Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Alexander 1966
Alexander 1966
Alexander 1966
8 AUGUST, 1966
90
U)
-80
0
I I - 70
I U)
U)
0
-J
uL. 60
0
'- 5C
/
w 40
30
Fig. 4. Magnetic flux paths for extreme overexcitation on low volt- C.)
age, core saturated. No load.
E - 20
U)
U)
region. Hence, the core leg is most susceptible to thermal 0
-J
damage resulting from overexcitation. IC0
Overexcitation must be extreme and of long duration
to produce damaging heating in core laminations. How-
ever, unlaminated structural parts can experience runaway 110 120 130
heating in a remarkably short time. Figure 5 shows cal- PERCENT VOLTS (CONSTANT FREQUENCY)
culated losses on a relative basis for a solid steel member Fig. 5. Loss in structural steel for overexcitation at no load.
in the leg region of one particular transformer design.
Losses were calculated by using Agarwal's analysis [2],
but with modification for the nonsinusoidal magnetizing greater than that of a sinusoidal load current because it is
force. The structural steel has attempted to carry flux rich in harmonics. Typical exciting current wave shapes
when the core steel became saturated but, since it was un- and their harmonic contents are shown in Fig. 6 for cur-
laminated, it was quite susceptible to eddy-current over- rents whose rms values are 10, 50, and 100 percent of full-
heating. The purpose of Fig. 5 is to illustrate how rapidly load current. For the transformer investigated, these would
losses in structural parts increase beyond some critical occur at excitations of approximately 125, 133, and 143
level of excitation. percent, respectively, as of course, the percent excitations
Outside of the core-leg region, other flux lines prin- and wave shapes are a function of each particular trans-
cipally in the air, as A and B in Fig. 4 may cause trouble former design.
by straying into locations where the flux is not anticipated. For a core-type transformer design, having an average
Appreciable flux flows in the air paths oinly during the strand eddy loss equal to ten percent of the 12R loss with
portion of the cycle when the core is saturated. Therefore, sinusoidal load current, the average eddy loss for the ex-
air flux is pulse-like in form as is the exciting current. citing current whose rms value is equal to 100 percent of
The pulse-like waveform has a high harmonic content, load current would be about 450 percent of 121R loss.
which increases its heating effect. Calculations were based on harmonics through the 15th.
Heating problems are not restricted to steel members. In the winding strands on the inner radius of the coil,
When flux passes through any conductor, eddy currents where magnetic flux density is greater than the average
result. Flux lines A and B in Fig. 4 may pass through value for the coils, the eddy loss would be in the vicinity of
structural parts outside the core, may link conducting loops 1300 percent of IPR loss. The loss in the inner strands would
in the leads, or may get into the tank base at the bottom of be about eight times that in the maximum-loss strands for
the core. normal-load current. In the transformer design used as
Overexcitation may even result in winding overheating an example, the winding conductor loss for a range of
if it is sufficiently extreme. Exciting current of the same excitations is shown in Fig. 7. If the winding conductors
magnitude as full-load current can occur for about 140 per- are not perfectly transposed for the overexcitation flux,
cent of rated excitation levels. For the same rms value, additional losses will result from circultating currents be-
however, the heating effect of the exciting current is much tween winding strands.
904 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER APPARATUS AND SYSTEMS AUGUST
z
w -.
ct l EXCITING CURRENT WAVE SHAPE
o 0 1.0 H
ZD0X 0.8
IxRS=100% IL z
V t43%
0 x 0.6 _ _J_
(.Ix(RMS)=50% I,-_
(, 0.4
V =I33%
z V=125%1
!P 02' 1-
O. 5 6 7 8 0 1
a._ U 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 X
tion will vary from one design to another, and any general
w
a-
trip operation. The unit's frequency dropped and varied as Since information was meager, a survey was started in
the operator tried to recover and bring the turbine-genera- the hope of verifying whether or not current utility operat-
tor back on the line. After three or four minutes, the trans- ing practices could lead to generator step-up transformer
former differential relay operated. Meanwhile, the trans- overexcitation. The benchmark was operations which could
former had been observed to vibrate severely and become lead to overexcitation if the shift operator's attention could
quite noisy. Inspection revealed little except that com- be distracted by other problems. It must be recognized
bustible gas was noted. that the short time within which damage may occur and
5) Utility E was preparing a unit to be brought on the the consequence of overexcitation are not generally under-
line. Prewarming had been accomplished at rated field stood by plant operators. These operations were studied:
current. During subsequent acceleration, the field current 1) M\Ianual voltage control on start-up.
was not reduced and a relay operation tripped the unit. 2) Voltage regulator control on shutdown.
