Professional Documents
Culture Documents
wind penetration
J. McCalley
Content
1. Motivation
2. Power balance-frequency basics
3. Frequency Performance Analysis
2
Motivation
• In many parts of the country, wind and/or solar is increasing.
• Fossil-based generation is being retired because
– There is significant resistance to coal-based plants due to their high
CO2 emission rates.
– There are other environmental concerns, e.g., once-through cooling
(OTC) units in California and the effects of EPA’s Cross-state air
pollutions rules (CSAPR) and Mercury and Air Toxic Standards (MATS)
(also known as Maximum Achievable Control Technology, MACT). For
CSAPR effects, see, e.g.,
www.powermag.com/POWERnews/4011.html (Texas shut downs) and
for CSAPR/MATS effects, see the next slide. For OTC effects, see
www.world-nuclear-news.org/RS-
California_moves_to_ban_once_through_cooling-0605105.html,
http://www.caiso.com/1c58/1c58e7a3257a0.html, and next-next
slide.
• Fossil-based generation contributes inertia. Wind and solar do
not contribute inertia, unless they are using inertial emulation.
• Inertia helps to limit frequency excursions when power
imbalance occurs.
Decreased fossil w/ increased wind/solar creates trans freq risk.3
Potential effects of CSAPR/MATS
Source: A. Saha, “CSAPR & MATS: What do they mean for electric power plants?” presentation slides at the 15 th Annual Energy, Utility, and
Environmental Conference, Jan 31, 2012, available at www.mjbradley.com/sites/default/files/EUEC2012_Saha_MATS-CSAPR.pdf. 4
Once-through cooling units in S. California
New wind
and solar
generation
due to Cal
requiring
33% by
2020.
There are 8 plants (26 units) that are impacted Load center
Total potential MW capacity at risk = 7,416 MW.
5
Summary of power balance control levels
6
• Inertia
Frequency Study Basics
The greater the inertia, the less acceleration will be
observed and the less will be the frequency deviation.
Inertia is proportional to the total rotating mass.
2H
(t ) Pau
Re
• Primary Control
Senses shaft speed, proportional to frequency, and modifies
the mechanical power applied to the turbine to respond to
the sensed frequency deviations.
7
First 2 Levels of Frequency Control
• The frequency declines from t=0 to about t=2 seconds. This frequency decline is due to
the fact that the loss of generation has caused a generation deficit, and so generators
decelerate, utilizing some of their inertial energy to compensate for the generation deficit.
• The frequency recovers during the time period from about t=2 seconds to about t=9
seconds. This recovery is primarily due to the effect of governor control (also,
underfrequency load shedding also plays a role).
8 / 12
First 2 Levels of Frequency Control – another look
9
Source: FERC Office of Electric Reliability available at: www.ferc.gov/EventCalendar/Files/20100923101022-
Complete%20list%20of%20all%20slides.pdf
First 3 Levels of Frequency Control
11
Transient frequency control
A power system experiences a load increase (or equivalently, a
generation decrease) of ∆PL at t=0, located at bus k.
At t=0+, each generator i compensates according to its proximity to the
change, as captured by the synchronizing power coefficient PSik between
units i and k, according to
Pei
PSik PL
PSik
PL
n n (1)
P
j 1
Skj P
j 1
Skj
Pik
PSik
ik ik 0
Equation (1) is derived for a multi-machine power system model where
each synchronous generator is modeled with classical machine models,
loads are modeled as constant impedance, the network is reduced to
generator internal nodes, and mechanical power into the machine is
12
assumed constant. Then the linearized swing equation for gen i is …
Transient frequency control
2 H i d 2 i
1 W
Wi J R2 , H i i
2 S B3 Pei (2)
KE in MW-sec of turb-gen
set, when rotating at ωR
Re dt 2
For a load change PLk, at t=0+, substituting (1) into the right-
hand-side of (2):
2 H i d 2 i PSik
n PL
Re dt 2 (3)
P j 1
Skj
j 1
(5a)
2 dH n n P
n Snk
Re
PSkj
dt
j 1
2 n
dH i i PSik
Re i 1 dt
i n1 PL PL (5b)
P
j 1
Skj
H
n
i i H i i
i 1
n or i 1
n
(7)
H i H
i 1
i
i 1
d
i 1 n dt (8)
dt H
i 1
i
17
[*] G. lalor, A. Mullane, and M. O’Malley, “Frequency control and wind turbine technologies,” IEEE Trans. On Power
Systems, Vol. 20, No. 4, Nov. 2005.
Transient frequency control
Consider losing a unit of ∆PG at t=0. Assume:
• There is no governor action between time t=0+ and time t=t1
(typically, t1 might be about 1-2 seconds).
• The deceleration of the system is constant from t=0+ to t=t1.
The frequency will decline to 60-mft1. The next slide illustrates.
d f PG f Re
n mf
2 H i
dt
i 1
18
Transient frequency control
Frequency(Hz) t1
Time (sec)
d f PG f Re
60
mf1
n mf 60-mf1t1
2 H i
dt mf2
60-mf2t1
i 1 mf3
60-mf3t1
The greater the ROCOF following loss of a generator ∆PG, the lower
will be the frequency dip.
