Change considered non impedance branches values in ACOPF #91
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: p-arvy <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: p-arvy <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: p-arvy <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: p-arvy <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: p-arvy <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: p-arvy <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: p-arvy <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: p-arvy <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: p-arvy <[email protected]>
p-arvy
force-pushed
the
add-branches-opened-one-side
branch
from
f6a2cf5 to
6d8b414
Compare
p-arvy
force-pushed
the
add-rho-alpha-for-znull-branches-in-acopf
branch
from
2e707c3 to
61240d2
Compare
p-arvy
changed the title
p-arvy
force-pushed
the
add-rho-alpha-for-znull-branches-in-acopf
branch
from
61240d2 to
9aa3c58
Compare
Signed-off-by: p-arvy <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: p-arvy <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: p-arvy <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: p-arvy <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: p-arvy <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: p-arvy <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: p-arvy <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: p-arvy <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: p-arvy <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: p-arvy <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: p-arvy <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: p-arvy <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: p-arvy <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: p-arvy <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: p-arvy <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: p-arvy <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: p-arvy <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: p-arvy <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: p-arvy <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: p-arvy <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: p-arvy <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: p-arvy <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: p-arvy <[email protected]>
p-arvy
force-pushed
the
add-branches-opened-one-side
branch
from
f2f5fdd to
9d951c1
Compare
Signed-off-by: p-arvy <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: p-arvy <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: p-arvy <[email protected]>
p-arvy
force-pushed
the
add-rho-alpha-for-znull-branches-in-acopf
branch
from
9aa3c58 to
1f9960c
Compare
p-arvy
changed the title
Signed-off-by: p-arvy <[email protected]>
So-Fras
approved these changes
Jan 7, 2025
klorel
approved these changes
Jan 7, 2025
Signed-off-by: Sophie Frasnedo <[email protected]>
|
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?
No.
What kind of change does this PR introduce?
The transformer ratios and phase shiftings are considered even on non impedant branches in ACOPF.
For lines considered as non-impedant and connecting two different nominal voltage levels, the conductances and susceptances are cancelled in order to avoid numerical instabilities.
What is the current behavior?
These elements are ignored.
Transformer ratios and phase shiftings are not considered.
Conductances and susceptances are also cancelled for lines connecting same nominal voltage levels.
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: