Substation Design

DESIGN DOCUMENT

Team: SDMay20-15
Client: Burns & McDonnell
Advisor: James McCalley

Team:
Kaitlyn Ziska – Professor Client Liaison
Brian Mace – Chief Engineer
Brandon Kaas – Scribe
Salvador Salazar-Garcia – Meeting Facilitator
Justin Fischbach – Test Engineer
Robert Huschak – Report Manager

Email: [email protected]
Website: http://sdmay20-15.sd.ece.iastate.edu/reports.html

Revised: 4/26/2020
 Executive Summary

Development Standards & Practices Used

Software practices used in this project include CAD, specifically Autodesk, for
substation circuit design. Engineering Standards which apply include IEEE
standard for AC and DC Substation Grounding, IEEE standard for Lead Acid
Battery Sizing, and IEEE standard for Lightning Protection.

Summary of Requirements
● Substation One-Line Circuit Diagram:
o three 138kV gas circuit breakers
o one 69/138kV transformer
o two 138kV line positions
o one 69kV line position
o one 69kV gas circuit breaker
o 138kV yard energized in a ring bus configuration with potential for
future expansion into a six-position breaker-and-a-half configuration

● Substation Plan View:

o one plan view document which contains the above hardware

components physically connected in precise measurement

o four section cut views which contain specific locational views of the
plan view document physically connected in precise measurement

● Lightning Study to remain in compliance with IEEE standards

● Alternating Current Study to remain in compliance with IEEE standards

● Direct Current Study to remain in compliance with IEEE standards

● Wiring and Schemes to finalize electric connections between hardware

components

MAY 20-15 1
Applicable Courses from Iowa State University Curriculum
EE 201, EE 230, EE 303, EE 456

New Skills/Knowledge acquired that was not taught in courses

AutoCAD Circuit Design, Large Scale Power System Drawings and Design,
Professional Documentation

MAY 20-15 2
Table of Contents
1 Introduction 8
1.1 Acknowledgment 8
1.2 Problem and Project Statement 8
1.3 Operational Environment 8
1.4 Requirements 8
1.5 Intended Users and Uses 9
1.6 Assumptions and Limitations 9
1.7 Expected End Product and Deliverables 9
Figure 1-1: Final Construction Package and Constituent Parts 10
2. Specifications and Analysis 11
2.1 Proposed Design 11
2.1.1 Substation Design Layout 11
Figure 2-1: Ring Bus Layout 11
Figure 2-2: Break and a Half Layout 12
Figure 2-3: Initial One-Line Design 13
2.1.2 Relay and Protection Design 13
Figure 2-4: Example of Relay Connections 14
Figure 2-5: Color Coated Wiring Example for Relay Definitions 14
2.1.3 Physical Design 14
Figure 2-6: AutoCAD Version of Plan View sans Dimensions 15
Figure 2-7: Revised Plan View AutoCAD Drawing 16
Figure 2-8: Section Cut Dwg# IASTATE-01-02 REV. 0 17
2.2 Design Analysis 17
2.2.1 Substation Design & Relay Wiring Revisions 17
Figure 2-9: One-Line Revision 2 18
Figure 2-10: One-Line Revision 3 19
2.2.2 Physical Design Revisions 19
Figure 2-11: Plan View Revision 2 20
Figure 2-12: Section Cuts Revision 1 21
Figure 2-13: Final Plan View Revision 22
Figure 2-14: Final Section Cut Revision 23

MAY 20-15 3
 2.2.3 Lightning Protection Study 23
Figure 2-15: Fixed Equipment Heights 24
Figure 2-16: Station Equipment to be Protected 25
Figure 2-17: Proposed Protective Equipment 25
Figure 2-18: Initial Lightning Protection Design 26
Figure 2-19: Final Revision of Lightning Protection Layout 27
2.2.4 AC/DC Study 27
AC Study: 27
Figure 2-20: Final Tabulation of AC Loads 29
DC Study: 30
Figure 2-21: Battery Correction Factors 30
Figure 2-22: First Minute Loads (Load L1, Time = 1 minute) 31
Figure 2-23: Continuous Loads (Load L2, Time = 480 minutes) 31
Figure 2-24: Non-Continuous Loads (Load L3, Time = 240 minutes) 31
Figure 2-25: Momentary Loads (Load L4, Time = 1 minutes) 32
Figure 2-26: Momentary Loads (Load L5, Time = 1 minutes) 32
Figure 2-27: Total Amp Hours 33
Figure 2-28: Load Profile 34
2.2.5 Schemes: 35
Figure 2-29: Initial Cedar Falls Line Relaying 35
Figure 2-30: Initial Des Moines Line Relaying 36
Figure 2-31: Initial B1 Relaying 37
Figure 2-32: Initial B2 Relaying 38
Figure 2-33: Initial B3 Relaying 39
Figure 2-34: Final Des Moines Line Relaying 40
2.2.6 Wiring: 40
Figure 2-35: Initial Wiring Drawing 41
Figure 2-36: Final Wiring Design 42
3. Statement of Work 43
3.1 Previous Work And Literature 43
3.2 Technology Considerations 43
3.3 Task Decomposition 43

MAY 20-15 4
Figure 3-1: Task progression for Substation Design 43
3.4 Possible Risks And Risk Management 44
3.5 Project Proposed Milestones and Evaluation Criteria 44
3.6 Project Tracking Procedures 44
3.7 Expected Results and Validation 44
4. Project Timeline, Estimated Resources, and Challenges 45
4.1 Project Timeline 45
Figure 4-1: Progress Tracker/Schedule 45
4.2 Feasibility Assessment 45
4.3 Personnel Effort Requirements 45
Figure 4-2: Resource Hour Allocation 46
4.4 Other Resource Requirements 46
4.5 Financial Requirements 46
5. Testing and Implementation (Implementation and Results) 47
5.1 Interface Specifications 47
5.2 Hardware and software 47
5.3 Functional Testing 47
5.4 Non-Functional Testing 47
5.5 Process 48
Figure 5-1: Final Design Process Flowchart 48
5.6 Results 48
Figure 5-2: Final Submission of One-Line 49
Figure 5-3: Final Submission of Plan View 50
Figure 5-4: Final Submission of Section View 51
Figure 5-5: Final Results of Lightning Study 52
Figure 5-6: Final Cedar Falls Line Relaying 53
Figure 5-7: Final Des Moines Line Relaying 54
Figure 5-8: Final Breaker B1 Relaying 55
Figure 5-9: Final Breaker B2 Relaying 56
Figure 5-10: Final Breaker B3 Relaying 57
Figure 5-11: Final Panel Wiring 58
6. Closing Material 59

MAY 20-15 5
 6.1 Conclusion 59
6.2 References 59
6.3 Appendices 59
A-1: ENERSYS EC-M BATTERY DISCHARGE CURRENT 59

List of figures/tables/symbols/definitions
Figure 1-1: Final Construction Package and Constituent Parts 10
Figure 2-1: Ring Bus Layout 11
Figure 2-2: Break and a Half Layout 12
Figure 2-3: Initial One-Line Design 13
Figure 2-4: Example of Relay Connections 14
Figure 2-5: Color Coated Wiring Example for Relay Definitions 14
Figure 2-6: AutoCAD Version of Plan View sans Dimensions 15
Figure 2-7: Revised Plan View AutoCAD Drawing 16
Figure 2-8: Section Cut Dwg# IASTATE-01-02 REV. 0 17
Figure 2-9: One-Line Revision 2 18
Figure 2-10: One-Line Revision 3 19
Figure 2-11: Plan View Revision 2 20
Figure 2-12: Section Cuts Revision 1 21
Figure 2-13: Final Plan View Revision 22
Figure 2-14: Final Section Cut Revision 23
Figure 2-15: Fixed Equipment Heights 24
Figure 2-16: Station Equipment to be Protected 25
Figure 2-17: Proposed Protective Equipment 25
Figure 2-18: Initial Lightning Protection Design 26
Figure 2-19: Final Revision of Lightning Protection Layout 27
Figure 2-20: Final Tabulation of AC Loads 29
Figure 2-21: Battery Correction Factors 30
Figure 2-22: First Minute Loads (Load L1, Time = 1 minute) 31
Figure 2-23: Continuous Loads (Load L2, Time = 480 minutes) 31

MAY 20-15 6
Figure 2-24: Non-Continuous Loads (Load L3, Time = 240 minutes) 31
Figure 2-25: Momentary Loads (Load L4, Time = 1 minutes) 32
Figure 2-26: Momentary Loads (Load L5, Time = 1 minutes) 32
Figure 2-27: Total Amp Hours 33
Figure 2-28: Load Profile 34
Figure 2-29: Initial Cedar Falls Line Relaying 35
Figure 2-30: Initial Des Moines Line Relaying 36
Figure 2-31: Initial B1 Relaying 37
Figure 2-32: Initial B2 Relaying 38
Figure 2-33: Initial B3 Relaying 39
Figure 2-34: Final Des Moines Line Relaying 40
Figure 2-35: Initial Wiring Drawing 41
Figure 2-36: Final Wiring Design 42
Figure 3-1: Task progression for Substation Design 43
Figure 4-1: Progress Tracker/Schedule 45
Figure 4-2: Resource Hour Allocation 46
Figure 5-1: Final Design Process Flowchart 48
Figure 5-2: Final Submission of One-Line 49
Figure 5-3: Final Submission of Plan View 50
Figure 5-4: Final Submission of Section View 51
Figure 5-5: Final Results of Lightning Study 52
Figure 5-6: Final Cedar Falls Line Relaying 53
Figure 5-7: Final Des Moines Line Relaying 54
Figure 5-8: Final Breaker B1 Relaying 55
Figure 5-9: Final Breaker B2 Relaying 56
Figure 5-10: Final Breaker B3 Relaying 57
Figure 5-11: Final Panel Wiring 58
A-1: ENERSYS EC-M BATTERY DISCHARGE CURRENT 59

MAY 20-15 7
1 Introduction
1.1 ACKNOWLEDGMENT
We would like to acknowledge and thank Burns & McDonnell for their assistance in our project,
technical advice, and for providing documentation of which we have used as reference in our
design process.

1.2 PROBLEM AND PROJECT STATEMENT

General problem statement – The city of Ames, Iowa requires a new 69/138 kV substation to be
designed, and later constructed by Burns & McDonnell. It will serve as an interconnection for a new
wind generation farm being built outside the city. The substation must be economically viable and
laid out in a way to allow for future expansions of equipment and relaying.
General solution approach – Burns & McDonnell have provided scope documents which
comprehensively cover all relaying and equipment specifications. With these specifications, it is
our team’s role to complete the design phase of this substation. The following documents will be
included to create a comprehensive substation design: one-line diagram, physical plan of the
substation, section cuts extracted from the physical plant, and schematics/wiring diagrams. In
conjunction with this, the following studies will be conducted to remain in compliance with IEEE
standards: AC study, DC study, and Lightning study. A comprehensive design package is to be
finalized once the aforementioned steps have been completed.

1.3 OPERATIONAL ENVIRONMENT

The Cyclone Substation will be an open-air environment located in Ames, Iowa. It will be exposed
to all forms of weather such as thunderstorms and temperatures ranging from extreme heat to
extreme cold. The perimeter of the substation will be enclosed with a fence but still may be
exposed to certain forms of wildlife such as birds, and rodents. The fencing surrounding the
perimeter will also contain roadway access to the site.

1.4 REQUIREMENTS
Functional Requirements - The comprehensive substation design contains both primary and
backup line protection relaying for the Des Moines, Cedar Falls, and Iowa City line exits. The line
exits are protected using the electrical relay components provided by Burns & McDonnell. Along
with line protection, transformer protection relays are also accounted for. Differential relaying is
used to protect both the primary and secondary sides of the 138/69kV transformer. Fiber optic
cable is used to communicate between substations for both primary and secondary relays.

Economic Requirements - No specific budget is required for this design process. However, our
team has been tasked with physically designing the substation to allow for future expansion and
flexibility, as to not take on more of a financial burden in the future.

Environmental Requirements - A perimeter fence in the physical layout of the substation is

included so as to prevent both humans and wildlife from entering and causing damage to
machinery. The final design also includes fire protection walls on two sides of the transformer to
not cause further damage to the environment and substation in the event that the transformer
catches fire.

MAY 20-15 8
1.5 INTENDED USERS AND USES
The primary end users of the substation are the citizens of Ames who will rely on this design to
power their homes and workplaces. Other users include nearby utility companies and power plants
that will also be dependent on the functionality of the substation as part of the local power grid.

1.6 ASSUMPTIONS AND LIMITATIONS

Assumptions:
● The wind energy farm is rated at 138kV
● The ground on which the substation is to be built has already been leveled
● The equipment and relaying specifications provided by Burns & McDonnell are
appropriately rated for the substation we are designing
Limitations:
● The design phase of the project must be completed by May 1st.
● The substation must service incoming lines of 138kV and outgoing lines of 69kV
● Battery bank must be rated at 125V DC and in accordance with IEEE 485
● Lightning protection must be in accordance with IEEE STD 998-2012
● All substation drawings are done using AutoCAD

1.7 EXPECTED END PRODUCT AND DELIVERABLES

The deliverables for this project are as follows: One-line diagram, physical plans and sections,
lightning study, AC/DC Study, and Schematics/Wiring diagrams.

One-Line - Due 10/18/2019

The one-line diagram is the overarching design of the substation. This drawing, as well as all of the
others, has been designed using AutoCAD. The drawing includes one transformer, all four breakers
and relaying equipment wired together in a three-ring bus configuration on the high-voltage side
and single breaker configuration on the low-voltage side. The one-line diagram also shows future
equipment and how it will be connected, while signifying that it is not part of our current scope.
Additionally, this diagram shows all interconnections in the substation yard as well as the incoming
and outgoing lines. It does not show the specifics of the wiring, i.e. port to port contacts, rather it
shows which devices and equipment are wired together and where the busses are located.

Physical Plan & Sections - Due 11/22/2019

The physical plan shows precisely where all equipment is laid out in the substation yard. It also
shows the substation enclosure, road access, rigid bus, structures, and perimeter fence. An
AutoCAD drawing has been submitted to Burns & McDonnell with all relevant and future
equipment with adequate descriptions and applicable standards used. The equipment is all
properly dimensioned and rounded to the nearest inch. There are also four sections cuts made from
the overall plan drawing. The section cuts provide the end user with a side view of certain sections
of the substation yard, and when used in conjunction with the plan view, a discernible 3D model of
the substation can be interpreted. Elevation section cut drawings include general dimensions and
equipment descriptions.

MAY 20-15 9
Lightning Study - Due 12/20/2019
The lightning study is conducted in order to evaluate and design lightning protection for
comprehensive station protection against direct lightning strikes in accordance with IEEE STD 998-
2012 Electro Geometric Model using the empirical curves method. This report contains the
following:
● Definitive calculations used in developing the layout of lightning protection
● Summary of the orientation and protection results for each group of shielding electrodes
● A recommended configuration of the shielding electrodes which is to include the
maximum effective heights of the lightning masts and shield wires

AC/DC Study - Due 3/13/2020

Similar to the Lightning Study, the AC/DC calculations and subsequent consequences of the
calculations have been provided to Burns & McDonnell. The study is predicated on the AC and DC
loads in the substation yard and enclosure, and includes a power flow analysis of the substation.

Schematics/Wiring - Due 5/1/2019

Following the development of the AC and DC study, schematics for the 69kV circuit breaker, 138kV
circuit breaker, 69kV line relay, and all the transformer protection have been accounted for. In
addition to this, panel layouts and schematics for the panel vendor’s use have been provided. The
wiring diagrams show all interconnections between relays and enclosure equipment.

Figure 1-1: Final Construction Package and Constituent Parts

MAY 20-15 10
2. Specifications and Analysis
As a group, various skill levels in application to substation design and overall background in energy
infrastructure has granted each of our members different learning experiences as this project
progresses. Due to our differences in background knowledge, we have used weekly group meetings
in conjunction with weekly conference calls with Burns McDonnell to develop questions which
mend our differences in skill level and create an environment which welcomes new ideas in our
design approach.

2.1 PROPOSED DESIGN

This section will cover the initial phases of design which resulted in both successes and failures in
the creation of our first drawings; these were later revised and corrected with the help of our client
and will be further elaborated on in Section 2.2.

2.1.1 Substation Design Layout

Following the schedule in Figure 1-1, the first task was to create an initial one-line layout for the
substation. In the given specifications, the system contained the following elements:

1. Install three (3) 138 kV circuit breakers (B1, B2 & B3), to be used for the transformer
high-side.
2. Install one (1) 69 kV circuit breaker (B4), to be used for the transformer low-side.
3. Install three (3) Coupling Capacitor Voltage Transformers (CCVT’s) (one per
phase) on all three of the ring-bus exits.
4. Station surge arrester specification to be determined by substation engineer.
5. All substation equipment and bus should be rated for at least 2000A. All line
conductors and equipment should be rated for at least 750A.
6. Install one (1) station service transformer on the 138-kV bus side of the
138/69kVtransformer MOAB to provide AC station service and relaying potentials.
7. New 3-phase 140-72-13.2, 100/134 MVA OA/FOA power transformer with Z1 = 5.6%
on 100 MVA base.
8. Install one (1) 138kV motor operated air brake switch (A1).

Furthermore, our system must be in a layout that is initially a ring bus, shown in Figure 2-1, and
that can easily be converted into a breaker and a half for future expansion, shown in Figure 2-2.

Figure 2-1: Ring Bus Layout

[1]

MAY 20-15 11
 Figure 2-2: Break and a Half Layout
[1]

Starting the design process, our team focused on creating a one-line layout that matched the
specifications given Burns & McDonnell, in a ring bus configuration, in the same style shown in
Figure 2-1. With this basis, our team began to convert this foundation to include all the necessary
information to be included in the final one-line diagram. The initial design is shown in Figure 2-3.
All changes made to the initial revision will be covered in Section 2.2.1.

MAY 20-15 12
 Figure 2-3: Initial One-Line Design

2.1.2 Relay and Protection Design

After the creation of an initial One-Line, details on protection needed to be added. This is also
according to the specifications given by the client. The system in total has ten relays wired for
different protection schemes and one wave trap utilized for communication; the electrical ratings
of these components were given to us directly in the form of AutoCAD cells provided by Burns &
McDonnell.

Figures 2-4 and 2-5 describe how the connections between electrical components are defined.

MAY 20-15 13
 Figure 2-4: Example of Relay Connections

Figure 2-5: Color Coated Wiring Example for Relay Definitions

Using Figure 2-4, CT is defined as a Current Transformer and PT is defined as a Potential or Voltage
Transformer. When Connecting a CT to a relay, such as the red line in Figure 2-5, the connection
enters either from the left or right side of the relay and exits the opposite side to be used in another
relay. When connecting a PT to a relay, nodes can be used to branch the connection from one
relay to another and will enter the relays from the bottom, depicted in Figure 2-6 as the blue line.
Referenced in Figure 2-4, it was determined that the “top” CT, also called the backup CT, will be
connected furthest from the breaker, circled in purple. Likewise, it was determined that the
“bottom” CT, also called the primary CT, is the nearest to the breaker and can be seen circled in
green in Figure 2-5.

With these features defined, an initial design of the one-line was able to be submitted with the
protection schemes included. Results of our team’s one-line design will be analyzed in Section 2.2.

2.1.3 Physical Design

Following the creation of the one-line, as shown in Figure 2-3, there were revisions that will be
covered in Section 2.2. These changes to the initial design of our one-line diagram are used as the

MAY 20-15 14
basis for the physical design, as drafting for the plan view of the substation was not started until the
one-line diagram was perfected. This stage of the design is divided into two groups: plan view and
section cuts. The team was tasked in submitting a plan view first before working on the section
cuts.

The plan view’s design is directly extracted from the design of the one-line and is defined as a top
down view of the substation which includes all relevant equipment and dimensions that would be
needed for construction.

Figure 2-6: AutoCAD Version of Plan View sans Dimensions

Figure 2-6 displays the first draft of our plan view according to the original one-line shown in
Figure 2-3. This section required the most knowledge about how a substation was constructed in
terms of proper connections and locations, therefore several revisions were conducted before
perfecting our design.

After working with advisors from Burns & McDonnell, the group decided to modify the one-line’s
layout in order to create a consistent design between all drawings which account for our client’s
revisions, which were directed toward the simplification and organization of our initial design. The
new submitted plan view is shown in Figure 2-7.

MAY 20-15 15
 Figure 2-7: Revised Plan View AutoCAD Drawing

Once the plan view was finished, the team focused on the creation of section cut views of the
physical design. In Figure 2-7, the direction of the section cut is determined by the yellow circles in
correlation to where the arrow is pointed. These section views show equipment heights and details
in equipment spacing that is not otherwise shown in the overall plan view.

Using Figure 2-7 as a reference, the first section cut designed was the leftmost bus that travels
vertically across the page. The second cut created was the rightmost bus that travels horizontally
across the page, and the final cut was the top most cut from left to right. The locations of these cuts
can be seen in Figure 2-7. Figure 2-8 shows an example of one of the section cuts in the first
revision stage.

MAY 20-15 16
 Figure 2-8: Section Cut Dwg# IASTATE-01-02 REV. 0
After all the above was submitted to Burns & McDonnell, the team waited for comments and
revisions for each section. These comments will be covered in Section 2.2

2.2 DESIGN ANALYSIS

This section will cover modifications and changes made to the original submissions in Section 2.1.

2.2.1 Substation Design & Relay Wiring Revisions

Though Figure 2-3 was a starting point for the teams one-line drawings, it was not complete
enough to function as a true one-line for construction purposes. It had little to no details about the
relaying at the substation and in the end many changes to the layout needed to be addressed.

By our second revision, Burns & McDonnell had provided relay wiring examples which could be
analyzed and considered in our team’s design. Extracting the information displayed in a functional
one-line diagram, our team was able to reanalyze our initial errors and apply more solidified
knowledge in our next revision. This submission is shown in Figure 2-9.

MAY 20-15 17
 Figure 2-9: One-Line Revision 2
After having revision 2 reviewed, it was determined that this layout meets the ring bus requirement
but does not lend itself to be easily modified to create a breaker and a half layout, which is a
requirement administered by our client. To change the system, the team altered the location of the
breakers to comply with the asked for layout and removed additional breakers.

MAY 20-15 18
 Figure 2-10: One-Line Revision 3
Figure 2-10 depicts the final version of the one-line for the substation. After this was completed, the
physical design process began.

2.2.2 Physical Design Revisions

After the submission of the first plan view, our client commented that we should not be fearful of
adding too many dimensions. Burns & McDonnell also stated that we should move our line exits to
be facing in the same direction of the one-line showed. The next version of what would be
submitted is shown in Figure 2-11 with an initial section cut view shown in Figure 2-12.

MAY 20-15 19
Figure 2-11: Plan View Revision 2

MAY 20-15 20
 Figure 2-12: Section Cuts Revision 1
After the above revisions were submitted, the team was told to fix the spacing on our section cut B
and remove the additional disconnect switches as they were not necessary for the design.
According to our client, the design also needed to have all the dimensions adjusted to whole inches
as most contractors do not value precise dimensions beyond whole inches.

MAY 20-15 21
Figure 2-13: Final Plan View Revision

MAY 20-15 22
 Figure 2-14: Final Section Cut Revision
The above revisions, Figures 2-13 and 2-14, are the last to be submitted until the completion of the
lightning study. As we have since concluded this, additional changes to the drawings have been
tracked in Section 2.2.3.

2.2.3 Lightning Protection Study

The purpose of the lightning study is to perform calculations based on IEEE standard 998-2012 [2].
The premise is to detail the additional structures necessary to implement proper lightning
protection measures and provide a comprehensive protection scheme that will shield the Cyclone
Substation from direct lightning strikes.

This study began with identifying components of the substation which are energized and require
protection. After assessing the heights of substation equipment against the span of protection
given by lightning masts, the level of protection provided by these masts was calculated. The
lightning masts required to use in this project stand at 55 feet and calculations relating to the area
of coverage these masts provide will be analyzed in this report. The calculations are analyzed from
the highest equipment height of the substation to ensure all energized equipment below that
height will inherently be protected. All calculations have been derived from the IEEE Standard
998-2012 “IEEE Guide for Direct Lightning Stroke Shielding of Substations” using the method of

MAY 20-15 23
Empirical Curves [2]. An exposure rate of 0.1% is utilized per Burns & McDonnell Standard
practices.

In order to accurately calculate the parameters of our lightning study, the Empirical Curve Method
of lightning protection calculation as defined in IEEE 998 Section 5 was utilized. This method uses
a ratio of the equipment's height to distance from a mast required for protection. The ideal
coverage ratings based on these ratios are nonlinear and vary based on the protection configuration
desired as well as the lighting exposure rate of the region the substation is located.

For the Cyclone Substation a fixed height of 23 feet is used as a conservative estimate for the
highest piece of energized equipment to be installed at the upgraded station. This ensures that all
energized equipment at a height below the 23-foot mark will also be adequately protected. This is
illustrated in Figure 2-15.

Figure 2-15: Fixed Equipment Heights

Figure 2-16 lists the equipment in the station which requires protection, in addition to relevant
parameters which were to be considered in our calculations. Figure 2-17 lists proposed protective
equipment heights to achieve the level of lightning protection desired.

MAY 20-15 24
 Figure 2-16: Station Equipment to be Protected

Figure 2-17: Proposed Protective Equipment

It is assumed that the 230kV bus height will not exceed 23 feet (with respect to grade) and that all
other energized equipment in the yard will fall below a 23-foot mark, except for the wave trap
which sits 25’ feet above the ground and directly underneath a lightning mast. We did not use the
25’ foot mark because the piece of equipment is already protected by being so close in proximity to
a lightning mast.

Figure 2-18 illustrates our first revision of our lightning protection study which was submitted to
Burns & McDonnel.

MAY 20-15 25
 Figure 2-18: Initial Lightning Protection Design
After reviewing our progress with our client, we began finalizing the number of lightning masts
necessary to complete full coverage of our substation and found that several more would need to be
included in order to fully protect all equipment within the substation. In conclusion, ISU Senior
Design has determined that the key plan design contains (9) masts at 55’ that sit on top of H-
Frames or stand-alone masts. The final product of our lighting protection study is illustrated in
Figure 2-19.

MAY 20-15 26
 Figure 2-19: Final Revision of Lightning Protection Layout

2.2.4 AC/DC Study

AC Study:
The purpose of the AC study is to determine the appropriate size of the station service transformer
(SSVT). The SSVT is used to supply 120/240 V AC power to the devices in the substation that run on
AC. These include (but are not necessarily limited to):

● Battery Charger
● Indoor & outdoor lights
● HVAC system in the control house
● Miscellaneous equipment in the control house (smoke detectors, exit signs, exhaust fan,
etc.)
● Receptacles in the control house & the yard
● Breaker SF6 tank heaters
● Yard equipment enclosure heaters
The SSVT must be large enough to supply power to all these loads, which was calculated by our
team and approved by our client. The diversity factor tells us the estimated percentage of the time
that each particular load will be active. For example, the outdoor lights will only be turned on at
night, so their diversity factor is 0.5 (i.e. they’re turned on half the time).

MAY 20-15 27
Diversity factor can be further broken down into summer diversity factor and winter diversity
factor. This is because some loads are more likely to be active when the outdoor temperature is
either hot or cold. Some examples of these are equipment heaters, transformer cooling fans, and
control house HVAC.

We determine the size of the SSVT by multiplying all AC loads by their diversity factor, then
summing the total load. We then choose an SSVT of the closest size available above the total. In the
example, we calculated a winter load of 144 kVA and a summer load of 113 kVA, so we chose a 167
kVA SSVT (the closest size available above 144 kVA).

Note that the total load we calculated is not necessarily the maximum momentary load. On a cold
winter night with electricity at peak demand, the load may go above 144 kVA, or even above the 167
kVA rated capacity of the SSVT. This is okay; the SSVT can operate above its rating for a period of
time, and our calculations show that the load will be lower than this on average.

Steps to complete the AC study:

1. Identify all AC loads in the substation

2. Determine the VA rating for each AC load (typically found on the datasheet)
3. Assign a summer and winter diversity factor for each load
4. Multiply each load’s VA rating by the summer and winter diversity factors
5. Sum all loads to determine the total load for summer and for winter
6. Choose the larger total load (summer or winter) and size the SSVT above this kVA rating

MAY 20-15 28
Figure 2-20: Final Tabulation of AC Loads

MAY 20-15 29
DC Study:
The purpose of the DC study is to ensure substation equipment remains energized under all
conditions, both planned and unplanned. DC systems provide continuous power for all operating
circuit breakers, protective relaying, SCADA system, and all other critical systems. These systems
are required to provide continuous power for a minimum of 8 hours after the loss of AC power,
provided through station batteries. The DC study is conducted with methods in accordance with
IEEE Standard 485 for defining DC load and lead-acid battery sizing.

The worst-case scenario for this substation is a fault on the 138kV Des Moines line exit, followed by
a breaker failure of B3. Breaker B1 would initially trip from the fault, and the breaker failure would
expose the transformer and breaker B4 and breaker B2 to the fault, resulting in the tripping of all
the substation’s breakers. The final result is the need to trip (3) 138kV breakers, (1) 69kV breaker
and (1) SSVT MOAB.

When sizing a battery, various factors used in the calculations account for the lowest possible
temperature, the age, and a design margin; these factors are shown in Figure 2-21.

Figure 2-21: Battery Correction Factors

Figure 2-22 through 2-2 displays all loads that must be taken into consideration. The first minute
loads are those which must be energized quickly in a worst-case scenario situation, depicted in
Figure 2-22. The continuous load is primarily made up of relay loads and devices to be
continuously energized throughout the eight-hour interval, as shown in Figure 2-23. Emergency
lighting loads are shown in Figure 2-24 and are only required to operate for the last half of the
eight-hour period. Figures 2-25 and 2-26 assume that the transformer fault and failed breaker
issues have been resolved and the affected part of the substation can be re-energized. Following
the re-energization, it’s assumed the station AC service issue is resolved and the eight-hour period
concluded.

MAY 20-15 30
 Figure 2-22: First Minute Loads (Load L1, Time = 1 minute)

Figure 2-23: Continuous Loads (Load L2, Time = 480 minutes)

Figure 2-24: Non-Continuous Loads (Load L3, Time = 240 minutes)

MAY 20-15 31
 Figure 2-25: Momentary Loads (Load L4, Time = 1 minutes)

Figure 2-26: Momentary Loads (Load L5, Time = 1 minutes)

To calculate the total number of amp-hours required of the battery, the 480-minute time frame can
be divided into periods where each one can be expressed as a function equal to the total amperes
consumed in that time frame. The integral of these piecewise functions over the entire time frame
yields the total amp-hours; this is shown in Figure 2-27.

MAY 20-15 32
 Figure 2-27: Total Amp Hours

From the data from Figure 2-27, a duty cycle can be shown as the following Figure 2-28.

MAY 20-15 33
 Figure 2-28: Load Profile

IEEE Standard 485 [3] goes into detail on how to calculate the number of positive plates required of
the battery. To do this, the load profile shown in Figure 2-27 used in conjunction with the current
per positive plate required to bring the batteries’ voltage to 2.25 per cell in a specified amount of
time are required. The latter is provided by the battery manufacturer and can be referenced in the
Appendix.

When sizing the battery charger, the capacity (A) in amps can be found by the following equation
where L is the continuous load being 20.8 Amps, C is the ampere hours emergency discharge which
is the 290Ah battery rating of the EnerSys EC-7M, H is the number of hours recharge time assumed
to be 24 hours, and the 1.1 constant is a factor accounting for the efficiency of lead acid cells.

A=L+(1.1*C)H

The charger capacity was calculated to be 34.10 Amps, and therefore, the next larger size provided
by EnerSys AT10-130-050 power capable of handling 50 Amps will be sufficient for the substation.

In conclusion, the battery sized for the Cyclone Substation can adequately power all major
equipment and relays residing in the substation yard and enclosure under emergency conditions.
The batteries sized for this substation take into account the possible addition of three (3) 138kV
breakers as part of a future breaker-and-a-half expansion. Additional relaying is not included
within this document nor the scope of this project, however it is assumed the battery bank will
handle all major relaying additions. Currently, the station is rated at nearly 178 Ah while the
EnerSys EC-7M is rated at 290 Ah, this difference allows for major future changes to the substation.

MAY 20-15 34
2.2.5 Schemes:
To facilitate the readability of the wiring, specific scheme drawings are created for the relays. A set
of relays related to a specific breaker or transformer are grouped into a diagram, in which the
relays, test switches and fuses are all connected and clearly labeled. These drawings also link to
each other to depict the same connections as the one line.

Each scheme drawing, as seen in Figure 2-29, has one to two relays, the basic structure of which is
provided by models from Burns & McDonnell for the line relaying diagrams, 2-29 and 2-30, the
diagrams have the primary and secondary line relaying relays. Those drawings also contain the X
and Y windings from their respective line exit. The breaker relaying diagrams contain the
schematics detailing the AC and DC power flow to the breakers, well as the Failure-to-Trip relays,
which protect the substation in the instance of a breaker failure or other emergency. There would
be one more scheme diagram which would detail the transformer and the 69kV line exit, however
Burns & McDonnell asked us not to complete that diagram due to limitations set in place from
COVID-19. Figures 2-31 through 2-33 detail the initial revisions submitted to Burns & McDonnell.

Figure 2-29: Initial Cedar Falls Line Relaying

MAY 20-15 35
Figure 2-30: Initial Des Moines Line Relaying

MAY 20-15 36
Figure 2-31: Initial B1 Relaying

MAY 20-15 37
Figure 2-32: Initial B2 Relaying

MAY 20-15 38
 Figure 2-33: Initial B3 Relaying
After creating the initial diagrams, the connections needed to be made. For the line relaying
schemes and the breaker relaying drawings, relay blocks needed to be added to the X and Y
windings of the line exits. Along with these, warning lights and multimeters were also needed in
order to monitor the status of the windings. After this is completed, the connections need to be
shown which connect the relays to the other drawings as well as the CTs. These connections are
created based on the wiring from the one line as shown in section 2.1.2.

After consultation with Burns and McDonnel, small changes were made with the connections in
the diagrams. Firstly, in order to improve clarity, the words “top” and “bottom” were changed to
“inner” and “outer” to describe the CTs. Secondly, the naming of the test switches was changed to
reflect real connections, as well as keep groupings of test switches correctly together. Thirdly, the
schemes were closely looked over to ensure that every connection was traceable on the drawings
they were said to go to. By adding these elements, the schemes passed review and could confidently
be used to complete the final step of the substation, the wiring diagrams.

MAY 20-15 39
 Figure 2-34: Final Des Moines Line Relaying

2.2.6 Wiring:
From the Schemes, we can create the wiring diagrams. These diagrams detail the physical structure
of the relay cabinet which contain the equipment needed to test and monitor the relays. These
wiring diagrams also show all the physical connections detailed in the scheme drawings, and where
they would be linked. This would be used in construction, similar to the plan and section views.
Due to this, special care is needed to accommodate the expected use, such as height of commonly
used switches, proper spacing and ease of construction.

This was created based on specifications from Burns & McDonnell. The first step was to create the
relay cabinet. The basic frame is provided in the form of CAD cells by Burns & McDonnell at the
industry standard height of 7’6”, or 72 Rack Units (R.U.). A R.U. is a measurement using the
standard size of a rack, or 1.25 in. Everything in the cabinet is in terms of rack units, and a 1 R.U.
spacer is placed between each major grouping of components.

In this frame, the test switches for the relays related to the specific breaker need to be made easily
accessible for the user on the substation. Along with this, relay shutoff electro switches for
emergencies or maintenance are added at chest level. This cabinet also includes a multimeter to
monitor the relay windings.

MAY 20-15 40
The back of this cabinet has the wiring connections. Based on the scheme diagrams, the specific
wiring to each test switch, fuse and relays is listed shorthand. Any connections that need to travel
to another relay cabinet or another part of the substation are fed through terminal blocks.

Our initial design focused on the initial relay cabinet. This version focused on the switch
placement, the test switches needed and the general layout of the cabinet, which can be viewed in
Figure 2-35.

Figure 2-35: Initial Wiring Drawing

After conversing with Burns & McDonnell, several changes were made, and the wiring was
completed. The dimensions and nameplates were added to the rack to assist construction workers
and substation users, and the wiring was completed. Due to limitations with the coronavirus, as
well as Burns & McDonnell’s original plan, only one wiring diagram was completed based on
scheme drawing 03-02. The substation would have a wiring diagram based on each scheme
drawing; however, due to time constraints and the repetitive nature of the work, Burns &
McDonnell decided to require only 1 diagram.

MAY 20-15 41
Figure 2-36: Final Wiring Design

MAY 20-15 42
3. Statement of Work
3.1 PREVIOUS WORK AND LITERATURE

Created in 1898, Burns & McDonnell has been dedicated to providing engineering solutions and is
trusted especially in substation design. The exemplary history of Burns and McDonnell leaves no
doubt to the efficacy of their work, documentation, and industry standard.

Our substation project is founded on resources and examples provided by Burns & McDonnell.
These resources were specially picked to pertain to our design specifications in order to most help
us in providing a high-quality result.

3.2 TECHNOLOGY CONSIDERATIONS

For this project, the substation componentry specified within our scope documents have been
provided by Burns and McDonnell as AutoCAD files. While this greatly simplifies the design
process, as the components are properly rated and ready for implementation, this also limits some
of the freedom available with creating drawings. The CAD files are not easy to modify and creative
methods often need to be used to properly integrate all necessary components in accordance with
precise measurements and scoping of our project.

3.3 TASK DECOMPOSITION

Figure 3-1: Task progression for Substation Design

These tasks follow a linear progression. The initial step, being the one-line diagram, yields a general
block diagram layout of the substation. The next step, being the plan view and section cuts, are an
elaboration of the one-line diagram, detailing specific dimensions and spacing of components.
After the plan is done, 3 studies must be completed to properly provide protection and power to
the different components in the substation: the lightning study, the AC study, and the DC study.
The lightning study details the protection from lighting strikes and must cover each component in
the plan view, while the AC and DC studies focus on the power supplied to run the various high-
power components in the substation. Once these are completed, an in-depth wiring scheme is
needed to complete the final design. Collectively, these tasks complete the finalization of our
substation project.

MAY 20-15 43
3.4 POSSIBLE RISKS AND RISK MANAGEMENT

Possible restrictions for this project are mainly related to inexperience and our dependence on
contacts at Burns and McDonnel. As this is our group’s first experience in power system design, the
revision process has proven to be extensive. The time spent between our drafting and our client’s
revising is unpredictable, changing from task to task.

Elements which may obstruct our intended schedule of work include a lack of understanding which
may delay the rate at which our drafts are submitted to our client for review and the rate at which
our client is available to review. However, neither of these case scenarios have affected our team’s
ability to provide exemplary work according to schedule.

3.5 PROJECT PROPOSED MILESTONES AND EVALUATION CRITERIA

As displayed by the progress tracker in Figure 4-1, there are six major milestones that need to be
met throughout the course of the project. We have remained on schedule despite project
limitations and delays caused by the development of COVID-19, and have successfully delivered all
documentation and designs pertaining to each milestone.

3.6 PROJECT TRACKING PROCEDURES

For project tracking, a Google Drive folder is shared between the group and Burns and McDonnell.
This folder contains all the reference materials, as well as our deliverables, and each revision made
to our documents, detailing our process. It also contains any formal report given to Burns and
McDonnel. Our internal weekly reports are included on our team website. This details our
individual contributions and progress.

Each time an edit is made to the document, a copy of that revision is saved to the Google Drive
folder. This ensures that we can both look back at past work to revert a change, but also illustrates
our progression to the Burns and McDonnell representatives.

3.7 EXPECTED RESULTS AND VALIDATION

The result is a full set of diagrams detailing the electrical and physical connections, which fulfils all
standards, restrictions and regulations. This plan should be “as built”, ready for construction. Our
final project has been successfully evaluated by representatives at Burns and McDonnel and
deemed complete as per our final review. A success in this project is a substation plan that Burns
and McDonnell deems fit for construction which has been accomplished.

MAY 20-15 44
4. Project Timeline, Estimated Resources, and Challenges
4.1 PROJECT TIMELINE

Figure 4-1: Progress Tracker/Schedule

The timeline of our project is broken up into the following discrete components: a one-line
diagram, a physical plan view, drawing cuts of specific sections extracted from the plan view, a
lightning study, AC and DC study, and the wiring and schemes which ultimately finalize the design
of our substation.

All deliverables for this project have been completed and submitted to Burns & McDonnell on time,
all have been deemed accurate and ready for construction.

4.2 FEASIBILITY ASSESSMENT

The final product of this project includes the design phase services necessary to serve as an
interconnection for a new wind generation plant being built in the area. We have provided all
specified designs, drawings, and protection services to Burns and McDonnell.

4.3 PERSONNEL EFFORT REQUIREMENTS

The project was estimated at 400 man-hours and to be completed by the end of the spring semester
2020. With approximately 26 weeks, we have put in about 16 hours of cumulative work a week.
Each phase lasted about a month given our deadline, and our work has been allocated
appropriately in order to effectively complete our tasks on time.

This breakdown includes two meetings a week, one spent with just our team aimed to organize
plans and peer review individual work and one spent with our advisor and client aimed to finalize
and perfect work, in conjunction with planning our next steps as a team to ensure we move forward
cohesively and effectively.

Beyond these team meetings, our efforts were split between individual and group work. All
individual work was peer reviewed by other members of the team to ensure correctness. However,
to work most effectively and ensure everyone understands all aspects of the design. While some

MAY 20-15 45
have a greater proficiency in certain areas and as a team it is in our interest to play to individuals’
strengths, we have all contributed to every element of the project, we have aimed to not specialize
people to certain types of work exclusively.

Figure 4-2: Resource Hour Allocation

4.4 OTHER RESOURCE REQUIREMENTS

All resources for this project have been previously described; documentation and resources utilized
in our design process have been provided directly from Burns & McDonnell. Software and other
hard materials needed to complete this design have been provided directly from Iowa State
University.

4.5 FINANCIAL REQUIREMENTS

There are no significant financial requirements to include with our project.

MAY 20-15 46
5. Testing and Implementation (Implementation and Results)
5.1 INTERFACE SPECIFICATIONS

Due to the nature of this project, there will be no hardware or software interface testing of the
design work.

5.2 HARDWARE AND SOFTWARE

Due to the nature of this project, there will be no hardware or software testing of the design work.

5.3 FUNCTIONAL TESTING

Due to the nature of this project, there will be no functionality testing of the design work.

5.4 NON-FUNCTIONAL TESTING

Due to the nature of this project, there will be no testing for non-functional items in the design.

MAY 20-15 47
5.5 PROCESS

Assessment
Assess what task needs to be accomplished within the scope of our project
Phase

Delve into the resources provided to us in order to extract useful information, seek
Research
Phase
further resources if needed

Generate drafts based on trial and error which meet the requirements of our scope
Drafting
Phase
based on examples provided to us

Review
Submit our rough draft to BMcD for an initial review
Phase

Recieve comments back from BMcD and make necessary changes to our design so
Revision
Phase
that it meets all the parameters in the scope and our client's expectations

Repeat phases one through five until our design has been deemed with a standard
of excellence from our client

Issued for
Once complete, the design is ready to be issued for construction
Construction

Figure 5-1: Final Design Process Flowchart

Proposed design strengths:

➔ Increases communication among team members

➔ Efficient
➔ Increases accuracy and correctness

Proposed design weaknesses:

➔ Time consuming and repetitive

5.6 RESULTS
Following the Design Process depicted in Figure 5-1, Figures 5-2 through 5-5 display the final results
of each deliverable which have been finalized and deemed by our client as ready for
implementation. As the physical construction of a substation is not within our project scope, these
drawing and analyses constitute the final deliverables for our project.

MAY 20-15 48
Figure 5-2: Final Submission of One-Line

MAY 20-15 49
Figure 5-3: Final Submission of Plan View

MAY 20-15 50
Figure 5-4: Final Submission of Section View

MAY 20-15 51
Figure 5-5: Final Results of Lightning Study

MAY 20-15 52
Figure 5-6: Final Cedar Falls Line Relaying

MAY 20-15 53
Figure 5-7: Final Des Moines Line Relaying

MAY 20-15 54
Figure 5-8: Final Breaker B1 Relaying

MAY 20-15 55
Figure 5-9: Final Breaker B2 Relaying

MAY 20-15 56
Figure 5-10: Final Breaker B3 Relaying

MAY 20-15 57
Figure 5-11: Final Panel Wiring

MAY 20-15 58
6. Closing Material
6.1 CONCLUSION
Our team began this project with a goal to create a new substation design which would be used as
an interconnection for a wind generation plant near Ames, IA. With the conclusion of this
semester, we have successfully accomplished our goal all while providing efficient, reliable, and
accurate work to our client. We can proudly say we remained an effective and consistent team,
even given the obstacles of computer labs shutting down on campus which limited our ability to
gather together in accomplishing each milestone.

We have provided each deliverable described in the sections above, and through vigorous processes
of revision and correction, our final product is a perfected and comprehensive substation design
ready to begin construction.

6.2 REFERENCES
[1] Burns & McDonnell (1999) Design guide for rural substations Kansas City, Missouri, Burns &
McDonnell.
[2] Ieeexplore.ieee.org. (2019). 998-2012 - IEEE Guide for Direct Lightning Stroke Shielding of
Substations - IEEE Standard. [online] Available at:
https://standards.ieee.org/standard/998-2012.html# [Accessed 03 Dec. 2019].
[3] Ieeexplore.ieee.org. (2019). 485-1997 - IEEE Recommended Practice for Sizing Lead-Acid
Batteries for Stationary Applications - IEEE Standard. [online] Available at:
standards.ieee.org/standard/485-1997.html. [Accessed 23 April. 2020]

6.3 APPENDICES

A-1: ENERSYS EC-M BATTERY DISCHARGE CURRENT

MAY 20-15 59