Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Abstract
The factors like reliability, availability, failure rate and cost are key
parameters in the selection of the appropriate power distribution system design.
This paper presents a relative comparison of reliability for different schemes of
power distribution systems and centralized or decentralized Alternate Current uninterrupted Power Supply (AC-UPS). It also examines the above networks for
brownouts and blackouts. To simplify the analysis, the alternative source is
assumed always available. The results for the normal supply with incoming
feeders from state board power supply corporation, Diesel Generator and Uninterrupted power supply system is given. The reliability of modified
configuration is calculated using minimal cut-set method and comparison of
results is presented. The advantages of the various topologies are described and
compared.
1. Introduction
The power distribution scheme of the launch complex and associated equipment
ensure continuous power to all the equipment. The power supply can be broadly
classified as:
Normal Power Supply: There are less critical loads, where loss of power is acceptable
for some considerable time. The loss of this type of power does not affect functioning of
the process. These are fed by Grid power of APTRANSCO through Distribution
Transformers. However, at the time of launch activities power is fed by 1MVA / 11KV DG
set through distribution transformers from Main Receiving Station. This supply also
stands as backup to UPS system.
Emergency Power Supply: There are critical loads, where loss of power is acceptable
for not more than two seconds, and further interruption may disturb flow of process and
its efficient execution. Such activities require continuous power supply during operation
for which DG sets of 1250KVA have been envisaged. This supply also stands as backup
to UPS system.
Availability
Reliability
Down time
per year .r
0.5368
0.636697
0.4632
Failure rate
0.1996
Availability
Reliability
0.96673
0.977461
Down time
per year .r
0.03327
0.021526
0.98695
0.998743
0.01305
In order to meet future load requirements often UPS is oversized. The system
runs more efficiently at its rated load. As the load drops from its rated capacity
the losses increase. In decentralized UPS the load requirements would be
nearer to its rated capacity, hence efficiency will be more.
Power Conditioning and Power Quality:
As the distance between UPS and protected equipment increases power
quality problems may rise. The noise would be less in decentralized UPS.
Failure rate
Availability
Reliability
Configuratio
n in Fig.4
Configuratio
n in Fig.5
0.000087064
0.99999979
0.99998012
0.0000001016
7
0.99999999746
0.999999977
Down time
per year .r
0.000000207
6
0.000000002
5
Component
1.
Circuit Breaker
0.0096
2.
Switchgear Bus
single breaker
3.
Bar
Repair time in
hour
r
8
for 0.0002
Protective Relay
0.0002
4.
Cable Terminations
0.0003
5.
Cable-1000ft
0-600V
601-15kV
0.004
0.006
6.
Transformer
0.0062
356.2
7.
Diesel Generator
0.1691
478
8.
9.
UPS
24
0.00002
0.52
72
References
[1]. W. Li, Risk Assessment of Power Systems, IEEE Press, 2005.
[2]. R. Billinton, Power-System Reliability Calculations, Massachusetts Institute of
Technology, 1973.
[3]. R.N. Allan and J.R. Ochoa, Modeling and Assessment of Station Originated
Outages for Composite Systems Reliability Evaluation, IEEE Transactions on
Power Systems, Vol. 3, No. 1, February 1988.
[4]. ] J.J. Meeuwsen and W.L. Kling, Substation Reliability Evaluation including
Switching Actions with Redundant Components, IEEE Transactions on Power
Delivery, Vol. 12, No. 4, October 1997.