Energy Metering Improvements A case study at VTPS

Abhimanyudu.P.V

ADE / MRT-1 / Stage-1/ VTPS

1. Introduction: Energy measurement is accurate if all the losses, consumptions are matching with cross checking of the parameters. Only providing a good quality energy meter will not serve the purpose of accurate measurement, it should also be supported with proper parameters of voltage and current from the instrument transformers. Instrument transformers plays very vital role for measurement in normal conditions. Before selecting the ratings of the Instrument transformers, details of relays, metering equipment and provisions for future expansion shall also be taken into consideration. In this article, we share our experiences on metering at EHV (220 kV) switchyard at Vijayawada Thermal Power Station (6 x 210 MW). During Electricity reforms of APSEB, APSEB has been unbundled into APGENCO, APTRANSCO and four DISCOMS. Vijayawada Thermal Power Station belongs to APGENCO and is connected to APTRANSCO substations by fifteen 220 kV feeders. Single line diagram of VTPS 220 kV Switchyard is shown if Fig 1. The switchyard arrangement is two bus and one transfer bus arrangement and is having thirty, 220 kV Bays as detailed below:
GT-1 GT-2 GT-3 GT-4 GT-5 GT-6 ST-1 ST-2 ST-3 ST-4 ST-5 PTR Bus-1 Bus-2 BUS PT ( Stage-2)

B/C

Podili-2

Podili-1

NNA-2

NNA-1

TDK-1

TDK-2

BMDL

CHLK

TPL-2

NKPL

KPL-1

TPL-1

BUS PT ( Stage-1)

Fig 1 : 220 kV Switchyard at VTPS

GDL

KPL-2

VJJM

? ? ? ? ? ?

Generator Transformers 240 MVA Station Transformers 31.5 MVA Power Transformer 25 MVA Outgoing Feeders Transfer Buses Bus Coupler

15.75/ 220 kV 220 / 6.6 kV 220 / 132 kV

6 Nos 5 Nos 1 No 15 Nos 2 Nos 1 No

As the switchyard is larger in size, two sets (here itself called as Stage1 and Stage-2 PTs) of PTs for Bus 1 and Bus 2 are erected and half of bays are connected to each set of PTs. Stage -1 PTs (220kV / 110V): BHEL make 500 VA, Class 1.0 Accuracy Stage -2 PTs (220kV / 110V): BHEL make 1000 VA, Class 0.5 Accuracy 2. Auxiliary consumption computing methods at power stations: Net energy generated and exported to the feeders depends on the unit outages, backing down of generation. However, auxiliary power consumption is the parameter which will monitor the performance of the power station. In three ways of methods, auxiliary power consumption can be calculated in a thermal power station. With accurate metering, all the three types of measurement shall show similar values with little deviations in the values caused due to number of metering equipment, transformer losses. Please refer single line diagram (Fig 2) for reference
UAT B 15.75/6.6 kV 6.6 kV Bus

GEN
GT 15.75 / 220 KV

EXC. TR

UAT A 6.6 kV Bus 15.75/6.6 kV Energy Meter Location of connected equipment

ST 220 / 6.6 kV

Fig 2 : Single Line Diagram of Layout of Equipment

220 Bus kV

Method 1: In this method, energy generated at Generator terminals is compared with net energy based on the difference of GT and STs S Generators = S GT S ST + Auxiliary power consumption Method 2: In this method, energy generated at Generator terminals is compared with net energy sent out on feeders. S Generators = S Feeders + Auxiliary power consumption Method 3: In this method, energy generated at Generator terminals is compared with energy measured on UAT, Exc. Transformers and Station Transformers. Auxiliary power consumption = S UAT + S ST + S EXC.TR 3. Energy billing based on Feeder metering till December 2003: Till December, 2003 Energy billing was based on Net Energy Exported to feeders (Feeder metering). Energy Exported to APTRANSCO= S Net Energy Exported on Feeders Method of Energy Measurement: On Feeders ? ? ? : Voltage Circuits are derived from CVTs. Current circuits from 220 kV CTs Secure make 0.2 class Meters (Main & Check) along with SIMCO make electromechanical energy meters

On GTs / STs : ? Voltage Circuits are derived from selected BUS PTs ? Current circuits from 220 kV CTs ? SIMCO make Electro mechanical energy meters A sample data for one month (October, 2003) Energy particulars are shown in the table 4. As per the agreement between APGENCO and APTRANSCO, Auxiliary power consumption was derived from method 3.

Observations: ? Auxiliary power consumption calculated in three methods shows three different values o Method 1 : 11.30 % o Method 2: 10.54 % o Method 3: 9.22 % ? Though the adopted method has given less value of Auxiliary power consumption, the other methods shows higher values ? Variation in Auxiliary power consumption attributed to Transformer losses 4. Energy billing based on GT / ST metering (From Janu 2004 onwards) However, it was decided to shift the Boundary metering point to GT and STs from January 2004 by both APGENCO and APTRANSCO. As per the agreement, net energy sent to APTRANSCO shall be taken as Energy Exported to 220 kV Bus, and Auxiliary power consumption shall be derived from method 1. Energy Exported to APTRANSCO: S Energy on GT S energy drawn by ST As per the new boundary metering agreement, available 0.2 class electronic energy meters on feeders removed and connected to GTs and STs. On 220 kV feeders, only SIMCO meters were available for measuring energy. A sample data for one month (Jan 2004) Energy particulars for the shown in table 4. Observations: ? Auxiliary power consumption calculated in method 2 and 3 is comparable o Method 1 : 11.16 % o Method 2: 8.9 % o Method 3: 8.7 % ? However, Auxiliary power consumption calculated by method 1 is very high ? Accepted method of Auxiliary power consumption i.e. Method 1 deviated from the allowable limits.

5. Study on Variation in APC: 4

The reasons for escalation in the Auxiliary power consumption were thoroughly checked as below: 1. Checked up the Currents in all the phases and compared with other cores of the CTs 2. Checked up the Voltages at the metering terminals and at JBs. 3. Compared the voltages (Phase to Neutral) of PTs on the Bus and on Line CVTs and the observations are given in table 1 : Table: 1 In Volts Description Podili 2 Feeder Line CVT Podili 1 Feeder Line CVT Tallapalli 2 Feeder Line CVT Tallapalli 1 Feeder Line CVT Tadikonda -1 Line CVT Tadikonda 2 Line CVT Gunadala Line CVT Nunna 2 Line CVT Nunna 1 Line CVT Bheemadole Line CVT Vijjeswaram Line CVT Narketpalli Line CVT Chillakallu Line CVT Kondapalli 1 Line CVT Kondapalli 2 Line CVT Stage-1 Bus -1 PT Voltages Stage-1 Bus -2 PT Voltages Stage-2 Bus -1 PT Voltages Stage-2 Bus -2 PT Voltages RN 61.27 63.8 63.5 64.1 63.5 66.4 62.4 61.4 56.8 64.1 63.1 62.2 64.7 64.9 64.4 62.65 61.45 63.3 63.9 YN 65.7 63.9 64.3 63.9 64.3 62.8 64.5 63.5 62.8 61.2 63.3 63.6 65.4 64.2 64.1 62.85 62.6 63.2 63.25 BN 61.1 66.4 63 59.8 62.9 63.4 62.6 61.3 58.4 63.3 62.5 63.3 64 64.2 64 63.15 62.5 64.3 63.3

Observed difference of more than 2 V between CVT and Bus PT voltages. Also observed the variation in the voltages of CVTs for the feeders. As the Yard is very large and suspecting lead drop in the cables, proposed to lay 6 sq.mm copper cable in parallel with existing 2.5 sq. mm cable for BUS PTs to improve the voltages to GT / STs. As the metering and protections are derived from the same core of PT, and for the terminations of new cable, evacuated the BUS PT by ? ? Both feeder protections kept on CVTs Metering for GT / ST transferred to other Bus PT 5

During this exercise, it was noted that after evacuating the PT the voltages on the PT were improved from 109.6 V to 111.9 V. Change in Bus voltage was observed step wise while disconnecting the loads one by one. Then terminated new cable and restored normalcy for all the protection and metering circuits. However a little improvement of 0.3 V was observed with this exercise. Load current on the PTs were measured as 4.12 Amps (4.12 x 63 V = 260 VA) and which is in the limits. This exercise has given clear picture of the behavior of PTs on Loads. The details of loads on the each PT are as below: ? Feeder protections of Four feeders ( Electromechanical relays / static relays) ? Directional O/C protections of one Transformer (Electromechanical / static relays ) ? Metering equipment of GT / STs. ( Analogue meters and energy meters of Electromechanical / electronic type) It is understood that the voltage drop due to electromechanical relays was more than static relays. As both main and check meters are available on GT / STs, other Electromechanical energy meters were removed from the circuit and an average of 0.25 V increase was observed in the PT Voltages. 6. Commissioning of Metering PTs: The above exercise did not deliver the fruitful results. As most of the feeder protections are equipped with electromechanical relays and which is causing voltage drop on the PT voltages, it was decided to erect separate PTs exclusively for metering with better accuracy. TELK make 0.2 class accuracy PTs were erected for both busses in parallel with existing PTs and connected exclusively to electronic energy meters of GT / STs. After commissioning of new PTs and extending the voltages to the electronic energy meters, voltages recorded on PTs are shown in table 2: TABLE: 2 Description of PT RY Metering PT ( 0.2 Class ) of Bus -1 110.5 Stage -1 Bus -1 PT 107.4 Stage- 2 Bus -1 PT 108.6

