g GE Power Systems

Static Potential Source Excitation

For the GE 7F/9F Gas Turbines
Standard Auxiliary Fed Excitation
and optional Terminal Fed Excitation
1. Introduction and System Configuration
For 7F and 9F gas turbine, GEs standard
offering is an Auxiliary bus-fed static
excitation system. There are many
advantages with this configuration compared
to GEs optional generator terminal bus-fed
static excitation system. The purpose of this
document is to give an overview of these
excitation systems, and some performance
comparisons.
A simplified high level one line showing the
excitation connection schemes are shown in
Figure 1a for the standard auxiliary fed
supply, and in Figure 1b for the optional
terminal fed supply. The standard system
configuration has the auxiliary transformer
sized to supply all of the normal auxiliary
loads plus the excitation system. This
connection facilitates the need for having
excitation on the machine at start of the unit.
This is required since the F turbines use LCI
static start for bringing the rotor up to speed
so the gas turbine can be fired and the
machine accelerated to rated speed. The
diagram in Figure 1a shows the configuration
if the unit has a generator breaker. In some
cases, synchronizing is done in the HV
switchyard, and the auxiliary transformer is
fed from the system side of the HV breaker.
The option of terminal fed excitation requires
some complexity in arranging interlocked
electrical systems to have the excitation
GSU
EX2000
52G
EXC PPT
Auxiliary Bus
System
Figure 1a Standard Configuration for the
Excitation System for GE 7F/9F Gas Turbines
GSU
EX2000
52G
41AC-2 41AC-1
MAIN PPT START-UP PPT
System
Auxiliary Bus
Figure 1b Optional Terminal Fed
Configuration for the Excitation System for GE
7F/9F Gas Turbines
g GE Power Systems
supply continuously available. The
following list outlines the major issues that
led to standardizing on the auxiliary fed
excitation.
1) Packaging of switchgear, transformers,
and control panels is greatly simplified
2) Parts count is reduced
Two excitation transformers (main and
startup PPTs) are replace with one
excitation transformer (full time PPT)
Two electrically interlocked 41AC
breakers are replaced with one 41AC
breaker or fused disconnect switch
The number of power cable connections
and runs are reduced.
I/O to Turbine control is reduced
Exciter 125 VDC field flashing is
eliminated.
3) Turbine control static start sequencing is
simplified.
Cycling and interlocking of (2) 41AC
breakers are eliminated.
4) Overall Electrical Compartment foot print
is reduced.
Eliminates Bus Auxiliary Cabinet (BAC).
5) Exciter performance not compromised by
voltage dips on auxiliary bus
6) PPT can be protected for overcurrent by
the breaker on PPT primary.
7) Generator steady state open circuit and
short circuit tests can easily be run at site.
2. Excitation Model
There are two issues regarding performance
that require some explanation of the control
philosophy in the excitation system. These
issues are (1) how the excitation is affected
by dips in the supply voltage, particularly
those on the aux. bus due to starting of loads
(motors), (2) the affect of the additional
impedance between the excitation system and
the generator imposed by the connection
through the auxiliary system. A comparative
performance study of some 7/9F machines is
shown later in this document.
The supply voltage for the excitation system
may be subject to transient voltage dips
during electrical faults, or for changes in
load, i.e. starting of large motor loads if the
supply is from an aux. bus. The expected
voltage dip on starting of motor loads on the
aux. bus is no more than 20%. Even without
control intervention, the short time drop in
voltage should have minimal effect on the
generator, due in large measure to the
relatively long field circuit time constant. In
one example, system studies, followed by a
successful tests on a 400MW combined cycle
unit demonstrated no problems when the
auxiliary fed excitation system was subjected
to a complete loss of power for almost 1.5
seconds. The level of disturbance for a
motor starting is obviously much less severe.
To understand the effect of transient voltage
dips in excitation system supply voltage, we
need to consider the structure of the
excitation system. Figure 2 shows the
control functions in block diagram form.
This is the IEEE Type ST4B model format
which is recommended for representation of
the GE EX2000 potential source excitation
system [1]. There are three basic blocks
shown in the shaded areas, the first is the
AVR (Automatic Voltage Regulator), which
is performing the primary function of
regulation of the terminal voltage. This
regulator is a proportional plus integral
design, which is typical of the digital-based
controls being implemented today.
g GE Power Systems
The lower part of the figure represents the
power source, which is proportional to the
supply voltage. The block labeled FVR
(Field Voltage Regulator) is a control that
can be applied if a large variation in supply
voltage is expected. It is normal to configure
the software in the excitations system to
include the FVR when a compound source
excitation system is used, for example. For
bus fed excitation there is little benefit from
the FVR and it is not normally used, except
in cases where a ceiling voltage limiter is
required.
The next section in this document describes
generic studies which were done to compare
alternatives of feeding the supply (PPT) for
the excitation system from either the
generator terminals or from an auxiliary bus
fed from the HV side. The two options were
outlined in the one-line diagrams shown as
Figure 1.
3. Performance Issues
Fault Support
A static excitation system fed from a supply
PPT is designed for a given ceiling voltage
assuming rated input voltage. In normal
operation the input voltage is of course near
nominal values. During times of electrical
disturbances (faults) on the power grid the
input voltage will be reduced. For a worst
case, close in three phase faults on the HV
grid, there is a voltage reduction during the
fault which is approximated by the voltage
divider using Xd and the transformer
reactance Xfmr, as follows:
Vgen fault = Xfmr/(Xd + Xfmr)
From this formula and assuming a sub-
transient reactance (Xd) of 25% and
transformer impedance (Xfmr) of 15%, we
can see that the generator terminal voltage
during a fault will be about 1/3 of normal.
The voltage regulator will drive the system to
ceiling. The available forcing depends on the
terminal voltage. The standard design has an
available forcing of about 160% of full load
at rated voltage. For improved transient
stability margins, or if significant voltage
swings are expected, higher levels up to
about 300% are available as an option. The
reduced level of input voltage exists only
until the fault is cleared by relay/breaker
action.
For excitation systems fed from an auxiliary
bus, the normal configuration of the auxiliary
bus is to feed from the system side of the
generator breaker, for units that have a
generator breaker. For system faults, the
stability margins for static excitation where
the PPT is fed from the auxiliary bus or the
generator terminals gives the almost the same
performance. For the auxiliary bus which is
fed from a HV bus connection, then the
excitation during the HV bus fault will
collapse completely for a close in fault.
Assuming a recoverable scenario where the
fault is cleared in time to prevent the unit
losing synchronism, then the difference in
support during the fault will be for only a
V
Mmax
V
Mmin
V
R
V
REF
I
FD
I
N
= K
c

I
FD
V
E
F
EX
= f(I
N
)
F
EX
V
T
I
T
I
N
V
E
= | K
P
V
T
+ j(K
I
+ K
P
X
L
) I
T
|
V
Bmax
E
fd
V
E
V
B
LV
Gate
V
OEL
-
+
V
C


+
V
S
V
UEL
+
1
1 + sT
A
K
PM
+
s
K
G
-
+
V
Rmax
V
Rmin
K
PR
+
s
K
IR
K
IM
V
M
Power
Source
AVR
FVR
Figure 2 Model Block Diagram for IEEE Type
ST4B to represent the GE EX2000 excitation
system.
g GE Power Systems
few cycles, until the fault clears. There is
not be a significant reduction in stability for
the auxiliary bus fed system. Study of the
alternative options can quantify stability
margins for a specific application, and these
studies are recommended if there is some
critical case or issue of stability at the unit.
For reference, Figure 3 contains two curves
for a 9F gas turbine, rated 236MVA,
3000RPM, 50Hz, and 15.75kV. One curve
is for the case of the PPT fed from an
auxiliary bus fed from the HV bus, and the
second is for the PPT fed from the generator
terminals. These results compare critical
clearing times for different system
reactances. Critical Clearing Time (CCT) is
defined as the longest duration fault that can
be tolerated and still have the unit remain
synchronized with the grid following fault
clearing. This is a common measure of
stability limit.
The results of the CCT analysis show there
is very little change, only between 0.25 to
0.75 cycles difference in CCT. Compared to
the base levels of 6-12 cycles, this is small
incremental impact on stability margins.
This curve in Figure 3 plots CCT as a
function of system impedance seen from the
HV bus, with values from 0.1 to 0.5 per unit
on the unit base. In each case there is the
GSU (Generator Step Up transformer) of
13.2% in addition to the system impedance.
The percentage impact on weaker systems is
larger, as the inherent stability is less, but the
changes are still not significant. For strong
to moderate connections to the system, it is
not likely that the excitation system supply
will be a limiting factor in stability margins.
Only in cases where it is close to the stability
limit might it be necessary to consider a
closer review. In those cases, an increase in
excitation ceiling voltage would easily
Figure 3 - CCT versus System Strength (Xe) - Comparing Aux Fed. (HV) and
Terminal Fed Excitation supply
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
0.1 0.3 0.5
System Strength (per unit Xe)
C
r
i
t
i
c
a
l

C
l
e
a
r
i
n
g

T
i
m
e

(
C
C
T
)
-
c
y
c
l
e
s
Gen Fed PPT
Aux Fed PPT
Weak System Strong System
g GE Power Systems
compensate for the slight difference in CCT.
Auxiliary Bus Transients
The more relevant issue in plant design and
operation is the integrity of the auxiliary bus
supply as it impacts the excitation system.
There are two issues here, on being faults
that temporarily interrupt the auxiliary bus
supply, and the second would be the impact
of transient loads on the auxiliary bus that
depress the voltage.
Studies that considered auxiliary bus faults
have shown that the excitation system fed
from the auxiliary bus does not adversely
impact the ability of the generator or the
auxiliary loads from riding through short
disturbances. Instances where the auxiliary
bus voltage is lost are due to faults on the
auxiliary system. In the worst case we can
assume that the voltage loss may be for as
long a one second. The curve in Figure 4
shows the response of a 7F gas turbine rated
218.2MVA, 3600RPM, 60Hz, and 18kV, to
a loss in excitation supply for one second,
assuming the generator is initially operating
at full load level. In this case the generator
voltage dips by 12.5% and recovers within
2.5 seconds to nominal operation. The large
field time constants allow for significant
periods of reduced or lost excitation before
there is likelihood of LOE (loss of excitation)
relaying operating.
The other issue is the effect of depressed
voltage on the auxiliary bus due to starting of
large motors, for example. In this case it
may have more impact during plant startup
rather than normal operation at load. To
look at a bounding case, we assume the
startup of a 3000HP pump on the same 7F
GT described above, which depresses voltage
on the auxiliary bus by about 10%. and
further assume this happens when the To be
conservative, the motor starting occurs when
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
0
1
2
3
4
5
Time (seconds)
Figure 4 Response of 7F GT Generator to a loss of field for 1 second
g GE Power Systems
the unit is at base load conditions, which is
the maximum load on the excitation system.
Figure 5 plots the generator response and
shows a drop of about 1-2% in the terminal
voltage, due primarily to the increased load
of the motor being started. The auxiliary bus
is assumed fed off the generator bus for this
case. This would be the case for units that
have a generator circuit breaker. If the
auxiliary bus is fed from the HV bus (where
the unit has no generator breaker and the HV
breaker is used for synchronization), then the
effect on the generator voltage will be even
less. The AVR is quick to respond to the
drop in generator voltage and there is
minimal impact due to the drop in auxiliary
voltage on the generator operation.
In summary, we can say there is expected to
be little significant difference in the
performance of the excitation system
between the auxiliary fed and the optional
terminal fed supply. We have considered the
difference in CCT stability index and it
shows only slight difference in stability
margins. Increasing the ceiling voltage of the
excitation system can compensate for the
differences. Also, the impact of voltage dips
of momentary losses on the auxiliary bus
shows no significant performance reduction
for the generator
[1] Computer Models for Representation of Digital-based
Excitation Systems, Digital Excitation System Task Force of
the Equipment Working Group, IEEE Trans EC, Vol. 11, No.
3, September 1996, pp. 607-615
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
1.1
1.2
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
1.5
2
2.5
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
0
0.5
1
Generator Terminal Voltage
Auxiliary Bus Voltage
Figure 5 Response of 7F GT Generator to starting of a 3000HP motor on the auxiliary bus