Blog – Page 23 – AC DRIVES SOLUTION.

AQ: Simulation interpretation in automation industry

Related to “automation industry”, there are generally 3 different interpretations of what simulations is:
1) Mechanical Simulations – Via various solid modeling tools and cad programs; tooling, moving mechanisms, end-effectors… are designed with 3D visualizations, connecting the modules to prevent interference, check mass before actual machining…
2) Electronics Simulations – This type of simulations are either related to the manufacturers of “specific instrumentations” used in automation industry (ultrasonic welders, laser marking systems,…) or the designers of circuit boards.
3) Electrical & Controls Simulations.
A) Electrical Schematics, from main AC disconnect switch, down to 24VDC low amps for I/O interface.
Simulation tools allow easy determinations of system’s required amperage, fuse sizes, wire gauges, accordance with standards (CE, UL, cUL, TUV…)…
B) Logic Simulations, HMI interface, I/O exchange, motion controls…
a) If you want to have any kind of meaningful simulations, get in the habit of “modular ladder logic” circuit design. This means, don’t design your ladder like one continuous huge program that runs the whole thing; simulating this type of programs is almost impossible in every case. Break down the logic to sub-systems or maybe even down to stand alone mechanisms (pick & place, motor starter…), simulating and troubleshooting this scenario is fairly easy.
b) When possible, beside automated run mode of the machine or system, build “manual mode logic” for it as well. Then via physical push-buttons or HMI, you should have “step forward” & “step back” for every “physical movement or action”.

Simulating the integrity of the “ladder logic program” and all the components and interfaces will be a breeze if things are done meticulously upfront.

AQ: Active power losses in electrical motor

Equivalent active power losses during electrical motor’s testing in no-load conditions contain next losses:
1. active power losses in the copper of stator’s winding which are in direct relation with square of no-load current value: Pcus=3*Rs*I0s*I0s,

2. active power losses in ferromagnetic core which are in direct relation with frequency and degree of magnetic induction (which depends of voltage):
a) active power losses caused by eddy currents: Pec=kec*f*(B)x
b) active power losses caused by hysteresis: Ph=(kh*d*d*f*f*B*B)/ρ

3. mechanical power losses which are in direct relation with square of angular speed value: Pmech=Kmech*ωmech*ωmech,

Comment:
First, as you can see, active power losses in ferromagnetic core of electrical motor depend of voltage value and frequency, so by increasing voltage value you will get higher active power losses in ferromagnetic core of electrical motor.

Second, you can’t compare two electrical motors with different rated voltage and different rated power because active power losses in the ferromagnetic core, as I have already said above, depend of voltage value and frequency while active power losses in the copper of stator’s windings depend of square of no-load current value which is different for electrical motors with different rated power.

Third, when you want to compare active power losses in no-load conditions of two electrical motors with same rated voltage and rated power, you need to check design of both electrical motors because it is possible that one of them has different kind of winding, because, maybe in the past, one of them was damaged, so its windings had to be changed, what could be the reason for different electrical design and that has a consequence different no-load current value.

AQ: Floor programmer and office programmer

The biggest differences between the floor programmer and the office programmer is often a piece of paper (knowledge and experience do not replace a piece of paper in the mind of HR person that has no understanding of the position they are seeking to fill) and that the floor programmer must produce a working machine. Also many an excellent programmer will never put up with the office politics seen in many companies. To appear right for me is worthless when being right is the goal. In a physical world it can be shown that a program is right or wrong because the machine works or does not. In the theory driven world of the office that can not happen, so appearing correct as well as being correct is necessary.

If you are the best programmer in your company or the worse. If you are the worse one then maybe you are correct. But if you are the best then please take a close look at the worse programmer’s work and tell us if there is not a need for some improvement.

I have cursed out more than one officer programmer for missing logic which on the floor is easy to see is necessary. The office programmer was more than once, myself. Making logic to control machine in theory is far more difficult a task than modifying that logic on a real running machine. Maybe your imagination and intelligence can create a theoretical image that matches the physical one.

Many office programmers are not up to that level. They lack the intelligence, imagination, experience or time to take an offline program that can be loaded and run a machine without help. But no fear, most start-up techs cannot debug a machine after the build is complete and remove all issues that will surface when the machine enters a customer’s plant and full production.

A good program will grow as time passes. To fill in the gaps in the software, to change the design from what design intended to what production requires and to cover the design changes as product models evolve. Static is not the floor condition of a good company, products and machines evolve and grow. More reliable, durable, quicker tool changes or device swaps, lower cycle times or more part types. There are examples of logic once written it never changes but that is not the whole of the world just one part of it.

AQ: DC Drives QUIZ

1. List three types of operations where DC drives are commonly found.

2. How can the speed of a DC motor be varied?

3. What are the two main functions of the SCR semi conductors used in a DC drive power converter?

4. Explain how SCR phase angle control operates to vary the DC output from an SCR.

5. Armature-voltage-controlled DC drives are classified as constant-torque drives. What does this mean?

6. Why is three-phase AC power, rather than single phase, used to power most commercial & industrial DC drives?

7. List what input line & output load voltage information must be specified for a DC drive.

8. How can the speed of a DC motor be increased above that of its base speed?

9. Why must field loss protection be provided for all DC drives?

10. Compare the braking capabilities of nonregenerative & regenerative DC drives.

11. A regenerative DC drive requires two sets of power bridges. Why?

12. Explain what is meant by an overhauling load.

13. What are the advantages of regenerative braking versus dynamic braking?

14. How is the desired speed of a drive normally set?

15. List three methods used by DC drives to send feed back information from the motor back to the drive regulator.

16. What functions require monitoring of the motor armature current?

17. Under what operating condition would the mini mum speed adjustment parameter be utilized?

18. Under what operating condition would the maxi mum speed adjustment parameter be utilized?

19. IR compensation is a parameter found in most DC drives. What is its purpose?

20. What, in addition to the time it takes for the motor to go from zero to set speed, does acceleration time regulate?

AQ: “critical” operation with a double-action cylinder, hydraulic or pneumatic

If I had a “critical” operation with a double-action cylinder, hydraulic or pneumatic, I’d put proximity sensors on both ends of travel, typically with small metal “marker” on the shaft. Each input “in series” with the “output” to each coil, time delayed to give the cylinder a chance to reach its destination. The “timer” feeds the “alarm.” If you want to spend the money for a pressure switch (or transducer) on each solenoid output, that’s a plus.

Now you can tell if there was an output to the solenoid from internal programming, if not another interlock prevented it from actuating. If there is an output to the solenoid and no pressure, then the signal did not reach the coil (loose wire somewhere), if it did the coil may be bad, if the coil is good and no pressure, the solenoid may be stuck or no pressure to it from another supervised failure or interlock. If there was sufficient pressure and the cylinder travel not reached, then the cylinder is stuck.

As a technician crawling over all kinds of other people’s equipment since 1975, I could figure out a lot of this from an old relay logic or TTL control system. A VOM confirms whether there is an output to the correct solenoid at the control panel terminals. This lets you now which direction to head next. If there is no power, it’s “upstream” of there, another interlock input that needs to be confirmed, time to dig into the “program.”

If there is power and the cylinder does not move it’s a problem outside of those terminals and the control system. I’d remove the wiring and check for coil resistance, confirming the coil and field wiring integrity while still at the panel. If everything checks out then go to the cylinder and see if a pressure gauge shows pressure on the line with the coil energized – presuming there is pressure to the valve. No pressure would be another “input alarm” from another pressure switch. If there is pressure and power to the valve and no pressure, the valve is bad. If there is pressure on the output side and the cylinder does not move – the cylinder is stuck or mechanically overloaded.

I&E “technicians” may know a lot about programming and code, but if they don’t know how a piece of equipment operates I/O wise then they don’t have a clue where to start looking. Then I guess you need all the sensors and step by step programmed sequences to “spell it out” for them on a screen. A device sequence “flow chart” may help run I/Os out for something like above. I/O status lights on the terminals like PLCs can easily confirm at a glance if you have the proper inputs for a sequence to complete, then you should have the proper outputs. Most output failures are a result of correct missing inputs. The more sensors you’re willing to install, the more the sequence can be monitored and spelled out on an HMI.

From a factory tech support in another location, being able to access the equipment remotely is a huge plus, whether directly through modem, or similar, or indirectly through the local technician’s computer to yours i.e. REMOTE ASSISTANCE. A tablet PC is a huge plus with IOMs, schematics and all kinds of info you can hold in one hand while trouble-shooting.

AQ: Industrial Ethernet vs. Fieldbus technologies

Where we really need digital communication networking, in my personal opinion, is down at the sensor/transmitter and positioner/actuator/valve level to take the place of 4-20 mA and on/off signals. Down at the level 1 of the Purdue reference model you need a fieldbus, not one of the “H2” types of fieldbus, but one of the “H1” types of fieldbus. When first introduced, these technologies were not as fast and not as easy to use has they could have been, but after many years of refinement these technologies are finally becoming sufficiently easy for most plants to use.

An “H1 fieldbus” is the most practical way to digitally network sensors/transmitters and positioners/actuators/valves to the DCS. Options include FOUNDATION fieldbus H1, PROFIBUS-PA, CompoNet, ASI, and IO-link. These protocols can take the place of 4-20 mA and on/off signals.

Note that “H1 fieldbus” should not be confused with the very different “H2 fieldbus” category of protocols used at level 1-1/2 of the Purdue reference model to connect remote-I/O,

AQ: Design and Implementation

The owner of the system should provide clear requirements of what the system should do and should define what constitutes “maintainability” of the system. This places a burden on the owner of the system to consider the full life-cycle of the system.

