Engineering, Technology & Applied Science Research Vol. 10, No.

6, 2020, 6432-6437 6432

Teaching-Learning-Based Optimization Algorithm

for the Combined Dynamic Economic Environmental
Dispatch Problem
Badr M. Alshammari
College of Engineering
University of Ha’il
Ha’il, Saudi Arabia

Abstract-The Dynamic Economic Environmental Dispatch several operating constraints have been taken into account in
Problem (DEEDP) is a major issue in power system control. It the DEEDP mathematical formulation, such as power balance
aims to find the optimum schedule of the power output of constraint, Valve-Point Loading Effects (VPLE), Prohibited
thermal units in order to meet the required load at the lowest cost Operating Zones (POZ), and RRLs. During the past decades,
and emission of harmful gases. Several constraints, such as several techniques have been proposed to solve this kind of
generation limits, valve point loading effects, prohibited problems, including linear programming [2], dynamic
operating zones, and ramp rate limits, can be considered. In this programming [3], and gradient algorithms [4]. Unfortunately,
paper, a method based on Teaching-Learning-Based in these techniques, the cost function has been approximated by
Optimization (TLBO) is proposed for dealing with the DEEDP quadratic functions and VPLEs have been ignored in the
problem where all aforementioned constraints are considered. To
investigate the effectiveness of the proposed method for solving
problem formulation. This frequently leads to inexactitude of
this discontinuous and nonlinear problem, the ten-unit system
the optimal solutions. Moreover, those techniques may be
under four cases is used. The obtained results are compared with trapped in local optima due to the non-convex and nonlinear
those obtained by other metaheuristic techniques. The characteristics of the cost function. In recent years, various
comparison of the simulation results shows that the proposed meta-heuristic techniques have been suggested in the literature
technique has good performance. to overcome the limitations of the traditional methods.
In [1], a differential evolution-based technique has been
Keywords-dynamic economic environmental dispatch;
teaching-learning-based optimization; prohibited operating zones;
used to solve the DEEDP where a fuzzy-based method has
ramp rate limits
been employed to extract the optimal solution. Authors in [5]
utilized the artificial bee colony algorithm to solve the EDP
I. INTRODUCTION with VPLEs. Unfortunately, the environmental impact of
thermal units has not been considered. Particle swarm
With the growing demand for electricity and rising fuel
optimization (PSO) has also been used to solve power dispatch
prices, electricity companies are constantly working to ensure
problems [6-8]. Basu [9] has solved the DEEDP by applying
continuous and reliable electrical power supply to their
the second version of the Non-dominated Sorting Genetic
customers. In order to achieve this, system operators need to
Algorithm (NSGAII) proving that such technique may provide
constantly adjust the control variables of power networks. This
promising results. Another technique based on NGSAII has
extremely difficult task is performed by the resolution of the
been developed in [10] to handle the DEEDP incorporating
Economic Dispatch Problem (EDP), which aims to determine
POZ constraints. An optimization method based on Simulated
the production levels of all thermal units which guarantee a
Annealing (SA) algorithm has been implemented in [11] in this
balance between production and consumption at the lowest
regard, the cost function has been approximated by a cubic
cost. Unfortunately, today network loads are dynamic, which
function and the problem has been converted into mono-
means that it is required to plan the generation of units in real
objective problem by using price penalty factors. Within this
time to guarantee continuous power balance. The resolution of
context, other metaheuristic techniques, such as Gravitational
such Dynamic EDP problems (DEDP), considers the
Search Algorithm (GSA) [12], Biogeography-Based
constraints imposed by generator Ramp-Rate Limits (RRL).
Optimization (BBO) [13], Bacterial Foraging Algorithm (BFA)
Along with DEDP, the emission dispatch problem, which aims
[14], and Harmony Search (HS) algorithm [15] have been
to minimize the emissions of fossil fuels, has emerged. The
developed and implemented for various complex dispatch
combination of the two problems in one single problem called
problems. The main advantage of the aforementioned
Dynamic Economic Environmental Dispatch Problem
techniques is that they expand the entire search space for the
(DEEDP) has become attractive. DEEDP aims to minimize
optimal solution to avoid getting trapped in a local optimal. In
simultaneously the total production cost and the emission of
addition, these techniques are not concerned with the nature
harmful gases. Thus, it can be considered as a multi-objective
and the shape of the objective functions. However, the
problem with conflicting objective functions [1]. In the past,
Corresponding author: Badr M. Alshammari
www.etasr.com Alshammari: Teaching-Learning-Based Optimization Algorithm for the Combined Dynamic Economic …
 Engineering, Technology & Applied Science Research Vol. 10, No. 6, 2020, 6432-6437 6433

