SC A1 ADVISORY GROUP A1.02 – Hydro Generators WG A1.02-3 Generator Fire Protection Scope of work:...

SC A1ADVISORY GROUP A1.02 – Hydro Generators

WG A1.02-3 Generator Fire ProtectionScope of work: Experience Update

Brazilian Regular Member of SC-A1: Erli Ferreira FigueiredoConvener of Working Group A1.02-3: Alexander Gromow (GIFEL)



STATUS REPORT ON ACTUAL WORK SITUATION12.10.2007




Dear ColleaguesDear Colleagues

The present task of making the "experience update" on Generator Fire Protection of the former work elaborated by Mr. Kranz in 1985 is on the receipt of fulfilled questionnaire stage, based upon an approved Questionnaire.

The incoming material (fulfilled Questionnaires) shows that there may be still some need to understand what is meant with the several involved groups, so here is a brief explanation of each one of them:

1) Generators users (owners): this part is basically the former Mr. Kranz's questionnaire with few more questions related to specific fire cases that may have occurred and relationship with insurance companies. Important here is to get the experience from those who have to live with the equipment for many years and keep it running.




2) Generators Manufacturers: here questions were made regarding the focus on the adaptation of the machines to the different fire protection alternatives and the use of fire retardant materials (and how these materials are tested).

3) Insurance companies and insurance brokers: the focus is on the requirements made to owners in order either to give insurance coverage or to reduce the insurance costs. These companies have to be addressed in a separated manner by the A1 Regular Members and A1 National Observers because they usually do not belong to CIGRÉ.

In many cases the Insurance companies are the “motivators” of the Generator Fire Protection use therefore their statements are interesting for these Update.




4) Erection, commissioning, refurbishment and maintenance companies: here the questions were stated about any data they can provide on the refurbishment of units that caught fire, data that can help to improve the generator's design concerning fire protection. It seems that some misunderstanding on the purpose of this item may be happening. In fact we are “chasing” companies that did work on units that had a fire accident in order to get their expertise to our Update. So if any company had a fire and hired a company to do a repair work so the intention is to send to this company the Questionnaire to be fulfilled (and now it can be easily downloaded from the Internet as you know and we will confirm later on). If your company did the job then please fulfill this item by yourself. In fact the “wishful dream” was to have some of these companies being CIGRÉ members, but it does not seem to be the case, it may be they do belong to other CIGRÉ’s Groups?




5) Research Centers and Universities: the focus here is on the question related to any survey that may have been made on the flammability behavior of materials nowadays used in the construction of hydro generators. This can bring light to the discussion about the alleged non-flammability of modern generators.

Here also the “wishful dream” was to have some of these centres being CIGRÉ members, but it does not seem to be the case, it may be they do belong to other CIGRÉ’s Groups? If not these entities will have to be addressed in a separated manner by the A1 Regular Members and A1 National Observers because they usually do not belong to CIGRÉ.




6) Consulting Companies: the Consulting Companies usually issue at least the project specification for the Generator Fire Protection in many countries. With these questions we intend to get valuable information from the particular stand point of the Consulting Companies in order to compose a picture as complete as possible of the subject we are dealing with to see if the opinions do converge or not to the same point.

These companies have to be addressed in a separated manner by the A1 Regular Members and A1 National Observers since very few of then usually do belong to CIGRÉ.




How are we acting in this particular Update case:This work is being made by the Advisory Group A1.02 – Hydro Generators and is related to (Hydro) Generator Fire Protection and we are using the pyramid principle of sending the material with personalized e-mails (according to the list sent by Mr. Joho) to the known A1 Regular Members and A1 Observer Members. It is their task (at least it should be) to distribute to each one of the groups mentioned above (some contacts of that list are not functional).

Two sets of documents were prepared and sent to each one of the Regulars and Observers composed by:-Motivational letter for CIGRÉ members-Motivational letter for Insurance Companies-Motivational letter for Consulting Companies-Questionnaire itself to be fulfilled according to the expertise of each

one




Why all this work? Simple: to try to capture the more answers of competent people as possible to get a statistically acceptable critical mass for the work. And this is a collective work that depends upon your participation!

Since in the begin of the work the real situation of the Group 4 – Erection Companies &… and Group 5 – Research Centers &… was not clearly identified no special motivational letters for the same was issued, but they can be attended directly as described above – if any

one of you will need support please let me know.




Still with doubts about what has to be done in this case?

Yes, this is a quite elaborated work so I made at first a table with the description of the working scheme (that is part of the motivational letters), but the feed-back showed me that a flux diagram could be of help in this case, so I made one for Regulars and Observers too; in the next slide you will see the example for Regulars.

As a matter of fact the groups 4 and 5 may have to be treated the same way as the groups 3 and 6 so that I ask you special attention to this aspect.




Research Institutes and Universities

It is possible that they have to be addressed in separate in order to seek for more answers…

Erection, Commissioning, Refurbishment and

Maintenance CompaniesIt is possible that they have to be addressed in separate in order to seek for more answers…




We are in the Internet age also in this Update!

I’m also a specialist for Internet collaborative working tools, which would be of great help if applied to many CIGRÉ’s tasks, but this may be music for a far future, and I do not have this time to wait…Being so I established as you know an Internet page:

http://www.gromow.com/CIGRE/working-page.htm

from which many download, follow-up and information tasks can be easily be performed; you can copy links to invite thirds to participate (right click – copy link then CTR-V where you need the information)Some correspondence exchange can also be seen via the hyperlinks connections.




Transparent work by means of multi layer follow up table:

One of the items that you can download at any time from the Internet Working Page is the “Actualized update follow-up table” where you can see who is doing what, and how is the present Questionnaire receiving statistic; it is astonishing to see how slowly things are happening in spite of the efforts described above.

Many Regulars and Observers simply do not even respond,

reasons for that?




Brief Statistical survey made on October 12th 2007:At first let’s see what Dr. Kranz did achieve 22 years ago (total of 40 answers), without Internet, and I do believe without this effort in motivation and communication with the involved Regulars and Observers:

Country A AUS B BR

CDN

CH CS F I J N S UK USSR

Nr of answers 1 5 1 6 3 6 1 1 1 1 9 1 3 1

Using the original template above we have the following situation at

the date considered for this evaluation:

Country A AUS B BR

CDN

CH CS F I J N S UK (USSR)Russia

Nr of answers 0 6* 0 6 2 0 0 1 0 4 4 4 0 0

*-including Australia (1) and New Zealand (4) and Insurance from USA (1) -sent by Australian A1 Deputy Regular

We have an answer from Germany too making a total of only 28 answers up to the considered date.




Present Group's Distribution

1-Owner (17)

2-Manufacturer (2)

3-Insurance &... (3)

4-Maintenance &... (3)

5-Universities &... (1)

6-Consulting (2)




Here it is to mention that Sweden, Canada and later South Africa started their work delayed considered to the original sending of the

material (only Canada and Sweden sent answers up to now). But there are other important countries that did not send any contribution yet, like Argentina, Italy, United Kingdom, Switzerland, China, Spain, Korea, Russia, India, Finland, USA, Mexico, Romania, Poland, Venezuela, Egypt, Belgium, Austria, Croatia, among others.

Israel has helped a lot during the first phase of the work, but since there is no Hydro Water Plant in that country they cannot participate in the second phase.

The next graph can help to visualize the situation, no need to make a graph for the A1 Observer Members since it would show nothing up to the selected date (it shows the sum of the different group's answers).




A1 Regular Members

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

Countries

An

swer

s

Série1




As you can see there is a big potential to get more answers to the present Update. There is only the need of effective participation of the involved A1 Regular Members and A1 Observers. We are keeping track on the work of all of them by means of the received feed backs, no feed-back represents to us no action.

As some of you know, I’m already clarifying the incoming answers, so I request to all that may being collecting answers to send them in block not to proceed so, but to send the incoming material to us as soon as it comes to you in order to avoid an avalanche effect, and

grant me time to work on the incoming material...




Language sometimes acting as barrier…

This may happen in some cases so that I offered my language knowledge to support the fulfillment of the Questionnaires, so besides English, Portuguese, Spanish, German, and with some more effort from my side French, Italian and Russian are welcome to be used in the fulfillment of the questionnaires. This represents for sure an additional effort to this work.




Suggestion for the future steps:

1- Considering the participation as achieved up to now, in spite of a revolutionary work and a big effort in many aspects, my suggestion is that the time for the receiving of fulfilled questionnaires will be extended up to mid of March 2008 in order to allow the results to be approved in the Paris Meeting.

2 - I encourage everybody to come back to their countries and to make another effort to get answers to our Update when applicable. As you can see there are many countries that even did not communicate with the Convener yet, this does not help to reach our goal, since this

is not a work of an individual, but of a collectivity!




3 - Allow me to remind you that you can invite also third parties to participate, since we get answers from knowledgeable persons that have expertise in one of the 6 groups that compose this work they can be invited to participate, and with the facility of downloading the questionnaire from the Internet from the Working Page, to make the invitation should be even a simpler procedure.

4 - I remain as from the beginning of my task as Convener at your disposal for any support I may give in this case and thank you all for the attention to this status report.



DRAFT – PROSPECTION FOR QUESTIONNAIRE


Any support to this task is welcome and additional explanation to the present proposition can be obtained with:

Alexander GromowAlexander Gromowe-mail: [email protected],

Cellular phones: +55 11 8223-7511 +55 11 9659-0846

Skype: agromow. São Paulo/SP

Brazil

I congratulate all of you that are already engaged and encourage the rest to join this quest for the sake of a

significative result for everybody.

SC A1 ADVISORY GROUP A1.02 – Hydro Generators WG A1.02-3 Generator Fire Protection Scope of work:...

Documents

Transcript of SC A1 ADVISORY GROUP A1.02 – Hydro Generators WG A1.02-3 Generator Fire Protection Scope of work:...