Optimised Energy Solutions Ltd

This document shall not be modified or copied to a third party under any circumstances, except with prior approval in writing from Optimised Energy Solutions Ltd. Copyright Optimised Energy Solutions Ltd. 2011. All rights reserved.

DOCUMENT NO: DOCUMENT TITLE: Power System Studies For New Arc Furnace Installation

PROJECT REFERENCE: Client Project No: ROTHERHAM, UK NEW ARC FURNACE INSTALLATION TATA STEEL

- Project Location: - Project Title: - Client:

Issue 1

Date 23/11/11

Pages 33 + App1,2 ,3,4,5 Client Issue

Issue Description

Originator SS

APPROVALS Checked IMC

Approved

Entire Document Issued this Revision Revised Pages Only Issued this Revision

In-house Review Client Issue Proposal

DOCUMENT ISSUED FOR: Enquiry Purchase Construction

Vanguard House, Daresbury SIC, Keckwick Lane, Daresbury, Cheshire WA4 4AB United Kingdom Telephone: 0151 606 422 email: contact@optimisedenergysolutions.com
Registered in England, Company No: 3593777 Registered Office: Vanguard House, Daresbury SIC, Keckwick Lane, Daresbury, Cheshire WA4 4AB

Table of Contents

1.0

SCOPE OF WORK ........................................................................................................................3

2.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY.................................................................................................................4 33 kV Bustube Sizing ...........................................................................................................................4 Minimum 33 kV Bustube Clearances ...................................................................................................4 33 kV Bustube Supports .......................................................................................................................4 Existing 33 kV CTs ...............................................................................................................................4 Fault Level Study Results .....................................................................................................................5 Power Flow Study Results ....................................................................................................................5 Protection ..............................................................................................................................................5 Power Quality Issues .............................................................................................................................5 3.0 POWER SYSTEM MODELLING .....................................................................................................6 4.0 POWER SYSTEM STUDIES DESIGN CRITERIA .........................................................................6 4.1 Power System Data Documents ......................................................................................................6 4.2 Engineering Assumptions ...............................................................................................................6 5.0 DESCRIPTION OF POWER SYSTEM STUDIES ...........................................................................7 5.1 Power System Study Scenarios .......................................................................................................7 6.0 POWER SYSTEM STUDIES SUMMARY OF RESULTS ..............................................................8 6.1 Bustube Sizing ................................................................................................................................8 6.2 Minimum Bustube Clearances ........................................................................................................9 6.3 33 kV Bustube Supports .................................................................................................................9 6.4 Existing CTs ....................................................................................................................................9 6.5 Fault Study Results .......................................................................................................................10 6.6 Power Flow Study Results ............................................................................................................11 APPENDIX ONE: POWER SYSTEM STUDIES INPUT DATA ........................................................33 APPENDIX TWO: LOAD FLOW RESULTS .......................................................................................33 APPENDIX THREE: FAULT LEVEL RESULTS ................................................................................33 APPENDIX FOUR: STANDARD COPPER BUSTUBE RATINGS ....................................................33 APPENDIX FIVE: 33 kV POST INSULATOR DATA ........................................................................33

2|Page

1.0 SCOPE OF WORK

This scope of work is for the power system design work for the arc furnace transformer upgrade and system at the Tata Steel plant in Rotherham. The scope of work will consist of the following two areas: Computer based analysis of new system and the interconnection to the grid as previously supplied. The following studies will be carried out: o Load Flow - steady state (continuous) thermal rating of electrical equipment and voltage levels o Fault rating for short time withstand, make and break duty o Busbar connector sizing and specification Report / specification to enable client to order equipment

Section 2.0 of this report is the executive summary where the main conclusions of the report are highlighted. Section 3.0 of this report describes the software used for power system modelling. Section 4.0 of this report describes the design criteria for these studies Section 5.0 of this report describes the studies carried out in this report. Section 6.0 of this report describes the results of the studies. Appendix One of this report documents the input data for the power system studies and calculations. Appendix Two of this report documents the load flow results. Appendix Three of this report documents the fault level results Appendix Four of this report documents standard copper bustube ratings Appendix Five of this report documents the 33 kV post insulators for the bustube supports

3|Page

2.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

33 kV Bustube Sizing The bustube sizing calculations were carried out based on the following data and standards: UK Copper Development Association o Publication 22: Copper For Busbars BS 7354: 1990: Code of practice for design of high voltage open terminal stations The selected high conductivity copper bustube is 75mm diameter with 10.2mm wall thickness

Minimum 33 kV Bustube Clearances The clearances between the phases and phase to earth should be as follows as a minimum: Phase to earth minimum clearance = 500mm Phase to phase minimum clearance = 430 mm

33 kV Bustube Supports The proposed new 33 kV post insulators are longer than the existing bus supports. In order to use existing post insulator supports it will have to be verified that the existing post insulators provide adequate mechanical strength and creepage distance. It would appear that they do, but without any documentation to validate this, OES cannot approve the use of the existing post insulators. This is a descision the client will have to make. It is worth noting that Connectors and Switchgear UK, believe that these existing 33 kV post type insulators are very difficult to get hold off and delivery times could be up to 4 months. It is recommended that the bustube connections at the end of the bustube run are connected at one end at least by a flexible copper braid which consists of an adequately rated lug/ferrule connection. All clamps should preferably be made of brass or bronze. All bustube supports and clamps should be adequately rated for the following maximum fault levels at 33 kV: Peak asymmetrical current = 58 kA Rms symmetrical current = 21.33 kA

Existing 33 kV CTs The client has two options with regard to the CTs: Presently the CTs are not adequately continuoulsy rated. Also it is not known whether they are adequately short circuit rated. Replace CTs for those of an adequate rating for the new transformer Carry out detailed testing of the CTs to establish the CT characteristics, this is also important to the protection study. If the new transformer is energised using these CTs then the client must realise that the thermal withstand of the existing CTs could be exceeded, causing CT insulation breakdown and a possible system fault.

4|Page

Fault Level Study Results The maximum 33 kV fault levels are: Peak asymmetrical current = 58 kA Rms symmetrical current = 21.33 kA The proposed 33 kV bustube will be adequately fault rated. Although not part of this scope of work, OES recommend that a full audit is carried out on the Tata Steel 33 kV system in order to verify that all electrical equipment is adequately fault rated in order that the requirements of the following UK statutory legislation is realised: Electricity At work Regulations 1989 It should also be verified that the arc furnace transformer secondary circuits are complaint with these regulations with respect to fault level.

Power Flow Study Results The power flow studies show there are various transformer overloads for various network operating conditions. The client should confirm the number of arc furnaces in operation per network operation configuration. See section 6.6 of this report. Although not part of this scope of work, OES recommend that a full audit is carried out on the Tata Steel 33 kV system in order to verify that all electrical equipment is adequately continuously rated for full load conditions, in order that the requirements of the following UK statutory legislation is realised: Electricity At work Regulations 1989

Protection OES recommend a protection study is carried out on the system. This will ensure that all equipment is adequately rated and complies with the following UK statutory legislation is realised: Electricity At work Regulations 1989

Power Quality Issues Due to the non linear nature of the arc furnace loads, OES recommend that a power quality study and monitoring review is carried out based on the requirements of IEC 61000.

5|Page

3.0 POWER SYSTEM MODELLING

The power system studies were carried out using ETAP. This is a computer based power system simulation package based on the application of the rms phasor based approach to solve the load flow and fault level algebraic equations. Fault level calculations are based on the use of IEC 60909, which is considered the most conservative method of fault level calculation as, due to its assumptions, produces the highest fault level results. This will be used as the basis of design. Bustube sizing will be based on the results from ETAP and supporting hand calculations.

4.0 POWER SYSTEM STUDIES DESIGN CRITERIA

4.1 Power System Data Documents The power system data is based on the following documents provided by the client: Tata Steel to OES email dated 21/10/11. o Transformer, VCB and cable data

Tata Steel to OES email dated 26/10/11. o o N Furnace transformer Electrical study RC Study

Tata Steel to OES email dated 27/10/11. o o ARC Furnace Tripping Scheme RC Details

Tata Steel to OES email dated 01/11/11. o Cable data

Tata Steel to OES email dated 08/11/11. o o ARC Furnace Tripping Scheme Furnace board and works board operating configuration

Tata Steel to OES email dated 10/11/11 o Furnace board and works board operating configuration

Tata Steel to OES email dated 10/11/11 o 33 kV system automatic voltage control data

4.2 Engineering Assumptions In order to complete the fault level studies the following assumptions have been made: 1. Cable impedance based on OES library data. 2. For sizing of bustube the following assumptions were made: a. Bustube sized for a continuous load of 132 MVA, i.e. new transformer rating b. 33 kV substation ambient temperature = 40C

6|Page

c.

Bustube maximum temperature rise during maximum load conditions = 35C

d. Bustube emissitivity factor = 0.1 (ability for copper to dissipate generated heat energy by radiation effect) 3. All fault level calculations have been carried out in accordance with IEC 60909 Short Circuit Currents In Three Phase AC Systems 2001. a. All fault impedance was considered zero, i.e. solid short circuit. 4. Presently, no data has been provided by the client for the earthing study.

5.0 DESCRIPTION OF POWER SYSTEM STUDIES

5.1 Power System Study Scenarios The power system studies were carried out for the scenarios as the Tata Steel ARC Furnace Tripping Scheme: Rotherham Works Electrical Loading and Supply Capacities, 33 kV furnace board. Based on data from Tat Steel the following operating configurations were considered: Tata Steel The furnace board and the works board are completely independent, this is because of the performance of a furnace means that we would have a lot of flicker on the works board therefore we have to have them completely independent. Tata Steel: The interconnector is currently out of action. It is normally run open. Cannot be run closed while arc furnaces running due to large voltage fluctuations in voltages. Bus section on works board can be opened so S.G.T.1A could feed the furnace board. When this was last done it was not successful as S.G.T.1A tried to pull more load and tripped the interconnector on overcurrent while furnace was in operation. There are no induction motor loads it is purely arc furnace main power load

