Paper accepted for presentation at 2003 IEEE Bologna Power Tech Conference, June 23th-26th, Bologna, Italy

Solid-State Voltage Regulator for Dispersed Rural Distribution Systems

Octavio M. Ruiz Garca and Antonio Gmez Expsito, IEEE Senior Member

Abstract Many countries are currently facing significant regulatory changes. One of the main outcomes of this process is the requirement for distribution companies to achieve higher quality of supply standards, for which application of new technologies may be the solution. This paper addresses the problem of keeping bus voltages within reasonable limits when long radial networks feed dispersed loads in rural areas. The problem in such cases is that voltages at nearby (distant) buses are unacceptably high (low) according to established standards, for which the distribution company can be penalised. To prevent this problem, an AC boost chopper is proposed, acting much in the same way as voltage regulating transformers located at intermediate points. Simulation results are presented showing the performance and viability of such a device. Index TermsRural feeders, Voltage regulation, Quality of supply, Custom Power.

10 Voltage drop (%) Un=230V

cos =0.8

cos =0.9 cos =1

0 0 5 10 15 20 25

Load moment (kWkm)

Fig. 1. Voltage drop versus load moment for RZ150 cable.

ISTRIBUTION systems have evolved in different ways depending on the country. In the US, for instance, medium voltage (MV) feeders, many times of the single-phase type, are used to bring power as close as possible to customers, whereas several small transformers reduce voltage to the appropriate low voltage (LV) level. This way, feeder losses are reduced at the cost of a large number of small relatively inefficient transformers. On the contrary, in Spain and many European countries, three-phase LV feeders, combined with a reduced number of larger and efficient MV/LV transformers, are preferred, leading to higher feeder losses and potential voltage problems. Figure 1 shows the voltage drop versus the electric load moment (power times distance) corresponding to the highestcapacity cable employed at the LV level.

I. INTRODUCTION

As can be seen, voltage drop can be significant when distance is increased for a given load. According to [1], LV level must lie within 10% of rated value (23023V), but there are reported cases in which loads located at 3 km downstream are fed at 190V. Based solely on the MV/LV under-load tap changers, it is extremely difficult or impossible to raise the voltage at the most distant buses without "burning" the customers close to the transformer. Until recently, this problem has been simply ignored or 1:1 transformers, equipped with off-load tap changers and hence unable to instantly adapt to the load level, have been installed at intermediate points. The solid-state tap changer concept, currently being investigated for MV/LV transformers [2,3,7], can be also of interest to prevent this problem when applied to 1:1 low voltage transformers. Technological advances in power electronics are giving rise to new generations of switching devices, capable of handling ever increasing currents and voltages at higher frequencies and reduced losses. In this paper, the viability of an AC boost chopper, properly equipped with low-pass filters, intended to raise the voltage at selected intermediate points, is analysed. A test case is simulated by means of PSCAD/EMTDC

The authors acknowledge the financial support of the Spanish DGI under grant DPI 2001-2367. O. M. Ruiz is with the I+A Elctrico deparment of Norcontrol, S.A. (email: oruizg@soluziona.com) A. Gmez is with the department of Electrical Engineering, University of Seville, Spain. (e-mail: age@us.es)

0-7803-7967-5/03/$17.00 2003 IEEE

II. AC BOOST CHOPPER In order to raise the voltage at a given point in the feeder, the AC chopper shown in figure 2 is installed at each phase:
R (50C) X Imax(50C)

TABLE I RZ150 CABLE DATA

0.231/km 0.1/km 271A

Pmax (cos=1) Pmax (cos=0.9) Pmax (cos=0.8)

178kVA 160kVA 148kVA

Phase

L 1 2 3

Ci

Co

Neutral Fig. 2. Single-phase topology of the AC chopper.

V1=253.0V V2=219.9V V3=187.1V

Pload =40kW, Qload=30kVAr

Psource=56.5kW, Qsource=37.13kVAr Losses: 16.5kW (29.2%)

Fig. 3. Test feeder in the base case (single load at the remote end).

By properly selecting the duty cycle of both, series and shunt, switches, made up of IGBTs, the output voltage can be kept under control. For this application, a 1800Hz switching frequency has been selected, as a compromise between the harmonic contents of voltage waveforms and physical semiconductor requirements. Passive components, besides playing an important role in the overall chopper performance as low pass filters, give rise by themselves to a certain amount of voltage increase, because of the way L and Co are connected. Assuming the switching frequency is large enough, such a voltage increment is given, in absence of load, by

A. Balanced Load: Steady-State Voltage Regulation In order to augment the voltage regulation margin, it is convenient for the term VCond to be as small as possible. Also, passive components must be able to keep harmonic levels within acceptable limits. As a compromise solution, assuming the maximum load is 50kVA, p.f.=0.8, the following values are adopted: Ci=400F, Co=500F, L=0.5mH. For a chopper output voltage of 253V, the term VCond amounts to 6.24V, which is nearly compensated by the voltage drop through the series switch. When the AC chopper is inserted at the intermediate point, the data shown in figure 4 result:
1 4

Cond

= Vo (2f ) 2 LCo

(1)
2 3

Therefore, the total no-load voltage increment can be expressed as

V = Vo Vi = (Vi + V

Cond

1 D

(2)

where D is the duty-cycle value (D=1 when the series switch is permanently closed and the shunt switch is open). Values of the passive elements are chosen taking into account the required filtering capability and the maximum acceptable voltage for D=1. Owing to the hourly load variation, the existing voltage drop at the furthest point may not always justify the presence of the proposed equipment. Hence, a by-pass switch may be required in order to prevent both extra losses and excessive voltage increase.

V1=253.0V V2=232.6V V3=253.1V V4=225.7V

Pload=40kW, Qload=30kVAr Psource=51.7, Qsource= -13.6kVAr Losses: 11.7kW (22.6%)

Fig. 4. Test feeder when the AC chopper is inserted.

III. TEST CASES As an example, a 3-km feeder, built upon the RZ150 cable (main parameters collected in table 1), feeding a 230V, 50kVA load, p.f.=0.8, located at the remote end, as shown in figure 3, will be used for simplicity.

Note that the load voltage is significantly improved (none of the buses exceeds 230V10%) while a 6.6% reduction of feeder losses is achieved. When resorting to switching devices, a careful analysis of harmonic generation is required, in order to check that the limits imposed in [1] are satisfied. Figures 5 and 6 show the voltage harmonic contents at buses 3 and 2 respectively. The resulting harmonics are compared in figures 7 and 8 with maximum levels allowed by European standards for LV networks. As can be seen, the pollution is acceptable even for harmonics 35 and 37 (the switching frequency corresponds to the 36th harmonic). Figure 9 represents the voltage waveforms at the same points. Finally, currents flowing through the inductance and one of the IGBTs are shown in figure 10, while load and source currents are shown in figure 11.

0,7

0.40 0.30 0.20 0.10 0.00 -0.10 -0.20 U2

U3

0,6

0,5

0,4

0,3

0,2

0,1

-0.30
0
3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45 47 49 51 53 55 57 59 61

-0.40

Fig. 5. Voltage harmonics at bus 3 (%).

0,9 0,8 0,7 0,6 0,5 0,4 0,3

Fig. 9. Voltage waveforms at relevant points (kV).

0.150 0.100 0.050 0.000 -0.050 Iinductance

0,2 0,1 0

Fig. -0.100 8. Voltage waveforms (kV).

3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45 47 49 51 53 55 57 59 61

-0.150

Fig. 6. Voltage harmonics at bus 2 (%).

6

0.125 0.100

Iseries switch

0.075 0.050 0.025

3

0.000 -0.025 -0.050

-0.075 -0.100
3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23

-0.125
25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43
Standard Bus 3

45

47

49

Fig. 7. Voltage harmonics at bus 3 (red, dark), compared with standard limits (blue, light) (%).
6

Fig. 10. Inductance (upper) and series switch (lower) current waveform (kA).

0.125 0.100 0.075 0.050 0.025

Isource

Iload

0.000 -0.025 -0.050 -0.075 -0.100

17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43
Standard Bus 3

11

13 15

-0.125

45

47

49

Fig. 8. Voltage harmonics at bus 2 (red, dark), compared with standard limits (blue, light) (%).

Fig. 11. Load current and source current waveforms.

