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

Thermal Model: Optimization seems to not pick up the most cost effective hour #353

Open
martinarva opened this issue Oct 7, 2024 · 3 comments

Comments

@martinarva
Copy link

Describe the bug
I fiddled with the target heat temperature and found out that the optimisation plan did not pick up the most cost effective hour to heat.

Here is the screenshot of the plan. To my understanding the hour with load cost of 0.107 would be more optimal than 0.109.
Screenshot 2024-10-07 at 17 27 42

Also maybe it would be a good idea for user to define the target temp and also add a constant of how much it can go below that for a more optimal solution. For example my target temp is 22, but it would be ok if it goes down to 21.5 if there is a more optimal solution.

@davidusb-geek
Copy link
Owner

davidusb-geek commented Jan 31, 2025

Also maybe it would be a good idea for user to define the target temp and also add a constant of how much it can go below that for a more optimal solution. For example my target temp is 22, but it would be ok if it goes down to 21.5 if there is a more optimal solution.

Yes, we should go in this direction.
A PR by @werdnum treating this is currently as a Draft: PR #374

@werdnum
Copy link
Contributor

werdnum commented Jan 31, 2025

Also maybe it would be a good idea for user to define the target temp and also add a constant of how much it can go below that for a more optimal solution. For example my target temp is 22, but it would be ok if it goes down to 21.5 if there is a more optimal solution.

Yes, we should go in this direction. A PR by @werdnum treating this is currently as a Draft: PR #374

Oh I didn't realise it was a draft. I'll rebase it onto trunk so it can be merged.

@davidusb-geek
Copy link
Owner

Oh I didn't realise it was a draft. I'll rebase it onto trunk so it can be merged.

Great, thanks!

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

No branches or pull requests

3 participants