2014 PV Distribution System Modeling Workshop: High Penetration PV Control Comparisons and Model-Centric Smart Grid CBA: Robert Broadwater, EDD
•
1 like•833 views
2014 PV Distribution System Modeling Workshop: High Penetration PV Control Comparisons and Model-Centric Smart Grid CBA: Robert Broadwater, EDD
More Related Content
What's hot
What's hot (20)
Viewers also liked
Viewers also liked (20)
Similar to 2014 PV Distribution System Modeling Workshop: High Penetration PV Control Comparisons and Model-Centric Smart Grid CBA: Robert Broadwater, EDD
Similar to 2014 PV Distribution System Modeling Workshop: High Penetration PV Control Comparisons and Model-Centric Smart Grid CBA: Robert Broadwater, EDD (20)
More from Sandia National Laboratories: Energy & Climate: Renewables
More from Sandia National Laboratories: Energy & Climate: Renewables (20)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
2014 PV Distribution System Modeling Workshop: High Penetration PV Control Comparisons and Model-Centric Smart Grid CBA: Robert Broadwater, EDD
- 1. High Penetration PV Control Comparisons and Model- Centric Smart Grid CBA May 7, 2014 1 Robert Broadwater dew@edd-us.com www.edd-us.com © Copyright Electrical Distribution Design, Inc. 2014
- 2. © Copyright Electrical Distribution Design, Inc. 2014 Confidential2 Model-Centric Smart Grid CBA
- 3. Model-Centric Smart Grid Performance Analysis + Economic Analysis + Lab Testing + Field Validation = Model-Centric Smart Grid Reliability, Efficiency, Capacity, Protection, Controllability © Copyright Electrical Distribution Design, Inc. 2014
- 4. Incremental Grid Modernization CBA Phase-Balance (no capacitors) Phase Balance for Time Varying Load Capacitor Design (capacitors on local control) Cap Design for Time Varying Load Auto Reconfiguration, Monte Carlo CBA1 CBA2 CBA3 CBA4 Base System (not optimized, some capacitors) “Dependency Ordering” of Investments Coordinated Control Coordinated Control Distribution Automation (blue sky days) (storm conditions) Reliability Efficiency Energy Time Series Analysis © Copyright Electrical Distribution Design, Inc. 2014
- 5. Time Series Analysis Example © Copyright Electrical Distribution Design, Inc. 2014
- 6. % Errors between Load Factor and Time Series Analysis -20 -10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 %ErrorsBetweenTimeSeriesand LoadFactorCalculations Feeders © Copyright Electrical Distribution Design, Inc. 2014
- 7. Present Value Savings for 10 Years Case Cost (Inc/Total) ($000) Savings Type Case Savings ($000) $ Saved / $ Invested (Inc/Total) Efficiency (Inc/Total) ($000) Energy (Inc/Total) ($000) Capital ($000) Operation ($000) CI ($000) CBA1 163/163 94/94 29/29 NA NA NA 123 0.75/0.75 CBA2 564/727 227/321 2,234/2,263 NA NA NA 2461 4.36/3.55 CBA3 68/795 88/409 2,064/4,328 NA NA NA 2,132 31.65/5.74 CBA4 1,953/2,748 NA NA 7,014 7,646 9,566 24,226 12.4/10.54 $1.4 ~ Residential $230 ~ Commercial $650 ~ Industrial Societal Benefits Estimated CO2 reduction = 76,330 tons © Copyright Electrical Distribution Design, Inc. 2014
- 8. Validation of Phase Balancing Crew Phase Balancing OperationAmps Days 1 2 3 4 5 6 © Copyright Electrical Distribution Design, Inc. 2014
- 9. © Copyright Electrical Distribution Design, Inc. 2014 Confidential9 High Penetration PV Control Comparisons
- 10. Control Approach • Configurable, Hierarchical, Model-based, Scheduling Control = Forecast – Monitor – Schedule - Adjust • Collects circuit-wide information and uses model to calculate set-points for control devices • Sends control set-points to both utility control devices and PV controllers • Strives to maintain the voltage profile that exists without PV generation while minimizing circuit losses and reducing the motion of utility control devices © Copyright Electrical Distribution Design, Inc. 2014
- 11. CHMSC Control Architecture CHMSC PV Controller PV Controller PV Generator PV Generator ... ... Local PV Controller PV Generator Base Controller Base Controller Voltage Regulator Switched Capacitor ... ... Local Base Controller Voltage Regulator, Switched Capacitor Controllable PV Uncontrollable PV Controllable Automated Device Uncontrollable Automated Device © Copyright Electrical Distribution Design, Inc. 2014
- 12. Local Voltage Controller Grid + Gain Vset-point - V Q Limit + + Q Q Vset-point QMax QMax Reactive Power Voltage Slope = GainSupply Reactive Power Consume Reactive Power (a) voltage-reactive power control block diagram (b) voltage-reactive power characteristics © Copyright Electrical Distribution Design, Inc. 2014
- 13. CHMSC Algorithm Updates periodically, where every five minutes is currently used Updates set-point schedules for base and/or PV control only if schedules change significantly If a communication failure occurs, the local controllers continue to work against the previously provided schedule as long as local constraint violations do not occur Load Forecast Base Controller Schedules PV Controller Schedules Set-point Scheduling Solar Forecast © Copyright Electrical Distribution Design, Inc. 2014
- 14. Circuit Model © Copyright Electrical Distribution Design, Inc. 2014 123% PV penetration
- 15. 1 Second PV Generation Data © Copyright Electrical Distribution Design, Inc. 2014
- 16. Controls Evaluated CHMSC: Feeder losses and utility controller motion are minimized and voltage set-points are used for PV generators CHMSC – 116V: Average customer voltage set-point at 116V CHMSC – 124V: Average customer voltage set-point at 124V CHMSC (PF set): Power factor set-points used for PV generators CHMSC – 116V (PF set): Average customer voltage set-point at 116V with power factor set-points provided to PV generators CHMSC – 124V (PF set): Average customer voltage set-point at 124V with power factor set-points provided to PV generators Local control only (116V): 116V set-point used by all PV generators Local control only (124V): 124V set-point used by all of PV generators © Copyright Electrical Distribution Design, Inc. 2014 Confidential16
- 17. CHMSC Results: Sub Q Flow © Copyright Electrical Distribution Design, Inc. 2014
- 18. CHMSC with 116V/124V SPs: Sub Q Flow © Copyright Electrical Distribution Design, Inc. 2014
- 19. CHMSC with 116V/124V SPs © Copyright Electrical Distribution Design, Inc. 2014
- 20. Sub Q Flow Comparison © Copyright Electrical Distribution Design, Inc. 2014
- 21. Average PF Results Comparison © Copyright Electrical Distribution Design, Inc. 2014
- 22. Average Q Generation Comparison © Copyright Electrical Distribution Design, Inc. 2014
- 23. Circuit Loss Comparison Real power loss (kW) comparison between local control and CHMSC © Copyright Electrical Distribution Design, Inc. 2014
- 24. Circuit Loss Comparison Local Control CHMSC Improvement Real Power Loss (kW-hr) 198.98 kW-hr 123.25 kW-hr 38.06% Reactive Power Loss (kVAR-hr) 240.69 kVar-hr 130.38 kVar-hr 45.83% © Copyright Electrical Distribution Design, Inc. 2014
- 25. © Copyright Electrical Distribution Design, Inc. 2014 Confidential25 Comparing CHMSC with Local Control with Increasing PV Penetration – 2 Hour Study
- 26. Control Device Motion Comparison Reduction in control device movement with CHMSC with increasing PV penetration © Copyright Electrical Distribution Design, Inc. 2014
- 27. Voltage Violation Comparison Number of voltage violations during 2 hour period with increasing PV penetration © Copyright Electrical Distribution Design, Inc. 2014
- 28. Conclusions CHMSC requires less reactive power flow at substation CHMSC provides higher power factor at PV • CHMSC has less reactive power generation at PV generator CHMSC results in lower circuit loss CHMSC results in fewer utility device controller steps CHMSC results in fewer voltage and overload violations © Copyright Electrical Distribution Design, Inc. 2014