Generalized unit commitment by the radar multiplier method

This operations research thesis should be situated in the field of the power generation industry. The general objective of this work is to efficiently solve the Generalized Unit Commitment (GUC) problem by means of specialized software. The GUC problem generalizes the Unit Commitment (UC) problem by simultane-ously solving the associated Optimal Power Flow (OPF) problem. There are many approaches to solve the UC and OPF problems separately, but approaches to solve them jointly, i.e. to solve the GUC problem, are quite scarce. One of these GUC solving approaches is due to professors Batut and Renaud, whose methodology has been taken as a starting point for the methodology presented herein. This thesis report is structured as follows. Chapter 1 describes the state of the art of the UC and GUC problems. The formulation of the classical short-term power planning problems related to the GUC problem, namely the economic dispatching problem, the OPF problem, and the UC problem, are reviewed. Special attention is paid to the UC literature and to the traditional methods for solving the UC problem. In chapter 2 we extend the OPF model developed by professors Heredia and Nabona to obtain our GUC model. The variables used and the modelling of the thermal, hydraulic and transmission systems are introduced, as is the objective function. Chapter 3 deals with the Variable Duplication (VD) method, which is used to decompose the GUC problem as an alternative to the Classical Lagrangian Relaxation (CLR) method. Furthermore, in chapter 3 dual bounds provided by the VDmethod or by the CLR methods are theoretically compared. Throughout chapters 4, 5, and 6 our solution methodology, the Radar Multiplier (RM) method, is designed and tested. Three independent matters are studied: first, the auxiliary problem principle method, used by Batut and Renaud to treat the inseparable augmented Lagrangian, is compared with the block coordinate descent method from both theoretical and practical points of view. Second, the Radar Sub- gradient (RS) method, a new Lagrange multiplier updating method, is proposed and computationally compared with the classical subgradient method. And third, we study the local character of the optimizers computed by the Augmented Lagrangian Relaxation (ALR) method when solving the GUC problem. A heuristic to improve the local ALR optimizers is designed and tested. Chapter 7 is devoted to our computational implementation of the RM method, the MACH code. First, the design of MACH is reviewed brie y and then its performance is tested by solving real-life large-scale UC and GUC instances. Solutions computed using our VD formulation of the GUC problem are partially primal feasible since they do not necessarily fulfill the spinning reserve constraints. In chapter 8 we study how to modify this GUC formulation with the aim of obtaining full primal feasible solutions. A successful test based on a simple UC problem is reported. The conclusions, contributions of the thesis, and proposed further research can be found in chapter 9.

[1]  Forman S. Acton,et al.  Numerical methods that work , 1970 .

[2]  R. Tyrrell Rockafellar,et al.  A dual approach to solving nonlinear programming problems by unconstrained optimization , 1973, Math. Program..

[3]  Thomas L. Magnanti,et al.  Applied Mathematical Programming , 1977 .

[4]  G. Cohen Auxiliary problem principle and decomposition of optimization problems , 1980 .

[5]  Richard E. Rosenthal,et al.  A Nonlinear Network Flow Algorithm for Maximization of Benefits in a Hydroelectric Power System , 1981, Oper. Res..

[6]  Philip E. Gill,et al.  Practical optimization , 1981 .

[7]  Dimitri P. Bertsekas,et al.  Constrained Optimization and Lagrange Multiplier Methods , 1982 .

[8]  D. Bertsekas,et al.  Solution of Large-Scale Optimal Unit Commitment Problems , 1982, IEEE Transactions on Power Apparatus and Systems.

[9]  A. Merlin,et al.  A New Method for Unit Commitment at Electricite De France , 1983, IEEE Transactions on Power Apparatus and Systems.

[10]  J. Bubenko,et al.  Application of Decomposition Techniques to Short-Term Operation Planning of Hydrothermal Power System , 1986, IEEE Transactions on Power Systems.

[11]  Monique Guignard-Spielberg,et al.  Lagrangean decomposition: A model yielding stronger lagrangean bounds , 1987, Math. Program..

[12]  S. Soares,et al.  An Efficient Hydrothermal Scheduling Algorithm , 1987, IEEE Power Engineering Review.

[13]  Francisco D. Galiana,et al.  Towards a more rigorous and practical unit commitment by Lagrangian relaxation , 1988 .

[14]  S.M. Shahidehpour,et al.  An innovative approach to generation scheduling in large-scale hydro-thermal power systems with fuel constrained units , 1989, Conference Papers Power Industry Computer Application Conference.

[15]  S. Virmani,et al.  Implementation of a Lagrangian Relaxation Based Unit Commitment Problem , 1989, IEEE Power Engineering Review.

[16]  Francisco D. Galiana,et al.  Unit commitment by simulated annealing , 1990 .

[17]  H. Habibollahzadeh,et al.  A new generation scheduling program at Ontario Hydro , 1990 .

[18]  Chiang-Tsung Huang,et al.  Dynamic security constrained multi-area unit commitment , 1991 .

[19]  S. M. Shahidehpour,et al.  A heuristic short-term unit commitment , 1991 .

[20]  A. Renaud,et al.  Daily generation scheduling optimization with transmission constraints: a new class of algorithms , 1992 .

[21]  F.-Javier Heredia,et al.  Numerical implementation and computational results of nonlinear network optimization with linear side constraints , 1992 .

[22]  S. M. Shahidehpour,et al.  Power generation scheduling for multi-area hydro-thermal systems with tie line constraints, cascaded reservoirs and uncertain data , 1993 .

[23]  C.-a. Li,et al.  Implementation of network flow programming to the hydrothermal coordination in an energy management system , 1993 .

[24]  L. Ferreira,et al.  On the convergence of the classic hydro-thermal coordination algorithm , 1994 .

[25]  Gerald B. Sheblé,et al.  Unit commitment literature synopsis , 1994 .

[26]  Ross Baldick,et al.  The generalized unit commitment problem , 1995 .

[27]  Dimitri P. Bertsekas,et al.  Nonlinear Programming , 1997 .

[28]  F.-Javier Heredia,et al.  Network model of short-term optimal hydrothermal power flow with security constraints , 1995 .

[29]  P. Carpentier,et al.  Stochastic optimization of unit commitment: a new decomposition framework , 1996 .

[30]  Abdul Razak Hamdan,et al.  Comprehensive algorithm for hydrothermal coordination , 1997 .

[31]  Peter B. Luh,et al.  An optimization-based algorithm for scheduling hydrothermal power systems with cascaded reservoirs and discrete hydro constraints , 1997 .

[32]  A. J. Svoboda,et al.  Short-term resource scheduling with ramp constraints [power generation scheduling] , 1997 .

[33]  O. Nilsson,et al.  Variable splitting applied to modelling of start-up costs in short term hydro generation scheduling , 1997 .

[34]  Xiaohong Guan,et al.  Multi-area unit commitment for large-scale power systems , 1998 .

[35]  Renjeng Su,et al.  Augmented Lagrangian approach to hydro-thermal scheduling , 1998 .

[36]  Malcolm Irving,et al.  A genetic algorithm modelling framework and solution technique for short term optimal hydrothermal scheduling , 1998 .

[37]  S. Ruzic,et al.  Optimal distance method for Lagrangian multipliers updating in short-term hydro-thermal coordination , 1998 .

[38]  Md. Sayeed Salam,et al.  Hydrothermal scheduling based Lagrangian relaxation approach to hydrothermal coordination , 1998 .

[39]  Peter B. Luh,et al.  An algorithm for solving the dual problem of hydrothermal scheduling , 1998 .

[40]  Lennart Söder,et al.  Integer modelling of spinning reserve requirements in short term scheduling of hydro systems , 1998 .

[41]  R. Adapa,et al.  A review of selected optimal power flow literature to 1993. I. Nonlinear and quadratic programming approaches , 1999 .

[42]  R. Baldick,et al.  Unit commitment with ramp multipliers , 1999 .

[43]  Peter B. Luh,et al.  A bundle method for hydrothermal scheduling , 1999 .

[44]  Antonio J. Conejo,et al.  Auction implementation problems using Lagrangian relaxation , 1999 .

[45]  Raymond B. Johnson,et al.  Short-term scheduling of electric power systems under minimum load conditions , 1999 .

[46]  S. M. Shahidehpour,et al.  Unit commitment with transmission security and voltage constraints , 1999 .

[47]  Xiaohong Guan,et al.  Scheduling hydrothermal power systems with cascaded and head-dependent reservoirs , 1999 .

[48]  Antonio J. Conejo,et al.  Short-term hydro-thermal coordination by Lagrangian relaxation: solution of the dual problem , 1999 .

[49]  R. Adapa,et al.  A review of selected optimal power flow literature to 1993. II. Newton, linear programming and interior point methods , 1999 .

[50]  F. Heredia,et al.  Short-term hydrothermal coordination by augmented lagrangean relaxation: a new multiplier updating , 1999 .

[51]  Michael Patriksson,et al.  Ergodic, primal convergence in dual subgradient schemes for convex programming , 1999, Mathematical programming.

[52]  Stefan Feltenmark,et al.  Dual Applications of Proximal Bundle Methods, Including Lagrangian Relaxation of Nonconvex Problems , 1999, SIAM J. Optim..

[53]  Samer Takriti,et al.  Incorporating Fuel Constraints and Electricity Spot Prices into the Stochastic Unit Commitment Problem , 2000, Oper. Res..

[54]  Antonio J. Conejo,et al.  Multiperiod optimal power flow using Benders decomposition , 2000 .