Draft: Bugfix: enhance DC multi-slack #997
Draft
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
Signed-off-by: vmouradian <valentin.mouradian@artelys.com>
Signed-off-by: vmouradian <valentin.mouradian@artelys.com>
vmouradian
force-pushed
the
bugfix/slackbus-select-non-impedant-branches
branch
from
526ab84
to
ac678e3
Compare
vmouradian
changed the title
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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
Does this PR already have an issue describing the problem?
The current algorithm of slackbus selection (for most meshed at least) can select two buses connected by a non impedant branch. This causes an exception when creating equations for DC loadflow.
just comment the filter here and run MultipleSlackBusesTest#nonImpedantBranchTest to see the exception.
Currently in this branch I reproduced the bug in a unit test and added a basic draft for a possible fix.
What kind of change does this PR introduce?
What is the current behavior?
What is the new behavior (if this is a feature change)?
Does this PR introduce a breaking change or deprecate an API?
If yes, please check if the following requirements are fulfilled
What changes might users need to make in their application due to this PR? (migration steps)
Other information: