Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Excitation Systems Ka Lun Khaa Lo
Excitation Systems Ka Lun Khaa Lo
Excitation Systems Ka Lun Khaa Lo
I. INTRODUCTION
C. AC Systems
In these systems auxiliary ac generators, mounted on the
main generator’s shaft, are used as the source for the
excitation current. The output of the auxiliary generator is
rectified by rectifiers, that can be controlled or non-controlled,
that produced the current necessary for the main generator.
The rectifiers can be stationary or rotary.
The AC systems with stationary rectifiers need rings to Fig. 5. Rotary AC excitation system.
deliver the current to the main generator, figure 4. The use of
rings is a major disadvantage that led to the search for new
alternatives to eliminate them. Some of the advantages of brushless excitation system are:
easy manual control; reduced maintenance.
𝐸 ×𝑆
𝑙𝑛(𝐸1 ×𝑆1 )
2 2
𝑏= (2)
𝐸1 −𝐸2
𝐸1 ×𝑆1
𝑎= (3)
𝑒 𝑏×𝐸1
𝐹𝐸𝑋 = 1 𝐼𝑁 ≤ 0
Fig. 9. Programmed model.
𝐹𝐸𝑋 = 1 − 0.577 × 𝐼𝑁 0 < 𝐼𝑁 ≤ 0.433
𝐹𝐸𝑋 = √0.75 − 𝐼 2 𝑁 0.433 < 𝐼𝑁 < 0.75 (4)
𝐹𝐸𝑋 = 1.732(1 − 𝐼𝑁 ) 0.75 ≤ 𝐼𝑁 ≤ 1
𝐹𝐸𝑋 = 0 𝐼𝑁 > 1
V. SIMULATION OF THE AC1A AND AC7B MODELS
TABLE II
GENERATOR PARAMETERS
A. Simulation environment
After the model is programmed, it’s important to understand Parameter Value
how it works. For that, the model was simulated with a PN 12.153E6
generator and a load for a short-circuit test, figure 10. It this VN 11E3
it’s possible to observe the response of the system to a fn 50
Xd 1.65
situation that causes a lot of disturbances. The excitation Xd’ 0.14
system must be able to limit the overvoltage and guarantee Xd’’ 0.12
that the voltage goes back to its initial value. Xq 1.5
Xq’’ 0.23
Xl 0.119
Tdo’ 3.2
Td’’ 0.045
Td’ 0.245
Tdo’’ 0.45
Tq’’ 0.067
Tqo’’ 0.438
Rs 0.0038
H 6
F 0.001
Pole pairs 2
Pole type Salient
Fig. 10. Simulation environment. Using the values on the tables, both models were simulated
. Figures 11, 12, and 13 show the responses for the short-
Both models were tested for a short-circuit fault of 1 circuit fault.
second, with a voltage fall of 20, 50, and 80%. Tables I and II
show the parameters used for each model, and for the
generator. All of these values were obtained from a real
system.
TABLE I
MODEL PARAMETERS
TR 0 0.02
KPR - 36.57
KIR - 73.14
KDR - 0
TDR - 9999
TC 25 -
TB 1 -
KA 400 -
KP - 0 Fig. 11. Models response to a short-circuit, with a 20% voltage fall.
KPA - 8.07
KIA - 40.33
TA 0.03 -
KF 0.0000001 -
KF1 - 0
KF2 - 1
KF3 - 0
TF 1 9999
KI 0 -
KL - 10
VAMAX 14.5 47.19
VAMIN -14.5 - 47.19
VRMAX 6.03 34.45
VRMIN -5.43 0
VUEL -15 -
VOEL 15 -
VFEMAX - 34.45
VEMIN - 0 Fig. 12. Models response to a short-circuit, with 50% voltage fall.
TE 0.15 0.55
KE 1 1
SEVE1 0.1 1.70
SEVE2 0.01 1.14
VE1 4.18 12.76
VE2 3.14 11.36
KD 0.38 2.44
KC 0.2
Fig. 13. Models response to a short-circuit, with 80% voltage fall.
Fig. 15. AC7B responses for two values for the upper regulator limit.
