IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery, Vol. 6, No.

4, October 1991

1671

THREE-PHASE COGENERATOR AND TRANSFORMER MODELS FOR DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM ANALYSIS

Tsai-Hsiang Chen Member, IEEE Mo-Shing Chen Fellow, IEEE Toshio Inoue Member, IEEE Paul Kotas Elie A. Chebli Member, IEEE

Energy Systems Research Center The University of Texas at Arlington Arlington, Texas 76019

Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc. 4 Irving Place, New York, NY 10003

A B S T R A C T - This paper presents detailed three-phase cogenerator and transformer models for analyzing a large-scale distribution system. The cogenerator model presented here is significant in that it will represent the inherent generator phase imbalance due to distribution system imbalance. The cogenerators can be synchronous or induction and can be on either primary or secondary systems. The transformer models consider the copper and core losses, the winding connection, the phase-shifting between primary and secondary windings, and the off-nominal tapping. An individual phase, as opposed to a balanced three-phase, representation was employed. This approach is oriented toward applications in distribution system operational analysis rather than planning analysis. This difference should be properly emphasized. The misuse of the planning oriented method to analyze the operational behavior of the system will distort the explanation of the calculated results and lead to incorrect conclusions.
Keywords: Cogenerator model, Transformer model, Power flow, Short circuit, System loss, Contingency, Distribution system, Injected current, System imbalance, Subtransient reactance.

JNTRODUCTION
It has becoming increasingly clear that utilities need demandside management (DSM). The least-cost planning as well as demand-side strategies are being widely adopted and mandated(e.g. in New York). Moreover, if current legislative proposals become law(e.g. Tim Worth's Energy Efficiency Act of 1989), mandates may apply more universally. Both the DSM and least-cost planning and many other distribution analyses, for example energy conservation and switching recommendation studies, need rigorous operational-type analysis rather than rough planning-type analysis. The difference between these two types of analyses should be properly emphasized. The misuse of the planning type method to analyze the operational behavior of the system will distort the explanation of the calculated results and lead to incorrect conclusions. The distribution system is basically unbalanced. Many factors cause system imbalance such as untransposed feeders, conductor bundles, single-phase loads, unequal three-phase loads, single and double-phase "radial spurs" on primary feeders. Furthermore, even if the network is balanced, asymmetrical faults introduce imbalance. To avoid significant error arising from inherent system imbalance, rigorous distribution system analysis using detailed component models is required.

The purpose of this paper is to provide mathematical component models for this kind of rigorous distribution system analysis. The components are modeled by their equivalent circuits in terms of inductance, capacitance, resistance, and injected current. The form of the models is dependent on the type of study to be performed. For example, in power flow and short circuit analyses, the same transformer and conductor models are used, but the cogenerator and load models are different. To develop such a distribution analysis system, the following component models were determined to be necessary: conductors, cogenerators, transformers, demands or loads, and capacitors. Other components such as network protectors, fuses, automatic switches, etc., although necessary in contingency analysis, are not important in power flow and short circuit studies, and therefore, are not presented. Of these required models, conductors, capacitors, and demands have previously developed standard implementations for the Gauss solution approach[l-31. This was not the case for the transformer and cogenerator models, which required an additional research effort to design and implement new models for the Z B and other solution methods. Hence, in this paper only the ~ ~ cogenerator and transformer models are introduced. For detailed discussion of feeder models for both coupled and uncoupled feeders see references[l] and [2]. For a discussion of the load model used, see reference [3]. These component models may require little, if any modification to apply them to other solution techniques.

COGENERATOR MO DELS
Cogeneration is an effective means of increasing energy efficiency and reducing energy costs. The cogeneration process puts wasted heat to work. It saves energy by using the reject heat of one process as an energy input to a subsequent process, effectively using the same fuel. The favorable economics of cogeneration enable it to play a substantial role in energy development in various parts of the world[4-61. One utility seeing the effects of these favorable economics is Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc. Con Edison anticipates the addition of more cogenerators to their system in the future, and is developing analysis tools to facilitate the study of their impact. The impact of cogenerators upon the existing system must be studied because their contribution to the power flow and shortcircuit current of the system is significant, When a request is made to generate electricity by using cogenerators in parallel with a utility system, electric distribution engineers need to study the impact that the proposed cogenerators will have upon existing facilities. There is currently no capability for studying the effects of cogenerators upon distribution systems, especially upon unbalanced distribution systems. This paper introduces new cogenerator models for three-phase distribution power flow and short-circuit studies. The cogenerator model used in power flow studies can also be used for system loss and contingency analyses. It is significant because it represents the generator phase imbalance due to inherent distribution system imbalance. A program called "Generalized Distribution Analysis System" (GDAS) has been developed to simulate a large scale unbalanced distribution system. This program can be used to evaluate the performance of a distribution system containing parallel cogenerators[7-81.

91 WM 0 8 3 - 6 PWRD A paper recommended and approved by the IEEE Transmission and Distribution Committee of the IEEE Power Engineering Society for presentation at the IEEE/PES 1991 Winter Meeting, New York, New York, February 3, 1991. Manuscript submitted June 26, 1990; made available for printing December 11, 1990.

0885-8977/91$01.000 1 IEEE 199

1672

Cogenerator M o u
A preliminary investigation of typical voltage control systems for synchronous cogenerators was done. According to the investigation results, synchronous cogenerators are not controlled to maintain constant voltage, they are controlled to maintain constant power and constant power factor. Furthermore, utilities may require that cogeneration operators provide such controls. For example, Con Edison, under some conditions, may require a power factor controller to maintain a constant power factor on the synchronous generator by controlling the voltage regulator. The power factor controller must be capable of maintaining a power factor within plus or minus one percent at any set point. As a result, the synchronous cogenerators can be represented approximately as constant complex power devices in the power flow study, i.e. cogenerators can be represented as P-Q specified devices in the power flow calculation. As for induction cogenerators, their reactive power will vary with the terminal voltage change. Thus, the reactive power consumption of the induction cogenerators is not exactly constant. For simplification, the induction cogenerators can be treated as P-Q specified devices because the bus voltages are near 1.0 p.u. in steady state cases. As a result, both the synchronous and induction generators can be represented as P-Q specified devices, i.e. constant complex power devices. The cogenerators are modeled as an internal voltage "EI" behind the proper reactance; the generator subtransient reactance Xd"[9,10] as shown in the Figure 1. This is the Thevenin equivalent circuit of a cogenerator. This model is different from the traditional power flow generator bus (PV Bus) which is represented by specified injected powers at a specified voltage. Using the Figure 1 model, injected power of each phase, under an unbalanced terminal voltage condition, can be calculated in detail.

.on

',
1 4

Figure 2 Norton Equivalent Cicuit of Cogenerator Sequence models in symmetrical component coordinates are used to derive the phase model of cogenerator shown in Figure 2. The sequence models shown in Figure 3 are widely used in power system analysis.

Zero Sequence

Positive Sequence

Negative Sequence

abc Z G 4

3;
,

Distribution System

,
I

,'

Figure 3 Sequence Models of Cogenerator Where 20 : Zero-sequence impedance Z : Impedance between neutral and ground , Z1 : Positive-sequenceimpedance (Subtransient reactance Z, : Negative-sequence impedance El : Generated voltage

&'I)

The subtransient reactance is used not only in short circuit studies but also in power flow studies. Rotor effects should be considered even in the steady state condition of power flow analysis because of phase imbalance. Figure 4 is the Norton equivalent circuit of Figure 3, where a current source 11 is used instead of the voltage source El.

Based on the assumptions discussed above, we have = Pr = pa + pb + pc = Constant ~ o t areal power l TO^ reactive power = Qr = qa + qb + qc = Constant The internal voltage is a balanced three-phase voltage in both magnitude and angle, assuming a balanced design of the generator windings. In the GDAS program, a Norton equivalent circuit of Figure 1 is used to represent the cogenerator model shown in Figure 2. The current vector in Figure 2 should be balanced and

Zero Sequence

Posit ive Sequence

Negative Sequence

ebc

Figure 4 Norton Equivalent Circuit for Cogenerator Where yo = 1 1

zo + 32,

Y1

=z;

y $

= (z$c)-l.

TI&

= y;JC Efbc
. -

(1)
The phase model can be obtained by transforming equation (1) to phase coordinates using the transformation matrix Ts. Ts[ ?]=Ts[ !]-Ts[i;y;]TITs[;] Where

(2)

1673

1 1 1

Thus the phase model is given by equation (4), resulting in the physical representa$on,shown in Figure (2).

(4)
where

Figure 5 shows the procedure for calculating I,, Ib and IC, the cogenerator injected source currents, for each iteration in the power flow study. For a more detailed discussion of the distribution power flow study, see references [ 111. From the above discussion, a cogenerator is represented by t r e he injected currents. This representation is suitable for the ZB"~ or factorized Y B methods, however, for Newton-Raphson, Gauss~ Seidel method or other solution methods, the representation may require modifcation. The basic algorithm is unchanged, however. Estimated values obtainedfrom Specified k-th iteration value

Y$=TsYg12?;1 = T s

(5)

The current source is balanced, thereby, by constraining the specified 4. and Qr in power flow studies. Multiplying equation ( ) both-side by Vak*t 4 on

$vc,

PT+jQr

Then the constraint is represented by (Pa + ~b + PC) + qb + qc) =1 1 1 + + av;) Y G~~ " h

v-3

v&*~

(7)

and

I; I;

Pr - j Qr = @a + pb + PC) -j(qa + qb + qc) (8) Thus, specifying total PT and total Qr is sufficient to guarantee a balanced current source. The cogenerator model shown in Figure 2 can be applied to both power flow and short circuit analysis. In the power flow study, the injection current 11 will be updated using equation (4) based on the updated voltage at each iteration. In the short circuit study, the 11 is constant, and is calculated using the converged power flow voltages at the bus where the cogenerator is connected to the system. In power flow studies the admittance matrix Gbctotal real power PT , and total reactive power Qr are held constant. In short circuit
studies the admittance matrix ydcbc and the internal balanced current source 11 are held constant. Although some variables are held constant during the iterative process, the voltages that are dependent on the system condition wl change at each iteration. Therefore, in i l both power flow and short circuit studies, the injected currents will change due to the voltage change at the buses where the cogenerator is connected.

Estimated values tobeusedfor (k+l)-th iteration

Figure 5 Procedure to Calculate Ia, Ib and for Power flow Study

rator Model for Short-circuit &&

The cogenerator model for short-circuit study is the same as that of the power flow study except for the calculation of the internal current source 1. In the short-circuit study, the initial value of the 1 internal current source 11,obtained from the power flow calculation, is maintained constant since the internal voltage E1 of the cogenerator is assumed constant at the instant of the fault. The constant 1 is 1 calculated using the converged power flow voltages at the bus where the cogenerator is connected to the system. The calculation procedure of the cogenerator model for short-circuit study is shown in Figure 6.

. .

Estimated values obtained from k-th iteration

Figure 2 shows the cogenerator model for power flow analysis,

{ 11 is obtained
-4

.--- - - - - -

v", $J

from converged; load flow result I andmaintained

where

Ib

tobeusedfor (k+l)-thiteration

Figure 6 Procedure to Calculate I,, I b and for Fault Study

(9)

F
The impact of the numerous transformers in a distribution system is significant. Transformers affect system loss, zero sequence current, grounding method, and protection strategy. Although the transformer is one of the most important components

1674

of modem electric power systems, highly developed transformer models are not employed in system studies. It is the intention of this paper to introduce a transformer model and its implementation method so that large-scale unbalanced distribution system problems such as power flow, short circuit, system loss, and contingency studies, can be solved. Recognizing the fact that the system is unbalanced, the conventional transformer.models, based on a balanced three phase assumption, can no longer be considered suitable. This is done with justifiable reason. For example in the widely used, delta-grounded wye connection of distribution step-down transformers, the positive and negative sequence voltages are shifted in opposite directions, this phase shift must be included in the model to properly simulate the effects of the system imbalance. Recent interest in unbalanced system phenomena has also produced a transformer model adaptable to the unbalanced problem which is well outlined in [12]. Further information about this model may also be found in [2,13,14]. The model developed thus far can be applied directly to distribution power flow and short-circuit analyses. However, it is still not accurate for system loss analysis because the transformer core loss contribution to total system loss is significant[l5,16]. To calculate total system loss, the core loss of the transformer must be included in the model. The complete transformer model combines the unbalanced and loss models from [12] and [15] in order to integrate system loss analysis in power flow or short-circuit studies. It is important to note that the unbalanced transformer model derived by Dillon in reference [12] cannot be applied directly to ~ ~ method because of either the factorized Y B or direct inverse YB,,~ numerical considerations. For some connections such as grounded wye-delta, delta- grounded wye, these models make the system YB,,~ singular. Therefore, the application of the factorized or direct inverse methods becomes impossible. To solve this problem, this paper introduces an implementation method in which artificial injection currents are used to make the system Y B nonsingular. A ~ ~ twelve-bus sample system is used to demonstrate the models and the effects of various transformer connections on a distribution system.

as functions of the terminal voltage of the transformer. Transformer core loss functions represented in per unit at the system power base are[15,16]: P (P.U.) = KVA Rating ( A [VI + B eclvl') (12) System Base

KVA Rating ( D I V 2 + E e FIVI2 ) I (13) (p'u.) = System Base Where, typically, A=0.00267 B = 0 . 7 3 4 ~ 1 0 - ~ C=13.5 D=0.00167 E=0.268x 10-1 F=22.7 is the voltage magnitude in per unit. It must be noted that the coefficients; A, B, C, D, E, and F; are machine dependent constants. For the current research project, core losses are represented by the functions and typical constants shown above.

Admittance MatriK
The admittance matrix part of the proposed three-phase transformer models follows the methodology derived by Dillon[l2], but a novel implementation is introduced herein. For simplification, a single three-phase transformer is approximated by three identical single-phasetransformers connected appropriately. This assumption is not essential, however, it simplifies the ensuing derivation and explanation. Based upon this assumption, the characteristic submatrices used in forming the threephase transformer admittance matrices can be developed. The matrices for the nine common connections of three-phase transformers are given in Table 1. Table 1 Characteristic Submatricesused in Forming the Transformerconnection W e-G W e-G Wye-G Wye
Wve

elf Admittance Mutual Admittance

Derivation of Transformer ModeIS

As used in Reference [15], a three-phase transformer is represented by two blocks shown in Figure 7. One block represents the per unit leakage admittance matrix Y+bc, and the other block models the core loss as a function of voltage on the secondary side of the transformer. Admittance
Primarv
Matnx

W e-G W e Delta Wye-G

Wve

yn
YI

yn Yn yn
Yn

-Yn ym -Yn
-Yn

-Yn

ym '
-YE

yn
YT T

-Yn

Wye Delta

Delta Wye-G

yn yn

Yn YI

ym

ym '
YDI

Secondary

Delta Wye Delta Delta Where . ~ ~ . ~ yt 0 0

I
I

yn Yn

Yn Yn
2Yt

I
I
-Yt

yfn -Yn
-Yt

ym
-Yn

a b c

Q
&
Core LQSS

c b a

(14) and Y t is the per-unit leakage admittance. If the transformer has an off-nominal tap ratio a:p between the primary and secondary windings, where CL and 0 are tappings on the primary and secondary sides, respectively, then the submatrices are modified as follows: a) Divide the self admittance matrix of the primary by a2 b) Divide the self admittance matrix of the secondary by

Figure 7 Overall Proposed Transformer Model The presence of the admittance matrix block is the major distinction between the proposed model and the model used in [15,16]. In the proposed model, Dillon's model is integrated with the admittance matrix part. As a result, the copper loss, core loss, system imbalance, and phase shift characteristics are taken into account. The implementation method is introduced in the following sections.

p2

The core loss of a transformer is approximated by shunt core loss functions on each phase of the secondary terminal of the transformer. These core loss approximation functions are based on the results of EPRI load modeling research [3] which state that real and reactive power losses in the transformer core can be expressed

c) Divide the mutual admittance matrices by ap The electrical models (equivalent circuits) and programming models (the modified equivalent circuit models for power flow and fault analysis) of the two most common connections, grounded wye-grounded wye and grounded wye-delta, are presented in this paper. The programming models of other connections can be derived through a similar procedure. The derivation of the

1675

characteristic submatrices of a three-phase transformer can be found in more detail in [ 121.

equivalent circuit disappear.

For the off-nominal tap ratio

1. Grounded Wye-Grounded Wye Transformer A network connection diagram for three-phase grounded wyegrounded wye transformer is shown in Figure 8.

transformer, either a or P or both a and are not equal to unity, therefore, the shunt elements reflect the effects of the off-nominal tap ratio. The programming model of a three-phase grounded wyegrounded wye transformer used in the GDAS program is shown in Figure 10.
Primary
Y3

Secondary

Figure 8 Network Connection Diagram for Three-phase Grounded Wye-Grounded Wye Transformer From Table 1, the admittance matrix for the three-phase
CO

" 1

o c

Yt

0 0 -Yt 0

Figure 10 Programming Model for Three-phase Grounded Wye-Grounded Wye Transformer Where

y3=Yt

aP
0 -Yt 0 0 Yt 0 0 0 -Yt 0 0 Yt
If the tappings a and P are not equal to 1 i.e. an off-nominal tap ratio, then the admittance matrix must be modified using Equation 16: the general form of admittance matrix for nominal and offnominal grounded wye-grounded wye transformer. The equivalent circuit of equation 16 is shown in Figure 9.

1;-

Yt

a-P (-)%

aP

aI:=-y'(-)v: P aP P

or in vector forms

The artificial current sources reflect the effect of the off-nominal tap ratio. If a is equal to P then
-ak = - a h = 0 Ip Is

and there is no injected current on either end of the transformer. Figure 10 is redrawn as Figure 11.

63
a b
C

Primary

Secondary

0
a

b
C

Figure 9 Equivalent Circuit for Three-phase Grounded Wye-Grounded Wye Transformer Where

Figure 11 Another Representation of Programming Model for Three-phase Grounded Wye-Grounded Wye Transformer Where

For a nominal tap grounded wye-grounded wye transformer, both a and

P are equal

to unity so the shunt elements in the

1676

2. Grounded Wye-Delta Transformer The network connection diagram for the three-phase grounded wye-delta transformer is shown in Figure 12.
Secondary -a

o b Figure 12 Network Connection Diagram for Three-phase Grounded Wye-Delta Transformer The admittance matrix for the three-phase grounded wye-delta transformer is

'S

In Figure 13, the equivalent circuit of grounded wye-delta transformer, there are three elements (Yl) connected to ground. These three elements must be represented by current injections because the Z B method (i.e. factorized Y B method) is used to ~ ~ ~ ~ solve the system equations for both power flow and short circuit studies. After replacing these three admittances by current injections, the system admittance matrix ( Y B ~becomes singular, if ) the grounded wye side is the end bus or swing bus. To avoid this difficulty three additional admittances (-Y3) are replaced by current injections. In the GDAS program, a two-step superposition method is used to implement the ZB,,~ method. In the fiist step, there are no loads applied to the system and hence no current flows, therefore, the three Y2 elements in the delta side are represented by current injections. As a result, only the equivalent lines between the primary and secondary sides in the same phase are used to form the system admittance or impedance matrices (YB"~ Z B ~ ~All other or ). equivalent admittances are represented by their equivalent injected currents. The programming model of a three-phase grounded wyedelta transformer used in the GDAS program is shown in Figure 14.

rYt

fls
~ t

O 1

19

8
Figure 14 Programming Model for Three-phase Grounded Wye-Delta Transformer

For an off-nominal mounded wve-delta transformer. the admitta

where y , = L I1 =yrva

flap

12=y'V"p

4=L(V:-*)
I6 =

g P 3s2
3B2

a2

I,=ytVp a2 1s = JL ( v - VS) : 3B2

JL ( v: - v:)

y = p
24)

Another representation of programming mddel for three-phase grounded wye-delta transformer is the same as Figure 11. But y3=Yt

The equivalent circuit of equation 24 is shown in Figure 13.

primary A

Secondary

I
Figure 13 Equivalent Circuit for Three-phase Grounded Wye-Delta Transformer

where

1677

C " O
Rigid cogenerator and transformer models were introduced in this paper. Based upon these detailed models, a program, entitled "Generalized Distribution Analysis System (GDAS)," was successfully developed and tested. The effect of a 400 KVA cogenerator on a 12-bus sample distribution system[7,11] and a large, 5 MW + j 2 MVAR cogenerator on a large, 5000 individual phase bus, distribution system was studied. The results show that the cogenerator has a significant impact on the system. For example, the direction of the power flow of many branches, especially those near the cogenerator, are changed. This change will affect the protection and coordination strategy. Furthermore, the voltage profile, system loss, and power factor are totally different. Hence, to analyze the distribution system in detail, the three-phase cogenerator model, as well as the three-phase system representation, are important. In the future, perhaps very large cogenerators will be used in distribution systems. The cogenerators may be can maintain the terminal voltage constant. In those cases, a big cogenerator bus can be represented as specified P-V buses. However, for small capacity cogenerators the models presented here can still be applied. The transformer model has also been successfully tested, from which an important conclusion can be drawn: the effects of the transformer connections on the distribution system are significant except for the balanced power flow study. This means that for the transmission system, if the system is or very nearly balanced, the transformers can be modeled as a simple Grounded Wye-Grounded Wye connection. Otherwise, for the unbalanced transmission and most distribution systems, the transformers must be modeled in greater detail. Core loss, system imbalance, and phase shift problems should be taken into account to improve the reliability of the results.

Sons, 1983.
[ 151 D. I. Sun, "Distribution System Loss Analysis and Optimal

Planning," Ph. D. Dissertation, The University of Texas at Arlington, May 1980. [16] D. I. Sun, S. Abe, R. R. Shoults, M. S. Chen, P. Eichenberger, and D. Fanis, "Calculation of Energy Losses in a Distribution System"' IEEE Transactions on Power Apparatus and Systems, Vol. PAS-99, No.4, July/Aug 1980.

'Jsai-Hsia was born in Taiwan, R.O.C. on March 15, 1953. H e e d his B.S. and M.S. degrees in electrical engineering from the National Taiwan Institute of Technology, Taipei, Taiwan, R.O.C. in 1980 and 1982 respectively. Since 1982, he has joined the National Taiwan Institute of Technology as a lecturer. With the support of the Ministry of Education of R.O.C., he worked for his Ph.D. at the Energy Systems Research Center at the University of Texas at Arlington and received the Ph.D. degree in May, 1990. He is currently Associate Professor of Electrical Engineering at the National Taiwan Institute of Technology. He is a member of Tau Beta Pi, Phi Beta Delta, and IEEE. Mo-Shine Chen received the B.S. degree in electrical engineering from the National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan in 1954 and the M.S. and Ph.D. degrees from the University of Texas at Austin in 1958 and 1962, respectively. He is currently Professor of Electrical Engineering and Director of the Energy Systems Research Center at the University of Texas at Arlington, Arlington, Texas. He has served as a consultant to numerous companies and government agencies. Dr. Chen is a member of Eta Kappa Nu, Tau Beta Pi, Sigma Xi, IEEE, ASEE, Texas Society of Professional Engineers and the New York Academy of Science. In 1976 he was the first recipient of the Edison Electric Institute's Power Engineering Educator Award. He is a Registered Professional Engineer in the state of Texas. Dr. Chen is an IEEE Fellow and has published more than 60 papers in the Referee Journal.

REFERENCES
[ l ] N. Vemptati, R.R. Shoults, M.S. Chen and L. Schwobel, "Simplified Feeder Modeling for Load Flow Calculations," IEEE Trans. on Power Sysrems,Vol. PWRS-2, No.1, pp. 168-174, February 1987. [2] M. S. Chen and W. E. Dillon, "Power System Modeling," Proc. IEEE, Vo1.62, No.7, PP.901-915, July 1974. [3] Energy Systems Research Center, The University of Texas at Arlington, "Determining Load Characteristics for Transient Performance," Final Report of EPRI Project RP 849-3. Vol. I. I . HI. December 1978. I [4] S. D.'Hu, Cogeneration, Reston, Virginia : Reston Publishing, 1985. [5] G. Polimeros, Enerev Copeneration Handbook, New York : Industrial Press, 1981. [6] S. A. Spiewak, Coyeneration and Small Power Production Manual, Lilburn, Georgia : The Fairmont Press, 1987. [7] Energy Systems Research Center, The University of Texas at Arlington,"Generalized Distribution Analysis System, Phase I : Feasibility Study," Final Report of Con Edison R&D Project 92087, June 1989. [8] Energy Systems Research Center, The University of Texas at Arlington,"GDAS User's manual," Arlington, Texas, 1990. [9] M. S. Sarma, Svnchronous Machines, New York : Gordon and Breach Science Publishers, 1979. [lo] D. B. Brown and E. P. Hamilton 111, Electromechanicd Energv Conversion, New York : Macmillan Publishing, 1984. [ 111 T. H. Chen, M. S . Chen, et al. "Distribution System Power Flow Analysis - A Rigid Approach," Submitted to IEEE Winter Power Meeting(1990). 1121 W. E. Dillon, "Modeling and Analysis of an Electrically Propelled Transportation System," Ph. D. Dissertation, The University of Texas at Arlington, May 1972. [13] W. E. Dillon and M. S . Chen, "Transformer Modeling in Unbalanced Three-phase Networks," IEEE Summer Power Meeting, Vancouver, Canada, July 1972. [14] J. Amllaga and C. P. Arnold, Computer Modelling of Electrical Power Systems, New Zealand: John Wiley and
I , I

Toshio Inoue was born in Tokyo, Japan on February 15, 1958.

He received his M.S. degree in Electrical Engineering from Waseda University in 1982. In 1982, he joined Central Research Institute of Electric Power Industry (CREPI) as a Engineer. Between August, 1988 and July 1989, he worked in Energy Systems Research Center at the University of Texas at Arlington as a Visiting Assistant Professor. Mr. Inoue is a Senior Research Engineer in Power System Department at CRIEPI and a member of IEEE.

Paul .Kota is a Computer Applications Engineer in the Computer Applications Engineering Department at Con Edison. He joined Con Edison in 1983. Mr. Kotas received a BS in Engineering Science from S.U.N.Y. at Buffalo in 1982 and an MS in Mathematics from the Courant Institute of Mathematical Sciences at New York University in 1987. Mr. Kotas is a member of the Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics (SIAM).

A. Chebli was born in Beirut Lebanon on April 17, 1936. He received his BEE(Major Electrical) degree from the American University of Beirut, School of Engineering in June 1960. In 1977, he completed the Power Systems Engineering Course given by the General Electric Co. Between 1961 and 1966, he was employed by the Electricite du Liban. In 1966, he joined Ohio Power in Canton Ohio as a Distribution Engineer and was promoted to Senior Engineer prior to his transfer to AEP in New York in 1973. At the time he resigned from AEP in July 1980, he was Assistant Section Head Distribution. From July 1980 to February 1984, he worked for the consulting f i i C. T. Main International and its subsidiaries. In February 1984, he joined Con Ed as a Principal Engineer and in October 1986 he was transferred to become Distribution Design Engineer. Mr. Chebli is a member of IEEE and is a registered professional engineer in the state of Ohio.

1678

DISCUSSION

W.H. KERSTING, New Mexico State University, Las Cruces, NM 88003. This paper is a very interesting paper to engineers involved with distribution system operations and analysis. The authors model the three-phase cogenerator as a negative constant P,Q load. That is not a new idea and is used by many three-phase power-flow programs. My major concern with the paper concerns the models of the transformers. I am disappointed that the authors do not show in any of the figures the currents that will be used in the current vectors for the various matrix equations. For the wye connected transformers I assume they are directed into the wye. For a delta connected transformer, are the currents the line currents or the actual transformer currents (delta currents)? For the grounded wye - grounded wye bank I was able to use Equation 15 and assuming primary and secondary voltages and transformer impedances, I was able to compute the primary and secondary line currents correctly. When I tried to apply Equation 23 again with assumed primary and secondary voltages, I was not successful in computing realistic primary and secondary currents. In applying Equation 23 it is not clear if the secondary voltages should be the line-to-line or line-to-neutral voltges. It is also not clear what base voltage to use for the line-to-line voltages It is impossible to shown in Figure 12. It follow the equations under Figure 14. appears that the authors have somehow come up with line-to-neutral voltages on the delta If I am given the line-to-line secondary. secondary voltages, how do I get the necessary line-to-neutral voltages to use in the equations listed under Figure 14? It would be of great help if the authors would include in their discussion an example on how to apply the method for a wye-delta transformer bank. Specify the voltages and currents on the primary wye connected side and demonstrate how the method can be used to determine the secondary voltages and currents. If that cant be done, at least assume primary and secondary voltages and compute the primary and secondary currents using Equation 23. I have to believe that the method and equations are correct, it is unfortunate that it is not possible to read the paper and learn how to apply the method to even a simple problem.
Manuscript received February 19, 1991.

1679
Closure T. H. Chen, M. S. Chen, T. Inoue, P. Kotas and E. A. Chebli The authors would like to thank the discussor for his interest in the paper. The questions raised by the discussor will be answered in turn.
(1) Question about the cogenerator model: W e would like to emphasize that the three-phase cogenerator modeled as a constant p,q device based upon the investigation results that were done by Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc. is only one of many important features of the cogenerator model presented in this paper. The more important one is that it will represent the inherent generator phase imbalance due to distribution system imbalance. The paper also introduced a cogenerator model for short circuit study as well as for the load flow study. The cogenerator model presented here is much more than only a negative constant p,q load. To our knowledge, cogenerator represented as shown in Figure 2 is a new idea. This is the first time cogenerator modeled for unbalanced distribution load flow study. (2) Questions about the transformer model: In this paper, the tedious derivation of the transformer models was omitted, only the results and its implementation method were shown. For explanation, a simplified derivation of the admittance matrix of a grounded wye-delta transformer is shown below: First, consider the arcuit in Figure D1. Z1 Zm 0 0 0 ZmZ2 0 0 0 0 0 z1zmI O 0 0 Zm 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 Z1 0 0 0 0 Zm The inverse relationship is
~

zz-z, 0 -zmzl 0
0 0 0

o o o o z ~
0
0

0 0 0 0 0 Z2-Zm 0 0 -zmzl 0

Now the branch voltages are related to the node voltages by the node connection matrix, N,

x 7x
~

1 0 0 0 0 0

00001-1

a'

0 0 1 0 0 0 000-101 vc Where the voltages denoted by letter subscripts are the node voltages with reference to ground in Figure D1. The node admittance matrix for these six nodes is defined as Ynode= Nt YprimN If the matrix multiplication indicated by the above equation is carried out, the node admittance matrix becomes: a b c A B C

:I[]

0 -Zm

Rl
a

R2

z,-zm-z1-z12z~J~

Now, the node admittance matrix for the transformer can be written in terms of the primary side short circuit admittance, yt , defined as:
Yt*I

z2

z lZ 2 - z;
Yt

/ / / / / / / / / / / / / /

Figure D1 Coupled Circuit Model of a Grounded Wye-Delta Transformer In the figure the six branches are oriented and numbered by the labeled branch currents. For simplification, branch self impedances are defined as: Z l = Rl +joLl Z 2 = R 2 + joL2

O
Yt

O
0 Ynode = nl
- E Y t

0
0
- E Y t

z3=zs=z, z,= z6=z2

nl
E Y t

nl

The mutual impedances between branches is now defined as:

z12=z34=z56=j o M

Et Y

nl

and Z, I j o M The primitive impedance matrix relationship between branch voltages and currents is :

If the above admittances are already in the per unit system, then the effective turns ratio, n)(2, must be :

1 = 1 L n2 6

Then equation becomes:

1680
bus "p", are assumed to be 1.0 P.u., three-phase balanced., the magnitudes and angles of voltages of bus no. "s" each iteration, and the convergence results are shown in Table D1. If the connection of the transformer is changed to delta-grounded wye, and the load is unbalanced, 50% load on phase A, 30% load on phase B,and 20% load on phase C, the results are shown in Table D2.

Ynode =

This is equation 23. In the equation 23, the Y F was used Furthermore, for the off-nominal tap ratio to replace ynode. transformer, the equation 23 should be modified to equations 24. Based on the results, the equivalent circuit for grounded wye-delta transformer was drawn in Figure 13. From Figure 13 to Figure 14 is very straightforward. The equations under Figure 14 can be obtained by using simple circuit theory, and can be proved by inspection. It is clear that the voltages used in these equations are the bus(node) voltages, and the currents are the bus currents. The relationship of the bus currents and voltages are shown below:

Three-phase Transformer 13.8kV-208V lOOOkVA Z=6% x/R=5 Figure D2 Two-bus Sample System

(same as

where

V;bc= IVa V; V, are the three-phase primary voltages;

V:bc=

vp

vz!

31

f
Figure D3 Equivalent Circuit of Two-bus Sample System

are the voltages;

three-phase

secondary

['a
] I . : '
[I:

1I
I

are the three-phase primary currents; I f are the three-phase secondary currents;

Transformer Model

-1
I I

and is a 6x6 matrix. The of grounded wye-grounded wye transformer is shown in Equation 15 and 16 and grounded wye-delta transformer in Equation 23 and 24. This per unit leakage admittance matrix Y is one of the two blocks shown , in Figure 7. Because the bus frame of reference was adopted for the models and the solution techniques, a set of updated bus voltages will be obtained each iteration, so it is no problem to apply the equations under the Figure 14. Furthermore, because the injected currents shown in Figure 14 depend on the bus voltages, if the voltages change, the currents should be modified. It means that for each iteration, the injected current should be updated based on the updated bus voltages or the result will be incorrect. A two-bus system is given in Figure D2 as an example. The system can be represented by its equivalent circuit shown in Figure D3 and modeled as Figure D4. After simplification, Figure D4 can be represented by Figure D5. The injected currents shown in Figure D5 are the combination of the contributions of load, and the core loss and some of the admittance part of the transformer. All of the injected currents are functions of the bus voltages. Therefore the injected currents should be updated each iteration until the convergence results are obtained. For simplification, the transformer in the sample system is assumed to be nominal, therefore, the a,and are equal to 1.0. Based upon that, the voltages of the swing bus,
abc

I$']

Swing Bus b
C

Load (represented ' by injected

cuneats)

Figure D4 Three-phase Model of Two-bus Sample System

- - - - -I
currents)

SwingBus

b
C

Figure D5 Alternative Model of Two-bus Sample System

1681
kind of research. It is expected that the transformer with midtap can be modeled in the near future. hase A hase B hase C

Manuscript r e c e i v e d June 23, 1991.

0 1 2 3

1.00000 0.99668 0.97590 0.97685 4 0.97688 5 0.97680

00 .0 -32.84 -31.05 -31.18 -31.18 -31.18

1.00000 0.9%71 0.97591 0.97684 0.97685 0.97680

Comments: 1 A l voltage magni tludes are in p.u. and angles .l in degree. 2.Iteration No. "0" neans initial guess. I
I

Voltage of Bus "S"

Iter.

phase A

phase B

phase C

No.

Ivl
1.00000

e
00 .0

IVl 0 \VI e 1.00000 -120.00 1.00000 120.00

Comments: 1.All voltage magnitudes are in p.u. and angles in degree. 2.Iteration No. "0"means initial guess. Any device models should be discussed with their solution technologies. This paper presented a near actual transformer model for distribution system analysis. From some case studies, we found that by using this model, the distribution system can be simulated in more detail, and some characteristics that can not be simulated by the conventional method can also be obtained. Unfortunately, only the optimally ordered triangular factorization method was used as a solution method, and not enough cases were studied, therefore, some application statuses are still unclear, for example, the convergence problem. In our research experience, the convergence characteristic will be affected by many factors, such as the system configuration, the acceleration factor, the connection of the transformer, the degree of the system unbalance, the location and size of cogeneration, the system grounding type, etc. In some cases, the acceleration factor should be reduced or the convergence results will be hard to obtain. To model a transformer, the model presented in this paper is not the only one and may not the best one , but it is significant that the paper introduced a way to model it in detail that was not done before. The convergence problem in the distribution system, especially when the system is modeled in detail, will be more complex than that of a transmission system. We are trying to make it clear and finding a better way to model the system devices, especially the transformer, and the solution technologies. Finally, we would like to mention that the transformer models presented in this paper cannot be applied to the transformer with mid-tap right now, and we are continuing this