Arteche Algorithms and their Application in the es-
timation of states in smart grid
Venkat Narayan* Alexis Martínez del Sol** Jorge Javier Mier García** Gabriel Becerril**
*President Netzconsult Ingenieure
Dünnistrasse 10 CH-8962 Bergdietikon
Tel.: +41 44 741 76 58
hvncons@switzerland.net
Abstract: The paper presents several practical criteria for select-
ing the types, number, and optimal location of measuring
equipment for collecting real time data with required accuracy
for the state estimation as demanded by the SCADA systems
used in the automation of distribution systems. It also suggests a
method for detection and elimination of possible errors in the
telemetric data. The algorithms presented are easy to imple-
ment computationally and guarantee the correct operation of
state estimators within acceptable economic constraints. The
application of the proposed algorithms is also illustrated by an
example chosen from a real network.
Index Terms: Algorithms, Automation, Indexes, Measurement
units, Measurement errors, Optimization methods, Power Dis-
tribution Control, State Estimation
I. INTRODUCTION
The real time data sent by the measuring equipment at
remote locations, as coordinated by the SCADA systems
constitute the starting point for any of the functions of distri-
bution systems and in particular, for the state estimator. Al-
though technically an ideal solution, it is not economically
justified to equip every distribution transformer with measur-
ing instruments; however, greater the number of measure-
ments available more accurate will be the results as calcu-
lated by the state estimator.
Specifically, the problem to be solved is: Given a net-
work, the type and the minimum number as well as the op-
timal location of the measuring units are to be determined so
as to guarantee the accuracy of the state estimators. The
complexity of the problem is the result of the enormous
number of possible combinations of the location of the mea-
suring equipment as well as the contradictory requirements
between the possible accuracy and the total cost of the mea-
suring system. For this reason, majority of the investigations
presented until now have been based on empirical rules
based on observations or experimental studies [1,2].
**Grupo Arteche
Derio Bidea 28 48100 Mungia,Tel:+3494 60112001
amds@arteche.es jmier@arteche.com.mx
gbecerril@arteche.com.mx
This paper presents four (4) practical rules for the prelim-
inary determination of the type and the number as well as the
location of the measuring units; new algorithms are then
presented, which enable optimization of the data to obtain
results within acceptable limits.
At this stage it is well to recall that for this type of studies,
there are no known and recognized standards available re-
commending the applicable level of accuracies. For this
reason, the recommendations of [2] for the different automa-
tion functions implemented in the distribution systems (in %
of respective magnitudes of interest) are applied.
• 5-8 % deviations for the reconfiguration of the network,
and for service restoration.
• 10-12 % deviations for Voltage and Var control, Power
factor control
• 11-18 % for load balance, load management, etc.
The results obtained are similar to those obtained by [3] in
an analysis of a similar network and allows the following
conclusions:
• Generally, greater the number of measurements in real
time, more precise is the result, as evidenced by a re-
duction in the deviations; this is as to be expected.
• The results for the voltages are a little better than in the
case of load flow.
• The substitution of the load flows (active power) by the
voltages at the nodes leads only to small variations of
the results (degraded); this suggests that whenever poss-
ible, voltage measurements can be used instead of load
flow calculations to obtain more economical results.
II. METHODS FOR PRELIMINARY DE-
TERMINATION OF TYPE, NUMBER AND
LOCATION OF MEASURING EQUIPMENT
Given the complexities of this problem, it is not the inten-
tion of this paper to present a rigorous solution as developed
for the transmission networks [4], but to apply a heuristic
approach based on the following observations [1]:
1. Since the precision required depends upon the automa-
tion functions implemented, it is not essential to deter-
mine all the values at all points with the same accuracy.
For example, the power flows at points of sectionaliza-
tions should be determined more precisely than those at
other points or individual loads. However, for the im-
portant automation functions such as optimal network
reconfiguration, it is necessary to obtain more precise
values at the points, where the circuit breakers or rec-
losers are installed than those at the locations of capaci-
tor banks, installed for voltage and var control and even
less at other points. Hence, locating the measuring
equipment at the points where circuit breakers, reclos-
ers and sectionalizing switches are installed is always a
good recommendation.
2. The state estimator uses the measurements for “correct-
ing” the errors in load values at specific zones. There-
fore, locating the measuring equipment in such a way
that the power supply region is divided into zones
(called measurement zones) with similar total loads,
will ensure that the load model will be more uniform as
regards precision. It is obvious that for a particular
measurement zone there will be less load, but with a
more precise estimation.
3. Because of economic considerations, the majority of
real time measurements will be voltages at the nodes or
line currents instead of power flows except at the power
supply substation.
Based on the above observations, we have developed a set
of rules which can be used for selecting the preliminary loca-
tions of measuring equipment.
A. Rule 1:
D. Rule 4
When economic restrictions impose a fixed number of
measurement equipment and you wish to install them at
those critical nodes with a given precision for one of the
magnitudes of interest the algorithm defined in the Fig. 1 can
be used. In the following a first algorithm is shown for the
case where a fixed number of measuring equipment is given
to be located. We start with an initial tolerance value, the
number of measuring equipment available as well as the
number of nodes in the circuit.
At the end, we will have the available equipment installed
at the critical nodes (of less precision or higher σi ) and de-
pending upon the number of measuring equipment the total
precision will be better or worse with respect to the initial
value; in exceptional cases, the final value will be the same
as initial value.
Start
CTol : Total permissible deviations in the
magnitudes of interest.
M : No. of measurements to be located
N : Total number of nodes
k=0
Calculate for the magnitudes
of interest the deviations σi
and sort them in descending
k=k+1
order

At locations where main circuit breakers and / or fuses are Locate Meas. at
installed voltages are measured. At the head substation the node i i =1
measurement should be power flows, in other cases mea-
Yes
surement of currents will be sufficient. This will enhance the
accuracy of reconfiguration and restoration of power supply k≤M
Yes
σi > CTol
functions.
No
B. Rule 2: No
CTol=CTol+
i = i+1
Along the power supply sections defined by the measur- ΔCTol
ing equipment into zones of similar total loads and of similar No
magnitude: These measurements could be of the type “cur- i=N
rent”; they will enhance the accuracy of the load model.
yes

C. Rule 3: yea

k<M CTol=CTol-
ΔCTol
At the locations with normally open circuit breakers the
measurement can be voltages. It is recommended to take No
these measurements at both sides of the circuit breakers (op- End
posite line ends) since this will enhance the precision of
monitoring and voltage / var control functions from the subs- FIG.1. Algorithm for the location of a fixed number of mea-
tation or from the load dispatch center. In addition, this will suring equipment.
improve the accuracy of the state estimator, once the circuit
breakers or reclosers are closed following a reconfiguration
or restoration.
 III. SORTING OF MEASUREMENTS AND
DERIVATION OF MINIMUM NUMBER

The proposed algorithm above (basic or metering

schemes) is a good compromise between precision and com-
putational simplicity. The method selects the number, the
type and the location of measuring equipment for a good
precision, however, without optimizing the process from the
points of view of precision vs. cost.

The recommendations regarding the levels of precision

imply that only at those points where circuit breakers or
sectionalizing switches are installed, high precision is neces-
sary; hence, it would be difficult to justify installing all the
measuring equipment as suggested by the basic algorithm.
For elimination of some of the measuring equipment of the
basic algorithm to minimize the number of equipment the
method of Koglin [2] is applied: It consists of eliminating
these in an orderly way. Its high efficiency results from eli-
minating the equipment one by one, based on their “contribu-
tion” to the precision of the magnitudes estimated and taking
into account other variables of interest.

For a set of variables of interest X, with its associated

deviations σi, where i = 1…k, a scheme z with a set Zo with
m measuring equipment is considered and the rules method
applied. Then the precision index of the system is defined as:
k
I ( z ) = ∑ σ i2 ( z ) (1)
i =1

The Index (Io) is calculated for the actual system and is

used for eliminating the measuring equipment one by one
as explained below:

