2018 National Power Engineering Conference (NPEC)
Economic scheduling of Plug-In Hybrid Electric
Vehicle considering various travel patterns
A.Akshaya Preethi*
Student Member, IEEE,
Electrical and Electronics Engineering Department,
Thiagarajar College of Engineering, Madurai, India
Email:akshayapreethi95@gmail.com
J.Jeslin Drusila Nesamalar
Assistant Professor,
Electrical and Electronics Engineering Department,
Kamaraj College of Engg. & Tech., Virudhunagar, India
Email:jeslindrusila@gmail.com
Abstract— Due to the wide usage of fossil fuels, global warming
has become a major threat in recent years. Hence, Plug-in
Hybrid Electric Vehicles (PHEVs) usage has become an
alternative solution due to the depletion of resources and the
increasing price of fossil fuels. In this work, the driving pattern of
the vehicles is calculated using probability density function. A
Fuzzy Logic based method is used to correlate the arrival and
departure time of the vehicle with the daily mileage as they are
independent in nature. The total operating cost minimization is
the main objective of the work by adopting controlled charging
strategy. The controlled charging strategy comprises of three
different modes: charging, discharging and idle mode. Thus, the
economic scheduling of PHEVs using the controlled charging
strategy is implemented considering two different test cases
namely residential and commercial area, each with a parking lot
for charging the vehicles. Finally, the scheduling of PHEV is
performed using MATLAB and the results of the two different
cases were analyzed under different charging levels and three All
Electric Range (AER)- 30,40 and 60 ranges of PHEVs.
Keywords— all electric range (AER), plug-in hybrid electric
vehicle (PHEV), fuzzy logic, probability density function, controlled
charging.
I. INTRODUCTION
A potential global warming has been created around the
globe with the anthropogenic emission of greenhouse gases
and the persistence of atmospheric carbon emission. The
transportation sector recently revealed that nearly 25% of
carbon dioxide is emitted due to 55% of oil consumption by
the humans as in [1]. In order to reduce the emission from the
transportation sector several initiatives are being taken by
researchers worldwide.
Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicles (PHEVs) has become an
alternative solution to tackle this situation. It uses rechargeable
batteries or other energy storage device for recharging by
plugging into an external electric source. The advantages of
PHEVs are their lesser operating cost, high energy efficiency
and less emission compared to the traditional combustion
* Corresponding author .
978-1-5386-3803-3/18/$31.00 ©2018 IEEE
S.Suganya
Research Scholar,
Electrical and Electronics Engineering Department,
Thiagarajar College of Engineering, Madurai, India
Email:suganyahselvam@gmail.com
Dr.S.Charles Raja
Assistant Professor,
Electrical and Electronics Engineering Department,
Thiagarajar College of Engineering, Madurai, India
Email:charlesrajas@tce.edu
engine vehicles. After a time period of travelling, the PHEVs
equipped with batteries should be charged for a better
performance. When PHEVs are plug-in to the power grid
through charging equipment there is a possibility of either
absorbing energy to charge the battery or by adopting vehicle-
to-grid (V2G) technology, the energy stored in the battery of
the vehicle can be supplied to the grid whenever needed.
In all-electric mode, the PHEVs can be designed to travel
either only at low speeds or it can be extended to drive at all
speeds.
As per the prognostication of International Energy Agency
(IEA), the PHEV/passenger Electric Vehicles (EVs) sales will
hike from 2020 and 100 million of EV/PHEV will be sold per
year by 2050 in [2]. PHEV owners tend to charge their
vehicles to maximum state of charge (SOC) during off-peak
hours because of low electricity price. During peak hours
when the electricity cost is high, the PHEV owners can sell the
power to the grid in [3]. By incorporating PHEVs as mobile
energy storage resources, the power grid can be transformed
into an efficient system.
The charging load profile developed to study the effects of
PHEV on electricity demand profile by using the data
collected from the National Household Travel Survey (NHTS)
in [4]. An optimal charging/discharging control mode of
PHEV was implemented to reduce its impact on power system
and thus reducing the operating cost of the system as in [5]. A
smart charging framework is modeled in [6] and different
driving patterns in [7] are used to minimize the daily cost and
performance comparison using fast and slow charging of
PHEV is demonstrated. To fulfill the preference of the vehicle
owner and to provide profit to the parking operator [8]
presents an energy management system. A UC-PHEV
structure is introduced to reduce the total operating cost using
the Genetic algorithm-LR procedure in [9] but it requires time-
consuming calculation and tedious algorithm. Depending on
discrete optimization criteria in [10]-[11], the effects of PHEV
on the power system is analyzed.
 2018 National Power Engineering Conference (NPEC)
The driving pattern of the vehicle and the vehicle’s
parameters were not considered together. It is assumed that
almost all the vehicles have empty battery when they arrive at
the parking lot. The vehicle owner’s preference on the final
SOC of the vehicle can be considered. The distribution of
vehicles in the charging station and the duration of time spent
will decide the charging schedule. In this paper, the
probability based fuzzy logic method is focused to correlate
the key parameters of driving pattern i.e. the arrival, departure
time and the daily distance travelled. The scheduling of the
vehicle is done based on three modes: charging, discharging
and idle mode.
II. PROBLEM DESCRIPTION
A. NHTS data analysis
The widespread transportation data of U.S. is provided by
National Household Travel Survey (NHTS) 2009 in [12]. The
data is collected based on daily trips taken in 24 hours period.
The periodic driving pattern of PHEVs is developed by
considering all the trips in a day as a person might travel Fig. 1. Probability distribution curve of residential area
several trips in a day. Here, the starting time of the initial trip The Fig. 1, shows the mobility pattern of residential area.
is defined as the departure time and the end time of the last The mobility pattern of the customers in residential area
trip of the day as the arrival time. follows a schedule with morning-departure and evening-
B. Probability based function arrival.
The probability of vehicles versus the departure time, the
arrival time and the daily distance travelled is based on NHTS
2009 as given in Fig. 1, of residential area and Fig. 2, of
commercial area as in [12].
A normal distribution function is considered for the
distribution of departure time and can be expressed as follows:
( ) /
(t)= ,0<t<24 (1)
√

