HP07 Electrical distribution sy 10/6/03 1:18 PM Page 57

PLANT UTILITIES/HEAT TRANSFER SPECIALREPORT

Electrical distribution system

voltage selection
Use these guidelines to determine the most economical solution
P. LIONETTO, R. BRAMBILLA and G. INVERNIZZI,
FWI-Foster Wheeler Italiana, Milan, Italy

S
electing voltage level of the electrical distribution system and dewaxing). The reason is to change their product mix in
in a large industrial installation is related to several fac- favor of an increased proportion of light products in line with
tors that shall be analyzed from technical and economical market trends.
points of view. The main factor is plant total power demand. When EU environmental regulations did not allow prod-
Usually, the bigger the total plant load, the higher the supply ucts with a sulfur content over 0.250.30 wt% to be burned
voltage. As a consequence, for a plant with high power demand in power stations without flue gas desulfurization fitted, a sharp
(reference figure may be 30 MW) in addition to the 6 kV dis- decline in the high (2.53%) and medium (12%) sulfur fuel
tribution/utilization voltage commonly used to feed large oil market resulted. This has forced refiners to make a sub-
motors, a second voltage level shall be selected as the primary dis- stantial investment to change their product mix or find new
tribution system to distribute the energy to several load cen- outlets for their tar.
ters within the plant. Several options were available and the one that better fitted
To select the most suitable voltage level, it is necessary to com- these requirements is the IGCC, a multiunit complex designed to
pare the various alternative solutions considering the basic require- process the high-sulfur byproducts of the refinery and produce
ments (e.g., fault duty, rating current and maximum allowable electric energy and hydrogen. The solution is globally environ-
voltage drop in normal operating condition and during large mentally beneficial. In fact, control of the combustion emissions
motor startup) and taking into account the standardized equip- is more efficient in an IGCC than in a conventional power station.
ment available on the market. The latter point is important to Electricity is normally delivered to the electrical grid while hydro-
avoid installing special equipment, which would lead to cost gen is returned to refinery to upgrade the refinery oil products.
increases and maintenance problems. The IGCC complex includes the following main units:
A second step of the analysis is relevant to selecting the level for Process unit:
low-voltage (LV) users.
Air separation plant
The most common low voltage used in European industrial
Gasification
plants is 400 V. This level is largely used because it is the same volt-
Syngas treatment and conditioning line
age used for the public electrical distribution network, so that
Gas enrichment
equipment, apparatus and components are readily available. How-
Sulfur recovery with tail gas recycle
ever, adopting a higher voltage level (i.e., 690 V) may present
Hydrogen production.
some advantages, mainly in cost savings. Power island:
These considerations have been extensively analyzed during the Gas turbines
basic design of the electrical system of a new integrated gasifica- Heat recovery steam generators
tion combined cycle (IGCC) plant. It is characterized by a total Steam turbine.
consumption of about 180 MW, 40% of which is fed at the LV Utilities units:
level.
Cooling water
Study targets were to:
Demineralized water system
Select the voltage level for the primary distribution net-
Plant and instrument air system.
work between two possible alternatives (66 kV and 30 kV) The plant under examination is designed to generate a gross
Evaluate the convenience of 690 V with respect to the 400 power of about 900 MW, with a total load demand of about 180
V for the LV distribution/utilization system. MW. Total load demand is split among the following main plant
This article gives a general view of the approach used in the units:
study that may be used for any other installation and presents Combined cycle unit: ~8 MW
several examples related to the considered plant. Gasification unit: ~10 MW
Air separation unit (ASU): ~140 MW
Plant description. In recent years, many refineries world- Utilities: ~20 MW
wide have been reequipped with severe processes, both ther- The air separation unit includes two trains with the following
mal (cooking) and catalytic (hydrocracking, catalytic cracking large motors:
HYDROCARBON PROCESSING JULY 2003
HP07 Electrical distribution sy 10/6/03 1:18 PM Page 58

SPECIALREPORT PLANT UTILITIES/HEAT TRANSFER

TABLE 1. Voltage drop on main distribution busbar TABLE 3. Capital cost comparison between 30-kV and
caused by air and nitrogen compressor startup 66-kV systems
Configuration Voltage drop, %, on distribution bus Components Capital cost, M
Air compressor Nitrogen compressor 30 kV 66 kV
30 kV s.s.s.1 11.9 3.4 SF6 AIS GI MEnc

66 kV s.s.s. 5.6 7.1 Step-down transformers 4.4 3.3 3.3 3.3

30 kV s.e.s.2 12.7 3.6 Main switchgear 1.0 2.5 4.0 1.8

Distribution cables 0.75 1.1 1.1 1.1
66 kV s.e.s. 5.9 7.4
1 2
Total 7.95 9.0 10.5 8.3
s.s.s.= secondary-selective scheme s.e.s. = single-ended scheme

TABLE 2. Load, fault current and power losses for TABLE 4. Area required for main distribution
different voltage levels switchgear installation
Configuration Current, A Fault duty, kA Power losses, kW Solutions Substation dimension, m
Load Rating Expected Rating
30 kV SF6 40
10
4 (h)
66 kV s.s.s. ~870 3,150 ~14 31.5 ~1,150
66 kV AIS 60
20
9.5 (h)
66 kV s.e.s. ~1,750 3,150 ~21.6 31.5 ~1,400
66 kV metal-enclosed 55
10
6 (h)
30 kV s.s.s. ~960 2,500 ~18 31.5 ~1,350
66 kV GIS 40
11
6 (h)
30 kV s.e.s. ~1,920 2,500 ~25 31.5 ~1,800

Air compressor motor: ~40 MW
Rated continuous current up to: 2,500 A

Nitrogen compressor motor:

Oxygen compressor motor:

Booster compressor motor:
Primary distribution system voltage selection
Voltage levels and total load demand. IGCC plant total
load supply needs a primary distribution network in addition to
the utilization system. A secondary selective scheme shall be
selected for both systems to enhance supply reliability and oper-
ation flexibility of process users. A 100% of circuit redundancy is
therefore ensured.
Voltage selection for the primary distribution system depends
on many factors:
Maximum power demand (i.e., maximum load current)
Size of standardized manufacturing components
Voltage profile during normal operating conditions and
large motor starting
Maximum fault current
Power losses
Capital cost
Available room for the substation.
Based on total power demand, two primary voltage levels can
be selected for total IGCC load supply:

66 kV (highest voltage 72.5 kV)

30 kV (highest voltage 36 kV)
The higher the voltage, the lower the load currents, fault cur-
rents and power losses. On the other hand, higher capital cost
and larger area shall be expected by using a higher voltage level.
Load currents corresponding to the maximum expected plant
power demand are:
1,850 A (66 kV)
4,050 A (30 kV).
Rating standard components. 30 kV switchgear. Metal-clad
switchgear, both air insulated and containing gas-filled (SF6)
compartments, are available on the market for this voltage level,
with the following maximum ratings:
~22 MW
Rated withstand fault current up to: 31.5 kA.
~6 MW From this, it results:
~4 MW With the 30 kV voltage level, total load must be shared
between two main switchgear
Each switchgear shall be supplied by two dedicated distri-
bution transformers
Total loads shall be balanced between the two switchgear
(and the relative transformers)
The ASU users shall be distributed on both switchgear.
66 kV switchgear. Three constructive solutions are available:

Conventional air insulated substation (AIS)

Metal-enclosed switchgear, air insulated type

Gas insulated metal-enclosed switchgear (GIS).
66 kV AIS and GIS are available with the following maxi-
mum ratings:
Rated continuous current: up to 3,150 A
Rated withstand fault current: up to 31.5 kA.
The metal-enclosed switchgear has a rated current up to 2,000
A, with a rated withstand fault current limited to 20 kA. By com-
paring these figures with the maximum load currents, the 66 kV
voltage level allows supplying total plant load with only one
switchgear, fed by two transformers.
Voltage profile. To ensure correct operation of users, voltage
profile on the overall distribution network should be kept around
the rated value during different possible steady-state operating
conditions. Further, voltage variation during transient condi-
tions shall not exceed the tolerable limits of user loads as recom-
mended by EN Code 61000-2-4 (12% of rated voltageClass
3 of EMC compatibility for sudden voltage changes).
Due to large motors in the ASU plant, sudden voltage varia-
tion caused by motor starting shall be expected throughout the
plants electrical system. It is, therefore, necessary to assess voltage
drop caused by the large motor starting for both alternatives
under examination. Voltage drops caused by ASU large motor
starting have been evaluated by considering the following sim-
ulations:
HYDROCARBON PROCESSING JULY 2003
HP07 Electrical distribution sy 10/6/03 1:18 PM Page 59
PLANT UTILITIES/HEAT TRANSFER
TABLE 5. Motor size and number installed in the main
IGCC process units, ASU excluded
Motor size, kW 5.5 11 30 45 90 160 200 250
Motor number 63 38 30 16 24 10 2 8
Motor size, kW 350 500 630 800 1,200 1,400 1,800 2,200
Motor number 9 13 2 4 2 3 2 4

Direct online starting of nitrogen compressor asynchronous
motor, via proper captive transformer

Starting of air compressor synchronous motor, rated about
40 MW, via a two-step autotransformer system (the synchronous
motor is started as asynchronous).
Results of voltage drop calculations are reported in Table 1.
From the results, the following can be concluded:
Voltage drop caused by large motor starting on the 30-kV
system is about twice that on the 66-kV one; voltage variation
exceeds the immunity limits proper of Class 3 (12%) recom-
mended by EN Code for industrial installations.
To reduce voltage variation in the 30-kV system, all ASU
large motors shall be started either via an autotransformer sys-
tem, with several tapping steps, or via a soft-start device, solid
state-type, at higher costs and larger space requirement.
Load currents, short circuit levels and power losses. Load
current, fault duty and power losses, as listed in Table 2, show
that in both cases required performance is well within the rating
of standard industry switchgear.
Further, with respect to power losses, a reduction of about
1520% shall be expected in a 66-kV system.
Capital and operating cost. Comparison of capital costs is
reported in Table 3; different types of 66-kV switchgear have
been compared. Capital cost of the 66-kV solution is from 15%
(AIS) to 30% (GIS) higher than the 30-kV one.
On the other hand, the 66-kV option would imply lower
power losses on the distribution system. The losses, capitalized
based on a five-yr period at a fee of 0.0363 per kWh and at a 7%
interest rate, would result in a saving of about 40% (1.39 M
for the 66-kV system, 1.61 M for the 30-kV system).
Occupied area. Depending on the selected constructive solu-
tions, area required for installing the AIS-type main 66-kV dis-
tribution switchgear is about 200% larger than the correspond-
ing 30-kV solution. It becomes only 20% larger in the GIS
solution. Table 4 compares the various solutions.
Selecting distribution system voltage. To sum up, the 66-kV
system is the most appropriate selection for the plant because:

Voltage drops on main distribution busbars, caused by
large motor starting, is limited within 6% Vn, both in normal
(secondary-selective scheme) and emergency (single-ended
scheme) operating conditions.

Maximum load currents are well below the maximum
equipment rating, with benefits for reducing component aging.

Maximum fault currents are around 20 kA, i.e., lower than
the switchgear ratings (31.5 kA). Lower fault currents reduce
fault energy, thus reducing potential equipment damage.

Only one main switchgear, a two-section-type, is suffi-
cient; no load sharing problem exists and easy distribution network
control is provided.

Starting large ASU motors can be implemented with sim-
ple systems (DOL and two-step autotransformer).
HYDROCARBON PROCESSING JULY 2003
SPECIALREPORT
TABLE 6. Voltage drop during motor starting
400 V 690 V 690 V 690 V
Motor rating, kW 200 200 630 800
Cable 2(3
185) 3
240 3(3
240) 4(3
240)
V mot, % 13.9 10.4 14.5 18.2
V bus, % 5.3 3.7 8.56 10
Capital costs of the 66-kV solution are about 15% to 40%
higher than the 30-kV system, partially compensated by the
power loss savings. Nevertheless, since the technical reasons play
a more important role for the best plant design and operation, the
66-kV system is recommended.
Low voltage selection
General considerations. The most common voltage used in
European industrial installations to feed LV electrical distribu-
tion networks is 400 V. The 400-V level is usually boosted in
industrial plants to 6,000 V to feed MV users, typically motors.
Use of these two voltage levels allows installing well-tested stan-
dardized equipment and machinery that can be provided by many
manufacturers.
However, adopting a higher LV level (i.e., 690 V) offers some
advantages that could make this choice quite interesting and con-
venient; main advantages relate to capital cost savings and
improved global network efficiency.
Several key factors must be considered to compare the two
alternatives (i.e., 690 V and 400 V):
Induction motor size and cost
Maximum load current and fault duty of switching appa-
ratus available on the market
Cable voltage drop during normal operating conditions
and motor startup
Cable cross-section
Sizing and number of feeding transformers
Total power losses.
These items have been analyzed for the plant with the aim of
verifying the real benefits of using 690 V rather than 400 V. User
loads related to the IGCC units, ASU excluded, are character-
ized by different induction motor sizes (Table 5.)
Induction motors. One key point in comparing 400 V and
690 V is capital cost of the induction motors. On the European
market, 690-V motors are available in the 0.181,000 kW range
with totally enclosed fan-cooled construction and up to 630 kW
with EEx-d, EEx-e, Ex-n protection for hazardous areas (EEx-p
for larger motors).
It is common in industry to use 400 V motors up to 160200
kW to keep voltage drop during normal and startup conditions
within acceptable limits up to a distance of about 200 m; larger
motors are fed at 6,000 V.
In general, capital cost of 690-V motors is the same as 400-V
motors. Capital cost of 6 kV motors is, however, about two to
three times higher than the corresponding LV-motor size. From
this, the greater the number of motors that can be fed at 690 V
instead of 6,000 V, the higher the capital cost savings. Conse-
quently, it is necessary to establish the upper motor size that can
be fed at 690 V.
Switchboards and switching equipment. LV switchboards are
generally designed, with regard to dielectric withstand, for nom-
HP07 Electrical distribution sy 10/6/03 1:18 PM Page 60

SPECIALREPORT PLANT UTILITIES/HEAT TRANSFER

TABLE 7. Total capital cost of motor feeders up to TABLE 8. Weight of different items on total
800 kW of the entire plant capital cost
Motor size, Total 400-V capital 6,000-V capital 690-V capital Items 400 V6,000 V 690 V6,000 V Cost saving
kW motors cost, M cost, M cost, M M % M % M %
5.5 63 0.100 0.100 Motor feeder
11 38 0.0864 0.0836 total cost 4.395 71.5 3.506 63.7 0.889 20

30 30 0.1291 0.1127 Distribution

45 16 0.0947 0.0831
90 24 0.2452 0.219
160 10 0.1949 0.1712
200 2 0.0461 0.040
250 8 0.4076 0.1840
350 9 0.512 0.300
500 13 0.768 0.510
630 2 0.132 0.091
800 4 0.316 0.2479
inal voltage up to 690 V. Therefore, standard LV switchboards can
be used either at 400 V or 690 V. On the other hand, short-cir-
cuit breaking and making capacity of circuit breakers, motor
starter and any switching devices are strongly de-rated when the
operating voltage increases. In general, fault duty capacity of
molded-case and open-air circuit breakers is reduced when used
at 690 V compared to the corresponding 400-V ratings in the
6575% and 1525% ranges, respectively.
Moreover, for 690 V, the manufacturers certify motor pro-
tection coordination (i.e., fuses and contractors, molded-case cir-
cuit breakers and contractors, and limitors and contractors) only
up to 50 kA and for motor size up to 350 kW. Open-air circuit
breakers with higher breaking capacity could be used, but they are
available only for motor starters above 300 kW. Therefore, with
690 V, the fault level of 50 kA shall not be exceeded; this limita-
tion does not exist for 400 V, although a fault duty above 50 kA
is usually not recommended for good engineering practice.
For motor starters, different solutions are possible. Coordi-
nated molded-case circuit breaker and contactor combinations
are available up to 315 kW and 335 kW, respectively for 400 V
and 690 V. In the latter case, the molded-case circuit breaker
shall be the current-limiting type, with a capital cost increase of
about 20%.
The fuse-contactor combination is cheaper (cost reduction
of about 40% to 20% from low to high ratings) and offers the
most reliable short-circuit protection level also at the highest
fault duties. Again, the coordination is ensured up to the same lim-
its of molded-case circuit breakers.
For motor sizes above 355 kW, motorized open-air circuit
breakers shall be used for 690 V.
Cables. LV cables, rated 0.6/1 kV, can be used either for 400
V or 690 V without affecting insulation withstand. With respect
to cable ampacity, use of 690 V motors involving lower load
currents than 400 V motors, makes possible reducing both con-
ductor cross-section (at the same voltage drop) and cable power
losses or, at the same conductor cross-section, feed motors located
at longer distances.
Reduced cross-section is true for motor ratings above 5.5 kW,
since for smaller motors cable cross-section is determined, both
for 400 and 690 V, by the maximum let-through energy.
HYDROCARBON PROCESSING JULY 2003
net. total cost 1.24 20 1.481 26.8 0.241 20
Network losses
total cost 0.486 8.5 0.520 9.5 0.034 7
Total cost 6.121 100 5.507 100 0.614 10
For motors above 200 kW, use of 690 V requires cables with
a larger cross-section than motors of the same size fed at 6,000 V.
Capital and operating costs are, therefore, greater since the con-
ductor material cost is the most important factor in cable cost.
LV transformers. Use of 690 V instead of 400 V provides the
possibility to increase transformer rated power. Its maximum
value is, however, limited by fault current duty on LV switch-
boards and their switching devices and motor starters. Since 50
kA shall not be exceeded, motor contribution included, LV trans-
former ratings shall not exceed 3.15 MVA, with a short-circuit
impedance not below 67%.
Consequently, since many motors usually fed at 6,000 V shall
be fed at 690 V, the number of LV transformers will increase
with respect to those necessary with 400 V. Moreover, if the LV
network is supplied from 6 kV busbars, MV transformer size
cannot be reduced. Hence, the higher number of 690 V trans-
formers involves an increase in both capital cost and transformer
power losses.
Upper size of 690-V motors. The upper motor size to be fed
at 690 V can be determined by fixing, at motor starting condition,
the same maximum voltage drop accepted for 400 V motors
(maximum 200 kW). Calculations (Table 6) have been carried out
assuming a cable length of 200 m and a motor starting current 6.5
times the respective rated current. Assumed maximum allowable
bus voltage drop during motor starting is 10%, with the voltage
at motor terminals not below 80% of rated voltage. From the
table, upper limit of the 690-V motor size is about 800 kW.
Larger motors shall be fed at 6,000 V.
Cost comparison. Capital cost evaluation shall include:

Motor feeders, complete with motor, cable, motor starter
and switching protective device

LV transformers and transformer feeders

LV switchboards composed of two incomers and one tie-
breaker (secondary selective scheme).
Motor feeder capital cost. The cost of 400-V, 690-V and 6,000-
V motor feeders are shown in Table 7, referring to the entire
plant. The combination of fuse and contactor has been considered
for 400-V and 6,000-V motors up to 1,200 kW. The same
arrangement has been taken into account for 690 V for motor
ratings up to 250 kW; an open-air circuit breaker is used for the
higher size.
Transformer feeders. To compare the two choices (i.e., 400
V and 690 V), determine the number of LV and MV trans-
formers required to feed the total load. The number of trans-
formers is calculated based on the criteria that each process unit
is fed by a proper load center and that the electrical system is
HP07 Electrical distribution sy 10/6/03 1:18 PM Page 62

SPECIALREPORT PLANT UTILITIES/HEAT TRANSFER

arranged, for reliability reasons, according to the secondary

selective scheme.
Due to the limitation on fault duty, the 690-V solution requires
more transformers than the 400-V solution. Hence, cost of the dis-
tribution network, i.e., transformer feeders and switchboards, is
higher for 690 V than for 400 V (Table 8).
Overall capital cost. Overall capital cost for the two solutions
is compared in Table 8. The lower motor feeder costs allow achiev-
ing a total cost saving of 10% by using 690 V instead of 400 V,
Pierfranco Lionetto is manager of electrical engineering
for power plants with FWI-Foster Wheeler Italiana, Milan, Italy. Prior
to Foster Wheeler he worked for Centro Elettrotecnico Speriman-
tale Italiano in Milan. Mr. Lionetto holds a degree in electrical engineering from the
University of Padova. He is a member of the Italian Electrotechnical Committee, Ital-
ian Institution of Electrical and Electronic Engineers, the International Conference
on Large High-Voltage Electric Systems and the Institute of Electrical and Electronic
Engineers. Mr. Lionetto is also the author of several technical papers.

even though the distribution network and power loss costs are
higher. Therefore, the greater the number of motors in the
250800 kW size range, the greater the savings.
As a general rule, with a large number of motors in the
Roberto Brambilla is chief electrical engineer for FWI-Foster
200800 kW size range, the 690-V solution should be recom- Wheeler Italiana, Milan, Italy. Prior to Foster Wheeler he was an
mended. HP electrical systems engineer for PIRELLI Cavi S.p.A. Mr. Brambilla
holds a degree in electrical engineering from Politecnico Di Milano.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
IEEE Std. 141-1993, Recommended Practice for Electric Power Distribution in Industrial
Plant.
IEEE Std. 666-1991, Design Guide for Electric Power Service System for Generating Sta-
tions.
Lionetto, P. F., A. Cerretti, G. Rizzi, B. Savasta and E. Mizia, Study of a New Electrical
Distribution Network as a Consequence of a Very Large Load Increase in an Oil-Refinery
Plant, CIRED, London,1989. Giuliana Invernizzi is an electrical engineer with FWI-Fos-
Gambirasio, D., P. F. Lionetto and F. Tommazzolli, Co-ordinated Design of Industrial Elec- ter Wheeler Italiana, Milan, Italy. She holds a degree in electrical
trical Network and its Protection System, LElettrotecnica, LXXVII, 33444 (Italian), engineering from the Universita degli Studi of Pavia and is a mem-
1990. ber of the Italian Electrotechnical Committee. Ms. Invernizzi is also coauthor of sev-
eral technical papers.

Article copyright 2003 by Gulf Publishing Company. All rights reserved. Printed in U.S.A.