Steady State & Electromagnetic Transient Study of a Power Grid During Consecutive Branches Connection

Diego Rodrguez
Abstract Switching transients are an important factor on the
study of connecting branches, loads, reactive banks, etc. Switching transient is one of the primary causes of transient overvoltage and over current in power systems. This report focuses on a comparative study of the modeling and simulation of a switching transient response using two simulation tools: PSCAD/EMTDC and MATLAB (Chenxis code). The comparative overvoltage transient results during the switching study are also provided.

connection of branches during the re-energization of a power system. To show the results this document it will be divided in three sections. Section I, will describe the models implemented in MATLAB for the analysis. Section II, provides a model case along with the comparison switching transient results for both programs during the energization. Finally, Section III concludes and exposes the future steps of the study. II. MODELING REQUIREMENTS With the use of EMTP representation of each element [1] during transient analysis, this section shows the standard representation of each element during a switching transient A. Resistance From [1] the representation of a resistor takes the form of Figure 1, this is the same as in steady state because there is not exist any element which stores energy (capacitor or inductor) i (t )

I. INTRODUCTION The opening or closing of breakers and switches in a power system produce switching transients. Those switching operations are depicted mainly in two categories: i) energization of a branch1 (main objective of this project) and ii) de-energization of a branch. The first category consists of energization of transformers, reactors, capacitor banks, transmission lines or cables, loads, and so on. The second category includes load rejections, faults clearing, shunt reactor banks de-energization, etc. As a result of the difficulty at the time of representing mathematically all the elements involved, digital computer simulations using Electromagnetic Transient Programs (EMTP) plays an important factor in the analysis of switching transient. The results from those studies are relevant in the study of: a. b. c. d. insulation co-ordination to determine overvoltages stresses on equipment determining the arrester characteristics determining the transient recovery voltage across circuit breakers. determining the effectiveness and security of a connection during the re-energization of a system (black start)

ek (t )
DATUM

em (t )
DATUM

Figure 1 Resistance models B. Inductance Equation 1, shows the relation between voltage and current in the inductor

( )

( )

( )

Equation 1

In EMTP the model takes the form of ( ) where ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )

Those factors are currently analyzed by software as PSCAD/EMTDC, ATP, EMTP-RV, etc. In this document, we will use the theory developed by H. Dommel [1] during the transient time to create a program in MATLAB which can analyzed the voltage and current response to consecutive

In this document a branch is a power system element as a transformer, a resistor, an inductor, a capacitor, a line, etc.

Ik,m(t t)
ik ,m (t )

ik ,m (t )

ik ,m (t )

ek (t )

I k (t )

I m (t )

em (t )

ek (t )
DATUM

em (t )
R 2L t
DATUM
DATUM

L' R Z C' 4

Surge Impedance or Characteristic Impedance

Figure 2 Capacitance model for transient analysis C. Capacitance Equation 2, shows the relation between voltage and current in a capacitor:
( ( ) ( ))

Figure 3 Lines representation for long lines during transient analysis E. Transformers Transformers are represented by a combination of a series R-L branch. F. Sources In switching transient studies, the voltage source is modeled as an ideal sine-wave source. Generators are modeled as a voltage behind a (subtransient) Thevenin impedance. However, the simulations up to now used a dc voltage source to reduce complexity. III. STUDY CASE The goal of this energization study case is to compare the entire voltage wave during the connection of a new branch in both programs. The comparison includes the settling time and the maximum amplitude of the waves. To achieve this objective a small system will be consecutive energized and the result compared. The power system is shown in Figure 4, is a 4 buses system 100 KVA and 230kV with an open ended line at the bus 4. For the analysis the system is progressive connected in two steps.
Bus 1
TR Swt 1

Equation 2

In EMTP the model takes the form of ( ( ) Where ( ) ( )) ( ( ( ) ) ( ) ( ))

The representation is homologous to inductor with a variation in the current source ( ) and the parallel resistor . D. Lines Lines are represented using the Bergeron method [1], Figure 3. ( ) ( ) ( ( Where H is ( )( ) ) ) (
( )

( ( ) )

) )
( )

Bus 2 Line 1 Load 1

Bus 3

Bus 4 Line 2

( )

Swt 2

VOLTAGE SOURCE

Load 2

Figure 4 4 buses system example for progressive connections. ) A. Step 1 -Voltage Magnitude & Settling time during the first energization First, with transformer connected to the generator and in open circuit2, the first loaded line at both ends is energized. The voltage results are shown in Figure 5.

Transformer saturation is not considered

results show a good approximation of the modeled system with Matlab and the simulation in PSCAD. The same criteria is applied for the settling time where the maximum error is 4.83 % B. Step 2- Voltage Magnitude & Settling time during the second energization When the steady state is reached the second open ended line is switched on. The results from MATLAB code and PSCAD are compared and the results summarize in Table 2. Table 2 Maximum voltage magnitude and settling time comparison for the second energization

Figure 5 Result connecting loaded line to a transformer in open circuit To compare the error in maximum voltages and settling times between Matlab code and PSCAD the next formula was used: ( | ) | | |

Bus Name

Maximum voltage magnitude (PE)

Settling time (PE)

Bus 2 Bus 3

0.16 % 0.56 %

4.83 % 3.84 %

Table 1 Maximum voltage magnitude and settling time comparison for the first energization The second column of Table 1 shows the result at the time of comparing the maximum voltage at bus 2 and bus 3. The

Figure 6 Voltage magnitude at all buses when connecting an open ended line to an already energized and loaded Figure 6 shows the voltage magnitudes in the system when the second line is connected. The general forms of the waves are

closed but the maximum magnitudes errors in Table 2 diverge in comparison with the first energization. . Bus Name Bus 2 Bus 3 Bus 4 Maximum voltage magnitude (PE) 5.42 % 15 % 7.06% Settling time (PE) 5.13 % 4.9 % 6.19%

demonstrated by modeling the switching overvoltage using a small system. Both programs produced acceptable voltage waves in magnitude and settling times during the connection of new branches. Future work includes the reduction in error percentage during the connection of the second branch and the test in a bigger power system to compare not only the transient response but also the new steady state after each connection.

IV. CONCLUSION AND FUTURE WORK A comparison of the performance of two simulation environments (PSCAD/EMTDC and Matlab code) has been REFERENCES

[1]

H. W. Dommel, Electromagnetic Transients Program, 1987.