RESULTS INTERPRETATION SERVICE

ZOOM MONITORING SYSTEM

WINDOWS VERSION 7.1.9

O
EM
TECHNICAL REPORT NO. 1

FEBRUARY 2017
D

Prepared by:
André Tétreault
Director
Tests & Diagnostics Division
Contents
1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 3
1.1 Test Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.2 Overall Unit Behavior . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.3 Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

2 TECHNICAL REPORT 5
2.1 Introduction and Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
2.2 General Findings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
2.3 Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
2.4 Overall Unit Behavior . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
2.4.1 Stator . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
2.4.2 Rotor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
2.4.3 Relative Shaft Vibration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
2.4.4 Absolute Stator Core Vibration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
2.5 Unit Behavior in Transient Mode . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66
2.5.1 Start-Up . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66
2.5.2 Field Flash . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74
2.5.3 Load Rejection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82
2.6 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91

3 APPENDICES 92
3.1 Unit Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92
3.2 Mechanical Tolerance Guide for Hydroelectrical Generators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93
3.2.1 Generator Air Gap Deviation Levels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93
3.2.2 Vibration Levels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93

2 CONTENTS
1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1.1 Test Overview
A Hydrogenerator Unit was commissioned in 1968 with a nominal capacity of 157 MW. The stator was
rewound and rewedged in 2006. The Unit was equipped with a ZOOM system in 2016 in order to measure
the generator air gap and magnetic flux, shaft displacement and stator core vibration.

A series of tests was conducted on October 21, 2016. Various operating conditions were recorded, as well as
tests in transient mode , such as start-up, field excitation and load rejection.

1.2 Overall Unit Behavior

The overall Unit behavior was evaluated during these tests. The following was observed:

ˆ The stator apparent circularity results at both the upper and lower parts of the Unit were found to be
quite acceptable throughout the various tests performed;

ˆ The stator concentricity results at both the upper and lower parts of the Unit were also found to be
quite good at all times;
ˆ Stator encroachments, at both the upper and lower parts, were found however; the stator shapes
remained acceptable;

ˆ The stator thermal expansion at both the upper and lower parts of the Unit was found to be non-
uniform;
ˆ The rotor apparent circularity and concentricity results, at both the upper and lower parts, were
excellent under all operating conditions;

ˆ The rotor rim expansion at both the upper and lower parts was found to be somewhat non-uniform;

ˆ No noticeable discrepancies were observed in regards to the magnetic field intensity generated by the
rotor poles;
ˆ The vibration levels recorded at all three (3) guide bearings were found to be quite acceptable, according
to ISO 7919-5 tolerances;

ˆ The results for the stator core absolute vibration were quite acceptable at all times;

ˆ The results observed during the transient conditions; namely a start-up, a field flash measurement, as
well as a load rejection measurement, showed that the Unit performed very well under those conditions.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 3
1.3 Recommendations
ˆ Although not urgent at this time, inspection of the stator should be performed in order to determine
if any constraints exist preventing the stator from adopting a more circular overall shape;
ˆ The rotor components should be verified at the earliest convenience so as to detect any anomalies.
Slight discrepancies were observed in regards to the rotor rim expansion;
ˆ The addition of complementary parameters is highly recommended as it would be very helpful to
analyze the Unit behavior;
ˆ Continued close monitoring of all parameters so as to detect any abnormal changes to the Unit’s
behavior is highly recommended.

4 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
2 TECHNICAL REPORT
2.1 Introduction and Background
A Hydrogenerator Unit was commissioned in 1968 with a nominal capacity of 157 MW. The stator was
rewound and rewedged in 2006. The Unit was equipped with a ZOOM system in 2016 in order to measure
the generator air gap and magnetic flux, shaft displacement and stator core vibration.

A series of tests was conducted on October 21, 2016. Various operating conditions were recorded, as well as
tests in transient mode , such as start-up, field excitation and load rejection.

The air gap instrumentation consists of sixteen (16) capacitive air gap sensors, spread equally on two (2)
radial planes of the stator core (upper and lower). At each level, sensor no.1 is located at 0° (slot 271) in
relation to upstream (0°) and the others are located at 45°, 90°, 135°, 180°, 225°, 270° and 315° (slots 316, 1,
46, 91, 136, 181 and 226 respectively). The magnetic flux sensor is installed on the upper plane, next to air
gap sensor no. 1, at 359° (slot 270).

Shaft displacement/vibration is monitored at all three (3) guide bearing levels (UGB, LGB and TGB) by
six (6) capacitive proximity probes; two (2) per guide bearing, located at 0° (Y) and 90° (X) axes.

Stator core vibration is monitored by four (4) piezoelectric accelerometers mounted on the back of the stator
core at 79°, 169°, 249° and 344° (slots 350, 80, 160 and 255 respectively).

The stator temperature readings were recorded manually during the tests. The stator temperature increased
from 32.0°C after the field flash, to 69.0°C at Full Load - Hot, which corresponds to an increase of 37.0°C. It
is assumed that operating the Unit at this load for a period of over three (3) hours was sufficient to ensure
the stator nominal temperature therefore; the thermal expansion evaluation is considered valid.

This report offers a brief analysis of the Unit’s behavior in stable and transient modes.

TECHNICAL REPORT 5
2.2 General Findings
Table 1 below shows the mechanical tolerances of Unit 1, calculated from data obtained during a test at Full
Load - Hot, recorded at 12:52 on October 21, 2016. The Unit tolerances are then compared with those of a
new or refurbished Unit shortly after commissioning (good), considered acceptable for unrestricted long-term
operation (acceptable), unsatisfactory for long term continuous operation (high) or in a condition considered
unsafe for operation (critical).

Parameter1 Top Bottom Good Acceptable High Critical

Max. air gap variation 10.5% 8.6% <13.0% 13.0 to 20.0% 20.0 to 30.0% >30.0%
Stator app. circularity2 6.6% 4.7% <7.0% 7.0 to 12.0% 12.0 to 20.0% >20.0%
Stator concentricity2 1.2% 1.5% <5.0% 5.0 to 7.5% 7.5 to 10.0% >10.0%
Rotor circularity2 3.5% 4.3% <6.0% 6.0 to 8.0% 8.0 to 10.0% >10.0%
Rotor concentricity2 1.1% 0.8% <1.2% 1.2 to 2.5% 2.5 to 4.0% >4.0%
Minimum air gap 101.5% 102.5% >85.0% 85.0 to 70.0% 70.0 to 50.0% <50.0%
Upper guide bearing displacement3 5.5 mils p-p <6.0 mils p-p 6.0 to 9.9 9.9 to 20.1 >20.1 mils p-p
Lower guide bearing displacement3 3.2 mils p-p <6.0 mils p-p 6.0 to 9.9 9.9 to 20.1 >20.1 mils p-p
Turbine guide bearing displacement3 1.7 mils p-p <6.0 mils p-p 6.0 to 9.9 9.9 to 20.1 >20.1 mils p-p

1. See Appendix for parameter definition

2. Air gap values with vibration filter applied, for a nominal air gap of 709 mils
3. Shaft vibration values are expressed in mils, pk-pk

Table 1: Comparison of mechanical tolerances

Apparent circularity and concentricity parameters were calculated in reference to a nominal air gap of
709 mils. The stator apparent circularity values at both the upper and lower parts of the generator were
found to be low, and the concentricity values were excellent under this operating condition when compared
to accepted tolerances.

The rotor apparent circularity and concentricity values at both the upper and lower parts of the generator
were found to be excellent. The minimum air gap values were found to be excellent, in reality abnormally
high. It is quite uncommon to see minimum air gap results higher than the nominal air gap. The latter
should be verified for its accuracy. Nonetheless, the NAG value of 709 mils was used throughout this report.

The vibration values at the upper and lower guide bearings, as well as at the turbine guide bearing, were
found to be quite low according to ISO 7919-5 standards for a Unit with a nominal speed of 180 RPM.

A more detailed analysis of the stator, rotor and vibration behavior is available in section 2.4.

6 TECHNICAL REPORT
2.3 Recommendations
Although the stator apparent dynamic parameters remained excellent both at the upper and lower parts, the
stator shape did present encroachments, and corresponding protrusions. In addition, the thermal expansion
of the stator was found to be non-uniform. Therefore; although not urgent at this time, an inspection of
the stator frame/core is recommended so as to determine if any constraints exist preventing the stator from
adopting a more circular overall shape. Improving the shape, especially the upper part vs. the lower part
would be preferable in order to avoid structural issues during the working lifespan of this stator.

Although the rotor dynamic parameters also remained excellent at both levels, the rotor rim expansion
analysis demonstrated that the expansion at both the upper and lower parts was somewhat non-uniform.
The rotor components should be verified at the earliest convenience so as to detect any anomalies. Any
signs of powdering, greasing and/or cracking at the rotor rim, rotor pole dovetails, rim to spider attachments
and/or spider arms would be clear signs of structural integrity issues, such as looseness or excessive tightness.

The addition of complementary parameters such as active power, reactive power, stator voltage and current,
rotor voltage and current, stator temperature, bearing temperature is highly recommended as it would be
very helpful to analyze the Unit behavior.

Continued close monitoring of all parameters so as to detect any abnormal changes to the Unit’s behavior is
highly recommended.

