In order to understand clearly what you are trying to compare, I would need to see the network topology.
But, it both cases include the OLTC in the topology and in one case you are modifying the tap ratio to control voltage and in the other you are simply modifying the generator voltage setpoints, then the two solutions will not be equivalent. -- Ray Zimmerman Senior Research Associate 419A Warren Hall, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853 phone: (607) 255-9645 On Feb 10, 2012, at 10:46 AM, Silvio Miceli wrote: > Dear Ray, > > As far as I know, taking into account the voltage at slack bus as > optimization variable is equal to have an OLTC. So, how can I compare the > results with and without voltage control at slack? Can it be done either by > changing the tap ratio or voltage limits? > Best Wishes > > Silvio Miceli > > > On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 18:57, Silvio Miceli <[email protected]> wrote: > Dear Ray, > > 1. Can I say MATPOWER's OPF considers the power factor angle of generators as > optimization variable? If not, how can I consider as optimization variable? > > 2. Also, according to one of your replies to a post with regards to > considering the slack bus voltage as optimization variable, why you want to > implement OLTC in MATPOWER? In my idea, considering the slack bus as > optimization variable is equal to have an OLTC and consequently considering > the secondary voltage as optimization variable. Because usually the OLTC is > used in order to control the voltage of slack bus and in MATPOWER is already > considered as optimization variable. If I am not right, please let me know? > > Best Wishes > > Silvio > > > > On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 17:47, Ray Zimmerman <[email protected]> wrote: > On Feb 8, 2012, at 10:01 AM, Silvio Miceli wrote: > >> 1. What kind of generator has been taken into account in MATPOWER in Section >> 5.4.3 of MANUAL in order to consider the capability curve? > > It is simply intended to be a piecewise linear approximation to the kind of > capability curve exhibited by many types of conventional generators, such as > this one from Figure 2 in [1]. > >> 2. I want to minimize losses instead of maximizing social welfare >> considering offers and bids. How can I do it in MATPOWER? > > The answer to this one is readily available in the list archives ... e.g. > http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg00817.html > >> 3. How can I maximize profit for generators in MATPOWER instead of >> maximizing Social welfare? >> Also, by which formula I can obtain profits (for generators), revenue and >> cost in MATPOWER? Could you please address it? > > I'm not aware of a method to maximize profits, since that would involve an > objective that is a function of price, a very unconventional type of > optimization problem. You can compute revenue directly as the product of > quantity and price, and the cost is available in the dispatch matrix returned > by runmarket. See help idx_disp for a description of each column of the > dispatch matrix. > > - Ray > > [1] > http://www.hydroworld.com/index/display/article-display/353952/articles/hydro-review/volume-28/issue-2/feature-articles/system-protection/coordinating-generator-protection-and-controls-an-overview.html > > -- > Ray Zimmerman > Senior Research Associate > 419A Warren Hall, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853 > phone: (607) 255-9645 > > > >