• After eliminating one measurand from the set Zo the

magnitudes of interest and their variance are esti-
mated and the resulting index I(z) is calculated; the
procedure is repeated eliminating the measurands one
by one and calculating the resultant I(z). At each itera-
tion only one measurand is eliminated at a time. From
the calculated I1 …Im the measurement whose remov-
al leads to an index Ix nearest to Io is then eliminated.
• With the new set of measuring equipment the process
is repeated for removing a second measurement of the
scheme z, then a third and thus until all the m mea-
surements are eliminated, leaving only very vital
measurands such as those at the supply station..
• A plot of precision index vs. number of measurements
is then constructed.
• The measurements at or near the asymptote part of the
curve are eliminated as well as others with minor ef-
fect on the index to respect the imposed economic
considerations. This results in the minimum number
of measuring equipment necessary for a technical and
economic solution of the problem.
The algorithm for this method is illustrated in Fig. 2.
FIG. 2 Algorithm for elimination of measuring equipment
The basic method offers the best precision, but leads some
times to unacceptable high costs. Elimination of one measu-
rand leads to a cost reduction, but at the same time the preci-
sion is sacrificed, since the deviations will increase. The
procedure is continued to arrive at an acceptable compromise
between cost and precision, which is the objective of this
study. This process of elimination is illustrated by a practical
example of a real network.
IV. DETECTION AND ELIMINATION OF
ERRORS IN MEASUREMENT
The real time telemetering equipment used in the SCADA
systems for the automation of electrical networks are gener-
ally reliable, but not all are free from errors. These errors can
result from several sources, as high lighted by Merrit [5],
such as the errors associated with the measuring equipment,
the different IEDs (Intelligent Electronic Devices) used as
well as those arising from the data transmission channels.
 For transmission system sufficiently adequate methods TABLE 1
PRECISION INDEX OF MEASURING EQUIPMENT
exist for detecting and eliminating the measurement errors
[6], all employing redundant measurements for checks, veri- Precision index and the order of elimination of measuring equipment
fication and comparison as well as initial data filtering.
Index 1.05 1.1 1.12 2.44 5.67 11.4 20.5 33.5
In the case of distribution systems, there are very little Equip.mz 7 1 5 3 6 4 2 0
studies on this subject. The difficulty remains in the absence
of the above mentioned redundancy and any proposal of
duplicating the measuring equipment will lead to unaccepta-
ble additional costs.

General criteria, which can help to detect and filter out

possible errors of measurement heuristically, are suggested
below:

1. At the substation, measurements both on the high

and low voltage sides should be foreseen; thus the
measurements on the load side can be estimated bet-
ter. This is justified by the vital importance of the
required precision of these data for all the algo-
rithms described in this paper.
2. For possible measurements at particular points in
the network, historical data under similar conditions
can be used to reach our objective.

V. ANALYSIS OF RESULTS
Taking the network shown in Fig. 3, the number, type and
location of measurements are determined and then the graph
of precision index vs. number of measurement equipment is
plotted.
FIG. 4 Influence of measurands on Precision index
As can be seen from Fig. 4 the measurands m7 m1 and m5
are practically unnecessary since their contribution to the
overall precision index is negligible. We can continue to
eliminate m3, m6, etc. in the same order as in the above Fig. 4
sacrificing the precision until permissible cost level is
reached.

The three graphs presented below correspond to three

scenarios of operation of the network. The results calculated
by the state estimator in each case confirm the accuracy of
the proposed algorithm for elimination of measuring equip-
ment.

FIG. 3 Single line diagram of an actual network

FIG. 5 Estimated node voltages only with measurement m0
Here, m0, m1, m4, m5, m6, and m7 are located according to
rule 1; m2 and m3 as per rule 2.

Fig.#6. Estimated node voltages with all the measuring
equipment present
Fig. # 7. Estimated node voltages with measuring equipment
m7, m1 and m5 eliminated
Legend:
Estimated values
± Standard deviations
The very little influence of m7, m1 and m3 on the preci-
sion index is evident from the above graphs. It is to be noted
that this method involves rather a large number of calcula-
tions. For example, in a system where m measuring equip-
ment are foreseen by the rules, m*(m+1)/2 repetitions of
state estimation and auxiliary calculations of the indices are
necessary before arriving at end results. However, this effort
is justified, since all these calculations have to be done only
once during the engineering phase of the project. This me-
thod is not only valid for a system of real time measurements
for the state estimator, but can also be used for the whole
distribution automation systems.
VI. CONCLUSIONS
1. Generally, when more real time measurements are avail-
able, the precision of results will be higher, as can be
seen from a reduction of the deviations.
2. The results of the voltages are generally more precise
than those of power flows.
3. The substitution of power flows by node voltages lead to
only small variations (degraded); this suggests that vol-
tage measurements can be used, which are more eco-
nomical, instead of power flows, whenever possible.
4. Tests made with these algorithms on real actual net-
works convincingly confirm their simplicity in computa-
tion, their effectiveness as well as the potential for their
future applications.
VII. REFERENCES
[1] Baran, M.E., and Kelley, A.W., “State Estimation Method For
Distribution Systems”, IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, Vol.9,
No. 3, Aug. 1994,pp.1601-1609.
[2] Brian Mc.D., “General Method for Optimal Measuring System for
Distribution Automation”, Procedings PSCC Conference, Paper No:
03-11, Oct. 1999
[3] Li, K., “State Estimation For Power Distribution System and
Measurement Impacts”, IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, Vol.
11, No. 2, May. 1996, pp. 911-916
[4] Baran E.M., Zhu, H, y ICE. Garren, A “Meter Placement Method for
State Estimation” paper presented at the” IEEE PES Winter Meeting,
Feb. 1995, paper no 218-8 PWRS.
[5] Merrit, H.M. and Schweppe, F.C., “Bad data suppression in power
system static state estimation”, IEEE Transactions on Power Appara-
tus and Systems, Vol. 90, No. 2, 1981, pp. 2718-2725
[6] Larson, R.E., W.F., and Peschon, J., “State Estimation in Power
Systems Part I: Theory and Feasibility,” IEEE Transactions on
Power apparatus and Systems, Vol. 89, N0. 3, Mar. 1970, pp. 345-352.
VIII. BIOGRAPHIES
Alexis Martínez del Sol was born in Cienfuegos
Cuba in 1964. He received his degree Doctor es
science from the Central Technical University of
Las Villas, Cuba in 1997. During 1987 – 1997 he
worked as an Assistant professor at the Faculty of
Electrical Engineering of the Central University of
Las Villas. There he was the chief of the depart-
ment and a member of Scientific Council.
From 1999 he acted as titular C professor (research) at the Departemento de
Ingeneniera Mecánica Eléctrica of the University of Guadalajara, Mexico.
Since 2005 he works as Chief Project Manager at the company Arteche,
Measurements and Technology S.A. The areas of his research interests
include analysis of operation, control and protection of electrical power
systems as well as soft ware development for applications. He is a member
of National Council of Researchers (Level 1).
Jorge Javier Mier García was born in Báaez,
Placetas, Cuba. He received his degree Doctor es
Sciences in 2005 from the Central University of
Las Villas, Cuba. During 1988 – 2005 he was
Assistant Professor at the Faculty of Electrical
Engineering of the Central University of Las
Villas. He was also a member of the National
Scientific Tribunal.
Since 2006 he is working as Design Engineer with Arteche, Measurements
and technology S.A. His areas of research interests include analysis of
operation, control and protection of electrical power systems as well as
development of soft ware for applications.
 Venkat Narayan (SM 04588000) was born in
India. He graduated from Indian Institute of
Science Bangalore with a Masters degree in
Electrical Power Engineering. After a few years
of training at EdF and French industries, he
worked for several years with BBC Brown Boveri
& Cie, AG, (ABB) Switzerland in the fields of
power system protection, control & automation in
various positions

He is a Senior Member of IEEE and a member of CIGRE, ElectroSuisse and

Swiss Engineering. Since 1995 he is president of NetzConsult Ingenieure,
consulting Industries and Power Utilities. His interests include power system
protection, control & automation as well as marketing and management.

Gabriel Becerril, was born in Mexico, DF. He

graduated from Instituto Politecnico Nacional as
Control Engineer and received his Master Degree
on Project Management on 2009. During 1995 –
2002 he was working for CFE CPTT as Designer
Engineer of substations with voltage up to 400 kV.
He was also a member of the ISA and IEEE.

Since 2002 he is working as Product Manager of Equipment for Distribution

Automation at Arteche. His areas of interests include distribution
automation, power system protection, control & automation as well as
marketing and management.