INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS

Log In

Come Join Us!

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips Forums!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!

*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.

Jobs

Generation on radial transmission lines

Generation on radial transmission lines

(OP)
Is there anything that I need to consider in terms of protective relaying when protecting radial lines with very large amounts of generation on the other side, ie in this case a 1,500MW+ plant on a 30 mile radial 345kv? I'm guessing I could have step distance under-reach for faults out on the line, but remain unsure.

RE: Generation on radial transmission lines

Depending on circuit capacity: generation run-back to respect thermal limits? Or, during planned circuit outages, if the combined path of the remaining circuits is skinny enough, generation rejection for instability?

CR

"As iron sharpens iron, so one person sharpens another." [Proverbs 27:17, NIV]

RE: Generation on radial transmission lines

(OP)
But nothing where the typical MHO elements under reach? And nothing special in the realm of out-of-step blocking?

RE: Generation on radial transmission lines

I don't have the expertise to speak to those concerns, sorry.

CR

"As iron sharpens iron, so one person sharpens another." [Proverbs 27:17, NIV]

RE: Generation on radial transmission lines

(OP)
No sweat. But I did find your prior posts helpful, so nothing wasted :)

RE: Generation on radial transmission lines

Be careful with reclosing.

RE: Generation on radial transmission lines

(OP)
I'm leaning toward not reclosing since its radial, but if I have two parellel lines, I'm all ears.

RE: Generation on radial transmission lines

My utility's historic practice has been to not provide any reclosing on radial generation circuits, although depending on switchyard configuration at the generation end, that could be changing, particularly where the units and the circuits don't share breakers...but where they do, the N minus one issues that could arise, even for such short duration as would be required to manually return the circuits in question to service, might prove problematic for our IESO / balancing authority due to system security considerations.

CR

"As iron sharpens iron, so one person sharpens another." [Proverbs 27:17, NIV]

RE: Generation on radial transmission lines

(OP)
I could see reclosing to re-power station service transformers once the generator trips during the open period.

RE: Generation on radial transmission lines

Might or might not be necessary, depending on station topology / connectivity; a 1.5 GW plant's units could reasonably expected to have a unit's station service fed from the isolated phase bus with the unit in service, these [often, in my experience] being provided with auto-transfer to what we called reserve station service supply upon unit trip. As such schemes can have profound effects on unit survivability and safety, the end [as-constructed] disposition of these elements often hinges upon the type of generation under consideration, i.e., whether fossil or nuclear.

CR

"As iron sharpens iron, so one person sharpens another." [Proverbs 27:17, NIV]

RE: Generation on radial transmission lines

(OP)
This is fossil, but what do you know about unit surviavability? My understanding is that once the line opens and no outlet exists for the generator's power, it trips immediately and station service comes from outside.

RE: Generation on radial transmission lines

Various scenarios come to mind...unit trips and line trips / auto-reclosures are generally very different animals...

Picture a breaker-and-a-half type switchyard in use for a three unit 1500 MW fossil station and three export circuits, with one 500 MW unit and one export circuit per diameter. Reserve station service transformers are connected to the "upper" and "lower" busses. A 1.5 breaker scheme is also used at the remote end of the export circuits.

Say station is at full production and one export circuit sustains an automatic trip with reclosure, due to, say, a lightning strike; provided the remaining export paths can absorb the full station output in the short term without developing excessive load angle and therefore instability, there is no reason to expect them not to survive. If the generating units are equipped with quick-acting AVRs or TSECs [ transient stability excitation controllers ] there is no reason not to expect them to survive the event as well. Based on the normal time delays applied to the typical reclosure schemes I'm familiar with, the circuit is placed on potential via its under voltage plus time breaker at the remote terminal, the companion remote breaker also recloses under synchro-check supervision, then the local breakers also reclose under synchro-check supervision. Mint!

Since circuit restoration has occurred rapidly enough, no generation runback occurs, as the time delay setting in the run-back scheme has not elapsed before everything is back to normal, therefore no thermal limits have been encroached...

Planned outages to one circuit would alter this scenario considerably...and unit trips are another story entirely.

Hope I'm not being too rudimentary...

CR

"As iron sharpens iron, so one person sharpens another." [Proverbs 27:17, NIV]

RE: Generation on radial transmission lines

(OP)
No, just fine, and well explained :) Run-back would be reducing the generator's output?

RE: Generation on radial transmission lines

That's correct; since the highest thermal limits are [again, in my experience] 5- or 15-minute LTRs [ limited time ratings ], and circuit reclosure schemes commonly complete their full operating process/event evolution within 30 seconds or less, a one minute delay before generator governor run-back begins is generally considered acceptable. The unloading rate is set to some compromise ramp that will meet both the thermal limit criteria and unit stability; only where absolutely necessary are pulverizer or burner trips employed to hasten the runback rate, as these greatly increase the risk of the entire boiler tripping off.

