A Simple Design Method For Island Microgrid in Rural Area
A Simple Design Method For Island Microgrid in Rural Area
http://doi.org/10.22214/ijraset.2020.7044
International Journal for Research in Applied Science & Engineering Technology (IJRASET)
ISSN: 2321-9653; IC Value: 45.98; SJ Impact Factor: 7.429
Volume 8 Issue VII July 2020- Available at www.ijraset.com
Abstract: In developing country there is a perpetual growing demand for electricity with an efficient and reliable system of power
supply. Power system is the most complex network with power generation, transmission and distribution system to consumer
loads. The distribution network is an integral part of the power system and acts as an interface to consumer load points. The
network incurs significant losses and voltage drop in the electrical system. Loss minimization and voltage stability are the main
objectives of the distribution network design. This paper introduces optimal branch conductor selection for the microgrid using
unified central load concept for radial distribution systems of microgrid. The conductor size defined by this approach will meet
the maximum current carrying capacity and uphold the acceptable voltage levels of the radial distribution system for rural areas.
The effectiveness of the proposed method in single line diagram is demonstrated through the design of microgrid as an example
for a developing country. The comparison shows that the results by proposed central load method is in close similar normal
representation of uniform consumer load and both are following similar trends. The voltage drops and total loss by proposed
method is compared and verified with three phase and single phase network system along with unified end load representation
by using ETAP simulation software.
Keywords: Microgrid design, Distribution network, Cable sizing, Load flow analysis, ETAP
Table 2.1 Comparison of central load and end load representation with normal load configuration for 3 phase 400 V
Length [m] 240 (20×12) 600 (50×12) 1200 (100×12) 2400 ( 200×12) 6000 (500×12) 12000 (1000×12)
Size V Loss Size V Loss Size V Loss Size V Loss Size V Loss Size V Loss
Power [VA] [mm²] [%] [W] [mm²] [%] [W] [mm²] [%] [W] [mm²] [%] [W] [mm²] [%] [W] [mm²] [%] [W]
Normal 6 99.75 1.4 6 99.38 2.9 6 98.74 5.8 6 97.46 12.4 6 93.46 32.7 16 95.06 24.6
600
Central 6 99.77 1.6 6 99.42 4.1 6 98.84 8.2 6 97.64 16.8 6 93.82 45.5 16 95.41 32.9
(50×12)
End 6 99.54 3.2 6 99.84 8.2 6 97.64 16.8 6 95.13 35.4 16 95.41 107.0 25 93.93 43.5
Normal 6 99.50 5.9 6 99.74 12.3 6 97.45 25.2 6 94.78 51.3 16 95.06 48.7 25 93.52 60.7
1200
Central 6 99.54 6.5 6 98.84 19.4 6 99.07 33.6 6 95.13 70.9 16 95.41 65.8 25 93.93 87.1
(100×12)
End 6 99.07 13.1 6 97.64 33.6 6 95.13 70.9 10 94.06 86.8 25 93.93 87.1 50 93.73 87.6
Normal 6 99.00 19.5 6 97.46 50.2 6 94.77 103.3 10 93.67 126.7 25 94.49 128.3 50 93.27 129.4
2400
Central 6 99.07 26.1 6 97.64 67.3 6 95.13 142.0 10 94.06 174.0 25 93.93 174.0 50 93.73 175.0
(200×12)
End 6 98.12 53.3 6 97.14 81.3 10 94.06 174.0 25 95.22 136.0 50 93.73 175.0 95 93.00 188.0
Normal 6 97.46 124.3 6 93.38 336.6 16 95.06 244.1 25 93.52 318.6 70 93.90 283.9 150 93.75 267.8
6000
Central 6 97.64 168.0 6 93.82 455.0 16 95.41 329.0 25 93.93 345.0 70 94.31 387.0 150 94.18 363.0
(500×12)
End 6 95.13 354.0 16 95.41 329.0 25 93.93 345.0 50 93.73 338.0 150 94.18 363.0 300 93.08 379.0
Normal 6 94.84 510.3 16 95.06 488.7 25 93.49 644.4 50 93.30 641.0 150 93.75 535.6 300 92.67 541.5
12000
Central 6 95.13 709.0 16 95.41 658.0 25 93.93 871.0 50 93.73 876.0 150 94.18 726.0 300 93.08 758.0
(1000×12)
End 16 94.06 868.0 25 93.93 871.0 50 93.73 876.0 95 93.00 941.0 300 93.08 758.0 - - -
D. Sizing of Conductor
The selection of conductor depends on the power carrying capacity, cost, growth of the load, and reliability & efficiency. While
unequal conductor lengths result in different voltages at each load, the proper selection of conductors can eliminate voltage
differences. For the safety and reliability Aerial Bunched Cables (ABC) is ideal for rural distribution but for the effective and proper
sizing for effective and economic sizing of the conductor following cable Ampacity, and voltage drop studies are essentials. This
section uses a three-phase, four-wire system to reduce transmission losses and simplify calculations, and assumes that the load is
balanced. The conductor size of the feeder is assumed to be the same in consideration of safety at the time of an accident.
1) Cable Ampacity: It is the maximum current that the conductor can carry without damaging its insulation. By considering load
wattage bellow the point W, voltage V, power factor and electrical efficiency , it is possible to calculate the current I
that passes through the cable in the ideal situation for three phase.
= × × ×
(1)
It is possible to select cable cross-section by obtaining its ampacity effectively, but this cross-section must be determined in real
circumstances taking into account physical and environmental factors. The cable capacity for passing current also depends on the
ambient condition and the method of laying the cable. Then the cable size that corresponds to this derated current is selected.
2) Verification of the Cable Size with The Permissible Voltage Drop: Percent voltage drop is defined by the following equations.
× × ×( + )
%= × 100% = × 100% (2)
Where, n= 2 for single phase system and n=3 for three phase system, ΔV is absolute value of voltage drop [V], VN is system rated
voltage [V], I is Line or cable current [A], L is line or cable length [km], RL is line or cable resistance at operating temperature
[ohm/km], XL is line or cable reactance [ohm/km] and cosφ is load power factor.
Since there are different methods for physical arrangement of cables but voltage drop method is found to be effective to get the
required acceptable cable cross section. A voltage drop occurs in the conductor while current flows through it. Generally, voltage
drop can be ignored for small lengths of conductors, but in the case of smaller diameter and long length conductors, significant
voltage drop occurs in the system.
The proposed method first select the cable size based on the section 2 and evaluates the losses, bus voltage and current throwing
through each branch sections by performing multiple load flow analysis in ETAP. Optimum conductor size after performing several
successive simulations PVC aluminum cable of diameter of 35 mm2 is selected by the analysis.
E. Load Flow Analysis
Load flow studies are used to ensure a consistency, efficiency and cost-effectiveness of electrical power distribution from generators
to consumers via microgird. The active and reactive power flows from the generator to the connecting loads over various
networking buses and branches in the system. For this study, three-phase and single-phase load flow analyses are done with ETAP
for the accurate analysis of the voltage profiles and energy loss with respect to the feeder loading, power factor, conductor size,
feeder length and distributed generator capacity is then performed with the Newton-Raphson (N-R) Methods [11]. For the simplicity
of simulation and limitation of space available, the loads of rural households are represented using a central lumped load method.
Table 4.1 Bus loading comparison for single phase and three phase system
T h re e P h a s e S in g le P h a s e
F e e d e r B u s A c t iv e R e a c t iv e A c t iv e R e a c t iv e
N o . ID P o w e r P o w e r P o w e r P o w e r
[k W ] [k v a r] [k W ] [k v a r]
1 3 2 .2 1 1 9 .0 2 3 8 .5 2 2 4 .1 1
2 3 0 .2 7 1 8 .1 6 3 4 .4 9 2 2 .8 9
3 2 6 .5 6 1 6 .1 4 2 9 .0 2 2 0 .3 0
4 2 4 .7 8 1 5 .3 0 2 5 .6 1 1 9 .4 2
1 5 4 .7 2 2 .9 0 4 .9 0 2 .9 3
6 4 .2 8 2 .6 4 4 .4 1 2 .6 6
7 2 .9 5 1 .8 2 2 .9 9 1 .8 2
8 2 .1 7 1 .3 4 2 .1 9 1 .3 5
9 1 .1 9 0 .7 4 1 .1 9 0 .7 3
1 0 6 .0 1 3 .7 2 6 .0 2 3 .7 2
2
1 1 0 .5 8 0 .3 6 0 .5 8 0 .3 6
1 2 1 6 .2 0 9 .7 7 1 8 .4 2 1 4 .0 2
3 1 3 1 4 .1 9 8 .9 2 1 4 .2 2 1 3 .1 8
1 4 0 .7 7 0 .5 8 0 .7 9 0 .4 9
1 5 2 8 .6 8 1 7 .1 4 3 2 .0 7 2 1 .4 5
1 6 2 6 .8 0 1 6 .2 5 2 8 .7 5 2 0 .3 1
1 7 1 8 .4 6 1 1 .2 8 1 9 .3 1 1 5 .1 5
1 8 1 6 .9 8 1 0 .5 0 1 7 .3 0 1 4 .2 7
4 1 9 6 .9 1 4 .2 8 6 .9 6 4 .2 8
2 0 2 .2 4 1 .3 9 2 .4 4 1 .3 9
2 1 1 .4 5 0 .9 0 1 .4 5 0 .9 0
2 2 1 .0 5 0 .6 5 1 .0 6 0 .6 5
2 3 0 .6 6 0 .4 1 0 .6 6 0 .4 1
The voltage profile comparisons for feeder 1 to feeder 4 are shown in from figure 4.2 to figure 4.4 It can be observed form the
figures that three phase system has improved voltage profile as compared with the single phase system. Bus voltage is gradually
decrease with increasing the distance from the generator bus for three phase system while that of single phase system decrease
rapidly. The minimum voltage is 372.0 V (7.00 %V) for three phase and 171.2 V (25.57 %V) for single phase at bus 9 in feeder 1.
The total power losses for active power are 5.31 kW and 24.21 respectively.
The summary of results obtained are presented on table 4.2, which shows the power flow, real power loss, reactive power loss,
power factor and percentage loading on the lateral branches between two successive connecting buses for three phase system. The
three phase system has better performance validating all the network parameters, although the cable size is remained same for both
systems. However, in actual operation, care must be taken in connecting the loads so that the three phases are balanced. To confirm
the results, the voltage profile from the simulation results for the feeder 2 with unified central load concept at Bus10 and Bus11 is
found to be valid for while comparing with normal representation of each single loads on distribution system.
V. CONCLUSION
A simple method for designing microgrid distribution system is shown in this paper. The selection procedures of the electrical
equipments and distribution cables are presented. Then, load flow analysis was taken for checking the following factors like the
sizes of equipment, losses and voltage drops. The proposed method for the distribution system planning with unified central load
method representation is developed on the use of low voltage radial distribution system. This methodology will be applied to
quantify in a case for the load modeling, cable sizing and generator sizing with the voltage on any section of the distribution
network. An equivalent single phase system of balanced three phase system and that of three phases system are compared and three
phase system is indicated to be techno economically efficient regarding conductor size, voltage profile and losses. Here the source
generator is sized 120kVA and the distribution conductor size is 35 mm2 (Al) for the same diameter case. Finally, the load flow
analysis results from applicable ETAP simulations confirm that the components of microgrid distribution system considering three
phase system are correctly sized to fully satisfy design requirements related with voltage profile, optimum losses and power factor
compensation.
Since 25 Bus three phase system is considered for the microgrid distribution as base case, voltage or current imbalance is a major
power quality issue to be solved. A single generator source is used in this study and there are possibilities of extension or addition of
various distributed generators (DGs) with certain percentage of load growth every year. Island microgrid networks of remote areas
or could be tied to the national grid when large amount of energy is produced.
VI. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
This work has been partially supported by Science and Technology Research Partnership for Sustainable Development (SATREPS)
in collaboration between Japan Science and Technology Agency (JST, JPMJSA1804) and Japan International Cooperation Agency
(JICA).
REFERENCES
[1] Marcus Wiemann, Simon Rolland, Guido Glania, “Hybrid Mini-grids for Rural Electrification”, Alliance for Rural Electrification, pp.6-13, 2011.
[2] Kees Mokveld & Steven von Eije (RVO.nl), “Final Energy report Tanzania”, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Netherland, pp.3-5, 2018.
[3] C. Li, S. Chaudhary, M. Savaghebi, J. Vasquez, and J. Guerrero, “Power flow analysis for low-voltage AC and DC microgrids considering droop control and
virtual impedance”, IEEE Tran. Smart Grid, 8 (6), pp. 2754-2764, 2017.
[4] Dzafic, M. Glavic and S. Tesnjak, “A component-based power system model-driven architecture,” IEEE Trans. Power Syst., 19 (4), pp. 2109-2110, 2004.
[5] A. Capasso, W. Grattieri, R. Lamedica, and A. Prudenzi, “A bottom-up approach to residential load modelling,” IEEE Trans. Power Syst., 9 (2), pp. 957-964,
1994.
[6] L. M. Hajagos and B. Danai, “Laboratory measurements and models of modern loads and their effect on voltage stability studies”, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., 13
(2), pp. 584-592, 1998.
[7] H. L. Willis, Power Distribution Planning Reference Book 2nd Edition, CRC Press, 2004.
[8] E. Hossain, E. Kabalci, R. Bayindir, and R. Perez, “A comprehensive study on distributed network technology”, Int. J. Renew. Energy Res., 4 (4), pp. 1094–
1107, 2014.
[9] Rakesh Ranjan, B. Venkatesh, and R. D. Das, “A new algorithm for power distribution system planning”, Electrical Power Syst. Res., 62 (1), pp. 55-65, 2002.
[10] Henrik Blennow, “Method for Rural Load Estimations- a case study in Tanzania”, Lund, pp. 85-101, 2004.
[11] A. Ben-Israel, “A Newton-Raphson Method for the Solution of Systems of Equation”, J. Math. Anal. Appl., 2 (15), pp. 243-252, 1996.