Applying FLO_FUNCX to FLO_FUNC

[O.Broad]

I am trying to use FLO_FUNC to modify the output of a commodity depending on the vintage of a technology. The commodity output is defined using FLO_FUNC. The documentation Part II suggests that this is possible if the correct parameterisation of FLO_FUNCX is chosen - but refers to "cgN". This is the only reference to cgN that I could find in the documentation and I don't know what it refers to.

The parameterisation I have pulled together does not work - and I have tried a number of different permutations - none of which affect the equations. 

- The technology is defined below. It is the output of BWOD that I would like to change over time. 

- Vintaging is active
- The SHAPE that I have created is defined using the following: 


and 


- Veda2 understands this shape definition and links it to the technology






- but this is not reflected in the equations


I would not have expected the above to contain references to VAR_ACT for ALUFOR01 - the first line is referencing the 2030 Activity from the 2025 vintage and multiplying it by the FLO_FUNC value for BWOD. The shape should include zeros between years 1 and 15 of the lifetime of the technology. 

I feel like I've clearly missed, or misinterpreted / mis-represented something. Any help on this would be greatly appreciated. 

Thank you!!

[Antti-L]

Thanks for this problem report. 
It revealed a bug in TIMES, related to the processing of those shape indexes. This bug manifests only when using shaping FLO_FUNC or VDA_FLOP, such that the derived flow is being reduced to the activity, and when the SHAPE value is zero, like in your case. This bug will be fixed in the next release.

Meanwhile, you could use FLO_EFF instead of FLO_FUNC, and use FLO_FUNCX(r,y,p,BWOD,BWOD) = 7.  I just tested that myself, and it worked fine with the zero SHAPE values.

I am sorry for the inconvenience caused to you by this bug.

[O.Broad]

Antti, thank you for the quick response and for the solution, good to hear it's not my error this time round! Will test the solution out on my side and hopefully move on.

[Antti-L]

Thanks for your understanding.

For clarifying a point in your original post, you had understood the use of FLO_FUNCX with FLO_FUNC correctly. The explanation "FLO_FUNC(cg1,cg2): cgN=cgN" in the documentation refers to the cg1 and cg2 indexes in the FLO_FUNC and FLO_FUNCX attributes by cgN (N=1,2).  The instruction "cgN=cgN" thus means that the cg1 in FLO_FUNC should correspond to the same cg1 specified in FLO_FUNCX, and the cg2 in FLO_FUNC should correspond to the same cg2 specified in FLO_FUNCX, which you had understood right.