convergence of most of these techniques depends on their where δ = rand ( 0,1) and λ is the average of the price
parameters and their computational time is quite large.
penalty factors of all units. The price penalty factor for unit i
The Teaching-Learning-Based Optimization (TLBO) can be determined as:
algorithm [16] is a powerful algorithm which can provide
promising results in single objective and multi-objective Cimax
optimization. It is a population algorithm inspired from the
λi = (4)
Eimax
teacher/learner relationship. The TLBO algorithm is based on
two basic methods of learning: (i) through the teacher, known where Cimax and Eimax are the maximum fuel cost and the
as the teacher phase, and (ii) through interaction with other
maximum emission of unit i respectively.
students, called student phase. In this optimization algorithm, a
group of students is considered as a population and the In order to find the optimal Pareto solutions, the objective
different subjects offered to the students are considered to be function FT is minimized for various values of δ subject to the
the feasible solutions and a student's result is considered to be constraints (5)-(9). Equation (5) describes the power balance
the value of the fitness function [16]. The best solution in the
whole population, which corresponds to the best value of the constraint where the real power losses PLt at time t are
objective function, is assigned to the teacher. It has been shown calculated by (10) [19]. As given in (6), the output power of
that TLBO has the advantage of only requiring a few control each generator i should be within its lower Pimin and upper
parameters, such as the number of students in the class and the
number of subjects presented for students, for its operation [17, Pimax limits. The RRLs of the thermal units are shown in (7)
18]. and (8) while POZs constraints are given in (9).
In this regard, a TLBO-based method is proposed for N
dealing with the problem of DEEDP. In the DEEDP
formulation all operating constraints, such as generation limits,
∑ Pit − PDt − PLt = 0, t = 1,...,T (5)
i =1
energy balance, VPLEs, RRLs, and POZ constraints are
considered. To render the problem more practical, total real where, PDt is the load at time t.
power losses are taken into account. To assess the effectiveness
of the proposed optimization method, a ten-unit system is
Pimin ≤ Pit ≤ Pimax , i = 1,..., N (6)
employed. The simulation results obtained by the proposed
method are compared with other metaheuristic techniques.
Pit −1 − Pit ≤ Ridown (7)
II. MATHEMATICAL FORMULATION OF THE DEEDP
The DEEDP is a principal problem in power network Pit − Pit −1 ≤ Riup (8)
operation. It aims to determine the optimum allocation of
power outputs of all thermal units to minimize simultaneously where Ridown and Riup are the down-ramp and up-ramp limits
the total fuel cost and total emission according to the predicted of unit i.
load demands, over entire dispatch periods generally of one
hour. Taking VPLEs into account, the total fuel cost can be  Pmin ≤ Pt ≤ P down
expressed by:  i i i,1
t  up
2 Pi ∈  Pi,k −1 ≤ Pi ≤ Pi,down
t
k , k = 2,..., zi (9)
{ }
T N
CT = ∑∑ ai + bi Pi t + ci ( Pi t ) + di sin ei ( Pi min − Pi t ) (1)  up
t =1 i =1  Pi, z ≤ Pit ≤ Pimax
 i
where ai , bi , ci , d i and ei are the cost coefficients of unit i,
where Pidown and Piup
, k are the down and up bounds of POZ
Pi t is the output power in MW of unit i at time t, T is the ,k

number of hours, and N is the number of units. number k and zi is the number of POZ for unit i.
The second objective function considered in this study, N N N
which is the total emission of harmful gases, is described as: PLt = ∑∑ Pit Bij Pjt + ∑ Boi Pit + Boo (10)
T N i =1 j =1 i =1
ET = ∑∑ αi + βi Pi t + γ i ( Pi t ) + ηi exp ( λi Pi t )
2
(2)
t =1 i =1 where, Bij , Boi , Boo are the loss coefficients of B-loss matrix.
where α i , βi , γ i , ηi and λi are the emission coefficients.
III. THE TLBO ALGORITHM
In this work, the two objective functions are combined in a TLBO algorithm, developed in [16], is a population-based
single objective function by integrating the price penalty factor. optimization algorithm that mimics the teaching and learning
The combined function is: phenomenon in a class. It is inspired by the transmission of
knowledge from teacher to students and the mutual interaction
FT = δ CT + (1 − δ ) λ ET (3) between classmates. In TLBO algorithm, students in a class

