Hydro Generator Simulator Final Project Report

Team Ironwood
Angel Barahona-Sanchez Craig Bjorklund Matt Colby David Fugate Yonas Woldemichael EE 416 Washington State University

Team Sponsor: Avista Utilities Mentor: Kristina Newhouse Instructor: Scott Campbell

Submitted on: November 16th, 2007

Table of Contents:
I. Introduction .2 II. Marketing 5 i) Market Analysis ..5 ii) Marketing Features .5 iii) Competition .6 iv) Documentation 6 III. Engineering ...7 i) Introduction .7 ii) Generator Model .7 iii) Governor/Turbine Model 13 iv) Excitation Model 18 v) Protection Model 23 vi) Phase II ...27 IV. Quality ..32 i) Quality in Software .32 ii) Reliability ....33 V. Manufacturing 34 i) Producing a Deliverable ..34 ii) Product Validation ..34 iii) Estimate of Other Production Costs 34 VI. References .36

I. Introduction:
The purpose of this senior design project is to design and build a test simulator of a generic hydro generator unit for Avista Utilities. The simulator is controlled by a master computer which provides simulated feedback of the generation system. Along with the simulator, a general layout has been developed for an interface panel capable of accepting inputs from various control devices so proper settings can be tested and control schemes developed. A Basler DECS300 Voltage Regulator, Woodward 505H Governor, and a Schweitzer 300G Protection Relay are the control devices that the simulator is designed to communicate with. The interface panel will have a modular design in order to incorporate other control elements aside from those listed above. The final objective of this project is to provide Avista Utilities with a software environment that provides an accurate representation of a hydro generation system. The software must accurately reflect real world responses to system disturbances, load requirements, and control device settings. Plans have also been developed containing the general specifications of the interface panel, which is to be constructed by Avista. These design plans offer a starting point for Avista to begin piecing together what is needed for the interface panel. The given information contains material lists, inputs and outputs for the control devices stated above, and a general layout of how the control elements interface with the system. Documentation provided with the software contains installation procedures, operating instructions, and a list of conditions the generator will be able to simulate. The hydro generator simulator encompasses the capabilities of National Instruments (NI) Labview graphical development software and incorporates it to develop the simulator models. Modeled to reflect a real world hydro generation plant, these models are designed to follow IEEE standards. The foundation of the simulator is designed around a Francis turbine and a salient pole generator. Generic control devices have been developed to control, monitor and protect the generator/turbine unit. These devices operate similarly to the Basler DECS300, Woodward 505H, and SEL 300G, containing common functions and I/Os. The capability of modeling to a specific type of control device from a generic base model gives the hydro generator simulator a robust design. The simulator is also a flexible engineering tool because it can develop with variations in a particular model, such as upgrades or revisions. National Instruments data acquisition cards (DAQ) and a programmable logic controller (PLC) will allow the simulator to interface with various control devices. The hydro generator simulator is designed specifically for Avista Utilities. A safe testing environment is needed to verify control settings without risking damage to expensive equipment. Other primary markets include different power generation utilities that use hydroelectric dams to generate electricity. As reliability standards continue to improve, control devices must be able to accurately monitor and control generation units to meet these standards. The simulator is designed to save power generation utilities 4

money and time by giving them the option to test their equipment in house. A possible secondary market includes schools and training environments, where operators and technicians can learn from a hands-on learning tool. One major revision to this project has taken place between the two semesters of this senior design course. At the end of the first semester (EE415), it was this groups intent to have both a software simulator (Phase I) and a physical interface panel (Phase II) completed by the end of the second semester (EE416). However, realizations from both the group and Avista determined that completing both phases of the project would be too cumbersome. Therefore, the hydro generator software simulator (Phase I) is the final object to be presented to Avista at the end of EE416. The interface panel, Phase II of the project, will not be completed by this design team but a starting point for its integration with the simulator will be provided. The five students responsible for the design and implementation of the hydro generator simulator remain unchanged from last semester and are known as team Ironwood. This team consists of five electrical engineering students, Angel BarahonaSanchez, Craig Bjorklund, Matt Colby, David Fugate, and Yonas Woldemichael, all in their senior year at Washington State University. Each member will contribute evenly to the efforts of the group, but to maximize efficiency, the project has been broken into different parts and assigned to group members. There are four main portions that define the following project plan: Marketing, Quality, Engineering, and Manufacturing. The following list shows the division of roles within these portions as shown in table 1: Table 1. Divisional Roles Marketing Matt Quality Angel Engineering Intro David Generator Angel Governor/Turbine Matt Protection Yonas Excitation System David HMI & Simulator Matt & Craig Phase II Craig & Matt Manufacturing Craig & Yonas

II. Marketing:
Market Analysis: The primary customer of the hydro simulator is Avista Utilities. Avista desires the ability to test control device settings in a safe environment without risking damage to expensive equipment such as a generator. In the past, engineers from Avista had to travel to Colorado to test a governor on a Woodward generator simulator. Although this simulator provided an adequate testing environment, resources were spent on traveling to Colorado from Spokane, WA. The governor was also damaged in shipping resulting in unnecessary downtime. An in house generator simulator would provide Avista with a cost effective solution. The market for the hydro generator simulator is primarily suited towards power utilities that use hydro electric dams to generate power. Since few hydro generator simulators exist in the U.S, the primary market for the generator simulator is fairly large. The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) regulates more than 1,500 hydro electric dams in the U.S. alone [1]. Power generation utilities must provide a cheap, reliable source of power as efficiently as possible with minimum downtime. Failure to do so could result in power outages, loss of money, and wasted resources. In order to meet standards, adequate control schemes will need to be developed and tested. A hydro generator simulator provides an effective solution for testing device settings. A possible secondary market could be trade schools and training for power generation control operators. It is essential for power generation operators to have hands on experience before working in an actual control room. The hydro generator simulator could provide the means to meet this end. In a class room or lab environment students would have the opportunity to apply theoretical knowledge to a simulation of an actual hydropower plant. This would allow students to make changes to different system parameters without worrying about damaging expensive equipment in the event of unexpected performance. Marketing Features: The hydro generator simulator is developed in National Instruments Labview 8.2. Labview provides the software interface that can be used both to manipulate inputs to the simulator and monitor the system. Using this software the simulator is modeled to reflect the necessary equipment for the control and operation of a hydro power generation system. A hydro turbine, generator, excitation system, governor, and protection element are programmed to reflect a real world system. These models respond according to the specifications given in the WECC and IEEE standards. The ingenuity of the simulator is that with Labviews simulation module the user can interact with the simulation during its real time operation. Control inputs can be adjusted while the software is running and the responses can be readily seen. The user no

