Measurement-Directed Reduction of Dynamic Models in Power Systems

The paper describes a new model reduction procedure tailored to power systems. It uses measurement data to devise a family of reduced order nonlinear models while retaining physical interpretability of parameters and equations. The manifold boundary approximation method (MBAM) uses the Fisher information matrix calculated from measurements to identify the least relevant parameter combination in the original model. Next, it numerically constructs a geodesic on the corresponding statistical manifold originating from the initial parameters in the least relevant parameter direction until a manifold boundary is found. MBAM then identifies a limiting approximation in the mathematical form of the model and removes one parameter combination. The simplified model is recalibrated by fitting its behavior to that of the original model, and the process is repeated as appropriate. MBAM is demonstrated on the example of a synchronous generator (SG), which has been treated extensively in the literature. Implications of the proposed model reduction procedure on large power system models are illustrated on a 441-bus, 72-SG dynamical model.

[1]  Mark K Transtrum,et al.  Model reduction by manifold boundaries. , 2014, Physical review letters.

[2]  Joe H. Chow,et al.  A Measurement-Based Framework for Dynamic Equivalencing of Large Power Systems Using Wide-Area Phasor Measurements , 2011, IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid.

[3]  Guangchao Geng,et al.  Power System Dynamic Model Reduction Based on Extended Krylov Subspace Method , 2016, IEEE Transactions on Power Systems.

[4]  Shuai Lu,et al.  Dynamic-Feature Extraction, Attribution, and Reconstruction (DEAR) Method for Power System Model Reduction , 2014, IEEE Transactions on Power Systems.

[5]  J. S. Edmonds,et al.  Trajectory sensitivity based identification of synchronous generator and excitation system parameters , 1988 .

[6]  M. A. M. Ariff,et al.  Estimating Dynamic Model Parameters for Adaptive Protection and Control in Power System , 2015, IEEE Transactions on Power Systems.

[7]  Louis B. Rall,et al.  Automatic Differentiation: Techniques and Applications , 1981, Lecture Notes in Computer Science.

[8]  Peter W. Sauer,et al.  Power System Dynamics and Stability , 1997 .

[9]  G. Verghese,et al.  Subset selection for improved parameter estimation in on-line identification of a synchronous generator , 1999 .

[10]  V. Vittal,et al.  Right-Sized Power System Dynamic Equivalents for Power System Operation , 2011, IEEE Transactions on Power Systems.

[11]  Aj van der Schaft.  On model reduction of physical network systems , 2014 .

[12]  R. Podmore,et al.  Dynamic Aggregation of Generating Unit Models , 1978, IEEE Transactions on Power Apparatus and Systems.

[13]  I. Hiskens.  Nonlinear dynamic model evaluation from disturbance measurements , 2002, 2002 IEEE Power Engineering Society Winter Meeting. Conference Proceedings (Cat. No.02CH37309).

[14]  J. Chow,et al.  A trajectory sensitivity method for the identification of nonlinear excitation system models , 1993 .

[15]  Albert Chang,et al.  Power System Dynamic Equivalents , 1970 .

[16]  George C. Verghese,et al.  Extensions, simplifications, and tests of synchronic modal equivalencing (SME) , 1997 .

[17]  Luis Rouco,et al.  Synchronic modal equivalencing (SME) for structure-preserving dynamic equivalents , 1996 .

[18]  Andrija T. Saric,et al.  Information geometry for model verification in energy systems , 2016, 2016 Power Systems Computation Conference (PSCC).

[19]  I. Hiskens.  Nonlinear Dynamic Model Evaluation from Disturbance Measurements , 2001, IEEE Power Engineering Review.

[20]  Ryan N. Gutenkunst,et al.  Sloppiness, Modeling, and Evolution in Biochemical Networks , 2007 .

[21]  Arjan van der Schaft,et al.  Physical Network Systems and Model Reduction , 2015 .

[22]  Arjan van der Schaft,et al.  Discrete conservation laws and port-Hamiltonian systems on graphs and complexes , 2011, ArXiv.

[23]  J. M. Undrill,et al.  Construction of Power System lectromechanical Equivalents by Modal Analysis , 1971 .

[24]  M.A. Pai,et al.  Model reduction in power systems using Krylov subspace methods , 2005, IEEE Transactions on Power Systems.

[26]  H. H. Happ,et al.  Power System Control and Stability , 1979, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics.

[27]  P. Kundur,et al.  Dynamic reduction of large power systems for stability studies , 1997 .

[28]  Mark A. Kramer,et al.  The simultaneous solution and sensitivity analysis of systems described by ordinary differential equations , 1988, TOMS.

[29]  George C. Verghese.  Getting to the gray box: Some challenges for model reduction , 2009, ACC.

[30]  Mark K Transtrum,et al.  Geometry of nonlinear least squares with applications to sloppy models and optimization. , 2010, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[31]  P. Kokotovic,et al.  Integral manifold as a tool for reduced-order modeling of nonlinear systems: A synchronous machine case study , 1989 .

[32]  L. Rouco,et al.  Large-Scale Power System Dynamic Equivalents Based on Standard and Border Synchrony , 2010, IEEE Transactions on Power Systems.

[33]  Federico Milano,et al.  Power System Modelling and Scripting , 2010 .

[34]  Jean Utke,et al.  Advances in Automatic Differentiation , 2008 .

[35]  Joe H. Chow,et al.  Power System Coherency and Model Reduction , 2019, Power System Modeling, Computation, and Control.

[36]  Mark K. Transtrum,et al.  Information topology identifies emergent model classes , 2014 .

[37]  A.R. Bergen,et al.  A Structure Preserving Model for Power System Stability Analysis , 1981, IEEE Transactions on Power Apparatus and Systems.

[38]  G. D. Byrne,et al.  VODE: a variable-coefficient ODE solver , 1989 .

[39]  Mark K Transtrum,et al.  Why are nonlinear fits to data so challenging? , 2009, Physical review letters.