This chapter resumes the various mathematical models used to represent the dynamic characteristics of the Dinorwig Hydroelectric Pumped Storage Plant. As described earlier, the models were developed systematically with increasing complexity, each model suitable for a particular system dynamic study. For instance, linear models can be applied to represent the effects of low frequency and guidance in speed control and nonlinear models are required when large changes of speed and power are considered, such as in islanding, load rejection and systems restoration studies. As Dinorwig has six units, the approaches considered both single input single output (SISO) and multivariable (multiple inputs multiple outputs, MIMO) models. The model of the system can be separated into subsystems. Figure A.1 shows a schematic of the Dinorwig power plant model. The full hydroelectric station model is constructed combining the four subsystems: guide vane dynamics, hydraulic subsystem, turbine/generator and sensor filters.
Guide Vane Multiple Input Multiple Output Single Input Single Output Matrix Transfer Function Direct Transfer Function
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.
Kundur, P.: Power System Stability and Control New York. Mc Graw Hill, New York (1994)Google Scholar
IEEE Working group on prime mover energy supply: Hydraulic turbine and turbine control model for system dynamic studies. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 7, 167–179 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mansoor, S.P.: Behaviour and operation of pumped storage hydro plants. Ph.D. thesis, Bangor University, Bangor (2000)Google Scholar
Hannett, L.N., Feltes, J.W., Fardanesh, B., Crean, W.: Modeling and control tuning of a hydro station with units sharing a common penstock section. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 14, 1407–1414 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anderson, P.M., Mirheydar, M.: A low-order frequency response model. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 5(3), 720–729 (1990)CrossRefGoogle Scholar