Grid Connection Study for Rareh Icon Solar Ltd

0
Our Ref: Your Ref: Date: 03/10/18
rAREH Icon Solar Ltd
Grid Connection Study
REVISED REPORT
(2nd REVISION)
1
2
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................. 7
1.1 Introduction...................................................................................................................... 7
1.2 Existing Power Network Conditions ................................................................................. 7
1.3 Grid Code Requirements.................................................................................................. 7
1.4 Technical Evaluation of Interconnection Options ............................................................ 7
1.5 Conclusion and Recommendation ................................................................................... 8
2. INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................................ 9
2.1 Introduction...................................................................................................................... 9
3. EXISTING POWER NETWORK CONDITIONS ........................................................................... 10
3.1 Juja-Rabai 132kV Line..................................................................................................... 13
3.2 Kiboko 132/33kV Substation .......................................................................................... 13
3.3 Sultan Hamud 132/33 Substation .................................................................................. 13
4. GRID CODE REQUIREMENTS .................................................................................................. 14
4.1 Frequency ....................................................................................................................... 14
4.2 Voltage ........................................................................................................................... 14
4.3 Harmonics ...................................................................................................................... 15
4.4 Technical Standards for Plant and Apparatus ................................................................ 15
4.5 Technical Requirements for Generating Units............................................................... 15
4.6 Grid Connection Guideline ............................................................................................. 16
4.7 Candidate Interconnection Points ................................................................................. 16
5. TECHNICAL EVALUATION OF INTERCONNECTION OPTIONS ................................................. 17
5.1 Study Assumptions ......................................................................................................... 17
5.2 Existing System ............................................................................................................... 17
5.2.1 Load Flow Analysis .................................................................................................. 17

3
5.3 Plant Interconnection Options ....................................................................................... 18
5.3.1 Methodology........................................................................................................... 18
5.3.2 Option 1: Connection to Kiboko 132/33kV substation 132kV bus ........................ 19
5.3.3 Option 2: Connection to the Kiboko 132/33kV Substation 33kV bus.................... 20
5.4 Short Circuit Fault Levels ................................................................................................ 22
5.5 Voltage Variation/Deviation........................................................................................... 23
5.6 Flicker Severity ............................................................................................................... 24
6. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ........................................................................... 25
6.1 Conclusions..................................................................................................................... 25
6.1.1 Load Flow ................................................................................................................ 25
6.1.2 Short Circuit Fault Levels......................................................................................... 25
6.1.3 Voltage Variation .................................................................................................... 25
6.1.4 Flicker Severity ........................................................................................................ 25
6.2 Recommendations ......................................................................................................... 25
6.3 Comment on the study's methodology…………………………………………………………………….26
ANNEXES ....................................................................................................................................... 27
A. Load Flow Diagram before connecting the Plant. .......................................................... 27
B. Option 1 Connection Load Flow Diagram ...................................................................... 28
C. Option 2 Connection Load Flow Diagram ...................................................................... 29
D. Option 1: 132kV Evacuation Proposal………………………………………………………………………30

E. Option 2: 33kV Evacuation Proposal ......................................................................... 31
F. Maximum Fault Level - Option 1………………………………………………………………………………31
G. Minimum Fault Levels - Option 1.................................................................................33
H. Maximum Fault Levels - Option 2 .................................................................................. 34
I. Minimum Fault Levels - Option 2 ................................................................................... 35

4
J. Project Conductors Considerations………………………………………………………………………37
K. Existing Kiboko Substation Transformer Details………………………………………………… 42
L. Evacuation Losses……………………………………………………………………………………………… 42
M. Voltage Variation Studies with Solar Generation Simulations with +/- 0.95 pf……42
N. Proposed New 40MVA Transformer Bay Location at Kiboko Substation………… 44
O. List of Tests/studies for Folar Plant to Establish Technical Operational Compliance
with Grid Code………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 46
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 3-1: Existing project area power network schematic diagram ............................................ 9
Figure 3-2: Existing KPLC Network Location Map in the area………………………………………… 10
Figure 5-1: Schematic diagram of the existing system ................................................................. 15
Figure 5-2: Option 1 Interconnection schematic diagram............................................................ 17
Figure 5-3: Option 11 Interconnection schematic diagram.......................................................... 19
LIST OF TABLES
Table 4-1: Frequency Limits .......................................................................................................... 12

5
Table 4-2: Steady- State Voltage Limits ........................................................................................ 12
Table 4-3: Harmonic Limits ........................................................................................................... 13
Table 4-4: Generation Capacity and Voltage Limits...................................................................... 14
Table 5-1: Transformer Parameter………………………………………………………........ 15
Table 5-2: Bus Fault Levels-Base case………………………………………………………….....................16
Table 5-3: Per Unit Bus Voltage Levels – Base Case………………………………………………………….16
Table 5-4: Percentage Line Loadings – Base Case…………………………………………………………….16
Table 5-5: Bus Fault Levels - Option I……………………………………………………………………………….17

Table 5-6: Per Unit Voltage Levels - Option I……………………………………………………………………18
Table 5-7: Percentage Line Loadings - Option I………………………………………………………………..18
Table 5-8: Bus Fault Levels - Option II………………………………………………………….....................19
Table 5-9: Per Unit Voltage Levels - Option II…………………………………………………………………. 20
Table 5-10: Percentage Line Loadings - Option II…………………………………………………………… 20

Table 5-11: Short Circuit Ratios at Connection Points……………………………………………………. 21
Table 5-12: Voltage variations at Connection Points……………………………………………...........22

Table 5-13: Short-term Flicker in Connection Points………………………………………………………..22
ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS
Abbreviation/
Description
Acronym
KPLC Kenya Power and Lighting Company Limited
ACSR Aluminium Conductor, Steel Reinforced
Ssc Short Circuit Level
SCR Short Circuit Ratio
EAPP Eastern Africa Power Pool
EN European Standards
KNTGC Kenya National Transmission Grid Code
IEC International Electrotechnical Commission
6
ISO International Organization for Standardization

