Distribution System Congestion Management Based

on Local Flexibility Market

Rui Liu Xiuli Wang Hongyang Zhao Yifei Wang
2021 6th Asia Conference on Power and Electrical Engineering (ACPEE) | 978-1-7281-9159-1/20/$31.00 ©2021 IEEE | DOI: 10.1109/ACPEE51499.2021.9436988

School of Electrical Engineering
Xi’an Jiaotong University
Xi’an China
sunny1154181543@
stu.xjtu.edu.cn
School of Electrical Engineering
Xi’an Jiaotong University
Xi’an China
xiuliw@xjtu.edu.cn
School of Electrical Engineering
Xi’an Jiaotong University
Xi’an China
zhaohongyang2014@stu.xjtu.edu
.cn
School of Electrical Engineering
Xi’an Jiaotong University
Xi’an China
yifei_wang@stu.xjtu.edu.cn

Abstract—With the increasing proportion of distributed
energy resources, the distribution network will face congestion
problems caused by fluctuations in renewable energy sources. This
paper proposes a distribution system congestion management
method based on local flexibility markets. By commercializing the
flexibility of various distributed energy sources, the output
schedule can be adjusted in market manner to eliminate the
congestion. The congestion management based on local flexibility
market aims to minimize the cost of flexibility utilization, and is
modeled with flexibility constraints of traditional power plants,
renewable energy power plants and storage devices. The second-
order cone relaxation model is built for distribution system power
flow, and system electricity loss is added in the objective function
for the exactness. Finally, an improved German Simbench
distribution network case is used to verify the validity and
accuracy of the model.
Keywords—congestion management, local flexibility market,
distributed energy resources, branch flow module
I. INTRODUCTION
In recent years, various distributed renewable energy sources
have been widely connected to the distribution network, and the
system is affected by the output of renewable energy. It poses a
challenge to the operation and dispatch mode of the traditional
distribution network [1]. At present, when the unified power
market is cleared, only the safe operation constraints of the
transmission grid are considered, and the network topology and
power access locations within each distribution network area are
not concerned. When the renewable energy fluctuate or the
system accident unexpectedly occurs, the transmission power of
the line will most likely exceed the operating limit, resulting in
congestion of the distribution network [2], endangering system
operation and equipment safety. How to use these resources
reasonably and efficiently for congestion management is of
great significance to the safe and stable operation of the
distribution network and to further increase the penetration rate
of renewable energy.
Compared with the transmission grid, the congestion
management of the distribution network is more complicated. At
present, the Distribution System Operator (DSO) mainly uses
network reconstruction (such as adjusting transformer joints,
adjusting reactive power compensation devices, adding or
reducing lines, etc.) to alleviate congestion with high
This work is supported by HM Government China Prosperity Fund
(CGF-R1-FPP206)
management cost and poor flexibility [3-4]. Regarding how to
use flexible energy to eliminate network congestion, domestic
and foreign researches have proposed two types of solutions
based on control and market respectively: the control-based
method is directly issued by DSO for congestion management,
mainly including virtual power plants [5-6], active distribution
network [7], etc. Market-based methods include regional energy
markets [8], regional flexibility markets [3], regional electricity
prices [9], etc., work by providing a trading platform, to solve
the congestion problem where all market participants can benefit
from it.
The Local Flexibility Market (LFM) is a market platform
that provides flexibility trade for DSO and flexibility provider.
All kinds of DER can be flexibility provider in this market if
only they can be adjusted. DSO is the buyer who purchases
flexibility and pays corresponding fees according to actual
management needs. By incentivizing DER to participate in the
management, LFM provides a market-oriented congestion
management method for DSO. It is parallel to the wholesale
electricity market and does not require large amount of
additional investment. .
At present, the power flow modeling methods for the
operation and management of the distribution network are
mainly divided into four categories: 1) the DC power flow
model, which is simple to solve. But due to the large R/X value
of the distribution network, the calculation accuracy is not high.
2) the AC power flow model. This modeling method has high
calculation accuracy, but the solution is complicated and cannot
guarantee the global optimum. 3) the linearization of the AC
power flow model. This method ignores the voltage difference
of each node according to the characteristics of the distribution
network, but introduces the voltage phase angle variable in the
optimization, which increases the data demand and the
complexity of the solution. 4) to introduce the relaxation method
to convexize the branch flow model [10-11]. The Second-Order
Cone (SOC) relaxation optimization model can not only ensure
the global optimization, increasing function of the square of the
current, the accuracy of the model is promised.
This paper adopts the power flow model based on the SOC
relaxation, introduces the mechanism of the LFM, and aims at
minimizing the cost of purchasing flexibility, and eliminates
system congestion by distributing various types of flexibility in

978-1-7281-9159-1/21/$31.00 ©2021 IEEE

1023
Authorized licensed use limited to: NUST School of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science (SEECS). Downloaded on May 26,2022 at 03:37:38 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 time and space. At the same time, it takes into account the
economic needs of reducing network loss, and introduces the
feasibility of the penalty function for the flow limit violation to
improve the feasibility of the problem, and comprehensively
considers the flexibility of various distributed energy sources.
Finally, the German Simbench distribution network example is
used to verify the effectiveness of the proposed method.
II. LOCAL FLEXIBILITY MARKET
A. Definition
The local flexibility market, also known as the Distribution-
level Flexibility Market (DFM), is a platform for flexible trade
in a small area. Members that participate in the transaction
include flexibility buyer, DSO, flexibility providers, flexible
units, and market operators. The schematic diagram of the LFM
is shown in Fig. 1.
Fig. 1.Schematic diagram of regional flexibility market operation
• DSO: Responsible for supplying power to users in the
distribution network to ensure the safety of system
operations. As a market buyer, it can purchase flexibility
from LFM to perform congestion management, reduce
network losses, and manage node voltages;
• Flexibility providers: includes all kinds of DER that can
flexibly adjust output. By reporting the time, size, price,
etc. providers can participate in the market. And they
need to adjust output and power consumption plan
according to the transaction results to obtain additional
income;
• Market operator: DSO or a third party can act as the
operator, with the goal of maximizing social welfare, or
minimizing flexibility purchase cost. Network operation
conditions and available flexibility distribution status are
combined to obtain the most economical flexibility
purchase results.
B. Distribution system congestion management with LFM
This article focuses on the use of LFM to manage congestion
in the distribution network. The purpose of congestion
management includes: limit the current in the line within the
allowable range; the voltage of each node is within the allowable
range. The LFM-based day-ahead congestion management
operation mechanism is shown in Fig. 2.
The LFM transaction occurs after the wholesale market
transaction result is determined, and it is mainly divided into two
parts: flexibility calculation and utility:
1024
Authorized licensed use limited to: NUST School of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science (SEECS). Downloaded on May 26,2022 at 03:37:38 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
Fig. 2. LFM-based day-ahead congestion management operation
mechanism
(1) Flexible calculation: DSO calculates the power flow of
the system according to the power generation and consumption
prediction of each node. After obtaining the initial reference
value of the system operating state, DSO detects whether there
is congestion. If yes, congestion management through LFM will
work, which is divided into the following several step:
• The DSO system submits the system congestion status
and flexibility purchase demand signals to the LFM. At
the same time, each flexibility provider reports the
available flexibility information to the LFM operator.
• Based on the information of buyers and sellers, LFM
operator formulates a flexible purchase optimization
that can meet the needs of DSO congestion management,
and aims at the lowest congestion management cost.
After the market clears, the LFM operator sends the
results to DSO.
• DSO recalculates the system power flow according to
the transaction results, and detects whether there is still
congestion. If not, LFM releases the market clearing
result information to each flexibility provider, and each
power supply adjusts the power generation schedule
according to the information. If there is still congestion,
LFM operator repeats the last step.
(2) Flexible utility: When the system is congested, the LFM
operator sends a control signal to the corresponding flexibility
provider, the flexibility provider adjusts the power after
confirmation. DSO pays to the LFM based on the actual
flexibility usage, and then the LFM allocate the corresponding
fees to each provider.
III. LFM-BASED DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM CONGESTION
MANAGEMENT MODULE
A. Branch Flow Module
In order to improve the accuracy of the system power flow
model and speed up the solution speed, the branch flow model
of the distribution network is used. This model has been widely
used in scenarios such as micro-grids and distribution networks,
and the solvability and accuracy have been verified in [12].
The branch flow model of the distribution network is
represented by Fig. 3.
If the power flow between nodes i and j is defined to flow
from i to j, then node i is called the parent node of node j, and
node j is the child node of node i. The child node set of node i is
 defined as α ( i ) and the parent node set is β ( i ) . If the actual
power is opposite to the specified direction, the corresponding
power value is negative.
U0 Un Um S
S 0n S nm mk
0 n m k
S0 Sn Sm
Fig. 3. Distribution system branch power flow module
Let I%ij ,t = I ij2,t , U% i ,t = U i2,t .The node injected power in this
model can be expressed as Pi ,t = Pi ,0t + ∆Pi ,+t − ∆Pi ,−t . Then the
equations above can be written as
 Pi ,0t + ∆Pi ,+t − ∆Pi ,−t =  Pic ,t −  Ppi ,t − I%pi ,t R pi
( )

c∈α ( i ) p∈β ( i )
 , i ∈ N (1)
 Qi ,t =  Qic ,t −  Q pi ,t − I%pi ,t X pi
( )
 c∈α ( i ) p∈β ( i )
U% j ,t = U% i ,t − 2 ( Rij Pij ,t + X ij Qij ,t ) + I%ij ,t ( R + X
2
ij
2
ij
2 Pij ,t
2Qij ,t ≤ I%ij ,t + U% j ,t , ( i, j ) ∈ L
I%ij ,t − U% j ,t
where: N represents the set of nodes in the distribution network,
L represents the set of lines in the distribution network, Rij , X ij
are the resistance, reactance of the line between node i and j.
B. Congestion Management Module
The goal of the LFM-based distribution network congestion
management is to eliminate the congestion with the minimum
cost of flexibility. Reference [10] proved that the SOC
relaxation model of power flow is accurate when the objective
function is the system network loss. This paper uses network
loss cost change CLoss to characterize the DSO payment for
network loss before and after management. In addition, the
purchase cost of traditional thermal power units, renewable
energy generation units, and storage flexibility are added. The
cost of upper-level transmission system electricity consumption
Cout has been introduced to characterize the cost corresponding
to the amount of power injected into the distribution network. In
order to improve the feasibility of the optimization problem, the
penalty cost of line overload CLine , which characterizes the cost
that DSO pays for the system line power flow exceeding the
limit, is added. The overall objective function is shown in (4),
where T is the set of congestion management time periods, and
PP, RES, and Stor are the sets of thermal power plants,
renewable energy power plants, and storage devices that provide
flexibility in the system. L is the system line set, and out is the
reference node connected to the upper-level system.
min CPP + CRES + CStor + Cout + CLine + CLoss
Authorized licensed use limited to: NUST School of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science (SEECS). Downloaded on May 26,2022 at 03:37:38 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
s.t. (1) - (3)
0 ≤ I%ij ,t ≤ I ij2 , ( i, j ) ∈ L (5)
Uk
U i2 ≤ U% i ,t ≤ U i2 , i ∈ N (6)
where: Iij is the maximum allowable current of the line
Sk between nodes i and j, U i and U i are the maximum and
minimum voltage values allowed at node i respectively.
In actual operation, when the line current is near the
maximum value, it will cause a series of problems, such as heat
generation and accelerated aging. Therefore, it is necessary to
operate congestion management when the line current is slightly
below the maximum value, so as to ensure the long-term safe
and stable operation of the system. aij ,t is defined as margin
degree coefficient.
0 ≤ I%ij ,t ≤ aij ,t I ij2 , ( i, j ) ∈ L (7)
) , ( i, j ) ∈ L (2)
IV. FLEXIBILITY PROVIDERS MODULE
In the distribution network, the sources of flexibility include:
1) Thermal power units, which are generally small gas-fired and
(3) biomass power units, which have a faster ramping speed; 2)
Renewable energy units, which include micro-hydro turbine
units, wind farms, photovoltaic (PV) farms, etc.; 3) Energy
storage devices, which can also be built with PV or wind farms.
There may be many kinds of flexibility in one node, so the
method of classification according to the type of flexibility
provider is used in modeling.
A. Base case
The wholesale electricity market transaction results and the
distribution network data are used as input, and the power of
each load, power source, and the energy state of the energy
storage device before adjustment are obtained as the optimized
reference state.
Pi ,0t : the benchmark power of the flexibility provider i in the
period t;
0
Estor , t : the reference energy of the storage device stor in the
period t.
B. Flexibility variables
In LFM, in order to solve the congestion, the amount of
output power increase of a flexibility provider is defined as its
positive flexibility. Conversely, the amount of power reduction
is defined as the negative flexibility. Both positive and negative
flexibilities are non-negative values, and are classified
according to different types of flexibility providers:
∆Pout+ ,t , ∆Pout− ,t : the increased and decreased amount of
power injected from the transmission system at time t;
∆Ppp+ ,t , ∆Ppp− ,t : the amount of increased and decreased
(4)
amount of output power of thermal power plant at time t;
1025
 +
∆PRES − the price of unit positive and negative for energy storage
,t , ∆PRES ,t : the amount of increased and decreased
+ −
output power of wind farms, PV farms, or micro-hydropower equipment stor at time t; ρout , t , ρout , t is the penalty coefficient

units at time t. for purchasing and selling unit power from upper-level
Renewable energy units generally work at the maximum transmission system at time t; ρl ,t is the penalty coefficient of
power point, and are limited by the natural energy intensity, so line l corresponding to the unit current that exceeds the
they cannot provide positive flexibility. However, if they were maximum allowable value at time t; Cl ,t is the price of unit
equipped with storage devices, the decreased power could be active power loss for line l at time t.
used for charging the storage, and they would be able to offer
positive flexibility through discharging. D. Flexibility provider module
The increase or decrease of the discharge power and Different kinds of generators are able to offer different types
charging power in storage device have different effects on the of flexibility. According to the direction of power change, the
internal energy, which is related to the specific charging and generation-side flexibility providers are divided into three types:
discharging efficiency. Therefore, the flexibility of the energy bi-direction, single-direction and energy storage flexibility
storage device is divided into two types: discharge power providers.
flexibility and charge power flexibility. (1) Bi-direction provider
dis , + dis , −
∆Pstor , t , ∆Pstor , t : the amount of increased or decreased
Generators that can provide bi-direction flexibility include
amount of discharge power at time t; gas-fired power plants, biomass power plants, and renewable
energy sets equipped with storage devices.
char , + char , −
∆Pstor ,t , ∆Pstor ,t : the amount of increased or decreased in For gas-fired power plants and biomass power plants, the
amount of charge power at time t. upper and lower limits of unit output are restricted as
In order to ensure the feasibility of the optimization problem,
the line overload variable ∆I loverload is introduced, and added to Pppmin ≤ Ppp0 ,t + ∆Ppp+ ,t − ∆Ppp− ,t ≤ Pppmax (14)
,t
the objective function through the overload penalty cost.
overload
where: Pppmax , Pppmin is the maximum and minimum power
∆I l ,t: the amount that the line l exceeds the maximum allowed of the power plant at time t.
allowable current in time period t.
The unit ramp speed constraint is
C. Objective function of congestion management
Each kinds of flexibility cost in (4) is show below ∆Ppp+ ,t +1 − ∆Ppp− ,t +1 − ( ∆Ppp+ ,t − ∆Ppp− ,t )
v pp ,t = v0pp ,t + (15)
∆t
CPP =  (C +
pp , t ∆P +
pp , t +C −
pp , t ∆P −
pp , t ) (8)
t∈T pp∈PP
, max , max
−v down
pp ≤ v pp ,t ≤ vup
pp (16)
CRES =   (C +
res , t ∆P +
res , t +C −
res , t ∆P −
res , t ) (9)
, max , max
t ∈T res∈RES where: vup
pp , v down
pp is the maximum up and down ramp
speed of the unit.
CStor =   +
Cstor , t ( ∆Pstor , t + ∆Pstor , t ) + Cstor ,t ( ∆Pstor ,t + ∆Pstor , t )
dis , + char , − − dis , − char , +

t∈T stor∈Stor In the optimization objective function (8), the flexibility

(10) purchase cost increases with the amount of power change
increasing. Therefore, according to [13], when the positive and
Cout =  ρ out
+ + − −
, t ∆Pout , t + ρ out , t ∆Pout , t (11) negative flexibility values are positive, the mutually exclusive
t∈T condition must be satisfied.
For renewable energy generator sets equipped with storage
CLine =  ρl ,t ∆I loverload
,t (12) devices, the upper and lower limits of the unit output are
t ∈T l∈L restricted to

CLoss =  Cl ,t I%l ,t − I%l0,t Rl

( ) (13) Presmin, stor ≤ Pres0 , stor ,t + ∆Pres+ , stor ,t − ∆Pres− , stor ,t ≤ Presmax, stor (17)
t∈T l∈L

