Fast solution technique for large-scale unit commitment problem using genetic algorithm

T. Senjyu,

H. Yamashiro, K. Shimabukuro, K. Uezato and T. Funabashi

Abstract An approach for a large-scale unit commitment problem is presented. The unit commitment (UC) problem plays a major role in power systems, because the improvement of commitment schedules results in the reduction of operating costs. However, the unit commitment problem is one of the most difficult optimisation problems in power systems. because this problem bas many constraints. Moreover, search space is vast. To overcome these problems, a new genetic operator based on unit characteristic classification and unit integation technique are proposed. The proposed algorithm was tested on a reported UC problem. From simulation results, better solutions are obtained in comparison with previously reported results. Numerical results for systems up to 100 units are compared to previously reported results.

index of unit (i= I , 2, ._.,N ) index of time(t= 1,2, ..,, 7) ith unit status at hour f (I if the unit is ON and 0 if O F F at hour t) output power of ith unit at hour f maximum output power of ith unit minimum output power of ith unit demand power at hour I system reserve at hour f minimum up time of ith unit minimum down time of ith unit duration during - which ith unit is continuously ON duration during which ith unit is continuouslv OFF starf-up cost of ith unit fuel cost of i t h unit total cost hot start cost of ith unit cold start cost of ith unit cold start hour of ith unit number of unit scheduling period

the unit commitment (UC) problem is the most important problem and has been studied over decades. The unit commitment problem involves determining the economical operation schedule subject to a number of operation constraints. Moreover, this problem has integer and, continuous variables. It is difficult to determine an economical operation schedule for this reason. The exact optimal solution can be obtained by a complete enumeration. However, this method cannot be applied to the unit commitment problem as the search space of this problem is vast. To solve the unit commitment problem, some optimisation techniques are applied to it. For example, there are Lagrangian relaxation [I], simulated annealing [2] and dynamic programming [3]. This paper presents a genetic algorithm (GA) solution to the large-scale unit commitment problem. Recently, a genetic algorithm has been successfully applied to unit commitment problems [49]. However, a G A requires excessive computation time because it has many populations. Also as genetic operators are operated at random, an infeasible solution may be generated. To overcome these dimculties, a new genetic operator and unit integration technique are introduced. From simulation results, an economical operation schedule can be obtained in reasonable computation time in comparison with previously reported results [6, IO].

2
1

Problem formation

Introduction

2.7 Objective function

The objective of the unit commitment problem is the minimisation of the total cost.

In r a n t years, power demand has been increasing with rapid industrialisation. As electric power systems play a major role in a modem society, professional engineers are responsible for proper operation of the generators. Hence,
0 IEE. 2W3 IEE Proceedky.9 Online no. 20030939 doi: 10.1049/ipyd2@930939 Paper first received I Ith Deamber 2002 and in revised form 5th August 2003. Onllne publishing date: 21 October 2W3 T.%njyu, H. Y s m d r o , K. Shunabukuro and K. U a t o are with the Faculty of E n g " e n g , University of lhe Ry&)us, I Senbaru Nishihvraiho Nakagami. Okinawa 9030213, Japan T. Funabashi is with the Meidensha Corporation. Riverside Building 36-2. NihonbasU Hokozakicho, Chuo-ku, Tokyo, 103-8515. Japan
IEE Proc.-Gpner Trmm. Dlrrib.. Vol 180, No. 6, Nowmber 2003

2. 7.7 Total coat The objective function of the UC problem consists of fuel cost and start-up cost.

2.7.2 Fuel cost; Fuel cost of thermal unit is expressed as

a second-order function of each unit output. FC,(t) = a, b,P,(t) ci<2(f) where a , b,, c, are fuel cost function coefficients.

(2)

153

Authorized licensed use limited to: UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE. Downloaded on August 07,2010 at 11:59:09 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.

2.7.3 Start-up cost; In this paper, simplified start-up

cost is applied as

3.7

Unit integration of large-scale problem

2.2

Constraints

The constraints that must be satisfied during the optimisation process are as follows:

2.2.7 System power balance: The generated power from all committed units must satisfy the power demand

2.2.2 Spinning reserve: To maintain system reliability, adequate spinning reserves are required. In this paper, the spinning reserve is 10% of the load,
N
i= I

The simulation includes runs for 40, 60, 80 and 100 units systems. These large-scale problems have many combinations, as the results, search space is vast. Hence to achieve a global search, the number of candidates of solutions and iterative calculation must be increased. However, these methods cannot be applied to the large-scale problem, as it is time-consuming. To solve a large-scale unit commitment problem in reasonable computation time, we proposed a unit integration method. The unit parameters for this problem are shown in Table 1. For the 20 units problem, the initial IO units systems were duplicated. The problem data were scaled appropriately for the problem with more units. In case of 40 units, there are four sets for every set often units. To reduce search space, groups of units of the same characteristics are integrated to one generator. As a result, 40, 60, 80 and 100 units problems can be reduced to the IO units problem. The parameters of integrated units are scaled in proportion to the number of units. For example, in the case of 40 units, maximum output, of Unit, 1 is 4SSMW x 4 = 1820MW, minimum output is 150MW x 4 = 600MW. There are no changes in the fuel cost, function coefficient, minimum up/down times and initial state.

c I i ( t .c ) m : 2 D(f) R(t)

3.2

Generating initial populations

2.2.3 Unit output limit; Each unit has output range

5 c(t) 2 Pym.

(7)

2.2.4 Minimum up/down time: Once a unit is committed/decommitted, there is a minimum time before it can be decommited/committd,

It is difficult to generate a feasible solution when initial populations are generated at random. The generation of initial populations is camed out by focusing on the day peak and bottom load. Generally, more generators are started up at around the peak load, whereas a few generators are started up at the light load. Hence as shown in Fig. 3, generators are mainly set continuously on status I around at the peak load to obtain feasible solution efficiently.Moreover, to exclude the difficulties in terms of the minimum up time, the minimum up time for each unit is also satisfied when unit status is set continuously on 1.

3.3 copy 3
Proposed method

The best solution is copied to another one. As a result, the best solution is saved for the next generation. and can be evolved.

When a genetic algorithm is applied to the UC problem, solution representation of the UC problem is shown in Fig. I . Figure 2 shows the system schedule. In this study, we separated commitment schedule into each unit.
1 it1
0
2

3
1

5 1

........
..e.

T
0

3.4 Mutation As standard mutation selects the mutation point randomly, it is difficult to satisfy the minimum up/down times constraint. To handle the m i n i up/down times constraint, a new mutation operator is adopted. This operator looks for 01 or IO combination in commitment schedule. Then the mutation operator randomly changes the combination to 00 or 11. 3.5 Crossover
When standard crossover is adopted, m i n i up/down time constraints can be violated. To overcome this difficulty,we used a new crossover as shown in Fig. 4. This crossover replaces a commitment schedule with other one in the populations.

unit2

...e

unilN

. e * *

3.6 Shift operator

As shown in Fig. 5, up time is shifted one hour up or down.

Fig. 1 Commitment schedule

unit 1 unit 2

...

unit N

3.7

Intelligent mutation

Fig.2 Genotype
754

Figure 6 shows the operation unit price of Unit 1, 5 and IO. From Fig. 6, we can see that the operation unit price of Unit IO is the most expensive one, therefore, in case of determination of commitment schedule, commitment of
IEE Proe-Cnur T r a m Dinrib., Vol. 150. No. 6, Noember 2003

Authorized licensed use limited to: UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE. Downloaded on August 07,2010 at 11:59:09 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.

Table 1: Unit parameter

Unit 1 Unit 2 455 150 970 17.26 0.00031 8 8

Unit 3
130 20 700 16.60 0.002

Unit4 130 20

Unit 5
162 25 450 19.70 0.00398

Pyx

455 150 1000 16.19

V"
ai

E80
16.50 0.00211

b,
C,

0.00048
8 8

Tp" Tp"
hcosti c-cost, c-s-hour,

5 5
550 1100 4

5 5 560
1120 4

6 6
900 1800 4

4500 9000

5000
10000

5
8
Unit 6

5
8 Unit 7 85 25

ini state

-5
Unit 8

-5
Unit 9

-6
Unit 10

p;""

80 20 370 22.26 0.00712 3

55
10

55
10

55 10
670 27.79 0.00173 1

Py
a,

480
27.74 0.00079 3 3 260 520 2

660
25.92 0.00413

665
27.27 0.00222 1 1 30

b,
C,
77-x

1 1
30

T"
hcost, c-cost, c-s-hour, ini state

3
170 340 2

30
60 0
-1

60 0
-1

60

0
-1

-3

-3

unit 1

Unit 2

unit N

1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 l

I 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0

unit 1

unit 2

1
0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 0

. . .. .. . .. .... .. . .. . . .. .

Fig. 3 Initial population

... ...
1 1 1

Unit 1 through to Unit 7 should he given priority over commitment of Unit 8 through to Unit 10. This operator looks for 01 combination in commitment schedule of Unit 1 through to Unit 7. As shown in Fig. 7, if overcommitted, it is decommitted, otherwise it is committed. To obtain lower cost, intelligent mutation is introduced into two parts: the fist. is used as one of the G A operators and the second is only applied to the best solution solved by the GA at the end of program. An explanation for the second part is described in Section 3.11.

...

.. . . .. .. .. . ..... ... . .. . . .

unit N U

3.8 Determination of small units

From Table 1, minimum upidown time of small units(Unit 8, 9, 10) is one hour, therefore small units can be committed/decommitted at. short intervals. As operation unit price of these units are costly, on-time must he
IEE Proc-Gener T r m . Dlrtr6.. Yo/. 150, No. 6, Noaember 2W3
0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0

Authorized licensed use limited to: UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE. Downloaded on August 07,2010 at 11:59:09 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.

unit 6

2.0
D

- ._.- .- .. unit 9 -

<
m

1.8

6 9 i

1.6 1.4

output, MW outpui, MW

Fig. 6 Operation unit price (Unit I , 5, IO)

Fig. 8 Fuel cost (Unit 8,9, IO)

160

f a x U .*

0:
8
.-

oa

6 .-

. . .. .. .. . , . . . . . . . . . .

... ... ... ... ... . . . . .

i i i -

60 -

4020

100

200 300 generation

400

500

" n d 3 01111111...

"4

.= .. Q P
0 0

Fig. 9

Calculation range oJELD

1 1

sh;tdown

3.11 Improvement of schedule

Fig. 7

Intelligent mutation

minimised. In this study, to minimise on-time of small units, small units mainly supply the power at peak load. Commitment order of these units were determined based on cost characteristics. Figure 8 shows cost characteristics of small units where we can see that the fuel cost of Unit 8 is the lowest of all, therefore Unit 8 is committed fist, thereby following Unit 9, and Unit IO having the most expensive fuel cost is committed the last.

Table 2 shows the commitment schedule solved by the GA, which is returned to the original size problem, i.e. in this case 40 units system from IO units system. There is a lot of room for improvement in this schedule because integrated units have same commitment schedule. To save the overcommitted unit, the intelligent mutation, which is mentioned in Section 3.7, is applied at the end of the program. To determine an economical schedule, the unit with a high operation unit price should be stopped preferentially. Table 3 shows the operation unit price of each unit, from which it is observed that the decommitment order is Unit 1 0 ~ 9 ~ 8 ~ 7 ~ 6 ~ 5 ~ 3 ~ 4 ~ 2 ~
4
Simulation data

3.9 ELD calculation

The economic load dispatch is a computational intensive part in a unit commitment problem. Hence, to save computation time, the economic load dispatch is only performed if the given unit commitment schedule is able to satisfy spinning reserve and minimum up/down time constraints. As shown in Fig. 9, we can see that calculation range of ELD varies directly with generation. The sinlation includes runs for 40, 60,SO and 100 units systems, and scheduling periods are 24 h. For the 20 units problem, the initial 10 units system were duplicated. The problem data were scaled appropriately for the problem with more units. In Table 1, ini state indicates how long the unit has been committed/decommitted. If positive, it indicates the number of hours the unit has been committed, if negative, it indicates the number of hours the unit has been decommitted. Adaptation of genetic operator probabilities are shown in Table 4.
5
Simulation results

3.10 Evaluation
For all violated constraints, a penalty term that the amount of violation of constraints is multiplied by a constant is added to the total cost.

F = K + a .PENA

(9)

where PENA is the amount of violation of constraints, a is the penalty multiplier.

156

The 20 test trials were made for each problem set due to the stochastic nature of the GA, with each run starting with
IEE Proc,-Gener. Tronrm Dirtrh, Vol. 180, No. 6,N o d e r ZWI3

Authorized licensed use limited to: UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE. Downloaded on August 07,2010 at 11:59:09 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.

1EE Proc.-Gener. Tr"

Divtrih. VoL 150, No. 6. N

w 2W3

151

Authorized licensed use limited to: UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE. Downloaded on August 07,2010 at 11:59:09 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.

Table 3 Operation unit price of each unit

Unit Operation unit price, 5IMW 18,60620 19.53292 22.24462 22.00507 23.12254 Unit Operation unit price, $IMW 27.45460 33.45421 38.14715 39.48301 40.06697

Unit 1 Unit 2 Unit 3 Unit 4 Unit 5

Unit 6 Unit 7 Unit 8 Unit 9 Unit 10

satisfied. In Table 7, overcommitments are decommitted by intelligent mutation, as mentioned in Section 3.11. For example, at 6 to 7 and 21 hours, unit 9 is shut down as shown in .Table 7. Figure IO shows the execution time. Introduction of intelligent mutation can achieve cost reduction. From Fig. IO, the execution time of the reported method increases in a quadratic manner with the increase of problem scale. However, as units are integrated at the IO units problem in all problem cases, execution time increases in a quasilinear way with the number of units. In comparison to the results produced by the reported methods, the proposed method gives satisfactory solution in a reasonable computation time.

Table 4 GA parameters
Selection Population size COPY Crossover Mutation Shift operator Intelligent mutation Elite selection
........j...

20
0.3 0.9 0.04 0.05 1.0

---fl---..

GA [6]

...... ......

........ ....... ....

EP[10] Proposed method ......(.........

different initial populations. The population size was 20 genotypes in all runs. The simulation results are shown in Tables2, 5-7. As shown in Table5, the proposed method gives better solution in comparison to other methods [6, IO]. In all test cases, total cost can decrease ahout 0.2-0.13% in comparison to reported methods [6, IO], From Table 6, as we adopt calculation range of ELD and unit integration method, the execution time is much faster than others [6, IO]. In all test cases, execution time can be reduced by up to 99-99.5%, in comparison to that reported in other techniques [6, IO]. Table 7 gives an example of the final commitment schedule for the 40 units system (total cost: $2247336). According to Table 7, this schedule indicates that all constraints are

10 I
40
60

80

100

number o f units

Fig. 10 Execution

tmie o f

reported merlwdy

Conclusions

This paper presents a genetic algorithm solution to the thermal unit commitment problem. The unit commitment problem is one of the most difficult optimisation problems in power systems as the search space is vast. To reduce search space, unit integration techniques are proposed. The initial populations are often generated randomly. However,

Table 5 Total cod

Total cost. 40units Best worst Average 2247336 2250507 2248812 2251911 2249093

5
80 units
4491509 4497047 4493853 4504933 4498479 100units 5610855 5617827 5613989 5627437 5623885

60 units
3367637 3373038 3370133 3376625 3371611

GA I61
EP 1101

Table 6 Computation time

Computation time, s 40units Proposed Method 29 2697 1176

60 units
42 5840 2261

80units

100 units 75 15733 6120

60
10036 3584

CM I 6 1
EP 1101
758

IEE Proc.-Genn T m m . Dim&.. Vol 150. No. 6 Nowmbn 2003

Authorized licensed use limited to: UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE. Downloaded on August 07,2010 at 11:59:09 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.

IEE Proc.-Getzer. T r m i . Dirrd., Yo/. 150, No. 6, Nowmber 2003

789

Authorized licensed use limited to: UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE. Downloaded on August 07,2010 at 11:59:09 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.

it is difficult to generate feasible solutions. To obtain feasible initial solutions, initial populations are generated based on load data. Hence feasible initial solutions can be obtained. Constraints, output range and operation costs vary with each unit. Units are classified into several groups based on minimum up/down times constraints. The operation schedule of small units are determined by numerical calculation based on cost characteristic. Other units schedules are determined by the genetic algorithm. To obtain more optimal operation schedules, new genetic operators are introduoed. The intelligent mutation performs a local bill-climbing optimisation technique. From simulation results, the proposed method can determine satisfactory commitment schedule in reasonable computation time.

7
I

References
Svoboda, A.J., Tseng, C.-L., Ki, C., and Johnson, R.B.: 'Short-term resource schedding w i t h ramp constraints', IEEE T r m . Power Sysi., 1997, 12, (I), pp. 7 7 4 3

760

IEE Proc.-Gmer. Trrmnn Dltnib., Vol. ISO. No. 6,No~wnber 2003

Authorized licensed use limited to: UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE. Downloaded on August 07,2010 at 11:59:09 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.