پیوندهای مفید
آمار
| تعداد نشریات | 21 |
| تعداد شماره‌ها | 629 |
| تعداد مقالات | 9,214 |
| تعداد مشاهده مقاله | 67,575,954 |
| تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله | 8,102,838 |
مقایسه روش‌های IGDT، TOAT و STC در برنامه‌ریزی مستحکم توسعه شبکه انتقال با وجود عدم‌قطعیت‌ها | ||
| مدل سازی در مهندسی | ||
| دوره 22، شماره 76، اردیبهشت 1403، صفحه 241-255 اصل مقاله (1.63 M) | ||
| نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی | ||
| شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.22075/jme.2023.31185.2489 | ||
| نویسنده | ||
| شهریار عباسی* | ||
| استادیار، گروه مهندسی برق و کامپیوتر، دانشکده فنی و حرفه‌ای استان کرمانشاه، واحد شماره 1 پسران کرمانشاه، کرمانشاه، ایران | ||
| تاریخ دریافت: 17 تیر 1402، تاریخ بازنگری: 30 مرداد 1402، تاریخ پذیرش: 01 آبان 1402 | ||
| چکیده | ||
| برنامه‌ریزی توسعه شبکه انتقال (TNEP) یک مسئله کلاسیک در مطالعات سیستم‌های قدرت است که به کرات بررسی شده است. هدف TNEP ارائه ظرفیت کافی برای انتقال توان از بخش تولید به مراکز بار بطور مطمئن و کارآمد است که در آن، مکان، زمان و نوع خطوط انتقال جدید در شبکه انتقال تعیین می‌گردد. هدف این مقاله، مقایسه روش‌های IGDT، TOAT و STC در TNEP مستحکم با وجود عدم‌قطعیت‌های بار و تولید توان بادی است. با این روش‌ها، طرح‌های توسعه مستحکم برای شبکه انتقال آزمایشی اصلاح شده 6 شینه Garver تعیین و با هم مقایسه شده‌اند. نتایج شبیه‌سازی‌ها موید اعتبار روش‌های ذکر شده در RTNEP است. لذا، این روش‌ها را می‌توان به راحتی بر روی هر سیستم قدرت بزرگتر و در مقیاس واقعی پیاده‌سازی کرد. بعلاوه، انواع مختلف عدم‌قطعیت را می‌توان به راحتی در این برنامه‌ریزی در نظر گرفت. نتایج شبیه‌سازی نشان می‌دهد که، روش IGDT دارای حجم محاسباتی بیشتر ولی عملکرد بهتری است. البته، مسئله RTNEP یک مسئله بلند مدت است و زمان اجرای برنامه و حجم محاسباتی آن حایز اهمیت نمی‌باشد. بنابراین، روش IGDT به دلیل قابلیت یافتن پاسخ بهینه با هزینه سرمایه‌گذاری کمتر نسبت به روش های TOAT و STC ارجحیت دارد. | ||
| کلیدواژه‌ها | ||
| برنامه‌ریزی مستحکم توسعه شبکه انتقال؛ عدم‌قطعیت بار؛ عدم‌قطعیت تولید توان بادی؛ IGDT؛ TOAT؛ STC | ||
| عنوان مقاله [English] | ||
| Comparison of IGDT, TOAT and STC Methods in Robust Planning of Transmission Network Expansion in the Presence of Uncertainties | ||
| نویسندگان [English] | ||
| Shahriar Abbasi | ||
| Assistant Professor, Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Faculty of Boys 1, Kermanshah Branch, Technical and Vocational Universtiy (TVU), Kermanshah, Iran | ||
| چکیده [English] | ||
| Transmission network expansion planning (TNEP) is a classic issue in power system studies that has been studied many times. Aim of TNEP is providing enough capacity to transfer power from generation section to load centers in a reliable and economically efficient manner. The mission of this problem is identifying where, when and what type of new transmission lines should be installed in transmission network. Purpose of this article is comparing the IGDT, TOAT and STC methods in robust TNEP (RTNEP) in the presence of load and wind power generation uncertainties. Using these methods, robust expansion plans for the modified 6-bus Garver test system are determined and compared. The simulations results confirm validity of these methods in RTNEP. Therefore, these methods can be easily implemented on any large and real scale power system. Moreover, different types of uncertainties can be easily considered in this planning. Simulation results show, the IGDT method has more computational burden, which considering that the RTNEP problem is a long-term problem, the CPU running time and computational burden are not important. Therefore, the IGDT method is preferable to the TOAT and STC methods due to the ability to find the optimal expansion plans with less investment cost. . | ||
| کلیدواژه‌ها [English] | ||
| Robust transmission network expansion planning (RTNEP), Load uncertainty, Wind power generation Uncertainty, IGDT, TOAT, STC | ||
| مراجع | ||
|
[1] G. Muñoz-Delgado, J. Contreras, J.M. Arroyo, A.S. De La Nieta, and M. Gibescu. "Integrated transmission and distribution system expansion planning under uncertainty." IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid 12, no. 5 (2021): 4113-4125. [2] A. Ashoornezhad, H. Falaghi, A. Hajizadeh, and M. Ramezani. "A two‐stage multi‐period distribution network expansion planning considering the integration of private investors." International Transactions on Electrical Energy Systems 31, no. 12 (2021): e13226. [3] S. Abbasi, and H. Abdi. "Multiobjective transmission expansion planning problem based on ACOPF considering load and wind power generation uncertainties." International Transactions on Electrical Energy Systems 27, no. 6 (2017): e2312. [4] S. Abbasi, H. Abdi, S. Bruno, and M. La Scala. "Transmission network expansion planning considering load correlation using unscented transformation." International Journal of Electrical Power & Energy Systems 103 (2018): 12-20. [5] M. Oloomi Buygi, G. Balzer, H.M. Shanechi, and M. Shahidehpour. "Market-based transmission expansion planning." IEEE Transactions on Power Systems 19, no. 4 (2004): 2060-2067. [6] G.A. Orfanos, P.S. Georgilakis, and N.D. Hatziargyriou. "Transmission expansion planning of systems with increasing wind power integration." IEEE Transactions on Power Systems 28, no. 2 (2012): 1355-1362. [7] R. Hemmati, R.A. Hooshmand, and A. Khodabakhshian. "Market based transmission expansion and reactive power planning with consideration of wind and load uncertainties." Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 29 (2014): 1-10. [8] M. Moeini-Aghtaie, A. Abbaspour, and M. Fotuhi-Firuzabad. "Incorporating large-scale distant wind farms in probabilistic transmission expansion planning—Part I: Theory and algorithm." IEEE Transactions on power systems 27, no. 3 (2012): 1585-1593. [9] M. Moeini-Aghtaie, A. Abbaspour, and M. Fotuhi-Firuzabad. "Incorporating large-scale distant wind farms in probabilistic transmission expansion planning—Part II: Case studies." IEEE Transactions on Power Systems 27, no. 3 (2012): 1594-1601. [10] L.L Garver. "Transmission network estimation using linear programming." IEEE Transactions on Power Apparatus and Systems 7 (1970): 1688-1697. [11] R. Fang, and D.J. Hill. "A new strategy for transmission expansion in competitive electricity markets." IEEE Transactions on Power Systems 18, no. 1 (2003): 374-380. [12] P. Maghouli, S.Hamid Hosseini, M. Oloomi Buygi, and M. Shahidehpour. "A multi-objective framework for transmission expansion planning in deregulated environments." IEEE Transactions on Power Systems 24, no. 2 (2009): 1051-1061. [13] M. Aien, M. Fotuhi-Firuzabad, and F. Aminifar. "Probabilistic load flow in correlated uncertain environment using unscented transformation." IEEE Transactions on Power Systems 27, no. 4 (2012): 2233-2241. [14] G. Verbic, and C.A. Canizares. "Probabilistic optimal power flow in electricity markets based on a two-point estimate method." IEEE Transactions on Power Systems 21, no. 4 (2006): 1883-1893. [15] G. Papaefthymiou, and D. Kurowicka. "Using copulas for modeling stochastic dependence in power system uncertainty analysis." IEEE Transactions on Power Systems 24, no. 1 (2008): 40-49. [16] Q. Zhang, and H. Wang. "Probability density function control for stochastic nonlinear systems using monte carlo simulation." IFAC-PapersOnLine 53, no. 2 (2020): 1288-1293. [17] M.M. Al Sobhi. "The extended Weibull distribution with its properties, estimation and modeling skewed data." Journal of King Saud University-Science 34, no. 2 (2022): 101801. [18] S.S. Eddin, and Y. Suzuki. "On the distribution of products of two primes." Journal of Number Theory 214 (2020): 100-136. [19] A. Rabiee, A. Soroudi, and A. Keane. "Information gap decision theory based OPF with HVDC connected wind farms." IEEE Transactions on Power Systems 30, no. 6 (2014): 3396-3406. [20] S. Dehghan, A. Kazemi, and N. Amjady. "Multi‐objective robust transmission expansion planning using information‐gap decision theory and augmented ɛ‐constraint method." IET Generation, Transmission & Distribution 8, no. 5 (2014): 828-840. [21] M. Taherkhani, and S.H. Hosseini. "IGDT‐based multi‐stage transmission expansion planning model incorporating optimal wind farm integration." International Transactions on Electrical Energy Systems 25, no. 10 (2015): 2340-2358. [22] J. Alseddiqui, and R.J. Thomas. "Transmission expansion planning using multi-objective optimization." In 2006 IEEE Power Engineering Society General Meeting, pp. 8-pp. IEEE, 2006. [23] in : https://www.ibm.com/products/ilog-cplex-optimization-studio [24] K.L. Tsui. "An overview of Taguchi method and newly developed statistical methods for robust design." Iie Transactions 24, no. 5 (1992): 44-57. [25] “Orthogonal Arrays (Taguchi Designs).” [Online]. Available: http://www.york.ac.uk/depts/maths/tables/orthogonal.htm. [26] R. Jiang, J. Wang, M. Zhang, and Y. Guan. "Two-stage minimax regret robust unit commitment." IEEE Transactions on Power Systems 28, no. 3 (2013): 2271-2282. [27] P. Maghouli, S.H. Hosseini, M. Oloomi Buygi, and M. Shahidehpour. "A scenario-based multi-objective model for multi-stage transmission expansion planning." IEEE Transactions on Power Systems 26, no. 1 (2010): 470-478. [28] B. Chen, J. Wang, L. Wang, Y. He, and Z. Wang. "Robust optimization for transmission expansion planning: Minimax cost vs. minimax regret." IEEE Transactions on Power Systems 29, no. 6 (2014): 3069-3077. | ||
|
آمار تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 253 تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 215 |
||