www.etasr.com Alshammari: Teaching-Learning-Based Optimization Algorithm for the Combined Dynamic Economic …
 Engineering, Technology & Applied Science Research Vol. 10, No. 6, 2020, 6432-6437 6434

constitute the population and a student is considered as a

feasible solution for the optimization problem. Subjects offered (
X vjk , new = X vjk + r X vjk − X uj
k
) (14)
to students constitute the decision variables and student’s result
is the fitness function evaluated at the feasible solution. TLBO The TLBO algorithm’s steps are shown in Figure 1.
method is divided into two phases which are teacher phase and
student phase.
A. Teacher Phase
In this phase, the teacher is the main interfering where his
job is to improve the knowledge level of learners (students) and
helps them to get high grades. However, grades or marks of
students depend on teaching quality and student’s quality. For
simulation, consider there are ‘n’ subjects offered to Npop
students. Therefore, variable ‘n’ is equivalent to the number of
problem design variables and Npop is the population, in TLBO
algorithm. Let M kj be the mean result of learners in a
particular subject j where j ∈ {1, 2,… , m} , at the k-th teaching-

{ }
learning cycle ( k ∈ 0,1, 2,…, I max ). Since the teacher is the
most highly learned and experienced person in the class, thus,
he is considered the best learner in the entire population or
class. Let X k * be the best solution in the entire population at
the k-th iteration. The difference between the teacher’s results
and the mean result of students in the j-th subject is calculated
as [18]:

(
Dkj = r X kj * − TF M kj ) (11)

where r ∈ [ 0,1] is a random number. TF is the teaching factor Fig. 1. Steps of the TLBO algorithm.

that is selected randomly from {1, 2} . It is used to choose IV. TLBO ALGORITHM IMPLEMENTATION FOR THE DEEDP
which value of mean should be changed. To verify the effectiveness of the proposed method in
At the k-th teaching-learning cycle, the i-th feasible solution solving the DEEDP, numerical experiments are carried out
is updated according to the following expression. employing the ten unit system. The TLBO algorithm was
firstly applied for static economic emission dispatch for total
X ijk,new = X ijk,old + Dkj (12) demand power of PD=2000MW, and then for the dynamic case.
All system data are taken from [20]. In this paper, TLBO and
PSO algorithms are implemented in Matlab R2018B on a PC
If X ijk,new gives better results compared to X ijk,old , it is intel(R) Core i7, 1.5GHz, 64 bits. Population size and
accepted, otherwise, it is rejected. All accepted solutions will maximum number of iterations are both 200. The B-loss matrix
be used as input for the student phase. of the studied system is shown in (15).
B. Student Phase 0.49 0.14 0.15 0.15 0.16 0.17 0.17 0.18 0.19 0.20
 
In this phase, students acquire knowledge through mutual 0.14 0.45 0.16 0.16 0.17 0.15 0.15 0.16 0.18 0.18
interaction. The learning phenomenon is simulated as follows.  0.15 0.16 0.39 0.10 0.12 0.12 0.14 0.14 0.16 0.16
 
Two feasible solutions, X uk and X vk with u ≠ v , are randomly  0.15
0.16
0.16 0.10 0.40 0.14 0.10 0.11 0.12 0.14 0.15
− 4 0.17 0.12 0.14 0.35 0.11 0.13 0.13 0.15 0.16
B = 10   (15)
selected from the population. If X uk is better than X vk , then 0.17 0.15 0.12 0.10 0.11 0.36 0.12 0.12 0.14 0.15
 
update X vk as given in (14) otherwise update X uk as given in 0.17 0.15 0.14 0.11 0.13 0.12 0.38 0.16 0.16 0.18
 0.18 0.16 0.14 0.12 0.13 0.12 0.16 0.40 0.15 0.16
(13). If the new solution is better than the old solution, then, the  
0.19 0.18 0.16 0.14 0.15 0.14 0.16 0.15 0.42 0.19
new solution will be accepted in the population and the old 0.20 0.18 0.16 0.15 0.16 0.15 0.18 0.16 0.19 0.44