POC Point of Connection
PSS/E Power System Simulator for Engineers
pu Per Unit
TSO Transmission System Operator
OHL Overhead Line
Weight and Measures
kA Kiloampere
km Kilometer (1,000 m)
kV Kilovolt (1,000 volts)
kVA Kilovolt-ampere
kW Kilowatt
kWh Kilowatt-hour
Hz Hertz
M Million
m meter
MVA Mega volt-ampere (106 volt-ampere)
MWh Megawatt-hour
GWh Gigawatt-hour
MW Megawatt
USD United States Dollar
7
1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1.1 Introduction
The rAREH Icon Solar PV plant is located in Makueni County in the Republic of Kenya. The
project entails construction of a 30MW PV plant, power collection system including inverters
and the interconnection facilities to integrate the plant to the national grid. The proposed plant
site is 3.5km from the existing Kiboko 132/33kV substation.
As part of the project development process, a grid interconnection study is carried out to assess
the available grid connection options, identify the technically feasible and best interconnection
scheme, and if necessary determine the required network reinforcement to ensure effective
interconnection of the plant. The study is aimed at demonstrating the ability of the grid at the
grid connection point to receive the solar PV power without significant negative impact on the
grid.
1.2 Existing Power Network Condition

The area around the proposed location of the solar PV plant is served by the following power
system infrastructure:
a) The 132kV Juja-Rabai Line

b) Kiboko 132/33kV Substation
c) Sultan Hamud 132/33kV Substation
d) Makindu KPC Pump Station
1.3 Grid Code Requirements

The requirements specified in the Kenya National Transmission Grid Code (KNTGC) formed the
basis for the grid impact assessment studies. The relevant chapters of the code are Chapter 6 –
Connections and Chapter 7 – Renewable Power Plant. Where there are differences in
requirements, the KNTGC specifies that the more stringent requirement shall hold.
An assessment of the existing power system infrastructure has been done and based on the
proposed generation capacity, there are two viable grid interconnection options.
(i) Option 1 – Connection to the Kiboko 132/33kV Substation 132kV Bus

(ii) Option 2 – Connection to the Kiboko 132/33kV Substation 33kV Bus
8
1.4 Technical Evaluation of Interconnection Options

Load flow and system stability analyses for the two grid interconnection options have been
carried out. The results of the load flow and grid stability analyses carried out can be
summarized as follows:
a) There are no thermal or voltage violations arising out of the connection of the proposed
power plant under any of the connection options studied.
b) The fault levels are slightly elevated on commissioning of the plant in all the relevant
buses, however, they do not exceed or approach the ratings of currently installed
network equipment.
c) The system voltage variation and the flicker severity at the proposed connection points
are within the required limits.
d) The expected voltage variation on interconnection for each of the proposed options is
within the required limit of +/- 10% at the 33kV voltage level and +/-5% at the 132kV
voltage level.
1.5 Conclusion and Recommendation
Based on the analysis and conclusions made from this study, it is technically possible to connect
the plant to the grid via either of the proposed interconnection options. It is however
recommended that the plant be connected to the grid via Option 2 i.e. by constructing a 3.5kM
33kV, double circuit line in 300mm2 AAAC (Upas) conductor to the Kiboko substation 33kV bus
bar and install one 40MVA, 33/132kV step up transformer between the existing 33kV and
132kV bus bars as shown on the attached single line diagram at Annex E.
9
2. INTRODUCTION
2.1 Introduction
The rAREH Icon Solar PV plant is located in Makueni County in the Republic of Kenya. The
project entails construction of a 30MW PV plant, power collection system including inverters
and the interconnection facilities to integrate the plant to the national grid. The proposed plant
site is 3.5km from the existing Kiboko 132/33kV substation.
The objective of the study will be to assess the available grid connection options, identify the
technically feasible and best interconnection scheme, and if necessary determine the required
network reinforcement to ensure effective interconnection of the plant. The study will also
estimate the network short circuit fault levels in order to determine the impact of the proposed
power plant on the existing network switchgears and aid in interconnection equipment design;
calculate voltage variation and also the flicker severity.
10
3. EXISTING POWER NETWORK CONDITIONS
The existing grid network in the area near the proposed project site is as shown in the figures 3.1 and 3.2 below.
11
Figure 3-1: Existing project area power network schematic diagram

12
Key:
132kV line
33kV line
Figure 3-2: Existing KPLC Network Location Map in the area

13
3.1 Juja-Rabai 132kV Line

The Juja-Rabai 132kV line interconnects the cities of Nairobi and Mombasa. It was constructed
using the ACSR conductor Lynx which is rated approximately 97MVA. It supplies many loads a
long the way including KPC Pump stations and many other substations.
3.2 Kiboko 132/33kV Substation

Kiboko 132/33kV 1X23MVA substation is supplied via the Juja-Rabai 132/33kV substation. Its
current load at peak is approximately 4MW. The proposed solar PV plant is located just 3.5km
from it and it is the ideal connection point for the plant to the grid.
3.3 Sultan Hamud 132/33 Substation

Sultan Hamud132/33kV 1X23MVA substation is also supplied via the Juja-Rabai 132kV line is
located towards Juja Road Substation from Kiboko. Its current load at peak is approximately
3.94MW. The substation is located next to the KPC Pump Station of Sultan Hamud. Wote
132/33kV substation which is currently under construction by KETRACO will also be connected
to the Juja-Rabai 132kV line via this substation and ultimately to Kindaruma Substation via
Mwingi.
14
4. GRID CODE REQUIREMENTS
The requirements specified in the Kenya National Transmission Grid Code (KNTGC) formed the
basis for the grid impact assessment studies. The relevant chapters of the code are Chapter 6 –
Connections and Chapter 7 – Renewable Power Plant. These chapters contain requirements
specific to both the Eastern Africa Power Pool and East African Community Interconnection
Code (EAPP IC) and the KNTGC. Where there are differences in requirements, the KNTGC
specifies that the more stringent requirement shall hold. Chapter 6 – Connections, specifies the
minimum technical, design and operational criteria of plant and apparatus that must be
complied with by the Transmission System Operator (TSO) and Users at the connection Point.
The Transmission System Performance Characteristics specified by the Code are as follows:
4.1 Frequency
The frequency limits under normal and contingency conditions are shown in Table 4-1. Large
generating units can cause a dip in system frequency on tripping due to the inability of the
remaining generators on the system to pick up the shortfall. In extreme circumstances, this can
cause a complete system collapse. The Makindu Solar PV plant is however relatively small and
will therefore have minimal impact on the system frequency.
Table 4-1: Frequency Limits
4.2 Voltage
The impact of the plant on steady-state voltage levels and in terms of voltage fluctuation or
flicker is assessed in the report. Steady-state voltage limits from the KNTGC are shown below.
Table 4-2: Steady- State Voltage Limits
For assessment of voltage fluctuation or flicker, the KNTGC quotes IEC 61000-3-7 (1996) and
includes the following general requirements:
15
Voltage fluctuation at a Connection Point shall not exceed:
 +/-1% of the steady-state voltage level when these occur repetitively or

 +/-3% of the steady-state voltage level when these occur infrequently
4.3 Harmonics
The limits for harmonic distortion are as follows.
Table 4-3: Harmonic Limits
4.4 Technical Standards for Plant and Apparatus

All Plant and Apparatus connected to or proposed for connection to the EAPP Interconnected
Transmission System shall meet certain minimum technical standards as detailed below, in the
following order of preference:
a) Relevant current international and African Standards, such as IEC, ISO, EN;
b) Relevant current national standards.
Furthermore, Plant and Apparatus shall be designed, manufactured and tested in accordance
with the quality assurance ISO 9000 family or equivalent. The above requirements are to be
complied with during the detailed design phase of the project. The KNTGC also specifies
requirements for electrical protection and telecommunication which are to be adhered to in
the detailed design.
4.5 Technical Requirements for Generating Units

Chapter 7 of the code specifies particular requirements for renewable power plants including:
 Fault ride-through
 Power system frequency range
 Active power control
 Frequency response and
 Ramp rates
16
These requirements should form part of the specification of the power plant during the next
stage of the project. At this stage, it is assumed that the plant will be designed with the
capability to comply with these requirements. Further tests/studies may be required to confirm
grid code compliance at a later stage. The list of studies/tests is indicated below at Annex O.
4.6 Grid Connection Guidelines

The grid connection guidelines for Feed-in-Tariffs projects specifies the voltage levels at which
plants of different capacities are supposed to be connected to the national grid as shown
below.
Table 4-4: Generation Capacity and Voltage Limits
From the table above, it can be seen that a plant of 30MW can be connected to the grid at 33kV
voltage level or above. It is however worth noting that these are just guidelines as suitably sized
33kV lines can evacuate much more than 10MW plants efficiently.
4.7 Candidate Interconnection Points

From the existing network in the area, it can be deduced that the proposed PV plant can be
connected to the grid via the following points;
(i) Kiboko Substation 132kV bus;
(ii) Kiboko Substation 33kV bus
Implementing each of the two options entails constructing a collection system/step-up

substation at the plant site and a line to the selected connection point.
17
5. TECHNICAL EVALUATION OF INTERCONNECTION OPTIONS
5.1 Study Assumptions

The following assumptions were made in the modelling of the system:
 The loads on the feeders are lumped at the individual 33kV buses.
 The following transformer parameters are assumed.
Table 5-1: Transformer Parameters

Voltage(kV) Power (MVA) Vector Group Imp (%) Tap Changer Earthed
132/33 23 Dyn11 9.52 1-17-9 (1.25%) n-Solid
 The solar PV plant can operate between power factors of 0.95 lagging and 0.95 leading
as provided for in the Grid Code.
5.2 Existing System

To assess the impact of the proposed power plant in the power system, the existing network
before the plant was included was first analyzed. The relevant sub-system of the existing
network was modelled as shown in the schematic diagram below.
Kiboko 132/33kV
1X23MVA Substation Makindu KPC
33kV Bus
Sultan Hamud 132/33kV station
132kV Bus
1X23MVA Substation
3.2MW Load
132kV Bus
3MW Load
33kV Bus
132kV Bus
2.6MW Load
43km 175sq.mm ACSR 15km 175sq.mm ACSR

Conductor (Lynx) Conductor (Lynx)
Figure 5-1: Schematic diagram of the existing system
5.2.1 Load Flow Analysis

A load flow analysis was carried out before the proposed Makindu Rareh Solar PV Power plant
was connected and the voltages and fault levels were monitored at the relevant buses as
shown in the tables below.
A fault level study was conducted in PSS/E software using the IEC 60909 to determine the
minimum and maximum three-phase fault levels in the network of interest.
Table 5-2 below is a summary of maximum and minimum short circuit fault levels.
18
Table 5-2: Bus Fault Levels-Base case

Rated Short 3 Phase fault levels
Circuit
Bus Voltage Current Maximum Minimum
(kV) (kA) S (MVA) I (kA) S (MVA) I (kA)
Kiboko 132 31.5 312.21 1.3656 285.57 1.2491
Sultan Hamud 132 31.5 305.40 1.3358 279.33 1.2218
Kiboko 33 31.5 146.69 2.5664 140.64 2.4606
Tables 5-3 and 5-4 give per unit voltages at the proposed interconnection points and line
loadings of relevant lines in percentage before the plant is added.
Table 5-3: Per Unit Bus Voltage Levels – Base Case

Bus Rated Voltage(kV) Actual Voltage (pu)
Kiboko 132 0.9923
Sultan Hamud 132 0.9930
Kiboko 33 0.9873
Table 5-4: Percentage Line Loadings – Base Case

Line Name Loading (%)
Kiboko-Sultan Hamud 132kV Line 7
Kiboko-Makindu 132kV Line 4
It can be noted that, the voltages at the relevant buses are all within acceptable limits i.e. 0.95-
1.05pu. The fault levels are all below the rated breaking currents for the circuit breakers and no
project relevant line is overloaded.
5.3 Plant Interconnection Options
5.3.1 Methodology
The study considered two grid interconnection options for the proposed plant as outlined here
below. For each of the alternative options, load flow and short circuit fault level studies were
carried out to assess adequacy of the network and strength of the point of connection with
respect to the proposed power plant. Short circuit fault levels were evaluated to determine the
impact of the proposed plant on the fault levels in selected relevant buses and ensure minimum
design short circuit ratings for both the transmission and distribution network in Kenya listed in
Table 5-2 above are not violated. The two interconnection options are analyzed below:
19
1. Option I: Connection to Kiboko 132/33kV substation 132kV bus

2. Option II: Connection to Kiboko 132/33kV substation 33kV bus
5.3.2 Option 1: Connection to Kiboko 132/33kV substation 132kV bus

This interconnection option entails establishing a 132/33kV step-up substation at the plant site
and construction of an approximately 3.5km 132kV line using the 300sq.mm ASCR conductor
(Goat). The proposed interconnection is illustrated in the single line schematic diagram in
Figure 5-2 below.
M 30MW Solar Farm
Rareh Solar 33/132kV

1X40MVA Substation
3.5km 300sq.mm ACSR

Conductor (Goat)
Kiboko 132/33kV
1X23MVA Substation Makindu KPC
33kV Bus
132kV Bus
1X23MVA Substation
3.2MW Load
132kV Bus
3MW Load
33kV Bus
132kV Bus
2.6MW Load
43km 175sq.mm ACSR 15km 175sq.mm ACSR

Conductor (Lynx) Conductor (Lynx)
Figure 5-2: Option 1 Interconnection schematic diagram
Load Flow Analysis

A load flow analysis was carried out assuming full output from the proposed Makindu Solar PV
power plant. Short circuit fault levels, voltages at relevant buses and loadings of the lines were
determined after addition of the plant and compared with the base case.
20
Table 5-5: Bus Fault Levels - Option I

Circuit
Kiboko 132 31.5 339.70 1.4858 313.07 1.3693
Sultan Hamud 132 31.5 329.32 1.4404 303.22 1.3262
Kiboko 33 31.5 151.96 2.6586 146.45 2.5621
Table 5-6: Per Unit Voltage Levels - Option I

Rated Actual Voltage Actual Voltage
Bus
Voltage (kV) (pu) Base Case (pu) Option 1 Variation (%)
Kiboko 132 0.9923 1.0238 3.2
Sultan Hamud 132 0.9930 1.0167 2.4
Kiboko 33 0.9873 1.0189 3.2
Table 5-7: Percentage Line Loadings - Option I

Loading (%) Loading (%)
Line Name Variation (%)
Base Case Option I
Kiboko-Sultan Hamud 132kV Line 7 21 14
Kiboko-Makindu 132kV Line 4 16 12
It can be noted that the fault levels are elevated at all the buses, but they are still below the
rated breaking currents for the circuit breakers. The addition of the plant also causes a slight
rise in voltages on the monitored buses and the loadings on the monitored lines.
5.3.3 Option 2: Connection to the Kiboko 132/33kV Substation 33kV bus

This interconnection option entails establishing a collection system in the solar PV plant site
and construction of an approximately 3.5km double circuit 33kV line using the 300sq.mm AAAC
conductor. The proposed interconnection is illustrated in the single line schematic diagram in
Figure 5-3 below.
21
30MW Rareh
M
Solar Farm
3.5km 300sq.mm AAAC

Conductor
Makindu KPC
33kV Bus
132kV Bus
1X23MVA Substation
3.2MW Load
132kV Bus
3MW Load
33kV Bus
132kV Bus
2.6MW Load
Kiboko 132/33kV
1X23,40MVA Substation
43km 175sq.mm ACSR
Conductor (Lynx)
15km 175sq.mm ACSR
Conductor (Lynx)
Figure 5-3: Option 2 Interconnection schematic diagram
Load Flow Analysis

A load flow analysis was carried out assuming full output from the proposed Makindu Rareh
solar PV power Plant. Short circuit fault levels, voltages at relevant buses and loadings of the
lines were determined after addition of the plant and compared with the base case.
Table 5-8: Bus Fault Levels - Option II

Circuit
Kiboko 132 31.5 339.98 1.4870 313.31 1.3704
Sultan Hamud 132 31.5 329.55 1.4414 303.43 1.3272
Kiboko 33 31.5 243.29 4.2564 230.53 4.0332
22
Table 5-9: Per Unit Voltage Levels - Option II

Rated Actual Voltage Actual Voltage
Bus
Voltage (kV) (pu) Base Case (pu) Option II Variation (%)
Kiboko 132 0.9923 1.0254 3.3
Sultan Hamud 132 0.9930 1.0180 2.5
Kiboko 33 0.9873 1.0225 3.6
Table 5-10: Percentage Line Loadings - Option II

Loading (%) Loading (%)
Line Name Variation (%)
Base Case Option II
Kiboko-Sultan Hamud 132kV Line 7 21 14
Kiboko-Makindu 132kV Line 4 16 12
It can be noted that the fault levels are elevated at all the buses, but they are still below the
rated breaking currents for the circuit breakers. The addition of the plant also causes a slight
rise in voltages on the monitored buses and the loadings on the monitored lines.
5.4 Short Circuit Fault Levels

Connection of a plant to the power system can compromise the supply quality, particularly
causing large voltage fluctuations beyond the acceptable +/- 10% at the point of connection.
The amount of generation that can be connected at a particular point in the power system is
therefore limited, depending on the power network relative system strength (system
impedance) at the point of connection. High system impedance (weak sys tem) results to large
voltage fluctuations with changes in generation output while low system impedance (strong
system) results to lower voltage fluctuations and therefore higher capacity to absorb power.
Power system strength with respect to generation is expressed in terms of system short circuit
ratio, which is defined as the ratio of the system short circuit power at the point of connection
to the Maximum power generation from the plant
i.e. ⁄
Where, SCR is the short circuit ratio;
is the power system short circuit level at the point of connection;
and P is the installed power capacity.

23
The power system is determined to be strong with respect to installed capacity if the short
circuit ratio is above 20 and weak if it is below 10.
SCR was calculated at the proposed connection points to the grid for the two options and
tabulated as shown below.
Table 5-11: Short Circuit Ratios at Connection Points
Plant Short Circuit Fault Level SCR
Option Bus Power maximum minimum
Maximum Minimum
(MW) (MVA) (MVA)
1 Kiboko 132kV 30 339.70 313.07 11.32 10.44
2 Kiboko 33kV 30 243.29 230.53 8.11 7.68
The capacity of the power network to absorb the proposed solar PV power plant at the
alternative points of connection considered can be assessed through calculation of short circuit
fault levels at these points. The calculated short circuit fault levels al so give an indication of
whether the existing network breaking capacity will be adequate for the expected increase in
system short circuit fault levels upon integration of additional generation capacity.
Based on the above criteria, it is shown that Kiboko 132kV bus is a strong point for connecting
the proposed solar PV plant to the grid and the 33kV bus in the same substation is a slightly
weaker point for connecting the plant to the grid.
Short circuit fault analysis results indicate that network short circuit fault levels will be slightly
elevated on commissioning of the plant in all the relevant buses. They will however not exceed
or approach the ratings of currently installed equipment at the considered 132kV and 33kV
points of connection.
5.5 Voltage Variation/Deviation

Voltage variation is a function of both SCR and X/R ratio and is estimated from the following
expression:
Voltage variation,
( ⁄ )
( ⁄ )
Where P and are as defined above, β is the angle of network short circuit impedance and α
is the phase angle of the plant output current.
24
The maximum voltage variation is expected at minimum system short circuit fault level.
Assuming unity power factor for the plant power output current, expected Voltage variation on
interconnection for each of the proposed interconnection option is shown in the table below
Table 5-12: Voltage variations at Connection Points
Option Bus SCR α β (%)

1 Kiboko 132kV 10.44 0 -69.57 3.34
2 Kiboko 33kV 7.68 0 -75.69 3.21
The voltage variation is within the allowed limits of +/-5% at 132kV voltage level and +/-10% at
the 33kV voltage level.
5.6 Flicker Severity

Flicker severity is dependent on the source of power, generator characteristics and voltage
variation. Short term flicker can be estimated from the expression below as given by Andreas
Spring et. al., Effects of Flicker in a Distribution Grid.
( )
Where R is the frequency factor, F is the form factor; r is the repetition rate per minute and
( ) % is the maximum voltage variation in percentage. Typical values for R and F are 0.2 and
1.4 respectively.
Short term flicker planning limits are; Pst< 0.9 for medium voltage systems and Pst< 0.8 for high
voltage systems.
Assuming repetition rate of 10 per minute and the determined voltage variations for both the
interconnection options above, applying the expression in above gives s hort term flicker as in
Table 5-13.
Table 5-13: Short-term Flicker in Connection Points

Option R F r (%) Flicker
1 0.2 1.4 10 3.34 0.7
2 0.2 1.4 10 3.21 0.7
This is less than the short-term flicker planning threshold of 0.9Pst for medium voltage systems
and 0.8Pst for high voltage systems for both interconnection options.
25
6. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
6.1 Conclusions
The following conclusions can be drawn from this study:
6.1.1 Load Flow

Load flow studies for the existing KPLC network show that no system elements are overloaded
and there are no voltage violations in the surrounding buses.
The results also indicate that connecting the solar PV power plant at any of the two proposed
interconnection options does not result to any thermal or voltage violations for the normal
network configuration.
6.1.2 Short Circuit Fault Levels

Short circuit fault analysis results indicate that network short circuit fault levels will be slightly
elevated on commissioning of the plant in all the relevant buses. They will however not exceed
or approach the ratings of currently installed equipment at the considered 33kV and 132kV
points of connection.
It is shown that Kiboko 132kV bus is a strong point for connecting the proposed solar PV plant
to the grid and the 33kV bus in the same substation is a slightly weaker point for connecting the
plant to the grid.
6.1.3 Voltage Variation

The expected voltage variation is within the allowed limits of +/-5% at 132kV voltage level and
+/-10% at the 33kV voltage level for both the interconnection options.
6.1.4 Flicker Severity

Short-term flicker severity is less than the planning threshold of 0.9Pst for medium voltage
systems and 0.8Pst for high voltage systems for both interconnection options.
6.2 Recommendations
Based on the analysis and conclusions made from this study, it is technically possible to connect
the plant to the grid via either of the proposed interconnection options. It is however
recommended that the plant be connected to the grid via Option 2 i.e. by constructing a 3.5kM
33kV, double circuit line in 300mm2 AAAC (upas) conductor to the Kiboko substation 33kV bus
bar and install one 40MVA, 33/132kV step up transformer between the existing 33kV and
132kV bus bars as shown on the attached single line diagram at Annex E. This proposa l will
avoid purchase of additional land for the extension of 132kV bus bar as proposed in Option 1. It
26
will also ease the way-leave acquisition process as the double circuit line will follow the existing
road reserves.
6.3 Comment on the study’s methodology
The studies were done in close consultation with Kenya Power who provided valuable system
data. Their input is acknowledged and appreciated.
Report by: Cyrus Njungu.
FOR: SCIENTIFIC AND ENGINEERING POWER CONSULTANTS LTD.

27
ANNEXES
A. Load Flow Diagram before connecting the Plant.
Bus - Voltage (kV/pu)
Branch - MW/Mvar
Equipment - MW/Mvar
kV: <=11.000 <=33.000<=66.000 <=132.000 <=220.000 <=400.000 <=500.000 >500.000
312005
KKIBOKO11
312009
SW KMAKINDU
312004 0.0
KSULTAN HA11
4.1 4.1 0.9 0.9

3.5 7% I 1.6 2.7 4% I 2.0
392055
KKIBOKO31
1.0
130.9
1.0
131.1
3.2 3.2 3.2
1
1
1.1 1.1I 1.1
15%
1.0
131.0
1.0
32.6
N/A
312013 1.0
RAREH132KV 135.1
N/A
1
N/A
1
N/A
332011 1.0
RAREH33KV 33.7
95% I
1
28
B. Option 1 Connection Load Flow Diagram

Bus - Voltage (kV/pu)
Branch - MW/Mvar
Equipment - MW/Mvar
kV: <=11.000 <=33.000<=66.000 <=132.000 <=220.000 <=400.000 <=500.000 >500.000
312005
KKIBOKO11
312009
SW KMAKINDU
312004 0.0
KSULTAN HA11
15.3 15.4 11.3 11.2

1.3 21% I 0.5 3.6 16% I 2.9
392055
KKIBOKO31
1.0
134.2
1.0
135.1
3.2 3.2 3.2
1
1
1.1 1.1I 1.1
14%
29.9
2.9
1.0
135.1
1.0
33.6
22% I
312013 1.0
29.9
3.0
RAREH132KV 135.1
3.0
29.9
N/A
1
N/A
1
73% I
332011 1.0
30.0
0.8
RAREH33KV 33.7
95% I
0.8L
30.0
1
29
C. Option 2 Connection Load Flow Diagram
312005
KKIBOKO11
312009
SW KMAKINDU
312004 0.0
KSULTAN HA11
15.2 15.3 11.2 11.1

1.7 0.1 3.3 2.7
392055
KKIBOKO31
1.0
134.4
15.3 15.3
1
2.1 1.4
1.0
135.3
3.2
1
1.1
11.1 11.1 14.8

1
1.4 0.9 0.6

1.0 14.8 Bus - Voltage (kV/pu)
135.3 0.6 Branch - MW/Mvar
1.0 Equipment - MW/Mvar
33.7
kV: <=11.000<=33.000<=66.000 <=132.000<=220.000<=400.000<=500.000>500.000
312013 1.0
RAREH132KV 135.6
332011 1 1.0
15.0
15.0
0.4
0.4
RAREH33KV 34.1
0.8L
30.0
1
30
D. 132KV EVACUATION PROPOSAL SLD

