MVWG Report to TSSMVWG Report to TSSMay 2013May 2013

Stephanie Lu, MVWG ChairSeattle City Light

MeetingsMeetings LMTF members met informally as needed PPMDTF Mar 15, 2013 HVDCTF Mar 20, 2013 REMTF Mar 26, 2013 MVWG Mar 27-28, 2013

Presentation OverviewPresentation Overview Load Modeling System Model Validation Generator Modeling, Testing, and Validation Renewable Energy Modeling HVDC Modeling Other items: JSIS Update, NERC MOD B,

RAS/Relay Modeling, WECC-0101 SAR, Program Updates

Next Meetings and Workshops

Load Modeling Load Modeling

Load Modeling – Implementation Load Modeling – Implementation Plan UpdatePlan Update Studies were due to TSS by March 29th

(presentation with update will be provided by Craig Quist/Rikin Shah)

Phase 1 approval now planned for August TSS meeting

Load Modeling – CMPLDW Load Modeling – CMPLDW StructureStructurePhase 1 work: Currently LMTF uses 0.93 pu voltage threshold at low-

side sub bus (uses alwscc as default for buses lower than threshold)

The programs will add the following parameters/logic: Min voltage for creating cmpldw record (an adjustable

parameter) Min voltage for end of feeder (used to adjust feeder

impedance) (an adjustable parameter) Feeder impedance cannot be less than 0 If feeder impedance is less than jumper threshold, it gets

forced to zero PSSE will also implement improvements to recognize

that not all power electronic load is reconnected after a fault

Load Modeling – CMPLDW Load Modeling – CMPLDW StructureStructurePhase 2 work: An IEEE paper written on FIDVR Event

Analysis, led by Richard Bravo SCE that looks at PQube monitoring is available

The model of what happens when A/C stalls is pretty good

More work on whether or not A/C would stall needs more work

Discussion on how to structure the model to create a common data model so that it can keep data that keeps getting replicated

Load Modeling – CMPLDW DataLoad Modeling – CMPLDW Data

An IEEE paper is planned to include: John Kueck’s protection and controls for

motor loads under voltage sag John Undrill’s point on wave Richard Bravo’s A/C research results

Load Modeling – CMPLDW Data Load Modeling – CMPLDW Data ToolsTools A stand-alone load model data tool is

being developed by PNNL Outputs PSLF dyd and PSSE dyr formats,

enabling both PSSE and PSLF users to perform model evaluation studies.

Load Model Data Tool (LMDT4A) is available in the Composite Load Model Folder on the TSS Base Cases website.

Load Modeling – CMPLDW Load Modeling – CMPLDW Benchmarking StudiesBenchmarking Studies Song Wang (PAC) presented cmpldw

benchmarking studies. Simulated phase 1 & 2 for no fault line trip

and three phase line trip Minor differences are seen between PSLF

18 and PSSE 32

System Model ValidationSystem Model Validation

System Model ValidationSystem Model Validation Several underfrequency events have occurred since

the last meeting, but nothing significant Dmitry sends out notices to the MVWG & JSIS mailing lists

Model validation report of July 4, 2012 event aimed for MVWG approval at the next meeting

Includes a recommendation to adjust the baseload flag for gas-turbine generators that are not a full output because some of them may respond

WECC staff will develop a Sep 8th case for model validation

Includes developing a process to facilitate development of future model validation cases based on WSM data

System Model ValidationSystem Model Validation MVWG participating in the TSS WBRTF effort MVWG contract with GE continuing to convert

WECC dyd data to an “element code” definition with WSM to provide node-breaker capabilities in PSLF

Eric Allen (NERC) provided an update on the efforts of the NERC MWG efforts:

Node-breaker modeling List of impeding data exchange Standardization of dynamic models (starting from

WECC’s work related to WECC’s Approved Dynamics Model List).

Generator Modeling, Testing, Generator Modeling, Testing, and Model Validationand Model Validation

Synchronous Generator, Excitation Synchronous Generator, Excitation and Turbine Control Modelsand Turbine Control Models Power Plant Model Data Task Force

OEL Model Update

Thermal governor modeling

Hydro governor model hyg6d

Power Plant Model Validation

NERC Frequency Response Initiative

Power Plant Model Data Task Force Reviewed the list of suspected errors identified

and discussed at the PPMDTF conference call. Each item was assigned for follow up with the data owners to correct or verify the data that is suspect. If there are additional errors suspected, continue to

send them to Kent. The error check for generator saturations factors

were added S(1.2) is to be greater than S(1.0) S(1.2) and S(1.0) are not equal to zero

PPMDTF – Generator Model Testing Tool John Undrill’s data checking tool is posted in the

For Generators area in Generator Testing Program Folder

NEW - “Generator_Model_Testing.zip” is posted on the WECC website in the For Generators area Tool is for validating generator response for generator

model on a 2 bus system There are several researchers developing tools

for model calibration using disturbance data, including Georgia Tech, PNNL, Univ of Wisconsin, and Univ of Texas

Excitation Models – OELExcitation Models – OEL IEEE working group is proposing the

OEL paper at the IEEE PES GM in July 2013

Note: not the same as PSLF OEL1 or IEEE OEL95

More discussion is needed to reconsider which model WECC will recommend to be the approved OEL model

Thermal Governor Model

Revision of the thermal governor recommendation is ongoing

Hydro Governor Model Hyg6d is planned for June 2013 MVWG approval

Implemented in PSLF, model being shared with PSSE and PowerWorld

Main purpose of hyg6d: appropriately model the low response of the Kaplan turbines (includes hydro-servo model)

Primarily intended for use by the Army Core of Engineers turbines

Kaplan turbines represent a very significant part of the frequency responsive capacity of WECC With approximately 15 GW of Kaplan turbines on the Columbia

River, there is a need to have this model This improved modeling will affect FRR Impacts damping of the system for high north to south transfers

Good calibration has been shown at McNary, John Day, other Lower Columbia units, and at Albany Falls

Power Plant Model ValidationPower Plant Model Validation

Power Plant Model Validation (PPMV) version 1B using PSLF play-in function is available on the WECC website in the MVWG PPMDTF Documents site

It is encouraged to install more PMUs at power plant point of interconnections

NERC Frequency Response NERC Frequency Response InitiativeInitiative NERC Interconnection Frequency

Response Obligations (IFRO) test results shows WECC has 840 MW / dHz.

At 840 MW/dHz, frequency response in the Western Interconnection is sufficient

Indicates to remain above the UFLS threshold of 59.5 Hz following the loss of 2 Palo Verde units.

Renewable Energy ModelingRenewable Energy Modeling

REMTF – Implementation Plan Update REMTF is working on model validation of the

prototyped models Will have a complete set of tests completed

before deploying models Showed good validation for type 3 and type 4

wind models, some tweaks were made during this model development process between users and vendors

More work is continuing, and the plan is still to follow the approved implementation plan and timeline

REMTF – Other Activities

Reconciliation of NERC MOD Standards and WECC generator data and model validation policy

Model documentation and application guidelines WECC model specifications (already approved) Model application guide with default data for model users Guidelines/examples for model validation There are already existing modeling guidelines (wind powerflow,

wind dynamics, PV powerflow) that will be updated. PV dynamics modeling guidelines will be developed.

Workshop focused on renewables in Fall 2013 (November)

Guideline for short circuit contribution modeling (needs to collaborate with Relay Working Group)

REMTF – Other Activities Inventory of wind/PV deployment in WECC and

how much is modeled in the WECC base cases

REMTF – Request for Data and Model Validation Tool Requesting for participation in two ways:

Members to work with the models in the development stage

Members to provide actual data for model validation for wind (especially type 3 and 4) and solar projects

EPRI WTGMV tool is publicly available: http://my.epri.com/portal/server.pt?Abstract_id=000000000001024346

HVDC ModelingHVDC Modeling

HVDC Modeling Conventional point-to-point HVDC

Powerflow model: already exists, documentation is being improved

Dynamic model: being developed, a benchmark test case was developed

Siemens is to better define the rectifier and inverter models PSLF user-written model is to be compared against Siemens

implementation ABB will review and comment on results Manitoba Hydro may provide PSCAD model for further

benchmarking.

