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

Merged voltage control separated by a switch contingency #630

Closed
annetill opened this issue Oct 18, 2022 · 1 comment
Closed

Merged voltage control separated by a switch contingency #630

annetill opened this issue Oct 18, 2022 · 1 comment
Assignees

Comments

@annetill
Copy link
Member

annetill commented Oct 18, 2022

  • Do you want to request a feature or report a bug?

A bug. In case of several voltage controls controlling buses that belong to the same non impedant connected set, they are merged. If we have a switch contingency that modify the non impedant connected set, we are not updating the voltage controls to go back to unmerged voltage controls.
Update: this bug could also happen when we run loadflow from network cache after a switch contingency.

  • What is the current behavior?

The spanning trees are computed once in the beginning. They should be recomputed in case of zero impedance branch enabled/disabled. In order to merge and unmerge voltage controls, we have to rethink about how we merge the voltage control when controlled buses belong to the same zero impedance connected set.

  • If the current behavior is a bug, please provide the steps to reproduce and if possible a minimal demo of the problem

  • What is the expected behavior?

  • What is the motivation / use case for changing the behavior?

  • Please tell us about your environment:

    • PowSyBl Version: ...
    • OS Version: ...
  • Other information (e.g. detailed explanation, stacktraces, related issues, suggestions how to fix, links for us to have context, eg. stackoverflow, spectrum, etc)

(if a question doesn't apply, you can delete it)

@annetill
Copy link
Member Author

annetill commented Apr 5, 2023

Solved by #718

@annetill annetill closed this as completed Apr 5, 2023
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

2 participants