CPES Testing with mosaik: Co-Simulation Planning, Execution and Analysis
Source abstract
Abstract
The complex nature of cyber-physical energy systems (CPES) makes systematic testing of new technologies for these setups challenging. Co-simulation has been identified as an efficient and flexible test approach that allows consideration of interdisciplinary dynamic interactions. However, basic coupling of simulation models alone fails to account for many of the challenges of simulation-based multi-domain testing such as expert collaboration in test planning. This paper illustrates an extended CPES test environment based on the co-simulation framework mosaik. The environment contains capabilities for simulation planning, uncertainty quantification and the development of multi-agent systems. An application case involving virtual power plant control is used to demonstrate the platform’s features. Future extensibility of the highly modular test environment is outlined.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Simulation Techniques and Applications · Smart Grid Security and Resilience · Modeling and Simulation Systems
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
OFFIS—Institute for Information Technology, Escherweg 2, 26121 Oldenburg, Germany
Department of Computer Science, University of Oldenburg, Ammerländer Heerstraße 114-118, 26129 Oldenburg, Germany
Group Energy Informatics, Leibniz University Hannover, Appelstraße 9a, 30167 Hannover, Germany
Funding
Horizon 2020 Framework Programme · Bundesministerium für Wirtschaft und Energie
References (48)
Show source-provided references
1. Designing Dependable and Sustainable Smart Grids—How to Apply Algorithm Engineering to Distributed Control in Power Systems10.1016/j.envsoft.2013.12.003 ↗
2. Cosimulation of Intelligent Power Systems: Fundamentals, Software Architecture, Numerics, and Coupling10.1109/MIE.2016.2639825 ↗
3. Applied co-simulation of intelligent power systems: implementation, usage, examples10.1109/MIE.2017.2671198 ↗
4. Blochwitz, T., Otter, M., Arnold, M., Bausch, C., Clauß, C., Elmqvist, H., Junghanns, A., Mauss, J., Monteiro, M., and Neidhold, T. (2011, January 20–22). The Functional Mockup Interface for Tool independent Exchange of Simulation Models. Proceedings of the 8th International Modelica Conference, Dresden, Germany.10.3384/ecp11063105 ↗
5. Dahmann, J.S., Fujimoto, R.M., and Weatherly, R.M. (1997, January 7–10). The Department of Defense High Level Architecture. Proceedings of the 1997 Winter Simulation Conference, Atlanta, GA, USA.10.1145/268437.268465 ↗
6. Neema, H., Sztipanovits, J., Burns, M., and Griffor, E. (2016, January 11). C2WT-TE: A Model-Based Open Platform for Integrated Simulations of Transactive Smart Grids. Proceedings of the Workshop on Modeling and Simulation of Cyber-Physical Energy Systems (MSCPES), Vienna, Austria.10.1109/MSCPES.2016.7480218 ↗
7. Davis, J., Goel, M., Hylands, C., Kienhuis, B., Lee, E.A., Liu, J., Liu, X., Muliadi, L., Neuendorffer, S., and Reekie, J. (1999). Overview of the Ptolemy Project, University of California. Technical Report, ERL Technical Report UCB/ERL.
8. Co-simulation of building energy and control systems with the Building Controls Virtual Test Bed10.1080/19401493.2010.518631 ↗
9. Galtier, V., Vialle, S., Dad, C., Tavella, J.P., Lam-Yee-Mui, J.P., and Plessis, G. (2015, January 12–15). FMI-based distributed multi-simulation with DACCOSIM. Proceedings of the Symposium on Theory of Modeling & Simulation: DEVS Integrative M&S Symposium. Society for Computer Simulation International, Alexandria, VA, USA.
10. Vaubourg, J., Presse, Y., Camus, B., Bourjot, C., Ciarletta, L., Chevrier, V., Tavella, J.P., and Morais, H. (2015, January 3–5). Multi-agent multi-model simulation of smart grids in the MS4SG project. Proceedings of the International Conference on Practical Applications of Agents and Multi-Agent Systems, Salamanca, Spain.10.1007/978-3-319-18944-4_20 ↗
11. Marten, F., Vogt, M., Widdel, M., Wickert, M., Meinl, A., Nigge-Uricher, M., and Töbermann, J.C. (2015, January 10–12). Real-time simulation of Distributed Generators, for testing a Virtual Power Plant software. Proceedings of the E-World Energy & Water, Essen, Germany.
12. Faschang, M., Kupzog, F., Mosshammer, R., and Einfalt, A. (2013, January 10–13). Rapid Control Prototyping Platform for Networked Smart Grid Systems. Proceedings of the Annual Conference of the IEEE Industrial Electronics Society, Vienna, Austria.10.1109/IECON.2013.6700500 ↗
13. Schlögl, F., Rohjans, S., Lehnhoff, S., Velasquez, J., Steinbrink, C., and Palensky, P. (2015, January 8–11). Towards a Classification Scheme for Co-Simulation Approaches in Energy Systems. Proceedings of the International Symposium on Smart Electric Distribution Systems and Technologies (EDST), Vienna, Austria.10.1109/SEDST.2015.7315262 ↗
14. A survey and statistical analysis of smart grid co-simulations10.1016/j.apenergy.2018.03.123 ↗
15. Schütte, S., and Sonnenschein, M. (2012, January 9–12). Mosaik—Scalable smart grid scenario specification. Proceedings of the 2012 Winter Simulation Conference, Berlin, Germany.10.1109/WSC.2012.6464986 ↗
16. Agent-Based Computational Models And Generative Social Science10.1002/(SICI)1099-0526(199905/06)4:5<41::AID-CPLX9>3.0.CO;2-F ↗
17. Klügl, F., and Rindsfüser, G. (2007, January 24–26). Large-Scale Agent-Based Pedestrian Simulation. Proceedings of the 5th German Conference on Multiagent System Technologies (MATES 2007), Leipzig, Germany.
18. Multi-Agent Systems for Power Engineering Applications—Part I: Concepts, Approaches, and Technical Challenges10.1109/TPWRS.2007.908471 ↗
19. MATPOWER: Steady-state operations, planning, and analysis tools for power systems research and education10.1109/TPWRS.2010.2051168 ↗
20. Lehnhoff, S., Nannen, O., Rohjans, S., Schlögl, F., Dalhues, S., Robitzky, L., Hager, U., and Rehtanz, C. (2015, January 13). Exchangeability of power flow simulators in smart grid co-simulations with mosaik. Proceedings of the 2015 Workshop on Modeling and Simulation of Cyber-Physical Energy Systems (MSCPES), Seattle, WA, USA.10.1109/MSCPES.2015.7115410 ↗
21. Büscher, M., Claassen, A., Kube, M., Lehnhoff, S., Piech, K., Rohjans, S., Scherfke, S., Steinbrink, C., Velasquez, J., and Tempez, F. (2014, January 3–6). Integrated Smart Grid simulations for generic automation architectures with RT-LAB and mosaik. Proceedings of the 2014 IEEE International Conference on Smart Grid Communications (SmartGridComm), Venice, Italy.10.1109/SmartGridComm.2014.7007645 ↗
22. Grunwald, A., Dieckhoff, C., Fischedick, M., Höffler, F., Mayer, C., and Weimer-Jehle, W. (2016). Consulting With Energy Scenarios: Requirements for Scientific Policy Advice, acatech—National Academy of Science and Engineering.
23. Donnellan, B., Klein, C., Helfert, M., Gusikhin, O., and Pascoal, A. (2019). Towards an Integrated Development and Sustainability Evaluation of Energy Scenarios Assisted by Automated Information Exchange. Smart Cities, Green Technologies, and Intelligent Transport Systems, Springer International Publishing.10.1007/978-3-030-02907-4 ↗
24. Schwarz, J.S., and Lehnhoff, S. (2018, January 12–16). Ontology-Based Development of Smart Grid Co-Simulation Scenarios. Proceedings of the EKAW 2018 Posters and Demonstrations Session (EKAW-PD 2018), Nancy, France.
25. Semantic Wikipedia10.1016/j.websem.2007.09.001 ↗
26. Magnusson, S.E. (1997). Uncertainty Analysis: Identification, Quantification And Propagation, Department of Fire Safety Engineering, Lund Institute of Technology, Lund University.
27. Different methods are needed to propagate ignorance and variability10.1016/S0951-8320(96)00071-3 ↗
28. Bruns, M., and Paredis, C.J.J. (2006, January 10–13). Numerical Methods for Propagating Imprecise Uncertainty. Proceedings of the ASME Design Engineering Technical Conferences and Computers and Information Engineering Conference, Philadelphia, PA, USA.10.1115/DETC2006-99237 ↗
29. Steinbrink, C. (2017). A Non-Intrusive Uncertainty Quantification System for Modular Smart Grid Co-Simulation. [Ph.D. Thesis, Carl-von-Ossietzky Universität Oldenburg].
30. Chaospy: An open source tool for designing methods of uncertainty quantification10.1016/j.jocs.2015.08.008 ↗
31. Steinbrink, C., and Lehnhoff, S. (2016, January 11). Quantifying Probabilistic Uncertainty in Smart Grid. Proceedings of the Workshop on Modeling and Simulation of Cyber-Physical Energy Systems (MSCPES), Vienna, Austria.10.1109/MSCPES.2016.7480222 ↗
32. Wooldridge, M. (2002). An Introduction to MultiAgent Systems, John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
33. Nieße, A., Beer, S., Bremer, J., Hinrichs, C., Lünsdorf, O., and Sonnenschein, M. (2014, January 7–10). Conjoint Dynamic Aggregation and Scheduling Methods for Dynamic Virtual Power Plants. Proceedings of the 2014 Federated Conference on Computer Science and Information Systems, Warsaw, Poland.10.15439/2014F76 ↗
34. Lehnhoff, S., Klingenberg, T., Blank, M., Calabria, M., and Schumacher, W. (2013, January 14). Distributed Coalitions for Reliable and Stable Provision of Frequency Response Reserve—An Agent-based Approach for Smart Distribution Grids. Proceedings of the IEEE International Workshop on Intelligent Energy Systems, Vienna, Austria.10.1109/IWIES.2013.6698554 ↗
35. Erlemeyer, F., Schmid, D., Rehtanz, C., Lüers, B., and Lehnhoff, S. (2019, January 3–6). Coordination and live testing of flexibility on distribution grid level. Proceedings of the CIRED 25th International Conference on Electricity Distribution, Madrid, Spain. submitted.
36. Nieße, A., and Tröschel, M. (2016, January 3–5). Controlled Self-Organization in Smart Grids. Proceedings of the 2016 IEEE International Symposium on Systems Engineering (ISSE), Edinburgh, UK.
37. A distributed combinatorial optimisation heuristic for the scheduling of energy resources represented by self-interested agents10.1504/IJBIC.2017.085895 ↗
38. Pandapower-an open source Python tool for convenient modeling, analysis and optimization of electric power systems10.1109/TPWRS.2018.2829021 ↗
39. Towards Generalized Co-simulation of Urban Energy Systems10.1016/j.proeng.2017.07.092 ↗
40. Chromik, J.J., Remke, A., and Haverkort, B.R. (2017). A Testbed for locally Monitoring SCADA Networks in Smart Grids. Energy-Open.10.1186/s42162-018-0058-7 ↗
41. Mirz, M., Razik, L., Dinkelbach, J., Tokel, H.A., Alirezaei, G., Mathar, R., and Monti, A. (2018). A Cosimulation Architecture for Power System, Communication, and Market in the Smart Grid. Complexity, 2018.10.1155/2018/7154031 ↗
42. Lessons learned from CPES co-simulation with distributed, heterogeneous systems10.1186/s42162-018-0042-2 ↗
43. Hofmann, L., and Sonnenschein, M. (2015). Smart Nord—Final Report, Hartmann GmbH.
44. Wissing, C. (2015). Marktbasiertes Redispatch mit Flexibilitäten von Netznutzern für das Verteilnetz. [Ph.D. Thesis, Carl von Ossitzky Universität Oldenburg].
45. Kintzler, F., Gawron-Deutsch, T., Cejka, S., Schulte, J., Uslar, M., Veith, E.M., Piatkowska, E., Smith, P., Kupzog, F., and Sandberg, H. (2018, January 4–7). Large Scale Rollout of Smart Grid Services. Proceedings of the 2018 Global Internet of Things Summit (GIoTS), Bilbao, Spain.10.1109/GIOTS.2018.8534432 ↗
46. Smart grid co-simulation with MOSAIK and HLA: a comparison study10.1007/s00450-017-0379-y ↗
47. Ferson, S., Hajagos, J., Myers, D.S., and Tucker, W.T. (2004). Constructor: Synthesizing Information about Uncertain Variables, Sandia National Laboratories. Technical Report.
48. Bayesian calibration of computer models10.1111/1467-9868.00294 ↗