0% found this document useful (0 votes)
44 views7 pages

Billinton 1996

This document presents an educational test power system for teaching overall power system reliability assessment. The test system extends an existing 6 bus system by developing additional distribution and subtransmission networks at buses 3, 5, and 6 to model a more complete and realistic power system. Customer and component reliability data is provided to enable calculation of overall reliability indices at the load point and system-wide level. The goal is to illustrate how reliability indices like SAIFI, SAIDI, CAIDI and ASAI can be predicted using the test system for educational purposes.

Uploaded by

Chimi Wangmo
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
0% found this document useful (0 votes)
44 views7 pages

Billinton 1996

This document presents an educational test power system for teaching overall power system reliability assessment. The test system extends an existing 6 bus system by developing additional distribution and subtransmission networks at buses 3, 5, and 6 to model a more complete and realistic power system. Customer and component reliability data is provided to enable calculation of overall reliability indices at the load point and system-wide level. The goal is to illustrate how reliability indices like SAIFI, SAIDI, CAIDI and ASAI can be predicted using the test system for educational purposes.

Uploaded by

Chimi Wangmo
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 7

1670 IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, Vol. 11, No.

4, November 1996

A Test System For Teaching Overall Power System Reliability Assessment


Roy Billinton Satish Jonnavithula
Power Systems Research Group
University of Saskatchewan
Saskatoon, Saskatchewan
Canada

Abstract- This paper presents the concept of overall power The basic data for performing reliability evaluation of
system reliability evaluation using an educational test system. the generation system (hierarchical level one, HLI) and for
The paper extends an existing test system by developing the the composite generation and transmission system
necessary distribution and subtransmission networks. The (hierarchical level 2, HLII) are provided in [3,4]. Reference
extended test system has all the main facilities, such as
generation, switching stations, transmission, sub transmission
5 provides distribution network data at buses 2 and 4. This
and radial distribution networks found in a practical system. paper extends the distribution system data and presents the
The test system, is however, sufficiently small that students can basic indices, and necessary data to conduct overall system
analyze it using hand calculations or by developing small reliability (hierarchical level 3, HLIII).
computer programs to fully understand the reliability models HLIII reliability evaluation includes all the segments of
and evaluation techniques. Overall power system reliability an electric power system in an overall assessment of actual
evaluation is concerned with providing acceptable customer consumer load point reliability. The primary reliability
service. This is an important concern in today's electric utility indices at HLIII are the expected failure rate h, the average
environment. This should therefore be an essential element in
teaching power system reliability evaluation at either the
duration of failure r, and the annual unavailability U, at the
graduate or undergraduate level. The extended test system customer load points [ 11. Individual customer indices can
presented in this paper and the concepts presented assist in also be aggregated with the number of customers at each
satisfying this requirement. load point to obtain HLIII system reliability indices. These
indices are the system average interruption frequency index
I. INTRODUCTION (SAIFI), the system average interruption duration index
Reliability evaluation of a complete electric power system (SAIDI), the customer average interruption duration index
including generation, transmission, station and distribution (CAIDI) and the average service availability index (ASAI).
facilities is an important ability in overall power system The customer load point indices, SAIFI, SAIDI, CAIDI and
planning and operation [I]. Due to the enormity of the ASAI are performance parameters obtained from historical
problem, reliability analysis is not usually conducted on a event reporting. Many electric power utilities throughout the
complete power systems and reliability evaluations of world compile these statistics on individual feeders,
generating facilities, transmission systems, station segments of the system, and on the entire system. This paper
configurations, and of distribution system segments are illustrates how similar indices can be predicted and provides
usually performed independently [1,2]. There are many an overall test system which can be used in a graduate or
benefits associated with the ability to perform overall system undergraduate setting to illustrate the calculation of these
reliability evaluation. The overall indices provide reliability indices.
prediction from a customer point of view and can be used to
rank the functional zone contributions. Incorporation of the II. DESCRIPTION OF THE TEST SYSTEM
concepts of customer service in teaching power system The RBTS is a 6 bus test system with five load buses
reliability evaluation involves a focus on the behavior of all (bus2-bus6). The RBTS has eleven generators and nine
the components involved in providing that service. An transmission lines. The installed capacity is 240 MW and
overall power system model has been sequentially developed the peak load of the system is 185 MW. This system has five
for this purpose. Initial data and results were published in voltage levels, 230 kV, 138 kV, 33 kV, and 11 kV. The
[3,4].This system evolved from the reliability research existing system has been extended by developing additional
activities conducted by Power Systems Research Group at distribution and sub station facilities. The overall system is
the University of Saskatchewan. shown in Figure 1.

III. DEVELOPMENT OF DISTRIBUTION


96 WM 056-2 PWRS A paper recommended and approved by the IEEE
Power Engineering Education Committee of the IEEE Power Engineering NETWORKS AT BUSES 3.5 AND 6.
Society for presentation at the 1996 IEEERES Winter Meeting, January 21- The distribution network at bus 3 of the RBTS represents
25, 1996, Baltimore, MD. Manuscript submitted July 24, 1995; made a typical industrial and large user distribution system with a
available for printing January 2, 1996.

0885-8950/96/$05.000 1996 IEEE


1671

LPl6 LP17 LPlS LP19 LEO LpLl LP22

LP1 LPZ LP3 LP4 LP5 LP6 LP7

LPll U12 LP13 LP14 LPIS LP16 LP17

w18 Lp19 LP2OLP2I Lp22LP23 LP24

Figure 1.Complete Single Line Diagram of the RBTS

peak load of 85 Mw. Bus 3 has industrial, large user, office The design of these distribution networks follow general
buildings, residential and commercial customers.The utility principles and practices regarding topology, ratings
distribution network at bus 5 represents a typical urban type and loading levels [6]. The developed sub stations for these
network consisting of residential, government and distribution networks are as shown in Figure 1. The failure
institutional, office and buildings, and commercial rates and repair durations of the various 'distribution
customers. The peak load of the distribution system at bus 5 components such as transformers, breakers, busbars, and
is 20 MW. The distribution network at bus 6 is a typical feeder sections follows the same data presented in [5].
rural network with agricultural, small industrial, commercial A wide range of reliability indices can be calculated for
and residential customers. The peak load of this network is the radial distribution networks at buses 3,5 and 6. These are
20 Mw. The distribution networks are shown in Figure 1 both load point and system indices. Load point indices
and are labeled in detail in Figures 2, 3 and 4. The customer include failure rate (A), outage time (r), annual
and loading data of the networks are given in Table 1 and unavailability (U) and ene:rgy not supplied (E).
the lengths of the feeder sections are presented in Table 2.
1672

Table 1. Customer Data


Number of Load Load Points Customer Type Load Level ver Load Point. MW Number of
Points Peak Average Customers
E&&
15 1,4-7,20,24, 32,36 residential 0.8367 0.4684 250
5 11,12, 13,18,25 residentlal 0.8500 0.4758 230
4 2, 15,26,30 residennal 0.7750 0.4339 190
3 39,40,44 large users 6.9167 4.3886 1
3 41-43 large users 11.5833 7 3496 1
3 8.9, 10 small lndustnal 1.0167 0.8472 1
9 3, 16, 17, 19,28,29,31,37,38 commercial 0.5222 0 2886 15
2 14,27 office buildings 0.9250 0 5680 1
Total 85.00 52.63 5805
Buss
4 1-2, 20,21 residenoal 0.7625 0.4269 210
4 4,6, 15,25 residenoal 0.7450 0.4171 240
5 26, 9-11, 13 residentlal 0.5740 0.3213 195
5 3, 5, 8,17,23 government and inst. 1.1100 0.6247 1
5 7,14,18,22,24 commercial 0.7400 0.4089 15
3 12, 16, 19 office bulldmgs 0.6167 0.3786 1
Total 20.00 11.29 2858

6-
3 139 residenhal 0.3171 0.1775 138
4 2 4 11 19 residential 0 3229 0 1808 126
2 56 residential 0.3864 0 2163 118
5 7 8 10 18 23 residentlal 0 2964 0 1659 147
3 12 13 22 residentlal 0.3698 0 2070 132
4 25 28 31 36 residentlal 0.2776 0.1554 79
4 27 29 33 39 residenhal 0.2831 0.1585 76
2 14 17 commercial 0.8500 0.4697 10
1 15 small 1.9670 1.6391 1
1 16 small 1.0830 0.9025 1
2 32 37 farm 0.5025 0 1929 1
3 20 30 34 f m 0 6517 0 2501 1
2 21 35 farm 0 6860 0 2633 1
2 24 40 farm 0 7965 0 3057 1
2 26 38 farm 0 7375 0 2831 1
Total 20.0000 IO.7155 2938

Table 2. Feeder Types and Lengths


Feeder Length Feeder Section Numbers Load point indices for selected load points at buses 3, 5
and 6 are presented in Tables 3, 4 and 5. System indices
&& include SAIH, SAIDI, CAIDI, ASAI and provide a relative
1 0.6 1 2 3 7 1 1 1 2 1 5 2 1 2 2 2930313640 measure for a group of load points or for the entire
42 43 48 49 50 56 58 61 64 67 70 72 76 distribution system. The basic system indices for the
2 0.8 4 8 9 1 3 1 6 1 9 2 0 2 5 2 6 3 2 3 5 374146
distribution systems at buses 3, 5 and 6 are presented in
47 51 53 57 60 62 65 68 71 75 77
3 0.9 5 6 1 0 1 4 1 7 1 8 2 3 2 4 2 7 2 8 3 3 3 4 3839 Table 6. Reference 1 illustrates the reliability effects of a
4445525455 596366697374 range of distribution design modifications using a simple
w single feeder. The distribution systems shown in Figures 2,3
1 0.5 1691314182125273135363942 and 4 provide a base for student evaluation of similar
2 0.65 4 7 8 1 2 1 5 1 6 1 9 2 2 262830333740 sensitivity analysis.
3 0.8 2 3 5 10 11 17 20 23 24 29 32 34 38 41 43

1 0.6 2389121317192024252831344147 IV. RELIABILITY ASSESSMENT AT HLIII


2 0.75 15671014152223262730334361 Overall (HLIII) power system reliability is concerned
3 0.8 41116182129323555 with assessment at the actual customer level. Customer
4 0.9 38 44 satisfaction is an important concern in today's electric power
5 1.6 37 3942495462 utility environment. This requirement should be
6 2.5 3640525760 incorporated in both graduate and undergraduate lecture
7 2.8 35 46 50 56 59 64 courses dealing with power system rehability evaluation.
8 3.2 4551535863 HLIII assessment incorporates the three functional zones of
generation, transmission and distribution in the analysis.
1673

F4

F3 Z C >C

I LP17 LP16 LP15 W14 LPll LP12 Wll '

LP24 LP23 LP22 LP2l LP20 LPIP ?IS


L

I L L 1 I
LP38 LP37 LP36 Lp35 LP34 LP33 LP32
71 6Y 67
w-w-w. - .. .

1
~

170 1 6 8 66 '
# Figure 4 . Distribution System for RBTS Bus 6

+fLI;+y+y..
NI0
LP41 LP4u LP39

. . . .'
Table 3. Base Case Reliability Indices for the Radial Distribution Network at
Bus3.
13XKV LPM LP43 LP42
,d. Point h (f/yr) r (hr) U (hr/yr) EENS (MWh/yr)
Figure 2 . Distribution System for RBl'S Bus 3 1 0.301 11.44 3.44 1.61223
3 0.314 11.17 3.51 1.01212
8 0.221 1.94 0.43 0.36345
11 0.314 11.17 3.51 1.66863
llK1
13 0.301 11.44 3.44 1.63770
21 0.301 11.44 3.44 1.61223
24 0.314 11.17 3.51 1.64268
27 0.321 10.96 3.51 1.99567
138 KV
32 0.288 12.18 3.51 1.64268

+E= LP14 LPlS LP16 LP17 LP18 LP19


38
41
44
0.269
0.189
0.202
12.70
1.83
1.77
3.41
0.34
0.36
0.98398
2.53194
1S6892

Table 4. Base Case Reliability Indices for the Radial Distnbubon Network at
BusS.
Ld Point h (f/yr) r (hr) U (hr/yr) EENS (MWhlyr)
1 02360 15.08 3.56 1.51934
4 0.2165 16.17 3.50 1.46006
9 0.2588 13.69 3.54 1.13829
12 0.2490 14.35 3.57 1.35236
.
Figure 3 Distribution System for RBTS Bus 5 19 0.2360 1525 360 136220
23 0.2263 15.69 3.55 2.21722
25 0.2068 17.07 3.53 1.47226
26 0.2263 16.03 3.63 1.16544
1674
Table 5. Base Case Reliability Indices for the Radial Distribution Network at and average annual outage time at each distribution
Bus6.
system supply point.
Ld. point h (f/yr) r (hr) U (hr/yr) EENS (MWh/yr) 3. At the radial distribution level, the effects due to
1 0.3303 11.10 3.67 0.65076 outages of system components such as primary
4 0.3303 11.10 3.67 0.66286 main/laterals/low voltage transformers, etc. are
8 0.3725 10.10 3.76 0.62387 considered.
12 0.3595 10.28 3.70 0.76497 The HLIII indices for the RBTS were obtained using the
above described approach and a seven step load model. The
16 0.2405 4.19 1.01 0.90927
HLIII indices can be obtained for all the load points in a
18 1.6725 5.02 8.40 3.26475
system. HLILI load point indices for selected load points at
23 1.7115 5.02 8.60 1.42616 the buses 2,3,4,5 and 6 are shown in Tables 7 to 11.
26 1.7115 6.71 11.48 3.25070
32 2.5890 5.02 12.98 1.67080 Table 7 HLIII Load Point Indices at Bus2.
37 2.5598 6.14 15.72 2.22438 Bus no , h(f/yr) r (hr) U (hr/yr) % Distn.
40 2.5110 6.16 15.48 3.45059 1 0.3116 12.41 3.87 93.93
4 0.3116 12.41 3.87 93.93
Table 6. Radial Distribution Svstem Indices
Index Bus 3 Bus 5 Bus 4
13 0.3246 11.96 3.88 93.95
S A M (fr/ syst. cust) 0 3027 0.2325 1.0067 19 0.3278 12.01 3.94 94.03
SAID1 (hr/ syst cust) 3 4726 3.5512 6 6688 22 0.3278 11.89 3.9 93.97
CAIDI (hr/cust) 11 4691 15 2151 6 6241
ASAI 0999604 0999595 0999239 Table 8. HLIII Load Point Indices at Bus3.
EENS (MWWyr) 6668024 4011936 7281531
Bus no ~ h (f/yr) r (hr) U (hr/yr) % Distn.
The HLIII reliability assessment presented in this paper 1 0.5013 8.98 4.5 78.63
includes the independent outages of generating units, 4 0.5208 8.83 4.6 79.08
transmission lines, outages due to station originated failures, 11 0.4683 9.66 4.52 78.72
sub-transmission and radial distribution element failures. 19 0.4683 9.66 4.52 78.72
The method used is summarized in the three steps given
31 0.5168 8.84 4.57 78.95
below:
1. The probability, expected frequency and duration of 39 0.3123 4.5 1.4 31.47
each contingency at HLII that leads to load 42 0.3058 4.32 1.32 27.09
curtailment for each system bus are obtained. The 44 0.3058 4.32 1.32 27.09
contingencies considered include outages up to: four
Table 9. HLIII Load Point Indices at Bus4.
generation units, three transmission lines, two lines
with one generator and two generators with one line. Bus no h (f/yr) r (hr) U (hr/yr) % Distn.
All outages due to station related failures and the 1 0.3721 10.15 3.78 92.47
isolation of load buses due to station failures are also 4 0.3851 9.98 3.84 92.60
considered. If the contingency results in load 7 0.3819 10.02 3.83 92.57
curtailment, a basic question is then how would the 19 0.4170 9.17 3.83 92.56
electric utility distribute this interrupted load among 27 0.3078 2.54 0.78 63.69
its customers. It is obvious that different power
35 0.4181 9.27 3.88 92.66
utilities will take different actions based on their
experience, judgment and other criteria. The method 38 0.4051 9.41 3.81 92.54
used in this paper assumes that load is curtailed
proportionately across all the customers For each Tables 7 to 11 also present the percentage contribution
contmgencyj that leads to load curtailment of LE at from distribution failures to the overall load point
J
Bus k, the ratio of L to bus peak load is determined. unavailability. The distribution facilities include the sub
kJ
The failure probability and failure frequency at each transmission and radial systems. It is also possible to obtain
bus k are modified using this ratio. The failure the percentage contribution of various segments of a system
probability and frequency due to an isolation case is to the load point HLIII indices. Consider load point 19 at bus
not modified as the isolation affects all the customers. 3. The contributions from various segments to the overall
2. At the sub transmission system level, the impact of all unavailability is shown in Figure 5. HLIII system indices can
outages is obtained in terms of average failure rate be obtained for individual feeders, groups of feeders and for
the entire system.
1675

8.35% m Generation

ITransmission
transmission reinforcements on actual load point adequacy.
The effect on the overall HILI11 indices of various distribution
9.70% system operational practices [6],such as providing alternate
H Switchng Station
supply and protective devices [7,8] can also be studied.

I 0 Sub Transmission
Index
Table 12. FILII1 System Indices.
SAIFI SAIDI CAIDI ASAI
Bus 2 0.3206 3.9056 12.1842 0.999554
Bus 3 0.4826 4.5131 9.3521 0.999485
Bus 4 0.3985 3.8302 9.6125 0.999563
Bus 5 0.3481 4.1663 11.9695 0.999524
Bus 6 2.3481 25.9128 11.0355 0.997042
Overall 0.7224 Z6550 10.5969 0.999I26

1 0.3516 11.87 4.17 86.65


4 0.3321 12.39 4.12 86.46 Table 13. HLlll System Indices arid the Contribution of Distnbution Failures.
12 0.3646 I1.48 4.19 86.69 SAIFI' %Dish SAIDI %Dish
16 0.3321 12.28 4.08 86.33 0.3206 94.90 3.9056 93.98
24 0.3321 12.39 4.12 86.46
26 0.3418 12.41 4.24 86.87
0.3481 82.88 4.1663

1 1.6768 13.67 22.91 16.24 V. CONCLUSIONS


This paper presents a basic electric power system
5 1.6865 13.59 22.92 16.28
network which can be used in teaching overall power system
8 1.7190 13.38 23.01 16.59
reliability assessment. The paper extends the basic system
16 1S870 12.76 20.25 5.25 described in [3,4,5]and introduces the concept of overall
20 3.0065 9.19 27.64 30.57 assessment, which deals with actual customer levels of
28 3.5590 9.35 33.29 42.35 service. This is an important requirement in today's
32 3.9230 8.21 32.22 40.44 changing utility environment and one that should be stressed
39 3.8450 9.03 34.72 44.72 in teaching reliability concepts.
40 3.8450 9.03 34.72 44.72
VI. REFERENCES
l.Billinton, R. md Allan, R. N., Reliability Evduatiop of Power Systems,
The system indices for buses 2 to 6 are presented in pltman Books, New York and London, 1984.
2.Billmton. R. and Allan, R. N., Reliability Evaluation of Engineenng
Table 12. This table also presents the HLIII system indices Systems Concepts and Techniques, Plenum Publishing, New York,1983.
for the entire RBTS. 3 Billinton. R . Kumar, S , Chowdhury, N., Chu, K., Debnath, K., Goel, L.,
Table 13 shows the percentage contribution of Khan,E . Kos, P , Nourbakhsh, G., and Oteng-Adjei, J., '' A Reliability Test
System for Educational Purposes - Basic Data", IEEE Trans. on Power
distribution system failures to the overall system indices of Systems, PWRS-A Vol. 4, No. 3, Aug. 1989, pp 1238-1244.
SAIFI and SAIDI. It can be seen from this table that 4.Billinton. R., Kumar, S., Chowdhury, N., Chu, K., Khan, E., Kos, P ,
distribution failures contribute significantly to the overall Nourbakhsh, G., and Oteng-Adjei, J., " A Reliability Test System for
Educatronal Purposes - Basic Results", IEEE Trans. on Power System, Vol.
reliability indices. 5. No.1. Feb 1990, pp. 319-325.
A wide range of studies can be conducted using the test 5 Allan, R N., Billmton, R., Sjanef, I., Goel, L., and So, K. S., A Reliability
"

system described in this paper. It is possible to identify how Test System for Educatlonal FzupOses - Basic Distnbution System Data and
different facilities, such as generation, transmission, Results". IEEETrans Power System, Vol. 6, No. 2, May 1991, pp. 813-820.
6. Gonen, T , Electric Power Distnbution System Engmneenng, McGraw Hill
switching stations, sub transmission, and radial distribution Book C O ,New York, 1986
systems influence the overall indices. A wide range of 7 Lakervi, E , Holmes, E J , Electric Distnbution Network Design, Peter
Peregrinus Ltd London, 1989
investigations can be carried out on suitable designs of
8 Westinghouse Electric Corporation "Electric Utility Reference Book -
different facilities, As an example, a switching station design Distribution Systems", Vol 3, E s t Pittsburgh. 1965
can influence the reliability indices at more than one bus [6].
The overall implications of design changes such as this can BIOGRAPHIES
ROYBillhton is presently C 1. MacKenwe, Professor of Engrneenng and Asaftate
be used to select a suitable station configurauon. The ability Dean, Graduate SIubes, Research and Extension of the College of Engneenng at the
to perform HLIII reliability evaluation provides the Uruvenlty of Saskatchewan Fellow of the IEEE. the EIC and the Royal Society of
Canadaand a Professional Ensneerin the Province of Saskatchewan.
opportunity to investigate the effect of generation and Satish Jonnavithula obtsned an Msc degree from the Umversity of
Saskatchewan and is pently in a PI1 D.p r o p m at the Umversity of Saskatchewan
1676

Discussion would provide these data for single weather and two-
weather state representations.
L. Goel and X. Liang (School of Electrical & Electronic
Engineering, Nanyang Tech. University, Nanyang Avenue, References
Singapore 639798):
We would like to congratulate the authors for presenting [I] R. Billinton, L. Goel, “Adequacy Assessment of an
the distribution systems for three of RBTS’s load buses, Overall Electric Power System”, IEE Proceedings - C,
and also for presenting an overall hierarchical level three Vol. 139, NO. 1, Jan 1992, pp 57-63.
(HLIII) approach for the RBTS. While some work has
been done in the area of HLIII reliability assessment [ 11, [2] L. Goel, R. Billinton, “A Procedure for Evaluating
and also in the cost-benefit considerations [2,3], this Interrupted Energy Assessment Rates in an Overall
paper is of immense educational value since it provides an Electric Power System”, IEEE Trans. on Power Systems,
overall power system that can be used in an engineering Vol. 6 , NO.4, NOV1991, pp 1396-1403.
curriculum to teach reliability assessment at HLI, HLII
and HLIII. [3] L. Goel, R. Billinton, “Utilization of Intempted
Energy Assessment Rates to Evaluate Reliability Worth in
We would like to seek some clarifications from the Electric Power Systems”, IEEE Trans. on Power Systems,
authors with regard to some data for the distribution Vol. 8, NO. 3, August 1993, pp 929-936.
systems designed for the RBTS buses 3 and 6 . We did
some Monte Carlo Simulation studies of the designed
Manuscript received February 15, 1996.
networks reported in the paper, and found our results to
be quite different (for some feeders) than those reported
in the paper. The basic queries that we have are as
follows:

- Feeder F4 of bus 6 (Figure 4 of the paper) is a 33kV


feeder for which the failure rate (single weather
condition) should be 0.046 failures/yr-kM as per the data ROY BILLINTON AND SATISH JOWAVITHULA:
provided in Reference 5 of the paper. We feel, however, We appreciate the dkxssers interest in our paper, The
that the authors have used a failure rate of 0 065 results presented in this paper were verified by both
failuredyr-kM - the data given for 11kV feeder sections analytical and Monte-Carlo techniques and therefore we
presume that the differences cited by thc discussers are due
in Reference 5 of the paper.
to data uncertainty. We used a failure rate of 0.065
E Reference 5 of the paper does not provide the data failuredyr-Km fm h e 33 kV rural. &&der F4 of bus 6. The
for the 33/0.415kV transformers in the feeder laterals. increase in failrrxe rate from 0.044t0 0.065 was intended to
Since feeder F4 of bus 6 distribution system (Figure 4 of rcprcscnt the change m line design from the 33 kV urban
the paper) utilizes these transformers, and since this paper transmission used in Reference 5 to the rural f e d e x in this
does not provide any additional component data, we are paper. We used the same data for both 33/0,415 kV and
not sure what data was used by the authors. We are of the 11/0.415 kV transformers. The failure rate of 0.065
opinion, based on our own studies, that the authors used
failures/yr.-Km was also used for the 138 ISV transmission.
In regard to two weather state re?pfe$entaGOn$,we would l&e
the same data as that provided for the 11/0.415kV 1.0srlggcsl noma1 and adverse weather duralions of 200 and
transformers in Reference 5 of the paper. 1.5 ho‘urs respectively, no repar during adverse weather and
?: Feeders F7 and F8 of the RBTS bus 3 distribution that 60 % of che line f;hilures occur during adverse weather,
system are 138kV feeders. Reference 5 of the paper also Id C6ndu$i6nt we wbdld 196 t6 thA& the diSi%$$&r$ fbf
does not provide the relevant data for 13XkV feeder their cmKWntS
sections. We would very much appreciate it if the authors Manuscript received March 22, 1996

You might also like