CIGRE COLLOQUIUM

From Grid friendly generation towards a coordinated SCA2 /SCB2/ SCD1

integration: A Phase Shifting Transformer helps to
complete the circle
Ajay Krishnan Nilakantan

From Grid friendly generation towards a coordinated integration: A Phase

Shifting Transformer helps to complete the circle

A. NILAKANTAN, L. KIRCHNER, A. KRÄMER

Maschinenfabrik Reinhausen GmbH
Germany

M. AMPOLU, K.S. SWARUP

Indian Institute of Technology Madras
India
SUMMARY

The outset of boom in Photo-Voltaic (PV) plants focused more on tapping the maximum power
from them. It neglected the need to contribute to system reliability, efficiency in grid operation
and stability. Additionally, a structure for incentives and standards for system services was
lacking, especially if the operation was not in coordination with rest of the system. With the
developed interconnection standards, the focus is slowly shifting from the magnitude of installed
renewable capacity towards efficient, economical and reliable integration into power system
operation.

Nevertheless, the question arises that, given the ageing infrastructure, financial situation of
Distribution Companies (DISCOMs) and volatility of renewable generation, how can PV
integration, which generally occurs in the distribution grid in a lot of countries, be directed
towards an efficient, economical and coordinated operation of grids? Efficiency in utilization of
the generated power depends on efficiency at generation as well as efficient dispatch of power.
Given the surplus state of generation that the country is marching to, the focus shifts to the
transport of power. Attributing to the impedance of parallel paths, variation in power
generating output, variation in loads and load center phase angles, the steady-state power
flow in such a system becomes complicated. It does not match the state of the system the
design was originally based on. The situation has gained more prominence after the
liberalization of the electricity market and the separation of power generation and transmission.
Today utilities have less direct influence on generating equipments, neither the access points,
nor the operation modes. This process indicates that there is an increasing need for appropriate
means to control the power flow within an interconnected network. The static control of the
power flow alone is not sufficient at all. An On-Load Tap-Changer (OLTC) at the generating
station as well as in a Phase-Shifting Transformer (PST) at the right network node serves that
purpose in outstanding manner.

This paper focusses on system requirements and manufacturer’s preferences to determine the
design type of PST. The system requirements are the power rating, the range of the phase shift,
the system voltage rating and the short-circuit power of the systems. The design considerations
are type of construction, winding type, shipping limitations and the OLTC selection.

As PV generation is concentrated in some of the states in India, PSTs help in preventing

congestion in such Intra State Transmission System. A steady state analysis of one of the
southern states of India is carried out to support the argument. From power flow solutions,
various overloaded lines and the alternate under loaded lines are identified. The optimal location
for installation of a PST is determined and it is supported by economic analysis in terms of
Return-of-Investment in comparison with a new line as well as a standalone equipment.
A.nilakantan@reinhausen.com
 CIGRE COLLOQUIUM
From Grid friendly generation towards a coordinated SCA2 /SCB2/ SCD1
integration: A Phase Shifting Transformer helps to
complete the circle
Ajay Krishnan Nilakantan

KEYWORDS

Photovoltaic, Phase-Shifting Transformers, On-Load Tap changers, Return-of-Investments,

DISCOMs

1. INTRODUCTION

The enormous growth in the installed capacity of renewable generation over the last 5 years in
some of the states in India has thrown many open questions in terms of grid integration of the
generated power. The unbundling of the power utility entities in the state further augments this,
as they are individual operation control centres. The surplus state of variable renewable
generation poses a huge challenge for integration by a strong, efficient, economical, reliable
and stable transmission and distribution grid.

The transmission system was designed in the 1900s for a unidirectional power flow from
generation to distribution grid. The changing structure of power flows from unidirectional top-
down approach to multi-level multi-directional generation and utilization, has led to creation of
active networks throughout the system, meaning generation and consumption at all voltage
levels. This also implies that with variable power generations, variable directions of loads or
power flows and differences in the impedances of parallel paths, the steady state power flow in
the network is floating and becomes bidirectional. Adding to it, the transmission utilities have
less direct influence on generating equipments, neither the access points, nor the operation
modes. Hence, the grid demands solutions, which enables coordinated operation of its assets,
flexible and dynamic control, optimal utilization of generated power, minimal losses, minimal
footprint of assets and so on. This means that there is a need for solutions, which control the
active power flow in an interconnected network dynamically. The static control of power flow of
synchronous generators meeting the load demands alone is no longer sufficient. This requires
a PST to complete the circle from a grid friendly variable generation to a coordinated and optimal
integration. An OLTC being the common factor providing variability in all stages of the power
system right from grid integration of the generated power to active power flow control in power
transmission.

Given that the PSTs are gaining prominence for its technical capabilities and benefits, the
selection of the right design is very important. The types of designs along with the factors for
choosing a particular type are mentioned in section 2. The chosen type also points towards the
requirements for selection of the right OLTC (section 3). Having chosen the right OLTC for a
particular PST design, it needs to be adapted for the applications in terms of certain
specifications (section 4).

Section 5 presents a case study of simulating the usage of a PST in the state of Andhra Pradesh
(AP) in India where renewable generation has increased substantially in the last 5 years. This
has resulted in intra state congestion along with overloaded lines as well as substations with
over-voltages due to variable power generation. Section 5.1 focusses on modelling and
simulation of the grid network of AP and the requirement of a PST at one of the substations in
a region dominated by renewable generation. This is validated by the economic analysis of
inclusion of a PST in the network (section 5.2) in comparison to a new transmission line or as a
standalone system.

2. SELECTION OF THE RIGHT DESIGN FOR PST

PSTs can be designed to provide a discrete phase angle shift, continuous variable phase angle
shift, or a combination of both. Some designs allow for magnitude as well as phase control.
Many different winding arrangements are possible depending on the rated voltage, the power
 CIGRE COLLOQUIUM
From Grid friendly generation towards a coordinated SCA2 /SCB2/ SCD1
integration: A Phase Shifting Transformer helps to
complete the circle
Ajay Krishnan Nilakantan

output, the amount of phase shift, and whether or not linear voltage control is also required.
Discrete phase angle shifters normally provide settings for a plus-or-minus fixed degree value
and zero. A variable phase shift can be achieved in a very efficient way by using OLTCs for the
variation of the phase shift in definite steps during operation. In most cases, the PSTs are
designed to allow the inversion of the phase shift from advance to retard and vice versa. In
practice, various solutions are possible to design a PST. The chosen design depends on the
major factors [1], [2]:
 Throughput power and phase-shift angle requirements
 Rated voltage
 Short-circuit capability of the connected system
 Shipping limitations
 On-load tap-changer performance requirements

Figure 1a : PST single core design symmetrical regulation Phasor diagram

Figure 1b : PST two-core design symmetrical regulation Phasor diagram

In addition, preferences of a manufacturer as to the type of transformer (core or shell) or other

design characteristics (symmetric or non-symmetric, quadrature or non-quadrature) may also
play a role. With respect to the OLTC, the decision whether a single- or a dual-core design is
chosen, is very important and may be determined by the performance characteristics of the
OLTC. Dual-core designs must not necessarily require a dual tank construction.

3. SELECTION OF THE RIGHT OLTC FOR PST [3] [4] [5]

OLTCs are subjected to numerous limits. Depending on the PST design, the tap-changer can
be located directly at the line end (high voltage, see Fig.1a) or in a separate exciting unit (see
Fig 1b). The solution with the OLTC(s) at the line end is typical for the single core design. The
arrangement of the OLTC(s) in the exciting winding is typical for dual core designs.

The advantage of the single core design is the less complexity combined with its high economic
efficiency. However, a number of disadvantages are existing connected with this design and the
OLTC application. As mentioned above, the OLTCs are located at the line end and therefore
exposed to all disturbances in the system (over voltages, short-circuit fault currents). The
regulation requirements determine directly the step voltage and the through-current of the
 CIGRE COLLOQUIUM
From Grid friendly generation towards a coordinated SCA2 /SCB2/ SCD1
integration: A Phase Shifting Transformer helps to
complete the circle
Ajay Krishnan Nilakantan

OLTC, but a variation of these values (and with this a possibly more economic choice of the
OLTC) is not possible due to the customer specification. In most of the cases each phase is
equipped with one (non-symmetric design in general) or two (symmetric design) OLTCs.
However, it is possible with one OLTC and two switched sectors to bring in symmetric regulation.

The most common configuration of a dual core design consists of a series and an exciting unit
(see Fig 1b). These units can be enclosed in one tank, but for large capacity transformers, they
are designed with to separate tanks. When using this design the step voltage and the through-
current of the regulating winding can be varied and optimized with respect to the rated step
voltage and rated through-current of the available OLTCs. Up to a certain rating, three-phase
OLTCs can be used, with higher ratings three single-pole OLTCs are necessary. The highest
voltage for equipment of the OLTC (insulation level) is independent of the system voltage and
can be kept low. The use of winding arrangements with coarse and tap winding is possible when
larger regulating ranges or reduced step voltage by increasing the number of steps are wanted
or necessary. This solution requires an additional switch (Advanced Retard Switch) which
serves for the advanced/retard selection.

The basic selection of the OLTC is carried out with the maximum through-current and the
maximum step voltage. The determination of these values has to be considered well. For both
designs is valid that the maximum phase shift is defined under no load conditions and is, usually,
symmetrical. However, the phase shift varies under load due to load losses and leakage
impedances, resulting in increase of the phase shift in the retard position, but a decrease in the
advanced position of the PST. Additionally the overloading of a PST amplifies the above-
mentioned effects and influences the rated values of the transformer and the OLTC.

4. OLTC-ADAPTION FOR PHASE-SHIFTING TRANSFORMERS[5]

All specified switching conditions of an application, including overload, have to be concerned to

identify the highest value of the step voltage, which is required for the OLTC selection as rated
step voltage. Especially in PST-applications with small phase angles α0, the specified overload
conditions should be checked concerning an increase of step voltages in the retard direction.
This rated step voltage will define the required minimum value of the transition resistor of the
OLTC to limit the circulating current in the mid-position of the diverter switch to a permissible
value concerning the switching capacity of the transition contacts.

The voltage drop at the transition resistor caused by the through-current forms the recovery
voltage of the main switching contact. Therefore, the switching capacity of this contact limits the
maximum permissible value of the transition resistor for a specified overload to be switched. For
the selection of the transition resistor, it is always necessary to find a balance between the
effects of the step voltage and the through-current. Therefore and for switching capability
reasons the “rated through-current” of an OLTC is assigned to a specified rated step voltage.
Regarding the switching capability this is also true for the “maximum rated through-current” of
an OLTC, but the “maximum rated through-current” additionally determines the current carrying
limits and is, with respect to contact heating and short-circuit withstand capability, independent
on the step voltage.

A standard requirement for OLTCs in common Power Transformers is the capability to break
twice the rated through-current at rated step voltage (overload condition). This breaking capacity
of the OLTC is guaranteed, provided that the step voltage is independent on the (over)load
current. In PST-applications, where a load and OLTC-position dependent range of step voltages
has to be handled, sometimes it is not possible to find a transition resistor dimensioning, which
is suitable for the rated step voltage (maximum value of step voltage appearing under any
specified switching condition) as well as for twice the rated load current. If the overload
 CIGRE COLLOQUIUM
From Grid friendly generation towards a coordinated SCA2 /SCB2/ SCD1
integration: A Phase Shifting Transformer helps to
complete the circle
Ajay Krishnan Nilakantan

requirements in those applications are not based on a breaking capacity of twice but for example
of only 1.5 times the rated load current, it should be proven, if an OLTC with reduced rated
through-current can be used to enable a more economical OLTC solution.

5. CASE STUDY OF USING PST IN INDIAN TRANSMISSION NETWORK

The evolution of the power grid in the last 5-6 years has been tremendous. A closer look into
one of the states in India, Andhra Pradesh (AP) validates this argument. Be it the increased
generation, the strengthening of
765 KV network, increased focus Power System equipment 2013 2019
on reactive power compensation
400/220 KV Transformer 7875 MVA 9950 MVA
devices like shunt reactors, or
more number of transmission 765/400 KV Transformer 6000 MVA 15000 MVA
lines, this progress can be
attributed to the increased Total transmission line lengths 6520 11911,68
(ckm) for 400 KV
renewable energy penetration into
the grid. A short look at the Total transmission line lengths 604 2612
statistics in Table 1, shows how (ckm) for 765 KV
the different power system
Number of Shunt Reactors & 23 & 2345 56 & 8760
equipment at different high voltage
Capacity Mvar Mvar
levels has evolved from 2013 to
2019 (Note: The numbers are 400 kV Generators 9651 MVA 18426 MVA
indicative of the size of the grid
220kV Generators 7506 MVA 7506 MVA
taken for modelling and simulation
with all generators greater than Renewable generation (Wind) 167 MW 6812 MW
100 MW being considered).
Renewable generation (Solar) 0 MW 3500 MW

Table 1: Statisitics of the development of the AP grid from 2013 to 2019

5.1.MODELLING AND SIMULATION OF AP TRANSMISSION NETWORK

The modelling and simulation of the practical state of the 220kV, 400kV and 765kV networks of
AP have been achieved in DigSilent PowerFactory software by varying the loads and external
grids to other states as well as the radial
networks (figure 2 shows a part of the modelled
network). This state of the grid is validated based
on the analysis of the quarterly operational
feedback report of the National Load Despatch
Centre (NLDC) [6][7][8][9][10][11]. The steady state
load flow analysis is carried out considering the
active and reactive power limits of the generators
using the balancing method of “Distributed Slack
by synchronous generators” in order to adjust the
generation from conventional generators to meet
the net load (Actual load –RE generation).
Fig 2: Modelling and simulation of the 400kV and 765kV network of AP

The P and Q values of the base case of such a network is designated as case 0, see Table 2.
This network contains the simulated high voltage substations and the highly loading lines as per
the NLDC report, as can be seen in Figure 2. The Anantapur and Kadapa regions have large
PV and wind parks which generate huge amounts of power. The evacuation of the generated
 CIGRE COLLOQUIUM
From Grid friendly generation towards a coordinated SCA2 /SCB2/ SCD1
integration: A Phase Shifting Transformer helps to
complete the circle
Ajay Krishnan Nilakantan

power leads to highly loaded lines and very high voltages at the substations. The operator has
to resort to opening the lines or breakers to control overloading as well as overvoltages.

This causes huge losses to the renewable park owner as well as the transmission utility, who is
unable to transmit the generated power. The heavily loaded line from the simulation is the 400kV
line from NP KUNTA to Kadapa, evacuating the power generated from 1500 MW solar plant.
A new transmission line in parallel to this
MW/ Case 0 Case 1 Case 2 highly loaded line reduces the loading to an
Mvar Base case PST New Xm line
certain extent (see Fig 3b). But this is
P Gen 21309,24 21326,06 21307,20 accompanied by transmission of a lesser
generated power as well as higher reactive
Q Gen 2136,73 2253,85 2105,05 power grid losses, making the grid more
P-Load 5408,78 5414,25 5408,37 capacitive (Q loss being more negative).
This has economic impact on the utility
Q-Load 1317,35 1317,35 1317,35 because it has to make payment to the pool
P-Loss 295,41 306,71 293,73 for importing reactive power during
overvoltage situations. Hence, a new
Q-Loss -10803,44 -10648,98 -10839,70 transmission line parallel to the overloaded
Q-comp 8524,14 8247,72 8291,92 line is not always the best solution (as seen
in Case 2 of Table 2)
Table 2: Results of P and Q values for various cases

Fig 3a: Simulation of the AP network with a 1400MVA Fig 3b: Simulation of the AP network with a new
PST at 400kV NP KUNTA substation transmission line parallel to the highly loaded line

A Phase-Shifting Transformer is a viable, economical and technically superior alternative to the

problem of evacuation of generated power. As the renewable generation is variable, a PST with
an OLTC offers that flexibility in optimal utilization of the power assets. It is an technically
superior solution for such grid applications as it increases the generated power which could be
taken up by the grid,increased power transfer capacity, optimal loading of lines and lower
reactive power grid losses (Case 1 in Table 2). The simulation using PST at NP Kunta substation
is shown in Figure 3a and the results of P and Q values are tabulated in Table 2.

5.2.ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF INCLUSION OF PST IN AP NETWORK

A PST is included in the network with an objective of reducing the loading of heavily loaded lines
and push the power through the relatively lesser loaded line by inserting an impedance in the
line by changing the phase angle (control of power flow). Along with performing this function,
the PST also provides economic benefits to the utility through an increased generation from the
solar plant, an increased power transfer capacity as well as reduced payments to the pool due
 CIGRE COLLOQUIUM
From Grid friendly generation towards a coordinated SCA2 /SCB2/ SCD1
integration: A Phase Shifting Transformer helps to
complete the circle
Ajay Krishnan Nilakantan

to reactive power exchanges. The latter is not considered for the calculation of the payback
period of a new PST in comparison to a new transmission line as well as for the case of a
standalone investment. The calculation also takes into consideration the losses in the line due
to a new transmission line or a PST (1% of the rated capacity).

Comparison in terms of losses and increased generation

Current Total Cost of
Line through Losses in the Losses for one losses for one
Cases to be considered Loading(%) line(KA) Parallel Lines line(MW) year(MWhr) year (Million Rs)
Overloaded network 128,3 2,55 2 0,95 2787,91 10,87
With PST 67,5 1,35 2 14,27 41661,39 162,48
With New Transmission line 89,9 2,672 3 0,70 2040,70 7,96
Total Increased beneficiary Increased beneficiary
Generation Energy per year by Energy to be sold per year Net increment
Cases to be considered (MW) TRANSCO(MWh) by TRANSCO(Million Rs) (Million Rs)
Overloaded network 21309 0 0 0
With PST 21326 49640 392,16 229,68
With New Transmission line 21307 -5840 -46,14 -54,09
Table 3a: Comparison of a new line and a PST in terms of losses and increased generation

Comparison in terms of increased transmission capacity (From Simulation)

Parameter Overloaded network With PST New Transmission line
Line loading (%) 59,78 53,63 53,63
Power Transferred p (MW) 5408,78 5414,25 5408,37
Difference of Power Transferred from the base
0,00 5,47 -0,41
overloaded network (MW)
Increase/ decrease of power transfer capacity in a 0,00 43,76 -3,28
day(MW)
Increase/ decrease of revenue due to power transfer
0,00 62,29 -4,67
capacity in a year (Million Rs)
Table 3b: Comparison in terms of increased transmission capacity

Financial Analysis with PST & New Transmission line

Differences Differences
Payback period Payback
Initial due to due to Total
comparison to period for a
investmentlosses and power earnings /
new new
(Million increased transfer expenditures
transmission equipment
Rs) generation capacity (Million Rs)
line (years) (years)
(Million Rs) (Million Rs)
[12]
PST 723,80 229,68 62,29 291,97 1,10 2,48
New Transmission line 404,00 -54,09 -4,67 -58,76
Table 3c: Payback period comparison of a PST with a new transmission line and a standalone equipment

Table 3a shows the comparison of a new transmission line and a PST in terms of losses and
increased generation by taking the values of line loading and current through the lines and the
total generation as mentioned also in Table 2. It can be seen that the line losses as well as lower
generated power due to a new transmission line keeps the net increment always on the
negative. However, inspite of higher internal as well as line losses, the increased generation
compensates for the utility in terms of net profit from the system per year. Table 3b shows the
comparison in terms of power transmission capacity due to differences in line loadings. It can
be inferred that inspite of same line loadings for a system with PST or with a new transmission
line, the power transmission capacity has reduced for a new line while that for a PST system
has increased. This has led to more revenue generation due to power transfer capacity for the
system with PST as compared to a new line. Table 3c takes in the values from tables 3a and
3b and the payback period of a PST as a standalone investment for the utility was found to be
around 2.5 years. After this time period, there is bound to be considerable savings for the utility
 CIGRE COLLOQUIUM
From Grid friendly generation towards a coordinated SCA2 /SCB2/ SCD1
integration: A Phase Shifting Transformer helps to
complete the circle
Ajay Krishnan Nilakantan

in terms of increased generation intake, increased transmission capacity and flexible grid
control. When the investment of PST is compared with the investment of a new transmission
line, the payback period for the PST is around 1.1 years. This does not take into account the
Right-of-Way issues and land requirements incase new tower structures for the transmission
system is needed to accommodate the extra line.

6. CONCLUSION

Concentrated regions of variable renewable generations leads to over-voltages in substations

as well as over loadings of lines. The evacuation of power in such regions requires dynamic
active power flow control and hence, a Phase-Shifting Transformer. The design aspects, factors,
OLTC requirements and its adaption for a PST were explained. A case study of a grid
requirement for PST in such variable renewable rich regions has been validated through the
modelling and simulation of the transmission network of Andhra Pradesh, India and determining
the optimal location of PST. An economical analysis in terms of calculation of payback period
for a PST at the required location in comparison with a new transmission line or as a standalone
equipment was also carried out and was found to be very economical.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

The authors acknowledge the Southern Regional Load Dispatch Center (SRLDC), Bangalore,
India and APTRANSCO for providing the data of the Indian transmission network for research.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

[1] Gustav Preininger “Phase-Shifting Transformers”(in: James Harlow “Electric Power

Transformer Engineering”, CRC Press, New York, 2004, pages 2-63 – 2-80)
[2] Walter Seitlinger “Phase Shifting Transformers – Discussion of Specific Characteristics”
(CIGRÉ Session 1998, Paris, 30th August – 5th September 1998, paper 12-306)
[3] A. Krämer, J. Ruff “Transformers for Phase Angle Regulation Considering the Selection of On-
Load Tap-Changers”, (IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery, Vol. 13 (1998) No.2, pp. 518-525)
[4] Dr. Axel Krämer “On-Load Tap-Changers for Power Transformers – Operation, Principles,
Applications and Selection”, (2nd edition, Kerschensteiner Verlag, Lappersdorf, Germany, 2014,
ISBN 978-3-931954-47-5)
[5] A. Krämer, D. Dohnal, B. Herrmann, “Special Considerations on the Selection of On-load Tap-
changers for Phase-shifting Transformers“, (CIGRÉ Session 2006, Paris, 27th August – 1st
September 2006, paper A2-205)
[6] Operational feedback on transmission constraints," National Load Dispatch Center, New Delhi,
Jan 2018.
[7] "Operational feedback on transmission constraints," National Load Dispatch Center, New Delhi,
Apr 2018.
[8] Operational feedback on transmission constraints," National Load Dispatch Center, New Delhi,
July 2018.
[9] "Operational feedback on transmission constraints," National Load Dispatch Center, New Delhi,
Oct 2018.
[10] "Operational feedback on transmission constraints," National Load Dispatch Center, New Delhi,
Jan 2019.
[11] "Operational feedback on transmission constraints," National Load Dispatch Center, New Delhi,
Apr 2019.
[12] T. Schmidt, "Phase-Shifting Transformers Applications & Technology," ABB, 2016.