Ijsred V2i2p3

International Journal of Scientific Research and Engineering Development-– Volume 2 Issue 1, Mar-Apr 2019
Available at www.ijsred.com
RESEARCH ARTICLE OPEN ACCESS
Review of Integrated Thermal Energy Storage with

Cogeneration System
Jaspal Singh1, Ms.Maninder2, Mr. Inderjit Singh3
M.Tech Scholar (EE)1 ,A.P (EE)2,3
SBSSTC Ferozepur
ABSTRACT:
The use of Combined Heat and Power (CHP) with an overall effectiveness from 70 to 90% is one of the most
effective solutions to minimize the energy utilization. Mainly caused by interdependence of the power as well
as heat in these systems, the optimal operation of CHP systems is a composite optimization issue that requires
powerful solutions. This paper discourse the optimal day-ahead scheduling of CHP units with Thermal Storage
Systems (TSSs). Fundamentally, the optimal scheduling of CHP units problemis a complex optimization
problem with innumerable stochastic besides deterministic variables. The initial stage models behavior of
operating parameters and to minimizes the operation costs or price meantime the second stage examine the
system's Thermal Storage Systems scenarios. The fruitfulness of the proposed algorithm has been examined.
This paper illustrates Firefly algorithm (FA) to probe CHPED with Thermal Storage Systems with bounded
feasible operating region. The main prospective of this technique is that it proper the fairness between local and
global search. A comparative investigation of the FA with (RCGA), (NSGAII), (SPEA2) is introduced.
Key words: Thermal Storage Systems (TSSs), TSS Modelling, Cost Function,CHP Unit Firefly Algorithm
(FA).
1. INTRODUCTION
Thermal energy storage (TES) is obtained with various different technologies. Depending on the
particular technology, it permits extra thermal energy to be stored and used hours, days, or months later, at
scales ranging from individual process, building, multiuser-building, district, town, or region. Examples of
utilization are the balancing of energy demand between daytime and nighttime, storing summer heat for
winter heating, or winter cold for summer air conditioning. Storage media include water or ice-slush tanks,
masses of native earth or bedrock executed with heat exchangers by means of boreholes,
deep aquifers contained between impermeable strata; shallow, lined pits filled with gravel and water and
insulated at the top.
Figure 1.1
ISSN : 2581-7175 ©IJSRED: All Rights are Reserved Page 17

A fleeting inspection into the energy storage approach currently available for the integration of oscillating
renewable energy was execute [1,2]. These incorporate Pumped Hydroelectric Energy Storage (PHES),
,,Underground Pumped Hydroelectric Energy Storage (UPHES), Battery Energy Storage (BES), Flow Battery
Energy Storage (FBES), Compressed Air Energy Storage (CAES), Flywheel Energy Storage (FES), Thermal
Energy Storage (TES), Supercapacitor Energy Storage (SCES), Superconducting Magnetic Energy Storage
(SMES), Hydrogen Energy Storage System (HESS) and Electric Vehicles (EVs).It is challenge to achieve
reliable and inexpensive electricity in mature energy market. The exhaustion of fossil fuel reserves and
advancement in technology development i.e. thermal energy storage and CHP unit is to reduced emission and
fuel cost.
The main objectives of the paper are:
1) Combined heat and power economic dispatch with scheduling of thermal storage system using
continuous and binary particle swarm optimization.
2) The minimization of fuel cost of thermal, CHP and heat generating units with scheduling of thermal
energy storage units to fulfill the load demand and satisfying inequality constraints.
3) The simulation is carried out on test system consisting of CHP, thermal, heat and heat storage units for
different load. Optimization technique based on swarm intelligent algorithm is used for optimization the
problem and simulation results have been computed in FORTRAN 90.
2. OVERVIEW
Vitality stockpiling advancements are significant parts in most vitality frameworks and could be a vital
apparatus in accomplishing a low-carbon future. These advancements take into account the decoupling of
vitality free market activity, generally providing a profitable asset to framework administrators. There are
numerous situations where vitality stockpiling organization is focused or close aggressive in the present vitality
framework. In any case, administrative and economic situations are habitually poorly prepared to remunerate
capacity for the suite of administrations that it can give. Moreover, a few innovations are still excessively costly
relative, making it impossible to other contending advancements (e.g. adaptable age and new transmission lines
in power frameworks). One of the key objectives of this new roadmap is to comprehend and communicate the
value of energy storage to energy system stakeholders. This will contain concepts that discourse the current
status of deployment and predicted evolution in the context of current and future energy system requires by
using a “systems perspective” as compared to looking at storage technologies in isolation.
3. Energy Technology Perspectives 2014 vision for electricity storage

Figure 1.2
Three frameworks for electricity storage deployment The ETP 2DS scenario distributeas a reference case,
governing the capacity expansion of power generation technologies at this moment to 2050 to meet low-carbon
intentions. The pliability or flexibility of the resulting system is then investigated using a linear dispatch model
where the overall price of operating the electrical system is dwindled by determining the dispatch of generation
as well as by storage technologies during every hour in a given year. This approach allows a detailed
assessment of the storage requirement within the power generation fleet from the 2DS under a span of
conditions with other technologies competitive to provide the similar services. Full detail on the modeling and
scenario expectation can be found in Annex B. The 2DS assume the cost of advancements providing frequently
capacity for arbitrage applications in 2050 will be that of the base cost and cost of the innovation giving this
administration these days: PSH. In the 'leap forward' situation, forceful drops in particular vitality (per MWh)
likewise control limit (per MW) stockpiling costs encourage a raising sending of capacity.
Figure 1.3
4. Thermal storage system (TSS) modeling

Thermal storage system (TSS) modeling and constraints are presented in this section. The constraints of thermal
storage system include the limits of thermal storage which is like an ESS constraints.
- Thermal storage limits in each period:
H storage (t ) = HCAP storage ∀ t (1)
Thermal storage maximal discharge limits:
HD storage (t ) ≤ (0.4 × HCAPstorage) × X (t ) ∀ t , X ∈ {0,1} (2)
Thermal storage maximal charge limits:
HC storage (t ) ≤ ( HCAPstorage) × Y (t ) ∀ t , Y ∈ {0,1} (3)
The thermal storage cannot charge and discharge at the same
time in each time slice:
X (t ) + Y (t ) ≤ 1 ∀ t , Y and X ∈ {0,1} (4)
Thermal storage maximal discharge limits in each period “t’’, considering the battery state storage in period t-1:
HD storage (t ) − H storage (t − 1) ≤ 0 ∀ t (5)
Thermal storage maximal charge limits in each period ‘‘t’’, considering the battery state storage in period t-1:
HC storage (t ) − H storage (t − 1) ≤ HCAPstorage ∀ t (6)
State balance of the thermal storage:
H storage (t ) = H storage (t − 1) − HD storage (t ) + HC storage (t − 1) ∀ t (7)
Initial state of the thermal storage:
HD storage (t = 0) ≤ (0.4 × HCAPstorage) ∀ t (8)
Thermal power balance:
HE Demand (t ) = H g (t ) − HDstorage (t ) − HC storage (t ) ∀ t (9)

5. Cost Function
The problem in the proposed case includes conventional power units, conventional heat units and cogeneration
units. Convex input-output operational curves for conventional power and heat only units are considered which
indicate their cost functions will be convex too. Thus, given problem have combined heat and power units with
convex quadratic cost functions. The cost function for each unit individually can be obtained by multiplying
input-output curve with fuel cost burned in that unit. Thus, cost function can be represented as the sum of cost
functions for all the units separately as given below:
C (H ) = α + β H + γ H 2
b b b b b b b (13)
2
C (P ) = α + β P + γ P
e e e e e e e (14)
2 2
C (P ,H )=α +β P +λ P +δ H +ψ H +ξ P H
chp chp chp chp chp chp chp chp chp chp chp chp chp chp chp
(15)
E CHP B
F(X) = ∑C e (Pe ) + ∑ C (P ,H ) + ∑C ( H )
e =1 chp =1 chp chp chp b =1 b b
(16)
where,
e, b, chp are the indices of power only units, heat only units and combined heat and power units
respectively and E, B, CHP are the number of conventional power units, conventional heat units and
combined heat and power units.
6. COMBINED HEAT AND POWER UNIT
CHP unit is an emerging technology and used in an effective manner for an economic operation. The generation
of heat and power from running CHP plants based on gas turbine and the steam turbine are following the
feasible region of operation (FOR). The interdependence of power and heat is illustrated in Fig. 1.The feasible
limits of the heat and power generation from CHP plants are given as:
G j( H j )U t,j ≤ Gt,j ≤ G j( H j )Ut,j t ∀T , j ∀Nc (17)
H j( G j )Ut,j ≤ Ht,j ≤ H j( G j )Ut,j t ∀T , j ∀Nc (18)

(a) (b)
Power (MW)
Gce
FOR
Gcb
Power (MW)
Power (MW)
H c,b
Heat (Mwth) Heat (MWth) Heat (MWth)
H c,e
Figure 1: Feasible operating region for Figure 2: The operating mode of CHP unit(a) Extraction mode and
generation of heat and power. (b) Back-pressure mode.
The modelling of dual-mode CHP plant is according to backpressure and extraction mode. The graphical
representation of power and heat (GH)-charts [4] for dual-mode CHP units is illustrated in Fig. 2. The
maximum power generated by the extraction mode is typically two to three times the power generated by the
backpressure mode, whereas the maximum heat generation is greater as compared to extraction mode and it is
illustrated in Fig. 2(a) and 2(b). This CHP plant has reached to the maximum generation output in less than 30
minutes. Moreover, large scale combined-cycle units are world leading with regard to lower capital costs, high
efficiencies, and short start-up times. The mathematical formulation of back-pressure and extraction mode is
given below:
A. Back-pressure mode:The generation of Gj and Hj during back-pressure mode is characterized by a fixed
ratio of Gj and Hj, which is expressed as:
G t , j = R bj H t , j t ∀T , j ∀Nc (19)
The heat and power generation is restricted by minimum and extreme limit, which is followed as:
G bj = R bj H bj t ∀T , j ∀Nc (20)
G bj = R bj H bj t ∀T , j ∀Nc (21)
The fuel consumption of CHP unit is a linear function of the heat and power output and it is expressed as:
F(Gt,j Ht,jUt,j ) = ψ qj Ht,jUt,j + ψ pj Gt,jUt,j t ∀T , j ∀Nc (22)
The fuel consumption from the CHP unit is follow Eq. 6 and limit on fuel consumption is given as:
F bjU t,j ≤ F t,j ≤ F bjU t,j t ∀T , j ∀Nc (23)

The fuel consumption of CHP unit must satisfy the ramping up and down limit at each subinterval, which is
expressed as:
RFD j ≤ F t,j − F(t −1),j ≤ RFU j t ∀T , j ∀Nc (24)
B. Extraction mode: This operating mode of cogeneration unit provides more flexibility than back-pressure
mode by relaxing the back-pressure constraints and the ratio of Gj and Hj is discussed as:
G t,j ≥ R e H t,j t ∀T , j ∀Nc (25)
j
Flexibility is increased due to variable ratio of Gj and Hj. Hence, it is useful for power sector to modify Hj and
Gj output to meet the demand.
G ej = R bj H ej t ∀T , j ∀Nc (26)
G ej = R bj H ej t ∀T , j ∀Nc (27)
F ejU t,j ≤ F t,j ≤ F ej U t,j t ∀T , j ∀Nc (28)
In this paper, this dual-mode CHP unit is investigated in the combined system. CHP unit operating in the
extraction and backpressure mode is given a valuable solution at a time when the penetration level of heat
demand of the system is higher or lower, regarding of current conditions. Moreover, the benefit of this model is
to take care of the fuel consumption limit of the CHP unit. This realistic model is helpful for utility planner to
known well qualified decisions before participating in the market. The CHP model, enabling short start up
regarding the generation output is leading to more flexibility in production planning. The main idea of this
paper is to obtain energy generation from the CHP units in such a way that GENCO’s profit is maximized for
the schedule horizon while satisfying all constraints.
7. FIREFLY ALGORITHM
Firefly algorithm has been effectively carryout to explain distinctive power frameworks difficulties. Economic
dispatch issue has been settled utilizing firefly calculation and its answer gives predominant outcome then other
optimization calculation. In, firefly algorithm has been utilized in recurrence control in combined cycle gas
turbine control plant for improvement of controller picks up. FA is one of the ongoing swarm intelligence
techniques created by Yang [3,2] in 2008 and is a sort of stochastic, nature-propelled, meta-heuristiccalculation
that can be connected for taking care of the hardest optimization issues (additionally NPdifficult issues). This
algorithm has a place with stochastic calculations. This implies it utilizes a kind a sort of randomization via
looking for an arrangement of arrangements. It is motivated by the flashing lights of fireflies in nature. Heuristic
signifies 'to find' or 'to find arrangements by experimentation'.
FireflyAlgorithm
Objective functionf(x),x=(x1. . .xd)

Initializeapopulationoffirefliesxi (i=1,2 . . .n)
Definelightabsorptioncoefficient
While(t<MaxGeneration)
fori=1:nallnfireflies
Forj=1:iallnfireflies
LightintensityIiatxiisdeterminedbyf(xi)
If(Ij>Ii)
Movefireflyitowardsjinallddimensions
Endif
Attractiveness varieswithdistancerviaexp
[-γr2]
Evaluatenewsolutionsandupdatelightintensity
Endforj
Endfori
Rankthefirefliesandfindthecurrentbest
Endwhile
Postprocessresultsandvisualization
8. RESULTS
The results are obtained by implemented the algorithm by using FORTRAN-90 on personal computer (1.66
GHz, Pentium-IV, with 512 MB RAM PC). The algorithms are operated for 100 individuals and 200 iterations
for setting of HFA control parameters. In this paper, best, worst and mean results of applying algorithms for
different trial along with their computation time are presented. The presented method applied to the different
test system to show the effectiveness of the proposed method. After many trails of proposed method parameter
set.

International Journal of Scientific Research and Engineering Development-– Volume 2 Issue 1,
1 Mar-Apr 2019
Fig 2: Feasible operating region of units (5 of test system 1), (14 and 16 of test system 2) and (28, 30, 34 and 36
of test system 3)
Fig 3: Feasible operating region of units (6 of test system 1), (15 and 17 of test system 2) and (27, 29, 33 and 35
of test system 3)

International Journal of Scientific Research and Engineering Development-– Volume 2 Issue 1,
1 Mar-Apr 2019
Fig 4: Feasible operating region of units (18 of test system 2) and (31 and 37 of test system 3)
Fig 5: Feasible operatingg region of units (19 of test system 2) and (32 and 38 of test system 3)

Parameter settings
Initialization is good in FA than pso. Hcso is better Many trails or run of program on different value of
population and society. Also changing the value of acceration coefficient (C1, C2 , C3, C4, C5). By varying the
value of society or increasing beyond range result in diteration of result. For proper exploration and explotation
(ns) value setting is important. No of iteration is set. Interia weight is set .9 - .4. In this proposed algorithm
based on HFA is carried out to solve CHPED. To find the stable and optimal solution, program is run for
different value of C1 , C2, C3, C4, wmax, wmin, ITmax and C factor The control parameter of FA and HFA are
decided by number of trails performed to set different values to achieve optimum solution. For different value
of swarm size , society, acceleration coefficients best result obtained from the parameter given below(table 1).
after 30 trails For the complex problem like CHP including the transmission losses and complex equality and
inequality constraints with changes the swarm size above or below 60 result in worst solution. Trails on
different the acceleration coefficients optimum solution set as parameter(table 1). For HFA search factor() and
constriction factor are decided.
Table 1
Parameter setting of FA and HFA algorithms
Parameter
FA HFA
Swarm size(M) 60 60
Number of society (Ns) 5 5
Inertia weight Wmax = 0.9, wmin = 0.4 Wmax = 0.9, wmin = 0.4
Acceleration CL = 2, CSL1 = 0.5, CSL2 = .5, CSM1 CL = 2, CSL1 = 0.5, CSL2 = .5, CSM1 = 0.25,
coefficients = 0.25, CSM2 = 0.75, CSM2 = 0.75
Acceleration CSL1 =2.05, CSL2 = 2.05, CSM1 = 2.05, CSM2
coefficients for HCSO = 2.05
Test system 1:
The test system consists of 7 units in which four are power generation units, two units are cogeneration units
and one is heat unit. For two cogeneration units the feasible operating region is shown in Fig (----).The feasible
operating reason equations for test systems 1 of cogeneration units are as follows:
Test system 1:
1.781914894 x h5 – p5 - 105.7446809 ≤ 0
0.1777777784 x h5 + p5 – 247.0 ≤ 0
- 0.169847328 x h5 - p5 + 98.8 ≤ 0

1.158415842 x h6 - p6 - 46.88118818 ≤ 0
0.151162791 x h6 + p6 – 130.6976744 ≤ 0
-0.067681895 x h6 - p6 + 45.07614213 ≤ 0
The parameters of test system 1 is shown in Table 1 which include the limits of power generation of
conventional unit, heat and active power of cogeneration unit and heat production of heat unit and also shows
the power and heat coefficient of conventional, cogeneration and heat units. The total demand of heat and
power are 150MWth and 600MW respectively.Table 2. shows the result obtained by applying he proposed
HCSO algorithm and their comparisons with PSO[], EP[], DE[], RCGE[], BCO[], CPSO[], TVAC-PSO[],
TLBO[], OTLBO[] and FA[]. It is observed from Table 3. that the cost obtained by applying the proposed
method HFA is much less than as compared to previously proposed best result of PSO(), EP(), DE(), RCGE(),
BCO(), CPSO(), TVAC-PSO(), TLBO() and OTLBO().
9. CONCLUSIONS
This paper proposes a new technique HCSO for solving CHPED problems. All the complications present in
CHPED problems can be handled effectively by HCSO. The results clearly illustrate its effectiveness. Proposed
technique HCSO is not only cost efficient but also it gives better results in terms of best fuel cost, computational
time and power loss. A new hybrid civilized swarm optimization approach is developed by embedding
constriction based particle swarm with society-civilization algorithm to solve complex combined heat and
power economic dispatch. A set of CHPED problems are solved by CSO and HCSO algorithms. The PSO
algorithms show poor performance, whereas the CSO is very effective in giving quality solutions consistently
for CHPED problems with less computational time. The HCSO outperforms the previous approaches and has
the following merits: efficient searching ability in the multi-minima environment; superior robustness than the
previousmethods; lesscomputational effort; comparable performance with mathematical programming approach
and applicability to large-scale systems. .Numerical results from the two test systems and comparative analysis
with previous approaches indicate the following advantages of CSO and HCSO. Perfect balance between global
and local search.Ability to produce highly optimal cost in more robust manner with less computational time
than the previous approaches.A meta-heuristic algorithm i.e. firefly algorithm is used for solving the CHPED
has been proposed. Complication of the CHPED problem is constraint handling process due to the mutual
dependencies of heat and power and multi-demand system. The proposed method in this work efficiently search
and exploit the optimal solutions in the suggested economic dispatch problem. Also, the FA effectively handles
the feasible region constraints. The algorithm integrates has the merits of global search and local search.
Euclidean distance based penalty factor is added to the objective function value for the purpose of well
satisfaction and handling of constraints regarding feasible operating region. Numerical results indicate that the
proposed algorithm is more advantageous and effective for solving the CHPED with thermal energy storage
system problem than all other previous techniques especially in case of the application to large-scale systems.
REFERENCES
[1] (International Energy Agency), International Low-Carbon Energy Technology Platform, Strategic and
Committee on Energy Research and Technology Cross-Cutting Workshop “Energy Storage Issues
[2] Energy Conservation through Energy Storage (ECES)

[3] Hauer, A., Storage Technology Issues and Opportunities,http://www.iea-eces.org/fiInnoStock 2012, May
2012, Lleida, Spain.
[4] Kroenauer, A., E. Laevemann, A. Hauer, Mobileles/090525_broschuere_eces.pdf.Opportunities”, 15
February 2011, Paris. France.Programme, International Energy Agency, Brochure: Recovery, International
Conference on Energy Storage, Sorption Heat Storage in Industrial Waste Heat.

Ijsred V2i2p3

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Ijsred V2i2p3

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Ijsred V2i2p3

Uploaded by

Copyright:

International Journal of Scientific Research and Engineering Development-– Volume 2 Issue 1, Mar-Apr 2019

Review of Integrated Thermal Energy Storage with

ISSN : 2581-7175 ©IJSRED: All Rights are Reserved Page 17

3. Energy Technology Perspectives 2014 vision for electricity storage

ISSN : 2581-7175 ©IJSRED: All Rights are Reserved Page 18

4. Thermal storage system (TSS) modeling

- Thermal storage limits in each period:

H storage (t ) = HCAP storage ∀ t (1)

Thermal storage maximal discharge limits:

HD storage (t ) ≤ (0.4 × HCAPstorage) × X (t ) ∀ t , X ∈ {0,1} (2)

Thermal storage maximal charge limits:

HC storage (t ) ≤ ( HCAPstorage) × Y (t ) ∀ t , Y ∈ {0,1} (3)

The thermal storage cannot charge and discharge at the same

time in each time slice:

X (t ) + Y (t ) ≤ 1 ∀ t , Y and X ∈ {0,1} (4)

HD storage (t ) − H storage (t − 1) ≤ 0 ∀ t (5)

HC storage (t ) − H storage (t − 1) ≤ HCAPstorage ∀ t (6)

State balance of the thermal storage:

H storage (t ) = H storage (t − 1) − HD storage (t ) + HC storage (t − 1) ∀ t (7)

Initial state of the thermal storage:

HD storage (t = 0) ≤ (0.4 × HCAPstorage) ∀ t (8)

Thermal power balance:

HE Demand (t ) = H g (t ) − HDstorage (t ) − HC storage (t ) ∀ t (9)

ISSN : 2581-7175 ©IJSRED: All Rights are Reserved Page 20

combined heat and power units.

6. COMBINED HEAT AND POWER UNIT

H j( G j )Ut,j ≤ Ht,j ≤ H j( G j )Ut,j t ∀T , j ∀Nc (18)

ISSN : 2581-7175 ©IJSRED: All Rights are Reserved Page 21

F bjU t,j ≤ F t,j ≤ F bjU t,j t ∀T , j ∀Nc (23)

ISSN : 2581-7175 ©IJSRED: All Rights are Reserved Page 22

F ejU t,j ≤ F t,j ≤ F ej U t,j t ∀T , j ∀Nc (28)

Objective functionf(x),x=(x1. . .xd)

ISSN : 2581-7175 ©IJSRED: All Rights are Reserved Page 23

Initializeapopulationoffirefliesxi (i=1,2 . . .n)

ISSN : 2581-7175 ©IJSRED: All Rights are Reserved Page 24

ISSN : 2581-7175 ©IJSRED: All Rights are Reserved Page 25

ISSN : 2581-7175 ©IJSRED: All Rights are Reserved Page 26

ISSN : 2581-7175 ©IJSRED: All Rights are Reserved Page 27

ISSN : 2581-7175 ©IJSRED: All Rights are Reserved Page 28

ISSN : 2581-7175 ©IJSRED: All Rights are Reserved Page 29

You might also like