Economic Dispatch of Non-Monotonically Increasing Generators

1
Economic Dispatch of Non-Monotonically Increasing
Generators

• May06-07
• Client
• MidAmerican Energy Company
• Alan Oneal
• Faculty Advisors
• Dr. John Lamont
• Students
• Matthew Ellis, EE
• Robert Walter, EE
• Jeremy Hamilton, EE
• Noraima Fernandez, EE

2
Overview of Presentation

• Introductory Material
• Project Activity Description
• Resources and Schedules
• Closing Material

3
Acknowledgements

• Dr. John Lamont
• Dedicated project team advisor
• Alan Oneal
• MidAmerican Energy client contact

4
List of Definitions 1/3
Waste Heat
Fuel
Power
CT
(Airplane Engine)
Waste Heat
5
List of Definitions 2/3
Average Cost per MWhr.
80
30
Monotonic (MU)?
?Non-Monotonic (NMU)
6
List of Definitions 3/3

• Unit Commitment Selection of which units to
  run(2 components)
• Operating Costs (Economic Dispatch)
• Start-up Costs
• Economic Dispatch Allocation of power to
  individual generating units on line to produce
  cheapest electricity demand solution (occurs when
  every unit has the same incremental cost)
• __________________________________________________
  ______________
• Monotonic unit (MU) a generator that produces
  more power output as fuel input is increased
  (i.e. Combustion Turbine)
• Non-monotonic unit (NMU) a generator that can
  have an increase in power output with no increase
  in fuel input
• Heat recovery steam generator (HRSG) the second
  process of the combined cycle that recovers waste
  heat to drive a steam turbine

7
Problem Statement

• General Problem Statement
• Conventional monotonically increasing algorithms
  will not dispatch non-monotonically increasing
  units without altering the data, thus currently
  an optimal solution can not be found.
• General Problem Solution
• Modification of a pre-existing algorithm
  incorporated into Microsoft Excel macros in order
  to give MidAmerican Energy the lowest cost
  solution to meet their power demand with the
  shortest solution time possible.
• The project team will focus their concentration
  on improving the structure of the unit commitment
  page, reorganizing the way output is displayed,
  implementing a main menu, and finally
  restructuring the code to allow the user to
  dispatch a defined range of hours.

8
Operating Environment

• Windows based computer system
• Adequate processing capabilities
• Microsoft Excel workbook
• Programming via Visual Basic macros

9
Intended Users and Intended Uses

• Users
• MidAmerican Energys generation dispatchers
• MidAmerican Energys short-term energy traders
• Uses
• Optimize the economic dispatch of monotonically
  increasing and non-monotonically increasing
  generators
• Benchmark cost curves for future algorithm
  designs

10
Assumptions and Limitations

• Assumptions
• Enumeration / iteration will be used as the
  optimization method for the algorithm
• 12 monotonically increasing units and two sets of
  non-monotonically increasing units are being
  modeled
• Limitations
• Software must use Microsoft Excel as the
  interface
• Input data for generating units will use
  piece-wise linear incremental cost curves
• Results must be written into a single Excel
  workbook

11
End Product and Other Deliverables

• Microsoft Excel workbook with Visual Basic macros
  embedded
• User instructional documentation
• Easy to use interface
• Programmers guide

12
Previous Activities

• The previous group accomplished
• A working algorithm
• Unverified complete solution
• The problems with previous work
• Errors in code
• Code was hard to understand due to lack of
  comments
• Main menu was hard to understand due to lack of
  instructions
• Lack of features in the program

13
(No Transcript)
14
Present Accomplishments

• Added features to program
• Unit commitment page
• Output page(s)
• Fixed errors from previous group
• Increased usability
• Main Menu
• Embedded instructions
• Restructured program
• Secondary Menu
• Range of hours
• Verified solution

15
New Main Menu
16
New Secondary Menu
17
Approaches Considered and One Used

• Only one approach considered
• Client requested not to change solution algorithm
  
• Solution algorithm from previous group was used
• Approach used
• Modify existing program
• Add features
• Speed up run-time

18
Project Definition Activities

• Technology considered and selected
• Client requirement was to use Excel with Visual
  Basic macros
• Advantages
• Previous program was already in this format
• User friendly
• Disadvantages
• Slow
• Lack of Visual Basic knowledge

19
Research Activities

• Meet with advisor
• Background information on Economic Dispatch
• How ED works for NMU
• Reading previous groups work
• Understand how solution works
• How to build and add to it
• Research on Visual Basic
• No prior knowledge

20
Design Activities

• Meeting with client
• What needed to be changed
• What needed to be added
• Group meetings
• How changes would be made
• How features would be added
• How it would be implemented
• How it would work with existing program

21
Implementation Activities

• Individual work
• Modifying existing code
• Writing new code
• Group work
• Integrating new code modules
• Integrating new features into menus

22
Testing and Modification Activities

• MATLAB
• Linear programming used
• Verified that solutions for program were correct
• Client
• Received feedback
• Modifications made based on client feedback

23
Resource Requirements 1/3
Labor at 10 per hour Total of hours Total amount
Ellis, Matthew 205 2,050.00
Fernandez, Noraima 135 1,350.00
Hamilton, Jeremy 160 1,600.00
Walter, Robert 170 1,700.00
Total 670 6,700.00
24
Resource Requirements 2/3

• Financial requirements expenses

Item ( of copies) W/O Labor With Labor
Bound project plan (2) 8.88 8.88
Bound design report (2) 8.88 8.88
Bound final report (2) 8.88 8.88
Poster (1) 20.00 20.00
Total 46.64 46.64
25
Resource Requirements 3/3
26
Schedules
27
Project Evaluation

• Project divided up into 8 milestones
• Priority status
• Assigned to each milestone
• Corresponds to percentage of time milestone
  required

28
Project Evaluation
Milestone Evaluation Priority Status Evaluation Score
Project Definition 7.4
Technology Selection .5
Product Design 24.9
Product Implementation 22.4
GUI 2.5
Dispatching a Range of Hours 10.4
Unit Commitment Sheet 4.5
Output Pages 3.5
Additional User Options 1.5
Product Testing 8.9
Product Documentation 5.9
Product Demonstration 5.9
Project Reporting 24.1
OVERALL 100.0
29
Project Evaluation

• Milestones evaluated as follows
• Greatly Exceeded Minimum expectations were met
  with the addition of several extra features.
• Exceeded Minimum expectations were met with the
  addition of one or more extra features.
• Fully Met Minimum expectations were met.
• Partially Met Some of the minimum expectations
  were met.
• Not Met None of the minimum expectations were
  met.
• Not Attempted The minimum expectations were not
  attempted.

30
Project Evaluation
Milestone Evaluation Priority Status Evaluation Score
Project Definition Fully Met 7.4
Technology Selection Fully Met .5
Product Design Exceeded 24.9
Product Implementation Exceeded/Fully Met 22.4
GUI Fully Met 2.5
Dispatching a Range of Hours Exceeded 10.4
Unit Commitment Sheet Fully Met 4.5
Output Pages Fully Met 3.5
Additional User Options Exceeded 1.5
Product Testing Greatly Exceeded 8.9
Product Documentation Fully Met 5.9
Product Demonstration Fully Met 5.9
Project Reporting Fully Met 24.1
OVERALL 100.0
31
Project Evaluation

• Evaluations we given a per-unit score
• Greatly Exceeded 1.1
• Exceeded 1.0
• Fully Met 0.9
• Partially Met 0.5
• Not Met 0
• Not Attempted 0 or Not Applicable
• Evaluation Score
• Priority Status x Per-Unit Evaluation Points

32
Project Evaluation
Milestone Evaluation Priority Status Evaluation Score
Project Definition Fully Met 7.4 6.7
Technology Selection Fully Met .5 .5
Product Design Exceeded 24.9 24.9
Product Implementation Exceeded/Fully Met 22.4 21.5
GUI Fully Met 2.5 2.3
Dispatching a Range of Hours Exceeded 10.4 10.4
Unit Commitment Sheet Fully Met 4.5 4.1
Output Pages Fully Met 3.5 3.2
Additional User Options Exceeded 1.5 1.5
Product Testing Greatly Exceeded 8.9 9.8
Product Documentation Fully Met 5.9 5.3
Product Demonstration Fully Met 5.9 5.3
Project Reporting Fully Met 24.1 21.7
OVERALL 100.0
33
Project Evaluation

• Passing Score 90
• If any major tasks were only partially completed
  the project would be unsuccessful
• Major tasks
• Design
• Implementation
• Testing

34
Project Evaluation

• The project teams final score

95.7
35
Commercialization

• This product (as is) is meant to perform a
  client specific task. The final product is
  intended to be used only by MidAmerican Energy.
  Therefore, there are currently no plans for
  commercialization.

36
Recommendations for Additional Work

• Implementation of a faster solution algorithm
• Additional user defined options for NMU
  configurations

37
Lessons Learned

• What went well?
• Worked well as a team to produce a successful
  product
• What did not go well?
• Dividing up tasks
• What technical knowledge was gained?
• Economic Dispatch
• Visual Basic Programming
• What non-technical knowledge was gained?
• How to interact with a client
• Things to be done different next time?
• More initial client interaction

38
Risk and Risk Management

• Anticipated Risks
• Loss of a team member
• Computer storage problems
• A change to one part of the code unexpectedly
  affecting another section of the code

• Planned Management
• After any change to the program the newest
  version was sent to every team member
• Software versions saved not only on ISU accounts,
  but also on every members personal account.
• A separate log-book was made detailing who made
  the last version and what has changed about it.

• Unanticipated Risks
• NONE

39
Closing Summary

• The electrical power industry is changing at an
  extremely rapid pace. This change is so rapid
  that there are many details that are being
  overlooked when it comes to economic dispatch.
  With the help of our product, MidAmerican Energy
  will not only be ahead of the times, but will
  also have the opportunity to make additional
  profit.

40
Questions?
Greater Des Moines Energy Combined Cycle Plant