Power Technologies International30 September 20021 Load Flow Modelling Service Project results 30...

30 September 2002 1Power Technologies International

Load Flow Modelling Service

Project results 30 September 2002

Mick Barlow

Srdjan Curcic


Content

• Project objectives• Modelling assumptions• Some potential issues with the proposed

approaches to allocation of losses• Illustration of the key results


Project objectives

• Power Technologies Int. has been commissioned to assist the assessment procedure of modification proposals P75 and P82, specifically:– to perform calculations of TLFs & TLMs for a specified

number of SPs for P75 & P82

– to present the results in a form suitable for the assessment procedure; and

– to draw attention to potential issues with the fundamentals of the two marginal approaches proposed (P75 & P82)

• This presentation contains an appropriate selection of the project results


Modelling assumptions

• MW injections are calculated from the metered volumes assuming they are constant (average)

• Power factors published in NGC’s SYS are used to calculate reactive power injections

• It is assumed that “offtake” metered volumes/injections are accurate and then the “delivery” volumes/injections are calculated to balance “offtake” metered volumes/injections and calculated variable active power system losses, while maintaining relative “deliveries” among the generators (DICTATED BY DATA QUALITY)



• Load flow assumptions:– Generation P is calculated as described above– Generation Q is calculated automatically by setting

voltage target to 1.03 p.u.– Load P is calculated from the metered volumes– Load Q is calculated from typical power factors given in

the NGC’s SYS– Transformer tap changer are set according to information

in the NGC’s SYS for each voltage level– Transformer target voltage is set to produce reasonable

voltage profile (between 0.97 and 1.03 p.u.)– SVC’s target voltage is set to values recommended in the

NGC’s SYS



• AC load flow calculations are using the standard NGC’s slack at Cowley

• PTI’s PSS/E-OPF is used for calculating marginal TLFs

• Out of TLFs obtained for active power injections and reactive power injections, unique TLFs are calculated that relate only to active power injections, while providing for the total losses incurred from a node

TLFij = (TLFPij Pij + TLFQij Qij) / Pij



• On the basis of information in the NGC’s SYS, the fixed losses are assumed to be 200MW (peak), 180MW (trough) and 190MW (other periods – Autumn)

• For the purpose of calculating TLMs, these fixed losses are smeared across generators, proportionally to their power output


Issues with proposed allocation of losses

Slack node – An issue with the marginal TLFs approach:

• The choice of the slack node potentially matters more that initially expected :



Network & metered volumes are for 22 January 2002Comparison is between slack node at Cowley and at Thorpe Marsh

Slack node

Generation TLMs Demand TLMs

Diff/(TLM-1) Diff/TLM Diff/(TLM-1) Diff/TLM

Average 9.23% 0.30% 9,96% 0.28%

SD 14.26% 0.17% 19.05% 0.16%

Illustrative example: Assume a generation metered volume of 1000MWh and a TLM of 0.94. That would attribute 60MWh of losses to this generation. Due to the indicated change in slack node this 60MWh of losses would change for 9.23%, on average.



• The sensitivity analysis to introduction/variation of power factors has been done in an simple exercise:

For 02 January 2002 network and metered volumes two cases were calculated:– P.F. = 1 for all demand nodes– P.F. by NGC’s SYS

Power factor



Power factor

At the level of TLFs the effect was much more tangible. This indicates:

a) that reactive powers should not be ignored; andb) a possible need for further consideration

Nodal TLMs Nodal TLFs

Generation Demand

Diff/TLM Diff/TLM Diff/TLF

Average 0.22% 0.23% 14.22%

Minimum 0.00% 0.00% 0.08%

Maximum 1.57% 1.32% 371.51%

SD 0.24% 0.18% 31.07%


Summary: Issues with proposed allocation of losses

• There are some issues arising from the modelling

• TLFMG, nevertheless, have confidence in the modelling results


Illustration of key results

P75


P75 (T1)Base cases

02 Jan. 02 (SP36) - Peak01 Aug. 01 (SP8) - Trough

10 Oct. 01 (SP25) – Week day daylight11 Oct. 01 (SP11) – Week day night

13 Oct. 01 (SP25) – Weekend daylight 14 Oct. 01 (SP11) – Weekend night


GSPG and TNUoS (gen) zones


Change P75 introduces – an example (based on marginal, GSPG zone, ½ h

TLFs)

North

South0.94

0.96

0.98

1

1.02

1.04

1.06

1.08

GSPG 13

GSPG 1

GSPG 2

GSPG 3

GSPG 4

GSPG 5

GSPG 6

GSPG 7

GSPG 8

GSPG 9

GSPG 10

GSPG 11

GSPG 12

Zonal TLMs (demand) for 02 January 2002TLMs (demand) for TLFs equal to ZEROs

02 January 2002


Demand TLMs for P75 (based on marginal, GSPG zone, ½ h TLFs)

0.94

0.96

0.98

1

1.02

1.04

1.06

1.08

GSPG 13

GSPG 1

GSPG 2

GSPG 3

GSPG 4

GSPG 5

GSPG 6

GSPG 7

GSPG 8

GSPG 9

GSPG 10

GSPG 11

GSPG 12

Max Average Min

North

South


Change P75 introduces – an example (based on marginal, TNUoS (gen) zone,

½ h TLFs)

North

South0.930.95

0.970.99

1.011.03

1.051.07

1.09

TNUoS 1

TNUoS 2

TNUoS 3

TNUoS 4

TNUoS 5

TNUoS 6

TNUoS 7

TNUoS 8

TNUoS 9

TNUoS 1

0

TNUoS 1

1

TNUoS 1

2

TNUoS 1

3

TNUoS 1

4

TNUoS 1

5

Zonal TLMs (generation) for 02 January 2002TLMs (generation) for TLFs equal to ZEROs

02 January 2002


Generation TLMs for P75 (based on marginal, TNUoS (gen) zone, ½ h

TLFs)

0.94

0.96

0.98

1

1.02

1.04

1.06

1.08

1.1

TNUoS 1

TNUoS 2

TNUoS 3

TNUoS 4

TNUoS 5

TNUoS 6

TNUoS 7

TNUoS 8

TNUoS 9

TNUoS 1

0

TNUoS 1

1

TNUoS 1

2

TNUoS 1

3

TNUoS 1

4

TNUoS 1

5

Max Average Min

North

South


P75 (T1) - Summary

• Introduction of Modification Proposal P75 would result in variable TLMs:– over time; and– across country

with an overall, indicative variation between 0.95 and 1.06 for demand and between 0.94 and 1.09 for generation


P75 (T2)Variation of TLMs over time

02 Jan. 02 (SP8 & SP36) – Peak day01 Aug. 01 (SP8 & SP36) – Trough day 10 Oct. 01 (SP1 – SP48) – Week day11 Oct. 01 (SP11) – Week day night



P75: GSPG zone TLMs over sample time period - demand

0.94

0.96

0.98

1

1.02

1.04

1.06

1.08

GSPG 1

3

GSPG 1

GSPG 2

GSPG 3

GSPG 4

GSPG 5

GSPG 6

GSPG 7

GSPG 8

GSPG 9

GSPG 1

0

GSPG 1

1

GSPG 1

2

Minimum Average Maximum

North

South


P75: TNUoS (gen) zone TLMs over sample time period - generation

0.94

0.96

0.98

1

1.02

1.04

1.06

1.08

1.1

TNUoS 1

TNUoS 2

TNUoS 3

TNUoS 4

TNUoS 5

TNUoS 6

TNUoS 7

TNUoS 8

TNUoS 9

TNUoS 1

0

TNUoS 1

1

TNUoS 1

2

TNUoS 1

3

TNUoS 1

4

TNUoS 1

5


North

South


P75: GSPG zone TLMs over a day - Demand

0.96

0.98

1

1.02

1.04

1.06

SP

1

SP

6

SP

11

SP

16

SP

21

SP

26

SP

31

SP

36

SP

41

SP

46

GSPG 1 GSPG 6 GSPG 12

10 October 2001

North

South


P75: TNUoS (gen) zone TLMs over a day - Generation

10 October 2001

0.96

0.98

1

1.02

1.04

1.06

1.08

SP

1

SP

6

SP

11

SP

16

SP

21

SP

26

SP

31

SP

36

SP

41

SP

46

TNUoS 1 TNUoS 6 TNUoS 15

North

South


P75 (T2) - Summary

• Introduction of Modification Proposal P75 would result in daily variation in TLMs of up to approximately 0.03 for demand and 0.045 for generation (the exception is TNUoS zone 5 with reversible hydro plants where the variation is up to 0.065) on a typical autumn working day


P75 (T3)Sensitivity to network

configurationIndicative/Intact/Representativenetworks for the following SPs:





P75: GSPG zone TLMs - Demandsensitivity to network configuration

0.94

0.96

0.98

1

1.02

1.04

1.06

GSPG 13

GSPG 1

GSPG 2

GSPG 3

GSPG 4

GSPG 5

GSPG 6

GSPG 7

GSPG 8

GSPG 9

GSPG 10

GSPG 11

GSPG 12

Base case - Indicative/Intact Network Representative Network

North

South

02 January 2002 (peak)


P75: TNUoS (gen) zone TLMs - Generation

sensitivity to network configuration

North

South

02 January 2002 (peak)

0.94

0.96

0.98

1

1.02

1.04

1.06

1.08

TNUoS 1

TNUoS 2

TNUoS 3

TNUoS 4

TNUoS 5

TNUoS 6

TNUoS 7

TNUoS 8

TNUoS 9

TNUoS 1

0

TNUoS 1

1

TNUoS 1

2

TNUoS 1

3

TNUoS 1

4

TNUoS 1

5

Base case - Indicative/Intact Network Representative Network


0.98

0.99

1

1.01

1.02

1.03

GSPG 13

GSPG 1

GSPG 2

GSPG 3

GSPG 4

GSPG 5

GSPG 6

GSPG 7

GSPG 8

GSPG 9

GSPG 10

GSPG 11

GSPG 12

Base case - Indicative Network Intact Network

Representative Network


North

South

01 August 2002 (trough)


0.96

0.98

1

1.02

1.04

TNUoS 1

TNUoS 2

TNUoS 3

TNUoS 4

TNUoS 5

TNUoS 6

TNUoS 7

TNUoS 8

TNUoS 9

TNUoS 1

0

TNUoS 1

1

TNUoS 1

2

TNUoS 1

3

TNUoS 1

4

TNUoS 1

5





North

South

01 August 2002 (trough)


0.98

0.99

1

1.01

1.02

1.03

1.04

1.05

GSPG 13

GSPG 1

GSPG 2

GSPG 3

GSPG 4

GSPG 5

GSPG 6

GSPG 7

GSPG 8

GSPG 9

GSPG 10

GSPG 11

GSPG 12




North

South

10 October 2001 (weekday daylight)


0.96

0.98

1

1.02

1.04

1.06

TNUoS 1

TNUoS 2

TNUoS 3

TNUoS 4

TNUoS 5

TNUoS 6

TNUoS 7

TNUoS 8

TNUoS 9

TNUoS 1

0

TNUoS 1

1

TNUoS 1

2

TNUoS 1

3

TNUoS 1

4

TNUoS 1

5





North

South

10 October 2001 (weekday daylight)


0.98

0.99

1

1.01

1.02

1.03

GSPG 13

GSPG 1

GSPG 2

GSPG 3

GSPG 4

GSPG 5

GSPG 6

GSPG 7

GSPG 8

GSPG 9

GSPG 10

GSPG 11

GSPG 12




North

South

11 October 2001 (weekday night)


0.96

0.98

1

1.02

1.04

TNUoS 1

TNUoS 2

TNUoS 3

TNUoS 4

TNUoS 5

TNUoS 6

TNUoS 7

TNUoS 8

TNUoS 9

TNUoS 1

0

TNUoS 1

1

TNUoS 1

2

TNUoS 1

3

TNUoS 1

4

TNUoS 1

5





North

South

11 October 2001 (weekday night)


0.98

0.99

1

1.01

1.02

1.03

1.04

GSPG 13

GSPG 1

GSPG 2

GSPG 3

GSPG 4

GSPG 5

GSPG 6

GSPG 7

GSPG 8

GSPG 9

GSPG 10

GSPG 11

GSPG 12




North

South

13 October 2001 (weekend daylight)


0.960.970.980.99

11.011.021.031.041.05

TNUoS 1

TNUoS 2

TNUoS 3

TNUoS 4

TNUoS 5

TNUoS 6

TNUoS 7

TNUoS 8

TNUoS 9

TNUoS 1

0

TNUoS 1

1

TNUoS 1

2

TNUoS 1

3

TNUoS 1

4

TNUoS 1

5





North

South

13 October 2001 (weekend daylight)



North

South

14 October 2001 (weekend night)

0.98

0.99

1

1.01

1.02

1.03

1.04

GSPG 13

GSPG 1

GSPG 2

GSPG 3

GSPG 4

GSPG 5

GSPG 6

GSPG 7

GSPG 8

GSPG 9

GSPG 10

GSPG 11

GSPG 12






North

South

14 October 2001 (weekend night)

0.97

0.98

0.99

1

1.01

1.02

1.03

1.04

TNUoS 1

TNUoS 2

TNUoS 3

TNUoS 4

TNUoS 5

TNUoS 6

TNUoS 7

TNUoS 8

TNUoS 9

TNUoS 1

0

TNUoS 1

1

TNUoS 1

2

TNUoS 1

3

TNUoS 1

4

TNUoS 1

5

Base case - Indicative Network Intact NetworkRepresentative Network


P75 (T3) - Summary

• Network configuration can have an effect on TLMs:– while there is almost no difference between

intact and representative networks,– there is a tangible difference between

indicative and intact networks


P75 (T4)Sensitivities to

constraints02 January 2002

(base case)02 January 2002

(constrained case)

5 double circuits restricted for 20% below the flow level in base case


0.94

0.96

0.98

1

1.02

1.04

1.06

1.08

GSPG 13

GSPG 1

GSPG 2

GSPG 3

GSPG 4

GSPG 5

GSPG 6

GSPG 7

GSPG 8

GSPG 9

GSPG 10

GSPG 11

GSPG 12

Base Case Constrained Case

P75: GSPG zone TLMs - Demandsensitivity to constraints

North

South

Losses: 758.5MW (base case), 573 (constrained case)


0.94

0.96

0.98

1

1.02

1.04

1.06

1.08

1.1

TNUoS 1

TNUoS 2

TNUoS 3

TNUoS 4

TNUoS 5

TNUoS 6

TNUoS 7

TNUoS 8

TNUoS 9

TNUoS 1

0

TNUoS 1

1

TNUoS 1

2

TNUoS 1

3

TNUoS 1

4

TNUoS 1

5


P75: TNUoS zone TLMs - Generation sensitivity to constraints

North

South



P75 (T4) - Summary

• Constraints may have an impact on TLMs


P75 (T5)Comparison of

Generation TLFs/TLMs and Demand TLFs/TLMs

at the same node


P75: Comparison of Generation/Demand Zonal TLFs/TLMs

Node: Rye HouseGSPG zone: 7TNUoS zone: 10SP: 02 January 2002, SP36

Generation Demand

Nodal TLMs 1.0346 1.0222

TNUoS (for generation) GSPG (for demand) Zonal TLMs

1.0408 1.0286

GSPG (for generation and demand) Zonal TLMs

1.1005 1.0885


P75 (T5) - Summary

• Discrepancies between TLMs for generation and demand at a node are not greatly exacerbated if generation and demand zones are different from one another

• Only one node has been assessed and this may not be representative


P75 (T6)Comparison of Nodal TLFs/TLMs

with Zonal TLFs/TLMs


P75: Comparison of Nodal/Zonal TLMs (Demand)

02 January 2002

Winter peak (SP36)

0.92

0.94

0.96

0.98

1

1.02

1.04

1.06

1.08

1

22

43

64

85

10

6

12

7

14

8

16

9

19

0

21

1

23

2

25

3

27

4

29

5

31

6

33

7

35

8

37

9

GSPG Zonal TLMs - Demand Nodal TLMs - Demand

North

South


P75: Comparison of Nodal/Zonal TLMs (Generation)

02 January 2002

Winter peak (SP36)

0.93

0.95

0.97

0.99

1.01

1.03

1.05

1.07

1.09

1

22

43

64

85

10

6

12

7

14

8

16

9

19

0

21

1

23

2

25

3

27

4

29

5

31

6

33

7

35

8

37

9

TNUoS (gen) Zonal TLMs - Generation Nodal TLMs - Generation

North

South


P75: Comparison of Nodal/Zonal TLMs (Demand)

01 August 2001

Summer trough (SP8)

0.96

0.97

0.98

0.99

1

1.01

1.02

1.03

1.04

1.05

1

20

39

58

77

96

11

5

13

4

15

3

17

2

19

1

21

0

22

9

24

8

26

7

28

6

30

5

32

4

34

3


North

South


P75: Comparison of Nodal/Zonal TLMs (Generation)

01 August 2001

Summer trough (SP8)

0.95

0.97

0.99

1.01

1.03

1.05

1

20

39

58

77

96

11

5

13

4

15

3

17

2

19

1

21

0

22

9

24

8

26

7

28

6

30

5

32

4

34

3

TNUoS (gen) Zonal TLMs - Generation Nodal TLMs - Generation

North South


P75 (T6) - Summary

• Introduction of Modification Proposal P75 and its zonal TLMs (GSPG zones for demand and TNUoS (gen) zones for generation) would result in nodal TLMs for some nodes being closer to neighbouring zonal TLMs


P75 (T7)Model performance

characteristics


• Data capture depends on the source systems

• Data capture will be greatly improved once NGC’s state estimator is fully operational

• Amount, duration and quality of data depends on the source systems and the TLF modification applied

• The quality and consistency of the data determine the time and effort required to establish acceptable loadflow conditions

P75: Input data


• Once a suitable loadflow data set has been obtained it should take less than 10 seconds to obtain TLFs for all considered generation/demand points for a SP

• The output would be suitably structured list of TLFs

• Further post processing could be established to automatically produce a higher level of the output data

P75: Processing and output data


P75 (T8)Sensitivities to flows on French Inter-connector31 October 2001

(importing)07 November

2001 (exporting)


0.94

0.96

0.98

1

1.02

1.04

1.06

GSPG 13

GSPG 1

GSPG 2

GSPG 3

GSPG 4

GSPG 5

GSPG 6

GSPG 7

GSPG 8

GSPG 9

GSPG 10

GSPG 11

GSPG 12

Importing from France Exporting to france

P75: GSPG zone TLMs -sensitivity to flows on French Inter-connector

North

South

Losses: 377.1MW (importing), 533.3 (exporting)


0.94

0.96

0.98

1

1.02

1.04

1.06

1.08

THUoS 1

THUoS 2

THUoS 3

THUoS 4

THUoS 5

THUoS 6

THUoS 7

THUoS 8

THUoS 9

THUoS 1

0

THUoS 1

1

THUoS 1

2

THUoS 1

3

THUoS 1

4

THUoS 1

5


P75: TNUoS zone TLMs -sensitivity to flows on French Inter-connector

North

South



P75 (T9&10)

Examples of moving

generation deliveries for the selected nodes

Greystones

Barking Power


P75: GSPG zone TLMs -sensitivity to plant outages / response to

signals

0.94

0.96

0.98

1

1.02

1.04

1.06

1.08

GSPG 13

GSPG 2

GSPG 4

GSPG 6

GSPG 8

GSPG 10

GSPG 12

Base Case

1000MW removedfrom Greystones (T9-1)

1000MW removedfrom Barking Power(T9-2)

1000MW moved fromGreystones to BarkingPower (T10)

North

South

02 January 2002


P75: TNUoS (gen) zone TLMs -sensitivity to plant outages / response to

signals

0.94

0.96

0.98

1

1.02

1.04

1.06

1.08

1.1

TNUoS 1

TNUoS 3

TNUoS 5

TNUoS 7

TNUoS 9

TNUoS 1

1

TNUoS 1

3

TNUoS 1

5

Base Case

1000MW removedfrom Greystones (T9-1)1000MW removedfrom Barking Power(T9-2)1000MW moved fromGreystones to BarkingPower (T10)

North

South

02 January 2002


For the base case of 02 January

2002 500MW were moved from

Dinorwig to 5 different places

Indian Queens

P75 (T11): Sensitivity to intermittent generation

Blyth

Harker

Grain

Norwich

Dinorwig


0.94

0.96

0.98

1

1.02

1.04

1.06

GSPG 1

3

GSPG 2

GSPG 4

GSPG 6

GSPG 8

GSPG 1

0

GSPG 1

2

Base Case

500MW to Blyth

500MW to Harker

500MW to IndianQueens

500MW to Grain

500MW to Norwich

P75: GSPG zone TLMs - Demandsensitivity to intermittent generation

North

South

02 January 2002


0.92

0.94

0.96

0.98

1

1.02

1.04

1.06

1.08

TNUoS 1

TNUoS 3

TNUoS 5

TNUoS 7

TNUoS 9

TNUoS 1

1

TNUoS 1

3

TNUoS 1

5

Base Case

500MW to Blyth

500MW to Harker


500MW to Grain

500MW to Norwich

P75: TNUoS zone TLMs - Generationsensitivity to intermittent generation

North

South

02 January 2002


P75 (T8 to T11) - Summary

• TLMs in Modification Proposal P75 are only locally sensitive to plant withdrawal or plant relocation or to intermittent generation

• Note that for Task 8 (sensitivity to flow on French inter-connector) the effect is complicated as we have two different dates and SPs with different generation and demand profiles


Illustration of key results

P82


P82 (T1)Variation of scaled TLFs over

time




0.97

0.98

0.99

1

1.01

1.02

1.03

1.04

GSPG 1

3

GSPG 1

GSPG2

GSPG 3

GSPG 4

GSPG 5

GSPG 6

GSPG 7

GSPG 8

GSPG 9

GSPG 1

0

GSPG 1

1

GSPG 1

2


P82: GSPG zone ½ h TLMs over sample time period - Demand

North

South


0.96

0.97

0.98

0.99

1

1.01

1.02

1.03

GSPG 1

3

GSPG 1

GSPG2

GSPG 3

GSPG 4

GSPG 5

GSPG 6

GSPG 7

GSPG 8

GSPG 9

GSPG 1

0

GSPG 1

1

GSPG 1

2


P82: GSPG zone ½ h TLMs over sample time period - Generation

North

South


0.98

0.99

1

1.01

1.02

1.03

1.04

SP

1

SP

6

SP

11

SP

16

SP

21

SP

26

SP

31

SP

36

SP

41

SP

46


P82: GSPG zone ½ h TLMs over a day - Demand

10 October 2001

North

South


0.97

0.98

0.99

1

1.01

1.02

SP

1

SP

6

SP

11

SP

16

SP

21

SP

26

SP

31

SP

36

SP

41

SP

46


P82: GSPG zone ½ h TLMs over a day - Generation

10 October 2001

North

South


P82 (T1) - Summary

• Before implementing the averaging of TLFs, the variation in TLMs for P82 would be up to approximately 0.016 for demand and 0.017 for generation on a typical autumn working day


P82 (T2)Base cases





GSPG and TNUoS (gen) zones


Change P82 introduces – an example (based on scaled, GSPG zone, averaged

TLFs)

North

South0.99

1

1.01

1.02

1.03

GSPG 13

GSPG 1

GSPG 2

GSPG 3

GSPG 4

GSPG 5

GSPG 6

GSPG 7

GSPG 8

GSPG 9

GSPG 10

GSPG 11

GSPG 12

Zonal TLMs (demand) for 02 January 2002TLMs (demand) for TLFs equal to ZEROs

02 January 2002


Demand TLMs for P82 (based on scaled, GSPG zone, averaged TLFs)

0.98

0.99

1

1.01

1.02

1.03

GSPG 13

GSPG 1

GSPG 2

GSPG 3

GSPG 4

GSPG 5

GSPG 6

GSPG 7

GSPG 8

GSPG 9

GSPG 10

GSPG 11

GSPG 12

Max Average Min

North

South


0.97

0.98

0.99

1

1.01

1.02

GSPG 13

GSPG 1

GSPG 2

GSPG 3

GSPG 4

GSPG 5

GSPG 6

GSPG 7

GSPG 8

GSPG 9

GSPG 10

GSPG 11

GSPG 12

Zonal TLMs (generation) for 02 January 2002TLMs (generation) for TLFs equal to ZEROs

Change P82 introduces – an example (based on scaled, GSPG zone, averaged

TLFs)

North

South

02 January 2002


Generation TLMs for P82 (based on scaled, GSPG zone, averaged TLFs)

0.97

0.98

0.99

1

1.01

1.02

GSPG 13

GSPG 1

GSPG 2

GSPG 3

GSPG 4

GSPG 5

GSPG 6

GSPG 7

GSPG 8

GSPG 9

GSPG 10

GSPG 11

GSPG 12

Max Average Min

North

South


P82 (T2) - Summary

• Introduction of Modification Proposal P82 would result in variable TLMs:– over time; and– across country

with an overall variation between 0.99 and 1.03 for demand and between 0.975 and 1.015 for generation, where spatial variations are larger than temporal variations


P82 (T3)Variation of TLMs over time

(based on average scaled TLFs)




P82: GSPG zone TLMs over sample time period - Demand

North

South0.98

0.99

1

1.01

1.02

1.03

GSPG 1

3

GSPG 1

GSPG2

GSPG 3

GSPG 4

GSPG 5

GSPG 6

GSPG 7

GSPG 8

GSPG 9

GSPG 1

0

GSPG 1

1

GSPG 1

2



P82: GSPG zone TLMs over sample time period - Generation

North

South0.97

0.98

0.99

1

1.01

1.02

GSPG 1

3

GSPG 1

GSPG2

GSPG 3

GSPG 4

GSPG 5

GSPG 6

GSPG 7

GSPG 8

GSPG 9

GSPG 1

0

GSPG 1

1

GSPG 1

2



P82: GSPG zone TLMs over a day - Demand

10 October 2001

North

South

0.98

0.99

1

1.01

1.02

1.03

1.04

SP

1

SP

6

SP

11

SP

16

SP

21

SP

26

SP

31

SP

36

SP

41

SP

46



P82: GSPG zone TLMs over a day - Generation

10 October 2001

North

South

0.97

0.98

0.99

1

1.01

1.02

SP

1

SP

6

SP

11

SP

16

SP

21

SP

26

SP

31

SP

36

SP

41

SP

46



P82 (T3) - Summary

• Introduction of Modification Proposal P82 would result in almost non-existent daily variations in TLMs (up to approximately 0.004 for demand and 0.004 for generation) on a typical autumn working day


P82 (T4)Sensitivity of TLFs & TLMs to

choice of historic data and weightings


• This task has not been completed as the required input data have not been provided

P82: Sensitivity of TLFs & TLMs to historic data and weighting coefficients


P82 (T5)Sensitivities to

constraints02 January 2002

(base case)02 January 2002

(constrained case)

5 double circuits restricted for 20% below the flow level in base case


P82: GSPG zone TLMs - Demandsensitivity to constraints

North

South


0.99

1

1.01

1.02

1.03

GSPG 13

GSPG 1

GSPG 2

GSPG 3

GSPG 4

GSPG 5

GSPG 6

GSPG 7

GSPG 8

GSPG 9

GSPG 10

GSPG 11

GSPG 12



P82: TNUoS zone TLMs - Generation sensitivity to constraints

North

South


0.97

0.98

0.99

1

1.01

1.02

GSPG 13

GSPG 1

GSPG 2

GSPG 3

GSPG 4

GSPG 5

GSPG 6

GSPG 7

GSPG 8

GSPG 9

GSPG 10

GSPG 11

GSPG 12



P82 (T5) - Summary

• TLMs in Modification Proposal P82 are almost insensitive to constraints – because the effects of such events would be averaged in the following year


P82 (T6)Comparison of Nodal TLFs/TLMs

with Zonal TLFs/TLMs


0.97

0.98

0.99

1

1.01

1.02

1.03

1

22

43

64

85

10

6

12

7

14

8

16

9

19

0

21

1

23

2

25

3

27

4

29

5

31

6

33

7

35

8

37

9

GSPG Zonal TLMs - Generation Nodal TLMs - Generation

North South

P82: Comparison of Nodal/Zonal TLMs – Generation

02 January 2002

Winter peak (SP36)


0.98

0.99

1

1.01

1.02

1.03

1.04

1

22

43

64

85

10

6

12

7

14

8

16

9

19

0

21

1

23

2

25

3

27

4

29

5

31

6

33

7

35

8

37

9


North South

P82: Comparison of Nodal/Zonal TLMs - Demand

02 January 2002

Winter peak (SP36)


0.97

0.98

0.99

1

1.01

1.02

1

20

39

58

77

96

11

5

13

4

15

3

17

2

19

1

21

0

22

9

24

8

26

7

28

6

30

5

32

4

34

3

GSPG Zonal TLMs - Generation Nodal TLMs - Generation

North South

P82: Comparison of Nodal/Zonal TLMs – Generation

01 August 2001

Summer trough (SP8)


0.98

0.99

1

1.01

1.02

1.03

1

20

39

58

77

96

11

5

13

4

15

3

17

2

19

1

21

0

22

9

24

8

26

7

28

6

30

5

32

4

34

3


North South

P82: Comparison of Nodal/Zonal TLMs - Demand

01 August 2001

Summer trough (SP8)


P82 (T6) - Summary

• Introduction of Modification Proposal P82 and its zonal TLMs (GSPG zones only for both demand and generation) would result in nodal TLMs for some nodes being closer to neighbouring zonal TLMs


P82 (T7)Sensitivities to flows on French Inter-connector31 October 2001

(importing)07 November

2001 (exporting)


0.98

0.99

1

1.01

1.02

1.03

GSPG 13

GSPG 1

GSPG 2

GSPG 3

GSPG 4

GSPG 5

GSPG 6

GSPG 7

GSPG 8

GSPG 9

GSPG 10

GSPG 11

GSPG 12


P82: GSPG zone TLMs - Demandsensitivity to flows on French Inter-connector

North

South



0.97

0.98

0.99

1

1.01

1.02

GSPG 13

GSPG 1

GSPG 2

GSPG 3

GSPG 4

GSPG 5

GSPG 6

GSPG 7

GSPG 8

GSPG 9

GSPG 10

GSPG 11

GSPG 12


P82: GSPG zone TLMs - Generationsensitivity to flows on French Inter-connector

North

South



P82 (T7) - Summary

• TLMs in Modification Proposal P82 are almost insensitive to direction of flows on the French inter-connector – because the effects of such events would be averaged in the following year


P82 (T8) Degree to which a scaling

factor of 0.5 recovers heating losses





0.48

0.49

0.5

0.51

0.52

0.53

0.54

0.55

02-Jan-2002

01-Aug-2001

10-Oct-2001

11-Oct-2001

13-Oct-2001

14-Oct-2001

Sc

ale

co

eff

icie

nts

Flat 0.5 scale coeff. Accurate scale coeff.

P82: Comparison between flat 0.5 scaling factor and the actual

reconciliation factors


90.00%

92.50%

95.00%

97.50%

100.00%

102.50%

105.00%

02-Jan-2002

01-Aug-2001

10-Oct-2001

11-Oct-2001

13-Oct-2001

14-Oct-2001

Un

de

r/O

ve

r R

ec

ov

ery

of

Lo

ss

es

Use of 0.5 scale coeff. Use of accurate scale coeff.

P82: Nodal TLFs – recovery of heating losses with scaling factor 0.5 and the actual reconciliation factors


P82 (T8) - Summary

• Scaling factor of 0.5 does not precisely recover heating losses but appears to be a reasonable approximation


P82 (T9&10)

Examples of moving

generation deliveries for the selected nodes

Greystones

Barking Power


P82: GSPG zone TLMs - Demand sensitivity to plant outages / response to

signals

0.99

0.995

1

1.005

1.01

1.015

1.02

1.025

1.03

GSPG 1

3

GSPG 2

GSPG 4

GSPG 6

GSPG 8

GSPG 1

0

GSPG 1

2

Base Case

1000MW removedfrom Greystones (T9-1)1000MW removedfrom Barking Power(T9-2)1000MW moved fromGreystones toBarking Power (T10)

North

South

02 January 2002


0.975

0.98

0.985

0.99

0.995

1

1.005

1.01

1.015

GSPG 13

GSPG 2

GSPG 4

GSPG 6

GSPG 8

GSPG 10

GSPG 12

Base Case

1000MW removedfrom Greystones (T9-1)1000MW removedfrom Barking Power(T9-2)1000MW moved fromGreystones toBarking Power (T10)

P82: GSPG zone TLMs - Generation sensitivity to plant outages / response to

signals

North

South

02 January 2002


For the base case of 02 January

2002 500MW were moved from

Dinorwig to 5 different places

Indian Queens

P82 (T11): Sensitivity to intermittent generation

Blyth

Harker

Grain

Norwich

Dinorwig


0.99

1

1.01

1.02

1.03

GSPG 13

GSPG 2

GSPG 4

GSPG 6

GSPG 8

GSPG 10

GSPG 12

Base Case

500MW to Blyth

500MW to Harker


500MW to Grain

500MW to Norwich

P82: GSPG zone TLMs - Demandsensitivity to intermittent generation

North

South

02 January 2002


0.97

0.98

0.99

1

1.01

GSPG 13

GSPG 2

GSPG 4

GSPG 6

GSPG 8

GSPG 10

GSPG 12

Base Case

500MW to Blyth

500MW to Harker


500MW to Grain

500MW to Norwich

P82: GSPG zone TLMs - Generationsensitivity to intermittent generation

North

South

02 January 2002


P82 (T9 to T11) - Summary

• TLMs in Modification Proposal P82 are almost insensitive to plant withdrawal or move or to intermittent generation – because the effects of such events would be averaged in the following year


END OF PRESENTATION

Power Technologies International30 September 20021 Load Flow Modelling Service Project results 30...

Documents

Transcript of Power Technologies International30 September 20021 Load Flow Modelling Service Project results 30...