1A30-1 The 4th IEEE Conference on Power Engineering and Renewable Energy

ICPERE 2018

Lesson Learned from Power System Design with

PowerWorld Simulator

Syafaruddin Satriani Latief

Department of Electrical Engineering Department of Architecture
Universitas Hasanuddin Universitas Bosowa
Makassar 90245, Indonesia Makassar 90231, Indonesia
syafaruddin@unhas.ac.id satrianilatief@yahoo.com

Abstract—Complexity design of power system is probably one of
the reluctances for undergraduate or graduate students to attend
power engineering courses. However, using simulation tools will
attract and encourage students to have their own design and model
as well as its analysis. This paper presents a protocol model of 10-
bus system with PowerWorld simulator includes load flow and
fault analysis as design verifications. To obtain a reliable model,
the basic knowledge of power system components following
specific criteria must be fulfilled in the selection of initial data. In
the verification stage, the proposed model has been tested with
load flow method in the normal and contingency operations, then
fault analysis is followed to simulate the proposed model responses
in both three-phase and single-phase to ground faults. The
measured parameters in these stages are focused on the bus
voltage magnitude and its phase angle as one of the reference
indicators for the state of power system operation.
Keywords-10-Bus system, PowerWorld simulator, load flow,
fault analysis, voltage magnitude, phase angle.
and other parameters in real time. With the animation, the users
can imagine the real condition what is happening within the
complex power system. Moreover, the software is very
powerful and reliable in load flow analysis, faults study
includes selection of circuit breakers, bus condition and cabling
within very complex system [13].
In this paper, a typical power system network as shown in
Fig.1 is arbitrarily designed by using PowerWorld Simulator
8.0 OFP, ATC, PV-QV software package. The proposed model
is composed of 10 buses; bus-1 is considered as a slack
(reference) bus whereas others are PQ buses. There are 4
generators which are connected by transformers to the 138kV
medium transmission line. Loads are attached in several buses,
except for buses where generator connected. The measured
parameters as expected results are focused on the bus voltage
magnitude and its phase angle as one of the reference indicators
for the stability state of power system operation.

I. INTRODUCTION
Power engineering subjects have been undergone less
attractive for undergraduate/graduate students in the last few
years. This trend will be serious problems behind the vast
growth of electricity industry worldwide. Negative perception
on the impacts of deregulation and restructuring in electricity
industry, high expectation of jobs requirements and perception
of power engineering as an old technology promote low interest
and motivation of students [1, 2]. Another reason is the
complexity of subjects which are taught in the power
engineering courses [3]. However, before reaching the ultimate
limit of this problem, several strategies have been offered to
make the power engineering fields become more attractive,
such as promoting technical challenges [4], collaborative
distance learning [2], [5] and through visualization and
simulation methods [6-9].
As one of the famous simulation software, the PowerWorld
simulator has been widely used in the power system application.
The combining with soft computing techniques, this simulator Fig.1. Proposed design of 10-bus power system
is applied for forecasting and mitigation of power system
blackout [10]. Other applications are the optimal power flow Accordingly, a good design of electrical power system is
simulation and animation of power system presented [11, 12]. required in order to maintain the continuity of supply-demand
The popularity of this software among other simulation tools power flow in any conditions. Therefore, verification in load
due to the ability to show the animation of power flows, voltage flow analysis, fault analysis and stability study are extremely
1A30-1 The 4th IEEE Conference on Power Engineering and Renewable Energy
ICPERE 2018

required. Load flow study is commonly used to assess the rated from 11.7 to 24.5%. The data of transformers is presented
performance of an existing system in the normal operation and in Table 2.
to design a new power system for future planning development,
while fault study is applied to obtain the appropriate setting and Table 2. Data leakage reactance of transformers
determine the interrupting and momentarily ratings of Capacity Leakage
Transformers Rating Voltage
protection system. Any changes of the power system in both (MVA) Reactance (p.u)
normal and fault conditions can be analyzed by stability study. T1 (FA) 22/138 kV 200 0.10
All these studies can be simultaneously performed in the T2 (FA) 13.8/138 kV 50 0.10
PowerWorld simulator, although the main objective in this T3 (FO) 20/138 kV 80 0.15
paper is only on the load flow and fault studies. By adding T4 (FO) 13.8/138 kV 50 0.15
specific data on the synchronous generators, such as inertia
constant and damping coefficient, then the proposed system Since the transformer is a static device, the leakage
will approach the configuration of IEEE 9 and 39 bus systems impedance is constant although the phase sequence is changed.
[14]. As a result, the positive sequence impedance is equal to the
negative sequence impedance. To allow zero sequence current
II. CRITERIA OF DATA SPECIFICATION flows, the neutral point should be connected to the ground. For
II.1 Selection of the Base Power, Voltage and Frequency transformers, the zero sequence impedance is also equal to
System. The base power, voltage and frequency system are leakage impedance [17].
intentionally determined following requirement of the system
II.4 Parameters of Transmission Lines. The
design. These values are 100 MVA, 22 kV on the side of
transmission lines are specified with nominal voltage and
generator at bus-1 (G1) and 50 Hz as the MVA base, voltage
frequency of 138 kV and 50Hz, respectively with operation
base and frequency system, respectively.
temperature at 50oC. The type of conductor is ACSR (Pheasant
II.2 Generators. A common voltage rating of generators 54/19) 1,272,000 CM with characteristic as outside diameter is
for practical purpose is in between 11 kV and 24 kV [15]. equal to 1.382 inches and the resistance is 0.084 Ω/mile per
Therefore, all generators will use the voltage rating within this conductor or 0.0522 Ω/km per conductor [18]. The reason of
range and the data about reactance and resistance are shown in choosing this conductor type is referred to the maximum current
Table 1. carrying capacity based on the total load of the proposed
system. Total load is about 237.12 MVA; comprises with 215
Table 1. Data reactance and resistance of generators
MW + j100 MVAR. Therefore, the magnitude of maximum
Parameters G1 G2 G3 G4 current carrying capacity can be calculated as follows:
Synchronous (Xd) 1.1 1.15 1.15 1.1 .
| |= = 992.0 (1)
Transient (Xd') 0.23 0.37 0.37 0.23 √

Reactances Substransient (Xd") 0.12 0.24 0.24 0.12 Basically, several types of conductors are also able to
(p.u) Negative sequence handle this maximum current, such as Grackle, Finch, Curlew
0.13 0.29 0.29 0.13
(X2) and Cardinal [19]. However, the ACSR (Pheasant 54/19) type
Zero sequence (X0) 0.05 0.11 0.11 0.05 is more properly safe for the expansion of the system in the
future with the approximated current carrying capacity of 1200
Resistances Positive sequence 0.005 0.012 0.012 0.005 A.
(p.u) Negative sequence 0.035 0.1 0.1 0.035 The other parameters, such as inductance and capacitance
should be determined from specific configuration of
• G1: Turbo Generator (solid rotor), 22 kV, 77 MVA, cos ϕ = transmission lines, which is designed as single 3 phase lines, as
0.972 lagging shown in Fig. 2.
• G2: Water wheel generator with damper, 13.8 kV, 42.7
MVA, cos ϕ = 0.94 lagging
• G3: Water wheel generator with damper, 20 kV, 67 MVA,
cos ϕ = 0.894 lagging
• G4: Turbo generator (solid rotor), 13.8 kV, 42.7 MVA, cos
ϕ = 0.94 lagging
Because G1 is connected to the slack bus, this generator
should be able to adjust its output anytime while system
parameters are changed.
II.3 Transformers. Power transformers with rating over Fig.2. Configuration of transmission lines
10 MVA and the highest voltage winding of 138 kV, the leakage The effective radius (r’) of each conductor is calculated by:
reactance can be specified according to its cooling system [16].
For the type of forced-air cooled (FA) is specified between 7 . "
= 0.7788 = 0.7788 = 0.0137 (2)
and 14% . Meawhile, for the type of forced-oil-cooled (FO) is
1A30-1 The 4th IEEE Conference on Power Engineering and Renewable Energy
ICPERE 2018

The geometric mean distance (GMD) is measured as: III. SIMULATION RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
= =13.44m (3) To assess the performance of load flow, it is required a
criteria of voltage in the bus. For the system 138kV, the
The inductance (L) and the inductive reactance (XL) are magnitude of voltage is limited between 0.90 p.u and 1.05 p.u
calculated as follows: in both normal and contingency operation [20]. For the system
between 1 kV and 132 kV, the permitted voltage regulation is
= 2 10 = 1.378 / (4) ±6% [21]. Meanwhile, the voltage phase angle in the normal
operation is limited within ±8 degrees.
=2 = 0.433 Ω/ (5)
III.1 Normal Operation. Table 5 shows the magnitude-
The capacitance (C) and the capacitive admittance (YC) are phase angle of voltage in all buses and the balance of output
calculated as follows: power that is generated and consumed in the normal operation.
= = 0.00838 (6) The magnitude and phase angle of voltage of buses are still in
the allowable range. The lowest magnitude voltage is 0.96 p.u
at bus-9, while the bus-4 has the highest magnitude voltage
= 2 = 2.632 / (7) about 1% higher than the voltage of slack bus generator. The
phase angles of voltage are still in the range of ±8 degrees.
The base Impedance (Zbase) is selected based on the equation
as follows: Table 5. Load flow results in the normal operating condition
( ) Voltage Angle Load Generation
= = = 190.44 (8) Buses
(p.u) (Deg) MW MVAR MW MVAR
1 1.00000 0.00 - - 75.44 18.25
The transmission lines parameters are shown in Table 3. 2 1.00185 -4.28 - - 40 15
3 1.00093 -3.66 - - 60 30
Table 3. Parameters of transmission lines
Distance 4 1.01153 -1.85 - - 40 15
Buses R (p.u) XL (p.u) BC (p.u) 5 0.98464 -4.39 40 20 - -
(km)
5-7 150 0.0411 0.341 0.0752 6 0.98769 -6.60 50 10 - -
5-8 110 0.0302 0.2501 0.0551 7 0.97281 -7.19 50 20 - -
5-9 120 0.0329 0.2728 0.0601 8 0.99749 -4.12 20 10 - -
6-8 110 0.0302 0.2501 0.0551 9 0.95777 -7.98 40 30 - -
6-10 100 0.0274 0.2273 0.0501 10 0.97004 -7.40 15 10 - -
7-10 140 0.0384 0.3182 0.0702
9-10 100 0.0274 0.2273 0.0501 In terms of power flows in the network, the system is
running in the high efficiency (99.8%) due to only 0.44 MW of
active power losses in the transmission line. Because of the
Since transmission line is also a static device, the phase transmission line is designed in the medium line configuration,
sequence has no effect on the impedance. As results, the the effect of line charging capacitor cannot be neglected. As a
positive sequence impedance (Z1) is equal to the negative result, the charging capacitor compensates for reactive power
sequence impedance (Z2). Due to possibility zero sequence and gives contribution to the whole network
current flows after neutral point connects to the ground, the zero
sequence impedance is commonly set by three times larger than III.2 Contingency Operation. In the contingency
Z1 or Z2 [18]. operation, there are two different scenarios where the generator
and transmission line are simultaneously failed. It will also be
II.5 Loads. The loads are located in the bus 5-10. The total
noticed later that the network has responded differently when
load recapitulation is shown in Table 4.
big generators go out, such as G3 and G4, where (G3 > G4). The
line failure is arbitrarily occurred in the line between bus 5 and
Table 4. Distribution of loads 6. The overall results of this condition are shown in Fig.3.
Loads
Buses Load (p.u)
(MW) (MVAR) In Fig.3, both magnitude and phase angle of voltage of some
5 40 20 0.40+j0.20 buses will be out of permitted range when G3 is off. For
6 50 10 0.50+j0.10 instance, the bus 3 and 7 have experienced a drop voltage to 0.8
7 50 20 0.50+j0.20 p.u and their voltage angles are falling to -20 degrees. By
8 20 10 0.20+j0.10 comparison, when G4 goes off, the magnitude voltage is
9 40 30 0.40+j0.30 basically in the range of allowable value, but the phase angle of
10 15 10 0.15+j0.10 some buses is remained lower than –8 degrees. As happened
Total 215 100 2.15 j1.00 when G4 is off, it will be almost similar result when the failure
1A30-1
Fig. 3. Magnitude and phase angle of voltage in the
contingency operation
occurs in the line 5-6. Since the phase angle tends to be
significantly varied and lead to instability operation in the
contingency situation, it should be figured out before the system
loses its synchronism.
In this case, load shedding is the only remedy being
performed to bring the voltage profile back to under normal
condition. Disconnection of loads at bus 7 and 10 is an option
to overcome the off-condition of the G3. Simultaneously, when
G4 goes off and the failure in the line 5-6, loads at bus 6 and 9,
respectively will be disconnected. The load shedding (LS)
results performance can be seen in the Fig. 4 as follows.
According to Fig. 4, it is apparent that load shedding is very
good method to remedy the voltage system back to the normal
operation. Now, the voltage magnitude stays in the range of
0.94-1.04 p.u, while the voltage angle is varied between 0 and
-8 degrees. In fact, load shedding could be solely expected in
order to maintain continuity of supply to the customers and
should be the last choice of the utility to maintain the stability
of the network.
III.3 Fault Conditions. In the fault conditions, the location
of fault is arbitrarily selected in the bus 8, as the bus is located
very close to the generator (G4) for both three-phase and single
phase to ground faults. The simulation results of three-phase
and single phase to ground faults are presented in Table 6 and
7, respectively.
The 4th IEEE Conference on Power Engineering and Renewable Energy
ICPERE 2018
Fig. 4. Magnitude and phase angle of voltage after load
shedding
When faults occur in the bus 8, the total of fault current is
1270.49A and the phase angle is -73.91 degrees in a three-phase
fault, while total of fault current is 2179.66A and the phase
angle is -79.83 degrees in the single phase to ground fault. The
single phase to ground fault current is likely to be greater than
three-phase fault current due to the fault location is near to the
source. For faults farther from source, three-phase faults are
likely to give higher fault currents. This is because transmission
lines have much higher zero sequence impedance than positive
sequence impedance. Since the rating of protective device is
commonly determined from single phase to ground fault current
level, this condition is actually less expected. The problem
could be overcome by putting a reactor (inductor) in the neutral
point of generator.
In the result of three phase fault condition, the voltage for
all phases at the bus fault location is equal to zero, whereas the
other buses experienced a significant voltage drop.
Nevertheless, the magnitude voltage in all phases remained
balanced with phase angle of each phase is still 120 degrees out
of phase. Therefore, three-phase fault is sometimes called
balanced fault condition.
In comparison, only voltage at the faulted phase (phase A in
this case) is zero when single phase to ground fault occurs,
while the voltage in the other 2 non-faulted phases are reduced
from their nominal values. This type of fault can also cause both
1A30-1 The 4th IEEE Conference on Power Engineering and Renewable Energy
ICPERE 2018

