Comparison of two alternate methods to establish an interrupted energy assessment rate

LAUR Repository

Show simple item record

dc.contributor.author Ghajar, R.
dc.contributor.author Billinton, R.
dc.contributor.author Oteng-Adjei, J.
dc.date.accessioned 2017-04-28T09:36:15Z
dc.date.available 2017-04-28T09:36:15Z
dc.date.copyright 1987 en_US
dc.date.issued 2017-04-28
dc.identifier.issn 1558-0679 en_US
dc.identifier.uri http://hdl.handle.net/10725/5561
dc.description.abstract Quantitative reliability evaluation is an important aspect of power system planning and operation. The indices produced in these applications are utilized in a wide range of management decisions throughout a utility. One issue which is often debated is the cost associated with a particular level of reliability. In order to make this argument complete, it is necessary to also thoroughly examine the worth or benefit associated with a particular level of reliability. Estimates of the impact of interruptions in service can be obtained by assessing the losses incurred by different customer types and classes. These data can then be used to generate a composite customer damage function for a given utility service area. In order to create a practical tool for assessing reliability worth, interruption costs must be related to the calculated indices used in system planning and operation. This paper uses two different approaches and a customer damage function to evaluate a factor designated as the Interrupted Energy Assessment Rate (IEAR) which can be used in conjunction with the calculated expected energy not supplied in the assessment of reliability worth. en_US
dc.language.iso en en_US
dc.title Comparison of two alternate methods to establish an interrupted energy assessment rate en_US
dc.type Article en_US
dc.description.version Published en_US
dc.author.school SOE en_US
dc.author.idnumber 199590160 en_US
dc.author.department Civil Engineering en_US
dc.description.embargo N/A en_US
dc.relation.journal IEEE Transactions on Power Systems en_US
dc.journal.volume 2 en_US
dc.journal.issue 3 en_US
dc.article.pages 751 - 757 en_US
dc.keywords Power system reliability en_US
dc.keywords Costs en_US
dc.keywords Power system planning en_US
dc.keywords Power system management en_US
dc.keywords Power supplies en_US
dc.keywords Power system analysis computing en_US
dc.keywords Power engineering and energy en_US
dc.keywords Systems engineering and theory en_US
dc.keywords Power & Energy Society en_US
dc.identifier.doi http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TPWRS.1987.4335205 en_US
dc.identifier.ctation Billinton, R., Oteng-Adjei, J., & Ghajar, R. (1987). Comparison of two alternate methods to establish an interrupted energy assessment rate. IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, 2(3), 751-757. en_US
dc.author.email rghajar@lau.edu.lb en_US
dc.identifier.tou http://libraries.lau.edu.lb/research/laur/terms-of-use/articles.php en_US
dc.identifier.url http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/abstract/document/4335205/ en_US
dc.orcid.id https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0630-8140 en_US
dc.author.affiliation Lebanese American University en_US

Files in this item

Files Size Format View

There are no files associated with this item.

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Search LAUR

Advanced Search


My Account