EE 220

UNIT COMMITMENT

Load Demand Cycles

Human activity follows cycles

Systems supplying services will also experience

usage cycles transportation, communication, and
electric power systems

Electric power consumption follows a daily, weekly,

and seasonal cycles

High power usage during the day and evening

hours industrial & commercial operations and
lighting loads

Lower usage on the weekends

Higher usage during the summer

Example: Demand Profile

June 10, 2010

Load cycles create economic problems for

power generation it is quite expensive to
continuously run all generation, which is needed
to meet the peak power demands

Unit Commitment

Definition: Commitment means to turn on a given

generation unit

Have the prime mover operating the unit at

synchronous speed

Synchronize and connect the unit to the network

Economics

Savings are gained by de-committing some of the

generation units when they are not needed to
meet the current load demand

The engineering problem is committing enough

units to meet current and future load demands
while minimizing starting and operating costs

Example

Consider the cost of operating three generation

units

Unit 1

F1(P1) = 561 + 7.92 P1 + 0.001562 P12 R/hr

150 P1 600 MW

Unit 2

F2(P2) = 310 + 7.85 P2 + 0.00194 P22 R/hr

100 P2 400 MW

Unit 3

F3(P3) = 93.6 + 9.56 P3 + 0.005784 P32 R/hr

50 P3 200 MW

What combination of units is best to supply a 550

MW load?

Using unit combination

Unit
1

Unit
2

Unit
3

Max. Min.
Gen. Gen.

Off

Off

Off

Infeasible

Off

Off

On

200

50

Infeasible

Off

On

Off

400

100

Infeasible

Off

On

On

600

150

400

150

On

Off

Off

600

150

550

On

Off

On

800

200

500

On

On

Off

1000

250

On

On

On

1200

300

P1

P2

P3

F1

F2

F3

FT

3760

1658

5418

5389

5389

50

4911

586

5497

295

255

3030

2440

5471

267

233

50

2787

2244

586

5617

The least expensive way to supply the generation is not with all
three units running or with any combination involving two units

The optimal commitment is to only run unit # 1, the most

economic unit

By only running the most economic unit, the load can be supplied
by that unit operating closer to its best efficiency.

If another unit is committed, both unit # 1 and the other unit will
be loaded further from their best efficiency points, resulting in a
higher net cost

But from reliability considerations, more units should be committed

UC with Demand
Pattern/Cycle

Consider the load demand with a simple peakTotal Loading

valley
pattern
1150 MW peak load

450 MW min. load

3 PM

9 PM

3 AM
Time of Day

9 AM

3 PM

In order to optimize the operation of the system

Units must be shut down as load goes down

Then the units must be recommitted as load goes back up

Simple approach to the solution is a simple priority list scheme

with the following rule

Rules
When

the load is above 1000 MW, run all three units

Loading

between 600 MW and 1000 MW, run units

#1 and #2

Loading

below 600 MW, only run unit #1

Generator Commitment
Total Loading
1200 MW
200 MW

Unit #3

1000 MW
400 MW

Unit #2

600 MW

Unit #1

3 PM

9 PM

3 AM
Time of Day

9 AM

3 PM

Unit Commitment
Constraints

Primary constraints

Enough units are committed to supply the load and the losses
economically.

Additional Constraints in Unit Commitment

Spinning reserve
Thermal unit constraints

Minimum up time

Minimum down time

Crew constraints

Hydro-constraints
Must run
Fuel constraints

Unit Commitment Solution

Priority-List Methods

Consists of a simple shut-down rule

Obtain by an exhaustive enumeration of all unit

combinations at each load level

Or obtained by noting the full-load average

production cost of each unit = net heat rate at fullload fuel cost.

Various enhancements can be made to the prioritylist scheme by the grouping of units to ensure that
various constraints are met

Typical shut-down rules

At each hour when load is dropping, determine whether dropping

the next unit on the list leaves sufficient generation to supply the
load plus the spinning-reserve requirements

Determine the number of hours before the unit is needed again

If the supply is not sufficient, keep the unit committed

If the time is less than the minimum shut-down time for the unit, keep it
committed

Perform a cost comparison

The sum of the hourly production costs for the next number of hours
with the next unit to be dropped being committed

And the sum of the restart costs for the next unit based on the
minimum cost of cooling the unit or banking the unit

Example

Construct a priority list for the units in the first

example using the same cost equations
2

Unit 1

F1(P1) = 561 + 7.92 P1 + 0.001562 P1 R/hr

Unit 2

F2(P2) = 310 + 7.85 P2 + 0.00194 P2 R/hr

150 P1 600 MW
100 P2 400 MW

Unit 3

F3(P3) = 93.6 + 9.56 P3 + 0.005784 P3 R/hr

50 P3 200 MW

Getting the Full-Load Average Cost

Unit 1

F1(600)/600 = 9.7922

Unit 2

F2(400)/400 = 9.4010

Unit 3

F3(200)/200 = 11.1848

A strict priority order for these units:

[ 2, 1, 3]

The commitment scheme

Ignoring minimum up/down times and start-up costs

Combination
2+1+3
2+1
2

Min MW Max MW
300
1200
250
1000
100
400

DYNAMICPROGRAMMING
SOLUTION

Chief advantage over enumeration schemes is

the reduction in the dimensionality of the problem

In a strict priority order scheme, there are only N

combinations to try for an N-unit system`

A strict priority list would result in a theoretically

correct dispatch and commitment only if

The no-load costs are zero

Unit input-output characteristics are linear

There are no limits, constraints, or restrictions

Start-up costs are a fixed amount

The following assumptions are made in this implementation of

the DP approach

A state consists of an array of units

With specified units operating and the rest de-committed (off-line)

A feasible state is one in which the committed units can supply the
required load and meets the minimum capacity for each period

Start-up costs are independent of the off-time or down-time

I.e., it is a fixed amount with respect to time

No unit shutting-down costs

A strict priority order will be used within each interval

A specified minimum amount of capacity must be operating

within each interval

Forwards DP Approach

Runs forward in time from the initial hour to the

final hour

The problem could run from the initial hour to the

final hour

The forward approach can handle a units start-up

costs that are a function of the time it has been offline (temperature dependent)

The forward approach can readily account for the

systems history

Initial conditions are easier to specify when going

forward

Recursive algorithm to compute the minimum cost in hour K

with combination I:

State (K,I) = Ith combination in hour K

A strategy is the transition or path from one state at a given hour

to a state at the next hour

X = number of states to search in each period

N = number of strategies or paths to save at each step

These variables allow control of the computational effort

For complete enumeration, the maximum value of X or N is 2N - 1

For a simple priority-list ordering, the upper bound on X is n, the number of

units

Reducing N means that information is discarded about the highest

cost schedules at each interval and saving only the lowest N
paths or strategies

There is no assurance that the theoretical optimum will be found

Example: Restricted search paths (e.g., N = 3, X = 5)

N
N
X

Interval
(K1)

Interval
(K)

Interval
(K+1)

Example

Fuel Cost = 2.0 R/MBtu for each unit

State

Unit 1

Unit 2

Unit 3

Unit 4

15
14
13
12
11
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0

1
1
0
0
1
1
1
0
1
0
0
0
1
1
0
0

1
1
1
1
0
1
0
0
1
1
0
1
0
0
0
0

1
1
1
1
1
0
1
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0

1
0
1
0
1
1
0
1
0
1
0
0
1
0
1
0

Allowable states: {5,12,14,15}

Max. Net Capacity

for Combination
690
630
610
550
440
390
380
360
330
310
300
250
140
80
60
0

Strict Priority

Unit

Pmax
(MW)

1
2
3
4

80
250
300
60

Pmin No-Load Incremental

(MW) Cost (R/h)
Cost
(R/MWh)
25
213
20.88
60
585.62
18
75
684.74
17.46
20
252
23.8

Cost at Full
Load
23.5425
20.34248
19.74246667
28

Priority

3
2
1
4