search

e2nIEE / pandapower

Convenient Power System Modelling and Analysis based on PYPOWER and pandas
https://www.pandapower.org
Other
838 stars 478 forks source link

BUG: switch in service in pp.topology.create_nxgraph #1776

Open dyzxtcwl opened 1 year ago

dyzxtcwl commented 1 year ago

when i runed pp.topology.create_nxgraph , it turned out that:

File "d:\anaconda3\envs\spyder\lib\site-packages\pandapower\topology\create_graph.py", line 246, in create_nxgraph indices, parameter = init_par(switch, calc_branch_impedances)

ValueError: too many values to unpack (expected 2)

Then I found in init_par() it was that : indices, parameter = init_par(switch, calc_branch_impedances)

def init_par(tab, calc_branch_impedances=False): if "in_service" in tab: return indices, parameters, tab.in_service.values.copy() else: return indices, parameters

So I try to modified it to: indices, parameter = init_par(switch.drop('in_service', axis=1), calc_branch_impedances)

jkisse commented 1 year ago

Hi, in_service is not a default column for switches and will probably be nowhere considered in the power flow. Only closed is considered. It would be interesting to know if there is a loophole somewhere that creates in_service columns for switches. Do you use any of the networks from the pandapower.networks package? If not, did you create the switches by the create_switch function?

Apart from that, your fix seems reasonable. I just wonder if an Error/Warning should be raised, because it will likely lead to unexpected behavior if the user thinks net.switch.in_service will be considered by the power flow calculation.

dyzxtcwl commented 1 year ago

Hi, in_service is not a default column for switches and will probably be nowhere considered in the power flow. Only closed is considered. It would be interesting to know if there is a loophole somewhere that creates in_service columns for switches. Do you use any of the networks from the pandapower.networks package? If not, did you create the switches by the create_switch function?

Apart from that, your fix seems reasonable. I just wonder if an Error/Warning should be raised, because it will likely lead to unexpected behavior if the user thinks net.switch.in_service will be considered by the power flow calculation.

There was an another problem with "in_service" column of switches in the funtion "pandapower.drop_inactive_elements()". This funtion needs the "in_service" column of switches otherwise it will raise an Error.

Jhei1195 commented 7 months ago

Hello, I have the same issue with pandapower version 2.13. Is there a proper solution now?