Optimal Placement of a Distribution Transformer
K.Shashidhar
Hitech College of Engineering & Technology,
Hyderabad, Andhra Pradesh, INDIA
Email: shashi_kb4u@yahoo.com
Cell contact: 09848909049
Abstract - Electric utilities in India are facing the pressure of
reducing costs and improving the quality and reliability of
supply. It is not sufficient to analyze how a particular portion
of the network may be modified to improve its performance
today: it is a matter of determining what would be the optimal
solution when allowance has also to be made for the
uncertainties in the prediction of the future scenario of
customer demand. The utilities do not follow any accurate
mathematical procedure in installing Distribution
Transformer. Moreover in many cases they are not placed in
the required position due to socio-political and economical
reasons which will result in losses. Since the Distribution form
a large part of the network, a small amount of loss at each
transformer leads to a great variation in total. To address this
problem care should be taken to minimize the power loss while
commissioning a transformer. Apart from estimating the
power loss the voltage regulation should also be considered for
finding the optimal location of a Transformer. In this paper a
mathematical analysis is made to find the optimal location of a
Transformer based upon the minimum peak power loss and
minimum voltage regulation. Here three different cases are
analyzed considering the present load and forecasting the
future load demand and thus obtaining four to five optimal
locations at which the distribution transformer can be placed.
A comparative study is also made to have a choice between
increasing the rating of the over rated transformer or finding
the optimal location for a new transformer.
Keywords: power loss, voltage regulation, transformer losses,
transformer banking.
I. INTRODUCTION
Although Considerable Research has been carried out in
distribution, there are yet few areas in the distribution
network which are to be concentrated in order to reduce the
losses to the maximum extent possible and to increase the
power quality. In developed countries, the amount of power
loss is not greater than 10%.However, in developing
countries, the percentage of active power losses is around
20%; therefore, utilities in the electric sector are currently
interested in reducing it in order to be more competitive,
since the electricity prices in deregulated markets are related
to the system losses [3]. In India, there are forty power
distribution companies in various states and Union
Territories supplying power. As on March, 2005 the total
transformer capacity of the distribution utilities is 330,829
MVA and total distribution line length of the forty
distribution utilities is 6,081,878 km. Total electricity
consumption is 381,359.5 Million Unit. Ideally, losses in an
electric system should be around 3 to 6%. Voltage stability
problem generally arises in over loaded systems. The
collapses are – low voltage profiles, heavy reactive power
flows, inadequate reactive support, and heavily loaded
systems. To reduce the losses and to improve the system
efficiency, a policy has been made [2].
If a new 11KV/415V Transformer is to be designed and
connected to an existing network, several possible solutions
are studied. These solutions may include various connection
schemes of the substation and several feasible locations,
while the principal scheme is defined with a limited number
of possibilities. Many a times with the utilities, due to large
number of possible sites, an economical comparison may
overlook the optimal technical solution. The final decision is
usually influenced by additional factors such as topography;
land ownership, environmental considerations etc. But if the
location of the Transformer is arbitrary the result can be a
bad voltage profile. In both the cases we have extra losses
resulting in a less efficient and unnecessary higher cost
electrical system installation [1].
One such attempt is made in this paper by estimating the
location of the distribution transformer taking into
consideration of the present and future possible load
demand. The various possible technical locations are tried
out to obtain an optimal position which can be later
compared with the economical issues in placing the
transformer. In this paper the reduction of total power loss is
compared by both finding the optimal location for an
additional transformer and replacing the over loaded
transformer with higher rating transformer. Three different
possible cases are considered and analyzed to reduce the
losses and improve the voltage regulation. The three
different cases are as follows:
Case 1: In a locality, the power demand is increasing at a
considerable rate without any change in the network. To
meet the load demand and also to reduce the line losses
either an additional transformer can be placed or the over
loaded transformer can be replaced by a higher rating
transformer.
Case 2: The load network (layout) is increasing in different
directions. To cater the new load demand and to reduce the
line losses, either a higher transformer rating is replaced
with the over loaded transformer or an additional
transformer can be placed within the same locality at some Pi is the real power at node i and
other different place. Qi is the reactive power at node i
Case 3: Considering the load demand is increased in and
around the transformer location. Study has to be carried out The total active and reactive power loss is given by
either to increase the transformer rating or install an
additional transformer. The better approach is followed to
reduce the line losses.
(3)
The above cases are analyzed in two steps
1. The location at which the minimum peak power
loss is obtained (4)
2. The location corresponding to minimum voltage
regulation is obtained. The voltage regulation is calculated by using the formula

The optimal location is found from these two analyses and

compared with the economical perspective to get the best
location taking into consideration of political bias and Where P.F is the power factor,
geographical constraints. D.F is the Diversity factor,
R.C is the regulation constant
II. SOLUTION METHODOLOGY B. Assumptions
In this paper the transformer ratings are consider as the
To optimally place a Distribution transformer, the maximum load ratings in the network, then a transformer
minimum peak power loss and voltage regulation of the with rating of 10 to 15% more than the load rating is
corresponding transformer are to be obtained. This can be considered. The transformer tap setting is considered as 0.9
done using any Distribution load flow method. and the load power factor is taken as 70%, The load factor is
The rating of the distribution transformer to be installed assumed as 0.3 and loss load factor as 0.132 [2]. The
should be judiciously selected to keep the losses in the conductor Regulation constant is taken as 900 and the
permissible limits. For the existing distribution system, the Diversity factor as 1.5.
appropriate capacity of distribution transformer may be
taken as very nearly equal to the maximum demand at good C. Algorithm
power factor. The Table 1 shows the losses in a distribution A complete algorithm for determining power loss and
transformer with percentage of loading at 90%. analyzing the optimal position of a transformer.
Standard Step 1: Read the line data
25 50 63 100 150 300 500
KVA
Step 2: Run the load flow program with the developed
rating
algorithm
Iron Loss 130 195 280 310 500 850 1420 Step 3: Determine the power loss of the Distribution
(watts) network
Step 4: Place the transformer in between any two buses and
Full Load calculate the power loss
650 920 1230 1700 2100 3900 6500
Cu Step 5: Calculate the voltage regulation.
Loss/Watts Step 6: After obtaining the location with minimal peak
power loss and voltage regulation, the position of
transformer is changed in unit distances between the two
Table 1: Losses in a distribution Transformer buses and the power loss is calculated.
Step 7: The transformer can thus be placed in a position
A. Equations
where optimal power loss is obtained.
The real and reactive power loss of line ‘j’ is given by
III. CASE STUDY AND SIMULATION RESULTS
Ploss[j] = Rj x (Pi+12 +Qi+12) / Vi+12 (1)
To analyze the optimal location of a distribution
Qloss[j] = Xj x (Pi+12 +Qi+12) / Vi+12 (2) transformer, a 11 KV feeder of Karapa Sub-station at
Kakinada, Andhra Pradesh is considered which forms a 11
Where i = 1,2,… are the buses Bus System. All the three cases are analyzed and the
Rj is the resistance on line j corresponding change in the optimal position of a
Xj is the reactance on line j distribution transformer is analyzed.
Case 1: The power demand is increasing on a feeder at a above procedure is to be repeated by moving the
considerable rate without change in the locality layout, transformer in unit steps between the buses 6-9. Table 3
which may happen due to increase in population density or shows the various locations with respect to the minimum
increase in usage of electrical appliances etc. peak power loss where the transformer can be placed.
The circuit diagram of Karapa Distribution Network is as
shown in the Figure 1.
Distance Power Loss
S.No
from bus 6 (KW)
1 0.1 140.793
2 0.2 47.745
3 0.21 28.50
4 0.22 67.685
5 0.23 76.681
6 0.24 85.8779
7 0.25 87.571
8 0.26 122.581
9 0.27 123.590
10 0.28 90.507
11 0.29 95.372
12 0.3 65.344
13 0.4 71.218

Table 3: Power loss when a transformer moved in unit distances

between buses 6-9
Figure 1. Circuit Diagram of Karapa Distribution Network
From the above table the optimal position of the
Transformer can be observed as 210 meters from Bus 6. If
The power loss of the existing network is calculated as
we cannot place the transformer because of any socio-
91.971 KW. Now a comparative study is made between
political and economic reasons, then the next optimal
placing an additional transformer at different positions in
location is selected.
the network and replacing the transformer with a higher
rating. In the next scenario, a transformer is replaced with a
In the first scenario of placing a new transformer, if a higher rating transformer, instead of placing a new
transformer of 63KVA is placed in between any two buses, transformer at some optimal location. Generally
optimal location is to be obtained. The power loss across Transformers are never shutdown, they are left energized,
various buses when the transformer is placed in center of and the transformer stays warmer than the ambient and
any two buses is as shown in Table 2. From the Table, the absorbs less moisture. This implies all year round, cost
location corresponding to minimum power loss is obtained. liabilities for a steady consumption of energy towards no
load losses. This no load losses represent energy
Power Loss
S.No Bus Numbers consumption. Over rated transformers draw an un-necessary
(KW)
high iron loss. In addition to the iron losses, the capital costs
1 1-2 146.895
locked up is high [5].The Standard Distribution 11/0.45 KV
2 2-3 49.206
3 3-4 201.581
3-Phase Transformer ratings for rural electrification are
4 4-5 85.467 given in Table 4.
5 2-6 120.353
6 6-9 87.51 KVA
63 100 200 315 500 630
7 6-7 17.432 Rating
8 7-8 48.952 Percentage
4.5 4.5 4.75 4.75 4.75 4.75
9 9-10 134.477 Impedance
10 10-11 149.493 No Load
180 260 500 580 850 1000
Losses KV
Table 2: Power loss when a transformer is placed in between the
Buses. Table 4: 11 KV Distribution Transformer Ratings

But in the network, since the buses 6-9 forms the main
line, it can be considered as better location to place a new
transformer. This analysis was also supported by observing
the voltage profile at all the transformers. Now to obtain the
exact location at which the transformer is to be placed, the
From the above two scenarios it is better to place a new
Transformer at some optimal location instead of increasing
the transformer rating, taking into consideration of all the
Geographical constraints and political issues.
Case 2: Due to urbanization there can be a change in the Distance From Power Loss
S.No
physical layout of the load network i.e the distance of the bus 6 (KW)
tail end load from the transformer is increased, which leads 1 0.05 149.6
to increase in line losses. In this case the transformer should 2 0.08 109.53
cater the increased load demand and line losses. Replacing 3 0.09 89.24
the transformer with higher rating will not reduce the line 4 0.1 63.36
losses. But if an additional transformer is placed at an 5 0.15 60.23
optimal location within the network the total power losses 6 0.2 56.41
are reduced. 7 0.3 109.74
8 0.4 103.78
Considering in the same Karapa Distribution Network of
Table 6: Power loss when a transformer is moved in unit distances
Figure 1, the line length is increased between the buses 10
between the Buses for an extended network
and 11 by 100 meters as shown in Figure 2.
From the above table it is observed that the optimal location
to place a transformer is at 200m from Bus 6. If at any case
it is not possible to place the Distribution transformer then
the next optimal location is selected.

Case 3: Considering the load demand is increased in and

around the transformer location, which can happen because
of the locality being commercially developed. In this case,
there is no additional contribution of line losses and all that
is primarily due to the load. Here to reduce the total power
loss, it is better to have an additional transformer in parallel
to the existing transformer as per the load requirement. This
is called as “Transformer Banking”. This method of placing
an additional transformer will keep the Iron losses within
considerable limits.

Figure 2. Circuit Diagram of extended Karapa Distribution IV. SUGGESTIONS

Network
Meters should be connected on all distribution
Here with the increase in Line length from 400 to 500 m, transformers for accurate calculation of energy loss. The
the total power loss of 11KV Feeder Network without low voltage problem on distribution feeders may be
placing a Transformer is 112.657 KW. Now by placing the corrected by operating an on-load-tap changing in the high
Transformer in between any two buses across the main line, voltage side of the power transformers situated at 33/11KV
The power loss obtained by simulation is tabulated as substations and providing a combination of switched
shown in Table 3. capacitors and automatic voltage regulators on 11 KV
feeders.
The size of the conductor should be selected on the basis
Power Loss of KVA X KM capacity of standard conductor for a
S.No Bus Numbers
(KW) required voltage regulation [7]. The maximum limits of
1 2-6 78.14
voltage variation should be as per the Indian Electricity
2 6-9 70.35
Rule. Length of the 11KV and 415 V corresponding to
3 9-10 175.85
different loads is presented in Table 6.
Table 5: Power loss when a transformer is placed in between the
Buses for an extended network KVA-KM Max.
Size Connected
for 8% drop length of
and code Load (kw)
From the table, it is observed that the minimal peak power at 0.8 pf. line (km)
loss is obtained in between the buses 6-9 and this location is 50 mm2
10,640 30 355
confirmed by observing the voltage regulation at all the ACSR
buses. To find the better location in between the bus 6-9, the 30 mm2
7,200 20 360
transformer is moved in unit steps from Bus 6 as shown in ACSR
the Table 5. 20 mm2
5,120 15 341
ACSR

Table 7: Length of 11 KV line corresponding to different loads

 Various other methods can be adopted to reduce the line APPENDIX
losses in a distribution transformer like placing a shunt
capacitor, Grading of conductor, Feeder Reconfiguration Karapa Distribution Layout is shown in the figure
etc.
The Transformer admittance is 0.4-j0.797
The Line admittance is 0.5346-j0.6682
V. CONCLUSION

The distribution losses can be reduced by proper selection

of transformer rating and location keeping in mind the
present and future load demand. The utility companies
should take into consideration of the technical and
economical issues in installing a new transformer with the
constraints of socio-political bias and geographical
constraints.

.
REFERENCES

[1] Piedade Jr., C.; “Rural electrification”, Nobel Editors,

Sao Paulo, Brazil, 1979 (In protugese)
[2] Indian Electricity Act. 2003. Online available:
http://powermin.nic.in/acts/notifications/electricity.
[3] L.Ramesh, S.P.Chowdhury, S.Chowdhury,
A.A.Natarajan, C.T.Gaunt “Minimization of power
loss in Distribution Networks by different
Techniques”,. International Journal of Electrical
Power and Energy
Systems Engineering 2:1 2009
[4] S. Corhodzic and A. Kalam ,”Assessment of
Distribution Transformers using Loss Capitalization
Formulae”
[5] K. V. S. Ramachandra murthy and M. Ramalinga raju ,
”Electrical Energy Loss in Rural Distribution Feeders-
A-Case study”,ARPN Journal of Engineering and
Applied Sciences.
[6] IEEE. 1991. IEEE Distribution Planning Working
Group report, Radial Distribution Test Feeders. IEEE
Transactions on Power Systems. 6(3): 974-985.
[7] J. D. Glover and M. Sarma. 1994. Power System
Analysis and Design. 2nd Edition, PWS publishing
company, Boston, MA.
[8] “Options for system upgrades for rural power networks”
for United States Agency for International
Development
[9] Best practices in Distribution Loss reduction,
Distribution Reform, Upgrades and Management
(DRUM) project training material of USAID INDIA.
Available at http://www.usaid.com.
[10] Hernán Prieto Schmidt, Nathan Ida, Fellow, IEEE,
Nelson Kagan, Senior Member, IEEE, and João
Carlos Guaraldo, ”Fast Reconfiguration of
Distribution Systems Considering Loss Minimization
“, IEEE Transactions on power systems, Vol. 20, No.
3, August 2005.