TECHNICAL REPORT 7
2.4 Overall Unit Behavior
Tables 2 and 3 summarize the main air gap measurements performed on October 21, 2016 on the upper
and lower parts of the Unit. This data was used to analyze the dynamic behavior of the generator. The
circularity and concentricity values of the main components were taken from polar graphs with the vibration
filter applied, some of which can be consulted in Sections 2.4.1 and 2.4.2. The data in Table 2 represents
the values recorded at the upper part of the generator.

Operating Minimum Average Stator1 Rotor1

Date Time
condition air gap air gap App. circ. Conc. Circ. Conc.
Slow rotation 10/21/2016 8:42 728 752 28 2 @ 177° 26 7 @ 295°
SNL - no excitation 10/21/2016 8:52 688 718 29 3 @ 190° 24 8 @ 304°
Field Applied 10/21/2016 8:57 683 713 30 4 @ 187° 22 8 @ 303°
Synchronized to the grid 10/21/2016 9:07 683 713 31 5 @ 191° 23 8 @ 298°
25% load 42 MW 10/21/2016 9:11 684 716 34 6 @ 188° 24 8 @ 297°
50% load 85 MW 10/21/2016 9:14 686 717 34 6 @ 179° 24 8 @ 296°
75% load 128 MW 10/21/2016 9:18 688 720 34 6 @ 177° 24 7 @ 296°
100% load 170 MW 10/21/2016 9:23 693 724 36 7 @ 169° 25 7 @ 297°
Full Load - Hot 10/21/2016 12:52 720 756 47 9 @ 158° 25 8 @ 293°
Notes: all measurements are expressed in mils
1. Rotor and stator results are taken from polar graphs with the vibration filter applied

Table 2: Summary of air gap measurements - Upper part

Operating Minimum Average Stator1 Rotor1

Date Time
condition air gap air gap App. circ. Conc. Circ. Conc.
Slow rotation 10/21/2016 8:42 715 754 41 10 @ 103° 25 4 @ 199°
SNL - no excitation 10/21/2016 8:52 681 712 37 9 @ 112° 30 5 @ 170°
Field Applied 10/21/2016 8:57 678 711 36 9 @ 115° 31 5 @ 168°
Synchronized to the grid 10/21/2016 9:07 679 711 35 9 @ 125° 31 6 @ 169°
25% load 42 MW 10/21/2016 9:11 682 714 35 9 @ 130° 33 6 @ 168°
50% load 85 MW 10/21/2016 9:14 682 714 35 10 @ 127° 34 6 @ 167°
75% load 128 MW 10/21/2016 9:18 687 718 36 10 @ 129° 34 6 @ 164°
100% load 170 MW 10/21/2016 9:23 690 722 36 11 @ 129° 35 6 @ 164°
Full Load - Hot 10/21/2016 12:52 726 756 33 10 @ 125° 31 6 @ 167°
Notes: all measurements are expressed in mils
1. Rotor and stator results are taken from polar graphs with the vibration filter applied

Table 3: Summary of air gap measurements - Lower part

As can be seen in Table 2, the stator apparent circularity values at the upper part were excellent for all
operating conditions. A value of 47 mils, or 6.6% of nominal air gap (NAG), was observed at Full Load -
Hot. The stator concentricity results were quite good at all times. The maximum value observed was 9 mils
(1.3% of NAG), also at Full Load - Hot.

The results for the rotor at the upper part were found to be excellent at all times. The maximum value
for the rotor apparent circularity was 26 mils (3.7% of NAG) at Slow rotation. The maximum value for the
rotor concentricity was 8 mils (1.1% of NAG), during most operating conditions. The average and minimum
air gaps remained quite good at all times.

The data in Table 3 represents the values recorded at the lower part of the generator. As can be seen in Table
3, the stator apparent circularity values were also excellent for all operating conditions. A value of 41 mils,
or 5.8% of nominal air gap (NAG), was observed at Slow rotation. The stator concentricity results were
quite good at all times. The maximum value observed was 11 mils (1.6% of NAG) at 100% load (170 MW).

8 TECHNICAL REPORT
The results for the rotor were found to be excellent at all times. The maximum value for the rotor ap-
parent circularity was 35 mils (4.9% of NAG) at 100% load (170 MW). The maximum value for the rotor
concentricity was 6 mils (0.8% of NAG), during all operating conditions after synchronization to the grid.
The average and minimum air gaps remained quite good at all times.

More specifically, the following behavior was observed:

2.4.1 Stator
To monitor the stator, sixteen (16) air gap capacitive sensors were installed. Eight (8) were installed at the
upper part of the stator and eight (8) were installed at the lower part. At each level, sensor no.1 is located at 0°
in relation to upstream (0°) and the others are located at 45°, 90°, 135°, 180°, 225°, 270° and 315° respectively.

The behavior of the stator was studied under various operating conditions. In general, the shape of the
stator at the upper part was found to be acceptable, when compared to accepted tolerance levels under all
operating conditions. The apparent circularity values, as shown in Table 2, were found to be good throughout
the various operating conditions. The results varied between 28 mils and 47 mils. The concentricity results
remained between 2 mils and 9 mils, with a rotor angle variation of 169° to 190° throughout the tests, with
the exception of at Full Load – Hot, where a value of 9 mils at 158° was observed.

The apparent circularity results at the lower part of the stator, as shown in Table 3, were comparable, and
remained fairly constant throughout the tests as well. The values varied between 33 mils and 41 mils. The
concentricity results remained constant between 9 mils and 11 mils, throughout the tests, with a rotor angle
variation of 103° to 130°.

Operating Air Gap / Ref. Pole 3 Stator

condition 0° 45° 90° 135° 180° 225° 270° 315° temp. °C
Field applied 697 686 708 716 700 698 707 711 32
Synchronized to the grid 695 686 703 718 699 701 706 710 29
25% load 42 MW 694 686 705 719 701 702 707 709 29
50% load 85 MW 697 689 708 722 703 705 707 711 31
75% load 128 MW 698 691 711 725 705 707 709 712 35
100% load 170 MW 701 693 714 730 709 709 710 714 45
Full Load - Hot 735 720 750 768 741 738 739 749 69
Total expansion 38 34 42 52 41 40 32 38 37
Shaft displacement -6 -4 0 3 5 4 0 -5
Max. expansion 44 38 42 49 36 36 32 43
Relative expansion 12 6 10 17 4 4 0 11

Note: All measurements are expressed in mils

Table 4: Stator expansion in mils - Upper part

Tables 4 and 5 show the stator thermal expansion under various operating conditions, as recorded by these
air gap sensors. The stator temperature readings were manually recorded during the tests. The stator
temperature variation during the tests was 37°C (from 32°C after excitation to 69°C at Full Load – Hot
operating condition) therefore; the thermal expansion evaluation is considered valid. The stator thermal
expansion was verified using pole 3 as reference at the upper part and pole 33 at the lower part.

The stator thermal expansion is considered non-uniform if the variation between any two (2) locations along
the circumference of the stator is greater than 10 mils. The total thermal expansion is obtained by subtract-
ing the smallest air gap (at field applied) from the greatest air gap (at Full Load - Hot), while removing the
shaft displacement from the result. The relative thermal expansion is calculated by reducing the smallest
total thermal expansion to 0 mil; in this case, sensor 270° at the upper part and sensor 180° at the lower
part of the generator. The same value is subtracted from the other results, giving us the relative thermal

TECHNICAL REPORT 9
expansion ratio for all sensors.

The results in Table 4 indicate that the stator thermal expansion at the upper part was found to be slightly
non-uniform as a relative expansion deviation value greater than the 10.0 mils tolerance was observed at
three (3) sensors. The maximum deviation was found to be 17 mils.

The results in Table 5 indicate that the stator thermal expansion at the lower part was slightly non-uniform
as relative expansion deviation values were found to be greater than the 10.0 mils tolerance at sensors 0° and
45° - 13 and 11 mils respectively.

Operating Air Gap / Ref. Pole 33 Stator

condition 0° 45° 90° 135° 180° 225° 270° 315° temp. °C
Field applied 708 699 706 704 716 701 682 694 32
Synchronized to the grid 706 699 703 706 715 703 682 692 29
25% load 42 MW 708 702 706 710 719 706 684 694 29
50% load 85 MW 710 704 708 712 721 708 687 695 31
75% load 128 MW 714 707 711 716 725 713 690 700 35
100% load 170 MW 719 712 716 722 730 716 693 702 45
Full Load - Hot 754 745 752 756 760 749 727 736 69
Total expansion 46 46 46 52 44 48 45 42 37
Shaft displacement -5 -3 0 5 6 5 1 -4
Max. expansion 51 49 46 47 38 43 44 46
Relative expansion 13 11 8 9 0 5 6 8

Note: All measurements are expressed in mils

Table 5: Stator expansion in mils - Lower part

Figure 1: Polar plot of stator relative expansion

The stator thermal expansion results can be viewed in Figure 1. The relative expansion of the stator is
shown in Figure 2. Figures 3 to 16 of the following pages show the stator shape at both the upper and lower
parts of the stator, under various operating conditions.

Figures 3 and 4 present the upper and lower stator shapes while the Unit was operating at speed no load,
without excitation. Although the stator apparent circularity (stator shape) at the upper part seems to be
distorted, the actual results are excellent. The apparent circularity at the upper part was 30 mils (4.2%
of NAG) while its concentricity was 3 mils (0.5% of NAG) at 193°. As for the lower part of the stator,
here also the stator apparent circularity (stator shape) seems to be distorted. But as was the case at the
upper part, the actual results are excellent. The apparent circularity was also 37 mils (5.3% of NAG) while

10 TECHNICAL REPORT
 Figure 2: Relative stator thermal expansion at upper and lower parts

its concentricity was 9 mils (1.2% of NAG) but at 115°. Therefore; although the results in concentricity
are excellent, the vectors are in somewhat different directions. This discrepancy is caused primarily by the
noticeable encroachment at 45° at the upper part, as opposed to the noticeable encroachment at 270° at the
lower part. Although the apparent circularity and concentricity results at both the upper and lower parts
are excellent, the stator shape and position differ when comparing the upper and lower parts. The results
are still considered quite acceptable.

Figures 5 and 6 present the upper and lower stator shapes while the Unit was operating after excitation.
The apparent circularity at the upper part remained at 30 mils (4.2% of NAG) while its concentricity also
remained quite stable, increasing only up to 4 mils (0.5% of NAG) at 191°. As for the lower part, the apparent
circularity also remained quite stable, decreasing only down to 36 mils (5.1% of NAG) while its concentricity
remained at 9 mils (1.2% of NAG) at 117°. The results are still considered quite acceptable.

Figures 7 and 8 present the upper and lower stator shapes while the Unit was operating at 42 MW. The
apparent circularity at the upper part increased slightly up to 34 mils (4.9% of NAG) while its concentricity
also remained quite stable, increasing only up to 6 mils (0.9% of NAG) at 188°. As for the lower part, the
apparent circularity also remained quite stable, decreasing only down to 35 mils (4.9% of NAG) while its
concentricity remained at 9 mils (1.3% of NAG) at 131°. The results are still considered quite acceptable.

Figures 9 and 10 present the upper and lower stator shapes while the Unit operated at 85 MW. The apparent
circularity at the upper part remained quite stable, increasing only up to 35 mils (4.9% of NAG) while its
concentricity also remained at 6 mils (0.9% of NAG) at 179°. As for the lower part, the apparent circularity
also remained at 35 mils (5.0% of NAG) while its concentricity remained quite stable, increasing only up to
10 mils (1.4% of NAG) at 129°. The results are still considered quite acceptable.

Figures 11 and 12 present the upper and lower stator shapes while the Unit was operating at 128 MW. The
apparent circularity at the upper part remained at 35 mils (4.9% of NAG) while its concentricity remained
at 6 mils (0.9% of NAG) at 180°. As for the lower part, the apparent circularity also remained quite stable,
increasing only up to 36 mils (5.1% of NAG) while its concentricity remained at 10 mils (1.4% of NAG) at
131°. The results are still considered quite acceptable.

Figures 13 and 14 present the upper and lower stator shapes while the Unit was operating at 170 MW. The
apparent circularity at the upper part remained quite stable, increasing only up to 36 mils (5.1% of NAG)
while its concentricity remained quite stable, increasing only up to 7 mils (1.1% of NAG) at 168°. As for the
lower part, the apparent circularity also remained at 36 mils (5.1% of NAG) while its concentricity remained

TECHNICAL REPORT 11
quite stable, increasing only up to 11 mils (1.6% of NAG) at 128°. The results are still considered quite
acceptable.

Figures 15 and 16 present the upper and lower stator shapes while the Unit was operating under Full Load
– Hot condition. The apparent circularity at the upper part increased somewhat, due to the effects of the
thermal forces, increasing up to 47 mils (6.7% of NAG) while its concentricity remained quite stable, increas-
ing only up to 9 mils (1.3% of NAG) at 158°. As for the lower part, the apparent circularity decreased, as
opposed to a noticeable increase at the upper part, decreasing slightly down to 33 mils (4.7% of NAG) while
its concentricity remained at 11 mils (1.5% of NAG) at 126°. The results are still considered quite acceptable.

12 TECHNICAL REPORT
 Figure 3: Upper stator shape at speed no load

Figure 4: Lower stator shape at speed no load

TECHNICAL REPORT 13
 Figure 5: Upper stator shape after field flash

Figure 6: Lower stator shape after field flash

14 TECHNICAL REPORT
 Figure 7: Upper stator shape at 42 MW

Figure 8: Lower stator shape at 42 MW

TECHNICAL REPORT 15
 Figure 9: Upper stator shape at 85 MW

Figure 10: Lower stator shape at 85 MW

16 TECHNICAL REPORT
 Figure 11: Upper stator shape at 128 MW

Figure 12: Lower stator shape at 128 MW

TECHNICAL REPORT 17
 Figure 13: Upper stator shape at 170 MW

Figure 14: Lower stator shape at 170 MW

18 TECHNICAL REPORT
 Figure 15: Upper stator shape at Full Load - Hot

Figure 16: Lower stator shape at Full Load - Hot

TECHNICAL REPORT 19
2.4.2 Rotor
The behavior of the rotor was studied under various operating conditions. In general, the shape of the rotor
at the upper part was found to be quite acceptable, when compared to accepted tolerance levels under all
operating conditions. The apparent circularity and concentricity values, as shown in Table 2, remained fairly
constant throughout the various operating conditions. The results varied between 22 mils and 26 mils. The
concentricity results remained between 7 mils and 8 mils, throughout the tests, with a rotor angle variation
of 293° to 304°.

The apparent circularity results at the lower part of the rotor, as shown in Table 3, were slightly higher but
remained fairly constant throughout the tests as well, varying only between 30 mils and 35 mils, except at
slow speed, where a value of 25 mils was observed. The concentricity results remained between 4 mils and
6 mils, throughout the tests, with a rotor angle variation of 164° to 199°.

Tables 6 and 7 show the results of the rotor expansion (centrifugal, magnetic and thermal) as seen by air gap
sensor at 0°, at both the upper and lower part of the generator, while the Unit operated from slow rotation
to nominal speed and up to Full Load - Hot. The total expansion represents the variation between the air
gap values for the specified pole at slow roll vs. the result for the same pole at Full Load – Hot.

Operating Air gap per pole (Top sensor 0°) Rotor

condition 5 10 15 22 26 31 35 39 conc. angle
Slow rotation 757 755 744 751 748 752 748 749 295°
SNL - no excitation 713 720 716 722 716 713 707 705 304°
Field applied 708 716 713 716 709 707 702 700 303°
Synchronized to the grid 706 717 713 713 704 706 702 699 298°
100% load 170 MW 711 724 723 720 713 719 714 709 297°
Full Load - Hot 741 758 755 753 744 749 748 742 293°
Total expansion -16 3 11 2 -4 -3 0 -7
Shaft displacement -10 -6 -4 -1 -2 -7 -9 -10
Max. expansion -6 9 15 3 -2 4 9 3
Relative expansion 0 15 21 9 4 10 15 9

Note: Air gap and shaft displacement values are expressed in mils

Table 6: Rotor rim relative radial expansion - Upper part

Operating Air gap per pole (Bottom sensor 0°) Rotor

condition 1 12 16 21 27 30 36 40 conc. angle
Slow rotation 767 776 757 750 760 768 760 766 199°
SNL - no excitation 733 723 713 722 719 715 716 732 170°
Field applied 731 720 711 720 715 711 713 729 168°
Synchronized to the grid 731 718 709 718 713 707 712 730 169°
100% load 170 MW 741 727 720 729 724 719 726 741 164°
Full Load - Hot 773 762 759 760 760 753 764 772 167°
Total expansion 6 -14 2 10 0 -15 4 6
Shaft displacement -10 -4 -1 -1 -4 -6 -9 -11
Max. expansion 16 -10 3 11 4 -9 13 17
Relative expansion 26 0 13 21 14 1 23 27

Note: Air gap and shaft displacement values are expressed in mils

Table 7: Rotor rim relative radial expansion - Lower part

The shaft displacement values represent the movement of the shaft (hence the rotor itself) between the two
operating conditions selected. The maximum expansion represents the expansion with the shaft displace-
ment removed. The relative expansion represents the variations between each individual pole vs. the pole
which displayed the greatest maximum expansion, i.e. pole 5 at the upper part and pole 12 at the lower
part. Any discrepancy above 10 mils is considered abnormal. Although only 8 poles per plane were selected

20 TECHNICAL REPORT
for presentation in Tables 6 and 7, the results for all poles are graphically presented in Figure 17, shown below.

The results displayed in Table 6 indicate that the relative expansion of the rotor at the upper part was
found to be somewhat non-uniform. The results (as can be seen in Figure 17) showed that some deviations
in relative expansion beyond the 10.0 mils tolerance were observed between poles 10 and 17, and between
poles 35 and 38. The maximum relative expansion was found at pole 15, where a value of 21 mils was observed.

The results displayed in Table 7 indicate that the relative expansion of the rotor at the lower part was
also found to be non-uniform. The results (as can be seen in Figure 17 as well) showed that a number
of poles show deviations in relative expansion beyond the 10.0 mils tolerance, in reference to pole 12. The
maximum relative expansion was found at pole 40, where a value of 27 mils was observed, which is quite high.

Figure 17: Rotor rim relative expansion in mils

Figures 18 to 33 show the rotor shape at various operating conditions in Polar format. Figures 18 and 19
show the rotor shapes (apparent circularities) at both levels, while the Unit was rotating at very slow speed
(∼5 rpm). The apparent circularity at the upper part was found to be 24 mils (3.5% of NAG) while its
concentricity was 5 mils (0.7% of NAG) at 269°. As for the lower part, the apparent circularity was found
to be 28 mils (4.0% of NAG) while its concentricity was 6 mils (0.9% of NAG) at 183°. The results are still
considered quite acceptable.

Figures 20 and 21 show the rotor shape at both levels while the Unit was operating at speed no load, without
excitation. The apparent circularity at the upper part remained stable, increasing only up to 27 mils (3.8%
of NAG) while its concentricity increased up to 9 mils (1.3% of NAG) at 317°. As for the lower part, the
apparent circularity also remained quite stable, decreasing only down to 27 mils (3.8% of NAG) while its
concentricity decreased down to 3 mils (0.5% of NAG) at 159°. The results are still considered quite accept-
able.

Figures 22 and 23 show the rotor shape at both levels while the Unit was operating after the field was
introduced into the air gap. The apparent circularity at the upper part remained stable, decreasing only
down to 26 mils (3.7% of NAG) while its concentricity remained at 9 mils (1.3% of NAG) at 310°. As for
the lower part, the apparent circularity also remained quite stable, increasing only up to 29 mils (4.1% of
NAG) while its concentricity remained at 3 mils (0.5% of NAG) at 170°. The results are still considered quite
acceptable.

Figures 24 and 25 show the rotor shape at both levels while the Unit was operating at 42 MW. The ap-
parent circularity at the upper part remained stable, increasing only up to 28 mils (3.9% of NAG) while its

TECHNICAL REPORT 21
concentricity remained at 9 mils (1.3% of NAG) at 310°. As for the lower part, the apparent circularity also
remained quite stable, increasing only up to 30 mils (4.3% of NAG) while its concentricity remained stable,
increasing only up to 4 mils (0.6% of NAG) at 160°. The results are still considered quite acceptable.

Figures 26 and 27 show the rotor shape at both levels while the Unit was operating at 85 MW. The apparent
circularity at the upper part remained stable, decreasing only down to 26 mils (3.7% of NAG) while its
concentricity remained at 9 mils (1.2% of NAG) at 305°. As for the lower part, the apparent circularity also
remained quite stable, increasing only up to 32 mils (4.5% of NAG) while its concentricity remained at 4 mils
(0.6% of NAG) at 166°. The results are still considered quite acceptable.

Figures 28 and 29 show the rotor shape at both levels while the Unit was operating at 128 MW. The ap-
parent circularity at the upper part remained stable, decreasing only down to 27 mils (3.8% of NAG) while
its concentricity also remained stable, decreasing only down to 8 mils (1.2% of NAG) at 308°. As for the
lower part, the apparent circularity also remained quite stable, decreasing only down to 31 mils (4.4% of
NAG) while its concentricity remained at 4 mils (0.6% of NAG) at 160°. The results are still considered
quite acceptable.

Figures 30 and 31 show the rotor shape at both levels while the Unit was operating at 170 MW. The apparent
circularity at the upper part remained at 27 mils (3.9% of NAG) while its concentricity also remained stable
at 8 mils (1.2% of NAG) at 311°. As for the lower part, the apparent circularity also remained quite stable,
increasing only up to 32 mils (4.4% of NAG) while its concentricity remained at 4 mils (0.6% of NAG) at
154°. The results are still considered quite acceptable.

Figures 32 and 33 show the rotor shape at both levels while the Unit was operating under Full Load –
Hot condition. The apparent circularity at the upper part remained at 27 mils (3.8% of NAG) while its
concentricity was also remained stable at 8 mils (1.2% of NAG) at 307°. As for the lower part, the apparent
circularity decreased slightly down to 28 mils (3.9% of NAG) while its concentricity remained at 4 mils (0.6%
of NAG) at 153°. The results are still considered quite acceptable.

22 TECHNICAL REPORT
 Figure 18: Upper rotor shape at slow roll

Figure 19: Lower rotor shape at slow roll

TECHNICAL REPORT 23
 Figure 20: Upper rotor shape at speed no roll

Figure 21: Lower rotor shape at speed no roll

24 TECHNICAL REPORT
 Figure 22: Upper rotor shape after field flash

Figure 23: Lower rotor shape after field flash

TECHNICAL REPORT 25
 Figure 24: Upper rotor shape at 42 MW

Figure 25: Lower rotor shape at 42 MW

26 TECHNICAL REPORT
 Figure 26: Upper rotor shape at 85 MW

Figure 27: Lower rotor shape at 85 MW

TECHNICAL REPORT 27
 Figure 28: Upper rotor shape at 128 MW

Figure 29: Lower rotor shape at 128 MW

28 TECHNICAL REPORT
 Figure 30: Upper rotor shape at 170 MW

Figure 31: Lower rotor shape at 170 MW

TECHNICAL REPORT 29
 Figure 32: Upper rotor shape at Full Load - Hot

Figure 33: Lower rotor shape at Full Load - Hot

30 TECHNICAL REPORT
Magnetic Flux

A magnetic flux probe is mounted on the stator core at 359°, next to the upper air gap sensor. Figure 34 of
the following page shows the results of the magnetic field profile while the Unit was under Full Load – Hot
operating condition, compared to the air gap amplitude at the same location (0°). The inverse relationship
between the air gap and the magnetic field intensity is clearly demonstrated on this graph. A smaller air
gap produces higher magnetic field intensities and vice-versa. An overall evaluation of the magnetic flux
intensity, generated by each individual pole, was performed and, although some magnetic flux variations
were observed, caused by the variation in rotor shape, no noticeable discrepancies were found. Therefore;
we can safely say that there are no issues with each poles capacity to generate the proper magnetic field.

Figure 34: Magnetic field intensity vs. air gap amplitude

TECHNICAL REPORT 31
2.4.3 Relative Shaft Vibration
To monitor the shaft vibration, a total of six (6) proximity probes are used on the three (3) bearings. Each
pair of probes is mounted 90° apart (0° and 90° angles). There are two (2) proximity probes on the upper
guide bearing (UGB), (2) proximity probes on the lower guide bearing (LGB) and (2) proximity probes on
the turbine guide bearing (TGB). The vibration readings were recorded with the ZOOM system, and the
results can be seen in Table 8. As was the case for the previous stator and rotor sections, the data from
various operating conditions was used for this analysis.

The vibration levels recorded at the upper, lower and turbine guide bearings were quite acceptable throughout
the tests, when compared to existing tolerance levels (ISO 7919-5). Any result below the tolerance of 6.0 mils
is considered good. The shaft vibration levels were quite stable until the Unit began producing power, which
is common as the water flow increases with load. In many cases, this corresponds to a shaft vibration increase.

The results of Table 8 are also displayed in Figure 35.

Relative shaft displacement (mils p-p)

Operating condition UGB X (0°) UGB Y (90°) LGB X (0°) LGB Y (90°) TGB X (0°) TGB Y (90°)
Avg. Max Avg. Max Avg. Max Avg. Max Avg. Max Avg. Max
SNL - no excitation 4.4 4.9 4.2 4.6 1.6 1.9 1.9 2.1 0.8 1.0 0.7 0.8
Field Applied 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.6 1.5 1.5 1.7 1.7 1.0 1.0 0.9 0.9
Synchronized to the grid 3.4 3.4 3.1 3.1 1.7 1.7 1.9 1.9 1.2 1.2 1.1 1.1
25% load 42 MW 4.4 5.3 3.6 4.4 2.1 2.6 2.5 2.9 0.9 1.2 1.0 1.2
50% load 85 MW 4.4 5.6 3.6 4.5 2.0 2.8 2.4 3.3 0.9 1.2 1.0 1.3
75% load 128 MW 4.8 5.9 3.9 4.7 2.1 3.0 2.5 3.5 1.0 1.3 1.0 1.4
100% load 170 MW 4.9 6.3 4.1 5.2 2.2 3.0 2.5 3.3 1.0 1.4 1.0 1.4
Full Load - Hot 4.6 5.5 4.1 4.9 2.3 3.1 2.6 3.2 1.2 1.7 1.2 1.7

Note: Shaft displacement values are expressed in mils pk-pk

Table 8: Shaft vibration at guide bearings

Figure 35: Vibratory behavior of the shaft

32 TECHNICAL REPORT
Figures 36 to 59 show the Orbit graphs at all three (3) guide bearings with the Unit operating under various
operating conditions.

Figure 36 shows that the Orbit pattern at the upper guide bearing was circular while the Unit was operating
at speed no load, without excitation. The average vibration amplitude levels were quite acceptable (∼6.1 mils,
pk-pk). Figure 37 shows that the Orbit pattern at the lower guide bearing was somewhat erratic (somewhat
of a figure 8 pattern) at the same operating condition, with average vibration amplitude levels of ∼2.5 mils,
pk-pk. Figure 38 shows that the Orbit pattern at the turbine guide bearing is also circular at the same
operating condition, with average vibration amplitude levels of ∼1.1 mils, pk-pk.

Figure 39 shows that the Orbit pattern at the upper guide bearing was somewhat circular while the Unit
was operating after the rotor was energized. The average vibration amplitude levels were quite acceptable
(∼5.1 mils, pk-pk). Figure 40 shows that the Orbit pattern at the lower guide bearing was somewhat erratic
at the same operating condition, with average vibration amplitude levels of ∼2.3 mils, pk-pk. Figure 41
shows that the Orbit pattern at the turbine guide bearing is also circular at the same operating condition,
with average vibration amplitude levels of ∼1.3 mils, pk-pk.

