You are on page 1of 16

INTRODUCTION

Electrical power systems are in the process of continual evolution and had undergone many
different changes. Electricity system matured quickly into a scheme of interconnecting
stations known as the National Grid. Various concerns ranging from the need to reduce losses
on transmission lines to greenhouse emissions would continue to push development of power
generation and transmission systems.
In reality, often generation levels and points are at a considerable distance from the
consumption levels and points, and a number of transmission cables, regulation transformers
and interconnecting busbars are required to complete a power network. The fact that loads
can be reactive or resistive. The complexity of interwoven elements therefore means that a
careful modelling of operating and potential fault characteristics is needed before a system
can be commissioned.

OBJECTIVE

 To get introduced to the main features of computer aided design and analysis of
power systems and the use of ERACS software package for diagram building and
Load Flow analysis.
 To enhance the student learning process, by relating the theory and analytic
procedures to computer aided techniques for system analysis and problem solving.

EQUIPMENT REQUIRED
 ERACS software package

 Lab Computer provided my lab assistant


PROCEDURES

1. Before you run ERACS package, create ‘Library’ and ‘Work’ folders in
pendrive. The former will hold all the library files that you create and the latter will
hold the network files. To do this, run the Windows Explorer from the Start, Programs
menu.

2. Run the ERACS package from the START menu and choose User Name as
Supervisor and password as Supervisor.

3. The first time use ERACS, required to create a new database by selecting New
Database from the Database menu. Note that save it in the ‘Work’ folder in drive
F(pendrive).

4. From the File menu select New Network and set Network Name and Data State
Name. You need to assign a project library from Libraries menu. Select a name for
Project Library 1 and save it into the ‘Library’ folder in drive F. You may choose
Project Library 2 as the Reference Library, by selecting Existing Library
(ERA_Reference_Library) from the subdirectory C:\Programme Files\ERACS\
Libraries.

5. Follow the instructions given in the Help menu to construct the network given. Notice
that you need to create each element of the network and save it in Project Library 1
(in drive F) by selecting Library and New for each element. Then, Select the element
from the Library Key list. Also, C.B.1 and C.B.2 are modeled as part of the bus
section. Further, generator G is modelled as a PQ type with assigned active power of
P = 20 MW and reactive power of Q = 10 MVAr.
Note that the resistances of all components in the network are assumed to be zero.
Furthermore, for the generator and transformers, select “Neutral Earthing Data” with
zero neutral earthing resistance and reactance.
6. From Calculate menu choose Load Flow and perform the Load Flow analysis, with
circuit breakers C.B.1 and C.B.2 closed. Accept all the default values for the negative
and zero sequence components during running of the program.

7. From the Results menu choose Select Data / Results and Load flow, then:
(i) Busbar : Voltage (p.u.) , Voltage (kV) , Voltage angle ( o ) , Three Phase
Fault level (MVA) and Three Phase Fault current (kA)
(ii) Line : Real power (MW) and Reactive power (MVAr).
(iii) For Cable, Transformer, Synchronous Machine and Shunt, select the same as in (ii).

From Results menu, choose Show Results to display the selected results and record them
(from File menu choose Print and then Network Diagram).

8. Comment on the results obtained with regard to the main factors that largely
determine the flow of active and reactive power through different parts of the
network. Also, comment on the values of fault level at different busbars in the system.

9. Change the Assigned Power and Reactive Power of generator G to P = 40 MW and Q


= 20 MVAr, respectively. Also change the rating of Load 1 to 20 MW at 0.9 p.f.
lagging. Perform the Load Flow Analysis and repeat step (8). Compare these results
with those obtained in step (8) and comment on the difference.

10. Open circuit breakers C.B.1 and C.B.2, perform the Load Flow Analysis and repeat
step (8).Compare the results obtained with those obtained in step (10) and comment
on the difference.

11. Using analytical procedure, calculate the three-phase fault level (in MVA) and the
short circuit current (in kA) for a three-phase fault on busbar 4. Repeat your
calculations for both sections of busbar 4 when C.B.1 and C.B.2 are open. Compare
the results obtained from the analytical calculations with those obtained from the
computer model and comment.
NETWORK ELEMENT ASSUMPTIONS

 Bus : Each bus is sized approximately to its voltage level and fault level. The default
fault levels were accepted for all buses.
 Tranmission lines : These were sized approximately to their positive, negative and
zero sequence reactances. Resistance is negligible.
 Transformers : A transformer rating 60MVA with 0.11p.u. reactance was selected to
be placed at Bus 2, and two transformers rating 30MVA with 0.1p.u. reactance were
selected to be placed at Bus 4a and Bus 4b. Neutral earthing data was selected with
zero neutral earthing resistance and reactance.
 Loads : Loads were configured from the MW/p.f selection and sized appropriately.
 Circuit breakers : Two circuit breakers were connected. One connecting Bus 3a and
3b, another connecting Bus 4a and 4b. The default values for the negative and zero
sequence components were accepted for both.
 Grid : The grid was sized based on the grid fault infeed of 10000MVA.
 Generators : Generator was modelled as a PQ type and assigned active power of
20MW and reactive power of 10MVar. For second part of the lab, generator was
assigned to 40MW active power and 20MVar of reactive power. Neutral earthing data
was selected with zero neutral earthing resistance and reactance.
RESULTS AND ANALYSIS
(i) Lab 1.1 : Load Flow Analysis of network with generator rating of 20MW and
10MVar (circuit breakers closed).

 Active and Reactive Power Flow : The grid supplies 5.0MW and 10.235MVar to the
network. The generator supplies 20.0MW and 10.0MVar to the network. The loads
absorb 25.0MW and 16.093MVar of the power supplied. The transmission lines and
the transformer absorb the balance. The transmission lines have no resistance and thus
consume no real power.
 Voltage : The voltage starts from 1.033p.u. at Bus 1 and drops to 1.0p.u. at Bus 2. The
voltage further drops to 0.985p.u. at Bus 3a and 3b. The voltage then decreases to
0.956p.u. at Bus 4a and 4b. The voltage drops due to loads and line resistance.
 Fault Levels : The fault level increases from 787.367MVA at Bus 1 to 10186.22MVA
at Bus 2. The fault level then decreases to 1072.031MVA at Bus 3a and 3b. Then, the
fault level further lowers to 385.205MVA at Bus 4a and 4b. This is because the fault
level at high transmission voltage is higher than that at low voltages (Weedy, 1987).

Busbar Voltage Profile (pu)


1.04
1.02
1
0.98
0.96 pV (pu)
0.94
0.92
0.9
Bus 1 Bus 2 Bus 3a-3b Bus 4a-4b

Figure 1 : Voltage profile of Busbars for Lab 1.1

Busbar Fault Profile (MVA)


12000
10000
8000
6000
3F (MVA)
4000
2000
0
Bus 1 Bus 2 Bus 3a-3b Bus 4a-4b

Figure 2 : Fault profile of Busbars for Lab 1.1


(ii) Lab 1.2 : Load Flow Analysis of network with generator rating of 40MW and
20MVar (circuit breakers closed).

 Active and Reactive Power Flow : The grid supplies 5.0MW and -12.183MVar to the
network. The generator supplies 40.0MW and 20.0MVar to the network. The loads
absorb 35.0MW and 20.936MVar of the power supplied. The transmission lines and
the transformer absorb the balance. The transmission lines have no resistance and thus
consume no real power.
 Voltage : The voltage starts from 1.06p.u. at Bus 1 and drops to 1.0p.u. at Bus 2. The
voltage further drops to 0.979p.u. at Bus 3a and 3b. The voltage then decreases to
0.940p.u. at Bus 4a and 4b. The voltage drops due to loads and line resistance.
 Fault Levels : The fault level increases from 807.658MVA at Bus 1 to 10193.41MVA
at Bus 2. The fault level then decreases to 1072.887MVA at Bus 3a and 3b. Then, the
fault level further lowers to 385.512MVA at Bus 4a and 4b. This is because the fault
level at high transmission voltage is higher than that at low voltages (Weedy, 1987).

Busbar Voltage Profile (pu)


1.04
1.02
1
0.98
0.96
pV (pu)
0.94
0.92
0.9
0.88
Bus 1 Bus 2 Bus 3a-3b Bus 4a-4b

Figure 3 : Voltage profile of Busbars for Lab 1.2g

Busbar Fault Profile (MVA)


12000
10000
8000
6000
3F (MVA)
4000
2000
0
Bus 1 Bus 2 Bus 3a-3b Bus 4a-4b

Figure 4 : Fault profile of Busbars for Lab 1.2


(iii) Lab 1.3 : Load Flow Analysis of network with generator rating of 40MW and
20MVar (circuit breakers opened).

 Active and Reactive Power Flow : The grid supplies 5.0MW and -12.277MVar to the
network. The generator supplies 40.0MW and 20.0MVar to the network. The loads
absorb 35.0MW and 20.936MVar of the power supplied. The transmission lines and
the transformer absorb the balance. The transmission lines have no resistance and thus
consume no real power.
 Voltage : The voltage starts from 1.06p.u. at Bus 1 and drops to 1.0p.u. at Bus 2. The
voltage further drops to 0.972p.u. at Bus 3a and 3b. The voltage then decreases to
0.931p.u. at Bus 4a and 4b. The voltage drops due to loads and line resistance.
 Fault Levels : The fault level increases from 807.658MVA at Bus 1 to 10193.41MVA
at Bus 2. The fault level then decreases to 457.35MVA at Bus 3a and 3b. Then, the
fault level further lowers to 181.325MVA at Bus 4a and 4b. This is because the fault
level at high transmission voltage is higher than that at low voltages (Weedy, 1987).

Busbar Voltage Profile (pu)


1.1

1.05

0.95 pV (pu)

0.9

0.85
Bus 1 Bus 2 Bus 3a-3b Bus 4a-4b

Figure 5 : Voltage profile of Busbars for Lab 1.3

Busbar Fault Profile (MVA)


12000
10000
8000
6000
3F (MVA)
4000
2000
0
Bus 1 Bus 2 Bus 3a-3b Bus 4a-4b

Figure 6 : Fault profile of Busbars for Lab 1.3


DISCUSSION

XG : Reactance at generator
𝑋𝐺𝑟𝑖𝑑 : Reactance at Grid infeed
𝑋𝑂𝐻 : Reactance at overhead line
𝑋𝑈𝐺 : Reactance at underground cable
𝑋𝑇3 : Reactance at transformer 3
𝑋𝑇2 : Reactance at transformer 2

(i) Calculation of three-phase fault level (in MVA) and the short-circuit current
(in kA) on Busbar 4 when the circuit breakers are closed.

60
𝑋𝐺 = 0.12 ( ) = 0.144𝑝. 𝑢.
50

60
𝑋𝐺𝑟𝑖𝑑 = ( ) = 0.006𝑝. 𝑢.
10000

60
𝑋𝑂𝐻 = 36.45 ( ) = 0.1255𝑝. 𝑢.
(132)2

60
𝑋𝑈𝐺 = 24.3 ( ) = 0.0837𝑝. 𝑢.
(132)2

60
𝑋𝑇3 = 𝑋𝑇2 = 0.1 ( ) = 0.2𝑝. 𝑢.
30
1
𝐼𝑓 = = 6.410𝑝. 𝑢.
0.156

60
𝐼𝐵 = = 1.0497𝑘𝐴
√3(33)

𝐼𝑓 = 6.410 × 1.0497 = 𝟔. 𝟕𝟐𝟗𝒌𝑨 ( short-circuit current )

𝑆𝑓 = 6.410 × 60 = 𝟑𝟖𝟒. 𝟔𝑴𝑽𝑨 ( three-phase fault level )


(ii) Calculation of three-phase fault level (in MVA) and the short-circuit current
(in kA) on Busbar 4 when the circuit breakers are opened.

1
𝐼𝑓 = = 3.4535𝑝. 𝑢.
0.28956

60
𝐼𝐵 = = 1.0497𝑘𝐴
√3(33)

𝐼𝑓 = 3.4535 × 1.0497 = 𝟑. 𝟔𝟐𝟓𝒌𝑨 ( short-circuit current )

𝑆𝑓 = 3.4535 × 60 = 𝟐𝟎𝟕. 𝟐𝟏𝑴𝑽𝑨 ( three-phase fault level )


1
𝐼𝑓 = = 3.0179𝑝. 𝑢.
0.33136

60
𝐼𝐵 = = 1.0497𝑘𝐴
√3(33)

𝐼𝑓 = 3.0179 × 1.0497 = 𝟑. 𝟏𝟔𝟕𝟗𝒌𝑨 ( short-circuit current )

𝑆𝑓 = 3.0179 × 60 = 𝟏𝟖𝟏. 𝟎𝟕𝟒𝑴𝑽𝑨 ( three-phase fault level )


(iii) Comparing 𝑃𝑖𝑛 and 𝑃𝑜𝑢𝑡 for every case (lab 1.1, lab 1.2 and lab 1.3)

Lab 1.1 : The real power, P from G is assigned 20W and Grid infeed is supplying 5 W.
Assuming zero resistance, real power, P of Load 1 is 10W and Load 2 is 15 W. Total real
power, P for Load is 25W.

Lab 1.2 : The real power, P from G is assigned 40W and 5W is returned back to Grid due to
real power. Real power, P of Load 1 is 20W and Load 2 is 15 W. Total real power, P for
Load is 35W.

Lab 1.3 : The real power, P from G is assigned 40W and 5W is returned back to Grid due to
real power. Real power, P of Load 1 is 20W and Load 2 is 15 W. Total real power, P for
Load is 35W.

(iv) Comparing 𝑄𝑖𝑛 and 𝑄𝑜𝑢𝑡 for every case (lab 1.1, lab 1.2 and lab 1.3)

Lab 1.1 : The reactive power, Q from G is 10MVAr. The output reactive power should be
greater than the input reactive power. In this case, Qout is 16.093 MVAr.

Lab 1.2 : The reactive power, Q from G is 10MVAr. The output reactive power should be
greater than the input reactive power. In this case, Qout is 20.936 MVAr.

Lab 1.3 : The reactive power, Q from G is 10MVAr. The output reactive power should be
greater than the input reactive power. In this case, Qout is 20.936 MVAr.
(v) Comparing the results of lab 1.1 and lab 1.2

In lab 1.1 the real power, P from G is 20W and Grid supplies 5 W. The real power, P of Load
1 and Load 2 are 10W and 15 W, hence total real power, P for Load is 25W. While in lab 1.2,
the real power, P from G is 40W and 5W is returned back to Grid due to real power. Real
power, P of Load 1 and Load 2 are 20 W and 15 W, hence total real power, P for Load is
35W.

(vi) Comparing the results of lab 1.2 and 1.3

In lab 1.2 and 1.3, the real power, P from G is 40W and 5W is returned back to Grid due to
real power. Real power, P of Load 1 is 20W and Load 2 is 15W, hence total real power is
35W. For lab 1.2 and 1.3, the value of real power, P and reactive power, Q are the same.
For lab 1.3, the circuit breakers are opened where before in lab 1.2 it were closed. In lab 1.2,
the short-circuit current and three-phase fault level at Busbar 4a and 4b are the same which is
6.729kA and 384.6MVA respectively. In other hand, in lab 1.3, the short-circuit current and
three-phase fault level at Busbar 4a and 4b are different which are 3.625kA and 207.21MVA
respectively for Busbar 4a and 3.1679kA and 181.0741MVA respectively for Busbar 4b.

(vii) Comparing the results obtained from the analytic calculations with those obtained
from the computer model of lab 1.1

For lab 1.1, the three-phase fault level obtained from the computer model was
CONCLUSION

Over the years, the unceasing growth of the transmission system is making the calculation of short-
circuit current highly challenging for the system engineers. It is absolutely imperative for the electric
service companies to provide power in the most reliable manner possible. So, to aid the engineers,
the “impedance method” and the “composition method” have been developed and consistently
modified and upgraded to provide a greater accuracy in the calculation of short-circuit currents.
Implementation of these methods provides an outcome that can be used by the system engineers to
design the transmission system according to the desired standard. In this thesis work the study of
short-circuit current calculation on an overhead transmission line was successfully done. Two
methods were used to calculated the short-circuit current accurately. The calculation of short-circuit
currents also protects the system from damage, fire and other physical hazards. This is achieved by
choosing the proper protective devices based on the calculated result. In the laboratory part of this
thesis the SPAA 120 C Feeder Protection Relay was successfully implemented to prevent short-circuit
current from flowing through the circuit. The growth of the transmission system also made the
calculation process complicated and time consuming to be done by hand. So, it has become essential
to develop computer software that simplifies these complicated calculations. A software
development was also a part of this thesis work and a software was developed to calculate the
short/circuit current on a transmission line.
REFERENCES

1. ERACS “User Guide” and “Technical Manual” available online in ERCAS Help
menu.

2. PUTRUS, G.A. “Lecture notes on Power Systems”.

3. CHAPMAN, S.: “Electric Machinery and Power System Fundamentals”, (McGraw


Hill), 2002.

4. WEEDY, B.M. and CORY B.J.: ‘Electric Power Systems’ (Wiley) 1998.