Power System Analysis and Design 6th

Edition Glover Solutions Manual

Go to download the full and correct content document:
https://testbankfan.com/product/power-system-analysis-and-design-6th-edition-glover
-solutions-manual/
More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant
download maybe you interests ...

Power System Analysis and Design 6th Edition Glover

Test Bank

https://testbankfan.com/product/power-system-analysis-and-
design-6th-edition-glover-test-bank/

Power System Analysis and Design SI Edition 6th Edition

Glover Solutions Manual

https://testbankfan.com/product/power-system-analysis-and-design-
si-edition-6th-edition-glover-solutions-manual/

Power System Analysis And Design 5th Edition Glover

Solutions Manual

https://testbankfan.com/product/power-system-analysis-and-
design-5th-edition-glover-solutions-manual/

Power System Analysis and Design SI Edition 6th Edition

Glover Test Bank

https://testbankfan.com/product/power-system-analysis-and-design-
si-edition-6th-edition-glover-test-bank/
Digital Control System Analysis and Design 4th Edition
Phillips Solutions Manual

https://testbankfan.com/product/digital-control-system-analysis-
and-design-4th-edition-phillips-solutions-manual/

Essentials of System Analysis and Design 4th Edition

Valacich Solutions Manual

https://testbankfan.com/product/essentials-of-system-analysis-
and-design-4th-edition-valacich-solutions-manual/

Systems Analysis and Design 6th Edition Dennis

Solutions Manual

https://testbankfan.com/product/systems-analysis-and-design-6th-
edition-dennis-solutions-manual/

Essentials of Systems Analysis and Design 6th Edition

Valacich Solutions Manual

https://testbankfan.com/product/essentials-of-systems-analysis-
and-design-6th-edition-valacich-solutions-manual/

Heating Ventilating and Air Conditioning Analysis and

Design 6th Edition McQuiston Solutions Manual

https://testbankfan.com/product/heating-ventilating-and-air-
conditioning-analysis-and-design-6th-edition-mcquiston-solutions-
manual/
Chapter 8
Symmetrical Components

ANSWERS TO MULTIPLE-CHOICE TYPE QUESTIONS

8.1 Equal, ± 120°; equal, ± 120 °; 8.21 Z go + 3 Z n

equal, zero 8.22 Positive-sequence, sub-transient
1 3 8.23 Does not
8.2 1e j120° ; − +j
2 2 8.24 a
8.3 V0 + V1 + V2 ; V0 + a 2V1 + av2 ; 8.25 (i) Can, do; does not, 3
V0 + aV1 + a 2V2 (ii) e j 30° :1, e− j 30° :1
(iii) Do not
1
8.4 (V + Vb + Vc ) ; 13 (Va + aVb + a2Vc ) ;
3 a 8.26 (i) Short
1 (ii) 3 Z n
(V + a2Vb + aVc )
3 a (iii) Open
8.5 Zero (iv) Short
8.6 May, Never
8.7 a 8.27 3
8.28 V0 I 0* + V1 I1* + V2 I2*
8.8 I a + I b + I c ; 3I 0
8.9 Zero
8.10 a
8.11 a
8.12 a
8.13 ZY + Z n ; Z n
8.14 A− 1 Z p A
8.15 a
8.16 ZY + 3 Z n
8.17 ∞, Z ∆ / 3, Z ∆ / 3
8.18 Diagonal, uncoupled
8.19 Uncoupled, positive-sequence
8.20 Diagonal, zero

199
© 2017 Cengage Learning®. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
8.1 Using the identities shown in Table 8.1
a −1 −(1 − a ) (−1) 3 ∠ − 30° 3
(a) = = = ∠ 90°
1+ a − a 2
(1 + a + a ) − 2a (−1) 2 ∠ 240° 2
2 2

(b)
( a2 − a ) + j = −1 + j
=
2∠135°
ja + a 2
a ( j + a)  1 3
(1∠120° )  j − + j 
 2 2 
2∠15° 2∠15°
= = = 0.7321 ∠ 270°
1  3  1.932 ∠ 105°
− + j  + 1 
2  2 
(c) (1 + a ) (1 + a 2 ) = ( −a 2 ) ( −a ) = a3 = 1 ∠ 0°
(d) ( a − a 2 )( a 2 − 1) = ( a 2 − a )(1 − a 2 ) = ( 3∠270° )( )
3∠30° = 3 ∠ 300°

1 3
(a) = a ( a3 ) = a = − + j
10 3
8.2 (a)
2 2
1 3
( ja ) = ( j) (a) = ( j) ( j ) ( j ) ( a ) = −a =
10 10 10 4 4 2
(b) −j
2 2

( ) ( 3 ) ∠ − 90° = 0 − j3
3 3
(1 − a )
3
(c) = 3∠ − 30° = 3
= 0 − j 5.196
1 3 1
− +j 3 −
(d) e a = e 2 2 = e 2∠
radians
2
= 0.6065∠49.62° = 0.3929 + j 0.4620

8.3 (a) I 0  1 1 1   6 ∠ 90 °  1 ∠90 ° + 1 ∠ 320 ° + 1∠220 ° 

  
I1  = 1 1 a a  6 ∠ 320 ° = 1 ∠90 ° + 1 ∠80 ° + 1 ∠100 ° 
2   6
3
I 2 
3 1 a 2 a  6 ∠ 220 ° 1 ∠ 90 ° + 1 ∠200 ° + 1 ∠ 340 °

0 − j 0.2856 0.571 ∠ − 90 °
6  0 + j 2.97  =  5.94 ∠ 90 °  A
= 
3  0 + j 0.316   0.632 ∠ 90 ° 

(b) I 0  1 1 1  40 ∠ 90 °  1 ∠ 90 ° + 1 ∠ 0 °   18.86 ∠ 45 ° 

  
I1  = 1 1 a a   40 ∠ 0 °  40 1 ∠90 ° + 1∠120 °  = 25.76 ∠ 105 ° A
2  
=
I 2  3 1 a 2 a   0  3 1 ∠ 90 ° + 1∠240 °  6.90 ∠ 165 ° 

8.4 Van  1 1 1  45 ∠ 80 ° 1 ∠80 ° + 2 ∠ 0 ° + 1 ∠90 ° 

  
Vbn  = 1 a
2
a   90 ∠ 0 °  = 45 1 ∠ 80 ° + 2 ∠ 240 ° + 1 ∠210 °
   
Vcn  1 a a 2  45 ∠ 90 ° 1 ∠ 80 ° + 2 ∠120 ° + 1 ∠330 ° 

200
© 2017 Cengage Learning®. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
  2.174 + j1.985   132.48∠ 42.4 °
= 45 − 1.692 − j1.247 = 94.58 ∠ 216.4 ° V
0.0397 + j 2.217 99.78 ∠ 88.97 °

8.5 Eq. (8.1.12) of text:

1
I0 = ( I a + Ib + Ic )
3
1
= (10∠0° + 8∠ − 90° + 6∠150° ) = 1.60128 − j1.667 = 2.31∠ − 46.15° A ←
3
1
I1 =
3
( I a + aIb + a 2 I c )
1
= (10∠0° + 1∠120° ( 8∠ − 90° ) + 1∠240° ( 6∠150° ) )
3
1
= (10∠0° + 8∠30° + 6∠30° ) = 7.37 + j 2.33 = 7.74∠17.56° A ←
3
1
I2 =
3
( I a + a 2 I b + aI c )
1
= (10∠0° + 1∠240° ( 8∠ − 90° ) + 1∠120° ( 6∠150° ) )
3
1
= (10∠0° + 8∠150° + 6∠ − 90° ) = 1.02 − j 0.667 = 1.22∠ − 33.07° ←
3
8.6 (a) Eq. (8.1.9) of text:
Va = (V0 + V1 + V2 )
= (10∠0° + 80∠30° + 40∠ − 30° ) = 114 + j 20 = 116∠9.9° V ←
Vb = V0 + a 2V1 + aV2
= 10∠0° + 1∠240° ( 80∠30° ) + 1∠120° ( 40∠ − 30° ) 
= (10∠0° + 80∠ − 90° + 40∠90° ) = 10 − j 40 = 41.3∠ − 76° ←
Vc = V0 + aV1 + a 2V2
= 10∠0° + 1∠120° ( 80∠30° ) + 1∠240° ( 40∠ − 30° ) 
= (10∠0° + 80∠150° + 40∠ − 150° ) = −94 + j 20 = 96.1∠168° ←

201
© 2017 Cengage Learning®. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
 (b) Vab = Va − Vb = (114 + j 20 ) − (10 − j 40 ) = 104 + j 60 = 120∠30° V ←
Vbc = Vb − Vc = (10 − j 40 ) − ( −94 + j 20 ) = 104 − j 60 = 120∠ − 30° V ←
Vca = Vc − Va = ( −94 + j 20 ) − (114 + j 20 ) = −208 + j 0 = 208∠180° V ←
1 1
(V )
ab 0 =
3
( Vab + Vbc + Vca ) = (120∠30° + 120∠ − 30° + 208∠180° ) = 0 ←
3
1 1 120∠30° + 1∠120° (120∠ − 30° ) 
(V ) = ( Vab + aVbc + a 2Vca ) =  
+1∠240° ( 208∠180° ) 
ab 1
3 3 
1
= (120∠30° + 120∠90° + 208∠60° ) = 69.33 + j120 = 138.6∠60° V ←
3
1 120∠30° + 1∠240° (120∠ − 30° ) 
(V )
ab 2 =
1
3
(
Vab + a 2 Vbc + a (Vca ) = 
3 
) +1∠120° ( 208∠180° ) 


1
= (120∠30° + 120∠210° + 208∠ − 60° ) = 34.67 − j 60 = 69.3∠ − 60° V ←
3
Since (Vab )0 = Va 0 − Vb 0 = 0

And (Vab )1 = Va1 − Vb1 ; (Vab )2 = Va 2 − Vb 2 , we have

VL − L 0 = 0; VL − L 1 = ( )
3∠30° V1 ; VL − L 2 = ( 3∠ − 30° V2 )
 1   1 
Or V1 =  ∠ − 30°  VL1 and V2 =  ∠30°  VL 2
 3   3 
Applying the above, one gets
 1 
V1 =  ∠ − 30°  (138.6∠60° ) = 80∠30° = 69.3 + j 40 ←
 3 
 1 
V2 =  ∠30°  ( 69.3∠ − 60° ) = 40∠ − 30° = 34.6 − j 20 ←
 3 
Phase voltages are then given by
Va = V1 + V2 = 103.9 + j 20 = 105.9∠10.9° V ←
Vb = a 2V1 + aV2 = 1∠240° ( 80∠30° ) + 1∠120° ( 40∠ − 30° )
= ( 80∠ − 90° + 40∠90° ) = − j 40 = 40∠ − 90° V ←
Vc = aV1 + a 2V2 = 1∠120° ( 80∠30° ) + 1∠240° ( 40∠ − 30° )
= 80∠150° + 40∠210° = −104 + j 20 = 105.9∠169° V ←
The above are not the same as in part (a) ←
However, either set will result in the same line voltages. Note that the zero-sequence
line voltage is always zero, even though zero-sequence phase voltage may exist. So it
is not possible to construct the complete set of symmetrical components of phase
voltages even when the unbalanced system of line voltages is known. But we can
obtain a set with no zero-sequence voltage to represent the unbalanced system.

202
© 2017 Cengage Learning®. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
8.7  I0  1 1 1  0   1∠150° + 1∠30° 
  1 2  1200 1∠270° + 1∠270°
 I1  = 1 a a  1200∠150°  =
 I 2  3 1 a 2 3  
a   1200∠30°   1∠30 ° + 1∠150 ° 

 400 ∠ 90° 
= 800 ∠ 270° A
 400 ∠ 90° 
Current to ground, I n = 3I 0 = 1000 ∠ 90 ° A

8.8 Vab = Va − Vb ; Vbc = Vb − Vc ; Vca = Vc − Va

∵ Vab + Vbc + Vca = 0, Vab 0 = Vbc 0 = Vca 0 = 0

Choosing Vab as the reference,

1
Vab1 =
3
(Vab + aVbc + a 2Vca )
1
(
= ( Va − Vb ) + a (Vb − Vc ) + a 2 (Vc − Va )
3
)
1
= (Va + aVb + a 2Vc ) − ( a 2Va + Vb + aVc ) 
3
1
= (Va + aVb + a 2Vc ) − a 2 ( Va + aVb + a 2Vc ) 
3
1
= (1 − a 2 ) (Va + aVb + a 2Vc )  = (1 − a 2 ) Va1
3
= 3 Va1 e j 30° ←
1
Vab 2 =
3
(Vab + a 2Vbc + aVca )
1
(
= (Va − Vb ) + a 2 (Vb − Vc ) + a (Vc − Va )
3
)
1
= (Va + a 2Vb + aVc ) − ( aVa + Vb + a 2Vc ) 
3
1
= (Va + a 2Vb + aVc ) − a ( Va + a 2Vb + aVc ) 
3
1
= (1 − a ) (Va + a 2Vb + aVc )  = (1 − a ) Va 2
3
= 3 Va 2 e − j 30° ←

203
© 2017 Cengage Learning®. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
8.9 Choosing Vbc as reference and following similar steps as in Problem 8.8 solution, one can
get
Vbc 0 = 0; Vbc1 = 3Va1e − j 90° = − j 3Va1 ;
 ←
and Vbc 2 = 3Va 2 e j 90° = j 3Va 2 

8.10 (a) VLg 0  1 1 1   280∠0° 

  1
VLg1  = 1 a a   250∠ − 110°
2

  3 1 a 2 a   290∠130° 
VLg 2 

280∠0° + 250∠ − 110° + 290∠130°  2.696 − j 4.257 

1  = 270.6 + j 31.26 
= 280∠0° + 250∠ 10° + 290∠10°   
3
280∠0° + 250∠130° + 290∠250°   6.706 − j 27 
 5.039 ∠ − 57.65°
=  272.4 ∠ 6.59°  V
 27.82∠ − 76.05° 

(b) Vab  Vag − Vbg   280∠0° − 250∠ − 110° 

     
Vbc  = Vbg − Vcg  =  250∠ − 110° − 290∠130°
Vca     290∠130° − 280∠0° 
Vcg − Vag  
 365.5 + j 234.9   434.5∠32.73° 
=  100.9 − j 457.1  =  468.1∠ − 77.55° V
 −466.4 + j 222.2   516.6∠154.5° 

(c) VLL 0  1 1 1   434.5∠32.73° 

  1
VLL1  = 1 a a 2   468.1∠ − 77.55°
VLL 2  3 1 a 2 a   516.6∠154.5° 

 434.5 ∠ 32.73° + 468.1 ∠ − 77.55° + 516.6 ∠154.5°   0 + j 0 

=  434.5 ∠ 32.73° + 468.1 ∠ 42.55° + 516.6 ∠ 34.5°  = 378.9 + j 281.2 
1  
3
 434.5 ∠ 32.73° + 468.1 ∠162.5° ∠ + 516.6 ∠ 274.5°  −13.46 − j 46.44 

 0   0 
 
=  471.8 ∠ 36.58°  V =  3 VLg1 ∠ + 30° 
 
 48.35 ∠ − 106.2°  3VLg 2 ∠ − 30° 

204
© 2017 Cengage Learning®. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
8.11 The circuit is shown below:

1
Ia0 = (10∠0° + 10∠180° + 0 ) = 0
3
1
I a1 = (10∠0° + 10∠180° + 120° + 0 ) = 5 − j 2.89 = 5.78∠ − 30° A
3
1
I a 2 = (10∠0° + 10∠180° + 240° + 0 ) = 5 + j 2.89 = 5.78∠30° A
3
Then
I b 0 = I a 0 = 0 A; Ic0 = Ia0 = 0 A
I b1 = a I a1 = 5.78∠ − 150° A; I c1 = aI a1 = 5.78∠90° A
2

I b 2 = aI a 2 = 5.78∠150° A; I c 2 = a 2 I a 2 = 5.78∠ − 90° A

8.12 Selecting a base of 2300 V and 500 kVA, each resistor has an impedance of 1∠0° pu ;
Vab = 0.8 ; Vbc = 1.2 ; Vca = 1.0
The symmetrical components of the line voltages are:
1
Vab1 = ( 0.8∠82.8° + 1.2∠120° − 41.4° + 1.0∠240° + 180° ) = 0.2792 + j 0.9453
3
= 0.9857∠73.6°
1
Vab 2 = ( 0.8∠82.8° + 1.2∠240° − 41.4° + 1.0∠120° + 180° ) = −0.1790 − j 0.1517
3
= 0.2346∠220.3°
(These are in pu on line-to-line voltage base.)
Phase voltages in pu on the base of voltage to neutral are given by
Van1 = 0.9857∠73.6° − 30° = 0.9857∠43.6°
[Note: An angle of 180° is assigned to Vca ]
Van 2 = 0.2346∠220.3° + 30° = 0.2346∠250.3°
Zero-sequence currents are not present due to the absence of a neutral connection.
I a1 = Va1 /1∠0° = 0.9857∠43.6° pu
I a 2 = Va 2 /1∠0° = 0.2346∠250.3° pu
The positive direction of current is from the supply toward the load.

205
© 2017 Cengage Learning®. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
8.13 (a) I ∆ 0  1 1 1   10 ∠ 0 ° 
I  1 1 a a 2  12 ∠ − 90 °
 ∆1  = 
I ∆ 2  3 1 a 2 a   15 ∠ 90 ° 

10 ∠ 0 ° + 12 ∠ − 90 ° + 15 ∠ 90 °   3.333 + j1   3.48 ∠16.7 ° 

=  10 ∠ 0 ° + 12 ∠ 30 ° + 15 ∠ 330 °  = 11.13 − j 0.5 = 11.14 ∠ − 2.58 ° A
1
3
10 ∠ 0 ° + 12 ∠150 ° + 15 ∠ 210 ° − 4.46 − j 0.5 4.49 ∠ − 173.6 °

(b) I a  I ab − I ca   10 ∠ 0 ° − 15 ∠ 90 °   10 − j15   18.03 ∠ − 56.3 ° 

         
Ib  = I bc − I ab  =  12 ∠ − 90 ° − 10 ∠ 0 °  = − 10 − j12 = 15.62 ∠ − 129.81 ° A
I c  I ca − I bc  15 ∠ 90 ° − 12 ∠ − 90 °  j 27   27 ∠ 90 ° 

(c) I L 0  1 1 1   18.03 ∠ − 56.3 ° 

  1
I L1  = 1 a a 2  15.62 ∠ − 129.81 °
I L 2  3 1 a 2 a   27 ∠ 90 ° 

 18.03 ∠ − 56.3 ° + 15.62 ∠ − 129.81 ° + 27 ∠ 90 ° 

=  18.03 ∠ − 56.3 ° + 15.62 ∠ − 9.81 ° + 27 ∠330 ° 
1
3
18.03 ∠ − 56.3 ° + 15.62 ∠ − 249.81 ° + 27 ∠ 210 °
0 + j 0  0  0 
     
= 16.26 − j10.39  = 19.29 ∠ − 32.57 °  A =  3I ∆1 ∠ − 30 ° 
− 6.257 − j 4.61 7.77 ∠ − 143.59 °  
 3 I ∆ 2 ∠ + 30 °

8.14

VLg 0 5.039∠ − 57.65 °

I0 = = = 0.252 ∠ − 110.78 ° A
Z0 20∠ 53.13 °
VLg1 272.4 ∠6.59 °
I1 = = = 13.62 ∠ − 46.54 ° A
Z1 20 ∠ 53.13 °
VLg 2 27.82 ∠ − 76.05 °
I2 = = = 1.391 ∠ − 129.18 ° A
Z2 20 ∠ 53.13 °

206
© 2017 Cengage Learning®. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
 I a  1 1 1  0.252 ∠ − 110.78 °
  
I b  = 1 a
2
a   13.62 ∠ − 46.54 ° 
I c  1 a a 2  1.391 ∠ −129.18 ° 
 
0.2520 ∠ − 110.78 ° + 13.62 ∠ − 46.54 ° + 1.391∠ − 129.18 °
= 0.2520 ∠ − 110.78 ° + 13.62 ∠193.46 ° + 1.391 ∠ − 9.18 ° 
0.2520 ∠ − 110.78 ° + 13.62 ∠ 73 .46 ° + 1.391 ∠110.82 ° 
 8.4 − j11.2   14 ∠ − 53.13 ° 
   
= − 11.96 − j 3.628 = 12.5 ∠ − 163.1 ° A
 3.294 + j14.12   14.5 ∠ 76.37 ° 
Note: The source and load neutrals are connected with a zero-ohm wire.
I a  Vag zY   280 ∠ 0 ° 20 ∠ 53.13 °   14 ∠ − 53.13 ° 
       
I
 b = Vbg zY  = 250 ∠ − 110 ° 20 ∠53.13 ° = 12.5 ∠ − 163.1 °
   
I c  Vcg zY   290 ∠130 ° 20 ∠53.13 °   14.5 ∠76.87 ° 
Which agrees with the above result.

8.15

I 0 = 0 ; From Problem 8.14, I1 = 13.62∠ − 46.54° A; I 2 = 1.391∠ − 129.18° A

 I a  1 1 1  0 
  
 I b  = 1 a
2
a   13.62∠ − 46.54° 
 
 I c  1 a a 2  1.391∠ − 129.18° 
 
13.62∠ − 46.54° + 1.391∠ − 129.18°
=  13.62∠193.46° + 1.391∠ − 9.18° 
 13.62∠73.46° + 1.391∠110.82° 
 8.49 − j10.96  13.86∠ − 52.24°
=  −11.87 − j 3.392  = 12.35∠195.9°  A
 3.383 + j14.36  14.75∠76.74° 

207
© 2017 Cengage Learning®. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
8.16

272.4∠6.59°
I 0 = 0; I1 = = 40.86∠ − 46.54° A
 20 
 3  ∠53.13°
 
27.82∠ − 76.05°
I2 = = 4.173∠ − 129.18° A
 20 
 3  ∠53.13°
 
 I a  1 1 1   0   41.58∠ − 52.24° 
  
 I b  = 1 a
2
a   40.86∠ − 46.54°  = 37.05∠195.9°  A
 
 I c  1 a a 2   4.173∠ − 129.18°   44.25∠76.74° 
 
Note: These currents are 3 times those in Problem 8.15.

VLg 0 5.039∠ − 57.65°

8.17 I0 = = = 0.4826∠ − 131° A
Z0 3 + j10
VLg1 272.4∠6.59°
I1 = = = 36.54∠ − 19.98° A
Z1 7.454∠26.57°
VLg 2 27.82∠ − 76.05°
I2 = = = 3.732∠ − 102.72° A
Z2 7.454∠26.57°

 I a  1 1 1   0.4826∠ − 131° 
  
 I b  = 1 a
2
a  36.54∠ − 19.98° 
 I c  1 a a 2  3.732∠ − 102.72°
 
 0.4826∠ − 131° + 36.54∠ − 19.98° + 3.732∠ − 102.72° 
=  0.4826∠ − 131° + 36.54∠220.02° + 3.732∠17.28° 
 0.4826∠ − 131° + 36.54∠100.02° + 3.732∠137.28° 
 33.2 − j16.49  37.07∠ − 26.41° 
=  −24.74 − j 22.75  = 33.61∠222.6°  A
 −9.416 + j 38.15 39.29∠103.9° 

208
© 2017 Cengage Learning®. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
8.18  Z0 Z 01 Z 02  1 1 1
Z Z1 Z12  1 1 a
 a 2 
 10 =
 Z 20 Z 21 Z 2  3 1 a 2 a 

( Z aa + Z ab + Z ac ) ( Z aa + a 2 Z ab + aZ ac )( Z aa + aZ ab + a 2 Z ac ) 
 
 ( Z ab + Z bb + Z bc ) ( Z ab + a Z bb + aZ bc )( Z ab + aZ bb + a Z bc ) 
2 2

 ( Z ac + Z bc + Z cc ) ( Z ac + a 2 Z bc + aZ cc )( Z ac + aZ bc + a 2 Z cc ) 
 
( Z aa + Z bb + Z cc ) + 2 ( Z ab + Z ac + Z bc )
1
= ( Z aa + aZ bb + a 2 Z cc ) + Z ab (1 + a ) + Z ac (1 + a 2 ) + Z bc ( a + a 2 )
3
( Z aa + a 2 Z bb + aZ cc ) + Z ab (1 + a 2 ) + Z ac (1 + a ) + Z bc ( a 2 + a )

( Z aa + a 2 Z bb + aZ cc ) + Z ab ( a 2 + 1) + Z ac ( a + 1) + Z bc ( a + a 2 )
( Z aa + a3 Z bb + a3 Z cc ) + Z ab ( a 2 + a ) + Z ac ( a + a 2 ) + Z bc ( a 2 + a 4 )
( Z aa + a 4 Z bb + a 2 Z cc ) + Z ab ( a 2 + a 2 ) + Z ac ( 2a ) + Z bc ( a 2 + a 4 )
( Z aa + aZ bb + a 2 Z cc ) + Z ab (1 + a ) + Z ac (1 + a 2 ) + Z bc ( a + a 2 ) 

( Z aa + a 2 Z bb + a 4 Z cc ) + Z ab ( 2a ) + Z ac ( 2a 2 ) + Z bc ( 2 ) 
( Z aa + a3 Z bb + a3 Z cc ) + Z ab ( a + a 2 ) + Z ac ( a + a 2 ) + Z bc ( a + a 2 ) 
 Z aa + Z bb + Z cc + 2 Z ab + 2 Z ac + 2 Z bc
1
=  Z aa + aZ bb + a 2 Z cc − a 2 Z ab − aZ ac − Z bc
3
 Z aa + a 2 Z bb + aZ cc − aZ ab − a 2 Z ac − Z bc
Z aa + a 2 Z bb + aZ cc − aZ ab − a 2 Z ac − Z bc
Z aa + Z bb + Z cc − Z ab − Z ac − Z bc
Z aa + aZ bb + a 2 Z cc + 2 a 2 Z ab + 2 aZ ac + 2 Z bc
Z aa + aZ bb + a 2 Z cc − a 2 Z ab − aZ ac − Z bc 

Z aa + a Z bb + aZ cc + 2 aZ ab + 2 a Z ac + 2 Z bc 
2 2

Z aa + Z bb + Z cc − Z ab − Z ac − Z bc 

8.19 (a)

209
© 2017 Cengage Learning®. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
 writing KVL equations [see Eqs (8.2.1) – (8.2.3)]:
Vag = Z y I a + Z n ( I a + I b + I c )
Vbg = Z y I b + Z n ( I a + I b + I c )
Vcg = Z y I c + Z n ( I a + I b + I c )

In matrix format [see Eq (8.2.4)]

( Z y + Z n ) Zn Zn  V 
   I a   ag 
 Zn (Z + Zn ) Zn   I b  = Vbg 
    
y


 Zn Zn ( Z y + Z n )  I c  Vcg 
( 3 + j 5 ) j1 j1   I a   100∠0° 
    
 j1 (3 + j5) j1   I b  =  75∠180°
 ( 3 + j 5)  I c   50∠90° 
 j1 j1
−1
 I a  ( 3 + j 5 ) j1 j1   100∠0° 
     75∠180° 
 I b  =  j1 ( 3 + j 5) j1   
   ( + )   50∠90° 
 I c   j1 j1 3 j 5

Performing the indicated matrix inverse (a computer solution is suggested):

 I a   0.1763∠ − 56.50° 0.02618∠150.2° 0.02618∠150.2°   100∠0° 
    
 I b  =  0.02618∠150.2° 0.1763∠ − 56.50° 0.02618∠150.2°  75∠180° 
 I c   0.02618∠150.2° 0.02618∠150.2° 0.1763∠ − 56.50°   50∠90° 
 
Finally, performing the indicated matrix multiplication:
 I a  17.63∠ − 56.50° + 1.964∠330.2° + 1.309∠240.2°
   
 I b  =  2.618∠150.2° + 13.22∠123.5° + 1.309∠240.2° 
 I c   2.618∠150.2° + 1.964∠330.2° + 8.815∠33.5° 
 
 I a   10.78 − j16.81  19.97∠ − 57.32° 
     
 I b  =  −10.22 + j11.19  = 15.15∠132.4°  A
 I c   6.783 + j 5.191  8.541∠37.43° 
 

210
© 2017 Cengage Learning®. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
 (b) Step (1): Calculate the sequence components of the applied voltage:
Vg 0  1 1 1   100∠0° 
  1
Vg1  = 1 a a 2  =  75∠180°
  3 1 a 2 a   50∠90° 
Vg 2  
 100∠0° + 75∠180° + 50∠90° 
= 100∠0° + 75∠300° + 50∠330°
1
3
 100∠0° + 75∠60° + 50∠210° 
8.333 + j16.667  18.63∠63.43° 
=  60.27 − j 29.98  = 67.32∠ − 26.45 V
 31.40 + j13.32  34.11∠22.99° 
Step (2): Draw sequence networks:

Step (3): Solve sequence networks

Vg0 Vg0 18.63∠63.43° 18.63∠63.43°
I0 = = = =
Z0 Z y + 3 Zn 3 + j7 7.616∠66.80°
I 0 = 2.446∠ − 3.37° A
Vg1 67.32∠ − 26.45° 67.32∠ − 26.45°
I1 = = = = 13.46∠ − 79.58 A
Z1 3 + j4 5∠53.13°
Vg 2 34.11∠22.99°
I2 = = = 6.822∠ − 30.14°
Z2 5∠53.13°
Step (4): Calculate the line currents (phase components):
 I a  1 1 1   2.446∠ − 3.37° 
  
 I b  = 1 a
2
a  13.46∠ − 79.58° 
 I c  1 a a 2  6.822∠ − 30.14°
 
 2.446∠ − 3.37° + 13.46∠ − 79.58° + 6.822∠ − 30.14° 
=  2.446∠ − 3.37° + 13.46∠160.42° + 6.822∠89.86° 
 2.446∠ − 3.37° + 13.46∠40.42° + 6.822∠209.86° 
 10.78 − j16.81  19.97∠ − 57.32°
=  −10.22 + j11.19  = 15.15∠132.4°  A
 6.773 + j 5.187  8.531∠37.45° 

211
© 2017 Cengage Learning®. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
8.20 (a) The line-to-line voltages are related to the ∆ currents by
Vab   j 27 0 0   I ab 
    
Vbc  =  0 j 27 0   I bc 
Vca   0 0 j 27   I ca 
 
Transforming to symmetrical components,
Vab 0   j 27 0 0   I ab 0 
   
A  Vab1  =  0 j 27 0  A  I ab1 
   0 0 j 27   I a b 2 
Vab 2    
Premultiplying each side by A−1 ,
Vab 0   I ab 0   j 27 0 0   I ab 0 
      
Vab1  = j 27 A A  I ab1  =  0
−1
j 27 0   I ab1 
     0 0 j 27   I ab 2 
Vab 2   I ab 2    
As shown in Fig. 8.5 of the text, sequence networks for an equivalent Y representation
of a balanced-∆ load are given below:

(b) With a mutual impedance of (j6) Ω between phases,

Vab 0   j 27 j6 j 6   I ab 0 
   
A  Vab1  =  j 6 j 27 j6  A  I ab1 
   j6 j6 j 27   I ab 2 
Vab 2    
Rewriting the coefficient matrix into two parts,
 j 27 j6 j6  1 0 0  1 1 1
 j6 j 27 j 6  = j 21  0 1 0  + j6 1 1 1
  

 j 6 j6 j 27   0 0 1  1 1 1

212
© 2017 Cengage Learning®. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
 and substituting into the previous equation,
Vab 0   1 1 1   I ab 0 
   −1    
Vab1  =  j 21A A + jGA 1 1 1 A   I ab1 
−1

   1 1 1   I 
Vab 2    ab 2 
  j 21 0 0   3 0 0    I ab 0 
  
=   0 j 21 0  + j 6  0 0 0    I ab1 

 0 0 j 21  0 0 0    I 
  ab 2 
 j39 0 0   I ab 0 
 
=  0 j 21 0   I ab1 
 0 0 j 21  I ab 2 
 
Then the sequence networks are given by:

8.21 From Eq. (8.2.28) and (8.2.29), the load is symmetrical.

Using Eq. (8.2.31) and (8.2.32):
Z 0 = Z aa + 2 Z ab = 5 + j10 Ω
Z1 = Z 2 = Z aa − Z ab = 5 + j10 Ω
5 + j10 0 0 

Zs =  0 5 + j10 0  Ω
 0 0 5 + j10 

8.22 Since Z s is diagonal, the load is symmetrical.

Using Eq. (8.2.31) and (8.2.32):
Z 0 = 6 + j10 = Z aa + 2 Z ab
Z1 = 5 = Z aa − Z ab
Solving the above two equations
1 1 1 10
Z aa = ( 6 + j10 − 5) = (1 + j10 ) = + j Ω
3 3 3 3
16 10
Z aa = Z ab + 5 = + j Ω
3 3

213
© 2017 Cengage Learning®. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
 16 10 1 10 1 10 
 3 + j 3 3+ j 3 3
+j 
3
 
Zp =  1
+j
10 16
+ j
10 1
+j
10 
Ω
3 3 3 3 3 3 
 
 1 + j 10 1
+j
10 16 10
+j 
 3 3 3 3 3 3 

8.23 The line-to-ground voltages are

Va = Z s I a + Z m I b + Z m I c + Z n I n
Vb = Z m I a + Z s I b + Z m I c + Z n I n
Vc = Z m I a + Z m I b + Z s I c + Z n I n

Since I n = I a + I b + I c , it follows

Va   Z s + Z n Z m + Z n Z m + Z n   I a 
    
Vb  =  Z m + Z n Z s + Z n Z m + Z n   I b 
Vc   Z m + Z n Z m + Z n Z s + Z n   I c 
  
    
phase impedance matrix Z p

or in compact form Vp = Z p I p
Form Eq. (8.2.9) Z s = A−1 Z p A

1 1 1   Zs + Zn Zm + Zn Z m + Z n  1 1 1
1  
∴ Z s = 1 a a 2   Z m + Z n Zs + Zn Z m + Z n  1 a 2 a 
3
1 a 2 a   Z m + Z n Zm + Zn Z s + Z n  1 a a 2 
 Zs + 3 Zn + 2 Zm 0 0 
 
= 0 Zs − Zm 0 
 0 0 Z s − Z m 
  
Sequence impedance matrix

When there is no mutual coupling, Z m = 0

 Zs + 3 Zn 0 0
 
∴ Zs =  0 Zs 0
 0 0 Z s 


214
© 2017 Cengage Learning®. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
8.24 (a) The circuit is shown below:

KVL: ( j12 ) I a + ( j 4 ) I b − ( j12 ) I b − j 4 ( I a ) = Va − Vb = VLINE ∠30°

( j12 ) I b + ( j 4 ) I c − ( j12 ) I c − ( j 4 ) I b = Vb − Vc = VLINE ∠ − 90°
KCL: I a + I b + I c = 0
In matrix form:
 j12 − j 4 − ( j12 − j 4 ) 0   I a  VL ∠30° 
   
 0 ( j12 − j 4 ) − ( j12 − j 4 )   I b  = VL ∠90°
 1 1 1   I c   0 
  
where VL = 100 3

Solving for I a , I b , I c , one gets I a = 12.5∠ − 90°; I b = 12.5∠150°; I c = 12.5∠30°A

(b) Using symmetrical components,
 0   j12 + 2 ( j 4 ) 0 0 
   
Vs = 100  ; Z s =  0 j12 − j 4 0 
 0   0 0 j12 − j 4 

From the solution of Problem 8.18 upon substituting the values
1 1 1
Is = Zs −1
Vs and I p = A I s where A = 1 a 2 a 
1 a a 2 

which result in
I a = 12.5∠ − 90°; I b = 12.5∠150°; I c = 12.5∠30° A

which is same as in (a)

215
© 2017 Cengage Learning®. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
 1 1 1 1 1 1
Z s = A −1 Z p A; A = 1 a 2 a  ; A−1 = 1 a
 a 2 
1
8.25 (a)
3
1 a a 2  1 a 2 a 

The load sequence impedance matrix comes out as

 6 + j 30 0 0 

Zs =  0 6 + j 21 0  Ω
 0 0 6 + j 21

see the result of Problem 8.18

 200∠25°  1 1 1
(b) Vp = 100∠ − 155°  ; Vs = A−1 Vp ; A−1 = 1 a
  a 2 
1
3
80∠100°  1 a 2 a 
Symmetrical components of the line-to-neutral voltages are given by:
V0 = 47.7739∠57.6268°; V1 = 112.7841∠ − 0.0331°; V2 = 61.6231∠45.8825° V
(c) Vs = Z s I s ; I s = Z s −1 Vs , which results in
I 0 = 1.562∠ − 21.06°; I1 = 5.164∠ − 74.0877°; I 2 = 2.822∠ − 28.1722° A
1 1 1
(d) I p = A I s ; A = 1 a 2 a 
1 a a 2 
The result is:
I a = 8.706∠ − 51.99°; I b = 5.062∠136°; I c = 3.129∠32.04° A

8.26

VLg 0 5.039∠ − 57.65° 5.039∠ − 57.65°

I0 = = = = 0.2016∠ − 110.78° A
3 + j 4 + Z0 ( 3 + j 4 ) + (12 + j16 ) 25∠53.13°
VLg1 272.4∠6.59°
I1 = = = 10.896∠ − 46.54° A
3 + j 4 + Z1 25∠53.13°
VLg 2 27.82∠ − 76.05°
I2 = = = 1.1128∠ − 129.18° A
3 + j 4 + Z2 25∠53.13°

216
© 2017 Cengage Learning®. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
  I a  1 1 1   0.2016∠ − 110.78°
  
 I b  = 1 a
2
a   10.896∠ − 46.54° 
 I c  1 a a 2  1.1128∠ − 129.18° 
 
 0.2016∠ − 110.78° + 10.896∠ − 46.54° + 1.1128∠ − 129.18°
=  0.2016∠ − 110.78° + 10.896∠193.46° + 1.1128∠ − 9.18° 
 0.2016∠ − 110.78° + 10.896∠73.46 + 1.1128∠110.82° 

 6.72 − j8.96  11.2 ∠ − 53.13 °

   
=  − 9.57 − j 2.902  =  10 ∠ − 163.1 °  A
2.635 + j11.297  11.6∠76.87 ° 

Also, since the source and load neutrals are connected with a zero-ohm neutral wire,
 I a  Vag / ( 3 + j 4 + ZY )   280∠0° / 25∠53.13°  11.2∠ − 53.13° 
       
 I b  = Vbg / ( 3 + j 4 + ZY )  =  250∠ − 110° / 25∠53.13°  =  10∠ − 163.1°  A
 I c  V / ( 3 + j 4 + Z )   290∠130° / 25∠53.13°   11.6∠76.87° 
   cg Y  
Which checks.

8.27 (a) KVL : Van = Z aa I a + Z ab I b + Z ab I c + Z an I n + Va′n′

− ( Z nn I n + Z an I c + Z an I b + Z an I a )

Voltage drop across the line section is given by

Van − Va′n′ = ( Z aa − Z an ) I a + ( Z ab − Z an )( I b + I c ) + ( Z an − Z nn ) I n

Similarly for phases b and c

Vbn − Vb′n′ = ( Z aa − Z an ) I b + ( Z ab − Z an )( I a + I c ) + ( Z an − Z nn ) I n
Vcn′ − Vc′n′ = ( Z aa − Z an ) I c + ( Z ab − Z an )( I a + I b ) + ( Z an − Z nn ) I n
KCL : In = − ( Ia + Ib + Ic )

Upon substitution
Van − Va′n′ = ( Z aa + Z nn − 2 Z an ) I a + ( Z ab + Z nn − 2 Z an ) I b + ( Z ab + Z nn − 2 Z an ) I c
Vbn − Vb′n′ = ( Z ab + Z nn − 2 Z an ) I a + ( Z aa + Z nn − 2 Z an ) I b + ( Z ab + Z nn − 2 Z an ) I c
Vcn − Vc′n′ = ( Z ab + Z nn − 2 Z an ) I a + ( Z ab + Z nn − 2 Z an ) I b + ( Z aa + Z nn − 2 Z an ) I c

The presence of the neutral conductor changes the self- and mutual impedances of the
phase conductors to the following effective values:
Z s ∆ Z aa + Z nn − 2 Z an ; Z m ∆ Z ab + Z nn − 2 Z an

217
© 2017 Cengage Learning®. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
 Using the above definitions
Vaa′  Van − Va′n′   Z s Zm Zm  Ia 
      
Vbb′  = Vbn − Vb′n′  =  Z m Zs Zm   Ib 
Vcc′  Vcn − Vc′n′   Z m Zm Z s   I c 
    
Where the voltage drops across the phase conductors are denoted by Vaa′ ,Vbb′ ,
and Vcc′ .
(b) The a-b-c voltage drops and currents of the line section can be written in terms of their
symmetrical components according to Eq. (8.1.9); with phase a as the reference phase,
one gets

Vaa′0    Z s − Z m i i   Zm Zm Zm   Ia0 
       
A  Vaa′1  =   i Zs − Zm i  +  Zm Zm Z m   A  I a1 
Vaa′2    i i Z s − Z m   Z m Zm Z m    I a 2 
  
Multiplying across by A−1,
Vaa′ 0   1 i i  1 1 1   I a 0 
        
Vaa′1  = A ( Z s − Z m )  i 1 i  + Z m 1 1 1  A  I a1 
−1

Vaa′ 2    i i 1 1 1 1   I a 2 

  
Vaa′ 0   Z s − 2 Z m i i  Ia0 
V  =  Zs − Zm
 
or  aa′1   i i   I a1 
Vaa′ 2   i i Z s − Z m   I a 2 

Now define zero-, positive-, and negative-sequence impedances in terms of Z s

and Z m as

Z 0 = Z s + 2 Z m = Z aa + 2 Z ab + 3 Z nn − 6 Z an
Z1 = Z s − Z m = Z aa − Z ab
Z 2 = Z s − Z m = Z aa − Z ab
Now, the sequence components of the voltage drops between the two ends of the line
section can be written as three uncoupled equations:
Vaa′0 = Van 0 − Va′n′0 = Z 0 I a 0
Vaa′1 = Van1 − Va′n′1 = Z1 I a1
Vaa′2 = Van 2 − Va′n′2 = Z 2 I a 2

218
© 2017 Cengage Learning®. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
8.28 (a) The sequence impedances are given by
Z 0 = Z aa + 2 Z ab + 3 Z nn − 6 Z an = j 60 + j 40 + j 240 − j180 = j160 Ω
Z1 = Z 2 = Z aa − Z ab = j 60 − j 20 = j 40 Ω
The sequence components of the voltage drops in the line are
Vaa′ 0  Van − Va′n′  (182.0 − 154.0 ) + j ( 70.0 − 28.0 ) 
  −1   −1  
Vaa′1  = A Vbn − Vb′n′  = A ( 72.24 − 44.24 ) − j ( 32.62 − 74.62 ) 
   V − V   − (170.24 − 198.24 ) + j ( 88.62 − 46.62 ) 
Vaa′ 2   cn c ′n′   
 28.0 + j 42.0   28.0 + j 42.0 
= A  28.0 + j 42.0  = 
−1
0  kV

 28.0 + j 42.0   0 
From Problem 8.22 result, it follows that
Vaa′0 = 28,000 + j 42,000 = j160 I a 0 ; Vaa′1 = 0 = j 40 I a1 ; Vaa′2 = 0 = j 40 I a 2
From which the symmetrical components of the currents in phase a are
I a 0 = ( 262.5 − j175 ) A; I a1 = I a 2 = 0

The line currents are then given by

I a = I b = I c = ( 262.5 − j175 ) A
(b) Without using symmetrical components:
The self- and mutual impedances [see solution of Problem 8.22(a)] are
Z s = Z aa + Z nn − 2 Z an = j 60 + j80 − j 60 = j80 Ω
Z m = Z ab + Z nn − 2 Z an = j 20 + j80 − j 60 = j 40 Ω
So, line currents can be calculated as [see solution of Problem 8.22(a)]
Vaa′  28 + j 42   j80 j 40 j 40   I a 
      
Vbb′  = 28 + j 42  × 10 =  j 40
3
j80 j 40   I b 
Vcc′  28 + j 42   j 40 j 40 j80   I c 
 
−1
 I a   j80 j 40 j 40   28 + j 42 
  
 I b  =  j 40 j80 j 40   28 + j 42  × 103
 
 I c   j 40 j 40 j80   28 + j 42 
 
262.5 − j175
= 262.5 − j175 A
262.5 − j175

219
© 2017 Cengage Learning®. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
8.29 Z1 = Z 2 = j 0.5 × 200 = j100 Ω
Z 0 = j 2 × 200 = j 400 Ω
Y1 = Y2 = j 3 × 10 −9 × 200 × 103 = j 6 × 10 −4 S
Y0 = j1 × 10 −9 × 200 × 103 = j 2 × 10 −4 S
Nominal- π sequence circuits are shown below:

VAB 480∠0°
8.30 (a) I AB = = = 23.31∠ − 29.05° A
(18 + j10 ) 20.59∠29.05°
VBC 480∠120°
I BC = = = 23.31∠ − 149.05° A
(18 + j10 ) 20.59∠29.05°
(b) I A = I AB = 23.31∠ − 29.05° A
I B = I BC − I AB = 23.31∠ − 149.05° - 23.31∠ − 29.05°
I B = −40.37 − j 0.6693 = 40.38∠180.95° A
IC = − I BC = 23.31∠30.95° A
I L0  1 1 1   23.31∠ − 29.05°
  1
(c)  I L1  = 1 a a 2   40.38∠180.95° 
3
I L2  1 a 2 a   23.31∠30.95° 
 
 23.31∠ − 29.05° + 40.38∠180.95° + 23.31∠30.95° 
= 23.31∠ − 29.05° + 40.38∠300.95° + 23.31∠270.95° 
1
3
 23.31∠ − 29.05° + 40.38∠60.95° + 23.31∠150.95° 
 0 + j0   0 
= 13.84 − j 23.09  =  26.92∠ − 59.06° A
  
6.536 + j11.77   13.46∠60.96° 

220
© 2017 Cengage Learning®. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
8.31

I Line 0 = I Line 2 = 0
 200 
Vg1   ∠90°
I Line1 = =  3
 Z∆   10 
Z Line1 +   0.5∠80° +  3  ∠40°
 3   
115.47∠90° 115.47∠90°
= = = 30.96∠45.05° A
2.64 + j 2.635 3.73∠44.95°

8.32

221
© 2017 Cengage Learning®. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
 Vgan = Vg1 = Vm1 + Z Line1 I m1
5000∠ cos−1 0.8
I m1 = = 18.04∠36.87° A
200 3 ( 0.8 )
200
Vgan = ∠0° + ( 0.5∠80° )(18.04∠36.87° )
3
= 115.47 + ( −4.077 + j8.046 )
= 111.39 + j8.046
= 111.7∠4.131° V
Vg = 3 (111.7 ) = 193.5V (Line to Line)

8.33 Converting the ∆ load to an equivalent Y, and then writing two loop equations:

 2 ( Z L + ZY ) − ( Z L + ZY )   I  Vcg − Vag 
  c  =  
 − ( Z L + ZY ) 2 ( Z L + ZY )   − I b  Vag − Vbg 
 
 21.46∠43.78° −10.73∠43.78°  I c   295∠115° − 277∠0° 
 −10.73∠43.78° 21.46∠43.78°    =  
   − I b   277∠0° − 260∠ − 120°
−1
 I c   21.46∠43.78° −10.73∠43.78°  482.5∠146.35°
  =  −10.73∠43.78° 21.46∠43.78°   
 − I b     465.1∠28.96° 
 I c   0.06213∠ − 43.78° 0.03107∠ − 43.78°   482.5∠146.35°
  = 0.03107∠ − 43.78° 0.06213∠ − 43.78°   
 − I b     465.1∠28.96° 
 I c   29.98∠102.57° + 14.45∠ − 14.82°   7.445 + j 25.57 
 = = 
 − I b  14.99∠102.57° + 28.90∠ − 14.82°   24.68 + j 7.239 
 I c  26.62∠73.77°
 = A
 − I b   25.71∠16.34° 

222
© 2017 Cengage Learning®. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
 Also, I a = − I b − I c

I a = ( 24.68 + j 7.239 ) − ( 7.445 + j 25.57 )

I a = 17.23 − j18.33 = 25.15∠ − 46.76°
 I a   25.15∠ − 46.76°
   
 I b  =  25.71∠196.34°  A
 I c   26.62∠73.77° 
 
which agrees with Ex. 8.6. The symmetrical components method is easier because it
avoids the need to invert a matrix.

8.34 The line-to-ground fault on phase a of the machine is shown below, along with the
corresponding sequence networks:

13.8
With the base voltage to neutral kV ,
3
Va = 0; Vb = 1.013∠ − 102.25°; Vc = 1.013∠102.25° pu.
= ( −0.215 − j 0.99 ) pu = ( −0.215 + j 0.99 ) pu

(13.8 )
2
j 2.38 j 3.33
with Z base = = 9.52 Ω, Z1 = = j 0.25; Z 2 = = j 0.35;
20 9.52 9.52
j 0.95
Z g0 = = j 0.1; Z n = 0; Z 0 = j 0.1pu
9.52

223
© 2017 Cengage Learning®. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
 The symmetrical components of the voltages at the fault point are
Va 0  1 1 1  0   −0.143 + j 0 
  1
Va1  = 3 1 a a   −0.215 − j 0.99  =  0.643 + j 0  pu
2

Va 2  1 a 2 a   −0.215 + j 0.99   −0.500 + j 0 

 

Ia0 = −
Va 0
=−
( −0.143 + j 0 ) = − j1.43pu
Z g0 j 0.1
Ean − Va1 (1 + j 0 ) − ( 0.643 + j 0 )
I a1 = = = − j1.43pu
Z1 j 0.25
Va 2 ( −0.5 + j 0 )
Ia2 = − =− = − j1.43pu
Z2 j 0.35
∴ Fault current into the ground I a = I a 0 + I a1 + I a 2 = 3I a 0 = − j 4.29 pu

20,000
With base current = 837 A , the subtransient current in line a is
3 × 13.8
I a = 4.29 × 837 = 3590 A

Line-to-line voltages during the fault are: (on base voltage to neutral)
Vab = Va − Vb = 0.215 + j 0.99 = 1.01∠77.7° pu = 8.05∠77.7° kV
Vbc = Vb − Vc = 0 − j1.98 = 1.98∠270° pu = 15.78∠270° kV
Vca = Vc − Va = −0.215 + j 0.99 = 1.01∠102.3° pu = 8.05∠102.3° kV

Phasor diagrams of line voltages before and after the fault are shown below:

Vab = 13.8∠30° kV Vab = 8.05∠77.7° kV

Vbc = 13.8∠270° kV Vbc = 15.78∠270° kV
Vca = 13.8∠150° kV Vca = 8.05∠102.3° kV
(Balanced) (Unbalanced)

8.35 Base MVA = 100

100 100 100
G1 : X = 0.1 × = 0.5; G2 : X = 0.15 × = 0.375; G3 : X = 0.15 × = 0.375
20 40 40
100 100
Reactors: X1 = 0.05 × = 0.25; X 2 = 0.04 × = 0.25pu.
20 16
Per-phase reactance diagram is shown below: (Excluding the source)

224
© 2017 Cengage Learning®. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
 [in pu]

 j 0.5  j ( 0.25 + 0.2344 )  with respect to f = j 0.246

100
∴ Fault MVA = = 406.5MVA ←
0.246
406.5 × 106
Fault Current = = 17,780 A
3 × 13.2 × 103
= 17.78 kA

8.36 Line-to-ground fault: Let Va = 0; I b = I c = 0 ←

1
Then I a 0 =
3
( I a + I b + I c ) = 13 I a
1 1
I a1 =
3
( I a + aI b + a 2 I c ) = I a
3
1 1
Ia2 = ( I a + a 2 I b + aI c ) = I a
3 3
1
so that I a 0 = I a1 = I a 2 = I a ; Va 0 + Va1 + Va 2 = 0 ←
3
Sequence network interconnection is shown below:

Ea
I 0 = I1 = I 2 =
Z 0 + Z1 + Z 2
V0 + V1 + V2 = 0 ←
3E a
Ia =
Z 0 + Z1 + Z 2

225
© 2017 Cengage Learning®. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
8.37 (a) Short circuit between phases b and c: I b + I c = 0; I a = 0 (Open Line); Vb = Vc
then I a 0 = 0;
1 1
I a1 =
3
( 0 + aI b + a 2 I c ) = 3 ( aI b − a 2 I b )
1
= ( a − a2 ) Ib
3
1 1 1
I a 2 = ( 0 + a 2 I b + aI c ) = ( a 2 I b − aI b ) = ( a 2 − a ) I b
3 3 3
so that I a1 = − I a 2
From Vb = Vc , one gets Va 0 + a 2Va1 + aVa 2 = Va 0 + aVa1 + a 2Va 2
so that Va1 = Va 2
Sequence network interconnection is shown below:

(b) Double line-to-ground fault:

Fault conditions in phase domain are represented by I a = 0; Vb = Vc = 0
1
Sequence components: Va 0 = Va1 = Va 2 = Va
3
I a 0 + I a1 + I a 2 = 0
Sequence network interconnection is shown below:

8.38 (a)

226
© 2017 Cengage Learning®. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
 (b)

8.39

227
© 2017 Cengage Learning®. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
 2
 345   100 
8.40 X pu new = ( 0.09 )     = 0.02755 per unit
 360   300 

8.41

2
 18   100 
X g1− 0 = ( 0.05 )     = 0.0054 = X g 2 − 0
 20   750 
 100 
X m 3−0 = ( 0.05 )   = 0.003333
 1500 
2
 18 
Xn2 = ( 0.06 )   = 0.0486 3 X n 2 = 0.1458
 20 

8.42 VA1 = 1∠45° + 30° = 1∠75° = 0.2588 + j 0.9659

VA2 = 0.5∠250 − 30° = 0.5∠220° = −0.383 − j 0.321
VA = VA1 + VA2 = 0.12422 + j 0.645 = 0.656∠100.91°
VB1 = a 2VA1 = 1∠315° = 1∠ − 45° = 0.7071 − j 0.7071
VB 2 = aVA2 = 0.5∠340° = 0.5∠ − 20° = 0.469 − j 0.171
VB = VB1 + VB 2 = 1.177 − j 0.878 = 1.47∠ − 36.7°
VC1 = aVA1 = 1∠195° = −0.9659 − j 0.2588
VC 2 = a 2VA 2 = 0.5∠100° = −0.0868 + j 0.492
VC = VC1 + VC 2 = −1.053 − j 0.234 = 1.078∠167.49°

228
© 2017 Cengage Learning®. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
 Line-to-line voltages are given by: [in pu on line-neutral voltage base]

VAB = VA − VB = −1.301 + j1.523

= 2∠130.5° ←
 Note: Divide by 3
VBC = VB − VC = 2.32 − j1.112 
if the base is
= 2.57∠ − 25.6° ← line-to-line voltage
VCA = VC − VA = −1.177 − j 0.411 
= 1.25∠ − 160.75° ←
Load impedance in each phase is 1∠0° pu.
∴ I a1 = Va1 in pu; I a 2 = Va 2 in pu
Thus I A = VA in pu
I A = 0.656∠100.91° pu 

I B = 1.47∠ − 36.7° pu  ←

I C = 1.078∠167.49° pu 

8.43 (a)

Per Unit Zero Sequence e j 90° : i e j 90° : i

1
X1 = X 2 = X 3 = ( 0.1 + 0.1 − 0.1) (e + j 90° : i) (e j 90° : i )
2
= 0.05 per unit Per Unit Positive Sequence
(Per Unit Negative Sequence)
(b)

Per Unit Zero Sequence Per Unit Positive Sequence

(Per Unit Negative Sequence)

229
© 2017 Cengage Learning®. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
 (c)

Per unit Zero Sequence e j 23.40 : i

(e − j 23.40 : i )
Per Unit Positive Sequence
(Per Unit Negative Sequence)

8.44

Per Unit Zero Sequence Network

Per Unit Positive (or Negative) Sequence Network (Phase Shift Not Shown)
p-primary
s-secondary
t-tertiary

230
© 2017 Cengage Learning®. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
8.45 S3φ = Van I a* + Vbn I b* + Vcn I c*
= ( 280∠0° )(14 ∠53.13° ) + ( 250∠ − 110° )(12.5∠163.1° )
+ ( 290∠130° )(14.5∠ − 76.87° )
= 3920∠53.13° + 3125∠53.1° + 4205∠53.13°
= 6751 + j8999
P3φ = Re S3φ = 6751W 
 delivered to the load.
Q3φ = Im S3φ = 8999 vars 

8.46 (a)

Z0 = Z y + 3 Zn
= 2 + j2 + j3
= 2 + j 5 = 5.385∠68.20°

V0 10∠60°
(b) I 0 = =
Z 0 5.385∠68.20°
I 0 = 1.857∠ − 8.199° A
Z∆
Z1 = ZY // = ( 2 + j 2 ) // ( 2 + j 2 ) = 1 + j = 2∠45°.Ω
3
V 100∠0°
I1 = 1 = = 70.71∠ − 45° A
Z1 2∠45°
Z 2 = Z1 = 2∠45°Ω
V2 15∠200°
I2 = = = 10.61∠155° A
Z2 2 ∠45°
S0 = V0 I 0* = (10∠60° )(1.857∠8.199° ) = 6.897 + j17.24
S0 = 18.57∠68.199°
S1 = V1 I1* = (100∠0° )( 70.71∠45° ) = 5000 + j 5000
S1 = 7071∠45°
S2 = V2 I 2* = (15∠200° )(10.61∠ − 155° ) = 112.5 + j112.5
S2 = 159.∠45°

231
© 2017 Cengage Learning®. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
 (c) S3φ = 3 ( S0 + S1 + S2 ) = 3 ( 5119 + j 5129 )
S3φ = 15,358. + j15,389.
S3φ = 21.74 × 103 ∠45.06° VA

8.47 S3φ = Va 0 I a*0 + Va1 I a*1 + Va 2 I a*2

Substituting values of voltages and currents from the solution of Problem 8.12,
S3φ = 0 + ( 0.9857∠43.6° )( 0.9857∠ − 43.6° ) + ( 0.2346∠250.3° )( 0.2346∠ − 250.3° )
= ( 0.9857 ) + ( 0.2346 )
2 2

= 1.02664 pu
With the three-phase 500-kVA base,
S3φ = 513.32 kW
To compute directly:
The Equivalent ∆-Connected resistors are
R∆ = 3 RY = 3 × 10.58 = 31.74 Ω
From the given line-to-line voltages
2 2 2
Vab Vbc Vca
S3φ = + +
R∆ R∆ R∆
(1840 ) + ( 2760 ) + ( 2300 )
2 2 2

=
31.74
= 513.33 kW

8.48 The complex power delivered to the load in terms of symmetrical components:
S3φ = 3 ( Va 0 I a*0 + Va1 I a*1 + Va 2 I a*2 )
Substituting values from the solution of Problem 8.20,
S3φ = 3  47.7739∠57.6268° (1.562∠21.06° ) + 112.7841∠ − 0.0331° ( 5.164∠74.0877° )
+61.6231∠45.8825° ( 2.822∠28.1722° ) 
= 1154.7 + j1388.4 VA
The complex power delivered to the load by summing up the power in each phase:
S3φ = Va I a* + Vb I b* + Vc I c* ; with values from Problem 8.25 solution,

= 200∠25° ( 8.706∠ − 51.99° ) + 100∠ − 155° ( 5.062∠136° )

+80∠100° ( 3.129∠32.04° ) 
= 1154.7 + j1388.4 VA

232
© 2017 Cengage Learning®. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
8.49 From Problem 8.6(a) solution:
Va = 116∠9.9° V; Vb = 41.3∠ − 76° V; Vc = 96.1∠168° V

From Problem 8.5, I a = 12∠0° A; I b = 6∠ − 90° A; I c = 8∠150° A

(a) In terms of phase values
S = Va I a* + Vb I b* + Vc I c*
= 116∠9.9° (12∠0° ) + 41.3∠ − 76° ( 6∠90° ) + 96.1∠168° ( 8∠ − 150° )
= ( 2339.4 + j 537.4 ) VA ←
(b) In terms of symmetrical components:
V0 = 10∠0° V; V1 = 80∠30° V; V2 = 40∠ − 30° V From Problem 8.6(a)
I 0 = 1.82∠ − 21.5° A; I1 = 8.37∠16.2° A; I 2 = 2.81∠ − 36.3° From Problem 8.5 Soln.
∴ S = 3 (V0 I 0* + V1 I1* + V2 I 2* )
= 3 10∠0° (1.82∠21.5° ) + 80∠30° ( 8.37∠ − 16.2° ) + 40∠ − 30° ( 2.81∠36.3° ) 
= 3 ( 779.8 + j179.2 )
= ( 2339.4 + j 537.4 ) VA ←

233
© 2017 Cengage Learning®. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
 234
© 2017 Cengage Learning®. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
discourses, recollecting my experience as the dupe of similar
expectations.
“I was tempted, nevertheless, by a Greek who had a process with
cinnabar, which failed. At the same time I became acquainted with a
strange gentleman, newly arrived, who often, in my presence, sold
the fruit of his operations to the goldsmiths. I was a long time
frequenting his company, but he did not consent to inform me of his
secret. At last I prevailed over him, but it was only a refinement of
metals more ingenious than the rest. I failed not to write to the abbé,
at Toulouse, enclosing a copy of the process of the stranger, and
imagining that I had attained some useful knowledge, he advised me
to remain another year at Paris, since I had made so good a
beginning.
“After all, as to the philosophers’ stone, I succeeded no better than
before. I had been three years at Paris, and my money was nearly
expended, when I had a letter from the abbé, informing me that he
had something to communicate, and that I should join him as soon
as possible.
“On my arrival at Toulouse, I found that he had a letter from King
Henry of Navarre, who was a lover of philosophy, and who requested
that I should proceed to Pau, in Berne, to teach him the secret I had
received from the stranger at Paris. He would recompense me with
three or four thousand crowns. The mention of this sum exhilarated
the abbé, and he never let me rest till I set out to wait on the prince. I
arrived at Pau in May 1542. I found the prince a very curious
personage. By his command I went to work, and succeeded
according to the process I knew. When it was finished I obtained the
expected recompense, but although the king wished to serve me
further, he was dissuaded by the lords of his court, even by those
who had engaged me to come to him. He dismissed me with great
acknowledgments, desiring me to see if there was anything in his
estates which would gratify me, such as confiscations or the like, and
that he would give them to me with pleasure. These promises, which
meant nothing, did not lead me to entertain the hopes of a courtier,
and I returned to the abbé at Toulouse.
 “On my road I heard of a religious man, who was very skilful in
natural philosophy. I went to visit him; he lamented my misfortunes,
and said, with a friendly zeal, that he advised me to amuse myself no
longer with these various particular operations, which were all false
and sophistical, but that I should rather peruse the best books of the
ancient philosophers, as well to know the true matter as the right
order that should be pursued in the practice of this science.
“I felt the truth of this safe counsel, but before I put it in execution, I
went to see my friend at Toulouse, to give him an account of the
eight hundred crowns that we had put in common, and to divide with
him the recompense I had received from the King of Navarre. If he
proved not content with all I told him, he was still less so at the
resolution I had taken to discontinue my operations. Of our eight
hundred crowns, we had but eighty-six left. I departed from him, and
returned home, intending to go to Paris, and there remain until I was
fixed in my theory of reading the works of the adepts. I reached Paris
in 1546, and remained there a year, assiduously studying the Turba
Philosophorum, the good Trévisan, the “Remonstrance of Nature,”
and some other of the best books. But as I had no first principles, I
knew not on what to determine.
“At length I went out of my solitude, not to see my old
acquaintances, the searchers after particular tinctures and minor
works, but to frequent those who proceeded in the great process by
the books of the genuine adepts. I was, nevertheless, disappointed
herein, by the confusion and disagreement of their theories, by the
variety of their works, and of their different operations. Excited by a
sort of inspiration, I gave myself up to the study of Raymond Lully
and Arnold de Villa Nova. My reading and meditation continued
another year. I then formed my plan, and only waited to sell the
remainder of my land to enable me to go home, and put my
resolution into practice. I commenced at Christmas, 1549, and after
some preparations, having procured everything that was necessary, I
began my process, not without inquietude and difficulty. A friend said
to me:—“What are you going to do? have you not lost enough by this
delusion?” Another assured me that if I continued to purchase so
much coal, I should be suspected of counterfeiting coin, of which he
had already heard a rumour. Another said I ought to follow my
business of a lawyer. But I was chiefly tormented by my relations,
who reproached me bitterly with my conduct, and threatened to bring
the officers of justice into my house to break my furnaces in pieces.
“I leave you to judge my trouble and grief at this opposition. I found
no consolation but in my work, which prospered from day to day, and
to which I was very attentive. The interruption of all commerce, which
was occasioned by the plague, gave me the opportunity of great
solitude, in which I could examine with undisturbed satisfaction the
success of the three colours which mark the true work. I thus arrived
at the perfection of the tincture, and made an essay of its virtue on
common quicksilver, on Easter Monday, 1550. In less than an hour it
was converted into pure gold. You may guess how joyful I was, but I
took care not to boast. I thanked God for the favour he shewed me,
and prayed that I should be permitted to use it but for His glory.
“The next day I set out to find the abbé, according to the promise
we gave each other, to communicate our discoveries. On my way, I
called at the house of the religious man who had assisted me by his
good advice. I had the grief to find that both he and the abbé had
been dead about six months. I did not go back to my house, but
sought another place, to await the arrival of one of my relations
whom I had left at my dwelling. I sent him a procuration to sell all that
I possessed, both house and furniture, to pay my debts, and to
distribute the remainder among those of my relations who were in
want. He soon after rejoined me, and we set out for Lausanne, in
Switzerland, resolved to pass our days without ostentation in some
of the celebrated cities of Germany.”
In his unknown retreat[V] the adept recorded his adventures and
experiences when in search of the philosophical stone, ut divertarem
bonos piosque vivos, à sophisticationibus, ad viam rectam
perfectionis in hoc opere divino. His little work is entitled simply
Opusculum Chemicum; it opens with the romantic narrative which I
have cited almost in extenso. It calls Hermes magnus propheta
noster, insists that the art is the gift of God alone on the authority of
all the initiates, and quotes so largely from previous writers that it
can scarcely be considered an original work on the Hermetic
philosophy.
The life of Bernard Trévisan has abundantly testified to the
physical nature of his object, which is amply confirmed by this
treatise. The methods of projection upon metals, the composition of
precious stones, and the application of the tincture as a medicine for
the human body, are successively considered. One grain of the
divinum opus, dissolved in white wine, transmutes that liquor into a
rich citron colour, and has innumerable hygienic uses.

FOOTNOTES:
[V] See Appendix I.
 BERIGARD OF PISA.
The following account of a transmutation performed by himself, is
recorded by the celebrated Italian philosopher, Claude Berigard, and
will be found on the twenty-fifth page of his Circulus Pisanus,
published at Florence in 1641.
“I did not think that it was possible to convert quicksilver into gold,
but an acquaintance thought proper to remove my doubt. He gave
me about a drachm of a powder nearly of the colour of the wild
poppy, and having a smell like calcined sea-salt. To avoid all
imposition, I purchased a crucible, charcoal, and quicksilver, in which
I was certain that there was no gold mixed. Ten drachms of
quicksilver which I heated on the fire were on projection transmuted
into nearly the same weight of good gold, which stood all tests. Had I
not performed this operation in the most careful manner, taking every
precaution against the possibility of doubt, I should not have believed
it, but I am satisfied of the fact.”
 CHARNOCK.
Thomas Charnock was born in the Isle of Thanet, in the year
1524. He calls himself an unlettered scholar, and student in
astronomy and philosophy. He practised surgery, and, though he
knew only the rudiments of Latin, it appears that he was famous in
the neighbourhood of Salisbury, where he had established himself,
for his accomplishments in the liberal sciences. He had two masters
in alchemy, the first being Sir James S——, a priest, dwelling in the
cloisters, near Salisbury, who informed Charnock that he did not
derive his knowledge from any living adept, but that by meditation
upon the words of the philosophers, he had mastered the principal
secrets of alchemy as he lay in his bed, and had accordingly
succeeded in making the silver powder.
The other master who instructed Charnock was a blind man, led
by a boy, whom the neophyte accidentally discovered at an inn
among other travellers, by a few words of the occult chemistry, which
he perceived in his conversation. As soon as the company had
retired, Charnock questioned the speaker, and requested instruction
in natural philosophy. To this the adept objected that he was
unacquainted with his interrogator, saying he would render up his
knowledge to God who gave it, if he did not meet with a certain
Master Charnock, the fame of whose learning and charity had
reached him.
At these words Charnock made himself known, and the old man
discoursed with him for an hour, during which time he found him
expert in many mysteries of the sacred science. He promised
Charnock that if he made a vow not to reveal the secret for gold,
preferment, or through affection for great men, but only at death to
one who was truly devoted to the search into nature, he would make
him the heir of his knowledge. Accordingly, on the following Sunday
they received the Eucharist together, and then, withdrawing into the
middle of a large field, the boy was sent away out of hearing, and, in
a few words, the blind man uttered “the mystery of mineral
prudence.” Their conversations were continued for nine days. The
secrets of alchemy were disclosed, and the adept also related his
own private history, acquainting Charnock that his name was William
Bird, that he had been a prior of Bath, and had defrayed the expense
of repairing the abbey church from treasure which he had acquired
by means of the red and white elixirs. At the suppression of the
abbey, he concealed the inestimable powder in the wall, and
returning in ten days it was gone. He found a few rags in the place
where he had left it. This misfortune almost deprived him of his
senses; he wandered about, and lost his sight. He was therefore
unable to repeat his process, and continued to travel over the
country, led by a boy. He had received his Hermetic knowledge from
a servant of Ripley.
At the time of this communication, Charnock was twenty-eight
years old, and two years after his first master fell sick while attending
his furnace for the completion of the red stone. He sent for
Charnock, made him the heir of his work, and died after giving him
instructions how to proceed. Charnock began his operations on the
materials left by his leader, and was much perplexed by the difficulty
of keeping the fire equal. He often started out of his sleep to examine
the fuel; but after all his care, which continued during the space of
several months, the frame of wood that covered the furnace took fire
during a short period of his absence, and when, smelling the
burning, he ran up to his laboratory, he discovered that his work was
completely destroyed. This occurred on January 1, 1555. To repair
the mischief he was obliged to recommence at the first part of the
process, and he hired a servant to assist in taking care of the fire. In
the course of two months certain signs filled him with hopes of
success, when his dependence on his servant proved the ruin of his
work. He discovered that this unfaithful assistant would let the fire
nearly out, and then, to conceal his neglect, would rekindle it with
grease till it was so hot as to scorch the matter beyond recovery.
In the third attempt, Charnock resolved to proceed without help.
His fire cost him three pounds a week, and he was obliged to sell
some rings and jewels to maintain it. He made good progress in the
course of eight months, and expected to be rewarded in a little time
for all his labours; but at this critical period he was impressed to
serve as a soldier at the siege of Calais. Furious with
disappointment, he took a hatchet, smashed his glasses, furnace,
and apparatus, and threw them out of the house.
He wrote his “Breviary of Philosophy” in 1557, and the “Enigma of
Alchemy” in 1572, with a memorandum, dated 1574, when he was
fifty years old. Therein he declares his attainment of the gold-
producing powder when his hairs were white. The “Breviary” claims
to describe all the vessels and instruments which are required in the
science; a potter, a joiner, and a glassmaker must lend their several
services. The address of one of these artificers, specially
recommended by the author, is said to be Chiddinfold in Sussex; he
could manufacture egg-shaped glasses which opened and shut “as
close as a hair.” The regulation of the philosophical fire is described
in this curious poem, but the rest of its information is of a purely
autobiographical kind.
 GIOVANNI BRACCESCO.
This alchemist of Brescia flourished in the sixteenth century. He
was the author of a commentary on Geber, which is not supposed to
cast much light on the obscurities of the Arabian philosopher. The
most curious of his original treatises is Legno della Vita, vel quale si
dichiara la medecina per la quale i nostri primi padri vivevano nove
cento anni, Rome, 1542, 8vo.—“The Wood of Life, wherein is
revealed the medicine by means of which our Primeval Ancestors
lived for Nine Hundred Years.” This work, together with La
Esposizione di Geber Filosophe, Venice, 1544, 8vo, was translated
into Latin, and may be found in the collections of Gratarole and
Mangetus. They were also published separately under the title De
Alchimia dialogi duo, Lugd., 1548, 4to. The Wood of Life is one of
the innumerable names given by the alchemists to the matured and
perfected stone, the composition whereof is the accomplishment of
the magnum opus. It is more generally denominated the Universal
Balsam or Panacea, which cures all diseases and insures to its most
blessed possessor an unalterable youth. The name Wood of Life is
bestowed by the Jews on the two sticks which confine the scroll of
the Law. They are convinced that a simple contact with these sacred
rods strengthens the eyesight and restores health. They also hold
that there is no better means of facilitating the accouchement of
females than to cause them to behold these vitalising sticks, which,
however, they are in no wise permitted to touch.[W]
The work of Braccesco is written in the form of a dialogue, and is
explanatory of the Hermetic principles of Raymond Lully, one of the
interlocutors, who instructs an enthusiastic disciple in the arcane
principles of the divine art, the disciple in question being in search of
a safeguard against the numerous infirmities and weaknesses of the
“humid radical.” Such a medicine is declared by the master to be
extracted from a single substance, which is the sophic aqua
metallorum. The dialogue is of interest, as it shows the connection in
the mind of the writer between the development of metallic perfection
and the physical regeneration of humanity.

FOOTNOTES:
[W] Dictionnaire des Sciences Occultes, i. p. 232.
 LEONARDI FIORAVANTI.
Doctor, surgeon, and alchemist of the sixteenth century, this Italian
was a voluminous author, who is best known by his “Summary of the
Arcana of Medicine, Surgery, and Alchemy,” published in octavo at
Venice in 1571, and which has been reprinted several times. It
contains an application of Hermetic methods and principles to the
science of medicine, but the author’s account of the petra
philosophorum shows the designation to be of a purely arbitrary kind,
for it is a mixture of mercury, nitre, and other substances, intended to
act on the stomach, and has no connection with the transmuting
lapis of the alchemical sages.
 JOHN DEE.
The life of this pseudo-adept, and of Edward Kelly, his companion
in alchemy, is involved in a cloud of necromancy and magico-
Hermetical marvels, so that the fabulous and historical elements are
not to be easily separated.
The true name of Edward Kelly is supposed to have been Talbot.
He is said to have been born at Worcester in 1555, and to have
followed the profession of a lawyer in London. His talents in
penmanship appear to have been utilised in the falsification of
deeds. He was prosecuted at Lancaster, according to a narrative of
his enemies, for an offence of this nature, and was condemned to
lose his ears. By some he is said to have suffered this punishment,
[X] by others to have evaded it, seeking safety in Wales, where he
lodged at an obscure inn, and concealed his identity by adopting a
new name. During this sojourn an old manuscript was shown him by
the innkeeper, which was indecipherable by himself or his
neighbours. The so-called Edward Kelly, being initiated into the
mysteries of ancient writing, discovered it to be a treatise on
transmutation, and his curiosity was highly excited. He inquired as to
its history, and was told that it had been discovered in the tomb of a
bishop who had been buried in a neighbouring church, and whose
tomb had been sacrilegiously uptorn by some wretched heretical
fanatics at that epoch of furious religiomania and rampant
Elizabethan persecution. The object of this desecration was the
discovery of concealed treasures in the resting-place of the prelate,
to whom immense riches were attributed by popular tradition. The
impiety was, however, rewarded by nothing but the manuscript in
question, and two small ivory bottles, respectively containing a
ponderous red and white powder. These pearls beyond price were
rejected by the pigs of apostasy; one of them was shattered on the
spot, and its ruddy, celestine contents for the most part lost. The
remnant, together with the remaining bottle and the unintelligible
manuscript, were speedily disposed of to the innkeeper in exchange
for a skinful of wine. The unbroken bottle was transferred by the new
owner as a plaything to his children, but the providence which in the
main overwatches the accomplishment of the sublime act preserved
its contents intact. When Edward Kelly, with an assumed antiquarian
indifference about objects which were more curious than valuable,
offered a pound sterling for all the articles, a bargain was promptly
effected. The lawyer was by no means an alchemist, but he believed
himself possessed of a Hermetic treasure; he determined, at all
risks, to return to London, and consult with his friend Dr Dee, who
abode in a cottage at Mortlake, and who, in matters of magical
devilment, and in the tortuosities of the occult, was considered a
man of men.
Whether he had been accused of forgery, whether he had lost his
ears, or not, the discovery of Edward Kelly caused the necromantic
doctor to be blind to his faults or his crimes; he at once set to work in
his company, in the year 1579, and in the month of December a
stupendous success was the crown of their labour in common. The
richness of Kelly’s tincture proved to be one upon two hundred and
seventy-two thousand two hundred and thirty; but they lost much
gold in experiments before they knew the extent of its power. In Dr
Dee’s “Diary in Germany” he mentions the book of St Dunstan,
which is probably the manuscript of Kelly, and also the powder
“found at the digging in England,” which indicates some foundation
for the narrative just given. The place where the treasure was
obtained is reported to have been the ruins of Glastonbury Abbey,
founded by St Dunstan. The last abbot was hanged by Henry VIII. for
his adherence to the Papal cause.
Kelly appears to have taken up his quarters at Islington. In June
1583 an attachment was issued against him for coining, of which his
companion declares him guiltless. In the following September, Dr
Dee, his wife and children, and Edward Kelly, with his wife,
accompanied by a certain Lord Albert Alasco, of Siradia, in Poland,
departed from London for Cracow. As soon as they had arrived in
the north of Germany, Dr Dee received a letter from one of his
friends in England, informing him that his library at Mortlake had
been seized and partially destroyed, on the vulgar report of his
unlawful studies, and that his rents and property were sequestered.
Despite the possession of the Donum Dei, all parties appear to have
been in considerable penury in consequence.
In 1585 we find them at Prague, then the metropolis of alchemy,
and the headquarters of adepts and adeptship. Edward Kelly and his
companions presently abounded in money, and the owner of the
Hermaic Benediction made no secret of his prize or his powers,
indulged in all kinds of extravagance, performed continual
projections for himself and his friends, as well as for many persons
of distinction who sought his acquaintance. Much of the result was
distributed. The transmutations of Kelly at this period are attested by
several writers, including Gassendus. The most authenticated and
remarkable, according to Figuier, is that which took place in the
house of the imperial physician, Thaddeus de Hazek, when, by the
mediation of a single drop of a red oil, Kelly transmuted a pound of
mercury into excellent gold, the superabundant virtue of the agent
leaving in addition at the bottom of the crucible a small ruby. Dr
Nicholas Barnaud, the assistant of Hazek, and an alchemical writer,
whose works are as rare as they are reputable, was a witness of this
wonder, and subsequently himself manufactured the precious metal,
the désir désiré, with the assistance of Edward Kelly.
The report spread, and the adept was invited by the Emperor
Maximilian II. to the Court of Germany, where his transmutations
raised him into highest favour; he was knighted, and created Marshal
of Bohemia. Now perfectly intoxicated, he posed as a veritable
adept, who was able to compose the inestimable projecting powder.
This gave a handle to the enemies whom his exaltation had made
him; they persuaded the Emperor to practically imprison this living
philosophical treasure, and to extract his alchemical secret. His
misfortunes now began. Absolute inability to obey the imperial
mandate and compose a considerable quantity of the stone
philosophical, was interpreted as a contumacious refusal; he was
cast into a dungeon, but on engaging to comply with the demand if
he had the liberty to seek assistance, he was speedily set free,
whereupon he rejoined Dr Dee, and they again set to work in
concert. The Book of St Dunstan indicated the use but not the
preparation of the powder, and their experiments, vigilantly
overwatched to prevent the escape of Kelly, proved entirely futile. In
the desperation which succeeded their failure, the outrageous
disposition of Kelly broke out, and he murdered one of his guards.
He was again imprisoned, his companion, for the most part,
remaining unmolested, and employing his opportunities, it is said, to
interest Queen Elizabeth in the fate of the Emperor’s prisoner. She
claimed the alchemist as her subject, but his recent crime had
rendered him obnoxious to the laws of the empire, and he was still
detained in his dungeon.
In 1589, Dr Dee set out himself for England. He halted at Bremen,
and was there visited by Henry Khunrath, one of the greatest adepts
of the age. The Landgrave of Hesse sent him a complimentary letter,
and was presented in return with twelve Hungarian horses. Dr Dee
arrived in England after an absence of six years; he was received by
the Queen, who subsequently visited him at his house, presented
him with two hundred angels to keep his Christmas, and gave him a
license in alchemy. Sir Thomas Jones offered him his Castle of
Emlin, in Wales, for a dwelling; he was made Chancellor of St Paul’s,
and in 1595, Warden of Manchester College. He repaired thither with
his wife and children, and was installed in February 1596. He does
not appear to have accomplished any transmutation after his return
to England. In 1607 we again find him at Mortlake, living on the
revenue which he derived from Manchester, but subject to much
persecution by the Fellows of that College. He died in 1608, at the
age of eighty years.
The Hermetic abilities of Kelly were always believed in by the
Emperor; he continued to detain him, hoping to extract his secret.
Some friends of the unfortunate alchemist endeavoured, in the year
1597, to effect his escape by means of a rope, but he fell from the
window of his prison, and died of the injuries which he received.
During his confinement he composed a treatise on the
philosophical stone, and the Diary of Dr Dee was published from a
genuine Ashmolean manuscript in 1604. The son of John Dee
became physician to the Czar at Moscow, and in his Fasciculus
Chemicus, he states that, in early youth, he witnessed transmutation
repeatedly for the space of seven years.
The metrical account of Sir Edward Kelly’s work in the Theatrum
Chemicum Britannicum informs all who are broiling in the kitchen of
Geber to burn their books “and come and learn of me,” for they can
no more compound the Elixir Vitæ and the precious stone than they
can manufacture apples. The progenitor of magnesia, wife to the
gold of the philosophers, is not a costly thing. The philosophical gold
is not common but Hermetic sulphur, and magnesia is essential
mercury.
The Testamentum Johannis Dee Philosophi Summi ad Johannem
Gwynn, transmissum 1568, is lucidly worded as follows in its
reference to the magnum opus:—

“Cut that in Three which Nature hath made one,

Then strengthen yt, even by it self alone;
Wherewith then cutte the powdered sonne in twayne,
By length of tyme, and heale the wounde againe.
The self same sonne troys yet more, ye must wounde,
Still with new knives, of the same kinde, and grounde;
Our monas trewe thus use by Nature’s Law,
Both binde and lewse, only with rype and rawe,
And aye thank God who only is our Guyde,
All is ynough, no more then at this tyde.”

FOOTNOTES:
[X] Morhof, Epistola ad Langlelotum de Metallorun
Transmutatione.
 HENRY KHUNRATH.
This German alchemist, who is claimed as a hierophant of the
psychic side of the magnum opus, and who was undoubtedly aware
of the larger issues of Hermetic theorems, must be classed as a
follower of Paracelsus. He was a native of Saxony, born about the
year 1560. He perambulated a large portion of Germany, and at the
age of twenty-eight received the degree of medical doctor at the
University of Basle. He practised medicine at Hamburg and
afterwards at Dresden, where he died in obscurity and poverty, on
the 9th of September 1601, aged about forty-five years. The
Amphitheatrum Sapientiæ Æternæ solius veræ, Christiano
Kabbalisticum divino magicum, &c., published in folio in 1609, is the
most curious and remarkable of his works, some of which still remain
in manuscript.[Y] It was left unfinished by its author, appearing four
years after his decease, with a preface and conclusion by his friend
Erasmus Wohlfahrt.
The prologue directs the aspirant to the supreme temple of
everlasting wisdom to know God and Jesus Christ whom He hath
sent, to know also himself, and the mysteries of the macrocosmos.
The whole treatise is purely mystical and magical. The seven steps
leading to the portals of universal knowledge are described in an
esoteric commentary on some portions of the Wisdom of Solomon.
The lapis philosophorum is declared to be identical with the Ruach
Elohim who brooded over the face of the waters during the first
period of creation. The Ruach Elohim is called vapor virtutis Dei, and
the internal form of all things. The perfect stone is attained through
Christ, and, conversely, the possession of that treasure gives the
knowledge of Christ. The Amphitheatrum Sapientiæ Æternæ seems
to be the voice of the ancient chaos, but its curious folding plates are
exceedingly suggestive.
 FOOTNOTES:
[Y] Chausepié, Dictionnaire.
 MICHAEL MAIER.
This celebrated German alchemist, one of the central figures of
the Rosicrucian controversy in Germany, and the greatest adept of
his age, was born at Ruidsburg, in Holstein, towards the year 1568.
In his youth he applied himself closely to the study of medicine, and
establishing himself at Rostock, he practised that art with so much
success that he became physician to the Emperor Rudolph II., by
whom he was ennobled for his services. Some adepts,
notwithstanding, succeeded in enticing him from the practical path
which he had followed so long into the thorny tortuosities of
alchemical labyrinths. Il se passionna pour le grand œuvre and
scoured all Germany to hold conferences with those whom he
imagined to be in possession of transcendent secrets. The
Biographie Universelle declares that he sacrificed his health, his
fortune, and his time to these “ruinous absurdities.” According to
Buhle,[Z] he travelled extensively; and on one occasion paid a visit to
England, where he made the acquaintance of the Kentish mystic,
Robert Fludd.
He appears as an alchemical writer a little before the publication of
the Rosicrucian manifestoes. In the controversy which followed their
appearance, and which convulsed mystic Germany, he took an early
and enthusiastic share, defending the mysterious society in several
books and pamphlets. He is supposed to have travelled in search of
genuine members of the “College of Teutonic Philosophers R.C.,”
and, failing to meet with them, is said to have established a
brotherhood of his own on the plan of the Fama Fraternitatis. These
statements rest on inadequate authority, and there is better ground
for believing that he was initiated, towards the close of his life, into
the genuine order. A posthumous tract of Michael Maier, entitled
“Ulysses,” was published in 1624 by one of his personal friends, who
added to the same volume the substance of two pamphlets which
had already appeared in German, but which, by reason of their
importance, were now translated into Latin for the benefit of the
literati of Europe. The first was entitled Colloquium
Rhodostauroticum trium personarum, per Famam et Confessionem
quodamodo revelatam de Fraternitate Roseæ Crucis. The second
was an Echo Colloquii, by Benedict Hilarion, writing in the name of
the Rosicrucian Fraternity. It appears from these pamphlets that
Maier was admitted into the mystical order, but when or where is
uncertain. He became the most voluminous alchemical writer of his
period, publishing continually till his death in the year 1622.
Many of his works are Hermetic elaborations of classical
mythology, and are adorned with most curious plates. They are all
hopelessly obscure, if his Rosicrucian apologies be excepted; the
latter are not deficient in ingenuity, but they are exceedingly
laboured, and, of course, completely unsatisfactory. He does not
appear to have been included among the adepts, and he is now
almost forgotten. His chemical knowledge is buried in a multitude of
symbols and insoluble enigmas, and believers in spiritual chemistry
will not derive much comfort or profit from his writings.

FOOTNOTES:
[Z] See De Quincey’s “Rosicrucians and Freemasons.”