50 Hz High-Voltage Transmission Line

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The forum discussion centers on calculating the power absorbed by a 50 Hz high-voltage transmission line under open-circuit conditions. The user, Joe, initially calculated the sending voltage (VS) and receiving current (IS) using the provided parameters from Table C, resulting in a negative power absorbed (PSO). Expert responses clarified that the complex conjugate of the current must be used in the power calculation, which accounts for the sign discrepancy. The correct approach emphasizes that the power absorbed should always yield a positive value, reflecting the actual power loss in the transmission line.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of complex power calculations in electrical engineering
  • Familiarity with transmission line theory and parameters
  • Knowledge of complex conjugates in electrical formulas
  • Ability to interpret and manipulate electrical circuit equations
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the application of complex conjugates in power calculations
  • Learn about the effects of inductance and capacitance in long transmission lines
  • Research methods for calculating power loss in AC circuits
  • Explore the use of simulation tools like Symbolab for electrical engineering problems
USEFUL FOR

Electrical engineers, power system analysts, and students studying transmission line theory will benefit from this discussion, particularly those focused on power loss calculations and complex power analysis.

Joe85
Messages
29
Reaction score
3
Homework Statement
Figure shows a 50 Hz, high-voltage, transmission line. The relationships between the sending and receiving end voltages and currents are given by the complex ABCD equations:
Relevant Equations
.
VS=VR(A1+jA2)+IR(B1+jB2)

IS=VR(C1+jC2)+IR(D1+jD2)

Given the parameter values in TABLE C and an open-circuit received voltage measured as 88.9 kV, calculate the values of VS and IS and hence the power (PSO) absorbed from the supply by the transmission line on open circuit.

VR= 88.9×103

Table C Values:
A1 = 0.8698
A2 = 0.03542
B1 = 47.94Ω
B2 = 180.8Ω
C1 = 0 S
C2 = 0.001349 S
D1 = 0.8698
D2 = 0.03542

Transmission Line is Open Circuit, thus:

IR = 0Hi all,

I seem to be coming up with the correct answer but I'm getting a negative value for PSO. Just wanted to be sure I'm not making an error with my numbers.

IR = 0

VS=VR(A1+jA2)+IR(B1+jB2)
∴ VS=VR(A1+jA2)
∴ VS= 88.9×103(0.8698 +J 0.03542)
VS = 77325.22 + J3148.838 Volts

And:

IS=VR(C1+jC2)+IR(D1+jD2)
∴ IS=VR(C1+jC2)
∴ IS= 88.9×103(0 + J0.001349)
IS= J119.9261 Amps

PSO = Re{VSIS*}
∴ PSO = Re{(77325.22 + J3148.838)(J119.9261)
= J9273312.066 + J2377627.8609
= (-1)*377627.8609 + J9273312.066
= -377627.8609 Watts

I've seen that other answers using a similar method are positive, does this mean i disregard it being a negative value as it's a 'Total Power absorbed' so must a positive quantity?

Any help much appreciated.

Joe.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I note that you didn't incorporate the received voltage in your calculation of the power lost. Are you really supposing that the entire source voltage is being "lost" along the trip to the receiving end?

Secondly, when you calculated the power you indicated that the complex conjugate of the current should be used. I didn't see that happen in the next line.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: jim mcnamara
Joe85 said:
I've seen that other answers using a similar method are positive, does this mean i disregard it being a negative value as it's a 'Total Power absorbed' so must a positive quantity?
No, you can't ignore the sign. Power absorbed implies a positive value absorbed (how you adapt your analysis method to arrive at that value is up to you).

In your analysis you didn't take the complex conjugate of the current when you solved for the (complex) power. I think you'll find that that will account for your sign discrepancy.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Joe85
CONJUGATE(IS)=-J119.9261

PSO = Re{√3(77325.22 + J3148.838)(-J119.9261)
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Joe85
gneill said:
I note that you didn't incorporate the received voltage in your calculation of the power lost. Are you really supposing that the entire source voltage is being "lost" along the trip to the receiving end?

Secondly, when you calculated the power you indicated that the complex conjugate of the current should be used. I didn't see that happen in the next line.
Doh, sorry Gneill. That's what i get for copy and pasting!

PS= Re{VSIS*}

I didn't get as PSO (which i assume will be the result of PR - PS? S & R being Sending and receiving?)

And would PR = Re{VRIS*} ?
 
You're looking for the power absorbed by the transmission line, so you want to work with the voltage dropped across the transmission line. Think of it like a very long resistor. You want the power absorbed by that resistor, so you don't just take the potential at one end.

Not that it's critical here, but note that long transmission lines can have not only resistance, but inductance and capacitance too. So don't be surprised if the open-ended received voltage is actually higher than the transmitted voltage! Think about what can happen with a resonant circuit.
 
gneill said:
You're looking for the power absorbed by the transmission line, so you want to work with the voltage dropped across the transmission line. Think of it like a very long resistor. You want the power absorbed by that resistor, so you don't just take the potential at one end.

Not that it's critical here, but note that long transmission lines can have not only resistance, but inductance and capacitance too. So don't be surprised if the open-ended received voltage is actually higher than the transmitted voltage! Think about what can happen with a resonant circuit.

There’s so little in the learning materials to go on here.

isn’t A1+jA2 the reverse voltage gain. So

(A1+jA2)2/ ( VS2/P) would equal the power absorbed?
 
Joe85 said:
isn’t A1+jA2 the reverse voltage gain. So

(A1+jA2)2/ ( VS2/P) would equal the power absorbed?
What's P in that equation?
 
Sorry it was PS from post 5. Or 378KW.
 
  • #10
Let's take a look at the units in your equation. The A's are unitless, Vs would be volts and P is VA. So:

##\frac{1^2}{\frac{V^2}{V A}} = \frac{A}{V} = \frac{1}{\Omega}##

That's not a power.

Consider this. The voltage change across the transmission line is:

##\Delta V = V_S - V_R##

and in this case since ##I_R = 0## you can write ##V_S = A V_R## where ##A = A_1 + j A_2##. Then:

##\Delta V = \left( A - 1 \right) V_r##

The complex power lost becomes:

##p = \Delta V I_s^* = \left( A - 1 \right) V_r I_s^*##
 
  • #11
Thanks gneill, I'm eternally grateful thus far, but why can't we just carry out the subtraction for VS-VR since we know what both VS and VR are? And then insert this into the power absorbed equation?
 
  • #12
Joe85 said:
Thanks gneill, I'm eternally grateful thus far, but why can't we just carry out the subtraction for VS-VR since we knoiw what both VS and VR are? And then insert this into the power absorbed equation?
You certainly can! That's how I originally did it myself when I worked your problem through. I just thought that your idea of using the A term was interesting and sought to show how it might work.

The thing you were missing in your original attempt was that you used the entire sending voltage in your power loss calculation. Not all of the sending voltage is dropped on the transmission line. It's the end to end ##\Delta V## across the line that represents the power lost.
 
  • #13
So having quickly whacked the figures into Symbolab Calc on my phone, the PSO = 377627.86 Watts or 378KW. So the answer was correct but the method wrong, hence what you were saying about the entire source being lost?
 
  • #14
Joe85 said:
So having quickly whacked the figures into Symbolab Calc on my phone, the PSO = 377627.86 Watts or 378KW. So the answer was correct but the method wrong, hence what you were saying about the entire source being lost?
Yup.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Joe85
  • #15
gneill said:
Yup.
Thank you gneill. You’ve been a real gent.
 
  • #16
I'm happy that I could help!
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Joe85

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
Replies
6
Views
6K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
13K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
6K