Upload
teagan-blakes
View
224
Download
2
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
2
SAR-003 Standard Drafting Team
BAL-001-TRE-1 RSC January 9, 2013
Name Company
Sydney Niemeyer (Chair) NRG Energy
Ananth Palani (Vice-Chair) Optim Energy
Pamela Zdenek Infigen Energy
Vann Weldon ERCOT
Brenda Hampton Luminant
Sandip Sharma ERCOT (Non-voting SME)
3
BAL-001-TRE-1 RSC January 9, 2013
Submittal for RSC Approval
● Drafting Team has finished the standard and related documents. Each active team member approved all documents.
● Request RSC to approve standard for Posting, Review and Balloting.
4
Requirements Overview
● Applies to BA, GO and GOP function● Provides requirements for:
Identifying Frequency Measureable Events (FME) Calculating the Primary Frequency Response (PFR) of each
resource in the Region Calculating the Interconnection minimum Frequency Response Monitoring the actual Frequency Response of the Interconnection Setting Governor deadband and droop parameters Providing Primary Frequency Response performance requirements.
● Importantly, the standard narrows the governor deadband and requires the droop curve to begin at the edge of the deadband with no step function.
BAL-001-TRE-1 RSC January 9, 2013
5
Generator PFR Performance Measures
● Under this standard, two Primary Frequency Response performance measures are calculated: “initial” and “sustained.”
The initial PFR performance (R9) measures the actual response compared to the expected response in the period from 20 to 52 seconds after an FME starts.
The sustained PFR performance (R10) measures the best actual response from t(46) to t(60), compared to the expected response at t(46).
BAL-001-TRE-1 RSC January 9, 2013
6
BAL-001-TRE-1 RSC January 9, 2013
Increased Maintenance & Operating Costs?
● Generator Owners had concerns with smaller dead-bands increasing costs.
● Data from before dead-band and droop curve implementation compared to latest data indicates a significant cost savings.
● Significant increase in grid reliability.
7
BAL-001-TRE-1 RSC January 9, 2013
ERCOT Frequency Profile from 2008
ERCOT Frequency Profile Comparison
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
30000
35000
40000
45000
On
e M
inu
te O
ccu
ran
ces
2008
439,200 One Minute Periods in the Ten Months of Data January through October
Prior to Nov 2008 nearly all generators implemented a +/- 0.036 Hz dead-band governor, many with a step-response at the dead-band. The frequency profile reflected this dead-band setting.
8
BAL-001-TRE-1 RSC January 9, 2013
ERCOT Frequency Profile from 2012
ERCOT Frequency Profile Comparison
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
30000
35000
40000
45000
On
e M
inu
te O
ccu
ran
ces
2012
439,200 One Minute Periods in the Ten Months of Data January through October
By the end of October 2012 more than 20% of ERCOT generators had implemented the smaller +/- 0.017 Hz dead-band.
9
BAL-001-TRE-1 RSC January 9, 2013
How Does This Impact Generator Movement?
Jan thru Oct 2008 and 2012
0
20000
40000
60000
80000
100000
120000
140000
160000
MW
2008 MW Response of 0.036 db 2012 MW Response of 0.0166 db
591324.0
364610.0 MW Response of 0.0166 db
MW Response of 0.036 db
38.34% Decrease in MW movement with lower deadband.
MW Movement of a Typical 600 MW Generator Exposed to ERCOT Frequency during Time PeriodDue to Primary Frequency Response Only
With the lower dead-band setting a similar size generator saw a 38% decrease in movement between 2008 and 2012.
10
BAL-001-TRE-1 RSC January 9, 2013
Not All Improvement Due to Dead-Band & Droop
● Approximately 20% of ERCOT Generators now meet R6 of this Standard.
● Other Changes Impacted Frequency Control Change in Market from Zonal to Nodal Dispatch. Many generators previously not providing PFR
correctly are now working correctly but at the larger dead-band.
Wind Generators are now required to have PFR and governors in service.
● However, only the decrease in the dead-band can significantly improve the frequency profile inside the +/-0.036 Hz deviation range.
11
BAL-001-TRE-1 RSC January 9, 2013
Impact on ERCOT CPS1 Performance
ERCOT CPS1
100
110
120
130
140
150
160
170
CP
S1
Av
era
ge
100
110
120
130
140
150
160
170
Monthly Average 12 Month Rolling Average
Oct 2008 12 month avg. CPS1 = 122.03
Oct 2012 12 month avg. CPS1 = 160.17
12
BAL-001-TRE-1 RSC January 9, 2013
With All the Improvement Why BAL-001-TRE
● Fair and accurate measure of PFR. 12 month rolling average or minimum 8 event avg. Allows for event exclusion due to equipment limits. Accounts for generator ramping before the event. Adjusts expected performance due to known
generator delivery limitations. Accounts for non-frequency responsive capacity
like duct burner operation and other augmentation.
● Equal expectations for all generators. Wider dead-band governors benefiting from
generators with smaller dead-band. With the standard all generators will move less and
operate closer to their economic target.
13
BAL-001-TRE-1 RSC January 9, 2013
Field Trial Results
● 28 generating units were evaluated in the trial, which included 7 coal, 4 gas, 2 simple cycle combustion turbine, 5 wind, and 10 combined cycle units.
● Based on 35 events from June 2011 to June 2012.
● No high-frequency events were evaluated.● 8-event average was not possible with some
units.● These results use NEW R10 calculation.
14
BAL-001-TRE-1 RSC January 9, 2013
Field Trial Results – Coal Units
Coal Plant R9 R10 Comments
Generator 1 0.5841 0.6460 Generator 2 0.4643 0.3706 Participation in less than 8
events Generator 3 1.1892 1.2609 Generator 4 0.8872 0.9909 Generator 5 0.2530 0.4113 Participation in less than 8
events Generator 6 0.6092 0.8444 Generator 7 1.1987 1.3827
15
BAL-001-TRE-1 RSC January 9, 2013
Field Trial – Gas Units
Gas Plant R9 R10 Comments
Generator 1 0.7712 1.1068 Generator 2 0.4716 0.7218 huge data latency Generator 3 1.3608 1.3778 Participation in less than 8
events Generator 4 1.3415 1.7862 Participation in less than 8
events
Simple cycle combustion turbine R9 R10 Comments
Generator 1 0.1001 0.0178 Participation in less than 8 events
Generator 2 0.7409 0.8621
16
BAL-001-TRE-1 RSC January 9, 2013
Field Trial – Wind Units
Wind Generation R9 R10 Comments
Generator 1 1.3824 1.3737 Participation in less than 8 events
Generator 2 No Evaluation No Evaluation No Participation Generator 3 No Evaluation No Evaluation No Participation Generator 4 0.6259 1.0435 Participation in less than 8
events Generator 5 0.8189 0.7211 Participation in less than 8
events
17
BAL-001-TRE-1 RSC January 9, 2013
Field Trial – Combined Cycle Units
Combined Cycle R9 R10 Comments
Generator 1 0.2712 0.2360 Generator 2 1.5976 1.7676 Participation in less than 8
events Generator 3 0.7664 0.7863 Generator 4 0.5668 0.6246 Generator 5 0.9181 1.2397 Generator 6 1.1232 1.4586 Generator 7 0.6946 0.9575 Generator 8 0.5710 0.8235 Generator 9 0.3705 0.7409
Generator 10 0.7794 1.1074
18
BAL-001-TRE-1 RSC January 9, 2013
Changes Made after Field Trial and Comments
● Changed Sustained Measure (R10) from average over several minutes to instantaneous at t(46). Too much happens during former averaging window.
● Added 5 MW limit to the 2% exception criteria.● Moved examples of “legitimate operating conditions
that may support exclusion” from Measures to Requirements (R9 and R10).
● M7 re-written to focus on notice from GO to GOP of change in Governor status. Avoids concern about 24/7 proof issue.
● Changed deadband setting from 0.01666 to 0.017 Hz.● Reformatted R2 to break into sub-requirements.● Added non-frequency responsive augmented capacity
exclusion.
19
BAL-001-TRE-1 RSC January 9, 2013
Benefits of the Field Trial
● Presentations prepared and delivered to each participant. One presentation for each generator with one
graph for each event evaluated (generator on line during the event). Potentially 980 graphs total. Included Performance summary and critique.
● Reviewed performance with each participant through web conferences.
● Participants became familiar with the standard, proper PFR expectations and could easily see shortcomings in performance.
20
BAL-001-TRE-1 RSC January 9, 2013
Example of New R10 Measure
540.0
550.0
560.0
570.0
580.0
590.0
600.0
610.0
59.66
59.68
59.7
59.72
59.74
59.76
59.78
59.8
59.82
59.84
59.86
59.88
59.9
59.92
59.94
59.96
59.98
60
60.02
60.04
60.06
13:15:43 13:15:53 13:16:03 13:16:13 13:16:23 13:16:33 13:16:43 13:16:53 13:17:03 13:17:13 13:17:23 13:17:33 13:17:43
Freq
uenc
y -H
z
Unit:Sample Generator
Hz Average Frequency MW Average MW Initial EPFR(Final) EPFR(Final@T(+46))
592.65
59.844
564.70
1.178 Initial P.U. Performance
MW
Thursday, December 15, 20111.434 Sustained P.U. Performance
60.005
1) Frequency @ t(+46) sets the expected performance.
2) Based on Frequency @ t(+46) expected performance is calculated.
3) Generator performance is based on “best” performance between t(+46) through t(+60).
21
BAL-001-TRE-1 RSC January 9, 2013
Primary Frequency Response Reference Document
● This Primary Frequency Response Reference Document is not considered to be a part of the regional standard.
● This document will be maintained by Texas RE and will be subject to modification as approved by the Texas RE Board of Directors, without being required to go through the formal Standard Development Process. This arrangement provides Regional flexibility in
adjusting the technical details of the performance metric calculations.
The PFR Reference Document includes flowcharts that detail the calculations
22
BAL-001-TRE-1 RSC January 9, 2013
PFR Reference Document Revision Process
● A Revision Request may be submitted to the Texas RE Reliability Standards Manager
● The Reliability Standards Committee (RSC) will consider the request The revision request will be posted in accordance with RSC
procedures The RSC shall discuss the revision request in a public meeting,
and will accept and consider verbal and written comments pertaining to the request
The RSC will make a recommendation to the Texas RE Board of Directors
● The Board may adopt the revision request, reject it, or adopt it with modifications Any approved revision to the Primary Frequency Response
Reference Document shall be filed with NERC and FERC for informational purposes
23
Implementation Plan
● 12 months after Effective Date The BA must be compliant with Requirement R1 At least 50% of the GO’s generating units/generating facilities must
be compliant with Requirement R6 (if >1 unit/facility) At least 50% of the GO’s generating units/generating facilities must
be compliant with Requirement R7 (if >1 unit/facility) The GOP must be compliant with Requirement R8
● 18 months after Effective Date The BA must be compliant with Requirements R2, R3, R4, and R5 100% of the GO’s generating units/generating facilities must be
compliant with Requirement R6 100% of the GO’s generating units/generating facilities must be
compliant with Requirement R7
BAL-001-TRE-1 RSC January 9, 2013
24
Implementation Plan
● 24 months after Effective Date At least 50% of the GO’s generating units/generating facilities must
be compliant with Requirement R9 (if >1 unit/facility) At least 50% of the GO’s generating units/generating facilities must
be compliant with Requirement R10 (if >1 unit/facility)
● 30 months after Effective Date 100% of the GO’s generating units/generating facilities must be
compliant with Requirement R9 100% of the GO’s generating units/generating facilities must be
compliant with Requirement R10
BAL-001-TRE-1 RSC January 9, 2013