Update IDAES to 2.1.0

[lbianchi-lbl]

Summary/Motivation:

• [x] Check whether changes in IDAES/idaes-pse#1180 cause regressions in DISPATCHES
  • This is moot as the PR has been merged and is already part of IDAES 2.1.0
• [ ] Fix remaining issues due to IDAES 2.1.0/Pyomo 6.6.1

Changes proposed in this PR:

-

Legal Acknowledgement

By contributing to this software project, I agree to the following terms and conditions for my contribution:

1. I agree my contributions are submitted under the license terms described in the LICENSE.md and COPYRIGHT.md file at the top level of this directory.
2. I represent I am authorized to make the contributions and grant the license. If my employer has rights to intellectual property that includes these contributions, I represent that I have received permission to make contributions and grant the required license on behalf of that employer.

[radhakrishnatg]

@lbianchi-lbl @nareshsusarla @esrawli The test failures in the fossil case study do not appear to be related to the changes in the MultiPeriodModel class. I see initialization and solver errors. So, could you please take a look at that?

@dguittet There is a test failure in the RE case study. I think it has to do with the length of the data being passed to the build_multi_period_model method. I think this should be an easy fix.

[adam-a-a]

@lbianchi-lbl @nareshsusarla @esrawli The test failures in the fossil case study do not appear to be related to the changes in the MultiPeriodModel class. I see initialization and solver errors. So, could you please take a look at that?

@dguittet There is a test failure in the RE case study. I think it has to do with the length of the data being passed to the build_multi_period_model method. I think this should be an easy fix.

One issue seems to occur within test_costing_method in dispatches\case_studies\fossil_case\ultra_supercritical_plant\storage\tests\test_integrated_storage_with_ultrasupercritical_power_plant.py, specifically at initialize_with_costing, where a negative value is being raised to a power:

[adam-a-a]

So, the failure mentioned above seems to be attributed (at least initially) to m.fs.hxd.steam_reynolds_number going to negative values.

I should also note that three of these errors already exist when I run tests without any of the changes associated with the IDAES PR.

[lbianchi-lbl]

• The test failures that are actually related to the changes in IDAES/idaes-pse#1180 will be addressed here (i.e. on the DISPATCHES side); no further functionality changes are planned on the IDAES PR
• The other test failures will be investigated separately. @lbianchi-lbl will open another PR against IDAES/idaes:main and start looking for possible commits causing the failures

[radhakrishnatg]

@lbianchi-lbl I ran the tests locally, and test_RE_flowsheet.py is not failing on my laptop. I don't know why those tests are failing here.

[radhakrishnatg]

Based on #202, the remaining RE test failures do not seem to be related to the changes in the IDAES PR.

[radhakrishnatg]

Hi @lbianchi-lbl Is IDAES 2.1. compatible with Pyomo 6.5.? If yes, please change the Pyomo version to 6.5.*. I'm trying to figure out whether RE test failures are caused by Pyomo version or the IDAES version.

[lbianchi-lbl]

We've decided to use IDAES 2.0/Pyomo 6.5 for the June release.