• English
    • español
  • español 
    • English
    • español
  • Login
Ver ítem 
  •   DSpace Principal
  • 2.- Investigación
  • Documentos de Trabajo
  • Ver ítem
  •   DSpace Principal
  • 2.- Investigación
  • Documentos de Trabajo
  • Ver ítem
JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

Which unit commitment formulation is best? A comparison framework

Thumbnail
Ver/
IIT-18-110A.pdf (625.3Kb)
Autor
Tejada Arango, Diego Alejandro
Lumbreras Sancho, Sara
Sánchez Martín, Pedro
Ramos Galán, Andrés
Estado
info:eu-repo/semantics/draft
Metadatos
Mostrar el registro completo del ítem
Mostrar METS del ítem
Ver registro en CKH

Refworks Export

Resumen
 
 
The Unit Commitment (UC) problem, which deter-mines the day-ahead dispatch of generation units, is one of the key problems in power systems operation. A long list of formulations that claim to solve this problem more efficiently have been pro-posed. However, comparing them is not easy due to the different interpretations of constraints (e.g., ramps, reserves, startup/shut-down) and the heuristic component of the solution process of most solvers. This paper proposes a general framework to establish a systematic procedure for comparing different formulations. We apply the procedure to the three current state-of-the-art formula-tions in this context: tight and compact (TC), state transition (ST), and projected two-binary-variable (2bin). We carry out an ex-haustive analysis over 54 problem instances of very different sizes (10 to 1888 generators) and time scopes (24 and 168h), for four alternative definitions of additional constraints. Our results favor the TC formulation in general in terms of integrality gap and CPU time. Stronger ramp constraints improve CPU time in general and depending on the case study and size the fastest formulation changes and sometimes the differences among the formulations are almost negligible.
 
URI
http://hdl.handle.net/11531/31481
Which unit commitment formulation is best? A comparison framework
Palabras Clave

mixed-integer linear programming (MIP), unit commitment (UC), tightness, compactness, reformulations.
Colecciones
  • Documentos de Trabajo

Repositorio de la Universidad Pontificia Comillas copyright © 2015  Desarrollado con DSpace Software
Contacto | Sugerencias
 

 

Búsqueda semántica (CKH Explorer)


Listar

Todo DSpaceComunidades & ColeccionesPor fecha de publicaciónAutoresTítulosMateriasPor DirectorPor tipoEsta colecciónPor fecha de publicaciónAutoresTítulosMateriasPor DirectorPor tipo

Mi cuenta

AccederRegistro

Repositorio de la Universidad Pontificia Comillas copyright © 2015  Desarrollado con DSpace Software
Contacto | Sugerencias