lanl-ansi / gaspowermodels.jl Goto Github PK

Hi,

I am trying to replicate the power gas model (belgium gas with IEEE14 bus) in python following the formulation in Convex Optimization for Joint Expansion Planning of Natural Gas and Power Systems. I ran into an issues with gas flow in parallel pipelines. I wonder if you have encountered the same issue. My model gave a very similar results for the gas flow as the gaspowermodel julia package. The only issue is that only one pipe has gas flow among parallel pipelines. For example, pipeline 1 and pipeline 2 are parallel pipelines that connect junction 1 and junction 2. The gas flow of pipeline 1 in my model is the sum of the gas flow of pipeline1 and pipeline 2 in the julia package model. I wonder whether this is an issue with the second order cone relaxation. Because equation 17 in the paper is greater or equal to, the flow can be 0 in pipeline2, which satisfies the weymouth equation. Meanwhile, the gas mass flow balance is met through pipeline1's transportation of gas. I have already set the binary flow direction variables of parallel pipelines to be the same. May I ask whether you have encountered the same issue and whether there is a fix? A picture of comparison of flow variables are attached? Thanks very much for your help.

This constraint looks for ql values at the junction level. Needs to be refactored to be at the consumer level. Input data files will need to be adjusted as well.

Hi,

May I ask if there is a way to fix a variable when run the gas power model? For example, the active power and reactive power flow on transmission line connecting node 6 to node 13 are fixed at 0. Thanks.

This issue is used to trigger TagBot; feel free to unsubscribe.

If you haven't already, you should update your TagBot.yml to include issue comment triggers.
Please see this post on Discourse for instructions and more details.

If you'd like for me to do this for you, comment TagBot fix on this issue.
I'll open a PR within a few hours, please be patient!

Refactor data files to conform to PowerModels 0.6 data models that split load from buses

v0.1.0
@JuliaRegistrator register()

Create GasPowerModels parse routines which handle all the per unit/data correction routines in one place. Leverage the data correction and parse routines of GasModels and PowerModels

The wiki documentation leaves much to be desired in terms of clarity on how the data model captures the coupling between gas and electric power systems

Add a function which converts powerModels rate (per hour) in a per second rate

Add capability to model gas component dependencies on electricity (compressors)

Consider unifying the objectives (and problem formulations) min_ne, min_opf, and min_ne_opf as a single function. min_ne is min_ne_opf without opf and min_opf is min_ne_opf without ne. With 0 cost provided as inputs, min_ne_opf could be used to model all three examples. Is there value in modeling these three problems independently?

What versions of PowerModels is this code compatible with? The REQUIRE says,

PowerModels 0.5

Which would suggest versions 0.5 and 0.6. However, providing an upper bound is the best practice to prevent this code from breaking when a new version is released. For example,

PowerModels 0.5 0.7-

would explicitly state that it is compatible with versions 0.5 and 0.6.

Hi,

I followed the instruction to add the command (Pkg.add("GasPowerModels") and add JuMP Juniper Ipopt Cbc). Then I run the testing. But it gave me error as below. Thanks for your help.

[ Info: no explicit NLP constraints or objective provided using @NLconstraint or @NLobjective macros
IEEE 14 Belgian case: Error During Test at /Users/carriesu/.julia/packages/GasPowerModels/aycKw/test/gpf.jl:15
Got exception outside of a @test
could not load library "/Users/carriesu/.julia/packages/Ipopt/Iu7vT/deps/usr/lib/libipopt.1.10.10.dylib"
dlopen(/Users/carriesu/.julia/packages/Ipopt/Iu7vT/deps/usr/lib/libipopt.1.10.10.dylib, 1): Library not loaded: @rpath/libgfortran.5.dylib
Referenced from: /Users/carriesu/.julia/packages/Ipopt/Iu7vT/deps/usr/lib/libipopt.1.10.10.dylib
Reason: image not found
Stacktrace:
[1] createProblem(::Int64, ::Array{Float64,1}, ::Array{Float64,1}, ::Int64, ::Array{Float64,1}, ::Array{Float64,1}, ::Int64, ::Int64, ::Ipopt.var"#eval_f_cb#18"{Ipopt.Optimizer}, ::Ipopt.var"#eval_g_cb#20"{Ipopt.Optimizer}, ::Ipopt.var"#eval_grad_f_cb#19"{Ipopt.Optimizer}, ::Ipopt.var"#eval_jac_g_cb#21"{Ipopt.Optimizer,Array{Tuple{Int64,Int64},1}}, ::Ipopt.var"#eval_h_cb#22"{Ipopt.Optimizer,Array{Tuple{Int64,Int64},1}}) at /Users/carriesu/.julia/packages/Ipopt/Iu7vT/src/Ipopt.jl:224
[2] optimize!(::Ipopt.Optimizer) at /Users/carriesu/.julia/packages/Ipopt/Iu7vT/src/MOI_wrapper.jl:684
[3] optimize!(::MathOptInterface.Utilities.CachingOptimizer{Ipopt.Optimizer,MathOptInterface.Utilities.UniversalFallback{JuMP._MOIModel{Float64}}}) at /Users/carriesu/.julia/packages/MathOptInterface/C3lip/src/Utilities/cachingoptimizer.jl:170
[4] optimize!(::MathOptInterface.Bridges.LazyBridgeOptimizer{MathOptInterface.Utilities.CachingOptimizer{Ipopt.Optimizer,MathOptInterface.Utilities.UniversalFallback{JuMP._MOIModel{Float64}}},MathOptInterface.Utilities.UniversalFallback{MathOptInterface.Bridges.AllBridgedConstraints{Float64}}}) at /Users/carriesu/.julia/packages/MathOptInterface/C3lip/src/Bridges/bridgeoptimizer.jl:73
[5] optimize!(::MathOptInterface.Utilities.CachingOptimizer{MathOptInterface.AbstractOptimizer,MathOptInterface.Utilities.UniversalFallback{JuMP._MOIModel{Float64}}}) at /Users/carriesu/.julia/packages/MathOptInterface/C3lip/src/Utilities/cachingoptimizer.jl:170
[6] optimize!(::Model, ::OptimizerFactory; bridge_constraints::Bool, ignore_optimize_hook::Bool) at /Users/carriesu/.julia/packages/JuMP/ibcEh/src/optimizer_interface.jl:132
[7] optimize! at /Users/carriesu/.julia/packages/JuMP/ibcEh/src/optimizer_interface.jl:105 [inlined]
[8] optimize_get_status_backend(::Model; solver::OptimizerFactory) at /Users/carriesu/.julia/packages/Juniper/N3gty/src/util.jl:271
[9] solve_root_model!(::Juniper.JuniperProblem) at /Users/carriesu/.julia/packages/Juniper/N3gty/src/model.jl:63
[10] optimize!(::Juniper.Optimizer) at /Users/carriesu/.julia/packages/Juniper/N3gty/src/MOI_wrapper/MOI_wrapper.jl:285
[11] optimize!(::MathOptInterface.Bridges.LazyBridgeOptimizer{Juniper.Optimizer,MathOptInterface.Utilities.UniversalFallback{MathOptInterface.Bridges.AllBridgedConstraints{Float64}}}) at /Users/carriesu/.julia/packages/MathOptInterface/C3lip/src/Bridges/bridgeoptimizer.jl:73
[12] optimize!(::MathOptInterface.Utilities.CachingOptimizer{MathOptInterface.AbstractOptimizer,MathOptInterface.Utilities.UniversalFallback{JuMP._MOIModel{Float64}}}) at /Users/carriesu/.julia/packages/MathOptInterface/C3lip/src/Utilities/cachingoptimizer.jl:170
[13] optimize!(::Model, ::OptimizerFactory; bridge_constraints::Bool, ignore_optimize_hook::Bool) at /Users/carriesu/.julia/packages/JuMP/ibcEh/src/optimizer_interface.jl:132
[14] optimize! at /Users/carriesu/.julia/packages/JuMP/ibcEh/src/optimizer_interface.jl:105 [inlined]
[15] macro expansion at ./timing.jl:310 [inlined]
[16] optimize!(::GenericPowerModel{SOCWRForm}, ::GenericGasModel{StandardMISOCPForm}, ::OptimizerFactory) at /Users/carriesu/.julia/packages/GasPowerModels/aycKw/src/core/base.jl:72
[17] solve_generic_model(::GenericPowerModel{SOCWRForm}, ::GenericGasModel{StandardMISOCPForm}, ::OptimizerFactory; solution_builder::Function) at /Users/carriesu/.julia/packages/GasPowerModels/aycKw/src/core/base.jl:63
[18] run_generic_model(::Dict{String,Any}, ::Dict{String,Any}, ::Type{T} where T, ::Type{T} where T, ::OptimizerFactory, ::typeof(GasPowerModels.post_gpf); power_ref_extensions::Array{Any,1}, solution_builder::Function, kwargs::Base.Iterators.Pairs{Union{},Union{},Tuple{},NamedTuple{(),Tuple{}}}) at /Users/carriesu/.julia/packages/GasPowerModels/aycKw/src/core/base.jl:29
[19] run_generic_model(::String, ::String, ::Type{T} where T, ::Type{T} where T, ::OptimizerFactory, ::typeof(GasPowerModels.post_gpf); solution_builder::Function, kwargs::Base.Iterators.Pairs{Union{},Union{},Tuple{},NamedTuple{(),Tuple{}}}) at /Users/carriesu/.julia/packages/GasPowerModels/aycKw/src/core/base.jl:23
[20] run_generic_model at /Users/carriesu/.julia/packages/GasPowerModels/aycKw/src/core/base.jl:21 [inlined]
[21] #run_gpf#26 at /Users/carriesu/.julia/packages/GasPowerModels/aycKw/src/prob/gpf.jl:7 [inlined]
[22] run_gpf(::String, ::String, ::Type{T} where T, ::Type{T} where T, ::OptimizerFactory) at /Users/carriesu/.julia/packages/GasPowerModels/aycKw/src/prob/gpf.jl:7
[23] top-level scope at /Users/carriesu/.julia/packages/GasPowerModels/aycKw/test/gpf.jl:16
[24] top-level scope at /Users/julia/buildbot/worker/package_macos64/build/usr/share/julia/stdlib/v1.5/Test/src/Test.jl:1115
[25] top-level scope at /Users/carriesu/.julia/packages/GasPowerModels/aycKw/test/gpf.jl:16
[26] top-level scope at /Users/julia/buildbot/worker/package_macos64/build/usr/share/julia/stdlib/v1.5/Test/src/Test.jl:1115
[27] top-level scope at /Users/carriesu/.julia/packages/GasPowerModels/aycKw/test/gpf.jl:15
[28] include(::String) at ./client.jl:457
[29] top-level scope at /Users/carriesu/.julia/packages/GasPowerModels/aycKw/test/runtests.jl:42
[30] include(::String) at ./client.jl:457
[31] top-level scope at none:6
[32] eval(::Module, ::Any) at ./boot.jl:331
[33] exec_options(::Base.JLOptions) at ./client.jl:272
[34] _start() at ./client.jl:506

