Your browser does not support JavaScript!
http://iet.metastore.ingenta.com
1887

access icon free Effects of correlated photovoltaic power and load uncertainties on grid-connected microgrid day-ahead scheduling

  • Author(s): Shichao Liu 1, 2 ; Peter Xiaoping Liu 1, 2 ; Xiaoyu Wang 3, 4 ; Zhijun Wang 3 ; Wenchao Meng 3
    • View affiliations
  • Source: Volume 11, Issue 14, 28 September 2017, p. 3620 – 3627
    DOI:  10.1049/iet-gtd.2017.0427 , Print ISSN 1751-8687, Online ISSN 1751-8695
© The Institution of Engineering and Technology
Received 16/03/2017, Accepted 15/06/2017, Revised 20/05/2017, Published 19/06/2017

Due to the increasing integration of photovoltaic-based distributed generators (PV-DGs), uncertainties resulted from both PV-DG power and loads have posed a serious challenge in microgrid day-ahead scheduling and operation. In this study, the effect of uncertainties in both PV-DG power and loads on the microgrid day-ahead scheduling is assessed. Specifically, the correlation between the PV-DG power and load uncertainties is taken into account as this is closer to the reality. The probabilistic optimal power flow (P-OPF) model is formulated to analyse the impact of the correlated PV-DG power and load uncertainties. A modified Harr's two-point estimation method (MH-2PEM) is introduced to provide computation-efficient estimation of the P-OPF solution. Results obtained by using the MH-2PEM and Monte Carlo simulation are compared in an equivalent 44 kV distribution feeder system and the accuracy and efficiency of the MH-2PEM are verified. The variation ranges of the microgrid day-ahead scheduling solution resulted from uncertainties in PV power and load are obtained with various confidence levels.

Inspec keywords: probability; load flow; power generation scheduling; photovoltaic power systems; Monte Carlo methods; correlation methods; distributed power generation

Other keywords: grid-connected microgrid day-ahead scheduling; confidence levels; computation-efficient estimation; modified Harr's two-point estimation method; Monte Carlo simulation; voltage 44 kV; P-OPF model; MH-2PEM; correlated photovoltaic power uncertains; probabilistic optimal power flow model; load uncertainties; PV-DG power; day-ahead operation; PV-DG loads; equivalent distribution feeder system; distributed generators

Subjects: Distributed power generation; Solar power stations and photovoltaic power systems; Monte Carlo methods

References

    1. 1)
      • 30. NREL: ‘Pvwatts version 5 manual’, 2015.
    2. 2)
      • 22. Ke, D., Chung, C.Y, Sun, Y.: ‘A novel probabilistic optimal power flow model with uncertain wind power generation described by customized Gaussian mixture model’, IEEE Trans. Sustain. Energy, 2016, 7, (1), pp. 200–212.
    3. 3)
      • 3. Guo, X., Xu, D., Guerrero, J., et al: ‘Space vector modulation for dc-link current ripple reduction in back-to-back current-source converters for microgrid application’, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., 2015, 62, (10), pp. 6008–6013.
    4. 4)
      • 8. Makarov, Y.V., Etingov, P.V., Ma, J., et al: ‘Incorporating uncertainty of wind power generation forecast into power system operation, dispatch, and unit commitment procedures’, IEEE Trans. Sustain. Energy, 2011, 2, (4), pp. 433–442.
    5. 5)
      • 26. Morales, J.M., Perez-Ruiz, J.: ‘Point estimate schemes to solve the probabilistic power flow’, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., 2007, 22, (4), pp. 1594–1601.
    6. 6)
      • 20. Qin, Z., Li, W., Xiong, X.: ‘Incorporating multiple correlations among wind speeds, photovoltaic powers and bus loads in composite system reliability evaluation’, Appl. Energy, 2013, 110, (10), pp. 285–294.
    7. 7)
      • 27. Verbic, G., Canizares, C.A.: ‘Probabilistic optimal power flow in electricity markets based on a two-point estimate method’, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., 2006, 21, (4), pp. 1883–1893.
    8. 8)
      • 34. Dent, C.J., Ochoa, L.F., Harrison, G.P.: ‘Network distributed generation capacity analysis using OPF with voltage step constraints’, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., 2010, 25, (1), pp. 296–304.
    9. 9)
      • 14. Dou, C.X., Jia, X.B., Li, H., et al: ‘Multi-agent system based energy management of microgrid on day-ahead market transaction’, Electr. Power Compon. Syst., 2016, 44, (12), pp. 1330–1344.
    10. 10)
      • 15. Zhang, J., Lu, C., Chung, C.Y., et al: ‘Online re-dispatching of power systems based on modal sensitivity identification’, IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., 2015, 9, (12), pp. 1352–1360.
    11. 11)
      • 29. Government of Canada: ‘Canadian weather energy and engineering datasets (CWEEDS)’, 2012.
    12. 12)
      • 9. Farzan, F., Jafari, M.A., Masiello, R., et al: ‘Toward optimal day-ahead scheduling and operation control of microgrids under uncertainty’, IEEE Trans. Smart Grid, 2015, 6, (2), pp. 499–507.
    13. 13)
      • 18. Keun Jo, B., Han, J.H., Guo, Q., et al: ‘Probabilistic optimal power flow analysis with undertermined loads’, J. Int. Electr. Eng., 2011, 2, (3), pp. 321–325.
    14. 14)
      • 35. Tanabe, R., Tada, Y., Chiang, H.D.: ‘A novel optimal power flow solver based on parameterized contingency for preventive control against insecure-contingencies’. 17th Conf. Power Syst. Computation, Stockholm, Sweden, 2011, pp. 1–7.
    15. 15)
      • 10. Wu, W., Wang, K., Li, G., et al: ‘Probabilistic load flow calculation using cumulants and multiple integrals’, IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., 2016, 10, (7), pp. 1703–1709.
    16. 16)
      • 19. Xu, Q., Zhang, N., Kang, C., et al: ‘Day-ahead battery scheduling in microgrid considering wind power uncertainty using ordinal optimization’. Proc. North American Power Symp., Pullman, Washington, 2014, pp. 1–3.
    17. 17)
      • 28. Wangdee, W., Billinto, R.: ‘Considering load-carrying capability and wind speed correlation of wecs in generation adequacy assessment’, IEEE Trans. Energy Convers., 2006, 21, (3), pp. 734–741.
    18. 18)
      • 5. Wang, Y., Zhang, P., Li, W., et al: ‘Online overvoltage prevention control of photovoltaic generators in microgrids’, IEEE Trans. Smart Grid, 2012, 3, (4), pp. 2071–2078.
    19. 19)
      • 31. Independent electricity system operator. Available at http://www.ieso.ca/power-data, accessed May 2015.
    20. 20)
      • 13. Kanchev, H., Lu, D., Colas, F., et al: ‘Energy management and operational planning of a microgrid with a PV-based active generator for smart grid applications’, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., 2011, 58, (10), pp. 4583–4592.
    21. 21)
      • 23. Zhang, H., Li, P.: ‘Probabilistic analysis for optimal power flow under uncertainty’, IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., 2010, 4, (5), pp. 553–561.
    22. 22)
      • 17. Li, X., Li, Y., Zhang, S.: ‘Analysis of probabilistic optimal power flow taking account of the variation of load power’, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., 2008, 23, (3), pp. 992–999.
    23. 23)
      • 33. Keane, A., Ochoa, L.F., Borges, C.L.T., et al: ‘State-of-the-art techniques and challenges ahead for distributed generation planning and optimization’, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., 2013, 28, (2), pp. 1493–1502.
    24. 24)
      • 24. Chang, C.H., Tung, Y.K., Yang, J.C.: ‘Evaluation of probability point estimate methods’, Appl. Math. Model., 1995, 19, (2), pp. 95–105.
    25. 25)
      • 11. Levron, Y., Guerrero, J., Beck, Y.: ‘Optimal power flow in microgrids with energy storage’, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., 2013, 28, (3), pp. 3226–3234.
    26. 26)
      • 25. Rosenblueth, E.: ‘Point estimates for probability moments’. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 1975, 72, (10), pp. 3812–3814.
    27. 27)
      • 12. Carpinelli, G., Bracale, A., Caramia, P.: ‘The great project: integer linear programming-based day-ahead optimal scheduling of a dc microgrid’. Proc. Int. Conf. Environment and Electrical Engineering, Wroclaw, Poland, May 2013, pp. 573–578.
    28. 28)
      • 2. Liu, S., Wang, X., Liu, P. X.: ‘Impact of communication delays on secondary frequency control in an islanded microgrid’, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., 2015, 62, (4), pp. 2021–2031.
    29. 29)
      • 4. EPIA: ‘Global market outlook: for photovoltaic 2014–2018’, 2014.
    30. 30)
      • 16. Kennedy, S., Marden, M.: ‘Reliability of islanded microgrids with stochastic generation and prioritized load’. Proc. Int. Conf. PowerTech, Bucharest, Romania, 2009, pp. 1–7.
    31. 31)
      • 1. Guerrero, J., Vasquez, J., Matas, J., et al: ‘Hierarchical control of droop-controlled ac and dc microgrids – a general approach toward standardization’, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., 2011, 58, (1), pp. 158–172.
    32. 32)
      • 6. Fan, B., Yang, Q., Wang, K., et al: ‘Transient stability enhancement control of power systems with time-varying constraints’, IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., 2016, 10, (13), pp. 3251–3263.
    33. 33)
      • 32. Dommel, H.W., Tinney, W.F.: ‘Optimal power flow solutions’, IEEE Trans. Power Appar. Syst., 1968, PAS-87, (10), pp. 1866–1876.
    34. 34)
      • 21. Wei, H., Sasaki, H., Kubokawa, J., et al: ‘An interior point nonlinear programming for optimal power flow problems with a novel data structure’, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., 1998, 13, (3), pp. 870–877.
    35. 35)
      • 7. Liu, S., Liu, P. X., Wang, X.: ‘Stochastic small-signal stability analysis of grid-connected photovoltaic systems’, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., 2016, 63, (2), pp. 1027–1038.
http://iet.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1049/iet-gtd.2017.0427
Loading

Related content

content/journals/10.1049/iet-gtd.2017.0427
pub_keyword,iet_inspecKeyword,pub_concept
6
6
Loading
Print this page
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address