Category: Blog

Home  ›  Blog  ›  Page 25

AQ: Power industry engineers

The power industry has many tentacles. Energy production is one key subset, the design, manufacture, installation and operation of hydro, nuclear, fossil, renewables, etc is continuing to grow especially in the renewable area. Then there is the transmission of energy which includes the design/manufacture/construction/maintenance of substations, protection and control systems, overhead and underground lines, series and shunt compensation, etc. Last there is the distribution of the energy to the customers at the lower voltages which includes many of the transmission opportunities but introduces other niche areas like power quality, smart metering, distributed generation, etc.

It’s not as simple as stating you want a PHD in the power industry with hands on experience without first knowing the ins and outs of the business. As has been previously mentioned, get your BS in EE with a slant toward power. Get a job in a utility and learn the business top to bottom so you can actually make an intelligent decision on what area of the business floats your boat. Once you know that then pursue an advanced degree in that specific area (the real bonus is most companies will pay for it).

AQ: Systems Development Life-Cycle

Step 1. Initiation
Step 2. System Concept Development
Step 3. Planning
Step 4. Requirements Analysis
Step 5. Design
Step 6. Development
Step 7. Integration and Test
Step 8. Implementation
Step 9. Operation and Maintenance
Step 10.Disposition

There are three major players present in this model; Customer (client), System Integrator, and Machine or device manufacturer.

In many instances, the result of step 4 (Requirements Analysis), is an RFQ for the system implementation has been issued to one or more systems integrators. Upon selecting the system integrator, step 5 (Design) begins. Upon completing step 5 (Design), the system or process flow is defined. One of the major outputs from step 5 are the RFQs for the major functional components of the finished system. Based on the RFQ responses (bids), the Machine or device manufacturers are chosen.

Steps 6, 7, and 8 are where all the individual functional components are integrated. This is where the system integrator makes sure the outputs and feedback between to machines or devices is defined and implemented. Step 8 ends with a full systems functional test in a real manufacturing situation is demonstrated to the customer. This test includes demonstrating all error conditions defined by the requirements document and the systems requirements document. If a specific device or machine fails its respective function it is corrected (programming, wiring, or design) by the manufacturer and the test begins anew.

Each of the scenarios presented is correct. The technician role being presented (customer, integrator, or manufacturer) is not clear. System diagnostics are mandatory and need to be well defined, even in small simple machines. There should be very few and extreme conditions under which the customer’s technician should ever have to dig into a machine’s code to troubleshoot a problem. This condition usually indicates a design or integration oversight.

(You can find a complete description here, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Systems_development_life-cycle)

AQ: DC Drives Field Voltage Control

To control the speed of a DC motor below its base speed, the voltage applied to the armature of the motor is varied while the field voltage is held at its nominal value. To control the speed above its base speed, the armature is supplied with its rated voltage & the field is weakened. For this reason, an additional variable-voltage field regulator is needed for DC drives with field voltage control. Field weakening is the act of reducing the current applied to a DC motor shunt field. This action weakens the strength of the magnetic field & thereby increases the motor speed. The weakened field reduces the counter emf generated in the armature; therefore the armature current & the speed increase. Field loss detection must be pro vided for all DC drives to protect against excessive motor speed due to loss of motor field current.

DC drives with motor field control provide coordinated automatic armature & field voltage control for extended speed range & constant-horsepower applications. The motor is armature-voltage-controlled for constant-torque, variable-horsepower operation to base speed, where it s transferred to field control for constant-horsepower, variable-torque operation to motor maximum speed.

AQ: UPS systems commissioning test and inspection procedures

The UPS systems commissioning test and inspection procedures are to conform to;

• BS EN 50091-1:1993 – Specification for Uninterruptible Power Supplies (UPS). General and Safety Requirements, AND

• IEC 62040-3 (Draft Edition – 2) in particular the Efficiency test procedures outlined in its “Annexure-J”.

These procedures to include:

1. Visual Inspection:
a. Visually inspect all equipment for signs of damage or foreign materials.
b. Observe the type of ventilation, the cleanliness of the room, the use of proper signs, and any other safety related factors.

2. Mechanical Inspection:
a. Check all the power connections for tightness.
b. Check all the control wiring terminations and plugs for tightness or proper seating.

3. Electrical Pre-check:
a. Check the DC bus for a possible short circuit.
b. Check input and Bypass power for proper voltages and phase rotation.
c. Check all lamp test functions.

4. Initial UPS Startup:
a. Verify that all the alarms are in a “go” condition.
b. Energize the UPS module and verify the proper DC, walkup, and AC phase on.
c. Check the DC link holding voltage, AC output voltages, and output waveforms.
d. Check the final DC link voltage and Inverter AC output. Adjust if required.
e. Check for the proper synchronization.
f. Check for the voltage difference between the Inverter output and the Bypass source.
g. Perform full-load, step-load, and battery discharge tests using supplier furnished load bank.

AQ: Techniques contribute in control system

1. Any successful methodology is not a simple thing to come by and typically requires a huge commitment in time and money and resources to develop. It will take several generations to hone the methods and supporting tools.

2. Once you get the methods and tools in place, you then face a whole separate challenge of indoctrinating the engineers in the methods.

3. Unique HMI text involves a lot of design effort, implementation, and testing.

Many of the techniques contributed by others in the discussion address faults, but how do you address the “normal” things that can hold up an action such as waiting for a process condition to occur, such as waiting for a level/pressure/temperature to rise above/fall below a threshold or waiting for a part to reach a limit switch?

Some methods allow for a text message that describes each step. When developing these text messages, I focus on what the step’s transition is waiting for, not the actions that take place during the specific step. This helps both the operator to learn the process as well as diagnose what is preventing the machine from advancing to its next step.

I have seen sequencing engines that incorporate a “normal” step time that can be configured for each step and if the timer expires before the normal transition occurs, then you have “hold” condition. While effective, this involves a lot of up-front development time to understand the process and this does not come cheaply (with another nod to John’s big check!).

(Side note on sequential operations: I have used Sequential Function Charts (SFCs/GRAFCET) for over 20 years and find them to be exceptionally well-suited for step-wise operations, both from a development perspective as well as a troubleshooting perspective.)

I have seen these techniques pushed by end users (typically larger companies who have a vested interest in standardization across many sites) as well as OEMs and System Integrators who see these as business advantages in shortening development, startup, and support cycles. Again, these are long-term business investments that require a major commitment to achieve.

AQ: Three Phase Input DC Drive

Controlled bridge rectifiers are not limited to single-phase designs. In most commercial & industrial control systems, AC power is available in three-phase form for maxi mum horsepower & efficiency. Typically six SCRs are connected together, to make a three-phase fully controlled rectifier. This three-phase bridge rectifier circuit has three legs, each phase connected to one of the three phase voltages. It can be seen that the bridge circuit has two halves, the positive half consisting of the SCRs S1, S3, & S5 & the negative half consisting of the SCRs S2, S4, & S6. At any time when there is current flow, one SCR from each half conducts.

The variable DC output voltage from the rectifier sup plies voltage to the motor armature in order to run it at the desired speed. The gate firing angle of the SCRs in the bridge rectifier, along with the maximum positive & negative values of the AC sine wave, determine the value of the motor armature voltage. The motor draws current from the three-phase AC power source in proportion to the amount of mechanical load applied to the motor shaft. Unlike AC drives, bypassing the drive to run the motor is not possible.

Larger-horsepower three-phase drive panels often consist of a power module mounted on a chassis with line fuses & disconnect. This design simplifies mounting & makes connecting power cables easier as well. A three phase input DC drive with the following drive power specifications:

  • Nominal line voltage for three-phase-230/460 V AC
  • Voltage variation-+15%, -10% of nominal
  • Nominal line frequency-50 or 60 cycles per second
  • DC voltage rating 230 V AC line: Armature voltage 240 V DC; field voltage 150 V DC
  • DC voltage rating 460 V AC line: Armature voltage 500 V DC; field voltage 300 V DC

AQ: Why your project failed?

I have contracted with lots of different groups and moving within the same company to save failed projects or project in trouble or impossible to implement and helped these groups to achieve company goal. What I have noticed is that less the managers or groups know less they realize more knowledge or experience can help them. Less they know, less they understand they need help because they don’t know what they need. They think they are just fine until it is too late and a group or company goes under because of it.

I give you an example of one of the project I worked on at Nortel. I was assigned to write project specification for a product working with a director group with 100 designers and testers. During my research to get information to write the product specification I discover deficiency in the hardware they wanted to use that would cause the system reliability and availability unacceptable to the customer and did not meet customer requirement. I proposed design change in one of the interface card and firmware used in the system. The management did not agree with me on this item so I refused to write the specification the way they want it to not expose this deficiency. We had a large meeting with the president of the company with 20 people in that meeting looking at two different presentation to see if they need to change direction or stay on course and move me out of the way to another project activity. I am not the greatest in politics and making things look good when they are not.

The result was that I was moved to different project for 1 year implementing and releasing one more product that made the company lots of money. After a year development, they complete the project and released it to the customer. The customer starts validating the product and had lots of the test cases failing in the area that I proposed to change.
This was a large project and lots of money involve. The customer rejected the product and they went back on the drawing board after getting lots of this equipment on order for this project. The management came back to me and one of my team members to come back to the team and help.

Me and my team member both having experience over 15 years at that point came back and have a solution designing a new complex interface card with microcode firmware and some software to save the project. I and he had to work for 4 months for day and night having design review between two of us at 3 am in the cafeteria to get it done (defining specification to validated working product).

This project was completed and customer accepted this solution. The director group was dismantled and all people in the group were laid off and absolved in other groups in the company and some in the same group. The management groups were smart people with good intention, they were with software background and good intention for the project. They just did not have the knowledge and background to manage the system and hardware level because of lake of knowledge and experience in that area.

You see this in lots of companies when a software designer or manager is successful in their area, they get promoted and manage groups that are out of their area and lots of time they destroy groups or project because of not having the background to identify good or bad direction to go. You will always have engineers to not agree with each other and managements have to make decision to go one way or another. The wrong decision in these cases can destroy a project or company. Not all engineers can present a case in 1 hour to sell you their point of view, Remember they are not lawyer or sales man, they are engineers. So what do you do, Follow the sales man or lawyer to save your project or the reason to drive your decision and if you don’t have the knowledge or experience to lesson to the reason then you will make the wrong decision.

AQ: Negative sequence

Negative sequence will not cause a physical rotation. This component creates a field which, though not strong enough, tries to counter the primary field, An increase in this component will cause the motor to overheat due to the opposition. a physical rotation is not likely to occur.

Negative sequence currents are produced because of the unbalanced currents in the power system. Flow of negative sequence currents in electrical machines (generators and motors) are undesirable as these currents generates high temperatures in very short time. The negative sequence component has a phase sequence opposite to that of the motor and represents the amount of unbalance in the feeder. Unbalanced currents will generate negative sequence components which in turn produces a reverse rotating filed (opposite to the synchronous rotating filed normally induces emf in to the rotor windings) in the air gap between the stator and rotor of the machines. This reverse rotating magnetic field rotates at synchronous speeds but in opposite direction to the rotor of the machine. This component does not produce useful power, however by being present it contributes to the losses and causes temperature rise. This heating effect in turn results in the loss of mechanical integrity or insulation failures in electrical machines within seconds. Therefore it is undeniable to operate the machine during unbalanced condition when negative sequence currents flows in the rotor and motor to be protected. Phase reversal will make the motor run in the opposite direction and can be very dangerous, resulting in severe damage to gear boxes and hazard to operating personnel.

AQ: Synchronous generator operating frequency

When synchronous generators (alternators) are connected in parallel with each other on an AC grid, they are all operating at a speed that is directly proportional to the frequency of the AC grid. No generator can go faster or slower than the speed which is proportional to the frequency.

That is, when a synchronous generator and its prime mover is operated in parallel with other synchronous generators and their prime movers, the speed of all of the generator rotors (and hence their prime movers if directly coupled to the generator rotors) is fixed by the frequency of the grid. If the grid frequency goes up, the speed of all the generator rotors goes up at the same time. Conversely, if the grid frequency goes down, the speed of all the generator rotors goes down at the same time. It is the job of the grid/system operators to control the amount of generation so that it exactly matches the load on the system so that the frequency remains relatively constant.

Isolated or is landed generators that are not in parallel with other generators have an added limitation in that keeping exactly 50Hz is somewhat difficult, or puts too much demand on controlling/governing systems. In such environments it is normal to accept some small deviation from the nominal frequency.

The vast majority of power for industry is supplied by large rotating AC generators turning in synch with the frequency of the grid. The frequency of all these generators will be identical and is tied directly to the RPM of the generators themselves. If there is sufficient power in the generators then the frequency can be maintained at the desired rate (i.e. 50Hz or 60Hz depending on the locale).

An increase in the power load is accompanied by a concurrent increase in the power supplied to the generators, generally by the governors automatically opening a steam or gas inlet valve to supply more power to the turbine. However, if there is not sufficient power, even for a brief period of time, then generator RPM and the frequency drops.

By operating transformers at higher frequencies, they can be physically more compact because a given core is able to transfer more power without reaching saturation and fewer turns are needed to achieve the same impedance. However, properties such as core loss and conductor skin effect also increase with frequency. Aircraft and military equipment employ 400 Hz power supplies which reduce core and winding weight. Operation of a transformer at its designed voltage but at a higher frequency than intended will lead to reduced magnetizing current. At a lower frequency, the magnetizing current will increase. Operation of a transformer at other than its design frequency may require assessment of voltages, losses, and cooling to establish if safe operation is practical. For example, transformers may need to be equipped with ‘volts per hertz’ over-excitation relays to protect the transformer from overvoltage at higher than rated frequency.

AQ: Solar power

On a purely theoretical level and ignoring interrelated economics and energy usage, it makes sense to charge EVs during the day – though never in non-distributed environments, IMO.

In reality, and the reality for likely the rest of my life, it makes more economic and particulate emissions sense to distribute solar power during the day to decrease, and ultimately decommission, fossil fuel sources used for peak demand supply that occurs during the day.

Thus, using solar output distributed to offset the dirtiest, most expensive and most distribution grid loading power enhances and optimizes the value and worth of that solar generated power – both economically and ecologically. Attempting, therefore, to do all of ones’ EV charging off peak is the optimal solution until the mix of energy sources changes dramatically – likely a 20 plus year process even in the most environmentally friendly “energy generation mix” regions of the world. Even if one charges during “peak”, it is better to simply charge from the grid as the distributed energy is allowed to go to areas of peak demand. Again, for at least my lifetime, I don’t project a more optimal use of that generation even assuming the archaic state of most “grids” persist.

Right now, even for a 1 story commercial building, solar cannot supply the energy needs used in the office, much less a manufacturing facility. In fact, it can normally only supply 1/3 or less for the most energy and resource intensive commercial environment in a UV intense region (and that is quite an optimistic calculation, more likely 1/5th). Once you get to two or more stories on the building, one is not even close. On a modest tower with a tower parking garage, the footprint is likely to small to even generate the needs on a theoretical basis. Distributing the energy to location of greatest needs will allow us to dial down and decommission peak sources, which again are the dirtiest and most wasteful.

At some point, we will hit a new equilibrium where the energy generation mix is much cleaner, solar generation specifically is much more efficient, and peak power generation is handled more efficiently and ecologically cleaner. I still believe, however, that distributed power is better than “off grid” type of scenarios as it allows the energy to go where it is being demanded at the moment, decreasing the need for redundant sourcing. And, even in the cleanest energy generation mix, redundancy means building more of something and is by definition more energy wasteful and ecologically wasteful than a scenario where the redundancy buffer that is required is lesser.

Much of this type of debate reminds me of the consumer sort recycle versus the destination sort recycle debate. Even with the advances in trash collection and recycling processes, 20 years later we are suboptimizing the recycling process. Much of the reason for that is the “style” statement, making people feel like they are contributing by sorting themselves. It may make some people “feel” better by imagining “independent” off grid or semi off grid solutions. In reality, however, we live in an interconnected world where “sharing” or distributing solutions to leverage scale and minimize redundancies is far more advantageous, economic, and a faster route to a solution to both particulate emissions issues and energy independence for groups of people.