Powplant V4 Print PDF

Design of an Additional 35 Mega Watts Power Plant in Calatagan, Batangas
By
Esteleydes, Roby A.
Lopez, Bryan Alllan C.
Mariño, Cyrus Fearl M.
Technological Institute of the Philippines

Manila
October 2018
TECHNOLOGICAL INSITUTE OF THE PHILIPPINES
1338 Arlegui St., Quiapo, Manila
Approval Sheet
The proposed system entitled “Design of Additional 35 MW Power Plant in Calatagan, Batangas” which
has been presented on October 2018, 1st Semester, S.Y. 2018-2019 by the proponent:
Esteleydes, Roby A.
I hereby approved by the following committee for Power Plant Engineering and Substation Design and
Electrical Transmission and Distribution System Design
Engr. Meyer Joseph Dizon Engr. Hualy Eiden Mataya

Panel Member Panel Member
Engr. John Placente

Project Adviser
Engr. Marianne L. Yumul

EE Program Chair
ii
TECHNOLOGICAL INSITUTE OF THE PHILIPPINES
1338 Arlegui St., Quiapo, Manila
Acceptance Sheet
The proposed system entitled “Design of Additional 35 MW Power Plant in Calatagan, Batangas” has
been prepared and submitted by the proponents:
Esteleydes, Roby A.
And for the approval to the committee for Power Plant Engineering and Substation Design and Electrical
Transmission and Distribution System Design
After thorough reviews and evaluations of the proposed system, the committee has accepted the presented
proposed design based on the required criteria. The acceptance is valid to the information being presented.
Accepted this October 2018, 1st Semester, S.Y. 2018-2019
Engr. Meyer Joseph Dizon Engr. Hualy Eiden Mataya

Panel Member Panel Member
Engr. John Placente

Project Adviser
iii
Dedication
First and foremost, we whole – heartedly dedicate this design project to the Lord our God, for without Him,
we're nothing. Second, to our loving parents who never get tired and old enough to work for our education,
we appreciate the unbiased, unconditional love and moral support. To our batch mates, classmates, and
friends who never left us when we have questions to ask.
iv
Acknowledgement
We wish to thank our mentor, Engr. Gerard Francesco DG. Apolinario, Engr. John C. Placente, and Engr.
Ulysses Paguio for teaching us, guiding us, and answering our questions about our design and also for
encouraging us in times of confusion, answering all the countless questions about the study, for you had
been a very vital part for the success of this design project.
We also want to give our thanks to our family for their accommodation and providing our financial needs.
To our program chair Engr. Marianne L. Yumul, for the formal approval of our thesis and extending a helping
hand throughout the documentation. Their guidance helped us in all the time of research and writing of this
thesis.
v
List of Tables
Table 2-1. Historical Data .................................................................................................... 4

Table 2-2. Load Forecasting ............................................................................................... 4
Table 2-3. Design Criteria ................................................................................................. 13
Table 3.1. Generator and Major Auxiliary Electrical Equipment ...................................... 188
Table 4-1. Design Criteria ............................................................................................... 207
Table 4-2. Wind Designs Normalization of Economic Constraints................................... 208
Table 4-3. Wind Designs Normalization of Efficiency Constraints ................................... 208
Table 4-4. Wind Designs Normalization of Degradation Constraints ............................... 208
Table 4-5. Wind Designs Normalization of Environmental Constraints ........................... 209
Table 4-6. Solar Designs Normalization of Economic Constraints .................................. 209
Table 4-7. Solar Designs Normalization of Efficiency Constraints ................................... 209
Table 4-8. Solar Designs Normalization of Degradation Constraints............................... 210
Table 4-9. Solar Designs Normalization of Environmental Constraints ........................... 210
Table 4-10. Hydro Design Normalization of Economic Constraints ................................. 210
Table 4-11. Hydro Design Normalization of Efficiency Constraints ................................. 211
Table 4-12. Hydro Design Normalization of Degradation Constraints ............................. 211
Table 4-13. Hydro Design Normalization of Environmental Constraints .......................... 212
Table 4-14. Pairwise Comparison of Design 1 in all Constraints ..................................... 212
Table 4-17. Economical vs Efficiency .............................................................................. 214
Table 4-18. Economical vs Degradation.......................................................................... 215
Table 4-19. Economical vs Environmental ...................................................................... 216
Table 4-20. Efficiency vs Environmental ......................................................................... 217
Table 4-21. Efficiency vs Degradation ............................................................................. 218
Table 4-22. Degradation vs Environmental ..................................................................... 219
Table 4-23. Sensitivity Analysis Trial 1 ............................................................................ 220
Table 4-32. Sensitivity Analysis Trial 10 .......................................................................... 222
vi
List of Figures
Figure 1-1. Project Development Flow Chart ...................................................................... 2

Figure 2-1. Calatagan Map [] ............................................................................................... 5
Figure 2-2. Solar Power Plant Location to The Loads [] ...................................................... 5
Figure 2-3. Direct Normal Irradiance in West Batangas [] ................................................... 6
Figure 2-4. Diffuse Horizontal Irradiance in Batangas [] ...................................................... 6
Figure 2-5. Climate Summary [] ........................................................................................... 7
Figure 2-6. Average High and Low Temperature [].............................................................. 7
Figure 2-7. Cloud Cover Categories [] ................................................................................. 8
Figure 2-8. Hours of Daylight [] ............................................................................................ 8
Figure 2-9. Sunrise and Sunset with Twilight [].................................................................... 9
Figure 2-10. Location of Wind Power Plant and the Loads [] ............................................... 9
Figure 2-11. Wind Map of Batangas [] ............................................................................... 10
Figure 2-12. Average Wind Speed in June [] ..................................................................... 10
Figure 2-13. Wind Direction in June [] ............................................................................... 11
Figure 2-14. Wind Power Density at 100 m Height in Calatagan [] .................................... 11
Figure 2-15. Wind Speed in Calatagan Batangas []........................................................... 12
Figure 2-16. Location of the Hydro Power Plant and the Loads [] ..................................... 13
Figure 3-1. Design Hierarchy of Renewable Power Plants ............................................... 15
Figure 3-2. Design Options of Wind Power Plant .............................................................. 16
Figure 3-3. Schematic for Wind Power Plant .................................................................... 17
Figure 3-4. Power Coefficient Versus Advance Ratio ....................................................... 18
Figure 3-5. Power Curve of Wind Turbine......................................................................... 19
Figure 3-6. Distance Between Wind Turbines................................................................... 19
Figure 3-7. Proposed Single Line Diagram of Wind Power Plant ...................................... 20
Figure 3-8. Substation Grid Layout ................................................................................... 28
Figure 3-9. Single Line Diagram of the New Substation (Wind Power Plant) .................... 28
Figure 3-10. New Substation Layout ................................................................................. 29
Figure 3-11. Balayan and Calatagan Transmission Line Map .......................................... 29
Figure 3-12. Single Circuit Tower ..................................................................................... 34
Figure 3-14. Single Line with Double Bus Double Breaker Bus Scheme .......................... 43
Figure 3-15. Switchyard Layout ........................................................................................ 44
Figure 3-16. Switchyard Sections and Details .................................................................. 44
Figure 3-17. Coordinates, Poles and Lattices of the Wind Farm ....................................... 45
Figure 3-18. Horizontal-Axis Wind Turbine (Free Standing) ............................................. 46
Figure 3-19. Power Plant Layout ...................................................................................... 49
Figure 3-20. Single Line Diagram of the Wind Farm ......................................................... 49
Figure 3-21. Horizontal-Axis Wind Turbine (Lattice) ......................................................... 50
Figure 3-24. Darrieus Vertical Wind Turbine ..................................................................... 54
Figure 3-25. Wind Turbine per Cluster .............................................................................. 57
Figure 3-26. Wind Turbine Clusters Connection .............................................................. 57
Figure 3-28. Vertical-Axis Wind Turbine (Savonius) ......................................................... 59
vii
Figure 3-30. Clusters Connection ..................................................................................... 62
Figure 3-32. Power Flow using Newton Rhapson Method ................................................ 64
Figure 3-33. 3-Phase Fault Short-Circuit .......................................................................... 64
Figure 3-34. 3- Line-Line(L-L) Fault Short-Circuit ............................................................. 65
Figure 3-35. 3- Line-Ground(L-G) Fault Short-Circuit ....................................................... 65
Figure 3-36. 3- Double Line – Ground(LLG) Fault Short-Circuit ....................................... 66
Figure 3-37. Protective Device Coordination .................................................................... 66
Figure 3-38. Graphical Representation of the Working Distance ...................................... 67
Figure 3-39. The PPE Category and Safety Clothing Required ........................................ 67
Figure 3-40. The Graphical Representation of the Working Distance ............................... 68
Figure 3-41. PPE Category and the Clothing Required .................................................... 68
Figure 3-42. The Working Distance at Green Zone .......................................................... 69
Figure 3-43. The PPE Category Needed for The Workers ................................................ 69
Figure 3-44. New Substation Grid Layout ......................................................................... 70
Figure 3-45. New Substation Grid Potential Lines ............................................................ 70
Figure 3-46. Design of The Rotor for HAWT Free Standing ............................................. 71
Figure 3-47. Simulation of The Wind Field ........................................................................ 71
Figure 3-48. Non-linear Lifting Simulation ......................................................................... 72
Figure 3-49. Wind Field Simulation ................................................................................... 72
Figure 3-50. Rotor Specifications...................................................................................... 73
Figure 3-51. Rotor BEM Simulation .................................................................................. 73
Figure 3-52. Non-linear Lifting Simulation ......................................................................... 74
Figure 3-53. Design of the Darrieus Wind Turbine ............................................................ 74
Figure 3-54. Wind Field Set at 9.88 m/s Mean Speed ...................................................... 75
Figure 3-55. Simulation of the designed Darrieus Turbine set at the simulated wind field 75
Figure 3-56. Design of the Savonius Rotor Using the Specified Technical Data............... 76
Figure 3-57. The Simulation of the Wind Field Set at 30 m Vertical Height ...................... 76
Figure 3-58. Simulation of the Savonius Wind Turbine ..................................................... 77
Figure 3-59. Design Options of Solar Generations ........................................................... 78
Figure 3-60. Proposed Single Line Diagram of Solar Power Plant.................................... 79
Figure 3-61. Substation Grid Layout ................................................................................. 86
Figure 3-62. Single Line Diagram of the New Sub Station (Solar Power Plant) ................ 87
Figure 3-64. Balayan and Calatagan Transmission Line Map .......................................... 88
Figure 3-67. Single Line with Double Bus Double Breaker Bus Scheme ........................ 101
Figure 3-68. Switchyard Layout ...................................................................................... 102
Figure 3-69. Switchyard Sections and Details ................................................................ 102
Figure 3-70. Solar Generation Diagram .......................................................................... 103
Figure 3-71. Polycrystalline Solar Panel ......................................................................... 103
Figure 3-72. Polycrystalline Silicon Solar Cells ............................................................... 104
Figure 3-73. Micro Inverter.............................................................................................. 105
Figure 3-74. Central Inverter ........................................................................................... 113
Figure 3-75. Three Phase String Inverter........................................................................ 120
viii
Figure 3-76. Location Map .............................................................................................. 127
Figure 3-77. Sun Paths Diagram .................................................................................... 128
Figure 3-78. PVSyst Simulation Parameters ................................................................... 128
Figure 3-79. Main Results and Balances ........................................................................ 129
Figure 3-80. PVSyst Loss Diagram ................................................................................. 129
Figure 3-81. PVSyst Horizon Line in Calatagan .............................................................. 130
Figure 3-82. Evaluation of the Production Probability Forecast ...................................... 130
Figure 3-83. Simulation Variants for the Solar Farm ....................................................... 131
Figure 3-84. Site Monthly Values .................................................................................... 131
Figure 3-85. PVSyst Simulation Parameters for the Solar Farm with String Inverter ...... 132
Figure 3-86. Main Results and Balances for String Inverter ............................................ 132
Figure 3-87. PVSyst Loss Diagram for the Solar Farm with String Inveter ..................... 133
Figure 3-88. Production Probability Forecast for the Solar Farm with String Inverter ..... 133
Figure 3-89. PVSyst Horizon Line in Calatagan .............................................................. 134
Figure 3-90. Site Monthly Values for String Inverter Design ........................................... 134
Figure 3-91. PVSyst Simulation Parameters for the Solar Farm with Central Inverter .... 135
Figure 3-92. Main Results and Balances for String Inverter............................................ 135
Figure 3-93. PVSyst Loss Diagram for the Solar Farm with Central Inverter .................. 136
Figure 3-94. Production Probability Forecast for the Solar Farm with Central Inverter ... 136
Figure 3-95. PVSyst Loss Diagram for the Solar Farm with Central Inveter ................... 137
Figure 3-96. PVSyst Horizon Line in Calatagan for the Central Inverter ......................... 137
Figure 3-97. PVSyst Simulation Parameters for the Solar Farm with Central Inverter .... 138
Figure 3-98. Site Monthly Values Central Inverter Design .............................................. 138
Figure 3-99. Design Options of Hydro Power Plant ........................................................ 139
Figure 3-100. Proposed Single Line Diagram of Hydro Power Plant .............................. 140
Figure 3-101. Single Line Diagram of the New Sub Station (Hydro Power Plant) ........... 148
Figure 3-102. New Substation Layout ............................................................................. 148
Figure 3-103. Balayan and Calatagan Transmission Line Map ...................................... 149
Figure 3-104. Single Circuit Tower ................................................................................. 153
Figure 3-105. Single Circuit Tower ................................................................................. 155
Figure 3-106. Single Line with Double Bus Double Breaker Bus Scheme ...................... 162
Figure 3-107. Switchyard Layout .................................................................................... 163
Figure 3-108. Tubular Turbine ........................................................................................ 164
Figure 3-109. Kaplan Turbine ......................................................................................... 164
Figure 3-110. Kaplan Axial Flow Turbine with fixed blades ............................................. 171
Figure 3-111. Bulb Turbine ............................................................................................. 172
Figure 3-112. Pelton Turbine .......................................................................................... 173
Figure 3-113. Turgo Impulse Turbine.............................................................................. 173
Figure 3-114. Hydro Power Plant Layout ........................................................................ 188
Figure 3-115. Power Flow using Fast Decoupled ........................................................... 195
Figure 3-116. Summary of Total Generation and Demand ............................................. 196
Figure 3-117. Busses and Branches Data ...................................................................... 196
Figure 3-118. Transformer and Line Voltage Regulator Data ......................................... 197
Figure 3-119. Power and Current Flow of the Branches ................................................. 197
Figure 3-120. Transformer and Line Regulator Loading ................................................. 198
Figure 3-121. System Summary and Calculation Options .............................................. 198
Figure 3-122. Short Circuit Report of the Simulation....................................................... 199
ix
Figure 3-123. Francis Turbine Model .............................................................................. 200
Figure 3-124. Turbine Model Specification ..................................................................... 200
Figure 3-125. Running Francis Turbine CFD Simulation ................................................ 201
Figure 3-126. Performance Curve Efficiency of Francis Turbine..................................... 201
Figure 3-127. Performance Curve for Flow Rate and Head for Francis Turbine ............. 202
Figure 3-128. Performance Curve for Flow Rate and Efficiency for Francis Turbine ...... 202
Figure 3-129. Kaplan Turbine Model............................................................................... 203
Figure 3-130. Turbine Model Specification ..................................................................... 203
Figure 3-131. Running Kaplan Turbine CFD Simulation ................................................. 204
Figure 3-132. Performance Curve for Flow Rate and Head for Kaplan Turbine.............. 204
Figure 3-133. Performance Curve for Flow Rate and Efficiency for Kaplan Turbine ....... 205
Figure 4-1. Criterion Rank Representation ..................................................................... 207
Figure 4-2. Trade-off Between Economical vs Efficiency ................................................ 214
Figure 4-3. Trade-off Between Economical vs Degradation ............................................ 215
Figure 4-4. Trade-off Between Economical vs Environmental ........................................ 216
Figure 4-5. Trade-off Between Efficiency vs Environmental ........................................... 217
Figure 4-6. Trade-off Between Efficiency vs Degradation ............................................... 218
Figure 4-7. Trade-off Between Degradation vs Environmental ....................................... 219
Figure 5-1. Design Options of Wind Power Plant ............................................................ 226
Figure 5-2. Schematic for Wind Power Plant .................................................................. 227
Figure 5-3. Power Coefficient Versus Advance Ratio ..................................................... 228
Figure 5-4. Power Curve of Wind Turbine....................................................................... 229
Figure 5-5. Distance Between Wind Turbines ................................................................. 229
Figure 5-6. Proposed Single Line Diagram of Wind Power Plant .................................... 230
Figure 5-7. Substation Grid Layout ................................................................................. 238
Figure 5-8. Single Line Diagram of the New Substation (Wind Power Plant) .................. 238
Figure 5-10. Balayan and Calatagan Transmission Line Map ........................................ 239
Figure 5-11. Single Circuit Tower ................................................................................... 244
Figure 5-12. Single Circuit Tower ................................................................................... 246
Figure 5-13. Single Line with Double Bus Double Breaker Bus Scheme ........................ 253
Figure 5-14. Switchyard Layout ...................................................................................... 254
Figure 5-15. Switchyard Sections and Details ................................................................ 254
Figure 5-16. Coordinates, Poles and Lattices of the Wind Farm ..................................... 255
Figure 5-17. Horizontal-Axis Wind Turbine (Free Standing) ........................................... 256
Figure 5-18. Power Plant Layout .................................................................................... 259
Figure 5-19. Single Line Diagram of the Wind Farm ....................................................... 259
Figure 5-20. Horizontal-Axis Wind Turbine (Lattice) ....................................................... 260
Figure 5-23. Darrieus Vertical Wind Turbine ................................................................... 264
Figure 5-24. Wind Turbine per Cluster ............................................................................ 267
Figure 5-25. Wind Turbine Clusters Connection ............................................................ 267
Figure 5-27. Vertical-Axis Wind Turbine (Savonius) ....................................................... 269
Figure 5-29. Clusters Connection ................................................................................... 272
x
Figure 5-31. Power Flow using Newton Rhapson Method .............................................. 274
Figure 5-32. 3-Phase Fault Short-Circuit ........................................................................ 274
Figure 5-33. 3- Line-Line(L-L) Fault Short-Circuit ........................................................... 275
Figure 5-34. 3- Line-Ground(L-G) Fault Short-Circuit ..................................................... 275
Figure 5-35. 3- Double Line – Ground(LLG) Fault Short-Circuit ..................................... 276
Figure 5-36. Protective Device Coordination .................................................................. 276
Figure 5-37. Graphical Representation of the Working Distance .................................... 277
Figure 5-38. The PPE Category and Safety Clothing Required ...................................... 277
Figure 5-39. The Graphical Representation of the Working Distance ............................. 278
Figure 5-40. PPE Category and the Clothing Required .................................................. 278
Figure 5-41. The Working Distance at Green Zone ........................................................ 279
Figure 5-42. The PPE Category Needed for The Workers .............................................. 279
Figure 5-43. New Substation Grid Layout ....................................................................... 280
Figure 5-44. New Substation Grid Potential Lines .......................................................... 280
Figure 5-45. Design of The Rotor for HAWT Free Standing ........................................... 281
Figure 5-46. Simulation of The Wind Field ...................................................................... 281
Figure 5-47. Non-linear Lifting Simulation ....................................................................... 282
Figure 5-48. Wind Field Simulation ................................................................................. 282
Figure 5-49. Rotor Specifications.................................................................................... 283
Figure 5-50. Rotor BEM Simulation ................................................................................ 283
Figure 5-51. Non-linear Lifting Simulation ....................................................................... 284
Figure 5-52. Design of the Darrieus Wind Turbine .......................................................... 284
Figure 5-53. Wind Field Set at 9.88 m/s Mean Speed .................................................... 285
Figure 5-54. Simulation of the designed Darrieus Turbine set at the simulated wind field285
Figure 5-55. Design of the Savonius Rotor Using the Specified Technical Data............. 286
Figure 5-56. The Simulation of the Wind Field Set at 30 m Vertical Height .................... 286
Figure 5-57. Simulation of the Savonius Wind Turbine ................................................... 287
xi
Table of Contents
Approval Sheet ............................................................................................................................................... i

Acceptance Sheet .........................................................................................................................................iii
Dedication..................................................................................................................................................... iv
List of Tables ................................................................................................................................................ vi
List of Figures ............................................................................................................................................... vii
Table of Contents ......................................................................................................................................... xii
Chapter 1. Project Background ...................................................................................................................... 1
The Project ................................................................................................................................................ 1
Project Objectives ...................................................................................................................................... 1
The Client .................................................................................................................................................. 1
Project Scope and Limitation ..................................................................................................................... 1
Project Development ................................................................................................................................. 2
Chapter 2. Design Inputs ............................................................................................................................... 4
Load Study ................................................................................................................................................ 4
Calatagan, Batangas ................................................................................................................................. 5
Location of the Power Plant and the Loads ............................................................................................... 5
Direct Normal Irradiance ............................................................................................................................ 6
Diffuse Horizontal Irradiance ..................................................................................................................... 6
Climate Summary ...................................................................................................................................... 7
Average High and Low Temperature ......................................................................................................... 7
Cloud Cover Categories ............................................................................................................................ 8
Hours of Daylight ....................................................................................................................................... 8
Sunrise & Sunset ....................................................................................................................................... 9
Location of the Wind Power Plant and the Loads ...................................................................................... 9
Wind Map of Batangas ............................................................................................................................ 10
Average Wind Speed in June .................................................................................................................. 10
Wind Direction in June ............................................................................................................................. 11
Wind Power Density ................................................................................................................................ 11
Wind Speed ............................................................................................................................................. 12
Location of the Hydro Power Plant and the Loads ................................................................................... 13
Design Criteria ......................................................................................................................................... 13
Chapter 3. Project Design............................................................................................................................ 15
Methodology ............................................................................................................................................ 15
Design 1: Wind Power Plant .................................................................................................................... 16
Stage 1: Load Forecasting ................................................................................................................... 20
Stage 2: Step Down Transmission Substation Design ......................................................................... 21
Stage 3: Transmission Line Design ..................................................................................................... 29
Stage 4: Step Up Transmission Substation Design ............................................................................. 38
Stage 5: Wind Power Plant Design ...................................................................................................... 45
Design 2: Solar Power Plant .................................................................................................................... 78
Stage 1: Load Forecasting ................................................................................................................... 79
Stage 2: Step Down Transmission Substation Design ......................................................................... 80
xii
Stage 3: Transmission Line Design ..................................................................................................... 88
Stage 4: Step Up Transmission Substation Design ............................................................................. 96
Stage 5: Solar Power Plant Design.................................................................................................... 103
Design 3: Hydro Power Plant ................................................................................................................. 139
Stage 1: Load Forecasting ................................................................................................................. 140
Stage 2: Step Down Transmission Substation Design ....................................................................... 141
Stage 3: Transmission Line Design ................................................................................................... 149
Stage 4: Step Up Transmission Substation Design ........................................................................... 157
Stage 5: Hydro Power Plant Design .................................................................................................. 163
Chapter 4. Design Constraints, Trade-Offs and Standards ....................................................................... 206
Design Constraints ................................................................................................................................ 206
Design Trade-Offs ................................................................................................................................. 206
Ranking Score ..................................................................................................................................... 207
Design Criteria ..................................................................................................................................... 207
Trade-off Design between Two Constraints ........................................................................................... 214
Sensitivity Analysis ................................................................................................................................ 220
Design Standards .................................................................................................................................. 223
Chapter 5. Final Design ............................................................................................................................. 226
Wind Power Plant .................................................................................................................................. 226
Stage 1: Load Forecasting................................................................................................................. 230
Stage 2: Step Down Transmission Substation Design ....................................................................... 231
Stage 3: Transmission Line Design ................................................................................................... 239
Stage 4: Step Up Transmission Substation Design ........................................................................... 248
Stage 5: Wind Power Plant Design .................................................................................................... 255
Conclusion ......................................................................................................................................... 288
References ................................................................................................................................................ 289
Appendices ................................................................................................................................................ 291
Appendix A. Trade Offs Computations ...................................................................................................... 291
OPTION 1: Horizontal-Axis Wind Turbine (Free Standing) ................................................................ 293
OPTION 2: Horizontal-Axis Wind Turbine (Lattice) ............................................................................ 293
OPTION 3: Darrieus Wind Turbine .................................................................................................... 293
OPTION 4: Savonius Wind Turbine ................................................................................................... 294
SOLAR POWER PLANT ....................................................................................................................... 294
OPTION 1: Central Inverter ............................................................................................................... 296
OPTION 2: Micro Inverter .................................................................................................................. 296
OPTION 3: String Inverter ................................................................................................................. 297
HYDRO POWER PLANT....................................................................................................................... 297
OPTION 1: Tubular Turbine ............................................................................................................... 299
OPTION 2: Kaplan Turbine ................................................................................................................ 300
OPTION 3: Kaplan Axial Flow Turbine .............................................................................................. 300
OPTION 4: Bulb Turbine.................................................................................................................... 300
OPTION 5: Pelton Turbine ................................................................................................................. 301
xiii
OPTION 6: Turgo Impulse Turbine .................................................................................................... 301
Appendix B. Normalization of Data ............................................................................................................ 302
Appendix C. Pareto Optimization ............................................................................................................... 312
Appendix D. Design Standards .................................................................................................................. 313
Appendix E. Arc Flash Computations ........................................................................................................ 320
Appendix F. Plagiarism Checker................................................................................................................ 324
Appendix G. Grammarly ............................................................................................................................ 329
Appendix H. Rubrics .................................................................................................................................. 341
xiv
Chapter 1. Project Background
The Project
The project is about the additional power generation for the electric distribution company of Batangas known
as BATELEC I, Batangas I Electric Cooperative, Inc., which covers its Franchise Areas from Nasugbu to Taal
with a total of 364 Barangays [1]. According to the electric distribution utility known as BATELEC I, the supply
of energy is still sufficient to meet the load demand in the area but due to the increased of demand in the
towns of Balayan and Nasugbu, the supply will not be able to sustain the load demand of the said electric
distribution utility [2]. According to BATELEC I, Balayan and Nasugbu has a growth of 7 - 9 % of energy
demand per year, thus, needing additional energy supply. Balayan and Nasugbu is growing in economic
status and majority of their livelihoods runs by electricity and as a result of that, demand of power supply is
far needed. Also, the growing population as well as the households increases the need of electricity
drastically. The design power generation will not only solve the problem in the said areas, but it will also solve
the possible depletion of fossil fuel reserves and lessen the emissions of carbon dioxide and mercury which
are considered the main reason behind the global warming [3].
Project Objectives
This project aims to design an additional power generation of 35 MW to provide power for the town of Balayan
and Nasugbu for the next ten (10) years.
Specific Objectives
 To design an efficient, cheap and reliable source of energy by means of solar energy that will last for
the next 10 years or more.
 To provide proper size of substation to properly size the loads.
 To be able to choose the best solar energy design that will meet the requirement by the client.
The Client
The client of this Project is the (BATELEC I) Batangas I Electric Cooperative, Inc.
Project Scope and Limitation

The project covers the design of a single line diagram to be used as reference for the construction of an
electrical power source in Calatagan. It will cover only from power generation to power transmission for the
towns of Balayan and Nasugbu. Power distribution should be handled by the local cooperative of Batangas
I (BATELEC I). The decision for the power generator to be used will be based on Economy, Reliability and
Efficiency. The transmission line design on this project will only cover the type of conductor, the conductor
size, conductor ampacity, and conductor thermal capacity. Transmission line clearances, insulation, and
insulators, overhead ground wires, sag, tension and structure data will not be included on this design project
assuming that the location is safe and clear for overhead transmission line installation.
The design focus only on Electrical Engineer work, the other will disregard the duty of Civil, Mechanical and
Electronics, that will not consider in the designing the system. At the end, the design project will benefit the
consumers the most. That is because the project aims to improve the power system for the towns of
1 BUENAVENTURA, J. U. (2014, August 20). Retrieved from Service Reliability of BATELEC I www.ejournals.ph/article.php?id=5768
2 SANTOS, I. A. (2014, JUNE 20). [Online]. Available https://apjmr.com>APJMR-2014-0-097
3 CUEVAS, A.E. (2015, JULY 15). [Online] Available. https://www.erc.gov.ph/files/render/application
1
Balayan and Nasugbu. It can be expected that there shall be no more rotating or unexpected blackouts
because the supply will meet the power demand of the consumers.
START
Load Study
Geographical Study
Multiple Designs
Design Optimization
Design Trade Off
Final Design
Design Simulation
Transient Stability Load Flow Study Short Circuit Study Arc Flash
END
Figure 1-1. Project Development Flow Chart
Project Development
The figure 1-1 shows the whole process of the design from load growth study to design simulation. The First
step is to define some load study that will set the project boundaries. The next step is geographical study it is
a field of science devoted to the study of the lands, the features, the inhabitants, and the phenomena of
2
Earth. Multiple designs are composed of Solar, Wind and a Hydro power plant so that we can choose a
design that is perfect to our project and also to choose which is the best one that will suit our chosen area
and has a good standard. Design Optimization is a problem in which certain parameters (design variables)
needed to be determined to achieve the best measurable performance (objective function) under given
constraints. Design trade-off is a situational decision that involves diminishing or losing one quality, quantity
or property of a set or design in return for gains in other aspects. In simple terms, a trade-off is where one
thing increases and another must decrease to produce a good output. Final design is if we meet the given
standard we have the solution to our problems we can now precede to the preparation of final construction
plans. Design Simulation is the imitation of the operation of a real-world process or system over time. The
type of generation is finalized and the project will design a solar power plant generation wherein the existing
system will design a new power generation that will benefit the towns of Nasugbu, Balayan and Lian in the
province of Batangas. The design project involves a continuous development after the implementation of the
design to cope up with the latest technologies used in the field of electrical engineering to have a better
system which can give a sufficient and reliable operation. Project design will be simulated for us to be
prepared on how to have solutions on problems that might occur during operation of the solar generating
power plant.
3
Chapter 2. Design Inputs
Load Study
This project forecasts the power deficit of Nasugbu and Balayan in 10 years to design the power plant to be
installed in Batangas from the proposed design from Solar Power Plant using appropriate analytical approach
to arrive at the data shown. Power loss is mostly considered in the design of the power generation, using the
reverse or back solution of power analysis to arrive at the real capacity of the power plant. The distance from
the transmission lines coming from the generation to substation and substation to feeders or load are
determined [4].
Table 2-1. Historical Data

Year 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
Balayan
2.996 7.1254 7.361 7.321 8.066 8.6566 8.719 9.250
Substation
(10 MVA)
Nasugbu1
8.57 8.575 8.478 9.802 7.2 7.349 8.202 8.801
(10 MVA)
Table 2-1 shows the data of load demand of the Balayan, Nasugbu 1 and 2 substations from 2010 – 2017.
Each substation has a capacity of 10 MVA. This data was given by Batangas I Electric Cooperative
(BATELEC 1).
Table 2-2. Load Forecasting

Year Balayan (10 MVA) Nasugbu 1 (10 MVA)
2018 9.749 14.561
2019 10.283 10.475
2020 10.846 11.382
2021 11.434 12.324
2022 12.041 13.292
2023 12.662 14.276
2024 13.293 15.269
2025 13.927 16.261
2026 14.561 17.242
2027 15.189 18.205
2028 15.805 19.139
Table 2-2 shows the data from 2018 – 2028 of total consumption forecasted per year. This data was given
by Batangas I Electric Cooperative (BATELEC 1) [5].
4 A. N. DIMAUNAHAN, “Performance of BATELEC I”,2 February 2014. [Online] Available. https://apjmr.com/apjmr-2014-02-130

5 R. C. Macalagim, “Electrical Loads for BATELEC I”, 26 March 2015. [Online] Available https://www.doe.gov.ph/du_csp
4
Calatagan, Batangas
Figure 2-1. Calatagan Map [6]
Figure 2-1 shows the location of Calatagan, it will be the location of the solar power plant that will supply the
power needed for its neighbor towns which is Balayan and Nasugbu. Balayan becoming the center of
commercials in the west part of Batangas, and Nasugbu as one of the fastest industrial locations in Batangas,
as well as hotels and resorts for tourists [7].
Location of the Power Plant and the Loads
Figure 2-2. Solar Power Plant Location to The Loads [8]
Figure 2-2 shows the location of the solar power plant and the loads. The Solar Power Plant is located in
Brgy. Sambungan, Calatagan, the municipality has a land area of 112.00 km 2 (43.24 sq mi) constituting
3.59% of the 3,119.75 km2 (1,204.54 sq mi) total area of Batangas. The power generated is to be feed on
6 https://www.googlemaps.com
7 P.G. ARROYO, "PHILIPPINE STATISTIC AUTHORITY," 20 JUNE 2009. [Online]. Available: https://psa.gov.ph/content/population-batangas-city
8 https://www.googlemaps.com
5
new additional substations in Balayan and Nasugbu. The distance of the feeders to the generation is 8.8 km
and 16.4 km respectively.
Direct Normal Irradiance

Direct Normal Irradiance (DNI) is the amount of solar radiation received per unit area by a surface that is
always held perpendicular (or normal) to the rays that come in a straight line from the direction of the sun at
its current position in the sky. This quantity is of particular interest to concentrating solar thermal installations
and installations that track the position of the sun.
Figure 2-3. Direct Normal Irradiance in West Batangas [9]
Figure 2-3 shows the Direct Normal Irradiance map in West Batangas, in which the Calatagan has the most
DNI of all the towns and has the most measure of sunlight available in whole Batangas.
Diffuse Horizontal Irradiance

Diffuse Horizontal Irradiance (DHI) is the amount of radiation received per unit area by a surface (not subject
to any shade or shadow) that does not arrive on a direct path from the sun, but has been scattered by
molecules and particles in the atmosphere and comes equally from all directions. This value is of particular
interest to photovoltaic installations
Figure 2-4. Diffuse Horizontal Irradiance in Batangas [10]
9 https://globalsolaratlas.org
10 https://globalatlas.org
6
Figure 2-4 shows the DHI map of Batangas, Calatagan gives at least 2.4 kWh/m 2 per day and the highest
among towns and cities in whole Batangas.
Climate Summary
Figure 2-5. Climate Summary [11]
Figure 2-5 shows the climate summary in Calatagan, Batangas the wet season is overcast, the dry season
is windy and partly cloudy, and it is hot and oppressive year round. Over the course of the year, the
temperature typically varies from 76°F to 91°F and is rarely below 73°F or above 94°F.
Average High and Low Temperature
Figure 2-6. Average High and Low Temperature [12]
Figure 2-6 gives a compact characterization of the entire year of hourly average temperatures. The horizontal
axis is the day of the year, the vertical axis is the hour of the day, and the color is the average temperature
11 https://accuweather.com
7
for that hour and day. The daily average high (red line) and low (blue line) temperature, with 25th to 75th and
10th to 90th percentile bands. The thin dotted lines are the corresponding average perceived temperatures.
Cloud Cover Categories
Figure 2-7. Cloud Cover Categories [13]
The Figure 2-7 shows that in Calatagan, the average percentage of the sky covered by clouds
experiences significant seasonal variation over the course of the year. The clearer part of the year in
Calatagan begins around November 22 and lasts for 5.1 months, ending around April 24. On February 28,
the clearest day of the year, the sky is clear, mostly clear, or partly cloudy 52% of the time,
and overcast or mostly cloudy 48% of the time. The cloudier part of the year begins around April 24 and lasts
for 6.9 months, ending around November 22. On August 23, the cloudiest day of the year, the sky
is overcast or mostly cloudy 93% of the time, and clear, mostly clear, or partly cloudy 7% of the time.
Hours of Daylight
Figure 2-8. Hours of Daylight [14]
The Figure 2-8 shows the number of hours during which the Sun is visible (black line). From bottom (most
yellow) to top (most gray), the color bands indicate: full daylight, twilight (civil, nautical, and astronomical),
8
and full night. The length of the day in Calatagan varies over the course of the year. In 2018, the shortest day
is December 22, with 11 hours, 19 minutes of daylight; the longest day is June 21, with 12 hours, 57
minutes of daylight.
Sunrise & Sunset
Figure 2-9. Sunrise and Sunset with Twilight [15]
Figure 2-9 Sunrise & Sunset with Twilight the year 2018. From bottom to top, the black lines are the previous
solar midnight, sunrise, solar noon, sunset, and the next solar midnight. The day, twilights (civil, nautical, and
astronomical), and night are indicated by the color bands from yellow to gray.
The earliest sunrise of the month in Calatagan is 5:28 AM on June 2 and the latest sunrise is 4 minutes later
at 5:33 AM on June 30. The earliest sunset is 6:21 PM on June 1 and the latest sunset is 7 minutes later
at 6:29 PM on June 30. Daylight saving time is not observed in Calatagan during 2018 [16].
Location of the Wind Power Plant and the Loads
Figure 2-10. Location of Wind Power Plant and the Loads [17]
17 https://googlemaps.com
9
Figure 2-10 shows the exact location of the Wind Power Plant which is to be located in Brgy. Biga, Calatagan.
The turbines are to be installed to capture efficiently the energy that is to be converted and supplied in the
Island. The annual average wind speed based on NREL data is 9.88 m/s, a decent wind for energy projects.
The power produced is to be fed on two feeders in Balayan and Nasugbu. The distance of the feeders load
from the generation is 10.70 km, and 15.70 km.
Wind Map of Batangas
Figure 2-11. Wind Map of Batangas [18]
Figure 2-11 shows the behavior of wind within the whole province of Batangas. It is obvious that the common
areas in the province of Batangas experience 8.7 m/s - 9.88 m/s of wind speed.
Average Wind Speed in June
Figure 2-12. Average Wind Speed in June [19]
The figure 2-12 shows the average of mean hourly wind speeds (dark gray line), with 25th to 75th and 10th
to 90th percentile bands. The average hourly wind speed in Calatagan is increasing during
18 https://globalwindatlas.org
10
June, increasing from 7.0 miles per hour to 8.2 mil es per hour over the course of the month. For reference,
on December 19, the windiest day of the year, the daily average wind speed is 12.5 miles per hour, while
on May 16, the calmest day of the year, the daily average wind speed is 6.8 miles per hour.
Wind Direction in June
Figure 2-13. Wind Direction in June [20]
The figure 2-13 discusses the wide-area hourly average wind vector (speed and direction) at 10 meters above
the ground. The wind experienced at any given location is highly dependent on local topography and other
factors, and instantaneous wind speed and direction vary more widely than hourly averages. The hourly
average wind direction in Calatagan throughout June is predominantly from the west, with a peak proportion
of 41% on June 29.
Wind Power Density

It is a useful way to evaluate the wind resource available at a potential site. The wind power density, measured
in watts per square meter, indicates how much energy is available at the site for conversion by a wind turbine.
Classes of wind power density for two standard wind measurement heights are listed in the table below. Wind
speed generally increases with height above ground
Figure 2-14. Wind Power Density at 100 m Height in Calatagan [21]
11
The figure 2-14 shows the wind power density of 553 W/m2 in Calatagan, the highest wind power density
among towns and cities in whole Batangas. The data is based on The Weather Research & Forecasting
(WRF) mesoscale model uses a linear flow model.
Wind Speed
The wind speed is extremely important for the amount of energy a wind turbine can convert to electricity. The
potential power output over the course of a day is directly related to the amount of wind velocity at a certain
site. Wind speed in any site is naturally highly variable and although we cannot see the air moving, we can
still feel it. So any wind energy device capable of slowing down this mass of moving air can extract some of
its energy and convert it into useful work but there is actually a fine line between enough wind speed and too
much.
Figure 2-15. Wind Speed in Calatagan Batangas [22]
Figure 2-15 shows the wind speed in Calatagan Batangas which is around 8 m/s – 9 m/s. A typical turbine
requires wind speeds of about 3 – 4 m/s to start generating. This minimum wind velocity is generally referred
to as the wind turbines cut-in speed. So for best results, a wind turbine should be positioned in an area where
there is a consistent wind speed greater than this minimum cut-in speed before power starts being produced.
12
Location of the Hydro Power Plant and the Loads
Figure 2-16. Location of the Hydro Power Plant and the Loads [23]
Figure 2-16 shows the exact location of the Hydro Power Plant and the loads. The Hydro Power Plant is
located in Lian, Batangas near Palico River. The Palico River is a stream and is located in Province of Lian,
Batangas. The estimate terrain elevation above sea level is 9 meters. The Municipality of Lian is a third class
municipality in the province of Batangas, Philippines. According to the 2015 census, it has a population of
52,660 people. According to the Philippine Statistics Authority, the municipality has a land area of 76.80
square kilometers (29.65 sq. mi) constituting 2.46% of the total area of Batangas. While the power is to be
feed on the two feeders namely Gimalas (one of the Barangays of Balayan), and Wawa (one of the Barangays
of Nasugbu). It is subdivided by two loads so that it can supply the community of Balayan and Nasugbu. And
It is assumed that Balayan and Nasugbu can be covered with this proposed project to help the people from
shortage of power. The yellow circle represents the Hydro Power Plant, the yellow triangles represent the
two loads, and the red lines represent the connections from the Hydro Power Plant to the loads.
Design Criteria
Table 2-3. Design Criteria

