tensorkelechi/arxiv-cstext · Datasets at Hugging Face

text stringlengths 0 89.3k
we convert the problem as weighted average minimization
problem by defining individual objective weights
Figure 7 a compares the Pareto fronts derived from fixed
battery sizes with those obtained using the CCD approach
The dashed lines depict the fronts for fixed sizes intersectingin certain regions indicating that optimal battery sizes for
one objective may be suboptimal for others In contrast the
solid black line representing the CCD approach consistently
remains below the dashed lines signifying a nondominated
solution This indicates that the CCD approach achieves the
lowest total cost for a given level of power loss or the least
power loss for a given total cost
We selected three points on the Pareto front identified
through CCD refer to Fig 7 a The endpoints of the
curve represent optimization for a single objective whereas
the midpoint is the Pareto optimal solution that balances
both objectives Figure 7 b illustrates the battery operation
at these three points When minimizing power loss battery
usage is highest conversely it is lowest when minimizing
total cost The Pareto optimal solution operates the battery
at a level that compromises between minimizing power loss
and total cost
Fig 7 a Pareto front of two objective functions with fixed battery sizes
and CCD b Battery chargingdischarging operations in the three selected
solutions on the Pareto front
Algorithm 1 is applied with different number of iterations
K10 30 100to identify weight combination for the Pareto
front shown in Fig 8 The zoomed view shows the algorithm
sampling in the region of maximum change
K 100
K 10
K 30
Fig 8 Pareto front of two objective functions with different iterations K
Stateoftheart multiobjective optimization methods like
evolutionary and swarmbased algorithms are effective but
become costly with larger problems The graphbased opti
mization outperforms these methods offering faster compu
tation and fewer iterations Applied to the IEEE9bus sys
tem it computes the Pareto front with impressive efficiency
for a resolution of K100 it takes only 17 minutes and for
K10 just 799 seconds significantly quicker than traditionalsolvers like IPOPT which take over 150 seconds for the same
task
V CONCLUSIONS
Our study introduces a graphbased multiobjective CCD
method for optimizing storage sizing in an ACgrid linked to
OWFs via MTDC considering power generation and trans
mission controls Results indicate energy storage can shift
demand to offpeak hours reducing costs with larger storage
preferred for higher demand A gradientbased framework
was used to identify the Pareto Front for minimizing cost
and power loss revealing variable optimal energy storage
solutions Future work will apply this CCD to larger systems
and incorporate offshore wind variability demonstrating the
advantages of graphbased optimization
REFERENCES
1 W Musial P Spitsen P Beiter P Duffy M Shields
D Hernando R Hammond M Marquis J King and
S Sriharan Offshore wind market report 2023 edition
2023 Online Available httpswwwenergygoveerewindarticles
offshorewindmarketreport2023edition
2 J A Ansari C Liu and S A Khan Mmc based mtdc grids A
detailed review on issues and challenges for operation control and
protection schemes IEEE Access vol 8 pp 168 154168 165 2020
3 H Sim ao W Powell C Archer and W Kempton The challenge
of integrating offshore wind power in the us electric grid part ii
Simulation of electricity market operations Renewable energy vol
103 pp 418431 2017
4 C Zhao P B Andersen C Træholt and S Hashemi Gridconnected
battery energy storage system a review on application and integra
tion Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews vol 182 p 113400
2023
5 H Zhao Q Wu S J Hu H hua Xu and C N Rasmussen Review
of energy storage system for wind power integration support
Applied Energy vol 137 pp 545553 2015 Online Available
httpsapisemanticscholarorgCorpusID10668291
6 N Halwany D Pagnani M Ledro O E Idehe M Marinelli and
L Kocewiak Optimal sizing of battery energy storage to enable
offshore wind farm black start operation in 21st Wind Solar
Integration Workshop WIW 2022 vol 2022 IET 2022 pp 232
240
7 S Paul A P Nath and Z H Rather A multiobjective planning
framework for coordinated generation from offshore wind farm and
battery energy storage system IEEE Transactions on Sustainable
Energy vol 11 no 4 pp 20872097 2019
8 I N Moghaddam B H Chowdhury and S Mohajeryami Predictive
operation and optimal sizing of battery energy storage with high wind
energy penetration IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics
vol 65 no 8 pp 66866695 2017
9 J T Allison T Guo and Z Han Codesign of an active suspension
using simultaneous dynamic optimization ASME Journal of Mechan
ical Design vol 136 no 8 p 081003 2014
10 A P Deshmukh and J T Allison multidisciplinary dynamic
optimization of horizontal axis wind turbine design Structural and
Multidisciplinary Optimization vol 53 no 1 p 1527 2016
11 H S Yan and G J Yan integrated control and mechanism design
for the variable inputspeed servo fourbar linkages Mechatron
ics vol 19 no 2 p 274285 2009
12 T Liu S Azarm and N Chopra Decentralized multisubsystem co
design optimization using direct collocation and decompositionbased
methods Journal of Mechanical Design vol 142 no 9 2020
13 A Bhattacharya S Vasisht V Adetola S Huang H Sharma and

