You are on page 1of 45

Dynamic
Monitoring
and
Decision
Systems


(DYMONDS)
for
Sustainable
Energy
Services



Marija
Ilic,
Professor
and

SRC
Smart
Grid
Research
Center
Director,

milic@ece.cmu.edu


Acknowledgment
Electric Energy Systems Group (EESG)
http://www.eesg.ece.cmu.edu

  A multi-disciplinary group of researchers from


across Carnegie Mellon with common interest in
electric energy.
  Truly integrated education and research

  Interests range across technical, policy, sensing,


communications, computing and much more;
emphasis on systems aspects of the changing
industry, model-based simulations and decision
making/control for predictable performance.
The Energy Research Initiative Vision

ERI

Energy Storage3 Smart Grid1 Photovoltaics2

1: Center for Smart Grid Research at Carnegie Mellon University


2: Center for Photovoltaics Research at Purdue University
3: Potential Future Center in Energy Storage TBD

Enabling Integration of Renewable Energy Resources on a Secure,


Reliable and Optimized Smart Grid
3
Smart Grid Research Center
Carnegie Mellon University

  Multi-university research collaboration in technologies to enable


Smart Grid directed by Carnegie Mellon University
  Initial focus on real-time modeling/simulation and software to control and
optimize the Smart Grid and ensure security, reliability and availability of
the electricity network with significant renewable energy resources
  Leverages CMU expertise in software development, network security and
control systems as well as CMU culture of collaboration across engineering,
computer science, public policy and business
  Specific projects to be decided by industry sponsors; initial
research thrust areas include:
  Smart Grid Simulator for Sustainable Services: Modeling, Analysis,
Simulations and Decision Making Methods
  Demand-Side Management in Smart Grids
  Transmission and Distribution Management in Smart Grids
  Secure Data Management and Mining: Model Validation; Large-Scale Novel
Computing for Smart Grids
  New Policy Paradigms

4
Outline

  The boom and busts of energy systems education


and research in the US universities
  Major once in a lifetime opportunity for innovation

  Electric energy systems as enablers of


sustainable services
  Relating Socio-Ecological Systems (SES)
concepts and the role of systems thinking
  Some examples of new modeling and control
challenges
  The critical need to build on the existing
knowledge
Many boom-and-bust cycles in the
US electric energy education
  Boom #1 : The biggest contribution of the 20th century –electrification
  Well established programs (even entire departments on electric
power engineering—RPI).
  Bust #1: Closing of power engineering programs and labs at leading
universities; education and research on life support.
  Boom #2: Restructuring of electric power industry--- economics,
policy disciplines gain recognition. Engineering knowledge
assumed.
  Bust #2: Restructuring problems –markets ``not working’’—they
never were designed nor implemented to support physics of electric
power grids.
  Boom #3: Energy and environment emerge as key social goals.
Young minds very excited and motivated to make the vision a reality.
  Bust#3--??? The biggest danger--- overwhelming complexity;
change driven by technology breakthroughs, social drivers. A very
real danger of not meeting the expectations.
State of electric energy systems programs

  Must educate the next generation work force


  Must do so in the context of, and centered in,
Electrical and Computer Engineering (ECE)
  Must integrate ECE with other academic disciplines

  Must also address non-technical issues (policy,


economics)
  Recent awareness of an educational void, and a
sense of urgency to innovate and integrate electric
energy systems education, into existing curricula
The burden on new leaders
  Rethink how to plan, rebuild and operate an
infrastructure which has been turned upside-down
from what it used to be
  Leaders must understand
  3ϕ physics (the basic foundations)
  Modeling of complex systems (architecture-dependent models,
components and their interactions, performance objectives)
  Dependence of models on sensors and actuators; design for
desired system performance (defined by economic policy and
engineering specifications)
  Numerical methods and algorithms
  IT
Smart Grids: Massive Systems Integration
Opportunity and Challenge
  NaGonal
scale
integraGon
of
coordinated

complex
systems: 


- energy
system
(power
grid,
power
electronics,
energy
resources)


















‐

communica7on
system
(hardware
and
protocols)


 
‐

control
system
(algorithms
and
massive
computa7on)







‐

economic
and
policy
system

(regula7on
and
s7mulus)

  Why?

On‐line
IT
enables:








‐

20%
increase
in
economic
efficiency
(FERC
es7mate)









‐

cost‐effec7ve
integra7on
of
renewables
and
reduc7on
of
emissions








‐

differen7ated
Quality
of
Service
without
sacrificing
basic
reliability








‐

seamless
preven7on
of
blackouts








‐

expanding
the
infrastructure
(genera7on,
T&D,
demand
side)
for











maximum
benefit
and
minimum
intrusion

  Who? 




‐

Huge
intellectual
challenge
–
must
be
university
led











(once
in
a
life7me
opportunity)



‐

industrial
partners
include
leading
technologists
in
all
four
systems







‐

government
partners

must
include
FERC,
NERC,
NARUC,
DoE,
NSF

Bringing
the
electronic
revoluGon
to
energy
systems


Electronic
technology
has
fundamentally
altered
the
way

we
live;

  Communica7ons

  Commerce


  Entertainment

  …




What
has
been
the
key
to
these
changes?

InformaGon
Technology

  Integrated
circuits
have
developed
in
a
manner
that

provides
ever
growing
informaGon
handling
power
at

ever
decreasing
cost

  Key
to
the
development
of
this
technology
and
its
wide

adopGon:

  
the
ability
to
model
and
design
these
systems

  
the
associated
development
of
so4ware
systems



+

ApplicaGon
to
Power
Systems

  The
creaGon
of
“smart
grids”
is
the
applicaGon
of

informaGon
technology
to
the
power
system
while

coupling
this
with
an
understanding
of
the
business
and

regulatory
environment

  CriGcal
to
the
creaGon
of
“smart
grids”
is;

  development
of
models
of
the
power
system

  development
of
command
and
control
soSware

  incorpora7on
of
security,
communica7ons,
and
safety

systems


  BEFORE
hardware
is
deployed!

  Our
Main
Approach‐‐Dynamic
Monitoring
and
Decision

Systems
(DYMONDS)

DYMONDS‐Enabled
Physical
Grid


Requires:


• 
SoSware
models

• 
Control

• 
Security

• 
Sensors

• 
Communica7ons

• …


CreaGon
of
“Smart
Grids”


  Clear
definiGon
of
what
“Smart
Grids”
means


  Deep
understanding
of
the
complexity
of
the
power
system


  Ability
to
not
simply
introduce/develop
technology
but
to

understand
the
effects
of
changes

  Ensure,
up
front,
security,
efficiency,
reliability,
and

integraGon
with
business/regulatory
environment

  CreaGng
flexibility
and
empowering
all
levels
from
producers

to
consumers

New
DYMONDS
FuncGonaliGes


  Just‐in‐Time
(JIT)

‐‐predicGons;
dynamic
look‐ahead

decision
making


  Just‐in‐Place
(JIP)

‐‐distributed,
interacGve,
mulG‐layered


  Just‐in‐Context
(JIC)
‐‐‐‐
performance
objecGves
funcGon
of

organizaGonal
rules,
rights,
and
responsibiliGes
(3Rs)

and

system
condiGons.


  Sample

examples
of

improved
performance—on‐going

work
in
EESG

(hap://www.eesg.ece.cmu.edu)

Key technical challenges
  Establish new modeling paradigms---models driven by
sensing, communications and decision making/automation
  Using these new models introduce next generation
dispatch/unit commitment methods and algorithms better
suited to manage intermittency (demand active decision
maker; topology switching for efficiency)
  Ensure short-term stabilization using on-line sensing and
adaptation (for the first time PMUs being deployed in large
amounts); renewal of high gain control using power
electronics switching; new models;
  Revisit Automatic Generation Control, Automatic Voltage
and Flow Control to include the potential of PMU
measurements and WAMS-based regulation; demand
included as decision variable
Transformational change in objectives of future energy
systems

Today’s Transmission Grid Tomorrow’s Transmission Grid

Deliver supply to meet given demand Deliver power to support supply and
demand schedules in which both supply
and demand have costs assigned