• ROCOF increases as total system inertia ΣHi decreases.
• Therefore, frequency dip increases as ΣHi decreases.
19
Frequency Basics
• Aggregation
– Network frequency is close to uniform throughout the inter-
connection during the 0-20 second time period of interest for
transient frequency performance.
– For analysis of average frequency, the inertial and primary
governing dynamics may be aggregated into a single machine.
– This means the interconnection’s (and not the balancing area’s)
inertia is the inertia of consequence when gen trips happen.
20
Inertia and primary control from
solar PV and wind
Fuel Steam valve
supply control
control Steam Generator
FUEL
Boiler
MVAR
voltage
control
STEAM-
only
TURBINE CONTROL
SYSTEM
Mechanical
power control
Generator
Gear
Wind
Box
speed
Real power MVAR
output control voltage
WIND- control
TURBINE CONTROL
SYSTEM
21
Inertia and primary control from
solar PV and wind
• A squirrel-cage machine or a wound-rotor machine (types
1 and 2) do contribute inertia.
• DFIG and PMSG wind turbines (types 3 and 4) and Solar PV
units cannot see or react to system frequency change
directly unless there is an “inertial emulation” function
deployed, because power electronic converters isolate
wind turbine/solar PV from grid frequency.
No inertial response from normal control methods of wind & solar
• Neither wind nor solar PV use primary control capabilities
today.
• There is potential for establishing both inertial emulation
and primary control for wind and solar in the future, but
so far, in North America, only Hydro Quebec is requiring it.
22
Transient frequency control
So what is the issue with wind types 3,4 & solar PV….?
1. Increasing wind & solar PV penetrations tend to
displace (decommit) conventional generation.
2. DFIGs & solar PV, without special control, do not
contribute inertia. This “lightens” the system
(decreases denominator) df P f
nG Re m f
2 H i
dt
3. DFIGs & solar PV, without special
control, do not have primary control capability. i 1
This causes frequency response degradation along
with other effects (e.g., increased deadband, sliding
pressure controls, blocked governor, use of power load
controllers, change in load frequency response)
23
Frequency Governing Characteristic, β
P
(MW/0.1 Hz)
f
β,
25
25
Some illustrations
26
Crete
In 2000, the island of Crete had only 522 MW of conventional generation [*]. One plant has
capacity of 132 MW. Let’s consider loss of this 132 MW plant when the capacity is 522 MW.
Then remaining capacity is 522-132=400 MW. If we assume that all plants comprising that
400 MW have inertia constant (on their own base) of 3 seconds, then the total inertia
following loss of the 132 MW plant, on a 100 MVA base, is
[*] N. Hatziargyriou, G. Contaxis, M. Papadopoulos, B. Papadias, M. Matos, J. Pecas Lopes, E.
Nogaret, G. Kariniotakis, J. Halliday, G. Dutton, P. Dokopoulos, A. Bakirtzis, A. Androutsos, J.
Stefanakis, A. Gigantidou, “Operation and control of island systems-the Crete case,” IEEE
Power Engineering Society Winter Meeting, Volume 2, 23-27 Jan. 2000, pp. 1053 -1056.
n
400 * 3
Hi
i 1 100
12
Then, for ∆PL=132/100=1.32 pu, and assuming the nominal frequency is 50 Hz, ROCOF is:
d f PL f Re 1.32(50)
mf n
2.75Hz / sec
2 H i
dt 2 *12
i 1
If we assume t1=2 seconds, then ∆f=-2.75*2=-5.5 Hz, so that the nadir would be 50-
5.5=44.5Hz! For a 60 Hz system, then mf=-3.3Hz/sec, ∆f=-3.3*2=-6.6 Hz, so that the nadir
would be 60-6.6=53.4 Hz.
27
Ireland
Reference [*] reports on frequency issues for Ireland. The authors performed analysis on the
2010 Irish system for which the peak load (occurs in winter) is inferred to be about 7245 MW.
The largest credible outage would result in loss of 422 MW. We assume a 15% reserve margin is
required, so that the total spinning capacity is 8332 MW.
Consider this 422 MW outage, meaning the remaining generation would be 8332-422=7910MW.
The inertia of the Irish generators is likely to be higher than that of the Crete units, so we will
assume all remaining units have inertia of 6 seconds on their own base. Then the total inertia
following loss of the 422 MW plant, on a 100 MVA base, is
n
7910 * 6
i 1 100
Hi
475
Then, for ∆PL=422/100=4.32, and assuming the nominal frequency is 50 Hz, ROCOF is:
d f PL f Re 4.32(50)
mf n
0.227 Hz / sec
2 H i
dt 2 * 475
i 1 2.75 sec
Nadir
Assuming t1=2.75 seconds, then
∆f=-0.227*2.75=-0.624 Hz,
so that the nadir is 50-0.624=49.38Hz.
The figure [*] illustrates simulated response
for this disturbance. 49.35
[*] G. lalor, A. Mullane, and M. O’Malley, “Frequency control and wind turbine 28
technologies,” IEEE Trans. On Power Systems, Vol. 20, No. 4, Nov. 2005.
Reasons why computed nadir is lower
than simulated one
• Governors have some influence in the simulation that is not
accounted for in the calculation.
• Some portion of the load is modeled with frequency
sensitivity in the simulation, and this effect is not accounted
for in the calculation.
29
Contingencies
• Category C disturbance
i. Loss of large amounts of generation via two units at a single power plant
• Category D disturbance
i. Loss of large amounts of generation via three units at a single power
plant
ii. Loss of the California-Oregon Interface (COI) followed by activation of
the NE/SE islanding scheme
iii. Loss of large amounts of generation simultaneous with a reduction in
solar or wind power output
• The category (C or D) is indicated in a small box below lower
left-hand corner of each plot. Remember:
– Category B minimum freq dip is 59.6 Hz.
– Category C minimum freq dip is 59.0 Hz.
– Category D does not have a minimum
– Category “D-” indicates it is a particularly unlikely, but
severe event
30
Some additional issues
• Spinning reserve levels affect on-line inertia and therefore results of transient
freq performance
• Solar-PV is “inertial-less.” Solar-thermal is not.
• Underfrequency load shedding can activate for “worse” initial freq performance
and make it look better at 10 secs.
• Severe voltage decline can reduce power consumption and improve freq
performance.
• The contingency selected has much effect.
d f PG f Re
n mf
2 H i
dt
i 1
o 2 units have greater ΔPG but
less restrictive criterion.
o What about loss of 2 units
AND large wind or solar
ramp?
o Islanding may be worst one.
Why?
31
Reduced inertia and governing capability in
SCE area (33% renewable for SCE in 2020)
Off-Peak Case
Peak Case
C: 59.0Hz
Nadir is around 59.82 / 59.74 Hz for reduced inertia in SCE area when Loss
of two Palo Verde units (2800MW in total)
32
Reduced inertia and governing capability in
WECC area
• Less Inertia causes steeper drop of
frequency
Peak Case
• Loss of 3 PV units, nadir is about
59.72/ 59.68 Hz for Peak/Off-Peak
case
Off-Peak Case
D 33
Less Reserve
Off-Peak Case
34
D
Lower Inertia/Governor Capability and Less
Reserve
Off-Peak Case
• Less Inertia and Less Reserve causes faster drop and slower
restoration of frequency, lower post-contingency frequency
• Loss of 3 PV units, nadir is about 59.67 Hz for Off-Peak case 35
Interaction Between Voltage Stability and
Frequency Stability-Loss of 2 Songs
Peak Case
Peak Case
• Put SVC near Songs Units, Frequency performance become worse than
C: 59.0Hz
the case without SVC, for loss of 2 Song Units
37
NE/SE Separation- Peak Case is studied
• Less Inertia and
primary control in
each island
• For peak case,
there is 4719 MW
of power flow on
those lines which
are part of the
separation
scheme.
• For off-peak case,
there are only
1405 MW.
• Only Peak Case is
studied
38
NE/SE Separation
- Frequency of South Island
Peak Case with
Lower Inertia
• Lower Inertia or
Peak Case less reserve causes
bigger ROCOF,
which leads to
more load
shedding
(2000MW more)
Peak Case with and higher post-
Less Reserve
Frequency
Peak Case
39
D-
NE/SE Separation
- Frequency of South Island
Peak Case
D-
• Lower Inertia and less reserve causes bigger ROCOF, which
leads to more load shedding and higher post-Frequency
40
Renewable Ramp Down Together
with Loss of 1 PV Unit
Simulation Conditions:
– Max-solar case (Peak)
– Disable all automatic load shedding in dynamic
data
– In 0.1 s, turn off 3300 MW renewable( 1500 wind
+ 1800 Solar)
– At 0.1s, shut down 1 Palo Verde unit
– Lower Inertia and Lower governor ( only for one
case)
41
Renewable ramp down with loss of 1 PV
unit
Peak Case
Ramp Down
Ramp Down +
1PV
Ramp Down+1 PV+
Lower Inertia and
Less Reserve
B-: 59.6Hz
Below 59.6 Hz
for more than 6
B-: 59.6Hz cycles (0.1s)
Frequency on different load buses (Ramp down renewable and loss of 1 biggest
unit with lower inertia and lower governor), Load shedding is disabled.
43
Replace CST with solar PV and Reduce
Reserve
• Change all solar thermal units to solar PV in
dynamic models
• Reduce reserve level to 5% from 18% for solar
PV case by decreasing Pmax at SCE/WECC
Or
Shutdown conventional units to reduce
reserve level to 10%
44
Change all solar thermal to solar PV in
dynamic models for islanding
Max-Solar Case
with CST
46
All Solar PV model and Two Ways to
Change Reserve
Peak Case with all Solar
PV+5% Reserve in SCE