Lack of Reactive Current Load Sharing, CCC
Lack of Reactive Current Load Sharing, CCC
(OP)
I am looking for a possible answer to an outcome i experienced with a CCC system. Utilizing 2 1750kw, 4160vac Gensets,in the system. If i had lack of CCC control, or lack of reactive current load sharing could a possible outcome be overheating of the Excitation field leading to catastrophic failure of these components (exciter rotor, stator that exploded due to over heating). The closest forum i have read on this was a answer of-
A lack of reactive current load sharing would mean that paralleled generators would 'fight' each other to supply the required reactive load. Thr results of this can be quite scarry, ammeters swing around and genereal geneset load instability ensues as each genset ships and then rejects load.
A lack of reactive current load sharing would mean that paralleled generators would 'fight' each other to supply the required reactive load. Thr results of this can be quite scarry, ammeters swing around and genereal geneset load instability ensues as each genset ships and then rejects load.






RE: Lack of Reactive Current Load Sharing, CCC
When generators are operated in parallel with similar generators or with a utility the voltage setting or excitation level determines the reactive current.
If generators are in Voltage control mode and one or both have inappropriate Voltage settings the generator with the higher voltage will supply a disproportionate amount of the reactive current.
I suspect that you may have had a failing component that caused the problem. A couple of shorted rotating diodes will overheat the exciter until something fails. A loose and possibly arcing connection in the quadrature CT circuit (CCC) could have interesting results.
CCC: Control Center Complex, Charge Current Controller, Crisis Coordination Center, Central Control Complex, Capacity Coordination Cell, Ah, there it is, Cross Current Compensator.
Bill
--------------------
"Why not the best?"
Jimmy Carter
RE: Lack of Reactive Current Load Sharing, CCC
RE: Lack of Reactive Current Load Sharing, CCC
Bill
--------------------
"Why not the best?"
Jimmy Carter
RE: Lack of Reactive Current Load Sharing, CCC
RE: Lack of Reactive Current Load Sharing, CCC
Bill
--------------------
"Why not the best?"
Jimmy Carter
RE: Lack of Reactive Current Load Sharing, CCC
If you have cooked the rotor did you have any significant imbalance on the load? Bigger machines almost always have a negative phase sequence relay to prevent damage due to negative sequence heating of the rotor forging; little machines hope for the best and usually get away with it because they are not so critically loaded.
----------------------------------
If we learn from our mistakes I'm getting a great education!
RE: Lack of Reactive Current Load Sharing, CCC
Bill
--------------------
"Why not the best?"
Jimmy Carter
RE: Lack of Reactive Current Load Sharing, CCC
I've seen this a couple of times before under the same circumstances. I am no longer associated with CAT or it's dealers, so what I give you here is my opinion based on my experience.
When the VR6 was retofitted in, the old droop CT was left in, correct? How was the droop adjusted on the new AVR? Was the old droop CT properly landed on the 1 amp droop CT input of the AVR? Even when hooked up in a cross current circuit, the unit needs some voltage droop, usually about 2-3%. Now for the bad news, the VR3 equipped units and the VR6 equipped unit will likely not work worth a darn in cross current compensation. You may get them to hang together for awhile, but the slightest change in the voltage adjust setting or the droop pot setting will cause the units to not share VAR's properly, usually resulting in one of the units going full field and the other going to little or no excitation output.
I got burned enough times retrofitting units that had to operate in islanded paralleled applications to where if I had to change to the newer AVR on a unit I would do everything I could to talk the customer into changing them all, and to install correctly sized droop CT's with 5 amp secondaries.
The main issues is that these are two different AVR's, and their droop characteristics are NOT the same, and I've tried pretty much everything to make them work reliably with not much luck, usually what ends up happening is that the two AVR's are effectively operating in droop and most of the time they will hang togethere for part of the load range.
As to your failure, if the exciter stator fried, it was likely on the unit that was supplying all the VAR's. As noted above, the AVR's should have some form of OEL. The VR3, depending on part number, uses fuses to protect itself, need to make sure correct fuses where installed. Refernece CAT publication SENR3905 for VR3's on MV tailends.
On the VR6, it has a fixed OEL, at about 125 VDC after 10 seconds it is supposed to shut off the AVR. This assumes the PM is not falling on it's rear end, unfortunately some CAT PM's had trouble maintaining output under high excitation level conditions. So check your no load and full load PM output voltage when you get it back together, make sure it's above 90 VAC and doesn't change much between no load and full load. IF the PM output is falling off, the excitation can go to full and never get to the point of the OEL shuting it off, after a few minutes the exciter gets pretty hot and sometimes fails. Worst case I've seen is that the main rotor also can fail on an older machine.
Also note above was issue of a loss of excitation relay, is one installed on each generator and are they properly installed?
On the machine with the fried exciter, make sure you do a fairly complete set of tests before putting it back into service, I would recommend doing a pole drop test on the rotor to make sure it's ok. Also replace the diodes and surge suppressor, even if they test good they have been stressed so toss them. Does this unit have the individual 6 diodes, three positive and three negative? Or does it have the positive and negative modular diodes assemblies?
When you get it back on line record the no load and full load field volts and amps on each unit, even with different AVR's they should be pretty close for given condition. If not something is wrong.
If you want to stay with a cross current compensation system, I would strongly recommend you replace both AVR's and droop CT's, get a resistive/reactive laod bank to properly set them up, and document all the information to use as reference at a later date.
The CAT VR6 is basically a Basler AVC63-12 (only offered in a 240 VAC sensing version thru CAT), and I find the Basler manual to be better than the CAT manual. The Basler instructions for a cross current circuit works quite well on VR6 equipped units of the same size and rating.
Personally I'm not a fan of cross current compensation systems on these generators, have had much better long term operation with an active VAR sharing control like the Woodward DSLC or EGCP.
Hope that helps.