IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, Vol. 9. No.

1, February 1994 29

Reactive Capability Limitation of Synchronous Machines

M. M. Adibi, LM D. P. Milanicz, SM
IRD Corporation Baltimore Gas & Electric Co.
Bethesda, Maryland Baltimore, Maryland
Abstract: Achievable g e n e r a t o r r e a c t i v e t a n c e i s used. The g e n e r a t o r i s assumed
c a p a b i l i t y (GRC) i s g e n e r a l l y much less t o b e connected t o an i n f i n i t e bus 111.
t h a n i n d i c a t e d by m a n u f a c t u r e r s ' r e a c t i v e
c a p a b i l i t y c u r v e s , due t o c o n s t r a i n t s For a g i v e n t e r m i n a l v o l t a g e V and c u r r e n t
imposed by p l a n t a u x i l i a r i e s and t h e power I, a t phase a n g l e @ ( i . e . , f o r a g i v e n MVA
system i t s e l f . The n a t u r e of t h e s e con- o u t p u t ) t h e emf E i s o b t a i n e d by adding
s t r a i n t s i s e x p l a i n e d and a method f o r armature r e a c t i o n I,Xd t o V a t 90" to I,.
c a l c u l a t i n g them i s provided and v e r i f i e d
by f i e l d tests on a u n i t a t h i g h and low For c o n s t a n t MVA o u t p u t , I, i s c o n s t a n t
system v o l t a g e l e v e l s . S e v e r a l recommen- and i t s l o c u s i s a c i r c l e w i t h c e n t e r on
d a t i o n s are made t o enhance t h e GRC of t h e t h e end of t h e v o l t a g e phasor V. Constant
tested u n i t . e x c i t a t i o n i m p l i e s t h a t t h e l o c u s of E i s
a l s o a c i r c l e w i t h c e n t e r 0.
Keywordo:overexcitation,underexcitation,
r e a c t i v e c a p a b i l i t y , g e n e r a t o r overheat- The a n g l e between E and V i s t h e power
ing, excitation limitation, reactive a n g l e 6. I t c a n b e s e e n t h a t g e n e r a t o r ' s
requirement. MW o u t p u t , V*I,*cos@, i s e q u a l t o :
INTRODUCTION (V*E/Xd)* s i n 6.
The g e n e r a t o r r e a c t i v e c a p a b i l i t y (GRC) For 6 = goo t h e limitof s t a b i l i t y
c u r v e s f u r n i s h e d by manufacturers a n d u s e d is reached, so that t h e horizontal line
i n o p e r a t i o n p l a n n i n g t y p i c a l l y have a through 0 r e p r e s e n t s t h i s l i m i t .
g r e a t e r range t h a n can be r e a l i z e d d u r i n g
actual operation. G e n e r a l l y , t h e s e GRC
c u r v e s are s t r i c t l y a f u n c t i o n of t h e syn-
chronous machine d e s i g n parameters and do
n o t c o n s i d e r p l a n t and system o p e r a t i n g
c o n d i t i o n s a s l i m i t i n g f a c t o r s . Recently /
concern o v e r GRC h a s been heightened by
i n c r e a s i n g need f o r r e a c t i v e power t o
provide voltage support f o r l a r g e blocks
of power t r a n s f e r . P
T h i s paper, d e s c r i b e s a method f o r d e t e r -
mining t h e r e a c t i v e c a p a b i l i t y l i m i t a t i o n
of synchronous machines under p l a n t and
system o p e r a t i n g c o n d i t i o n s . The method- U--
ology is tested and v e r i f i e d on a l a r g e 0
generator. Then s e v e r a l recommendations F i g u r e 1 . T h e P h a s o r Diagram
are made t o enhance t h e GRC of t h e u n i t . 2 . The R a t e d Gen. R e a c t i v e Curves
BACKGROUND The GRC c u r v e s shown i n F i g u r e 2 are drawn
f o r synchronous r e a c t a n c e x d = 167 per-
1. The Phasor Diasram cent. For z e r o e x c i t a t i o n t h e armature
r e a c t a n c e d r o p ( s h o r t c i r c u i t r a t i o o r SCR)
The b a s i s f o r g e n e r a t o r r e a c t i v e c a p a b i l i - i s 100/1.67 = 60 p e r c e n t of f u l l l o a d ,
t y (GRC) c u r v e s i s shown i n F i g u r e 1. To r e p r e s e n t i n g 60 p e r c e n t of f u l l MVA
s i m p l i f y t h e diagram t h e e f f e c t o f s a t u r a - scales. The v e r t i c a l l i n e GO i s drawn and
t i o n and of r e s i s t a n c e are n e g l e c t e d , and s c a l e d t o 60 p e r c e n t War, and c o n t i n u e d
an u n s a t u r a t e d v a l u e of synchronous reac beyond 0 € o r l a g g i n g War. From 0 a
horizontal line, which i s s i m i l a r l y
s c a l e d , g i v e s power i n MW. A c i r c l e drawn
93 WM 203-0 PWRS A paper recommended and approved w i t h 0 as i t s c e n t e r and i t s r a d i u s s i m i -
by the IEEE Power System Engineering Committee of l a r l y scaled g i v e s s t a t o r c u r r e n t i n
the IEEE Power Engineering Society for presentation p e r c e n t of f u l l l o a d . The r a d i i from 0
at the IEEE/PES 1993 Winter Meeting, Columbus, OH, i n d i c a t e power f a c t o r v a l u e s . C i r c l e s of
-
January 31 February 5, 1993. Manuscript submitted p e r c e n t a g e e x c i t a t i o n are drawn from
August 12, 1992; made available for printing c e n t e r G. A 100 p e r c e n t e x c i t a t i o n ( i . e . I
December 14, 1992.
amperes f i e l d no-load o r A F N L ) , c o r r e -

0885-8950/94/$04.00 0 1993 IEEE

30
sponds to the f i x e d t e r m i n a l v o l t a g e GO. chronous machine d e e i g n p a r a m e t e r s a t
Y r a t e d t e r m i n a l v o l t a g e and d o n o t c o n e i d e r
g e n e r a t i n g s t a t i o n and power system oper-
a t i n g c o n d i t i o n s as l i m i t i n g f a c t o r e .
These d e s i g n c u r v e s show t h a t d i f f e r e n t
g e n e r a t o r loads produce greater h e a t i n g i n
d i f f e r e n t p a r t s of g e n e r a t o r . The eegment
AB i s l i m i t e d by rotor h e a t i n g due t o
o v e r - e x c i t a t i o n , BQ i s l i m i t e d b y armature
h e a t i n g due t o large l a g g i n g r e a c t i v e
g e n e r a t i o n , t h e l i m i t - l i n e QPPQN by t h e
prime-movers MW o u t p u t , and Q,,F by arma-
t u r e core end h e a t i n g due t o l a r g e l e a d i n g
r e a c t i v e generation.

GENERATION REACTIVE CAPABILITY NODELING

The o p e r a t i n g limits imposed on GRC can

b e formulated u s i n g t h e d e s i g n c u r v e s . I n
Figure 3, t h e d e s i g n l i m i t s are d e s c r i b e d
by arc6 AB, BC, CD, and DF.
Y
I /

G
L STABILITY UMIT

F i g u r e 2. ORC Curves B
Taking 100 p e r c e n t MW as t h e maximum
a l l o w a b l e power ( p r o v i d e d by t h e prime-
mover), a v e r t i c a l l i m i t - l i n e i s drawn
through P a t 100 p e r c e n t MW. I t is as-
sumed t h a t t h e g e n e r a t o r i s r a t e d t o g i v e
100 p e r c e n t MW a t power f a c t o r 0.90 lag-
ging. T h i s d e t e r m i n e s p o i n t QP. L i m i t a -
t i o n of t h e s t a t o r c u r r e n t t o t h e corre-
sponding v a l u e r e q u i r e s t h e l i m i t - l i n e t o
become c i r c u l a r arc BQp about c e n t e r 0 .
A t B a new l i m i t by t h e e x c i t i n g c u r r e n t
has t o b e i n t r o d u c e d , and it is assumed
t h a t t h e r o t o r c u r r e n t must n o t exceed
t h a t corresponding t o an emf E = 260
p e r c e n t of t e r m i n a l v o l t a g e V (i.e., GO).
The c i r c u l a r arc AB is t h e r e f o r e drawn
from c e n t e r G a t t h i s v a l u e of e x c i t a t i o n .
The upper l i m i t ABQp is t h u s completed. -k
G
The l i n e QpP cannot be c o n t i n u e d downwards
t o t h e s t a t i c l i m i t of s t a b i l i t y because Figure 3. ORC Nodel
of t h e l i m i t a t i o n i n t h e u n d e r e x c i t e d
r e g i o n by t h e l o c a l i z e d o v e r h e a t i n g of t h e 1. The Desiffn Curves
s t a t o r c o r e ends. T h i s i s due t o t h e f a c t
t h a t d u r i n g weak f i e l d o p e r a t i o n t h e re- The emf E can be determined from t h e
t a i n i n g r i n g s a t t h e end o€ t h e s t a t o r are e x c i t a t i o n arc AB which s u b t e n d s t h e power
no l o n g e r s a t u r a t e d a l l o w i n g armature end a n g l e 6, a t t h e c e n t e r G:
l e a k a g e f l u x t o produce l o c a l i z e d h e a t i n g
i n t h o s e areas where t h e f l u x i s a t r i g h t L e t N, b e e q u a l t o t h e c o r d AB, t h e n
a n g l e s t o t h e p l a n e of t h e lamination.
The l i m i t imposed by t h e end h e a t i n g i s
also c i r c u l a r w i t h i t s c e n t e r a t some
NI = [ (4 - By)’ + B;]ln,

p o i n t H, on t h e GO l i n e [2 & 3 1 . 01 = tan-’ [ B x / ( q . - By)],

The g e n e r a t o r r e a c t i v e c a p a b i l i t y c u r v e s cos 0, = NI/(2E), and

of Figure 2 which are provided by manufac-
t u r e r s , a r e s t r i c t l y a f u n c t i o n of syn-
 31
E = Nl/(lCOS 61). system. Each component is designed and
rated to operate continuously within cer-
Consider a point on the excitation arc AB tain electrical and mechanical limits
corresponding to the power angle 6, reac- specified by the manufacturer. Any compo-
tive power q,, and real power p, then nent may have operating limits imposed on
voltage, current, frequency or a combina-
6 = sin-' (p/E), tion of these such as MVA, volt/hertz, and
stability. These limitations reduce the
COB 6 = (ql+E-A,)/E, and reactive capability of a generator to
below the designed ranges.
q, = 9. - E(l - COS 6).
The limitations imposed by station equip-
The limits imposed by the stator iron end ment on the generator's reactive capabili-
heating during under-excitation operation ty during normal operation can be deter-
is a circle with radius R, centered on Y- mined using the system representation of
axis at H. Therefore, the leading reac- Figure 4, where :
tive power g, for a given real power p,
can be determined in a manner similar to T and X are the respective trans-
that of over-excitation operation. former taps and reactances,

The arc DF subtends the angle R, at the g, a, s and as subscripts indicate

center H: the generator, auxiliary, system
and start-up buses or transformes,
Let N, be equal to cord DF, then
I , V, P and Q are current, voltage,
N, = [ (DY - F,)' + D:]IR,
real and reactive powers as indi-
cated, and
8, = tan-' [D,/ (DY - F,) 1, mx and mn subscripts indicate the
cos S, = N,/ (2R), and maximum and minimum limits.

R = N2/(2c0s S 2 ) . E9 Xt.Tt Eo

Consider a point on the arc DF correspond-

ing t o the angle B, reactive power q,, and
real power p, then

B = sin-' (p/R),

cos R = (q,+R-F,)/R, and

q, = R(l - cos R ) - FY.

The stator current I, (assuming 1 pu volt- Figure 4. Auxiliary Equipment

age) can be determined from the arc BC
which subtends the phase angle (power In general the main and auxiliary trans-
factor) $, at the center 0: formers are equipped with fixed taps,
whose optimum positions with respect to
I, = (B: + B2)lR. power system operating conditions need to
be determined. Otherwise, they may pose
Consider a point on the arc BC correspond- more restrictive limits on either lagging
ing to phase angle $, reactive power q-,, or leading reactive capabilities of the
and real power p, then generator.
e = (12 - p2)'n. The auxiliary real and reactive powers, P,
and Q., are some functions of generator's
For a point on the arc CD, output P, and Q,, e.g. [ S I ,
e( = -(I? - p2)'n.

2. The Plant and Svstem Constraints

Atypical arrangement for supplying power-
plant auxiliaries and services in a gener-
ating station is composed of many major
components and sub-components that operate
as a system to supply power to the power
32
Neglecting the effect of the main and and minimum system voltages reflected t o
auxiliary transformers' resistances, we the generator terminal bus, then when
have : Egi>,,E ,E is the overexcitation limit-
ing factor, and when Epz > E-, ,E is the
P, = P, + P,, and underexcitation limiting factor. Thus, the
generator reactive power fQ, can be deter-
Q, = Q + Q. + ,
%
.
I mined as a function of real power output
Ps, from minimum generation P-, t o maxi-
where : mum generation P-, for a given main and
auxiliary transformer tap positions TI and
T,, and for system voltage schedule E,.
The above formulation also allows optimi-
zation of the two transformer tap posi-
tions for a given system voltage schedule
under light and peak load conditions.
E, = (E, + j I,X,)T,. Figure 5 superimposes the cumulative
effect of all the operating requirements
where : in limiting GRC on the manufacturer's
design values. The actual reactive capa-
(P.+j Q ) * is the conjugate (P.+j a). bility is restricted t o the area bounded
by all the operating curves, which are
The maximum and minimum auxiliary voltages coneiderably more restrictive than the
,E and ,E reflected t o the generator design curves.
terminal bus are:
E,' = (E, + j I,*X,)*T,, and TEST AND VERIFICATION OF GRC MODEL

E," = OLl + j I,*X,) *T,. The operating reactive capability of a 460

MVA generator at Baltimore Gas and Elec-
If E,'>E,, then the ,E is the overexcit- tric Co. was tested in order t o verify the
ation limiting factor, and if E,">E,, GCR methodology and also t o determine the
then the ,E is the underexcitation limit- extent of improvement which could be made
ing factor. in the generator's reactive capability [4
& 51.
Similarly, when E,, and Epz are the maximum

MINIMVM CBNIRATION LIMIT

MAR ROTOR TINDINC aXrTIHC A'XXmy
p 1 8 ,-vwm
~ EICE VOLTACB LIMIT
CINBRA2VR TIRMINAL
RICE VOLTACI LIMIT
POLTAGI RBCUqT W .OlrTPI'1'
LAC (+) AND &!TS/Es LIMITBR

(Op1R-

BXCIY'XD)
ARylTVM C V W N T LIMIT

Mlr

VNDBR RBACTlVZ
AMPIM LIMIT RILAY

LBO(-J

MINIMIW IXCITATION LIMIT

?OLTACI RIClrLATOR
AT MlNIMlrM OI'TPIW

GINBRATOR TIRMINAL LOT POLTAGI LIMIT

COR# XND EBATINC LIMIT

Figure 5. Generator Reactive Capability Limitation

 33
1. Test Conditions and Procedure: 0 the unit service megawatts t o be
monitored at the control center to
0 Station service load was carried by determine the net generation,
the unit service transformer,
0 the voltmeter scale on the unit
0 The generator voltage regulator was service transformer t o be expanded
placed under automatic control, t o read 600 volts AC,

0 The unit was paralleled and kept at 0 the net rather than gross generator
full load for the start of test. W a r t o be monitored at the control
center, and
0 Minimum load ( 1 4 MW), full load
(400 MW), and several intermediate 0 the local voltage adjuster t o be
points (i.e. 100, 200, and 300 MW) replaced by remote solid state con-
were selected, trol.

0 System voltage was maintained con- Table A. R a t e d Machine R e a c t i v e L i m i t s

stant at the desired level ( 2 3 0 and MW War MAX kV War N I N kV
237 kV) for the duration of test,
0 318 26.21 -251 22.12
0 The generator was kept at each test 20 318 26.21 -257 22.08
point for 1 0 minutes and test data 50 316 26.21 -263 22.03
was recorded for each MW loading 75 314 26.20 -266 22.00
for both overexcitation and undere- 100 312 26.18 -268 21.98
xcitation, and 125 308 26.15 -269 21.97
150 303 26.12 -268 21.97
0 Tests were repeated for high and 175 298 26.09 -266 21.98
low system voltage levels. 200 292 26.05 -263 22.00
225 285 26.00 -258 22.03
In addition t o the generators various 250 277 25.94 -251 22.08
ratings and plants parameters which were 275 268 25.87 -243 22.13
discussed before, the following "GRC D a t a 300 258 25.80 -234 22.20
Sheet", was completed before the start of 335 242 25.69 -217 22.32
the test: 370 224 25.55 -196 22.47
400 207 25.43 -175 22.62
2. GRC Test Sheet 430 160 25.09 -150 22.80
460 0 23.94 0 23.94
Hydrogen Cooling Pressure 60 psi
Gen. Term. Voltage, Hi Limit 25.2 kV
Gen. Term. Voltage, Lo Limit 22.8 kV
Gen. Field Current Limit 3,026 A
Sta.Ser.Bus Voltage, Hi Limit 4576 V
Sta.Ser.Bus Voltage, Lo Limit 3744 v
Turbine-Generator Limit 398 MW
Min. Excitation Limit Circular
Sta. Ser. Unit Transformer Low Side
System Voltage Upper Limit 237 kV
System Voltage Lower Limit 230 kV
Field Temperature Limit 80" c

3. Test Results

Table A lists the rated GRC. The simulat-

ed and tested GRC are listed in Tables 1
t o 4 in the Appendix. GRC for the 237 kV
system voltage is shown in Figure 6.
I I I 1 I

0 200 400 600

ENEANCING GEN. REACTIVE CAPABILITY
Megawatts
Based on the above test results the fol- 0 Test Points 0 Operating Limits - Rated Capability
lowing changes were recommended t o enhance F i g u r e 6 . GRC at 237 kV System Voltage
the generator's reactive capability:
0 the step-up transformer tap posi-
tion t o be changed from 235.75 to The comparison of GRC simulation results
241.50 kV t o increase the lagging of Tables 1 and 3 with Tables 5 and 6 (for
reactive capabilities at 237 kV system voltages of 230 kV and 237 kV,
system voltage, respectively), listed in Appendix, show

. . ." _, . I . .
34
that the implementation of the above Electric Power Company for assisting with
recommendations would improve the GRC. GRC Modeling and Programming. The first
author acknowledges the partial support of
Tables 2 and 4 show the spot tests on the ECC, Inc.
GRC curves, verifying the simulation
results as shown in Figure 6. Figure 7 is REFERENCES
the plot of W a r lag and lead for the two
Tables 3 and 6, showing the GRC improve- [l] Say, M.G.: The Performance and De-
ment for the 237 kV system voltage case. sign of Alternating Current Machin-
es; Pitman & Son, Second Edition
CONCLUSION 1949.

Actually realizable generator reactive [2] Farnharn, S.B. et al.: Field Excita-
capabilities, which are usually signifi- tion in Relation to Machine and
cantly less than those indicated by manuf- System Operation; AIEE, Fall GM,
acturers' curves, may be calculated ac- Nov 1953, Kansas City.
cording to the expressions developed in
this paper. The resulting, verified [3] Nagy, I.: Analysis of Minimum Exci-
mathematical model may further be used to tation Limits of Synchronous Ma-
identify the step-up and the auxiliary chines; IEEE TRANS, VOL PAS-86,
transformers tap positions that will N0.12, Jul/Aug 1970, pp.1001-1008.
provide the best overall GRC under pre-
vailing high and low system voltage condi- [4] Prince, W.R.: PJM Generator Reac-
t ions. tive Testing; PEA, Hershey, PA, May
1983.
The power system reactive capabilities
under changing load conditions can be [5] Milanicz, D.P.: Generator Reactive
determined by including the GRC models in Capability - Testing and Optimiza-
power system dynamic simulators. This tion; Southwestern Electrical Ex-
will be the subject of an ensuing effort. change, Alabama, Oct 1989.
BIOGRAPHIES
System Voltaqe 237kV M. M. Adibi (M'56, SM'70, LM 90) received
I I the B.Sc. degree with honors in electrical
engineering from the University of Bir-
mingham, England,in June 1950, and the

t
M.E.E. degree from Polytechnic Institute
2w
2w of Brooklyn in January, 1960. Since 1950,
+ +++++++++++ + +
he has assumed various responsibilities in
the electric utility industry; about one

\ half of which has been at IBM Corp. He is

at the present a consultant with IRD
Corp., engaged in power system computer
applications.
Mr. Adibi is the author of over thirty
IEEE papers, a member of Power System
Engineering Committee, Chairman of Power
System Restoration Working Group, Char-

-3001 '
0
I I
200
1
400
I I
BOO
I I
tered Electrical Engineer, UK, and a
Professional Engineer in the State of
Maryland.
Megawatts
+ Existing Limila 0 Operating Limits - Rated Capability D. P. Milanicz (M'72, SM'85) receivedthe
B.S. degree in electrical engineering from
Figure 7. Increased GRC at 237 kV the University of Maryland in 1972. He
has assumed various engineering positions
at Baltimore Gas and Electric Company in
the Electric Test Department including;
nineteen years in designing, building and
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT testing protective relays, relaying sys-
tems, excitation systems and associated
The authors wish to express their appreci- generator control systems.
ation to Mr. J. E. Siegmund, 111, of
Electric System Engineering Department of Mr. Milanicz is Supervisor of Generation
Baltimore Gas & Electric Company and Mr. and Associated Transmission Unit, System
M. J. O'Grady of System Operation, Potomac Protection, Metering and Control Section.
 35
APPENDIX
Tablo 1. GRC at 230 kV System Voltage Table 4. Spot Tests at 237 kV
GROSS LAG MAX LAG LEAD MIN LCAD GROSS LAG MAX LAG LEAD MIN LEAD
Mw War kV LIMIT MVar kV LIMIT MW MVar kV LIMIT MVar kV LIMIT
0 262 25.20 3 -77 22.80 8 20 164 25.2 3 -172 22.2 7
20 262 25.20 3 -77 22.80 8 100 153 25.2 3 -165 22.1 7
50 262 25.20 3 -78 22.80 8 200 153 25.3 3 -144 22.4 7
75 262 25.20 3 -78 22.80 8 300 153 25.2 3 -115 22.6 7
* 100 262 25.20 3 -78 22.80 8 400 156 25.1 3 -68 23.1 7
125 262 25.20 3 -77 22.80 8
150 262 25.20 3 -77 22.80 8 Table 5. Increased Lead GRC at 230 kV
175 263 25.20 3 -76 22.80 8 0 318 25.04 1 -158 21.55 7
200 264 25.20 3 -75 22.80 8 20 318 25.04 1 -158 21.56 7
225 265 25.20 3 -74 22.80 8 50 316 25.03 1 -156 21.57 7
250 266 25.20 3 -72 22.80 8 75 314 25.02 1 -154 21.59 7
275 267 25.20 3 -71 22.80 8 100 312 25.00 1 -152 21.61 7
300 258 25.13 1 -69 22.80 8 125 308 24.98 1 -148 21.64 7
335 242 25.01 1 -66 22.80 8 150 303 24.95 1 -143 21.67 7
370 224 24.87 1 -63 22.80 8 175 298 24.91 1 -138 21.71 7
400 207 24.74 1 -60 22.80 8 200 292 24.86 1 -132 21.75 7
430 160 24.39 5 -48 22.87 7 225 285 24.81 1 -125 21.80 7
460 0 23.20 5 0 23.20 5 250 277 24.75 1 -117 21.85 7
275 268 24.68 1 -108 21.91 7
Tablo 2. Spot Tests at 230 kv 300 258 24.60 1 -99 21.98 7
20 249 25.2 3 -168 21.8 7 335 242 24.48 1 0 22.74 6
100 255 25.2 3 -159 22.1 7 370 224 24.34 1 0 22.72 6
200 257 25.3 3 -140 22.0 7 400 207 24.20 1 0 22.70 6
300 245 25.1 1 -107 22.9 7 430 160 23.85 5 0 22.67 6
400 195 24.8 1 -57 22.8 7 460 0 22.63 5 0 22.63 5
Tablo 3. GRC at 237 kV System Voltage Table 6. Increased Lag GRC at 237 kV
0 159 25.20 3 -170 22.80 8 0 242 25.20 3 -168 22.21 7
20 159 25.20 3 -171 22.80 8 20 242 25.20 3 -167 22.22 7
50 159 25.20 3 -171 22.80 8 50 242 25.20 3 -166 22.23 7
75 158 25.20 3 -171 22.80 8 75 242 25.20 3 -164 22.25 7
100 159 25.20 3 -170 22.81 7 100 242 25.20 3 -161 22.27 7
125 159 25.20 3 -167 22.83 7 125 242 25.20 3 -158 22.29 7
150 159 25.20 3 -163 22.86 7 150 242 25.20 3 -154 22.32 7
175 160 25.20 3 -158 22.89 7 175 243 25.20 3 -149 22.36 7
200 161 25.20 3 -152 22.93 7 200 244 25.20 3 -143 22.40 7
225 161 25.20 3 -146 22.97 7 225 245 25.20 3 -136 22.44 7
250 163 25.20 3 -139 23.02 7 250 246 25.20 3 -129 22.49 7
275 164 25.20 3 -131 23.07 7 275 247 25.20 3 -121 22.54 7
300 165 25.20 3 -122 23.12 7 300 249 25.20 3 -111 22.60 7
335 168 25.20 3 -109 23.21 7 335 242 25.14 1 -97 22.69 7
370 170 25.20 3 -94 23.30 7 370 224 25.01 1 -81 22.80 6
400 173 25.20 3 -79 23.39 7 400 207 24.87 1 -67 22.89 7
430 160 25.09 5 -64 23.48 7 430 160 24.53 5 -51 22.99 7
460 0 23.94 5 0 23.94 5 460 0 23.35 5 0 23.35 5

The lag and lead limits identify:

1. F i e l d Heating,
2. Maximum E x c i t a t i o n L i m i t ,
3. Generator Bus Voltage/Voltage Regulator Control a t Maximum,
4. S t a t i o n S e r v i c e Bus Voltage a t Maximum,
5 . S t a t o r Heating; Armature Current; F i e l d Current
6. Armature Iron C o r e End Heating
7. Minimum E x c i t a t i o n L i m i t
8. Generator Bus Voltage/Voltage Regulator Control a t Minimum
9: S t a t i o n S e r v i c e Bus Voltage a t Minimum
10: S t a t i o n Instrumentation
36

Discussion
750 1
BOOMV,A, 3-PH. 6 O h ~
J. Hercurio and N. E. Nilsson (Ohio Edison n 75 PSlC 2OKV. 75PSIG H2
W
Company, Akron, Ohio): The authors are to be 4
congratulated on the development of an 0
excellent paper. on the application of X
generator capability curves. This is a w
LT
subject of high interest and related papers W
were presented on this topic at the 1993 IEEE 7
Winter Power Meeting in Columbus, Ohio [l]. 0
The authors clearly demonstrate the dependency
of generator reactive capability on the system LT
to which it is connected, including the System 6
voltage regulation schedule, generator step-up >
transformer (GSU) voltage tap setting and the z
unit auxiliary transformer (UAT) voltage tap
setting. n
The discussers have some observations and
MW 1 1 1
would like to address some questions to the X
authors.
Neglecting the effects of armature resis-
tance and saturation may simplify the
analysis, but also results in an overly
optimistic calculation of overexcited reactive -5wJ
capability. The discussers have found that by
including these effects, the discussers can
calculate actual rotor field currents within a Figure D1: Manufacturerls Capability Curve
few percent of measured values.
The loci shown in Figure 2 may need some
additional explanation. The thinner lines are
not defined. What do they represent? Arc AB 8OOMVA. 3-PH, 60ht
n 2OKV. 75PSIG H2
should be part of a circle centered on the w
Reactive Axis at Point G [2]. However, it k
does not appear to have been constructed in 0
this manner, or even have its center on the X
Reactive Axis. W
lx
w
The end iron heating limit, as shown on
Figure 2, may be circular in shape in some b
areas, but is not really a circle. Also, the
apparent center is not located on the Reactive CK
Axis, but rather somewhere to the right of it
(first quadrant). The shape of the end iron PI
heating limit is normally determined by the
synchronous generator manufacturer. Accord-
ingly, the manufacturers' capability curve
normally looks a little more like Figure D1 in
this discussion.
Could the authors discuss in a little
more detail the 100 percent MW rating at 0.90 a:
W
PF lagging? The discussers are more familiar D
with ratings defined at point B which would Z
make the rating of this synchronous generator 3
more like 0.85 PF. The authors claim that the
region BQ in Figure 2 is "limited by armature
heating due to large lagging reactive genera-
tion." Could the authors provide a little
more background on why they believe this is Figure D2: Features of Protective Devices in
so? The discussers have always been of the the Underexcited Region.
opinion that the BQ limit is strictly a stator
heating limit occurring because of 12R losses It should be noted that the tested limits
in the stator. shown on both Figure 6 and Figure 7 of the
paper are only for the case with the high
The discussers have found that the under- voltage bus at 237 kV. At lower high side bus
excited limit for generator operation is often voltages, the achievable overexcited capabi-
a result of the steady state stability limit, lity would increase, whereas at higher high
including some stability margin, as well as side voltages, the achievable underexcited
coordination of the Minimum Excitation Limiter capability would increase. Since the system
(MEL) setting with the Underexcitation Alarm voltage is regulated between 230 kV and 237
relay setting and the Loss-of-Field Tripping kV, why show the limit of overexcited capabi-
relay setting. The limiting characteristics lity for the maximum 237 kV bus voltage, since
of these devices are illustrated in Figure D2. it is more likely that MVAR support will be
 37

required whenever the high voltage bus is at described by the Authors be eliminated by
its minimum levels? the use of auxiliaries with adequate rating
and range of operation to better utilize
There are perhaps some other significant the reactive capability of synchronous
situations that the authors may want to machines?
discuss that impact the application of
synchronous generator capability curves. It Manuscript received February 16, 1993.
is not uncommon for synchronous generators to
have shorted rotor field turns. Testing and
analysis of this phenomenon by the discussers
has revealed that rotor field deterioration
due to or manifested by turn shorting develops ALIA PANVINI, Public Service Company of
slowly over a period of time [ 3 ] . Usually One Colorado, Denver, Colorado.
of three limits will occur which will
ultimately require rewinding the rotor field: The authors bring attention to an increasingly
important issue of reactive power in power
1. The bearing vibration increases to systems. The main point of the paper is that
unacceptable levels. the Generator Reactive Capability Curves
(GRC), supplied by the manufacturers, can not
2. The exciter will become loaded be used blindly but, rather, the plant house-
beyond nameplate when endeavoring to power equipment limitations as well as the
achieve modest levels of exported
MVARS. system limitations have to be considered.
This is a valid point. The main portion of
the paper deals with the machine design limits
3. The generator cannot provide rated described by different arcs of the GRC curve.
power in the lagging region which After superimposition of all o f the system and
results in low UAT voltages. equipment limitations on the GRC curve, the
authors obtain the boundary of the actual
The discussers have found it necessary to operating area inside of the GRC curve.
provide new capability curves to cognizant A close match of the calculated and tested
company personnel showing the loss of over- curves is evidence that the theoretical
excited capability on one or two synchronous formulas are correct.
machines in the company system suffering from
shorted turns in the rotor field. However, the authors' only valuable and
practical recommendation for increasing the
'.Nilsson, N.E. and J. Mercurio, "Synchronous machine's reactive capability is to change a
Generator Capability Curve Testing and step-up transformer tap. While this
EvaluationI1'paper 93WM042-2PWRD presented on recommendation is a good one, no rigorous
February 4, 1993, at the 1993 Winter Power field test is required in order to prove that
Meeting in Columbus, Ohio. the change is needed.
'.Hunt, J. P. "Capability Curves and Excitation Public Service Company of Colorado took a more
Requirements of Saturated Cylindrical Rotor practical approach. TWO load points on the
Synchronous Machines," IEEE Transactions on generators' GRC curves were spot-checked.
Power Apparatus and Systems, Vol. PAS-86, No. This field check revealed the need for
7, July 1967, pp. 855-859. numerous changes. Some of the problem areas
were step-up and load center transformer taps,
'.Nilsson, N.E. and J. Mercurio, "Evaluating temperature alarm settings, calibration of the
the Service Degradation of Large Hydrogen temperature recorders and electrical meters,
Cooled Generator Rotor Fields, It IEEE maximum excitation limiters and volts per
Transactions on Power Apparatus and Systems, hertz limiters adjustments. The problems were
Vol. PAS-102, No. 9, September 1983, pp. 2950- corrected, and classes on reactive power
2958. fundamentals were presented to the plant and
system operators.
Much more beneficial for the industry would be
to have some specific recommendations of how
E. S. DEHDASHTI, Pacific Gas and Electric to increase the reactive capability of the
generators, as opposed to the methodology on
Company, San Francisco, CA; Authors are how to calculate the existing limits.
congratulated for bringing into light an issue
which can significantly impact conclusions of Manuscript received March 1, 1993.
reactive power adequacy studies and potential
for voltage stability. Can the Authors
respond to the following questions:
1. From their experience, is there any
evidence leading to the conclusion that the M. M. Adibi and D. P. Milanicz: The authors thank the discu-
limitations they experienced in their ssers for their comments and questions, which allow clarification
testing apply to many utility grade of some points in the paper. We would like to respond to
generators? discussers individually.
2. Regarding the test generator, were the J. Mercurio & N. E. Nilsson: The authors agree that including
auxiliary equipment supplied by the same
manufacturer as the generator itself? the effects of armature resistance and saturation result in more
accurate calculations, however the focus of our work was not to
3. Can some of the limitations that were attempt to model the generator capability curves but rather identify
38

and predict external system conditions which are typically more without the need to retest the unit which prevents additional costs.
limiting than the machine characteristics. In addition, the real Figures 3 & 4 illustrate the optimum generator reactive capability
limit in this overexcited region is field temperature which is of with appropriate limiting factors after recommendations were
course directly related to the PR losses in the generator field. We implemented.
have consulted with the generator manufacturers who are typically
willing to allow an increase in field current beyond its nameplate The issue of shorted field turns has typically not be a serious
rating so long as the field temperature limit is not exceeded. problem on any of the machines tested. Bearing vibration is con-
stantly monitored by automatic systems (typically WDPF or
The discussers are correct in their assumptions related to Figure 2, similar). The utility involved conducts flux probe testing of
that is, the thinner arcs are meant to represent loci of constant generating units to help with the determination of the field
excitation i.e., arc AB and as such should have their center on the condition. Several units have experienced either partial or total
reactive axis lacated at the per unit value of short circuit ratio field rewinds. Upon occasion, the various generator manufacturers
(SCR). As for the core end heating characteristic, it may or may have agreed to modify the nameplate rating of field amps slightly
not be a circle which may or may not be centered on the reactive (typically upward) to allow lagging MVAR capability to be
axis. Since the graph shown in Figure 2 is not meant to represent reached so long as the field temperature limitations are not
any particular case (no values are assigned to the M W & MVAR violated. Exciter output has never been a problem, presumably
axis)$ was provided for discussion purposes only. Also the due to conservative application and large margins in the original
steady state stability limit as shown in the figure may or may not design criterion.
be more limiting than the actual machine capability and is shown
only to reinforce the point that it must to be considered as a Eddie S. Dehdashti: Based on the testing experiences of 23
possible limiting factor. generating units, the authors believe the limitations will apply to
a large percentage of situations. The following table is a compila-
Refemng again to Figure 2, the arc BQP is meant to represent that tion of statistical data related to addressable limiting factors on
portion of the capability curve limited by stator heating (I?R losses tested units:
in the stator) and any limitation imposed by the prime mover. The
Occurrence of Addressable Limiting
dashed lines extending upward at point B and downward at point
Factors on the Tested Units
QP are intended to show the continuation of the stator heating
"General Limit Areas"
limitation just as the dashed line extending downward at point B
shows the extension of the field limitation curve. Admittedly, a
1.Metering Related 52 %
magnification of this portion of the curve would have improved the
discussion. The whole point here is that in this region there are
2.Excitation System Related 18%
3 .Transformer Related 13%
several factors possibly field heating, stator heating and prime
mover constraints interacting in a relatively small portion of the 4.Machine Related 10%
capability curve. The selection of the 0.9 PF rating was complete- 5 .Procedure Related 7%
ly arbitrary and is not meant to represent any particular generating The "addressable" refers to limiting conditions which can be
unit on the Baltimore Gas & Electric system. possibly modified in some way so as to improve reactive capa-
bility:
In order to simplify the discussion of system voltage limitations,
please refer to Figures A, B, C and D. For the electric system 1. Metering related limitations include; out of calibration, inade-
under consideration, the scheduled system voltages were 230 kV quate or improper range, non-existent, improper d e s or nomen-
and 237 kV (scheduled in this case means if the voltage falls clature, poor intelligencesources, and defectiveor not operational.
outside this range, the system operator must take some action to
bring it within limits). The task at hand was to attempt to 2. Excitation system related limitations include; MEL or URAL
describe the available reactive capability under any allowed system failed to operate or was out of calibration, excitation system range
voltage. The approach then, was to consider the extremes of (voltage) incorrect, incorrect limiter and or protective settings, and
system voltage, determine the capability at these extremes obsolete or inadequate equipment.
including such parameters as step-up and service transformer taps,
voltage limitations on auxiliary equipment, generator terminal 3. Transformer related areas include; station service transformers
voltage limits etc. For system voltages between the scheduled not on optimum tap setting, generator step-up transformers not on
limits the capability could be determined by linear interpolation optimum tap, and transformers not correctly applidsized.
(not a particularly bad assumption for a small voltage range). A
mathematical model was developed to accept the various input data 4. Machine related areas include; problems with protective
and produce an output of predicted capabilitiesat the selected high devices, problems with control systems, and artificially imposed
and low voltage levels. Refemng to Figures A & B, the outer- heating limitations (stator & field).
most curve is the published generator reactive capability from the
manufacturer. The inner curve is the predicted reactive capability 5 . Procedure related limitations include; operating procedures
from the spreadsheet labelled with the appropriate limiting factors. which do not exploit full reactive capability such as "it has never
The discrete points on the graphs are actual test points with been done before.
measured values. Some of the test points in Figure 2 lie outside
the predicted locus since the machine low voltage limit was Discussions with several other utilities which have conducted any
exceeded (of course, machine conditions were closely monitored form of reactive capability testing indicate that many of these
for these points). The real value of the pretest predictions can problems have occurred on their systems as well.
now be appreciated. Before any testing is conducted a model of
the machine-system can be used to determine which limits can be Regarding the test generator in particular and the other tested units
adjusted or altered (i.e. transformer taps, relay settings, voltage in general, the auxiliary equipment was not supplied by the same
regulator setpoints etc.) to allow optimum reactive capability manufacturer as the generator.
 39

The discusser is certainly correct in his assumption that the use or

purchase of equipment with adequate range and or ratings will
improve the reactive capability of the generating units. At the S y s t e m Voltage 2 3 0 KV
time of installation and based on requirements which existed, the
auxiliary equipment and subsystems purchased were probably
adequate or in some cases possibly the only alternative. For Lag 400 1 I
example, advances in excitation control and protection in the past
thirty years allow the operation of machines in areas which were
previously avoided. Operating conditions, voltage levels, the need
for VAR capability to support power transfers, etc. have all
changed dramatically during the period of time many of the Regulator Control S wax
operating units were commissioned. To put it simply, conditions
have changed but in many cases equipment upgrades or retrofits Stator Neating /
have not. The purpose and in some cases the success of a reactive
capability testing and evaluation program must be judged by these
constraints.
r
Alla Panvini: The authors most definitely agree with the discusser -
.
s -100 1 I
on the point that the manufacturer’s designed reactive capability
curves are not a true picture of the available machine reactive
+ 1
capability. The whole point of our computer study, which includes
input data such as transformer tap settings, maximum and mini-
mum excitation limiter setting, protective device settings, etc., was
to be armed with expectation of the test results, possibly correcting
any deficiencies before embarking on the expensive (and time I rn Test Points

consuming)task of generator reactive capability testing. Refemng

to the previous discussion, certain problems were discovered
during testing, a number of them unexpected. This points up the
need to actually test the unit under consideration. However, by
applying the computer program, we hope to uncover possible
problems and solve them before testing if possible, thus aug-
menting a comprehensive testing program.

H . A . Wagner C‘nit #4
Optim urn Reactive Capability
H.A. Wagner Unit #4 S y s t e m Voltage 2 3 7 KV
Existing Reactive Capability
S y s t e m Voltage 237 KV
I
I
I Field,Heating /
Lag 4 0 0

300 -

Regulator Control g x
Regulator Control @ .ffax 1
200 - 100 - I
r r ? I e
I
1

E
a
V
a !
l
a l Uinimum Excitation Limit

Generator Bus VoltagC /

Regulator Control B
s -100 -

- I
-200
-300 1 1
j
1 1
1
-300 - Lead - 4 0 0
I
I
I .Test Points 0 100 200 300 400 500
Lead-400
I
!
I
, J Megawatts
0 100 200 300 400 500
Uegawat ts
40

System Voltage 230 KV

Lag 400
I I
300

zoo
I

Y 100
e

a 0
V
a
r
s -100
/'

0 100 ZOO 300 400 500

Megawatts

Uinuscript received March 29, 1993.