Determining an Optimal Number of Spares for Hydro One 230-115 Kv Auto-transformers

© All Rights Reserved

Просмотров: 2

Determining an Optimal Number of Spares for Hydro One 230-115 Kv Auto-transformers

© All Rights Reserved

- BOQ 400 & 132 Kv Lattice Tower
- GSI 122 & 130
- lmu.pdf
- 0208 Power System
- World Electricity Transmission & Distribution Equipment
- Power Generation Operation y Control Allen Wood 379
- vaz
- Untitled
- Erc_feeder Test Data1
- UI Amendments Regulations 2010
- Pspr Lecture 01
- A NEW TREND IN IMPROVING EFFICIENCY OF TRANSMISSION LINES IN
- 2012 Project
- Electric Power
- sandy3
- 2 Thanapong Asset Mgmt TR Paper
- Guidance Notes for Generators for Submission of Grid Code Data
- Black Start Studies
- Draft-SIS Negros Ph Solar Inc. 50 MW Solar Project(1)(1)
- Anexo 2 PQSensor

Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 5

G. A. Hamoud, SMIEEE P. Zhao, SMIEEE

Hydro One Inc. Hydro One Inc.

Toronto, Ontario, Canada Toronto Ontario, Canada

gomaa.hamoud@HydroOne.com peter.zhao@HydroOne.com

Abstract – A reliability study has been performed recently at based on Markov models for determining the optimal number

Hydro One to evaluate the optimal numbers of spare of spare units for a given population of transformers used in

transformers required for 250 MVA and 125 MVA, 230/115 kv, transmission stations.

3 phase auto-transformers of the Hydro One’s transmission

system. In this study, a probabilistic method based on a Markov

A reliability study was performed in 2003 [10] to determine

model and a bulk power reliability program was developed in

determining the number of spare units for each group of auto- the numbers of spare auto-transformers required for 250

transformers. The purpose of this paper is to describe the MVA and 125 MVA, 230/115 kv, 3 phase auto-transformers

assessment approach used in the study and to present the study of the Hydro One transmission system. The study used a

findings and its recommendations. benefit/cost analysis approach in determining the required

numbers of spares. The following assumptions were made in

Index Terms- Auto-transformer, spare units, Markov model, the study:

reliability assessment of bulk power system, probability of

failure, failure consequences, system availability, benefit/cost - No power flow models were used in the assessment of

analysis.

the failure consequences.

- Approximate load duration curves were used to estimate

I. INTRODUCTION

potential load cuts for multi-unit stations.

- All generators connected to the 115 kV transmission

High voltage auto-transformer stations in bulk transmission

network were not considered.

systems are normally designed to withstand the failure of one

- Power transfers between 115 kv areas through normally

unit or two units without shedding customer’s loads.

open lines were allowed before cutting any loads.

Therefore, the loss of one auto-transformer at any transformer

station may not be a concern to utilities from the reliability

The study findings suggested that two spare auto-

point of view. On the other hand, the loss of one unit at a

transformers are required for each group of the auto-

transformer station may result in generation rescheduling and

transformers.

therefore an increase in the system energy production costs.

In other situations, the loss of two units at the same station

At present, there are 53, 250 MVA auto-transformers and

may result not only in generation rescheduling but also in

31, 125 MVA auto-transformers on the Hydro One’s bulk

load shedding.

transmission system. In terms of spare units, there are 2

spare units for the 250 MVA group and one spare unit for the

The failure of auto-transformers can be of two types: minor

125 MVA group. Since 2003, there have been many changes

(or Class II failures) and major (Class I failures). Class II

to the transmission system network, system generation,

failures are of short duration and are repaired on site and are

system load and the number of auto-transformers on the

covered by system planning criteria. On the other hand,

system. The purpose of this study is to review the adequacy

Class I failures are of long duration and can not be easily

of the current spare policy for the two groups of auto-

repaired on site and failed units may be repaired or replaced

transformers following the various system changes.

depending on unit conditions resulted from the failure. It has

been a practice in the utility industry to carry spare units for a

II. METHOD OF ASSESSMENT

group of similar auto-transformers in service to avoid

extended customer interruption or impaired system operating

Two criteria are used in the current study to determine the

conditions. Determining how many spare units are needed

number of spare transformers for each group of auto-

has been a big challenge for transmission companies.

transformers. The 1st criterion assumes that spare units are

added to the population, one at a time, until a pre-determined

More work has been done in the area of the spare

level of group availability is reached or the group availability

transformer requirements for distribution stations [1]-[7]. On

saturates. The 2nd criterion is based on the minimization of

the other hand, some work has been reported in the area of

the total system cost (cost of carrying spares and outage costs

spare transformer requirements for transmission stations.

resulting from transformer failures). The required number of

References [8] and [9] presented some probabilistic methods

spare transformers (optimal number) is determined when the Nj = Number of units in Group 2.

total system cost is minimum.

B. Complicated Method (both Failure Probabilities and

Depending on the assessment criterion used, the method of Failure Consequences are Required)

assessment can be simple or complicated. The simple method

involves only the calculation of the probability of Class I This method requires the calculations of both the

transformer failures while the complicated method involves probability of failures and the failure consequences. The

the calculations of both the probability of failures and the probability of failures is evaluated by the simple method. The

failure consequences. The two methods are discussed in brief failure consequences are calculated with the help of the

as follows: Hydro One’s PROCOSE program [11] (Probabilistic

Composite System Evaluation program). The calculation is

A. Simple Method (only Failure Probabilities are Required)) done on a monthly basis and involves the following steps:

This method requires the calculation of probabilities of 1. Establish a system base case using PROCOSE. In this

Class I transformer failures. These failure probabilities are base case, generation is dispatched economically and all

obtained using the Markov model of [8]. 250 MVA and 125 MVA, 3 phase auto-transformers are

assumed to be in service and all critical transmission

A transformer station with more than one unit is normally network interfaces including the auto-transformer ratings

designed to withstand the loss of one unit at any time without are observed.

overloading the remaining units. However, the loss of the 2. Obtain from the base case results, the system expected

second unit at the same station could result in overloads at the MW cut and the system average hourly production cost.

same station or in nearby stations. Therefore, remedial These system quantities are computed under the

actions such as generation rescheduling and/or load shedding assumptions that the transmission system remains intact

are taken to alleviate overloads. and system generators can fail. In addition, the computed

system quantities can change under different generation

The probabilities of having one Class I failure (T1) and two dispatches.

Class I failures (T2) at one station are given by: 3. Select one transformer station and run PROCOSE cases

with one transformer and two transformers out of service

T1 = (m/N/) P1 (1) to compute the system expected MW cut and the system

average hourly production cost.

T2 = (mc2 /Nc2) P2 (2) 4. Use the results in Steps 2 and 3 to obtain the changes

Where: (only increases) in the system expected MW cut and in

the system average hourly production cost.

P1= Probability of having N-1 units in service 5. Repeat Steps 3 and 4 for other transformer stations

P2= Probability of having N-2 in service 6. Repeat the above steps for some overlap outages of two

m =Number of units at the station transformers at different stations in the same local area.

N =Number of units at all stations

m

c2 = Number of ways a pair of units can be formed from a It should be mentioned that in most cases, the loss of one

population of m units and is equal to m (m-1)/2. auto-transformer at any multi-unit station would have no

N

c2 = Number of ways a pair of units can be formed from a impacts on customers. On the other hand, the loss of two

population of N units and is equal to N (N-1)/2. auto-transformers at one station or the loss of two at two

stations supplying one 115 kv local area could result in an

The probability of the overlap of two Class I failures at overload of the remaining units or in an island. The overload

Stations i and j, T2ij, in the same transformer group is given problems can be solved by rescheduling generation in the 115

by: kv local area if any exists or by cutting loads. In case of

islanding, the entire 115 kv local area load will be lost if it

T2ij = (1 /Nc2) P2 (3) can not be transferred to neighbouring areas. On the other

hand, if transmission ties exist between the 115 kv affected

The probability of the overlap of two Class I failures at area and its neighbouring areas, the entire area load or portion

Stations i and j, T2ij, in two different transformer groups is of it can be transferred. The amount of load cuts computed by

given by: PROCOSE under a given contingency should be adjusted to

reflect the amount of load transfer.

