Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 28

# Governors

## ECE 576 Power System

Dynamics
and Stability
Prof. Tom Overbye
Dept. of Electrical and Computer Engineering
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
overbye@illinois.edu

Announcements
Midterm exam is on March 13 in class
Closed book, closed notes
You may bring one 8.5 by 11" note sheet
You do not have to write down model block
diagram or the synchronous machine differential
equations I'll supply those if needed

not governors
2

P,

Q,V
4

## Prime Movers and

Governors
Synchronous generator is used to convert mechanical energy
from a rotating shaft into electrical energy
The "prime mover" is what converts the orginal energy source
into the mechanical energy in the rotating shaft
Possible sources: 1) steam (nuclear, coal, combined cycle,
solar thermal), 2) gas turbines, 3) water wheel (hydro
turbines), 4) diesel/
gasoline, 5) wind
(which we'll cover separately)
The governor is used
to control the speed
1/1e/Centrifugal_governor.png

## Prime Movers and

Governors
In transient stability collectively the prime mover and the

## governor are called the "governor"

As has been previously discussed, models need to be
appropriate for the application
In transient stability the response of the system for
seconds to perhaps minutes is considered
Long-term dynamics, such as those of the boiler and
automatic generation control (AG), are usually not
considered
These dynamics would need to be considered in longer
simulations (e.g. dispatcher training simulator (DTS)

## Power Grid Disturbance

Example
Figures show the frequency change as a result of the sudden
loss of a large amount of generation in the Southern WECC
60
59.99
59.98
59.97
59.96
59.95
59.94
59.93
59.92
59.91
59.9
59.89
59.88
59.87
59.86
59.85
59.84
59.83
59.82
59.81
59.8
59.79
59.78
59.77
59.76
59.75
59.74
59.73

q. Hz)

10

11

12

13

Time in Seconds

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

Frequency
Contour
7

## Frequency Response for Generation

Loss
In response to a rapid loss of generation, in the initial
seconds the system frequency will decrease as
energy stored in the rotating masses is transformed
into electric energy
Solar PV has no inertia, and for most new wind turbines
the inertia is not seen by the system

## Within seconds governors respond, increasing the

power output of controllable generation
Many conventional units are operated so they only
respond to over frequency situations
Solar PV and wind are usually operated in North America
at maximum power so they have no reserves to contribute

Governor Response:
Thermal Versus Hydro
Thermal units respond quickly, hydro ramps slowly (and goes down
initially), wind and solar usually do not respond. And many units are set
to not respond!

Normalized
output

Time in Seconds

## Some Good References

Kundur, Power System Stability and Control, 1994
Wood, Wollenberg and Sheble, Power Generation,
Operation and Control (2nd edition, 1996, 3rd in 2013)
IEEE PES, "Dynamic Models for Turbine-Governors in
Power System Studies," Jan 2013
"Dynamic Models for Fossil Fueled Steam Units in Power
System Studies," IEEE Trans. Power Syst., May 1991, pp.
753-761
"Hydraulic Turbine and Turbine Control Models for System
Dynamic Studies," IEEE Trans. Power Syst., Feb 1992, pp.
167-179

10

Control of Generation
Overview
Goal is to maintain constant frequency with changing load
If there is just a single generator, such with an emergency generator
or isolated system, then an isochronous governor is used
Integrates frequency error to insure frequency goes back to
the desired value
Cannot be used with
interconnected systems
because of "hunting"

## Image source: Wood/Wollenberg, 2nd edition

11

Generator Hunting
Control system hunting is oscillation around
an equilibrium point
Trying to interconnect multiple isochronous
generators will cause hunting because the
frequency setpoints of the two generators are
never exactly equal
One will be accumulating a frequency error trying
to speed up the system, whereas the other will be
trying to slow it down
The generators will NOT share the power load
proportionally.
12

## Isochronous Gen Example

WSCC 9 bus from before, gen 3
dropping (85 MW)
No infinite bus, gen 1 is modeled with an
isochronous generator (new PW v18
ISOGov1 model)

Bus 2

Bus 7

Bus 8

Bus 9

Bus 3

60

1.025 pu

1.026 pu

1.032 pu

1.025 pu

59.95

85 MW
-11 Mvar

59.9

Bus 5

0.996 pu

100 MW

Bus 6

59.85

1.013 pu

35 Mvar

59.8

125 MW
50 Mvar
Bus 4

1.026 pu

90 MW
30 Mvar

Bus1

1.040 pu

slack

72 MW
27 Mvar

Speed (Hz)

163 MW
7 Mvar

1.016 pu

59.75
59.7
59.65
59.6
59.55
59.5
59.45

## Gen 2 is modeled with no

governor, so its mechanical power
stays fixed

59.4
0

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

Time (Seconds)
f
g

Speed_Gen Bus 2 #1 f

Speed_Gen Bus 3 #1 f

13

Speed_Gen Bus1 #1

19

20

## Isochronous Gen Example

Graph shows the change in the
mechanical output
180
170

in MWs due
to the loss of
gen 3 is
being picked
up by
gen 1

160

150
140
130
120
110
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
0

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

Time (Seconds)
f
g

## Mech Input_Gen Bus 3 #1

14

Droop Control
To allow power sharing between
generators the solution is to use what
is known as droop control, in which the
Risis known as the
desired set point frequency
1
regulation constant
pm pref f
dependent upon the Rgenerators
or droop; a typical
output
value is 4 or 5%.
At 60 Hz and a 5%
droop, each 0.1 Hz
change would
change the output
by 0.1/(60*0.05)=
3.33%
15

## WSCC 9 Bus Droop Example

Assume the previous gen 3 drop
contingency (85 MW), and that gens 1
and 2 have ratings of 500 and 250
MVA
respectively
and
governors
with
a
To solve the problem in per unit, all values need to be on a
5%
droop. What is the final frequency
common base (say 100 MVA)
(assuming
nochange
pm1 pm 2 85 /100
0.85
100
100
0.01, R2,100 MVA R2
0.02
500
250

1
1
pm1 pm 2

f 0.85

## 1,100 MVA R2,100 MVA

f .85 /150 0.00567 0.34 Hz 59.66 Hz
16
R1,100 MVA R1

190
180
170
160

## The below graphs compare the

mechanical power and generator
match the calculated 59.66 Hz value
60

59.95
59.9

59.85
59.8

140

59.75

130
120

59.7

Speed (Hz)

150

110
100
90
80
70
60

59.65
59.6
59.55
59.5
59.45
59.4

50

59.35

40

59.3

30
20

59.25

10

59.2

59.15

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

Time (Seconds)
gf

17

18

19

20
0

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

Time (Seconds)

## Mech Input_Gen Bus 3 #1

f
g

Speed_Gen Bus 2 #1 f

Case is wscc_9bus_TGOV1

Speed_Gen Bus 3 #1 f

17

Speed_Gen Bus1 #1

19

20

Quick Interconnect
Calculation

## When studying a system with many

generators, each with the same (or
online
generators
close) droop, then the The
final
frequency
obviously does not
R Pgen , MW
f is
include the contingency
deviation

Si , MVA

generator(s)

OnlineGens

## The online generator summation

should only include generators that
actually have governors that can
18

## Larger System Example

As an example, consider the 37 bus,
nine generator example from earlier;
assume one generator with 42 MW is
0.05 42The total MVA of the
opened.
f
0.00186 pu 0.111 Hz 59.889 Hz
1132
remaining
generators is 1132. With
R=0.05
60

200
190
180
170
160
150
140
130
120
110
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0

59.99
59.98
59.97
59.96
59.95
59.94
59.93
59.92
59.91

59.9
59.89
59.88
59.87
59.86
59.85
59.84
59.83
59.82
59.81
59.8

59.79
59.78
59.77
0

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

10

f
g

## Mech Input, Gen BLT69 #1

Case is Bus37_TGOV1

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

19

18

19

20

## Impact of Inertia (H)

Final frequency is determined by the
droop of the responding governors
How quickly the frequency drops
depends upon the generatorThe
inertia
least
values
frequency
deviation
occurs with
high inertia
and fast
governors
20

## Restoring Frequency to 60 (or

50) Hz
In an interconnected power system
the governors to not automatically
restore the frequency to 60 Hz
Rather this is done via the ACE (area
control area calculation). Previously
we defined ACE as the difference
between the actual real power
exports from an area and the
scheduled exports. But it has an
21

Recovery

22

Turbine Models

## model shaft squishiness as a spring

d
s
TM K shaft HP TOUT
dt
2 H d
TM TELEC TFW
Usually shaft dynamics
s dt
are neglected
d HP
HP s
dt
2 H HP d HP
TIN TOUT
s
dt

High-pressure
turbine shaft
dynamics
23

## Steam Turbine Models

Boiler supplies a "steam chest" with the steam then
entering the turbine through a value

dPCH
PCH PSV
dt
Assume Tin = PCH and a rigid shaft with PCH = T M

TCH

## Then the above equation becomes

dTM
TM PSV
dt
And we just have the swing equations from before

TCH

d
s
dt
2H d
TM TELEC TFW
s dt

We are
assuming
=HP and
=HP

24

25

dPSV
1
TSV
PSV PC
dt
R
s
where
s
max
0 PSV PSV

## R = .05 (5% droop)

26

TGOV1 Model
Standard model that is close to this is
TGOV1

## Here T1 corresponds to TSV and T3 to TCH

TGOV1 is not commonly used because it is too simple,
but it is a good place to start; Dt is used to model
turbine damping and is often zero
27

IEEEG1
A common stream turbine model, is
the IEEEG1, originally introduced in the
below 1973 paper

## In this model K=1/R

Uo and Uc are rate
limits

## It can be used to represent

cross-compound units, with
high and low pressure steam

IEEE Committee Report, Dynamic Models for Steam and Hydro Turbines in Power System
28 1973, pp
Studies, Transactions in Power Apparatus & Systems, volume 92, No. 6, Nov./Dec.
1904-15