-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 5
No/#405 add olm model #505
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: dev
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
add OLM type model according to IEEE 738-2012
Delete olmCharacteristic from line entity model
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
Codecov ReportBase: 78.94% // Head: 78.94% // No change to project coverage 👍
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## dev #505 +/- ##
=========================================
Coverage 78.94% 78.94%
- Complexity 2131 2133 +2
=========================================
Files 265 265
Lines 8356 8356
Branches 785 785
=========================================
Hits 6597 6597
Misses 1356 1356
Partials 403 403 Help us with your feedback. Take ten seconds to tell us how you rate us. Have a feature suggestion? Share it here. ☔ View full report at Codecov. |
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.
Thanks a lot for your draft!
If we can get convergence on this documentation, we can start implementing the model (wouldn't like to merge a documentation, that does not reflect the actual state of code). Currently we are about and on our way to have a release with breaking changes in data scheme. I will have a discussion with the other team mates, if we can't / wouldn't like to include your changes in that release as well.
+--------------+---------+---------------------------------------------+ | ||
| id | -- | Human readable identifier | | ||
+--------------+---------+---------------------------------------------+ | ||
| T_s | °C | max. line temperature | |
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.
Throughout the PowerSystemDataModel our variable naming shifted a bit towards expressiveness. It would be good, if you could consider some changes in the naming. E.g. temperatureMax
. Additionally, we have used camel case in the other documentation pages. So, it would be good, if we could stick with the same concept in all places.
Moreover, we have defined some StandardUnits. Maybe you could consider to switch the units to those.
+--------------+---------+---------------------------------------------+ | ||
| sq | mm^2 | cross section | | ||
+--------------+---------+---------------------------------------------+ | ||
| D_0 | m | Leiterdurchmesser Bewehrung | |
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.
As we want to target a wide audience, please use English for the documentation.
+--------------+---------+---------------------------------------------+ | ||
| R_dc20 | Ohm/m | Specific DC resistance at 20°C | | ||
+--------------+---------+---------------------------------------------+ | ||
| Buendelanzahl| -- | | |
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.
Same here.
@@ -59,11 +59,6 @@ Entity Model | |||
| geoPosition | -- | | Line string of geographical locations describing the | | |||
| | | | position of the line | | |||
+-------------------+------+--------------------------------------------------------+ | |||
| olmCharacteristic | -- | | Characteristic of possible overhead line monitoring | |
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.
Within the line model, we need some reference to the OLM model. That is, that I'd like to keep this field and possibly rename it to olmModel
or so. Moreover, it would also be desired, that we can have simple models as well. That said, would you mind proposing a second olm model (in the way with the above file) to keep the functionality of this simple model?
resolves #405