Impact Study on Intentional Islanding of Distributed Generation Connected to Radial Subtransmission System in Thailands Electric Power System

Pradit Fuangfoo(1) Student Member, IEEE Wei-Jen Lee(2) Senior Member, IEEE Ming-Tse Kuo(2) Student Member, IEEE (1) Provincial Electricity Authority, 200 Ngam Wong Wan Rd, Chatuchak, Bangkok 10900, Thailand (2) Energy Systems Research Center, University of Texas at Arlington UTA Box 19048, Arlington, TX 76019
Abstract-- Traditionally, interconnection standards avoid islanding operation of distributed generation, DG, due to the concerns of equipment failure and safety issues. However, in some cases, allowing of islanding of DG connected to radial subtransmission system could improve the system reliability and decrease outage cost during power outage or schedule maintenance. In order to perform intentional islanding appropriately, this paper presents the impact study on DG connected to radial subtransmission system. Both steady- state and dynamic studies are performed to show how to arrange DG and electric power system for the intentional islanding on the specific case. Index terms Distributed generation, Impact study, Dynamic performance. INTRODUCTION Currently, many DGs are installed in electric power systems. Many more units will be installed in the future due to some advantages over large remote generation units [1]. Researchers [1-3] are trying to maximize the benefits of DGs in the system. To deploy DGs operating in islanding mode is one of the main research topics in this area. When there is a fault in the system, the protective devices will isolate the faulted area while remain the service continuity in the rest of the system. However, a faulted area with DGs can be operated in islanding mode if the islanding part can be isolated from the faulted area. This operation can improve system reliability and reduce the outage cost from lost of supply [4-7]. Outage cost depends on repair time and load characteristics. Repair time is only one parameter, which can be reduced by allowing islanding operation of DG. However, utilities normally do not permit intentional islanding operation without thoroughly impact study. Since the islanding is formed after disconnected from the main grid, utilities cannot guarantee that the islanding system will remain stable, and it relies upon DGs to control voltage and frequency within the normal operation ranges. The safety issue is also an important concern since line crews do not know the faulted part is still alive. This paper starts with the forming of islanding part and introduces the impact study and related issues for islanding operation. Finally, the procedures for proper landing operation are proposed. TEST SYSTEM As shown in Fig. 1, a 7 buses, 5 loads, and 2 DGs (DG1 = 90 MW and DG2 = 50 MW) subtransmission system (115 kV) within Thailands Electric Power System (EPS) is used as test system. To simplify the study, the drooping governor characteristics of both DGs are set at the same value. The size, type of DG and the type of control modes including disturbances will affect to islanding operation of DGs. All of these need to be studied before operating intentional islanding. In this study, it is assumed that the protective devices can separate the faulted part from the islanding area before DGs can perform intentional islanding operation. Another assumption is that the protective devices can adjust settings automatically after islanding operation is engaged. Finally, this paper will concentrate on only Synchronous Generator (SG) since Squirrel Cage Induction Generator (SCIG) cannot operate during islanding operation [8].

Fig. 1 Study case of subtransmission system connected to Thailands EPS FORMING OF INTENTIONAL ISLANDING OPERATION Islanding can be formed due to system faults or schedule maintenance. They create different operating

1-4244-0365-0/06/$20.00 (c) 2006 IEEE

conditions that require different handling procedures and considerations for islanding operation. Islanding detection is beyond the scope of this paper and will not be discussed. 1) Forming Islanding Caused by Fault From Fig.1, when the fault occurs at line between #100 and #101, the islanding is formed. Fig.2 shows that both DG1 and DG2 share the system load at the same ratio due to the same speed droop. In practice, the protective devices may disconnect DGs caused by out of protection setting limits of frequency and voltage due to load generation mismatch as shown in Fig. 3. The only case that may allow operating under islanding condition is the case when the load is around 80% of peak load which is close to the total generation of DGs. Even in this case, the maximum frequency deviation is 0.02 pu or frequency over 51.0 Hz for 1.5 sec which is longer than the relay setting under normal operating conditions. To avoid disconnecting of DGs under islanding operating mode, protective relay settings have to be changed to accommodate the situation. Additionally, during islanding operation the case of 100% loading, DGs operate under overload condition resulting in low system frequency and voltage as shown in Fig. 3.
100% of peak load

One can see that the system frequency reaches 49 Hz, which is lower than underfrequency relay pick up at t = 3 sec. Load shedding will be the only solution to maintain system integrity [11]. Therefore, the area with DGs should equip with proper load shedding scheme to maintain the system frequency and reach to the steady-state condition quickly after islanding. The well-coordinated criteria of underfrequency relay setting and load shedding scheme are required to assure appropriate coordination. There are three criteria for optimizing the amount of load shedding and coordination with turbine underfrequency protection [9]: (a) The load shedding setting should prevent underfrequency excursions below 0.95 pu for longer than 30 sec. (b) The system frequency should recover fast enough to provide adequate margin with the turbine protection scheme. (c) Frequency overshoot caused by overshedding of load should be limited to less than 1.0 Hz deviation from normal system frequency.

40% of peak load

80% of peak load

60% of peak load

60% of peak load

40% of peak load 80% of peak load 100% of peak load

(a)

(a)
80%, 60%, and 40% of peak load

100% of peak load

100% of peak load

80% of peak load 60% of peak load 40% of peak load

(b) Fig. 2 Power outputs of (a) DG1 and (b) DG2 at different load conditions operated on islanding mode after applying fault on line #100-#101 at t = 2 sec for 5 cycles

(b) Fig. 3 SGs operated on islanding mode at different load conditions presented by (a) frequency deviation at bus #103 and (b) voltage at bus #103 after applying fault at line #100-#101 at t = 2 sec for 5 cycles

2) Forming Islanding Caused by Maintenance From Fig.1, if utility needs to maintain the upstream system including the subtransmission line linking between the main grid and the local system, the subsystem will be disconnected from the grid. This is the other possibility to have islanding operation. The simulation results are similar to the islanding system due to system fault as shown in Fig.4. However, the power output and voltage oscillations are smaller than in the case of islanding created by fault. In the case of load condition at 80% of peak demand, the maximum frequency deviation is only 0.008 pu of frequency over 50.4 Hz for 1.5 sec. The islanding system, loading 80% of peak demand formed by separating islanding part from the main grid during normal condition can operate without any changing the protection scheme during transition period. However, if the total load and total generation has wider gap, such as loading at 60% and 40%, the frequency deviation is nearly 5 Hz and 15 Hz, respectively. They are not acceptable for protection point of view even the voltage changes are acceptable. For the case of full load, the frequency and voltage are unacceptable since the total load is greater than total generation of both DGs. Prearrangements are needed for intentional islanding operation when generation and load have large mismatch.

(c) Fig.4 Dynamic performances of SGs operated on islanding mode at different load conditions (a) power output of DG1, (b) frequency deviation, and (c) voltage at bus #103 after disconnecting line #100-#101 at t = 2 sec IMPACT STUDY FROM DISTURBANCES DURING ISLANDING OPERATION The major disturbances affecting the dynamic performance of the system with DGs can be categorized into three categories: (a) Load disturbances such as large load rejection, (b) Generator disturbances because of plant shutdown, and (c) Contingency disturbances due to faults in the system. Usually, transient stability study focuses on the moment 3 to 5 sec following the disturbances. The dynamics of excitation systems, underfrequency load shedding, automatic voltage regulators, and speed governing systems are all active in this time frame [10]. Nevertheless, dynamic stability studies cover longer time intervals, sometimes up to 40 sec. Generators and control devices will respond to the disturbance to maintain synchronism in the system. DGs are one kind of generators connected to the system close to loads. They are more sensitive to the disturbances occurring at the customer site such as large load rejections. The impact of disturbances during islanding operation is very important since islanding system is a weak system. Large motor starting, load following and load rejection, and fault in the islanding part create significant impacts on the performance of the islanded system and will be studied. 1) Large Motor Starting Normally, while the large motor is starting, it would cause voltage sag for a short period because of the high starting current (2-4 times of rated current) with low power factor. The level of voltage sag depends on the stiffness of the system. If a motor connects to a weak system, the drop in voltage is higher than motor connected to a strong system. Since the islanding system is relative weak, the

40% of peak load

60% of peak load

80% of peak load

100% of peak load

(a)

