Emre-Can-Kara PDF

Towards Real-Time Estimation of Solar
Generation for Power System Operations
Emre Can Kara

Associate Staff Scientist
SLAC National Linear Accelerator Laboratory
Lyngby, Denmark
July 7, 2016
Organization
Introduction
! Problem Statement
! State-of-the-art
Estimation
! Dataset
! Power Factor Based Estimation—Back of the envelope
! Multilinear Regression
! Contextually Supervised Source Seperation
Current Work
! Behind-the-meter Solar Generation Estimation
Future Work
E.C.Kara Towards Real-Time Estimation of Solar Generation for Power System Operations 1 / 42
Increasing Distribution-Level Generation
Renewable&Energy
Supply&
=&
Demand&
Transmission Grid Distribution Grid
& & 5&
Renewable&Energy
generaIon&
Ime&
Supply&
=&
Demand&
Transmission Grid Distribution Grid
& & 6&
Future Grid: A Well-Monitored Entity
Synchrophasors
● Measure Voltage, Current magnitudes + angles

● Timestamped to ns precision, µs accuracy
MicroSynchrophasor (uPMU)
● 120 Hz sampling x 12 ch = 1440 Hz
● Local data buffering + batching (2 min)
● Linux box running our DISTIL agent
● Connectivity via Ethernet
Currently:
! Visibility into the distribution grid is
limited.
! Redundant, deterministic design
principles made it to today.
! Anomalies and outages are
increasing due to:
! Stochastic generation
! Equipment degradation
! Cybersecurity attacks
! Visibility into the distribution grid is We need to:

limited. ! Understand the
! Redundant, deterministic design variability in DERs
(generation, storage,
and load flexibility)
! Anomalies and outages are ! Detect and classify
increasing due to: the threats
! Stochastic generation ! Control DERs to
! Equipment degradation mitigate these
! Cybersecurity attacks threats
! Visibility into the distribution grid is We need to:

limited. ! Understand the
! Redundant, deterministic design variability in DERs
(generation, storage,
and load flexibility)
! Anomalies and outages are ! Detect and classify
increasing due to: the threats
! Stochastic generation ! Control DERs to
! Equipment degradation mitigate these
! Cybersecurity attacks threats
Visibility Into Solar Generation
Why do we need better visibility into solar generation at the

distribution?
! Ensure continuing instantaneous balance between generation and
load
! Increasing likelihood of extreme disturbances
! Distributed generation units may trip to protect themselves
! Settlement for behind-the-meter assets without NEM
! Better understanding of fault conditions might result in better
control
Current Visibility
Lack of metering infrastructure
! Data ownership—siloed
! Managing data
! Cost
Often only installed capacity information is available
! Degradation in equipment?
! Dirt?
Current techniques to estimate:
! Use capacity information and real-time irradiance
! Capture disturbances emprically
Can existing data obtained from distribution-level measurements help

understand current generation conditions and their impacts on
distribution-level assets?
Organization
Introduction
! Problem Statement
! State-of-the-art
Estimation
! Dataset
! Power Factor Based Estimation—Back of the envelope
! Multilinear Regression
! Contextually Supervised Source Seperation
Current Work
! Behind-the-meter Solar Generation Estimation
Future Work
Dataset
Synchrophasors
Dataset
● Measure Voltage, Curr
● Timestamped to ns pre
Micro-synchrophasors (µPMUs)
Measure 12 channels at 120 Hz :
MicroSy
! Voltage magnitude
● 120
! Voltage angle
! Current angle
● Loca
! Current magnitude ● Linu
GPS-synchronized ● Con
µs accuracy
Ground truth data from–µPMU2
Figure: Active power calculated from µPMU2 measurements
Figure: Reactive power calculated from µPMU2 measurements

Data from the substation–µPMU1
Figure: Active power calculated from µPMU1 measurements
Figure: µPMU1 reactive power corrected for capacitor bank action

Power Factor Based Estimation—Back of the
envelope
! Start with a simple disaggregation strategy suitable to existing
data collection framework
! Assume power factor of load based overnight measurements.

! Assume only active power generation from solar.
Overnight: cosΦ̂PF PF
Load ≈ 0.998, cosΦ̂PV = -1, Case I
Assume: cosΦ̂PF PF
Load = 0.97, cosΦ̂PV = -1, Case II
Solar Estimation
Figure: Estimated generation using learned and sample PF
Figure: Contribution of each assumption made in PFBE to Case I errors.
Solar Estimation
! Can we estimate the day-time load PF (or a proxy) and use it for
obtaining solar generation?
Figure: Proxy irradiance measurements obtained from a nearby PV site and

the PV generation active power calculated from µPMU2 measurements.
Solar Estimation: Linear Estimator
PtPMU1 = PtLoad + PtPV (1)
PtPV = Ceff φt + ϵPV , ∀t where φt > 0 (2)
PtLoad = keff QtPMU1 + R + ϵLoad , ∀t where φt > 0 (3)

In our current estimation setting, we do not have access to PtLoad or PtPV .
However, we observe the aggregate measurements PtPMU1 .
Total ϵ
! "# $
PtPMU1 = keff QtPMU1 t
+ Ceff φ + R + ϵPV + ϵLoad , ∀t where φt > 0 (4)
Reconstruct the signals estimation with a big assumption on errors:
P̂tLoad = keff QtPMU1 + R

(5)
P̂tPV = PtPMU1 − P̂tLoad
Figure: P̂tPV estimated using the LE (i.e. Equation (5))
Figure: Proxy irradiance measurements obtained from a nearby PV site

We made big assumptions on the error, how can we manage the error
more systematically?
Contextually Supervised Source Separation
For L many unknown signals that are of interest, we observe the
aggregate signal, Yagg such that
L
%
Yagg = Yi (6)
i=1
where Yi represents an individual unknown signal. Assuming we can

represent the individual load with a linear model (i.e., Xi Θi ):
minimize {αi ℓi (Yi − Xi Θi ) + ηi gi (Yi ) + γi hi (Θi )}

Yi ,Θi
L
% (7)
subject to Yagg = Yi
i=0
M. Wytock and Z. Kolter, “Contextually Supervised Source Seperation with Application to Energy
Dissagregation”, in arXiv preprint arXiv:1312.5023, 2013
minimize {αi ℓi (Yi − Xi Θi ) + ηi gi (Yi ) + γi hi (Θi )}

Yi ,Θi
L
% (8)
subject to Yagg = Yi
i=0
ℓ: penalizes the difference between the reconstructed signal and

the corresponding linear model.
g: captures additional contextual information on individual signals,
such as smoothness.
h: regularization term on the model parameters to prevent
overfitting.
For ℓ is ℓ − 2 norm and no g or h:

! the estimate of the Θi reduces to the least-squares estimate from
linear estimator
! accurate signal recovery depends only on the degree to which
features in different groups are correlated,
! not on the correlations contained within a particular group.
M. Wytock and Z. Kolter, “Contextually Supervised Source Seperation with Application to Energy
Dissagregation”, in arXiv preprint arXiv:1312.5023, 2013
Contextually Supervised Estimation
! We made big assumptions on the error, how can we manage the

error more systematically?
minimize {α||PtLoad − (keff QtPMU1 + R)||2 + β||PtPV − Ceff φt ||2 }
PLoad ,PPV ,keff ,Ceff
subject to PtPMU1 = PtLoad + PtPV

(9)
! This is exactly what α and β are for.
To manage the errors more systematically:
Assuming errors independent:
Var(ϵTotal ) = Var(ϵPV ) + Var(ϵLoad ) (10)
We first obtain Var(ϵTotal ) using the LE:
PPMU1 = keff QtPMU1 + Ceff φt + R + ϵ∗Total , ∀t where φt > 0 (11)
Estimate Var(ϵLoad ), assume night time error variances are similar to

day time:
PPMU1 = keff QtPMU1 + R + ϵLoad , ∀t where φt ≤ 0 (12)
We then use the property introduced in equation (10) to estimate

Var(ϵPV ).
To distribute the errors to minimize reconstruction error:
α∗ = 1/Var(ϵLoad ), β ∗ = 1/Var(ϵPV ) (13)
Figure: Estimated solar using CSGE
Figure: Proxy irradiance measurements obtained from a nearby PV site

Figure: The sensitivity of estimation accuracy to α/β.The left plot shows the
RMSE between the real and estimated solar generation and load, while the
right plot shows the MAE between the real and estimated load
Current Work
! Single large plant vs. distributed roof top solar

! Use Pecan street data: 1 minute load, AMI and solar data
! Aggregate AMIs to create 1 minute net-load measurement
upstream
! Individual AMI update happens end of the day
! No reactive power measurements, model load as temperature
dependent
Current Work
Figure: Framework with daily AMI updates
Current Work
Expand the estimation strategy to include AMI:

N
%
minimize {α(ALt − Θf(Tt )) + β 2
(Sit − Cieff φt )2 }
ALt ,Lit ,Sit ,Cieff ,Θ
i
subject to Lit + Stt = AMIit (14)
N
%
Lit = ALt
i=1
Current Work: « Preliminary Results
Figure: Load estimation for a day: 4 households
Current Work: « Preliminary Results
Figure: Solar estimation for a day: 4 households
Future Work
! Expand to capture a larger dataset

! Investigate the performance with changing ratio of peak
generation to peak load
! g and h can be helpful to incorporate contextual knowledge (i.e.
solar generation smoothness)
! Use the results in an ADMS to quantify benefits over limited
visibility
Acknowledgements
People:
Michaelangelo Tabone, Ciaran Roberts, Duncan Callaway, Liliana
Alvarez, Sila Kiliccote, Emma Stewart
Questions?
kara_ec
emrecan@slac.stanford.edu
Additional Slides
Before Capbank Compansation
Figure: Reactive power calculated from µPMU1 measurements
Solar Disaggregation
Per second change in reactive power at µPMU1
Figure: One second change in the observed reactive power QPMU1 ,t
Removing Capbank Actions
compensation=0 ;
while True do
∆Qt = QPMU1 ,t−1 − QPMU1 ,t ;
if |∆Qt | ≥ 90 kVAR per phase then
compensation=∆Qt + compensation;
end
if |compensation| < 90 kVAR per phase then
compensation=0;
end
Qfiltered
PMU1 ,t = QPMU1 ,t + compensation;
end
Algorithm 1: Capacitor Bank Switching Detection and Compensation Al-
gorithm
Solar Disaggregation
Figure: µPMU1 reactive power corrected for capacitor bank action
Figure: µPMU1 reactive power difference between the corrected and the
original measurements
Solar Disaggregation: Linear Estimator
Figure: The data points and corresponding OLS results for the model in
equation (4)
Coefficients LE in (4)
2193.556∗∗∗
R (intercept)
(81.402)
1.05∗∗∗
keff
(0.161)
-47.454∗∗∗
Ceff
(1.015)
Adjusted R2 0.749
Number of observations 1896
Table: Regression coefficients for the model in equation (4). Standard errors
are reported in parentheses. *, **, *** indicates significance at the 90%, 95%,
and 99% level, respectively.
Figure: P̂tLoad estimated using the LE (i.e. Equation (5))
Figure: Estimated load using CSGE

Contextually Supervised Disaggregation
Figure: Data, the resulting fit, and 95% confidence intervals for both models
introduced in equations (12), and (4) and (11)
Contextually Supervised Disaggregation
Coefficients Model in (12) LE in (4) and (11)

2194.32∗∗∗ 2193.556∗∗∗
R (intercept)
(5.448) (81.402 )
2.795∗∗∗ 1.05∗∗∗
keff
(0.025) (0.161)
-47.454∗∗∗
Ceff
(1.015)
Adjusted R2 0.849 0.749
Number of observations 2295 1896
Table: Regression coefficients for the models in equation (12), and
equations (4) and (11). Standard errors are reported in parentheses. *, **, ***
indicates significance at the 90%, 95%, and 99% level, respectively.

Emre-Can-Kara PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Emre-Can-Kara PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Towards Real-Time Estimation of Solar

Generation for Power System Operations

Emre Can Kara

Transmission Grid Distribution Grid

& & 5&

Transmission Grid Distribution Grid

& & 6&

● Measure Voltage, Current magnitudes + angles

! Visibility into the distribution grid is We need to:

! Visibility into the distribution grid is We need to:

Why do we need better visibility into solar generation at the

Can existing data obtained from distribution-level measurements help

Figure: Active power calculated from µPMU2 measurements

Figure: Reactive power calculated from µPMU2 measurements

Figure: Active power calculated from µPMU1 measurements

Figure: µPMU1 reactive power corrected for capacitor bank action

! Assume power factor of load based overnight measurements.

Figure: Estimated generation using learned and sample PF

Figure: Contribution of each assumption made in PFBE to Case I errors.

Figure: Proxy irradiance measurements obtained from a nearby PV site and

PtPMU1 = PtLoad + PtPV (1)

PtPV = Ceff φt + ϵPV , ∀t where φt > 0 (2)

PtLoad = keff QtPMU1 + R + ϵLoad , ∀t where φt > 0 (3)

Reconstruct the signals estimation with a big assumption on errors:

P̂tLoad = keff QtPMU1 + R

Figure: P̂tPV estimated using the LE (i.e. Equation (5))

Figure: Proxy irradiance measurements obtained from a nearby PV site

where Yi represents an individual unknown signal. Assuming we can

minimize {αi ℓi (Yi − Xi Θi ) + ηi gi (Yi ) + γi hi (Θi )}

minimize {αi ℓi (Yi − Xi Θi ) + ηi gi (Yi ) + γi hi (Θi )}

ℓ: penalizes the difference between the reconstructed signal and

For ℓ is ℓ − 2 norm and no g or h:

! We made big assumptions on the error, how can we manage the

subject to PtPMU1 = PtLoad + PtPV

! This is exactly what α and β are for.

Var(ϵTotal ) = Var(ϵPV ) + Var(ϵLoad ) (10)

We ﬁrst obtain Var(ϵTotal ) using the LE:

PPMU1 = keff QtPMU1 + Ceff φt + R + ϵ∗Total , ∀t where φt > 0 (11)

Estimate Var(ϵLoad ), assume night time error variances are similar to

PPMU1 = keff QtPMU1 + R + ϵLoad , ∀t where φt ≤ 0 (12)

We then use the property introduced in equation (10) to estimate

To distribute the errors to minimize reconstruction error:

α∗ = 1/Var(ϵLoad ), β ∗ = 1/Var(ϵPV ) (13)

Figure: Estimated solar using CSGE

Figure: Proxy irradiance measurements obtained from a nearby PV site

! Single large plant vs. distributed roof top solar

Figure: Framework with daily AMI updates

Expand the estimation strategy to include AMI:

Figure: Load estimation for a day: 4 households

Figure: Solar estimation for a day: 4 households

! Expand to capture a larger dataset

Figure: Reactive power calculated from µPMU1 measurements

Per second change in reactive power at µPMU1

Figure: One second change in the observed reactive power QPMU1 ,t

Figure: µPMU1 reactive power corrected for capacitor bank action

Figure: P̂tLoad estimated using the LE (i.e. Equation (5))

Figure: Estimated load using CSGE

Coefﬁcients Model in (12) LE in (4) and (11)

You might also like