Thanks

 
 
From: [email protected]
Subject: Re: MIPs and FMINCON solvers
Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2014 15:39:04 -0500
To: [email protected]

All of the AC OPF solvers are numerical solvers with termination tolerances. If 
you want more precise solutions, you have to make these tolerances smaller. 
Since they solve for local optima, it is always possible that different 
algorithms will find different local optima, but in your case I think it is a 
simple matter of tightening the termination tolerances. I have no idea what you 
intended to accomplish with your "LamQ= - LamQ in the Hessian file”.
In any case, check “help mpoption” to find the termination tolerance options 
for the solvers you are using.

-- Ray ZimmermanSenior Research AssociateB30 Warren Hall, Cornell University, 
Ithaca, NY 14853phone: (607) 255-9645



On Feb 14, 2014, at 9:50 AM, amel zerigui <[email protected]> wrote:Dear 
all, 

By using Matpower for OPF solution with several solvers I recognize that the 
solution has a bit difference, maybe you tell me that this difference is not 
important for OPF, but I found it crucial if I used the obtained point as 
initial point in my research, bellow you find an example with explanation:
The solved case is New-England power system, the obtained OPF with FMINCON (520 
in mpoption)
Bus                         Voltage                                 Generation  
            #             Mag(pu)          Ang(deg)           P (MW)        Q 
(MVAr)  30              1.012               -2.924              244.61          
   -78.21      31              1.087               -0.000              570.84   
          427.49     32              1.030                1.981              
647.05             194.82      33              1.015                3.514       
       636.83             107.29      34              1.022                
2.268              513.32             137.83      35              1.062         
      5.410               656.12             160.27      36              1.090  
             7.896               563.70             116.85      37              
1.046               2.359               539.02              39.18      38       
       1.045               7.701               836.45             19.06      39 
             1.051               -9.700               983.52            48.70  
The objective function (520) is: 61748.05 $/hr Then same case_name is solved by 
using MIPs solver (560) and the results are: Bus                        Voltage 
                                 Generation              #             Mag(pu)  
        Ang(deg)           P (MW)        Q (MVAr)  30              1.012        
       -2.926              244.61              -78.15      31              
1.087               0.000               570.84             427.02     32        
      1.030               1.980               647.05             195.11      33 
             1.015               3.512               636.83             107.31  
    34              1.022                2.267               513.32             
137.82      35              1.062                5.409              656.12      
       160.31      36              1.090                7.894              
563.70             116.82       37              1.046               2.357       
         539.02             39.19      38              1.045               
7.700               836.45             19.07      39              1.051         
      -9.702               983.52             48.74  The objective function (of 
560) is: 61748.06 $/hr The difference is in red.
Then what I did, because the large difference is in Q(MVAr) I took LamQ= - LamQ 
in the Hessian file and I run OPF with MIPs solver, the results are bellow:   
Bus                           Voltage                                    
Generation                #                Mag(pu)          Ang(deg)            
P (MW)         Q (MVAr)     30                 1.012               -2.924       
       244.61              -78.22         31                 1.087              
 0.000               570.84             427.49        32                 1.030  
             1.981                647.05            194.82         33           
      1.015               3.514                636.83            107.30         
34                 1.022               2.268               513.32             
137.82         35                 1.062               5.410               
656.12             160.27         36                 1.090               7.896  
             563.70             116.85         37                 1.046         
      2.359               539.02             39.18          38                 
1.045               7.701               836.45             19.06         39     
            1.051               -9.700              983.52              48.71  
The objective function now (of 560) is same as above: 61748.06 $/hr Now the 
results are nearly closer to the results of FMINCON but still have too small 
difference which still caused for mea problem if I take this point as initial 
point of my work. What do you think? Is there any suggestion? And what I did is 
right or no? Thanks 
                                          

Reply via email to