magnitude and phase angle voltage at adjacent buses for each
phase become unbalanced. The bus voltage at fault location or
the voltage at the phase fault will not be equal to zero if there is
impedance being involved the fault to ground. In this case, it is
considered that bolted fault occurred in both types of fault.
Table 6. Three-phase fault simulation results in bus 8
line, it is expected that the system parameters do not change too
drastically. However, if the system condition cannot be
recovered naturally, the utility should be able to manipulate the
system in order to bring back to the normal condition. The load
shedding method can provide remedies to the contingency
situation as the last option in maintaining the continuity of
utility services.

Voltages (p.u) Phase Angles (degrees)

In the fault condition, the voltage at the location of the fault
or voltage at faulted phase will decrease significantly and could
Buses
A B C A B C be zero in the case of bolted fault. Although the voltage in each
1 0.46034 0.46034 0.46034 16.54 -103.46 136.54
phase of the three phase fault is still balanced, the magnitude of
voltage decreases significantly. In comparison, the single phase
2 0.53049 0.53049 0.53049 8.18 -111.82 128.18 to ground fault causes imbalanced phase voltage in the location
3 0.49642 0.49642 0.49642 10.42 -109.58 130.42 of fault and the adjacent buses as well.
4 0.10451 0.10451 0.10451 18.65 -101.35 138.65
With the animation based simulation, the simulator will
5 0.37815 0.37815 0.37815 10.25 -109.75 130.25 attract the users especially the students to imagine the real
6 0.46845 0.46845 0.46845 6.06 -113.94 126.06 condition that occurs within the complex power system.
7 0.41240 0.41240 0.41240 6.23 -113.77 126.23
REFERENCES
8 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00 0.00 0.00
[1] G.G. Karady, and G.T. Heydt: “Increasing Student Interest and
9 0.36839 0.36839 0.36839 5.11 -114.89 125.11 Comprehension in Power Engineering at the Graduate and Undergraduate
10 0.28665 0.28665 0.28665 4.95 -115.05 124.95 Levels”, IEEE Trans. on Power System, Vol.15, pp.16-21 (2000)
[2] J. Hou: “Toward an Interactive Virtual Classroom for Power System
Distance Education”, International Journal of Power and Energy
Systems, Vol.27(2), pp.180-185 (2007)
Table 7. Single phase-ground fault simulation results in bus 8 [3] Electric Power Engineering Education Resources 2005–2006 IEEE Power
Engineering Society Committee Report: “The Power Engineering
Voltages (p.u) Phase Angles (degrees) Education Committee (PEEC) Task Force on Educational Resources”,
IEEE Trans. on Power System, Vol.23, pp.1-24 (2008)
Buses
A B C A B C [4] E.K. Stanek, Tompkins, and J. Curtis: “Power Engineering Education as
Viewed from University Administration”, IEEE Trans. on Power
1 0.64842 0.74047 0.70738 10.43 -109.61 125.81
Systems, PWRS-2 (1), pp. 226-231 (1987)
2 0.69458 0.77829 0.74651 4.34 -115.30 119.97 [5] M. L. Crow, A. Pahwa, S. K. Starrctt, K. J. Olciniczak, and S. D. Sudhoff:
3 0.65498 0.77310 0.73236 6.02 -113.83 120.72 “Collaborative Distance Education in Power Engineering”, IEEE Trans.
on Power Systems, Vol,15. pp.3-8 (2000)
4 0.30515 0.62905 0.57020 12.35 -110.32 120.51
[6] O. Toshiaki, and O. Takahisa: “Visualization and Interactive Simulation
5 0.54285 0.71589 0.67851 5.00 -113.20 119.41 for Power System Operation and Education”, IEE Conference Publication
6 0.63400 0.74691 0.71454 2.03 -116.60 116.95 (450), pp. 802-807 (1998)
[7] H. Ni, G.T. Heydt, D.J. Tylavsky, and K.E. Holbert: “Power Engineering
7 0.56404 0.72840 0.68794 1.81 -116.57 116.31
Education and the Internet: Motivation and Instructional Tools”, IEEE
8 0.00000 0.68564 0.61670 0.00 -115.53 122.77 Trans. on Power Systems, Vol.17, pp.7-12 (2002)
9 0.51066 0.70873 0.66557 0.46 -117.33 115.67 [8] J. Yang, and M.D. Anderson: “PowerGraf: An Educational Software
Package for Power Systems Analysis and Design” IEEE Trans. on Power
10 0.39445 0.70837 0.65691 0.27 -117.31 116.95 Systems, Vol.13, pp.1205-1210 (1998)
[9] J.R. Shin, W.H. Lee, and D.H. Im: “A Windows-based Interactive and
Graphic Package For the Education and Training of Power System
IV. CONCLUSION Analysis and Operation”, IEEE Trans. on Power Systems, Vol.14,
pp.1193-1199 (1999)
The protocol design and analysis of 10-bus power system [10] F.A. Shaikh, Zaheeruddin, M.S.J. Asghar, and G. Singh: “Soft Computing
using PowerWorld® simulator has been presented. This Techniques and Role of PowerWorld® Simulator for Forecasting and
simulator is very popular to design and analyse several aspects Mitigation of Power System Blackout”, International Conference on
in power system practices. In this paper, the basic knowledge Computational Intelligence and Multimedia Applications, pp.341-343
of power system components is required for the protocol (2008)
design. Then, the reliability of design is tested by using the [11] F.Z. Gherbi, M. Rahli, and S. Hadjeri: “Optimal Power Flow using
PowerWorld”, Modelling, Measurement and Control A77(5-6), pp.33-47
PowerWorld simulator tools in terms of load flow analysis and (2004)
faults study.
[12] F. Pietryga: “Animation of a Power System using Powerworld
Under load flow study, the power flow condition of the Simulator”, ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition 2006
power system network should be balanced between generation [13] http://www.powerworld.com/Default.asp, accessed on 22 May 2008
and load in the normal operation. Thus, the nominal voltage can [14] http://psdyn.ece.wisc.edu/IEEE_benchmarks/, accessed on 22 May 2008
be kept in permitted limit. In the contingency situation, such as [15] L.M. Faulkenberry, and M. Coffer: Electrical Power Distribution and
one big generator goes out or the failure of a main transmission Transmission, USA: Prentice Hall, 1996
1A30-1 The 4th IEEE Conference on Power Engineering and Renewable Energy
[16] W.D. Stevenson: Elements of Power System Analysis, 4th Ed., New
York:McGraw-Hill, 1982
[17] H. Saadat: Power System Analysis, Boston: WCB/McGraw-Hill, Boston,
1999
[18] Z.A.Yamayee, and J.L.Bala: Electromechanical Energy Devices and
Power Systems, New York: J. Wiley, 1994
[19] J.D. Golver, and M. Sarma: Power System Analysis and Design: With
Personal Computer Applications, Boston: PWS Publisher, 1987
ICPERE 2018
[20] D. Holhbaugh, and D.Grimes: Final Report: “System Impact Study to
Allegheny Energy Supply for 180MW Electric Generating Facility”,
Lawrence County, PA, ATSI, 2001
[21] C.L. Master: “Voltage rise: the big issue when connecting embedded
generation to long 11 kV overhead lines”, IEE Power Engineering
Journal, Vol.16(1), pp.5-12, (2002)