requirements in applications of Disconnecting Circuit Breakers for AIS S/S Hans-Erik Olovsson* Carl-Ejnar Silver ABB Power Technologies ABB Power Technologies Sweden Sweden Summary Technical development of Circuit Breakers (CBs) has made maintenance on them less frequent, while maintenance of open-air Disconnectors (DSs) for Air Insulated Substations (AIS) has remained unchanged. Open-air DSs primary contacts are exposed to atmospheric and industrial pollution, which lead to frequent maintenance and potential risk of failure. Due to this the Disconnecting Circuit Breaker (DCB) for ATS Substations was introduced in 2000. The DCB integrates the breaking and disconnecting function into an SF6 encapsulated contact(s) making it possible to build AIS without any open-air DSs, By using DCB in AIS Substations the following advantages are obtained: - Tess investinent cost - reduced space requirement - higher availability : reduced maintenance cost Keywords. Availability Compacting Rehabilitation Maintenance Substation perenne *Contact address: ABB Power Technologies, Substations & SA, dept. K SE-721 82 Vasteras, SWEDEN telephone: +46-21-328 030(office) 4+46-70-328 030(mobile) telefax: +46-21-328 019 e-tnail: hans-etik.olovsson@ se.abb.com Figure 1: DCB in a 400 KV Transmission substation1. Background of todays single line diagrams In the early days of electricity the Circuit Breakers (CBs) were mechanically and electrically complicated and therefore needed a lot of maintenance and this was the reason why disconnectors (DSs) were introduced, Maintenance of the CB was much more frequent than the DS maintenance interval, which was about 4-5 years for “normal” pollution level in Air Insulated Substations (AIS). The introduction of DS’s thus inereased the availability of AIS, Single line diagrams where accordingly built up based on the fact that CBs are the “bad guys” and DSs the “good guys", i.e. a lot of DSs where put in the AIS in order to make it possible to maintain the CBs, while at the same time keeping the outgoing objects in service, please see fig. 2. a)A bya ec B-ba-. e A B Figure 2: Different types of single line configurations based on that CBs need a lot more maintenance than DSs, which no longer is true. 2) single busbar, b) double busbar, c) double plus transfer busbar. ‘The main reason for going from single to double busbar (fig. 2b)) was to make it possible to make maintenance on busbar DSs in own hay and at the same time being able to keep the other bays in the substation in service by connecting them to the busbar “remote” to the busbar DS under service. Double busbar also made it possible to connect “parallel objects” to different busbars, which will limit the consequences in case of a busbar fault. Having “parallel objects” on different bushars can also be achieved by introducing a section breaker in the single busbar scheme and make the busbar in U- shape, see dashed part of By introducing the transfer busbar (fig. 2c)) it was possible to keep own bay in service, also for main- tenance of its own CB, by using the transfer CB during this time. All of the configurations shown in fig. 2 focus on CB maintenance aspects, 2) and b) makes it possible to have busbar energised during maintenance of CB, and c) also makes it possible to have own bay in service at CB maintenance. These types of single line configuration still are sensitive in case of primary faults If a primary fault occur on one of the outgoing objects and the breaker for that bay fails to open the whole section of busbar must be de-energised. A failure in the bus-section or bus-coupler breaker will lead to loss of the whole substation. Using any of the configurations shown in fig. 2 thus means that you must be prepared “to lose” part of or whole substation in case of a primary fault. aar3) | Figure 3: Single line configurations where a busbar fault will not cause outa objects. a) 1 ¥-breaker, b) double breaker. e on! any of the outgoingTn oder to make the substation “immune” against busbar faults and when a CB fails to open at a primary fault 1 'a-breaker and double breaker configurations were introduced, please sce fig. 3. The idea is to have more than one CB feeding each object continuously. If a primary fault occurs on one of the outgoing objects and the CBs fails to open no other outgoing bay is affected for the double breaker and for 1 Y-breaker only outgoing object on same diameter is affected. A busbar fault will open alt CBs towards the faulty busbar and thus taking away one of the CB feeding the outgoing bays. The remaining CBs and busbar will however keep all outgoing objects in service and the busbar fault will not cause outage on any of the outgoing objects. 1 Yebreaker and double breaker according to fig. 3 also make it possible to maintain all CB without taking any of the outgoing objects out of service. These single line configurations thus gives the best solution both from CB maintenance aspects as well as being immune against primary failures and if CB should fail to open at a primary fault 2. Development of Circuit Breakers and Disconnectors ‘Technical development of CBs has made maintenance on them less frequent, while maintenance of open-air DSs has remained unchanged, please see fig. 4. The maintenance interval of new CBs requiring primary 10 be taken out of service, is today 15 years. This improvement of CBs, while DSs hhas remained unchanged has gradually lead to that today DSs are the apparatuses requiring most ‘maintenance in outdoor substations [1]. Installing DSs for enabling maintenance of CBs is therefore not a good idea, . a) Bulk Oil Breakers Air blast Breakers Minimum Oil breakers. 1 Chamber245 kV 1950 Figure 4: a) 400 kV air-blast CB, b) 400 kV DCB, ¢) Failure and maintenance rate for CBs and DSs. In order to minimize outages in substations due to maintenance of open-air DS, Disconnecting Circuit Breakers (DCBs) for AIS were introduced in 2000 (2), {3}. [4]. [5]. [6]. The DCB integrates the breaking and disconnecting function into an SF6 encapsulated coatact(s) making it possible to build AIS without any open-air DSs. Having all primary contacts encapsulated in SF6 and protected trom industrial and atmospheric pollution, will decrease maintenance work significantly and increase reliability of primary system By keeping same single line configuration, as with conventional solution the overall availability of substation will increase. alternatively single line configuration can be simplified by using DCB and still maintaining the overall availability as before. Integration of the breaking and disconnecting func: tions into DCB also give space-savings, which make rehabilitation of existing substations easier and at the same time reduce the environmental impact, due to less material and pollution3. Comparison of space and availability for 400 kV substation using CBs+DSs vs DCBs, In fig. 5 single line diagram and corresponding space requirement is compared, for traditional type of solution with CBs and DS’s versus solution with DCBs, for a typical 400 kV substation with three ‘Oll-lines, two power transformers and one shunt reactor. By using DCB the outdoor switchyard area is reduced from about 11500 m” to 6200 m* a reduction with almost 50%. (© = Dissonnscting city, to be used in case ct main tenance or falure of DOB = Disconnectng Creut Breaker Figure 5: Single line diagram and layout for 400 kV traditional CBs and DSs vs solution with DCB. ig. 5 is makes it possible to disconnect the DCB, in de- chgear. Section clearance is achieved after disconnecting, 1g maintenance or possible repair of The disconnecting facility[4] shown in energised condition, from other part of wi which means that surrounding switchgear can be energised dui DCB. Outages due to maintenance and failures for an outgoing bay with single line configuration according to fig. 5, is shown in fig. 6.By using DCBs instead of traditional solution with CBs+DSs, the average outage duration duc to maintenance is reduced with 90% and due to failure 50%, please see fig. 6. Maintenance outage | Failure outage | 400 kV 1 1/2-breaker 400 KV 1 1/2-breaker aol 7 7 | 5. § 0.19 Fou! Te FF i ag ie . i. | 3 os 2 | 00 oo 00 7 | cees0se = cen ccs | Figure 6: Average outage duration due to maintenance and failures for 400 kV traditional CBs and DSs vs solution with DCBs,4. Comparison of space and availability for 132 kV substation using CBs+DSs vs DCBs, In fig. 7 single line and corresponding space requirement is compared, for double busbar solution with CBs and DSs versus sectionalized busbar solution with DCBs, for a typical 132 kV substation with four OH-lines, two power transformers and one bus-coupler or bus-section breaker. By using DCBs the outdoor switchyard area is reduced from about 4200 m’ to 2500 m’ a reduction with more than 40%. In fig 7 it ean also be seen that the DCB solution can accommodate two more bays. one ox either side of power transformers, without increasing the site, which will size compared to CBs+D: ‘© = Disconnecting facility, to be used in case of maintenance or failure of DCB YK = Disconnecting Circuit Breaker jv Figure 7: Single line diagram and layout for 132 kV traditional CBs and DSs vs solution with DCBs, Outages due to maintenance and failures for an outgoing bay with single line configuration according to fig. 7, is shown in fig. 8.By using DCBs instead of traditional solution with CBs#DSs, the average outage due to maintenance is reduced with about 80% and due to failure about 40%, please see fig, | Maintenance outage 132 kV Failure outage 132 kV & 80) | i 03 ; 2} ss g o2t 12 | 2 - a —-—|); a | 12 | Eos eit é | 6 cesiDss pees | 6 casiss pews Figure 8: Average outage duration due to maintenance and failures for 132 kV traditional CBs and DSs vs solution with DCBs,Failure rates for high voltage apparatus are taken ftom interational stalstic (CIGRE; Canadian Electricity Association; etc.) based on actual equipment in service. Busbars, Circuit Breakers, Measuring Transformers, Disconnectors and Surge Arresters are modelled with failure frequency and ‘mean time to repair according to above sources. We are using same failure and maintenance rates for DCB and CB since the high voltage part is similar except that DCB has silicone rubber insulators. Silicone nibber is hydrophobic (self-cleaning) and will in reality mean less risk of flashover compared to solution with porcelain as insulators for CBs, It is only primary faults considered in the unavailability calculations since the secondary system will use same type of hardware independent of primary system, However for DCB secondary circuits will be less complicated and therefore the risk of failure in secondary system will be less. This means that if secondary system should be considered the availability increase with DCB would be even bigger than shown in the diagrams. Inerval and time for maintenance is taken from manufacturers maintenance instructions and is ‘modelled for Citcuit Breakers and Disconnectors only, since modern measuring transformers are con- sidered maintenance free. For DSs five years maintenance interval is used. Different DS manufacturers recommend different maintenance intervals, which can be as tow as one year for normal condition. Using five years intervals will thus give a result on the conservative side, and in reality the availability increase with DCB will be larger than shown in the diagram. REFERENCES [1] P Norberg, M Tapper. W Lord, A Engqvist, “The Future Substation - Reflection About Design,” Report 23-105, Cigré Session, Paris, 1998. [2] C-E Solver, H-E Olovsson, W Lord, P Norberg, J Lundquist, “Innovative Substations with High Availability using Switching Modules and Disconnecting Circuit Breakers.” Report 23-102, Cigré Session, Paris, 2000, [3] H-E Olovsson, C-E Solver, “Innovative Solutions for Increasing Reliability and Availability in AIS Substations,” Cigré SC23 Colloquium. Venezuela, 2001. [4] P-O Andersson, H-E Olovsson, B Franzén, U Lager, J Lundquist, “Applications of Disconnecting Circuit Breakers.” Report B3-210, Cigré Session, Patis, 2004 [5] _H-E Olovsson, Jean Constantinescu, “Application of Disconnecting Circuit-Breakers” Report ID 427, CEPSI Shanghai, China, 2004. [6] __H-E Olovsson, “More reliable and cost effective AIS substations by using Disconnecting Circuit Breakers”, CONCAPAN San Jose. Costa Rica, 2004.