This study develops a 24-hour coordinated active- and reactive-power dispatch framework for a battery energy storage system (BESS) interfaced through a four-quadrant smart inverter in a radial distribution network with photovoltaic generation and electric-vehicle charging. The IEEE 33-bus feeder is evaluated under identical operating profiles and fixed hardware for three cases: no BESS, optimized active-power-only dispatch, and coordinated P--Q dispatch. A backward/forward-sweep power-flow solver is integrated with sequential least-squares programming to minimize a normalized objective combining feeder active-energy loss and system-wide voltage deviation, subject to BESS power limits, inverter apparent-power capability, charge/discharge efficiencies, state-of-charge (SOC) bounds, and terminal SOC equality. For an 800-kWh BESS with a 200-kW active-power limit and a 250-kVA inverter connected at Bus~18, P-only dispatch reduces daily feeder loss by 2.65\%, whereas coordinated P--Q dispatch reduces it from 4267.86 to 3842.57~kWh/day, corresponding to a 9.97\% reduction. The coordinated strategy further decreases daily voltage deviation by 17.77\% and improves the worst-case minimum bus voltage from 0.83871 to 0.86695~p.u. The SOC remains within 19.41--95.00\% and returns to 50\% at the end of the scheduling horizon. Under deterministic load, PV, and EV perturbations applied without re-optimization, the fixed P--Q schedule maintains feeder-loss reductions of 9.42--10.61\% and voltage-deviation reductions of 16.48--19.37\%. These results demonstrate the additional network benefit of coordinated reactive-power support while also revealing the practical limitations imposed by fixed inverter capacity.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Chooseang et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: