Optimal Capacitor Placement Benefits

Optimal Capacitor Placement
Costs Benefits Due to Loss Reductions

In general, capacitor banks are installed in power systems for voltage support, power factor
correction, reactive power control, loss reduction, system capacity increase, and billing charge
reduction. This process involves determining capacitor size, location, control method, and
connection type (Wye or Delta). The main effort usually is to determine capacitor size and
location for voltage support and power factor correction. Secondary considerations are
harmonics and switching transients.
Methods
There are different methods for determining capacitor size and location.
1. The most common method (intuitive) is based on rules of thumb followed by running
multiple load flow studies for fine-tuning the size and location. This method may not
yield the optimal solution and can be very time consuming and impractical for large
systems.
2. The second method is to use the ETAP Optimal Power Flow (OPF) program to optimize
the capacitor sizes based on the candidate locations selected by the engineer. This
method requires per-selected locations, since OPF can optimize the capacitor sizes but
not the locations.
3. The most effective method is to use the Optimal Capacitor Placement (OCP) program to
optimize capacitor sizes and locations with cost considerations. OCP employs a genetic
algorithm, which is an optimization technique based on the theory of nature selection.
OCP uses the “Present Worth Method” to do alternative comparisons. It considers initial
installation and operating costs, which includes maintenance, depreciation, and interest
rate.
To demonstrate the difference in benefits between the intuitive (rules of thumb + load flow) and
OCP methods, a very simple distribution system is used.
Example System
The example considered is as shown in Figure 1. It is assumed that:
1) Design loading occurs 55% of the time

2) Maximum loading (110% of design loading) occurs 25% of the time
3) Minimum loading (90% of design loading) occurs 20% of the time
4) Average energy cost is $0.07/kWh
5) Planning period is 10 years
6) 4.16 kV capacitors: 200 kvar banks

Purchase cost is $20/kvar
Installation cost is $1,200
Operating cost is $200/year
Page 1 of 4
7) 13.8 kV capacitors: 300 kvar banks
Purchase cost $25/kvar
Installation cost is $1,600
Operating cost is $300/year
The objective of this exercise is to make all system bus voltages greater than 98% and less than
102%, while minimizing total cost, by adding capacitors to any bus with a nominal voltage of
either 4.16kV or 13.8kV. The initial load flow study (Figure 1) shows that the voltages at buses
3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9 and 10 are less than 98% at maximum loading conditions. The total loss of the
system during maximum loading conditions is 616.3 kW.
Figure 1: A Simple Distribution Power System with Power Flows Shown in kW + jkvar
Page 2 of 4
Comparison
Figure 2 shows OCP result in Crystal Report format. The results for both methods are
summarized in Table 1 below.
Figure 2: OCP Result in Crystal Report Format
Table 1: Capacitor Placement Results
Number of Capacitor Banks Installed

Bus ID Nominal Original Intuitive OCP
kV System Method Method
Bus2 13.8 - - -
Bus3 13.8 - 1 3
Bus4 13.8 - 4 10
Bus5 13.8 - 6 1
Bus6 13.8 - 4 4
Bus7 4.16 - - -
Bus8 4.16 - 1 4
Bus9 4.16 - 1 3
Bus10 4.16 - 3 -
Total System Losses 616.3 449.1 431.7

@ Max. Loading (kW)
Approx. Analysis Time (min.) 120 5
Page 3 of 4
The OCP method installed 3 more capacitor banks at 13.8 kV buses, and 2 more capacitor banks
at 4.16 kV buses. Due to the additional capacitors, OCP results show $30,500 more one-time
purchase cost, and $1,300 more operating cost each year; however, 17.4 kW of additional system
loss reduction is achieved. Also, the total installation cost will be $1,200 less in the OCP method
since no capacitors were installed on Bus10. Each year, savings due to the reduction in losses is
$10,670 and the corresponding profit is $9,370. With respect to the intuitive approach, the total
additional savings over the 10 year planning period is $64,400 and the cost break-even point is at
3.1 years.
Using the OCP generated Maximum, Minimum, and Average Loading reports, we can verify that
the system voltage requirements have been achieved. The data from the three reports has been
summarized in Table 2 below. It is shown in Table 2 that all bus voltages are above 98% and
below 102%.
Table 2: Bus Voltage Summary
%V %V %V
Bus ID Min. Loading Average Loading Max. Loading
Bus1 99.32 99.07 98.81
Bus2 101.82 101.35 100.87
Bus3 100.88 99.97 99.02
Bus4 100.92 99.85 98.75
Bus5 100.64 99.43 98.19
Bus6 100.66 99.39 98.09
Bus7 101.88 101.48 101.06
Bus8 101.76 100.93 100.07
Bus9 101.20 100.06 98.89
Bus10 100.74 99.54 98.30
Conclusion
Even for a small system, the Optimal Capacitor Placement method yields considerable savings in
both time to perform the analysis and system operating costs. Considering real power systems
are much more complex, it becomes unrealistic for engineers to find a maximum cost solution by
using the intuitive method. The ETAP OCP program is a powerful tool for finding the best
capacitor locations and sizes, while meeting operating requirements and achieving minimum
cost.
Page 4 of 4

Optimal Capacitor Placement Benefits

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Optimal Capacitor Placement Benefits

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Optimal Capacitor Placement

Costs Benefits Due to Loss Reductions

1) Design loading occurs 55% of the time

6) 4.16 kV capacitors: 200 kvar banks

Figure 2: OCP Result in Crystal Report Format

Table 1: Capacitor Placement Results

Number of Capacitor Banks Installed

Total System Losses 616.3 449.1 431.7

Table 2: Bus Voltage Summary

You might also like