Category: Blog

Home  ›  Blog  ›  Page 15

AQ: Load Break Switch VS Circuit Breaker

There are two important different parameters as far as the disconnection/connection of Electrical utilities is concerned.
– Breaking capacity.
– Making Capacity.

Making capacity is more higher since it is considering the initial starting current, inrush and faults that might occur at switching on moment.

Accordingly, the Circuit breakers have both while the Isolator or LBS has only breaking capacity. Isolator therefore used to isolate/disconnect/break load. To be switched on only under no load.

Basically and LBS is only designed to make and break load currents. It can be closed onto a fault (has a making rating) and cannot break a fault current. A CB is designed to make and break fault currents and off course load currents. Need to be careful with switching long cables and long lines with LBS, due to its limitation with switching cable/line charging (highly capacitive) currents. Similar precaution with needed with switching reactive loads like large transformers. Normally a CB is recommended for the 2 latter cases. Check the manufacturer test specs.

In simple way the Load Break Switch used to cut off healthy circuits or to break / disconnect the load. As a precaution, normally the LBS / Isolator are to be switched on under no load, the connected load to be utilized after switching on the Isolator. This why it has no making capacity. Circuit Breakers are intended to operate under unnormal conditions in order to clear the fault & to isolate the defective circuits protecting its associated electrical equipment, therefore breaking and making capacities are considered as the most important criteria as far Circuit breaker are concerned.

The making current is not an RMS value it is the peak value ie. Impk = 2.5Irms. The peak value of 2.5 times RMS is the DC offset at point when the LBS closes on the fault and is taken as the worst case X/R ratio of the source (X/R of about 20). This peak decays to RMS value Ith (thermal withstand current) dependent on the X/R delay constant. The decay rate is exponential with time. There is a misconception that making is 2.5times breaking current, but making is normally quoted as a peak and breaking as RMS. The breaking current in a CB is an RMS value. Breaking fault current is far more difficult that making especially when the contacts open when current is not at zero crossing point on the sine wave. For HV systems 132KV and above, the restrike and TRV starts to become a major consideration in CB selection, especially for long cables and lines.

AQ: Parallel operation of autotransformers

Q:
We have 2 no 160MVA 220/132/11 kV transformers with short circuit impedance 46.06 ohm, and one 160MVA transformer, 220/132/11 kV with % impedance 15.02%. Can we parallel these three transformers?

A:
Indeed, the vector group is an important (mandatory) consideration when connecting transformers in parallel. And also important if a transformer is going to close a loop in either the HV or LV sides.

But it is perfectly OK to parallel transformers with different impedances. All it is going to happen is an uneven distribution of the power flow, among the parallel transformers. The unit with the lowest impedance would carry a larger share of the load.

Regarding “same ratio”: are you talking about the transformer ratio, such as 138/230 kV? Or are you talking about tap positions? Within certain constraints, it is possible to parallel transformers with different ratios (let’s think, for a second, of identical transformers at different tap positions). This is not recommended, though, because of reactive power circulation.

So, without disagreeing with the factors that you have listed, I would like to re-order, if you will, the conditions you have described:
1) Mandatory: making sure that the vector group and nominal voltages of transformers being considered for parallel operation are indeed adequate and compatible with the intended parallel operation
2) Desirable: ability to operate parallel transformers at the same tap positions or as close as possible, to minimize reactive current circulation
3) Almost indifferent: identical impedances on the parallel transformers simplify things a bit, but this is not a “show stopper” for parallel operation of these transformers. Actually, it is more realistic to expect some differences in impedances, even for otherwise “identical” transformers (same manufacturer, same nameplate ratings, etc.)

For the “Y-Y- Delta” transformers operated in parallel, there exist two kinds of the circulating currents between the tanks and between the banks of the delta side. As the circulating current between the tanks is 90 degree out of phase of the load current, it is estimated by decomposing the line current into the component 90 degree out of phase of the load current. The circulating current between the banks in the delta side is estimated from the delta winding current and the line currents.

The estimated circulating current depends on the power factor of the system even with the same tank currents. This characteristic is derived from the view point of the active and reactive power. Also, it needs the voltage as well as the tank and the load currents.

AQ: Parallel connection transformers

AQ: What happen if we put a magnet near digital energy meter?

In the “olden” days when there were only moving disk meters, I heard that people drilled small holes into the Bakelite cases and tried to get spiders to make a web inside the meter and slow the meter down. It probably wasn’t true, but there have always been people trying to get something for nothing.
I also heard that some people were using a welder and found that their moving disk meter went backwards, but it depended where they positioned the welder, and how strong the welding current was.

Back to electronic meters, if there are transformers inside the electronic meter, placement of a magnet as close to this transformer as possible could cause over fluxing every half a cycle, this could cause a diode like affect in the meter electronics, and if the electronics are designed to eliminate harmonics for calculating energy usage, then the magnet has let this person pay less for electricity, i.e. steal electricity.

Of course the meter may also have a detection circuit for high harmonics and send a message back to the utility to say the harmonic level is too high and a serviceman may then discover this magnet.
I do know that some electronic meter IC manufacturers have added a bump circuit into their ICs so I am sure they have thought about this sort of trickery too.

I like everyone paying full dollar for their electricity, otherwise most of us are carrying the small number of people doing these sorts of things.

“Meters should offer compliance to requirements of CBIP-304 and its amendments for tampering using external magnets. The meter should be immune to tamper using external magnets. The meters should be immune to 0.2T of A.C. magnetic fields and 0.5 T of D.C. magnetic fields, beyond which it should record as tamper if not immune.”
The above statement is a requirement during the manufacturing of digital energy meter. Hence we shall assume that digital meters are tamper proof using Magnets.

AQ: Directional Numerical over current relay

If current will flow in positive direction then the relay will behave as a Normal over current relay and if current will flow in negative direction then the relay will behave as a Directional over current relay…..Why the angle between healthy line voltage and fault current is required for sensing the direction??

Suppose you have purely resistive circuit with a voltage source connected to it. Now take any arbitrary node X in the network Look at the current flow from the node. Now when the source voltage is positive the current flows from the say upper node of the source to the lower node of source. Now if you look at this current flow from the arbitrary node X mentioned above, the current will be moving towards the node X from one side and it is moving away on the other side of the arbitrary node X node in one half cycle.
Now in the next half cycle the same thing repeats but with one difference, that the direction of current flow changes.

Now you want to operate your relay when the current is moving away from the arbitrary node in the first half cycle. place a CT at the node with primary P1 towards the node X1 and p2 away and take Secondary S1 to the relay . Now when current flow is from P1 to P2 current flow in the secondary will be say S1 to S2 thru relay.

Now we can say that, when the arbitrary node voltage is positive current flows from P1 to P2 and we take this as our direction required for the relay to operate.

Again when you look back from the node you will see that when the arbitrary node is at higher potential current is flowing towards you. Now place another CT with P1 towards the arbitrary node P2 on the other side and connect another relay at s2 side (now you can visualise 2 CTs on either side of the node with P1 towards the node X in both CTs). The current will be flowing from P2 to P1 in this CT and hence S1 will be negative with respect to S2 and current flow in this relay will be in reverse direction as that of the first relay.

In the next half cycle the current direction reverses and first relay current will be s2 to s1 thru relay and second relay current is from S1 to S2 thru second relay.

Now we want the relay no 1 to operate and relay no 2 not to operate. how do you achieve it when you connect the current alone to the relay which is changing the direction in every half cycle .
To achieve this now you connect a PT at the same arbitrary node X and connect the voltage to both the relays. The same point of the PT secondary voltage is connected to both the relays. Now find the phase angle between the current in the first relay and the voltage. You will see that when node voltage is positive, the current flow in the first CT will be from P1- P2 in primary and S1 to S2 in the secondary. In this case let us say that the phase angle between voltage and current is Zero in the first relay.

What happens in the second relay and CT /PT. The voltage is same as first relay which is positive and the current flow in the CT is P2 to P1 and in relay it is S2 to S1
– meaning opposite direction to first relay . As the current is in reverse direction with respect to voltage we can say that they are out of phase (180 degree).
Now you set both relays to operate when the voltage and currents are in phase. observe the result in first half cycle . Relay 1 operates (phase angle between v and I zeo ) and relay 2 no operation ( phase angle 180 deg ).

