Veda2.0 Released!


A question about User Constraint
#1
Sorry to bother again.
I just start to learn how to use Process set and Commodity set. And is demo11, it creat a Process set called PP_RENNEW. Then it was used to specifies a minimum renewable penetration share.
I saw the value is negative and Iwant to know why. If I change it to postive, the constraint will be invalid?


Attached Files Thumbnail(s)
   
Reply
#2
> I saw the value is negative and I want to know why.

It is due to basic algebra. The default form of inequality constraints is such that the terms referring to variables are all on the LHS (Left-Hand-Side). So, if your constraint is something like:

  SUM({p ∈ PP_RENEW }, 1×VAR_FLO(REG1,2050,p,ELC))  ≥  0.2×VAR_COMPRD(REG1,2050,ELC)

In the standard form the it will thus be:

  SUM({p ∈ PP_RENEW }, 1×VAR_FLO(REG1,2050,p,ELC)) − 0.2×VAR_COMPRD(REG1,2050,ELC) ≥  0

As you can see, the sign of the term referring to VAR_COMPRD has been changed due to moving it onto the LHS. And because of that, the UC_COMPRD coefficient must be −0.2 when using this default arrangement. The negative per cent values in your screenshot are defining exactly those UC_COMPRD values on the LHS. Alternatively, one can also explicitly tell the model generator, which terms are supposed to be on the LHS and which are on the RHS, but that's more like an advanced option.
[+] 1 user Likes Antti-L's post
Reply
#3
(07-06-2024, 02:46 PM)Antti-L Wrote: > I saw the value is negative and I want to know why.

It is due to basic algebra. The default form of inequality constraints is such that the terms referring to variables are all on the LHS (Left-Hand-Side). So, if your constraint is something like:

  SUM({p ∈ PP_RENEW }, 1×VAR_FLO(REG1,2050,p,ELC))  ≥  0.2×VAR_COMPRD(REG1,2050,ELC)

In the standard form the it will thus be:

  SUM({p ∈ PP_RENEW }, 1×VAR_FLO(REG1,2050,p,ELC)) − 0.2×VAR_COMPRD(REG1,2050,ELC) ≥  0

As you can see, the sign of the term referring to VAR_COMPRD has been changed due to moving it onto the LHS. And because of that, the UC_COMPRD coefficient must be −0.2 when using this default arrangement. The negative per cent values in your screenshot are defining exactly those UC_COMPRD values on the LHS. Alternatively, one can also explicitly tell the model generator, which terms are supposed to be on the LHS and which are on the RHS, but that's more like an advanced option.
Thank you Antti! You help me a lot!
Reply


Possibly Related Threads…
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  VEDA2 Question Antti-L 14 1,551 1 hour ago
Last Post: AKanudia
  A question about Run Manager Lee 2 204 25-06-2024, 02:28 PM
Last Post: Lee
  One question about the Rusult Lee 3 448 15-06-2024, 08:24 PM
Last Post: Ravinder
  One question about EU-TIMES seanli12354 0 176 09-06-2024, 06:54 PM
Last Post: seanli12354
  A question about EU_TIMES Lee 0 193 07-06-2024, 07:42 AM
Last Post: Lee
  One question of EU-TIMES: CO2 emissions for gas/oil production/transmission process xiao.li8@mcgill.ca 1 311 30-05-2024, 02:58 PM
Last Post: Antti-L
  Batteries input capacity constraint juan.correalaguna@vito.be 5 860 05-04-2024, 06:00 PM
Last Post: Antti-L
  Model Infeasible Question VanessaDing 4 727 14-03-2024, 07:47 PM
Last Post: Antti-L
Question User define commodity group anik 3 656 14-03-2024, 06:52 PM
Last Post: AKanudia
  Question on the levelized cost computation Mahmoud 2 633 03-11-2023, 04:01 PM
Last Post: Mahmoud

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)