T2ij = P1i P1j/Ni Nj (4)

III. DETERMINING THE OPTIMAL NUMBER OF

Where: SPARES

P1i = Probability of having one Class I failure in Group 1 In this study, both assessment criteria are used in

P1j = Probability of having one Class I failure in Group 2 determining the optimal number of spare units for each group

Ni = Number of units in Group 1

2

of auto-transformers. The assessment procedure associated APC1i = Increase in system average hourly production

with each criterion is now described. cost with one failure at Station i

T2i = Probability of having two failures at Station i

A. Using the Group Availability Criterion T2ij = Probability of losing two units one at Station i and

one Station j

The group availability used in this study is defined as the MWC2i = Increase in system expected MW cut with two

probability of having all units up and running. The option of failures at Station i

saturating the group availability is selected. The assessment APC2i = Increase in system average hourly production

procedure involves the following steps: cost with two failures at Station i

APC2ij = Increase in system average hourly production

1. Use the Markov model of [8] with no spares to compute cost with two failures at Station i and Station j

the group availability. MWC2ij = Increase in system expected MW cut with two

2. Add one spare unit to the group and calculate the group failures at Station i and Station j

availability. Check the group availability to see whether k = Number of transformer stations in the population

the calculated availability saturates or not. If it saturates N = Number of units in the group

(i.e. the group availability remains almost unchanged as CIC = Customer interruption cost in $/MWh

the number of spare units increases), stop the process

because the addition of more spare units would not help. with i and j in the 3rd term of Equation (5) belonging to

The number of optimal spare will be equal to the number different stations.

of spares at this particular stage. If it does not saturate,

add more spare units. 5. Estimate the annual cost of carrying spare units for each

group using the following expression:

B. Using a Total Cost Optimization Criterion

ACCS = M *C* RCC (6)

In this case, the required number of spare units is

determined using a cost optimization method. The cost Where:

involved has two components: the cost of carrying spare units

and the outage cost resulting from transformer outages. ACCS = Annual cost of carrying spares

M = Number of spare units

The assessment process involves the following steps: C = Cost of one spare unit

RCC = Rate of carrying charge.

1. Calculate, for each station in each group, the

consequences of the loss of one transformer and two 6. Calculate the total cost by adding (5) and (6).

transformers. 7. Repeat Steps 3 to 8 with a different number of spares.

2. Calculate, for some selected stations, the consequences 8. Use the above results for each group to obtain the

of the loss of two transformers at two different stations in number of spares that has the minimal total cost.

the same local area whether the two transformers belong

to one group or both. The 1st term in Equation (5) represents the outage cost due

3. Calculate T1, T2 and T2ij using Equations (1), (2), (3) to the loss of any single unit. The 2nd term represents the

and (4) assuming no spare units. outage cost due to the loss of two units at the same station.

4. Calculate the annual risk cost (customer interruption The 3rd term represents the outage cost due to the loss of two

cost) for each group using the following expression: units at two different stations.

ARC = Σ D T1i [MWC1i *CIC + APC1i ] + groups, the outage cost is split equally between the two

i=1 groups.

k

Σ D T2i [MWC2i *CIC + APC2i ] + Equation (6) can be modified to include other costs such as

i the cost of maintaining spare transformers if necessary.

N N

Σ Σ D T2ij [MWC2ij *CIC + APC2ij] (5) IV. SYSTEMS USED IN THE ASSESSMENT

j≠i i=1

Where: A. Generation System

ARC = Annual risk cost in dollars The current generation system with no coal-fired plants was

T1i = Probability of having one failure at Station i used in the study. Some generating units were modelled

D = Length of study period in hours (8760 hours) deterministically and others were modeled probabilistically.

MWC1i = Increase in system expected MW cut with one

failure at Station i

3

B. Transmission System The criterion of saturating the group availability,

probability of no failures, was used in the assessment. Tables

The present Hydro One’s transmission system with all III and IV show the probabilities of no failures, one failure

elements in service was used in the study as a base case. The and two failures for two transformer groups with 0, 1, 2 and 3

115 kv transmission network was divided into pockets (local spares. Table III shows that the probability of no failures for

areas) and each pocket is interconnected to the 230 kv the 250 MVA group saturates at .98 when the number of

transmission network by one or more auto-transformer spare units is 2. For the 125 MVA group, the group

stations. The pockets may be interconnected by lines that are availability with no failures saturates at .94 as seen from

operated open under normal system conditions. Under some Table IV when the number of spare unit is two.

system outage conditions, the lines can be closed so that

some pocket loads can be transferred between the pockets. In It should be mentioned that the impact of transformer

addition, some pockets may contain local generators which outages at various stations on the system expected MW cut

supply part of the pocket load.

and the system average hourly production cost can vary

The 250 MVA group has 53 units while the 125 MVA significantly among the various stations under a given

group has 31 units. generation dispatch. In this assessment, it was assumed that

only one generation dispatch (most likely one) is used and a

C. System load spare unit is used at any one of the stations regardless of the

value of the outage impact. The results of outage

A system annual peak load of 25,000 MW with a load consequences assessment at various stations were not

factor around 70 % was assumed. The load is distributed at

reported in this paper due the paper limited space.

various buses in the base case power flow. The hourly load

profile for the city of Toronto was assumed for the entire

The results of the benefit/cost analysis approach for the 250

system.

MVA group with 0, 1, 2 and 3 spare units are shown in Table

V. As seen from Table V, the annual increase in system

V. Study Assumptions and Data Used

production costing is much smaller than the annual increase

in customer interruption costs. It is seen from Table V that

The system operating costs are influenced by a number of

the minimum total annual cost occurs when the number of

factors such as the system load, system generators and their

spare units is two.

costs and network conditions. The study has made the

following assumptions: TABLE I TRANSFORMER CLASS I FAILURE DATA

1. A summary of unit reliability indices used in the study is 250 MVA 125 MVA

provided in Table I (Based on Hydro One’s experience Group Group

No. of units 53 31

over the last 14 years).

Class I annual unit failure rate .00292 .005044

2. Single and double outages of auto-transformers are Unit repair or lead time in years 1.5 1.5

considered in the assessment. Spare unit installation time in days 35 130

3. Spare transformer units are used at any one of the

stations considered in the study even if there are no TABLE II OTHER RELEAVANT DATA

outage consequences. The outage consequences at a

Cost of one 250 MVA spare unit $ 2.5 million

particular station are unknown until the consequences Cost of one 125 MVA spare unit $ 1.8 million

assessment is done. If transformer outages at a station are Annual discount rate in % 5

known in advance to have no impact on the computed Average customer interruption cost 10 $/KWh

quantities, then the station should be excluded in the No. of repair teams More than 1

spare assessment. No. of installation teams 1

4. Study period of one year is considered in the assessment.

TABLE III PROBABILITY OF SYSTEM FAILURES FOR 250

5. In case of islanding, 50 % of the area or pocket load will MVA GROUP

be transferred to neghbouring pockets if normally open

lines exist between them. Case Probability Probability of Probability of

of no One Failure Two Failures

Failures (P1) (P2)

Table II provides information about other relevant data 0 spare .783077917 .193404584 .023517499

used in the assessment. 1 spare .962728836 .035173341 .002097823

2 spares .983495686 .016178589 .000325725

VI. STUDY RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 3 spares .98507467 .014707156 .000218174

The results for the two criteria used in the assessment are

now discussed. Table VI provides a summary of the benefit/cost analysis

for the 125 MVA group with 0, 1, 2 and 3 spare units. It is

seen from Table VI that the minimum total annual cost occurs The study uses a probabilistic method based on a Markov

when the number of spare units is one. model for computing the probability of transformer failures

and utilizes the Hydro One’s PROCOSE program for

evaluating the failure consequences.

TABLE IV PROBABILITY OF SYSTEM FAILURES FOR 125 MVA

GROUP

Based on the study assumptions and data used in the

Case Probability of Probability of Probability of assessment, the following conclusions and recommendations

no Failures One Failure Two Failures can be drawn from the study findings:

(P1) (P2)

0 spare .750470061 .217814395 .031715544

1 spare .924054752 .070681696 .005263553 1. It is justified, based on the availability criterion

2 spares .943208812 .053381755 .0029736 (availability saturates) to carry two spares for the 250

3 spares .944499382 .0526598 .00284079 MVA group and two spares for the 125 MVA group.

2. It is justifiled, based on the minimum cost criterion to

carry two spares for the 250 MVA group and one for the

TABLE V SUMMARY OF COST RESULTS FOR 250 MVA GROUP 125 MVA group.

Number Annual Annual Annual Increase Total

3. The sensitivity analysis results show that the number of

of Carrying Increase in in Customer Annual spare units could be two for each group for most of the

Spares Cost in $k Production Interruption cost in cases studied.

Cost in $k Cost in $k $k 4. Due to uncertainties in the system parameters used and

0 0 5.37 2351.26 2356.63

1 125 .32 329.83 455.15

the amounts of power that can be transferred between the

2 250 .11 123.97 374.08 stations, it is recommended to carry two spare units for

3 375 .10 109.42 484.42 each group of the auto-transformers.

REFERENCES

TABLE VI SUMMARY OF COST RESULTS FOR125 MVA GROUP

[1] W. Li, E. Vaahedi and Y. Mansour, “Determining number and timing

Number Annual Annual Annual Total

of substation spare transformers using a probabilistic cost analysis

of Carrying Increase in Increase in Annual

approach,” IEEE Transactions on power delivery, Vol. 14, No. 3, July

Spares Cost in Production Customer cost in

1999.

$k Cost in $k Interruption $k

[2] J. M. Nahman and M. R. Tanaskovic, “Probability models for optimal

Cost in $k

sparing of distribution network transformers,” IEEE Transactions on

0 0 5.33 1049.47 1054.80

Power Delivery, Vol. 24, Issue 2, April 2009, pp. 758-763.

1 90 .32 170.80 261.12 [3] A. A. Chowdhury and D. O. Koval, “Development of probabilistic

2 180 .11 96.10 276.21 models for computing optimal distribution substation spare

3 270 .10 91.76 361.86 transformers,” IEEE Transactions on Industry Applications, Vol. 41,

Issue 6, November 2005, pp. 1493-1498.

Additional studies were performed to evaluate the impact of [4] A. M. Leite da Silva, J. G. de Carvalho and A. A. Chowdhury,

“Probabilistic methodologies for determining the optimal number of

varying some of the system paramters on the number of substation spare transformers,” IEEE Transactions on Power Systems,

spares. In these studies, the unit failure rate was doubled, the Vol. 25, Issue 1, February 2010, pp. 68-77.

unit repair time was increased to 2 years and the customer [5] G. A. Hamoud, “Assessment of spare transformer requirements for

interruption cost was increased to $20 /KWh. distribution stations,” IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, Vol. 26,

Number 1, February 2011, pp. 174 - 180.

[6] G. A. Hamoud, “Use of Markov models in assessing spare transformer

The results using the two assessment criteria show that the requirements for distribution stations,” IEEE Transactions on Power

number of spare units for the 250 MVA is two for all the Systems, Vol. 27, No. 2, May 2012 , pp. 1098 - 1105.

cases except one. [7] G. A. Hamoud and C. Yiu, “One Markov model for spare analysis of

distribution power transformers, ” IEEE Transactions on Power

Systems, Vol. 31, No. 2, March 2016 , pp. 1643 - 1648.

