Rules and Guidelines
Want to participate in the discussions? Please read our Community Rules and Guidelines. Need some help? Visit Support and Answers.

  • State Not Answered
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 9 replies
  • Subscribers 27 subscribers
  • Views 470 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Options
You may also be interested in
This discussion is locked.
You cannot post a reply to this discussion. If you have a question start a new discussion

Loss of mains for type tested generation units

Jam
Hi all,


I'm reviewing the Loss of Mains protection for a number of old (pre-2018) G59 type tested inverters. While for site commissioned units it is required to note the LOM detection method, the "G59 certificate" only records operation time. I haven't managed to find (yet) a statement that it must be a certain method; G59 only seems to say that the parameters must be XX for each method (depending on age) and leaves it open to the manufacturer to decide. Does anyone know where it states which method is used? I'm also trying manufacturers but not all of them still exist!


It's always been a niggle at the back of my mind, but it's not been an issue... Now with the ENA's requirement to update old settings it's relevant.


Ta,

Jam
Parents
  • 0
    Nothing coming back so far! But the question applies to other manufacturers too; this is just an example.


    Indeed you're right re the intent (last August's load shedding event being an example of when it would have helped). I too feel that disabling LOM is brave... perhaps cleverer minds have determined that it'll mainly apply to smaller plant that is unlikely to be stable and over-/under-/volts/freq (which do stay) will kick in quickly.


    Thing is... lots of smaller inverter G59 type test certs look like this (it's based on the model form after all). So perhaps most of them do need changing or perhaps I'm getting overexcited (ha) and they're all mandated to use "frequency shift with resonant circuit" (picking up a different inverter certificate which does actually state the method) instead of VS/ROCOF in some standard somewhere.


Reply
  • 0
    Nothing coming back so far! But the question applies to other manufacturers too; this is just an example.


    Indeed you're right re the intent (last August's load shedding event being an example of when it would have helped). I too feel that disabling LOM is brave... perhaps cleverer minds have determined that it'll mainly apply to smaller plant that is unlikely to be stable and over-/under-/volts/freq (which do stay) will kick in quickly.


    Thing is... lots of smaller inverter G59 type test certs look like this (it's based on the model form after all). So perhaps most of them do need changing or perhaps I'm getting overexcited (ha) and they're all mandated to use "frequency shift with resonant circuit" (picking up a different inverter certificate which does actually state the method) instead of VS/ROCOF in some standard somewhere.


Children
No Data

Join us to get the best from IET EngX.

Joining EngX lets you personalise your experience so you stay up to date on the topics that interest you, plus you’ll be able to make connections who are looking to collaborate, exchange ideas and more.

Join us Not now

Community Rules & Guidelines