4.6 Article

Long term transmission expansion planning to improve power system resilience against cascading outages

期刊

ELECTRIC POWER SYSTEMS RESEARCH
卷 192, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE SA
DOI: 10.1016/j.epsr.2020.106972

关键词

Transmission expansion planning; Security; Resilience; Cascading failure; Blackout Simulation; Load shedding

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The proposed Resilient TEP (RTEP) problem aims to find the optimal configuration of the transmission network considering security and resilience constraints. It minimizes the effects of cascading outages to reduce load curtailment. An iterative algorithm is used to estimate the size of cascading outages, while security constraints and resilience requirements are also taken into account.
A Transmission Expansion Planning (TEP) problem is proposed to find the optimal configuration of the transmission network with considering security and resilience constraints. Due to the importance of blackouts and cascading failure, the proposed Resilient TEP (RTEP) minimizes the effects of cascading outages in term of load curtailment. In order to estimate the size of cascading outages, based on the total lost load, an iterative algorithm is proposed to analyze and simulate the steady state mechanism of cascading outages. A set of initiating events are defined as the triggering points of the cascading failure and the consequent chain of related outages are identified to determine the blackout size. In addition to the resilience constraints, the security constraints based on N-1 security criterion are also considered. Based on the Benders Decomposition (BD) algorithm, a multi-stage solution procedure is developed to handle the investment decisions, security constraints, and resilience requirements efficiently. In order to achieve the optimal resilient TEP configuration, all the master and subproblems are formulated as Mixed Integer Programming optimization models. The proposed RTEP is implemented over the IEEE 24-bus test system.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据