If you are saying that adding the penalty function (to violations of certain constraints, I assume? which ones?) increases your reactive power output, I’m afraid I don’t have a good explanation for that. It’s also not clear which “outputs” are giving you “lesser values” without penalties than with. If you are talking about losses, that makes sense (see my explanation in a previous post to Ambika).
Regarding whether or not to enforce Q limits, that depends on your problem I suppose. In the end, I guess you want feasible solutions, so you can either enforce the Q limits directly, or put penalty functions on their violations. -- Ray Zimmerman Senior Research Associate B30 Warren Hall, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853 USA phone: (607) 255-9645 > On Oct 17, 2014, at 11:09 AM, nivedita arunachalam > <[email protected]> wrote: > > I do powerloss optimisation which adds up the violation values. I have the > voltages of the gen bus as my control variable. My outputs without penalty > gives lesser values than with penalties. > And i hav another ques that is while doing reactive power optimisation should > i enforce q limits. I refered all your previous replies and wanted your > suggestion regarding it. > > On 17 Oct 2014 19:00, "Ray Zimmerman" <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > You’ll have to describe what you’re doing in a bit more detail for us to be > able to give any useful input. Presumably, you are doing an OPF with some > sort of modified cost function? What is the objective function? > > Ray > > On Oct 17, 2014, at 12:02 AM, nivedita arunachalam > <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > >> Dear all, >> Im working with reactive power optimization on IEEE30 bus >> system. And I need to add penalty to my fitness function. While doing so I >> get maximum reactive power for all generator buses. why does this occur can >> anyone explain me? >> I there any remedy for that? >
