Control Strategies For Under-Frequency Load Shedding

eeh
power systems laboratory
Igeneia Stefanidou - Maria Zerva
Control Strategies for Under-frequency Load Shedding

Interaction of Distributed Generation with Load Shedding Decentralized Under-Frequency Load Shedding of Household Loads
Semester Thesis PSL0904
EEH Power Systems Laboratory Swiss Federal Institute of Technology (ETH) Zurich Expert: Prof. Dr. G oran Andersson Supervisor: Dipl.-Ing. Stephan Koch Zurich, September 3, 2009
Statement regarding plagiarism when submitting written work at ETH Zurich
By signing this statement, I affirm that I have read the information notice on plagiarism, independently produced this paper, and adhered to the general practice of source citation in this subject-area. Information notice on plagiarism: http://www.ethz.ch/students/semester/plagiarism_s_en.pdf
_______________________ place and date
___________________________________ signature
4/4
Abstract The current approach of the Union for the Co-ordination of Transmission of Electricity for counteracting large frequency deviations due to lack of generation is the Under-Frequency Load Shedding scheme. The Under-Frequency Load Shedding scheme is the interruption of the power supply to a predened percentage of customers when certain frequency deviations occur in the system. The drawback of the Under-Frequency Load Shedding scheme is that loss of load in entire areas occurs, since entire feeders are disconnected from the grid, and the interaction of the increasing Distributed Generation present in the system is not considered. The scope of the present study is to evaluate the impact of the Distributed Generation on the stable and secure electricity transmission systems operation and assess the performance of the proposed Under-Frequency Household Load Shedding scheme. The Under-Frequency Household Load Shedding scheme provides a exible and decentralized way of mitigation.
I. Stefanidou & M. Zerva
0. CONTENTS
Contents
1 Introduction 2 UCTE - Conventional Load Shedding 2.1 2.2 2.3 Reference Power System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Stabilization of the System Frequency . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . System Modeling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.3.1 2.3.2 2.3.3 2.3.4 2.3.5 2.3.6 Inputs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Dynamics of generators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Frequency Dependency of Loads . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Primary Control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Load Shedding Mechanism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Frequency Response Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 11 11 12 13 14 14 15 16 17 18 20 20 22 23 25 27 27 30
3 Interaction of Distributed Generation with Load Shedding 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 Distributed Generation in Germany . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Penetration Scenarios . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Distributed Generation Power Output . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Frequency Response Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
4 Household Load Shedding 4.1 4.2 4.3 Household load prole during the day . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The potential of Under-Frequency Household Load Shedding . . . . . . . . Under-Frequency Household Load Shedding as a complement to Conventional Load Shedding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
35
4.3.1 4.4
Frequency response model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
35
Under-Frequency Household Load Shedding for substitution of Conventional Load Shedding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.4.1 Frequency Response Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 38 41 42 42 43 44 44 50 55 60 65 67
5 Reference Cases - Results 5.1 Reference Cases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.1.1 5.1.2 5.2 Summer scenario . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Winter scenario . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Simulation Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.2.1 5.2.2 5.2.3 5.2.4 Case 1 - Summer scenario, 11 a.m. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Case 2 - Summer scenario, 3 a.m. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Case 3 - Winter scenario, 11 a.m. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Case 4 - Winter scenario, 3 a.m. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
6 Conclusions References
0. LIST OF FIGURES
List of Figures
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Interconnected UCTE Power System [1]. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Total system inertia of the interconnected system. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Frequency Dependency of Loads. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Primary Control. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Load Shedding. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Frequency Response Model. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Load density (left) and DG share (right) of each State. . . . . . . . . . . . Wind (left) [13] and Solar (right) potential of Germany [14]. . . . . . . . . The power system frequency response model, considering the DG loss. . . . Share of consumption of the household appliances [5]. . . . . . . . . . . . . Power consumption of each household appliance group over the day. . . . . Sheddable household load in Germany. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . HLS scheme. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Frequency response model including the HLS mechanism. . . . . . . . . . . HLS mechanism. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Set of ip ops. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Frequency response model including the substitutional HLS mechanism. . . Substitutional HLS mechanism. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Physical and planned ows within the UCTE [6]. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Summer scenario. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Winter scenario. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Case 1 - Dynamic response including DG. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 11 15 16 17 18 19 22 25 26 28 29 33 35 36 37 37 39 40 41 43 44 46
0. LIST OF FIGURES
23 24
Case 1 - Dynamic response with dierent household participations. . . . . Case 1 - Dynamic response without the HLS mechanism and with the participation of 10% of the German households. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
46
47
25
Case 1 - Dynamic response with 30% and 50% of the German households participating in the HLS scheme. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
26
27
Case 1 - Dynamic response with HLS scheme substituting the CLS mechanism for Germany. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
28
Case 1 - Dynamic response with HLS scheme substituting the CLS mechanism for Germany. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49 51 51
29 30 31
Case 2 - Dynamic response including DG. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Case 2 - Dynamic response with dierent household participation. . . . . . Case 2 - Dynamic response without the HLS mechanism and with the participation of 10% of the German households. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
52
32
33
34
Case 2 - Dynamic response with the HLS scheme substituting the CLS mechanism for Germany. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
35
Case 2 - Dynamic response with the HLS scheme substituting the CLS mechanism for Germany. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54 56 56
36 37 38
Case 3 - Dynamic response including DG. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Case 3 - Dynamic response with dierent household participation. . . . . . Case 3 - Dynamic response without the HLS mechanism and with the participation of 10% of the German households. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
57
39
40
41
42
Case 3 - Dynamic response with the HLS scheme substituting the CLS mechanism for Germany. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59 61 61
43 44 45
Case 4 - Dynamic response including DG. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Case 4 - Dynamic response with dierent household participation. . . . . . Case 4 - Dynamic response without the HLS mechanism and with the participation of 10% of the German households. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
62
46
47
48
49
List of Tables
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Load Shedding stages according to the UCTE Handbook [2]. . . . . . . . . Type of Loads. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . DG installed capacity and penetration scenarios for 2010 and 2020. . . . . Power Output. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Comfort loss of each appliance category. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sheddable load per German household. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Case 1 - Power data. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Case 2 - Power data. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Case 3 - Power data. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Case 4 - Power data. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 16 23 25 31 34 45 50 55 60
1. Introduction
Introduction
Power systems provide a vital infrastructure for the functioning of todays societies which have become increasingly dependent on reliable and secure supply of electricity. Their operation and structure have signicantly evolved over the years incorporating market mechanisms in the initially monopolistic trade of electricity. The deregulation of the electricity markets has created challenges concerning the operation of the systems, while the goal is still to maintain the reliability and the security of supply. The decoupling of the electricity generation, transmission, distribution and retail and the involvement of more participants has led to a more complex environment, both economical and technological. The interconnection links between dierent countries do no more serve emergency but regular trading purposes, resulting in the increasing probability of the overloading of the tie-lines. A possible disturbance now aects the whole interconnected system and can be spread over long distances within seconds and, if not eliminated, it may result in a complete system collapse. The liberalization of electricity markets provides free market access to many various participants, while the trend of the last decades towards reducing greenhouse gas emissions leads to the development of mainly small scaled, 2 -free sources for energy production, which are strongly supported by legislation. Consequently, the integration of distributed sources into the networks leads to the modication of the structure of the electric power systems and the initial unidirectional power ows. Therefore, as a side eect of the development of Distributed Generation units, the traditional protection and control mechanisms of the power systems, which do not consider the Distributed Generation (DG), turn to be insucient or inappropriate. The security and the quality of supply are the primary goal of the electric power systems, considering the strong impacts that a disturbance may have on the society and the fact that electricity as a product cannot be stored on a large scale. However, the security of power systems is jeopardized by the previously mentioned changes of their operation and structure. The impact of the Distributed Generation penetration can be assessed by quantifying the Distributed Generation and modelling its interaction with the power system. Future scenarios for increasing the Distributed Generation imply the need for a further modication of the control methods used under normal or emergency conditions. 9
1. Introduction
The proposed method is the Under-Frequency Household Load Shedding (UFHLS) which includes the frequency dependent, automatic disconnection of non-vital individual household loads. The UFHLS can be implemented either together with the present control mechanisms in order to act complementary or for a complete substitution of the existing control schemes. In each case, the proposed scheme is decentralized in order for the system to be robust to imminent disturbances, while the shedding of household loads is realized step-by-step, according to predened frequency thresholds. Individual household loads are disconnected with priority to the uncritical ones that are less vital for the consumers, so as for the interruption of supply to be least observed by the consumers. The implementation of the UFHLS scheme should ensure the robustness of the power systems. Therefore, an automatic mechanism is needed in order for the suitable load reductions to be realized in every disturbance case, considering the capacity of the system and the comfort loss for the consumers at any time. Germany, being among the leaders in technological innovation and a major UCTE membercountry, provides a good paradigm for the assessment of the performance of the proposed HLS mechanism and the interaction of DG in the context of UCTE. For these reasons, data for the German households and DG are used for the derivation of reference scenarios appropriate for the simulation of the UCTE power system frequency response in case of a contingency.
10
2. UCTE - Conventional Load Shedding
UCTE - Conventional Load Shedding
2.1
Reference Power System
The Union for the Co-ordination of Transmission of Electricity (UCTE) is an association of the Transmission System Operators (TSOs) of 24 European countries (Figure 1). The interconnected system handled by the UCTE comprises of 220.000 Km of transmission lines and a total installed capacity of 640 GW.
Figure 1: Interconnected UCTE Power System [1].
The interconnected power systems of the member-countries of the UCTE operate synchronously at the nominal frequency of 50 Hz. The UCTE interconnected system was initially introduced for the cooperation of the TSOs in emergency cases. Over the past few years the electricity market across Europe has been redesigned and the trade of electricity among European countries has been developed. The use of the interconnections between countries has shifted from emergency to trade purposes, resulting in the operation of the interconnection links to their limits and, thus, compromising the stability and the security of the UCTE power system. Therefore, the coordinated actions of the UCTE member-countries are necessary in order to ensure the secure and reliable operation of the 11
system. The UCTE issues the UCTE Operation Handbook which is a set of technical and operational principles and rules ensuring the reliable performance of the interconnected high voltage grids of the continental Europe. All UCTE members are bound to comply with the UCTE and collectively contribute to the stabilization of the system in any emergency case.
2.2
Stabilization of the System Frequency
Emergency situations within the UCTE power system are mainly indicated by the deviations of the system frequency. Since the frequency is approximately equal in all participating countries, the automatic response of the primary controllers in each member-country is triggered in order to stabilize the frequency. The secondary control acts then in order to bring the system frequency back to its nominal value 1 . In response to a quasi-steady-state 2 frequency deviation of 200 mHz or more [2], the primary control reserves in each UCTE member-country are deactivated or activated, in order to restore the power balance of the system. The primary controllers should be able to stabilize the system in case of a failure up to 3000 MW of the generating capacity in normal operation [2]. The contribution of each member-country to the primary reserves is proportional to the ratio of the electricity produced over the total electricity production across the UCTE. In case that the extent of the disturbance is higher than the capability of the primary controllers, additional measures are required, such as the frequency sensitive triggering of load shedding. The Load Shedding is triggered when the frequency drops to a predened level, in order to protect the power generating systems and avoid a major power system breakdown. During a major disturbance, i.e. a loss of generation, and under emergency conditions when there is insucient generation capability for the current demand, the electrical supply is interrupted to a certain number of consumers in each member-country of the UCTE according to the implemented Load Shedding scheme in order to prevent a total collapse of the UCTE system.
1
The secondary control is not regarded, since its dynamics are much slower and out of the scope of the
present study. 2 The quasi-steady-state refers to a stable system frequency but not at the nominal value.
12
Each TSO determines its shedding plan according to the rules of the UCTE. The TSOs of the UCTE participate in the Load Shedding scheme irrespectively of the location of the failure. The UCTE recommends that the Load Shedding is implemented in three steps and involves the disconnection of feeders amounting to a predened share of the load. The rst step of the Load Shedding is initiated at the frequency threshold of 49 Hz by disconnecting the 1020% of the total load. The second and the third step are triggered at 48.7 Hz and 48.4 Hz, respectively, by disconnecting an additional 1015% of the initial load at each step (see Table 1). Frequency Thresholds 49.0 Hz 48.7 Hz 48.4 Hz Load Shedding 1020% 1015% 1015%
Table 1: Load Shedding stages according to the UCTE Handbook [2].
2.3
System Modeling
The interconnecting links among the member-countries of UCTE were traditionally used under emergency conditions, while, nowadays, they also serve trading purposes and are known as tie-lines. Besides the benets of the interconnection of the power systems, the regular trading of electricity results in a high possibility of the overloading of the tie-lines. A disturbance within the UCTE can be spread over large distances and, in the worst case, cause a total collapse of the interconnected system. The power system frequency response model of the UCTE, including the Load Shedding mechanism recommended by the UCTE, simulates the frequency deviations during normal and emergency conditions. In order to study the power system of Germany, it is necessary to also consider the behavior of the whole interconnected system, since the system frequency is determined by the balance between the total generation and demand. Furthermore, the power exchanges of the UCTE with other interconnected systems via DC or AC links inuence the frequency response in each member-country, since a local disturbance can cause a cascading series of outages within the interconnected system. 13
2.3.1
Inputs
The inputs to the frequency response model are the total generation, the total consumption and the total net imports of the interconnected system. The data for the power exchanges within the UCTE and between the UCTE and other interconnected systems are published by the UCTE for every third Wednesday of each month and for 3 a.m. and 11 a.m. The load prole of each member-country is also provided by the UCTE, by publishing the load values for every 15 minutes. The total generation, as well as the generation of each member-country of the UCTE, is computed using the data for the load and net imports. In the present study the net import of the interconnected system is of major interest, since the sum of the power exchanges within the interconnected system are equal to zero. The Distributed Generation units are usually connected through inverters and do not contribute to system inertia. However, the power from Distributed Generation units is not subtracted from the total generation, since the portion of the DG in Germany over the total generation of the UCTE is insignicant.
2.3.2
Dynamics of generators
The frequency response of the UCTE, having as inputs the total generated power, the total load and the total net imports of the system, can be determined by considering the behavior of the synchronous machines. Based on the swing Equation 1 [3], the angular frequency of each rotor derives from its mechanical ( ) and electrical torque ( ).
0 ( (..) (..)) 2
(1)
The interconnected system of the UCTE is highly meshed, which allows us to assume that all the generator units are connected to the same bus and further consider them as one unit. Therefore, the system frequency response derives from the power balance of the system and the total system inertia constant. With further simplications concerning the transmission losses during a disturbance, the linear approximation of the swing equation (Equation 2) provides the system frequency response. 14
0 ( ) 2
(2)
The respective block in the frequency response model describes the total system inertia and the reection of the power imbalances on the frequency deviations of the system (Figure 2). The total system inertia constant is assumed to be equal to 5 seconds, while the represents the cumulated power rating of the rotating synchronous machines in the interconnected system under study.
Generation
dP 1 s Integrator
f0/(2*H*S) Net Import Gain Subtract Load
df
Figure 2: Total system inertia of the interconnected system.
2.3.3
Frequency Dependency of Loads
The frequency dependency of the active power of the loads is taken into account, since the frequency deviation within a system inuences the behavior of the loads. The industrial loads are mainly motors which can store the kinetic energy of their rotating masses. Therefore, a possible frequency drop during a disturbance can be partly stabilized by the stored kinetic energy of the motors. The commercial and residential loads can also be frequency dependent, depending on their structure. Typical values describing the frequency dependency of the loads are expressed in per cent of the load variation from the total load for one per cent of frequency deviation from the nominal value (Table 2). 15
Load Type Residential Commercial Industrial
dP/df (%/%) 0.9 1.4 2.6
Representative Type Share 40% 20% 40%
Table 2: Type of Loads.
According to the proposed values for the load models, the frequency dependency of the active power consumed by the loads can be described by the factor which equals to 1.6 ( = 1.6). The respective block in the frequency response model describes the normalized active power deviation of the loads resulting from a system frequency deviation (Figure 3).
df Frequency deviation
1.66*S/f0
dP Frequency dependent active power
Figure 3: Frequency Dependency of Loads.
2.3.4
Primary Control
The primary controllers of the entire UCTE system can eliminate a disturbance caused by a power decit not higher than 3000 MW under normal conditions. The primary reserves in each member-country of the UCTE are proportional to its generation capacity [2]. In case of a disturbance, the primary controllers of every country of the interconnected system contribute to its elimination. The speed droop characteristic of the interconnected system under study represents the dierent operating points of the system. The speed droop of the system is considered to be approximately equal to the total generated power at each time instant. The linearized dynamic modelling of the turbines of the primary reserves is essential, despite the fact that the turbine controllers time constant is much smaller than the time constant of the frequency dynamics of the system. The UCTE system is modeled as an one-area system, 16
where the majority of the turbines are steam turbines in single reheat, tandem compound conguration. The primary control and the simplied model of the turbine dynamics are represented by the respective blocks in the frequency response model (Figure 4). The time constant of the turbine controllers is assumed to the time delay caused by the presence of the reheater and equals to 7 seconds ( = 7 seconds), since the delays between the control valves and the high- and low-pressure turbines are signicantly lower ( = 0.3 seconds, = 0.4 seconds). The saturation block describes the limited primary reserves within the UCTE (3000 MW).
Primary control Saturation df Frequency deviation -1/(Spr*f0/S) 1 7s+1 Turbine dynamics dP Primary active power reserves
Figure 4: Primary Control.
2.3.5
Load Shedding Mechanism
The Load Shedding mechanism proposed by the Operation Handbook of the UCTE is implemented for the interconnected system under study. Under emergency conditions and when the frequency drops to predened frequency thresholds, the Load Shedding mechanism is triggered, causing the interruption of power supply to a predened percentage of consumers. The automatic Load Shedding mechanism is included in the frequency response model and is represented by the respective block (Figure 5). The mechanism is described in the model by a lookup table which corresponds the predened frequency thresholds to the required share of each member-countrys load to be shed. Intentional time delays between dierent portions of load at the same shedding stage are neglected, although small time delays are implemented in some countries in order to avoid overshedding. 17
load
df Frequency deviation
df
Share of load
LS Load shed
Load Shedding
Figure 5: Load Shedding.
2.3.6
Frequency Response Model
The frequency response model is constructed by combining the previously analyzed mechanisms (Figure 6). The inputs to the modeled power system of the interconnected areas are the total generated power, the total consumed power and the net imports from neighboring power systems at each time instant. In case of a disturbance, i.e. loss of generation or unexpected increase of the load, the power decit is reected on a system frequency deviation by means of the generators dynamics and the system inertia constant. Subsequently, the frequency deviation inuences the active power consumption of the frequency dependent loads and triggers the primary controllers and the load shedding mechanism, according to the magnitude of the disturbance.
18
Frequency dependency of Loads 1.66*S/f0
Primary control Saturation 1 7s +1 Turbine dynamics f0 Sum of f 0+df f0/(2*H*S) 1 s -1/(Spr*f0/S)
freq System frequency
Generation
Net Import
Load
load Conventional Load Shedding

Load Shed df
Sum of loads of 24 UCTE countries
Figure 6: Frequency Response Model.
19
3. Interaction of Distributed Generation with Load Shedding
Interaction of Distributed Generation with Load Shedding
The term Distributed Generation (DG) is used to characterize electric power sources with small rating as compared to conventional power plants, which are connected to the distribution grid, i.e. Medium and Low Voltage Level. Distributed Generation has faced a signicant growth, mainly due to the liberalization of the electricity market and the trend for shifting the electricity production towards 2 -neutral energy sources for reducing greenhouse gas emissions and mitigating climate change. The DG, being mostly renewable energy sources, creates a number of uncertainties in the power system, in terms of inability to precisely schedule the power injected into the grid. Additionally, the renewable energy sources that are connected to the distribution grid cannot be directly controlled by the transmission system operators. In case of necessity for activation of the Load Shedding mechanism due to an imminent disturbance, there is high probability that additional loss of generation will occur. Feeders that are disconnected in emergency cases may have Distributed Generation units connected to them, which causes to the disconnection of the dispersed generation. Thus, the extent of the Distributed Generation loss in such cases should be quantied in order for the interaction to be evaluated.
3.1
Distributed Generation in Germany
The European Union has adopted certain measures for promoting renewable energy sources, in view of the commitments of the Kyoto Protocol. Germany, as a Member State of the EU has set specic targets for renewable energy penetration and has achieved to become the leader on the grounds of both installations and technical know-how. In the case of Germany, most common energy carriers for DG are wind, solar, biomass and to a limited extent geothermal, hydro and gas power plants. Four TSOs operate within Germany, i.e. Transpower Strom ubertragungs GmbH (company aliated with E.ON) [4], Vattenfall Europe Transmission GmbH [5], RWE Transportnetz Strom GmbH [6] and EnBW Transportnetze AG [7]. According to data published by the TSOs, Germany has a total installed capacity of 137.5 GW. The renewable energy sources 20
installations amount to 38029 MW, out of which 12245 MW are installations with a rating smaller than 10 MW, connected to the low and medium voltage level. The regionally dierent renewable energy potential leads to regional dierences in the DG installed capacity of the dierent energy carriers [8]. In the present study, the power plants who receive the feed-in tari are divided according to the state of Germany to which they belong to in order to correspond to the regional potential. Thus, in Northern Germany the dominant energy carrier is wind, whereas in the Southern Germany DG is mostly solar installations. Southern Germany has lower shares of DG due to the fact that solar installations have signicantly smaller rating and are not yet as developed as wind power units. For biomass, gas and geothermal installations there is no clear geographical distinction. Apart from the renewable energy source DG, non-renewable small-scale Combined Heat and Power (CHP) plants are also connected to the distribution levels and are disconnected in the case of load shedding. However, the penetration levels are quite low and there is no exact data available. The raw data published by the TSOs concerning the power plants which receive a feed-intari have been sorted according to energy carrier, nominal installed capacity and postal code. The installations data need to be further sorted per State in order for the relation between the load density3 and the potential of each region to be also considered (Figure 7). The DG shares over the total DG capacity are higher in the Northern States of Germany due to the high penetration of wind power plants. In States with high DG shares and relatively low load density the risk of deteriorating the situation, by disconnecting signicant amounts of DG units together with a small portion of load, is higher.
The load share is assumed to be equal to the population share of each State of Germany.
21
Figure 7: Load density (left) and DG share (right) of each State.
3.2
Penetration Scenarios
Renewable energy source power plants are expected to further increase in the years to come. In 2002 Germany set a goal to cover the 14% [9] of the electricity consumption with renewable energy sources until 2008. The goal has been achieved (14.2%) [10] and higher targets have been set. Increase of the DG is expected to substantially change the structure of the electricity transmission and distribution grid, posing great ambiguity to the eectiveness of the current control mechanisms; the load shedding mechanisms involves the disconnection of feeders in case of lack of generation irrespectively of the DG units that they may have connected to them. The future possible growth of the DG is necessary to be considered in order to quantify the future DG installations and assess the degree of interaction of the DG with the security 22
and integrity of the power system. The installed capacity of the DG is based on penetration scenarios concerning the renewable energy source power plants increase. The considered scenarios have been conducted within Germany for the years 2010 and 2020. The study Stromversorgung 2020 [11] is conducted by the Bundesverband Erneuerbare Energie e.V. The study considers that in 2010 it is possible that 21% of the total electricity consumption will be delivered by renewable energy sources, whereas this percentage rises up to 47% in 2020, compared to todays share of 14.2%. The Weiterentwicklung der Ausbaustrategie Erneuerbare Energien, Leitstudie 2008 [12], conducted by the Bundesministerium f ur Umwelt, Naturschutz und Reaktorsicherheit, considers that in 2010 the contribution of the renewable energy sources in the total electricity consumption will be 16.9%, with this share rising to 30.4% in 2020 (Table 3). The increase rates of the total installed capacity are considered to be equal for all voltage levels. Energy Carrier 2008 BEE e.V Solar (kW) Wind (kW) Biomass (kW) Geothermal (kW) Hydro (kW) Gas (kW) Total (kW) Share tal of To14.2% 21% 16.9% 47% 30.4% Electricity 2327583 7000090 1871797 3220 568958 473938 5069259 8842229 2281179 33206 653076 473938 2010 Leitszsenario 2008 4547968 8089738 2361025 3274 582947 473938 BEE e.V 24124787 17302983 4268694 628906 994095 473938 2020 Leitszsenario 2008 10601463 11971135 3373920 4508000 617194 473938
12245589 17351890 16058892
47793405 31545652
Consumption from RES
Table 3: DG installed capacity and penetration scenarios for 2010 and 2020.
3.3
Distributed Generation Power Output
The renewable energy source installed capacity in 2008 was approximately 26% of the total installed capacity in Germany, whereas the contribution of the renewable energy sources in 23
the electricity consumption was 14.2%. The dierence in the two percentages implies that the load factors of the renewable energy source power plants are substantially limited by weather conditions, regional potential and time of the day. The data published by the TSOs concern either the installed capacity or total energy production over a year. However, the eect of the DG in the system in emergency cases can only be assessed by considering the instantaneous injected power from the DG installations, rather than their installed capacity. The power output of each installation highly depends on the type of the energy carrier, the weather conditions, the time of the day and the potential of the region in which it is installed. Therefore, factors which reect the potential of each region and the maximum power output for each energy carrier are necessary. The methodology followed in the present study in order for the factors to be derived is the normalization of representative parameter for each energy carrier. The parameter that limits the power output of wind power plants is mainly the wind speed. The wind power potential of each region of Germany is derived based on statistical data concerning the mean wind speed in each State for every month of the year. The mean wind speed of every State in each month is divided by the maximum mean wind speed in Germany over a year. The normalized wind speeds are considered as factors which scale the wind power output. A factor of 1 is attributed to the region with the highest potential and for the month with the highest mean wind speed. As far as solar panels are concerned, the parameters taken into account are the mean irradiation in each region during the year and the mean duration of sunshine. Similar to wind power and based on statistical data, the factors for solar power correspond to the normalized irradiation in each State (Figure 8). For the solar panels optimal inclination is assumed, providing the opportunity to have the maximum possible power output. For geothermal, hydro, gas and biomass power plants it is assumed that the power output is independent of weather conditions, regional distribution and time of the day. Therefore, uniform factors are considered to limit the power output and approximate their contribution to the total Distributed Generation. The factors calculated for each energy carrier are multiplied with the installed capacity, and, therefore, the energy injected into the system is calculated for the time snapshots for which UCTE publishes load and power exchange data (Table 4).
24
Figure 8: Wind (left) [13] and Solar (right) potential of Germany [14].
OUTPUT (MW) Energy Carrier Solar Wind Biomass Geothermal Hydro Gas Winter 11 a.m 853.05 5279.58 1684.62 426.54 2.90 512.06 3 a.m 0 5279.58 1684.62 426.54 2.90 512.06 Summer 11 a.m 2202.51 3981.70 1684.62 426.54 2.90 512.06 3 a.m 0 3981.70 1684.62 426.54 2.90 512.06
Table 4: Power Output.
3.4
The Distributed Generation loss at each load shedding stage is assumed to be 10% of the total Distributed Generation output injected into the system at each time instant. In the power system frequency response model (Figure 9) the Distributed Generation taken 25
into account is the total Distributed Generation in Germany, considering the fact that in the reference scenarios used Germany has the highest degree of renewable energy source penetration and is, thus, the main contributor in terms of Distributed Generation. The DG lost at each load shedding stage is proportional to the load shed. The power system frequency response including the DG units disconnection is simulated for the current DG installed capacity and for the two future scenarios (Section 5).
Frequency Dependency of Loads 1.66*S/f0
Primary control Saturation 1 7s+1 Turbine dynamics -1/(Spr*f0/S)
f0 Sum of f0+df f0/(2*H*S) System inertia Net Import 1 s
freq Final f
Generation
Load
Sum of loads of 24 UCTE countries
Load
Conventional Load Shedding

Load shed df
Distributed Generation DG
Figure 9: The power system frequency response model, considering the DG loss.
26
4. Household Load Shedding
Household Load Shedding
Under-frequency load shedding is traditionally triggered when the power system suers from a lack of generation, i.e. sudden loss of generation or increase of load. In order to stabilize the frequency, entire feeders are disconnected from the grid, while unexpected additional loss of generation may occur due to disconnection of Distributed Generation connected to the distribution level. With increasing Distributed Generation the conventional under-frequency load shedding scheme cannot guarantee the stabilization of the system, which could be avoided by the development of automated and locally controlled load shedding schemes. The Under-Frequency Household Load Shedding (HLS) is a decentralized scheme under which households participate with small scale appliances in the grid control schemes. In the case of an underfrequency disturbance, the appliance operation can be inuenced by control commands sent through a communication interface by a decentralized control system, equipped with suitable control algorithms. Aiming to the minimum cost for the society and to the minimum comfort loss for the consumers, a fast and graceful load reduction can be achieved and a total system collapse can be prevented by shedding non-vital, individual household loads. The HLS scheme can act either as a complement to the Conventional Load Shedding (CLS) mechanism, and, thus, delay or even avoid its triggering, or for complete substitution of the CLS, depending on the implementation of the scheme. The potential of the HLS is studied, in compliance with the quantied Distributed Generation, for the household load of Germany.
4.1
Household load prole during the day
The household load in each time instant is highly dependent on the weather conditions, the time of the day and the lifestyle in the region under study. Germany has a total of 39 700000 households [15] which according to statistical data are responsible for approximately 30% [5] of the total load of Germany in average. In 2008, the total electricity consumption in Germany was 557 162 GWh [1]. Considering the percentage share of the household consumption over the total consumption of Germany, German households ap27
proximately consumed in 2008 167 149 GWh, which corresponds to an average household load of 19 081 MW. For load shedding purposes the vital load of each household is not considered, whereas for the non-vital appliances their specic consumption has to be quantied. Due to their volatility, the devices within a household are grouped according to their similarities in their characteristics, i.e. usage, and classied considering the utilization and comfort loss over the day. The German household appliances are categorized according to their aggregate consumption over a year (Figure 10). Based on statistical data [16] and considering the total household consumption over the year, the average consumption during the day of each appliance group can be computed. In order to quantify the potential of the HLS scheme, the specic utilization factors of each appliance group have to be dened. For this purpose, typical utilization patterns of each appliance group are considered. The specic utilization factors are, thus, derived from the normalization of the instantaneous consumption of each appliance group with its average consumption over the day.
TV- HiFi TV 7% Washing appliances 12% RefrigeratorsFreezers 22%
Small electric devices 23%
Warm-water boilers 14%
Electric Heating 3% Cooking appliances 10% Lighting 9%
Figure 10: Share of consumption of the household appliances [5].
The specic consumption of each appliance group, which equals to the product of the normalized utilization and the average consumption, describes the household consumption 28
of each appliance group during the day, including both the vital and non- vital loads (Figure 11).
80 Small devices 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 0:00 0:45 1:30 2:15 3:00 3:45 4:30 5:15 6:00 6:45 7:30 8:15 9:00 9:45 10:30 11:15 12:00 12:45 13:30 14:15 15:00 15:45 16:30 17:15 18:00 18:45 19:30 20:15 21:00 21:45 22:30 23:15 TV-Hifi Cooking devices Lighting
Load[GW]
Washing and drying devices Electric heating Warm-water boiler RefrigeratorFreezer Total German load profile
Time of the day
Figure 11: Power consumption of each household appliance group over the day.
The groups that include thermal appliances are considered to be non-vital due to their high inertia which makes the interruption of their power supply hardly observed by the consumers. Such appliances are the refrigerators, the freezers, the warm-water boilers and the electric heating. It is assumed that this group of appliances oers control reserves during the day, constituting the base load 4 . Therefore, refrigerators, freezers and boilers are assumed to have constant utilization during the day and, therefore, provide a constant base household load for the HLS scheme. However, the utilization of the rest of the appliance groups varies during the day, shaping the household load prole curve and signicantly
Warm-water boilers power consumption is often shifted to the night due to special taris. However, in the present study, the are assumed to participate in a load control scheme and have constant consumption over the day.
4
29
dierentiating the household load during the day. The base household load over the whole day is approximately 8.5 GW, while the household load peak can be found during the evening hours and is in the order of 30 GW. The potential of the HLS scheme is perceived as the total sheddable household load at each time instant, considering only the non-vital devices and their respective consumption. The non-vital devices, i.e. the sheddable devices, are prioritized using as a criterion their comfort loss. Comfort loss can be dened as an indicator for assessing the degree of the annoyance caused to the consumers by shedding a specic appliance group. Appliances are characterized by their comfort loss representing the extent to which their disconnection is observed by the consumers. The comfort loss is not considered to be uniform for each device over the day or over the year, but varies according to the utilization and necessity.
4.2
The potential of Under-Frequency Household Load Shedding
In the previous Section 4.1, the sheddable household load has been dened as the nonvital devices within a household. Additionally, each device has been attributed with a factor indicating its individual comfort loss. Since the goal is to develop a simple, exible and fast mechanism for the decentralized HLS scheme, the non-vital devices are further categorized. Each category is characterized by a single value of comfort loss (Table 5). However, each category does not have constant comfort loss over the day and over the year, since there are signicant variations of the lifestyle and the weather conditions. The thermal appliances together with the battery chargers represent the category with the lowest comfort loss, and thus, the rst appliance category to be shed. The washing appliances, including the washing machine, the dish-washer and the dryer, are also of constant and relatively low comfort loss during the day and during the year, representing the second category to be shed. Electric heating is not in operation during the summer, and therefore, its contribution to the available sheddable load is zero during the summer. However, during the winter the utilization of electric heating is assumed to be constant over the day. The comfort loss of the lights is higher during the night and during the winter than during 30
Appliances Categories Refrigerator - Freezer Warm water boiler Electrical heating Battery - charger Lights Microwave Oven Oven Coee Machine Iron Vacuum Machine Hair Dryer Washing Machine Dryer Dishwasher TV DVD HiFi
Comfort Loss 0:00 - 5.30 5.30 - 15:00 14:30 - 20:00 20:00 - 24:00
6 4
3 5
3 4
4 3
Table 5: Comfort loss of each appliance category.
31
the day and summer, respectively. The cooking appliances, including the microwave oven, the electric oven and the coee-machine, are mainly switched on during the morning and early evening hours. Therefore, their utilization as well as their comfort loss is increased during these hours. The small electric devices represent the non-vital load, such as the iron, the vacuum cleaner and the hair-dryer. Their comfort loss is highly dependent on their utilization which is assumed to be higher during the evening. The most critical appliance category includes the devices whose shedding is immediately realized by the consumers, such as TV, DVD and HiFi, and may cause annoyance to the users. Their utilization and, consequently, their comfort loss is high during the evening and before midnight, making them the last load to be shed during the day, whereas their utilization is high during the evening and before midnight. The comfort loss indicators of most of the appliance categories vary during the day, since their utilization and necessity also vary. Therefore, the shedding order of these appliance categories should change according to their comfort loss. The comfort loss indicators determine the shedding order of the appliances categories at each time instant. Since the main target of the HLS is the stabilization of the system in case of a disturbance with the minimum comfort loss to the consumers and HLS is a decentralized scheme, it is necessary that the shedding order of the appliance categories is updated automatically. It is assumed that the data concerning the available sheddable load of each category and the shedding order of the appliances are updated four times per day, representing roughly the changes of the comfort loss values. Based on the previous assumptions and on the instantaneous consumption of each appliance group, the potential of the HLS scheme considering the total sheddable household load of Germany, i.e. 39 700000 households, during the day can be computed. Considering also the shedding order of the appliance categories, the percentage of the total German load to be shed at each step of the HLS scheme provides an indicator of the eciency of the scheme during a disturbance in the power system (Figure 12). The numbering of the categories order to be shed corresponds to the value of the comfort loss for each appliance category.
32
45,00% 40,00% 35,00%
Category 6 Category 5 Category 4 Category 3
30,00% 25,00% 20,00% 15,00% 10,00% 5,00% 0,00% 0:00 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00
Category 2 Category 1 Total share of German load
Figure 12: Sheddable household load in Germany.
The base household load consisting of the thermal appliances and the battery chargers constitutes during the day the rst household loads to be shed, providing for the HLS scheme a potential of almost 10% of the total German load. Due to the varying utilization, functionality and comfort loss indicators of the rest of the appliance categories, the total available sheddable household load in Germany is not constant during the day, but ranges from 12% to 35% of the total German load. The HLS scheme can be implemented either for prevention of the triggering of the CLS or for complete substitution of CLS. The potential of the HLS scheme depends in both cases on the time of the day, i.e. the load conditions, whereas the applied mechanism and the demands for the available sheddable load of each function dier. By implementing the HLS scheme as a complement to CLS, the main target is to delay or even prevent the triggering of CLS by shedding individual household loads before the frequency drops to the predened thresholds of CLS. In this case, the number of German households considered determine 33
the potential of the scheme. In order to assess the potential of the HLS scheme at the time frames for which a complete set of data is available, the total sheddable load within a German household should be quantied for 3 a.m. and 11 a.m. on a winter and on a summer day (Table 4.2). As expected, during the night the available sheddable load is signicantly lower, while it is slightly dierentiated between winter and summer days. Available Sheddable load Electrical devices per Household (in W) Winter 11 a.m Refrigerator Warm water - boiler Electrical Heating Battery - charger Non-vital lights Microwave Oven Oven Coee Machine Iron Vacuum Machine Hair Dryer Washing Machine Dryer Dishwasher TV DVD Audio-HiFi 62.288 1.142 9.803 4.949 25.000 100.001 19.606 14.705 19.606 19.606 38.346 30.677 20.707 4.129 1.032 2.064 3 a.m 62.288 1.142 1.634 1.252 0.000 0.000 3.268 2.451 3.268 3.268 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 Summer 11 a.m 62.288 0.000 9.803 4.949 25.000 100.001 19.606 14.705 19.606 19.606 38.346 30.677 20.707 4.129 1.032 2.064 3 a.m 62.288 0.000 1.634 1.252 0.000 0.000 3.268 2.451 3.268 3.268 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
105.738 105.738 105.738 105.738
Table 6: Sheddable load per German household.
34
4.3
Under-Frequency Household Load Shedding as a complement to Conventional Load Shedding
The HLS scheme as a complement to the CLS is triggered at thresholds higher than those dened for the CLS. The goal is to delay or preferably prevent the triggering of CLS, thus minimizing the costs related to the disturbance and the comfort loss to the consumers. There are six frequency thresholds dened, corresponding to the six levels of comfort loss (Figure 13). Taking into account the tolerance for the frequency deviation from its nominal value of 50 Hz and in an attempt to prevent the unnecessary triggering of the HLS, the rst frequency threshold is set to 49.8 Hz. The frequency threshold for the CLS is set by the UCTE to 49 Hz. Thus, the frequency steps for the HLS are set to 0.1 Hz, i.e. the range 49.8-49.3 Hz.
Figure 13: HLS scheme.
4.3.1
Frequency response model
The HLS scheme is implemented complementary to the CLS mechanism in order to delay or even prevent the complete loss of load in certain areas under emergency conditions. Therefore, the performance of the HLS scheme as a complement to the CLS mechanism can be quantied by additionally including in the frequency response model of the inter35
connected system the block describing the function of the HLS mechanism (Figure 14). The input to the HLS block is the frequency deviation from its nominal value. When the system frequency drops to the predened thresholds, the HLS mechanism is triggered and the respective household load category is disconnected (Figure 15). The look-up table corresponds the number of HLS stages being triggered to the cumulative household load that has to be shed. Since the system frequency is sampled in variable steps, a set of ip ops is implemented in order to avoid the multiple consideration of each household category that is shed (Figure 16).
Frequency Dependency of Loads 1.66*S/f0
Primary control Saturation 1 7s+1 Turbine dynamics -1/(Spr*f0/S)
f0 Sum of f0+df f0/(2*H*S) System inertia Net Import Load Households Load Shedding
Household Load shed df
freq Final f
Generation 1 s
Sum of loads of 24 UCTE countries 0 Load 1 Conventional Load Shedding

Load shed df
Distributed Generation DG
Figure 14: Frequency response model including the HLS mechanism.
The coordination of the two load shedding schemes, i.e. the CLS and the HLS, is crucial for the stability of the system when the CLS is triggered. The degree of correlation of the two load shedding schemes signicantly depends on the number of households participating in the HLS scheme and the plan according to which feeders are shed for the CLS. The main point of interest is the assessment of the performance of the HLS, since the CLS is already implemented and well-dened. Therefore, it is assumed that once the CLS is not prevented, 36
it acts completely independently from the HLS by shedding the predened share of total load, whereas the HLS acts until the CLS is triggered.
-0.2 1 df
up u lo In 1 Out 1
-0.8
1st stage
-0.3
up u lo In 1 Out 1
-0.8
2nd stage 1 Household Load Shed
-0.4
up u lo In 1 Out 1
Lookup Table
-0.8
3rd stage Subtract

up u lo In 1 Out 1
-0.5
-0.8
4th stage
-0.6
up u lo In 1 Out 1
-0.8
5th stage
-0.7
up u lo In 1 Out 1
-0.8
6th stage
Figure 15: HLS mechanism.
1 In1
OR Logical Operator
U < U/z Detect Decrease
boolean Data Type Conversion
!Q
1 Out1
!Q
Figure 16: Set of ip ops. 37
4.4
Under-Frequency Household Load Shedding for substitution of Conventional Load Shedding
The HLS scheme can be alternatively implemented for substitution of the CLS scheme. The goal is to completely substitute the function of the CLS with the HLS scheme while being compliant with the UCTE guidelines regarding the emergency measures. Therefore, the frequency thresholds for the HLS scheme as a substitution of the CLS are set equal to those of the CLS, whereas at each frequency threshold the household load to be shed should equal to 10% of the total German load. The category with the lowest comfort loss, i.e. the refrigerators, boilers and electric heating, can successfully fulll the UCTE requirements for the rst load shedding step, assuming the participation of 100% of the German households (39 million) in the HLS scheme. For the subsequent load shedding steps, the shedding order of the devices categories is maintained. Thus, the devices categories are grouped together, so as the sheddable load at each shedding step amounts at least to 10% of the total German load. In the case that the sheddable household load is insucient to cover 10% of the total German load for the second and third load shedding stages, the household loads are grouped in a way to amount to the maximum available load. Of interest in the present study is the capability of the Household Load Shedding scheme to completely substitute the existing load shedding schemes.
4.4.1
The performance of the HLS scheme for the complete substitution of the CLS can be described by completely substituting the CLS block by the HLS block in the frequency response of the UCTE power system (Figure 17). The contribution of the DG to the total generation of the UCTE is considered, whereas the additional loss of generation due to loss of DG is avoided, since feeders are not shed.
38
Frequency dependency of Loads 1.66*S/f0
Primary control Saturation 1 7s+1 Turbine dynamics -1/(Spr*f0/S) f0
freq Sum of f0+df System frequency
Generation f0/(2*H*S)
1 s
Net Import
Load Households Load Shedding Sum of loads of 24 UCTE countries

Household Load Shed df
Figure 17: Frequency response model including the substitutional HLS mechanism.
The function of the HLS block is to detect the deviation from the nominal value and trigger the corresponding load shedding of the respective household load categories (Figure 18). A frequency drop to the predened frequency thresholds triggers the HLS mechanism which disconnects the corresponding household load according to the UCTE guidelines, in order to protect the power generating systems and avoid a major power system breakdown. The frequency thresholds for HLS are set equal to those of the CLS, i.e. 49 Hz, 48.7 Hz and 48.4 Hz. The simulated frequency response of the UCTE system considers the implementation of the HLS scheme in Germany, whereas for the rest of the UCTE members the implementation of the CLS scheme is assumed. Therefore, each load shedding stage that is triggered causes through the look-up table the disconnection of 10% of each member States total load plus the German sheddable household load amounting to 10% of the total German load, when it is possible. The set of ip ops is essential in order to avoid the consideration of the same load shed. 39
-1 1 df -1.6
up u lo In1 Out1
1st stage
-1.3
up u lo In1 Out1
-1.6
2nd stage
Lookup Table
1 Household Load shed
<= -1.6 3rd stage
In1 Out1
Figure 18: Substitutional HLS mechanism.
40
5. Reference Cases - Results
Reference Cases - Results
The purpose of the frequency control mechanisms of the power system is to maintain the power balance between the generation and consumption and, thus, guarantee the reliability and the security of the system. Deregulation of the electricity market has boosted the international trade of electricity and, therefore, has forced the interconnected power system to operate closer to its limits. The tripping of a generator, the tripping of a transmission line or the sudden increase of the load may result in the decrease of the frequency from its nominal value. In case of lack of generation, the frequency drops from its nominal value and all member countries of the UCTE follow certain procedures dened in the UCTE Operation Handbook, so as to stabilize the system and prevent the spreading of the disturbance.
Figure 19: Physical and planned ows within the UCTE [6]. Under normal conditions, the cross-border exchanges vary signicantly according to time, weather conditions and locality. Tie-lines which were initially built for emergency and auxiliary purposes are used nowadays for trading. For the protection and the security of the system, the traded quantities and the power ows are planned and the stability of the system is tested ahead by simulation. However, the physical ows may dier from the planned ones, further stressing the system and making it more vulnerable to imminent disturbances (Figure 19). Considering the fact that limited capacity mainly exists for the interconnections of the control zones rather than for the transmissions system within a 41
control zone, the study cases include the outage of the interconnection lines and, subsequently, the islanding of areas. Therefore, in order to articially create disturbances within the UCTE power system, the load-generation balance is aected either by the outage of interconnection lines or by the outage of generators.
5.1
Reference Cases
In the context of this study, the eects of the Distributed Generation present in the system and the eectiveness of the conventional and the household load shedding are evaluated through two study cases. In both cases, the disturbance is a lack of generation due to the islanding of parts of the UCTE system. Individual control zones are kept intact, i.e. there is no tripping of transmission lines within the control zones. The lack of generation is attributed to the loss of interconnection lines, i.e. loss of net import and probably also generation loss, since a major disturbance is mainly caused by the cumulative impact of such incidents. The set of data available by the UCTE limits the appropriate time snapshots for which the power system frequency response can be evaluated at 3 a.m. and at 11 a.m. For completeness reasons, the cases are evaluated for dierent seasons of the year, so as to represent the dierent weather conditions and subsequently the dierent household load and Distributed Generation values.
5.1.1
Summer scenario
The summer day scenario includes the islanding of four countries, i.e. Germany, Switzerland, Austria and Italy and the additional loss of 12 GW of generation within Italy (Figure 20). The data used concern the 16th of July 2008, for which the UCTE load peaks during the summer and sucient published data are available. Under the emergency conditions, where interconnections to all other UCTE member countries, as well as the DC link to the Nordic countries, are lost, the power decit at 11 a.m. is 14561 MW, while at 3 a.m. the power decit of the islanded system is 17748 MW. 42
Figure 20: Summer scenario.
5.1.2
Winter scenario
The winter day scenario involves the loss of interconnection to France and subsequently to Spain and Portugal, to the Czech Republic, Poland, the Nordic countries and the UCTE participating part of Denmark (Figure 21). The obtained data are for the 20th of February 2008, which represent the winter peak load. At 11 a.m. the power decit is 11296 MW, whereas at 3 a.m. the power decit is 7197 MW. 43
Figure 21: Winter scenario.
5.2
Simulation Results
The frequency response of the power system to the disturbance reference cases is simulated in the environment of MATLAB with the toolbox SIMULINK. The derived model for the interconnected system of UCTE (see Section) is such that no time delay at the load shedding stages across the UCTE member countries is assumed. The data concerning the potential of DG and the household load of Germany and the UCTE published data of the system net import and load are used as inputs to the model.
5.2.1
Case 1 - Summer scenario, 11 a.m.
The rst case considered represents the summer scenario at 11 a.m. The data used as inputs to the frequency response model in order for the rst case to be simulated are presented at the following Table 7. 44
Generation Load Net import Power decit Sheddable load per household DG installed capacity 2008 DG 2010 BEE e.V. DG 2020 BEE e.V. DG 2010 Leitszenario 2008 DG 2020 Leitszenario 2008
123905 MW 138466 MW 0 MW 14561 MW 483.26 W 8810.33 MW 12923.02 MW 38399.29 MW 11984.12 MW 24916.67 MW
Table 7: Case 1 - Power data. The frequency decay caused by the decit of 14.56 GW is arrested by the triggering of the rst under-frequency load shedding stage (Figure 22). The Distributed Generation contributes the 7.11% of the total generation in the system. Due to the loss of 10% of the Distributed Generation in Germany at the rst load shedding stage, together with the 10% shed load, the frequency stabilizes at 49.8 Hz, rather than at 50 Hz, which is the case when no Distributed Generation is considered. There is a further drop of the stabilizing frequency with increasing contribution of the Distributed Generation, according to the penetration scenarios. As mentioned before (Section 4), two approaches for the implementation of the Household Load Shedding Scheme have been studied. The functionality of the HLS scheme as a complement to the existing load shedding scheme encompasses the ability to reduce the rate the frequency drops and with a satisfactory amount of household participation prevent the triggering of the CLS (Figures 23, 24, 25, 26). The substitutional function of the HLS mechanism to the CLS is sucient to cover the required rst load shedding stage and at the same time fully avoid the shedding of DG (Figures 27, 28).
45
50.2
50
49.8
Frequency [Hz]
49.6
49.4
49.2 2008, 7.11% from DG 2010 BEE e.V, 10.43% from DG 2020 BEE e.V, 31% from DG 2010 Leits., 9.67% from DG 2020 Leits., 20.12% from DG No DG installations considered 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
49
48.8 0
Time [sec]
Figure 22: Case 1 - Dynamic response including DG.
50 49.9 49.8
Frequency [Hz]
49.7 49.6 49.5 49.4 49.3 49.2 49.1 49 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40

CLS with DG considered 10% HLS participation 30% HLS participation 50% HLS participation 70% HLS participation 100% HLS participation
Time [sec]
Figure 23: Case 1 - Dynamic response with dierent household participations. 46
Without HLS
50
10% Participation of Households

50
Frequency [Hz]
49.8 49.6 49.4 49.2 49 0 10 20 30 40
Frequency [Hz]
49.8 49.6 49.4 49.2 49 0 10 20 30 40
Time [sec]
20 20
Time [sec]
Power [GW]
10 0 10 20
Power [GW]
10 0 10 20
dP CLS HLS
0 10 20 30 40
dP CLS HLS
0 10 20 30 40
Time [sec]
Time [sec]
Figure 24: Case 1 - Dynamic response without the HLS mechanism and with the participation of 10% of the German households.
30% Participation of Households 50% Participation of Households

50 50
Frequency [Hz]
49.8 49.6 49.4 49.2 49 0 10 20 30 40
Frequency [Hz]
49.8 49.6 49.4 49.2 49 0 10 20 30 40
Time [sec]
20 20
Time [sec]
Power [GW]
10 0 10 20
Power [GW]
10 0 10 20
dP CLS HLS
0 10 20 30 40
dP CLS HLS
0 10 20 30 40
Time [sec]
Time [sec]
Figure 25: Case 1 - Dynamic response with 30% and 50% of the German households participating in the HLS scheme. 47
70% Participation of Households100% Participation of Households

50 50
Frequency [Hz]
Frequency [Hz]
0 10 20 30 40
49.8 49.6 49.4 49.2
49.9 49.8 49.7 49.6 49.5 0 10 20 30 40
Time [sec]
20 20
Time [sec]
Power [GW]
10 0 10 20
Power [GW]
10 0 10 20
dP CLS HLS
0 10 20 30 40
dP CLS HLS
0 10 20 30 40
Time [sec]
Time [sec]
Figure 26: Case 1 - Dynamic response with 70% and 100% of the German households participating in the HLS scheme.
50.4
50.2
50
Frequency [Hz]
49.8
49.6
49.4
49.2
CLS without considering DG CLS considering DG HLS 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
49 0
Time [sec]
Figure 27: Case 1 - Dynamic response with HLS scheme substituting the CLS mechanism for Germany. 48
50
Frequency [Hz]
49.9 49.8 49.7 49.6 49.5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Time [sec]
20
Power [GW]
10 0 10 20 0 HLS dP 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Time [sec]
Figure 28: Case 1 - Dynamic response with HLS scheme substituting the CLS mechanism for Germany.
49
5.2.2
Case 2 - Summer scenario, 3 a.m.
The second case studied represent the summer scenario at 3 a.m. The set of input data to the frequency response model for the second case are given in the following Table 8. Generation Load Net import Power decit Sheddable load per household DG installed capacity 2008 DG 2010 BEE e.V. DG 2020 BEE e.V. DG 2010 Leitszenario 2008 DG 2020 Leitszenario 2008 74429 MW 92177 MW 0 MW 17748 MW 188.17 W 6607.82 MW 8126.16 MW 15570.84 MW 7680.53 MW 14884.87 MW
Table 8: Case 2 - Power data. The power decit of 17.75 GW is compensated by the activation of two under-frequency load shedding stages, i.e. the frequency decay is intercepted at 48.7 Hz. Distributed Generation represents 8.88% of the total generation, with this share rising up to 20.92% in the future penetration scenarios (Figure 29). The activation eect of the HLS mechanism can be observed due to the small delay of the triggering of the two required stages of the CLS (Figure 30. However, the large power decit combined with the low household load during the night limits the eectiveness of the HLS. Therefore, the triggering of the CLS is not avoided even under the favorable conditions of 100% of households participation (Figures 31, 32, 33). In the case of the complete substitution of the CLS by the HLS the sheddable household load is insucient for covering the UCTE-compliant second load shedding stage (20% of the total German load). The inability of the HLS scheme to cover the second load shedding step during the night was expected according to the quantied sheddable load potential which does not exceed the 15% of the total German load (Figures 34, 35).
50
50.4 50.2 50
Frequency [Hz]
49.8 49.6 49.4 49.2 49 48.8 48.6 0 2008, 8.88% from DG 2010 BEE e.V, 10.92% from DG 2020 BEE e.V, 20.92% from DG 2010 Leits., 10.32% from DG 2020, Leits., 20% from DG No DG installations considered 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Time [sec]
50
49.8
49.6
Frequency [Hz]
49.4
49.2
49
48.8
48.6 0
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
Time [sec]
Figure 30: Case 2 - Dynamic response with dierent household participation. 51
Without HLS
50

50
Frequency [Hz]
49.5
Frequency [Hz]
0 10 20 30 40
49.5
49
49
48.5
48.5
10
20
30
40
Time [sec]
20 20
Time [sec]
Power [GW]
10 0 10 20
Power [GW]
10 0 10 20
dP CLS HLS
0 10 20 30 40
dP CLS HLS
0 10 20 30 40
Time [sec]
Time [sec]

50 50
Frequency [Hz]
49.5
Frequency [Hz]
0 10 20 30 40
49.5
49
49
48.5
48.5
10
20
30
40
Time [sec]
20 20
Time [sec]
Power [GW]
10 0 10 20
Power [GW]
10 0 10 20
dP CLS HLS
0 10 20 30 40
dP CLS HLS
0 10 20 30 40
Time [sec]
Time [sec]

50 50
Frequency [Hz]
49.5
Frequency [Hz]
0 10 20 30 40
49.5
49
49
48.5
48.5
10
20
30
40
Time [sec]
20 20
Time [sec]
Power [GW]
10 0 10 20
Power [GW]
10 0 10 20
dP CLS HLS
0 10 20 30 40
dP CLS HLS
0 10 20 30 40
Time [sec]
Time [sec]
50.4 50.2 50
Frequency [Hz]
49.8 49.6 49.4 49.2 49 48.8 48.6 0 CLS without considering DG CLS considering DG HLS 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Time [sec]
Figure 34: Case 2 - Dynamic response with the HLS scheme substituting the CLS mechanism for Germany. 53
50
Frequency [Hz]
49.5
49
48.5 0
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
Time [sec]
20
Power [GW]
10 0 10 20 0 dP HLS 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Time [sec]
Figure 35: Case 2 - Dynamic response with the HLS scheme substituting the CLS mechanism for Germany.
54
5.2.3
Case 3 - Winter scenario, 11 a.m.
The input data to the frequency response model in the third case, representing the winter scenario at 11 a.m. are shown in the following Table 9. Generation Load Net import Power decit Sheddable load per household DG installed capacity 2008 DG 2010 BEE e.V. DG 2020 BEE e.V. DG 2010 Leitszenario 2008 DG 2020 Leitszenario 2008 210557 MW 221883 MW 30 MW 11296 MW 484.40 W 8758.75 MW 11623.26 MW 27620.6 MW 10847.25 MW 20989.82 MW
Table 9: Case 3 - Power data. The system under study of the second scenario is larger and therefore more robust. The power decit of 11.3 GW is compensated with the activation of the rst under-frequency load shedding stage. The contribution of the Distributed Generation is signicantly smaller (4.16%) and thus, the negative eects of the additional loss of generation due to load shedding are less observable (Figure 36). The household load of the 30% of the German households proves to be sucient to cover the power decit of the system under study, without shedding the category with the highest comfort loss. The 50% of the German households have a total sheddable load enough to stabilize the system frequency with only four HLS stages triggered (Figures 37, 38, 39, 40). The HLS mechanism functioning as a substitution of the CLS proves to be successful in eliminating the disturbance caused on a winter day (Figures 41, 42). The overshedding of the HLS mechanism compared to the CLS is owned up to the fact that the household load in Germany is categorized in six categories. The categories are grouped together at each stage in order to amount to at least 10% of the total German load and they cannot be further split, since the decentralized HLS mechanism is preset.
55
51.5
51
Frequency [Hz]
50.5
50
49.5
2008, 4.16% from DG 2010 BEE e.V., 5.52% from DG 2020 BEE e.V., 13.12% from DG 2010 Leits., 5.16% from DG 2020 Leits., 9.97% from DG No DG installations considered 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
49 0
Time [sec]
51.5
51
Frequency [Hz]
50.5
50
49.5
49 0
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
Time [sec]
Without HLS
51.5

51.5
Frequency [Hz]
51 50.5 50 49.5 49 0 10 20 30 40
Frequency [Hz]
51 50.5 50 49.5 49 0 10 20 30 40
Time [sec]
20 20
Time [sec]
Power [GW]
0 10 20 30 0 10 20 30 dP CLS HLS 40
Power [GW]
10
10 0 10 20 30 0 10 20 30 dP CLS HLS 40
Time [sec]
Time [sec]

50 50
Frequency [Hz]
Frequency [Hz]
0 10 20 30 40
49.8 49.6 49.4 49.2
49.9 49.8 49.7 49.6 49.5 0 10 20 30 40
Time [sec]
10 10
Time [sec]
Power [GW]
0 5 HLS CLS dP 10 15 0 10 20 30 40
Power [GW]
5 0 5 HLS CLS dP 10 15 0 10 20 30 40
Time [sec]
Time [sec]

50 50.1
Frequency [Hz]
49.9 49.8 49.7 49.6
Frequency [Hz]
0 10 20 30 40
50 49.9 49.8 49.7
10
20
30
40
Time [sec]
10 20
Time [sec]
Power [GW]
Power [GW]
5 0 5 10 15 0 10 20 30
10 0 10 20
dP CLS HLS
40
dP CLS HLS
0 10 20 30 40
Time [sec]
Time [sec]
52
51.5
Frequency [Hz]
51
50.5
50
49.5 CLS without considering DG CLS considering DG HLS 49 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Time [sec]
52
Frequency [Hz]
51.5 51 50.5 50 49.5 49 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Time [sec]
30
Power [GW]
20 10 0 10 20 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 HLS dP 40
Time [sec]
59
5.2.4
Case 4 - Winter scenario, 3 a.m.
The input data to the frequency response model in the fourth case, representing the winter scenario at 3 a.m. are shown in the following Table 10. Generation Load Net import Power decit Sheddable load per household DG installed capacity 2008 DG 2010 BEE e.V. DG 2020 BEE e.V. DG 2010 Leitszenario 2008 DG 2020 Leitszenario 2008 153942 MW 160818 MW -321 MW 7197 MW 189.31 W 7905.70 MW 9765.41 MW 18779 MW 9180.44 MW 17104.44 MW
Table 10: Case 4 - Power data. The frequency drop is eliminated at 49 Hz, i.e. the rst under-frequency load shedding stage is triggered. The power decit of 7.2 GW is fully compensated, without, however, achieving to avoid load overshedding (Figure 43). The triggering of the CLS is completely avoided with the participation of 30% of the German households (Figures 44, 45, 46). With a participation of at least the 70% of the German households in the HLS mechanism, the system frequency is stabilized only by disconnecting the rst HLS category, with the lowest comfort loss to the consumers (Figure 47). On a winter day, during night, the substitutional function of the HLS mechanism proves to be successful in stabilizing the system (Figures 48, 49, in spite the fact that the sheddable household load is limited including mainly the rst category with the appliances with high inertia. Thus, the household load mechanism proves to be compliant with the UCTE guidelines and sucient for covering the rst shedding stage at all times.
60
51.5
51
Frequency [Hz]
50.5
50
49.5
2008, 5.14% from DG 2010 BEE e.V, 6.34% from DG 2020 BEE e.V, 12.2% from DG 2010 Leits., 5.96% from DG 2020 Leits., 11.11% from DG No DG installations considered 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
49 0
Time [sec]
51.5
51
Frequency [Hz]
50.5
50
49.5
49 0
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
Time [sec]
Without HLS
51.5

51.5
Frequency [Hz]
51 50.5 50 49.5 49 0 10 20 30 40
Frequency [Hz]
51 50.5 50 49.5 49 0 10 20 30 40
Time [sec]
20 10
Time [sec]
Power [GW]
10 0 10 20
Power [GW]
20 10 20 10 0 10 0
dP CLS HLS
dP CLS HLS
0 10 20 30 40
10
20
30
40
Time [sec]
Time [sec]

50 50
Frequency [Hz]
Frequency [Hz]
0 10 20 30 40
49.8 49.6 49.4 49.2
49.9 49.8 49.7 49.6 49.5 0 10 20 30 40
Time [sec]
20 20
Time [sec]
Power [GW]
10
Power [GW]
0 10 20 30 40
10
10
10
10
20
30
40
Time [sec]
Time [sec]

50
Frequency [Hz]
49.95 49.9 49.85 49.8 49.75 0 10 20 30 40
Frequency [Hz]
50 49.95 49.9 49.85 49.8 0 10 20 30 40
Time [sec]
20 20
Time [sec]
Power [GW]
10 0 10 20
Power [GW]
10 0 10 20
dP CLS HLS
0 10 20 30 40
dP CLS HLS
0 10 20 30 40
Time [sec]
Time [sec]
52
51.5
Frequency [Hz]
51
50.5
50
49.5 CLS without considering DG CLS considering DG HLS 49 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Time [sec]
Frequency [Hz]
50 49.95 49.9 49.85 49.8 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Time [sec]
20
Power [GW]
30 20 10 0 10 20 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 dP HLS 40
Time [sec]
64
6. Conclusions
Conclusions
Events like the system disturbance on the 4th of November 2006 [17] have made very clear that the changes that have been taking place in the electricity sector have put the stability, security and reliability of the power systems into jeopardy. The growth of the Distributed Generation has signicantly changed the topology of the UCTE system, relocating the generation and modifying the direction of power ows. In 2008 the DG in Germany represented the approximately 8.9% of the total installed capacity. In the future this share is expected to rise considerably, creating the necessity to explicitly dene the location of the DG in order to avoid their unintentional loss. In severe cases and with extensive penetration of renewable energy sources, unintentional loss of generation due to load shedding, and subsequently disconnection of DG units could result in the deterioration of the situation, triggering initially unnecessary load shedding stages. A rst approach to avoid the loss of DG units with a current load shedding scheme could be the tracing of the feeders with DG connected on them. The development of a load shedding plan which characterizes the feeders according to the related load and generated units, could enable their prioritized and fully controlled shedding order. However, the complexity of the systems topology and the randomly highly dispersed generation create the need for development of alternative load shedding schemes for the emergency situations. The proposed load shedding scheme is the Household Load Shedding Scheme. The assessment of the HLS as a complement to the CLS has illustrated that the disconnection of entire feeders can be signicantly delayed or even prevented by disconnecting only household loads. The complementary function of the HLS scheme lies within the fact that the mechanism acts at frequency thresholds higher than those of the CLS, lowering the rate of the frequency drop and in cases that the sheddable household load is sucient for the compensation of the power decit, preventing the triggering of the CLS and avoiding DG loss. With a satisfactory share of household participation in Germany, severe system disturbances can be successfully eliminated only by disconnecting household load, minimizing the related costs and comfort loss to the consumers. The crucial parameter which must be taken into account for the design of the HLS scheme is the uctuation of the load prole of households during the day and among seasons. During the night the household load is substantially lower than during the day and represents 65
6. Conclusions
lower shares of the total German load. However, the household appliances with high inertia which represents the base load of the HLS mechanism are approximately 10-15% of the total German load. Thus, the function of the HLS mechanism for substitution of the CLS can successfully be implemented being compliant with the UCTE guidelines for the rst load shedding stage at all times. In case of necessity for triggering the second and third load shedding stages, it is uncertain whether the HLS mechanism can eliminate the disturbance while being compliant to the UCTE guidelines, depending on the time of the day and the household load prole. The current study has stressed the important interaction of the DG with power system performance and a high potential that the HLS scheme has. Apart for the technical point of view, economical aspects should be considered. Further research should be conducted concerning the costs related to the disturbances of the power systems as compared to the costs for the implementation of the HLS mechanism.
66
6. REFERENCES
References
[1] Union for the Co-ordination of Transmission of Electricity. http://www.ucte.org. [2] Union for the Co-ordination of Transmission of Electricity. UCTE Operation Handbook, 2004. [3] G. Andersson. Dynamics and Control of Electric Power Systems. EEH - Power Systems Laboratory, ETH Z urich, 2009. [4] Transpower Strom ubertragungs GmbH. http://www.transpower.de. [5] Vattenfall Europe Transmission GmbH. http://www.vattenfall.de. [6] RWE Transportnetz Strom GmbH. http://www.rwetransportnetzstrom.com. [7] EnBW Transportnetze AG. http://www.enbw.com. [8] J. Mayer J. Diekmann, A. Vogel-Sperl. Vergleich der Bundesl ander: Best Practice f ur Ausbau Erneuerbarer Energien, Indikatoren und Ranking. Studie des DIW Berlin und des ZSW Stuttgart im Auftrag und in Kooperation mit der Agentur f ur Erneuerbare Energien e.V., Berlin. [9] Bundesministerium f ur Umwelt Naturschutz und Reaktorsicherheit. Erneuerbare Energien in Zahlen - Nationale und internationale Entwicklung, 2008. [10] Bundesnetzagentur. 2008 Report by the Federal Network Agency for Electricity, Gas, Telecommunications, Post and Railway to the European Commission on the German electricity and gas market, 2009. [11] Bundesverband Erneuerbare Energie e.V. Agentur f ur Erneuerbare Energien. Stromversorgung 2020 - Wege in eine moderne Energiewirtschaft, StromAusbauprognose der Erneuerbare-Energien-Branche, 2009. [12] Bundesministerium f ur Umwelt Naturschutz und Reaktorsicherheit. Weiterentwicklung der Ausbaustrategie Erneuerbare Energien - Leitstudie 2008, 2008. [13] Bundesverband Windenergie e.V. http://www.wind-energie.de. [14] The Solarserver. http://www.solarserver.de. 67
6. REFERENCES
[15] Statistische Amter des Bundes und der L ander. http://www.statistik-portal.de. [16] L. Tanner. Lokales Lastmanagement - Das Lastabwurfpotential in Haushalten und dessen Abh angigkeit von der Tageszeit. FHNW - Institut f ur Aerosol- und Sensortechnik IAST, 2007. [17] Union for the Co-ordination of Transmission of Electricity. Final Report - System Disturbance on 4 November 2006.
68

Control Strategies For Under-Frequency Load Shedding

Transféré par

Informations du document

Titre original

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Control Strategies For Under-Frequency Load Shedding

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

eeh

power systems laboratory

Igeneia Stefanidou - Maria Zerva

Control Strategies for Under-frequency Load Shedding

Statement regarding plagiarism when submitting written work at ETH Zurich

_______________________ place and date

I. Stefanidou & M. Zerva

Frequency Response Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Frequency response model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

I. Stefanidou & M. Zerva

I. Stefanidou & M. Zerva

I. Stefanidou & M. Zerva

I. Stefanidou & M. Zerva

I. Stefanidou & M. Zerva

2. UCTE - Conventional Load Shedding

UCTE - Conventional Load Shedding

Reference Power System

Figure 1: Interconnected UCTE Power System [1].

I. Stefanidou & M. Zerva

2. UCTE - Conventional Load Shedding

Stabilization of the System Frequency

I. Stefanidou & M. Zerva

2. UCTE - Conventional Load Shedding

Table 1: Load Shedding stages according to the UCTE Handbook [2].

I. Stefanidou & M. Zerva

2. UCTE - Conventional Load Shedding

I. Stefanidou & M. Zerva

2. UCTE - Conventional Load Shedding

f0/(2*H*S) Net Import Gain Subtract Load

Figure 2: Total system inertia of the interconnected system.

Frequency Dependency of Loads

I. Stefanidou & M. Zerva

2. UCTE - Conventional Load Shedding

Load Type Residential Commercial Industrial

dP/df (%/%) 0.9 1.4 2.6

Representative Type Share 40% 20% 40%

Table 2: Type of Loads.

dP Frequency dependent active power

Figure 3: Frequency Dependency of Loads.

I. Stefanidou & M. Zerva

2. UCTE - Conventional Load Shedding

Figure 4: Primary Control.

Load Shedding Mechanism

I. Stefanidou & M. Zerva

2. UCTE - Conventional Load Shedding

Figure 5: Load Shedding.

Frequency Response Model

I. Stefanidou & M. Zerva

2. UCTE - Conventional Load Shedding

Frequency dependency of Loads 1.66*S/f0

Primary control Saturation 1 7s +1 Turbine dynamics f0 Sum of f 0+df f0/(2*H*S) 1 s -1/(Spr*f0/S)

freq System frequency

load Conventional Load Shedding

Sum of loads of 24 UCTE countries

Figure 6: Frequency Response Model.

I. Stefanidou & M. Zerva

3. Interaction of Distributed Generation with Load Shedding

Interaction of Distributed Generation with Load Shedding

Distributed Generation in Germany

I. Stefanidou & M. Zerva

3. Interaction of Distributed Generation with Load Shedding

I. Stefanidou & M. Zerva

3. Interaction of Distributed Generation with Load Shedding

f0/(2HS) Net Import Gain Subtract Load

Primary control Saturation 1 7s +1 Turbine dynamics f0 Sum of f 0+df f0/(2HS) 1 s -1/(Spr*f0/S)

f0 Sum of f0+df f0/(2HS) System inertia Net Import 1 s