In this section, the numerical studies are described. Firstly, the input data of the test grid are explained. Thereafter, the simulation results are described and discussed.
3.2. Simulation Results and Discussions
In this section, the simulation results of the case studies are discussed. The active distribution grid consist of flexible power and heat demands to provide flexibility services, i.e., voltage regulation. In order to study the impacts of different flexible demands on the distribution grid operation, different case studies are addressed as follows:
Case Study 1: in this state, only the household demands are considered in the network; therefore, the flexible HPs, EVs and PV-batteries are disregarded. This is a base case without demand flexibility.
Case Study 2: in this state, the HPs are integrated to the household demands; as a result, the active distribution grid benefits from the heat-to-power flexibility.
Case Study 3: in this state, the EVs and HPs are integrated to the household demands; then, the network utilizes the power and heat-to-power flexibilities simultaneously. To discuss different charging schemes of EVs, three scenarios are designed for this case study as: (1) Charging priority (2) V2G and droop control (3) V2G, droop control and schedule charging.
Case Study 4: in this state, all the flexible demands, including HPs, EVs, PV-BESS as well as the household demands are integrated to the distribution grid. This is the most complete case study where the active distribution grid takes the advantages of all flexibility potentials.
Figure 10 shows the voltage magnitude at different buses, accumulative power demand of residential areas, power loading of different lines and the transformer loading for case study 1. In this case study, neither flexible demand nor CCMs are addressed. In subfigure (a), the daily demand can be divided into three sections: valley, from hours 1-6; shoulder, from hours 7-16; and peak, from hour 17-24. Despite the difference in the actual demand between the two residential areas, the three demand sections are observed in the transformer loading and line loading in subfigures (c) and (d), respectively.
Although we can observe the three slots for valley, shoulder, and peak in the voltage profile, the valley and peak voltage sections occur during the peak and valley demand slots, respectively. Therefore, when the line loadings are between 20-40% during valley demand, the bus voltage magnitudes vary between 0.96-1 p.u. in the peak period. In contrast, during peak demand, when the line loadings increase up to 80%, the voltage magnitudes drop to approximately 0.92 p.u. Note that this represents the baseline case study, wherein no flexible demands are considered. Upon integrating HPs, EVs, and the PV-BSS into the grid, there is a possibility of voltage magnitude deterioration during peak demand hours. Consequently, CCMs will be implemented in subsequent case studies to provide voltage regulation as additional heat and power demands are introduced to the distribution grid.
Figure 11 describes the operation dynamics of the active distribution network in case study 2 when the HPs and associated CCMs are integrated to the grid. Regarding the PCM temperature in subfigure (a), it is evident that the storage temperature peaks between approximately 50-65°C during nighttime from hours 1 to 6 and remains elevated until hour 9. Subsequently, the storage temperature decreases to 35°C due to low household heat demand when residents are out at work. As time passes and residents return home from the workplace, household demand increases, leading to a gradual rise in storage temperature from hour 14.
During the peak demand period, hours 17-24, which corresponds to the valley of the voltage profile, the temperature of the PCM begins to decrease. This indicates that HPs are extracting heat energy from the storage precisely when there is a high heat demand, and the voltage profile is at its lowest. In this manner, the CCM supplies the HPs with energy from the PCM, effectively contributing to voltage regulation for the grid.
Subfigure (b) illustrates the voltage magnitudes for different buses when the flexible HPs and PCM storages are integrated into the grid through the CCMs. Comparing the voltage profile with subfigure (b) in case study 1, despite the addition of heat demands to the distribution grid, the CCMs effectively maintain the voltage magnitude within the lower and upper permitted thresholds, i.e., 0.92-1.08 p.u. In essence, the CCMs unleash the power-to-heat flexibility of the HPs and utilize the storage capacity of the PCM to regulate the bus voltage magnitude while simultaneously meeting the residents’ heat demand. In this context, we observe greater variations in the voltage profile compared to case study 1. The primary reason for this difference is the on-off switching operation of the HPs.
Regarding line loading in subfigure (d), there is an increase compared to case study 1. Additionally, it displays more fluctuations in the loading profile attributed to the switching operation of the HPs. It’s noteworthy that the step-wise changes in voltage and line loading demonstrate the responsive actions of the CCMs to the switching operations of the HPs in order to regulate bus voltages.
Figure 12 illustrates the operation dynamics of the grid for case study 3 where both the HPs and EVs are integrated into the grid. Subfigure (b) depicts the voltage magnitudes at network buses. The graph reveals two key points. Firstly, with the integration of EVs into the grid, there is an increase in voltage variation. Secondly, during the early nighttime, i.e., hours 1-2, when EVs are connected to the grid for charging, the voltage magnitude remains lower compared to the preceding case where no EVs are involved. Compared to the previous case study, although EVs and HPs are added to the distribution grid as new demands, the CCMs unlocked the heat and power flexibility to offer voltage regulation.
In subfigure (c), illustrating line loading, two noteworthy points should be highlighted. Firstly, the addition of EVs to the network results in an increase in line loading percentage during the valley period. Although there is a noticeable but less pronounced increase in the shoulder and peak periods, the primary escalation occurs during the valley period when most EVs are connected for night charging. Secondly, the line loading profile undergoes more frequent fluctuations due to the charging and discharging schedules of the EVs.
Subfigure (d) explains the SOC of the EV batteries. As depicted in the graph, the majority of charging schedules occur during valley and peak demands, with less charging taking place during the shoulder period. This pattern is attributed to the fact that most EVs are connected to home parking during nighttime, i.e., hours 1-8, and outside of working hours, i.e., 16-24, when residents return home from workplaces.
To elaborate on the various CCMs for EVs,
Figure 13,
Figure 14 and
Figure 15 the grid’s dynamics for three scenarios including (1) charging priority, (2) V2G and droop control, and (3) V2G, droop control, and scheduled charging, respectively.
To distinguish the functionalities of the three scenarios, we focus on the voltage and SOC diagrams of the EVs. It is evident that the strength of voltage control increases from control scenario 1 to 3; therefore, we should anticipate greater voltage control stability in scenario 3 than in scenario 1.
In the first scenario,
Figure 15, EVs are charged to 100% throughout all time slots without considering voltage conditions. In this state, the average voltage of the grid is 0.9578 p.u. during the peak period. In the second scenario, as depicted in
Figure 16, most EVs reach 100% SOC during valley and shoulder periods. However, some EVs reduce the maximum SOC to 60-80% during the peak period to contribute to voltage regulation on the grid. Consequently, the average voltage magnitude of the grid increases to 0.9593 in the peak period. In the third scenario, based on the SOC diagram of
Figure 17, more EVs participate in the voltage regulation program. Here, some EVs not only limit the maximum SOC but also restrict the charging rate to lower values following droop control. This results in an increase in the average voltage to 0.9602 p.u. in the peak period.
As a result, it is evident that the integration of more CCMs into the EV charging control leads to an enhancement in the voltage stability of the distribution grid.
Figure 16 represents the dynamics of the distribution grid for the most comprehensive state, case study 4, incorporating all flexible demands, including HPs, EVs, and PV-BESS, connected to the network.
Subfigure (b) illustrates the voltage profile. According to the graph, upon the integration of the PV-BESS into the grid, the designed CCM strives to stabilize the voltage magnitude during peak hours. This is evident at hour 17 when there is a noticeable increase, up to around 0.98 pu, in the voltage magnitude. Concurrently, there is a decline in the line loading depicted in subfigure (f) at hour 17, indicating that household demands are being supplied by the local PV-BESS.
Subfigure (d) depicts the power generation of the PV system. As evident, solar power generation initiates at around 6 am during daytime hours. The peak of solar power generation is observed in the midday, gradually decreasing to reach zero by hour 20. The solar panels are connected to the BESS, allowing for a decision to either supply the local demands directly on the line or store excess power in the batteries. As illustrated in subfigure (g), the SOC of batteries increases from 20% to 60% from hours 1 to 15, reaching its peak shortly after that for most batteries. This behavior is primarily attributed to the BSS charging from the PV system during the shoulder period and subsequently supplying the local demands during the peak period, specifically from hour 17 onwards.
Subfigure (h) illustrates the power transactions between 8 households and the grid. Positive transaction power values indicate power selling to the grid, while negative values represent power purchasing from the grid. According to the graph, households equipped with flexible heat-power demand and storage have the capability to meet their local demand at certain time slots and also sell excess power to the grid during specific periods. As observed in the diagram, during the valley and shoulder periods, households draw power from the distribution grid. In the peak hours from 17 to 19, households sell power to the grid, providing voltage support. In the remaining peak period from hours 19 to 24, most households minimize power purchases from the distribution grid and meet their demands locally through heat and power storages.
Figure 17 illustrates the secondary controller’s action in correcting errors in the forecasted schedule. This figure is depicted for one EV, i.e., EV2, to clearly describe this matter. The EV was scheduled to depart at hour 10 with a minimum SOC requirement of 80%. Incorrect charging schedule estimation prompted a priority request from the secondary control at hour 4, leading the EV to start charging at the rated power, deviating from the planned power level schedule. Once the EV reaches the minimum required SOC, it continues to charge to 100% using the droop control. Based on the subfigure (c), the red diagram depicts EV’s participation in regulation power, but a regulation cut-off around hour 4 occurs due to the activation of priority charging at midnight.
The primary objective of the presented case studies was to provide voltage support for the grid by unlocking the flexibility of heat and power demand. This was achieved through the design of CCMs. The graphical representation in the presented voltage profile figures demonstrated how the daily voltage profile remains stable in response to the addition of loads, including HPs and EVs. To quantify the voltage stabilization,
Table 4 illustrates the average voltage magnitude for the peak period and the entire day. According to the table, despite the integration of additional demands such as EVs, HPs, and batteries into the grid, not only does the bus voltage not decrease, but the CCMs also unleash the flexibility of power and heat demands, enhancing the voltage profile.