Mutualize usage rules with powsybl

[pet-mit]

Describe the current behavior

OpenRAO and PowSyBl's security analysis API have different objects that represent the same business concept: the application condition of a remedial action.

• In PowSyBl, the interface is called "Condition". Currently, this can represent 4 cases:
  • Condition can always be True, meaning that the RA will be applied no matter the situation given the conditions of the contingency context are met
  • "all in violation": RA is applied if all network elements of a given set have operational limit violations
  • "any violation": RA is applied if any violation is met in the network
  • "at least one violation": RA is applied if any network element of a given set has operational limit violations
• in OpenRAO, the interface is called "UsageRule" and covers more cases:
  • it can make the RA available, unavailable, or it can force its application
  • it has the concept of instant (of application), contingency (after which the RA can be applied), country, etc

Describe the expected behavior

Try to converge to a common object model, even though it might not be easy!

Describe the motivation

Common code with PowSyBl, and streamlined experience across RAO & sensitivity analysis APIs

Extra Information

No response

[pet-mit]

To share your opinion @annetill @phiedw @pjeanmarie @obrix @bqth29

[bqth29]

I believe that what you described is some kind of a mix between our UsageMethods and our UsageRules. The big difference comes from the fact that PowSyBl allows multiple CNECs to be included in a Condition whereas in OpenRAO it is only one for the moment.

I guess some changes to include could be:

• An OnConstraint usage rule can have multiple CNECs and must, in addition to the UsageMethod, contain another Enum Field that can be either ANY or ALL to precise how many CNECs must be overloaded for the UsageRule to be triggered
• The OnFlowConstraintInCountry could also be expanded to cover multiple countries at once, such that if all countries (or none) are passed, the any violation case from PowSyBl could be covered

In any case, we should carry this reflection based on the POC in #1050 that attempts to generify UsageRules and make them more flexible.

[bqth29]

Also, based on what I wrote previously, here is how I would map PowSyBl's Conditions on what exists in OpenRAO:

• Always TRUE: that would correspond to OnInstant and OnContingencyState usage rules with a FORCED usage method
• All in violation: that would correspond to an OnConstraint usage rule with several CNECs declared and an ALL strategy (cf. previous answer)
• At least one violation: that would correspond to an OnConstraint usage rule with several CNECs declared and an ANY strategy (cf. previous answer)
• Any violation: I can see several ways to represent this without having to create a new kind of usage rule
  • OnConstraint with all CNECs and ALL strategy
  • OnContraint with empty set of CNECs that implicitly means that all CNECs are considered + ALL strategy
  • OnFlowConstraintInCountry with all countries
  • OnFlowConstraintInCOuntry with no country which implicitly means that all countries are considered