realife-brahmin / multiperiod-distopf-benchmark Goto Github PK

MAYBE sometimes DOPF sims are giving more optimal results compared to COPF (MAYBE).
If there is no modelling fault, then I should really check if DOPF is abusing battery energy more (pretty sure SCD is in check for both cases).

Add PLoss and PSubsCost vs macroItr plots

In this issue, it was found that COPF and DOPF violate the battery terminal charge penalty (a soft constraint) differently, causing different objective function values between the two simulations. Maybe it is time we put a hard constraint on it closed this gap between the simulations.

instead of Area 3 Battery 5 it should say something like Battery at Bus 23 in Area 3

An example of the legend blocking battery charging values at t = 1, 2

Currently only PSubs is printed out, which is unlike the OpenDSS validation script, which prints out both PSubs, QSubs for power borrowed from the substation.

Ensure folders obey:
numAreas_X/areaY/Horizon_T/ContextOfPlots/

Just realized that if after a simulation I run validate and then run checkForSCD iterations, they are saved wrt validateOPF's path instead of main's path, which is why I see battery scd plots in validateAgainstOpenDSS folder

So I have an easier time comparing COPF and DOPF battery plots

It is mildly annoying to wait for all six boundary convergence plot to show up before I can see my change in output plots. Maybe I can also turn off their showing?

Because right now, with the hard terminal SOC constraint in place, whatever contribution batteries have (and they basically don't have any contribution before T = 10, but that's more likely due to a boring time-series), batteries will always give a net 'contribution' of around 0kW, because they need to ensure (about) the same horizon-total amount of charging and discharging in order to arrive at the same SOC as that at the beginning of the Multi Period.
This new metric will really give a much better perspective on the role of the batteries in the grid.

Right now, because of area-wise selection of GED Buses based on a desired DER_percent and Batt_percent, causing discrepancy in both number of GED buses chosen as well as (probably) causing a non-overlapping set of GED buses to be chosen between the two simulations.

I'm assuming that the x-axes are decoupled anyway. Still it would be cool if they have a head-to-head correlation.

For example the very first purple bar should always match the last one in height, so we should be showing B0 as the first one, not B1.