Analysing the Degree of Meshing in Medium Voltage Target Grids - An Automated
Technical and Economical Impact Assessment
Leon Thurnera,d , Alexander Scheidlerb,d , Alexander Probstc , Martin Brauna,b
b Fraunhofer

a University of Kassel, Germany
Institute for Wind Energy and Energy System Technology, Kassel, Germany
c Netze BW GmbH, Stuttgart, Germany
d contributed equally

arXiv:1802.01492v1 [cs.CE] 5 Feb 2018

Abstract
There are different medium voltage (MV) grid concepts with regard to mode of operation and protection system layout.
The increasing installation of distributed generation (DG) raises the question if the currently used concepts are still
optimal for future power systems. We present a methodology that allows the automated calculation and comparison of
target grids within different concepts. Specifically, we consider radial grids, closed ring grids and grids with switching
stations. A target grid structure is optimized for each of those grid concepts based on geographical information. To
model a realistic planning process, compliance with technical constraints for normal operation, contingency behaviour
and reliability figures are ensured in all grid concepts. We present a multiphase approach to solve the optimization
problem based on an iterated local search meta-heuristic. We then economically compare the grids with regards to
investment and operational cost for primary and secondary equipment, to analyse which concept leads to the most
overall cost-efficient target grids. Since the methodology allows an automated evaluation of a large number of grids,
it can be used to draw general conclusions about the cost-efficiency of specific concepts. The methodology is applied
to 44 real MV grids spanning about 4800 km of lines, for which the results show that a radial grid structure is overall
cost effective compared to grid topologies with switching stations or closed rings even in grid areas with a large DG
penetration. The contribution of this paper is threefold: first, a comprehensive methodology to compile automated target
grid plans under realistic premises is presented. Second, the practical applicability of the approach is demonstrated by
its application in a large scale case study with a high degree of automation. And third, the results of the case study
allow to draw conclusions about the techno-economical differences of different MV grid concepts.
Keywords: grid planning, distribution systems, expansion planning, reliability, meshing, switching stations, single
contingency policy, radial grid, mode of operation, distributed generation, optimal planning

1. Introduction
The increasing installation of distributed generation
(DG) in electric distribution systems leads to a gradual
transformation from a centralized to a decentralized power
generation. This paradigm shift presents a significant challenge for distribution system operators (DSO), especially
in medium voltage (MV) and low voltage (LV) grids. For
example, the German DSO Netze BW GmbH expects necessary investment costs between 1.5 and 1.9 billion Euros
to integrate additional DG units between the years 2012
and 2030 [1].
1.1. DG Integration and Increased Degree of Meshing
Several improvements in grid operation have been considered to reduce grid integration costs, such as controllable MV/LV substations, innovative HV/MV transformer
control or intelligent curtailment of DG feed-in [1]. It has
also been suggested that an increased degree of meshing
in the MV grid can facilitate the integration of DG by

improving the operational behaviour of the grid [2, 3, 4],
which could decrease the need for additional grid extension. But closed ring systems also require a more sophisticated protection system layout than open ring systems
[5, 6], which leads to additional costs. So while meshing
can be a technical solution for DG integration, the question arises if it is also economically feasible. It is therefore
necessary to study not only the qualitative effect of additional integration of DG by closed ring structures, but
to quantify the benefits in terms of saved grid extension
and compare them to the additional costs for a more sophisticated protection system layout. Because of the high
diversity of distribution grids, it is difficult to draw substantiated conclusions from exemplary case studies. For
statistically relevant results, a grid study has to be based
on the evaluation of a large number of grids. This can only
be achieved with a high degree of automation [7].

Preprint submitted to International Journal of Electrical Power & Energy Systems

February 6, 2018

1.2. Automated Comparison of Grid Concepts
In this paper we introduce a methodology that allows
the automated comparison of different grid concepts for
future power systems. We consider the current grid structure as well as the expected changes in future power systems, such as increasing installation of DG and increasing
share of underground cables. We then derive three different possible future grid structures following the three
different grid concepts: radial grid without switching station, radial grid with switching station and closed ring
grid. To ensure that all grids have equivalent technical
capabilities, all grids have to comply with the same technical constraints. These include constraints on voltage and
line loading in normal operation and in contingency operation as well constraints that limit the outage times in the
grid. The different grid plans are then compared with regard to their cost for primary and secondary equipment.
This methodology is applied to 44 real MV grid areas that
span about 4800 km of lines to reach a sound conclusion
about the technical and economic feasibility of each grid
concept. The presented approach takes the existing grid
infrastructure as well as a prognosis for the future development of the grid into account. The results allow to draw
conclusions about strategic decisions in grid planning and
adaptation of planning principles.

Figure 1: Basic structural MV grid elements: a. open ring, b. closed
ring, c. switching station ring.

Radial grid. A radial grid is built exclusively out of open
ring structures as shown in Figure 1 a. The radial structure ensures that short-circuit currents are always unidirectional, which makes fault detection and location easier than in grid structures with closed rings. We therefore consider a simple protection system layout with overcurrent protection systems at HV/MV substations (primary substations) for fault cut-off and non-directed shortcircuit indicators at the MV/LV substations (secondary
substations) for fault location in this concept.
Closed Ring grid. A closed ring grid has the same structure as a radial grid, only that some of the rings are operated as closed rings as shown in Figure 1 b. Since this
allows bi-directional short-circuit currents, the protection
system needs to be more sophisticated than in the open
ring case. We therefore assume an impedance protection
system in the primary substations and directional shortcircuit indicators in the secondary substations.

1.3. Overview

Switching Station grid. The switching station concept is a
radial grid concept with additional MV substations placed
in load or generation centres to stabilize the grid. Switching stations are MV substations with over-current protection devices that allow parallel operation of cables (see
Figure 1 c.). Apart from the additional protection system
in the MV substations, the protection system layout is
the same as in a radial grid. Using switching stations can
be seen as a way to allow closed rings in the grid without
changing the overall protection system layout by installing
additional circuit breakers in the MV grid.

The paper is organized as follows: Section 2 defines the
three grid concepts that are considered in this study and
Section 3 gives an overview of the overall methodology that
is used to replace switching stations. Section 4 introduces
the grid data used in the case study and the scenario for
future power systems which is applied. Section 5 describes
the optimization problem and its solution with heuristic
random search algorithms in general. Section 6 outlines
the specific multi-phase target grid optimization approach
in detail. Finally, the results of applying the methodology
to all grids are presented and interpreted in Section 7.
Section 8 gives a summary and an outlook of how the
presented methodology can be used in future studies.

3. Methodology for Replacing Switching Stations
We use the existing switching stations as starting point
for the analysis and optimize the respective area for the
three concepts. We assume that the switching station will
have to be renewed within the planning horizon, so that a
replacement investment will be necessary if the switching
station topology is maintained. The question then arises,
if it is more economical to avoid this replacement investment by changing the grid concept to a strictly radial or
a closed ring grid structure. Founding new switching stations in grid areas that are currently radial is out of the
scope of this paper. An example for the methodology
can be seen in Figure 2, where a current grid structure
with switching station is shown on the left. The grid area
around the switching station is now dismantled with respect to the planning horizon of the year 2030 (Figure 2,

2. Grid Concepts
Grid layout and protection system layout have to be
inter-coordinated to guarantee a safe grid operation [8].
For the grid layout, we consider three basic structural elements: open line rings, closed line rings and ring structures
with switching stations (see Figure 1). A grid concept is
then defined as the combination of these elements with an
appropriate protection system layout.
Every DSO defines its grid concept depending on individual requirements and boundary conditions. For this
study, we consider three different MV grid concepts:
2

Current Network Configuration
(with Switching Station)

Radial Target Network 2030
(with Switching Station)

Dismantled Network 2030
(with Switching Station)

Radial Target Network 2030
(without Switching Station)
Dismantled Network 2030
(without Switching Station
& Supply Lines)

Closed Ring Target Network 2030
(without Switching Station)

Primary Substation

Secondary Substation

Long Line

Switching Station

Automated Station

Supply Line

Closed Ring

Figure 2: Overview of target grid optimization methodology: the current grid structure (left) is dismantled with and without switching station
with assumptions for the grid state in 2030 (middle) and then target grids for switching station, open ring and closed ring grid concept is
optimized (right)

middle). Since asset data of the lines was not available,
the dismantling is based on the importance of the line for
the grid topology. Short lines which connect two secondary
substations will be necessary in any grid to ensure the supply of all stations. Longer supply lines however might be
replaced by different cable routes depending on the chosen concept. We therefore remove all long lines, which are
defined as lines with a length of over 2 km for this case
study. The methodology works the same with other criteria for which lines should be removed, for example by
installation date or standard type if this data is available.
To develop an alternative radial grid structure, we create
a second dismantled grid where the switching station with
all of its supply lines is removed in addition (Figure 2,
middle). From these two topologies, we then generate target grids for open ring, closed ring and switching stations
concepts as shown in Figure 2 on the right. The optimization process that is used to create these grids is outlined
in detail in Section 6.

level through 51 HV/MV transformers. The grids cover
a total of about 4800 km of lines and service loads with
about 770 MVA and DG with about 750 MVA installed
power (see Table 1). The grids are all located in southern
Germany and operated by the DSO Netze BW GmbH. All
MV grids are currently operated as an open ring grid with
switching stations in load or generation centres. There are
a total of 49 switching stations in the grid data. The grid
area around each switching station is taken as a starting
point for the analysis as outlined in Section 3. We model
the situation for the planning horizon of 2030 by applying a load prognosis as well as installing additional DG
based on a prognosis for the expected expansion of phoGrid
Group
1
2
3
4
5
Total

4. Grid Data and Scenario
In this paper we study 5 MV grid groups at the 20 kV
voltage level which are connected to the 110 kV voltage

HV/MV
Transf.
15
8
8
12
8
51

Switching
Stations
16
8
8
7
10
49

Load
[MVA]
249
87
151
169
117
773

DG
[MVA]
183
275
231
28
34
751

Table 1: Parameters of considered grid groups

3

Lines
[km]
1363
907
1329
655
525
4779

Grid Component
Cable NA2XS2Y 3x1x300
MV switching station
Communication link
Directed short-circuit indicator (update)
Impedance protection (update)

tovoltaic systems (PV) and wind power plants [1]. Table
1 shows that the load remains predominant in some grids
while in others DG clearly dominates. The set of grid
groups was chosen in order to form a good representation of the expected situation in 2030. The DSOs internal
planning principles dictate that new line trails are always
built as underground cables. We therefore assume that all
new lines are built as cables and overhead lines will be replaced by underground cables until the planning horizon
in 2030. The grid is modelled and analysed in the open
source power system analysis tool pandapower [9].

Annual Cost
7,000 e/km
35,900 e
1,200 e
30 e/Station
400 e/Feeder

Table 2: Annual costs of elements considered in this study

5.3. Cost Assumptions
Different measures, such as cables or communication
links, differ in operational costs, investment costs and life
expectancy. To make the costs of these measures comparable, we chose the Net Equivalent Uniform Annual Cost
[10] as a measure of cost for all grid elements. The annual
costs Cpa are equal to the sum of annual operational costs
Cop,pa [EU R/a] and annual investment costs Cinv,pa [EU R/a]:

5. Heuristic Grid Optimization
The goal of this paper is to economically compare different grid concepts taking into account the currently existing grid structure. Figure 2 shows an example of such a
topology optimization. This section outlines, how the optimization problem is formulated and solved with a heuristic
random search algorithm.

Cpa = Cop,pa + Cinv,pa

(1)

While operational costs are usually already given as yearly
costs, investment costs are typically given as total costs
Cinv,total [EU R]. The annual investment costs can be calculated by discounting the total investment costs with the
calculation interest rate i [%] over the life expectancy m [a]
of the component:

5.1. Technical Constraints
An economic comparison is only valid if the compared
grids are equivalent with respect to their technical capabilities. To ensure all grids meet the technical requirements, we introduce constraints regarding grid topology,
operational behaviour in normal operation, operational behaviour in contingency operation and outage times. The
goal of the optimization is then to find a grid that complies with all these constraints at the minimal possible
costs. Which constraints are applied in the different optimization phases is explained in detail in Section 6.

Cinv,pa = Cinv,total ·

(1 + i/100)m · i/100
(1 + i/100)m − 1

(2)

The cost assumptions used for all relevant components in
this study are depicted in Table 2. The cable costs are
assumed to be constant per kilometre for both adding new
lines an replacing existing lines. This is because the main
cost factor is the excavator work, which has to be carried out when replacing an existing line as well as when
laying a new cable. The full switching station costs are
assumed even if the switching station already exists in the
current grid, in accordance with the strategic viewpoint of
expected renewal outlined in Section 3.

5.2. Measures
To generate realistic grid structures, all options that a
grid planner has in the planning process have to be considered as degrees of freedom in the optimization. In this
study, we consider the following measures:
• Replacing existing overhead lines with cables
• Replacing existing cables with cables of higher diameter

5.4. Heuristic Solution

• Optimizing the position of normally open switches
(sectioning points)

We formulate the DEP as a combinatorial optimization
problem with non-linear constraints. Given a fixed number of possible measures, the goal is to find the cheapest
subset of these measures that fulfils all constraints. It
is not considered feasible to formulate this optimization
problem in a closed form and solve it analytically. Instead,
heuristic algorithms such as genetic algorithms [11, 12, 13],
evolutionary algorithms [14], tabu search [15, 16], particle
swarm optimization [17, 18] or artificial immune systems
[19] are popular methods for its solution. Most of these
studies assume the radial structure of the grid as a constraint [20, 11, 15, 21, 16, 13, 12, 18] and are therefore not
designed to optimize and compare grids in other grid concepts. The approach described in [7] is however flexible
enough to handle the heuristic optimization with varying

• Adding cables in parallel to existing line trails
• Adding cables in new line trails
• Equipping secondary substations with communication
links to improve reliability
• Removing or renewing switching stations
Each of the possible measures can either be applied or not
applied, which leads to the formulation of the Distribution system Expansion Problem (DEP) as a combinatorial
optimization problem [7]. The details of the different measure and at what point in the optimization process they
are deployed is explained in detail in Section 6.
4

Current Grid
Preparation and
Dismantling
With
Switching
Station

Without
Switching
Station

Secondary Substation

1a

1...m
Topology
Optimization

1b

Topology
Optimization

2a

Reconfiguration
Reinforcement

2b

Reconfiguration
Reinforcement

3a

Automation for
Reliability
Switching
Station
Network

5

1...m

3b

Line

Primary Substation
Supply Line

Switching Station

New Line

Figure 4: Considered new line trails in the example grid area

6.1.1. Topological Constraints
Topological constraints specify requirements for the
topological structure of the grid without taking electric
parameters into account. They can be analysed with
graph searches using the pandapower topology package [9].
Which topological constraints are relevant depend on the
grid concept and protection system layout. Here, we assume the following constraints:

4
Automation for
Reliability

Meshing

Radial
Network

Closed Ring
Network

Cost Comparison

Supply connection. All secondary substations have to be
connected to an HV/MV substation to be supplied. This
means there has to be at least one path from each station
to an external grid connection.

Figure 3: Methodology for the calculation and comparison of the
three grid structures

measures and constraints, so that a study of different grid
concepts is possible. The DEP is solved using an Iterated Local Search (ILS) algorithm with Hill Climbing as
local search. This paper concentrates on the application
of the optimization framework to the specific questions of
structural optimization in different grid concepts. Detailed
information on the formulation of the optimization problem, codification of measures, definition of the step-wise
cost function and neighbourhood function can be found in
[7] and [22].

Contingency supply. All secondary substations must have
a second connection for resupply in case of a single contingency, which is provided by ring structures in the grid.
Secondary substations which are located on stubs and
therefore do not have a contingency connection in the current configuration are exempted from this rule. Note that
this constraint only guarantees the topological possibility
of a resupply, operational constraints in the contingency
state are addressed in section 6.2.2.
Radiality. The grid has to be radial, in that no feeders
can be galvanically connected through closed rings in the
MV grid. Rings are only permitted if they go through
a switching station. Closed ring structures as shown in
Figure 1 b. are note permitted, as they will be investigated
separately in phase 4 (see Section 6.4).

6. Multiphase Target Grid Optimization
Because of the complexity of the combinatorial optimization problem, it is not feasible to optimize sectioning
points, new line trails, line replacement, parallel lines and
secondary substation automation all in one optimization.
We therefore split the problem into several sub-problems
that are solved subsequently. An overview of the multiphase optimization process that is used to find grid structures for the three concepts starting from the current grid
configuration is shown in Figure 3. Each phase is explained
in this section with the help of the example grid area shown
in Figure 2.

6.1.2. Line Trail Optimization
To construct grid structures that comply with the constraints outlined above from a dismantled grid, new lines
are added between two secondary substations which are
not currently connected. The length of a new line is calculated as the air-line distance between the stations multiplied with a factor of 1.5. The costs per kilometre line
are given in Table 2. We find possible new line trails to
complete the grid with a Delaunay-triangulation [23] between all stations from which a line was removed. The
considered line trails in the example grid are shown in
the example in Figure 4 for the layout with and without
switching station. Since there are a lot of possible combinations and the topologies cannot be easily compared, we

6.1. Phase 1: Topology Optimization
A valid grid has to comply with several constraints regarding its structural layout. In the first step, we therefore
optimize the topology of the grid.
5

Scaling Load
Scaling DG (PV)
Scaling DG (Wind)
Transformer Setpoint

Peak Load
1.0
0.0
0.0
1.0 pu

Peak Generation
0.3
0.8
1.0
1.05 pu
Figure 5: Resupply switching sequence for a line fault in an open
ring: a. normal operation, b. line fault with protection trip, c. fault
isolation, d. resupply

Table 3: Definition of worst-case scenarios

consider several different solutions. Specifically, we create
50 different topologies for each grid area. Figure 6 shows
three of the 50 topologies for the example grid area. All
steps that are explained in the following are conducted 50
times per studied grid area.

scenario, since the whole ring has to be supplied through
only one feeder. A typical switching sequence for a line
outage in a radial grid is shown in Figure 5. When a line
fails, the circuit breaker in the primary substation opens to
disrupt the short-circuit current, and thereby cuts the affected half ring from power supply (Figure 5 b.). After the
fault is located, it is isolated by manually opening the loadbreak switches at the secondary substations connected to
the faulted line segment (Figure 5 c.). Finally, the circuit
breaker in the primary substation as well as the sectioning point are closed to allow a resupply of all stations on
the ring (Figure 5 d.). This switching sequence is automatically carried out for all feeders using the pandapower
topology package to find a resupplied state. Compliance
with contingency constraints is checked with a power flow
in the resupplied state. The constraints are checked for the
peak load case as defined in Table 3. The peak generation
scenario is not checked in contingency situations because
DG are not considered to be subject to the SCP.

6.2. Phase 2: Reconfiguration and Reinforcement
After the first optimization step, the grids comply with
topological constraints, so that all stations are supplied
and the grid is radial. In the second optimization step, it
is ensured that the electric parameters of the grids comply
with the grid planning principles. This is achieved by grid
reconfiguration and reinforcement.
6.2.1. Normal Operation Constraints
Constraints for equipment loading and bus voltages have
to be complied with in every possible load or generation
scenario. We therefore define two worst-case scenarios for
the peak load and peak generation situation. The simultaneous factors used to generate the worst case scenarios
can be seen in Table 3. The scaling factors for the loads
refer to the drag pointer measurements at the secondary
substations and to the installed power of DG. Since we
assume V(P) transformer control, the voltage set point for
the transformer voltage controller depends on the active
power flow and is therefore different in the two worst-case
scenarios. Adherence with the power flow constraints in
normal operation is checked with one power flow for each
worst-case scenario using pandapower [9]. In both cases,
all bus voltages have to be within the voltage band defined
by the DSO and the line loadings have to be below 100 %.

6.2.3. Optimization of Operational Behaviour
We consider switching and cable measures to improve
the electric parameters in a grid structure and ensure compliance with constraints for normal and contingency operation.
Sectioning Point Optimization. In a radial grid structure,
sectioning points are necessary to fulfill the topological
constraints, specifically to avoid direct galvanic connection of feeders or transformers. Sectioning points can be
relocated to improve the operational behaviour of the grid.
The heuristic optimization aims to find a switching state
which minimizes the voltage and line loading violations
while still complying with all topological constraints. Details about the used composite objective function are described in [22].

6.2.2. Constraints in Contingency Operation
The Single Contingency Policy (SCP) dictates, that the
power system must continue functioning after the outage
of one power system element. The topological contingency
constraint ensures that a resupply is possible after the failure of a line through a backup connection (see Section
6.1.1). However, it also has to be ensured that the grid
operates safely in the resupplied state. Specifically, the
bus voltages have to be within the contingency voltage
band (which is usually broader than the voltage band for
normal operation) and the line loadings have still to be
below 100 %.
To check this constraint, we calculate a resupply scenario for each feeder line directly connected to transformer
or switching station. A fault of such a line is the worst case

Cable Measures. Existing line segments can be replaced by
a new cable with higher ampacity, to mitigate line overloading, or with a lower impedance, to mitigate voltage
problems. If line replacement is not enough to mitigate
all constraint violations, additional lines can be added to
the grid in parallel to existing line routes. Parallel lines
can only be connected to secondary substations and the
radiality constraints have to be respected.
Constraint violations are first mitigated through sectioning point optimization, since opening and closing
switches is not associated with costs. If not all constraint
6

failure rates of the components are taken from statistical
analysis where it is given as a function of the line type
and, in case of underground cables, the insulation material. The effect of a line failure can be calculated from
the resupply switching sequence as shown in Figure 5. By
assuming time constants for fault location, on-site switching and remote switching, we calculate the outage time for
each of the m stations in the case of a failure of each of
the n lines in the grid. By weighting the calculated outage time with the yearly failure rate, we get the expected
yearly outage time tout,i [h/a] for a station i:
tout,i =

n
X

hk · tout,ki

(3)

k=0

where hk [1/a] is the yearly failure rate of line k and
tout,ik [h] is the outage time for station i after a failure
of line k. The yearly outage energy Eout,i [kW h/a] for a
station i can then be calculated with the installed power
Pk as:
Eout,i = Pk · tout,i

Secondary Substation
Primary Substation

(4)

The ASIDI of the whole grid is then defined as the sum of
all the outage energy in all m stations in relation to the
total installed power:
Pm
i=0 Eout,i
(5)
ASIDI = P
m
i=0 Pi

Figure 6: Necessary reinforcement for the three example grids with
and without switching station

violations can be mitigated through reconfiguration, the
grid has to be reinforced with additional cable measures
until all violations are mitigated.
The necessary reinforcement for the three example grids
can be seen in Figure 6. It can be seen that there is overall
less need for reinforcement in the switching station grid,
since the switching station serves as a junction that stabilizes the grid.

To prevent any decline in service reliability, we define
the following reliability constraints:
System wide Criterion. To assure that the target grid
topologies are at least as reliable as the current grid, the
ASIDI of the grid must not increase compared to the current grid.

After the second optimization step, all grids comply with
topological constraints as well as operational constraints
for normal and contingency operation. To ensure that the
grids are also sufficiently reliable, the grid is equipped with
communication links to speed up resupply and reduce outage times if necessary.

Station Criterion. To assure that no individual station
suffers a great setback in service reliability compared to
the current grid, the expected outage energy for each station is limited to an allowed maximum of Eout,max . For
stations that already violate this constraint in current grid
configuration, no further increase of the outage energy is
allowed. In this case study, we use a maximum outage
energy of Eout,max = 150 kWh/a.

6.3.1. Reliability Constraints
The SCP demands that the grid complies with the operational constraints in the resupplied state. It does however
not draw any conclusion about the frequency of fault occurrences in the grid or about which secondary substations
will experience outages for how long. In this optimization
step, it is ensured that the grid structure is sufficiently
reliable with respect to outage frequency and restoration
times. The service reliability can be measured in reliability
figures, the most prominent of which is the Expected Average System Interruption Duration Index (ASIDI), which
can be computed with a Failure mode and effects analysis
(FMEA) [24]. The FMEA takes into account the failure
rates of components as well as the effect of the failure. The

6.3.2. Automating Resupply
Secondary substations can be equipped with a communication link to allow remote controllable switching of the
sectioning point. This measure accelerates the fault isolation and resupply process, so that it can be used to improve the service reliability. If there are violations of the
reliability constraints in a feeder, the secondary substation
in the load centre of the feeder is chosen for automation.
This results in a partitioning, which confines the spread
of the fault area and speeds up the resupply process. secondary substations are repeatedly selected until all constraints are met. The resulting grids now comply with all
planning constraints and are used as the reference grid for
the radial and switching station grid respectively.

6.3. Phase 3: Automation for Reliability

7

122.1

101.3

Closed Ring

Cost [Thousand EUR / Year]

100

Switching Station

Network Concept

Radial Network

120

Cabling
Switching
Station
Secondary
Equipment
0

50

100
Cost [Thousand EUR /Year]

150

200

90.7
80

60

40

20

0

Radial
Network

Closed
Rings

Switching
Station

Figure 7: Cost comparison for example grid area: costs for all 50 separately optimized grids (left) and cost minimal reference grid (right) for
each concept

solution, since the additional cost for secondary equipment
is greater than the cost savings in grid reinforcement. We
therefore conclude, that the best concept for the example
grid area is a radial grid without a switching station.

6.4. Phase 4: Meshing
In a last step, we construct a closed ring structure from
the radial grid. Closed rings are only allowed with a more
sophisticated protection system as detailed in Section 2.
The costs for updating the protection system are considered as per Table 2. In return, the meshing constraint
is now relaxed so that the meshing of two feeders is allowed even without a switching station. The Iterated Local Search meta-heuristic is used to create a closed ring
solution from each of the fifty valid radial topologies. As
explained in Section 2, closing sectioning points leads to a
decrease in service reliability, so that compliance with the
reliability constraints cannot be guaranteed after sectioning points are closed. We therefore demand that for every
sectioning point that is closed, the associated secondary
substations has to be automated. Since the open sectioning point is replaced with an automated sectioning point,
the grid is considered at least as reliable as the radial grid.
The optimization creates fifty closed ring grids for each
grid area and the cost minimal grid is chosen as the reference grid for the closed ring concept.

7. Results
The methodology outlined in Section 6 for one grid area
is applied to all switching stations in the case study grid.
Of the 49 switching stations, 5 where dismissed due to
faulty or inconsistent data. The methodology described in
Section 6 is applied to all remaining 44 switching station
grid areas. As 50 topologies are calculated for all the three
network concepts in each of the 44 grid areas, a total of
3 · 50 · 44 = 6600 independent network plans are compiled
for this study. To provide enough computational power,
calculations were carried out on a computation cluster and
over 840 million power flows were conducted to obtain the
results. The results are now interpreted to draw a conclusion about the overall cost efficiency of the different MV
grid concepts.

6.5. Phase 5: Cost Comparison

7.1. Switching Stations

We have constructed fifty grids for each of the three
meshing concepts which all fulfil the planning constraints,
but differ in their structure and therefore in their total
costs. Figure 7, shows the costs of the fifty topologies for
each grid concept on the left. We select the cost minimal
grid for each concept as the reference grid. These three
grids are then compared to draw a conclusion about the
differences of the three concepts. This comparison is shown
for the example area in Figure 7 on the right. We can
see, that the best open ring grid is cheaper than the best
switching station solution for the example grid by around
31,400 e per year. We can also see, that the best closed
ring solution is more expensive than the best open ring

We compare radial and switching station grids to evaluate the profitability of switching stations. The switching
station improves reliability because of the included protection systems as well as the operational behaviour by allowing closed line rings. On the other hand, the costs for
the switching station are equivalent to over 5 km of cable
and it needs additional supply lines to create a junction
in the grid. The comparison in Figure 8 shows, that the
radial grid is more cost efficient in all 44 analysed cases.
This means that none of the switching stations are able to
save enough grid reinforcement for it to be cost-efficient.
Reliability only seems to be a minor impact factor, since
compliance with the reliability constraints can be achieved
8

are outweighed by the costs for the switching station itself and the necessary supply lines. We therefore conclude
that it is more cost-efficient to develop the grid towards
a radial structure in the long run, avoiding replacement
investments for switching stations that have reached the
end of their life cycle. The closed ring concept is only cost
effective in few grid areas, where the expected savings are
small compared to the additional cost in other grid areas.
We therefore conclude, that the radial grid in combination with selective automation of secondary substations is
the most cost efficient mode of operation for the analysed
grids. The contributions of this paper can be summarized
as follows:

1. Automated target grid planning: the methodology
presented in this paper allows to automatically compile target grid plans based on geographical information and a wide range of technical constraints. This
includes constraints for grid topology, normal operation power flow parameters, contingency operation
power flow parameters and service reliability.

Figure 8: Cost difference between switching station and radial grid
for all 44 grid areas (GA)

with 2.4 automated stations on average, which is the cost
equivalent of 0.4 km of cable.
We therefore conclude, that a radial grid with automated secondary substations is preferable to a structure
with switching stations. The radial grid structure with secondary substation automation is equivalent to the switching station grid in relation to grid operation and service
reliability, but comes with significantly lower investment
and maintenance costs.

2. Proof of concept: the successful application of the approach to 44 grid areas with about 4800 km of lines
demonstrates the practical applicability of the approach. The high degree of automation makes the
approach feasible for large-scale grid studies as well
as for grid planning assistance systems.
3. Comparison of grid concepts: The results of the case
study allow to draw conclusions about the technoeconomical differences of different MV grid concepts.
A higher degree of meshing for the integration of DG
was not found to be cost-efficient, as the additional
costs for secondary equipment outweighed the cost
savings in network reinforcement.

7.2. Closed Rings
We now compare the closed ring grids with the open
ring grids to evaluate the profitability of a closed ring concept. The comparison for all 44 cases is shown in Figure
9. In five grid areas, the closed ring solution is economical (green). In ten grids, the costs for the upgrade of
the protection and fault location systems exceed the savings in grid reinforcement (orange). In the remaining 29
grids, closed rings do not lead to any savings in grid reinforcement and are therefore not cost-efficient (red). In
conclusion, closed rings are only cost-efficient in very few
grids, and even in those grids the saving potential with less
than 4,000 e per year in average is not very high. Since
the DSO usually aims to have the same grid concept in all
MV grids to allow harmonized procedures in grid planning
and operation, the radial structure is more cost effective
than the closed ring structure for the overall grid.

It should be noted that the conclusion about the grid concepts are only valid for the considered grids and under the
considered boundary conditions. Even though the grids
where chosen with the aim to include structurally different
grids, a generalization for other grid groups is not easily
possible. The boundary conditions with regard to protection system layout, spatial distribution of loads and DG
or ratio of underground cables and overhead lines might
differ significantly in other grids, especially of a different
DSO. While meshed operation for the integration of DG
could still be cost-efficient in other grids, our study does
not confirm the assumption that meshing is always better
for integration of DG. Instead, a comprehensive consideration of expected grid extension cost and protection system
layout is necessary to determine the best mode of operation for the future power system. The approach could be
further extended in the future to include transformation
paths from the current power system to a future target
grid or probabilistic scenarios for DG installation.

8. Conclusion
In this study we economically compare target grids for
radial, closed ring and switching station grids to come to
a conclusion about the optimal grid concept in 44 real
MV grid areas for a planning horizon in 2030. The results
show, that switching stations are economically inefficient
under the assumed constraints, since the technical benefits
9

GA 01
GA 02
GA 03
GA 04
GA 05
GA 06
GA 08
GA 07
GA 09
GA 10
GA 11
GA 12
GA 13
GA 14
GA 15
GA 16
GA 17
GA 18
GA 19
GA 20
GA 21
GA 22
GA 23
GA 24
GA 25
GA 26
GA 27
GA 28
GA 29
GA 30
GA 31
GA 32
GA 33
GA 34
GA 35
GA 36
GA 37
GA 38
GA 39
GA 40
GA 41
GA 42
GA 43
GA 44

Figure 9: Cost difference between closed ring and radial grid for all 44 grid areas (GA)

Acknowledgement

[7] A. Scheidler, L. Thurner, M. Braun, Automated distribution
system planning for large-scale network integration studies, IET
Renewable Power Generation (submitted)Preprint.
URL https://arxiv.org/abs/1711.03331
[8] J. Schlabbach, K.-H. Rofalski, Power System Engineering:
Planning, Design, and Operation of Power Systems and Equipment, Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, 2008.
[9] L. Thurner, A. Scheidler, F. Schäfer, J.-H. Menke, J. Dollichon,
F. Meier, S. Meinecke, M. Braun, pandapower - an Open Source
Python Tool for Convenient Modeling, Analysis and Optimization of Electric Power Systems, preprint (2017).
URL https://arxiv.org/abs/1709.06743
[10] H. Seifi, M. S. Sepasian, Electric Power System Planning - Issues, Algorithms and Solutions, Springer, 2011.
[11] V. Camargo, M. Lavorato, R. Romero, Specialized genetic algorithm to solve the electrical distribution system expansion
planning, in: 2013 IEEE Power Energy Society General Meeting, 2013, pp. 1–5. doi:10.1109/PESMG.2013.6672615.
[12] V. Miranda, J. V. Ranito, L. M. Proenca, Genetic algorithms in
optimal multistage distribution network planning, IEEE Transactions on Power Systems 9 (4) (1994) 1927–1933. doi:10.1109/
59.331452.
[13] H. Falaghi, C. Singh, M.-R. Haghifam, M. Ramezani, Dg integrated multistage distribution system expansion planning,
International Journal of Electrical Power & Energy Systems
33 (8) (2011) 1489 – 1497. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.ijepes.2011.06.031.
[14] Z. Zmijarević, M. Skok, H. Keko, D. Škrlec, S. Krajcar, N. LangKosić, G. S. čki, A comprehensive methodology for long-term
planning of distribution networks with intrinsic contingency
support, in: 18th International Conference and Exhibition on
Electricity Distribution, CIRED, Turin, Italy, 2005, pp. 1–5.
doi:10.1049/cp:20051353.
[15] A. M. Cossi, L. G. W. D. Silva, R. A. R. Lazaro, J. R. S.
Mantovani, Primary power distribution systems planning taking into account reliability, operation and expansion costs, IET
Generation, Transmission Distribution 6 (3) (2012) 274–284.
doi:10.1049/iet-gtd.2010.0666.

