3.8 Proceedings Paper

Decentralized AC Optimal Power Flow Problem Considering Prohibited Operating Zones

出版社

IEEE
DOI: 10.1109/EEEIC/ICPSEUROPE54979.2022.9854696

关键词

Decentralized optimization; matheuristic optimization; mixed-integer nonlinear programming; optimal power flow; prohibited operating zones

资金

  1. Sao Paulo Research Foundation (FAPESP) [2019/01841-5 2015/21972-6]
  2. Coordination for the Improvement of Higher Education Personnel (CAPES) [001]
  3. Brazilian National Council for Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq) [304726/2020-6]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This paper proposes a model and solution technique for solving the decentralized optimal power flow problem considering prohibited operation zones. A matheuristic algorithm is used to handle the integer variables, while a non-linear optimization solver is used for the continuous variables. The effectiveness of the model is validated through experiments.
The Optimal Power Flow (OPF) problem is commonly formulated considering one central operator manager (centralized approach). However, in practice, the power system is structured by interconnected areas, controlled by several system operators, which are dependent on their neighbors and must exchange sensitive data with each other. In addition, some generation units must be restricted in some zones of operation to avoid negative operational effects. This paper proposes a mixed-integer nonlinear programming model to solve the decentralized AC-OPF considering prohibited operation zones (POZ). A matheuristic algorithm based on the variable neighborhood descent heuristic method is used to deal with the integer variables of the problem, while a non-linear optimization solver is used to solve the optimal power flow with continuous variables. The proposed model and solution technique are validated using the IEEE 118-bus system, ensuring that the decentralized model determines solutions close to the centralized model without and with POZ constraints.

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

3.8
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