Thanks for the suggestion. The best way to register this sort of suggestion in a way that I won’t lose track of it is to submit it as a new issue here<https://github.com/MATPOWER/matpower-extras/issues>.
Ray On Sep 24, 2023, at 6:04 AM, Ігор Ткач <ig0r-1...@ukr.net> wrote: checklimits is a very useful feature. For ease of transition from text to numbers, I humbly suggest the following addition to the checklimits function for a future version of Matpower. Indexes for out of limits : [check_index.]=checklimits where [check_index = 0 - all o'key check_index=1 - Pgen out limit check_index=2 - Qgen out limit check_index=3 - VG out limit check_index=4 -......... .............................................. 22 вересня 2023, 22:02:25, від "Ray Daniel Zimmerman" <r...@cornell.edu<mailto:r...@cornell.edu>>: I assume you are asking whether it’s possible to have checklimits() return a 0 or 1 depending on whether or not there are limit violations. I don’t really have the time to work on this now, but I shouldn’t be too hard to add. You’d simply check to see if all of the following outputs are empty (no violations) or not: Fv.i, Pv.i, Pv.I, Qv.i, Qv.I, Vv.i, Vv.I. Feel free to enhance this function to make it more useful and submit your updates as a pull request here<https://github.com/MATPOWER/matpower-extras/pulls>. Hope this helps, Ray On Sep 22, 2023, at 12:32 AM, Ігор Ткач <ig0r-1...@ukr.net<mailto:ig0r-1...@ukr.net>> wrote: Is it possible to [Index_check]=checklimits(results, 1) output Index_check = 1 or 0 when there is an output of constrains or not out of limits? 20 вересня 2023, 16:45:03, від "Ігор Ткач" <ig0r-1...@ukr.net<mailto:ig0r-1...@ukr.net>>: Dear all, Question. how do I find the constraint. which removes my cost calculation when calculating the runopf cost? For case30, I study the dependence of cost when adjusting the voltage of generators. For example, I change the voltage of the 4th generator: cost=function('VM') == cost=function(mpc10.gen(4,6)) The skript runopf is closed and this dependency cannot be seen. Test network case30 has an optimal value runopf() of f= 576.8923 My first calculation. My changes to the input data - pasted the results : mpc10.gen(:,6)=resopf.gen(:,6) - 'VM' mpc10.gen(4,6)=resopf.gen(4,6)-0.025 - new ' VM' 4-th gen rez10=runopf(mpc10) f=576.8923 - the cost hasn't changed since we went down to the minimum. O'Key, runopf found a minimum calculated with the constraints. Next I'll show that in my example cost smaller cost=576.661 - I'm assuming that my initial conditions went out of bounds and were discarded I am assuming that my initial conditions (-0.025 p.u.) give the best cost 576.661 , but go beyond the some constraints. My cost was rejected by runopf. I need to make sure of this Dear all, My calculation. I calculated runopf. I took the results runopf for PG and VG to new_mpc and calculated the runpf(new_mpc). After the runpf calculation, all datasets matched with runopf , in particular the cost. Сosts runpf are runopf the same 576.8923. My runpf option works correctly. Then I slightly reduce the voltage on the 4-th generator "-0.025 p.u. " and calculate the cost by runpf. I got less, better cost f=576.661 I emphasize, the active power of generators 2-6 and the voltage on the buses of generators 1-6 are the same for runpf and runopf, there is only an addition of 0.01 voltage on generator 4. I emphasize that for the case of the test runopf and my runpf, the calculation results in the active power of generators 2-6 and the voltage on the buses of generators 1-6 are the same, there is only an addition of -0.025 voltage on generator 4.( see line 42 in the attached script. ) I have checked that the voltages on all nodes are within the constrains range. I've attached a program to tesе. Question. how do I find the constraint. which removes my cost calculation when calculating the runopf cost? Igor.
