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

Slack distribution support for DC power flow #183

Merged
merged 5 commits into from
Dec 10, 2020
Merged

Conversation

annetill
Copy link
Member

@annetill annetill commented Dec 9, 2020

Please check if the PR fulfills these requirements (please use '[x]' to check the checkboxes, or submit the PR and then click the checkboxes)

  • The commit message follows our guidelines
  • Tests for the changes have been added (for bug fixes / features)
  • Docs have been added / updated (for bug fixes / features)

Does this PR already have an issue describing the problem ? If so, link to this issue using '#XXX' and skip the rest

Slack distribution was not supported before for DC power flow. The slack was entirely put at the slack node.

What kind of change does this PR introduce? (Bug fix, feature, docs update, ...)

Slack distribution is now supported for balance type PROPORTIONAL_TO_LOAD, PROPORTIONAL_TO_P_MAX and PROPORTIONAL_TO_CONFORM_LOAD. The power factor of loads is ignored as we are in a DC approximation. Looses are neglected. I need to add unit tests. A refactoring is needed for pre-distribution of slack used here and in the security analysis.

What is the current behavior? (You can also link to an open issue here)

What is the new behavior (if this is a feature change)?

Does this PR introduce a breaking change or deprecate an API? If yes, check the following:

  • The Breaking Change or Deprecated label has been added
  • The migration guide has been updated in the github wiki (What changes might users need to make in their application due to this PR?)

Other information:

(if any of the questions/checkboxes don't apply, please delete them entirely)

@annetill annetill requested a review from geofjamg December 9, 2020 10:10
Signed-off-by: Geoffroy Jamgotchian <geoffroy.jamgotchian@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Geoffroy Jamgotchian <geoffroy.jamgotchian@gmail.com>
private void distributeSlack(LfNetwork network) {
double mismatch = network.getActivePowerMismatch();
ActivePowerDistribution activePowerDistribution = ActivePowerDistribution.create(parameters.getBalanceType(), false);
activePowerDistribution.run(network, -mismatch);
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Maybe we shoud invert the sign of Network.getActivePowerMismatch to avoid this minus anf be consistent everywhere?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I have changed the sign. Do you think that I need to perform a functional validation ?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I should be ok

Signed-off-by: Anne Tilloy <anne.tilloy@rte-france.com>
@sonarqubecloud
Copy link

Kudos, SonarCloud Quality Gate passed!

Bug A 0 Bugs
Vulnerability A 0 Vulnerabilities
Security Hotspot A 0 Security Hotspots
Code Smell A 0 Code Smells

94.6% 94.6% Coverage
0.0% 0.0% Duplication

@geofjamg geofjamg merged commit d283905 into master Dec 10, 2020
@geofjamg geofjamg deleted the dc-slack-distribution branch December 10, 2020 15:41
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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants