Academia.eduAcademia.edu

Figure 3 – uploaded by Journal of Electrical and Computer Engineering Innovations

See full PDFdownloadDownload figure
To analyze the reliability of the system in different topologies, 5 different scenarios have been used as follows: First Scenario: In this case, we do not use auxiliary central server IPC2 and network NCCS2. System network topology is as Figure 7. Second scenario: In this case, we do not use auxiliary central server IPC2 and network NCCS2 but communication path of IPC1 server also passes ESW1 switch, in addition to the switch ESW 2. This scenario network topology is presented in Figure 8. Figure 3: Architecture of SAS in Mianeh Aidoghmoush for the first loop.

Figure 7 To analyze the reliability of the system in different topologies, 5 different scenarios have been used as follows: First Scenario: In this case, we do not use auxiliary central server IPC2 and network NCCS2. System network topology is as Figure 7. Second scenario: In this case, we do not use auxiliary central server IPC2 and network NCCS2 but communication path of IPC1 server also passes ESW1 switch, in addition to the switch ESW 2. This scenario network topology is presented in Figure 8. Figure 3: Architecture of SAS in Mianeh Aidoghmoush for the first loop.

Related Figures (19)

Figure 1: Architecture of IEC 61850 [16].
Figure 1: Architecture of IEC 61850 [16].
DCS is used in this substation and has a specific automation architecture system. Protection and control equipment is provided from reputable manufacturers in Europe. It is very likely to use the other manufacturers’ equipment with different MTBF in order to expand substation bays. If we want to use the other venders’ products, we will be necessarily imposed to compare these products by evaluating their impacts on system reliability and availability. Figure 2: SAS layout in Mianeh Aidoghmoush substation with three BCRs. According to Figure 4, Aseries can be obtained as (3):
DCS is used in this substation and has a specific automation architecture system. Protection and control equipment is provided from reputable manufacturers in Europe. It is very likely to use the other manufacturers’ equipment with different MTBF in order to expand substation bays. If we want to use the other venders’ products, we will be necessarily imposed to compare these products by evaluating their impacts on system reliability and availability. Figure 2: SAS layout in Mianeh Aidoghmoush substation with three BCRs. According to Figure 4, Aseries can be obtained as (3):
FAILURE RATE OF COMPONENTS IN THE SUBSTATION AUTOMATION SYSTEM [12] Third scenario: In this case, we do not use auxiliary central server IPC2 and network NCCS2 but communication path of IPC1 server also passes ESW1 switch, in addition to the switch ESW2. TABLE 1 Fourth scenario: In this case, we use auxiliary -entral server IPC2 and network NCCS2.
FAILURE RATE OF COMPONENTS IN THE SUBSTATION AUTOMATION SYSTEM [12] Third scenario: In this case, we do not use auxiliary central server IPC2 and network NCCS2 but communication path of IPC1 server also passes ESW1 switch, in addition to the switch ESW2. TABLE 1 Fourth scenario: In this case, we use auxiliary -entral server IPC2 and network NCCS2.
Figure 6: Mianeh Aidoghmoush substation simplified RBD. Figure 5: Mianeh Aidoghmoush substation RBD for the first loop.
Figure 6: Mianeh Aidoghmoush substation simplified RBD. Figure 5: Mianeh Aidoghmoush substation RBD for the first loop.
Figure 10: Fourth scenario of Mianeh substation.
Figure 10: Fourth scenario of Mianeh substation.
Figure 7: First scenario of Mianeh substation. Figure 8: Second scenario of Mianeh substation. The difference between this scenario and the main topology of Mianeh SAS is in removals of ESW4 and ESW3 switches. This network topology is shown in Figure 11.
Figure 7: First scenario of Mianeh substation. Figure 8: Second scenario of Mianeh substation. The difference between this scenario and the main topology of Mianeh SAS is in removals of ESW4 and ESW3 switches. This network topology is shown in Figure 11.
Figure 9: Third scenario of Mianeh substation.
Figure 9: Third scenario of Mianeh substation.
Figure 11: Fifth scenario of Mianeh substation
Figure 11: Fifth scenario of Mianeh substation
RELIABILITY OF THE SYSTEM FOR DIFFERENT SCENARIOS
RELIABILITY OF THE SYSTEM FOR DIFFERENT SCENARIOS
RELIABILITY OF THE SYSTEM FOR DIFFERENT SCENARIOS CONSIDERING REDUNDANCY Reliability of the system can be obtained for the IEDs produced by different manufacturers. We consider MTBF of each IED in three different ranges of 103.5, 300 and 600. Considering Mean Time to Repair (MTTR) of IEDs is negligible, the above numbers can be considered as components, MTTF and the above steps can be repeated.
RELIABILITY OF THE SYSTEM FOR DIFFERENT SCENARIOS CONSIDERING REDUNDANCY Reliability of the system can be obtained for the IEDs produced by different manufacturers. We consider MTBF of each IED in three different ranges of 103.5, 300 and 600. Considering Mean Time to Repair (MTTR) of IEDs is negligible, the above numbers can be considered as components, MTTF and the above steps can be repeated.
Figure 16: Simplified RBD for Mianeh substation in the fifth scenario. Figure 15: Simplified RBD for Mianeh substation in the fourth scenario.
Figure 16: Simplified RBD for Mianeh substation in the fifth scenario. Figure 15: Simplified RBD for Mianeh substation in the fourth scenario.
Figure 14: Simplified RBD for Mianeh substation in the third scenario.
Figure 14: Simplified RBD for Mianeh substation in the third scenario.
Figure 17: RBD of Mianeh Aidoghmoush SAS considering redundancy. RBD for Mianeh substation automation system considering redundancy for one of the IEDs is presented in Figure 17. In this case, system is available even if one of the IEDs fails.
Figure 17: RBD of Mianeh Aidoghmoush SAS considering redundancy. RBD for Mianeh substation automation system considering redundancy for one of the IEDs is presented in Figure 17. In this case, system is available even if one of the IEDs fails.
Figure 19: System’s MTTF for three different types of IEDs in different scenarios with considering redundancy. Figure 18: System’s MTTF for three different types of IEDs in different scenarios without considering redundancy.
Figure 19: System’s MTTF for three different types of IEDs in different scenarios with considering redundancy. Figure 18: System’s MTTF for three different types of IEDs in different scenarios without considering redundancy.
Figure 20: Increasing slope of SAS MTBF using three different ranges of MTBF.
Figure 20: Increasing slope of SAS MTBF using three different ranges of MTBF.
580 California St., Suite 400
San Francisco, CA, 94104
© 2025 Academia. All rights reserved