Deadbands, Droop, and Inertia Impact on PowerSystem Frequency Distribution

Vorobev, Petr; Greenwood, David; Bell, John; Białek, Janusz; Taylor, Philip; Turitsyn, Konstantin

doi:10.1109/pesgm41954.2020.9282048

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 13 publications

(21 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Moreover, the inertia time constant H i , the tie-line parameter T ij , and the droop characteristic R i have a considerable impact on frequency quality according to [35,36]. Therefore, different values of H i , T ij , and R i were used to show the impact of the simultaneous operation of the INP and CBRR on the indicators for evaluation of LFC, INP, and CBRR provision.…”

Section: Test Casesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of the Simultaneous Operation of the Mechanisms for Cross-Border Interchange and Activation of the Regulating Reserves

Topler

Polajžer

2021

Applied Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article examines the mechanisms for cross-border interchange of the regulating reserves (RRs), i.e., the imbalance-netting process (INP) and the cross-border activation of the RRs (CBRR). Both mechanisms are an additional service of frequency restoration reserves in the power system and connect different control areas (CAs) via virtual tie-lines to release RRs and reduce balancing energy. The primary objective of the INP is to net the demand for RRs between the cooperating CAs with different signs of interchange power variation. In contrast, the primary objective of the CBRR is to activate the RRs in the cooperating CAs with matching signs of interchange power variation. In this way, the ancillary services market and the European balancing system should be improved. However, both the INP and CBRR include a frequency term and thus impact the frequency response of the cooperating CAs. Therefore, the impact of the simultaneous operation of the INP and CBRR on the load-frequency control (LFC) and performance is comprehensively evaluated with dynamic simulations of a three-CA testing system, which no previous studies investigated before. In addition, a function for correction power adjustment is proposed to prevent the undesirable simultaneous activation of the INP and CBRR. In this way, area control error (ACE) and scheduled control power are decreased since undesired correction is prevented. The dynamic simulations confirmed that the simultaneous operation of the INP and CBRR reduced the balancing energy and decreased the unintended exchange of energy. Consequently, the LFC and performance were improved in this way. However, the impact of the INP and CBRR on the frequency quality has no unambiguous conclusions.

show abstract

Section: Test Casesmentioning

confidence: 99%