Amendment 01 to RFP No. SUB-2023-10379_.pdf

National Renewable Energy Laboratory Managed and Operated by the Alliance for Sustainable Energy, LLC

15013 Denver West Parkway

Golden, CO 80401

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION

Request for Proposal (RFP)

No. SUB-2023-10379 Amendment No. 01

Date: June 17, 2023

ISSUED BY:

National Renewable Energy Laboratory

15013 Denver West Parkway

Golden, CO 80401

PROJECT NAME

"Variable Speed Hydro Generator Emulation Platform"

The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth below. The hour and date specified for receipt of offers

[X] is not extended. [ ] is

EXCEPT AS PROVIDED HEREIN, ALL TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THE SOLICITATION DOCUMENT REMAIN UNCHANGED

AND IN FULL FORCE AND EFFECT.

Subcontract Administrator: Todd Labosky

The purpose of this Amendment is to document questions and answers provided on the above-mentioned

Request for Proposal (RFP).

Part A – Questions/Answers

Question 1: The motors are not well defined and the inverters in the graphic don’t really help (3-300Hz is listed).

Response 1: Please ignore the text 3-300Hz. We require shaft rotational speed up to 400 RPM.

Question 2: Please advise what the expected torque needed. There is a very large difference between a

‘standard’ 1800RPM 1.25MW motor and a 400RPM 1.25MW motor. Do you want constant torque from 0 to max 400RPM with 1.25MW at 400RPM? That would have 29,840 Nm of torque. A 4-pole, 1800RPM motor would have 6630 Nm. The cost difference is large.

Response 2: A. Yes, this understanding is accurate.

B. No, NREL does not want constant torque from 0 to max 400RPM but please include torque-speed characteristics.

Question 3: Are you expecting 18-pole inverter-duty motors (0-400RPM = 0-60Hz) or is there no specific requirement for number of poles? Please advise if you have any additional motor information.

Response 3: No, we do not have a specific requirement for number of poles. We prefer direct shaft coupling without a gearbox.

Question 4: Regarding the inverters, would you consider two separate line-regenerative units as an option rather than a single common active front end? This would offer more flexible test capabilities without losing the capability to run as a load or driver together in tandem or act as a drive/load arrangement.

Response 4: We prefer a single common active front end, but please provide both options in your solution.

Part B – Revisions and Acknowledgement and Acceptance

1. The Due Date for receipt of proposals is not extended and remains 07/07/2023

2. Proposal Cover letters must include acknowledgement of receipt of Amendment 01 to RFP No. SUB-

2023-10379