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]
> <mailto:[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]
>> <mailto:[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 <http://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]
>> <mailto:[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]
>>> <mailto:[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]
>>> <mailto:[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] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > sir
>>> >
>>> > what does it means a negative objective function.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
