This document discusses using phasor measurement unit (PMU) data and wide area monitoring systems (WAMS) to observe power system oscillations and transient stability issues in real-time and potentially take automated control actions. It provides examples of how WAMS have been used to identify oscillation sources, locate them, and implement constraints to improve stability. It also examines using synchronized phasor angles and frequencies to define thresholds for automated generation tripping to prevent angular instability and system separation during transient events. The document advocates moving towards more automated real-time stability controls based on PMU data while still involving system operators.
This document discusses using phasor measurement unit (PMU) data and wide area monitoring systems (WAMS) to observe power system oscillations and transient stability issues in real-time and potentially take automated control actions. It provides examples of how WAMS have been used to identify oscillation sources, locate them, and implement constraints to improve stability. It also examines using synchronized phasor angles and frequencies to define thresholds for automated generation tripping to prevent angular instability and system separation during transient events. The document advocates moving towards more automated real-time stability controls based on PMU data while still involving system operators.
This document discusses using phasor measurement unit (PMU) data and wide area monitoring systems (WAMS) to observe power system oscillations and transient stability issues in real-time and potentially take automated control actions. It provides examples of how WAMS have been used to identify oscillation sources, locate them, and implement constraints to improve stability. It also examines using synchronized phasor angles and frequencies to define thresholds for automated generation tripping to prevent angular instability and system separation during transient events. The document advocates moving towards more automated real-time stability controls based on PMU data while still involving system operators.
This document discusses using phasor measurement unit (PMU) data and wide area monitoring systems (WAMS) to observe power system oscillations and transient stability issues in real-time and potentially take automated control actions. It provides examples of how WAMS have been used to identify oscillation sources, locate them, and implement constraints to improve stability. It also examines using synchronized phasor angles and frequencies to define thresholds for automated generation tripping to prevent angular instability and system separation during transient events. The document advocates moving towards more automated real-time stability controls based on PMU data while still involving system operators.
WAMS Deployment Dynamics & Control Operations & Planning Guidance Power System Analysis IEEE GM Discrete Control - 23/07/2013 - P 3 2012/13 Distribution: Wind control; microgrid 1999 National Grid: Security Constraint relief Global Activities Addressing Power System Challenges 2009 Energinet.dk: Renewable integration, oscillations 2006 Iceland: PSS tuning, Islanding Defence, Model 2009 Colombia: Frequency stability, governor tuning 1995 Scottish Power: 1 st
install, constraint relief 2000 Powerlink/AEMO: Synchronising QND / NSW, constraint relief 2011 Eskom: Large WAMS, EMS integration (4,200 phasors) 2011 Manitoba: SVC-POD tuning WECC: 300+ PMUs, CC integration Short-Term Voltage Stability & Voltage Rise Long-Term Voltage Stability Oscillatory Stability Frequency Stability Local & Differential Fault Protection Transient Stability N-x Transient / Area Angular Stability Thermal Limits Phasor-based Wide Area Control P5 15 minutes Operator Dispatch Human-in-the-Loop 3-15 seconds Automated Dispatch 200-600ms Phasor Primed 16-200ms Equipment Protection 0.6-3s Phasor Triggered Guided Operator Response Automated Control Response Phasor-based Wide Area Control Control Room EMS/DMS/WAMS Protection Pre-contingency operations IEEE GM Discrete Control - 23/07/2013 - P 5 Measuring Dynamic Response SCADA WAMS 4 sec SCADA: apparently small change PMU data shows much larger frequency swing and poorly damped oscillations WAMS Accurate time- alignment, hence phase displacement, is key to identifying sources of oscillation problems WAMS shows grid dynamic response, hence use in transient & oscillation applications IEEE GM Discrete Control - 23/07/2013 - P 6
Oscillation Constraint Relief and Security Introduction Oscillations Transients Conclusions Questions Addressing dynamics issues Constraint relief and security Observing and controlling Roadmap to Real-Time Stability Actions
7 15 22 2 IEEE GM Discrete Control - 23/07/2013 - P 7 Australia 3 damping constraints, 488MW, depending PhasorPoint Iceland network procedures address oscillation risk (ring split) Colombia Thermal / hydro dispatch constraint for frequency stability UK oscillation security warning & operational guidance Control-room Oscillation Management Examples of WAMS-based oscillation management Australia 3 Oscillation Constraints +128MW +160MW +200MW AREA 1 AREA 2 Uncertainty in model limit Use margin if well damped Reduce limit if poorly damped IEEE GM Discrete Control - 23/07/2013 - P 8 Examples of Control-Room Implementations Presentation title - 23/07/2013 - P 9 Landsnet, Iceland WAMS mapboards for Network & Balancing Oscillation Indicator Since 1999 National Grid, UK Simple Oscillation warning indicator & operational rules XM Colombia V. Low frequency oscillation monitoring hydro/thermal balance Oscillations Islanding Oscillation Event Management, Australia Occasional instability events Onset time & mode frequency to diagnose Real-time location tools of interest
11:14:50 11:15:10 11:15:30 11:15:50 11:16:10 11:16:30 -220 -200 -180 -160 -140 R a w
D a t a
P o w e r
( M W )
11:14:50 11:15:10 11:15:30 11:15:50 11:16:10 11:16:30 0 10 20 30 40 Time 0 . 6 H z
M o d e
D e c a y
T i m e
( s e c )
3% damping 1% damping Separation avoided, 10 April 2004 Event #1 2004 Generator returned to service after maintenance with control issue. Interstate line 150MW oscillations @ 0.6Hz separation risk. Generator rejection restored stability. Event #2 2010 Generator AVR malfunction, instability of 0.3Hz QNI mode, growing to 150MW. Operator location tests, then AVR state change restored stability, without generator rejection. #1 #2 Oscillation Source Location: Nearest PMU
P1
P2
c 11
c 12
c 22
c 21
Pd2 Pd1
P1
P2
c 11
c 12
c 21
c 22
Pd1 2 generators, identical damping 2 generators, only 1 damping Identify PMU nearest contributing sources Which group of generators? Which location within group?
Identify changes where damping degraded
Can use sparse PMU monitoring No currents
IEEE GM Discrete Control - 23/07/2013 - P 11 Western Power, Australia MGA NBT PJR KW ALB MU MRT EMD WKT 50mHz, 0.045Hz Low frequency common mode, 0.045Hz
Same amplitude everywhere
Small phase difference identify sources
IEEE GM Discrete Control - 23/07/2013 - P 12 Western Power, Australia Source/Sink Location Map, 0.045Hz
Geographic area of main source identified. Degrees of 0.045Hz Mode Phase Shift (NOT 50Hz voltage angle) IEEE GM Discrete Control - 23/07/2013 - P 13 Manitoba Hydro 0.009Hz Governor Mode Northern Collector System 2 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.6 2.7 2.8 2.9 3 6 8 10 12 14 x 10 -3 F r e q u e n c y
( H z ) Event_MH121001_1100to1500LocalMH 2 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.6 2.7 2.8 2.9 3 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 P 2 P
A m p l i t u d e
( m H z ) 2 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.6 2.7 2.8 2.9 3 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 P
A m p l i t u d e
i n
p h a s e
w i t h
F
( M W ) ) Time (Hours)
Kettle : K3-dc Kettle : K1-nac Kettle : K1-dc Kettle : K2-dc Limestone : H1 Limestone : H2 Longspruce : GS-L1 Longspruce : GS-L2 Longspruce : GS-L3 Longspruce : GS-L4 Longspruce : GS-L5 O s c i l l a t i o n
A m p l i t u d e
O s c i l l a t i o n
C o n t r i b u t i o n
Raised oscillation amplitude Specific signals show raised contribution (NOT Amplitude) NOTE: The oscillations occur in the Northern Collector System, connected to the Eastern Interconnection by a DC corridor U n i t
P o w e r
O u t p u t s
IEEE GM Discrete Control - 23/07/2013 - P 14
Observing and Controlling Transient Stability Introduction Oscillations Transients Conclusions Questions Addressing dynamics issues Constraint relief and security Observing and controlling
Roadmap to Real-Time Stability Actions
7 15 22 2 IEEE GM Discrete Control - 23/07/2013 - P 15 Angle-based Wide Area Defence SW FREQ E FREQ Smelter load 132kV ring power Main generation area Loss of Large Smelter in SW Islanding Frequency rises rapidly Nearby generators change speed/angle quickly Frequency rises more slowly Trip Gen proportionally in correct zone Angle difference increase IEEE GM Discrete Control - 23/07/2013 - P 16 Disturbance Record 1 Sept 2010 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 -100 -80 -60 -40 -20 0 20 40 Time (sec) A n g l e
d i f f e r e n c e
( r a d ) SIGALDA BLANDA A BLANDA B FLJOTSDALUR KRAFLA FLJ B usA FLJ B usB HRA HRA-FLJ Diff: 25 Time: 0.23s HRA-FLJ Diff: 50 Time: 0.41s Blanda bus tie opening T=0.5s -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 50 50.2 50.4 50.6 50.8 51 Time (sec) S y s t e m
F r e q u e n c y
( H z ) SIGALDA BLANDA A BLANDA B FLJOTSDALUR KRAFLA FLJ B usA FLJ B usB HRA HRA Frq >50.2Hz Time: 0.04s Slower Frq rise at FLJ HRA FLJ IEEE GM Discrete Control - 23/07/2013 - P 17 Threshold
Threshold , Relationship WADS Generation Tripping Angle Difference Frequency Difference Landsnet WADS Triggering Zone IEEE GM Discrete Control - 23/07/2013 - P 18 Testing with Measurements & Simulation Pink background = trip criteria met Measurements show: Restraint when not required Triggering when required Confirm thresholds
Simulations show: Triggering conditions met for family of problems Threshold levels Effectiveness of actions
IEEE GM Discrete Control - 23/07/2013 - P 19 Brazil Separation Example Other systems show same Area Transient Stability Behaviour Similar & F characteristics Separation occurs 5 sec from initial fault Other separation events 0.5 to 5s Feasible timeframe for action
Loss of Sync Angle diff increase 5s F sustained 5s Fault Event Fault Loss of Sync #1 3 sec & 5 sec #2 0.8 sec #3 2.1 sec #4 0.5s & 0.9s GB Transient Stability Boundary with Wind
()
P Scotland-England Boundary ~ 3.5GW Transient Stability Limit (P) ~ 1.5GW Wind Capacity in Corridor Volatility in corridor capability Expressing Limit as Angle? Transient stability closely related to angle difference Should operators run to Angle, not MW limit? Should new HVDC link control by Angle?
Observing and Controlling Transient Stability Introduction Oscillations Transients Conclusions Questions Addressing dynamics issues Constraint relief and security Observing and controlling
Roadmap to Real-Time Stability Actions
7 15 22 2 IEEE GM Discrete Control - 23/07/2013 - P 22 Control Room Procedures for oscillations established Further operator guidance needed Transient stability benefits from angle limit thresholds
Conclusions Automation , f for defence action proportional to system need Response time for wide area angle separation is feasible Principle applies to many inter- angle separation threats
Roadmap to Real-Time Stability Actions Growing experience through WAMS improves control actions www.psymetrix.com