Session: Grid Optimization (GO) Competition
Chair: Jesse Holzer
Cluster: Computational Software
Talk 1: Multi-Period Reserve-Constrained AC Optimal Power Flow on High Performance Computing
Speaker: Yong Fu
Abstract: The power grid is becoming more diverse and integrated with high-level distributed energy resources, creating new grid management challenges of large-scale, nonlinear, and non-convex problem modeling, complex and time-consuming computation. This work focuses on solutions for integrating operating reserves into system operation scheduling to co-optimize power generation, delivery, and reserve allocation over multiple time periods. The presented multi-period reserve constrained AC optimal power flow (M-ROPF) problem is challenged by the expanded model scale with linked decision variables across time periods, additional and comprehensive reserve requirements, and the inherent nonlinearity of power systems. We propose a parallel method for a fast, efficient, and reliable solution to M-ROPF. To decompose the problem, we reformulate the original problem by introducing auxiliary bounding variables for both producing and consuming devices, converting the hard and direct ramping up and down constraints to the soft and indirect real power dispatching boundaries. This reformulation yields a decomposable problem structure that can be solved by augmented Lagrangian relaxation-based decomposition methodologies. We use the alternating direction of method of multipliers to decompose the problem into two modules: the single period reserve constrained AC optimal power flow (S-RCOPF) module, and the single device ramping limit (S-DRL) module. The S-RCOPF module co-optimizes power dispatch and reserve allocation of devices by period, while satisfying AC network constraints, system reserve requirements, as well as the auxiliary real power dispatching boundaries for devices. It can be efficiently solved by an accelerated primal-dual interior point method that we developed. The S-DRL module determines the optimal auxiliary real power dispatching boundaries for a device which meets its intertemporal coupling constraints. It can be rapidly solved by quadratic programming. These solver modules can be processed in parallel, ensuring scalability across time periods. The solver guarantees feasibility through the whole iterative process, and achieves optimality in a limited time. The proposed parallel method is implemented and verified on the HPC platform. We will discuss multiple technical issues to enhance computational efficiency on multicore resources, such as task mapping strategy, communication and synchronization of tasks, and computational efficiency with increased computing processors. The effectiveness of the proposed solution is shown on datasets from the DOE ARPA-E Grid Optimization (GO) Competition Challenge 3, ranging from a small 73-bus system to a large-scale 23,643-bus system, and with different dispatch horizons including the real-time market with 8-hour look ahead, day-ahead market with 48-hour look ahead, and week-ahead advisory with 7-day look ahead. The results show a potential to meet the growing and diverse demands of the future electricity grid.
Talk 2: A Parallelized, Adam-Based Solver for Reserve and Security Constrained AC Unit Commitment
Speaker: Samuel Chevalier
Abstract: Power system optimization problems which include the nonlinear AC power flow equations require powerful and robust numerical solution algorithms. Within this sub-field of nonlinear optimization, interior point methods have come to dominate the solver landscape. Over the last decade, however, a number of efficient numerical optimizers have emerged from the field of Machine Learning (ML). One algorithm in particular, Adam, has become the optimizer-of-choice for a massive percentage of ML training problems (including, e.g., the training of GPT-3), solving some of the largest unconstrained optimization problems ever conceived of. Inspired by such progress, this talk presents a parallelized Adam-based numerical solver to overcome one of the most challenging power system optimization problems: security and reserve constrained AC Unit Commitment. The resulting solver, termed QuasiGrad, recently competed in the third ARPA-E Grid Optimization (GO3) competition. In the day-ahead market clearing category (with systems ranging from 3 to 23,643 buses over 48 time periods), QuasiGrad's aggregated market surplus scores were within 5% of the winningest market surplus scores. The QuasiGrad solver is now released as an open-source Julia package, and the internal gradient-based solver (Adam) can easily be substituted for other ML-inspired solvers (e.g., AdaGrad, AdaDelta, RMSProp, etc.).
Talk 3: Grid Optimization Competition and AC Unit Commitment
Speaker: Jesse Holzer
Abstract: The Grid Optimization (GO) Competition has posed challenge problems combining AC optimal power flow (ACOPF) and unit commitment (UC) into a single problem. UC typically is posed as a mixed integer linear programming (MILP) problem to determine the startup and shut down schedules along with real power output profiles of a set of generators in a power system so as to meet a given load over a planning horizon partitioned into multiple intervals. The physics of power flow through the network is represented by a linear model. In ACOPF, the network physics is modeled with a more accurate but nonlinear AC formulation, permitting the resolution of voltage and reactive power, but the discrete variables of generator commitment are either fixed to prescribed values or relaxed to continuous variables. Thus ACOPF is typically a nonlinear programming (NLP) problem in continuous variables. A day ahead UC with AC power flow modeling uses a more accurate power flow physics model to get a better day ahead commitment schedule. A real time ACOPF with unit commitment for fast start generators uses a more accurate representation of the actual capabilities and costs of the generators at the five to fifteen minute time scale. We describe two classes of solver approaches for a combined UC and ACOPF problem in the illustrative example of a single period UC model with AC power flow and balance constraints, voltage bounds, and limits on apparent power flow over transmission lines. In an NLP-based approach, we model the AC physics through nonlinear equations and use quadratic constraints to force the commitment variables to take integer values. In an MILP-based approach, we model the commitment decisions with binary variables and iteratively apply linear constraints derived from AC power flow subproblems to enforce the AC physics aspects of the model. We show computational results from these two approaches and discuss their advantages and disadvantages.