Cable #
Ampacity, A
Temperature,
1b
651
86.9
1a
620
89.4
2a
620
88.7
1c
682
87.9
2b
651
87.2
2c
682
86.7
Figure 5.8. The best configuration for three unbalanced cables per phase of a particular
example.
For three unbalanced cables per phase, where c is the highest loaded phase, the
best configuration based on ampacity is shown in Fig. 5.8, and the detailed results are
shown in Table 5.4.
68
Table 5.4. Detailed results for three unbalanced cables per phase.
Cable #
Ampacity, A
Temperature,
1c
594
82.8
2c
594
89.7
1a
540
86.6
3c
594
86.1
1b
567
88.3
2a
540
87.7
2b
567
86.9
3a
540
89.3
3b
567
87.4
5.3.3 Configuration Optimization for General Unbalanced Condition
If the highest loaded phase is changed from phase c to phase b and then to phase c,
a general pattern for the unbalanced condition is observed.
Figure 5.9. The best configuration for general two unbalanced cables per phase.
69
Figure 5.10. The best configuration for general three unbalanced cables per phase.
where H means highest loaded phase; L means lowest loaded phase; M means medium
loaded phase. The best configurations for balanced condition and unbalanced condition
based on ampacity are different according to Fig. 5(a), Fig. 6(a), Fig. 9 and Fig. 10. The
worst configuration is arranging all cables near each other.
70
CHAPTER SIX
IMPACTS OF SLGF ON CONFIGURATION OPTIMIZATION
6.1
Introduction
In Chapter 5, the best configuration for cables in a ductbank under both balanced and
unbalanced conditions was proposed using the optimization method in normal condition.
This sixth chapter discusses the impacts of optimization during abnormal condition. The
objective of this chapter is to determine the best configuration to reduce overheating when
fault occurs in the underground cable system.
Since the single line-to-ground fault (SLGF) is the most common type of fault
(more than 85 percent of faults in power system are SLGF), this study is limited to this
type of fault. The study includes different loading conditions and faulted phases. Based on
the results, the configuration that causes less overheating of cables is proposed.
6.2
Method of Simulation
A test system is simulated to analyze the impacts of SLGF on configuration
optimization results. In this chapter, the same system stated in Chapter 3 is used. The test
system is modified and simulated in POWERWORLD software, which is shown in Fig.
6.1. This system is simulated in PSCAD software as well. The single-line-to-ground fault
occurs on Bus 3, and the cable from Bus 2 to Bus 3 is monitored. The length of this cable
is 1.9 km. The detailed data of this cable is shown in Appendix E Table 6. The current
data of all phases of this cable is collected using the fault analysis toolbox in
POWERWORLD and Fault Element module in PSCAD. The output data is used to
analyze the overheating conditions of cables in a ductbank. Since the best configuration
71
based on ampacity for both balanced and unbalanced conditions is proposed in Chapter 5,
the overheating results of the best configuration during SLGF are compared with the
overheating effects of the common sense configuration during SLFG to decide if the
optimization configuration causes less overheating under abnormal condition.
Figure 6.1. SLGF analysis of one cable in POWERWORLD.
6.3
Results of Simulation
6.3.1 Balanced System
For a balanced scenario, different loading conditions are considered, including 50
percent load, 80 percent load and 100 percent load. The temperature results of
optimization configuration and common sense configuration are summarized and
compared in Table. 6.1 through Table 6.7.
72
Table 6.1. Impacts of SLGF with zero fault impedance (One cable per phase).
Condition
Do'stlaringiz bilan baham: |