1. You need good design documentation.

2. All source code should be well-documented.

3. Coders should be trained on the techniques used and mentored,

4. The use of “templates” helps ensure that coders and maintenance alike are familiar with routine functions.

5. The HMI should provide clear indication of faults and interlocks.

6. The HMI should provide clear indication of equipment statuses.

7. Any code that is hidden must “work as advertised”. This means that it must be completely and unambiguously documented for all inputs, outputs, statuses, and configurations. It must be thoroughly tested and warranted by the vendor,

8. All code should be well-tested. (I have found that the first line of defense is to simply read the code!)

Post-Startup
1. The owner should have a change-control procedure to manage modifications.

2. All users and maintenance support personnel should have adequate training. Training needs to be periodically refreshed as it can become stale through lack of use.

AQ: Benefits of Having products and services in the same company

Having products and services in the same company can either be treated as an opportunity or as a constraint. I strongly believe that having services and products in the same company should be treated as an opportunity, and that any potential constraints should be eliminated.

Here are the things that I have learned.

First: Never limit the product sales to the capacity of your service organization:
I see some companies that develop products that are so great that they want to be the only organization delivering, implementing and maintaining them. They believe that the products are a competitive advantage that will allow them to dominate the services market. This almost always fails; your example from Xerox is one of many. One of two things tend to happen: Either the product does not reach its full market potential due to limited services capacity, or the product organization limits their innovation and product development so that it can continue a lucrative services business. Both may be good short term, but fails on a longer term basis.
My recommendation is that companies that have both products and services should allow their products to be delivered, implemented and maintained by other companies that compete with themselves in the services market.

Second: Never limit the services that you offer to the products that you have in your own portfolio:
Service organizations are typically focused on delivering, implementing and maintaining solutions for their customers. They deliver more than just the product. If you limit the services to only focus on the products in the in-house portfolio, then you are either going to miss opportunities to sell services or you are going to get a portfolio that is too broad. Neither of them is good.
My recommendation is that companies that have both products and services should allow their services organization to deliver products from everywhere, even products that directly compete with the products in their own portfolio. This will ensure that the services organization stays competitive.

Third: Leverage the synergies between products and services:
You may ask “why have both products and services in the same organization if they need to be kept separate?”. The answer lies in the synergies. Companies need to create a culture where the product and services organizations can collaborate even though they are independent. Good organizations can make good decisions about when to expand their own portfolio and when to solve the same customer problems through services and/or third party products. I have seen great innovations come from organizations that master this.

Having products and services in the same organization creates a great foundation for innovation. The key to success is to have the right company culture.

AQ: Operate low speed generator and high speed generator in the same terminal

Can we operate low speed generator and high speed generator in the same terminal? Is there a mechanical effect?

First, specify that this is an isolated system with two generators feeding the same bus. Operation of an isolated system is different than a grid connected system, and the mode setting of the governors have to be set to accommodate this. Depending upon the prime mover type and governor model, improper tuning will manifest itself in speed variations. The size of the two machines relative to each other, as well as their size relative to the load, can have measurable impact as well. The best way to tell whether it is mechanical or electrical in nature is to look at the time-frame of the phenomena relative to the time constants of the various control and response loops.

Second, “…In large power system, generators are not connected in the same terminal…” is not generally true, there are many power plants where multiple generators feed the same bus before the power is utilized.

Third, “…frequency oscillation is about 1.5-2 Hz…”, if you mean that the frequency swings between 48 and 52 Hz routinely, that usually indicates a governor setup/tuning problem or a non-uniform load.

Fourth, reactive current compensation takes place in quadrature from real power and should have minimal effect on real power and only affect the terminal voltage if not set properly. Droop compensation is the means for ensuring that the AVRs do not fight with each other since you cannot have two independent controllers attempting to control the same control variable.

Fifth, regarding different types of prime movers, some are inherently more likely to induce mechanical vibrations, especially reciprocating engines, especially if they are not all of the same size and/or number of cylinders. The same is true of the loads, non-uniform, cyclic loads can cause very severe problems especially on isolated systems where the load is a significant percentage of the prime movers’ output power. The analysis of, and solution to, such problems is an interesting area of study.

AQ: Why we need Engineers?

Even the humble motor car runs diagnostics that the garage read to see the problems with your car. This doesn’t involve technicians looking at the code that controls the car but is 100% driven by the faults flagged by the car’s management system programs. These could even be displayed to the users, the drivers like me and you but the manufacturers don’t want amateurs hacking around their management systems and you know that is exactly what we would do.

Do we ask for this functionality from our car manufacturer? Do we complain about it and ask for them not to fit it? Would we like to go back to the “golden age” of motoring where we spent as much time under the hood as we did on the road?

You do?…. Yeah right and neither do I nor do I want a plant where I need a guy with a laptop to diagnose a blown fuse, sticking valve, overload trip, etc .

We need to change as Engineers by selling systems to customers that fulfill their needs, that are safe and reliable, that follow industry and international best practices and are user friendly. The notion of having to wait for a blank cheque from the customer to fulfill these goals is really a cop out, you either do what is right or just walk away because at the end of all this it is you who are under scrutiny when things go wrong not the customer who will plead ignorance.