4 Load Modeling Overview Status of Phase 1 Implementation PlanReview of Composite Load Model StructureReview and Updates to Composite Load Model DataValidation and System Impact StudiesNext Steps
5 Status of Composite Load Model Implementation Plan Phase 1 DescriptionDateStatusValidation studies for oscillation eventsCompletedSystem performance studies using existing cases (PSLF)On-goingTSS approved Implementation PlanAugust 25-26, 2011ApprovedTSS Study Process – Q/A Proposed/Accepted by TSS (Include 2012 HS-OP, 2012 LS cases for review), key study areas, paths evaluated)Early Sept 2011Training via web conference on the Long ID (LID) for the load records, to train members on how to populate the LIDSeptember 19, 2011October 6, 2011PCC approved implementation planOctober 12-14, 2011MVWG Meeting - Status updateNovember 7-10, 2011SRWG Meeting and WorkshopWorkshop to include 2 hours for the composite load model – explanation on the LIDs and tools for customizing the composite load model parameters.November 16, 2011
6 Status of Composite Load Model Implementation Plan Phase 1 (cont.) DescriptionDateStatusData request for the 2012 HS-OP and 2012 LS-OP from the 2011 Study Program to include LIDs populated for each load recordBased on the Study Program Schedule2012 HS Completed; 2012 LS in progressData due to Area Coordinator for 2012 HS-OP and 2012 LS-OP from the 2011 Study ProgramPer Study Program Schedule - Oct 14 & Oct 28, 20112012 HS-OP and 2012 LS-OP base cases availablePer Study Program Schedule - Nov 2 & 16, 20112012 HS case posted Jan 11, 2012; dyd file expected this week2012 LS case in progress.PSSE dynamics file with composite load model available (through the PSLF to PSSE conversion program)By January 2012In progress.
7 Status of Composite Load Model Implementation Plan Phase 1 (cont.) DescriptionDateUpdated DateTSS Meeting – Status updateJanuary 25-27, 2012MVWG Meeting – Status updateMarch 2012March 19-22, 2012TSS Meeting – Status UpdateApril 25-27, 2012RS Meeting – Status UpdateMay 2012May 10-11, 2012Utility members evaluation for path ratingsThrough March 16, 2012By May 2012Utility members evaluation for TPL StudiesJune 18-21, 2012Draft “Summary Paper” Distributed to TSS and RSEarly April 2012July 2012RS Meeting – Member Reports/Status UpdateAugust 16-17, 2012TSS Meeting – Member Reports/Status UpdateAugust 29-31, 2012PCC MeetingTSS recommends to PCC that WECC write a letter announcing the move to the composite load modelOctober 10-12, 2012SRWG DPM UpdateNovember 7-9, 2012
8 Flow chart to create CMPLDW dynamic records LMDT 3A is posted on WECC web-site, including user’s manual
10 WECC Composite Load Model Distribution EquivalentSubstation LTC xfmr & shuntsFeeder equivalentFull and partial load sheddingUnder-frequencyUnder-voltageEnd-usesMotors (3Ø, or 1Ø A/C)Electronic loadStatic loadElectronicM69-kV115-kV138-kVStaticAC12.5-kV13.8-kVUVLSUFLSComposite load model structure is implemented in General Electric’s PSLF, Siemens PTI PSS®E, Power World SimulatorSimilar model exists in PowerTech’s TSAT
14 Distribution Equivalent Data MMR + j X69-kV115-kV138-kVMMB1B2BssElectronicDV = 4 to 6%X/R = 1.5PL < 7%B1:B2 = 3:1X = 8%LF = 110%Tap = +/- 10%Static14
15 Load Model Composition – Long ID (LID) LID code is one of the following:<3-character climate zone>_<3-character load class><7-character industrial, agricultural or auxiliary load ID>Examples:Commercial load downtown Phoenix with high concentration of commercial loads would be identified as "DSW_COM"Rural agricultural load in Moses Lake, WA would be identified as "NWI_RAG“A steel mill would be “IND_SML”A power plant auxiliary would be “PPA_AUX”
16 WECC Climate Areas ID Climate Zone Representative City NWC Northwest CoastSeattle, Vancouver BCNWVNorthwest ValleyPortland OR, west of CascadesNWINorthwest InlandBoise, Tri-Cities, SpokaneRMNRocky Mountain NorthCalgary, Montana, WyomingNCCNorthern California CoastBay AreaNCVNorthern California ValleySacramentoNCINorthern California InlandFresnoSCCSouthern California CoastLA, San DiegoSCVSouthern California ValleySCISouthern California InlandDSWDesert SouthwestPhoenix, Riverside, Las VegasHIDHigh DesertSalt Lake City, Albuquerque, Denver, Reno
17 Substation/Feeder Type IDSubstation TypeResidentialCommercialIndustrialAgriculturalRES75 to 80%15 to 30%0%COM10 to 20%80 to 90%MIXMixed40 to 60%0 to 20%RAGRural Agricultural40%30%10%20%