The results also show that the number of spare units for the [8] G. Hamoud,” Assessment of spare transformer requirements for high

125 MVA using both criteria is two for most of the cases voltage load stations,” PES General Meeting, 2012.

studied. [9] G. Hamoud, F. Qureshy, A. Elen and L. Lee, “Assessment of high

voltage auto-transformer spare requirements in bulk transmission

systems,” Power Engineering Society General Meeting, 2004, IEEE,

In summary, the two criteria should be used to complement June 6 – 10, pages 434 – 439.

one another when assessing the number of spares. [10] B. Parker, “Optimum Number of Spare Auto-transformers 250 MVA

and 125 MVA, 230/115 kv Categories,” Hydro One Internal Report,

VII. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS November, 2003

[11] B. Porretta and D. Kiguel, “Bulk power system reliability evaluation,

part I: PROCOSE – a Computer Program for Probabilistic Composite

The paper describes the reliability study that has been System Evaluation”, 14th Inter-RAM Conference for the Electric

performed at Hydro One to review the adequacy of the Power Industry, Toronto, May 26-29, 1987.

current spare numbers for the 230/115 kv, 3 phase auto-

transformers of the Hydro One’s bulk transmission system.

- BOQ 400 & 132 Kv Lattice TowerЗагружено:Sourav Satapathy
- GSI 122 & 130Загружено:Theerayoot
- lmu.pdfЗагружено:ceverth
- 0208 Power SystemЗагружено:abdulmagsod
- World Electricity Transmission & Distribution EquipmentЗагружено:Michael Warner
- Power Generation Operation y Control Allen Wood 379Загружено:Vinod Murugan
- vazЗагружено:joeny1983
- UntitledЗагружено:eurolex
- Erc_feeder Test Data1Загружено:Jeremy Hensley
- UI Amendments Regulations 2010Загружено:nbvltraining
- Pspr Lecture 01Загружено:Kedar Patil
- A NEW TREND IN IMPROVING EFFICIENCY OF TRANSMISSION LINES INЗагружено:Karthick K Kanagarathinam
- 2012 ProjectЗагружено:Yashasvi Bhattiprolu
- Electric PowerЗагружено:riz2010
- sandy3Загружено:Sandy Ronaldo
- 2 Thanapong Asset Mgmt TR PaperЗагружено:bcqbao
- Guidance Notes for Generators for Submission of Grid Code DataЗагружено:Tạ Đức Dũng
- Black Start StudiesЗагружено:mike
- Draft-SIS Negros Ph Solar Inc. 50 MW Solar Project(1)(1)Загружено:Negros Solar PH
- Anexo 2 PQSensorЗагружено:aramirezbenites
- Power system analysis slidesЗагружено:Samundar Khan
- Indramat KDV 2.3Загружено:thadner
- 20-689.pdfЗагружено:Brett Hendricks
- A02-0158.pdfЗагружено:Er Prashant Kumar Yadav
- 1st LectureЗагружено:Jalees
- Safety_in_AC_Substation_Grounding_System.pdfЗагружено:nilushka
- NewЗагружено:Igwe
- Electrical_Power_Products.pdfЗагружено:Pauli Ta
- Section BeeЗагружено:TILAK PATEL
- Pico Hydro Operational TrainingЗагружено:Sandeep Joshi

