General Polynomial Chaos vs Crude Monte Carlo for Probabilistic Evaluation of Distribution Systems

Arpan Koirala, T. Acker, D. Van Hertem, Juliano Camargo, R. D’hulst
{"title":"General Polynomial Chaos vs Crude Monte Carlo for Probabilistic Evaluation of Distribution Systems","authors":"Arpan Koirala, T. Acker, D. Van Hertem, Juliano Camargo, R. D’hulst","doi":"10.1109/PMAPS47429.2020.9183453","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Recent evolutions in low voltage distribution system (LVDS), e.g., distributed generation and electric vehicles, have introduced a higher level of uncertainty. To determine the probability of violating grid constraints, e.g., undervoltage, such system must be assessed using a probabilistic power flow, which considers these uncertainties. Several approaches exist, including simulation-based and analytical methods. A well-known example of the simulation-based methods is the crude Monte Carlo (MC) approach which is very common in scientific computation due to its simplicity. Recently, analytical methods such as the general polynomial chaos (gPC) approach have gained increasing interest. This paper illustrates the effectiveness of the gPC approach compared to the MC method in determining the uncertainty of certain grid measures. Both methods are compared with respect to computational time and accuracy using a small test case with stochastic input which coheres to a univariate continuous distribution.","PeriodicalId":126918,"journal":{"name":"2020 International Conference on Probabilistic Methods Applied to Power Systems (PMAPS)","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2020 International Conference on Probabilistic Methods Applied to Power Systems (PMAPS)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/PMAPS47429.2020.9183453","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

Abstract

Recent evolutions in low voltage distribution system (LVDS), e.g., distributed generation and electric vehicles, have introduced a higher level of uncertainty. To determine the probability of violating grid constraints, e.g., undervoltage, such system must be assessed using a probabilistic power flow, which considers these uncertainties. Several approaches exist, including simulation-based and analytical methods. A well-known example of the simulation-based methods is the crude Monte Carlo (MC) approach which is very common in scientific computation due to its simplicity. Recently, analytical methods such as the general polynomial chaos (gPC) approach have gained increasing interest. This paper illustrates the effectiveness of the gPC approach compared to the MC method in determining the uncertainty of certain grid measures. Both methods are compared with respect to computational time and accuracy using a small test case with stochastic input which coheres to a univariate continuous distribution.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
分配系统概率评估的一般多项式混沌与粗糙蒙特卡罗
低压配电系统(LVDS)的最新发展,例如分布式发电和电动汽车,引入了更高水平的不确定性。为了确定违反电网约束(例如欠压)的概率,必须使用考虑这些不确定性的概率潮流来评估此类系统。存在几种方法,包括基于仿真的方法和分析方法。基于仿真的方法的一个众所周知的例子是粗糙的蒙特卡罗(MC)方法,由于其简单性,它在科学计算中非常常见。近年来,广义多项式混沌(gPC)等分析方法得到了越来越多的关注。本文举例说明了gPC方法与MC方法在确定某些网格测度的不确定性方面的有效性。通过一个小的测试用例,比较了两种方法的计算时间和精度,该测试用例具有单变量连续分布的随机输入。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Operating Reserve Assessment in Systems with Energy Storage and Electric Vehicles Framework and methodology for active distribution grid planning in Norway Parallel GPU Implementation for Fast Generating System Adequacy Assessment via Sequential Monte Carlo Simulation Distribution System Planning Considering Power Quality, Loadability and Economic Aspects Modelling and Simulation of Uncertainty in the Placement of Distributed Energy Resources for Planning Applications
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1