247 From Eq, (12.27) 1104 ~ 0.1696 yo) avy) = at x 0.4050258.21° = 0,1508,—121.79* per unit avg?) = UO 201086 ey6 cipu." = 0060.58.21 per uni 701s ave owes %0.2404/--121.79° = 0.0624,58.21° per unit Fi Change in a-phase voltage at bus @) is AVG SAVQO) = (0.1598—0.0850~0.8624) ,—191.79° = 0.0324) =121.70° per unit Chapter 13 Problem Solutions 13.1 For a generating unit the fuel input in millions of Btu/h is expressed as a function of output P, in megawatts by 0.032P? + 5.8P, +120. Determine (a) the equation for incremental fuel cost in dollars per megawatthour as a function of P, in megawatts based on a fuel cost of $2 per million Btu. (b) the average cost of fuel per megawatthour when P, = 200 MW. (c) the approximate additional fuel cost per hour to raise the output of the ‘unit from 200 MW to 201 MW. Also find this additional cost accurately and compare it with the approximate value Solution: (a) The input-output curve in dollars per MWh is f= (0032P?+5.8P, +120) x2 = 0064P? + 11.6P, +240 8/MWh ‘The incremental fuel cost is af ap; ~ 01287, +116 s/MWh (6) The average cost of fuel when P, = 200 MW is 0.064(202)? + 11.6(200) + eee 06 N+ 240 _ 95,6 s/MWh (c) The approximate incremental cost for an additional 1 MW generation when P, = 200 MW is af = 0.128(200) + 11.6 = 37.28/h 200248 ‘The additional cost per hour to raise the output from 200 MW to 201 MW can be calculated accurately as follows: 201 = 37.264 8/h f "(0.128P, +1168) P, = 00647? +1167, hoo 00 13.2 The incremental fuel costs in $/MWh for four units of a plant are — 4h _ _ afz _ A= ai 0.012P,;+9.0 a2 = aya 0.0096P, » + 6.0 Zoe =a a3 = 2,3 = 0.008P,3 + 8.0 y= ae 0.0068P, 4 + 10.0 Assuming that all four units operate to meet the total plant load of 800 MW, find the incremental fuel cost A of the plant and the required output of each unit for economic dispatch. Solution: 1 1 1 1\7* ee a= (3+3+3+2) - (coat some oo by = op( eRe ed) = ama (a tate gg gllg) = ese Pyr = 800 MW The A of the plant is given by A = apPyr + br = 2176 x 10°? x 800+8.368 = 10.1088 $/MWh Using Eq. (13.4), for each unit we have Anh 2 Pp 10.1088 — 9 7 0.012 ey Py = ante a = 16 MW 13.3 Assume that maximum load on each of the four units described in Prob. 13.2 is 200 MW, 400 MW, 270 MW and 300 MW, respectively, and that minimum load on each unit is 50 MW, 100 MW, 80 MW and 110 MW, respectively. With249 these maximum and minimum output limits, find the plant A and MW output of each unit for economic dispatch. Solution: ‘The solution to Prob. 13.2 shows that each unit's output would be 92.4 MW, 428 MW, 263.6 MW and 16 MW, respectively, if there were no maximum and minimum limits on unit, outputs. It is seen that the output of Unit 2 violates its upper limit, and the output of Unit 4 violates its lower limit, This fact does not necessarily mean that the outputs of Units 2 and 4 should be set at their upper and lower limits, respectively. In fact, these limits should be checked individually First, assume that Unit 2 is operating at its upper limit of 400 MW. Using the remaining Units 1, 2 and 3, we esloulate the plant 2 as follows: 1 1 1\7 1 1 1 3 or = (t+2+2) = (sit cast oe ae by > (9 , 8 , 10 p= or (+e) = amor (95458 43g) = somone Since P, A = arPyr +br = 2813793 x 10°? x 400+ 9.062069 = 10.187586 $/MWh 400 MW, the total output of Units 1, 3 and 4 should be 400 MW. Therefore, Using this plant , each unit's output is, Andy 7586 — ook ce 98.9655 MW a 0.012 1oasTse5—8 , Pa = T5808 _ ors 4489 MW 1.187566 — 10 Pye = S158 —10 _ 9 seca MW Por & 400 MW It is seen that the outputs of Units 3 and 4 violate their respective upper and lower limits. Consequently it is concluded that other units besides Unit 2 need be operating at their limits if the output of Unit 2 is specified to be 400 MW. ‘This time assume that Unit 4 is operating at its lower limit of 110 MW. Using Units 1, 2 and 3 only, the plant 2 is calculated as follows: . 244)". (2 1,4)" «10-3 o = (S+5te) 7 Gaeta am) = 92 = ce 3 (_9 6 8 n= 2+) ~ 22«10° (sa + oom tom) - 7 Since P,4 = 110 MW, the total output of Units 1, 2 and 3 should be 690 MW. Therefore, D = arPyr tbr = 32% 10" x 690+47.6 = 9.808 $/MWh Using this plant , each unit's output is Asb _ 9.808 — Py = 2808—8 a o0r2 67.3333 MW250 13.4 9.808 ~6 on Se = tage. = 2966067 Mew Dab _ 9808-8 Ps = SSS = Oe 7 Bem Pj, 2 OMW Apparently there‘are no limit violations here. Therefore, economic dispatch requires that the output of Unit 4 be set to its lower limit of 110 MW and that the outputs of the remaining tunits be those obtained above. Solve Prob. 13.3 when the minimum load on Unit 4 is 50 MW rather than 110 MW, Solution: It was shown in Prob. 13.3 that if the output of Unit 2 is set to its maximum limit of 400 MW, some other units will also have to be operating at their limits. We now examine whether load limit constraints will be violated if Unit 4 is operating at its new lower limit of 50 MW. Using Units 1, 2 and 3, the plant 2 is calculated as follows: Since P,« = 50 MW, the total output of Units 1,2 and 3 should be 750 MW. Therefore, A = arPyrtbp = 32x 10x 750476 = 103/MWh Each unit’s output is calculated as follows: 10-9 Pa P58 = essa Mw 0-6 Par Toews = 116.6667 MW 0 Pys OSS = 20MW 0.008 It is noted that the output of Unit 2 exceeds its maximum load limit. Ik follows from the above analysis that both Units 2 and 4 should be operating at their upper and lower limits, respectively. Therefore, let Pz 2 400 MW and P,« 2 50 MW, and find the plant A as follows: 1iayt 1 «> Geta) > (ae by be 9 8 br = 2) = 48x10 (9.48) ° (248) 48x10 (om a5) Ba The plant 2 in this case is A= arPyr+br = 48x 10" x 350484 = 10.08 $/MWh13.5 251 The outputs of Units 1 and 3 are calculated to be Aad 1008 - 9 1 a Ww a ay 0.012 es 3 _ 1008-8 ; Py = ASR = MORES = 200 mw Py) = 90MW = Pys = 260 MW yp = 400MW Phy = 50 MW ‘The incremental fuel costs for two units of a plant are dh AAA ah =Sh. 2Py, +8.0 » ere . 9.6 An = Gp = 0012F i +8 2 Fy = 000RP a+ where f is in dollars per hour and P, is in megawatts. If both units operate at all times and maximum and minimum loads on each unit are 550 MW and 100 MW, plot A of the plant in $/MWh versus plant output in MW for economic dispatch as total load varies from 200 to 1100 MW. Solution: At their lower limit of 100 MW, the incremental costs of the units are calculated as af. = af, 2h = oosr,, +06 sf ated = AAs the plant output exceeds 200 MW, initially che incremental fuel cost 2 of the plant is determined by Unit 1 alone and the additional power should come from Unit 1. ‘This will continue until the incremental fuel cost of Unit 1 becomes $10.4/MWh, (ie., 0.012P, ;+8.0 = 10.4) from which the values of P, 1 = 200 MW. Therefore, for 200 < Pyr < 300, a 0.012P,1 +80 0.012 (Pyr ~ 100) +8.0 = 0.012P,r +68 For Pyr > 300, both units will increase their outputs simultaneously, To determine which unit will reach its upper limit first, we calculate incremental costs at the upper limit as follows: of, = oo12P,, +80] = 46 Py IP, Py 1550. dhs sh = 0.008P,2 +9. = SP yal, yass0 aml ree Mo ‘The result shows that Unit 2 will reach its maximum load limit earlier than Unit 1. The value of P, 1 for which the incremental cost becomes $14.0/MWh is computed from 0.0127, +8.0 = 14.0 which yields P, , = 500 MW. For 300 < Pyr < 1050, the plant 2 is calculated. Since the ineremental fuel costs of Units 1 and 2 should be the same, we have 0.012P,,+8.0 = 0.008P,2+9.6252 13.6 13.7 from which Py2 = 1.5P,1~200. Since Px + Pyz = Pyr, Pps ean be represented in terms of Por a8 Py1+1.5P,1~200 = Pyr from which Pp, = O4P,r-+ 80. The plant is then sven by Y= 0.012), +8.0 = 0.012(0.4P yr +80) +8.0 = 0.0048P,r +8.96 For Pyr > 1050,.only Unit 1 will have an excess capacity, and the plant A is determined by Unit T alone as A = 0.012P,1 +80 = 0.012(Pyr ~550)+8.0 = 0.012Pyr + 1.4 The results are summarized as follows: For 200< Per < 300 = 0.012P,r +68 For 300 < Per $1050 A = 00048P,r + 8.96 For 1050 < Per $1100 A = 0.012Pyr +14 Find the savings in $/h for economig dispatch of load between the units of Prob. 13.5 compared with their sharing the output equally when the total plant output is 600 MW. Solution: Economic dispatch for Pr = 600 MW requires that 0.012P,1+8.0 = 0.008P,2+96 and Pyi+Py2 = 600 Solving the two equations for Py and P,2 yields Py = 320 MW Pro = 280 MW ‘The savings calculations are as follows: 3 df fee ah, Net savings = aP,, ghar, eomines = [aga [ BPs 300 200 - . (oor2F, +8)4P+ f (0.008P, 2 +9.6) dP, 0 so 200 200 + (0.00472, + 9.6P,2) lso0 F 0$/h (0.00673, + 8P, 80 284.4 + 238.4 A power system is supplied by three plants, all of which are operating on eco- nomic dispatch. At the bus of Plant 1 the incremental cost is $10.0 per MWh, at Plant 2 it is $9.0 per MWh and at Plant 3 it is $11.0 per MWh. Which plant. has the highest penalty factor and which one has the lowest. penalty factor? Find the penalty factor of Plant 1 if the cost per hour to increase the total delivered load by 1 MW is $12.0.253 Solution: Since the system A should satisfy the equation A = 100L, = 9.0L; = 1.0L5 it must be the case that Ly > Ly > L3, Given the system \ of $12,0/MWh, the penalty factor of plant 1, Ly, can be calculated from 10.0L, = 12.0 from which we have Ly = 12 13.8 A power system has two generating plants and B-coefficients corresponding to Eq. (13.37) which are given in per unit on a 100 MVA base by 5.0 —0.03 | 0.15 —0.03 8.0 [0.20 | x 107% The incremental fuel costs in $/MWh of the generating units at the two plants are af, th aP, aP,2 If Plant 1 presently supplies 200 MW and Plant 2 supplies 300 MW, find the penalty factors of each plant. Is the present dispatch most economical? If not, which plant output should be increased and which one should be decreased? Explain why. M= = 0.012P,1 +66 de = 0.0096P,2 + 6.0 Solution: ‘The power loss Pr is given by the equation 5x10"? ~003 x 10-2 | 0.15 x10" ] [Py 41 Perf 1] |_-oosxio-? _extom#| 02% 10-3 | | Po O15x10> 02x10 [O08 x10 | [1 = 5% 10-*P3, ~2(0.03 x 10%) Py Py2 +8 x 10-2Py + 0.18 x 10-P, 0.2 x 10°°Py2 + 0.08 x 10-2 a= [ where Ps and Py» are in per unit on the 100 MVA base. Penalty factors are calculated as 1 1= {2 (5 x 10-9) Py ~ 2(0.08 > 10-9) Pya + 0.18 x 10-9}, Tower eres = 1070876 1 7 1 = (2x (8 x 10-5) Py — 2(0.03 x 10-3) Py $0.2 x 10-3} 1,0505084loseere = esreo0t = ty ‘are suoprenbs anoge ay anos yorum Ey pur ty Jo sanyea ou, sootess's = “fgvtuz6z0't + *cro6860000— veerzeet = “qoss6o000— 'fz9e99296°0 se uonauiad ze YI 2-01 * 6688°0 * OL - OT + F9- = a (¢ 01 X 98896'S * OT x + 96°0) + Ha (, 01 x (BPF6HO'O-) x OL X 2) c-OT FOTOSL'0 x OT - 0 +8~ = “a (¢-01 x (SppErO'O-) x OF x Z) + Ta (¢-O1 x EBTERE’S x OL XZ +8'0) axey am ‘sone sodord Suranatasqns uodg, (ayy +%4-) @ay-\+%4-) Ay (Staree +) +g (HEY) 28g (tga) + Ma (Save +) se uarumar ome Iya, (org + Mgtege + agttga)y +y— (54+ ofa) (org + egtigg + Mattgay +y— (4+ Mae) oy pue 44 20} pastos aq pnoys suorvenbs om Fuori axa veWN (EP'eT) “ba wos SMOG} YE GAS wan St O0T =n TEAS og Tang uornjog ‘un sod payepdn ue ureago 0} uoryerox 3s1y ayy SuEMp suoWemoeo Aresseo—u ax wuoyied 'yeT apdurexg ut y waiscs Jo anyea Surareas ayy se YWIN/O'OTS SUIS GET vyeredsip 1wouose anatyoe 03 poseazsep oq prmoys z werd jo 3eys ar Poseasour aq prnous t ued jo andano axa “(6p /2f p) £7 wath sofTu (“ZRF P) 7 US tgp ‘ap grisece's = Ep t7 —eoeeers = EF! ‘xy om ‘syS09 any yeauraxoUt atp AUT pareioduooUT aze sior9e) Aayeuad WANK casa) typ ee = 09+ 008 x = Hae 88° = 019 +008 « 96000 re Beer cg = ee 6 = 99+002 x z100 le aq 01 pareinoyee aze sesng ue]d oma ays 2e sas09 Jong JeUEUID.DUT ay, Pst13.10 255, Step 4: The transmission loss is computed to be Po = BirPj,+2Bi2PyiPy2 + Bo2Poy + BioPyi + BroPy2 + Boo = 8.383183 x 107? x (2.062489)? +2 x (—0. 049448) x 10° x 2.062489 x 3.333861 + 5.963568 x 107° x (3.333861)? + 0.750164 x 1073 x 2.962480 + 0.38094 x 107° x 3.333861 + 0.090121 x 107? = 0.104201 Per unit Step 5: Since Po er unit, Po+P, (Pf +P) fi) = 5 +0.104201 ~ (2.082489 + 3.333861) = ~0.292148 per unit ‘The incremental change in 2 is calculated from Eq. (13.88) as follows: Po + PID — (Pills PD) aa = (0-40) a) a) = (10-0) SREP osaiasis and the updated A becomes a® = A+ aM = 10-0.5413896 9.4586174 Suppose that bus @ of a four-bus system is a generator bus and at the same time a load bus. By defining both a generation current and a load current at bus @ as shown in Fig. 13.5c, find the transformation matrix C for this case in the form shown in Eq. (13.31). Solution: Let the generator and load currents at bus @ be denoted by If and If, respectively. The total system load current is given by Ip = Hth+h Constants ds, ds and dy are then obtained to be hb le foe teria) dy Since the net current injection at bus @, Iz, is If + If, from Eq, (13.23) we have Vin = Zith + Zia (B+) + Zish + Zigh Zirh + Zi2lf + (daZia + dis + deZs4) ID from which we also get Zur =2i2 -2; Ip Diovan ee, 8+ oS SS + Ss Gat aA at * Gat hls tala * Basaran ~thh tif 42256 13.11 where [2 = —Viq/Z1s. Now the load currents ean be represented in terms of generator currents" and the no-load current as follows He = dots, ~ dotolf - dytyl Ty = ~dstyls — datal$ - dst Tq = duty — data ~ ety? The transformation C of old currents J;, If + If, Is and J, to the generator and no-load currents J;, If and 19 is defined as h 1 _ : H+ | _ | dat: ida ~dt || | ae] pe Is wits date -dat |] | | Ik det, data dat * ™ The four-bus system depicted in Fig. 13.5 has bus and line data given in Ta- ble 13.2. Suppose that the bus data is slightly modified such that at bus Q, P-generation is 4.68 per unit, and P-load and Q-load are 1.5 per unit and 0.9296 per unit, respectively. Using the results of Table 13.3, find the power-flow solu- tion corresponding to this modified bus data. Using the solution to Prob. 13.10, also find the B-coefficients of this modified problem in which there is load as well as generation at bus Q. Solution: ‘The power flow solution should be the same as that of Table 13.3 except that P- and Q- generation at bus @ needs to be modified to account for the load at that bus. Using P- and Q-generation of 3.8 per unit and 1.325439 per unit as shown in Table 13.3, and adding to those P- and Q-load at bus @, we get Py = 318415 = 4.68 per unit Qe2 = 1.325499 +0.9296 = 2.255089 per unit ‘The bus voltages and P- and Q-generation at bus () should remain the same. currents are calculated from the power-flow results as follows: The load é PH-5Q% _ -15+ 30.9296 if Toca ~ —15982150+ j0.8648990 =2.2 + 71,6340 ; Is 7 Dees LaTaaS = ~2-2680198 + j1.4628529 Pr-5Qe __=2.8+51.73520 7 he 7 Tea Daaee 7881685 + jL.97a1431 Constants da, dy and dy are then found to be if 4s = BERET 7 o2ees2 + joorsasre hh 4 = oe _e - Ib = FRET 7 09890401 ~ 0.0008083 a = gp = oczwa67 - j0.0126389 fth+h13.12 257 Constants t; and tz defined in Prob. 13.10 are calculated to be 2 . = pL = 09030684 + j0.0013885, Boat hh tia , Zin GQ t hls t GZ, Using the constants d;, ds, ds, t; and t2, the transformation C defined in Prob. 13.10 is obtained: te 1,0020780 — j0.0004610 1 ° ° aznoses? joorsuse rma potsiees ozone” corse | ~Ehowint sJomoses —ogosTeejo0omTsss —o.3e601 = 70001388 Eomresoouogio aimee +joai200rr —0s86086 + 300130610 Using Rous given in Example 13.3, we then find 4.543134 +70 0.892927 — j0.076535 0.938793 - 0.023045 CT RyuC* = | -0.892027 + j0.076535 —-307S414+ 70 0.194901 + 0.0% x10-? | 0.938793 + j0.023045 0.194991 - 0.054548 (0.246415 + 0 ‘The no-load current is calculated, as given in Example 13.3, to be Pp ta = 0.000436 — j0.387164 ‘Also using the power-flow solution, we have jC) 10202 1.0 — j0.978615 135 (2B) iii) 70 — sae = 10196070 ~ 70.4388360 The matrix T., of Eq. (13.36) is then calculated to be 8.894036 +0 1.336685 + j0.388211 0.364217 + j0.355146 Tr. 1.336685 — 0.388211 _-3.789452+j0 0.011499 + 0.086254 | x 10-* 0.364217 ~ 0.355146 0.011499 - 0.086254 0.036937 + 30 ‘The B-coefficients are the real parts of the matrix Tq. Finally, the power loss is calculated as follows: 1913182 Py = [19isis2 468/1][B]|_ 468 0.093158 per unit, neeleae Three generating units operating in parallel at 60 Hz have ratings of 300 MW, 500 MW, and 600 MW and have speed-droop characteristics of 5%, 4% and 3%, respectively. Due to a change in load, an increase in system frequency of 0.3 Hz is experienced before any supplementary control action oceurs. Determine the amount of the change in system load, and also the amount of the change in generation of each unit to absorb the load change258 Solution: Using Eq, (13.65), the change in the system load is calculated to be ‘Sri #) Af ee $p2 , See) Af Gree ie (aie so.) 93 03) op = ~1925 MW The change in the outputs of the units can be calculated by Eq. (13.63) or Eq, (13.67) as Sai Af 300 0.3 AP = Rie > “O08 wo =~ MW = SeAf _ 50003 are = ~fe28f - 5098 as vnw APs = —S824f _ 003 soy xp Raw fa ~~ 0.03 60 13.13 A 60-Hz system consisting of the three generating units described in Prob. 13.12 is connected to a neighboring system via a tie line. Suppose that a generator in the neighboring system is forced out of service, and that the tie-line flow is observed to increase from the scheduled value of 400 MW to 631 MW. Determine the amount of the increase in generation of each of the three units and find the ACE of this system whose frequency-bias setting is -58 MW/0.1 Hz. Solution: ‘The increase in the total generation resulted in the increase in the tie line flow by 231 MW. Therefore, it follows from Eq. (13.65) that am = ~ (92 0 HY af 0.05 * 004 * 003) Go from which we have Af = 231 x 60 = -0.36 Hz ‘The three units should have increased their outputs according to Eq, (13.63) as follows: AP, = AP = APys ‘The ACE of the system is determined from Eq, (13.68) as AGE = (631 ~ 400) - 10(-58)(~0.36) = 22.2 MW 13.14 Suppose that it takes 5 mimutes for the AGC of the power system of Prob. 13.13 to command the three units to increase their generation to restore system fre-259 quency to 60 Hz. What is the time error in seconds iicurred during this 5- minute period? Assume that the initial frequency deviation remains the same throughout this restoration period. Solution: The frequency error in per unit is 0.36 = -6 x 10° per unit ‘Therefore, the time error incurred during the S-minute period is 6x10" x 5x60 = -18s 13.15 Solve Example 13.8 when the system load level is 1300 MW. Solution: ‘Among the four combinations 2, 22, 3 and 7», combination 2p is infeasible since the total generation from units 1 and 2 cannot exceed 1250 MW. (1) Combination 2s: With units 1, 2 and 4 operating, we use Eqs. (13.7) and (138) to calculate the coefficients er (eq! + az! +51)? = (0.008-' +0.0096-' + 0.01171)! = 3.1243 x 107% by, be be) 64 75) _ eo a. (2 Bah) = er Sa gay) = 73074 ‘The incremental fuel cost at the load level of 1300 MW is Dd = apPyr +bp = 3.1243 x 107% x 1300+ 7.3374 = 11.3990 ‘The corresponding economic dispatch outputs are Ash _ 11.9990 - 8.0 < ; Se EET 88 & 425 MW fn _ 11.3990 — 6.4 a 0.0006 Aabe _ 11.3900 = a oon = 52073 = 521 MW Pos The hourly production costs of the three units are calculated to be h contr, +8075: +50 = 4623 8/h fa = O.008P3, + 6.4P,2 +400 5037 5/h logan hoa 085+ 757, +40] = 37448/h260 (#8) Combination 22: Using the values of ay and by found in Example 13.8, A is caleulated to be A = orPyptbr = 3.038 x 10-* x 1350+ 7.4634 = 11.4128, The corresponding economic dispatch outputs are jy _ 11a128—80 a 7008 fe _ 418-64 a > 0000 Abs 11,4128 - 7.9 = 7 or 426.60 & 427 MW 522.17 & 522 MW 351.28 & 351 MW ‘The hourly production costs of the three units are calculated to be ae 004, + 807; + 00 = 4645 §/h fr = 0.0048P2, +.6.4P,» +400] 5049 §/n Hoyentaa fy = 0.005P2, + 7.97, 5 + 600] = 3989 §/h psoas, (iti) Combination 21 Using the values of az and br found in Example 13.8, dis calculated to be d= apPyp tbr = 2.9805 x 10°* x 1300+ 7.4712 = 10.56 ‘The corresponding economic dispatch outputs are 1056585 — 8.0 7 Pr T0568 80 _ spo73 = 221 MW 1056565 - 64 Pe = W885 64 io 94 aaa MW . ESBS = 84 _ 433.04 = 434 M 1056565 - 7.9 7 Pps = MSBSBA TE ossso = 250 MW Poa = 1056585=75 _ org7 = 279 MW Oar The hourly production costs of the four units are calculated to be Si = 0.004P2, +8.0P,: + 500] = 3480 $/h fa = 00048P2, +6.4P,2 +400] = 4082 8/n Pyanee f= OO05F fs + 707; + 20 = 3055 S/h Pants fa = 000552, 47.5754 + 409 = 2921 8/h -27913.16 If the start-up costs of the four units of Example 13.9 are changed to §: $3000, $3400, and $2600, and the shut-down costs are changed to $1500, $1200 $1000, and $1400. respectively, find the optimal unit commitment policy. As. sume that all other conditions remain unchanged. Solution: ‘At stage 6, the condition remains the same. Therefore, Fa(6) = $45,868, At stage 5, by using different transition costs T, we have As) +T.9(5) + Fo(6)} = [58,428 + 1000 + 1400+ 45, 863] = $106, 696 Fi(S) = {P2(5)+Ta0(5) + Fo(6)} = [59,356 + 1000 + 45,868] = $106,224 Fy(5) = {Ps (5) +Tho(5) + Fo(6)} = [58,236-+ 1400+ 45, 868] = $105,504 At stage 4 Fy(4) = min [Py (4) + Tsa(4) + FG) Pu(A) + Tad) + Fal); PA(4) + Th a(4) + Fa(5)] = min{76,472 +0 + 106, 696; 76,472 + 1400 + 106, 224; 76,472 + 1000 + 105, 504] min [183, 168; 184, 096; 182, 976] = $182,976 (4) ‘min (P2(4) + Ta,x(4) + Fi(5);-Pa(4) + Ta,2(4) + Fo(5); Pa(4) + Ta,a(4) + Fa(5)] = min 79, 184 + 2600 + 106, 696;79, 184 +0 + 106, 224;79, 184 + 1000 + 2600 + 105, 504] = min (188, 480; 185, 408;188, 288] = $185,408 ‘At stage 3, Fy(3) = min [P,(3) + Ti.1(3) + Fa(4); Py(3) + Ti,2(8) + Fa(4)] ‘min {70, 908 + 0 + 182, 976;70,908 + 1400 + 188, 408} min (253, 884;257, 716] = $253, 884 Fx(3)_ = min [P3(3) + 72,2(3) + Fi(4); Pa(8) + Te(3) + Fa(4)] rin (68, 976 + 2600 + 182,976; 68, 976 +0 + 185, 408] min 254,552; 254, 384] = $254, 384 Fx) = min (Pa(3) + Ta1(8) + Fi(4); Pa(8) + Ta(8) + (4)] ‘min 67, 856 + 3400 + 182, 976; 67, 856 + 3400 + 1400 + 185, 408} = min 254,232; 258,064] = $254,232 At stage 2, Fy(2) = min(P,(2) +7,2(2) + Fi(3);P(2) +7 a(2) + Fa(3); Py(2) +T,(2) + Fa(3)] rin (58, 428 + 0 + 253, 884;58, 428 + 1400 + 254, 384;58, 428 + 1000 + 254,232] rin 812,312; 914, 212;313, 660] = $312,312 tin Pa(2) + Ta (2) + Fi(8); Pa(2) + Ta.a(2) + Fa(8); Pa(2) + Te(2) + Fal3)] = min|[59, 356 + 2600 + 253, 884: 59,356 + 0 + 254, 384; 59, 356 + 1000+ 2600 + 254, 232] rnin 315,840; 313, 740;317, 188] = $313,740 Fs(2) = min Ps(2) + 73.2) + Fi(8); Ps(2) + Ta.2(2) + Fa(8); Ps(2) + Ty.(2) + Fal3)] min (98, 286 + 3400 + 253, 884; 58,236 + 3400 + 1400 + 254, 384;58, 296 +0 + 254,239] min 315,520; 317, 420;312, 468) = $312, 468 Fa(2)262 At stage 1, Fo) = min [Po(1) + Zo,a(1) + Ful2};Po(1) + Toa(2) + Fa(2);Po(1) + Toll) + Fa(2) = min [45,868 + 3400 + 2600 + 312, 312; 45, 868 + 9400 + 913, 740;45, 868 + 2600 + 312, 468] rin (364, 180; 363, 008;360,996] = $360,936 When the least cost path is retraced, the optimal unit commitment is found to be the same as that of Example 13.9. The associated total operating cost in this case is $360,936, which {s $600 less than $361,536 obtained in Example 13.9. 13.17 Due to a 400 MW short-term purchase request from the neighboring utility, the demand during the second interval of the day is expected to increase from 1400 MW to 1800 MW for the system described in Example 13.9. Assuming that other conditions remain unchanged, find the optimal unit commitment policy and the associated total operating cost for the day. Solution: In applying dynamic programming to this problem, the process up to stage 3 should be the same as that given in Example 13.9. At stage 2 no other combinations besides 2; and 22 have sufficient capacity to serve the increased load of 1800 MW; therefore, we only heve to consider combinations x; and 22. It was found at stage 4 that to serve the load of 1800 MW, the minimum production costs of combinations 2; and 2 would be $76,472 and $79,184, respectively. Stage 2 can now be handled as follows: FQ) = min[P,(2)+ Tha) + GPA) + Tia2) + Fa3); Pi(2) + Thal2) + Fa(9)] min [76,472 +0 + 254, 484; 76,472 + 1500 + 254, 884; 76, 472 + 1500 + 254, 432] ‘min [330, 956; 332, 856; 332,404] = $330,956 min {P2(2) + Ta,.(2) + Fi(8);Pa(2) + Toa(2) + Fo(8); Po(2) + Toal2) + F@)] min [79, 184 + 3000 + 254, 484; 79, 184 + 0 + 254, 884; 79, 184 + 4500 + 254, 432], min [236, 668;334, 068; 336,116] = $234,068 FA(2) ‘At stage 1, Fa) min [Po(1) + To,1(1) + Fi(2); Po(1) + To,2(1) + F(2)) min (45, 868 + 6000 + 330, 956; 45, 868 + 3000 + 334, 068] min (982, 824; 382, 936] = $382, 824 ‘The optimal unit commitment is found by retracing the least cost path in the forward direc- tion, and is given by ‘Stage | Optimal combination | Load level T En 1100 MW, 2 a 1800 MW 3 a 1600 MW 4 nh 1800 MW 5 En 1400 MW 6 a 1100 MW, From Fa(1), the total operating cost is found to be $382,824. a263 13.18 Suppose Unit 4 of Example 13.9 will have to be taken off line for 8 hours begin- ning at the fifth interval of the day to undergo minor repair work. Determine the optimal unit commitment policy to serve the system load of Fig. 13.11 and the increase in the operating cost for the day. Solution: Combinations z; or x3 are no longer a viable option during the 5** and 6** intervals. There- fore, the only F,(k) that needs to be evaluated at stage 5 is F(5) = 106,724 which was given in Figure 13.14. Since 2» is the only combination available at stage 5. Fi(4), for i = 1 and i= 2, are to be recalculated (using the already available information in Figure 13.14) as F,(4) = 184,696 Fed) = 185,908 Now, recalculation of F,(k) is required from stage 3 onwards. At stage 3, FA(3) = min(P,(3) + Tal) + Fi(4); Pi(3) +Ti.2(3) + F(4)) min (70, 908 + 0 + 184, 696; 70,908 + 1500 + 185, 908] min [255, 604; 258, 316] = $255,604 F(3) = min[P2(8) + Tea(8)+ Fi); PB) + Taal) + lA)] = min(68,976 + 3000 + 184, 696; 68, 976 + 0 + 185, 908} sin (256, 672; 254, 884] = $254, 884 min [Pa(8) + Ta,(8) + Fa(4); Pa(S) + Taa(8) + Fa(4)] ‘min 67,856 + 3000 + 184, 696; 67, 856 + 4500 + 185, 908} = min 255,552; 258,268] = $255,552 F(3) At stage 2, FQ) = min[P,(2) + Tha(2) + Fa(3);Pr(2) + Th2(2) + Fa); Pi(2) + Tis(2) + Fs(3)) min (58, 428 +0 + 255, 604;58, 428 + 1500 + 254, 884; 58, 428 + 1500 + 255, 552) rin (314, 032; 314, 812; 315,480] = $314,032 sin [P,(2) + T,2(2) + Fi(3); Pa(2) + Taa(2) + Fa(3); Pa(2) + Ta9(2) + Fa(3)] ‘min [59, 356 + 3000 + 255, 604; 59, 356 + 0 + 254, 884; 59, 356 + 4500 + 255, 552] rin (317, 960;314, 240;319, 408] = $314,240 Fa(Q) = min [Ps(2) + Toa(2) + Fi(3); Pa(2) + Taa(2) + Fa(@); Pa(2) + Taa(2) + Fa(3)] min [68, 236 + 3000 + 255, 604;58, 236 + 4500 + 254, 884; 59, 296 + 0 + 255, 552| ‘= min 16,840; 317, 620;313, 788] = $313,788 amin (P)(1) + Ta,1(1) + Fi (2);Po(1) + Toa(1) + Fa(2); Po(1) + Toa(2) + Fa(2)] = min [45, 868 + 6000 + 314, 032; 45, 868 + 3000 + 314, 240; 45, 868 + 3000 + 313, 783] = min 365,900; 363, 108; 362, 656] = $362,656 ‘racing the process in the forward direction, we find the optimal policy as (9 23 23 2: 22 25) from stage 1 to stage 6. The increase in the operating cost is 362, 656 - 361,536 = $112013.19 A diagram similar to Fig. 13.14 is shown in Fig. 13.15 in which directed branches represent transitions from one state, represented by a node, to another. Associ- ated with each directed branch (i, j) is the cost fi; (k), as defined in Eq, (13.72). The values of fy (k) are given in Table 13.7. Note that index k of fij(k) does not play any role here, and consequently will now be omitted. If the value of fy is interpreted to be the distance between states i and j, then the unit commitment problem becomes that of finding the shortest path from the ori- gin, represented by node @, to the destination, represented by node @. The problem of this nature is called the stagecoach problem. Write the backward re- currence equation similar to Eq, (13.75), and solve the problem by commencing calculations at the destination and then moving toward the origin. In forward recurrence the process starts with the origin and moves toward the destination. Write the forward recurrence equation, solve the problem and check the result with that of the backward dynamic programming procedure. Table 13.7 Matrix of costs (or distances) f,; between states (or nodes) @ and © of Fig. 13.15 @ ®BO®@OODOO®O 20°15 17 35 31 38 39 42 33 36 40 34 26 22 29 25 41 44 15 18 oO Se@8GGeG6ee Solution: ‘The backward recurrence equation can be written as, RN =1) = min (fy + BN) Starting with node 10, the destination, we have at stage 5, Fol) = 0265 At stage 4, Fela) = min{fsie+ Fio(6)] = min(15 +0] Fe(4) = min [fo.0 + Fio(5)] = min (18 +0 At sage 3, min [fee + Fa(4); foo + Fo(4)] = min {26 + 15; 22 + 18] min(41;40] = 40 rin [fea + Fo(4); foo + Fo(4)] = min 20+ 15;25 +18) min [44:43] = 43 min [fre + Fa(4); fro + Fo(4)] = min [41 + 15; 44 + 18) min |[36;62| = 56 At stage 2, Fy(2) = min|fos + Fo(8); fast Fol); for + Fr(@)) = min(35 + 40;31 + 43,38 + 56) min [75;74;94] = 74 min {fas + Fe(3); fas + Fo(3); far + Fr(3)] min {79;85;89] = 79 PQ) = min [fas + Fo(3): fee + F6(3)i for + 3) = min({76;83;90] = 76 At stage 1 FQ) min (39 + 40; 42 +43; 33 + 56] rin [36+ 40;40 + 49; 34 + 56] min (fie + Fo(2); fis + Fa(2)s fis + Fal2)} min [94;94;93] = 93 Retracing the path in the forward direction, the shortest path is found to be 1445-9510 min [20 + 74;15 + 79; 17 +76) and the shortest distance is 93 ‘The fooward recurrence equation can be written as BUN) = min {fag + FUN 0} Starting with node 1, we have at stage 1, FQ) = 0 At sage 2, FQ) = min[fi2+ FQ] = min [20+ 0] FQ) = min[fis + F(2)) = min [15 +0) FQ) = min|[fia+ FD] = min{17 +0] = 17 ‘At stage 3 Fs) = min [fas + Fa(2):fas + Fal): fas + Fa(2I) min [35 + 20;39-+ 15,36 + 17] = min 55:54:53] min (foe + Fo(2); fae + Fa(2): fae + Fa(2)) min [31 + 20;42 + 15;40 +17] = min (51557; F(3) = min [for + Fa(2); far + Fa(2)i far + Fal2)) = min (38+ 20;33-+ 15,34 +17] = min (58:58:51) = 51 Fe(3)266 141 At stage 4 Fe(4) = min[fss + F(3); fon + Fol): frs + Fr0)] = min 26+ 53;29+51;41 +51] = min{79;80;92) Fo(4) = min [foo + Fo(9); foo + Fo(3); fro + Fr(3)] = min [22-+53;25+51;44 +51] = min(75;76;95] = 75 At stage 5, Fio(S) = min |fs.0 + Fo(4); foro + Fo(4)] min(15-+79;18 +75] = min|94;03] = 93 Retracing the process from node 10 in the backward direction, the shortest path is identified to be 9-541 and the distance of the corresponding path is 93. This result is identical to that by the backward dynamic programming procedure Chapter 14 Problem Solutions A four-bus system with Zpas given in per unit by ® @ @ @® @ [70.041 70.031 70.027 70.018 @ | 50.031 70.256 70.035 0.038 @ | 50.027 70.035 70.158 70.045 @ {70.018 0.038 70.045 50.063. has bus voltages Vi = 1.020%, Ve = 0.980°, Vs = 0.9620° and Vi = 1.0420". Using the compensation current method, determine the change in voltage at bus ® due to the outage of line ()-@ with series impedance j0.3 per unit. Solution: 1 40.041 0.027) soos zi) = 2, _ | 3(0.031 0.035) | _ | —j0.008 fous = Zoe | 1 | = | 5(0.027-0.158) | = | -70.131 0 3(0.018 — 0.045) — 30.027 By Bq, (14.14), : (i-¥a) 8 (1.0 ~0.98) Ge Ania zs jo0ld—j(-0181)-j03 ~ By Eq, (14.7), ) cote = -at pet