Method for evaluating operational and financial performance for dispatchers using after the fact analysis

• US 20110022434A1
• Filed: 07/02/2010
• Published: 01/27/2011
• Est. Priority Date: 07/02/2010
• Status: Active Grant

• Current Assignee: Alstom Technology Ltd. (Alstom SA)
• Original Assignee: Alstom Technology Ltd. (Alstom SA)
• Inventors: Xiao, Ying, Sun, David, Chiu, But-Chung, Cheung, Kwok, Wang, Xing, Yao, Mike, Mok, Kee
• Granted Patent: US 9,727,828 B2
• Time in Patent Office: Days
• US Class Current: 705/7
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 10/04 Forecasting or optimisation specially adapted for administrative or management purposes, e.g. linear programming or "cutting stock problem" market predictions or forecasting for commercial activities G06Q30/0202
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 10/06375 Prediction of business process outcome or impact based on a proposed change
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 50/06 Energy or water supply
• CPC Class Codes: Y04S 10/50 Systems or methods supporting the power network operation or management, involving a certain degree of interaction with the load-side end user applications

Abstract

A method is provided for evaluating operational and financial performance for dispatchers in power grid control centers associated with utility systems. A comprehensive operating plan is provided that applies after the fact analysis for performance metrics, root-cause impacts and process re-engineering. after the fact analysis of past events and practices is performed. Actual system and resource conditions are captured. the system and resource conditions are supplied to a relational database. A scheduler engine receives the actual system and resource conditions from the relational database and processes it to calculate system performance. At least one of the following is displayed, transmission evaluation application displays, reference and scenario cases and associations between them, results presented with a graphical or tabular displays, comparison results between scenario cases and a reference case, a family of curves where each curve is a performance metric, comparison of scenario input data, study results and statistical analysis and historical data.

Claims

1. A method for evaluating operational and financial performance for dispatchers in power grid control centers associated with utility systems, comprising:

providing a comprehensive operating plan that applies after the fact analysis for performance metrics, root-cause impacts and process re-engineering;

applying after the fact analysis of past events and practices; and

capturing actual system and resource conditions;

supplying the system and resource conditions to a relational database, wherein a scheduler engine receives the actual system and resource conditions from the relational database and processes it to calculate system performance; and

displaying at least one of, transmission evaluation application displays, reference and scenario cases and associations between them, results presented with a graphical or tabular displays, comparison results between scenario cases and a reference case, a family of curves where each curve is a performance metric, comparison of scenario input data, study results and statistical analysis and historical data.

2. The method of claim 1, wherein after the fact analysis is a decision-support tool to evaluate operational and financial performance.

3. The method of claim 1, wherein after the fact analysis assess impacts due to historical or potentially new system events and/or conditions.

9. The method of claim 1, further comprising:

providing integrated comprehensive operating plan, market clearing engine and operator user interface components.

4. A method for evaluating operational and financial performance for dispatchers in power grid control centers associated with utility systems, comprising:

applying after the fact analysis of past events and practices;

using after the fact analysis for performance metrics, root-cause impacts and process re-engineering;

using quantitative assessments of how specific events and practices effect energy dispatch power grid system performance; and

using hypothetical scenario analysis to perform simulation of hypothetical scenarios and evaluate cost deviations.

5. The method of claim 4, further comprising:

capturing actual system and resource conditions.

6. The method of claim 4, further comprising:

enabling user-defined impact factors for scenario analysis and evaluation criteria.

7. The method of claim 4, further comprising:

setting up scenario models, automated execution and data analysis data analysis tasks.

8. The method of claim 4, further comprising:

providing an operator user interface for cause-impact assessment with effective case-comparison.

10. A method for evaluating operational and financial performance for dispatchers in power grid control centers associated with utility systems, comprising:

applying after the fact analysis of past events and practices; and

using after the fact analysis for performance metrics, root-cause impacts and process re-engineering, wherein after the fact analysis calculates a hypothetical least bid production cost commitment and dispatch.

11. The method of claim 10, wherein after the fact analysis is an objective measure of regional transmission organization/transmission system operator'"'"'s performance with average of % savings, standard deviation of % savings in dispatching the power grid system in a most efficient manner possible by evaluating a potential production cost saving derived from after the fact analysis solutions.

12. The method of claim 10, wherein after the fact analysis is an actual dispatch and includes at least one of, actual load, resource output, actual unit regulation status and regulation contribution, actual resource reserve status and reserve contribution, actual unit commitment and actual network topology.

13. A method for evaluating operational and financial performance for dispatchers in power grid control centers associated with utility systems, comprising:

applying after the fact analysis of past events and practices;

using after the fact analysis for performance metrics, root-cause impacts and process re-engineering; and

wherein after the fact analysis calculates cost associated with actual dispatch and compares it against a cost associated with the reference dispatch.

14. The method of claim 13, further comprising:

analyzing performance impacts associated with specific operating events

15. The method of claim 13, further comprising:

simulating specific events and calculating their quantitative impacts on system performance to generate information that assists in identification of reasons that contribute to a performance gap between actual system operation and an idealized reference condition.

16. A method for evaluating operational and financial performance for dispatchers in power grid control centers associated with utility systems, comprising:

applying after the fact analysis of past events and practices; and

using after the fact analysis for performance metrics, root-cause impacts and process re-engineering; and

identifying impacts for events and analyzing multiple events within a given after the fact analysis study.

17. The method of claim 16, wherein expected results from each after the fact analysis study include at least one of, re-constructed actual system operation history from recorded real-time data, actual load, actual unit output, actual unit commitment status for each scheduling interval, actual network topology and actual constraint flows.

18. The method of claim 16, wherein one or more scenario results from a set of specific events associate each after the fact analysis study.

19. The method of claim 16, wherein scenario results can include at least one of, performance metrics calculated for HIS, reference case dispatch results, and each scenario, appropriate summary and drill-down details for each performance metrics, and a comparison of different cases.

20. The method of claim 16, wherein impact factors that have an impact on after the fact analysis system operations are selected from at least one of, system and area load changes, zone and area regulation requirement changes, zone and area reserve requirement changes, unit limit and ramp rate changes, unit commitment status change, unit minimum UP and Down time changes, security constraint change, schedule transaction megawatt and price changes, constraint limit and contingency changes and topology changes.