Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
Shammya Saha
Graduate Research Assistant
Electrical Engineering
Ira A. Fulton School of Engineering
Arizona State University
shammya.saha@asu.edu
Nathan Johnson
Assistant Professor
The Polytechnic School
Ira A. Fulton School of Engineering
Arizona State University
nathanjohnson@asu.edu
This document is one of several guides designed to support skills development in distribution
network modeling. It can be used during standard university curricula, a short industry course,
self-guided lessons, peer learning, or other training opportunities. Files resulting from the guide
can also be modified at the discretion of the user to pursue advanced topics of analysis. The IEEE
Test Feeders are used as examples given their wide recognition and use. Resulting power flow
analysis and short circuit analysis are presented in separate documents for each test feeder.
Each guide is developed through a partnership between Arizona State University researchers and
XENDEE. These training guides have been successfully used to train people individually, in small
and large classrooms, during interactive micro-grid boot camps, and during short sessions for
industry integrators and operators.
The below figure shows the one-line diagram of the IEEE 13 Node Test Feeder built in XENDEE.
File Details
IEEE_13_LVRauto.xpf
IEEE_13_LVRtapsFixed.xpf
Cap data.xls
Transformer data.xls
Transformer Parameters
Line Configurations.xls
Line data.xls
Regulator Data.xls
Matrix to Sequence.xls
UG configuration.xls
Figure 1. Slack Bus with model (left) and power flow solution (right).
IEEE Test Feeder.pdf All details summarized for the IEEE Test Feeder.
Table 2. IEEE Conductor Models in XENDEE
IEEE Conductor Model
Corresponding code
word from XENDEE
Catalogue
IEEE 2
ACSR #2 6/1
IEEE 11
ACSR 1/0
IEEE 8
Figure 2. Transmission Line with model (left) and power flow solution (right).
% ratio for
Substation Transformer
Ignored in the IEEE results
XFM-1
1.00
8.00
% = +
8.062
(/)%
1.9
4.08
2.283
1.818
8.000
Substation transformer impedances are provided but they are not used by IEEE for power flow
analysis. IEEE reports results that assume voltage begins at the substation bus at the designated
voltage. To address this issue, a substation transformer in XENDEE has % of 0.001% and %
of 1.001%.
Figure 3. Transformer with model (left) and power flow solution (right).
Value
6
Rating
Impedance
/% ratio
Delay
Tapping
2MVA
0.001%
1.001
30s
Secondary
The LVR is modeled by a single phase transformer with a fixed tap setting. Similarly, a three phase
LVR is modeled by three single phase transformers each associated with an individual phase and
a fixed tap position.
IEEE_13_LVRtapsFixed.xls uses single phase transformers with fixed tapping instead of LVR.
The fixed tap values are present in IEEE 13 Node Test Feeder.doc in the power flow results
section. Each LVR fixed tap setting is calculated using the following equation:
% = 100 + 0.625
For example, if the transformer tap in the power flow solution is kept at position 12, the
corresponding percentage tap in XENDEE is: 100 + 0.625 12 = 107.5%
Figure 4. LVR with model (top) and power flow solution (bottom).
Figure 5. Spot loads with model (left) and power flow solution (right).
The power factor for the load is calculated in the Excel file. XENDEE requires the power factor
be given as a percentage of the load. See column heading Power Factor (%).
XENDEE / EPRI OpenDSS approach this scenario by inserting a middle node and modeling two
overhead wires of the same configuration but each having one-half the length of the original line.
Figure 6b shows this approach for the original line shown in Figure 6a.
In looking at an example from the actual IEEE 13 Node Test Feeder system, Figure 7 shows an
extra node created at the midpoint between nodes 632 and 671. That distributed load is connected
to that middle node.
Figure 7. Distributed loads with model (left) and power flow solution (right).
Figure 8. Shunt capacitors with model (left) and power flow solution (right).
10
Configuration 606
0.09231
0.07862
0.26718
0.08834
Configuration 607
0.084753
0.032349
0.084754
0.032349
The underground cable modeled in XENDEE are shown in Fig. 9 along with the power flow
results associated with it.
Figure 9. Underground Cable with model (left) and power flow solution (right).
11
Output Result
Total System input MW
Total System input MVAR
Total System kW Loss
Total System kVAR Loss
IEEE
3.577
1.724
111.063
324.653
XENDEE
3.579
1.725
108.577
322.407
Difference (%)
0.0559
0.0579
2.2384
0.6918
IEEE
A-N
0.9900
XENDEE
A-N
0.9898
IEEE
B-N
1.0529
XENDEE
B-N
1.0537
IEEE
C-N
0.9778
XENDEE
C-N
0.9793
IEEE
Angles
-5.3/-122.3/116.0
XENDE
Angles
-5.3/-122.4/116.1
0.9900
0.9881
0.9898
0.98846
1.0529
1.0537
0.9778
0.9758
0.9738
0.9793
0.9783
0.97635
-5.3/-122.3/116.0
-5.3/
/115.9
/115.8
-5.3/-122.4/116.1
-5.3/
/116.0
/115.9
The voltage profile at each node can be viewed within the annotation view in XENDEE. Moreover,
the professional report view in XENDEE can be used to check voltages at any node.
From
Node
To
Node
L632_645
632
645
L634
634
Load634
L611c
611
Load611c
L692_675
692
675
IEEE
Phase A
704.83
205.33
XENDEE
Phase A
707.402
205.353
IEEE
Phase B
XENDEE
Phase B
IEEE
Phase C
XENDEE
Phase C
143.02
142.929
65.21
65.4452
529.73
531.105
543.45
544.701
71.15
78.3514
124.07
123.886
69.59
69.5161
12
The annotation view in XENDEE can also be used to view current values through individual lines
for each phase.
5 ADDITIONAL NOTES
We hope you have benefited from this step-by-step guide to creating an IEEE Test Feeder in
XENDEE. The full XENDEE results report can be generated by importing and simulating the
models referenced in this guide. The partnership with XENDEE has allowed our education and
research programs at Arizona State University to grow rapidly through the easy-to-use and
versatile user interface. You can find out more about our research, computational lab, micro-grid
test bed, and capacity building programs at http://faculty.engineering.asu.edu/nathanjohnson/