that any curtailment would be
>> an indication of an infeasibility in the problem.
>>
>> Ray
>>
>>
>> On May 31, 2024, at 6:24 PM, Ari N wrote:
>>
>> Healthy greetings,
>>
>> In generator scheduling, what is the objective function for renewable
>> energy generation?
>>
>> I hope someone can help, thank you.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Ari
>>
>>
>>
>
hy greetings,
In generator scheduling, what is the objective function for renewable energy
generation?
I hope someone can help, thank you.
Regards,
Ari
ings,
>
> In generator scheduling, what is the objective function for renewable
> energy generation?
>
> I hope someone can help, thank you.
>
> Regards,
>
> Ari
>
>
>
the objective function for renewable energy
generation?
I hope someone can help, thank you.
Regards,
Ari
Healthy greetings,
In generator scheduling, what is the objective function for renewable
energy generation?
I hope someone can help, thank you.
Regards,
Ari
costs, then the objective function would be equal
to the negative of the social welfare.
That said, the runmarket() does maximize the welfare or system net benefits as
defined by the bids and offers.
Ray
On Oct 27, 2023, at 2:29 AM, Dr. D. Karthikaikannan
wrote:
thank you sir.
is that
thank you sir.
is that the objective function value 2985.78 $/hr represents the social
welfare (supplier profit for the given offers +consumer net surplus for the
given bid).
From: bounce-127850109-88225...@list.cornell.edu
on behalf of Ray Daniel Zimmerman
optimization. You can find them in mpc_out.genoffer.
The cost displayed in the Market Summary output is based on 1. The objective
function is based on 2.
>> sum(totcost(mpc_out.genoffer,mpc_out.gen(:,PG)))
ans =
2.9858e+03
>> mpc_out.f
ans =
2.9858e+03
Hope this clears things up.
-2000.00 0.00 -2000.00887.58
Total: 155.32 7801.60 1172.63 0.00 1172.63 6628.97
Converged in 0.14 seconds
Objective Function
Can you send me the details I need to reproduce your result? The simple OPF on
that case does show consistency between the objective function value and the
sum of the generator costs.
>> r = runopf('t_auction_case');
>> sum(totcost(r.gencost, r.gen(:, PG)))
ans =
-2
9 30 -20.0055.621 -1112.42 -2000.00 0.00 -2000.00887.58
Total: 155.32 7801.60 1172.63 0.00 1172.63 6628.97
Converged in 1.14 seconds
Objective Function Value = 2985.78 $/hr
:17 AM, Dr. D. Karthikaikannan
wrote:
Dear sir,
In optimal power flow the objective function is sum of the cost function and
benefit function of generator and load respectively. I run smart market and
cross checked the objective function displayed with the corresponding cost
function and
Dear sir,
In optimal power flow the objective function is sum of the cost function and
benefit function of generator and load respectively. I run smart market and
cross checked the objective function displayed with the corresponding cost
function and generation using total cost function and it
...@list.cornell.edu
[mailto:bounce-126045400-90152...@list.cornell.edu] On Behalf Of Ray Daniel
Zimmerman
Sent: Tuesday, November 2, 2021 9:53 AM
To: MATPOWER-L
Subject: Re: Why is objective function in negative
Hi Maliha,
When using dispatchable loads, the objective function value includes a large
“
Hi Maliha,
When using dispatchable loads, the objective function value includes a large
“negative cost” to represent the value of serving the dispatchable load. If all
load is dispatchable, you could think of the objective function value as the
negative of the social welfare.
If you want to
Respected Ray
I performed simple runopf function to check the cost minimization of case 30 by
observing objective function in dollar per hour.
Similarly, when i increased the load in Pd column it gives error of "too many
refrence buses making a connected system..."
But when i run ca
ell.edu>>
Sent: Thursday, October 14, 2021 1:01:06 AM
To: MATPOWER-L mailto:matpowe...@list.cornell.edu>>
Subject: Re: How to edit objective function in most
No need to edit the code, just set the appropriate cost parameters to zero. If
I remember correctly, most of them should be zero by defa
bounce-125997458-89272...@list.cornell.edu
on behalf of Ray Daniel Zimmerman
Sent: Thursday, October 14, 2021 1:01:06 AM
To: MATPOWER-L
Subject: Re: How to edit objective function in most
No need to edit the code, just set the appropriate cost parameters to zero. If
I remember correctly, most o
No need to edit the code, just set the appropriate cost parameters to zero. If
I remember correctly, most of them should be zero by default, if not defined.
Ray
> On Oct 13, 2021, at 3:58 AM, MALIHA SHAH
> wrote:
>
> Respected Ray,
>
> As tge objective function is
Respected Ray,
As tge objective function is explained in most manual , it comprises of
different types of costs. If one wants to manipulate objective function and
remove some of the cost , for example if only cost of generators are to be
counted then where should I edit the code .
Will be
11:54, Karthikaikannan D
wrote:
Dear all,
how to make the total active power loss as
the objective function instead of
Hello,
if you set operation costs of power plants to zero, than power losses costs are
the only one left. Have you tried this approach?
BR,
Michal Polecki
On 03/01/21 11:54, Karthikaikannan D wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Dear all,
> how to make the total active
Dear all,
how to make the total active power loss as the objective function instead of
summation of all cost function in opf
Regards,
Dr.D.Karthikaikannan
Assistant Professor III,
Department of EEE,
School of EEE,
SASTRA Deemed to be University
(Recognised as Category 1 University by UGC
ote:
>
> Hi Ray
>
> Please how can I determine the objective function of photovoltaic in
> microgrid
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>
Using a marginal cost of zero for PV generation is typical.
Ray
> On Dec 16, 2019, at 11:48 PM, Sarhan Hasan wrote:
>
> Hi Ray
>
> Please how can I determine the objective function of photovoltaic in
> microgrid
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>
Hi Ray
Please how can I determine the objective function of photovoltaic in microgrid
Sent from my iPhone
deviation
>> using MAT-POWER. Through this email, there is an attachment of runpf.m
>> coding to calculate the losses. I need your assistance in oder to
>> calculate the voltage deviation by employing the following formula.:
>>
>> min VD = min (Vi - 1.0) to mini
f runpf.m coding
to calculate the losses. I need your assistance in oder to calculate the
voltage deviation by employing the following formula.:
min VD = min (Vi - 1.0) to minimize the deviations in voltage magnitud at
load bus.
I want to change objective function of losses to d
al
>> <https://www.dropbox.com/home/work/latest-MATPOWER-manual?preview=MATPOWER-manual.pdf>.
>>
>> if you have more questions along the way, don’t hesitate to ask.
>>
>> Ray
>>
>>
>>
>>> On May 7, 2018, at 11:01 AM, Stefanie Aebi >
you have more questions along the way, don’t hesitate to ask.
>>
>> Ray
>>
>>
>>
>>> On May 7, 2018, at 11:01 AM, Stefanie Aebi >> <mailto:aeber...@student.ethz.ch>> wrote:
>>>
>>> I am trying to set up an OPF problem wher
018, at 11:01 AM, Stefanie Aebi
<aeber...@student.ethz.ch>
wrote:
I am trying to set up an OPF problem where
the objective function consists of
- active power generation (Pg*cp, where
<mailto:aeber...@student.ethz.ch>> wrote:
>
> I am trying to set up an OPF problem where the objective function consists of
> - active power generation (Pg*cp, where Pg is generation and cp is cost)
> - reactive power generation (|Qg|*cq, where Qg is reactive generation and cq
>
rote:
>
> I am trying to set up an OPF problem where the objective function consists of
> - active power generation (Pg*cp, where Pg is generation and cp is cost)
> - reactive power generation (|Qg|*cq, where Qg is reactive generation and cq
> is cost)
>
> How do I get the absol
I am trying to set up an OPF problem where the objective function consists of
- active power generation (Pg*cp, where Pg is generation and cp is cost)
- reactive power generation (|Qg|*cq, where Qg is reactive generation and cq is
cost)
How do I get the absolute values for Qg into the objective
If you want to use social welfare as the objective function, simply convert all
loads to dispatchable loads. In that case, cost minimization, which now
includes minimizing the negative costs (i.e. positive benefits) of the loads is
actually minimizing the negative of the social welfare (or
Hi all,
I am using Matpower to run a DC opf, if I want to change the objecive function
of opf, such as changing it to social welfare instead of cost. Can anyone tell
me how I can do this change in Matpower? Thanks so much.
Best Regards
Stephanie
ses.
>> 3.Now i use price sensitive loads concept where I assume the marginal
>> benefit is 28.5$/MWh,above that pirce the load should be curtailed.
>> 4.In peak periods the load is curtailed and I show the gencost,objective
>> function,demand cost comparisons by not applying
s to the customers for load reduction,the objective function should
> includes the incentives payment along with the generators cost.whereas
> showing the price sensitive loads the objective function removes the payment
> by the loads.presently in matpower the runopf does this.
>
y, but (2)
> forces the power factor of the load to remain constant, so reactive power is
> curtailed in proportion to the real power curtailed.
>
>Ray
>
>
>
>
>> On Mar 16, 2016, at 10:10 PM, Mounika Vanjarapu > <mailto:mounikavanjar...@gmail.com&
Since MATPOWER represents dispatchable demand as negative generation with
negative cost, the objective function ends up being the negative of net
benefits. Normally you want to maximize net benefits (total benefit to demand
minus total cost of supply). MATPOWER does this by minimizing the
.77mw.so/> there will be congestion
>>> occured.therefore the LMP values will increase.
>>> 2.In order to mitigate this condition I use the scale load function and
>>> scale the load into peak ,off peak and valley periods in the ratio of
>>> 0.55,0.3,0.1
gt;>>>> congestion management.ie for different periods the price will be
>>>>> different .for example peak and off peak,valley periods.
>>>>> 1.I take the case of ieee14 bus system and i create congestion by
>>>>> decreasing the line flow li
take the case of ieee14 bus system and i create congestion by
>>>> decreasing the line flow limit at 3rd bus to 30MW where the actual power
>>>> flow is 39.77MW.so <http://39.77mw.so/> there will be congestion
>>>> occured.therefore the LMP values will increase.
,off peak and valley periods in the ratio of
0.55,0.3,0.15 resp. at all buses.
3.Now i use price sensitive loads concept where I assume the marginal
benefit is 28.5$/MWh,above that pirce the load should be curtailed.
4.In peak periods the load is curtailed and I show the gencost,objective
function
;> 2.In order to mitigate this condition I use the scale load function and
>> scale the load into peak ,off peak and valley periods in the ratio of
>> 0.55,0.3,0.15 resp. at all buses.
>> 3.Now i use price sensitive loads concept where I assume the marginal
>&g
o peak ,off peak and valley periods in the ratio of
> 0.55,0.3,0.15 resp. at all buses.
> 3.Now i use price sensitive loads concept where I assume the marginal
> benefit is 28.5$/MWh,above that pirce the load should be curtailed.
> 4.In peak periods the load is curtailed and I show
sir
coming to direct load control program where the case is to give
incentives to the customers for load reduction,the objective function
should includes the incentives payment along with the generators
cost.whereas showing the price sensitive loads the objective function
removes the payment
>> occured.therefore the LMP values will increase.
>>> 2.In order to mitigate this condition I use the scale load function and
>>> scale the load into peak ,off peak and valley periods in the ratio of
>>> 0.55,0.3,0.15 resp. at all buses.
>>> 3.Now i use pr
t.ie/> for different periods the price will
>>>> be different .for example peak and off peak,valley periods.
>>>> 1.I take the case of ieee14 bus system and i create congestion by
>>>> decreasing the line flow limit at 3rd bus to 30MW where the actual p
sir
what does it means a negative objective function.
2016, at 8:03 AM, Ali wrote:
>
> Dear MATPOWER,
>
> I was wondering how can I define some specific objective function in DCOPF?
>
> For example how can I define the flow of a specific branch as the objective
> function ?
>
> Sincerely
>
> Ali Salem.
Dear MATPOWER,
I was wondering how can I define some specific objective function in DCOPF?
For example how can I define the flow of a specific branch as the
objective function ?
Sincerely
Ali Salem.
the case. In any case, adding the two multipliers
together should give you the sensitivity of the objective function to changes
in RATE_A.
Ray
On May 5, 2015, at 6:49 AM, Mari Hardersen Prydz
mailto:mari.pr...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Dear all,
I'm running the ACOPF on different test
and those constraining flow at the
> “to bus” end. Usually, if a flow constraint is binding, it is binding only at
> one end, but this is not always the case. In any case, adding the two
> multipliers together should give you the sensitivity of the objective
> function to changes in
> multipliers together should give you the sensitivity of the objective
> function to changes in RATE_A.
>
> Ray
>
>
> On May 5, 2015, at 6:49 AM, Mari Hardersen Prydz
> wrote:
>
> Dear all,
>
> I'm running the ACOPF on different test cases, and would like to
, if a flow constraint is binding, it is binding only at one
end, but this is not always the case. In any case, adding the two multipliers
together should give you the sensitivity of the objective function to changes
in RATE_A.
Ray
> On May 5, 2015, at 6:49 AM, Mari Hardersen Prydz wr
Dear all,
I'm running the ACOPF on different test cases, and would like to find the
effect on the objective function value when changing the thermal limits
(rate A, B and C).
Firstly, is it only rate A that limits the power flow, or will rate B and C
also affect this?
So far I have look
If you are using a piecewise linear cost model, the costs must be convex in
order to define the function you intend. See section 6.4.1 in the (v 5) User’s
Manual to understand the resulting cost function. In this case, I believe the
objective function value will be equal to the sum of the y
Ok, I found the reason: Some of my cost curves are non-convex. If I change the
curves to be perfectly linear, the two values match.
But this does leave another question for me: In the case of non-convex cost
curves, what does the objective function value "result.f" represent? Why i
6.9125e+05
>> sum(totcost(result.gencost, result.gen(:, PG)))
ans =
6.1887e+05
So effectively, my objective function value is 691250 $/h, whereas my total
generator cost is just 618870 $/h. Where could this discrepancy come from? If I
"manually" calculate the production cost of a
mpute the objective function value yourself using the totcost()
> function, or even by explicitly using the quadratic coefficients to compute
> the cost of each gen.
>
> --
> Ray Zimmerman
> Senior Research Associate
> B30 Warren Hall, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853 USA
> p
There’s always the possibility of a bug, but I’d be a bit surprised in this
case. Unless you have additional user-defined costs, you can easily compute the
objective function value yourself using the totcost() function, or even by
explicitly using the quadratic coefficients to compute the cost
rrect ranges. However
the object function is displaying a very, very large number. Could there
be a bug in the display of the objective function?
Regards
Tom
Hello sir,
Can any one give me latest paper , material or book regarding
topic " FUEL COST MINIMIZATION AS AN OBJECTIVE FUNCTION FOR OPTIMAL ACTIVE
-REACTIVE POWER DISPATCH (OARPD) PROBLEM."?
Thank you.
; Could please let know according to the below post how " cost minimization
>>> is equivalent to loss minimization"? Could you please explain?
>>>
>>>
>>> Best Wishes
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -- Forward
;>
>> On Jan 13, 2014, at 5:23 AM, Carlos Gonzalez Almeida <
>> cgonzalezalme...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Dear Dr. Zimmerman,
>>
>> Could please let know according to the below post how " cost
>> minimization is equivalent to loss minimization"? C
t; cost minimization
>> is equivalent to loss minimization"? Could you please explain?
>>
>>
>> Best Wishes
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -- Forwarded message --
>> From: Ray Zimmerman
>> Date: Wed, May 4, 2011 at 3:17 PM
>> Su
gt; wrote:
>
> Dear Dr. Zimmerman,
>
> Could please let know according to the below post how " cost minimization is
> equivalent to loss minimization"? Could you please explain?
>
>
> Best Wishes
>
>
>
>
> -- Forwarded message --
>
arded message --
> From: Ray Zimmerman
> Date: Wed, May 4, 2011 at 3:17 PM
> Subject: Re: Question about objective function
> To: Dailan Xu
>
>
> The purpose of runmarket is to implement a standard auction market such as
> those used by the typical ISO. The obj
Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853
> phone: (607) 255-9645
>
>
>
> On May 4, 2011, at 8:15 AM, Dailan Xu wrote:
>
> > Dear Prof. Zimmerman
> >
> > Could you please let me know why in the runmarket you have chosen the
> objective function as minimization of cost
: Question about objective function
To: Dailan Xu
The purpose of runmarket is to implement a standard auction market such as
those used by the typical ISO. The objective of minimization of cost or
maximization of social welfare is consistent with such markets.
Now, if you want to minimize lo
: (607) 255-9645
On May 19, 2013, at 11:06 AM, Aman Bansal wrote:
> Hi all
>
> For every time I run OPF for different problems, there appear a particular
> objective function value in $/hr
>
> What is signifies actually?
>
> --
> Aman Bansal,
> M.Tech. St
, then the
objective function is the negative of social welfare.
2. Yes. In this case the OFV is the total cost of energy + total cost of
reserves.
3. I'm afraid I don't understand what you are proposing. However, this is not
really the appropriate forum for the question of what
Dear Professor Zimmerman,
1. What does "objective function value (OFV)" represent when you do a
runopf? Is it system operation cost(sum of generation cost + startup cost) or
social welfare?
2. What about the objective function value when you do a runopf_w_res? Can
it be
Thanks for the help!
On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 4:38 PM, Ray Zimmerman wrote:
> The easiest way to get MATPOWER to do loss minimization is to give all of the
> generators an identical linear cost function. Then minimizing the generation
> cost will also minimize the total generation. For a fixed l
ilto:matpower-l@list.cornell.edu>
> Date: Tue, 11 May 2010 08:38:32 -0400
> Subject: Re: Loss minimization objective function in MATPOWER OPF
>
> The easiest way to get MATPOWER to do loss minimization is to give all of the
> generators an identical linear cost function. Then
The easiest way to get MATPOWER to do loss minimization is to give all of the
generators an identical linear cost function. Then minimizing the generation
cost will also minimize the total generation. For a fixed load, this is the
same as loss minimization.
--
Ray Zimmerman
Senior Research Ass
Hi
I am new to Matpower and am required to perform OPF for a 30-bus
system (case 30). Can you tell me how to change the OPF formulation
from cost minimization to transmission losses minimization?
I read something in the paper on 'MATPOWER's extensible architecture
for OPF' on f(x) + fu(x,z) but c
Unfortunately, the branch flows are non-linear functions of the
optimization variables and are not directly available to apply costs
to them. The best you could do would probably be to apply a cost to
the DC approximation of the branch flow, which is a linear function of
the bus angles, tho
Sir,
Thank you very much for your support. Now I want to minimize generation
cost as well as transmission cost. Obj = sum(fuel cost) + sum(
transmission cost )
where transmission cost = (power flow / line limit) * constant
The fuel cost minimization is already available. Now I want t
You will need to add some user defined constraints and costs as
described in Section 3.4.1 of the User's Manual.
If you call the base dispatch (where the line overload exists) P0,
then you'll need to define two new variables for each generator, one
Pplus to represent the upward deviation fr
I am using the lpopf.m file to solve the OPF.
1. case I
for minimizing the cost as objective using lpopf.m . (This is given directly
so I did it.)
2. case II
This is congestion removal by generation resheduling. After adding bilateral
transaction some of the lines get overloaded, In order to rem
I believe you can accomplish what you want using dispatchable loads.
Please have a look at the section on dispatchable loads in the manual.
Another option is to add fake generators to model the curtailments.
Ray
On Jan 30, 2008, at 9:45 AM, Boko Soo wrote:
Hello,
1. Suppose I want t
Hello,
1. Suppose I want to determine the demand volume that can be taken closest
to the contract and I would have the following function as an objective;
f = c.(Pd -Pd0)
where c is cost of curtailment
Pd0 is the demand volume target.
How could I do that?
2. Suppost I wan
84 matches
Mail list logo
