See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/4341566

Coordinated synchronism check settings for optimal use of critical

transmission network corridors

Conference Paper · August 2007

DOI: 10.1109/PCT.2007.4538311 · Source: IEEE Xplore

CITATIONS READS

7 294

3 authors, including:

Victor Popescu Walter. Sattinger

Fichtner GmbH & Co. KG Swissgrid
9 PUBLICATIONS   32 CITATIONS    28 PUBLICATIONS   175 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Reinforcement Transmission Interconnections of the South Caucasus Countries View project

CE power system dynamics monitoring View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Victor Popescu on 20 June 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.


Coordinated synchronism check settings for
optimal use of critical transmission network
corridors
Liliana Oprea, Member IEEE, Victor Popescu, Member IEEE and Walter Sattinger
Abstract — The paper presents an efficient methodology for
establishing synchrocheck relay settings for transmission lines of
high power transit corridors, optimized for maximum use of the
design capacity without jeopardizing equipment safety. It details
the criteria used for limiting the generation units shaft
mechanical surges to non-cumulative fatigue values and for
keeping the electromagnetic stresses of generators and switching
equipment within the withstand ratings. The main
recommendation is that synchrocheck relay settings of critical
lines shall be based on dynamic simulations of the switching
particulars in a large number of relevant system configurations.
Typical setting values as often applied in the practice may not be
on the safe side, especially for lines in the vicinity of major power
plants.
Index Terms—transmission lines, synchronization, dynamic
simulations, torsional stresses, power system security
I. INTRODUCTION
F ULFILLING the synchronism conditions when energizing
transmission lines can be, under certain load flow and
topology assumptions, a more restrictive criterion for the
maximum transit capacity than the conductor’s thermal
withstand. With reference to the investigated system, the
restoration of a high transit over a critical 400 kV corridor
after a major incident, has been prohibited by angle
differences beyond the limits set at the synchrocheck relay.
This fact delayed the restoration of the normal system state
and emphasized the necessity of systematic investigation of
location-specific synchrocheck settings, allowing for
maximum used of the transmission capacity without
jeopardizing the equipment or the system operation.
Energisation of a tie line between two already
synchronously operating networks with considerable voltage
magnitude and angle differences, as often the case in
transmission systems is (“coarse synchronizing”) causes in
general two types of stresses:
L. Oprea is with Fichtner GmbH&Co KG, Stuttgart, 70195 GERMANY
(phone: +49-711-8995423; fax: +49-711-8995459; e-mail: opreal@
fichtner.de).
V. Popescu is with Fichtner GmbH&Co KG, Stuttgart, 70195 GERMANY
(e-mail: popescuv@ fichtner.de).
W. Sattinger is with Swissgrid, Laufenburg, 5080 Switzerland (e-mail:
walter.sattinger@ swissgrid.ch).
1
-- mechanical torque surges, of concern especially for multi-
mass shafts of rotating machines and associated prime movers
-- electromagnetic forces due to peak currents, of concern
especially for the generator stator coils ends.
The mechanical torque surges are critical for rotating
machines with long shafts and low ratio between the inertia of
the generator and the prime mover (typically nuclear units).
Mechanical stresses on the ends of stator coils are
particularly critical for generators with large diameters, as
used for large hydro units.
Figure 1.1 shows graphically in the slip-angle plane a
general overview of the coarse synchronizing standard setting
limits; following areas are identified:
- unconstrained area
- area limited by torque surges at generating units shafts
- area limited by electromagnetic forces acting on
generators coils and switchgears
The “unconstrained area” can be in practice considerably
reduced at certain locations, usually in the vicinity of large
power plants feeding directly into the transmission system.
Except for some isolated cases, the study assumed that the
networks to be coupled are already synchronously running
(e.g. over a weaker parallel link) and therefore only the limits
for the voltage and angle difference are of interest.
s[%]
Stator
current
6 limit
4 Torque limit
2
10 20 30 δ [deg]
Unconstrained
area
Fig. 1.1 Permissible area for synchronizing
 2

The study encompassed following main activities: practical drawback of non-availability of intimate design data
- Transmission and generation system modeling, including (for older units not even from the original manufacturers) and
electrically near power plants of neighboring utilities the lack of records on the history of incidents which may have
- Computation of load flow cases under all realistic reduced the fatigue reserves.
network configurations, load scenarios and outages, with In some isolated cases of large thermal units, studies with
emphasis on the lines situated in critical power transit detailed distributed shaft models were available from the unit
corridors manufacturer, stating maximum recommendable angle
- Validation of the dynamic model by simulation of real differences to guarantee negligible shaft fatigue. These cases
incidents on 400 kV and 220 kV lines and comparison were simulated with the lumped mass shaft model and the
with the oscillographic records calculated active power surge retained as reference for all
- Dynamic simulation of the energisation sequence with
other investigations, along with the 50 % power surge
maximum angle difference for all 400 kV and 220 kV
benchmark.
lines, with monitoring of electrical and mechanical
Another limiting criterion is related to the electromagnetic
torques, peak currents, active power surges
- Evaluation of the results and recommendations for forces acting on sensible parts of the rotating machines, like
synchrocheck relay settings at all 400 kV and 220kV the end of the stator coils [5]. The stress is depending on both
terminals. DC and AC components of the switching current. The
manufacturer’s reference from this point of view is the sub-
II. SETTING CRITERIA transient (first cycle) three-phase short circuit current for a
fault at the generator terminals (Fk3 in Figure 2.1). Since the
For the evaluation of the torsional stresses due to a coarse
maximum electrical torque in a coarse synchronization
synchronization, the study used basically the recommendation
without frequency slip appears in the first half cycle, the
of the WG 11.01-CIGRE [1]. This is the result of long term
reference short circuit stress can be also used as a limiting
monitoring of many types of generation units and information
criterion for the permissible angle and voltage differences.
exchanges between turbine manufacturers and power plant
Considering that the voltage magnitude difference can be
operators around the world [2],[3],[4]. Accordingly, a detailed
influenced to a large extent by local voltage control, the two
study of the torsional stresses (by continuum models) and
types of dynamic stresses are approximately following the
their contribution to the cumulative shaft fatigue is required
squared ratio of the respective instantaneous current values:
only if the active power surge ∆P is exceeding 50 % of the
Fsynch /Fk3 = (i~synch /i~k3) 2
rated active power of the unit.
Targeting a maximum coarse synchronization stress of 85
By evaluating over a significant time frame records from
% of the 3-phase solid fault at the HV side of the unit
Torsional Stress Analyzer (TSA) installed at very large
transformer (iFO3) results roughly in a permissible isynch value
generating units, it was concluded that for active power surges
of 50% of i k3 , or 25 % of the reference stress for stator coil
not exceeding 50%, the expected cumulative shaft fatigue for
ends. Confirmed by discussions with generator manufacturers,
every incident is less than 0.1% of the manufacturer
this value can be considered as non-cumulative.
guaranteed fatigue capacity. The recommendation makes
distinction between “coarse” and “faulty synchronization” Network 1 Network
Netz 1 Netz 22
incidents (angle differences in excess of 90 deg), the latter Fsynch
accounting typically for 1% to 10 % of the shaft fatigue
capacity.
Because it is not practically possible to restrict the
switching to particular network locations, but monitoring of FOS
the active power surges on all generation units requires only a
reasonable computation effort, the above active power surge
criterion was checked for synchronizing at any 400 kV or 220
kV line terminal of the investigated system. By that full
flexibility with respect of location and the number of Fk
switching attempts is ensured.
If for any reason a coarse synchronizing leading to power
surge above 50 % is not avoidable (after exhausting load flow i“~k3 3-phase fault at generator terminal
control measures) cumulative fatigue contributions must be i“ ~ OS3 3-phase fault at HV side of the unit transformer
i~synch initial switching current for coarse synchronizing
monitored by a locally installed TSA, eventually in
combination with active power surge tripping devices. Fig.2.1 Criterion for limiting stator coil ends stresses
An important practical consequence is that the check of this
criterion requires only conventional transient simulations tools Criteria are additionally required for checking the adequacy
with lumped mass shaft models. It is noted marginally that the of the switchgear and switching equipment. In this context
use of detailed continuum models for the shafts has the two questions are of interest:
 3

- if the half-cycle switching current including offset is blocks angle applicable 0,5 I“k3
within the peak rated current of the switchgear H gen / H tot I gen3 pol KS
- if the switching current can affect any current-based > 0,5
protection function
The half-cycle switching current i12 with angle and voltage
difference can be roughly evaluated with reference to the III. METHODOLOGY AND MODEL VALIDATION
equivalent circuit in Figure 2.2.
A. Model development and validation

