Regressionbased Approach for Calculating CBL - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

1 / 15
About This Presentation
Title:

Regressionbased Approach for Calculating CBL

Description:

For Heating Degree Days (HDD) 65, 55, 40, 25. For Cooling Degree Days (CDD) 65, 80, 90, 100 ... Day type. Weekdays. Weekends and Holidays. Season. Winter ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:54
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 16
Provided by: nae5
Learn more at: http://www.naesb.org
Category:

less

Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Regressionbased Approach for Calculating CBL


1
Regression-based Approachfor Calculating CBL
Dr. Sunil Maheshwari Dominion Virginia Power
2
Benefits of Regression Approach
  • This approach can be used to calculate CBL for
    both weather-sensitive and non-weather-sensitive
    loads.
  • The science of regression theory is well
    developed.
  • Most statistical packages such as SAS, STATA,
    SPSS, etc. can perform regression analysis.
  • Regression equations can be easily updated on a
    periodic basis (perhaps annually).

3
Description of Regression Approach
  • The idea is to treat load as a function of
    explanatory factors such as weather, time of day,
    day of the week, etc.
  • Estimate the relationship between load and
    explanatory variables using a variety of
    functional forms.
  • Pick the functional form that gives the highest
    R-sq adjusted or the lowest Root Mean Squared
    Error (RMSE)

4
Functional Forms for Weather-Sensitive Loads
  • Form 1 Load a bCDD cHDD
  • Form 2 Load a S (bi CDDi) S (cj HDDj)
  • Temperature breakpoints to be established based
    on Regression Analysis
  • Form 3 Load a S (bi CDDi) S (cj HDDj)
    S (dk hourk)
  • In addition to weather, each hour impacts the
    load as well.

5
Functional Forms for Non-Weather Sensitive Loads
  • The following forms may do a good job of
    estimating CBL for Industrial loads
  • Form 4 Load a S (bk hourk) S (cj
    monthj)
  • Form 5 Load a b TimeTrend S (ck hourk)
    S (dj monthj)

6
Applying Theory into Practice
  • For one of our DSR participants (a Building
    Complex), we estimated the relationship between
    2006 hourly Load and Weather using Functional
    Form 3
  • Load a S (bi CDDi) S (cj HDDj) S (dk
    hourk)
  • Following temperature breakpoints were used
  • For Heating Degree Days (HDD) 65, 55, 40, 25
  • For Cooling Degree Days (CDD) 65, 80, 90, 100

7
Applying Theory into Practice
  • We further sliced the data by
  • Day type
  • Weekdays
  • Weekends and Holidays
  • Season
  • Winter December - March
  • Summer June - September
  • Shoulder April, May, October, November

8
Partial Regression Output (Summer, Weekday)
  • regress load cdd_65to80 cdd_80to90 cdd_90to100
    cdd_over100 hdd hddsq hour2-hour24 if
    year2006 weekdayflag1 holiday0
    season"Summer"
  • Source SS df MS
    Number of obs 2040
  • -------------------------------------------
    F( 28, 2011) 518.86
  • Model 339127510 28 12111696.8
    Prob gt F 0.0000
  • Residual 46942715.2 2011 23342.9713
    R-squared 0.8784
  • -------------------------------------------
    Adj R-squared 0.8767
  • Total 386070225 2039 189342.925
    Root MSE 152.78
  • --------------------------------------------------
    ----------------------------
  • load Coef. Std. Err. t
    Pgtt 95 Conf. Interval
  • -------------------------------------------------
    ----------------------------
  • cdd_65to80 33.08646 .9634143 34.34
    0.000 31.19707 34.97586
  • cdd_80to90 31.6024 .5931229 53.28
    0.000 30.4392 32.7656
  • cdd_90to100 32.58845 .68489 47.58
    0.000 31.24528 33.93162
  • cdd_over100 (dropped)
  • hdd -104.137 6.194134 -16.81
    0.000 -116.2846 -91.98941
  • hddsq 4.866126 .6342737 7.67
    0.000 3.622224 6.110028
  • hour2 -33.26744 23.44299 -1.42
    0.156 -79.24253 12.70765

9
Predicted Load (CBL) based on 2006 data applied
to 2007 data
  • Using regression parameters from previous slide,
    predict the load for 2007.
  • Compare predicted load (CBL) to actual load.
  • Absolute average deviation between Actual and
    Predicted Load was less than 5.
  • Regression Equations will be re-estimated every
    year

10
Actual vs Predicted (CBL) - 2007
11
Actual Load vs Predicted (CBL) - Summer,
Weekday(Absolute Average Deviation 3)
12
Actual Load vs Predicted (CBL) - Winter,
Weekday(Absolute Average Deviation 3.6)
13
Actual Load vs Predicted (CBL) - Shoulder,
Weekday(Absolute Average Deviation 3.7)
14
Actual Load vs Predicted (CBL) -
Weekend/Holiday(Absolute Average Deviation
4.7)
15
Conclusions
  • 4 Equations with single variable hourly
    temperature
  • Summer, Weekday
  • Winter, Weekday
  • Shoulder, Weekday
  • Weekends / Holidays
  • Good fit (R-sq adjusted gt 78 in all cases).
  • Simplified calculations, and the regression
    equations can be easily updated.
Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
About PowerShow.com