-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 10
remove voltage step without angles #28
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
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
TODO: also update the solutions in accordance to the workshop itself
Signed-off-by: Sander-Timmerman <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Sander-Timmerman <[email protected]>
…ear not observable error before Signed-off-by: Sander-Timmerman <[email protected]>
state-estimation-assignment/State Estimation Assignment with Solutions.ipynb
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
state-estimation-assignment/State Estimation Assignment with Solutions.ipynb
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
state-estimation-assignment/State Estimation Assignment with Solutions.ipynb
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
"id": "70cb5b3c", | ||
"metadata": {}, | ||
"source": [ | ||
"# Assignment 4: Add voltage angle measurements\n", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Since assignment 3 now only contains an error and not a task, we may want to put them together (3 and 4) back again such that the assignment is to fix the error. However, it is probably better to address the above: How are we going to handle this potentially breaking change.
state-estimation-assignment/State Estimation Assignment with Solutions.ipynb
Show resolved
Hide resolved
"delta_u: [0.00028959 0.00037244 0.00042541]\n", | ||
"delta_u: [-0.02183464 -0.02204176 -0.02207393]\n", | ||
"-------------- lines --------------\n", | ||
"delta_p_from: [ 1.69415257 -0.19360323]\n", | ||
"delta_p_to: [-1.7813758 0.13951295]\n", | ||
"delta_q_from: [-4.79719471 -1.68604537]\n", | ||
"delta_q_to: [4.70671219 1.61927823]\n" | ||
"delta_p_from: [-73.84315465 -25.57343819]\n", | ||
"delta_p_to: [73.76371305 25.51731618]\n", | ||
"delta_q_from: [-0.57519337 -0.42228019]\n", | ||
"delta_q_to: [1.89164762 1.67790199]\n" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Again seeing differences where I don't think there should be. You think is worth taking a look?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
And this is because of different rounding
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Just triple checking that this expected before resolving (cc @mgovers), maybe you can elaborate a bit more so it is documented somewhere for future reference? Since validation test cases remain intact, I don't expect this to be an issue, but just want to make sure. If you are sure this is fine, feel free to resolve.
Signed-off-by: Sander-Timmerman <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Sander-Timmerman <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Sander-Timmerman <[email protected]>
Fixes issue:
# name and number of the issue
Changes proposed in this PR include:
Could you please pay extra attention to the points below when reviewing the PR: