Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
This article is an assimilation of the interwoven factors & issues that contribute to the reliability of power systems in industrial plants...
Distribution Systems to power up various processes of an industrial plant whose appetite for power may be small or big time. The questions thus, are:
1) What is the industrial plants desired condition in so far as operational continuity is concerned? 2) How long can the industrial plant endure a forced shutdown?
The type of process and the behavior of manufacturing operations of the plant dictate the continuity of service requirements of the power system. Some plants can tolerate interruptions while others require the highest degree of continuity. Where adequacy & continuity of service is of prime importance, these plants deserve a much higher degree of sophistication in their own distribution systems than others.
As can be seen, reliability performance has got to do with the quality of services. In its everyday sense, quality of service means "consistency" and "repeatability". Reliability is when the service, whatever it is, is available or unavailable depending on one's perspective. A perfectly reliable system therefore is said to have a reliability of 1.0000, or a hundred percent reliable.
What about the factory? A factory or manufacturing plant supposedly belongs to fournines. The expressed term four-nines refer to the figure 99.99%. It's not just how frequent pieces of equipment in a power system burst into flames that solely counts. It's how much of the time the manufacturing plant is available for production. Availability already imbeds how often it breaks down and how fast it gets back into service. In addition, how long a system is out of service due to routine maintenance. If a reliability of two nines is acceptable to a manufacturing plant, this means that it could afford an average 87.6 hours of downtime annually (3 days, 15 hours and 40 minutes). To increase this reliability to four-nines, it means redundant systems where maintenance can be performed without necessarily shutting down production, while not loading the transformers, switchgears or cables heavily to their thresholds, and to make the system resistant to faults & failures and if it should fail, it should fail well. Failing Well is what experts refer to in systems that sturdy enough to resist faults. And faults here mean that there shall be no disturbance to other systems that are unfaulted. The system therefore should be designed to isolate faults selectively with least disturbance to other parts of the system and should have the features for maximum reliability consistent with plant requirements. Failing Well also means that no damage in catastrophic proportions must result out of these faults. In Europe it is referred to as fault control.
While it is true that reliability is fundamentally influenced by the sturdiness of equipment & apparatuses in the system, trouble-free operation and effective maintenance starts at the drawing board when the design of a system is conceptualized. The design of an electrical system is to provide continuous operation under all foreseeable circumstances, including utility outages and equipment breakdown. When considering the implications of reliability, all three pillars of system reliability: design, operations, and maintenance, must be inputted in the design concept. Experts in Reliability say, There is no maintenance program that can improve the reliability of a poorly designed system. Additionally, whatever maintenance program developed by a plant is
determined by the design of the system and the goals of the organization. One goal for reasonable levels of reliability given the nature of the technology is a good selection of equipment or system that provides a Mean Time Between Failure (MTBF) that is as long as possible. It is desirable to have a few relatively long but planned service interruptions rather than lots and lots of short ones that are unexpected. Maintenance also aims to provide a Mean Time To Resolution (MTTR) that is as short as possible, so that when a failure does occur service can get back quickly. Again, this is maintainability. Reliability practitioners further say, The telephone system is a good example of reliability improvement over time. When telephones first became widely available in the early twentieth century, their reliability was poor by today's standards, with outages, dropped calls, line noise and crosstalk quite common. As time passed, technology improved to the point where five nines of reliability are now common. It did, however, take nearly eighty years to reach that standard of reliability. For sure, reliability comes at a cost - and it doesnt come in cheap. For electric systems of any manufacturing plant for that matter; operational continuity frequently is synonymous to 'how fast the restoration of electric service' is. But swift restoration of service cannot be achieved when there are no alternate paths of power flow provided in the system.
Thus new reliability jargon has given rise to the novel terms as: N+1, N+2, N+3 or N+n which speak for the degree of redundancy. How then does the Power System of an industrial plant fare with the N + n principle? Note that in a system that has been operating for 20 years, the more honest-to-goodness maintenance is needed to sustain continuous operation. But decent maintenance (other than wiping, air-blowing or cleaning the externals of the equipment & apparatuses) cannot be done if there is no degree of redundancy in the system. Chances are, maintenance time would only be a few hours usually allocated during scheduled plant-wide annual shutdown. In this case, maintenance becomes superficial and hasty as production group would be scratching their backs when schedule to re-start operation has come. So then, maintenance cant be effective if the plant itself is not designed to be maintainable. The power system configuration must be maintenance-friendly such that maintaining major equipment does not mean shutting down the plant. If maintenance requires shutting down the plant, so then the plant is "not maintainable. If continuous round-the-clock operation of all or some identifiable parts of the process is required, then system configuration must have redundant feeders or separate supplies to these components to support maintenance at other portions of the system. The power system must also be flexible in events of failures of major equipment such that the plant can still operate partially in a considerable production capacity.
But then, redundant power supplies in some instances do not always improve reliability. If two redundant feeders supply power to an industrial facility but originate at the same utility substation and are carried on the same set of power poles, reliability will be lower than if they originate at separate substations and travel to the site on different sets of power poles. The problem with redundant feeders carried on the same set of poles is that a single-point failure (e.g., a weather-related event, pole fire, or traffic accident) could cause simultaneous outages on both sources.
Intermediate Substations that could have resulted to over-stresses and poor voltage regulations, b) Review on the Flexibility of the System with regards to power supply and feeders, its capacity or capability in supporting the loads in alternate paths,
2) To identify major deviations from normal industry practices, including but not limited to:
a) Voltage-Dip levels on each major feeder or intermediate substations during starting of large motors and under other operating conditions, b) Review on the Power Factor condition of each substation or feeder,
3) To identify whether the power system is resistant to faults & failures to include but not limited to the ability of a device or system to perform a required function under fault conditions and the ability of the system to "fail well". This includes the following:
a) Review & Confirmation of Actual Fault Duties against Interrupting or Momentary Ratings of the Existing Sets-Up, b) Engineering Calculations Leading to Coordination and/or Discrimination of Protective Devices within the entire system, c) Actual Re-setting, Testing & Simulations on these Protective relays whether they are performing as expected, d) Evaluate actual condition of the equipment & apparatuses within the system if they could still last longer than expected.
4) Recommend measures to close identified gaps & vulnerabilities, including application of technology and/or system modifications that will facilitate improvement in reliability, as follows:
a) Capacity Review on all electrical equipment whether additional capacities are necessary to maintain reliable service under various operating conditions.
Voltage Sag is a partial reduction in the magnitude of voltage that often persists for extended periods and is usually related to system loading conditions. Voltage Dip is a significant reduction in voltage for a relatively short duration, often caused by power system faults, or as frequently in events of large motor starts-up. Voltage Interruption is a complete loss of input voltage, lasting from seconds to a much longer time.
Inside the industrial plant, voltage dips may be caused by faults somewhere in the other parts of the distribution system and more frequently by large motor starts-up in already loaded transformers. Common in heavy industrial plants, voltage sags are caused by heavily loaded transformers with poor voltage regulation and relatively lengthy distribution lines. Utility system Voltage Dips are often caused by bad weather conditions (thunderstorm, etc), or utility equipment failures, or faults in some other areas of the utility system; and can last anywhere from a few cycles to seconds or more. Voltage Sags in utility systems on the other hand, are related to voltage drops along transmission lines and more prevalently by system loading conditions, as well. Voltage Interruption is the complete loss of voltage and usually require a source of energy to replace the utility supply. There are several mechanisms by which voltage sag or dip can interfere with industrial manufacturing processes, as follows:
Control Error Loss of control power results in the inability to control the process. Contactor Dropout Many industrial controls employ magnetically-latched contactors as motor control devices. A voltage dip or sag can cause a momentary collapse of the magnetic field which holds the contacts closed. When the contacts open, the motor stops. Voltage Flicker In the practical sense, flicker is the repetitive variation in intensity of lighting, and is more of a human irritation factor (threshold of perception, or threshold of human objection) than a direct cause of process disruption. However, it can also be used in a more literal sense to describe a set of problems in which lighting is extinguished due to voltage dips. Machine Dynamics Since voltage magnitude is essential to transmitting power, voltage dips and sags limit the ability of a power system to distribute power from sources to loads. This limitation in power transfer can lead to generators not being able to maintain stability. Stall & Re-Acceleration Motors will stall if the supply voltage is depressed for a prolonged period. Furthermore, motors must reaccelerate when normal voltage is restored. Reacceleration involves higher than normal motor currents which may result in further voltage sag problems.
and duration of the voltage dip, motor speed may recover to its normal value as the voltage amplitude recovers. If the voltage dip magnitude and/or duration exceed certain limits, the motor may stall and would be taken out of the system by the means provided for in its controls. Maximum voltage dip magnitude and/or duration, which the motor operation can survive, depend on the motor parameters and the torque-speed characteristic of the driven load. On the other hand, when a large motor is started-up in an already sagged voltage of an already loaded transformer source, the ensuing resultant voltage dip during motor starting may cause the motor to stall and could not complete the starting process. As discussed above, this scenario would also affect the running motors, as they too may stall - aggravating the problem in a domino effect. In this scenario, currents fly high and something somewhere has to trip to relieve the system from further disturbance.
SYSTEM BEHAVIOR DURING LARGE MOTOR START-UP STARTTransformer reactions to large motorstarting are manifested in voltage dips. In general terms, transformers in an electrical system are usually larger than the maximum demands they serve, in some instances even larger than the connected loads. In the industrial plant scenario, the obvious reason at first glance for this apparent oversizing is the anticipation for future load growth. Fine But more often than not, sizing the transformer with extra kVA capacity unwittingly addresses voltage dip problems, not for load growth for which it is intended originally. Thats why for newly constructed plants where load growth is not yet there, the problem of starting significantly large motors may not surface out. Why? Because the extra kVA capacity intended for load growth is taking care of it. Now, when the plant is already 25 years old and a series of expansions & load growths had been in place, the transformers may now be loaded near their full load ratings. Finethe transformer can still handle it. However, effects of voltage regulation (which is normal to transformers) this time would surface out. The voltage difference between loaded and unloaded output of a transformer is voltage regulation. Voltage Regulation in transformers is normal meaning, as the load increases there is a decrease in voltage output due to the corresponding voltage drop within the primary and secondary windings. Now if a 3.6 kV transformer (transformer terminal voltage of 3.6 kV by North American Norms) has a voltage regulation of 8% (which is usual); the voltage at the secondary terminals in a fully loaded transformer would then be 3.3 kV. If the same transformer is 80% loaded, the voltage at the secondary terminals of the transformer may have been in the vicinity of 3.37 kV. What happens then when a 2,300 kW or a 6,400 kW motor is started up? There would surely be voltage dip! By how much..? And how much voltage dip can cause problems?
short circuit. Like short circuits, the effect of starting large motors results to huge voltage dips but lower in magnitude than the full short circuit scenario. The voltage drop at the transformer secondary terminals is proportional to motor starting kVA over the short-circuit capacity of the transformer. When motor starting kVA is drawn from a system, the voltage drop in percent of the initial voltage is approximately equal to the Motor Starting kVA divided by the Sum of this kVA and the Short Circuit kVA (Motor Application & Maintenance Handbook by Robert W. Smeaton, 1969 Edition).
Thats why most motors are designed to be capable of operating at plus or minus 10% of nameplate voltage. Therefore, the voltage drop on inrush should not be allowed to drop more than
10% of the rated voltage. This means 208v for 230v or 414v for 460 volt motors. Likewise, 2.07 kV for 2.3 kV motors, or 3.6 kV for 4.0 kV motors. It means that a 4.0 kV motor can still operate satisfactorily at 3,600v but any disturbance in the system that brings the system voltage lower, the affected motors may trip off as provided for by its protection or if not, the motor burns. Hence, the wisdom of employing reduced voltage stating methods are common to large motors in order to reduce the voltage dips during starts-up. Foremost of these mitigating starting methods are: reduced voltage auto-transformer type, soft starters, and variable frequency controllers for squirrel cage induction motors and resistor starting (liquid or hard resistor) types for wound rotor induction motors.
ECONOMIC EVALUATION
While the stability of the incoming supply voltage is fundamentally a technical problem, at the end of the day, it is business sense that makes decisions in implementing a fix. Some solutions to voltage dip and sag problems require the use of exotic technology. Today, terms like: voltage dip-proofing or voltage dip & sag immunization are already a reality, but then again, they dont come in cheap and may be prohibitive! A major influencing factor concerning the financial loss is whether or not the factory production is continuous. As practiced by many industries, continuous production means that there is market to all products that a company can produce. In continuous production, the production lost during downtime cannot be recovered by working extra time, so loss of production translates directly into loss of profit that is, the loss is equal to the value of the product not produced as a result of the downtime. In a non-continuous process, lost production can be recovered by overtime working, although there may well be additional labor & utilities consumption costs. Whether or not a solution is seen as cost-effective thus depends on the economic criterion that is used to evaluate the solution. The actual economic justification in preventing production interruptions due to voltage disturbances must therefore consider the following elements:
1) 2) 3) 4) How vulnerable is the process to various types of voltage disturbances? What is the net cost of production outages due to these disturbances? How effective is a particular solution in avoiding these outages? How does the cost of the solution compare to the savings which can be realized?
As to the cost associated with voltage interruptions the following elements should be recognized and quantified: Cost of Lost Production In the simplest case, this is the incremental margin on products that cannot be sold because they are not manufactured. Cost of Damaged Product If the interruption damages a partially completed product, the cost of repairing that product must be recognized. In some cases, the product cannot be repaired, so the value of the raw materials (including the consumed energy and other manufacturing costs up to the point where the disruption occurred) must be accounted for together with the cost of the incremental value added to the product. In other environments, a major source of concern is lost computer data. Cost of Maintenance This is the cost of reacting to a voltage disruption. This includes everything involved in restoring production, including trouble-shooting and correcting the problem, cleanup and repair, disposing of damaged product, and environmental costs. In some industries (e.g., plastics, glass manufacturing, cement manufacturing, electronics, etc), an interruption may result in the need to invest many days and a significant amount of money in cleaning up the process system before it can be returned to service. Hidden Costs This factor may be the most difficult to quantify but it can easily be the
most significant. If the impact of the voltage dip or sag is control error, it is possible that the impact on product may not be apparent until the product is in the hands of the consumer. As business nightmare, product recall and the subsequent public relations costs can be significant or may even cause bankruptcies. It is usually best to identify the problems that are responsible for Plant Reliability, and apply solutions that most efficiently address those gaps. If the manufacturing plant does not design its system with reliabilty and quality in mind, SOMEONE ELSE WILL.
DISCLAIMER Information contained in this work has been obtained from sources believed to be reliable, i.e., on top of personal experiences of the author and the benchmarked practices so far available at hand. However, the author cannot guarantee the perfection, accuracy or completeness of any information written herein. Should there be perceived incompleteness or gray areas in the presentation of information in this work, it is advised that the reader will seek for reference books or materials to reinforce the vague portions of this work; or the assistance of an appropriate professional should be sought.