Filter disabled generators when computing bus Q limits #1220
Conversation
Signed-off-by: Didier Vidal <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Didier Vidal <[email protected]>
vidaldid-rte
requested review from
jeandemanged,
SylvestreSakti and
Hadrien-Godard
| @@ -451,6 +451,7 @@ public double getMaxP() { | |||
|
|
|||
| private double getLimitQ(ToDoubleFunction<LfGenerator> limitQ) { | |||
| return generators.stream() | |||
| .filter(g -> !g.isDisabled()) | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Should we apply the same filter for generationTargetP and generationTargetQ ?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Good question, although if these quantities were wrong we would have noticed ...
Here is what happens (and it's not as homogeneous we would like... however some quantities can be cached, other not)
Here the protection is necessary because the disconnected groupe is removed from tension control and its targetQ might be added to the limit.
Fot generationTargetP, the mecanism is different. The contingency triggers a setTargetP to the group that invalidates the bus generationTargetP. So no need.
Slightly different for generationTargetQ - le quantity is directly updated by the contingence.
jeandemanged
changed the title
Signed-off-by: Damien Jeandemange <[email protected]>
|
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?
When a generator attached to a bus is disabled, exclude it from Q limit computations.
What is the current behavior?
Disabled generators are counted in Q limits.
What is the new behavior (if this is a feature change)?
Disabled generators are excluded from Q limits.
Does this PR introduce a breaking change or deprecate an API?