You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
When only MVAsc3 is specified and not MVAsc1 (such as IEEE34), the numerical results differ between OpenDSS and PMD. This leads me to believe that the default value for MVAsc1 is not mapped correctly.
This is not an important element of IEEE34, as MVAsc3 is set to a large value to model a very stiff source; I will assume the same for MVAsc1. This does not have to be fixed prior to the PSCC deadline.
I have been able to verify all feeders to a very high accuracy (1E-7).
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Fixes the creation of vsource from circuit to use correct values for mvasc3,mvasc1 and isc3,isc1 if one of the pair is not specified.
Default values in documentation are not consistent with software for ISC(1|3)
Updates unit tests and changelog
Closes#176
Fixes the creation of vsource from circuit to use correct values for mvasc3,mvasc1 and isc3,isc1 if one of the pair is not specified.
Default values in documentation are not consistent with software for ISC(1|3)
Updates unit tests and changelog
Closes#176
When only MVAsc3 is specified and not MVAsc1 (such as IEEE34), the numerical results differ between OpenDSS and PMD. This leads me to believe that the default value for MVAsc1 is not mapped correctly.
This is not an important element of IEEE34, as MVAsc3 is set to a large value to model a very stiff source; I will assume the same for MVAsc1. This does not have to be fixed prior to the PSCC deadline.
I have been able to verify all feeders to a very high accuracy (1E-7).
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: