Update DC-OPF with correct PU and additional flow limit constraints #714
Conversation
![github-actions[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/15368?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
This PR attempts to correct enhance flexibility of per-unit system of units in the DC-OPF and also impose line-flow MW limit constraint to represent thermally constrained lines.
Added base quantity definitions explicitly
Added pu reactance instead of P DC Coefficient
Minor typo fix
Adding transformer details; work in progress
Co-authored-by: github-actions[bot] <41898282+github-actions[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
Added transformer data for HT and LT sides
Added completed transformer details
…on of transformer reactance to line reactance remaining
lbonaldo
force-pushed
the
sambuddhac-patch-6
branch
from
90f2cdc to
c039a0d
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hey @sambuddhac, thanks for this PR! I’ve added a few comments to the changes, let me know your thoughts.
I've also rebased the branch onto the current develop.
As a note for the next release: this PR breaks backward compatibility by changing some column names in the Network.csv file used when DC-OPF: 1 (see the tests, for example).
| inputs_nw["pTrans_Max"] = to_floats(:Line_Max_Flow_MW) / scale_factor # convert to GW | ||
| if setup["DC_OPF"] == 1 | ||
| # DC-OPF requires the transmission capacity to be in pu | ||
| inputs_nw["pTrans_Max"] = to_floats(:Line_Max_Flow_MW) / to_floats(:MVA_Base)[1] # convert to GW |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is using only the first entry of MVA_Base intended?
Also, is the comment # convert to GW still valid?
| inputs_nw["kV_LT"] = to_floats(:Line_Voltage_kV_LT) | ||
| inputs_nw["kV_HT"] = to_floats(:Line_Voltage_kV_HT) | ||
| # Transmission line resistance (in Ohms) - Used when modeling quadratic transmission losses | ||
| inputs_nw["Ohms"] = to_floats(:Line_Resistance_Ohms) | ||
| inputs_nw["Ohms_LT"] = to_floats(:Line_Resistance_Ohms_LT) | ||
| inputs_nw["Ohms_HT"] = to_floats(:Line_Resistance_Ohms_HT) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Do we need to save these values in the inputs Dict? They don't seem to be used elsewhere in the code.
| println("Total HT reactance in Ohms", total_ht_reactance_txr_line_Ohms) | ||
| println("Total LT reactance in Ohms", total_lt_reactance_txr_line_Ohms) | ||
| #DC-OPF coefficient for each line (in MW when not scaled, in p.u. when scaled) | ||
| inputs_nw["pDC_OPF_coeff_ht"] = 1 ./ (total_ht_reactance_txr_line_system_pu) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I couldn’t find any usage of pDC_OPF_coeff_ht elsewhere in the code. Was it intended to be used somewhere? Should we remove it?
| total_ht_reactance_ohms = line_transformer_ht_reactance + lt_reactance_referred_to_ht | ||
| #Total HT Reactance in pu | ||
| total_ht_reactance_pu = total_ht_reactance_ohms ./ ht_reactance_Base | ||
| println("P.U. values of Total LT Reactance") |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It would probably be helpful to add some documentation for these equations to make the code easier to follow.
2 participants
This PR attempts to correct enhance flexibility of per-unit system of units in the DC-OPF and also impose line-flow MW limit constraint to represent thermally constrained lines.
Description
This PR attempts to correct enhance flexibility of per-unit system of units in the DC-OPF and also impose line-flow MW limit constraint to represent thermally constrained lines.
What type of PR is this? (check all applicable)
Related Tickets & Documents
Checklist
How this can be tested
Post-approval checklist for GenX core developers
After the PR is approved