Test case I: It is two area forty thermal power generating units. The fuel cost characteristics data, operating limits and tie line limits are similar to [19, 24]. This test case has all practical complexity as valve point loading (VPL) effect, ramp rate limit (RRL) and prohibited operating zones (POZ) that makes the system much complex …show more content…
no. 4.1 : A two-area system with four generating units (Test Case I) 35 The best result in term of operating cost achieved by MFO is $/hr10604.48 for tie line limit of 200MW. To make a fair comparison statistical comparison of results obtained by MFO made with other recently reported methods as hybridization of Covariance Matrix Adapted Evolution strategy (CMAES) [18], PSO algorithm [19] and hybrid sum local search optimizer (HSLSO)[24] algorithm which are presented in Table I. The performance of MFO is found to be superior for finding optimal solution for comparatively large complex contained optimization problem related to power system. TABLE I. COMPARISION OF SIMULATION RESULTS FOR TEST CASE I
Generator units/ Tie-lines CMAES[18] PSO[19] HSLSO[24] MFO
P_1 (MW) 560.938 444.8047 445.1254 445.1223
P_2 (MW) 168.930 139.1953 138.8747 138.8777
P_3 (MW) 99.989 211.0609 211.9889 196.0000
P_4 (MW) 290.142 324.9391 324.011 340.0000
T_12 (MW) -194.39 -200.000 -199.9999 -200.000
∑▒P_g 1120.000 1120.000 1120.000 1120.000
Cost($/h) 10574.0 10604.678 10604.67