The following scenarios were considered: Base Case: SGT1B, SGT3, SGT4 in Parallel Case 1: SGT1B, SGT3 in Parallel Case 2: SGT1B, SGT3, SGT1A in Parallel Case 3: SGT1B, SGT4 in Parallel Case 4: SGT1B, SGT4, SGT1A in Parallel Case 5: SGT3, SGT4 in Parallel Case 6: SGT3, SGT4, SGT1A in Parallel

7|Page

6.0 POWER SYSTEM STUDIES SUMMARY OF RESULTS

6.1 Bustube Sizing The bustube sizing calculations were carried out based on the following data and standards: UK Copper Development Association o Publication 22: Copper For Busbars BS 7354: 1990: Code of practice for design of high voltage open terminal stations BS EN 13600: 2002 Copper and copper alloys Seamless copper tubes for electrical purposes The bustube size was selected based on the following parameters: Maximum continuous current based on 132 MVA transformer on full load (2309 A on 33 kV system) 33 kV substation ambient temperature = 40C (this is on the high side but after the site inspection it was found that the 33 kV substation was very warm) Bustube maximum temperature rise during maximum load conditions = 35C Bustube emissitivity factor = 0.1 (ability for copper to dissipate generated heat energy by radiation effect) Impact of skin effect on bustube rating (skin effect denotes the tendency of AC current to flow away from the centre of a conductor). Short circuit withstand current Appendix Four shows the standard copper bustube ratings obtained from the UK Copper Development Association. OES calculations based on the UK Copper Development Association calculation methods have found that the existing copper bustube of 50mm diameter with 10mm wall thickness is inadequately rated for the 33 kV continuous current of 2309 A for the new 132 MVA transformer. It was found that the minimum bus tube size was 70mm diameter with a 10.2 mm wall. This gave a maximum temperature rise of 76C. This size of bustube appears to be not available within the UK Copper Development Association standard tables, hence the next value of bustube of 75mm diameter with 10.2mm wall thickness was selected. The gives an indoor dc current rating of 2760 A based on 50 C temperature rise on a 40 C ambient. Applying the skin effect factor of 1.1 will increase the heat generated in the bustube by 10% as ac resistance is 110% of the dc resistance. For the same value of ac current as dc current this will give a 10% increase in heat generated during current flow through the busbar. The busbar will be able to operate for this condition. The short circuit withstand was calculated based on the equations produced by the UK Copper Development Association. It was found that the bustube is adequately rated for the bustube specified, The voltdrop across the bustube during full load conditions is not considered an issue due to the short length of the 33 kV bustube installed. In summary, the selected bustube is 75mm diameter with 10.2mm wall thickness. See Appendix Four where this is highlighted in red coloured font. The bustube has been calculated based on the maximum continuous 33 kV load current of the new 132 MVA transformer, hence the increase in bustube size with respect to the original installation. The Copper Development Association guidance notes recommend that the bustube is sized based on the maximum continuous current rating and this guidance has been duly adopted. However, the copper bustube maximum size is dictated by the heat generated and dissipated during normal load conditions. It is worth noting that the arc furnace should only operate in short time frames, which means in practice a smaller bustube could be used. However, the equations are not provided by the Copper Development Association to achieve this. If the client wishes to look at this opportunity then this would be extra work in addition to this scope of work.

8|Page

6.2 Minimum Bustube Clearances The clearances between the phases and phase to earth should be as follows as a minimum: Phase to earth minimum clearance = 500mm Phase to phase minimum clearance = 430 mm It is recommended that these clearances are exceeded at all times throughout the installation. It is assumed that specific vendor equipment purchased for the project is already compatible with the correct clearances based on the standards governing its design. 6.3 33 kV Bustube Supports The existing supports are based on the use of 33 kV post insulators for indoor substations. The supports will need to be able to meet the following criteria in order to support the new bustube: Be of adequate mechanical strength to support the bustube Provide adequate creepage to maintain safe distance between the bustube and earthed steelwork supporting the post insulators. Appendix Five shows the proposed new 33 kV post insulators as provided by Connectors and Switchgear in the UK. After discussions with Connectors and Switchgear it is advisable that this 33 kV post insulator is used. Due to the thickness of the new bustube, the bustube will be adequately supported as long as the distance between brackets is less than 5m. Connectors and Switchgear can provide this information if an order is placed upon them in the future. Based on the close proximity of the existing supports, the existing support spacings are considered adequate to support the new bustube. The creepage of the new post insulators is 1200mm which is considered more than adequate for this application. The proposed new 33 kV post insulators are longer than the existing bus supports. In order to use existing post insulator supports it will have to be verified that the existing post insulators provide adequate mechanical strength and creepage distance. It would appear that they do, but without any documentation to validate this, OES cannot approve the use of the existing post insulators. This is a descision the client will have to make. It is worth noting that Connectors and Switchgear UK, believe that these existing 33 kV post type insulators are very difficult to get hold off and delivery times could be up to 4 months, if they are able to get hold of them. It is recommended that the bustube connections at the end of the bustube run are connected at one end at least by a flexible copper braid which consists of an adequately rated lug/ferrule connection. All clamps should preferably be made of brass or bronze. All bustube supports and clamps should be adequately rated for the following maximum fault levels at 33 kV: Peak asymmetrical current = 58 kA Rms symmetrical current = 21.33 kA

6.4 Existing CTs Site inspection of the CTs showed the following parameters: 2000/5 A 30 VA 1000 / 5A 30 VA 500 / 5 A 30 VA It is envisaged that the CTs are connected on the 2000 / 5 A winding. However, this needs to be assessed during future protection study work.

