Shaft Current Protection: Tin Rabuzin

Shaft Current Protection
TIN RABUZIN
Degree project in
ICS
Master thesis
Stockholm, Sweden 2015
XR-EE-ICS 2015:009
Abstract
Shaft current protection in hydro and turbo generators is an important gen-
erator protection issue. Currents flowing in the generator shaft might damage
generator bearings which, in turn, could reduce operating time and cause large
financial losses. Therefore, it is important to prevent operation of the generator
under conditions of high shaft currents.
In this project, task was to develop measurement and protection system that
is able to operate under certain conditions. Measurement device has to be able
to accurately measure currents lower than 1 A in a generator shaft that can
vary in diameter from 16 cm up to 3 m. Also, those currents might appear in
frequencies equal to multiples of line frequency. Device is to be located in a
limited space and in a proximity of the generator. Thus, stray flux is expected
which might influence measurements. Furthermore, since currents that have
to be measured are low, output of a measurement device is usually a low level
signal. Such signal had to be catered for and adapted in a way that it can be
used with numerical relay.
After literature review and overview of possible solutions, Rogowski coil was
chosen as the measurement device which will be further analysed. Two other
current transformers were considered which served as a good comparison with
Rogowski coil. Several different tests and measurements were made on men-
tioned measurement devices. Also, it was investigated how IEC61850-9-2 and
Merging Unit (MU) could be used in this application. Upon this investigation,
complete protection systems were assembled in the laboratory and they were
tested.
To asses the behaviour of different systems in the real environment, test in-
stallation was built in the hydro power plant, Hallstahammar. This installation
included traditional systems, with measurement signals connected to the relayå,
and the one which utilized concepts of Process Bus and Merging Unit. Measure-
ments and tests that were made there served as a final proof of successfulness
of protection systems.
Results showed that Rogowski coil was a suitable choice for a measurement
device due to its beneficial mechanical and electrical properties. Also, tests made
with actual shaft current showed advantages of using Rogowski coil in pair with
Merging Unit and process bus over traditional protection systems. Nevertheless,
it was confirmed that both types of systems satisfy project requirements.
Keywords: shaft current, Rogowski coil, generator protection, Merging Unit,

process bus
Referat
Skydd mot axelströmmar i vattenkraft- och turbo-generatorer är mycket viktiga.
Strömmar kan uppkomma i generatoraxeln beroende påmagnetisk osymmetri i
statorkärnan. Denna osymmetri ger upphov till en inducerad spänning i axeln
som sedan kan ge en axel-ström vid kortslutning av isolationen som rotorns
lager vilar på. Om axel-strömmen går genom generatorns lager, kan lagret
skadas allvarligt. Detta kommer i sin tur minska drifttiden och orsaka stora
ekonomiska förluster vid produktionsbortfall. Därför är det viktigt att detektera
om det går axelströmmar genom generatorns lager.
Examensarbetets mål var att utveckla ett mät- och skyddssystem för att de-
tektera axel-strömmar. Den mätande enheten måste kunna detektera strömmar
mindre än 1 A i generatoraxeln vilken kan variera i diameter från 16 cm upp till
3 m. Dessutom kan dessa strömmar ha frekvenser lika med eller multiplar av
kraftnätets frekvens (50 eller 60Hz). Den mätande enheten skall vidare kunna
monteras i ett trångt utrymme och i närhet av generatorns stator. Läckflöde
från statorn kan förväntas vara stort, och detta kan antas ha stor påverkan
påmätningarna. Eftersom axelströmmen som mäts är låg, är utsignalen från
den mätande enheten vanligtvis en lågnivåsignal. Denna låga signalnivåmåste
anpassas såatt den kan användas i ett numeriskt relä, vilka vanligtvis kräver
högre energinivåer påingångsignalerna.
Efter genomförd litteraturstudie och översikt över möjliga lösningar, kon-
kluderades det att en lösning med Rogowski spole som mätanordning borde vara
intressant, och denna analyserades ytterligare. Tvåströmtransformatorer med
konventionell konstruktion med kärna av elektroplåt valdes som jämförelse med
lösningen baserad påRogowski spole. Flera olika tester och mätningar gjordes.
Dessutom undersöktes hur en process-bus lösning enligt IEC61850-9-2LE med
en Merging Unit (MU) skulle kunna användas i denna tillämpning. Vid alla
dessa undersökningar har kompletta system för mätning och skydd monterats
och testats i laboratoriemiljö.
För att registrera funktionen för de olika systemlösningarna i en verklig
miljö, monterades det kompletta systemet från laboratorietesterna in i ett vat-
tenkraftverk i Hallstahammar. I detta vattenkraftverk ingår traditionella skydd-
, styrnings- och kontroll-system och även en äldre lösning för att skydda gen-
eratorn mot axelströmmar. Därmed kunde man jämföra prestanda mellan de
olika lösningarna baserade påströmtransformatorer av konventionell konstruk-
tion med kärna av elektroplåt och lösningen med Rogowski spole. Signaler
från båda givarna anslöts till ett numeriskt relä, och anslutning av Rogowski
spolen gjordes även via en MU till det numeriska relät. Mätningar och tester
som gjordes i kraftstationen kunde tas som ett slutligt bevis påatt de olika
lösningarna baserade på Rogowski spole är en framtida lösning för ett väl
fungerande axel-ströms skydd för generatorer.
Resultaten visar att Rogowskispolen är ett lämpligt val även med avseende
pådess fördelaktiga mekaniska och elektriska egenskaper. Testerna som gjordes
med en verklig axel-ström visade tydligt fördelarna med att använda Rogowski
spolen i kombination med MU och process bus jämfört med traditionella sky-
ddssystem. Det ska dock understrykas att både systemet med och det utan MU
uppfyllde projektets krav.
Nyckelord: axelström, lagerström, Rogowskispole, generatorskydd, Merging
Unit, process bus
Acknowledgements
Foremost, I would like to thank my examiner, Prof. Lars Nordström, for provid-
ing me with the guidance during my thesis work and advice regarding my future
career. It has been an honour to be the student of one of the best professors I
have had during my studies. His words have always been inspiring.
During my stay at ABB SA Products, I have also had a lot of help and
guidance. Sincere thank you to my supervisor, Zoran Gajić, who entrusted me
with an opportunity to work on this project and for his valuable comments and
advice. Also, special thanks to Odd Werner-Erichsen and Mohammad Khorami
who had enough patience to answer my endless questions and helped me to
carry out this work. I am also thankful to Kjell Westberg for arranging my
training and for all of his efforts regarding my work.
To my collegue students, Konstantinos Bourchas, Alexandra Kapidou, Arvind

Muthukrishnan, Fabian Hohn, Dimitrios Zografos and Andromachi Bletsa, who
shared both hard and fun moments with me in Västerås, thank you.
Last, but not the least, my deepest gratitude goes to my parents Zdravko and
Silvija Rabuzin, brothers Filip and Lovro Rabuzin, girlfriend Andrea Cvek and
grandparents Josip and Marija Hajduk. They have been my biggest emotional
support and encouragement throughout my studies. This journey would not be
possible without them.
Contents
Abstract i
Referat ii
Acknowledgements iii
List of Figures vii
List of Tables viii
Acronyms ix
1 Introduction 1
2 Shaft Currents and Voltages in Generators 4

2.1 Theory of Shaft Voltages and Currents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2.2 Bearing Damage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
2.2.1 Frosting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
2.2.2 Pitting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
2.2.3 Spark Tracks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
2.2.4 Welding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
2.3 Mitigation Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
2.3.1 Bearing Insulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
2.3.2 Shaft Grounding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
2.3.3 Shaft Current Measurement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
3 Analysis of Shaft Current Measurement Devices 12

3.1 Description and Technical Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
3.1.1 Rogowski coil . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
3.1.2 Zelisko GWR3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
3.1.3 ILDD 096 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
3.2 Magnetization Curve . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
3.3 Linearity Test . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
3.4 Frequency Response . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
3.5 Sensitivity Tests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
3.6 External Rejection Test Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
3.7 Step Response . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
3.8 Waveform Consistency . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
3.9 Summary and Comparison . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
Contents v
4 Shaft Current Protection Systems 29

4.1 Isolation Amplifier . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
4.1.1 Linearity Measurements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
4.1.2 Frequency Response . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
4.2 Description of Protection Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
4.2.1 System A . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
4.2.2 System B . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
4.3 Linearity Measurements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
4.4 Ramping Tests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
4.5 Filtering Tests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
4.6 Excessive Currents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
4.7 Application of Process Bus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
4.7.1 Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
4.7.2 Implementation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
4.8 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
5 Hydro Power Plant Tests 44

5.1 Existing Installation in Hallstahammar . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
5.2 Description of new installation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
5.3 Measurements and Test Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
5.3.1 Shaft Short-Circuit Measurements . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
5.3.2 Linearity Measurements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
5.3.3 Ramping Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
5.3.4 Noise levels and Waveform Recordings . . . . . . . . . . . 51
6 Conclusions and Future Work 53

6.1 Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
6.2 Future Work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
A ABB REG670 - Generator Protection Relay 55

A.1 Hardware Configuration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
A.2 Application Configuration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
A.2.1 Analogue Inputs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
A.2.2 Protection Functions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
A.2.3 Disturbance Recorder . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
A.2.4 LED and Binary Output Logic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
A.3 Graphical Display . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
A.4 Linearity and Accuracy for Low Level Signals . . . . . . . . . . . 61
A.4.1 Manufacturer Technical Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
A.4.2 Test Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
B Laboratory Set-up 65
List of Figures
1.1 Previous RARIC installations in turbo generators [20] . . . . . . 1

1.2 Previous RARIC installations in hydro generators [20] . . . . . . 2
2.1 Flux causing shaft voltage in a 4-pole machine [3] . . . . . . . . 5

2.2 Bearing damage - pitting, frosting and spark tracks [23] [9] . . . 6
2.3 Shaft current transformer ILDD [20] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
2.4 Shaft Condition Monitoring (SCM) [16] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
2.5 Principle of Rogowski coil . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
3.1 Rogowski coil with corresponding integrator box . . . . . . . . . 13

3.2 Zelisko GWR3 and its core joint . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
3.3 ILDD 096 and its core joint . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
3.4 Zelisko GWR3 and ILDD 096 magnetization curves . . . . . . . 16
3.5 Rogowski coil 332 cm Linearity Test . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
3.6 ILDD096 and Zelisko GWR3 Linearity Test . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
3.7 Simplified model of the current transformer . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
3.8 Rogowski Coil 332 cm Frequency Response . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
3.9 Zelisko GWR3 Frequency Response . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
3.10 ILDD 096 Frequency Response . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
3.11 RARIC sensitivity curve with displayed results for Zelisko GWR3 21
3.12 External rejection test of Rogowski coil . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
3.13 External rejection test of CTs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
3.14 External rejection test of Rogowski coil . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
3.15 External rejection test of Zelisko GWR3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
3.16 External rejection test of ILDD 096 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
3.17 Step response of three devices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
3.18 Rogowski Op-Amp noise analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
3.19 Waveforms of Rogowski coil and Zelisko GWR3 . . . . . . . . . 26
3.20 ILDD 096 Voltage Waveforms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
3.21 Comparison of linearity test results from different devices . . . . 27
3.22 Comparison of frequency responses from different devices . . . . 28
4.1 Amplifier Linearity Test . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30

4.2 Amplifier Frequency Response . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
4.3 Connection scheme of Rogowski based Shaft Protection System 32
4.4 Connection scheme of CT based Shaft Protection System . . . . 33
4.5 Linearity measurements for System A . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
4.6 Linearity measurements for System B with Zelisko GWR3 . . . 34
List of Figures vii
4.7 Linearity measurements for System B with ILDD 096 . . . . . . 35

4.8 Ramping test results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
4.9 Example of injected primary current during filtering tests . . . . 37
4.10 Recording in case of excessive current . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
4.11 Cabling in Hallstahammar coming from the generator . . . . . . 39
4.12 Substation communication architecture according to IEC 61850 40
4.13 Network Configuration for SV testing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
4.14 OMICRON CMC256-6 SV configuration . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
4.15 Sampled Value Frame . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
4.16 Application Configuration of merging unit input . . . . . . . . . 43
5.1 Modification of existing installation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45

5.2 Mounting of Rogowski coil . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
5.3 Protection and measurement equipment at Hallstahammar . . . 46
5.4 Shaft current measurement with Rogowski coil . . . . . . . . . . 48
5.5 Shaft current measurement with ILDD 096 . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
5.6 Disturbance recording from REG670 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
5.7 Linearity measurement at Hallstahammar . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
5.8 Results of ramping test made at Hallstahammar . . . . . . . . . 51
5.9 Relay recoding of secondary voltage waveforms . . . . . . . . . . 52
5.10 Noise from Rogowski coil and ILDD 052 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
A.1 Backside of REG670 2.0 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56

A.2 Analogue Inputs Application Configuration . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
A.3 Application Configuration of Protection Function . . . . . . . . 59
A.4 Configuration of Disturbance Recorder . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
A.5 Binary Output Logic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
A.6 LED Logic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
A.7 Display on LHMI . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
A.8 Noise levels on TRM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
A.9 Testing of voltage and current inputs of REG670 . . . . . . . . . 63
A.10 Linearity and Accuracy at low voltage levels . . . . . . . . . . . 64
B.1 Overview of physical arrangement of laboratory set-up - Part 1 . 65

B.2 Overview of physical arrangement of laboratory set-up - Part 2 . 66
List of Tables
2.1 Advantages and disadvantages of Rogowski coil . . . . . . . . . . 10
3.1 Rogowski coil LFR 015/1.5 - Technical data . . . . . . . . . . . 13

3.2 Zelisko GWR3 nameplate data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
3.3 ILDD 096 nameplate data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
3.4 Phase difference introduced by Rogowski coil . . . . . . . . . . . 18
3.5 Sensitivity test results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
4.1 KNICK VariTrans P27000 - Technical data . . . . . . . . . . . . 29

4.2 Amplifier Input/Output Range Settings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
4.3 Coefficient of determination for systems with different settings . 35
4.4 Harmonic content of primary current . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
4.5 Filtering Test Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
5.1 Hallstahammar generator data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44

5.2 Trip and alarm level settings of REG670 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
A.1 REG670 2.0 Hardware Configuration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55

A.2 SMAI HPAC Parameter Settings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
A.3 Transformer Input Module - Technical Data . . . . . . . . . . . 61
A.4 General Purpose Function (CVGAPC) - Technical Data . . . . . 61
A.5 Settings of TRM channels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
Acronyms
ADM Analog Digital Conversion Module

CBM Combined Backplane Module
CT Current Transformer
EMF Electromotive Force
EMI Electromagnetic Interference
HMI Human-Machine Interface
IED Intelligent Electronic Device

MU Merging Unit
NUM Numerical Process Module
PCB Printed Circuit Boards

PSM Power Supply Module
SV Sampled Values
TRM Transformer Input Module
UBM Universal Backplane Module

CHAPTER 1
Introduction
Shaft current protection in hydro and turbo generators is an important gen-

erator protection issue. Currents flowing in the generator shaft might damage
generator bearings which, in turn, could reduce operating time and cause large
financial losses. Therefore, it is important to prevent operation of the generator
under conditions of high shaft currents.
Generation of electromotive force (EMF) in the shaft is governed by princi-
ples explained in Chapter 2. This chapter also discusses how shaft currents can
be reduced. Usually, the first line of defence against shaft currents is grounding.
This also prevents shaft from being electrically charged. Shafts of the turbo
generators are grounded via slip ring on the prime mover side (shown in Figure
1.1) and in case of hydro generators, shaft is grounded via water in the turbine
(shown in Figure 1.2).
If, for some reason, bearing pedestal on the other side of the rotor is grounded,
voltage is imposed on the bearing. Breakdown of the insulation in the bearing
leads to high currents and destruction of the bearing. Consequences of high
currents are described in Chapter 2. On the other hand, it is considered that
shaft currents lower than 1 A will not cause any damage.
Usually, shaft currents are measured by shaft current transformer which is
placed between the turbine and the generator in hydro-generators and between
non-insulated bearing and the generator in turbo-generators. Measurements
Figure 1.1: Previous RARIC installations in turbo generators [20]

Introduction 2
Figure 1.2: Previous RARIC installations in hydro generators [20]
are then used by protection relay which, in case of excessive currents, trips the
unit. Certain issues are associated with shaft current transformers. Installation
of such large and heavy transformer in confined space, where it is usually placed,
is difficult and time consuming. Furthermore, it has to accurately measure low
level primary currents (less than 1 A) in a large conductor which is shaft. This
causes its secondary current to be at a very low level. Also, because it is
installed in the proximity of the generator, there is a possible high influence of
the stray flux from the generator on measurements. Figures 1.1 and 1.2 show
previous ABB’s solution with the shaft current transformer, ILDD, and the
shaft overcurrent relay, RARIC.
In this project, the new solution for shaft current protection had to be found.
The requirement of the solution for the new current sensor was that it has to
show better mechanical and electrical properties than the shaft current trans-
former. It shall be easy to assemble and mount. Also, since the use of numerical
relay for protection purposes is assumed, its secondary quantities must be suit-
able for its inputs. In this project, ABB’s relay REG670 2.0 was used. Appendix
A provides a reader with an overview and possible configuration of this relay.
Also, results of the investigation of relay’s measurement performance in low
current or voltage level range is presented.
In Chapter 2, literature review of possible current sensors that could be used
in this case is given. Selected sensors are then analysed and results are shown
in Chapter 3.
Chapter 4 presents complete shaft current protection systems consisting of
measurement devices, protection relay and/or amplifier. Those systems are
tested and different measurements are performed. Also, this chapter gives an
Introduction 3
overview of part of substation automation standard IEC61850-9-2. It investi-

gates and proposes possible utilization of process bus and merging unit for this
application.
Following laboratory work, systems analysed in Chapter 4 were installed
in the hydro power plant Hallstahammar for testing in an actual installation.
Measurements and test results are shown in Chapter 5.
The report is concluded with Chapter 6 where all findings are summarized
and conclusions are given. Also, future work that could be done on this topic
is suggested.
CHAPTER 2
Shaft Currents and Voltages in Generators
2.1 Theory of Shaft Voltages and Currents

The topic of shaft currents in generators has been investigated since the begin-
ning of the last century. Therefore, knowledge about this phenomenon already
exists. Perhaps one of the first attempts to thoroughly explain all causes of
shaft currents dates back to 1923 [3]. Most discussions of those causes in papers
published later is based on finding presented in [3].
According to [3] and [6], the most important and most common source of
shaft currents is due to asymmetry in the armature field. Therefore, the solu-
tions presented in this work will focus on this source of shaft currents.
As found in [5], ”... in a perfectly constructed alternator both practice and
theory tell us that no such vagabond current exists so that the cause must be
looked for in constructive inequalities.” In short, no shaft currents would exist
in a perfectly manufactured machine.
In a multi-pole machine such as a synchronous generator, flux passing through
the shaft splits into two parts. One part of it takes the counter-clockwise direc-
tion and the other takes clockwise direction. If those two parts are not equal
due to magnetic dissimilarities, resulting flux will circulate around the yoke as
shown in Figure 2.1. Circulating flux will then induce voltage in the generator
shaft. As it is already mentioned, magnetic dissimilarities are caused by ”nor-
mal manufacturing tolerances” [6]. If not prevented in any way, voltage induced
in the shaft will generate current in a circuit consisting of shaft, bearing(s), and
the base.
Two causes of magnetic dissimilarities in electrical machines are discussed
in [3]. Those are sectionalized stator and the use of segmental punching. De-
pending on the number of poles and joints or segments in stator core, shaft
current is generated with certain frequency. It is found in [3] that if the ratio
of twice the number of joints, J, and poles, P, in equation 2.1, reduced to its
lowest term, has an odd number in the numerator, shaft currents will exist with
a frequency that will be equal to A × f , where f is line frequency.
A 2×J
= (2.1)
B P
Similarly, if ratio of four times number of segments and the number of poles,
reduced to its lowest terms, has an odd number for the numerator, shaft currents
Shaft Currents and Voltages in Generators 5
Figure 2.1: Flux causing shaft voltage in a 4-pole machine [3]
will exist with frequency equal to A × f .

A 4×S
= (2.2)
B P
According to [22], ”The number of joints is the number of segments per circle,
S, times the number of layers before the pattern repeats, generally 2”. Therefore,
it can be written as follows, J = 2 × S. It is also stated in [22] that in spite of
ignored impact of spatial and time harmonics or saturation in rules mentioned
above, these effects will cause only negligible currents if nominator A is an even
number.
From the rules stated above, it can be concluded that, if shaft current will
exist, frequency of this current will be equal to line frequency or odd multiples
of line frequency.
However, it is discussed and confirmed by experiment, in [22], that rule
stated above did not take certain affects (causing magnetic asymmetry) into
account. For this reason, shaft currents can be expected to contain harmonics
with frequencies equal to multiples of line frequency. This was also confirmed
by measurements shown in [6].
Findings presented in this section will be important for the setting of the
filter in the Intelligent Electronic Device (IED) discussed in Appendix A.
2.2 Bearing Damage

Effects of shaft currents on bearing damage are discussed in [6] and findings will
be shown here.
There are four types of bearing damage: frosting, spark tracks, pitting and
welding. Each of them will be briefly introduced.
2.2.1 Frosting
Frosting is the most common type of bearing damage due to shaft currents.
Damage is not noticeable to human eye. Microscopic view of the damage re-
veals craters whose bottoms are round and shiny. This indicates melting of the
material. This kind of damage where material is removed occurs during voltage
discharge. Sometimes, damage due to chemical attacks might be mistaken for a
shaft current damage. Microscopic view of frosting damage is shown in Figure
2.2.
2.2.2 Pitting
Pitting damage shown in Figure 2.2 on the left, appears similar to the frosting
damage except it is much larger in size since its source is powerful. Pitting
occurs more randomly and does not cover entire area as frosting. It is sometimes
possible to count the number of discharges.
2.2.3 Spark Tracks

Initial appearance of spark tracks, on the right in Figure 2.2, appears as damage
from foreign particles in the lubrication or seal oil. However, spark tracks are
irregular in nature and do not follow direction of rotation. Bottom of the tracks
is melted and corners are sharp.
2.2.4 Welding
Welding is caused by very high currents (hundreds of amperes). It is easily
noticed by human eye. Welded parts usually have to be split by sledgehammer
or other mechanical means.
Figure 2.2: Bearing damage - pitting, frosting and spark tracks [23] [9]
2.3 Mitigation Methods

There are mainly two things that could be done to prevent shaft currents. That
is bearing insulation and shaft grounding (in case of turbo generators). With
those two methods, it is attempted to isolate shaft current or to redirect its flow.
The following two sections will look into details of those two methods. Lately,
more work has been done on the topic of shaft currents and more solutions of
shaft currents have been found [25]. However, those solutions mostly deal with
currents generated due to use of inverters. Therefore, they are not applicable
to the case studied here.
As described before, if bearing insulation fails, shaft currents will flow and
destroy bearings. In that case, the shaft currents are measured, followed by
either a warning to the operator or by a tripping of the unit. Possible measure-
ment techniques can be found in the last section of this chapter.
2.3.1 Bearing Insulation

Most of the insulated bearings on the market can be found in two groups, coated
bearings and hybrid bearings [8], [27].
In hybrid bearings rolling elements are made out of silicon nitride and bear-
ing rings out of steel, thus the name. Silicon nitride is compound found in
ceramic material and, in this case, it is used as an isolator. It prevents shaft
currents from flowing through the bearings thus extending their lifetime. In
addition to good isolating characteristic, this material has some other good me-
chanical properties such as shock resistance, lower weight (compared to steel),
material strength, etc.
Second type of insulated bearings are coated bearings. In this case, inner
and outer ring of the bearings are coated with ceramic material. Coating is
performed by plasma sprayed method where oxide ceramic layer is applied to
material. It is hard, resistant to wear and has good thermal conductivity while,
at the same time, provides isolation from shaft voltage.
2.3.2 Shaft Grounding

Shafts are grounded to prevent rotor from being electrically charged [20]. In
addition to this, in turbo generators, grounding at the drive end provides alter-
nate path for the shaft current. Instead of passing through drive-end bearing,
this current can pass through grounded point. There are three ways in which
shaft could be grounded. It could be done using grounding brushes, grounding
bearings or conductive grease in bearings.
Grounding Brushes
Grounding brushes can be used for practical and economical shaft grounding.
They provide low impedance path from the shaft to the ground. However, there
are some well known issues that come with using brushes such as oxidation
buildup, mechanical wear because of contact with shaft, reduced effectiveness
due to contaminants built up on metallic bristles and required maintenance [17].
Some of those issues are reflected on and improvements are suggested in [16].
Grounding Rings
Grounding ring is a recent method of grounding shafts. Its advantages are pre-
sented in [14]. Grounding ring uses microfibres to establish electrical contact
with the shaft. Due to very small diameter of fibres, surface roughness does not
affect resistance between two conducting materials, unlike in the case of ground-
ing brushes. Because of this reason, there is no need to apply pressure to keep
electrical contact which results in low friction and negligible wear. Authors also
state that microfibres are resistant towards contamination. One other benefit
of using grounding ring is that even if fibres loose physical contact with the
shaft surface, ”breakdown due to local field emission will occur and reestablish
electrical contact”.
Conductive Grease
Third method of grounding the shaft is through grease in the bearings. Such
electrically conductive grease provides path for the current through the bearing
without causing arcing. It should be said that this, in comparison with previous
examples, is not shaft grounding per se. In this case shaft is grounded only if
pedestal of bearing is grounded. And then, as it was mentioned, arcing in bear-
ings is prevented. According to [17], conductive particles might cause lubricant
to be ineffective and, therefore, this method has been abandoned.
Turbine Grounding
Previously mentioned grounding methods were applicable to turbo generators.
In case of hydro-generators, water in the turbine provides good grounding for
the shaft. Therefore, no additional grounding is applied to the shaft.
2.3.3 Shaft Current Measurement

To prevent the damage to bearings, excessive shaft currents can be measured
and unit can be brought to a halt until the problem is resolved. There are
different ways currents can be measured and they are discussed in the following
sections.
Current Transformers
First obvious choice is to use current transformer to measure shaft current.
Generator shaft, as a conductor of shaft current, acts as a primary winding with
one turn. Magnetic core with secondary and test winding is mounted around the
shaft. Principle of operation is the same as of any current transformer and it is
well known. Therefore, it will not be discussed further. Depending on the shaft
size, core is built out of two or four parts. Because of its weight and difficulties
in connecting the core parts on site, current transformer with magnetic core is
not mechanically attractive.
As it was mentioned in Chapter 1, this solution was previously used by ABB.
Diagram of shaft current transformer ILDD is shown in Figure 2.3.
Main issue with ILDD was its low sensitivity at desired trip and alarm
levels. As it is described in [10], new solutions to this problem were investigated.
Among other solutions, current transformer design was improved such that it
Figure 2.3: Shaft current transformer ILDD [20]
satisfied requirements of protection system. However, those improvements did

not reflect on simplicity of installation and, therefore, they will not be considered
in this project.
Grounding Brush Measurements

In previous section, grounding brush was discussed. In addition to grounding
purposes, this brush could also be used to measure shaft voltages. One example
of such attempt is presented in [15]. In this example, both shaft current and
voltage measurements are made by using multiple brushes at the shaft ends and
grounding brushes. It is suggested that current shunt should be connected to
grounding brushes which can then be used as an input to monitoring equipment
342 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ENERGY CONVERSION, VOL. 19, NO. 2, JUNE 2004
as shown in Figure 2.4.
However, even the author himself shows how resistance in the grounding
cable affects voltage that is induced in the shaft. In other words, by connecting
a shunt which is used to measure currents, grounding is disturbed. In addi-
tion, just as described in previous sections, brushes have some issues associated
with them and, therefore, not only grounding is affected but also shaft current
measurements.
Rogowski Coil
One of the proposed solutions in [10], is Rogowski coil. Rogowski coil is named
after German physicist Walter Rogowski. It was used since the beginning of
Fig. 1. Turbine generator shaft grounding current and voltage sensing.
troubleshooting, leading to orderly planning and/or execution

of maintenance or shutdowns, as appropriate.
VI. SCM TECHNOLOGY CASE HISTORIES

A. A Stator Coil Failure Due to Core Iron Shorting on a
750 MW Turbine-Generator
During the month of July 1995, VCM shaft grounding current
readings were recorded on a strip chart. The author inspected
this chart and found that the unit operated less than half time
in this normally high demand period. There were six periods
of operation lasting from 10 to 20 hours. Five of the six pe-
riods showed initial normal low level current, less than three
amperes, followed by bursts of high to excessive currents. Fig. 3
shows the period of highest currents exceeding the scale max-
Fig. 2. Sensing grounding current and voltage on an electrically-isolated shaft. imum of ten amperes. For all six periods, the shaft grounding
Figure 2.4: Shaft Condition Monitoring (SCM) current [16] then settled down to either a normal or a slightly higher
8) Stator Winding Partial Discharge Level and continuous level, indicating that shorted laminations or turns
Changes. either blew open, or shorted together. At that time, the author
9) Stator Winding Turn and/or Circuit Short or Open predicted (based upon experience) that these signals were ei-
Circuits. ther from shorted stator core laminations or shorted rotor field
10) Field Winding Ground Fault Indications. winding turns. Operators were questioned about other possible
11) Current Side Band Analysis on Induction unit operation or instrument conditions that would explain the
Machines. trace abnormalities, but none could be found. In year 2000, the
12) Gap Flux-Probe Symmetry on Synchronous unit was pulled from service because of a stator coil failure to
Machines. ground located adjacent to a zone of excessive heat caused by
13) Field AC Impedance Changes on Synchronous shorted core end lamination packets. Validating the 1995 pre-
Machines. diction after five years is reasonable since this generator was
14) Field Current for a Given Load and Power Factor on peaking duty, operating only for short periods during the
on Synchronous Machines 1995–2000 interval.
15) Cooling Gas Particle Monitor Indications.
16) Sparking of Brushes on Commutator and/or Col- B. Electrostatic Charges From Wet Steam [1]
the 18th century. However, it has only gained popularity in the recent years
due to solutions of certain problems associated with Rogowski coil. For pro-
tection purposes it could not have been used earlier due to low power output
which could not be used as an input to electromechanical relays. However, with
numerical relays, power requirement of input devices decreased and they are
gaining popularity [26]. They also exhibit behaviour that gives them advantage
over conventional CTs [11].
Some of the benefits and drawbacks of using Rogowski coil as a measurement
device as found in literature are presented in Table 2.1.
Principle of operation has been well known and covered by the number of
papers and review is given in [24].
Following Ampere’s law it is written
I
1 −−→ → −
i(t) = B(t) · ds (2.3)
µ0
What Equation 2.3 says is that if magnetic flux density is integrated around
closed contour, this results in a current which is flowing inside closed contour.
Table 2.1: Advantages and disadvantages of Rogowski coil
Advantages Drawbacks
No iron core - linear, no saturation
Necessity of integration circuit
and magnetizing current
Low production cost Low voltage output
Mechanical fexibility, small size Low frequency noise
and weight from integrator circuit
Electrically safe when open Sensitivity to conductor position
Wide bandwidth Limited rejection of external fields
Non-disturbing for primary circuit Inability to measure DC currents
Can endure large overload without
damage
Figure 2.5: Principle of Rogowski coil

Ampere’s law is the reason why Rogowski coil can be flexible and mechanically
attractive, unlike, e.g. CTs.
Change in magnetic flux which is passing through turns in Rogowski coil
will, according to Faraday’s law, induce voltage. This is written in following
equation.
dΦ
u(t) = N (2.4)
dt
If laws stated in Equations 2.3 and 2.4 are combined, they result in next equation
Z
u(t) = N Ḃ ~ dA ~ = N A · µ0 · i(t)
~˙
(2.5)
s
where N is the number of turns in Rogowski coil, A is the area surrounded by
a single turn and s is the coil length. Equation 2.5 states relationship between
measured current and voltage induced in Rogowski coil.
To get the waveform of the measured current, output voltage has to be
integrated. There are different methods possible to perform integration each
of them with their own benefits and drawbacks [21]. Problems associated with
integration circuits were the reason why, in the beginning, Rogowski was not
used much.
In [7], Rogowski coil is analysed under non-ideal measurement conditions
such as non-uniform turn distribution, terminal opening, tilted conductor and
influence of external fields. All of those are applicable to the possible solution
of shaft current problem.
Nevertheless, it is shown in [18] that Rogowski coil yields accurate measure-
ments of shaft currents compared to measurement described in IEEE Standard
112-2004. Moreover, some measurements of shaft currents with Rogowski coils
were already successful [13].
Both of the above mentioned measurements utilized Rogowski coil relatively
long time ago. However, it has not been used for shaft current protection pur-
poses until now due to its low power output which was not sufficient to drive
electromechanical and solid state relays. Now, with numerical relays, Rogowski
coil can also be considered for those purposes.
CHAPTER 3
Analysis of Shaft Current Measurement Devices
Three measurement solutions that could be used to measure shaft currents were
presented in Chapter 2. Based on the possible performance and ease of instal-
lation, Rogowski coil was chosen to proceed with. In addition to Rogowski coil,
two other CTs were tested also. Purpose of testing CTs is to be able to compare
Rogowski coil with older solution and to investigate possible retrofit solutions
of ILDD with REG670 or Zelisko GWR3 with RARIC.
First, devices will be described and relevant technical data will be presented.
Then, different measurements will be shown and analysed for each of these de-
vices such as linearity measurements, frequency response, magnetization curve,
waveforms and step response. Furthermore, sensitivity test was performed for
current transformers to check their compatibility with old ABB relay, RARIC.
It is important for devices to be able to reject external fields because they will
be placed in areas affected by high stray fields from the generator. Therefore,
this ability is also checked. In the end, devices are compared and conclusions
are drawn.
3.1 Description and Technical Data

