Substation Busbar Arrangement

please help me to indicate the values x,y,z and w in %

reliability=x.Roubustness+y.Operationability+z.Maintainability+w.Cost.

Those criteria are probably too incommensurable with each other to assign meaningful weightings. For instance, inadequate robustness kills the whole approach.

you can analysis it by just using common sense.

Using a simple single/multi-step approach with the basics of a (slightly modified) encabulator with X/Y/S inputs will yield the data you want.

Modification is necessary (obviously) due to the age of the encabulator decision process.

The right busbar arrangements, (as well as the left and left-of-center busbars!) can be deduced with defined output and produce the robust quality you desire.

Weightage, however, can be an issue. Due to (again) the age of the encabulation process, the standardized metrical functions once perceived for future usage (1960's mentality), a conversion to gross mass having imperial aspects will be necessary.

The core strength will necessarily not change with conversion except in the case of "grounding" your system. NASA discovered this effect a few years back.

Cost is low, as fictational rotations through the matrix can only be done in the future sense. Maintenance is non-existent.

Cheers!

Are you working in your old substation job you mentioned or did you get that job as a consultant?

As someone who works in the substation construction industry your analysis spreadsheet just isn't going to be anything other than a vague guess (at best), or detrimental to your career (at worst) if the customer questions the calculations behind the spreadsheet.

Substation design (underscore design) depends greatly on customer and site specific requirements along with overall system interaction which dictates robustness, operationability, maintainability and cost. The system is only as strong as its weakest link, etc, and what may be the best and cheapest solution for one site may be unsuitable for another.

Spreadsheet analysis is a powerful tool but it has its limitations, especially in complex systems where numerous parameters cannot always be included and accounted for, resulting in GIGO (garbage in, garbage out) while looking impressive with 8 decimal places of inaccuracy.

Proper initial analysis and component selection (before the actual design) really comes down to plain industry experience and knowledge for a system as complex as custom-designed substations.

I would strongly advise sticking to creating simpler charts of advantages/disadvantages of each of the different elements as this will give you and the customer the most useful and accurate initial analysis tools. Cost comparisons can also be included to round out this powerful tool.

This is what I would do in your position.

_{Jack - Didn't I see this in a Dilbert cartoon once?}

My client declear total shut down loss per hr. and most of the clients are not interested to take deceission regarding busbar arrangements. To remember this situation I want to introduce the excel application which gives ready reference beased on number of lines, transformers, transmission voltage, shut down loss and cost of the substation.

Please guide me based on the above.

Show them all the Dilbert cartoons mentioning "viewgraphs".

Given the information provided there is just too many variables to get an accurate figure for hours total shut down loss in event of failure (if that is what the customer is asking for). You would need to take everything into account, from temperature variations, to staff training, time necessary to perform the repair work through to the probability of a failure occuring (historical analysis, probability of a monkey getting into the substation and causing a short circuit, etc).

The figures are only going to be as accurate as the information and variables you can take into account, so the better option is a basic comparison between the options assuming that a failure will occur and estimating the average time to repair each of the different options.

This results in (for example) 'option a' being more expensive initially than 'option b' or 'c' but being the quickest to repair under certain possible faults resulting in the lowest shutdown time of the options. etc.