714 IEEE TRANSACTIONSON INDUSTRY APPLICATIONS VOL. 28, NO.

4, JULY / AUGUST 1992

Voltage-Drop Calculations and Power-Flow

Studies for Rural Electric Distribution Lines
Charles W. Brice, 111, Senior Member, ZEEE

Abstract-This paper examines the history of distribution
system voltage-drop and loss calculation from paper-and-pencil
methods to full three-phase power flow calculations using the
digital computer and offers recommendations to aid the practic-
ing engineer in the choice of the best analytical tools.
INTRODUCTION
F ROM THE EARLIEST days of electric power sys-
tems, electrical engineers have performed calcula-
tions of voltage drop and loss in distribution lines. In
transmission systems, the corresponding calculations are
generally performed in a power-flow (also called load-flow)
study using a computer. Recent advances in digital com-
puter technology and corresponding decreases in com-
puter hardware costs have opened many new opportuni-
ties to improve such calculations by including increasing
detail in the models. Unfortunately, computer software
costs can be high, especially if the costs of training per-
sonnel to use the software are included. Consequently, it
is not always clear whether the benefits of a new software
package outweigh its costs.
This paper examines the history of distribution system
voltage drop and loss calculation from paper-and-pencil
methods to full three-phase power flow calculations using
the digital computer. Although the paper-and-pencil
methods are based on rough approximations, such as
assuming perfectly balanced load, the more modern meth-
ods allow for unbalanced loads of any type. In the process
of discussing the modern methods, some nontrivial model-
ing problems appear, such as the following:
1) In a four-wire rural distribution system serving
mostly single-phase loads connected line to neutral,
unbalanced currents exist in much of the line even
if the total load is perfectly balanced. Under what
conditions should be unbalance be included?
2) In many rural systems, the exact nature of the load,
its power factor, and how the loads respond to
voltage changes are only approximately known. If
the results of the study are sensitive to these un-
knowns, then does using a more detailed model
give better results?
Paper IPCSD 91-104, approved by the Rural Electric Power Commit-
tee for presentation at the 1990 Rural Electric Power Committee Tech-
nical Conference, Orlando, FL, April 29-May 1. Manuscript released for
Dublication SeDtember 17. 1991.
The author is with the Department of Electrical and Computer
Engineering, University of South Carolina, Columbia, SC 29208.
IEEE Log Number 9108230.
This paper examines these issues and offers recommen-
dations to aid the practicing engineer in the choice of the
best analytical tools for a particular purpose.
BRIEFHISTORYOF VOLTAGE AND LOSS
CALCULATIONS
Until the 1960s most engineering calculations were
performed using paper and pencil, with the aid of slide
rules, nomograms, special-purpose graphical methods, and
mechanical calculating machines.
During the 1960s and 1970s, electronic calculators
made a significant impact on engineering calculations, but
still, the paper and pencil were an integral part of the
method. In this same time period, the digital computer
evolved into an extremely useful engineering tool, espe-
cially for calculations of a tedious and repetitive nature. A
good example of this is the power-flow study used in
analyzing power transmission networks interconnected to
generators and substations. Such iterative calculations are
impractical by hand or even with the use of an electronic
calculator.
In the 1980s, the computer revolution spawned the
personal computer, and the price of computer hardware
dropped dramatically. At the same time, computer soft-
ware for many special purposes became available in a
form that is called user friendly. In other words, the
user of the program need not be skilled in computer
programming. Graphical interfaces and menus allow the
user to simply select an appropriate choice from a list. An
interesting side effect of these developments is to reduce
(but not eliminate) the need of the engineer to use paper
and pencil in the actual solution of a problem.
In paper-and-pencil calculations of voltages and losses
on distribution lines, simplification of the problem is nec-
essary to speed the process. Typically, the load is approxi-
mated as being uniformly distributed along sections of
line, which is then replaced by a lumped equivalent. It is
well known [l] that the voltage drop on a line segment
caused by a uniformly distributed load of S kVA is equal
to that caused by a concentrated load of one half of S
located at the receiving end of the segment.
LOADMODELS
Load models are very important in the calculation of
voltages on all types of lines. In fact, load models are
necessary for voltage profile studies on distribution lines

0093-9994/92$03.00 0 1992 IEEE


BRICE: VOLTAGE DROP CALCULATIONS AND POWER-FLOW STUDIES
for power-flow studies of transmission systems and for
transient stability studies. In each of these studies, how-
ever, different load models are in common use. Since
power-flow studies are being used on distribution systems,
it seems worthwhile to make a short review of load
modeling.
One simple load model, which is often used in power-
flow studies on transmission systems, is the constant P +
j Q model. As its name implies, this model assumes that
the load current decreases with an increase in the voltage
(and that the power factor is constant) to maintain the
real and reactive power constant. This model is useful
only if the load voltage is regulated since it does not give
an accurate picture of the sensitivities of most loads to
voltage variations. Its usefulness in power-flow studies on
high-voltage transmission systems is largely due to the
presence of voltage regulators and load tap-changing
transformers in distribution substations. The constant P
+ j Q model should not be used on distribution system
studies unless the load is known to be insensitive to
voltage changes.
The constant R + j X model is often used in transient
stability studies and sometimes in power-flow studies. This
model implies that the load real and reactive power varies
in proportion to the square of the voltage magnitude. This
is still not an accurate representation of most loads, with
the possible exception of resistance heating loads. Most
loads draw a real power that varies somewhat with voltage
but less than what this model predicts. Incandescent lamps
loads, for example, exhibit real power proportional to the
voltage raised to the 1.6 power 121. The Appendix gives an
outline of the derivation of this result.
A model that gives a middle ground between the ex-
tremes of the two previous models is the constant current
model. This model predicts that P and Q vary in direct
proportion to the voltage since the load current is treated
as being constant. While the actual load current is ex-
pected to vary somewhat with the voltage, this model is
probably the best simple model for general use in distri-
bution voltage studies [3].
A simple variation on the constant current model is to
recognize that some portion of Q will be due to magnetiz-
ing reactances of transformers and induction motors,
which are accurately modeled as constant reactances.
Likewise, resistance heating loads are reasonably modeled
as constant resistances. Thus, a composite load model
could represent SO% (for example) of the reactive power
as shunt reactance and SO% as constant current and 10%
(for example) of the real power load as constant resis-
tance and 90% as constant current. The astute observer
will immediately notice that the engineer must now deter-
mine the correct percentages for the particular system.
Indeed, on some systems, the percentages will change
from one feeder to the next, depending on the predomi-
nant nature of the load served.
This idea can be extended to allow a composite load
model, with some portion of the load modeled as constant
impedance, some portion modeled as constant current,
~
775
and some portion modeled as constant power [4]:
P = A,, + A,V + A,V*
Q = B" + B,V + B p .
The process described in the preceding paragraph may
be improved by the use of end-use models. The idea here
is to disaggregate the load into categories based on the
end use of the electric energy. For example, feeder 1
serves mostly rural residences and small farms. The end
uses of the electricity are water pumps, incandescent
lighting, discharge lighting, water heating, resistance space
heating, cooking, air conditioning, heat pumps, etc. Feeder
2 serves mostly irrigation pumps; therefore, the end uses
are pumps and miscellaneous. Obviously, the application
of end-use modeling requires that a significant amount of
load-research data be available. If such data needs to be
gathered for other purposes, such as load management,
then a side benefit may be the opportunity to use the
results to refine the load models used in voltage calcula-
tion.
A great deal of very useful data may be gathered from
real-time data telemetry from a distribution automation
system. Although a distribution automation system could
not be justified on the basis of improving the load model
accuracy, if such a system is needed for other purposes, it
should be configured to allow measurements of voltages
and line currents. Not only will this allow greater model-
ing detail, but it will also allow the results of any calcula-
tions to be tested immediately using real data.
The complexity of the load modeling problem may be
appreciated by considering a residential air-conditioning
compressor. On a distribution feeder, there may be hun-
dreds of small induction motors driving air-conditioning
compressors. Each of these motors has some impedance
parameters, which are essentially unknowable given the
cost of making large numbers of tests. Each of these
compressors has some torque-speed characteristics, which
are again unknowable. Each of the units is under thermo-
static control, but the setpoint is not usually known. To
make a completely accurate load model, all of these
parameters plus the thermal characteristics of the build-
ing would need to be known. This is obviously impossible;
consequently, the model must be an approximation. Each
of the load models discussed is an approximation to some
degree. For the purposes of this paper, the examples will
use the constant-current model for its simplicity. In prac-
tice, if data were available to support the end-use models
or the composite models, they would produce better re-
sults but higher engineering costs.
A common approximation is to assume that a large
number of small loads can be replaced by a uniformly
distributed load. Let a line section of impedance 2 = R
+ J X R have a receiving-end current (the sum of the load
current lumped at the receiving end plus the line current
of the downstream section) of Zr amperes and a load
current of Id amperes that is uniformly distributed over
the section. The voltage drop across the section is Z(Zr +
 -

776 IEEE TRANSACTIONSON INDUSTRY APPLICATIONS, VOL. 28, NO. 4, JULY / AUGUST 1992

0 CONDUCTORS

DoP
1 DcB

NOT TO SCALE
Lnn In

a
.\
A N
I
C IMAGE C O N D U C T O R S
RC LCC
>
IC

Fig. 1. Cross section of line showing image conductors.

Fig. 2. Circuit model of 1-m length of line.
Zd/2), and the power loss in the section is R(Zr2 + ZrZd +
Id2/3). The derivations of these results are outlined in larger than Dab,then DaB = DaA:
the Appendix. The example includes both loads lumped at
the end of line sections and distributed loads to model a DaA = DbB = DCc= DnN = DaB = Db, = DUN
large number of relatively small loads. = e.. = Dk,

LINEMODELS
where L is the inductance per unit length, Lk, is the
The distribution line itself is more easily modeled than self-inductance of conductor k , and L i j is the mutual
is the load since the parameters may be calculated using inductance between i and j. Both i and j range over
the results of Carsons classic paper [5]-[7]. Fig. 1 shows a ( a ,b,c, n, A , B , C , NI:
three-phase four-wire distribution line (in cross section).
The geometric mean radius of conductor a is denoted Lij = 2 X In ( l / D i j ) H/m.
Daa, and the distance between conductor a and conductor
b is Dab ( = Dba). The resistance of conductor a is Fig. 2 shows a circuit diagram representing a 1-m length
denoted Ra. The three phases are denoted a, b, and c of the three phases, the grounded neutral, and the image
and the neutral n. To represent the effects of earth conductors. Note that the voltage drop across the neutral
currents, fictitious image conductors, denoted A, B, C, and the image conductors is the same since the image
and N , are placed below the ground surface (modeled as conductors are in the earth, and the neutral is grounded.
an infinite plane). Carsons results give Actually, the neutral of an overhead line is grounded at
points many meters apart, but the model simplifies this to
some extent. For most purposes, this approximation is
trivial, but if the neutral currents are to be calculated
exactly, or if unusual conditions (such as a broken neu-
= 59.21 X n/m
tral) are to be analyzed, this approximation could be easily
removed. For our purposes, the voltage drop across the
neutral and the image conductors will be lumped in with
that of the phase conductors, and this approximation is
for f = 60 Hz and p = 100 a-m. Since DaA is much insignificant.
BRICE: VOLTAGE DROP CALCULATIONS AND POWER-FLOW STUDIES 777

R, 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
O R , O O 0 0 0 0
O O R e O 0 0 0 0
O O O R n O O O O
O O O O R , O 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 R, 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 RN 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 O R , v

XU

Xh c
XC,
x nc
+j
xk K
xk ti

xk ti
xk K

where X I ] = 2.rrfLI1 = 75.40 X l o p 6 In ( l / D r , ) .0,

Note that X k , = 75.40 X ln(1/850) = 508.6 x l o p 6
n/m.
Subtract the last equation from the result and replace it
with
0 =Iu + Ih + I , + In + IA + I B + I , + Z v . For lines of two phases (for open wye transformer
Define primary connections), the missing phase (say phase c)
vu= ua - un, Vh = U/, - U,, < = uc - U,,.
would produce two corresponding missing rows and
columns in the above matrix (those corresponding to the
Then missing currents I,. and IC). For single-phase lines (say

uhk ark unk knh knc Zknn

hhk hck hnk knh Zk I1 c Zk I1 n
rhk crh cn k knh knc knn
Znhk Znc,! Znnk knh knc knn
0 0 0 uhn Zacn Zunn
0 0 0 Zbhn Zhcn Zhnn
0 0 0 c hn zccn Zen,
1 1 1 1 1 1

where
phase a and the neutral n), four rows and columns of the
Irk = R I + j X r l- j X k K i, j = ( a ,b , c , n } above matrix would be missing, namely, the phases b and
z]k = jx,,-WkK i, j = ( a ,b , C, n } c and their images. Since these are straightforward simpli-
fications, these cases will not be discussed further. The
zknn = -R, +jXkK- jXnn i = {a,b,c) example, however, includes both open-wye and single-
Zknr =jXkK -jXnl i = {a,b,c} phase lines.
778
The next step is to eliminate the neutral and the
fictitious image elements by Kron reduction [81, [91, which
is equivalent to performing network reductions that lump
in the effect of the impedance elements that were elimi-
nated. Note that this process depends on having zero on
the left-hand side of the equations (which was one of the
motivations for subtracting the last equation from the
rest). The result is a set of three equations for the voltage
drop in each phase (with the neutral and earth drops
lumped in):
=I:[ 'ua
:[ 2::
'ub
,I;[]:
'uc
These equations are for an untransposed line; if sym-
metrical component transformations are applied, the re-
'a
sults will show mutual coupling between the sequence
components [lo], [ll], [7]. As a result, positive-sequence
currents will produce voltage drops in the negative-se-
quence and zero-sequence networks and vice versa. Since
this is not desirable, the use of symmetrical components is
not advised unless the line is assumed to be perfectly
transposed. Note that this is the usual assumption, even
though most lines are not actually transposed, and that
the approximation is usually a good one. The equations
for the transposed line are simply obtained by averaging
the diagonal impedances and the off-diagonal impedances:
where
2, = (zua+ z b b + zcc)/3
m' = (2ub + zbc + zcu)/3.
Then, the symmetrical component transformation will
give
z, = z, + 22,
and
z, = z, = z, - zm.
These equations give the results that are generally
desired for most purposes, but as illustrated in the exam-
ples, on occasion, it is preferable to use the untransposed
impedances in the ubc variables instead of the symmetri-
cal component variables. Of course, in the balanced
three-phase case, the positive-sequence resistance is just
the resistance of one conductor, and the positive-se-
quence reactance is readily calculated:
XI = 47rf x io-' In ( D,,/D,)
where De, is the geometric mean of the phase-phase
spacings, and 0,is the geometric mean radius of the
conductor. These resistances and reactances are available
in tables [12], [13].
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRY APPLICATIONS, VOL. 28, NO. 4, JULY / AUGUST 1992
RESULTS
Fig. 3 shows a typical four-conductor rural overhead
distribution line (multigrounded neutral) that will be used
for illustrating the results. The geometric mean spacing is
58.3 in, and the line is 20-mi long. For convenience, the
line is divided into several sections, each having a conduc-
tor size given in Table I.
The impedances of the three-phase sections are com-
puted according to the equations in the previous section,
and the results are shown in Table 11.
By way of comparison, the tabulated resistance is R I =
0.1888 R/km, and the equations for the reactance gives
X, =
=
47rf x
7.54 X
In (D,,/D,)
In (1.482/6.77 X
= 0.406 R / h .
Note that these agree (to three significant figures, which is
an upper bound on the accuracy of the input data) with
the values calculated by use of the matrix equations. If the
three-phase line sections serve loads that are approxi-
mately balanced, then the matrix approach is not neces-
sary, and the conventional calculation is preferable for its
simplicity.
The open-wye line is inherently unbalanced, even when
it supplies a balanced load. The results for the open-wye
section are given in Table 111. It is expected that the
matrix method will be preferable in this case, due to the
inherent unbalance.
For the single-phase line section, the matrix reduction
gives a single impedance value: Z = Zs = Z0 -- Z 1 =
0.995 + j1.002 R / h ( l / O AWG AESR).
The single-line diagram (Fig. 4) shows large loads
and lumped at their location (at the end of a line section) and
small loads treated as if they were uniformly distributed.
The voltage-drop calculation starts at the single-phase
line section:
Z =R + jX = 4.81 + j4.84 0
I = 50 kVA/7.2 kV = 6.94 A.
If the power factor is 0.90 lagging, then the phasor voltage
drop across this section is
Vu = ( R +j X ) I(0.90 - j0.436) = 44.7 +j15.65 V, L-N.
The calculation on the open-wye section immediately hits
a snag: How is the 350 kVA divided between the two
phases? Here, the division is assumed to be equal, and it
should be obvious that an unequal division could alter the
results. Table I11 impedances multiplied by the line length
in kilometers give
R/m Zuu =+ j3.21 R
3.14
Zub 0.903 + j1.559 R
=
Zbb = 3.15 + j3.20 R.
If the load on each phase is treated as single-phase load,
BRICE: VOLTAGE DROP CALCULATIONS AND POWER-FLOW STUDIES 779

1 2 47 kV

T LEGEND

55 lru
3 PHASES
1 NEUTRAL

i P T- 300 kVA 2 PHASES

1 NEUTRAL

/UI

EQUIVALENT
LUMPED LOAD

350 4VA
/ \\
/ \\
50 kVA
Dab = Dbc = 4 7 5 in = 1 2 0 7 m 750 kVA
Dco = 88 in = 2 2 4 m
Dan = Dcn = 5 7 5 in = 1 4 6 0 m Fig. 4. Single-linediagram showing lumped equivalent loads for voltage
Dbn = 55 111 = 1 3 9 7 m profile calculations.
Fig. 3. Line geometry and spacings.
TABLE I11
IMPEDANCESOF OPEN-WYE CONDUCTOR1 / 0
LINESECTION,
TABLE I AWG ACSR
CONDUCTOR SIZE AND LINESECTION LENGTH
CHART
a b
1 5 mi 336.4 kcmil ACSR Three Phase a +
0.9756 j0.9981 0.2804 + j0.4843
2 10 mi 336.4 kcmil ACSR Three Phase b +
0.2804 j0.4843 0.9772 + j0.9942 R/km
3 2 mi # 1/0 AWG ACSR Two Phase (Open Y) Z, = 0.976 + j0.996 R/km
4 3mi #1/0AWGACSR OnePhase +
Z , = 0.280 j0.484 R/km
kcmil = Thousand Circular Mils (same as MCM) +
2, = 1.537 j1.965 R/km
AWG = American Wire Gauge +
2, = Z , = 0.696 j0.512 R/km
ACSR = Aluminum Conductor,Steel Reinforced

latter case, the phasor voltage drops are

TABLE I1
IMPEDANCESOF THREE-PHASELINESECTIONS,
CONDUCTOR
Vu = 132.0 - j55.6 = 143/ - 22.8" V, L-N
336.4 kcmil ACSR I/b = 80.5 - j99.6 = 128/-51.0"V,L-N.
a b C The three-phase line sections are assumed to serve
a +
0.2872 j0.7101 0.0987 + j0.3170 0.0984 + j0.2727 loads that are approximately balanced on the three phases.
b +
0.0987 + j0.3170 0.2878 j0.7053 +
0.0987 j0.3170
c + +
0.0984 j0.2727 0.0987 j0.3170 +
0.2872 j0.7101 R/km Thus, the calculation uses the positive sequence
Z, +
= 0.287 j0.708 R/km impedance to determine the phasor voltage drop along
Z, = 0.0986 + j0.302 R/km each section. Although the "exact" equations could be
Z, = 0.484 + j1.313 R/km
used here, it is not believed that the extra computational
Z, = 2, = 0.1888 + j0.406 R/km
expense is worthwhile. In addition, the extra equations
may produce undesirable numerical problems and will not
then give exact answers in any case (unless exact load data is
la = 24.31-25.8" Ib = 24.3/-145.S0A. used). Thus, the approximate methods are preferable here:
If the load is treated as an equivalent open wye to delta 10-mi section:
Z = 7.20/65.OoR I = 34.7/-25.8"A
transformer supplying balanced three-phase secondary Vu = 193.7 + j158.0 = 250139.2" V,L-N.
load currents (secondary load = 303 kVA), then
5-mi section :
l a = 24.3/-55.8" Ib = 24.31- 115.8" A. Z = 3.60/65.0" R I = 13.89/ - 25.8" A
(See Appendix C for the derivation of this result.) In the Vu = 38.7 + j31.60 = 50/39.2" V,L-N.
780

The results are quite dependent on the power factor.

To illustrate this, the 10-mi section is recalculated with
power factors of 0.80 lagging and unity.

Vu
10-mi section (power factor
= 250128.1" = 220
= 0.80):
+ j117.8 V, L-N
g-I
IEEE TRANSACTIONSON INDUSTRY APPLICATIONS, VOL. 28, NO. 4, JULY / AUGUST 1992

SEQUENCE ABC

Vu
10-mi section (power factor
= 250165.0" = 105.7
= 1.O) :
+ j227 V,L-N. - 1/90' (PER UNIT)

The real part of these phasor voltage drops produces most Fig. 5. Open wye-Delta bank.
of the change in the magnitude of the voltage magnitude
since the drop is small compared with the source voltage
a reasonable value for the load power factor than to
[l]. Thus, a change of power factor from 1.0 to 0.80 account exactly for every small unbalance in the line
(lagging) essentially doubles the voltage drop (in this
impedances.
example). The results are, of course, dependent on the
line parameters as well. APPENDIX A
Now, the source voltage (7200 V L-N) and the voltage DERIVATION OF INCANDESCENT LAMP MODEL
drops are used to calculate the phasor voltages at any
The filament approximates an ideal radiator, which
point on the line. For example, at the end of the open-wye
radiates a power proportional to the absolute temperature
section, the voltage magnitude is 6837 V or 95% or 114 V
raised to the fourth power T4 by the Stefan-Boltzmann
on a 120-V basis. Note that this is the primary voltage and
Law. If all the input power were converted to radiation,
does not include the voltage drop in the transformer bank
then
nor the secondary conductors.
Shunt capacitor banks for power factor correction can P = V2/R a T 4 .
easily be added by representing the bank as an equivalent The resistance of the filament is proportional to the
load. If the program being used handles constant temperature (for normal ranges of temperatures); thus
impedance loads, the capacitor is represented by an
impedance Zc = -jl/wC or by an admittance Yc = jwC. V2 a T 5
For example, if a 300-kVAr capacitor is installed on the T a V215
system studied p a T4 a V815 = V1.6
OC = 300 kVA/(12.47 kV)2 = 100 kVA/(7.2kV)' This agrees well with the results of Berg and Kar [4J:
= 1.93 x 10-3 R P a V"
Zc = -j518 fl (per phase). where 1.55 In I 1.60.

If the program does not handle constant impedance loads, APPENDIX B

then treat the capacitor as a constant current load: DERIVATION
OF CALCULATIONS FOR UNIFORMLY
DISTRIBUTED LOAD
IC = 7200V/( -j518 0) = j13.9 A.
Let a line segment have a uniformly distributed load
The shunt capacitor will obviously produce a voltage current Id and a receiving-end current Zr (which includes
rise across the line reactance due to the phase angle of both the lumped load at the end and the line current of
the charging current. the downstream segments, if any). The linear current
density is Zd/L, where L is the line segment length. The
CONCLUSIONS sending-end current is Zr + Id. Then
Voltage-drop calculations for distribution systems may
be performed by hand or using the digital computer as an
Z(x) = (Zr + I d ) - Z&/L
aid. In either case, accurate information about load loca- where x is the distance from the sending end. The voltage
tions, power factors, and magnitudes is needed to perform drop across the segment is
an accurate calculation. Regardless of the sophistication
of the computer program, the results of the study are no V drop = 1 L

0
zZ( x ) dx = zL( Zr + Id/2)
better than the data that is used as a basis for the study.
Methods discussed in the paper include an approach where z is the impedance per unit length.
that allows unbalanced operation (such as an open-wye The power loss in the segment is
line) to be analyzed accurately. It is suggested that intelli-
gent use of the models will entail using the more detailed P loss = iLrz2(n) dx = +
rL(lr-2 + ~ d ~~ dr2 / 3 )
models only if necessary, thereby avoiding unnecessary
computational expense. It is much more important to use where r is the resistance per unit length.
BRICE: VOLTAGE DROP CALCULATIONS AND POWER-FLOW STUDIES
APPENDIX C
OF EQUIVALENT OPENWYETO DELTA
DERIVATION LOAD
Assume phases A and B are connected on the high-
voltage (open-wye) side and that the low-voltage side
supplies balanced three-phase currents at unity power
factor, as shown in Fig. 5. Notice that the phase currents
of the transformers are shifted, one by -30 and the
other by + 30 from the applied voltage. If the load is at a
power factor other than unity, the power factor angle
would shift all current phase angles, respectively.
In the example, the load current is 24.3 A on the
high-voltage side; therefore, the line currents are
la = 24.3A/( -25.8 - 30) = 24.3A/-55.8
Ib = 24.3A /( -25.8 - 120 + 30)
= 24.3A / - 115.8.
REFERENCES
C. W. Brice, A comparison of approximate and exact voltage-drop
calculations for distribution lines, IEEE Trans. Power App. Syst.,
vol. PAS-101, pp. 4428-4431, 1982.
C. W. Brice et al., Physically-based models of power system load,
Report to U S . Dept. Energy Texas A & M Res. Foundation,
Contract DEA SO1 77ET 29 129, June 1982.
[31 Switching in capacitors does not reduce real power on feeders,
Elec. World, pp. 32-36, Mar. 1988.
[41 G. J. Berg and A. K. Kar, Model representation of power system
loads, in PICA Conf. Proc., 1971, pp. 153-162.
7X 1
J. R. Carson, Wave propagation in overhead wires with ground
return, Bell Syst. Tech. J., vol. 5, pp. 539-554, 1926.
M. H. Hesse, Electromagnetic and electrostatic transmission line
parameters by digital computer, IEEE Trans. Power App. Syst.,
vol. PAS-82, pp. 282-291, 1963.
J. D. Glover and M. Sarma, Power System Analysis and Design.
Boston: PWS, 1987.
G. Kron, Tensor Analysis of Networks. New York: Wiley, 1939.
H. E. Brown, Solutions of Latge Networks by Matrix Methods (2nd
ed.). New York Wiley, 1985.
C. L. Fortescue, Method of symmetrical components applied to
the solution of polyphase networks, Trans. AIEE, vol. 37, pp.
1027-1140, 1918.
C. F. Wagner and R. D. Evans, Symmetrical Components. New
York: McGraw-Hill, 1933.
Westinghouse Electric Corporation, Electrical Transmission and
Distribution Reference Book (4th ed.). E. Pittsburgh, PA, 1964.
W. D. Stevenson, Elements of Power System Analysis (4th ed.).
New York: McGraw-Hill 1982.
Charles W. Brice (SM83) was born in New
Orleans, LA, and attended public school in
Chester, SC. He received the B.E.E. degree in
1971, the M.S.E.E. degree in 1972, and the Ph.D
degree in 1977, all in electrical engineering from
the Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta.
He is an Associate Professor in the Depart-
ment of Electrical and Computer Engineering at
the University of South Carolina. From 1977 to
1983, he was a faculty member at Texas A & M
University.