Lecture 24C: FLISR – Cost-Benefit
Analysis (CBA) Example
1. Introduction
● Topic: Cost-Benefit Analysis (CBA) of feeder automation in power distribution systems.
● Automation affects utility costs (capital + operational); in this example, operational costs
are neglected.
● Benefits include:
○ Improved reliability indices (SAIFI, SAIDI).
○ Reduced crew dispatch, reduced maintenance.
● Full CBA can be complex, but goal is benefits > costs.
2. System Description
● Feeder length: 5 miles.
● Customers located on laterals A, B, C, and D.
● Load tapers down farther from the substation.
● Feeder automation improves reliability only on the main feeder, not on laterals.
3. Assumptions
● Failure rate = 0.4 failures/year/mile.
● Mean time to repair (MTTR) = 4 hours.
● All faults are considered permanent.
● Station breaker is SCADA-operated → switching time = 0.
● Lateral faults and temporary faults are ignored.
4. Base Case (No Automation)
● Total failures/year = 0.4 × 5 miles = 2 events/year.
● SAIFI = 2 interruptions/year.
● SAIDI = 8 hours/year (2 events × 4 hrs).
5. Option 1: Install Manual Switch (Cost:
$3,000)
● Installed at the midpoint → divides feeder into two equal sections.
● Fault on upper section: everyone out for 4 hours.
● Fault on lower section:
○ Crew arrives in ~1 hour → customers A & B restored quickly.
○ C & D wait full 4 hours.
● Results:
○ SAIFI = 2
○ SAIDI = 6.2 hours/year
● Significant improvement for a low cost.
6. Option 2: Install Midpoint Recloser
(Cost: $40,000)
● Recloser isolates downstream faults automatically.
● Fault on upper half:
○ Breaker trips → all customers see interruption.
● Fault on lower half:
○ Recloser trips → customers A & B see no outage.
○ Customers C & D experience 1 outage of 4 hours.
● Results:
○ SAIFI ≈ 1.4
○ SAIDI ≈ 5.6 hours/year
7. Option 3: Recloser + Automated Tie
Switch (Cost: $52,000)
● Automated switch restores supply to C & D from the alternate source.
● Requires fast switching logic (centralized or peer-to-peer).
● Fault on upper section:
○ Recloser opens, tie switch closes → C & D restored quickly.
● Results:
○ SAIFI = 1
○ SAIDI = 4 hours/year
● Large reliability improvement.
8. Option 4: Manual Switch + Fault Current
Indicator (Cost: $6,000)
● Fault indicator helps pinpoint fault location quickly.
● Reduces crew travel time → faster switching.
● Mean switching time decreases to ~0.333 hrs for lower-feeder faults.
● Results:
○ SAIFI = 2
○ SAIDI ≈ 5.8 hours/year
9. Comparison of Options (Cost vs SAIDI
Improvement)
Option Cost ($) SAIDI Improvement (hrs) $ / hr Improved
Manual Switch 3,000 1.8 $1,667/hr
Recloser 40,000 2.4 $16,667/hr
Recloser + Auto Tie 52,000 4.0 $13,000/hr
Manual + FCI 6,000 2.2 $2,727/hr
Observations
● Manual switch = best cost-benefit ratio ("low-hanging fruit").
● Reclosers offer improvements but are far more expensive.
● Diminishing returns: additional automation yields smaller improvements per dollar.
10. Additional Considerations
● Reclosers may be needed for:
○ Long feeders
○ Protection coordination
● Other reliability improvements not considered:
○ Tree trimming
○ Animal guards
○ Lightning protection
● Automation is typically deployed on 5–10% of circuits—those with:
○ High customer count, or
○ Critical loads (hospitals, police, etc.)
11. Customer-Side Cost Analysis
Using the IEEE ICE calculator:
● Example: 1500 residential customers
● Base reliability: SAIFI = 2, SAIDI = 8
● Customer interruption cost = $15,804/year.
If automation reduces SAIDI by half:
● Customer annual cost decreases to ≈ $7,000.
● 10-year present value of benefits ≈ $31,000.
● Some automation options may still not justify cost unless:
○ There are critical customers, or
○ The devices serve other protection purposes.
12. Reference
● Book: Control and Automation of Electric Power Distribution Systems
Authors: Northcutt, Greene, and Wilson
(One of the few detailed references on feeder automation hardware.)
