Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
2
IEEE 2002 Summer Meeting, 2002
Procedure
1) Define scope
3
IEEE 2002 Summer Meeting, 2002
Techniques Used
! Steady-state methods (powerflow : P-V Curves)
4
IEEE 2002 Summer Meeting, 2002
1. Define Scope
! Base System conditions (dispatch, topology, load)
! Contingencies
! Transactions
! Criteria
5
IEEE 2002 Summer Meeting, 2002
2. Build Models
Dynamic and dynamic models where applicable
! ULTC
! Switchable devices (capacitors, reactors)
! Dynamic VAR sources/sinks (SVC, FACTS, HVdC, etc)
! Generator controls : (OEL / UEL / V/Hz)
! Protections :generator, line, load
! Special protections (i.e. load shedding)
! LOADS
Distribution detail as needed
Explicit representation of caps on LV (such as PF correction)
V and F dependency
Thermostatic effects
Extinction lights
motors
6
IEEE 2002 Summer Meeting, 2002
3. Preliminary Studies
! Use steady-state and dynamic approaches (PV & time-domain)
as indicated
7
IEEE 2002 Summer Meeting, 2002
Monday, September 10, 2001, 10:30:19
Buf. Binary Result File Scenario Contingency
1 base-30.bin All ctg at base-30 MW transfer 4 -- G2
2 base.bin All ctg at base transfer 11 -- G2
(Time-domain) 1.200
13730 KTA33---33.0 2
0.950
0.700
0.450
V Pre-Contg. St a
ble
e
Uns
tabl
Case: 2001wp_wet_2hly
0.200 Contingency: G2
0 48 96 144 192 240
Time in seconds
TSAT
Powertech Labs Inc.
Nanjing Automation Research Institute
Post-Contg. Transient Security Assessment Tool Copyright 2001 All rights reserved
Post-Contg. Margin
Po Pcm Pm P
8
IEEE 2002 Summer Meeting, 2002
N I 2001 S U MME R C AS E
Area 11,12,21,22 LOAD - from S . Gen
OTA220--220. B us V oltage
0.94
0.92
0.9
0.88
0.86
0.84
0.82
1300
1350
1400
1450
1500
1550
N.LOA D 1600
9
IEEE 2002 Summer Meeting, 2002
Typical Comparison of Static vs Dynamic Methods
-5 0 5 10
% Margin
10
IEEE 2002 Summer Meeting, 2002
Load may introduce significant uncertainty
Statistical nature of load (amount and type)
Distributed collection of many devices and controls
Composition (residential, commercial, industrial)
% of motors + type of motors + driven load = equivalent motor ?
Load protection and control
44 kV ? 44 kV
M M
f
M M M M M M
M M M M
f f
M M M M M M M
M M M M
11
IEEE 2002 Summer Meeting, 2002
Sunday, April 14, 2002, 14:49:10
Buf. Binary Result File Scenario Contingency
2 A.bin Ctg A at base transfer 1 -- A
42
31
21
Motors tripped
in the simulation
10
0
0 24 48 72 96 120
Time in seconds
12
IEEE 2002 Summer Meeting, 2002
Sunday, April 14, 2002, 14:44:28
Buf. Binary Result File Scenario Contingency
1 A.bin Ctg A at base transfer 1 -- A
1.120
0.840
0.560
0.280
0.000
0 24 48 72 96 120
Time in seconds
13
IEEE 2002 Summer Meeting, 2002
Monday, September 10, 2001, 08:37:02
Buf. Binary Result File Scenario Contingency
1 base.bin All ctg at base transfer 15 -- I
2 base+50.bin All ctg at base+50 MW transfer 14 -- I
1.000
0.800
0.600
Case: 2001wp_wet_2hly
0.400 Contingency: I
0 48 96 144 192 240
Time in seconds
14
IEEE 2002 Summer Meeting, 2002
MW
Load Variation Stability
Limit
B
Changing motor load percentage (5% increase) -6%
C
Changing motor loading factor (0.7 to 0.6) +5%
D
Changing motor load characteristic ((1-s)2.0 to (1-s)1.8) -10%
E
Changing motor load characteristic ((1-s)2.0 to (1-s)1.6) -9%
F No limit
Changing motor load characteristic ((1-s)2.0 to (1-s)1.5)
found
15
IEEE 2002 Summer Meeting, 2002
Load Modeling
16
IEEE 2002 Summer Meeting, 2002
4. Detailed Study and Analysis
For many large non-soft systems, steady-state analysis is often
sufficient and results are consistent with dynamics
17
IEEE 2002 Summer Meeting, 2002
British
Columbia
British
Columbia
Source
North generation
(Source)
! Configurations
Lower Tie
Tie to
Mainland
Results, to
USA Load
USA
! Critical conditions
! Critical contingencies
! Stability Limits
! Assessment of cause and remediation
18
IEEE 2002 Summer Meeting, 2002
5. Analysis & Design of Enhancements
! Modal analysis useful for assessing areas prone to collapse
Only useful for critical point (zero eignevalue)
Participations used to site compensation and load shedding sites
19
IEEE 2002 Summer Meeting, 2002
No. Bus No., Name Area Zone Part.Fac.
--------------------------------------------------
1 18430 PEN33---33.0 12 4 1.00000
2 18420 PEN22---22.0 12 4 0.96349
3 18460 PEN220--220. 12 4 0.56946
4 18450 PEN110--110. 12 4 0.32655
5 18490 PEN-*T10100. 12 4 0.31574
6 18411 PEN11T1011.0 12 4 0.30552
7 18030 PAK33---33.0 12 4 0.29870
8 18006 PAK-ET6-33.0 11 4 0.29738
9 18050 PAK110--110. 12 4 0.26572
10 22330 WIR33---33.0 12 4 0.26123
V Pre-Contg. 11 17852 OTA110-2110. 12 4 0.24721
12 22352 WIR110-2110. 12 4 0.23744
13 22351 WIR110-1110. 12 4 0.23544
14 17815 OTA11-G511.0 12 42 0.23033
15 17814 OTA11-G411.0
16 17816 OTA11-G611.0
12
12
42
42
0.23033
0.17399
Post-Contg.
17 10730 BOB33---33.0 12 5 0.16782
18 10750 BOB110--110. 12 5 0.15753
Modal Analysis 19 16250 MER110--110.
20 22530 WRU33---33.0
13
11
7
3
0.13434
0.11825
Point 21 16230 MER33---33.0 13 7 0.11377
Post-Contg. Margin
Pre-Contg. Margin
Po Pcm Pm P
20
IEEE 2002 Summer Meeting, 2002
Summary
! Different methods can produce unique insight
Steady-state
Dynamics
Modal analysis
Optimization
21
IEEE 2002 Summer Meeting, 2002