Correction: Lee et al. Optimal Operation Scheduling Considering Cycle Aging of Battery Energy Storage Systems on Stochastic Unit Commitments in Microgrids. Energies 2021, 14, 470

Yong-Rae Lee; Hyung-Joon Kim; Mun-Kyeom Kim

doi:10.3390/en15062107

In the original publication [1], References [2,3,4,5] were not cited, and proper credit was not given for the Algorithm steps in Section 3.2.1 (Reference [5]). The correct citation has now been inserted into Section 3, BESS Modeling, Section 3.2.1, Rainflow-Counting Algorithm, Paragraph 1, and should read as follows:

3.2.1. Rainflow-Counting Algorithm

The rainflow-counting algorithm is applied for the stress analysis of materials in order to calculate the cumulative effect through cycle counting [35,36]. Here, this algorithm was adopted to assess the battery’s life cycle in the SUC problem of an MG. Figure 2 depicts the DOD provided by the rainflow-counting algorithm [37]. As an example, an SOC profile with local extremes

ω_{n}

is shown in Figure 2a. According to the rainflow-counting algorithm, the DOD can be calculated (as shown in Figure 2b) using the following sequence:

The procedure starts from $ω_{0}$ and involves the calculation of $Δ ω_{1} = |ω_{0} - ω_{1}|, Δ ω_{2} = |ω_{1} - ω_{2}|$ , and $Δ ω_{3} = |ω_{2} - ω_{3}|$ ;
If $Δ ω_{2} \leq Δ ω_{1}$ and $Δ ω_{2} \leq Δ ω_{3}$ , a full cycle of depth $Δ ω_{2}$ is confirmed. Thereafter, $ω_{1} and ω_{2}$ are removed from the profile, and step (2) is repeated using points $ω_{0}, ω_{3}, ω_{4}, ω_{5}$ …;
If a cycle is not confirmed, the confirmation is shifted forward, and step (2) is repeated using points $ω_{1}, ω_{2}, ω_{3}, ω_{4}$ …;
The confirmation is repeated until no more full cycles can be confirmed throughout the remaining profile.

Additionally, the citation for References [2,3] have now been inserted into Section 1.2, Literature Review, Paragraph 2. The citation for Reference [4] was inserted into Section 3.2.1, Rainflow-Counting Algorithm, Paragraph 1. An additional citation for Reference [5] was included in Section 3.2.2, LCC, Paragraph 1.

Due to adding new References, the numeration of References with respect to the original publication has been modified. References [2,3,4,5] will appear in the document as References [14,18,36,37] respectively. The authors apologize for any inconvenience caused and state that the scientific conclusions are unaffected. The original publication has also been updated.

References

Lee, Y.-R.; Kim, H.-J.; Kim, M.-K. Optimal operation scheduling considering cycle aging of battery energy storage systems on stochastic unit commitments in microgrids. Energies 2021, 14, 470. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Zhang, Z.; Wang, J.; Wang, X. An improved charging/discharging strategy of lithium batteries considering depreciation cost in day-ahead microgrid scheduling. Energy Convers. Manag. 2015, 105, 675–684. [Google Scholar]
Dong, X.; Yuying, Z.; Tong, Z. Planning-operation co-optimization model of active distribution network with energy storage considering the lifetime of batteries. IEEE Access 2018, 6, 59822–59832. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Lee, Y.L.; Barkey, M.E.; Kang, H.T. Metal Fatigue Analysis Handbook: Practical Problem-Solving Techniques for Computer-Aided Engineering; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2011. [Google Scholar]
Xu, B.; Zhao, J.; Zheng, T.; Litvinov, E.; Kirschen, D.S. Factoring the cycle aging cost of batteries participating in electricity markets. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 2017, 33, 2248–2259. [Google Scholar]

Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

© 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

Article Metrics

Citations

Article Access Statistics

Journal Statistics

Multiple requests from the same IP address are counted as one view.