Addition to my previous message:
It does seem that the generation sums up to 240, but the dispatchable load
(generator 4) reaches -540 and the rows of mdo.results.Pc don’t sum to 0. Does
this make sense?
> On 5 Dec 2016, at 19:50, Gal D <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Hi Ray,
>
> Thanks for the interesting idea. However it doesn’t seem to work since I
> don’t witness the result I expect. I’ll explain:
>
> - I’m running most_ex5_mopf
> - I removed the wind completely for simplicity. There’s no storage either.
> - I included only the 3 branch contingencies in ‘contab’, all with
> probability 0
>
> What I expect to see: generation & load always bounded by 240, since this is
> the bottleneck when line 2-3 is out.
> What I see: generation & load bounded by 540, which is the no-contingency
> case. When I inspect the verbose output, I see that per each contingency it
> is indeed bounded according to the specific case, but the overall result is
> as I described.
>
> PS. possible bug: I also tried assigning 0.25 probabilities to all three
> branch contingencies and MOST converges on negative values for generator 2
> for some reason.
> I’m attaching my most_ex5_mopf.m and ex_contab.m for you convenience.
>
> Your help is appreciated!
> Gal
> <most_ex5_mpopf.m>
> <ex_contab.m>
>
>
>> On 5 Dec 2016, at 17:11, Ray Zimmerman <[email protected]
>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>>
>> What about using the contab table as you mentioned, but assigning a
>> probability of 1 to the base case and 0 to the contingency cases? The
>> constraints will still need to be satisfied for the contingency cases, but
>> the objective function will only be based on the base case. You will need to
>> make sure that you only include contingencies that are feasible however, so
>> beware of isolated buses and islanding.
>>
>> Ray
>>
>>
>>> On Dec 5, 2016, at 6:38 AM, Gal D <[email protected]
>>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I wish to run an N-1 unit commitment, considering all branch outages. How
>>> do I do that?
>>>
>>> - Notice I saw a question regarding N-1 contingency analysis by Harron
>>> Malik from July, however I’m asking a different question - I do not want to
>>> iterate on contingencies and solve per each one on its own, rather to add
>>> all N-1 constraints into a single optimization program.
>>>
>>> - I thought of doing that using the ‘contab’ table by assigning uniform
>>> probabilities on all branch failures , but I’m afraid this results in a
>>> different optimization program.
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Gal
>>
>
