Load Modeling and State Estimation
Load Modeling and State Estimation
Load Modeling and State Estimation
Team Member:
Project 1055-0001
Summary of Activity............................................................................................................... 3
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
References ............................................................................................................................. 11
List of Figures
Figure 1 - Line Section and State Variables for Branch Current State Estimation......................... 4
Figure 2 - Test Feeder Instrumented with Substation and Feeder Meters, Line Post Sensors,
Wireless Current Sensors, and AMI Voltage Measurements ......................................................... 6
Figure 3 - Data Historian and Feeder Electrical Model Interfaced to State Estimation ................. 7
List of Tables
Table 1 - Project Tasks, Goals, and Accomplishments .................................................................. 2
May 7, 2010
Project 1055-0001
1 Executive Summary
State estimation is a key enabler for any number of smart grid applications on the distribution
system; these include reactive power management, outage management, loss reduction, demand
response, adaptable over-current protection, condition-based maintenance, distributed generation
dispatch, integration with transmission system operations, and more. At a February, 2008 DOE
meeting hosted by Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL), state estimation was listed as
one of eight non-prioritized requirements for modeling and simulation. State estimations
importance was reinforced in DOEs first biannual Smart Grid report [1].
The project objective was to provide robust state estimation for distribution systems, comparable
to what has been available on transmission systems for decades [2]. Classical methods work
poorly on distribution feeders for several reasons:
Very few measurements are available, sometimes only the voltage and current at the
substation.
Switch states, capacitor bank states and transformer/regulator taps may not be directly
monitored, as they typically are on transmission systems.
Many of the feeder measurements are current, rather than power (P and Q).
Three-phase unbalances and low X/R ratios complicate the measurement function
In addition, its necessary to use historical load data as pseudo-measurements. Due to the radial
structure of must feeders, load and state estimation are practically synonymous for most North
American distribution systems.
This project used an algorithm called Branch Current State Estimation (BCSE), which is more
effective because it decouples the three phases of a distribution system, and uses branch current
instead of node voltage as a state variable, which is a better match to current measurement. Some
benefits of distribution system state estimation are:
1. Improved reliability
a.
b.
c.
d.
May 7, 2010
Project 1055-0001
Goal
Result
Phase I 1
Phase I 2
Phase I 3
Phase I 4
Phase II 1
Load modeling
Phase II 2
Phase II 3
Phase II 4
Phase II 5
Phase II 6
Phase II 7
Phase II 8
May 7, 2010
Project 1055-0001
3 Summary of Activity
During the three years of Phases I and II, emphasis shifted from data historians to AMI projects,
which offer the best opportunity for collecting detailed load data. EnerNex contributed to the
MultiSpeak and Common Information Model (CIM) data exchange formats, which offer the best
opportunity for interfacing advanced algorithms into a utilitys existing IT infrastructure.
EnerNex also participated in open-source modeling efforts GridLab-D and OpenDSS, which
offer the most accessible simulation platforms for state estimation. The Branch Current State
Estimation (BCSE) algorithm, developed by Mesut Baran at North Carolina State University,
was selected during Phase I as the best candidate for commercial implementation. These efforts
were documented in previous project progress reports [3-5]. The rest of this section describes the
BCSE algorithm, and two current projects using it.
(1)
If you have only the substation voltage and feeder current, then you have to estimate all the other
quantities by scaling the load models, based on archived data. Sometimes the archived data
accounts for season, day of the week, hour of the day, etc., but these are relatively coarse
adjustments. Inherently, the pseudo-measurements will be less accurate than real measurements.
The resulting state estimates are also relatively coarse. Existing distribution system state
estimators operate this way. The results are used to identify overloads and assist in service
restoration, but they are not good enough for smart grid applications.
May 7, 2010
Project 1055-0001
Sometimes there will be a few downstream current measurements available, such as from an
automated recloser. While helpful, these are not as good as the P, Q measurements typical of
transmission state estimators. One reason is that current magnitude measurements convey no
direct information about phase angles (actually, there are non-unique solutions for the phase
angles). Another reason is that equation (1) is ill conditioned for current measurements on
lightly loaded lines, because of the nearly equal voltage magnitudes at each end.
A typical transmission state estimator decouples the solutions real and imaginary parts, taking
advantage of the fact that real power flow depends mainly on phase angles, while reactive power
flow depends mainly on voltage magnitudes. This doesnt work very well on distribution feeders
with relatively high resistance, or low X/R ratio. The solution cannot be decoupled. Also,
distribution feeders can be significantly unbalanced, and the state estimator should account for
that by providing estimates by phase.
BCSE still uses weighted least squares, but estimates the branch currents instead of node
voltages. Any voltage measurements are ignored, except for the substation bus voltage, which
becomes the reference. If you know the substation voltage plus all the branch currents, then you
know all of the downstream node voltages as well.
Figure 1 and equation (2) show the line voltage drop as a function of branch current. BCSE still
needs an electrical model of the system. There is a measurement function for each of the three
phases of a branch, but it depends only on the currents in that phase. So the state estimation
problem is decoupled by phases. The current magnitude and phase angle solutions are still
coupled, because of the low X/R ratio. Overall, the solution is easier than if using node voltages
as the state variable.
A current magnitude measurement has a simple measurement function that fits right into the
BCSE. This gets around all of the problems with current measurements in traditional SE. The
pseudo-measurements from archived load data, namely power and power factor, are converted
into load current magnitude and angle for BCSE. The missing data and topology identification
issues still apply to BCSE. These may add more variables to be estimated, such as capacitor and
switch on/off status.
Vt
Vs
ph. 1
Il,1
ph. 2
Il,2
ph. 3
grnd.
Il,3
S t,1
S t,2
Il+1,1
Vt,1 Vs,1
z11
V V g z
t,2
s,2
l 21
z31
Vt,3 Vs,3
z12
z22
z32
S t,3
z13 Il,1
z23 Il,2
z33
Il,3
(2)
Figure 1 - Line Section and State Variables for Branch Current State Estimation
(3)
4
May 7, 2010
Project 1055-0001
(4)
Current magnitude measurement leads to non-linear measurement functions, coupling real and
imaginary parts of current in equations (5) (7).
(5)
(6)
(7)
Voltage drop measurement couples both phases and real / imaginary parts of the current in
equations (8) (10). This leads to some loss in efficiency when BCSE processes voltage
measurements from AMI. In a pilot project, more emphasis was placed on AMI demand interval
measurements, which can be converted to equivalent P and Q, or to current magnitude.
(8)
(9)
(10)
Once all of the measurement functions have been defined, they are used to update the gain
matrix, G, and measurement Jacobian, H. Equations (11) and (12) are used to iteratively refine
the estimated branch currents in x.
(11)
(12)
May 7, 2010
Project 1055-0001
expensive to deploy. Wireless sensors on switches and capacitor banks can assist greatly with
network topology identification. Line post sensors at key points provide a complement of P, Q,
I, and V measurements out on the feeder. Figure 2 also shows a large number of voltage
measurements (V) from customer meters; these meters also collect load information for
statistical analysis and modeling.
v
v
v
T, V
P, Q, I
P, Q, I, V
I
I
P, Q, I
Figure 2 - Test Feeder Instrumented with Substation and Feeder Meters, Line Post Sensors, Wireless Current
Sensors, and AMI Voltage Measurements
Figure 3 shows how several data sources can be linked to BCSE through a data historian. Several
commercial SCADA and EMS products interface with Osisofts PI already.
Level 1 tags (or points, in SCADA terminology) cover what most utilities have today; although
they might not be using it for distribution state estimation.
1. Substation voltage
2. Feeder current, power, and reactive power
3. Ambient temperature
Level 2 adds the direct measurement of local control states that would otherwise have to be
estimated. For example, feeder capacitor banks could either be centrally dispatched, or
communicate their on/off state back to the substation. Disconnect switches can be automated and
their actual state would then be a measurement. Likewise for line voltage regulators. Most
automated products outside the substation fence are not compliant with IEC 61850, so
integration of them into a SE could be a bit more work.
1. Switch, capacitor, and tap changer status
2. Switch and regulator currents
Level 3 represents an attempt to flesh out the missing feeder measurements. Some utilities have
a limited number of power quality meters that could provide some data. AMI has the potential of
providing a measurement of some type at every customer load. Various low-cost sensors are also
under development; these may provide current or other measurements.
6
May 7, 2010
Project 1055-0001
Customer classes
Load profiles by day and hour
kW, and either kVAR or power factor
corresponding weather data (temperature)
Figure 3 - Data Historian and Feeder Electrical Model Interfaced to State Estimation
May 7, 2010
Project 1055-0001
CGI (to become M3I) for the Outage Management System (OMS)
The project was delayed starting due to state budget constraints in California, and in the
meantime the responsible personnel at SCE were transferred to other responsibilities. Site
selection is now underway to complete the project during 2010.
May 7, 2010
Project 1055-0001
4. With line post sensors, AMI can be allocated to zones with improved estimation
results.
5. Further improvement is possible if using AMI demand interval measurements, either 15minute or hourly, to serve as pseudo-load measurements. Selected AMI voltage
measurements can then be checked against the estimated feeder model. However,
precision of the demand measurements can still be an issue for shorter demand intervals.
The final report on this project is due within the next month or two.
May 7, 2010
Project 1055-0001
4 Products Developed
Four conference papers have been written and presented [6-9]. These all acknowledge
government support through this project. All are available through IEEE Xplore.
The project has fostered and supported many other collaborations:
Electric Power Research Institute performed a gap analysis of the CIM, facilitated the
release of their Distribution System Simulator (OpenDSS) on SourceForge, and provided
a new sparse matrix solver for OpenDSS.
Elster Electric discussions of pilot project with their Advanced Grid Initiative (AGI).
CEATI and Southern Company / Alabama Power EnerNex and NC State have nearly
completed a pilot project using AMI and DSCADA for distribution system phasing. Use
of the state estimation algorithm was a key part of this project.
CIEE and Southern California Edison EnerNex, Tollgrade, and NC State are
conducting a pilot project incorporating advanced state estimation with wireless current
sensors into a distribution management system.
10
May 7, 2010
Project 1055-0001
5 References
1. U. S. Department of Energy, Smart Grid System Report, July 2009.
2. A. Abur and A. G. Exposito, Power System State Estimation: Theory and
Implementation, Marcel Dekker, 2004.
3. Mesut Baran and Jaesung Jung, Branch Current State Estimation with Voltage
Measurements, May 29, 2008.
4. T. E. McDermott, Load Modeling and State Estimation Methods for Power Distribution
Systems: Phase II Continuation Report, June 13, 2008.
5. T. E. McDermott, RDSI Peer Review Summary: Load Modeling and State Estimation
Methods for Power Distribution Systems, October 30, 2008.
6. M. Baran and T. E. McDermott, "Distribution system state estimation using AMI data,"
IEEE Power Systems Conference and Exposition, pp.1-3, 15-18 March 2009, Seattle,
WA.
7. M. Baran and T. E. McDermott, "State estimation for real time monitoring of distribution
feeders," IEEE Power & Energy Society General Meeting, pp.1-4, 26-30 July 2009,
Calgary, AB.
8. M. E. Baran, Jaesung Jung, and T. E. McDermott, "Including voltage measurements in
branch current state estimation for distribution systems," IEEE Power & Energy Society
General Meeting, pp.1-5, 26-30 July 2009, Calgary, AB.
9. M. E. Baran, Jaesung Jung, and T. E. McDermott, "Topology error identification using
branch current state estimation for distribution systems," IEEE Transmission &
Distribution Conference & Exposition: Asia and Pacific, pp.1-4, 26-30 Oct. 2009, Seoul,
Korea.
11
May 7, 2010