Grid

Load B
S.N.O.P.
Load A
Having SOPs in place allows for precise balancing of main feeder currents. Figure 2
indicates the loading of each corresponding feeder with Loads A and B of Figure 1
set to approximately 1.0 per-unit and 0.5 per-unit, respectively. The meshed
(normally-closed) system offers better balancing than the purely radial system but
nor is it possible to exercise control over the feeder loading percentages.
Generally, sensors and a communication network would be required to balance
the feeder currents but in the case of some simple systems it is possible to balance
the load without remote sensors.
Distribution Level Power Electronics:
Soft Open-Points (SOPs)
by Jeff Bloemink and
Professor Tim Green
DG Integration
Loss Reductions
Load Balancing
Emergency Operation
The topology of current distribution systems can be described as radial (normally
open) meshed (normally-closed). Radial systems have no links between adjacent
feeders, and allow for a simple and consistent protection scheme at the cost of
reliability. Meshed systems require a more complex protection scheme but offer
some increased reliability. Both systems offer other advantages and disadvantages
by nature; by placing soft normally open points (SOPs) into a distribution system, a
hybrid system type is achieved with the benefits of both radial and meshed systems
and the detriments removed.
The following are the key features of a system with a soft open point:
Support to an isolated load on a feeder can be provided immediately through power
transfer from the neighbouring feeder
Voltage at interface terminals can be regulated to a certain level or reactive power
injection can be specified directly
Real power flow between feeder lines can be controlled precisely to allow for
improved feeder load balancing regardless of loading on individual feeders or other
network parameters, even compared to a meshed system
Disturbances and faults on one feeder are essentially isolated from the other feeder
as with a radial system
With VSC overcurrent limiting, contributions to fault currents are minimal and
controllable;
The two feeders are effectively isolated from each other in terms of undesirable
disturbances
Bus voltages throughout the system can be affected by controlling real and reactive
power flow through the SOP, allowing for increased levels of DG integration
Many distribution systems in use today are arranged in a radial configuration for its
simplicity and low cost. Upon a fault occurrence, it is common practice to isolate the
segment of the feeder containing the fault. For a radial distribution system, this
often means that loads downstream" from the fault experience a loss of supply
until the system is feeder restored. Figure 1 compares a fault scenario for four
different systems: a purely radial system, a radial system with a closable tie-line
breaker (normally open), a meshed system (normally closed) and a system with a
SOP. It can be seen that the system with a SOP restores supply to the load quickly,
while leaving adjacent feeders unaffected.
Issues associated with the integration of
distributed generation (DG), such as wind
turbines, micro turbines and PV. Some of the
Software allowing the optimisation of a particular distribution system through the
use of SOPs has been developed as part of this project. Initially the objective was
a minimization, or reduction, of losses. Table 1 shows some resulting loss
reduction figures for the optimisation software used on some actual UK
distribution system data.
Future Work
In order to draw accurate conclusions about the economic viability of the SOP concept, it
will be necessary to quantify the value for increased flexibility in future planning
operations, increased reliability/benefits in emergency situations (faults), detriments
including converter losses and capital costs of the converter relative to its rating.
Alternate topologies for the SOP hardware will be considered and necessary control
strategies developed to account for all unique issues associated with SOP operation. A
prototype distribution system with SOPs will be constructed in the Imperial College
Laboratory as a proof of concept for all works.
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
SNOP
Meshed
Radial
Feeder Power Delivered
S
y
s
t
e
m

T
y
p
e
Load Balancing Comparison
Feeder B
Feeder A
System
Yearly Loss
Reduction
(MWh)
Loss
Reduction
(%)
Yearly Cost
Savings
VSC Rating
(MVA)
Horley 622.82 19.82 22,546 3.9
Nutfield 639.88 22.65 23,164 5.0
Reigate 292.97 10.93 10,605 3.8
-1
0
1
S
N
O
P
Feeder A Load Voltage During L-L-L-GND Fault on Feeder A
-1
0
1
M
E
S
H
-1
0
1
T
I
E
L
I
N
E
4 4.2 4.4 4.6 4.8 5 5.2
-1
0
1
R
A
D
I
A
L
Time (s)
-1
0
1
S
N
O
P
Feeder B Load Voltage During L-L-L-GND Fault on Feeder A
-1
0
1
M
E
S
H
-1
0
1
T
I
E
L
I
N
E
4 4.2 4.4 4.6 4.8 5 5.2
-1
0
1
R
A
D
I
A
L
Time (s)
Only
affected
until fault
cleared
Not restored until supply to feeder from
MSS returns
Feeder B
affected
By Fault on
feeder A
Feeder B
isolated
From fault
Tie-line breaker closed
Figure 1 - Simple
Distribution System Model
with SOP
The cost savings were calculated based on an estimated of 3.62 p/kWh including
wholesale value and transmission, distribution and environmental costs. Based on
these results, it is likely that the a reduction in total network losses will not be the
greatest benefit of implementation. However, it should be considered that the
distribution networks being studied are typical or actual networks with the
balancing of loads taken into account as a primary component of distribution
planning. A distribution network designed with poor load balancing could have a
much more dramatic overall decrease in network losses than a properly planned
system.
Load DG
SNOP A
SNOP B
Figure 4 Sample disitribution system for
study of DG integration effects
Figure 3 Effect of fault and restoration on faulted and adjacent feeders
27%
76%
Bus Voltages
Max
Min
Max
Min
Bus Voltages
Without SOPs
With SOPs
Figure 5 Effect of DG Penetration on Bus Voltages
especially when distribution networks begin to near maximum DG penetration.
Figure 4 shows the topology of a slightly more complicated distribution system with
DG units randomly placed. Figure 5 shows how the voltages at each bus of this
Figure 2 Comparison of main feeder loading for simple
system of Figure 1
system are affected as more and
more DG units are added. Without
SOPs actively controlling power flow,
the voltage increases past the
maximum allowable level for 27% of
the total network load supplied by
DG. With SOPs in place, the allowable
DG penetration has been shown to
increase to beyond 100%. Note that
this study discounts other DG
integration issues.
predominate issues are stability and
voltage rise; both can be mitigated with
the implementation of SOPs. Future
incentives for facilitating DG growth
could make the implementation of
SOPs economically favourable,
For new
networks, SOPs
offers some
flexibility in
distribution
planning since
the network
does not have
to be arranged
based on
forecasted
loads. This could
result in shorter
cable runs.