19 Load Composition Model Tools Load Composition Model - PNNL LCMLoad Composition Model “Light” - WECC LCMSpreadsheet updated, version 1x.PNNL is developing the “next generation” LCM toolTo combine the ease of interface of the WECC light model with the computational capabilities of the full PNNL model, including the capabilities of validating the load shapes
21 System Impact StudiesPSE and CalISO presented results with Phase 1 and Phase 2 CMPLDW modelsConclusionsPhase 1 performed similar to the existing interim modelWhen large portions of load are tripped the system may experience high voltages and frequenciesPhase 2 model is sensitive to the percentage of motors that trip/lockout and trip/restart, more research is needed to determine the appropriate percentage of motors that lockout versus restartSome generators may go out of step because of under-excitationAn outage on lower voltage close to load may be more critical than a 500 kV outageMore model validation is needed based on actual system events
23 Next Steps Phase 1: Phase 2: Continuous: See implementation plan Perform additional sensitivity studiesDetermine protection settingsContinue work on understanding the phenomenon of air-conditioner stalling in distribution systems (supported by DOE and LBNL)Continue collecting disturbance recordings for validation, e.g., SCE’s PQube recordingsProvide recommendations for changing the voltage dip criteriaContinuous:Model validation
24 Voltage Dip Criteria Main factors and considerations under discussion Consistency with new TPL standardAddress performance during FIDVR eventsCoordinate with recent power swing criterion
26 System Model Validation Studies System model validation is a priority of MVWGSystem model validation is a deliverable under the Western Interconnection Synchro-phasor ProgramStart conducting system model validation studies in 2012System model validation is part of the NERC Model Validation Task Force effortsMajor impediment:Validation base case developmentSolution:Automate the process of base case developmentLeverage West-wide System Model (WSM)26
28 System Model Validation Studies Option 1 (WECC is working on the contract):Convert WECC dynamic data base to “element code” definition consistent with WSM (one time effort)Validation studies are done using WSM powerflow case and the new dynamic data fileOption 2 (developed by MVWG resources):Map generation, loads and equipment status from WSM to WECC powerflow caseValidation studies are done using WECC powerflow case and existing dynamic database28
29 System Model Validation Analytic Tools Develop and deploy analytic tools for system model validationTo match features of the response and understand of its sensitivities to model parametersApply analytic tools forpower plant model calibrationcomposite load model calibrationsub-system model calibrationsmall signal model validationmodel validation using large disturbance dataSee Statement of Work for more informationWECC MVWG SOW System Model Validation DGD.doc
31 Synchronous Generator, Excitation and Turbine Control Models Power Plant Model Data Task ForceHeld kick-off meeting November 8, 2011Charter approved by MVWGExcitation model conversion to IEEE models RFP (Completed)OEL, UEL and generator protection models (In progress )Review of generator testing documents (in progress)Power Plant Model Validation Tool Updated31
32 Power Plant Model Data Task Force – Charter Summary Ensure the quality of the power plant modeling data in grid simulation databases and to improve coordination between GOs and TPsContinuous review of existing power plant modeling data in the powerflow and dynamics databasesImproving data checking and processing of new power plant modeling dataDevelopment of processes and tools to improve coordination between GOs and TPs for submitting dataReview the existing WECC power plant model validation guidelines and recommend improvementsThe Task Force shall work with SRWG and MVWG to carry out these objectives
33 Exciter ConversionMVWG issued RFP to convert legacy excitation models to IEEE-approved excitation models – Completed November 2011Independent model translation program created with the ability to convert any model to any other model, logic developed for exciter model conversions33
34 Excitation ModelsNext goal is to reduce the number of approved excitation modelsShort-list needs to include the capability of modeling OELs, UELs, and any other features that are determined to be importantThe existing OEL1 model is not compatible with the IEEE modelsShawn Patterson will lead an effort to clearly define the issues and determine a plan moving forward
35 Generator Testing Documents Documents currently under reviewWECC Generating Unit Model Validation Policy (Additional to the recent updates proposed by TSS)WECC Generating Facility Data RequirementsWECC Generating Unit Baseline Test Requirements (with the proposed addition to add for V-curve data as discussed during the November MVWG meeting)WECC Generating Facility Model Validation Requirements
36 Power Plant Model Validation Power Plant Model Validation application using PSLF play-in function has been updated to PPMV Version 1BPower Plant Model Validation is one of the deliverables under WISPAn application is being developed for checking the “reasonableness” of the power plant response:Compare the actual response to “best practices”36
38 Status of Wind Modeling Effort Version 1 of wind generic models implemented as library models in PSSE, PSLF and other platformsPSLF/17PSSE/32
39 Phase 2 of wind model development – Model structure improvements Type 1 and 2 improvements include:Redesign aero/pitch model to better represent pitch strategy during low voltage conditionsType 4 improvements include:Add option to bypass local volt/var controlsAdd turbine shaft model and pitch control similar to type 3Add frequency droop for high frequency conditionsAdd voltage dip logic and integrator freezingAdd voltage divider and integrator bypassType 3 improvements to develop a non-GE specific model include:Review representation of the response during low voltage performance; emerging consensus is to add a voltage dip look up tablePossibly add defensive pitch strategy similar to Type 1 and 2Type 1, 2, and 4 planned to be up for approval at the March meeting. More work is needed for Type 3.
41 Large PV Power Plant Modeling Current versions of PSLF and PSSE have models that can be used for representation of large PV generationPSLF Version 18 includes a WECC generic version of a PV system model, PV1, which consists of two modules - PV1E and PV1G. It is a full featured model based on the WECC Type 4 wind generation model.Refinements to the models are in progressAdd active power control for frequency responseChange limit nomenclature from Pmax to Pavail and Pmin to 0Add voltage dip logic and integrator freezingAdd voltage divider and integrator bypassConsistent with the WECC PV Modeling Guide, the feeder or collector system equivalent should be included in the power flow model for large PV plants
42 Distributed PV Modeling Distributed PV modeling can be separated into:large commercial (usually warehouse rooftop) installationresidential rooftop panelsPVD1 is a more basic model than PV1 and is intended to represent large distribution-connected PV that are represented in power flow as stand-alone generatorsRecommended refinements to PVD1 include:Add function to allow remote bus controlAdd function to allow for reconnect of a portion of the generation “tripped”Add simple current limiterA similar version of PVD1 will eventually be made part of the WECC composite load dynamic model to residential or smaller-scale distributed PV that is load-netted in power flow. Specifications are not yet complete, as further discussion is needed.
46 HVDC ModelingThe task force has started with the point-to-point Conventional and Voltage Source Converter (VSC) HVDC modelsConventional point-to-point HVDCThe powerflow model exists and has been well testedPotential improvement is to add capability for user-defined tap controlEffort may be needed to improve documentationVSC point-to-point HVDCAdd capability in powerflow to allow DC bus to connect to a PV node via a VSC so that it can improve the coordination between powerflow and dynamic models for a seamless initializationA skeleton document has been started and will aim to get vendor feedback at the next task force meeting
47 PDCI HVDC ModelingPDCI model for south to north was derated due to a bad model – the converter controls at SylmarLADWP needs to provide an as-built model and run validation of the model and current controlWill be discussed at the next HVDC task force meeting
Your consent to our cookies if you continue to use this website.