Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “decentralized coordination”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

95 records · Page 6
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2025

High-Power Electric Vehicle Charging Hub Integration Platform (eCHIP): Site Energy Management System Platform Development

A site energy management system is a critical component of future high-power EV charging hubs. It monitors and supervises all inter-hub operations, coordinates grid interactions, and implements energy management strategies and load-sharing controls at various levels and time scales. This report provides a comprehensive high-level overview and guidelines on the essential elements of such energy management systems. These elements primarily focus on the core functions, architecture, and monitoring aspects of site energy management. The core functions define the grid services and operational objectives that a charging hub is expected to provide and achieve. The architectural section investigates the coordination between hub assets, different control schemes, and their potential benefits and drawbacks. Lastly, the report discusses the needs, types, and functionalities of a monitoring and visualization system.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗
DOE OSTI2021

Emergency Voltage Regulation in Power Systems via Ripple-Type Control

With increasing penetrations of volatile renewable generation and cyber-physical disruptions, ensuring the safe operation of bulk power systems has become unprecedentedly challenging. Because communication and computational costs restrict centralized system dispatch to being called upon every few minutes, and because purely local schemes are shown to be insufficient, distributed controls have been advocated for handling unanticipated system conditions in real time. The applicability of distributed control schemes, however, is fundamentally limited by their need for widespread communication and model cognizance. In this context, we put forth a hybrid, low-communication, saturation-driven protocol for the coordination of control agents that are distributed over a physical system and are allowed to communicate with peers over a "hotline" communication network. Under this protocol, when agents observe a constraint violation based on local measurements, they respond locally until their control resources saturate, in which case they send a beacon for assistance to peer agents. The scheme ensures that minor violations are efficiently mitigated via fast local controls, whereas severe violations can be handled by collaboration among a relatively small set of agents. We evaluate the performance of this scheme via numerical tests on the IEEE 14-bus test feeder, where agents act upon noisy measurements under diverse scenarios of load variations and severe low-/high-voltage events.

collaboration↗
NASA NTRS2015

TTEthernet for Integrated Spacecraft Networks

Aerospace projects have traditionally employed federated avionics architectures, in which each computer system is designed to perform one specific function (e.g. navigation). There are obvious downsides to this approach, including excessive weight (from so much computing hardware), and inefficient processor utilization (since modern processors are capable of performing multiple tasks). There has therefore been a push for integrated modular avionics (IMA), in which common computing platforms can be leveraged for different purposes. This consolidation of multiple vehicle functions to shared computing platforms can significantly reduce spacecraft cost, weight, and design complexity. However, the application of IMA principles introduces significant challenges, as the data network must accommodate traffic of mixed criticality and performance levels - potentially all related to the same shared computer hardware. Because individual network technologies are rarely so competent, the development of truly integrated network architectures often proves unreasonable. Several different types of networks are utilized - each suited to support a specific vehicle function. Critical functions are typically driven by precise timing loops, requiring networks with strict guarantees regarding message latency (i.e. determinism) and fault-tolerance. Alternatively, non-critical systems generally employ data networks prioritizing flexibility and high performance over reliable operation. Switched Ethernet has seen widespread success filling this role in terrestrial applications. Its high speed, flexibility, and the availability of inexpensive commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) components make it desirable for inclusion in spacecraft platforms. Basic Ethernet configurations have been incorporated into several preexisting aerospace projects, including both the Space Shuttle and International Space Station (ISS). However, classical switched Ethernet cannot provide the high level of network determinism required by real-time spacecraft applications. Even with modern advancements, the uncoordinated (i.e. event-driven) nature of Ethernet communication unavoidably leads to message contention within network switches. The arbitration process used to resolve such conflicts introduces variation in the time it takes for messages to be forwarded. TTEthernet1 introduces decentralized clock synchronization to switched Ethernet, enabling message transmission according to a time-triggered (TT) paradigm. A network planning tool is used to allocate each device a finite amount of time in which it may transmit a frame. Each time slot is repeated sequentially to form a periodic communication schedule that is then loaded onto each TTEthernet device (e.g. switches and end systems). Each network participant references the synchronized time in order to dispatch messages at predetermined instances. This schedule guarantees that no contention exists between time-triggered Ethernet frames in the network switches, therefore eliminating the need for arbitration (and the timing variation it causes). Besides time-triggered messaging, TTEthernet networks may provide two additional traffic classes to support communication of different criticality levels. In the rate-constrained (RC) traffic class, the frame payload size and rate of transmission along each communication channel are limited to predetermined maximums. The network switches can therefore be configured to accommodate the known worst-case traffic pattern, and buffer overflows can be eliminated. The best-effort (BE) traffic class behaves akin to classical Ethernet. No guarantees are provided regarding transmission latency or successful message delivery. TTEthernet coordinates transmission of all three traffic classes over the same physical connections, therefore accommodating the full spectrum of traffic criticality levels required in IMA architectures. Common computing platforms (e.g. LRUs) can share networking resources in such a way that failures in non-critical systems (using BE or RC communication modes) cannot impact flight-critical functions (using TT communication). Furthermore, TTEthernet hardware (e.g. switches, cabling) can be shared by both TTEthernet and classical Ethernet traffic.

Loveless, Andrew↗
DOE OSTI2024

The Transactive Energy Network Template Metamodel

While transactive energy, which is defined as an allocation of electricity based on dynamically discovered values or prices, has been extensively studied, its uptake and use has been slow. This report describes a tool, the transactive network template, which should hasten the creation and uptake of transactive energy networks. Some basic principles of transactive energy are familiar from existing wholesale electricity markets. Locational prices are calculated today for zones within bulk electric transmission systems. Locational prices differ while accounting for the locational costs of electricity generation and the losses and constraints incurred when electricity is transmitted from generators and distributed to consumers. A transactive energy network might include these transmission zones. However, current research strives to apply transactive energy also in electricity distribution circuits, buildings, and even for individual generating and consuming devices. At the same time, researchers explore how to apply transactive energy in real time during increasingly shorter time intervals. Automated computational agents become necessary as transactive energy becomes applied to smaller circuit zones and at faster dynamic timescales. A transactive energy network is an example of a multi-agent system. Each zone in the network is represented by its transactive agent, which makes decisions for and acts on behalf of a business entity that is responsible for and manages one of the circuit regions. A transactive energy network is also an example of a decentralized, distributed control system. Control decisions and responsibilities are distributed among the network’s transactive agents. The transactive agents are independent; that is, there typically is no centralized authority or oversight function. Instead, transactive agents exchange transactive signals and thereby negotiate the prices and quantities of electricity that they will exchange. Initially, the circuit regions and responsibilities of transactive agents appear to be very dissimilar. Each circuit region may comprise transmission, distribution, or building-level circuits. Each has a unique position and electrical connectivity within the transactive energy network. Each possesses unique assets that either generate or consume electricity, and these (e.g., renewable energy generator, diesel generator, aggregate utility load, building load, space conditioning, refrigerator, etc.) may further differ in their price flexibility and in their strategies for responding to dynamic electricity prices. Given such diversity, an implementer’s first inclination might be to start from scratch to define all these devices and to engineer their seemingly unique interactions. Given that each implementer’s perspective may be narrow within a transactive energy network, it is unlikely that uniquely engineered systems would interact well. This is where the transactive network template is applicable. The transactive network template is a metamodel that has been developed to guide implementers as they configure their own transactive agent within a network of such agents. The object-oriented design of the transactive network template provides basic code object types that may be used and extended by implementers to represent each of the assets in their circuit region. These objects further facilitate the transactive agent’s necessary computations, which are divided among responsibilities to schedule power usage, balance electric supply and demand, and coordinate the exchange of electricity with the other transactive agents. This report addresses the conceptual transactive network template design. Implementers are directed to more formal design documents and reference implementations. A Python™-based1 reference implementation of the transactive network template has been coded, and three implementations have been configured to represent a national laboratory and two university campuses. Version 2 of the transactive node template generalizes the market class and its methods to facilitate multiple, and more diverse market coordination mechanisms than were facilitated by and demonstrated using Version 1. Version 3 includes new Appendix B, which addresses the designs of methods that would make dynamic prices track approved electricity rates. In the future, the author wishes to make the transactive network template more generally applicable to networks that require more accurate power flow. Development of the transactive network template is jointly funded by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy and the DOE Office of Electricity. In late 2015, one of the first projects to be funded by the DOE Grid Laboratory Modernization Laboratory Consortium was the Clean Energy and Transactive Campus project, led by Pacific Northwest National Laboratory. DOE funds were matched by an investment by the Washington Department of Commerce through its Clean Energy Fund. The transactive network template was developed to guide the implementation of transactive energy networks within this project’s scope.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗
DOE OSTI2020

Steady-State Analysis of Microgrid Distributed Control Under Denial of Service Attacks

Distributed control is an effective method to coordinate multiple components in a microgrid. It usually has mandatory requirements for communication graph topology; changing the topology unexpectedly could disrupt the operation of a distributed controller. A denial of service (DoS) attack blocks communication channels to cause variations in communication graph. Unforeseen topology changes render a controller to receive incomplete system information. Control decisions made based on incorrect information can lead to significantly reduced grid supporting capability. As a result, the vital power balance between generation and load may be challenged. Determining power balance requires steady-state power flow analysis; however, the cyber-induced steady-state analysis is not well studied in the literature. Here, in this article, we show that a cyber–physical microgrid with unknown DoS attacks has augmented uncertain power flow equations, whose special structure creates new computational issue to determining power balance. To deal with the issue, we develop a novel cyber-induced microgrid model: the cyber–physical system is transformed into a pure physical model, where the disruption effects of DoS in the cyber layer are shown to be equivalent to the variations of the physical model parameters. With the transformed system, we develop a sufficient condition to ascertain the system power balance under unknown DoS attacks. In addition, practical insights for resilient distributed control design are shown as well.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