solution will be rejected, otherwise the new solution will be
rejected and old solution will be kept in the population. A. Static Dispatch
The convergence of the objective functions for the
k
X uj k
( k k
,new = X uj + r X uj − X vj ) (13) proposed algorithm and PSO is shown in Figure 2. It can be
seen that TLBO provides cheaper electricity production and
lowest emission compared to PSO. In fact, the minimum cost

www.etasr.com Alshammari: Teaching-Learning-Based Optimization Algorithm for the Combined Dynamic Economic …
 Engineering, Technology & Applied Science Research Vol. 10, No. 6, 2020, 6432-6437 6435

and emissions are 132968.93$/h and 18832.63ton/h

respectively for the TLBO algorithm and 133088.62$/h and
19054.12ton/h respectively for the PSO algorithm. The Pareto
front generated by the proposed algorithm is shown in Figure 3.

Emission (ton/h)
It is clear that that the Pareto solutions are uniformly
distributed in the objective space. Moreover, Figure 3 shows
that cost and emissions are conflicting functions.
Cost ($/h)

Fig. 3. Pareto solutions for PD=2000MW.

(a)
B. Dynamic Dispatch
Pure dynamic economic dispatch and pure dynamic
environmental dispatch are solved separately. Then, they are
dynamically combined for economic environmental dispatch.
Table I shows the optimal variation of the generation for
dynamic economic dispatch, according to the daily variation
of the load ( PDt ). It is clear that the optimal output powers of
Emission (ton/h)

all units are within their limits. The minimum production cost
is 2472116.66$ while the corresponding emission is at its
(b) maximum value which is 330411.81ton. The optimum
schedule of all system units for the dynamic emission dispatch
is depicted in Table II. It can also be seen that output powers of
all units are within their limits. The minimum emission is
294153.04ton while the total cost is at its maximum value
which is 2594148.32$.
Fig. 2. Convergence of objective functions for PD=2000MW: (a) cost, (b)
emission.

TABLE I. DYNAMIC ECONOMIC DISPATCH

Hour PDt P1 P2 P3 P4 P5 P6 P7 P8 P9 P10

1 1036 150.1259 135.5687 73.0000 117.0485 175.4140 126.8733 130.0000 117.5441 20.0000 10.0000
2 1110 150.0664 135.0000 73.0000 108.9781 225.4140 160.0000 130.0000 120.0000 20.0000 10.0000
3 1258 150.2382 135.0000 153.0000 125.7599 223.8123 159.6342 129.5876 119.8081 49.7545 39.8977
4 1406 150.5704 135.0000 206.7431 175.7599 243.0000 159.0079 129.5631 119.0141 79.6457 43.2159
5 1480 150.5888 135.0000 255.5104 225.7599 221.4589 156.7358 130.0000 119.9033 78.9610 45.4764
6 1628 150.2503 135.0000 335.5104 275.7599 243.0000 159.7044 129.6031 119.9085 79.8822 47.4658
7 1702 150.1468 198.5926 331.5975 300.0000 241.5421 160.0000 130.0000 119.9352 79.8647 43.3868
8 1776 210.1460 213.1343 340.0000 300.0000 243.0000 160.0000 130.0000 120.0000 80.0000 38.2598
9 1924 273.4194 293.1343 340.0000 300.0000 243.0000 160.0000 130.0000 120.0000 80.0000 55.0000
10 2022 300.4154 373.1343 340.0000 300.0000 243.0000 160.0000 130.0000 120.0000 80.0000 55.0000
11 2106 315.4490 453.1343 337.4498 300.0000 243.0000 160.0000 130.0000 120.0000 80.0000 55.0000
12 2150 344.5307 470.0000 340.0000 300.0000 243.0000 160.0000 130.0000 120.0000 80.0000 55.0000
13 2072 331.2602 397.3814 340.0000 300.0000 242.9249 159.9539 130.0000 119.9397 79.9670 55.0000
14 1924 251.3135 317.3814 338.7426 300.0000 242.6070 159.6948 129.9303 120.0000 79.9776 54.9429
15 1776 171.7944 237.3814 339.7179 300.0000 242.9101 159.5908 129.9045 118.7763 79.9693 54.4079
16 1554 150.0967 157.3814 296.4912 250.7445 238.3715 159.4043 129.3618 119.6965 53.0343 43.1300
17 1480 150.9007 135.0000 240.7998 242.3687 242.1751 159.6100 129.7144 119.7307 55.0000 44.0521
18 1628 150.3632 174.5376 300.0000 292.3687 242.2373 159.9336 129.4308 119.2750 54.7366 53.3392
19 1776 217.4110 254.5376 300.0000 300.0000 243.0000 160.0000 130.0000 120.0000 55.0000 55.0000
20 1972 284.3186 334.5376 340.0000 300.0000 243.0000 160.0000 130.0000 120.0000 80.0000 55.0000
21 1924 259.9202 309.6601 340.0000 300.0000 243.0000 159.2709 129.8075 119.9798 79.9277 53.0288
22 1628 180.1857 229.9838 291.1958 250.6165 223.4006 159.4022 126.6683 120.0000 51.6945 43.7541
23 1332 150.2720 150.0578 211.4456 201.6378 174.2186 160.0000 130.0000 90.0000 52.0055 44.2729
24 1184 150.5086 135.0000 131.4456 167.0485 175.3310 110.0000 130.0000 120.0000 50.0000 40.0000
Cost ($) 2472116.66
Emission
330411.81
(ton)

