Experience of a Flux Probe User
Relu Ilie
The Israel Electric Corporation Ltd.,
Email reluilie@iec.co.il.
Abstract - The flux probe periodic on-line testing is a widely
recognized method for rotor shorted turns detection in turbo-
generators and it is justified by field winding insulation failures,
mostly experienced in older peak regime machines.
The drawback of the flux probe test is that, for sensitivity
reasons, it should be performed at various unusual or
unpredictable loads that do not fit optimal unit loading.
Consequently, this test is not easily accepted by load dispatcher or
operation personnel.
The main goal of this paper is to propose a simple
computational method, based on minimum input data, intended
to determine in advance the generator loads suitable for flux
probe readings. The paper originally explains the flux probe
operation starting from synchronous machine principles and
specifies the calculation mode. The accuracy of presented solution
is then estimated versus field data for different generators.
The proposed method has been thoroughly verified and proves
promising results. It can be very easily implemented, leading to
better test preparation, faster flux probe readings and minimum
impact on normal unit operating conditions.
Additionally, the paper presents further useful aspects
concerning installing and using flux probe equipment.
T
All the described issues have been experienced and
successfully implemented at Israel Electric Corporation
(IECo).
I. INTRODUCTION
HE shorted turns (turn-to-turn short-circuits) in turbo-
generator field windings are generally the result of rotor
insulation failures due to various causes [1]. As units age,
shorted turn problems become more probable. The stresses
involved in each start / stop cycle contribute to shorted turns
development, especially for machines activated daily in two-
shift mode.
Shorted turns cause higher field currents and temperatures
than previously experienced. Common effects of field shorted
turns are excessive vibrations due to rotor thermal unbalance,
which in severe conditions may impose generator reactive load
restrictions.
Several shorted turn detection methods have been proposed
and tested over the years [2]. The flux probe method main
advantage is that it monitors the on-line generator, the rotor
components being stressed at speed and load by real forces and
Iris Rotating Machine Conference
June 2007, San Antonio, TX
temperatures. Moreover, the flux probe indicates the slots
containing inter-turn defects and allows an approximation of
the number of short-circuited turns.
II. SYNCHRONOUS MACHINE BASICS
At any steady-state load, the cylindrical-rotor synchronous
generator is described by the phasors diagram from Fig. 1
(armature winding resistance neglected). Magnetic flux density
rotating spatial phasors are shown beside voltage phasors and
considered initially sinusoidal in time.
The terminal phase voltage V is assumed to be at zero angle
for reference. The rotating field flux BF induces in the stator
winding an excitation voltage E proportional to –dBF/dt
(phasor E lags BF by 90º). The armature reaction flux BI is in
phase with the load current I. The resultant air-gap flux density
BR is the vectorial sum of BF and BI. BR induces the total air-
gap magnetizing voltage EM, proportional to –dBR/dt (phasor
EM lags BR by 90º).
The synchronous reactance X is composed of the armature
leakage reactance XL and the armature self reactance XS.
The power-factor angle was noted with φ, positive for over-
excited operation and negative in under-excited regime.
E leads V by the internal electrical load angle δ, intensively
used in stability studies. However, this paper deals meanly
with the angular displacement δ' by which E leads EM. By the
same spatial angle δ' the field pole longitudinal axis (BF
phasor) leads the resultant air-gap flux axis (BR). The technical
literature often neglects the difference between δ and δ', but
for the present paper purpose this distinction is important.
According to Fig. 1 and assuming that base quantities are
generator rated phase voltage V and current I, the load angle δ
can be calculated from (1) using per-unit quantities:
tanδ = XIcosφ / (V + XIsinφ). (1)
The angular displacement δ' is smaller than δ by a
decrement (δ- δ') due to leakage reactance, resulting from:
tan(δ-δ') = XLIcosφ / (V + XLIsinφ). (2)
In actual quantities, (1) becomes:
tanδ = XP / (V2 + XQ), (3)
1
 BI
BF BR
E
δ'
δ EM
δ'
φ V
I
Fig. 1. Phasors diagram for 133.75MVA, 11.5kV, 2 poles, 50Hz generator,
loaded @ 70MW, 30MVAR.
X being the synchronous reactance in Ω, P and Q the active
respectively reactive three-phase generator load in MW and
MVAR, V the generator line voltage in kV.
The cylindrical-rotor flux BF has actually a trapezoidal form
due to its winding distribution in slots, the maximum being
located in the centerline of rotor pole and the zero value in the
quadrature axis (midline between the two largest coils).
Obviously, this flux rotates with the rotating field. For a two-
pole 50Hz machine, one complete rotor rotation lasts 20ms
and covers 360 electrical degrees.
For the particular case of no-load and excitation applied,
Fig. 2 shows the BR curve, identical to BF because there is no
armature reaction. The zero BF value coincides with zero BR,
i.e. the angular displacement δ' is null. At whatever load as in
Fig. 3, the armature reaction flux BI (assumed sinusoidal like
the current) is summed point-by-point to BF in order to obtain
the resultant air-gap flux. BR zero value is now shifted behind
the rotor quadrature axis (BF zero value) by an angle equal to
the angular displacement δ'.
Fig. 2 and Fig. 3 show also the total magnetizing voltage
EM, obtained by graphical derivation of resultant flux BR. This
data will be used in the context of flux probe explanations.
jX S I
III. FLUX PROBE PRINCIPLES
jX I
The flux probe is in fact a small search coil located in the
jX L I generator air-gap. The voltage induced in this coil (flux probe
data) depends by the rate-of-change of magnetic flux radial
components detailed below.
Primarily, the flux probe is sensitive to the rate-of-change
of main air-gap flux BR, similar to the armature winding as
explained before. The voltage induced in the flux probe
(similar to EM induced in the stator winding) is proportional to
–dBR/dt. Consequently, the integration of the flux probe data
by suitable software permits to obtain the total flux BR curve
and zero BR angle [3], [4].
Secondarily, the flux probe is located close enough to rotor
surface to be sensitive also to the rate-of-change of its teeth tip
leakage flux. Fig. 4 shows two adjacent rotor slots, with
normal non-magnetic wedges, and their leakage flux paths.
The radial fundamental component of this leakage flux
alternates around the rotor surface, and a voltage proportional
to its negative derivative is induced in the flux probe. Then,
the flux probe data exhibit voltage peaks in front of rotor slot
centerlines and valleys corresponding to rotor teeth, as shown
in Fig. 5 and Fig. 6. The midline between the two largest coils
peaks (coils #7 in Fig. 5 and Fig. 6) represents the location of
rotor quadrature axis, i.e. zero BF angle.
Showing both angles were BF and BR are null, the flux probe
permits an estimation of their difference, i.e. the angular
displacement δ', although this is not its declared purpose.