YB 109.7 107.2 108.0

BR 109.7 107.2 108.7 6

Metering PT ( 0.2 Class ) of Bus -2 110.6 Stage -1 Bus -2 PT 106.5 Stage- 2 Bus -2 PT 108.6

109.8 106.3 107.5

109.8 105.9 108.5

The less burdened metering PTs are having better secondary voltages than the other sets of PTs. Subsequently, new electronic energy meters of Landis + Gyr were commissioned in place of electromechanical meters on Feeders and extended the metering PT voltages to these meters also. Even with the addition of these new energy meters, voltages of the metering PTs are delivering the better results. 7. Improvements achieved: With the new metering PT circuits to all the GT / ST / Feeders, energy measurements at 220 kV switchyard are satisfactory. After all the modifications of PT circuits and commissioning of Electronic energy meters to all the feeders, a sample data for one month of Energy particulars are shown in table-4 for March 2006. Observations: ? Auxiliary power consumption calculated in all the three methods shows similar values which indicates better energy metering practices. ? Transformer losses measured are around 0.2 % only. Subsequently, renovated the eight feeder protections schemes where electromechanical relays were replaced with numerical relays during July-Sep 2006 and observed the improvement in Stage-1 BUS PT Voltages due to removal of electromechanical relays. After this renovation, comparisons of voltages of all the BUS PTs are carried out and are shown in table 3: TABLE: 3 Description of PT RY YB BR Metering PT ( 0.2 Class ) of Bus -1 116.9 116.2 115.7 Stage -1 Bus -1 PT 116.5 116.0 115.7 Stage- 2 Bus -1 PT 114.0 113.7 113.7 Metering PT ( 0.2 Class ) of Bus -2 115.5 114.7 114.5 Stage -1 Bus -2 PT 114.5 114 114 Stage- 2 Bus -2 PT 114 113 113.2 7. Recommendations from the experience: ? ? ? Protection and metering circuits shall be derived from two different cores Load on PTs shall be monitored whenever the opportunity arises and compare the same with PT burden. Compare voltages with all available PTs / CVTs and observe the deviations 7

Energy meters on feeders are not preferable to connect to CVT Circuits as the variation in the CVT voltages is more. ? Whenever new bays are added to the switchyard, PT burden shall be checked. ? Electronic energy meters and static / numerical relays are less burdened to instrument transformers ? Periodical measurement of Voltages at metering terminals, PT Junction boxes shall be carried out and they shall be checked with displayed voltages in the meters / relays. ? It is recommended to use 3 phase, 4 wire method of energy metering in 220 kV switchyard. ? Depending on the length of the PT cabling, lead size shall be increased to reduce the lead resistance phenomenon. Table: 4 Energy in MWH Sl.No Description Oct 03 Jan 04 Mar 06 1 Energy Generated ( LV Side of 874005 905843 953409 Generators) 2 Energy at HV side of Generator 797016 824727 891610 Transformers 3 Energy Drawn through STs 21857 20008 21704 4 Net Energy Export ( GT - STs) 775159 804719 869906 5 Difference between Generation & Net 98846 101124 83503 energy Export 6 % Difference between Generation & net 11.30 11.16 8.76 energy Export (APC : Method 1) 7 Energy sent on feeders 781840 825129 871342 8 Difference between energy on 92165 80714 82067 Generators &feeders 9 % Difference between energy on 10.54 8.9 8.60 Generators & feeders (APC : Method 2) 10 Energy on UAT & Excitation Transformers 58753 58826 59903 11 Energy consumed at VTPS UAT + EXC. 80610 78834 81607 TR + ST 12 %Energy consumed at VTPS UAT + EXC. 9.22 8.7 8.56 TR + ST ( APC : Method 3) ?