Modeling and Analysis of Generation System Based On Markov Process With Case Study
Modeling and Analysis of Generation System Based On Markov Process With Case Study
Modeling and Analysis of Generation System Based On Markov Process With Case Study
Abstract
Power system is very complex and tedious task to study the reliability of whole system. In this work we are concentrating only
on the reliability evaluation of the generation system. The reliability analysis of the generation system is applied in numerous
ways. These ways are differing in time consumption and technology. Compared to simulation technique Markov technique has
additional benefits. In this work using Markov process, Frequency and Duration of system, transient and steady-state
probabilities are calculated for Bhoruka Power Corporation of Gadag.
Keywords: Reliability, Adequacy, Generation Model, Load Model, Risk Model, Markov Chain, MTTFF
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________
I. INTRODUCTION
The modern installation is separated into generation system, transmission and distribution system, because it is tedious task to
review the entire installation as shown in figure 1. The modeling and analysis of generation system has been worked in this
work.
In figure 1 the HL-I explains, the study and analysis of only generation system. HL-II explains, the study and analysis of the
both generation and transmission systems. HL-III explains the study and analysis of the generation, transmission and distribution
systems. In this work we are focusing on the reliability evaluation of the generation system (HL-I).
Adequacy assessment of the HL-I explains, ability of the generation system capacity to meet load demand. The generation
system capacity is estimated with response to only load demand as shown in figure 2 [1][2][3].
Adequacy assessment of HL-I is carried out by modeling load and generation system separately then these two models are
combined. Whenever the generation system is not able to meet the load demand, this value is represented by risk model as
reliability index as shown in figure 3.
A. Generation Model:
The modeling of generation system is done by various methods as deterministic and probabilistic method. Deterministic method
does not take into account of facility capacity, failure and repair rates. Probabilistic method is more advance from deterministic
method. Monte carlo simulation and analytical methods are two methods in probabilistic method. Simulation needs past history
data, errors are more compared to analytical method [1][2][3]
The analysis of the generation system conventionally created by developing the COPT (capacity outage probability table)
using capacity units. Minimum cut set methodology, fault tree methodology, event based methodology, state based methodology
and Markov ways are various methods obtainable in analytical methodology. Markov method is a lot of advance methodology to
research and modeling of the generation system compared to different methods and it is explained in section II [4].
B. Load Model:
Load model is formed by using daily or monthly or yearly peak loads via time in seconds or minutes or hours as shown in figure
4. Where tk is the time at outage of unit k, Qk is the outage capacity and [1][2][5].
C. Risk Model:
Risk model is to evaluate the risk indices such as LOLE, LOEE, EENS, Frequency and duration of system etc. In this work we
are concentrating on the Frequency and Duration of states and steady state probabilities of the system [3].
m=MTTF=1/ λ
r=MTTR=1/ µ
T=MTBF=m+r=1/f
And
Availability=m/(m+r)=m/T=1/ λ T=f/ λ ; Unavailability=r/(m+r)=r/T=1/T µ=f/ µ
Where,
A= unit availability
λ = unit failure rate
µ =unit repair rate
U =unit unavailability.
Markov model is depicted in two parts as, variety of states and its state transitions between states. The one-component Markov
model is shown in figure 6. Where state 1 represents the unit is operating and state 2 represents the unit is failed.
From figure 6 we can acquire the steady state values for probabilities of every state. Using these values we can predict the
behavior of the system. The steady state probabilities can be written as [6][7].
P1=Pup, P2=Pdown. P1= λ /(λ+µ), P2= µ /(λ+µ).
( ) (( ) (( ) (( ) ) (eq-2)
) ( ) ( ) ) ∑
Where,
A= unit availability
Qi= unit unavailability of unit i
Qp= unavailability of parallel units
λp =failure rate of parallel units.
The equations of state probabilities are,
λ () ()
() () (eq-3)
In general,
( )
Where
A= stochastic transitional probability matrix.
P(t)= vector of the state probabilities.
λ
[ ]
λ
Using the transition matrix several reliability indices is obtained like the probability changes of every state with relevance to
time, the system steady state probability, and MTTFF are quickly obtained. These results can be used in the operation and
programming of power system for various interval of Δt.
∫ ()
∫ ()
( ) ( )
( ) ( ),
( ) ( )
( ) ( )
(-1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1) = (q1, q2, q3, q4, q5, q6, q7, q8)*A (eq-7)
Table -1:
AUGUST-MONTH 2014 REPORT
WT OPERATION CAPACITY WOTT RT AVAILABILITY
NO hrs KW λ(hr) µ(hr) (A)
1 666.24 37 72.53 5.23 95.00
2 668.12 48 69.79 6.09 95.60
3 685.13 42 55.62 3.25 97.89
4 689.32 44 54.68 0.00 98.14
5 690.28 38 53.72 0.00 97.46
6 671.15 38 72.85 0.00 96.08
7 668.19 45 69.71 6.10 94.27
8 672.38 42 70.12 1.50 95.61
9 694.14 47 49.86 0.00 98.26
10 675.18 34 68.82 0.00 95.63
11 654.39 39 82.43 7.18 95.85
12 692.34 43 51.66 0.00 97.84
13 696.39 44 47.61 0.00 99.18
14 669.39 40 74.61 0.00 95.01
15 NA NA NA NA NA
16 689.22 33 54.78 0.00 98.39
17 501.56 36 235.06 7.38 92.07
18 NA NA NA NA NA
Total 10685.57 650 1183.85 37.53 90.72
λ () ( λ λ ) () λ () λ ()
() ( λ λ ) () λ () λ ()
() ( λ λ ) () λ () λ ()
() () ( λ ) () λ ()
() () ( λ ) () λ ()
() () ( λ ) () λ ()
() () () ( ) ()
In general,
( )
Where,
(λ λ λ ) λ λ λ
( λ λ ) λ λ
( λ λ ) λ λ
( λ λ ) λ λ
( λ ) λ
( λ ) λ
( λ ) λ
[ ( ) ]
Using eq-1 and eq-2 obtained the values as,
λ1=0.0821/hr µ1=820.9/hr
λ2=0.07613/hr µ2=44.706/hr
λ3=0.0277/hr µ3=0.8804/hr.
Table -2:
The Steady-State Probabilities of each state are,
State no Steady-State Probabilities
P1 P1UxP2UxP3U =0.96775
P2 P1DxP2UxP3D =0.03044
P3 P1UxP2DxP3U =1.6479e-3
P4 P1UxP2DxP3D =5.18505e-5
P5 P1DxP2UxP3U =9.6786e-5
P6 P1DxP2UxP3D =3.0452e-6
P7 P1DxP2DxP3U =1.6481e-7
P8 P1DxP2DxP3D =5.1856e-9
Table -3:
Frequency and Duration of states
Mean duration of one state to
State State Rate of departure from one state to Frequency of encounter from one state
other states
no probability other states to other states
(hr)
P1UxP2UxP3U
λ1+ λ2+ λ3 (λ1+ λ2+λ3)xP1 1/(λ1+ λ2+ λ3)
P1 =0.9677
=0.18593 =0.1799 =5.3783
P1DxP2UxP3D λ2+ µ1+ λ3 (λ2+ µ1+ λ3)xP2 1/( λ2+ µ1+ λ3)
P2
=0.03044 =1.03863 =0.0316 =0.9628
P1UxP2DxP3U µ2+ λ3 + λ1 (µ2+ λ3 + λ1)xP3 1/( µ2+ λ3 + λ1)
P3
=1.6479e-3 =44.8158 =0.0738 =0.0223
P1UxP2DxP3D µ3+ λ2+ λ1 (µ3+ λ2+ λ1)xP4 1/( µ3+ λ2+ λ1)
P4
=5.18505e-5 =45.6685 =2.3679e-3 =0.02189
P1DxP2UxP3U µ2+ µ1+ λ3 (µ2+ µ1+ λ3)xP5 1/( µ2+ µ1+ λ3)
P5
=9.6786e-5 =821.0038 =0.07946 =1.2180e-3
P1DxP2UxP3D µ3+ µ2+ λ1 (µ3+ µ2+ λ1)xP6 1/( µ3+ µ2+ λ1)
P6
=3.0452e-6 =821.8565 =2.5027e-3 =1.21675e-3
P1DxP2DxP3U µ3+ µ1+ λ2 (µ3+ µ1+ λ2)xP7 1/( µ3+ µ1+ λ2)
P7
=1.6481e-7 =865.6337 =1.4272e-4 =1.1552e-3
P1DxP2DxP3D µ3+ µ2+ µ1 (µ3+ µ2+ µ1)xP8 1/( µ3+ µ2+ µ1)
P8
=5.1856e-9 =866.4864 =4.4933e-6 =1.1540e-3
V. CONCLUSION
The modeling and analysis of Bhoruka Power Corporation of Gadag using Markov model has resulted that the steady state
probability of states is decreasing. Frequency and duration values of each state has resulted that, frequency and duration values
are decreases as state increases. The frequency and duration of state-1 is highest and state-8 is lowest. Complexity will increases
by considering de-rated states but it gives same results of Three-component model values by neglecting very low values.
REFERENCES
[1] Roy Billington, “Reliability Assessment of Large Electric Power Systems”, Kluwer academic Press/springer india, 2008
[2] R.Billington and a.N.allen, “Reliability Evaluation of Engineering Systems; Concepts and Techniques”, springer, 1992.
[3] R.Billington and R.N.Allen,“Reliability Evaluation Of Power System”, second edition, 1996.
[4] Yaw-Juen Wang, “A Method Integrating Deterministic and Stochastic Approaches for the Simulation of Voltage Unbalance in Electric Power Distribution
Systems”, IEEE Member, IEEE Transactions On Power Systems, Vol. 16, No. 2, May 2001.
[5] Dr. Attila Csenki, “The Number of Working Periods of a Repairable Markov System during a Finite Time Interval”, Aston University; Aston Triangle;
Birmingham, IEEE Transactions On Reliability, Vol. 43, NO. 1, March 1994.
[6] Isaac W.Soro,Mustapha Nourelfath Daoud ait-Kadi, “Performance evaluation of multi-state degraded systems with minimal repairs and imperfect
preventive maintenance”, Elsevier, Reliability Engineering and System Safety 95 (2010) 65–69.
[7] Wenchen LI, Lu Sun, Weimei Zou, Chunqing Luo, “Power System Reliability Analysis of System Based on PSASP and Fault Enumeration Method and
Applications”, China Electric Power Research Institute-China, China International Conference on Electricity Distribution (CICED), Shenzhen, 23-26 Sep.
2014.
[8] The thesis by po hu on,“ Reliability Evaluation Of Electric Power Systems Including Wind Power And Energy Storage”, university of saskatchewan
saskatoon 2009.
[9] Yang Wang, Xueshan Han, and Ying Ding, “Power System Operational Reliability Equivalent Modeling and Analysis Based on the Markov Chain”, IEEE
Transactions 2012.