7.

Generating Unit Model

Validation Process

1 – Generating Unit Model Validation – August 2017

 Tools Essential for Testing and Modeling
Testing Equipment:

• Digital AVR and/or Governor with built-in testing and data recording
capabilities
• Specialized testing equipment, such as, Powertech’s Tabula data
acquisition system (hardware & software)
• Other off-the-shelf digital recorder
Simulation Tools:
• Power flow and short-circuit analysis (PSAT, PSS/E, PSLF…)
• Time domain simulation (TSAT, PSS/E, PSLF, DigSILENT,
PowerWorld…)
• Eigenvalue analysis (SSAT, …) & PSS tuning tools (CDT)
• MATLAB/Simulink for controls

2 - Generating Unit Model Validation – August 2017

 Requirements to Power Plants for Site Testing
Coordination :

• Collect information and document for test procedure development

• Apply to regional system operator for testing date and time
• Coordinate with service representatives from equipment manufacturer
for Digital AVR and/or Governor with built-in testing and data recording
capabilities
• Specialized testing equipment for recording generator/system dynamics
Assistance and Cooperation:
• Technician/electrician for making connections to onsite signals
• Plant operators for communicating with regional system operator and
adjusting generator operating conditions
• Temporary changes to control equipment setting as needed for testing
purpose only (no protection setting change will be attempted)

3 - Generating Unit Model Validation – August 2017

 Model Validation Procedures and Examples

• Model validation normally takes place after all the field

measurements are obtained, which takes longer than
performing the field testing.
• Model validation requires a comprehensive use of power
system and control simulation tools.
• Simulation programs routinely used for power system studies
should be used for model validation since different programs
may handle generator nonlinear characteristics, and control
limits differently.
• Some parameters can be directly computed using field
measurements without using simulation tools, e.g., governor
gate closing rate, exciter ceiling voltage, governor droop or
regulation etc.

4 - Generating Unit Model Validation – August 2017

 Model Validation Procedures and Examples Cont’d

Device under test

Apply an electrical step of Record the step

appropriate level response

Field Testing Compare

Transfer function of
device under test

Observe
Apply a step input of same response of
size as in Field Test. transfer function

Adjust transfer function

parameters with
constraints for best match
Simulation

Flowchart for Model Validation Based on Field Measurements

5 - Generating Unit Model Validation – August 2017
 Step Response of Basic Control Blocks

6 - Generating Unit Model Validation – August 2017

 Model Validation Procedures

After field testing is complete, model validation should proceed by

selecting appropriate standard models, or constructing user-defined
models if necessary, and simulating the field tests in the following
sequence, which is very important to obtain correct validation results.

1. Open-circuit saturation test 8. Reactive current compensation

2. Online measurement for validating Xd
3. Excitation Removal test for validating
T’do
4. Manual Excitation Step test for
validating T’do
5. Direct-axis test
6. Quadrature-axis test
7. AVR step response test
test
9. Water starting time constant test
10. Governor droop measurement
11. Governor response test
12. Partial load rejection test
13. PSS and excitation limiter tests
14. Others

7 - Generating Unit Model Validation – August 2017

 Validation Example – Saturation Factors

• Either the exponential or quadratic function can be used to represent

the generator saturation characteristic.

• Generators normally saturate at about 70% rated voltage.

• Field measurements often fall in the range of 50% - 109% voltage,

therefore, some extrapolation is necessary.

• For a generator with a brushless exciter, the measured curve between

exciter field current and main generator terminal voltage can be
approximately used to derive the generator saturation factors S1.0,
S1.2 since an A.C. exciter usually does not saturate under the open-
circuit testing conditions.

• The measured generator voltage should be corrected if the unit

frequency deviates from its rated value considerably.

8 - Generating Unit Model Validation – August 2017

 Validation Example – Saturation Factors Cont’d
Vf (V) If (A) Vt (kV) Vt (pu) 10
57.9 215.8 7.09 0.5135
58.3 216.6 7.12 0.5159 9
y = 0.0322x
62.9 232.5 7.53 0.5455 8
66.8 248.5 7.98 0.5780
7
72.1 269.7 8.59 0.6221
76.3 284.8 9.05 0.6557 6
80.3 299.8 9.52 0.6899
5
93.3 349.6 10.94 0.7929
99.1 370.8 11.53 0.8352 4 Vt (kV)
109.3 410.9 12.52 0.9069
3 Linear (Vt (kV))
115.8 436.1 13.12 0.9508
121.7 457.6 13.54 0.9812 2
124.5 468.1 13.76 0.9968
1
128.1 475.4 13.87 1.0048
129.0 486.8 14.09 1.0213 0
136.6 516.5 14.58 1.0562 0 100 200 300
141.1 533.4 14.83 1.0748

1. Determine Generator Field Current Base IFB:

Draw the air-gap line of maximum possible slope through the origin, tangent to the
saturation curve, or use the first a few testing points (lower than 70% rated voltage)
to calculate the air-gap slope.
For the 13.8 kV example generator, IFB = Vrated / Slope = 13.8 /0.0322 =428.6 A

9 - Generating Unit Model Validation – August 2017

 Validation Example – Saturation Factors Cont’d
1.2

1.1

1.0

0.9
Terminal Voltage(pu)

0.8

0.7 2 points to define the function

0.6

0.5

0.4
Data
0.3
Air-gap line
0.2 Fitting model

0.1

0.0
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0
Field Current (pu)

1. Specify two testing points to define the saturation function (quadratic/exponential)

2. Use the defined saturation function to calculate the generator saturation factors
(extrapolation is needed), For the given example
S1.0 = 0.109, S1.2 = 0.252
3. Determine the generator field voltage base VFB = IFB* Rf = 428.6 *0.2671 =114.5V

10 - Generating Unit Model Validation – August 2017

 Validation of Generator Open-circuit Time Constant T’do
• The generator open-circuit time constant T’do can be validated either
from a field short-circuiting test or an exciter manual step response
test.
• In most cases, the generator main field, if accessible, does not
immediately decrease to zero from its initial value after opening the
unit field breaker. On the contrary, it normally goes quite negative
before coming back to zero due to the effect of field-discharging
circuit, as shown in the following example.
• In model validation, the generator field voltage change/shape must be
appropriately taken into account by feeding the measured field
voltage into the generator model in order to obtain correct results
• For a generator with a brushless exciter, the effects of an excitation
system also must be considered in model simulation studies as the
test is normally done with the exciter in operation, not isolated from
the unit.
• The measured generator terminal voltage should be corrected to
rated machine speed if the unit speed is not at rated speed in the test.
11 - Generating Unit Model Validation – August 2017
 Validation of Generator Open-circuit Time Constant T’do Cont’d

Exciter Model Generator Model

(GENROU/GENSAL)

VREF
VRMAX=+99 VT-Measured
VF-Measured +
∑ EFD G
−
VRMIN=-99 VT-Simulated

200
100 1.2

0
1
Vf ( VDC)

-100 Measured
-200 0.8 Simulated

Vt (pu)
-300
0.6
-400
-500 0.4
-600
0.2
-700
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
0
Time (Sec) 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Time (Sec)

T’do Validation from Excitation Removal Test for Generating Unit with Static Excitation System

12 - Generating Unit Model Validation – August 2017

 Validation of Generator Open-circuit Time Constant T’do Cont’d

Exciter Model Generator Model

(GENROU/GENROE)
VFEMAX - KDIFD
VEMAX = VT-Measured
VREF KE + SE(VE)
+ VE
− ∑
1
sTE
∏ EFD G
VEF-Measured VEMIN
VFE VT-Simulated
+
∑
+ ∑ KE FEX = f(IN)
+
+
VE  SE (VE )
IN = KCIFD/VE
KD IFD

1.2
4
2 1

0 0.8
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
-2 Vt (adjusted)
0.6
-4
-6 Vef (adjusted) 0.4
-8
0.2
-10
-12 0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40

T’do Validation for Generating Unit with Excitation System using Brushless Exciter

13 - Generating Unit Model Validation – August 2017

 Generator D- and Q-axis Parameter Validation
• The load interruption approach for validating generator d-axis and q-axis
parameters ideally requires the generator field voltage to be held constant
during and after opening the unit circuit breaker. In reality, it’s very difficult
to meet the requirement unless an external power source is used to supply
the power to the machine field. This may only be practical for small hydro
units with field voltage close-loop control.
• While field measurements indeed indicate that the generator field voltage
changed in the performed tests even with exciter in manual control,
special care must be exercised when validating the generator d- and q-
axis parameters using the recorded test data.
• The measured generator terminal voltage should be corrected to rated
machine speed if the unit speed is not at rated speed in the test.
• Similar to handling the open-circuit time constant test data, the measured
and varied field voltage must be fed into the generator model in model
simulation in order to obtain valid results.
• The simulation program used for the study should have the capability to
read the measured generator field voltage or exciter field voltage.

14 - Generating Unit Model Validation – August 2017

 Generator D- and Q-axis Parameter Validation Cont’d

Generator D- and Q-axis Model Parameter Validation for a Generating Unit with Static Exciter

15 - Generating Unit Model Validation – August 2017

 Generator D- and Q-axis Parameter Validation Cont’d

Generator D- and Q-axis Model Parameter Validation for a Generating Unit with Brushless Exciter

16 - Generating Unit Model Validation – August 2017

 Validation Example – D-axis Parameters

• In theory the generator field voltage must be held constant in the

reactive load rejection in order to use the recorded generator voltage to
validate the d-axis parameters

• Practically it’s often difficult to satisfy the testing condition unless an

alternative excitation power source is utilized in the test.

• It should be cautioned that erroneous results can be reached from

simply fitting the d-axis test results without further examining the
generator field voltage condition.

• If the generator field voltage change is evident and measured, the

generator d-axis parameters can alternatively be validated by feeding
the measured field voltage into the synchronous generator model as
explained in the example.

17 - Generating Unit Model Validation – August 2017

 Validation Example – D-axis Parameters Cont’d
Tripping at T = T0

G 
X = XT (0.12, 0.20)
VS
P = P0, VT = VT0, Q = Q0

Generator in Test Adjust VS to Meet Q = Q0

 VT VS
 P  sin 
 X P  (Q 
2 VT2 2 VV
)  ( T S )2
 2 X X
Q  V T

VT VS
cos 

 X X
Notes:
1) P and Q should be per unit VT2 2
value on 100 MVA base VS  P  (Q 
2
) X / VT
X
2) VT is p.u. value on
generator voltage base
Simple Case Setup for Simulating Load Rejection Tests
18 - Generating Unit Model Validation – August 2017
 Validation Example – D-axis Parameters Cont’d
Fitting X”d, X’d, T”do Fitting T’d0 Fitting Xd
1.0

0.9 Measured Simulated

Vt(pu)

0.8

0.7
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Time (Seconds)

1.2
1
0.8
Vf (pu)

0.6
0.4 Measured Vf (pu)

0.2
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Time (Seconds)
1.0

0.9 Measured Simulated

If (pu)

0.8

0.7
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Time (Seconds)

D-axis Test on 85 MVA Generator with Terminal Fed Static Exciter

19 - Generating Unit Model Validation – August 2017
 Validation Example – AVR Reference Step Test

• After the main generator parameters are determined, (mainly saturation

factors and time constants), the excitation system model parameters
can be validated using voltage reference step response test results

• All the excitation systems have been tested for voltage steps as part of
the site commissioning and acceptance test, so this field testing is
straight-forward except digital AVRs using proprietary software

• Set up a power flow case such that the generator terminal voltage can
be changed with the voltage reference

Apply A Step at T = T0 P = Q = 0, VT = VT0 VS = VT0

AVR+EX G 
X = 99+j 999 (pu)

Simple Case Setup for Simulating Exciter Step Test

20 - Generating Unit Model Validation – August 2017

 Calculation of Water Starting Time Constant Tw
• Calculation Method by Definition (An Example)

Penstock Geometric Data

Diameter =17 ft => 17*0.3048 = 5.1816 m
Length L = 280.125 ft => 280.125*0.3048 = 85.38 m
Penstock cross-section area A = 3.15926 * (5.1816/2) 2 = 21.087 m2
Turbine Operation Data
Water flow at rated load (15.7 MW) Qr = 1390 cfs => 1390*0.02831685
=39.36 m3/s
Rated head Hr = 145 ft => 145*0.3048 =44.196 m, therefore,
Water Velocity Ur in the Penstock at Rated Load:
Ur = flow rate Qr / penstock area A =39.36 m3/s / 21.087 m2 = 1.866 m/s

Water Starting Time Constant Tw at Rated Load:

Tw = LUr/(agHr)=85.38*1.866/(9.81*44.196) = 0.368 seconds

21 - Generating Unit Model Validation – August 2017

 Validation of Water Starting Time Constant Tw from Field Tests

• Validation Approach from Field Tests

─ Test: Apply a quick change to the wicket gate position using a speed
adjuster motor (gate limiter), causing a step change in unit output to
about 50%, and make full measurements including wicket gate position

─ Note: Change in gate is not a step

Pmeasured Vs Psimulated
GMeasured

24
65
60 22 Measured MW

Unit power output in MW

Gate position… Simulated MW
Gate Position / limit (%)

55 Gate limit (%) 20

50
18
45
40 16

35 14
30
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 12
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Time (Seconds) Time (Seconds)

22 - Generating Unit Model Validation – August 2017

 Load Rejection Test for Validating Unit Inertia & Governor Model

23 - Generating Unit Model Validation – August 2017

 Limitations of the Modeling Process
• Some Limitations of the Modeling Process
– Saturation and Magnetic Hysteresis: Any magnetic materials, when
magnetized, will exhibit magnetic hysteresis. The synchronous generator
core is no exception. The existence of hysteresis or residual flux can yield
errors in the calculation of open-circuit saturation parameters (based on
measurement), per unit base field current, and consequently the generator
reactance, etc.
– Q-axis Saturation: The q-axis saturation depends on loading of the
generator. This can have a considerable effect on the results, and
modeling the q-axis saturation is rather difficult.
– Model Parameter Variations with Loading Conditions: For example, the
field resistance varies with rotor winding temperature, and the water
starting time constant varies with the wicket gate position. All these should
be carefully taken into account when per-unitizing the field voltage, and
deriving the generator open-circuit time constant, and the water starting
time constant, etc.
– Judgment Errors introduced by the engineer performing model validation
studies in the curve-fitting process.
24 - Generating Unit Model Validation – August 2017
 Accuracy of Model Validation from Field Testing
• Field measurements inevitably contain certain measurement errors, which
may be attributed to:
– Unbalanced load or possible difference (order of ±0.01pu) between 3-
phase generator terminal voltages and currents, due to tolerances in
PTs & CTs
– Random noise on the system that show up in the measurement.
– Measurement error in measuring devices, particularly for field current
and field voltage measurements.
For example, the generator field current is normally measured as voltage across a field shunt. If
a unit has a field shunt ratio of 600 Amps to 100 mV, and if the tolerance on the
measurement device is +/- 0.5 mV, the measurement error for field current is 0.5 mV =
0.005*600 = 3 Amps. If the field current base is 240 Amps, it means an error of 3/240 =
0.0125 pu. However, the net effect remains insignificant as per unitized values are used in
generator modeling.
– High frequency spikes on the field voltage due to power rectifier
circuits. To measure them, some sort of filter are used sometimes.
– Most of these are absolute errors, the relative errors can be even
larger since most of the proposed tests are performed at low load.
25 - Generating Unit Model Validation – August 2017
 Practical Issues and Experiences
• Generator model parameters, provided by the manufacturer as
calculated/designed data. In general, they are good in most cases,
particularly for newer units. However, model parameters for older units
may be questionable particularly after units have had a long history of
service and went through numerous rewound or other types of
modifications.
• AVR/Exciter parameters have wider variations than the planning database
(exception digital). In a lot of cases, “typical”, “generic” data are assumed
for the exciter, which are not unit specific.
• PSS model parameters could be very wrong and quite often engineers
may make unfounded changes, just to make it acceptable to the
simulation program they are using and ignore the actuality of it.
• Excitation limiter settings often are not appropriate.
• Governor/Turbine parameters have even wider variations than the
planning database

26 - Generating Unit Model Validation – August 2017