31
E. OPTION 2: 33KV EVACUATION PROPOSAL SLD
F. Maximum Fault Levels - Option 1

PSS(R)E-33.5.0 IEC 60909 SHORT CIRCUIT CURRENTS
OPTIONS USED:
- VOLTAGE FACTOR C=1.05 WHEN BUS BASE kV<=1.0 kV and C=1.1 WHEN BUS BASE kV>1.0 kV
- SET SYNCHRONOUS/ASYNCHRONOUS MACHINE POWER OUTPUTS TO P=0.0, Q=0.0
- SET GENERATOR POSITIVE SEQUENCE REACTANCES TO SUBTRANSIENT
- TRANSFORMER TAP RATIOS AND PHASE SHIFT ANGLES UNCHANGED
- SET LINE CHARGING=0.0 IN +/- SEQUENCES

32
- SET LINE/FIXED/SWITCHED SHUNTS=0.0 AND TRANSFORMER MAGNETIZING ADMITTANCE=0.0 IN +/-

SEQUENCES
- SET LOAD=0.0 IN +/- SEQUENCES
- DC LINES AND FACTS DEVICES BLOCKED
- IMPEDANCE CORRECTIONS NOT APPLIED TO TRANSFORMER ZERO SEQUENCE IMPEDANCES
VOLTAGE FACTOR C= 1.10, NOMINAL FREQUENCY=50.0 Hz, BREAKING CURRENT at TIME= 0.100 seconds
<-SCMVA-> <-Sym I''k rms--> <-ip(B)-> <-ip(C)-> <DC Ib(C)> <Sym Ib-> <Asym Ib>
/I/ AN(I) /I/ /I/ /I/ /I/ /I/
X---------- BUS ----------X MVA AMP DEG AMP AMP AMP AMP AMP
312005 [KKIBOKO11 132.00] 3PH 339.70 1485.8 -69.45 3233.6 2865.5 230.8 1485.8 1503.6
Note - ip(B) currents include safety factor multiplier (1.15).
THEVENIN IMPEDANCE, X/R (OHM) Z+:/56.422/69.446, 2.66694
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
/I/ AN(I) /I/ /I/ /I/ /I/ /I/
312009 [KMAKINDU 132.00] 3PH 329.32 1440.4 -69.22 3124.7 2766.4 159.9 1440.4 1449.2
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
/I/ AN(I) /I/ /I/ /I/ /I/ /I/
392055 [KKIBOKO31 33.000] 3PH 151.96 2658.6 -79.63 5962.8 6016.4 526.6 2658.6 2710.3

33
G. Minimum Fault Levels - Option 1

OPTIONS USED:

SEQUENCES
/I/ AN(I) /I/ /I/ /I/ /I/ /I/
312005 [KKIBOKO11 132.00] 3PH 313.07 1369.3 -69.57 2985.2 2645.2 247.6 1369.3 1391.5
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
/I/ AN(I) /I/ /I/ /I/ /I/ /I/
34
312009 [KMAKINDU 132.00] 3PH 303.22 1326.2 -69.32 2881.1 2550.4 170.8 1326.2 1337.2
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
/I/ AN(I) /I/ /I/ /I/ /I/ /I/
392055 [KKIBOKO31 33.000] 3PH 146.45 2562.1 -79.31 5711.7 5763.7 559.2 2562.1 2622.4
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
H. Maximum Fault Levels - Option 2

OPTIONS USED:

SEQUENCES
/I/ AN(I) /I/ /I/ /I/ /I/ /I/

35
312005 [KKIBOKO11 132.00] 3PH 342.60 1498.5 -69.57 3266.8 2921.2 191.6 1498.5 1510.7
/I/ AN(I) /I/ /I/ /I/ /I/ /I/
312009 [KMAKINDU 132.00] 3PH 331.82 1451.3 -69.32 3153.0 2814.1 127.0 1451.3 1456.9
/I/ AN(I) /I/ /I/ /I/ /I/ /I/
392055 [KKIBOKO31 33.000] 3PH 246.28 4308.7 -76.11 10418.2 9238.3 816.6 4308.7 4385.4
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I. Minimum Fault Levels - Option 2

OPTIONS USED:

36

SEQUENCES
/I/ AN(I) /I/ /I/ /I/ /I/ /I/
312005 [KKIBOKO11 132.00] 3PH 313.31 1370.4 -69.52 2985.8 2668.3 176.0 1370.4 1381.6
/I/ AN(I) /I/ /I/ /I/ /I/ /I/
312009 [KMAKINDU 132.00] 3PH 303.43 1327.2 -69.28 2881.5 2570.2 116.5 1327.2 1332.3
/I/ AN(I) /I/ /I/ /I/ /I/ /I/
392055 [KKIBOKO31 33.000] 3PH 230.53 4033.2 -75.69 9680.8 8584.9 744.6 4033.2 4101.4

37
J. Project Conductors Considerations.
i. Continuous Ratings For Optimum Option
a. KIBOKO SUBSTATION BUS BARS

VOLTAGE LEVEL EXISTING PROPOSED COMMENT
CONDUTOR CONDUCTOR
1. 33kV Wolf(150mm2 Upas(300mm2- Existing 33kV bus
ACSR)-355A(20MVA) AAAC)- bar to be re-
718A(37MVA) conductored from
wolf to upas and
extended to
receive the solar
energy generation
2. 132kV Lynx(175mm2 Lynx and 50mm2 -
ACSR)-386A(88MVA) Annular Alu,33mm
wall thickness tube-
(Latter 900A rating)
b. 33kV POWER EVACUATION LINE.

VOLTAGE LEVEL EXISTING PROPOSED COMMENT
CONDUTOR CONDUCTOR
33kV None Upas(300mm2- While one single
AAAC)- circuit line can
718A(37MVA) evacuate the
whole generated
power, it is
proposed to
construct a double
circuit line to fulfill
the n-1 criteria in
the grid code and
also to increase
the power
evacuation
security
ii. Optimum Option Conductor Fault Capacity Calculations.

a. Fault Situation Mechanical Capacities.
1. 33kV System:
38
Fmax = 0.2KI2/d-----As indicated in BS Standard 7354:1990-Design of high-voltage open

terminal stations at page 10. This should be multiplied by 20.5 to take account of peak
current and 2.5 to account for asymmetry
Where:
Fmax = Maximum force in Newton per metre
I = Symmetrical short circuit current in kA
K = Stress factor = 0.8
d = Spacing between conductors in metres
From the already undertaken short circuit study at Kiboko, the maximum short circuit level at the
33kV bus bar is 3.1kA.
Therefore for Kiboko:
Fmax = (0.2 *0.8*3.1*3.1/1.3)*20.5 *2.5 Newtons per metre
=1.18*1.414*2.5
=4.18N/m
 For 30m maximum Span in the substation:

Fmax =4.18*30 N
= 125.4N
For 100m span span of 33kv line outside the substation
Fmax = 418N
From manufacturers tables breaking strength of Upas conductor is 103700N.
COMMENT: Upas conductor meets the mechanical requirements of the project.
2. 132kV System:
Fmax = 0.2KI2/d-----As indicated in BS Standard 7354:1990-Design of high-voltage open

terminal stations at page 10. This should be multiplied by 20.5 to take account of peak
current and 2.5 to account for asymmetry
Where:
Fmax = Maximum force in Newton per metre
I = Symmetrical short circuit current in kA
K = Stress factor = 0.8

39
d = Spacing between conductors in metres
From the already undertaken short circuit study at Kiboko, the maximum short circuit level at the
33kV bus bar is 1.48kA.
Therefore for Kiboko:
Fmax = (0.2 *0.8*1.48*1.48/2.2)*20.5*2.5 Newtons per metre
=0.159*1.414*2.5
=0.562N/m
 For 30m maximum Span in the substation:

Fmax =0.562*30 N
= 16.9N
From the manufacturers’ tables breaking strength of Lynx conductor is 79500N.
COMMENT: Lynx conductors meets the mechanical requirements of the project.
b. Fault Situation thermal short circuit current capacity(I th) calculations.

i. Formulae
The relevant formula is as follows:
Ith = I’’k(m +n)0.5-----As indicated in ABB Switchgear Manual, 11 th Edition at page 146
and 147
Where:
Where:
Ith = Thermal short circuit current
I’’k = Transient current at time T k
m = DC component factor
n = Thermal effect factor for AC component.
The other relevant formula is :
ip =K.20.5.I’’k -----Indicated at page 74 of ABB Switchgear Manual, 11 th Edition
Where K = Factor for calculating peak short time current
= 1.95------- Figure nearest the limiting factor of 2.
Therefore,
ip/I’’k = 1.95*20.5
40
= 2.76
ii. 33kV Side Calculations
It is assumed as it is in practice that the relays are set for 1sec fault clearing time
From the fault level studies for Kibko:
ip = 1.414*3.1 kA
= 4.38K
ip/I’’k = 2.83
Therefore, I’’k = 4.38/2.76
=1.59kA
At Kiboko, I’’k/Ik = 1.59/3.1
= 0.52
From the the tables at page 147 of the ABB Switchgear Manual;
m = 0.19
n = 0.95
Ith = 1.55(0.19 + 0.95)0.5
= 1.65Ka
Area of Upas conductor = 362.1mm2
Therefore,
Thermal fault level current density at Kiboko = 1650/362.1 A/mm2
=4.56A/mm2
COMMENT:
The allowed threshold fault current density for Upas conductor with operating temperature of 75 0C
and maximum ultimate temperature of 2000C is 85A/mm2. Refer to Fig 4.16(b) of ABB Switchgear
Manual 11th Edition at page 148.
From the above calculation Upas has adequate capacity to withstand the fault conditions thermal
duty requirements at Kiboko.
iii. 132kV Side Calculations

41
It is assumed as it is in practice that the relays are set for 1sec fault clearing time
From the fault level studies for Kibko:
ip = 1.414*1.48 kA
= 2.09K
ip/I’’k = 2.76
Therefore, I’’k = 2.09/2.76
=0.76kA
At Kiboko, I’’k/Ik = 0.76/1.48
= 0.51
From the the tables at page 147 of the ABB Switchgear Manual;
m = 0.19
n = 0.97
Ith = 0.76(0.19 + 0.97)0.5
= 0.82Ka
Area of Lynx conductor = 226.2mm2
Therefore,
Thermal fault level current density at Kiboko = 820/226.2 A/mm2
=3.63A/mm2
COMMENT:
The allowed threshold fault current density for Lynx conductor with operating temperature of 75 0C
and maximum ultimate temperature of 2000C is 85A/mm2. Refer to Fig 4.16(b) of ABB Switchgear
Manual 11th Edition at page 148.
From the above calculation Lynx has adequate capacity to withstand the fault conditions thermal
duty requirements at Kiboko.

42
K. Existing Kiboko Substation Transformer Details
Details of the Kiboko 132/33kV Tx Shown Below
S/ NAME SIZE IMPEDAN NO LOA VECTO TAP MAKE YOM

N (MV CE LOAD D R S
A) LOSS(K LOSS
W)
1 KIBOKO_13 23 9.52 17.0 75 Dyn1/D 17 CROMPT 2013
2_33_TX1 yn11 ON
NB. Other details available on the transformer rating plate on site
L. Evacuation Losses
The active power losses of the network from is rAREH Icon Solar Limited substation to each of the
proposed connection points were evaluated by determining the active power loss in the overhead line
used to connect the solar plant to the network.
Losses between rAREH Icon Solar and Kiboko substation
Losses in Evacuation Line

Option Bus Losses in Evacuation Line (%)
(MW)
1 Kiboko 132kV 0.1 0.3
2 Kiboko 33kV 0.4 1.3
From the results in the table above, the losses are within the acceptable limits. Losses of less than 6%
in 33kV lines are considered satisfactory and thus losses are not a limiting factor in this study.
M. Voltage Variation Studies with Solar Generation Simulations with +/- 0.95 pf
The voltage variations at various bus bars in the substations nearest and interconnected to the solar
generation plant at Makindu is indicated in the tables below.
Option 1
0.95 Power Factor (Lagging)
Actual
Rated Voltage Actual Voltage (pu) Voltage
Bus Variation (%)
(kV) Base Case (pu) Option
1
Kiboko 132 0.9923 1.0266 3.5%
Sultan
132 0.993 1.019 2.6%
Hamud
Kiboko 33 0.9873 1.0245 3.8%
43
0.95 Power Factor (Leading)
Actual
Bus Variation (%)
1
Kiboko 132 0.9923 1.0111 1.9%
Sultan
132 0.993 1.0065 1.4%
Hamud
Kiboko 33 0.9873 1.009 2.2%
Option 2
0.95 Power Factor (Lagging)
Actual
Bus Variation (%)
1
Kiboko 132 0.9923 1.0281 3.6%
Sultan
132 0.993 1.0202 2.7%
Hamud
Kiboko 33 0.9873 1.0266 4.0%
0.95 Power Factor (Leading)
Actual
Bus Variation (%)
1
Kiboko 132 0.9923 1.0056 1.3%
Sultan
132 0.993 1.0021 0.9%
Hamud
Kiboko 33 0.9873 0.9926 0.5%
COMMENT:
From the above tables, it can be seen that the voltages at the 132kV and 33kV bus bars at the point of supply
at Kiboko are below the required threshold of +/_ 5% and +/_ 10% for 132kV and 33kV voltage levels
respectively.
44
N. Proposed New 40MVA Transformer Bay Location at Kiboko Substation
NB: PROPOSED NEW 40MVA TRANSFORMER BAY WITH EQUIPMENT IS INDICATED IN RED.
COMMENT:
There is adequate space at KPLC Kiboko 132/33kV Substation for an additional 40MVA 132/33kV transformer bay which
does not interfere with the future expansion of the substation as shown in the above location drawing. More details
including the elevation drawings shall be indicated during detailed design.
45
O. LIST OF TESTS/STUDIES FOR SOLAR PLANT TO ESTABLIS H TECHNICAL OPERATIONAL

