2014018-20-1.0 Testing of Primary Response of Chamera I Unit 3

Valid date
Project (no - customer)
Report No:
2014-11-23
2014018- POSOCO
2014018-20
Page (no pages)
Author
Reviewed
Approved
Shweta Tigga/Niclas Krantz
Sven Granfors
Bengt Johansson
Niclas Krantz
1 (39)
Title
2014018-20-1.0 Testing of Primary Response of Chamera

I Unit 3.
docx
Distribution
Nodal officers NTPC, NHPC, THDC, PPCIL, POSOCO
SUMMARY
This document presents the results of primary response tests, including island operation tests of a
180 MW hydroelectric unit at Chamera I Power Plant, India, conducted from 13th Oct 15th
October 2014.
The report describes the test setup, conditions and results from the measurements made by
Solvina International. Tests show that both FGMO and RGMO work as expected and that
FGMO can be used to control the frequency both in interconnected mode and in islanded mode.
In the latter case power feedback should be set OFF.
The following tests were performed at Chamera-I unit 3:
-
Step response tests with FGMO mode, power feedback ON: The step response tests
performed show a consistent behaviour in accordance with droop, with the expected
value of 60MW/Hz. However, the time constant varies vastly due to actuator
imperfection, i.e mechanical backlash.
Step response tests with FGMO mode, power feedback OFF: The performed step
response tests show longer delay compared to power feedback ON and a varying
response of the generated load magnitude. This is according to expected behaviour due to
mechanical backlash in the actuator system. The tests in this mode show that the
generated load response is only approximately in accordance with the droop setting,
whereas the gate position response is in accordance with the droop, which can be
expected considering the mechanical backlash.
Step response tests with RGMO mode: The tests conducted in RGMO mode show a
consistent behaviour and in line with the grid code. The generated load increases by 5 %
of the actual generated load for 5 min for a drop in frequency.
Small Island test: From the tests it was concluded that the unit is able to control the
frequency in a stable way. Up to 20MW load changes were tested without any problems.
Due to mechanical backlash, continuous but stable oscillations in the generated load were
observed.
Large Island test: The test shows that the power plant responds well to load steps on a
large grid as well. The oscillations on application of the load step are quite damped due to
the presence of inertia of other plants. In this case 30MW load changes were tested
successfully.
Solvina International AB
Gruvgatan 37
Phone +46 031 - 709 63 00
SE-421 30 Vstra Frlunda
SWEDEN
Document template: Solvina International Report.dot. Last change made by VOl 20
Internet www.solvina.com
st
of October 2010
Org no 556782-3280
Location: Gteborg
CONTENTS
1
1.1
1.2
2
2.1
2.2
2.3
3
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.3.1
3.3.2
3.3.3
3.3.4
4
4.1
4.1.1
4.1.2
4.2
4.2.1
4.2.2
4.3
4.3.1
4.3.2
4.4
5
5.1
5.2
5.3
5.3.1
5.3.2
6
6.1
6.2
6.3
7
INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................... 4
Background ....................................................................................................... 4
Tests performed ................................................................................................ 4
DESCRIPTION OF TESTED UNIT ............................................................ 5
Basic unit data .................................................................................................. 5
Governor ........................................................................................................... 5
Actuator system ................................................................................................ 6
DESCRIPTION OF TESTS PERFORMED ................................................ 7
Definitions ........................................................................................................ 7
Method for island operation testing .................................................................. 8
Test procedure .................................................................................................. 9
Test equipment/function/signal check ............................................................... 9
Step response tests ............................................................................................ 9
Small island tests .............................................................................................. 9
Large island test ............................................................................................. 10
TEST RESULTS ........................................................................................... 11
Executive summary ........................................................................................ 11
Primary frequency response ........................................................................... 11
Island operation.............................................................................................. 11
Primary frequency response, step response tests ............................................ 11
Step response tests in FGMO mode ................................................................ 11
Step response tests in RGMO mode ................................................................ 19
Island operation tests Small island .............................................................. 27
Small island generated load 10 %. .............................................................. 28
Small island generated load 75% ................................................................ 31
Island operation tests Large island .............................................................. 33
CONCLUSIONS ........................................................................................... 36
FGMO............................................................................................................. 36
RGMO ............................................................................................................ 36
ISLAND OPERATION .................................................................................. 36
Small Island test: ............................................................................................ 36
Large island test ............................................................................................. 37
RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................................. 38
Normal (grid connected) operation ................................................................ 38
Island operation .............................................................................................. 38
Mechanism ..................................................................................................... 38
REFERENCES ............................................................................................. 39
C:\Temp\2014018 - INT, POSOCO, Testing of Primary Response\2014018-20-1.0 Testing of Primary Response of Chamera I Unit 3.docx
Page 2 of 39
Printed 2014-11-23 14:37
REVISION RECORD
Rev.
No.
1.0
Date
Section
2014-11-23
All
Cause
Draft report submitted
Revised
Distributed to
by
NKr
Nodal officers
Page 3 of 39
Printed 2014-11-23 14:37
INTRODUCTION
1.1
Background
After the large disturbance/outage in northern India in July 2012 it was concluded
that there is a need to verify the primary response of generating units in India. In
March 2013 it was decided that a pilot project to carry out primary frequency
response would be carried out, and this was then described in terms of reference
document (annexure to contract agreement) [1].
Solvina International was awarded this pilot project after a global tender process and
signed a contract agreement with Power Grid PGCIL/POSOCO in August 2014 [1].
The purpose of these tests was to record and verify the following capabilities on the
specified generating units:
Primary Frequency Response in normal operation under Restricted governor

mode (RGMO) and Free governor mode (FGMO).
Primary Response of the machine to a simulated frequency signal

corresponding to islanded conditions in small island (one unit) and large
island (2000MW system load).
The following units are included in the project:
490 MW thermal unit at Dadri NCTPS
210 MW thermal unit at Dadri NCTPS
216 MW gas turbine at Bawana GPS
180 MW hydro unit at Chamera-1 HPS
250 MW hydro unit at Tehri HPS
This report is for the tests at unit 3 (180MW) at Chamera, NHPC.
1.2
Tests performed
The following tests were carried out on Chamera-I unit 3 as per the test program [2]:
13th Oct 2014 Test equipment/function/signal check
Connections completed with signal check and test equipment
function check.
14th Oct 2014
Step Response tests

Step response tests at 10%, 75% and 100% of rated generated load
under FGMO and RGMO mode.
15th Oct 2014
Small Island test: 10% and 75% of rated generated load.

Large Island test: 75% of rated generated load.
Page 4 of 39
Printed 2014-11-23 14:37
DESCRIPTION OF TESTED UNIT

Chamera hydro power station has three units of 180 MW each. The turbines are
Francis type.
2.1
Basic unit data

Table 1: Basic data Chamera unit 3
Turbine
Make
BHEL
Age
1994
Size
180MW
Speed
214.3 rpm
Generator Make
Governor
2.2
BHEL
Age
1994
Size
200MVA
Make
ALSTOM
Age
2011
Type
Digital
Governor
The governor is supplied by Alstom. It has two frequency control modes for normal
operation
1. FGMO (Free Governor Mode of Operation) is a linear power/frequency
control, based on a PI controller with droop. The feedback which is used for
forming the droop response can be taken from either the measured generated
active power (referred to as power feedback ON) or from the corresponding
wicket gate position (referred to as power feedback OFF). This is selected by
a switch in the control room. The normal condition is power feedback ON.
FGMO is also suitable for islanding.
2. RGMO (Restricted Governor Mode of Operation) is a non-linear control
especially adapted for the grid code requirements. Certain conditions of
decreasing grid frequency within the RGMO frequency band will cause the
governor to increase the generated load by 5 % of actual generated load for 5
minutes. If the grid frequency goes above the limit of the RGMO, the
governor will decrease the generated load by an amount calculated from
droop (which is in this case referred to rated generated load).
Page 5 of 39
Printed 2014-11-23 14:37
2.3
Actuator system
The wicket gate of each unit is controlled by a hydraulic actuator cylinder that rotates
a wicket gate ring in proportion to the governor output. The gate sections are linked
to this ring and are rotated by it, as indicated in the figure below. The sensor of the
wicket gate position is placed on the actuator piston rod, which means that it cannot
sense if there is any mechanical play or backlash in the link between the piston and
the ring or between the ring and the gate sections. The gate position in the figures in
this report is the position as measured by this sensor. The actual angle of the gate
sections may differ from this measured position in case of mechanical play or
backlash.
The hydraulic actuator has a pressure reserve that enables rapid movement of the
wicket gate. Repeated large movements could theoretically deplete this reserve faster
than it can be refilled, but no such problems were seen during the tests.
Sensor
ACTUATOR
CYLINDER
Piston rod
Links
Gate
sections
Ring
Figure 1.
Simplified diagram of the wicket gate control mechanism.
The results from the tests indicate that there is in fact a significant play or backlash in
the mechanism. This is the case for both the step response tests and the island
operation tests, see section 5.
Page 6 of 39
Printed 2014-11-23 14:37
DESCRIPTION OF TESTS PERFORMED
3.1
Definitions
Simulated frequency:
This is the signal generated by the test

equipment, SSPS.
It can be used as input to the
frequency/speed controller instead of the
actual speed from the frequency/speed
sensor.
Actual frequency:
Signal from generator frequency/speed

sensor.
Generated load:
Active power of generating unit
[Active power (used in plots) ]

System load:
Total active power consumption in the

grid
Simulated system load
System load simulated in the test

equipment
System base load:
Start value of simulated system load when

starting the island simulation test.
Page 7 of 39
Printed 2014-11-23 14:37
Method for island operation testing

Solvina has developed a test equipment to be used for evaluation of the island
operation capability of power turbines. The equipment is called SolvSim Power
Station, SSPS.
The test method uses the principle of HardWare In the Loop, i.e. a simulator
simulating that a small power system is connected to the speed governor of a turbine.
The speed controller will then act as if it is actually running in island operation. The
active power produced by the turbine is measured and summed up with simulated
contributions to calculate the active power balance of the simulated island.
Gen.
Turbine
Measured Signals
3.2
Grid
Relay Actual Frequency
Governor
Simulated
Frequency
SSPS
Simulated
island
Figure 2.
Hardware-in-the-loop simulation of island operation.
Models of loads as well as other power producers can be included in the model of the
electric island.
Using the active power balance and the total moment of inertia of the island, the
island frequency can be calculated and fed back to the speed controller of the turbine
tested. In this way, the capability of running in island operation can be tested while
the turbine is still synchronized to a strong grid.
SSPS is also used to inject simulated frequency steps for primary response tests.
Page 8 of 39
Printed 2014-11-23 14:37
3.3
Test procedure
3.3.1
Test equipment/function/signal check

Before commencement of actual tests, all the values/scalings of the measured signals
and the installation of the test equipment were checked to ensure correct
measurements and safe operation. The switching between the actual and the
simulated frequency was tested several times to verify a bumpless transition. The
internal safety functions of the SSPS system were also verified.
3.3.2
Step response tests

With commencement of the test sequence, initially the simulated frequency was kept
at 50Hz. The primary response was tested by injecting a frequency step to the
governor frequency input. The frequency step was calculated from the droop settings,
to produce an generated load change of up to approx. 5% of rated load.
The step tests with RGMO/ FGMO engaged in governor were performed at 10%,
75% and 100% of rated generated load with positive and negative steps in frequency.
3.3.3
Small island tests

This test was performed to assess the ability of the turbine to control the frequency as
sole production on an island grid. Simulated load steps of different sizes were
applied (see section 4.3), which resulted in a change in simulated frequency.
For the tests at Chamera, Table 2 below summarizes the grid model with a total
simulated system base load of 18 and 135 MW respectively. The simulated system
load comprises frequency dependent and frequency independent loads.
Table 2
Simulator parameters for small island test.
System
Base load
Rated apparent
power (Sn) of
generator
System load with

linear frequency
characteristic
System load without

frequency
dependence, no inertia
8 MW
10 MW
Small
Island
@10%
18MW
Small
Island
@75%
135 MW
(Inertia 0,70 s)
200 MVA
(Inertia 4,07 s)
60 MW
65 MW
(inertia 0,70 s)
Page 9 of 39
Printed 2014-11-23 14:37
Simulated load steps were added to this base load as shown in section 4.3. After each
load step, the generated load and the simulated frequency were allowed to stabilize
(near to 50 Hz).
The tests were repeated at 10% and 75% generated load with FGMO engaged in
governor. The size of the acceptable system load steps was decided by increasing the
step size gradually until the simulated frequency limits or other limitations were
reached.
3.3.4
Large island test

This test was performed to assess the ability of the turbine to control the frequency
together with other power plants on a local grid. All other power plants were
simulated to act according to power control. Simulated load steps of different sizes
were applied (see section 4.4) to determine the size of the load changes that the
power plant could handle.
The summary of the total simulated base load was 2000 MW. Table 3 below
summarizes the grid model. The simulated load comprises frequency dependent and
independent loads.
Table 3
Simulator parameters for large island test
Total
system
base load
Rated
apparent
power (Sn) of
generator
System load with

linear frequency
characteristic
Large
island:
200 MVA
1000 MW
(inertia 4,07 s)
(Inertia 0,70 s)
2000 MW
System load
without
frequency
dependence,
no inertia
1000 MW
Additional
simulated
power
plants
2000 MVA
(Inertia 4,0 s)
1800 MW
Page 10 of 39
Printed 2014-11-23 14:37
TEST RESULTS
4.1
Executive summary
4.1.1
Primary frequency response

FGMO works as expected in both power feedback ON and power feedback
OFF. The magnitude of the response is as per the droop settings. However, the time
constant varies vastly, mainly because of mechanical backlash in the actuator system.
In power feedback OFF (meaning gate opening feedback), the gate opening
responds according to droop, but due to the mechanical backlash, the load responds
to various extent only. During the tests, both positive and negative frequency steps
up to 0.15 Hz were tested.
RGMO works as intended and in accordance with the Grid Code. Simulated
frequency steps were made to test functionality both within and outside the RGMO
frequency range 49.0-50.05 Hz.
4.1.2
Island operation
The unit is very capable of controlling the frequency both in small island grids and
large island grids. The capacity of handling load changes was tested up to 20MW
(11%) with very moderate frequency variations (1,5Hz). It is believed that up to
30MW should not be a problem in islanding.
Due to the mechanical backlash of the actuator there is a slow spontaneous frequency
oscillation of 0.3-0.4 Hz that however does not at all tend to cause instability.
4.2
Primary frequency response, step response tests
4.2.1
Step response tests in FGMO mode

The step response tests are carried out to investigate how well the plant supports the
power system at frequency changes of the grid. The speed droop is the parameter that
decides the magnitude of response. The response has two characteristics that are
interesting to examine, the magnitude and the time constant (67% value, T67).
For the tests in FGMO mode the droop setting during test was 6%. Both power
feedback ON and power feedback OFF were tested.
Steps were carried out to give up to 5% load change, which is 9MW, and the
frequency step size giving that response would be 0.05*0.06*50 = 0.15 Hz.
Consequently 9MW is the expected response for the steps to be carried out.
Similarly, expressed in MW/Hz, the response is expected to be 60MW/Hz for any
step (9/0.15).
Page 11 of 39
Printed 2014-11-23 14:37
4.2.1.1
Step response in FGMO, generated load 10%, power feedback ON
The step response tests were carried out at 10% generated load with power feedback
ON.
Frequency steps in FGMO, generated load 10 %, power feedback ON part 1
Table 4
Simulated
frequency (Hz)
Initial
generated
load (MW)
Post step
generated
load (MW)
Gen. load
change , P
(MW)
MW
Time
contribution constant
(MW/Hz)
T67 (s)
50 50,1
20
14
-6
60
48
50,1 50
14
20
+6
60
59
20
26
+6
60
25
49,9 50
26
20
-6
60
65
50 49,85
20
29
+9
60
42
49,85 50
30
20
-10
67
47
5049,9
Figure 3.
Frequency steps in FGMO, generated load 10 %, power feedback ON part 1.
Page 12 of 39
Printed 2014-11-23 14:37
Frequency steps in FGMO, generated load 10%, power feedback ON part 2
Table 5.
Simulated
frequency (Hz)
Initial
generated
load (MW)
Post step
generated
load (MW)
Gen. load
change , P
(MW)
MW
Time
(MW/Hz)
T67 (s)
Load setpoint changed from 20 25 MW @ 50 Hz

50 50,15
25
15
-10
67
30
50,1550
15
25
+10
67
45
Figure 4.
Frequency steps in FGMO, generated load 10%, power feedback ON part 2.
It can be concluded that the response is correct and in accordance with the droop
settings at all steps. The spread of time constant values mainly depends on
mechanical backlash of the actuator linkage as explained in section 2.3 and 5.1. It
can be seen from the above figure that the measured gate position opening varies
depending on step sequence whereas the load response is constant, which is expected
as power feedback is ON. The measured gate position is moved further to
compensate for the existing mechanical backlash (see section 5.1). For steps in the
same (decreasing) direction, the effect of mechanical backlash is reduced as the gate
position is already moving in upward direction so a shorter traveling distance is
required by the actuator piston rod.
Page 13 of 39
Printed 2014-11-23 14:37
4.2.1.2
Step response in FGMO, generated load 10%, power feedback OFF
The tests with power feedback OFF were carried at 10% generated load.
Table 6.
Frequency steps in FGMO, generated load 10 %, power feedback OFF
Simulated
frequency
(Hz)
Initial
generated
load
(MW)
Post step Gen. load

generated change ,
load
P (MW)
(MW)
MW
Gate
Time
contribution position constant,
(MW/Hz)
change T67 (s)
(%)
5049,85
22
25
+3
20
57
49,8550
25
23
-2
13
78
50 50,15
23
13
-10
67
27
50,1550
13
14
+1
75
Figure 5.
Frequency steps in FGMO, generated load 10 %, power feedback OFF.
The test shows that the gate opening response is according to the droop setting. The
measured gate position change of 5% is in perfect accordance with the set droop
value of 6%. However, looking at load response to frequency, steps have a varying
magnitude. This is mainly because of the mechanical backlash, where certain gate
opening value causes different values in real gate value and hence generated load.
The generated load change after a step is dependent on the direction of the previous
step. For example, for two steps in the same consecutive directio, the response of the
active load is immediate with frequency steps in increasing direction and the effect of
the mechanical backlash is not there. This is because the movement of the gate
position is already in the downward direction and requires shorter piston traveling
distance.
Page 14 of 39
Printed 2014-11-23 14:37
4.2.1.3
The same procedure as above tests is repeated. The power feedback being ON so the
response is expected to be faster as mentioned in section 4.1.1.
Table 7
Frequency steps in FGMO, generated load 75 %, power feedback ON.
Simulated
frequency (Hz)
Initial
generated
load (MW)
50 49,85 Hz
133
142
+9
60
11
49,85 50 Hz
142
133
-9
60
42
50 50,15 Hz
133
122
-10
67
31
50,1550 Hz
122
133
+10
67
18
Figure 6.
Post step
generated
load (MW)
Gen. load
change , P
(MW)
MW
Time
(MW/Hz)
T67 (s)
The test shows that the response to frequency steps has a consistent magnitude which
is in accordance with the droop setting. The response of the measured gate position
signal is immediate. The response of the active load is immediate for some steps but
delayed by 7-10 seconds for some steps, due to the mechanical backlash as described
in sections 2.3 and 5.1.
Page 15 of 39
Printed 2014-11-23 14:37
4.2.1.4
Tests were performed at 75% generated load with the same conditions as previous
tests mentioned in above sections.
Table 8
Simulated
frequency
(Hz)
Initial
generated
load
(MW)
Post step Gen. load

generated change ,
load
P (MW)
(MW)
MW
Gate
contribution position
(MW/Hz)
change
(%)
Time
constant,
T67 (s)
50 50,15
136
127
-9
60
47
50,15 50
127
133
+9
60
79
Figure 7.
value of 6%.
However, the generated load response magnitude varies. This is mainly because of
the mechanical backlash, where certain measured gate opening value causes different
values in real gate value and hence load.
Page 16 of 39
Printed 2014-11-23 14:37
4.2.1.5
Tests were performed at 100% generated load with the same conditions as for
previous tests.
Table 9
Simulated
frequency (Hz)
Initial
generated
load (MW)
50 49,85
180
189
+9
60
29
49,85 50
189
179
-10
67
26
50 50,15
179
169
-10
67
14
50,1550
169
180
+10
67
30
Figure 8.
Post step
generated
load (MW)
Gen. load
change , P
(MW)
MW
Time
(MW/Hz)
T67 (s)
The test shows that the generated load response to frequency steps has a consistent
magnitude in accordance with the droop setting. The response of the gate position
signal is immediate. The response of the active load is immediate for some steps but
delayed by 7-10 seconds for some steps, due to the mechanical backlash as described
in sections 2.3 and 5.1.
Page 17 of 39
Printed 2014-11-23 14:37
4.2.1.6
Tests were performed at 100% generated load with power feedback OFF and with
same conditions as for the previous tests.
Table 10
Simulated
frequency
(Hz)
Initial
generated
load
(MW)
Post step Gen. load

generated change ,
load
P (MW)
(MW)
MW
Gate
contribution position
(MW/Hz)
change
(%)
Time
constant,
T67 (s)
50 50,15
179
170
-9
60
34
50,1550
170
177
+7
47
38
50 49,85
177
190
+13
87
24
49,85 50
190
186
-4
27
52
Figure 9.
value of 6%. However, looking at load response to frequency, steps have a varying
magnitude. This is mainly because of the mechanical backlash, where certain gate
opening value causes different values in real gate value and hence generated load.
Page 18 of 39
Printed 2014-11-23 14:37
4.2.2
Step response tests in RGMO mode

The purpose of this test is to elaborate the function of RGMO. Frequency steps of
different size and different levels are generated to excite the response of the RGMO.
The response in this mode should be in accordance with the grid code, which states
that, There should not be any reduction in generation in case of improvement in
grid frequency below 50.05 Hz. Whereas for any fall in grid frequency, generation
from the unit should increase by 5 % limited to 105% of the MCR of the unit
subject to machine capability.
In Chamera, the RGMO frequency band is 49-50.05 Hz. The droop setting kept
during these tests in RGMO was 6%. The following sections give the results of the
tests performed.
Page 19 of 39
Printed 2014-11-23 14:37
4.2.2.1
Step response in RGMO, generated load 10%
For the tests at 10% generated load in RGMO mode, it is expected that for any
decrease in frequency below the RGMO upper band limit of 50.05 Hz, the generated
load should increase by 5%.
Table 11
Frequency steps in RGMO mode, generated load 10%, part 1of 2.
Simulated frequency
(Hz)
Initial generated
load (MW)
Post step generated

load (MW)
Generated load
change, P (MW)
50 49,95
24
22
-2
49,95 50
22
23
+1
50 50,10
23
16
-7
50,10 50
16
23
+7
50 50,15
23
13
-10
50,1550
13
23
+10
Figure 10.
Frequency steps in RGMO mode, generated load 10%, part 1of 2
Page 20 of 39
Printed 2014-11-23 14:37
Figure 11: Frequency steps in RGMO, generated load 10 % - part 2 of 2.
From the above figure, it can be seen that for a decrease in frequency, the generated
load increases by 5% of the actual value which is 1MW at that level. With increase in
frequency to 50 Hz, no change in generated load is seen. For a step change in
frequency outside the RGMO frequency band 50.05 Hz, the generated load is
decreased in accordance with the droop setting referred to the rated load. The
behavior is correct and in accordance with the grid code.
Page 21 of 39
Printed 2014-11-23 14:37
4.2.2.2
The same procedure is repeated as per the above tests were performed at 75%
generated load.
Table 12
Frequency steps in RGMO, generated load 75 % - part 1 of 2
Simulated
frequency (Hz)
Initial generated
load (MW)
Post step generated

load (MW)
Generated load
change, P (MW)
50 49,85
133
140 and ramp back to

133 MW after 5 min
+7
49,85 50
133
133
50 49,80
133
141
+8
49,80 50
141
Figure 12.
No initial response. Ramps back to 134

MW after 5 min
load increases by 5% of the actual value which is 7 MW at that level. With increase
in frequency to 50 Hz, no change in generated load is seen. The behavior is in
accordance with the grid code.
Page 22 of 39
Printed 2014-11-23 14:37
Table 13
Frequency steps in RGMO, generated load 75 % Part 2 of 2
Simulated
frequency (Hz)
Initial generated
load (MW)
Post step generated

load (MW)
Generated load
change, P
(MW)
50 50,15
134
124
-10
50,15 50
124
134
+10
50 49,95
135
141
+6
49,9550
141
141
Figure 13.
Frequency steps in RGMO, generated load 75 % Part 2 of 2
The test shows that when the frequency goes above 50.05 Hz, the generated load is
decreased in accordance with the droop setting. When the frequency decreases, the
generated load is increased by 5 % of actual generated load for 5 minutes. This is in
accordance with the grid code.
Page 23 of 39
Printed 2014-11-23 14:37
4.2.2.3
The same procedure is repeated for tests carried out at 100% generated load. The
behavior is expected to be according to grid code.
Table 14
Frequency steps in RGMO, generated load 100 % - part 1 of 2.

Note: generated load changes after 5350 s are caused by water head
oscillations due to starting of another unit.
Simulated frequency
(Hz)
Initial generated
load (MW)
Post step generated

load (MW)
Generated load
change, P
(MW)
50 49,85 Hz
179
188
+9
49,85 50Hz
188
179
-9
50 50,15 Hz
179
168
-11
50,15 50 Hz
168
187
+19 *)
*)Simulated frequency going in and out of RGMO band, so result is not taken
into account.
Figure 14.
Frequency steps in RGMO, generated load 100 % - part 1 of 2. Note:

generated load changes after 5350 s are caused by water head oscillations due
to starting of another unit.
load increases by 5% of the actual generated load which is 9MW at that level. With
increase in frequency to 50 Hz, no change in generated load is seen. The behavior is
in accordance with grid code.
Page 24 of 39
Printed 2014-11-23 14:37
Table 15
Simulated frequency
(Hz)
Initial generated
load (MW)
Post step generated

load (MW)
Generated load
change, P
(MW)
50 50,10 Hz
178
171
-7
50,10 50 Hz
171
187
+16
50 50,2 Hz
178
164
-14
50,20 50 Hz
164
186
+22
50 49,98 Hz
178
178
49,98 50 Hz
178
178
5050,02 Hz
178
178
50,0250 Hz
178
178
5049,99 Hz
178
178
49,9950 Hz
178
178
50 50,04 Hz
178
178
50,0450 Hz
176
186
+10
5050,05 Hz
186
176*
-10
50,0550 Hz
176
186*
*Simulated frequency going in and out of RGMO band
+10
Page 25 of 39
Printed 2014-11-23 14:37
Figure 15.
The test shows that when the frequency goes above 50.05 Hz, the generated load is
decreased in accordance with the droop setting. When the frequency decreases, the
generated load is increased by 5 % of actual generated load.
Page 26 of 39
Printed 2014-11-23 14:37
4.3
Island operation tests Small island

This test shows the ability of the plant to control the frequency when the tested unit
is the only generating source of the system. By simulating system load changes of the
simulated island, the simulated frequency will change. The tested unit will try to
control the simulated frequency. This way, it can be seen if the unit is stable. The
island operation tests were performed with power feedback off.
Droop setting was 6 %.
It was decided that the testing would be made at 10% and 75% load.
For the following figures, the legend is as below:
Blue
Red
Green
Purple
Simulated frequency. This denotes the grid frequency in

real Island operation.
Generated load (= measured active power). This denotes
the mechanical turbine load in real island operation.
Gate position feedback. Please note that this is measured on
the actuator piston, see section 2.3.
Simulated system load. This denotes the actual system load
in real island operation.
Page 27 of 39
Printed 2014-11-23 14:37
4.3.1
Small island generated load 10 %.

The tests were carried out at only 10% of generated load. Simulated system load
steps were applied and the frequency deviations were recorded.
Table 16
Simulated island operation, generated load 10 %, all applied load steps.
Total range of
generated load (MW)
23-40 MW

step (MW)
Max. frequency deviation,

f (Hz)*
+6 MW
-0,8
-6 MW
+0,4
+8 MW
-0,9
-8 MW
+1,0
+10 MW
-1,2
-10 MW
+0,5
+12 MW
-0,8
-12 MW
+0,8
+14 MW
-1,4
-14 MW
+0,7
+16 MW
-1,5
-16 MW
+1,2
+18 MW
-1,2
-18 MW
+1,3
+20 MW
-1,3
-20 MW
+1,1
*Please note: All frequency deviations are measured from the instant the step is
applied.
Page 28 of 39
Printed 2014-11-23 14:37
Figure 16.
Simulated island operation, generated load 10 %, load step 16 MW.
Figure 17.
Page 29 of 39
Printed 2014-11-23 14:37
Figure 18.
The test shows that the unit is able to control the frequency in a stable way. There is
a continuous slow oscillation while in island operation, due to mechanical backlash
as earlier described, causing frequency deviations of around 0.3-0.4 Hz. (The cause
of the oscillation is further described in section 5.) Nevertheless, the unit responds
well to system load steps and the frequency stabilizes quickly. The largest simulated
load steps were 20 MW. It is likely that the unit can handle even larger steps but the
test was halted after 20 MW to avoid overstressing of the turbine.
Page 30 of 39
Printed 2014-11-23 14:37
4.3.2
Small island generated load 75%

The tests were carried out at only 75% of rated generated load. Simulated system
load steps were applied and the frequency deviations were recorded.
Table 17
Simulated island operation, generated load 10 %, all applied load steps.
Total range of
generated load
(MW)
134-155 MW
Simulated system load step

(MW)
Max. frequency deviation, f

(Hz)*
+4 MW
-0,4
-4 MW
+0,6
+8 MW
-0,5
-8 MW
+0,7
+12 MW
-0,5
-12 MW
+1,0
+16 MW
-1,2
-16 MW
+1,0
+20 MW
-1,3
-20 MW
+1,0
Page 31 of 39
Printed 2014-11-23 14:37
Figure 19.
Simulated island operation, generated load 75%, load step 16 MW.
Figure 20.
The test shows that the unit is able to control the frequency in a stable way. There is
a continuous slow oscillation while in island operation, due to mechanical backlash
as earlier described, causing frequency deviations of around 0.3-0.4 Hz.
Nevertheless, the unit responds well to load steps and the frequency stabilizes
quickly. The largest simulated load steps were 20 MW. It is likely that the unit can
handle even larger steps but the test was halted after 20 MW to avoid overstressing
of the turbine.
Page 32 of 39
Printed 2014-11-23 14:37
4.4
Island operation tests Large island

This test was performed to assess the ability of the turbine to control the frequency
together with other power plants on a local grid. The summary of the simulated base
load is described in section 3.3.4. The large island tests were performed at 75% of
rated generated load. Simulated system load steps were applied and the frequency
deviations were recorded. The droop setting during test was 6%.
Table 18
Simulated large island operation, generated load 75 %, all applied steps.
Total range of
generated load
(MW)
134-168 MW

step (MW)
Max. frequency
deviation, f (Hz)*
+12 MW
-0,33
-12 MW
+0,26
+20 MW
-0,32
-20 MW
+0,40
+25 MW
-0,40
-25 MW
+0,56
+30 MW
-0,63
-30 MW
+0,62
Page 33 of 39
Printed 2014-11-23 14:37
Figure 21.
Simulated large island operation, generated load 75 %, load steps 25, 30

MW. Simulated frequency and simulated system load are shown.
Figure 22.
Simulated large island operation, generated load 75 %, load steps 25, 30

MW. Generated load (active power) and gate position along with simulated
frequency are shown.
Page 34 of 39
Printed 2014-11-23 14:37
The test shows that the power plant responds well to load steps on a large grid. The
largest simulated system load steps were 30 MW. It is likely that the unit can
handle even larger steps but the test was halted after 30 MW to avoid overstressing
of the turbine.
From the above figure it can be seen that the load follows the same profile as the
frequency because of the inertia and linear frequency dependency characteristic of
the load model described in section 3.3.4. Together with the inertia of the other
simulated power plants, this has a stabilizing effect of the grid frequency.
Page 35 of 39
Printed 2014-11-23 14:37
CONCLUSIONS
5.1
FGMO
The results for step response tests in FGMO mode show a consistent behavior. Tests
were performed both with power feedback ON and OFF.
Test performed with power feedback ON, show that response of load for a step
change was as per droop, but with a variation in time constant.
Tests with power feedback OFF show that the response with regard to gate opening
value was as per droop. However, a longer delay compared to power feedback ON
was noticed, as well as a varying response of the load magnitude depending on the
character of the step sequence.
The delay in response is attributed to mechanical backlash of the actuator system.
This cause shows in several ways. The measured gate position is seen to increase by
3-4% before the load actually starts to increase. It was also observed that this
phenomenon was not so pronounced when consecutive steps in frequency were
applied in the same direction (either positive or negative), because the backlash at the
second step then is zero.
In the case of power feedback is ON, the control compensates for this mechanical
backlash by further moving the gate position. The tests with power feedback OFF
show a larger time delay for the response of the load. Here the delay is longer as the
governor does not compensate for the existing mechanical backlash as there is no
feedback of generated load (active power).
5.2
RGMO
The grid code states that, There should not be any reduction in generation in case
of improvement in grid frequency below 50.05 Hz. Whereas for any fall in grid
frequency, generation from the unit should increase by 5 % limited to 105% of the
MCR of the unit subject to machine capability.
All tests show that the behavior is in accordance with the grid code. The time delays
caused by mechanical backlash has not been considered here because it is not part of
the requirements, but the same variation in delay is present in RGMO.
5.3
ISLAND OPERATION
5.3.1
Small Island test:

The unit could handle the 20MW system load steps very well, with very moderate
frequency variations. The tested load changes correspond to 11% of rated load, and
that is considered being very good.
Page 36 of 39
Printed 2014-11-23 14:37
5.3.2
Large island test

For the large island test, the highest system load step of 30 MW was applied which
generated a frequency deviation of approx. 0.63 Hz. From Figure 22, it can be seen
that there is a delay in the response of the load but there exists no continuous
oscillations. This delay in the response is again caused by the mechanical backlash.
As the system inertia is higher in a large island, the plant can more easily keep the
frequency in a large island than in a small island. It is most likely that the unit can
handle much bigger system load changes in such a large island, at least double the
tested amount, i.e 60MW.
Page 37 of 39
Printed 2014-11-23 14:37
RECOMMENDATIONS
The results from the tests were analyzed to see what could further be done to
improve the performance. In this section some recommendations are presented.
6.1
Normal (grid connected) operation

FGMO is useful for providing frequency control to the national grid. While
connected to the national grid, the governor should be set to power feedback ON for
best accuracy of generated load and fastest possible response.
RGMO has a consistent response which is according to the settings. No actions are
recommended regarding this function.
6.2
Island operation
FGMO is also useful for frequency control while in island operation, either with one
unit as sole production on the grid or together with other units which may operate in
frequency or load control. The unit responds well to load changes in the grid and can
handle load changes of at least 20 MW as sole production, and more if operating
together with other units. While operating on an island grid, the governor should be
set to power feedback OFF for best stability.
While operating on a small island grid, there may be some slow continuous
oscillations, caused by mechanical backlash in the wicket gate control mechanism.
This oscillation does not impede the ability of the unit to respond to load changes in
the grid. It could however cause some difficulty or delay in the synchronization of
the island grid to another grid.
RGMO should not be used while in island operation.
6.3
Mechanism
It is likely that a reduced mechanical backlash between the gate position sensor and
the angle of the gate sections will provide less continuous oscillations in island
operation, as well as faster load control in grid connected operation.
One way of compensating for the backlash could be to move the gate position
feedback sensor so that it senses the angle of the gate section rather than the position
of the piston that rotates the wicket gate ring.
Page 38 of 39
Printed 2014-11-23 14:37
REFERENCES
[1] Contract Agreement No.: CC-CS/422-CC/CON-2241/3/G8/CA/5002 dated
19/08/2014
[2] Test Program - Chamera : 2014 018-14-1.0
Page 39 of 39
Printed 2014-11-23 14:37

2014018-20-1.0 Testing of Primary Response of Chamera I Unit 3

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

2014018-20-1.0 Testing of Primary Response of Chamera I Unit 3

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Valid date

Project (no - customer)

Page (no pages)

Shweta Tigga/Niclas Krantz

2014018-20-1.0 Testing of Primary Response of Chamera

Nodal officers NTPC, NHPC, THDC, PPCIL, POSOCO

Document template: Solvina International Report.dot. Last change made by VOl 20

Printed 2014-11-23 14:37

Printed 2014-11-23 14:37

Primary Frequency Response in normal operation under Restricted governor

Primary Response of the machine to a simulated frequency signal

The following units are included in the project:

490 MW thermal unit at Dadri NCTPS

210 MW thermal unit at Dadri NCTPS

216 MW gas turbine at Bawana GPS

180 MW hydro unit at Chamera-1 HPS

250 MW hydro unit at Tehri HPS

This report is for the tests at unit 3 (180MW) at Chamera, NHPC.

Step Response tests

15th Oct 2014

Small Island test: 10% and 75% of rated generated load.

Printed 2014-11-23 14:37

DESCRIPTION OF TESTED UNIT

Basic unit data

Printed 2014-11-23 14:37

Simplified diagram of the wicket gate control mechanism.

Printed 2014-11-23 14:37

DESCRIPTION OF TESTS PERFORMED

This is the signal generated by the test

Signal from generator frequency/speed

Active power of generating unit

[Active power (used in plots) ]

Total active power consumption in the

Simulated system load

System load simulated in the test

System base load:

Start value of simulated system load when

Printed 2014-11-23 14:37

Method for island operation testing

Hardware-in-the-loop simulation of island operation.

Printed 2014-11-23 14:37

Test equipment/function/signal check

Step response tests

Small island tests

Simulator parameters for small island test.

System load with

System load without

Printed 2014-11-23 14:37

Large island test

Simulator parameters for large island test

System load with

Printed 2014-11-23 14:37

Primary frequency response

Primary frequency response, step response tests

Step response tests in FGMO mode

Printed 2014-11-23 14:37

Step response in FGMO, generated load 10%, power feedback ON

Frequency steps in FGMO, generated load 10 %, power feedback ON part 1.

Printed 2014-11-23 14:37

Frequency steps in FGMO, generated load 10%, power feedback ON part 2

Load setpoint changed from 20 25 MW @ 50 Hz

Frequency steps in FGMO, generated load 10%, power feedback ON part 2.

Printed 2014-11-23 14:37

Step response in FGMO, generated load 10%, power feedback OFF