1. Electric Power Group Presents Maximizing Use of Synchrophasor Technology for Everyday Tasks
Welcome! The meeting will begin at 2:00 p.m. EDT / 11:00 a.m. PDT Oct. 12, 2016
Today’s Topic: System Model Validation for NERC MOD-33 Requirements
Registration URL:
Webinar Teleconference Number:
Access code:
Please mute your phone during the presentation.
We will encourage discussion at planned QA session.
Thank you for your cooperation.
For any technical issues with this webinar, please contact or call (626) 685–2015

2. Maximizing Use of Synchrophasor Technology for Everyday Tasks
System Model Validation
for NERC MOD-33 Requirements
Webinar
Oct 12, 2016
Presented by
Douglas Selin, Bajarang Agrawal, APS
Prashant C. Palayam, Kevin Chen, EPG

3. © Electric Power Group 2016. All rights reserved
Outline
DRAFT
Background
NERC MOD-033-1: Steady-State and Dynamic System Model Validation
Standard, Requirements, Criteria & Metrics
Example of Model Validation Process – APS Experience
WECC Guidelines
Reliability Coordinator Level
Planning Coordinator Level
APS Demo using Microsoft Excel
Model Validation Using Phasor Grid Dynamics Analyzer (PGDA)
Data Collection Method – PMU and Simulated
PGDA Steps – time alignment, calculating missing metrics, mapping signals, recursive validation
Example – Unit Trip Event
Findings/Observations
Demo Using PGDA
Discussion
Your Practice, Use Cases, Suggestions
Summary
© Electric Power Group All rights reserved

4. © Electric Power Group 2016. All rights reserved
Background
NERC MOD becomes enforceable 7/1/2017
WECC and Peak RC are developing a process to provide basecase for model validation
APS and EPG discussed use of EPG tools for model validation
August 11, EPG demonstrated model validation using PGDA and APS demonstrated model validation using Microsoft Excel
August 16, 2016 – EPG illustrated ability to load PSLF Channel file data into PGDA using a sample dataset
August 25, 2016 – EPG was provided with unit trip event from both PSLF and PMU to demonstrate the complete process of model validation using PGDA
September 6, 2016 – EPG illustrated methodology and demonstrated model validation process using PGDA for their event
APS adopting EPG methodology for model validation using PGDA
Today – APS and EPG will share our experience
© Electric Power Group All rights reserved

5. Example Of Model Validation Process
© Electric Power Group All rights reserved

6. Steady-State and Dynamic System Model Validation - Standard
Number: MOD-033-1
Purpose:
To establish consistent validation requirements to facilitate the collection of accurate data and building of planning models to analyze the reliability of the interconnected transmission system
Applicability:
Planning Coordinator
Reliability Coordinator (RC)
Transmission Operator (TOP)
© Electric Power Group All rights reserved

7. © Electric Power Group 2016. All rights reserved
MOD Requirements
Planning Coordinator Shall:
Implement a documented a Data Validation Process that includes
Performance Comparison of power flow model to actual system behavior
Performance Comparison of dynamics model to actual system response
Guidelines to determine unacceptable discrepancies during comparison
Guidelines to resolve unacceptable differences in performance
Use a dynamic local event or wide area event having measurable transient response
Closing a transmission line near a generating plant (local event)
Oscillation event between a generator and the system (local event)
Local response to wide area event
Validate models at least once every 24 calendar months
More frequent validation is encouraged
© Electric Power Group All rights reserved

8. MOD-033-1 Specifications for Criteria and Metrics
Modify & Match Planning Simulation with State Estimator case or measured values prior to disturbance:
System Load
Transmission Topology and Parameters
Voltages at Major Buses
Flows on major transmission elements
Metrics for Dynamic Comparison:
Voltage oscillations at major buses
System frequency
Real and Reactive Power Oscillations on lines, ties, and generating units
© Electric Power Group All rights reserved

9. WECC Guideline In Development for MOD-033-1 Compliance
Further Investigation with MVWG & TOPs 8
Selects a disturbance 1
Repeat At Least Once Every 24 Months, MVWG to provide 2 events per year
Unsatisfactory
MVWG
WECC Staff
Validate Dynamic Response 7
Satisfactory 2
Peak RC
WECC Staff
State Estimator (SE), SCADA, PMU data collection used to simulate event
Planning Coordinators
TOPs
Create Comprehensive switching sequence 6
PCs review and provide feedback (4 week time period). WECC issues final case.
WECC Staff
WECC Staff
Create or Select dynamic data file 5 3
Modify & Match WECC Planning case to SE prior to disturbance
WECC Staff
Validate Steady State Model 4
© Electric Power Group All rights reserved

10. Examples of WECC Level Comparison
© Electric Power Group All rights reserved

11. Validation Process at Planning Coordinator Level – MOD-033-14
PCs
Correct model or data
WECC Validated Dynamic Response case available to PCs 1
PCs 3
Validate local response or Identify unsatisfactory correlation 2
PCs
Download case and make local adjustments as needed
PMU Data
© Electric Power Group All rights reserved

12. Examples of APS Model Validation
© Electric Power Group All rights reserved

13. Conclusions and Summary of Steps
WECC/MVWG plays a big role in creating cases for model validation which PCs can use.
Peak RC state estimator and SCADA data used to initially create a case for a large system wide event (*WSM case). Initial comparison to PMU data is made.
WECC uses WSM case to create planning case and does an overall system validation
WECC provides validated planning case to individual PCs
Individual PCs contribute and refine the case
PCs then use the case to do model validation of their local system.
* West-wide System Model, also referred to as WWSM
© Electric Power Group All rights reserved

14. © Electric Power Group 2016. All rights reserved
APS Demo
Using Microsoft Excel
© Electric Power Group All rights reserved

15. Model Validation Using PGDA
Data Collection, Methodology, Demo, Findings/Observations
© Electric Power Group All rights reserved

16. Data Collection Disturbance PMU data Simulated data Data Source
Database – PI, eDNA, SQL, Oracle, Phasor Archiver
Dynamic Simulation
Tools
Data Extraction Tools e.g. ePDE
PSLF, PSS/E, Power World, ePHASORSim, RTDS
Input
Start and End Time
Planning Power Flow Model, Dynamic Data File and Event Sequence
Event Sequence for dynamic simulation
N/A
Event Analysis Tools e.g. PGDA
© Electric Power Group All rights reserved

17. Model Validation Using PGDA – 8 Steps
Generate Report
*.chf
*.txt
*.p
Extract simulated data into CSV file 8
PSLF
Repeat At Least Once Every 24 Months
Generate Analysis Template for model validation 1 7
PSS/E
*.out
*.csv 2
Next iteration of same event after tuning models
Identify unacceptable discrepancies by location and metric
Load into PGDA with an identifier 6
PMU data 5
PMU Voltage & Current Phasors
Map signals from simulated and PMU data using Plot analysis 3
Time Synchronize event start time using crosshair and GUI
Calculate Generator and Line power flows using Pseudo signal calculator
MW & MVAR 4
© Electric Power Group All rights reserved

18. Unit Trip – 345kV Bus Frequency Comparison Using Plot Analysis
18 mHz
Detrending by First Value
Dynamic
Steady State
23 mHz
10 mHz
© Electric Power Group All rights reserved

19. Unit Trip – 500kV Bus Voltage Comparison Using Plot Analysis
Steady State
Dynamic
Detrending by First Value
7 kV
1 kV
© Electric Power Group All rights reserved

20. Unit Trip – 345kV Bus Voltage Comparison Using Plot Analysis
Steady State
Detrending by First Value
Dynamic
11 kV
1 kV
© Electric Power Group All rights reserved

21. Unit Trip – 345kV Line Real Power (MW) Comparison Using Plot Analysis
Steady State
Dynamic
63 MW
125 MW
© Electric Power Group All rights reserved

22. © Electric Power Group 2016. All rights reserved
Unit Trip – 345kV Line Reactive Power (MVAR) Comparison Using Plot Analysis
16.5 MVAR
1.2 s
13 MVAR
1.4 s
© Electric Power Group All rights reserved

23. Findings/Observations
Steady-State
Dynamic
Match
Unit Trip
Bad
Good
Acceptable
Voltages
Best Fit
Frequency,
Reactive Power
Unacceptable
Real Power
** Metrics
Steady State
Dynamic
(Diff in Rate of Change during First Transient Response)
(First Transient Rise Time of Simulation Response is within x% of Actual Response)
(Oscillatory Behavior – Diff in Frequency of Oscillation & Damping %)
Frequency
< 20mHz (vary based on interconnection)
< 20%
< 0.1Hz, < 1% for not well damped conditions
Voltage
< 1 % of base kV
Power Flows
< 5% of Line Ratings
< 10 MW
< 10 MVAR
** Criteria used here may not reflect in your interconnection.
© Electric Power Group All rights reserved

24. © Electric Power Group 2016. All rights reserved
EPG Demo
Using PGDA
© Electric Power Group All rights reserved

25. © Electric Power Group 2016. All rights reserved
Q&A, Discussion
Your Practice, Use Cases, Suggestions
© Electric Power Group All rights reserved

26. © Electric Power Group 2016. All rights reserved
Q&A, Discussion
Q&A
Model Validation
Your Practices
Use Cases
Pain Points
Suggestions
Next Webinar Focus
Priority
Other topics
© Electric Power Group All rights reserved

27. © Electric Power Group 2016. All rights reserved
EPG Webinar Series
Configuring alarms and validate parameters to provide meaningful results for operators. (Nov 16)
Mining large data archives for events of different types, e.g. oscillations, generator trips, etc.
Using alarms & events for proactive actions.
Providing secure remote access to users in real-time for monitoring and diagnostics during normal times and emergencies.
Sending data & alarms to EMS.
Leveraging existing one-line diagrams to map synchrophasor data.
Extending grid synchrophasor observability with Linear State Estimation technology.
Other topics?
Extracting large amounts of synchrophasor data efficiently for offline analysis. (August 2016)
Quickly creating an event report that could be distributed to operators, engineers and managers. (Sept. 2016)
System Model Validation for MOD-33 Requirement (Oct. 12)
© Electric Power Group All rights reserved

28. © Electric Power Group 2016. All rights reserved
Summary
NERC MOD-033-1: Steady-State and Dynamic System Model Validation
Example of Model Validation Process – APS Experience
WECC Guidelines
APS Demo using Microsoft Excel
Model Validation Using PGDA
Data Collection Method – PMU and Simulated
PGDA Steps – time alignment, calculating missing metrics, mapping signals, recursive validation
© Electric Power Group All rights reserved

29. Thank you for participating!
If you have any questions regarding any part of the course, please contact us at
201 S. Lake Ave., Ste. 400
Pasadena, CA 91101