Deliver power assuming a predefined Deliver electricity at QoS determined by


tariff the customers willingness to pay
Deliver power subject to predefined CO2 Deliver power defined by users’
constraint willingness to pay for CO2
Deliver supply and demand subject to Schedule supply, demand and
transmission congestion transmission capacity (supply, demand
and transmission costs assigned);
transmission at value
Use storage to balance fast varying Build storage according to customers
supply and demand willingness to pay for being connected to
a stable grid
Build new transmission lines for forecast Build new transmission lines to serve
demand customers according to their ex ante
(longer-term) contracts for service
DYMONDS Simulator
Scenario 2: + Price-responsive demand
[3-5]

$


J.Y.
Joo

kWh

  Elastic
demand
that responds
to time-varying
prices

8
Example
1:
AdapGve
Load
Management

‐‐scheduling



Ter5ary
level

Bid
func<on

y(λ)

Market
price

λ
 …

Secondary
level

Load
aggregator
I
 Load
aggregator
II
 Load
aggregator
III


Demand
func<on
 End‐user
rate

x(λI)
 λI

Primary
level
 …

End‐user

DYMONDS Simulator
Scenario 1: + Wind generation [3,4]

Le
Xie


  20% / 50%
penetration to
the system

6
Example
2:
Wind
predicGon,
look‐ahead
management
using
storage



Compare
the
outcome
of
ED
from
both
the

centralized
and
distributed
MPC
approaches.

IntegraGng
>50%
Wind


DYMONDS Simulator
Scenario 3: + Electric vehicles [6]

NiklasRotering


  Interchange
supply /
demand mode
by time-varying
prices
10
Example
3:
OpGmal
Control
of
Plug‐in‐Electric
Vehicles:
Fast
vs.
Smart



24
InformaGon
flow
for
integraGng
PHEVs

DYMONDS Simulator
Scenario 5: + PMU-Based Robust Control [7]

P
Zhijian
Liu

P   Automated Voltage
Control (AVC) and
Automated Flow
P Control (AFC)
  Design Best
Locations of PMUs
  Design Feedback
Control Gains

P
26
Two
ConvenGonal
Generators


Hydroelectric
Generator
Dynamic Equations: Dynamic states for Hydro
Generator
x1 = [ωH , δHline:
Transmission , P m,H , G]
Constant
Reactance
Load: Constant power
Transmission
Line


Transmission Line
Equations

Assumptions:

-Voltage magnitudes are 1 p.u.

-Angle δ1,2 is small


One
Hydro,
One
Wind


Wind Generator
Dynamic
Equations: Hydroelectric
Dynamic Generator
states for Dynamic Equations:
Hydro
Generator
x1 = [ωw ,
δw, λds, λqs,
λdr
, λqr]
Transmission
Line


Transmission Line
Equations

Assumptions:

-Voltage magnitudes are 1 p.u.

-Angle δ1,2 is small


Equilibrium
Point:
Centralized


Step 1: Gather All Dynamic Equations for


System, set differential term to zero

Step 2: Solve Simultaneous Equations

Step 3: If multiple solutions, find physically


feasible solution close to initial value for solver
algorithm
Two
ConvenGonal
Generators


Simultaneous Equations:
2x Hydroelectric Generator Dynamic Equations:
Hydro 1 Hydro 2

Transmission Line
Equations
One
Hydro,
One
Wind

Simultaneous Equations:
Solver: Newton Raphson Method
Wind Generator
Hydroelectric
Dynamic
Generator
Equations:
Dynamic Equations:

Transmission Line
Equations
Equilibrium
Results

One Hydro, One Wind Results
Two Hydro-generator Results
Feasible Solution*
One Solution 2bus hydro-wind
2bus hydro
Wref = 1 Pmh = .8
Wsys = 1 Wref1 = 1.43 Wref2 = 1.43 PL = 1 Pmw = .2
PL = 1 Pm1 = 0.8 Pm2 = 0.2

wH 1.0404
Pe1 0.8000 wR 1.1297
Pe2 0.2000 PeH 0.9872
w1 1.0019 Pew 0.0128
w2 1.0019 flux_ds 0.0000
Steps 2.0000 flux_qs -0.9600
flux_dr 0.1404
flux_qr 0.0002
*multiple equilibria (3), one has high freq (~3 p.u.), one has negative frequency
Distributed
Equilibrium
Solver

Equality Constrained Newton Method
Objective function:
f(x) = Σkn Φk (xk) where x = [P1, … Pn] represents the power flows
for each of the n buses in the system

The objective function f(x) tries to minimize the difference


between the local frequency ωn and a frequency setpoint ωsys
Design Φk (xk) to make each module’s frequency independent:

Φk (xk) = (ωk - ωsys )2

Then write ωk as a function of Pk so that the distributed


Newton Step can be written in terms of power flow variables.
Distributed
Equilibrium
Solver


Equality Constrained Newton Method
How to update variable x (power flows)

Hk = = Hessian Matrix

= Jacobian Matrix
Ax =b : network constraint
hk = Axk - b

Source: Jadbabaie, A. , et. Al. “A Distributed Newton Method for Network Optimization
AutomaGc
GeneraGon
Control
:
Revisited


  Need Systematic Approach that accounts for Network Constraints
  Inter-Area Oscillations
  Insufficient Regulation Capacity
  Wind Farms far away from the Load Centre

Generator Real Power Output in 5 Bus System


3.5
Pg1
3
  Insufficient Regulation Capacity Pg2
2.5 Pg3

Pg (p.u.)
1.5

0.5

-0.5   Inter-Area Oscillations


-1
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Time (sec)

  Network Constraints Effecting Regulation of Wind


Fluctuations
AutomaGc
GeneraGon
Control
:
Revisited



  Hard-to-Predict Imbalances
  Load Fluctuations: White Noise
  Wind: Case of Non-Zero Mean
Deviations

  Wind as Negative Load: CPS-2 Violated


  A Case of Non-Zero Mean in Wind
Wind
GeneraGon:
A
Source
of
Disturbances


  Measure Imbalances at Multiple


locations

v/s

  Static Control Notion   Decentralized Response


Modeling
System
Components


  GTG’s Quasi Static   Frequency based Control Model


Model

Frequency Deviations at G2 (Hz)


0.2

  Load Characterization Frequency Sensitivity L4=0.10, L5=0.14 (rad/sec)/p.u.


0.1

  An LQG Problem
0

-0.1

-0.2
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000

0.2
Frequency Sensitivity L4=0.25, L5=0.25 (rad/sec)/p.u.
0.1

-0.1

-0.2
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000

  Network Constraints
0.2
Frequency Sensitivity L4=0.40, L5=0.40 (rad/sec)/p.u.
0.1

  Load Parameterization Critical -0.1

-0.2
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000
Time(s)
RegulaGon
Reserve
Planning:
Frequency
Bias

AutomaGc
GeneraGon
&
Demand
Control

(AGDC)

  Active Demand Response   Power based Control Model
  Sensors embedded in Smart Appliances
  Potential Source of Regulation
  Flexibility in Electric Grid

  Load Characterization

  High Accuracy with Power Model for


Distribution System
AutomaGc
GeneraGon
&
Demand
Control

(AGDC)

  Proof of Concept

  Wind and Load Disturbance at L4 and L5

  Actual Power Generation and


Consumption
AGDC:
Open
QuesGons

  How much Demand needs to participate to offset the need for one
gas power plant ?

  Provide Incentives to encourage the use of Variable Speed Drive’s


Technology.

  Trade-off between the need for very accurate sensor (e.g. to sense
frequency) and the need for communication (e.g. power based control
on load side)

  Studies to realize potential of AGDC in real-world systems

  How do the frequency response specifications for generator and


load, as part of AGDC, relate to current industry standards ?
Advancing
The
New
GeneraGon
of
Smart
Grid
Technologies


We
are:

  Moving

DYMONDS
concepts
forward


  PresenGng
and
becoming
familiar
to

DoE,
NIST,
FERC,
EPRI,

NERC

  Developing
modeling,
simulaGons,
tesGng
using
real‐system

data

  Assessing
potenGal
benefits
from
implemenGng

JIT,
JIP
and
JIC

operaGng
and
planning
paradigm


  Making
Smart
Grid
A
Reality!


  A
huge
job
which
only
can
be
done
by
drawing
on
previous

R&D,
aoer
re‐posing
the
problems.
For
the
first
Gme
feasible!