POWER SYSTEM ANALYSIS

Practical Report

Submitted by

Name: Kinga Tandin Sherpa

Student No: 02200258

Electrical Engineering

College of Science and Technology

Rinchending:Phuentsholing

Experiment No: 4 Date: 23/10/2024

Aim:
Determine short-circuit current and fault levels at various system locations and verify that the
power system components are adequate to withstand the expected short-circuit.

Objective:

 To simulate symmetrical faults (LLL, LLL-G) at all buses and compare short circuit
current level (SCC) and short circuit currents.
 To simulate unsymmetrical faults (LL, LL-G, L-G) on nodes, lines and calculate line
voltages and currents at fault location, both side of transformers and generators.
 To plot the three-phase voltages and currents before and after the fault is cleared.

Procedure

1) Build the network model of the typical power system network below with data given in
tables 01 to 03.

Figure 1 Network Model

Table 01: Network Feeder data (External Grid)

Table 02: Transformer data (Two-winding transformer)

 Table 03: Cables and Overhead Line Data

Perform the following Tasks with IEC60909 standard;

a) Simulate the LLL and LLL-G fault at all busbars (with earth resistance of Zg =0.1 ohm).
Compare simulations of fault MVA and short circuit current for all busbars (LLL and
LLL-G faults) and comment on how ground fault resistance affects the results.
b) Create LLL short circuits at Bus 4 with and without including Line 2 (switch off or out
of service) and Compare fault MVA and short circuit current.
c) Simulate the LL-G with the ground resistance of Zg =0.1 ohm at BUS2 and BUS4.
Record the line currents and voltages at both sides of nodes.
d) Create LL-G in the overhead line 4 at 70% of the line length and record the line currents
and voltages at the fault location and at BUS 5 and Bus 6.
Create EMT simulation and plot three phase line voltages and currents at BUS 5 if the
breaker is opened to clear fault at 0.05 seconds.
e) Repeat case (d) with single line to ground fault with Zf=0.1 ohm.
Results

Model for SLD from DIgSILENT

Figure 2 Model for SLD from DIgSILENT

Simulated Output from DIgSILENT

Figure 3 Simulated Output from DIgSILENT

System Summary

Figure 4 Total System Summary

Task to be performed

a) Simulate the LLL and LLL-G fault at all busbars (with earth resistance of Zg =0.1 ohm). Compare
simulations of fault MVA and short circuit current for all busbars (LLL and LLL-G faults) and
comment on how ground fault resistance affects the results.

Result for With and Without the Ground Fault Resistance

Table 2 With resistance 0.1 ohm Table 1 Without the ground resistances 0.1 ohm

Name Sk'' Ik'' Name Sk'' Ik''

MVA kA MVA kA
BUS 342.6839 9.892431 BUS 1 346.4102 10
1
BUS 2 25.1455 35.40917
BUS 1.727729 2.432939
2 BUS 3 24.54173 34.55896
BUS 1.726967 2.431865
3 BUS 4 24.99296 35.19437
BUS 1.723201 2.426562 BUS 5 15.64174 22.02625
4
BUS 1.638288 2.30699 BUS 6 5.057555 7.121904
5
BUS 1.378189 1.940726
6
Effect of Ground Fault resistance on the Fault MVA

Effect of ground fault resistance to the short circuit fault capacity

400 Sk'' MVA Sk'' MVA

350

300

250

200

150

100

50

0
BUS 1 BUS 2 BUS 3 BUS 4 BUS 5 BUS 6

BUSBAR

Figure 5: Effect of ground fault resistances

Figure 6 Effect of ground fault resistances to the Fault Current

The graph comparing fault MVA values with and without ground fault resistance illustrates a
significant impact on the fault current magnitude and MVA across the system. With ground
fault resistance, BUS 1 exhibits a substantially higher fault MVA (342.68 MVA) compared to
the scenario without ground fault resistance (9.89 MVA), indicating a stabilizing effect of
ground fault resistance. For the other buses (BUS 2, BUS 3, BUS 4, BUS 5, BUS 6), the
presence of ground fault resistance also reduces the fault MVA, though the effect is less
pronounced. This demonstrates that ground fault resistance is instrumental in limiting fault
current magnitudes, safeguarding equipment, and ensuring the stability of the power system
during fault conditions.

b) Create LLL short circuits at Bus 4 with and without including Line 2 (switch off or out of
service) and Compare fault MVA and short circuit current.

Name With Line 2 Without Line 2

Sk'' Ik'' Sk'' Ik''
MVA kA MVA kA
BUS 4 24.99296 35.194 15.86658 22.343

Table 3 Fault current and MVA with and without Line 2

When creating a Line-to-Line (LLL) short circuit at Bus 4, the results show a notable difference
in fault MVA and short-circuit current depending on whether Line 2 is in service (with Line 2)
or out of service (without Line 2). With Line 2 in service, the fault MVA at Bus 4 is 24.99
MVA, and the short-circuit current is 35.194 kA. However, when Line 2 is out of service, the
fault MVA decreases to 15.87 MVA, and the short-circuit current reduces to 22.34 kA. This
suggests that Line 2's inclusion significantly contributes to the fault current and MVA at Bus
4, highlighting the importance of considering line configurations in short-circuit analysis for
the design and protection of the power system.

c) Simulate the LL-G with the ground resistance of Zg =0.1 ohm at BUS2 and BUS4. Record
the line currents and voltages at both sides of nodes.

Name Fault current (kA) voltage (kV)

Phase A Phase B Phase C Phase A Phase B Phase C
BUS 2 0 4.956853 4.936835 0.24886 0.243634 0.24265
BUS 4 0 4.927684 4.907105 0.248982 0.243484 0.242467
Table 4 Fault current and voltage at BUS 2 and 4
In the simulation of Line-to-Line-to-Ground (LL-G) fault at BUS2 and BUS4 with a ground
resistance of 0.1 ohms, the fault current in Phase A for both buses is effectively zero, indicating
no fault current flows in that phase during the fault condition. The fault current in Phase B and
Phase C for both buses is very low (4.93 to 4.96 kA). This signifies that the LL-G fault does
not create a significant fault current in the system, likely due to the ground fault resistance
mitigating the fault's impact. In terms of voltage, the results show minor reductions in voltage
levels across all three phases for both buses, with Phase A experiencing the most significant
reduction. These findings suggest that the LL-G fault scenario with a ground resistance of 0.1
ohms has limited impact on the system's fault current and voltage, and the protection systems
appear to be effectively mitigating the fault condition.

d) Create LL-G in the overhead line 4 at 70% of the line length and record the line currents
and voltages at the fault location and at BUS 5 and Bus 6.

Create EMT simulation and plot three phase line voltages and currents at BUS 5 if the
breaker is opened to clear fault at 0.05 seconds.

Figure 7 Three phase fault current for LLG

In the LL-G fault scenario on overhead Line 4 occurring at 70% of the line length, the
simulation records the fault currents and voltages at various locations. At the fault location,
fault currents are observed. BUS 5 and BUS 6 experience fault-induced voltage and current
conditions. Additionally, an Electromagnetic Transient (EMT) simulation is employed to
model the system's dynamic response, specifically the effects of breaker operation. When the
breaker at BUS 5 is opened to clear the fault at 0.05 seconds, the EMT simulation allows the
plotting of three-phase line voltages and currents at BUS 5. This comprehensive analysis
provides insight into the transient behaviour and system response during and after a LL-G
fault, aiding in the evaluation of protective devices and system resilience.
 Figure 8 Three phase voltage during LLG fault

In the event of a Line-to-Line-to-Ground (LLG) fault in a three-phase electrical system, the

behaviour of fault currents is complex and exhibits variations across the different phases. The
phase directly impacted by the fault experiences a notably higher current flow, primarily due
to the reduced impedance path created by the fault, serving as a clear indicator of the fault's
presence and its severity. The other unaffected phases also carry fault currents, although these
currents are generally at lower levels compared to the phase directly affected by the fault.

e) Repeat case (d) with single line to ground fault with Zf=0.1 ohm.

Figure 9 Three phase voltage and three phase fault current during LG fault
In the repeated scenario involving a single Line-to-Ground (LG) fault with a ground fault
resistance (Zf) of 0.1 ohm, the analysis captures the dynamics of the fault event in a
threephase system. The results detail the behavior of fault currents and voltages during the
LG fault. Notably, the presence of Zf introduces resistance into the fault path, leading to a
moderated fault current magnitude. The three-phase voltage and fault current data provided in
Figure 9 offer valuable insights into the system's response to this specific fault condition,
aiding in the assessment of protective measures and the system's resilience when exposed to
single LG faults.

Conclusion/Discussions:

In this thorough examination of short-circuit currents and fault scenarios in a power system, a
variety of symmetrical and unsymmetrical fault circumstances were considered. The
inclusion of ground fault resistance (Zg) significantly influenced the results. It was clear that
ground fault resistance efficiently limited fault MVA and short-circuit currents, which helped
to safeguard equipment and maintain overall system stability. These findings highlight the
necessity of including ground fault resistance in system protection design, as it can reduce the
potentially damaging effects of short circuits while also improving power grid reliability.

The utilisation of Electromagnetic Transient (EMT) simulations provided crucial information

about the system's dynamic response during failure situations. EMT simulations enabled the
assessment of protective device performance and system resilience in real-world fault
scenarios, improving the capacity to make educated decisions about system design and
operation. The investigation of a single Line-to-Ground (LG) failure with resistance (Zf)
revealed a mitigated fault current size under such conditions, emphasising the need of fault
resistance in maintaining system integrity.