1. WECC JSIS Update
Dmitry Kosterev, BPA

2. January 15-17, 2012 Meeting
WECC JSIS met on January 15-17, 2012 in Tempe, AZ

3. 4. Event Analysis
JSIS is working with MVWG on model validation studies of July 4, 2012 under-frequency event
System Frequency
CO Power
Next step: verify the amount of generation tripped, confirm with SRP and APS

4. 5. Frequency Response Analysis
JSIS worked with PNNL on improvements to Frequency Response tool
JSIS populated Frequency Response Tool with historic events

5. 5. Frequency Response Analysis
Frequency response baseline (by date)

6. 5. Frequency Response Analysis
Frequency response baseline (by time of day)

7. 6. Disturbance-Based Model Validation

8. Test A
Test B

9. Test A
Test B
Reality

10. Using PMU Data for Model Validation
Install PMUs at power plant POIs
BPA developed Power Plant Model Validation (PPMV) application using PMU data
Substation
Record:
POI bus voltage
POI bus frequency
Power plant MWs and MVARs
Point of Interconnection V I
Power Plant ~

11. Power Plant Model Validation
What a good models looks like:
Voltage and frequency are inputs
Active and reactive power are “measures of success”
Blue line = actual recording
Red line = model

12. Power Plant Model Validation
What a bad model looks like:
Voltage and frequency are inputs
Active and reactive power are “measures of success”
Blue line = actual recording
Red line = model

13. Model Validation State
Plant
Active Power
Reactive
H1(14)
H2(18)
H3(16)
H4(12)
H5(27)
T1(1)*
T2(2)*
T3(3)
T4(1) W2
Good
Acceptable
Needs Review
Needs Major Revisions

14. Experience with Disturbance-Based Model Validation
Most common model issues:
Power System Stabilizer models
Turbine control mode of operation / governor models
Generator inertia
Deficiencies in model structure
Other reasons for model mismatch
Automatic Generation Controls
“Clinical” experience:
Plants with modern digital systems have good models that stay accurate over time
Plants with legacy analog controls have most errors and tend to change in time

15. Model Calibration BPA has PMUs at POIs of 14 power plants
About 40 monitoring points,
112 generators
About 19 GW capacity
More PMUs are to be added at wind sites
PMU data is used to validate dynamic models of power plants:
used for pass / fail checking
no model adjustments are made should the model be wrong
DOE is funding a research project by Bernie Lesieutre at University of Wisconsin to determine how the PMU data can be used for model calibration

16. Model (in)Validation Blue = actual Red = simulated
Simulations done using a model from WECC dynamic data base
Blue = actual
Red = simulated

17. Model (in)Validation Blue = actual Red = simulated
Simulations done using a model from WECC dynamic data base
Blue = actual
Red = simulated

18. Model Calibration Blue = actual Red = simulated
Simulations done using a calibrated model
Blue = actual
Red = simulated

19. Model Calibration Blue = actual Red = simulated
Simulations done using a calibrated model
Blue = actual
Red = simulated

20. Performance Monitoring Event 1✔
PSS ON
PSS OFF

21. Performance Monitoring Event 3✔
PSS ON
PSS OFF

22. Performance Monitoring Event 4
PSS ON ✔
PSS OFF

23. Performance Monitoring Event 7
PSS ON ✔
PSS OFF

24. 6. Disturbance-Based Model Validation
Recommendations:
Use disturbance data recordings for power plant model verification
Disseminate within WECC applications for model validation and calibration using PMU data

25. 7. Oscillation Baselining
PDCI probing and Chief Joseph brake tests are performed in 2012
The test will continue in 2013, starting March 20. Three brake tests will be done.
Tests are useful for calibrating Mode Meter application
We can work with MVWG to use the tests for model validation
More baselining is planned as WECC-wide data becomes available
PCC Assignment: Develop a paper on modes of power oscillations in Western Interconnection

26. Power System Models Power System Stabilizers Load Models
Accurate
Transmission Lines, Transformers
Excitation Systems
Generators (Machine)
Turbine controls
Power System Stabilizers
Load Models
Generator Protection
Uncertain
Inaccurate

27. 2008 vs. 2012 NS Mode A Starts at midnight

28. 2008 vs. 2012 NS Mode B Starts at midnight

29. 8. Ringdown Damping and Oscillation Detection
WECC JSIS prepared test cases using actual and simulated data:
Disturbance ringdown (60 second files)
Ambient data containing sustained oscillations, disturbances and bad data
Developers and vendors were asked to show case their applications

30. Montana Tech Ringdown Ambient Oscillation Detection
Script-driven general Prony tool
Easy to repeat results
Script-driven batch WECC Prony tool
Specifically designed for WECC system modes
Automates mode selection
Designed to batch analyze MANY cases
Writes results to XLS and DOC files
Good signal conditioning
Linear algorithm, sometimes have “mode splititng”
Ambient Oscillation Detection
Got most, not all, oscillations, got tricked by bad data

31. University of Wisconsin
Ringdown
Uses a nonlinear estimator to fit prony model
Provided very good fit with a minimum model size
Got good results for challenging cases when conventional linear Prony produced mode splitting.
Ambient Oscillation Detection
Under analysis

32. Washington State University
Event Analysis Engine
Three algorithms: Prony, Matrix Pencil and Hankel Total Least Square.
Aimed at events resulting in sudden changes in damping
Looks at consistency among three engines to alarm
Damping Monitor Engine
Ambient noise based. Continuous.
Frequency Domain Decomposition
Provides early warning on poorly damped modes

33. Other demonstrations Other demonstrations included:
Alstom Grid
Electric Power Group
Pacific Northwest National Lab
San Diego State University
Presentatons and demo movies are available on WECC JSIS website

34. Other Items Control Room applications Data Management
Phase Angle Alarming
Voltage Stability Applications
Linear state estimation
Oscillation Detection and Low Damping Alarming
Operating Procedures
Application and Operating procedure Approval process
Data Management

35. 15. Oscillation Mitigation Procedures
Alberta Connected
0.4-Hz Mode
0.25-Hz Mode
0.4-Hz Mode
Measured during Aug. 22, 2009 PDCI probe test.

36. Alberta Disconnected 0.32-Hz Mode
Measured during Sep 14, 2005 PDCI probe test.