Case Study

Voltage Profile Improvement, Transmission Line

Loss Reduction in Rajasthan Power System:
A Case Study
Suresh Prajapat1, Mukesh Lodha2, Nim Anurag3, Om Prakash Kumawat4
Abstract
The complexity is increasing day by day with the advancement of buses in interconnected power system.
The complexity of the power system can easily handle by analyzing the performance of the transmission
system by using load flow study. The real and reactive power losses are largely affected at the transmission
level. This paper presents case study of real time system operation to reduce losses and improve the
voltage profile with optimum utilization of existing transmission system elements. West-North part of
Rajasthan power system having one 400 kV GSS, five 220 kV GSS and nineteen 132 kV GSS have been
selected to carry out case study and simulated in PSSE software. Simulation model consists of 55 buses, 34
transmission lines, 66 transformers and 34 capacitor banks. Eight cases have been simulated considering
the effect of transformer tap position, closing of opened transmission lines and shunt capacitors. From
simulation studies it is found out that transmission losses are reduced by 50.36 % in addition to improve
network voltage profile.

Keywords: Grid substation, Load flow studies, Transformer tap setting, Transmission loss reduction,
Voltage profile improvement

Introduction
Voltage profile improvement is a fixed part of power system. India has one of the highest levels of electricity losses in
the world. Consistently research has been carried over role of Voltage profile improvement in Rajasthan power system. A
case study of Rajasthan power system has been presented and studied to evaluate transmission losses and to diagnosis
the actual condition of real time system under operation.

Therefore, loss reduction of real time test system through routine activities has been evaluated. From the results
presented by early researchers, improvements in terms of voltage profile and loss reduction could be achieved by
effective coordination of equipment’s working at sub stations.

As instructed by Carson W. Taylor static var compensators were designed specifically for transmission voltage regulation.2
Genetic algorithm has also paved the path for optimal reactive power dispatch proposed by W. N. W Abdullah, H. Saibon
by scheduling reactive power in an optimum manner which reduces circulating VAR of system and thus promoting
consistent voltage profile and appreciable MW saving.3 Shunt capacitors compensation power loss reduction by
maintaining system voltage profile and reducing the lines and transformer loading were briefed by A. A. Sallam et al.
in 2002.4 It has been observed that Rajasthan Power System is lacking ways of optimum reactive power management

1
M. Tech Student, 2Assistant Professor, Sri Balaji College of Engineering and Technology, Jaipur, Rajasthan, India.
Assistant Professor, Global Institute of Engineering and Technology, Jaipur, Rajasthan, India.
3,4

Correspondence: Suresh Prajapat, Sri Balaji College of Engineering and Technology, Jaipur, Rajasthan, India.

E-mail Id: sureshsp90@gmail.com

Orcid Id: http://orcid.org/?

How to cite this article: Prajapat S, Lodha M, Anurag N et al. Voltage Profile Improvement, Transmission Line Loss Reduction in
Rajasthan Power System: A Case Study. J Adv Res Electri Engi Tech 2017; 4(3&4): 1-12.

© ADR Journals 2017. All Rights Reserved.

Prajapati S et al. J. Adv. Res. Electri. Engi. Tech. 2017; 4(3&4)

thus creating higher losses.5 Therefore, different case
study with simulations has been carried from previously
recorded literature methods and which are presently not
actively taking part in grid operations in Rajasthan State
power system.
Objectives of Case Study
In power system, to regulate the voltage in different grid
conditions, On Load Tap Changer (OLTC) is attached with
power transformers to change the tap ratio but due to
manual operation of OLTC sometimes it is not operated at
few Grid Substations (GSS). In this research paper, network
voltage profile and system losses have been simulated.
Capacitor banks are installed at 33 kV bus of every EHV GSS
to improve the 33-kV bus power factor up to 0.98 in peak
load condition and operated as per loading condition of
individual GSS. Under low load condition of a GSS, capacitor
bank is kept out of circuit whereas particular area of power
system is deficit of reactive power. In this research paper,
under this scenario capacitor banks have been switched
ON to simulate the effect on grid parameters and losses.
In Rajasthan power system 132 kV transmission system is
radially operated to control the power flow in various system
conditions. Therefore, approximately one hundred fifteen
132 kV transmission lines are opened. These transmission

Figure 1.Single Line Diagram of Test System

lines are used in contingency of grid. Moreover, parallel transformers, 33 kV bus load, bus voltage, transformer
220 kV transmission lines are got opened by State Load tap positions, operating status of lines and capacitor banks
Dispatch Center (SLDC) under high voltage condition. Due to for West-North part of Rajasthan have been collected on
communication gap and responsibility, opened transmission 31.12.2016 at 1 PM. Actual operating condition has been
lines are not taken in circuit when system voltage is under simulated in PSSE software. 400 kV Bus of 400 kV GSS
control. In this research paper, effect of closing of opened Bikaner is set as slack bus with 1.02 PU voltage setting to
transmission lines on loading of transformers and lines, carry out simulations. Load flow study results with actual
network voltage profile and system losses have been operating condition are plotted at Fig. 2 and analyzed
simulated. here under: -

Test System Data • Transmission losses are 22.219MW (3.734%) which

Single line diagram of test system is placed at Fig. 1.
The network model has 55 buses comprising one 400 kV
bus, six 220 kV buses, twenty-four 132 kV buses and twenty-
four 33 kV buses. The network model has 34 transmission
lines comprising seven 220 kV voltage level and twenty-
seven 132 kV voltage level. There are total 66 transformers
out of which two 400/220 kV, elven 220/132 kV and fifty-
three 132/33 kV transformers at 33 kV buses, Thirty-four
capacitors of 5.43 MVAR individual rating and total 184.62
MVAR capacity are connected. Total system load is 594.95
MW and 325.56 MVAR having constant power characteristic
and connected at 33 kV voltage level. Detailed data of
Simulation model are mentioned in Appendix-1.
Load Flow Study
Authentic active and reactive power flow on lines and
are higher than bench mark viz. 2 %.
• Voltage of all buses is below 0.95 PU
• Minimum bus voltage at 220kV, 132kV and 33kV are
0.8826PU, 0.7752PU and 0.7435PU respectively.
• Slack bus power factor is 0.81
• One 220kV and five 132kV transmission lines are
opened.
• Two capacitor banks are switched OFF.
• All transformers tap position is at nominal.
Following eight cases have been simulated in PSSE software
to simulate the effect of change of transformers tap position,
closing of opened transmission lines and shunt capacitors: -
• Case I: Load flow study (LFS) is carried out for existing
operating condition
• Case II: LFS is carried out with closing of opened 220kV
line
In Case I, one circuit of 220 kV D/C Bikaner-Gajner line was

2
J. Adv. Res. Electri. Engi. Tech. 2017; 4(3&4)
opened which when closed and again simulated while other
• Case III: LFS is carried out with closing of opened
132kV lines
• In Case I, five 132 kV S/C lines are opened which closed
and again simulated while other conditions remains
unchanged
• Case IV: LFS is carried out with closing of opened
220kVand132kV lines
• In this case opened 220 kV and 132 kV circuits are
closed
• Case V: LFS is carried out with switching ON of switched
OFF shunt capacitor banks
• In case I, capacitor banks at bus 39 and 42 are switched
OFF which are switched on.
• Case VI: Increase of tap position of 400/220 kV and
220/132 kV transformers
In case I, voltage of most of 220kV and 132kV buses are
below 0.95pu. Therefore, tap position of 400/220 kV
transformers is increased from 9 to 13 and 220/132kV
Results are plotted from Fig. 2 to Fig. 9
Figure 2.Load flow results of Case I
Figure 3.Load flow results of Case II
3
Prajapati S et al.
transformers at Gajner, Nokha, Badnu and Sridungargarh
is increased from 9 to 11 and at Bikaner from 9 to 13 and
case is simulated. In this case voltage of all 132kV and
220kV buses are above 0.95pu.
• Case VII: Increase of tap position of 400/220 kV,
220/132 kV and 132/33kV transformers
In case VI, voltage of 33kV bus no. 34, 35 and 46 are below
0.95 pu. Therefore, tap position of 132/33kV transformers
connected to these buses is also increased from 9 to 13 to
increase voltage of these buses above 0.95pu.
• Case VIII: Closing of opened lines and capacitor banks
and increase of tap position of transformers
In this case first of all, opened lines and shunt capacitor
banks are closed and simulated. In case VI, voltage of 33kV
bus no. 34, 35 and 46 are below 0.95 pu. Therefore, tap
position of 132/33kV transformers connected to these
buses is also increased from 9 to 13 to increase voltage of
these buses above 0.95pu.
Power system losses for different cases are tabulated in
Prajapati S et al. J. Adv. Res. Electri. Engi. Tech. 2017; 4(3&4)

Figure 4.Load flow results of Case III

Figure 5.Load flow results of Case IV

Figure 6.Load flow results of Case V

Figure 7.Load flow results of Case VI

4
J. Adv. Res. Electri. Engi. Tech. 2017; 4(3&4) Prajapati S et al.

Figure 8.Load flow results of Case VII

Figure 9.Load flow results of Case VIII

Result Analysis Table 1. The simulation results show that with optimum
utilization of existing elements transmission losses are
Effect on Transmission Losses reduced by 50% due to increase of system voltage, decrease
of reactive power flow on transmission lines and decrease
Power system losses for different cases are tabulated in of network resistance.
Table 1.Transmission losses In Case VIII system

Particulars Loss(MW) % Loss % Loss Reduction

Case-I 22.219 3.734 -
Case-II 20.600 3.462 7.29
Case-III 17.083 2.871 23.12
Case-IV 15.539 2.611 30.06
Case-V 21.489 3.611 3.29
Case-VI 14.848 2.495 33.17
Case-VII 14.758 2.48 33.58
Case-VIII 11.029 1.853 50.36

Case VIII system losses are reduced by 11.19MW as compared to Case-I. Considering 80 percent load factor, Annual
Energy Saving (AES) is determined.

Loss load factor (LLF) = 0.3 (LF) + 0.7 (LF) 2 = 0.688 (1)
AES = [11.19 x8760xLLF/10 LUs/Annum]
2
(2)
AES = 674.40 LUs/Annum (3)
Annual cost saving = Units Saved X tariff rate (4)
ACS = (674.40) X (5)
ACS = Rs. 3372 Lakhs/Annum (6)

5
Prajapati S et al. J. Adv. Res. Electri. Engi. Tech. 2017; 4(3&4)

Effect on Swing Bus Loading Table-II. The simulation results show that with optimum
utilization of existing elements swing bus MW and MVAR
Swing bus loading for different cases are tabulated in loading is reduced and power factor is improved.
Table 2.Swing bus loading and power factor
Particulars MW losses
Case-I 617.17
Case-II 615.55
Case-III 612.03
Case-IV 610.49
Case-V 616.44
Case-VI 609.80
Case-VII 609.71
Case-VIII 605.98

Power system voltage from Case I to Case VIII at the given in Fig. 10 at 220 kV bus voltage level, Fig. 11 at 132
different bus voltage level at various represented GSS and kV bus voltage level and Fig.12 at 33 kV bus voltage level.
detail graphical representation and its variation profile is

Figure 10.220kV bus voltage

Figure 11.132kV Bus Voltage

Number of buses which are fall in certain voltage range and improved as indicated in table III. Value of minimum bus
minimum bus voltage in each case is tabulated at table III. voltage is also improved. In case VIII, voltage of all buses
From Case I to Case VIII, voltage profile of the network is is above 0.95 PU.

6
J. Adv. Res. Electri. Engi. Tech. 2017; 4(3&4) Prajapati S et al.

Table 3.Network voltage range

Particulars V < 0.90 0.90 ≤ V < 0.95 0.95 ≤ V ≤ 1 1< V < 1.05 Min. Bus Voltage
Case-I 52 2 0 1 0.7435
Case-II 51 3 0 1 0.7623
Case-III 49 5 0 1 0.7845
Case-IV 44 9 1 1 0.81
Case-V 51 3 0 1 0.7543
Case-VI 0 3 35 17 0.9191
Case-VII 0 0 36 19 0.9522
Case-VIII 0 0 11 44 0.9678

Conclusion 3. Taylor CW. Line drop compensation, high side voltage

In this paper, case study of Rajasthan power system has been
presented and studied to evaluate the impact of optimum
utilization of existing transmission system elements on
transmission losses and other system parameters. Studies
have been carried for existing power system operation
(Case-I) versus proposed power system operation (Case-
VIII). Following are the conclusions of study:
1. Voltage profile is improved as compared from Case-I
to Case-VIII.
2. MW losses are significantly reduced in Case-VIII as
compare to Case-I.
References
1. Energy Portal Government of Rajasthan. Available
from: http://energy.rajasthan.gov.in.
2. Kundur P. Power System Stability and Control. Tata
McGraw Hill publications, New Delhi, 2007.
control, secondary voltage control-why not control a
generator like a static var compensator? IEEE Power
Engineering Society Summer Meeting, 2000.
4. Abdullah WNW, Saibon H, Lo KL. Genetic algorithm
for reactive power dispatch. Energy Management and
Power Delivery, 1998.
5. Sallam AA, Desouky M. Shunt capacitor effect
on electrical distribution system reliability. IEEE
Transactions on Reliability 2002; 43: 170-6.
6. PSS/E website, Siemens PTI. Available from: https://
w3.siemens.com/smartgrid/global/en/products-
systems-solutions/software-solutions/planning-
datamanagement-software/planning-simulation/
Pages/PSS-E.aspx.
7. Panwar R, Sharma V. Circulating MVAr Control
in Rajasthan (India) Transmission System. IEEE,
ICPEICES-2016, Delhi Technical University, 2016.
8. Rajasthan Electricity Regulatory Commission Grid Code,
Jaipur (As per Electricity Act, 2003). Available from:
http://www.rvpn.co.in/aboutus/GridCode-01.pdf.

Appendix-1
Table 1.Bus data
Bus No. Bus Name Nominal Bus Voltage (kV) Max. Bus Voltage (PU) Min. Bus Voltage (PU)
1 BIKANER400KV 400.0 1.05 0.95
2 BIKANER_42 220.0 1.05 0.95
3 BIKANER220 220.0 1.05 0.95
4 GAJNER220KV 220.0 1.05 0.95
5 NOKHA220KV 220.0 1.05 0.95
6 BADNU220KV 220.0 1.05 0.95
7 SRIDUNGH220 220.0 1.05 0.95
8 LALMDSR132KV 132.0 1.05 0.95
9 LOONKRNSR132 132.0 1.05 0.95
10 SHARERA132KV 132.0 1.05 0.95
11 DULCHSR132KV 132.0 1.05 0.95
12 PUGALRD132KV 132.0 1.05 0.95
13 BHINASR132KV 132.0 1.05 0.95

7
Prajapati S et al. J. Adv. Res. Electri. Engi. Tech. 2017; 4(3&4)

14 GAJNER132KV 132.0 1.05 0.95

15 NOKHAD132KV 132.0 1.05 0.95
16 KOLAYAT132KV 132.0 1.05 0.95
17 BAJJU132KV 132.0 1.05 0.95
18 PS1_132KV 132.0 1.05 0.95
19 PS2_132KV 132.0 1.05 0.95
20 NOKHA132KV 132.0 1.05 0.95
21 DESHNOK132KV 132.0 1.05 0.95
22 PANCHU132KV 132.0 1.05 0.95
23 JASRASR132KV 132.0 1.05 0.95
24 BADNU132KV 132.0 1.05 0.95
25 BIKANER132KV 132.0 1.05 0.95
26 NAPASAR132KV 132.0 1.05 0.95
27 MOONDSR132KV 132.0 1.05 0.95
28 SRIDUNG2_132 132.0 1.05 0.95
29 SRIDUNG1_132 132.0 1.05 0.95
30 RIRI132KV 132.0 1.05 0.95
31 UPANI132KV 132.0 1.05 0.95
32 BIKANER33KV 33.0 1.05 0.95
33 LOONKRNSR33 33.0 1.05 0.95
34 SHARERA33KV 33.0 1.05 0.95
35 DULCHSR33KV 33.0 1.05 0.95
36 PUGALRD33KV 33.0 1.05 0.95
37 BHINASR33KV 33.0 1.05 0.95
38 GAJNER33KV 33.0 1.05 0.95
39 NOKHAD33KV 33.0 1.05 0.95
40 KOLAYAT33KV 33.0 1.05 0.95
41 BAJJU33KV 33.0 1.05 0.95
42 PS1_33KV 33.0 1.05 0.95
43 PS2_33KV 33.0 1.05 0.95
44 NOKHA33KV 33.0 1.05 0.95
45 DESHNOK33KV 33.0 1.05 0.95
46 PANCHU33KV 33.0 1.05 0.95
47 JASRASR33KV 33.0 1.05 0.95
48 BADNU33KV 33.0 1.05 0.95
49 LALAMDSR33KV 33.0 1.05 0.95
50 NAPASAR33KV 33.0 1.05 0.95
51 MOONDSR33KV 33.0 1.05 0.95
52 SRIDUNG2_33 33.0 1.05 0.95
53 SRIDUNG1_33 33.0 1.05 0.95
54 RIRI33KV 33.0 1.05 0.95
55 UPANI33KV 33.0 1.05 0.95

8
J. Adv. Res. Electri. Engi. Tech. 2017; 4(3&4) Prajapati S et al.

Table 2.Line data

From Bus No. To Bus No. Line Volt. Line R Line X Line Charging B Line Length
(kV) (pu) (pu) (pu) (kM)
2 3 220 0.001547 0.008249 0.0142 10
2 3 220 0.003558 0.018973 0.03266 23
2 4 220 0.009127 0.048669 0.08378 59
2 4 220 0.009127 0.048669 0.08378 59
2 5 220 0.011448 0.061043 0.10508 74
2 7 220 0.009127 0.048669 0.08378 59
3 6 220 0.01021 0.054443 0.09372 66
8 23 132 0.017689 0.042104 0.00969 19
8 24 132 0.011172 0.026592 0.00612 12
9 25 132 0.060515 0.14404 0.03315 65
10 11 132 0.035378 0.084208 0.01938 38
10 25 132 0.04655 0.1108 0.0255 50
11 28 132 0.032585 0.07756 0.01785 35
12 14 132 0.023275 0.0554 0.01275 25
12 25 132 0.023275 0.0554 0.01275 25
13 14 132 0.023275 0.0554 0.01275 25
13 25 132 0.013965 0.03324 0.00765 15
14 15 132 0.020482 0.048752 0.01122 22
14 16 132 0.020482 0.048752 0.01122 22
16 17 132 0.040964 0.097504 0.02244 44
17 18 132 0.047481 0.113016 0.02601 51
18 19 132 0.00931 0.02216 0.0051 10
20 21 132 0.031654 0.075344 0.01734 34
20 23 132 0.036309 0.086424 0.01989 39
20 23 132 0.036309 0.086424 0.01989 39
21 22 132 0.029792 0.070912 0.01632 32
21 25 132 0.023275 0.0554 0.01275 25
24 27 132 0.013034 0.031024 0.00714 14
24 28 132 0.026068 0.062048 0.01428 28
25 26 132 0.019551 0.046536 0.01071 21
26 27 132 0.013965 0.03324 0.00765 15
28 29 132 0.002793 0.006648 0.00153 3
28 30 132 0.015827 0.037672 0.00867 17
30 31 132 0.012103 0.028808 0.00663 13

9
Prajapati S et al. J. Adv. Res. Electri. Engi. Tech. 2017; 4(3&4)

Table 3.Load data

S. No. Bus No. Pload (MW) Qload (Mvar)
1 32 34.9 14.97
2 33 30.18 17.91
3 34 15.47 8.81
4 35 31.68 21.7
5 36 33.6 15.7
6 37 50 30
7 38 5.39 3.34
8 39 3.22 1.56
9 40 47.42 35.56
10 41 11.48 4.54
11 42 5.71 0.81
12 43 1.5 0.8
13 44 17.2 11.69
14 45 41.59 20.14
15 46 14 8.31
16 47 26.44 12.81
17 48 47.55 23.43
18 49 15.63 5.14
19 50 40 13.15
20 51 10.38 3.77
21 52 29 17.97
22 53 36 22.31
23 54 26 16.11
24 55 20.61 15.03
Total 594.95 325.56
Table 4.Capacitor data
S. No. Bus No. Total Capacity of Capacitor Banks (MVAR)
1 32 16.29
2 33 10.86
3 35 10.86
4 36 10.86
5 37 10.86
6 39 5.43
7 40 10.86
8 42 5.43
9 44 5.43
10 45 10.86
11 47 10.86
12 48 16.29
13 50 10.86
14 52 10.86

10
J. Adv. Res. Electri. Engi. Tech. 2017; 4(3&4) Prajapati S et al.

15 53 16.29
16 54 10.86
17 55 10.86
Total 184.62
Table 5.Transformer data
From Bus No. To Bus No. Id Total Tap Full load loss (kW) Specified X (pu) Rating
Positions (MVA)
1 2 1 17 430 0.13 315
1 2 2 17 430 0.13 315
3 25 1 21 160 0.12 100
3 25 2 21 160 0.12 100
3 25 3 21 160 0.12 100
4 14 1 21 185 0.12 160
4 14 2 21 160 0.12 100
5 20 1 21 185 0.12 160
5 20 2 21 160 0.12 100
6 24 1 21 185 0.12 160
6 24 2 21 185 0.12 160
7 28 1 21 160 0.12 100
7 28 2 21 160 0.12 100
8 49 1 17 65 0.1 25
9 33 1 17 65 0.1 25
9 33 2 17 65 0.1 25
10 34 1 17 65 0.1 25
11 35 1 17 140 0.1 50
11 35 2 17 65 0.1 25
12 36 1 17 140 0.1 50
12 36 2 17 65 0.1 25
13 37 1 17 65 0.1 25
13 37 2 17 65 0.1 25
13 37 3 17 65 0.1 25
14 38 1 17 140 0.1 50
14 38 2 17 65 0.1 25
14 38 3 17 65 0.1 25
15 39 1 17 55 0.1 12.5
15 39 2 17 55 0.1 0
16 40 1 17 65 0.1 25
16 40 2 17 65 0.1 25
16 40 3 17 65 0.1 25
17 41 1 17 55 0.1 12.5
17 41 2 17 55 0.1 12.5
18 42 1 17 65 0.1 25
18 42 2 17 65 0.1 25
19 43 1 17 65 0.1 25

11
Prajapati S et al. J. Adv. Res. Electri. Engi. Tech. 2017; 4(3&4)

20 44 1 17 140 0.1 50
20 44 2 17 140 0.1 50
20 44 3 17 65 0.1 25
21 45 1 17 65 0.1 25
21 45 2 17 65 0.1 25
21 45 3 17 65 0.1 25
22 46 1 17 65 0.1 25
23 47 1 17 65 0.1 25
23 47 2 17 65 0.1 25
24 48 1 17 65 0.1 25
24 48 2 17 65 0.1 25
24 48 3 17 65 0.1 25
25 32 1 17 140 0.1 50
25 32 2 17 140 0.1 50
25 32 3 17 65 0.1 25
26 50 1 17 65 0.1 25
26 50 2 17 65 0.1 25
26 50 3 17 55 0.1 12.5
27 51 1 17 65 0.1 25
27 51 2 17 55 0.1 12.5
28 52 1 17 140 0.1 0
28 52 2 17 65 0.1 25
29 53 1 17 65 0.1 25
29 53 2 17 65 0.1 25
30 54 1 17 65 0.1 25
30 54 2 17 65 0.1 25
30 54 3 17 65 0.1 25
31 55 1 17 65 0.1 25
31 55 2 17 65 0.1 25
Table 6.Transformer tap data
Min Tap Nom. Tap Max. Tap
S. No. Voltage Ratio(kV) Capacity (MVA) Nom. Tap
Voltage Voltage Voltage
1 400/220 315 360 9 400 440
2 220/132 160 242 9 220 187
3 220/132 100 242 9 220 187
4 132/33 40/50 138.6 5 132 112.2
5 132/33 20/25 138.6 5 132 112.2
6 132/33 10/12.5 138.6 7 132 112.2

12