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

Outage timestep corrections #313

Merged
merged 6 commits into from
Jul 7, 2022
Merged

Outage timestep corrections #313

merged 6 commits into from
Jul 7, 2022

Conversation

hdunham
Copy link
Collaborator

@hdunham hdunham commented Mar 26, 2022

Please check if the PR fulfills these requirements

  • The commit message follows our guidelines
  • Tests for the changes have been added (for bug fixes / features)
  • Docs have been added / updated (for bug fixes / features)

What kind of change does this PR introduce?

bug fix

What is the current behavior?

When normal and critical load profiles are spliced together for the BAU problem (and zeroed out after the time steps that BAU techs can sustain), missing minus ones in indexing is causing BAU problem to be infeasible when existing techs can sustain part but not all of outage.

What is the new behavior (if this is a feature change)?

The spliced load passed to the BAU problem contains the critical load in the outage time steps up to t (where t is the last consecutive time step that the existing techs can meet load) and zeros in the outage time steps after that.

Does this PR introduce a breaking change?

no

Other information:

missing -1 in indexing was causing BAU problem to be infeasible when existing techs could sustain part of outage
@hdunham hdunham requested review from NLaws and adfarth and removed request for NLaws March 28, 2022 22:45
Copy link
Member

@NLaws NLaws left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Please update the test re: my inline comment.

reo/tests/test_critical_load_bau.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@hdunham hdunham requested a review from NLaws April 23, 2022 17:24
Copy link
Member

@NLaws NLaws left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Please add a description to the doc string of test_critical_load_bau_can_sustain_part_outage of what is being tested so that we do not have to read the test line by line to understand what it is doing. Can you please describe the blocks of calculations with comments? Is it only testing BAU values? (If so when we put it in REopt.jl we could run just a BAU scenario). It looks like pwf_om is calculated but not used.

reo/tests/test_critical_load_bau.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Copy link
Collaborator

@adfarth adfarth left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@hdunham @NLaws I think this is good to go with just the one unaddressed comment from Nick

@hdunham hdunham merged commit 54d28b2 into develop Jul 7, 2022
@hdunham hdunham mentioned this pull request Jul 26, 2022
3 tasks
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants