3. This is getting interesting. Could you please share GEI-100628 Mr. Demigrog?

ainuddin <at> gmail <dot> com

 

Arbam,

Trying to draw a similarity between the electronics control module of a car (any car) and the control system of a turbine-generator is like trying to compare watermelons and grapes. They're both round and have fleshy insides; some have seeds, some don't; both are edible. But the similarities end there.

You are correct when you say that the Mark II is an adequate control system and that parts and service (though the latter is increasing difficult to come by) are still available. A grape can provide some nourishment, but very little by itself.

One of the more modern control systems can do everything the Mark II did, but with the added benefit that obtaining data, monitoring turbine operation, and troubleshooting are all supremely enhanced over what could be done with the Mark II. A watermelon, even a small one, will provide more nourishment than a grape.

In today's world, technicians and plant supervisors (or even operators) can't be bothered with converting voltages to engineering units, reading chart recorder outputs, waiting for test instrumentation to be connected and configured (voltmeters, current meters, chart recorders, etc.). With some type of properly configured data archival and retrieval system, previous operations and situations can be accessed and compared for analysis, and detailed trends of operating parameters can be created and monitored. The Mark II simply can't do this, but, with trained technicians and operators and plant supervisors who actually understand turbine-generator and auxiliary operation, the Mark II can be a very reliable control system. Just don't expect any easily obtainable operational data or troubleshooting capability.

Having said that, most technicians and operators and plant supervisors are woefully lacking in the capabilities of the Mark V, Mark VI, Mark VI, or Mark VIe. A lot of possibilities are wasted and misunderstood. And, on the other hand, these same control systems can be brought to their knees when they are queried at extremely fast rates for nearly every possible control signal value, including the values of Control Constants (which don't normally change) by some data archival and retrieval system. And, the the Speedtronic gets all the blame. "The salesman said we could connect our historian/DCS and collect data!" Yes, but not for every point at ridiculous rates, and why, just because something might be missed if it's not collected.

So, yes, salesman have been known to leave out a few details or embellish their presentations a little. But, the data-gathering and troubleshooting capabilities of any modern control system far exceed what the Mark II was capable of, even though at their most basic level they are primarily both still controlling a turbine, its driven device, and the auxiliaries.

 

I'd like to be able to share manuals, but I've been advised by my legal people that I cannot. The only GE documents that can be publicly shared are basically marketing brochures. However, at least I can help you know what to ask for if you talk to GE directly.

 

Contact Jim Jacoby with Triconex. He's based out of Houston and one of the most knowledgeable Turbo guys I know. 281-709-1200.

 

Did someone say OPC? As the above posts state, the newest version of the workstation software comes with an OPC Server. For older Mark V or VIs, MatrikonOPC has both a direct MarkV version (ARCNet), as well as one that bolts onto TCI to speak to either V or VIs.

Direct MarkV: http://www.matrikonopc.com/opc-drivers/303/base-driver-details.aspx

TCI MarkV/VI: http://www.matrikonopc.com/opc-drivers/209/base-driver-details.aspx

Adriel Michaud
MatrikonOPC

 

This is true, as far as it goes. But there are new control functions that can be programmed into the Mark Ve that simply will not fit in a Mark V.

Most people who do these conversions are looking for lowered emissions or increased efficiency. I believe model based control is also in the works, if not available already.

Let me turn your question around. If you could get better fuel economy, lower emissions and improved power from your car just by replacing one component, why wouldn't you?

 

This post might have been relevant in 1988. The Triconex PLC was originally a Safety Shutdown system, but was redesigned for turbine control decades ago. It has many specialized modules that are designed specifically for turbine control and I have personally replaced dozens of Speedtronic Mark I, II, III, IV and even V systems with Triconex controls. Triconex has decades of experience replacing these controls and libraries full of function blocks, many of which are designed specifically to replace these controls. I speak with experience when I say that the "advanced" algorithms you speak of do not exist in the early Mark I, II and even III controls... they are very simple controllers that were wonderful in the 1960s and 70s, but are very limited by today's standards.

GE has a very "our way or the highway" attitude and delivery and pricing on parts that has created a very large market for aftermarket conversions. I have replaced a large number of GE control systems owned by unhappy customers who could not get parts in a timely and costly fashion and were ruthlessly arm-twisted into either upgrading to Mark V or VI (at huge expense) or continuing to have these problems. Triconex is a wonderful solution and is one of the best platforms out there for turbine control. (I've retrofitted using Woodward products and several PLC based products as well as DCS based control)

Triconex has a good balance of lower cost, great performance and reliability and long (and fast) availability of parts. I can also quickly gut a 20 year old Triconex Chassis and replace all the cards with new ones. Try that with a Mark II! The Triconex team in Webster, TX has some of the most Brilliant turbo-machinery professionals I've ever worked with, and the pool of knowledge and experience there is unmatched...remember that they have to know everyone's machine...not just one manufacturer's... this produces much more knowledgeable and well rounded professionals. If you're not on a shoestring budget, it's one of the best choices out there...and I'd choose it in a heartbeat over GE's current offerings, especially for a retrofit.

Triconex is also THE platform of choice for digital control of Nuclear plants (1E and non 1E) both by retrofit and in several new plants. Would you replace your reactor protection and control systems with a Mark V? I think not.

 

I have done four mark II to third party control system retrofits.
The replacement system was a "PLC" but built specially for aeroderivatiove gas turbines.

The algorithms in the "PLC" was very good and emulated the algorithms in any gas turbine controller. It interfaced to Wonderware through Modbus 232. The only problem I faced at the time was that most control systems cater for ONE fuel control valve and as a result have ONE high speed VCE/FSR type signal.

Unfortunately, the GE machine designs have the Stop/Speed ratio valve and the Fuel control Valve. My solution was to repeat the SRV ladder rungs every 10 rungs of logic to ensure it got updated faster than one ladder execution scan.

Other than that, it has been 15 years and we are are still running our Frame 5s with the third party system.

If you need any further information, d_jacob9 [at] yahoo.com

 

yes, if you need original MARK II control board or complete set, you are advised to contact these GE exclusive distributor. These parts will be with GE certificates or origin, and warranty. But many OEM or refurbished parts or aftermarket vendor misguide you their parts are GE parts, actually they not. In this case to tell the truth, you ask them GE certificates. There is a site on how to get real and dynamic GE quotation:

www.china-power-contractor.cn/gas-turbine.html

 

Dear friend,

our company has TONS of experience upgrading Mark I, II, EHC (GE Canada) to Mark VIe, Mark IV to Mark IVe, Mark V to Mark Ve and clean slate installations for Mark VIe and VIeDCS. We use to do this for the OEM. I digress when it comes to the "prowess" of the "enhanced" Mark's over the classic Mark VI, which we consider the most robust of the recent platforms. The reasons to go to "e" are simple: GE has developed a made-in-taiwan, to-be-packaged-anywhere, VERY, VERY low cost-of-production package to compete with the PLC's and Triconexes as the Mark VI was so "dedicated" and "integrated" that it could not compete when compared to perfectly capable PLC based competitors. It is worthwhile to mention that this ultra-low cost product is more expensive than the one it replaces and not much different than a high speed PLC. There is reason why the "e" came out: GE was, and is, feeling the pain from perfectly capable PLC based solutions. If PLC based controls and non-OEM solutions had little or no appeal, GE would not have rushed the "e" series platform through the door like it did (and it has proven a very costly endeavor indeed - to the point that it was meant to be priced slightly over the PLC bracket but is now more expensive than the classic Mark VI).
End result is that:

1. Experience dictates that most customers who own Mark VI and also an "e" version dislike the new ToolboxST over the "Classic" one and only "migrated" because they had DLN2,2.6 or 2.3 to meet emissions using a model-based control system not currently implementable on the V and pre-V series controls. Otherwise they would have purchased a PLC.

2. unlike the PLENTIFUL and competitive supply of Mark I through VI new and remanufactured parts most of the "e" model parts will NOT be resold through resellers or remanufactured by GE. If you dont believe me ask the GE sales guy. Only new, hefty-priced components will be sold through GE direct sales channels. The aim is to make YOU have to go back to GE all the time (think if your budgets are prepared for that). The other way is if you sign up to a multiyear LTSA, clearly a strong-arm tactic.

3. the I/O packs and power-supplies are known to have a series of quality issues not registered in TIL's. Clearly another strong-arm tactic as some of this hardware is "still in development" and thus not "suited for a TIL-type notice.

4. The "e" models have been around since 2001 (first one installed in Qatar I believe) and STILL there are major problems with hardware and software on this "common" architecture and GE STILL has engineering staff (from India and the US) going to the field to assist the service engineers in retrofits - it begs to question... ...how many years did Mark VI or Mark V need to "mature" ...definitely not 10. Judging by a product life cycle of 20 years, the "e" models have spent 50% of their life cycle in development.

We suggest, that if you have a frame 1,3,5,6,7,9, Aerodev with DLN 2.6 or a steamer of any size less and not interested in Model based combustion you are probably just as good with a ICS, TRICONEX and/or EMERSON solution. EMERSON has an ovation solution for the more complicated equipments and if you dont have complex DLN you can go with an ICS/TRI control system. If you are knowledgeable you already know that the algorithms used by GE on older/vintage units is not a black box and pretty much straightforward and industry-wide available thus not exactly rocket science. If you do your homework you can find ample, technically responsible and cost-effective solution BUT you have to do your homework and get involved with the retrofitter and the party that will perform the retrofit (that is key to success, and even applies to OEM's). The GE gas or steam engines are not rocket-science-based and that is very clear ...even to the various OEM's who nowadays spend most of their time trying to lock-in the various end users into dubiously motivated Long Term Service Agreements. Good luck with your retrofit.

 

TurboYankee,

Is there any way I can get your email address I might have a few questions for you. We will be upgrading our Frame 7 to a dln in the near future and there is a very strong possibility that they are going to try to integrate it into our ABB infi90

 

I need to help for upload and download program on MKII CPU. or right person for doing and start 2 turbine SGT 100 Dual shaft.

Mahdi_ vosooghi at yahoo dot com