- Open Access
- Authors : Peter . O. Ohiero
- Paper ID : IJERTV12IS010087
- Volume & Issue : Volume 12, Issue 01 (January 2023)
- Published (First Online): 01-02-2023
- ISSN (Online) : 2278-0181
- Publisher Name : IJERT
- License: This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
Application of Newton Raphson Method to Voltage Stability Analysis of the Nigeria 330kV Transmission Grid
Peter .O. Ohiero
Department of Electrical and Electronic Engineering, Cross River University of Technology,
Calabar, Nigeria
Abstract This paper presents the voltage stability analysis of the Nigeria 330kV transmission network using Newton Raphson load flow method. A model of the existing 56-bus transmission network was developed and simulations have been carried out using Electrical Transient and Analyzer Program (ETAP) software. The simulation results show that the voltage magnitudes of buses; Aliade (0.9469pu-26.180), Damaturu (0.8961pu-39.390), Gombe (0.9000pu-37.040), Jalingo (0.8721pu-25.510), Jos (0.9112pu-32.950), Kaduna (0.8833pu- 34.560), Kano (0.7805pu-44.590), Makurdi (0.9432pu-27.660),
Maiduguri (0.8961pu-39.380), Yola (0.8920pu-23.390) fall below the acceptable voltage limit of 0.95pu. These buses are the weak buses in the existing Nigeria 330kV transmission network that contribute more to system collapse and blackouts. This work also demonstrates the effectiveness of voltage stability analysis in proper identification of weak buses and proper location of reactive power compensation devices. Hence, in order to improve on the stability of the power system network, there is need for reactive power compensation devices to be located on these buses.
Keywords Voltage Stability, Voltage Instability, Voltage Collapse, Newton Raphson load flow method, Nigeria 330kV Transmission Grid.
-
INTRODUCTION
Voltage and frequency are important parameters used to determine the stability, security, quality and performance of a power system network. Power system network and it components are designed to operate at a constant and specified value of voltage and frequency. This is achieved when there is a balance between the power generation and power demand. In other words, the power generation must be equal to power demand and losses.
In Nigeria, electricity is transmitted through transmission lines at a high voltage of 330kV. This voltage is to be maintained at the acceptable operational value of 330kV±5% that is, between 315.5kV and 346.5kV or 0.95pu to 1.05pu stability limit. However, numerous challenges facing the Nigeria power system have been forcing the transmission network to operate out of the stability limit. Some of these challenges are inability to maintain a balance between power generation and power demand; the power generation is less than power demand due to increasing population and industrialization, sudden increase in load, increasing reactive power demand without adequate reactive power support, slow
pace of rehabilitation and expansion, erratic power supply, long radial, fragile transmission lines with limited transmission wheeling capacity without redundancies, aged power system equipment, high losses [1].
At present, there are twenty three (23) power generating plants with a total installed capacity 10,396MW connected to the Nigeria national grid but with only available capacity of 6,056MW [2]. Even if all the existing generating plants are operational, there is a great limitation to dispatch the generated power by the transmission and distribution infrastructures. The transmission network has a theoretical wheeling capacity of 7,500MW and a current transmission wheeling capacity of 5,300MW which is overstressed and overloaded. When the generated reactive power is greater than or less than the demanded reactive power, the voltage level goes up and down and results to voltage instability. Voltage instability is direct opposite of voltage stability. Voltage instability occurs when a power system is unable to maintain its bus voltages within the acceptable operational limit under normal condition and after being subjected to disturbance. Voltage instability causes overheating, excessive voltage drop and power losses, and force the components of the power system to operate above their thermal limits and consequently reduces power quality, efficiency, reliability and performance and leads to a wide scale supply disruptions, resulting to grid collapse and blackout. In a power system, some components and buses are more prone to voltage variation than the other because of their location with regards to the sources of electricity and load demand. A power bus which voltage fall outside of the acceptable voltage range of
±5% of nominal value is a weak bus. Weak buses poses great challenge in the operation, reliability and security of power system. A weak bus cannot support additional loads and have negative effect on generation, transmission and distribution of electricity to industrial and residential customers. Several studies and methods have been used to know the operational voltage and identify weak buses in power system network [3][4][5][6].
Voltage stability can be analyzed using power flow analysis, continuation power flow, bifurcation diagram, V-P curves, P- Q sensitivity analysis, Q-V modal analysis, Q-V curves, and minimum singular value methods, modal/eigen value, Fast Voltage Stability Indices (FVSI). Voltage Stability Analysis
of Nigerian 330kV Power Grid using Static P-V Plots was investigated in [7]. In their approach, the real power P of electric load, at a particular area or bus is varied in steps at a fixed power factor while the value of the voltage V is recorded. The plot of the PV curve is used to determine the voltage stability of the system. Two solutions were arrived at for the voltage, one for the high voltage but within the voltage stability limit which is the stable solution and the other one is the low voltage but outside the minimum voltage stability limit which the unstable solution. Their results showed the maximum power point, at which the two solution
Newton Raphson method is an iterative method in which a set of linear simultaneous equations is obtained from a set of nonlinear simultaneous equations by successive approximation using Taylors series expansion [13]. It is widely applied to solving load flow problems and only first approximation is taken. It begins with an initial estimate or a guess at the solution and at the end of an iteration, the solution is checked of its closeness to the actual solution, the solution is updated until the solution converges and a final solution is obtained.
for voltage is equal beyond which increase in real power P and reactive power Q will make the voltage unstable. In
Considering an
ith bus as shown in a single line diagram in
another work, the fast voltage stability indices (FVSI) was
Fig. 1 below, the current injection into the
ith
bus Ii is a
analysed and presented [8]. They used the fast voltage
function of the voltage at
i bus V and the impedance of
stability indices (FVSI) to identify the critical lines and buses to install the FACTS controllers. The line stability indices
the line
Zij
th
between the ith
i
bus and another bus say jth bus
were evaluated for each loading condition and line outage.
The line that gives FVSI value close to one were taken to be the most critical line corresponding to the bus causing the power system to tend towards instability. The simulation results by using PSAT software for the IEEE-14 bus system shows the proper location of UPFC as identified by the FVSI in a particular line connected to the most critical bus to maintain the stability of the system. When a power system network is subjected to voltage instability, there is need for reactive power compensation, expansion an upgrade. The problem of voltage instability can be solved with reactive power compensating devices such as shunt capacitors, UPFC, SVC, FACTS and under load tap changing (ULTC) transformer [9][10]. The location of reactive power compensating devices must be accurately known and located to improve the stability of the power system network. The challenge most power system operators and engineers faced
given as;
G
I Vi
i Z
ij
Fig. 1. Single line diagram of a two bus system.
Load
(1)
is the proper and optimal location of the point where voltage instability originates from and the correct placement of reactive power compensator [11]. Reference [12] studied the compensation effect on the interconnected Nigerian Electric Power grid and concluded that concentrating the
In order to eliminate the burden of calculation in (1), the relationship between impedance and admittance can be used and (1) becomes;
compensation on the problem buses gives best results. Hence, there is need to investigate the voltage stability of the entire power system network to know in advance the parts or buses likely to contribute more to voltage instability and system
Where,
Ii Vi yij
yij is the admittance of the line between bus i and j.
(2)
collapse or blackouts in order to correctly locate voltage compensation devices. In this paper, the load flow method approach is used to analyse voltage stability. It involves carrying out a load flow analysis to know the voltage
In an n-bus power system, the current injection into ith
calculated based on Kirchhoff Current Law (KCL) as;
n n
bus is
i i ij
j ij
magnitude and angle at each bus, the real and reactive power
of the generator and loads and the power flow and losses along the transmission lines. Once, the bus voltage magnitude
I V y
j 0
-
V y
j 1
j i
(3)
and angle is known, it becomes easier to know the buses whose voltage limit is violated.
-
-
FORMULATION OF NEWTON RAPHSON LOAD
Equation (3) can be written in terms of the bus admittance matrix Yij as;
n
FLOW METHOD
Load flow analysis can be carried out using any of the following; Newton Raphson, Gauss Seidel and Fast Decoupled methods. Among these, Newton Raphson is
Ii
j 1
YijVj
, for i 1, 2, 3,…n
(4)
widely used because it has better accuracy, less iterative time and very fast convergence speed.
Where Vi
and Vj are given as,
Vi Vi i Vi (cosi j sin i )
(5)
2
And
Vj Vj j Vj
(cos j j sin j )
(6)
P2 .
. .
Yij Yij ij Yij
(cosij j sinij )
(7)
. .
.
n
Substituting equations (6) and (7) into equation (4), the
P
V2
current injected into the
ith
bus can be expressed in polar
n
Q2
J V
2
(13)
form as
. .
n
Ii Yij
Vj ij j
(8)
. .
. .
j 1
The complex power at ith bus is given by,
Q1n
V1n
n
0 0
P jQ
V *I
V * Y V
(9)
V
0
i i i i i ij j
j 1
1n
Where, J is the Jacobian matrix which element is divided
P jQ
V *I
V
n
Y V
(10)
into sub-matrices; J1, J2 , J3 , J4 as shown in (14).
i i i i i i
j 1
ij j ij j
Where, Pi
is the real power in bus-i and Qi is the reactive
Pi J1
J2 i
(14)
i
power in bus-i and V * is the conjugate of the voltage at bus-i
Qi J3
J4 Vi
Substituting equations(5), (6) and (7) into (10) and simplify, the real and reactive power at ith bus are given by;
n
Where, Pi is the real power mismatch, Qi is the reactive power mismatch, i is the changes in the bus voltage angle,
Pi Yij Vj
Vi cos(ij j i )
(11)
Vi
is the changes in the bus voltage magnitude. At each
j 1
n
Qi Yij
j 1
Vj Vi sin(ij j i )
(12)
iteration a jacobian matrix is formed and sub-matrices are
computed with the partial derivatives of the real and reactive power (11) and (12) with respect to small changes in the bus voltage magnitude and angle given. The element of the sub-
Equations (11) and (12) are nonlinear equations with voltage
matrices J1, J2 , J3 and J4
can be expressed as;
magnitude V and voltage angle and are called power flow equations. These equations can be solved iteratively by
The diagonal element of
J1 is
Newton Raphson method starting with an initial estimate.
P n
Assuming that the slack bus is the first bus with a fixed
i Y V V
cos(
)
(15)
voltage angle/magnitude, the voltage magnitude and angle at each bus or area of the power system is determined by the
i
j 1 j i
ij j i ij j i
matrix form of Newton Raphson method as;
The off-diagonal element of
J1 is
Pi
Y V V
sin(
)
(16)
j
ij j i ij j i
The diagonal element of J2 is
P
i ij ii
n
ij j ij j i
i
Vi
2 V Y
cos
-
Y V
j 1
cos(
) (17)
j i
The off-diagonal element of J2 is
Pi
V Y
cos(
)
(18)
Vj
i ij ij j i
The diagonal element of J3 is
k 1
i
i
k k
(26)
Q n
ij j i ij j i
-
-
MATERIALS AND METHOD
i
i
j 1
Y V V
cos(
)
(19)
In order to carry out voltage stability analysis of the existing Nigeria transmission network, it is necessary to first perform
j i
The off-diagonal element of
J3 is
load flow analysis. For this research, the load flow analysis is
based on Newton Raphson method performed using Electrical Transient and Analyzer Program (ETAP) software. ETAP is a computer-aided software suitable for design, modelling, simulation and analyzing generation, transmission
Qi
Y V V
cos(
)
(20)
and distribution power system as well as renewable energy
j
ij j i ij j i
generation. The single line diagram of the existing 330kV Nigeria Transmission network used in this study was drawn as shown in Fig. 2. A model of the 56 bus system of the Nigeria 330kV transmission network was developed in ETAP software. The model requires input data, which are the real
and reactive power of the generating plants, the voltages and power rating of the transformers, voltages, real and reactive
The diagonal element of
Q
J4 is
n
power of the loads, the length of transmission lines, real and reactive power of generator buses. The input data of the
i ij ii
ij j ij j i
generators and loads as obtained from the Transmission
i
Vi
2 V Y
sin
-
Y V
j 1 j i
sin(
)
(21)
Company of Nigeria is shown in Table 1. The transmission line model in ETAP requires basic data such as the type of
The off-diagonal element of
J4 is
conductor, the length of lines, the voltage rating of the lines,
the number of parallel lines, the type and configuration of circuits (e.g. single and double circuit), the number of
Qi
V Y
sin(
)
<>(22)
conductor per phase, the height of towers, the spacing of
Vj
i ij ij j i
conductors in the bundle and spacing between phases. The
type of conductor used in the existing 330kV overhead transmission lines in the Nigeria power system network is
The iteration continues until it converges thereby reaching a
satisfactory solution. The changes in the bus real power, Pi and reactive power, Qi are the mismatches which are the difference between the calculated and scheduled values of the real and reactive power given as;
350mm2 Aluminium Conductor Steel Reinforced (ACSR) twin conductor bundle Bison conductor with an average spacing of the conductor in the bundle as 400mm and the spacing between the phases as 10.5m [12]. The supporting structure are made of steel towers and spanned at an average distance of 500m apart, with a height of 75 metres for the
double circuits and 54 metres for the single circuit [11].
Pi
k
Pi
sch
-
Pi
k
(23)
These data were inputted into the transmission line model in ETAP and the transmission line parameters were obtained as
Qi
k
Qi
sch
Qi
k
(24)
shown in Table 2. All the components were adequately represented in the model of the transmission network as
i
Where, Psch and
i
Q sch are the scheduled real ad reactive
shown in Fig. 3 and Fig. 4. With Egbin power plant as the slack bus because of its location in the far western part of the
power while
i
Pk and
Q
k
i
the calculated real and reactive
country, these data were used for the simulation analysis. The
power respectively. From (23) and (24), the new estimates for
bus voltages and angles, real and reactive power flow and
the voltage magnitude
V k 1 and angle k 1 are given by
losses under steady state were recorded.
V k 1
(k
Vi
(k
-
Vi
(25)
Fig. 2. Single line diagram of the 56-bus Nigerian 330kV Transmission Network.
Table 1. Generator and Load Bus Data for the existing Nigerian 330kV Transmission Grid
SN
Bus Name
Bus Nominal Voltage (V)
Generation
Load
From
Max. Active Power (MW)
Active Power Schedule (MW)
Active (MW)
Reactive (MVAr)
1
AES
330
270
200
–
–
2
Afam GS
330
776
500
–
–
3
Ayiede
330
–
–
270
166.10
4
Aja
330
–
–
220
103
5
Ajaokuta
330
–
–
96
45
6
Akamgba
330
–
–
471
156.071
7
Aladja
330
–
–
167
20
8
Alaoji
330
1079
450
266.18
155
9
Alaogbon
330
–
–
220
103
10
Aliade
330
–
–
136
84
11
B.Kebbi
330
–
–
112
60
12
Benin
330
–
–
298
131.2
13
Benin North
330
–
–
80
50
14
Calabar
330
561
240
110.75
60.37
15
Damaturu
330
–
–
75
259.18
16
Delta I -IV
330
960
620
–
–
17
Egbema
330
378
200
–
–
18
Egbin PS
330
1320
610
–
–
19
Egbin TS
330
–
–
–
–
20
Erunkan
330
–
–
14.5
8.93
21
Ganmo
330
–
–
270
223.35
22
Geregu
330
434
200
–
23
Gombe
330
–
–
180
100
24
Gwagwalada
330
–
–
75
65
25
Ihovbor
330
451
182
–
–
26
Ikeja West
330
–
–
510
115
27
Ikot Abasi
330
195
0
–
–
28
Ikot Ekpene
330
–
–
45.8
20
29
Jalingo
330
–
–
75
50
30
Jebba GS
330
590
475
–
–
31
Jebba TS
330
–
–
360
180
32
Jos
330
–
–
141
155
33
Kainji
330
760
313
–
–
34
Kaduna
330
–
–
193
144
35
Kano
330
–
–
180
100
36
Katampe (Abuja)
330
–
–
290
60
37
Lokoja
330
–
–
75
65
38
Makurdi
330
–
–
75
37.7
39
Maiduguri
330
–
–
70
50
40
New Haven
330
–
–
140
10
41
New Haven South
330
–
–
40
27
42
Olorunshogo
330
335
195
–
–
43
Omotosho
330
335
220
–
–
44
Omoku
330
150
75
–
–
45
Oshogbo
330
–
–
201
150
46
Okpai
330
480
330
–
–
47
Onitsha
330
–
–
162
28
48
Owerri
330
–
–
100
60
49
Papalanto
330
1020
450
–
–
50
PortHarcourt
330
200
100
316
159
51
Sapele
330
1020
550
–
–
52
Sakete
330
–
–
145
70
53
Shiroro
330
600
450
–
–
54
Shiroro TS
330
–
–
97.5
22.75
55
Ugwuaji
330
–
–
75.7
46.8
56
Yola
330
–
–
112
65
Table 2. Transmission Line Data (of Bison, two conductors per phase & 2×350 mm2 X-section Conductor) for the 330KV Lines obtained from ETAP.
SN
Bus Name
Length (km)
Type of Circuit
R1
(/km)
X1
(/km)
Y1
(S/km)
R0
(/km)
X0
(/km)
Y0
(S/km)
From
To
1
Afam GS
Alaoji
25
Double
0.01879
0.14976
8.08147
0.17972
1.02342
1.93438
2
Afam GS
Ikot Ekpene
90
Double
0.01879
0.14976
8.08147
0.17972
1.02342
1.93438
3
Afam GS
PortHarcourt
45
Double
0.01879
0.14976
8.08147
0.17972
1.02342
1.93438
4
Ayiede
Oshogbo
115
Single
0.03809
0.033368
3.42768
0.23426
1.09356
1.75899
5
Ayiede
lkeja West
137
Single
0.03809
0.033368
3.42768
0.23426
1.09356
1.75899
6
Ayiede
Papalanto
60
Single
0.03809
0.033368
3.42768
0.23426
1.09356
1.75899
7
Aja
Egbin PS
14
Double
0.01879
0.14976
8.08147
0.17972
1.02342
1.93438
8
Aja
Alagbon
26
Double
0.01879
0.14976
8.08147
0.17972
1.02342
1.93438
9
Ajaokuta
Benin North
195
Single
0.03809
0.033368
3.42768
0.23426
1.09356
1.75899
10
Ajaokuta
Geregu
5
Double
0.01879
0.14976
8.08147
0.17972
1.02342
1.93438
11
Ajaokuta
Lokoja
38
Double
0.01879
0.14976
8.08147
0.17972
1.02342
1.93438
12
Akamgba
Ikeja West
18
Single
0.03809
0.033368
3.42768
0.23426
1.09356
1.75899
13
Aladja
Sapele
63
Single
0.03809
0.033368
3.42768
0.23426
1.09356
1.75899
14
Aladja
Delta PS
32
Single
0.03809
0.033368
3.42768
0.23426
1.09356
1.75899
15
Alaoji
Owerri
60
Double
0.01879
0.14976
8.08147
0.17972
1.02342
1.93438
16
Alaoji
Onitsha
138
Single
0.03809
0.033368
3.42768
0.23426
1.09356
1.75899
17
Alaoji
Ikot Ekpene
38
Double
0.01879
0.14976
8.08147
0.17972
1.02342
1.93438
18
Aliade
New Haven South
150
Double
0.01879
0.14976
8.08147
0.17972
1.02342
1.93438
19
Aliade
Makurdi
50
Double
0.01879
0.14976
8.08147
0.17972
1.02342
1.93438
20
B.Kebbi
Kainji
310
Single
0.03809
0.033368
3.42768
0.23426
1.09356
1.75899
td> 21
Benin
Ikeja West
280
Double
0.01879
0.14976
8.08147
0.17972
1.02342
1.93438
22
Benin
Sapele
50
Double
0.01879
0.14976
8.08147
0.17972
1.02342
1.93438
23
Benin
Delta PS
41
Single
0.03809
0.033368
3.42768
0.23426
1.09356
1.75899
24
Benin
Oshogbo
251
Single
0.03809
0.033368
3.42768
0.23426
1.09356
1.75899
25
Benin
Onitsha
137
Single
0.03809
0.033368
3.42768
0.23426
1.09356
1.75899
26
Benin
Benin North
20
Single
0.03809
0.033368
3.42768
0.23426
1.09356
1.75899
27
Benin
Egbin PS
218
Single
0.03809
0.033368
3.42768
0.23426
1.09356
1.75899
28
Benin
Omotosho
51
Single
0.03809
0.033368
3.42768
0.23426
1.09356
1.75899
29
Benin North
Eyaen
5
Double
0.01879
0.14976
8.08147
0.17972
1.02342
1.93438
30
Calabar
Ikot Ekpene
72
Double
0.01879
0.14976
8.08147
0.17972
1.02342
1.93438
31
Damaturu
Gombe
135
Single
0.03809
0.033368
3.42768
0.23426
1.09356
1.75899
32
Damaturu
Maiduguri
140
Single
0.03809
0.033368
3.42768
0.23426
1.09356
1.75899
33
Egbema
Omoku
30
Double
0.01879
0.14976
8.08147
0.17972
1.02342
1.93438
34
Egbema
Owerri
30
Double
0.01879
0.14976
8.08147
0.17972
1.02342
1.93438
35
Egbin PS
Ikeja West
62
Single
0.03809
0.033368
3.42768
0.23426
1.09356
1.75899
36
Egbin PS
Erunkan
30
Single
0.03809
0.033368
3.42768
0.23426
1.09356
1.75899
37
Erunkan
Ikeja West
32
Single
0.03809
0.033368
3.42768
0.23426
1.09356
1.75899
38
Ganmo
Oshogbo
87
Single
0.03809
0.033368
3.42768
0.23426
1.09356
1.75899
39
Ganmo
Jebba TS
80
Single
0.03809
0.033368
3.42768
0.23426
1.09356
1.75899
40
Gombe
Jos
264
Single
0.03809
0.033368
3.42768
0.23426
1.09356
1.75899
41
Gombe
Yola
240
Single
0.03809
0.033368
3.42768
0.23426
1.09356
1.75899
42
Gwagwalada
Lokoja
140
Double
0.01879
0.14976
8.08147
0.17972
1.02342
1.93438
43
Gwagwalada
Shiroro
114
Double
0.01879
0.14976
8.08147
0.17972
1.02342
1.93438
44
Gwagwalada
Katampe
30
Double
0.01879
0.14976
8.08147
0.17972
1.02342
1.93438
45
Ikeja West
Oshogbo
252
Single
0.03809
0.033368
3.42768
0.23426
1.09356
1.75899
46
Ikeja West
Omotosho
200
Single
0.03809
0.033368
3.42768
0.23426
1.09356
1.75899
47
Ikeja West
Papalanto
30
Single
0.03809
0.033368
3.42768
0.23426
1.09356
1.75899
48
Ikeja West
Sakete
70
Single
0.03809
0.033368
3.42768
0.23426
1.09356
1.75899
49
Ikot Abasi
Ikot Ekpene
75
Double
0.01879
0.14976
8.08147
0.17972
1.02342
1.93438
50
Ikot Ekpene
New Haven South
143
Double
0.01879
0.14976
8.08147
0.17972
1.02342
1.93438
51
Jalingo
Yola
132
Single
0.03809
0.033368
3.42768
0.23426
1.09356
1.75899
52
Jebba TS
Oshogbo
157
Double
0.01879
0.14976
8.08147
0.17972
1.02342
1.93438
53
Jebba TS
Jebba GS
8
Double
0.01879
0.14976
8.08147
0.17972
1.02342
1.93438
54
Jebba
Kainji
81
Double
0.01879
0.14976
8.08147
0.17972
1.02342
1.93438
55
Jebba
Shiroro
244
Single
0.03809
0.033368
3.42768
0.23426
1.09356
1.75899
56
Jos
Kaduna
196
Single
0.03809
0.033368
3.42768
0.23426
1.09356
1.75899
57
Jos
Makurdi
230
Double
0.01879
0.14976
8.08147
0.17972
1.02342
1.93438
58
Kaduna
Kano
230
Single
0.03809
0.033368
3.42768
0.23426
1.09356
1.75899
59
Kaduna
Shiroro TS
96
Single
0.03809
0.033368
3.42768
0.23426
1.09356
1.75899
60
Abuja (Katampe)
Shiroro GS
144
Double
0.01879
0.14976
8.08147
0.17972
1.02342
1.93438
61
New Haven
Onitsha
96
Single
0.03809
0.033368
3.42768
0.23426
1.09356
1.75899
62
New Haven
New Haven South
5
Double
0.01879
0.14976
8.08147
0.17972
1.02342
1.93438
63
Okpai
Onitsha
60
Double
0.01879
0.14976
8.08147
0.17972
1.02342
1.93438
64
Onitsha
Owerri
137
Double
0.01879
0.14976
8.08147
0.17972
1.02342
1.93438
-
-
RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
The developed model was simulated based on Newton Raphson load flow method using ETAP software as shown in Figs. 3 and 4 below. The simulation results of the bus voltage magnitudes and angles were recorded and presented as shown in Table 3. The voltage profile in Fig. 5 shows the buses which voltages violates the acceptable bus voltage limit of 0.95pu 1.05pu. They are Aliade (0.9469pu-26.80),
Damaturu (0.8961pu-39.390), Gombe (0.9000pu-37.040), Jalingo (0.8721pu-25.510), Jos (0.9112pu-32.950), Kaduna (0.8833pu-34.560), Kano (0.7805pu-44.590), Makurdi (0.9432pu-27.660), Maiduguri (0.8961pu-39.380), Yola (0.8920pu-23.390). These buses contribute more to the voltage instability been experienced in the Nigeria 330kV transmission network.
Fig. 3. A simulation model of the Nigerias 330kV Transmission network using Newton Raphson Method.
Fig. 4. A Zoomed section of the simulation model of the Nigerias 330kV Transmission network using Newton Raphson Method.
Table 3. Simulation Results of Bus Voltages
S/N
Bus Name
Bus Nominal Voltage (kV)
Operational Voltage (%)
Operational Voltage (kV)
V (pu)
Angle (0)
1
AES
330
99.24
327.492
0.9924
-2.99
2
Afam GS
330
96.93
319.869
0.9693
-15.57
3
Ayiede
330
96.90
319.77
0.9690
-14.93
4
Aja
330
99.52
328.416
0.9952
-0.458
5
Ajaokuta
330
96.10
317.13
0.9610
-27.48
6
Akamgba
330
95.74
315.942
0.9574
-13.01
7
Aladja
330
99.25
327.525
0.9925
-20.48
8
Alaoji
330
97.08
320.364
0.9708
-15.63
9
Alaogbon
330
99.06
326.898
0.9906
-0.886
10
Aliade
330
94.69
312.477
0.9469
-26.18
11
B.Kebbi
330
98.51
325.083
0.9851
-23.39
12
Benin
330
97.73
322.509
0.9773
-19.32
13
Benin North
330
95.76
316.008
0.9576
-21.68
14
Calabar
330
96.59
318.747
0.9659
-17.5
15
Damaturu
330
89.61
295.713
0.8961
-39.39
16
Delta
330
100.0
330.00
1.0000
-20.26
17
Egbema
330
97.68
322.344
0.9768
-10.64
18
Egbin PS
330
100.0
330.00
1.0000
0
19
Erunkan
330
98.08
323.664
0.9808
-5.51
20
Ganmo
330
95.40
314.82
0.954
-20.75
21
Geregu
330
96.01
316.833
0.9601
-27.5
22
Gombe
330
90.00
297.00
0.9000
-37.04
23
Gwagwalada
330
95.84
316.272
0.9584
-29.11
24
Ihovbor
330
96.61
318.813
0.9661
-19.14
25
Ikeja West
330
97.04
320232
0.9704
-11.48
26
Ikot Abasi
330
96.55
318.615
0.9655
-17.39
27
Ikot Ekpene
330
96.64
318.912
0.9664
-17.38
28
Jalingo
330
87.21
287.793
0.8721
25.51
29
Jebba GS
330
100
330.00
1.0000
-18.5
30
Jebba TS
330
99.65
328.845
0.9965
-18.79
31
Jos
330
91.12
300.696
0.9112
-32.95
32
Kainji
330
100.9
332.97
1.0090
-17.25
33
Kaduna
330
88.33
291.489
0.8833
-34.56
34
Kano
330
78.05
257.565
0.7805
-44.59
35
Katampe (Abuja)
330
95.75
315.975
0.9575
-29.28
36
Lokoja
330
95.95
316.635
0.9595
-28.38
37
Makurdi
330
94.32
311.256
0.9432
-27.66
38
Maiduguri
330
89.61
295.713
0.8961
-39.98
39
New Haven
330
97.0
320.10
0.9700
-20.13
40
New Haven South
330
97.01
320.133
0.9701
-20.09
41
Olorunshogo
330
101.8
335.94
1.018
-10.37
42
Omotosho
330
100.0
330.00
1.0000
-16.50
43
Omoku
330
97.79
322.707
0.9779
-10.64
44
Oshogbo
330
97.41
321.453
0.9741
-18.92
45
Okpai
330
98.61
325.413
0.9861
-17.84
46
Onitsha
330
98.23
324.159
0.9823
-17.81
47
Owerri
330
97.6
322.08
0.976
-13.45
48
Papalanto
330
97.09
320.397
0.9709
-12.97
49
PortHarcourt
330
95.69
315.777
0.9569
-16.69
50
Sapele
330
98.31
324.423
0.9831
-19.04
51
Sakete
330
95.22
314.226
0.9522
-13.31
52
Shiroro
330
95.51
315.183
0.9551
-28.22
53
Ugwuaji
330
96.89
319.737
0.9689
-20.21
54
Yola
330
89.20
294.36
0.892
-23.39
Fig. 5. Voltage profile of the existing Nigeria 330kV transmission network
-
CONCLUSION
The voltage stability of the Nigeria 330kV transmission network have been simulated and analysed. The results revealed the buses that operates at voltage outside the acceptable operational voltage limit of 330kV±5% which is between 313.5kV 346.5kV. These buses constitute the weak buses that cause voltage instability and system collapse in the network and require serious attention. It is therefore necessary to put in place adequate reactive power compensation in these buses to reduce or avoid voltage stability problems and system collapse.
REFERENCES
[1] A Isdore Onyema Akwukwaegbu, Fabian Izundu Izuegbunam , Michael Chukwudi Ndinechi, Voltage Stability Analysis of 86-Bus 330KV Nigeria Power Grid Based on Reserved Energy Potential via Continuation Power Flow Technique, International Journal of Engineering Research & Technology (IJERT), Volume 10, Issue 10 (October, 2021), ISSN (Online): 2278-0181. [2] https://nerc.gov.ng/index.php/home/nesi/404-transmission visited on 18th October, 2022. [3] Liang, X.; Chai, H.; Ravishankar, J. Analytical Methods of Voltage Stability in Renewable Dominated Power Systems: A Review. Electricity 2022, 3, 75107. https://doi.org/10.3390/ electricity3010006. [4] Hang Liang and Jinquan Zhao, A New Method of Continuous Power Flow for Voltage Stability Analysis, 2021 IEEE Asia-Pacific Conference on Image Processing, Electronics and Computers (IPEC), Dalian, China, April 14-16, 2021, pp. 337 -340, | 978-1-7281-9018- 1/20/$31.00 ©2021 IEEE | DOI: 10.1109/IPEC51340.2021.9421181. [5] Aththanayake, L.; Hosseinzadeh, N.; Mahmud, A.; Gargoom, A.; Farahani, E.M. Comparison of Different Techniques for Voltage Stability Analysis of Power Systems. In Proceedings of the Australasian Universities Power Engineering Conference, Hobart, Australia, 29 November2 December 2020. [6] I A Samuel, A O Soyemi, A A Awelewa, A A Olajube and J Ketande, Review of Voltage Stability Indices, IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 730 (2021) 012024, IOP Publishing, doi:10.1088/1755-1315/730/1/012024. [7] E. N. Ezeruigboa, A. O. Ekwue, L. U. Anih, Voltage Stability Analysis of Nigerian 330kV Power Grid using Static P-V Plots, Nigerian Journal of Technology, Vol. 40, No. 1, January, 2021, pp. 7080. www.nijotech.com, Print ISSN: 0331-8443, Electronic ISSN: 2467- 8821, http://dx.doi.org/10.4314/njt.v40i1.11.
[8] Pinki Yadav,P.R.Sharma, S.K.Gupta, Enhancement of Voltage Stability in Power System Using Unified Power Flow Controller OSR Journal of Electrical and Electronics Engineering (IOSR-JEEE), e- ISSN: 2278-1676,p-ISSN: 2320-3331, Volume 9, Issue 1 Ver. I (Jan.2014), PP 76-82 www.iosrjournals.org
[9] Omorogiuwa Eseosa and Ike Samuel Power Flow Control in the Nigeria 330kV Integrated Power Network using Unified Power Flow Controller (UPFC), International Journal of Engineering Innovation & Research, Volume 3, Issue 6, 2014, pp 723 732, ISSN: 2277 5668. [10] Rilwan Usman, Marvin Barivure Sigalo & Steve McDonald (PhD), Analysis of the Effect of Flexible Alternating Current Transmission Network Using ERACS and MATLAB Simulink, European Journal of Engineering and Technology, Vol. 4 No. 3, 2016, pp18 34, ISSN2056-5860.
[11] R. Siva Subramanyam Reddy & Dr.T. Gowri Manohar, Literature Review on Voltage stability phenomenn and Importance of FACTS Controllers In power system Environment, Global Journal of Researches in Engineering Electrical and Electronics Engineering, Volume 12 Issue 3 Version 1.0 March 2012, Online ISSN: 2249-4596& Print ISSN: 0975-5861.
[12] Ogbuefi U. C, Ayaka . O, Mbunwe M. J, and Madueme T. C., Compensation Effect on the interconnected Nigeria Electric Power Grid, Proceedings of the World Cogress on Engineering and Computer Scioece 2017, Vol. 1, WCECS 2017, Octoer 25-27, 2017, San Fransisco, USA, ISBN: 978-988-14047-5-6, ISSN: 2078- 0958(Print), ISSN: 2078-0966. [13] Swarupa Mishra; Yadwinder Singh Brar, Load Flow Analysis using MATLAB, 2022 IEEE International Students Conference on Electrical, Electronics and Computer Science (SCEEECS), BHOPAL, India, 19-20 February, 2022, DOI: 1109/SCEECS54111.2022.9741005.