Contingency Ranking and Screening of an IEEE Bus-6 …iiee.org.ph/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/MR_Contingency-Ranking-and... · Contingency Ranking and Screening of an IEEE Bus-6 Case

Contingency Ranking and Screening of an IEEE Bus-6 Case System with

Distributed Generation

John Christopher T. Adina

John Mark L. Gonzales

Jonathan John C. Lacsa

Julius Patrick L. Fontanilla

Engr. Michael C. Pacis

Adviser

Mapua Institute of Technology

Muralla, Intramuros, Manila

1 40th IIEE Annual National Convention, 2nd EE Faculty Research Colloquium, SMX Mall of Asia

CONTENTS 1. Introduction 2. Problem Statement 3. Objectives 4. Methodology 5. Results and Discussion 6. Conclusion 7. Recommendations

2

Introduction

• is defined as any small scale electrical power generation technology that provides electric power at or near the load site.

• DG technologies includes internal combustion engines, small gas turbines, micro turbines, small combined cycle gas turbine, combined heat and power (CHP), solar photovoltaic, fuel cells, wind turbines and biomass. •can increase reliability, power quality and voltage profiles with flexibility in operation.

3

What is Distributed Generation?

Dugan R.C. and McDermott T.E. “Operating conflicts for distributed generation on distribution systems” Rural Electric Power Conference, April 2001.

Introduction

4

What is Contingency Analysis? - since it serves a fast solution to most common contingencies - predict the effect of these outages - models single failure events or even multiple failure events - process of identifying these critical contingencies is referred to as contingency selection.

Power Generation, Operation, and Control 3rd edition by Allen J. Wood, Bruce F. Wollenberg & Gerald B. Shelbe page 328

Problem Statement

5

Studies had developed an algorithm for ranking contingencies for every line and power outages according to its severity. But some of these studies did not screen the critical and non critical case which is important in power system security analysis. Contingency screening will limit the outages from the most severe line down to the non- severe lines.

Objectives

6

(1) To create a Newton Raphson Load Flow simulation program (2) To simulate all possible line and generator contingencies (3) To create an algorithm for contingency analysis using the PI method (4) To integrate NRLF and PI method algorithm (5) To adapt a method for screening the contingencies used by the authors of “Neural network approach to contingency screening and ranking in power systems.”

Performance Indices (PI)

7

-are used to rank the contingencies accordance to its impact - also represents the severity of the contingencies.

Allen J. Wood, Bruce F. Wollenberg & Gerald B. Shelbe “Power Generation, Operation, and Control” 3rd edition

OPI = Pip + PIv


8

C. I. Faustino Agreira, J. A. Dias Pinto, “Contingency Screening and Ranking Algorithm Using Two Different Sets of Security Performance Indices”. 2003 IEEE Bologna PowerTech Conference, June 23-26, Bologna, Italy


9

C. I. Faustino Agreira, J. A. Dias Pinto, “Contingency Screening and Ranking Algorithm Using Two Different Sets of Security Performance Indices”. 2003 IEEE Bologna PowerTech Conference, June 23-26, Bologna, Italy

Methodology

10

Newton Raphson Load Flow

11

Stagg and El-Abiad, Computer Methods in Power System Analysis, 1968, McGraw Hill Arrillaga J. and Arnold C.P., Computer Analysis of Power Systems, 1990, John Wiley and Sons

Systematic Flowchart

12

Screening Flowchart

13

Limits for Contingency Screening

14

OPI Line and Voltage Violation Performance Index

Non Critical (Class IV)

Probably Critical (Class III)

Critical (Class II) Most Critical (Class I)

<0.03 0.03-1.19 1.2-1.59 1.6 above

Swarup, K.S., Sudhakar, G. “Neural network approach to contingency screening and ranking in power systems.” Science Direct, 2006

IEEE Bus 6 Test Case System

15

LOAD and GENERATOR DATA

LINE DATA


16

BUS DATA


17

The connected generator at bus 2 and bus 3 use solar thermal as the distributed generation. Solar thermal power capacity ranges from 10 to 80 MW. Generator 2 and 3 MW rated capacity are 50 and 60 and connected in a PV bus type

EPCOR, Distributed Generation, January 2002

Results and Discussion

18

The combination for the possible list of outages or case was computed by using the combnk in MATLAB. The result shows 91 possible combinations for the ‘n-2’ condition and 15 for the ‘n-1’ condition, a total of 106 combinations for the system.

NRLF Results

19

Newton Raphson Loadflow Analysis

Case 1 Injection Generation Load

Bus No. Vpu Angle Degree MW Mvar MW Mvar MW Mvar

1 1.05 0 161.1746 1.12061 161.1746 1.12061 0 0

2 1.05 -6.709741046 2.84E-14 97.6837 2.84E-14 97.6837 0 0

3 1.07 -6.900184843 60 90.23717 60 90.23717 0 0

4 0.990903 -6.176068192 -70 -70 -5.7E-14 -3.4E-13 70 70

5 0.985613 -7.338592125 -70 -70 -1.4E-14 -1.7E-13 70 70

6 1.004546 -8.58875426 -70 -70 0 2.27E-13 70 70

Total 11.17461 -20.9585 221.1746 189.0415 210 210

NRLF Results

20

Line Flow and Losses

Case 1 P Q From To P Q Line Losses

From Bus To Bus MW MVar Bus Bus MW MVar MW MVar

1 2 53.03651 -22.7426 2 1 -50.016 28.78363 3.020497 6.040995

1 4 60.68624 18.87351 4 1 -58.8545 -11.5465 1.831759 7.327037

1 5 47.45186 12.70724 5 1 -45.7008 -6.14083 1.75104 6.566402

2 3 -0.17861 -8.36179 3 2 0.210338 8.520415 0.031724 0.15862

2 4 17.08583 53.55357 4 2 -15.6528 -50.6874 1.433066 2.866132

2 5 10.17432 19.16467 5 2 -9.74728 -17.8836 0.427031 1.281092

2 6 22.93448 16.11987 6 2 -22.4355 -14.6943 0.498946 1.425561

3 5 15.77682 27.45862 5 3 -14.7257 -25.1811 1.051149 2.27749

3 6 44.01284 61.69998 6 3 -43.0094 -56.6829 1.003409 5.017047

4 5 4.507243 -0.89286 5 4 -4.46424 0.978869 0.043004 0.086007

5 6 4.638017 -7.68754 6 5 -4.55504 7.936476 0.08298 0.24894

Total 11.17461 33.29532

NRLF results in comparison with Power World

21

Case 106 P Q From To P Q

From Bus

To Bus MW MVar Bus Bus MW MVar

1 2 0.18% 0.16% 2 1 0.16% 0.15%

1 4 0.10% 0.11% 4 1 0.10% 0.10%

1 5 0.11% 0.26% 5 1 0.09% 0.24%

2 3 0.33% 0.31% 3 2 0.35% 0.46%

2 4 0.03% 0.02% 4 2 0.05% 0.02%

2 5 0.03% 0.13% 5 2 0.04% 0.11%

2 6 0.04% 0.20% 6 2 0.06% 0.17%

3 5 0.04% 0.12% 5 3 0.02% 0.10%

3 6 0.02% 0.02% 6 3 0.02% 0.02%

4 5 0.08% 1.31% 5 4 0.07% 4.63%

5 6 0.36% 0.36% 6 5 0.35% 0.54%

NRLF results in comparison with Power World

22

Injection

Bus No. Vpu Angle

Degree MW Mvar

1 0.00% 0.00% 0.12% 0.73%

2 0.01% 0.24% 0.00% 0.00%

3 0.01% 0.16% 0.00% 0.00%

4 0.00% 0.10% 0.00% 0.00%

5 0.01% 0.07% 0.00% 0.00%

6 0.01% 0.21% 0.00% 0.00%

Power World Sample

23

T-Test of the NRLF Algorithm Vs Power World

24

shows that the null hypothesis 1 is accepted since the p-value is nearest to 1 at the 5% level of significance, so the MATLAB loadflow results of CASE 18 is approximately equal to the reference value


25


26


27

OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDEX

RANK OPI OUTAGE NAME CLASSIFICATION

1 2.47389 - Line 3-6 & Line 5-6 MOST CRITICAL



4 1.65919 Line 1-4 & Line 3-6 - MOST CRITICAL

5 1.28378 - Line 2-3 & Line 3-6 CRITICAL

6 1.15037 Line 1-4 & Line 1-5 - PROBABLY CRITICAL

7 1.12413 - Line 2-4 & Line 3-6 PROBABLY CRITICAL

8 1.04641 Bus 2 & Line 3-6 - PROBABLY CRITICAL





13 0.88522 Bus 1 & Line 3-6 Line 3-6 PROBABLY CRITICAL





























28









49 0.16182 Bus 2 & Bus 3 - PROBABLY CRITICAL














63 0.08748 Bus 1 & Line 2-6 Line 2-3 & Line 2-6 PROBABLY CRITICAL



66 0.08669 Line 1-2 & Line 2- 6 - PROBABLY CRITICAL
















29


82 0.03176 Bus 1 & Bus 3 Bus 3 PROBABLY CRITICAL

83 0.03176 Bus 1 & Bus 3 Bus 3 PROBABLY CRITICAL

84 0.02925 Bus 2 & Line 5-6 - NON CRITICAL

85 0.02700 - Line 4-5 & Line 5-6 NON CRITICAL

86 0.02532 Bus 1 & Line 5-6 Line 5-6 NON CRITICAL



89 0.02388 Line 1-2 & Line 5-6 - NON CRITICAL



92 0.02002 Bus 1 & Bus 2 Bus 2 NON CRITICAL

93 0.02002 Bus 1 & Bus 2 Bus 2 NON CRITICAL



96 0.01586 - Bus 1 NON CRITICAL








104 0.00000 Line 1-4 & Line 2-4 NON CRITICAL

105 0.00000 Line 2-6 & Line 3-6 NON CRITICAL

Benchmark Record


Benchmark Record

Conclusions

Objective (1) To create a Newton Raphson Load Flow simulation program NRLF section takes longer execution times, but the algorithm shows accurate results via comparison on Power World.

Benchmark Record

Conclusions

Objective (2) To simulate all possible line and generator contingencies -Simulation of all the possible line and generator contingencies were done. Using the combination command in MATLAB for finding the n-2 and n-1 cases, all of the possible combination of outages were found. - Combination of outages is dependent to the number of the slack bus, PV bus and the lines. - For the IEEE 6-bus system, with n=14 (Slack Bus=1, PV bus=2, lines=11), the n-2 cases and n-1 cases numbered to 91 and 14 respectively.

Benchmark Record

Conclusions

Objective (3) To create an algorithm for contingency analysis using the PI method

An algorithm for contingency analysis using the Performance Index (PI) method was created and integrated to the NRLF in MATLAB.

Objective (4) To integrate NRLF and PI method algorithm

Integration made the simulation process easier to operate. A GUI was also made for the changing some parameters of the system.

Benchmark Record

Conclusions

Objective (5) To adapt a method for screening the contingencies used by the authors of “Neural network approach to contingency screening and ranking in power systems.” - A method was adapted for screening the contingencies. The computed OPI from MATLAB is transferred to the MS excel for data logging for ranking and screening. - The OPI is compared to the range of the critical limits and then classified if it is most critical, critical, probably critical, and non critical. - It was found out that 4 out of 105 cases were the most critical cases and therefore it must be the focus of analysis. But 26 cases are considered as non critical cases which means that these cases have a lesser impact.

Benchmark Record

Recommendations

1.) After the generation of ranked contingencies, another method can be proposed, using PIVQ method or PIs. 2.) The screened contingencies can be improved in terms of performance by applying the optimal load flow solution to these outages. 3.) A faster contingency simulation can be proposed, by changing NRLF by Fast Decoupled Load Flow, or DC Load Flow. 4.) Correlation study is vital for the accuracy of the ranking of the contingencies.

Benchmark Record

References

[1] C. I. Faustino Agreira, J. A. Dias Pinto, “Contingency Screening and Ranking Algorithm Using Two Different Sets of Security Performance Indices”. 2003 IEEE Bologna PowerTech Conference, June 23-26, Bologna, Italy [2] EPCOR, Distributed Generation, January 2002 [3] B. Krishnakumar, S. K. Soundarajan, R. Gnanadass, “Fuzzy Based Contingency Assessment Using Performance Indices with Masking Effect. 2012 IEEE Students’ Conference on Electrical, Electronics and Computer Science [4] Mohammad Khazaei, Shahram Jadid, Contingency Ranking Using Neural Networks by Radial Basis Function Method, 2008 IEEE [5] P. Sekhar, S. Mohanty, “Power system contingency ranking using Newton Raphson load flow method”. 2013 Annual IEEE India Conference (INDICON). [6] T. S. Sidhu, L. Cui, “Contingency Screening for Steady-State Security Analysis By Using FFT and Artificial Neural Networks. IEEE transactions on power systems, vol. 15, no.1 February 2000 [7] Power Generation, Operation, and Control 3rd edition by Allen J. Wood, Bruce F. Wollenberg & Gerald B. Shelbe page 328 [8] Dugan R.C. and McDermott T.E. “Operating conflicts for distributed generation on distribution systems” Rural Electric Power Conference, April 2001. [9] Stagg and El-Abiad, Computer Methods in Power System Analysis, 1968, McGraw Hill [10] Arrillaga J. and Arnold C.P., Computer Analysis of Power Systems, 1990, John Wiley and Sons

Benchmark Record

END OF PRESENTATION

THANK YOU!

Documents

Contingency Ranking and Screening of an IEEE Bus-6 …iiee.org.ph/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/MR_Contingency-Ranking-and... · Contingency Ranking and Screening of an IEEE Bus-6 Case