longer has to re-run the simulation to view the output response every time a parameter is modified as you would have to do with other software. Labview provides an effective human-machine interface and is capable of handling multiple analog and digital inputs if necessary. Due to this benefit the simulator is also developed to allow for a future expansion of an interface panel. This will include a Data Acquisition card (DAQ) and Programmable Logic Controller (PLC). After the interface panel is implemented, the simulator will be able to accept numerous inputs from the control devices while in turn providing a feedback response that replicates an actual system output. Current control devices which are compatible with the simulator are a Basler DECS300 voltage regulator, a Woodward 505H governor and a SEL 300G. After the interface panel is complete the simulator is designed so the respective software models can be disabled when the physical device is attached. Using this interface system, an engineer will be able to connect various control elements and perform the various simulations so control settings can be tested. Competition: There are not many hydro generator simulators available for power utilities that can be used to test control devices in a safe environment. The main competitor is the Woodward generator simulator in Colorado. Since this is a not a distributed product, engineers from power utilities bring their control devices to be tested. One thing that separates our product from the Woodward simulator is the fact that power utilities do not have to travel to test their control schemes. Instead they can test control settings in house, saving time and resources. The Woodward simulator also lacks the ability to simulate control devices, but requires the physical devices in question to be plugged into the system. The developed simulator represents other control devices in software and generates response signals that reflect a corresponding physical device. What makes the designed product excel is its ease of use compared to other products. Various components can be tested simultaneously and their effects on the simulated system can be observed. For example, if the load on the generator increases, the response of the governor can be observed to see if it correctly increases the flow rate to the turbine. Without a fail safe testing environment it can be difficult to predict the response of a control device or generation system. Documentation: Documentation for the simulator covers detailed information on the models and how to use the simulator. Default parameters, I/O locations, valid data ranges, and how the models work are some examples of information contained in the documentation. Details on the overall simulation explain how the simulator works and how to perform various tests.

Documentation necessary to get started implementing the interface panel is also provided. Being that this is a custom designed panel for each customers specifications, the layout of the product will vary slightly from product to product. To aid in any confusion that may exist because of this, documentation for the panel will be included on the same disk as the simulator software. This documentation includes mappings of what control device signals attach to the DAQ modules and which attach to the PLC.

III. Engineering:
Introduction: The development of the hydro generator simulator was broken into two phases. Phase I was to develop a virtual simulator while Phase II was to gather information on how to interface real devices with the simulator. Phase I was further broken down into five sections which makes up the simulator: the generator, governor/turbine, excitation system, protection device, and the human machine interface (HMI). In each section the process used to develop the model is explained. First, an explanation of what the model represents in the real world is covered. Next is a description of the different parts of each model and how they interact with each other. Following this is an explanation of how the model was programmed and validated using Labview. Problems that were encountered when developing the particular Labview model are explained. 3.1 Generator Model: Background: Synchronous generators form the principle source of electrical energy in todays power systems and are the core component of the generator simulator. In producing such a model for the generator, an understanding of its characteristics and accurately modeling the dynamics are of fundamental importance. Described below is a brief description of the synchronous generator and its function, followed by the research done in order to chose an appropriate model. The synchronous generator consists of a round or salient rotor. Its type depends on the rated rotational speed of the turbine. For example, at higher speeds, typically around 1800 rpms and greater, a round rotor is used; and at lower speeds, a salient pole rotor is used. Typically round rotor generators are found on steam powered units, and salient pole rotors on hydro powered units. Another important part of a generator is the stator, which consists of armature windings that are distributed 120 apart in space. This is done in order to produce uniform rotation of the magnetic field when excitation current is applied to the field winding of the rotor. Because of this, the three phase voltages in the armature windings are displaced by 120 in time.

The production of three phase voltage is the result of the total net magnetomotive force produced by the field and armature windings and there relation according to Faradays Law which is shown below. (1) (2)

In the above equations, see Equation (1) and Equation (2), ei is the induced voltage, the instantaneous value of flux linkage at time t, L the inductance, R the resistance of the conducting wire, and i the per unit current entering the circuit in Figure 1. Because of the large amounts of circuits, like Figure 1, that are involved in the synchronous machine, and the fact that the mutual and self inductance of the stator circuits vary with rotor position synchronous generator equations are complicated [2]. This complication poses a problem when describing the electrical performance of synchronous machines, or when modeling a synchronous generator. Historically this has been always a challenge.

Figure 1. Single-excited magnetic circuit [2] In the past, to simplify the modeling and analysis of transients for a synchronous generator, two axes were defined. The direct axis, or d-axis, was centered magnetically on the north pole of the rotor, and the quadrature axis, or q-axis, was 90 electrical degrees ahead of the d-axis, as shown in Figure 2. The d and q axis were further developed by mathematically transforming the 3 phase stator quantities into corresponding two axis quantities. These transforms developed by R.H. Park, are the widely known Parks transformations. The effects of such transformations are to move all the machine timevarying inductance coefficients from the machine flux linkage equations. The widespread use of the direct axis and quadrature axis equations has been developed from these concepts. These can also be visualized in terms of d and q axis equivalent circuits. The order can be defined simply as the number of rotor circuits in either the d or q axis; depending upon the number of inductance/resistance series combinations representing the field and direct axis equivalent rotor circuits, or the number representing quadrature axis equivalent circuits [3].

Figure 2. Stator and rotor circuits of a synchronous machine [2] Choosing a Model: The basic approach taken in generating or finding a model was to first locate historical work done in this area. The IEEE Xplorer library was the primary source that provided information relating to model parameters and test procedures of synchronous generators. Specifically the IEEE standards 1110-1991 and 115-1995 provided a basic understanding of this subject. After reading through the IEEE standards, many concepts related to properly modeling the synchronous generator were still unclear These modeling uncertainties created difficulties in finding the correct model for the generator. Even though much work has been done historically on modeling dynamics in a synchronous generator for stability studies, assistance was needed to put this information into some context. Individuals like Larry Long [16], Professor Tomsovic [18], and Professor Mani [19] provided assistance in understanding the concepts needed to find the correct model for the synchronous generator and its relating equations. When choosing a model for the synchronous generator the main consideration was keeping to the specifications of Avista. The model desired was a salient pole

10

generator. Being that most salient pole generators are constructed with laminate rotors, the rotors usually include copper damper bars located in the pole faces. The purpose of the damper windings is to reduce the mechanical oscillations of the rotor about synchronous speed [4]. These damper bars tend to form a squirrel-cage amortisseur circuit that is effective both in the direct and quadrature axes because they are connected at their pole faces with continuous end-rings. Since this amortisseur is the only physical circuit present in the q-axis, a first-order model can describe it adequately. Hence, Model 2.1 is recommended for most salient pole generators [3]. The model chosen was the gensal model from the WECC approved model library because it represents a salient pole synchronous generator. This model is shown in Figure 3 and is represented as model 2.1 in Figure 4. The main reason it differs from the round rotor model is that throughout each revolution of the rotor, the self inductances of the stator, and the mutual inductances between them, are not constant. These values vary as a function of the rotor angular displacement , which is shown in Figure 2 [4]. The angle , is the angle between the axis of phase a and the d-axis [2]. Also, the salient-pole model doesnt saturate significantly in the quadrature axis as it does in the round rotor model, and thus no quadrature axis saturation is present for Figure 3. As a result, the equations for the flux linkages of the salient-pole machine are more difficult to use than their round-rotor counterparts [4]. Fortunately, the equations that pertain to the a, b, and c phases can be transformed by using Parks transformations.

Efd +
-

+ -

d-axis

+ + +

id

iq
q-axis
+ -

Figure 3. Linearized synchronous generator block diagram of a salient pole, gensal

11

Ll

Lf1d R1 d Lad L1d

Rfd Lfd

Ll R1q Laq
Figure 4. Model 2.1 Model Description: The model shown above in Figure 3 has been the standard salient-pole model used in recent years for small-disturbances. The direct axis sub transient open circuit time constant, T`d0, and the direct axis sub transient open circuit time constant, T``d0, are used to account for time responses of faults that might occur. For example, if a terminal fault was simulated from an open circuit, the stator currents would be inversely proportional to Xd0 (for the sub transient period) and inversely proportional to Xd, (for the transient period) during the fault [3]. These time constants are normally between 0.01 and 9.0 seconds, depending on the type of generator[2]. When the terminal voltage and three-phase currents of the machine change, so does the field voltage of the rotor windings. This typically causes saturation in the d-axis of the rotor. The generator open-circuit saturation curve in the model shows this saturation relationship and is used to determine the saturation factors in this axis. An internal voltage behind some specified reactance is used to locate the operating point on the open-circuit saturation curve to calculate a saturation factor K (or a saturation correction E) [3]. Thus, the internal excitation Xaduifd, (or Laduifd) is then the sum of several components [3]. This form of excitation determination has had widespread use since the early 1960s [3]. Equation (3) shows this relationship to Figure 3 in per unit.
` ` X ad i fd = EI = Eq + I d ( X d X d ) + E

L1q

(3)

12

Programming in Labview: Using the simulation module in Labview made programming of the synchronous generator model rather straightforward. A snapshot of the synchronous generator is in Figure 5 below illustrating the manner this was done. The complications that did arise occurred during the verification stage of the model.

Figure 5. Screenshot of salient-pole model in Labview. Due to the fact that the generator is part of an integrated system which includes various controls, the synchronous generator, by itself, could only be verified to a limited extent. These tests included responses to changes in field voltage inputs and changes to the respective input axis currents. The results were used to verify that a particular change in input resulted in the correct output from the model. After these basic tests were completed, the generator model was connected to the excitation model of the simulator. Once connected with the excitation model, a general test was conducted to insure that it worked properly. This was accomplished by changing the reference voltage in the exciter model and observing if the terminal voltage of the generator responsded correctly. After this, the synchronous generator model was incorporated into the simulator with a load and circuit breaker so validation tests could done. Tests were evaluated by comparing the synchronous generator outputs from the Noxon report [5] to the simulator synchronous generator outputs. The only discrepancy between the simulator and the

13

Noxon report was that a round rotor synchronous generator was modeled for the Noxon testing rather than a salient-pole generator. 3.2 Governor/Turbine Model: Background: Speed governors are used to regulate the output torque and rotational speed of the prime mover, in this case the hydro turbine. By controlling the energy input to the turbine, the governor can effectively regulate the MW load on the generator in a continual effort to match the generation to the load. By controlling the rotational speed of the turbine the governor can control the electrical frequency of the generator. To accomplish these two tasks the governor adjusts the turbine wicket gates, which affects the amount of water that flows into the guide vanes of the turbine. It was desired by Avista for the governor model to represent an electro-hydraulic governor. This type of governor uses solid state electronics to implement feedback control. It senses the speed of the turbine using a frequency transducer and converts this signal into a DC voltage using a frequency to voltage converter. This signal is compared with reference DC voltage that represents the desired operating frequency. The error between these signals is fed into the PID controller. The output of the governor is an analog signal that operates the control mechanism necessary to adjust the wicket gate position. For example, if the measured electrical frequency is lower than the desired frequency the governor gives a raise signal to open the wicket gates. This increases the shaft speed and therefore the electrical frequency. It was also necessary for the model to include speed droop. Speed droop opens the control valve a specified amount for a given disturbance. By definition droop is the percent difference between the no-load and full load speeds of the unit. [6] It is necessary for generators to operate with stability in parallel with other generators in interconnected systems. In operation, droop causes the generation unit to decrease speed for an increasing power output so that it doesnt continually work to maintain a constant speed under different loading conditions. This allows for generators to share a load increase in proportion to the different ratings of the generators in the system. Most electronic governors implement droop that receives feedback directly from a power (watt) transducer from the generator potential transformers (PTs) and current transformers (CTs), instead of the control gate position. This is known as speed regulation [6]. Speed regulation is preferred over droop with gate position feedback because it is not affected by the nonlinear relationship between the gate position and the water flow. Electro-hydraulic governors also include a speed reference signal. Using this input signal an operator or an automatic control system can increase the desired rotational speed of the unit. The speed reference signal can be used to set the individual loading of a unit.

14

Governor/turbine models also include representation of the hydraulic system which is used to position the wicket gates. In the real world this is usually a pressurized oil system. A pilot valve is used to direct pressurized oil to the prime mover actuators as controlled by the PID controller. The pressurized oil is relayed to servo motors that transmit this hydraulic pressure to a rotating gate ring which is attached to the wicket gates of the turbine. The rate at which the gate opens and closes as well as the time constants of the pilot value and servo motors need to modeled in order for an accurate simulator. In addition to the governor and hydraulic system it was also necessary for a prime mover to be modeled. The prime mover converts kinetic energy from rushing water into mechanical energy necessary to rotate the shaft of the generator. A Francis turbine is modeled as the prime mover. A Francis turbine is a reaction turbine that is used at dams with larger head levels, usually 50 to 2400 feet [7]. How the Francis turbine performs is influenced by several characteristics of the turbine as well as the water column behind the turbine. Several non-ideal characteristics of the water column include water inertia and water compressibility as well as the elasticity of the penstock walls. Head level, flow rate, and penstock length are also factors that should be accounted for. These factors are usually modeled into the water starting time. The water starting time is defined as the time required for water flow to in the penstock to accelerate from zero to no load water velocity given some initial head level. [2] The turbines relationship between the ideal gate opening and real gate opening was also necessary to be modeled. This is modeled as an overall turbine gain. This can be found by inverting the difference between the full load gate position and the no load gate position. Finally the non-linear relationship between the gate position and power at the turbine must be modeled. This relationship is measured during the real time operation of the turbine and modeled using a lookup table. Choosing a Model: The process of researching and finding an appropriate governor/turbine model was fairly difficult. Initially, during the research process, the main source of information was the IEEE Xplorer. The IEEE Xplorer is a library of IEEE documents that cover a wide range of technical subjects which includes power system control modeling. Many of the governor models found were designed to represent the older mechanical governors which included transient and permanent droop instead of PID control and speed regulation. The initial model chosen for the simulator was the PID governor model gpwscc as recommended by Larry Long [16]. This is an accepted model of the Western Electricity Coordinating Council (WECC) and can be used in most steady state and transient analysis studies. The only drawback is that the turbine depicted in this model was an ideal lossless turbine represented by a single transfer function. For simulations involving large variations in power output and frequency this ideal turbine model is not appropriate [2]. It was preferred to have a more accurate turbine model that accounts for

15

non-ideal properties such as an inelastic water column as well as flow rate and head level. After contacting Kristina Newhouse [17], the model Avista provided was the hyg3 model as shown in Figure 6. This model is used to represent the governor/turbine for Unit 1 at Noxon Rapids generation station.
Governor

Hydraulic system

Francis Turbine

Figure 6. Hyg3 Model Model Description: As seen from Figure 6 the desired governor characteristics (droop, PID control, etc.) are incorporated into this model. Droop is shown as relec while the PID controller gains are ki, k1 and k2. Transducer delay effects are also modeled using first order transfer functions. The inputs to the model are electrical power, reference power (or speed setpoint) and the speed deviation. The resulting outputs are the mechanical power and the gate valve position. It should be noted that the model shown in Figure 6 has been modified from the original Hyg3 model. The model shown in Figure 6 neglects the option of using gate droop feedback from the control value. Instead this model only allows for electrical droop (speed regulation) because it is more frequently used. Although deadband is shown in

16

Figure 6 it is usually not modeled because it is difficult to get the necessary data to model it [2]. A hydraulic system and detailed turbine model representing a Francis turbine are also shown in hyg3. For the hydraulic system, the first transfer function represents the pilot valve and servo motors. This transfer function is limited by the maximum rate at which the gate can open and close. The gate position is modeled by the integrator block and is limited by the maximum and minimum gate positions. The output of the hydraulic system in the model is the gate valve position. The value of the gate value position is fed into the non-linear lookup table that converts the gate position to the power at the gate valve. This value is then fed into the turbine model which calculates running values of the head level and flow rate. The water time constant, as discussed earlier, is modeled as Tw. The block labeled At is used to account for the difference between the ideal gate opening and real gate opening. Programming in Labview: Programming the hyg3 model into Labview using the simulation toolkit was fairly straightforward. Since the simulation toolkit supports linear and non-linear functions such as transfer functions and saturation limiters, the block diagram shown in Figure 6 was programmed in a few hours. A screen capture of the governor/turbine model is shown in Figure 7 below.

Figure 7. Screenshot of the governor/turbine model in Labview 17

Difficulty arose during the debugging and verification stages. Even if the model could be programmed into Labview fairly quickly, there was no way to tell if the model was functioning correctly unless there was data to compare it with. In order to determine if the model was functioning as desired, different scenarios were simulated. By connecting the output of the model, Pmech, back to the input, Pelec, it was possible to simulate feedback control. After running the simulation, the output had a steady state value of the reference input. This showed that the PID controller was functioning correctly. Other tests included varying the speed deviation, dW, and the reference speed, Pref. Since the inputs are in per unit, Pref has a range from 0-0.04 per unit assuming the droop is set to four percent. By adjusting this value to 0.03 for example the output power of the system was verified to level off at 0.75 per unit. To test the dW input, the frequency was adjusted by -0.01 per unit. A one percent drop in frequency should result in a 25% increase in the power output if the unit is set to four percent droop. See Equation (4) for this calculation. The model response was verified for this test as shown in Figure 8.
Ppu = Pref 1 .01 f = 0 = 0.25 pu R .04

(4)

Figure 8. Model response for 1% frequency drop During simulation, probes were used to measure various points in the system. As a result of this testing several problems in the system were discovered. It was noted that the integrators of the system had to be limited to prevent them from going to infinity in certain cases. Another problem with the model dealt with initial conditions. Due to the feedback loop shown in the turbine model Labview was unable simulate hyg3. Without initial conditions this created what is called a cycle. A cycle is where one calculation point, say 18

node 1, is waiting for the output of another node, node 2 for example. Node 2 is also waiting for the output from node 1. If neither of these nodes are initialized with presimulation conditions, the results are NaN (not a number). This problem was resolved by creating a simple initial conditions function. 3.3 Excitation Model: Background: The primary function of an excitation system is to provide direct current to the field winding of a synchronous generator so voltage can be induced in the armature winding. It also regulates the generators terminal voltage and reactive power output by controlling the DC current that is applied to the field windings. A typical excitation system contains five subsystems; an exciter, voltage regulator, terminal voltage transducer and load compensator, power system stabilizer, and limiters and protective circuits, Figure 9.

Figure 9. Excitation block diagram [2] The first subsystem of the excitation system is the exciter. The exciter provides the necessary DC power to the synchronous machine's field windings to maintain a desired terminal voltage. It was desired to model a DC excitation system as apposed to newer AC and static excitation systems because this is what Avista has in place at Noxon Rapids Unit 1. A DC excitation system uses a DC generator with a commutator to provide power. The next major subsystem is the voltage regulator. The voltage regulator controls the amount of excitation that is applied by the exciter. It receives voltage signals from the generator(s) as well as the operator set voltage reference. The error between these two signals is used for the excitation control. This is known as feedback control. Depending on the excitation type, proportional, integral, and differential (PID) controls are used to improve voltage profile and the regulator's dynamic response. The third subsystem is the terminal voltage transducer and load compensator. This senses the generator's terminal voltage, VT, and line current, CT, and can use them to

19

calculate a compounded terminal voltage. With load compensation, the excitation system can be used to regulate voltage at a set point out in the system. Although currently not relevant for the hydro simulator, some excitation systems include an automatic voltage regulator, AVR, which uses inputs from other local synchronous machines to control the machine's terminal voltage since they share a common load. The fourth subsystem is the power system stabilizer, or PSS. The PSS provides an additional signal to the regulator to enhance damping of power system oscillations. Commonly used input signals are terminal voltage, accelerating power, rotor speed, and frequency deviation. Although the power system stabilizer is an important part is system stability it is not implemented at Noxon unit 1 therefore is not necessary to be modeled. The fifth subsystem is the protective circuits and limiters. Various control and protective features work to ensure that the limits of the both the exciter and the generator are not exceeded. If they are exceeded, some of these functions can also take emergency action and signal the breaker to take the generator offline. Some of the commonly used functions are over/under excitation, field-current limiter, terminal voltage limiter, and volts/hertz limiter. Excitation systems need to be able to control the generators operation not only during steady state conditions, but during transient, and post disturbance conditions. Failure to due so could result in power outages and equipment damage. The ceiling voltage and the response rate are the main factors that determine how well an excitation system can respond to sudden changes during disturbances. The ceiling voltage is the maximum field voltage the exciter can operate at [7]. It usually ranges from 1.5 to 6 times the field voltage during full load conditions. The response rates deals with how fast the excitation system can respond to changes in voltage. It is defined as the time required for the exciter to go from open circuit voltage to the ceiling voltage when then generator is at full load field voltage [7]. These conditions are necessary to be incorporated into the model. Choosing a Model: The excitation model to be used in the hydro simulator is EXAC8B, an approved WECC model, which is also known as the AC8B by IEEE. This model is shown in Figure 10, with the colored blocks representing the different sections of the model. The EXAC8B was chosen after Larry Long [16] suggested using this model due to the fact that it reflects the digital PID controls that are similar to the Basler DECS300. The EXAC8B models an AC excitation system which uses an AC alternator and either stationary or rotating rectifiers to produce the DC field. Although this model was developed for brushless AC exciters, it can be used to model a DC exciter simply by settings the gains of Kc and Kd to zero.

20

Figure 10. AC8b/EXAC8B Model The AC type models are not valid for frequency deviations of +- 5% from the rated frequency, 60Hz and oscillation frequencies up to about 3 Hz [8]. This is because the model does not account for regulator modulation as a function of the system frequency. Hence this model should not be used to study sub-synchronous resonance or other shaft torsional interaction problems. The synchronous machine's field current must be supplied back to the model in order for it to represent loading effect accurately. Model Description: EXAC8B receives the following inputs from the synchronous generator: compound terminal voltage Vcomp (or Vc), generator field current Ifd, and Vs from the power systems stabilizer, if in use. Section A in Figure 10 is the PID voltage regulator. This takes the sum of Vsig, Vc, and Vref, and amplifies the signal in block B. The time constant, Tdr represents lag from the PID controls and Ta is the lag from the voltage amplifier. The constant Ka represents the voltage regulators set gain. The output of the voltage regulator is now a regulated voltage, Vr. This signal is used to control the excitation system, which is modeled in blocks C and D. Section C uses Vr in a feedback loop and also receives the generator field current, Ifd. The time constant in the integration block is the lag associated with the exciter. The output from this block is the exciter voltage, Ve. This voltage is multiplied with Fex to represent Efd, the exciter field voltage that is fed to the generator. The exciter voltage is used to calculate a voltage, Vx, which is proportional to exciter saturation between the field current and field voltage as the load increases. Section D models rectifier regulation. Rectifier regulation is a non-linear effect that decreases the rectifier output voltage as the load current increases. The expression for 'Fex' is determined by the value of 'In.' There are three specific modes of operation, as shown in Table 2. Table 2. Rectifier regulation effect 21

Mode 1 Mode 2 Mode 3

f(In)=1.0+0.577In f(In)= 0.75 - In 2 f(In)=1.732(1.0-In)

In 0.433 0.433 < In < 0.75 0.75 In 1.0

It should be noted that although DC exciters ignore effects of rectifier regulation and field current feedback, these features were still modeled incase a user desired to simulate an AC excitation system. Programming in Labview: By using Labviews simulation toolkit, programming the excitation system took only a couple of hours. Once EXAC8B was programmed into Labview, a few basic tests were performed to validate that the model worked as expected. Model parameters from the Noxon report [5], specifically unit 1, were programmed into the model and set as the models default parameters. Figure 11 shows a screen capture of the programmed excitation system model.

Figure 11. Screenshot of the excitation system in Labview To perform the test, the output Efd was fed back to the input, Vc. Normally the compound terminal voltage, Vt from the generator would be fed into Vc, but since Efd and Vt are proportional it can be done. The gains Kc and Kd were set to zero for this to model a DC excitation system. The additional voltage signal, Vsig was set to zero because this input is from a PSS and this component is not needed for modeling unit 1 of the Noxon plant. For the first test, the reference voltage, Vref, was initially set to 0.1 per unit (pu) and speed to 1 pu. When Vref was increased to 0.8 pu, Efd also increased. When Vref was decreased back to 0.1 pu, Efd decreased, see Figure 12. This test demonstrated that when the reference voltage is increased or decreased, the PID controller drives the field voltage to this same reference value. 22

Figure 12. Resulting field voltage after changing the input, Vref For the next test Vref was held at 0.5 pu and the speed signal was changed. When speed was decreased from 1 pu to 0.8 pu, Efd initially decreased. The voltage regulator amplified this error and the PID controller brought the level of the field voltage back up to the reference value. Likewise, when the speed signal was increased, Efd increased and then automatically decreased to the set level, as shown in Figure 13. These results follow what should be expected. If the speed of the generator decreases, power output and terminal voltage will decrease as well. To stay at the desired voltage the excitation system compensates for the decrease in speed by increasing Efd. The same response is seen if the speed increases, but instead Efd is decreased to maintain the reference voltage.

Figure 13. Resulting field voltage after change in speed A few problems were encountered while working on the excitation model. The first problem with the model was that the original diagram provided by Larry Long was incorrect. Highlighted in Figure 14, block A has two inputs but no outputs. This problem was thought to be solved by looking at other documentation of the EXAC8B [9]; which

23

shows that the output of the block A connects directly to block B and that the only input to block A was from Ladifd, not from block C.

Figure 14. Exac8b model with labeled blocks Eventually, while looking at the two different sources, it was discovered that block A actually received inputs from block C and Ladifd, [2],[8],. It was also verified that block A output was the input to block B. The rest of the model was verified to be correct. The other problem with the EXAC8B model was some confusion in what block B represented. It was later discovered that the output from block A, representing the rectifier current, which is used to determine which equation should be used to calculate Fex, see Table 2. 3.4 Protection Model: Background: A protection model was also necessary be included in the simulator. This model was developed using several features from the Schweitzer 300G protection relay. The 300G provides protection for the generator by controlling the current, voltage, and frequency outputs from the generator. Some of the key features of the 300G relay include current differential protection, out-of-step protection, over excitation detection, directional power protection, volts/hertz Protection. Even though the relay provides numerous protection features, only a handful of features were chosen to be incorporated into the simulation design due to the design of the generator model. For example, in the simulator, the generator output is simply a per unit value for the magnitude of the terminal voltage. Since many of the protection elements use a three phase input for their calculations, only the over and under voltage, over and under current and frequency protection elements were chosen to be modeled.

24

Over and Under Voltage: Phase over voltage protection operates by measuring the output voltage at the generator terminals and compares this with a reference maximum value. In an actual unit the voltage is simply measured with potential transformers (PTs). If the measured secondary voltage is higher than the maximum reference voltage, the under voltage protection element is activated. This element will open the circuit after a certain amount of time proportional to the magnitude of the measured voltage, if it is greater than the reference voltage. Phase under voltage protection uses this same concept. Over and Undercurrent: Phase overcurrent protection operates using the maximum of the measured phase current magnitudes. Phase undercurrent protection operates using the maximum of the measured phase current magnitudes. There are many types of overcurrent elements which the 300G relay provides for protection of the generator. Some of the typical elements of protection are definite time overcurrent, neutral time overcurrent, residual time overcurrent, and voltage controlled definite time overcurrent protection. Frequency Protection: Over frequency conditions usually occur during dramatic load variations. In order to provide protection during these situations frequency protection is provided. The relay provides six bands of over/under frequency protection. The pickup settings for the under and over frequency elements are 59.5 Hz and 60.5 Hz respectively. When the frequency deviates below 59.5 Hz it will fall in one of the six protection bands. The greater the frequency deviation the fast the relay will operate. Figure 15 shown below provides a more detailed description of how under frequency protection works in the 300G relay.

Figure 15. Under frequency operation [10] The band between 60 and 59.5 Hz is the area of unrestricted time operating frequency, while the dotted areas below 59.5 Hz are areas of restricted time operating. Table 3 shows a more detailed description of the different operating conditions.

25

Table 3. Under frequency operation description [11] Frequency Band (Hz) Time delay Comments 60-59.5 No action, generator can operate 59.5 and below 1.5 s Continuous under frequency alarm 59.558.8 50 min Alarm under frequency 58.8- 58.0 9 min limit exceeded. These 58-57.5 1.7min bands may trip or alarm 57.5-57 14 sec depending on individual 57 - 56.5 2.4 sec utilities practices. 56.5 and blow 1.0 sec Programming in Labview: As with the other models, Labviews simulation toolkit was used to implement the protection model. One challenge during programming the model was making the correct timer from the simulation toolkit for the frequency and overcurrent elements. Initially, the frequency and current protection models failed in situations when the simulation speed was increased because the timer used in the while loop and simulation loop were mismatched. The simulation loop timer ran faster than the while loop timer. Therefore, a different approach was used where the timing from one loop was linked to the other. Over and Under Voltage Labview Model: The function of the under and over voltage model is to read the terminal voltage from the generator and feed this value to a comparator with respect to the voltage reference. The comparator then checks if the given voltage is below or above the reference voltage. A Boolean value is returned to determine if the relay is to trip the circuit breaker. Figure 16 shows the Labview screenshot for the under and over voltage model. Figure 16. Under Over voltage model

26

Overcurrent Labview Model: The overcurrent element was programmed using the U.S Inverse curve U2. This equation can be used to calculate the operating time of the relay see Equation (5). 5.95 tp = TD * 0.180 + 2 (5) M 1 The time dial (TD) settings are used to control the slope of the inverse curve. The more inverse the slope, the faster the relay will operate for a given current. The operating time (tp) is the time which the relay will operate for a given current input. Multiples of pickup current (M) are given by the ratio of the input current to pickup setting. In this model Ipickup is set to 5A secondary current. Current input (Iinput) is the output current from the generator. A screen capture of this model is shown in Figure 17.

Figure 17. Screenshot of the Overcurrent model in Labview Under Frequency Labview Model: The under frequency model monitors the generators operating frequency to make sure it is within the acceptable bounds of 60 Hz. If the generator's frequency is below a certain limit frequency, then this model determines if the generator is disconnected from the grid. A screen capture of the under frequency model is shown in Figure 18.

27

Figure 18. Screenshot of the under frequency model in Labview For the Labview model, this is done by monitoring the generators, operating frequency and comparing it to a set trip frequency, in this case 59.5 Hz. If the operating frequency is below 59.5 Hz then the case structure, which holds the current simulation time, turns false and captures the time at which the operating frequency entered the restricted operation zone. To calculate the elapsed time the generator is in restricted operation zone, the captured time is subtracted from the simulation time. To determine if the generator is disconnected from the grid, the elapsed time is compared against different time bands as shown in Figure 15. If the time exceeds one of the time bands for a given frequency range then the generator is disconnected from the grid. 3.5 Phase II: As mentioned earlier in this report, the Phase II stage of this project is not a major part of this groups work. Instead, team Ironwood has assembled the beginning portions of the work needed to be done for the physical interfacing with the generator simulator. To recap, Phase II consists of integrating the software simulator with the physical control devices being modeled within the software. Therefore, if the user/utility wanted to use an

28

actual Woodward 505H governor in the simulation, the software model for the governor would be deactivated and the physical devices inputs and outputs would be connected to the simulator via a PLC and DAQ. The simulation would then run as it normally would, only the governor control signals are given from the actual governor. Figure 19 is shown to give a general schematic of how the physical system would be interconnected.

