Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

MVWG Report to TSS January 2012 Stephanie Lu Puget Sound Energy.

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "MVWG Report to TSS January 2012 Stephanie Lu Puget Sound Energy."— Presentation transcript:

1 MVWG Report to TSS January 2012 Stephanie Lu Puget Sound Energy

2 Presentation Overview 1. Load Modeling 2. System Model Validation 3. Synchronous Generation Modeling 4. Renewable Generation Modeling 5. SVC Modeling 6. HVDC Modeling 7. Next Meeting

3 Load Modeling

4 Load Modeling Overview Status of Phase 1 Implementation Plan Review of Composite Load Model Structure Review and Updates to Composite Load Model Data Validation and System Impact Studies Next Steps

5 Status of Composite Load Model Implementation Plan Phase 1 DescriptionDateStatus Validation studies for oscillation eventsCompleted System performance studies using existing cases (PSLF)On-going TSS approved Implementation PlanAugust 25-26, 2011Approved TSS Study Process – Q/A Proposed/Accepted by TSS (Include 2012 HS-OP, 2012 LS cases for review), key study areas, paths evaluated) Early Sept 2011Completed Training via web conference on the Long ID (LID) for the load records, to train members on how to populate the LID September 19, 2011 October 6, 2011 Completed PCC approved implementation planOctober 12-14, 2011Approved MVWG Meeting - Status updateNovember 7-10, 2011Completed SRWG Meeting and Workshop Workshop to include 2 hours for the composite load model – explanation on the LIDs and tools for customizing the composite load model parameters. November 16, 2011Completed

6 Status of Composite Load Model Implementation Plan Phase 1 (cont.) DescriptionDateStatus Data request for the 2012 HS-OP and 2012 LS-OP from the 2011 Study Program to include LIDs populated for each load record Based on the Study Program Schedule 2012 HS Completed; 2012 LS in progress Data due to Area Coordinator for 2012 HS-OP and 2012 LS-OP from the 2011 Study Program Per Study Program Schedule - Oct 14 & Oct 28, HS Completed; 2012 LS in progress 2012 HS-OP and 2012 LS-OP base cases availablePer Study Program Schedule - Nov 2 & 16, HS case posted Jan 11, 2012; dyd file expected this week 2012 LS case in progress. PSSE dynamics file with composite load model available (through the PSLF to PSSE conversion program) By January 2012In progress.

7 DescriptionDateUpdated Date TSS Meeting – Status updateJanuary 25-27, 2012 MVWG Meeting – Status updateMarch 2012March 19-22, 2012 TSS Meeting – Status UpdateApril 25-27, 2012 RS Meeting – Status UpdateMay 2012May 10-11, 2012 Utility members evaluation for path ratingsThrough March 16, 2012By May 2012 Utility members evaluation for TPL StudiesThrough March 16, 2012By May 2012 MVWG Meeting – Status updateJune 18-21, 2012 Draft Summary Paper Distributed to TSS and RSEarly April 2012July 2012 RS Meeting – Member Reports/Status UpdateMay 2012August 16-17, 2012 TSS Meeting – Member Reports/Status UpdateApril 25-27, 2012August 29-31, 2012 PCC Meeting TSS recommends to PCC that WECC write a letter announcing the move to the composite load model July 2012October 10-12, 2012 SRWG DPM UpdateJuly 2012November 7-9, 2012 Status of Composite Load Model Implementation Plan Phase 1 (cont.)