3.1.1 Rogowski coil
Rogowski coil was supplied by PEM Ltd. It consisted of actual Rogowski coil
which was connected via double-shielded coaxial cable to the integrator box
shown in Figure 3.1. Length of this double-shielded coaxial cable is 10 m.
Rogowski coil can be easily mounted around the shaft using T-connection
at the end of the coil circumference. It is also supplied with removable silicone
sleeve for additional mechanical protection. Integrator box has indication if Ro-
gowski coil is turned on, state of the battery and selection switch for sensitivity.
It is powered by 9V battery or 12 V to 24 V DC power supply. Supplied bat-
tery usually provides 50 hours of operation in case of loss of DC power supply.
As mentioned, integrator box is connected to Rogowski coil via double-shielded
coaxial cable and, on the output side, there is a BNC connector available. This
way, output signal can be further transmitted via standard, single-shielded coax-
ial cable.
Additional technical data provided by manufacturer is shown in Table 3.1. It
is also important to mention that the manufacturer states that typical accuracy
Analysis of Shaft Current Measurement Devices 13
Figure 3.1: Rogowski coil with corresponding integrator box
of measurements can be up to 3% depending on the distance of conductor from

the middle of the coil.
Rogowski coils that were available in the lab and were used to perform var-
ious tests were equal in every term except their circumference length. Lengths
available were 130 cm, 169 cm and 332 cm. However, performance of different
coils did not vary in any aspect. Therefore, only measurements with coil length
of 332cm are shown.
Sensitivity of Rogowski coil was set to 200.0 mV/A in all cases studied.
Such setting allows higher amplitude of output signal for the same amplitude of
primary current, when compared to sensitivity of 20.0 mV/A. Rated current, on
the other hand, is reduced to 30.0 A. Nevertheless, it was assumed that under
normal conditions, current level will not exceed this value. With such sensitivity
setting, peak di/dt is also reduced. However, such changes of primary current
Table 3.1: Rogowski coil LFR 015/1.5 - Technical data
x10 x1
Type LR 015/1.5
Sensitivity (mV/A) 200.0 20.0
Peak Current (A) 30.0 300.0
Noise typ. (mVRMS ) 1.0 0.5
Phase Error at 50 Hz (deg.) 7.0
Peak di/dt (kA/µs) 0.01 0.1
Low Frequency Bandwidth - fL (Hz) 4.0
High Frequency Bandwidth - fH (kHz) ≈ 40
Typical Linearity (Hz) ±0.05% (full scale)
Typical Accuracy (Hz) ±0.3%
Minimum Output Loading (kΩ) 100
are not expected in this application.

It is stated in technical reference that low frequency noise can be expected
which is distributed around low frequency bandwidth. This noise is identified
and measured in Section 3.7.
Minimum output loading of Rogowski coil is 100 kΩ and, therefore, it cannot
be used with old shaft overcurrent relay RARIC. For this reason, sensitivity tests
will be performed only for current transformers.
3.1.2 Zelisko GWR3

Zelisko GWR3 was current transformer produced by company Zelisko. Initial
intention of ABB was to find a new manufacturer of shaft current transform-
ers which would be used with shaft overcurrent relay RARIC. Zelisko was the
company that developed this CT shown in Figure 3.2. Its nameplate data is
summarized in Table 3.2.
Table 3.2: Zelisko GWR3 nameplate data
Name Zelisko GWR3 Primary Winding 1 turn

Inner Diameter DI = 990 mm Secondary Winding 600 turns
Outer Diameter DO = 1100 mm Test Winding 2 turns
As it can be seen on the left side of Figure 3.2, this current transformer
is fairly large and bulky. It is made out of two parts which are electrically
connected by wires. Magnetic connection is shown on the right side of Figure
3.2. Two core part ends are shaped in form of a letter L and they are pressed
together with two metal plates with four screws. This way air gap is reduced and
mechanical robustness is increased. Tightening screws are made out of plastic
to avoid creating additional short circuited winding around the core.
High number of secondary winding turns results in low secondary currents.
Therefore, on it’s secondary winding, 82 Ω resistor is connected and this sec-
ondary voltage is measured. Resistance is chosen to be the same as an input
resistance of RARIC. Connecting resistance on the secondary side of the CT
Figure 3.2: Zelisko GWR3 and its core joint

increases secondary voltage. This voltage is then easier to measure than low
level currents.
Later, in Chapter 4, possibility of using secondary current as a measurement
signal will be investigated. However, in this chapter, only secondary voltage
measurement will be shown.
3.1.3 ILDD 096

ILDD 096, shown on Figure 3.3, is the test version of this device which was
manufactured after magnetic performance problems were noticed. Magnetic
material and construction of this ILDD is different from the ILDDs produced
in 1990s. Nameplate data for this CT is shown in Table 3.3.
Table 3.3: ILDD 096 nameplate data
Name ILDD 096 Primary winding 1 turn

Inner Diameter 990 mm Secondary winding 500 turns
Outer Diameter 1030 mm Test winding 4 turns
It also consists of two parts connected electrically with wires. Core joints in
case of ILDD 096 are not manufactured in the same way as in the case of Zelisko
GWR3. It is obvious if one looks at the joint displayed on the right side of Figure
3.3. Distance between lamination ends is much greater thus increasing influence
of air gap on magnetic performance. Also, mechanically, it is much harder to
assemble and connect two parts together. Plastic plates connected with metallic
screw are used to tighten laminations of different core parts together.
As in the case of Zelisko GWR3, due to the fact that secondary winding has
500 turns, currents are very small. Therefore, 82 Ω resistor is connected to the
secondary. Then, voltage is measured as a secondary signal.
Figure 3.3: ILDD 096 and its core joint

3.2 Magnetization Curve

Both of the current transformers, before any other measurements, were first
demagnetized in order to remove any remanence flux in the core that might
have been found otherwise.
It was done by open circuiting primary of the transformer and slowly increas-
ing voltage on its secondary. When saturation was reached, indicated by high
increase of secondary current with small increase of secondary voltage, voltage
was slowly reduced to zero. Magnetization curves of both devices are shown in
Figure 3.4.
It should be noted that ILDD 096 was easily magnetized and, as a result, sec-
ondary voltage measurements were higher or lower than those expected. There-
fore, following each test, ILDD 096 was demagnetized.
Figure 3.4 indicates that Zelisko GWR3 has knee point higher than ILDD
096 in the magnetization curve. In other words, ILDD 096 stars saturating at
lower secondary voltage than Zelisko GWR3. It can also be observed that at
the lower voltage level, magnetization curve of ILDD 096 is not linear which
indicates its worse performance.
3.3 Linearity Test

Linearity test was performed for all three devices. Primary current was varied
from 0 A to 1.5 A and output signal was recorded. In case of Rogowski coil
output signal from integrator box was recorded. In case of Zelisko GWR3 and
ILDD 096 voltage across 82 Ω resistor was recorded. Same was done for four
different frequencies (50 Hz, 60 Hz, 150 Hz and 180 Hz). As explained in Chapter
2, those are the frequencies that can occur in the shaft currents. Results are
shown in Figures 3.5 and 3.6.
In case of Rogowski coil, measurements are linear and accurate. They cor-
respond to expectations based on manufacturer data. It is also concluded that
frequency of primary current has no influence over Rogowski coil sensitivity
Magnetization Curves
70
ILDD 096
Zelisko GWR3
60
50
Secondary Voltage (V)
40
30
20
10
0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350
Secondary Current (mA)
Figure 3.4: Zelisko GWR3 and ILDD 096 magnetization curves

Rogowski Linearity Test

300
50 Hz
250
Secondary Voltage (mV)
200
150
100
50
0
0 0.5 1 1.5
Primary Current (A)
Figure 3.5: Rogowski coil 332 cm Linearity Test
which is due to the lack of iron core. Therefore, curve given in Figure 3.5 is
applicable to all frequencies.
Judging by measurements with Zelisko GWR3, it can also be concluded
that they are linear. However, in this case, they are dependant on frequency.
Of course, as frequency of the primary current is increased, lines are steeper
which indicates better performance of the transformer.
Measurements with ILDD 096, on the other hand, are not linear at levels up
to 1 A. Around trip and alarm levels, non-linearity is very high. Transformer
exhibits similar behaviour when it comes to frequency dependency as Zelisko
GWR3.
Changes in measurements with changes in frequency can be explained by in-
creased magnetization impedance. Very simplified model of current transformer
is shown in Figure 3.7. If it is assumed that primary current of any frequency
ILDD 096 Linearty Test Zelisko GWR3 Linearity Test

180 200
50 Hz 50 Hz
160 60 Hz 180 60 Hz
150 Hz 150 Hz
180 Hz 160 180 Hz
140
140
120
120
100
100
80
80
60
60
40
40
20 20
0 0
0 0.5 1 1.5 0 0.5 1 1.5
Primary Current (A) Primary Current (A)
Figure 3.6: ILDD096 and Zelisko GWR3 Linearity Test

Ip0 Lm 82Ω
Im Is
Figure 3.7: Simplified model of the current transformer
is the same, Kirchhoff’s law states that this current has to be equal to the
sum of magnetizing current and secondary current. If frequency of the current
is increased, both magnetization impedance and, as a consequence, secondary
currents are increased.
This model is simplified to a great extend and cannot be used to accurately
predict behaviour of CT. Nevertheless, it serves as a good explanation of phe-
nomenon seen in Figure 3.6.
3.4 Frequency Response

Frequency response was measured at four different primary current levels (250
mA, 0.5 A, 1 A and 1.5 A). Levels 0.5 A and 1 A correspond to alarm and
trip levels typically used with RARIC. Other two values are chosen to observe
behaviour at smaller value than alarm level and higher value than trip level.
Frequency of those currents was increased from 10 Hz to 1 kHz and output
voltage was measured. Frequency range was limited by capabilities of device
used to inject currents. Therefore, whole bandwidth of devices will not be
visible. Nevertheless, measurements made at those lower frequencies will be
sufficient enough for this application. Results are shown in Figures 3.8, 3.9 and
3.10.
Figure 3.8 indicates that there is no frequency dependency of Rogowski coil
when it comes to amplitude response (flat response). It can be seen that out-
put voltages are at levels corresponding to sensitivity stated by manufacturer.
However, this is not the case for phase response. At frequencies higher than
200 Hz, phase difference between primary current waveform and output voltage
waveform is almost negligible. On the other hand, at lower frequencies which
are relevant for this application, it is not. Table 3.4 summarizes phase difference
results at relevant frequencies. Phase shifts at 50 Hz comply with manufacturer
Table 3.4: Phase difference introduced by Rogowski coil
Primary Current (mA) 250 500 1000 1500

∆φ at 50Hz 7◦ 7◦ 7◦ 5◦
∆φ at 60Hz 6◦ 6◦ 6◦ 4◦
∆φ at 150Hz 2◦ 2◦ 2◦ 2◦
∆φ at 180Hz 2◦ 2◦ 2◦ 2◦
Rogowski coil Amplitude Response Rogowski coil Phase Response

300 40
Iprim = 250 mA Iprim = 250 mA
Iprim = 500 mA 35 Iprim = 500 mA
250
Iprim = 1000 mA Iprim = 1000 mA
Iprim = 1500 mA 30 Iprim = 1500 mA
Phase Difference (deg.)

Output Voltage (mV)
200
25
150 20
15
100
10
50
5
0 0
0 200 400 600 800 1000 0 200 400 600 800 1000
Frequency (Hz) Frequency (Hz)
Figure 3.8: Rogowski Coil 332 cm Frequency Response
data for all current levels except 1.5 A. It is also shown that phase difference is
reduced with increase of primary current level and frequency. This is even more
clear in the Figure 3.8.
In case of Zelisko GWR3 there is a change in amplitude of output voltage
with a change in frequency for the same primary current levels. Secondary
voltage is stable after approximately 200 Hz. However, higher frequencies will
not be measured and, therefore, we can expect non-linear behaviour at lower
frequencies. This is reflected in the Figure 3.6, where frequency dependency was
already noticed. When it comes to phase difference between primary current
and secondary voltage, it decreases with frequency until it is settled at around
10◦ . For instance, at 50 Hz and 1 A, secondary voltage is shifted for 28◦ .
Even worse results were obtained with ILDD 096. Secondary voltage is
settled at even higher frequencies and, at lower levels, it is very non-linear.
Zelisko GWR3 Amplitude Response Zelisko GWR3 Phase Response

200 70
Iprim=250 mA Iprim=500 mA
180 Iprim=500 mA Iprim=1000 mA
60
160 Iprim=1000 mA Iprim=1500 mA
Iprim=1500 mA
50
140
120
40
100
30
80
60 20
40
10
20
0 0
0 200 400 600 800 1000 0 200 400 600 800 1000
Figure 3.9: Zelisko GWR3 Frequency Response

When it comes to phase response, we can see that it depends on frequency as

well as primary current levels. As primary current level is increased, phase shift
is decreased. Similarly, as frequency is increased, phase shift is decreased. It
settles at higher frequencies around 25◦ . With primary current level equal to
250 mA and 500 mA at frequencies less than 200 Hz, phase shift could not be
measured because secondary signal was too small. Just to be able to compare
with other devices, phase shift at 50 Hz and 1 A for ILDD 096 was equal to 42◦ .
3.5 Sensitivity Tests

Sensitivity test was performed for ILDD 096 and Zelisko GWR3 only. This test
was used before to check if manufactured current transformer was compatible
with shaft over current relay, RARIC. Actually, what was checked is if current
transformer can produce voltage which was high enough for a relay to operate
at set primary current trip levels of 0.5 A and 1 A. If this current is above
limits set in Figure 3.11, it means that CT cannot produce voltage at the input
of RARIC which is sufficient high to close the output contacts at set primary
current trip level.
Sensitivity test was done by increasing current at test winding until sec-
ondary voltage across 82 Ω resistor (input resistance of RARIC) reaches 40 mV
or 80 mV corresponding to primary current levels of 0.5 A and 1 A. Results are
summarized, for both transformers, in Table 3.5.
Figure 3.11 shows two sensitivity curves for RARIC relay as a functions
of diameter of current transformer for two levels of primary current. Vertical
axis marks current level at test winding with four turns. Therefore, current
measured from Zelisko GWR3 was scaled down to be able to compare it with
sensitivity curves. Coloured dots displayed on this figure correspond to test
results of Zelisko GWR3.
Test winding current levels read from sensitivity curves at given diameters
for Zelisko GWR3 and ILDD 096 are as follows. For 40 mV at resistor, current
Rogowski coil Amplitude Response Rogowski coil Phase Response

200 70
Iprim = 500 mA
Iprim = 250 mA
180 65 Iprim = 1000 mA
Iprim = 500 mA
Iprim = 1500 mA
160 Iprim = 1000 mA 60
140 Iprim = 1500 mA 55

Output Voltage (mV)
120 50
100 45
80 40
60 35
40 30
20 25
0 20
0 200 400 600 800 1000 0 200 400 600 800 1000
Figure 3.10: ILDD 096 Frequency Response

Table 3.5: Sensitivity test results
Frequency (Hz) Voltage (mV) Current (mA) Device

• 50 40,03 105,8
• 50 80,01 203,2
Zelisko GWR3
• 150 40,04 88,0
• 150 80,01 173,0
50 39,97 161,8
50 80,01 240,0
ILDD 096
150 40,04 132,5
150 80,05 202,5
Figure 3.11: RARIC sensitivity curve with displayed results for Zelisko GWR3
limit is 130 mA and for 80 mV at resistor it is 250 mA. We can see that all
currents form Table 3.5 for Zelisko GWR3 are well bellow current limits. ILDD
096 current at 50 Hz and 40 mV at resistor is above current level limit. Other
ILDD 096 currents satisfy requirement, but they are very close to the limit.
Based on test results, it is concluded that Zelisko GWR3 passes the sensitiv-
ity test. However, ILDD 096 does not. As it was already mentioned, Rogowski
coil requires minimum output loading of 100 kΩ and, therefore, this test was
not done with it.
3.6 External Rejection Test Results

Measurement devices are meant to be placed in a close vicinity to the generator.
Therefore, they might be subjected to the high influence of stray flux. Since, in
some cases, component of the shaft current which is to be measured is influenced
by stray flux , accuracy of measurements might be reduced. Therefore, Rogowski
coil and CTs were subjected to tests investigating their ability to reject influence
of external fields.
Those tests were done by placing vertical conductor outside of CTs and
Rogowski coil. Conductor was moved around circumference of measurement
devices and secondary signal was measured.
Figure 3.12 illustrates how this test was done for Rogowski coil. Numbers
from 1 to 15 indicate position at the circumference where external conductor
was placed. External conductor is marked with red ellipse. Conductor was not
placed in the area surrounding T-connection. According to the manufacturer
data,this area is highly sensitive.
Figure 3.13 shows how the same test was done for CTs. There is less mea-
surement points at which external conductor was placed. This is due to the fact
that no more points are needed to capture the behaviour of CTs with respect
to position of external currents, as it will be seen later.
Measurements under influence of external fields for Rogowski coil are shown
in Figure 3.14. Left part shows measurements with external current of 50 A at
different distances from circumference of Rogowski coil. Right part shows mea-
surements at 5 cm from circumference of Rogowski coil with different currents.
What can be noticed is that, as external conductor is moved further away
from T-connection starting from the node 1, influence is decreased. When com-
Figure 3.12: External rejection test of Rogowski coil
Figure 3.13: External rejection test of CTs

External 50 A current External currents at 5 cm

150 150
10 cm 50 A
5 cm 25 A
20 cm 10 A
Measured Primary Current (mA)

100 100
50 50
0 0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Node Number Node Number
Figure 3.14: External rejection test of Rogowski coil
ing back to T-connection from the other side, external influence is increasing,
until node 15 (closest to the T-connection). At node 15, measurements are
sharply reduced. However, conductor was then moved even closer to the T-
connection (not shown in measurements) and influence was increased again.
Anomaly at node 15 (reduction of influence) cannot be explained without know-
ing details of construction of Rogowski coil, however, this is most likely due to
geometrical position of the external field and end turns at the T-connection. It
should be noted that distance between each node and between T-connection is
approximately 20 cm.
Different attempts were made to protect T-connection of Rogowski coil
against external fields. Two solutions of Faraday cage were tried out. One
of them was rigid cage made out of steel and the other one was aluminium tape.
No significant improvement was noticed.
External conductor was also placed in the plane of Rogowski coil around its
circumference. Again, as this conductor is moved closer to the T-connection
its influence on the measurement is increased. Small improvement of external
rejection was noticed with Faraday cage made of steel. Faraday cage with
aluminium foil did not show any improvement. This is due to the fact that
aluminium has lower magnetic permeability than steel. Magnetic permeability
is the parameter that influences how well Faraday cage can protect against low
frequency magnetic fields such as those studied here. However, improvement of
Faraday cage made of steel is very small. To keep the mechanical flexibility of
the solution, it is decided not to proceed with using Faraday cage to protect the
T-connection.
Another observation was made when measurements were being done. Ro-
gowski coil was much better at rejecting external fields from conductor that was
in its plane than those from conductor perpendicular to its plane. In fact, if
this conductor was not close to T-connection, no change is measurement was
noticed and, therefore, they are not shown here.

600 600
10 cm 50 A
5 cm 25 A
500 20 cm 500 10 A

400 400
300 300
200 200
100 100
0 0
1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
Figure 3.15: External rejection test of Zelisko GWR3

600 550
10 cm 50 A
5 cm 500 25 A
500 20 cm 10 A
450
400 400
350
300
300
200 250
200
100
150
0 100
1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
Figure 3.16: External rejection test of ILDD 096
3.7 Step Response

Step response was recorded for all three devices to check how long it takes them
to react to change in primary current and come to a steady state. Figure 3.17
shows these recordings.
At t = 0 s, primary current is increased from 0 A to 1 A. Output voltage of
Rogowski coil and secondary voltage of CTs across 82 Ω resistor were observed.
Dashed lines show steady state value of all three voltages. It can be seen that
Rogowski coil and Zelisko GWR3 quickly settle at those values, with small
overshoot in the beginning. However, this is not the case with ILDD 096. In
the beginning, secondary voltage quickly reaches value just bellow steady state
value. Nevertheless, after this it takes a long time for this voltage to reach final
steady state value (compared to other devices).
One other thing that can be observed in Figure 3.17 is variation of voltage
Step Response
200 Zelisko GWR3

Rogowski coil
180 ILDD 096
160
140
Voltage (mV)
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
−0.1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6
Time (s)
Figure 3.17: Step response of three devices
around steady state value in case of Rogowski coil. This variation should not
be mistaken for consequence of poor damping in the system. It is actually noise
from operational amplifier. Manufacturer states that this noise is distributed
around low frequency bandwidth, fL = 4 Hz and peak-to-peak magnitude of
this noise is equal to 6.1 mV. Attempt was made to isolate and analyse this
noise. Results shown in Figure 3.18 correspond to expectations with minor
deviation in noise amplitude and low frequency bandwidth. Peak-to-peak noise
was equal to 5 mV and frequency of harmonic with maximum amplitude is 5.64
Hz. Afterwards, frequency analysis was done for output voltage after reaching
steady state from Figure 3.17. Same low frequency noise was identified thus
confirming variations of output voltage in steady state.
−4 Amplitude Spectrum of Noise Noise Time Signal

x 10 20
3.5
15
3
10
2.5
5
Voltage (mV)
2
|V(f)|
0
1.5
−5
1
−10
0.5
−15
0
0 5 10 15 20 −20
0 2 4 6 8 10
Frequency (Hz)
Time (s)
Figure 3.18: Rogowski Op-Amp noise analysis

3.8 Waveform Consistency

It is important for complete protection systems shown later in Chapter 4 that
measurement devices accurately reproduce primary current waveforms. There-
fore, those waveforms and waveforms from secondary of transformers and Ro-
gowski coil were recorded and visually compared. Recordings for each of devices
can be seen in Figures 3.19 and 3.20 .
By visual inspection, it can be seen that primary current waveform is accu-
rately reproduced in waveforms of Rogowski coil and Zelisko GWR3. On the
other hand, secondary waveform of ILDD 096 is distorted. All of the waveforms
are phase shifted as expected and measured in Section 3.4.
Rogowski coil Zelisko GWR3

300 1.5 150 1.5
200 1 100 1

Primary Current (A)
Primary Current (A)

100 0.5 50 0.5
0 0 0 0
−100 −0.5 −50 −0.5
−200 −1 −100 −1
VRogowski VZelisko
Iinj Iinj
−300 −1.5 −150 −1.5
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Time (ms) Time (ms)
Figure 3.19: Waveforms of Rogowski coil and Zelisko GWR3
ILDD 096
1.5 1.5
VILDD
Iinj
1 1
0.5 0.5
Primary Current (A)
0 0
−0.5 −0.5
−1 −1
−1.5 −1.5
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Time (ms)
Figure 3.20: ILDD 096 Voltage Waveforms

3.9 Summary and Comparison

In this chapter, three devices were tested. Those are Rogowski coil, Zelisko
GWR3 and ILDD 096. Best performance was expected from Rogowski coil
and worse from Zelisko GWR3 and ILDD 096. Expectations were based on
the fact that Rogowski coil does not have magnetic core, and therefore some
problems associated with it can be avoided, unlike in the case of Zelisko GWR3
and ILDD 096. Furthermore, the worst results were expected to be obtained
from ILDD 096 because of poor magnetic properties of this transformer at core
joints and previous experience with magnetic material used in production of
this transformer. In the end, results confirmed expectations.
To start with, ILDD 096’s worse performance than Zelisko GWR3’s could be
seen already at magnetization curve. It was shown how ILDD 096 could be more
easily saturated than Zelisko GWR3 which was observed during other tests. It
had to be demagnetized after each test, whereas this was not the case with
Zelisko GWR3. Of course, there was no magnetization problem with Rogowski
coil.
By looking at Figure 3.21, one can see comparison of linearity test results of
different devices at 50 Hz. Benefit of using Rogowski coil is obvious. There are
no linearity problems in the lower range of primary current levels and higher
secondary voltage is obtained for the same level of primary current. ILDD 096
gives worst results. Slope of it’s curve is almost the same as in the case of Zelisko
GWR but it is clearly less linear.
Same order of quality applies to the case of secondary voltage waveforms
tests. While Rogowski coil and Zelisko secondary voltage waveforms are almost
sinusoidal, there is a distortion in case of ILDD 096. Also, highest phase shift
can be observed in ILDD 096 waveforms.
Figure 3.22 shows comparison of frequency responses from all three devices
in case of 1 A primary current. Here, advantage of Rogowski coil over other
three devices is even more obvious. While amplitude response of Rogowski coil
is almost flat, this is not the case with other two devices. In the lower frequency
1000
Rogowski coil
900 Zelisko GWR3
ILDD 096
800
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 5000
Primary Current (mA)
Figure 3.21: Comparison of linearity test results from different devices

200 70
Zelisko GWR3
Rogowski coil ILDD 096
180
Zelisko GWR3 60 Rogowski coil
ILDD 096
160
50

140
120 40
100 30
80
20
60
10
40
20 0
0 200 400 600 800 1000 0 200 400 600 800 1000
Figure 3.22: Comparison of frequency responses from different devices
levels they are very non-linear. While amplitude response of Zelisko GWR3
settles after a certain frequency, this cannot be seen in the range of frequencies
that were applied here in case of ILDD 096. Similarly, phase response is the
best in case of Rogowski coil and the worst in case of ILDD 096. Despite non-
linearities noticed in frequency response, those will not cause significant errors
in complete protection system. As it will be shown later, relay will filter out
desired frequency and therefore, non-linarity of frequency response will not make
significant difference in performance of CT and Rogowski coil.
It should be noted that primary conductor was moved around the area cir-
culated by Rogowski coil and two other current transformers. No significant
deviations from expected measurements were detected.
To conclude, advantage of Rogowski coil is obvious in comparison to other
two current transformers. Both in terms of mechanical and electrical properties.
It is expected that it will perform well as a part of the systems discussed in
Chapter 4. Same can be expected from Zelisko GWR3, even though at the lower
level. On the other hand, ILDD 096, most likely, will not show satisfactory level
of performance. Biggest concern would be magnetization and non-linearity of
ILDD 096 at current levels and frequencies which are to be measured.
CHAPTER 4
Shaft Current Protection Systems
Performance of measurement devices and the protection relay was evaluated

in Chapters 3 and Appendix A. Project continued with evaluation of complete
shaft current protection systems consisting of measurement devices, relay and/or
isolation amplifier. Here, different systems with different settings are described.
Also, measurement results are presented and analysed.
4.1 Isolation Amplifier

Since secondary quantities of measurement devices described in Chapter 3 were
lower than the nominal range of TRM, isolation amplifier was used to amplify
those. Therefore, it will be presented first along with corresponding measure-
ments.
It was necessary to check if amplifier will perform well enough as a part
of systems discussed later in this chapter. Decision was based on linearity
measurements and its frequency response.
First, some of the amplifier’s technical data is shown in Table 4.1. By looking
at this data, one can conclude that this amplifier is suitable to be used in this
application. Input and output loads are below or above values required by
measurement devices or relay (depending on the type of input/output). Error
in amplifier’s gain is also low enough for this application.
There is a wide range of possible settings for input and output ranges which
were selectable using DIP switches. Four different settings that were chosen are
shown in Table 4.2. Two of the input ranges were voltage inputs with different
ranges (different maximum input voltage), and two of them were current input
ranges. Since current output from both current transformers is a small value,
those current ranges were smallest that were possible to select. Output range
Table 4.1: KNICK VariTrans P27000 - Technical data
Name KNICK VariTrans P27000

Power Supply 20-253 V AC/DC
Input Load ≈ 1 MΩ (Voltage) ≈ 100Ω (Current)
Output Load ≈ 1 kΩ (Voltage) ≈ 600Ω (Current)
Gain Error 0.08 %
Shaft Current Protection Systems 30
Table 4.2: Amplifier Input/Output Range Settings
Setting 1 Setting 2 Setting 3 Setting 4

Input Range 0...250 mV 0...1 V 0...5 mA 0...5 mA
Output Range 0...10V 0...10 V 0...10 V 0...20 mA
Gain 40 10 2 V/mA 4
in all cases is largest possible voltage range (such that the maximum possible
amplification is achieved), except in the last case. There, largest possible current
range is selected.
Reason for choosing two voltage input ranges for further testing is in the
way how they are set. When using Setting 1, one has to, in addition to selecting
position of DIP switches, adjust potentiometer ”Span” and reduce the maximum
input voltage from 1 V to 250 mV. On the other hand, in case of Setting
2, there was no need to use potentiometer to adjust input range. Mentioned
potentiometer is very sensitive and it required some time to precisely set the
input voltage. Therefore, by using both Setting 1 and 2 in further measurements,
stability of amplifier’s gain was tested.
4.1.1 Linearity Measurements

As it was mentioned above, linearity measurements were done. Input voltage
and currents were changed from 0 mV to 250 mV and from 0 mA to 5 mA. In
both cases, output voltage was measured. This covers the range from no shaft
currents to current levels that are above trip value. Same was done for four
different frequencies that can be found in a shaft current signal (50Hz, 60Hz,
150Hz and 180Hz). No change in linearity curves was detected with change
in frequency and, therefore, only measurements at 50 Hz are shown in Figure
4.1. Linearity measurement for Setting 4 was not made because device that
was used to measure currents was not accurate enough in amplifier’s output
range. However, this setting will be used in pair with current transformers in
Linearity with Setttings 1 and 2 Linearity with Settting 3

10 10
Setting 1 Setting 3
9 Setting 2 9
8 8
7 7
Output Voltage (V)
Output Voltage (V)
6 6
5 5
4 4
3 3
2 2
1 1
0 0
50 100 150 200 250 1 2 3 4 5
Input Voltage (mV) Input Current (mA)
Figure 4.1: Amplifier Linearity Test

next sections.
It can be seen that measurements are linear. Amplifier gain corresponds to
specified settings. There are some small deviations at lower input voltages (not
visible in Figure 4.1) for settings 1 and 2. However, those voltages will not be
measured in the final set-up. Also, they are not significant, compared to the
absolute measured value.
Larger inaccuracies can be seen in measurements with amplifier setting 3 in
lower range. However, that is due to imperfections of injected currents at low
values and not due to performance of the amplifier. This was concluded based
on observations of low amplitude current waveforms.
4.1.2 Frequency Response

Next measurements that were made are amplitude and phase responses. This
time, frequency of the input signal was varied from 10 Hz to 1 kHz and RMS
value of the output voltage was recorded. At the same time, while changing
frequency, phase difference between input and output signals was measured.
This was done for different input voltage levels (Settings 1 and 2) and different
current levels (Setting 3). Measurements with setting 4 were not made due to
low accuracy of measurement device in low current range. For the same reason,
phase difference between low input current and output voltage is not measured
in case of Setting 3.
No difference in performance of amplifier with different input RMS values
was detected. Therefore, results in Figure 4.2 are shown only for the input
voltage equal to 200 mV and input current equal to 1 mA.
Results confirm assumption that this amplifier will be suitable for this ap-
plication. Amplifier gain was stable for settings 1 and 2 on the whole range
of frequencies. Gain with setting 3 started to deteriorate only at frequencies
higher than 500 Hz. Phase difference between input and output signal is small
until 100 Hz. After 100 Hz, phase difference starts to increase. Nevertheless,
both gain errors and phase differences are not significant for frequencies that
will be measured in the shaft current signal.
Amplitude Response Phase Response

9 0
Setting 1
Setting 2
8 −2
Setting 1
7 Setting 2 −4
Phase Difference (deg)
Setting 3
Output Voltage (V)
6 −6
5 −8
4 −10
3 −12
2 −14
1 1 2 3
−16 1 2 3
10 10 10 10 10 10
Figure 4.2: Amplifier Frequency Response

4.2 Description of Protection Systems

In this section, hardware arrangement of different systems will be discussed.
Actual laboratory arrangements can be seen in Figures B.1 and B.2.
4.2.1 System A
Connection diagram for System A is shown in Figure 4.3. It is based on Ro-
gowski coil.
Analogue current output of CMC 256-6 is used to inject primary current
that simulates real shaft current. Rogowski coil is mounted around conduc-
tor through which primary current is flowing. Double shielded co-axial cable
connects Rogowski coil with the Integrator box. Integrator box performs inte-
gration and amplification of the signal from Rogowski coil. Signal is amplified
20 times and it can be measured at the output BNC connector. Using this con-
nector, signal is further transmitted to amplifier discussed in previous section
via second single shielded co-axial cable and BNC-to-screw terminal adapter.
Output of the amplifier is, depending on the settings, connected to voltage or
current channel of the TRM module as shown. DC/DC converter is used to
transform the DC voltage from 48 V power supply to 12 V and 24 V and to
supply it to Integrator Box and amplifier.
4.2.2 System B
Second system is based on current transformers ILDD 096 and Zelisko GWR3.
Connection diagram in both cases is the same and, therefore, only one of them
is shown in Figure 4.4.
It is also mostly the same as the one in Figure 4.3. Difference is in the
way that secondary signal is connected to the amplifier. In this case, secondary
terminals S1 and S2 are connected directly to the amplifier. Also, there is no
need to supply DC voltage to the current transformer as it is the case with
Integrator
Box KNICK TRM of REG670
∫ 2
4
5
6
CH1
7 8
CH11
DC/DC
Converter
48 V
Figure 4.3: Connection scheme of Rogowski based Shaft Protection System

KNICK TRM of REG670

S1
82 Ω 2 5
S2 CH1
4 6
7 8
CH11
ILDD/GWR3
DC/DC
Converter
48 V
Figure 4.4: Connection scheme of CT based Shaft Protection System
Rogowski coil. Depending on the setting of the amplifier, output voltage is

connected to Channel 11 and output current is connected to Channel 1 of the
TRM.
4.3 Linearity Measurements

Linearity measurements were made for both systems, A and B. Primary current
was injected from 0 A to maximum value possible on amplifiers inputs. Filtered
voltages and currents were recorded from graphical display on the IED.
It should be noted that measurements were made for four different frequen-
cies as it was done in Chapter 3. However, here, only 50 Hz measurements will
be shown. This is due to the fact that the difference in measurements is not
large and behaviour of the system with respect to frequency is determined only
by measurement device. This was shown and discussed in Chapter 3 and there
is no need to repeat it.
Figure 4.5 shows measurements made for System A. They were done for
amplifier settings 1, 2 and without amplifier. It can be seen that they are
linear and accurate. In case when Rogowski coil voltage is connected directly
to the TRM, small step-like measurements can be seen in low range of primary
currents. This is due to the fact that change in primary current results in such a
small change in output voltage that it cannot be measured accurately. However,
at current levels higher than, approximately, 250 mA, measurements are more
accurate.
Measurements for System B with Zelisko GWR3 are shown in Figure 4.6.
They were made for all four amplifier settings and without an amplifier. Sim-
ilarly as in the case of System A, it can be said that they are linear. Also, in
case when voltage was measured without an amplifier, resolution was reduced.
It means that for certain increase in primary currents, change in secondary volt-
Linearity with Settings 1 and 2 Linearity without amplifier

10 300
Setting 1 Without Amplifier
9 Setting 2
250
8

7
200
6
5 150
4
100
3
2
50
1
0 0
0 0.5 1 1.5 0 0.5 1 1.5
Figure 4.5: Linearity measurements for System A
Linearity with Settings 1, 2 and 3 Linearity with Setting 3 and without amp.
7 200 8
Setting 1 Without Amplifier
Setting 2 180 Setting 4 7
6 Setting 3
160
6

5
140
5
120
4
100 4
3
80
3
2 60
2
40
1 1
20
0 0 0
0 0.5 1 1.5 0 0.5 1 1.5
Figure 4.6: Linearity measurements for System B with Zelisko GWR3
age was not large enough to be registered. In this case, however, such behaviour
is not limited only to the low ranges of primary currents. Also, there was no
large difference in linearity of measurements when secondary current was used
instead of voltage. Measurements without an amplifier and secondary current
were attempted, but they were very low and unstable and thus not shown here.
Measurements for System B with ILDD 096 are shown in Figure 4.7. They
are done in a same way as those with Zelisko GWR3. Again, non-linearity
discussed in Chapter 3 is noticeable in the low ranges of primary current. Reso-
lution issues are, also, present without an amplifier. It should be mentioned that
non-linear behaviour in range of primary currents lower than 0.5 A is captured
well with voltage inputs. In case of Setting 4, where current is used as a sec-
ondary signal, resolution of those measurements is low. However, it is improved
at values larger than 0.5 A.
In the end, quantization of linearity was attempted for different systems and
Linearity with Settings 1,2 and 3 Linearity with Setting 3 and without amp.
6 8
Setting 1 140 Without Amplifier
Setting 2 Setting 4
7
5 Setting 3
120
6

4 100
5
80
3 4
60
3
2
40 2
1
20 1
0 0 0
0 0.5 1 1.5 0 0.5 1 1.5
Figure 4.7: Linearity measurements for System B with ILDD 096
settings. Data from measurements with range from 0 A to 1.5 A of primary

current was taken into account. Maltab tool for polynomial fitting was used
to approximate data with first degree polynomial (linear). Then coefficient of
determination, R2 , was calculated as follows.
If we denote actual data points with yi and fitted data points as fi , we can
write that residual sum of squares is equal to
n
X
SSresid = (yi − fi )2 (4.1)
i=1
Total sum of squares can be calculated by multiplying total number of points

minus 1, n - 1, with variance of measured data.
SStotal = (n − 1) · Var(y) (4.2)
Finally, coefficient of determination is calculated as

SSresid
R2 = 1 − (4.3)
SStotal
Coefficient R2 tells us how much variance in data (in percentage) linear ap-
proximation predicts in measured data. Therefore, it can be used to compare
linearity of different systems and amplifier settings. Results are shown in Table
4.3. Column ”Set 0” corresponds to measurements without an amplifier.
What can be concluded with certainty is that System B with ILDD 096 is
less linear than both System A and System B with Zelisko GWR3. Also, we can
Table 4.3: Coefficient of determination for systems with different settings
System Set 0 Set 1 Set 2 Set 3 Set 4

A 0.9993 1.0000 1.0000 X X
B with GWR3 0.9944 0.9997 0.9996 0.9994 0.9989
B with ILDD 096 0.9522 0.9562 0.9671 0.9467 0.9359
see that current measurements are less linear than voltage measurements with
ILDD. There are very small deviations of coefficient of determination in System
A and System B with Zelisko GWR3 with all amplifier settings. Furthermore,
calculated value of R2 is very close to 1, which suggest that measurements are
very linear.
4.4 Ramping Tests

Ramping tests were performed as follows. CMC 256-6 had been automatically
increasing primary current in settable time steps. In each step primary current
was increased for 20 mA. Primary current was then measured by each of the
systems described in the beginning of this chapter. When the over-voltage events
occurred in the REG670, binary output has been closed on the BOM. Logic is
shown in Figure A.5.
Since, binary outputs of REG670 were connected to binary inputs of CMC
256-6, primary current at the time of the tripping could be registered by CMC
256-6. It should be mentioned that trip levels were set according to measure-
ments obtained in previous section. They were set to correspond to 1 A of
primary current. However, due to imperfections of protection system, devia-
tions from desired trip current occurred.
Results of the ramping tests are shown in Figure 4.8. Left side of the figure
corresponds to results with time step equal to ∆t = 200ms and the right side of
the figure to ∆t = 3s. Since first time step is 5 times shorter than filter length
and second time step is 3 times longer than filter length, results shown on the
right side are closer to the desired trip value.
Also, ILDD 096 had highest deviations from desired trip value. Rogowski
coil, in both cases of time steps and all three settings, had lowest deviation.
Zelisko GWR3 was not as good as Rogowski coil with shorter time steps. How-
ever, with increased time steps, deviation from the desired current level was
almost as low as in the case of Rogowski coil.
Perhaps, this test best describes the effect of different amplifier settings. Of
Ramping time step, ∆ t = 200 ms Ramping time step, ∆ t = 3 s

1.4 1.4
ILDD 096 ILDD 096
Zelisko GWR3 Zelisko GWR3
1.2 Rogowski coil 1.2 Rogowski coil
1 1
Primary trip current (A)
0.8 0.8
0.6 0.6
0.4 0.4
0.2 0.2
0 0
0 1 2 3 4 0 1 2 3 4
Setting number Setting number
Figure 4.8: Ramping test results

course, as amplification of voltage signal is increased (settings 0 to 2), deviations

tend to be smaller. Also, systems with settings 3 and 4 with current inputs show
somewhat larger deviations than voltage input with the highest amplifier gain.
Therefore, it can be concluded that it is better to use secondary voltage than
secondary current signals with amplifier. Furthermore, usage of amplifier might
be questioned. As it is shown here, when amplifier is not used, deviation from
desired trip value is, in the worst case, 12 % with Zelisko GWR3 and with
Rogowski coil it is 10 %. Author’s opinion is that, if the trip current levels will
not be further reduced from 1 A, amplifier is not necessary as part of systems.
4.5 Filtering Tests

As discussed in Chapter 2, shaft currents will contain harmonics. However, it
was shown in Appendix A that SMAIHPAC filter will be used to extract only
certain harmonic from the signal. Therefore, filtering tests were conducted in
order to investigate the ability of the protection system to isolate only certain
harmonics.
Primary current was injected with high content of other harmonics than
the one which was being measured. Measured magnitude of selected frequency
component was recorded for comparison with different devices and settings.
Harmonic content of primary current which was being injected can be found in
Table 4.4.
Example of the waveform that is generated with this harmonic content is
shown in Figure 4.9.
Table 4.5 shows results of filtering tests for measurements of first order har-
monics in primary current at trip and alarm levels. More measurements were
Table 4.4: Harmonic content of primary current
Frequency Magnitude (mA) Phase (deg.)

50 Hz 250-1500 0
100 Hz 750 90
150 Hz 250-1500 20
200 Hz 850 100
250 Hz 950 25
Waveform of a primary current

6
4
Primary Current (A)
−2
−4
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Time (ms)
Figure 4.9: Example of injected primary current during filtering tests

Table 4.5: Filtering Test Results
Device Set 0 Set 1 Set 2 Set 3 Set 4 Iprim

Rogowski coil 965 mA 1000 mA 970 mA X X
Zelisko GWR3 960 mA 914 mA 959 mA 980 mA 960 mA 1A
ILDD 096 925 mA 972 mA 950 mA 1081 mA 1100 mA
Rogowski coil 500 mA 500 mA 500 mA X X
Zelisko GWR3 490 mA 458 mA 502 mA 505 mA 533 mA 0.5 A
ILDD 096 620 mA 606 mA 563 mA 684 mA 725 mA
made but the ones shown here represent findings from all of them. Cells marked
yellow are those with measurements that have error greater than 50 mA and
cells marked red are those with error greater than 100 mA.
Behaviour of systems, when it comes to filtering tests, is clear. At higher
magnitudes of primary currents, all systems gave measurements with errors
within reasonable limits except System B with ILDD and amplifier setting 4.
When primary current is decreased to 0.5 A, results are still within limits for
System A and System B with Zelisko GWR3. However, measurements at 0.5
A of System B with ILDD 096 have high errors. Errors go up to 45 % of
actual primary current. Poor performance of ILDD 096 can be associated with
non-linearities shown in 3.6 and distortions of waveforms shown in 3.20.
4.6 Excessive Currents

During the testing and measurements it was noticed that, when there is a ex-
cessive primary current flowing, voltage on the input of the amplifier is higher
than the maximum level. Investigation of behaviour of the amplifier and relay
in such case was done.
To avoid injecting excessive currents, voltage was imposed on the input of the
amplifier. Figure 4.10 shows disturbance recording from the relay in case when
input voltage was 30 V. This input voltage corresponds to 150 A of primary
current which is 5 times higher than the rating of Rogowski coil.
What can be seen from the figure is that, in case when there is a voltage
15 Voltage Waveform
Filtered RMS Voltage
10
5
Voltage (V)
−5
−10
−15
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Time (ms)
Figure 4.10: Recording in case of excessive current

higher than the maximum input value, amplifier limits the output voltage to
the maximum possible value. This results in, of course, limited filtered RMS
voltage level. However, this voltage is high enough for protection function to
recognize the fault. It should also be mentioned that such high currents, as they
are assumed here, are not expected in reality.
4.7 Application of Process Bus

In previous sections, protection system consisted of, in essence, measurement
device, relay and, possibly, amplifier. Measurement signal was connected di-
rectly or through an amplifier to the TRM module. ”Data”, in communication
sense, was sent raw through electrically conducting media to the TRM.
Since data was not digitalized, any interference in communication media
(including cable impedance) could directly reduce accuracy of measurements
and, possibly, cause maloperation of relay. Furthermore, measurement device
will be mounted around the generator shaft and the relay is usually placed in
control room. In hydro power plant presented in Chapter 5, distance between
those two devices is approximately 60 m. Measurement cables are adjacent to
other cables including generator power cables in length of 40 m as shown in
Figure 4.11. Therefore, there are plenty of possibilities where measurements as
low as those used in this project could be jeopardized.
To reduce possibility of interference, application of process bus is considered
and analysed in this section. At the time when measurements were made in the
laboratory, no Merging Unit was available. However, it will be used as a part
of the installation in the following chapter.
4.7.1 Overview
The topic of IEC61850 standard is substation automation based on modern nu-
merical relays exploiting benefits of communication networks within substation.
Communication network of a modern substation, according to IEC 61850, is split
into three levels. Those are process, bay and station levels shown in Figure 4.12.
Part 9-2 of above mentioned standard defines lower part of the communication
Figure 4.11: Cabling in Hallstahammar coming from the generator

system hierarchy within modern substation, process level. What is also defined
in Part 9-2 is process bus. Process bus is used for ”communication between
high voltage process and components interacting with it” [4]. Since process bus
will be analysed as a part of the solution to the problem this project deals with,
only Part 9-2 will be considered in the following discussion.
To begin with, essential device for existence of process bus will be discussed,
merging unit. It is used as an interface between conventional or non-conventional
CTs or VTs and IEDs, just as it is shown in Figure 4.12. Signals from mentioned
sensors are digitalized and synchronized and then sent across process bus to bay
level IEDs. In that sense, part of merging unit has similar role as TRM and
ADM of REG670 discussed in Appendix A. Difference now is that, instead of
data ”travelling” through backplane module of IED, it travels through Ethernet
link which is part of the process bus. Data sampling and protection functions
are now located in different devices. Sampled Values according to IEC61850 are
primary quantities and they are sent using multicast from the merging unit to
all IEDs [4].
Since merging units do not have to perform sampling at the same time as
all other merging units in substation, they have to be synchronized. Synchro-
nization will not be discussed here since it is not important for this particular
Introduction to process bus
application. There is only one voltage signal from measurement device that is
used for protection purposes. Therefore, phase shift of this signal, with respect
What is process bus?
to some other signal, is not important.
Station level IEC 61850 describes all

communication in the
substation
IEC 61850
station bus
The station bus transmits
Bay level
information between the ba
level IEDs, and between th
station level and the bay le
The process bus connects
process to the bay level
IEC 61850
process bus
Process level MU MU MU MU MU MU
NCIT NCIT
Figure 4.12: Substation communication architecture according to IEC 61850

MU = merging unit
© ABB Group
October 8, 2012 | Slide 9 NCIT = non-conventional instrument transformer
4.7.2 Implementation
In this project, Rogowski coil can be considered to be non-conventional trans-
former. Therefore, merging unit could be used as an interface between Rogowski
coil and REG670 2.0. First, capability of REG670 2.0 will be investigated in
order to check if the same application can be used with Sampled Values as the
one described in Appendix A.
For this reason, system depicted in Figure 4.13 was assembled and config-
ured. It consists of OMICRON CMC256-6 test set, industrial Ethernet switch
and REG670 2.0. Both test set and relay are connected to the switch via optical
fibres.
Test set has option to behave as a MU. Sampled Values are generated by the
test set according to [1]. Since [1] refers to the subset of IEC61850-9-2, this kind
of Sampled Values is called 9-2 Light Edition (LE). Multicast SV are mapped
to the secondary voltage outputs of the test set and current output group A.
Therefore, all physically injected currents and voltages at the test set are also
scaled to the primary values according to the user settings and multicast across
process bus.
Figure 4.14 shows parameters for SV configuration of test set. First pa-
Figure 4.13: Network Configuration for SV testing
Figure 4.14: OMICRON CMC256-6 SV configuration

rameter, Sampled Value ID, specifies ID of the merging unit which sends the
sampled value. Since, as described earlier, SV are sent as multicast, multicast
MAC Address is specified in the second parameter. According to [1], Applica-
tion Identifier (APPID) always has to be set to 16384 (0x4000). IEC 61850 can
utilize virtual LAN (VLAN) according to IEEE 802.1q. This allows traffic seg-
regation and prioritization [28]. Therefore identifier of virtual LAN and priority
of data was entered as shown. According to IEC 61850-7-3, quality of data can
be specified. Different values of quality tag and their meaning can be found
in [12]. If the value is set to 0, validity of the data is assumed to be ”good”. In
the end, simulation flag can be used to indicate that SVs come from test device.
Upon applying configuration in 4.14 to test device, SV frames were captured
by Wireshark. One of the frames is shown in Figure 4.15.
It can be seen that frame structure corresponds to the one described by
[1]. Therefore, it is expected that such SV stream will be compatible with
REG670 2.0. 64 bytes under section seqData is actually data corresponding to
4 voltage and 4 current channels. At the time of capture, it can be seen that the
instantaneous value of current is equal to 1145 mA (0x0479). This information
is found in first four bytes of seqData.
Next, REG670 2.0 was reconfigured. Merging unit was added in Hardware
Configuration of the IED as an additional hardware card. Following this hard-
ware configuration, only Sampled Value ID was changed to be the same as the
one set at the test set. Now, merging unit channel can be used just like a TRM
channels.
This is shown in Figure 4.16. Rest of the application is configured as shown
in Appendix A. Only difference is that now, instead of using signals from the
TRM, one can use signals from the Merging Unit. Therefore, no additional
change is shown here.
Finally, Sampled Values streamed from the test set were display on the HMI
Figure 4.15: Sampled Value Frame

B
CURRENT INPUT
SMAI2_SHAFT_3P
SMAI2 SMAIHPAC
SHAFT_CURRENT BLOCK G2AI3P G3P AI3P SMAIHPAC2_SHAFT_I3P
REVROT G2AI1 SMAI2_SHAFT_IL1 BLOCK AI1 SMAIHPAC2_SHAFT_IL1
GRP2L1 G2AI2 AI2
GRP2L2 G2AI3 AI3
TRM_40.CH1(I) GRP2L3 G2AI4 AI4
GRP2N G2N O:3|T:8|I:2
Shaft Current Protection
O:1|T:8|I:14 Systems 43
C
SMAI4 MU_SHAFT_SMAI_3P SMAIHPAC

BLOCK G4AI3P G3P AI3P MU_SHAFT_3P
REVROT G4AI1 MU_SHAFT_SMAI BLOCK AI1 MU_SHAFT_HPAC
GRP4L1 G4AI2 AI2
GRP4L2 G4AI3 AI3
MU1_921.I1 GRP4L3 G4AI4 AI4
O:1|T:8|I:16
Figure 4.16: Application Configuration of merging unit input
of REG670. They corresponded to ones injected with the test set.

There was no time in this project to test the actual Merging Unit with
REG670 in the lab. However, it will be shown in Chapter 5 how the test set
was easily replaced with Merging Unit, SAM600, to which Rogowski coil was
connected.
E
4.8 Summary
Two systems with three different measurement devices were described in this
chapter.
1
Also, for all of those2
and for various amplifier 3
settings, linearity
4
mea- 5
surements, ramping and filtering Project
test
Thesis Project
were performed. What can be concluded
Responsible department
ABB Ltd.
Technical reference
is that both Systems ReplacingA and System B with Zelisko GWR3 showed satisfactory Created by
Rev. Modification
performance.
Rel. date
However,
Created by
System
Based on
Thesis BProject.Substation.Voltage
with ILDD 096 is not recommended to use
Level.Bay Approved by
for this purpose.

Furthermore, results in this chapter are given for different settings of an
amplifier. From those it can be concluded that it is better to use voltage in-
puts with highest amplifier gain. Also, question of benefit that is gained by
using amplifier is raised. Of course, with amplifier, results are closer to those
desired. However, amplifier also introduces complexity into the system and it
is another point of weakness. For this reason, Chapter 5 will further investigate
its necessity.
In the end, it was shown how Merging Unit and Process Bus could be used
as a part of shaft current protection solution.
CHAPTER 5
Hydro Power Plant Tests
After analysis of complete protection systems in Chapter 4 and proposed im-

plementation of process bus, final measurements and testing were done on the
installation in hydro power plant, Hallstahammar. Based on those tests, capa-
bility of systems to successfully protect against shaft overcurrent will be decided.
5.1 Existing Installation in Hallstahammar

First, some general data about Hallstahammar found in [2] will be given. Hall-
stahammar is a hydro powerplant built on the river Kolbäcksån. It was com-
missioned in September 1990. Maximum water flow is equal to 60 m3 /s giving
power output of 16 MW. There is one generating unit present in the power plant
whose technical data is shown in Table 5.1.
What is important for this project is existing shaft current protection system
in Hallstahammar. Existing CT is of type ILDD 052 which was produced before
problems with magnetic properties of core material were detected. For this
reason, better performance is expected than the one shown in previous chapters
with ILDD 096. Secondary and test windings of ILDD 052 are connected to
the old Combiflex shaft overcurrent relay RARIC. This relay is located in the
control room. Its construction and operation principle can be found in [20].
Existing installation of RARIC and ILDD allowed comparison of the old
shaft overcurrent solution with different protection systems which will be dis-
cussed later in this chapter.
5.2 Description of new installation

To be able to test different systems, installation was altered. Overview of alter-
ations that were made is shown in Figure 5.1. Following text describes them in
Table 5.1: Hallstahammar generator data
Type ABB GGS 2 700 U Rated Voltage 10,5 kV

Power Output 16 MW Speed 250 r/min
Power Factor 0,85 Rotor Diameter 3943 mm
Hydro Power Plant Tests 45
detail.
First, Rogowski coil (model LFR/015/1.5/1690) was put on top of existing ILDD
and strapped with cable strips which is shown in Figure 5.2. Also, additional
conductor shown on the right side of Figure 5.2 was placed between shaft and
ILDD and Rogowski coil. This conductor was used to inject primary currents
for ramping and linearity tests shown later.
In addition to cables connecting RARIC and secondary of ILDD, two other
cables were connected in parallel so that the performance of ILDD can be ob-
served. This can also be seen on Figure 5.2.
Intentional
A Shaft Gorunding
Bearing
Rotor
Coaxial cable
Rogowski coil
Injection wire
ILDD 052 Secondary of ILDD
RARIC
Turbine
Figure 5.1: Modification of existing installation
Figure 5.2: Mounting of Rogowski coil

Since injection current cannot accurately represent shaft current, shaft was
grounded intentionally while generator was in service. In between the shaft
and the grounding point there was an amperemeter installed. More detailed
description will be given in the following section.
The rest of measurement and protection equipment was placed on the outside
of the compartment where measurement devices were located. Overview of
this equipment is shown in Figure 5.3. Secondary of ILDD 052 was connected
to the amplifier, in parallel with RARIC. Output of the amplifier was then
connected to the voltage channel on the TRM. Similarly, output from integrator
box of Rogowski coil was connected to second amplifier. Output from the second
amplifier was also connected to the voltage channel on TMR of REG670. In
parallel, the same voltage from Rogowski coil was connected to the Merging
Unit which digitalized signal and sent it via optic fibers to Optical Ethernet
Module on REG670 (see Figure 5.3). It should be mentioned that for some
measurements, amplifiers shown here were bypassed and signal was connected
directly to the TRM.
What is not shown on Figure 5.3 is OMICRON test set. Its current outputs
were connected to injection wire shown in Figure 5.1. Also, its analog voltage
inputs were used to record different analog signals in this system.
Furthermore, changes were also made on the RARIC relay in the control
room. First of all, trip outputs from this relay were blocked so as to be able
to test performance of both existing and new installation without tripping the
unit. Moreover, to be able to compare performance of RARIC and REG670,
trip outputs were redirected to additional numerical relay. This relay was used
only for recording of secondary voltage from ILDD on RARIC inputs and trip
outputs. This way, one can use ILDD voltage as a reference signal when com-
paring recordings done by REG670 and additional numerical relay in the control
Secondary of ILDD
from Figure 7.1
Rogowski - Coaxial cable

from Figure 7.1
Merging
Unit
Figure 5.3: Protection and measurement equipment at Hallstahammar

room.
Lastly, for the reader be able to understand figures shown in following sec-
tions, Table 5.2 is shown. It summarizes trip and alarm values that were set for
REG670 with different devices.
Table 5.2: Trip and alarm level settings of REG670
System Trip Value Alarm Value

Rogowski (No Amp) 200 mV 100 mV
Rogowski (With Amp) 8V 4V
Rogowski (MU) 200 mV 100 mV
ILDD 096 (No Amp) 125 mV 62 mV
ILDD 096 (With Amp) 5,2 V 2,6 V
ILDD 096 + RARIC 164 mV X
5.3 Measurements and Test Results

Several different measurements and tests were made which will be discussed in
following sections. Due to time limitations, these were not as extensive as ones
done in the laboratory. However, they provided some hands-on experience of
possible permanent installation. Also, they provide enough data on which final
conclusions can be based.
5.3.1 Shaft Short-Circuit Measurements

First measurement was done by short-circuiting the shaft of the generator as it
was shown in Figure 5.1. When the top of the shaft is grounded, path is provided
for the current to flow. This can be represented by the simple electrical circuit.
Voltage generated by generator’s asymmetry drives the current through the
shaft which can be represented by a conductor.
When shaft was short-circuited, output voltage from Rogowski coil and sec-
ondary voltage of ILDD 052 were recorded. In addition to this, ampermeter
which was connected in series with the top of the shaft and grounding point
served as a rough comparison of measurements made by two devices mentioned
above.
Figure 5.4 shows captured recordings from Rogowski coil during the time
when primary current was flowing through the shaft. As it was described pre-
viously, Rogowski coil voltage has to be scaled according to its rated sensitivity
to get the waveform of the primary current. Result of scaling is what is shown
in Figure 5.4.
Figure 5.5 shows captured secondary voltage from ILDD 096, also while shaft
was short-circuited. In this case, however, waveform was not scaled. This is due
to the fact that relationship between primary current and secondary voltage is
dependant on frequency. Therefore, scaling by fixed number would not represent
actual waveform of the primary current, as it is the case with Rogowski coil.
FFT analysis of waveforms shown in Figure 5.4 and 5.5 was done. What can
be seen is that shaft current consists mainly of 150 Hz component. RMS value
of primary current measured by Rogowski coil was roughly the same as the one
Primary Current Waveform − Rogowski coil Amplitude Spectrum of Primary Current − Rogowski coil
4 1.6
3 1.4
2
1.2
Primary Current (A)
1
1
|I(f)| (A)
0
0.8
−1
0.6
−2
0.4
−3
−4 0.2
−5 0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 0 200 400 600 800
Time (ms) Frequency (Hz)
Figure 5.4: Shaft current measurement with Rogowski coil
Secondary voltage Waveform − ILDD Amplitude Spectrum of Secondary Voltage − ILDD 096
250
800
600
200
400
200 150
|V(f)| (mV)
−200 100
−400
50
−600
−800
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 0 200 400 600 800
Figure 5.5: Shaft current measurement with ILDD 096
measured with amperemeter which served as a confirmation that the shaft was
actually grounded. Information on number of stator segments was not available
which, unfortunately, results in inability to check the accuracy of the theory
presented in Chapter 2 and [3].
Figures also show that ratios between different frequency components of
shaft current in case of Rogowski coil and ILDD 096 are not the same. This
is, as it was mentioned before, due to the fact that secondary voltage of CTs
depends on frequency of primary current.
It was also observed how the relay reacts to the actual short-circuit cur-
rent. Unfortunately, behaviour of the part of the installation that incorporates
Merging Unit could not be observed. SMAIHPAC filter had temporary issues
which caused its inability to filter the SV data coming from the MU. For this
reason, this part of the installation could not have been used for testing with
shaft-current (150 Hz). However, its behaviour without the filter was observed
later when 50 Hz current was injected through injection wire.

Figure 5.6 shows retrieved disturbance record from the relay during 10s when
the top of the shaft was connected to the ground.
At the time instant marked by 0 s, grounding is applied. Immediately,
current started flowing through the shaft and it is picked up by both ILDD and
Rogowski coil. Trip of both protection functions which use ILDD and Rogowki
coil occurs 1.2 s later. This time delay is caused by the time length of the filter
which is discussed in Appendix A. Trip signal from RARIC relay is also shown.
It takes a bit longer time for RARIC to trip because it has time delay set to
1.8s.
Disturbance recording in Figure 5.6 is shown for the signals which are not
amplified before entering into relay. Nevertheless, same behaviour of the system
was seen with amplified signals. However, later in this chapter it will be shown
how amplified signals are more stable and not influenced by the noise on the
TRM.
To summarize, all protection functions, including RARIC relay, behaved as
expected and reacted to the shaft current.
Secondary Voltage Waveforms
500
V (mV)
−500 Rogowski
ILDD 052
0 2 4 6 8 10
Time (s)
Filtered Secondary Voltage
400
300
V (mV)
200
100 Rogowski
ILDD 052
0
0 2 4 6 8 10
Time (s)
ILDD 052 Trip Signal
1
0.5
0
0 2 4 6 8 10
Rogowski Trip Signal
1
0.5
0
0 2 4 6 8 10
RARIC Trip Signal
1
0.5
0
0 2 4 6 8 10
Figure 5.6: Disturbance recording from REG670

5.3.2 Linearity Measurements

Linearity measurements were made similarly as in Chapters 3 and 4. Injection
wire shown on the right side of Figure 5.2 was used to inject primary current
at 50 Hz frequency. Amplified and non-amplified signals from Rogowski coil
and ILDD 052 were measured by the relay. In addition, SV data was sent from
Merging Unit where non-amplified Rogowski coil signal was connected. All those
measurements are shown in Figure 5.7.
All of the systems exhibit linear behaviour. It appears as if measurements
around 1 A current are step-like while the rest of measurements are not. This
is due to the fact that more measurements were taken around 1 A than along
other parts of the measurement range.
In general, it was noticed that measurements at the power plant were more
unstable than those made in the lab. This is most likely due to the stray flux
from the generator. More discussion on this topic will be given in last section
of this chapter.
5.3.3 Ramping Results

Ramping tests were also performed in a similar way as it was done in Chapter
4. This time, for each part of the system, four attempts were made. Also, due
to time constraints, testing was made only for time step equal to ∆t = 200 ms.
Figure 5.8 shows results of ramping test. What can be seen is that the
primary trip current was within 20% of the set trip value. It is assumed that
similar reduction of deviation of trip current as in Figure 4.8 would have been
noticed if the time step would have been longer than the length of the filter.
Because of this and because there is no significant change between four different
attempts, it can be concluded that results of the ramping test are satisfactory.
Results for the case when Rogowski coil is connected to Merging Unit are
not shown in Figure 5.8. All trip currents, in that case, were equal to exactly
1 A. As it was mentioned before, SMAIHPAC filter for the data from MU was
disabled during testing. Therefore, protection function was receiving output
Systems without an amplifier Systems with an amplifier

250 10
Rogowski No Amp Rogowski With Amp
MU + Rogowski 9 ILDD 052 With Amp
ILDD 052 No Amp
200 8
150 6
100 4
50 2
0 0
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2
Primary Current (A) Primary Current (mA)
Figure 5.7: Linearity measurement at Hallstahammar

Ramping results − Rogowski, ∆ t = 200 ms Ramping results − ILDD 052, ∆ t = 200 ms

1.4 1.4
With MU No Amp
No Amp With Amp
1.2 With Amp 1.2
1 1

0.8 0.8
0.6 0.6
0.4 0.4
0.2 0.2
0 0
1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
Attempt number Attempt number
Figure 5.8: Results of ramping test made at Hallstahammar
from SMAI preprocessing block whose filter length is much shorter than the one
from SMAIHPAC filter. For this reason, protection function is much faster. It
is, however, expected that primary trip currents would have been higher in case
where SMAIHPAC would have been used (with ∆t = 200 ms). Nevertheless,
advantage of using merging unit over other set-ups will be shown in the following
section.
5.3.4 Noise levels and Waveform Recordings

When measurements in previous chapters were made, it was noticed that some
of them were more or less stable than the others.
For this reason, attempt was made to measure secondary waveforms in order
to compare those with observation made on the HMI. 1 A of 50 Hz primary
current was injected through injection wire. Same was done for different settings
of the set-up. Retrieved disturbance recordings are shown in Figure 5.9. It can
be seen that, as the signal is lower, influence of noise to signal-to-noise ratio is
higher. For this reason, distortion of the signal is higher for systems without an
amplifier than for the systems with an amplifier. Also, since secondary voltage
of ILDD 052 is lower than those of Rogowski coil, distortion is higher in that
case.
However, it is clear from observations on HMI and Figure 5.9 that the com-
bination of Merging Unit and Rogowski coil provides the best results. Even at
low voltage values, waveform is accurately reproduced without distortion. Also,
measurements from Merging Unit were much more stable than others. TRM of
a REG670 has, unlike Merging Unit, input transformers. Those transformers
need to be magnetized by part of the signal. When this signal is very low, like it
is here, measurements become unstable and less accurate due to magnetization.
One of the biggest concerns that was detected with measurement devices in
Chapter 3 was influence of stray flux from the generator. Here, this influence,
along with inherited noise of devices is refereed to as noise. To check how this
influences devices, noise was recorded on the output of both ILDD and Rogowski
coil.
Voltage waveform form Rogowski with an amplifier

Voltage waveform form MU + Rogowski
10
200
V (mV)
0 5
V (mV)
−200 0
0 20 40 60 80 100
Time (ms) −5
Voltage waveform form Rogowski without an amplifier
−10
200 0 20 40 60 80 100
V (mV)
Time (ms)
0
Voltage waveform form ILDD 096 with an amplifier
−200 10
0 20 40 60 80 100
Time (ms) 5
Voltage waveform form ILDD 096 without an amplifier
V (mV)
200 0
V (mV)
0
−5
−200
0 20 40 60 80 100 −10
0 20 40 60 80 100
Time (ms)
Time (ms)
Figure 5.9: Relay recoding of secondary voltage waveforms
Figure 5.10 shows those recordings. Frequency analysis of voltage waveforms

showed that both devices measure some stray flux from the generator at 50 Hz
and 150 Hz. However, it is evident that in case of Rogowski coil, influence of
stray flux is much smaller. Low frequency noise of Rogowski coil analysed in
Chapter 3 is also present.
Recordings shown above are captured when power output of the generator
was 5 MW. To check if there is any change in measurement of stray flux with
increase of power output, power output was increased to 12 MW. No change
was detected.
Noise waveforms Amplitude Spectrum of Primary Current

40 18
ILDD 052 ILDD 052
Rogowski coil Rogowski coil
30 16
14
20
12
10
|V(f)| (mV)
10
0
8
−10
6
−20
4
−30 2
−40 0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 0 50 100 150 200
Figure 5.10: Noise from Rogowski coil and ILDD 052

CHAPTER 6
Conclusions and Future Work
In this chapter conclusions based on the work presented in previous chapters will
be given. Also, this solution cannot be considered as a final product. Therefore,
following conclusions, future work that needs to be done will be stated.
6.1 Conclusions
To start with, assumption that Rogowski coil was suitable choice for measure-
ment device was investigated throughout this project.
In terms of its mechanical properties, Rogowski coil outweighed CTs used
in this project but, also, some other possible solution presented in Chapter 2.
Similarly, in terms of electromagnetic properties it was proven that it is more
suitable for this application. Its secondary voltage output after integrator is
higher than those of CTs. Also, lack of magnetic core results in flat frequency
responses and linearity on the whole measurement range considered. Low fre-
quency noise was detected with Rogowski coil. However, since it is very low and
it is not at the frequencies that are to be measured, it does not affect overall
performance. Some concerns were raised regarding its rejection ability when
external fields exist around T-connection. Those concerns were disputed by
measurements made at Hallstahammar. It was shown that stray flux in this
particular power plant was not high enough to cause errors in measurements.
Three different CTs were also investigated. They are mechanically much
less attractive than Rogowski coil. The weight of CT makes it hard to mount
it around the shaft in confined and dark space, as it was encountered in Hall-
stahammar. Also, they are made out of 2 or more parts. Those core parts of
the CTs have to be accurately connected and pressed together to reduce the
air gap as much as possible which. This might be, depending on the design,
more or less difficult (see Figures 3.2 and 3.3). Also, voltage outputs of those
transformers are lower than those of Rogowski coil. Since they do have magnetic
core, measurements are dependant on frequency of primary current.
Nevertheless, Zelisko GWR3 and older ILDD 052 were proven to be suitable
to use as a measurement device. ILDD 052 can be considered as a part of retrofit
installation with REG670. Also, Zelisko GWR3 could be used with old ABB’s
relay RARIC and REG670. This was not the case for ILDD 096 because of its
low voltage output and reduced magnetic performance.
Conclusions and Future Work 54
It was intended that REG670 should be used with measurement device to

perform shaft current protection function. Because of input current transform-
ers, measurements were not stable and precise in range of voltages below mini-
mum nominal value. For this reason, amplifier was used as a part of the systems
in Chapters 4 and 5. It was shown that measurements were more accurate when
they were amplified.
However, with currently set trip and alarm levels, even if measurements are
outside of nominal measurement range, systems without amplifiers could also
be used in conjunction with SMAIHPAC filter.
At the end of the project, there was a possibility to investigate how merg-
ing unit and process bus could be used in this particular case. Due to time
limitations, this solution was not tested and measured as extensively as others.
However, initial measurements in the lab and those obtained in the power plant,
give promising results. Lack of input transformers of merging unit resulted in
much more accurate and stable measurements at low levels, even without an am-
plifier. Also, possibility of EMI on cabling going to the control room is greatly
reduced due to usage of optic fibers.
6.2 Future Work

There are several steps that need to be done before finalizing this protection
function as a part of the product.
First, Rogowski coil was mounted on top of ILDD 052 in Hallstahammar.
This structure will, perhaps, not be available in other installation. Therefore,
new mounting solution designed for Rogowski coil needs to be proposed.
Set-ups were tested in only one, fairly small, powerplant. Therefore, conclu-
sions from this work cannot be generalized, with absolute certainty, to include
all powerplants. Same procedure presented here should be repeated during com-
missioning in other powerplant.
Furthermore, shaft short-circuiting provided valuable measurements of ac-
tual shaft current. It was shown that it manly consisted of 150 Hz component
even though some other frequency components also existed. With current ap-
plication function, filter allows to choose only one component. Not taking into
account other components, reduces accuracy of protection function but, on the
other hand, increases security against noise and stray flux.
To cater for reduction of accuracy, dedicated function block could be de-
veloped. This function block would, in case when there is no high influence
of stray flux, contain several filters connected in parallel. They would, then,
calculate multiple harmonics without reducing security. Those harmonics could
be summed up and used as an input to protection function block.
APPENDIX A
ABB REG670 - Generator Protection Relay
For the purpose of generator shaft protection, numerical relay REG670 Version
2.0 made by ABB was used [19]. Following text will be dedicated to its hardware
configuration, application configuration and ability to measure low level signals.
A.1 Hardware Configuration

Hardware configuration of the particular unit that was used will be described
here. Summary of all modules that this device is equipped with is shown in
Table A.1. Back of the IED with module slots is shown in Figure A.1. Those
modules will be explained in the following text.
Device was enclosed in a 1 /2 19” wide rack casing and it was 6U (6 rack
units) high. Inside of its casing, several slots for printed circuit boards (PCBs)
or modules can be found. They are powered by Power supply module (PSM). It
is used to supply voltage to circuits and to isolate them from the station battery.
This is performed using DC/DC converter. Input voltage rating of this module
is (24-60) V DC.
All PCBs in device’s casing can be connected to two different, again, PCBs
at the backplane of the IED. One of them, Combined Backplane Module (CBM),
carries all internal signals between modules except Transformer Input Module
(TRM) signals. To perform this task, dedicated Universal Backplane Module
Table A.1: REG670 2.0 Hardware Configuration
Card Space Card Type

p1 PSM - Power Supply Module
p3 BIM - Binary Input Module
p4 BOM - Binary Output Module
p30 NUM - Numerical Process Module
p31 ADM - Analog digital Conversion Module
p30:1 OEM - 2 port Optical Ethernet Module
p30:2 LDCM - Line Data Communication Module
p30:3 GTM - GPS time synchronization module
p40 TRM - Transformer Input Module (6I + 6U)
ABB REG670 - Generator Protection Relay 56
Figure A.1: Backside of REG670 2.0
(UBM) is assigned. TRM is connected to UBM along with Numerical process

module (NUM) and Analog Digital conversion Module (ADM).
TRM is used as a galvanic separation of external wiring and internal circuits.
It also transforms secondary currents and voltages generated by measurement
transformers. In this case, TRM had 12 input channels. Six of them were
voltage and six were current channels. Signals transformed by TRM are then
processed by ADM. In ADM, current signals are adjusted to electronic levels
by using two different shunts to obtain 20 bit dynamic range with 16 bit A/D
converter. Sampling frequency of both voltage and current signals is 5 kHz at
50Hz system and 6 kHz at 60Hz system. Converted signals are also filtered
with a cut off frequency of 500 Hz. They are then transmitted to NUM with a
frequency of 1 kHz at 50Hz system and 1.2 kHz at 60Hz system. More text will
be dedicated to filtering and sampling of signals later in this chapter. NUM is
in charge of all protection functions and logic.
To be able to read binary inputs and set the state of binary outputs, device
was equipped with Binary Input Module (BIM) and Binary Output Module
(BOM). BIM has 16 optically isolated input signals which can be used as a
logical signals to any of application functions. BOM, on the other hand, has 24
output relays which can be used for tripping or any other signalling purposes.
Few other modules were mounted on ADM. One of them was Optical Ethernet
module (OEM) with two ports which are later used as described in Chapter 5.
Its purpose is to connect IED to communication buses such as those ones which
utilize IEC 61850 communication standard. One more communication module
was mounted on ADM and that is Line Data Communication Module (LDCM).
It is used to communicate with other IEDs or optical to electrical converter
both equipped with LDCM modules. GPS time synchronization module (GTM)
could also be found on one of the ADM slots.
On the front of this IED, Local Human-Machine Interface (LHMI) could
be found. LHMI consists of display, various buttons and LED indicators and
Ethernet communication port.
A.2 Application Configuration

In this section, Application Configuration and function blocks which will be
used for shaft current protection purposes are described.
A.2.1 Analogue Inputs

To start with, Figure A.2, shows Application Configuration of analogue inputs.
As it is shown, voltage and current signals from TRM are connected to Signal
Matrix for Analogue Inputs (SMAI) preprocessing blocks. This function block
uses signals connected at its inputs to calculate different information about this
signals such as RMS value, harmonics, frequency, etc. This information (244
parameters in total) is then used by other function blocks connected to outputs
of SMAI.
In this case, output signals from SMAI function blocks are connected to
corresponding multi-purpose filtering function block, SMAIHPAC. Signals from
the SMAI function blocks come at the rate of 20 samples per period of system
frequency. Filter first saves samples from SMAI blocks in time frame settable by
user. After enough samples are saved in the filter, desired frequency component
of the signal is calculated. This includes its magnitude, phase angle and exact
frequency. By using this filter, one can isolate exact frequency component from
the shaft current signal that is needed to perform shaft current protection.
Parameters that need to be set for this filter are shown in Table A.2
First parameter that needs to be set is the connection type of the input
signal. Since we have only one input signal per filter or SMAI block, there is no
SECONDARY VOLTAGE INPUT
SMAI1_SHAFT_3P
SMAI1
SMAIHPAC
BLOCK SPFCOUT
SHAFT_VT DFTSPFC G1AI3P G3P AI3P SMAIHPAC_SHAFT_3P
REVROT G1AI1 SMAI1_SHAFT_UL1 BLOCK AI1 SMAIHPAC_SHAFT_UL1
GRP1L1 G1AI2 AI2
GRP1L2 G1AI3 AI3
TRM_40.CH11(U) GRP1L3 G1AI4 AI4
O:1|T:8|I:13
CURRENT INPUT
SMAI2_SHAFT_3P
SMAI2 SMAIHPAC
SHAFT_CURRENT BLOCK G2AI3P G3P AI3P SMAIHPAC2_SHAFT_I3P
REVROT G2AI1 SMAI2_SHAFT_IL1 BLOCK AI1 SMAIHPAC2_SHAFT_IL1
GRP2L1 G2AI2 AI2
GRP2L2 G2AI3 AI3
TRM_40.CH1(I) GRP2L3 G2AI4 AI4
O:1|T:8|I:14
Figure A.2: Analogue Inputs Application Configuration

Table A.2: SMAI HPAC Parameter Settings
Connection type Ph-N

SetFrequency 50/150 Hz
FreqBandWidth 0.0 Hz
FilterLength 1.0 s
OverLap 20 %
way of connecting inputs of the TRM other than Ph-N. Parameter SetFrequency
can be used to specify which frequency component one wants to extract from
the input signal.
FreqBandWidth can be used to set the bandwidth around the desired fre-
quency in which frequency components will be looked for. It is important to
mention that filter has its own natural bandwidth which depends on Filter-
Length.
FilterLength sets the time it will take for the filter to store all samples
needed for calculation. As the filter length is increased, natural bandwidth
is decreased. In the case of 1.0 s of filter length and 0 Hz of set frequency
bandwidth as it is here, total frequency bandwidth of the filter will consist only
of natural frequency bandwidth and that is ±3 Hz. If there are more than one
frequency components within the bandwidth, filter will choose the one with the
highest magnitude. However, if there is no clear highest magnitude, filter will
return zero for the magnitude and phase angle. Signal frequency will have value
equal to minus one in that case.
Parameter OverLap defines how often the calculations will be performed.
What will happen in the case of 20 % overlap is as follows. Frames of data
corresponding to filter length of 1.0 s will be filled with data. Last 20 % of the
previous data will be taken into the new frame. Therefore, two frames will be
overlapped. When the new frame is full, calculations will be done again and
this way number of times that the filter performs calculation per filter length is
increased.
A.2.2 Protection Functions

Based on the data from the SMAI function blocks and filtered data from SMAIH-
PAC filters, protection function will be performed. Application configuration is
There are two sets of General current and voltage protection functions, CV-
GAPC. One set will be used with signals from the filters and the other one with
the signals from the SMAI preprocessing block. This way, it will be possible to
see the difference in using those two types of signals.
For each of the two CVGAPC blocks, two overvoltage and two overcurrent
protections are enabled. They are of type IEC Definite Time with time delay
set to be zero. They come in pairs because one of them will be set to operate
at the lower voltage or current level corresponding to the alarm level and the
other one to higher voltage or current corresponding to the trip level.
ABB
1 REG670 - Generator
2 Protection
3 Relay 4 5 59 6
SHAFT CURRENT PROTECTION

A Test of OV and OC protection with Test of OV protection with voltage from Preproc
CVGAPC CVGAPC
SMAIHPAC2_SHAFT_I3P I3P TRIP SMAI2_SHAFT_3P I3P TRIP
SMAIHPAC_SHAFT_3P U3P TROC1 SHAFT_TOC1 SMAI1_SHAFT_3P U3P TROC1
BLOCK TROC2 SHAFT_TOC2 BLOCK TROC2
BLKOC1 TRUC1 BLKOC1 TRUC1
BLKOC1TR TRUC2 BLKOC1TR TRUC2
ENMLTOC1 TROV1 SHAFT_TOV1 ENMLTOC1 TROV1 SHAFT_SMAI1_OV1
BLKOC2 TROV2 SHAFT_TOV2 BLKOC2 TROV2 SHAFT_SMAI1_OV2
BLKOC2TR TRUV1 BLKOC2TR TRUV1
ENMLTOC2 TRUV2 ENMLTOC2 TRUV2
BLKUC1 START BLKUC1 START
BLKUC1TR STOC1 BLKUC1TR STOC1
BLKUC2 STOC2 BLKUC2 STOC2
BLKUC2TR STUC1 BLKUC2TR STUC1
BLKOV1 STUC2 BLKOV1 STUC2
BLKOV1TR STOV1 BLKOV1TR STOV1
BLKOV2 STOV2 BLKOV2 STOV2
B BLKOV2TR STUV1 BLKOV2TR STUV1
BLKUV1 STUV2 BLKUV1 STUV2
BLKUV1TR BLK2ND BLKUV1TR BLK2ND
BLKUV2 DIROC1 BLKUV2 DIROC1
BLKUV2TR DIROC2 BLKUV2TR DIROC2
UDIRLOW UDIRLOW
CURRENT CURRENT_RMS CURRENT CURRENT_RMS_SMAI
ICOSFI ICOSFI
VOLTAGE VOLT_RMS VOLTAGE VOLTAGE_RMS_SMAI
UIANGLE ANGLE UIANGLE ANGLE_SMAI
O:2094|T:8|I:1 O:2099|T:8|I:2
Figure A.3: Application Configuration of Protection Function

C
A.2.3 Disturbance Recorder

To be able to record and analyse waveforms of the shaft signals and trip out-
puts of protection functions, built-in disturbance recorder is used. Application
Configuration for disturbance recorder is shown in Figure A.4.
Three function blocks are shown. Two of them, A1RADR and A4RADR, are
D
used for analogue signal recordings of external signals from the TRM and SMAI
function blocks and internal analogue signals, respectively. As mentioned, dif-
ferent signals such as signal waveforms, RMS values, phase angles, frequencies,
etc. are connected to those function blocks and stored in the memory when
triggering occurs.
Disturbance recordings are triggered when there is a change to logical true
E value in binary signals on function block B1RBDR. All binary signals that one
wants to capture are connected to the inputs of this function block. In this case
Main Application: PROT_SHAFT, Page
it1 is alarm and trip2 signals from protection
3
function blocks.
4 5 6
Project Responsible department Technical reference Document kind
Thesis Project ABB Ltd. Graphical Application Configuration
Replacing Created by Title
A.2.4 LED and Thesis

Binary Output
Project.Substation.Voltage Logic
Level.Bay Approved by
REG670
Rev. Modification Rel. date Created by Based on
To be able to test protection function, application configuration shown in Figure

A.5 was created.
Trip signals from protection functions are connected to the Signal Matrix
for Binary Ouputs, SMBO. SMBO serves as an interface between binary signals
and actual binary outputs on the BOM. What is achieved in this way is that
Figure A.4: Configuration of Disturbance Recorder

1 2 3 4 5 6
Disturbance Recorder Triggering every 2 hours LED Logic

A
GRP1_LE
SRMEMORY TIMERSET
ROG_TOV2 HM1L01R
SR_NOUT SET OUT INPUT ON TIMER ROG_TOV1 HM1L01Y
TIMER RESET NOUT OFF HM1L01G
O:914|T:3|I:1 O:911|T:3|I:1 O:5600|T:3|I:
SR_NOUT
GRP1_LE
ILDD_OV2 HM1L02R
ABB REG670 - Generator Protection Relay 60 ILDD_OV1 HM1L02Y
HM1L02G
B O:5600|T:3|I:
Binary Outputs
BOM_4.BO1
SMBO
SHAFT_TOV1 BO1 BO1
SHAFT_TOC1 BO2 BO2
BO3 BO3
BO4 BO4 BOM_4.BO2
BO5 BO5
BO6 BO6 GRP1_LED1
BO7 BO7
BO8 BO8 DISTREC_FULL HM1L14R
BO9 BO9 HM1L14Y
BO10 BO10 HM1L14G
C O:6300|T:3|I:1 O:5600|T:3|I:1
Figure A.5: Binary Output Logic
for any trip from protection functions, corresponding contact on the BOM will
close. D
Furthermore, to be able to visually distinguish between different trip or

alarm events, binary signals are also connected to different LEDs as shown in
Figure A.6. Only first three LEDs on the relay HMI are used. When the trip
event occurs, red light on corresponding LED lights up and when alarm event
occurs, yellow light is on.
E
Main Application: LO
A.3 Graphical Display 1 2

Project
Thesis Project
3 4
Responsible department
ABB Ltd.
5
Technical reference
6
Document kind
Graphical Application
Replacing Created by Title
REG670-9-2
To ease the process of measurements, graphical
Rev. Modification display is used to show different
Thesis Project.Substation.Voltage Level.Bay
Rel. date Created by Based on
Approved by
variables. Variables that are shown are filtered and unfiltered voltage output
from measurement devices, frequency obtained from the filtered signal, primary
current calculated from filtered voltage, filtered secondary current from mea-
surement devices, and phase angles of current and voltage signals. Display is
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
GRP1_LED1 GRP1_LED2 GRP1_LED3

SHAFT_TOV1 HM1L01R SHAFT_TOC1 HM1L02R SHAFT_SMAI1_OV1 HM1L03R
SHAFT_TOV2 HM1L01Y SHAFT_TOC2 HM1L02Y SHAFT_SMAI1_OV2 HM1L03Y
HM1L01G HM1L02G HM1L03G A
on Signals
O:5600|T:3|I:1 O:5600|T:3|I:1 O:5600|T:3|I:1
FXDSIGN Figure A.6: LED Logic

OFF
ON SIGN_ON
INTZERO
INTONE
INTALONE
REALZERO
STRNULL
ZEROSMPL ZEROSMPL
GRP_OFF GRP_OFF
35|T:1|I:1
D
Figure A.7: Display on LHMI
Main Application: COMM, Page: 1

2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Project Responsible department Technical reference Document kind Doc. designation
Thesis Project ABB Ltd. Graphical Application Configuration AA0B0Q0A0
Replacing Created by Title Document id.
REG670
Thesis Project.Substation.Voltage Level.Bay Approved by Rev. Rel. date Lang.
Created by Based on 0 2015-02-16 en 1/1
A.4 Linearity and Accuracy for Low Level Sig-

nals
Most common application of REG670 includes measurement of voltages and
currents much higher than those measured in this project. Therefore, linearity
and accuracy was investigated for such low level signals. Secondary quantities
of measurement devices can be currents and voltages. Therefore, performance
of REG670 will be tested for both of the signals.
A.4.1 Manufacturer Technical Data

Technical data provided by manufacturer regarding TRM and its rated values
and limits is given in Table A.3. Technical data for protection function block
is shown in Table A.4. Further discussion about accuracy of measurements and
protection functions will be based on this data.
Since all of the output signals from measurement devices presented in Chap-
ter 3 will be at low levels, only lower levels of measurement range and its ac-
curacy will be discussed. According to Table A.3, lowest current that could
be accurately measured with TRM within nominal range is 200 mA. In case
of voltage, lowest measurable level within nominal range is 500 mV. However,
operating range for both voltage and current inputs starts from 0 A or 0 V.
Therefore, for such low levels ability to measure signals and accuracy needs to
be checked. This was done and results will be presented in the following section.
According to technical data for protection function CVGAPC shown in Table
A.4, accuracy of over current protection at levels less than 1 A is ±10 mA for
specified range of currents. Similarly, accuracy of over voltage protection on
levels less than 110 V is ± 5 mV for specified range of voltages.
Table A.3: Transformer Input Module - Technical Data
Quantity Rated Value Nominal Range

Current Ir = 1 or 5A
Operative Range (0 − 100) × Ir (0.2 − 40) × Ir )
Burden < 20mVA at Ir = 1A
AC Voltage Ur = 110 V
Operative Range (0 − 340) V (0.5 − 288) V
Burden < 20 mVA at 110 V
Frequency fr = 50/60 Hz ±5%
Table A.4: General Purpose Function (CVGAPC) - Technical Data
Function Range or Value Accuracy

Start Overcurrent (2 − 5000)% ofIbase ±1.0% of Ir for I ≤ Ir
Start Overvoltage (2.0 − 200.0)% ofUbase ±0.5% of Ur for U ≤ Ur
A.4.2 Test Results

Since technical data does not cover the range of values which are to be measured,
linearity and accuracy of IED measurements was tested.
REG670 settings of protection functions are based on the primary quantities
set by the user. It was not possible to set the VT ratio to 1:1 and, therefore,
primary side of the transformers are set to the value that would allow scaling
the values with the factor of 100. Settings are then scaled accordingly. CT and
VT ratios are shown in Table A.5.
Before performing tests, noise levels on voltage and current channels were
recorded. This was done by grounding both terminals of voltage channels and
open circuiting terminals of current channels. Intention is to use filtered signals
and therefore, when it comes to noise levels, RMS output from the filters will
be taken as relevant.
Results shown in Figure A.8 show that filtered voltage noise level does not
exceed 5 mV and filtered current noise level does not exceed 0.1 mA. This was
later taken into account when the measurements were made. Voltage measure-
ments were rounded on 5 or 10 mV and current measurements on multiples of
0.1 mA.
What can also be seen is the benefit of using SMAIHPAC filter. In case
of signal from the SMAI preprocessing block (filtered with 1-cycle DFT), RMS
value of the noise is much higher than in case of signal from SMAIHPAC filter.
Table A.5: Settings of TRM channels
Name Unit Step Description IED Value

CTsec1 A 1 Rated CT secondary current for CH1 1.0
CTprim1 A 1 Rated CT primary current for CH1 1.0
VTsec10 V 0.001 Rated VT secondary voltage for CH10 1.0
VTprim10 kV 0.05 Rated VT primary voltage for CH10 0.1
VTsec11 V 0.001 Rated VT secondary voltage for CH11 1.0
VTprim11 kV 0.05 Rated VT primary voltage for CH11 0.1
35 400
SMAI Output SMAI Output
SMAIHPAC Output SMAIHPAC Output
30 350
300
25
Noise Voltage (mV)
Noise Current ( µA)
250
20
200
15
150
10
100
5 50
0 0
0 2 4 6 8 10 0 2 4 6 8 10
Time (s) Time (s)
Figure A.8: Noise levels on TRM

Set-up for the linearity and accuracy measurements is shown in Figure A.9.
All signals were generated by high accuracy unit - OMICRON CMC 256-6.
Voltage and current outputs of CMC 256-6 were directly connected to current
and voltage inputs on the TRM of REG670. They were Channel 1 and Channel
11, respectively. Measurements were recorded from the graphical display on the
relay. They are shown in the Figure A.10.
On the left side of the figure, it can be seen that the measurements are linear.
Also, frequency of the signal does not affect measurements shown. Right side of
the figures shows deviations of the measurements from the actual values injected.
No measurement deviates more than 10 mV from the actual injected value at all
four frequencies tested. Attempt was made to measure linearity and accuracy
for the low current levels as well. However, measurements were not stable.
After examination of the waveform of the injected current, it was noticed that
the waveforms had glitches and irregularities. Therefore, measurements with
low level currents were not done.
What can be concluded is that the REG670 provides accurate and linear
measurements at the low level voltages. It is expected that it will perform well
with different measurement devices with secondary voltage outputs. However, it
was noticed that at voltages below lowest nominal voltage, measurements were
less accurate and stable. Even though it was not possible to test performance at
low level currents, attempt of using secondary currents of current transformers
as output signals is shown in Chapter 4.
OMICRON CMC 256‐6
Current Output
Voltage Output
Figure A.9: Testing of voltage and current inputs of REG670

Linearity of measurements Accuracy of measurements

5 15
4.5
10
4
3.5
Measured Voltage (V)
5
Voltage Error (mV)
2.5 0
2
−5
1.5
1 50 Hz 50 Hz
−10
60 Hz 60 Hz
0.5 150 Hz 150 Hz
180 Hz 180 Hz
0 −15
0 1 2 3 4 5 0 1 2 3 4 5
Input Voltage (V) Input Voltage (V)
Figure A.10: Linearity and Accuracy at low voltage levels

APPENDIX B
Laboratory Set-up
Physical arrangement which was built in the lab to test measurement devices
and systems A and B discussed in Chapters 3 and 4 is shown in Figures B.1
and B.2.
Figure B.1: Overview of physical arrangement of laboratory set-up - Part 1

Laboratory Set-up 66
Figure B.2: Overview of physical arrangement of laboratory set-up - Part 2

Bibliography
[1] Implementation Guidance for Digital Interface to Instrument Transformers

Using IEC 61850-9-2.
[2] Mälarenergi Vattenkraft AB. Hallstahammar kraftstation Tekniska
uppgifter, 2009.
[3] P.L. Alger and H.W Samson. Shaft currents in electric machines. American
Institute of Electrical Engineers, Journal of the, 42(12):1325–1334, Dec
1923.
[4] A. Apostolov. Iec 61850 9-2 process bus applications and benefits. In
Developments in Power System Protection (DPSP 2010). Managing the
Change, 10th IET International Conference on, pages 1–5, March 2010.
[5] W. Buchanan. Current in bearings of electric generators. Electrician (Lon-
don), 75:266–267, May 1915.
[6] M.J. Costello. Shaft voltages and rotating machinery. In Petroleum and
Chemical Industry Conference, 1991, Record of Conference Papers., Indus-
try Applications Society 38th Annual, pages 71–78, Sep 1991.
[7] G Crotti, Domenico Giordano, and Andrea Morando. Analysis of rogowski
coil behavior under non ideal measurement conditions.
[8] Schaeffler Group. Current insulated bearings. ”http://www.schaeffler.
com/remotemedien/media/_shared_media/08_media_library/01_
publications/schaeffler_2/tpi/downloads_8/tpi_206_de_en.pdf”.
Accessed: 2015-04-20.
[9] Sohre Turbomachinery Inc. Babbitt bearings, surface damage. http:
//www.sohreturbo.com/damage-examples/babbit-bearings.php. Ac-
cessed: 2015-04-15.
[10] P. Aloszko J. Krata. New technology of shaft current measurements in turbo
and hydro generators for protection purposes. Technical report, ABB CRC
Poland, 2013.
[11] L.A. Kojovic. Comparative performance characteristics of current trans-
formers and rogowski coils used for protective relaying purposes. In Power
Engineering Society General Meeting, 2007. IEEE, pages 1–6, June 2007.
[12] R. Kuffel, D. Ouellette, and P. Forsyth. Real time simulation and test-
ing using iec 61850. In Modern Electric Power Systems (MEPS), 2010
Proceedings of the International Symposium, pages 1–8, Sept 2010.
Bibliography 68
[13] P.J. Link. Minimizing electric bearing currents in adjustable speed drive
systems. In Pulp and Paper Industry Technical Conference, 1998. Confer-
ence Record of 1998 Annual, pages 181–195, June 1998.
[14] A. Muetze and H.W. Oh. Design aspects of conductive microfiber rings for
shaft-grounding purposes. Industry Applications, IEEE Transactions on,
44(6):1749–1757, Nov 2008.
[15] P.I. Nippes. Understanding shaft voltage and grounding currents of turbine
generators. Magnetic Products and Services, Inc.
[16] P.I. Nippes. Early warning of developing problems in rotating machinery

as provided by monitoring shaft voltages and grounding currents. Energy
Conversion, IEEE Transactions on, 19(2):340–345, June 2004.
[17] H.W. Oh and A.H. Willwerth. New motor design with conductive micro
fiber shaft grounding ring prevents bearing failure in pwe inverter driven
motors. In Electrical Insulation Conference and Electrical Manufacturing
Expo, 2007, pages 240–246, Oct 2007.
[18] R. Ong, J.H. Dymond, and R.D. Findlay. Comparison of techniques for
measurement of shaft currents in rotating machines. Energy Conversion,
IEEE Transactions on, 12(4):363–367, Dec 1997.
[19] ABB SA Products. Generator protection REG670 2.0 IEC - Technical

Manual.
[20] ABB SA Products. RARIC Shaft-current relay, User’s Guide, 2004.
[21] W.F. Ray and C.R. Hewson. High performance rogowski current transduc-
ers. In Industry Applications Conference, 2000. Conference Record of the
2000 IEEE, volume 5, pages 3083–3090 vol.5, 2000.
[22] K.J. Raymond Ong. An Investigation of Shaft Current in a Large Sleeve
Bearing Induction Machine. PhD thesis, School of Graduate Studies, Mc-
Master University, 1999.
[23] Aegis Bearing Protection Rings. Edm fluting. http://www.est-aegis.

com/bearing-protection-EDM-fluting.php. Accessed: 2015-04-15.
[24] M.H. Samimi, A. Mahari, M.A. Farahnakian, and H. Mohseni. The ro-
gowski coil principles and applications: A review. Sensors Journal, IEEE,
15(2):651–658, Feb 2015.
[25] R.F. Schiferl and M.J. Melfi. Bearing current remediation options. Industry
Applications Magazine, IEEE, 10(4):40–50, July 2004.
[26] V. Skendzic and B. Hughes. Using rogowski coils inside protective relays. In
Protective Relay Engineers, 2013 66th Annual Conference for, pages 1–10,
April 2013.
[27] SKF. Electrically insulated bearings from skf. ”http://www.skf.com/
binary/98-111303/Motor-Insocoat-hybrid-6160_EN.pdf”. Accessed:
2015-04-20.
Bibliography 69
[28] C. Wester, M. Adamiak, and J. Vico. Iec61850 protocol - practical ap-

plications in industrial facilities. In Industry Applications Society Annual
Meeting (IAS), 2011 IEEE, pages 1–7, Oct 2011.

Shaft Current Protection: Tin Rabuzin

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Shaft Current Protection: Tin Rabuzin

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Shaft Current Protection

Keywords: shaft current, Rogowski coil, generator protection, Merging Unit,

To my collegue students, Konstantinos Bourchas, Alexandra Kapidou, Arvind

List of Figures vii

List of Tables viii

2 Shaft Currents and Voltages in Generators 4

3 Analysis of Shaft Current Measurement Devices 12

4 Shaft Current Protection Systems 29

5 Hydro Power Plant Tests 44

6 Conclusions and Future Work 53

A ABB REG670 - Generator Protection Relay 55

1.1 Previous RARIC installations in turbo generators [20] . . . . . . 1

2.1 Flux causing shaft voltage in a 4-pole machine [3] . . . . . . . . 5

3.1 Rogowski coil with corresponding integrator box . . . . . . . . . 13

4.1 Amplifier Linearity Test . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30

4.7 Linearity measurements for System B with ILDD 096 . . . . . . 35

5.1 Modification of existing installation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45

A.1 Backside of REG670 2.0 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56

B.1 Overview of physical arrangement of laboratory set-up - Part 1 . 65

2.1 Advantages and disadvantages of Rogowski coil . . . . . . . . . . 10

3.1 Rogowski coil LFR 015/1.5 - Technical data . . . . . . . . . . . 13

4.1 KNICK VariTrans P27000 - Technical data . . . . . . . . . . . . 29

5.1 Hallstahammar generator data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44

A.1 REG670 2.0 Hardware Configuration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55

ADM Analog Digital Conversion Module

IED Intelligent Electronic Device

PCB Printed Circuit Boards

UBM Universal Backplane Module

Shaft current protection in hydro and turbo generators is an important gen-

Figure 1.1: Previous RARIC installations in turbo generators [20]

Figure 1.2: Previous RARIC installations in hydro generators [20]

overview of part of substation automation standard IEC61850-9-2. It investi-

2.1 Theory of Shaft Voltages and Currents

Figure 2.1: Flux causing shaft voltage in a 4-pole machine [3]

will exist with frequency equal to A × f .

2.2 Bearing Damage

2.2.3 Spark Tracks

2.3 Mitigation Methods

2.3.1 Bearing Insulation

2.3.2 Shaft Grounding

2.3.3 Shaft Current Measurement

Figure 2.3: Shaft current transformer ILDD [20]

satisfied requirements of protection system. However, those improvements did

Grounding Brush Measurements

troubleshooting, leading to orderly planning and/or execution

VI. SCM TECHNOLOGY CASE HISTORIES

Table 2.1: Advantages and disadvantages of Rogowski coil

Figure 2.5: Principle of Rogowski coil

3.1 Description and Technical Data

Figure 3.1: Rogowski coil with corresponding integrator box

of measurements can be up to 3% depending on the distance of conductor from

Table 3.1: Rogowski coil LFR 015/1.5 - Technical data

are not expected in this application.

3.1.2 Zelisko GWR3

Table 3.2: Zelisko GWR3 nameplate data

Name Zelisko GWR3 Primary Winding 1 turn

Figure 3.2: Zelisko GWR3 and its core joint

3.1.3 ILDD 096

Table 3.3: ILDD 096 nameplate data

Name ILDD 096 Primary winding 1 turn

Figure 3.3: ILDD 096 and its core joint

3.2 Magnetization Curve

3.3 Linearity Test