sc a1 advisory group a1.02 – hydro generators wg a1.04 generator fire protection guidelines

SC A1ADVISORY GROUP A1.02 – Hydro Generators

WG A1.04 Generator Fire Protection Guidelines

Convener of Working Group A1.04: Alexander Gromow Brazilian Regular Member of SC-A1: Jacques Philipe Marcel Sanz

Chairman A1: Erli Ferreira Figueiredo


WG A1.04 Generator Fire Protection GuidelinesScope of work: Report on Experience Update

SECOND PART OF THIS WORK: GROUP-1 USERS21.09.2009





Calculation of the real size of the Generator Fire Protection Update Information

Gathering, Statistics and Presentationmeasured by the number of surveyed items:

I believe that it is important to show this calculation in order to allow to the interested fellow members to know the real dimensions of this huge task and to understand the time required to accomplish this task that is being

made by one sole person!

Here it is to point out the importance of the contribution gave by the fellow members by answering the questionnaire in the total of 65 contributions for

the different Groups – allowing this work to reach this dimension.

On the other hand, Dr. Kranz’s original version was made by a Working Group.





PART - 1 – Comparison between similar questions from the Groups 1, 2 and 6

Status: Ready in 2008 (Paris Biannual Meeting)

Number of pages: 40

Participation

Check-Box Open questions

Questions Participants

Total Questions

Questions Participants

Total Questions

Group - 01 7 35 245 3 35 105

Group - 02 3 10 30 4 10 40

Group - 06 4 9 36 1 9 9

311 154

Total of surveyed items in Part-1: 465





PART - 2: Isolated analysis Group-01

Status: Ready in 2009 (Sidney Meeting)

Number of pages: 174Questions type

Check-Box 16

Open Questions 17

Multiple questions 35

Consolidated 3

Detailed questions and contributions counting

Check-Box 44

Open Questions 60

Sub-totals (44+60) x 35 = 3640

Total surveyed items 1 Part-2 = 3640





PART - 3: Isolated analysis Group-02, Group-03 and Group-06

Status: forecasted for 2010 (Paris Biannual Meeting)

Number of pages: to be determined

Group- 2 Group-3 Group-6

Questions type

Check-Box 2 2 3

Open Questions 8 2 7

Multiple questions 15 13 11

Detailed questions and contributions counting

Check-Box 19 15 15

Open Questions 25 14 21

Sub-totals (19+25) x 10 = 440 (15+14) x 05 = 145 (15+21) x 9 = 324

Forecast of total surveyed items for Part-3 (final) = 909In addition to that an extensive work will be done to issue the Update’s

conclusions!





Real size of the Generator Fire Protection Update – measured by the number of surveyed items:

Part 1- ready in 2008 - 465

Part 2- ready in 2009 - 3640

Part 3- forecast for 2010 - 909 + Conclusions

5014 TOTAL

[Surveyed item: Check-Box or Open questions]





At first we recall that this work is an UPDATE being so the final step of it will be a comparative analysis of the original conclusions made by the Working group lead by Dr. Kranz back in 1981 and the conclusions of the present work.

Since we are considering the contributions of Users (Group-1), Manufacturers (Group-2), Insurance Companies (Group-3), and Consulting Companies (Group-6) there will be a possibility to compare the results on the coincident items.

HOW ABOUT THE CONCLUSIONS?

This will be made at the final stage of the work and in this particular case based upon a large and deep survey made on a total of 5014 survey items.

Dr. Kranz’s original paper:





The next examples are shown to give an idea of how the final evaluation will look like

It is clear that the reading is difficult due to the size of the letters.

But the time available for this presentation does not allow to go deep in to details at this occasion.





Nr. Original conclusions of the former Generator Fire Protection work mad

by Dr. Kranz-1981:

Update comments for the Group-1 Users, based upon the data received

and its evaluation - 2009:

01 With the absence of international standards or recommendations the philosophy for application of fire extinguishing Installations vary considerably. The decisions are mostly taken individually based on positive or negative experience, tradition, or legislation and insurance requirements.

The basic idea of Dr. Kranz’s Conclusions (DKC) is still valid and we add to that the fact that there a lack of specific knowledge on fire protection principles and experience may be detected considering some of the received contributions. Here more information based upon fire protection principles and exchange of experience seems to be required.


by Dr. Kranz-1981:



02 In some cases the application is restricted to vertical generators with closed air circuits or to machines operated in unmanned plants.

The application range nowadays shows that there are other criteria for the application of GFP then those shown on DKC as size of the units. The present Update (TPU) shows that GFP is also applied in some open generators by means of provisions to close the volume for the extinguishing media application.






by Dr. Kranz-1981:



03 Although modern insulations are mostly considered to be non-inflammable, fire retardant or self-extinguishable, accidents have shown that these materials may burn, given sufficient temperature and heat input by the igniting arc and then by the burning insulation itself promoting the extension of fire, if there is enough oxygen. This experience, gained by accident, has been proved by relevant tests and has led to a later installation of fire extinguishing equipment in some plants.This experience may not necessarily apply to all modem insulation systems..

The DKC conclusion seems to continue valid and there may be that the divulgation made by some manufacturers that their machines are inflammable may bring an increased risk to power plants not equipped with GFP. This risk is highlighted by the following comment: “As one can recognize, the oxygen and heat are present if no suppression is available. The question then becomes whether or not the fuel exists to support a chemical reaction – according to the Fire scheme. Manufacturers suggest that the current materials (epoxy based materials) will not burn if the heat is removed.However, many times the heat is so intense that even if the "flash" that started the ignition is removed, the epoxy forms combustible gas (in the contained environment of the air housing) via a chemical reaction, and it becomes the fuel source.”

Dr. Kranz’s conclusions go up to the number 17...





The present part of the GFP Update 174 pages long was put on a special independent Internet Site for viewing and evaluation on August the 21th.

http://www.consultasi.com.br/cigre2/





More than 200 e-mails were sent to inform about this facts, divulge the Site’s address and invite the visitors to read the document and make their on-line evaluation until September the 10th . A reminder e-mail was sent.

The Site received 145 hits from 34 cities from 18 countries (status September 10th) this allows to say that the divulgation was broad as the next picture shows:

Provisions were taken to make the reading of the documents as easy and straightforward as possible by the use of hyperlinks that allow easy navigation throughout the document when read on a PC.





ID Country Visits

01 Brazil 53

02 Japan 14

03 Croatia 11

04 Argentina 10

05 France 9

06 Norway 8

07 Switzerland 6

08 Macedonia 5

09 Canada 5

10 Australia 5

11 United Kingdom 4

12 Poland 4

13 Italy 3

14 Austria 2

15 Sweden 2

16 United States 2

17 Germany 1

18 Israel 1

Total – status September 10th 145





A total of 12 evaluations were received up to September 10, 2009 from eight countries, as follows: Brazil (2), Norway (2), New Zealand (1), Japan (1), Croatia (1), Australia (2), Poland (2) and Switzerland (1), they answered to the following questions:

1) The applied working scheme follows what was approved for the first phase. Looking at this stage (Group 1 - Users) is this scheme still appropriate?

Result: 12 answers YES

2) How is the level of detail of this document?Result: 12 answers “SATISFACTORY”

3) The collected information fulfills the GFP Update requirements? Result: 12 answers “YES”

4) Considering the text of the questionnaire items evaluation and their annexes do you consider the presented document sufficiently complete?

Result: 12 answers “YES”





Convener: Alexander Gromow (Born 1947)

Lives in: São Paulo /SP Brazil

Profession: Electrical Engineer option ElectrotechnicGraduated in: 1971 by the University Mackenzie – São Paulo; Medal Thomas Alva Edison – 1st Place at all five graduation years.Professional experience:

- Electrical equipment for industry (focus on Steel Plants): 6 years (2½ years in Germany) – in parallel Professor at the University Mackenzie- Waterpower: 20 years - also including 11+2=13 years for Itaipu Project – as WGG – Working Group Generators Coordinator-CIEM after as Technical Director-CEITAIPU and additional 2½ years in Germany. - Thermal power: 4 years- Fire protection engineering and application: present occupation for 8 years…

- Languages: Fluent: Portuguese, German, English and Spanish Speak and read: Russian, French and Italian.

[email protected]





At this moment I would like to thank to all colleagues that contributed by fulfilling the questionnaire sharing their valuable

experience with the community involved.

All received contributions are present in this work by means of the annexes that show the original contributions received. This shows

the transparency of this work and gives material for those that need to go deeper in the analysis.

Special mention to the support this work received from CIGRÉ Brazil for the costs of the important Computer Technological Support delivered by the

Company ConsultASI from Belo Horizonte / MG Brazil.

And now to those that read the present Part-2 Users and in special to those that made the evaluation.

2 0 10 à PARIS!!!

Thanks for your attention and hope to meet you in Paris at the next Biannual Meeting





sc a1 advisory group a1.02 – hydro generators wg a1.04 generator fire protection guidelines

Documents

hydro generatorswg a1

hydro generators wg

isolated analysis group

erli ferreira figueiredopart

total of surveyed items

total surveyed items

similar questions

number of surveyed items