Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Vladimir Frolov, Priyanko Guha Thakurta, Scott Backhaus, Janusz Bialek Fellow, IEEE and
Michael Chertkov Senior Member, IEEE
N OMENCLATURE
Parameters:
Nl
Nb
M
Ny R
Optimization variables:
V RN b
RN b
PG RNb
x RNl
x RNl
Q RNb
l0 RNb
Other variables:
Peij R2Nl
e ij R2Nl
Q
I. I NTRODUCTION
Power system planning and operation are terms which
encompass an entire range of activities performed by different
stakeholders. As shown schematically in Figure 1 the planning
activities fall under categories of long, medium and short term
investments ranging from 15 years to a season.
High penetration of variable renewable energy output coupled with significant increase in load uncertainty result in
frequent overloads of the system. To mitigate the overloads
TSOs have to plan for counter measures. Transmission expansion within the congested zones is one suitable option.
However, building new transmission lines is both expensive
and politically challenging. Moreover, some congestion management options like generation re-dispatch and demand side
management come at a significant extra cost to the TSOs in
a decentralized, e.g. European, environment. Hence, TSOs are
interested to find less expensive alternatives for their long term
planning strategies.
As argued in [2], [3] Flexible Alternating Current Transmission System (FACTS) is a technology capable to offer
the highly desirable and affordable alternative to traditional
network expansion. This strategic (grid reinforcement) use
of the FACTS devices comes in addition to many (more
traditional) operational benefits. This technology offers to
control power flows [4][8], improve voltage stability [9]
[11], damp power system oscillations [12][15] and improve
Operational Planning
Planning
Operations
Real-Time Operation
Short-Term
Miliseconds, Seconds
Mid-Term
Long Term
Years (2-5)
Market Forces
Years (5-15)
Regulation, Legislation
Uncertainties in variable production and demand; External Forces; Vulnerabilities (physical and cyber)
Severe Emergency
Conditions requiring
Automatic and Self-Healing
Control and Protective
Actions
Fig. 1.
Non-Severe Emergency
Conditions requiring
Coordinated Operator
Assited Control and
Optimized Re-Dispatch and
Balancing
25,000
20,000
MW
i = 1...M ; pi = wi
15,000
10,000
5,000
0
In this paper, the prime focus lies on finding optimal locations and sizes to install series and/or shunt FACTS devices.
Multiple loading configurations/scenarios are accounted within
the proposed optimization framework. The objective function
in the optimization consists of the capital investment term
and the system operational costs depending on the planning
period (optimization horizon). Capacities and operational settings (different for different scenarios, but all under respective
capacities) of the newly installed Series Capacitors (SCs) and
Static Var Compensators (SVCs) are among the optimization
variables. (However, already installed series and shunt FACTS
devices can also be included within the framework.)
The optimization problem is stated as follows:
X
Ta Ca (P (a) )
min CSC
x
1 +CSV C
Q
1 +Ny
4x,4Q
a=1..N
(1)
subject to:
(a)
x(a) = x0 + 4x(a)
(a)
PG
(a)
QG
(a)
(a)
=
=
= f (V
= g(V
(a)
PG
Q(a)
G
(a)
PD0 + P (a)
(a)
QD0 + Q(a)
(a) (a)
(a)
4Q 4Q
V
(a)
(a)
(a)
(a)
[Peij ]T [Peij ]
75%
100%
(3)
+ Q
(4)
(a)
(5)
(6)
(7)
(8)
(9)
(10)
(11)
(12)
(a)
(a)
,x
4x
(a)
50%
(2)
(a)
(a)
PG P G
(a)
(a)
QG QG
(a)
4x 4x
25%
,x
(a)
Fig. 2.
0%
4Q
(a)
e (a) ]T [Q
e (a) ]
[Q
ij
ij
(S
(a) 2
TABLE I
I MPLEMENTATION OF THE LD CURVE SCHEME
wi
1
2
3
4
5
6
5,50
19,50
25,00
25,00
18,80
6,20
0,940
0,845
0,775
0,685
0,590
0,51
0,064
0,041
0,045
0,080
0,068
0,078
The optimization problem (1)-(12) is difficult due to nonlinearity of the thermal constraints (12) and non-linearity and
non-convexity of the power balance constraints (3) and (4). In
order to solve the optimization problem, an efficient linearization based heuristics is developed. Note that the linearization is
done analytically, which is critical for the algorithm scalability.
The linearization is illustrated for Eq. (12), which is replaced by:
(19)
li0 = i l0
(14)
(15)
pji
(16)
= wi /N
li0 =
(17)
(18)
V. O PTIMIZATION A LGORITHM
The sequence of QP optimizations with linearized constraints are solved using an iterative algorithm in order to find
a solution for optimization problem (1)-(12). The flowchart of
the algorithm is shown in Figure 3.
A. General description
If some of the constraints (1)-(12) are violated the initial
state of the system lies outside of the feasible domain (A)
defined by the constraints (2)-(12). At each iteration within
the sequence the nonlinear constraints are linearized around a
current state, thus resulting in the construction of the domain
(B).
CPLEX optimization solver [36] is used to evaluate the
resulting QP optimization with linear constraints over (B).
Replacement of non-convex and non-linear (A) by convex and
linear (polytope) (B) is achieved in a number of iterations,
needed to get from the initial state outside of the domain (A)
to a point which lies inside. The algorithm is terminated when
either the preset target precision or the maximum number of
iterations is reached.
B. Details of the algorithm
Flowchart of the algorithm is shown in Figure 3. Brief
description of the flowchart is as follows:
1) Each load configuration for each scenario is given.
2) OPF is solved for each scenario without considering
any line thermal limits. Solutions of the OPF define the
initial states for each scenarios.
3) Linearization of the thermal and power balance constraints over the current state for each scenario is applied
and QP is solved.
Linearize Conditions
& Solve QP
5
Next Iteration
Yes
Violations?
No
Stop
Fig. 3.
TABLE II
O PTIMAL SETTINGS OF THE INSTALLED FACTS FOR EACH SCENARIO
Scenario (+ for
ACOPF feas)
1 (-)
2 (+)
3 (+)
4 (-)
5 (-)
6 (+)
7 (-)
8 (-)
9 (-)
10 (+)
SC optimal settings
(%)
51,90
-1,52
11,91
51,90
51,90
15,40
47,03
14,86
16,40
7,23
16
6.4
14
6.3
6.2
Scn 1
Scn 2
Scn 3
Scn 4
Scn 5
Scn 6
Scn 7
Scn 8
Scn 9
Scn 10
Total cost
10
8
6
4
2
6.1
6
5.9
12
5.8
5.7
0
2
Fig. 4.
10
12
14
Iterations
16
18
20
22
24
5.6
Fig. 5. Optimal solution for IEEE-30 bus system over 10 years planning
horizon. One SVC (solid dot) and one SC (dotted line) are installed.
TABLE III
C OMPUTATION TIMES
30bus
30bus
Polish
Polish
No. of
scenarios
10
160
4
16
No. of
iterations
25
25
15
15
Time (sec)
28.6
260.2
591.6
10397.0
The approach takes into account non-linear power flow equations. The most important features of the newly developed
framework include, scalability, allowing to resolve congestion
over practical (thousands of buses) size transmission systems,
and also the ability to resolve multiple scenarios simultaneously. The optimization can be considered as generalizing
standard AC-OPF over multiple scenarios with an additionally
added cost of operation (over a time horizon) and the cost of
installation. The optimization accounts for both installation
and operations, allowing the installed devices to adjust operationally to a particular scenario within the bounds set by the
installed capacity. Many interesting cases are experimented.
In all the cases considered the output (optimal placement) is
spatially sparse also showing strong non-locality (in the sense
that placement of a device may resolve congestion in a distant
region of the grid). It is also observed that under highly loaded
conditions FACTS devices are beneficial in reducing the total
cost of generation. Optimal installation of the devices helps to
resolve infeasibilities that are projected to become even more
severe in the future.
Main technical achievement reported in this paper is the
development of efficient heuristics for solving the non-linear
and non-convex optimization. The developed methodology
builds a convergent sequence of convex optimizations with
linear constraints. Each constraint is represented explicitly
(a) 1 year horizon. Capacities of SCs from left to right: through exact analytical linearization of the original nonlinear
35.6 %, 24.4 %, 100 %, 9.24 %, 100 %.
constraints (e.g. representing power flows and apparent power
line limits) over all the degrees of freedom (including FACTS
corrections) around the current operational point. In order to
represent uncertainty in the projected growth of the system
(loads) a custom scenario sampling is introduced. Practicality
of our approach for resolving investment planning is illustrated
on the IEEE 30-bus and 2383-bus Polish systems. It is evident
from the experimental results that the approach is capable both
in improving the system economy (reduce congestion price
and generation cost) and resolving congestion by increasing
the feasibility domain. Development of convenient web visualization software within the project is also significant.
R EFERENCES
(b) 10 years horizon. Capacities of SCs from left to right: 14.4 %, 70.4 %.
SVC capacity: 3.30 MVAr.
Fig. 6.
Planning for 2383-bus Polish system. Yellow and black dots
represent loads and generators respectively. Blue long-dashed lines represent
compensated lines that are initially overloaded, green and red short-dashed
lines represent compensated and initially overloaded lines respectively. Large
green dot represents installed SVC compensator.
[1] P. Guha Thakurta, J. Maeght, R. Belmans, and D. Van Hertem, Increasing Transmission Grid Flexibility by TSO Coordination to Integrate
More Wind Energy Sources while Maintaining System Security, IEEE
Trans. Sustain. Energy, vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 11221130, July 2015.
[2] Y. Xiao, Y. Song, C. C. Liu, and Y. Sun, Available transfer capability
enhancement using FACTS devices, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 18,
no. 1, pp. 305312, Feb 2003.
[3] J. Mutale and G. Strbac, Transmission network reinforcement versus
FACTS: an economic assessment, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 15,
no. 3, pp. 961967, Aug 2000.
[4] D. J. Gotham and G. T. Heydt, Power flow control and power flow
studies for systems with FACTS devices, IEEE Trans. Power Syst.,
vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 6065, Feb 1998.
[5] Y. Xiao, Y. Song, and Y. Sun, Power flow control approach to power
systems with embedded FACTS devices, IEEE Trans. Power Syst.,
vol. 17, no. 4, pp. 943950, Nov 2002.
[6] N. Li, Y. Xu, and H. Chen, FACTS-based power flow control in
interconnected power system, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 15, no. 1,
pp. 257262, Feb 2000.
[7] M. Noroozian, L. Angquist, M. Ghandhari, and G. Andersson, Use of
UPFC for optimal power flow control, IEEE Trans. Power Del., vol. 12,
no. 4, pp. 16291634, Oct 1997.