Cited by 93Optimal Power Flow DistributionPower Quality and HarmonicsSmart Grid Energy Management

Monte Carlo-based assessment of PV impacts on real UK low voltage networks

Open access
Navarro, Alejandro, Ochoa, Luis F., Randles, Dan·2013·2013 IEEE Power & Energy Society General Meeting

Abstract

The penetration of residential photovoltaic (PV) panels is increasing particularly in those countries with special incentives. The total PV installed capacity in the UK has increased from negligible to 1.2 GW since the Feed-In Tariff scheme was created in 2010. As a result, Distribution Network Operators (DNOs) are already experiencing voltage issues in low voltage (LV) feeders were clusters have appeared. This work proposes a Monte Carlo-based technique to assess the impacts of different PV penetrations on LV networks in order to estimate their corresponding hosting capabilities. Three-phase models of two real LV networks in the North West of England are studied considering 5-min resolution synthetic data for domestic load and PV generation. Voltage-related impacts are measured using the European Standard EN50160. Additionally, the importance of data granularity on the impact assessment is analyzed. Results for the studied LV networks indicate that feeders with greater lengths and larger number of customers tend to experience voltage issues with lower PV penetration levels. In terms of the granularity, it was found that hourly resolution analyses underestimate the voltage impacts of residential PV.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/pesmg.2013.6672620

Cites

11 of 11 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • In all examined studies, the permissible violation probability was 5% or more.

    “In the criteria of all examined studies, the permissible violation probability was 5% or more [41,42,60,61].”

    From Stochastic Approach for Increasing the PV Hosting Capacity of a Low-Voltage Distribution Network (2022) · cites this paper as [61]

    The Impact Assessment section states that EN50160 requires voltage to remain within 0.9–1.1 p.u. for at least 95% of weekly measurements, allowing up to 5% outside that range. That is a tolerance for measurements over time, not an explicit permissible probability of violations across Monte Carlo simulations; the section also specifies limits that must never be exceeded. This paper cannot establish the criterion used by the other cited studies. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • The probability limitations chosen for analysis are significantly more conservative than the commonly used limit.

    “The probability limitations chosen for analysis are significantly more conservative than the commonly used limit.”

    From Stochastic Approach for Increasing the PV Hosting Capacity of a Low-Voltage Distribution Network (2022) · cites this paper as [61]

    Section C (Impact Assessment; page not provided) describes the EN50160 voltage criterion, including its 95% requirement, and Section IV reports probabilities of voltage problems. Neither section says that the probability limits chosen for the analysis are more conservative than a commonly used limit. Searches for conservative probability thresholds and a comparison with the 95% criterion found no such statement in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.73)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Office for National Statistics, "Families and households, 2001 to 2011," Statistical Bulletin, January 2012.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Navarro, A., Ochoa, L. F., & Randles, D.
Affiliations
  • University of Manchester (GB)
  • Electricity North West (United Kingdom) (GB)
Venue
2013 IEEE Power & Energy Society General Meeting
Publisher
IEEE
Published
2013
ISSN
1932-5517 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2143532846
Cited by
93
References
11
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 19 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 1
FWCI
16.23
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Locations
  • IEEE Power Engineering Society General Meeting (publishedVersion)
  • Research Explorer (The University of Manchester) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Loughborough University
  • Core Research for Evolutional Science and Technology
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Electrical and Electronic Engineering › Optimal Power Flow Distribution
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Electrical and Electronic Engineering › Power Quality and Harmonics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Electrical and Electronic Engineering › Smart Grid Energy Management
Keywords
low-voltage distribution networks, hosting capacity, voltage quality, Monte Carlo simulation, data resolution, feed-in tariffs, North West England

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review