Automated Demand Response System with Multi-Level Load Control
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Existing demand response systems lack flexibility in accommodating different event intensity levels, leading to inadequate control of facility equipment and over-complicated user interfaces that hinder quick configuration and customization of demand response strategies.
Innovation Solution
A comprehensive Automated Demand Response (ADR) system that allows loads to take different actions based on event severity levels, featuring a user interface for monitoring and configuring multiple loads, utilizing virtual shed groups, and providing scheduling flexibility through customizable strategies and separate limiting targets for each event.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Device complexity
If facility loads are set to take one action only during demand response, then the control is simplified, but the flexibility to accommodate different event intensity levels is reduced
Solution Approach 1:
The demand response system segments the response actions into multiple levels (e.g., first level, second level, third level actions) that can be selectively applied based on event intensity. This allows the system to handle different severity levels with appropriate actions while maintaining organized control structure.
Solution Approach 2:
The system dynamically selects which action level to apply based on the detected event intensity. The control strategy transitions from static single-action responses to dynamic multi-level responses that adapt to changing conditions, enabling flexibility without overwhelming complexity.
2Adaptability or versatility
If multiple settings for demand response are located in different locations in user interfaces, then the customization capability is improved, but the workflow becomes over-complicated
Solution Approach 1:
The system merges multiple demand response settings and configurations into a unified user interface structure. Instead of scattering settings across different locations, the interface consolidates related controls and provides a centralized view, making the workflow more intuitive while preserving full customization capability.
Solution Approach 2:
The user interface is designed with universal controls that can handle multiple configuration tasks from a single location. The interface provides multi-functional capabilities allowing users to configure different action levels, event parameters, and load settings in one unified workspace rather than requiring navigation through multiple separate settings areas.
3Adaptability or versatility
If a comprehensive configuration system is provided for multiple loads, then the customization of demand response strategy is improved, but the interface complexity increases
Solution Approach 1:
The configuration system segments the large number of loads into manageable groups or categories that can be configured systematically. This segmentation allows building managers to handle multiple loads in organized batches rather than individually, reducing the perceived interface complexity while maintaining comprehensive customization capability.
Solution Approach 2:
The system provides preliminary configuration options and templates that pre-establish common demand response strategies. Building managers can apply these pre-configured templates to multiple loads simultaneously, which simplifies the initial configuration process while still allowing detailed customization when needed.
4Productivity
If demand response requests result in loads being shut down or running at reduced capacity, then the load reduction is achieved, but the facility conditions can be adversely affected
Solution Approach 1:
The system dynamically adjusts load reduction strategies based on real-time facility conditions and event intensity levels. Rather than applying fixed shutdown commands, the system modulates load reduction to achieve necessary demand response while maintaining facility conditions within acceptable ranges, balancing productivity with condition preservation.
Solution Approach 2:
The system implements cushioning measures by establishing minimum operational thresholds and protective controls before demand response events occur. These pre-configured safeguards ensure that even when loads are reduced, critical facility conditions are protected from adverse effects, and loads can be restored to appropriate levels when conditions require it.
Data Source
AI summary
Devices, methods, and systems for providing demand response are described herein. One device includes instructions executable to receive an indication of a demand response event, determine, based on a configuration made using a user interface, an action to be taken by a load of a facility in response to the demand response event, communicate the determined action to a controller associated with the load, and monitor a status of the action as the action is taken.