Thank you Prof !!

On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 7:51 AM, Ray Zimmerman <[email protected]> wrote:

> The total cost for a dispatchable load is negative … the marginal cost is
> positive. But, yes, the overall cost of "generation" at a bus could be
> negative if you are adding together the costs of actual generators and
> dispatchable loads. In fact, the total "cost" is now the negative of the
> net benefit, so it could be a very large negative number.
>
>  --
> Ray Zimmerman
> Senior Research Associate
> 419A Warren Hall, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853
> phone: (607) 255-9645
>
>
>
>
> On Mar 22, 2013, at 12:30 AM, Aman Bansal <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> Dear Prof.
>
> Last question, like we have represented dispatchable loads as negative
> generation, what about their cost functions?
>
> I mean a & b for dispatchable loads will also be considered as negative?
>
> if yes this may result in overall negative cost function for the
> generation at a particular bus...
>
> thanks sir
>
>
> On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 1:35 PM, Ray Zimmerman <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> For multiple generators and dispatchable loads at a bus, you simply have
>> multiple injections, let's call them p1, p2, …, pn, and each has a cost
>> f1(p1), f2(p2), … fn(pn). To get the aggregate cost function you simply add
>> everything together. Let p = p1+ p2 + … + pn be the aggregate injection and
>> f(p) = f1(p1) + f2(p2) + ... + fn(pn) be the total cost function.
>>
>>  --
>> Ray Zimmerman
>> Senior Research Associate
>> 419A Warren Hall, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853
>> phone: (607) 255-9645
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Mar 21, 2013, at 3:20 AM, Aman Bansal <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>> Prof. Zimmerman
>>
>> But in case when a generator and a price sensitive load lie on same bus,
>> then if we denote price sensitive load as negative of generation, then what
>> is the effective cost function at that bus is both generator and
>> dispatchable load have different cost functions.....
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 8:16 PM, Ray Zimmerman <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> You can still easily create a matrix that corresponds to only the real
>>> generators (dimension 6 in your example). There is a lot of internal code
>>> that does something like …
>>>
>>> ig = find(~isload(mpc.gen));
>>>
>>> … and then uses ig to index the generator and gencost matrices to get
>>> info only for the real generators.
>>>
>>> --
>>>  Ray Zimmerman
>>> Senior Research Associate
>>> 419A Warren Hall, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853
>>> phone: (607) 255-9645
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mar 20, 2013, at 2:54 AM, Aman Bansal <[email protected]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hello Prof. Zimmerman
>>>
>>> I just realized from the manual that dispatchable or price-sensitive
>>> loads are modelled as negative real power injections with associated costs.
>>> But if we represent them as generators instead of loads (which they are
>>> actually), the flow participation matrix (that is obtained from power
>>> tracing) get affected. Like consider we have 6 gencos in problem and there
>>> are 5 price sensitive loads, then generator participation matrix would
>>> become 11*x instead of 6*x.
>>>
>>> How to deal with this??
>>>
>>> please enlighten me
>>>
>>> --
>>> Aman Bansal,
>>> M.Tech. Student (Power Systems)
>>> Indian Institute of Technology (BHU)
>>> Varanasi
>>> Cell No. +91-841-799-9350
>>>
>>> **The smallest good deed is better than the grandest good intention**
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Aman Bansal,
>> M.Tech. Student (Power Systems)
>> Indian Institute of Technology (BHU)
>> Varanasi
>> Cell No. +91-912-569-8850, 841-799-9350
>>
>> **The smallest good deed is better than the grandest good intention**
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Aman Bansal,
> M.Tech. Student (Power Systems)
> Indian Institute of Technology (BHU)
> Varanasi
> Cell No. +91-912-569-8850, 841-799-9350
>
> **The smallest good deed is better than the grandest good intention**
>
>
>


-- 
Aman Bansal,
M.Tech. Student (Power Systems)
Indian Institute of Technology (BHU)
Varanasi
Cell No. +91-912-569-8850, 841-799-9350

**The smallest good deed is better than the grandest good intention**

Reply via email to