Depending on if the 1500 MW of generation is on an isolated grid or even if it's part of an interconnection, the recognized effects of large unit trips may be such that they are the MSSC [ most severe single contingency ] for that grid, and load/generation rejection schemes may be required.

At the risk of being obvious, nuclear units commonly have much more stringent station service power supply requirements than do fossil units..."cross-pollinating" reserve station service supplies and unit outputs is also practiced, meaning that unit outputs and their reserve station service supplies are [where possible] not tied to a common circuit breaker, since if said breaker goes into breaker fail both the unit and its reserve supply would go down at the same time.

RE: Generation on radial transmission lines

(OP)
Makes sense and much appreciated.

RE: Generation on radial transmission lines

My pleasure.

CR

"As iron sharpens iron, so one person sharpens another." [Proverbs 27:17, NIV]

RE: Generation on radial transmission lines

...anybody have input for the question MBrooke posed in the OP?

CR

"As iron sharpens iron, so one person sharpens another." [Proverbs 27:17, NIV]

RE: Generation on radial transmission lines

Hey MBrooke, here's another real-life scenario I used to encounter...

In the eight-unit 300 MW per unit thermal plant where I worked many years ago, the 230 kV switchyard used a ring bus configuration that only ran closed when there were less than four units on line; any greater number than that necessitated ring bus splits to respect fault current infeed limits and breaker interrupting capability.

The actual layout looked like this, with Xs representing breakers:

- X - G1 - X - Line 1 - X - G2 - X - G3 - X - Line 2 - X - G4 - X - G5 < truncated > - X - Line 4 - X - G8 -
| |
| |
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

As a consequence it sometimes happened that a unit [or two] might be feeding its/their output through a single circuit breaker, such that for breaker operations associated with a trip of that circuit a generating unit would lose an export path...but since much of the unit's station service load was supplied from its own isolated phase bus, and the unit was external to the actual faulted zone, the unit would remain running but carrying only some station service load. In such situations the unit governors would limit the turbine speed rise to < 1% . . . but the unit operators would be out of their chairs toot sweet, quickly reducing the boiler's firing rate and making every effort to have the unit survive the event.

If the line contingency was due to lightning, that circuit was usually switched back into service manually within five minutes; if not, the IESO would lose little time making changes to the bus split configuration to provide a fresh export path for the surviving units. The upshot was that if the unit survived it was generally re-synchronized fairly rapidly and loaded back up...which was important, as failure to promptly re-load the unit unit could and usually would lead to steam turbine differential expansion problems.

CR

"As iron sharpens iron, so one person sharpens another." [Proverbs 27:17, NIV]

RE: Generation on radial transmission lines

(OP)
@Crshears: Thanks and big Thanks :)

So basically with station service load placed on the generator it can continue spinning even after load is dropped, and then that generator can be re-synchronized once an export path is found?

RE: Generation on radial transmission lines

(OP)
And I tried to give your new reply another star, but the thread just took it from your first one. :/

RE: Generation on radial transmission lines

Thanks, MBrooke; I'll take the intent for the deed. smile

To answer your question, yes, more or less; if no boiler, turbine, generator or main output transformer trip occurs, and provided the other technical challenges and considerations as met can be caught in time, there is no underlying reason why a unit cannot undergo grid separation without surviving. In the instance quoted, the unit is not actually ever completely unloaded, as it is still carrying its own station services.

Even during unit trips, if the major electrically driven elements such as boiler feed pumps, pulverizers, etc. use maintained position breakers they are frequently able to hang in through the hiccup of station service transfer to the reserve supply and will continue operating.

CR

"As iron sharpens iron, so one person sharpens another." [Proverbs 27:17, NIV]

RE: Generation on radial transmission lines

(OP)
Any idea if a minimum load needs to exists on the station service transformer to keep that turbine stable?

RE: Generation on radial transmission lines

I could not possibly say; that would vary from station to station, as there are so many potential factors involved, and it would take someone with more recent operating experience to give an informed answer.

The only thing I believe would apply is that the smaller the percentage of maximum continuous rating the load is the shorter the length of time the unit would survive before tripping it off manually would become necessary to avoid turbine differential expansion and internal rubbing; perhaps some of the mechanical engineers on these fora might have some input on this...

CR

"As iron sharpens iron, so one person sharpens another." [Proverbs 27:17, NIV]

Red Flag This Post

Please let us know here why this post is inappropriate. Reasons such as off-topic, duplicates, flames, illegal, vulgar, or students posting their homework.

Red Flag Submitted

Thank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts.
The Eng-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.

Reply To This Thread

Posting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members!


Resources


Close Box

Join Eng-Tips® Today!

Join your peers on the Internet's largest technical engineering professional community.
It's easy to join and it's free.

Here's Why Members Love Eng-Tips Forums:

Register now while it's still free!

Already a member? Close this window and log in.

Join Us             Close