A BI-LEVEL OPTIMIZATION APPROACH FOR ENERGY ALLOCATION PROBLEMS

被引:0
作者
Biswas, Arpan [1 ]
Chen, Yong [2 ]
Hoyle, Christopher [1 ]
机构
[1] Oregon State Univ, Dept Mech Engn, Corvallis, OR 97331 USA
[2] Oregon State Univ, Coll Agr Sci, Corvallis, OR 97331 USA
来源
PROCEEDINGS OF THE ASME INTERNATIONAL DESIGN ENGINEERING TECHNICAL CONFERENCES AND COMPUTERS AND INFORMATION IN ENGINEERING CONFERENCE, 2018, VOL 2B | 2018年
关键词
ROBUST DESIGN; MODEL;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
T [工业技术];
学科分类号
08 ;
摘要
In our previous paper,[1] we have integrated the Robust Optimization framework with the Real Options model to evaluate flexibility, introducing the Flexible-Robust Objective. Flexibility is defined as the energy left to allocate after meeting daily demands. This integration proved more efficient in risk evaluation in energy allocation problems. However, the integration has some limitations in applying operational and physical constraints of the reservoirs. In this paper, an in-depth analysis of all the limitations is discussed. To overcome those limitations and ensure a conceptually correct approach, a bi-level programming approach has been introduced in the second stage of the model to solve the energy allocation problem. We define the proposed model in this paper as Two-Stage, Bi-Level Flexible-Robust Optimization. Stage 1 provides the maximum total flexibility that can be allocated throughout the optimization period. Stage 2 uses bi-level optimization. The Stage 2 upper level sets the target allocation of flexibility in each iteration and maximizes net revenue along with the evaluation of allocated flexibility by the real options model. The Stage 2 lower level minimizes the deviation between the level 1 target and the achievable solution, ensuring no violation in physical and operational constraints of the reservoirs. Some compatibility issues have been identified in integrating the two levels, which have been discussed and solved successfully; the model provides an optimal achievable allocation of flexibility by maximizing net revenue and minimizing violation of constraints. Uncertainty in the objective function and constraints has been handled by converting into a robust objective and probabilistic constraints, respectively. Both classical methods (SQP) and evolutionary methods (GA) with continuous decision variables have been applied to solving the optimization problem, and the results are compared Also, the result has been compared with the simplified version in previous paper, which was limited to randomly generate discrete decision variables. The new results provided an 8% improvement over the previous simplified model.
引用
收藏
页数:12
相关论文
共 21 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], J WATER RESOURCES PL, V118
[2]  
[Anonymous], J WATER RESOURCES PL, V139
[3]  
Biswas A., 2017, APPROACH FLEXIBLE RO
[4]   Real Option Valuation of FACTS Investments Based on the Least Square Monte Carlo Method [J].
Blanco, Gerardo ;
Olsina, Fernando ;
Garces, Francisco ;
Rehtanz, Christian .
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER SYSTEMS, 2011, 26 (03) :1389-1398
[5]   Analysis of regulation and policy of private toll roads in a build-operate-transfer scheme under demand uncertainty [J].
Chen, Anthony ;
Subprasom, Kitti .
TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH PART A-POLICY AND PRACTICE, 2007, 41 (06) :537-558
[6]   Robust design approach for achieving flexibility in multidisciplinary design [J].
Chen, W ;
Lewis, K .
AIAA JOURNAL, 1999, 37 (08) :982-989
[7]  
Colson B., 2005, 4OR, V4or, P87, DOI [10.1007/s10288-005-0071-0, DOI 10.1007/S10288-005-0071-0]
[8]  
Colson Benoit, OVERVIEW BILEVEL OPT
[9]   OPTION PRICING - SIMPLIFIED APPROACH [J].
COX, JC ;
ROSS, SA ;
RUBINSTEIN, M .
JOURNAL OF FINANCIAL ECONOMICS, 1979, 7 (03) :229-263
[10]   Biological robustness [J].
Kitano, H .
NATURE REVIEWS GENETICS, 2004, 5 (11) :826-837