www.ietdl.

org
Published in IET Generation, Transmission & Distribution
Received on 12th June 2009
Revised on 18th January 2010
doi: 10.1049/iet-gtd.2009.0611

ISSN 1751-8687

Harmony search algorithm for transmission

network expansion planning
A. Verma B.K. Panigrahi P.R. Bijwe
Department of Electrical Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology, Delhi, Hauz Khas, New Delhi 110016, India
E-mail: ashu.ee.iitd@gmail.com

Abstract: Transmission network expansion planning (TNEP) is a very important problem in power systems. It is a
mixed integer, non-linear, non-convex optimisation problem, which is very complex and computationally
demanding. Various meta-heuristic optimisation techniques have been tried out for this problem. However,
scope for even better algorithms still remains. In view of this, a new technique known as harmony search is
presented here for TNEP with security constraints. This technique has been reported to be robust and
computationally efcient compared to other meta-heuristic algorithms. Results for three sample test systems
are obtained and compared with those obtained with genetic algorithm and bacteria-foraging differential
evolution algorithm to verify the potential of the proposed algorithm.

Introduction

Transmission network expansion planning (TNEP) problem

[1] deals with the least cost expansion of new lines such that
no overloads are produced during the planning horizon. This
is a large scale, non-linear, mixed integer, non-convex
optimisation problem. The problem is very complex and
computationally demanding because of large number of
options to be investigated and the discrete nature of the
optimisation variables. Further, the number of options to be
analysed increases exponentially with the size of the
system, hence the problem is non-polynomial time-hard.
Conventional optimisation techniques provide very successful
strategies to obtain global optimum in simple and ideal
models. However, real-world engineering optimisation
problems like TNEP are very complex and difcult to solve
with these methods. In view of this, many new meta-heuristic
techniques have been proposed for TNEP in last few years
because of their ability to nd global optimal solutions for
such combinatorial problem. Some of them are discussed below.
A simulated annealing (SA) approach for TNEP is proposed
in [2] for long-term TNEP. The SA approach is a
generalisation of Monte-Carlo method for examining the
equations of states and frozen states of n-body system. The
concept is based on the manner in which liquids freeze or
metals recrystallise in an annealing process. A parallel Tabu
search algorithm for TNEP is discussed in [3]. The proposed
IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., 2010, Vol. 4, Iss. 6, pp. 663 673
doi: 10.1049/iet-gtd.2009.0611

method is a third generation Tabu search procedure, which

includes features of a variety of other approaches such as
heuristic search, SA and genetic algorithms (GAs). A new
variant of Tabu search is presented in [4] for static TNEP
(STNEP). The intensication and diversication phases are
designed using medium and long-term memory concepts.
Applications of GA have been proposed by many researchers
in [57]. An improved GA is proposed for TNEP in [5].
Some special features have been added to the basic GA to
improve its performance. The GA works on the set of
candidate solutions known as population, and performs a
number of operations. These operators recombine the
information contained in the individuals to create new
solutions (populations). A procedure based on SA approach is
implemented to improve the mutation mechanism. A GAbased approach for multistage and coordinated planning of
transmission expansions is presented in [6]. An efcient form
of generation of initial population is used in the proposed
approach. A specialised GA is proposed in [7] for static and
multistage TNEP. The proposed GA has the following
special characteristic: (i) it uses tness and untness functions
to identify the value of objective function and unfeasibility of
the tested solution; (ii) applies efcient strategy of local
improvement for each individual tested and (iii) it substitutes
only one individual in the population for each iteration. A
greedy randomised adaptive search procedure (GRASP) for
solving TNEP is presented in [8]. GRASP is an expert
iterative sampling technique that has two phases for each
663

& The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2010

www.ietdl.org
Sf k + g = d

iteration. The rst phase is construction phase that nds out the
feasible solution. The second phase is a local search procedure
that seeks for improvements on the construction phase
solution by local search. The application of a new discrete
method in particle swarm optimisation for TNEP has been
discussed in [9].
A new technique known as harmony search (HS) used for
solving engineering optimisation problems was rst presented
in [10]. The HS algorithm is based on the musical process of
searching for a perfect state of harmony. The harmony in
music is analogous to the optimisation solution vector, and the
musicians improvisations are analogous to local and global
search schemes in optimisation techniques. Instead of a
gradient search, the HS algorithm uses a stochastic random
search [11] based on the harmony memory considering rate
(HMCR) and the pitch adjustment rate (PAR), so that
derivative information is unnecessary. Compared to earlier
meta-heuristic optimisation algorithms, the HS algorithm
imposes fewer mathematical requirements and can be easily
adapted for various types of engineering optimisation problems.
The HS algorithm has been very successful in wide variety of
optimisation problems [1217]. An improved version of
harmony search (IHS) is presented in [18] which employ a
novel method for generating new solution vectors that
enhances the accuracy and convergence rate of the classical HS.
Despite the promise shown by meta-heuristic methods for
TNEP, better techniques are still required. Hence, this paper
presents an application of IHS to TNEP with security
constraints. The transmission expansion problem is a very
complex problem. Hence, it is not possible to consider all
aspects of TNEP in this paper. The objective in this paper
is to investigate the potential of IHS algorithm for TNEP.
Hence, a simple STNEP with security constraints based on
DC model, is considered. The N 2 1 contingency analysis
is used to ensure system security. However, the algorithm is
general enough to consider all other aspects of TNEP. The
planners can use this technique for TNEP incorporating
the issues relevant to the individual systems.

2 Transmission network
expansion planning
The TNEP can be formulated as a mixed integer non-linear
optimisation problem. System security is an important aspect
and must be considered in a TNEP. The N 2 1 contingency
analysis looks at the system state after a single line outage. A
comprehensive model for TNEP with security constraints is
presented in [19], which is used as a base for formulating
TNEP with security constraints in this paper. The TNEP
with security constraints can be stated as follows

cl nl
(1)
min v =
l[V

s.t.
664
& The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2010

(2)

fl k gl (n0l + nl )(Dukl ) = 0,
for l [ 1, 2 . . . , nl and l = k
fl k gl (n0l + nl 1)(Dukl ) = 0,
|fl k | (n0l + nl )f l ,

for l = k

for l [ 1, 2 . . . , nl and l = k

|fl k | (n0l + nl 1)f l ,

0 nl nl

for l = k

(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7)

fl k and ukl are unbounded, nl 0 and integer, for

l [ 1, 2 . . . , nl and l = k, (nl + n0l 1) 0 and integer
for l = k, l [ V and k = 0, 1, . . ., NC, where k = 0
represents the base case without any line outage
S is the branch-node incidence transposed matrix of the
power system, f k is the vector with elements flk, gl is the
susceptance of the circuit that can be added to lth right-ofway, nl is the number of circuits added in lth right-of-way,
n0l is the number of circuits in the base case, Dukl is the
phase angle difference in lth right-of-way when kth line is
out, flk is the total real power ow by the circuit in lth
right-of-way when kth-line is out, f l is the maximum
allowed real power ow in the circuit in lth right-of-way, nl
is the maximum number of circuits that can be added in
lth right-of-way, V is the set of all right-of-ways, nl is the
total number of lines in the circuit and NC is the number
of credible contingencies (taken as equal to nl in the
present case).
The objective is to minimise the total investment cost of
the new transmission lines to be constructed, satisfying the
constraint on real power ow in the lines of the network,
for base case and N 2 1 contingency cases. Constraint (2)
represents the power balance at each node. Constraints (3)
and (4) are the real power ow equations in DC network.
Constraints (5) and (6) represent the line real power ow
constraint. Constraint (7) represents the restriction on the
construction of lines per corridor.

HS algorithm

The HS algorithm has recently been used for variety of

engineering optimisation problems. The HS algorithm is
developed based on an analogy with music improvisation
process, where music players improvise the pitches of their
instruments to obtain better harmony [10]. Musical
performers seek to nd pleasing harmony (a perfect state)
as determined by aesthetic standard, just as the
optimisation process seeks to nd a global optimum
solution. The pitch of each musical instrument determines
the aesthetic quality, just as the objective function value is
determined by the set of values assigned to each decision
variable. The IHS algorithm proposed in [18] is used for
solving the STNEP problem. Brief outline of the method
is as follows.
IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., 2010, Vol. 4, Iss. 6, pp. 663 673
doi: 10.1049/iet-gtd.2009.0611

www.ietdl.org
random selection

The steps involved in the procedure of HS are:

1. Initialise the problem and algorithm parameters.

xti 

2. Initialise the harmony memory.

xti [ {x1i , x2i . . . xHMS

} with probability HMCR
i

xti [ Xi with probability(1 HMCR)

(11)

3. Improvise a new harmony.

4. Update the harmony memory.
5. Check for the stopping criteria.
For better understanding, these steps are briey described
in the following ve subsections:
1. Initialise the problem and algorithm parameters: Specify
the optimisation problem as follows
minimise f (x)
subject to

xi [ Xi ,

(8)

i = 1, 2, . . . , N

(9)

where f (x) is an objective function, x is set of decision

variables xi , N is the number of decision variables and Xi
represents the possible range of values for each decision
variables.
The HS algorithm parameters to be initialised are as
follows:

A HMCR of 0.90 indicates that the HS algorithm will

choose the decision variable from the stored values in the
HM with 90% probability and from the entire range with
(100 90%) probability. Every component chosen by
harmony consideration is examined for pitch adjustment
based on the following rule:
Pitch adjusting decision for xti is given as

xti

Yes with probability PAR

No with probability (1 PAR)

(12)

The value of (1 2 PAR) sets the rate of doing nothing. If

pitch adjustment decision for xti is yes, xti is modied as
follows
xti = xti + rand( ) bw

(13)

where bw is an arbitrary distance bandwidth and rand() is a

random number between 0 and 1.
The PAR and bw are adjusted as follows

harmony memory size (HMS): this indicates the number

of solution vectors in the harmony memory;
HMCR;

number of improvisations (NI) or stopping criteria.

2. Initialise the harmony memory: The harmony memory is

initialised with as many randomly generated vectors as the
HMS
x11
x21

..
HM =

.
HMS1
x1
xHMS
1

x12
x22

x1N 1
x2N 1

x2HMS1

...
...
..
.
...

HMS1
xN
1

xHMS
2

...

xHMS
N 1

..
.

..
.

x1N
x2N

(PAR max PAR min )

gn
NI

(14)

where gn 1, 2, . . ., NI, PAR(gn) is the pitch adjusting rate

for generation or improvisation of gn, PARmin is the
minimum pitch adjusting rate and PARmax is the
maximum pitch adjusting rate.

PAR;

PAR(gn) = PAR min +

..

.
HMS1

xN
xHMS
N
(10)

3. Improvise a new harmony: A new harmony vector

xt = (xt1 , xt2 , . . . , xti ) is generated based on three rules: (i)
memory consideration, (ii) pitch adjustment and (iii)
IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., 2010, Vol. 4, Iss. 6, pp. 663 673
doi: 10.1049/iet-gtd.2009.0611

To explore the search space, the control parameter

bandwidth bw is adjusted depending upon the variance of
the population in each improvisation [20], and is given by
bw(gn) =


var(X )

(15)

4. Update the harmony memory: The new memory is

judged in terms of the objective function (tness function)
value and if the new memory is better than the previous
memory in the HM, then new harmony memory is
included in the HM and the existing worst harmony is
excluded from the HM.
5. Check for stopping criteria: If maximum number of
improvisations is reached, then stop, otherwise steps 3 and
4 are repeated.
665

& The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2010

www.ietdl.org

Figure 1 Flowchart IHS for TNEP

3.1 HS for TNEP with security constraints

The f (x) represents the objective function represented by (1)
for STNEP. x denes the set of candidate lines presenting a
666
& The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2010

solution to STNEP. Each element in x represents the rightof-way in which a candidate line is constructed. The range of
each variable dened by Xi indicates the list of available rightof-ways. If two lines are added in a particular right-of-way,
IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., 2010, Vol. 4, Iss. 6, pp. 663 673
doi: 10.1049/iet-gtd.2009.0611

www.ietdl.org
then two elements with same number (indicating number of
the right-of-way) will come in the vector x.

3.1.1 Fitness function evaluation: To check the

worth of a vector (solution) in the harmony memory,
tness function is evaluated using the following equation
f =


l

c l nl + W 1

NC 

k=0

(abs(fl k ) f l ) + W2 (nl n
l )

ol

(16)
Here ol represents the set of overloaded lines.
The objective of STNEP is to nd the set of transmission
lines to be constructed such that the cost of expansion plan is
minimum and no overloads are produced during the planning
horizon. Hence, the rst term in (16) indicates the total
investment cost of a transmission expansion plan. The
second term is added to the objective function for the real
power ow constraint violations in the base case, and
N 2 1 contingency cases. The third term is added to the
objective function if maximum number of circuits that can
be added in lth right-of-way exceeds the maximum limit.
W1 and W2 are constants. The second and third terms are
added to the tness function only in case of violations.
A stepwise owchart of IHS algorithm for TNEP (Fig. 1)
is given in Section 3.2 as follows.

3.2 Flowchart of HS algorithm

3.3 Handling of unconnected buses in the
system
3.3.1 Handling of unconnected generators/loads:

Figure 2 Candidate lines connected

unconnected interconnecting bus

through

an

x 2NGU+1 , . . ., x genNGU+1
] indicates the set of decision
NGU+1
variables that dene all other candidate lines connected to
the network for a given topology (this includes indirect
connections to the generators also).
It must be noted that this division is carried out only
before evaluating the tness function using DC load ow
to ensure the connectivity of unconnected generators. For
all the other meta-heuristic operations like improvisation,
and so on the harmony vector is a single vector only, like
in the case where unconnected generators/loads are not
present.
Note: Unconnected loads are also treated as unconnected
generators.

3.3.2 Handling of unconnected interconnecting

buses: In case of the candidate lines, which are connected
through an unconnected interconnecting bus, for example,
lines ni2j and nj2k are connected through an unconnected
interconnecting bus j (Fig. 2), a single line from bus j
cannot be connected until and unless at least one line exists
between bus j and other two buses, i and k.
These types of cases are handled by imposing an additional
constraint on such candidate paths considered for TNEP.
The constraint can be dened as if ni2j . 0, then
necessarily nj2k . 0; that is a line cannot be added in i and
j without adding a line between j and k. This constraint is

In cases where the unconnected generators are present in the

network, the total available candidate lines are divided into
total number of unconnected generators+1 parts (say
NGU + 1). The initial 1, 2, . . ., NGU parts dene the
available candidate lines that can be directly connected to
generator 1, 2, . . ., NGU, respectively. The last part or
(NGU + 1)th part denes all other available candidate lines
for the given network (this includes indirect connections to
the generators also).
Before calculating the tness function given by (16) using
DC load ow, the harmony vector is also divided into
NGU + 1 parts
x = [x1 :x2 : :xNGU :xNGU+1 ]
gen

where x1 = [x11 , x21 , . . . , x1 ] indicates the set of decision

variables that dene the candidate lines directly connected
to generator 1 for a given topology; xNGU [x 1NGU , x 2NGU ,
. . ., x genNGU
] indicates the set of decision variables that
NGU
dene the candidate lines directly connected to generator
NGU for a given topology and xNGU+1 [x 1NGU+1 ,
IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., 2010, Vol. 4, Iss. 6, pp. 663 673
doi: 10.1049/iet-gtd.2009.0611

Figure 3 IEEE 24 bus system [22]

667

& The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2010

www.ietdl.org
Table 1 Results for TNEP with security constraints for generation plan G1 G4
Plan

TNEP with IHS

TNEP with BF-DEA

TNEP with GA

n7 8 3, n1 5 2, n1 2 1,
n3 24 2, n4 9 1, n6 10 2,
n9 12 1, n10 11 1,
n11 14 1, n12 13 1,
n14 16 2, n15 24 1,
n15 21 2, n15 16 1,
n19 22 1

n7 8 3, n6 10 2, n1 5 2,
n15 24 2, n15 21 2,
n15 16 1, n4 9 1, n2 6 1,
n3 24 2, n14 16 2,
n10 11 1, n11 13 1,
n19 22 1

n7 8 3, n6 10 2, n1 5 2,
n1 2 1, n15 24 2, n15 21 2,
n15 16 1, n4 9 1, n2 6 1,
n3 24 2, n14 16 2,
n10 11 1, n11 13 1,
n19 22 1

total number
of lines

22

21

22

investment
cost [106 US$]

964

975

978

n7 8 2, n1 5 1, n2 4 1,
n3 24 2, n3 9 1, n6 10 2,
n10 12 2, n12 13 1,
n14 16 2, n15 24 2,
n15 21 1, n16 17 2,
n17 18 2, n21 22 1

n7 8 2, n6 10 2, n1 5 1,
n15 24 2, n15 21 2,
n15 16 1, n3 24 2,
n14 16 2, n10 12 2,
n19 22 1, n3 9 1, n2 4 1,
n12 13 1

n7 8 2, n6 10 2, n1 5 1,
n1 2 1, n15 24 2, n15 21 2,
n15 16 1, n3 24 2,
n14 16 2, n10 11 1,
n10 12 1, n19 22 1, n3 9 1,
n2 4 1, n11 13 1

total number
of lines

22

20

21

investment
cost [106 US$]

942

974

977

G1

G2

G3

n1 5 2, n3 9 2, n3 24 1,
n4 9 1, n6 10 2, n7 8 3,
n9 12 1, n10 12 1,
n12 23 1, n13 14 1,
n14 23 1, n15 21 1,
n20 23 1, n21 22 1

n7 8 3, n6 10 3, n1 5 2,
n7 8 3, n6 10 2, n1 5 1,
n1 2 1, n15 21 1, n20 23 1,
n15 21 1, n20 23 1,
n1 3 1, n3 9 1, n14 23 1,
n3 24 1, n16 19 1,
n13 14 1, n9 12 1,
n14 23 2, n15 24 1,
n12 23 1, n3 24 1,
n9 12 1, n10 12 1,
n10 12 1, n21 22 1, n2 4 1, n12 13 1, n19 22 1, n4 9 1
n10 11 1

total number
of lines

19

20

20

investment
cost [106 US$]

837

898

903

n7 8 3, n6 10 2, n15 24 2,
n3 24 2, n12 13 1, n2 4 1,
n1 5 1, n1 2 1, n14 23 2,
n10 12 1, n15 21 1,
n21 22 1, n10 11 1

n7 8 3, n6 10 2, n15 24 2,
n3 24 2, n12 13 1, n2 4 1,
n1 5 1, n1 2 1, n14 23 2,
n10 12 1, n15 21 1,
n21 22 1, n10 11 1

n7 8 3, n6 10 2, n1 2 2,
n1 5 1, n15 21 1, n10 11 1,
n3 9 2, n19 22 1, n14 16 2,
n12 23 1, n4 9 1, n20 23 1,
n10 12 1, n9 12 1,
n11 13 1

total number
of lines

19

19

21

investment
cost [106 US$]

882

882

899

G4

imposed till at least one such connection exists between buses

i 2 j and k. After that possibility of addition of only one line,
ni2j or nj2k can be considered.
The connectivity of the generators/loads and unconnected
interconnecting buses are checked before the evaluation
668

& The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2010

of tness function, and if the network is found unconnected

for certain topology, tness function is not actually
evaluated and the f in (16) is assigned a very high value
(penalty). So, with subsequent improvisations such type
of topologies are omitted and we approach towards the
solution.
IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., 2010, Vol. 4, Iss. 6, pp. 663 673
doi: 10.1049/iet-gtd.2009.0611

www.ietdl.org
4

Results

4.1.2 TNEP with security constraints: The nal

solutions obtained with IHS, BF-DEA and GA for plan
G1 G4 , for TNEP with security constraints are presented
in Table 1 and the number of tness function evaluations
required are presented in Table 2.

The proposed algorithm has been tested for three standard test
systems, IEEE 24 bus system, south Brazilian 46 bus system
and 93 bus Colombian system. The comparison of results is
presented for IEEE 24 bus system and 46 bus south
Brazilian system, with the one obtained with basic binary
GA and bacteria foraging-differential evaluation algorithm
(BF-DEA) to conrm the potential of the proposed
approach. The GA and BF-DEA were implemented to
compare the results. The detailed results are shown only for
the case of TNEP with security constraints; however, the
results for TNEP without security constraints are also available.

The percentage reductions in cost and number of tness

function evaluations required by IHS as compared to BFDEA and GA for plans G1 G4 are given in Table 3.
It can be observed from Table 3 that the IHS provides
better results (lower cost), in all cases except one in which
the solutions are same. It can also be seen that IHS
requires much lesser number of tness function evaluations
for the solutions of all cases as compared to other two
methods. The range of reduction is being 82 97%.

4.1 IEEE 24 bus system

This system consists of 24 buses, 41 candidate circuits and
8550 MW of total demand. A maximum of three lines per
corridor can be added. The initial network can be found in
[21] and also shown in Fig. 3. The electrical data and
generation/load data have been taken for plans G1 G4 of [22].

A rigorous study of algorithm parameters done by varying

them for the above system between the permissible ranges is
given in Tables 4 and 5. The parametric study presented in
Tables 4 and 5 are done for plan G3 . Initially, the effect of
variations of HMCR is observed by keeping HMS
constant. Then with the best value of HMCR obtained,
the effect of variations of HMS is observed.

4.1.1 TNEP without security constraints: The nal

solution obtained with IHS for TNEP without security
constraints results in an investment cost of US$ 390 106
for plan G1 , US$ 336 106 for plan G2 , US$ 214 106
for plan G3 and US$ 292 106 for plan G4 . The results
obtained with BF-DEA and GA matches exactly with the
ones obtained with IHS. The cost of expansion plan
obtained for generation plan G1 is 11% and for generation
plan G4 1.8% lesser, with three methods applied, than the
one given in [22].

It can be observed from Tables 4 and 5 that HMS 50

and HMCR 0.98 provided the best results in terms of
number of tness function evaluations and standard
deviations, whereas according to the parametric study
carried out for TNEP without security constraints for the
same plan (G3), (not included in this paper), the

Table 2 Comparison of number of tness function required by three algorithms, for plans G1 G4
Cost [106 US$]

Plan

Number of tness function evaluation required

to obtain the nal solution

IHS

BF-DEA

GA

IHS

BF-DEA

GA

G1

964

975

978

118 280

1 157 900

1 945 090

G2

942

974

977

20 450

737 300

313 167

G3

837

898

903

58 400

553 500

2 753 166

G4

882

882

899

220 500

1 293 100

2 690 833

Table 3 Percentage reduction in cost and number of tness function evaluation

Plan

% Reduction in cost of expansion plan obtained with IHS

% Reduction in number of tness function

evaluation required with IHS

Compared to BF-DEA

Compared to GA

Compared to BF-DEA

Compared to GA

G1

1.13

1.43

89.78

93.92

G2

3.29

3.58

97.23

93.47

G3

6.79

7.31

89.45

97.88

G4

no change

1.89

82.95

91.81

IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., 2010, Vol. 4, Iss. 6, pp. 663 673
doi: 10.1049/iet-gtd.2009.0611

669

& The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2010

www.ietdl.org
Table 4 Effect of HMCR variation on performance of IHS algorithm for TNEP (with HMS 50)
HMCR
6

cost of expansion plan [US$ 10 ]

standard deviation

0.99

0.98

0.95

0.9

837

837

837

1026

38.31

number of tness function evaluations

61 250

25.82
58 400

76.77

79.69

113 950

114 300

Table 5 Effect of HMS variation on performance of IHS algorithm for TNEP (with HMCR 0.98)
HMS
cost of expansion plan [US$ 106]
standard deviation
number of tness function evaluations

25

50

75

100

837

837

837

925

82.88
40 250

parameters HMS 35 and HMCR 0.98 provided the

best results. Hence, these settings are system dependent.
For experiments with large number of systems and with
different levels of complexity, it has been observed that for
TNEP problem, HMCR value of 0.98 provides better
results. However, HMS needs to be adjusted depending
upon the size of the system and level of complexity of
TNEP problem.
The nal parameters used for IHS, BF-DEA and GA for
the results shown in Table 1 are as follows.
For IHS: HMS 50; HMCR 0.98; maximum PAR
(PARmax) 0.99; minimum PAR (PARmin) 0.1;
number of improvisations (NI) or stopping criteria are 2500.

25.82
58 400

19.50
117 975

85.0815
149 300

4.2.2 TNEP with security constraints: The nal

solution obtained by HS for TNEP with security
constraints results in an investment cost of US
$337 809 000 with the addition of following 34 lines
n3132 = 1, n2830 = 1, n2629 = 3, n2930 = 2,
n1719 = 1, n2738 = 1, n4611 = 3, n115 = 6,
n1214 = 1, n4243 = 3, n2324 = 1, n2021 = 1,
n2425 = 3, n2521 = 1, n2532 = 1, n2627 = 1,
n3243 = 1,n25 = 1, n1921 = 1, n2021 = 1

For BF-DEA: swimming length (Ns) 1, cross-over

rate (CR) 0.75, scale factor for DE-type mutation
F 1.0, number of bacteria S 100 and number of
iterations 3000.
For GA: population size 750, CR 0.8, mutation
rate 0.01, number of generations 4000.

4.2 South Brazilian 46 bus system

This system has 46 buses, 79 right-of-ways on which circuits
can be constructed, and a total demand of 6880 MW.
The maximum number of lines which can be added to
each corridor is six. This is a realistic system representing a
good test case for the proposed algorithm. The relevant
data can be found in [23] and the network conguration is
shown in Fig. 4.

4.2.1 TNEP without security constraints: The

nal solution obtained by HS for TNEP without security
constraints results in an investment cost of
US$154 420 000, which matches exactly with the one
reported in [24].
670
& The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2010

Figure 4 46 Bus south Brazilian system [23]

IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., 2010, Vol. 4, Iss. 6, pp. 663 673
doi: 10.1049/iet-gtd.2009.0611

www.ietdl.org
Table 6 Effect of HMCR variation on performance of IHS algorithm for TNEP (with HMS 50)
HMCR

0.99

0.98

0.95

0.9

337.809

337.809

337.809

340.679

cost of expansion plan [US$ 10 ]

standard deviation

21.39

number of tness function evaluations

239 550

18
96 800

15.55

48

172 600

230 700

Table 7 Effect of HMS variation on performance of IHS algorithm for TNEP (with HMCR 0.98)
HMS

25
6

cost of expansion plan [US$ 10 ]

340.679

standard deviation
number of tness function evaluations

50
337.809

42

18

79 900

96 800

However, the TNEP with security constraints for above

system is also obtained with BF-DEA and basic binary GA.
The nal solution obtained by BF-DEA results in an
investment cost of US $361 863 000 with the addition of
following 36 lines
n3132 = 1, n2830 = 1, n2629 = 3, n2930 = 2, n466 = 2,
n65 = 4, n2425 = 5, n2532 = 1, n2521 = 1, n3243 = 1,
n4243 = 3, n1214 = 1, n3739 = 2, n25 = 3, n2021 = 2,
n1921 = 1, n1719 = 1, n2738 = 1
The nal solution obtained by GA results in an investment
cost of US$ 432 350 000 with the addition of following 43
lines
n2629 = 3, n2930 = 2, n2830 = 1, n3132 = 1,
n4611 = 1, n115 = 3, n2425 = 4, n2532 = 1,
n2521 = 1, n466 = 2 , n65 = 2, n1214 = 3, n25 = 2,
n1628 = 1, n2627 = 1, n17 = 2, n1921 = 1, n914 = 1,
n2736 = 1, n2843 = 1, n4243 = 3, n3739 = 2, n3435 = 1,
n2021 = 2, n24 = 1
The rigorous algorithm parametric study for the above system
is given in Tables 6 and 7.
It can be observed from Tables 6 and 7 that HMCR 0.98
and HMS 50 provided best results in terms of number
of tness function evaluations and standard deviation for
the above system. Hence, the algorithm parameters used for
this system are as follows: HMS 50; HMCR 0.98;
PARmax 0.99; PARmin 0.1; NI or stopping criteria 2500.
The parameters used for BF-DEA and GA for
comparison are as follows.
IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., 2010, Vol. 4, Iss. 6, pp. 663 673
doi: 10.1049/iet-gtd.2009.0611

75

100

337.809

337.809

19.50

17.809

117 975

155 300

For BF-DEA: swimming length (Ns) 1, CR 0.75, scale

factor for DE-type mutation F 1.0, number of bacteria
S 100 and number of iterations 4000.
For GA: number of population 1000, CR 0.8, mutation
rate 0.01 and number of generations 4000.
The number of tness function evaluations required by all
the methods for the results shown above is given in Table 8.
It can be observed from the above results that the HS
algorithm provides much better (low cost) results with
lesser number of tness function evaluations as compared
to basic binary GA and BF-DEA. The cost of expansion
plan obtained with IHS is 6.65 and 21.86% lesser than the
one obtained with BF-DEA and GA, respectively. The
number of tness function evaluations required by IHS is
19.46% and 91.101% lesser as compared to that required
by BF-DEA and GA, respectively.

4.3 93 Bus Colombian system

This system has 93 buses and 155 circuits, and a maximum
of ve circuits can be added to each corridor. The initial
conguration for the above system can be seen in [6] and
also presented in Fig. 5. After taking results for two
systems, IHS has been proved to be the best for all the

Table 8 Cost and number of tness functions required by

different methods for 46 bus south Brazilian system
Method

Number of tness
function
evaluations

Cost of expansion
plan [US$ 106]

HS

2.40 105

337.809

BF-DEA

2.98 10

361.863

basic binary GA

2.67 106

432.350

671

& The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2010

www.ietdl.org
case studies (TNEP with/without security constraints).
Hence, for this system the results are obtained with
IHS only.

4.3.1 TNEP without security constraints: The

solution to TNEP without security constraints results in an
investment cost of US$ 562 417 000 with the addition of
following 19 lines
n4388 = 2, n1982 = 2, n3065 = 1, n6886 = 1,
n5054 = 1, n6273 = 1, n5562 = 1, n3072 = 1,
n5557 = 1, n8285 = 1, n7273 = 1, n5584 = 1,
n2764 = 1, n5657 = 1, n5456 = 1, n1518 = 1, n2729 = 1

4.3.2 TNEP with security constraints: The solution to

TNEP with security constraints results in an investment cost
of US$ 1 194 448 000 with the addition of following 46 lines.
n4388 = 3, n159 = 1, n283 = 1, n371 = 1, n790 = 1,
n983 = 1, n1314 = 1, n1518 = 1, n1821 = 1, n1858 = 1
n1982 = 3, n2780 = 1, n2764 = 2, n2829 = 1,
n2931 = 1, n3065 = 1, n3072 = 1, n4581 = 2,
n4550 = 1, n4863 = 1, n5562 = 2, n5557 = 1,
n5584 = 2, n5781 = 3, n5784 = 1, n5967 = 1,
n6273 = 2, n6768 = 1, n6886 = 2, n7273 = 2
n8285 = 2, n8385 = 1

Figure 5 93 Bus Colombian system [6]

672
& The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2010

IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., 2010, Vol. 4, Iss. 6, pp. 663 673
doi: 10.1049/iet-gtd.2009.0611

www.ietdl.org
5

Conclusions

In this paper, application of IHS algorithm has been

investigated for TNEP with security constraints. The
comparison of results is made with the ones obtained with
BF-DEA and basic binary GA. Results for three sample
systems conrms the potential of the proposed approach.
The proposed IHS algorithm provides better (low cost)
solution in all the cases with lesser number of tness
function evaluations.

References

[1] GARVER L.L.: Transmission network estimation using

linear programming, IEEE Trans. PAS, 2007, 89, (7),
pp. 1688 1697
[2] ROMERO R., GALLEGO R.A. , MONTICELLI A. : Transmission
network expansion planning by simulated annealing, IEEE
Trans. Power Syst., 1990, 11, (1), pp. 364 369
[3] GALLEGO R.A. , ROMERO R. , MONTICELLI A.J.: Tabu search
algorithm for network synthesis, IEEE Trans. Power Syst.,
2000, 15, (2), pp. 490 495

[11] GEEM Z.W. : Novel derivative of harmony search

algorithm for discrete design variables, Appl. Math.
Comput., 2008, 199, (1), pp. 223 230
[12] KIM J.H., GEEM Z.W., KIM E.S.: Parameter estimation of the
nonlinear Muskingum model using harmony search, J. Am.
Water Resour. Assoc., 2001, 37, (5), pp. 1131 1138
[13] GEEM Z.W.: Harmony search optimization to the pumpincluded water distribution network design, Civil Eng.
Environ. Syst., 2009, 26, (3), pp. 211 221
[14] GEEM Z.W.: Particle-swarm harmony search for water
network design, Eng. Optim., 2009, 41, (4), pp. 297 311
[15] GEEM Z.W.: Optimal cost design of water distribution
networks using harmony search, Eng. Optim., 2006, 38,
(3), pp. 259 280
[16] LEE K.S. , GEEM Z.W. : A new structural optimization
method based on the harmony search algorithm,
Comput. Struct., 2004, 82, (9 10), pp. 781 798
[17] GEEM Z.W., TSENG C., PARK Y.: Harmony search for generalized
orienteering problem: best touring in China, 2005, LNCS
(Learning Notes in Computer Science), 3612, pp. 741750

[4] DA SILVA E.L. , ORTIZ J.M.A., OLIVEIRA G.C. , BINATO S. :

Transmission network expansion planning under a Tabu
search approach, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., 2001, 16, (1),
pp. 62 68

[18] MAHDAVI M., FESANGHARY M., DAMANGIR E.: An improved

harmony search algorithm for solving optimization
problems, Appl. Math. Comput., 2007, 188, pp. 1567 1579

[5] DA SILVA E.L., GIL H.A. , AREIZA J.M.: Transmission

network expansion planning under an improved genetic
algorithm, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., 2000, 15, (3),
pp. 1168 1175

[19] SILVA I.D.J., RIDER M.J., ROMERO R., GARCIA A.V., MURARI C.A.:
Transmission network expansion planning with security
constraints, IEE Proc. Gener. Transm. Distrib., 2005, 152,
(6), pp. 828 836

[6] ESCOBAR A.H., GALLEGO R.A., ROMERO R.: Multistage and

coordinated planning of the expansion of transmission
systems, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., 2004, 19, (2),
pp. 735 744

[20] PANDI V.R., PANIGRAHI B.K., MALLICK M.K., ABRAHAM A., DAS S.:
Improved harmony search for economic power dispatch.
Int. Conf. Hybrid Intelligent Systems, 2009, DOI 10.1109/
HIS.2009.294

[7] ROMERO R., RIDER M.J., SILVA I.D.J.: A metaheuristic to solve

the transmission expansion planning, IEEE Trans. Power
Syst., 2007, 22, (4), pp. 2289 2291

[21] FANG R., HILL D.J.: A new strategy for transmission

expansion in competitive electricity markets, IEEE Trans.
Power Syst., 2003, 18, (1), pp. 374 380

[8] BINATO S. , DE OLIVEIRA G.C. , DE ARAUJO J.L.: A greedy

randomized adaptive search procedure for transmission
expansion planning, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., 2001, 16,
(2), pp. 247 253

[22] ROMERO R., ROCHA C. , MANTOVANI J.R.S. , SA NCHEZ I.G.:

Constructive heuristic algorithm for the DC model in
network transmission expansion planning, IEE Proc.
Gener. Transm. Distrib., 2005, 152, (2), pp. 277 282

[9] JIN Y.X., CHENG H.Z., YAN Y.J., ZHANG L.: New discrete particle
swarm optimization and its application in transmission
network expansion planning, Electr. Power Syst. Res.,
2007, 77, pp. 227 233

[23] HAFFNER S., MONTICELLI A., GARCIA A., MANTOVANI J., ROMERO R.:
Branch and bound algorithm for transmission system
expansion planning using a transportation model, IEE
Proc. Gener. Transm. Distrib., 2000, 147, (3), pp. 149 156

[10] GEEM Z.W., KIM J.H. , LOGANATHAN G.V.: A new heuristic

optimization algorithm: harmony search, Simulation,
2001, 76, (2), pp. 60 68

[24] ROMERO R., MONTICELLI A.: A hierarchical decomposition

approach for transmission network expansion planning,
IEEE Trans. Power Syst., 1994, 9, (1), pp. 373 380

IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., 2010, Vol. 4, Iss. 6, pp. 663 673
doi: 10.1049/iet-gtd.2009.0611

673

& The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2010