Dear Ray Zimmerman,
I just put the success after the runpf call, so here is the answer
==========================================================================================
******************** SIMULATION RESULTS OF 64 BUS DISTRIBUTION NETWORK
*******************
==========================================================================================
BEFORE RECONFIGURATION AFTER
RECONFIGURATION
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tie switches: 62 63 64 65 66 56 60 62
63 64
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Power loss: 28.6627 kW 42.4297 kW
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Power loss reduction: _______ -48.0313 %
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Minimum voltage: 0.97552 pu 0.96821 pu
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Elapsed time is 34.535879 seconds.
and this is when I don't put the success
==========================================================================================
******************** SIMULATION RESULTS OF 64 BUS DISTRIBUTION NETWORK
*******************
==========================================================================================
BEFORE RECONFIGURATION AFTER
RECONFIGURATION
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tie switches: 62 63 64 65 66 22 28 58
63 66
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Power loss: 28.6627 kW 28.1178 kW
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Power loss reduction: _______ 1.9011 %
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Minimum voltage: 0.97552 pu 0.9764 pu
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Elapsed time is 39.312077 seconds.
I don't know why the result is so much different, can you give me clue?
thank you
*Best Regards,*
*Putu Diah Nitya Kirana,*
Assistant and Researcher at Electric Energy Conversion Laboratory B101
Electrical Engineering Department
Faculty of Electrical Technology
Institut Teknologi Sepuluh Nopember
Surabaya, Indonesia
+62 8170 3178 248
On Tue, 9 Apr 2019 at 23:31, Ray Zimmerman <[email protected]> wrote:
> I put the success check immediately after the runpf call, inside the if
> statements.
>
> Ray
>
>
> On Apr 9, 2019, at 11:25 AM, Nitya Kirana <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> Dear Ray Zimmerman,
>
> Thank you before for your answer,
>
> I have tried to write
>
> if sum(sum(matran))==0
> result=runpf(hop);
>
> fitness(k)=sum(result.branch(:,14)+result.branch(:,16))*1e3;
> end
> end
> if ~result.success
> keyboard;
> end
>
>
> but It didn't drop me into Matlab Debugger, or did I write it wrong? The
> problem is my program works but the result is different for every run.
>
> *Best Regards,*
>
> *Putu Diah Nitya Kirana,*
>
> Assistant and Researcher at Electric Energy Conversion Laboratory B101
> Electrical Engineering Department
> Faculty of Electrical Technology
> Institut Teknologi Sepuluh Nopember
> Surabaya, Indonesia
>
> +62 8170 3178 248
>
>
>
> On Tue, 9 Apr 2019 at 22:58, Ray Zimmerman <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I ran your code on my machine using the latest MATPOWER development
>> version (available on GitHub <https://github.com/MATPOWER/matpower/>).
>> It ran to the end with the following result …
>>
>>
>> ==========================================================================================
>> ******************** SIMULATION RESULTS OF 64 BUS DISTRIBUTION NETWORK
>> *******************
>>
>> ==========================================================================================
>> BEFORE RECONFIGURATION AFTER
>> RECONFIGURATION
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Tie switches: 62 63 64 65 66
>> 3 4 14 19 23
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Power loss: 28.6627 kW NaN kW
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Power loss reduction: _______ NaN %
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Minimum voltage: 0.97552 pu 0.95288 pu
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> However, it does appear that some of the power flows did not converge. I
>> checked the first two instances and found that in both cases the network
>> was not fully connected. In case you’re interested in how I did it, I
>> inserted the following lines right after the call to runpf.
>>
>> if ~result.success
>> keyboard;
>> end
>>
>> This drops me into the Matlab debugger if the power flow fails to
>> converge. Then I just use case_info()
>> <http://www.pserc.cornell.edu/matpower/docs/ref/matpower6.0/case_info.html>
>> to
>> check the connectivity of that particular case …
>>
>> case_info(hop1)
>>
>> Give it a try and you should see what I mean. And I recommend using
>> MATPOWER 7.0b1 or at the very least 6.0.
>>
>> Ray
>>
>>
>>
>> On Apr 9, 2019, at 9:07 AM, Nitya Kirana <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>> Dear Ilias Sarantakos,
>>
>> I didn't find Matpower 6.1 and I downloaded the 6.0 version instead. When
>> I run the program, it still doesn't converge. I don't know if the problem
>> is in my SPSO or in my Newton Raphson Method. Here I attach my coding, can
>> you run it for me? Thank you. I really need help for my final project.
>>
>> Notes : The program you have to run is in main64.
>>
>> *Best Regards,*
>>
>> *Putu Diah Nitya Kirana,*
>>
>> Assistant and Researcher at Electric Energy Conversion Laboratory B101
>> Electrical Engineering Department
>> Faculty of Electrical Technology
>> Institut Teknologi Sepuluh Nopember
>> Surabaya, Indonesia
>>
>> +62 8170 3178 248
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, 9 Apr 2019 at 17:49, Ilias Sarantakos <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Nitya,
>>>
>>> I tried your network and it converged; I am using MATPOWER 6.1.
>>>
>>> Kind regards,
>>>
>>> Ilias Sarantakos
>>> PhD Student
>>> Newcastle University
>>> UK
>>>
>>> Στις Τρί, 9 Απρ 2019 στις 9:19 π.μ., ο/η Nitya Kirana <
>>> [email protected]> έγραψε:
>>>
>>>> Dear Fiaz Ahmad,
>>>>
>>>> I actually have run the simulation for IEEE 33 bus, 16 bus, and 69 bus
>>>> using Newton Raphson method and the result is convergen. And also in IEEE
>>>> 33 bus it has the ratio R/X greater than mine, so I just think that the
>>>> problem is not the Newton Raphson method. Anw, thank you for your
>>>> recommendation.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *Best Regards, *
>>>>
>>>> *Putu Diah Nitya Kirana,*
>>>>
>>>> Assistant and Researcher at Electric Energy Conversion Laboratory B101
>>>> Electrical Engineering Department
>>>> Faculty of Electrical Technology
>>>> Institut Teknologi Sepuluh Nopember
>>>> Surabaya, Indonesia
>>>>
>>>> +62 8170 3178 248
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, 9 Apr 2019 at 11:54, Fiaz Ahmad <[email protected]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Dear Nitya use forward-backward sweep algorithm for the power flow of
>>>>> this system.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Have a nice day
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>> DR. FIAZ AHMAD
>>>>> PhD Mechatronics Engineering (Sabanci University, Istanbul Turkey),
>>>>> Mob: 0092-332-9124525,
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Apr 9, 2019 at 9:51 AM Nitya Kirana <[email protected]>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Dear Fiaz Ahmad,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Okay thank you, so what's your recommendation for this power system
>>>>>> analysis method?
>>>>>> *Best Regards,*
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *Putu Diah Nitya Kirana,*
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Assistant and Researcher at Electric Energy Conversion Laboratory B101
>>>>>> Electrical Engineering Department
>>>>>> Faculty of Electrical Technology
>>>>>> Institut Teknologi Sepuluh Nopember
>>>>>> Surabaya, Indonesia
>>>>>>
>>>>>> +62 8170 3178 248
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, 9 Apr 2019 at 01:04, Fiaz Ahmad <[email protected]>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Normally Newton Raphson method doesn't converge for distribution
>>>>>>> systems due to high r/x ratios
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Mon, Apr 8, 2019, 22:48 Carlos A. Castro <[email protected]>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Dear Nitya
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I would do two things:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 1. I would replace all commas "," by points "." in the data file.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 2. I would try to draw the one line diagram of the network based on
>>>>>>>> the data, to check whether the network is all connected, that is, that
>>>>>>>> there are no isolated buses or group of buses,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Good luck,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Carlos
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Em seg, 8 de abr de 2019 às 14:42, Nitya Kirana <
>>>>>>>> [email protected]> escreveu:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Dear all,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I have run the power flow of 64 radial test bus system using
>>>>>>>>> Newton Raphson in Matpower 4.1. It shows the result of power
>>>>>>>>> losses but it doesn't converge, whenever I run the matlab, the result
>>>>>>>>> is
>>>>>>>>> always different, and I don't know what's the problem. Can anyone
>>>>>>>>> help me?
>>>>>>>>> because this is my final project. It shows "Warning: Matrix is
>>>>>>>>> singular to working precision."
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> So, here is my data :
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> bus data
>>>>>>>>> bus type Pd Qd Gs
>>>>>>>>> Bs area Vm Va baseKV zone Vmax Vmin
>>>>>>>>> 1 3 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 20 1 1 0,9
>>>>>>>>> 2 3 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 20 1 1 0,9
>>>>>>>>> 3 3 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 20 1 1 0,9
>>>>>>>>> 4 1 0,0136 0,016256 0 0 1 1 0 20 1 1 0,9
>>>>>>>>> 5 1 0,0204 0,024384 0 0 1 1 0 20 1 1 0,9
>>>>>>>>> 6 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 20 1 1 0,9
>>>>>>>>> 7 1 0,07684 0,091846 0 0 1 1 0 20 1 1 0,9
>>>>>>>>> 8 1 0,02856 0,034138 0 0 1 1 0 20 1 1 0,9
>>>>>>>>> 9 1 0,03808 0,045517 0 0 1 1 0 20 1 1 0,9
>>>>>>>>> 10 1 0,0238 0,028448 0 0 1 1 0 20 1 1 0,9
>>>>>>>>> 11 1 0,01768 0,021133 0 0 1 1 0 20 1 1 0,9
>>>>>>>>> 12 1 0,017 0,02032 0 0 1 1 0 20 1 1 0,9
>>>>>>>>> 13 1 0,022304 0,02666 0 0 1 1 0 20 1 1 0,9
>>>>>>>>> 14 1 0,0204 0,002438 0 0 1 1 0 20 1 1 0,9
>>>>>>>>> 15 1 0,05848 0,069901 0 0 1 1 0 20 1 1 0,9
>>>>>>>>> 16 1 0,26384 0,315366 0 0 1 1 0 20 1 1 0,9
>>>>>>>>> 17 1 0,03774 0,04511 0 0 1 1 0 20 1 1 0,9
>>>>>>>>> 18 1 0,0204 0,002438 0 0 1 1 0 20 1 1 0,9
>>>>>>>>> 19 1 0,05576 0,06665 0 0 1 1 0 20 1 1 0,9
>>>>>>>>> 20 1 0,0136 0,016256 0 0 1 1 0 20 1 1 0,9
>>>>>>>>> 21 1 0,0306 0,016256 0 0 1 1 0 20 1 1 0,9
>>>>>>>>> 22 1 0,0204 0,024384 0 0 1 1 0 20 1 1 0,9
>>>>>>>>> 23 1 0,0272 0,032512 0 0 1 1 0 20 1 1 0,9
>>>>>>>>> 24 1 0,11764 0,140614 0 0 1 1 0 20 1 1 0,9
>>>>>>>>> 25 1 0,0068 0,008128 0 0 1 1 0 20 1 1 0,9
>>>>>>>>> 26 1 0,0136 0,016256 0 0 1 1 0 20 1 1 0,9
>>>>>>>>> 27 1 0,0238 0,028448 0 0 1 1 0 20 1 1 0,9
>>>>>>>>> 28 1 0,112948 0,135006 0 0 1 1 0 20 1 1 0,9
>>>>>>>>> 29 1 0,02176 0,02601 0 0 1 1 0 20 1 1 0,9
>>>>>>>>> 30 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 20 1 1 0,9
>>>>>>>>> 31 1 0,01768 0,021133 0 0 1 1 0 20 1 1 0,9
>>>>>>>>> 32 1 0,05168 0,061773 0 0 1 1 0 20 1 1 0,9
>>>>>>>>> 33 1 0,03468 0,041453 0 0 1 1 0 20 1 1 0,9
>>>>>>>>> 34 1 0,02856 0,034138 0 0 1 1 0 20 1 1 0,9
>>>>>>>>> 35 1 0,0272 0,032512 0 0 1 1 0 20 1 1 0,9
>>>>>>>>> 36 1 0,01768 0,021133</fon
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> <main64.m><case64.m><bus64.xls><swarm64.m><branch64.xls>
>>
>>
>>
>
