2Overview Approval Status TSS Charter 2011 Annual Study Program Outline Base Case Coordination System – Request for ProposalStatusSRWG ActivitiesMVWG ActivitiesProject Coordination and Three-Phase Rating StatusOverviewTSS has three approval items for the June 2010 PCC meeting.In addition to the three approval items, I will present a status update on work group activities.
3TSS CharterPurposeThe purpose of TSS is to undertake those studies related to the reliability of the interconnected bulk power systems that have been approved and authorized by the PCC.TSS CharterTSS Charter has been reviewed by a WECC Technical Writer after posting to PCC website. Only minor editorial comments were received.TSS Charter sent to GNC for review/comment. TSS did not receive any comments from the GNC.33
4TSS Charter Responsibilities Conduct studies and evaluate study results to determine the reliability of the Western Interconnection. Prepare annual “state of the system” reports and other reports covering study results and evaluations, and make recommendations to the PCC.Collect, coordinate, and maintain data files for power flow and stability studies. Monitor data submission for quality assurance.Determine program or modeling requirements and evaluate, validate, and propose modifications to existing WECC computer programs.TSS Charter“State of the System” reports include the WECC Annual Study Program ReportWECC Annual Study Program through the development eleven base cases.MVWG, GEPUWG, and PTIPUWG efforts.44
5TSS Charter Responsibilities (continued) Conduct and evaluate studies to investigate special conditions.Evaluate and explore new developments and techniques of interest to WECC.Review and evaluate reports from member systems covering proposed additions or alterations to facilities in relation to NERC Planning Standards and WECC Regional Criteria.Recommend liaising with other areas when required.Prepare and submit an annual budget.Perform such other functions as may be delegated by the Planning Coordination Committee.TSS CharterValidate system performance after a system disturbance.Annual Progress Reports and Comprehensive Progress Report submittals.55
6TSS Charter Proposed Motion: TSS requests PCC approval of the TSS Charter as modified related to the appointment of the TSS ChairTSS Charter66
7SRWG Activities 2010 Annual Study Program 2011 Annual Study Program Outline - ApprovalPerformance LogRepresentation LogBase Case Coordination System (BCCS) -Request for Proposal (RFP) - ApprovalSRWG Activities77
82010 Annual Study Program The 2010 Annual Study Program is in progress The areas of focus for 2010 studies include Path 15: Midway-Los Banos and Path 46: West of Colorado RiverSRWG is editing the proposed disturbance list based on input received from TSS2010 Annual Study ProgramHowever, meeting the proposed schedule is slipping. For some cases it is between four to six weeks.Dynamic data conversion from PSLF to PSS/E has become more and more difficult. Many of the models available in each program do not convert easily leading to data issues. This now includes a number of generator models. The time spent performing dynamic data conversions has been exponentially increasing and has been a MAJOR contributor to delays in the base case compilation schedule. The data conversion for just one of these cases can take up to a full week to perform.Most data has been coming in on time. However, the format and number of comments that we are receiving is a major concern and has caused delays in the approval of cases. We are consistently receiving hundreds changes and requests to replace the entire area for review cases from several area coordinators. Some changes are received in a list form as opposed to EPCL. While this is acceptable a large list of changes can take a significant amount of time to perform since all changes must be made manually. With this we would encourage all to make an increased effort to provide the best data possible in the prerun and make only minor changes in the comment period, where possible.SRWG reported that the responses to disturbances in the 2011 Annual Program Survey was low. This is an on-going issue for SRWG.88
92011 Annual Study Program Outline The 2011 Annual Study Program includes 11 cases and is typical for Annual Study Program OutlinesFive Operating CasesOne 5-year winter Planning CaseOne 5-year summer Planning CaseOne 10-year winter Planning CaseThree Scenario Cases2015HA1: Stress paths in S. Nevada/Arizona/New Mexico2022LS1: High renewable generation simultaneous with light summer conditions2017LW1: High renewable generation displacing thermal generation with S-N flow from California to the Northwest.2011 Annual Study Program SurveyThe 2011 Study Program Survey was distributed to SRWG, TSS, TEPPC, and PCC on February 1, Responses were due by March 1, 2010.Concern about not having more light load cases available for NERC Compliance requirements.Suggestions included dropping one of the operating cases.99
102011 Annual Study Program Outline Regular CasesHW2-OP: Heavy Winter OperatingLW1-OP: Light Winter Operating2012HSP1-OP: Heavy Spring Operating2012HS2-OP: Heavy Summer Operating2012LS1-OP: Light Summer Operating2017HS2-G: 5-Year Summer PlanningHW2-G: 5-Year Winter Planning2022HW1-G: 10-Year Winter Planning2011 Annual Study Program Outline1010
112011 Annual Study Program Outline Proposed Motion:SRWG and TSS request PCC approve the general structure of the 2011 Annual Study Program Outline2011 Annual Study Program Outline1111
12Performance Log (Closed) Log/DisturbanceResponsible EntityDescription/StatusP07-02-NTD0709IPC, PACA single-line-to-ground Jim Bridger 345 kV fault and loss of the Jim Bridger-Kinport and Jim Bridger-Goshen 345 kV lines on the 2011 HS1B configuration. Results for this simulation indicate post-transient voltage deviations up to 15.2% in eastern Idaho and southwestern Montana.Status: Closed at TSS in August 2009P07-06-NTD0713TSGT, PSCOA three-phase Comanche 230 kV fault and loss of the Comanche-Walsenburg 230 kV line on the 2010 HS2-SA configuration. Results for this simulation indicate post-transient voltage deviations up to 17.8% in southern Colorado. A solved follow-up post-transient power flow case with southern Colorado loads increased to 105% indicates voltage stability is maintained. Results for this simulation also indicate that Rosebud pump load in northern New Mexico trips by frequency relay.P07-08-NTD0728A three-phase Comanche 230 kV fault and loss of the Comanche-Walsenburg 230 kV line on the 2011 LSP1-SA configuration. Results for this simulation indicate post-transient voltage deviations up to 22.1% in northeastern New Mexico and -iv-southern Colorado. A solved follow-up post-transient power flow case with southern Colorado loads increased to 105% indicates voltage stability is maintained. Results for this simulation also indicate that Rosebud pump load in northern New Mexico trips by frequency relay.P08-01-NTD0837PACLoss of St.George SVC. Post-transient case did not solve;Performance Log (Closed)At the March 2010 PCC meeting, TSS reported there were no new log items approved for closure1212
13Performance Log (Conditional Closure) Log/DisturbanceResponsible EntityDescription/StatusP07-01-NTD0706NV EnergyA three-phase Midpoint 345 kV fault and loss of the Midpoint-Humboldt 345 kV line on the 2011 HS1B configuration. Results for this simulation indicate post-transient voltage deviations up to 5.9% in northeastern California and southern Oregon.Status: Conditional Closure at TSS in August Project completion anticipated after June 2011.P07-05-FTD0712TSGT, PSCOA three-phase Comanche 230 kV fault and loss of the Comanche-Walsenburg 230 kV line on the HW1A configuration. Results for this simulation indicate post-transient voltage deviations up to 7.3% in southern Colorado. A solved follow-up post-transient power flow case with southern Colorado loads increased to 105% indicates voltage stability is maintained.Status: Conditional Closure at TSS in August Project completion anticipated after December 2013.P08-02-NTD0829A three-phase Hesperus 345 kV fault and loss of Hesperus – San Juan 345 kV line resulted in 26 buses in southwest Colorado exceeding the 5% post-transient voltage limit. Largest was 12.7%.Performance Log (Conditional Closure)At the March 2010 PCC meeting, TSS reported three log items were approved for conditional closure.Performance Logs identified for conditional closure will remain on the conditional closure log until future system reinforcements are operational.1313
14Performance Log (Open) Log/DisturbanceResponsible EntityDescription/StatusP08-03-FTD0815WAPAA three-phase Midpoint 345 kV fault and loss of the Midpoint-Humboldt 345 kV line on the 2011 HS1B configuration. Results for this simulation indicate post-transient voltage deviations up to 5.9% in northeastern California and southern Oregon.Status: Open – Resolution anticipated in July 2010Performance Log (Open)At the March 2010 PCC meeting, TSS reported one log item remained open.At the March 2010 SRWG meeting, WAPA reported that 1) there are no automatic switching devices they can take credit for, 2) there is no additional modeling to be utilized, 3) the capacity factor of the wind at the three wind farms under review is significantly less than the capacity factor of the wind used in the revised study. WAPA then proposed that an operating procedure be created requiring existing shunt capacitors in the area of influence be turned ON prior to the outage based on a set of identifiable flow/voltage conditions. SRWG agreed to place this Log Item on the Conditional Closure List and rule on the recommended procedure during the July, 2010 meeting.At the April 2010 TSS meeting, TSS recommended that the log item remain open due to additional follow-up from WAPA.1414
15Representation Log Representation Log SRWG continues to update the Representation Log.Current log total including PSS, shows an increase over the previous Representation Log.Increase in PSS numbers is thought to be more a result of the robustness of a new routine that staff wrote. The new routine may have captured additional Gens without PSS and is not necessarily a reflection that there are more gens being modeled without PSS. This will be tested at the next SRWG meeting after members have each looked at their respective areas to see which of their Gens were counted on the replog.Over the years SRWG has discussed the PSS count issue numerous times and each time it is clear that there are two main issues: 1. The members aren’t sure who they are supposed to send their exceptions to or what the process is; and 2. The updates to the PSS exceptions list lag the replog production schedule. So in other words, members who do send in exceptions and still see those gens listed without PSS in the subsequent replog then wonder and start to question what it is it takes to get off the list. The SRWG is addressing these issues by revisiting the PSS requirements section in the DPM to ensure it is clear to the members and asking staff to match the PSS exceptions list update schedule so that the latest one is always used for the replog.Excluding PSS, the standards count did not change significantly.1515
16Base Case Coordination System – RFP BCCS Task Force has completed drafting a Request for Proposal – RFPTSS approved the BCCS-RFP at the April 2010 TSS MeetingBranden Sudduth - WECC (TF Co-Lead) will give a presentation on the BCCS-RFP after the TSS presentationBase Case Coordination System – RFPPCC 2009 Goals/Assignments – Continue to reduce the number of system base case late data submittalsRFI was issued on August 3, 2009 and concluded on September 14, 2009.Received responses from ten vendors.Interviews were conducted with seven vendors including demonstrations.Majority of critical BCCS requirements can now be met with existing software which includes data storage and retrieval.1616
17MVWG Activities Load Modeling System Model Validation Solar PV Generation ModelingWind Power Plant ModelingGenerator Testing and Model ValidationSVC ModelingHVDC ModelingMVWG ActivitiesMVWG met in San Diego, CA on March 10-12, 2010.Next MVWG meeting to be hosted by Puget Sound Energy in Bellevue, WA on July 7-9, 2010.1717
18WECC Composite Load Model Load ComponentModelDataMDistribution Equivalent DataM115-kV230-kVMLoad ModelCompositionDataMUVLSComposite Load ModelOptional distribution transformer with fixed and variable tap and automatic tap adjustments with specified time delays.Optional distribution substation capacitor.Optional equivalent distribution feeder.Capacitors split between feeder ends to compensate load to match transmission bus Q.Load ComponentsStatic Load – P & Q each represented by two fractions w/specified voltage exponents and a constant power fraction.Electronic Load – Constant P & Q w/ gradual disconnection between two specified voltage levels.Motor load – up to 4 motor models, each of which may be eitherAggregate three-phase motor model based on the MOTORW model.Aggregate single-phase air conditioner model based on the LD1PAC modelPartial or full load shedding based on signal from UVLS and UFLS relay models.UFLSElectronicStatic
19Load Modeling Composite Load Model Structure Composite load model is implemented in PSLF and PSS®E as specified by WECCDefault load composition data sets are availableUsed as a starting point for load model validation studiesTools for creating load model records are available in PSLFCreates load records with default data for every load that meets filter criteria (area/zone, etc.)Success of load model implementation is highly dependent of availability of tools for managing load model data and for creating load model data setsComposite Load Model Structure - Step OneThere are no new additions to PSLF composite load model.PSS/E completed model development and presented results of model acceptance tests.Model went through a very comprehensive set of tests. Thousands of WECC-wide studies are done.Load Composition Data Sets/Tools - Developed by David Chassin (PNNL) – calculates load model fractions for different climate zones, seasons and time of day.1919
20Composite Load Model - System Impact Studies System impact studies are on-going, model revisions are very likelyFIDVR Validation StudiesValley and Palo Verde – Devers faults in Southern California2003 Hassayampa fault2009 Utah Mid-Valley faultSystem-Wide Validation StudiesAugust 4, 2000 oscillationJune 14, 2004 West-Wing disturbanceJuly 2003 Palo Verde single unit outageMajor Path System Impact StudiesLoad Model System Impact StudiesSCE has done a lot of excellent work on model validation (FIDVR studies).System impact studies have not shown any instability caused by FIDVR.Issues are observed with high voltages after air-conditioners trip.SCE, BPA, PG&E, CAISO and IPC are currently involved in system impact studies.System-Wide Validation StudiesDeveloped an automated approach for model validation and parameter tuning. This approach is significant since the correspondence between the model and reality is judged not in terms of point by point response comparison, but rather by comparing prominent features of the simulated and actual responses such as voltage dip, settling voltage, frequency dip, power pick-up, phase angle change, oscillation frequency, and damping.Differences between simulations and actual responses can be related to a specific phenomenon.2020
