Full Text 014

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.
net/publication/305213054
Fast-response rotating brushless exciters for improved stability of

synchronous generators
Thesis · June 2016

DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.1.1982.6164
CITATIONS READS
3 2,600
1 author:
Jonas Kristiansen Nøland

Norwegian University of Science and Technology
36 PUBLICATIONS 113 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
Optimal Utilization of Smart Generators View project
Electrical effect in windings of large AC machines - application to double fed induction machines View project
All content following this page was uploaded by Jonas Kristiansen Nøland on 12 July 2016.
The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Fast-response rotating
brushless exciters for
improved stability of
JONAS KRISTIANSEN NØLAND
UURIE 347-16L
ISSN 0349-8352
Division of Electricity
Department of Engineering Sciences
Licentiate Thesis
Uppsala, 2016
Abstract
The Norwegian Network Code FIKS from the Norwegian Transmission System Operator
(TSO) Statnett, states that synchronous generators ≥ 25 MVA must have a static
excitation system. It also includes requirements on the step time response and the
available field winding ceiling voltage of the excitation system. An improved brushless
excitation system is in operation in some pilot power plants. A rotating thyristor bridge is
controlled via Bluetooth. The step time response is as fast as conventional static excitation
systems. However, a ceiling voltage factor of 2 requires the thyristor bridge to operate at
firing angles about 60 degrees. High torque pulsations, low power factor and low
utilization of the exciter is the end result. New power electronic interfaces on the shaft
results in a betterutilization of the designed exciter and improves the mechanical
performance as well as the controllability of the generator field winding. Permanent
magnet rotating exciters increase the field forcing strength of the synchronous generator,
yielding improved transient stability (Fault Ride-Through req.). Brushless exciters also
reduces regular maintenance of the generator. The thesis includes experiments on a state
of the art synchronous generator test setup including constructed PM exciter and different
power electronic solutions. Some investigations has been done on industrial power plants
as well.
Keywords: synchronous generators, permanent magnet machines, excitation systems,

power electronic interfaces
© Jonas Kristiansen Nøland 2016

To my
mother
List of papers
This thesis is based on the following papers, which are referred to in the text
by their Roman numerals.
I Nøland, J. K., Hjelmervik, K. B., Lundin, U., "Comparison of

Thyristor-Controlled Rectification Topologies for a Six-Phase Rotating
Brushless Permanent Magnet Exciter", IEEE Transactions on Energy
Conversion, vol. 31, no. 1., March 2016.
II Nøland, J. K., Lundin, U., "Step time response evaluation of different

synchronous generator excitation systems", 4th IEEE International
Energy Conference (ENERGYCON’2016) in Leuven, Belgium, in April
2016.
III Nøland, J. K., Evestedt, F., Perez-Loya, J. J., Abrahamsson, J.,

Lundin, U., "Design and characterization of a rotating brushless PM
exciter for a synchronous generator test setup", XXIIth International
Conference on Electrical Machines (ICEM’2016) in Lausanne,
Switzerland, in September 2016.
IV Nøland, J. K., Evestedt, F., Perez-Loya, J. J., Abrahamsson, J.,

Lundin, U., "Evaluation of different power electronic interfaces for
control of a rotating brushless PM exciter", 42nd Annual Conference of
the IEEE Industrial Electronics Society (IECON’2016) in Firenze,
Italy, in October 2016.
Reprints were made with permission from the publishers.

Contents
1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
1.1 Project background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
1.2 Outline of the thesis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
2 Excitation systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
2.1 Excitation control system . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
2.2 Open circuit characteristics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
2.3 Ceiling voltage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
2.4 High initial response excitation system . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
2.5 Different excitation systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
2.5.1 Static excitation systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
2.5.2 Rotating brushless excitation systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
2.6 Standards and technical requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
2.7 Implementation of modern power electronics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
3 Analytical solutions of open-circuit dynamics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
3.1 Terminal voltage buildup . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
3.2 De-excitation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
3.3 Positive step response . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
3.4 Negative step response . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
4 Electromechanical modelling of synchronous generators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
4.1 Equivalent circuit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
4.2 Grid dynamics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
4.3 Mechanical dynamics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
4.4 Park transformation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
4.5 Steady state operation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
5 Parameter exctraction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
5.1 Synchronous generator parameters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
5.2 Field-wound exciter parameters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
6 Results ........................................................................................................ 41
7 Conclusion ................................................................................................. 43
8 Future work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
8.1 Exciter armature winding design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
8.2 Power electronic interfaces . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
8.3 Bang-bang excitation control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
8.4 Synchronous generator modelling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
9 Summary of papers .................................................................................... 46
10 Svensk sammanfattning ............................................................................. 48
11 Acknowledgements ................................................................................... 49
References ........................................................................................................ 51
List of symbols
Symbol Unit Description

f Hz Fundamental electrical frequnecy
TÛ f s Field voltage time constant
α ◦ Firing delay angle of thyristor bridge
γ Ceiling voltage factor
Lf H Field winding self inductance
Mf H Field winding mutual inductance to the stator
Rf Ω Field winding resistance (hot)
Uf V Rated steady state field voltage
If A Rated steady state field current
uf V Instantaneous field voltage
if A Instantaneous field current
Tdo0 s Field winding open circuit time constant
Td0 s Field winding short circuit time constant
Tf s Field winding voltage buildup time constant
T37% s Field winding de-excitiation time constant
T+5% s Field winding positive step response time
T+5% s Field winding negative step response time
Td00 s Subtransient short circuit time constant, d-axis
Tdo00 s Subtransient open circuit time constant, d-axis
Tq00 s Subtransient short circuit time constant, q-axis
Tqo00 s Subtransient open circuit time constant, q-axis
Xdu Ω Unsaturated synchronous reactance, d-axis
Xqu Ω Unsaturated synchronous reactance, q-axis
Xd Ω Saturated synchronous reactance, d-axis
Xq Ω Saturated synchronous reactance, q-axis
Xd0 Ω Transient reactance, d-axis
Xd00 Ω Subtransient reactance, d-axis
Xq00 Ω Subtransient reactance, q-axis
Xl Ω Stator leakage reactance
9
Symbol Unit Description
ufd V Instantaneous field voltage in the equivalent circuit
ifd A Instantaneous field current in the equivalent circuit
ud V d-axis voltage of the grid seen from the generator (line-to-line rms)
uq V q-axis voltage of the grid seen from the generator (line-to-line rms)
p
A p /2 times the d-axis phase current amplitude the generator
id 3
iq A 3/2 times the q-axis phase current amplitude the generator
ed V d-axis terminal voltage of the generator (line-to-line rms)
eq V q-axis terminal voltage of the generator (line-to-line rms)
Lfd H Field winding leakage inductance in the equivalent circuit
L1d H Damper winding d-axis leakage inductance in the equivalent circuit
L1q H Damper winding q-axis leakage inductance in the equivalent circuit
Ll H Stator winding leakage inductance of the generator
Le H Equivalent leakage inductance of the grid (step-up transformer leakage)
Lad H Main d-axis inductance of the generator
Laq H Main q-axis inductance of the generator
Rfd Ω Field winding resistance in the equivalent circuit
R1d Ω Damper winding d-axis resistance in the equivalent circuit
R1q Ω Damper winding q-axis resistance in the equivalent circuit
Ra Ω Phase armature resistance of generator
Re Ω Equivalent grid resistance
Te Nm Electrical torque from the generator
Tm Nm Mechanical torque from the turbine
Pe W Electrical power produced by the generator
Pm W Mechanical power input from the turbine
Qe VA Reactive power produced by the generator
p Number of poles of generator
ωr rad/s Electrical frequency of the rotor
ωs rad/s Electrical frequency of the grid
δ ◦ Rotor angle
ϕ ◦ Load angle (power factor angle)
10
1. Introduction
Hydropower still maintains its position as the most important source of renew-
able power generation in the world. In these days, most European countries
go through a phase of intense refurbishment and upgrading of their existing
plants. This leads to new challenges and the engineers need to regain back
the knowledge that went lost twenty years ago. The trend in the hydropower
industry today is more use of computerized tools and this has really revolu-
tionized the whole design process.
The generator is one of the key components of a hydropower plant, since it
is responsible for converting the mechanical energy from the turbine to mag-
netic energy through rotor excitation and finally to electric power absorbed by
the stator windings, distributing the energy into the power grid. The gener-
ators used in hydro power plants are mainly synchronous generators. Those
generators need to be fed with direct current into their rotating field winding.
This is the role of the excitation system.
This thesis investigates the benefits of a fast-response brushless rotating ex-
citer, intended to feed the synchronous generator with controllable field cur-
rent.
1.1 Project background

The project initially started with a master thesis in 2011 by Peter Butros, in
cooperation with industry. Johan Bladh (former PhD student) supervised the
work. A brushless field-wound rotating exciter was studied, intended for use
in a fast-response brushless excitation system, with Bluetooth communication
for control of a thyristor bridge attached to the rotor. The work continued
and an exciter rotor was constructed at the Ångstöm Laboratory during the
following year.
Jonas Kristiansen Nøland (also author of this thesis) did his thesis on de-
sign and simulation of a permanent magnet stator, intended to be fitted into to
the constructed rotor of the brushless exciter. Six phase topologies was inves-
tigated since it seemed to be relevant for the hydro power industry. The whole
system was planned to be fitted into a complete state of the art synchronous
generator test rig at the Ångstöm Laboratory. The master thesis was presented
both at Chalmers University of Technology and Uppsala University, in the
end of Mai 2013. Representatives from Statkraft was invited to the master
thesis presentation at Uppsala University. The meeting with Statkraft opened
11
up for a PhD-position at the Ångstöm Laboratory with further work on the
fast-response brushless rotating exciter technology. Jonas Kristiansen Nøland
started as a PhD-student part-time from the autumn 2013 and full-time (80%)
from spring 2014.
1.2 Outline of the thesis

Chapter 2 presents an overview of excitation systems. The chapter includes
different important terms, standards and types of systems. Chapter 3 derives
the analytical solutions of the response times of the excitation system when the
synchronous generator is open-circuited. The obtained solutions are closely
linked to Paper II, where experimental data from a hydro power plant is in-
vestigated. Paper II studies the open circuit step response with a conventional
field-wound rotating exciter and compares it with the performance of a shaft-
driven PM rotating exciter investigated in Paper I, III and IV.
In Chapter 4, a complete dq-equivalent circuit model of the synchronous
generator is presented including both mechanical dynamics and grid dynam-
ics. The model parameters are extracted from manufacturer data in Chapter 5.
Chapter 6 extends the generator open-circuit step response given in Paper II
with a field current step response during loaded operation for the same power
plant. The step response is acting against a voltage dip in the connection point
of the generator to the grid. In Chapter 7, the conclusions of the thesis are
summarized and discussed, and Chapter 8 outlines the work of the PhD thesis
to come.
12
2. Excitation systems
Fig. 2.1 shows a block diagram of the components included in an excitation

control system. The exciter generates the direct current for the field winding
of the synchronous generator. The excitation system includes the synchronous
machine regulator with different control schemes and protective functions. In-
teractions exists between the power system and the excitation control system,
including the feedback dynamics of the synchronous generator.
Figure 2.1. Block diagram of the components of an excitation control system.

c
IEEE2014 [1]
2.1 Excitation control system

A complete excitation control system is given in Fig. 2.2, including the most
important subsystems.
Figure 2.2. General block diagram for synchronous machine excitation control sys-
tem.
c
IEEE2005 [2]
13
In the terminal voltage transducer, the terminal voltage is sensed and re-
duced to a dc quantity. The load compensator measures the current from
the generator terminals in order to account for the voltage drop in the step-
up transformer connecting the generator to the grid. If multiple generators
are connected in parallel, the load compensator acts as a artificial coupling
impedance for load sharing purposes. The excitation control system also in-
cludes a power system stabilizer (PSS), over- and under-excitation limiters and
an automatic voltage regulator (AVR). The PSS is an additional function to the
voltage regulator to improve the damping of power system oscillations.
The dynamic response to a step input is one of the most important fea-
tures of an excitation system, giving the generator the ability to act against
disturbances in the grid. Fig. 2.4 shows some of the most important qualities
characterizing such a response, including rise time, overshoot, peak time, and
settling time as indicated.
Figure 2.3. Typical dynamic step response of a feedback control system to a step
change in input.
c
IEEE2014 [1]
2.2 Open circuit characteristics

Fig. 2.4 plots the relation between the terminal voltage of the generator and
the field current. The correlation is linear up to a certain point. The fully
14
loaded generator would need extra field current to account for the armature
reaction with the load currents.
Figure 2.4. Determination of no-load field current and air-gap field current. Line
1 plots the linearized air-gap line, whereas line 2 includes the saturation effect.
c
IEC2011 [3]
2.3 Ceiling voltage

The ceiling voltage is the maximum field voltage available for the excitation
system. The difference between the positive ceiling voltage and the rated field
voltage indicates the field forcing capability and tends to improve power sys-
tem transient stability [1]. With a voltage-bidirectional excitation system, a
negative ceiling voltage is possible. This is helpful for a rapid demagnetizing
of the synchronous generator and for control of the generator during over-
voltage conditions. A high ceiling voltage can force rapid change in field
current. The firing angle margins causes the magnitude of the negative ceiling
voltage to be lower than the positive ceiling voltage for thyristor-controlled
excitation systems. Bus-fed or transformer-fed potential-source exciters loose
some advantage by the fact that the available ceiling voltage is reduced dur-
ing the actual fault period [4]. During the fault period, the terminal voltage is
greatly reduced, directly influencing the bus-fed excitation system. Exciters
with ceiling voltage less than 150% of rated field voltage are classified as low
ceiling voltage exciters according to IEEE [5].
15
2.4 High initial response excitation system
The literature tend to distinguish between high-speed response and normal
response excitation systems [6]. Excitation systems with a fast dynamic per-
formance are classified as a high initial response excitation system. Those
systems are able to reach 95 percent of the difference between the available
ceiling voltage and the rated field voltage in less then 0.1 seconds. A 6-
pulse thyristor bridge rectifier directly connected to the field winding is able
to change the voltage over the whole range in less than 10 milliseconds with
a 50Hz ac input [7]. With six firing pulses per electrical period, the maximum
time delay in the voltage response is [8]
1
TÛ f = . (2.1)
6f
Fig. 2.5 shows the voltage response delay for a step change in the applied
field voltage for a thyristor bridge rectifier. The thyristor bridge firing angle
is changed from 75◦ to 0◦ and the voltage response delay is less than 3ms.
Theoretically the thyristor bridge ceiling voltage is obtained with a 0◦ firing
angle, but normally the minimum firing angle is in the range 7-10◦ to ensure
positive forward voltage when the thyristors are triggered.
Figure 2.5. DC voltage waveform applied over the field winding due to a step change
in the firing angle. Effects of commutation is neglected.
c
IEEE1968 [8]
Fig. 2.6 shows how the nominal voltage response of an excitation system
is characterized. This evaluation is mostly used for slow response brushless
excitation systems with an uncontrollable rotating diode bridge in the rotor.
16
Figure 2.6. Excitation system nominal response.
c
IEEE2014 [1]
2.5 Different excitation systems

2.5.1 Static excitation systems
Potential source bus-fed excitation system
Fig. 2.7 shows a block diagram of the static exication system. All com-
ponents in these systems are stationary. They feed the direct current to the
field winding through slip rings. The most common type is the potential-
source controlled-rectifier excitation system. The excitation power is bus-fed
or transformer-fed, generated from the synchronous generator terminals and
fed to a controlled rectifier through a shunt-connected step-down power poten-
tial transformer. The system has a fast inherent response, it is easy maintain-
able and inexpensive. However, the available ceiling voltage is dependent on
the input ac voltage to the controlled rectifier. During system-fault conditions,
the depressed terminal voltage reduces the available ceiling voltage. Now-
days, the potential-source excitation system is usually designed with higher
ceiling voltage levels to ensure satisfactory fault-on field-forcing capability.
The ceiling voltage requirement is typically 2 times the rated field voltage.
As an example; With a 30 percent drop in terminal voltage, a ceiling volt-
age of 1.4 times the rated field voltage is available for field forcing. For high
power synchronous generator excitation systems, the potential-source thyris-
tor rectifier exciter is the dominant topology [9]. Recent studies has shown
that the implementation of modern power electronic interfaces in static excita-
tion systems can improve the field-forcing capability during reduced terminal
voltages [10–12].
17
Stationary Synchronous
Grid Transformer Rectifier Generator Load
Voltage
- Sensors
Controller + Reference
Figure 2.7. Diagram of the conventional static excitation system.
Compound-cource excitation system

Compound excitation systems were very popular in the early 1970s and before,
since prior to that time, fault current could not be provided by other sources
[13]. The cost of a compound system is approximately 2 times the cost of a
potential source bus-fed system. Where excitation support is needed, a power
current transformer is included, yielding a compund-source static excitation
system. When the generator produces an output current, some of the excitation
power is provided by series connected power current transformers, yielding an
equivalent to the field forcing capability in a shaft driven excitation system. All
field excitation power is supplied by the power potential transformer when the
generator operates at no-load.
2.5.2 Rotating brushless excitation systems

Brushless synchronous machines became reality with the introduction of com-
pact high-power silicon diodes during the 1950s [14]. In the beginning they
were introduced for aircraft applications, where special flameproofing in haz-
ardous atmospheres were needed [15]. In rotating brushless excitation sys-
tems, the excitation power for the generator field winding is generated physi-
cally close to the utilization point.
With an armature core carrying alternating current, the rotor core should
be laminated to reduce core loss. Solid steel rotors offers better mechanical
stability, but laminated cores has been proven successful for large induction
motors. Another challenge arises with wireless measurement and control sys-
tem of field voltage and field current. However, the signals could also be
delivered through brushes to attain better redundancy.
Conventional bus-fed brushless excitation system

One of the main problems associated with the conventional brushless excita-
tion system (Fig. 2.8) was the slow step response of the generator field current.
Because of a rotating uncontrolled diode bridge, the generator field voltage is
not directly controlled. It takes time to change the field voltage to attain the
ceiling voltage. It was proven that this problem could be solved by minimizing
the inductances of the exciter in the initial design [16]. The ac-exciter could
be designed to be capable of extremely fast changes of flux [17]. However, the
18
diode bridge could still not attain negative voltage for de-excitation purposes.
This problem could be solved by a de-excitation resistor on the shaft [18].
Maintenance is a very important aspect for the operation of synchronous
generators, since it can reduce the cost of the power production. The use of
slip-rings and carbon-brushes is one of the key contributors to the required
maintenance [19, 20]. The brushes needs to be replaced regularly as they get
worn down during use. The use of a rotating brushless exciter can handle this
problem and thereby reduce the maintenance cost. However, several problems
related to the conventional brushless excitation system in the past, made a
market driver for the static excitation instead [21].
Stationary Rotating Rotating Synchronous
Grid Transformer Rectifier Exciter Rectifier Generator
Load
Voltage
- Sensors
Figure 2.8. Diagram of the conventional bus-fed brushless excitation system.
Improved bus-fed brushless excitation system

The improved bus-fed brushless excitation system shown in Fig. 2.9 is in
operation on some pilot power plants. They are still not operated with the
same dynamic performance as the static excitation system. This is due to the
dual control scheme, where the stationary thyristor bridge reduces the ceiling
voltage available for the rotating thyristor bridge. Operators tend to not let
the rotating thyristor bridge operate at higher firing angles during steady state
conditions. Keeping the firing angle low, reduces the steady state torque pul-
sations caused by the rotating rectifier as well as keeping the power factor of
the rotating armature currrents high.
Stationary Rotating Rotating Synchronous
Grid Transformer Rectifier Exciter Rectifier Generator Load
Voltage
- - Sensors
Controller 2 + Controller 1 + Reference
Figure 2.9. Diagram of the dual control bus-fed brushless excitation system.
3-stage shaft-driven brushless excitation system

With a permanent-magnet generator (PMG) overhung from the ac-exciter, the
total excitation power requirements is obtained directly from the generator
19
shaft [15]. Since all excitation power is derived directly from shaft rotation,
this system is classified as a [?] or [?] exciter. The independence of power sys-
tem disturbances provides improved reliability. Fig. 2.10 shows the schematic
diagram of the conventional PMG excitation system. Because of the uncon-
trolled rotating diode bridge connected to the field-wound exciter, this excita-
tion system lacks a fast dynamic response.
Stationary Stationary Rotating Rotating Synchronous
Pre-exciter Rectifier Chopper Exciter Rectifier Generator Load
N
S
Voltage
- Sensors
Figure 2.10. Diagram of the conventional shaft-driven brushless excitation system.
2-stage shaft-driven brushless excitation system

The 2-stage shaft-driven excitation system utilizes the permanent magnet gen-
erator as the main exciter in an outer pole PM topology. A wirelessly con-
trolled power electronic interface is needed on the shaft. Fig. 2.11 and 2.12
proposes two different power electronic interfaces suitable for the 2-stage
shaft-driven brushless excitation system. The thyristor-based interface is in-
vestigated in Paper I of this thesis. It includes even multiphase topologies.
Paper III presents the complete design characterization of a designed outer
pole PM exciter for a 2-stage configuration. Paper IV investigates modern
power electronic interfaces as shown in Fig. 2.12.
Rotating Rotating Synchronous
Exciter Rectifier Generator Load Controller
N
Reference +
S -
Voltage
Sensors
Figure 2.11. Diagram of the 2-stage shaft-driven brushless excitation system with
rotating thyristor-based power electronic interface.
Rotating Rotating Rotating Synchronous

Exciter Rectifier Chopper Generator Load Reference Controller
N +
S -
Voltage
Sensors
Figure 2.12. Schematic diagram of the 2-stage shaft-driven brushless excitation sys-
tem with rotating PWM chopper-based power electronic interface.
20
2.6 Standards and technical requirements
Different transmission system operators (TSO’s) operates their grids with dif-
ferent standards related to the excitation system of synchronous generators.
Table 2.1 compares standards for the step response and the field winding ceil-
ing voltage from different standards.
Table 2.1. Performance of the different interfaces
Standard Owner OC step response test Requirement Ceiling voltage
FIKS Statnett 0.95pu −→ 1.00pu 0.5s 2.00pu
SvKFS Svenska Krafnat 1.00pu −→ 1.10pu 0.8s NA
NGTR Statkraft/Vattenfall 0.95pu −→ 1.05pu 0.5s 2.00pu
IEEE IEEE Std 421 1.00pu −→ 1.03pu NA 1.50pu
IEEE standard 421.4 defines no step response time requirement for the ex-
citation system but prefers to require a high initial response type exciter for
larger generators. This is because a fast field voltage response is directly linked
to the response of the field current.
The TSO’s specifies requirements on the fault ride-through capability of the
grid connected generators. Fault ride-through means the capability of electri-
cal devices to be able to remain connected to the network and operate through
periods of low voltage at the connection point caused by secured faults. FIKS
states that synchronous generators should be able to withstand a fault in the
grid if the actual time-dependent voltage profile lies within a certain minimum
requirement ("worst case"). The generator should also be able to support the
grid during the whole low voltage ride-through. After the fault clearing, the
generator should be able to operate with a lower voltage level as a result of a
weaker grid. The time it takes to clear the fault will determine the real voltage
profile of the grid. Fig. 2.13 shows the time-dependent voltage profile required
for generators connected to a grid with 220kV operating voltage or higher.
U[pu]
1
0.9
0
0 150 900 t[ms]
Figure 2.13. Time-dependent fault ride-though voltage profile for generators con-
nected to a grid with operating voltage above or equal to 220kV [22].
21
2.7 Implementation of modern power electronics
The thyristor bridge rectifier was introduced by General Electric in 1957 [23].
From then, a revolution in the control of power was initiated. It marks the
beginning of modern power electronics as we know it. The semi-controlled
thyristor devices was able to rectify a controlled dc voltage by adjusting the
delay firing angle. However, the expense of the delayed firing angle causes a
larger phase shift between voltage and current fed from the ac input. Espe-
cially in the hydropower industry, where a high firing angle is required for an
available ceiling voltage, a high firing angle causes low power factor for the
excitation power.
In Fig. 2.14, a step change in the dc output voltage is compared with a
thyristor bridge rectifier and a dc-dc step-down converter. The dc-dc converter
changes the voltage reference by adjusting the duty cycle. The dc input could
be fed from an uncontrolled diode bridge rectifier with no delay angle, yielding
a higher power factor. For a shaft-driven exciter, less torque ripple is also the
end result (Paper IV). With modern power electronics, the voltage response
is instead related to the switching frequency of the pulse-width modulation,
yielding
1
TÛ f = , (2.2)
fsw
which causes a faster response of the field voltage compared to thyristor-
controlled rectifiers. The voltage time response becomes independent of the
fundamental electrical frequency in the exciter armature. The switching fre-
quency tends to be much higher than the fundamental frequency.
Figure 2.14. Comparison of different voltage control techniques. (a) Step-down dc-dc
converter. (b) Three-phase thyristor rectifier.
c
IEEE2015 [24]
22
3. Analytical solutions of open-circuit
dynamics
An unloaded synchronous generator excitation system can be simplified as a

classical RL-circuit. The relation between the instantaneous field voltage (u f )
and instantaneous field current (i f ), is given by
di f
uf = Lf +Rf if , (3.1)
dt
or written in circuit form shown in Fig. 3.1.
Lf Rf
+
− uf if
Figure 3.1. Simple equivalent circuit of the excitation system with unloaded generator.
At rated steady state conditions, the voltage-current relationship is given by

ohms law, yielding
Uf = Rf If , (3.2)
where U f is the rated mean steady state field voltage and I f is the rated field
current. If u f = γU f , the general solution for Eq. 3.1 yields
− t0
T
i f = γI f + Ke do , (3.3)
0 = Lf
where Tdo Rf .
3.1 Terminal voltage buildup

If the excitation system initially starts with zero excitation current, i f (0) = 0,
then K = −γI f in Eq. 3.3 , yielding
− t0

i f = γI f 1 − e Tdo , (3.4)
23
with u f = γU f as the applied field voltage. The time it takes to reach the
nominal field current becomes

0 γ
T f = Tdo ln . (3.5)
γ −1
Fig. 3.2 shows how the terminal voltage buildup of a generic unloaded syn-
chronous generator depends on the applied field voltage. With γ = 2, the
T
generator reaches the terminal voltage in T 0f = ln(2) ≈ 0.693. The voltage
do
buildup time T f will then become smaller than the generator d-axis transient
time constant. The positive ceiling factor (γ) improves the dynamic response.
1
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
Current [pu]
0.5 γ = 3.0
γ = 2.8
0.4 γ = 2.6
γ = 2.4
0.3 γ = 2.2
γ = 2.0
γ = 1.8
0.2
γ = 1.6
γ = 1.4
0.1 γ = 1.2
γ = 1.0
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2
Time [pu]
if
Figure 3.2. No-load terminal voltage buildup: Field current, If , as a function of time,
t
0 ,
Tdo
with different applied field voltages, u f = γU f .
3.2 De-excitation
De-excitation starting with rated excitation current, i f (0) = I f , leads to K =
(1 − γI f ) in Eq. 3.3 , yielding
− t0
T
i f = γI f + (1 − γ)I f e do , (3.6)
with u f = γU f as the applied field voltage. The time it takes to reach 37 percent
of the nominal terminal voltage yields
" #
0 1 − γ
T37% = Tdo 1
(3.7)
e −γ
at no-load operation. There exists certain requirements in the NGTR of how

0 =7.5s,
fast the system should be demagnetized. If the generator time constant Tdo
24
the requierement is TT37%0 ≤ 15 = 0.2. The requirement should be met from
do
nominal load. Fig. 3.3 shows the benefit of applying a negative field voltage
0 to reach 1 I if
during de-excitation of the generator. Notice that it takes Tdo e f
the applied field voltage is zero during de-excitaiton. During balanced short
circuit of the synchronous generator terminals, the subtransient short-circuit
time constant, Td0 , should be used for calculation of T37% .
γ = -3.0
γ = -2.8
0.9 γ = -2.6
γ = -2.4
γ = -2.2
γ = -2.0
0.8 γ = -1.8
γ = -1.6
γ = -1.4
Current [pu]
0.7
γ = -1.2
γ = -1.0
γ = -0.8
γ = -0.6
0.6 γ = -0.4
γ = -0.2
γ = 0.0
0.5
0.4
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1

Time [pu]
if
Figure 3.3. No-load de-excitation response: Field current, If , as a function of time,
t
0 ,
Tdo
with different applied field voltages, u f = γU f .
3.3 Positive step response

Given that i f (0) = 0.95I f initially, leads to K = (0.95 − γ)I f in Eq. 3.3, yield-
ing
− t0
T
i f = γI f + (0.95 − γ)I f e do . (3.8)
With a field current step change from 0.95pu to 1.00pu, 90% is reached when
i f (t) = 0.995I f , yielding

0 0.95 − γ
T+5% = Tdo ln . (3.9)
0.995 − γ
According to FIKS, T+5% ≤ 0.5s. If the generator time constant Tdo 0 =7.5s, then
T+5% 1
0
Tdo
≤ 15 ≈ 0.067. A positive ceiling factor (γ) is needed for fast postive step
response. FIKS requirement is gamma equal to 2.
25
3.4 Negative step response
Given that i f (0) = I f initially, leads to K = (1 − γ)I f in Eq. 3.3, yielding
− t0
T
i f = γI f + (1 − γ)I f e do . (3.10)
With a field current step change from 1.00pu to 0.95pu, 90% is reached when
i f (t) = 0.955I f , yielding

0 1−γ
T−5% = Tdo ln (3.11)
0.955 − γ
With a six pulse thyristor bridge, a negative value of γ is possible. With the
positive ceiling factor (γ) of 2 at a firing angle of 10 degrees, a negative ceil-
ing factor (γ) of about -1.75 is obtainable at 150 degrees firing angle during
unloaded operation. A large difference applies between the nominal field volt-
age and the actual negative ceiling voltage during a negative step response. In
comparison to the positive step response, the negative step response is usually
faster for fully controlled thyristor rectifiers.
26
4. Electromechanical modelling of
During transient simulation of the synchronous generator, the rotor speed will
no longer be constant as in the steady state model. The rotor speed depen-
dent voltage terms in the equivalent circuit model leads to a non-linear set of
differential equations to be solved.
If one assumes that the synchronous generator feeds a balanced set of source
voltages through an equivalent inductance Le and an equivalent resistance
Re , those components needs to be included in the equivalent circuit equa-
tions [25].
4.1 Equivalent circuit

The final equivalent circuit model is given in Fig. 4.1 and Fig. 4.2. The circuits
are magnetically cross-coupled. The generator terminal voltages are denoted
ed and eq , whereas the grid voltages are denoted ud and uq .
Ra Ll
ifd
+
Rfd R1d Re
Lfd L1d Lad ed Le
+ +
− ufd i1d − ud
−
id
−
+
ωr ψq
Figure 4.1. Synchronous machine d-axis equivalent circuit
27
Ra Ll
+
R1q Re
L1q Laq eq Le
+
i1q ωr ψd − uq
−
iq
+
−
Figure 4.2. Synchronous machine q-axis equivalent circuit
The d- and q-axis flux linkages are calculated from the d- and q-axis cur-
rents, yielding
ψd = Lad (−id + i1d + i f d ) − (Ll + Le )id (4.1)
ψq = Laq (−iq + i1q ) − (Ll + Le )iq , (4.2)
where the equivalent inductance (Le ) is added to the stator leakage inductance
(Ll ) of the synchronous generator. With the modified d- and q-axis flux link-
ages, the grid-side d- and q-axis voltages equals
dψd
ud = −(Ra + Re )id − ωr ψq + (4.3)
dt
dψq
uq = −(Ra + Re )iq + ωr ψd + , (4.4)
dt
where the equivalent resistance (Re ) is added to the stator armature resistance
(Ra ) of the synchronous generator.
4.2 Grid dynamics

Since all electrical components between the generator and the infinite bus is
now included in the equivalent circuit, the d- and q-axis voltages can be ob-
tained from the instantaneous rotor angle (δ ), yielding
ud = U sin δ (4.5)
28
uq = U cos δ . (4.6)
For modelling of static exciation systems, the available field voltage is pro-
portional to the voltage on the generator terminals. The generator terminal
voltage can be calculated from the infinite bus voltages, yielding
did
ed = ud + Re id − ωr Le iq + Le (4.7)
dt
diq
eq = ud + Re id + ωr Le id + Le . (4.8)
dt
Note that the mutual coupling between the d-axis circuit and the q-axis circuit
is a function of the instantaneous rotor electrical angular speed (ωr ) and not the
synchronous electrical angular speed of the grid (ωs ). In steady state operation,
ωr = ωs .
4.3 Mechanical dynamics

The deviations in the rotor speed is found from
2J dωr
Tm − Te = , (4.9)
p dt
where Tm is the applied mechanical torque and the electrical torque is calcu-
lated from
p
Te = [ψd iq − ψq id ] . (4.10)
2
The assumption of a constant mechanical torque is not fully valid in reality.
To account for the turbine effect on the torque as a result of speed deviations,
another model [26] equals the turbine torque
p Pm
Tm = , (4.11)
2 ωr
where the turbine power, Pm , is assumed to be constant instead. With an in-
crease in the rotor speed, the turbine will react with a slightly lower torque,
causing a damping effect.
The oscillations in the rotor angle (δ ) are obtained by integrating the differ-
ence between rotor speed and synchronous speed, yielding
dδ
ωr − ωs = . (4.12)
dt
The instantaneous power factor angle seen from the connection point to the
grid, could be calculated from the instantaneous rotor angle, yielding

id
ϕ = tan−1 −δ. (4.13)
iq
29
4.4 Park transformation
The real time-dependent phase voltages are found from power-invariant trans-
formation, yielding
  r   
ua −cos(θ ) sin(θ ) 1 ud
ub  = 2 −cos(θ − 2π ) sin(θ − 2π ) 1 uq  ,
3 3 (4.14)
3 2π 2π
uc −cos(θ + 3 ) sin(θ + 3 ) 1 u0
similarly for the phase currents

  r   
ia −cos(θ ) sin(θ ) 1 id
ib  = 2 −cos(θ − 2π ) sin(θ − 2π ) 1 iq  . (4.15)
3 3 3
ic −cos(θ + 2π 2π
3 ) sin(θ + 3 ) 1
i0
As a result of the power-invariant transformation, ud and uq displays a vector

with magnitude equal to the line-to-line rms voltage.
p The magnitude of the
current vector composed of id and iq is equal to 3/2 times the rms phase
current. The power delivered to the grid equals
Pe = ud id + uq iq , (4.16)
and the reactive power production equals
Qe = uq id − ud iq . (4.17)
4.5 Steady state operation

By applying KVL rule on the d- and q-axis equivalent circuits, steady state
operation yields
− Ra Id −U sin(δ ) + ωs Lq Iq = 0 (4.18)
− Ra Iq −U cos(δ ) + ωs Lad I f d − ωs Ld Id = 0. (4.19)
Equation 4.18 could be expressed as
Ra I sin(δ + ϕ) +U sin(δ ) = Xq I cos(δ + ϕ). (4.20)
The solution with respect to the rotor angle yields

Xq I cos(ϕ) − Ra I sin(ϕ)
tan(δ ) = . (4.21)
U + Ra I cos(φ ) + Xq I sin(ϕ)
The rotor angle at rated apparent power, power factor and terminal voltage can
be obtained with Ra and Xq in per unit quantities, yielding
Xq,pu cos(ϕ) − Ra,pu sin(ϕ)

tan(δ ) = . (4.22)
1 + Ra,pu cos(φ ) + Xq,pu sin(ϕ)
30
Also, the required steady state field current given from 4.19, yielding
U cos(δ ) + Xd I sin(δ + ϕ) + Ra I cos(δ + ϕ)
Ifd = . (4.23)
Xad
The field current in real quantities is equal to
U cos(δ ) + Xd I sin(δ + ϕ) + Ra I cos(δ + ϕ)
If = q , (4.24)
3
ω M
2 s f
p
where the factor 3/2 comes from the fact that the mutual inductance in the
equivalent circuit model is scaled up as a result of power
√
invariant transforma-
√
tion. The field winding reduction factor k f is equal to 2L ad/ 3M f .
31
5. Parameter exctraction
5.1 Synchronous generator parameters

Table 5.1 compares the re-specification of the Svante generator with the orig-
inal specification (generator in the lab). The major change is the increased
length of the air gap from 4mm to 8.3mm. Studies of the generator has al-
ready been made in [26–28]. Table 5.2 compares the rating of four differ-
ent larger generators. Generator G4 has already been investigated extensively
in [29, 30]. The collection of generators show the variations in terminal volt-
age, mechanical speed and apparent power. G2 and G3 are installed with a
brushless rotating exciter with rotating thyristor bridge and wireless trigger-
ing.
Table 5.1. Specification of the test generator in the lab
Description Symbol G1 G1* Unit
Apparent power S 75 185 kVA
Power factor cos(ϕ) 0.90 0.90
Rotor angle, rated load δ 24.2 21.7 ◦
Terminal voltage U 156 380 V

Rated current I 278 281 A
Field voltage, rated load Uf 64.5 107.2 V
Field current, rated load If 20.8 34.5 A
Field current, ceiling limit IˆF 50.0 50.0 A
Field current, rated no load IFNL 12.4 27.5 A
Field current, rated short circuit IFSC 11.7 21.3 A
Field current, air gap line IFAG 9.6 21.1 A
Frequency f 50 50 Hz
Number of poles p 12 12
Air gap length g 8.3 4 mm
Mechanical speed n 500 500 rpm
Moment of inertia J 55 75 kgm2
Inertia constant H 1.01 0.56 s
32
Table 5.2. Specification comparing four different synchronous generators in operation
in nordic countries
Symbol G2 G3 G4 G5 Unit
S 36.00 52.00 206.00 320.00 MVA
cos(ϕ) 0.85 0.90 0.90 0.86
δ 20.87 23.87 20.57 23.90 ◦
U 11.00 11.00 21.00 18.00 kV
I 1.89 2.73 5.66 10.26 kA
UF 161 183 188 340 V
IF 806 1156 1766 1570 A
IFNL 479 594 1245 527 A
IFSC 452 569 970 617 A
IFAG 461 545 1110 493 A
f 50.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 Hz
p 64.00 32.00 52.00 16.00
n 93.75 166.67 115.38 375.00 rpm
J 1950.00 865.50 9877.50 1651.00 tm2
H 2.61 2.54 3.50 3.98 s
Additionally to the generator rating, also a proper design specification lies

behind. Table 5.3 shows the design chosen to fulfill the ratings given in Table
5.1 and 5.2.
Table 5.3. Comparing the design specification of the four different industrial genera-
tors with the generator in the lab
Description Symbol G1 G2 G3 G4 G5 Unit
Stator inner diam. Dsi 0.725 8.03 6.42 10.50 5.60 m
Active length la 0.303 0.89 0.87 1.835 2.65 m
Air gap length g 8.3 (4) 15.5 18 25 30 mm
Number of slots Qs 108 432 240 390 288
Slots per pole per phase qs 3 2 1/4 2 1/2 2 1/2 6
Coil pitch qs,coil 9 6 NA NA 15
Circuits per phase cs 1 1 1 4 4
Conductors per slot ns 2 2 2 2 2
Dampers per pole nD 3 4 4 5 9
Field turns per pole NF 162 24 1/2 26 1/2 18 1/2 42 1/2
There exists rough analytical estimates which relates the design specifica-
tion to the ratings. The general generator formula
r
3 qs ns
U = k1 2π f Dsi la B̂δ , (5.1)
2 cs
estimates the terminal voltage. B̂δ is the fundamental air gap flux density
(normally slightly above 1T) and k1 is the fundamental winding factor. The
33
fundamental winding factor is calculated from [31]

sin π6

qs,coil π
k1 = sin . (5.2)
qs sin 6qπ s 6qs
An important parameter for exciation systems is the reduction factor, relating

the field current and field voltage in the equivalent circuit to the real ones. An
analytical estimation in [32] states that the field winding reduction factor is
equal to √
6 qs ns
kf = k1 kc , (5.3)
π N f cs
where kc is a correction factor related to the longitudinal reaction of the ma-
chine. The relation between the stator referred and the rotor referred field
voltage is
ufd = kf uf (5.4)
if
ifd = , (5.5)
kf
used in the equivalent circuit of the synchronous generator. Also the field
winding parameters in real quantities yields
Rf
Rf = (5.6)
k2f
Lad + L f d
Lf = . (5.7)
k2f
r
2 Lad
Mf = . (5.8)
3 kf
The equivalent circuit parameters can be extracted from the standard param-
eters in Table 5.4. G1W D corresponds to the experimental generator without
damper bars, whereas G1CD shows the standard parameters with continuous
damper bar connection.
34
Table 5.4. Standard parameters comparing the test rig generator with four different
industrial generators
Symbol G1WD G1CD G2 G3 G4 G5 Unit
Xl 0.0880 0.0880 0.170 0.170 0.147 0.150 pu
Xdu 1.2130 1.2130 0.980 0.959 0.874 1.250 pu
Xqu 0.9100 0.9100 0.620 0.687 0.574 0.750 pu
Xd 0.9430 0.9430 0.943 0.959 0.768 1.170 pu
Xq 0.7130 0.7130 0.597 0.687 0.512 0.702 pu
Xd0 0.4090 0.4173 0.320 0.299 0.253 0.270 pu
Xd00 0.2851 0.3749 0.240 0.198 0.188 0.170 pu
Xq00 0.5362 0.3192 0.190 0.243 0.218 0.190 pu
0
Tdo 0.6233 0.6336 2.700 5.309 7.440 12.570 s
Td0 0.2703 0.2803 1.000 1.614 1.796 2.916 s
00
Tdo 0.0005 0.0024 0.053 0.058 0.092 0.086 s
Td00 0.0003 0.0021 0.040 0.047 0.068 0.054 s
00
Tqo 0.0003 0.0057 0.137 0.120 0.028 0.233 s
Tq00 0.0002 0.0025 0.042 0.055 0.012 0.063 s
Ta 0.0191 0.0171 0.090 0.210 0.239 0.319 s
From the synchronous generator standard parameters, the main inductances

are obtained from simply subtracting the leakage (Lad = Ld − Ll and Laq =
Lq − Ll ). The other equivalent circuit parameters are obtained according to
[29, 33], yielding
L0 − Ll
L f d = Lad d (5.9)
Ld − Ld0
Ld00 − Ll
L1d = (Ld0 − Ll ) (5.10)
Ld0 − Ld00
Lq00 − Ll
L1q = Laq (5.11)
Lq − Lq00
Lad + L f d
Rfd = 0 (5.12)
ωbase Tdo
L1d + Ld0 − Ll
R1d = 00 (5.13)
ωbase Tdo
Laq + L1q
R1q = 00
(5.14)
ωbase Tqo
2Ld00 Lq00
Ra = (5.15)
Ta (Ld00 + Lq00 )
The following relations exists between the open circuit time constants and the
short circuit time constants
0 Xd
Tdo = 0 Td0 , (5.16)
Xd
35
00 Xd0 00
Tdo = T , (5.17)
Xd00 d
00 Xq 00
Tqo = T . (5.18)
Xq00 q
Table 5.5 shows the standard parameter in per unit quantities, whereas Table
5.5 outputs the parameters in actual quantities for the power-invariant recipro-
cal dq-system. The real rotor-referred quantities are given in Table 5.7.
Table 5.5. Equivalent circuit parameters of the generators in per unit
Ll 0.088 0.088 0.170 0.170 0.1470 0.1500 pu
Lad 0.855 0.855 0.773 0.789 0.6210 1.0200 pu
Laq 0.625 0.625 0.427 0.459 0.3650 0.5520 pu
Lfd 0.433 0.693 0.186 0.153 0.1254 0.1360 pu
L1d 0.511 2.290 0.131 0.035 0.0669 0.0240 pu
L pl 0.081 -0.161 NA NA NA NA pu
L1q 1.584 0.367 0.084 0.029 0.0462 0.0208 pu
Rfd 0.007 0.007 0.001 0.001 0.0003 0.0003 pu
R1d 21.916 3.507 0.017 0.009 0.0060 0.0053 pu
R1q 1.584 0.556 0.012 0.013 0.0467 0.0078 pu
Ra 0.062 0.062 0.008 0.003 0.0027 0.0018 pu
Table 5.6. Equivalent circuit parameters of the generators

Ll 0.0909 0.0909 1.819 1.262 1.001 0.483 mH
Lad 0.8831 0.8831 8.270 5.843 4.232 3.287 mH
Laq 0.6455 0.6455 4.568 3.402 2.487 1.779 mH
Lfd 0.4472 0.7158 1.991 1.135 0.853 0.438 mH
L1d 0.5278 2.3652 1.404 0.261 0.456 0.077 mH
L pl 0.0837 -0.1663 NA 1.135 NA NA mH
L1q 1.6360 0.3791 0.896 0.218 0.315 0.067 mH
Rfd 2.2714 2.2714 3.800 1.316 0.683 0.296 mΩ
R1d 1904.7 1137.9 56.419 20.858 12.872 5.396 mΩ
R1q 514.0 119.1 41.962 30.312 100.070 7.930 mΩ
Ra 20.1178 20.1178 25.213 7.703 5.750 1.813 mΩ
Table 5.7. Real field winding parameters of the four different generators
Symbol G1 G2 G3 G4 G5 Unit
kf 0.027 0.138 0.091 0.080 0.037
Lf 1.96 0.54 0.84 0.79 2.72 H
Mf 32.70 59.90 64.47 52.75 88.86 mH
Rf 3.1075 0.1993 0.1583 0.1062 0.2166 Ω
36
5.2 Field-wound exciter parameters
Due to the small size and lower market value in comparison to a generator or
a turbine, exciters have not been sufficiently focused upon [34]. All conven-
tional exciters studied in this thesis have equal design parameters with slight
modifications (See Table 5.8).
Table 5.8. Generic design parameters for all exciters
Description Parameter Value Unit
Number of poles p 18
Slots per pole per phase qr 3
Number of parallel circuits cr 6
Number of conductors per slot nr 8
Number of field winding turns per pole nf 240
Coil pitch in number of slots qr,coil 8
Fundamental winding factor k1 0.9452
Rotor outer diameter Dro 1.7 m
Table 5.9 compares the specification of three different exciters with equal
design parameters given in Table 5.8. The behavior of exciter X1 with a ro-
tating thyristor bridge is investigated in Paper II. Exciter X1 is in operation
on an industrial power plant including a wireless communication system for
thyristor triggering.
The different exciters are fitted into generators with different mechanical
speeds, which results in slight variations in the electrical frequency of the ro-
tor armature winding. For exciters with a rotating thyristor bridge, the field
voltage time response is directly proportional to the electrical frequency. This
is because the thyristor bridge is triggered only 6 times per electrical period.
Table 5.9. Specification of three different exciters with generic design parameters
Description Parameter X1 X2 X3 Unit
Apparent power S 231 260 313 kVA
Power factor cos(ϕ) 0.919 0.920 0.921
Terminal voltage U 150 212 212 V
Rated I 888 708 853 A
Rated generator field voltage UF 183 260 260 V
Rated generator field current IF 1156 920 1110 A
Rated exciter field voltage Uf 109 210 189 V
Rated exciter field current If 21.42 22.87 20.58 A
Electrical frequency f 25.00 14.07 17.31 Hz
Mechanical speed n 166.70 93.80 115.38 rpm
Air gap length g 5.3 5.0 5.3 mm
Active length la 0.25 0.5 0.5 m
The power factor of the the different exciters are specified only for rotat-
ing diode bridge operation. For the specification of a fast-response brushless
37
excitation system with a rotating thyristor bridge, this would not be a valid as-
sumption. At higher firing angles, the commutation interval tends to be small
as a result of high commutation voltages. The phase currents in the rotor ar-
mature have a square wave shape. The relation between the rms value of the
armature currents and the generator field current becomes then
r
2
I= If . (5.19)
3
Including the both the effect of the displacement and distortion of the currents,
the true power factor becomes
1
PF = q 2 π 2 −6
· cos(α) ≈ 0.955 cos(α), (5.20)
3
1+ 6
where the firing angle (α) accounts for the displacement power factor. Nor-
mally the ceiling voltage of a fast-response exciter is attained at 10◦ firing
angle. For a ceiling voltage factor of 2, the steady state operating firing angle
tends to be about 60◦ (Paper II). This suggests the actual steady state power
factor is about 0.48. The problem of a low power factor could be solved with
other power electronic interfaces, like a rotating capacitor and a dual quadrant
chopper (Paper IV).
In recommended exciter design, the direct axis synchronous reactance should
be about 1.22 per unit [34]. Also, the direct axis transient reactance is pro-
posed to be 0.26 per unit. Among the exciters investigated in this thesis, X2
have parameters close to this recommended practice (see Table 5.10). Pa-
per III investigates the design of an outer pole PM exciter with a direct axis
synchronous reactance of about 0.2 per unit. This is a general trend when
comparing field wound synchronous machines with permanent magnet ma-
chines [35].
Table 5.10. Standard parameters of different exciters
Leakage reactance Xl 0.212 0.108 0.160 pu
Commutating reactance Xcom 0.410 0.250 0.378 pu
D-axis synchronous reactance Xd 1.912 1.242 1.751 pu
Q-axis synchronous reactance Xq 0.883 0.555 0.788 pu
D-axis transient reactance Xd0 0.410 0.227 0.339 pu
D-axis subtransient reactance Xd00 0.390 0.216 0.322 pu
Q-axis subtransient reactance Xq00 0.883 0.555 0.788 pu
Open circuit time constant 0
Tdo 2.113 2.453 2.314 s
Short circuit time constant Td0 0.453 0.451 0.448 s
Armature time constant Ta 0.108 0.147 0.145 s
The final per unit equivalent circuit parameters are given in Table 5.11. The
rotor of the exciters are solid, with no added damper bars. However a small
38
damping effect is seen due to the induced eddy currents in the rotor. How-
ever, for modelling purposes, the effect of the damper winding could easily be
neglected.
Table 5.11. Equivalent circuit parameters of different exciters
D-axis main inductance Lad 1.7000 1.1345 1.5920 pu
Q-axis main inductance Laq 0.6700 0.4475 0.6280 pu
Field winding leakage inductance Lfd 0.2241 0.1354 0.2017 pu
Damping leakage inductance L1d 1.7622 1.0377 1.7058 pu
Field winding resistance Rfd 0.0058 0.0059 0.0071 pu
Armature winding resistance Ra 0.0319 0.0240 0.0290 pu
For conversion of the equivalent circuit parameters into real measurable

parameters, equations given in [36], yields
0
L f = Tdo Rf (5.21)
q
M f = (Tdo0 − T 0 )R L , (5.22)
d f d
where R f is the measured hot-field resistance. The rotor armature winding no-
load terminal voltage (E) can be calculated from the mutual inductance (M f )
and the no-load exciter field current (IFNL ), according to
r
3
E= ωM f IFNL . (5.23)
2
q
The factor 32 is included into equation 5.23 as a result of the power-invariant
dq-transformation in order to obtain reciprocal mutual inductance between the
field winding and the fictive d-axis armature winding. If the stator field wind-
ing is replaced by permanent magnets (Paper I, III and IV), the no-load termi-
nal voltage equals r
3
E= ωψm , (5.24)
2
where the magnet flux linkage ψm replaces M f I f . All extracted parameters in
real units of the investigated field-wound exciters are given in Table 5.12.
39
Table 5.12. Machine parameters in natural reference frame of different exciters
Field winding inductance Lf 10.7524 22.5261 21.2510 H
Mutual inductance Mf 0.1004 0.2105 0.1986 H
Reduction factor of field winding kf 0.0106 0.0105 0.0105
Field winding resistance, cold R f ,15◦C 4.0900 7.3900 7.3900 Ω
Field winding resistance, hot Rf 5.0887 9.1837 9.1837 Ω
Armature winding resistance, cold Ra,15◦C 2.9500 4.0700 4.0700 mΩ
Armature winding resistance, hot Ra 3.1254 4.1479 4.1479 mΩ
The field inductances of the exciters are high, which explains the reason
why the dynamics of conventional brushless exciters are slow dynamically.
The field inductances of exciter X2 and X3 are about two times higher than
the field inductance of exciter X1. This is primarily a result of the scaling of
the active length (la ).
40
6. Results
This chapter uses the model of the synchronous generator presented in Chapter
4 and the parameter data given in Chapter 5. The field current step response
studied in Paper II for for open circuit operation is extended with a study of
the step response during loaded operation for the same generator and with a
low voltage ride-through profile on the connection point to the grid. Firstly,
the synchronous generator is simulated with an infinite bus directly connected
to the generator terminals. The study investigates the transient stability of
generator G3 with the 4 following excitation control approaches:
• Case 1: No step response; field current is kept constant during the whole
fault ride-through and equal to the current needed to obtain zero power
factor at rated turbine power during steady state conditions.
• Case 2: No step response; field voltage is kept constant during the whole
fault ride-through and equal to the field voltage needed to obtain zero
power factor during steady state operation at rated turbine power.
• Case 3: The field winding is fed with the available ceiling voltage during
the whole fault ride-through, but the available field voltage fed from the
generator terminals, is directly dependent on the time-dependent LVRT-
profile.
• Case 4: Field voltage is independent of the fault and rated ceiling volt-
age is applied during the whole fault, yielding fastest step response pos-
sible. This is the case if one applies a shaft-driven PM exciter, equivalent
to the novel prototype analyzed in Paper I, III and IV. The details of the
fast-response shaft-driven excitation system is presented in Chapter 2.
Another simulation is made with an equivalent grid inductance (Le ) in order to
more correctly represent the behavior of the interaction between the generator
and the grid.
Final results are given on the next page. Fig. 6.1 shows that case 2, 3 and 4
obtains synchronism during the fault ride-through. The field current reach high
values during the fault as a result of the fact that the equivalent grid inductance
is neglected. Keeping the field current constant during the LVRT-profile is not
a good idea in order to keep synchronism.
Fig 6.2 investigates case 3 and 4 with an equivalent grid inductance of 0.05
in per unit. This is an approximation to account for the leakage reactance
of the step-up transformer in between the generator and the connection point
to the grid. The static potential source excitation system cannot keep syn-
chronism since the available field voltage is reduced during the fault. The
shaft-driven excitation system is independent of the grid. Because of its field
forcing strength, the synchronism is kept.
41
Rotor angle
180
150 Case1
Angle [deg]
120 Case2
90 Case3
Case4
60
30
0
-30
Rotor electrical frequency
53
52.5
Frequency [Hz]
52 Case1
51.5 Case2
51 Case3
50.5 Case4
50
49.5
49
48.5
48
Field current
3
2.5 Case1
Current [pu]
Case2
2
Case3
1.5 Case4
1
0.5
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.8 1.9 2
Time [s]
Figure 6.1. Low Voltage Ride-Through test following the profile of Fig. 2.13 with
zero power factor and with different excitation control approaches. The equivalent
inductance (Le ) and equivalent resistance (Re ) is set to zero.
Rotor angle
180
150 Case3
Angle [deg]
120 Case4
90
60
30
0
-30
Rotor electrical frequency
54
53.5
Frequency [Hz]
53 Case3
52.5 Case4
52
51.5
51
50.5
50
49.5
49
48.5
48
Field voltage
3
2.5 Case3
Voltage [pu]
Case4
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.8 1.9 2
Time [s]
Figure 6.2. Low Voltage Ride-Through test following the profile of Fig. 2.13 with zero
power factor, comparing potential source static excitation with shaft driven exciation.
The equivalent inductance (Le ) is equal to 0.05 per unit and equivalent resistance (Re )
is set to zero.
42
7. Conclusion
The thesis includes many different disciplines within electrical power engi-
neering. In exciter design, the power electronic design aspects is directly
linked to the electrical machine design. The performance of the excitation
system determines the field forcing strength of the synchronous generator.
Traditionally, permanent magnets have not found its use in hydropower gen-
erators. However, outer pole PM exciters are able to make the excitation sys-
tem independent of the grid voltage.
Modern power electronic interfaces are able to improve the performance of
the exciter. The end result is increased power factor, reduced torque pulsa-
tions and improved controllability. The dual quadrant chopper, with a rotating
capacitor on the rotating shaft, includes less active components compared to
conventional thyristor based interfaces.
The step response of the field current in the synchronous generator is di-
rectly linked to the available field winding ceiling voltage. The availability
of the field voltage is more reliable on shaft-driven PM rotating exciters com-
pared to conventional potential-source static exciters. Compound-source static
exciters is an alternative, but it includes more components, causing it to be less
attractive due to increased costs.
Simulations shown in Chapter 6 proves that field forcing during low volt-
age ride-through improves the ability to keep the synchronous generator in
synchronism to the grid. The shaft-driven PM excitation system has a good
ability to keep the generator in synchronism during voltage dips. Even the
bus-fed field-wound exciter used on some pilot plants will perform better than
the conventional static excitation system. This is because the exciter field
winding has a very high self inductance. It takes time to change the exciter
field current, even during voltage dips.
The stabilizing effect of the fast-response available ceiling voltage has been
documented in the literature [4, 6]. In [37], it is pointed out the problem of
the reduced terminal voltage input to the bus-fed static and rotating excitation
system during faults. This is the major benefit of the rotating shaft-driven PM
excitation system.
43
8. Future work
The content of my future work is divided into four different branches; exciter
design aspects, power electronic design aspects, controller design aspects and
complete models that incorporates all aspects, including regulator, generator
and the grid.
8.1 Exciter armature winding design

Our rotor armature winding design was based on conventional field-wound
rotating exciters. Distributed windings are widely used in industry, but sin-
gle layer concentrated winding design would lead to better fault tolerance of
the exciter. Paper III shows that the per unit reactances of the designed ex-
citer are small compared to conventional field-wound exciters. Short circuit
currents are easier to suppress in field-wound exciters, which is as challenge
for PM rotating exciters, especially since the armature currents flows in the
rotor. Fault tolerant design will make the phases less magnetically coupled to
each other. With a six phase system, one could obtain redundancy not only
in the power electronics but also from the sources. Single layer concentrated
winding design tends to obtain higher values for the phase inductances, which
could make the per unit reactances of the PM exciter closer to the conventional
field-wound exciters.
8.2 Power electronic interfaces

The power electronic interfaces studied in Paper IV should be studied for mul-
tiphase topologies as well. Some investigations has been made of the multi-
phase topologies in Paper I, but not for the modern power electronic interfaces.
The rotating diode bridge connected to a dc link capacitor is proven to reduce
torque ripple and increase the power factor compared to the thyristor rectifier.
Multiphase topologies with the diode bridge are expected to improve the per-
formance further. Also the dynamics of the the rotating thin film capacitor and
the dual quadrant chopper should be compared with the controllability of the
thyristor bridge rectifier. Earlier investigations shows that the controllability
of the thyristor bridge is more sensitive to the size of the phase inductances of
the exciter.
44
8.3 Bang-bang excitation control
Most excitation systems uses a PID regulator in the automatic voltage regu-
lator (AVR). The regulator adjusts the average field voltage by changing the
delay firing angle of a thyristor bridge rectifier. I order to obtain a fast step
response, a high gain of the regulator is required. This leads to overshoots in
the field current during step response. FIKS requires that the overshoot should
be less than 15 percent of the step change and non-oscillating [22]. Other
transmission system operators have requirements on the field current settling
time instead [38].
With the implementation of modern power electronic excitation control in-
terfaces like the dual-quadrant chopper, new control strategies are possible
to implement. The field voltage can change from positive ceiling voltage to
negative ceiling voltage instantaneously, yielding a reduced the field current
overshoot. The switches are controlled based on a reference value of the field
current. By allowing a certain tolerance band for the field current, the switch-
ing position of the chopper is changed every time the field current hits the edge
of the band. The switching frequency and the duty cycle happens naturally as
a result of the specified reference and tolerance. Earlier work has shown the
possibility of rapid changes of field voltage in the bang-bang excitation control
scheme [39], which leads to improved damping of oscillations in the system.
8.4 Synchronous generator modelling

The impact of the excitation system on synchronous generator transient stabil-
ity should be studied further. The synchronous generator model should include
accurate models of the excitation system, the step-up transformer and and the
automatic voltage regulator including PSS. The electromechanical generator
model presented in Chapter 4 should be validated with experimental measure-
ments on industrial power plants. It is interesting to investigate if the applica-
tion of fast-response brushless rotating exciters could increase the active power
utilization of the synchronous generator. Studies of low voltage ride-through
for governor controlled prime mover driven generators are rarely found in the
literature [40].
45
9. Summary of papers
Paper I
Comparison of Thyristor-Controlled Rectification Topologies for a Six-
Phase Rotating Brushless Permanent Magnet Exciter. A preliminary de-
sign of the outer pole PM exciter with a diametrical permanent magnet orien-
tation is analyzed. Different thyristor rectification topologies of a multiphase
PM exciter is investigated. Analytical models are compared with equivalent
circuit simulations and a FEM model. The results proves the benefit of a
multiphase exciter with a thyristor based power electronic interface. The per-
formance is evaluated with respect to torque ripple and excitation current con-
trollability.
The article was published in IEEE Transactions on Energy Conversion, vol.
31(1), pp. 314-322, March 2016.
Paper II
Step time response evaluation of different synchronous generator excita-
tion systems. Different excitation system configurations are investigated with
respect to their dynamic performances. Experimental results from a real in-
dustrial power plant with brushless excitation and wireless communication is
used as input for a simulation study. The same exciter is simulated in different
configurations. The new brushless configurations all meet the step time re-
sponse requirements for conventional static excitation systems set by Statnett
SF.
E. Dahlen from Voith Hydro helped out with technical and experimental
data.
The paper was presented by the author, who is the main author of the pa-
per, at the 4th IEEE International Energy Conference (ENERGYCON’2016) in
Leuven, Belgium, in April 2016. It was also selected for inclusion in the IEEE
Xplore database.
46
Paper III
Design and characterization of a rotating brushless PM exciter for a syn-
chronous generator test setup. The final design of the PM exciter with para-
metrical permanent magnet orientation is analyzed. The construction and and
fitting of the stator into the synchronous generator test rig is also discussed.
Experimental measurements of coil voltages, phase voltages and line-to-line
voltages is made with a 166.67 rpm speed on the shaft. Comparison with FEM
simulations is done. Also simulated magnetic flux densities is validated with
hall sensor measurements. An extensive analysis of the d- and q-axis induc-
tances is made in the end of the paper, as well as a full specification of the
exciter.
The paper was submitted to the XXIIth International Conference on Elec-
trical Machines (ICEM’2016) in Lausanne, Switzerland, in September 2016.
Paper IV
Evaluation of different power electronic interfaces for control of a rotat-
ing brushless PM exciter. This paper investigates the performance of differ-
ent power electronic interfaces on the PM exciter, designed for a synchronous
generator test setup. Three different interface is studied with respect to avail-
able field winding ceiling voltage and torque ripple pulsations. It is concluded
that a diode rectifier in the rotating frame makes the system simpler since it
is self-commutated. It also reduces the torque ripple and improves the power
factor compared to the thyristor bridge rectifier. Interface B is proven to be the
best compromise between complexity and performance.
The paper was submitted to the 42nd Annual Conference of the IEEE Indus-
trial Electronics Society (IECON’2016) in Firenze, Italy, in October 2016.
47
10. Svensk sammanfattning
Den norska elnätsstandarden FIKS från Statnett, uppger att synkrongenerato-

rer med Installerad effekt över 25 MVA måste ha statisk magnetiseringsutrust-
ning. Den innehåller också krav på stegsvar för fältströmmen och tillgänglig
toppspänning för fältlindningen till synkrongeneratorn.
Ett förbättrat borstlöst magnetiseringssystem är i drift i vissa pilot kraftverk.
En roterande tyristorbrygga styrs via Bluetooth. Stegsvarstiden är lika snabbt
som konventionella statiska excitationssystem. Men en toppspänningsfaktor
på två kräver att tyristorbryggan driver tändvinklarna på ungefär 60 grader.
Resultatet av detta är högre vridmomentpulsationer, lägre effektfaktor och lågt
utnyttjande av mataren.
Nya kraftelektroniska gränssnitt på axeln resulterar i en bättre utnyttjan-
de av den designade mataren och förbättrar den mekaniska prestanda såväl
som bättrad styrbarhet av fältströmmen genom fältlindningen. Även perma-
nentmagnetiserade roterande matare ökar styrkan at tvinga fältström hos den
synkrona generator, vilket ger förbättring i transient stabilitet (det så kallade
Lov Voltage Ride Through kravet). Borstlösa matare minskar också det regel-
bundna underhållet av generatorn.
Avhandlingen ger experimentella mättningar på en testanläggning med syn-
krongenerator och en konstruerad permanentmagnetiserad matare med olika
kraftelektroniska lösningar. Den innehåller även mätningar på industrianlägg-
ningar.
48
11. Acknowledgements
The research presented in this thesis was carried out as a part of the Stat-
kraft R&D-program: Future Hydro Power. Statkraft is a leading company in
hydropower internationally and Europe’s largest generator of renewable ener-
gy. The company supports hydropower research in both Sweden and Norway.
Statkraft is a member of the Swedish Hydropower Centre (SVC), where Upp-
sala University hosts the electromechanical research. They also supports the
Norwegian Hydropower Centre, including the hydropower group at the Uni-
versity College of Southeast Norway (USN), hosted by Norwegian University
of Science and Technology in Trondheim.
Urban Lundin, my supervisor: Thank you for your support and for all the
opportunities you have given me. Without you, I would never have been where
I am today. Thank you for all the exciting experiments we have set up the last
years. It is an honor to have you as my main supervisor.
From Statkraft, Geir Aalvik and Jan Petter Haugli: Thank you for your great
follow up on the project and your feedback. Also thanks to Stefan Ring, from
Statnett, for giving me insights into the grid requirements on the excitation
systems.
Special thanks to Fredrik Evestedt for all the help you have given me for
running our experiments on the test rig and your work on the power electronic
interfaces. Also thanks to Johan Abrahamsson and J. Jose Perez-Loya, for
your extensive experimental knowledge and for all the help and supervision
you have given me.
From Vattenfall R&D, Johan Bladh and Linn Saarinen: Thanks for all gre-
at discussions and for our cooperation. And also thanks to my colleges Per
Norrlund and Weijiia Yang, for the opportunity to get real insights into the
turbine-generator interaction.
Thanks for good cooperation with Mats Wahlen at Svea Power and Erik
Dahlen from Voith Hydro. It is very motivating to get real industrial data to
confirm what you are working on.
From the University College of Southeast Norway (USN), Duy Tho Do
and Tone Gran: Thank you for giving me the opportunity to do my PhD at
Uppsala University in cooperation with Statkraft. Thanks to Lars Christian
Iversen, for initiation of the project. Also thanks to Roy Rasmussen, for the
opporunity to give lectures on Electrical Machines and Power Electronics to
second year engineering students. I have also had a good time cooperating
with Per Åsmund Jørgensen.
49
Special thanks to Karina Bakkeløkken Hjelmervik. Your supervision so far
has been very helpful. You have great skills in Matlab and Latex, which is pri-
celess for publishing in journals. Also, thanks for your insights into analytical
mathematics and simulation methods.
I want to thank Einar Halvorsen, Medhi Azadmehr and Frank Karlsen, for
your interest and insights into energy conversion approaches. Thanks for the
discussions we have had. I would also like to thank Marius Stian Tannum and
Helge Tor Kristiansen for giving me insights into maritime electrical power
systems, automation systems and electrical standards.
Thanks to Svein Thore Hagen for my opportunity to join USN’s hydropo-
wer group. Special thanks to Thomas Øyvang, my friend and colleage, doing a
PhD on hydropower generators as well. All our discussions have been very va-
luable. And thanks for great feedback and discussions with Gunne J. Hegglid,
Dietmar Winkler and Bernt Lie.
50
References
[1] “IEEE Guide for Identification, Testing, and Evaluation of the Dynamic
Performance of Excitation Control Systems,” IEEE Std 421.2, 2014.
[2] “IEEE Recomended Practice for Excitation System Models for Power System
Stability Studies,” IEEE Std 421.5, 2005.
[3] “IEC Rotating Electrical Machines - Excitation Systems for Synchronous
Machines - Definitions,” IEC Std 60034-16-1, 2011.
[4] J. Bayne, P. Kundur, and W. Watson, “Static exciter control to improve transient
stability,” Power Apparatus and Systems, IEEE Transactions on, vol. 94, no. 4,
pp. 1141–1146, 1975.
[5] “IEEE Guide for the Preparation of Excitation System Specification,” IEEE Std
421.4, 2004.
[6] J. Hurley and M. Baldwin, “High-response excitation systems on
turbine-generators: A stability assessment,” IEEE Transactions on Power
Apparatus and Systems, vol. 11, no. PAS-101, pp. 4211–4221, 1982.
[7] W. Wright, R. Hawley, and J. Dinely, “Brushless thyristor excitation systems.”
IEEE Transactions on Power Apparatus and Systems, vol. 5, no. PAS-91, pp.
1848–1854, 1972.
[8] P. B. Wooldridge and A. Blythe, “Considerations affecting the design
philosophy of solid-state exciters,” IEEE Transactions on Power Apparatus and
Systems, vol. 5, no. PAS-87, pp. 1288–1299, 1968.
[9] Z. Jurin, B. Brkljač, M. Kolić, M. Kajari, and V. Ćesić, “Excitation systems for
high power synchronous generators with redundant configurations,”
Proceedings of the 7. Konferenca Slovenskih Elektroenergetikov, pp. 55–60,
2005.
[10] H.-W. Rhew, S.-K. Sul, and M.-h. Park, “A new generator static excitation
system using boost-buck chopper,” in Industrial Electronics, Control, and
Instrumentation, 1996., Proceedings of the 1996 IEEE IECON 22nd
International Conference on, vol. 2. IEEE, 1996, pp. 1023–1028.
[11] C.-K. Kim, H.-W. Rhew, and Y. H. Kim, “Stability performance of new static
excitation system with boost-buck converter,” in Industrial Electronics Society,
1998. IECON’98. Proceedings of the 24th Annual Conference of the IEEE,
vol. 1. IEEE, 1998, pp. 402–409.
[12] Z. Chen, J. Lu, C. Mao, Y. Zhou, and D. Wang, “Design and implementation of
voltage source converter excitation system to improve power system stability,”
in Industry Applications Society Annual Meeting, 2015 IEEE. IEEE, 2015,
pp. 1–10.
[13] R. Jordan, R. Schaefer, J. Estes, and M. Dube, “Good as new,” Industry
Applications Magazine, IEEE, vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 31–38, 2005.
[14] G. Allen, “Brushless excitation systems for synchronous machines,” Electronics
& Power, vol. 21, no. 15, pp. 866–869, 1975.
51
[15] E. Whitney, D. Hoover, and P. Bobo, “An electric utility brushless excitation
system,” Power Apparatus and Systems, Part III. Transactions of the American
Institute of Electrical Engineers, vol. 78, no. 4, pp. 1821–1824, 1959.
[16] T. Dillman, J. Skooglund, F. Keay, W. South, and C. Raczkowski, “A high initial
response brushless excitation system,” Power Apparatus and Systems, IEEE
Transactions on, no. 5, pp. 2089–2094, 1971.
[17] C. Stigers, J. Hurley, D. Gorden, and D. Callanan, “Field tests and simulation
of a high initial response brushless excitation system,” Energy Conversion,
IEEE Transactions on, no. 1, pp. 2–10, 1986.
[18] C. A. Platero, M.-A. Redondo, F. Blazquez, and P. Frias, “High-speed
de-excitation system for brushless synchronous machines,” Electric Power
Applications, IET, vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 156–161, 2012.
[19] R. Schaefer, “Applying static excitation systems,” Industry Applications
Magazine, IEEE, vol. 4, no. 6, pp. 41–49, 1998.
[20] C. V. Maughan, “Carbon brush collector maintenance on turbine-generators,”
in Electrical Insulation Conference and Electrical Manufacturing Expo, 2007.
IEEE, 2007, pp. 57–62.
[21] R. Schaefer, “Application of static excitation systems for rotating exciter
replacement,” in Pulp and Paper Industry Technical Conference, 1997., Annual.
IEEE, 1997, pp. 199–208.
[22] Ø. Kirkeluten and Ø. Breidablik, “Veileder for funksjonskrav i kraftsystemet
(FIKS) - spesifikasjon for reguleringstekniske krav til magnetiseringssystemer
og dempetilsatser,” Norwegian grid codes for transmission system (Statnett SF),
pp. 101–108, 2012.
[23] B. J. Baliga, “Power semiconductor devices for variable-frequency drives,”
Proceedings of the IEEE, vol. 82, no. 8, pp. 1112–1122, 1994.
[24] S. Kouro, M. A. Perez, J. Rodriguez, A. M. Llor, and H. A. Young, “Model
predictive control: Mpc’s role in the evolution of power electronics,” Industrial
Electronics Magazine, IEEE, vol. 9, no. 4, pp. 8–21, 2015.
[25] T. A. Lipo, Analysis of synchronous machines. CRC Press, 2012.
[26] J. Lidenholm, M. Ranlof, and U. Lundin, “Effects of including automatic
excitation control in transient field simulations of hydrogenerators,” in
Universities Power Engineering Conference (UPEC), 2009 Proceedings of the
44th International. IEEE, 2009, pp. 1–5.
[27] J. Bladh, M. Wallin, L. Saarinen, and U. Lundin, “Standstill frequency response
test on a synchronous machine extended with damper bar measurements,” 2012.
[28] M. Wallin, M. Ranlöf, and U. Lundin, “Design and construction of a
synchronous generator test setup,” in Electrical Machines (ICEM), 2010 XIX
International Conference on. IEEE, 2010, pp. 1–5.
[29] J. Lidenholm, M. Ranlöf, and U. Lundi, “Comparison of field and circuit
generator models in single machine infinite bus system simulations,” in
Electrical Machines (ICEM), 2010 XIX International Conference on. IEEE,
2010, pp. 1–6.
[30] J. Lidenholm and U. Lundin, “Estimation of hydropower generator parameters
through field simulations of standard tests,” Energy Conversion, IEEE
Transactions on, vol. 25, no. 4, pp. 931–939, 2010.
[31] O. Wallmark, “AC machine analysis - fundamental theory,” KTH Royal
52
Institute of Technology, 2014.
[32] A. Barakat, S. Tnani, G. Champenois, and E. Mouni, “Analysis of synchronous
machine modeling for simulation and industrial applications,” Simulation
Modelling Practice and Theory, vol. 18, no. 9, pp. 1382–1396, 2010.
[33] P. Kundur, N. J. Balu, and M. G. Lauby, Power system stability and control.
McGraw-hill New York, 1994, vol. 7.
[34] M. Tartibi and A. Domijan, “Optimizing ac-exciter design,” Energy
Conversion, IEEE Transactions on, vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 16–24, 1996.
[35] K. W. Klontz, T. J. Miller, M. I. McGilp, H. Karmaker, and P. Zhong,
“Short-circuit analysis of permanent-magnet generators,” Industry
Applications, IEEE Transactions on, vol. 47, no. 4, pp. 1670–1680, 2011.
[36] E. Rebollo, F. R. Blanquez, C. A. Platero, F. Blazquez, and M. Redondo,
“Improved high-speed de-excitation system for brushless synchronous machines
tested on a 20 mva hydro-generator,” Electric Power Applications, IET, vol. 9,
no. 6, pp. 405–411, 2015.
[37] R. Eshraghnia and R. J. Kleen, “Modeling and simulation of the transient
response of 138.75 mva synchronous generator with rotating and static
excitation systems,” in T&D Conference and Exposition, 2014 IEEE PES.
IEEE, 2014, pp. 1–5.
[38] R. Thornton-Jones, I. Golightly, N. Gutteridge, C. Huizer, and D. Navratil,
“Review of generator and excitation system specification and test requirements
to satisfy multiple international grid code standards,” in Power and Energy
Society General Meeting, 2012 IEEE. IEEE, 2012, pp. 1–2.
[39] A. Rajagopalan and M. Hariharan, “Bang-bang excitation control,” Power
Apparatus and Systems, IEEE Transactions on, no. 2, pp. 703–711, 1974.
[40] Y. Shicong, G. V. Shagar, A. Ukil, S. Gamini Jayasinghe, and A. K. Gupta,
“Evaluation of low voltage ride-through capability of synchronous generator
connected to a grid,” in Power & Energy Society General Meeting, 2015 IEEE.
IEEE, 2015, pp. 1–5.
53
View publication stats

Full Text 014

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Full Text 014

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

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

Fast-response rotating brushless exciters for improved stability of

Thesis · June 2016

Jonas Kristiansen Nøland

Optimal Utilization of Smart Generators View project

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

JONAS KRISTIANSEN NØLAND

Keywords: synchronous generators, permanent magnet machines, excitation systems,

© Jonas Kristiansen Nøland 2016

I Nøland, J. K., Hjelmervik, K. B., Lundin, U., "Comparison of

II Nøland, J. K., Lundin, U., "Step time response evaluation of different

III Nøland, J. K., Evestedt, F., Perez-Loya, J. J., Abrahamsson, J.,

IV Nøland, J. K., Evestedt, F., Perez-Loya, J. J., Abrahamsson, J.,

Reprints were made with permission from the publishers.

Symbol Unit Description

1.1 Project background

1.2 Outline of the thesis

Fig. 2.1 shows a block diagram of the components included in an excitation

Figure 2.1. Block diagram of the components of an excitation control system.

2.1 Excitation control system

2.2 Open circuit characteristics

2.3 Ceiling voltage

2.5 Different excitation systems

Figure 2.7. Diagram of the conventional static excitation system.

Compound-cource excitation system

2.5.2 Rotating brushless excitation systems

Conventional bus-fed brushless excitation system

Figure 2.8. Diagram of the conventional bus-fed brushless excitation system.

Improved bus-fed brushless excitation system

Controller 2 + Controller 1 + Reference

3-stage shaft-driven brushless excitation system

Figure 2.10. Diagram of the conventional shaft-driven brushless excitation system.

2-stage shaft-driven brushless excitation system

Rotating Rotating Rotating Synchronous

An unloaded synchronous generator excitation system can be simplified as a

At rated steady state conditions, the voltage-current relationship is given by

3.1 Terminal voltage buildup

at no-load operation. There exists certain requirements in the NGTR of how

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1

3.3 Positive step response

4.1 Equivalent circuit

Lfd L1d Lad ed Le

Figure 4.1. Synchronous machine d-axis equivalent circuit

Figure 4.2. Synchronous machine q-axis equivalent circuit

4.2 Grid dynamics

4.3 Mechanical dynamics

similarly for the phase currents

As a result of the power-invariant transformation, ud and uq displays a vector

and the reactive power production equals

4.5 Steady state operation

Ra I sin(δ + ϕ) +U sin(δ ) = Xq I cos(δ + ϕ). (4.20)

The solution with respect to the rotor angle yields

Xq,pu cos(ϕ) − Ra,pu sin(ϕ)

5.1 Synchronous generator parameters

Terminal voltage U 156 380 V

Additionally to the generator rating, also a proper design specification lies

An important parameter for exciation systems is the reduction factor, relating

From the synchronous generator standard parameters, the main inductances

Table 5.6. Equivalent circuit parameters of the generators

For conversion of the equivalent circuit parameters into real measurable

8.1 Exciter armature winding design

8.2 Power electronic interfaces

8.4 Synchronous generator modelling

Den norska elnätsstandarden FIKS från Statnett, uppger att synkrongenerato-