In the second half cycle observe the phase angle of relay 1 . Voltage at node is negative. (voltage phasor reversed ) Current flows from P2 to P1 and S2 to s1 in the relay 1 (current phasor also reversed) still the phase angle is zero and hence relay 1 operates Similarly relay 2 restrains.

Hence we found that, the relay 1 operates in both half cycle and relay 2 restrains. This is the importance of Voltage for directional relay.

AQ: High starting torque, synchronous motor, induction motor or DC motor?

It depends on so much more than the simple requirements listed of high starting torque and variable speed. What kind of application are you using it for? Is it on an automobile (where you have DC already), a factory, and do you have the budget and/or space for a variable frequency drive. A synchronous servo motor gives great dynamic control and great starting torque per volume, but its speed range is limited (unless you’re field weakening by the back EMF). Servo-motors are also the most expensive due to their position sensors and more intelligent drives.

With a proper soft drive you can go with an induction motor, but it depends. if power is small you can go to step motor also. But dc series motor’s starting torque is high as expressed others.
DC Series motors have high starting torque but induction motors have wide range of speed control. So, If DC motor is used, then DC drives you can use, although it will be expensive and DC motors are tough to maintain than ac motors due to commutation Problem.

DC series motor would provide both the high starting torque and adjustable speed BUT beware that DC motors have high maintenance cost and also require AC-DC conversion. You could use other available options e.g. double wound induction motors etc, depending upon your requirements.

But today, there is no application where you cannot apply AC motors, asynchronous or synchronous. If the motor and the associated power electronics are correctly rated, you can have any starting torque you want.

The typical application of DC series motors was in locomotives. This technology has been replaced by AC motors since 20 years. The latest generation of high speed trains use synchronous, permanent magnet motors.

AQ: EMI & EMC

EMI/EMC is rather a subjective topic than theoretic, but we shall look at it with start from noise prevention then noise suppression.

Prevention or design in the solution is needed to concentrate on noise making part/component or its mechanism play in the circuit. These are referring to those part and circuit that directly involve in switching, like PFC mosfet and its driver, PFC diode, DC/DC switching mosfet and its driver, and its output diode, do not left out the magnetic part and layout design, bad design will cause ugly switching then give you headache in EMC problem.

Part/component and topology selection is somehow important in which had some level predetermine your EMI/EMS need to take care, like what Stephen had explained; phase-shift is better than none phase shift.

Mosfet would have higher noise at high frequency but it can be somehow compensated or tolerated or trick by driving speed, by using snubber and may be shielding. The output Diode should be carefully selected so that its high frequency noise is within your output noise spec else is an issue, please make sure this noise is not able to be transmitted out as Radiated noise, or it is not couple into your Primary circuit, else it will all the way out to the input AC then transmitted as Radiated noise. Trr is the parameter to look at, sure the lower the best. Anyhow, some snubber (RC or feerite bead,..) shall be determined and add-in.

Noise suppression is what refer to Filter, energy dumping circuit,.. but somehow is basic need, one of it Input filter that give noise isolation between what generated internal in psu not pass to input supply system that could interfere other system/supply environment (EMI), or what noise environment that could enter into your power supply and interfere your power supply (EMS). Input filter is definitely a must for your switching frequency and its sub-harmonics, which is fall into the EMI standard range.

There are many technique to suppress the noise and is depend on what location, nature of the circuit, switch and diode, like what you means by RCD, is not mistaken is refer to RCD that add across the main transformer, DC/DC switcher and typically at the output Diode, you are on right direction with using this snubber around these component.

Shielding may be needed for your main transformer if you have some gap in it (but is not needed if your controller and your switcher is so call good part), but may be needed after you have made some study it the samples.

Good layout always give peaceful mind, whereby noise part have to be some distant away from noise sensitive controller or decision making circuit, decision making connection point have to wise at right termination point that prevent sense the high noise content signal, but if no choice some RC filter is unpreventable, anyhow and mostly RC is commonly located even is known clean in noise to those decision making circuit.

AQ: Phase rotation errors

Phase rotation errors are not as rare as they ought to be. I’ve seen more than one building with a systematic phase rotation error. This can be prevented by carefully following the color coding system (Yellow Orange Brown and Red Blue Black for 480 volt and 208 volt systems in the US for example) and tagging feeders at both ends to assure proper connections.

