0% found this document useful (0 votes)
47 views6 pages

Particle Swarm Optimization Using Economic Dispatch

This document summarizes a research paper that proposes using binary particle swarm optimization (BPSO) to solve the unit commitment problem in power systems. The unit commitment problem involves determining an optimal schedule for starting up and shutting down generation units to meet forecasted demand at minimum cost while satisfying operating constraints. The paper formulates the unit commitment problem, describes how BPSO works, and explains how BPSO is applied to the unit commitment problem by considering minimum up and down time constraints and using penalty factors to avoid infeasible solutions. Simulation results demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed BPSO method.

Uploaded by

Dilatory
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
0% found this document useful (0 votes)
47 views6 pages

Particle Swarm Optimization Using Economic Dispatch

This document summarizes a research paper that proposes using binary particle swarm optimization (BPSO) to solve the unit commitment problem in power systems. The unit commitment problem involves determining an optimal schedule for starting up and shutting down generation units to meet forecasted demand at minimum cost while satisfying operating constraints. The paper formulates the unit commitment problem, describes how BPSO works, and explains how BPSO is applied to the unit commitment problem by considering minimum up and down time constraints and using penalty factors to avoid infeasible solutions. Simulation results demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed BPSO method.

Uploaded by

Dilatory
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 6

7th WSEAS Int. Conf.

on MATHEMATICAL METHODS and COMPUTATIONAL TECHNIQUES IN ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING, Sofia, 27-29/10/05 (pp372-377)

Unit Commitment by Binary Particle Swarm Optimization


LIU YONG, HOU ZHI-JIAN, JIANG CHUAN-WEN
Department of Electrical Engineering
Shanghai Jiaotong University
Shanghai, 200030
CHINA

Abstract: - A solution to unit commitment using binary particle swarm optimization (BPSO) is presented. The
minimum up and down time constraints, start-up and shutdown cost, spinning reserve, and generation limit are
taken into account. The minimum up and down time constraints are considered in generating the particles to
narrow the search space. Penalty factors are introduced to calculate the fitness of particles, which tend to avoid
infeasible combinations. Problem formulation, representation and the simulation results are presented. The
results show that the proposed method is effective.

Key-Words: - unit commitment, power system, binary particle swarm optimization, economic dispatch, penalty
factors

1 Introduction are prone to cause the curse of dimensionality. LR


Unit commitment (UC) in power systems involves methods have problems in modeling plant crew
determining a start-up and shutdown schedule of constraints since they introduce coupling. In addition,
units to meet the forecasted demand over a short term artificial intelligence methods such as genetic
period [1]. The committed units must meet the algorithms (GA) and simulated annealing (SA) have
system forecasted demand and spinning reserve been successfully used to solve UC problem [10-13].
requirement at minimum operating cost, subject to a Kennedy and Eberhart presented a new
large set of operating constraints. Hence, the UC evolutionary computation algorithm, the particle
problem is quite difficult due to its inherent swarm optimization (PSO), in 1995 [14]. It is a
high-dimensional, non-convex, and non-linear nature. stochastic optimization technique that simulates the
The UC problem can be considered as two linked behavior of a flock of birds or the sociological
optimization problems, namely the unit-scheduled behavior of a group of people. Zwe-Lee Gaing has
problem, which is a combinatorial optimization used it to solve the UC problem [15]. However, the
problem, and the economic dispatch (ED) problem, initialization of the particles in the presented method
which is a non-linear programming optimization was time-wasted; as well the results were incorrect
problem. The solution of the former must satisfy the because it miscalculated the start-up costs.
system capacity requirements, generation limits, and In this paper, binary particle swarm optimization
the constraints on start-up and shut-down of the (BPSO) algorithm is used to solve the UC problem.
scheduled units during each planning period. The The formulation of the UC problem is listed in
solution of the latter must perform the optimal section 2, including spinning reserve, minimum up
generation dispatch among the operating units during and down time, and generation limit. The BPSO is
each specific period of operation to satisfy the system described in section 3. The application of BPSO to
load demand and spinning reserve capacity. the UC problem is demonstrated in section 4.
The exact optimal solution can be obtained by a Minimum up/down time constraints are considered in
complete enumeration, which cannot be applied to producing the particles as well as penalty coefficients
realistic power systems due to its excessive are introduced into the evaluation function to avoid
computation time requirements. To solve the unit infeasible particles. Simulated results in section 5
commitment problem, some optimization techniques indicate the efficiency of the methodology, and the
are applied to it. For example, there are priority list conclusions are made in section 6.
(PL) [2-3], dynamic programming (DP) [4-6], and
Lagrangian relaxation [7-9]. PL methods are very
fast but they are highly heuristic and give schedules 2 Problem Formulation
with relatively high production costs. DP methods The general problem formulation of unit
7th WSEAS Int. Conf. on MATHEMATICAL METHODS and COMPUTATIONAL TECHNIQUES IN ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING, Sofia, 27-29/10/05 (pp372-377)

commitment is given as follows. evolutionary computation technique. Similar to


Objective function genetic algorithms (GA), PSO is a population based
T N optimization tool. The system is initialized with a
min F = ∑∑ [(ai + bi Pij + ci Pij2 )]uij + population of random solutions and searches for
j =1 i =1
(1) optima by updating generations. However, unlike
T N
GA, PSO has no evolution operators such as
∑∑ [S u
j =1 i =1
ij ij (1 − ui ( j −1) ) + Dij ui ( j −1) (1 − uij )] crossover and mutation. In PSO, the potential
solutions, called particles, are “flown” through the
Subject to problem space by following the current optimum
(a) System power balance particles. Compared to GA, the advantages of PSO
N

∑Pu
i =1
ij ij − PDj = 0 (2)
are that PSO is easy to implement and there are few
parameters to adjust. Therefore, PSO has been
(b) Spinning reserve requirement successfully applied in many areas.
N Each individual in PSO flies in the search space
∑P i =1
i
max
uij ≥ PDj + PRj (3) with a velocity which is dynamically adjusted
according to its own flying experience and its
(c) Generation limit companions’ flying experience. Each individual
Pi min ≤ Pij ≤ Pi max (4) keeps track of its coordinates in the problem space,
which are associated with the best solution (fitness) it
(d) Minimum up/down time has achieved so far. This value is called pbest.
TijON > MUTi (5) Another best value that is tracked by the global
version of the particle swarm optimizer is the overall
TijOFF > MDTi (6)
best value, and its location, obtained so far by any
where particle in the population. This location is called
N number of units, gbest. At each time step, the particle swarm
T scheduling period in hours, optimization concept consists of velocity changes of
Pij generation of unit i for hour j, each particle toward its pbest and gbest locations.
Acceleration is weighted by a random term, with
ai , bi , ci fuel cost coefficients of unit i,
separate random numbers being generated for
uij on(1)/off(0) status of unit i at time j, acceleration toward pbest and gbest locations.
Sij start-up cost of unit i at time j, where If xi = ( xi1 , xi 2 ,L , xiD ) represent the ith particle
−TijOFF / τ i
in the D-dimensional space, the binary version of
Sij = σ i + δ i (1 − e ) , and σ i , δ i , τ i PSO can be formulated as follows [16].
are start-up cost coefficients of unit i, vidk +1 = w ⋅ vidk + c1 ⋅ rand () ⋅ ( pbestid − xidk )
Dij shutdown cost of unit i at time j, (7)
+c2 ⋅ rand () ⋅ ( gbestd − xidk )
PDj system load demand at time j,
⎧1 rand () < S (vidk +1 )
PRj system spinning reserve required at time j, xidk +1 = ⎨ (8)
⎩0 otherwise
Pi min minimum generation limit of unit i, where
Pi max
maximum generation limit of unit i, vidk velocity of individual i at iteration k,
T ON
ij ON period of unit i at time j, v min ≤ vik ≤ v max ,
w inertia weight factor, often decrease linearly
TijOFF OFF period of unit i at time j,
from about 0.9 to 0.4 during a run [17].
MUTi minimum up time of unit i, wmax − wmin
w = wmax − × iter .
MDTi minimum down time of unit i, itermax
c1 , c2acceleration constant, often set to be 2,
rand() uniform random number between 0 and 1,
3 Binary Particle Swarm xidk current position of individual i at iteration k,
Optimization (BPSO)
Kennedy and Eberhart first introduced the particle
pbesti pbest of individual i,
swarm optimization (PSO) method, which is an gbest gbest of the group,
7th WSEAS Int. Conf. on MATHEMATICAL METHODS and COMPUTATIONAL TECHNIQUES IN ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING, Sofia, 27-29/10/05 (pp372-377)

S(v) a sigmoid limiting transformation function, ⎧1 tij < MUTi & ui ( j −1) = 1
S (v) = 1/(1 + e − v ) . ⎪
uij = ⎨0 tij < MDTi & ui ( j −1) = 0 (9)