+ − When the output of the unit is reduced, the energy storage

where: C pp ,t , C pp ,t represent the price of unit positive and
device is charged. The charging power must meet the maximum
+
negative flexibility for thermal power plant pp at time t; Cres ,t ,
power constraint and negative flexibility constraint of the
− storage device
Cres , t represent the price of unit positive and negative flexibility
+ −
for renewable energy unit res at time t; Cstor , t , Cstor , t represent

1026
Authorized licensed use limited to: NUST School of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science (SEECS). Downloaded on May 26,2022 at 03:37:38 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 0 ≤ Pres
char − Similar to bi-direction flexibility providers, it can be
, stor , t ≤ ∆Pres , stor ,t
 char max
obtained that the increment and decrement of charging power
 0 ≤ Pres , stor ,t ≤ Pres , stor (18) and discharging power will also automatically satisfy the mutual
0 ≤ ∆P − 0 exclusion constraint.
 res , stor , t ≤ Pres , stor ,t

When the storage device is in the discharging state, if it is

When the output increases, the storage device generates required to provide negative flexibility, the energy storage
electricity, and the discharge power is the positive flexibility device will reduce the discharge power. If the required negative
exactly. The maximum charging power constraint of the storage flexibility power is greater than the charging power, the storage
device needs to be met. device will switch to charging state. That is, there is a mutually
char , + dis ,0 dis , −
exclusive relationship between ∆Pstor ,t and Pstor , t − ∆Pstor , t , and

 Pres , stor ,t = ∆Pres , stor ,t

dis +
dis , + char ,0 char , −
 (19) similarly ∆Pstor ,t and Pstor , t − ∆Pstor ,t are also mutually
dis max
0 ≤ Pres , stor ,t ≤ Pres , stor exclusive.

Energy storage devices need to meet energy constraints

 char , +
0 ≤ ∆Pstor ,t ≤ uM

 0 ≤ Pstor ,t − ∆Pstor ,t ≤ (1 − u ) M
dis ,0 dis , −

min char
Presdis, stor ,t max  (27)
Eres , stor ≤ Eres , stor , t + Pres , stor , tη res , stor ∆t − ∆t ≤ Eres (20) dis , +
, stor
 0 ≤ ∆Pstor , t ≤ vM
ηres , stor
0 ≤ Pstor ,t − ∆Pstor ,t, − ≤ (1 − v ) M
char ,0 char

(2) Single-direction provider
where: u and v are binary variables, which respectively indicate
Renewable energy units without storage devices, including whether the charging power and discharging power of the
micro hydro turbine units, wind farms, and PV farms, can only energy storage device are allowed to increase or decrease. There
provide negative flexibility under output power constraint: are mutually exclusive conditions between u and v. M is a large
constant.
0 ≤ ∆Pres− ,t ≤ Pres0 ,t (21)
The energy stored at next time is the sum of the energy at
this time period and the energy stored or used with the
(3) Energy storage flexibility provider consideration of efficiency η . The expression is
The flexibility of storage devices not only need to meet the
limitation of output power, but also need to consider the Estor ,t +1 = Estor ,t + η ( Pstor , t + ∆Pstor ,t − ∆Pstor , t ) ∆t
char ,0 char , + char , −
constraints of energy. The maximum and minimum output
power constraint is: dis ,0 dis , + dis , − (28)
Pstor , t + ∆Pstor , t − ∆Pstor , t
− ∆t
min 0 + − max
η
Pstor ≤ Pstor , t + ∆Pstor , t − ∆Pstor , t ≤ Pstor (22)
The power constraint of the storage device is:
Since the increment or decrement of charging and
discharging power have different effects on energy reserved, min
Estor max
≤ Estor ,t ≤ Estor (29)
they are restricted with different constraints.
min max
dis ,0 dis , + dis , − max where: Estor and Estor are the minimum and maximum storage
0 ≤ Pstor , t + ∆Pstor , t − ∆Pstor , t ≤ Pstor (23)
limits of the storage device respectively.
char ,0
0 ≤ Pstor char , + char , − min After congestion management, it is necessary to ensure that
, t + ∆Pstor , t − ∆Pstor , t ≤ − Pstor (24)
the storage device can still operate according to the original
output plan. The energy storage margin coefficient is
Both the decrement of charging power and the increment of introduced, and the cycle storage energy constraint is:
discharge power of storage devices will cause an increment in
output power. The increment of charging power and the 0 0
decrement of discharge power will cause a decrement. That is, Estor ,T +1 ≤ Estor ,T +1 ≤ kstor Estor ,T +1 (30)
the positive and negative flexibility of the energy storage device
are V. CASE STUDY
+ dis , + char , −
This paper uses two of the feeders in the German Simbench
∆Pstor , t = ∆Pstor , t + ∆Pstor , t (25) medium-voltage distribution network example, and adds gas-
fired power plants to the basic network. The output of DERs is
− char , + dis , − adjusted to simulate the future operation status to obtain multiple
∆Pstor , t = ∆Pstor , t + ∆Pstor , t (26)
congestion scenarios. This system contains 43 nodes, 42 lines,

