When iterating through the network reduction maps, I often end up dealing with an item that's one of the following types: BranchesParallel, BranchesSeries, ThreeWindingTransformerWinding, or a 2-terminal ACTransmission subtype like Line. We have a constellation of functions that operate on such objects: get_name, get_equivalent_physical_branch_parameters, get_arc_tuple, ybus_branch_entries, etc. Such methods are frequently implemented for some but not all of these things, which causes headaches.
It'd decrease mental burden and code complexity downstream if we could commit to offering definitions for those for all members. Even better would be to introduce a common supertype, a sort of VirtualArc: a (from, to) pair with some transmission parameters attached.
Current status of things:
PNM.get_name: missing forBranchesSeries.get_equivalent_physical_branch_parameters: missing forACTransmission and 3WT windings.get_arc_tuple: ?ybus_branch_entries: ?
When iterating through the network reduction maps, I often end up dealing with an item that's one of the following types:
BranchesParallel,BranchesSeries,ThreeWindingTransformerWinding, or a 2-terminalACTransmissionsubtype likeLine. We have a constellation of functions that operate on such objects:get_name,get_equivalent_physical_branch_parameters,get_arc_tuple,ybus_branch_entries, etc. Such methods are frequently implemented for some but not all of these things, which causes headaches.It'd decrease mental burden and code complexity downstream if we could commit to offering definitions for those for all members. Even better would be to introduce a common supertype, a sort of
VirtualArc: a(from, to)pair with some transmission parameters attached.Current status of things:
PNM.get_name: missing forBranchesSeries.get_equivalent_physical_branch_parameters: missing forACTransmissionand 3WT windings.get_arc_tuple: ?ybus_branch_entries: ?