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

check_thermal_limits on multiconductor networks #338

Closed
pseudocubic opened this issue Aug 1, 2018 · 4 comments
Closed

check_thermal_limits on multiconductor networks #338

pseudocubic opened this issue Aug 1, 2018 · 4 comments
Labels

Comments

@pseudocubic
Copy link
Collaborator

Discuss best implementation of check_thermal_limits for multiconductor networks, particularly with inactive conductors on a line.

@ccoffrin ccoffrin added the bug label Aug 2, 2018
@ccoffrin
Copy link
Member

ccoffrin commented Aug 2, 2018

The current implementation does not have the correct semantics for multiple phases. The simplest solution for now is to add a check that the incoming date is implicit single phase. A good generalization will require some thought.

@ccoffrin
Copy link
Member

ccoffrin commented Feb 6, 2020

Will this be resolved by the changes PowerModels v0.15?

@pseudocubic
Copy link
Collaborator Author

It looks like we are using correct_thermal_limits! in PMD without problem, but I don't know if calc_thermal_limits is working, I will do some tests. Note that there is a dangling reference to MultiConductorVector (commented out) in calc_thermal_limits

@ccoffrin
Copy link
Member

Closing as PMD no longer depends on PM.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants