Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > sci.electronics.design > #446378 > unrolled thread

OT: Current standard for watch precision

Started byPimpom <pimpom@invalid.com>
First post2017-02-06 11:22 +0530
Last post2017-02-09 04:57 -0500
Articles 20 on this page of 119 — 31 participants

Back to article view | Back to sci.electronics.design


Contents

  OT: Current standard for watch precision Pimpom <pimpom@invalid.com> - 2017-02-06 11:22 +0530
    Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Phil Allison <pallison49@gmail.com> - 2017-02-05 22:13 -0800
      Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Pimpom <Pimpom@invalid.com> - 2017-02-06 17:15 +0530
        Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Phil Allison <pallison49@gmail.com> - 2017-02-06 05:11 -0800
          Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Pimpom <Pimpom@invalid.com> - 2017-02-06 19:30 +0530
            Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Phil Allison <pallison49@gmail.com> - 2017-02-06 06:33 -0800
              Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision nub12 <nub12@null.com> - 2017-02-07 07:57 +0800
          Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Robert Baer <robertbaer@localnet.com> - 2017-02-08 20:06 -0800
        Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Tauno Voipio <tauno.voipio@notused.fi.invalid> - 2017-02-06 20:16 +0200
          Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Pimpom <Pimpom@invalid.com> - 2017-02-07 00:12 +0530
          Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-02-06 11:58 -0700
        Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Jasen Betts <jasen@xnet.co.nz> - 2017-02-07 05:50 +0000
          Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-07 02:43 -0500
            Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Pimpom <Pimpom@invalid.com> - 2017-02-07 14:53 +0530
              Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision krw@notreal.com - 2017-02-07 12:32 -0500
            Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Phil Allison <pallison49@gmail.com> - 2017-02-07 02:33 -0800
            Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision upsidedown@downunder.com - 2017-02-07 17:56 +0200
              Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-07 17:32 -0500
                Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Lasse Langwadt Christensen <langwadt@fonz.dk> - 2017-02-07 14:52 -0800
                  Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision upsidedown@downunder.com - 2017-02-08 10:25 +0200
                    Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-08 03:37 -0500
                      Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Martin Brown <|||newspam|||@nezumi.demon.co.uk> - 2017-02-08 09:01 +0000
                        Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-08 05:24 -0500
                          Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> - 2017-02-08 09:08 -0800
                            Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-08 16:04 -0500
                              Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Clifford Heath <no.spam@please.net> - 2017-02-09 08:12 +1100
                                Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-08 17:28 -0500
                                  Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision pcdhobbs@gmail.com - 2017-02-08 16:19 -0800
                                    Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-09 00:36 -0500
                                      Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-09 00:38 -0500
                                      Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Clifford Heath <no.spam@please.net> - 2017-02-09 18:39 +1100
                                        Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-09 04:16 -0500
                                      Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Martin Brown <|||newspam|||@nezumi.demon.co.uk> - 2017-02-09 09:46 +0000
                                        Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-09 05:03 -0500
                                          Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Jeroen Belleman <jeroen@nospam.please> - 2017-02-09 11:45 +0100
                                            Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-09 07:12 -0500
                                              Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Jeroen Belleman <jeroen@nospam.please> - 2017-02-09 13:31 +0100
                                          Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Martin Brown <|||newspam|||@nezumi.demon.co.uk> - 2017-02-09 12:14 +0000
                                            Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-09 07:25 -0500
                                              Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Martin Brown <|||newspam|||@nezumi.demon.co.uk> - 2017-02-10 09:17 +0000
                                                Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Jeroen Belleman <jeroen@nospam.please> - 2017-02-10 10:45 +0100
                                                Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-10 21:56 -0500
                                          Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Jasen Betts <jasen@xnet.co.nz> - 2017-02-11 02:06 +0000
                                            Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision krw@notreal.com - 2017-02-10 22:24 -0500
                                      Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Jasen Betts <jasen@xnet.co.nz> - 2017-02-11 01:54 +0000
                                        Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Lasse Langwadt Christensen <langwadt@fonz.dk> - 2017-02-10 18:10 -0800
                                Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Cursitor Doom <curd@notformail.com> - 2017-02-08 23:34 +0000
                                  Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Lasse Langwadt Christensen <langwadt@fonz.dk> - 2017-02-08 15:49 -0800
                                    Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision pcdhobbs@gmail.com - 2017-02-08 15:55 -0800
                                      Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Lasse Langwadt Christensen <langwadt@fonz.dk> - 2017-02-08 16:08 -0800
                                        Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Ralph Barone <ralph@invalid.com> - 2017-02-09 03:24 +0000
                                          Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> - 2017-02-08 20:34 -0800
                                            Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Tim Wescott <tim@seemywebsite.com> - 2017-02-08 23:26 -0600
                                              Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> - 2017-02-08 23:28 -0800
                                            Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Spehro Pefhany <speffSNIP@interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> - 2017-02-09 00:48 -0500
                                            Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision George Herold <gherold@teachspin.com> - 2017-02-09 06:52 -0800
                                            Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision krw@notreal.com - 2017-02-09 20:37 -0500
                                    Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Cursitor Doom <curd@notformail.com> - 2017-02-10 17:11 +0000
                                Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision upsidedown@downunder.com - 2017-02-09 23:13 +0200
                              Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision krw@notreal.com - 2017-02-08 20:17 -0500
                              Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> - 2017-02-08 19:29 -0800
                                Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> - 2017-02-08 20:16 -0800
                          Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Martin Brown <|||newspam|||@nezumi.demon.co.uk> - 2017-02-08 17:13 +0000
                            Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision kevin93 <kevin@whitedigs.com> - 2017-02-08 12:54 -0800
                          Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision krw@notreal.com - 2017-02-08 12:35 -0500
                            Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Lasse Langwadt Christensen <langwadt@fonz.dk> - 2017-02-08 09:50 -0800
                              Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision krw@notreal.com - 2017-02-08 13:14 -0500
                              Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> - 2017-02-08 11:35 -0800
                                Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision upsidedown@downunder.com - 2017-02-08 23:16 +0200
                                Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Jeroen Belleman <jeroen@nospam.please> - 2017-02-09 09:59 +0100
                          Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Lasse Langwadt Christensen <langwadt@fonz.dk> - 2017-02-08 09:41 -0800
                            Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision krw@notreal.com - 2017-02-08 13:15 -0500
                          Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Jasen Betts <jasen@xnet.co.nz> - 2017-02-11 01:46 +0000
                            Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-10 22:12 -0500
                        Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> - 2017-02-09 15:25 -0800
                        Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Clifford Heath <no.spam@please.net> - 2017-02-10 10:38 +1100
                          Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision bill.sloman@ieee.org - 2017-02-09 17:42 -0800
                    Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Jeroen Belleman <jeroen@nospam.please> - 2017-02-08 11:01 +0100
                      Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Jasen Betts <jasen@xnet.co.nz> - 2017-02-11 04:06 +0000
                Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision krw@notreal.com - 2017-02-07 21:02 -0500
            Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> - 2017-02-07 10:24 -0800
              Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> - 2017-02-07 10:48 -0800
                Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision George Herold <gherold@teachspin.com> - 2017-02-07 11:12 -0800
                  Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Mikko OH2HVJ <mikko.syrjalahti@nospam.fi> - 2017-02-08 09:33 +0200
                    Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision George Herold <gherold@teachspin.com> - 2017-02-08 06:31 -0800
        Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Martin Brown <|||newspam|||@nezumi.demon.co.uk> - 2017-02-07 09:58 +0000
      Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Robert Baer <robertbaer@localnet.com> - 2017-02-08 20:00 -0800
    Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> - 2017-02-05 23:01 -0800
    Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision mike <ham789@netzero.net> - 2017-02-06 03:21 -0800
      Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Pimpom <Pimpom@invalid.com> - 2017-02-06 17:25 +0530
    Re: Current standard for watch precision "Tim Williams" <tiwill@seventransistorlabs.com> - 2017-02-06 06:57 -0600
      Re: Current standard for watch precision Pimpom <Pimpom@invalid.com> - 2017-02-06 19:10 +0530
        Re: Current standard for watch precision "Tim Williams" <tiwill@seventransistorlabs.com> - 2017-02-06 08:13 -0600
          Re: Current standard for watch precision Pimpom <Pimpom@invalid.com> - 2017-02-06 21:04 +0530
        Re: Current standard for watch precision Spehro Pefhany <speffSNIP@interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> - 2017-02-06 09:30 -0500
          Re: Current standard for watch precision George Herold <gherold@teachspin.com> - 2017-02-06 06:56 -0800
        Re: Current standard for watch precision Robert Baer <robertbaer@localnet.com> - 2017-02-08 20:11 -0800
      Re: Current standard for watch precision Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-02-06 12:04 -0700
        Re: Current standard for watch precision Jim Thompson <To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@On-My-Web-Site.com> - 2017-02-06 14:58 -0700
          Re: Current standard for watch precision Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-02-06 15:21 -0700
            Re: Current standard for watch precision Jim Thompson <To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@On-My-Web-Site.com> - 2017-02-06 16:06 -0700
              Re: Current standard for watch precision Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-02-06 17:19 -0700
                Re: Current standard for watch precision Jim Thompson <To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@On-My-Web-Site.com> - 2017-02-06 17:52 -0700
                  Re: Current standard for watch precision Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-02-06 17:55 -0700
        Re: Current standard for watch precision krw@notreal.com - 2017-02-06 21:44 -0500
      Re: Current standard for watch precision Robert Baer <robertbaer@localnet.com> - 2017-02-08 20:04 -0800
    Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Spehro Pefhany <speffSNIP@interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> - 2017-02-06 09:06 -0500
      Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Pimpom <Pimpom@invalid.com> - 2017-02-06 21:04 +0530
    Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision TTman <pcw1.cad@ntlworld.com> - 2017-02-06 14:31 +0000
      Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Clifford Heath <no.spam@please.net> - 2017-02-07 08:54 +1100
    Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Tim Wescott <seemywebsite@myfooter.really> - 2017-02-06 17:33 -0600
    Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision krw@notreal.com - 2017-02-06 21:23 -0500
    Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision prairiesky <outgoing.server@mozilla.com> - 2017-02-06 23:00 -0800
    Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Cursitor Doom <curd@notformail.com> - 2017-02-07 18:29 +0000
    Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Robert Baer <robertbaer@localnet.com> - 2017-02-08 19:59 -0800
      Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-09 00:48 -0500
        Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Tim Wescott <tim@seemywebsite.com> - 2017-02-08 23:54 -0600
          Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Tim Wescott <tim@seemywebsite.com> - 2017-02-09 00:00 -0600
          Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-09 04:57 -0500

Page 2 of 6 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 5 6  Next page →


#446758

Fromrickman <gnuarm@gmail.com>
Date2017-02-08 03:37 -0500
Message-ID<o7el8a$doe$2@dont-email.me>
In reply to#446757
On 2/8/2017 3:25 AM, upsidedown@downunder.com wrote:
> On Tue, 7 Feb 2017 14:52:09 -0800 (PST), Lasse Langwadt Christensen
> <langwadt@fonz.dk> wrote:
>
>> Den tirsdag den 7. februar 2017 kl. 23.32.16 UTC+1 skrev rickman:
>>> On 2/7/2017 10:56 AM, upsidedown@downunder.com wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 7 Feb 2017 02:43:33 -0500, rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I also remember building a clock with a vacuum florescent display with a
>>>>> trimmer.  I was adjusting it by beating a 60 Hz output against the power
>>>>> line.  I could get it very, very close, but then ten or fifteen minutes
>>>>> later it would drift again!  It took me awhile before I realized that
>>>>> wasn't the clock, it was the power line.  lol
>>>>>
>>>>> Does the power line still drift like that?  Is there a reason why it
>>>>> would in this day with the many sources of accurate timing available?
>>>>> I'd expect the many generators could do a much better job of not running
>>>>> up and down in frequency so much, or is this an inherent aspect of a
>>>>> widely distributed network?
>>>>
>>>> This is exactly how synchronous AC generators are operated. A changing
>>>> load will slightly change the frequency and the primary mover (water,
>>>> steam) are adjusted accordingly. The variation is small and the error
>>>> in a mains synchronized clocks is usually below 10 to 15 s. During the
>>>> night, the network is running slightly above nominal frequency, in
>>>> order to catch up before the next morning.
>>>
>>> I think there is more to it than that.  We aren't talking about a single
>>> generator, we are dealing with a country wide network that has to stay
>>> very close to in phase.  I would be *very* surprised to find the grid
>>> would drift by multiple seconds within a day.
>>
>> on the page Jeff linked to it says they can catch up ~17 seconds a day,
>> once they get 20 seconds out of sync
>>
>> and it is just country wide, the synchronous grid of Continental Europe
>> 667 gigawatts in 20 some countries
>
> There are thousands of generators connected in parallel and the
> fluctuating frequency ensures that there are proper load sharing
> between generators. This method has been used for more than a century.

So how is the average frequency maintained?  What actually controls the 
long term frequency of the grid?  If it were just the load sharing 
driving the frequency up and down as the loads and generators vary, the 
frequency would wander with no fixed average.

-- 

Rick C

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#446759

FromMartin Brown <|||newspam|||@nezumi.demon.co.uk>
Date2017-02-08 09:01 +0000
Message-ID<o7emp2$vef$1@gioia.aioe.org>
In reply to#446758
On 08/02/2017 08:37, rickman wrote:
> On 2/8/2017 3:25 AM, upsidedown@downunder.com wrote:
>> On Tue, 7 Feb 2017 14:52:09 -0800 (PST), Lasse Langwadt Christensen
>> <langwadt@fonz.dk> wrote:
>>
>>> on the page Jeff linked to it says they can catch up ~17 seconds a day,
>>> once they get 20 seconds out of sync
>>>
>>> and it is just country wide, the synchronous grid of Continental Europe
>>> 667 gigawatts in 20 some countries
>>
>> There are thousands of generators connected in parallel and the
>> fluctuating frequency ensures that there are proper load sharing
>> between generators. This method has been used for more than a century.
>
> So how is the average frequency maintained?  What actually controls the
> long term frequency of the grid?  If it were just the load sharing
> driving the frequency up and down as the loads and generators vary, the
> frequency would wander with no fixed average.

The long term average is very carefully maintained by running the grid 
faster usually at night to catch up when the load is lowest - a quirk 
that used to annoy astronomers back in the days when synchronous 60Hz 
motors were used on some telescope drives. If you watch the realtime 
grid frequency display at times of peak load on for example UK gridwatch 
you will see the relation between load and frequency.

They try never to get more than 0.2Hz out for an extended period and 
will bring in fast generators like the pumped hydro storage and gas 
turbines if it does or typically if peak load is anticipated.

http://www.gridwatch.templar.co.uk/

Big football match half time is particularly hard on the grid at this 
time of year as everyone goes to put the kettle on at once and load is 
already pretty close to the upper limit. Not much margin on UK capacity.

-- 
Regards,
Martin Brown

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#446763

Fromrickman <gnuarm@gmail.com>
Date2017-02-08 05:24 -0500
Message-ID<o7erho$16l$2@dont-email.me>
In reply to#446759
On 2/8/2017 4:01 AM, Martin Brown wrote:
> On 08/02/2017 08:37, rickman wrote:
>> On 2/8/2017 3:25 AM, upsidedown@downunder.com wrote:
>>> On Tue, 7 Feb 2017 14:52:09 -0800 (PST), Lasse Langwadt Christensen
>>> <langwadt@fonz.dk> wrote:
>>>
>>>> on the page Jeff linked to it says they can catch up ~17 seconds a day,
>>>> once they get 20 seconds out of sync
>>>>
>>>> and it is just country wide, the synchronous grid of Continental Europe
>>>> 667 gigawatts in 20 some countries
>>>
>>> There are thousands of generators connected in parallel and the
>>> fluctuating frequency ensures that there are proper load sharing
>>> between generators. This method has been used for more than a century.
>>
>> So how is the average frequency maintained?  What actually controls the
>> long term frequency of the grid?  If it were just the load sharing
>> driving the frequency up and down as the loads and generators vary, the
>> frequency would wander with no fixed average.
>
> The long term average is very carefully maintained by running the grid
> faster usually at night to catch up when the load is lowest - a quirk
> that used to annoy astronomers back in the days when synchronous 60Hz
> motors were used on some telescope drives. If you watch the realtime
> grid frequency display at times of peak load on for example UK gridwatch
> you will see the relation between load and frequency.
>
> They try never to get more than 0.2Hz out for an extended period and
> will bring in fast generators like the pumped hydro storage and gas
> turbines if it does or typically if peak load is anticipated.
>
> http://www.gridwatch.templar.co.uk/
>
> Big football match half time is particularly hard on the grid at this
> time of year as everyone goes to put the kettle on at once and load is
> already pretty close to the upper limit. Not much margin on UK capacity.

Yes, but *how* do they run the grid faster or slower?  Also, *who* 
controls this?

-- 

Rick C

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#446797

FromJeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com>
Date2017-02-08 09:08 -0800
Message-ID<kaim9clrvvpmlfoe33eehkpe7p1ugha1om@4ax.com>
In reply to#446763
On Wed, 8 Feb 2017 05:24:35 -0500, rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote:
>Yes, but *how* do they run the grid faster or slower?  Also, *who* 
>controls this?

This is cool.  Crowd sourced utility frequency data:
"FNET/GridEye Web Display.  U.S. Frequency Gradient Map"
<http://fnetpublic.utk.edu/gradientmap.html>  (USA/Canada)
<http://powerit.utk.edu/worldmap/>  (World)
Some detail on how it works:
<http://fnetpublic.utk.edu>
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FNET>

Wikipedia article on Utility Freq:
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utility_frequency#Stability>
Looks like it's run by the NERC:
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_Electric_Reliability_Corporation>
but I couldn't find anything involving frequency control on their web
pile.

"How do power plants maintain a 60 Hz frequency?"
<https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/1kpx0l/how_do_power_plants_maintain_a_60_hz_frequency/>

My guess(tm) is the actual speed adjustment varies by the generator
type.  For solar, there's a DC to AC inverter which can be controlled
electronically.  For hydro, vary the flow rate to match the load.  For
steam power, vary the steam pressure to match the load.  Since both
the load and the flow/pressure affects the frequency, the steam
pressure, flow rate, etc will need to track to considerable precision.

There's also a proposal to eliminate the TEC (time error correction):
"Time Error Correction and Reliability White Paper"
<http://www.nerc.com/pa/Stand/Project%2020101422%20Phase%202%20of%20BARC%20%20BAL004%20DL/BAL-004-0_White_Paper_Clean_09242015.pdf>

-- 
Jeff Liebermann     jeffl@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D    http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann     AE6KS    831-336-2558

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#446857

Fromrickman <gnuarm@gmail.com>
Date2017-02-08 16:04 -0500
Message-ID<o7g11k$frj$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#446797
On 2/8/2017 12:08 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
> On Wed, 8 Feb 2017 05:24:35 -0500, rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Yes, but *how* do they run the grid faster or slower?  Also, *who*
>> controls this?
>
> This is cool.  Crowd sourced utility frequency data:
> "FNET/GridEye Web Display.  U.S. Frequency Gradient Map"
> <http://fnetpublic.utk.edu/gradientmap.html>  (USA/Canada)
> <http://powerit.utk.edu/worldmap/>  (World)
> Some detail on how it works:
> <http://fnetpublic.utk.edu>
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FNET>
>
> Wikipedia article on Utility Freq:
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utility_frequency#Stability>
> Looks like it's run by the NERC:
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_Electric_Reliability_Corporation>
> but I couldn't find anything involving frequency control on their web
> pile.
>
> "How do power plants maintain a 60 Hz frequency?"
> <https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/1kpx0l/how_do_power_plants_maintain_a_60_hz_frequency/>
>
> My guess(tm) is the actual speed adjustment varies by the generator
> type.  For solar, there's a DC to AC inverter which can be controlled
> electronically.  For hydro, vary the flow rate to match the load.  For
> steam power, vary the steam pressure to match the load.  Since both
> the load and the flow/pressure affects the frequency, the steam
> pressure, flow rate, etc will need to track to considerable precision.
>
> There's also a proposal to eliminate the TEC (time error correction):
> "Time Error Correction and Reliability White Paper"
> <http://www.nerc.com/pa/Stand/Project%2020101422%20Phase%202%20of%20BARC%20%20BAL004%20DL/BAL-004-0_White_Paper_Clean_09242015.pdf>

Thanks for all the links, but they don't actually explain the mechanism 
for how the various generators are adjusted to maintain the grid 
frequency.  Someone else indicated in Europe there is a central point of 
measurement and once a day they send out orders to plant operators to 
adjust some control that causes the generator to exert force on the 
network.  I suppose that creates an individually small, but in aggregate 
large force to drive the grid frequency.  But that has to be separate 
from adjusting the generators for the varying loads.

-- 

Rick C

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#446863

FromClifford Heath <no.spam@please.net>
Date2017-02-09 08:12 +1100
Message-ID<589b89c9$0$43766$c3e8da3$5e5e430d@news.astraweb.com>
In reply to#446857
On 09/02/17 08:04, rickman wrote:
> On 2/8/2017 12:08 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
>> On Wed, 8 Feb 2017 05:24:35 -0500, rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Yes, but *how* do they run the grid faster or slower?  Also, *who*
>>> controls this?
>>
>> This is cool.  Crowd sourced utility frequency data:
>> "FNET/GridEye Web Display.  U.S. Frequency Gradient Map"
>> <http://fnetpublic.utk.edu/gradientmap.html>  (USA/Canada)
>> <http://powerit.utk.edu/worldmap/>  (World)
>> Some detail on how it works:
>> <http://fnetpublic.utk.edu>
>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FNET>
>>
>> Wikipedia article on Utility Freq:
>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utility_frequency#Stability>
>> Looks like it's run by the NERC:
>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_Electric_Reliability_Corporation>
>>
>> but I couldn't find anything involving frequency control on their web
>> pile.
>>
>> "How do power plants maintain a 60 Hz frequency?"
>> <https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/1kpx0l/how_do_power_plants_maintain_a_60_hz_frequency/>
>>
>>
>> My guess(tm) is the actual speed adjustment varies by the generator
>> type.  For solar, there's a DC to AC inverter which can be controlled
>> electronically.  For hydro, vary the flow rate to match the load.  For
>> steam power, vary the steam pressure to match the load.  Since both
>> the load and the flow/pressure affects the frequency, the steam
>> pressure, flow rate, etc will need to track to considerable precision.
>>
>> There's also a proposal to eliminate the TEC (time error correction):
>> "Time Error Correction and Reliability White Paper"
>> <http://www.nerc.com/pa/Stand/Project%2020101422%20Phase%202%20of%20BARC%20%20BAL004%20DL/BAL-004-0_White_Paper_Clean_09242015.pdf>
>>
>
> Thanks for all the links, but they don't actually explain the mechanism
> for how the various generators are adjusted to maintain the grid
> frequency

The generators will tend to phase lock by themselves because of
the load. If you feed in more power (more steam, water, etc)
then its phase will just move ahead slightly. Loss of lock would
be disastrous.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#446888

Fromrickman <gnuarm@gmail.com>
Date2017-02-08 17:28 -0500
Message-ID<o7g5vl$3l8$2@dont-email.me>
In reply to#446863
On 2/8/2017 4:12 PM, Clifford Heath wrote:
> On 09/02/17 08:04, rickman wrote:
>> On 2/8/2017 12:08 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
>>> On Wed, 8 Feb 2017 05:24:35 -0500, rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Yes, but *how* do they run the grid faster or slower?  Also, *who*
>>>> controls this?
>>>
>>> This is cool.  Crowd sourced utility frequency data:
>>> "FNET/GridEye Web Display.  U.S. Frequency Gradient Map"
>>> <http://fnetpublic.utk.edu/gradientmap.html>  (USA/Canada)
>>> <http://powerit.utk.edu/worldmap/>  (World)
>>> Some detail on how it works:
>>> <http://fnetpublic.utk.edu>
>>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FNET>
>>>
>>> Wikipedia article on Utility Freq:
>>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utility_frequency#Stability>
>>> Looks like it's run by the NERC:
>>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_Electric_Reliability_Corporation>
>>>
>>>
>>> but I couldn't find anything involving frequency control on their web
>>> pile.
>>>
>>> "How do power plants maintain a 60 Hz frequency?"
>>> <https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/1kpx0l/how_do_power_plants_maintain_a_60_hz_frequency/>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> My guess(tm) is the actual speed adjustment varies by the generator
>>> type.  For solar, there's a DC to AC inverter which can be controlled
>>> electronically.  For hydro, vary the flow rate to match the load.  For
>>> steam power, vary the steam pressure to match the load.  Since both
>>> the load and the flow/pressure affects the frequency, the steam
>>> pressure, flow rate, etc will need to track to considerable precision.
>>>
>>> There's also a proposal to eliminate the TEC (time error correction):
>>> "Time Error Correction and Reliability White Paper"
>>> <http://www.nerc.com/pa/Stand/Project%2020101422%20Phase%202%20of%20BARC%20%20BAL004%20DL/BAL-004-0_White_Paper_Clean_09242015.pdf>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Thanks for all the links, but they don't actually explain the mechanism
>> for how the various generators are adjusted to maintain the grid
>> frequency
>
> The generators will tend to phase lock by themselves because of
> the load. If you feed in more power (more steam, water, etc)
> then its phase will just move ahead slightly. Loss of lock would
> be disastrous.

That doesn't explain how the "herd" is controlled.

-- 

Rick C

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#446924

Frompcdhobbs@gmail.com
Date2017-02-08 16:19 -0800
Message-ID<7098daf1-d7bf-476e-9920-266316ebc9c1@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#446888
>That doesn't explain how the "herd" is controlled. 

It's mostly large-scale rotating machinery with a lot of inertia. When the load exceeds the input, the 'herd' slows down. Thus you keep the system in balance by watching the frequency. 

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#446973

Fromrickman <gnuarm@gmail.com>
Date2017-02-09 00:36 -0500
Message-ID<o7gv1a$uov$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#446924
On 2/8/2017 7:19 PM, pcdhobbs@gmail.com wrote:
>> That doesn't explain how the "herd" is controlled.
>
> It's mostly large-scale rotating machinery with a lot of inertia. When the load exceeds the input, the 'herd' slows down. Thus you keep the system in balance by watching the frequency.

That's not the question I'm asking.

You have 10,000 people on a ship as oarsmen.  None can really see the 
others, but they all can hear each other and they all chant the cadence 
as they paddle.  It is *much* more effective if they all stroke 
together.  There is no guy on deck with a drum, just the chorus of 
voices crying, "stroke, stroke,..."

The pilot can talk to any of the oarsmen singly.  Or maybe he has an 
intercom that lets him talk to them all.  I don't know.

If the pilot wants to speed up the boat, what does he do?

That's what I'm asking about keeping the grid on sync with the time. 
How does the pilot control the oarsmen and how do the oarsmen keep in 
step but also nudge the stroke?

-- 

Rick C

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#446974

Fromrickman <gnuarm@gmail.com>
Date2017-02-09 00:38 -0500
Message-ID<o7gv4g$uov$2@dont-email.me>
In reply to#446973
On 2/9/2017 12:36 AM, rickman wrote:
> On 2/8/2017 7:19 PM, pcdhobbs@gmail.com wrote:
>>> That doesn't explain how the "herd" is controlled.
>>
>> It's mostly large-scale rotating machinery with a lot of inertia. When
>> the load exceeds the input, the 'herd' slows down. Thus you keep the
>> system in balance by watching the frequency.
>
> That's not the question I'm asking.
>
> You have 10,000 people on a ship as oarsmen.  None can really see the
> others, but they all can hear each other and they all chant the cadence
> as they paddle.  It is *much* more effective if they all stroke
> together.  There is no guy on deck with a drum, just the chorus of
> voices crying, "stroke, stroke,..."
>
> The pilot can talk to any of the oarsmen singly.  Or maybe he has an
> intercom that lets him talk to them all.  I don't know.
>
> If the pilot wants to speed up the boat, what does he do?
>
> That's what I'm asking about keeping the grid on sync with the time. How
> does the pilot control the oarsmen and how do the oarsmen keep in step
> but also nudge the stroke?

Oh yeah, and dealing with varying loads in the boat and wind and waves...

-- 

Rick C

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#446984

FromClifford Heath <no.spam@please.net>
Date2017-02-09 18:39 +1100
Message-ID<589c1ca5$0$29106$c3e8da3$38634283@news.astraweb.com>
In reply to#446973
On 09/02/17 16:36, rickman wrote:
> On 2/8/2017 7:19 PM, pcdhobbs@gmail.com wrote:
>>> That doesn't explain how the "herd" is controlled.
>>
>> It's mostly large-scale rotating machinery with a lot of inertia. When
>> the load exceeds the input, the 'herd' slows down. Thus you keep the
>> system in balance by watching the frequency.
>
> That's not the question I'm asking.

Yes, it is, but you still don't seem to understand why.

> You have 10,000 people on a ship as oarsmen.  None can really see the
> others, but they all can hear each other and they all chant the cadence
> as they paddle.  It is *much* more effective if they all stroke
> together.

That's a terrible example that does not apply.
The oarsmen must stroke together only because the oars would
collide. Remove 2 of every three oars so there is room and
each oarsman could stroke at whatever pace he chose. He
could also choose how much actual work to do on each stroke
too (as can each one when all are in sync of course).
He can idle along, letting the passing water push the oar,
or he can lean into it, and propel the boat.

In a similar way, each generator can keep pace, however much
power it is contributing. But if it contributes little power,
its turbine will tend to run fast, pushing its phase ahead,
which makes it contribute more power and so stay in a (slightly
advanced) phase lock. Similarly if it falls behind; its power
contribution falls until it's being dragged along by the grid,
instead if pushed along by its turbine (like the rower letting
the water push the oar).

Each power station can in this way sense when all together are
meeting the demand, or when they need to change, and each can
change in the right direction on their own.

Clifford Heath.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#446988

Fromrickman <gnuarm@gmail.com>
Date2017-02-09 04:16 -0500
Message-ID<o7hbtm$9i$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#446984
On 2/9/2017 2:39 AM, Clifford Heath wrote:
> On 09/02/17 16:36, rickman wrote:
>> On 2/8/2017 7:19 PM, pcdhobbs@gmail.com wrote:
>>>> That doesn't explain how the "herd" is controlled.
>>>
>>> It's mostly large-scale rotating machinery with a lot of inertia. When
>>> the load exceeds the input, the 'herd' slows down. Thus you keep the
>>> system in balance by watching the frequency.
>>
>> That's not the question I'm asking.
>
> Yes, it is, but you still don't seem to understand why.
>
>> You have 10,000 people on a ship as oarsmen.  None can really see the
>> others, but they all can hear each other and they all chant the cadence
>> as they paddle.  It is *much* more effective if they all stroke
>> together.
>
> That's a terrible example that does not apply.
> The oarsmen must stroke together only because the oars would
> collide. Remove 2 of every three oars so there is room and
> each oarsman could stroke at whatever pace he chose. He
> could also choose how much actual work to do on each stroke
> too (as can each one when all are in sync of course).
> He can idle along, letting the passing water push the oar,
> or he can lean into it, and propel the boat.
>
> In a similar way, each generator can keep pace, however much
> power it is contributing. But if it contributes little power,
> its turbine will tend to run fast, pushing its phase ahead,
> which makes it contribute more power and so stay in a (slightly
> advanced) phase lock. Similarly if it falls behind; its power
> contribution falls until it's being dragged along by the grid,
> instead if pushed along by its turbine (like the rower letting
> the water push the oar).
>
> Each power station can in this way sense when all together are
> meeting the demand, or when they need to change, and each can
> change in the right direction on their own.

Ok, thank you for the explanation.

-- 

Rick C

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#446990

FromMartin Brown <|||newspam|||@nezumi.demon.co.uk>
Date2017-02-09 09:46 +0000
Message-ID<o7hdp7$b6k$1@gioia.aioe.org>
In reply to#446973
On 09/02/2017 05:36, rickman wrote:
> On 2/8/2017 7:19 PM, pcdhobbs@gmail.com wrote:
>>> That doesn't explain how the "herd" is controlled.
>>
>> It's mostly large-scale rotating machinery with a lot of inertia. When
>> the load exceeds the input, the 'herd' slows down. Thus you keep the
>> system in balance by watching the frequency.
>
> That's not the question I'm asking.

But it is the answer to how does it all work together. An offline 
generator carefully syncs itself to the herd before joining the pack and 
once connected to the grid is locked to it by the sheer momentum of the 
mechanical energy in the turbines and the drag created by the load.

Entrainment describes the tendency of oscillators at similar frequencies 
to lock step even when you don't want them to.
>
> You have 10,000 people on a ship as oarsmen.  None can really see the
> others, but they all can hear each other and they all chant the cadence
> as they paddle.  It is *much* more effective if they all stroke
> together.  There is no guy on deck with a drum, just the chorus of
> voices crying, "stroke, stroke,..."
>
> The pilot can talk to any of the oarsmen singly.  Or maybe he has an
> intercom that lets him talk to them all.  I don't know.
>
> If the pilot wants to speed up the boat, what does he do?

Asks a few of the biggest or most responsive units to increase their 
output accordingly or to come onstream if they are really short of 
power. UK uses pumped storage to handle short term transient loads like 
soap opera advert breaks and half time at televised football matches.
>
> That's what I'm asking about keeping the grid on sync with the time. How
> does the pilot control the oarsmen and how do the oarsmen keep in step
> but also nudge the stroke?

They can all monitor grid frequency and so know which way they are 
aiming for in a classic local control loop. But the ensemble average 
works much better than the regulation on any single unit.

-- 
Regards,
Martin Brown

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#446993

Fromrickman <gnuarm@gmail.com>
Date2017-02-09 05:03 -0500
Message-ID<o7hemi$9iq$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#446990
On 2/9/2017 4:46 AM, Martin Brown wrote:
> On 09/02/2017 05:36, rickman wrote:
>> On 2/8/2017 7:19 PM, pcdhobbs@gmail.com wrote:
>>>> That doesn't explain how the "herd" is controlled.
>>>
>>> It's mostly large-scale rotating machinery with a lot of inertia. When
>>> the load exceeds the input, the 'herd' slows down. Thus you keep the
>>> system in balance by watching the frequency.
>>
>> That's not the question I'm asking.
>
> But it is the answer to how does it all work together. An offline
> generator carefully syncs itself to the herd before joining the pack and
> once connected to the grid is locked to it by the sheer momentum of the
> mechanical energy in the turbines and the drag created by the load.
>
> Entrainment describes the tendency of oscillators at similar frequencies
> to lock step even when you don't want them to.

I'm not asking how they lock to each other.  That I get.  I'm asking how 
the herd is steered.  I'm told in Europe they have a single measurement 
of the frequency or more likely the phase and once a day an order is 
sent out for all of the operators to change their speeds.

But if they are all synced to each other, how do they change the speed? 
Each one is outputting some amount of energy which has to do with demand 
(which I also don't see how they know how much energy to create). 
Theoretically they are only producing the energy their customers are 
asking for and get billed for.


>> You have 10,000 people on a ship as oarsmen.  None can really see the
>> others, but they all can hear each other and they all chant the cadence
>> as they paddle.  It is *much* more effective if they all stroke
>> together.  There is no guy on deck with a drum, just the chorus of
>> voices crying, "stroke, stroke,..."
>>
>> The pilot can talk to any of the oarsmen singly.  Or maybe he has an
>> intercom that lets him talk to them all.  I don't know.
>>
>> If the pilot wants to speed up the boat, what does he do?
>
> Asks a few of the biggest or most responsive units to increase their
> output accordingly or to come onstream if they are really short of
> power. UK uses pumped storage to handle short term transient loads like
> soap opera advert breaks and half time at televised football matches.

No one said they are short of power.  Say the power is perfectly 
matched, but the phase has drifted behind.  The power they generate 
needs to match the power being consumed by their customers, no?


>> That's what I'm asking about keeping the grid on sync with the time. How
>> does the pilot control the oarsmen and how do the oarsmen keep in step
>> but also nudge the stroke?
>
> They can all monitor grid frequency and so know which way they are
> aiming for in a classic local control loop. But the ensemble average
> works much better than the regulation on any single unit.

So everyone acts independently?

-- 

Rick C

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#446995

FromJeroen Belleman <jeroen@nospam.please>
Date2017-02-09 11:45 +0100
Message-ID<o7hh7j$hhl$1@gioia.aioe.org>
In reply to#446993
On 2017-02-09 11:03, rickman wrote:
> On 2/9/2017 4:46 AM, Martin Brown wrote:
>> On 09/02/2017 05:36, rickman wrote:
>>> On 2/8/2017 7:19 PM, pcdhobbs@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>> That doesn't explain how the "herd" is controlled.
>>>>
>>>> It's mostly large-scale rotating machinery with a lot of
>>>> inertia. When the load exceeds the input, the 'herd' slows
>>>> down. Thus you keep the system in balance by watching the
>>>> frequency.
>>>
>>> That's not the question I'm asking.
>>
>> But it is the answer to how does it all work together. An offline
>> generator carefully syncs itself to the herd before joining the
>> pack and once connected to the grid is locked to it by the sheer
>> momentum of the mechanical energy in the turbines and the drag
>> created by the load.
>>
>> Entrainment describes the tendency of oscillators at similar
>> frequencies to lock step even when you don't want them to.
>
> I'm not asking how they lock to each other.  That I get.  I'm asking
> how the herd is steered.  I'm told in Europe they have a single
> measurement of the frequency or more likely the phase and once a day
> an order is sent out for all of the operators to change their
> speeds.
>
> But if they are all synced to each other, how do they change the
> speed? Each one is outputting some amount of energy which has to do
> with demand (which I also don't see how they know how much energy to
> create). Theoretically they are only producing the energy their
> customers are asking for and get billed for.

They don't change speed. Individually, they can't. They have to
stay synchronous. They change the power they inject into the network,
according to the network frequency error. Collectively, that will
steer the frequency to its set point. In Europe, the conversion factor
is of the order of 20GW/Hz.

Measuring frequency is easy enough that each plant can work out
for itself which way to adjust its own power output. Only for long-
term accuracy do they need some central authority.

Get rid of the idea that demand is the primary input variable. It's
not. The collective load is basically resistive.

Jeroen Belleman

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#446997

Fromrickman <gnuarm@gmail.com>
Date2017-02-09 07:12 -0500
Message-ID<o7hm7t$51l$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#446995
On 2/9/2017 5:45 AM, Jeroen Belleman wrote:
> On 2017-02-09 11:03, rickman wrote:
>> On 2/9/2017 4:46 AM, Martin Brown wrote:
>>> On 09/02/2017 05:36, rickman wrote:
>>>> On 2/8/2017 7:19 PM, pcdhobbs@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>> That doesn't explain how the "herd" is controlled.
>>>>>
>>>>> It's mostly large-scale rotating machinery with a lot of
>>>>> inertia. When the load exceeds the input, the 'herd' slows
>>>>> down. Thus you keep the system in balance by watching the
>>>>> frequency.
>>>>
>>>> That's not the question I'm asking.
>>>
>>> But it is the answer to how does it all work together. An offline
>>> generator carefully syncs itself to the herd before joining the
>>> pack and once connected to the grid is locked to it by the sheer
>>> momentum of the mechanical energy in the turbines and the drag
>>> created by the load.
>>>
>>> Entrainment describes the tendency of oscillators at similar
>>> frequencies to lock step even when you don't want them to.
>>
>> I'm not asking how they lock to each other.  That I get.  I'm asking
>> how the herd is steered.  I'm told in Europe they have a single
>> measurement of the frequency or more likely the phase and once a day
>> an order is sent out for all of the operators to change their
>> speeds.
>>
>> But if they are all synced to each other, how do they change the
>> speed? Each one is outputting some amount of energy which has to do
>> with demand (which I also don't see how they know how much energy to
>> create). Theoretically they are only producing the energy their
>> customers are asking for and get billed for.
>
> They don't change speed. Individually, they can't.

I didn't say "change speed".  I said "change the speed"... of the network!


> They have to
> stay synchronous. They change the power they inject into the network,
> according to the network frequency error. Collectively, that will
> steer the frequency to its set point. In Europe, the conversion factor
> is of the order of 20GW/Hz.

Yes, how is this controlled?


> Measuring frequency is easy enough that each plant can work out
> for itself which way to adjust its own power output. Only for long-
> term accuracy do they need some central authority.

Don't they sell power?  If they are selling power to a customer and they 
have to pump extra power into the grid, who pays for it?


> Get rid of the idea that demand is the primary input variable. It's
> not. The collective load is basically resistive.

Then how does it get billed?  Money is the primary input variable.

-- 

Rick C

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#447001

FromJeroen Belleman <jeroen@nospam.please>
Date2017-02-09 13:31 +0100
Message-ID<o7hnfq$s64$1@gioia.aioe.org>
In reply to#446997
On 2017-02-09 13:12, rickman wrote:
> On 2/9/2017 5:45 AM, Jeroen Belleman wrote:
>> On 2017-02-09 11:03, rickman wrote:
>>> On 2/9/2017 4:46 AM, Martin Brown wrote:
>>>> On 09/02/2017 05:36, rickman wrote:
>>>>> On 2/8/2017 7:19 PM, pcdhobbs@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>>> That doesn't explain how the "herd" is controlled.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It's mostly large-scale rotating machinery with a lot of
>>>>>> inertia. When the load exceeds the input, the 'herd' slows
>>>>>> down. Thus you keep the system in balance by watching the
>>>>>> frequency.
>>>>>
>>>>> That's not the question I'm asking.
>>>>
>>>> But it is the answer to how does it all work together. An offline
>>>> generator carefully syncs itself to the herd before joining the
>>>> pack and once connected to the grid is locked to it by the sheer
>>>> momentum of the mechanical energy in the turbines and the drag
>>>> created by the load.
>>>>
>>>> Entrainment describes the tendency of oscillators at similar
>>>> frequencies to lock step even when you don't want them to.
>>>
>>> I'm not asking how they lock to each other.  That I get.  I'm asking
>>> how the herd is steered.  I'm told in Europe they have a single
>>> measurement of the frequency or more likely the phase and once a day
>>> an order is sent out for all of the operators to change their
>>> speeds.
>>>
>>> But if they are all synced to each other, how do they change the
>>> speed? Each one is outputting some amount of energy which has to do
>>> with demand (which I also don't see how they know how much energy to
>>> create). Theoretically they are only producing the energy their
>>> customers are asking for and get billed for.
>>
>> They don't change speed. Individually, they can't.
>
> I didn't say "change speed".  I said "change the speed"... of the network!

Dammit! You're trawling for trouble!

>
>> They have to
>> stay synchronous. They change the power they inject into the network,
>> according to the network frequency error. Collectively, that will
>> steer the frequency to its set point. In Europe, the conversion factor
>> is of the order of 20GW/Hz.
>
> Yes, how is this controlled?

As I said, if the frequency is low, the plant increases its
power output. More steam into the turbine, adjust generator
excitation to remain synchronous, power output goes up.

> Don't they sell power?  If they are selling power to a customer and they
> have to pump extra power into the grid, who pays for it?

The consumers, collectively. The power doesn't just vanish. It's
distributed over all consumers.

>> Get rid of the idea that demand is the primary input variable. It's
>> not. The collective load is basically resistive.
>
> Then how does it get billed?  Money is the primary input variable.

That should be evident by now.

Jeroen Belleman

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#446998

FromMartin Brown <|||newspam|||@nezumi.demon.co.uk>
Date2017-02-09 12:14 +0000
Message-ID<o7hmf6$qef$1@gioia.aioe.org>
In reply to#446993
On 09/02/2017 10:03, rickman wrote:
> On 2/9/2017 4:46 AM, Martin Brown wrote:
>> On 09/02/2017 05:36, rickman wrote:
>>> On 2/8/2017 7:19 PM, pcdhobbs@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>> That doesn't explain how the "herd" is controlled.
>>>>
>>>> It's mostly large-scale rotating machinery with a lot of inertia. When
>>>> the load exceeds the input, the 'herd' slows down. Thus you keep the
>>>> system in balance by watching the frequency.
>>>
>>> That's not the question I'm asking.
>>
>> But it is the answer to how does it all work together. An offline
>> generator carefully syncs itself to the herd before joining the pack and
>> once connected to the grid is locked to it by the sheer momentum of the
>> mechanical energy in the turbines and the drag created by the load.
>>
>> Entrainment describes the tendency of oscillators at similar frequencies
>> to lock step even when you don't want them to.
>
> I'm not asking how they lock to each other.  That I get.  I'm asking how
> the herd is steered.  I'm told in Europe they have a single measurement
> of the frequency or more likely the phase and once a day an order is
> sent out for all of the operators to change their speeds.

OK. In familiar control terms there is a local proportional to error 
control loop on each generator that tries to maintain frequency and in 
addition there is an integral control loop over 24 hours that tries to 
maintain the running average equal to nominal cycles/day too.

The latter is the one done supra nationally by asking a few of the most 
powerful stations to up their output slightly at night.
>
> But if they are all synced to each other, how do they change the speed?
> Each one is outputting some amount of energy which has to do with demand
> (which I also don't see how they know how much energy to create).
> Theoretically they are only producing the energy their customers are
> asking for and get billed for.

If the torque applied by the mechanical drive system exceeds the drag 
presented by the load the whole system spins up very slightly. The ones 
now outputting extra power making life easier for the others.

>>> You have 10,000 people on a ship as oarsmen.  None can really see the
>>> others, but they all can hear each other and they all chant the cadence
>>> as they paddle.  It is *much* more effective if they all stroke
>>> together.  There is no guy on deck with a drum, just the chorus of
>>> voices crying, "stroke, stroke,..."
>>>
>>> The pilot can talk to any of the oarsmen singly.  Or maybe he has an
>>> intercom that lets him talk to them all.  I don't know.
>>>
>>> If the pilot wants to speed up the boat, what does he do?
>>
>> Asks a few of the biggest or most responsive units to increase their
>> output accordingly or to come onstream if they are really short of
>> power. UK uses pumped storage to handle short term transient loads like
>> soap opera advert breaks and half time at televised football matches.
>
> No one said they are short of power.  Say the power is perfectly
> matched, but the phase has drifted behind.  The power they generate
> needs to match the power being consumed by their customers, no?

The phase is irrelevant apart from when you are connecting a new power 
station into the grid when it needs to be matched up first. Once 
connected up its speed it regulated by the whole ensemble and daily 
corrections are done by cycle counting and an integral control loop.

It is a dynamic system where the instantaneous load is never quite 
matched to the demand which is why the frequency is allowed to vary. It 
would be too costly to try and hold it to a tighter tolerance.

>>> That's what I'm asking about keeping the grid on sync with the time. How
>>> does the pilot control the oarsmen and how do the oarsmen keep in step
>>> but also nudge the stroke?
>>
>> They can all monitor grid frequency and so know which way they are
>> aiming for in a classic local control loop. But the ensemble average
>> works much better than the regulation on any single unit.
>
> So everyone acts independently?

The first order control is eliminate proportional error from the target 
frequency but that is never achieved in practice. So the next level 
correction is based on the integral number of cycles in 24 hours (which 
can also be measured and determined locally but ISTR is for historical 
reasons is done centrally by CEGB in the UK). They have a much better 
understanding of the national and international predicted load profile 
than any one generating plant can possibly have.

-- 
Regards,
Martin Brown

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#447000

Fromrickman <gnuarm@gmail.com>
Date2017-02-09 07:25 -0500
Message-ID<o7hn01$auq$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#446998
On 2/9/2017 7:14 AM, Martin Brown wrote:
> On 09/02/2017 10:03, rickman wrote:
>> On 2/9/2017 4:46 AM, Martin Brown wrote:
>>> On 09/02/2017 05:36, rickman wrote:
>>>> On 2/8/2017 7:19 PM, pcdhobbs@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>> That doesn't explain how the "herd" is controlled.
>>>>>
>>>>> It's mostly large-scale rotating machinery with a lot of inertia. When
>>>>> the load exceeds the input, the 'herd' slows down. Thus you keep the
>>>>> system in balance by watching the frequency.
>>>>
>>>> That's not the question I'm asking.
>>>
>>> But it is the answer to how does it all work together. An offline
>>> generator carefully syncs itself to the herd before joining the pack and
>>> once connected to the grid is locked to it by the sheer momentum of the
>>> mechanical energy in the turbines and the drag created by the load.
>>>
>>> Entrainment describes the tendency of oscillators at similar frequencies
>>> to lock step even when you don't want them to.
>>
>> I'm not asking how they lock to each other.  That I get.  I'm asking how
>> the herd is steered.  I'm told in Europe they have a single measurement
>> of the frequency or more likely the phase and once a day an order is
>> sent out for all of the operators to change their speeds.
>
> OK. In familiar control terms there is a local proportional to error
> control loop on each generator that tries to maintain frequency and in
> addition there is an integral control loop over 24 hours that tries to
> maintain the running average equal to nominal cycles/day too.
>
> The latter is the one done supra nationally by asking a few of the most
> powerful stations to up their output slightly at night.
>>
>> But if they are all synced to each other, how do they change the speed?
>> Each one is outputting some amount of energy which has to do with demand
>> (which I also don't see how they know how much energy to create).
>> Theoretically they are only producing the energy their customers are
>> asking for and get billed for.
>
> If the torque applied by the mechanical drive system exceeds the drag
> presented by the load the whole system spins up very slightly. The ones
> now outputting extra power making life easier for the others.
>
>>>> You have 10,000 people on a ship as oarsmen.  None can really see the
>>>> others, but they all can hear each other and they all chant the cadence
>>>> as they paddle.  It is *much* more effective if they all stroke
>>>> together.  There is no guy on deck with a drum, just the chorus of
>>>> voices crying, "stroke, stroke,..."
>>>>
>>>> The pilot can talk to any of the oarsmen singly.  Or maybe he has an
>>>> intercom that lets him talk to them all.  I don't know.
>>>>
>>>> If the pilot wants to speed up the boat, what does he do?
>>>
>>> Asks a few of the biggest or most responsive units to increase their
>>> output accordingly or to come onstream if they are really short of
>>> power. UK uses pumped storage to handle short term transient loads like
>>> soap opera advert breaks and half time at televised football matches.
>>
>> No one said they are short of power.  Say the power is perfectly
>> matched, but the phase has drifted behind.  The power they generate
>> needs to match the power being consumed by their customers, no?
>
> The phase is irrelevant apart from when you are connecting a new power
> station into the grid when it needs to be matched up first. Once
> connected up its speed it regulated by the whole ensemble and daily
> corrections are done by cycle counting and an integral control loop.

This conversation gets old when people don't understand the basics.  The 
phase is what controls the time on the clocks.  That is the thing that 
gets adjusted over the course of the day/week/month to keep the clocks 
running on time.


> It is a dynamic system where the instantaneous load is never quite
> matched to the demand which is why the frequency is allowed to vary. It
> would be too costly to try and hold it to a tighter tolerance.
>
>>>> That's what I'm asking about keeping the grid on sync with the time.
>>>> How
>>>> does the pilot control the oarsmen and how do the oarsmen keep in step
>>>> but also nudge the stroke?
>>>
>>> They can all monitor grid frequency and so know which way they are
>>> aiming for in a classic local control loop. But the ensemble average
>>> works much better than the regulation on any single unit.
>>
>> So everyone acts independently?
>
> The first order control is eliminate proportional error from the target
> frequency but that is never achieved in practice. So the next level
> correction is based on the integral number of cycles in 24 hours (which
> can also be measured and determined locally but ISTR is for historical
> reasons is done centrally by CEGB in the UK). They have a much better
> understanding of the national and international predicted load profile
> than any one generating plant can possibly have.

The grid is nudged by power generators outputting more power than 
"something".  I don't know what the "something" is.  Meanwhile each 
generator is charging a customer somewhere and they can only bill them 
for what they are using.  So how can a power plant output more power 
than they are billing and still make profit?

-- 

Rick C

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#447143

FromMartin Brown <|||newspam|||@nezumi.demon.co.uk>
Date2017-02-10 09:17 +0000
Message-ID<o7k0fd$cnd$1@gioia.aioe.org>
In reply to#447000
On 09/02/2017 12:25, rickman wrote:
> On 2/9/2017 7:14 AM, Martin Brown wrote:
>> On 09/02/2017 10:03, rickman wrote:
>>> On 2/9/2017 4:46 AM, Martin Brown wrote:
>>>> On 09/02/2017 05:36, rickman wrote:
>>>>> On 2/8/2017 7:19 PM, pcdhobbs@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>>> That doesn't explain how the "herd" is controlled.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It's mostly large-scale rotating machinery with a lot of inertia.
>>>>>> When
>>>>>> the load exceeds the input, the 'herd' slows down. Thus you keep the
>>>>>> system in balance by watching the frequency.
>>>>>
>>>>> That's not the question I'm asking.
>>>>
>>>> But it is the answer to how does it all work together. An offline
>>>> generator carefully syncs itself to the herd before joining the pack
>>>> and
>>>> once connected to the grid is locked to it by the sheer momentum of the
>>>> mechanical energy in the turbines and the drag created by the load.
>>>>
>>>> Entrainment describes the tendency of oscillators at similar
>>>> frequencies
>>>> to lock step even when you don't want them to.
>>>
>>> I'm not asking how they lock to each other.  That I get.  I'm asking how
>>> the herd is steered.  I'm told in Europe they have a single measurement
>>> of the frequency or more likely the phase and once a day an order is
>>> sent out for all of the operators to change their speeds.
>>
>> OK. In familiar control terms there is a local proportional to error
>> control loop on each generator that tries to maintain frequency and in
>> addition there is an integral control loop over 24 hours that tries to
>> maintain the running average equal to nominal cycles/day too.
>>
>> The latter is the one done supra nationally by asking a few of the most
>> powerful stations to up their output slightly at night.
>>>
>>> But if they are all synced to each other, how do they change the speed?
>>> Each one is outputting some amount of energy which has to do with demand
>>> (which I also don't see how they know how much energy to create).
>>> Theoretically they are only producing the energy their customers are
>>> asking for and get billed for.
>>
>> If the torque applied by the mechanical drive system exceeds the drag
>> presented by the load the whole system spins up very slightly. The ones
>> now outputting extra power making life easier for the others.
>>
>>>>> You have 10,000 people on a ship as oarsmen.  None can really see the
>>>>> others, but they all can hear each other and they all chant the
>>>>> cadence
>>>>> as they paddle.  It is *much* more effective if they all stroke
>>>>> together.  There is no guy on deck with a drum, just the chorus of
>>>>> voices crying, "stroke, stroke,..."
>>>>>
>>>>> The pilot can talk to any of the oarsmen singly.  Or maybe he has an
>>>>> intercom that lets him talk to them all.  I don't know.
>>>>>
>>>>> If the pilot wants to speed up the boat, what does he do?
>>>>
>>>> Asks a few of the biggest or most responsive units to increase their
>>>> output accordingly or to come onstream if they are really short of
>>>> power. UK uses pumped storage to handle short term transient loads like
>>>> soap opera advert breaks and half time at televised football matches.
>>>
>>> No one said they are short of power.  Say the power is perfectly
>>> matched, but the phase has drifted behind.  The power they generate
>>> needs to match the power being consumed by their customers, no?
>>
>> The phase is irrelevant apart from when you are connecting a new power
>> station into the grid when it needs to be matched up first. Once
>> connected up its speed it regulated by the whole ensemble and daily
>> corrections are done by cycle counting and an integral control loop.
>
> This conversation gets old when people don't understand the basics.

And that is *YOU*. The phase is drifting out by more 2pi every thousand 
cycles when the frequency is just 0.1Hz off its nominal value (a common 
situation). Just about all clocks work by dividing down some form of 
oscillator signal and rely on counting the *cycles* of that signal.

The phase error merely represents sub cycle jitter on that timing 
resolution - which may be important in some time critical applications 
like interferometry or ultra precision timekeeping for GPS.

> The
> phase is what controls the time on the clocks.  That is the thing that
> gets adjusted over the course of the day/week/month to keep the clocks
> running on time.

No it isn't. YOU have failed to understand the basics. It is the average 
frequency that is kept tightly constrained over a 24 hour period and 
kept even more accurate over the longer term.

>> It is a dynamic system where the instantaneous load is never quite
>> matched to the demand which is why the frequency is allowed to vary. It
>> would be too costly to try and hold it to a tighter tolerance.
>>
>>>>> That's what I'm asking about keeping the grid on sync with the time.
>>>>> How
>>>>> does the pilot control the oarsmen and how do the oarsmen keep in step
>>>>> but also nudge the stroke?
>>>>
>>>> They can all monitor grid frequency and so know which way they are
>>>> aiming for in a classic local control loop. But the ensemble average
>>>> works much better than the regulation on any single unit.
>>>
>>> So everyone acts independently?
>>
>> The first order control is eliminate proportional error from the target
>> frequency but that is never achieved in practice. So the next level
>> correction is based on the integral number of cycles in 24 hours (which
>> can also be measured and determined locally but ISTR is for historical
>> reasons is done centrally by CEGB in the UK). They have a much better
>> understanding of the national and international predicted load profile
>> than any one generating plant can possibly have.
>
> The grid is nudged by power generators outputting more power than
> "something".  I don't know what the "something" is.  Meanwhile each
> generator is charging a customer somewhere and they can only bill them
> for what they are using.  So how can a power plant output more power
> than they are billing and still make profit?

The "something" is the load on the other end. Energy is conserved so the 
extra torque they input results in spinning up the generators. 
Equivalently they can ask some of the biggest sink loads to drop off and 
exactly the same would happen. I begin to think you are either extremely 
stupid or are deliberately trolling.

-- 
Regards,
Martin Brown

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


Page 2 of 6 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 5 6  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | sci.electronics.design


csiph-web