A workman, standing near the transformer bank, had ob- 3) Load rejection caused by system conditions.
served that the transformer was making a loud noise and 4) Back-up relay operations during system faults.
was on his way to the plant to advise the operator that he 5) Control trouble due to electrical, mechanical, or
thought the transformer was in trouble. A recording mega- pneumatic control failure which could reduce machine
var chart showed a very large increase in megavar out of output.
the generator just prior to the relay operation. 6) Other operations, which necessitate closing of turbine
6) An overspeed test was being run on a machine by valves, included human error, turbine vibration, boiler
utility F. The machine was up to 3900 r/min with excita- trouble, and loss of auxiliary components.
tion applied to it when the transformer differential tripped.
Investigationi did not indicate a transformer fault. The next conditions were not examined:
7) A cross-compound unit of utility G was in service 1) Generator rotor or stator preheating or prewarming.
when boiler trouble necessitated tripping the generator 2) Presynchronizing of cross-compound units.
breaker. The voltage regulator was kept in service because 3) Automated units.
the operator did not have time to manually control the field 4) Utility test procedures, including overspeed tests
to a predetermined value and was reluctant to trip excita- with excitation applied and operational high-potential test
tion which would have required resynchronizing of the of the generator step-up unit.
cross-compound unit. In several cases, after approximately
three to four minutes, the transformer differential relay The sampling, which was necessarily general in nature,
tripped. In these instances, the transformers were given a was combined with outage information contained in EEI
visual inspection and no sign of damage was detected. reports [5], [6] in an attempt to determine the percentage
8) At utility H, a computer-operated unit was being shut of units each year which could experience overexcitation of
down during a change of shifts. Normal procedure was to generator step-up transformers. The listed operating condi-
manually control excitation on shutdown. In this case, the tions indicated, on a pessimistic basis, that up to 20 percent
voltage regulator was left in service through an oversight of all generator step-up transformers could be subjected to
and resulted in a transformer differential relay operation. overexcitation each year. On an individual basis, this
Now, the computer is reprogrammed to automatically re- means that on the average, a large generator step-up
move excitation on shutdown. Computer-operated units transformer could experience overexcitation once every
can be conveniently programmed to sense volts per c/s five years. This does not necessarily imply a catastrophic
quantities and take corrective action. This allows basic experience. As was mentioned previously, there is a good
protection of the generator step-up transformer under possibility that some instances will be of a minor nature
programmed conditions. and some will inadvertently be interrupted by a relay which
misoperates, but it must be emphasized that some will
cause a transformer failure. The catastrophic possibility
NUMBER OF UNITS WHICH MIGHT EXPERIENCE requires that automatic protection be employed to detect
OVEREXCITATION overexcitation and to take corrective action.
Survey of Electric Utility Excitation Practices
There are no industry statistics on generator step-up PROTECTION OF GENERATOR STEP-UP TRANSFORMERS
transformer overexcitation since this subject overlaps AGAINST OVEREXCITATION
product responsibility, industry groups, standards com- It is recommended that transformer overexcitation be a
mittees, and individual operating philosophy. Warnings primary relaying objective and that it not be incor-
appear to have been given in past literature [31, [4], on porated as an auxiliary function to an existing protective
the possibility of transformer damage during overexcita- device. For example, such relays as transformer differential,
tion, but few installations experienced it until the last negative phase sequence (unbalanced current), etc., have
five years. The importance of large units being installed occasionally operated on overexcitation. This creates
or planned for the future necessitated further investigation confusion in the determination of the cause of the relay
of possible occurrence and, hence, of unit outages resulting operation, or in the investigation of possible damage, and
from transformer damage. in the information necessary to make a decision to con-
1966 ALEXANDER ET AL.: EXCITATION OF GENERATOR STEP-UP TRANSFORMERS 907
separate relays be installed on each unit to detect this con- Stating this requirement in another way, the volts per c/s or the
volts per r/min should not exceed 100 percent of normal.
dition. Since the field current should not exceed that required to produce
5) It is further recommended that the method of de- 110 percent of rated voltage at rated frequency and load, the no
tection initiate automatic action to reduce the excitation maximum generator field current for operation at reduced frequency
to levels which are permissible. can be established on this basis. Automatic generator voltage
regulators may increase the field current in an attempt to maintain
ACKNOWLEDGMENT rated voltage as the speed decreases, thus causing overexcitation
of the generator transformer under these conditions. Provision
The authors wish to acknowledge the contribution of must, therefore, be made to limit their effect if safe operation is to
A. J. McConnell in developing the protective concepts and be assured.
logic diagram of Fig. 9 of the paper. The flux in a transformer core, produced by exciting current in a
winding, is confined to the core because of its greater permeability
compared to the surrounding volume. When flux density in the core
REFERENCES increases beyond saturation point, substaintial amount of flux will
a
[1] "Preferred voltage ratings for ac systems and equipment," spread into the air paths. In so doing, the flux lines cut the winding
Joint Edison Electric Institute-National Electrical Manu- copper and other metal parts, including the end frames and trans-
facturers Association Report, EEI publication R-6, NEMA former case, taking paths which normally have little flux. This
publication 17, New York, N. Y., May 1949.
[2] P. D. Agarwal, "Eddy-current losses in solid and laminated stray causes local eddy currents to flow and produce hot spots,
iron" Trans. AIEE (Power Apparatus and Systems), vol. 78, charring adjacent insulation, blistering paint, or even melting metal.
pp. 169-81, May 1959. With overexcitation, the flux lines of the primary coil as an air
[3] W. J. Gilson, Jr. and M. Temoshok, "Turbine-generator rotor core solenoid are superimposed on the flux lines at normal voltage.
prewarming," Trans. AIEE. (Power Apparatus and Systems)
vol. 76, pp. 549-556, May 1957. They cut the conductor of the coils in other directions than normal
[4] "Generator operation," General Electric Company publication and also cut the end frames and transformer tank.
GEI-74424A, June 1960. The amount of local heating and its location depends on the
[5] "Analytical report of equipment availability for the seven- individual transformer construction. A wide variation exists because
year period, 1955-1961," EEI publication 63-42, May 1963.
[6] "Report on equipment availability for the four-year period, other considerations than overexcited operation govern the me-
1960-1963." EEI publication 64-59, September 1964. chanical construction of transformers. Since transformers are
constructed under the assumption that the excitation will not
exceed 110 percent of normal, operation beyond this point is like
placing an air core reactor in the transformer tank and asking for
resultant damage to the transformer.
Discussion The transformer damage may or not be apparent. If the
may
practice is to maintain field current in the generators to keep them that more attention should be paid to factory-performed excitation
in step with each other and thus facilitate bringing them back up to tests. For a transformer with permissible overexcitation specified
speed. in the ASA Standard, special tests might from
range minute atone
An example of overexcitation at rated frequency is the practice of 120-percent to two hours at 110-pereent excitation.
bringing the generator voltage up to 125 percent at no load for a An alternative approach to this problem, differing from that
few minutes to confirm that the generator is in operating condition. proposed by the authors, may be adopted by users. This
many
Because of the difference in voltage rating of transformer and will specify that generator transformers have greater margin a
generator, this may produce 130-percent voltage on the transformer. between normal operating flux density and saturation, and that
Because the current taken by an overexcited transformer is less than they be capable of "delivering rated output in kVA at 10 percent
full load and the overvoltage is moderate, it was sometimesmis- above rated secondary voltage ... " instead of five percent as
in
takenly assumed that the transformer was being operated safely, ASA C57.12-00.411. In many cases, this will obviate the need for
and damage, or even transformer failure, resulted in some instances. special overexcitation detection circuits and corrective action.
To assure safe operation for the transformer, the flux density in Recent studies on base-load thermal and nuclear plants showed this
the transformer iron should not exceed 110 percent of normal. practice to result in lowest overall cost, including a high value for
Manuscript received February 14, 1966. Mnsrp received
Manuscript 96
February 17,7 1966.
eevdFbur
1966 ALEXANDER ET AL.: EXCITATION OF GENERATOR STEP-UP TRANSFORMERS 909
capitalized losses, compared with other possible methods of rating leeway mentioned does not appear to be sufficient to cover all pos-
the transformers. sible operating conditions, some of which have lead to overexcitation
magnitudes well above those which could be protected by the sug-
gested decrease in flux density. It should be realized that the protec-
C. Concordia (General Electric Company, Schenectady, N. Y.): tive features recommended in this paper are much less costly than
This paper does an excellent job of summarizing all of the various specifying lower flux densities which would protect the GSU against
ways in which generator step-up transformers might become subject the magnitudes of overexcitation which can be encountered. Extra
to excessive flux, and recommending preventive measures. However capacity for overexcitation also means extra weight in the trans-
I could not help but be very much impressed by the fact that most former. This would be a serious complication to the problem of ship-
(5 out of eight) of the actual cases cited were due to a single cause, the ment of very large generator step-up units.
attempt of the automatic generator excitation control to hold The special tests proposed by Mr. Harrison could be made at only
constant volts as generator frequency decreased. These cases would slight inconvenience (increased test time), but it is not clear how they
not have occurred if the excitation control had been designed to would measure the transformer's capacity for overexcitation. Units
hold constant volts per cycle. designed to ASA Standards should be capable of operation at 110
Since the characteristics of the voltage regulator seem to be so percent excitation and no-load indefinitely. There has been no field
important in the cases actually experienced (as distinguished from experience to cast doubt on this capability, so the value of a two-hour
conceivable cases) it would seem that holding volts per cycle would test is questionable.
be an obvious and direct way of solving the majority of the problems The authors agree with Mr. Concordia that the incorporation of a
actually encountered. volts per cycle limit is highly desirable on new excitation systems and,
Therefore I was surprised that this fact was not noted in the if practical, on existing systems as well. This will provide the most
conclusions (although it is mentioned in the text), and I should like straightforward and reliable means of protection under most operat-
to suggest that mention of the desirability of using volts per cycle ing conditions, when the voltage regulator is available. However, we
be made as one of the conclusions. Indeed this seems to me to be must nof overlook the fact that circumstances which necessitate
the most important conclusion. operating under manual control will occur. Hence, use of a voltage
Volts per cycle does not really have to be confined to use during regulator with a volts per cycle characteristic should not detract from
start-up and shutdown. To the contrary it may be desirable at all the recommendations that separate relays should be installed to
frequencies below 60 cycles regardless of the cause, since there are detect overexcitation and to initiate automatic corrective action, as
usually a great many other transformers distributed around a power outlined in the paper.
system, all of which would presumably be better adapted to reduced- In conclusion, it should be noted that cases of damage have oc-
frequency operation at a constant value of volts per cycle. For curred with 0.5 response generator excitation systems having shaft-
frequencies much above 60 cycles the feature should not be in- driven exciters. The use of high response systems and/or motor-
corporated. If there has to be a definite break in characteristic this driven exciters further increases the likelihood of overexcitation
should occur either slightly above or slightly below 60 cycles de damage to generator step-up transformers, assuming that the auto-
pending upon other factors. matic voltage regulators are in service, because
Manuscript received February 23, 1966. 1) With certain exceptions (such as controlled-rectifier excitation
systems), high response is accompanied by increased exciter ceiling
voltage. The higher ceiling voltage, in addition to contributing to a
somewhat higher value of transformer excitation, will sustain excita-
G. W. Alexander, S. L. Corbin, and W. J. McNutt: The authors wish tion at a damaging level for lower turbine-generator speeds, thus ex-
to thank the discussors for their comments on this subject. tending the time the transformer is exposed to overexcitation during
We appreciate the viewpoint of another manufacturer, presented coastdown after a tripout.
by Mr. Sealey, and are pleased to find him in agreement with our 2) A motor-driven exciter provides generator excitation independ-
conclusions. His observation that operation of a transformer at an ent of turbine-generator speed. The end result is that the transformer
excitation beyond 110 percent of normal "is like placing an air core is exposed to overexcitation down to an extremely low turbine-
reactor in the transformer tank," is particularly apt. It suggests the generator speed.
need for a completely different set of design rules than would nor-
mally apply to a power transformer. This is indeed the case. The use of generator excitation to attempt to brake units on shut-
Mr. Harrison suggests a greater capacity for overexcitation be down should be carefully reviewed. The relatively small value of gen-
specified as an alternate solution to the problem. This could be an erator and transformer core loss plus exciter power, in the case of a
acceptable solution, but it might be costly. The extra five percent shaft-driven exciter, contributes little to lowering shutdown time.
Such a small gain can hardly be justified when the consequences of
Manuscript received April 8, 1966. improper operation under such conditions are considered.