1027
Authorized licensed use limited to: NUST School of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science (SEECS). Downloaded on May 26,2022 at 03:37:38 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 and 76 DERs, which is as showed in Fig. 4. There are 96 periods 400

in one day for optimization 300

After the power flow calculation through MatPower, it is 200

obtained that there is congestion at time t45, t51, t54, t67, t72, 100
and t73, and there are five congestion lines in total, 33-34, 34-
0
45, 45-56, 39-40 and 40-41, of which 33-34 are blocked in the
forward and reverse directions. -100

-200
The flexible price setting of renewable energy will affect the Current before
Current after
final purchase result. Some operators have corresponding -300 Current safe limit

energy storage equipment, which can store this part of electricity -400
50 55 60 65 70 75
when they provide negative flexibility, and inject it into the time step/15 mins
system at other times. Some operators do not have, so reducing Fig. 5. Congestion line 33-34 current before and after management
output will directly cause economic loss equivalent to electricity
prices. Therefore, two different scenarios are designed to TABLE I. THE COMPARISON OF FLEXIBILITY PURCHASE VOLUME AND
perform congestion management on the system, COST BETWEEN TEO SCENARIOS

Scenario 1: Use the flexibility of various DERs for Scenario 1 2

Cost/€ Volume/MWh Cost/€ Volume
congestion management, and all renewable energy sources have /MWh
no energy storage devices; Total 19.50 0.5028(+) 13.67 0.4989(+)
12.88(+) 0.5075(-) 12.28(+) 0.5046(-)
Scenario 2: Use the flexibility of various DERs for 6.75(-) 1.57(-)
congestion management, and all renewable energy sources have -0.15 -0.18
energy storage devices. (loss) (loss)
Transmission 0.26 (+) 0.0065(+) 0 0
The cost of various flexible resources is priced through the system 5.44 (-) 0.3421(-)
cost of per unit electricity themselves. The electricity price is Gas-fired power 12.19(+) 0.4783(+) 5.78(+) 0.2373(+)
based on the NordPool Elspot market price in the Nordic plants 0.76(-) 0.1036(-)
electricity market, and the gas, oil, and carbon dioxide emission Wind/PV/Hydro 0 0 6.50(+) 0.2616(+)
prices are based on the German average price. power plants 1.57(-) 0.5046(-)
Storage devices 0.43(+) 0.0180(+) 0 0
A. Congestion management results in different scenarios 0.55(-) 0.0618(-)
According to the original data of the distribution network In two scenarios, the comparison of flexibility purchase
system and price, the LFM model proposed in this paper is volume and cost is as Table I shows. The total cost of scenario
verified, and Gurobi is used to solve the problem. The 2 is lower, because renewable energy is equipped with energy
optimization results are substituted into MatPower again for storage, which greatly reduces the price of providing negative
power flow calculation to verify whether the system congestion flexibility and can also provide positive flexibility.
is eliminated . The results show that the congestion of each line In Scenario 1, because the positive flexibility provided by
in two scenarios is eliminated, without new congestion. The the storage device is small, the positive flexibility of the gas-
currents of lines 33-34 before and after optimization are shown fired power plant is largely used for congestion management,
in Fig. 5. resulting in higher management costs. On the other hand,

Fig. 4 The geographical distribution map of study case

1028
Authorized licensed use limited to: NUST School of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science (SEECS). Downloaded on May 26,2022 at 03:37:38 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 renewable energy can only provide negative flexibility, and the
price is relatively high, so it does not participate in the
congestion management. A lot of the negative flexibility of the
cheaper upper-level transmission system is used. Since the
network connection point is far away from the congested lines,
more flexibility need to be used to relieve congestion, which
further increases management costs.
In Scenario 2, there is no energy exchange with the upper-
level network, realizing the regionalization of congestion
management. Compared with a simple energy storage device, a
renewable energy power plant equipped with storage device can
not only provide bi-direction flexibility, but also has no energy
amount constraints after management, so it has greater freedom
of use. In this case, it completely replaces the flexibility of the
simple storage device. When constructing the power flow
model, only the SOC relaxation is carried out. In this paper, the
objective function of the minimum purchase cost of flexibility
and the minimum network loss is used to study the accuracy of
the model in this case. Define the current deviation index ∆I%ij ,t
to characterize the degree of current relaxation
Pij2,t + Qij2,t
∆I%ij ,t = − I%ij ,t
U%i ,t
In Scenario 1 and 2, the error of each line at each time period
is shown in Fig. 6. The deviation after relaxation is 10-7
magnitude, which can meet the system operation requirements.
Fig. 6. SOC relaxation deviation in two scenarios
VI. CONCLUSION
This paper proposes a distribution network congestion
management method based on the regional flexibility market,
which commercializes the adjustments of various distributed
power generation resources, so that each DER can participate in
Authorized licensed use limited to: NUST School of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science (SEECS). Downloaded on May 26,2022 at 03:37:38 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
the congestion management by selling flexibility to LFM. This
paper adopts the second-order cone relaxation power flow
model based on the branch power flow of the distribution
network, which has high accuracy. It is verified by an improved
distribution network example. The second-order cone relaxation
power flow model meets the accuracy requirements in the
distribution network congestion management, and has practical
application value. The use of regional flexible markets to allow
various distributed energy sources to participate in congestion
management can effectively eliminate system congestion, while
also reducing system losses and minimizing total costs.
REFERENCES
[1] Huang, Shaojun , et al. "Review of congestion management methods for
distribution networks with high penetration of distributed energy
resources." Innovative Smart Grid Technologies Conference Europe
IEEE, 2014.
[2] Ciavarella, R. , et al. "Congestion Management in distribution grid
networks through active power control of flexible distributed energy
resources." IEEE Milan PowerTech
[3] Bouloumpasis, Ioannis , D. Steen , and L. A. Tuan . "Congestion
Management using Local Flexibility Markets: Recent Development and
Challenges."2019 IEEE PES Innovative Smart Grid Technologies Europe
(ISGT-Europe) IEEE, 2019.
(31)
[4] Poudineh, Rahmatallah , and T. Jamasb . "Distributed generation, storage,
demand response and energy efficiency as alternatives to grid capacity
enhancement." Energy Policy67.apr.(2014):222-231.
[5] Ruiz, N. , I. Cobelo , and J. Oyarzabal . "A Direct Load Control Model
for Virtual Power Plant Management." IEEE Transactions on Power
Systems 24.2(2009):959-966.
[6] Giuntoli, M. , and D. Poli . "Optimized Thermal and Electrical Scheduling
of a Large Scale Virtual Power Plant in the Presence of Energy Storages."
IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid4.2(2013):942-955.
[7] Liere-Netheler, Ingo , et al. "Optimised curtailment of distributed
generators for the provision of congestion management services
considering discrete controllability." IET Generation, Transmission &
Distribution 14.5(2020):735-744.
[8] Khorasany, Mohsen , Y. Mishra , and G. Ledwich . "Market framework
for local energy trading: a review of potential designs and market clearing
approaches." IET Generation, Transmission & Distribution
12.22(2018):5899-5908.
[9] Papavasiliou, and Anthony. "Analysis of distribution locational marginal
prices." IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid (2017):1-1.
[10] Farivar, Masoud , and S. H. Low . "Branch Flow Model: Relaxations and
Convexification — Part I." IEEE Transactions on Power Systems
28.3(2013):2565-2572.
[11] Farivar, Masoud , and S. H. Low . "Branch Flow Model: Relaxations and
Convexification — Part II." IEEE Transactions on Power Systems
28.3(2013):2565-2572
[12] Hermann, Alexander , et al. "Congestion Management in Distribution
Networks With Asymmetric Block Offers." IEEE Transactions on Power
Systems 34.6(2019):4382-4392.
[13] Yang, P. , and A. Nehorai . "Joint Optimization of Hybrid Energy Storage
and Generation Capacity with Renewable Energy." IEEE Transactions on
Smart Grid 5.4(2017):1566-1574.
1029