Minimizing Cost and Power loss by Optimal Placement of Capacitor using ETAP

Pravin Chopade'

and Dr.Marwan Bikdash

Computational Science and Engineering Department ,Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering North Carolina A & T State University Greensboro, USA Email: bikdash@ncat.edu.pravinvchopade@gmail.com
(LAuthor is doing Ph.D. at NCA T, USA and Assc. Professor at Bharati Vidyapeeth Deemed University College of Engineering Pune.INDIA)

Abstract-Loads in a power distribution system network are mostly inductive and lead to poor power factor. In order to utilize tbe generated power optimaUy it is necessary to maintain closeto-unity power factor. Power factor correction is possible by introducing the capacitive loads in the circuit, as to nullify the effect of inductive loading. Due to simplicity of analysis of radial distribution systems, most previous work (I) studied the effect of nonlinear and capacitive loads on the optimal solution of the Capacitor Placement Problem (CPP) for radial distribution systems only. In this paper, we study optimal capacitor placement on interconnected distribution systems in the presence of nonlinear loads. The placement problem is solved using Genetic Algorithms (GA) as implemented in the ETAP Power station software. Results (power losses, operating voltages and annual benefits) are analyzed. Computational results show that harmonic components affect optimal capacitor placement in all system configurations. If all loads were linear, interconnected and loop system configurations offer lower power losses and better operating conditions than the radial system configuration.
Keywords-

Optimal placement of capacitors, Reactive

POII/Cr,

ETAP Software.

INTRODUCTION

The leading current provided by a capacitor can effectively cancel the lagging current demanded by reactive load components. Power factor is defined as the ratio of real power (kW) to total power (kV A). When the distribution system's reactive load can be canceled by a capacitor placed at the reactive load center, the entire power delivery system will be relieved of KVAR, originally supplied from the power supplier's generator. This makes the full capacity of the generator available to serve real power loads [1]. If a capacitor is connected to the distribution system either too far ahead of or too far beyond the system's inductive load center, the capacitor still provides reactive loading relief, but the system will not gain the full advantages of voltage and loss improvement which would be afforded by proper capacitor placement [2]. Electric power is supplied to final users by means of Medium Voltage (MY) or Low Voltage (LV) distribution systems, their structures and schemes can differ significantly according to loads location. Overhead lines with short interconnection capabilities are mostly employed in rural areas, whilst cables with a great number of lateral connections for alternative

supplies are widespread used in urban areas [3]. Most power distribution systems are designed to be radial, using only one path between each customer and the substation. If power flowing away from the substation to the consumer is interrupted, complete loss of power to the consumer will follow [4]. The predominance of radial distribution is due to two overwhelming advantages: it is much less costly than the other two alternatives (loop and interconnected systems) and it is much simpler in planning, design, and operation. An alternative to purely radial feeder design is a loop system, which has two paths between the power sources (substations, service transformers) and each customer [5]. Equipment is sized and each loop is designed so that service can be maintained under a single fault. In terms of complexity, a loop feeder system is only slightly more complicated than a radial system [6]. Power usually flows out from both sides toward the middle, and in all cases can take only one of two routes. Voltage drop, sizing, and protection are only slightly more complicated than for radial systems. Interconnected distribution systems are the most complicated and costly but they are the most reliable method of distributing electric power. An interconnected distribution system involves multiple paths between all points in the network and provide continuity of service (reliability) far beyond that of radial and loop designs. Interconnected distribution systems are more expensive than radial distribution systems, but not greatly so in dense urban applications, where the load density is very high and the distribution must be underground. Given that repairs and maintenance are difficult because of traffic and congestion, interconnected systems may cost little more than loop systems. Interconnected systems require little more conductor capacity than a loop system. The loop configuration required "double capacity" everywhere to provide increased reliability. Interconnected systems are generally no worse and often need considerably less capacity and cost, if that are well designed. The solution procedures of the Capacitor Placement Problem (CPP) start with performing a load flow analysis to analyze the steady-state performance of the power system prior to capacitor placement and after capacitor placement and to study the effects of changes in capacitor sizes and locations [7].

978-1-4244-9592-4/11/$25.00

2011 IEEE

26

-,

2 Load and power flow direction are easy to establish in a radial distribution system, and voltage profiles can be determined with a good degree of accuracy without resorting to exotic calculation methods; equipment capacity requirements can be ascertained exactly; capacitors can be sized, located, and set using relatively simple procedures (simple compared to those required for similar applications to non-radial (loop and interconnected) system designs [8]. Due to the simplicity of analysis of radial distribution systems, all previous work studied the effect of nonlinear loads on optimal solution ofCPP on only radial distribution systems [9]. The study of the optimal placement and sizing of fixed capacitor banks placed on distorted interconnected distribution systems using Genetic Algorithms (GA) as used in ETAP Software [10] is presented in this paper. Results (power losses, operating conditions and .annual benefits) are compared with that obtained from radial and loop distribution systems. The radial, loop and interconnected distribution systems models are obtained by suitably simplification of a typical Power grid. The Commercial package ETAP 7.1 program is also used for . harmonic load flow analysis [10]. Computational results obtained showed that harmonic component distortion affects the optimal capacitor placement in all system configurations. When all loads were assumed to be linear, interconnected and loop system configurations offer the lowest power losses and best operating conditions rather than the radial system configuration. Radial system configuration offers the best annual benefits due to capacitor placement. In distorted networks, the interconnected system configuratior offers lower power losses, best operating conditions, and best annual benefits due to capacitor placement. II.
CAPACITOR BASED POWER FACTOR CORRECTION

reducing the generator's designations. III.

capacity

to produce reef' power.

PROBLEM FORMULATION

The current in branch (i,k) connecting buses i and k is given by[I,2,4,12]

L, = Pit - JQik

Vi
where
lik = ?ik Qik

(1)

Current through branch (i, k).

(i, k).

= Total real power flow in the branch

= Total reactive power flow in the branch ( i, k).

Vi = Voltage at node i.

The Total Power Loss in the transmission lines is :

,,n

TPL where

L.,;I I'k 1 R'k

ik;1

n = Current through branch (i

Rik

f1
a

= Resistance of branch

Ci f1
e,rtive (l
)

A branch curr nt has two component":

and

reactive ( l ' ).The total loss associated with the active and reactive components of a branch current can be written as
n
~,r(1I""'"

As a rural power distribution system load grows, the system power factor usually declines. Load growth and a decrease in power factor lead to [ 3, 5] Voltage regulation problems; 2. Increased system losses; 3. Power factor penalties in wholesale power contracts; and 4. Reduced system capacity. In addition to improving the system Power Factor, capacitors also provide some voltage drop correction. A capacitor's leading current cause a voltage rise on the system. But care must be exercised as not to cause too much voltage rise or provide too much leading current. Distribution capacitors can also reduce system line losses, as long as the system power factor is not forced into a leading mode. Properly placed and sized capacitors can usually reduce system line losses sufficiently to justify the cost of their installation [I, II].
I.

ik=1

and TPLr
=

LI I~ 12Rik
ik;1

The loss TPL" associated with the active component of branch current cannot be minimized for a single - source radial network because all active power must be supplied by the source at the root bus. However, supplying part of the reactive power demands locally, the loss TPLr associated with the reactive components of branch currents can be minimized. The capacitor draws a reactive current I, and for a radial network it changes only the reactive component of current of branch set c. The current of other branches is unaffected by the capacitor. Thus the new reactive current of the (i,k)'h branch is given by (2) where

BuLk power facilities have to use some of their capacity to carry the inductive kVAR current to the distribution system. The resultant reactive current flow produces losses on the bulk facilities as wel!, introducing unnecessary costs. Generators provide the reactive needs of distribution plant inductive loads

27

.. 7D

=
ik

1,

if branch (i R) otherwise.

IV.

CAPACITOR

LOCATION

0,

Here I,~ is the reactive current of branch in the original system obtained from the load flow solution. The loss TPLrcom associated with the reactive component of branch current in the compensated system (when the capacitor is connected) can be written as TPL~om=

L U;;' + Dik1c)2 Rik

ik=1

(3)

The loss saving T LS is the difference between equation (2) and (3) and is given by . TLs = TPLr- TPLrcom
n n

Maximum benefits are obtained by locating the capacitors as near the inductive reactance kV AR loads as possible and by matching the magnitude of the inductive reactance kV AR requirement. Practical considerations of economics and availability of a limited number of standard kV AR sizes necessitate that capacitors be clustered near load centers. Computer modeling or rigorous evaluation of considerable load metering data are absolutely necessary to make the proper capacitor placement decision and keep line losses as low as possible. The loss reduction benefits possible with capacitor use can be significant enough to economically justify feeder metering or a large share of SCAD A system costs. A textbook solution [I] assume a uniform distribution of consumers, and suggests that as the distance from the substation increases, the number of consumers per main line mile of feeder increases.

To obtain maximum benefits in voltage improvement and reduction of loss on such a line, a permanently connected n _:::: ':Cfixed)_capllcilor bank should be located at a.distance from the (2DikI,: + DikI/}Rik -----substation which is 1/2 to 2/3 of the total length of theIine." ik=1 This location method is used strictly as a "Rule of Thumb" because few rural circuits contain such uniformly distributed The capacitor current Ie that provides maximum loss saving loads. can be obtained from dS/d1e= 0 Thus, the following method is better suited for locating " capacitors: Use a computer model of electric system and allow (DiJ:~ +DikI~)Rik =0 the computer program to place the capacitors on the system in ik=1 blocks of the largest size that can be used to limit the voltage changes to 3 volts per switched bank. Thus the capacitor current form loss saving is given by ik=1 ik=1

LU;;')2 Rik - L

U,~ + DikIi~)2

Rik

=L

-L I;;' Rik
I
c =

ikea

L.J H,k '"

ik ea

The corresponding capacitor size is Q =V I c me where

Qc = Capacitor size in KV AR
Vm Ie

= Voltage magnitude of bus' m' in volts

= Capacitor

current in amps

The corresponding susceptance is I S =-...

V

Computer models calculate proper capacitor placement by trying the smallest size capacitor a system uses in each line section of every feeder and calculating the total circuit losses. In this way, the computer selects the line secuon with the lowest net losses and then places subsequent additional capacitors in the same manner. The individual effect on feeder losses is tabulated for each capacitor placed, with each subsequent unit having less benefit. At some point at less than unity power factor, an additional capacitor offers little additional benefit, and adding more actually increases losses. Capacitors should be located so as to reduce feeder losses as much as economically practical. The first capacitor placed provides the most improvement per unit cost because it is usually a fixed capacitor and it increases power factor the most. Each subsequent unit is less economically practical [13).

V.

OPTIMAL

CAPACITOR

PLACEMENT (OCp)

USING

ETA?:

SYSTEM DESIGN WITH ETAP.

The proposed technique can also be repeatedlyemployed to further optimizing saving of cost of energy by identifying sequence of buses to be compensated for further loss reduction by optimal placement of capacitor.

ETAP PowerStation [10) is a fully graphical power systems analysis program. ET AP PowerStation uses genetic algorithm technique for optimal capacitor placement.

28

'\m.t

hT~~t.

FJ:~'ie.

lP. ~' .
Ai

Uhf

-~~!j

D
l,I;1lW

.ro;
~'f" ro Ltl.1,
1~1/7!:I "'~,

l:ilflO
4[)

~v.

D
W-\'.\
f;!~ Yo'l flX(]

f\~","" &:0:

W\~A

Ij'j,l

Figure

.1: Typical Single line diagram of Power

Grid on ETAl>.

Most power systems that operate at a lagging power factor ~.' The objeetive of optimal capacitor placement is to minimize the cost of the system. The cost includes four parts: due to loads and delivery apparatus (lines and transformers) are inductive in nature. Therefore, power systems require 1. fixed capacitor installation cost: $ 4369.75 /year additional VAR flow. This results in reduced system capacity, increased losses and decreased voltage [2, 10J. 2. capacitor purchase cost: $ 1860 US/year To place shunt capacitors tasks are to be performed: I. 2. 3. 4. in power systems, the following 3. 4. capacitor bank operating cost (maintenance and depreciation) : $3588.24/year cost of real power losses: 7.56c1KWh

Determine the bank size in KV AR Determine the connection location Determine a control method D--'p.--,"n.! ~? cor.'1ero':T\"'! ~-pe ( r r-/' '.

The main constraints for capacitor placement are

Minimizing the cost while determining the capacitor size and location mathematically is an optimization problem. Therefore, we should employ an optimization approach. The ET AP Optima! Capacitor Placement (OCP) module is a powerful simulation tool that is specifically designed for this application. The OCP module helps to place capacitors for voltage support and power factor correction while minimizing total cost. The advanced graphical interface gives the flexibility to control the capacitor placement process and allows to view the results graphically. The precise calculation approach automatically determines the best location and bank sizes. In addition, it reports the branch capacity release and the savings during the planning period due to V AR loss reduction. OCP uses the present worth method to perform alternative comparisons. It considers initial installation and operating costs, which include maintenance, depreciation, and loss reduction savings. It also provides interest rate and inflation consideration.

2.

To ensure bars;

that, all voltage magnitudes of load

(PQ) buses should be within the lower and upper

3.

To ensure that power factor (PF) should be greater than a threshold. It may be a maximum power factor bar.

The constraints are the power flow equations. VI.

NUMLRICAL CALCULATIONS

The distribution network models are obtained by suitably simplification of a typical Power grid [3]. The Single line diagram of the network simulated in ETAP is shown in Figure 1 and the system data as follows: Larger interconnected two 132 kV HV networks with the same short circuit power MV Asc of 6000 MVA; Two HV /MV substations, comprising eaeh a 132 kV HV busbar, a 132/20 kV 40 MV A transformer and a 20 kY MY busbar; A feeder, subdivided in three line sections (LOI, Ll2 and L23) of 3 km each with % positive sequence impedance (l00 MY A base) R=5. 17, X=4.23, Z=6.68.A series of further passive overhead

29

5 feeders; Link lines between various 4eeder (Lml Lm2);Configuration switches (S I, S2, S3, S4, S5 and S6). and
Table 2 : Values of Capacitor before and after OCP for radial, loop and interconnected distribution systems for Test Case.

Table 1 shows the system load data The GA optimization method was applied to the test system- for three different network configurations: l. Radial configuration open); (SI, S2, S3, S4, S5, S6 all

Variable QCI(kVAR) QCz(kVAR) QC3(kVAR) QC4(kVAR) Qcs(kVAR) QC6(kVAR) QC7(kVAR) Qcg(kVAR) QC<J(kVAR) QCIOkVAR) QCII(kVAR) QcdkVAR) Total capacitor(kV AR)

2. 3.

Loop configuration (Slopen, S2 open, S3 closed, S4 closed, S5 closed and S6 closed); Interconnected configuration (S 1closed, S2c1osed, S3 open, S4 open, S5 open and S6 open)

Table I: Test system load data

Bus No. --

Load(80% Motor, 20 % static

MW

After OCP for Test Case Interconnec ted Radial Loop 4050 3600 3900 4050 4050 3900 4050 3600 3900 1500 1800 3600 2400 3300 3300 1650 2700 2100 3450 3450 3300 750 2400 3300 3450 2400 3450 1800 2400 1200 2250 2550 2100 2700 2250 1650 34350 32850 35100

"~.

I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

5.25 5.25 5.25 4..5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5

-.c

~_

MVAR 5.356 5.356 e- 5~.356 - 2.18 . 2.18 2.18 2.18 2.18 2.18 2.18 2.18 2.18

.--. ~---

-, -

..

..

Min voltage
(pu)

Tab1e\-:" Cmnpariso'R-:'-of resultso"efore and after OC~ for radial, Ioop and -~~ interconnected distribution systems for Test case - -

--

Min voltage (pu) before OCP 0.91 0.91484 0.92671

Min voltage (pu) after OCP 0.96535 0.97364 0.97521

Max voltage (pu) Power losses (kW) Cap. Cost ($/year) Total C051 ($/year) Benefits ($/year)

Max voltage (pu) before OCP 0.95516 0.95516 0.94462

Max voltage (pu) after OCP 0.98778 0.98860 0.98554

Power losses (kW) before OCP 1211.1 1244.1

----------

1206.5
-----

Power losses (kW) after OCP 812.8 795.7 6142.8 6301.65

796.8 6156.9

Commercially-available capacitor sizes with real costs/kv t\. were used in the analysis. It was c~::i~~d hat th largest capacitor size Qcmaxshould not exceed the total reactive load, i.e., 35688 kVAR. The yearly costs of capacitor sizes as described in [4].

The Optimum shunt capacitor sizes have been evaluated for the test case where all loads arc assumed to be linear and Kp was selected to be $168IkW. The voltage limits on the rms voltages were selected as V min= 0.95pu, and V m.:>.,= 1.05, for test case and V min= 0.93 pu, and V m,,=1.05 pu. Table 2 shows the values of capacitors for radial, loop and interconnected distribution systems and Table 3 shows comparison of power loss and voltages before and after OCP for radial, loop and interconnected distribution systems for Test Case. This table shows significant use of OCP with respect to saving $/year. Figure 3 shows Power losses before and after Capacitor placement and Figure 4 shows total cost $/year before and after capacitor placement. Plots of Comparison for Power losses ($/year) before and after OCP.
\
I I

Total Cost ($,yearj ~~~u~" VCr' 209008 203464 Benefits ($/ycar) before OCP -

202692

Total Cost I \. c.. ; 139904 . 139952 142685 Benefits ($/yea r) a fter OCP 62740 66323 63560

I I

r~------------------~- i4W

..-.-----,-,

"'-~"'"

........

1
0

120<)

.--.i

_---------- ---_ .._------,

-..

i I

s
M

woo
SCQ

!
I

-,
O?ow~rIOl;~5 inMW ~iQre OCP (for Test ca
1L

! ;

o s

w e w e s r
i

600 400

100
0
L-.

_.1 1

Power I05S3 in

OCPlior Test ca.

I. Radial Sjsiom

syste.. Case,

2. Loop Sj>lBm 3.lrnerrOllllected

~'"'I
I

and Total cost

I
Figure 3: Power losses before and after OCP

30

6
2 soooo

2:00000

----j

s
c I
0

lSOCOO

I
1
;

5.
o To~;;1 cesr (She';.r) befor~ oo
I;",T< Coo., Total Ct':-ti$/ye~ri stter jforTe.rtC-ase) OCP

capacitors as near the inductive reactance kV AR loads as possible. Limited number of standard kVAR sizes necessitate that capacitors be clustered near load centers. ACKNOWLEDGMENT

1000

500

l. Ratial SYStem !.l.nop~1{'m llnSi!.Jtord1eCr~l S.\-"STiWI

L. .._._

__

.__ _

..__ ._._._

............ _._-_

.. _

_... _,j

Figure4: Total Cost ($fYear)before andafterOCP

VII.

CONCLUSIONS

~ _.=,

The study of the optimal capacitor placement on interconnected distribution systems in the presence of nonlinear loads using ET AP is presented in this paper. Results (power REFERENCES losses, operating conditions and annual benefits) are compared with..:.fhat obtained. from. radial-and 19op'"ne.!Works-Ihe-radiaj-, __ --== [~ D.~~g~e R~ac~vep.2.wer..managem..e~ ~.:-G~~ Hill2000. __ _ . . ---loop' and _ interconnected dtstribution- 1?ystems~:::"modefS;iiLe_ ~.l2f ~fan{andYijaya, -"DistJjbation~iffefrr-J.o~J~b ~bycapacltors", ~=:f~obtained, by suitable simplification .of.a typic~l powes grid. -::. -Pr5'~.of l'iati.unal Conference oncm~~i~g TrendsirfEllgi_neeril!g(2000), Computational results obtained showed that the harmonic - - - Husur, ~--~~.,-.- [3] D.Rajicic &Y.Tamura(1988)IEEEtrans. on powersystemsvolume-I. component affects the optimal capacitor placement in an ~ 4 system configurations. - - _[] Aoki k, IchimoriT, Kanezashi M. (1985), "Normalstate-optimal load~_ allocation in distribution systems", IEEE Trans PowerDeliv, Volume 3 (issue I), pp. 147-155. When all loads were assumed to be linear, interconnected (5] S.I.Wamoto & Y.Tamura (1981),IEEE trans. On power apparatus & and loop system configurations offer lowest power losses and systems. best operating conditions rather than the radial system [6] Y. Baghzouz,S. Ertem, "ShuntCapacitor Sizing forRadial Distribution configuration while radial system configuration offer best Feeders with Distorted SubstationVoltages", IEEETrans. on Power annual benefits due to capacitor placement. In distorted Delivery, Vol.5, No.2, April 1990,pp. 650-65. networks, interconnected systems configuration offer lower [7] ETAP Product Overview - Power System Enterprise Solution, Operation Technology Inc. power losses, best operating conditions and best annual [8 M.Brenna, RFaranda and E'TriAri "Non-convert iona! Distribution benefits due to capacitor placement .Capacitors can thus be Network Schemes Analysis \\'-:'.1 Vl.>trU.)ut(.;t,) G~J.l:;.r-J.ltv.u., ~ used effectively for reactive power compensation which helps Bucharest, 2004. in improving the power factor, reducing system losses, [9] Larsson, M. (2000) Coordinated Voltage Control in Electric Power improving voltage, increasing the capacity of feeders etc. Systems. Doctoral dissertation, Department of Industrial Electrical Engineeringand Automation, LundUniversity. The study made above leads to the following conclusions: [l0] P. M. Anderson,A. A. Fouad, Power System Control and Stability, I. Optimum value of the capacitor New York:IEEEPress, 1992. required can be [II] R. H. Park, "Improved reliabilityof bulk power supply by fast load determined. control," in Proceedings of the 1968, American PowerConference, pp. 2. The algorithm finds out the proper location of the 445-457. capacitor. fl2] Aoki K, Kuwahara H, Satoh t, Kanezashi M (1988), "An efficient 3. The results are encouraging with reference to the algorithm for load balancing of transformers and feeders".IEEE Trans improvement in power factor and Voltage, thereby Power Deliv,Volume 3 (issue4), pp.1865-1872. increasing the feeder capacity. [l3] IEEE Recommended Practicesand Requirements for Harmonic Control in Electrical Power Systems, IEEE Std. 519-1992, 1993. 4. Maximum benefits are obtained by selecting the optimum size of the capacitor and by locating the
L. -...:: .. ~ ,

The authors gratefully acknowledge Mr.D.M. Tagare, Managing Director, Madhav Capacitors Ltd. Pune, India for his contribution for providing data on Reactive Power Management for effect of variation of switched capacitor bank on daily power load. The Authors are greatly thankful to Dr. Ajit D. Kelkar, Director Computational Science and Engineering Department, North. Carolina A & T State University, Greensboro, USA and the Management of Bharati Vidyapeeth Pune, Bharati Vidyapeeth Deemed University Pune, Dr. Anand R. Bhalerao, Principal, Bharati Vidyapeeth Deemed University College of Engineering, Pune,INDIA , for their support.

31