-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 5
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
eHV subnetworks #78
Comments
that are very interesting findings! |
but in the meantime I would kick out these small subnetworks in order to test your methodology (just as an interim solution). @IlkaCu has some scripts for that procedure... |
Here you find the SQL code I'm usually using to delete subgrids. Obviously the substation-IDs and the scenario names need to be adjusted. |
The example above is a quite well-known structure in Berlin. In osmTGmod we connected it to the 110 kV grid. @S3PP can you also put the other cases here? I would then compare those to the ones deleted in SciGRID. |
Do I understand you right? In osmTGmod those buses (bus_id in (1127,1128,1132,23838,24743,24899)) are of 110kV? Because after the dp they are definitely 380kV. |
Other subnetworks row wise |
Yes, they are also in osmTGmod 380 kV, but not in OSM. So they must have been assigned to 380 at some point in the abstraction. I'll go hunting, you can guess my mood. |
The buses are not only 380 kV, they are just "on top" of 110 kV buses (because substations are divided by voltage in otg). However, the subnetwork problem still persists. I checked the ones mentioned by @S3PP
Berlin subgrid, see above.
Kraftwerk Weiher (Saarland), there is a proper OSM line missing somehow, don't see the reason why.
That's one of the subgrids also deleted in SciGRID --> OSM mapping issue
also in Saarland, another line connecting the subgrid is missing in otg, why?
Sweden connection.
I don't see why this is a subnetwork. Can you also provide the lines that are not connected?
Kraftwerk Weisweiler. There was a bugfix concerning power plant connections by wupperinst. Since some of the subnetworks are power-plant specific, I'll check for that. Otherwise, I was told that some of the subnetworks are quite close to the national border and that there might by an issue with cross-border lines. I will also follow that approach. |
Generally, I would propose to go ahead with deleting the subnetworks until we resolve this issue (either by bugfixing or by a connection approach) |
But we have to check what generation/demand is connected to these buses and if there is underlying 110kV infrastructure with again demand and generation. If we delete that stuff we get troubles when disaggregating results from the ehv level to the hv level and might lose hv-mv substations which are a interfaces to the MV world. Also for example just deleting the entire connection to Sweden does not seem very handy. |
That's true. |
@lukasol can you check what happened to the connection Lübeck-Siems (Sweden connection) after applying the algorithm? Since there is a 380kV at Siems but only coming 220 from Lübeck I wonder if the algorithm connects it with the help of a transformer to the next 220kV(Lübeck) or goes to very far away 380kV... |
I could change the algorithm so that the 380kV line is connected to the 220 kV grid. Since there is a connection via the 110 kV grid, I am not certain if we should really implement a separate connection algorithm for eHV at all. Let's discuss this at the next opportunity. |
Since this is osmTGmod related, refer to openego/osmTGmod#10 for future discussions. |
Working with the networkclustering PyPSA always determines eight subnetworks for a clustered ehv - network. (Based on 'Status Quo' data used for the article.) Seven of those subnetworks consist of 6 or less buses. Those subnetworks render the problem infeasible. How should I handle this?
e.g.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: