Feeder Load Balancing Using Neural Network
Abhisek Ukil, Willy Siti, and Jaco Jordaan
Tshwane University of Technology, Private Bag X680,
Pretoria, 0001, South Africa
{abhiukil, willysiti, jakop_s2003}@yahoo.com

Abstract. The distribution system problems, such as planning, loss minimization, and energy restoration, usually involve the phase balancing or network reconfiguration procedures. The determination of an optimal phase balance is, in
general, a combinatorial optimization problem. This paper proposes optimal reconfiguration of the phase balancing using the neural network, to switch on and
off the different switches, allowing the three phases supply by the transformer
to the end-users to be balanced. This paper presents the application examples of
the proposed method using the real and simulated test data.

1 Introduction
Phase balancing in the distribution system have different needs, from minimizing the
losses in the system to relieving the transformer during the peak time and so forth.
There are a number of normally closed and normally opened switches in a distribution
system. By changing the open/close status of the feeder switches, load currents can be
transferred from feeder to feeder, that is, from the heavily loaded to the less loaded
feeders. In South Africa, to reduce the unbalance current in a feeder the connection
phases of some feeders are changed manually after some field measurement and software analysis. This is, however, time-consuming and unsuccessful many times [1].
With the uses of the artificial intelligence, telecommunication and power electronics equipments in the power system, it is becoming easier to automate the phase balancing problem. The automation implementation will be technically advantageous as
well as economical for the utilities and the customers, in terms of the variable costs
reduction and better service quality, respectively.
The approach proposed here uses the neural network which will be able to switch
on/off the different switches and keep the phases balanced. Each load will cater only
one of the three phases following the constraint that for each load only one switch (to
the phase) should be closed, while other two should remain open. For each loading
condition, the neural network will be trained for the relevant minimum loss configuration. This can be applied to the small networks, for example, six to fifteen houses as
the unbalanced loads.

2 Problem Description
To balance the three phase currents in every segment and then depressing the neutral
line current is a very difficult task. Using the manual trial and error technique, used

most of the time in South Africa for phase balancing, interruption of the service continuity is unavoidable when changing the connection phases of the distribution transformers to the feeder [1].
In South Africa, a distribution feeder is usually a three-phase, four-wire system. It
can be radial or open loop structure [3]. The example feeder shown in Fig. 1 has three
phase conductors for the section between the main transformer and the different load
points. We limit our present study to six load points, as shown in Fig. 1. To improve
the system phase voltage and current unbalances, the connections between the specific feeders and the distribution transformers should be suitably arranged.

Fig. 1. Example Distribution Feeder

3 Feeder Reconfiguration Technique
In the case of a distribution system with some of the branches overloaded, and other
branches lightly loaded, there is the need to reconfigure the networks such that loads
are transferred from the heavily loaded feeder or transformers to the less loaded
feeder (or transformers). The maximum load current the feeder conductor can take
may be taken as the reference. The transfer of load must be done by satisfying the
predefined objective to have minimum real power loss. Consequently, network reconfiguration may be redefined as the rearrangement of the network such as to minimize
the total real power losses arising from the line branches. Mathematically, the total
power loss can be expressed as follows [2]:
n

∑

ri

Pi 2 + Qi2

i =1

Vi

2

,

(1)

where, ri, Pi, Qi, Vi are respectively the resistance, the active power, the reactive
power and the voltage of the branch i, and n is the total number of branches in the system. Due to some practical considerations, there could be a constraint on the number
of switch–on and off. Given a distribution system as shown in Fig. 1, a network with
three phases with a known structure, the problem consists of finding a condition of
balancing. The mathematical model [1] can be expressed as:

I ph1k =

3

∑ sw
i =1

k 1i

I ki + I ph1( k +1)

(2)

I ph 2 k =

3

∑ sw

k 2i

i =1

I ph 3k =

3

∑ sw

k 3i

i =1

I ki + I ph 2 ( k +1)

I ki + I ph 3( k +1) ,

(3)

(4)

where, Iph1k, Iph2k and Iph3k represent the currents (phasors) per phase (1, 2 & 3) after
the k point of connection; swk11,…,swk33 are different switches (the value of ‘1’ means
the switch is closed and ‘0’ means it is open). Following the constraint of allowing
only one breaker in each of the equations (2) – (4) to be closed, we can write the following set of modified constraints:
3

∑ sw

k 1i

−1= 0

k 2i

−1= 0

k 3i

−1= 0 .

(5)

i =1

3

∑ sw

(6)

i =1

3

∑ sw

(7)

i =1

4 Neural Network-Based Approach
In the proposed strategy in this paper, the neural network must control the switchclosing sequence of each load for the minimum power loss which will lead to the
optimal phase balance. The inputs to the neural network are the unbalanced load currents (six in the current study) and the outputs are the switch closing sequences for
each load.
The input layer of the network has N input neurons, N being number of unbalanced
load currents to be controlled. The following column vector has been assumed as the
input

C Sw = [ I L1 ..............I LN ] .

(8)

The output of the network is in the range {1, 2, 3} for each load, i.e., which switch
(to the specific phase) should be closed for that specific load.
4.1 Neural Network Structure

For this application, we used the radial basis network [3]. Experimentations with the
backpropagation and the radial basis network indicated faster training and better convergence for the latter. Radial basis networks may require more neurons than the

standard feed-forward backpropagation networks, but often they can be designed in a
fraction of the time needed to train the standard feed-forward networks. They work
best when many training vectors are available [4]. Matlab® neural network toolbox [5]
has been used for the implementation. We experimented with different kinds of radial
basis networks, but generalized regression neural network (“GRNN”) [5] produced
the best result. A generalized regression neural network is often used for function approximation. It has a radial basis layer and a special linear layer [5].
4.2 Network Training

We have used the neural network-based operation for the test data in following structure: real and simulated data for six loads.
The real data set consisted of unbalanced load data from a South African city. The
test data set had average load current values per houses in a specific locality of the
city for the different times of each day in a month. We randomly selected six houses
as our test data for each specific time, and we tested our result on 500 data. Simulated
data were generated using the computer following the real load data structure.
First, we used the Matlab®-based fast heuristic method [1] for balancing the unbalanced load data. Details of the algorithm can be referred to in [1], but we explain the
necessary part briefly below.
We consider the loads to be equally distributed per phase, i.e., we assume two loads
to be connected per phase. So, the problem is to find the optimum three sets of two
loads, with minimum differences among the individual sums of the three sets. To
achieve this, first we calculate the ideal phase balance current value Iideal, which is
equal to the one-third of the sum of the all six load currents IL.
(9)

1 6
∑ IL .
3 j =1

I ideal =

j

In the second step, we optimally select our 3 sets of currents for the three phase
currents Iph, each set comprising of two load currents {I j , j = 1,2} .

I Load = {I L , j = 1,...,6} ,
j

I ph = {I j , j = 1,2}

where

I j ∈ I Load .

(10)
(11)

Difference between the individual sum of these sets and the Iideal should be minimum, ideally 0 for the perfect phase balance. So, we need to find three sets of
{I j , j = 1,2} , subject to the constraint,
2

min

∑

I j − I ideal , where I j ∈ I Load .

(12)

j =1

Following this, we obtain the output switching sequences as the target data set for
training the networks. Using the output switching sequences and the input load currents, we calculate the balanced phase currents Iph1, Iph2 and Iph3. For example, Iph1 is

calculated by adding the two load currents corresponding to the output switching sequences marked 1. Then we calculate the differences between Iph1, Iph2 and Iph3, which
ideally should be zero. The differences indicate the quality of the phase balance [1].
Using the real and simulated unbalanced load as the input vector, and the output
switching sequences as the target vector, we trained the above-mentioned neural network. Then, we tested the network with different unbalanced load data set. The output
was the optimal switching sequences of {1, 2, 3} for the three-phases as explained
above. Using the similar procedure as explained above, we computed the balanced
phase currents and the differences between the phase currents, which indicate the
quality of the balance.

5 Application Results
An Intel® Celeron® 1.9 GHz, 256 MB RAM computer was used for the test. Test results of the neural network-based approach for the simulated six load data format are
shown in Table 1 to 4, for three different sample data. Table 1 shows the unbalanced
load (current) data, Table 2 the output switching sequences, Table 3 the balanced
phase currents and Table 4 the absolute differences between the balanced phase currents. In Table 2 to 4, ‘NN’ is the abbreviation for the Neural Network-based approach and ‘HEU’ is the abbreviation for the Heuristic Method [1]-based approach.
Table 1. Unbalanced Load (Current) Data

Table 3. Balanced Phase Currents

Table 2. Output Switching Sequences

Table 4. Differences between Phase Currents

5.1 Comments on Application Results
•

Summary of the neural network-based approach in comparison with the heuristic method [1]-based one is as follows.
o
o

Neural Network performs better than Heuristic Method: 14%
Neural Network performs same as Heuristic Method: 67%

•

•
•

o Neural Network performs worse than Heuristic Method: 10%
o Neural Network fails to converge or gives erroneous result: 9%
From the above summary, it should be noted that the neural network-based
approach mostly works similar to the heuristic method [1]-based approach.
Deviation of the results in the 10% worse cases are not that severe, however,
the 14% better performance is a significant improvement, as the heuristic
method proved to be the most efficient [1].
Speed of operation (average computation time 0.14 seconds) is similar with
the heuristic method [1], once the network is trained. For this reason, once
the network is suitably trained, we save and use it as a neural network object.
This approach can be extended to any number of unbalanced load data. But
as the training data construction depends on the heuristic method [1], at this
stage, we have to limit our studies to the number of load data exactly divisible by 3 so that the loads can be equally distributed per phase.

6 Conclusion
The neural network-based approach for phase balancing for a small size network (six
load data) proved the feasibility of the proposed control. The result achieved from the
Matlab® implementation pertain to that obtained using the heuristic method. Besides,
neural network-based approach gives better result in 14% cases, which is a significant
improvement. This encourages the implementation of the neural network-based strategy on a large size network.

References
1. Ukil, A., Siti, M. and Jordaan, J.: MATLAB®-based Fast Load Balancing of Distribution System
Using Heuristic Method. SAIEE Transactions (under review)
2. Chen, C.S. and Cho, M.Y.: Energy Loss Reduction by Critical Switches, of Distribution
Feeders for Loss Minimization. IEEE Trans. Power Delivery 4 (1992)
3. Wasserman, P.D.: Advanced Methods in Neural Computing. Van Nostrand Reinhold, New
York (1993)
4. Chen, S., Cowan, C.F.N. and Grant, P.M.: Orthogonal Least Squares Learning Algorithm
for Radial Basis Function Networks. IEEE Trans. Neural Networks 2 (1991) 302-309
5. MATLAB® Documentation – Neural Network Toolbox, Version 6.5.0.180913a Release 13,
Mathworks Inc., Natick, MA (2002)