This work was supported by the German Federal Ministry for Economic Affairs and Energy and the Projektträger Jülich GmbH (PTJ) within the framework of the
project Smart Grid Models (FKZ: 0325616).
References
References
[1] C. Rehtanz, M. Greve, B. Gwisdorf, A. El-Hadidy, J. Kays,
M. Kch, V. Liebenau, J. Teuwsen, EnBW-Verteilnetzstudie
(2014).
[2] G. Celli, F. Pilo, G. Pisano, V. Allegranza, R. Cicoria, A. Iaria,
Meshed vs. radial mv distribution network in presence of large
amount of dg, in: Power Systems Conference and Exposition,
2004. IEEE PES, 2004, pp. 709–714 vol.2. doi:10.1109/PSCE.
2004.1397664.
[3] S. Repo, A. Nikander, H. Laaksonen, P. Jrventausta, A method
to increase the integration capacity of distributed generation on
weak distribution networks, in: 17th International Conference
on Electricity Distribution, 2003.
[4] A. Nikander, R. E. P. O. Sami, P. Järventausta, Utilizing the
ring operation mode of medium voltage distribution feeders,
2003.
[5] F. Viawan, D. Karlsson, A. Sannino, J. Daalder, Protection
scheme for meshed distribution systems with high penetration
of distributed generation, in: Power Systems Conference: Advanced Metering, Protection, Control, Communication, and
Distributed Resources, 2006. PS ’06, 2006, pp. 99–104. doi:
10.1109/PSAMP.2006.285378.
[6] S. Salman, S. Tan, Comparative study of protection requirements of active distribution networks using radial and ring operations, in: Power Tech, 2007 IEEE Lausanne, 2007, pp. 1182–
1186. doi:10.1109/PCT.2007.4538483.

10

[16] B. R. P. Junior, A. M. Cossi, J. Contreras, J. R. S. Mantovani,
Multiobjective multistage distribution system planning using
tabu search, IET Generation, Transmission Distribution 8 (1)
(2014) 35–45. doi:10.1049/iet-gtd.2013.0115.
[17] S. Ganguly, N. Sahoo, D. Das, A novel multi-objective pso
for electrical distribution system planning incorporating distributed generation, Energy Systems 1 (3) (2010) 291–337.
[18] N. Sahoo, S. Ganguly, D. Das, Multi-objective planning of electrical distribution systems incorporating sectionalizing switches
and tie-lines using particle swarm optimization, Swarm and
Evolutionary Computation 3 (2012) 15 – 32. doi:http://dx.
doi.org/10.1016/j.swevo.2011.11.002.
[19] H. Keko, M. Skok, D. Skrlec, Solving the distribution network
routing problem with artificial immune systems, in: Proceedings
of the 12th IEEE Mediterranean Electrotechnical Conference
(MELECON), Vol. 3, Dubrovnik, Croatia, 2004, pp. 959–962
Vol.3. doi:10.1109/MELCON.2004.1348212.
[20] N. G. Boulaxis, M. P. Papadopoulos, Optimal feeder routing in
distribution system planning using dynamic programming technique and gis facilities, IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery
17 (1) (2002) 242–247. doi:10.1109/61.974213.
[21] E. Diaz-Dorado, J. Cidras, E. Miguez, Application of evolutionary algorithms for the planning of urban distribution networks
of medium voltage, IEEE Transactions on Power Systems 17 (3)
(2002) 879–884. doi:10.1109/TPWRS.2002.800975.
[22] L. Thurner, A. Scheidler, A. Probst, M. Braun, IET Generation, Transmission & Distribution 11 (2017) 4264–4273(9).
[link].
URL
http://digital-library.theiet.org/content/
journals/10.1049/iet-gtd.2017.0729
[23] M. de Berg, O. Cheong, M. van Krefeld, M. Overmars, Computational Geometry: Algorithms and Applications, 2008.
[24] R. E. Brown, Electric power distribution reliability, 2nd Edition,
Vol. 31 of Power engineering, CRC, Boca Raton, 2009.

11

