Expediency of creating an automated control system of the technological processes of hydroelectric stations

Abstract

Works on the creation of an automated control system of the technological processes of hydroelectric stations (ACS TP HES) have acquired a grand scale. The question arises: under what conditions is the creation of an ACS effective and where are the limits of its applicability? Taking into account the urgency of the problem, the journal opened a discussion of the problem of improving control of HES (article of Baskin and Stasenkov [i]). Such a decision is correct and timely.However, a number of methodological principles playing a substantial role for discussing the indicated problem have still not been solved and a method for technicoeconomic justification of an ACS TP HES has not been developed. A number of issues of a controversial and methodological character are discussed in the present article.Baskin and Stasenkov touch on a number of important problems of improving control. Although some of them are disputable and some of them are well known and rather obvious, on the whole the authors' concern about the rationalization of control of the technological process of HES is understandable and useful.Unfortunately, in the article being discussed, too much attention is given to attempts to refine the term ACS TP HES.In essence, the authors suggest extending this term to a system of automatic control of the technological processes of HES (SAC TP HES), suggesting that this is the same as the ACS TP but without a computer. However, this adds nothing to the method of improving the control of HES. Furthermore, the very term ACS arose in Soviet literature exactly with the appearance of computers. And it is usually assumed that an ACS TP HES contains a computer and a SAC TP HES does not.State Standard GOST 19675-74 states that an ACS is a "man--machine system." Although the GOST does not reveal the content of the term "man--machine" it is assumed that this is a "man plus computer" system. It seems to us that the problem of what to call the ACS HES should not be the main subject of dispute.It is far more important to pose the question differently: where does one draw the line separating the area of applicability of the SAC TP HES and the ACS TP HES? Since in the majority of cases the SAC TP are considerably cheaper, they are preferable at low-capacity HES. One-and two-level ACS TP requiring different costs for their implementation also will have a different area of use.We note that the introduction at HES of computing machinery affects also the SAC TP. Solving the problem of the rational structure, we must remember that there exist three possible forms of automation of control:i. Classical SAC TP (relay or analog) without using computing machinery components. Duplication of individual functions (tasks) of devices of the SAC TP by functions(tasks) of the ACS TP.3. Combining (program and apparatus) the functions of the ACS TP and functions of the SAC TP.Today they all have the right to exist and the rational form of control should be selected by a technicoeconomic comparison.Baskin and Stasenkov speak more about the first fo...