To check for proper phase rotation sequencing (ABC and not ACB) you can use a phase rotation meter. Without that you can bump a three phase motor that should be correctly connected to see if it turns in the right direction. If it’s wrong, reverse any two phase wires from the source to the distribution equipment. However, if you have a tie breaker and intend to operate the secondaries of two transformers in parallel by closing it that is not good enough. Both transformer distribution networks have to be connected correctly on all three phases. You have to check the voltage across each corresponding pair of terminals on the tie breaker and be certain they are all about zero volts. If you don’t and there is an error, closing the tie breaker if that is possible at all (some electronic breakers may lock you out) will result in a phase to phase bolted fault that can result in severe damage to your distribution equipment. Phase rotation errors are invariably the result of incompetent installation, inadequate specifications for feeder identification, and inadequate inspection.

There are times when the phase rotation error is made on the primary side of the transformer. If this happens it can be compensated for by reversing the phase rotation error from the secondary side. This is less desirable but it will work. If you have multiple phase rotation errors in the same distribution network you have quite a mess to clean up. It will be time consuming and expensive tracking all of them down to be certain you have eliminated them. False economies by cutting corners on the initial installation of substations and distribution equipment will result in necessitating very expensive and inconvenient repairs. If it is not corrected you risk severe damage to three phase load equipment.

AQ: High AC current inductors

There are several issues at work here. For high AC current inductors, you want to have low core losses, low proximity loss in the windings, and low fringing effects.

At normal frequencies, ferrites are by far the lowest core loss, much better than MPP and other so called “low-loss” materials. So you would like to use them from this aspect.

A toroid gives the greatest winding surface for the magnetic material, letting you use the least number of layers and hence minimizing proximity loss. The toroid also has the advantage of putting all the windings on the outside of the structure, facilitating cooling. This is very important.

However, you can’t easily gap a toroid of ferrite, it’s very expensive.

Some aerospace applications actually cut the ferrite toroid into segments and reassemble them with several gaps to solve the problem. The multiple gaps keep fringing effects low. It might be nice if you could buy a set of toroidal segments so you don’t have to do the cutting because that is a big part of the cost. I don’t know if that is a reasonable thing to do, maybe someone can comment.

Once you go to MPP, the core loss goes up, but the distributed gap minimizes the fringing losses.

The MPP lets you run somewhat higher on current before saturation, but if you have high ac you can’t take full advantage of that due to the core losses.

All these tradeoffs (and quite a few more not mentioned for brevity) are the reason that so many different solutions exist.

AQ: Moving data around within memory of an individual PLC

The first question would have to be – why do want to do it? If the data already exists in one location that is accessible by all parts of the program, why are you going to use up more PLC memory with exactly the same data?

Well, there are a couple of candidate reasons. One might be recipe data. You have an area of memory with a set of stored recipes for different products, and at an appropriate moment you want to copy a specific recipe from the storage area to the working area. The first thing to be said about that is that if your recipes are at all complex and you have a requirement to have a significant number of different recipes, then PLC memory is probably not the right place to be storing them. The ultimate, these days, of course, is that recipes are created by techies on PCs away from the production area, in nice quite, comfortable labs or whatever, and are stored on a SQL server. Only the recipe for today’s actual production run gets transferred to the PLC. But there are some applications where there is a limited number of different recipes required and the recipes themselves are quite simple, when it can be reasonable to store the recipes in PLC memory.

A second reason for copying memory areas within the same PLC is for procedures, sub-routines or whatever. But again, these days, all PLC languages have some sort of in-built facility for procedures – what Rockwell uniquely call Add On Instructions, what everyone else calls UDFBs – user defined function blocks. In any case, the point is that these facilities usually make all that memory management stuff transparent to the programmer. You just configure the UDFB and call it as required. The compiler takes care of all the memory data moves for you.

Another reason for copying memory, actually related to the previous, is a technique much used by PLC programmers where they use an area of memory as a ‘scratch-pad’. So they will copy some unprocessed data to the scratchpad area, all of the operations performed on the data take place using the scratchpad, and at the end, they copy the processed data back again. Again, it is questionable how much this technique is actually required these days, I would suggest that it most cases, there probably is a better way using a UDFB. But I have seen some programmers who routinely include a scratchpad area within any UDFBs they define.