COMPLIANCE WITH GRID CODE
GRID CODE SECTION DESCRIPTION

1. 7.2.3.1 Fault Ride-through Requirements for RPPs
2. 7.2.3.2 Active Power Provision During Fault
3. 7.2.3.3 Reactive Current Flows During Fault
4. 7.2.3.4 Active Power Recovery After Fault
5. 7.2.3.5 Power System Remain Connected Frequency Ranges
6. 7.2.3.6 Active Power Control
7. 7.2.3.7 Safety Standards
8. 7.2.4 Frequency Response
9. 7.2.5 Ramp Rates
10. 7.2.6 Reactive Power Capability
11. 7.2.7 Rate of Change of Frequency Range
12. 7.2.8 Voltage and Frequency for Synchronisation
13. 7.2.10 System Reserve Requirements
14. 7.2.11 Renewable Power Plant Hourly MW Production Forecast
15.

Grid Connection Study for Rareh Icon Solar Ltd

Enviado por

Dados do documento

Título original

Direitos autorais

Formatos disponíveis

Compartilhar este documento

Compartilhar ou incorporar documento

Opções de compartilhamento

Você considera este documento útil?

Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Grid Connection Study for Rareh Icon Solar Ltd

Enviado por

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

0

Our Ref: Your Ref: Date: 03/10/18

rAREH Icon Solar Ltd

Grid Connection Study

1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................. 7

1.2 Existing Power Network Conditions ................................................................................. 7

1.3 Grid Code Requirements.................................................................................................. 7

1.4 Technical Evaluation of Interconnection Options ............................................................ 7

1.5 Conclusion and Recommendation ................................................................................... 8

3. EXISTING POWER NETWORK CONDITIONS ........................................................................... 10

3.1 Juja-Rabai 132kV Line..................................................................................................... 13

3.2 Kiboko 132/33kV Substation .......................................................................................... 13

3.3 Sultan Hamud 132/33 Substation .................................................................................. 13

4. GRID CODE REQUIREMENTS .................................................................................................. 14

4.1 Frequency ....................................................................................................................... 14

4.2 Voltage ........................................................................................................................... 14

4.3 Harmonics ...................................................................................................................... 15

4.4 Technical Standards for Plant and Apparatus ................................................................ 15

4.5 Technical Requirements for Generating Units............................................................... 15

4.6 Grid Connection Guideline ............................................................................................. 16

4.7 Candidate Interconnection Points ................................................................................. 16

5. TECHNICAL EVALUATION OF INTERCONNECTION OPTIONS ................................................. 17

5.1 Study Assumptions ......................................................................................................... 17

5.2 Existing System ............................................................................................................... 17

5.2.1 Load Flow Analysis .................................................................................................. 17

5.3 Plant Interconnection Options ....................................................................................... 18

5.3.2 Option 1: Connection to Kiboko 132/33kV substation 132kV bus ........................ 19

5.3.3 Option 2: Connection to the Kiboko 132/33kV Substation 33kV bus.................... 20

5.4 Short Circuit Fault Levels ................................................................................................ 22

5.5 Voltage Variation/Deviation........................................................................................... 23

5.6 Flicker Severity ............................................................................................................... 24

6. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ........................................................................... 25

6.1.1 Load Flow ................................................................................................................ 25

6.1.2 Short Circuit Fault Levels......................................................................................... 25

6.1.3 Voltage Variation .................................................................................................... 25

6.1.4 Flicker Severity ........................................................................................................ 25

6.2 Recommendations ......................................................................................................... 25

6.3 Comment on the study's methodology…………………………………………………………………….26

A. Load Flow Diagram before connecting the Plant. .......................................................... 27

B. Option 1 Connection Load Flow Diagram ...................................................................... 28

C. Option 2 Connection Load Flow Diagram ...................................................................... 29

D. Option 1: 132kV Evacuation Proposal………………………………………………………………………30

F. Maximum Fault Level - Option 1………………………………………………………………………………31

G. Minimum Fault Levels - Option 1.................................................................................33

H. Maximum Fault Levels - Option 2 .................................................................................. 34

I. Minimum Fault Levels - Option 2 ................................................................................... 35

J. Project Conductors Considerations………………………………………………………………………37

K. Existing Kiboko Substation Transformer Details………………………………………………… 42

N. Proposed New 40MVA Transformer Bay Location at Kiboko Substation………… 44

O. List of Tests/studies for Folar Plant to Establish Technical Operational Compliance

with Grid Code………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 46

Figure 3-2: Existing KPLC Network Location Map in the area………………………………………… 10

Figure 5-1: Schematic diagram of the existing system ................................................................. 15

Figure 5-2: Option 1 Interconnection schematic diagram............................................................ 17

Figure 5-3: Option 11 Interconnection schematic diagram.......................................................... 19

Table 4-1: Frequency Limits .......................................................................................................... 12

Table 4-2: Steady- State Voltage Limits ........................................................................................ 12

Table 4-3: Harmonic Limits ........................................................................................................... 13

Table 4-4: Generation Capacity and Voltage Limits...................................................................... 14

Table 5-1: Transformer Parameter………………………………………………………........ 15

Table 5-2: Bus Fault Levels-Base case………………………………………………………….....................16

Table 5-3: Per Unit Bus Voltage Levels – Base Case………………………………………………………….16

Table 5-4: Percentage Line Loadings – Base Case…………………………………………………………….16