lifecycle optimizer

Upload: aruna-kari

Post on 14-Apr-2018

216 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

  • 7/30/2019 Lifecycle Optimizer

    1/15

    Lifecycle Optimization for Power Plants

    Marc Antoine, Luis Ruiz-Escribano

    ABB Switzerland Ltd, Utility Automation, Baden, CH

    Abstract

    Due to the deregulation in energy markets there is an increased need for asset

    management tools. The essence of asset management is having the decision-support

    for finding an optimum between financial performance, operational performance, and

    risk exposure. Decisions must be made about operating and maintaining infrastructure

    assets. Hence, the primary goal of an asset management tool is informed decision-

    making, rather than the pure focus on technical performance.

    A central component in achieving these requirements is the calculation of production

    costs, taking into account plant depreciation and degradation resulting from this

    production. This paper describes a decision support system that is based on the

    optimization of an objective function that includes terms for revenues from energy

    sales, production costs and plant ageing. Plant ageing is based on lifecycle models

    that are directly load dependent. The optimization results in a trade-off between

    maximisation of immediate profits and minimisation of lifetime consumption. The

    earnings can be achieved by selling energy, or even fuel or emission credits (CO2,

    SO2, NOx).

    The Lifecycle Optimizer, presented in this paper, addresses the influence of a given

    operating mode on the ageing process of the power plant and includes this in the

    economic optimization. A Model Predictive Control (MPC) and Mixed Logical

    Dynamic (MLD) approach are used to solve the posed optimization problem.

    PGE04-181-Lifecycle-Optimizer.doc 1 / 15

  • 7/30/2019 Lifecycle Optimizer

    2/15

    1 Asset management for power plants

    As a consequence of the deregulation in the power industry, utility business units have

    been transformed from cost centers into profit centers. Whereas they previously had a

    budget and carried out projects, they are now charged with contributing to growth in

    corporate earnings. Whereas the justification of their budget was mainly based on

    engineering criteria related to Operation and Maintenance (O&M), they have become

    increasingly more focused on return-on-investment.

    The primary task of asset management is to reduce negative surprises by identifying

    performance problems, improving predictive maintenance, extending asset lifecycles,

    and most of all, developing solid business plans for investments.

    Today the utility business faces the challenge of aligning the management of their

    assets with corporate objectives. This requires engineering and economic tools as well

    as value-based decision-support. The strategic plan of a company defines the high-

    level goals and based on this, the business units setup their operational plans to

    achieve their targets. The asset manager sits between these functions and must

    therefore have comprehensive tools for decision-making about assets.

    The key component in asset management is lifecycle costing, which implies cost

    minimization starting with the initial investment, continuing through O&M, and

    ending with recycling or phase-out. This approach requires asset plans to be linked to

    financial plans. In order to achieve this, the asset manager shall be able to carry out

    the following tasks:

    Monitoring the condition and performance of each asset.

    Having the key data of all assets available in real-time across the enterprise.

    Calculating asset lifecycle costs and the impact of asset failure.

    Linking trading decisions to O&M decisions.

    This is only possible through informed decision-making. The asset manager shall not

    only receive data about specific assets, but shall also be able to translate that data into

    knowledge.

    PGE04-181-Lifecycle-Optimizer.doc 2 / 15

  • 7/30/2019 Lifecycle Optimizer

    3/15

    1.1 The stakeholders

    For complex asset infrastructures such as power plants, the responsibilities can be

    divided among the following two key persons:

    The asset owner represents corporate strategy, defines the asset costs and risks thecompany is willing to accept, and sets the level of expected performance. The asset

    owner is also responsible for raising and managing capital.

    The asset manager focuses on decision-making and optimizes asset values in line

    with corporate objectives. His core competencies are performance analysis, financial

    analysis, risk management and economic decisions. The asset manager sets the budget

    and the targets for the trader and the O&M manager in the plant.

    2 Asset management systems

    Information management systems are the backbone of asset management. Such

    systems not only handle data archiving and retrieval but need to offer data analysis

    tools as well, ranging from condition monitoring, maintenance management, purchase

    and inventory control, predictive modeling, and decision-making including risk-

    assessment software.

    Today, the information retrieved through the automation system from the plant floor

    is usually of technical nature. Knowledge of the influence of some technical facts on

    the plant floor on the commercial success of the plant lies with the experienced plant

    manager. If a plant is run on condition based maintenance, where outages are not

    planned in regular intervals, but depending on the state of the plant, the success of this

    strategy is highly dependent on the quality of the plant state assessment. But even

    with a very precise plant state assessment there is room for optimization in this

    approach. Information on how plant operation influences the plant state is needed.

    Only with this information, the plant manager has the full picture of the results of his

    decisions. If we provide a tool which not only analyses the current plant state, but also

    informs the operator about the influence of his actions on the future plant state, a

    business decision can be taken on whether to run the plant aggressively and to initiate

    maintenance earlier, or to run the plant more smoothly and extend the maintenance

    interval.

    PGE04-181-Lifecycle-Optimizer.doc 3 / 15

  • 7/30/2019 Lifecycle Optimizer

    4/15

    Planning &Scheduling

    PlantEngineering

    Maintenance

    Operations

    InformationCentric

    BusinessSystems

    AssetOptimization

    FieldDevices

    Design

    ProcessEngineerin

    g

    Figure 1: Seamless integration of plant automation, asset optimization, and collaborative

    business processes in real-time using IndustrialIT

    .

    IndustrialIT is an architecture which incorporates the features described above:

    seamless linking of multiple applications and systems in real-time. This could include

    e.g. process automation, asset optimization and collaborative business processes. It

    includes functionality ranging from field devices to business systems, focused on

    decision-support, from the first phases of design, through installation, commissioning,

    operation, maintenance and asset optimization (Fig. 1).

    2.1 Aspect Objects

    The two central themes in IndustrialIT are information availability and information

    integration. This means that information must be available at the right place at the

    right time independent of where the information comes from. It must be possible to

    seamlessly integrate the right information from any combination of sources.

    A well known problem in plant operations as well as asset lifecycle management isthat you need a way to keep together, manage, and have access to information about

    all different aspects of a great number of e.g. plant and process entities. These

    entities, or real world objects, are of many different kinds. They can be physical

    process objects, like a valve, or more complex, like a reactor. Other examples are

    products, material, production orders, batches, customer accounts, etc.

    Each of these real world objects can be described from several different perspectives.

    Each perspective defines a piece of information, and a set of functions to create,access, and manipulate this information. We call this an Aspect of the object.

    PGE04-181-Lifecycle-Optimizer.doc 4 / 15

  • 7/30/2019 Lifecycle Optimizer

    5/15

    Aspects, which can be defined as all the real-time information connected to a

    particular Object, including design drawings, control diagrams, maintenance

    information, location, quality information and configuration information. In fact, an

    Aspect can be composed of data and programs performing specific functions.

    Together, these Aspects form a dynamic 'model object' containing links to all the

    important information. In IndustrialIT terminology, this is called an Aspect ObjectTM.

    Once the physical device (object) is put in place in the plant, the operator can simply

    copy and paste the model Aspect Object into the overall system. No matter where

    each real object is deployed, one 'click' on the model object provides a link to its

    Aspect information.

    The approach to introducing an application such as operational optimization into an

    existing platform thus centres around one concept define new aspects specific to

    lifecycle modeling and optimization and attach them to power plant objects. In this

    way a link between process data and asset management is achieved. Access to the

    appropriate information in real-time is now one mouse-click away from the user.

    3 The Lifecycle Optimizer

    3.1 Complexity grows

    Todays plant manager assumes new responsibilities mostly focused towards the

    management of more complex business situations. When talking about decisions for

    plants with a complex configuration (multi-unit plants, multi-plants and multi-product

    trading, i.e. fuel, power, heat, emissions), finding the operation schedule that provides

    the optimal economical results cannot be solved without decision-support tools.

    Decisions support systems for operation of power plants in an economic market are

    typically based around the concepts of economic commitment and dispatch. The

    objective of, what hereafter is referred to as operational optimization,is to schedule or

    commit generating units over a certain horizon such that the difference between

    operating cost and revenue is minimized. In addition to meeting the expected load, the

    PGE04-181-Lifecycle-Optimizer.doc 5 / 15

  • 7/30/2019 Lifecycle Optimizer

    6/15

    operational optimization problem must take into account requirements such as

    minimum uptime and downtime of generation units, startup and shutdown times,

    spinning reserve, and other constraints such as emissions (e.g. CO2, NOx, SO2) and

    minimum or maximum power output.

    As indicated above it is important to realize that asset lifetime is a resource that

    contributes to the cost of operating the power plant and as such should be included in

    the operational optimization problem. The Lifecycle Optimizer addresses this

    requirement, i.e. the influence of a given operating mode on the ageing process of the

    power plant is included with variables considered in the optimization.

    Two elements are at the core of any operational optimization problem. The first is a

    model of the plant describing how the plant reacts to various control signals, i.e., an

    input-output model. The second is an objective function that uses a combination of

    external variables and variables from the plant model to compute a plant performance

    measure, e.g., external variables could include the electricity market price and fuel

    price, and model variables the plant output and fuel consumption. The objective

    function has the generic form [1]:

    duuqucuefuJTt

    t

    +

    = ))()),(,()),(,()),(,((][

    where:

    T : time optimization horizon;

    u: power plant control, for example, generated power and heat;

    e: ageing rate of plant components, or more exactly, its dollar effect;

    c: cost rates;

    q: revenue rates.

    There are various techniques for solving this class of optimization problem but one

    widely adopted by industry to solve control problems of systems subject to input and

    output constraints is Model Predictive Control (MPC) [2]. The following components

    are thus required:

    Process models to describe how fuel is converted into electrical and thermal

    energy. This gives the traditional plant operating costs. The models take static,

    PGE04-181-Lifecycle-Optimizer.doc 6 / 15

  • 7/30/2019 Lifecycle Optimizer

    7/15

    dynamic and integral factors into account. These factors include, for example,

    fuel heat consumption, auxiliary power consumption, minimum standstill period,

    minimum operating time, load gradient limitation, hot start/cold start, limitations

    on operating time, on production quantities, on startup frequency, and also on

    emissions (e.g. CO2, NOx, SO2).

    Component lifetime models to assess stress loading, which in turn is used to

    compute ageing and lifetime cost.

    Operation and constraint models for the plant, including the ageing models in this

    plant. This is achieved in a hybrid systems modeling framework [3] known as

    Mixed Logic and Dynamic models (MLD).

    An optimization routine that computes the optimal control sequence using the

    MPC strategy.

    Fig. 2 shows an example of optimization results for generated power and

    corresponding price levels for trading.

    3.2 Trading

    Trading and asset management have much in common with traditional utility

    management, such as demand forecasting, lifecycle costing, risk management,

    performance monitoring, condition-based maintenance, and other aspects. The power

    of the Lifecycle Optimizer is its ability to integrate these components and optimize

    the trade-offs between financial performance, operational performance and risk

    exposure. This can be achieved by:

    Trading of gas, oil, steam and electricity, including penalties for not matchingthe objectives.

    Fuel trading: the trader is able to buy and resell fuel.

    Fuel balancing: when a gate-close event occurs and the trader still needs tofulfill a diary or subdiary balance of fuel, this may be done through the storage

    capacity of the fuel network.

    Power trading: the trader is able to stop power generation in case buyingpower from other generators and reselling it to the grid is found more

    profitable.

    PGE04-181-Lifecycle-Optimizer.doc 7 / 15

  • 7/30/2019 Lifecycle Optimizer

    8/15

    Emission trading: the trader is able to stop or reduce power generation in orderto comply to emission constraints, or to sell emission permits to others if this

    is profitable.

    Choosing different types of contracts, e.g. bilateral, fortnight-, week- or day-ahead, block-hour (4h or 6h), hour (1h), half-hour (0.5h) and quarter-hourly

    (15m) contracts.

    Figure 2: Example of optimized plant load profiles and trading prices.

    3.3 Ageing

    The key stochastic variables for scheduled maintenance are expected life estimations

    for repair and replacement of major parts. These are based on manufacturer data and

    calculation methods which take into account equipment load factors such as, e.g.

    equivalent operation hours, number of startups, etc.

    For the purpose of lifecycle or ageing modeling two factors are critical. Firstly, the

    models are required to provide a direct relationship between equipment load and

    equipment ageing. Ageing in a gas turbine, for example, takes into account effects

    like firing temperature, fuel type, fuel switch-over, use of power augmentation, trips,

    startups, etc. Secondly, the models must capture the equipments operating history.

    PGE04-181-Lifecycle-Optimizer.doc 8 / 15

  • 7/30/2019 Lifecycle Optimizer

    9/15

    Finally, for lifecycle optimization purposes, the ageing function is included in the

    optimization routine.

    3.4 Risk estimation

    In order to account for the risk of suffering an unplanned outage or the risk of not

    being able to connect to the grid after a plant shutdown, risk estimation and evolution

    of the failure probability distribution of individual components are addressed. These

    risk considerations are condensed as additional terms in the cost objective function

    and add a tuneable term to penalize events through the optimization. Those terms may

    depend on factors such as the equipment life already consumed, the time since last

    shutdown, the weather conditions, etc. The factors are tuneable by the user becausetaking one or the other decision is affected by the market pressure and by the risk the

    asset manager or trader is willing to take.

    Take as an example the decision to shutdown a plant during the weekends. Even if it

    is clear that shutting down is the best economical solution, the operator could choose

    not to assume the risk of not being able to provide the committed power to the grid on

    monday. This could ruin the earning of the week but can be included as a risk term in

    the cost objective function. In this sense, risk considerations include subjective

    evaluations by the user but are nevertheless analytically formulated.

    3.5 Emissions

    Emission trading is playing an increasingly important role in energy markets. If a

    plant emits less than the level of its allocations, it can sell the additional permits to

    others that may have emitted more. If it emits more, then it needs to purchase

    additional permits or pay a penalty. To arrive at an optimal decision the asset manager

    or trader needs to consider two important factors:

    Price levels and price volatility.

    The technical characteristics of the plant.

    Decision tools which are based on historic data (looking at the past days, weeks or

    months) will not be able to capture these factors and therefore disadvantage the

    competitive position of the plant. This is true for combined cycle power plants, firing

    PGE04-181-Lifecycle-Optimizer.doc 9 / 15

  • 7/30/2019 Lifecycle Optimizer

    10/15

    gas or oil as primary fuel, but is even more important for coal-fired plants because of

    the problems of coal storage and the difficulties for the trader to unwind a coal

    position. The Lifecycle Optimizer is able to take such effects into account by

    including additional terms, related to emission credits and penalties, into the cost

    objective function. An example of optimized load dispatch, e.g. shutting down the

    plant for a period of time based on NOx emission trading, is shown in Fig. 3. The

    influence on profits and losses can be huge, specially in case emission permits have to

    be purchased and traded. The strength of this approach is the ability to take such a

    variety of factors into the optimization and calculate the impact on profitability, an

    impossible task for decision-makers without tool support.

    NOx in Flue Gas

    Figure 3: Example of optimized load dispatch taking emission constraints into account.

    3.6 Mapping Money

    The Lifecycle Optimizer approach is intended for decision-makers that economically

    quantify the effect of plant operation on plant ageing. The result of the optimization is

    a cost per kW (including ageing costs) and a kW production level, characteristics

    essential for actions such as bidding into a pool.

    PGE04-181-Lifecycle-Optimizer.doc 10 / 15

  • 7/30/2019 Lifecycle Optimizer

    11/15

    A frequent problem is the lack of equipment manufacturer data required for

    parametrising the lifetime models. This is overcome by directly mapping the

    monetary value of such components, based on O&M data such as replacement cost

    and estimated lifecycle. The additional advantage of this method is the possibility for

    the asset manager to use his/her preferred accounting method (replacement value,

    value in the books, etc.).

    The Lifecycle Optimizer has been installed and successfully tested at Enfield Energy

    Center Ltd. (UK). The main purpose of this project was to verify the optimization

    approach, the system design and configuration, as well as the software

    implementation.

    4 Examples

    4.1 Lifecycle optimum versus Preventive maintenance

    In this example we consider the following scenario: the plant outage for inspection

    and preventive maintenance is scheduled to take place 100 days from now. The

    inspection threshold is set at 1000 EOH (Equivalent Operating Hours) and the plant is

    presently at zero EOH. There is a multitude of operating strategies which lead to 1000

    EOH in 100 days, e.g. 10 EOH per day, 24 EOH per day for the next 41.6 days, etc. In

    order to simplify this example, we allocate extremely high costs to overshooting of

    EOH, i.e. this option will not be optimal. The task is to find an operation strategy

    resulting in maximum profit over a defined time horizon, and respect the EOH

    constraint. Note that profit depends on actual energy prices and that revenues are lost

    in case the plant has not consumed the available EOH. The following cases are

    considered:

    The flat solution running constant plant output to satisfy the EOH constraint.

    PGE04-181-Lifecycle-Optimizer.doc 11 / 15

  • 7/30/2019 Lifecycle Optimizer

    12/15

    The manual solution selecting an operating strategy to match the EOH

    constraint, while simultaneously trying to maximize profit. The strategy is to

    initially set all hours to minimum production and then increase peak price

    hours to maximum production until the EOH constraint is met. Note that this

    assumes lifetime models available, which is usually not the case if the

    Lifecycle Optimizer is not installed.

    The optimal strategy determined by the Lifecycle Optimizer.

    The results (normalized) show the advantage of the optimizer approach in terms of

    Net Present Value (NPV) and profit:

    Solution method NPV Profit

    Flat 100% 100%

    Manual 109% 108%

    Optimal 111% 109%

    4.2 Optimal load scheduling

    This example focuses on load scheduling but can also be used for post operation

    analysis and monitoring. The task is to find the optimal load dispatch strategy of a

    unit resulting in maximum profit over a defined time horizon, again taking lifecycle

    costs into account. For the purposes of this analysis three possible operating strategies

    are compared:

    Keep the plant on constant base load.

    Allow the plant to peak during high energy price periods.

    Allow the plant to follow load in the range 80 to 100 %.

    The results (normalized) indicate that, for this example, a peaking strategy increases

    both income from sales and lifecycle costs, resulting in an increase in net revenues. A

    load-following strategy reduces both income from sales and lifecycle costs also

    PGE04-181-Lifecycle-Optimizer.doc 12 / 15

  • 7/30/2019 Lifecycle Optimizer

    13/15

    resulting in a higher net revenue. The calculated increases in net revenues reflect an

    expected upper limit on benefits resulting from the Lifecycle Optimizer.

    Strategy Income from

    sales

    Generation cost Lifecycle cost Net revenue

    Base load 100% 100% 100% 100%

    Peaking 103% 103% 103% 109%

    Load-following 98% 96% 96% 124%

    PGE04-181-Lifecycle-Optimizer.doc 13 / 15

  • 7/30/2019 Lifecycle Optimizer

    14/15

    5 Conclusions

    The use of optimization techniques, risk assessment and information integration are

    central components of asset management for todays power plants. Decisions are

    driven by the actual condition and performance of assets. Not meeting corporate

    objectives such as operating requirements, financial targets and regulations are among

    the risks which shall be addressed by the asset manager.

    The objective of Lifecycle Optimization in power plants is to satisfy demand at a

    minimum cost or, as is more likely in a deregulated market, selecting the production

    levels given predicted energy prices (i.e. prices at which produced energy can be

    sold). In either case the requirements are the same decide when to turn equipment

    on and choose the production levels. A key component resulting from this decision is

    the information used to formulate bids for submission into a spot market. A Lifecycle

    Optimization tool is thus a decision tool for plant asset managers and traders

    operating in a competitive market.

    The first new element in this approach is the explicit handling of lifecycle models and

    their inclusion in the optimization routine. The lifecycle models provide a direct

    relationship between plant load and plant ageing, and capture the operating history of

    the component.

    The other new element is the representation of the lifecycle optimization in a hybrid

    systems modeling framework known as Mixed Logic and Dynamic models (MLD).

    This enables the economic problem to be solved using Model Predictive Control

    (MPC) techniques.

    PGE04-181-Lifecycle-Optimizer.doc 14 / 15

  • 7/30/2019 Lifecycle Optimizer

    15/15

    PGE04-181-Lifecycle-Optimizer.doc 15 / 15

    6 References

    [1] E. Gallestey, A. Stothert, M. Antoine, S. Morton, Model predictive control and

    the optimization of power plant load while considering lifetime consumption, IEEE

    PE-803PRS (08-2001).

    [2] E. Camacho and C. Bordons, "Model Predictive Control", Springer 1999.

    [3] A. Bemporad and M. Morari, "Control of systems integrating logic, dynamics, and

    constraints", Automatica, Vol. 35, no. 3, pp 407-427, 1999.

    Authors:

    Marc Antoine was born in Belgium 1959, received his M.Sc. in mechanical engineering at

    the University of Brussels 1982, research assistant in aerospace & ocean engineering at

    Virginia Polytechnic Institute USA, joined Brown Boveri Company as development engineer

    for process computer systems in Switzerland 1985. Senior engineer at ABB Power Generation

    for plant management systems 1989, development manager for plant monitoring &

    optimisation systems at ABB Power Automation 1999. Currently product manager for plant

    automation systems at ABB Switzerland.

    Luis Ruiz-Escribano was born in Madrid 1974, received his M.Sc. in power engineering at

    the Polytechnic University of Madrid, research assistant at the Institute of Thermal Power

    Systems, Technical University of Munich. Joined ABB Power Automation Switzerland in

    2001. Currently, system engineer at ABB Switzerland for plant monitoring & optimisation

    applications.