Criteria Range Constraints
Plant Efficiency 10% – 50% Efficiency
Capital Cost 100M – 10B Economical
Physical Life 10yrs – 50 yrs. Degradation
Land Area 100 m2 – 100M m2 Environmental
23 https://googlemaps.com
13
Plant Efficiency - The design should have the least amount of percentage of loss in the power plant itself,
to have the highest value of efficiency. These constraints will choose the best option among the proposed
designs that accord to the percentage of power output over the power input in the power plant. And also, this
characteristic of the performance will conclude the efficiency of the power plant that will expose how small or
large the losses that could affect the power plant.
Capital Cost - The amount of money that the investor will spend to build the proposed power plant. It includes
the installation of equipment and the construction of the power plant. This will determine the best design that
will have the least amount of expenditures as it gives a solution to the current problem in Balayan and
Nasugbu, Batangas.
Physical Life - In which the length of years that will take the power plant to become fully depreciated, in
which it will not provide an additional use. Choosing among the proposed power plant that will give a longer
time of service than to other proposed designs.
Land Area - Proposed designs should have a possible size in which the province can provide that will respect
to the target allocation of the project. It will only cover the land area in covers.
14
Chapter 3. Project Design
Methodology
The design of an additional power plant for an existing electrical grid requires backward computation starting
from the load to the proposed additional generating unit.
Figure 3-1. Design Hierarchy of Renewable Power Plants
Figure 3-1 shows the flow of the design project. Load forecasting estimates the future power demand which
can be based on several factors including time, weather, customer’s classes, historical load, economic and
demographic data, and etc. The second stage of the project is the design of the step-down transmission
substation. Step-down transmission substation connects the transmission line to the distribution system and
transforms the transmission voltage to a suitable distribution voltage. The third stage is the design of
transmission line connecting the step-up and the step-down transmission substation. The fourth stage of the
project is the design of the step-up transmission substation. A step-up transmission substation obtains the
power from the generation side and a large power transformer is utilized to increase the voltage before
sending to long transmission lines. The fifth and final stage of the project is the design of a power plant that
can supply the forecasted deficiency in the year 2028.
15
Design 1: Wind Power Plant
Wind power plant is a type of power plant that utilizes electric energy by the use of wind energy. It transforms
kinetic energy of wind into kinetic energy (rotational force) with wind turbine and mobilize generator with the
force to gain electric energy. A wind power plant is one of the designs considered in the proposed
development of the 35 MW power requirement of the client. The wind turbine will be an alternative source for
the area of western part of Batangas specifically Balayan and Nasugbu as the two towns are expected to
bloom into a full blown cities in the province in the years to come. Based on the location of the client, a wind
power plant will be a suitable option because of the weather on the town of Calatagan in Batangas. Last year,
an average of 8.9 meter per second wind speed measured at 10 meters above the ground in Calatagan, a
neighbor town of Balayan and Nasugbu. The highest wind speed measured is 9.88 meter per second and
the direction of the wind is West. Another reason why Calatagan is considered to be the location of the wind
power plant is because of few natural obstacles that will block the path of wind.
Figure 3-2. Design Options of Wind Power Plant
Figure 3-2 shows the design options of the wind power plant. The design will revolve on the which orientation
is the best suitable for the location. Horizontal – axis wind turbine is further divided into two which is the free
standing type and the lattice type. Vertical – axis wind turbine has savonius and darrieus types.
16
Design Options of Wind Power Plant
The diagram above shows the different wind turbine design options. There are two types of wind turbines
according to the rotor axis orientation-horizontal and vertical. Under each category fall more subtypes. In this
design project, two horizontal axis wind turbine and two vertical axis wind turbines. Wind turbines use the
energy of the wind to drive a generator which generates the electricity. Wind power can be extracted with the
use of wind turbines. They could be grouped together on a wind farm to produce a desired output. Oftentimes
they are on land but now, there are also offshore wind turbines. Wind turbine generators differ in size from
small ones which generate enough power for a small application or establishment to utility size ones which
can generate power for hundreds of users.
Figure 3-3. Schematic for Wind Power Plant
The figure 3-3 shows the AC voltage output from the wind farm shall be step-up by a transformer before
transmitting it via a transmission line to the substation. Then from the substation, the voltage shall be stepped
down to a suitable voltage for consumer loads supplied by feeders. Different turbines have different efficiency.
Specifically, this refers to the ability of the blades to capture the mechanical power from the wind referred to
as the coefficient of power. Almost all generators have similar gearbox and generator efficiencies. The
formula for power coefficient is:
P
Cp = IEC 61400-12-1 Sec. 8.4 Power
1 3 coefficient of Wind Turbines
ρAV
2
where,
Cp = power coefficient
P = mechanical power harnessed by the blades from the wind
ρ = 1.225 density of air (kg/m3)
A = area swept by the blades (m2)
V = 9.88 in the Calatagan wind farm site velocity of wind (m/s)
From the above equation, the general formula for estimating the power in watts that can be harnessed by the
blades from wind energy can be obtained:
IEC 61400-12-1 Power Performance
1 Measurements of Electricity
Pblades = ρAV3 Cp
2 Producing Wind Turbines
17
To get the raw power of the wind only, omit the power coefficient. Note that input power mentioned above is
the mechanical power produced in the blades, not the power of the wind itself. Therefore, the total input
power is:
Pin = ρAV3
2 Producing Wind Turbines.
In the above formula, the air density, area swept by the blades, and the wind speed in the locality would be
considered in the selection of the wind turbine rating to be selected by the designer.
Figure 3-4. Power Coefficient Versus Advance Ratio
The figure 3-4 shows the Glauert ideal Cp, which is the result of a more detailed analysis that explicitly
involves the advance ratio. Lying below and to the right of the Glauert ideal are the expected Cp values for
different wind turbine configurations.
To make the selection process of wind turbines easier, IEC has provided a standardized means of describing
the output power characteristics of wind turbines. This is through the provisions of power curves on the turbine
datasheets. These power curves are manufactured based on careful measurements as prescribed in IEC
61400-12-1 Sec. 8.1.
18
Figure 3-5. Power Curve of Wind Turbine
Figure 3-5 shows that by only having the wind speed as an input, the designer can easily determine if a wind
turbine fits the air conditions in the locality. In the site where the wind farm is to be situated in Calatagan, the
average annual wind speed is 9.88 m/s. It is a high wind area thus it is a great spot for harnessing wind
energy.
Figure 3-6. Distance Between Wind Turbines
The figure 3-6 shows the distances between turbines varies per design options, as it depends on rotor
diameter. Regarding wake losses, the general recommendation of the wind turbine manufacturers is that if
the turbines are to be placed in a cluster, the minimum separation distance between the turbines should be
4 to 6 times the rotor diameter to reduce wake losses. We decided to keep a minimum separation distance
of 5 times the rotor diameter. The distance requirement is based on the assessment as prescribed in IEC
61400-12-1 A.1.
19
Thus, Distance between Turbines = 5(D)
IEC 2005 (E) 61400-12-1 A.1:
where: Requirements regarding neighboring
D = Rotor Diameter and operating wind turbines
Requirements regarding neighbouring
The physical constraints of the chosen site can play a decisive roleand
in operating
designing wind turbines
a wind farm layout. The
nature of the terrain and surrounding developments need to be considered. A wind farm layout should aim at
reducing wake losses caused by interaction of wind turbines in a cluster. A general rule is that as the
separation distance between the turbines increases, the wake losses decrease. With very large separation
distance, the number of turbines that can be placed in a given area reduces. For example, if turbines are to
be placed in a row, these should be preferentially placed, perpendicular to the predominant wind direction.
This will reduce wake losses as well as loss of energy due to yaw operations.
Design Stages of Wind Power Plant
Figure 3-7. Proposed Single Line Diagram of Wind Power Plant
The figure 3-7 shows the single line diagram of the power system and the stages where each component is
designed.
Stage 1: Load Forecasting
Data from Load Curve IEEE Std. 1013 (2000). Load

Peak demand in the year 2018 = 20.76 Computation, Future Maximum
Peak demand in the year 2019 = 24.31 Demand, Section 6, p.236
20
Computation of Rate of Increase (g)
Using the growth equation from Electric Power Distribution
IEEE Std. 1013 (2000). Load
System Engineering by TuranGönen:
Computation, Average Demand, Section
6, p.236
where:
Pm = P2018 (1+g)m
Pm = Peak demand after 'm' years
P2018 = Peak demand in year 2018
m = Elapsed Time in Years
20.76 (1+g)2
Computing Future Peak Demand for the year 2028

P2028 = P2018 (1+g)10 IEEE Std. 1013 (2000). Load
P2028 = 20.76 (1+0.0821)10 Computation, Future Maximum
P2028 = 34.944 MW Demand, Section 6, p.236
Reserve Capacity in 10 years

PRC = PDC - P2028 IEEE Std. 1013 (2000). Load
Computation, Future Maximum
where: Demand, Section 6, p.236
PRC = Reserve Capacity
PDC = Dependable Capacity
PRC = 6.48 – 34.944

PRC = ⎼28.464 MW (Deficient)
Power Demand per Feeder

PRC IEEE Std. 1013 (2000). Load
PF =
n Computation, Future Maximum
Demand, Section 6, p.236
where:
PF = Demand per Feeder
n = Number of Feeder
34.944 MW
PF =
3
PF = 11.648 MW
*Note: load forecasted data sourced from BATELEC I
Stage 2: Step Down Transmission Substation Design
Rating
10,000 kVA, 3-phase, 69/13.8 kV
21
Power Losses IEEEC.57.12.00-2010 IEEE Standard
NLL = 11.6 kW General Requirements for Liquid-
LL = 47.6 kW Immersed Distribution, Power, and
Regulating Transformers
where:
NLL = No Load Losses
LL = Load Loss
Short Circuit Impedance IEEE Standard C57.12.00-2010,

%Z* = 9 Standard General Requirements for
Power and Regulation Transformers
Total Power Losses
TLF = NLL + LL
TL = 3TLF IEEE Standard C57.12.00-2010,
Standard General Requirements for
where: Power and Regulation Transformers
TLF = Total Loss in the Transformer per Feeder
TL = Total Loss for the Two Transformers
LL = Load Loss
TLF = 11.6 kW + 47.6 kW

TLF = 59.2 kW
TL = 177.6 kW
*Note: Transformer rating, losses, and short-circuit impedance are according to manufacturer
specifications: https://www.alibaba.com/product-detail/69kv-10mva-Power-Transformer-for-
Electric_60696507750.html?spm=a2700.7724857.normalList.30.18a4f9d2RWOnFO
At Primary Side IEEE Standard C57.12.00-2010,

MVA Rating Standard General Requirements for
I=
√3 × V Power and Regulation Transformers.
10 MVA
I=
√3 (69 kV)
I = 83.6739 A
Primary Winding Conductor

The size of conductor for primary winding should be
167.3479 A. As indicated that the 80% ampacity of NEC Section 240-3: General
the conductor shall be the full load current. Requirements for Branch Circuit,
Feeder and Other Conductors.
IFL = 83.6739 A × 1.25
IFL = 104.5924 A
Use: Waxwing 266.8 (KCM or AWG)
22
At Secondary Side IEEE Standard C57.12.00-2010,
I=
10 MVA
I=
√3 (13.8 kV)
I = 418.3698A
Secondary Winding Conductor

The size of conductor for secondary winding should NEC Section 240-3: General
be 418.3698A. As indicated that the 80% ampacity Requirements for branch circuit,
of the conductor shall be the full load current. feeder and other conductors
IFL = 418.3698A x 1.25
IFL = 522.9622 A
Use: Finch 1113.0 (KCM or AWG)
Circuit Breaker
Primary Circuit Breaker NEC Section 450.3 – Computation for
16.7348 A × 3 = 50.2043 A Overcurrent Protection of Transformer
Use: 60AT CB
Secondary Circuit Breaker

83.6740 A × 3 =251.022 A NEC Section 450.3 – Computation for
Use: 300 AT CB Overcurrent Protection of Transformer
Grounding Conductor
Primary Grounding Conductor PEC Part 2, Article 1.4.4.3(b) or
1 System Grounding Conductors for
IGROUNDING = (Current)
5 Multi-Grounded Alternating Current
1
IGROUNDING = (83.6739) Systems.
5
IGROUNDING = 16.7348 A
Use: Turkey 6 (KCM or AWG)
The size of conductor should be 16.7348 A as indicated that the 80% ampacity of the conductor shall be
the full load current.
Secondary Grounding Conductor PEC Part 2, Article 1.4.4.3(b) or

1 Systems.
IGROUNDING = (418.3698 A)
5
Use: Raven 1/0 (KCM or AWG)
23
Neutral Conductor PEC Part I(2009), Sec. 2.20.3.22 page
INEUTRAL = (IFLSecondary) 320: Feeder or Service Neutral Ground
INEUTRAL = 522.9622 A
Switch Gear Design

S IEC 62271-102(2001) High-voltage
IDSA = switchgear and control gear - Part
√3 VL 102: Alternating current disconnectors
10 MVA and earthing switches
IDSA = × 2.5
√3 (13.8 kV)
IDSA = 1045.9244 A
IEC standards assume that peak value of making current disconnectors is to be 2.5 times the RMS value
of rated short circuit current for MV (13.8 kV) switches and between 1.7-2.2 times for LV switches.
Use: 12 – 100 A – Medium Split-Core 1.25” (32mm) Opening
Disconnector Rating
Voltage Transformer IEC 62271-102(2001) High-voltage
69 kV switchgear and control gear - Part
VT- Primary Voltage =
√3 102: Alternating current disconnectors
VT- Primary Voltage = 39.8372 kV and earthing switches
13.8 kV
VT-Secondary Voltage = IEC 60099-8(2011) Part 8/IEEE C62.22
√3
VT- Secondary Voltage = 7.9674 kV page 8 – 16; Standard for Lightning
Arrester and Ground Voltage Fault
Type: Disconnector Material: Porcelain
Rated Voltage: 13.2 kV Application
Current Transformer
IGROUNDING = 43. 7386 A
IEC 60099-8(2011) Part 8/IEEE C62.22
Use: Primary Current = 100 A
page 8 – 16; Standard for Lightning
Secondary Current = 5 A
Accuracy Power = 30 VA
Accuracy Class = 0.5
Lighting Arrester
Voltage ×1.05 NEC (2001) Article 310, Table 310.60
VLA = (C) (67) and 310.60(C) (69), page 226;
√3
Highest Voltage Conductor for general wiring
69 kV × 1.05
VLA =
√3
VLA = 41.829 kV
Use: RP1 Primary Side Normal Duty Distribution Class (ZnO)
24
Nominal Voltage Philippine Grid Code PP. (32) Section 3.2.3 – the
13.8 kV × 1.05 system owner must ensure that the voltage variation
VLA = must be not more or less than +-5% of the nominal
√3 voltage at any point during normal operation.
VLA = 11.9512 kV
Use: RP1 Load Side Normal Duty Distribution Class (ZnO)
Bus Bar Sizing

10 MVA Copper Development Association
ILF = (2014), Article 5.2, page 79: Conductor
√3 (13.8 kV)
for general wiring
ILF = 418.3697 A
IBUS = ILF1 + ILF2 + ILF3

IBUS = 418.3697 A + 418.3697 A + 418.3697 A IEEE Std Red Book C4 A4.5. Page 124
IBUS = 1255.1091 A - 125: Solving 3 phase current
Use: 750 MCM or 375 mm2
Bus Bar Dimension

Direct in ground – ¼ x 8, ⅜ x 6, ½ x 5, ½ x Copper development association
6, ¾ x 4, ¾ x 5 (2014), Article 5.2, page 79: Conductor
Free air – ¼ x 6, ⅜ x 5 for general wiring
For 30˚C Rise
Copper Development Association Inc.
Resistance per Meter

Copper development association
0.68 × 10-6
RDCBUSBAR = (2014), Article 5.2, page 79: Conductor
(0.00635) (0.125) for general wiring
RDCBUSBAR = 7.0452 × 10-4 Ω/m
(0.2) (0.68 × 10-6 ) Copper development association
RACBUSBAR =
(0.00635) (0.125) (2014), Article 5.2, page 79: Conductor
RACBUSBAR = 7.5825 × 10-6 Ω/m for general wiring
Inductance Per Meter and Inductive Reactance Per Meter

(31.9) (0.125) (0.125) Copper Development Association
L= (2014), Article 5.2, page 79: Conductor
(0.125)
L = 3.9875 × 10-9 H/m for general wiring.
XL = 2π (60) (3.99×10−9)
XL = 1.5042 Ω/m
Capacitance Per Meter and Capacitive Reactance Per Meter

(0.225) (8.8542×102 ) (0.125) Copper Development Association
C=
(0.125) (2014), Article 5.2, page 79: Conductor
C = 15.9376 × 10-24 F/m for general wiring.
25
1
Xc =
2π (6) (5937610×10-24 )
Xc = 1.6644 × 1020 Ω/m
Impedance
ZBUS = [√(3 9875×10-9) × (5 9376×10-2)] Copper Development Association
ZBUS = 2.5209 × 10-16 Ω/m (2014), Article 5.2, page 79: Conductor
1.5042×10-9 ×5.9376×10-2 for general wiring.
Φ = tan
7.5825×10-6
Φ = 90∘
ZTOTAL = 2.5209 × 10-6 Ω/m × (10 m)

ZTOTAL = 2.5209 × 10-15∠-90
Use: Dimensions in meter: 6.35 mm × 152 mm IEEE Std Gray Book C8.3.3 page 231:
Skin Effect Ratio at 70℃: 1.18 Basic insulating materials are either
Area in CM: 1910CM organic or inorganic.
Voltage Drop Calculation
VD = I √R2 + X2) National Electric Code (1999), Article
210, page 19: Where the maximum total
where: voltage drop on both feeders and branch
I = Full Load Current circuits to the farthest outlet does not
R = Resistance exceed 5 percent.
X = Reactance
At 6.1 miles to New Substation

R = 6.1 (0.8950) = 5.4595 Ω National Electric Code (1999), Article
X = 6.1 (0.6403) = j3.9058 Ω 210, page 19: Where the maximum total
VD = 83.6739 √(5.45952 + 3.90582) voltage drop on both feeders and branch
VD = 3.7705 kV circuits to the farthest outlet does not
3.7705 kV exceed 5 percent.
VD % =
69 kV
VD % = 4.4645 %
The voltage drop is passing because under National Electric Code (1999), Article 210, page 19 the voltage
drop should not exceed 5%.
Touch Potential Calculation

Using clay as soil which is 100 Ω
The metal is 100 mm thick
Derating Factor
Stated under IEEE Std 80 (2000), Guide for safety in AC substation grounding
26
100
0.09 (1 - 100 ×100) IEEE Std 80 (2000), Guide for safety in
CD = 1 -
2 × 0.1 + 0.09 AC substation grounding: Calculation
CD = 0.6928 of Potential Difference
Decrement Factor
X 1
Ta = × ( )
R 2 TF IEEE Std 80 (2000), Guide for safety in
1 AC substation grounding: Calculation
Ta = 15 × ( ) of Potential Difference
2 T(60)
Ta = 0.0398
-2 × Tf
Ta
DF = √1+ ( Tf ) (1 - e Ta ) IEEE Std 80 (2000), Guide for safety in
-2 × 0.15
AC substation grounding: Calculation
Ta
DF = √1+ ( Tf ) (1 - e 0.0398 ) of Potential Difference
DF = 1.1248
Maximum Grid Current

I = IGDF
IEEE Std 80 (2000), Guide for safety in
I = 3.1 (1.1248)
I = 3.4869 A
of Potential Difference
Ground Potential
0.157
VTOUCH POTENTIAL MAX = 1.5 CDρs ( ) IEEE Std 80 (2000), Guide for safety in
√0.15 AC substation grounding: Calculation
VTOUCH POTENTIAL MAX = 45 V
Buried Length
Lr
L = LC+ [1.55 + 1.22 ( )] LR
√L2X + L2Y IEEE Std 80 (2000), Guide for safety
in AC substation grounding:
3
L = LC+ [1.55 + 1.22 ( )] LR Calculation of Potential Difference
√90 + 502 2
L = 994 m
Geometric Spacing Factor

1 1 1 1
KS = π [2h + D+h + D (1 – 0.5n-2)] IEEE Std 80 (2000), Guide for safety
1 1 1 1 in AC substation grounding:
KS = π [2 (0.6) + 12.5+0.6 + 12.5 (1 – 0.5n-2)]
Calculation of Potential Difference
KS = 0.314
27
Figure 3-8. Substation Grid Layout
The figure 3-8 shows the grid consists of 20 integrated rods at each corners. Buried length of 994 m and
ground potential of 45 V.
New Substation Single Line Diagram
Figure 3-9. Single Line Diagram of the New Substation (Wind Power Plant)
28
New Substation Layout
Figure 3-10. New Substation Layout
The figure 3-10 shows the layout design of the new substation that will be deployed in Balayan and Nasugbu,
both are rated 10 MVA.
Stage 3: Transmission Line Design
Figure 3-11. Balayan and Calatagan Transmission Line Map
The figure 3-11 shows the location of the Wind Power Plant is at Calatagan, Batangas (yellow pinpoint). The
power generated is to be transmitted on two feeders namely Balayan (blue pinpoint) and Nasugbu (white
29
pinpoint). The distances of the two feeders from the generation to substation is 9.8 km and 16.4 km
respectively.
Computation for Line Current per Feeder

S
IL = PEC Part I (2017) Sec 4.30.2.4 page
√3 VL 580: General Requirements for Full
Load Branch Circuit, Feeder and Other
where: Conductors.
IL = Load Current
S = Apparent Power Output
VL = Line Voltage
11.648 MW + 177.6 kW
IL =
√3 69 kV
IL = 97.9588 A
Conductor Specifications
The size of conductor 97.9588 × 1.25 = 122.4485 A
PEC Part I (2017) Sec 4.30.2.4 page
As indicated that the 80% ampacity of the conductor
580: General Requirements for Full
shall be the full load current.
Use: ACSR Turkey, AWG 6
Conductors.
For the grounding conductor,
1 Philippine Electrical Code Part 2
IGROUNDING CONDUCTOR = ( ) (IL )
5 Article 1.4.4.3 (b): “System Grounding
1 Conductors for Multi-Grounded
IGROUNDING CONDUCTOR = ( ) (97.9588 )
5 Alternating Current Systems”
IGROUNDING CONDUCTOR = 19.5918 A
Conductor Specification
Code = Turkey
Area = 6 AWG IEC 60826 (2003) – DESIGN CRITERIA
Copper Area = 8 AWG ~ 8.39 mm2 FOR OVERHEAD TRANSMISSION
Strand = 6/1.68 mm LINE, Chapter 6.2.1, and Section:
Diameter = 5.04 mm Specification for Aluminum Conductors
Weight = 54 kg/km ~ 0.054 kg/m for Overhead Power Transmission Line,
Rated Strength = 5.28 kN p43
Maximum Resistance @ 20˚C = 2.1499 Ω/km
Elevation: 0m
30
Sag and Tension Calculation
1 kt = 1.852 km/hr ~ 1.15708 mph NESC C2(2007) – Strength
km Requirements and wind loading, Section
1.852
Wind Speed = (9 kt) × ( hr ) × ( 1000 m ) × ( 1 hr ) 26 for installations and maintenance,
1 kt 1 km 3600 sec p43
Wind Speed = 4.63 m/s
0.5 × ρ × v2 × d
WW =
g
where:
ρ = density of air ~ 1.2 kg/m3
v = wind velocity ~4.63 m/s
g = earth’s gravity ~ 9.8066 m/s2
d = diameter of conductor ~ 9.00 mm
WW = Wind Speed in Terms of kg/m
2 1cm 1in 1ft 1m

(0.5) × (1.2kg/m3) × (4.63m/s) × (5.04mm × × × × )
WW = 10cm 2.54cm 12in 3.28ft
9.8066m/s2
WW = 0.0014 kg/m
Wt = √(WC)2 + (WW)2 IEC 60826(2003) – Design Criteria for

(WC)2 + (WW)2 Overhead Transmission Line, Chapter
Wt = √(0.054 kg/m)2 + (0.0014 kg/m)2 6.2.6.4 Wind Loads, p54-55
Wt = 0.0540 kg/m
1kg
T= (5.28kN) × ( )
4.8066N
T = 1098.4896 kg
L h×T
X1 = –[ ]
2 WT × L
360m (0) × (1098.4896kg)
X1 = –[ ]
2 (27kg/m) × (360m)
X1 = 180 m
WT × X1 2
S1 =
2×T
2
(0.0540kg/m) × (180)
S1 =
(2) × (1098.4896kg)
S1 = 0.7964 m
WW
Θ = tan-1 ( )
WC
31
0.0014kg/m
Θ = tan-1 ( )
0.054kg/m
Θ = 0.0259˚
Vertical Sag:
Vsag1 = (S1) × (cos Θ) NESC 235C2B (2007) –Sag Related
Vsag1 = (0.7964m) cos (3.9383˚) Clearances, Section: Clearances to
Vsag1 = 0.7691 m other structure, p142
2
Wt (L)
YMAX =
8(T)
2
(0.0540kg/m) × (360)
YMAX = NESC C2 (2007) – For Clearances
(8)(1098.48963kg) Computation, Section 23, p81
YMAX = 0.7964 m
8 × YMAX 2
Lconductor = L + [ ]
3L
2
(8) × (0.7964m)
Lconductor = 360 + [ ]
(3) × (360)
Lconductor = 360.0047 m
Clearance = H – S
Clearance = 28m – 0.7964m NESC C2 (2007) – For Clearances
Clearance = 27.2036 m Computation, Section 23, p81
Total Length of Conductor (Balayan) = 9.8 km

Line Voltage = 69 kV
No. of Disc Insulator = 5 disc
Potential Difference Across Insulators

VM = (V) × [2 × sinh(1/2√k) × cosh (n × 1/2) (√k)/sinh (n × √k)]
Standard Handbook for Electrical
where: Engineers (2009) – Line Insulation,
n = Insulator Number p14 -21
k = 0.12
V2 = (V1) × (1+k)
V2 = (V1) × (1+0.12)
V2 = 1.12V
V3 = (V1) × k + (V2) × (1+k) Standard Handbook for Electrical

V3 = 0.12V1 + (V2) × (1.12) Engineers (2009) – Voltage levels,
V3 = 1.3744V1 p14 -3
32
V4 = (V1) × k + (V2) × k + (V3) × (1+k)
V4 = 0.12V1 + (1.12) × (0.12) + (1.3744V1) (1.12)
V4 = 1.7937V1
69kV
= V1 + 1.12V1 + 1.3744V1 + 1.7937V1
√3
69kV
V1 = √3
4.2881
V1 = 9.2902 kV
V5 = (1.7937) × (9.2902)
V5 = 16.6638 kV
69kV
( )
√3
ηSTRING = [ ] × 100
(9) × (16.6638)
ηSTRING = 59.7660%
Transmission Line Resistance

Based on ACSR Turkey specifications,
IEC 60228, 3rd Edition 2004 – 11
Resistance⁄
1000 ft = 0.641 Ω International Standard on Conductors
Length of Feeders: of Insulated Cables.
LF1 = 9.8 km
LF2 = 16.4 km
Conductor Calculation
At Balayan = 9.8 km
Calculation for Total Resistance of Conductor
Ω IEC 60287-1-1 Calculation of Current
R = (0.06712 ) 9.8km
km Ratings, Section 2.4.3, Table 2, Page
R = 0.6578 Ω 31, 2006
Calculation for the Inductance of the Transmission Line

Deq
L = 2 x 10-7 ln ( )
GMR
where:
Deq = Equivalent spacing of conductors or Geometric Mean Distance(GMD) of conductors
GMR = Geometric Mean Radius of conductor
L = Inductance of the conductor
Considering the transmission system is completely transposed,
GMR = 0.7788 (r)
33
where:
National Electrical Code (NEC), Rated
r = Radius of The Conductor
60-Hz withstand voltage, Article 370,
.680 in page 461, 2011
r= = 0.34 in = 0.008636 m
2
GMR = 0.7788 (0.008636 m)
GMR = 6.7257 × 10-3
Using a Single Circuit Tower
Figure 3-12. Single Circuit Tower
The figure 3-12 above shows the appearance of a single circuit tower for a transmission line.
3
Deq = √(7.7492m)(8.4119m)(5.2469m)
Deq = 6.9933 m BULLETIN 1724E-2003 Horizontal
Separation Recommendations Section
6.9933 1000m 6.b.(2), page 6-1
L = 2 x 10-7 ln ( -3
)( ) ( 9.8km )
6.7257 x 10 1km
L = 13.6157 mH
XL = 2π f L = 2π (60) (13.6157 mH)
XL = j5.133 Ω/phase
page 461, 2011
34
Total Impedance of Transmission Line
ZCONDUCTOR = 0.6578 + j5.133 Ω/phase
ZT = ZCONDUCTOR × 3 phase
ZT = (0.6578+ j5.133 Ω/phase) × 3 phase
ZT = 1.9734 + j6.9147 Ω
At Nasugbu = 16.4 kmCalculation for Total Resistance of Conductor

R = (0.06712 ) 10.34km
R = 0.6940 Ω 31, 2006

Deq
L = 2 x 10-7 ln ( )
GMR
where:
Considering the transmission system is completely

transposed National Electrical Code (NEC), Rated
GMR = 0.7788 (r) page 461, 2011
where:
r = radius of the conductor
0.680 in
r= = 0.34 in = 0.008636 m
2
GMR = 0.7788 (0.008636m)
GMR = 6.7257 × 10-3 m
35
The figure 3-13 shows the appearance of a single circuit tower for a transmission line.
3
Deq = √(7.7492 m)(8.4119 m)(5.2469 m) BULLETIN 1724E - 2003 Horizontal
Deq = 6.9933 m Separation Recommendations Section
6.9933 1000 m 6.b.(2), page 6-1
L = 2 x 10-7 ln ( -3
)( ) (10.34 km)
6.7257 x 10 1 km
L = 14.3659 mH
XL = 2π f L = 2π (60) (14.3659 mH)

XL = 5.4158 Ω/phase

ZCONDUCTOR = 0.5262 + j5.4158 Ω/phase National Electrical Code (NEC), Rated
ZT = ZCONDUCTOR × 3 phase page 461, 2011
ZT = (0.5262 + j5.4158 Ω/phase) × 3 phase
ZT = 1.5786 + j16.2474 Ω
Total Resistance of Each Feeder

RFn = LFn x R IEC 60228, 3rd Edition 2004 – 11
International Standard on Conductors
of Insulated Cables.
36
where:
LFn = Length of Feeder 'n'
R = Conductor Resistance per Unit Length
RF1 = LF1 x R
IEC 60228, 3rd Edition 2004 – 11
RF1 = 9.8 km x 0.641Ω⁄0.3048 km International Standard on Conductors
RF1 = 20.6096 Ω of Insulated Cables.
RF2 = LF2 x R
RF2 = 16.4 km x 0.641Ω⁄0.3048 km
RF2 = 34.4895 Ω
RFT = RF1 + RF2

RFT = 55.0992 Ω
Losses per Feeder:

PFn = 3I2 RFn IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery
where: (Volume: 21, Issue: 3, July 2006)
PFn = Power Loss in Feeder 'n' Power Loss Measurement and
I = Line Current Estimation Method
RFn = Resistance of Feeder 'n'
PF1 = 3I2 RF1

2
PF1 = 3(97.9588) (20.6096) IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery
PF1 = 593.3046 kW (Volume: 21, Issue: 3, July 2006)
Power Loss Measurement and
PF2 = 3I2 RF2 Estimation Method
2
PF2 = 3(97.9588) (34.4895)
PF2 = 621.3142 kW IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery
(Volume: 21, Issue: 3, July 2006)
PFT = PF1 + PF2 Power Loss Measurement and
PFT = 1214.6188 MW Estimation Method
Computation for the Receiving End Voltage in Substation

Nominal T
ZL = 3.2772 + j53.7304 Ω Standard Handbook for Electrical
Y = j2πfc ~ 2π (60) (4.5697uF/phase) Engineers (2009) – Electrical
Y = j1.7227 x 10-3 Properties of Conductors, P14-6
A ~ D = 1+(ZL × Y/2) = 0.9537 < 0.0029 Ω

B = ZL [1 + (ZL × Y/4)] = 51.2896 < 87.6958 Ω
C ~ Y = j1.7227 x 10-3
37
69kV 5MVA
VSN = A[ <0] + B[ <-cos-1(0.8)]
√3 √3×69kV
VSN = 36831.9699 < 0.0529 V
VS = (√3) × (36.8319kV)
VS = 63.7947 kV
69kV 5MVA
IS = ( <0) × (1.227x10-3< 90) + ( <-cos-10.8) × (0.9537 < 0.0029)
√3 √3×69kV
IS = 22.2695 < 1.1006 A
Efficiency
(5MVA) × (0.8)
η =[ 2
] × 100
(5MVA) × (0.8) + (3) × (22.2695) × (3.2772)
η = 99.8783%
Voltage Regulation
63.7947–69
VR =( ) × 100
69
VR = 7.5439%
Stage 4: Step Up Transmission Substation Design
Rating
25,000 kVA, 3-phase, 13.8 kV/69 kV
Power Losses
NLL = 19.2 kW IEEEC.57.12.00-2010 IEEE Standard
LL = 84.2 kW General Requirements for Liquid-
Immersed Distribution, Power, and
where: Regulating Transformers
LL = Load Loss
Short Circuit Impedance

%Z = 9 IEEEC.57.12.00-2010 IEEE Standard
General Requirements for Liquid-
Total Power Losses Immersed Distribution, Power, and
TL = NLL + LL Regulating Transformers
where:
TL = Total Loss for the Step-up Transformer
LL = Load Loss
TL = 103.4 kW
38
Primary Winding
MVA Rating
I=
√3× V
25 MVA
I=
√3 (13.8 kV)
I = 836.7395 A

be 836.7395 A. As indicated that the 80% ampacity Requirements for Branch Circuit,
of the conductor shall be the full load current. Feeder and Other Conductors.
IF = 836.7395 A x 1.25
IF = 1045.9244 A
At Secondary Winding
MVA Rating IEEE Standard C57.12.00-2010,
I= Standard General Requirements for
√3 × V
25 MVA Power and Regulation Transformers.
I=
√3 (69 V)
I = 167.3479 A
IF = 167.3479 A x 1.25
IF = 209.1849 A
Circuit Breaker NEC Section 450.3 – Computation for

Primary Circuit Breaker Overcurrent Protection of Transformer
836.7395 A x 3 = 2510.2135 A
Use: 2500 AT CB

167.3479 A x 3 = 502.0437 A NEC Section 450.3 – Computation for
39
Grounding Conductor
PEC Part 2, Article 1.4.4.3(b) or
Primary Grounding Conductor
IGROUNDING CONDUCTOR = (Current) Multi-Grounded Alternating Current
5
1 Systems.
IGROUNDING CONDUCTOR = (836.7395 A)
5
Secondary Grounding Conductor

1 PEC Part 2, Article 1.4.4.3(b) or
IGROUNDING CONDUCTOR = (Current)
5 Systems.
Neutral Conductor
INEUTRAL = (IFLSecondary) PEC Part I(2009), Sec. 2.20.3.22 page
INEUTRAL = 522.9622 A 320: Feeder or Service Neutral Ground
Switch Gear Design IEC 62271-102(2001) High-voltage

S switchgear and control gear - Part
IDSA = 102: Alternating current disconnectors
√3 VL
IDSA = × 2.5
√3 (13.8 kV)
IDSA = 1045.9244 A
Disconnector Rating
VT- Primary Voltage = 102: Alternating current disconnectors
√3
13.8 kV
VT-Secondary Voltage =
√3 IEC 60099-8(2011) Part 8/IEEE C62.22
40
Current Transformer
IGROUNDING = 43. 7386 A IEC 60099-8(2011) Part 8/IEEE C62.22
Use: Primary Current = 100 A page 8 – 16; Standard for Lightning
Secondary Current = 5 A Arrester and Ground Voltage Fault
Lighting Arrester
VLA = (C) (67) and 310.60(C) (69), page 226;
√3
Conductor for general wiring
Highest Voltage
69 kV × 1.05
VLA =
√3
VLA = 41.829 kV
Philippine Grid Code PP. (32) Section 3.2.3 – the
Nominal Voltage system owner must ensure that the voltage variation
13.8 kV × 1.05 must be not more or less than +-5% of the nominal
VLA =
VLA = 11.9512 kV

VD = I √(R2 + X2)
where: National Electric Code (1999), Article 210,
I = Full Load Current page 19: Where the maximum total voltage drop
R = Resistance on both feeders and branch circuits to the
X = Reactance farthest outlet does not exceed 5 percent.
At 6.1 miles to Balayan New Substation
R = 6.1 (0.8950) = 5.4595 Ω
X = 6.1 (0.6403) = j3.9058 Ω National Electric Code (1999), Article 210,
page 19: Where the maximum total voltage drop
VD = 167.3479 √(5.45952 + 3.90582) on both feeders and branch circuits to the
VD = 1.1234 kV farthest outlet does not exceed 5 percent.
1.1234 kV
VD % =
69 kV
VD % = 1.6281 %
At 10.2 miles to Nasugbu New Substation
41
R = 10.2 (0.8950) = 9.1290 Ω National Electric Code (1999), Article 210,
X = 10.2 (0.6404) = j6.5321 Ω page 19: Where the maximum total voltage drop
1.878.5275 kV
VD % =
69 kV
VD % = 2.7225 %

Derating Factor
100
CD = 1 -
Decrement Factor
X 1
Ta = × ( )
R 2 TF
1 IEEE Std 80 (2000), Guide for safety
Ta = 15 × ( )
2 T(60) in AC substation grounding:
Ta = 0.0398 Calculation of Potential Difference
-2 × Tf
Ta
Ta -2 × 0.15 AC substation grounding: Calculation
DF = 1.1248

I = IGDF
I = 3.1 (1.1248) IEEE Std 80 (2000), Guide for safety
I = 3.4869 A in AC substation grounding:
Ground Potential
0.157
VTOUCH POTENTIAL MAX = 1.5 CDρs ( )
√0.15
42
VTOUCH POTENTIAL MAX = 45 V IEEE Std 80 (2000), Guide for safety
Buried Length Calculation of Potential Difference
Lr
L = LC+ [1.55 + 1.22 ( )] LR
√L2X + L2Y
3
L = LC+ [1.55 + 1.22 ( )] LR
√(902 + 502)
L = 994 m

1 1 1 1
KS = π [2h + D+h + D (1 – 0.5n-2)] IEEE Std 80 (2000), Guide for safety in
1 1 1 1
KS = π [2 (0.6) + 12.5+0.6 + 12.5 (1 – 0.5n-2)] of Potential Difference
KS = 0.314
Single Line Diagram with Bus Scheme
Figure 3-14. Single Line with Double Bus Double Breaker Bus Scheme
43
The figure 3-14 shows the type of a single line using a double bus double breaker bus scheme.
Switchyard Layout
Figure 3-15. Switchyard Layout
The figure 3-15 shows a switchyard, consisting of large breakers and towers, is usually located in an area
close to the plant. The substation is used as the distribution center where electrical power is supplied to the
plant from the outside, and electrical power is sent from the plant
Figure 3-16. Switchyard Sections and Details
44
The figure 3-16 shows the sections and details of the wind farm switchyard.
Stage 5: Wind Power Plant Design
Coordinates of Plant & Poles and Lattices
Figure 3-17. Coordinates, Poles and Lattices of the Wind Farm
The figure 3-17 shows the site in Calatagan has a flat terrain and does not have any tall structures in the
vicinity, which may have a significant effect on the wind farm layout.
Required kW Output
2
POut = PDeficient + PTL + ∑ PFn

n=1
where:
Pout = Required kW Output of the Transformer
PDeficient = Power Deficiency in Balayan & Nasugbu in the year 2028
PTL = Total Losses in the Transformers
2
∑ PFn = Total Losses in the Distribution Feeders

n=1
POut = 28.464 MW + (0.177 MW + 0.103 MW) + 1.214 MW

POut = 29.958 MW
45
Number of Wind Turbines to be Used
Target Power Output
Number of Turbines =
Output of Each Unit
Horizontal Wind Turbine
This wind turbine is characterized by blades which are perpendicular to the ground. Most of them which are
built nowadays are two or three-bladed. Meanwhile, there are some which use single blade only or even
more than three. The following is the wind turbine to be used.
Option 1: Horizontal-Axis Upwind Turbine (Free Standing)
Figure 3-18. Horizontal-Axis Wind Turbine (Free Standing)

Figure 3-18 shows a horizontal-axis wind turbines (HAWT) have the main rotor shaft and electrical generator
at the top of a tower, and may be pointed into or out of the wind. Small turbines are pointed by a simple wind
vane, while large turbines generally use a wind sensor coupled with a servo motor. Most have a gearbox,
which turns the slow rotation of the blades into a quicker rotation that is more suitable to drive an electrical
generator. HAWT in free standing configuration was made by steel pipe with a free standing design. It was
used for 1 kW to 50 kW wind turbines. The height of mono tower is usually from 12m to 36m. It has less
vibration and more reliable.
General Data
 Manufacturer: Vestas (Denmark)
 Model: V117
46
 Nominal power: 4.2 MW
 Rotor diameter: 57.2 m
 Number of blades: 3
 Start-up wind speed: 4 m/s
 Maximum wind speed: 25 m/s
 Generator output voltage: 690 V
Power Available in the Wind

To compute the available power in the wind we use the formula:
1
PAVAIL = 2 ρAV3
IEEE Trans Power Apparatus Syst
PAS-102(12):3791–3795. Stability
where: Simulation of Wind Turbine Systems.
D
Swept area = π ( 2 )2
Air Density = 1. 225 kg / m3
Wind Velocity = 9.88 m / s
Rotor Diameter = 57.2 Dm
52
PAVAIL = Pin = (0.5) (1.225) (9.88)3 π ( )2
2
PAVAIL = Pin = 3.0359 MW
Note: Pin is the mechanical power produce by the rotational movement of the wind turbine.
Theoretical Maximum Wind Power

1
PMAX = 2 ρAV3 Cp IEC 61400-12-1 Power Performance
Measurements of Electricity Producing
where: Wind Turbines
Cp = Betz Limits (0.5926)
57.2
PMAX = (0.5) (1.225) (9.88)3 (0.5926) π ( )2
2
PMAX = 1.7990 MW
Reasonably Obtainable Wind Power

POBT = Cp (PAVAIL)
POBT = (0.55) (3.0359 MW)
POBT = 1.6697 MW
Wind Turbines
Generator Efficiency
Efficiency Generator = (0.95 × 0.97) × 100% = 92.15%
Efficiency at The Generation Part = (0.9215 × 0.98) × 100% = 90.307%
Note: Considering that the nominal power that the generator served was 1000 kW and the generator should
only be loaded at 50% of its full load.
47
Pout = 0.90307% (1.6697) = 1.5079 MW per turbine
Note: The electrical power output will depend on the efficiency at the generator part and the mechanical
power.
Number of Wind Turbines

34.944 MW
Number of Wind Turbines = = 23.17 ≅ 24 wind turbines
1.5079 MW
Note: To know the number of turbines needed to be constructed we have to consider the electrical power
needed in the area which is 34.944 MW:
Losses Calculation
Power Input - losses IEEE Trans Power Apparatus Syst PAS-
Efficiency =
Power Input 102(12):3791–3795. Stability Simulation
1.5079 MW - losses of Wind Turbine Systems.
92.15 % =
1.5079 MW
Losses = 1.5079 MW – 0.9215 (1.5079 MW)
Losses = 118.3702 kW per turbine
Note: To compute for the losses in each turbine consider the amount of mechanical power in the wind turbine
and the efficiency of the generator.
Total Power Losses

Total losses = Losses × Number of Wind Turbines IEEE Trans Power Apparatus Syst PAS-
Total losses = 118.3702 kW × 23 102(12):3791–3795. Stability Simulation
Total losses = 2.7225 MW of Wind Turbine Systems.
Note: To compute for the total losses in the wind turbines, multiply the total losses in each turbine to the
number of turbines.
Distance Between Turbines IEC 2005 (E) 61400-12-1 A.1:

Distance between Turbines = 5(D) Requirements regarding neighboring and
where: operating wind turbines
D = Rotor Diameter Requirements regarding neighbouring and
Ln = 5 (57.2 m) operating wind turbines
Ln = 286 m
48
Power Plant Layout
Figure 3-19. Power Plant Layout
The figure 3-19 shows the layout of the wind farm consisting of 23 wind turbines with a distance of 286 m
between each of them.
Single Line Diagram
Figure 3-20. Single Line Diagram of the Wind Farm
49
Option 2: Horizontal-Axis Upwind Turbine (Lattice)
Figure 3-21. Horizontal-Axis Wind Turbine (Lattice)
Horizontal-axis wind turbine in lattice configuration turbines are delivered with steel towers, which are
manufactured in sections of 20-30 meters with flanges at either end, and bolted together on the site. The
towers are conical (i.e. with their diameter increasing towards the base) in order to increase their strength
and to save materials at the same time.
General Data
 Manufacturer: Siemens Gamesa
 Model: SG 4.5-145 DD
 Nominal power: 6 MW
 Rotor diameter: 102 m

1
PAVAIL = 2 ρAV3
IEEE Trans Power Apparatus Syst PAS-
102(12):3791–3795. Stability Simulation
where: of Wind Turbine Systems.
D
50
Rotor Diameter = 102 Dm
102
PAVAIL = Pin = (0.5) (1.225) (9.88)3 π ( )2
2

1
102 IEC 61400-12-1 Power Performance

PMAX = (0.5) (1.225) (9.88)3 (0.5926) π ( )2 Measurements of Electricity Producing
2
PMAX = 5.7209 MW per turbine Wind Turbines

POBT = Cp (PAVAIL) IEC 61400-12-1 Power Performance
POBT = (0.55) (2.5090 MW) Measurements of Electricity Producing
POBT = 5.3097 MW Wind Turbines
Pout = 0.90307% (5.3097 MW) = 4.7950 MW per turbine
power.

34.944 MW
4.7950 MW
Losses Calculation
Power Input - losses
Efficiency = IEEE Trans Power Apparatus Syst PAS-
92.15 % =
1.3799 MW
51
Losses = 1.3799 MW – 0.9215 (1.3799 MW)
Total Power Losses

number of turbines.
Distance Between Turbines

Distance between Turbines (Ln) = 5 (D)
IEC 2005 (E) 61400-12-1 A.1:
where: Requirements regarding neighboring and
D = Rotor Diameter operating wind turbines
Requirements regarding neighbouring and
Ln = 5 (102 m) operating wind turbines
Ln = 510 m
Power Plant Layout
The figure 3-22 shows the layout of turbines which is a box type with 510 meters between each turbines.
52
Single Line Diagram
The figure above shows the single line diagram of the wind farm. The numbers of the wind turbine and its
corresponding connections.
53
Option 3: Vertical-Axis Wind Turbine (Darrieus)
Figure 3-24. Darrieus Vertical Wind Turbine
Figure 3-24 is a type of vertical axis wind turbine (VAWT) used to generate electricity from the energy carried
in the wind. The turbine consists of a number of curved aero foil blades mounted on a vertical rotating shaft
or framework. The curvature of the blades allows the blade to be stressed only in tension at high rotating
speeds. A Darrieus wind turbines appear to be more suitable in different fields such as building integration,
the extreme zones (mountain refuge, observatories) than the classic wind turbines. It is less efficient
compared with the three-bladed wind turbines, this kind of wind turbine can overcome the limits due to the
sizes of blades and their rotation speed. The main advantage of this type of turbines is that the generator can
be easily set up in the ground.
General data
 Manufacturer: Ropatec (Italy)
 Model: TS30pro
 Nominal power: 50 kW
 Rotor Diameter: 12 m
54
 Generator Output voltage: 400 V

To compute the available power in the wind we use
the formula: IEEE Trans Power Apparatus Syst PAS-
1
PAVAIL = 2 ρAV3 102(12):3791–3795. Stability Simulation
of Wind Turbine Systems.
where:
D
12
PAVAIL = Pin = (0.5) (1.225) (9.88)3 π ( )2
2
PAVAIL = Pin = 133.6163 kW

1
PMAX = 2 ρAV3 Cp
Measurements of Electricity
where:
D Producing Wind Turbines
12
PMAX = (0.5) (1.225) (9.88)3 (0.5926) π ( )2
2
PMAX = 123.7203 kW

POBT = (0.40) (133.6143 kW) Measurements of Electricity
POBT = 53.4465 kW Producing Wind Turbines
55
Pout = 0.90307% (53.4465 kW) = 48.2660 kW per turbine
power.

34.944 MW
Number of Wind Turbines = = 724 wind turbines
48.2660 kW
Losses Calculation
32.1776 kW - losses of Wind Turbine Systems.
92.15 % =
32.1776 MW
Losses = 32.1776 kW – 0.9215 (32.1776 kW)
Total Power Losses IEEE Trans Power Apparatus Syst PAS-

Total losses = Losses × Number of Wind Turbines 102(12):3791–3795. Stability Simulation
Total losses = 2.5259 kW × 26 of Wind Turbine Systems.
Total losses = 2.7405 MW
number of turbines.

IEC 2005 (E) 61400-12-1 A.1:
where:
Requirements regarding neighboring and
D = Rotor Diameter
operating wind turbines. Requirements
regarding neighbouring and operating
Ln = 5 (12 m)
wind turbines
Ln = 60 m
56
Power Plant Layout
Figure 3-25. Wind Turbine per Cluster
The figure 3-25 shows the first 4 clusters are comprised of 100 wind turbines while the other 4 comprises a
total number of 101 wind turbines.
Figure 3-26. Wind Turbine Clusters Connection
57
The figure 3-26 shows the layout of the wind farm consisting of 6 clusters of wind turbines with each clusters
comprising 100 and 101 wind turbines.
Single Line Diagram
Figure 3-27 shows the single line diagram of the wind farm. Wind turbines are connected to breakers to
collector bus and goes through the collector feeder breakers. The local wind turbine grid can be AC or DC
and is the grid connecting the wind turbines together and to the collecting point. It is then connected to switch
gear or open substation which converts the voltage to a desired output. The collecting point is the substation,
including the transformer and power electronics used for the respective transmission technology that is
chosen. The transmission system is the connection to shore, where the power is transmitted to the wind farm
grid interface.
58
Option 4: Vertical-Axis Wind Turbine (Savonius)
Figure 3-28. Vertical-Axis Wind Turbine (Savonius)
Figure 3-28 is a savonius vertical-axis wind turbine is a slow rotating, high torque machine with two or more
scoops and are used in high-reliability low-efficiency power turbines. Most wind turbines use lift generated
by airfoil-shaped blades to drive a rotor, the Savonius uses drag and therefore cannot rotate faster than the
approaching wind speed.
General Data:
 Manufacturer: Arborwind (Michigan, USA)
 Model: PT-180
59
 Start-up wind speed: 3.129 m/s
 Maximum wind speed: 11.176 m/s

1
PAVAIL = 2 ρAV3
where:
D of Wind Turbine Systems.
18
PAVAIL = Pin = (0.5) (1.225) (9.88)3 π ( )2
2

1
PMAX = 2 ρAV3 Cp
where: Producing Wind Turbines
18
PMAX = (0.5) (1.225) (9.88)3 (0.5926) π ( )2
2
PMAX = 178.1523 kW

POBT = Cp (PAVAIL)
POBT = (0.30) (178.1523 kW) IEC 61400-12-1 Power Performance
POBT = 53.4472 kW Measurements of Electricity
Generator Efficiency Producing Wind Turbines
power.
60
34.944 MW
48.2665 kW
Losses Calculation IEEE Trans Power Apparatus Syst

Power Input - losses PAS-102(12):3791–3795. Stability
Efficiency = Simulation of Wind Turbine Systems.
Power Input
48.2665 kW - losses
92.15 % =
48.2665 kW
Losses = 48.2665 kW – 0.9215 (48.2665 kW)
Total Power Losses

Total losses = 3.7889 kW ×724 102(12):3791–3795. Stability Simulation
number of turbines.

IEC 2005 (E) 61400-12-1 A.1:
Ln = 90 m
61
Power Plant Layout

Figure 3-30. Clusters Connection
62
Single Line Diagram
grid interface.
63
Design Simulation
Figure 3-32. Power Flow using Newton Rhapson Method
The figure 3-32 shows the Power flow using Newton Rhapson Method result in Paladin DesignBase.
Figure 3-33. 3-Phase Fault Short-Circuit
The figure 3-33 shows the 3-phase fault short circuit of the system.
64
Figure 3-34. 3- Line-Line(L-L) Fault Short-Circuit
The figure 3-34 shows the Line-Line(L-L) Fault Short-Circuit is recorded data for 3-Phase Fault for the whole
system during ½ cycle, 3 cycle and during steady-state. The data recorded that the short circuit current for
all substations are supported by the calculation in the chapter 3.
Figure 3-35. 3- Line-Ground(L-G) Fault Short-Circuit
The figure 3-35, Line-Line(L-L) Fault Short-Circuit is recorded data for 3-Phase Fault for the whole system
during ½ cycle, 3 cycle and during steady-state. The data recorded that the short circuit current for all
substations are supported by the calculation in the chapter 3.
65
Figure 3-36. 3- Double Line – Ground(LLG) Fault Short-Circuit
The figure 3-36, 3-Phase Fault Short-Circuit is recorded data for 3-Phase Fault for the whole system during
½ cycle, 3 cycle and during steady-state. The data recorded that the short circuit current for all substations
are supported by the calculation in Chapter 3.
Protective Device Coordination (PDC)
Figure 3-37. Protective Device Coordination
66
The figure 3-37 shows the Time Current Characteristics (TCC) curve showed the coordination between the
breakers and load of the substations. As shown in the figure, all of the breakers will not trip unless there will
be over-current in the system.
Arc Flash Hazard for New Substations
Figure 3-38. Graphical Representation of the Working Distance
Figure 3-38 shows the working distance at 12inches from the equipment. The distance is already outside the
safety green zone.
Figure 3-39. The PPE Category and Safety Clothing Required
67
Figure 3-39 shows that at least PPE Category 3 is needed for 12 inches working distance for the workers.
The required clothes are at class 3, gloves at class 2, insulated tools, suit hood, eye protection and a non-
melting AR hair/beard nets.
Figure 3-40. The Graphical Representation of the Working Distance
Figure 3-40 shows the graphical representation of the working distance which is still within the red zone at
24inches away from the equipment.
Figure 3-41. PPE Category and the Clothing Required
68
Figure 3-41 indicates that PPE Category 2 is needed for a 24inches working distance away from the
equipment. Category 2 needs at least clothing at level 2, gloves at class 2, insulated tools, face shield, eye
protection, non-melting AR
Figure 3-42. The Working Distance at Green Zone
The figure 3-42 shows the Shows the working distance at green zone which means less protective
equipment required for the workers.
Figure 3-43. The PPE Category Needed for The Workers
Figure 3-43 shows PPE Category 0, which includes clothing at level 0, gloves at class 2, insulated tools but
not required, face shield but not required, an eye protection and a non-melting AR hair/beard nets.
69
Substation Grid Layout
Figure 3-44. New Substation Grid Layout
The figure 3-44 shows the Substation Grid Layout is the footprint of the transformer’s substations. This grids
consists of integrated rods at each corners. Grounding is a major importance to increase the reliability of the
transformer to provide stability of voltage conditions, preventing excessive voltage peaks during
disturbances. It also means a measure of protection against lighting.
Figure 3-45. New Substation Grid Potential Lines
70
The figure 3-45 Substation Grid Potential Lines shows the touch potential of the transformer. The touch
potential is the voltage difference between the energized object and the soil where the transformer is located.
As shown in the figure, the highest potential of the grid is located in the corners. The potentials measured is
45 V in both of the corners. The lowest potential of the substation occurs at the center part of the transformer.
Turbine Simulation
HAWT (Free Standing)

Using QBlade Turbine Simulation. QBlade is an open source wind turbine calculation software. The software
is especially adequate for designing, as it provides a hands on design and simulation capabilities for HAWT
and VAWT rotor design and shows all the fundamental relationships of design concepts and turbine
performance in an easy and intuitive way.
Figure 3-46. Design of The Rotor for HAWT Free Standing
The figure 3-46 shows the designing of the rotor with its technical specifications. Setting the foil and its curve,
the width and thickness of the blades.
Figure 3-47. Simulation of The Wind Field
71
The figure 3-47 shows the wind fields will be simulated for the sectors given in this list. Any wind direction
can be given, but if climatology data is then introduced, it is recommended to simulate the same sectors as
those found in the climatology data.
Figure 3-48. Non-linear Lifting Simulation
Using non-linear lifting simulation with the rotor technical specifications provided and the wind field having
9.88 m/s mean speed, the designed wind turbine produces 2.9845 MW of power with betz limit of 0.52. All
output is on the same magnitude as the computed output.
HAWT (Lattice)
Using QBlade Simulation program for designing turbines.
Figure 3-49. Wind Field Simulation
Depending on the stability of the atmosphere the wind profile in the higher elevations differs considerably. It
is therefore more convenient to prescribe a “reference speed” in a “reference height” near the surface.
72
Figure 3-50. Rotor Specifications
The designed rotor is in line with the technical specification of the rotor to be used in the final design.
Specification of a file with geometry used for visualization. For Turbine objects it is recommended to use
turbin_nn (nn is a height), which automatically generates simple scalable geometries in accordance with the
legend in the report section.
Figure 3-51. Rotor BEM Simulation
The blade element momentum (BEM) method is a popular tool for predicting the performance of wind turbine
rotors. This study investigated the impact of including factors such as tip loss, hub loss and drag coefficients
in BEM simulations
73
9.88 m/s mean speed, the designed wind turbine produces 9.5932 MW of power with betz limit of 0.45. All
VAWT (Darrieus)
Figure 3-53. Design of the Darrieus Wind Turbine
QBlade Simulation also provides designs on vertical-axis wind turbines. Same with HAWT, setting the
thickness, length and curve of the blades is the first step. The distance of the blades is also a factor since
the blades are on a vertical configuration it is important to note that rotational speed varies depending on the
distance of the blades with each other.
74
Figure 3-54. Wind Field Set at 9.88 m/s Mean Speed
Since VAWT has lower height than HAWT, the wind field is set on a lower stand point. The hub of the turbine
is also lower. The mean speed is still at 9.88 m/s.
Figure 3-55. Simulation of the designed Darrieus Turbine set at the simulated wind field
9.88 m/s mean speed, the designed wind turbine produces 132.6771 kW of power with betz limit of 0.39. All
75
VAWT (Savonius)
Figure 3-56. Design of the Savonius Rotor Using the Specified Technical Data
QBlade Simulation also provides designs on vertical-axis wind turbines. Same with HAWT, setting the
thickness, length and curve of the blades is the first step. The distance of the blades is also a factor since
the blades are on a vertical configuration it is important to note that rotational speed varies depending on the
distance of the blades with each other.
Figure 3-57. The Simulation of the Wind Field Set at 30 m Vertical Height
Since VAWT has lower height than HAWT, the wind field is set on a lower stand point. The hub of the turbine
is also lower which set at 12 m. It is important to note that the height of the hub should be higher than the
diameter of the turbine. The mean speed is still at 9.88 m/s.
76
Figure 3-58. Simulation of the Savonius Wind Turbine
9.88 m/s mean speed, the designed wind turbine produces 50.6541 kW of power with betz limit of 0.31. All
output is on the same magnitude as the computed output. Before running the Wind Resource module at least
one climatology must exist and all sectors defined in that climatology must exist in the wind database.
77
Design 2: Solar Power Plant
Solar power is the conversion of sunlight into electricity, either directly using photovoltaic (PV), or indirectly
using concentrated solar power (CSP). Concentrated solar power systems use lenses or mirrors and
tracking systems to focus a large area of sunlight into a small beam. Photovoltaics convert light into an
electric current using the photovoltaic effect.
Figure 3-59. Design Options of Solar Generations
Figure 3-59 shows the design options of solar power generation. The design is Grid-Tied and all of them
have back up batteries for the storage of the generated electricity of the solar power plant this design is used
by polycrystalline consisting of different types of inverter like Micro-inverter, Central inverter, and String
inverter with the use of Lithium-ion and Lead acid. The final design will be chosen and will undergo the
constraints and trade-off analysis for further evaluation and analyzation of the best solar panel appropriate in
the location of the solar generating power plant and the consumer’s benefits. To provide the long-term service
needed by the clients and low-cost electricity for the community and industrial power plants to help the
economy. The solar power generating power plant helps reduced the emission of the carbon dioxide from
diesel power plants in the air because it uses the sun light as the main source of the renewable energy.
78
Design Stages of Solar Power Plant
Figure 3-60. Proposed Single Line Diagram of Solar Power Plant
The figure 3-60 shows the single line diagram of the power system and the stages where each component
is designed.

Using the growth equation from Electric Power Distribution IEEE Std. 1013 (2000). Load
System Engineering by TuranGönen: Computation, Average Demand, Section
6, p.236
where:
Pm = P2018 (1+g)m
20.76 (1+g)2
79
P2028 = P2018 (1+g)10 IEEE Std. 1013 (2000). Load

PRC = PDC - P2028
where: Computation, Future Maximum
PRC = Reserve Capacity Demand, Section 6, p.236
PRC = 6.48 – 34.944


PF =
where:
34.944 MW
PF =
3
PF = 11.648 MW
Rating IEEEC.57.12.00-2010 IEEE Standard

10,000 kVA, 3-phase, 69/13.8 kV General Requirements for Liquid-
Power Losses Regulating Transformers
NLL = 11.6 kW
LL = 47.6 kW
where:
LL = Load Loss

%Z* = 9
80
Total Power Losses IEEE Standard C57.12.00-2010,
TLF = NLL + LL Standard General Requirements for
TL = 3TLF Power and Regulation Transformers
where:
LL = Load Loss
TLF = 11.6 kW + 47.6 kW IEEE Standard C57.12.00-2010,

TLF = 59.2 kW Standard General Requirements for
TL = 177.6 kW Power and Regulation Transformers
At Primary Side
√3 × V
I=
√3 (69 kV)
I = 83.6739 A

NEC Section 240-3: General
167.3479 A. As indicated that the 80% ampacity of
Requirements for Branch Circuit,
the conductor shall be the full load current.
IFL = 83.6739 A × 1.25
IFL = 104.5924 A
At Secondary Side
√3 × V
I=
√3 (13.8 kV)
I = 418.3698A

IFL = 418.3698A x 1.25
81
IFL = 522.9622 A
Circuit Breaker
Primary Circuit Breaker
16.7348 A × 3 = 50.2043 A NEC Section 450.3 – Computation for
Use: 60AT CB Overcurrent Protection of Transformer

Grounding Conductor
1
IGROUNDING = (Current) PEC Part 2, Article 1.4.4.3(b) or
1
IGROUNDING = (83.6739) Multi-Grounded Alternating Current
5
IGROUNDING = 16.7348 A Systems.

1
IGROUNDING = (418.3698 A) Multi-Grounded Alternating Current
5
IGROUNDING = 83.6740 A Systems.
Neutral Conductor
Switch Gear Design

S
IDSA = IEC 62271-102(2001) High-voltage
√3 VL switchgear and control gear - Part
10 MVA 102: Alternating current disconnectors
IDSA = × 2.5
√3 (13.8 kV) and earthing switches
IDSA = 1045.9244 A
82
Disconnector Rating
13.8 kV
√3 page 8 – 16; Standard for Lightning
VT- Secondary Voltage = 7.9674 kV
Current Transformer
Lighting Arrester
VLA =
√3 (C) (67) and 310.60(C) (69), page 226;
69 kV × 1.05
VLA =
√3
VLA = 41.829 kV
Nominal Voltage Philippine Grid Code PP. (32) Section 3.2.3 –

13.8 kV × 1.05 the system owner must ensure that the voltage
VLA = variation must be not more or less than +-5% of
√3 the nominal voltage at any point during normal
VLA = 11.9512 kV
Use: RP1 Load Side Normal Duty Distribution Class (ZnO) operation.
Copper Development Association
Bus Bar Sizing
(2014), Article 5.2, page 79: Conductor
10 MVA
ILF = for general wiring
√3 (13.8 kV)
ILF = 418.3697 A
IBUS = ILF1 + ILF2 + ILF3 IEEE Std Red Book C4 A4.5. Page 124
IBUS = 418.3697 A + 418.3697 A + 418.3697 A - 125: Solving 3 phase current
83
IBUS = 1255.1091 A
Bus Bar Dimension

For 30˚C Rise
Resistance per Meter Copper development association

-6 (2014), Article 5.2, page 79: Conductor
0.68 × 10
RDCBUSBAR = for general wiring
(0.00635) (0.125)
RDCBUSBAR = 7.0452 × 10-4 Ω/m
(0.2) (0.68 × 10-6 )
RACBUSBAR = Copper development association

(31.9) (0.125) (0.125)
L= Copper Development Association
(0.125)
L = 3.9875 × 10-9 H/m
for general wiring.
XL = 2π (60) (3.99×10−9)
XL = 1.5042 Ω/m

C=
1
Xc =
2π (6) (5937610×10-24 )
Xc = 1.6644 × 1020 Ω/m
Impedance
Φ = tan
7.5825×10-6
Φ = 90∘
ZTOTAL = 2.5209 × 10-6 Ω/m × (10 m) IEEE Std Gray Book C8.3.3 page 231:
ZTOTAL = 2.5209 × 10-15∠-90 Basic insulating materials are either
Use: Dimensions in meter: 6.35 mm × 152 mm organic or inorganic.
84
Skin Effect Ratio at 70°C: 1.18
Area in CM: 1910CM

VD = I √(R2 + X2) National Electric Code (1999), Article
X = Reactance

VD % =
69 kV
VD % = 4.4645 %

Derating Factor
100
CD = 1 - AC substation grounding: Calculation
2 × 0.1 + 0.09
Decrement Factor
X 1
Ta = × ( ) IEEE Std 80 (2000), Guide for safety in
R 2 TF
2 T(60)
Ta = 0.0398
Ta -2 × Tf IEEE Std 80 (2000), Guide for safety in

DF = √1+ ( Tf ) (1 - e Ta ) AC substation grounding: Calculation
Ta -2 × 0.15
DF = √1+ ( Tf ) (1 - e 0.0398 )
85
DF = 1.1248

I = IGDF
I = 3.1 (1.1248) IEEE Std 80 (2000), Guide for safety in
I = 3.4869 A AC substation grounding: Calculation
Ground Potential
0.157
VTOUCH POTENTIAL MAX = 1.5 Cρs ( ) IEEE Std 80 (2000), Guide for safety
√0.15 in AC substation grounding:
VTOUCH POTENTIAL MAX = 45 V Calculation of Potential Difference
Buried Length
Lr
L = LC+ [1.55 + 1.22 ( )] LR
√L2X + L2Y
IEEE Std 80 (2000), Guide for safety
3
√90 + 502
2
L = 994 m

1 1
KS = [ +
1 1
+ (1 – 0.5n-2)] IEEE Std 80 (2000), Guide for safety
π 2h D+h
1 1
D
1 1
KS = π [2 (0.6) + 12.5+0.6 + 12.5 (1 – 0.5n-2)] Calculation of Potential Difference
KS = 0.314
86
Figure 3-62. Single Line Diagram of the New Sub Station (Solar Power Plant)
87
respectively.

S PEC Part I (2009) Sec 4.30.2.4 page
IL =
where: Conductors.
IL = Load Current
VL = Line Voltage
11.648 MW + 177.6 kW
IL =
√3 69 kV
IL = 97.9588 A
Conductors.
88
Code = Turkey
Elevation: 0m

1.852
Wind Speed = (9 kt) × ( hr ) × ( 1000 m ) × ( 1 hr ) 26 for installations and maintenance, p43
1 kt 1 km 3600 sec
0.5 × ρ × v2 × d
WW =
g
where:
2 1cm 1in 1ft 1m

(0.5) × (1.2kg/m3) × (4.63m/s) × (5.04mm × × × × )
WW = 10cm 2.54cm 12in 3.28ft
9.8066m/s2
WW = 0.0014 kg/m
Wt = √(WC)2 + (WW)2
Wt = √(0.054 kg/m)2 + (0.0014 kg/m)2 IEC 60826(2003) –Design Criteria for
Wt = 0.0540 kg/m Overhead Transmission Line, Chapter
6.2.6.4 Wind Loads, p54-55
89
1kg
T= (5.28kN) × ( )
4.8066N
T = 1098.4896 kg
L h×T
X1 = –[ ]
2 WT × L IEC 60826(2003) –Design Criteria for
360m (0) × (1098.4896kg) Overhead Transmission Line, Chapter
X1 = –[ ]
2 (27kg/m) × (360m) 6.2.6.4 Wind Loads, p54-55
X1 = 180 m
WT × X1 2
S1 =
2×T
2
(0.0540kg/m) × (180)
S1 =
(2) × (1098.4896kg)
S1 = 0.7964 m
WW
Θ = tan-1 ( )
WC
0.0014kg/m
Θ = tan-1 ( )
0.054kg/m
Θ = 0.0259˚
Vertical Sag: NESC 235C2B (2007) –Sag Related

Vsag1 = (S1) × (cos Θ) Clearances, Section: Clearances to other
Vsag1 = (0.7964m) cos (3.9383˚) structure, p142
Vsag1 = 0.7691 m
2
Wt (L)
YMAX =
8(T)
2
(0.0540kg/m) × (360)
YMAX = 0.7964 m
8 × YMAX 2
3L
2
(8) × (0.7964m)
(3) × (360)
Clearance = H – S
90
No. of disc insulator = 5 disc
where: Standard Handbook for Electrical

n = Insulator Number Engineers (2009) – Line Insulation,
k = 0.12 p14 -21
V2 = (V1) × (1+k)
V2 = (V1) × (1+0.12)
V2 = 1.12V1
V3 = (V1) × k + (V2) × (1+k) Engineers (2009) – Voltage levels,
V3 = 0.12V1 + (V2) × (1.12) p14 -3
V3 = 1.3744V1
V4 = (V1) × k + (V2) × k + (V3) × (1+k)

V4 = 0.12V1 + (1.12) × (0.12) + (1.3744V1) (1.12)
V4 = 1.7937V1
69kV
= V1 + 1.12V1 + 1.3744V1 + 1.7937V1
√3
69kV
V1 = √3
4.2881
V1 = 9.2902 kV
V5 = (1.7937) × (9.2902)
V5 = 16.6638 kV
69kV
( )
√3
ηSTRING = [ ] × 100
(9) × (16.6638)
ηSTRING = 59.7660%

Based on ACSR Turkey specifications, IEC 60228, 3rd Edition 2004 – 11
Resistance⁄ International Standard on Conductors
1000 ft = 0.641 Ω
Length of Feeders: of Insulated Cables.
LF1 = 9.8 km
LF2 = 16.4 km
91
At Balayan = 9.8 km IEC 60287-1-1 Calculation of Current
Calculation for Total Resistance of Conductor Ratings, Section 2.4.3, Table 2, Page
Ω 31, 2006
R = (0.06712 ) 9.8km
km
R = 0.6578 Ω

Deq
L = 2 x 10-7 ln ( )
GMR
where:

transposed, National Electrical Code (NEC), Rated
GMR = 0.7788 (r) 60-Hz withstand voltage, Article 370,
page 461, 2011
where:
.680 in
r= = 0.34 in = 0.008636 m
2
GMR = 0.7788 (0.008636 m)
GMR = 6.7257 × 10-3
92
3
Deq = √(7.7492m)(8.4119m)(5.2469m) BULLETIN 1724E-2003 Horizontal
6.b.(2), page 6-1
6.9933 1000m
L = 2 x 10-7 ln ( -3
) ( ) ( 9.8km )
6.7257 x 10 1km
L = 13.6157 mH
XL = 2π f L = 2π (60) (13.6157 mH) 60-Hz withstand voltage, Article 370,
XL = j5.133 Ω/phase page 461, 2011
ZT = (0.6578+ j5.133 Ω/phase) × 3 phase
ZT = 1.9734 + j6.9147 Ω

R = (0.06712 ) 10.34km Ratings, Section 2.4.3, Table 2, Page
km 31, 2006
R = 0.6940 Ω

Deq
L = 2 x 10-7 ln ( )
GMR
where:
Deq = Equivalent spacing of conductors or Geometric Mean Distance (GMD) of conductors

page 461, 2011
where:
0.680 in
r= = 0.34 in = 0.008636 m
2
GMR = 0.7788 (0.008636m)
GMR = 6.7257 × 10-3 m
93
3
6.9933 1000 m 6.b.(2), page 6-1
L = 2 x 10-7 ln ( -3
)( ) (10.34 km)
6.7257 x 10 1 km
L = 14.3659 mH
XL = 2π f L = 2π (60) (14.3659 mH) National Electrical Code (NEC), Rated

XL = 5.4158 Ω/phase 60-Hz withstand voltage, Article 370,
page 461, 2011
ZT = (0.5262 + j5.4158 Ω/phase) × 3 phase
ZT = 1.5786 + j16.2474 Ω

where: of Insulated Cables.
RF1 = LF1 x R
94
RF1 = 9.8 km x 0.641Ω⁄0.3048 km IEC 60228, 3rd Edition 2004 – 11
RF1 = 20.6096 Ω International Standard on Conductors
RF2 = LF2 x R
RF2 = 16.4 km x 0.641Ω⁄0.3048 km
RF2 = 34.4895 Ω
RFT = RF1 + RF2

RFT = 55.0992 Ω
Losses per Feeder:

2
PFn = 3I RFn
IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery
where:
PFn = Power Loss in Feeder 'n'
I = Line Current
Estimation Method
PF1 = 3I2 RF1 IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery

2
PF1 = 3(97.9588) (20.6096) (Volume: 21, Issue: 3, July 2006)
PF1 = 593.3046 kW Power Loss Measurement and
Estimation Method
PF2 = 3I2 RF2
2
PFT = PF1 + PF2 Estimation Method
PFT = 1214.6188 MW

Nominal T
A ~ D = 1+(ZL × Y/2) = 0.9537 < 0.0029 Ω

B = ZL [1 + (ZL × Y/4)] = 51.2896 < 87.6958 Ω
C ~ Y = j1.7227 x 10-3
69kV 5MVA
VSN = A[ <0] + B[ <-cos-1(0.8)]
√3 √3×69kV
VSN = 36831.9699 < 0.0529 V
VS = (√3) × (36.8319kV)
VS = 63.7947 kV
95
69kV 5MVA
IS = ( <0) × (1.227x10-3< 90) + ( <-cos-10.8) × (0.9537 < 0.0029)
√3 √3×69kV
IS = 22.2695 < 1.1006 A
Efficiency
(5MVA) × (0.8)
η =[ 2
] × 100
(5MVA) × (0.8) + (3) × (22.2695) × (3.2772)
η = 99.8783%
Voltage Regulation
63.7947–69
VR =( ) × 100
69
VR = 7.5439%
Rating
25,000 kVA, 3-phase, 13.8 kV/69 kV IEEEC.57.12.00-2010 IEEE Standard
Power Losses Immersed Distribution, Power, and
NLL = 19.2 kW Regulating Transformers
LL = 84.2 kW
where:
LL = Load Loss

where:
LL = Load Loss
TL = 103.4 kW
96
Primary Winding
MVA Rating
I=
√3× V
20 MVA
I=
√3 (13.8 kV)
I = 836.7395 A

The size of conductor for secondary winding should
be 836.7395 A. As indicated that the 80% ampacity
of the conductor shall be the full load current.
IF = 836.7395 A x 1.25
IF = 1045.9244 A
MVA Rating
I= IEEE Standard C57.12.00-2010,
√3 × V
20 MVA Standard General Requirements for
I= Power and Regulation Transformers.
√3 (69 V)
I = 167.3479 A

be 167.3479 A. As indicated that the 80% ampacity
IF = 167.3479 A x 1.25
IF = 209.1849 A
Circuit Breaker
167.3479 A x 3 = 502.0437 A Overcurrent Protection of Transformer
Use: 600 AT CB

Grounding Conductor
1
IGROUNDING CONDUCTOR = (Current) System Grounding Conductors for
Systems.
97
1
5

1
IGROUNDING CONDUCTOR = (Current) PEC Part 2, Article 1.4.4.3(b) or
1
IGROUNDING CONDUCTOR = (167.3479 A) Multi-Grounded Alternating Current
5
IGROUNDING CONDUCTOR = 33.4696 A Systems.
Neutral Conductor
Switch Gear Design

IDSA =
√3 VL switchgear and control gear - Part
IDSA = × 2.5 and earthing switches
√3 (13.8 kV)
IDSA = 1045.9244 A
Disconnector Rating
13.8 kV
√3
Current Transformer
98
Use: Primary Current = 100 A IEC 60099-8(2011) Part 8/IEEE C62.22
Secondary Current = 5 A page 8 – 16; Standard for Lightning
Accuracy Power = 30 VA Arrester and Ground Voltage Fault
Lighting Arrester
VLA =
√3 (C) (67) and 310.60(C) (69), page 226;
Highest Voltage
69 kV × 1.05
VLA =
√3
VLA = 41.829 kV
Nominal Voltage Philippine Grid Code PP. (32) Section 3.2.3

13.8 kV × 1.05 – the system owner must ensure that the
VLA = voltage variation must be not more or less than
√3 +-5% of the nominal voltage at any point during
VLA = 11.9512 kV normal operation.

VD = I √(R2 + X2) National Electric Code (1999), Article
X = Reactance

voltage drop on both feeders and branch
VD = 167.3479 √(5.45952 + 3.90582) circuits to the farthest outlet does not
VD = 1.1234 kV exceed 5 percent.
1.1234 kV
VD % =
69 kV
VD % = 1.6281 %

R = 10.2 (0.8950) = 9.1290 Ω
X = 10.2 (0.6404) = j6.5321 Ω
99
VD = 167.3479 √(9.12902 + 6.53212)
VD = 1.8795 kV National Electric Code (1999), Article 210,
1.878.5275 kV page 19: Where the maximum total voltage drop
VD % =
69 kV on both feeders and branch circuits to the
VD % = 2.7225 % farthest outlet does not exceed 5 percent.

Derating Factor
100
CD = 1 - AC substation grounding: Calculation
2 × 0.1 + 0.09
Decrement Factor
X 1
Ta = × ( ) IEEE Std 80 (2000), Guide for safety in
R 2 TF
2 T(60)
Ta = 0.0398
-2 × Tf
Ta
DF = √1+ ( Tf ) (1 - e Ta )
Ta -2 × 0.15
DF = √1+ ( Tf ) (1 - e 0.0398 )
DF = 1.1248 of Potential Difference

I = IGDF
I = 3.1 (1.1248) IEEE Std 80 (2000), Guide for safety in
I = 3.4869 A AC substation grounding: Calculation
Ground Potential
0.157 IEEE Std 80 (2000), Guide for safety in

√0.15
VTOUCH POTENTIAL MAX = 45 V of Potential Difference
100
Buried Length
Lr
L = LC+ [1.55 + 1.22 ( )] LR IEEE Std 80 (2000), Guide for safety in
√L2X + L2Y AC substation grounding: Calculation
3 of Potential Difference
L = LC+ [1.55 + 1.22 ( )] LR
√902 +502
L = 994 m

1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1
KS = π [2 (0.6) + 12.5+0.6 + 12.5 (1 – 0.5n-2)] AC substation grounding: Calculation
KS = 0.314
Figure 3.67 above shows a single line diagram with a double bus breaker scheme.
101
Switchyard Layout
102
Stage 5: Solar Power Plant Design
Figure 3-70. Solar Generation Diagram
Figure 3-70 shows the connection of the solar generation in the system along with its components.
Figure 3-71. Polycrystalline Solar Panel
Figure 3-72 shows the polycrystalline photovoltaic solar panel is the newer technology and vary in the
manufacturing process. It is identifying as one of the most common choice of consumers because of its lower
cost compared with its counterpart, the monocrystalline solar panels. Polycrystalline solar panel have a lower
efficiency compared to other photovoltaic technologies such as monocrystalline yet it still manages to be the
best alternative from monocrystalline. Polycrystalline starts a silicon crystal seed placed in a vat of molten
silicon, its purpose is simply allowed it to be cool. It is also being referred to multi-crystalline or many crystal
silicon.
103
Figure 3-72. Polycrystalline Silicon Solar Cells
Brand Name: Trina

Model: TSM-325PEG14
Max. Power: 355 watts
Maximum voltage: 37.4Volts DC
Operating Current: 8.69 Amperes
Short Circuit Current: 9.27 Amperes
Open Circuit Voltage: 45.6 Volts DC
Peak Efficiency: 16.41%
Series Fuse Rating: 15 A
Maximum System Voltage: 1000V
Length: 78.1 in. (1,984mm)
Width: 39.3 in. (998mm)
Depth: 0.3in (8mm)
Polycrystalline Solar Panel
Desired Capacity of PV module = 260 W
Array Size
Maximum No. of PV Module =
Desired Capacity of PV Module
40.078MW
Maximum No. of PV Module =
260W
Maximum No. of PV module = 184,915 pcs
kWh
5.0 2 1day
Pin = daym × × 1.6269m2
6hrs
Pin = 1617 W per PV module
104
Losses in the polycrystalline solar panel = 1356 W – 260 W
Losses in the polycrystalline solar panel = 1,096W
The total solar power not utilized by the solar panels can be computed as shown below:
Solar power losses (polycrystalline) = losses × no. of PV modules
Solar power losses (polycrystalline) = 1,096 W × 184,915
Solar power losses (polycrystalline) = 202.6668MW
Option 1: Three Phase Micro Inverter
Load Computation
Future Maximum Demand

Pm = Po (1 + g)m IEEE Std. 1013 (2000). Load
P10 =20.76 MW × (1+0.0821)10
P10 =34.944 MW
Future Reserve Capacity

Preserve = Plant rating – Future Maximum Demand IEEE Std. 1013 (2000). Load
Preserve = 32MW – 34.944 MW Computation, Future Maximum
Preserve = -2.944 MW Demand, Section 6, p.236
Note: Negative sign indicates insufficient supply
Average demand in 10 years

m
Pm = P0 (1+g)
P10 = 15.0214 MW × (1+0.0821)10
P10 = 33.0662 MW
Reserve Capacity in terms of average demand in 10 Years

Preserve = Plant rating – Future Average Demand
Preserve = 32 MW - 33.0662 MW = -1.0662 MW
Note: Negative sign indicates insufficient supply.
Figure 3-73. Micro Inverter
105
Inverter Specification
Brand Name: ABB
Model: MICRO-0.25-I-OUTD
Rated Grid AC voltage: 240 V
Max. Efficiency: 96.5%
European Efficiency: 96%
Dimension: 266 × 246 × 35 mm
Input
Max. Dc Usable Power 265 Wp
Maximum Pv Panel Rating (Stc) 300 W
Absolute Maximum Voltage (Vmax) 65 V
Start-Up Voltage (Vstart) 25 V
Full Power Mmpt Voltage Range 25 V ~ 60 V
Mmpt Operating Voltage Range 12 V ~ 60 V
Maximum Usable Current (Idcmax) 10.5 A
Maximum Short Circuit Current Limit 12.5 A
Output
Grid Connection Type 1Ø/2 W
Adjustable Voltage Range 183 - 228 V
Nominal Grid Frequency 60Hz
Adjustable Grid Frequency Range 57- 60.5Hz
Maximum Output Current 1.20 A
Power Factor 0.95
Average Load at Noon Time and System Size

Average Load at Noon Time = No. of Solar Panel × NOCT No. Power Rating of Solar Module
Average Load at Noon Time = 184915 × 325 W
Average Load at Noon Time = 60 MW
System Size = No. of Solar Panel × Pmax
System Size = 184915 x 355 = 65.6448 MW
Design of Inverters
Peak Demand IEC 62109-2 (2011). Particular
No. of Micro Inverters =
Desired Rating of Inverter requirements for inverters use in
34.944MW photovoltaic systems, p.60
No. of Micro Inverters =
300W
No. of Micro Inverters = 116,480 inverters
Option 1: Lead Acid Battery

Battery Specifications:
Brand: Ritar
Model: RA12-100
Voltage: 12V
Capacity: 200 Ah
106
Max Discharge Current: 2000(5sec)
Depth of Discharge: 70%
Battery Efficiency: 90%
Battery Sizing
Average Demand × 24 IEEE Std. 1013 (2009). IEEE Guide
Average Daily Watt-Hoursbattery = for Array and Battery Sizing in Grid-
Inverter Efficiency
33.0662 MW × 24 Tie Photovoltaic (PV) Systems 9,
Average Daily Watt-Hoursbattery = p.157
0.965
Average Daily Watt-Hoursbattery = 822.3718 MW/hr
Average Daily Energy

Total Ah of batteries = IEEE Std. 1013 (2009). IEEE Guide
Nominal Battery Voltage for Array and Battery Sizing in Grid-Tie
822.3718 MW/hr
Total Ah of batteries = Photovoltaic (PV) Systems 9, p.157
12 V
Total Ah of batteries = 68.5310 MAh
Total Ah of Batteries × No. of Days of Autonomy

Adjusted total Ah of batteries =
Depth of Discharge
68.5310 Mah × 2 days
Adjusted total Ah of batteries =
0.70
Adjusted total Ah of batteries =195.8029 MAh
Ah of Battery
Minimum No. of Batteries =
Desired Ah rating of Battery IEEE Std. 1013 (2009). IEEE Guide
195.8029 MAh for Array and Battery Sizing in Grid-Tie
3000 Ah Photovoltaic (PV) Systems 9, p.157
Minimum No. of Batteries = 65267.6333≌65268
Minimum No. of Battery

No. of Batteries per Inverter =
No. of Inverters
65268
437
No. of Batteries per Inverter = 149.3547≌ 149
Nominal Input Voltage Range

No. of Batteries in Series =
Battery Nominal Voltage
240 V
24 V
No. of Batteries in Series = 1
No. of Battery per Inverter

No. of Batteries in Parallel =
No. of Battery in Series
103
10
107
No. of Batteries in Parallel = 10.3 ≌ 10
Total No. of Batteries = No. of Battery in Series × No. Of Battery in Parallel × No. of Inverters
Total No. of Batteries = 10 × 10 × 437
Total No. of Batteries = 43700
PV Module Computation
Peak Demand × Operating Hourspv NEC Article 690.8(A) (2010).
Average Daily Energy = Calculation of Maximum Circuit
Inverter Efficiency Current and Wire Selection, p.216
34.944 MW × 5hr
Average Daily Energy =
0.98
Average Daily Energy = 178.2857 MW/hr

Adjusted Daily Energy =
Efficiencybattery × Total Solar Resource Factor
178.2857 MW/hr
0.95 × 0.80
Adjusted Daily Energy = 234.5864 MW/hr
Adjusted Daily Energy

Array Size = IEEE Std 1562-2007. PV Array sizing,
Average Sun hour/s per day
234.5864 MW/hr Section 9. IEEE Guide for Array and
Array Size = Battery Sizing in Photovoltaic (PV)
5hr
Array Size = 49.9173 MW Systems, pp.5-7, 2008.
In compliance with NEC Article 690.7, Table 690.7
Voltage Correction
Voc of Inverter
No. of PV per String =
Solar PV Module Open Circuit Voltage × Deration Factor
600 V
38 V × 0.0085
No. of PV per String = 1774.0982
Maximum No. of PV Module

No. of String in Parallel = IEEE Std. 1013 (2009) IEEE Guide
No. of PV per String
184915 for Array and Battery Sizing in Grid-
No. of String in Parallel = Tie Photovoltaic (PV) Systems 9,
1774.0982
No. of String in Parallel = 104.2304 p.157
In compliance with IEEE 1562-2007
108
Option 2: Lithium Ion Battery
Brand: LG Chem Lithium Ion Battery
Model: RESU10
Nominal Voltage: 51.8V
Capacity: 189 Ah IEC 60086-4: Primary Batteries –
Max Discharge Current: 2000(5sec) Part 2: Physical and Electrical
Depth of Discharge: 80% Specification
Battery Sizing
Average Demand × 24
Average Daily Watt-Hoursbattery = IEC 60086-4: Primary Batteries –
Inverter Efficiency
33.0662 MW × 24 Part 2: Physical and Electrical
Average Daily Watt-Hoursbattery = Specification
0.98
Average Daily Energy IEC 60086-4: Primary Batteries –

Total Ah of batteries =
Nominal Battery Voltage Part 2: Physical and Electrical
809.7844 MW/hr Specification
Total Ah of batteries =
51.8 V
Total Ah of batteries = 15.6329MAh

Adjusted Total Ah of batteries =
Depth of Discharge
15.6329 × 2 days
Adjusted Total Ah of Batteries =
0.80
Adjusted Total Ah of Batteries = 39.08225 MAh
Ah of Battery
Minimum No. of Batteries = IEC 60086-4: Primary Batteries –
Desired Ah Rating of Battery
39.08225 MAh Part 2: Physical and Electrical
Minimum No. of Batteries = Specification
1890 Ah

No. of Batteries per Inverter=
No. of Inverters IEC 60086-4: Primary Batteries –
20678 Part 2: Physical and Electrical
437 Specification
No. of Batteries per inverter = 47.3181≌ 47
Nominal Input Voltage Range IEC 60086-4: Primary Batteries –

Battery Nominal Voltage Part 2: Physical and Electrical
Specification
109
240 V
51.8 V
No. of Batteries in Series = 4.6332= 5
No. of Battery per Inverter

47
5
Total No. of Batteries = No. of Battery In Series × No. of Battery In Parallel × No. of Inverters
Total No. of Batteries = 5 × 9.4 × 437
NEC Article 690.8(A) (2010).
Peak Demand × Operating Hourspv
Inverter Efficiency Current and Wire Selection, p.216
34.944 MW × 5hr
0.98

178.2857 MW/hr
0.95 × 0.80
IEEE Std 1562-2007. PV Array
Array Size = sizing, Section 9. IEEE Guide for
Average Sun Hour/s per Day Array and Battery Sizing in
234.5864 MW/hr Photovoltaic (PV) Systems, pp.5-7
Array Size =
5 hr
Array Size = 49.9173 MW

Voltage Correction
Voc of Inverter
600 V
38 V × 0.0085
IEC 60086-4: Primary Batteries –
Maximum No. of PV Module Part 2: Physical and Electrical
No. of String in Parallel =
No. of PV per String Specification
110
184915
1774.0982
No. of String in Parallel = 104.2304
MPPT Charge Controller Sizing

Peak Power per String
Charge Controller Current =
Operating Voltage
355 W × 1774.0982
37.4 V
Charge Controller Current = 16.8397 kA
Wiring and Fusing

As per NEC Article 690.8(A): Calculation of maximum circuit current
Compute for Maximum Current and select applicable wiring
From NEC Article 690.8(B): Ampacity and overcurrent device rating
PV Module to PV Module
NEC Article 690.8 (A) (1). The
Iwire= Isc × 1.25
maximum current shall be the sum of
Iwire = 9.27 A × 1.25
parallel module rated short circuit
Iwire = 11.5875 A
currents multiplied by 125 percent
Use: 1-3.5 mm2 THHN + 1-2.0 mm2
PV Module to Charge Controller

Iwire = Isc × 1.25
Iwire = 9.27 A × 1.25 PEC Article 4.30.6.3. Requires that
Iwire = 11.5875 A OCPD rating not exceed 30A when
Use: 1-3.5 mm2 THHN + 1-2.00 mm2 protecting a Copper 10 AWG conductor.
Ifuse = Isc × 3
Ifuse = 9.27 A × 3
Ifuse = 29.07 A
Use: 30 A fuse
Charge Controller to Batteries

Iwire = Isc × 1.25
maximum current shall be the sum of
Iwire = 9.27 A × 1.25
parallel module rated short circuit
Iwire = 11.5875 A
Use: 1-3.5 mm2 THHN + 1-2.0 mm2
Ifuse = Isc × 3
Ifuse = 9.27 A × 3
Ifuse = 29.07 A
Use: 30 A fuse
111
Batteries to Combiner Box
PEC Article 4.30.6.3 requires that OCPD
Combine Box to Inverter
No. of String in Parallel rating not exceed 30A when protecting a
Iwire = Isc × × 1.25 Copper 10 AWG conductor.
No. of Phase × No. of Inverters
135
Iwire = 9.69 × × 1.25
3 × 662 NEC Article100. The continuous current
Iwire = 82.34 A for this circuit is equal to the current
Use: 1-#30 THHN + 1-8.0 THHN multiplied by 1.25
No. of String in Parallel
Ifuse= Isc × ×3
104.2304
Ifuse = 9.27 × × 3 = 193.61 A
3 × 437
Use: 200 A fuse
Inverter to Transformer
Transformer to busbar A NEC Article 110.114(C) The lowest
Iwire = Irating × 1.25 terminal temperature rating for this
Iwire = 606.06 A × 1.25 segment is 125°C. The base ampacity of
Iwire = 757.58 A this conductor at 125°C is 200 A.
Use: 2 - #250 THHN + 1 - #50 THHN

IITCB = Irating × 2.50 NEC Article100. The continuous current
IITCB = 606.06 × 2.50 for this circuit is equal to the current
ITCB = 1515.15 A multiplied by 1.25
Use: 1600-A Inverse Time Circuit Breaker
Transformer Rating
Solar PV system voltage = 480 V NEC Article100. The current rating for this
Bus voltage = 13,200 V circuit is equal to the current multiplied by
S= √3 × 606.06 A × 13 200 V 2.50
S = 13.86 MVA
Use: 14 MVA, 480 V (wye) / 13,200 V (wye) transformer
Option 2: Three Phase Central Inverter
Load Computation
Future Maximum Demand IEEE Std. 1013 (2000). Load

Pm = Po (1+g)m Computation, Future Maximum Demand,
P10 =20.76 MW* (1+0.0821)10 Section 6, p.236
P10 =34.944 MW
Future Reserve Capacity

Preserve = Plant Rating – Future Maximum Demand
112
Preserve = 32MW - 34.944 MW
Preserve = -2.944 MW
Note: Negative sign indicates insufficient supply.
Average demand in 10 years

m
Pm = P0 (1+g) IEEE Std. 1013 (2000). Load Computation,
P10 =15.0214 MW* (1+0.0821)10 Future Maximum Demand, Section 6, p.236
P10 =33.0662 MW
Reserve Capacity in terms of average demand in 10 Years

Preserve = Plant rating – Future Average Demand
Preserve = 32 MW - 33.0662 MW = -1.0662MW
Note: Negative sign indicates insufficient supply
Figure 3-74. Central Inverter
Inverter Specifications
Brand Name: ABB
Model: PVS800
Max. Efficiency: 98.8%
European Efficiency: 98.6%
Dimension: 2630 ×2130 ×708 mm
Input
DC voltage range,mpp 450-825V

Maximum DC Voltage 1100 V
Maximum DC current 1145A
No. of protected DC Inputs 4-15(+/-)
113
Output
Nominal Power 500kW
Maximum output Power 600kW
Nominal AC current 965A
Nominal output voltage 300 V
Output Frequency 50 – 60hz

Average Load at Noon Time = No. of Solar Panel × NOCT Power Rating of Solar Module
Average Load at Noon Time = 184915 × 325 W
Average Load at Noon Time = 60MW
System Size = 184915 × 355 = 65.6448 MW
Design of Inverters
Peak Demand
No. of Central Inverters = IEC 62109-2 (2011). Particular
Desired Rating of Inverter
34.944MW requirements for inverters use
No. of Central Inverters = in photovoltaic systems, p.60
500kW
No. of Central Inverters = 69.89 ≌ 70 inverters
Brand: Ritar
Model: RA12-100
Voltage: 12V
Capacity: 200 Ah
Battery Sizing
Average Daily Watt-Hoursbattery =
Inverter Efficiency
33.0662 MW × 24
0.988
IEEEStd. 1013 (2009). Battery
Average Daily Energy Sizing Stationary Lead-Acid
Total Ah of Batteries = Batteries-General
Nominal Battery Voltage
803.2275 MW/hr Requirements, Section 9, p.157
Total Ah of Batteries =
12 V
Total Ah of Batteries = 66.9356 MAh
114
Depth of Discharge
66.9356 Mah × 2 days
0.70
Adjusted Total Ah of Batteries = 191.2446 MAh
Computation for Batteries
Ah of Battery
Minimum No. of Batteries = IEEEStd. 1013 (2009). Battery
Desired Ah Rating of Battery Sizing Stationary Lead-Acid
191.2446 MAh
Minimum No. of Batteries = Batteries - General Requirements,
2000 Ah Section 9, p.157
Minimum No. of Batteries = 95622.3 ≌ 95622

No. of Inverters
95622
437
No. of Batteries per Inverter = 218.8153≌ 219

240 V
12 V
IEEEStd. 1013 (2009). Battery
No. of Battery per Inverter Sizing Stationary Lead-Acid
No. of Battery in Series Batteries-General Requirements,
219 Section 9, p.157
20
Total No. of Batteries = No. of Battery in Series × No. of Battery in Parallel × No. of Inverters
Inverter Efficiency Calculation of Maximum Circuit
34.944 MW × 5hr Current and Wire Selection, p.216
0.988

115
176.8421 MW/hr
Adjusted Daily Energy = 0.90 × 0.80
Adjusted Daily Energy = 245.6140 MW/hr IEEE Std 1562-2007. PV Array
sizing, Section 9. IEEE Guide for
Adjusted Daily Energy Array and Battery (PV) Systems,
Array Size = pp.5-7, 2008.
Average Sun Hours Per Day
245.6140 MW/hr
Array Size =
5hr
Voltage Correction
Voc of Inverter
580 V
38 V × 0.0085
Maximum No. of PV Module IEC Standard 61724: Photovoltaic

No. of PV Per String System Performance, Monitoring
184915 Guidelines for Measurement, Data
No. of String in Parallel = Exchange and Analysis
1775.6656
Model: RESU10
Capacity: 189 Ah
Battery Sizing
Inverter Efficiency
33.0662 MW × 24
0.988
116
Average Daily Energy IEEE Std 1562-2007. PV Array sizing,
Nominal Battery Voltage Section 9. IEEE Guide for Array and
803.2275 MW/hr Battery Sizing in Photovoltaic (PV)
51.8 V Systems, pp.5-7, 2008
Total Ah of Batteries = 15.5063MAh
Depth of Discharge
15.5063 mAh × 2 days
0.80
Adjusted Total Ah of Batteries = 38.7658 mAh
Ah of Battery
38.7658 mAh
1890 Ah
Minimum No. of Battery IEEE Std 1562-2007. PV Array sizing,

No. of Inverters Section 9. IEEE Guide for Array and
20511 Battery Sizing, Photovoltaic (PV)
437 Systems, pp.5-7, 2008
No. of Batteries per Inverter = 46.9359 ≌ 47

240 V
51.8 V
No. of Batteries in Series = 4.6332= 5
No. of Battery per Inverter IEC 60086-4: Primary Batteries

No. of Battery in Series – Part 2: Physical and Electrical
47 Specifications
5
Inverter Efficiency Calculation of Maximum Circuit
34.944 MW × 5hr Current and Wire Selection,
Average Daily Energy = p.216
0.98
117
178.2857 MW/hr
0.95 × 0.80
IEEE Std 1562-2007. PV Array sizing,
Array Size = Section 9. IEEE Guide for Array and
Average Sun hours per day Battery Sizing Photovoltaic (PV)
234.5864 MW/hr Systems, pp.5-7, 2008
Array Size =
5hr
Voltage Correction
Voc of inverter
600 V
38 V × 0.0085
Maximum no. of PV module IEC 60086-4: Primary Batteries – Part 2:

No. of PV per string Physical and Electrical Specifications
184915
1774.0982
Voc of Inverter
580 V
38 V × 0.0085
Maximum no. of PV module IEC 60086-4: Primary Batteries –Part 2:

No. of PV per string Physical and Electrical Specifications
184915
1775.6656

Operating Voltage
355 W x 1774.0982
37.4 V
118
Wiring and Fusing

As per NEC Article 690.8(A): Calculation of maximum circuit current
Compute for Maximum Current and select applicable wiring
From NEC Article 690.8(B): Ampacity and overcurrent device rating
NEC Article 690.8 (A) (1). The maximum
Iwire= Isc × 1.25
current shall be the sum of parallel module
Iwire = 9.27 A × 1.25
rated short circuit currents multiplied by
Iwire = 11.5875 A
125 percent.
Use: 1-3.5 mm2 THHN + 1-2.0 mm2
PV Module to Charge Controller

Iwire = Isc × 1.25 NEC Article 690.8 (A) (1). The maximum
Iwire = 9.27 A × 1.25 current shall be the sum of parallel module
Iwire = 11.5875 A rated short circuit currents multiplied by
Use: 1-3.5 mm2 THHN + 1-2.00 mm2 125 percent.
Ifuse = Isc × 3
Ifuse = 9.27 A × 3
Ifuse = 29.07 A
Use: 30 A fuse

PEC Article 4.30.6.3: Requires that
Iwire = Isc × 1.25
OCPD rating not exceed 30 A when
Iwire = 9.27 A × 1.25
Iwire = 11.5875 A protecting a Copper 10 AWG conductor.
Use: 1-3.5 mm2 THHN + 1-2.0 mm2
Ifuse = Isc × 3 NEC Article 690.8 (A) (1). The maximum

Ifuse = 9.27 A × 3 current shall be the sum of parallel module
Ifuse = 29.07 A rated short circuit currents multiplied by
Use: 30 A fuse 125 percent.

Combine Box to Inverter PEC Article 4.30.6.3: Requires that
OCPD rating not exceed 30 A when
No. of String in Parallel protecting a Copper 10 AWG conductor.
Iwire = Isc × × 1.25
135
Iwire = 9.69 × × 1.25 NEC Article 100: The continuous current
3 × 662
Iwire = 82.34 A for this circuit is equal to the current
Use: 1- #30 THHN + 1-8.0 THHN multiplied by 1.25
119
No. of String in Parallel
Ifuse= Isc × ×3 A NEC Article 110.114 (C). The lowest
104.2304 terminal temperature rating for this
Ifuse = 9.27 × × 3 = 193.61 A segment is 125°C. The base ampacity of
3 × 437
Use: 200 A fuse this conductor at 125°C is 200 A.
Transformer to Busbar NEC Article 100: The continuous current
for this circuit is equal to the current
Iwire = Irating × 1.25 multiplied by 1.25
Iwire = 606.06 A × 1.25
Iwire = 757.58 A
Use: 2 - #250 THHN + 1 - #50 THHN
IITCB = Irating × 2.50

IITCB = 606.06 × 2.50
ITCB = 1515.15 A
Transformer Rating
NEC Article 100: The current rating for
Solar PV System Voltage = 480 V this circuit is equal to the current multiplied
Bus Voltage = 13,200 V by 2.50
S= √3 × 606.06 A ×13 200 V

S = 13.86 MVA
Use: 14 MVA, 480 V (wye) / 13,200 V (wye) transformer
Option 3: Three Phase String Inverter
Figure 3-75. Three Phase String Inverter
120
Inverter Specifications
Brand Name: Siel

Model: Soleil 1F-TL
Max. Efficiency: 96%
European Efficiency: 95%
Dimension: 355 ×161 ×365 mm
Input
Max. Power of modules 10kW
Min/Max MPPT Voltage 350/850 V
Max. Input Voltage 1000 V
Working Voltage 250-1000 V
Max Current of Modules 2x16A
No. MPPT 2
Output
Nominal Power 10kW
Max Power AC 10KVA
Nominal Voltage 400 V
Power factor 0.95

Average Load at Noon Time = No. of Solar Panel × NOCT Power Rating of Solar Module
Average Load at Noon Time = 184915 × 325W
Average Load at Noon Time = 60MW
System Size = 184915 × 355 = 65.6448 MW
Design of Inverters
Peak Demand IEC 62109-2 (2011). Particular
No. of String Inverters = requirements for inverters use in
Desired Rating of Inverter
34.944 MW photovoltaic systems, p.60
No. of String Inverters =
10 kW
No. of String Inverters = 3494.4 ≌ 3494 inverters
Brand: Ritar
Model: RA12-100
Voltage: 12V
Capacity: 200 Ah
121
Battery Sizing
Inverter Efficiency
33.0662 MW × 24
0.96
Average Daily Energy IEC 60086-4: Primary Batteries –

Nominal Battery Voltage Part 2: Physical and Electrical
826.655 MW/hr Specifications
12 V
Total Ah of Batteries = 66.1324MAh

Depth of Discharge
66.1324 mAh × 2 days
0.70
Adjusted total Ah of batteries =181.9497 mAh
Ah of Battery
181.9497 MAh
2000 Ah

No. of Batteries per Inverter= IEEE Std 1562-2007. PV Array
No. of Inverters
90975 sizing, Section 9. IEEE Guide for
No. of Batteries per Inverter= Array and Battery Sizing in Stand-
437
No. of Batteries per inverter = 208.1808 ≌ 208 Alone Photovoltaic (PV) Systems,
pp.5-7, 2008
240 V
12 V
No. of Battery per Inverter IEC 60086-4: Primary Batteries –

No. of Battery in Series Part 2: Physical and Electrical
208 Specifications
20
122
Peak Demand × Operating Hourspv NEC Article 690.8 (A) (2010).
Inverter Efficiency
34.944 MW × 5hr Current and Wire Selection,
Average Daily Energy = p.216
0.96
Average Daily Energy = 182 MW/hr

182 MW/hr
0.90 × 0.80 IEC 60086-4: Primary Batteries
Adjusted Daily Energy = 252.78 MW/hr –Part 2: Physical and Electrical
Specifications
Array Size =
Average Sun Hours per Day
252.78 MW/hr
Array Size =
5 hrs
Voltage Correction
Voc of Inverter
1000 V
38 V × 0.0085
Maximum no. of PV Module IEC 60086-4: Primary Batteries

No. of PV per String –Part 2: Physical and Electrical
184915 Specifications
3095.9752
Model: RESU10
123
Capacity: 189 Ah
Max Discharge Current: 2000 (5sec)
Battery Sizing IEEE Std 1562-2007. PV Array sizing,

Average Demand × 24 Section 9. IEEE Guide for Array and
Inverter Efficiency Battery Sizing in Stand-Alone
33.0662 MW × 24 Photovoltaic (PV) Systems, pp.5-7,
0.96 2008

Nominal Battery Voltage
826.655 MW/hr
51.8 V
Total Ah of Batteries = 15.9586 mAh

Depth of Discharge
15.9586MAh × 2 days
0.80
Adjusted Total Ah of Batteries = 39.8965 mAh
Ah of Battery
Desired Ah Rating of Battery IEC 60086-4: Primary Batteries – Part
39.8965 mAh 2: Physical and Electrical
1890 Ah Specifications
Minimum No. of Batteries = 21109.2592 ≌ 21109

No. of Inverters
21109
437
No. of Batteries per Inverter = 48.3043 ≌ 48

240 V
51.8 V
No. of Batteries in Series = 4.6332 = 5
No. of Battery per Inverter IEC 60086: Standards for Portable

No. of Batteries in Parallel = Primary (Non-Rechargeable) Batteries
124
48
5
Total No. of Batteries = No. of Battery In Series × No. of Battery In Parallel × No. of Inverters
Total No. of Batteries = 21850 NEC Article 690.8 (A) (2010).
Calculation of Maximum Circuit
PV Module Computation Current and Wire Selection, p.216
Peak Demand × Operating Hourspv
Inverter Efficiency
34.944 MW × 5hr
0.9
Efficiencybattery × Total Solar Resource Factor IEC 60086-4: Primary
194.1333 MW/hr Batteries – Part 2: Physical
Adjusted Daily Energy = and Electrical
0.95 × 0.80
Adjusted Daily Energy = 255.4386 MW/hr Specifications

Array Size =
Average Sun Hours per Day
255.4386 MW/hr
Array Size =
5hr
Voltage Correction
Voc of Inverter
1000 V
38 V × 0.0085
Maximum no. of PV Module

No. of PV per String IEEE Std 1562-2007. PV Array Sizing,
184915 Section 9. IEEE Guide for Array and
3095.9752 Battery Sizing in Stand-Alone
No. of String in Parallel = 59.7275 Photovoltaic (PV) Systems, pp.5-7,
2008
125
Operating Voltage
355 W × 1774.0982
37.4 V
Wiring and Fusing

As per NEC Article 690.8(A): Calculation of maximum circuit current.
From NEC Article 690.8(B): Ampacity and overcurrent device rating.
Iwire= Isc × 1.25
maximum current shall be the sum
Iwire = 9.27 A × 1.25
of parallel module rated short circuit
Iwire = 11.5875 A
Use: 1-3.5 mm2 THHN + 1-2.0 mm2
PV Module to Charge Controller NEC Article 690.8 (A) (1). The

Iwire = Isc × 1.25 maximum current shall be the sum
Iwire = 9.27 A × 1.25 of parallel module rated short circuit
Iwire = 11.5875 A currents multiplied by 125 percent.
Use: 1-3.5 mm2 THHN + 1-2.00 mm2
Ifuse = Isc × 3 PEC Article 4.30.6.3: Requires that

Ifuse = 9.27 A × 3 OCPD rating not exceed 30 A when
Ifuse = 29.07 A protecting a Copper 10 AWG
Use: 30 A fuse conductor.

Iwire = Isc × 1.25 NEC Article 690.8 (A) (1). The
Iwire = 9.27 A × 1.25 maximum current shall be the sum
Iwire = 11.5875 A of parallel module rated short circuit
Use: 1-3.5 mm2 THHN + 1-2.0 mm2 currents multiplied by 125 percent.
Ifuse = Isc × 3
Ifuse = 9.27 A × 3 PEC Article 4.30.6.3: Requires that
Ifuse = 29.07 A OCPD rating not exceed 30 A when
Use: 30 A fuse protecting a Copper 10 AWG
conductor.
Combine Box to Inverter
No. of String in Parallel NEC Article 100: The continuous
Iwire = Isc × × 1.25 current for this circuit is equal to the
135 current multiplied by 1.25
Iwire = 9.69 × × 1.25
3 × 662
Iwire = 82.34 A
Use: 1- #30 THHN + 1-8.0 THHN
126
No. of String In Parallel NEC Article 110.114 (C): The
Ifuse= Isc × ×3
No. of Phase × No. of Inverters lowest terminal temperature rating
104.2304 for this segment is 125°C. The base
Ifuse = 9.27 × × 3 = 193.61 A
3 × 437 ampacity of this conductor at 125°C
Use: 200 A fuse is 200 A.
Transformer to Bus Bar
Iwire = Irating × 1.25 NEC Article 100: The continuous
Iwire = 606.06 A × 1.25 current for this circuit is equal to the
Iwire = 757.58 A current multiplied by 1.25.
Use: 2 - #250 THHN + 1 - #50 THHN
IITCB = Irating × 2.50

IITCB = 606.06 × 2.50
ITCB = 1515.15 A
Transformer Rating
Solar PV System Voltage = 480 V NEC Article 100: The current rating
Bus voltage = 13,200 V for this circuit is equal to the current
multiplied by 2.50.
S= √3 × 606.06 A × 13 200 V
S = 13.86 MVA
Use: 14 MVA, 480 V (wye) / 13,200 V (wye) Transformer
Design Simulation Using PVsyst
Figure 3-76. Location Map
127
Figure 3-76 shows the location of the solar generating power plant is on Calatagan, Batangas shown in the
figure with geographical coordinates and site parameters of Calatagan.
Figure 3-77. Sun Paths Diagram
Figure 3-77 shows the sun path of Calatagan, Batangas within the whole year, with the latitude of 13.86 N
and longitude of 120.63 E
Simulation for Micro Inverter
Figure 3-78. PVSyst Simulation Parameters
128
Figure 3-78 shows the parameters for the simulation using PVSyst.
Figure 3-79. Main Results and Balances
Figure 3-79 shows the main results and balances of the simulated design using PVSyst.
Figure 3-80. PVSyst Loss Diagram
Figure 3-80 shows the loss diagram of the simulated design in PVSyst.
129
Figure 3-81. PVSyst Horizon Line in Calatagan
Figure 3-81 shows the horizon line simulated in Calatagan, Batangas
Figure 3-82. Evaluation of the Production Probability Forecast
Figure 3-82 shows the probability forecast of the power production in Calatagan,Batangas.
130
Figure 3-83. Simulation Variants for the Solar Farm
Figure 3-83 shows the variants needed for the simulation of the designed solar farm.
Figure 3-84. Site Monthly Values
Figure 3-78 shows the generation of synthetic hourly meteo values based on the PVSyst that applies the
synthetic generation and used the monthly diffuse to re-normalize the hourly output values of diffuse.
131
Simulation of String Inverter
Figure 3-85. PVSyst Simulation Parameters for the Solar Farm with String Inverter
Figure 3-85 shows the parameters for the simulation using PVSyst for the string inverter designed solar farm.
Figure 3-86. Main Results and Balances for String Inverter
132
Figure 3-87. PVSyst Loss Diagram for the Solar Farm with String Inveter
Figure 3-88. Production Probability Forecast for the Solar Farm with String Inverter
133
Figure 3-89. PVSyst Horizon Line in Calatagan
Figure 3-89 shows the horizon line simulated in Calatagan, Batangas.
Figure 3-90. Site Monthly Values for String Inverter Design
The figure 3-90 shows the generation of synthetic hourly meteo values based on the PVSyst that applies
the synthetic generation and used the monthly diffuse to re-normalize the hourly output values of diffuse.
134
Simulation for Central Inverter
Figure 3-91. PVSyst Simulation Parameters for the Solar Farm with Central Inverter
Figure 3-91 shows the parameters for the simulation using PVSyst for the string inverter designed solar farm.
Figure 3-92. Main Results and Balances for String Inverter
135
Figure 3-93. PVSyst Loss Diagram for the Solar Farm with Central Inverter
Figure 3-94. Production Probability Forecast for the Solar Farm with Central Inverter
136
Figure 3-95. PVSyst Loss Diagram for the Solar Farm with Central Inveter
Figure 3-96. PVSyst Horizon Line in Calatagan for the Central Inverter
Figure 3-96 shows the horizon line simulated in Calatagan, Batangas.
137
Figure 3-97. PVSyst Simulation Parameters for the Solar Farm with Central Inverter
Figure 3-97 shows the parameters for the simulation using PVSyst for the central inverter designed solar
farm.
Figure 3-98. Site Monthly Values Central Inverter Design
Figure 3-98 shows the generation of synthetic hourly meteo values based on the PVSyst that applies the
synthetic generation and used the monthly diffuse to re-normalize the hourly output values of diffuse.
138
Design 3: Hydro Power Plant
A hydropower system is a series of interconnected components. Hydropower is based on simple concepts.
Flowing water spins a turbine, the turbine spins a generator and electricity is produced in the generator. Many
other components may be in a system, but it all begins with the energy already within the flowing water. For
maximum efficiency, the turbine should be designed to match specific head and flow. The following is the
hydro turbine to be used.
Figure 3-99. Design Options of Hydro Power Plant
Figure 3-99 shows the design options of the hydro power plant. The design will revolve on the availability of
water flow and water head is the best suitable for the location. Run off river without pondage is further divided
into two which is the Tubular Turbine and Kaplan Turbine. Low Head Hydro Power have Kaplan Axial Flow
Turbine and Bulb Turbine and for High Head Hydro Power have Pelton Turbine and Turgo Impulse Turbine.
Design Options of Hydro Power Plant

The diagram above shows the different hydro turbine design options. There are types of hydro turbines
according to its water head and water flow. Under each category fall more subtypes. In this design project,
four hydro turbines for different water head and two hydro turbines for run off river without pondage. Run-off
river without pondage does not have storage or pondages to stop water and this type of plant can only use
139
water as and when available. Based on the water head we have the Low head hydro power which generally
utilize heads of only a few meters or less and the High head hydro power which utilize a dam to store water
at an increased elevation.
Design Stages of Hydro Power Plant
Figure 3-100. Proposed Single Line Diagram of Hydro Power Plant
The figure 3-100 shows the single line diagram of the power system and the stages where each component
is designed.
Data from Load Curve

Peak demand in the year 2018 = 20.76 IEEE Std. 1013 (2000). Load
Using the growth equation from Electric Power Distribution IEEE Std. 1013 (2000). Load
System Engineering by TuranGönen: Computation, Average Demand,
Section 6, p.236
where:
Pm = P2018 (1+g)m
140
20.76 (1+g)2

P2028 = P2018 (1+g)10 IEEE Std. 1013 (2000). Load
PRC = PDC - P2028
where: Computation, Future Maximum
PRC = Reserve Capacity Demand, Section 6, p.236
PRC = 6.48 – 34.944


PRC
PF = IEEE Std. 1013 (2000). Load
where:
34.944 MW
PF =
3
PF = 11.648 MW
Rating
10,000 kVA, 3-phase, 69/13.8 kV
At Primary Side
I=
√3 × V Standard General Requirements for
I=
√3 (69 kV)
I = 83.6739 A
141
The size of conductor for primary winding should be NEC Section 240-3: General
167.3479 A. As indicated that the 80% ampacity of Requirements for Branch Circuit,
the conductor shall be the full load current. Feeder and Other Conductors.
IFL = 83.6739 A × 1.25

IFL = 104.5924 A
At Secondary Side
I=
I=
√3 (13.8 kV)
I = 418.3698A

be 418.3698A. As indicated that the 80% ampacity
Feeder And Other Conductors
IFL = 418.3698A x 1.25
IFL = 522.9622 A
Circuit Breaker
Use: 60AT CB

Grounding Conductor
1 Systems.
IGROUNDING = (83.6739)
5
142
1
IGROUNDING = (418.3698 A) Multi-Grounded Alternating Current
5 Systems.
Neutral Conductor
Switch Gear Design

S
IDSA = IEC 62271-102(2001) High-voltage
√3 VL
switchgear and control gear - Part
10 MVA
IDSA = × 2.5 102: Alternating current disconnectors
√3 (13.8 kV) and earthing switches
IDSA = 1045.9244 A
Disconnector Rating
13.8 kV
√3 IEC 60099-8(2011) Part 8/IEEE C62.22
Current Transformer
IEC 60099-8 (2011) Part 8/IEEE C62.22
143
Lighting Arrester
VLA =
√3 (C) (67) and 310.60(C) (69), page 226;
Highest Voltage Conductor For General Wiring
69 kV × 1.05
VLA =
√3
VLA = 41.829 kV
Nominal Voltage Philippine Grid Code PP. (32) Section 3.2.3 – The
VLA = 11.9512 kV
Bus Bar Sizing

√3 (13.8 kV) for General Wiring
ILF = 418.3697 A

IBUS = 1255.1091 A - 125: Solving 3 Phase Current
Bus Bar Dimension

Direct in ground – ¼ x 8, ⅜ x 6, ½ x 5, ½ x Copper Development Association
6, ¾ x 4, ¾ x 5 (2014), Article 5.2, Page 79: Conductor
Free air – ¼ x 6, ⅜ x 5 for General Wiring
For 30˚C Rise

0.68 × 10-6 Copper Development Association
RDCBUSBAR = (2014), Article 5.2, Page 79: Conductor
(0.00635) (0.125) for General Wiring
RDCBUSBAR = 7.0452 × 10-4 Ω/m
(0.2) (0.68 × 10-6 )
RACBUSBAR =
(0.00635) (0.125)
RACBUSBAR = 7.5825 × 10-6 Ω/m

L=
L = 3.9875 × 10-9 H/m for General Wiring
144
XL = 2π (60) (3.99×10−9)
XL = 1.5042 Ω/m

(0.225) (8.8542×102 ) (0.125)
C=
(0.125) Copper Development Association
C = 15.9376 × 10-24 F/m (2014), Article 5.2, page 79: Conductor
1 for General Wiring
Xc =
2π (6) (5937610×10-24 )
Xc = 1.6644 × 1020 Ω/m
Impedance
ZBUS = [√ (3 9875×10−9) × (5 9376×10−2)]
ZBUS = 2.5209 × 10-16 Ω/m Copper Development Association
1.5042×10-9 ×5.9376×10-2
Φ = tan for general Wiring
7.5825×10-6
Φ = 90 ∘
ZTOTAL = 2.5209 × 10-6 Ω/m × (10 m)

ZTOTAL = 2.5209 × 10-15∠-90 IEEE Std Gray Book C8.3.3 page 231:
Use: Dimensions in meter: 6.35 mm × 152 mm Basic insulating materials are either
Skin Effect Ratio at 70℃: 1.18 organic or inorganic.
Area in CM: 1910CM

VD = I √ (R2 + X2) National Electric Code (1999), Article
210, page 19: Where the maximum
where: total voltage drop on both feeders and
I = Full Load Current branch circuits to the farthest outlet
R = Resistance does not exceed 5 percent.
X = Reactance
At 6.1 miles to New Substation National Electric Code (1999), Article

R = 6.1 (0.8950) = 5.4595 Ω 210, page 19: Where the maximum
X = 6.1 (0.6403) = j3.9058 Ω total voltage drop on both feeders and
branch circuits to the farthest outlet
VD = 83.6739 √(5.45952 + 3.90582) does not exceed 5 percent.
VD = 3.7705 kV
3.7705 kV
VD % =
69 kV
VD % = 4.4645 %
145
Derating Factor
100
0.09 (1 - 100 ×100) IEEE Std 80 (2000), Guide for Safety
CD = 1 - in AC Substation Grounding:
2 × 0.1 + 0.09
CD = 0.6928 Calculation of Potential Difference
Decrement Factor
X 1
Ta = × ( ) IEEE Std 80 (2000), Guide for Safety
R 2 TF
1 in AC Substation Grounding:
Ta = 15 × ( ) Calculation of Potential Difference
2 T(60)
Ta = 0.0398
-2 × Tf
Ta
DF = √1+ ( Tf ) (1 - e Ta ) IEEE Std 80 (2000), Guide for Safety
Ta -2 × 0.15 in AC Substation Grounding:
DF = √1+ ( Tf ) (1 - e 0.0398 ) Calculation of Potential Difference
DF = 1.1248

I = IGDF
I = 3.1 (1.1248) IEEE Std 80 (2000), Guide for Safety
I = 3.4869 A in AC Substation Grounding:
Ground Potential
0.157
√0.15
VTOUCH POTENTIAL MAX = 45 V IEEE Std 80 (2000), Guide for Safety
Buried Length in AC Substation Grounding:
Lr Calculation of Potential Difference
L = LC+ [1.55 + 1.22 ( )] LR
√L2X + L2Y
3
L = LC+ [1.55 + 1.22 ( )] LR
√90 + 50 2 2
L = 994 m

146
1 1 1 1
KS = π [2h + D+h + D (1 – 0.5n-2)] IEEE Std 80 (2000), Guide for Safety
1 1 1 1
KS = π [2 (0.6) + 12.5+0.6 + 12.5 (1 – 0.5n-2)] in AC Substation Grounding:
KS = 0.314
Power Losses
NLL = 11.6 kW IEEEC.57.12.00-2010: IEEE Standard
LL = Load Loss

%Z* = 9%
Total Power Losses

TLF = NLL + LL IEEE Standard C57.12.00-2010:
TL = 3TLF Standard General Requirements for
where:
LL = Load Loss
TLF = 11.6 kW + 47.6 kW IEEE Standard C57.12.00-2010:

TLF = 59.2 kW Standard General Requirements for
TL = 177.6 kW Power and Regulation Transformers
147
Figure 3-101. Single Line Diagram of the New Sub Station (Hydro Power Plant)
148
The figure 3-102 shows the layout design of the new substation that will be deployed in Balayan and
Nasugbu, both are rated 10 MVA.
The location of the Wind Power Plant is at Calatagan, Batangas (yellow pinpoint). The power generated is to
be transmitted on two feeders namely Balayan (blue pinpoint) and Nasugbu (white pinpoint). The distances
of the two feeders from the generation to substation is 9.8 km and 16.4 km respectively.

S
√3 VL
where:
Conductors.
IL = Load Current
VL = Line Voltage
11.648 MW + 177.6 kW
IL =
√3 69 kV
IL = 97.9588 A
The size of conductor 97.9588 × 1.25 = 122.4485 A PEC Part I (2009) Sec 4.30.2.4 page
As indicated that the 80% ampacity of the conductor 580: General Requirements for Full
shall be the full load current. Load Branch Circuit, Feeder and Other
Use: ACSR Turkey, AWG 6 Conductors.
For the Grounding Conductor
149
Code = Turkey
Area = 6 AWG IEC 60826 (2003) – Design Criteria for
Copper Area = 8 AWG ~ 8.39 mm2 Overhead Transmission Line, Chapter
Strand = 6/1.68 mm 6.2.1, and Section: Specification for
Diameter = 5.04 mm Aluminum Conductors for Overhead
Weight = 54 kg/km ~ 0.054 kg/m Power Transmission Line, p43
Rated Strength = 5.28 kN
Elevation: 0m

1 kt = 1.852 km/hr ~ 1.15708 mph NESC C2 (2007) – Strength
km Requirements and Wind Loading;
1.852
Wind Speed = (9 kt) × ( hr ) × ( 1000 m ) × ( 1 hr ) Section 26: For Installations and
1 kt 1 km 3600 sec Maintenance, p43
0.5 × ρ × v2 × d
WW =
g
where:
2 1cm 1in 1ft 1m

(0.5) × (1.2kg/m3) × (4.63m/s) × (5.04mm × × × × )
WW = 10cm 2.54cm 12in 3.28ft
9.8066m/s2
WW = 0.0014 kg/m
Wt = √(WC)2 + (WW)2
Wt = √(0.054 kg/m)2 + (0.0014 kg/m)2
Wt = 0.0540 kg/m
IEC 60826(2003) – Design Criteria for
1kg Overhead Transmission Line, Chapter
T= (5.28kN) × ( ) 6.2.6.4 Wind Loads, p54-55
4.8066N
150
T = 1098.4896 kg
L h×T
X1 = –[ ]
2 WT × L
360m (0) × (1098.4896kg)
X1 = –[ ]
2 (27kg/m) × (360m)
X1 = 180 m
WT × X1 2
S1 =
2×T
2
(0.0540kg/m) × (180)
S1 =
(2) × (1098.4896kg)
S1 = 0.7964 m
WW
Θ = tan-1 ( )
WC
0.0014kg/m
Θ = tan-1 ( )
0.054kg/m
Θ = 0.0259˚
Vertical Sag: NESC 235C2B (2007) – Sag Related

Vsag1 = (S1) × (cos Θ) Clearances, Section: Clearances to other
Vsag1 = (0.7964m) cos (3.9383˚) structure, p142
Vsag1 = 0.7691 m
2
Wt (L)
YMAX =
8(T) NESC C2 (2007) – For Clearances
2
(0.0540kg/m) × (360) Computation, Section 23, p81
YMAX =
(8)(1098.48963kg)
YMAX = 0.7964 m
8 × YMAX 2
3L
2
(8) × (0.7964m)
(3) × (360)
Clearance = H – S
Clearance = 28m – 0.7964m
Clearance = 27.2036 m
151
No. of disc insulator = 5 disc

where: Standard Handbook for Electrical

n = Insulator Number Engineers (2009) – Line Insulation,
k = 0.12 p14 -21
V2 = (V1) × (1+k)
V2 = (V1) × (1+0.12)
V2 = 1.12V1 Standard Handbook for Electrical
Engineers (2009) – Voltage Levels,
V3 = (V1) × k + (V2) × (1+k) p14 -3
V3 = 0.12V1 + (V2) × (1.12)
V3 = 1.3744V1
V4 = (V1) × k + (V2) × k + (V3) × (1+k)

V4 = 0.12V1 + (1.12) × (0.12) + (1.3744V1) (1.12)
V4 = 1.7937V1
69kV
= V1 + 1.12V1 + 1.3744V1 + 1.7937V1
√3
69kV
V1 = √3
4.2881
V1 = 9.2902 kV
V5 = (1.7937) × (9.2902)
V5 = 16.6638 kV
69kV
( )
√3
ηSTRING = [ ] × 100
(9) × (16.6638)
ηSTRING = 59.7660%

Based on ACSR Turkey specifications, IEC 60228, 3rd Edition 2004 – 11:
Resistance⁄ International Standard on Conductors
1000 ft = 0.641 Ω of Insulated Cables.
Length of Feeders:
LF1 = 9.8 km
LF2 = 16.4 km
Conductor Calculation IEC 60287-1-1: Calculation of Current

At Balayan = 9.8 km Ratings, Section 2.4.3, Table 2, Page
Calculation for Total Resistance of Conductor 31, 2006
152
Ω
R = (0.06712 ) 9.8km
km
R = 0.6578 Ω

Deq
L = 2 x 10-7 ln ( )
GMR
where:

transposed, National Electrical Code (NEC), Rated
page 461, 2011
where:
.680 in
r= = 0.34 in = 0.008636 m
2
GMR = 0.7788 (0.008636 m)
GMR = 6.7257 × 10-3
The figure 3-104 above shows the appearance of a single circuit tower for a transmission line.
153
3
6.b.(2), page 6-1
6.9933 1000m
L = 2 x 10-7 ln ( -3
)( ) ( 9.8km )
6.7257 x 10 1km
L = 13.6157 mH
XL = 2π f L = 2π (60) (13.6157 mH) National Electrical Code (NEC): Rated

XL = j5.133 Ω/phase 60-Hz Withstand Voltage, Article 370,
page 461, 2011
ZT = (0.6578+ j5.133 Ω/phase) × 3 phase
ZT = 1.9734 + j6.9147 Ω
At Nasugbu = 16.4 km
Ω IEC 60287-1-1: Calculation of Current

R = (0.06712 ) 10.34km
R = 0.6940 Ω 31, 2006

Deq
L = 2 x 10-7 ln ( )
GMR
where:

transposed National Electrical Code (NEC): Rated
GMR = 0.7788 (r) 60-Hz Withstand Voltage, Article 370,
page 461, 2011
where:
0.680 in
r= = 0.34 in = 0.008636 m
2
GMR = 0.7788 (0.008636m)
GMR = 6.7257 × 10-3 m
154
3
Deq = √(7.7492 m)(8.4119 m)(5.2469 m) Bulletin 1724E – 2003: Horizontal
6.9933 1000 m 6.b.(2), page 6-1
L = 2 x 10-7 ln ( -3
)( ) (10.34 km)
6.7257 x 10 1 km
L = 14.3659 mH
XL = 2π f L = 2π (60) (14.3659 mH) National Electrical Code (NEC): Rated

XL = 5.4158 Ω/phase 60-Hz Withstand Voltage, Article 370,
page 461, 2011
ZT = (0.5262 + j5.4158 Ω/phase) × 3 phase
ZT = 1.5786 + j16.2474 Ω

RFn = LFn x R
IEC 60228, 3rd Edition 2004 – 11:
where: International Standard on Conductors of
Insulated Cables.
155
RF1 = LF1 x R
RF1 = 9.8 km x 0.641Ω⁄0.3048 km IEC 60228, 3rd Edition 2004 – 11:
RF1 = 20.6096 Ω International Standard on Conductors of
Insulated Cables.
RF2 = LF2 x R
RF2 = 16.4 km x 0.641Ω⁄0.3048 km
RF2 = 34.4895 Ω
RFT = RF1 + RF2

RFT = 55.0992 Ω
Losses per Feeder:

PFn = 3I2 RFn
IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery
(Volume: 21, Issue: 3, July 2006):
where:
PFn = Power Loss in Feeder 'n'
Estimation Method
I = Line Current
PF1 = 3I2 RF1

2 IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery
PF1 = 3(97.9588) (20.6096) (Volume: 21, Issue: 3, July 2006):
PF1 = 593.3046 kW Power Loss Measurement and
Estimation Method
PF2 = 3I2 RF2
2
PF2 = 3(97.9588) (34.4895)
(Volume: 21, Issue: 3, July 2006):
Nominal T
A ~ D = 1+(ZL × Y/2) = 0.9537 < 0.0029 Ω

B = ZL [1 + (ZL × Y/4)] = 51.2896 < 87.6958 Ω
C ~ Y = j1.7227 x 10-3
69kV 5MVA
VSN = A[ <0] + B[ <-cos-1(0.8)]
√3 √3×69kV
156
VSN = 36831.9699 < 0.0529 V
VS = (√3) × (36.8319kV)
VS = 63.7947 kV
69kV 5MVA
IS = ( <0) × (1.227x10-3< 90) + ( <-cos-10.8) × (0.9537 < 0.0029)
√3 √3×69kV
IS = 22.2695 < 1.1006 A
Efficiency
(5MVA) × (0.8)
η =[ 2
] × 100
(5MVA) × (0.8) + (3) × (22.2695) × (3.2772)
η = 99.8783%
Voltage Regulation
63.7947–69 NEC Section 240-3: General
VR =( ) × 100 Requirements for Branch Circuit,
69 Feeder and Other Conductors.
VR = 7.5439%
Rating
25,000 kVA, 3-phase, 13.8 kV/69 kV
Primary Winding
MVA Rating
I=
√3 × V
20 MVA
I=
√3 (11 kV)
I = 836.7395 A

IF = 836.7395 A x 1.25
IF = 1045.9244 A
I=
I=
√3 (69 V)
I = 167.3479 A
157
The size of conductor for secondary winding should be 167.3479 A. As indicated that the 80% ampacity of
the conductor shall be the full load current.
IF = 167.3479 A x 1.25
IF = 209.1849 A NEC Section 450.3 – Computation for
Use: Finch 1113.0 (KCM or AWG) Overcurrent Protection of Transformer
Circuit Breaker
Primary Circuit Breaker
167.3479 A x 3 = 502.0437 A
Use: 600 AT CB

NEC Section 450.3 – Computation for
33.4696 A x 3 = 100.4088 A
Overcurrent Protection of Transformer
Use: 15000 AT CB
Grounding Conductor
1 PEC Part 2, Article 1.4.4.3 (b) or
IGROUNDING CONDUCTOR = (Current) System Grounding Conductors for
5
IGROUNDING CONDUCTOR = (836.7395 A) Systems.
5

1
IGROUNDING CONDUCTOR = (167.3479 A) Multi-Grounded Alternating Current
5 Systems.
Neutral Conductor
Switch Gear Design

IDSA =
√3 VL Switchgear and Control Gear - Part
IDSA = × 2.5 and earthing switches
√3 (13.8 kV)
158
IDSA = 1045.9244 A
Disconnector Rating
69 kV Switchgear And Control Gear - Part
VT- Primary Voltage = 102: Alternating Current Disconnectors
√3
VT- Primary Voltage = 39.8372 kV and Earthing Switches
13.8 kV
√3 IEC 60099-8(2011) Part 8/IEEE C62.22
Type: Disconnector Material: Porcelain Arrester and Ground Voltage Fault
Current Transformer
Use: Primary Current = 100 A IEC 60099-8(2011) Part 8/IEEE C62.22
Secondary Current = 5 A page 8 – 16; Standard for Lightning
Accuracy Power = 30 VA Arrester and Ground Voltage Fault
Lighting Arrester
Voltage ×1.05
VLA = NEC (2001) Article 310, Table 310.60
√3 (C) (67) and 310.60(C) (69), page 226;
Highest Voltage
69 kV × 1.05 Conductor for General Wiring
VLA =
√3
VLA = 41.829 kV
Philippine Grid Code PP. (32) Section 3.2.3 – The
Nominal Voltage
system owner must ensure that the voltage variation
13.8 kV × 1.05
VLA = 11.9512 kV

National Electric Code (1999), Article
VD = I √(R2 + X2) 210, page 19: Where the maximum
total voltage drop on both feeders and
where: branch circuits to the farthest outlet
I = Full Load Current does not exceed 5 percent.
159
R = Resistance
X = Reactance

R = 6.1 (0.8950) = 5.4595 Ω
X = 6.1 (0.6403) = j3.9058 Ω
VD = 167.3479 √(5.45952 + 3.90582) National Electric Code (1999), Article

VD = 1.1234 kV voltage drop on both feeders and branch
1.1234 kV circuits to the farthest outlet does not
VD % =
69 kV exceed 5 percent.
VD % = 1.6281 %

R = 10.2 (0.8950) = 9.1290 Ω
National Electric Code (1999), Article
X = 10.2 (0.6404) = j6.5321 Ω
1.878.5275 kV exceed 5 percent.
VD % =
69 kV
VD % = 2.7225 %

Derating Factor
100
0.09 (1 - )
CD = 1 -
100 ×100 IEEE Std 80 (2000), Guide for Safety
2 × 0.1 + 0.09 in AC Substation Grounding:
CD = 0.6928 Calculation of Potential Difference
Decrement Factor
X 1
Ta = × ( ) IEEE Std 80 (2000), Guide for Safety
R 2 TF
in AC Substation Grounding:
160
1
Ta = 15 × ( )
2 T(60)
Ta = 0.0398
-2 × Tf
Ta
DF = √1+ ( Tf ) (1 - e Ta ) IEEE Std 80 (2000), Guide for Safety
Ta -2 × 0.15 in AC Substation Grounding:
DF = √1+ ( Tf ) (1 - e 0.0398 ) Calculation of Potential Difference
DF = 1.1248

I = IGDF
IEEE Std 80 (2000), Guide for Safety
I = 3.1 (1.1248)
I = 3.4869 A
Ground Potential
0.157 IEEE Std 80 (2000), Guide for Safety

√0.15 in AC Substation Grounding:
VTOUCH POTENTIAL MAX = 45 V Calculation of Potential Difference
Buried Length
Lr
L = LC+ [1.55 + 1.22 ( )] LR
√L2X + L2Y
IEEE Std 80 (2000), Guide for Safety
3
√902 + 502
L = 994 m

1 1 1 1
KS = π [2h + D+h + D (1 – 0.5n-2)] IEEE Std 80 (2000), Guide for Safety
1 1 1 1 in AC Substation Grounding:
KS = π [2 (0.6) + 12.5+0.6 + 12.5 (1 – 0.5n-2)]
KS = 0.314
Power Losses
LL = Load Loss
161
%Z = 9%
IEEEC.57.12.00-2010 IEEE Standard
Total Power Losses
TL = NLL + LL
where:
LL = Load Loss
TL = 103.4 kW
The figure above shows the single line diagram of the system using double breaker bus scheme.
162
Switchyard Layout
Stage 5: Hydro Power Plant Design
Required kW Output
2

n=1
where:
2

n=1
POut = 28.464 MW + (0.177 MW + 0.103 MW) + 1.214 MW
POut = 29.958 MW
Number of Hydro Turbines to be Used

Target Power Output
Capacity of Each Unit
System Data
Peak Demand = 34.944 MW
Average Daily Energy per Day = 873.6 MWh
163
Turbine Design
Selecting the type of turbines is affected by the generator’s kilowatt rating. Turbine kilowatt rating must be
compatible with the kilowatt rating of the generator. Application of different types of turbines to specific hydro
plants depends on the available heads.
IEC: 1116 – 1992: Electromechanical
Availability of Water Flow Equipment Guide for Small Hydroelectric
Installations
Case 1: Run of River Without Poundage
Option 1: Bhel - Standard Tubular Turbines
Figure 3-108. Tubular Turbine
Figure 3.108 shows a tubular type turbine which is usually the best choice for exploitation of tidal power and
hydraulic power with extremely low heads and extremely large flow rates. This has the advantages such as
large discharge, high flow speed and high efficiency.
General Data:
 Manufacturer: Bharat Heavy Electricals Limited
 Power Output: 2475 kW
 Runner Diameter: 1800mm
 Design Head: 15m
 Efficiency: 96%
Option 2: Bhel-Standard Kaplan Turbines
Figure 3-109. Kaplan Turbine
164
Figure 3-109 shows a kaplan turbine which is an inward flow reaction turbine, which means that the working
fluid changes pressure as it moves through the turbine and gives up its energy. Its main parts usually include
Blades, hub, main shaft, runner cone, and rotating mechanism.
General Data:
 Manufacturer: Bharat Heavy Electricals Limited

 Runner Diameter: 2200mm
 Design Head: 16m
 Efficiency: 94%
Regulation
The regulation considered under turbine design is the pressure regulation and it is computed in terms of
percentage rise using
n√P IEC: 41–1991: Field acceptance tests to
ns = 5 determine the hydraulic performance of
H4 hydraulic turbines, storage pumps and
A=πd2 pump-turbines
P
Q=
hr ×9.804×.8
Q LV
V= n=
A gHT
∆H n
= {n±√n2 ÷4}
H 2
Wherein:
Ns = Specific Speed
Nr = Revolutions Per Minute
Pr = Power in Metric Horse Power at Full Gate Opening
ΔH = Change in Design Head
L = Length of The Penstock
V = Velocity
g = Gravity
T = Time
Q = Discharge
A = Area
P = Rated Power
hr = Rated Head or Design Head
d = Diameter
165
Regulation Computation
Assumptions:
Equal length of penstock in all turbine units = 100m
Equal closing time in all turbine units = 1 sec

Option 1: Bhel - Standard Tubular Turbines
The Tubular turbine is designed using the following parameters:
Rated Power of the turbine output = 2475 kW IEC: 41–1991: Field acceptance tests to
Runner diameter =1800 mm determine the hydraulic performance of
Effective head = 14m hydraulic turbines, storage pumps and
Efficiency = 96% pump-turbines
Frequency= 60 HZ
Length of penstock = 100m
Design Speed
Head is expected to vary less than 10% from design head and h the next greater speed may be chosen. A
multiple of four poles is preferred, but standard generators are available in some multiples of two poles.
120f 120(60) IEC:1116-1992-10: Electromechanical

n= = =300 rpm
p 24 Equipment Guide for Small Hydroelectric
Installation
Design Specific Speed
The specific speed value defines the approximate head range application for each turbine type and size. Low
head units tend to have a high specific speed, and high-head units to have a low specific speed.
n√P 300√2475 IEC:1116-1992-10: Electromechanical
ns = 5 = 5⁄4
= 551.1233 m-kW
H4 14 Equipment Guide for Small Hydroelectric
Installation
Rated Discharge vd
Rated head; discharge; unit size and runner diameter and configuration. Runner diameter may be used for
preliminary layout of the turbine for economic evaluation.
P 2475
Qr = = = 22.54 m3 ⁄s IEC:1116-1992-10: Electromechanical
hr ×9.804×0.8 14×9.804×0.8
Equipment Guide for Small Hydroelectric
Cross Sectional Area of Penstock Installation
A=πd2
2
A=πd2 =π(1.8) =10.1788 m2
Rated Velocity (Conduit Water Velocity for Full Gate at Hr, M/S)
166
Q 22.54 m3 ⁄s IEC:1116-1992-10: Electromechanical
V= = = 2.2144 m⁄s
A 10.1788 m2 Equipment Guide for Small Hydroelectric
Installation
Pressure Regulation
Pressure characteristics of turbine are required to be provided according to performance requirement of the
hydroelectric stations by optimizing pressure water system design.
LV (100m)(2.2144 m⁄s)
n= = = 1.6123
gHT (9.81 m⁄s2 )(14m)(1s)
Pressure Rise:
∆H n 0.16123 2
= {n±√n2 +4} = {0.16123 +√0.16123 +4} =0.1747 x 100% = 17.47%
H 2 2
Pressure Drop:
∆H n 0.16123
= {n±√n2 ÷4} = {0.16123-√0.161232 +4} =-0.1487 x100% = -14.87%
H 2 2
Option 2: Bhel - Standard Kaplan Turbines
The Kaplan turbine is designed using the following parameters:
Design head = 16m hydraulic turbines, storage pumps and
Frequency= 60 HZ
Speed Design
Head is expected to vary less than 10% from design head and h the next greater speed may be chosen.

n= = = 300 rpm Equipment Guide for Small Hydroelectric
p 24 Installation

ns = 5
= 5⁄4
= 554.6325 rpm Equipment Guide for Small Hydroelectric
H4 16
Installation
167
Rated Discharge
P 3500
Q= = =27.8904 m3 ⁄s
hr ×9.804×.8 (16m)(9.804)(0.8)
Cross Sectional Area of Penstock

IEC:1116-1992-10: Electromechanical
A=πd 2 Equipment Guide for Small Hydroelectric
2 Installation
A=πd2 =π(2.2) = 15.2053m2
Rated Velocity (Conduit Water Velocity for Full Gate at Hr, M/S)

V= = =1.8402 m⁄s Equipment Guide for Small hydroelectric
A 15.2053m2
installation
Pressure Regulation
LV (100m)(1.8402 m⁄s)
n= = =1.1724
gHT (9.81 m⁄s2 )(16m)(1s)
Pressure Rise:
∆H n .1172
= {n±√n2 ÷4} = {.1172+√.11722 +4} = 0.1243 × 100% = 12.43%
H 2 2
Pressure Drop:
∆H n .1172
= {n±√n2 ÷4} = {.1172-√.11722 +4} =-0.1105 × 100% = -11.05%
H 2 2
Stability
The stability of the turbine is called its speed regulation. The more important factors upon which the stability
of interconnected units depend are the flywheel effect of the unit, the hydraulic design of the
water passages and speed and capacity of the unit. It is expressed as the mechanical start up time of the
unit and it is computed using
GD2 × n2
Tm= 5
(metric units)
3.6×10 × P
120f
n=
p
Wherein:
Tm = Mechanical start up time
168
GD2 = WR2 = Flywheel Effect of the Revolving Parts
W = Weight of The Revolving Parts
R = Radius of The Revolving Parts
N = Rotational Speed
P = Turbine Full Gate Capacity in Metric Horse Power (1 Kw = .86 Metric Hp)
P = Number of Poles=4
f = Frequency
Tw = Water Start Up Time
Stability Computation
120f 120(60)
n= p = 24 = 300rpm

Option 1: Bhel-Standard Tubular Turbines
The Tubular turbine is designed using the following parameters:
Rated Power of the Turbine Output = 3319.03metric Hp

Runner Diameter =1800 Mm
Design Head = 14m IEC: 41–1991: Field acceptance
Efficiency = 96% tests to determine the hydraulic
Frequency= 60 HZ performance of hydraulic turbines,
Length of Penstock = 100m storage pumps and pump-turbines.
Mass = 2700Kg
Mechanical Start Up Time or Speed Regulation

The speed regulation or stability of a hydro-electric unit may be defined as its inherent property to ensure
that changes in external conditions as well as in the turbine and governing equipment result in a periodic or
rapidly damped, periodic return to the new steady state.
Weight of Rotating Parts IEC:1116-1992-10 Electromechanical

Equipment Guide for Small
W=Mg=(2700Kg)(9.81 m⁄s2 )=26487 Kgm⁄s2 Hydroelectric Installation
Product of weight of rotating parts and square of the radius of gyration

2 2 2
1.800 2
GD =WR =(26487Kgm⁄s ) (( ) ) =21454.47
2
Flywheel Effect
Flywheel effect is expressed as starting up time of the unit (Tm). This is the time in seconds for torque to
accelerate the rotating masses from 0 to rotational speed.
IEC:1116-1992-10 Electromechanical
2 2 2
GD ×n 21454.47×300 Equipment Guide for Small
Tm= 5
(metric units)= 5
= 1.6160s Hydroelectric Installation
3.6×10 ×P 3.6×10 × 3319.03
169
Water Start Up Time (Tw)
LV 100(2.2144)
Tw = = = 1.5048s
gH 9.81(15)
Discharge Diameter (D3)

2 2
Velocity Ratio (ϕ) = 0.0211(ns )3 = 0.0211(551.1233)3 = 1.4183
84.47×ϕ×√hd 84.47×1.4183×√14
D3 = = = 1.4942 m3 ⁄s
n 300
Maximum Head
Hmax =125%(hr )=1.25(14m)=17.5 m
Equipment Guide for Small Hydroelectric
Installation
Minimum Head
Hmin =65%(hr )=0.65(14m) = 9.1 m
Option 2: Bhel -Standard Kaplan Turbines
The Kaplan turbine is designed using the following parameters:
Rated Power of the turbine output = 4693 metric hp

Runner diameter =2200 mm
Design head = 16 m IEC: 41–1991: Field acceptance tests to
Efficiency = 94% determine the hydraulic performance of
Frequency= 60 Hz hydraulic turbines, storage pumps and
Length of penstock = 100 m pump-turbines.
Mass = 8000 Kg
Power required by the system = 35 MW (assuming that generator is lossless)

Weight of Rotating Parts
equipment guide for small hydroelectric
W = Mg=(8000Kg)(9.81 m⁄s2 )=78480 Kgm⁄s2 installation
Product of Weight of Rotating Parts and Square of the Radius of Gyration
2.200 2
GD2 =WR2 =(78480Kgm⁄s2 ) (( ) ) = 94960.8
2
Flywheel effect
170
GD2 ×n2 94960.8×3002 IEC:1116-1992-10: Electromechanical
Tm= (metric units)= = 5.0586 s
5
3.6×10 ×P
5
3.6×10 ×4693 Equipment Guide for Small Hydroelectric
Installation
Water Start Up Time (Tw)
LV 100(1.8402)
Tw = = = 1.1724 s
gH 9.81(16)

2 2
Velocity Ratio (ϕ)=0.0211(ns )3 = 0.0211(554.6325 )3 = 1.4243
84.47×ϕ×√hd 84.47×1.4243×√16
D3 = = =1.6041 m3 ⁄s
n 300
Maximum Head IEC:1116-1992-10: Electromechanical

Hmax =125%(hr )=1.25(16m)=20 m Equipment Guide for Small Hydroelectric
Installation
Minimum Head
Hmin =65%(hr )=0.65(16m) = 10.4 m
Availability of Water Head
Case 1: Low Head Hydro Power

Option 1: Kaplan Axial Flow Turbine
Option 2: Darrieus Helical Turbine
Case 2: High Head Hydro Power

Option 1: Jyoti-Standard Pelton Turbine
Option 2: Jyoti-Standard Turgo Turbine
Figure 3-110. Kaplan Axial Flow Turbine with fixed blades
171
Figure 3-110 shows a hydraulic turbine which is an axial flow turbine with a vertical shaft, and its spiral case
is made of metal. The water flows through the channeling pipe, and then into the spiral case.
General Data:
 Manufacturer: Hangzhou Hydrotu Eng’
 Water Head: 2m to 30m
 Runner Diameter: 1100 mm
 Design Head: 40 m
 Efficiency: 90%
Option 2: Bulb Turbine
Figure 3-111. Bulb Turbine
Figure 3-111 shows a Bulb Turbines which is horizontal, and have propeller runners directly connected to
the generator. The generator is enclosed in a water-tight enclosure (bulb) located in the turbine water
passageway. These turbines are typically used at low heads and high discharges.
General Data:

 Water Head: 6m
 Runner Diameter: a mm
172
Figure 3-112. Pelton Turbine
Figure 3-112 shows a Pelton Turbine which is an impulse machine that transforms the potential energy of
water into kinetic energy in a form of a water jet, which impacts and drives a Pelton runner.
General Data:

 Power Output: 5000kW
 Efficiency: 94%
Option 2: Jyoti-Standard Turgo Impulse Turbine
Figure 3-113. Turgo Impulse Turbine
Figure 3-113 shows a turgo turbine which is an impulse turbine and can handle flow rates that are higher
than those Pelton turbines can handle.
173
General Data:
 Manufacturer: Jyoti Ltd.

 Power Output: 4500kW
 Efficiency: 83%
Regulation
The regulation considered under turbine design is the pressure regulation and it is computed in terms of
percentage rise using
A=πd2
P
Q=
hr ×9.804×0.8
Q LV
V= n=
A gHT
∆H n
= {n±√n2 ÷4}
H 2
Wherein:
ΔH = Change in Design Head

H = Design Head
L = Length of The Penstock
V = Velocity
g = Gravity
T = Time
Q = Discharge
A =Area
P = rated power
hr = Rated Head or Design Head
d = Diameter
Regulation Computation
Assumptions:
Equal length of penstock in all turbine units = 100m
Equal closing time in all turbine units = 1 sec
The Kaplan Axial Flow turbine is designed using the following parameters:
174
Frequency= 60 HZ
Design Speed

n= = =300 rpm Equipment Guide for Small Hydroelectric
p 24 Installation
n√P 300√1000
ns = 5 = = 94.3075 m-kW Equipment Guide for Small Hydroelectric
5⁄4
H4 40 Installation
Rated Discharge
P 1000
Qr = = = 3.1875 m3 ⁄s IS 12800 (Part 3) 1991 – Guide lines for
hr ×9.804×0.8 40×9.804×0.8 selection of hydraulic turbines,
preliminary dimensioning and Layout of
Cross Sectional Area of Penstock surface Small Mini and Micro
A=πd2 Hydroelectric Power Houses
2
A=π(1.1) =3.8013m2
Rated Velocity (Conduit Water Velocity for Full Gate at hr, m/s)

V= = = 0.8385 m⁄s Equipment Guide for Small Hydroelectric
A 3.8013m2
Installation
Pressure Regulation
LV (100m)(0.8385 m⁄s)
n= = = 0.2137
gHT (9.81 m⁄s2 )(40m)(1s)
175
Pressure Rise:
∆H n 0.2137
= {n±√n2 ÷4} = {0.2137+√0.21372 +4} = 0.2377 × 100% = 23.77%
H 2 2
Pressure Drop:
∆H n 0.2137
= {n±√n2 ÷4} = {0.2137-√0.21372 +4} = -0.1921 × 100% = -19.201%
H 2 2
The Bulb turbine is designed using the following parameters:
Frequency= 60 HZ
Design Speed
120f 120(60)
n= = =600 rpm IEC:1116-1992-10: Electromechanical
p 12 Equipment Guide for Small Hydroelectric
Installation

ns = 5
= 5⁄4
= 723.73 m-kW
18 Equipment Guide for Small Hydroelectric
H4
Installation
Rated Discharge
P 2000 IEC:1116-1992-10: Electromechanical

Q= = =14.1665 m3 ⁄s Equipment Guide for Small Hydroelectric
hr ×9.804×.8 (18m)(9.804)(0.8)
Installation
A=πd2
2
A= π(3.8) = 45.3646m2
176
Q 14.1665 m3 ⁄s
V= = =0.3123 m⁄s Equipment Guide for Small Hydroelectric
A 45.3646m2 Installation
Pressure Regulation
LV (100m)(1.8268 m⁄s) IEC:1116-1992-10: Electromechanical

n= = =2.6603
gHT (9.81 m⁄s2 )(7m)(1s) Equipment Guide for Small Hydroelectric
∆H n 2.6603 2
Installation
= {n±√n2 ÷4} = {2.6603-√2.6603 ÷4} =1.7693
H 2 2
The Pelton Turbine is designed using the following parameters:
Frequency= 60 HZ
Design Speed

p 12
Installation

ns = 5 = 5⁄4
= 17.9442 m-kW Equipment Guide for Small Hydroelectric
H4 500 Installation
Rated Discharge
177
Q= = = 1.2750 m3 ⁄s
hr ×9.804×.8 (500m)(9.804)(0.8) Equipment Guide for Small Hydroelectric
Installation
A=πd2
2
A=π(1.1) =3.8013m2
Q 1.2750 m3 ⁄s
V= = = 0.3354m⁄s
A 3.8013m2
Pressure Regulation
LV (100m)(0.3354 m⁄s)
n= = = 0.00694 Equipment Guide for Small Hydroelectric
gHT (9.81 m⁄s2 )(500m)(1s) Installation
∆H n 0.00694
= {n±√n2 ÷4} = {0.00694-√0.006942 +4} = 0.0070
H 2 2

The Turgo Impulse Turbine is designed using the following parameters:
Frequency= 60 HZ
Design Speed

p 12
Installation
178
ns = = = 32.057 m-kW
5
300
5⁄4 Equipment Guide for Small Hydroelectric
H4 Installation
Rated Discharge

Q= = = 1.8912 m3 ⁄s
hr ×9.804×.8 (300m)(9.804)(0.8) Equipment Guide for Small Hydroelectric
Installation
A=πd2
2
A=π(1.1) =3.8013m2
Q 1.8912 m3 ⁄s
V= = = 0.4975 m⁄s
A 3.8013m2
Pressure Regulation
LV (100m)(0.1621 m⁄s)
n= = = 5.5080×10-3
gHT (9.81 m⁄s2 )(300m)(1s)
∆H n 5.5080×10-3 2
2
= {n± n ÷4} =
√ {5.5080×10-3 -√5.5080×10-3 ÷4} = 7.5845×10-6
H 2 2
Stability
The stability of the turbine is called its speed regulation. The more important factors upon which the stability
of interconnected units depend are the flywheel effect of the unit, the hydraulic design of the
water passages and speed and capacity of the unit. It is expressed as the mechanical start up time of the
unit and it is computed using
GD2 ×n2 IEC:1116-1992-10: Electromechanical

Tm= 5
(metric units) Equipment Guide for Small Hydroelectric
3.6×10 ×P Installation
120f
n=
p
Wherein:
Tm = Mechanical start up time
GD2 = WR2 = flywheel effect of the revolving parts
179
W = Weight of the Revolving Parts
R = Radius of the Revolving Parts
N = Rotational Speed
P = Turbine Full Gate Capacity in Metric Horse Power (1kw = .86 Metric HP)
P = Number of Poles=4
f = Frequency
Stability Computation
120f
n=
p
The Kaplan Axial Flow turbine is designed using the following parameters:

Runner diameter =2500 mm IEC: 41–1991: Field acceptance tests to
Design head = 8m determine the hydraulic performance of
Efficiency = 94% hydraulic turbines, storage pumps and
Frequency= 60 HZ pump-turbines
Mass = 2700Kg

W = Mg = (2700Kg)(9.81 m⁄s2 ) = 26487 Kgm⁄s2
2 2 2.500 2
2
GD = WR = (26487Kgm⁄s ) (( ) ) = 41385.9375
2
Flywheel effect
180
GD2 ×n2 41385.9375×18002
Tm = 5
(metric units) = 5
= 188.3081s
3.6×10 ×P 3.6×10 ×1978
Discharge diameter (D3)

2 2
84.47×ϕ×√hd 84.47×0.3048×√300
D3 = = = 0.2477 m3 ⁄s
n 1800rpm
Maximum Head
Hmax = 125%(hr )=1.25(300m) = 100m
Minimum Head
Hmin = 65%(hr )=0.65(300m) = 195m
The Bulb turbine is designed using the following parameters:

IEC: 41–1991: Field acceptance tests to
Efficiency = 94%
determine the hydraulic performance of
Frequency= 60 HZ
hydraulic turbines, storage pumps and
pump-turbines
Mass = 8000Kg

W = Mg=(8000Kg)(9.81 m⁄s2 )=78480 Kgm⁄s2

2 2 2
3.800 2
GD = WR = (78480Kgm⁄s ) (( ) ) = 283312.8
2
Flywheel Effect
181
GD2 ×n2 283312.8×18002
Tm = 5
(metric units) = 5
= 651.6267s
3.6×10 ×P 3.6×10 ×3913

2 2
84.47×ϕ×√hd 84.47×0.3048×√300
D3 = = = 0.2477 m3 ⁄s
n 1800rpm
Maximum Head
Hmax = 125%(hr ) = 1.25(300m) = 100m
Minimum Head
Hmin = 65%(hr ) = 0.65(300m) = 195m
The Pelton turbine is designed using the following parameters:
Rated Power of the turbine output = 3895.8 metric hp

