I understand the concept behind that but my doubt is how to represent a dummy generator in matpower like coding or editing the code.
On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 10:23 PM, Ray Zimmerman <[email protected]> wrote: > Suppose a particular bus has a 100 MW load and a 100 MW generator that is > dispatched at 25 MW. That is equivalent to a 75 MW load and the cost of the > 25 MW of generation can be considered as the cost of curtailing 25 MW of > the nominal 100 MW load. > > Ray > > > On Mar 17, 2016, at 12:43 PM, Mounika Vanjarapu < > [email protected]> wrote: > > k sir. > and how to represent a dummy generator.when i include a generator at one > bus,it is also scheduled as per opf formulation.and how the load will be > curtailed by using this. > > On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 10:07 PM, Ray Zimmerman <[email protected]> wrote: > >> I’m afraid I can’t answer the question of whether or not your particular >> problem formulation implements the “time of use” program you intend. >> >> Ray >> >> >> On Mar 17, 2016, at 12:01 PM, Mounika Vanjarapu < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >> thanx for replying sir and i will try this. one more clarification i >> need from you. >> I implement time of use program for congestion >> management.ie for different periods the price will be different .for >> example peak and off peak,valley periods. >> 1.I take the case of ieee14 bus system and i create congestion by >> decreasing the line flow limit at 3rd bus to 30MW where the actual power >> flow is 39.77MW.so <http://39.77mw.so/> there will be congestion >> occured.therefore the LMP values will increase. >> 2.In order to mitigate this condition I use the scale load function and >> scale the load into peak ,off peak and valley periods in the ratio of >> 0.55,0.3,0.15 resp. at all buses. >> 3.Now i use price sensitive loads concept where I assume the marginal >> benefit is 28.5$/MWh,above that pirce the load should be curtailed. >> 4.In peak periods the load is curtailed and I show the gencost,objective >> function,demand cost comparisons by not applying time of use. >> My question is am i using the price sensitive loads in >> a correct way in my context of time of use program are I am violating.I >> mean that, is my approach for implementing time of use program using price >> sensitive loads is in a correct way. >> Please suggest me,i need advice from you. >> >> >> On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 7:47 PM, Ray Zimmerman <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> I can think of two essentially equivalent ways to do this. >>> >>> (1) Model the loads as fixed loads at their nominal values plus a dummy >>> generator that represents curtailment. The cost of curtailment is then >>> included directly as a positive cost for these curtailment dummy generators. >>> >>> (2) Model your load as a dispatchable load with a benefit function equal >>> to the benefit to the load minus the curtailment payment from the ISO. >>> >>> For a DC OPF there should be no difference between the two approaches. >>> For an AC OPF the only difference is that (1) affects real power only, but >>> (2) forces the power factor of the load to remain constant, so reactive >>> power is curtailed in proportion to the real power curtailed. >>> >>> Ray >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Mar 16, 2016, at 10:10 PM, Mounika Vanjarapu < >>> [email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> sir >>> coming to direct load control program where the case is to give >>> incentives to the customers for load reduction,the objective function >>> should includes the incentives payment along with the generators >>> cost.whereas showing the price sensitive loads the objective function >>> removes the payment by the loads.presently in matpower the runopf does this. >>> my question is can we change our objective >>> function according to our problem in matpower.why because ISO have to pay >>> money to the people for their curtailment.so i want to includes this money >>> in my objective function. >>> >>> On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 7:51 PM, Ray Zimmerman <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> Since MATPOWER represents dispatchable demand as negative generation >>>> with negative cost, the objective function ends up being the negative of >>>> net benefits. Normally you want to maximize net benefits (total benefit to >>>> demand minus total cost of supply). MATPOWER does this by minimizing the >>>> negative of net benefits. So a negative objective function silly means that >>>> the benefits to the loads is greater than the cost to generators … which is >>>> what you normally expect. >>>> >>>> Ray >>>> >>>> >>>> > On Mar 16, 2016, at 5:13 AM, Mounika Vanjarapu < >>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>> > >>>> > sir >>>> > >>>> > what does it means a negative objective function. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >> >> > >
