ECONOMICAL AND RELIABILITY IMPACT OF DIFFERENT URBAN

SUPPLY CONCEPTS

Jrgen Backes Andr Osterholt Werner Zimmermann

ABB Calor Emag Schaltanlagen AG, Mannheim

ABB Calor Emag Schaltanlagen AG e-mail juergen.backes @de.abb.com

Electric Systems Consulting andre.osterholt@de.abb.com
Kaefertaler Strasse 250 werner.s.zimmermann @de.abb.com
D-68167 Mannheim tel +49-621-386.2807
Germany fax +49-621-386.2785
The presented study compares different supply concepts for an urban network with high load density: the HV
supply via AIS technology from the outer regions of the city, and the supply via GIS HV stations directly in the
load centers. The MV levels used are 10 kV as well as 20 kV.
The concept comparison shows that it is necessary to study complete concepts before deciding about the advan-
tages of GIS or AIS. It is decisive for the economic operation of MV networks to locate the HV injections close
to the load centers. For urban regions, this is only possible by using GIS components together with HV cables.
Although the GIS solution initially appears to be the more costly solution, its flexibility allows the optimal loca-
tion of the HV transformer stations. The number of injections from the HV system can be optimized, and the
transportation function of the MV network can be reduced. This leads to significant savings for investments as
well as for operation cost, which over-compensate by far the additional expenses for GIS and HV cables. An-
other advantage of the GIS/cable combination is the increased reliability in comparison to the AIS/OHL solu-
tion. Especially for big customers linked to the HV station via parallel MV cables, this advantage is also experi-
enced in network operation. This is an inherent advantage of the GIS/cable variant offered for free to the net-
work operator.
The GIS technology includes also further assets, which are hard to quantify, but which can be decisive for the
implementation of a project. One example is the option of completely integrating a GIS station into a building,
even when no free ground area is available. Compared to the AIS technology, the GIS concept offers a solution
compatible to any future requirements, and which in addition is the more economical solution for the supply in
case of high load densities.

1 Introduction
The reliable supply with electric energy is one of the basic needs of modern society. Like many other large-
scale technologies it has a big impact on the human environment and therefore is subjected to changes in para-
digms. Urban MV networks today are completely designed as cable networks with indoor switching stations,
which reduce the optical presence of electric supply. But also for the HV supply, the GIS technology offers a
reliable and flexible solution for high-load areas where only minimum ground area is available. GIS technology
together with HV cables leads to a safe, reliable and optically unobtrusive supply.
The direct comparison of the component investments for identical switchgear configurations results in higher
expenses for the GIS variant than for the AIS variant. This however does not consider, that the location of GIS
transformer station close to the load centers allows a much more efficient network structure, not only for the
HV level but also for the MV distribution network. This leads to reduced investments and operational cost.
The quantification and monetarisation of this difference is the task of the following report. It is based on the
load situation of a typical German distribution network with a maximum load of about 120 MW and compares
the life cycle cost for the different supply concepts.

2 Methodology of the comparison

The task of network planning consists in adapting the network topology to the changing conditions and at the
same time to provide efficient network operation by a clearly structured supply concept.
High demands for the quality of network planning exist for the supply of urban networks with limited or no
load growth. In network with high growth rates, additional network equipment is utilized within short time even
when it is not optimally planned. Without load growth, the kind and the location of required investments must
be carefully planned, under consideration of different scenarios for future developments and supported by risk
management strategies. Also the time horizon for changes in the network concept is much longer, e.g. the tran-
sition to a higher MV supply voltage. These aspects stress the importance of defining a clear goal and deriving a
network development strategy.
This paper quantifies the impact of AIS and GIS technology on the HV and the MV level of an urban supply
situation, derived from an existing network. For each of the HV variants, GIS and AIS, the optimal MV net-
work is designed. This is done for both 10 kV and 20 kV distribution voltages, resulting in the evaluation of 4
different HV/MV networks. The planning process is similar to a basic design study.

3 Design of the AIS/GIS-network variants

3.1 High voltage network
The desired location of the HV injections into the distribution network cannot be seen independent from the
selected HV technology (AIS or GIS).
Ground areas of sufficient size for AIS switchgear installations are only seldomly available, and if so, at ex-
treme cost. But also for the expansion or substitution of existing sites, the GIS alternative is the most economic
alternative. The inner city area that was formerly occupied by an AIS installation can be sold or rented out, so
that the returns can finance the new site installations. The compactness of the GIS allows solutions, where the
HV transformer substation can be completely integrated into a building. This in-house installation leads to no
additional ground-area, but only to additional height (or depth) of the building.
Space requirements do not only exist for the transformer substations, but also for the HV connections. Overhead
lines (OHL) can be practically excluded for the supply of inner-city areas. Even if traces should be available for
historical reasons, they can be utilized alternatively in a much more economic way. Further arguments against
overhead lines are the aesthetic nuisance and the electromagnetic field, whose effects presently are under inten-
sive public discussion.
At the same time, today's HV cables are a reliable solution with additional technical assets towards OHL con-
nections. The consequence is, that there is no realistic alternative for HV cables for the supply in urban regions.
The GIS variant designed in the presented study (see. Fig 3.1a) consists of three HV transformer stations in the
city center. The connection to the surrounding 110 kV network is implemented by three cables to the nearest
HV station. The three cables end at the main station of the urban HV network. This main station is implemented
as a double busbar system, which allows maintenance of one busbar without de-energizing the complete station.
The remaining stations in the HV cable ring, also situated in the center of the city, are H-type transformer sta-
tions with a bus-tie. They also allow maintenance and repairs within the gas compartment on one half of the
busbar during the operation of the other part.
In the AIS-variant (see. Fig 3.1b) the supply region is surrounded by an OHL loop, whose right half consists of
double lines (for load-flow reasons). Like in the GIS variant, the main HV station consists of a double busbar
system, the remaining HV transformer stations are of H-type. The station UW2 has a double T-connection to
the double OHL, the station UW3 is looped into the single line on the left side. Because of the ground area
required, the transformer stations are located in the less densely populated outer parts of the city. The power
transfer to the loads is - as shown later - one of the tasks of the MV network.
The connections from the outer ring to the transformer stations have been implemented as double lines, which
means two circuits on the same poles. This solution leads to an efficient utilization of the available space. It
however reduces the reliability of the HV supply, as both circuits can trip for a single reason (e.g. back flash-
over from the poles to both circuits when flash strikes the earth wire, or branch contacts). The effect of these
"common mode failures" can be seen in the subsequent reliability calculations.
 4.5 km 3 km

3.7 km
UW 1

UW 1 4.2 km

30.3 MVA
63.0 MVA 5.6 km

1.6 km UW 2
2.0 km 1 km

SS 1

UW 3
2.7 km 1 km
UW 3 SS 2
33.2 MVA

33.1 MVA

28.1 MVA
UW 2 27.8 MVA

35.0 MVA
UW 4 8.6 km
11.6 km

4.1 km
a) b)
Fig 3.1: GIS-variant (a) and AIS variant (b) of the 110-kV-network

3.2 Medium voltage network

A comparison of the GIS and the AIS variants only based on the differences in the HV network is not sufficient.
The locations of the HV transformer stations are of decisive importance for the structure of the MV network.
Initial point for the study is the load situation of a real urban network. This includes the geographical location
of the transformer stations as well as their load .
The radial operation of a MV network leads to a large number of possible network concepts. These differ in
their investments, but have also a big influence on operational aspects. Each utility therefore designs planning
rules, which adapt the network scheme to the customers' requirements as well as the geographic characteristics
of the MV loads.
3.2.1 Planning rules
Technical constraints for the network variants are the allowed voltage band and the limits for the short circuit
power according to the rating of the switchgear equipment. Besides these, also the following design rules have
been considered:
- Application of standard components:
XLPE MV cables with a cross section of 150 mm2 Al (distribution cables) and 240 mm2 (transportation
cables)
110-kV/MV-transformers with a rated power of 31.5/40 MVA
- Open loop topology for the distribution network. The distribution cables start from the MV busbar of the
HV/MV transformer stations, are guided between customer stations and are looped back to the MV busbar
of the same HV transformer station again. One of the cables in this ring is open under normal operation to
allow easy protection. Each HV/MV transformer station has its own backup transformer, so that mainte-
nance of a transformer is possible without switching in the MV network.
- Maximum number of 14 customer stations in a loop. This limits the number of interrupted customers in the
case of a MV network failure, as only the feeder connected to the HV/MV station busbar is equipped with
overcurrent protection and circuit breaker.
- Normal loading of the feeder cables so, that the worst-case cable failure (feeder failure close to the HV/MV
transformer station) does not load any cable above 120% of its capacity. The maximal loading of 5.2 MVA
per cable at 10 kV (10.2 MVA at 20 kV) at the beginning of the planning period considers the reduced am-
pacity for cables bundled in the same cable trench close to the transformer as well as a margin for the load
growth during the planning period.
3.2.2 Planning results
The flexibility inherent in the GIS technology allows the planner to place the injection close to the load centers
(see Fig 3.2 a) This first has an effect on the optimal number of loads per HV station and thus on the trans-
former capacity installed in the HV station. Second this reduces the power transportation function imposed on
the MV network, so that additional savings result from the smaller MV cable cross sections required. Third, the
operation cost are reduced, as avoided power transportation does not cause any losses. This advantage applies
the more the lower the voltage level in the MV network is (e.g. 10 kV).
These general effects can be found in the results for the network solutions in the example. The MV network
supplied by GIS stations consists of radially operated (open) loops, which are all fed by the MV busbars of the
HV stations.

UW1 UW2

UW2
UW1

UW4

UW3

UW3

a) b)
Fig 3.2: Topology of the GIS variant (a) and the AIS variant (b) for 20 kV distribution network

The peripheral locations of the transformer stations in the AIS variant require additional "satellite"-stations.
These are remote MV busbars fed by the HV transformer stations via several parallel and selectively protected
transportation cables (see Fig 3.2 b). Their reliability is comparable to the reliability of the MV busbar of the
HV transformer stations, but they require additional investments and cause additional losses. The AIS variant
with a voltage of 10 kV requires 6 parallel cables from the HV injection to the satellite station, the 20 kV vari-
ant requires 4 cables. These satellite busbars, just like the MV busbars of the HV stations, supply the network
MV stations via open loops.

4 Cost comparison for the GIS/AIS-variants

Fig 4.1 compares the cost for the AIS- and the GIS-variant [1]. The prices for the different components and also
for external service have been chosen according to the prices of the German market. The assumptions for the
calculation of the cash values were an interest rate of 8 % together with an inflation of 3 %. The load growth
was set to 1.5 % linearly, and the cash value was calculated for a planning horizon of 10 years. Planning times
of 20 or 25 years, as used in the past for the evaluation of different variants, are not realistic under the present
rapidly changing conditions. But even when pay-back periods of investments are getting shorter and even in
energy engineering come into the range of years, network planning itself must should not be near-sighted and
should design flexible plans for the network development, which are compatible and cost-efficient to a broad
range of unforeseeable developments. This aspect is addressed e.g. in [2].
The first cost considered in this comparison are the cost for the HV switchgear installations. These are signifi-
cantly higher for the GIS variant than for the AIS solution. The difference in the system costs however does not
represent the difference in component costs, e.g. a switchbay. The reason for that is, that the flexibility inherent
in GIS/cable topology allows a more efficient structure of the HV network, leading to a reduced number of HV
stations (3 for GIS, 4 for AIS) and also a reduced number of switchbays per HV transformer station. A similar
impression is given by the costs for the 110 kV connections. Although the cable length in the GIS variant is
much lower than the length of the OH lines for the AIS variant, the investments for equipment and civil works
are higher for the GIS variant.
The different costs for the 110-kV-/MV-transformers result from the different number of transformers for the
variants. In the GIS variant of UW1, two transformers are required for normal operation, so that only a single
additional device is necessary as the shared backup device. Another cost factor that is of benefit for the GIS
variant are the expenses for MV switchgear installations. The difference is made up by the additional switch-
gear panels for the satellite stations. The expenses for MV cables are extraordinarily high for both variants
(about 40 % of the life-cycle costs/cash value). Their absolute value as well as the difference between AIS/GIS
show how important the comparison of complete supply concepts is instead of the comparison of pure HV sta-
tions. The lower number of HV switchbays and MV cubicles leads to reduced expenses for secondary equip-
ment (protection/control/ instrumentation) for the GIS variant. Furthermore, the absolute values of the expenses
for ground, foundations and buildings obviously are much lower for the GIS variant, even though the substa-
tions are located in the city center. The difference in loss costs quantifies the additional transportation functions
in the MV network for the AIS variant. Expenses for maintenance and inspection have no impact on the rank-
ing.
100.0% maintenance
/repair
90.0% losses

80.0% ground
/construction
instrumentation
70.0% /control/protection
relative cash values

cables MV
60.0%
Switchgear comp.
50.0% MV
transformers
40.0% 110 kV/MV
lines/cables
110 kV
30.0%
Switchgear comp.
110 kV
20.0%

10.0%

0.0%
AIS (MV 20kV) AIS (MV 10kV) GIS (MV 20kV) GIS (MV 10kV)

Fig 4.1: Life-cycle costs (cash values) for the GIS/AIS comparison (cash value over 10 yrs)

The cost comparison between the 20-kV-implementation of the GIS- and the AIS variant shows reduced differ-
ences for losses and also for MV cable investments. But the costs of the AIS variant are still significantly higher
( 4%) than for the GIS variant. The direct comparison between 20 kV and 10 kV for similar HV technologies
shows an advantage for the 20 kV solution. This result is plausible and congruent with the experiences from
planning practice.

5 Reliability of the AIS/GIS variants

In the case of urban networks with high load densities and sensitive customers, the reliability of supply is of
high importance. And it is just in this field that the GIS- and the AIS solution show a contrary behavior. Faults
on 110-kV-cables are seldom, and in most cases, the reasons are damages during construction works. Especially
in densely populated regions, the available traces are filled with tubes and energy/information cables, so that the
laying and the mechanical protection of the cable is a major aspect. 110-kV-cables are buried deeper than MV
cables, so that they are "protected" by the MV circuits laid above them. If the HV cable itself is not sufficiently
robust, e.g. by a surrounding steel tube in the case of external gas pressure cables, concrete ducts can be an
appropriate means of shielding. This leads to a minimal fault rate even in supply regions with high construction
activities. Besides their costs, the main drawback of HV cables are the long duration for cable repairs, as splices
for HV cables can be done only by the manufacturer's staff.
The behavior of OHL's is complementary to the behavior of cables (see Table 5.1). They show high outage
frequencies together with low repair times. In order to keep OHL systems compact, parallel circuits are ar-
ranged on the same pylons. As mentioned earlier, a single event thus can lead to the tripping of several circuits
(common mode failure). This is an important aspect that has to be considered for reliability comparisons.
Table 5.1 and Table 5.2 show the main reliability data that have been used for the reliability calculation. Table
5.1 describes the failure rate and repair duration for HV lines, HV and MV cables. Table 5.2 contains the failure
rates and repair duration for switchgear equipment and transformers as well as maintenance data for the switch-
gear. Additional data for the circuit breakers are the protection failure rate, which summarizes non-interruption
of the short circuit current due to malfunction of the protection relay and unsuccessful operation of the circuit
breaker itself. Another parameter is the overfunction rate, which describes for a distance relay the non-selective
early tripping after an overcurrent. The reliability calculations have been carried out with Calpos, a network
planning tool including a powerful reliability engine.
Table 5.1:Reliability data of cables and OHL
Parameter Outage frequency Repair duration
Unit 1 h
yr 100 km

HV OHL short 0.162 1.0

(1 circuit) long 0.038 20.5
HV OHL 0.08 2.7
Common Mode
HV cables short 0.35 3.4
long 0.35 298.0
MV cables 4.8 13.4

Table 5.2:Reliability data of switchgear [3][4][5] and transformers

Parameter Outage Repair Maintenance fre- Maintenance Maintenance Protection

frequency duration quency duration interruption failure
Unit #/yr h #/yr h h %
HV GIS busbar (per bay) 0.00036 72 0 0 0 -
HV GIS circuit breaker 0.00259 72 0.1 60 24 0.9
HV GIS disconnector 0.00075 72 0.1 48 24 -
HV AIS busbar (per bay) 0.0082 12 0.1667 4 2 -
HV AIS circuit breaker 0.00814 48 0.1667 10 3 0.9
HV AIS disconnector 0.0047 8 0.5 4 2 -
HV/MV transf. short 0.0127 3.0 0.33 12 5 -
long 0.0063 118
MV busbar (per panel) 0.0001 3.2 0 0 0 -
MV circuit breaker 0.0002 3.2 0.1 8 3 7.0

The applied reliability data for high voltage (HV) equipment have been taken from international surveys
[3][4][5], the MV reliability data are plausible average values. The reliability calculation has been carried out
first only considering first order contingencies, then also considering those of second order. The results for the
MV busbars of the transformer substations UW1, UW2, UW3 and UW4 and for the respective satellite substa-
tions in the AIS variant are shown in Fig 5.1. It is obvious, that the interruption frequencies and the interruption
probabilities at the substation MV busbars are much lower for the GIS variant than for the AIS system. UW2
experiences a factor of 6 higher number of disturbances in the AIS variant than for GIS supply. For the interrup-
tion probability, this difference is even more striking. The comparison between the calculation for single (only
1st order) and for double contingencies (1st/2nd order) shows, that the interruptions are mainly caused by single
faults.
The explanation lies in the network connection of UW2. It is tapped into a double line of the OHL ring
surrounding the city. The combined routing of the two circuits and the installation of the same system of pylons
makes it possible that a single fault can affect both circuits, leaving UW2 with no more supply. This failure
mode, the tripping of two circuits caused by a single event, is called a common-mode failure, as mentioned
before. As the affected substation UW2 cannot be re-supplied by switching within the substation but must wait
until the reason of the fault is removed (assumed to be 2.7 hrs), the common-mode failure leads to a big
contribution to the interruption probability. HV cable connections, even if routed close to each other,
statistically do not show a relevant number of those common modes. The cable systems may be routed in cable
ducts, may be protected by steel tubes or simply shielded by the MV cables buried above the HV cables.
Another result of Fig 5.1 is, that the satellite substations SS1 and SS2 show exactly the same reliability of sup-
ply as the MV busbars of the transformer substations themselves. The parallel cables connecting the satellites
with the transformer S/S are protected selectively, so that the failure of one cable leaves the others in operation.
The same consideration applies to special customers supplied by multiple parallel cables directly from the trans-
former S/S busbar.
0.3 2.5

AIS 1st order AIS 1st order

AIS 2nd order AIS 2nd order
0.25
GIS 1st order 2 GIS 1st order
Interruption probability (in min/yr) .

GIS 2nd order GIS 2nd order

interruption frequencies (in #/yr)

0.2
1.5

0.15

1
0.1

0.5
0.05

0 0
UW1 SS1 UW2 SS2 UW3 UW4 UW1 SS1 UW2 SS2 UW3 UW4
S/S busbars
a) b) S/S busbars

Fig 5.1: Interruption frequencies (a) and probabilities (b) at the HV station MV busbars

0.35 3.5

0.3 3 AIS 1st order

AIS 2nd order
System interruption prob. (in min/yr) .

AIS 1st order

System interruption frequency (in #/yr)

AIS 2nd order GIS 1st order

0.25 GIS 1st order 2.5 GIS 2nd order
GIS 2nd order

0.2 2

1.5
0.15

1
0.1

0.5
0.05

0
0 Busbar coupler Busbar section Common Line HV Switchbay HV Transformer
Busbar coupler Busbar section Common Mode Line HV Switchbay HV Transformer HV HV Mode Branch (2W) HV
HV HV Branch HV (2W) HV HV

a) b)
Fig 5.2: Component group contributions to the interruption frequencies (a) and probabilities (b) at the HV
substations

Fig 5.2 differentiates the different component groups in their impact on the system non-reliability. For the sys-
tem frequency of supply interruptions, AIS HV switchgear and transformers are the main impact. As the trans-
former capacity and the switchgear layout of each substation is redundant, the interruption can be ended by
switching over to the respective reserve units. This is confirmed by the illustration of the contribution of com-
ponent groups to the system interruption probability. Transformers and switchgear show a similar impact. De-
spite of its small contribution to the interruption frequency, the influence of common-mode failures in the AIS
variant becomes - as expected - significant and even exceeds the influence of transformer outages.
The evaluations up to now focused on the reliability of supply provided at the MV busbars of the system. Con-
nected to these busbars are typically cable loops supplying the MV customers or the MV/LV transformer ser-
vice stations. One disconnector in the loop is normally open, so that the supply is radial. Fig 5.3 shows the reli-
ability of these (around 500) nodes in the form of a histogram. Each column shows the percentage of customers
with values for interruption frequency (a) or probability (b) in the respective interval.
25 20

18
GIS
GIS
20 16 AIS

Share of customer nodes (in %) .

AIS 14
Share of nodes (in %) .

15 12

10

10 8

5 4

0 0
0

0.02

0.04

0.06

0.08

0.1

0.12

0.14

0.16

0.18

0.2

0.22

0.24

0.26

0.28

0.3

0.32

0.34

0.36

0.38

0.4

0.42

0.44

0.46

0.48

0.5

0.8

1.6

2.4

3.2

4.8

5.6

6.4

7.2

8.8

9.6

10.4

11.2

12

12.8

13.6

14.4

15.2

16

16.8

17.6

18.4

19.2

20
Interval for interruption frequency (in #/yr) Interval for interruption probability (in min/yr) .
a) b)
Fig 5.3: Histograms for the interruption frequencies and probabilities of the MV customer nodes

The main result is that the big differences in supply reliability observed close to the S/S MV busbars are eased
by the failures arising from the MV network. The reason lies in the radial operation of the MV loops. Each
failure leads to the tripping of the attached substation feeder and interrupts all customers in the same half-loop.
This service interruption is usually ended by (manual or remote operated) switching. The big number of events
in the MV network dominate the events in the HV network, so that the differences in the HV supply are eased..
However the GIS/cable variant still offers a significantly higher reliability performance, for both the interrup-
tion frequency and the interruption probability. As opposed to the situation for normal customers in the radially
fed distribution network, important customers with parallel cable connections to the transformer substations and
no radial supply can take full benefit from the reduced non-reliability of the GIS variant.
6 References
[1] Zimmermann W.; Osterholt A.; Backes J.:
Comparison of GIS and AIS Systems for Urban Supply Networks, ABB Review 2/99, pages 19-26
[2] Bambao P. P; Simpao L. P.; Zimmermann W. S.; Brown R. :
Basic Planning for a new fast growing area in Manila with a total electrical load of 650 MVA, 12th Con-
ference on the Electric Power Supply Industry (CEPSI) 1998, Pattaya, Paper 33-21
[3] CIGR WG 23.02: Report on the second international survey on high voltage GIS service experience
(1999), CIGR (International Conference on Large High Voltage Electric Systems), Paris, 1999
[4] CIGR WG 06: Final report of the second international enquiry on high voltage circuit-breaker failures
and defects in service experience (1994), CIGR, Paris, 1999
[5] Forced outage performance of transmission equipment, Canadian Electricity Association (01/93 12/97)