First time here? We are a friendly community of Power Systems Engineers. Check out the FAQ!
2023-02-13 05:48:28 -0500 | commented answer | REGC_A (REGCA1) network non-convergence for close-in faults Some info here on LVPL related to network convergence: https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy16osti/64822.pdf. We have been experiencing issues with LVPL on models that have xsource set ~= 1.0 instead of >= 9999.0 as suggested in the PSSE PAGV2 manual. |
2020-02-06 08:41:13 -0500 | answered a question | I am using version 34 and the sld files just stopped working. Is there a fix? Someone in our group had this issue as well. After must frustration, we resolved the problem. Windows installed a .NET update on the day the diagrams stopped working. This update appears to have broken the diagram functionality in PSSE. The solution was to force Windows to check for updates again (Settings > Updates & Security, or search for "WIndows Update" in the start menu). Another .NET update was applied and all PSSE diagrams resumed working. If your IT group manages your Windows update, you may need to have them force updates to your machines. Hope this helps! |
2020-01-06 15:02:33 -0500 | received badge | ● Famous Question (source) |
2020-01-06 15:02:33 -0500 | received badge | ● Notable Question (source) |
2020-01-06 15:02:33 -0500 | received badge | ● Popular Question (source) |
2019-06-22 22:10:38 -0500 | received badge | ● Famous Question (source) |
2018-08-24 06:00:42 -0500 | received badge | ● Enthusiast |
2018-08-21 14:45:15 -0500 | received badge | ● Editor (source) |
2018-08-21 14:29:07 -0500 | asked a question | pssarrays accc_solution mvaflow direction/sign The mvaflow array returned by pssarrays.accc_solution() appears to not always return flow direction calculated in the same way. I'm monitoring ~2000 branches and performing ~1000 contingencies. For each contingency, there are 5-10 branches that show a flow direction change that isn't correct. Taking the contingency manually in the case shows that the flow direction did not change. For example: In the 'BASE CASE' contingency, branch 100-200-1 shows a mvaflow of -168.34. In 'CONTINGENCY 1', branch 100-200-1 shows a mvaflow of 169.32. Opening the case will show that the magnitude is correct in both cases, but the direction should be the same. Is this a known issue with a solution? |
2018-06-21 11:46:30 -0500 | received badge | ● Notable Question (source) |
2018-06-10 09:35:31 -0500 | received badge | ● Popular Question (source) |
2018-06-07 07:14:30 -0500 | answered a question | Direct psspy to parallel processor I think I might have found the answer to my own question. |
2018-06-05 16:36:37 -0500 | asked a question | Direct psspy to parallel processor Is there a way to direct psspy to use the parallel processing version of PSSE 33? Currently I'm doing the following from a python terminal: Even after setting the number of processors, it returns (0, 1) indicating that there is only one contingency processor. My thought is that somehow psspy is directed to the single processor version of PSSE instead of the parallel version. Is there a way to change this? |