Skip to content
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

Extend export of results to OEDB #209

Closed
6 tasks done
gplssm opened this issue Jul 17, 2017 · 2 comments
Closed
6 tasks done

Extend export of results to OEDB #209

gplssm opened this issue Jul 17, 2017 · 2 comments
Assignees
Labels
enhancement Prio3 Priority Level 3
Milestone

Comments

@gplssm
Copy link
Contributor

gplssm commented Jul 17, 2017

Problem description

We need a data export of Ding0's grid topology in a tabular format suitable to export to CSV files and to database tables of the OEDB.

Table structure

please fill the remaining tables based on the attributes used by the eDisGo importer
LVGrid & MVGrid

Ding0 attribute Attribute name
id_db id
geo_data geom
(zensus_sum) population population
v_level voltage_nom
network network
() lv_grid () grid

(MV loads) & LV Loads

Ding0 attribute Attribute name
id_db id
geo_data geom
(grid) lv_grid grid
consumption consumption

MV Generators & LV Generators

Ding0 attribute Attribute name
id_db id
geo_data geom
capacity nominal_capacity
type type
subtype subtype
v_level v_level
(grid) lv_grid grid

(MV) + LV BranchTees (Cable distributor)

Ding0 attribute Attribute name
id_db id
geo_data geom
(grid) lv_grid grid
(False) in_building in_building

MV Lines & LV Lines

Ding0 attribute Attribute name
id_db id
type type
length /1e3 length
() kind () kind
(grid) lv_grid grid

LVLoadAreaCentreDing0

these are very special. In the end, a table detailing aggregated generation capacity within aggregated load areas (LAs) cumulated by generation voltage_level (6 or 7), type and subtype would be useful. Loads in aggregated LAs should grouped by sector.

Aggregated LV load areas/ LVLoadAreaCentreDing0 contain load and generators in in LV level that are modeled as "aggr. components" in eDisGo be connecting the right to the HV/MV substation's bus bar. This is done cumulatively per sector for loads. Generators are aggregated by voltage level (6 or 7), its type and subtype.
Hence, to keep this procedure aggregation with the new, tabular data export format aggregation has to be performed while exporting data. Thus, the tables MV generators, MV loads and MV lines have to be extended by these aggregated loads, generators and its connection lines.
How load and generation is aggregated during data import to eDisGo can be found here. This function is called in line

MV Disconnecting points (Circuit breaker)

Ding0 attribute Attribute name
id_db id
geo_data geom
status state
grid grid

MV stations & LV stations

Ding0 attribute Attribute name
id_db id
geo_data geom
() None () grid
() grid () mv_grid

MV + LV transformers

Ding0 attribute Attribute name
id_db id
count count
geo_data geom
grid mv_grid
(grid) None grid
v_level voltage_op
s_max_a (s) S_nom
x (x) X
r (r) R

Tasks

  • Complete table structure overview above. Required attributes for each component can be found in the eDisGo importer
  • Complete export function (be aware its located in the branch 'features/export-stats') according to defined table structure
  • Make sure references between individual tables can be build (i.e. transformers in stations, generators in grid, etc.)
  • Write function to export to CSV files
  • Include run_id in data export to distinguish from different runs
  • Write function to export tabular data to OEDB. Therefore, see this function) to see how export to OEDB works in general
@gplssm gplssm added this to the Release 0.1.1 milestone Jul 17, 2017
@nglsrrl
Copy link
Contributor

nglsrrl commented Oct 9, 2017

Some attributes had different names for LV and MV, e.g. grid. I put the MV name in brackets. Is it possible, that some attributes were omitted for the MV definition or did I misunderstand it?

@boltbeard boltbeard added the Prio3 Priority Level 3 label Jan 15, 2019
@mltja
Copy link
Member

mltja commented Mar 13, 2023

Reopen if needed after discussion in #384

@mltja mltja closed this as completed Mar 13, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement Prio3 Priority Level 3
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants