and Paper Organization

In this paper, the optimal coordination of DOCRs was determined by a nature-inspired whale optimization algorithm (WOA) deployed in a multi-loop power system. The WOA is inspired by the Humpback whales’ strategy for apprehending prey using the bubble-net hunting approach, a cooperative feeding method used by groups of humpback whales as they blow bubbles to encircle and corral their prey. The suggested WOA has extraordinary exploration competency and speed as compared to other meta-heuristic techniques [50,51]; this characteristic makes the population members of WOA more discriminative when searching for the optimal solution compared to other meta-heuristic algorithms. The primary aim of our proposed WOA is to determine the optimal values of TDS and PS to minimalize the operational period of DOCRs with respect to backup and relay setting restrictions. The remaining of this paper is organized as follows. Section 2 describes the DOCR problem formulation. The proposed WOA is presented in Section 3. Section 4 elaborates on the simulation results for different IEEE test systems with other reported methods. Section 5 summarizes all simulation results with previous techniques. The conclusions are stated in Section 6.

2. DOCR Problem Formulation

The key objective of DOCR coordination is to sense the fault and detach the affected sections as quickly as possible. To achieve this goal in relay coordination, optimum settings for TDS and PS of each DOCR must be established. The aim is to minimize the total operating time of all primary DOCRs by satisfying the distinct constraints, as defined by the objective function (OF) (Equation (1)):
min f = ∑ i = 1 n T i , j ,
where T i , j   is the operational time of the primary relay for a fault at zone j. In this way, the distinctive curve for working relay R i   is chosen from a selected portion of the decisions of the IEC standard as follows (Equation (2)):
T o p = TDS i α IF i PS × CTR k − 1 ,
where α and k are constants having values α = 0.14 and k = 0.02, and TDS, IF, PS, and CTR are the time dial setting, fault current, plug setting, and current transfer ratio (CTR) for normal inverse type relays, respectively. Figure 1 portrays the schematic outline for the coordination of DOCRs in an electrical power network.

2.1. Coordination Criteria

In an electrical protection scheme, the primary/backup safety pattern needs to be simultaneously coordinated by coordination time interval (CTI). The value of the CTI could vary from 0.2–0.5 s, depending upon different circumstances and factors. The preceding can be written as:
T b ≥ T p + CTI ,
where:
  • Tb: the backup relay operating time; and
  • Tp: the primary (or main) relay operating time.

2.2. Relay Setting Bounds

The overall working time can be minimized under two imperatives: the requirements of relay restriction and coordination limitations. The main requirements define the limits of TDS and PS, while alternate imperatives are related to the coordination of primary/backup relays. The limits on relay setting parameters are dependent on relay limitations and design, and their ranges can be expressed as follows:
TDS i m i n   ≤ TDS i   ≤ TDS i m a x ,
PS i m i n   ≤ PS i   ≤ PS i m a x .

3. Whale Optimization Algorithm

The whale optimization algorithm (WOA) was developed by Mirjalili in 2016 [50] as a novel nature-inspired heuristic technique to solve problems related to engineering and different mathematical optimization issues. The common behaviors of humpback whales are the basis of WOA. This optimization technique is inspired by the bubble net hunting approach of humpback whales as they follow a circular shaped route for hunting small fish near the surface. This feeding process is a distinctive behavior of humpback whales, making this optimization unique among other nature-inspired optimization methods. To design the mathematical model of WOA, three steps are involved in the bubble-net hunting process. The first step is the encircling of the prey, the second step is a spiral bubble-net feeding movement, and the third step is the search for prey. All steps are described in detail below.

3.1. Encircling Prey

The position of the target and prey is recognized and surrounded by the humpback whales. Since the optimal strategy for locating the prey in the search area is not characterized by all of the whales at first, the existing best candidate guidance is supposed to be revealed by the entity closest to the optimum plan. By characterizing the best search agent, other search agents are updated in the direction of the best search agent. This plan can be illustrated as:
E → = C → · Z → * t − Z → t ,
Z → * t + 1 = Z → * t − A → · D , →
where t is the current iteration; Z → * denotes the provided best solution in the position vector Z → ; and A → and C → are the coefficient vectors. It should be noted that Z → * will be amended in each iteration, where D → is the distance of ith whale to the prey. In addition the vectors A → and C → are calculated as in Equations (8) and (9), respectively, as follows:
A → = 2 a → · r → − a → ,
C → = 2 · r , →
where r → is arbitrarily nominated vector having a range between zero and one, while, for the exploitation and exploration steps, the value of a is reduced from two to zero.

3.2. Bubble-Net Attacking Method

To model this strategy, two techniques employed by humpback whales are presented below.

3.2.1. Shrinking Encircling Mechanism

A → decrease in the estimation of a from two to zero through the iterations of Equation (7) results in this conduct. Likewise, by diminishing the value of a, which is a randomly chosen value in [−a, a], the change scope of A → is additionally decreased. The original location of search agents is chosen amongst the primary location of every agent and position of the best agent by picking irregular qualities for A → in the interval [−1, 1].

3.2.2. Spiral Updating of Position

In this process, the separation between the whale positioned at (Z, W) and prey positioned at (Z*, W*) is determined. From that point forward, for mimicking the spiral-shaped movement of humpback whales, a helix condition is composed amongst the whale location and prey location as:
Z → t + 1 = D → ′ · e b l · cos 2 π l + Z → * t ,
where D → ′ determines the location or distance of whale i to the prey and can be obtained as D → ′ = D → ′ ·   e b l · cos 2 π l . Furthermore, b is a constant to represent the state of the logarithmic helix, and l is an arbitrary number in the range [−1, 1]. In view of the concurrent swimming of humpback whales around the prey in a contracting loop and following a helix formed path, the equal likelihood of choosing either the shrinking surrounding technique or the helix strategy can be summarized as:
Z → t + 1 = Z → t − A → . D → if   p ≤ 0.5 D → ′ ·   e b l · cos 2 π l + Z → * t if   p   ≥ 0.5 ,
where p is an arbitrary number having a range between zero and one.

3.3. Search for Prey

An equivalent technique dependent on the heterogeneity of the vector A → can be utilized when searching for the prey (exploration). An arbitrary survey of humpback whales shows that they are in view of one another and distinguishable. In like manner, a moving search agent far from a reference whale is expected to be skilled in the behavior, where | A → | > 1. Additionally, the situation of a search agent in the exploration stage is updated in view of an arbitrary search agent rather than the best pursuit agent originated up until this point. The mathematical model can be expressed as:
D → = C → · Z → * rand − Z → ,
Z → t + 1 = Z → rand − A → ·   D → .

3.4. The Steps of WOA

The principal procedures of WOA are as follows: The WOA starts with an established set of randomly-created results. The locations of pursuit agents, considering an arbitrary determination of hunt agent or the given best result, are then updated. For exploration and exploitation, parameter “a” is reduced from two to zero. When | A → | > 1, an arbitrary hunt agent is chosen, and when | A → | < 1, the best result is chosen for updating the positions of the pursuit agents. This enhancement strategy can modify the movement among spiral and circular movements depending on the measure of p. Finally, the WOA is stopped when the criteria are met. Algorithm 1 depicts the pseudocode of the WOA. In addition, the flowchart of WOA is given in Figure 2.
Algorithm 1. The pseudocode of WOA.
Initialize population size (NP), number of design variables and meeting criteria, number of fitness function evaluations
Analyze the fitness function value for each search agent
X * = The best search agent
while (t < maximum number of iteration)
for each search agent
Update a, A → , C, l and p
if (p < 0.5)
if (| A → | < 1)
Update the position of the current search agent by the Equation (6)
else if (| A → | ≥   1
Select the random search agent X rand
Update the position of the current search agent by the Equation (13)
end if
else if (p ≥ 0.5 )
Update the position of the current search agent by the Equation (10)
end if
end for
Alleviate any search agent that goes outside the search space
fitness function evaluations of each search agent
Update X * if there is a better solution
t = t + 1
end while
Return X *

4. Results and Discussion

In this section, we report that the suggested WOA used to manage the DOCR coordination problem has been confirmed and successfully tested for six case studies: the IEEE 3-, 8-, 9-, 14-, 15-, and 30-bus systems. The results have been obtained by developing an accurate simulation program using MATLAB software @R2018b (Mathworks, Natick, MA, USA).

4.1. Case I: IEEE Three-Bus System

The suggested algorithm is verified on an IEEE three-bus system. The details of this test system can be found in [28]. This system consists of three lines and six DOCRS as presented in Figure 3. The proposed settings for CT ratios and pickup tap settings are shown in Table 1. It is assumed that the pickup tap setting is a discrete variable between 1.25 and 5.0 in steps of 0.5, and the ranges of lower and upper TDS are set at 0.05 and 1.1, respectively. The coordination interval to be considered is 0.3 s. To create a perfect assessment, a three-phase short circuit current is replicated in the central of lines [28] and, hence, is not repeated here. The optimal TDS and PS values achieved by the proposed algorithm are tabulated in Table 2. Table 3 shows the relative result of the proposed algorithm in comparison to other published techniques reported in the literature. It was observed that the suggested WOA accomplishes a better result as compared to other methods. The overall net gain in time obtained by the suggested WOA is depicted in Table 4, which shows the superiority of the WOA over other methods explained in the literature. Figure 4 depicts the WOA convergence characteristic obtained during the course of the simulation.

4.2. Case II: IEEE Eight-Bus System

The effectiveness and the performance of the suggested WOA is successfully tested on the IEEE eight-bus system. The information about the eight-bus test network is specified in [28]. This network comprises seven lines and 14 OCRs as presented in Figure 5, and has 28 design variables and 20 constraints. The proposed settings for current transformer ratio for the IEEE eight-bus system are shown in Table 5. The lower and upper limits of TDS are set to 0.1 and 1.1, respectively, and seven discrete pickup tap settings are assumed (i.e., 0.5, 0.6, 0.8, 1.0, 1.5, 2.0, and 2.5). A CTI of 0.2 s is also assumed. To create a perfect assessment, a deliberate three-phase short circuit current is reported in [28]; hence it is not repeated here. The optimal TDS and PS for DOCRs obtained by the suggested WOA are shown in Table 6, while Table 7 depicts the relative comparison of the suggested WOA with other published techniques explained in the literature. As shown in Table 7, the suggested WOA has obtained an improved result for the above stated IEEE eight-bus system. The assessment of total net gain in time obtained in this case by the suggested WOA is shown in Table 8 with respect to other evolutionary algorithms mentioned in the literature. It was observed that the WOA algorithm has an advantage of net gain in time over other techniques and shows satisfactory and improved results. Figure 6 depicts the convergence characteristic of the WOA achieved during the course of the simulation.

4.3. Case III: IEEE Nine-Bus System

The third framework deliberated in this paper is the IEEE nine-bus test system as shown in Figure 7. This conveyance framework comprises nine buses and 12 lines and is powered by a generator associated with bus 1. The short circuit test estimated for primary/back up OCRs is given in reference [13] and, thus, is not revisited here. The proposed setting value for the current transformer proportion is 500/1 for all OCRs. The lower and higher estimates of TDS are set to 0.1 and 1.2, respectively. The lower and higher estimates of PS are set to 1.5 and 2.5, respectively. A coordination interval of 0.2 s is considered. The optimum values for TDS and PS of the DOCRs obtained by WOA are shown in Table 9. Table 10 depicts the relative result of the suggested WOA with other published algorithms cited in the literature. As indicated by Table 10, the suggested WOA has accomplished a superior result when compared with different algorithms referred to in the literature. The examination of the complete net gain in time obtained for this illustration by the suggested WOA is shown in Table 11. It is seen that the WOA algorithm has promising advantages of net gain in time over other algorithms. Figure 8 delineates the convergence characteristic of WOA obtained during the simulation.

4.4. Case IV: IEEE 15-Bus System

The proposed technique is actualized over the IEEE-15 bus framework. This test framework is a highly distributed generator (DG) augmented distribution network comprising 21 lines and 42 DOCRs as shown in Figure 9, and it has 84 design variables and 82 imperatives. Additionally, the three-phase short circuit framework details can be found in [28]. The proposed setting for current transformer ratios and primary/backup relationships for the relays is shown in Table 12. The lower and upper limits of TDS and PS are set to 0.1 and 1.2, and 0.5 and 2.5, respectively. A coordination interval of 0.3 s is considered. The optimal TDS and PS for DOCRs accomplished by the suggested WOA are given in Table 13, while Table 14 shows the relative outcome of the suggested WOA with an already-published algorithm. The convergence characteristic for the overall operational period of the 15-bus system during the simulation is shown in Figure 10, which indicates that the convergence is quicker and yields an improved value for the objective function in fewer iterations. The advantage in overall net gain in time obtained by the suggested WOA is presented in Table 15, showing the dominance of the WOA algorithm over recent published methods.

4.5. Case V: IEEE 30-Bus System

Figure 11 illustrates the 33 kV part of the IEEE 30-bus network. The network is sustained by three 50 MVA, 132/33 kV transformers associated with buses 1, 6, and 13. Notwithstanding the focus of over three supplies, two distributed generators (DGs) associated with buses 10 and 15 are likewise providing power to the network. The data and information of the network is presented in [52]. The framework has 20 lines (L1, L2, …, L20) and is protected by 39 DOCRs (R1, R2, …, R39) having 64 essential reinforcement assortments amongst them. Table 16 demonstrates all the conceivable 64 assortments of the essential reinforcement connections amongst the 39 OCRs. The fault current going through the primary/backup OCRs for different close-end three-phase faults is specified in [52], and, hence, are not reported here. The CT ratio for each OCR is assumed as 500:1. The upper and lower limits of TDS and PS are set to 0.1 and 1.2 for TDS, respectively, and 1.5 and 2.5 for PS, respectively.
A coordination interval of 0.3 s is considered. It is to be noticed that, for this framework, a portion of the essential reinforcement connections has been disregarded while tackling the coordination issue. These essential reinforcement connections are 14, 17-4, 19-4, 28-34, 30-33, 31-34, 32-33, and 37-33. The purpose for this lies in the way that, for these assortments, the fault currents going through the associated backup OCRs are small resulting in a greater working time of the backup OCRs; subsequently, the minimum CTI conditions are always sustained for these combinations.
The optimal TDS and PS for DOCRs accomplished by the suggested WOA is specified in Table 17. Table 18 gives the relative result of the suggested WOA with other published algorithms cited in the literature. The convergence characteristic for overall operational time achieved for the 30 bus system in the simulation is presented in Figure 12, showing that the convergence is faster and yields an improved value for the objective function in less number iterations. The advantage in total net gain time obtained by the suggested WOA is presented in Table 19 that show the dominance of the WOA algorithm over recent published method.

4.6. Case VI: Coordination Scheme Using Numerical Directional Relays

This test framework is a highly distributed generator (DG) augmented distribution network comprising of 40 DOCRs as shown in Figure 13. Additionally, the three-phase short circuit framework and system details can be found in [53]. The proposed setting for current transformer ratios and for the relays is shown in Table 20. The lower and upper limits of TDS and PS are assumed as continuous and set in the range of [0.1, 1.1] and [0.5, 2] [54], and CTI is considered as 0.2 s, respectively.

Application of WOA

The objective function was utilized by the suggested WOA for numerical DOCRs with indistinguishable parameter as consider for the rest of case studies. The optimal TDS and PS obtained are given in Table 21, which shows that the WOA algorithm gives an optimum and best values and that it optimized the TDS, PS, and total operating time to optimal values. The objective function value obtained during the course of the simulation for the finest candidate arrangement in every iteration appears in Figure 14, which validates that the convergence is prompter and acquires the preeminent values in fewer iterations. Furthermore, for all the coordination conditions, the optimal value obtained by WOA for all numerical DOCRs will fulfill the coordination constraints. Moreover no desecration has been established regarding the coordination constraints. Table 22 provides the comparative results with previously published techniques, which validate the superiority of WOA over other optimization techniques. In all conditions, the WOA performed outstandingly in minimizing the overall operational time up to an optimal value and will maintain proper coordination as well during a fault condition. Table 23 shows the overall time gain accomplished by the suggested WOA, exhibiting the predominance and favorable circumstances of WOA over the algorithms specified in the references.

5. Discussion

The WOA algorithm was used to assess the DOCR coordination problem. The suggested algorithm has a high search capability and convergence speed compared to other algorithms, and these distinctive features make the search agents of the WOA more discriminative in finding the optimum result as compared to other algorithms. The case studies presented in this paper have also been evaluated by different optimization algorithms as shown in the literature, and an improved optimal solution was observed from the proposed WOA algorithm compared to these other algorithm options. The DOCR coordination problem is basically a highly constrained optimization problem. As the WOA can solve constrained and unconstrained optimization problems, the relay coordination problem has been converted into an unconstrained optimization problem by defining a new objective function and by using the boundaries on the TDS and PS (and boundaries on the relay operating time) as the limits of the variables. A systematic procedure for converting a relay coordination problem into an optimization problem has been developed in this paper. A program has been developed in MATLAB for finding the optimum time coordination of DOCRs using the WOA method. The program can be used for setting the optimum time coordination of DOCRs in a system with any number of relays and any number of primary-backup relationships. The TDS, PS, and total operating time of relays obtained for all case studies by the proposed WOA ensured that the DOCRs will activate in the minimum possible amount of time for a fault at any point in the system. However, if the number of relays is increased, the nature of the highly constrained problem becomes more distinct. Therefore, an accurate and optimum relay coordination minimizes the total operating time as well as reduces and limits the damage produced by the fault. Unwanted tripping of the circuit breakers can also be bypassed by this method. The convergence characteristic graphs obtained during simulations show that the convergence is faster and obtains a superior solution for the fitness function “Z” in fewer iterations. The WOA algorithm is superior to the TLBO (MOF), TLBO, MDE, SM, MINLP, SA, PSO, and BBO-LP algorithms, as shown in Table 4. The WOA algorithm gains 5.4458 s, 3.8087 s, 3.2544 s, 0.3996 s, 0.2008 s, 0.0728 s, 0.3996 s, and 0.07251 s over the TLBO (MOF), TLBO, MDE, SM, MINLP, SA, PSO, and BBO-LP algorithms in Case I, respectively. Although this may appear insufficient, it should be noted that it is a very small system. In Case II, the WOA algorithm gains 2.4735 s, 5.0475 s, 4.9964 s, 0.45819 s, 5.111 s, 2.8020 s, 0.6929 s, 0.3955 s, and 0.4095 over the SA, GA, HGA-LP, NLM, LM, BBO-LP, MILP, FA, MEFO, and BSA algorithms, respectively, as shown in Table 8. In Case III, the WOA algorithm gives an advantage of 74.5163 s, 51.2622 s, 33.5192 s, 24.2209 s, 20.449 s, 17.4991 s, 11.0192 s, 5.5893 s, 1.4531 s, and 0.2973 s over the TLBO, IDE, MTALBO, GA, BBO, BH, NPL, PSO, HS, and DE, respectively, as shown in Table 10. In Case IV, the WOA algorithm gives an advantage of 41.2369 s, 0.96 s, 4.068 s, 0.3872 s, 2.3872 s, 0.868 s, 0.4921 s, 1.3555 s, 2.686 s, and 5.026 over the TLBO, SA, MINPL, AP, GSO, IGSO, DE, HS, MEFO and BSA algorithms, respectively, as shown in Table 14. This advantage is sufficient given that it is a very large system. In case V the WOA again gains 12.3056 s, 23.4697 s, 2.0983 s, 2.0983 s, 3.4994 s, and 18.0595 s over the GA, PSO, DE, HS and SOA algorithms. In case 6 of numerical DOCRs the WOA gains 3.5812 s, 3.2306 s, 3.0085 s, and 4.2155 s over the HGA-LP, MILP, MECPSO, and MAPSO, respectively. For Case V, this advantage is more than sufficient given that it is a very large and complex system, as can be clearly seen from Table 3, Table 7, Table 10, Table 14, Table 18 and Table 23 from Figure 4, Figure 6, Figure 8, Figure 10, Figure 12 and Figure 14 the proposed method is superior to the recent published techniques mentioned in the literature in terms of the quality of the solution, convergence, and minimization of the objective function to the optimum value. Furthermore, the suggested technique addressed the weaknesses of the already published algorithms.

6. Conclusions

In this paper, the problem of optimally coordinating DOCRs was evaluated using a swarm-based optimizer that is inspired by the hunting behavior of humpback whales. The suggested WOA has three operators to simulate the search for prey, encircling the prey, and bubble-net foraging behavior of humpback whales. The optimum coordination problem of DOCRs has been expressed as a mixed integer nonlinear programing problem. In order to assess the performance of the proposed WOA, it has been applied to six different systems, which include the IEEE three-bus, eight-bus, nine-bus, 14-bus, 15-bus, and 30-bus test systems. The simulation results of the WOA algorithm efficiently minimize all six models of the problem. The performance of the WOA can be seen from the optimized minimum objective function values for each case studies. The results obtained validate that the proposed WOA is an effective and reliable tool for the coordination of directional overcurrent relays. Moreover, the results obtained using WOA are better than those obtained using a number of well-known and up-to-date algorithms stated in the literature.
In the future the proposed WOA will be implemented to solve the protection coordination problem for micro-grids both for grid-connected and islanded modes of operation that correspond to line, substation, and DG outages, as well as micro-grid operation modes. Moreover, as the current implementation is limited to three-phase faults only, we aim to implement our proposed scheme for single-phase and two-phase faults in the systems in future study.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, S.G.F. and J.Y.; Data curation, C.-H.K.; Formal analysis, S.G.F.; Funding acquisition, S.-B.R.; Investigation, A.W., T.K. and S.-B.R.; Methodology, A.W., T.K. and J.Y.; Resources, C.-H.K.; Software, C.-H.K.; Supervision, S.-B.R.; Validation, A.W. and T.K.; Writing—original draft, A.W. and T.K.; Writing—review & editing, S.-B.R.

Funding

This research was supported by Korea Electric Power Corporation, grant number (R17XA05-38).

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Nomenclature

OCROvercurrent relay
DOCRDirectional overcurrent relay
TDSTime dial setting
TopTotal operating time
PSMPlug setting multiplier
IfFault current
IpPickup current
CTRCurrent transformer ratio
CTICoordination time interval
DGDistributed generation
IDMTInverse definite minimum time
IECInternational electro-technical commission
IEEEInstitute of electrical and electronics engineers
NERCFederal energy regulatory commission
PRPrimary relay
BRBackup relay
TbBackup relay operating time
TpPrimary relay operating time
LPLinear programming
NLPNon-linear programming
MILPMixed integer linear programming
MINLPMixed integer non-linear programming
MECPSOMultiple embedded crossover PSO
FAFirefly algorithm
GAGenetic algorithm
HGAHybrid genetic algorithm
DEDifferential evaluation
MEFOModified electromagnetic field optimization
PSOParticle swarm optimization
BBOBiogeography based optimization
GWOGrey wolf optimization
TLBOTeaching learning based optimization
SASeeker algorithm
GSOGroup search optimization
APAnalytic approach
BSABack tracking search algorithm
WOAWhale optimization algorithm

References

  1. Lu, Y.; Chung, J.-L. Detecting and solving the coordination curve intersection problem of overcurrent relays in subtransmission systems with a new method. Electr. Power Syst. Res. 2013, 95, 19–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Ezzeddine, M.; Kaczmarek, R.; Iftikhar, M. Coordination of directional overcurrent relays using a novel method to select their settings. IET Gener. Transm. Distrib. 2011, 5, 743–750. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Sharifian, H.; Abyaneh, H.A.; Salman, S.K.; Mohammadi, R.; Razavi, F. Determination of the minimum break point set using expert system and genetic algorithm. IEEE Trans. Power Deliv. 2010, 25, 1284–1295. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Birla, D.; Maheshwari, R.; Gupta, H. A New nonlinear directional overcurrent relay coordination technique, and banes and boons of near-end faults based approach. IEEE Trans. Power Deliv. 2006, 21, 1176–1182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Damborg, M.; Ramaswami, R.; Venkata, S.; Postforoosh, J. Computer aided transmission protection system design part I: Alcorithms. IEEE Trans. Power Appar. Syst. 1984, 51–59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Yu, J.T.; Kim, C.H.; Wadood, A.; Khurshiad, T.; Rhee, S. Self-adaptive multi-population JAYA algorithm with lévy flights for solving economic load dispatch problems. IEEE Access 2019, 7, 21372–21384. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Yu, J.; Kim, C.H.; Wadood, A.; Khurshiad, T.; Rhee, S.B. A novel multi-population based chaotic JAYA algorithm with application in solving economic load dispatch problems. Energies 2018, 11, 1946. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Gholami Farkoush, S.; Khurshaid, T.; Wadood, A.; Kim, C.H.; Kharal, K.H.; Kim, K.H.; Rhee, S.B. Investigation and optimization of grounding grid based on lightning response by using ATP-EMTP and genetic algorithm. Complexity 2018, 2018, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Mousa, A.A.A. Hybrid ant optimization system for multiobjective economic emission load dispatch problem under fuzziness. Swarm Evol. Comput. 2014, 18, 11–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Camargo, M.P.; Rueda, J.L.; Erlich, I.; Añó, O. Comparison of emerging metaheuristic algorithms for optimal hydrothermal system operation. Swarm Evol. Comput. 2014, 18, 83–96. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Bhattacharya, S.K.; Goswami, S.K. Distribution network reconfiguration considering protection coordination constraints. Electr. Power Compon. Syst. 2008, 36, 1150–1165. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Abyaneh, H.; Al-Dabbagh, M.; Karegar, H.; Sadeghi, S.; Khan, R. A new optimal approach for coordination of overcurrent relays in interconnected power systems. IEEE Trans. Power Deliv. 2003, 18, 430–435. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Bedekar, P.P.; Bhide, S.R. Optimum coordination of directional overcurrent relays using the hybrid GA-NLP approach. IEEE Trans. Power Deliv. 2010, 26, 109–119. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Noghabi, A.S.; Sadeh, J.; Mashhadi, H.R. Considering different network topologies in optimal overcurrent relay coordination using a hybrid GA. IEEE Trans. Power Deliv. 2009, 24, 1857–1863. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. US Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. Mandatory Reliability Standards for the Bulk-Power 718 System; Docket no. RM06-16-000; Order no. Order 693: 72; US Federal Energy Regulatory Commission: Washington, DC, USA, 2007. [Google Scholar]
  16. Zhang, H.; Heydt, G.T.; Vittal, V.; Quintero, J. An improved network model for transmission expansion planning considering reactive power and network losses. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 2013, 28, 3471–3479. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Khanabadi, M.; Ghasemi, H.; Doostizadeh, M. Optimal transmission switching considering voltage security and N-1 contingency analysis. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 2012, 28, 542–550. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Urdaneta, A.; Perez, L.; Restrepo, H. Optimal coordination of directional overcurrent relays considering dynamic changes in the network topology. IEEE Trans. Power Deliv. 1997, 12, 1458–1464. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Noghabi, A.S.; Mashhadi, H.R.; Sadeh, J. Optimal coordination of directional overcurrent relays considering different network topologies using interval linear programming. IEEE Trans. Power Deliv. 2010, 25, 1348–1354. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Zeineldin, H.H.; Mohamed, Y.A.-R.I.; Khadkikar, V.; Pandi, V.R. A protection coordination index for evaluating distributed generation impacts on protection for meshed distribution systems. IEEE Trans. Smart Grid 2013, 4, 1523–1532. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Najy, W.K.; Zeineldin, H.H.; Woon, W.L. Optimal protection coordination for microgrids with grid-connected and islanded capability. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 2012, 60, 1668–1677. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Saleh, K.A.; Zeineldin, H.H.; El-Saadany, E.F. Optimal protection coordination for microgrids considering N $−$1 contingency. IEEE Trans. Ind. Informatics 2017, 13, 2270–2278. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Saleh, K.A.; Zeineldin, H.H.; Al-Hinai, A.; El-Saadany, E.F. Optimal coordination of directional overcurrent relays using a new time-current-voltage characteristic. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 2014, 30, 537–544. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Saleh, K.A.; El-Saadany, E.F.; Al-Hinai, A.; Zeineldin, H.H. Dual-setting characteristic for directional overcurrent relays considering multiple fault locations. IET Gener. Transm. Distrib. 2015, 9, 1332–1340. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Saleh, K.A.; El Moursi, M.S.; Zeineldin, H.H. A New protection scheme considering fault ride through requirements for transmission level interconnected wind parks. IEEE Trans. Ind. Inform. 2015, 11, 1324–1333. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Zeineldin, H.H.; El-Saadany, E.F.; Salama, M.M.A. Optimal coordination of overcurrent relays using a modified particle swarm optimization. Electr. Power Syst. Res. 2006, 76, 988–995. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Zeienldin, H.; El-Saadany, E.F.; Salama, M.A. A novel problem formulation for directional overcurrent relay coordination. In Proceedings of the Large Engineering Systems Conference on Power Engineering (IEEE Cat. No. 04EX819), Halifax, NS, Canada, 28–30 July 2004; pp. 48–52. [Google Scholar]
  28. Amraee, T. Coordination of directional overcurrent relays using seeker algorithm. IEEE Trans. Power Deliv. 2012, 27, 1415–1422. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Urdaneta, A.; Nadira, R.; Jimenez, L.P. Optimal coordination of directional overcurrent relays in interconnected power systems. IEEE Trans. Power Deliv. 1988, 3, 903–911. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Wadood, A.; Farkoush, S.G.; Khurshaid, T.; Kim, C.-H.; Yu, J.; Geem, Z.W.; Rhee, S.-B. An optimized protection coordination scheme for the optimal coordination of overcurrent relays using a nature-inspired root tree algorithm. Appl. Sci. 2018, 8, 1664. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Wadood, A.; Khurshaid, T.; Farkoush, S.G.; Kim, C.H.; Rhee, S.B. A bio-inspired rooted tree algorithm for optimal coordination of overcurrent relays. In International Conference on Intelligent Technologies and Applications; Springer: Singapore, 2018; pp. 188–201. [Google Scholar]
  32. Wadood, A.; Kim, C.-H.; Khurshiad, T.; Farkoush, S.G.; Rhee, S.-B. Application of a continuous particle swarm optimization (CPSO) for the optimal coordination of overcurrent relays considering a penalty method. Energies 2018, 11, 869. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Khurshaid, T.; Wadood, A.; Farkoush, S.G.; Kim, C.-H.; Cho, N.; Rhee, S.-B. Modified particle swarm optimizer as optimization of time dial settings for coordination of directional overcurrent relay. J. Electr. Eng. Technol. 2019, 14, 55–68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Mansour, M.M.; Mekhamer, S.F.; El-Kharbawe, N. A modified particle swarm optimizer for the coordination of directional overcurrent relays. IEEE Trans. Power Deliv. 2007, 22, 1400–1410. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Baghaee, H.R.; Mirsalim, M.; Gharehpetian, G.B.; Talebi, H.A.; Aghamirsalim, M. MOPSO/FDMT-based pareto-optimal solution for coordination of overcurrent relays in interconnected networks and multi-DER microgrids. IET Gener. Transm. Distrib. 2018, 12, 2871–2886. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Darabi, A.; Bagheri, M.; Gharehpetian, G.B. Highly accurate directional overcurrent coordination via combination of Rosen’s gradient projection–complex method with GA-PSO algorithm. IEEE Syst. J. 2019, 1–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Thangaraj, R.; Pant, M.; Deep, K. Optimal coordination of over-current relays using modified differential evolution algorithms. Eng. Appl. Artif. Intell. 2010, 23, 820–829. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Kim, C.H.; Khurshaid, T.; Wadood, A.; Farkoush, S.G.; Rhee, S.B. Gray wolf optimizer for the optimal coordination of directional overcurrent relay. J. Electr. Eng. Technol. 2018, 13, 1043–1051. [Google Scholar]
  39. Singh, M.; Panigrahi, B.; Abhyankar, A. Optimal coordination of directional over-current relays using teaching learning-based optimization (TLBO) algorithm. Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst. 2013, 50, 33–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Albasri, F.A.; Alroomi, A.R.; Talaq, J.H. Optimal Coordination of directional overcurrent relays using biogeography-based optimization algorithm. IEEE Trans. Power Deliv. 2015, 30, 1810–1820. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. El-Hana Bouchekara, H.R.; Zellagui, M.; Abido, M.A. Coordination of directional overcurret relays using the backtracking search algorithm. J. Electr. Syst. 2016, 12, 387–405. [Google Scholar]
  42. Damchi, Y.; Dolatabadi, M.; Mashhadi, H.R.; Sadeh, J. MILP approach for optimal coordination of directional overcurrent relays in interconnected power systems. Electr. Power Syst. Res. 2018, 158, 267–274. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Sulaiman, M.; Waseem; Muhammad, S.; Khan, A. Improved Solutions for the optimal coordination of DOCRs using firefly algorithm. Complexity 2018, 2018, 1–15. [Google Scholar]
  44. Bouchekara, H.; Zellagui, M.; Abido, M.; Bouchekara, H.R.E.-H. Optimal coordination of directional overcurrent relays using a modified electromagnetic field optimization algorithm. Appl. Soft Comput. 2017, 54, 267–283. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Kalage, A.A.; Ghawghawe, N.D. Optimum coordination of directional overcurrent relays using modified adaptive teaching learning based optimization algorithm. Intell. Ind. Syst. 2016, 2, 55–71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Mahari, A.; Seyedi, H. An analytic approach for optimal coordination of overcurrent relays. IET Gener. Transm. Distrib. 2013, 7, 674–680. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Alipour, M.; Teimourzadeh, S.; Seyedi, H. Improved group search optimization algorithm for coordination of directional overcurrent relays. Swarm Evol. Comput. 2015, 23, 40–49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Alam, M.N.; Das, B.; Pant, V. A comparative study of metaheuristic optimization approaches for directional overcurrent relays coordination. Electr. Power Syst. Res. 2015, 128, 39–52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Farzinfar, M.; Jazaeri, M.; Razavi, F. A new approach for optimal coordination of distance and directional over-current relays using multiple embedded crossover PSO. Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst. 2014, 61, 620–628. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Mirjalili, S.; Lewis, A. The whale optimization algorithm. advances in engineering software. Neurocomputing 2016, 95, 51–67. [Google Scholar]
  51. Mafarja, M.M.; Mirjalili, S. Hybrid Whale Optimization algorithm with simulated annealing for feature selection. Neurocomputing 2017, 260, 302–312. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Mohammadi, R.; Abyaneh, H.A.; Rudsari, H.M.; Fathi, S.H.; Rastegar, H. Overcurrent relays coordination considering the priority of constraints. IEEE Trans. Power Deliv. 2011, 26, 1927–1938. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Alam, M.N. Adaptive protection coordination scheme using numerical directional overcurrent relays. IEEE Trans. Ind. Informatics 2019, 15, 64–73. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Alam, M.N.; Das, B.; Pant, V. An interior point method based protection coordination scheme for directional overcurrent relays in meshed networks. Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst. 2016, 81, 153–164. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Energies 12 02297 g001 550
Figure 1. Schematic outline for DOCR coordination in an electrical power network.
Figure 1. Schematic outline for DOCR coordination in an electrical power network.
Energies 12 02297 g001
Energies 12 02297 g002 550
Figure 2. The flowchart of whale optimization algorithm (WOA).
Figure 2. The flowchart of whale optimization algorithm (WOA).
Energies 12 02297 g002
Energies 12 02297 g003 550
Figure 3. The IEEE three-bus system.
Figure 3. The IEEE three-bus system.
Energies 12 02297 g003
Energies 12 02297 g004 550
Figure 4. Convergence characteristic of WOA for Case I.
Figure 4. Convergence characteristic of WOA for Case I.
Energies 12 02297 g004
Energies 12 02297 g005 550
Figure 5. The IEEE eight-bus system.
Figure 5. The IEEE eight-bus system.
Energies 12 02297 g005
Energies 12 02297 g006 550
Figure 6. Convergence characteristic of WOA for case 2.
Figure 6. Convergence characteristic of WOA for case 2.
Energies 12 02297 g006
Energies 12 02297 g007 550
Figure 7. The IEEE nine-bus system.
Figure 7. The IEEE nine-bus system.
Energies 12 02297 g007
Energies 12 02297 g008 550
Figure 8. Convergence characteristic of WOA for Case 3.
Figure 8. Convergence characteristic of WOA for Case 3.
Energies 12 02297 g008
Energies 12 02297 g009 550
Figure 9. Diagram of the IEEE 15-bus system.
Figure 9. Diagram of the IEEE 15-bus system.
Energies 12 02297 g009
Energies 12 02297 g010 550
Figure 10. Convergence characteristic of WOA for Case 4.
Figure 10. Convergence characteristic of WOA for Case 4.
Energies 12 02297 g010
Energies 12 02297 g011 550
Figure 11. Diagram of the IEEE 30-bus system.
Figure 11. Diagram of the IEEE 30-bus system.
Energies 12 02297 g011
Energies 12 02297 g012 550
Figure 12. Convergence characteristic of WOA for Case 5.
Figure 12. Convergence characteristic of WOA for Case 5.
Energies 12 02297 g012
Energies 12 02297 g013 550
Figure 13. Diagram of the IEEE 14-bus system.
Figure 13. Diagram of the IEEE 14-bus system.
Energies 12 02297 g013
Energies 12 02297 g014 550
Figure 14. Convergence characteristic of WOA for the IEEE-14 bus system.
Figure 14. Convergence characteristic of WOA for the IEEE-14 bus system.
Energies 12 02297 g014
Table
Table 1. Proposed setting for the IEEE three-bus system.
Table 1. Proposed setting for the IEEE three-bus system.
Relay No.CTRPickup Tap
1300/55
2200/51.5
3200/55
4300/54
5200/52
6400/52.5
Table
Table 2. Optimal TDS for the IEEE three-bus system.
Table 2. Optimal TDS for the IEEE three-bus system.
Relay No.TDSPS
10.05001.2500
20.05001.2500
30.055531.3837
40.05001.2500
50.07102.4746
60.15872.2163
Total Operating Time (s)1.5262
Table
Table 3. Comparison of the WOA result with the literature for the IEEE three-bus system.
Table 3. Comparison of the WOA result with the literature for the IEEE three-bus system.
MethodObjective Function
TLBO (MOF) [39]6.972
TLBO [39]5.3349
MDE [37]4.7806
Simplex method [29]1.9258
MINLP [28]1.727
Seeker algorithm [28]1.599
PSO method [34]1.9258
BB0-LP [40]1.59871
GSO [47]1.4807
Proposed algorithm1.5262
Table
Table 4. Comparison of total net gain in time achieved by WOA with the methods used in the literature for IEEE three-bus system.
Table 4. Comparison of total net gain in time achieved by WOA with the methods used in the literature for IEEE three-bus system.
Net Gain∑ ∆(t) (s)
WOA/TLBO (MOF)5.4458
WOA/TLBO3.8087
WOA/MDE3.2544
FWOA/SM0.3996
WOA/MINLP0.2008
WOA/SA0.0728
WOA/PSO0.3996
WOA/BBO-LP0.07251
Table
Table 5. Current transformer ratio of the IEEE eight-bus system.
Table 5. Current transformer ratio of the IEEE eight-bus system.
Relay No.CTR
11200/5
21200/5
3800/5
41200/5
51200/5
61200/5
7800/5
81200/5
9800/5
101200/5
111200/5
121200/5
131200/5
14800/5
Table
Table 6. Optimal TDS for the IEEE eight-bus system.
Table 6. Optimal TDS for the IEEE eight-bus system.
Relay No.TDSPS
10.10001.25
20.59291.3746
30.10071.2586
40.10001.25
50.35812.0638
60.24901.5745
70.10181.2726
80.34301.8559
90.10001.25
100.10001.25
110.10041.2548
120.15211.901
130.10001.25
140.10001.25
Total operating time (s)5.9535
Table
Table 7. Comparison of the WOA result with the methods used in the literature for the IEEE eight-bus system.
Table 7. Comparison of the WOA result with the methods used in the literature for the IEEE eight-bus system.
MethodObjective Function
SA [28]8.4270
GA [14]11.001
HGA-LP [14]10.9499
NLP [2]6.4169
LM [2]11.0645
BBO-LP [40]8.75559
MILP [42]8.0061
FA [43]6.6463
MEFO [44]6.349
BSA [41]6.363
Proposed algorithm5.9535
Table
Table 8. Comparison of total net gain in time achieved by WOA with the methods used in the literature for the IEEE eight-bus system.
Table 8. Comparison of total net gain in time achieved by WOA with the methods used in the literature for the IEEE eight-bus system.
Net Gain∑ ∆(t) (s)
WOA/SA2.4735
WOA/GA5.0475
WOA/HGA-LP4.9964
WOA/NLP0.45819
WOA/LP5.111
WOA/BBO-LP2.8020
WOA/FA0.6929
WOA/MEFO0.3955
WOA/BSA0.4095
Table
Table 9. Optimal TDS for the IEEE nine-bus system.
Table 9. Optimal TDS for the IEEE nine-bus system.
Relay No.TDSPS
10.23162.4466
20.10011.5014
30.23772.4650
41.2002.5000
50.14692.2553
60.70592.5000
70.17612.4542
80.56742.4224
91.20002.5000
100.21932.3922
110.69901.8076
120.13681.8399
130.14542.1276
140.14972.5000
150.16322.0901
161.14312.3815
170.26361.6991
180.148752.2135
190.122511.8376
200.186562.4963
210.514791.5402
220.176532.5000
231.20002.5000
240.13031.9311
Total operating time (s)8.3849
Table
Table 10. Comparison of the WOA result with the methods used in the literature for the IEEE-9 bus system.
Table 10. Comparison of the WOA result with the methods used in the literature for the IEEE-9 bus system.
MethodObjective Function
TLBO [45]82.9012
IDE [45]59.6471
MTALBO [45]41.9041
GA [13]32.6058
BBO [40]28.8348
BH [44]25.884
NPL [13]19.4041
PSO [48]13.9742
HS [44]9.838
DE [48]8.6822
Proposed algorithm8.3849
Table
Table 11. Comparison of total net gain in time achieved by the WOA with the methods used in the literature for the IEEE nine-bus system.
Table 11. Comparison of total net gain in time achieved by the WOA with the methods used in the literature for the IEEE nine-bus system.
Net Gain∑ ∆(t) (s)
WOA/TLBO74.5163
WOA/IDE51.2622
WOA/MTALBO33.5192
WOA/GA24.2209
WOA/BBO20.4499
WOA/BH17.4991
WOA/NPL11.0192
WOA/PSO 5.5893
WOA/HS1.4531
WOA/DE0.2973
Table
Table 12. Current transfer ratio for the relay of the IEEE 15-bus system.
Table 12. Current transfer ratio for the relay of the IEEE 15-bus system.
Relay No.CT Ratio
18-20-21-291600/5
2-4-8-11-12-14-15-231200/5
1-3-5-10-13-19-36-37-40-42800/5
6-7-9-16-24-25-26-27-28-31-32-33-35600/5
17-22-30-34-38-39-41400/5
Table
Table 13. Optimal TDS for the IEEE 15-bus system.
Table 13. Optimal TDS for the IEEE 15-bus system.
Relay No.WOARelay No.WOA
TDSPS TDSPS
10.10000.5000220.10390.5195
20.10300.5150230.10100.5049
30.10780.5393240.10000.5000
40.10000.5000250.11390.5695
50.10410.5206260.11010.5504
60.12400.6201271.04142.3668
70.10000.5003280.32601.1297
80.10000.5000290.22490.7461
90.14550.7275300.10000.5000
100.10780.5392310.14830.5000
110.10200.5103320.10560.5280
120.10000.5000330.14870.7438
130.10700.5350340.21230.5689
141.10002.5000350.11520.5759
150.10000.5000360.71401.6790
160.11480.5742370.12450.6229
170.10150.5077380.10661.1121
180.49301.4766390.41130.9377
190.15390.7699400.15150.7576
200.26440.9671410.40330.9166
210.15570.7785420.11050.5195
T o p (s)11.2670
Table
Table 14. Comparison of the WOA result with the methods used in the literature for the IEEE 15-bus system.
Table 14. Comparison of the WOA result with the methods used in the literature for the IEEE 15-bus system.
MethodObjective Function
MTLBO [45]52.5039
SA [28]12.227
MINLP [28]15.335
AP [46]11.6542
GSO [47]13.6542
IGSO [47]12.135
DE [48]11.7591
HS [48]12.6225
MEFO [44]13.953
BSA [41]16.293
Proposed algorithm11.2670
Table
Table 15. Comparison of total net gain in time achieved by the WOA with the methods used in the literature for the IEEE 15-bus system.
Table 15. Comparison of total net gain in time achieved by the WOA with the methods used in the literature for the IEEE 15-bus system.
Net Gain∑ ∆(t) (s)
WOA/TLBO41.2369
WOA/SA0.96
WOA/MINPL4.068
WOA/AP0.3872
WOA/GSO2.3872
WOA/IGSO0.868
WOA/DE0.4921
WOA/HS1.3555
WOA/MEFO2.686
WOA/BSA5.026
Table
Table 16. Primary/backup relay pairs of the IEEE 30-bus system.
Table 16. Primary/backup relay pairs of the IEEE 30-bus system.
Fault ZonePrimary RelayPrimary Relay
L 114, 18, 20
26
L232, 18, 20
45, 8
L 351
63, 8
L 473, 5
810, 36
L 597, 36
1012
L 6119
12-
L 71311
1415
L 81511
1613
L 9172, 4, 20
1824
L 10192, 4, 18
2022
L 112119
2226
L 122317
2428
L 132521
2630
L 142723
2832, 34
L 152925
3031, 33, 38
L 163127, 34
3229, 33, 38
L 173327, 32
3437
L 183529, 31, 38
367, 10
L 193737
3829, 31, 33
L 203935
--
Table
Table 17. Optimal TDS for the IEEE 30-bus system.
Table 17. Optimal TDS for the IEEE 30-bus system.
Relay No.TDSPS
10.11311.6958
20.10001.5000
30.10071.5109
40.10071.5111
50.10001.5000
60.92362.4761
70.10001.5005
80.10001.5000
90.10011.5029
100.10021.5042
110.10761.6149
120.10001.5000
130.10741.6118
141.09332.4849
150.64612.3447
160.85411.9412
170.27371.7453
180.69842.1623
190.10461.5824
200.23282.4762
210.16722.3334
220.11181.6782
230.10031.5000
240.10001.5000
250.10131.5205
260.17572.3145
270.10371.5555
280.21702.3228
290.19902.1887
300.28562.5000
310.35982.0241
320.10491.5747
330.15222.1039
340.10001.5006
350.22422.4661
360.12711.9075
370.17272.4772
380.20071.7111
390.10021.5035
Total operating time (s)15.7139
Table
Table 18. Comparison of the proposed WOA with the methods used in the literature for the IEEE 30-bus system.
Table 18. Comparison of the proposed WOA with the methods used in the literature for the IEEE 30-bus system.
MethodObjective Function
GA [48]28.0195
PSO [48]39.1836
DE [48]17.8122
HS [48]19.2133
SOA [48]33.7734
Proposed Algorithm15.7139
Table
Table 19. Comparison of total net gain in time achieved by the WOA with the methods used in the literature for the IEEE 30-bus system.
Table 19. Comparison of total net gain in time achieved by the WOA with the methods used in the literature for the IEEE 30-bus system.
Net Gain∑ ∆(t) (s)
WOA/GA12.3056
WOA/PSO23.4697
WOA/DE2.0983
WOA/HS3.4994
WOA/SOA18.0595
Table
Table 20. Current transfer ratio for the relay of the IEEE 14-bus system.
Table 20. Current transfer ratio for the relay of the IEEE 14-bus system.
CT RatioRelay No.CT RatioRelay No.
8000/511000/520, 35, 38
5000/529800/516,18
4000/55, 25600/522, 32, 37, 40
3500/53, 14500/517, 26, 34
3000/521400/52, 4, 8, 10, 13, 24
2500/57250/511
2000/512,36,39200/56
1600/59, 19, 23, 27, 3150/528
1200/515, 30, 33--
Table
Table 21. Optimal TDS for the IEEE 14-bus system.
Table 21. Optimal TDS for the IEEE 14-bus system.
Relay No.TDSPS
10.10000.5000
20.10000.5000
31.02271.9967
40.10000.5000
51.10002.0000
61.07031.9461
70.10000.5000
80.10100.5048
90.13160.6582
100.24191.1192
110.10970.5486
120.11540.5773
130.10000.5000
141.09681.9941
150.11460.5731
160.11070.5539
170.10000.5001
180.50581.9887
191.05511.9185
200.11450.5727
210.24391.2169
220.13790.6897
230.28960.5218
240.29231.4617
250.30491.7079
261.10002.0000
270.10140.5071
280.10210.5108
290.10000.5000
300.81581.9280
311.01751.9850
321.07211.9508
330.12780.6390
340.12640.6324
350.16200.8101
361.05571.9810
370.17100.8283
380.27210.5000
390.96861.7611
400.130370.6518
Total operating time (s)9.9105
Table
Table 22. Comparison of the proposed WOA with the methods used in the literature for the IEEE 14-bus system.
Table 22. Comparison of the proposed WOA with the methods used in the literature for the IEEE 14-bus system.
MethodObjective Function
HGA-LP [42]13.4914
MILP [42]13.1411
MECPSO [49]12.919
MAPSO [49]14.126
Proposed Algorithm9.9105
Table
Table 23. Comparison of total net gain in time achieved by the WOA with the methods used in the literature for the IEEE 14-bus system.
Table 23. Comparison of total net gain in time achieved by the WOA with the methods used in the literature for the IEEE 14-bus system.
Net Gain∑ ∆(t) (s)
WOA/HGA-LP3.5812
WOA/MILP3.2306
WOA/MECPSO3.0085
WOA/MAPSO4.2155

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Wadood, A.; Khurshaid, T.; Farkoush, S.G.; Yu, J.; Kim, C.-H.; Rhee, S.-B. Nature-Inspired Whale Optimization Algorithm for Optimal Coordination of Directional Overcurrent Relays in Power Systems. Energies 2019, 12, 2297. https://doi.org/10.3390/en12122297

AMA Style

Wadood A, Khurshaid T, Farkoush SG, Yu J, Kim C-H, Rhee S-B. Nature-Inspired Whale Optimization Algorithm for Optimal Coordination of Directional Overcurrent Relays in Power Systems. Energies. 2019; 12(12):2297. https://doi.org/10.3390/en12122297

Chicago/Turabian Style

Wadood, Abdul, Tahir Khurshaid, Saeid Gholami Farkoush, Jiangtao Yu, Chang-Hwan Kim, and Sang-Bong Rhee. 2019. "Nature-Inspired Whale Optimization Algorithm for Optimal Coordination of Directional Overcurrent Relays in Power Systems" Energies 12, no. 12: 2297. https://doi.org/10.3390/en12122297

APA Style

Wadood, A., Khurshaid, T., Farkoush, S. G., Yu, J., Kim, C.-H., & Rhee, S.-B. (2019). Nature-Inspired Whale Optimization Algorithm for Optimal Coordination of Directional Overcurrent Relays in Power Systems. Energies, 12(12), 2297. https://doi.org/10.3390/en12122297

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop