Revision history [back]

Is it necessary to sandwich "powerflow" commands between powerflowmode() and dynamicsmode() commands when simulating dynamics contingencies?

For example, say I have a bus fault and want to disconnect the bus after the fault:

psspy.run(0, 1)

# Apply fault
psspy.dist_bus_fault(111111, _i, _f, [0.0, -0.2E+10])

# Run 6 cycles
psspy.run(0, 1.1)

# Clear fault
psspy.dist_clear_fault(1)

psspy.powerflowmode()    # Is this necessary?

# Disconnect bus
psspy.dscn(111111)

psspy.dynamicsmode(1)    # Is this necessary?

Is it necessary to sandwich "powerflow" commands between powerflowmode() and dynamicsmode() commands when simulating dynamics contingencies?

For example, say I have a bus fault and want to disconnect the bus after the fault:

psspy.run(0, 1)

# Apply fault
psspy.dist_bus_fault(111111, _i, _f, [0.0, -0.2E+10])

# Run 6 cycles
psspy.run(0, 1.1)

# Clear fault
psspy.dist_clear_fault(1)

psspy.powerflowmode()    # Switch to powerflow mode Is this necessary?

# Disconnect bus
psspy.dscn(111111)

psspy.dynamicsmode(1)    # Switch back to dynamics mode, with factorizing. Is this necessary?