9|Page

CTs need to be rated for the maximum continuous current that can flow on the 33 kV system (2309 A). Based on this the CTs are inadequately rated for the new transformer. The CT short circuit withstand time could not be obtained from the CT rating plate. It is unknown whether the CT is adequately rated for the short circuit currents calculated in this report. The client has two options with regard to the CTs: Replace CTs for those of an adequate rating for the new transformer Carry out detailed testing of the CTs to establish the CT characteristics, this is also important to the protection study. If the new transformer is energised using these CTs then the client must realise that the thermal withstand of the existing CTs could be exceeded, causing CT insulation breakdown and a possible system fault.

6.5 Fault Study Results Tables 1 7 show the fault level results. Full detailed reports are given in Appendix Three of this document. It can be seen that the following Tata Steel electrical network operating configurations give the maximum fault conditions on the network. Table 1: Base Case: SGT1B, SGT3, SGT4 in Parallel Table 7: Case 6: SGT3, SGT4, SGT1A in Parallel It can be seen that the maximum fault levels on the 33 kV system are: Peak asymmetrical current = 58 kA Rms symmetrical current = 21.33 kA It can be seen that the maximum fault levels on the arc furnace transformer secondary are: Peak asymmetrical current = 647 kA Rms symmetrical current = 240 kA In order to comply with the Electricity At work Regulations 1989, the client needs to verify that all electrical equipment on their 33 kV system and the arc furnace transformer secondary system is compliant with respect to fault level rating.

10 | P a g e

6.6 Power Flow Study Results Tables 8 14 show the power flow results. Full detailed reports are given in Appendix Two of this document. Voltage profiles and equipment power flows are given for the network configurations as described in section 5.1 of this report. The 33 kV switchboard voltage is assumed to be at 1 pu based on the grid transformer automatic voltage control. The power flow results are described below: Table 8/8.1: Base Case: SGT1B, SGT3, SGT4 in Parallel From Table 8.1, it can be seen that the transformer SGT1B is overloaded at 126 %. This is assumed to be due to the operation of the transformer tap changer control scheme. If there is a circulating current automatic voltage control scheme, then any circulating current should be eliminated. It is understood that this is an NGC issue. Table 9/9.1: Case 1: SGT1B, SGT3 in Parallel From Table 9.1, it can be seen that the transformer SGT1B and SGT3 are overloaded. This is based on all arc furnaces running. The client should confirm the loading scenario for this case.

Table 10/10.1: Case 2: SGT1B, SGT3, SGT1A in Parallel From Table 10.1, it can be seen that the transformer SGT1B and SGT 1A are overloaded. This is assumed to be due to the operation of the transformer tap changer control scheme. If there is a circulating current automatic voltage control scheme, then any circulating current should be eliminated. It is understood that this is an NGC issue. Table 11/11.1: Case 3: SGT1B, SGT4 in Parallel From Table 11.1, it can be seen that the transformer SGT1B and SGT4 are overloaded. This is based on all arc furnaces running. The client should confirm the loading scenario for this case. Table 12/21.1: Case 4: SGT1B, SGT4, SGT1A in Parallel From Table 12.1, it can be seen that the transformer SGT1B and SGT 1A are overloaded. This is assumed to be due to the operation of the transformer tap changer control scheme. If there is a circulating current automatic voltage control scheme, then any circulating current should be eliminated. It is understood that this is an NGC issue. Table 13/13.1: Case 5: SGT3, SGT4 in Parallel From Table 13.1, it can be seen that the transformer SGT3 and SGT4 are overloaded. This is based on all arc furnaces running. The client should confirm the loading scenario for this case. Table 14/14.1: Case 6: SGT3, SGT4, SGT1A in Parallel From Table 14.1, it can be seen that the transformer SGT 1A is overloaded. This is assumed to be due to the operation of the transformer tap changer control scheme. If there is a circulating current automatic voltage control scheme, then any circulating current should be eliminated. It is understood that this is an NGC issue.

11 | P a g e

Optimised Energy Solutions Ltd

FAULT STUDY RESULTS FOR DIFFERENT SCENARIOS Table 1: Base Case (red coloured font shows worse case fault level)

3P Fault - IEC60909 Methods at the Following Times SWBD Voltage Level

(kV)

Rating Make
(kA)

Calculated Results Ip (t=10ms) 647.066 57.2 57.2 55.409 56.394 56.501 56.388 47.505 I
k(t=0ms)

S.No

Break
(kA)

Ib sym
(t=60ms)

Idc
(t=60ms)

Ib asym
(t=60ms)

I k sym 239.743 21.334 21.334 20.884 21.1 21.116 21.08 16.796

1 1.2kV SWBD 2 33kV - 1 3 33kV-2 4 33kV-3 5 33kV-SGT1B 6 33kV-SGT3 7 33kV-SGT4 8 275kV

1.2 33 33 33 33 33 33 275

239.743 21.334 21.334 20.884 21.1 21.116 21.08 16.796

239.743 21.334 21.334 20.884 21.1 21.116 21.08 16.796

183.42 14.895 14.895 12.681 14.134 14.362 14.276 3.606

301.86 26.019 26.019 24.433 25.396 25.537 25.459 17.178

Vanguard House, Daresbury SIC, Keckwick Lane, Daresbury, Cheshire WA4 4AB United Kingdom Telephone: 0151 606 422 email: contact@optimisedenergysolutions.com
Registered in England, Company No: 3593777 Registered Office: Vanguard House, Daresbury SIC, Keckwick Lane, Daresbury, Cheshire WA4 4AB

Optimised Energy Solutions Ltd

Table 2: Case 1

3P Fault - IEC60909 Methods at the Following Times Rating S.No SWBD Voltage Level
(kV)

Calculated Results Ip (t=10ms) 539.499 39.923 39.923 39.043 39.851 40.027 41.472 I
k(t=0ms)

Make Break
(kA) (kA)

Ib sym
(t=60ms)

Idc
(t=60ms)

Ib asym
(t=60ms)

I k sym 203.216 14.819 14.819 14.601 14.798 14.85 16.796

1 1.2kV SWBD 2 33kV - 1 3 33kV-2 4 33kV-3 5 33kV-SGT1B 6 33kV-SGT3 7 275kV

1.2 33 33 33 33 33 275kV

203.216 14.819 14.819 14.601 14.798 14.85 16.796

203.216 14.819 14.819 14.601 14.798 14.85 16.796

124.124 11.043 11.043 17.618 10.978 11.145 3.606

238.125 18.481 18.481 9.859 18.425 18.567 17.178

Vanguard House, Daresbury SIC, Keckwick Lane, Daresbury, Cheshire WA4 4AB United Kingdom Telephone: 0151 606 422 email: contact@optimisedenergysolutions.com
Registered in England, Company No: 3593777 Registered Office: Vanguard House, Daresbury SIC, Keckwick Lane, Daresbury, Cheshire WA4 4AB

Table 3: Case 2 3P Fault - IEC60909 Methods at the Following Times Rating S.No SWBD Voltage Level
(kV)

Calculated Results Ip (t=10ms) 625.2 55.371 55.371 53.691 41.472 54.505 54.662 54.78 I Ib sym (t=0ms) (t=60ms) k 236.486 20.644 20.644 20.222 16.796 20.392 20.438 20.459 236.486 20.644 20.644 20.222 16.796 20.392 20.438 20.459 Idc
(t=60ms)

Make
(kA)

Break
(kA)

Ib asym
(t=60ms)

I k sym 236.486 20.644 20.644 20.222 16.796 20.392 20.438 20.459

1 1.2kV SWBD 2 33kV - 1 3 33kV-2 4 33kV-3 5 275kV 6 33kV-SGT 1A 7 33kV-SGT 1B 8 33kV-SGT3

1.2 33 33 33 275 33 33 33

136.367 14.489 14.489 12.398 3.606 13.673 13.817 14.039

272.987 25.221 25.221 23.72 17.178 24.552 24.67 24.813

14 | P a g e

Table 4: Case 3

3P Fault - IEC60909 Methods at the Following Times Rating S.No SWBD Voltage Level (kV) 1.2 33 33 33 33 33 275 Make
(kA)

Calculated Results Ip (t=10ms) 534.871 39.232 39.232 38.382 39.181 39.316 41.472 I
k(t=0ms)

Break
(kA)

Ib sym
(t=60ms)

Idc (t=60ms) Ib asym

(t=60ms)

I k sym 201.433 14.56 14.56 14.35 14.545 14.586 16.796

1 1.2kV SWBD 2 33kV - 1 3 33kV-2 4 33kV-3 5 33kV-SGT1B 6 33kV-SGT4 7 275kV

201.433 14.56 14.56 14.35 14.545 14.586 16.796

201.433 14.56 14.56 14.35 14.545 14.586 16.796

123.37 10.871 10.871 9.725 10.828 10.956 3.606

236.21 18.171 18.171 17.335 18.133 18.242 17.178

15 | P a g e

Table 5: Case 4

3P Fault - IEC60909 Methods at the Following Times SWBD Rating Voltage Level (kV) Make Break
(kA) (kA)

Calculated Results Ip (t=10ms) 622.293 54.748 54.748 53.105 41.472 53.921 54.071 54.091 I
k(t=0ms)

S.No

Ib sym
(t=60ms)

Idc (t=60ms) Ib asym

(t=60ms)

I k sym 235.357 20.408 20.408 19.997 16.796 20.168 20.212 20.204

1 1.2kV SWBD 2 33kV - 1 3 33kV-2 4 33kV-3 5 275kV 6 33kV-SGT1A 7 33kV-SGT1B 8 33kV-SGT4

1.2 33 33 33 275 33 33 275

235.357 20.409 20.409 19.997 16.796 20.168 20.212 20.204

235.357 20.409 20.409 19.997 16.796 20.168 20.212 20.204

135.951 14.351 14.351 12.301 3.606 13.57 13.709 13.849

271.801 24.95 24.95 23.477 17.178 24.309 24.422 24.495

16 | P a g e

Table 6: Case 5 3P Fault - IEC60909 Methods at the Following Times Rating S.No SWBD Voltage Level (kV) 1.2 33 33 33 33 33 275 Make
(kA)

Calculated Results Ip (t=10ms) 552.316 41.902 41.902 40.934 41.939 41.889 47.505 I
k(t=0ms)

Break
(kA)

Ib sym
(t=60ms)

Idc (t=60ms) Ib asym

(t=60ms)

I k sym 208.184 15.564 15.564 15.323 15.574 15.559 16.796

1 1.2kV SWBD 2 33kV - 1 3 33kV-2 4 33kV-3 5 33kV-SGT3 6 33kV-SGT4 7 275kV

208.184 15.564 15.564 15.323 15.574 15.559 16.796

208.184 15.564 15.564 15.323 15.574 15.559 16.796

125.988 11.494 11.494 10.206 11.539 11.497 3.606

243.338 19.348 19.348 18.411 19.384 19.346 17.178

17 | P a g e

Table 7: Case 6 (red coloured font shows worse case fault level) 3P Fault - IEC60909 Methods at the Following Times Rating S.No SWBD Voltage Level (kV) 1.2 33 33 33 275 33 33 33 Make
(kA)

Calculated Results Ip (t=10ms) 633.319 57.155 57.155 55.368 41.472 56.175 56.459 56.346 I
k(t=0ms)

Break
(kA)

Ib sym
(t=60ms)

Idc (t=60ms) Ib asym

(t=60ms)

I k sym 239.658 21.321 21.321 20.872 16.796 21.036 21.103 21.068

1 1.2kV SWBD 2 33kV - 1 3 33kV-2 4 33kV-3 5 275kV 6 33kV-SGT1A 7 33kV-SGT3 8 33kV-SGT4

239.658 21.321 21.321 20.872 16.796 21.036 21.103 21.068

239.658 21.321 21.321 20.872 16.796 21.036 21.103 21.068

137.399 14.85 14.85 12.645 3.606 13.934 14.323 14.237

276.251 25.983 25.983 24.403 17.178 25.232 25.505 25.428

18 | P a g e

LOAD FLOW STUDY RESULTS FOR DIFFERENT SCENARIOS WITH TAP SETTINGS (33 kV System Voltage Control)

Table 8: Base Case: Load Flow Bus Voltage Profile

Bus ID 1.2 kV SWBD 33kV - 1 33kV - 2 33kV - 3 33kV - SGT 1B 33kV- SGT 3 33kV - SGT4 Grid

Nominal (kV) 1.2 33 33 33 33 33 33 275

Actual Voltage (kV) 1.082 32.521 32.521 32.449 32.575 32.591 32.592 275

Actual Voltage (%) 90.17 98.55 98.55 98.33 98.71 98.76 98.76 100.00

19 | P a g e

Table 8.1: Base Case: Load Flow Branch Power Flow

ID Cable(275kV) Cable (SGT4) Cable (SGT3) Cable (SGT 1B) C (33kV-1 - 33kV-2) C1(33kV-2 - 33kV-3) C2(33kV-2 - 33kV-3) C3(33kV-2 - 33kV-3) SGT 1B SGT 3 SGT 4 T (132MVA)

Type Cable Cable Cable Cable Cable Cable Cable Cable Transf. 2W Transf. 2W Transf. 2W Transf. 2W

Rating

Power Flow (MVA) 302.81

Real Power (P) 236.881 78.979 82.453 73.988 98.24 32.271 32.271 33.699 74.449 82.964 79.468 98.109

Reactive Power (Q) 188.623 42.717 44.597 39.946 64.07 18.885 18.885 26.302 59.289 66.063 63.271 63.8

% Loading

120MVA 100MVA 75MVA

89.79 93.74 84.08 117.29 37.39 37.39 42.75

75MVA/ 275kV 120MVA / 275kV 120MVA / 275kV 132MVA /33kV

95.17 106.05 101.58 117.03

126.90 88.4 84.6 88.7

20 | P a g e

Table 9: Case 1: Load Flow Bus Voltage Profile

Bus ID
1.2 kV SWBD 33kV - 1 33kV - 2 33kV - 3 33kV - SGT 1B 33kV- SGT 3 Grid

Nominal (kV)
1.2 33 33 33 33 33 275

Actual Voltage(kV)
1.081 32.607 32.607 32.535 32.688 32.712 275

Actual Voltage (%)

90.08 98.81 98.81 98.59 99.05 99.13 100.00

21 | P a g e

Table 9.1: Case 1: Load Flow Branch Power Flow

ID
Cable(275kV) Cable (SGT3) Cable (SGT 1B) C (33kV-1 - 33kV-2) C1(33kV-2 - 33kV-3) C2(33kV-2 - 33kV-3) C3(33kV-2 - 33kV-3) SGT 1B SGT 3 T (132MVA)

Type
Cable Cable Cable Cable Cable Cable Cable Transf. 2W Transf. 2W Transf. 2W

Rating

Power Flow (MVA)

324.95

Real Power (P)

238.771 124.683 111.882 98.573 32.375 32.375 33.824 112.927 125.844 98.44

Reactive Power (Q)

220.41 67.436 60.345 63.94 18.838 18.838 26.264 104.249 116.161 64.669

% Loading

100MVA 75MVA

141.75 127.12 117.49 37.46 37.46 42.82

75MVA/ 275kV 120MVA / 275kV 132MVA /33kV

153.69 171.26 117.78

204.9 142.7 88.8

22 | P a g e

Table10: Case 2: Load Flow Bus Voltage Profile

Bus ID 1.2 kV SWBD 33kV - 1 33kV - 2 33kV - 3 33kV - SGT 1B 33kV- SGT 3 33kV - SGT 1A Grid

Nominal (kV) 1.2 33 33 33 33 33 33 275

Actual Voltage (kV) 1.094 32.99 32.99 32.99 33.05 33.062 33.058 275

Actual Voltage (%) 91.17 99.97 99.97 99.97 100.14 100.19 100.18 100.00

23 | P a g e

Table10.1: Case 2: Load Flow Branch Power Flow

ID Cable(275kV) Cable (SGT3) Cable (SGT 1B) Cable (SGT1A) C (33kV-1 - 33kV-2) C1(33kV-2 - 33kV-3) C2(33kV-2 - 33kV-3) C3(33kV-2 - 33kV-3) Cable (Furnace Board) SGT 1B SGT 1A SGT 3 T (132MVA)

Type Cable Cable Cable Cable Cable Cable Cable Cable Cable Transf. 2W Transf. 2W Transf. 2W Transf. 2W

Rating

Power Flow (MVA) 311.96

Real Power (P) 243.611 86.667 77.77 77.64 100.903 33.14 33.14 34.623 77.565 78.264 78.132 87.215 100.767

Reactive Power (Q) 194.859 46.764 41.885 41.793 65.451 19.283 19.283 26.885 41.548 62.629 62.446 69.784 65.174

% Loading

120MVA 75MVA 75MVA

98.48 88.33 88.17 120.27 38.34 38.34 43.84 87.99

75MVA/ 275kV 75MVA/ 275kV 120MVA / 275kV 132MVA /33kV

100.24 100.02 111.70 120.01

133.7 133.4 93.1 90.9

24 | P a g e

Table11: Case 3: Load Flow Bus Voltage Profile

Bus ID 1.2 kV SWBD 33kV - 1 33kV - 2 33kV - 3 33kV - SGT 1B 33kV - SGT4 Grid

Nominal (kV) 1.2 33 33 33 33 33 275

Actual Voltage (kV) 1.096 33.052 33.052 32.979 33.136 33.163 275

Actual Voltage (%) 91.33 100.16 100.16 99.94 100.41 100.49 100.00

25 | P a g e

Table11.1: Case 3: Load Flow Branch Power Flow

Power Flow (MVA) 335.41 120MVA 75MVA 142.69 133.59 120.72 38.48 38.48 44.00 75MVA/ 275kV 120MVA / 275kV 132MVA /33kV 162.24 173.16 120.45

ID

Type

Rating

Real Power (P) 245.388 125.502 117.569 101.279 33.263 33.263 34.752 118.692 126.696 101.143

Reactive Power (Q) 228.651 67.902 63.425 65.695 19.355 19.355 26.986 110.61 118.042 65.417

% Loading

Cable(275kV) Cable (SGT4) Cable (SGT 1B) C (33kV-1 - 33kV-2) C1(33kV-2 - 33kV-3) C2(33kV-2 - 33kV-3) C3(33kV-2 - 33kV-3) SGT 1B SGT 4 T (132MVA)

Cable Cable Cable Cable Cable Cable Cable Transf. 2W Transf. 2W Transf. 2W

216.3 144.3 91.3

26 | P a g e

Table12: Case 4 : Load Flow Bus Voltage Profile

Bus ID

Nominal (kV)

Actual Voltage (kV) 1.091 32.922 32.922 32.85 32.978

Actual voltage (%)

1.2 kV SWBD 33kV - 1 33kV - 2 33kV - 3 33kV - SGT 1B Furnace board 33kV - SGT4
33kV - SGT 1A Grid

1.2 33 33 33 33 33 33
33

90.92 99.76 99.76 99.55 99.93 99.76 99.99 99.97 100.00

32.922
32.996 32.991 275

275

27 | P a g e

Table12.1: Case 4: Load Flow Branch Power Flow

ID

Type

Rating

Power Flow (MVA) 311.31

Real Power (P) 242.632 83.94 78.636 78.505 100.485 33.003 33.003 34.488 78.428 79.143 79.01 84.479 100.35

Reactive Power (Q) 195.048 45.298 42.357 42.264 65.181 19.208 19.208 26.78 42.012 63.653 63.467 67.928 64.904

% Loading

Cable(275kV) Cable (SGT4) Cable (SGT 1B) Cable (SGT1A) C (33kV-1 - 33kV-2) C1(33kV-2 - 33kV-3) C2(33kV-2 - 33kV-3) C3(33kV-2 - 33kV-3) Cable (Furnace Board) SGT 1B SGT 1A SGT 4 T (132MVA)

Cable Cable Cable Cable Cable Cable Cable Cable Cable Transf. 2W Transf. 2W Transf. 2W Transf. 2W 75MVA/ 275kV 75MVA/ 275kV 120MVA /275kV 132MVA /33kV 120MVA 75MVA 75MVA

95.38 89.32 89.16 119.77 38.19 38.19 43.66 88.97 101.56 101.34 108.40 119.51

135.1 135.1 90.3 90.6

28 | P a g e

Table13: Case 5: Load Flow Bus Voltage Profile

Bus ID 1.2 kV SWBD 33kV - 1 33kV - 2 33kV - 3 33kV- SGT 3 33kV - SGT4 Grid

Nominal (kV) 1.2 33 33 33 33 33 275

Actual Voltage (kV) 1.088 32.81 32.81 32.738 32.912 32.914 275

Actual Voltage (%) 90.67 99.42 99.42 99.21 99.73 99.74 100.00

29 | P a g e

Table13.1: Case 5: Load Flow Branch Power Flow

ID Cable(275kV) Cable (SGT4) Cable (SGT3) C (33kV-1 - 33kV-2) C1(33kV-2 - 33kV-3) C2(33kV-2 - 33kV-3) C3(33kV-2 - 33kV-3) SGT 3 SGT 4 T (132MVA)

Type Cable Cable Cable Cable Cable Cable Cable Transf. 2W Transf. 2W Transf. 2W

Rating

Power Flow (MVA) 326.97

Real Power (P) 241.676 117.182 122.335 99.802 32.778 32.778 34.245 123.438 118.238 99.668

Reactive Power (Q) 220.231 63.373 66.157 64.737 19.073 19.073 26.592 112.492 107.739 64.463

% Loading

120MVA 100MVA

133.22 139.08 118.96 37.92 37.92 43.36

120MVA / 275kV 120MVA / 275kV 132MVA /33kV

167.01 159.96 118.70

139.2 133.3 89.9

30 | P a g e

Table 14: Case 6: Load Flow Bus Voltage Profile

Bus ID 1.2 kV SWBD 33kV - 1 33kV - 2 33kV - 3 33kV- SGT 3 33kV - SGT4 33kV - SGT 1A Grid

Nominal kV 1.2 33 33 33 33 33 33 275

Actual Voltage (kV) 1.078 32.53 32.53 32.458 32.599 32.601 32.596 275

Actual Voltage (%) 89.83 98.58 98.58 98.36 98.78 98.79 98.78 100.00

31 | P a g e

Table 14.1: Case 6: Load Flow Branch Power Flow

ID

Type

Rating

Power Flow (MVA)

Real Power (P)

Reactive Power (Q) 188.116 42.626 44.501 39.772 63.637 18.749 18.749 26.14 39.544 59.011 65.946 63.159 63.368

% Loading

Cable(275kV) Cable (SGT4) Cable (SGT3) Cable (SGT1A) C (33kV-1 - 33kV-2) C1(33kV-2 - 33kV-3) C2(33kV-2 - 33kV-3) C3(33kV-2 - 33kV-3) Cable (Furnace Board) SGT 1A SGT 3 SGT 4 T (132MVA)

Cable Cable Cable Cable Cable Cable Cable Cable Cable Transf. 2W Transf. 2W Transf. 2W Transf. 2W 75MVA/ 275kV 120MVA / 275kV 120MVA / 275kV 132MVA /33kV 120MVA 100MVA 75 MVA

302.45 89.77 93.72 83.91 116.94 37.28 37.28 42.62 83.74 94.92 106.00 101.53 116.68

236.826 79.003 82.478 73.887 98.106 32.221 32.221 33.664 73.818 74.345 82.989 79.492 97.974

126.6 88.3 84.6 88.4

32 | P a g e

APPENDIX ONE: POWER SYSTEM STUDIES INPUT DATA APPENDIX TWO: LOAD FLOW RESULTS APPENDIX THREE: FAULT LEVEL RESULTS APPENDIX FOUR: STANDARD COPPER BUSTUBE RATINGS APPENDIX FIVE: 33 kV POST INSULATOR DATA

33 | P a g e