See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/266888989

Power substation energy efficiency analysis - a case study

Article · January 2011

CITATION READS

1 2,236

3 authors:

Emil Cazacu Marilena Stanculescu

Polytechnic University of Bucharest Polytechnic University of Bucharest
83 PUBLICATIONS   256 CITATIONS    73 PUBLICATIONS   137 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Iosif Vasile Nemoianu

Polytechnic University of Bucharest
59 PUBLICATIONS   130 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Development of Electrical Machine Drives for a range of applications View project

The derating parameters of power transformers operating under nonsinusoidal condition View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Marilena Stanculescu on 21 November 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

ISSN 1843-6188 Scientific Bulletin of the Electrical Engineering Faculty – Year 11 No. 2 (16)

POWER SUBSTATION ENERGY EFFICIENCY ANALYSIS - A CASE STUDY

Emil CAZACU1, Marilena STANCULESCU1, Iosif Vasile NEMOIANU1

1
University Politehnica of Bucharest, Department of Electrical Engineering, Faculty of Electrical Engineering, 060042,
313 Spl. Independentei, Bucharest, Romania,
E-mail: cazacu_emil@yahoo.com

Abstract. This paper presents a case study concerning The complete technical data, according to the latest
energy efficiency functionality in an electrical technical bulletin, accomplished in 2008, are presented
substation, consisting of two power transformers. The in Table 1 and Table 2.
whole analysis is done in order to accurately express
both active and reactive power losses within the Table 1. Technical data for Transformer 1
substation for a certain load. Thus, a complete power
Transformer power Sn kVA 1600
quality measurement (wave forms, harmonics,
Terminal Primary voltage U1n kV 20
unbalances, flicker etc.) was accomplished with a class
A analyzer (Fluke 435). By analyzing and processing Terminal Secondary voltage U2n kV 0.4
the measured data, we propose a solution for Primary nominal current I1n A 46.2
minimizing the energy loss. The proposed solution is a Secondary nominal current I2n A 2309
substation functioning in time-harmonic regime with Type of Connection Dyn05
only one power transformer. No load losses P0 W 1600
Copper losses Pk W 12000
Keywords: power substation, energy quality, energy loss. No load current i0 % 0.36
Short-circuit voltage uk % 6.33
1. INTRODUCTION
Table 2. Technical data for Transformer 2
The power balance boundary is represented by the power
Transformer power Sn kVA 1600
substation consisting of two oil transformers having
Terminal Primary voltage U1n kV 20
1600 kVA. The transformers are powered at primary
windings with 20 kV. All the equipments in the plant are Terminal Secondary voltage U2n kV 0.4
powered on the secondary windings at 0.4 kV. Primary nominal current I1n A 46.2
Secondary nominal current I2n A 2309
Type of Connection Dyn05
No load losses P0 W 1580
Copper losses Pk W 12000
No load current i0 % 0.36
Short-circuit voltage uk % 6.36

2. DIAGRAM AND MEASURING POINTS

The measuring points for monitoring the power

substation [1, 2] of the entire factory are considered in
the secondary of the two transformers – at the low
voltage part.

This placement allows an accurate and complete

Figure 1. Boundary for the power balance.
The two transformers power independently with low
electrical voltage (0.4 kV) the main factory’s
consumers: calcinatory, the technological line, the
dryer equipment etc.
Both considered transformers were manufactured in
1998 at Filiasi-Electrical Equipments Factory -Romania.
measurement of all the electrical parameters of the
energy which flows through each transformer is
absorbed by the factory’s equipments [3, 4].
Moreover, the choice of this measurement point was
imposed by the fact that the installation placement does
not allow the non-invasive access to other measurement
points.

11
Scientific Bulletin of the Electrical Engineering Faculty – Year 11 No. 2 (16) ISSN 1843-6188

Figure 5. Voltage and current values for each phase of

Transformer 2.

Figure 2. Measurement points for all electrical energy

parameters of each transformer.

Because the transformers belong to Dyn05 connection

type group, the scheme used to treat the null in
secondary is TN-S [2, 5].

The choice of the measurement scheme for the energy

quality analyzer is done in a corresponding manner.

Figure 6. Powers and the Power Factor (PF) for

Transformer 1.

We notice a consumption of approx. 630 kW active

power and approx. 78 kVAR reactive power at inductive
regime under an average power factor of approx 0.95.

Figure 3. Null treatment circuit in secondary for TN-S

transformer.

3. MEASURED DATA – POWER QUALITY

Below we present the measured data obtained using the

energy quality analyzer FLUKE 435. The voltage
measurements took place on a TNS system for null
Figure 7. Powers and the Power Factor (PF) for
treatment, the chosen maximum nominal voltage was 400 Transformer 2.
V and for current measuring 3000 A belts were used.
Similarly, for the second transformer the consumed
active power is 310 kW, 57 kVAR for reactive power
also under inductive regime at an average power factor
of approx 0.98.

One can notice that the two transformers, which work at

different load factors, have a higher power factor-PF -
over the minimum value 0.92 demanded by the energy
supplier. Thus the whole factory is not charged for
reactive energy consumption.

Next we are going to presents the main power quality

aspects which were measured in the secondary of the
Figure 4. Voltage and current values for each phase for first power transformer, which works at a greater load
Transformer 1. factor compared to the first one.

12
Because the loads of the two transformers have similar
characteristics, the power quality parameters for the
second transformer are not exposed.
Figure 8. Voltage waveform of the three power lines.
One can notice a sinusoidal variation of the voltage
between the 3 phases and the neutral point of the
transformer’s secondary, which belongs to the admitted
in terms of the rms values.
Figure 9. Vector diagram and unbalance level for the
voltage system
The vector diagram of the voltage system underlines the
appearance of the positive phase sequence. We can also see
the voltages between each phase and the neutral point. The
relative to fundamental negative voltage sequence is only
0.2 %, while zero sequence voltage is 0.3 %. These
parameters are under the acceptable limit (2 %) thus the
voltage system can be considered as a balanced one [6].
Figure 10. Harmonic histogram of the voltage waveform
13
One can notice that the total harmonic distortion (THD)
level for the voltage weave form of each phase is very
small (fewer than 10%) [6].
Figure 11. Current waveforms
We notice a balance loading, on each of the three phases,
the current being around 950 A. One can also notice the
relatively high level of harmonic distortion of current for
all the three phase.
Figure 12. Vector diagram and unbalance level for the
current system.
The vector diagram of the current system shows a
normal distribution of the currents. The relative to
fundamental negative current sequence is 0.4% while
zero sequence current is 0.7%. The parameters are under
the acceptable limit (10%), thus the current system can
also be accepted as a balanced one [6, 7]
Figure 13. Harmonic histogram of the current waveform
Scientific Bulletin of the Electrical Engineering Faculty – Year 11 No. 2 (16) ISSN 1843-6188

The total harmonic distortion (THD) level of current

weave form for each phase is very high (almost 30%). ∆Q = ∆Q + β 2 ⋅ ∆ Q (3)
That can be easily explained by the fact that the load T 0 sc
contains a variety of converters and other power
electronics equipment for motors speed control [7,8]. ∆PT - total active power loss for transformer;
i
∆Q = 0 Sn - reactive power loss in the transformer,
4. ELECTRICAL POWER LOSS COMPUTATION 0 100
no load operation;
The active power loss for a transformer is computed u
using the relation [2, 5]: ∆Q = sc Sn - reactive power loss in the transformer,
sc 100
short-circuit operation.
∆PT = ∆P0 + β 2 ⋅ ∆PSC (1) The active and reactive losses for each transformer are
where: below presented taking into account their load factor and
∆PT - total active power loss for transformer; technical data.
∆P0 - active power loss in the transformer, no load Thus, Figs. 14-17 show the losses for both active and
operation; reactive power stressing also the position of load factor β
∆PSC - active power loss in the transformer, short-circuit accordingly.
operation ;
β - load factor of the transformer.
The load factor β is determined using the relation:
Im
β = kf ⋅ (2)
In
where:
Im - average current value flowing through the
transformer;
In - nominal current value of the transformer, at high
voltage
kf - is the form factor of the function I = f(t) and it
represents the time variation of the line current I, defined
I
mp
by the relation: k f =
I
m
The measurements are realized for a 24h time interval, Figure 14. Active power loss for 1600 kVA Trafo 1
by choosing a representative day.
Im is the average value of the measured value at the end
n
∑ I
i
of the powered line: I = i = 1 [kA]
m n
Imp mean squared value of the measured current at the
n

∑I
1
i
2

end of the powered line: I mp = [kA]

n
n - the number of time intervals (minimum 24, for 24h)
when the current reading takes place;
Ii - the value of the current, measured at the middle of the
interval i, in the end of the powered line [kA].
The no load functioning loss ∆P0 and the short circuit
functioning loss ∆PSC are red from the transformer’s
label, or from its data sheet [5], [6]. Figure 15. Active power loss for 1600 kVA Trafo 2
We consider also important to evaluate also the reactive
power loss in each transformer. A relation similar to (1)
qualitatively assesses the reactive losses [2,5]

14
 5. RESULTS - OPTIMIZED BALANCE TABLE
Component’s name kW kWh/24h %
0 1 2 3 4
In this section we quantitatively present the active and
INPUT ENERGY
reactive power and energy losses for two different
Active electrical energy 65.67
615.59 14774.16 situations: when the station is working with two
1 Trafo 1 0
Active electrical energy 34.33 transformers (real case), and when the station has only
321.805 7723.320 one transformer (optimum case).
2 Trafo 2 0
TOTAL INPUT ACTIVE 100.0 The transformer circuit model [5] was used in order to
ENERGY 937.395 22497.48 00 evaluate the power and energy losses for primary and
ACTIVE ENERGY LOSSES secondary winding of each transformer.
1 Iron Losses Trafo 1 1.6 38.400 0.171
2 Iron losses Trafo 2 1.58 37.920 0.169 5.1 Active energy real balance
Joule losses primary
0.982 23.568 0.105
3 Trafo 1 Table 3. Active energy real balance for the power
Joule losses secondary substation 2×1600 kVA 20/0.4 kV
0.973 23.352 0.104
4 Trafo 1
Joule losses Primary
0.26 6.240 0.028
5 Trafo 2
Joule losses Secondary 5.2 Reactive energy real balance
0.254 6.096 0.027
6 Trafo 2
7 INCONGRUITIES 0.42 10.08 0.045 Table 4. Reactive energy real balance for the power
TOTAL ACTIVE LOSSES 6.069 145.656 0.647 substation 2×1600 kVA 20/0.4 kV
TOTAL USEFUL 99.35 Component’s name kW kWh/24h %
931.326 22351.82 0 1 2 3 4
ACTIVE ENERGY 3
INPUT REACTIVE
ENERGIES
Reactive electrical
223.11 5354.712 71.256
1 energy Trafo 1
Reactive electrical
90 2160.000 28.744
2 energy Trafo 2
TOTAL INPUT
RECTIVE ENERGY 313.11 7514.712 100.00
REACTIVE LOSSES
Magnetizing losses
5.54 132.960 1.769
1 Trafo 1
Magnetizing loss
5.54 132.960 1.769
2 Trafo 2
Inductance losses
8.237 197.688 2.631
3 Primary Trafo 1
Inductance losses
8.153 195.672 2.604
4 Secondary Trafo 1
Induction losses
2.182 52.368 0.697
5 Primary Trafo 2
Figure 16. Reactive power loss for 1600 kVA Trafo 1 Induction losses
2.144 51.456 0.685
6 Secondary Trafo 2
7 INCONGRUITIES 0.42 10.08 0.134
TOTAL REACTIVE
32.216 773.184 10.289
ENERGY LOSSES
TOTAL USEFUL
280.897 6741.528 89.711
REACTIVE ENERGY

5.3 Active energy optimum balance

The active energy optimum balance is computed for the

power substation consisting of only one transformer
having the load factor:

β = β1 + β 2 = 0.41 + 0.21 = 0.62 .

Figure 17. Reactive power loss for 1600 kVA Trafo 2

15
 Scientific Bulletin of the Electrical Engineering Faculty – Year 11 No. 2 (16) ISSN 1843-6188

- each of the two transformers composing the power

substation can take over the load required by the
factory’s consumers in stationary regime obtaining a
maximum loading factor of 0.7 for the transformer. The
transient regime when a high power machine start should
be avoided because they can cause important electro-
dynamic stresses inside the transformer.

Acknowledgment

We would like to thank ELNET INSTAL Ltd.

Figure 18. Active power loss for 1x1600 kVA Trafo
Considering the complete reactive power compensation at the
secondary winding the single working power transformer the
reactive energy balance is not presented.
The active energy balance in the case of a single transformer is
detailed in Table 5.
Company- Romania for proving us all the necessary
equipment for measurement tests.
The work has been co-funded by the Sectoral
Operational Programme Human Resources Development
2007-2013 of the Romanian Ministry of Labour, Family
and Social Protection through the Financial Agreement
POSDRU/89/1.5/S/62557.
7. REFERENCES

Table 5. Active energy optimum balance for the power [1] Arri, E. Locci, N. Mocci, F., Measurement of
substation 1 x 1600 kVA 20/0.4 kV transformer power losses and efficiency in real
Nr. Component’s name kW kWh/24h % working conditions, International Conference on
0 1 2 3 4 Precision Electromagnetic Measurements CPEM.
INPUT ENERGIES 1990, pp. 164 – 165, Ottawa, June1990.
Active electrical energy
[2] Golovanov N, et. al, Power Plants and industrial
931.265 22350.360 100.000 audit elements, N’ERGO Publishing House, 2008
1 from Trafo
2 0 0.000 0.000 (in romanian).
931.265 22350.360 100.000
[3] Olivares J. C., et al, Reducing Losses in Distribution
TOTAL ACTIVE ENERGY
Transformers, IEE Transactions on Power
ENERGY LOSSES
Delivery, vol. 18, no. 3, July 2003, pp. 821-825.
1 Iron losses in Trafo 1.6 38.400 0.172 [4] Lin, D., Fuchs, E. F., Real-time monitoring of iron-
Joule losses primary 2.23792 53.710 0.240 core and copper losses of three-phase transformers
2 Trafo under (non)sinusoidal operation, IEEE
Joule losses secondary Transactions on Power Delivery, vol. 21, issue 3,
2.22309 53.354 0.239
3 Trafo July 2006, pp. 1333-1341.
4 INCONGRUITIES 0.42 10.08 0.045 [5] Fitzgerald, A. E., Kingsley C. Jr., Umans S., Electric
TOTAL ENERGY LOSSES 6.48101 155.544 0.696 Machinery, McGraw-Hill Science, 6th Edition,
924.784 22194.816 99.304
2002.
TOTAL USEFUL ENERGY
[6] Bollen, M.H.J., Understanding Power Quality
Problems, IEEE Press Series on Power
6. CONCLUSIONS
Engineering, 2000.
[7] Pierce, L.W., Transformer design and application
Analyzing both measured and computed data for the real
considerations for nonsinusoidal load currents,
balance, we can conclude the following:
IEEE Transactions on Industry Applications, vol.
- the power substation necessary to assure the energy
32, issue 3, May-June 1996, pp. 633-645.
consumption for the whole factory, consisting of two
[8] Fuchs, E.F., Lin, D., Martynaitis, J., Measurement of
transformers of 1600 kVA with almost identical
three-phase transformer derating and reactive
characteristics, that are functioning with a high
power demand under nonlinear loading conditions,
efficiency (the transformer’s loading is in the optimum
IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery, vol. 21,
functioning area).
issue 2, April 2006, pp. 665-672.
- the total active energy for the whole station (for the 2
transformers) during 24h is approx. 22 MWh, having an
average power factor of approx. 0.95.
- the energy losses of the two transformers are normal
for the exploitation practice or for those presented in
literature characteristic to the specified power class of
these transformers (between 1000-2000 kVA) [4, 5].

16

View publication stats