Superconducting Partnership with Industry Program Update

Document Sample
Superconducting Partnership with Industry Program Update Powered By Docstoc
					Superconducting Power Equipment:
   Readiness Review Program

                 Mike Gouge, ORNL
                Steve Ashworth, LANL


    DOE 2009 Superconductivity for Electric Systems
                   Peer Review
                 August 4-6, 2009




                          1
    SPE Readiness Review Program
•   Goal: enhance the probability of successful SPE
    grid projects

•   Relevance to DOE-OE Program Mission:
     –   Development of HTS wires, and novel and revolutionary electric     R e s is ta n c e
         power equipment, such as cables, fault current limiters, and
         transformers, utilizing HTS wires.                                   is fu tile .

•   The major tool: phased readiness assessments:

     – Focus is on early identification and resolution of technical
       issues
          • issues involving cryogenic temperatures, mechanical stresses,
            vacuum + high voltage dielectrics are a major concern
     – Performed by an independent small group
     – Emphasis is on an objective technical review
     – Report goes directly back to SPE team with a copy to DOE
       staff




                                                   2
Anticipate at least 4 reviews over a project’s lifetime



    Phase 1                  Phase 2               Phase 3              Phase 4
    During R&D +             End of                Before system        “Lessons
    conceptual               design and            operations or        learned” after
    design after             prior to              tie-in to electric   demo phase
    award                    significant           grid
                             hardware

              Option for
              review at
              preliminary
                                           • Risk/reliability issues tracked by
              design stage
              for complex
                                             each project
              projects                        – Captures actions/issues/concerns
                                                from each readiness review
                                              – Assigns owner for resolution
                                              – Set ‘resolve by’ date

                                              3
              Peer Review Interface
• At the annual DOE peer review:

   – Each SPE team should present “readiness” preparation activities
     in accordance with the evaluation criteria (next slide).
   – Only non-proprietary information presented.
   – Peer reviewers provide feedback on readiness review program
     as implemented by each SPE projects.




                                 4
Relevant 2009 Peer Review evaluation criteria
          distributed by Energetics

• Approach and project management (25%)
  – Degree to which the project approach is free of major
    flaws that would limit the project’s effectiveness or
    efficiency. If this project is continuing, the degree to
    which the project has effectively planned its future,
    defined milestones, identified risks, considered
    contingencies to mitigate/manage risks, built in
    optional paths, etc.




                               5
FY 2003-2009 Review Summary
• Four SPI readiness reviews in FY 2003
• Nine reviews in FY 2004
• Eleven reviews in FY 2005
• Three cable projects reviewed in FY 2006
• One project review in FY 2007 (SFCL).
• Three FCL project reviews and one cable (LIPA
  pre-energization) review in FY 2008.
• Two FCL project reviews (AMSC and Zenergy)
  and one cable project review (LIPA) in FY 2009.

                         6
    FCL Readiness Reviews

FCL Review Team:
Dr. Michael Gouge, ORNL
Dr. Mischa Steurer, CAPS/FSU
Dr. William Hassenzahl, AEA




                               7
    2009 FCL SPE Readiness Reviews
• A 2nd Readiness Review of AMSC FCL project (with
  Siemens and Nexans staff participation) was conducted on
  January 13-14, at AMSC.
• An 2nd Readiness Review of Zenergy FCL project was
  conducted on June 23-24 at Zenergy San Francisco office.
• This met a DOE milestone to complete 2009 readiness
  reviews of the fault current limiter projects by July 2009.




     FCL off   FCL concept   FCL on

                               8
         FCL Readiness Reviews: Generic
            Issues/Recommendations
•   Once the design configuration of the
    various components (HTS elements,
    shunt coils, connections, etc.) is
    established, a rigorous test program and
    assessment method should quantify
    acceptable performance over the design
    lifetime.
     –   Weibull or similar statistical approach on
         components
     –   FMEA on systems/components
•   The reliability of the individual series and
    parallel components has to be
    demonstrated to support the overall
    SFCL device availability as required by               Status and grid parameters
    the utility.                                          of FCL Projects
•   Example: AMSC project added a 2nd
    series “fast” breaker on FCL to ensure
    FCL elements not damaged by failure of
    one fast breaker to open.

                                                      9
  Weibull Statistics: An effective tool for predicting
  performance of both insulators and conductors
HV breakdown of LN: A compilation by Prof. M. O.
Pace, UT-K and ORNL: BD voltage vs. gap            HV breakdown of LN




                                                     From ORNL testing


                                      10
    FCL Readiness Reviews Generic Issues
        and Recommendations (cont.)
•   More experiments are needed on PD (partial discharge) in dielectric
    materials to support aging studies.
•   Cryogenic system reliability: redundancy in rotating parts like
    compressors and submerged pumps, purity of LN, etc.
•   There is very limited experience with a closed liquid nitrogen system
    that will experience the operating conditions of a commercial SFCL
    (high voltage, high fault current – heating and forces, and boiling LN).
•   Recovery under load (RUL - if required) needs more R&D.
     – Thermal response times can be large at 77 K.
•   Benefits of a single-phase prototype tested off-grid.
•   The SPE projects should consider the development of a
    comprehensive set of design and performance criteria.
     – High voltage standards: An FCL can be part breaker, part reactor and part
       transformer (see Thursday pm roundtable agenda)
     – Initial efforts by IEEE and CIGRE working groups

                                        11
Generic Issues and Recommendations (cont.)
• There are several issues remaining that SPE teams need
  to carefully evaluate regarding the use of 2G conductor in
  grid demonstrations:
     Delamination remains an issue: qualify the proposed conductor for
     the intended operation: thermal stresses and cycles, mechanical
     and combined stresses at normal and during faulted conditions
     Joints/splices:
        keep to a minimum (improve Ic uniformity)
        compatibility of joint solder to laminated or plated materials and YBCO
        solder temperature and impact on laminate, YBCO and insulation
     Substrate and laminate materials: evaluate intrinsic ferromagnetic
     and enhanced superconductor hysteretic losses in ac applications
     (cables, FCLs and transformers)
     Cost: earlier manufacturer projections indicated cost at or below
     1G. This has not yet happened and 2G $/kA-m are about 2 x 1G.

                                     12
Cable Readiness Reviews

      Steve Ashworth, LANL
   Andreas Neuber, Texas Tech
       Ed Hahn, NYPA (ret)




                 13
            SPI Cable Project Status
Albany (SuperPower/SEI)
◦ Successful operation
     Phase 1 (1G wire)
     Phase 2 (30m, 2G wire section)
◦ Very successful test period
◦ Off line in March 2008

AEP Bixby Substation (Southwire)
◦ Successful operation
◦ Nearly 3 kA at low voltage (13.8 kV)
◦ On line for three years

LIPA I
◦ Energized Spring 2008
◦ 138 kV at low currents (50-450 A)
◦ No significant issues


                                      14
            SPE Cable Project Status

• LIPA II
  – Initial Readiness Review in 2009


• Southwire/Entergy New Orleans Cable
  – Slow start due to reduced load growth
  – Initial Readiness Review planned in FY 2010




                           15
           FY 2009 Plans                             FY 2009 Performance

• Continue focused reviews as projects            Two SPE FCL projects were reviewed this FY.
  complete final design, fabricate/install        LIPA II cable project had initial review this FY.
  equipment and commission systems

• Encourage the SPE projects to develop           All the projects have implemented risk
  risk identification and mitigation              assessment and management tools
  processes to manage risks.

• More emphasis is needed on R&D and              Cryogenics dielectrics R&D (next talk).
                                                  Projects aware of HV scaling issues.
  design guidelines in HV cryogenic
  dielectrics for the grid-based SPI
  projects.

• A web-site will be implemented with             Implemented in 2008-2009:
  lessons-learned from prior SPI projects              Upgraded in 2008. Final reports added for
  and general design guidance                          GE HTS Generator Project and Reliance
                                                       Electric (Baldor) HTS Motor Project
                                                       Comprehensive data on breakdown in liquid
                                                       nitrogen vs. gap (dc, ac, impulse) 2009




                                             16
FY 2010 Plans
•   A program solicitation on superconducting power equipment
    resulted in five new HTS demonstration projects in 2007.
    – 3 HTS FCL projects and 2 HTS cable projects.
    – In FY 2008 the three FCL projects had initial Readiness Reviews.
    – One FCL project was subsequently declined by SuperPower; leaving 2
      FCL projects that were reviewed in 2009 as well as the LIPA cable project
    – Plan a third readiness review in 2010 of each FCL project as they complete
      planned R&D and detailed design to review the final technical baseline and
      associated risk assessments.
    – Conceptual and preliminary design reviews for the two cable projects are
      planned in 2009-2010.
    – “Lessons-learned” reviews are planned as these projects finish their in-grid
      demonstration periods.

•   In 2010 the web-site will be upgraded further:
    – Lessons-learned from prior projects
    – General design guidance on high voltage, vacuum, etc.



                                        17
    Research Integration - General
•    Since the reviews contain a large amount of proprietary material,
     the results and recommendations are typically shared only
     between the project being reviewed, the reviewers and DOE.

•    The reviewers, to the extent possible, highlight potential problem
     areas that they have learned from other projects.

•    Have engaged review staff from 2 DOE labs, 2 DOD labs, a
     university, CAPS/FSU, NYPA and outside consultants to leverage
     expertise.

•    Steve Ashworth (LANL), who leads the readiness review team of
     the DOE cable projects, has, with DOE-OE support, performed
     oversight and targeted assessments on the DHS 25-m FCL cable
     at ORNL.



                                     18
    Research Integration – Support of Overall Program
•    Participated in 8th annual EPRI Superconductivity Conference held at Oak Ridge
     on November 12-13, 2008.
      – Emphasis on HTS applications and testing.

•    Participated in a Coated Conductor for Applications workshop at University of
     Houston on December 4-5, 2008.
      – Session A on HTS applications chaired by Mike Gouge.

•    Task Force on Fault Current Limiter Testing sponsored by the IEEE Switchgear
     Administrative Subcommittee had their first meeting in Atlanta, GA on January
     15, 2009 and second meeting on May 5 in Ashville, NC.
      – A Project Authorization Request (PAR) for initiating a working group to develop a
        Guide for testing FCLs is under way.

•    CIGRE Working Group A3.23 "Application and feasibility of fault current limiters
     in power systems“ met in Los Angeles on March 9-11, 2009.
      – Dr. Mischa Steurer serves on the FCL readiness review team and is engaged with
        both of these committees and is Chairman of the IEEE Task Force.




                                              19