变压器模型和仪表在MATLAB和PSCAD中进行GIC和漏电直流的研究

Pitambar Jankee, H. Chisepo, Victor Adebayo, D. Oyedokun, C. T. Gaunt
{"title":"变压器模型和仪表在MATLAB和PSCAD中进行GIC和漏电直流的研究","authors":"Pitambar Jankee, H. Chisepo, Victor Adebayo, D. Oyedokun, C. T. Gaunt","doi":"10.1109/SAUPEC/RobMech/PRASA48453.2020.9041060","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Geomagnetically induced currents (GIC) caused by abnormal space weather have traditionally been modelled as balanced dc in low-frequency transients studies. Existing transformer models can be used to investigate a power system with GIC but the extent to which these models are consistent is unclear. This paper investigated the differences between the three-phase five limb (3p5L) power transformer models in MATLAB Simulink and PSCAD/EMTDC when they were subjected to dc (dcGIC) and low-frequency GIC (acGIC). The simulation protocol used a simple 4-bus power system with a generator, two transformers, a line, and a PQ load. An IEEE 1459 power calculation block was developed in MATLAB for non-ideal conditions whereas waveform data was post-processed from the PSCAD simulations. The results showed that even though the transformer models were calibrated with the same magnetization characteristics, the 3p5L PSCAD models with inter-phase magnetic coupling yielded a slightly different magnetization curve for each phase. By contrast, the MATLAB model yielded the same magnetization curve for each phase under the same conditions. As a result, there were differences in the performance with dc or acGIC, with the PSCAD model being more responsive to phase unbalance, simulating greater distortion in the transmission line, and voltage drop at the end.","PeriodicalId":215514,"journal":{"name":"2020 International SAUPEC/RobMech/PRASA Conference","volume":"32 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"10","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Transformer models and meters in MATLAB and PSCAD for GIC and leakage dc studies\",\"authors\":\"Pitambar Jankee, H. Chisepo, Victor Adebayo, D. Oyedokun, C. T. Gaunt\",\"doi\":\"10.1109/SAUPEC/RobMech/PRASA48453.2020.9041060\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Geomagnetically induced currents (GIC) caused by abnormal space weather have traditionally been modelled as balanced dc in low-frequency transients studies. Existing transformer models can be used to investigate a power system with GIC but the extent to which these models are consistent is unclear. This paper investigated the differences between the three-phase five limb (3p5L) power transformer models in MATLAB Simulink and PSCAD/EMTDC when they were subjected to dc (dcGIC) and low-frequency GIC (acGIC). The simulation protocol used a simple 4-bus power system with a generator, two transformers, a line, and a PQ load. An IEEE 1459 power calculation block was developed in MATLAB for non-ideal conditions whereas waveform data was post-processed from the PSCAD simulations. The results showed that even though the transformer models were calibrated with the same magnetization characteristics, the 3p5L PSCAD models with inter-phase magnetic coupling yielded a slightly different magnetization curve for each phase. By contrast, the MATLAB model yielded the same magnetization curve for each phase under the same conditions. As a result, there were differences in the performance with dc or acGIC, with the PSCAD model being more responsive to phase unbalance, simulating greater distortion in the transmission line, and voltage drop at the end.\",\"PeriodicalId\":215514,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"2020 International SAUPEC/RobMech/PRASA Conference\",\"volume\":\"32 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"10\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"2020 International SAUPEC/RobMech/PRASA Conference\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1109/SAUPEC/RobMech/PRASA48453.2020.9041060\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2020 International SAUPEC/RobMech/PRASA Conference","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/SAUPEC/RobMech/PRASA48453.2020.9041060","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 10

摘要

在低频瞬态研究中,异常空间天气引起的地磁感应电流(GIC)传统上被建模为平衡直流。现有的变压器模型可用于研究具有GIC的电力系统,但这些模型在多大程度上是一致的尚不清楚。本文研究了MATLAB Simulink中三相五肢(3p5L)电力变压器模型和PSCAD/EMTDC模型在直流(dcGIC)和低频(acGIC)作用下的差异。仿真协议使用一个简单的4总线电力系统,包括一台发电机、两台变压器、一条线路和一个PQ负载。在MATLAB中开发了IEEE 1459功率计算模块,并对PSCAD仿真的波形数据进行了后处理。结果表明,尽管变压器模型具有相同的磁化特性,但具有相间磁耦合的3p5L PSCAD模型的每相磁化曲线略有不同。相比之下,MATLAB模型在相同条件下得到了相同的各相磁化曲线。因此,与直流或acGIC的性能存在差异,PSCAD模型对相位不平衡的响应更大,在传输线中模拟更大的失真,最后电压下降。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Transformer models and meters in MATLAB and PSCAD for GIC and leakage dc studies
Geomagnetically induced currents (GIC) caused by abnormal space weather have traditionally been modelled as balanced dc in low-frequency transients studies. Existing transformer models can be used to investigate a power system with GIC but the extent to which these models are consistent is unclear. This paper investigated the differences between the three-phase five limb (3p5L) power transformer models in MATLAB Simulink and PSCAD/EMTDC when they were subjected to dc (dcGIC) and low-frequency GIC (acGIC). The simulation protocol used a simple 4-bus power system with a generator, two transformers, a line, and a PQ load. An IEEE 1459 power calculation block was developed in MATLAB for non-ideal conditions whereas waveform data was post-processed from the PSCAD simulations. The results showed that even though the transformer models were calibrated with the same magnetization characteristics, the 3p5L PSCAD models with inter-phase magnetic coupling yielded a slightly different magnetization curve for each phase. By contrast, the MATLAB model yielded the same magnetization curve for each phase under the same conditions. As a result, there were differences in the performance with dc or acGIC, with the PSCAD model being more responsive to phase unbalance, simulating greater distortion in the transmission line, and voltage drop at the end.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信