| Literature DB >> 31212670 |
Eric Bernardes C Barros1, Dionísio Machado L Filho2, Bruno Guazzelli Batista3, Bruno Tardiole Kuehne4, Maycon Leone M Peixoto5.
Abstract
Energy advancement and innovation have generated several challenges for large modernized cities, such as the increase in energy demand, causing the appearance of the small power grid with a local source of supply, called the Microgrid. A Microgrid operates either connected to the national centralized power grid or singly, as a power island mode. Microgrids address these challenges using sensing technologies and Fog-Cloudcomputing infrastructures for building smart electrical grids. A smart Microgrid can be used to minimize the power demand problem, but this solution needs to be implemented correctly so as not to increase the amount of data being generated. Thus, this paper proposes the use of Fog computing to help control power demand and manage power production by eliminating the high volume of data being passed to the Cloud and decreasing the requests' response time. The GridLab-d simulator was used to create a Microgrid, where it is possible to exchange information between consumers and generators. Thus, to understand the potential of the Fog in this scenario, a performance evaluation is performed to verify how factors such as residence number, optimization algorithms, appliance shifting, and energy sources may influence the response time and resource usage.Entities:
Keywords: cloud; energy distribution model; fog; microgrid; performance evaluation; power grid; smart grid
Year: 2019 PMID: 31212670 PMCID: PMC6604070 DOI: 10.3390/s19112642
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sensors (Basel) ISSN: 1424-8220 Impact factor: 3.576
Figure 1Smart grid topology aided by the Fog and Cloud.
Related work.
| Authors | Peak | Fog | Cloud | Optimization | Scheduling | Clean | Communication | PDI |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (Shahryari, 2017) | √ | √ | √ | √ | ||||
| (Wan, 2018) | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | |||
| (Zahoor, 2018) | √ | √ | √ | √ | ||||
| (Nadeem et al., 2018) | √ | √ | √ | |||||
| (Logenthiran et al., 2012) | √ | √ | ||||||
| (Sedighizadeh et al., 2019) | √ | √ | √ | |||||
| (Izadbakhsh et al., 2015) | √ | √ | ||||||
| (Jamil, 2018) | √ | √ | √ | |||||
| (Wang et al., 2018) | √ | √ | √ | √ | ||||
| (Muralitharan, 2016) | √ | √ | √ | |||||
| (Javaid, 2018) | √ | √ | √ | |||||
|
| √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ |
Figure 2Power generation managed by the PID controller and GA and FIFO algorithm in the Fog.
Consumption.
| Appliance | kWh |
|---|---|
| Refrigerator | 2 |
| Freezer | 1.5 |
| Washing Machine | 0.47 |
| Dishwasher | 1.2 |
Price.
| Appliance | Energy Type | Price/kWh |
|---|---|---|
| Refrigerator Minimum | RNW | 0.3 |
| Refrigerator Maximum | N-RNW | 0.9 |
| Freezer Minimum | RNW | 0.225 |
| Freezer Maximum | N-RNW | 0.675 |
| Washing Machine Minimum | RNW | 0.0705 |
| Washing Machine Maximum | N-RNW | 0.2115 |
| Dishwasher Minimum | RNW | 0.18 |
| Dishwasher Maximum | N-RNW | 0.54 |
Factors and levels.
| Factors | Levels | |
|---|---|---|
| Algorithm |
|
|
| Appliance | Shifting | Non-shifting |
| Residences | 2 | 4 |
| PID Controller | Renewable | Diesel turbine |
Experiments.
| Exp | Algorithm | Residences | Appliance | PID Controller |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0 | FIFO | 2 | SHIFT | RNW |
| 1 | FIFO | 2 | SHIFT | N-RNW |
| 2 | FIFO | 2 | N-SHIFT | RNW |
| 3 | FIFO | 2 | N-SHIFT | N-RNW |
| 4 | FIFO | 4 | SHIFT | RNW |
| 5 | FIFO | 4 | SHIFT | N-RNW |
| 6 | FIFO | 4 | N-SHIFT | RNW |
| 7 | FIFO | 4 | N-SHIFT | N-RNW |
| 8 | GA | 2 | SHIFT | RNW |
| 9 | GA | 2 | SHIFT | N-RNW |
| 10 | GA | 2 | N-SHIFT | RNW |
| 11 | GA | 2 | N-SHIFT | N-RNW |
| 12 | GA | 4 | SHIFT | RNW |
| 13 | GA | 4 | SHIFT | N-RNW |
| 14 | GA | 4 | N-SHIFT | RNW |
| 15 | GA | 4 | N-SHIFT | N-RNW |
Figure 3CPU usage. The experiments can be seen in Table 5.
Figure 4Waiting time for the request.
Figure 5Average power generation managed by the PID controller in the Fog.
Figure 6Comparison of power management algorithms and infrastructures.
Figure 7Influence factors in the studied scenario.
Figure 8CPU usage with and without the appliance shifting.
Figure 9Time usage with and without the appliance shifting.