we convert the problem as weighted average minimization

problem by defining individual objective weights

Figure 7 a compares the Pareto fronts derived from fixed

battery sizes with those obtained using the CCD approach

The dashed lines depict the fronts for fixed sizes intersectingin certain regions indicating that optimal battery sizes for

one objective may be suboptimal for others In contrast the

solid black line representing the CCD approach consistently

remains below the dashed lines signifying a nondominated

solution This indicates that the CCD approach achieves the

lowest total cost for a given level of power loss or the least

power loss for a given total cost

We selected three points on the Pareto front identified

through CCD refer to Fig 7 a The endpoints of the

curve represent optimization for a single objective whereas

the midpoint is the Pareto optimal solution that balances

both objectives Figure 7 b illustrates the battery operation

at these three points When minimizing power loss battery

usage is highest conversely it is lowest when minimizing

total cost The Pareto optimal solution operates the battery

at a level that compromises between minimizing power loss

and total cost

Fig 7 a Pareto front of two objective functions with fixed battery sizes

and CCD b Battery chargingdischarging operations in the three selected

solutions on the Pareto front

Algorithm 1 is applied with different number of iterations

K10 30 100to identify weight combination for the Pareto

front shown in Fig 8 The zoomed view shows the algorithm

sampling in the region of maximum change

K 100

K 10

K 30

Fig 8 Pareto front of two objective functions with different iterations K

Stateoftheart multiobjective optimization methods like

evolutionary and swarmbased algorithms are effective but

become costly with larger problems The graphbased opti

mization outperforms these methods offering faster compu

tation and fewer iterations Applied to the IEEE9bus sys

tem it computes the Pareto front with impressive efficiency

for a resolution of K100 it takes only 17 minutes and for

K10 just 799 seconds significantly quicker than traditionalsolvers like IPOPT which take over 150 seconds for the same

task

V CONCLUSIONS

Our study introduces a graphbased multiobjective CCD

method for optimizing storage sizing in an ACgrid linked to

OWFs via MTDC considering power generation and trans

mission controls Results indicate energy storage can shift

demand to offpeak hours reducing costs with larger storage

preferred for higher demand A gradientbased framework

was used to identify the Pareto Front for minimizing cost

and power loss revealing variable optimal energy storage

solutions Future work will apply this CCD to larger systems

and incorporate offshore wind variability demonstrating the

advantages of graphbased optimization

REFERENCES

1 W Musial P Spitsen P Beiter P Duffy M Shields

D Hernando R Hammond M Marquis J King and

S Sriharan Offshore wind market report 2023 edition

2023 Online Available httpswwwenergygoveerewindarticles

offshorewindmarketreport2023edition

2 J A Ansari C Liu and S A Khan Mmc based mtdc grids A

detailed review on issues and challenges for operation control and

protection schemes IEEE Access vol 8 pp 168 154168 165 2020

3 H Sim ao W Powell C Archer and W Kempton The challenge

of integrating offshore wind power in the us electric grid part ii

Simulation of electricity market operations Renewable energy vol

103 pp 418431 2017

4 C Zhao P B Andersen C Træholt and S Hashemi Gridconnected

battery energy storage system a review on application and integra

tion Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews vol 182 p 113400

2023

5 H Zhao Q Wu S J Hu H hua Xu and C N Rasmussen Review

of energy storage system for wind power integration support

Applied Energy vol 137 pp 545553 2015 Online Available

httpsapisemanticscholarorgCorpusID10668291

6 N Halwany D Pagnani M Ledro O E Idehe M Marinelli and

L Kocewiak Optimal sizing of battery energy storage to enable

offshore wind farm black start operation in 21st Wind Solar

Integration Workshop WIW 2022 vol 2022 IET 2022 pp 232

240

7 S Paul A P Nath and Z H Rather A multiobjective planning

framework for coordinated generation from offshore wind farm and

battery energy storage system IEEE Transactions on Sustainable

Energy vol 11 no 4 pp 20872097 2019

8 I N Moghaddam B H Chowdhury and S Mohajeryami Predictive

operation and optimal sizing of battery energy storage with high wind

energy penetration IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics

vol 65 no 8 pp 66866695 2017

9 J T Allison T Guo and Z Han Codesign of an active suspension

using simultaneous dynamic optimization ASME Journal of Mechan

ical Design vol 136 no 8 p 081003 2014

10 A P Deshmukh and J T Allison multidisciplinary dynamic

optimization of horizontal axis wind turbine design Structural and

Multidisciplinary Optimization vol 53 no 1 p 1527 2016

11 H S Yan and G J Yan integrated control and mechanism design

for the variable inputspeed servo fourbar linkages Mechatron

ics vol 19 no 2 p 274285 2009

12 T Liu S Azarm and N Chopra Decentralized multisubsystem co

design optimization using direct collocation and decompositionbased

methods Journal of Mechanical Design vol 142 no 9 2020

13 A Bhattacharya S Vasisht V Adetola S Huang H Sharma and