Line
Leitung The systematic work was carried out on a transmission
Remote area Near area system with 400 kV and 220 kV levels. It has to be
Fernbereich Nahbereich
X"s2 X 12 X"s1 emphasized that the simulations have been performed with a
comprehensive interconnected power system model, including
u 2 =(1-b)U sin(ω t+δ) u 1 =U sin ω t over 200 high voltage transmission lines and 60 generator
units.
U RMS Phase voltage For the validation of the dynamic model of the generation
X”s1 , X”s2 Short circuit impedance of the systems units, recorded system events have been used, in particular
X12 Reactance of the interconnection
δ Angle difference
short circuits at different busbars. One of the validation cases
b Voltage difference is shown in Figure 3.1-a,b, namely a phase to phase short
circuit on a 400 kV line. The difference between the
Fig.2.2 Evaluation of the half-cycle switching current at synchronizing with
angle and voltage difference
simulated and the recorded values for the phase short circuit
currents is 2.7 %.
 2U 2 δ  δ  U 2
i12 =  sin ⋅ cos ωt +  + b ⋅ sin (ωt + δ ) (1) 40

 ∑ X 2  2  ∑ X [kA]
30 37 kA
For small voltage differences, the symmetrical RMS value
is : 20

2U δ (2) 10
I 12 = sin
∑ X 2 0
It can be directly compared with the short-circuit withstand
-10
of the switchgear, taking into account a security margin k s in
order to get a rough approximation of the maximum allowable -20

switching angle: -30

2U δ U
sin ≤ " (3)
∑ X 2 X S1 ⋅ k s
-40
0,00 0,05 0,10 0,15 0,20 [s] 0,25
(f ile BRE_BEZ.cf g; x-var t) c:Strom c:Strom

For the short-circuit impedance of the investigated system Fig. 3.1-a Recorded short circuit phase currents on a 380 kV
and the switchgear ratings in common use, this condition has transmission line during a double-phase short circuit

DIgSILENT
60.00

been proven in practice as non-restrictive, so that it was not

evaluated systematically further. 40.00 36 kA
A summary of the applied criteria is shown in the table
below, which adds a further criterion required to identify 20.00

based on the ratio between the generator inertia and the total
inertia of the rotating masses the shaft-critical generator units. 0.00

TABLE I EQUIPMENT STRESS CRITERIA FOR COARSE SYNCHRONISING -20.00

Power Load flow Permissible Permissible Permiss.

prior to active stator coil
plant type synchro- power surge ends stress peak -40.00

nizing current

Thermal N-1 and

-60.00
0.000 0.038 0.076 0.114 0.152 [s] 0.190
Irchel Süd(1): Phasenstrom L2/Anschluss i in kA
Irchel Süd(1): Phasenstrom L3/Anschluss i in kA

plants, large maximum

SHC(1) Date: 4/24/2007
Annex: /2

blocks permissible 0,5 Prated 0,5 I“k3

angle I gen 3 pol KS Fig. 3.1-b Simulated short circuit phase currents on a 380 kV transmission line
H gen / H tot for the event as presented in Figure 3.1.a
< 0,5
Hydro units N-1 and B. Network analysis methodology
and small maximum
therma l permissible Criterion not The computational investigations included:
 4

-- steady state analysis, aiming at finding realistic angle

differences on heavily loaded transmission corridors under
normal and abnormal topology situations Initial load flow
-- dynamic simulations of all 400 kV and 220 kV transmission configuration with high
lines switching, aiming at finding the terminal-specific limits load transit
of the angle difference acceptable from the point of view of
the equipment and safety criteria detailed before.
Simulation of N-1
It is pointed out as peculiarity of the study that a unique
configurations
network model was used for all simulations, since the power (determination of maximum
system analysis tool allows for switching between RMS and ibl
voltage angle
phase domain simulations. difference) - rms domain
Initially, a load flow condition with high transit on the
studied transmission line before switching was considered.
Voltage angle
The topology assumed N-1 line availability, so that parallel Lower
difference higher or
paths were as a rule out of service during the simulation. If lower than existing
the voltage angle difference at the line terminal was lower settings?
than the existing synchrocheck relay setting, the simulation Additional load flow
Higher
was repeated for the next realistic outage scenario which led configuration with higher
to higher voltage angle differences. Phase domain simulation of load transit
The dynamic behavior was investigated over a time interval synchronisation with the
of 20 s, allowing amply for the monitoring of the damping of angle difference resulting Simulation of N-1
low frequency oscillations. from N-1 configuration configuration
For all power plants in the system, following variables have (determination of the
been observed during the phase-domain simulation: highest voltage angle
Thermal power plants difference) - rms domain
-- Phase value of the generator stator current
-- Active and reactive power at generator terminals Phase domain simulation of
-- Rotor angle synchronisation with the
-- Mechanical torque angle difference as result of
the new N-1 configuration
Hydro power plants
-- Phase value of the generator stator current
Fig. 3.2 Flow chart for the performed simulations
-- Active and reactive power at generator terminals
A voltage magnitude difference of 5% between the
synchronizing network parts has been assumed to account for
measurements errors and limits of the local voltage control
The flow chart for the performed simulations is presented in
Figure 3.2.
C. Simulation results
Some of the typical topologies in respect to the generator Fig. 3.3-a Network topology with weak and strong connection to the grid

connection to the grid are presented in Figure 3.3-a to 3.3-c.

Case a shows the connection of the power plant to the
transmission grid over a high (weak) and a low impedance
path. From the point of view of the synchronization, the
simulation assumed that the weak connection is in service and
a synchrocheck-enabled switching must be performed to Fig. 3.3-b Simple network connection over a single OHL
restore the strong link. The connection of a power plant
connected by one single line to the grid (Case b) was not
considered relevant since in this case the synchronization is
always fine tuned by an automatic synchronizing device at the
power plant. Finally, the connection of a power plant over a
double circuit line (Case c) assumed that one of the circuits is
out of service and synchrocheck-enabled switching must be
possible for all lines evolving from the plant busbar.
Figure 3.3-c Network connection over a double circuit OHL
 5

Typical simulation results are presented in Figure 3.4 for % of the rated unit power (accepted in the practice as the limit
evaluating the active power surge and Figure 3.5 for beyond which the shaft fatigue is cumulative).
evaluating the stator end coil stress. Figure 3.4 shows the A valuable asset for the application of the described
variation of the generator power output after the methodology is a power system analysis tool which can switch
synchronization of the HV side evacuation line with a phase between RMS and phase domain system models. This is
angle difference of 40 deg. Figure 3.5 shows the variation of essential for efficient check of the initial load flow cases,
the generator power output and the generator stator current identifying the high loaded lines under various contingencies
after the synchronization of the HV side evacuation line with a and unit commitments scenarios, and of course mandatory for
the simulation of the switching transients. It is mentioned
phase angle difference of 20 deg.
finally that the application of the defined stress-limiting
criteria is requiring only a lumped mass shaft model of the
generating units and can therefore make use of available data
Power surge 0.33 pu with all power plant operators.
A check of the possible nuisance protection trips during
coarse synchronizing revealed that the Switch On to Fault
feature available in all distance relays for EHV applications
might operate in case of a coarse synchronizing. Since the line
to be switched is already under voltage by the time of
switching, a proposal was discussed to disable this function
by a „live voltage“ input check. Another recommendable
check is an eventual operation of the emergency overcurrent
protections, as provided on some transmission lines.

REFERENCES
Fig. 3.4 – Typical generation power output after HV transformer side
synchronizing with phase angle difference [1] Lambrecht, D.R.: Problems of Torsional Stresses in the shaft lines of
Turbogenerators, CIGRE WG 11.01, Section 3, Recommendations,
Electra No. 143, August 1992
DIgSILENT

Stator current
20.00

[2] Lambrecht, D., Kulig, T.S., Berchtold, W., van Hoorn, J.; Fick, H.:
10.00
Evaluation of the torsional impact of accumulated failure combinations
on turbine shafts as a basis of design guidelines, CIGRE 1984, Paper 11-
0.00

06
[3] IEEE Working Group on Synchronous Machinery: Effects of switching
network disturbances on turbine – generator shaft systems, IEEE PAS,
-10.00

Vol. PAS-101, No.9, September 1982

[4] Dunlop, R.D., Horowitz, S.H., Joyce, J.S., Lambrecht, D.: Torsional
-20.00
-0.0888 1.1865 2.4618 3.7371 5.0124 [s] 6.2877
SM ChamosonV: Phase Current B in kA
SM ChamosonV: Phase Current B in kA
SM ChamosonV: Phase Current C in kA

1.20 oscillations and fatigue of steam turbine generator shafts caused by

Power output system disturbances and switching events, CIGRE 1980, paper 11-06.
1.00

[5] IEEE Screening guide for planned steady-state switching operations to

0.80
minimize harmful effects on steam turbine generators, IEEE PAS, Vol.
PAS-99, No.4, July 1980
0.60

0.40

0.20
-0.0888 1.1865 2.4618 3.7371 5.0124 [s] 6.2877
SM ChamosonV: Electrical Power in p.u.

SHC(1) Date: 4/24/2007

Annex: U-220 /2

Fig. 3.5 Typical simulation results for power plant connection type “a” (Fig.
3.3-a)

IV. CONCLUSIONS
It is recommendable to validate the settings for
synchrocheck relays on critical transmission lines based on
dynamic simulation of the switching transients, in a large
number of relevant system configurations. The standard
setting values used in the practice for the angle difference (20
to 30deg) may not be adequate for synchronizing of
transmission lines evolving or in the vicinity of a major
thermal power plant busbar. Restrictive settings for the angle
difference as low as 5deg may be required at such particular
locations, in order to keep the active power surges below 50

View publication stats