![]() |
Regarding S_FLO_FUNC - Printable Version +- IEA-ETSAP Forum (https://iea-etsap.org/forum) +-- Forum: Model Generators (https://iea-etsap.org/forum/forumdisplay.php?fid=2) +--- Forum: TIMES (https://iea-etsap.org/forum/forumdisplay.php?fid=8) +--- Thread: Regarding S_FLO_FUNC (/showthread.php?tid=73) |
Regarding S_FLO_FUNC - Pernille.S - 16-01-2015 As I understand, FLO_FUNC is times-slice dependent whereas S_FLO_FUNC is only on an annual level. Correct? If this is correct, is it possible to use S_FLO_FUNC together with FLO_FUNC values at a time-slice level? For example: FLO_FUNC(Fall)+ S_FLO_FUNC(Annual) I think it would be very convenient with a time slice dependent S_FLO_FUNC. Regarding S_FLO_FUNC - Pernille.S - 16-01-2015 It seem possible to use S_FLO_FUNC together with FLO_FUNC values at a time-slice level. Regarding S_FLO_FUNC - Antti-L - 16-01-2015 Yes, right, it can be used together with any FLO_FUNC / ACT_EFF / FLO_EMIS / FLO_EFF / ACT_FLO / EFF / CEFF / VDA_FLOP / INPUT / OUTPUT, at any timeslice level (ACT_FLO is only supported in ANSWER, EFF / CEFF / VDA_FLOP / INPUT / OUTPUT are only supported in VEDA-FE). S_FLO_FUNC is one of the most complex parameter in TIMES, with respect to implementation. Generalizing it to a timeslice-dependent variant might have additional complications, and so I would not expect it to happen very soon, unless there is wide common interest for it. Regarding S_FLO_FUNC - Pernille.S - 19-01-2015 Thank you for the fast response ![]() Now I can combine S_FLO_FUNC with S_COM_FR to model what I want so there is no urgent need for a timeslice-dependent parameter. |