Georgian Scientists/ 4(02), 2022 84 Georgian Scientists Vol. 4 Issue 2, 2022 https://doi.org/10.52340/gs.2022.04.02.06 35/6 . . , , . . 35/6 6 . : , . 6 . 6/0.38 . 0.38 , 6 U . U 35/6 . . “NEPLAN”. : , , , , . Georgian Scientists/ 4(02), 2022 85 . , [5]. , , , . , , [4]. , , , , [6]. , , , . , . . , , [7] . . 35/6 6 . 6/0.38 , . 6 . Georgian Scientists/ 4(02), 2022 86 35/6 6 , 6 . . 6 . .1- 35/6 6 , .2- . .2- , -12 , 1 . 1 -12 . „NEPLAN“- , ÷ = 6 5,88 = 0,12 ÷ = 6 5,39 = 0,61 . : . , 6 , , -12 , , 0,95 , 1 1,05 . , = 0,39 = 0,36 . .1- , 1 -12 . , (TM400 6) . TM400 6 [2]: P . = 5,5 U . % = 4,5 % Georgian Scientists/ 4(02), 2022 87 .1. 6 Georgian Scientists/ 4(02), 2022 88 .2. Georgian Scientists/ 4(02), 2022 89 % . % = (5,5 400)100 = 1,37% , % , % = U . % = 4,5%. , [3]: % = % cos + % sin S S = (1,13 + 2,47)0,67 = 2,4% , 1 -12 (TM400 6) , 2,4%. , -12 , , 0,95 , 1 1,05 . -12 , , 1 . % = % % = 95 + 2,4 = 97,4% = 5,84 % = % % = 105 + 2,4 = 107,4% = 6,44 6 (12) (1) , = 6 , = 6 6 , . , , 6 1 -12 . = ÷ = 5,84 + 0,61 = 6,45 = ÷ = 6,44 + 0,12 = 6,56 , 6 , , 6 , , 1, -12 , . [1]: Georgian Scientists/ 4(02), 2022 90 = + 2 = 6,45 + 6,56 2 = 6,5 , , = 6,5 , , 35 6 TMH4000 35 , ±6 × 1,5% . , 6 6,5 , 6,5 = 1,08 . , TMH4000 35 , , 6,5 . -5 6,45 . , , .3- . , 35 6 , 6 , , . 1 -12 „NEPLAN“- ÷ = 6 5,95 = 0,05 ÷ = 6 5,77 = 0,23 , -12 , , 0,98 , 1 1,05 . , = 0,39 = 0,37 . , 1 -12 TM400 6 , . % = % cos + % sin S S = (1,13 + 2,47)0,29 = 1,04% Georgian Scientists/ 4(02), 2022 91 -12 , Georgian Scientists/ 4(02), 2022 92 , 1 . % = % % = 98 + 1,04 = 99,04% = 5,94 % = % % = 105 + 1,04 = 106,04% = 6,36 , , 6 1 -12 . = ÷ = 5,94 + 0,23 = 6,17 = ÷ = 6,36 + 0,05 = 6,41 , , 6 . = + 2 = 6,17 + 6,41 2 = 6,29 , 35 6 TMH4000 35, ±6 × 1,5%. , TMH4000 35, , 6,29 . - 3 6,27 . , 35/6 6 (6.27 ÷ 6.45 ). U = 6.27 U = 6.45 , 6 , 0.38 , „NEPLAN”. .1; .2; .3; .4) Georgian Scientists/ 4(02), 2022 93 1 6 ° % -0 6.45 0 107.5 -1 6.37 -0.29 106.16 -2 6.31 -0.45 105.23 -3 6.29 -0.43 104.86 -4 6.28 -0.42 104.65 -5 6.277 -0.418 104.62 -6 6.272 -0.414 104.54 -7 6.047 -0.965 100.79 -8 6.039 -0.958 100.65 -9 6.027 -0.976 100.46 -10 6.026 -0.975 100.43 -11 5.983 -1.002 99.72 -12 5.927 -0.954 98.78 -13 5.974 -0.994 99.57 -14 5.979 -0.998 99.65 2 0.38 ( ) / % - ( ) TM400/6( 1) 6.37 0.395 103.88 0 3.56 + 16.17 TM400/6( 3) 6.29 0.389 102.52 0 3.6 + 16.14 TM400/6( 12) 5.927 0.366 96.33 0 3.79 + 16.03 TM100/6( 5) 6.277 0.388 102.18 0 1.26 + 4.34 TM160/6( 6) 6.272 0.387 101.9 0 1.8 + 7.1 TM160/6( 8) 6.039 0.372 97.91 0 1.87 + 7.05 TM160/6( 10) 6.026 0.371 97.69 0 1.88 + 7.05 TM160/6( 13) 5.974 0.368 96.79 0 1.89 + 7.04 TM160/6( 14) 5.979 0.369 96.88 0 1.89 + 7.04 Georgian Scientists/ 4(02), 2022 94 3 6 ° % -0 6.27 0 104.5 -1 6.255 -0.12 104.25 -2 6.233 -0.17 103.88 -3 6.223 -0.16 103.72 -4 6.218 -0.16 103.64 -5 6.217 -0.158 103.63 -6 6.215 -0.156 103.59 -7 6.126 -0.358 102.1 -8 6.123 -0.355 102.04 -9 6.118 -0.361 101.97 -10 6.117 -0.360 101.96 -11 6.1 -0.367 101.67 -12 6.078 -0.344 101.3 -13 6.097 -0.363 101.61 -14 6.099 -0.365 101.65 4 0.38 ( ) / % - ( ) TM400/6( 1) 6.255 0.392 103.21 0 1.58 + 10.28 TM400/6( 3) 6.223 0.390 102.67 0 1.57 + 10.21 TM400/6( 12) 6.078 0.381 100.23 0 1.55 + 9.86 TM100/6( 5) 6.217 0.390 102.51 0 0.55 + 3.04 TM160/6( 6) 6.215 0.389 102.38 0 0.74 + 4.62 TM160/6( 8) 6.123 0.383 100.83 0 0.73 + 4.51 TM160/6( 10) 6.117 0.382 100.73 0 0.73 + 4.51 TM160/6( 13) 6.097 0.381 100.4 0 0.726 + 4.49 TM160/6( 14) 6.099 0.381 100.4 0 0.727 + 4.49 , , 35/6 6 Georgian Scientists/ 4(02), 2022 95 , . . , , . , . 6 , , . 6 , = 6 6 , . 6 . , , . . 1. . ., . : — : . 2019. —296 . 2. . ., . . : - 4- ., . – .: , 2014 – 648 . 3. . ., . . , ., , 1960, 368 . Georgian Scientists/ 4(02), 2022 96 4. . ., . ., . ., . . , .2. . . . . . ., , 1971, 440 . 5. . ., . . , ., , 1968. 152 . 6. William H. Kersting. Distribution System Modeling and Analysis, Third edition. CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group, New York, 2012. 7. Turan Gonen. Electric Power Distribution Engineering, Third edition. CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group, New York, 2014. Selecting the optimal working value of the voltage at 6kv busbar of the 35/6kv step down dead end substation during centralized voltage regulation Lasha matchavariani Akaki Tsereteli State University. Department of Energetics and Telecommunications. PhD student of PhD program, Engineering Technologies and Systems. Summary. The paper presents procedure for selecting the optimal working value of voltage at 6kv busbar of the 35/6kv step down dead end substation of Kutaisi. In particular: the configuration, distribution and load of the largest feeder coming out of the substation are studied. As a result the electrically nearest and farthest nodes from 6kv busbar of substation are determined and voltage losses up to the above nodes in limit demands are calculated. The percentage of voltage losses is also determined in 6 / 0.38 kV transformers installed in electrically nearest and farthest nodes. In the maximum and minimum load modes, a preliminary assumption is obtained in the 0.38kv characteristic nodes, on the basis of which the optimal value of the working voltage U at 6kv busbar of substation is established. The rms value of nodal voltages are determined Via U . Based on the obtained nodal voltages, the validity of the methodology presented in the paper is confirmed. The engineering computer program "NEPLAN" is used to calculate the limit modes of the network. Keywords: voltage, centralized regulation, node, limit mode, optimal.