From the figures we can see that both of the models have a
difficulty in limiting the overvoltage and have a slow
response. After the fault the voltage shouldn’t surpass 10% of By changing VRMAX its possible to limit the overvoltage
the nominal value, although in some cases it can go as high as after the fault. Still the response of the system is a bit slower.
40% for a few seconds. Either way, both of the models have To improve this we can find new values for the regulator,
values higher than 40% when the voltage fall is around 80%. instead of just for the upper limit.
This situation is in need of improvement.
One easy solution is to decrease the voltage regulator upper
limit to a value that sets the overvoltage to 10%. In both VI. REGULATIONS OPTIMIZATION OF THE AC7B’S CONTROLLER
models this leads to a situation where the response becomes
very slow. This happens because of the windup in the In order to find new values for the controller two methods
regulator. In the AC7B model it is possible to introduce anti- were used. First the PID Tuner tool in Matlab. The tool
windup in its PID regulator to fix this problem. The AC1A provides a simple way to determinate values for a PID
model doesn’t allow this solution. Therefore the next controller. Second the Ziegler-Nichols method. This method
simulations will only consider the AC7B model. Figure 14 provides a formula to calculate the PID parameters.
shows the models response to the same situation as figure 13,
with anti-windup.
A. PID Tuner
Before using this tool the system need to be simplified. For
that, the generator has to be replace with a bloc that simulates
its behavior, through the transfer function: KG/(1 + s.TG). For
this optimization method, we consider the saturated values of
the generator’s parameters, and so KG is 1 and TG equals
4,591. The AC7B model has its regulator replaced with a PID
Controller bloc, available in Matlab, that allows for the use of
the PID Tuner tool. Figure 16 shows the system with these
changes.
Fig. 14. AC7B response to a short-circuit, with 80% voltage fall and anti-
windup.
The values obtained with the tool were then tested with the
complete system. The new values for the PID controller found
with the PID Tuner were:
Fig. 19. Constant oscillation with Tu period.
KPR = 49.1719
KIR = 26.1069 With the values of Ku and Tu the PID parameters are
KDR = 2.6773 calculated like:
KP = Ku/1,7
Figure 18 show the response to the short-circuit fault, with KI = 2*(KP/Tu)
80& voltage fall, with the new and the old values for the PID KD = (KP*Tu)/8
controller parameters.
KP = 15.29
KI = 28.89
KD = 5.85
With this values the AC7B system was simulated, this time
for a short-circuit fault that lowers the voltage to zero, figure
Fig. 18. AC7B responses with the old and the new values for PID 20. For the same fault situation, voltage dropping to zero,
controller parameters. figure 21 shows the response with the values calculated with
the PID tuner tool.
1.8
REFERENCES
1.6
1.4
[1] Kundur, P. “Power System Stability and Control”, McGraw-Hill,
1.2 1994.
Vt (pu)
1
[2] Sucena Paiva, José Pedro “Redes de Energia Eléctrica : uma Análise
0.8 Sistémica”, IST Press 2005.
0.6
[3] IEEE Power Engineering Society, “IEEE Recommended Practice for
0.4 Excitation System Models for Power System Stability Studies”, IEEE
Std. 421.5-2005, 2006
0.2
0
34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41
[4] Kabir, S.M.L. and Shutleworth, R. “Brushless exciter models”, IEEE
Tempo (s) Proc.-Gener. Transm. Dirtib., Vol. 141, No. 1, January 1994.
Fig. 20. AC7B response with PID controller parameters from Ziegler-
Nichols method. [5] Jerkovic, V., Miklosevic, K. e Spoljaric, Z. “Excitation System
Models of Synchronous Generators”.
1.6
[7] Feng, S., Jianbo, X., Guoping, W. e Yong-hong, X. “Study of a
1.4 Brushless Excitation System Parameters Estimation Based on
Improved Genetic Algorithm”, IEEE,
1.2
[8] Bayram, M., Bulbul, H., Can, C., Bayindir, R. “Matlab/GUI Based
Vt (pu)
1
Basic Design Principles of PID Controller in AVR”, Istanbul, Turkey,
0.8
13-17 May 2013.
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41
Tempo (s)
Fig. 20. AC7B response with PID controller parameters from PID Tuner.
VII. CONCLUSION