Η ΡΑΑΕΥ, σε συνέχεια της από 9ης Ιουλίου πρόσκλησής της για συμμετοχή στη Δημόσια Διαβούλευση σχετικά με τη «Διαδικασία Επιβεβαίωσης Συμμόρφωσης Μονάδων Ηλεκτροπαραγωγής» σύμφωνα με τον Κανονισμό (ΕΕ) 2016/631 [RfG], δημοσιοποιεί τον ακόλουθο πίνακα συμμετεχόντων στην ανωτέρω διαβούλευση, καθώς και το περιεχόμενο των επιστολών που υποβλήθηκαν στο πλαίσιο αυτής. Η ΡΑΑΕΥ ευχαριστεί όσους συμμετείχαν στη Δημόσια Διαβούλευση. Συμμετέχοντες: Ημερομηνία Αποστολής: 02.09.2024 Αριθμός Πρωτοκόλλου: Ι-379699 Αποστολέας: GE VERNOVA Ημερομηνία Αποστολής: 02.09.2024 Αριθμός Πρωτοκόλλου: Ι-379702 Αποστολέας: ΕΜΠΙΣΤΕΥΤΙΚΟ Ημερομηνία Αποστολής: 02.09.2024 Αριθμός Πρωτοκόλλου: Ι-379709 Αποστολέας: ΜΠΑΛΑΔΑΚΗΣ-ΚΟΤΤΑΣ ΙΩΑΝΝΗΣ Ημερομηνία Αποστολής: 04.09.2024 Αριθμός Πρωτοκόλλου: Ι-379963 Αποστολέας: ΔΕΔΔΗΕ Α.Ε Ημερομηνία Αποστολής: 01.10.2024 Αριθμός Πρωτοκόλλου: Ι-381513 Αποστολέας: EDP RENEWABLES Ημερομηνία Αποστολής: 01.10.2024 Αριθμός Πρωτοκόλλου: Ι-381528 Αποστολέας: ΠΡΟΤΑΣΙΣ Α.Ε Ημερομηνία Αποστολής: 07.10.2024 Αριθμός Πρωτοκόλλου: Ι-381839 Αποστολέας: ΑΔΜΗΕ Α.Ε GE Vernova 20 avenue du Maréchal Juin 90000 Belfort FRANCE Purpose: GE Vernova answer on public consultation of document “Power-Generating Modules compliance verification: Power-Generating Modules types Α, B, C and D according to NC RfG and Decision RAE 1165/2020 as in force” version 1.0 Belfort, August 28th 2024 GE Vernova (GEV) has been made aware of the willing of Rythmistiki Archi Energeias to receive industry comments through a public consultation (https://www.rae.gr/diavoulefseis/94199/) on the document “Power-Generating Modules compliance verification: Power-Generating Modules types Α, B, C and D according to NC RfG and Decision RAE 1165/2020 as in force” version 1.0, made it available on the following link of RAE website: https://www.rae.gr/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/PowerGenerating-Modules-compliance-verification-%CE%94%CE%94.pdf Please find below GE Vernova grid code experts feedback on the public consultation document: Ref. 1 Requirements Clarifications General comment As a general comment, GEV would like to have more details on how this document applies for a combined cycle gas turbine plant in single shaft configuration versus a Multi shaft configuration, and also how the Steam Turbine operation shall be taken in account. Page 1 of 4 Ref. Requirements Clarifications 3.2.1 LFSM-O (p24-28) Combined Cycle Gas Turbine active power decrease frequency response beyond -10% load change may not be committed within 30 seconds response time. GEV recommends also to allow testing frequency injections beyond ±250mHz (5% droop) to be performed as a ramp instead of a step, as allowed already for simulations. LFSM-O simulations, page 27: “A tolerance band of max. +/- 5% of the measured value will be accepted”: GEV recommends to add an acceptable tolerance band on the simulation & tests results versus ideal response, for transient and steady-state. For example, GEV CCGT tolerance band is the following: • • 2 Tolerance band for simulations: ±10% of rated load in transients (first 30 seconds), ±5% of rated load in steady-state after settling time ; Tolerance band for tests: see below envelope for frequency tests used by GEV. 3 3.2.2 LFSM-U (p28-33) Refer to LFSM-O comments above 4 3.2.4 Frequency restoration (p40-41) No comment 3.2.5 Black start (p42-44) GEV understands Black start / grid reconstruction scenario shall take place to reconstruct quickly and the most efficiently a failing grid. As such, a combined cycle gas turbine (CCGT) plant that is started from scratch to support grid reconstruction will not have sufficient steam to use its Steam Turbine. One shall take in consideration that only Gas Turbine capability (~66% of full CCGT nominal power output) will be available for grid reconstruction since Steam Turbine will be off-line). 5 Also and to foster efficient operation during grid reconstruction and avoid any unexpected new blackout, GEV recommends to allow a simple, restricted operation mode in such case: 4 or 5% fixed droop, 10mHz deadbdand, LFSM mode inactive (only droop mode, equivalent to FSM). After grid reconstruction event, TSO may inform plant owner by mail/phone or through a dedicated signal so that the plant will switch again the normal, unrestricted modes (FSM/LFSM…) 6 3.2.6 Tripping to houseload (p45-46) No comment Page 2 of 4 Ref. Requirements Clarifications 3.2.7 Frequency range (p47-51) GEV understands that only voltage range will be tested on site, no test on frequency range for SPGM. This is aligned with our design limitations: GEV gas turbines do not allow true offfrequency testing on site beyond ±1%. The GEV SPGM generators are compliant to IEC60034 for voltage level ±5% for permanent steady state, Generator Stepup Transformers taps to be set in accordance. 7 The GEV SPGM generators are compliant to IEC60034 for flux (U/f) level for permanent steady state, Generator Step-up Transformers taps to be set in accordance. 3.2.8 Reactive power capability (p52-71) 8 The GEV SPGM generators are compliant to IEC60034 for voltage level ±5% for permanent steady state, Generator Stepup Transformers taps to be set in accordance. The GEV SPGM generators are compliant to IEC60034 for flux (U/f) level for permanent steady state, Generator Step-up Transformers taps to be set in accordance. 3.2.13 Island Operation (p 83-84) 9 Only article RfG 2016/631 15
(5)(b) is used in page 83, one may understand that this requirement applies only to Type C generators. GEV understands this requirement applies also to Type D generator, per RfG Article 16
(1). GEV recommends to indicate this Article too for sake of clarity. 3.2.14 FRT profiles (p85-93) Page 85 & 89: profiles given are indicated for SPGM Type C & D, but the chapter indicated also Type D. GEV recommends to clarify on both pictures and wording whether type B/C or type B/C/D are impacted by this chapter. Page 86 & 90:same comment on PPM profiles. Per GEV experience and technical limitations on generators, GEV recommends to perform only simulations and not tests to assess FRT capability. 10 Page 91 FRT SPGM test: GEV understands the test aims to assess the plant accessories capability to withstand a FRT event. GEV recommends to clarify the duration time of the low voltage ride through event: it is stated two duration times on this section, one is 200ms and the other 1.5s. 3.2.15 Post fault active power recovery (p94-95) GEV would recommend to highlight that the required simulations shall be applied on both PPM and SPGM – the way the wording is done currently may lead to false conclusions. 3.2.16 Power Oscillation Damping Control (POD) (p96-106) GEV understands per ‘Objective’ section in page 96: “With regard to the power oscillations damping control simulation […]” that only simulations and no real tests are required. However, following chapters are called “Under-excitation limiter (UEL) tests”, “Over-excitation limiter (OEL) tests”, “Excitation control system open-loop response tests”, “Excitation control system and PSS response test”. Please clarify if both on site tests & simulations are required for Power Oscillation Damping Control. 11 12 Page 3 of 4 For more details or queries, please reach out: Romaric JENNEVIN Grid Code Compliance Senior Engineer Mail : romaric.jennevin@ge.com 20 avenue du Maréchal Juin, 90000 Belfort (FRANCE) Page 4 of 4 From: EDP Renewables Address: Gravias 4 Marousi, Attiki 15125 Date: 30/09/2024 Protocol No.: 234 To: Regulatory Authority for Energy, Waste and Water (RAAEY) Address: Peiraios Street 132 Athens, Attiki, 11854 Response to Public Consultation on the compliance verification procedure for Power Generating Modules according to NC RfG Dear Sir/Madam, With this letter we would like to submit our comments on the draft document “RfG compliance verification for Power generating modules types A, B, C and D” under public consultation. The comments are attached in Table 1 below, with reference to the relevant page of the above document. Yours sincerely, Sofia Korkizoglou Engineering department, EDPR Greece Table
- EDPR Comments on the draft document “RfG compliance verification for Power generating modules types A, B, C and D” under public consultation No. Reference 1 - p.9 “The PGMD is published on the Comment These annexes and chapter 4 are missing 2 Please clarify if the requirements apply only to OPPM or to both OPPM and PPM. Please confirm that only the submission of the full detail PowerFactory (PF) model is compulsory and that the other three models (PSSE full or aggregated and PF aggregated) will depend on project and/or in agreement between TSO and PGFO. Please clarify if island operation is required for type C and D PPMs. Please clarify to which value is the ±5% referred to. According to IEC 61400-21-1 for active power control is defined ±5% of rated power. Please clarify what is the Pref when the three modes are enabled, as well as in the transitions between the different control modes. Also, the table Test 1 is not coherent with Figure 4.10 for frequencies 49.7 and 50.3Hz. The time required at 85% Un is too long to be fulfilled at terminals of Generating Units (wind turbine/inverter). The requirement is defined at Connection Point (PCC), and normally an on-load tap changer is installed in the main transformer that allows to fulfill this requirement. Our suggestion is to demonstrate conformity with this requirement by simulation, using validated models of generating units and detailed model of the PPM. It is not clear the Q requirement at an active power below 0.1 (below the green line), both, supplying and absorbing reactive power. The required reactive power output is not according to the U-Q/Pmax profile. website of RSO see annex:” - p. 9 “Execution of required tests, as specified in chapter 4;” - p. 13 “Simulation models, as required by the RSO (Annex 4:Technical Guideline on Compliance Simulatons for the Assessment of PGM Technical Requirements);” p. 13, 75 (O)PPM 3 p. 19 Simulation models 4 p. 23 “4.2.13 Island operation” 5 p. 27, 32, 72, 73 “A tolerance band of max. +/- 5% of the measured value will be accepted.” p. 37 “During the test we have three different Pref values, one when entering FSM, one when entering LFSM-O and one when entering LFSM-U. This is also shown in table below.” p. 50 “The minimum voltage is 85%:” 6 7 8 9 10 p. 58 - 62 “Figures P-Q/Pmax profile of a power park module Type C/D below maximum power” p. 69 Table for PPM Type D <300kV, Cases 8-11 p. 70 Table for PPM Type D >=300kV, Cases 8-10 p. 76 “Test parameters of the voltage control mode for ΔU/ΔQ” in both tables It seems that the indicated slope and the values in the table are not coherent. For example, according to table for the test 6, the slope would be (ΔU/U)/(ΔQ/Qmax), 0,01/(0,06/=Qmax). According to Qmax definition in test procedure, for type C PPM, Qmax would be 0,
- Then the 11 12 13 14 15 p. 79 “Test evaluation criteria” p. 97 “The model of the PPM shall demonstrate that it can provide active power oscillations damping capability accordance with point (f) of Article 21
(3).” p. 121 “The model shall automatically initialise for all operation points within all operation modes and remain stable.” p. 121 “The model shall include predefined faults which are necessary to perform the system conformity study. The faults shall be adjustable” p. 121 “As described in IEC 61400-27-2 the GU should be validated for:” slope would be 0,01/(0,06/0,25) = 4,2%. For test test 12, the slope would be, 0,01/(0,05/Qmax). Qmax keep being 0,25 according to test procedure, "the lowest value of the absolute maximum inductive (injected) and absolute maximum capacitive (absorbed) reactive power". Then the slope would be 0,01/(0,05/0,25)=5%. Could you clarify how the slope is calculated, please? Please clarify if the response time is evaluated. Please clarify if there is any procedure. Sometimes models require less than 10 s to stabilize. Please clarify if this requirement is valid. Please clarify which are these faults. To demonstrate the generation unit model fulfill these bullets, simulations must be performed by PGFO or the doc of manufacturer is valid (certificate according to IEC 61400-21)?