Boiler Effects on Steam Turbine Response

James W. Feltes, Johnny R. Willis Power Technologies, Inc. Schenectady, New York
Abstract This paper is concerned with the effects of the boiler and associated controls on the power response of steam turbines following sudden imbalances in load and generation. The paper reviews a commonly used turbinegovernor model for steam turbines, especially with regard to its assumptions regarding boiler response. Then a model structure for a boiler and controls is described, as well as the most common control philosophies such as boiler-follow, turbine-follow, coordinated control, and variable pressure. Finally, to illustrate the differences in response in boiler control strategies, as well as to compare their response with the more simplified model, simulations on an example system are presented and discussed. Introduction Simulation studies of frequency transients in a power system following sudden load/generation unbalance are used to help identify spinning reserve requirements, load shedding, and governor response requirements. Since the main interest is frequency dynamics, of particular importance to the accuracy of simulations are governor and prime mover modeling. This paper examines one facet of the response of steam turbines that is often overlooked in simulation studies: the effect of boiler pressure. Governor/Prime Mover Models A typical governor model for steam turbines has two main sections, the governor and steam control valve, whose output is effective control valve area in response to speed deviation of the machine, and a section modeling the turbine, whose input is steam flow and output is mechanical power applied to the generator rotor. (Such a model, based on IEEE recommendations [1], is PTIs PSS/E model IEEEG1.) Figure 1 shows this basic model. Speed Governor Control and Deviation Steam Valve Control Valve Area ( = Steam Flow) Steam Turbine Mechanical Power

FIGURE 1: Model Assuming Throttle Constant Pressure (Infinite Steam Source) This model assumes that steam flow and valve position are the same, that is, the steam pressure, often called throttle pressure, is assumed to be 1.0 per-unit under all conditions. This model also implies (1) that the boiler can maintain constant pressure to the control valve regardless of its steam output, and (2) that this pressure is at 100% of rated pressure regardless of whether the unit is at full load or partial load. In reality, of course, boilers are not true constant pressure devices and may not be operating at full pressure under all conditions. A more accurate model of the steam flow relationship with valve area and throttle pressure would look like Figure 2. In this model, steam flow to the turbine is the product of valve area and throttle pressure. Thus, if throttle pressure drops due to an increased demand in steam flow, the valve area must further increase to maintain the same flow as compared with the simplified model. Control Valve Position Steam Flow Mechanical Power Steam Turbine Steam Pressure at Control Valve (Throttle Pressure) FIGURE 2: Model Including Effect of Pressure Deviations (Finite Boiler)

Speed Deviation

Governor Control and Steam Valve

A model that incorporates this effect, and allows for modeling of the effects of boiler dynamics on throttle pressure, is the PSS/E TGOV5 model [2]. A block diagram of this model is shown in Figure 3. The governor model is similar to the IEEEG1 model. Proper selection of the time constants and gains allows the modeling of the reheater and intermediate and low-pressure turbine effects. It can be used for tandem and cross-compound units. The valve has rate (velocity) limits as well as position (area) limits. However, steam flow is proportional to the product of throttle pressure and valve area rather than just proportional to valve position as in the standard governor models. The variables of the governor that interface with the other portions of the model are Po (load reference of the governor), PT (throttle pressure) and ms (steam flow). The additional boiler controls will handle practically any mode of control including conventional (boiler-follow), turbine-follow, coordinated optimal, and variable pressure. The control mode is selected by the proper choice of constants.
+ + VMAX SPEEDHP
K(1 + sT2)

+ + K5

+ + K7

PMECHLP PM1

K1
. ms

K3 1
1 + sT5

+ +

UO

1 + sT 1

Po

1 T3 UC

1 s VMIN PELEC KMW 1 + sTMW

x PT

1
1 + sT4

1
1 + sT6

1
1 + sT7

K2

K4 + +

K6 + +

K8 + +

f B + C2 K13 PSP +
Desired MW

PMECHLP PM2

MW Demand

+ -

+ -

RMAX K14 RMIN KL

LMAX
1

PO

S LMIN

K12 +

PE (pressure error) Deadband PE PE

+ C3

. ms x

Po CMIN Controller KI(1 + sT I)(1 + sT R) s(1 + sTR1) CMIN PD Fuel Dynamics + + K11 Desired MW + PSP + x PT

PE

K9 -

C1 +

1 CBs +

+ K10

-sTD (1 + sT F) (1 + sT W)

. ms

. ms

Figure 3. PSS/E Model TGOV5, IEEE Type 1 Speed-Governing Model Modified To Include Boiler Controls
Boiler Control Modes There are four basic boiler/turbine control strategies [3]: 1. Conventional Control (Boiler-Follow). Most conventional drum-type steam units are operated in the boiler follow mode, where changes in generation are initiated by the turbine control valves responding to change in load reference or machine speed. The boiler controls respond with the necessary control action upon sensing the resulting changes in steam flow and deviations in pressure. In this mode the turbine can draw on the stored energy in the boiler and load changes within reasonable magnitudes can occur with fairly rapid response. The use of the TGOV5 model for conventional control, simplified to show only the active controls, is shown in Figure 4.

The load reference of the governor, Po is fixed based on the initial loading of the unit (it could be adjusted based on external signals such as modeling of AGC pulsing). Drum pressure, PD , is proportional to the integral of steam generation less steam flow out of the boiler, ms. Throttle pressure, PT , is equal to drum pressure less a pressure drop across superheaters and steam leads. This pressure drop varies as square of steam flow and also with density of steam. [4,5] Steam generation is controlled by the inputs to the boiler (fuel and air) which are driven by a three-mode controller. In conventional control, the fuel is controlled to correct the pressure error, the difference between throttle pressure and the pressure setpoint (rated pressure or 1.0 per unit). The three-mode controller includes controller limits and can be adjusted to model manual or two mode control. Time delay in the fuel system is modeled as it can be very significant, especially for coal-fired units. 2. Turbine-Follow. The turbine follow mode involves use of the turbine control valves to regulate boiler pressure. This method can be done with practically no time delay so that boiler pressure suffers virtually no transient deviations. Stored energy in the boiler is not used. Steam flow through the turbine and, therefore, turbine power follows closely the amount of steam generation, i.e., the input to the boiler. The response of turbine power is considerably slower than conventional control. Implementation of turbine follow control using the TGOV5 model is shown in Figure 5. Fuel is no longer controlled by pressure error but by a desired MW signal. A MW demand signal (fixed based on the initial loading of the unit unless adjusted based on external signals such as modeling of AGC pulsing) is modified by a frequency deviation bias, B, usually matching the units governor droop, 1/K, to form the desired MW signal. As well as being the input to the fuel controls this desired MW signal is summed with a pressure error signal and the power reference to form a MW error which is integrated to move the load reference Po, modeling the turbine speed changer. 3. Coordinated Optimal. The coordinated optimal mode recognizes the advantages and disadvantages of the conventional and turbine follow modes and the need for varying degrees of compromise between the desire for fast response to load changes and the desire for boiler safety and good quality of control of steam conditions. The implementation of this approach using the TGOV5 model structure is shown in Figure 6. The MW demand signal is modified by a frequency deviation bias matching the units governor droop characteristic to develop the desired MW. Comparison with the units actual output develops the MW error. The desired MW signal may be sent to the boiler controls. Turbine-speed changer position is directed to reduce a combination of MW error and pressure error to zero while the boiler controls are directed to reduce the pressure error to zero. Depending on the cross-coupling strength between pressure and MW loops, the load response can be adjusted to any degree between that of the conventional and turbine follow modes. 4. Variable Pressure. In the variable pressure (or often called sliding pressure) control mode, the pressure set point is proportional to MW demand. The pressure error between set point and actual throttle pressure drives steam generation through the fuel controls. The amount of coupling, if any, that occurs between the demand signal and the turbine control valve position is selected based on the plants control philosophy. One implementation of variable pressure control using the TGOV5 model structure is shown in Figure 7. Thus the TGOV5 model can simulate each of these control strategies by judicious setting of the model gains. Actual plant controls could be variants of the standard control philosophies or combinations of them. The documentation further describing the above model in reference 2 gives data for typical boiler control methods such a boiler-follow, turbine-follow, coordinated, and variable pressure for gas/oil and coal fired units. Availability of Data The data necessary to model the boiler and controls is rarely available. However, it is usually known under which control mode a unit operates, e.g., boiler-follow. It is often preferable, in such cases, to represent boiler response with typical data rather than ignore an important effect due to lack of data. Also, a number of key parameters, such as boiler storage time constant (CB) and pressure drop coefficient C1 can often be estimated from on-line measurements of unit response during system disturbances, or from staged tests.

Governor +

. m Valve x
s

PMECH Turbine

Po

PT

f B

PELEC

REF

MW Demand + C2 + Desired MW + x +

K14 RMIN

RMAX

LMAX 1 S LMIN PO

Governor

Po

Valve

x PT

. ms

PMECH Turbine

PE (pressure error) Deadband P

E

. ms PE

. ms x
P
E

PSP PT

Controller KI(1 + sT I)(1 + sT R) s(1 + sTR1) CMIN

CMIN

PE

PSP + -

x PT +
+ + PD

C1 +

Fuel Dynamics

CBs . ms

+ PD Fuel Dynamics + -sTD (1 + sTF) (1 + sT W ) 1 CBs + . ms

C1

-sTD

(1 + sTF) (1 + sTW)

K1
1

Desired MW

Figure 4. Conventional (Boiler Follow) Control using the TGOV5 Model

Figure 5. Turbine Follow Control Using the TGOV5 Model

Governor + Valve x

. ms Turbine

PMECH

Po PT

. ms + Po PT Valve x Turbine

PMECH

Governor

f KMW B

PELEC

1 + sTMW RMAX K14 RMIN x LMAX

MW Demand C2 + Desired MW + +

1 S LMIN PO

MW Demand

Desired MW C2 + + K12

+ -

K13
PE (pressure error) Deadband PE PE . ms

PE (pressure error) Deadband

PSP x

P
E

. ms PE

Po

CMIN Controller KI(1 + sTI)(1 + sTR) s(1 + sTR1) PE

PSP + PT

CMIN Controller KI(1 + sTI)(1 + sTR) s(1 + sTR1) PE

PSP + PT

CMIN + PD

+ 1 CBs C1

CMIN + PD

K9 1 CBs + C1

Fuel Dynamics -sTD . ms

Fuel Dynamics + -sTD + . ms

(1 + sTF) (1 + sTW)

(1 + sTF) (1 + sTW )

Figure 6.

Coordinated Optimal Control Using the TGOV5 Model

Figure 7. Variable Pressure Control Using the TGOV5 Model

Simulation Examples To illustrate these points, loss of generation using a small example case was simulated. A single unit in the system is tripped when carrying about 7% of the total system generation; all remaining units are assumed to be steam units. Of these units, one is at about half-load, while the others are near full load but still with some MW reserve to respond to frequency disturbances. Frequency dependence of network parameters is modeled. Frequency dependence of loads and underfrequency load shedding are not, to more clearly show the effects of the boiler controls. (Normally these would be modeled in actual studies). In the first simulation, all steam governor/turbines were modeled using the "standard" IEEEG1 model; thus all units are at 100% boiler pressure regardless of load, and throttle pressure will remain constant regardless of steam flow. In the second simulation, the TGOV5 model was used for all units to allow for variations in throttle pressure, and control constants were chosen to represent "boiler-follow" control. In this control method, the steam valve position changes to increase steam flow and turbine power to arrest machine speed deviations without concern for the effects of the increased steam flow on boiler pressure. It is up the boiler controls to adjust fuel input to maintain pressure, and thus the boiler "follows" the change in turbine power. Thus, in the second simulation, the control strategy for moving the valve is the same as in the first, but the difference is that boiler pressure will not be constant. In the third simulation, all units were modeled in a turbine-follow control mode as discussed above. In the fourth and final simulation, the partially loaded unit is modeled with TGOV5 using the "variable pressure" control constants; at partial load the pressure is assumed to be lower than at full load (70% versus 100%), thus the steam valve must be open much more to achieve the same steam flow; other units are modeled with boiler-follow controls. The frequency deviation at a system bus for the various simulations is shown in Figure 8.

60.2 60 59.8 Frequency (Hz) 59.6 59.4 59.2 59 58.8 58.6 58.4 58.2 0 30 60 90 120 150 180 210 240 270 300 Tim e (seconds)

Without Boiler Model

Boiler-follow Turbine-follow Variable pressure on one unit, others boiler follow

FIGURE 8: Effect of Boiler Modeling on Frequency for Example System with 7% Loss of Generation The minimum frequency and maximum frequency deviation for each simulation are given in the table below: Boiler Control Mode Without Boiler Model Boiler-follow Turbine-follow Variable pressure (one unit) Minimum Frequency 59.34 Hz 59.20 Hz 59.20 Hz 58.35 Hz Max. Frequency Deviation - 0.66 Hz - 0.80 Hz - 0.80 Hz - 1.65 Hz

Note that there is a difference in the lowest frequency reached with and without the boiler models. For the boiler-follow and turbine-follow controls, this is primarily due to throttle pressure drop due to the increase in steam flow as shown in Figure 9 below. This has an effect similar to a reduction in governor gain and is overcome only as the boiler controls respond to restore pressure. Also, note that the response of the system frequency is much slower when all units are under turbine-follow control when compared with boiler-follow. The second dip in frequency seen in Figure 8 when boiler effects are modeled is often seen in recordings of

actual disturbances resulting from significant generation/load imbalances, and is usually due to this pressure drop effect on the steam units.

1.05 1 Throttle Pressure (p.u.) 0.95 0.9 0.85 0.8 0.75 0.7 0.65 0 30 60 90 120 150 180 210 240 270 300 Tim e (seconds)

Without Boiler Model

Variable pressure

Boilerfollow

Turbinefollow

FIGURE 9: Comparison of Throttle Pressure for Part-Load Unit Under Different Boiler Models When the unit with the most reserve is on variable pressure control, the magnitude of the frequency drop increases from 0.80 Hz to 1.65 Hertz. Because the pressure is reduced for part-load operation, the units control valve has much less margin for opening and thus cannot contribute as effectively to spinning reserve as under boiler-follow. Figure 10 shows the movement of the control valve of this unit, and its mechanical power for both boiler-follow and variable pressure control. The Figure shows that under variable pressure control, the valve is limited in its travel since it is almost fully open, whereas under boiler-follow control it does not reach its limit. The boiler-follow controls, with high initial steam pressure, can use the storage energy in the boiler to arrest frequency decay while the variable pressure controls have no such capability. Thus the boiler-follow unit provides better spinning reserve response at the cost of the lower efficiency resulting from throttling the units control valve.

0.95 P.U. Valve or Mechanical Power

0.85

Valve Movement with Boiler-follow Mechanical Power with Boiler-follow

Valve Movement with Variable pressure

0.75

0.65

Mechanical Power with Variable Pressure

0.55 0 30 60 90 120 150 180 210 240 270 300 Tim e (seconds)

FIGURE 10: Comparison of Valve Movement and Mechanical Power for Part-Loaded Unit for Boiler-Follow and Variable Pressure Control One final simulation shows the effect of load limiting under boiler-follow control. Under load limiting, a units controls do not allow excessive movement of the units control valve under governor control. This is often necessary because rapid, large variations in valve position can lead to transients in the boiler which may make

operation difficult and could even lead to boiler trip. In this simulation, valve limits are set to be 10% above the initial operating point (subject to a ultimate limit of 0.9 p.u. on machine MVA base) to model this effect. Figure 11 compares the system frequency transient for the loss of generation under three control assumptions: using a standard IEEE governor model (boiler is not modeled and assumed to provide constant pressure at 100%), boiler-follow, and finally boiler-follow with load limiting. In this example, only the two units with the largest MW reserve were affected by load limiting as the other units were already near their maximum valve opening. The figure illustrates the importance of modeling load limiting at steam plants as its effect on a units response in providing MW reserve can be very significant.

60.2 60 Frequency (Hz) 59.8 59.6 59.4 59.2 59 58.8 0 30 60 90 120 150 180 210 240 270 300 Tim e (seconds)

Without Boiler Model

Boiler-follow

Boiler-follow with load limiting

FIGURE 11: Frequency Transient in Example System Showing the Effect of Load Limiting Under Boiler-Follow Control Conclusions This paper discusses the effects of the boiler and its associated controls on steam turbine power response. Simulations on an example system compare the response of common boiler control methods such as boilerfollow, turbine-follow, and variable pressure (or sliding pressure). Of special importance is the demonstration that the common assumption in steam turbine-governor models of a constant-pressure steam source, that is, ignoring boiler limitations, can lead to optimistic results in studies of load/generation imbalances.

Appendix I Parameters:
K T1 & T2 T3 Uo Uc VMAX VMIN T4 T5, T6, & T7 K1, K3, K5, & K7 K2, K4, K6, & K8 K9 K10 K11 K12 K13 K14 RMAX RMIN LMAX LMIN C1 C2 C3 B CB KI TI TR TR1 CMAX CMIN TD TF TW Psp TMW KL KMW DPe

The following is an explanation of the model constants: Description:

The inverse of the governor speed droop. The governor controller lag and lead time constants (sec). The valve servomotor time constant for the control valves (sec). The control valve open rate limit (per unit/sec). The control valve close rate limit (per unit/sec). The maximum valve area (per unit). The minimum valve area (per unit). The steam flow time constant (sec). The first and second reheater time constants, and the crossover time constant. They may be set to zero if all steps are not necessary: i.e., no second reheat stage. The fractions of the HP units mechanical power developed by the various turbine stages. The sum of these constants should be one for a non-cross-compound unit. Similar fractions of the LP units mechanical power. These fractions should be zero for a non-crosscompound unit. For a cross-compound unit, the sum of K1 through K8 should equal one. The adjustment to the pressure drop coefficient as a function of drum pressure. The gain of anticipation signal from main stream flow. The gain of anticipation signal from load demand. The gain for pressure error bias. The gain between MW demand and pressure set point. Inverse of load reference servomotor time constant (= 0.0 if load reference does not change). The load reference positive rate of change limit (per unit/sec). The load reference negative rate of change limit (per unit/sec). The maximum load reference. The minimum load reference. The pressure drop coefficient. The gain for the pressure error bias. The adjustment to the pressure set point. The frequency bias for load reference control. The boiler storage time constant (sec). The controller integral gain. The controller proportional lead time constant (sec). The controller rate lead time constant (sec). The inherent lag associated with lead TR(usually about TR/10) (sec). The maximum controller output. The minimum controller output. The time delay in the fuel supply system (sec). The fuel and air system time constant (sec). The water wall time constant (sec). The initial throttle pressure set point. The MW transducer time constant (sec). The feedback gain from the load reference (0.0 or 1.0). The gain of the MW transducer (0.0 or 1.0). The deadband in the pressure error signal for load reference control (per unit pressure).

References: 1. IEEE Committee Report Dynamic Models for Steam and Hydro Turbines in Power Systems, IEEE Transactions on Power Apparatus and Systems, Vol. PAS-92, pp. 1904-1915, 1973. PSS/E Program Application Guide, Power Technologies, Inc., Vol. II, pp. 22-12 - 22-18, 1998 "MW Response of Fossil-Fueled Steam Units," IEEE Working Group on Power Plant Response to Load Changes, F.P. de Mello (Chairman), Joint Power Generation Conference, IEEE Transactions on Power Apparatus and Systems, Vol. PAS-92, No. 2, March/April 1973, pp. 455-463. "Dynamic Models for Fossil Fueled Steam Units in Power System Studies", Working Group on Prime Mover and Energy Supply Models for System Dynamic Performance Studies, F.P. de Mello (Chairman), IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, Vol. 6, No. 2, May 1991, p. 753. F. P. de Mello, "Boiler Models for System Dynamic Performance Studies," IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, Vol. 6, No. 1, February 1991, pp. 66-74.

2. 3.

4.

5.