- Transformer 845 Introduction Seminar June 2015Загружено:sulemankhalid
- PDTools - a Toolbox of Partial Discharge (PD) Signal Analysis for Transformer Condition AssessmentЗагружено:sulemankhalid
- On the Development of Power Transformer Failure Models - An Australian Case StudyЗагружено:sulemankhalid
- Impacts of Substation Transformer Backfeed at High PV PenetrationsЗагружено:sulemankhalid
- The PUHC Act of 1935Загружено:sulemankhalid
- Exploring the Role of Demand Shifting in Oligopolistic Electricity MarketsЗагружено:sulemankhalid
- Enhancing Distance Relay Security During Power System Stresses - An Apparent Power ApproachЗагружено:sulemankhalid
- Control and Derating of a PV Inverter for Harmonic Compensation in a Smart Distribution SystemЗагружено:sulemankhalid
- A Two-Stage Overload Strategy of Oil-immersed Transformers Considering Operation RiskЗагружено:sulemankhalid
- 028Загружено:sulemankhalid
- a69d5016ce0bdf766250c2b6457137bf_wang_papЗагружено:Deptiranjan Mohapatra
- 2000 Ga Tech PaperЗагружено:Aceel Fitch
- 2_RECs_14Загружено:sulemankhalid
- 3_CO_RPS_2014Загружено:sulemankhalid
- 3_The_Gap.pptxЗагружено:sulemankhalid
- 6705 CapturingGenerator NS 20160208 Web2Загружено:sulemankhalid
- A Robust Optimization Based Strategy for Optimal Power System Protection Considering UncertaintiesЗагружено:sulemankhalid
- Bharati Module3 Lect12Загружено:kranthikoyyada
- Introduction to Water Supply SystemsЗагружено:sulemankhalid
- Hydro Electric Power PlantsЗагружено:Anjna Singhal
- 170333871-Hydropower-Practice-and-Application.pdfЗагружено:bagastc
- EE Overview 14Загружено:sulemankhalid
- EE_PolicyЗагружено:sulemankhalid
- Sustainable Future 12 1Загружено:sulemankhalid
- Renewables AB Electricity Market Fellows Moore ShafferЗагружено:sulemankhalid
- Electrical Area Classification in Coal-fired Power Plants.pdfЗагружено:sulemankhalid
- Sdr Electric IndustryЗагружено:sulemankhalid
- 2006 03 22 Rehab PowerplantsЗагружено:sulemankhalid
- NERC Balancing and Frequency ControlЗагружено:sulemankhalid

- DAFTAR PUSTAKAЗагружено:Kwok Hin SMA Harapan Mandiri
- ejemplo 1Загружено:Marrozk84
- HRЗагружено:ParthMair
- EM-I LAB MANUALЗагружено:RamKumar
- Unwedge ArticleЗагружено:Ismael
- Grammar of Mathematics.pdfЗагружено:M2C7r6
- 0417_s11_qp_22.pdfЗагружено:edward nodzo
- American Slavery, American Freedom Argument EvaluationЗагружено:Carl Churchill
- Sears Dehumidifier ManualЗагружено:mitchrow
- Clinical Pearls CardiologyЗагружено:Maritza24
- Integrating Information About the Cost of Carbon Through Activity Based Costing 2012 Journal of Cleaner ProductionЗагружено:Lilian Brodesco
- Ansiedade Matemática - Metodos de IntervençãoЗагружено:Lucas Franco Melchiades
- VALV SELENOIDEЗагружено:jhoger2012
- Marketing Plan TemplateЗагружено:Isles Rouie Caceres
- Infant of Diabetic MotherЗагружено:al_humaira91
- Dr Tareef FinalЗагружено:Fawwaz Roti
- VmeyeCloud iPhone-User's Manual 2014.8.15.Загружено:sunnyday32
- theory and technique of play writing by john Howard LawsonЗагружено:rgopasan
- 1 2 8 a airfoiltestЗагружено:api-254328029
- M4164-C 06-15_Etrinsa Technical Manual_MN031r2hq.pdfЗагружено:Maria Lavinia Iordache
- An Overview of Short Circuit Current Part 2Загружено:Robert Galarza
- How to Troubleshoot Communication From the Oracle Management Service OMS to a Grid Agent in 10g Enterprise Manager Grid ControlЗагружено:Rey Kristoffer Cruz
- BEAM Gaya Internal, Diagram Gaya Geser Dan MomenЗагружено:azamataufiq
- 132kv GIS O&M ManualЗагружено:vipinraj
- Brain machine interface PPTЗагружено:Mettu Balanandu
- Sciencescopeandsequence612 WebЗагружено:Arvin Zalameda
- TapesЗагружено:1m54z64e10sfaabuz33o
- White Paper Oracle BI Publisher Draft Ver1.7Загружено:Asad Rao
- 14 Sharma RupaliЗагружено:san
- near field communicationЗагружено:Pankaj Kumar

## Гораздо больше, чем просто документы.