Paper accepted for presentation at the 2011 IEEE Trondheim PowerTech
Modeling of a Number of Heat Pump Water
Heaters as Control Equipment for Load
Frequency Control in Power Systems
Taisuke Masuta, Akihiko Yokoyama, Member, IEEE, and Yasuyuki Tada, Member, IEEE
 intermittent output of wind power generation and photovoltaic
Abstract—In Japan, it is expected to establish the smart grid
as a power system into which a large amount of generation from
renewable energy sources such as wind power generation and
photovoltaic generation can be installed. A large penetration of
these renewable energy sources causes some problems in power
systems, e.g. distribution voltage rise and frequency fluctuation.
Our research group has developed a supplementary Load
Frequency Control (LFC) method by use of Heat Pump Water
Heaters (HPWHs) as controllable loads. Such control methods
are developed and tested in general based on numerical
simulations. This paper proposes a lumped HPWH model for
simplifying such numerical simulation which is statistically
designed taking into account customers’ convenience and
uncertainty. The model can approximate well the behavior of a
number of HPWHs. The effectiveness of the frequency control
method by the HPWHs is also evaluated by simulations based on
the proposed lumped model.
Index Terms-- Controllable load, Heat Pump Water Heater
(HPWH), Load Frequency Control (LFC), smart grid, statistical
modeling.
I. INTRODUCTION
S MART grid is a new concept of a better future grid with
Information and Communication Technology (ICT),
which enables us to solve the problems of the present power
systems; environmental issues, aging infrastructures, energy
security, quality of power supply, etc. In Japan, from
viewpoints of global warming countermeasures and energy
security, it is expected to establish the smart grid as a power
system into which a large amount of generation from
renewable energy sources such as wind power generation and
photovoltaic generation can be installed. A large penetration
of these renewable energy sources causes some problems in
power systems, e.g. distribution voltage rise and frequency
fluctuation. Distribution voltage rise is caused by reverse
power flow from the photovoltaic generation connected to the
distribution network. Frequency fluctuation is caused by
Taisuke Masuta is with the Department of Electrical Engineering and
Information Systems, University of Tokyo, Tokyo 113-8656, Japan (e-
mail:masuta@syl.t.u-tokyo.ac.jp).
Akihiko Yokoyama is with Department of Advanced energy, The
University of Tokyo, Chiba 272-8581, Japan (e-mail:yokoyama@syl.t.u-
tokyo.ac.jp).
Y. Tada is with the R&D Center, Tokyo Electric Power Company, Inc.,
Yokohama, 230-8510, Japan (Tada.Yasuyuki@tepco.co.jp).
978-1-4244-8417-1/11/$26.00 ©2011
generation. Battery Energy Storage System (BESS) is one of
the effective solutions to these problems. Due to a high cost of
the BESS, an application of customers’ appliances to the
power system control as the replacement of a part of BESS
has gained much attention [1] [2].
Our research group has developed new supplementary
Load Frequency Control (LFC) methods by use of plenty of
customers’ appliances such as Electric Vehicle (EV) and Heat
Pump Water Heater (HPWH) [3]-[5]. These new appliances
have energy storages such as battery or hot water tank. They
are also conceived as controllable loads because the power
consumption can be changed during battery charging and
discharging or water heating as long as the charging or
heating is completed when the customer would like to use
them.
A coordinated LFC method of the BESS and the HPWHs
was proposed in the previous research [3]. It was made clear
in the simulation based on a number of the detailed HPWH
models [3] that HPWHs on customer side can be effective as
control equipment for LFC. Such control method is developed
and tested in general based on numerical simulation and it is
complicated to deal with a number of the detailed models in
the simulation. In this paper, a lumped HPWH model for
simplifying such simulation is statistically designed
considering customers’ convenience and uncertainty. Hot
water demand, Coefficient Of Performance (COP), rated
power consumption, and capacity of hot water tank are taken
into account in the model.
II. DETAILED HPWH MODEL [3]
An HPWH is a high-efficiency and energy-saving
appliance, which has a tank to store hot water because its
thermal power output is smaller than that of a gas-fired water
heater. In this paper, it is assumed that customers set the
requested amount of hot water everyday and the requested
amount of a day is heated during the nighttime. In addition,
each HPWH keeps the minimum amount of hot water in the
tank. The amount of hot water used per second is considered
as power and the amount of hot water stored in the tank as
energy in this paper. They are denoted by P [kW] and E
[kWh] respectively.
The detailed HPWH model [3] which describes the
 2

behavior of an HPWH is depicted in Fig. 1. This model amount of hot water in the tank Etank is calculated by (1).
consists of three units; control unit, start unit and thermal
storage unit. The parameters are shown in Table I. The Etank Einitial  Euse  Eheated (1)
condition of COPs of the HPWHs in this paper is presented in
section III and IV. The input of this model is the control signal where Einitial is the initial hot water amount and Euse is the
to an HPWH whereas the output is the power consumption of amount of used hot water which is the integral of the amount
an HPWH. In the previous research [3], the frequency analysis of hot water used per second Puse.
was performed by the numerical simulation based on a The excess of Euse over the sum of Einitial and Eheated is
number of the detailed HPWH models. It was assumed that considered as the shortage of hot water Eshortage. The
hot water demand was different from customer to customer occurrence of shortage of hot water Eshortage is assumed not to
and that all the HPWHs had the same rated power make any impact on the amount of used hot water Puse and Euse
consumption, capacity of hot water tank, and value of COP. later. The criterion of customers’ convenience in this paper is
Control Unit 0.1PHP Rhp whether the shortage of hot water Eshortage occurs or not and
Control Signal
1
Thpcs+1
1
Tims+1 whether the requested amount of hot water Erequest is
Control Delay -0.1PHP Rate Limiter Delay of IM completed to be heated or not.
Start Unit 0.9PHP
1
Start Reference Tstarts+1
0 Start Delay III. LUMPED HPWH MODEL
Emax
Einitial A. HPWH Control System
Euse k>0
Puse 1
s
KN Etank min
Power Figure 2 shows the HPWH control system assumed in this
Consumption
1 KN
0
0
Erequest k<0 paper [3]. It is a hierarchical control system which consists of
s 0
Normalization
-1 Eshortage two hierarchies, i.e. local control centers and a central load
Eheated dispatching center. The control area of each local control
1
Thps+1
COP center is the same size as that of each distribution substation.
Conversion Delay A number of HPWHs are under the control of the local control
Thermal Storage Unit
centers. A two-way communication network is assumed. A
Fig. 1. Detailed HPWH model.
lumped model proposed in this paper is designed to simulate
TABLE I the behavior of a number of HPWHs under the control of one
PARAMETERS OF DETAILED HPWH MODEL local control center.
P HP Rated Power Consumption [kW] 1.0 / 1.3
E max
Each local control center collects the information on its
Thermal Capacity of Hot Water Tank [kWh] 20 / 26
T start Start Delay [s] 300
HPWHs and sends it to the central load dispatching center.
T hpc Control Delay [s] 30 Based on the information, the central load dispatching center
R hp Rate Limiter [%kW/s] 1 generates a LFC signal for the whole HPWHs and sends it to
T ig Delay of Induction Motor [s] 1 the HPWHs via the local control centers. The LFC signal is
T hp Conversion Delay [s] 300 generated based on the coordinated LFC method proposed in
KN Nomalization Coefficient [h/s] 1/3600 the previous research [3] [4]. As is shown in Fig. 3, the LFC
signal is dispatched not only to the conventional power plants
The start unit is modeled for operation from zero to the (LFC generators) but also to the BESS and the HPWHs
steady-state power consumption, 90% of the rated power according to the magnitude and period of the Area
consumption here, which is approximated by the first-order Requirement (AR).
model with the time delay of 300 seconds on the basis that the
power consumption of an air conditioner for home use Local
ControlCenter
becomes stable 0.25 [h] after start.
The control unit is designed on the assumption that the 䞉
HPWH HPWH 䞉䞉䞉 HPWH HPWH
power consumption of an HPWH can be controlled in the
䞉
䞉

range over 80 % of the rated power consumption, that 90% of TransmissionSystem

Local
ControlCenter

that is consumed without the input control signal, and that ± CentralLoad
DispatchingCenter

10 % of that can be controlled by the input control signal 䞉

䞉 HPWH HPWH 䞉䞉䞉 HPWH HPWH
(LFC signal). It is uncontrollable until the power consumption 䞉

becomes stable (0.25 [h] after start). Local

ControlCenter

In the thermal storage unit, the amount of heated water

Eheated and the amount of hot water in the tank Etank are :ControlSignal HPWH HPWH 䞉䞉䞉 HPWH HPWH

calculated. It is designed to stop heating if the amount of :StateofHPWH

heated water Eheated is larger than the requested amount of hot Fig. 2. HPWH control system.
water Erequest, or the amount of hot water in the tank Etank is
equal to the thermal capacity of the hot water tank Emax. The
 3

range of 90 ± 10 % of the rated power consumption according

[MW]
to input LFC signal.
BESS

Power Spectrum C. Lumped HPWH Model

LFCGen. The lumped HPWH model proposed in this paper is shown
in Fig. 4, which approximates the dynamic behavior of the
LFCGen. total power consumption of the HPWHs controlled by one
BESS

HPWH
local control center. The total power consumption on start-up
Period
[s] or [min]
is approximated by a ramp function which is to be 90 % of the
Fig. 3. Conceptual image of LFC dispatching method. total rated power consumption of the HPWHs at 0.5 [h] after
B. Control Method of HPWHs start. The change of the total power consumption after the
HPWHs begin to stop heating is approximated by the normal
The HPWHs are controlled by each local control center.
distribution function based on the average value TAVG and the
Each local control center grasps the information on the
standard deviation TSD of the estimated heating period Theat
number of its HPWHs with several kinds of rated power
calculated by (3). The lumped HPWH model developed here
consumption and tank capacity. Therefore, the central load
is used in numerical simulations in this paper. In addition, it is
dispatching center grasps the total number and the total rated
assumed that this model is used by the central load
power consumption of the HPWHs in each local control
dispatching center for the estimation of the dynamic behavior
center. The local control center collects the information on the
of the total power consumption and controllable capacity of
requested amount of hot water Erequest of the controlled
the HPWHs.
HPWHs in advance of the control. Based on that information, Cestimated(t) Rhp
it calculates the expected heating period Theat of each HPWH Control Signal
1 1
Thpcs+1 Tims+1
by (2). The power consumption of an HPWH in this Control Delay -Cestimated(t) Rate Limiter Delay of IM
calculation is considered as 90 % of the rated power Pinstalled*
1 1 Power
consumption because the power consumption of each HPWH 0.5 [h]
0.9
Tstarts+1 Consumption
is controlled in the range of 90 ± 10 % of the rated power Ramp 0 Start Delay

consumption. It is assumed that the COP can be estimated Poperating(t)

based on weather forecast as the average value, which is TAVG

1 Pinstalled 0.9

described as COP*estimated in (2), in each local control center. TSD

Normal
s

(NHP: The number of the HPWHs controlled by the local Distribution * Pinstalled : Total Rated Power Consumption of Installed HPWHs

control center, iѮNHP) Fig. 4. Lumped HPWH model.

i
Erequest The total controllable capacity Cestimated(t) is calculated by
i
Theat (2)
0.9 P ˜ COP
i * (4).
HP estimated

­0 , if 0  t  0.25 [h]
Each local control center calculates the average value TAVG °
and the standard deviation TSD of the expected heating period C estimated t  ®0.1 ˜ Poperating t  0.25  , if 0.25  t  0.75 [ h] (4)
°
Theat of the HPWHs by (3) and sends them to the central load
dispatching center. Not only the transmission of the
information between each local control center and its
customers but also that between the central load dispatching
center and the local control centers is carried out once a day.
The upstream information communication to the central load
dispatching center does not have to be in real-time.
¯0.1 ˜ Poperating t  , if 0.75  t [ h]
where Poperating(t) is the total rated power consumption of the
operating HPWHs shown in Fig. 4.
The time t = 0 is when the first one of the HPWHs starts.
The time t = 0.75 [h] is when the power consumption of the
last starting HPWH, which starts at t = 0.5 [h], becomes stable.
As long as all the HPWHs are operating, Poperating(t) does not
¦ T 
N HP N HP

¦T
2
i
heat
i
heat  TAVG change after t = 0.5 [h] because the HPWHs do not start any
TAVG i 1
, TSD i 1 (3)
N HP N HP more. It is assumed that no HPWHs stop operating from
t = 0.5 [h] to t = 0.75 [h] and that Poperating(t) is constant during
According to the statistical information, the central load that period. Cestimated(t) changes in proportion to Poperating(t)
dispatching center estimates the change of the total power after t = 0.75 [h] because all the operating HPWHs are
consumption of the HPWHs as a normal distribution, controllable.
determines the start time and the control period, and sends the
start time and the control signal (LFC signal) to the HPWHs IV. EVALUATION OF DYNAMIC BEHAVIOR OF LUMPED MODEL
via the local control centers. Each local control center starts its Numerical simulations are carried out to compare between
HPWHs at random in 0.5 [h] so as to avoid a great impact of the output of a lumped model responding to the input LFC
the simultaneous start of a number of HPWHs on the power signal and that of a number of detailed models and to verify
system. Each HPWH changes its power consumption in the whether the proposed lumped model can well approximate the
 4

behavior of a number of the HPWHs. On the assumption of TABLE III

AVERAGE VALUE AND STANDARD DEVIATION
installation of two kinds of HPWHs, not only uncertainty of OF ESTIMATED HEATING PERIOD
hot water demands but also uncertainty of COPs is considered. Average Value Standard Deviation
T AVG [h] T SD [h]
A. Simulation Condition
3.45 0.67
The number of the HPWHs controlled by one local control
center, whose control area is assumed to be the same size as
䢲䢰䢳
that of each distribution substation, is from about 1,000 to
2,000. It is assumed in this simulation that the number of the 䢲䢰䢲䢷

䣎䣈䣅䢢䣵䣫䣩䣰䣣䣮䢢䣝䣲䢰䣷䢰䣟
HPWHs controlled by one local control center is 1,000 and 䢲

that there are two kinds of HPWHs which are different in the 䢯䢲䢰䢲䢷
rated power consumption and the capacity of tank. The data of
䢯䢲䢰䢳
the installed HPWHs used in the simulation is shown in Table 䢲 䢳 䢴 䢵 䢶 䢷 䢸 䢹
II. 䣖䣫䣯䣧䢢䣝䣪䣟

In this paper, each customer sets the requested amount of
hot water Erequest for 1-day use everyday and each HPWH
keeps operating until the requested amount is completed to be
heated. The requested amount of hot water Erequest used in the
simulation is determined on each customer using the hot water
demand in the Tokyo metropolitan area in winter [6] for
reference. The histogram of the requested amount of hot water
Erequest of 1,000 customers is shown in Fig. 5.
The estimated average COP in the simulation, which is
described as COP*estimated in (2), is determined to be 4.0. The
actual average COP is denoted by COP*, which is a parameter
in the simulation. The COPs of 1,000 HPWHs are statistically
distributed as a normal distribution (average value: COP*,
standard deviation: 5.0 %). Although COP changes with time
actually, it is assumed to be constant. It is sufficient to
consider COP as constant at the average value in the
simulation period because the heated amount of hot water is
calculated as the integral of the power consumption multiplied
by the COP as shown in Fig. 1. Table III shows the average
value TAVG and the standard deviation TSD of the estimated
heating period calculated by (3) using the data shown in Fig. 5.
The LFC signal to one machine in the simulation period is
shown in Fig. 6. The simulation period is 7 hours. The
HPWHs starts heating from t = 0 to t = 0.5 [h]. The LFC
signal is sent from t = 0.25 to t = 6.0 [h]. The HPWHs respond
to the LFC signal as long as they are operating.
TABLE II
DATA OF INSTALLED HPWHS
Type A
Rated Power Consumption [kW] 1.0
Rated Thermal Output [kW] 4.5
Capacity of Hot Water Tank [l ] 370
Capacity of Hot Water Tank [kWh] 20
Instration Rate [%] 70
Fig. 6. LFC signal to one machine.
B. Simulation Results
The total power consumption and the total controlled
power of the HPWHs of both the lumped model and a
thousand of the detailed models in the simulation period are
shown in Fig. 7. The actual average value COP* is 4.0 which
is the same value as COP*estimated estimated by the central load
dispatching center.
Figure 7 (a) shows the total power consumption of the
HPWHs. The total controlled power of the HPWHs shown in
Fig. 7 (b) changes within the controllable capacity shown in
Fig. 7 (d), which stands for the power consumption controlled
within ± 10 % of the total rated power consumption of the
HPWHs. Figure 7 (c) is a close-up of Fig. 7 (b) from t = 3.0 to
t = 5.0 [h]. It can be seen in Fig. 7 that the output of the
lumped model almost agrees with that of the detailed models
from t = 1.0 to t = 3.0 [h], and that there is a difference
between the two outputs from t = 3.0 to t = 5.0 [h]. The reason
of the difference is because the lumped model is designed on
the assumption that the distribution of the heating period of
the HPWHs is an exact normal distribution and that the power
consumption is constant at 90 % of the rated power
consumption during the control period. However, during the
period that the lumped model well approximates (from t = 1.0
to t = 3.0 [h]), almost all the HPWHs are operating and the
controllable capacity of the HPWHs is large enough to
contribute to the frequency control. It can be said that the
lumped model can approximate the detailed models while the
Type B frequency control by use of the HPWHs is effective.
1.3 Figure 8 shows the RMS value of the error between the
6.0
total controlled power of HPWHs represented by the lumped
460
model and that by the detailed models. It is calculated by (5)
26
30
hourly.

䢴䢷䢲 PRMS
1 N i

¦ PLM  PDMi
N i1

2 (5)
䣐䣷䣯䣤䣧䣴䢢䣱䣨䢢䣥䣷䣵䣶䣱䣯䣧䣴䣵

䢴䢲䢲

䢳䢷䢲
where N is the sample number, PLM is the total controlled
䢳䢲䢲
power of the HPWHs represented by the lumped model, and
䢷䢲 PDM is that by the detailed models.
䢲
䢳 䢵 䢷 䢹 䢻 䢳䢳 䢳䢵 䢳䢷 䢳䢹 䢳䢻 䢴䢳 䢴䢵 䢴䢷 The RMS of the error is large not only in the period from
䣔䣧䣳䣷䣧䣵䣶䣧䣦䢢䣣䣯䣱䣷䣰䣶䢢䣱䣨䢢䣪䣱䣶䢢䣹䣣䣶䣧䣴䢢䣝䣭䣙䣪䣟
Fig. 5. Histogram of requested amount of hot water.
t = 3.0 to t = 5.0 [h] but also in the period from t = 0 to
 5

t = 1.0 [h]. It is because the total power consumption of the 䢸䢰䢲

lumped model on start-up is designed as a ramp function as

䣔䣏䣕䢢䣸䣣䣮䣷䣧䢢䣱䣨䢢䣧䣴䣴䣱䣴䢢䣝䣭䣙䣟
䢷䢰䢲

shown in Fig. 4, which cannot completely approximate that of 䢶䢰䢲

the actual HPWHs which consists of two different kinds of 䢵䢰䢲

HPWHs. However, the RMS of the error is small in the period 䢴䢰䢲

from t = 1.0 to t = 3.0 [h], which verifies quantitatively that 䢳䢰䢲

the approximation of the lumped model to the detailed models 䢲

䢲䢯䢳 䢳䢯䢴 䢴䢯䢵 䢵䢯䢶 䢶䢯䢷 䢷䢯䢸 䢸䢯䢹
is appropriate when the controllable capacity of the HPWHs is 䣖䣫䣯䣧䢢䣝䣪䣟
Fig. 8. RMS value of error of controlled power.
large.
Next, the impact of the estimated error of the average COP
䢳䢴䢲䢲 䢢 is evaluated. As is described in the previous subsection, the
䣖䣱䣶䣣䣮䢢䣲䣱䣹䣧䣴䢢䣥䣱䣰䣵䣷䣯䣲䣶䣫䣱䣰䢢䣝䣭䣙䣟

䣆䣧䣶䣣䣫䣮䣧䣦䢢䣯䣱䣦䣧䣮䣵
䢳䢲䢲䢲 䣎䣷䣯䣲䣧䣦䢢䣯䣱䣦䣧䣮 COPs of the detailed models are stochastically determined
䢺䢲䢲 based on the average value of the COPs. There is a possibility
䢸䢲䢲 that the response of the actual HPWHs is different from that
䢶䢲䢲
of the lumped model if COP* (actual average value) is
different from COP*estimated (estimated average value).
䢴䢲䢲
Figure 9 shows the change of the controllable capacity of
䢲䢢
䢲 䢳 䢴 䢵 䢶 䢷 䢸 䢹 HPWHs in the three cases; 0, +5 %, and -5 % in the estimated
䣖䣫䣯䣧䢢䣝䣪䣟
error of COP*. The smaller COP*, the slower decrease in the
(a)
controllable capacity. It is because the smaller the COP is, the
䢢
longer it takes to complete to heat the water.
䢳䢲䢲 䣆䣧䣶䣣䣫䣮䣧䣦䢢䣯䣱䣦䣧䣮䣵
䣖䣱䣶䣣䣮䢢䣥䣱䣰䣶䣴䣱䣮䣮䣧䣦䢢䣲䣱䣹䣧䣴䢢䣝䣭䣙䣟

䢢
䣎䣷䣯䣲䣧䣦䢢䣯䣱䣦䣧䣮 䢳䢲䢲 䣅䣑䣒䢬䢿䢵䢰䢺
䣅䣱䣰䣶䣴䣱䣮䣮䣣䣤䣮䣧䢢䣥䣣䣲䣣䣥䣫䣶䣻䢢䣝䣭䣙䣟

䢷䢲
䣅䣑䣒䢬䢿䢶䢰䢲
䢷䢲
䢲 䣅䣑䣒䢬䢿䢶䢰䢴

䢲
䢯䢷䢲
䢯䢷䢲
䢯䢳䢲䢲
䢢
䢲 䢳 䢴 䢵 䢶 䢷 䢸 䢹 䢯䢳䢲䢲
䢢
䣖䣫䣯䣧䢢䣝䣪䣟 䢲 䢳 䢴 䢵 䢶 䢷 䢸 䢹
(b) 䣖䣫䣯䣧䢢䣝䣪䣟
Fig. 9. Control capacity of HPWHs.
䢢
䢳䢲䢲 䣆䣧䣶䣣䣫䣮䣧䣦䢢䣯䣱䣦䣧䣮䣵 Figure 10 shows the RMS value of the error between the
䣖䣱䣶䣣䣮䢢䣥䣱䣰䣶䣴䣱䣮䣮䣧䣦䢢䣲䣱䣹䣧䣴䢢䣝䣭䣙䣟

䣎䣷䣯䣲䣧䣦䢢䣯䣱䣦䣧䣮
䢷䢲 total controlled power of the HPWHs represented by the
lumped model and that by the detailed models in the five
䢲
cases; 0, ± 5 %, ± 10 % in the estimated error of COP*.
䢯䢷䢲 䢴䢷 䢢
䣅䣑䣒䢬 䢿䢵䢰䢸
䣔䣏䣕䢢䣸䣣䣮䣷䣧䢢䣱䣨䢢䣧䣴䣴䣱䣴䢢䣝䣭䣙䣟

䢯䢳䢲䢲 䢴䢲 䣅䣑䣒䢬 䢿䢵䢰䢺

䢢 䣅䣑䣒䢬 䢿䢶䢰䢲
䢵 䢵䢰䢷 䢶 䢶䢰䢷 䢷 䢳䢷 䣅䣑䣒䢬 䢿䢶䢰䢴
䣖䣫䣯䣧䢢䣝䣪䣟 䣅䣑䣒䢬 䢿䢶䢰䢶
䢳䢲
(c)
䢷
䢢
䢳䢲䢲 䣆䣧䣶䣣䣫䣮䣧䣦䢢䣯䣱䣦䣧䣮䣵 䢲䢢
䣅䣱䣰䣶䣴䣱䣮䣮䣣䣤䣮䣧䢢䣥䣣䣲䣣䣥䣫䣶䣻䢢䣝䣭䣙䣟

䢲䢯䢳 䢳䢯䢴 䢴䢯䢵 䢵䢯䢶 䢶䢯䢷 䢷䢯䢸 䢸䢯䢹

䣎䣷䣯䣲䣧䣦䢢䣯䣱䣦䣧䣮 䣖䣫䣯䣧䢢䣝䣪䣟
䢷䢲 Fig. 10. RMS value of error of controlled power.
䢲
The larger error of the COP estimation, the larger error of
䢯䢷䢲
the controlled power. However, it can be seen that the
䢯䢳䢲䢲 difference during t = 1-2 [h] is slight. It concludes that the
䢢
䢲 䢳 䢴 䢵 䢶 䢷 䢸 䢹 impact of the estimated error of the COP is small in the period
䣖䣫䣯䣧䢢䣝䣪䣟
that almost all the HPWHs are operating and the frequency
(d)
control by use of the HPWHs is expected to be effective. In
Fig. 7. Simulation results. (a) Total power consumption of HPWHs. (b) Total this simulation, the LFC signal is generated and sent all the
controlled power of HPWHs. (c) Total controlled power of HPWHs (close-up time when the HPWHs are operating in order to evaluate the
scale). (d) Controllable capacity of HPWHs.
dynamic behavior of the proposed lumped model. However, in
the practical use for the power system control, the central load
dispatching center only has to generate and send the LFC
 6

signal just while the approximation is accurate. The proposed TABLE IV

SYSTEM DATA
lumped model makes the estimation of such period possible.
Rated Capacity[MW]
The real-time communication is not necessary to control the Nuclear 4,000
HPWHs during such period. Thermal (Max) 5,800
Wind 2,000
V. FREQUENCY ANALYSIS Photovoltaic 2,000
BESS 100 (800MWh)
In this section, the frequency analysis is performed on the
power system model with a large penetration of wind power
generation and photovoltaic generation. The effectiveness of It is assumed that 420,000 HPWHs (10 % of the total
the frequency control by use of the HPWHs is verified. customers) are installed in the considered area. The HPWH
model in Fig. 11 is the lumped HPWH model which stands for
A. Simulation Condition all the HPWHs in the considered area. The parameters of the
The simulation model [3] used in this simulation is shown lumped HPWH model in this simulation are shown in Table V.
in Fig. 11. This model consists of an equivalent generator The maximum controllable capacity of the HPWHs is ± 45.8
model, control system model, load fluctuation, renewable [MW]. The average value TAVG and the standard deviation TSD
energy output, nuclear power plant output, BESS model, of the estimated heating period are the same ones as those
thermal power plant model, and HPWH model. The shown in Table III. Both COP* and COP*estimated are assumed
equivalent generator model has an inertia constant Meq equal to be 4.0. The simulation period is from 23:00 to 10:00. In this
to the sum of the inertia constants of all the generators. It is simulation, the central load dispatching center selects 4:00 as
updated according to the total capacity of the connected the start time of the HPWHs and controls the HPWHs from
generators. The load-damping constant D is updated according 5:00 to 6:00. As a result, the HPWHs are controlled in the
to the total load demand. minimum-load time zone which is a difficult time period to
Load - suppress frequency fluctuation due to small regulating
capacity of thermal power plants in association with their low
Renewable
Energy
+ power outputs. The control period is from 1 to 2 [h] after the
start, during which the lumped model well approximates the
Nuclear
Power Plant
+ dynamic behavior of the actual HPWHs as shown in Figs. 8
䂴P 1 䂴䃨
and 10.
Battery Energy
+
Storage System Meqs  D
Generator Model 䢳䢳䢮䢲䢲䢲
Control Heat Pump
-
䣖䣱䣶䣣䣮䢢䣮䣱䣣䣦䢢䣨䣮䣷䣥䣶䣷䣣䣶䣫䣱䣰䢢䣝䣏䣙䣟

System Water Heater

䢳䢲䢮䢲䢲䢲
Thermal
+
Power Plant 䢻䢮䢲䢲䢲

䢺䢮䢲䢲䢲
Minimum Load
Fig. 11. Frequency analysis model.
䢹䢮䢲䢲䢲

The 8-machine system model described in Fig. 12 is used 䢸䢮䢲䢲䢲

䢴䢵 䢲䢢 䢳䢢 䢴䢢 䢵䢢 䢶䢢 䢷䢢 䢸䢢 䢹䢢 䢺䢢 䢻䢢 䢳䢲
as a power system model for the system frequency analysis in 䣖䣫䣯䣧䢢䣝䣪䣟
this study. The system data is summarized in Table IV. This Fig. 13. Total load fluctuation.
model is a part of IEEJ 30-machine system model [7]. The
load fluctuation and the total output of renewable energy 䢴䢮䢲䢲䢲
䣖䣱䣶䣣䣮䢢䣱䣷䣶䣲䣷䣶䢢䣱䣨䢢䣔䣇䣕䢢䣝䣏䣙䣟

sources are shown in Figs. 13 and 14 respectively. The long-

䢳䢮䢷䢲䢲
term fluctuation of the load is obtained using the daily load
curve of holiday in Japan for reference whereas the short-term 䢳䢮䢲䢲䢲
fluctuation is calculated by a random function. The total
output of renewable energy sources of wind power generation 䢷䢲䢲

and photovoltaic generation is obtained from the

䢲
meteorological observation data of wind velocity and solar 䢴䢵 䢲䢢 䢳䢢 䢴䢢 䢵䢢 䢶䢢 䢷䢢 䢸䢢 䢹䢢 䢺䢢 䢻䢢 䢳䢲
䣖䣫䣯䣧䢢䣝䣪䣟
radiation in January [8]. Fig. 14. Total output of renewable energy sources.

TABLE V
PARAMETERS OF LUMPED HPWH MODEL IN THE SIMULATION
P installed [MW] 458
T AVG [h] 3.45
T SD [h] 0.67

Nuclear
Thermal
B. Simulation Results
Fig. 12. 8-machine system model. The simulation results are shown in Figs. 15 and 16. The
 7

total power consumption of the HPWHs is depicted in Fig. 15. Statistical HPWH Model in Power system with a Large Penetration of
Renewable Energy Sources," in Proc. 2010 International Conference on
It can be seen from this figure that the total power Power System Technology, Hangzhou, China, Oct. 2010.
consumption is controlled responding to the control signal [4] H. Irie, A. Yokoyama, and Y. Tada, "System Frequency Control by
during the control period. Coordination of Batteries and Heat Pump based Water Heaters on
Customer Side in Power System with a Large Penetration of Wind
Power Generation," IEE Japan Trans. Power and Energy, vol. 128, no. 3,
䣖䣱䣶䣣䣮䢢䣲䣱䣹䣧䣴䢢䣥䣱䣰䣵䣷䣯䣲䣶䣫䣱䣰䢢䣱䣨䢢䣊䣒䣙䣊䣵䢢䣝䣏䣙䣟

䢷䢲䢲 pp. 338-346, Mar. 2010. (in Japanese)

[5] K. Shimizu, T. Masuta, Y. Ota, and A. Yokoyama, "Load Frequency
䢶䢲䢲
Control in Power System Using Vehicle-to-Grid System Considering the
䢵䢲䢲 Customer Convenience of Electric Vehicle," in Proc. 2010 International
Conference on Power System Technology, Hangzhou, China, Oct. 2010.
䢴䢲䢲 [6] E. Imamura and H. Asano, "Load Survey Analysis of Hot Water and
Electricity Demands of Residential Sector in the Metropolitan Area,"
䢳䢲䢲 CRIEPI Research Report Y08054, Oct. 2009. (in Japanese)
[7] IEE Japan, "Japanese Power System Models," IEEJ Technical Report,
䢲
䢴䢵 䢲 䢳 䢴 䢵 䢶 䢷 䢸 䢹 䢺 䢻 䢳䢲 vol. 754, 1999. (in Japanese)
䣖䣫䣯䣧䢢䣝䣪䣟 [8] Japan Meteorological Business Support Center (JMBSC). [Online].
Fig. 15. Total power consumption of HPWHs. Available: http://www.jmbsc.or.jp/

Figure 16 shows that the frequency fluctuation is VIII. BIOGRAPHIES

suppressed in the case of the control of the HPWHs. The result
concludes that the frequency control method by use of the Taisuke Masuta received the B.S and M. S. in
HPWHs is effectively designed when the lumped model well Electrical Engineering, The University of Tokyo,
approximates the dynamic behavior of the actual HPWHs. Tokyo, Japan, in 2004 and 2006 respectively. He is
currently a doctoral student at The University of
Tokyo, Japan. His interests include system frequency
䢷䢲䢰䢶 䢢
䣹䢱䣱䢢䣊䣒 control using customer equipment such as Heat Pump
䣹䣫䣶䣪䢢䣊䣒 Water Heater (HPWH) and Electric Vehicle (EV).
䢷䢲䢰䢴
䣈䣴䣧䣳䣷䣧䣰䣥䣻䢢䣝䣊䣼䣟

䢷䢲

䢶䢻䢰䢺
Akihiko Yokoyama (Member) received B.S., M.S.,
䢶䢻䢰䢸 䢢 and Dr. Eng from The University of Tokyo, Tokyo,
䢴䢵 䢲 䢳 䢴 䢵 䢶 䢷 䢸 䢹 䢺 䢻 䢳䢲
䣖䣫䣯䣧䢢䣝䣪䣟 Japan in 1979, 1981 and 1984, respectively. He has
Fig. 16. Frequency. been with Department of Electrical Engineering, The
University of Tokyo since 1984 and currently a
professor in charge of Power System Engineering. He
VI. CONCLUSION is a member of IEEJ, IEEE and CIGRE.
In this paper, a lumped HPWH model has been designed to
approximate the dynamic behavior of a number of HPWHs
considering not only the uncertainty of the customers but also
that of the machine characteristics. The response of the
Yasuyuki Tada (Member) received the Ph.D. degree
proposed lumped model to the LFC signal has been evaluated in engineering from the University of Tokyo, Tokyo,
in comparison with that of the detailed models. It has also Japan, in 1998. Currently, he is a Researcher in the
been manifested by the frequency analysis simulation that the Power System Technology Group, Electric Power
Engineering R&D Center, Tokyo Power Electric
frequency control method by use of the HPWHs can be Company (TEPCO), where he has been since 1981.
effectively designed. Hence, the proposed lumped HPWH
model can well approximate the behavior of the actual
HPWHs as long as the central load dispatching center
generates and sends the LFC signal in the period that the
frequency control is expected to be effective. In the future
work, we will develop a coordinated LFC method by use of
not only HPWHs but also EVs.

VII. REFERENCES
[1] Leehter Yao and Hau-Ren Lu, "A Two-Way Direct Control of Central
Air-Conditioning Load Via the Internet," IEEE Trans. Power Delivery,
vol. 24, no. 1, pp. 240-248, Jan. 2009.
[2] J.R.Pillai and B.Bak-Jensen, "Integration of Vehicle-to-Grid in the
Western Danish Power System," IEEE Trans. Sustainable Energy, vol. 2,
no. 1, pp. 12-19, Jan. 2011.
[3] T. Masuta, A. Yokoyama, and Y. Tada, " System Frequency Control by
Heat Pump Water Heaters (HPWHs) on Customer Side Based on