Figure 42 shows that the Orbit pattern at the upper guide bearing was somewhat circular while the Unit
was operating after the Unit was synchronized to the grid. The average vibration amplitude levels were
quite acceptable (∼4.6 mils, pk-pk). Figure 43 shows that the Orbit pattern at the lower guide bearing
was somewhat erratic at the same operating condition, with average vibration amplitude levels of ∼2.5 mils,
pk-pk. Figure 44 shows that the Orbit pattern at the turbine guide bearing is also circular at the same
operating condition, with average vibration amplitude levels of ∼1.6 mils, pk-pk.

Figure 45 shows that the Orbit pattern at the upper guide bearing was somewhat circular while the Unit was
operating at 42 MW. The average vibration amplitude levels were quite acceptable (∼5.7 mils, pk-pk). Fig-
ure 46 shows that the Orbit pattern at the lower guide bearing was somewhat erratic at the same operating
condition, with average vibration amplitude levels of ∼3.3 mils, pk-pk. Figure 47 shows that the Orbit pat-
tern at the turbine guide bearing is also circular at the same operating condition, with average vibration
amplitude levels of ∼1.3 mils, pk-pk.

Figure 48 shows that the Orbit pattern at the upper guide bearing was somewhat circular while the Unit was
operating at 85 MW. The average vibration amplitude levels were quite acceptable (∼5.7 mils, pk-pk). Fig-
ure 49 shows that the Orbit pattern at the lower guide bearing was somewhat erratic at the same operating
condition, with average vibration amplitude levels of ∼3.1 mils, pk-pk. Figure 50 shows that the Orbit pat-
tern at the turbine guide bearing is also circular at the same operating condition, with average vibration
amplitude levels of ∼1.3 mils, pk-pk.

Figure 51 shows that the Orbit pattern at the upper guide bearing was somewhat circular while the Unit
was operating at 128 MW. The average vibration amplitude levels were quite acceptable (∼6.2 mils, pk-
pk). Figure 52 shows that the Orbit pattern at the lower guide bearing was somewhat erratic at the same
operating condition, with average vibration amplitude levels of ∼3.3 mils, pk-pk. Figure 53 shows that the
Orbit pattern at the turbine guide bearing is also circular at the same operating condition, with average
vibration amplitude levels of ∼1.4 mils, pk-pk.

Figure 54 shows that the Orbit pattern at the upper guide bearing was somewhat circular while the Unit
was operating at 170 MW. The average vibration amplitude levels were quite acceptable (∼6.4 mils, pk-
pk). Figure 55 shows that the Orbit pattern at the lower guide bearing was somewhat erratic at the same
operating condition, with average vibration amplitude levels of ∼3.3 mils, pk-pk. Figure 56 shows that the
Orbit pattern at the turbine guide bearing is also circular at the same operating condition, with average
vibration amplitude levels of ∼1.4 mils, pk-pk.

TECHNICAL REPORT 33
Figure 57 shows that the Orbit pattern at the upper guide bearing was somewhat circular while the Unit was
operating under Full Load – Hot condition. The average vibration amplitude levels were quite acceptable
(∼6.2 mils, pk-pk). Figure 58 shows that the Orbit pattern at the lower guide bearing was somewhat erratic
at the same operating condition, with average vibration amplitude levels of ∼3.5 mils, pk-pk. Figure 59
shows that the Orbit pattern at the turbine guide bearing is also circular at the same operating condition,
with average vibration amplitude levels of ∼1.7 mils, pk-pk.

34 TECHNICAL REPORT
 Figure 36: Orbit pattern of UGB at speed no load

Figure 37: Orbit pattern of LGB at speed no load

TECHNICAL REPORT 35
 Figure 38: Orbit pattern of TGB at speed no load

Figure 39: Orbit pattern of UGB after field flash

36 TECHNICAL REPORT
 Figure 40: Orbit pattern of LGB after field flash

Figure 41: Orbit pattern of TGB after field flash

TECHNICAL REPORT 37
 Figure 42: Orbit pattern of UGB after synchronization to the grid

Figure 43: Orbit pattern of LGB after synchronization to the grid

38 TECHNICAL REPORT
 Figure 44: Orbit pattern of TGB after synchronization to the grid

Figure 45: Orbit pattern of UGB at 42 MW

TECHNICAL REPORT 39
 Figure 46: Orbit pattern of LGB at 42 MW

Figure 47: Orbit pattern of TGB at 42 MW

40 TECHNICAL REPORT
 Figure 48: Orbit pattern of UGB at 85 MW

Figure 49: Orbit pattern of LGB at 85 MW

TECHNICAL REPORT 41
 Figure 50: Orbit pattern of TGB at 85 MW

Figure 51: Orbit pattern of UGB at 128 MW

42 TECHNICAL REPORT
 Figure 52: Orbit pattern of LGB at 128 MW

Figure 53: Orbit pattern of TGB at 128 MW

TECHNICAL REPORT 43
 Figure 54: Orbit pattern of UGB at 170 MW

Figure 55: Orbit pattern of LGB at 170 MW

44 TECHNICAL REPORT
 Figure 56: Orbit pattern of TGB at 170 MW

Figure 57: Orbit pattern of UGB at Full Load - Hot

TECHNICAL REPORT 45
 Figure 58: Orbit pattern of LGB at Full Load - Hot

Figure 59: Orbit pattern of TGB at Full Load - Hot

46 TECHNICAL REPORT
Figures 60 to 83 of the following pages represent spectral graphs (FFTs) of all three (3) guide bearings,
recorded while the Unit was operating under various conditions.

Figures 60 to 62 represent spectral graphs while the Unit was operating at speed no load condition. Figure
60 shows that the fundamental frequency of 3.0 Hz at the upper guide bearing is clearly defined, with an
amplitude level of ∼4.2 mils, pk-pk, which is quite acceptable. The results at the lower guide bearing show
that, in addition to the fundamental frequency of 3.0 Hz, a 2nd super-synchronous harmonic of 6.0 Hz is
present. The amplitude levels are ∼1.2 mils, pk-pk at the fundamental frequency and ∼1.0 mil, pk-pk, at
the 2nd super-synchronous harmonic (see Figure 61). The results at the turbine guide bearing are similar
to those at the upper guide bearing, in that the fundamental frequency of 3.0 Hz is clearly defined however;
the amplitude level is quite lower at ∼0.7 mil, pk-pk (see Figure 62).

Figures 63 to 65 represent spectral graphs while the Unit was operating after the rotor was energized. Figure
63 shows that the fundamental frequency of 3.0 Hz at the upper guide bearing is clearly defined, with an
amplitude level of ∼3.6 mils, pk-pk, which is similar to the previous operating condition amplitude level
and quite acceptable. The results at the lower guide bearing show that, both the fundamental frequency of
3.0 Hz and the 2nd super-synchronous harmonic of 6.0 Hz are still present. The amplitude levels are ∼1.0 mil,
pk-pk at both frequencies (see Figure 64), which are similar to the previous operating condition levels. The
results at the turbine guide bearing are similar to those at the upper guide bearing, in that the fundamental
frequency of 3.0 Hz is clearly defined however; the amplitude level is quite lower at ∼0.8 mil, pk-pk (see
Figure 65).

Figures 66 to 68 represent spectral graphs while the Unit was operating after the Unit was synchronized to
the grid. Figure 66 shows that the fundamental frequency of 3.0 Hz at the upper guide bearing is clearly
defined, with an amplitude level of ∼3.3 mils, pk-pk, which is similar to the previous operating condition
amplitude level and quite acceptable. The results at the lower guide bearing show that, both the fundamen-
tal frequency of 3.0 Hz and the 2nd super-synchronous harmonic of 6.0 Hz are still present. The amplitude
levels are ∼1.1 mils, pk-pk and ∼1.0 mil, pk-pk respectively (see Figure 67). The results at the turbine guide
bearing are similar to those at the upper guide bearing, in that the fundamental frequency of 3.0 Hz is clearly
defined however; the amplitude level is quite lower at ∼0.9 mil, pk-pk (see Figure 68).

Figures 69 to 71 represent spectral graphs while the Unit was operating at 42 MW. Figure 69 shows that
the fundamental frequency of 3.0 Hz at the upper guide bearing is clearly defined, with an amplitude level of
∼4.0 mils, pk-pk, which is similar to the previous operating condition amplitude level and quite acceptable.
The results at the lower guide bearing show that, both the fundamental frequency of 3.0 Hz and the 2nd
super-synchronous harmonic of 6.0 Hz are still present. The amplitude levels are ∼1.7 mils, pk-pk and ∼1.0
mil, pk-pk respectively (see Figure 70). The results at the turbine guide bearing are similar to those at the
upper guide bearing, in that the fundamental frequency of 3.0 Hz is clearly defined however; the amplitude
level is quite lower at ∼0.8 mil, pk-pk (see Figure 71).

Figures 72 to 74 represent spectral graphs while the Unit was operating at 85 MW. Figure 72 shows that
the fundamental frequency of 3.0 Hz at the upper guide bearing is clearly defined, with an amplitude level of
∼4.0 mils, pk-pk, which is identical to the previous operating condition amplitude level and quite acceptable.
The results at the lower guide bearing show that, both the fundamental frequency of 3.0 Hz and the 2nd
super-synchronous harmonic of 6.0 Hz are still present. The amplitude levels are ∼1.6 mils, pk-pk and ∼1.0
mil, pk-pk respectively (see Figure 73). The results at the turbine guide bearing are similar to those at the
upper guide bearing, in that the fundamental frequency of 3.0 Hz is clearly defined however; the amplitude
level is quite lower at ∼0.8 mil, pk-pk (see Figure 74).

