782 IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery, Vol. 7 , No.

2, April 1992
CONSIDERATIONS FOR HIGHER VOLTAGE DISTRIBUTION

Alfred I. Jones Bynum E. Smith Daniel J. Ward

Senior Member Senior Member Senior Member
S & J Consultants, P.C. Virginia Power
Richmond, VA Richmond, VA

ABSTRACT development criteria (e.g., size, fault current limits,

The proper selection of a distribution voltage is one volt/var control, load transfer capability, etc.), line design
of the more important considerations of the electric utility criteria (operating and emergency capability, clutter and
planning engineer. This determination can have a esthetics, availability of corridors, etc.) and, of course, the
signZcant effect on the economics and efficiency of availability of equipment for the chosen distribution
transmission and distribution power delivery. voltage.

This paper discusses the major considerations DISTRIBUTION VOLTAGE AND LOAD AREA
involving the selection of the voltage level for distribution Prior to the establishment of a higher distribution
facilities, principally 25 kV and 35 kV systems, and voltage, it is useful to determine the relationships between
highlights Virginia Power's experience with 34.5 kV. the more important variables involved. Through simplified
analyses involving idealized load areas, the more significant
KEYWORDS: High voltage distribution, distribution parameters affecting the distribution line and substation
planning, distribution economics, voltage conversion design can be readily identified.

Van Wormer in [2] used rectangular load areas and

INTRODUCTION found that maximum load area coverage on voltage limited
The following excerpt from [l] concisely states the feeders is obtained when one-third of the allowable voltage
importance of distribution voltage: drop occurs in the lateral and two-thirds occurs in the
main. In addition to Van Wormer, Denton and Reps [3]
"The primary-system voltage level is probably the used a variety of geometric patterns and introduced the
system-planning parameter which has the greatest concept of kVA-miles of coverage.
influence on system cost, design and operation. The
voltage level has a direct effect on main feeder length; The load area studies demonstrate that higher
feeder loading; number and rating of distribution voltage distribution provides greater area coverage than
substations; the amount of subtransmission lines; and the that provided from lower voltage distribution for the same
number of consumers affected by a particular outage." load density. The area coverage is proportional to voltage.
Table I indicates the area coverage relative to that for a
The distribution voltage level influences the 12.47 kV system. This assumes uniform load density, but
economics of the entire system. This includes that part of does not include particular transmission concerns,
the transmission system which is directly concerned with substation arrangements and special load considerations.
the energy supply to the distribution system, any
subtransmission, distribution substations, and feeders. Table 1. Relative Area Coverage Versus Distribution Voltage
Choosing an uneconomic distribution voltage results in an
ineffective arrangement of the foregoing factors. Other Voltaqe
(kV) (relative)
considerations include the distribution substation
12.47 1.o
This paper was presented at the Transmission 24.94 2.0
34.50 2.8
and Distribution Conference in Dallas, Texas
from September 22-27,1991at the Dallas Con-
vention Center. Sponsored by the IEEE Power RELIABILITY
Engineering Society. An "acceptable level" of reliability (i.e., service
availability) is a function of economics and customer
complaints. With today's increased customer dependence
on electric service, this acceptable level is what customers

0885-8977/9 1/$3.0001992 IEEE

 783
perceive it to be. An improvement might be deemed RELATIVE CUSTOMER INTERRUPTIONWYEAR
necessary if the customers have seen a dramatic decrease
in service reliability or that same level may be judged
acceptable because the present cost of service is
acceptable. One way to address this issue is to
periodically survey customers and/or monitor complaints.

An interesting axiom suggests that in high growth

areas the higher voltage distribution system on buildout
will probably end up with the same number of customers
and the same amount of line exposure as the original I I I
1 2 3 4 6 6
lower voltage system. This is based on the consideration NUMBER OF MAIN FEEDER SECTIONS
that the newer customers tend to have higher load per
Figure 1. Customer Reliability Versus Number of Sections
customer than the older ones and, hence, the total number
of customers per circuit is usually less than the number
based on the original load data. With greater load per
customer, the circuit length becomes less. within the zones.

Prior to buildout, the area covered by higher voltage The zone approach starts with the basic customer
distribution is greater than what it would be for a lower data by circuit and prioritizes line sections according to the
voltage system and so is the exposure to more number of customers that could be affected by
interruptions. There are some relatively simple measures interruptions on each section. A typical feeder has a
to consider which will improve the overall reliability of the substation interrupting device, reclosers, sectionalizers and
higher voltage distribution system. One of these is the fuses, each of which will de-energize its zone along with
addition of extra sectionalizing or switching points on the any other zones that are connected to it. Any interruption
main feeder. Separating the main feeder into sections resulting from a disturbance can affect a few customers,
results in improved reliability. such as those on a fused tap line, or it can involve all the
customers on the feeder, should the substation breaker
Figure 1shows the relative customer reliability for trip.
a radial distribution feeder versus the number of sections
[4]. The loop system, referred to in the figure, implies
that unfaulted portions of the feeder can be transferred
rapidly or automatically to other feeders. The upper curve
shows how more feeder sections lead to a shorter outage / I recloser\/ /Zone
time for many customers and, if the switches have fault
interrupting capability, it results in fewer customers
interrupted per outage; the lower curve shows the
improvement in service availability due to the addition of
a tie to another circuit. This information can be used to Figure 2A Fauit Locations Causing Zone Tripping
determine the number of switches to produce a reliability
level comparable to that of a lower voltage system. Zone 1 Affects

In addition to switching, the use of the "zone

concept" should be considered for reliability improvements.
A distribution system can be considered to be an circuit
assortment of zones of line exposure to various breaker
circumstances that can cause interruptions to electric
service. Each zone has an interrupting device that will not
only de-energize it for a problem, but also cause an
interruption to all other zones that rely on it for an
electrical source. It is therefore obvious that there is a Figure 28. Customers Affected by Zone Tripping
difference in the importance of zones on a given feeder
from a reliability standpoint, depending on their location Figure 2. The Zone Concept
and the number of customers affected by any disturbance
784
The classification by zone exposure consists of the advantage of a thermally limited system for a given
multiplying the number of customers affected by a kVA of load.
disturbance in a line section times the length of that
section in miles. This becomes the zone exposure for the
line section or zone. As shown in Figure 2, Zone 1is that .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ... ...
section between the substation breaker and the next 1 . :.
8 ................... L .........j ......... .......... i.........1.........L.........i .........
. . . . . .....

protective device(s). Outages in this zone are significantly

more important than others because they affect more
customers (i.e., all the customers on the feeder). 5
I : ; ; ........;
i i1.........ii.........fi..voltage/
........ ..........
:
liml~ed I
..
: : I
j
..
,
j
. ..

Another zone that may have a higher zone exposure

is an unusually long section of line, even though the
number of customers is lower than Zone 1. Zone 1 and
other sections with high customer-miles of exposure should
1 12 1.4 1.8 1.8 2 2.2 2.4 2.8 2.8 9
be built, inspected and maintained at a level somewhat
higher than the normal standards in recognition of their EJE,
higher priority. Figure 3. Relative Feeder Losses Per kVA of Load

The zone concept is being applied to tree trimming Compared to 24.94 kV, the feeder losses at 12.47
schedules and to the selection of protective device kV are in the range of 1.6 - 4.0 times greater. When
locations based on the maximum number of customers compared to 34.5 kV, the feeder losses are 2.0 - 7.7 times
behind them. Virginia Power also includes surge greater at 12.47 kV.
protection improvement in the zone concept. This
program includes the use of more arresters, more and It is not unusual to find that, with load growth,
improved grounding, higher rated insulators and more lower voltage distribution systems become voltage limited
extensive use of fault indicators in Zone 1. before thermal limits are reached. Corrective equipment
(i.e., capacitors and regulators) is then added and
Through the judicious use of additional switching, overbuilding and/or reconductoring of feeders may even
through distribution automation (SCADA) and through be necessary. Finally, additional pole lines are added and
the zone concept, Virginia Power successfully maintains more substations and transmission becomes necessary.
service reliability levels comparable to that of lower
voltage distribution systems and still achieves the economic VOLTAGE COMTERSION
benefit of the higher voltage. Conversion to a higher distribution voltage is
frequently used to provide additional capacity for load
Another consideration is equipment reliability. growth in areas presently served at a lower voltage. The
Because equipment BIL is not in direct proportion to general procedure, as thermal or voltage limitations are
design voltage, the use of higher voltage distribution reached, is to contain the existing load at the lower
requires paying more attention to arrester quality, lead voltages while using the higher voltage for load growth.
length, grounding and surge protection in general. This is accomplished by establishing a higher voltage
source in an area at an opportune time to provide service
LOSSES for new loads and high load growth. Conversion of the
Losses are more expensive today because of their lower voltage facilities is then done on a containment basis
increased energy (fuel) costs. Of interest is the difference as thermal or voltage limitations are reached. There are
in distribution feeder losses as a function of voltage level. occasions, however, when it is the economic choice to
expand the lower voltage system.
Schultz [5] extended the work of Van Wormer [2]
and analyzed the effects of system voltage on primary The initial establishment of a higher distribution
feeder 12R losses for both thermally and voltage limited voltage for an area being served by a lower voltage is
feeders. He concluded that feeder losses per kVA of sometimes very difficult to just+ because of high initial
feeder load are (E2/E,)" times greater at the lower expenditures for the substation, transmission line, etc. In
voltage, where E, is the higher voltage, E, is the lower these cases, the related factors of line congestion,
voltage and n is an exponent. The expected value for n is substation siting and right-of-way for subtransmission lines
2/3 for the thermally limited case and 2 for the voltage must be given detailed consideration.
limited case. The results shown in Figure 3 clearly show
 785
Once established, the decision of what to do with approximately 3 0,Wsquare miles in Virginia and North
the existing lower distribution voltage needs to be Carolina, introduced 34.5 kV as a distribution voltage on
addressed. The practical aspect of utilizing the existing its system in 1%3 and has continually added load at this
equipment is very important. Converting to a higher voltage. Today, it accounts for service to about 85% of
voltage too quickly can result in an excessive amount of the system load. Lower voltage distribution is still utilized,
equipment being taken out of service and remaining idle but generally in low growth areas.
until it can be used in other areas of the system.
The main objectives for using a higher voltage were
To determine if a specific area should be converted to decrease land and right-of-way use and to reduce
or if the existing system should be expanded, the following transmission and distribution system costs. In addition,
factors must be considered the manpower requirements were reduced as a result of
0 Growth Rate. Can the area be served for a having fewer substations and lines. The change to 34.5 kV
reasonable period of time utilizing existing voltage levels, distribution was particularly inviting because of the
equipment and manpower available? extensive amount of existing 34.5 kV subtransmission in
0 Congestion. Can substation capacity be made the metropolitan areas. These were readily converted to
available and new circuits constructed in the time period distribution by the addition of a neutral conductor.
required without undue clutter and objection?
0 Thermal Problems. Can thermal problems of The effectiveness of 34.5 kV has been proven in
overloaded equipment and circuits be best solved by rapidly growing, high load density urban areas, where land
transferring load to other circuits, adding new capacity or is at a premium and it is very difficult to build the
circuits, partial conversion to higher voltage, additional substations and circuits required by lower
reconductoring of existing circuits or some other means? voltages. The majority of Virginia Power’s load growth is
0 Voltage Problems. Can voltage problems be best in the urban conidor, an area extending from the suburbs
solved by capacitors, regulators, load transfers, additional of Washington, D.C., through Richmond to the rapidly
feeders, conversions, or some other means? developing Hampton Roads area of Virginia. Over the
0 Availability of Lower Voltage Equipment. Is the past 10 years, Company growth rate averaged more than
required lower voltage equipment available to supply loads 4 percent per year; in the same time period, load in the
at the lower voltage levels or must it be purchased? urban corridor has grown three times faster than the rest
ContaminatedAreas. What is the highest voltage of the state. The use of 34.5 kV distribution in this type
that can be reliably operated in a contaminated area? of growth situation greatly reduces the need for additional
substations and circuits, and greatly reduces the congestion
The following are Virginia Power’s guidelines with and the need for double circuit lines, as wouId be required
regard to higher voltage distribution: for lower voltage distribution. Thus, 34.5 kV has some
0 In areas where 34.5 kV is available and growth is aesthetic benefits, too.
5% or more, the general rules are to contain the lower
voltage distribution systems and add new load directly to The success of 34.5 kV has also been proven in
the higher voltage system. Existing lower voltage facilities rural areas, where the higher voltage removes voltage drop
are maintained at their present load level by selective limitations on long lines, thus avoiding or postponing new
conversion of circuit portions to the higher voltage. transmission construction. In addition, the cost of a rural
Existing circuit ties are maintained on the low voltage 34.5 kV line is not much more than one at 15 kV.
facilities when possible to prevent the degradation of
service reliability. The first 34.5 kV distribution installations of
0 In areas where 34.5 kV is not available and load appreciable magnitude on the Virginia Power system were
growth is low, there may not be a clear economic choice rural in nature. They generally involved isolated pockets
for the lower voltage system or the 34.5 kV system. The of loads, such as small industrial or commercial loads or
availability of transmission in the area as well as other waterfront subdivisions, that were a considerable distance
factors have to be evaluated before arriving at a decision. from established load centers. The cost savings on the
Each case is decided on its own merit. early projects were very substantial - primarily because of
0 If conversion costs are marginal, 34.5 kV may be the elimination of substation facilities and the use of the
the economic choice because of lower losses and more existing 34.5 kV subtransmission feeders as distribution
capacity for load growth. feeders [6].

VIRGINIA POWER EXPERIENCE These early projects enabled Virginia Power to

Virginia Power, which serves an area of investigate many of the parameters and equipment needs
 786
necessary to make 34.5 kV viable as a distribution voltage substation transformers and a total of 6 - 34.5 kV circuits.
(e.g., the use of 27 kV arresters protecting 125 kV BIL
transformers). It was found too that special attention Figure 5 shows an alternate approach using 12.5 kV
needs to be paid to ferroresonance and electromagnetic distribution. This resembles what Virginia Power did
interference, which are more prevalent on higher voltage before converting the distribution voltage to 34.5 kV.
systems. This latter point was particularly important
where voltage conversions were involved because the lower I

voltage system would be more tolerant of sharp edges or

loose connections than a higher voltage system. Also,
f 290 kV

better work methods are required for gloving at the higher

voltages.
150 MVA
ECONOMIC COMPARISON
The factors cited in the opening quotation [l] that aubatation 4UI
are influenced by voltage level are examined by a snapshot
technique, using a given theoretical area having individual
load clusters in the area similar to actual loads, load mixes
and an overall load density similar to that experienced in I

Northern Virginia. ...... .......

kV
To properly compare the economics of systems i feeders aubatation
using different primary distribution voltages, at the very Figure 5. 12.5 kV Distribution Plan
minimum, it is necessary to include everything from a
common local area transmission voltage level to the
customer service drops [A. A comparison of two different Like the previous plan, the voltage is stepped down
'
plans will be developed, one resembling the Virginia from 230 kV to 34.5 kV at a central point. With 12.5 kV
Power present standard 34.5 kV distribution and the other, distribution, a total of 5 - 34.5 kV/12.5 kV substations are
the older 12.5 kV distribution. It is assumed that 230 kV required, each having 4 - 12.5 kv feeders. For reliability
transmission is available to both plans. purposes, each substation is fed by 2 - 34.5 kV
subtransmission circuits. The Virginia Power standard
Consider an idealized square load area of 22.4 12.5 kV distribution substation consists of 2 - 12/16/20
square miles serving a demand of 112 M W , which is the MVA substation transformers. Fundamental differences
actual load density of Fairfax County, Virginia (SO00 kVA between the two plans are summarized in Table 11.
per square mile).

i Table II. Ideal 22.4 Square Mile Area with 112 MW Demand

Requires -
34.5 kV -
12.5 kV

230 kV/34.5 kV Substation 1 1

34.5 kV/12.5 kV Substations 0 5
Distribution Feeders 6 20
34.5 kV Subtransmission Circuits 0 6

