Turbine Generator Synchronization - Two Case Studies: Universiti Teknologi, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
Turbine Generator Synchronization - Two Case Studies: Universiti Teknologi, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
Turbine Generator Synchronization - Two Case Studies: Universiti Teknologi, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
Figure 2. Plot of bearing vibrations with exciter voltage and active power
during synchronization.
Figure 3. Plot of bearing casing vibrations with active power during load
removal and coast down.
10www.SandV.com
SOUND & VIBRATION/MAY 2012 SOUND & VIBRATION/MAY 2012
www.SandV.com 9
Figure 5. Exciter shaft vibrations and gearbox acceleration DCS readings
during synchronization process.
Figure 4. Vibration spectrum of turbine, gear box and generator bearing
casings.
15
632 X Axis
also continuously monitored with multichannel data loggers over 5
the entire duration for start up, synchronization and load removal –5
process of unit switch-over and operation combinations. On-board –15
15
Velocity, mm/s
OEM (original equipment manufacturer) overall vibration moni- 632 Y Axis
5
toring data for gear box bearing acceleration and generator shaft
–5
displacements (exciter bearing) were available in the control room
display. Overall casing vibrations under steady-state operation for –15
15
632 Z Axis
the different test combinations are summarized in Table 1. 5
While vibrations as measured on the casing were significant
–5
particularly for Units 2 and 3, these levels were not of major con-
–15
cern. Vibration frequency spectrum under steady-state operation 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8
Time, Sec × 103
showed dominant spectral peaks at 25 Hz (corresponding to the
generator 1¥ RPM synchronous frequency) and 250 Hz (turbine 1¥ Figure 6. Unit 2 generator 1¥ filtered vibrations (3 axes) before start-up,
RPM rotation frequency). The other significant spectral peak was start-up, and synchronization.
at 460 Hz (1¥ gear mesh frequency). The second harmonics (50 Hz)
of the generator 1¥ RPM synchronous frequency was insignificant 30
634 X Axis
(noted primarily on the generator casing measurements only). This 10
50-Hz component corresponded to the electrical line frequency of – 10
50 Hz. The other notable peak (occasionally noted in the spectrum) –30
30 634 Y Axis
Velocity, mm/s
was 225 Hz (9¥ generator RPM or the lower sideband of the turbine
10
1¥ RPM of 250 Hz modulated at the generator RPM).
– 10
Synchronization of a third unit into the power system (with
–30
two units already operating) resulted in time-varying vibrations 30 634 Z Axis
on all units, most pronounced on the generator. Results for Unit 2 10
synchronizing into the power system during Units 1 and 3 opera- – 10
tion are presented here. Power dispatch was at approximately 65%
–30
of system full-load capacity. (Results were similar with other test 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8
Time, Sec × 103
cases with different combinations of test units).
At the instance of Unit 2 synchronization, manual readings from Figure 7. Unit 3 generator 1¥ filtered vibrations (3 axes) before start-up and
the on-board exciter shaft displacement sensor showed increased during synchronization of Unit 2.
levels from 1.3 mils p-p to 2.5 mils p-p, and fluctuated with time not high (increased) during steady state operation, a reasonable
between 0.2 mils p-p to 3 mils p-p. After approximately 10 minutes, conclusion was that the generators themselves were not faulty.
vibration levels stabilized at 1.1 mils p-p. Gearbox casing vibra- Overall and filtered 1¥ synchronous time waveforms from these
tions remained constant at 2.2 g RMS. A plot of the DCS manual data were then examined in detail during phases of synchroni-
vibration readings versus time is given in Figure 5. zation and load removal. These time histories showed distinct
Casing vibration measurements, particularly on the generator fluctuations in vibration amplitudes initiated during synchroniza-
drive end and nondrive-end bearings showed increased vibra- tion that dropped back down to pre-synchronization levels after
tion levels during synchronization and load removal of generator approximately 10 minutes (for test conditions at 65% of system
units. Vibration frequency spectrum showed vibration increase full load capacity).
at the 1¥ RPM generator synchronous frequency component. Vibration time waveforms for measurements on Unit 2 start-up
Vibration frequency components corresponding to electrical line are shown in Figure 6. The time waveforms showed fluctuating
frequency and its harmonics were not evident (insignificant). This vibration amplitudes for generator casing vibrations (axial x,
contradicted expectations of dominant vibration components of 2¥ horizontal y, and vertical z directions). The time histories also
line frequency associated with conventional faults of generators showed four non-successive start-ups of Unit 2 prior to the eventual
and electrical machines (if the faults were originating from the synchronization. Prior to start-up, the generator (drive-end casing)
generators themselves). In this respect, since vibration levels were vibrations of Unit 2 were less than 2 mm/s (due to transmitted
vibrations from the other two running units). Upon synchroniza-
Table 1. Summary of measured overall casing vibrations, mm/s. tion, horizontal casing vibration levels (y direction) of the Unit 2
Field Test, Unit 1 Unit 2 Unit 3 generator increased to more than 10 mm/s and fluctuated between
~65% load Turb. Gen. Turb. Gen. Turb. Gen.
8 mm/s to 15 mm/s, thereafter stabilizing at 11 mm/s. The time
All on 3.1 2.0 3.4 7.3 3.6 11.0
fluctuating vibrations were evident (and perhaps visually more
Unit 1 off; 2 & 3 on 0.6 0.7 2.9 5.7 4.0 11.2
obvious) in the time history plots for the axial (x) and vertical (y)
Unit 2 off, 1 & 3 on 0.6 0.7 0.6 1.1 4.7 11.2
directions. The vibration fluctuations spanned over 10 minutes.
Unit 3 off, 1 & 2 on 3.0 2.1 3.4 8.0 0.5 1.1
Vibration time waveforms for measurements on the already op-
11www.SandV.com
SOUND & VIBRATION/MAY 2012 SOUND & VIBRATION/MAY 2012
www.SandV.com 9
1.8 5.0 nal or external pollution, low pressure dielectric, humidity and
4.5 decomposition of breaker’s insulation).
1.6
Velocity, mm/sec
2.5 Vibration signatures of 1¥ RPM, 2¥ RPM and 2¥ line frequency (and
0.8 its harmonics) lend itself to relatively straightforward identifica-
2.0
0.6 tion of the faults. However, there are possibilities of misdiagnosis
1.5
0.4 1.0
frequency associated with a misalignment and generator electrical
0.2 0.5 fault are the same. For electrical motors, there is differentiating
0 0.0 evidence by means of a slip frequency between the 2¥ RPM and
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60
Frequency, Hz 2¥ line frequency that differentiates a mechanical misalignment
with an electrical fault. For synchronous generators, correlation
Figure 8. Spectral map of Unit 2 generator 1¥ filtered vibrations (vertical)
during start-up process to loading.
of vibration levels against electrical power generation and load
removal would be necessary, which could later readily confirm
erating Unit 3 (measured at the same time and displayed over the whether the vibration problem is electrically induced. This was
same time segments) are given in Figure 7. Prior to start-up of the demonstrated from the Case 1 study here.
stationary Unit 2, generator (drive end casing) vibrations of Unit However, there are other problems that could lead to excessive
3 were below 10 mm/s. Upon synchronization of Unit 2, vibra- vibration during the synchronization process. But such failures and
tion levels on the Unit 3 generator increased up to 20 mm/s and problems are not frequently reported in the literature. This article
fluctuated between 8 mm/s to 20 mm/s. Vibration levels on Unit reports on time-varying vibration fluctuations predominantly at
3 thereafter stabilized to levels similar to pre-synchronization (as synchronous 1¥ RPM frequency and resulting from the synchro-
partial load was transferred to the newly started Unit 2). nization of a third generator affecting two other generators already
This start up sequence and vibration spectral peaks were evident in operation (with load dispatch). Even though this was originally
in the spectral plots (FFT cascade plots plotted against time). A thought to be due to structure-borne vibration transmission on a
spectral plot for Unit 2 prior to and during start-up, synchronization common structural deck (in an offshore platform), the problem
and thereafter with load dispatch is shown in Figure 8. Fluctuations pointed to electrical faults in the synchronization process, with
in vibration levels after synchronization for a significant duration likely out of phase synchronization. The excessive transient vibra-
(~10 minutes) were visually evident from the plots. The units tion extremes during this synchronization process appeared to be
continued with acceptable operations thereafter under partial-load load dependent and under full-load conditions had resulted in
operating conditions (up to ~80% system capacity). machine vibration alarm trips due to excessive vibrations.
Past experiences during full load (almost 100% system load) While the literature on power system dynamics and stability
showed that the elevated vibrations during synchronization did tended to report on issues related to voltage instability arising
not drop back to pre-synchronization levels and remained high from synchronization5 (which is indeed a major issue of concern
(exciter shaft displacements above 3 to 5 mils p-p) based on manual to the electricity power grid), this article presents an operational
readings from the control room monitoring system. This subse- perspective to the synchronization problem with respect to exces-
quently resulted in the units tripping as a result of high generator sive vibrations induced in synchronous generators during synchro-
exciter shaft vibrations. It could be reasonably assumed that under nization. Such excessive vibrations can result in machine trips or
full-load conditions, vibration levels increased corresponding to potential restriction to electrical load generation.
higher electrical loads. At these elevated vibrations, shaft rubs at
the generator bearing may also occur, thereby aggravating the situa- References
tion. (During the investigation, vibration tests were not undertaken 1. John S. Mitchell, An Introduction To Machinery Analysis And Monitoring,
pp. 202-204, PennWell Publishing, 1981.
up to full load conditions to avoid unnecessary system trip that 2. Thierry Van Cutsem, “Voltage Instability: Phenomena, Countermeasures,
would adversely affect the entire offshore platform’s production). and Analysis Methods,” Proceedings of the IEEE, Vol. 88(2), pp. 208-
Since the vibration levels during steady-state operation (with 227, 2000.
load dispatch) were acceptable, except for instances where full-load 3. H. H. Chen, G. E. Jablonka, J. V. Mitsche, J. B. Lewis, “Turbine-Generator
Loss of Life Analysis Following a Faulty Synchronization Incident,”
dispatch resulted in the units not “surviving” the synchronization Proceedings of the American Power Conference, Vol. 42, 1980.
related process, the cause of excessive vibration was shown to be 4. Emmanuel G. Potmianakis and Costas D. Vournas, “Short-Term Voltage
related to likely faults in the synchronization system. Common Instability: Effects on Synchronous and Induction Machines,” IEEE Trans-
faults in the synchronization are voltage out of phase, failures actions on Power Systems, Vol. 21(2), pp. 791-798, 2006.
in wiring, settings of synchronization system, delays or faults in
breaker closure, and flash-over in breaker’s contacts (from inter- The author can be reached at salman@ic.utm.my.