⎩0 or 1 otherwise
4 Solution Methodology This means that the status of the units will be
A proposed binary particle swarm optimization determined by the minimum up/down time
(BPSO) method is proposed in the paper to solve the constraints of the units at first, and then determined
UC problem. Two modifications are made to the by BPSO. Hence, minimum up and down time
solution. One is using a new method to generate the constraints can be considered when initializing or
particles, which insures the particles satisfy modifying the individuals. The individual i in the
minimum up and down time constraints. The other is BPSO would be presented as
introducing penalty factors to avoid infeasible xi = ( xi1 , xi 2 ,L , xi ( N *T ) )
individuals. These modifications will prevent random (10)
generation and test feasibility step in [15]. = (u11 , u21 ,L u N 1 , u12 , u22 ,L u N 2 ,L u NT )

4.1 Representation strategy 4.2 Evaluation function


Before using the BPSO algorithm to solve the UC The evaluation function is mainly used to provide a
problem, the representation of a particle must be measure of how the individual performed in the
defined. A particle is also called an individual. problem domain. The best individual should have the
Similar to GA, we can define each generator’s status lowest total generation cost of objective function, and
as a gene, all available generators’ status at each also satisfy system constraints of the UC problem.
schedule time make up a sub-chromosome, all Therefore, in the BPSO algorithm, we define the
sub-chromosomes in the scheduling period evaluation function as
NC
comprising an individual as shown in Fig.1. For
example, for a 10-unit system and 24-hour f = 1/( F + ∑ PFj )
j =1
scheduling period the dimension of an individual is (11)
NC
= 1/( F + ∑ µ j | VIOL j |)
10*24=240.
j =1
hour
where
1 2 ... T PFj penalty associated with violated constraint j,
1 1
Unit 1 1 µj penalty multiplier associated with constraint
Unit 2 0 0 0
Unit 3 1 1 ... 1 j,
... ... ... ... VOIL j amount of violation of constraint j
Unit N 0 0 0 The penalty multipliers are chosen sufficiently
large to discourage the selection of solutions with
violated constraints.
1 2 ... T
xi 101...0 101...1 ... 101...1 4.3 Implementation of the BPSO solution for
UC problem
The procedure of the proposed BPSO method is as
shown below.
Fig.1 Representation of unit commiment
Step 1 Generate L initial individuals with
solution
dimension of N*T. The statuses at each
Suppose tij is the unit status variable which scheduling time are determined by the given
denotes the continuous on/off time of unit i at time j, initial staus and equation (9).
then Step 2 Calculate the evaluation value of each
initialized individual xi using the evaluation
function f as given by equation (11).
Step 3 Compare each initialized individual’s
7th WSEAS Int. Conf. on MATHEMATICAL METHODS and COMPUTATIONAL TECHNIQUES IN ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING, Sofia, 27-29/10/05 (pp372-377)

evaluation value with the individual’s pbest.


The individual who owns the best evaluation
value among pbests is set to be gbest.
Table 2 Hourly load demand
Step 4 Modify the velocity vi of each individual xi
according to equation (7). Hour Demand(MW) Hour Demand(MW)
1 700 13 1400
Step 5 If vidk +1 > v max , then vidk +1 = v max . 2 750 14 1300
If vidk +1 < v min , then vidk +1 = v min .
3 850 15 1200
4 950 16 1050
Step 6 Modify the position of individual xi 5 1000 17 1000
6 1100 18 1100
according to equation (9) and (8). Equation 7 1150 19 1200
(9) is prior to equation (8) to satisfy the 8 1200 20 1400
minimum up and down time constraints. 9 1300 21 1300
Step 7 Calculate the evaluation value of the new 10 1400 22 1100
11 1450 23 900
individual. If xik +1 is better than pbest, then 12 1500 24 800
the current individual xik +1 is set to be pbest.
Subsequently, if the best pbesti is better
than gbest, then pbesti is set to be gbest.
Step 8 If the maximum iteration number is reached,
then go to step 9. Otherwise, go to step 4.
Step 9 The individual that generated the latest gbest
indicates the optimal units-scheduled
combination during the scheduling period.

