ceonr 10) Speed Governing Prime mover governors, especially centrifugal flyball governors, have been in use since the late 1700s. James Watt first applied a centrifugal governor to a steam engine in about 1788, ‘There is evidence that he considered a patent application for his governor and probably decided agains it because of earlier patents for similar centrifugal devices used to regulate the speed of water wheels and windmills in the milling industry (1, 2]. During the 19th century interest in speed governing intensified and a number of scholarly papers were written on the subject. Over 100 references on the subject are given in the Royal Society of London Catalogue of Scientific Papers, 1800-1900 [3]. Many of the prominent engineers and scientists of that era made contri- butions to the description and analysis of governors. These include C. W. Siemens, J. C ‘Maxwell, W. Thompson (Kelvin), J.B. L. Foucault, and I. Vyshnegradski, Pontryagin [4] refers to the work of the Russian engineer Vishnegradski (published in 1876) as of “complete clarity and simplicity” and credits him as being the originator of automatic controls (in Russia). Ham- ‘mond (5] notes that J.C. Maxwell, writing in 1868, identified the instability of an carly gover- nor design as being due toa positive eigenvalue [6]. ‘The mechanical flyball governor of Watt and Boulton came into wide use during the early 19th century and easily outstripped competing devices, such as the float valve regulator of French design. Watt’s governor is extensively treated in the literature of that era and even some «elementary quantitative analysis is evident in works prior to 1850 [2]. However, the control dy- namic problems inherent in feedback systems were not recognized until the second half of the 19th century ‘The dynamic problems associated with speed governing almost certainly provided the in- centive for establishing the mathematical theory underlying automatic control. Mayr (2} lists the earliest contributors to this quantitative theory as G. B. Airy (1840051), J. C. Maxwell (1868), I. 1. Vyshnegradskii (1876), E. J. Routh (1877), A. M. Lyapunov (1892), A. Stodola (1893/94), and A. Hurwitz (1895). Mostly, these works consisted of attempts to solve the differ- ential equations by classical methods and did not present a generalized theory of feedback con- trol. By the end of the 19th century, the dynamic speed control problem had been thoroughly documented in the technical literature, was presented in textbooks and handbooks, and was ‘even the subject of historical studies [2]. The treatment in this book is therefore the restatement ‘ofa very old problem, but itis placed in a modem setting and is attacked with the tools ofthe control engineer developed in this century In a steam ot hydraulic turbine~generator system, the goveming is accomplished by a speed transducer, a comparator, and one or more force-stroke amplifiers. Figure 10.1 shows the system block diagram for a steam turbine generator. The speed governor in the figure isa speed transducer, the output of which is typically the position (stroke) of a rod that is therefore pro- 401402 CChopter 10 Load Tore Reference Psion Valve Developed [Accelerting Postion Enor Postion ge Toraue Torque Speed + rey ae | 6 Tor ~ae fein — bow aay liners Speed Goveror Speat Postion coverer Fig 10.1 Bleek diagram of steam turbine contol system from [1] wth permission, portional to speed. This stroke is mechanically compared toa preset reference position to give a position error proportional to the speed error. The force that controls this position error is small ‘and must be amplified in both force and stroke. This is the purpose of the two amplifiers labeled speed relay and servomotor. This same figure also describes a hydraulic turbine control system if the valve position is changed to a gate position and the steam valve block is considered the ‘wicket gate and hydro turbine system, including the penstock. ‘The speed transducer is the heart of the govemor system and may be a mechanical, hy- [{f cover tava (b) | Psion 1 ST PP \ / Et spent © Fig. 102 Examples of cemifuglflyball governors404 Chapter 10 ‘Turbine Shaft Mala ON Piss {asl Governor Oil Pump L. Governor oil Orifice |= Oil Reservoir Oil Ejector (Check Valve Fig. 103A hydraulic govemor. on the flyball-crankarm system: an outward centrifugal force Fe acting on the masses, and a downward spring force Fs acting on the throttle rod. The reference position r is adjusted to cor- respond to the desired speed. The total outward force Fc on the two flyballs depends on the mass m, the peripheral veloc~ ity v, the downward force of the spring, and the radial displacement R of the mass m: re Speed & VGrie contro Fig. 1044 Ayball governorSpeed Governing 405 2mv? R Using the familiar relation between peripheral velocity v and shaft angular velocity y we can write Fe (10.1) ve Ry 102) Now, relating the governor speed tothe turbine shat speed through the gear ratio N, oN (193) wwe can write (10.1) as Fe= 2mN*Re? N (10.4) where Fis in Newtons, is in radians per second, m is in kg, and R is in meters. By simple ‘geometry, we can relate R tox, and x as follows b myo Rod=—2xe-Gx Red-Cx (10.5) ‘where C, = bia isthe lever ratio constant. Then the ballhead force F-may be written in terms of xas Fe=2mN¥d—Cx)u? (10.6) ‘Now, using Figure 10,5, we sum the forces on the ballhead using Newton's law: mij =3 Forces = FE — gi, HE oz) 2 2 ‘where Fis the force due to the spring and Bi isthe force required to overcome friction, both applied atthe ballhead. Equating moments about the pivot, we can relate F¢ 10 Fs, the actual spring force, as follows: (10.8) Five Fig. 105 Crank arm geometry and foros.406 CChopter 10 and solve for F{ withthe result (109) where Kis the spring constant of the speeder spring. Substituting (10.6) and (10.9) into (10.7) we have Kir-x) 2m, + 28%, = ImN*d~ Cao? (10.10) ‘Now, from (10.5) x; = -C,x and the entire equation can be writen in terms of the variables -xand with the result kp 20 Z~ Cx)ul = Imi + Bi + Kx 0.11) where we define an effective spring constant K, = K//C2. Equation (10.11) shows clearly the nonlinearities ofthe system. Not only are the products and quadratic terms nontinear, but the coefficients, particularly K, and B, can not be expected to be linear over a large range of x and i. Furthermore, there may be backlash in the gears and dead zones in the pivots or other mechanical connections, which introduces nonlinearities that are not continuous functions of x, , and theit derivatives. In order to gain a beter grasp of govemor behavior, we lincarize (10.9) about a steady-state ‘operating point (subscript 0) ftom which we will study small deviations (subscript A). This is justified since the speed will deviate from its rated value only by small amounts in normal oper- ation, Thus, we write ot Ky roth (10.12) 0, (10.11) must still be satisfied. This gives the qui- Atthe quiescent points, with x, escent condition Kay (a C.x90h= Keo 0.13) Now, substituting (10.12) into the system equation (10.11) and using (10.13) to simplify the result, we compute Kirs- (d~ C.xghng = 20 + 2Bi +(K,— Image (10.14) ‘hich isa linear differential equation inthe variables rs, x, and ay, The ballhead force F,- acts in the x, direction (see Figure 10.5) on the total mass 2m. This force creates an equivalent force in the -x direction, which we shall call Fé, From Figure 10.5 we readily compute Fe=CFe= 2mCld~Cx)ut (10.15) a function ofboth x and w, Upon linearization we can write Fég= Kory t Keoos (10.16)Speed Governing “7 where we define the positive constants ke # | - 208 ‘The Ballarm Scale ore 2 uo #| 4mN°C(d~ Cx) The Balhead Seale cio. Using these defined constants in (10.14) the system equation becomes Kyra Ko mia + 2BRy + (K, ~ Ke (10.18) Taking the Laplace transform of this linear equation we can visualize the computation of x from the block diagram of Figure 10.6. The variable xs, which relates tothe throttle rod motion, ‘can be applied directly to the throttle valve or, more commonly, applied first to a force-stroke amplifier that drives the throttle. ‘The linear equation of motion ofthe governor is a second-order equation, We would expect ‘a response that is probably oscillatory when a step change is made in rs oF ws, or a well-“tuned” ‘governor may respond in a critically damped mode. In any event, the frequency of oscillation and the damping ratio are determined by the coefficients on the right-hand side of (10.18). Since the governor is physically small and it controls a massive turbine, we know that the solution of (10.18) will each steady state much faster than the turbine shaft. We are interested primarily in the motion of the turbine shaft. Therefore, we will neglect the governor oscillatory behavior to write, as an estimate, Kiry—Kutoy = (K, Kot (10.19) which will be sufficiently accurate in the longer time span of interest. This equation is algebraic and specifies that a eduction in speed results in an immediate increase in x4. Since a reduction {n speed would normally accompany an increase in load on the turbine, the increase in x, should be ina direction to futher open the throttle valve. The linear equation (10.19) is commonly used to represent governor behavior in power sys- tem simulations. The assumption of linearity is justified since deviations from synchronous speed are small, even for large disturbances such as faults on the generator terminals. ‘The spring constant K, is an important parameter in governor design. It determines the nat- ural frequency of oscillation ofthe governor from (10.18), from which we compute (10.20) Furthermore, itis obvious that the system is unstable when K, < K, and K,, is always posi- tive. Therefore, a minimum spring stiffness exists for satisfactory operation, “2 O-ee Be Fo, Fig. 106 Block diagram of linear speed governor.408 CChopler 10 ‘Also note that the system is designed for correct operation with K, > 0. From (10.17) this means that d > C,xo, but we see from Figure 10.4 and (10.5) that this inequality always holds. Finally, note carefully that rs, acting through the spring constant K,, is in fact the speed ref: ‘erence. A simple manipulation of this position will cause a change in x and eventually, as the shaft responds, will cause w to seek a new steady-state value. 10.2. The Isochronous Governor ‘The flyball governors similar to those shown in Figure 10.2 are capable of sensing changes in speed and responding by making a small change in a displacement or stroke (x) according to Equation (10.19). However, the force available to move a throttle mechanism in the x direction is small and the displacement is usually small as well. Therefore, what is needed is a force-stroke amplifier to magnify the stroke and exert a sufficient force to manipulate the valve, ‘This is accomplished by means of a hydraulic amplifier or servomotor (see Appendix E) ‘Consider the system shown in Figure 10.7, which consists ofa flyball governor, a spool (pi- Jot) valve, and a piston that is capable of exerting a large linear force.* The flyball governor equation isthe same as (10.19) except that a new force, the hydraulic reaction force due to the spool valve, must be added. This hydraulic reaction force, or Bernoulli force, has two compo- nents; a steady-state component that is always proportional to x and acts in a direction to close the valve orifice, and a transient component that is proportional to x and may be either a stabi- lizing (closing) or a destabilizing (opening) force {7]. Since the valve transient period is very short compared to the turbine response time, we need to represent only the steady-state hy- 0 Ko (at b+ oad + be + ca) (abe +) . 4 atbte (10.59) ‘The later of these constraints may be simplified by converting into the form. K<(a+ byfe2 + (a + bye + ab] (10.60)48 Chapter 10 of, substituting gains and time constants and simplifying, we get Bate) , 2) 1m Tm neccinro + rt 1G < (+ ap (10.61) ‘Since the damping D is always a stabilizing force, we examine (10.61) for the case where D= 010 compute (10.62) Now +, and H are fixed positive constants. The gain K; is a function ofthe control valve and turbine design and is fixed fora given system, although it may vary slightly with the oper- ating point. The quantities R and 7, vary with the lever ratio al. since we define, from (10.47) mie, (ee) (Bz)¢ (10.63) ‘Thus, increasing a/L increases R and decreases 7, which increases the stability margin. From Figure 10.13, we note that increasing the ratio a/L moves the flyball connection with the summing beam to the right. This increases the negative feedback, increases the droop, and re- duces the governor time constant. In the root locus plot of Figure 10.17, this increase in all. ‘moves the pole at s =-a farther to the left Finally, we compute the response of the system to a step increase in reference rs (ot a step decrease in T,s). From (10.58) we have, with rs = A/s, KyAls 0" S¥(@ th + ost + (ab + be + cas + (abe + K) (10.64) From ha ae heen ewe . Kg tx4)— Keng + Kelty (10.74) ‘The second subsystem is the upper summing beam shown in Figure 10.22(a), for which we ‘write both a displacement and a force equation. For incremental displacements, we can write cd sop pa (10.75)423 alll Fig, 1021 The Myball governor subsystem. here £1 =¢ + d, Summing moments about R in the clockwise sense, we compute EMg=0= Fé + LiFs = cK fxs +4) —CKry + Koy + Ls (10.76) For the pilot valve beam of Figure 10.22(b) we can write, for incremental displacements ba we Ea (10.77) ‘where L)=a + b, Then summing moments about G in the clockwise direction we have (10.78) or 40.79) a) fe f ’ 3 Tt Th tt et F, 7 a r (b) Pilot Valve Summing Beart (©) Compensator Summning Beam Fig, 1022 Mechanical beams ofthe compensted governor.424 Chopler 10 ‘The compensator beam of Figure 10.22(c) is nothing but a lever for which we can write the displacement equation yon Gon (10.80) and, summing moment in the clockwise sense about N, fe, aos where Ps is the supply pressure behind the hydraulic ram and a isthe ram area. ‘The compensator system is show in Figure 10.23 on an enlarged scale. Here, we write the equations forthe forces acting at B and E as Fyn asPy—Kizy Fe aPy (10.82) ‘The equation forthe volumetric discharge rate of fluid through the needle valve is CPy= ah aség (1083) the incremental pressure change in the chamber in Ibf?, Cy is the needle valve in ft/s Ibf or in'/s psi, and other quantities are as previously defined. ‘The final subsystem is the hydraulic piston or ram shown in Figure 10.24. Since the avail- able force Fis usually much greater than the load F, and the load mass is small compared to this force, we write only the integrator equation Kya ava (10.84) for this subsystem. Ifload force and mass are important considerations, the complete equations for the piston should be written (see Appendix F). This completes the subsystem equations. We now collect the equations necessary to de- scribe the total system behavior. From (10.75) and (10.76) we compute GK Ke ie OK TES Teo Tp Bi Kitt Fs (10.85) But Fs may be catculated from (10.81) and (10.82) withthe result ea, _ cask, Bye tay 10.86) To fay (oso, Fig. 1023 The compensator system.425 Fig, 10.24 The hyavlc piston subsystem, ‘Substituting into (10.85) and rearranging, we have 4 Jat ae ~ otk, (1087) ‘From compensator equation (10.83) and beam equation (10.80) we compute Jan ats (10.88) ‘Also, from (10.82) and (10.79) we can write Fao Rita” aPo— Ken (10.89) and using (10.84) we compute (10.90) from which we can find P, asa function of 24 and y,. Substituting this result into (10.88) and simplifying we have candy | aaiky Ke pian eat (1091) aa, DKK, Cok, which is the desired equation for the compensator. Note that (10.91) may be written in the form nismast tds (10.92) where we define a Ck, eayarlaK, + afaik, 9 CR (1093) But 7, may also be written as — eanabaKy* KI gy, Wai, where 5’ is defined as the coefficient multiplying 7 n (10.94)426 ‘Chapter 10 ‘We may also define, from (10.87) alyL(K,~ K,) eee al(K,—K,) _ €03L3K, eK, efasK, ‘Then the system equations (10.87) and (10.92) may be summarized as, a bk, (1095) og = Yat Ty Key cK, Bir ig™ 2a tabs (10.96) Equation (10.96) can be normalized in the usual way to write dry Kon ru — Wan = Yau Taw ey” eKiyy OP Bryn q Baw Feu TaEan (10.97) ‘The coefficients of (10.96) are determined from full-load and no-load steady-state tests, In performing these tests, we note from (10.96) that whenever ya ~ 0, then we also have 2, £4 = ‘as well, and that this always holds inthe steady state. At full (rated) load and rated speed at steady state, equation (10.96) becomes 4,,- Uke o=y,+040 1098) Grae OMe (10.98) or Beg (10.99) and the r, coefficient of (10:97) is unity. Now ifthe load is removed and the reference is held at ry the speed wil each ay = Roy at steady state and (10.96) becomes (10.100) (10,101) ve LKR and the coefficients of ws, in the normalized equation (10.97) becomes C, = 1/R as before, Now, if we arbitrarily let zp ~ yp then (10.96) may be written as "au Cyltse~ You Tau Ketan Beau Zou Tadaw (10.102) Equation (10.102) may be writen ina slightly improved form by defining a new variable v= Kita (10.103) If we multiply the compensator equation by K and define 8 = KB’, where 3” is given by (10.94), we can writeSpeed Governing a7 iets Fig 1025 Block diagram oF he compensated governor Fae — Cee Vau™ Yau t Tu Yau + Trin = Btu (10.104) ‘This is the desired system description, If (10.104) is written in the s domain, the system block diagram is that given in Figure 10.25, ‘The block diagram helps clarify the role of the compensation feedback and the derivative effect ofthe temporary droop 8. Note that the signal v, will always return to zero in the steady state and the system tends toward the speed droop governor similar to Figure 10.14 inthe long term. ‘Another form of the compensated governor derived by Ramey and Skoogland [13, 14] is shown in Figure 10.26. This form of representation is instructive as it directly parallels the per- ‘manent (R) and temporary (R6) droop factors and also shows the integrating effect of the servo- motor in the absence of droop. To analyze the performance of the compensated governor, we again apply the governor as the controller in the system of Figure 10.15. The result isthe composite system shown in Figure 1027 ‘The steady-state performance of the system shown in Figure 10.26 is analyzed using (10.37) with the result Kin Tox "DERG, D+KG This is exactly the same result obtained for the speed droop governor with no compensa- tion. This result was anticipated as the compensation signal v, goes to zero inthe steady stat, The transient performance of the compensated governor is not easily analyzed using the ‘manual root locus or Routh techniques because of the added compensation. A computer root lo- ; 749 + >| > . 3 Ras . Rie + Ron Fig, 12.26 Allerate form of compensted governor representation [3,14 (10.105)28 Chopter 10 1 1 a Plant | 7]. D+ 2H Fig, 1027 Typical system application block diagram fo the compensated govern ‘cus method can be used for numerical results, bt this requires a cut and try procedure to opti- ‘mize the variable parameters in the system. As an instructive altemative, one can use an analog ‘computer of digital simulator to determine suitable values for all parameters and then examine ‘the behavior in the s plane for further insight into the design optimization. Problems 10.1. Verify the development of equation (10.11). Give a physical explanation forthe resulting effective spring constant of K, = KIC? 10.2. Verify that the dimension of the leading coefficient on the right-hand side of (10.26) isin inverse of a time constant in seconds. 10.3. From Appendix E we find the mathematical statement in (C.32) that Based on this premise, find the expression for stability of the system. 104. Evaluate the function 1 ~(sin 4,/sin ds) for values of , = 10, 20, and 30 degrees, and for ‘various positive values of gy between 0 and 75 degrees. Plot the results. 10.5. Perform a computer simulation ofthe isochronous, speed droop, and compensated gover- nots. Use the following constants forall simulations. Determine suitable settings for the gain K; in all governors and for the parameters 8 and ‘rin the compensated governor. References 1. Dickinson, H, W. and Rhys Jenkins, James Watt and the Steam Engine, Oxford, 1927 2. Mayr, Otto, The Origins of Feedback Control (translation of Zur Frikgeschite der Technischen Regelungen), MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1970. 3. Royal Society of London, Catalog of Scientific Papers, 1800-1900, Subject Index, vl, Mechanics, Cambridge, 1900, pp. 136-137. 4. Pontryagin, L-S., Ordinary Differential Equations, Addison-Wesley, Boston, 1962. 5. Hammond, P. H., Feedback Theory and its Applications, Macmillan, New York, 1958.13. 14 Speed Governing 429 Maxwell, J. C., On Governors, Proc. Royal Society of London, v. 16, 1868, pp. 270-283, Raven, Francis H., Automatic Control Engineering, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1968, Merit, Herbert E., Hydraulic Control Systems, Wiley, New York, 1967, ‘Takahashi, Yasundo, Michael J. Rabins, and David M. Auslander, Control and Dynamic Systems, Ad- dison-Wesley, Boston, 1970. Anderson, P. M., Modeling Thermal Power Plants for Dynamic Stability Studies, Project Report, Pa- cific Gas and Electric Company, San Francisco, 1972. Eggenberger, M. A., A simplified analysis ofthe no-load stability of mechanical-hydrauli speed con- teol systems for steam turbines, Paper 60-WA-34, ASME Winter Annual Meeting, New York, NLY., November 27-December 2, 1960. Eggenberger, M.A. Introduction tothe basic elements of control systems for large steam turbine-gen- cerators, GET-3096B, General Electric Co., 1970. Ramey, D. G., Hydro unit transfer functions, IEEE Tutor System Stability, IEEE pub. 70M29-PWR, 1970, pp. 34-39. Ramey, D. G. and J. W. Skoogland, Detaled hydro govemor representation for system stability stud- ies, Sixth PICA Conf. Proc., May 1969, pp. 490-501 Course, The Role of Prime Movers in