Figure 19. Phase II layout for connecting a 505H For purposes of this project, the group has determined the following I/Os to be those covered to meet the requirement of physically connecting the governor and excitation system into the simulation. The information given below is based on the I/Os typical for a Woodward 505H digital governor and a Basler DECS300 voltage regulator. The highlighted items are those covered by the PLC with the remaining to be covered by the DAQ. Table 4. I/O Layout between the PLC and DAQ Governor: Voltage Regulator: (6) Analog Inputs (4-20 mA) (1) Generator Voltage Sensing (~120 V) (6) Analog Outputs (4-20 mA) (2) Generator Current Sensing (~1 A) (1- 2) Speed inputs (1-30 Vrms) (13) Switching contact inputs (24 Vdc) (16) Discrete Inputs (18-26 V dc) (1) Remote set point control Input (-10 to 10 V) (1-2) Actuator Outputs (4-20 mA) (1) Analog output (-10 to 10 volts or 4-20 mA) (8) Discrete Outputs (form C) (8) Contact outputs

29

In order to handle the various I/Os required of the PLC, various control cards are needed. To ensure the correct parts were chosen, the customer service department for the PLC was contacted and the above list of requirements was given to them. Avista requested the use of a Modicon Quantum PLC as it is one that they have used in the past. The company responsible for the Quantum PLC is Schneider Electric, based in Palatine, IL. The customer service representative (Joe Cyr) was briefed on the requirements of the PLC for this project and the following parts list was established to do the job. The pricing for the below PLC parts, shown in Table 5, were quoted on 10/22/2007 from Graybar, the supplier Avista will most likely be using should they choose to order these parts. Table 5. PLC Quote Description Part Number 10 Slot Backplane 140XBP01000 AC Power Supply 115/230V 140CPS11420 Quantum 434 Controller (High End) 140CPU43412A Quantum 512K CPU (Mid Range) 140CPU11303 Relay Out 16 x 1 NO 140DRA84000 Analog Out 4ch Current 140ACO02000 Discrete DC Input Module 140DDI35300 Total with High End CPU: Total with MidRange CPU: Price $481.24 $994.47 $8,615.57 $5,178.24 $740.20 $1,479.61 $740.20 $13,051.29 $9,613.96

While these pieces of equipment cover the requirements of the PLC, there are a couple of signals that still remain uncovered for the voltage regulator I/Os. The generator voltage and current sensing signals are two inputs into the voltage regulator that require a voltage and current amount that exceeds the rated handling of any PLC and DAQ card available. A possible solution to this may lie within using an external source such as a Doble power source to generate these high values required. Being that Phase II is beyond the scope of this groups project, the details in solving this issue will be left as is and remain to be solved by others. Data Acquisition: The Labview simulator is designed to also communicate with the physical control devices using Data Acquisition methods developed by National Instruments, the same company that develops Labview. These types of equipment are designed to seamlessly interface directly with any virtual instrument developed in Labview with little additional programming. DAQ devices can accept a wide range of analog and digital inputs from the control I/Os that will be hardwired to the device itself. After deciding which control device I/Os will interface with the PLC and which will interface with the DAQ, it was desired to find an effective, low cost solution. As previously discussed the PLC will be handling more of the digital I/Os while the DAQ will handle much of the analog I/Os such as the actuator signals and the speed signals.

30

National Instruments offers several methods that would work. Figure 20 shows several of the data busses available.

Figure 20. Bandwidth vs. Latency of various busses [12] The first option researched was PXI/PCI interface method. This option proved to be one of the best methods. It could cover most of the required I/Os and also interfaced with the computer using the PCI slot. Also, the I/O card purchased for this system would all run on the same clock so there would be no problems with synchronizing the different I/O modules. Even though this option had the most benefits, they did not outweigh the cost of this option. After configuring a complete system to handle the necessary analog I/Os, the PXI method would have run roughly $6000 to $8000. After further research, the method eventually decided upon was the compact DAQ system. This system provides a simple means to interface with the computer using USB 2.0. It is much cheaper than the PXI interface method. As it can be seen from Figure 20, USB 2.0 provides good bandwidth with a fairly low latency. Another benefit in using USB is that it is designed to take advantage of the plug and play feature of a Windows computer with no additional hardware necessary, similar to a USB thumb drive. The computer can automatically detect the new device when it is attached. The only drawback to this system is that the USB 2.0 bus shares its bandwidth across all the I/O modules. This means that when all the modules are connected to control devices there may be some time delay in transferring the data. However according to a National Instruments engineer, Avinash Harjani [15], this is not a significant problem for this application. A typical compact DAQ system is shown below in Figure 21.

31

Figure 21. A compact DAQ system attached to a computer [13] As it can be seen from Figure 21, the compact DAQ uses a chassis where several I/O modules are connected. The chassis provides power for the signal generation of the I/O modules. The individual control and measurement modules are designed to interface with control devices using screw terminals. The process of selecting the appropriate I/O modules was fairly straightforward. The analog and digital signals from the Woodward 505H and Basler DECS300 not covered by the PLC were matched to the appropriate modules using the compact DAQ builder on the National Instruments website. After developing a compact DAQ system a National Instruments applications engineer verified that the I/O modules selected would be appropriate for this application. Some of the analog signals created more of a problem. One example is the speed signal that is fed into the Woodward 505H. This speed signal is of the magnitude 1-30 volts RMS. The I/O modules for the compact DAQ system are only in the range of 0 to 10 volts and 0 to 20 mA. Not only did a DAQ device need to be able to generate this signal, it had to do so at the appropriate frequency because this signal represents the signal read from the speed transducer. By working with the applications engineer from National Instruments the PCI-6624 was chosen as shown below in Figure 22.

Figure 22. The NI-PCI-6624 DAQ card [14] This card plugs directly into the PCI slot of a standard computer. Although this card runs at about $1,300, it is able to provide eight channels of frequency controlled analog voltage. When connected and programmed properly, this DAQ card should be able to mimic the speed signal from a real hydro plant. After verifying this card, a full quote was developed by customer service at National Instruments. This quote is shown below in Figure 23 with the total price for the DAQ system at $4,671. 32

Figure 23. National Instruments DAQ quote

IV. Quality:
Quality in Software: When looking at the main work that was done for this project, the majority of the time was spent within the software models. The generator, exciter/voltage regulator, turbine/governor, and the protection device each have their own Labview software model. However, the design for each model was based on the general operating principles of its physical counterpart and the respective standard that it followed. Therefore, the quality of each developed software model was tested to meet similar specifications.

33

To meet these specifications, each model underwent an end item verification process throughout the design and upon completion of the finished model. This was done to reduce any final troubleshooting time as well as to verify that the developed model met the requirements for its respective device after major programming changes were made. Not only was the model checked against requirements of the device, but also verified to meet the functionality of parameters desired by the customer. With each model passing its respective tests, the final deliverable (hydro generator simulator) was tested to verify that each component worked compatibly with one-another. To ensure the quality of the software models, various test procedures specific to each model were also developed. These verification procedures were implemented for each respective model, and for a couple of protection schemes. These tests determined how accurately the developed software models simulated the operation of the physical devices they were representing. An example of such a test was the comparison to the Noxon Report simulation [5], which was done at one of Avistas current facilities. This was emulated on the simulator to see if the modeled equipment responded in a similar way that the Noxon report did. To expand the testing even more, the simulation parameters were tested to determine the range of the respective parameters the models could operate in. With the equipment models being tested in this fashion, certain parameter boundaries were enabled. The software was made to simulate a hydro generator, so proper operating boundaries were checked. These boundaries were checked before and during the simulation. For example, if an actual turbine had a speed limitation of 100 RPMs, then a user input of 200 RPMs would be responded to with an error prompt notifying the user, telling him to input another value. With these boundaries set and proper testing complete, the quality of each software model was assured. Reliability: Finally, to insure the reliability of the software, all specifications of each respective model were tested and challenged. This enabled the design team to check when the software was vulnerable to errors, thus rendering it useless. To further prolong the life of the software, a modular development approach was taken. This approach allowed the design of the software models to be easily substituted in and out of the overall system. This permitted for future device changes and upgrades to be accounted for. For example, if a company would change their voltage regulator to a new model, the corresponding block could be changed by simply adding in an updated module in the place of the current one.

34

V. Manufacturing:
Producing a Deliverable: As a product that is individually tailored for the client, the hydro generator simulator is an item that is produced in relatively small numbers. The product is developed for power utilities that have specific requirements and regulations that their personalized simulator must adhere to. With the client base of the product being a fairly narrow one, the client can rest assured that their product will fit their needs. This personalization and attention to detail therefore means that a large manufacturing facility for mass production will not be necessary. The overall manufacturing process for the hydro generator simulator consists of two parts, the software and the interface panel. The software consists of the hydro generator simulator along with all of the control device models. This single program runs using the Labview application on the customers computer to form the overall simulation. The interface panel is the physical device that allows the customer to integrate actual control elements into the computer simulation. The final design and assembly of the interface will be done by the customer, but information provided by team Ironwood offers a starting point and some general information needed to create the interface. The completed product includes all of the software, interface panel (Phase II) documentation and a manual covering the details for each model and what conditions the simulator can model. All of this data is included on a compact disk. This results in a very simple manufacturing process since all that is needed to be produced is a CD. Product Validation: With the final software and documentation loaded onto a compact disk, final verification procedures were implemented to ensure the disk is ready to be delivered to the customer. The software was first installed onto a generic computer that met minimum specifications. Once the software was installed, several basic simulations were run. This ensures that no essential modules of the software are missing or erroneous. The different trials place specific stress on individual sub-functions within the software. Along with the software install validation, the included documentation was checked to confirm they have been successfully installed on the computer. Since these procedures simply verify the proper installation of the software and corresponding materials, minimal time is taken. After the manufacturing tests have been run, the disk can then be labeled and is ready for delivery to the customer. Estimate of Other Production Costs: As was discussed in the Phase II portion of the Engineering section of this paper, two quotes were obtained covering the costs of the PLC and DAQ equipment. The final

35

pricing for these items are given in Table 6, neglecting the necessary man-hours needed to assemble the interface panel. Table 6. Estimated cost of the interface panel High Cost Low Cost Modicon Quantum PLC $13,051.29 $9,613.96 NI DAQ $4,671.60 $4,671.60 Total $17,722.89 $14,285.56

36

VI. References:
[1] Wikipedia, Hydropower, www.wikipedia.org, 2007. [Online]. Available: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydropower. [Accessed: April. 9, 2007]. [2] [Kundur] P. Kundur, Power System Stability Control, 1st ed., San Francisco: McGraw-Hill Inc., 1994. [3] IEEE Power Engineering Society, Power System and Electrical Machinery Committees, " IEEE Std 1110-1991," IEEE Guide for Synchronous Generator Modeling Practices in Stability Analyses, 1991. [4] J.J. Granger, W.D. Stevenson, Jr., Power System Analyses, 1st ed. , San Francisco: McGraw-Hill, Inc., 1994. [5] Hannett, Louis N, Report to: Avista Corp. for Noxon Rapids 1-4, 28 April 2005 [6] WECC Control Work Group, WECC Tutorial on Speed Governors, WECC, 1998. [7] Avista Generation Staff, Introduction to Generation, Avista Utilities, 2001. [8] IEEE, IEEE Recommended Practice for Excitation System Models for Power System Stability Studies, IEEE Std 421.5-2005 (Revision of IEEE Std 421.5-1992), 21 April 2006. [9] Pacific Gas and Electric Company, System Impact Study, www.energy.ca.gov, 2005. [Online]. Available: http://www.energy.ca.gov/sitingcases/humboldt/documents/applicant/afc/Volume_02/App endix%205/HBRP_Appendix_5B_System_Impact_Study.pdf, pp. 146 [Accessed: Oct. 13, 2007] [10] Schweitzer Engineering Laboratories Technical Staff, SEL-300G Multifunction Generator Relay Instruction Manual, Schweitzer Engineering Laboratories, 2006, pp. 299. [11] IEEE Power Engineering Society, Power System and Electrical Machinery Committees, ANSI/IEEE C37.106-1987,"An American National Standard IEEE Guide for Abnormal Frequency for Power Generating Plants, 1987, pp. 19 [12] National Instruments, Digital What Makes a Bus High Performance, www.ni.com, 2007. [Online]. Available: http://zone.ni.com/devzone/cda/tut/p/id/4819. [Accessed: Sep. 17, 2007]. [13] National Instruments, NI Compact DAQ, www.ni.com, 2007. [Online]. Available: http://www.ni.com/dataacquisition/compactdaq. [Accessed: Nov. 15, 2007].

37

[14] National Instruments, NI PCI-6624, www.ni.com, 2007. [Online]. Available: http://sine.ni.com/nips/cds/view/p/lang/en/nid/12501. [Accessed: Nov. 15, 2007]. [15] Avinash Harjani (private communication). 2007. [16] Larry Long (private communication), 2007. [17] Kristina Newhouse (private communication), 2007. [18] Kevin Tomsovic (private communication). 2007. [19] Mani Venkatasubramanian (private communication). 2007.

38