www.etasr.com Alshammari: Teaching-Learning-Based Optimization Algorithm for the Combined Dynamic Economic …
 Engineering, Technology & Applied Science Research Vol. 10, No. 6, 2020, 6432-6437 6436

TABLE II. DYNAMIC EMISSION DISPATCH

Hour PDt P1 P2 P3 P4 P5 P6 P7 P8 P9 P10

1 1036 150.3364 135.2479 88.8628 91.5246 133.1490 133.2677 96.0287 92.6589 79.7478 54.8723
2 1110 150.4649 138.1099 101.9172 99.8572 143.6597 143.8590 105.5614 114.0802 79.9698 55.0000
3 1258 164.2919 166.1639 117.3305 121.6243 172.9143 159.9093 129.7196 120.0000 80.0000 54.9823
4 1406 199.0112 203.9786 147.0126 144.0633 204.0232 159.7183 129.9286 119.9410 79.9646 55.0000
5 1480 216.9388 219.6330 157.4592 163.6519 218.2469 160.0000 129.9633 120.0000 79.9462 55.0000
6 1628 253.4935 255.9774 190.1283 190.7046 242.9276 159.9049 129.9803 119.9825 80.0000 55.0000
7 1702 275.2332 273.7700 209.7002 210.7657 242.8287 160.0000 129.9338 120.0000 79.9196 54.9987
8 1776 291.1351 295.7189 229.4559 232.4257 242.9839 159.8865 130.0000 120.0000 80.0000 54.8400
9 1924 324.3152 326.1564 277.5305 279.7439 243.0000 160.0000 129.9974 119.9869 79.9975 54.9994
10 2022 348.6556 349.0595 321.7455 294.5092 243.0000 160.0000 130.0000 119.9751 80.0000 55.0000
11 2106 383.1823 382.7515 339.9697 299.9955 243.0000 160.0000 130.0000 120.0000 80.0000 54.9992
12 2150 397.8457 425.6329 340.0000 300.0000 241.7596 152.4816 130.0000 120.0000 80.0000 55.0000
13 2072 364.1944 364.2761 339.9983 299.9967 243.0000 159.9968 130.0000 120.0000 79.9960 55.0000
14 1924 327.2057 322.9324 278.8479 278.7852 243.0000 159.9789 130.0000 120.0000 79.9829 55.0000
15 1776 292.5619 292.8412 230.3221 233.2478 242.7153 159.8868 129.8985 119.9561 80.0000 55.0000
16 1554 234.6654 237.5412 181.0347 183.2478 243.0000 160.0000 129.7930 120.0000 55.0000 55.0000
17 1480 224.4285 225.2253 162.6887 164.5307 224.1457 160.0000 129.9327 120.0000 54.9989 55.0000
18 1628 262.2682 260.2198 197.1840 196.3723 242.4237 159.9493 129.8766 119.9320 55.0000 55.0000
19 1776 298.9110 296.1538 240.5298 238.0002 243.0000 159.9865 129.9697 120.0000 54.9945 55.0000
20 1972 337.0679 337.4869 297.2509 287.9121 242.9982 159.9977 129.9953 119.9968 79.9966 54.9965
21 1924 328.1016 326.5158 278.6325 274.7016 243.0000 159.9165 130.0000 119.9709 79.9725 54.9936
22 1628 248.1062 246.5158 198.6325 224.7016 215.3974 159.6594 130.0000 119.9354 79.8864 55.0000
23 1332 176.4330 166.5158 127.4188 174.7016 174.6863 160.0000 129.7901 119.8400 80.0000 54.9865
24 1184 154.0152 155.7069 100.8685 124.7016 168.9035 152.3155 107.1434 110.9206 80.0000 55.0000
Cost ($) 2594148.32
Emission
294153.04
(ton)

TABLE III. COMBINED ECONOMIC EMISSION DISPATCH

Hour PDt P1 P2 P3 P4 P5 P6 P7 P8 P9 P10

1 1036 150.4594 135.3072 80.0281 120.0864 126.2070 124.4066 129.6379 86.1200 59.2616 44.0814
2 1110 150.0709 135.0000 81.2516 102.8341 167.8358 125.3782 129.3292 116.1200 79.9973 44.7038
3 1258 150.4932 135.0161 138.7766 129.6167 188.9086 160.0000 129.2388 120.0000 79.7994 54.6856
4 1406 154.9053 161.9512 177.1730 179.6167 223.7618 159.9893 129.7067 119.9437 79.9075 54.7681
5 1480 152.9466 217.8705 186.4596 185.1000 236.2579 159.5941 130.0000 119.8567 79.8784 52.1092
6 1628 213.1264 236.4829 260.3624 203.1865 243.0000 136.3359 130.0000 120.0000 80.0000 55.0000
7 1702 227.8217 221.6160 271.7060 246.9217 243.0000 160.0000 129.8277 120.0000 79.9719 55.0000
8 1776 228.2304 242.9587 290.8592 286.3618 242.9531 159.9532 130.0000 119.4716 79.8240 54.3041
9 1924 293.0721 293.5529 340.0000 280.7385 243.0000 160.0000 130.0000 120.0000 80.0000 54.5004
10 2022 306.2281 368.3049 340.0000 300.0000 243.0000 160.0000 129.8569 120.0000 80.0000 54.1663
11 2106 376.6213 389.3073 339.9899 299.9805 242.9987 159.9980 129.9979 119.9977 79.9869 54.9993
12 2150 385.6214 428.8158 340.0000 300.0000 243.0000 160.0000 130.0000 120.0000 80.0000 55.0000
13 2072 361.8808 397.2726 340.0000 300.0000 243.0000 160.0000 130.0000 90.0000 80.0000 55.0000
14 1924 289.4585 317.2726 300.7884 300.0000 243.0000 159.9907 129.6966 119.8300 80.0000 55.0000
15 1776 232.8384 281.4039 276.1673 257.2175 242.9575 159.8950 129.9781 120.0000 79.9478 55.0000
16 1554 153.0008 218.8426 222.2456 241.2300 243.0000 159.9386 130.0000 119.8715 55.0000 55.0000
17 1480 150.1175 217.9193 195.6985 194.4730 243.0000 159.8241 129.9954 119.9426 55.0000 54.0499
18 1628 229.1932 233.6730 207.0696 244.4730 243.0000 160.0000 130.0000 120.0000 55.0000 55.0000
19 1776 257.6630 290.2181 268.7446 256.2676 242.9809 159.9782 130.0000 120.0000 54.9739 54.9997
20 1972 271.6633 347.2125 340.0000 300.0000 243.0000 160.0000 130.0000 120.0000 80.0000 55.0000
21 1924 301.8759 308.5015 297.6986 299.7156 242.8737 159.9440 129.6663 119.8831 79.9622 54.9860
22 1628 222.0018 228.5015 217.6986 249.7616 222.5752 159.8970 129.6350 119.9210 79.9730 47.2841
23 1332 150.2022 148.5746 138.5624 200.3815 223.2994 159.5506 130.0000 89.9210 80.0000 43.5042
24 1184 150.4527 135.1441 73.0000 170.0864 173.2994 127.6795 130.0000 114.8581 80.0000 55.0000
Cost ($) 2519909.93
Emission
303338.20
(ton)

Table III depicts the best compromise solution obtained cost obtained for the pure economic dispatch (2472116.66$)
from the resolution of the combined DEEDP. Fuzzy-based and less than the cost obtained for the pure environmental
method [9] is employed to extract the optimal best compromise dispatch (2594148.32$). Similarly, the emission is
solutions. The total cost is 2519909.93$ which is more than the 303338.20ton which is less than the emission obtained for the

www.etasr.com Alshammari: Teaching-Learning-Based Optimization Algorithm for the Combined Dynamic Economic …
 Engineering, Technology & Applied Science Research Vol. 10, No. 6, 2020, 6432-6437 6437

pure economic dispatch (330411.81ton) and more than the [8] W. Jiang, Z. Yan, and Z. Hu, “A Novel Improved Particle Swarm
emission obtained for the pure environmental dispatch. The Optimization Approach for Dynamic Economic Dispatch Incorporating
Wind Power,” Electric Power Components and Systems, vol. 39, no. 5,
comparison results shown in Table IV show that the proposed pp. 461–477, Mar. 2011, https://doi.org/10.1080/15325008.2010.
TLBO outperforms PSO, Improved Bacterial Foraging 5628536.
Algorithm (IBFA), and the second version of the Non- [9] A. Torchani, A. Boudjemline, H. Gasmi, Y. Bouazzi, and T. Guesmi,
dominated Sorting Genetic Algorithm (NSGAII) in finding the “Dynamic Economic/Environmental Dispatch Problem Considering
optimum generation schedule for the DEEDP. Prohibited Operating Zones,” Engineering, Technology & Applied
Science Research, vol. 9, no. 5, pp. 4586–4590, Oct. 2019,
https://doi.org/10.48084/etasr.2904.
TABLE IV. COMPARISON WITH OTHER META-HEURISTIC TECHNIQUES
[10] M. Basu, “Dynamic economic emission dispatch using nondominated
Method Minimum cost ($) Minimum emission (ton) sorting genetic algorithm-II,” International Journal of Electrical Power
TLBO 2472116.66 294153.04 & Energy Systems, vol. 30, no. 2, pp. 140–149, Feb. 2008,
PSO 2497562.38 301539.82 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijepes.2007.06.009.
IBFA [21] 2481733.3 295833.0 [11] I. Ziane, F. Benhamida, and A. Graa, “Simulated annealing algorithm for
NSGAII [10] 2.5168x106 3.1740x105 combined economic and emission power dispatch using max/max price
penalty factor,” Neural Computing and Applications, vol. 28, no. 1, pp.
197–205, Dec. 2017, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-016-2335-3.
V. CONCLUSION [12] I. Bala and A. Yadav, “Optimal Reactive Power Dispatch Using
Gravitational Search Algorithm to Solve IEEE-14 Bus System,” in
In this study, a new metaheuristic called Teaching- Communication and Intelligent Systems, Singapore, 2020, pp. 463–473,
Learning-Based Optimization (TLBO) algorithm was used for https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-3325-9_36.
solving the DEEDP. The problem is described as an [13] V. Raviprabhakaran and C. S. Ravichandran, “Enriched Biogeography-
optimization problem. The decision variables of the problem Based Optimization Algorithm to Solve Economic Power Dispatch
are the output powers of units at the hours of a single day. Problem,” in Proceedings of Fifth International Conference on Soft
Energy balance equation, generation limits, valve point loading Computing for Problem Solving, Singapore, 2016, pp. 875–888,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-0451-3_78.
effects, prohibited operating zones and ramp rate limits are
considered as problem constraints. To assess the effectiveness [14] B. Hernández-Ocaña, J. Hernández-Torruco, O. Chávez-Bosquez, M. B.
Calva-Yáñez, and E. A. Portilla-Flores, “Bacterial Foraging-Based
of the proposed method, the ten-unit system is used. The TLBO Algorithm for Optimizing the Power Generation of an Isolated
is applied for the pure dynamic economic dispatch, the pure Microgrid,” Applied Sciences, vol. 9, no. 6, p. 1261, Jan. 2019,
dynamic environmental dispatch and the combined dynamic https://doi.org/10.3390/app9061261.
economic environmental dispatch. The obtained results were [15] K. Lenin, B. R. Reddy, and M. Suryakalavathi, “Upgraded Harmony