Figures 75 to 77 represent spectral graphs while the Unit was operating at 128 MW. Figure 75 shows that
the fundamental frequency of 3.0 Hz at the upper guide bearing is clearly defined, with an amplitude level of

TECHNICAL REPORT 47
∼4.4 mils, pk-pk, which is slightly higher than the previous operating condition amplitude level but still quite
acceptable. The results at the lower guide bearing show that, both the fundamental frequency of 3.0 Hz and
the 2nd super-synchronous harmonic of 6.0 Hz are still present. The amplitude levels are ∼1.7 mils, pk-pk
and ∼1.0 mil, pk-pk respectively (see Figure 76). The results at the turbine guide bearing are similar to
those at the upper guide bearing, in that the fundamental frequency of 3.0 Hz is clearly defined however; the
amplitude level is quite lower at ∼0.7 mil, pk-pk (see Figure 77).

Figures 78 to 80 represent spectral graphs while the Unit was operating at 170 MW. Figure 78 shows that
the fundamental frequency of 3.0 Hz at the upper guide bearing is clearly defined, with an amplitude level of
∼4.6 mils, pk-pk, which is similar to the previous operating condition amplitude level and quite acceptable.
The results at the lower guide bearing show that, both the fundamental frequency of 3.0 Hz and the 2nd
super-synchronous harmonic of 6.0 Hz are still present. The amplitude levels are ∼1.7 mils, pk-pk and ∼1.0
mil, pk-pk respectively (see Figure 79). The results at the turbine guide bearing are similar to those at the
upper guide bearing, in that the fundamental frequency of 3.0 Hz is clearly defined however; the amplitude
level is quite lower at ∼0.7 mil, pk-pk (see Figure 80).

Figures 81 to 83 represent spectral graphs while the Unit was operating under Full Load – Hot condition.
Figure 82 shows that the fundamental frequency of 3.0 Hz at the upper guide bearing is clearly defined, with
an amplitude level of ∼4.4 mils, pk-pk, which is similar to the previous operating condition amplitude level
and quite acceptable. The results at the lower guide bearing show that, both the fundamental frequency
of 3.0 Hz and the 2nd super-synchronous harmonic of 6.0 Hz are still present. The amplitude levels are
∼1.7 mils, pk-pk and ∼1.0 mil, pk-pk respectively (see Figure 82). The results at the turbine guide bearing
are similar to those at the upper guide bearing, in that the fundamental frequency of 3.0 Hz is clearly defined
however; the amplitude level is quite lower at ∼0.8 mil, pk-pk (see Figure 83).

48 TECHNICAL REPORT
 Figure 60: FFT of UGB at speed no load

Figure 61: FFT of LGB at speed no load

TECHNICAL REPORT 49
 Figure 62: FFT of TGB at speed no load

Figure 63: FFT of UGB after field flash

50 TECHNICAL REPORT
 Figure 64: FFT of LGB after field flash

Figure 65: FFT of TGB after field flash

TECHNICAL REPORT 51
 Figure 66: FFT of UGB after synchronization to the grid

Figure 67: FFT of LGB after synchronization to the grid

52 TECHNICAL REPORT
 Figure 68: FFT of TGB after synchronization to the grid

Figure 69: FFT of UGB at 42 MW

TECHNICAL REPORT 53
 Figure 70: FFT of LGB at 42 MW

Figure 71: FFT of TGB at 42 MW

54 TECHNICAL REPORT
 Figure 72: FFT of UGB at 85 MW

Figure 73: FFT of LGB at 85 MW

TECHNICAL REPORT 55
 Figure 74: FFT of TGB at 85 MW

Figure 75: FFT of UGB at 128 MW

56 TECHNICAL REPORT
 Figure 76: FFT of LGB at 128 MW

Figure 77: FFT of TGB at 128 MW

TECHNICAL REPORT 57
 Figure 78: FFT of UGB at 170 MW

Figure 79: FFT of LGB at 170 MW

58 TECHNICAL REPORT
 Figure 80: FFT of TGB at 170 MW

Figure 81: FFT of UGB at Full Load - Hot

TECHNICAL REPORT 59
 Figure 82: FFT of LGB at Full Load - Hot

Figure 83: FFT of TGB at Full Load - Hot

60 TECHNICAL REPORT
2.4.4 Absolute Stator Core Vibration
Table 9 below presents the overall stator core vibration results under various operating conditions. The
results were quite acceptable at all times. The highest results were observed while the Unit was operating
under Full Load – Hot condition, which is to be expected.

Absolute Vibration (G pk)

Operating Conditions Slot 350 / 79° Slot 80 / 169° Slot 160 / 249° Slot 255 / 344°
Avg. Max. Avg. Max. Avg. Max. Avg. Max.
SNL 0.07 0.11 0.03 0.06 0.03 0.06 0.04 0.06
Field Applied 0.12 0.18 0.09 0.10 0.06 0.09 0.21 0.22
Sync to Grid 0.11 0.14 0.13 0.18 0.16 0.19 0.18 0.20
25% Load 0.15 0.19 0.13 0.16 0.15 0.17 0.14 0.16
50% Load 0.16 0.20 0.12 0.14 0.12 0.16 0.17 0.20
75% Load 0.15 0.18 0.15 0.18 0.08 0.11 0.19 0.21
100% Load 0.10 0.15 0.16 0.18 0.08 0.10 0.16 0.18
Full Load - Hot 0.20 0.23 0.19 0.21 0.17 0.20 0.17 0.21

Table 9: Stator core vibration behavior

Figures 84 to 90 of the following pages represent spectral graphs (FFTs) of all four (4) stator core absolute
vibration sensors, recorded while the Unit was operating under various conditions.

Figure 84 presents the results while the Unit was operating after the rotor was energized. The fundamental
electro-magnetic frequency of 120.0 Hz is present, with an amplitude level of ∼0.16 G, peak, which is quite
acceptable. A 2nd super-synchronous harmonic of 240.0 Hz is also present, at very low amplitude.

Figure 85 presents the results after the Unit was synchronized to the grid. The fundamental electro-magnetic
frequency of 120.0 Hz is present, at a significantly lower amplitude level of ∼0.042 G, peak. The 2nd super-
synchronous harmonic of 240.0 Hz is still present, at a slightly higher amplitude of 0.058 G, peak. However,
this result is still quite low.

Figure 86 presents the results while the Unit was operating at 42 MW. The fundamental electro-magnetic
frequency of 120.0 Hz is present, at a similar amplitude level of ∼0.045 G, peak. The 2nd super-synchronous
harmonic of 240.0 Hz is still present, also at a similar amplitude of 0.045 G, peak. These results are still
quite low.

Figure 87 presents the results while the Unit was operating at 85 MW. The fundamental electro-magnetic
frequency of 120.0 Hz is present, at a similar amplitude level of ∼0.054 G, peak. The 2nd super-synchronous
harmonic of 240.0 Hz is still present, at the same amplitude level of 0.045 G, peak. These results are still
quite low.

Figure 88 presents the results while the Unit was operating at 128 MW. The fundamental electro-magnetic
frequency of 120.0 Hz is present, at a similar amplitude level of ∼0.051 G, peak. The 2nd super-synchronous
harmonic of 240.0 Hz is still present, at the same amplitude level of 0.045 G, peak. These results are still
quite low.

Figure 89 presents the results while the Unit was operating at 170 MW. The fundamental electro-magnetic
frequency of 120.0 Hz is present, at a similar amplitude level of ∼0.043 G, peak. The 2nd super-synchronous
harmonic of 240.0 Hz is still present, at a similar amplitude level of 0.049 G, peak. These results are still
quite low.

Figure 90 presents the results while the Unit was operating under Full Load – Hot condition. The funda-
mental electro-magnetic frequency of 120.0 Hz is present, at a slightly higher amplitude level of ∼0.063 G,

TECHNICAL REPORT 61
peak. The 2nd super-synchronous harmonic of 240.0 Hz is still present, also at a slightly higher amplitude
level of 0.105 G, peak. These results are still quite low.

Figure 84: FFT of stator core after excitation

Figure 85: FFT of stator core after synchronization to the grid

62 TECHNICAL REPORT
 Figure 86: FFT of stator core at 42 MW

Figure 87: FFT of stator core at 85 MW

TECHNICAL REPORT 63
 Figure 88: FFT of stator core at 128 MW

Figure 89: FFT of stator core at 170 MW

64 TECHNICAL REPORT
 Figure 90: FFT of stator core at Full Load - Hot

TECHNICAL REPORT 65
2.5 Unit Behavior in Transient Mode
The following tests were selected to show the Unit’s behavior in transient mode:

ˆ Start-up

ˆ Field flash

ˆ Load rejection

2.5.1 Start-Up
Amongst the tests which were performed, a start-up measurement was recorded on October 21, 2016. Dur-
ing this measurement, the Unit speed increased from ∼12 rpm up to full speed at ∼180 rpm. The behavior
during this event was recorded. The results can be seen in Figures 91 through 103 of the following pages.
Figure 91 shows that the air gap at the upper part of the Unit decreased as the speed of the Unit increased.
The maximum air gap decrease was ∼48 mils or ∼6.8% of the nominal air gap (NAG) of 709 mils. The
minimum air gap recorded during this event was 687 mils, or 96.9% of NAG, at sensor 45°. Figure 92 shows
that the maximum air gap decrease at the lower part of the Unit was ∼55 mils, or ∼7.8% of NAG. The
minimum air gap recorded at the lower part was 680 mils, or 95.9% of NAG, at sensor 270°. These results
are quite acceptable.

Figures 93 to 96 show the rotor shapes at both the upper and lower levels of the Unit, at relatively slow
speed (∼12 rpm) and then as the Unit reached its nominal speed (∼180 rpm). The rotor apparent circularity
values at the upper part decreased slightly from 26 mils down to 23 mils; 3.2% of NAG, as the speed reached
nominal speed. This result is quite acceptable (see Figures 93 and 95). Its concentricity remained stable at
7.0 mils during the same period, while the angle changed from 295° to 301°.

As for the results at the lower part of the Unit, the rotor apparent circularity values at the upper part
increased slightly from 23 mils up to 29 mils; 4.1% of NAG, as the speed reached nominal speed. This result
is quite acceptable (see Figures 94 and 96). Its concentricity remained fairly stable, increasing only from
4.0 mils up to 5.0 mils, while the angle changed from 188° to 171°.

Figure 97 shows the stator core absolute vibration results during the start-up event. A noticeable increase
in stator core absolute vibration was observed, although still quite low. This increase is solely caused by
the overall increase in vibration at the Unit during the sudden significant increase in water flow during the
start-up event.

Figure 98 shows the upper guide bearing vibration during the start-up event. A noticeable increase in shaft
vibration was observed as the speed of the Unit increased up to nominal speed. The levels remained low
during this event (∼5.0 mils, pk-pk).

Figure 99 shows the lower guide bearing vibration during the start-up event. A slight increase in shaft
vibration was observed as the speed of the Unit increased up to nominal speed. The levels remained low
during this event (∼2.0 mils, pk-pk).

Figure 100 shows the turbine guide bearing vibration during the start-up event. No noticeable changes in
shaft vibration were observed as the speed of the Unit increased up to nominal speed. The levels remained
low during this event (∼1.0 mils, pk-pk).

Figure 101 shows the Orbit pattern of the upper guide bearing during the start-up event. A noticeable
increase in shaft vibration was observed as the speed of the Unit increased up to nominal speed. A slight

66 TECHNICAL REPORT
change in position was also observed in the general direction of 270°.

Figure 102 shows the Orbit pattern of the lower guide bearing during the start-up event. A slight increase
in shaft vibration was observed as the speed of the Unit increased up to nominal speed.

Figure 103 shows the Orbit pattern of the turbine guide bearing during the start-up event. No noticeable
changes in shaft vibration were observed as the speed of the Unit increased up to nominal speed. A slight
change in position was also observed in the general direction of 90°.

Figure 91: Upper air gap behavior during start-up

TECHNICAL REPORT 67
 Figure 92: Lower air gap behavior during start-up

Figure 93: Upper rotor/stator shape at slow speed (74 rpm)

68 TECHNICAL REPORT
 Figure 94: Lower rotor/stator shape at slow speed (74 rpm)

Figure 95: Upper rotor/stator shape at nominal speed

TECHNICAL REPORT 69
 Figure 96: Lower rotor/stator shape at nominal speed

Figure 97: Stator core absolute vibration during start-up

70 TECHNICAL REPORT
 Figure 98: UGB shaft displacement during start-up

Figure 99: LGB shaft displacement during start-up

TECHNICAL REPORT 71
 Figure 100: TGB shaft displacement during start-up

Figure 101: Orbit of UGB shaft displacement during start-up

72 TECHNICAL REPORT
 Figure 102: Orbit of LGB shaft displacement during start-up

Figure 103: Orbit of TGB shaft displacement during start-up

TECHNICAL REPORT 73
2.5.2 Field Flash
A second important test was performed, namely a field flash measurement, which was also recorded on Oc-
tober 21, 2016. The results can be seen in Figures 104 through 116 of the following pages.

Figure 104 shows that the air gap at the upper part of the Unit decreased slightly as the rotor was energized.
The maximum air gap decrease was ∼11 mils or ∼1.6% of the nominal air gap (NAG) of 709 mils. The
minimum air gap recorded during this event was 685 mils, or 96.6% of NAG, at sensor 45°. Figure 105 shows
that the maximum air gap decrease at the lower part of the Unit was ∼10 mils, or ∼1.4% of NAG. The
minimum air gap recorded at the lower part was 679 mils, or 95.8% of NAG, at sensor 270°. These results
are quite acceptable.

Figures 106 to 109 show the rotor and stator shapes at both the upper and lower levels of the Unit, before
and after the field flash. The rotor apparent circularity values at the upper part decreased slightly from
24 mils down to 22 mils, or 3.1% of NAG, as the rotor was energized. This result is quite acceptable (see
Figures 106 and 108). Its concentricity remained stable at 8.0 mils during the same period, while the angle
changed from 299° to 303°.

As for the results at the lower part of the Unit, the rotor apparent circularity values at the upper part
increased slightly from 27 mils up to 31 mils; 4.4% of NAG, as the rotor was energized. This result is quite
acceptable (see Figures 107 and 109). Its concentricity remained stable at 5.0 mils, while the angle changed
from 167° to 168°.

As for the stator, the apparent circularity values at the upper part remained stable at 30 mils; 3.1% of NAG,
as the rotor was energized. This result is quite acceptable (see Figures 106 and 108). Its concentricity re-
mained fairly stable, increasing from 2.0 mils up to 4.0 mils during the same period, while the angle changed
from 185° to 187°.

As for the apparent circularity values at the lower part, they remained fairly stable, increasing only from
35 mils up to 36 mils; 5.1% of NAG, as the rotor was energized. This result is quite acceptable (see Figures
107 and 109). Its concentricity remained fairly stable, increasing from 8.0 mils up to 9.0 mils during the same
period, while the angle changed from 112° to 115°.

Figure 110 shows the stator core absolute vibration results during the field flash event. A noticeable increase
in stator core absolute vibration was observed, although still quite low. This increase is solely caused by the
sudden increase in magnetic forces as the rotor is energized.

Figure 111 shows the upper guide bearing vibration during the field flash event. No noticeable increase in
shaft vibration was observed as the rotor was energized.

Figure 112 shows the lower guide bearing vibration during the field flash event. No noticeable increase in
shaft vibration was observed as the rotor was energized.

Figure 113 shows the turbine guide bearing vibration during the field flash event. No noticeable increase in
shaft vibration was observed as the rotor was energized.

Figure 114 shows the Orbit pattern of the upper guide bearing during the field flash event. No noticeable
increase in shaft vibration and/or change in shaft position were observed as the rotor was energized.

Figure 115 shows the Orbit pattern of the lower guide bearing during the field flash event. No noticeable
increase in shaft vibration and/or change in shaft position were observed as the rotor was energized.

74 TECHNICAL REPORT
Figure 116 shows the Orbit pattern of the turbine guide bearing during the field flash event. No noticeable
increase in shaft vibration and/or change in shaft position were observed as the rotor was energized.

Figure 104: Upper air gap behavior during field flash

TECHNICAL REPORT 75
 Figure 105: Lower air gap behavior during field flash

Figure 106: Upper rotor/stator shape before field flash

76 TECHNICAL REPORT
 Figure 107: Lower rotor/stator shape before field flash

Figure 108: Upper rotor/stator shape after field flash

TECHNICAL REPORT 77
 Figure 109: Lower rotor/stator shape after field flash

Figure 110: Stator core absolute vibration during field flash

78 TECHNICAL REPORT
 Figure 111: UGB shaft displacement during field flash

Figure 112: LGB shaft displacement during field flash

TECHNICAL REPORT 79
 Figure 113: TGB shaft displacement during field flash

Figure 114: Orbit of UGB shaft displacement during field flash

80 TECHNICAL REPORT
 Figure 115: Orbit of LGB shaft displacement during field flash

Figure 116: Orbit of TGB shaft displacement during field flash

TECHNICAL REPORT 81
2.5.3 Load Rejection

A third test was performed, namely a load rejection measurement, which was also recorded on October 21,
2016. The results can be seen in Figures 117 through 131 of the following pages.

Figure 117 shows that the air gap at the upper part of the Unit decreased somewhat as the magnetic forces
were decreased and the Unit speed increased to ∼211 rpm (117.2% speed) during the corresponding over-
speed. The maximum air gap decrease was ∼20 mils or ∼2.8% of the nominal air gap (NAG) of 709 mils, at
sensor 135°. The minimum air gap recorded during this event was 704 mils, or 99.3% of NAG, at sensor 45°.
Figure 118 shows that the maximum air gap decrease at the lower part of the Unit was ∼24 mils, or ∼3.4%
of NAG, at sensor 90°. The minimum air gap recorded at the lower part was 706 mils, or 99.6% of NAG,
also at sensor 270°. These results are acceptable.

Figures 119 to 124 show the rotor and stator shapes at both levels, before, during and after the load rejection,
that is to say the corresponding overspeed. The rotor apparent circularity values at the upper part increased
slightly from 25 mils up to 31 mils; 4.4% of NAG, which is quite acceptable when compared to accepted
tolerance levels (see Figures 119 and 121). Its concentricity increased slightly, from 7.0 mils up to 10.0 mils,
while the angle changed slightly from 299° to 282°. As the Unit slowed down back to ∼182 rpm, the rotor
apparent circularity values at the upper part decreased slightly from 31 mils down to 27 mils; 3.8% of NAG,
which is quite good (see Figures 121 and 123). Its concentricity decreased slightly, from 10.0 mils down to
9.0 mils, while the angle changed slightly from 282° to 292°. This result is also quite acceptable according to
existing tolerances.

The rotor apparent circularity values at the lower part increased only somewhat from 30 mils up to 40 mils;
5.6% of NAG, which is a slightly greater variation than what was observed at the upper part. However,
the results remained acceptable when compared to existing tolerance levels (see Figures 120 and 122). Its
concentricity increased slightly from 6.0 mils up to 8.0 mils, while the angle changed slightly from 166° to
190°. As the Unit slowed down back to ∼182 rpm, the rotor apparent circularity values at the upper part
decreased somewhat from 40 mils down to 32 mils; 4.5% of NAG, which is quite good (see Figures 122 and
124). Its concentricity decreased slightly, from 8.0 mils back down to 6.0 mils, while the angle changed slightly
from 190° to 179°. This result is also quite acceptable according to existing tolerances.

As for the stator apparent circularity, the values at the upper part remained at 44 mils; 6.2% of NAG (see
Figures 119 and 121). Its concentricity remained stable at 7.0 mils, while the angle changed only from 165°
to 167°. This result is quite acceptable according to existing tolerances. As the Unit slowed down to ∼182
rpm, the stator apparent circularity values at the upper part remained constant at 45 mils; 6.3% of NAG,
which is acceptable (see Figures 121 and 123). Its concentricity increased only slightly, from 7.0 mils up to
8.0 mils, while the angle changed slightly from 167° to 162°. This result is also quite acceptable according to
existing tolerances.

The stator apparent circularity values at the lower part decreased slightly from 32 mils down to 31 mils; 4.4%
of NAG (see Figures 120 and 122). Its concentricity decreased slightly from 10.0 mils down to 9.0 mils; 1.3%
of NAG while the angle changed only from 120° to 123°. This result is quite acceptable according to existing
tolerances. As the Unit slowed down to ∼182 rpm, the stator apparent circularity values at the lower part
remained fairly constant, increasing only from 31 mils up to 32 mils; 4.5% of NAG, which is acceptable (see
Figures 122 and 124). Its concentricity increased only slightly from 9.0 mils up to 10.0 mils, while the angle
changed slightly from 123° to 124°. This result is also quite acceptable according to existing tolerances.

Figure 125 shows the stator core absolute vibration results during the load rejection event. A sudden mo-
mentary increase in stator core absolute vibration was observed, although still quite low. This increase is
solely caused by the sudden decrease in magnetic forces as the Unit was disconnected from the grid.

82 TECHNICAL REPORT
Figure 126 shows the upper guide bearing vibration during the load rejection event. No noticeable increase
in shaft vibration was observed as the Unit was disconnected from the grid.

Figure 127 shows the lower guide bearing vibration during the load rejection event. A slight increase in shaft
vibration was observed as the Unit was disconnected from the grid.

Figure 128 shows the turbine guide bearing vibration during the load rejection event. A slight momentary
increase in shaft vibration was observed as the Unit was disconnected from the grid.

Figure 129 shows the Orbit pattern of the upper guide bearing during the load rejection event. No noticeable
increase in shaft vibration and/or change in shaft position were observed as the Unit was disconnected from
the grid.

Figure 130 shows the Orbit pattern of the lower guide bearing during the load rejection event. A slight
increase in shaft vibration was observed as the Unit was disconnected from the grid.

Figure 131 shows the Orbit pattern of the turbine guide bearing during the load rejection event. A slight
momentary increase in shaft vibration was observed as the Unit was disconnected from the grid.

Figure 117: Upper air gap behavior during load rejection

TECHNICAL REPORT 83
 Figure 118: Lower air gap behavior during load rejection

Figure 119: Upper rotor/stator shape before load rejection

84 TECHNICAL REPORT
 Figure 120: Lower rotor/stator shape before load rejection

Figure 121: Upper rotor/stator shape during load rejection

TECHNICAL REPORT 85
 Figure 122: Lower rotor/stator shape during load rejection

Figure 123: Upper rotor/stator shape after load rejection

86 TECHNICAL REPORT
 Figure 124: Lower rotor/stator shape after load rejection

Figure 125: Stator core absolute vibration during load rejection

TECHNICAL REPORT 87
 Figure 126: Upper guide bearing vibration during load rejection

Figure 127: Lower guide bearing vibration during load rejection

88 TECHNICAL REPORT
 Figure 128: Turbine guide bearing vibration during load rejection

Figure 129: Orbit of UGB shaft displacement during load rejection

TECHNICAL REPORT 89
 Figure 130: Orbit of LGB shaft displacement during load rejection

Figure 131: Orbit of TGB shaft displacement during load rejection

90 TECHNICAL REPORT
2.6 Conclusion
The ZOOM system was able to show that the stator dynamic parameters at the upper and lower parts of
the Unit were found to be quite acceptable throughout the various tests performed.

Noticeable encroachments were observed at 45° at the upper part and at 270° at the lower part of the stator.
Nevertheless, the stator apparent circularity results were excellent.

The thermal expansion at the upper and lower parts of the stator was found to be slightly non-uniform as
values exceeding the 10 mils tolerance were observed at a few locations. However, the deviations are minor.

Results for the rotor showed that its apparent circularity and concentricity values, at both the upper and
lower parts of the rotor, were also found to be excellent under all operating conditions tested. The rotor rim
expansion at both the upper and lower parts was found to be somewhat non-uniform.

No noticeable discrepancies were observed in regards to the magnetic field intensity generated by the poles.

The vibration levels recorded at all three (3) guide bearings were found to be quite acceptable throughout
the tests, when compared to existing tolerance levels (ISO 7919-5).

The results for the stator core absolute vibration were quite acceptable at all times. The results observed
during the transient conditions; namely a start-up, a field flash measurement, as well as a load rejection
measurement, showed that the Unit performed very well under those conditions.

This Report has been prepared solely for information purposes and the author’s opinions or findings are
based on circumstances and facts as they existed at the time it was written. VibroSystM Inc. accepts no
liability or responsibility for any actions taken in connection with the information contained herein, or
for any loss or damage resulting from its misuse.

TECHNICAL REPORT 91
3 APPENDICES
3.1 Unit Data
Tables 10 and 11 below show various parameters of Hydrogenerator Unit 1 analyzed in the current report.

Parameter Value
Manufacturer Toshiba
Commissioning 1968
Power nominal 157 MW
Stator voltage 13.8 kV
Stator current 7321 A
Excitation Voltage 375
Excitation Current 1450 A
Frequency 60 Hz
Rotational speed 180 RPM
Rotor rotation CW
Power factor 0.9
Nominal air gap 709 mils
Stator bore diameter 306 in
Stator core height 132 in
Number of stator sections 4
Number of stator soleplates 8
Number of stator slots 360
Number of circuits per phase 3
Insulation class F
Number of rotor poles 40

Table 10: Generator parameters

Parameter Value
Manufacturer Voith
Turbine type Impulse/Pelton
Number of blades 22
Net head 1319 ft
Rated power 212000 HP

Table 11: Turbine parameters

92 APPENDICES
3.2 Mechanical Tolerance Guide for Hydroelectrical Generators
3.2.1 Generator Air Gap Deviation Levels

Parameter Good Acceptable High Critical

1
Maximum air gap variation <13% 13 to 20% 20 to 30% >30%
Stator apparent circularity2 ** <7% 7 to 12% 12 to 20% >20%
Stator concentricity3 ** <5% 5 to 7.5% 7.5 to 10% >10%
Rotor apparent circularity4 ** <6% 6 to 8% 8 to 10% >10%
Rotor concentricity5 ** <1.2% 1.2 to 2.5% 2.5 to 4% >4%
Minimum air gap6 >85% 85 to 70% 70 to 50% <50%
1. Maximum difference between rotor and stator measured at any point on a single plane
2. Difference between maximum inside radius and minimum inside radius, measured from the
rotor rotation axis
3. Difference between rotor rotation axis and the best stator center measured on the same
plan, calculated from the rotor reference pole
4. Difference between maximum outside radius and minimum outside
5. Difference between the rotor rotation axis and the best rotor center calculated from the
outside radius of each pole
6. Minimum value measured or calculated
* Air gap deviation expressed in percentage of a theoretical (nominal) air gap of 709 mils
** Table shows apparent circularity and concentricity of parameters as calculated by ZOOM
system

Table 12: Generator Air Gap Deviation Levels

3.2.2 Vibration Levels

Parameter Good Acceptable High Critical

Shaft displacement (mils pk-pk)1 <6.0 6.0 to 9.9 9.9 to 20.1 >20.1
Absolute core vibration (mils/s rms)2 <267 267 to 400 400 to 533 >533
1. Relative displacement recorded from the bearing housing, expressed in mils peak-to-peak
2. Absolute vibration recorded on the stator core, expressed in mils/sec rms

Table 13: Vibration levels

APPENDICES 93