An-Najah National University

Faculty of Graduate Studies

Power Flow Analysis Using ETAP Software

By:

Tareq Foqha

Supervisor:

Dr. Maher Khammash

Nablus, Palestine
2020
 ABSTRACT
Load flow is an important tool used by power engineers for planning, to determine the best

operation for a power system and exchange of power between utility companies. In order to

have an efficient operating power system, it is necessary to determine which method is

suitable and efficient for the system’s load flow analysis. This research will introduce a load

flow study and analysis for 36-bus power system using ETAP software to improve the power

factor and to reduce the electrical losses.

II
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Cover Page I
Abstract II
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION…………………..….………………………..….……..... 1
1.1 Load Flow Studies …..….…….…………………..….……….……………..……..…..…..… 2
1.2 Newton-Raphson Power Flow Solution ………………..….……………..….……….… 4
1.3 Control of Power Flow …………………..…………………………………..…………....… 6
1.4 ETAP ………………………………………..……………..….…………………………....….… 7
CHAPTER 2: LOAD FLOW ANALYSIS .…..…..………..…..…..…..…...…...……... 8
2.1 Power System Description ……………….....….…………….……….…..……….….……. 9
2.2 Load Flow Analysis for the 36-Bus System (normal condition) …...…….……… 9
2.3 Load Flow Analysis for the 36-Bus System (Maximum Load Condition) ….… 11
2.3.1 The Maximum Load Improvement ….………….………….………….……………... 12
2.3.1.1 Improvement by increasing the swing bus voltage ….……………..……… 13
2.3.1.2 Improvement by Using Tap-Changing Transformers ….……………..…… 15
2.3.1.3 Improvement by Using Shunt Capacitor Banks ….……………..…………. 17
2.3.1.4 Comparison between the three cases ….……………..………….….……….. 21
2.4 Load Flow Analysis For the 36-Bus System (Minimum Load Condition) ….... 22
2.4.1 The Minimum Load Improvement ….………….………….………….………….….. 24
2.4.1.1 Improvement by increasing the swing bus voltage ….………….….……... 25
2.4.1.2 Improvement by Using Tap-Changing Transformers ….……….….……... 27
2.5 Load Flow Analysis For the 36-Bus System (Post Fault Condition) ..….……...…. 28
2.5.1 The Post Fault Condition Improvement ….……………..………...….……………..... 31
2.5.1.1 Improvement by Using Shunt Capacitor Banks ….……………..………... 31
CHAPTER 3: CONCLUSION …………..…..…..…..…..…..…..…..…..…...…..…..……... 34
3.1 Conclusion …………………..….…………….……………....….…..……………….....……… 35
BIBLIOGRAPHY ………..….……...…………………..…………....….…..……..………….....……. 36
APPENDICES …………..….……...………………………………....….…..……………….....……… 37

III
CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

1
 CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Power Flow Studies:

Power flow (or load flow) is the solution for the normal balanced three-phase steady-state
operating conditions of an electric power system. In general, power flow calculations are
performed for power system planning and operational planning, and in connection with system
operation and control.

The data obtained from power flow studies are used for the studies of normal operating mode,
contingency analysis, outage security assessment, and optimal dispatching and stability [1].

The main objective of the load flow analysis is to identify the potential problems, in terms of
unacceptable voltage conditions, overloading of facilities, decreasing reliability, or any failure
of the transmission system to meet performance criteria. After this analysis stage, the planner
develops alternative plans or scenarios that not only will prevent the foreseen problems but
also will best meet the long-term objectives of system reliability and economy.

The effectiveness of the alternative plans is determined by load-flow, or power-flow studies

under both normal and emergency operations. The load-flow programs now in use by the
utilities allow the calculation of currents, voltages, and real and reactive power flows, taking
into account the voltage-regulating capability of generators, transformers, synchronous
condensers, specified generation schedules, as well as net interchange among interconnected
systems, automatically. By changing the location, size, and number of transmission lines, the
planner can achieve to design an economical system that meets the operating and design
criteria [2].

2
Successful power system operation under normal balanced three-phase steady-state conditions
requires the following:

1. Generation supplies the demand (load) plus losses.

2. Bus voltage magnitudes remain close to rated values.
3. Generators operate within specified real and reactive power limits.
4. Transmission lines and transformers are not overloaded.

The power-flow computer program is the basic tool for investigating these requirements. This
program computes the voltage magnitude and angle at each bus in a power system under
balanced three-phase steady-state conditions. It also computes real and reactive power flows
for all equipment interconnecting the buses, as well as equipment losses.

Both existing power systems and proposed changes including new generation and
transmission to meet projected load growth are of interest. Conventional nodal or loop analysis
is not suitable for power-flow studies because the input data for loads are normally given in
terms of power, not impedance. Also, generators are considered as power sources, not voltage
or current sources. The power-flow problem is therefore formulated as a set of nonlinear
algebraic equations suitable for computer solution [3].

Every power system have a special operation of the system depend on knowing the effects of
this power system with other power systems and we will have new loads ,new generating
stations and new transmission lines before they are installed. The required condition according
to load studies for any network which consider the most difficult are:

1. Maximum load;
2. Minimum load;
3. Faults.

3
1.2 Newton-Raphson Power Flow Solution:

It is an iterative method which approximates a set of non-linear simultaneous equations to a

set of linear simultaneous equations using Taylor’s series expansion and the terms are limited
to the first approximation. It is the most iterative method used for the load flow because its
convergence characteristics are relatively more powerful compared to other alternative
processes and the reliability of Newton-Raphson approach is comparatively good since it can
solve cases that lead to divergence with other popular processes. If the assumed value is near
the solution, then the result is obtained very quickly, but if the assumed value is farther away
from the solution then the method may take longer to converge. This is another iterative load
flow method which is widely used for solving nonlinear equation. The admittance matrix is
used to write equations for currents entering a power system.

Equation (1) is expressed in a polar form, in which j includes bus i

(1)

The real and reactive power at bus i is

(2)

Substituting for Ii in Equation (1) from Equation (2)

(3)

The real and imaginary parts are separated:

(4)

(5)

4
The above Equation (4) and (5) constitute a set of non-linear algebraic equations in terms of
|V| in per unit and δ in radians. Equation (4) and (5) are expanded in Taylor’s series about the
initial estimate and neglecting all higher order terms, the following set of linear equations are
obtained.

In the above equation, the element of the slack bus variable voltage magnitude and angle are
omitted because they are already known. The element of the Jacobian matrix are obtained after
partial derivatives of Equations (15) and (16) are expressed which gives linearized relationship
between small changes in voltage magnitude and voltage angle. The equation can be written in
matrix form as:

(6)

J1, J2, J3, J4 are the elements of the Jacobian matrix.

The difference between the schedule and calculated values known as power residuals for the
terms ∆Pi(k) and ∆Qi(k) is represented as:

(7)

5
 (8)

The new estimates for bus voltage are [4]:

(9)

(10)

1.3 Control of Power Flow:

The following means are used to control system power flows:

1. Prime mover and excitation control of generators.

2. Switching of shunt capacitor banks, shunt reactors, and static var systems.
3. Control of tap-changing and regulating transformers.

From the power-flow standpoint, an increase in prime-move power corresponds to an increase

in P at the constant-voltage bus to which the generator is connected. The power-flow program
computes the increase in d along with the small change in Q. An increase in generator
excitation corresponds to an increase in voltage magnitude at the constant-voltage bus to
which the generator is connected. The power-flow program computes the increase in reactive
power Q supplied by the generator along with the small change in δ.

The addition of a shunt capacitor bank to a load bus corresponds to the addition of a negative
reactive load, since a capacitor absorbs negative reactive power. The power-flow program
computes the increase in bus voltage magnitude along with the small change in δ. Similarly,
the addition of a shunt reactor corresponds to the addition of a positive reactive load, wherein
the power-flow program computes the decrease in voltage magnitude.

6
Tap-changing and voltage-magnitude-regulating transformers are used to control bus voltages
as well as reactive power flows on lines to which they are connected. Similarly, phase-angle
regulating transformers are used to control bus angles as well as real power flows on lines to
which they are connected. Both tap-changing and regulating transformers are modeled by a
transformer with an off-nominal turns ratio c. A change in tap setting or voltage regulation
corresponds to a change in c. The power-flow program computes the changes in Ybus, bus
voltage magnitudes and angles, and branch flows [3].

1.4 ETAP:

Electrical Transient Analyzer Program (ETAP) is the foremost-integrated for electrical

systems allowing to have multiple representations of a power system for different analysis and
design purpose. This research will introduce the load flow studies for various conditions by
Electrical Transient Analyzer Program (ETAP) application software as a successful and
accurate tool to conduct load flow study of complex electrical power systems within the
minimum time period.

7
 CHAPTER TWO

LOAD FLOW ANALYSIS

8
 CHAPTER TWO

LOAD FLOW ANALYSIS

2.1 System Description:

The one line diagram of a 36-bus system is shown in Figure 1. The System data needed for
power flow are shown in appendix A. In this system one generator placed at bus number 36. In
short, this network consists of 36 buses, 35 branches, and 35 loads as presented in table (1).

System Description
Swing 1
Buses Regulated 0
Load 35
Transmission Lines 18
Branches
Transformers 17
Generators 1
Loads 30

2.2 Load Flow Analysis For the 36-Bus System (normal condition):

For load flow analysis we used the Newton Raphson method with max number of iterations of

50 and precision of 0.0001. Figure 2 shows the normal load flow analysis, after we run the

program the results are obtained from ETAP are shown in tables 2 and 3. Other results are

shown in Appendix A.

Nominal Voltage
Bus Number Bus Type PF
% Angle
1 Load Bus 89.078 -5.6 69.9
2 Load Bus 86.527 -5.2 69.9
3 Load Bus 86.193 -5.1 70.4
4 Load Bus 86.193 -5.1 75.5
5 Load Bus 86.132 -5.1 64.6
6 Load Bus 86.098 -5.1 73.9

9
 7 Load Bus 86.106 -5.1 66.9
8 Load Bus 86.202 -5.1 74.4
9 Load Bus 86.321 -5.1 60.8
10 Load Bus 86.170 -5.1 68.7
11 Load Bus 86.393 -5.1 71.4
12 Load Bus 85.526 -5.0 67.5
13 Load Bus 86.495 -5.1 68.6
14 Load Bus 85.558 -4.9 68.0
15 Load Bus 86.007 -5.0 67.5
16 Load Bus 85.129 -4.8 68.0
17 Load Bus 85.116 -4.8 66.6
18 Load Bus 85.110 -4.9 70.9
19 Load Bus 85.416 -4.9 61.5
20 Load Bus 76.747 -9.3 67.4
21 Load Bus 81.932 -6.7 70.7
22 Load Bus 82.863 -5.7 75.5
23 Load Bus 80.874 -7.2 65.6
24 Load Bus 79.266 -9.1 78.4
25 Load Bus 77.474 -9.5 70.7
26 Load Bus 79.511 -8.8 72.9
27 Load Bus 80.147 -7.5 64.0
28 Load Bus 79.804 -8.4 70.7
29 Load Bus 78.101 -10.2 74.6
30 Load Bus 78.909 -8.7 70.7
31 Load Bus 78.488 -9.5 70.7
32 Load Bus 78.444 -8.9 71.5
33 Load Bus 76.979 -9.5 72.0
34 Load Bus 76.674 -9.5 70.7
35 Load Bus 77.168 -9.8 74.9
36 Slack Bus 100.00 0.0 62.3
Table (2)

Summary of total generation, loading and demand are shown in the following table:

MW Mvar MVA PF
Source (Swing Bus) 143.465 180.335 230.440 62.26 lagging
Total Demand 143.465 180.335 230.440 62.26 lagging
Total Losses 8.407 48.888
Table (3)

We conclude that all voltages are less than the nominal voltage. And there is a high voltage

drop and transmission losses.

10
 Figure (1): 36-bus power system.

2.3 Load Flow Analysis For the 36-Bus System (Maximum Load

Condition):

In this section maximum load state will be studied and we will see the optimization problems

and will search solution for this optimization problem; and obtain results and make

recommendations.

11
 Figure (2): Load Flow Analysis in normal condition.

2.3.1 The Maximum Load Improvement

When the original condition analyzed we noticed that there is a drop voltage in most of the

buses. The calculated voltages shown in the table are not acceptable because of the extra drop

voltage in the networks; and the voltages should be adjusted to Vmax = (105% - 110%)

Vnominal. This is required in max load for better performance of the network, because of the

drop in voltage; we have three methods to increase the voltage on the buses:

12
 1. Increasing the swing bus voltage;

2. Tap changing Transformers;

3. Addition of a shunt capacitor bank to a load bus

2.3.1.1 Improvement by increasing the swing bus voltage:

For this network we assume that we can increase the voltage on the swing bus up to 5% from

the nominal voltage (220 kV), the new value of the swing bus voltage will be (231 kV), After

running the ETAP the load flow results obtained are shown in the tables 4 and 5, other results

are shown in the appendix B, Figure 3 shows the load flow analysis after increasing the swing

bus voltage by 5%.

Nominal Voltage
Bus Number Bus Type PF
% Angle
1 Load Bus 94.680 -5.6 70.1
2 Load Bus 92.246 -4.7 70.2
3 Load Bus 91.926 -4.7 70.4
4 Load Bus 91.926 -4.7 75.5
5 Load Bus 91.868 -4.6 64.7
6 Load Bus 91.838 -4.7 74.4
7 Load Bus 91.845 -4.6 67.4
8 Load Bus 91.935 -4.7 74.7
9 Load Bus 92.049 -4.7 61.1
10 Load Bus 91.905 -4.6 68.9
11 Load Bus 92.117 -4.7 71.7
12 Load Bus 91.292 -4.5 67.9
13 Load Bus 92.214 -4.6 68.9
14 Load Bus 91.322 -4.5 68.4
15 Load Bus 91.763 -4.6 68.0
16 Load Bus 90.928 -4.4 68.4
17 Load Bus 90.917 -4.4 67.1
18 Load Bus 90.911 -4.4 71.4
19 Load Bus 91.203 -4.4 62.2
20 Load Bus 83.043 -8.3 67.4
21 Load Bus 87.870 -6.1 70.7
22 Load Bus 88.750 -5.2 75.5
23 Load Bus 86.873 -6.5 65.6
24 Load Bus 85.379 -8.2 78.4

13
25 Load Bus 83.709 -8.5 70.7
26 Load Bus 85.603 -7.9 72.9
27 Load Bus 86.192 -6.8 64.0
28 Load Bus 85.875 -7.6 70.7
29 Load Bus 84.303 -9.2 74.6
30 Load Bus 85.036 -7.8 70.7
31 Load Bus 84.656 -8.6 70.7
32 Load Bus 84.606 -8.1 71.5
33 Load Bus 83.260 -8.6 72.0
34 Load Bus 82.977 -8.6 70.7
35 Load Bus 83.440 -8.9 74.9
36 Slack Bus 105.000 0.0 63.2
Table (4)

Figure (3): Load flow analysis after increasing the swing bus voltage by 5%.

14
Summary of total generation, loading and demand are shown in the following table:

MW Mvar MVA PF
Source (Swing Bus) 145.585 178.444 230.440 63.22 lagging
Total Demand 145.585 178.444 230.440 63.22 lagging
Total Losses 7.598 44.148
Table (5)

The increasing of the swing bus voltage by 5% didn’t achieve the required, so we have to

change the tap changer.

2.3.1.2 Improvement by Using Tap-Changing Transformers:

In this network the max tap of the transformer T20 is +1 x 5% and the rest of the transformers

have max tap of +1 x 2%, so we put the settings of the transformers tap’s as shown in the

following table:

Transformer Tap Settings

T20 -4% on the primary Side

Other transformers -1% on the primary Side

Table (6)

After running the ETAP the load flow results obtained are shown in the tables 7 and 8, other

results are shown in the appendix C, Figure 4 shows the load flow analysis after changing the

tap as shown in table 6.

15
 Figure (4): Load flow analysis after Changing the Tap of the transformers.

Nominal Voltage
Bus Number Bus Type PF
% Angle
1 Load Bus 99.474 -4.7 70.4
2 Load Bus 97.123 -4.4 70.4
3 Load Bus 96.813 -4.3 70.4
4 Load Bus 96.813 -4.4 75.5
5 Load Bus 96.757 -4.3 64.8
6 Load Bus 96.730 -4.3 74.8
7 Load Bus 96.736 -4.3 67.7
8 Load Bus 96.822 -4.3 74.9
9 Load Bus 96.933 -4.3 61.4
10 Load Bus 96.793 -4.3 69.1
11 Load Bus 96.998 -4.4 71.9
12 Load Bus 96.201 -4.2 68.2
13 Load Bus 97.092 -4.3 69.1

16
 14 Load Bus 96.231 -4.2 68.7
15 Load Bus 96.663 -4.3 68.4
16 Load Bus 95.859 -4.1 68.8
17 Load Bus 95.848 -4.1 67.5
18 Load Bus 95.842 -4.2 71.8
19 Load Bus 96.124 -4.1 62.7
20 Load Bus 89.357 -7.6 67.4
21 Load Bus 93.912 -5.6 70.7
22 Load Bus 94.748 -4.8 75.5
23 Load Bus 92.965 -6.0 65.6
24 Load Bus 91.561 -7.5 78.4
25 Load Bus 89.990 -7.8 70.7
26 Load Bus 91.772 -7.3 72.9
27 Load Bus 92.323 -6.2 64.0
28 Load Bus 92.026 -6.9 70.7
29 Load Bus 90.564 -8.4 74.6
30 Load Bus 91.222 -7.2 70.7
31 Load Bus 90.891 -7.8 70.7
32 Load Bus 90.819 -7.4 71.5
33 Load Bus 89.556 -7.9 72.0
34 Load Bus 89.290 -7.8 70.7
35 Load Bus 89.728 -8.1 74.9
36 Slack Bus 105.00 0 63.9
Table (7)

Summary of total generation, loading and demand are shown in the following table:

MW Mvar MVA PF
Source (Swing Bus) 147.947 177.921 231.396 63.94 lagging
Total Demand 147.947 177.921 231.396 63.94 lagging
Total Losses 7.045 40.817
Table (8)

The changing of the tap on the transformers still didn’t achieve the required, so we have to add

shunt capacitor banks.

2.3.1.3 Improvement by Using Shunt Capacitor Banks:

After running the ETAP the load flow results obtained are shown in the tables 9 and 10, other

results are shown in the appendix D, Figure 5 shows the network after adding the capacitor

bank and Figure 6 shows the load flow analysis after installing the capacitor banks.

17
 This equation will be used to calculate the reactive power needed from the capacitors:

Qc= P(tan cos-1 (PFold) - tan cos-1(PFnew)) PFnew (desired) = 0.94 lag

Table (9) shows the voltage level before and after adding the capacitors:

Nominal Voltage Nominal Voltage

Bus QC before adding after adding
Bus Type PFold PFnew
Number Mvar capacitor bank capacitor bank
% %
1 Load Bus - 99.474 105.570 70.4 94.6
2 Load Bus - 97.123 103.875 70.4 94.7
3 Load Bus 1.9111 96.813 103.654 70.4 94.9
4 Load Bus 1.7980 96.813 103.641 75.5 94.8
5 Load Bus 1.3399 96.757 103.606 64.8 88.7
6 Load Bus - 96.730 103.568 74.8 92.4
7 Load Bus 1.7840 96.736 103.568 67.7 93.4
8 Load Bus 3.1000 96.822 103.668 74.9 99.0
9 Load Bus - 96.933 104.018 61.4 94.2
10 Load Bus 1.9110 96.793 103.750 69.1 94.0
11 Load Bus 8.6389 96.998 103.710 71.9 94.0
12 Load Bus 1.95556 96.201 103.130 68.2 93.6
13 Load Bus 9.3594 97.092 103.834 69.1 94.1
14 Load Bus 2.0613 96.231 103.202 68.7 93.5
15 Load Bus - 96.663 103.527 68.4 92.9
16 Load Bus 2.2910 95.859 102.936 68.8 93.1
17 Load Bus 2.4210 95.848 102.937 67.5 93.2
18 Load Bus 2.0778 95.842 102.904 71.8 92.9
19 Load Bus - 96.124 103.152 62.7 92.5
20 Load Bus 5.2780 89.357 101.519 67.4 94.5
21 Load Bus 0.3824 93.912 102.914 70.7 94.9
22 Load Bus 0.1163 94.748 102.778 75.5 94.6
23 Load Bus 1.0947 92.965 102.944 65.6 95.1
24 Load Bus 1.0291 91.561 101.417 78.4 94.3
25 Load Bus 3.5689 89.990 101.565 70.7 94.5
26 Load Bus 1.7164 91.772 102.186 72.9 94.6
27 Load Bus 0.8376 92.323 102.881 64.0 95.2
28 Load Bus 1.7207 92.026 102.431 70.7 94.7
29 Load Bus 4.4229 90.564 101.700 74.6 94.8
30 Load Bus 3.9067 91.222 101.938 70.7 94.6
31 Load Bus 4.6842 90.891 102.198 70.7 94.7
32 Load Bus 4.1007 90.819 101.779 71.5 94.5
33 Load Bus 4.5665 89.556 101.093 72.0 94.3
34 Load Bus 4.8434 89.290 101.104 70.7 94.3
35 Load Bus 4.1664 89.728 100.877 74.9 94.2
36 Slack Bus - 105.00 105.000 63.9 90.7
Table (9)

18
Summary of total generation, loading and demand are shown in the following table:

MW Mvar MVA PF
Source (Swing Bus) 149.626 71.177 165.699 90.3 lagging
Total Demand 149.626 71.177 165.699 90.3 lagging
Total Losses 3.595 20.772
Table (10)

Figure (5): 36-bus power system with capacitor banks.

19
 Figure (6): Load flow analysis after installing the capacitor banks.

We conclude that all voltages are within the specifications required in the case of maximum

load.

20
2.3.1.4 Comparison between the three cases:

Table (11) shows the effect on the bus voltage after using each improvement method.

Changing the tap

Increase the Changing the tap
changer, change the
voltage of changer and change
Bus Normal Case swing bus voltage
Bus Type swing bus by the swing bus
Number by 5% and adding
5% voltage by 5%
capacitor bank
% % % %
1 Load Bus 89.078 94.680 99.474 105.790
2 Load Bus 86.527 92.246 97.123 104.143
3 Load Bus 86.193 91.926 96.813 103.922
4 Load Bus 86.193 91.926 96.813 103.909
5 Load Bus 86.132 91.868 96.757 103.929
6 Load Bus 86.098 91.838 96.730 103.836
7 Load Bus 86.106 91.845 96.736 103.863
8 Load Bus 86.202 91.935 96.822 103.935
9 Load Bus 86.321 92.049 96.933 104.018
10 Load Bus 86.170 91.905 96.793 103.903
11 Load Bus 86.393 92.117 96.998 103.933
12 Load Bus 85.526 91.292 96.201 103.354
13 Load Bus 86.495 92.214 97.092 104.060
14 Load Bus 85.558 91.322 96.231 103.430
15 Load Bus 86.007 91.763 96.663 103.791
16 Load Bus 85.129 90.928 95.859 103.201
17 Load Bus 85.116 90.917 95.848 103.202
18 Load Bus 85.110 90.911 95.842 103.206
19 Load Bus 85.416 91.203 96.124 103.416
20 Load Bus 76.747 83.043 89.357 101.811
21 Load Bus 81.932 87.870 93.912 103.195
22 Load Bus 82.863 88.750 94.748 103.055
23 Load Bus 80.874 86.873 92.965 103.288
24 Load Bus 79.266 85.379 91.561 101.705
25 Load Bus 77.474 83.709 89.990 101.860
26 Load Bus 79.511 85.603 91.772 102.475
27 Load Bus 80.147 86.192 92.323 103.169
28 Load Bus 79.804 85.875 92.026 102.720
29 Load Bus 78.101 84.303 90.564 102.856
30 Load Bus 78.909 85.036 91.222 102.180
31 Load Bus 78.488 84.656 90.891 102.445
32 Load Bus 78.444 84.606 90.819 101.027
33 Load Bus 76.979 83.260 89.556 101.384
34 Load Bus 76.674 82.977 89.290 101.396
35 Load Bus 77.168 83.440 89.728 101.214
36 Slack Bus 100.00 105.000 105.00 105.000
Table (11): Comparison between the three cases.

21
2.4 Load Flow Analysis For the 36-Bus System (Minimum Load

Condition):

In this case the network will be studied at its minimum load that the load will be decreased by

70% that we will multiply the real and reactive power by 0.3 at each load, the new data for the

minimum case are shown in table (12).

Normal Case Minimum Load

Bus Number Bus Type
P (MW) Q (Mvar) P (MW) Q (Mvar)
1 Load Bus - - - -
2 Load Bus - - - -
3 Load Bus 3.000 3.000 0.900 0.900
4 Load Bus 3.570 3.100 1.190 0.930
5 Load Bus 2.610 3.000 0.783 0.900
6 Load Bus - - - -
7 Load Bus 2.800 2.800 0.840 0.840
8 Load Bus 4.019 3.100 1.206 0.930
9 Load Bus - - - -
10 Load Bus 3.000 3.000 0.900 0.900
11 Load Bus 16.70 14.70 5.010 4.410
12 Load Bus 3.070 3.070 0.921 0.921
13 Load Bus 14.66 14.68 4.398 4.893
14 Load Bus 3.330 3.270 0.999 0.981
15 Load Bus - - - -
16 Load Bus 3.800 3.670 1.140 1.101
17 Load Bus 3.800 3.800 1.140 1.140
18 Load Bus 4.000 3.530 1.200 1.059
19 Load Bus - - - -
20 Load Bus 7.200 7.900 2.16 2.37
21 Load Bus 0.600 0.600 0.18 0.18

22
 22 Load Bus 0.230 0.200 0.069 0.06
23 Load Bus 1.390 1.600 0.417 0.48
24 Load Bus 2.400 1.900 0.720 0.570
25 Load Bus 5.600 5.600 1.68 1.68
26 Load Bus 2.980 2.800 0.984 0.934
27 Load Bus 1.000 1.200 0.3 0.36
28 Load Bus 2.700 2.700 0.810 0.810
29 Load Bus 8.350 7.450 2.505 2.235
30 Load Bus 6.130 6.130 1.839 1.839
31 Load Bus 7.350 7.350 2.205 2.205
32 Load Bus 6.670 6.530 2.001 1.959
33 Load Bus 7.600 7.330 2.280 2.199
34 Load Bus 7.600 7.600 2.280 2.280
35 Load Bus 8.000 7.070 2.400 2.121
36 Slack Bus 0.384 1.920 0.1152 0.576
Total Number of buses = 36 144.543 140.6 45.595 42.318
Table (12): New Load values for minimum load condition.

Figure 7 shows the load flow analysis for minimum load condition, after we run the program

the results are obtained from ETAP are shown in tables 13 and 14. Other results are shown in

Appendix E.

Nominal Voltage
Bus Number Bus Type PF
% Angle
1 Load Bus 97.186 -1.6 77.4
2 Load Bus 96.393 -1.6 77.3
3 Load Bus 96.300 -1.5 70.6
4 Load Bus 96.185 -1.6 95.7
5 Load Bus 96.283 -1.5 65.4
6 Load Bus 96.278 -1.6 77.4
7 Load Bus 96.278 -1.5 69.9
8 Load Bus 96.298 -1.6 74.7
9 Load Bus 96.337 -1.6 63.3
10 Load Bus 96.294 -1.5 70.2
11 Load Bus 96.450 -1.5 73.2
12 Load Bus 96.215 -1.5 70.0

23
 13 Load Bus 96.478 -1.5 70.4
14 Load Bus 96.224 -1.5 70.6
15 Load Bus 96.363 -1.5 70.7
16 Load Bus 96.126 -1.5 71.1
17 Load Bus 96.123 -1.5 69.8
18 Load Bus 96.121 -1.5 74.0
19 Load Bus 96.205 -1.5 66.0
20 Load Bus 93.996 -2.5 67.4
21 Load Bus 95.150 -1.9 70.7
22 Load Bus 95.276 -1.7 75.5
23 Load Bus 94.880 -2.1 65.6
24 Load Bus 94.502 -2.5 78.4
25 Load Bus 94.065 -2.6 70.7
26 Load Bus 94.260 -2.5 70.7
27 Load Bus 94.698 -2.1 64.0
28 Load Bus 94.698 -2.3 70.7
29 Load Bus 94.622 -2.7 74.6
30 Load Bus 94.334 -2.4 70.7
31 Load Bus 94.414 -2.6 70.7
32 Load Bus 94.388 -2.4 71.5
33 Load Bus 94.055 -2.6 72.0
34 Load Bus 93.981 -2.6 70.7
35 Load Bus 94.109 -2.6 74.9
36 Slack Bus 100.00 0 71.2
Table (13)

Summary of total generation, loading and demand are shown in the following table:

MW Mvar MVA PF
Source (Swing Bus) 45.4 45.228 64.084 70.84 lagging
Total Demand 45.4 45.228 64.084 70.84 lagging
Total Losses 0.642 3.688
Table (14)

We have to increase the buses voltage up to 100%, for this case firstly we will increase the

swing bus voltage to 5%.

2.4.1 The Minimum Load Improvement

When the minimum load condition analyzed we noticed that there is a drop voltage in most of
the buses. The calculated voltages shown in the table are not acceptable because of the extra
drop voltage in the networks; and the voltages should be adjusted to Vmax = (100%) Vnominal.

24
This is required in minimum load for better performance of the network, because of the drop
in voltage; we have three methods to increase the voltage on the buses:

1. Increasing the swing bus voltage;

2. Tap changing Transformers;
3. Addition of a shunt capacitor bank to a load bus

Figure (7): Load flow analysis for minimum load condition.

2.4.1.1 Improvement by increasing the swing bus voltage:

For this network we assume that we can increase the voltage on the swing bus up to 5% from
the nominal voltage (220 kV), the new value of the swing bus voltage will be (231 kV), After

25
running the ETAP the load flow results obtained are shown in the tables 15 and 16, other
results are shown in the appendix F, Figure 8 shows the load flow analysis after increasing the
swing bus voltage by 5%.

Nominal Voltage
Bus Number Bus Type PF
% Angle
1 Load Bus 102.281 -1.5 77.4
2 Load Bus 101.512 -1.4 77.3
3 Load Bus 101.422 -1.4 70.6
4 Load Bus 101.311 -1.5 95.7
5 Load Bus 101.406 -1.5 77.5
6 Load Bus 101.401 -1.4 77.5
7 Load Bus 101.401 -1.4 69.9
8 Load Bus 101.420 -1.4 74.8
9 Load Bus 101.458 -1.4 -63.3
10 Load Bus 101.417 -1.4 70.3
11 Load Bus 101.568 -1.4 73.3
12 Load Bus 101.340 -1.4 70
13 Load Bus 101.595 -1.4 70.4
14 Load Bus 101.349 -1.4 70.8
15 Load Bus 101.484 -1.4 70.8
16 Load Bus 101.254 -1.4 71.1
17 Load Bus 101.251 -1.4 69.9
18 Load Bus 101.250 -1.4 74.1
19 Load Bus 101.331 -1.4 66.1
20 Load Bus 99.196 -2.3 67.4
21 Load Bus 100.310 -1.8 70.7
22 Load Bus 100.431 -1.6 75.5
23 Load Bus 100.048 -1.9 65.6
24 Load Bus 99.684 -2.3 78.4
25 Load Bus 99.262 -2.4 70.7
26 Load Bus 99.450 -2.3 70.7
27 Load Bus 99.873 -2.0 64.0
28 Load Bus 99.800 -2.1 70.7
29 Load Bus 99.522 -2.5 74.6
30 Load Bus 99.678 -2.2 70.7
31 Load Bus 99.599 -2.4 70.7
32 Load Bus 99.573 -2.2 71.5
33 Load Bus 99.253 -2.4 72.0
34 Load Bus 99.182 -2.4 70.7
35 Load Bus 99.305 -2.4 74.9
36 Slack Bus 105.00 0 74.4
(Table 15)

26
Summary of total generation, loading and demand are shown in the following table:

MW Mvar MVA PF
Source (Swing Bus) 46.279 45.849 65.145 71.04 lagging
Total Demand 46.279 45.849 65.145 71.04 lagging
Total Losses 0.601 3.455
Table (16)

The increasing of the swing bus voltage by 5% didn’t achieve the required, so we have to

change the tap changer.

2.4.1.2 Improvement by Using Tap-Changing Transformers:

the settings of the transformers tap’s are set as shown in the following table:

Transformer Tap Settings

T20 0% on the primary Side
Other transformers -1% on the primary Side
Table (17)

After running the ETAP the load flow results obtained are shown in tables 18 and 19, other
results are shown in the appendix G. If we change the tap of the transformer T20 the buses
voltage will be out of the range

Nominal Voltage
Bus Number Bus Type PF
% Angle
1 Load Bus 102.275 -1.5 77.4
2 Load Bus 101.505 -1.4 77.3
3 Load Bus 101.415 -1.4 70.6
4 Load Bus 101.304 -1.5 95.7
5 Load Bus 101.399 -1.5 77.5
6 Load Bus 101.393 -1.4 77.5
7 Load Bus 101.394 -1.4 69.9
8 Load Bus 101.414 -1.4 74.8
9 Load Bus 101.451 -1.4 -63.3
10 Load Bus 101.410 -1.4 70.3
11 Load Bus 101.561 -1.4 73.3
12 Load Bus 101.332 -1.4 70
13 Load Bus 101.588 -1.4 70.4

27
 14 Load Bus 101.341 -1.4 70.8
15 Load Bus 101.476 -1.4 70.8
16 Load Bus 101.246 -1.4 71.1
17 Load Bus 101.243 -1.4 69.9
18 Load Bus 101.241 -1.4 74.1
19 Load Bus 101.323 -1.4 66.1
20 Load Bus 100.225 -2.3 67.4
21 Load Bus 101.334 -1.8 70.7
22 Load Bus 101.453 -1.6 75.5
23 Load Bus 101.074 -1.9 65.6
24 Load Bus 100.712 -2.3 78.4
25 Load Bus 100.292 -2.3 70.7
26 Load Bus 100.480 -2.3 70.7
27 Load Bus 100.900 -1.9 64.0
28 Load Bus 100.827 -2.1 70.7
29 Load Bus 100.554 -2.5 74.6
30 Load Bus 100.704 -2.2 70.7
31 Load Bus 100.631 -2.3 70.7
32 Load Bus 100.601 -2.2 71.5
33 Load Bus 100.280 -2.3 72.0
34 Load Bus 100.209 -2.3 70.7
35 Load Bus 100.331 -2.4 74.9
36 Slack Bus 105.00 0 71.4
Table (18)

Summary of total generation, loading and demand are shown in the following table:

MW Mvar MVA PF
Source (Swing Bus) 46.374 45.941 65.279 71.04 lagging
Total Demand 46.374 45.941 65.279 71.04 lagging
Total Losses 0.602 3.456
Table (19)

2.5 Load Flow Analysis For the 36-Bus System (Post Fault

Condition):

In this section we will assume that the network is affected by a fault condition in some
locations of the transmission lines of the network, after the fault occurs we will try to optimize
the problem. Line (1-15) one of the most important lines in the network, which is carries max
power as shown in figure (8). It will be assumed that a fault happened at one line of the double

28
line, because of that the resistance and inductance will be multiplied by 2 and we will divide
the admittance by 2.

Figure (8): Load flow analysis for post fault condition (determine the critical transmission
line in the network).

After we change the line 1-15 parameters as follows and run ETAP the load flow results
obtained are shown in tables 20 and 21, other results are shown in the appendix H, Figure 9
shows the load flow analysis for this case.

R= 0.04  new R = 0.08

X= 0.024  new X = 0.048

29
 Figure (9): Load flow analysis for post fault condition

Nominal Voltage
Bus Number Bus Type
%
1 Load Bus 105.470
2 Load Bus 103.774
3 Load Bus 103.553
4 Load Bus 103.540
5 Load Bus 103.504
6 Load Bus 103.466
7 Load Bus 103.493
8 Load Bus 103.566
9 Load Bus 103.649
10 Load Bus 103.533
11 Load Bus 103.609
12 Load Bus 103.028
13 Load Bus 103.733
14 Load Bus 103.100
15 Load Bus 101.281

30
 16 Load Bus 100.675
17 Load Bus 100.675
18 Load Bus 100.643
19 Load Bus 100.895
20 Load Bus 99.0160
21 Load Bus 102.807
22 Load Bus 102.672
23 Load Bus 102.835
24 Load Bus 101.308
25 Load Bus 101.453
26 Load Bus 102.076
27 Load Bus 102.771
28 Load Bus 102.322
29 Load Bus 101.589
30 Load Bus 101.828
31 Load Bus 102.087
32 Load Bus 101.669
33 Load Bus 98.6070
34 Load Bus 98.6070
35 Load Bus 98.4010
36 Slack Bus 105.000
Table (20)

Summary of total generation, loading and demand are shown in the following table:

MW Mvar MVA PF
Source (Swing Bus) 150.055 72.944 166.839 89.94 lagging
Total Demand 150.055 72.944 166.839 89.94 lagging
Total Losses 4.477 21.595
Table (21)

We conclude that after the fault the voltage of some buses reduced, for this case we will add
capacitor bank at bus 19 with 12 Mvar rating,

2.5.1 The Post Fault Condition Improvement

2.5.1.1 Improvement by Using Capacitor Bank:

After adding a capacitor bank at bus 19 with 12 Mvar rating then running the ETAP the load

flow results obtained are shown in the tables 22 and 23, other results are shown in the

appendix J, Figure 10 shows the load flow analysis after installing the capacitor banks.

31
 Nominal Voltage
Bus Number Bus Type
%
1 Load Bus 106.343
2 Load Bus 104.664
3 Load Bus 104.445
4 Load Bus 104.432
5 Load Bus 104.397
6 Load Bus 104.359
7 Load Bus 104.386
8 Load Bus 104.458
9 Load Bus 104.540
10 Load Bus 104.425
11 Load Bus 104.499
12 Load Bus 103.924
13 Load Bus 104.623
14 Load Bus 103.997
15 Load Bus 102.804
16 Load Bus 102.208
17 Load Bus 102.208
18 Load Bus 102.175
19 Load Bus 102.733
20 Load Bus 101.055
21 Load Bus 103.745
22 Load Bus 103.597
23 Load Bus 103.787
24 Load Bus 102.268
25 Load Bus 102.437
26 Load Bus 103.039
27 Load Bus 103.732
28 Load Bus 103.283
29 Load Bus 102.565
30 Load Bus 102.796
31 Load Bus 103.063
32 Load Bus 102.642
33 Load Bus 100.293
34 Load Bus 100.300
35 Load Bus 100.080
36 Slack Bus 105.000
Table (21)

Summary of total generation, loading and demand are shown in the following table:

MW Mvar MVA PF
Source (Swing Bus) 150.445 57.651 161.111 93.38 lagging
Total Demand 150.445 57.651 161.111 93.38 lagging
Total Losses 4.19 20.371
Table (22)

32
Figure (10): Load flow analysis for post fault condition after adding capacitor bank.

33
CHAPTER THREE

CONCLUSION

34
 CHAPTER THREE

CONCLUSION

3.1 Conclusion:

Power flow analysis is an essential step for operational purposes to evaluate various operating
states of an existing system. Also it is necessary for enhancement and development projects. In
this research Load flow study using ETAP software is carried out to analyze the system under
various conditions. By using ETAP load flow program, it is found that the 36-bus network
experiences many technical problems including: poor power factor, low voltage levels and
power losses. And the aim of this load flow studies is to determining the system voltage under
various conditions, and to use proper methods that used to maintain the problem of under
voltage. And they are useful to determine if system voltages remain within specific limits
under various conditions, and whether equipment such as transformers and transmission lines
are overloaded. It is used to identify the need for additional generation, placement of shunt
capacitors or reactors to maintain the system voltages within the limits.

35
 BIBLIOGRAPHY

[1]: Gonen, T. (2013). Modern power system analysis. CRC Press.

[2]: Turan, G. (1998). Electric power transmission system engineering.
[3]: Glover, J. D. D., & Sarma, M. S. (2001). Power system analysis and design. Brooks/Cole
Publishing Co.
[4]: Afolabi, O. A., Ali, W. H., Cofie, P., Fuller, J., Obiomon, P., & Kolawole, E. S. (2015).
Analysis of the load flow problem in power system planning studies. Energy and Power
Engineering, 7(10), 509.

36
 Appendices

Appendix (A): Normal Case

A.1 Input Data
Bus Input Data:

37
Branch Connections:

38
2-Winding Transformer Input Data:

A.2 Load Flow Solution

39
40
A.3 Branch Losses

41
Appendix (B): Maximum Load Condition (Swing Bus)

B.1 Load Flow Solution (Swing Bus)

42
43
B.2 Branch Losses (Swing Bus)

44
Appendix (C): Maximum Load Condition (Tap Changing Transformer)

C.1 Load Flow Solution (Tap Changing Transformer)

45
46
C.2 Branch Losses (Tap Changing Transformer)

47
Appendix (D): Maximum Load Condition (Capacitor Bank)

D.1 Load Flow Solution (Capacitor Bank)

48
49
D.2 Branch Losses (Capacitor Bank)

50
Appendix (E): Minimum Load Condition

E.1 Load Flow Solution

51
52
E.2 Branch Losses

53
Appendix (F): Minimum Load Condition (Swing Bus)

F.1 Load Flow Solution (Swing Bus)

54
55
F.2 Branch Losses (Swing Bus)

56
Appendix (G): Minimum Load Condition (Tap changing Transformer)

G.1 Load Flow Solution (Tap changing Transformer)

57
58
G.2 Branch Losses (Tap changing Transformer)

59
Appendix (H): Post Fault Condition

H.1 Load Flow Solution

60
61
H.2 Branch Losses

62
Appendix (J): Post Fault Condition (Capacitor Bank)

J.1 Load Flow Solution (capacitor bank)

63
64
J.2 Branch Losses (Capacitor Bank)

65