40% of peak load

60% of peak load

80% of peak load

100% of peak load

(b)

effect of starting a large motor requires further investigation. The cases of load conditions, 40%, 50%, and 60% of peak load will be used in the study to avoid overloading conditions during simulation. The motor capacity is assumed to be 14 MW (20% of total islanding load) at power factor 0.90 (running) and is connected to bus #103. The starting current of the motor is assumed to be 3.0 times of rated current at power factor of 0.30. Since the behavior of motor during starting depends on both the control device and the motor itself, the worst case scenario would represent the motor during starting as constant shunt admittance for 4 sec, and then change the motor load back to the normal condition. The initial shunt admittance is 0.140 j0.445 pu relative to a 100 MVA base. The simulation start at t = 60 sec, then switch on the motor load by inserting the initial shunt admittance for 4 sec, after that the shunt admittance is replaced with the normal motor load. Fig.5 shows that the maximum frequency deviation is -0.012 pu or frequency below 49.4 Hz for 4 sec, and the drop in voltage is less than 0.1 pu or voltage higher than 0.9 pu for all cases. Without proper coordination, underfrequency relay may be activated to trip loads from the islanded system in some cases.

2) Load Following and Load Rejection It is normal that the electric energy demand does not remain constant all the time. The fluctuation depends on load behaviors. The load following capability affects the performance of DG during operating on islanding mode. If DGs cannot support load changes, the system could have a dynamic stability problem. Load rejection has almost the same characteristic as load following, except the step of load change can be higher. The load following and load rejection patterns for the test system are shown in Fig.6. Though Fig.7 shows that system remain in synchronism during load following, 20% load rejection creates frequency deviation 0.05 pu or frequency over 52.5 Hz for 5 sec (at load 40% of peak demand the duration is longer than 5 sec), and voltage at 1.17 pu for 0.5 second. With such high frequency deviation, some utilities may not allow this operation because it can cause equipment failure or malfunctioning. Therefore, it is necessary to study load characteristic and load profile before performing islanding operation.

Fig.6 Load following and load rejection patterns

(a)

(a)

(b) Fig.5 Dynamic performances of SGs operated on islanding mode at different load conditions presented by (a) frequency deviation, and (b) voltage at bus #103 during the large motor starting at t = 60 sec

(b) Fig.7 Load following and load rejection performance of SGs operated on islanding mode at different load conditions presented by (a) frequency deviation, and (b) voltage at bus #103 3) Fault on Islanding Part Fault is a severe disturbance occurring in the system. This study applies a three-phase fault at bus #106 for 5 and 10 cycles respectively. The islanding system can remain stable on both cases because of fault occurring far from generators as shown in Fig.8. For longer fault duration, the larger oscillations happen. When applying fault at bus #101 for 5 cycles, system is still stable. However, the system becomes unstable in the case of fault clearing after 10 cycles (Fig. 9).

(b) Fig.8 Power outputs of DG1 when applying fault at bus #106 during SGs operated in islanding mode at different load conditions for (a) 5 cycles, (b) 10 cycles

Fig. 9 Dynamic performances after applying fault at bus #101 when SGs operated in islanding mode at load 80% of peak demand for 10 cycles EFFECT OF OPERATING CONTROL MODES OF SG DURING ISALANDING OPERATION As mentioned before, SGs can control frequency in the system by using speed droop characteristic of the governor control. SGs can also control system voltage at the terminal by using Automatic Voltage Regulator (AVR). In fact, both speed droop control and AVR are common control devices for a large generator. During islanding operation, both speed droop control and AVR are imperative. Fig.10 shows the system responses during the fault with different operating control modes.

(a)

SUGESTION ISLANDING OPERATION Intentional islanding after faults or schedule maintenance can improve system reliability. Well planed protection and operation schemes are required for intentional islanding operation. The suggestion islanding operation flowchart is shown in Fig.11. Normally, adaptive protection, which changes the setting of protective devices from the normal protection scheme to islanding-mode protection scheme, is necessary for this operation. For DG operating in islanding mode, the negative sequence relay (46) is required for the system having high unbalance voltage to protect DG from negative sequence current. To synchronize DG to the main grid, DG has to adjust its frequency, voltage, and phase angle close to the main grid before synchronization. The differences have to be smaller for larger size of DG to reduce the disturbance during synchronization [12] CONCLUSION In practice, it may take 2-3 hours or more to repair the faulted part from a permanent fault. If loads cannot transfer to the other circuit, the outage cost from lost of energy of supply may be high. That is the reason why many utilities are paying attention to operate intentional islanding to improve system reliability and service continuity for their customers. Nevertheless, not all types of DGs can operate at islanding mode. The study results show that SG with governor and exciters control can be operated in islanding mode, including doubly-fed induction generator. Dynamic impact study is required to analyze performances of the DGs under islanding operations. Most cases show that protection settings need to be changed during islanding operation. The basic requirement is the total generation must be greater than the total load. During transition to islanding operation, system will have a small oscillation if the difference between total generation and total load is small. However, if total load is greater than total generation, the load shedding scheme is required. For resynchronization, synchronization check relay is also required. The differences of voltage, frequency, and phase angle at re-synchronization should comply with IEEE 15472003.

(a)

(b)

(c) Fig. 10 Effect of control operating modes of SGs connected to islanding system presented by (a) power output of DG1, (b) frequency deviation, (c) voltage at bus #103

Fig.11 Flowchart of islanding operation of DG REFERENCES

[1] El-Khattam, W., Salama, M.M.A., Distributed Generation Technologies, Definitions and Benefits, Electric Power Systems Research, Vol.71, no. 2, October, 2004, page(s): 119-128. [2] Davis, Murray W., Distributed Resource Electric Power Systems Offer Significant Advantages Over Central Station Generation and T&D Power Systems Part I Proceedings of the IEEE Power Engineering Society Transmission and Distribution Conference, Vol. 1, Jul 21-25 2002, page(s): 54-61. [3] Davis, Murray W., Distributed Resource Electric Power Systems Offer Significant Advantages Over Central Station Generation and T&D Power Systems Part II Proceedings of the IEEE Power Engineering Society Transmission and Distribution Conference, Vol. 1, Jul 21-25 2002, page(s): 62-69. [4] Pilo, F., Celli, G., and Mocci, S., Improvement of Reliability in Active Networks with Intentional Islanding, Electric Utility Deregulation, Restructuring and Power Technologies, 2004. (DRPT 2004). Proceedings of the 2004 IEEE International Conference on Volume 2, 5-8 April 2004 Page(s):474 479. [5] Zeineldin, H., El-Saadany, E.F., and Salama, M.M.A., Intentional Islanding of Distributed Generation, Power Engineering Society General Meeting, 2005. IEEE June 1216, 2005 Page(s):653 659. [7] Nigim, K.A. and Hegazy, Y.G., Intention Islanding of Distributed Generation for Reliability Enhancement, Power

Engineering Society General Meeting, 2003, IEEE Volume 4, 1317 July 2003 Page(s): 2446-2451. [8] Cheng-Ting Hsu and Chao-Shun Chen, Islanding Operations for the Distribution Systems with Dispersed Generation Systems Power Engineering Society General Meeting, 2005. IEEE June 1216, 2005 Page(s):298 304. [9] Pradit Fuangfoo, Impact Study of Distributed Generation on the Thailands Electric Power System, The University of Texas at Arlington, 2006. [10] Paul M. Anderson Power System Protection, Wiley-IEEE Press, 1998. [11] P. Kundar, Power System Stability and Control, McGraw Hill, 1994. [12] IEEE 1547-2003, IEEE Standard for Interconnecting Distributed Resources with Electric Power Systems, 2003.
Pradit Fuangfoo (S01) received B.E. from Kasetsart University, M.E. from Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand, and Ph.D. degree from the university at University of Texas, Arlington, in 1994, 1997, and 2006, respectively, all in electrical engineering. He has been working for Provincial Electricity Authority (PEA) since 1990. Currently, he is working for research division, research and development department, PEA. His research interests comprise electric power system analysis, distributed generation, power system reliability, power distribution planning, micro grid systems, power quality, transient stability, and transient analysis. Wei-Jen Lee (S85-M85-SM97) received the B.S. and M.S. degrees from National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan, R.O.C., and the Ph.D. degree from the University of Texas, Arlington, in 1978, 1980, and 1985, respectively, all in electrical engineering. In 1985, he joined the University of Texas, Arlington, where he is currently a professor of the Electrical Engineering Department and the director of the Energy Systems research Center. He has been involved in research on power flow, transient and dynamic stability, voltage stability, short circuits, relay coordination, power quality analysis, and deregulation for utility companies. Prof. Lee is a Registered Professional Engineering in the States of Texas.

Ming-Tse Kuo (S03) received a Bachelors and Masters degree in electrical engineering from the Department of Electrical Engineering at National Sun Yat-Sen University, Kaohsiung, Taiwan, R.O.C. He is currently working toward his Ph.D. degree in the Energy Systems Research Center, The University of Texas, Arlington. His major interests include electric power system analysis, deregulated power systems, power system transients and dynamic stability.