1 / 12

Security-Constrained OPF and Risk-Based OPF

Security-Constrained OPF and Risk-Based OPF. SCOPF. OBJECTIVE . Subject to:. Power Flow Eqts . “Normal Condition” constraints. Contingency constraints.

admon
Télécharger la présentation

Security-Constrained OPF and Risk-Based OPF

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Security-Constrained OPF and Risk-Based OPF

  2. SCOPF OBJECTIVE Subject to: Power Flow Eqts “Normal Condition” constraints Contingency constraints • Assume normal condition constraints are satisfied. The word “flow” below refers only to post-contingency flow. How does SCOPF distinguish between the two cases in the following two situations: • Situation 1: • having one flow at 99% and • having one flow at 101%? • Situation 2 • having ten flows at 99% and one flow at 101% • having all flows below 50% except for one which is at 101%.

  3. Basic Concepts Security level: A continuous function of operating conditions reflecting the “strength” of the power system with respect to a defined contingency set. Risk level: A continuous function of operating conditions reflecting the “weakness” of the power system with respect to a defined contingency set. Fact: (1) All “secure” operating conditions not equally secure. (2) All “insecure” operating conditions not equally risky. • Why? Because security level (or risk level) depends on • All flows (not just ones at the limits) • Contingency probabilities

  4. Risk Evaluation • Contingency Probabilities: • Always estimates • Reasonable default is proportional to line length • Can depend on line length, location, & weather, if outage data available. • Consider as weightings on severity reflecting contingency importance. Severity function: Post-contingency loading on each line

  5. Probability sectors: sector angular spread is proportional to contingency probability Security regions : White center corresponds to loadings less than 90% of emergency rating. Yellow “doughnut” corresponds to loadings 90% -100%. Red outside corresponds to loadings in excess of emergency rating. Severity circles/squares: represents a post-contingency violation or near-violation with the number corresponding to the violated circuit. Radial distance from the center of the diagram to each small circle is proportional to the extent (severity) of the violation. Risk Visualization

  6. Illustration

  7. Illustration

  8. RB-OPF: Visualization All lines, 40 hrs, no contingency Vertical axis: angular separation across each line obtained from SCOPF Horizontal axis: angular separation across each line obtained from RBOPF Points above the diagonal indicate lines for which SCOPF solution results in greater stress. Points below the diagonal indicate lines for which RBOPF solution results in greater stress. All lines, 1 hr,40 contingencies

  9. Preventive RBOPF

  10. Preventive-Corrective RBOPF

  11. Preventive-Corrective RBOPF (4)

  12. RB-LMPs Deterministic: Congest component for one contingency, (line s, t above 100%, line u at 92%) Energy component Energy cost Loss cost Loss component Congest cost Risk-based: • Control of risk level is uniform • Price signal for risk-relief is more effective • LMPs are less volatile

More Related