2.45 2.45

2.1 2.1

1.75 1.75

1.4 1.4

1.05 1.05

0.7 0.7

0.35 0.35

pu 0 pu 0
40 85 130 175 220 265 310 355 400 445 490 40 85 130 175 220 265 310 355 400 445 490
-0.35 -0.35

-0.7 -0.7

-1.05 -1.05

-1.4 -1.4

-1.75
-1.75 Rotating field flux density Armature reaction flux density
Resultant air-gap flux density Total air-gap magnetizing voltage Resultant air-gap flux density Total air-gap magnetizing voltage
-2.1 -2.1

-2.45 -2.45

Degrees Degrees

Fig. 2. Calculated flux density and magnetizing voltage curves for Fig. 3. Calculated flux density and magnetizing voltage curves for
133.75MVA, 11.5kV, 2 poles, 50Hz generator, @ no-load. 133.75MVA, 11.5kV, 2 poles, 50Hz generator, loaded @ 70MW, 30MVAR.

Iris Rotating Machine Conference 2

June 2007, San Antonio, TX
 Radial component of tooth tip leakage flux
Flux probe data induced by leakage flux
Fig. 4. Rotor tooth tip leakage flux and flux probe data component.
The main goal of the flux probe is achieved by the fact that
the voltage induced in front of each slot by the rotor leakage
flux is proportional to the ampere-turns of the embedded coil.
Consequently, a reduced voltage is observed when shorts
occur in that coil. This principle permits comparing adjacent
slots of the same pole and diametrically opposite slots of
different poles, leading to shorted turn detection.
The generator air-gap main flux is in fact an undesired noise
for flux probe readings that alters the useful slot leakage flux
data (mainly by teeth saturation) [3]. The shorted turns
detection sensitivity is highest when the background main flux
is negligible, i.e. when the slot centerline of any particular
tested coil is located at zero BR angle. Fig. 7 shows zooms of
flux probe data exemplifying this fact: the shorted turns in
slots #2, #4 of one pole and #3 of opposite pole are very
prominent in the upper reading for zero BR line close to slot
#3, but almost invisible when zero BR is aligned with slot #6
(bottom curves). (Fig.7 shows flux probe data conveniently
inverted and aligned to facilitate peak magnitude comparison
between poles.)
Fig. 5. Actual measured flux probe data (GeneratorTech, Inc. software) for
133.75MVA, 11.5kV, 2 poles, 50Hz generator, @ no-load.
Iris Rotating Machine Conference
June 2007, San Antonio, TX
One solution to this drawback is obvious but difficult to
implement: performing the shorted turn test when the
generator is short-circuited and the field fundamental flux is
essentially cancelled by the armature reaction [5].
A more practical solution results from the above explanation
of generator basics: monitoring of each field winding coil by
slot alignment with zero flux means shifting BF angle
relatively to BR, i.e. changing the angular displacement δ'.
According to (3), this can be performed easily by choosing
different MW and MVAR loads during generator operation.
Larger angles can be obtained increasing the generator active
load or decreasing its reactive load. Highest angle values can
be usually achieved at full MW and under-excited (negative)
reactive loads.
Ignoring slot leakage flux harmonics, Fig. 2 vs. Fig. 5 and
Fig. 3 vs. Fig. 6 show good EM and BR waveform correlation
between calculated curves and actual measured flux probe
data. This is a promising conclusion that will be quantitatively
verified below.
IV. FLUX PROBE PRACTICAL CONSIDERATIONS
In order to shift the zero flux line, the manufacturers
recommend performing 5 to 12 incremental tests from zero to
full MW load, mostly at unity power-factor [6], [7], [8].
For peak machines like two-shift operated gas turbines, the
flux probe data can be easily accumulated during the daily
normal starting and loading. Testing large base load generators
is more difficult: some low load data can be obtained at
synchronization, but generally the testing sequence is likely
contradictious to optimized generation and requires lengthy
coordination between the test performer and the load
dispatcher. In addition, the recommended equal load
increments do not exactly meet the zero flux requirements and
extreme minimum / maximum loads may be unavailable due to
operational reasons.
Fig. 6. Actual measured flux probe data (GeneratorTech, Inc. software) for
133.75MVA, 11.5kV, 2 poles, 50Hz generator, @ 70MW, 30MVAR.
3

Fig. 7. Actual measured flux probe data zoom (GeneratorTech, Inc. software)
for 647MVA, 22kV, 2 poles, 50Hz generator, @ two different loads.
Solutions to these disadvantages appear in literature in the
form of sophisticated flux measurements systems performing
some degree of automated testing and continuous collection of
data [9], including even an algorithm to detect changes in zero
flux points [10]. There are still problems that these systems do
not solve, like testing at unusual loads e.g. negative MVAR; in
fact, readings in under-excited regimes are especially
important allowing accurate testing of the smallest coils (that
have maximum impact to thermal sensitivity).
This paper goal is to establish a synchronous machine model
able to anticipate with sufficient accuracy the MW/MVAR
loads required for a given angular displacement (i.e. for test
sensitivity in a given slot). If feasible, the solution will permit
selecting for tests those specific loads that are enough close to
the optimal regime and easily accepted by operation personnel.
V. ANGULAR DISPLACEMENT CALCULATION
As a first step, the author looked for a model to calculate the
angular displacement δ'. An imposed requirement was to use a
simple model based only on a few easy to obtain machine
rated data (like MVA, terminal voltage, synchronous
reactance). The operational values read during flux probe
measurements (active and reactive loads, actual voltage) were
Iris Rotating Machine Conference
June 2007, San Antonio, TX
input to the calculation routine. The calculated angular
displacement δ' was thus compared with the measured one in
order to verify the correctness of the used algorithm.
The calculation of the internal angle can be a laborious
process, some aspects of which being described below.
In addition to generator loads dependence as stated above,
(3) shows that angle δ also changes with the generator terminal
voltage. The author preferred to use the actual voltage on main
transformer high voltage side, because the system voltage
profile is easier to predict for the testing schedule. According
to [11], the generator voltage results solving (4) in actual
complex quantities (transformer resistance neglected):
VS = V / kT – jkTXT (P – jQ) / V, (4)
VS being the system line voltage in kV, kT the main
transformer ratio at the actual tap and XT the transformer
reactance in Ω calculated at high voltage side. (The accurate
power values in (4) should be P and Q diminished by unit
auxiliaries loads, but this precision is not considered.)
According to (3), δ also depends on generator synchronous
reactance. The main difficulty of the model is the
representation of steady-state saturation, which decreases the
reactance depending on the generator magnetization curve and
leads to lower internal angle value. An additional complication
is that references usually deal with load angle δ calculation,
whereas the flux probe indicates the angular displacement δ'
(which differs from δ by the amount done by (2)).
Various saturation representation methods have been
proposed by numerous papers, the more accurate ones
unfortunately needing extensive computations and not
commonly available generator information. The simplest
"standard" method described in [12] considers that XS value is
affected by machine saturation while XL remains roughly
constant, uses one (direct axis) saturation factor and requires
the knowledge of the generator magnetization curve and
leakage reactance. A more accurate method from [12] requires
to know also the quadrature axis unsaturated reactance and its
own magnetization curve (normally different than d-axis one).
Further, other methods take into consideration the cross-
coupling reactance between d and q axes. The required input
data for these calculations are not usually available from
manufacturers and can be determined only by special tests.
The author intensively tried to use different calculation
methods looking for accuracy, computation simplicity and
input data availability. The various methods described in
literature led to large internal angle discrepancies against
measured values. Moreover, the error values and their sign
differ from one machine to the other. The calculation methods
applied to certain large generators (especially under leading
power-factors) overestimate the angular displacement by as
much as 10º. In other cases of unsaturated machines, the
calculated angle resulted smaller than the measured one.
For these reasons, this paper proposes an extremely simple
but relative accurate model, corrected according to a
4
preliminary flux probe test. The model is still based on [12]
but assumes initially that the generator has no leakage
reactance (XL = 0) and that it is not saturated at all. The angular
displacement δ' is firstly calculated according to (1) and (2)
based on unsaturated synchronous reactance. Then, δ' is
linearly adjusted by one unique saturation-correction factor k
to match the actual measured angle. k is a number greater than
unity, higher for machines that work more saturated (for
analyzed generators k resulted in the range of 1.0 to 1.3). The
angular displacement corrected value δ'C will be:
δ'C = δ' / k .
The unique generator saturation-correction factor k can be
easily determined by a normal load preliminary flux probe test,
once per generator type life.
Undoubtedly, a further advantage of this method is that the
leakage reactance value and magnetization curve / air-gap line
are no longer required for the computation.
The results from Table I indicate that in the majority of
cases this calculation gives acceptable angular displacement
absolute errors versus measured data, inside 4º range. Fig. 8
displays the uncorrected and corrected errors using the factor
k, for different generators.
The proposed method may have significant intrinsic errors,
a part of them mentioned already due to the simple used model
and other due to data and calculus uncertainties (like power
and voltage measurements). Considering these limitations, the
total angular errors obtained in Table I seem reasonable. In
addition, for most generators the error margin of 4º does not
exceed half of adjacent rotor slot centerlines distance, i.e. it is
completely adequate for test sensitivity.
WITHOUT CORRECTION
20
Calculated δ' absolute error
In comparison with conventional generator models, the
proposed solution attains good internal angle errors. For
instance [13] mentions internal angle errors as high as 10º
using "standard" saturation representation.
VI. ANGULAR DISPLACEMENT PREDICTION
As a second step, the author used the above mentioned
verified method to anticipate the required MW and MVAR
values towards future flux probe detection in any rotor slot.
Table I shows cases when the loads have been predicted before
(5) the tests and their results.
The angular displacement prediction stages are as following:
A. One Preliminary Flux Probe Test (at any normal high
load, once per each generator type life; coordination with
operation or dispatcher personnel is not needed for this
preliminary test).
Test Input: Generator actual MW, MVAR; System actual kV.
Test Output: Saturation-correction factor k, rotor slots
centerline angles.
- Calculate the angular displacement δ' according to (2) and
(3). For this purpose we use a simple spreadsheet (Table I).
- Establish the saturation-correction factor k according to (5)
looking for minimum absolute error between δ'C and measured
angle. We determine k in the same spreadsheet using the Excel
"Goal Seek" function.
- Read on flux probe data the rotor slots centerline angle
values. In many generators the slots are equally distributed
between poles. In other cases, the angle step differs around the
rotor. For the analyzed generators having 7 or 8 coils per pole,
the measured angle step is 8º to 10º.
B. Computation before Flux Probe Periodical Tests (based
on load dispatcher forecast regarding unit loads and system
voltage profile; any predicted P and Q shall meet the unit
limits: generator capability curve, maximum and minimum

MD1
15
excitation limits settings, ±5% generator terminal voltage
AT2
HG6
limits, etc.)
10
RH2 Test Input: Rotor slots centerline angles, saturation-correction
5
ZA3
factor k; System expected kV at plant location.
RT1 0
RT2 0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Test Output: Generator predicted MW, MVAR.
-5
- Predict MVAR for small coils (e.g. slots #1 to #4), testing as
Actual measured angular displacement δ'
long as possible at optimized or full MW required by
dispatcher. Normally, it is much faster and cheaper for plant
WITH CORRECTION
and tester to play with reactive than active loads.
20
- Predict MVAR for larger coils (e.g. slots #5 to #7), testing at
Calculated δ' absolute error

MD1 minimum operational MW. Normally these tests should be

AT2 15
performed at a different time than the previous, like during the
HG6
RH2
10
night (low system loads).
ZA3 5 - Predict MW and MVAR for largest coil (e.g. slot #8).
RT1 0 Usually this test can be done only at very low MW
RT2
-5
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 (immediately after unit synchronization).
Actual measured angular displacement δ' The above mentioned spreadsheet permits also goal seeking
Q (or P) for any given δ' and P (or Q).
Fig. 8. Uncorrected and corrected errors using the saturation-correction factor Fig. 9 shows another way to present the suitable loads:
k, for different generators. constant δ' lines on generator capability curve.

Iris Rotating Machine Conference 5

June 2007, San Antonio, TX

1.0
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
Q (pu)
0.2
0.1
0.0
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 1.1 1.2
-0.1
-0.2
-0.3
-0.4
-0.5
-0.6
P (pu)
Fig.9. Example of constant angular displacement curves per each rotor slot.
To make the flux probe more practical for angular
displacement prediction, it is desirable to improve its
monitoring software in order to display the time axis (ms)
ruled also in electrical degrees (º).
VII. OTHER ASPECTS
Israel Electric (IECo) is gradually equipping its turbo-
generators with permanent flux probes, during major outage
opportunities when the rotor is withdrawn. Some flux probes
are furnished as a part of contractor's overhaul works; in other
cases, IECo installs the probes by itself (Fig. 10). A dedicated
IECo team performs the periodic flux probe tests in all units
using mobile PC-based hardware / software package.
If the flux probe supplier is different than the generator
OEM, the flux probe ordering involves knowledge of relevant
machine internal dimensions. The restrictive outage schedules
require obtaining these data from the OEM before rotor
withdrawal, but this can be an impossible task. One European
manufacturer still refuses to provide us the pertinent data.
IECo implemented some alternative installation solutions to
those recommended by the flux probe manufacturer. For
instance, in just re-winded generators the dedicated flux probe
penetration gland is not used; its wires are passed through
spare holes in RTD / thermo-couplers gland, as in Fig. 11.
To date, IECo performed hundreds of flux probe readings.
Several generators exhibit shorted turns problems.
VIII. CONCLUSIONS
This paper presents some flux probe aspects of theoretical
and practical interest, including a simple method intended to
predict the generator loads suitable for test.
The flux probe measurements can help understanding the
synchronous machine theory and behavior.
Iris Rotating Machine Conference
June 2007, San Antonio, TX
4.8º (slot 7)
14.5º (slot 6)
24.1º (slot 5)
33.8º (slot 4)
43.4º (slot 3)
53.0º (slot 2)
62.7º (slot 1)
Fig. 10. Block mount type flux probe (GeneratorTech, Inc. hardware) installed
in a 133.75MVA, 11.5kV, 2 poles, 50Hz generator.
Fig.11. Passing flux probe wires through existing RTD / thermo-couplers
penetration gland (Doosan) in a 464.4MVA, 18kV, 2 poles, 50Hz generator
REFERENCES
[1] D. J. Albright and D. R. Albright, GeneratorTech Inc., "Generator Field
Winding Shorted Turns: Observed Conditions and Causes". Available:
http://www.generatortech.com
[2] G. Klempner, Kinectrics Inc., "Rotor Shorted Turns - Detection and
Diagnostics", EPRI International Conference on Electric Generator
Predictive Maintenance and Refurbishment, Orlando, 2003.
[3] D. R. Albright, D. J. Albright and J. D. Albright, GeneratorTech Inc.,
"Generator Field Winding Shorted Turn Detection Technology".
Available: http://www.generatortech.com
[4] General Electric Company, "Generator Field Winding Shorted-Turn
Detector", GET-6987, 1988.
[5] D. R. Albright, General Electric Company, "Interturn Short-Circuit
Detector for Turbine-Generator Rotor Windings", GER-2668, IEEE
Summer Power Meeting, Los Angeles, 1970.
[6] GeneratorTech, Inc., "Generator Field Winding Shorted Turn Detector",
Information packet, 2005.
[7] GeneratorTech, Inc., "Two-Pole Rotor Winding Shorted Turn Detection
System. Instruction Manual", 2004.
[8] General Electric Company, "Generator Field Winding Shorted Turn
Detector (Flux Probe)", GET-6987B, 2001.
[9] J. Kapler, S. Campbell and M. Credland, Iris Power Engineering Inc.,
"Continuous Automated Flux Monitoring for Turbine Generator Rotor
Condition Assessment", EPRI Workshop, Charlotte, 2004.
[10] K. K. Rao, G. J. Goodrich, "Online Detection of Shorted Turns in a
Generator Field Winding", US Patent US 6911838 B2, 2005.
[11] IEEE C57.116-1989, "IEEE Guide for Transformers Directly Connected
to Generators".
[12] IEEE Std 1110-2002, "IEEE Guide for Synchronous Generator Modeling
Practices and Applications in Power System Stability Analyses".
[13] Prabha Kundur, "Power System Stability and Control", McGraw-Hill,
1994, pp. 117-118.
6
 TABLE I
ANGULAR DISPLACEMENT CALCULATION AND PREDICTION

RATED INPUT SATURATION FIELD ACTUAL INPUT OUTPUT FLUX PROBE DATA
GENERATOR MAIN TRANSFORMER CORRECTION SLOT ANGULAR DISPLACEMENT δ'
Rated Rated Unsaturated Rated Rated Rated FACTOR Active Reactive System Load
Reactance Calculated Corrected Measured Error Test time
output voltage reactance power low high power power voltage point
MVA kV pu MVA kV kV pu # MW MVAR kV deg (º) deg (º) deg (º) deg (º) # d/m/y h:m
MD1
464.4 18 2.1 450 18 169.05 0.137 1.15 8 22 38 165.2 4.9 4.3 4.6 -0.3 10 17/05/2006 19:41
464.4 18 2.1 450 18 169.05 0.137 1.15 7 75 100 164.5 13.1 11.4 13.4 -2.0 31 23/05/2006 00:11
464.4 18 2.1 450 18 169.05 0.137 1.15 6 130 107 164.0 21.6 18.8 21.8 -3.1 39 23/05/2006 00:36
464.4 18 2.1 450 18 169.05 0.137 1.15 5 150 33 164.2 31.4 27.3 29.8 -2.5 17 22/05/2006 08:57
464.4 18 2.1 450 18 169.05 0.137 1.15 4 350 120 165.0 45.5 39.6 39.9 -0.3 60 28/06/2006 23:52
464.4 18 2.1 450 18 169.05 0.137 1.15 3 350 40 164.8 54.1 47.1 44.9 2.2 59 28/06/2006 23:51
464.4 18 2.1 450 18 169.05 0.137 1.15 2 350 -30 164.0 63.9 55.6 53.7 1.9 58 28/06/2006 23:49
464.4 18 2.1 450 18 169.05 0.137 1.15 1
AT2

133.75 11.5 1.905 140 11.5 169.05 0.13 1.07 7 10 0 163.0 8.7 8.1 6.7 1.4 5 20/03/2006 16:29
133.75 11.5 1.905 140 11.5 169.05 0.13 1.07 6 20 25 163.5 12.0 11.2 14.7 -3.4 7 20/03/2006 16:31
133.75 11.5 1.905 140 11.5 169.05 0.13 1.07 5 40 30 164.3 21.8 20.4 24.3 -4.0 10 20/03/2006 16:33
133.75 11.5 1.905 140 11.5 169.05 0.13 1.07 4 70 30 164.3 35.0 32.7 34.6 -1.9 15 20/03/2006 16:36
133.75 11.5 1.905 140 11.5 169.05 0.13 1.07 3 110 30 165.0 47.7 44.6 43.8 0.8 21 20/03/2006 16:40
133.75 11.5 1.905 140 11.5 169.05 0.13 1.07 2 110 10 164.7 54.9 51.4 52.2 -0.9 26 20/03/2006 16:52
133.75 11.5 1.905 140 11.5 169.05 0.13 1.07 1 110 -10 164.5 63.7 59.5 55.2 4.4 29 20/03/2006 16:55
AT2

133.75 11.5 1.905 140 11.5 169.05 0.13 1.07 7 6 0 163.5 5.2 4.9 5.9 -1.0 3 23/10/2006 08:56
133.75 11.5 1.905 140 11.5 169.05 0.13 1.07 6 19 0 163.2 16.2 15.1 16.4 -1.3 6 23/10/2006 09:01
133.75 11.5 1.905 140 11.5 169.05 0.13 1.07 5 32 0 162.8 26.2 24.5 26.7 -2.2 11 23/10/2006 09:14
133.75 11.5 1.905 140 11.5 169.05 0.13 1.07 4 100 60 165.5 36.7 34.3 34.7 -0.4 12 23/10/2006 09:53
133.75 11.5 1.905 140 11.5 169.05 0.13 1.07 3 100 27 164.6 46.1 43.0 43.0 0.1 16 23/10/2006 10:04
133.75 11.5 1.905 140 11.5 169.05 0.13 1.07 2 100 4 163.4 55.2 51.6 49.5 2.1 17 23/10/2006 10:07
133.75 11.5 1.905 140 11.5 169.05 0.13 1.07 1 100 -10 162.8 62.0 58.0 54.0 4.0 20 23/10/2006 10:09
HG6

148.5 11.5 1.959 150 11.5 421.23 0.12 1.04 7 12 0 399.6 10.0 9.6 8.4 1.2 8 07/03/2006 14:50
148.5 11.5 1.959 150 11.5 421.23 0.12 1.04 6 20 0 399.6 16.3 15.7 13.8 1.9 10 07/03/2006 14:51
148.5 11.5 1.959 150 11.5 421.23 0.12 1.04 5 60 40 408.4 27.4 26.3 29.4 -3.0 102 10/05/2006 16:01
148.5 11.5 1.959 150 11.5 421.23 0.12 1.04 4 80 40 408.4 34.7 33.3 33.1 0.2 104 10/05/2006 16:04
148.5 11.5 1.959 150 11.5 421.23 0.12 1.04 3 90 20 408.4 44.0 42.3 43.2 -0.9 109 10/05/2006 16:08
148.5 11.5 1.959 150 11.5 421.23 0.12 1.04 2 90 5 408.4 49.7 47.7 47.8 -0.1 112 10/05/2006 16:10
148.5 11.5 1.959 150 11.5 421.23 0.12 1.04 1
HG6

148.5 11.5 1.959 150 11.5 421.23 0.12 1.04 7 7 0 403.4 5.7 5.5 6.5 -0.9 6 08/01/2007 08:35
148.5 11.5 1.959 150 11.5 421.23 0.12 1.04 6 21 0 403.4 16.8 16.2 17.2 -1.0 8 08/01/2007 08:37
148.5 11.5 1.959 150 11.5 421.23 0.12 1.04 5 37 0 403.4 28.0 27.0 29.1 -2.2 12 08/01/2007 08:40
148.5 11.5 1.959 150 11.5 421.23 0.12 1.04 4 100 52 404.4 38.1 36.6 37.8 -1.2 19 08/01/2007 08:49
148.5 11.5 1.959 150 11.5 421.23 0.12 1.04 3 100 20 404.6 47.4 45.6 45.1 0.5 23 08/01/2007 08:51
148.5 11.5 1.959 150 11.5 421.23 0.12 1.04 2 100 -6 404.0 58.0 55.8 52.6 3.1 26 08/01/2007 08:54
148.5 11.5 1.959 150 11.5 421.23 0.12 1.04 1 100 -13 404.0 61.4 59.0 54.7 4.3 28 08/01/2007 08:55
RH2

133.75 11.5 1.905 140 11.5 165.03 0.13 1.06 7 4 15 160.4 2.8 2.6 5.5 -2.9 8 25/09/2006 12:03
133.75 11.5 1.905 140 11.5 165.03 0.13 1.06 6 19 14 160.4 13.0 12.3 14.5 -2.2 10 25/09/2006 12:05
133.75 11.5 1.905 140 11.5 165.03 0.13 1.06 5 35 13 160.5 23.4 22.0 23.5 -1.5 13 25/09/2006 12:07
133.75 11.5 1.905 140 11.5 165.03 0.13 1.06 4 55 13 160.5 34.2 32.3 34.0 -1.7 19 25/09/2006 12:09
133.75 11.5 1.905 140 11.5 165.03 0.13 1.06 3 74 13 160.6 42.5 40.1 43.0 -2.9 23 25/09/2006 12:12
133.75 11.5 1.905 140 11.5 165.03 0.13 1.06 2 95 0 160.2 55.4 52.2 52.9 -0.6 29 25/09/2006 12:18
133.75 11.5 1.905 140 11.5 165.03 0.13 1
ZA3
295 15.75 2.07 350 15.75 425.25 0.166 1.21 8 11 25 408.2 3.9 3.3 3.8 -0.5 4 28/11/2006 14:56
295 15.75 2.07 350 15.75 425.25 0.166 1.21 7 70 128 410.2 14.2 11.7 13.0 -1.3 13 28/11/2006 15:18
295 15.75 2.07 350 15.75 425.25 0.166 1.21 6 70 29 408.2 23.1 19.1 21.7 -2.6 8 28/11/2006 15:05
295 15.75 2.07 350 15.75 425.25 0.166 1.21 5 70 -20 407.4 33.0 27.2 29.5 -2.2 20 28/11/2006 15:29
295 15.75 2.07 350 15.75 425.25 0.166 1.21 4 230 116 405.6 41.6 34.4 34.8 -0.4 43 28/11/2006 18:03
295 15.75 2.07 350 15.75 425.25 0.166 1.21 3 230 60 404.7 49.7 41.0 41.2 -0.2 39 28/11/2006 17:56
295 15.75 2.07 350 15.75 425.25 0.166 1.21 2 230 14 407.4 57.8 47.8 47.1 0.7 34 28/11/2006 17:45
295 15.75 2.07 350 15.75 425.25 0.166 1.21 1 230 -25 403.7 66.9 55.3 51.0 4.3 36 28/11/2006 17:49
RT1
647 22 1.74 651 22 409.5 0.17 1.28 8 30 10 401.9 4.6 3.6 3.8 -0.2 7 26/04/2006 12:51
647 22 1.74 651 22 409.5 0.17 1.28 7 120 100 403.0 14.1 11.0 10.5 0.5 14 26/04/2006 14:05
647 22 1.74 651 22 409.5 0.17 1.28 6 204 70 402.8 24.8 19.3 19.3 0.0 22 26/04/2006 15:41
647 22 1.74 651 22 409.5 0.17 1.28 5 240 0 402.8 33.8 26.4 26.6 -0.2 24 26/04/2006 15:52
647 22 1.74 651 22 409.5 0.17 1.28 4 390 28 404.7 44.8 35.0 34.8 0.2 30 23/05/2006 00:05
647 22 1.74 651 22 409.5 0.17 1.28 3 450 -70 405.6 58.5 45.7 42.2 3.6 38 23/05/2006 00:39
647 22 1.74 651 22 409.5 0.17 1.28 2 500 -70 403.7 61.6 48.1 46.2 1.9 42 23/05/2006 00:52
647 22 1.74 651 22 409.5 0.17 1.28 1
RT2
647 22 1.74 651 22 409.5 0.17 1.28 8
647 22 1.74 651 22 409.5 0.17 1.28 7
647 22 1.74 651 22 409.5 0.17 1.28 6 219 109 411.8 23.5 18.3 18.6 -0.3 20 21/01/2007 01:45
647 22 1.74 651 22 409.5 0.17 1.28 5 240 3 411.6 32.4 25.3 26.6 -1.3 15 21/01/2007 01:29
647 22 1.74 651 22 409.5 0.17 1.28 4 390 36 410.8 43.3 33.9 34.2 -0.4 9 21/01/2007 00:24
647 22 1.74 651 22 409.5 0.17 1.28 3 575 100 407.4 50.2 39.2 37.6 1.6 1 02/01/2007 12:29
647 22 1.74 651 22 409.5 0.17 1.28 2
647 22 1.74 651 22 409.5 0.17 1.28 1

The highlighted values are for predicted MW and MVAR loads.

Iris Rotating Machine Conference 7

June 2007, San Antonio, TX