compared with other techniques proposed recently in the Search Algorithm for Solving Optimal Reactive Power Dispatch
literature, such as PSO, IBFA and NSGAII, and it was found Problem,” International Journal of Mathematics Research, vol. 4, no. 1,
pp. 42–52, 2015.
that the proposed algorithm outperforms them.
[16] R. V. Rao, V. J. Savsani, and D. P. Vakharia, “Teaching–learning-based
optimization: A novel method for constrained mechanical design
REFERENCES optimization problems,” Computer-Aided Design, vol. 43, no. 3, pp.
[1] X. Jiang, J. Zhou, H. Wang, and Y. Zhang, “Dynamic environmental 303–315, Mar. 2011, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cad.2010.12.015.
economic dispatch using multiobjective differential evolution algorithm [17] A. Farah, T. Guesmi, H. Hadj Abdallah, and A. Ouali, “A novel chaotic
with expanded double selection and adaptive random restart,” teaching–learning-based optimization algorithm for multi-machine
International Journal of Electrical Power & Energy Systems, vol. 49, power system stabilizers design problem,” International Journal of
pp. 399–407, Jul. 2013, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijepes.2013.01.009. Electrical Power & Energy Systems, vol. 77, pp. 197–209, May 2016,
[2] G. W. Chang et al., “Experiences with mixed integer linear https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijepes.2015.11.050.
programming based approaches on short-term hydro scheduling,” IEEE [18] H. Singh Gill, B. Singh Khehra, A. Singh, and L. Kaur, “Teaching-
Transactions on Power Systems, vol. 16, no. 4, pp. 743–749, Nov. 2001, learning-based optimization algorithm to minimize cross entropy for
https://doi.org/10.1109/59.962421. Selecting multilevel threshold values,” Egyptian Informatics Journal,
[3] Z.- Liang and J. D. Glover, “A zoom feature for a dynamic programming vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 11–25, Mar. 2019, doi: 10.1016/j.eij.2018.03.006.
solution to economic dispatch including transmission losses,” IEEE [19] Τ. M. Kumar and Ν. A. Singh, “Environmental Economic Dispatch with
Transactions on Power Systems, vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 544–550, May 1992, the use of Particle Swarm Optimization Technique based on Space
https://doi.org/10.1109/59.141757. Reduction Strategy,” Engineering, Technology & Applied Science
[4] C. Cao, J. Xie, D. Yue, J. Zhao, Y. Xiao, and L. Wang, “A distributed Research, vol. 9, no. 5, pp. 4605–4611, Oct. 2019, https://doi.org/
gradient algorithm based economic dispatch strategy for virtual power 10.48084/etasr.2969.
plant,” in 2016 35th Chinese Control Conference (CCC), Chengdu, [20] T. Guesmi, A. Farah, I. Marouani, B. Alshammari, and H. H. Abdallah,
China, Jul. 2016, pp. 7826–7831, https://doi.org/ “Chaotic sine–cosine algorithm for chance-constrained economic
10.1109/ChiCC.2016.7554598. emission dispatch problem including wind energy,” IET Renewable
[5] Y. Labbi, D. B. Attous, and B. Mahdad, “Artificial bee colony Power Generation, vol. 14, no. 10, pp. 1808–1821, 2020,
optimization for economic dispatch with valve point effect,” Frontiers in https://doi.org/10.1049/iet-rpg.2019.1081.
Energy, vol. 8, no. 4, pp. 449–458, Dec. 2014, https://doi.org/ [21] N. Pandit, A. Tripathi, S. Tapaswi, and M. Pandit, “An improved
10.1007/s11708-014-0316-8. bacterial foraging algorithm for combined static/dynamic environmental
[6] J. B. Park, K. S. Lee, J. R. Shin, and K. Y. Lee, “A particle swarm economic dispatch,” Applied Soft Computing, vol. 12, no. 11, pp. 3500–
optimization for economic dispatch with nonsmooth cost functions,” 3513, Nov. 2012, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asoc.2012.06.011.
IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 34–42, Feb.
2005, https://doi.org/10.1109/TPWRS.2004.831275.
[7] N. Singh and Y. Kumar, “Economic load dispatch with environmental
emission using MRPSO,” in 2013 3rd IEEE International Advance
Computing Conference (IACC), Ghaziabad, India, Feb. 2013, pp. 995–
999, https://doi.org/10.1109/IAdCC.2013.6514362.

www.etasr.com Alshammari: Teaching-Learning-Based Optimization Algorithm for the Combined Dynamic Economic …