You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
PowerModels uses bus voltages (vm) from bus data as a setpoint for power flow calculations, even at generator buses. The .raw files have generator scheduled voltages (vg), that seems to be taking over the bus voltages (vm) for generator buses. Adding following simple code is helping to validate results for case 3, case 5 and case 14.
for (g,gen) in destination_data["gen"]
genbus = gen["gen_bus"]
destination_data["bus"]["$genbus"]["vm"] = gen["vg"]
end
where destination_data is the input_data dictionary (see pti.jl).
It might be a good idea to include this logic in data processing.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
I agree that is gonna be a good addition. The export_pti function also export the vg field instead of the bus vm.A similar process should be include there too.
I think we have a plan for how to update the PowerModels conventions in the next breaking release. If you have other suggestions please add them to that thread.
PowerModels uses bus voltages (vm) from bus data as a setpoint for power flow calculations, even at generator buses. The .raw files have generator scheduled voltages (vg), that seems to be taking over the bus voltages (vm) for generator buses. Adding following simple code is helping to validate results for case 3, case 5 and case 14.
for (g,gen) in destination_data["gen"]
genbus = gen["gen_bus"]
destination_data["bus"]["$genbus"]["vm"] = gen["vg"]
end
where destination_data is the input_data dictionary (see pti.jl).
It might be a good idea to include this logic in data processing.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: