Upload
austin-jennings
View
224
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Automation of Hungry Horse PowerplantSteven Jarsky, USBR BoiseDennis Philmon, Hungry Horse Dam
May 8, 2013
Overview
• Statistics• Automation History• Automation Equipment• Water Bypass
Provisions• Implementation
Challenges• Lessons Learned• Closing Comments
Statistics
• South Fork Flathead River• Construction complete in 1952• Four Generating Units – 107 MW each• Head = 447’, 3,150 cfs each• About a billion kilowatt-hours annually• The 2000 Federal Columbia River Power System
Biological Opinions affect ramp rate and minimum flow
Automation History
• Automation studies as part of 1990-1993 uprate and overhaul program
• Decided on operation from Grand Coulee (300 miles)• Switchyard also rebuilt in 1995
Automation Equipment
• Generators– Monitoring– Control– Start/stop– Protection
• Outlet Works– Flow bypass
• Spillway
Water Bypass Provisions
• Spillway• Selective Withdrawal• Outlet Works• Federal Columbia
Power System Biological Opinions
Implementation Challenges
• Drawings• Emergency backup• Operations staff• Operations training of
crafts• Call-out provisions
Implementation Challenges
• Communications• Security• Transmission restrictions• Rough zones• Unit dispatching
Lessons Learned
• Be sure roles and responsibilities are clear• Provide sufficient support for the project• Perform rigorous functional testing• Recognize and mitigate risks of remote operation• Plan for staff transition early
– Identify operations functions needed– Address the people side– Provide training– Document the plan
Closing Comments
• With good planning and implementation, automation and remote operation have proven to:– enhance operation– minimize risk– save money