Thank you very much for your help and time. I very much appreciate it.

On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 11:02 PM Ray Zimmerman <[email protected]> wrote:

> You cannot modify voltage angles independently and maintain feasibility
> (respect the power balance constraints). In order to maintain feasibility
> you must modify voltage angles and generator injections together along the
> surface of power flow solutions.
>
> If you modify the voltage angles along the power flow surface, that is,
> while maintaining feasibility, it will imply changes in generation which
> will result in changes in cost.
>
>    Ray
>
>
> On Mar 20, 2019, at 1:25 PM, Arkan Arkan <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> I see. Thank you for your clarification. So, is there any trick and
> solution to be able to change the output cost though manipulating the
> voltage angles?
>
> Thanks.
>
> On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 7:33 PM Ray Zimmerman <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Ok, so you just want to evaluate the objective (or cost) function of the
>> DC OPF at a given solution. The issue is that the cost function depends
>> only on the generator injections, which are related to the voltage angles
>> through the constraints. So if you take a DC PF solution and make changes
>> to the voltage angles, without changing the generator injections, the
>> result will be only infeasible power balance constraints with no change in
>> the cost function.
>>
>> Simply put, manipulating the voltage angles will affect feasibility, but
>> not cost.
>>
>>     Ray
>>
>>
>> On Mar 19, 2019, at 10:03 AM, Arkan Arkan <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> Dear Ray,
>>
>> Thank you so much for your response. I very much appreciate it. What I
>> mean is a little bit different.  Based on my understanding, I exactly need
>> DC for my work. This is my understanding. When we run "rundcopf", after
>> some calculations, the phase angles are obtained and then fed into the OPF
>> function which finally gives us the total cost and the whole process is
>> done as a function. Now, after computing the phase angles through PF and
>> before feeding into OPF function to calculate the cost, I need to somehow
>> change the values of calculated phase angles a little bit so that the final
>> cost will be based on the manipulated (my values) phase angles. I tried to
>> change the values of phase angles in different steps of the function but
>> wasn't effective and the final calculated cost is like before change.
>> Please let me know your thoughts on this.
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>> Kind regards,
>> Arkan
>>
>> On Tue, Mar 19, 2019 at 6:21 PM Ray Zimmerman <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> I’m not sure I understand what you want to do.
>>>
>>> Let’s start with the DC OPF. It sounds like you’re saying you need to
>>> run a DC OPF where you are directly specifying (constraining to a specific
>>> value) some of the voltage angles. Is that correct? The problem is that
>>> there are very few degrees of freedom in the voltage angles due to the
>>> power balance constraints. I suspect that manipulating (constraining) the
>>> voltage magnitudes directly will very quickly result in an infeasible OPF.
>>>
>>> But, you’re welcome to try. You can add user-defined linear constraints (
>>> A, l and u) to restrict the voltage angles. The first nb columns of A
>>> correspond to the voltage angles. See section 6.3 and Chapter 7 in the
>>> User’s Manual for more details. Simply use the VMIN and VMAX columns of
>>> the bus matrix to restrict voltage magnitudes.
>>>
>>>    Ray
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mar 19, 2019, at 8:26 AM, Arkan Arkan <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>> Dear All,
>>>
>>> I hope this note finds you well. I need to run optimal power flow (both
>>> DC and AC) while the input values for phase angles and voltage magnitudes
>>> are manipulated. In other words, how could I run OPF with desired values of
>>> phase angles and voltage magnitudes? I know that I should change the values
>>> on the way and in the middle of code but I wasn't able to find the right
>>> place in MATPOWER.
>>>
>>> I would be so grateful if you could, please, help me in this regard.
>>>
>>> Thank you for your time and consideration.
>>>
>>> Kind regards,
>>> Arkan
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>

Reply via email to