HVDC Modeling VSC point-to-point HVDC

Powerflow model: specs have been agreed upon Implemented in PSSE, beta in PowerWorld, PSLF is

implementing Next step is to benchmark across programs

Dynamic model: two proposals are being discussed 1) Siemens proposal and 2) proposal described in draft task

force document Need to consider the emulation of DC faults and decide

between a DC injection type model or voltage phase between reactance model

Additional testing is needed

HVDC Modeling HVDCTF will provide an educational document

for the HVDC user-defined models in WECC, including PDCI, TransBay, IPP and Blackwater

Trans Bay DC model still needs to be validated PDCI Modeling

Sylmar model still needs to be validated Celilo is expected to be replaced in 2016, the updated

model is in progress

Other ItemsOther Items

Other Items JSIS Update NERC MOD B Standard Process Update MSRATF Update - RAS/Relay Modeling WECC-0101 SAR Generator Validation PSSE, PSLF, and PowerWorld provided

program updates

Other Items – JSIS Update NERC restarted work on PRC-002-2 on dynamic

monitoring equipment BPA is performing system tests

Every other Wednesday starting March 20th

Three full tests including the Chief Joseph brake insertion in April, June, and September

This will provide good data for validating power plant models

Will provide JSIS survey of synchro-phasor projects by utilities that implemented PMUs

Paper with justification for medium sized utilities to install PMUs is in progress

Other Items – JSIS Update Power plant model validation with two consultants

showed different results PMU data is a good way to get additional data to validate models

Most common model issues: PSS (most commonly gain) turbine control mode of operation / governor model generator inertia deficiencies in model structure

Other common model issues: AGC, UEL. Through “clinical” experience, digital systems tend to

stay accurate over time, and electromechanical systems tend to drift

Other Items – NERC MOD B NERC is starting an informal development

process for 3 MOD efforts MOD A: ATC/TTC/CBM (MOD-001, 004, 028, 029, 030)

MOD B: Modeling Data (MOD-010 to 015)

MOD C: Demand Data (MOD-016 to 021)

MOD B proposed approach is to consolidate MOD-010 through 015 into one standard for steady-state, dynamics, and short circuit data

Considering MVWG comment to include baseline testing and validation as part of MOD B

Other Items – MSRATF Reviewed MVWG model specifications process and

MSRATF’s scope of work Dmitry reviewed event-based RAS modeling

Functional description and specifications for the MATL RAS was presented

Dmitry provided a system impact study on relay modeling Recommendation includes using "zlinw" in monitoring mode as

an interim approach for power swing and FIDVR-type events as a screening tool

Model specifications for overcurrent relays by MSRATF’s Relay subgroup is expected at the next meeting

Other Items – WECC-0101 SAR MVWG was requested to perform a technical study for

WECC-0101 SAR on Generator Validation Policy Questions raised:

What is the relationship between WECC Generating Unit Model Validation Policy and NERC MOD Standards?

Do we need WECC Policy since NERC Standards are passed? What are reliability implications of reclassifying WECC

Generating Unit Model Validation Policy as a Guideline?

Draft response and recommendations are under review by MVWG

Due to WSC by June 1, 2013

Other Items – WECC-0101 SAR Some of the most important differences between the

Policy and MOD 26/27 are: The Policy contains a generator baseline testing requirement,

whereas the MOD 26/27 standards do not. Baseline testing is critical for initial model development.

The Policy specifies a model re-validation period of 5 years, whereas the MOD 26/27 standards specify a re-validation period of 10 years.

The Policy applies to plants 20 MVA or larger and units 10 MVA or larger, whereas the MOD26/27 standards would apply to plants or units 75 MVA or larger.

The Policy has specific technical guidance for generator testing and validation, whereas the MOD 26/27 standards do not.

Next Meetings / WorkshopsNext Meetings / Workshops

2013 Meetings2013 Meetings

Meeting Dates and Locations for M&VWG and REMTF:

June 18-20 in Salt Lake City, hosted by WECC November 4-6 in Phoenix, hosted by APS

HVDCTF, PPMDTF, and LMTF will meet independently from the main M&VWG meeting, as needed.

Upcoming WorkshopsUpcoming Workshops

Joint WorkshopJuly 17-18 SRWG Workshop (2 half days)July 18-19 MVWG Workshop (2 half days)Note: Coordinated with SRWG July Meeting

Wind/Solar Modeling Workshop Fall 2013

Generator Testing Workshop TBD