Thank you for your answer. Let me ask you one small question. Assume
that we have 2 areas and links between them and area 3.
Power, from area 1 to area 2, can flow :
1. directly through branches that belong to interface area1-area2.
2. through area3(from area1->area3->area2).
Is there any way to consider first transfer throw direct links and skip
transfer through area3 ?
Regards,
Aneta
W dniu 2013-01-08 15:15, Ray Zimmerman pisze:
Sorry, I should have mentioned that the interface constraints were
based on DC flow models. This is because the current version of the
MATPOWER OPF formulation makes it easy to add linear constraints,
whereas adding non-linear constraints would require non-trivial
modifications to the code. So it's the latter … implementation complexity.
--
Ray Zimmerman
Senior Research Associate
419A Warren Hall, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853
phone: (607) 255-9645
On Jan 8, 2013, at 4:05 AM, Aneta Goska <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Thank you very much for your help. Let me ask you a question, why
this is done as DC (not AC) ?
(Because of computational cost or implementation complexity ?)
Best regards,
Aneta
W dniu 2013-01-02 16:38, Ray Zimmerman pisze:
See Section 6.5.2 in the User's Manual
<http://www.pserc.cornell.edu/matpower/manual.pdf>.
--
Ray Zimmerman
Senior Research Associate
419A Warren Hall, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853
phone: (607) 255-9645
On Jan 2, 2013, at 4:00 AM, Aneta Goska
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Dear all,
I have a question regarding the max P constraints of the
group of branches.
Are there easy way to set up constraints for group of links
For example***
* case9Q branch 5-4 PF+branch 5-4 PF < assumed Const
Best regards,
Aneta
--
Pozdrawiam,
Aneta Goska
--
Pozdrawiam,
Aneta Goska
--
Pozdrawiam,
Aneta Goska