8 Flow chart to create CMPLDW dynamic records LMDT 3A is posted on WECC web-site, including users manual

9 Composite Load Model Structure

10 WECC Composite Load Model Electronic M M M 69-kV 115-kV 138-kV Static AC 12.5-kV 13.8-kV UVLS UFLS Distribution Equivalent o Substation LTC xfmr & shunts o Feeder equivalent Full and partial load shedding o Under-frequency o Under-voltage End-uses o Motors (3Ø, or 1Ø A/C) o Electronic load o Static load

11 Composite Load Model Data

12 WECC Composite Load Model Electronic M Load Model Composition Data M M 115-kV 230-kV Static Load Component Model Data Distribution Equivalent Data UVLS and UFLS Data AC

13 cmpldw "CANYON " "1 " : #1 mva=63.18 "Bss" 0 "Rfdr" "Xfdr" 0.04 "Fb" 0.749/ "Xxf" 0.08 "TfixHS" 1 "TfixLS" 1 "LTC" 1 "Tmin" 0.9 "Tmax" 1.1 "step" / "Vmin" "Vmax" 1.04 "Tdel" 30 "Ttap" 5 "Rcomp" 0 "Xcomp" 0 / "Fma" "Fmb" "Fmc" "Fmd" "Fel" / "PFel" 1 "Vd1" 0.75 "Vd2" 0.65 "Frcel" 0.35 / "Pfs" "P1e" 2 "P1c" "P2e" 1 "P2c" "Pfreq" 0 / "Q1e" 2 "Q1c" -0.5 "Q2e" 1 "Q2c" 1.5 "Qfreq" -1 / "MtpA" 3 "MtpB" 3 "MtpC" 3 "MtpD" 1 / "LfmA" 0.75 "RsA" 0.04 "LsA" 1.8 "LpA" 0.12 "LppA" / "TpoA" "TppoA" "HA" 0.05 "etrqA" 0 / "Vtr1A" 0.7 "Ttr1A" 0.05 "Ftr1A" 0.2 "Vrc1A" 1 "Trc1A" 9999 / "Vtr2A" 0.55 "Ttr2A" 0.03 "Ftr2A" 0.75 "Vrc2A" 0.65 "Trc2A" 0.1 / "LfmB" 0.75 "RsB" 0.03 "LsB" 1.8 "LpB" 0.19 "LppB" 0.14 / "TpoB" 0.2 "TppoB" "HB" 0.5 "etrqB" 2 / "Vtr1B" 0.65 "Ttr1B" 0.05 "Ftr1B" 0.1 "Vrc1B" 1 "Trc1B" 9999 / "Vtr2B" 0.6 "Ttr2B" 0.03 "Ftr2B" 0.1 "Vrc2B" 1 "Trc2B" / "LfmC" 0.75 "RsC" 0.03 "LsC" 1.8 "LpC" 0.19 "LppC" 0.14 / "TpoC" 0.2 "TppoC" "HC" 0.15 "etrqc" 2 / "Vtr1C" 0.65 "Ttr1C" 0.05 "Ftr1C" 0.1 "Vrc1C" 1 "Trc1C" 9999 / "Vtr2C" 0.6 "Ttr2C" 0.03 "Ftr2C" 0.1 "Vrc2C" 1 "Trc2C" / "LfmD" 1 "CompPF" 0.98 / "Vstall" 0.54 "Rstall" 0.1 "Xstall" 0.1 "Tstall" 0.03 "Frst" 0.14 "Vrst" 0.95 "Trst" 0.3 / "fuvr" 0.1 "vtr1" 0.6 "ttr1" 0.02 "vtr2" 0.9 "ttr2" 5 / "Vc1off" 0.5 "Vc2off" 0.6 "Vc1on" 0.4 "Vc2on" 0.5 / "Tth" 15 "Th1t" 0.7 "Th2t" 1.9 "tv" Distribution Equivalent Data Load Component Model Data Load Model Composition Data WECC Composite Load Model

14 Distribution Equivalent Data Electronic M M M 69-kV 115-kV 138-kV Static M X = 8% LF = 110% Tap = +/- 10% V = 4 to 6% V = 4 to 6% X/R = 1.5 PL < 7% B1:B2 = 3:1 V = 1.02 … 1.04 V > 0.95 B1 B2 R + j X Bss