Test Summary: | Error Total
test qp gf pf | 1 1
IEEE 14 Belgian case | 1 1
ERROR: LoadError: LoadError: Some tests did not pass: 0 passed, 0 failed, 1 errored, 0 broken.
in expression starting at /Users/carriesu/.julia/packages/GasPowerModels/aycKw/test/gpf.jl:14
in expression starting at /Users/carriesu/.julia/packages/GasPowerModels/aycKw/test/runtests.jl:42
ERROR: Package GasPowerModels errored during testing

Should include GasModels.jl, PowerModels.jl, InfrastructureModels.jl

Based on the current codebase, it looks like this dependency does not need to be called out explicitly.

Dear Sir,

Recently I installed the GasPowerModels package in Julia. Then I tried to add the Pavito solver. It was unsuccessful. It seems that the JuMP versions compatible with Pavito are different from those with GasModels. Without the Pavito solver, GasPowerModels cannot run. Could you please give me some advice on this issue?

The GasPowerModels is really a powerful tool to model the gas and power coupling scenarios. Many thanks for your sharing.

Sincerely yours,
Sean
——————————————————————————

julia> Pkg.add("Pavito")
Resolving package versions...
ERROR: Unsatisfiable requirements detected for package JuMP [4076af6c]:
JuMP [4076af6c] log:
├─possible versions are: [0.18.3-0.18.6, 0.19.0-0.19.2, 0.20.0-0.20.1, 0.21.0-0.21.2] or uninstalled
├─restricted to versions * by an explicit requirement, leaving only versions [0.18.3-0.18.6, 0.19.0-0.19.2, 0.20.0-0.20.1, 0.21.0-0.21.2]
├─restricted by compatibility requirements with GasModels [5e113713] to versions: 0.19.1-0.19.2
│ └─GasModels [5e113713] log:
│ ├─possible versions are: [0.3.0, 0.3.2-0.3.5, 0.4.0-0.4.1, 0.5.0, 0.6.0] or uninstalled
│ ├─restricted to versions * by an explicit requirement, leaving only versions [0.3.0, 0.3.2-0.3.5, 0.4.0-0.4.1, 0.5.0, 0.6.0]
│ └─restricted by compatibility requirements with GasPowerModels [1fcaf345] to versions: 0.4.0-0.4.1
│ └─GasPowerModels [1fcaf345] log:
│ ├─possible versions are: 0.1.0-0.1.1 or uninstalled
│ └─restricted to versions * by an explicit requirement, leaving only versions 0.1.0-0.1.1
└─restricted by compatibility requirements with Pavito [cd433a01] to versions: 0.18.3-0.18.6 — no versions left
└─Pavito [cd433a01] log:
├─possible versions are: [0.1.1-0.1.2, 0.2.0] or uninstalled
└─restricted to versions * by an explicit requirement, leaving only versions [0.1.1-0.1.2, 0.2.0]

• connections
• ne_connections
• type

This will happen once a new version of GasModels is posted.

The nefd problem should be eliminated as it can be replaced with the new forms that assume fixed direction.

This function should be more appropriately named to add_consumer_generators

The implementation can be cleaned up a little bit using this new feature, lanl-ansi/PowerModels.jl#401

We need an implementation of status propagation between infrastructure systems. For example, if a PowerModels generator status = 0, PowerModels will remove the generator from ref. However, a GasModels receipt point might point at that generator as a consumer of gas. Given that the generator is removed, this will result in a dangling data pointer. So, we need to make this receipt status = 0 as well. This might require manual execution of the correct_network functions in GasModels and PowerModels

These need to be fully refactored to conform to the multi-network data structures

See if requirements for AmplNLWriter and CoinOptServices can be eliminated by using native Julia solvers.

Currently, parameters related to the definition of an objective function (e.g., gas_ne_weight, power_ne_weight, and obj_normalization) are passed in via kwargs. These should instead be migrated to the corresponding PowerModels input file as global parameters. This should be done for all relevant test cases.

• update to PowerModels v0.14
• drop Manifest.toml from git and add to .gitignore
• add "ResultCount" check in build_solution, otherwise JuMP.value() can fail (see PowerModels fix, lanl-ansi/PowerModels.jl@b80f4fe)
• remove JuMP.optimize!, and merge code into optimize_model!
• in optimize_model! make optimizer an optional kwarg (see, lanl-ansi/PowerModels.jl@8a8c9c0)
• update core function names, build_model -> instantiate_model; build_solution -> build_result
• update post_* functions to build_*
• follow problem naming convention post_(mn_)<prob name>(_<variant>)*

There should be al linear relaxation of the heat rate curve when the user chooses linear power models and linear gas models