TE Challenge Phase II Team Collaboration Meeting #4
TE Challenge Phase II Team Collaboration on Challenge Scenario
Meeting #4 June 6, 2017
Meeting Agenda 1. Update on Challenge Scenario—key issues 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.
Grid update (PNNL) Load models PV, battery, inverter models’ Weather Metrics
2. Team objectives and plans—review of status. Homework. 3. Prep for June 14 workshop at TE Systems Conference Portland, OR and future meeting schedule
N I S T
s m a r t
g r i d
p r o g r a m
IEEE 8500-node test feeder • http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/5484381/ • https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pes/dsacom/testfeeders/8500node.zip
• The test feeder has been designed to present challenges to distribution system analysis software in the following areas: – Constructing models of large unbalanced distribution feeders. – Solving large distribution systems containing numerous unbalances. – Modeling the 120/240V center-tapped transformer common in North American systems. – Modeling LV (secondary) distribution.
• Includes: multiple feeder regulators, per-phase capacitor control, feeder secondaries, and service transformers. • Load and DER distributions? – The test feeder makes two load model cases (secondary loading case models with residential loads connected to a 120V/240V split-phase transformer in balanced and unbalanced configurations) available to users. – PNNL will add house loads and PV/batteries. N I S T
s m a r t
g r i d
p r o g r a m
8500 grid Can we choose some part of the grid for focus?
// Nominal peak load = 10773.2 + j2700.0 kVA // Houses: 1977 from 500.0 to 3500.0 sq feet, total area 3960179.6 sq ft // Electric water heaters: 1052 totaling 4741.5 kW // Air conditioners: 1781 totaling 23734.5 kW // Solar: 605 totaling 2310.6 kW // Storage: 305 totaling 1525.0 kW // Waterheater load is resistive // HVAC load ZIP=0.2,0.0,0.8 with variable power factor as input // (the fan load ZIP=0.2534,0.7332,0.0135 and pf=0.96) // The non-responsive ZIP load is input all constant current, pf=0.95
N I S T
s m a r t
g r i d
p r o g r a m
Clear Day
N I S T
s m a r t
g r i d
p r o g r a m
Cloud transient
N I S T
s m a r t
g r i d
p r o g r a m
Issues to settle—HVAC and water heater models • How do we model houses for indoor air temperature (controllable HVAC load model) such that we can compare across simulations? – GLD house model has many parameters and complex model in C code. – We could use a very simple house model for HVAC loads. NIST could provide. – We need some house model such that we can gauge comfort. For example: • • • •
70-74 F, good comfort (1.0 on comfort scale) 68-70, and 74-77, OK comfort (0.7 on comfort scale) 66-68 and 77-81, marginal comfort (0.3 on scale) 81, 0 on comfort scale.
– We need occupancy schedule to then say average comfort across occupied hours. – Power used and cost still are important metrics. – Do we need both real and reactive profiles?
• Likewise for hot water—we need some profile for water draws and simple model for temperature in the tank. – Need some similar acceptable water temps and rating on acceptable availability of hot water. N I S T
s m a r t
g r i d
p r o g r a m
Issues to settle—PV, batteries and inverter • What is the PV and inverter model? Can it be very simple so we only need a few parameters that can be made available to all? • Battery model? • What low voltage ridethrough settings are assumed?
N I S T
s m a r t
g r i d
p r o g r a m
Issues to settle—weather • Weather profile using minutely data from where? • Storm front passing data: – Data below shows real front passing data from NOAA superimposed on clear-sky solar data. Quick drop, then 3 hours of clouds at approx 30% solar, then return to clear sky over 2 hours – Storm front speed = 4.6 mph. Double it and it will look more like our scenario schedule.
• We can implement with time passing on various segments of the grid.
N I S T
s m a r t
g r i d
p r o g r a m
Latest set of metrics • line voltages and frequency, power flows, line losses, real and reactive, sub-second or not – – – –
at each load or node (meter) or at minimum set of agreed on points? At each DER (PV or battery inverter)—real and reactive power? Timestep? Maybe 1 minute timestep for common reporting. Make sure we can separate PV generation from aggregated loads
• reliability indices: utility metrics on out-of-band events and outages, but also measures of voltage excursions even if in limits – voltage violations (per timestep?) +/- 5%, other limits? – “RMS error of voltage” at each node
• utilization of local green energy (PV or battery sourced on the feeder vs. from transmission substation) • Economic metrics: – market transactions and prices – Billing data (customer energy cost monthly or minutely or?) – Total cost of energy at feeder level?
• Comfort metrics – House air temps, setpoint deviations—average comfort scale over occupied period – Water temps and deviations
N I S T
s m a r t
g r i d
p r o g r a m
Homework for next meeting • Questions for participants (if you have not done this already) – What concerns/changes do you have for the Challenge Scenario? – Consider TE market objectives for your team research. What are the best metrics for reporting results? Contract to metrics in previous slide. – How will your team implement the common platform model interfaces/components?
• Each team prepare an implementation plan for the Challenge Scenario. – Prepare a one page summary that can be shared with a team introduction at the Portland workshop and on our collaboration page. – What is your tool set, what are your TE goals, what is your timeline, and are you open for partners? N I S T
s m a r t
g r i d
p r o g r a m
Important Collaboration Points • Previous presentations – – – – – – –
TE Challenge Phase II Launch webinar intro Slides from May 9 first collaboration meeting Slides from May 16 meeting #2 Slides from May 30 meeting #3 Slides from June 6 meeting #4 Abstract Component Model on github Collaboration site: https://pages.nist.gov/TEChallenge
• What is the Challenge Scenario? – Goal—we want to enable comparison of transactive methods across different platforms by implementing a common event narrative on a common grid, with results reported with common metrics. – The narrative (clouds passing over distribution feeder) – IEEE 8500 grid, with identified sub-set for focus. – Common metrics for reporting (minimum set that all use, plus additional potentially) – Implementation steps: 1. Baseline event day, no weather, no market 2. Add weather 3. Add dynamic electricity price (homes are price-takers—no TE bids) 4. Add your TE market N I S T
s m a r t
g r i d
p r o g r a m
TE Systems Conference workshop plans • TE Challenge Scenario Workshop, Wed, June 14, 5:30-7:00pm. – Opportunity to connect face-to-face, present research objectives, build teams, plan for Scenario implementation work and beyond to accomplish team research goals. – Review Phase II Scenario, available components, additional planned meetings • Discuss outstanding issues (TBD after today’s call) • Next steps • Q&A
– Intro of participant plans to allow team connecting potential participants in room to team leads.
N I S T
s m a r t
g r i d
p r o g r a m
Meetings after TE Systems Conference (Portland) • Meetings June 28 (Wed, 1:00pm ET), July 5 (Wed, 1:00pm ET, TBD) and 11 (Tues, 1:00pm ET): – Yes to June 28 since we need to follow up on TESC results and catch up any new participants from there. – Probably bi-weekly after that to review and finalize Challenge Scenario, start to share simulation results and issues. – July 25 official “TEC Simulation Kick-off” with the published Challenge Scenario at the SEPA TE Working Group meeting. https://sepapower.org/eventcomplex/grid-evolution-summit/ – August and September TBD—may have meetings/webinars to share results, compare notes on simulations.
N I S T
s m a r t
g r i d
p r o g r a m
Meeting #4 June 6, 2017
Meeting Agenda 1. Update on Challenge Scenario—key issues 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.
Grid update (PNNL) Load models PV, battery, inverter models’ Weather Metrics
2. Team objectives and plans—review of status. Homework. 3. Prep for June 14 workshop at TE Systems Conference Portland, OR and future meeting schedule
N I S T
s m a r t
g r i d
p r o g r a m
IEEE 8500-node test feeder • http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/5484381/ • https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pes/dsacom/testfeeders/8500node.zip
• The test feeder has been designed to present challenges to distribution system analysis software in the following areas: – Constructing models of large unbalanced distribution feeders. – Solving large distribution systems containing numerous unbalances. – Modeling the 120/240V center-tapped transformer common in North American systems. – Modeling LV (secondary) distribution.
• Includes: multiple feeder regulators, per-phase capacitor control, feeder secondaries, and service transformers. • Load and DER distributions? – The test feeder makes two load model cases (secondary loading case models with residential loads connected to a 120V/240V split-phase transformer in balanced and unbalanced configurations) available to users. – PNNL will add house loads and PV/batteries. N I S T
s m a r t
g r i d
p r o g r a m
8500 grid Can we choose some part of the grid for focus?
// Nominal peak load = 10773.2 + j2700.0 kVA // Houses: 1977 from 500.0 to 3500.0 sq feet, total area 3960179.6 sq ft // Electric water heaters: 1052 totaling 4741.5 kW // Air conditioners: 1781 totaling 23734.5 kW // Solar: 605 totaling 2310.6 kW // Storage: 305 totaling 1525.0 kW // Waterheater load is resistive // HVAC load ZIP=0.2,0.0,0.8 with variable power factor as input // (the fan load ZIP=0.2534,0.7332,0.0135 and pf=0.96) // The non-responsive ZIP load is input all constant current, pf=0.95
N I S T
s m a r t
g r i d
p r o g r a m
Clear Day
N I S T
s m a r t
g r i d
p r o g r a m
Cloud transient
N I S T
s m a r t
g r i d
p r o g r a m
Issues to settle—HVAC and water heater models • How do we model houses for indoor air temperature (controllable HVAC load model) such that we can compare across simulations? – GLD house model has many parameters and complex model in C code. – We could use a very simple house model for HVAC loads. NIST could provide. – We need some house model such that we can gauge comfort. For example: • • • •
70-74 F, good comfort (1.0 on comfort scale) 68-70, and 74-77, OK comfort (0.7 on comfort scale) 66-68 and 77-81, marginal comfort (0.3 on scale) 81, 0 on comfort scale.
– We need occupancy schedule to then say average comfort across occupied hours. – Power used and cost still are important metrics. – Do we need both real and reactive profiles?
• Likewise for hot water—we need some profile for water draws and simple model for temperature in the tank. – Need some similar acceptable water temps and rating on acceptable availability of hot water. N I S T
s m a r t
g r i d
p r o g r a m
Issues to settle—PV, batteries and inverter • What is the PV and inverter model? Can it be very simple so we only need a few parameters that can be made available to all? • Battery model? • What low voltage ridethrough settings are assumed?
N I S T
s m a r t
g r i d
p r o g r a m
Issues to settle—weather • Weather profile using minutely data from where? • Storm front passing data: – Data below shows real front passing data from NOAA superimposed on clear-sky solar data. Quick drop, then 3 hours of clouds at approx 30% solar, then return to clear sky over 2 hours – Storm front speed = 4.6 mph. Double it and it will look more like our scenario schedule.
• We can implement with time passing on various segments of the grid.
N I S T
s m a r t
g r i d
p r o g r a m
Latest set of metrics • line voltages and frequency, power flows, line losses, real and reactive, sub-second or not – – – –
at each load or node (meter) or at minimum set of agreed on points? At each DER (PV or battery inverter)—real and reactive power? Timestep? Maybe 1 minute timestep for common reporting. Make sure we can separate PV generation from aggregated loads
• reliability indices: utility metrics on out-of-band events and outages, but also measures of voltage excursions even if in limits – voltage violations (per timestep?) +/- 5%, other limits? – “RMS error of voltage” at each node
• utilization of local green energy (PV or battery sourced on the feeder vs. from transmission substation) • Economic metrics: – market transactions and prices – Billing data (customer energy cost monthly or minutely or?) – Total cost of energy at feeder level?
• Comfort metrics – House air temps, setpoint deviations—average comfort scale over occupied period – Water temps and deviations
N I S T
s m a r t
g r i d
p r o g r a m
Homework for next meeting • Questions for participants (if you have not done this already) – What concerns/changes do you have for the Challenge Scenario? – Consider TE market objectives for your team research. What are the best metrics for reporting results? Contract to metrics in previous slide. – How will your team implement the common platform model interfaces/components?
• Each team prepare an implementation plan for the Challenge Scenario. – Prepare a one page summary that can be shared with a team introduction at the Portland workshop and on our collaboration page. – What is your tool set, what are your TE goals, what is your timeline, and are you open for partners? N I S T
s m a r t
g r i d
p r o g r a m
Important Collaboration Points • Previous presentations – – – – – – –
TE Challenge Phase II Launch webinar intro Slides from May 9 first collaboration meeting Slides from May 16 meeting #2 Slides from May 30 meeting #3 Slides from June 6 meeting #4 Abstract Component Model on github Collaboration site: https://pages.nist.gov/TEChallenge
• What is the Challenge Scenario? – Goal—we want to enable comparison of transactive methods across different platforms by implementing a common event narrative on a common grid, with results reported with common metrics. – The narrative (clouds passing over distribution feeder) – IEEE 8500 grid, with identified sub-set for focus. – Common metrics for reporting (minimum set that all use, plus additional potentially) – Implementation steps: 1. Baseline event day, no weather, no market 2. Add weather 3. Add dynamic electricity price (homes are price-takers—no TE bids) 4. Add your TE market N I S T
s m a r t
g r i d
p r o g r a m
TE Systems Conference workshop plans • TE Challenge Scenario Workshop, Wed, June 14, 5:30-7:00pm. – Opportunity to connect face-to-face, present research objectives, build teams, plan for Scenario implementation work and beyond to accomplish team research goals. – Review Phase II Scenario, available components, additional planned meetings • Discuss outstanding issues (TBD after today’s call) • Next steps • Q&A
– Intro of participant plans to allow team connecting potential participants in room to team leads.
N I S T
s m a r t
g r i d
p r o g r a m
Meetings after TE Systems Conference (Portland) • Meetings June 28 (Wed, 1:00pm ET), July 5 (Wed, 1:00pm ET, TBD) and 11 (Tues, 1:00pm ET): – Yes to June 28 since we need to follow up on TESC results and catch up any new participants from there. – Probably bi-weekly after that to review and finalize Challenge Scenario, start to share simulation results and issues. – July 25 official “TEC Simulation Kick-off” with the published Challenge Scenario at the SEPA TE Working Group meeting. https://sepapower.org/eventcomplex/grid-evolution-summit/ – August and September TBD—may have meetings/webinars to share results, compare notes on simulations.
N I S T
s m a r t
g r i d
p r o g r a m