B. Balanced Load: Transient Response In order to track load variations, a simple closed-loop control scheme is implemented by which the duty-cycle value is modified so that a voltage reference is maintained. In our case, the reference voltage is 253V (230+10%). The control loop gain is chosen so as to prevent excessive oscillations. Starting with an initial load of 25kVA p.f.=0.8, the chopper transient response to a second identical load is simulated. As in the previous section, both loads are located for simplicity at the end of the feeder. Figure 12 shows the evolution of the RMS output voltage (Vo) when the load current suddenly changes. Note that the output voltage takes about three cycles to fully recover to the specified value.
254.0 252.0 250.0 248.0 246.0 244.0 242.0 240.0 238.0 236.0 0.150 0.100 0.050 0.000 -0.050 -0.100 -0.150 Iload U3 RMS

2.50 2.00 1.50

Imbalance (%)

1.00 0.50 0.00

0.125 0.100 0.075 0.050 0.025 0.000 -0.025 -0.050 -0.075 -0.100 -0.125

I load a

I load b

I load c

Fig. 13. Voltage imbalance (upper) and load currents (lower).

IV. CONCLUSIONS In this paper, the performance of a solid-state voltage regulator, intended to raise the voltage at remote buses in long rural distribution feeders, is shown. This kind of devices will benefit also nearby customers, whose voltage is usually kept too high. Compared to other means for voltage regulation, the proposed regulator offers instantaneous response to voltage fluctuations, continuous rather than discrete output, unlimited number of control shifts and low maintenance. An additional benefit is the reduced feeder losses achieved by the improved voltage profile, as the converter losses grow slightly more than linearly with load current. V. REFERENCES
[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] Characteristics of voltage delivered by generic distribution networks European Standard EN 50160. 2001. P. Bawer, S.W.H. de Haan. Solid State Tap Changers for Utility Transformers. 0-7803-5543-6/99 IEEE pp 897-902. O. Demirci, D.A. Torrey, R.C. Degeneff. A new approach to solid-state on load tap changing transformers. IEEE transactions on Power Delivery. Vol. 13, n3. July 1998. N.G. Hingorani, L. Gyugyi. Understanding Facts. Concepts and Technology of Flexible AC Transmissions Systems. IEEE Press Editorial Board. New York 1999. E. Lefeuvre, T. Meynard, P. Viarouge. Fast Line Voltage Conditioners using a New PWM AC Chopper Topology. EPE 2001. pp 1-9. R.J. Nelson. Transmission Power Flow Control: Electronic vs Electromagnetic Alternatives for Steady-State Operation. IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery. Vol. 9, n 3. July 1994. pp 1678-1684. E.R. Ronan, S.D. Sudhoff, S.F. Glover, D.L. Galloway. A Power Electronic-Based Distribution Transformer. IEEE Transactions. on Power Delivery. Vol. 17, n 2, april 2002. pp 537-543.

Fig. 12. RMS voltage at bus 3, figure 4 (upper) and load current (lower).

C. Unbalanced Load Additionally, it is possible to reduce the imbalance of the output voltage by separately controlling each phase. In this test, the system is initially supplying a 25-kVA, p.f.=0.8 balanced load, when a 25/3-kVA single-phase load is suddenly connected. In absence of chopper, such unbalanced load would lead to a voltage imbalance of 1.8% at the middle point (bus 2, figure 3). Figure 13 shows the evolution of the output voltage imbalance in the presence of the chopper. Again, after approximately three periods of the fundamental frequency, the voltage imbalance reduces to acceptable values.

VI. BIOGRAPHIES
Octavio M. Ruiz Garca was born in Spain, in 1972. He received his industrial engineering degree from the University of Seville, where he is currently doing his phD in electrical engineering. Since 2000 he has been with the I+A Elctrico Department of Norcontrol, S.A. (Soluziona Calidad y Medio Ambiente), Madrid, where he is currently working as an electrical and programming engineer. Since 2002 he has been with the Industrial Engineering Department of the University Antonio de Nebrija, Madrid, where he is working as a partial time associate lecturer. His primary areas of interest are power quality and power electronics. Antonio Gmez Expsito was born in Spain, in 1957. He received his electrical and doctor engineering degrees from the University of Seville. Since 1982 he has been with the Department of Electrical Engineering, University of Seville, where he is currently a Professor and Head of the Department. His primary areas of interest are optimal power system operation, state estimation and computer relaying.