Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Update to 2.0.0b4 #103

Merged
merged 53 commits into from
Aug 1, 2018
Merged

Update to 2.0.0b4 #103

merged 53 commits into from
Aug 1, 2018

Conversation

mfripp
Copy link
Member

@mfripp mfripp commented Feb 15, 2018

This branch includes various upgrades to support the case study on obtaining reserves from batteries or demand response. In particular, it adds the spinning_reserves_advanced module, which allows definition of multiple spinning reserve products (e.g., regulation or contingency).

There are also a number of minor bug fixes and feature improvements, as shown in the commit log.

All tests pass.

@bmaluenda
Copy link
Member

All the minor fixes and improvements look good to me, though I haven't read the Hawaii package in enough detail as to be able to check those other commits.

…t to the spinning_reserves example, which makes me think it has a bug.

Updated documentation in spinning_reserves_advanced
Added destinations for CLI arguments to make the file easier to grep.
Fixed bugs in project-level contingencies & NREL 3+5 rule
Updated default GEN_SPINNING_RESERVE_TYPES to make code match documentation, and allow generation_projects_reserve_capability.tab to be optional.
Fixed a minor indexing bug in hawaii/hydrogen.py
@josiahjohnston
Copy link
Contributor

The spinning_reserves_advanced module needs an example to demonstrate its intended functionality and test it. Should we dust off #93 (Small Hawaii Test Case), or would you like to add a new one to exercise the different types of reserve products?

In the interim, I made a spinning_reserves_advanced example that was should be equivalent to the spinning_reserves example, but using the new module. It has some kind of bug that yields a different total_cost. Not sure if that's a bug in the basic or advanced version, or if it's an expected behavior that I didn't anticipate. Can you take a look?

If spinning_reserves_advanced can do everything in spinning_reserves (plus more), would you be ok having this replace spinning_reserves? I'll want to make sure they are equivalent first, but I like the structure of the advanced version, and don't see a need to keep two modules that duplicate functionality.

I just committed some edits: a new example, updates to documentation, some bug squishes, removing references to undefined components, and similar clean-ups.

@josiahjohnston
Copy link
Contributor

Oops, just noticed that my push didn't go through on Friday like I expected because of a glitch on my end. Just finished pushing.

@mfripp
Copy link
Member Author

mfripp commented Jun 30, 2018

@josiahjohnston I think this is about ready to merge to master. I'm also thinking of bumping the version number to 2.0.0. Seems like as good a time as any. Let me know if you have any objections.

Can we live with just the simple spinning_reserves_advanced example that you made for now? It now matches the older version, which is nice. (Although we may now want to drop the old version...) I can add a better test case later, once I'm through this big summer paper push.

mfripp added 12 commits July 1, 2018 13:42
…ntested, needs code to prevent switching directions when providing reserves)
…antzig-Wolfe decomposition of EV fleet charging requirements)
…oad full solution long enough to save it (if ever).
This is useful for decomposing cost on a large scale, e.g., into taxes, 
EV costs, transmission, etc.
This ensures it will be included in overall evaluation, and will be 
important later if we switch ev_share to a decision variable.
@mfripp
Copy link
Member Author

mfripp commented Aug 1, 2018

Since the code has been pretty stable for a while, I'm merging it and declaring it version 2.0.0. Congratulations everyone!

@mfripp mfripp merged commit a660620 into master Aug 1, 2018
staadecker pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 28, 2023
staadecker pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 28, 2023
staadecker pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 29, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants