Upgrade to Pro — share decks privately, control downloads, hide ads and more …

Control in Power-Electronics-Dominated Power Sy...

Florian Dörfler
September 25, 2024
140

Control in Power-Electronics-Dominated Power Systems

Plenary at Isaac Newton Institute 2023

Florian Dörfler

September 25, 2024
Tweet

Transcript

  1. Acknowledgements & miscellaneous ...partially ruptured Achilles → remote talk Annual

    Review of Control, Robotics, and Autonomous Systems Control of Low-Inertia Power Systems Florian Dörfler1 and Dominic Groß2 1Automatic Control Laboratory, ETH Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland; email: dorfl[email protected] 2Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Wisconsin–Madison, Madison, Wisconsin, USA; email: [email protected] reference for today Verena H¨ aberle Irina Subotic Ali Tayyebi Xiuqiang He Eduardo Prieto Catalin Arghir Meng Chen Dominic Groß 1
  2. Power-electronics-dominated power systems !"#$%&'$%(! )*+),-"#.$+/& 01&!2!./(! /3/%+2&!."%$+/ 4*35 +/3/%$."% 4*35&'$%(!

    67! 67! 8#./%! +%*5 8#./%! +%*5 !"#$%&9$3/# !($%.&#"$5! relevant observation: system enabled by ubiquitous actuation, pervasive sensing, & digitalization, i.e., control, rather than clever physical design aggressive integration of technology → system issues : oscillations, lack of inertia (→ RoCoF limits) & reactive power (→ SE Australia outages), ... 2
  3. Issues are by now broadly recognized • low-inertia issues were

    not really on the radar (outside few places, e.g., Ireland) until nine years ago → led to rather comical situations ... Biblis A generator stabilizes the grid as a synchronous condenser Instrumentation, Controls & Electrical SPPA-E3000 Electrical Solutions makes it possible to use the generator of Biblis A as a synchronous condenser. This serves to even out grid voltage fluctuations. The Plant The Biblis power plant, which has been in a permanently non-productive state, is located in the community of Biblis in the south of Hesse, Germany and belongs to RWE Power AG. Until 2011 it comprised two pressurized water reactors in units A and B, with an output of 1200 MW (unit A) and 1300 MW ( unit B) respectively. Based on the decision of the nuclear energy moratorium, unit A was disconnected from the grid on March 18, 2011. At that time unit B was already in a scheduled revision. The Task As a result of the fluctuating infeed of renewable energy and the shutdown of nuclear power plants in southern Germany, voltage stabilization within the Amprion grid is becoming increasingly challenging. In order to stabilize the grid in the future too, the Biblis A generator was to be converted into a synchronous condenser. This called for a provider capable of implementing this project together with the customer and delivering the requisite major components in the shortest possible time. Our Solution For the first time a generator of this size was converted into a rotating synchronous condenser by usage of various solutions from the SPPA-E3000 Electrical Solutions product The Result Ŷ Improved grid stability thanks to the generation of reactive power through the conversion of the generator to a synchronous condenser Ŷ Innovative further use of a shut down power plant Ŷ Optimum planning security and deadline compliance thanks to smooth project handling the generator via the generator terminal lead. It was thus possible to connect the generator from unit A to the grid as a synchronous condenser. This now regulates the reactive power from -400 up to +900 MVar, which is made available to grid operator Amprion in situations of low or high grid voltage. The resulting voltage regulation thus ensures a balanced relationship between active and reactive power. During the start-up procedure of the synchronous condenser, special functions are set in the unit protection. Measures here include deactivation of the underfrequency protection and switching to a sensitive-setting definite time overcurrent protection of the synchronous machine. Even though the customer addressed additional requirements, it was possible to keep the set timeframe of five months for the realization of the project. "The synchronous condenser makes it easier for us to maintain system security in the grid even in difficult operational Reference – Electrical Solutions Biblis A generator stabilizes the grid as a synchronous condenser Instrumentation, Controls & Electrical SPPA-E3000 Electrical Solutions makes it possible to use the generator of Biblis A as a synchronous condenser. This serves to even out grid voltage fluctuations. The Plant The Biblis power plant, which has been in a permanently non-productive state, is located in the community of Biblis in the south of Hesse, Germany and belongs to RWE Power AG. Until 2011 it comprised two pressurized water reactors in units A and B, with an output of 1200 MW (unit A) and 1300 MW ( unit B) respectively. Based on the decision of the nuclear energy moratorium, unit A was disconnected from the grid on March 18, 2011. At that time unit B was already in a scheduled revision. The Result Ŷ Improved grid stability the generator via the generator terminal lead. It was thus possible to connect the generator from unit A to the grid as a synchronous condenser. This now regulates the reactive power from -400 up to +900 MVar, which is made available to grid operator Amprion in situations of low or high grid voltage. The resulting voltage regulation thus ensures a balanced relationship between active and reactive power. During the start-up procedure of the synchronous condenser, special functions are set in the unit protection. Measures here include deactivation of the underfrequency protection and switching to a sensitive-setting definite time overcurrent protection of the synchronous machine. Reference – Electrical Solutions 8/19/18, 14:35 Generator wird zum Motor STARTSEITE → PRESSE 24.02.2012 12:00 24.02.2012 12:00 GENERATOR WIRD ZUM MOTOR Die Spannungshaltung im deutschen Stromnetz wird durch die Einspeisung schwankender erneuerbarer Energien und die Abschaltung von Kernkra werken vor allem im Süden Deutschlands immer anspruchsvoller. Insbesondere im Herbst und Winter kann es hier zu Störungen kommen. Dies hat die Bundesnetzagentur (BNA) in ihrem Bericht zu den Auswirkungen des Kernkra ausstieges auf die Übertragungsnetze und die Versorgungssicherheit im Sommer 2011 deutlich gemacht. Der Übertragungsnetzbetreiber Amprion und RWE Power haben vor diesem Hintergrund vereinbart, den Generator von Block A im nicht-nuklearen Teil des abgeschalteten Kernkra werks Biblis für die Netzdienstleistung ¿Phasenschieberbetrieb¿ umzurüsten und so zur Stabilisierung des Netzes im Süden Deutschlands beizutragen. ¿Der Phasenschieber erleichtert es unseren Ingenieuren, die Systemsicherheit im Amprion-Netz auch in schwierigen Netzsituationen aufrecht zu erhalten¿, so Dr. Klaus Kleinekorte, Technischer Geschä sführer. ¿Die rasche Durchführung dieses ehrgeizigen Projektes war nur möglich, weil alle Beteiligten - Siemens, RWE Power und unsere Mitarbeiter ¿ in den vergangenen Monaten hervorragende Arbeit geleistet haben.¿ Die elektrische Maschine ist technisch so von RWE Power und dem Hersteller Siemens umgerüstet worden, dass der Generator jetzt im Motorbetrieb so genannte Blindleistung regeln kann, die für die Spannungshaltung im Netz dringend benötigt wird. Die ersten Planungen für die umfangreiche und technisch sehr schwierige und aufwändige Umrüstung hatten im Juli vergangenen Jahres begonnen. ¿Uns blieb nicht viel Zeit, denn Amprion wollte den Phasenschieber schon im Februar 2012 in Betrieb nehmen¿, sagte Marcel Lipthal, Projektleiter der Siemens AG. Die Umrüstung ab Oktober 2011 wurde zu einem großen Teil von Eigenpersonal des Kra werks Biblis USING DECOMMISSIONED NUCLEAR POWER PLANT AS SYSTEM SERVICE PROVIDERS REPORT 2017:348 NUCLEAR POWER NUCLEAR POWER USING DECOMMISSIONED NUCLEAR POWER PLANT AS SYSTEM SERVICE PROVIDERS REPORT 2017:348 NUCLEAR POWER new challenges: low-inertia stability, grid- forming control, & fast frequency support → industry willing to explore green-field approach & join forces with academia • since 2015: EU MIGRATE project & successors (OSMOSE, POSYTYF, ...) • across the pond: 3
  4. Exciting research bridging communities power electronics power systems control systems

    theory ↔ practice device ↔ system proof ↔ experiment 4
  5. Conclusion: re-visit models / analysis / control / ... Foundations

    and Challenges of Low-Inertia Systems (Invited Paper) Federico Milano University College Dublin, Ireland email: [email protected] Florian D¨ orfler and Gabriela Hug ETH Z¨ urich, Switzerland emails: dorfl[email protected], [email protected] David J. Hill∗ and Gregor Verbiˇ c University of Sydney, Australia ∗ also University of Hong Kong emails: [email protected], [email protected] • New models are needed which balance the need to include key features without burdening the model (whether for analytical or computational work) with uneven and excessive detail; • New stability theory which properly reflects the new devices and time-scales associated with CIG, new loads and use of storage; • Further computational work to achieve sensitivity guidelines including data-based approaches; • New control methodologies, e.g. new controller to mitigate the high rate of change of frequency in low inertia systems; • A power converter is a fully actuated, modular, and very fast control system, which are nearly antipodal characteristics to those of a synchronous machine. Thus, one should critically reflect the control of a converter as a virtual synchronous machine; and • The lack of inertia in a power system does not need to (and cannot) be fixed by simply “adding inertia back” in the systems. The later sections contain many suggestions for further work, which can be summarized as follows: Annual Review of Control, Robotics, and Autonomous Systems Control of Low-Inertia Power Systems Florian Dörfler1 and Dominic Groß2 1Automatic Control Laboratory, ETH Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland; email: dorfl[email protected] 2Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Wisconsin–Madison, Madison, Wisconsin, USA; email: [email protected] Annual Review of Control, Robotics, and Autonomous Systems Stability and Control of Power Grids Tao Liu,1,∗ Yue Song,1,∗ Lipeng Zhu,1,2,∗ and David J. Hill1,3 1Department of Electrical and Electronic Engineering, University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China; email: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] 2College of Electrical and Information Engineering, Hunan University, Changsha, China; email: [email protected] 3School of Electrical Engineering and Telecommunications, University of New South Wales, Kensington, New South Wales, Australia On the Inertia of Future More-Electronics Power Systems Jingyang Fang , Student Member, IEEE, Hongchang Li , Member, IEEE, Yi Tang , Senior Member, IEEE, and Frede Blaabjerg , Fellow, IEEE Power systems without fuel Josh A. Taylor a,n, Sairaj V. Dhople b,1, Duncan S. Callaway c a Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada ON M5S 3G4 b Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN 55455, USA c Energy and Resources Group, University of California, Berkeley, CA 94720, USA Fundamentals of power systems modelling in the presence of converter- interfaced generation Mario Paolonea,⁎, Trevor Gauntb, Xavier Guillaudc, Marco Liserred, Sakis Meliopoulose, Antonello Montif, Thierry Van Cutsemg, Vijay Vittalh, Costas Vournasi Power system stability in the transition to a low carbon grid: A techno-economic perspective on challenges and opportunities Lasantha Meegahapola1 | Pierluigi Mancarella2,3 | Damian Flynn4 | Rodrigo Moreno5,6,7 focus today : control on device & system level 5
  6. Outline: a personal journey through the field Introduction Device-Level: Grid-Forming

    Converter Control System-Level: Ancillary Services in Low-Inertia Grids Conclusions
  7. Outline: a personal journey through the field Introduction Device-Level: Grid-Forming

    Converter Control • Salient Characteristics & Specifications • State-of-the-Art Grid-Forming Controls • Synopsis & Lessons Learnt System-Level: Ancillary Services in Low-Inertia Grids Conclusions
  8. Device-level challenges with inverter-based sources !"#$%&'$%(! )*+),-"#.$+/& 01&!2!./(! /3/%+2&!."%$+/ 4*35

    +/3/%$."% 4*35&'$%(! 67! 67! 8#./%! +%*5 8#./%! +%*5 !"#$%&9$3/# !($%.&#"$5! • primary source: constrained in active/ reactive power, energy, bandwidth, ... • interlinking converters: master vs. slave • fragile grid-connection (over-currents) • assuring time-scale separation & avoiding resonances + oscillations • ... • signal causality: following vs. forming 6
  9. Grid-forming control Fig. 2. Bears on bicycles showing conceptually that

    with high levels of grid- following PECs, the system becomes unstable simply because sufficient levels of grid-forming assets are not present [13]. Here, the full bicycle is any grid- forming asset, either SGs or grid-forming PECs, whereas the tagalong bicycle is a grid-following asset, with or without grid-supporting functionality. For power systems experiencing high instantaneous PEC penetrations today, and facing the reality that grid-forming • fact: power systems need XXX% of grid-forming sources • no universally accepted definition of grid-forming behavior grid-following grid-forming converter-type current-controlled & frequency-following voltage-controlled & frequency-forming signal causality (ω, v ) −→ (P, Q) (P, Q) −→ (ω, v ) dynamic reachability needs a stiff grid blackstart & islanded operation disturbance sensitivity filters only low frequencies smoothens high frequencies 7
  10. Comparison: storage & conversion mechanisms M ω τm vg ir

    Lθ is dθ dt = ω M dω dt = −Dω + τm + Lmir − sin θ cos θ is Ls dis dt = −Rsis + vg − Lmir − sin θ cos θ ω vg vdc idc Cdc if Lf m Cdc dvdc dt = −Gdcvdc + idc + m if Lf dif dt = −Rf if + vg − m vdc controllable energy supply energy storage controllable energy conversion AC power system τm (slow) vs. idc (fast) M (large) vs. Cdc (small) Lθ (physical) vs. m (control) resilient vs. fragile physical & robust vs. controlled & agile energy conversion & (kinetic) storage anti-podal characteristics =⇒ do not use a converter to emulate a machine 8
  11. Cartoon of power electronics control DC/AC power inverter measurement processing

    (e.g., via PLL) reference synthesis (e.g., droop or virtual inertia) cascaded voltage/current tracking control converter modulation DC voltage control DC voltage AC current & voltage PWM (P, Q, V , ω) actuation of DC source/boost measurement processing comparison to reference model error signal PI 6. plus implementation tricks: saturation via virtual impedance, low-pass filter for dissipation, limiters, dead zones, logic, ... 1. acquiring & processing of AC measurements 2. synthesis of references (voltage/current/power) “how would a synchronous generator respond now ?” 3. cascaded PI controllers to track reference error assumption: no state constraints encountered 4. actuation via modulation 5. energy balancing via dc voltage P-control assumption: unlimited power & instantaneous 9
  12. Conventional reference behaviors virtual synchronous machine vdc idc Cdc if

    Lf m M ω τm ir Lθ is • reference = machine (order 3,...,12) → most commonly accepted solution in industry ( ? backward compatibility ?) → poor fit: converter = flywheel – good small-signal but poor post-fault performance (reference not realizable) – over-parametrized & ignores limits → emulate only “useful” dynamics droop / power-synchronization P2 P1 P ! !* !sync ω p − p⋆ ω⋆ ω • direct control of frequency & voltage via (p, ω) & (q, v ) droop ω − ω ∝ p − p d dt v = −c1 ( v − v ) − c2 (q − q ) → decoupling = true in transients → good small-signal but poor large signal (narrow region of attraction) → main reason: two linear SISO loops for MIMO nonlinear system → need “nonlinear & MIMO” droop 10
  13. Modern reference behaviors: VOC family reference model: virtual oscillator control

    (VOC) θ⋆ jk vk vj v⋆ k ω⋆ ω⋆ • VOC dynamics realizable via fully decentralized control & set-points d dt vk = 0 −ω ω 0 vk oscillation at ω + c1 · (vk 2 − vk 2) vk local amplitude regulation + c2 · 1 v k 2 qk pk −pk qk vk − if,k synchronization through grid current • polar coordinates reveal nonlinear & multivariable droop control d dt θk = ω + c2 pk v k 2 − pk vk 2 ≈ vk ≈1 ω + c2 (pk − pk ) (p − ω droop) d dt vk ≈ vk ≈1 c1 (vk − vk ) + c2 (qk − qk ) (q − v droop) • strong certificates (interconnected stability) & excellent ac performance 11
  14. Experimental validation @NREL (often replicated, varied, & extended) black start

    of inverter #1 under 500 W load (making use of almost global stability) 250 W to 750 W load transient with two inverters active connecting inverter #2 while inverter #1 is regulating the grid under 500 W load change of setpoint: p of inverter #2 updated from 250 W to 500 W 12
  15. Duality & matching of synchronous machine conversion M ω τm

    vg ir Lθ is dθ dt = ω M dω dt = −Dω + τm + Lmir − sin θ cos θ is Ls dis dt = −Rsis + vg − Lmir − sin θ cos θ ω vg vdc idc Cdc if Lf m dδ dt = η · vdc Cdc dvdc dt =−Gdcvdc + idc + mampl − sin δ cos δ if Lf dif dt = −Rf if + vg − mampl − sin δ cos δ vdc 1. modulation in polar coordinates: m = mampl − sin δ cos δ & ˙ δ = mfreq → duality : Cdc ∼ M is equivalent inertia 2. matching : mfreq = ηvdc with η = ω v dc dc frequency/imbalance signal ω ≡ vdc dc inertia M ≡ Cdc ≡ fast dc source structural (not quantitative) similarities simple & robust but slow ac behavior 13
  16. High-level comparison of grid-forming control P2 P1 P ! !*

    !sync ω p − p⋆ ω⋆ ω droop control + good performance near steady state – relies on decoupling & small attraction basin vdc idc Cdc if Lf m M ω τm ir Lθ is virtual synchronous machine + backward compatible in nominal case – not resilient under large disturbances virtual oscillator control + excellent large-signal behavior + local droop – voc, droop, & vsm need strong dc source M ω τm Lθ vdc idc Cdc vdc ∼ ω matching control & duality + simple & robust – slow ac performance 15
  17. Detailed comparison(s) (stopped collecting references at mid 2020) Frequency Stability

    of Synchronous Machines and Grid-Forming Power Converters Ali Tayyebi, Dominic Groß, Member, IEEE, Adolfo Anta, Friederich Kupzog and Florian Dörfler, Member, IEEE Comparative Transient Stability Assessment of Droop and Dispatchable Virtual Oscillator Controlled Grid-Connected Inverters Hui Yu, Student Member, IEEE, M A Awal, Student Member, IEEE, Hao Tu, Student Member, IEEE, Iqbal Husain, Fellow, IEEE and Srdjan Lukic, Senior Member, IEEE, Comparison of Virtual Oscillator and Droop Control Brian Johnson, Miguel Rodriguez Power Systems Engineering Center National Renewable Energy Laboratory Golden, CO 80401 Email: [email protected], [email protected] Mohit Sinha, Sairaj Dhople Department of Electrical & Computer Engineering University of Minnesota Minneapolis, MN 55455 Email: {sinha052,sdhople}@umn.edu Transient response comparison of virtual oscillator controlled and droop controlled three-phase inverters under load changes Zhan Shi1 , Jiacheng Li1, Hendra I. Nurdin1, John E. Fletcher1 1School of Electrical Engineering and Telecommunications, UNSW Sydney, UNSW, NSW, 2052, Australia E-mail: [email protected] Comparison of Virtual Oscillator and Droop Controlled Islanded Three-Phase Microgrids Zhan Shi , Member, IEEE, Jiacheng Li , Student Member, IEEE, Hendra I. Nurdin , Senior Member, IEEE, and John E. Fletcher , Senior Member, IEEE GRID-FORMING CONVERTERS ! INEVITABILITY, CONTROL STRATEGIES AND CHALLENGES IN FUTURE GRIDS APPLICATION Ali TAYYEBI Florian DÖRFLER Friederich KUPZOG AIT and ETH Zürich ! Austria ETH Zürich ! Switzerland Austrian Institute of Technology ! Austria Simulation-based study of novel control strategies for inverters in low-inertia system: grid-forming and grid-following Author: Alessandro Crivellaro Grid-Forming Converters control based on DC voltage feedback Yuan Gaoa,, Hai-Peng Rena,, Jie Lia, Comparison of Droop Control and Virtual Oscillator Control Realized by Andronov-Hopf Dynamics Minghui Lu∗, Victor Purba†, Sairaj Dhople†, Brian Johnson∗ ∗Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195 identical steady-state & similar small-signal behavior (after tuning) virtual synchronous machine has poor transients (converter = flywheel) VOC has best large-signal behavior : stability, post-fault-response, ... matching control ω ∼ vdc is most robust though with slow AC dynamics ...comparison suggests multivariable control (e.g., VOC + matching) 16
  18. Abstract perspective on converter controls 1 droop control = 3

    decoupled SISO loops - Vdcref i0 iu vdc - Pref w 0 w u p - Qref E0 Eu q Dp Dq kpdc + kidc s 2 virtual machine = droop + filters + ... - Vdcref i0 iu vdc - Pref w 0 w u p - Qref E0 Eu q - w g w u - Vref V kpdc + kidc s 1 2Hs + 1/Dp kp 2Hs + 1/Dp kq s kq /Dq s 3 matching = unconventional coupling - Vdcref i0 iu vdc w 0 w u E0 Eu - Vref V ki kdc kpv + kiv s 4 nonlinear & coupled preprocessing of control inputs: virtual oscillator control   p q v   →   p/ v 2 q/ v 2 v   → control loops → u or droop adapting to impedance angle ϕ p q → cos ϕ sin ϕ − sin ϕ cos ϕ p q → control loops → u ⇒ seek MIMO, dynamic, & nonlinear control 17
  19. Optimal multivariable grid-forming control    u1 . .

    . um    = K(s)    y1 . . . yp    • inputs: modulation, dc-power supply, & inner references • outputs: (nonlinear) state tracking errors → can include all other controls (e.g., droop or VOC) depending on I/O’s optimal/robust linear design via H2 / H∞ & nonlinear implementation forming / following mode enforced by small-signal Bode characterization linear stability under interconnection Time (s) (d) Fig. 12. Simulation comparisons among different grid-forming converters when grid frequency decreases from 50 Hz to 49.9 Hz. DC source Inverter LCL filter dSPACE System PC Oscilloscope Grid Simulator Fig. 13. Experimental setup. V. CONCLUSION This paper proposes a generalized configuration for the grid- forming converter based on multi-input-multi-output feedback control theory. Instead of assuming that different loops are decoupled, the proposed configuration considers DC voltage control, frequency control, and voltage control as a single MIMO control transfer matrix to be designed. It is shown that many of the popular grid-forming controls as well as their improved formulations can be unified into a generalized control transfer matrix in the proposed configuration. Besides, q vdc Time Fig. 15. grid freq this co of con withou the mu optima optimiz verify [1] F. and Co [2] J. pow vol [3] D. vol stu 101 droop control virtual synchronous machine emulation optimal & multivariable 18
  20. Synopsis & lessons learnt 1 converter = flywheel: very different

    actuation & energy storage 2 take dc voltage into account: robust imbalance signal akin to frequency 3 multivariable design instead of decoupling: simple but results in huge gains → based on optimization & account for grid-forming / following specifications → motivates architecture-free definitions of grid connection requirements 4 open & hard problem: satisfy current constraints & remain stable post-fault 5 synchronization is only the beginning: what to do once sync’d ? services ! 19
  21. Outline: a personal journey through the field Introduction Device-Level: Grid-Forming

    Converter Control System-Level: Ancillary Services in Low-Inertia Grids • System-Level Metrics • Ancillary Services: Where & How? • Synopsis & Lessons Learnt Conclusions
  22. Hook curve & services in conventional system source: W. Sattinger,

    Swissgrid 49.88 49.89 49.90 49.91 49.92 49.93 49.94 49.95 49.96 49.97 49.98 49.99 50.00 50.01 50.02 16:45:00 16:50:00 16:55:00 17:00:00 17:05:00 17:10:00 17:15:00 8. Dezember 2004 f [Hz] 49.88 49.89 49.90 49.91 49.92 49.93 49.94 49.95 49.96 49.97 49.98 49.99 50.00 50.01 50.02 16:45:00 16:50:00 16:55:00 17:00:00 17:05:00 17:10:00 17:15:00 8. Dezember 2004 f [Hz] Frequency Athens f - Setpoint Frequency Mettlen, Switzerland PP - Outage PS Oscillation Source: W. Sattinger, Swissgrid Primary Control Secondary Control Tertiary Control Oscillation/Control M echanical Inertia 20
  23. Naive insight: we are loosing inertia nadir ~ M/T M

    T ~ 1/M aggregated model: M d dt ω = pmech − pelec T d dt pmech = −pmech + Kω • first-order observation: less inertia M =⇒ steeper RoCoF & lower nadir • second-order observation: can trade off inertia M with faster actuation T • more profound observations: the above classic hook curves reflect the physical behavior of a system dominated by synchronous machines → new physical phenomena → new metrics & new ancillary services needed 21
  24. Fast frequency response provided by converters 1 Mi s +

    Di . . . . . . power system ω τm τe iαβ if Lg Lg Lg iPV Lg fast-frequency response synchronous machines, governors, loads, transmission, batteries, PLL, … disturbance inputs performance outputs (implemented as inertia + damping) converter AC voltage power imbalance ω p (e.g., generator frequencies) (e.g., loss of load/generation) which metric(s) should we optimize when tuning controls ? 23
  25. Historic & revived (but naive !) metrics: damping ratio, RoCoF,

    nadir, & total inertia !"#$%&'$()*(+,-&./+%$/0& 1/$&%2(&'*%*$(&34&5/6($&!-7%("& 5(%($&8#00& &9(:#$&!2#"7;&& <0#=>">$&?($@>A#& ?2(&B+>C($7>%-&/1&& D#+,2(7%($& D#+,2(7%($;&BE& <#+=#=&F#">=>& .2#$0/%%(&3$#+%& 9#%>/+#0&3$>=& 8#$6>,G;&BE& H/*:0#7&8>07/+;&& !(I+&9/$$>7& E-$>#G>&D#0(G#& J07%/"&3$>=& K=>+L*$:2;&BE& .#"ML(00&4//%2;&& N>%(+:&F/+:;&& J+=$(6&O/7,/(& ?2(&B+>C($7>%-&/1& !%$#%2,0-=(& 30#7:/6;&BE& & RoCoF frequency nadir source: http://www.think-grid.org damping ratio Need for synthetic inertia (SI) for frequency regulation ENTSO-E guidance document for national implementation for network codes on grid connection 24
  26. Futility of traditional metrics 25 km 10 km 25 km

    10 km 25 km 110 km 110km 110km 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1570 MW 1000 MW 100 Mvar 567 MW 100 Mvar 400 MW 490 MW 611 MW 164 Mvar 1050 MW 284 Mvar 719 MW 133 Mvar 350 MW 69 Mvar 700 MW 208 Mvar 700 MW 293 Mvar 200 Mvar 350 Mvar • Kundur case study with 3rd area & ∼ 40s of rotational inertia • removed 28s of inertia which can be re-allocated as virtual inertia • study 2 virtual inertia allocations metrics allocation 1 allocation 2 total inertia 40.85 s 40.85 s damping ratio 0.1190 0.1206 RoCoF 0.8149 Hz/s 0.8135 Hz/s ω nadir -84.8 mHz -65.1 mHz peak injection 118.38 MW 7.0446 MW control energy 15.581 2.699 traditional metrics ambiguous → discard Mi [s] allocation 2 allocation 1 node allocation 2 allocation 1 ω [mHz] 0 1 2 3 −80 −60 −40 −20 0 comparison for 100 MW load step at bus 7 25
  27. More useful metrics: system norms • from step responses in

    a conventional power system to more modern (1980) system norms quantifying the effect of shocks on variables of interest disturbances: impulse (fault), step (loss of generation), stochastic signal (renewables) system η y performance outputs: signal energy or peak in time / frequency domain of output • practical: efficiently computable, analysis & design, & captures relevant shocks • example: as a result of fault choose best fast frequency response to minimize ∞ 0 {frequency deviation}2 + {coherency: deviation from COI}2 + {control effort}2 dt f nominal frequency 26
  28. Case-study: South-East Australian Grid grid topology VI VI VI 406

    407 403 408 402 410 401 404 405 409 411 412 413 414 415 416 VI VI VI VI VI 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 102 101 VI VI VI VI 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 VI VI VI 501 502 503 504 505 506 507 508 509 VI VI VI 406 407 403 408 402 410 401 404 405 409 411 412 413 414 415 416 VI VI VI VI VI 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 102 101 VI VI VI VI 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 VI VI VI 501 502 503 504 505 506 507 508 509 VI VI VI 406 407 403 408 402 410 401 404 405 409 411 412 413 414 415 416 VI VI VI VI VI 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 102 101 VI VI VI VI 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 VI VI VI 501 502 503 504 505 506 507 508 509 VI VI VI 406 407 403 408 402 410 401 404 405 409 411 412 413 414 415 416 VI VI VI VI VI 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 102 101 VI VI VI VI 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 VI VI VI 501 502 503 504 505 506 507 508 509 simulation model 27
  29. Closed-loop with optimal fast frequency response 0 2 4 6

    8 10 12 14 −150 −100 −50 0 50 t [s] ωG [mHz] Low-Inertia Grid-Following Grid-Forming 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 −0.2 0 0.2 t [s] ˙ ωG [Hz/s] 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 −10 0 10 20 t [s] PVI [MW] model & fast frequency response • replaced some machines with converters & (forming or following) fast frequency response: virtual inertia + damping frequency = 1 M s + D power • choose performance inputs / outputs & optimize response on linearized model • nonlinear closed-loop simulations: 200 MW disturbance at node 508 observations → system-level optimization makes a difference (even at same inertia) → forming beats following in nadir, RoCoF, & peak power 28
  30. Optimal allocation of virtual inertia + damping 102 208 212

    215 216 308 309 312 314 403 405 410 502 504 508 0 10 20 30 40 50 (a) Grid-Forming inertia [MW s2/rad] damping [MW s/rad] 102 208 212 215 216 308 309 312 314 403 405 410 502 504 508 0 10 20 30 40 50 node (b) Grid-Following observations • both control modes allocate virtual inertia in (blackout & battery) area 5 • grid-following : more reliance on damping (due to PLL-delay in ˙ ω) • grid-forming : results in a more uniform (thus robust) allocations conclusions → total inertia/damping not crucial → in comparison spatial allocation & tuning make a big difference → implications for pricing & markets 29
  31. Services from Dynamic Virtual Power Plant (DVPP) DVPP: coordinate heterogeneous

    set of DERs to collectively provide dynamic ancillary services • heterogenous collection of devices – reliable provide services consistently across all power & energy levels and all time scales – none of the devices itself is able to do so • dynamic ancillary services – fast response, e.g., inertia for brittle grid, robustly implementable on converter sources – specified as desired dynamic I/O response • coordination aspect – decentralized control implementation – real-time adaptation to variable DVPP generation & ambient grid conditions 4 1 hydro BESS c 6 4 1 hydro BESS super- capacitor SG 3 (thermal-based) DVPP 1 ⇡ <latexit sha1_base64="u9TlhYF1chaJglqJH0mOQprDJzc=">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</latexit> examples frequency containment with non-minimum phase hydro & batteries (for fast response) wind providing fast frequency response & voltage support augmented with storage hybrid power plants, e.g., PV + battery + supercap 30
  32. Nordic case study • FCR-D service → desired behavior power

    frequency = 3100 · (6.5s + 1) (2s + 1)(17s + 1) • well-known issue: actuation of hydro is non-minimum phase → initial power surge opposes control → unsatisfactory response • discussed solution: augment hydro with on-site batteries for fast response → works but not economic • better DVPP solution: coordinate hydro & wind to cover all time scales 31
  33. Enabler: dynamic & adaptive participation factors • specify desired aggregate

    DVPP behavior Tdes(s), e.g., a desired fast frequency response p → f • disaggregate Tdes(s) into local desired behaviors for each device taking dynamics constraints into account & adapt disaggregation to varying ambient conditions via dynamic & adaptive participation factors Ti (s) = mi (s) Tdes(s) • decentralized model matching control to achieve Ti (s) 75 100 125 150 5 25 50 75 100 125 150 0 10 20 d step at bus 6 load step at bus 6 desired b ... ... Tdes(s) t = 0 T1 (s) T2 (s) T3 (s) Tdes (s) Running case studies - DPF se Case study I: hydro supplementation 4 1 hydro BESS super- capacitor DVPP 1 10-2 100 102 10-3 10-2 10-1 100 101 32
  34. Synopsis & lessons learnt 1 initial literature was all about

    inertia ...but we should not extrapolate from the old system: total inertia & conventional metrics might be misleading 2 system norms are more useful, practical, & sharper metrics for both system analysis & optimal design of fast frequency response 3 spatial allocation & tuning of fast frequency response & forming vs. following behavior matters more than total amount of inertia & damping 4 dynamic virtual power plants to distribute ancillary services across heterogeneous DERs collectively covering all power levels & time scales 5 wide open: specification of future ancillary services, e.g., desired input / output responses + share & location of grid-forming sources 33
  35. Preliminary ideas on future ancillary service specs • decoupling issues

    with standard services separating (p, θ) & (q, v ) dynamics → recall VOC error coordinates & define normalized power ˜ s = p/ v 2 + i q/ v 2 complex frequency ˜ ω = d dt lg( v ) + i d dt θ [Milano, 2022] → VOC = complex droop: ˜ ω − ˜ ω ∼ ˜ s − ˜ s → the right coordinates for analysis & control !?! R I v(t) ˙ v(t) = ˜ ω ˙ v⊥ = d dt θ ˙ v = d dt lg( v ) • from static to dynamic ancillary service specifications, including, e.g., roll-off, PD-action, interconnected stability certificates, forming/following specifications, ... → ideally seek architecture-free & computationally tractable definitions, e.g., minimize cost ˜ ω, ˜ s subject to device & operational constraints 34
  36. Conclusions • do not think only of “inertia” when designing

    converter controls, analyzing power systems, or specifying ancillary services • rather: adopt more system-theoretic & computational mind-set: specify desired responses & use optimization + multivariable control • grid-forming control is only part of the puzzle: what to do once sync’d? services! who provides them? where? how to disaggregate desired behavior? • last: free yourself from textbook plots – tomorrow’s system will be different nadir 35