15 Load Model Composition – Long ID (LID) LID code is one of the following: _ 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 IDClimate ZoneRepresentative City NWCNorthwest CoastSeattle, Vancouver BC NWVNorthwest ValleyPortland OR, west of Cascades NWINorthwest InlandBoise, Tri-Cities, Spokane RMNRocky Mountain NorthCalgary, Montana, Wyoming NCCNorthern California CoastBay Area NCVNorthern California ValleySacramento NCINorthern California InlandFresno SCCSouthern California CoastLA, San Diego SCVSouthern California ValleyLA, San Diego SCISouthern California InlandLA, San Diego DSWDesert SouthwestPhoenix, Riverside, Las Vegas HIDHigh DesertSalt Lake City, Albuquerque, Denver, Reno

17 Substation/Feeder Type ID Substation TypeResidentialCommercial IndustrialAgricultural RES Residential75 to 80%15 to 30% 0% COM Commercial10 to 20%80 to 90% 0% MIX Mixed40 to 60% 0 to 20%0% RAG Rural Agricultural40%30% 10%20%

18 Industrial, Agricultural, and Power Plant Auxiliary Loads IDFeeder Type IND_PCH Petro-Chemical Plant IND_PMK Paper Mill – Kraft Mill IND_PMTPaper Mill – Thermo-mechanical process IND_ASM Aluminum Smelter IND_SML Steel Mill IND_MINMining operation IND_SCD Semiconductor Plant IND_SRF Server Farm IND_OTH Industrial – Other AGR_IRR Agricultural irrigation loads AGR_PMP Large pumping stations with synchronous motors PPA_AUX Power Plant Auxiliary

19 Load Composition Model Tools Load Composition Model - PNNL LCM Load Composition Model Light - WECC LCM Spreadsheet updated, version 1x. PNNL is developing the next generation LCM tool To 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

20 Validation and System Impact Studies

21 System Impact Studies PSE and CalISO presented results with Phase 1 and Phase 2 CMPLDW models Conclusions Phase 1 performed similar to the existing interim model When large portions of load are tripped the system may experience high voltages and frequencies Phase 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 restart Some generators may go out of step because of under-excitation An outage on lower voltage close to load may be more critical than a 500 kV outage More model validation is needed based on actual system events

22 Next Steps

23 Phase 1: See implementation plan Phase 2: Perform additional sensitivity studies Determine protection settings Continue 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 recordings Provide recommendations for changing the voltage dip criteria Continuous: Model validation

24 Voltage Dip Criteria Main factors and considerations under discussion Consistency with new TPL standard Address performance during FIDVR events Coordinate with recent power swing criterion

25 System Model Validation

26 System Model Validation Studies System model validation is a priority of MVWG System model validation is a deliverable under the Western Interconnection Synchro-phasor Program Start conducting system model validation studies in 2012 System model validation is part of the NERC Model Validation Task Force efforts Major impediment: Validation base case development Solution: Automate the process of base case development Leverage West-wide System Model (WSM)

27 System Model Validation Studies WECC Powerflow Case: Bus-branch Bus number, ID WSM Powerflow Case: Node-breaker-element Element Code WECC Dynamic Database: Bus number, ID WSM Dynamic Database: Element code, node 1 2

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 file Option 2 (developed by MVWG resources): Map generation, loads and equipment status from WSM to WECC powerflow case Validation studies are done using WECC powerflow case and existing dynamic database

29 System Model Validation Analytic Tools Develop and deploy analytic tools for system model validation To match features of the response and understand of its sensitivities to model parameters Apply analytic tools for power plant model calibration composite load model calibration sub-system model calibration small signal model validation model validation using large disturbance data See Statement of Work for more information WECC MVWG SOW System Model Validation DGD.doc

30 Synchronous Generation

31 Synchronous Generator, Excitation and Turbine Control Models Power Plant Model Data Task Force Held kick-off meeting November 8, 2011 Charter approved by MVWG Excitation 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 Updated

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 TPs Continuous review of existing power plant modeling data in the powerflow and dynamics databases Improving data checking and processing of new power plant modeling data Development of processes and tools to improve coordination between GOs and TPs for submitting data Review the existing WECC power plant model validation guidelines and recommend improvements The Task Force shall work with SRWG and MVWG to carry out these objectives

33 Exciter Conversion MVWG issued RFP to convert legacy excitation models to IEEE-approved excitation models – Completed November 2011 Independent model translation program created with the ability to convert any model to any other model, logic developed for exciter model conversions

34 Excitation Models Next goal is to reduce the number of approved excitation models Short-list needs to include the capability of modeling OELs, UELs, and any other features that are determined to be important The existing OEL1 model is not compatible with the IEEE models Shawn Patterson will lead an effort to clearly define the issues and determine a plan moving forward

35 Generator Testing Documents Documents currently under review WECC Generating Unit Model Validation Policy (Additional to the recent updates proposed by TSS) WECC Generating Facility Data Requirements WECC 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 1B Power Plant Model Validation is one of the deliverables under WISP An application is being developed for checking the reasonableness of the power plant response: Compare the actual response to best practices

37 Wind Generation Modeling

38 Status of Wind Modeling Effort Version 1 of wind generic models implemented as library models in PSSE, PSLF and other platforms PSLF/17 PSSE/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 conditions Type 4 improvements include: Add option to bypass local volt/var controls Add turbine shaft model and pitch control similar to type 3 Add frequency droop for high frequency conditions Add voltage dip logic and integrator freezing Add voltage divider and integrator bypass Type 3 improvements to develop a non-GE specific model include: Add option to bypass local volt/var controls Review representation of the response during low voltage performance; emerging consensus is to add a voltage dip look up table Possibly add defensive pitch strategy similar to Type 1 and 2 Add frequency droop for high frequency conditions Type 1, 2, and 4 planned to be up for approval at the March meeting. More work is needed for Type 3.

40 PV Generation Modeling

41 Large PV Power Plant Modeling Current versions of PSLF and PSSE have models that can be used for representation of large PV generation PSLF 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 progress Add active power control for frequency response Change limit nomenclature from Pmax to Pavail and Pmin to 0 Add voltage dip logic and integrator freezing Add voltage divider and integrator bypass Consistent 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) installation residential rooftop panels PVD1 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 generators Recommended refinements to PVD1 include: Add function to allow remote bus control Add function to allow for reconnect of a portion of the generation tripped Add simple current limiter A 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.

43 SVC Modeling

44 SVC Models Webinar was held Dec 12, 2011 for SRWG members Is there interest for MVWG to provide a full day workshop?

45 HVDC Modeling

46 The task force has started with the point-to-point Conventional and Voltage Source Converter (VSC) HVDC models Conventional point-to-point HVDC The powerflow model exists and has been well tested Potential improvement is to add capability for user-defined tap control Effort may be needed to improve documentation VSC point-to-point HVDC Add 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 initialization A skeleton document has been started and will aim to get vendor feedback at the next task force meeting

47 PDCI HVDC Modeling PDCI model for south to north was derated due to a bad model – the converter controls at Sylmar LADWP needs to provide an as-built model and run validation of the model and current control Will be discussed at the next HVDC task force meeting

48 Next Meeting

49 Maxwell Room Edison/Fermi Rooms Tesla Room MondayTuesdayWednesdayThursdayFriday March 19 June 18 Nov 5 March 20 June 19 Nov 6 March 21 June 20 Nov 7 March 22 June 21 Nov 8 March 23 June 22 Nov 9 MVWG - PPMDTF MVWG - Utility Mtg MVWG - REMTF MVWG - LMTF MVWG SRWG Breakout 2 SRWG SRWG Breakout 1 SRWG Breakout 3 SRWG Breakout 2 SRWG Breakout 1 SRWG Breakout 3

50 Upcoming Workshops/Training? SVC Modeling? Joint Training Session with SRWG and Program Users Work Groups

Download ppt "MVWG Report to TSS January 2012 Stephanie Lu Puget Sound Energy."

Similar presentations

Ads by Google