The result of assigning costs to the two plans (viz.,

Figures 4 & 5) is shown in Table 111. The reduced
substation costs with 34.5 kV distribution represents a
sigdkant savings. In addition, it eliminates the need for
34.5 kV subtransmission required in the 12.5 kV
distribution plan. There is also a savings in substation
Figure 4. 34.5 kV Distribution Plan transformer losses (34.5 kVl12.5 kV) because the 12.5 kV
plan involves a double voltage transformation. This
Figure 4 shows one possible layout using 34.5 kV transformer loss savings, along with line loss savings, is
distribution. This employs the basic Virginia Power 34.5 considered an added benefit, rather than enumerated in
kV substation consisting of 2 - 75 MVA 230 kV134.5 kV favor of the 34.5 kV.
 787
0 Subtransmission. What is the existing
Table 111. Cost Savings (34.5 kV over 12.5 kV for the Systems of
Figures 4 and 5) subtransmission voltage? Can the lines be
converted to distribution lines?
112 MW LOAD -
MVA YkVA 34.5kV 12.5kV 0 Other existing electrical facilities. What condition
($100Os)( $1000s) are they in? Are they obsolete by today's
standards?
230kV/34.5 Kv Substation 150 24 3,560 3,560
0 Local restrictions and zoning requirements. What
Residential Subdivisions 35 202 7,085 5,670
Townhouses 32 159 5,090 3,815 is the availability of transmission in the area? Is
Apartment Complexes 20 75 1,505 1,245 underground construction required? What are
Shopping Centers 25 91 2,280 1,965 the constraints on substation and feeder
Substation Exits 520 1,040 construction?
-
Main feeders underground 555 1,010 0 Environmental Considerations. Can multiple
-
Main feeders overhead 1,115 1,670
7,280 circuits be used over available routes? What
34.5/12.5 KV Substations
Subtransmission 1,310 clearances are available for right-of-way? In
Distribution Transformers 6,100 5,700 some cases, the substation may be required to be
Swltchgear 1,020 830 disguised, not merely screened or concealed
--- .__--___-_
from view.
Totals 28,830 35,095
Difference in First Costs 6,265
Relative Costs 1.oo 1.22 SUMMARY
A significant savings can be achieved with higher
voltage distribution in the cost of plant required per MWh
delivered with no sacrifice in reliability.
Although the Virginia Power standard construction
for some time has been 34.5 kV, the ratios in Table IV are Higher voltage distribution also provides a reduction
believed to be representative of the cost ratios between in energy losses, substation and line construction, thermal
34.5 kV and 12.5 kV. problems, operating and maintenance costs, and manpower
requirements.
Table IV. 34.5 kV to 12.5 kV Cost Ratios
Guidelines are suggested for the establishment as
Cost Item underqround overhead
well as the conversion of facilities to a higher distribution
Subdivision, no bulk feeders 1.25 1.13 voltage for a given area.
Subdivision, with bulk feeder 1.00 0.85
Bulk feeders alone 0.55 0.55 The mix of loads, load density, load growth, existing
Commercial Areas 1.05-1.25 1.05-1.25 facilities and environmental pressure are important study
factors which determine the suitability of using a higher
voltage.
The main savings at 34.5 kV are in substation,
subtransmission and bulk feeder costs. In addition to the This paper has been limited to the basic
savings in transmission and distribution (T&D) plant, considerations of higher voltage distribution. The authors
studies further indicate that companies with higher voltage acknowledge that more in-depth treatment is required for
distribution have significantly lower T&D operating and such specialized topics such as overcurrent protection
maintenance costs per dollar of plant. This is due to more (including the use of current-limiting fuses), distribution
effective use of plant, less congestion and, simply, less SCADA and distribution automation development,
plant. insulation coordination, extension of the zone concept,
power quality, etc. Many of these will be addressed in
OTHER SCENARIOS future papers.
The previous example was based on a high load
density area and a load mix that was largely residential
with some commercial. There are many other situations REFERENCES
where the savings will vary. Some of the considerations [l] Electric Utility Engineering Reference Book -
for different scenarios involve variations in the following: Distribution Systems, Westinghouse Electric Corporation,
0 Load. What is the type (residential, commercial, 1959, p. 118
industrial) and mix of load? Also important are [2] F.C. Van Wormer, "Some Aspects of Distribution
the initial and final load magnitudes, growth Load Area Geometry", AIEE Transactions on Power
rates and load density. Apparatus and Systems, October 1%1,pp. 1343-1349
788
[3] W.J. Denton, D.N. Reps, "Distribution-Substationand Bynum E. Smith
Primary-Feeder Planning", AIEE Transactions on Power (SM) received the
Apparatus and Systems, June 1955, pp. 484-499 BEE from North
[4] R.S. Cohen, N.R. Schultz, B.E. Smith, "Switching and Carolina State
Fusing of Underground Distribution Circuits'', Proceedings University. A
of the American Power Conference, Vol. 35, 1973, pp. principal of S & J
1207-1214 Consultants, P.C.,
[5] N.R. Schultz, "Distribution Primary Feeder IzR Richmond, VA, Mr.
Losses", IEEE Transactions on Power Apparatus and Smith has had wide
Systems, Vol. PAS-97, No. 2, March/April 1978, pp. 603- experience in the
609 analysis, planning,
[6] B.E. Smith, "34.5 k'J Distribution at the Virginia engineering and
Electric and Power Company", IEEE Transactions on o p e r a t i o n of
Industry and General Applications, Vol. IGA-7, No. 3, transmission and distribution supply systems during his 39
May/June 1971, pp. 439-442 years with Virginia Electric and Power Company, from
[A J A . Smith, "Economics of Primary Distribution which he is now retired.
Voltages of 4.16 Through 34.5 k V , AIEE Transactions on Mr. Smith is past Chairman of the IEEE/PES
Power Apparatus and Systems, October 1%1,pp. 670-683 Special Technical Conferences, past Chairman of the
[8] E.E. Gil, Houston Lighting and Power, "Economic Insulated Conductors Committee, and a member of the
Evaluation of Alternative Voltages", Power Distribution ICC and the Transformers Committee. In 1989, he
Conference, October 23, 1973 received the "Jack H. Easley Award for Excellence and
[9] D.L. Nickel, "Higher Voltage Distribution Systems", Outstanding Contributions in the Field of Electric Power
Transmission & Distribution Magazine, August, 1974, pp. Distribution" from the T&D Committee. B p u m is a
52-56 registered professional engineer in Virginia.
[lo] B.E. Smith, R.D. Dartnall, "VEPCO Proves Loss
Savings Pays for 35 k V , EL&P Magazine, May 1972, p. 65 Daniel J. Ward
(SM) received the
BI(IGRAPHIES BE from Stevens
Alfred 1. Jones (SM) I n s t i t u t e of
received the BSEE Technology and the
from Virginia MSEE from Union
Polytechnic and College. He was
State University. A with General
principal of S & J Electric for many
Consultants, P.C., years, working on a
Richmond, VA, Mr. wide variety of
1 J o n e s has had distribution systems
extensive experience analysis and
in the engineering equipment application studies, particularly those dealing
and planning of with loss evaluation, capacitor optimization and equipment
power supply - obsolescence. He joined Virginia Power in 1988 and is
systems during his 34 years with Virginia Electric and involved in distribution R&D studies aimed at system
Power Company, from which he is now retired. In reliability improvements.
addition, Mr. Jones has frequently appeared before the Mr. Ward is Chairman of the IEEE PES Working
Virginia State Corporation Commission and various courts Group on Distribution Voltage Quality, Vice Chairman of
as an expert witness and engineering advisor on accident the Distribution Subcommittee and Secretary of the Power
investigations, justification of facilities construction, right Quality Coordinating Committee. Dan is also a member
of entry for construction, necessity and convenience of the Insulated Conductors Committee and a registered
certification for facilities and other subjects. Mr. Jones professional engineer in Virginia.
has had extensive experience in budget preparation,
project analysis and justification, and load forecasting
procedures.
Al is a Senior Member of IEEE and a member of
the Power Engineering Society.