Jun Wen, MVWG Chair Southern California Edison MVWG Report to TSS Jan 2016 Jun Wen, MVWG Chair Southern California Edison

MVWG Vice Chair Song Wang (PacificCorp) agreed to serve as MVWG Vice Chair - Principal Transmission Planner at PacificCorp - 20+ years working experience in power system engineering

MVWG TFs LMTF – Hamody Hindi (BPA) PPMVDTF – Steve Yang (BPA) REMTF – Spencer Tacke (MID)* HVDCTF – Pouyan Pourbeik (EPRI) SMVTF – Slaven Kincic (PeakRC)* Relay TF? TBD RAS TF? TBD * New TF Chairs in Nov 2015

Recent Meetings and Workshops Meeting / Workshop Date Load Modeling Webinar Oct 22, 2015 HVDCTF Meeting Oct 28, 2015 LMTF Meeting Nov 17, 2015 REMTF Meeting Nov 18, 2015 PPMVDTF Meeting MVWG Meeting Nov 18-19, 2015

MVWG Activities Overview and Approval Items Load Modeling Renewable Energy Modeling White paper on limitations of generic model – Approval Item System Model Validation SMVTF Charter Generator Modeling, Testing, and Model Validation HVDC Modeling RAS and Relay Modeling Approved Dynamic Model List 2016 MVWG Meetings and Workshops

Load Modeling 6

Composite Load Model Work Plan Direct phase 1 model improvements Improve stall characteristics Improve protection and control Model implementation improvements Consistent, robust rules for model initialization Program benchmarking Data management improvements Efficient data management R&D work Component model flexibility (plug and play) Motorc model benchmarking Improvements to 3ph motor models Load model data tool development Model simplification Evaluation of special studies Expect for approval next meeting

Program Benchmarking Studies The purpose is to ensure performance uniformity among the programs. Benchmark methodology: Simple 2 bus model Play-in signal of frequency and voltage at the “system” bus 6 different play-in signals 6 different load models Preliminary results indicated that overall models behave mostly the same. The plan is to have benchmarking tests done by March 2016, and white paper by June 2016.

MEPPI WECC Load Model Sensitivity Study Observations Type of observation Phase 2 Base Case % change from Base Case for all contingencies (Motor D fraction) Parameters Heat Maps

Load Loss Summary Per Contingency 1PH Stuck Breaker 5+ branches lost No-fault gen loss No-fault gen loss Line and gen loss Double line loss

Composite Load Model Improvements Motor characteristics were not fully captured by positive sequence program The closer the fault is, the larger the breaking torque is. Some continuums needs to be added to stalling phenomenon John Undrill played a movie of hundreds of disturbance events seen by a feeder in Houston during summer. FIDVR doesn’t happen every time.

Stall Voltage and point-on-wave variation Ramp voltage instead

NERC, DOE, and Industry Activities NERC-DOE Joint FIDVR Workshop http://www.nerc.com/comm/PC/Pages/System-Analysis-and- Modeling-Subcommittee-(SAMS)-2013.aspx NATF Load Modeling Activities WECC LMTF Load Modeling Webinar Oct 22, 2015 Available at WECC MVWG page  Seminars NERC new LMTF First meeting, Jan 12-13, Salt Lake Office NERC and WECC LMTF coordination is being worked on to avoid overlap

Renewable Energy Modeling 14

New REMTF chair: Spencer Tacke (MID) Many thanks to Abe Ellis (Sandia) who served as REMTF chair for the past 10 years REMTF charter is expected to be reviewed at the next meeting

Whitepaper on Limitations of Generic Models Pouyan Pourbeik (EPRI) led and completed the White Paper “Value and Limitations of the Positive Sequence Generic Models of Renewable Energy Systems” The White Paper summarized why the second generation renewable energy models were developed, and the limitations in their applicability. The main limitations: Not intended for use in performing studies of phenomena outside of typical range of frequencies of interest in power system stability studies (i.e. 0.1-3 Hz) Not intended for detailed analysis of unbalanced phenomena Not intended for detailed local studies associated with control tuning and design for the interconnection of win/PV to very weak system (i.e. short-circuit ratios below 2-3) The White Paper was unanimously approved. Motion: Approve the White Paper on the Limitations of Generic Models

Energy Storage Modeling Xiaokang Xu (S&C) tested the battery storage model REEC_C across 4 software platforms. His simulation results showed large differences in the responses of the frequency and MW output, as well as noticeable differences of the voltage and MVAR output. The most likely reason seemed to be the use of system base versus generator base when calculating the model per unit values. The software vendors will look into this and the simulations will be re-run.

Enhanced Plant Level Control REPC_B will have additional new features, including interface with multiple WTGs, interface with reactive support devices, and plant level power factor control option. Work in progress. GE and PowerWorld have beta versions implemented. PTI is working on the model. Jay Senthil (Siemens) presented his work on implementing the model. Jay proposed a new module for the plant controller which allows users to interface with up to 50 devices including Wind Type 3, 4, PV, STATCOM, SVC, Synchronous Condenser, etc., and allows for interface with the REPC_A model. Jay proposed alternatives which would allow users to define a few, or many, sub-models that can interface with the existing REPC_A model The proposal will be discussed among a small group, including Pouyan Pourbeik (EPRI) who wasn’t able to attend the meeting.

DG Modeling Abe Ellis (Sandia) briefed the current revision work on IEEE 1547. DG tripping/recovery needs to be considered for the advanced DG modeling. The flexibility to plug-in different DG models into the Composite Load Model was briefly discussed. Jamie Weber presented the implementation of DG for both power flow and dynamics in PowerWorld.

Others “Generic Wind Turbine Generator Models for WECC – A Second Status Report” was awarded one of the four “Best of the Best” papers at 2015 IEEE PES General Meeting. Potential work by Sandia and BPA sponsored by DOE: Wind model verification tool Wind model validation process and guideline Vendor specific type 4 WTG modeling issues

System Model Validation 21

JSIS Update Dmitry Kosterev (BPA) provided update on the JSIS activities https://www.wecc.biz/Pages/FilteredCalendar.aspx?FilterField1=Committee&FilterValue1=JSIS

SMVTF Charter SMVTF Charter was unanimously approved by MVWG System Model Validation TF (SMVTF): Select disturbance events and develop disturbance cases 2 Planning Case conversions per year Have a basecase review process in place Perform system model validation studies and provide modeling and practice recommendations Have a communication mechanism in place to send out notification of disturbance events and disturbance cases (PC can choose to leverage the case or develop their own for MOD-033 compliance) Create SMVTF tab at the MVWG page and maintain list of disturbance events and all the disturbance reports and slides Conduct educational workshops Chair of SMVTF will be Slaven Kincic (PeakRC) Calling for more volunteers, more logistics need to be worked out SMVTF Charter was unanimously approved by MVWG

System Model Validation Studies Event Model Validation Efforts (WSM model validation): May 28th Montana Event June 17th Chief to Brake insertion The results are reasonable, and it is much faster to prepare the WSM case comparing to the planning case approach. More simulations are needed to gain more confidence and to improve models.

Generator Modeling, Testing, and Model Validation 25

Generator Models Excitation Models Hydro-turbine Model The ballot for IEEE Standard 421.5 on excitation models closed, with 80% response rate and 100% approval rate. MVWG plans to review and update the exciter models following the IEEE standard in effect Hydro-turbine Model BPA is working with John Undrill on the hydro-turbine model. John provided an update on the h6e model. Thermal Governor Model Practice (baseload flag) PPMVDTF will compile the suspect error list and send to SRWG

Machine Documentations John Undrill talked about the history of GENROU, GENSAL, GENTPF, GENTPJ models GENSAL comes from limitations of analog computers in late 1950s GENTPJ and GENTPF come from GENROU but with different saturation calculations. The 2012 GENTPJ model specification document will be updated with reference documents A Paper written by John Undrill but never submitted, if available Documentation by Jamie Weber http://www.powerworld.com/files/GENROU-GENSAL-GENTPF- GENTPJ.pdf

Power Plant Testing and Model Validation PPMVDTF had its first TF meeting, led by Steve Yang (BPA) NERC SMS PPMV activities Reliability Guideline draft – Power Plant Model Verification using PMUs PSSE has added the play-in function Pavel Etingov (PNNL) provided an overview of BPA-PNNL tool. Hassan Ghoudjebaklou (SDG&E) shared SDG&E’s experience using the PPMV tool More participation to the TF activities is highly encouraged.

HVDC Modeling

HVDC Modeling Conventional HVDC point-to-point dynamic model Final memo and model sent to software vendors Once implemented by software vendors, EPRI will help to test with BPA PDCI data Target to have model spec and model for approval in the March meeting VSC HVDC point-to-point dynamic model The interface between power flow model and dynamic model still needs to be decided The proposal is to start with voltage source behind reactance model Pouyan Pourbeik (EPRI) will go through the Transbay model to determine if it can be represented with the generic VSC model

RAS and Relay Modeling 31

RAS and Relay Modeling GE implemented Steady State RAS implementation. The training videos for PSLF users are available at https://vimeo.com/album/3561877 James O’Brien (PeakRC) provided a brief update to the transient RAS modeling. Jun Wen (SCE) will schedule a follow up call for RAS work planning It seemed little interest on additional relay modeling

WECC Approved Dynamic Model List 33

WECC Approved Dynamic Model List All three software vendors reviewed and updated comment All the blanks were filled in “not approved”- the model was never approved by MVWG “un-approved” – the model was approved at one time and then un-approved later No model is incorrect modeling. If you don’t know what to do, consult with MVWG Motion: Approve the WECC Approved Dynamic Model List??

2016 MVWG Meetings and Workshops 35

2016 MVWG Meetings & Workshops 3 MVWG Meetings and 2 Hands-on Regional Workshops South Regional Hands-on Workshop and 1st MVWG Meeting March 8-10 San Diego 2nd MVWG Meeting June 14-16 Salt Lake North Regional Hands-on Workshop Aug 2-3 Portland 3rd MVWG Meeting Nov 15-17 Salt Lake

Questions ? 37

Type 1 Type 2

Type 3

Type 4

PV

BESS

Test System Very simple 2 bus model Play in signal of frequency and voltage is done at the “SYSTEM” Bus Vary the Load Model and the Playin Signals

Test Cases 6 Different Playin Signals 6 Different Load Models FLAT – output with 1.03 voltage and 1.0 frequency, but with a Fault applied 50% of the way down the transmission line at 10.00 sec and cleared at 10.10 sec FREQ – Drop of frequency to about 0.992 per unit (about 59.5 Hz) OSC – oscillatory signal of both voltage and frequency VRamp – Ramp voltage down to zero, Frequency Flat VSag75 – Ramp voltage down to 0.75, Frequency Flat VSag90 – Ramp voltage down to 0.90, Frequency Flat 6 Different Load Models ALL_P1 – all model types without motor stalling on LD1PAC ALL_P2 – all model types including motor stalling on LD1PAC MA – 100% motor A MB – 100% motor B MD_P1 – 100% LD1PAC without motor stalling MD_P2 – 100% LD1PAC with motor stalling This gives us 6 X 6 = 36 scenarios to test