5 Simulation Results

Table 1 Data of 10 base units


Unit 1 Unit 2 Unit 3 Unit 4 Unit 5
Pmax(MW) 455 455 130 130 162
Pmin(MW) 150 150 20 20 25 Fig.2 Convergence tendency of the
a($/h) 1000 970 700 680 450 evaluation value
b($/MWh) 16.19 17.26 16.60 16.50 19.70
c($/MW2h) 0.00048 0.00031 0.002 0.00211 0.00398
MUT(h) 5 5 2 2 2
MDT(h) 5 5 2 2 2
σ($) 4500 5000 550 560 900
δ($) 4500 5000 550 560 900
τ(h) 4 4 2 2 2
initial
8 8 -5 -5 -6
status(h)

Unit 6 Unit 7 Unit 8 Unit 9 Unit 10


Pmax(MW) 80 85 55 55 55
Pmin(MW) 20 25 10 10 10
a($/h) 370 480 660 665 670
b($/MWh) 22.26 27.74 25.92 27.27 27.79
c($/MW2h) 0.00712 0.00079 0.00413 0.00222 0.00173
MUT(h) 2 1 0 0 0
MDT(h) 2 1 0 0 0 Fig.3 Scheduling generation-load
σ($) 170 260 30 30 30
δ($) 170 260 30 30 30
τ(h) 2 2 1 1 1
initial
-3 -3 -1 -1 -1
status(h)
7th WSEAS Int. Conf. on MATHEMATICAL METHODS and COMPUTATIONAL TECHNIQUES IN ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING, Sofia, 27-29/10/05 (pp372-377)

Table 3 Best individual (combination) by the proposed BPSO method

Spinning
Operation Startup Unit
Hour Reserve Generation Schedule (MW)
Cost ($) Cost ($) Schedule
(MW)
1 13683.13 0 210 1100000000 455 245 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2 14554.50 0 160 1100000000 455 295 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
3 16301.89 0 60 1100000000 455 395 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
4 18637.68 1109.74 90 1101000000 455 365 0 130 0 0 0 0 0 0
5 20020.02 1793.94 202 1101100000 455 390 0 130 25 0 0 0 0 0
6 22387.04 1096.29 232 1111100000 455 360 130 130 25 0 0 0 0 0
7 23261.98 0 182 1111100000 455 410 130 130 25 0 0 0 0 0
8 24150.34 0 132 1111100000 455 455 130 130 30 0 0 0 0 0
9 26588.96 339.31 112 1111110000 455 455 130 130 110 20 0 0 0 0
10 29365.95 519.36 97 1111111000 455 455 130 130 162 43 25 0 0 0
11 31916.06 120.00 167 1111111110 455 455 130 130 162 73 25 10 10 0
12 33205.25 0 117 1111111110 455 455 130 130 162 80 25 53 10 0
13 29365.95 0 97 1111111000 455 455 130 130 162 43 25 0 0 0
14 26588.96 0 112 1111110000 455 455 130 130 110 20 0 0 0 0
15 24150.34 0 132 1111100000 455 455 130 130 30 0 0 0 0 0
16 20895.88 0 152 1101100000 455 440 0 130 25 0 0 0 0 0
17 19608.54 0 72 1100100000 455 455 0 0 90 0 0 0 0 0
18 21891.43 897.67 102 1110100000 455 455 130 0 60 0 0 0 0 0
19 24150.34 913.99 132 1111100000 455 455 130 130 30 0 0 0 0 0
20 29365.95 833.10 97 1111111000 455 455 130 130 162 43 25 0 0 0
21 26588.96 0 112 1111110000 455 455 130 130 110 20 0 0 0 0
22 21891.43 0 102 1110100000 455 455 130 0 60 0 0 0 0 0
23 17684.69 0 172 1100100000 455 420 0 0 25 0 0 0 0 0
24 15427.42 0 110 1100000000 455 345 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Total 551682.71 7623.39 3153 559306.10

The BPSO program was implemented in MATLAB solution. The results are shown in Table 4. As can be
and executed on a Pentium III 800 personal computer seen, the proposed BPSO method has good quality
with 256MB RAM. The program is tested on a and convergence characteristic.
10-unit system, which data is given in Table 1 and 2
[15]. The 10-unit system simulation results of [15]
were incorrect because the startup costs of the units Table 4 The quality of the
which start up at the first scheduling time were not solution
calculated. Moreover, the worst generation cost in best generation cost ($) 559306.10
Table (8) of [15] was also unbelievable. worst generation cost ($) 562383.57
The spinning reserve is assumed to be 5% of the average generation cost ($) 560894.43
load demand. The population size is set to be 20, and standard deviation ($) 751.21
the iteration is set to be 100. The convergence
tendency of the best evaluation value in the
population during BPSO processing is shown in 6 Conclusion
Fig.2. Fig.3 shows the scheduling generation and In this paper, a modified BPSO method is proposed
load demand. Table 3 illustrates the solution obtained to solve the UC problems. A new strategy is
by the BPSO. Operation, startup costs, spinning for employed for representing chromosomes and
the 24h period, unit on/off schedule and generation encoding the problem search space, of which the
supplying the load is also provided in Table 3. 50 minimum up and down time constraints are taken
trials are performed to examine the quality of the into account in initializing and modifying the
7th WSEAS Int. Conf. on MATHEMATICAL METHODS and COMPUTATIONAL TECHNIQUES IN ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING, Sofia, 27-29/10/05 (pp372-377)

particles. Thus, the individuals of the BPSO method [12] K.S. Swarup, S. Yamashiro, Unit commitment
are all satisfy the minimum up and down time solution methodology using genetic algorithm,
constraints. The penalty coefficients are used to IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, Vol.17,
calculate the evaluation value of the individuals, No.1, 2002, pp. 87-91.
which discourage the infeasible combinations. The [13] A.H. Mantawy, Youssef L. Abdel-Magid,
feasibility of the proposed method is demonstrated by Shokri Z. Selim, A simulated annealing algorithm
simulation. for unit commitment, IEEE Transactions on
Power Systems, Vol.13, No.1, 1998, pp. 197-204.
[14] J. Kennedy, R. Eberhart, Particle swarm
References: optimization, Proceddings of IEEE International
[1] A.J. Wood, B.F. Wollenberg, Power Generation Conference on Neural Networks, Vol. IV, Perth,
Operation and Control, John Wiley, New York, Australia, 1995, pp. 1942-1948.
1984. [15] Zwe-Lee Gaing, Discrete particle swarm
[2] Happ H.H., R.C. Johnson, W.J. Wright, Large optimization algorithm for unit commitment,
scale hydro-thermal unit commitment-method IEEE Power Engineering Society General
and results, IEEE Trans. on PAS, Vol.PAS-90, Meeting, Vol.1, 2003, pp. 13-17.
1971, pp. 1373-1383. [16] J. Kennedy, R. Eberhart, A discrete binary
[3] Baldwin, C.J., K.M. Dale, R.F. Dittrich, A study version of the particle swarm algorithm,
of economic shutdown of generating units in Proceeding of IEEE International Conference on
daily dispatch, AIEE Tr. on PAS, Vol.78, 1960, Evolutionary Computation, Anchorage, 1998, pp.
pp. 1272-1284. 84-89.
[4] W.L. Snyder, H.D. Powell, Jr., J.C. Rayburn, [17] Y. Shi, R.C. Eberhart, Empirical study of
Dynamic programming approach to unit particle swarm optimization, Proceedings of the
commitment, IEEE Transactions on Power 1999 Congress on Evolutionary Computation,
Systems, Vol.2, No.2, 1987, pp. 339-350. Piscataway, 1999, pp. 1945-1950.
[5] W.J. Hobbs, G. Hermon, S. Warner, G.B. Sheble,
An enhanced dynamic programming approach for
unit commitment, IEEE Transactions on Power
Systems, Vol.3, No.3, 1988, pp. 1201-1205.
[6] Z. Ouyang, S.M. Shahidehpour, An intelligent
dynamic programming for unit commitment
application, IEEE Transactions on Power
Systems, Vol.6, No.3, 1991, pp. 1203-1209.
[7] F. Zhuang, F.D. Galiana, Towards a more
rigorous and practical unit commitment by
Lagrangian relaxation, IEEE Transactions on
Power Systems, Vol.3, No.2, 1988, pp. 763-773.
[8] S.J. Wang, S.M. Shahidehpour, D.S. Kirschen, S.
Mokhtari, G.D. Irisarri, Short-term generation
scheduling with transmission and environmental
constraints using augmented Lagrangian
relaxation, IEEE Transactions on Power Systems,
Vol.10, No.3, 1994, pp. 1294-1301.
[9] Chuan-Ping Cheng, Chih-Wen Liu, Chun-Chang
Liu, Unit commitment by Lagrangian relaxation
and genetic algorithms, IEEE Transactions on
Power Systems, Vol.15, No.2, 2000, pp. 707-714.
[10] Time T. Maifeld, Gerald B. Sheble,
Genetic-based unit commitment algorithm, IEEE
Transactions on Power Systems, Vol.11, No.3,
1996, pp. 1359-1370.
[11] S.A. Kazarlis, A.G. Bakirtzis, V. Petridis, A
genetic algorithm solution to the unit
commitment problem, IEEE Transactions on
Power Systems, Vol.11, No.1, 1996, pp. 83-92.

You might also like