21Composite Load Model – Outstanding Issues Load Model Data ToolMotor and Electronic Load ModelingIndustrial Load RepresentationDistribution-Connected GenerationPost-Transient Load ModelsLoad model implementation processSupport review of WECC voltage dip criteriaComposite Load Model – Outstanding IssuesMotor and Electronic Load Modeling - WECC is funding MOTORC model development for air-conditioner stall benchmarking in large scale studies including motor and drive protection.Industrial load representation – Petrochemical plants, server farms and paper millsWith large amount of distribution-connected generation expected in the next 10 years, there is a need to represent them as a part of composite load model.RS and TSS are made aware of the issues related to WECC voltage dip criteria. Approval of the composite load model for production studies needs to be accompanied by the criteria review and possible revision.
22System Model Validation Studies NERC TIS developed a White Paper on System Model ValidationSystem model validation is a deliverable under Western Interconnection Synchrophasor Project (WISP)WECC needs to start doing regular system model validation studiesEnough evidence that the overall model performance is diverging from the system performanceSystem Model Validation StudiesWECC has a good history of system-wide model validation.However, current process is time consuming and labor intense (6-9 months).This has been a major impediment to the periodic model validation (last validation done in 2004).WECC manually collects data from utilities following a disturbance to align data from various sources.Data coverage has a few major holes.
23System Model Validation Studies Validation Base CasesUse element code to match dynamic data with West-wide System Model?Interconnection-Wide DataDisturbance data for the model validation process will be supported by WISPPerformance baselining analysis is done by North American Synchrophasor Initiative (NASPI), to become an automated continual process by end of MaySystem Model Validation ToolsPower plant model validation tools are available from MVWGSystem-wide model validation tools are testedSystem Model Validation StudiesThe following efforts are identified to enable periodic system-wide model validation in the West.Use 2011 MVWG funding for developing a pilot project for system model validation study of disturbances and high-stressed conditions during 2010 operating season.Availability of West-wide System Model (WSM) can provide a snapshot of power system condition.Western Interconnection Synchrophasor Program (WISP) is expected to be a step function in improving of availability of synchronized wide-area data for model validation.University of Wisconsin has a project with BPA to develop validation tools.
24Solar PV Generation Modeling A comprehensive overview of solar PV generation, including technologies, performance issues, operations and modeling was provided by Abe Ellis (Sandia)From a modeling perspective, solar PV generation can be grouped into two categoriesCentral plant solar PV installations andDistribution-connected PV installationsIssues under consideration includePower Flow Representation, GuideUnderstanding Dynamic BehaviorSpecifications for WECC PV System modelSolar PV Generation ModelingRichard Bravo is also working with NREL and Sandia on testing converters and solar panels. This data is fundamental for model development and validation.Central solar PV installations can be modeled similarly to Type 4 wind generation. There are many similarities, including power electronic connection to the grid, and distributed nature of solar PV converters within a PV power plant.
25Wind Power Plant Models Generic model structures are developed for all type 4 wind-turbine generatorsFrequency response not part of original specificationFor under-frequency events, all generic models show good agreement with “typical” WTG manufacturer modelNo significant issues reported with respect to the WT3 and WT4 generic models.Validation against actual system disturbances is neededWind Power Plant ModelsModel testing and validation are in progress.Models are not appropriate for studies of under- or over-frequency events.Still issues with Type 1 pitch control models.Ian Hiskens is reviewing structural issues with WTG models.
26Wind Power Plant Models Wind Power Plant DataDeveloping generic model parameter sets for different manufacturers is criticalModel acceptance/adoptionUser feedback and model refinementSeveral efforts underwayInitial model verification at Siemens and GENREL/UM (CEC and DOE sponsoring)EnerNex/UWIG (DOE sponsoring)Wind Power Plant Models – ContinuedWind power plant model validation is a critical task.Concern that a large amount of wind generation already connected based on studies done with model data that is not validated.
27Wind Power Plant Model Data WT1WT2WT3WT4Vestas V821.65 MW, 50/60HzVestas V MW, 60HzGE 1.5 MW, 50/60 HzEnercon E MW, 50 HzBonus 1.3 MW, 50/60 HzVestas V kW, 50/60 HzGE 3.6 MW, 50/60 HzEnercon E MW, 50 HzBonus 2.3 MW, 50 HzVestas V MWGamesa G80, G83, G87, G902 MW, 50/60 HzGeneral Electric 2SX2.5 MW, 60 HzMitsubishi MWT1000A1 MW, 60 HzGamesa G801.8 MW, 60 HzNORDEX N802.5 MW, 50HzSiemens 2.3 SWT932.3 MW, 60 HzSuzlon S661.25 MW, 50 HzSuzlon S882.1 MW, 50/60HzREPower MD70 and MD771.5 MW, 50HzClipper Liberty 2.5MW2.5MW, 60 HzREPower MM70/MM82/MM MW, 50/60HzSamsung 2.5 MWMitsubishi MWT-92/95 / MWVestas V MW & 3 MWAcciona 1.5/3.0 MW (*)Fuhrlaender FL 2.5 MW, 60 HzRED: Default WTG Model Data. BLUE: ongoing work to identify parameters
28Wind Power Plant Modeling Guide Resource to transmission planers, project developers on WPP modeling using WECC generic modelsApplicability and limitationsModel structure and default dataExamplesApproval processSubmit to MVWG for commentThen present to TSS for approvalLarger questionHow to migrate to WTG modelsStandards compliance issue
29Generator Testing and Model Validation Generator model data review (WECC Staff)Donald Davies provided log of suspicious dataModel validation and system impact studies with GENTPJ model – on-goingJohn Undrill provided a program to create OEL and Generator Protection models with default dataShawn Patterson reviewed hydro governor data – many questionable data recordsKaplan turbine model data – no progress is madeGenerator ModelsWECC Staff is going through the generator model data errors.
30SVC Models Progress is slower than expected SVSMO1 – SVC model with TSC and TCR is most mature and implemented in PSLF beta version. The model is being tested and expected to be ready for approval at July meetingSVSMO2 – SVC model with TSC is under development.SVSMO3 – STACTCOM model is prototypedMSS01 – relay model for switching mechanical shunt capacitors and reactors is under developmentSVC ModelsJanet Kowalski (SCE) provided update on new SVC model development.In addition, specifications are being developed for a relay model used for mechanical switching of shunt capacitors and reactors.
31HVDC Models IPP DC model PDCI model LADWP provided a new model for IPP DC controls for PSLF and PSS®E programs.PDCI modelTOS brought up an issue with PDCI responses during close AC system faultsMVWG recommended a code to simulate DC converter bypass to represent commutation failures when a fault occurs close to HVDC inverterNeed to confirm with TOS that this issue has been addressedIPP DC ModelThe model was developed by ABB, detailed model documentation was provided.PDCI ModelDmitry Kosterev described modeling issue with Pacific HVDC Intertie during faults close to an inverter end of the line.During a close-in fault, inverter AC and DC voltages are depressed, thereby resulting in large dc current and power flow on the line.This modeled behavior is different from what is expected in reality, when the inverter is likely to experience commutation failures during a close-in fault.Once commutation failure incepts the inverter will essential appear as bypassed during the fault and restart after the fault is cleared and voltages are restored to normal.
32Project Coordination Project Coordination No new projects entered or completed the Project Coordination Process since the March 2010 PCC Meeting3232
33Project Rating Process – Phase One No new projects entered or completed the Phase One since the March 2010 PCC Meeting3333
34Project Rating Process – Phase Two No new projects have entered or completed Phase Two since the March 2010 PCC Meeting3434
35Project Rating Process – Phase Three The following projects have entered or completed Phase Three since the March 2010 PCC MeetingProject NameSponsorRatingDatePath 14 and Path 75 Redefinition and the Hemingway Transmission ProjectIdaho Power1200 MW (W-E)2400 MW (E-W)550 MW (W-E)1500 MW (E-W)Completed 6/8/103535