Efficiency = 94% IEC: 41–1991: Field acceptance tests to
Frequency= 60 HZ determine the hydraulic performance of
Length of penstock = 100m hydraulic turbines, storage pumps and
Mass = 8000Kg pump-turbines

rapidly damped, periodic return to the new steady state

W = Mg = (800Kg)(9.81 m⁄s2 ) = 7848 Kgm⁄s2

2 2 2
1.000 2
GD =WR =(7848Kgm⁄s ) (( ) ) = 1962
2
Flywheel Effect
182
GD2 ×n2 1962×18002
Tm = 5
(metric units) = 5
= 4.5326s
3.6×10 ×P 3.6×10 ×3895.8
2 2
84.47×ϕ×√hd 84.47×0.3048×√300
D3 = = = 0.2477 m3 ⁄s
n 1800rpm
Maximum Head
Hmax = 125%(hr ) = 1.25(300m) = 100m
Minimum Head
Hmin = 65%(hr ) = 0.65(300m) = 195m
The Turgo Impulse Turbine is designed using the following parameters:

Runner diameter =1100 mm IEC: 41–1991: Field acceptance
Efficiency = 94% tests to determine the hydraulic
Frequency= 60 HZ performance of hydraulic turbines,
Length of penstock = 100m storage pumps and pump-turbines
Mass = 1507Kg


W = Mg = (1507Kg)(9.81 m⁄s2 ) = 14783.67 Kgm⁄s2

2 2 2
1.100 2
GD = WR = (14783.67Kgm⁄s ) (( ) ) = 4472.0602
2
Flywheel Effect
183
GD2 ×n2 4472.0602×18002
Tm = 5
(metric units) = 5
= 32.2763s
3.6×10 ×P 3.6×10 ×1247

2 2
84.47×ϕ×√hd 84.47×0.3048×√300
D3 = = = 0.2477 m3 ⁄s
n 1800rpm
Maximum Head
Hmax = 125%(hr ) = 1.25(300m) = 100m
Minimum Head
Hmin = 65%(hr ) = 0.65(300m) = 195m
Generator Design
It is in the generator where the electricity is produced. The shaft of the water turbine rotates in the generator,
which produces alternating current in the coils of the generator. It is the rotation of the shaft inside the
generator that produces magnetic field which is converted into electricity by electromagnetic field induction.
Turbo Generator
Efficiency
The efficiency of generator can be calculated using the typical values seen on Table J13. Considering the
armature resistance of a given generator copper loss is solved. Other losses like core loss, friction and wind
age loss, ventilation and field winding losses are neglected in the design.
The following equations are used to determine the efficiency of the alternator:
RDCP.U. VL 2
RDC =
1000KVA
RDC
Ra =
2
Srated
IL =
√3VL
IP = IL
Pcu(3∅) = 3Ip 2 Ra
Plosses = Pcu(3∅)
Pout(3∅) = √ 3VL IL cosθ
Pout
η=
Pout +Plosses
184
Wherein:
RDC = DC resistance
RDCP.U.= Per unit DC resistance
VL = Line to line voltage
KVA= KVA rating of the generator
Ra = Armature resistance
Il = Line current
Srated = Apparent rating of the generator
Ip = Phase current
Pcu(3ø) = Three phase cupper loss
Plosses = power losses
Pout = Power Output
p.f. = cosθ = power factor
𝜂 = efficiency
The type of generator to be used are Turbo generator, the typical average values of synchronous machine
constants are also given on Table 3. The actual value of the apparent rating of the generator is chosen as 4
MVA from which the turbine design on stage 5 is considered and has an approximate output up to 5MW.
Therefore 7-5MVA, 13.8 KV, 3ø, 60Hz generators are used in the design since the needed total output of the
generator must not less than 34.944 MW which is equal to 43.68MVA 80% power factor. The power factor is
assumed 80% from which most generators are designed to operate.
Efficiency computation
Turbo Generator
A turbo generator is the combination of a turbine directly connected to an electric generator for the
generation of electric power.
Refer to Appendix J13 for per unit DC Resistance of the Turbo generator
RDCP.U. = 0.003
IEC-34-2A-1972 - Rotating Electrical
RDCP.U. VL 2 0.003(13.8KV)2
RDC = = = 0.1428mΩ machines methods for determining
1000KVA 1000(4000KVA) losses and efficiency of electrical
RDC 0.1428mΩ machinery from tests
Ra = = = 0.0714mΩ
2 2
Srated 4MVA
IL = = =167.3479A
√3VL √3(13.8KV)
IP =IL =167.34791A
Pcu(3∅ ) = 3Ip 2 Ra = 3(167.3479A)2 (0.0714mΩ) = 5.9987W
Plosses =Pcu(3∅) =5.9987W
Pout(3∅) = √ 3VL IL cosθ = √3(13.8KV)(167.3479A)(0.80) = 3199999.9210
Pout 3199999.9210W
η= = = 0.999998=99.9998%
Pout +Plosses 3199999.9210W+5.9987W
185
Voltage Regulation
XSP.U. VL 2 IEC-34-1: 1983 – Rotating Electrical

XS =
1000KVA Machines, Rating and Performance
RDCP.U. VL 2
RDC =
1000KVA
RDC
Ra =
2
Z = Ra +jXS
Srated
IL =
√3VL
IP = IL
VL
VP =
√3
EP = VP +[(IP ∠- cos-1 p.f.)(Z)]
EP -V P
%VR = (100)
VP
Voltage Regulation Computation
Turbo Generator
RDCP.U. = 0.003
XSP.U. = 1.1 IEC-34-1: 1983 – Rotating Electrical
Machines, Rating and Performance
XSP.U. VL 2 (1.1)(13.8kV)2
XS = = = 0.0524Ω
1000KVA 1000(4000KVA)
RDCP.U. VL 2 (0.003)(13.8kV)2
RDC = = = 0.1428mΩ
1000KVA 1000(4000KVA)
R 0.1428mΩ
Ra = DC = = 0.0714mΩ
2 2
Z = Ra +jXS = 0.0714+j52.4mΩ
S 4MVA
IL = rated = = 167.3479
√3V √3(13.8KV)
L
IP = IL = 167.3479
V 13.8kV
VP = L = = 7967.4337V
√3 √3
EP = 7967.4337+[(167.3479∠- cos-1 0.8)(0.0714+j52.4mΩ)] = 7972.7078∠0.0504
E -V 7972.7078-7967.4337
%VR = PV P (100) = (100) = 0.0662%
P 7967.4337
Voltage Stability
RDCP.U. VL 2
RDC =
1000KVA
186
RDC
Ra =
2 IEC-34-2A-1972 - Rotating electrical
XSP.U. VL 2 machines methods for determining losses
XS =
1000KVA and efficiency of electrical machinery from
Z = Ra +jXS tests.
ZS = Z+ZT-LINE +ZX-FORMER
|→|
ZS
∆W = 1-
|→|
ZL
W = 1-∆W
Wherein:
RDC= DC Resistance
RDCP.U.= Per Unit DC Resistance
VL = Line to Line Voltage
KVA= KVA Rating of the Generator
Ra = Armature Resistance
XSP.U.=Per Unit Reactance
Z= Equivalent Impedance of the Generator
ZT-LINE= Equivalent Impedance of the Transmission Line
ZX-FORMER= Equivalent Impedance of the Transformer
ZS = Magnitude of System Impedance
ZL = Magnitude of Load Impedance
ΔW= Change in Voltage Stability Margin
W= Stability Margin
The magnitude of load impedance used is similar to the load impedance used in the previous stage which is
|→| = 547.5121Ω
ZL
ZT-LINE = 22.2410∠10.2965 Ω
ZXFORMER = 0.1058+j1.6842Ω
Voltage Stability Computation
Turbo Generator
Refer to Appendix J13 for per unit resistance and reactance
R_(DCP.U.) = 0.003 IEC-34-2A-1972 - Rotating Electrical

X_(SP.U.) = 1.1 machines methods for determining
losses and efficiency of electrical
XSP.U. VL 2 (1.1)(13.8KV)2 machinery from tests
XS = = = 0.0524Ω
1000KVA 1000(4000KVA)
187
RDCP.U. VL 2 (0.003)(13.8KV)2
RDC = = = 0.1428mΩ
1000KVA 1000(4000KVA)
RDC 0.1428mΩ
Ra = = = 0.0714mΩ
2 2
Z = Ra +jXS = 0.0714+j52.4mΩ
ZS = Z+ZT-LINE +ZX-FORMER = 0.0714+j52.4mΩ+(22.2410∠10.2965)+0.1058+j1.6842=22.7561∠14.4010
|→ |
ZS 22.7561
∆W = 1- = 1- 547.5121 = 0.9584372656
|→|
ZL
W = 1-∆W = 0.04156
Figure 3-114. Hydro Power Plant Layout
Figure 3-114 shows the distances between turbines varies per design options, as it depends on rotor
diameter. Regarding wake losses, the general recommendation of the hydro turbine manufacturers is that if
4 to 6 times the rotor diameter to reduce wake losses.
Table 3.1. Generator and Major Auxiliary Electrical Equipment

Type of Turbine Power Design Specific Rated Rated Velocity
Output Speed Speed Discharge (m/s)
(kw) (rpm) (m-kW) (m3/s)
Bhel Standard 2475 300 551.1233 22.54 2.2144
Tubular Turbine
Bhel Standard 3500 300 554.6325 27.8904 1.8402

Kaplan Turbine
188
Kaplan Axial Flow 1000 300 94.3075 3.1875 0.8385
Turbine
Bulb Turbine 2000 300 723.73 14.1665 0.3123
Jyoti Standard 5000 600 17.9442 1.2750 0.3354

Pelton Turbine
Jyoti Standard 4450 600 32.057 1.8912 0.4975

Turgo Impulse
Turbine
Case 1: Run of River Without Pondage
For Bhel Standard Tubular Turbine:

The theoretical power (P) available from a given head of water is in exact proportion to the head and the
quantity of water available.
To compute the available power, we use the formula:

Power at the generator terminal = Q × H × e × 9.81(kW)
where:
P - Power at the generator terminal, in kilowatts (kW)
H - The gross head from the pipeline intake to the tail water in meters (m)
Q - Flow of water, in cubic meters per second (m3/s)
e -The efficiency of the plant, considering head loss in the penstock/ hydraulic system and the
efficiency of the turbine and generator.
9.81 is a constant and is the product of the density of water and the acceleration due to gravity (g)

Power at the generator terminal = 22.54 x 14 x 0.96 x 9.81 (kW)
Pin = 2.9718 MW per turbine
Note: Pin is the mechanical power produce by the rotational movement of the hydro turbine.
EfficiencyGENERATOR = (0.95 × 0.97) x 100 % = 92.15%

Efficiency at The Generator Part = (0.9215 × 0.98) × 100 % = 90.307%
Pout = 0.90307% × (2.9718 MW) = 2.6837 MW per turbine
189
power.
Target Power Output
34.944 MW
Number of Turbines = = 14.12 ≈ 14 Turbines
2475 kW
needed in the area which is 34.944MW.
Power Input - losses IEC-34-2A-1972 - Rotating Electrical
Efficiency = machines methods for determining
Power Input
2.9718 MW - losses losses and efficiency of electrical
96 % = machinery from tests
2.9718 MW
Losses = 118872 kW per turbine

Note: To compute for the losses in each turbine consider the amount of mechanical power in the wind
turbine and the efficiency of the generator.
Total losses = losses × Number of Hydro Turbines IEC-34-2A-1972 - Rotating Electrical

Total losses = 118872 kW × 14 machines methods for determining
Total losses = 1.6642 MW losses and efficiency of electrical
machinery from tests.
For Bhel Standard Kaplan Turbine:
Pin = 4.1150MW per turbine

power.
Target Power Output
34.944 MW
3500kW
190
Power Input - losses machines methods for determining
Efficiency =
Power Input losses and efficiency of electrical
4.1150 MW - losses machinery from tests.
94 % =
4.1150 MW
Losses = 246900 kW per turbine

Total losses = losses × Number of Hydro Turbines

Total losses = 246900 kW × 10
machines methods for determining
For Kaplan Axial Flow Turbine:

Power at the generator terminal = 3.1875 x 40xe 0.94 x 9.81 (kW)

power.
Target Power Output
34.944 MW
1000kW

Efficiency =
Power Input IEC-34-2A-1972 - Rotating Electrical
1.1757 MW - losses machines methods for determining
94 % = losses and efficiency of electrical
1.1757MW
191
Losses = 70542 W per turbine
Total losses = losses × Number of Hydro Turbines IEC-34-2A-1972 - Rotating Electrical
Total losses = 70542W × 35 machines methods for determining
Total losses = 2.4690 MW losses and efficiency of electrical
For Bulb Turbine:
Pin = 2.3514MW per turbine

Pout = 0.90307% × (2.3514 MW) = 2.1235MW per turbine
power.
Target Power Output
34.944 MW
Number of Turbines = = 17.472≈ 17 Turbines
2000kW

Efficiency =
Power Input machines methods for determining
90 % =
2.3514 MW machinery from tests

Total losses = 235140 W × 17
machinery from tests
192
Case 2: High Head Hydropower
For Jyoti- Standard Pelton Turbine


power.
Target Power Output
34.944 MW
5000kW

Efficiency = IEC-34-2A-1972 - Rotating Electrical
94 % =
5.8786 MW machinery from tests.

Total losses = 352716 W × 7
For Jyoti- Standard Turgo Impulse Turbine

193


power.
Target Power Output
34.944 MW
4450kW

Efficiency =
90 % =
5.0092 MW machinery from tests.
Total losses = losses × Number of Hydro Turbines machines methods for determining
Total losses = 352716 W × 8 losses and efficiency of electrical
Total losses = 4.0074 MW machinery from tests.
194
Design Simulation
Power Flow using Paladin DesignBase
Figure 3-115. Power Flow using Fast Decoupled
Figure 3-115 shows the result of the power flow of the hydropower plant using fast decoupled method.
195
Figure 3-116. Summary of Total Generation and Demand
Figure 3-116 above shows the summary of total generation and demand in simulation.
Figure 3-117. Busses and Branches Data
The figure 3-117 above shows the data of the busses and branches of the system.
196
Figure 3-118. Transformer and Line Voltage Regulator Data
Figure 3-118 shows the data for the transformer and line voltages of the regulator.
Figure 3-119. Power and Current Flow of the Branches
Figure 3-119 shows the power and current flow of the different branches for the system.
197
Figure 3-120. Transformer and Line Regulator Loading
Figure 3-120 shows the loading data for the transformers and line regulators.
Short Circuit Analysis
Figure 3-121. System Summary and Calculation Options
Figure 3-121 shows the summary for the system and the options for the calculations.
198
Figure 3-122. Short Circuit Report of the Simulation
Figure 3-122 shows the short circuit report of the simulated design.
199
Francis Turbine Simulation
Figure 3-123. Francis Turbine Model
In this figure 3-123 it shows the particular case the Francis turbine model is split into three components. The
Spiral, the Impeller and the Drafttube. Each component has its own mesh. All the meshes are created
automatically for each component within snappyHexMesh. Any number of model components is allowed, for
example a typical Francis turbine might have a five component alternative: Spiral, Stay, Guide, Impeller and
Drafttube.
Figure 3-124. Turbine Model Specification
The figure 3-124 shows the component graph shows how the components are organized - the model
topology, what is the inlet, the outlet and how the components are connected via interfaces.
200
Figure 3-125. Running Francis Turbine CFD Simulation
Figure 3-125 above shows the CFD simulation of the francis turbine in running condition.
Figure 3-126. Performance Curve Efficiency of Francis Turbine
The figure 3-126 shows the simulation that can be run on any number of parallel processors. Immediately
after the simulation is started you can follow the progress of all the important quantities: flow rates, residuals,
efficiency, torque, or pressure difference. This run-time functions give the user valuable information of the
convergence and also the availability to stop the simulation before its standard end.
The graph shows the performance curves of the of blade under different operation condition, this indicate
that the efficiency of the turbine blade increased with increasing of N rpm until reach maximum point and
201
then decreased gradually (parabolic sharp) this valid only for N from 120 to 150 rpm out of this range the
efficiency is varying.
Figure 3-127. Performance Curve for Flow Rate and Head for Francis Turbine
The figure 3-127 above shows the flow rate is increasing when you will have a higher head for the turbine
using the CFD Simulation.
Figure 3-128. Performance Curve for Flow Rate and Efficiency for Francis Turbine
The figure 3-128 shows the flow rate in terms in efficiency and we can see that the efficiency of the turbine
is decreasing if the flow rate becomes higher. For Francis turbine we can see that it only has a maximum
flow rate of 9 m3/s.
202
Kaplan Turbine Simulation
Figure 3-129. Kaplan Turbine Model
The figure above shows a Kaplan turbine model is split into three components. The Spiral, the Impeller and
the Drafttube. Each component has its own mesh. All the meshes are created automatically for each
component within snappyHexMesh. Any number of model components is allowed, for example a typical
Kaplan turbine might have a five component alternative: Spiral, Stay, Guide, Impeller and Drafttube.
Figure 3-130. Turbine Model Specification
The figure 3-130 shows the technical specification of the Kaplan Turbine based on the CFD simulation result
203
Figure 3-131. Running Kaplan Turbine CFD Simulation
The figure 3-131 shows the simulation that can be run on any number of parallel processors. Immediately
after the simulation is started you can follow the progress of all the important quantities: flow rates, residuals,
efficiency, torque, or pressure difference. This run-time functions give the user valuable information of the
convergence and also the availability to stop the simulation before its standard end.
Figure 3-132. Performance Curve for Flow Rate and Head for Kaplan Turbine
The figure 3-132 shows the flow rate is increasing when you will have a higher head for the turbine using
the CFD Simulation.
204
Figure 3-133. Performance Curve for Flow Rate and Efficiency for Kaplan Turbine
The figure 3-133 shows the flow rate in terms in efficiency and we can see that the efficiency of the turbine
is slightly decreasing if the flow rate becomes higher and for the flow rate of Kaplan it can have a maximum
flow rate of 105 m3/s.
205
Chapter 4. Design Constraints, Trade-Offs and Standards
Design Constraints
It restricts the design project that underwent a detailed consideration of different constraints. Furthermore,
trade-offs were done to determine the outstanding design with standards for the final basis.
Area
The Area is an important factor on considering a wind power plant. The wind turbine sizes should be suitable
on which will take effect on the location. With respect with other criterions specially efficiency, the area of the
wind turbine must be at the minimum.
Efficiency
The design should achieve sustaining efficiency when custom-made as a whole system. In the case of wind
turbine, their different efficiency was taken into consideration so that there can be an appropriate selection
of wind turbine without much affecting the other factors considered such as the cost of materials or Return of
Investments (ROI).
Lifespan
The wind energy industry and the Government base all their calculations on turbines enjoying a lifespan of
20 to 25 years. The study estimates that routine wear and tear will more than double the cost of electricity
being produced by wind farms in the next decade.
Return of Investment
Economically, the design project main household tasks are the design costs, where in the information
gathering and research are considered, the main factors to be considered on this is labor, materials, and
maintenance. The demands of the client are also considered without affecting the design, so that in future
there will be a cost savings and profit.
Design Trade-Offs
The process where each design considers its respective constraints. Using the value for the factors of the
constraint, the computation will start for determining the best design. All constraint has a criterion of
importance which ranked in accordance to the level of how the researchers see the most important aspect
of the design. The criterion of importance will be multiplied to the respective score of the design, the result
will then be added for all the score of each design. The result of the analysis will determine the best design
that will be considered for the chapter 5 of the study [24].
 Return of investment (Considered on this is labor, materials and maintenance)
 Efficiency (Wind turbine should be efficient)
 Degradation (It should be minimal to maximize the power of wind turbines)
 Area (Location should be considered in constructing the wind power plant)
24 J. B. C. a. E. M. R. ALMARIO, "PHILISCILETTERS.ORG," PHILIPPINE SCIENCE LETTER, 25 JULY 2018. [Online]. Available: https://www. philsciletters.org.ph
206
Computation of Ranking for Ability to Satisfy Criterion of Materials:
Based on the formula below, low values are preferred.

Max - PC
PCnorm = 9 Maxraw - Minraw +1
raw raw
Based on the formula below, high values are preferred.

PC - Max
PCnorm = 9 Maxraw - Minraw +1
raw raw
Where: PCnorm = Performance Criterion Scale

Pcraw = Option Performance Criterion
Minraw = Minimum Raw Option
Maxraw = Maximum Raw Option
Ranking Score
The governing rank is the subjective choice of the designer. In assigning the value for the criterion’s
importance and the ability to satisfy the criterion, a desired value was chosen that will respond to the level of
importance of the constraints. The subjective value depends on the value initial computed.
Figure 4-1. Criterion Rank Representation
The figure 4-1 shows the Criterion Rank Representation, on which it will vary only from 0 (as the lowest)
and 5 (as the highest). It is said to rank it, in order to know who won from the three options.
Design Criteria
Table 4-1. Design Criteria

Criteria Range Constraints
Capital Cost 100M – 10B Economical
Plant Efficiency 10% – 50% Efficiency
Physical Life 10yrs – 50 yrs. Degradation
Land Area 100 m2 – 100M m2 Environmental
207
Table 4-1 shows the project design criteria which indicate the range and constraint. The project has plant
efficiency, capital cost, physical life, and land area to have a guide for doing the project.
Table 4-2. Wind Designs Normalization of Economic Constraints

Designs Options Economical Ranked Score
Darrieus Type Wind
PHP 254.4Million 8.46
Turbine
HAWT
Savonius Type Wind
PHP 464.8 Million 6.35
Turbine
Free Standing PHP 388.2 Million 7.12
VAWT
Lattice PHP 319.4 Million 7.81
Table 4-2 shows the results of the set-out values of the breakdown and construal of each design options.
This demonstrates the graphical illustration of the disparity between each design options in terms of
economical constraint.
Table 4-3. Wind Designs Normalization of Efficiency Constraints

Wind Designs Options Efficiency Ranked Score
Darrieus Type Wind
29.1630% 6.55
Turbine
VAWT
Savonius Type Wind
34.4154% 5.61
Turbine
Free Standing 42.5233% 4.15
HAWT
Lattice 40.5104% 4.51
environmental constraint.
Table 4-4. Wind Designs Normalization of Degradation Constraints

Wind Designs Options Degradation Ranked Score
Darrieus Type Wind
25 7.43
Turbine
VAWT
Savonius Type Wind
24 7.43
Turbine
HAWT Free Standing 20 7.43
208
Lattice 21 8.07
sustainability constraint.
Table 4-5. Wind Designs Normalization of Environmental Constraints

Designs Options Environmental Ranked Score
Darrieus Type Wind
18,408,949.5 m2 9.24
Turbine
VAWT
Savonius Type Wind
24,428,116 m2 8.60
Turbine
Free Standing 15,470,674.4 m2 9.50
HAWT
Lattice 16,516,512.4 m2 9.40
manufacturability constraint.
Table 4-6. Solar Designs Normalization of Economic Constraints

Solar Designs Options Economical Ranked Score
Micro PHP 1.03 Billion 9.15
Inverter Central PHP 1.13 Billion 9.06
String PHP 1.33 Billion 8.88
Table 4-7. Solar Designs Normalization of Efficiency Constraints

Solar Designs Options Efficiency Ranked Score
Micro 18.29% 8.51

Inverter
Central 16.75% 8.79
209
String 10.82% 9.85
Table 4-8. Solar Designs Normalization of Degradation Constraints

Solar Designs Options Degradation Ranked Score
Micro 20 7.75
Inverter Central 25 6.63
String 20 7.75
Table 4-9. Solar Designs Normalization of Environmental Constraints

Solar Designs Options Environmental Ranked Score
Micro 38,459,052 m2 7.15
Inverter Central 42,323,936 m2 6.67
String 65,690,790 m2 4.43
Table 4-10. Hydro Design Normalization of Economic Constraints

Hydro Design Options Economical Ranked Score
Tubular Turbine PHP 100.744 Million 9.97
Turbine Kaplan Turbine PHP 145.367 Million 9.95

Kaplan Axial Flow
Turbine
210
Bulb Turbine PHP 6.829 Billion 3.88
Pelton Turbine PHP 170.233 Million 9.93

Turgo Impulse
Turbine)
Table 4-11. Hydro Design Normalization of Efficiency Constraints

Hydro Design Options Efficiency Ranked Score
Tubular Turbine 47.80% 3.19
Kaplan Turbine 45.01 % 3.68

Kaplan Axial Flow
54.33 % 2.02
Turbine
Turbine
Bulb Turbine 57.24 % 1.49
Pelton Turbine 48.34 % 3.09

Turgo Impulse
58.54 % 1.26
Turbine)
Table 4-12. Hydro Design Normalization of Degradation Constraints

Hydro Design Options Degradation Ranked Score
Tubular Turbine 20 7.75
Kaplan Turbine 20 7.75

Kaplan Axial Flow
Turbine 24 6.85
Turbine
Bulb Turbine 25 6.63
Pelton Turbine 24 6.85
211
Turgo Impulse
24 6.85
Turbine)
Table 4-13. Hydro Design Normalization of Environmental Constraints

Hydro Design Options Environmental Ranked Score
Tubular Turbine 12,408,949.5 m2 9.76
Kaplan Turbine 24,428,116 m2 8.56

Kaplan Axial Flow
15,470,674.4 m2 9.53
Turbine
Turbine
Bulb Turbine 16,516,512.4 m2 9.35
Pelton Turbine 18,547,888.4 m2 9.15

Turgo Impulse
13,456,423.5 m2 9.65
Turbine)
Table 4-14. Pairwise Comparison of Design 1 in all Constraints

Performance Performance Performance Performance
Option Number
Criterion 1 Criterion 2 Criterion 3 Criterion 4
1 8.46 3.39 3.25 9.24
2 6.35 3.89 4.15 8.60
3 7.12 5.05 3.25 9.50
4 7.81 6.94 4.38 9.50
In Table 4-14 for raw values for performance criterion 1 in column 2, the normalized values are: Option 1,
9.98; Option 2, 9.99; Option 3, 9.91, as shown in column 2 of Table 4-14. The pairwise comparison of rows
in Table 4-14 will result in the same conclusion as the one in Table 4-2, whereby Option 2 dominates all of
the performance criterion compare to the other two options.

Option Number
1 9.05 2.49 3.25 7.15
2 9.15 2.22 3.25 6.67
3 8.88 1.15 3.25 4.43
212

Option Number
1 9.97 7.80 3.25 9.76
2 9.95 7.03 3.48 8.56
3 9.89 8.98 3.25 9.53
4 3.88 9.50 3.48 9.35
5 9.93 9.16 3.48 9.15
6 9.71 8.39 3.48 9.65
213
Trade-off Design between Two Constraints
Table 4-17. Economical vs Efficiency

Design Option Economical Efficiency
Design 1 Option 4 (X1) PHP 319.4 Million 40.51%
Design 2 Option 1 (X2) PHP 1.03 Billion 18.29%
Design 3 Option 1 (X3) PHP 100.744 Million 47.80%
f1 = 319.4X1 + 1.03x10^9X2 + 100.7X3 ≤ 100 Billion
f2 = 40.51X1 + 18.29X2 + 47.80X3 ≤ 60%
Economical vs Efficiency
30
25
20
Efficiency
15
10
0
0 2,000,000,000 4,000,000,000 6,000,000,000 8,000,000,000 10,000,000,000
Economical
Figure 4-2. Trade-off Between Economical vs Efficiency
Figure 4-2 shows the different values in terms of Economical Constraints and Environmental Constraints.
The graph explains that the area bounded by design 1 option 2 and design 2 option 2 are the accepted design
options with respect to the Economical Constraints and Efficiency Constraints.
214
Table 4-11. Economical vs Degradation
Design Option Economical Degradation
Design 1 Option 4 (X1) PHP 319.4 Million 25
Design 2 Option 2 (X2) PHP 1.03 Billion 20
Design 3 Option 1 (X3) PHP 100.744 Million 20
f1 = 319.4X1 + 1.03x10^9X2 + 100.7X3 ≤ 100 Billion
f2 = 25X1 + 20X2 + 20X3 ≤ 50 yrs.
Economical vs Degradation
50
45
40
35
Degradation
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
0 2,000,000,000 4,000,000,000 6,000,000,000 8,000,000,000 10,000,000,000
Economical
Figure 4-3. Trade-off Between Economical vs Degradation
Figure 4-3 shows the different values in terms of Economical Constraints and Degradation Constraints. The
graph explains that the area bounded by design 1 option 2 and design 2 option 2 are the accepted design
options with respect to the Economical Constraints and Degradation Constraints.
215
Table 4-21. Economical vs Environmental
Design Option Economical Environmental
Design 1 Option 4 (X1) PHP 319.4 Million 15,470,674 m2
Design 2 Option 2 (X2) PHP 1.03 Billion 38,459,052 m2
Design 3 Option 1 (X3) PHP 100.744 Million 12,408,949 m2
f1 = 319.4X1 + 1.03x10^9X2 + 100.7X3 ≤ 100 Billion
f2 = 15,470,674X1 + 38,459,052X2 + 12,408,949X3 ≤ 100,000,000 m2
Between Economical vs Environmental
100,000,000
90,000,000
80,000,000
70,000,000
Environmental
60,000,000
50,000,000
40,000,000
30,000,000
20,000,000
10,000,000
0
0 2,000,000,000 4,000,000,000 6,000,000,000 8,000,000,000 10,000,000,000
Economical
Figure 4-4. Trade-off Between Economical vs Environmental
Figure 4-4 shows the different values in terms of Economical Constraints and Environmental Constraints.
The graph explains that the area bounded by design 1 option 2, design 2 option 1 and design 2 option 2 are
the accepted design options with respect to the Economical Constraints and Environmental Constraints.
216
Table 4-23. Efficiency vs Environmental
Design Option Efficiency Environmental
Design 1 Option 4 (X1) 40.51% 15,470,674 m2
Design 2 Option 2 (X2) 18.29% 38,459,052 m2
Design 3 Option 1 (X3) 47.80% 12,408,949 m2
f1 = 40.51X1 + 18.29X2 + 47.80X3 ≤ 60%
f2 = 15,470,674X1 + 38,459,052X2 + 12,408,949X3 ≤ 100,000,000 m2
Efficiency vs Environmental
100,000,000
90,000,000
80,000,000
70,000,000
Environmental
60,000,000
50,000,000
40,000,000
30,000,000
20,000,000
10,000,000
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Efficiency
Figure 4-5. Trade-off Between Efficiency vs Environmental
Figure 4-5 shows the different values in terms of Enviromnental Constraints and Sustainability Constraints.
The graph explains that the area bounded by design 1 option 2, design 2 option 1 and design 2 option 2 are
the accepted design options with respect to the Enviromnental Constraints and Sustainability Constraints.
217
Table 4-25. Efficiency vs Degradation
Design Option Efficiency Degradation
Design 1 Option 4 (X1) 40.5104% 25
Design 2 Option 2 (X2) 18.29% 20
Design 3 Option 1 (X3) 47.80% 20
f1 = 40.51X1 + 18.29X2 + 47.80X3 ≤ 60%
f2 = 25X1 + 20X2 + 20X3 ≤ 50 yrs.
Efficiency vs Degradation
50
45
40
35
30
Degradation
25
20
15
10
5
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Efficiency
Figure 4-6. Trade-off Between Efficiency vs Degradation
Figure 4-6 shows the different values in terms of Efficiency Constraints and Degradation Constraints. The
graph explains that the area bounded by design 2 option 1 and design 2 option 2 are the accepted design
options with respect to the Efficiency Constraints and Degradation Constraints.
218
Table 4-27. Degradation vs Environmental
Design Option Degradation Environmental
Design 1 Option 4 (X1) 25 15,470,674 m2
Design 2 Option 2 (X2) 20 38,459,052 m2
Design 3 Option 1 (X3) 20 12,408,949 m2
f1 = 25X1 + 20X2 + 20X3 ≤ 50 yrs.
f2 = 15,470,674X1 + 38,459,052X2 + 12,408,949X3 ≤ 100,000,000 m2
Degradation vs Environmental
100,000,000
90,000,000
80,000,000
70,000,000
Environmental
60,000,000
50,000,000
40,000,000
30,000,000
20,000,000
10,000,000
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Degradation
Figure 4-7. Trade-off Between Degradation vs Environmental
Figure 4-7 shows the different values in terms of Degradation Constraints and Environmental Constraints.
The graph explains that the area bounded by design 2 option 1 and design 2 option 2 are the accepted design
options with respect to the Degradation Constraints and Environmental Constraints.
Importance Level
Weighted Factor =
Total Importance Level
4
For Economical Constraint, x1 = 10 = 0.4
3
For Environmental Constraint, x2 = 10 = 0.3
219
2
For Sustainability Constraint x3 = 10 = 0.2
1
For Manufacturability Constraint x4 = 10 = 0.1
WPCi = x1PC1i + x2PC2i + x3PC3i + x4PC4i + x5PC5i
Sensitivity Analysis
Table 4-29. Sensitivity Analysis Trial 2

4 3 1 2
Designs Options Total
Economical Efficiency Degradation Environmental
Wind Lattice 7.81 6.94 4.38 9.50 7.94
Micro
Solar 9.15 2.49 3.25 7.15 9.57
Inverter
Pelton
Hydro 9.97 7.80 3.25 9.76 8.69
Turbine
This demonstrates that the design 2 option 2 has the highest in terms of ranking of all given constraints.

4 2 3 1
Wind Lattice 7.81 6.94 4.38 9.50 7.47
Micro
Solar 9.15 2.49 3.25 7.15 9.12
Inverter
Pelton
Hydro 9.97 7.80 3.25 9.76 8.43
Turbine

4 2 1 3
Wind Lattice 7.81 6.94 4.38 9.50 7.42
Micro
Solar 9.15 2.49 3.25 7.15 9.52
Inverter
Pelton
Hydro 9.97 7.80 3.25 9.76 8.66
Turbine

4 1 3 2
Wind Lattice 7.81 6.94 4.38 9.50 6.96
Micro
Solar 9.15 2.49 3.25 7.15 9.08
Inverter
220
Pelton
Hydro 9.97 7.80 3.25 9.76 8.40
Turbine

4 1 2 3
Wind Lattice 7.81 6.94 4.38 9.50 6.93
Micro
Solar 9.15 2.49 3.25 7.15 9.28
Inverter
Pelton
Hydro 9.97 7.80 3.25 9.76 8.51
Turbine

3 4 2 1
Wind Lattice 7.81 6.94 4.38 9.50 7.88
Micro
Solar 9.15 2.49 3.25 7.15 9.36
Inverter
Pelton
Hydro 9.97 7.80 3.25 9.76 8.57
Turbine

3 4 1 2
Wind Lattice 7.81 6.94 4.38 9.50 7.85
Micro
Solar 9.15 2.49 3.25 7.15 9.56
Inverter
Pelton
Hydro 9.97 7.80 3.25 9.76 8.68
Turbine

3 2 4 1
Wind Lattice 7.81 6.94 4.38 9.50 6.90
Micro
Solar 9.15 2.49 3.25 7.15 8.87
Inverter
Pelton
Hydro 9.97 7.80 3.25 9.76 8.28
Turbine

3 2 1 4
Wind Lattice 7.81 6.94 4.38 9.50 6.81
Micro
Solar 9.15 2.49 3.25 7.15 9.47
Inverter
221
Pelton
Hydro 9.97 7.80 3.25 9.76 8.62
Turbine

3 1 4 2
Wind Lattice 7.81 6.94 4.38 9.50 6.38
Micro
Solar 9.15 2.49 3.25 7.15 8.83
Inverter
Pelton
Hydro 9.97 7.80 3.25 9.76 8.25
Turbine

3 1 2 4
Wind Lattice 7.81 6.94 4.38 9.50 6.32
Micro
Solar 9.15 2.49 3.25 7.15 9.23
Inverter
Pelton
Hydro 9.97 7.80 3.25 9.76 8.47
Turbine

2 4 3 1
Wind Lattice 7.81 6.94 4.38 9.50 7.30
Micro
Solar 9.15 2.49 3.25 7.15 9.11
Inverter
Pelton
Hydro 9.97 7.80 3.25 9.76 8.42
Turbine
Total Trial-Total Trial Loss 12 - 0

Sensitivity Percentage = x 100% = x 100% = 100%
Total Trial 12
The proponent conducted 12 sensitivity analysis trials to determine the best design options. The result of
each sensitivity analysis trials shows that the Design 2 Option 2 Horizontal-Axis Wind Turbine (Lattice)
earned the highest points from the trials conducted. The formula stated above was used to prove that these
design options won the trade-offs based on their sensitivity analysis percentage which are the highest among
the other design options.
222
Design Standards
International Electrical Code
IEC: 1116 – 1992. Electromechanical Equipment Guide for Small Hydroelectric Installations
IEC – 34 – 2A – 1972. Rotating Electrical Machines Methods for Determining Losses and Efficiency
of Electrical Machinery from Tests
IEC: 41 – 1991. Field Acceptance Tests to Determine the Hydraulic Performance of Hydraulic
Turbines, Storage Pumps and Pump-Turbines
IEC 61400 – 12 – 1. Power Performance Measurements of Electricity Producing Wind Turbines
IEC 2005 (E) 61400 – 12 – 1 A.1. Requirements Regarding Neighboring and Operating Wind
Turbines
IEC 61400 – 12 – 1, Section 8.4. Power coefficient of Wind Turbines
IEC 60287 – 1 – 1, Section 2.4.3, Table 2, Page 31, 2006. Calculation of Current Ratings
IEC 62271 – 102 (2001) High-Voltage Switchgear And Control Gear – Part 102
Alternating Current Disconnectors and Earthing Switches
IEC 60099 – 8 (2011) Part 8/IEEE C62.22 page 8 – 16. Standard for Lightning Arrester and Ground
Voltage Fault
Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers
IEEE Std. 1013 (2000). Load Computation, Future Maximum Demand, Section 6, p.236
IEEE Standard C57.12.00 – 2010. Standard General Requirements for Power and Regulation
Transformers.
IEEE Std Red Book C4 A4.5. Page 124 – 125. Solving 3 – Phase Current
IEEE Std Gray Book C8.3.3 page 231. Basic Insulating Materials Are Either Organic or Inorganic
IEEE Std 80 (2000), Guide for Safety in AC Substation Grounding. Calculation of Potential Difference
IEEE C.57.12.00 – 2010. General Requirements for Liquid-Immersed Distribution, Power, and
IEEE Std 80 (2000), Guide for safety in AC substation grounding. Calculation of Potential Difference
223
IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery (Volume: 21, Issue: 3, July 2006). Power Loss Measurement
and Estimation Method
IEEE Std. 1013 (2000), Section 6, p.236. Load Computation, Future Maximum Demand
IEEE Trans Power Apparatus Syst PAS – 102 (12): 3791 – 3795. Stability Simulation of Wind Turbine
Systems.
IEEE C.57.12.00 – 2010. General Requirements for Liquid-Immersed Distribution, Power, and
National Electrical Code
National Electric Code (NEC) Article 210, page 19. Where the maximum total voltage drop on both
feeders and branch circuits to the farthest outlet does not exceed 5 percent.
National Electrical Code (NEC), Article 370, page 461, 2011. Rated 60-Hz Withstand Voltage
National Electrical (NEC) Section 240 – 3

General Requirements for Branch Circuit, Feeder and Other Conductors
National Electrical (NEC) Section 450.3. Computation for Overcurrent Protection of Transformer
National Electrical (NEC) (2001) Article 310, Table 310.60 (C) (67) and 310.60 (C) (69), page 226.
Conductor For General Wiring
Philippine Electrical Code
Philippine Electrical Code Part 2 Article 1.4.4.3 (b). System Grounding Conductors for Multi-
Grounded Alternating Current Systems
Philippine Electrical Code (PEC) Part 2, Article 1.4.4.3 (b). System Grounding Conductors for Multi-
Grounded Alternating Current Systems.
Philippine Electrical Code (PEC) Part I (2009), Sec. 2.20.3.22 page 320. Feeder or Service Neutral
Ground
Philippine Grid Code PP. (32) Section 3.2.3. The system owner must ensure that the voltage variation
must be not more or less than +-5% of the nominal voltage at any point during normal operation.
Philippine Electrical Code (PEC) Part I (2009) Sec 4.30.2.4 page 580. General Requirements for Full
Load Branch Circuit, Feeder and Other Conductors.
Philippine Electrical Code (PEC) Part I (2009), Sec. 2.20.3.22 page 320. Feeder or Service Neutral
Ground
224
Proceedings of the American Institute of Electrical Engineers
Calculation of Iron Losses in Dynamo-Electric Machinery
American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers
ANSI/ASHRAE 70-1991 – ASHRAE. Standard Methods of Testing to Determine the Thermal

Performance of Solar Collectors. Atlanta, Ga.: The Society, 1991.
ANSI/IEEE 122-1991 – IEEE. Recommended Practice for Functional and Performance

Characteristics of Control Systems for Steam Turbine Generator Units
225
Chapter 5. Final Design
Wind Power Plant

Wind power plant is a type of power plant that utilizes electric energy by the use of wind energy. It transforms
kinetic energy of wind into kinetic energy (rotational force) with wind turbine and mobilize generator with the
force to gain electric energy. A wind power plant is one of the designs considered in the proposed
development of the 35 MW power requirement of the client. The wind turbine will be an alternative source for
the area of western part of Batangas specifically Balayan and Nasugbu as the two towns are expected to
bloom into a full blown cities in the province in the years to come. Based on the location of the client, a wind
power plant will be a suitable option because of the weather on the town of Calatagan in Batangas. Last year,
an average of 8.9 meter per second wind speed measured at 10 meters above the ground in Calatagan, a
neighbor town of Balayan and Nasugbu. The highest wind speed measured is 9.88 meter per second and
the direction of the wind is West. Another reason why Calatagan is considered to be the location of the wind
power plant is because of few natural obstacles that will block the path of wind.
Figure 5-1. Design Options of Wind Power Plant
Figure 5-1 shows the design options of the wind power plant. The design will revolve on the which orientation
is the best suitable for the location. Horizontal – axis wind turbine is further divided into two which is the free
standing type and the lattice type. Vertical – axis wind turbine has savonius and darrieus types.
226
Design Options of Wind Power Plant
The diagram above shows the different wind turbine design options. There are two types of wind turbines
according to the rotor axis orientation-horizontal and vertical. Under each category fall more subtypes. In this
design project, two horizontal axis wind turbine and two vertical axis wind turbines. Wind turbines use the
energy of the wind to drive a generator which generates the electricity. Wind power can be extracted with the
use of wind turbines. They could be grouped together on a wind farm to produce a desired output. Oftentimes
they are on land but now, there are also offshore wind turbines. Wind turbine generators differ in size from
small ones which generate enough power for a small application or establishment to utility size ones which
can generate power for hundreds of users.
Figure 5-2. Schematic for Wind Power Plant
The figure 5-2 shows the AC voltage output from the wind farm shall be step-up by a transformer before
transmitting it via a transmission line to the substation. Then from the substation, the voltage shall be stepped
down to a suitable voltage for consumer loads supplied by feeders. Different turbines have different efficiency.
Specifically, this refers to the ability of the blades to capture the mechanical power from the wind referred to
as the coefficient of power. Almost all generators have similar gearbox and generator efficiencies. The
formula for power coefficient is:
P
Cp = IEC 61400-12-1 Sec. 8.4 Power
1 3 coefficient of Wind Turbines
ρAV
2
where,
Cp = power coefficient
P = mechanical power harnessed by the blades from the wind
ρ = 1.225 density of air (kg/m3)
A = area swept by the blades (m2)
V = 9.88 in the Calatagan wind farm site velocity of wind (m/s)
From the above equation, the general formula for estimating the power in watts that can be harnessed by the
blades from wind energy can be obtained:
Pblades = ρAV3 Cp
2 Producing Wind Turbines
227
To get the raw power of the wind only, omit the power coefficient. Note that input power mentioned above is
the mechanical power produced in the blades, not the power of the wind itself. Therefore, the total input
power is:
Pin = ρAV3
2 Producing Wind Turbines.
In the above formula, the air density, area swept by the blades, and the wind speed in the locality would be
considered in the selection of the wind turbine rating to be selected by the designer.
Figure 5-3. Power Coefficient Versus Advance Ratio
The figure 5-3 shows the Glauert ideal Cp, which is the result of a more detailed analysis that explicitly
involves the advance ratio. Lying below and to the right of the Glauert ideal are the expected Cp values for
different wind turbine configurations.
To make the selection process of wind turbines easier, IEC has provided a standardized means of describing
the output power characteristics of wind turbines. This is through the provisions of power curves on the turbine
datasheets. These power curves are manufactured based on careful measurements as prescribed in IEC
61400-12-1 Sec. 8.1.
228
Figure 5-4. Power Curve of Wind Turbine
Figure 5-4 shows that by only having the wind speed as an input, the designer can easily determine if a wind
turbine fits the air conditions in the locality. In the site where the wind farm is to be situated in Calatagan, the
average annual wind speed is 9.88 m/s. It is a high wind area thus it is a great spot for harnessing wind
energy.
Figure 5-5. Distance Between Wind Turbines
The figure 5-5 shows the distances between turbines varies per design options, as it depends on rotor
diameter. Regarding wake losses, the general recommendation of the wind turbine manufacturers is that if
4 to 6 times the rotor diameter to reduce wake losses. We decided to keep a minimum separation distance
of 5 times the rotor diameter. The distance requirement is based on the assessment as prescribed in IEC
61400-12-1 A.1.
229
Thus, Distance between Turbines = 5(D)
IEC 2005 (E) 61400-12-1 A.1:
where: Requirements regarding neighboring
D = Rotor Diameter and operating wind turbines
Requirements regarding neighbouring
The physical constraints of the chosen site can play a decisive roleand
in operating
designing wind turbines
a wind farm layout. The
nature of the terrain and surrounding developments need to be considered. A wind farm layout should aim at
reducing wake losses caused by interaction of wind turbines in a cluster. A general rule is that as the
separation distance between the turbines increases, the wake losses decrease. With very large separation
distance, the number of turbines that can be placed in a given area reduces. For example, if turbines are to
be placed in a row, these should be preferentially placed, perpendicular to the predominant wind direction.
This will reduce wake losses as well as loss of energy due to yaw operations.
Design Stages of Wind Power Plant
Figure 5-6. Proposed Single Line Diagram of Wind Power Plant
The figure 5-6 shows the single line diagram of the power system and the stages where each component is
designed.

230
Using the growth equation from Electric Power Distribution
System Engineering by TuranGönen:
Computation, Average Demand, Section
6, p.236
where:
Pm = P2018 (1+g)m
20.76 (1+g)2

P2028 = P2018 (1+g)10 IEEE Std. 1013 (2000). Load

PRC = PDC - P2028 IEEE Std. 1013 (2000). Load
where: Demand, Section 6, p.236
PRC = 6.48 – 34.944


PF =
where:
34.944 MW
PF =
3
PF = 11.648 MW

IEEEC.57.12.00-2010 IEEE Standard
Rating Immersed Distribution, Power, and
10,000 kVA, 3-phase, 69/13.8 kV
231
Power Losses
NLL = 11.6 kW
LL = 47.6 kW
where:
LL = Load Loss
Short Circuit Impedance IEEE Standard C57.12.00-2010,

%Z* = 9 Standard General Requirements for
Total Power Losses
TLF = NLL + LL
TL = 3TLF IEEE Standard C57.12.00-2010,
Standard General Requirements for
where: Power and Regulation Transformers
LL = Load Loss
TLF = 11.6 kW + 47.6 kW

TLF = 59.2 kW
TL = 177.6 kW
At Primary Side IEEE Standard C57.12.00-2010,

I=
10 MVA
I=
√3 (69 kV)
I = 83.6739 A

167.3479 A. As indicated that the 80% ampacity of NEC Section 240-3: General
the conductor shall be the full load current. Requirements for Branch Circuit,
IFL = 83.6739 A × 1.25
IFL = 104.5924 A
232
At Secondary Side IEEE Standard C57.12.00-2010,
I=
10 MVA
I=
√3 (13.8 kV)
I = 418.3698A

IFL = 418.3698A x 1.25
IFL = 522.9622 A
Circuit Breaker
Use: 60AT CB

83.6740 A × 3 = 251.022 A NEC Section 450.3 – Computation for
Grounding Conductor
1
IGROUNDING = (83.6739) Systems.
5
Secondary Grounding Conductor PEC Part 2, Article 1.4.4.3(b) or

1 Systems.
IGROUNDING = (418.3698 A)
5
233
Neutral Conductor PEC Part I(2009), Sec. 2.20.3.22 page
INEUTRAL = (IFLSecondary) 320: Feeder or Service Neutral Ground
INEUTRAL = 522.9622 A
Switch Gear Design

IDSA = switchgear and control gear - Part
√3 VL 102: Alternating current disconnectors
IDSA = × 2.5
√3 (13.8 kV)
IDSA = 1045.9244 A
Disconnector Rating
13.8 kV
√3
Current Transformer
IEC 60099-8(2011) Part 8/IEEE C62.22
Lighting Arrester
VLA = (C) (67) and 310.60(C) (69), page 226;
√3
69 kV × 1.05
VLA =
√3
VLA = 41.829 kV
234
Nominal Voltage Philippine Grid Code PP. (32) Section 3.2.3 – the
VLA = 11.9512 kV
Bus Bar Sizing

√3 (13.8 kV)
for general wiring
ILF = 418.3697 A

IBUS = 1255.1091 A - 125: Solving 3 phase current
Bus Bar Dimension

For 30˚C Rise

Copper development association
0.68 × 10-6
RDCBUSBAR = (2014), Article 5.2, page 79: Conductor
(0.00635) (0.125) for general wiring
RDCBUSBAR = 7.0452 × 10-4 Ω/m
(0.2) (0.68 × 10-6 ) Copper development association
RACBUSBAR =

L= (2014), Article 5.2, page 79: Conductor
(0.125)
L = 3.9875 × 10-9 H/m for general wiring.
XL = 2π (60) (3.99×10−9)
XL = 1.5042 Ω/m

C=
235
1
Xc =
2π (6) (5937610×10-24 )
Xc = 1.6644 × 1020 Ω/m
Impedance
Φ = tan
7.5825×10-6
Φ = 90∘
ZTOTAL = 2.5209 × 10-6 Ω/m × (10 m)

ZTOTAL = 2.5209 × 10-15∠-90
Use: Dimensions in meter: 6.35 mm × 152 mm IEEE Std Gray Book C8.3.3 page 231:
Skin Effect Ratio at 70℃: 1.18 Basic insulating materials are either
Area in CM: 1910CM organic or inorganic.
VD = I √R2 + X2) National Electric Code (1999), Article
X = Reactance

VD % =
69 kV
VD % = 4.4645 %

Derating Factor
236
100
CD = 1 -
Decrement Factor
X 1
Ta = × ( )
R 2 TF IEEE Std 80 (2000), Guide for safety in
2 T(60)
Ta = 0.0398
-2 × Tf
Ta
-2 × 0.15
Ta
DF = 1.1248

I = IGDF
I = 3.1 (1.1248)
I = 3.4869 A
Ground Potential
0.157
VTOUCH POTENTIAL MAX = 1.5 CDρs ( ) IEEE Std 80 (2000), Guide for safety in
√0.15
VTOUCH POTENTIAL MAX = 45 V AC substation grounding: Calculation
Buried Length
Lr
L = LC+ [1.55 + 1.22 ( )] LR
√L2X 2 IEEE Std 80 (2000), Guide for safety
+ LY
3 Calculation of Potential Difference
L = LC+ [1.55 + 1.22 ( )] L R
√502 + 902
L = 994 m

1 1 1 1
KS = π [2h + D+h + D (1 – 0.5n-2)] IEEE Std 80 (2000), Guide for safety
1 1 1 1 in AC substation grounding:
KS = π [2 (0.6) + 12.5+0.6 + 12.5 (1 – 0.5n-2)]
KS = 0.314
237
Figure 5-8. Single Line Diagram of the New Substation (Wind Power Plant)
238
239
respectively.

S
where: Conductors.
IL = Load Current
VL = Line Voltage
11.648 MW + 177.6 kW
IL =
√3 69 kV
IL = 97.9588 A
Conductors.
Code = Turkey
Elevation: 0m
240
1.852
Wind Speed = (9 kt) × ( hr ) × ( 1000 m ) × ( 1 hr ) 26 for installations and maintenance,
1 kt 1 km 3600 sec p43
0.5 × ρ × v2 × d
WW =
g
where:
2 1cm 1in 1ft 1m

(0.5) × (1.2kg/m3) × (4.63m/s) × (5.04mm × × × × )
WW = 10cm 2.54cm 12in 3.28ft
9.8066m/s2
WW = 0.0014 kg/m
Wt = √(WC)2 + (WW)2 IEC 60826(2003) – Design Criteria for

(WC)2 + (WW)2 Overhead Transmission Line, Chapter
Wt = √(0.054 kg/m)2 + (0.0014 kg/m)2 6.2.6.4 Wind Loads, p54-55
Wt = 0.0540 kg/m
1kg
T= (5.28kN) × ( )
4.8066N
T = 1098.4896 kg
L h×T
X1 = –[ ]
2 WT × L
360m (0) × (1098.4896kg)
X1 = –[ ]
2 (27kg/m) × (360m)
X1 = 180 m
WT × X1 2
S1 =
2×T
2
(0.0540kg/m) × (180)
S1 =
(2) × (1098.4896kg)
S1 = 0.7964 m
WW
Θ = tan-1 ( )
WC
241
0.0014kg/m
Θ = tan-1 ( )
0.054kg/m
Θ = 0.0259˚
Vertical Sag:
Vsag1 = (S1) × (cos Θ) NESC 235C2B (2007) –Sag Related
Vsag1 = (0.7964m) cos (3.9383˚) Clearances, Section: Clearances to
Vsag1 = 0.7691 m other structure, p142
2
Wt (L)
YMAX =
8(T)
2
(0.0540kg/m) × (360)
YMAX = 0.7964 m
8 × YMAX 2
3L
2
(8) × (0.7964m)
(3) × (360)
Clearance = H – S

No. of Disc Insulator = 5 disc

where: Engineers (2009) – Line Insulation,
n = Insulator Number p14 -21
k = 0.12
V2 = (V1) × (1+k)
V2 = (V1) × (1+0.12)
V2 = 1.12V
V3 = (V1) × k + (V2) × (1+k) Standard Handbook for Electrical

V3 = 0.12V1 + (V2) × (1.12) Engineers (2009) – Voltage levels,
V3 = 1.3744V1 p14 -3
242
V4 = (V1) × k + (V2) × k + (V3) × (1+k)
V4 = 0.12V1 + (1.12) × (0.12) + (1.3744V1) (1.12)
V4 = 1.7937V1
69kV
= V1 + 1.12V1 + 1.3744V1 + 1.7937V1
√3
69kV
V1 = √3
4.2881
V1 = 9.2902 kV
V5 = (1.7937) × (9.2902)
V5 = 16.6638 kV
69kV
( )
√3
ηSTRING = [ ] × 100
(9) × (16.6638)
ηSTRING = 59.7660%

Based on ACSR Turkey specifications,
IEC 60228, 3rd Edition 2004 – 11
Resistance⁄
1000 ft = 0.641 Ω International Standard on Conductors
Length of Feeders:
LF1 = 9.8 km
LF2 = 16.4 km
At Balayan = 9.8 km
R = (0.06712 ) 9.8km
R = 0.6578 Ω 31, 2006

Deq
L = 2 x 10-7 ln ( )
GMR
where:
Considering the transmission system is completely transposed,
243
GMR = 0.7788 (r)
where:
.680 in page 461, 2011
r= = 0.34 in = 0.008636 m
2
GMR = 0.7788 (0.008636 m)
GMR = 6.7257 × 10-3
The figure 5-11above shows the appearance of a single circuit tower for a transmission line.
3
6.b.(2), page 6-1
6.9933 1000m
L = 2 x 10-7 ln ( -3
) ( ) ( 9.8km )
6.7257 x 10 1km
L = 13.6157 mH
XL = 2π f L = 2π (60) (13.6157 mH)
XL = j5.133 Ω/phase
page 461, 2011
244
ZT = (0.6578+ j5.133 Ω/phase) × 3 phase
ZT = 1.9734 + j6.9147 Ω

R = (0.06712 ) 10.34km
R = 0.6940 Ω 31, 2006

Deq
L = 2 x 10-7 ln ( )
GMR
where:

GMR = 0.7788 (r) page 461, 2011
where:
0.680 in
r= = 0.34 in = 0.008636 m
2
GMR = 0.7788 (0.008636m)
GMR = 6.7257 × 10-3 m
245
3
6.9933 1000 m 6.b.(2), page 6-1
L = 2 x 10-7 ln ( -3
)( ) (10.34 km)
6.7257 x 10 1 km
L = 14.3659 mH
XL = 2π f L = 2π (60) (14.3659 mH)

XL = 5.4158 Ω/phase

ZCONDUCTOR = 0.5262 + j5.4158 Ω/phase National Electrical Code (NEC), Rated
ZT = ZCONDUCTOR × 3 phase page 461, 2011
ZT = (0.5262 + j5.4158 Ω/phase) × 3 phase
ZT = 1.5786 + j16.2474 Ω

246
where:
RF1 = LF1 x R
IEC 60228, 3rd Edition 2004 – 11
RF1 = 9.8 km x 0.641Ω⁄0.3048 km International Standard on Conductors
RF1 = 20.6096 Ω of Insulated Cables.
RF2 = LF2 x R
RF2 = 16.4 km x 0.641Ω⁄0.3048 km
RF2 = 34.4895 Ω
RFT = RF1 + RF2

RFT = 55.0992 Ω
Losses per Feeder:

PFn = 3I2 RFn IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery
where: (Volume: 21, Issue: 3, July 2006)
PFn = Power Loss in Feeder 'n' Power Loss Measurement and
I = Line Current Estimation Method
PF1 = 3I2 RF1

2
PF2 = 3I2 RF2 Estimation Method
2
PF2 = 3(97.9588) (34.4895)

Nominal T
A ~ D = 1+(ZL × Y/2) = 0.9537 < 0.0029 Ω

B = ZL [1 + (ZL × Y/4)] = 51.2896 < 87.6958 Ω
C ~ Y = j1.7227 x 10-3
247
69kV 5MVA
VSN = A[ <0] + B[ <-cos-1(0.8)]
√3 √3×69kV
VSN = 36831.9699 < 0.0529 V
VS = (√3) × (36.8319kV)
VS = 63.7947 kV
69kV 5MVA
IS = ( <0) × (1.227x10-3< 90) + ( <-cos-10.8) × (0.9537 < 0.0029)
√3 √3×69kV
IS = 22.2695 < 1.1006 A
Efficiency
(5MVA) × (0.8)
η =[ 2
] × 100
(5MVA) × (0.8) + (3) × (22.2695) × (3.2772)
η = 99.8783%
Voltage Regulation
63.7947–69
VR =( ) × 100
69
VR = 7.5439%
Rating
25,000 kVA, 3-phase, 13.8 kV/69 kV
Power Losses
LL = Load Loss

where:
LL = Load Loss
TL = 103.4 kW
248
Primary Winding
MVA Rating
I=
√3× V
25 MVA
I=
√3 (13.8 kV)
I = 836.7395 A

IF = 836.7395 A x 1.25
IF = 1045.9244 A
√3 × V
I=
√3 (69 V)
I = 167.3479 A
IF = 167.3479 A x 1.25
IF = 209.1849 A
Circuit Breaker NEC Section 450.3 – Computation for

Primary Circuit Breaker Overcurrent Protection of Transformer
836.7395 A x 3 = 2510.2135 A
Use: 2500 AT CB

249
Grounding Conductor
PEC Part 2, Article 1.4.4.3(b) or
IGROUNDING CONDUCTOR = (Current) Multi-Grounded Alternating Current
5
1 Systems.
5

5 Systems.
Neutral Conductor
Switch Gear Design IEC 62271-102(2001) High-voltage

S switchgear and control gear - Part
IDSA = 102: Alternating current disconnectors
√3 VL
IDSA = × 2.5
√3 (13.8 kV)
IDSA = 1045.9244 A
Disconnector Rating
VT- Primary Voltage = 102: Alternating current disconnectors
√3
13.8 kV
√3 IEC 60099-8(2011) Part 8/IEEE C62.22
250
Current Transformer
Lighting Arrester
VLA = (C) (67) and 310.60(C) (69), page 226;
√3
Highest Voltage
69 kV × 1.05
VLA =
√3
VLA = 41.829 kV
Philippine Grid Code PP. (32) Section 3.2.3 – the
Nominal Voltage system owner must ensure that the voltage variation
13.8 kV × 1.05 must be not more or less than +-5% of the nominal
VLA =
VLA = 11.9512 kV

VD = I √ (R2 + X2)
where: National Electric Code (1999), Article 210,
I = Full Load Current page 19: Where the maximum total voltage drop
R = Resistance on both feeders and branch circuits to the
X = Reactance farthest outlet does not exceed 5 percent.
R = 6.1 (0.8950) = 5.4595 Ω
X = 6.1 (0.6403) = j3.9058 Ω National Electric Code (1999), Article 210,
page 19: Where the maximum total voltage drop
1.1234 kV
VD % =
69 kV
VD % = 1.6281 %
251
R = 10.2 (0.8950) = 9.1290 Ω National Electric Code (1999), Article 210,
X = 10.2 (0.6404) = j6.5321 Ω page 19: Where the maximum total voltage drop
1.878.5275 kV
VD % =
69 kV
VD % = 2.7225 %

Derating Factor
100
CD = 1 -
Decrement Factor
X 1
Ta = × ( )
R 2 TF
1 IEEE Std 80 (2000), Guide for safety
Ta = 15 × ( )
2 T(60) in AC substation grounding:
Ta = 0.0398 Calculation of Potential Difference
-2 × Tf
Ta
Ta -2 × 0.15 AC substation grounding: Calculation
DF = 1.1248

I = IGDF
I = 3.1 (1.1248) IEEE Std 80 (2000), Guide for safety
I = 3.4869 A in AC substation grounding:
Ground Potential
252
0.157
√0.15
VTOUCH POTENTIAL MAX = 45 V IEEE Std 80 (2000), Guide for safety
Buried Length Calculation of Potential Difference
Lr
L = LC+ [1.55 + 1.22 ( )] LR
√L2X + L2Y
3
L = LC+ [1.55 + 1.22 ( )] LR
2
√90 + 50 2
L = 994 m

1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1
KS = π [2 (0.6) + 12.5+0.6 + 12.5 (1 – 0.5n-2)] of Potential Difference
KS = 0.314
253
The figure 5-13 shows the type of a single line using a double bus double breaker bus scheme.
Switchyard Layout
254
Stage 5: Wind Power Plant Design
Coordinates of Plant & Poles and Lattices
Figure 5-16. Coordinates, Poles and Lattices of the Wind Farm
The figure 5-16 shows the site in Calatagan has a flat terrain and does not have any tall structures in the
vicinity, which may have a significant effect on the wind farm layout.
Required kW Output
2

n=1
where:
2

n=1
POut = 28.464 MW + (0.177 MW + 0.103 MW) + 1.214 MW

POut = 29.958 MW
255
Number of Wind Turbines to be Used
Target Power Output
Output of Each Unit
Horizontal Wind Turbine
This wind turbine is characterized by blades which are perpendicular to the ground. Most of them which are
built nowadays are two or three-bladed. Meanwhile, there are some which use single blade only or even
more than three. The following is the wind turbine to be used.
Option 1: Horizontal-Axis Upwind Turbine (Free Standing)
Figure 5-17. Horizontal-Axis Wind Turbine (Free Standing)
Figure 5-17 shows a horizontal-axis wind turbines (HAWT) have the main rotor shaft and electrical generator
at the top of a tower, and may be pointed into or out of the wind. Small turbines are pointed by a simple wind
vane, while large turbines generally use a wind sensor coupled with a servo motor. Most have a gearbox,
which turns the slow rotation of the blades into a quicker rotation that is more suitable to drive an electrical
generator. HAWT in free standing configuration was made by steel pipe with a free standing design. It was
used for 1 kW to 50 kW wind turbines. The height of mono tower is usually from 12m to 36m. It has less
vibration and more reliable.
General Data
 Manufacturer: Vestas (Denmark)
256
 Model: V117
 Nominal power: 4.2 MW
 Rotor diameter: 57.2 m

1
PAVAIL = 2 ρAV3
IEEE Trans Power Apparatus Syst
PAS-102(12):3791–3795. Stability
where: Simulation of Wind Turbine Systems.
D
Rotor Diameter = 57.2 Dm
52
PAVAIL = Pin = (0.5) (1.225) (9.88)3 π ( )2
2

1
57.2
PMAX = (0.5) (1.225) (9.88)3 (0.5926) π ( )2
2
PMAX = 1.7990 MW

POBT = Cp (PAVAIL)
POBT = (0.55) (3.0359 MW)
POBT = 1.6697 MW
Wind Turbines
257
Pout = 0.90307% (1.6697) = 1.5079 MW per turbine
power.

34.944 MW
1.5079 MW
Losses Calculation
Power Input - losses IEEE Trans Power Apparatus Syst PAS-
Efficiency =
92.15 % =
1.5079 MW
Losses = 1.5079 MW – 0.9215 (1.5079 MW)
Total Power Losses

number of turbines.
Distance Between Turbines IEC 2005 (E) 61400-12-1 A.1:

Distance between Turbines = 5(D) Requirements regarding neighboring and
where: operating wind turbines
D = Rotor Diameter Requirements regarding neighbouring and
Ln = 5 (57.2 m) operating wind turbines
Ln = 286 m
258
Power Plant Layout
Single Line Diagram
259
Option 2: Horizontal-Axis Upwind Turbine (Lattice)
Figure 5-20. Horizontal-Axis Wind Turbine (Lattice)
Horizontal-axis wind turbine in lattice configuration turbines are delivered with steel towers, which are
manufactured in sections of 20-30 meters with flanges at either end, and bolted together on the site. The
towers are conical (i.e. with their diameter increasing towards the base) in order to increase their strength
and to save materials at the same time.
General Data
 Manufacturer: Siemens Gamesa
 Model: SG 4.5-145 DD
 Nominal power: 6 MW
 Rotor diameter: 102 m

1
PAVAIL = 2 ρAV3
where: of Wind Turbine Systems.
D
260
102
PAVAIL = Pin = (0.5) (1.225) (9.88)3 π ( )2
2

1
102 IEC 61400-12-1 Power Performance

PMAX = (0.5) (1.225) (9.88)3 (0.5926) π ( )2 Measurements of Electricity Producing
2
PMAX = 5.7209 MW per turbine Wind Turbines

POBT = (0.55) (2.5090 MW) Measurements of Electricity Producing
POBT = 5.3097 MW Wind Turbines
Pout = 0.90307% (5.3097 MW) = 4.7950 MW per turbine
power.

34.944 MW
4.7950 MW
Losses Calculation
92.15 % =
1.3799 MW
261
Losses = 1.3799 MW – 0.9215 (1.3799 MW)
Total Power Losses

number of turbines.

IEC 2005 (E) 61400-12-1 A.1:
Ln = 510 m
Power Plant Layout
The figure 5-21 shows the layout of turbines which is a box type with 510 meters between each turbines.
262
Single Line Diagram
Figure 5-22 above shows the single line diagram of the wind farm. The numbers of the wind turbine and its
corresponding connections.
263
Option 3: Vertical-Axis Wind Turbine (Darrieus)
Figure 5-23. Darrieus Vertical Wind Turbine
Figure 5-23 is a type of vertical axis wind turbine (VAWT) used to generate electricity from the energy carried
in the wind. The turbine consists of a number of curved aero foil blades mounted on a vertical rotating shaft
or framework. The curvature of the blades allows the blade to be stressed only in tension at high rotating
speeds. A Darrieus wind turbines appear to be more suitable in different fields such as building integration,
the extreme zones (mountain refuge, observatories) than the classic wind turbines. It is less efficient
compared with the three-bladed wind turbines, this kind of wind turbine can overcome the limits due to the
sizes of blades and their rotation speed. The main advantage of this type of turbines is that the generator can
be easily set up in the ground.
General Data
 Manufacturer: Ropatec (Italy)
 Model: TS30pro
264

To compute the available power in the wind we use
the formula: IEEE Trans Power Apparatus Syst PAS-
1
PAVAIL = 2 ρAV3 102(12):3791–3795. Stability Simulation
of Wind Turbine Systems.
where:
D
12
PAVAIL = Pin = (0.5) (1.225) (9.88)3 π ( )2
2

1
PMAX = 2 ρAV3 Cp
where:
D Producing Wind Turbines
12
PMAX = (0.5) (1.225) (9.88)3 (0.5926) π ( )2
2
PMAX = 123.7203 kW

POBT = (0.40) (133.6143 kW) Measurements of Electricity
POBT = 53.4465 kW Producing Wind Turbines
265
power.

34.944 MW
48.2660 kW
Losses Calculation
32.1776 kW - losses of Wind Turbine Systems.
92.15 % =
32.1776 MW
Losses = 32.1776 kW – 0.9215 (32.1776 kW)
Total Power Losses IEEE Trans Power Apparatus Syst PAS-

Total losses = Losses × Number of Wind Turbines 102(12):3791–3795. Stability Simulation
Total losses = 2.5259 kW × 26 of Wind Turbine Systems.
number of turbines.

IEC 2005 (E) 61400-12-1 A.1:
where:
Requirements regarding neighboring and
D = Rotor Diameter
operating wind turbines. Requirements
regarding neighbouring and operating
Ln = 5 (12 m)
wind turbines
Ln = 60 m
266
Power Plant Layout
Figure 5-24. Wind Turbine per Cluster
The figure 5-24 shows the first 4 clusters are comprised of 100 wind turbines while the other 4 comprises a
total number of 101 wind turbines.
Figure 5-25. Wind Turbine Clusters Connection
267
Single Line Diagram
grid interface.
268
Option 4: Vertical-Axis Wind Turbine (Savonius)
Figure 5-27. Vertical-Axis Wind Turbine (Savonius)
Figure 5-27 is a savonius vertical-axis wind turbine is a slow rotating, high torque machine with two or more
scoops and are used in high-reliability low-efficiency power turbines. Most wind turbines use lift generated
by airfoil-shaped blades to drive a rotor, the Savonius uses drag and therefore cannot rotate faster than the
approaching wind speed.
General Data:
 Manufacturer: Arborwind (Michigan, USA)
 Model: PT-180
269
 Start-up wind speed: 3.129 m/s
 Maximum wind speed: 11.176 m/s

1
PAVAIL = 2 ρAV3
where:
D of Wind Turbine Systems.
18
PAVAIL = Pin = (0.5) (1.225) (9.88)3 π ( )2
2

1
PMAX = 2 ρAV3 Cp
where: Producing Wind Turbines
18
PMAX = (0.5) (1.225) (9.88)3 (0.5926) π ( )2
2
PMAX = 178.1523 kW

POBT = Cp (PAVAIL)
POBT = (0.30) (178.1523 kW) IEC 61400-12-1 Power Performance
POBT = 53.4472 kW Measurements of Electricity
Generator Efficiency Producing Wind Turbines
power.
270
34.944 MW
48.2665 kW
Losses Calculation IEEE Trans Power Apparatus Syst

Power Input - losses PAS-102(12):3791–3795. Stability
Efficiency = Simulation of Wind Turbine Systems.
Power Input
48.2665 kW - losses
92.15 % =
48.2665 kW
Losses = 48.2665 kW – 0.9215 (48.2665 kW)
Total Power Losses

Total losses = 3.7889 kW ×724 102(12):3791–3795. Stability Simulation
number of turbines.

IEC 2005 (E) 61400-12-1 A.1:
Ln = 90 m
271
Power Plant Layout
Figure 5-29. Clusters Connection
272
Single Line Diagram
grid interface.
273
Design Simulation
Figure 5-31. Power Flow using Newton Rhapson Method
The figure 5-31 shows the Power flow using Newton Rhapson Method result in Paladin DesignBase.
Figure 5-32. 3-Phase Fault Short-Circuit
The figure 5-32 shows the 3-phase fault short circuit of the system.
274
Figure 5-33. 3- Line-Line(L-L) Fault Short-Circuit
The figure 5-33 shows the Line-Line(L-L) Fault Short-Circuit is recorded data for 3-Phase Fault for the whole
system during ½ cycle, 3 cycle and during steady-state. The data recorded that the short circuit current for
all substations are supported by the calculation in the chapter 3.
Figure 5-34. 3- Line-Ground(L-G) Fault Short-Circuit
The figure 5-34, Line-Line(L-L) Fault Short-Circuit is recorded data for 3-Phase Fault for the whole system
during ½ cycle, 3 cycle and during steady-state. The data recorded that the short circuit current for all
substations are supported by the calculation in the chapter 3.
275
Figure 5-35. 3- Double Line – Ground(LLG) Fault Short-Circuit
The figure 5-35, 3-Phase Fault Short-Circuit is recorded data for 3-Phase Fault for the whole system during
½ cycle, 3 cycle and during steady-state. The data recorded that the short circuit current for all substations
are supported by the calculation in Chapter 3.
Protective Device Coordination (PDC)
Figure 5-36. Protective Device Coordination
276
The figure 5-36 shows the Time Current Characteristics (TCC) curve showed the coordination between the
breakers and load of the substations. As shown in the figure, all of the breakers will not trip unless there will
be over-current in the system.
Arc Flash Hazard for New Substations
Figure 5-37. Graphical Representation of the Working Distance
Figure 5-37 shows the working distance at 12inches from the equipment. The distance is already outside the
safety green zone.
Figure 5-38. The PPE Category and Safety Clothing Required
277
Figure 5-38 shows that at least PPE Category 3 is needed for 12 inches working distance for the workers.
The required clothes are at class 3, gloves at class 2, insulated tools, suit hood, eye protection and a non-
melting AR hair/beard nets.
Figure 5-39. The Graphical Representation of the Working Distance
Figure 5-39 shows the graphical representation of the working distance which is still within the red zone at
24inches away from the equipment.
Figure 5-40. PPE Category and the Clothing Required
278
Figure 5-40 indicates that PPE Category 2 is needed for a 24inches working distance away from the
equipment. Category 2 needs at least clothing at level 2, gloves at class 2, insulated tools, face shield, eye
protection, non-melting AR
Figure 5-41. The Working Distance at Green Zone
The figure 5-41 shows the Shows the working distance at green zone which means less protective
equipment required for the workers.
Figure 5-42. The PPE Category Needed for The Workers
Figure 5-42 shows PPE Category 0, which includes clothing at level 0, gloves at class 2, insulated tools but
not required, face shield but not required, an eye protection and a non-melting AR hair/beard nets.
279
Substation Grid Layout
Figure 5-43. New Substation Grid Layout
The figure 5-43 shows the Substation Grid Layout is the footprint of the transformer’s substations. This grids
consists of integrated rods at each corners. Grounding is a major importance to increase the reliability of the
transformer to provide stability of voltage conditions, preventing excessive voltage peaks during
disturbances. It also means a measure of protection against lighting.
Figure 5-44. New Substation Grid Potential Lines
280
The figure 5-44 Substation Grid Potential Lines shows the touch potential of the transformer. The touch
potential is the voltage difference between the energized object and the soil where the transformer is located.
As shown in the figure, the highest potential of the grid is located in the corners. The potentials measured is
45 V in both of the corners. The lowest potential of the substation occurs at the center part of the transformer.
Turbine Simulation
HAWT (Free Standing)

Using QBlade Turbine Simulation. QBlade is an open source wind turbine calculation software. The software
is especially adequate for designing, as it provides a hands on design and simulation capabilities for HAWT
and VAWT rotor design and shows all the fundamental relationships of design concepts and turbine
performance in an easy and intuitive way.
Figure 5-45. Design of The Rotor for HAWT Free Standing
The figure 5-45 shows the designing of the rotor with its technical specifications. Setting the foil and its curve,
the width and thickness of the blades.
Figure 5-46. Simulation of The Wind Field
281
The figure 5-46 shows the wind fields will be simulated for the sectors given in this list. Any wind direction
can be given, but if climatology data is then introduced, it is recommended to simulate the same sectors as
those found in the climatology data.
In figure 5-47 above, using non-linear lifting simulation with the rotor technical specifications provided and
the wind field having 9.88 m/s mean speed, the designed wind turbine produces 2.9845 MW of power with
betz limit of 0.52. All output is on the same magnitude as the computed output.
HAWT (Lattice)
Using QBlade Simulation program for designing turbines.
Figure 5-48. Wind Field Simulation
282
Depending on the stability of the atmosphere the wind profile in the higher elevations differs considerably. It
is therefore more convenient to prescribe a “reference speed” in a “reference height” near the surface.
Figure 5-49. Rotor Specifications
In figure 5-49, the designed rotor is in line with the technical specification of the rotor to be used in the final
design. Specification of a file with geometry used for visualization. For Turbine objects it is recommended to
use turbin_nn (nn is a height), which automatically generates simple scalable geometries in accordance with
the legend in the report section.
Figure 5-50. Rotor BEM Simulation
In figure 5-50, the blade element momentum (BEM) method is a popular tool for predicting the performance
of wind turbine rotors. This study investigated the impact of including factors such as tip loss, hub loss and
drag coefficients in BEM simulations
283
In figure 5-51,using non-linear lifting simulation with the rotor technical specifications provided and the wind
field having 9.88 m/s mean speed, the designed wind turbine produces 9.5932 MW of power with betz limit
of 0.45. All output is on the same magnitude as the computed output.
VAWT (Darrieus)
Figure 5-52. Design of the Darrieus Wind Turbine
Figure 5-52 shows that QBlade Simulation also provides designs on vertical-axis wind turbines. Same with
HAWT, setting the thickness, length and curve of the blades is the first step. The distance of the blades is
also a factor since the blades are on a vertical configuration it is important to note that rotational speed varies
depending on the distance of the blades with each other.
284
Figure 5-53. Wind Field Set at 9.88 m/s Mean Speed
In figure 5-53, since VAWT has lower height than HAWT, the wind field is set on a lower stand point. The
hub of the turbine is also lower. The mean speed is still at 9.88 m/s.
Figure 5-54. Simulation of the designed Darrieus Turbine set at the simulated wind field
In figure 5-54, using non-linear lifting simulation with the rotor technical specifications provided and the wind
field having 9.88 m/s mean speed, the designed wind turbine produces 132.6771 kW of power with betz limit
of 0.39. All output is on the same magnitude as the computed output.
285
VAWT (Savonius)
Figure 5-55. Design of the Savonius Rotor Using the Specified Technical Data
Figure 5-55 shows that QBlade Simulation also provides designs on vertical-axis wind turbines. Same with
HAWT, setting the thickness, length and curve of the blades is the first step. The distance of the blades is
also a factor since the blades are on a vertical configuration it is important to note that rotational speed varies
depending on the distance of the blades with each other.
Figure 5-56. The Simulation of the Wind Field Set at 30 m Vertical Height
In figure 5-56, since VAWT has lower height than HAWT, the wind field is set on a lower stand point. The
hub of the turbine is also lower which set at 12 m. It is important to note that the height of the hub should be
higher than the diameter of the turbine. The mean speed is still at 9.88 m/s.
286
Figure 5-57. Simulation of the Savonius Wind Turbine
In figure 5-57, using non-linear lifting simulation with the rotor technical specifications provided and the wind
field having 9.88 m/s mean speed, the designed wind turbine produces 50.6541 kW of power with betz limit
of 0.31. All output is on the same magnitude as the computed output. Before running the Wind Resource
module at least one climatology must exist and all sectors defined in that climatology must exist in the wind
database.
287
Conclusion
After the creation of three different designs in each of the power plants (wind, solar and hydro), engineering
constraints were used to determine the best possible design in the deficit power needed. The constraints are
based upon the availability of the resources and the desired characteristics the client needs.
After the step by step process, the HAWT turbine set up with lattice tower has won the trade-off with its
economic advantage through getting it leveled cost of energy. The costing of this project has been minimized,
the efficiency is also satisfactory. The performance of this plant has been maximized related to its warranty
given in the data sheet from its manufacturer. With sensitivity analysis emphasized on the economical and
degradation factor, the turbine had gained a significant advantage over the other conversion technology.
After the trade off, the final design that was chosen, then was simulated and has been tested to prove if the
system has succeeded to compensate the deficit of 34.99 MW.
Using the Paladin DesignBase software, the system parameters were obtained by checking the full report
after conducting load flow analysis. With the wind power generation, the 34.99 MW deficit power of Balayan
and Nasugbu towns in the province of Batangas will overcome. Satisfying and overcoming all the problems
that will be faced for the next decade as mentioned earlier, this design project has been a success.
Lastly, standards play a vital role in governing the system and processes, such as IEC, IIEE, ANSI, PEC,
and etc., and must always incorporate in the design to ensure that the design is reliable and has safety
measures.
288
References
[1] BUENAVENTURA, J. U. (2014, August 20). Retrieved from Service Reliability of BATELEC I
www.ejournals.ph/article.php?id=5768
[2] SANTOS, I. A. (2014, JUNE 20). [Online]. Available https://apjmr.com>APJMR-2014-0-097
[3] CUEVAS, A.E. (2015, JULY 15). [Online] Available. https://www.erc.gov.ph/files/render/application
[4] A. N. DIMAUNAHAN, “PERFORMANCE OF BATELEC I”,2 FEBRUARY 2014. [Online] Available.

https://apjmr.com/apjmr-2014-02-130
[5] R. C. MACALAGIM, “ELECTRICAL LOADS FOR BATELEC I”, 26 MARCH 2015. [Online] Available
https://www.doe.gov.ph/du_csp
[6] P.G. ARROYO, "PHILIPPINE STATISTIC AUTHORITY," 20 JUNE 2009. [Online]. Available:
https://psa.gov.ph/content/population-batangas-city
[7] "IEEE," STANDARD 1562-2007, 12 MAY 2008. [Online].

Available: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/4518937.
[8] "IEEE," STANDARD 1020-2011, 12 APRIL 2012. [Online].

Available: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/6183450/definitions.
[9] IEEE, SEPT 2010 STANDARD C57.12.00-2010. [Online]. Available:

https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/5954111.
[10] "IEEE," 29 APRIL 1994. [Online]. Available: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/398556.

"NEC," 62271-100:2008, 27 FEBRUARY 2008. [Online]. Available:
https://webstore.iec.ch/publication/6688.
[11] "NEC," 7 MAY 2013. [Online]. Available: https://webstore.iec.ch/publication/7242.

[16] "IEC," 60099-4:2004, 25 MAY 2004. [Online]. Available:
https://webstore.iec.ch/publication/13265.
[12] "IEC," 62271-100, 15 JUNE 2017. [Online]. Available: https://webstore.iec.ch/publication/60907.
[13] M. JOHNSTON, "ELECTRICAL CONTRACTOR," 15 NOVEMBER 2015. [Online].

Available: https://www.ecmag.com/section/codes-standards/beyond-minimum.
[14] C. R. MILLER, "ELECTRICAL CONTRACTOR," 3 OCTOBER 2012. [Online].

Available: https://www.ecmag.com/section/codes-standards/sizing-conductors-part-xvii.
289
[15] "ELECTRICAL CONTRACTOR," 1 MARCH 2006. [Online]. Available:
https://www.ecmag.com/section/codes-standards/branch-circuit-feeder-and-servicecalculations.
[16] "ELECTRICAL CONTACTOR," 2 APRIL 2000. [Online]. Available:

https://www.ecmag.com/section/miscellaneous/temperature-limitations-electrical-connections-part-
1.
[17] T. E. GLAVINICH, "ELECTRICAL CONTACTOR," 8 APRIL 2005. [Online]. Available:

https://www.ecmag.com/section/codes-standards/pv-installation-codes-andstandards.
[18] C. R. MILLER, "ELECTRICAL CONTRACTOR," 2 AUGUST 2011. [Online].

Available: https://www.ecmag.com/section/codes-standards/sizing-conductors-partiii.
[19] C. R. MILLER, "ELECTRICAL CONTRACTOR," 15 JUNE 2011. [Online]. Available:

https://www.ecmag.com/section/codes-standards/sizing-conductors.
601
[20] R. LAEZMAN, "ELECTRICAL CONTRACTOR," 8 FEBRUARY 2008. [Online]. Available:

https://www.ecmag.com/section/green-building/states-failing-advance-interconnection-
renewablepower.
[21] C. R. MILLER, "ELECTRICAL CONTRACTOR," 3 JANUARY 2012. [Online].

Available: https://www.ecmag.com/section/codes-standards/sizing-conductors-part-viii.
[22] M. JOHNSTON, "ELECTRICAL CONTRACTOR," 5 JULY 2016. [Online]. Available:

https://www.ecmag.com/section/codes-standards/voltage-drop-sizing-equipmentgrounding-
conductors.
[23] C. R. MILLER, "ELECTRICAL CONTRACTOR," 25 NOVEMBER 2014. [Online].

Available: https://www.ecmag.com/section/codes-standards/sizing-conductors-part-xlii.
[24] D. BREMER, "ELECTRICAL CONTRACTOR," 10 MAY 2011. [Online]. Available:

https://www.ecmag.com/section/green-building/soaking-sunshine-benefitting-solar-power.
[25] C. ROSS, "ELECTRICAL CONTRACTOR," 20 FEBRUARY 2013. [Online].

Available: https://www.ecmag.com/section/green-building/hybrid-power.
[26] "NEC," 7 MAY 2013. [Online]. Available: https://webstore.iec.ch/publication/7242.
[27] "IEC," 60099-4:2004, 25 MAY 2004. [Online]. Available: https://webstore.iec.ch/publication/13265.
[28] "IEC," 62271-100, 15 JUNE 2017. [Online]. Available: https://webstore.iec.ch/publication/60907.
290
Appendices
Appendix A. Trade Offs Computations
Category: Horizontal-Axis Wind Turbine
OPTION 1: Horizontal-Axis Wind Turbine (Free Standing)
Table A-1. Costs (Free Standing)

Component Quantity Price (₱) Cost
Wind Turbine 24 10,018,108.92 240,434,614.10

Inverter 24 28,623.17 686,956.08
Charge Controller 24 57,246.34 1,373,912.16
Rectifier 24 477,052.81 11,449,267.44
Tower 24 1,860,505.94 44,652,142.56
Subtotal 298,596,892.30
Labor and Installation cost
(30% of component cost) 89,579,067.69
Total 388,175,960.00
OPTION 2: Horizontal-Axis Wind Turbine (Lattice)
Table A-2. Costs (Lattice)

Component Quantity Price Cost
Wind Turbine 8 5,728,543.10 45,828,344.80
Inverter 8 45,344.40 362,755.20
Charge Controller 8 39,090.00 312,720.00
Rectifier 8 477,052.81 191,525,620.00
Tower 8 654,120.00 3,816,422.48.00
Subtotal 245,662,284.96.00
Total 319,360,970.45
Category: Vertical-Axis Wind Turbine
OPTION 3: Darrieus Type Wind Turbine
Table A-3. Costs (Darrieus Type Wind Turbine)

Wind Turbine 724 134,365.36 97,280,520.64
Inverter 724 25,344.40 18,349,345.60
Charge Controller 724 39,090.00 28,301,160.00
Rectifier 724 16,713.00 12,100,212.00
Tower 724 54,789.50 39,667,598.00
Subtotal 195,698,836.24
291
Total 254,408,487.11
OPTION 4: Savonius Type Wind Turbine
Table A-4. Cost (Savonius Type Wind Turbine)

Wind Turbine 724 325,451.40 235,626,813.60
Inverter 724 24,344.4 17,625,345.60
Charge Controller 724 39,090 28,301,160.00
Rectifier 724 15,130 10,954,120.00
Tower 724 89,854.80 65,054,875.20
Subtotal 357,562,314.40
Total 464,831,008.72
Table A-5. Area (Savonius Type Wind Turbine)

Design Options Wind Turbines Area
1 Free Standing (Vestas) 9,408,949.5 m2
2 Lattice (Siemens Gamesa) 24,428,116 m2
3 Darrieus (Ropatec) 15,470,674.4 m2
4 Savonius (Arbonwind) 16,516,512.4 m2
Area
The formula below shows the area that can be employed by the wind turbine with respect with other option
of the design.
Area = No. of Wind Turbine × Area of Wind Turbine
Table A-6. Life Span (Wind)

Design Options Wind Turbines Lifespan
1 Free Standing (Vestas) 25
2 Lattice (Siemens Gamesa) 25
3 Darrieus (Ropatec) 25
4 Savonius (Arbonwind) 25
Efficiency
The efficiency of the wind turbine is one of the most important factor on constructing the wind power plant,
because it allows you to compute and generate the power output.
Shaft Power Out of Turbine Into Gear Box

Wind Turbine Efficiency = × 100%
Wind Power Into Wind Turbines
292
Table A-7. Efficiency (Wind)
Design Options Wind Turbines Efficiency
1 Free Standing (Vestas) 49.67%
2 Lattice (Siemens Gamesa) 40.5104%
3 Darrieus (Ropatec) 29.1630%
4 Savonius (Arbonwind) 34.4154%
OPTION 1: Horizontal-Axis Wind Turbine (Free Standing)
Efficiency
Wind Turbine Efficiency =
Wind Power Into Turbine Blades
1.5079 MW
Wind Turbine Efficiency = × 100
3.0359 MW
Wind Turbine Efficiency = 49.67%
Area
4046.86m2
Area = (24) (25acres × 1acres )
Area = 2428116.5 m2
OPTION 2: Horizontal-Axis Wind Turbine (Lattice)
Efficiency
4.795 MW
9.654 MW
Area
4046.86m2
Area = (8) (8acres 1acres )
Area = 258,999.04 m2
OPTION 3: Darrieus Wind Turbine
Efficiency
48.26 kW
Wind Turbine Efficiency = 133.62 kW × 100
293
Area
4046.86m2
Area = (724) (10acres 1acres )
Area = 13,516,512.4 m2
OPTION 4: Savonius Wind Turbine
Efficiency
48.27 kW
Wind Turbine Efficiency = 178.15 kW × 100
Area
4046.86m2
Area = (724) (10acres )
1acres
Area = 12,428,116 m2
SOLAR POWER PLANT
OPTION 1: Micro Inverter
Table A-8. Cost (Micro Inverter)

PV Module 184915 33456 7,618,6516,240
Battery 149 24789 3,693,561
Charge Controller 28466 9850 280,390,100
Inverter 116480 12000 242,436,000
Land Area 464515.2 763 354,425,097
Subtotal 7,955,835,809
(30% of component cost) 2,386,750,743
Total 10,342,586,550
OPTION 2: Central Inverter
Table A-9. Cost (Central Inverter)

294
PV Module 184915 33456 7,618,6516,240
Battery 96140 2478 6,436,740
Inverter 79 13098 1,968,156,000
Land Area 464515.2 763 354,425,097
Subtotal 9,681,555,809
Total 12,586,022,550
OPTION 3: String Inverter
Table A-10. Cost (String Inverter)

PV Module 184915 33456 7,618,6516,240
Battery 9876 2478 7,466,740
Inverter 3494 7500 2,538,292,500
Land Area 464515.2 763 354,425,097
Subtotal 10,251,692,310
Labor and Installation
cost 3,075507,693
(30% of component cost)
Total 13,327,200,000
Area
The formula below shows the area that can be employed by the solar panels with respect with other option
of the design.
Area = No. of Inverter × Area of Inverter
Table A-11. Area (Solar)

Design Options Inverter Area
1 Micro Inverter 388459052 m2
2 Central Inverter 424323936 m2
3 String Inverter 656690790 m2
Degradation
The formula below designates the rate at which the solar modules degrade. It is expressed in a unit less
variable, k. The solar module is about to reached the end of its life when it degrades by approximately more
than 20 percent of its maximum power rating.
R(t)= e-kt
-ln R(t)
k= t
295
Table A-12. Life Span (Solar)
Design Options Inverter Degradation
1 Micro Inverter 0.0089
2 Central Inverter 0.0074
3 String Inverter 0.0074
Efficiency
The efficiency of the solar panel is one of the most important factor on constructing the solar power plant, it
allows you to compute and generate the power output.
Peak Sun = 1000 W / m2

Rated Output Power
Inverter Efficiency = 1000 W × 100%
2 × Area of Inverter
m
Table A-13. Efficiency (Solar)

Design Options Inverter Efficiency
1 Central Inverter 18.29%
2 Micro Inverter 16.75%
3 String Inverter 10.82%
OPTION 1: Central Inverter
Efficiency
Desired Rating of PV module
Efficiency= × 100%
W
1000 2 × Area of PV module
m
355 W
Efficiency= × 100%
W
1000 2 × 1956 mm × 992 mm
m
Efficiency=18.29%
Area
Area = No. of PV Module × Area of PV Module
Area = 200,203 × 1956 mm × 992 mm
Area = 388,459,052 m2
OPTION 2: Micro Inverter
Efficiency
Efficiency = × 100%
W
1000 2 × Area of PV module
m
325 W
Efficiency = × 100%
W
1000 2 × 1956 mm × 992 mm
m
Efficiency = 16.75%
296
Area
Area = No. of PV module * Area of PV module
Area = 218684 x 1956 mm x 992 mm
Area = 424,323,936 m2
OPTION 3: String Inverter
Efficiency
Efficiency= x 100%
W
1000 2 x Area of PV module
m
210 W
Efficiency= x 100%
W
1000 2 x 1956 mm x 992 mm
m
Efficiency=10.82%
Area
Area = No. of PV module × Area of PV module
Area = 338439 × 1956 mm × 992 mm
Area = 656,690,790 m2
HYDRO POWER PLANT
Category: Run of River without Pondage
OPTION 1: Tubular Turbine
Table A-14. Costs (Tubular Turbine)

Hydro turbine 14 400000 5,600,000
Generator 14 45344.4 634821.6
Transformer 1 491700 491700
Subtotal 6,726,521.6
Total 8,744,478.08
OPTION 2: Kaplan Turbine
Table A-15. Costs (Kaplan Turbine)

Hydro Turbine 10 1,500,000 15,000,000
Generator 10 425,000 4,250,000
Transformer 1 475000 475000
Subtotal 19,725,000
297
(30% of component cost) 5,917,500
Total 45,367,500
Category: Low Head Hydropower
OPTION 3: Kaplan Axial Flow Turbine
Table A-16. Costs (Kaplan Axial Flow Turbine)

Hydro turbine 35 2,430,000 85,050,000
Generator 35 201400 7,049,000
Transformer 2 425100 850,200
Subtotal 92,949,200
(30% of component cost) 27,884,760
Total 213,783,160
OPTION 4: Bulb Turbine
Table A-17. Cost (Bulb Turbine)

Hydro turbine 17 1342365.36 72,960,390.48
Generator 17 45344.4 770,854.8
Transformer 2 390900 1,112,735,940
Subtotal 5,253,214,098
Total 6,829,178,327
Category: High Head Hydropower
OPTION 5: Pelton Turbine
Table A-18. Cost (Pelton Turbine)

Hydro turbine 7 18,550,000 129,850,000
Generator 7 45344.4 317,410.8
Transformer 2 390900 781,800
Subtotal 130,949,210.8
Total 170,233,974
OPTION 6: Turgo Impulse Turbine
298
Table A-19. Cost (Turgo Impulse Turbine)
Hydro turbine 8 4,770,000 38,160,000
Generator 8 45344.4 362,755.2
Transformer 2 390900 781,800
Subtotal 39,304,555.2
Total 51,095,921.76
Area
The formula below shows the area that can be employed by the hydro turbine with respect with other option
of the design.
Area = No. of Hydro turbine × Area of Hydro Turbine
Table A-20. Area (Hydro)

Design Options Hydro Turbines Area
1 Tubular Turbine 9,408,949.5 m2
2 Kaplan Turbine 24,428,116 m2
3 Kaplan Axial Flow Turbine 15,470,674.4 m2
4 Bulb Turbine 16,516,512.4 m2
5 Pelton Turbine 18,547,888.4 m2
6 Turgo Impulse Turbine 13,456,423.5 m2
Life Span
Typical lifespan of a hydro turbine based on some manufacturers is 10-20 years.
Table A-21. Life Span (Hydro)

Design Options Hydro Turbines Lifespan
1 Tubular Turbine 20
2 Kaplan Turbine 20
3 Kaplan Axial Flow Turbine 20
4 Bulb Turbine 20
5 Pelton Turbine 20
6 Turgo Impulse Turbine 20
OPTION 1: Tubular Turbine
Efficiency
Power Out of Turbine
Hydro Turbine Efficiency =
Hydro Power Into Turbine
2.6837 MW
Hydro Turbine Efficiency = × 100
2.9718 MW
Hydro Turbine Efficiency = 90.30%
299
Area
Area = No. of Hydro Turbine × Hydro of Wind Turbine
4046.86m2
Area = 3,965,922.8 m2
OPTION 2: Kaplan Turbine
Efficiency
3.7161 MW
4.1150 MW
Hydro Turbine Efficiency = 91%
Area
4046.86m2
Area = 2,832,802 m2
OPTION 3: Kaplan Axial Flow Turbine
Efficiency
866,726 kW
1.1757 MW
Area
4046.86m2
Area = (35) (70acres × )
1acres
Area = 9,914,807m2
OPTION 4: Bulb Turbine
Efficiency
1.8418 MW
2.3514 MW
300
Area
4046.86m2
Area = 4,815,763.4 m2
OPTION 5: Pelton Turbine
Efficiency
5.3088 MW
5.8786 MW
Area
4046.86m2
Area = 1,982,961 m2
OPTION 6: Turgo Impulse Turbine
Efficiency
4.5237 MW
5.0092 MW
Area
4046.86m2
Area = 2,266,241.6 m2
301
Appendix B. Normalization of Data
Table B-1. Design 1 Normalization of Data in Terms of Economical Constraint

Designs Options Economical Ranked Score
Darrieus Type Wind
PHP 254.4Million 8.46
Turbine
VAWT
Savonius Type Wind
Turbine
Free Standing PHP 388.2 Million 7.12
HAWT
Lattice PHP 319.4 Million 7.81

Maxraw - PCraw
PCnorm = 9 ( ) +1
Maxraw - Minraw
Design 1 Option 1:
10x10^9 - 254x10^6
Ranked Score = 9 ( ) +1 = 8.46
10x10^9 - 100x10^6
Design 1 Option 2:
10x10^9 - 465x10^6
Ranked Score = 9 ( ) +1 = 6.35
10x10^9 - 100x10^6
Design 1 Option 3:
10x10^9 - 388.2x10^6
Ranked Score = 9 ( ) +1 = 7.12
10x10^9 - 100x10^6
Design 1 Option 4:
10x10^9 - 319.4x10^9
Ranked Score = 9 ( ) +1 = 7.81
10x10^9 - 100x10^6
Table B-2. Design 1 Normalization of Data in Terms of Efficiency Constraint

Wind Designs Options Efficiency Ranked Score
Darrieus Type Wind
29.1630% 3.39
Turbine
VAWT
Savonius Type Wind
34.4154% 3.89
Turbine
HAWT Free Standing 42.5233% 5.05
302
Lattice 40.5104% 6.94

PCraw - Minraw
PCnorm = 9 ( ) +1
Maxraw - Minraw
Design 1 Option 1:
29.1630 - 10
Ranked Score = 9 ( ) +1 = 3.39
60 - 10
Design 1 Option 2:
34.4154 - 10
Ranked Score = 9 ( ) +1 = 3.89
60 - 10
Design 1 Option 3:
42.5233 - 10
Ranked Score = 9 ( ) +1 = 5.05
60 - 10
Design 1 Option 4:
40.5104 - 10
Ranked Score = 9 ( ) +1 = 6.94
60 - 10
Table B-3. Design 1 Normalization of Data in Terms of Degradation Constraint

Wind Designs Options Degradation Ranked Score
Darrieus Type Wind
20 3.25
Turbine
VAWT
Savonius Type Wind
24 4.15
Turbine
Free Standing 20 3.25
HAWT
Lattice 25 4.38

PCraw - Minraw
PCnorm = 9 ( ) +1
Maxraw - Minraw
Design 1 Option 1:
20 - 10
Ranked Score = 9 ( ) +1 = 6.63
50 - 10
Design 1 Option 2:
303
24 - 10
Ranked Score = 9 ( ) +1 = 6.85
50 - 10
Design 1 Option 3:
20 - 10
Ranked Score = 9 ( ) +1 = 7.75
50 - 10
Design 1 Option 4:
25 - 10
Ranked Score = 9 ( ) +1 = 7.53
50 - 10
Table B-4. Design 1 Normalization of Data in Terms of Environmental Constraint

Designs Options Environmental Ranked Score
Darrieus Type Wind
18,408,949 m2 9.24
Turbine
VAWT
Savonius Type Wind
24,428,116 m2 8.60
Turbine
Free Standing 15,470,674 m2 9.50
HAWT
Lattice 15,470,674 m2 9.50

Maxraw - PCraw
PCnorm = 9 ( ) +1
Maxraw - Minraw
Design 1 Option 1:
100x10^6 - 18x10^6
Ranked Score = 9 ( ) +1 = 9.24
100x10^6 - 10x10^6
Design 1 Option 2:
100x10^6 - 24x10^6
Ranked Score = 9 ( ) +1 = 8.60
100x10^6 - 10x10^6
Design 1 Option 3:
100x10^6 - 15x10^6
Ranked Score = 9 ( ) +1 = 9.50
100x10^6 - 10x10^6
Design 1 Option 4:
100x10^6 - 15x10^6
Ranked Score = 9 ( ) +1 = 9.50
100x10^6 - 10x10^6
304
Solar Designs Options Economical Ranked Score
Micro PHP 1.03 Billion 9.15
Inverter Central PHP 1.13 Billion 9.06
String PHP 1.33 Billion 8.88

Maxraw - PCraw
PCnorm = 9 ( ) +1
Maxraw - Minraw
Design 2 Option 1:
10x10^9 - 1.03x10^9
Ranked Score = 9 ( ) +1 = 9.15
10x10^9 - 100x10^6
Design 2 Option 2:
10x10^9 - 1.13x10^9
Ranked Score = 9 ( ) +1 = 9.06
10x10^9 - 100x10^6
Design 2 Option 3:
10x10^9 - 1.33x10^9
Ranked Score = 9 ( ) +1 = 8.88
10x10^9 - 100x10^6

Solar Designs Options Efficiency Ranked Score
Micro 18.29% 2.49
Inverter Central 16.75% 2.22
String 10.82% 1.15

PCraw - Minraw
PCnorm = 9 ( ) +1
Maxraw - Minraw
Design 2 Option 1:
18.29- 10
Ranked Score = 9 ( ) +1 = 2.49
60 - 10
305
Design 2 Option 2:
16.75- 10
Ranked Score = 9 ( ) +1 = 2.22
60 - 10
Design 2 Option 3:
10.82 - 10
Ranked Score = 9 ( ) +1 = 1.15
60 - 10

Solar Designs Options Degradation Ranked Score
Micro 20 3.25
Inverter Central 20 3.25
String 20 3.25

PCraw - Minraw
PCnorm = 9 ( ) +1
Maxraw - Minraw
Design 2 Option 1:
20 - 10
Ranked Score = 9 ( ) +1 = 3.25
50 - 10
Design 2 Option 2:
20 - 10
Ranked Score = 9 ( ) +1 = 3.25
50 - 10
Design 2 Option 3:
20 - 10
Ranked Score = 9 ( ) +1 = 3.25
50 - 10

Solar Designs Options Environmental Ranked Score
Micro 38,459,052 m2 7.15
Inverter Central 42,323,936 m2 6.67
String 65,690,790 m2 4.43
306
Maxraw - PCraw
PCnorm = 9 ( ) +1
Maxraw - Minraw
Design 2 Option 1:
100x10^6 - 38.46x10^6
Ranked Score = 9 ( ) +1 = 7.15
100x10^6 - 10x10^6
Design 2 Option 2:
100x10^6 - 42.32x10^6
Ranked Score = 9 ( ) +1 = 6.77
100x10^6 - 10x10^6
Design 2 Option 3:
100x10^6 - 65.69x10^6
Ranked Score = 9 ( ) +1 = 4.43
100x10^6 - 10x10^6

Hydro Design Options Economical Ranked Score
Tubular Turbine PHP 100.744 Million 9.97
Kaplan Turbine PHP 145.367 Million 9.95

Kaplan Axial Flow
Turbine
Turbine
Bulb Turbine PHP 6.829 Billion 3.88
Pelton Turbine PHP 170.233 Million 9.93

Turgo Impulse
Turbine)

Maxraw - PCraw
PCnorm = 9 ( ) +1
Maxraw - Minraw
Design 3 Option 1:
10x10^9 - 128.744 x10^6
Ranked Score = 9 ( ) +1 = 9.97
10x10^9 - 100x10^6
Design 3 Option 2:
10x10^9 - 145.367 x10^6
Ranked Score = 9 ( ) +1 = 9.95
10x10^9 - 100x10^6
307
Design 3 Option 3:
10x10^9 - 213.783x10^6
Ranked Score = 9 ( ) +1 = 9.89
10x10^9 - 100x10^6
Design 3 Option 4:
10x10^9 - 6.829 x10^9
Ranked Score = 9 ( ) +1 = 3.88
10x10^9 - 100x10^6
Design 3 Option 5:
10x10^9 - 170.233x10^6
Ranked Score = 9 ( ) +1 = 9.93
10x10^9 - 100x10^6
Design 3 Option 6:
10x10^9 - 410.095x10^6
Ranked Score = 9 ( ) +1 = 9.71
10x10^9 - 100x10^6

Hydro Design Options Efficiency Ranked Score
Tubular Turbine 47.80% 7.80
Kaplan Turbine 45.01 % 7.03

Kaplan Axial Flow
54.33 % 8.98
Turbine
Turbine
Bulb Turbine 57.24 % 9.50
Pelton Turbine 55.34 % 9.16

Turgo Impulse
51.11 % 8.39
Turbine)

PCraw - Minraw
PCnorm = 9 ( ) +1
Maxraw - Minraw
Design 3 Option 1:
47.80 - 10
Ranked Score = 9 ( ) +1 = 7.80
60 - 10
Design 3 Option 2:
45.01 - 10
Ranked Score = 9 ( ) +1 = 7.03
60 - 10
308
Design 3 Option 3:
54.33 - 10
Ranked Score = 9 ( ) +1 = 8.98
60 - 10
Design 3 Option 4:
57.24 - 10
Ranked Score = 9 ( ) +1 = 9.50
60 - 10
Design 3 Option 5:
55.34 - 10
Ranked Score = 9 ( ) +1 = 9.16
60 - 10
Design 3 Option 6:
55.11 - 10
Ranked Score = 9 ( ) +1 = 8.39
60 - 10

Hydro Design Options Degradation Ranked Score
Tubular Turbine 20 3.25
Kaplan Turbine 21 3.48

Kaplan Axial Flow
20 3.25
Turbine
Turbine
Bulb Turbine 21 3.48
Pelton Turbine 21 3.48

Turgo Impulse
21 3.48
Turbine)

PCraw - Minraw
PCnorm = 9 ( ) +1
Maxraw - Minraw
Design 3 Option 1:
50 - 20
Ranked Score = 9 ( ) +1 = 3.25
50 - 10
Design 3 Option 2:
50 - 21
Ranked Score = 9 ( ) +1 = 3.48
50 - 10
309
Design 3 Option 3:
50 - 20
Ranked Score = 9 ( ) +1 = 3.25
50 - 10
Design 3 Option 4:
50 - 21
Ranked Score = 9 ( ) +1 = 3.48
50 - 10
Design 3 Option 5:
50 - 21
Ranked Score = 9 ( ) +1 = 3.48
50 - 10
Design 3 Option 6:
50 - 21
Ranked Score = 9 ( ) +1 = 3.48
50 - 10

Hydro Design Options Environmental Ranked Score
Tubular Turbine 12,408,949.5 m2 9.76
Kaplan Turbine 24,428,116 m2 8.56

Kaplan Axial Flow
15,470,674.4 m2 9.53
Turbine
Turbine
Bulb Turbine 16,516,512.4 m2 9.35
Pelton Turbine 18,547,888.4 m2 9.15

Turgo Impulse
13,456,423.5 m2 9.65
Turbine)

Maxraw - PCraw
PCnorm = 9 ( ) +1
Maxraw - Minraw
Design 3 Option 1:
100x10^6 - 12.40x10^6
Ranked Score = 9 ( ) +1 = 9.76
100x10^6 - 10x10^6
Design 3 Option 2:
100x10^6 - 24.43x10^6
Ranked Score = 9 ( ) +1 = 8.56
100x10^6 - 10x10^6
310
Design 3 Option 3:
100x10^6 -15.47x10^6
Ranked Score = 9 ( ) +1 = 9.53
100x10^6 - 10x10^6
Design 3 Option 4:
100x10^6 - 16.52x10^6
Ranked Score = 9 ( ) +1 = 9.35
100x10^6 - 10x10^6
Design 3 Option 5:
100x10^6 - 18.55x10^6
Ranked Score = 9 ( ) +1 = 9.15
100x10^6 - 10x10^6
Design 3 Option 6:
100x10^6 - 13.46x10^6
Ranked Score = 9 ( ) +1 = 9.65
100x10^6 - 10x10^6
311
Appendix C. Pareto Optimization
Table C-1. Design Optimization in Terms of Total Score

4 3 2 1
HAWT
Wind 8.46 6.94 4.38 3.93 9.37
(Lattice)
Central
Solar 9.15 2.49 3.25 9.44 7.96
Inverter
Hydro Pelton 9.97 9.50 3.48 8.54 8.58
Importance Level
Weighted Factor =
Total Importance Level
4
For Economical Constraint, x1 = 10 = 0.4
3
For Efficiency Constraint, x2 = 10 = 0.3
2
For Degradation Constraint x3 = 10 = 0.2
1
For Environmental Constraint x4 = 10 = 0.1
WPCi = x1PC1i + x2PC2i + x3PC3i + x4PC4i + x5PC5i
For The Total Score of Each Design:
WPC1 = (0.4)(9.93) + (0.3)(9.88) + (0.2)(7.43) + (0.1)(49.44) = 9.37
WPC2 = (0.4)(9.99) + (0.3)(9.11) + (0.2)(4.21) + (0.1)(3.93) = 7.96
WPC3 = (0.4)(8.94) + (0.3)(8.87) + (0.2)(7.43) + (0.1)(8.54) = 8.58
312
Appendix D. Design Standards
IIEE Std 141 – 1993

IEEE Recommended Practice for Electric Power Distribution for Industrial Plants
IEC 62109-2:2011
Electromechanical Equipment Guide for Small Hydroelectric Installations
313
IIEE Standards Coordination Committee 21
314
IEC 60086 Part 2
Physical and Electrical Specifications
IEC 690.8 (A)

Cicuit Sizing and Current
315
IEEE Std C57.12.00-2010
IEEE Standard for General Requirements for Liquid-Immersed Distribution. Power, and Regulating
Transformers
316
NEC and NEMA Standards, Chap. 4, Table 9
AC Resistance and Reactance for 600-V Cables, 3-phase, 60 Hz
317
318
IEC 61400-12-1-2005 (E)
Power Coefficient and Power Measurement
319
Appendix E. Arc Flash Computations
There are two important things to consider in analyzing arc flash computations. These are calculation of arc
flash boundary distances (DB) and incident energy (EN).
Using NFPA 70E and IEEE 1584 equations:
Normalized incident energy (EN):
IgEN=K1+K2+1.081(IgIa)+0.0011G (1)
Where:
EN = incident energy in J/cm2 normalized for time and distance. The equation above is based on data
normalized for a distance from the possible arc point to the person of 610 mm. and an arcing time of
0.2sec
K1 = -0.792 for open configurations, and is -0.555 for box configurations / enclosed equipment
K2 = 0 for ungranded and high resistance grounded systems, and equals -0.113 for grounded
systems
G = gap between conductors in millimeters
Ia = predicted three phases arcing current in kA. It is found by using Equations 2 a) or b) so the
operating time for protective devices can be determined
For 1000V and lower systems:
IgIa=K+0.62(IgIbf)+0.0966V+0.000526G+0.5588(IgIbf)-0.00304G(IgIbf) (2a)
Where:
Ig = is logarithm base 10 (log 10)
Ia = arcing current in kA
K = equals -0.153 for open configurations and -0.097 for box configurations
Ibf = bolted fault current for three phase faults in kA symmetrical rms
V = system voltage in kV
G = gap between conductors in millimeters
Other formula (Derived Short Formula):
IgIa=0.00402+0.983(IgIbf) (2b)
For the IEEE Std 1584-2002 empirically derived model, arc flash boundary (Da) is calculatied using the
equation below:
1
x
t 610 x
DB = [4.184*Cf *EN * (0.2) ( E )] (3)
B
Using Lee Method:

1
6 t 2
DB = [2.142*(10 )*(V)*(Ibf ) (E )] (4)
B
320
Where:
DB = distance of the boundary from the arc point in millimeter
Cf = calculation factor equal to 1.0 for valtages above 1 kV, and 1.5 for voltages below 1 kV
En = normalized incident energy in J/cm2 as calculated by Equation 1
EB = incident energy in J/cm2 at the boundary distance. It is usually sat at 5 J/cm2 (1.2 cal/cm2) for
bare skin, or at the rating of proposed personal protection equipment
Ibf = bolted fault current for three phase faults in kA symmetrical rms
T = arcing time in seconds
x = distance exponent
@ Fault 1:
Recall from short circuit analysis computation,

Isc = Ibf = 2.386 kA
V = 13.2 kV
G = PPE Based on 24 inches working distance or 24 inches = 609.9 mm = 610 mm
IgIbf = log10(2.386) = 2.421 kA
Using Equation (2a)
Ia = e-0.097+0.662(0.3777)+0.0966(13.2)+0.000526(610)+0.5588(0.3777)-0.00304(610)(0.3777) = 3.5245 kA
Using Equation (1) and the equipment is enclosed and grounded system:
J
EN =e-0.555-0.113+1.081(log(3.5245))+0.0011(610) = 1.8120
cm2
To get the distance of boundary (DB) Using Lee Method or Equation (4):
t = Using based arcing time of 0.2 sec
EB = 5 J/cm2 (1.2 cal/cm2) – Normalized
1
6 0.2 2
DB = [2.142*(10 )*(13.2)*(2.386) ( )] = 1642.71 mm
5
@ Fault 2:

Isc = Ibf = 26.676 kA
V = 1.1 kV
IgIbf = log10(26.676) = 1.064 kA
Using Equation (2a)
Ia =e-0.097+0.662(1.4261)+0.0966(1.1)+0.000526(610)+0.5588(1.4261.)-0.00304(610)(1.4261) = 0.5637 kA
321
J
EN =e-0.555-0.113+1.081(log(0.5637))+0.0011(610) = 0.7663
cm2
1
0.2 2
DB = [2.142*(106 )*(1.1)*(26.676) ( )] = 1585.6102 mm
5
@ Fault 3:

Isc = Ibf = 28.629 kA
V = 13.2 kV
IgIbf = log10(28.629) = 1.633 kA
Using Equation (2a)
Ia = e-0.097+0.662(0.3777)+0.0966(13.2)+0.000526(610)+0.5588(0.3777)-0.00304(610)(0.3777) = 1.7793 kA
J
EN =e-0.555-0.113+1.081(log(1.7793))+0.0011(610) = 1.3146
cm2
1
0.2 2
DB = [2.142*(106 )*(13.2)*(28.629) ( )] = 5690.2295 mm
5
@ Fault 4:

Isc = Ibf = 28.629 kA
V = 13.2 kV
IgIbf = log10(28.629) = 1.657 kA
Using Equation (2a)
322
Ia = e-0.097+0.662(0.3777)+0.0966(13.2)+0.000526(610)+0.5588(0.3777)-0.00304(610)(0.3777) = 1.7793 kA
J
EN =e-0.555-0.113+1.081(log(1.7793))+0.0011(610) = 1.3146
cm2
1
6 0.2 2
DB = [2.142*(10 )*(13.2)*(28.629) ( )] = 5690.2295 mm
5
323
Appendix F. Plagiarism Checker
Chapter 1
Figure F-1. Chapter 1 Plagiarism Checker Result
Figure F-2. Chapter 1 Plagiarism Checker Originality Report
324
Chapter 2
325
Chapter 3
326
Chapter 4
327
Chapter 5
328
Appendix G. Grammarly
Figure G-1. Chapter 1 Grammarly Checker Result Part 1
329
330
331
332
333
334
335
336
Figure G-.9 Chapter 1 Grammarly Checker Result Part 5
337
338
339
340
Appendix H. Rubrics
341

Powplant V4 Print PDF

Diunggah oleh

Informasi Dokumen

Judul Asli

Hak Cipta

Format Tersedia

Bagikan dokumen Ini

Bagikan atau Tanam Dokumen

Opsi Berbagi

Apakah menurut Anda dokumen ini bermanfaat?

Apakah konten ini tidak pantas?

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Powplant V4 Print PDF

Diunggah oleh

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Design of an Additional 35 Mega Watts Power Plant in Calatagan, Batangas

Technological Institute of the Philippines

Engr. Meyer Joseph Dizon Engr. Hualy Eiden Mataya

Engr. John Placente

Engr. Marianne L. Yumul

Engr. Meyer Joseph Dizon Engr. Hualy Eiden Mataya

Engr. John Placente

friends who never left us when we have questions to ask.

Table 2-1. Historical Data .................................................................................................... 4

Figure 1-1. Project Development Flow Chart ...................................................................... 2

Approval Sheet ............................................................................................................................................... i

Project Scope and Limitation

Design Trade Off

Figure 1-1. Project Development Flow Chart

Table 2-1. Historical Data

Table 2-2. Load Forecasting

4 A. N. DIMAUNAHAN, “Performance of BATELEC I”,2 February 2014. [Online] Available. https://apjmr.com/apjmr-2014-02-130

Figure 2-1. Calatagan Map [6]

Location of the Power Plant and the Loads

Figure 2-2. Solar Power Plant Location to The Loads [8]

Direct Normal Irradiance

Figure 2-3. Direct Normal Irradiance in West Batangas [9]

Diffuse Horizontal Irradiance

Figure 2-4. Diffuse Horizontal Irradiance in Batangas [10]

Figure 2-5. Climate Summary [11]

Average High and Low Temperature

Figure 2-6. Average High and Low Temperature [12]

Figure 2-7. Cloud Cover Categories [13]

Figure 2-8. Hours of Daylight [14]

Sunrise & Sunset

Figure 2-9. Sunrise and Sunset with Twilight [15]

Location of the Wind Power Plant and the Loads

Wind Map of Batangas

Figure 2-11. Wind Map of Batangas [18]

Average Wind Speed in June

Figure 2-12. Average Wind Speed in June [19]

Wind Direction in June

Figure 2-13. Wind Direction in June [20]

Wind Power Density

Figure 2-14. Wind Power Density at 100 m Height in Calatagan [21]

Figure 2-15. Wind Speed in Calatagan Batangas [22]

Table 2-3. Design Criteria

Plant Efficiency 10% – 50% Efficiency

Capital Cost 100M – 10B Economical

Physical Life 10yrs – 50 yrs. Degradation

Land Area 100 m2 – 100M m2 Environmental

Figure 3-1. Design Hierarchy of Renewable Power Plants

Figure 3-2. Design Options of Wind Power Plant

Figure 3-3. Schematic for Wind Power Plant

Figure 3-4. Power Coefficient Versus Advance Ratio

Figure 3-6. Distance Between Wind Turbines

Design Stages of Wind Power Plant

Figure 3-7. Proposed Single Line Diagram of Wind Power Plant

Stage 1: Load Forecasting

Data from Load Curve IEEE Std. 1013 (2000). Load

Computing Future Peak Demand for the year 2028

Reserve Capacity in 10 years

PRC = 6.48 – 34.944

Power Demand per Feeder

*Note: load forecasted data sourced from BATELEC I

Stage 2: Step Down Transmission Substation Design

Short Circuit Impedance IEEE Standard C57.12.00-2010,

TLF = 11.6 kW + 47.6 kW