Comparison of Sen Transformer and UPFC for congestion management in hybrid electricity markets

Abstract Congestion management (CM) is one of the most important and challenging tasks of the Independent System Operator (ISO) in the deregulated environment. Recently, Sen Transformer (ST) has emerged as an important power flow control device which has the capability of power flow control over a wide range like UPFC. This device with a conventional transformer and tap changers has the capability of bidirectional control of active and reactive power and can play a very important role in future markets for mitigating the congestion problems. In this paper, the capability of ST has been utilized to manage transmission line congestion for hybrid based electricity market model. The main contribution of the paper is: (i) to develop an optimal rescheduling of generators strategy for real time congestion management and impact of ST for congestion management, (ii) the comparison of ST with unified power flow controller (UPFC) for congestion management, (iii) the secure bilateral transactions determination in a hybrid market model and congestion management with both power flow controllers in combined pool and bilateral market model. The optimal location of ST and UPFC has been obtained solving mixed integer non-linear programming model of congestion management. The proposed model has been applied for results on IEEE 24-bus RTS test system.

[1]  Y. H. Song,et al.  Apply Lagrangian relaxation to multi-zone congestion management , 2001, 2001 IEEE Power Engineering Society Winter Meeting. Conference Proceedings (Cat. No.01CH37194).

[2]  F. Galiana,et al.  Studies of bilateral contracts with respect to steady-state security in a deregulated environment , 1997, Proceedings of the 20th International Conference on Power Industry Computer Applications.

[3]  A. Vojdani,et al.  Transmission dispatch and congestion management in the emerging energy market structures , 1998 .

[4]  A. Kumar,et al.  A zonal congestion management approach using real and reactive power rescheduling , 2004, IEEE Transactions on Power Systems.

[5]  S. M. Shahidehpour,et al.  Fixed transmission rights for zonal congestion management , 1999 .

[6]  E. Bompard,et al.  Congestion-management schemes: a comparative analysis under a unified framework , 2003 .

[7]  F. Alvarado,et al.  Management of multiple congested conditions in unbundled operation of a power system , 1997 .

[8]  Kwang-Ho Lee,et al.  Optimal siting of TCSC for reducing congestion cost by using shadow prices , 2002 .

[9]  S. C. Srivastava,et al.  Optimal power dispatch in deregulated market considering congestion management , 2000, DRPT2000. International Conference on Electric Utility Deregulation and Restructuring and Power Technologies. Proceedings (Cat. No.00EX382).

[10]  Manasarani Mandala,et al.  Congestion management by optimal placement of FACTS device , 2010, 2010 Joint International Conference on Power Electronics, Drives and Energy Systems & 2010 Power India.

[11]  Ashwani Kumar,et al.  Comparison of Sen Transformer and Unified Power Flow Controller on Spot Price Variation of Real and Reactive Power under Maximum Loadability Condition , 2008 .

[12]  I. Wangensteen,et al.  Transmission management in the deregulated environment , 2000, Proceedings of the IEEE.

[13]  A. David,et al.  Optimal dispatch under transmission contracts , 1999 .

[14]  K. Mwanza,et al.  Congestion management: Re-dispatch and application of FACTS , 2006 .

[15]  Ping Yan,et al.  TCSC and SVC as re-dispatch tools for congestion management and TTC improvement , 2002, 2002 IEEE Power Engineering Society Winter Meeting. Conference Proceedings (Cat. No.02CH37309).

[16]  Enrique Acha,et al.  FACTS: Modelling and Simulation in Power Networks , 2004 .

[17]  Kalyan K. Sen,et al.  Comparison of the "Sen" transformer with the unified power flow controller , 2003 .

[18]  Mohammad Shahidehpour,et al.  The IEEE Reliability Test System-1996. A report prepared by the Reliability Test System Task Force of the Application of Probability Methods Subcommittee , 1999 .

[19]  X. Wang,et al.  Lagrangian decomposition approach to active power congestion management across interconnected regions , 2001 .

[20]  Ashwani Kumar Sharma.  New Secure Bilateral Transaction Matrix Determination Using AC Distribution Factors and Impact of TCPAR and TCSC on Its Pattern , 2007 .

[21]  F. Galiana,et al.  Studies of bilateral contracts with respect to steady-state security in a deregulated environment [of electricity supply] , 1998 .

[22]  E. Handschin,et al.  Congestion management methods with a special consideration of FACTS-devices , 2001, 2001 IEEE Porto Power Tech Proceedings (Cat. No.01EX502).

[23]  Michael C. Ferris,et al.  MATLAB and GAMS: Interfacing Optimization and Visualization Software , 1999 .

[24]  M. Shahidehpour,et al.  Restructured Electrical Power Systems: Operation: Trading, and Volatility , 2001 .

[25]  Seema Singh,et al.  Congestion management in competitive power market : A bibliographical survey , 2005 .

[26]  A. David,et al.  Transmission congestion management in an electricity market , 1999 .

[27]  Ashwani Kumar,et al.  Power-flow Model of “Sen” Transformer for Loadability Enhancement and Comparison with Unified Power-flow Controllers in Hybrid Electricity Markets , 2009 .

[28]  G. Yesuratnam,et al.  Congestion management for security oriented power system operation using generation rescheduling , 2010, 2010 IEEE 11th International Conference on Probabilistic Methods Applied to Power Systems.

[29]  A. Papalexopoulos,et al.  Transmission congestion management in competitive electricity markets , 1998 .

[30]  M. Tech,et al.  FACTS Modeling and Simulation in Power Networks , 2014 .

[31]  Y. H. Song,et al.  Combined Active and Reactive Congestion Management with FACTS Devices , 2002 .