Support of BusbarSectionContingency for everything #667
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
annetill
changed the title
|
Kudos, SonarCloud Quality Gate passed! |
Signed-off-by: Anne Tilloy <anne.tilloy@rte-france.com>
annetill
commented
Jan 11, 2023
| assertEquals(-3.895, postContingencyResult.getNetworkResult().getBranchResult("L1").getP2(), LoadFlowAssert.DELTA_POWER); | ||
| assertEquals(603.769, postContingencyResult.getNetworkResult().getBranchResult("L2").getP1(), LoadFlowAssert.DELTA_POWER); | ||
| assertEquals(-596.104, postContingencyResult.getNetworkResult().getBranchResult("L2").getP2(), LoadFlowAssert.DELTA_POWER); | ||
| assertEquals(0.099, postContingencyResult.getNetworkResult().getBranchResult("L1").getP1(), LoadFlowAssert.DELTA_POWER); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Because I have changed minP and maxP.
Signed-off-by: Florian Dupuy <florian.dupuy@rte-france.com>
annetill
changed the title
jeandemanged
approved these changes
Jan 13, 2023
There was a problem hiding this comment.
ok for me
note: to be continued with bus contingencies after powsybl-core 5.1.0 RC (powsybl-core support of BUS contingencies were added in powsybl/powsybl-core#2416)
Signed-off-by: Florian Dupuy <florian.dupuy@rte-france.com>
…l/powsybl-open-loadflow into busbarsection-contingency
Signed-off-by: Anne Tilloy <anne.tilloy@rte-france.com>
Signed-off-by: Anne Tilloy <anne.tilloy@rte-france.com>
annetill
commented
Mar 23, 2023
| @@ -287,6 +295,17 @@ public Optional<LfContingency> toLfContingency(LfNetwork network) { | |||
| .filter(LfBranch::isConnectedAtBothSides) | |||
| .forEach(connectivity::removeEdge); | |||
|
|
|||
| // FIXME | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@geofjamg to ne removed after merging your big PR about zero impedance lines
# Conflicts: # src/main/java/com/powsybl/openloadflow/network/impl/ContingencyTripping.java # src/main/java/com/powsybl/openloadflow/network/impl/PropagatedContingency.java # src/test/java/com/powsybl/openloadflow/sa/OpenSecurityAnalysisTest.java
# Conflicts: # src/test/java/com/powsybl/openloadflow/sa/OpenSecurityAnalysisTest.java
annetill
commented
Mar 30, 2023
| @@ -325,8 +344,11 @@ public Optional<LfContingency> toLfContingency(LfNetwork network) { | |||
| Set<LfGenerator> generators = new HashSet<>(1); | |||
| for (String generatorId : generatorIdsToLose) { | |||
| LfGenerator generator = network.getGeneratorById(generatorId); | |||
| if (generator != null) { // could be in another component | |||
| generators.add(generator); | |||
| if (generator != null) { // could be in another component FIXME | |||
Signed-off-by: Anne Tilloy <anne.tilloy@rte-france.com>
|
Kudos, SonarCloud Quality Gate passed! |
geofjamg
approved these changes
Mar 31, 2023
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Please check if the PR fulfills these requirements (please use
'[x]'to check the checkboxes, or submit the PR and then click the checkboxes)Does this PR already have an issue describing the problem ? If so, link to this issue using
'#XXX'and skip the restMaybe :-)
What kind of change does this PR introduce? (Bug fix, feature, docs update, ...)
This PR is a trial, to see what is missing in the API and what kind of difficulties we can met in the implementation. I am only testing on node/breaker topology network for the moment, but I have in mind to test on bus/breaker topology through the busId.
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:
Other information:
(if any of the questions/checkboxes don't apply, please delete them entirely)