## 4 Optimization Results
### Case C: Abnormal Mode with Proposed Dynamic Priorities  
The purpose of this section is to investigate the impact of the proposed priority model on the optimal solutions mentioned in Case B. In this regard, Equation (11) is considered to prioritize the loads in the objective function (15). The values of \(w_{ENS}\) and \(w_{pen}\) were taken to be 0.5 to generalize this paper by assigning equal importance weights for each factor EENS and interruption penalty. The value of \(W_{j,t}^{pen}\) for the high priority loads, medium priority loads and low priority loads were considered \(10^{3}\), \(10^{2}\) and 10, respectively. Also, the values of \(W_{j,t}^{criti}\) were equal to those mentioned in Table 1. The MTTR for each generator is assumed to be five time slots. Table 6 is the same as Table 3 but the proposed priority model was considered for it. As can be seen, unlike Table 3, the high priority load ECS at time slot 15 and 18 was connected. But instead of that, the ECS fans which have less power were cut off during these hours. Also, various AC loads and forward AC cargo were disconnected which have medium and low priorities, respectively. Because in the proposed model, in addition to the penalty interruption of loads, the EENS and the importance of loads was also considered. Therefore, the disconnection of the load with high power and high priority was prevented and replaced by less important loads. Also, Table 7 verifies these results for \(\beta=0.5\). However, the total amount of load shedding was increased for forward cargo AC load during time slots 17-20. The effect of the proposed priority model on PEMFCS size and load shedding can be seen in Table 8. As it turns out, the optimum power of the PEMFCS is 265 kW for \(\beta=0.7\). This power in the modes of four, three and two generator outage led to interruptions of 672 kW, less than 500 kW and less than 180 kW, respectively. Also, in the mode of only one generator outage, it does not result in interruption of loads. So, the load shedding was decreased compared to Table 5. Also, according to Figure 8, the weight of the PEMFCS with the power of 265 kW was 325 kg. Therefore, prioritizing loads in critical situations has an important impact on the fuel cell weight and the consumption of hydrogen. According to the simulation results, the proposed priority model reduces the consumption of hydrogen while decreasing the load shedding. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline  & \multicolumn{10}{c}{**Connection Status of Loads**} \\ \hline
**Time** & **ECS** & **Hypardless** & \begin{tabular}{c} **Equip.** \\ **Coiling** \\ \end{tabular} & **ECS Fans** & **ICS** & **Highal** & **Fuel Pumps** & \begin{tabular}{c} **Vations AC** \\ **Loads** \\ \end{tabular} & **Iee** & \
\begin{tabular}{c} **Foreural Cargo** \\ **Coiling** \\ \end{tabular} & **Cailleys** &
\begin{tabular}{c} **Vations DC** \\ **Loads** \\ \end{tabular} \\ \hline
15 & 1 & 1 & 1 & 0 & 1 & 1 & 1 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 0 & 1 \\
16 & 0 & 1 & 1 & 1 & 1 & 1 & 1 & 1 & 1 & 0 & 1 \\
17 & 0 & 1 & 1 & 1 & 1 & 1 & 1 & 1 & 1 & 0 & 1 \\
18 & 1 & 1 & 1 & 0 & 1 & 1 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 0 & 1 \\
19 & 0 & 1 & 1 & 1 & 1 & 1 & 1 & 1 & 1 & 0 & 1 \\
20 & 0 & 1 & 1 & 1 & 1 & 1 & 1 & 1 & 0 & 1 & 1 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 6: The load status connection in the moment of three outages for \(\beta=0\) with dynamic priorities.