Correct. I didn’t read clearly enough.
No, both would. @constraint(model, 0.9 <= x <= 1)
adds a ScalarAffineFunction
-in-Interval
constraint.
Correct. I didn’t read clearly enough.
No, both would. @constraint(model, 0.9 <= x <= 1)
adds a ScalarAffineFunction
-in-Interval
constraint.
But I imagine the order is also important: fix
ing before adding the constraints will result in an error/infeasibility?
Oops. I didn’t read your question enough. Both result in infeasibilities.
So fix
only applies to the bounds declared with the variable
Yes. You can set variable bounds one of two ways:
@variable(model, l <= x <= u)
or
@variable(model, x)
set_lower_bound(x, l)
set_upper_bound(x, u)
I am watching your educational video
Thank you
and I have another question please
If I want to validate my ACOPF results, can I use Power World Simulator for example to do so
Is it a good choice ?
I have been watching lecture now on convex relaxation and it explained to me the main concept so now how can I do convex relaxation for my problem…Do I have to write the code of SDP for example or can I use certain solver instead
I would start with one of the simplest convex relaxations. That is the SOC relaxation in the W space. The idea is, defined new voltage product variables W^R_{i,j} + i*W^I_{i,j}, which will represent the complex voltage products V_i * V_j. You go through your model and make these replacements,
You then add this constraint,
As a refrence implementation here is how AC and SOC models are constructed in PowerModels,
I will try that…Thank you Dr. @ccoffrin
I will try that…Thank you Dr. @ccoffrin
Aha ,so I want to use the AC OPF then switch to the rectangular or maybe I will do both in parallel…so
I used Couenne with ACOPF formulations through AmplNLWriter and I got “INFEASIBLE”
Although with the same model and equations with Ipopt, a local solution was found
could it be something with the couenne or my model ?!
That sounds like a tolerance issue. Under the hood, Couenne is using Ipopt to solve the continuous problems.