where = 9.97 ( ),
= 16 ( ), = 2.2
The pdf of arrival time of the PHEVs also follows a
normal distribution function which is given as:
( ) /
(t)= ,0<t<24 (2)
√

where = 17.01 ( ),
= 10 ( ), = 3.2
For describing the distribution of daily mileage of the Fig. 2. Probability distribution curve of commercial area
vehicle a lognormal distribution function is used which can be
The mobility pattern of customers in the commercial area
expressed as follows:
( ) /
is shown in Fig. 2, which is different from that of residential
(t)= ,d>0 (3) pattern because the customers in commercial area follow a
√
pattern with morning-arrival and evening-departure.
where = 3.2 , = 0.9
C. Fuzzy Model of PHEV
In (1) and (2), (R) denotes the residential area and (C)
denotes the commercial area. The and values given in [12] The probability distribution functions of the arrival and
provides efficient result hence these values are chosen for the departure time of the PHEV are found to be two independent
analysis. events by analyzing the NHTS data. But while considering the
The probability distribution curve of the residential and the daily mileage travelled, it is dependent on the arrival and
commercial area is shown in Fig. 1, and Fig. 2, respectively. departure time. Hence, the pdf of daily mileage travelled can
be different for different combination of the arrival time and
the departure time.
 2018 National Power Engineering Conference (NPEC)
By using Fuzzy Logic concept the three fundamentals of
driving pattern can be handled certainly. To generate the
driving pattern of the PHEVs a fuzzy logic model is used. The
SOC of the vehicle is differentiated into five distinct stages.
During each time slot it can vary from one stage to another
after the charging is done. Different ranges of daily mileage
can be converted into different stages of SOC.
The membership function of the departure, arrival time and
the daily mileage travelled is classified into various regions.
The triangular membership function along with the advantage
of simplicity is the most prevalent method formed using
straight line. By applying proper fuzzy rules their relationship
can be defined. The fuzzy membership function of the
residential is shown in Fig.3 and commercial area is exhibited
in the Fig. 4.
The fuzzy membership function formed based on the
different fuzzy rules for both residential and commercial area
is indicated in Fig.3 and Fig. 4. The departure and the arrival
time are defined as input variables and their membership
functions are specified as very early (VE), little early (LE),
normal (N), little late (LL), and very late (VL). The daily
mileage is defined as output variable and its membership
functions are illustrated as small (S), small-medium (SM),
medium (M), medium-large (ML) and large (L). The pdf is
used to generate the parameters of the maximum, minimum
limit and the mean value of each variable.
The pdf based fuzzy rules are applied for mapping from
the input space to the output space in the stochastic fuzzy
model. A Probability matrix ‘P’ is defined as follows:
, , , , ,

, , , , ,
P= , , , , ,

, , , , ,

, , , , ,

∀ ∈ , , , , ] (4)
The corresponding entry of P is a row vector. It is a
probability distribution over the membership functions of
output variable based on a combination of membership
function of the two input variables.
The scheduling of PHEV is represented as a block diagram
in Fig. 5,

STAGE-1
(Arrival and STAGE-2 STAGE-3
Departure time (Fuzzy Model) (Energy
Probability) Equation)
Fig. 3. Fuzzy membership function of residential area

STAGE-4
(Scheduling
for a day)

Fig. 5. Block diagram of PHEV scheduling

The description of the block diagram given in Fig. 5 of

Fig. 4. Fuzzy membership function of commercial area
PHEV scheduling is that using probability density function –
the arrival, departure time and the daily distance travelled is
calculated. Applying the minimum and maximum values of
input and output variables, the fuzzy model is composed into
different membership function. After defuzzification the
distance driven is used to calculate the initial SOC and then
energy rate of the PHEV is found. Then the scheduling of
PHEV is done using the three states: charging, discharging
and idle state under normal and fast charging and using
normal charging alone to meet the objective.
 2018 National Power Engineering Conference (NPEC)
D. Initial SOC The objective function of the work can be denoted as
SOC is defined as the amount of energy stored in the battery. follows,
The fuel gauge in conventional internal combustion vehicle is Minimize( ) (7)
identical to SOC of the battery. In a V2G management system, where,
SOC is a key parameter as it can be used for extending the = − (8)
battery life. The amount of energy remains in the battery of Both the charging cost and the revenue acquired by
the vehicle when it enters home after daily trip is referred to discharging comes under the charging cost as given in (8).
be initial SOC in this paper. It plays a vital role in improving =∑ . ( ) (9)
the capability of the battery. The appropriate estimation of By adopting regulation service, the revenue obtained is
SOC can not only prevent the battery over discharge and given:
improving the battery life but also allows the application to =∑ . ( ) (10)
make control over the strategies to save energy. It is assumed where, = Rated charging power
that each trip starts with 100% SOC and the SOC of a PHEV
decreases with the distance traveled. r( ) = Electricity price at time period t.
( )= Regulation service price at time period t.
A factor l is defined as the percentage of distance travelled
in all electric range. The PHEV with an All Electric Range B. Constraints
(AER) of is assumed here and energy consumption of the The charging, discharging power and SOC of the PHEVs
vehicle is proportional to the travel distance d. should lie between their minimum to maximum limit or in
.
(1 − ∗ 100%, 0 < . < 0.8 their acceptable range to avoid the any uncertainties in the
= (5) system.
20%, . ≥ 0.8
where, l - % of distance travelled in all electric range. The charging power limit of the PHEV is given by,
d - Distance travelled from the defuzzified output. < < (11)

- PHEVs all electric range. The discharging power limit of the PHEV is given by,

E. Energy Required < < (12)

The energy required to charge the PHEV battery after the
arrival time of a final trip of the day depends on an initial SOC
of the vehicle. The energy needed to charge the battery is
obtained by plug-in to the utility power source or grid. The
minimum time required to charge a battery is 4 hours. But, the
time required to charge the vehicle will vary according to the
initial SOC of each vehicle. The energy rating required for the
PHEV undergoing scheduling is calculated using an initial
SOC of a PHEV and the capacity of the battery is given as
follows:
= ∗C (6)
where, C - battery capacity
III. PROBLEM FORMULATION
The overloading of the network at peak hours will be
prevented by controlled charging and discharging of PHEVs
as well as the advantage of off-peak charging benefits is also
utilized by the PHEV owners. By adopting V2G strategy, the
dependencies on small expensive units is decreased by
discharging the PHEV at peak hours which leads to
decrement in the operating cost of the system.
A. Objective
The main objective of the work is to minimize the total
operational cost of the system which comprises of two parts:
1. Charging and discharging cost
2. Profit earned by enhancing regulation service.
The SOC should lie within the limit to maintain the battery life
20% ≤ ≤ 100% (13)
C. Earning Regulation Service
The PHEV scheduling is performed using three modes:
charging, discharging and idle mode. V2G technology leads
PHEV to provide earning regulation service to the power
system. The PHEV owners are destined with transmission
system operator (TSO) through aggregators and incentives are
provided for the owners participating in the regulation service.
Here, when the PHEVs are in idle mode they are utilized to
provide regulation service and paid by power capacity
provider.
IV. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
Two different cases are used for analysis in this paper.
Each case is evaluated under different vehicle type and
charging level.
A. Case 1-Residential Area
A residential case consisting of 100 houses and each with a
PHEV is taken for analysis. The arrival, departure time and
the distance travelled is based on probability distribution
function (pdf).
B. Case 2-Commercial Area
A commercial case considered for the scheduling consists
of 100 PHEV in an institution. The pdf based arrival,
departure and daily mileage is utilized.
 2018 National Power Engineering Conference (NPEC)
C. Charging Level F. Charging and discharging cost
Due to wide structure of power system and various The charging and discharging cost calculated using (9) and
charging types, different charging levels have been considered earning regulation cost using (10) for all the three types of
to charge the vehicle’s battery so far. For example, the PHEV with two different charging level of residential area is
charging level is assumed to be 4 kW based on a 230 V/4.6 shown in Table I-III.
kW outlet in Belgium as in [13]. In [10] outlet of 120 V/15 A The number of vehicles to be charged per day is chosen
and 240 V/50 A are used. Here, two different charging outlets from probability distribution curve as shown in Fig.1 and
of 230 V/30 A for normal charging and 400 V/62 A for fast Fig.2 of the residential and commercial area respectively. The
charging is considered. maximum vehicles charged per day for residential and
commercial area is 12.
D. Vehicle Type
In “normal charging” condition the vehicle is charged at
The driving range of a vehicle utilizing only power from single charging rate but when there is an emergency case the
its electric battery to travel over a given distance is termed as vehicle owner can adopt “fast and normal charging” condition
AER or in other words it is defined as the driving range of the which includes two charging rate. The normal charging rate is
vehicle. The calculation of all electric range varies according 6 kW/hr whereas fast charging rate is 24 kW/hr.
to the designs of the hybrid electric vehicles. A plug-in
vehicle’s all-electric range is defined as PHEV (miles) or TABLE I. COST OF RESIDENTIAL AREA WITH AER-30
PHEV (kilometers) km representing the distance the vehicle
can travel on battery power alone. Therefore, an AER-n can AER-30
travel n miles by considering the energy stored in the battery Fast and Normal
Normal Charging
charging
alone. AER-30, 40 and 60 type is considered in this paper.
Charging and
E. Electricity and Regulation service price Discharging
1240.60 245.18
cost ($/day)
Several programs are introduced by utilities, which
encourage their customers to use electricity during off-peak
As given in the Table. I, the charging and discharging cost
hours to reduce the power demand and by conserving energy
of the vehicles per day at normal charging level is 80% lesser
in order to save money. Charging the vehicle at off-peak hours
than fast and normal charging level. The earning regulation
and discharging at peak hours is cost effective, hence time-
cost of PHEV with AER-30 type is 435.23 ($/day) which
based pricing attracts the owners of PHEV to adopt this
denotes the cost provided when the vehicle is at idle state.
strategy. The Regular Electricity Price as well as the Earning
Regulation service cost for the PHEV scheduling as shown in TABLE II. COST OF RESIDENTIAL AREA WITH AER-40
the price plot of Fig. 6,
AER-40
Fast and Normal
Normal Charging
charging
Charging and
Discharging 1023.70 28.27
cost ($/day)

Table. II shows that the charging and discharging cost of

normal charging level is 97% lesser than the other charging
level this is because under normal charging level the discharge
rate is higher than charging rate and hence the cost is less. The
earning regulation cost calculated from (10) is 421.76 ($/day)
for the vehicle with AER-40 type.

TABLE III. COST OF RESIDENTIAL AREA WITH AER-60

AER-60
Fast and Normal
Normal Charging
charging
Fig. 6. Price plot (a) Electricity (b) Regulation service Charging and
The Fig. 6, depicts that using the pricing scheme in [14] Discharging
713.39 -282.01
cost ($/day)
and [15], the PHEVs are scheduled accordingly and finally the
objective of minimizing the total operational cost of the
system is calculated.
 2018 National Power Engineering Conference (NPEC)
The charging and discharging cost of the vehicle with AER-60 TABLE VII. TOTAL OPERATING COST OF RESIDENTIAL AREA
type at fast and normal charging level is very high of about Total operating cost ($/day)
713.39 ($/day) whereas, the same cost under normal charging
level yields a profit of 282.01 ($/day). The earning regulation Fast and Normal Charging 805.35
cost earned during the idle state is 421.76 ($/day) as inferred AER-30 Normal Charging -190.05
from the Table. III.
Fast and Normal Charging 601.93
The charging and discharging cost of the system for
commercial area is shown in the Table IV-VI is calculated AER-40 Normal Charging -393.49
using (9) and (10).
Fast and Normal Charging 291.63
TABLE IV. COST OF COMMERCIAL AREA WITH AER-30 AER-60 Normal Charging -703.77
AER-30
Fast and Normal It is inferred from the Table. VII is that the total
Normal Charging
charging operational cost of case1 at fast and normal charging condition
Charging and
of vehicles with AER-30, 40 results in higher operational cost
Discharging
995.08 925.42 compared to the PHEV with AER-60 type with an increase in
cost ($/day)
cost of about 63% and 51% respectively. Similarly, under
Table. IV indicates that the PHEV with AER-30 type normal charging condition, the PHEVs with AER-30, 40 the
results in lesser charging and discharging cost of about 7% corresponding increase in cost is 73% and 44% higher than the
under normal charging level compared to the other charging PHEV with AER-60 type.
level. The earning regulation cost obtained is 1135.50 ($/day).
TABLE VIII. TOTAL OPERATING COST OF COMMERCIAL AREA
TABLE V. COST OF COMMERCIAL AREA WITH AER-40
Total operating cost ($/day)
AER-40
Fast and Normal Charging -140.423
Fast and Normal
Normal Charging AER-30 Normal Charging -209.05
charging
Charging and
Discharging Fast and Normal Charging -161.23
951.27 881.24
cost ($/day) AER-40 Normal Charging -230.23
The charging and discharging cost of PHEV with AER-40 Fast and Normal Charging -243.36
range results in 8% lesser operating cost under normal AER-60 Normal Charging -324.84
charging level compared to the other charging level and the
lesser cost is about 881.24($/day) and the earning regulation
cost is 1125.50 ($/day) as depicted from Table. V. The total operational cost obtained using all the three types
of PHEV results in profit but the higher profit is earned in case
TABLE VI. COST OF COMMERCIAL AREA WITH AER-60 of AER-60 range as shown in Table. VIII. In commercial area,
AER-60 at fast and normal charging condition the PHEV with AER-30,
Fast and Normal 40 type results in 42% and 14% higher operational cost than
Normal Charging AER-60 type respectively. Similarly, under normal charging
charging
Charging and condition the PHEV with AER-30, 40 types provide a
Discharging respective increase in cost of about 36% and 29% than the
869.14 787.66
cost ($/day) operational cost of PHEV with AER-60 type.
The result of PHEV with AER-60 range is given in Table. H. Conclusion
VI in which the charging and discharging cost under fast and In this work, the economic scheduling of PHEV is
normal charging level of about 869.14 ($/day). But, under analyzed using two different test cases. The driving pattern of
normal charging level a profit of 787.66 ($/day) is obtained the vehicles for both the test cases is derived using probability
which is 9% lesser than the previous charging level. The distribution function. Fuzzy logic based method, used for
earning regulation cost found to be 1125.50 ($/day). correlating the mileage driven provides better result. By
G. Comparision of total operating cost adopting PHEV, the earning regulation service provided at
idle state of the vehicle is utilized to minimize the total
The total operating cost calculated from the (7) of the
operating cost of the system. The normal charging condition
residential area with all the three types of AER-30, 40 and 60
considered for charging the PHEVs in a parking lot results in
at both the charging levels are compared and is given in the
minimum final SOC when the mileage driven is very less (i.e.,
Table. VII and similarly for the commercial area it is shown in
>50%) but, the objective of acquiring minimum cost is
Table. VIII
satisfied. In parking lots, the owner’s adopting fast and normal
 2018 National Power Engineering Conference (NPEC)
charging condition yields the final SOC to be maximum (i.e., [15] W. Liu, H. Xu, S. Niu and X. Li, “A new method to plan the capacity
and location of battery swapping station for EV considering demand
100%) thus the operating cost is also higher. Hence, Fuzzy side management”, Sustainability 2016. [doi:10.3390/su8060557].
logic based controlled charging method can be incorporated
according to the choice of the customer and either of the
charging can be preferred.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The authors extend their sincere thanks to the management
of their respective college for their constant encouragement
and flexibility in doing this research work and the financial
support from Science and Engineering Research Board
(SERB), India under Early Career Research (ECR) Scheme.
(F.No. ECR/2017/000827) is gratefully acknowledged.

REFERENCES
[1] I. Rahman , P.M. Vasant, B. Singh, M. Singh, M. Abdullah-Al-Wadud,
N. Adnan, “Review of Recent Trends in Optimization Techniques for
Plug-in Hybrid, and Electric Vehicle Charging Infrastructures”,
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, vol. 58, pp. 1039-1047,
2016.
[2] R. Garcia-Valle, J.A. Pecas Lopes, “Electric vehicle integration into
modern power networks”, New York, NY: Springer; 2012
[3] S. Suganya, S. Charles-Raja & P. Venkatesh, “Smart management of
distinct plug‐in hybrid electric vehicle charging stations considering
mobility pattern and site characteristics”, International Journal of Energy
Research, vol. 41, pp: 2268–2281, 2017.
[4] Z. Darabi and M. Ferdowsi, “Aggregated Impact of Plug-in Hybrid
Electric Vehicles on Electricity Demand Profile”, IEEE Trans.
Sustainable Energy, vol. 2, no. 4, pp.501-508, Oct. 2011.
[5] R.C. Leou, “Optimal Charging/Discharging Control for Electric
Vehicles Considering Power System Constraints and Operation Costs”,
IEEE Trans. on Power Syst., vol. 31, no. 3, pp.1854-1860, May. 2016
[6] R. Mehta, D. Srinivasan, A.M. Khambadkone, J. Yang and A. Trivedi,
“Smart Charging Strategies for Optimal Integration of Plug-in Electric
Vehicles within Existing Distribution System Infrastructure”, IEEE
Trans. Smart Grid, vol. PP, pp. 1-1, 2016.
[7] S. Suganya, S. Charles-Raja and P. Venkatesh, ‘Simultaneous
coordination of distinct plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicle charging
stations: A modified Particle Swarm Optimization approach’, Energy,
vol. 138, pp. 92-102, Nov. 2017
[8] M.J. Mirzaei, A. Kazemi and O. Homaee, “Real-world based approach
for optimal management of electric vehicles in an intelligent parking lot
considering simultaneous satisfaction of vehicle owners and parking
operator”, Energy 2014, vol.76, pp-345-356.
[9] E. Talebizadeh, M. Rashidinejad and A. Abdollahi, “Evaluation of
plug-in electric vehicles impact on cost-based unit commitment”,
Journal of Power Sources, vol. 248, pp. 545-552, 2014.
[10] S. Shafiee, M.Firuzabad and M. Rastegar, “Investigating the impacts of
plug-in hybrid electric vehicles on power distribution systems”, IEEE
Trans. Smart Grid, vol. 4, no. 3, pp. 1351–1360, Sep. 2013.
[11] J. Tan, L. Wang, “Assessing the impact of PHEVs on Load Frequency
Control with high penetration of wind power”, T&D Conference and
Exposition, 2014 IEEE PES, pp. 1–5.
[12] J. Tan, L. Wang, “Integration of plug-in hybrid electric vehicle into
residential distribution grid based on two-layer intelligent optimization”,
IEEE Trans. Smart Grid, vol.5, No. 4, pp.1774-1784, July 2014.
[doi:10.1109/TSG.2014.2313617].
[13] K. Clement-Nyns, E. Haesen and J. Driesen, “The impact of charging
plug-in hybrid electric vehicles on a residential distribution grid,” IEEE
Trans. Power Syst., vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 371–380, Feb. 2010.
[14] A. Zakariazadeh, S. Jadid and P. Siano, “Integrated operation of electric
vehicles and renewable generation in a smart distribution system”,
Energy Conversion and Management, vol.89, pp. 99-110, 2015.