Energy Cost Optimization in Water Distribution Systems Using Markov Decision Processes Paulo T. Fracasso, Frank S. Barnes and Anna H. R. Costa University.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Instrumental Analysis
Advertisements

Specialization in Ocean Energy MODELLING OF WAVE ENERGY CONVERSION António F.O. Falcão Instituto Superior Técnico, Universidade de Lisboa 2014.
Automation I. Introduction. transmitter actuator Structure of control system Process or plant Material flow sensorstransducers actuating units actuating.
International Symposium on Low Power Electronics and Design Qing Xie, Mohammad Javad Dousti, and Massoud Pedram University of Southern California ISLPED.
Markov Decision Process
Time-of-Use and Critical Peak Pricing
Modern pipe network models
Energy Savings from Supplying Drinking Water at Two Pressure Levels - a Retrofit in Las Delicias, El Salvador, EWB-MAP Presented by Adam A. Brostow November.
OPTIMIZATION Lecture 24. Optimization Uses sophisticated mathematical modeling techniques for the analysis Multi-step process Provides improved benefit.
Planning under Uncertainty
Module F: Simulation. Introduction What: Simulation Where: To duplicate the features, appearance, and characteristics of a real system Why: To estimate.
Neeraj Jaggi ASSISTANT PROFESSOR DEPT OF ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING AND COMPUTER SCIENCE WICHITA STATE UNIVERSITY 1 Rechargeable Sensor Activation under Temporally.
KI Kunstmatige Intelligentie / RuG Markov Decision Processes AIMA, Chapter 17.
Discrete-Event Simulation: A First Course Steve Park and Larry Leemis College of William and Mary.
1 Hybrid Agent-Based Modeling: Architectures,Analyses and Applications (Stage One) Li, Hailin.
Monroe L. Weber-Shirk S chool of Civil and Environmental Engineering AguaRed.
Simon Bunn – Derceto Inc
Energy Savings from Supplying Drinking Water at Two Pressure Levels - a Retrofit in Las Delicias, El Salvador, EWB-MAP.
BLM National Training Center HYDRAULIC DESIGN PART 2.
ANALYZING YOUR ELECTRIC BILL Bob Walker Met-Ed November 7, 2007.
Analysis of wind energy with pumped storage systems in autonomous islands George Caralis Mechanical Engineer NTUA National Technical University of Athens.
EPANET FOR PRESSURIZED PIPE SYSTEMS
“Collaborative automation: water network and the virtual market of energy”, an example of Operational Efficiency improvement through Analytics Stockholm,
Least Cost System Operation: Economic Dispatch 1
Common Energy Mistakes
Computational Stochastic Optimization: Bridging communities October 25, 2012 Warren Powell CASTLE Laboratory Princeton University
1 Medical Office Building. 2 Occupancy – 400 persons 8 a.m. – 5 p.m. Monday - Friday Building Characteristics Three stories 40,000 square feet (200’ x.
TEC 4607 Wind and Hydro Power Technologies Fall 2011.
TEC 4607 Wind and Hydro Power Technologies Fall 2011.
What is Ubiquity™? ubiquity (noun): the state of being, or seeming to be, everywhere at once Ubiquity™ is a powerful building management system that.
ESET ALEMU WEST Consultants, Inc. Bellevue, Washington.
Electric vehicle integration into transmission system
Distributed Demand Scheduling Method to Reduce Energy Cost in Smart Grid Humanitarian Technology Conference (R10-HTC), 2013 IEEE Region 10 Akiyuki Imamura,
Final Design Project Group 8 Frank Monzon Keaton Davis Brandon Krick Eunice Cavalcanti.
Thermal Storage Coupled to a Ground Source Heat Pump in a Public Services Building COIMBRA Andre Quintino Duarte Oradea, 06 June 2012.
Decision Making Under Uncertainty and Risk 1 By Isuru Manawadu B.Sc in Accounting Sp. (USJP), ACA, AFM
Management and Organisation of Electricity Use Electrical System Optimisation Belgrade November 2003.
PRESENTED BY: J.MIKE TYSON S.RAVIKUMAR S.SAKTHI M.SATHISHKUMAR.
Fatemeh Alighalehbabakhani Carol J. Miller Shawn McElmurry S. Mohsen Sadatiyan A.
Electrical Efficiency. Electrical Efficiency Electrical Energy Consumption: the amount of electrical energy used.
Alex Gee Jon Locke Joe Cooper Kylie Rhoades Clara Echavarria Ice Energy Extraction.
Embedded Design Using ARM For Strong Room Security System
CUHK Learning-Based Power Management for Multi-Core Processors YE Rong Nov 15, 2011.
D Nagesh Kumar, IIScOptimization Methods: M6L5 1 Dynamic Programming Applications Capacity Expansion.
Variable Speed Applied to Pumps. Life Cycle Costs - Courtesy of Hydraulic Institute and Europump Initial cost is not the only cost associated with a pump.
1 1 Slide Simulation Professor Ahmadi. 2 2 Slide Simulation Chapter Outline n Computer Simulation n Simulation Modeling n Random Variables and Pseudo-Random.
1 Optimal operation of energy storage in buildings: The use of hot water system Emma Johansson Supervisors: Sigurd Skogestad and Vinicius de Oliveira.
Water Resources System Modeling
An optimal water allocation in a Metropolitan region June An Integrated Operation of Multi-Regional Water Supply Networks for Tae-Sang Ryu, Sung.
Markov Decision Process (MDP)
1 (Chapter 3 of) Planning and Control in Stochastic Domains with Imperfect Information by Milos Hauskrecht CS594 Automated Decision Making Course Presentation.
Variable Load on Power Stations
Power to the Coast Project Presented by: Su Wei Tan Industrial Research Ltd.
Determining Optimal Processor Speeds for Periodic Real-Time Tasks with Different Power Characteristics H. Aydın, R. Melhem, D. Mossé, P.M. Alvarez University.
Water System Master Plan & Rate Study City of DeKalb, Illinois City Council Presentation May 16, 2015.
1 Passive Reinforcement Learning Ruti Glick Bar-Ilan university.
EE5900 Cyber-Physical Systems Smart Home CPS
HEV Fundamentals Hybrid electric vehicles (HEVs) are vehicles that combine an internal combustion engine (ICE) with an electrical traction system. It usually.
Introduction to genetic algorithm
SMPS.
Irvine Ranch Water District Distributed Energy Storage Case Study
Engineering Economics (2+0)
System Control based Renewable Energy Resources in Smart Grid Consumer
Thermal Energy Storage
Parul Institute of Technology
Markov Decision Processes
Markov Decision Processes
Chapter 17 – Making Complex Decisions
Multidisciplinary Optimization
Beartooth Electric Cooperative Rate Design Analysis
Presentation transcript:

Energy Cost Optimization in Water Distribution Systems Using Markov Decision Processes Paulo T. Fracasso, Frank S. Barnes and Anna H. R. Costa University of Sao Paulo Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering Intelligent Techniques Laboratory

Agenda Anatomy of Water Distribution Systems Problem relevancy Markov Decision Process Modeling a Water Distribution System as an MDP Monroe Water Distribution System Experiment results Conclusions 1

Water distribution system It is a complex system composed by pipes, pumps and other hydraulic components which provide water supply to consumers. Focus of my work 2

Problem relevancy About 3% of US energy consumption (56 billion kWh) are used for drinking water (Goldstein and Smith, 2002). $2 billion/year Source: Electric Power Research Institute,

MDP is a model for sequential decision making in fully observable environments when outcomes are uncertain. Advantages of MDP compared to other techniques:  Real world – operates in uncertain and dynamic domains  Planning – generates control policies to sequential decisions  Optimal solution – guarantees to achieve a higher future payoff Disadvantages of MDP:  Discrete domains (state and action)  Course of dimensionality Markov Decision Process - MDP 4

 MDP is defined as a tuple where:  S is a discrete set of states (can be factored in Nv features):  A is a discrete set of actions:  T is a transition function where  R is a reward function where Markov Decision Process - MDP 5

 Solving an MDP consists in finding a policy, which is defined as a mapping from states to actions, s.t.  Bellamn’s equation allows to break a dynamic optimization problem into simpler sub-problems:  The optimal value of the utility is:  The optimal policy are the actions obtained from : Markov Decision Process - MDP

 Topology of a typical water distribution system:  States (everything that is important to control):  Time – range: discrete:  Tank level – range: discrete: Water Distribution System modeled as an MDP 7

 Actions (what you can manipulate):  Triggered directly:  Associated with a VFD – range: discrete:  Transition function (how the system evolves):  Calculated by EPANET  Reward function (how much an action cost):  Consumption:  Demand: Water Distribution System modeled as an MDP 8

Markov Decision Processes Constraints Control policy Demand Electrical power Final result: Energy price schema 9 Water Distribution System modeled as an MDP

Understand MDP results  Control policy:  Maps state variables into a set of actions  States variables: everything that is important to control (tank level and time)  Set of actions: what you can manipulate (pumps)  Indicates controllability (avoid black region)  Correlated to demand curve Tank level Time 10

Understand MDP results  Controller:  Uses control policy map to produce actions  Actions are based just on tank level and time  Easy to implement and fast to run in PLC (lookup table) Tank level Time Pump trigger 11

Monroe Water Distribution System  Characteristics:  11 pumps  1 storage tank  4 pressure monitoring  40k people served  182 miles of pipes  Diameters varying from 2 to 42 inches 12

Monroe Water Distribution System 13  Demand curve (during summer season): Average: GPM Minimum: GPM Maximum: GPM  Pressure restrictions (in PSI):  J-6: 65 ≤ P ≤ 70 ▪ J-131: 45 ≤ P ≤ 55  J-36: 50 ≤ P ≤ 60 ▪ J-388a: 40 ≤ P ≤ 90

Monroe Water Distribution System 14  Pumps (E2, E3, E4, E5, E6, E7, W8, W9, W10, W11 and W12):  Energy price schema:  On-peak (09:00 – 20:59): $ /kWh  Off-peak (21:00 – 08:59): $ /kWh  Demand (monthly): $13.75/kW

MDP apply to Monroe WDS Mathematical model:  Set of states: where and  Set of actions:  Transition function:  Reward function: Data flux diagram: EPANET DLL.INP FILEMATLAB 15

MDP results in Monroe WDS  Expected electrical power : 16 E5 and E7 consume 144.3kW W11, E2 and E6 consume 320.4kW

MDP results in Monroe WDS  Number of activated pumps (27 possibilities): 17 on={E2,E6}on{E5,E7} on={W12,E3,E4,E5}on={E2,E3,E4,E5}

MDP results in Monroe WDS  SCADA records:  obtained from historical data (July 6 th, 2010)  75% of WTP consumption is considered to be used in pump  One day is extrapolated to one billing cycle (30 days)  Both approaches started in the same level (19.3 ft) Energy expensesSCADA recordsMDPDifference Off-peak energy [$/month] % On-peak energy [$/month] % Demand [$/month] % Total [$/month] % 18

Conclusions  MDP avoids restrictions (level, pressure, and pumps) and reduces expenses with energy  To reduce energy consumption is different to reduce expenses with energy (demand is the biggest villain)  Summer season imposes small quantity of feasible actions  Verify if it is possible to reduce the number of pump combination  MDP policy is easy to implement in a non-intelligent device (PLC) 19

Contact Thank you for your attention PAULO THIAGO FRACASSO Av. Prof. Luciano Gualberto, trav.3, n.158, sala C2-50 CEP: São Paulo, SP - Brazil Phone: