Skip to content

Resolves the problems with zero system (#4654) #4656

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

Open
wants to merge 8 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

AHaumer
Copy link
Contributor

@AHaumer AHaumer commented May 29, 2025

Implementing a Boolean parameter useZeroSystem to be able to suppress the calculation of the zero current (set to zero).
Backwards compatible: Default = true. In 3 examples (Modelica.Electrical.Machines.Examples.InductionMachines.IMC_YD, Modelica.Magnetic.FundamentalWave.Examples.BasicMachines.InductionMachines.IMC_YD, Modelica.QuasiStatic.Magnetic.FundamentalWave.Examples.BasicMachines.InductionMachines.IMC_YD) used to resolve numerical issues as reported in #4654 and #4486. Setting the attribute nominal = 10 (#4486) has been removed again.
Should we backport this to maintenance/4.1.0 ?

@AHaumer AHaumer self-assigned this May 29, 2025
@AHaumer AHaumer added enhancement New feature or enhancement L: Electrical.Machines Issue addresses Modelica.Electrical.Machines L: Magnetic.FundamentalWave Issue addresses Modelica.Magnetic.FundamentalWave labels May 29, 2025
@AHaumer AHaumer linked an issue May 29, 2025 that may be closed by this pull request
@AHaumer AHaumer added the create new reference results create new reference results label May 29, 2025
Copy link
Contributor

@christiankral christiankral left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

We shall also add a link to Modelica.Magnetic.FundamentalWave.UsersGuide.ZeroSystem in the documentation of the zero impedance models.

@AHaumer
Copy link
Contributor Author

AHaumer commented May 30, 2025

@christiankral I followed your suggestions, but the description of the Boolean parameter should rather be:
parameter Boolean useZeroSystem=true "Suppresses zero current, if false";

@AHaumer AHaumer requested a review from christiankral May 30, 2025 17:51
@christiankral
Copy link
Contributor

@christiankral I followed your suggestions, but the description of the Boolean parameter should rather be: parameter Boolean useZeroSystem=true "Suppresses zero current, if false";

Good point.

@HansOlsson
Copy link
Contributor

quick comment: is there a good reason to call the new model ZeroImpedance when the previous (somewhat related) was called ZeroInductor? I do understand that there's a bit of difference between the two.

@AHaumer
Copy link
Contributor Author

AHaumer commented Jun 2, 2025

quick comment: is there a good reason to call the new model ZeroImpedance when the previous (somewhat related) was called ZeroInductor? I do understand that there's a bit of difference between the two.

First: everything is 100% backwards compatible.
@HansOlsson to explain my intention:
The new component is named ZeroImpedance because in reaility it is rather an impedance (with ohmic part) than a pure inductance. Thus - if necessary - it can be enhanced in future easily under the same name.

@casella
Copy link
Contributor

casella commented Jun 3, 2025

@AHaumer according to Modelica.UsersGuide.Conventions.ModelicaCode.Format, we should have something like

Boolean useZeroSystem=true "= true if zero current is explicitly computed";

@AHaumer
Copy link
Contributor Author

AHaumer commented Jun 3, 2025

Now I've corrected descriptions string of useZeroSystem according to Conventions.
@casella should we backport this to maintenance/4.1.0 ?
BTW the maintenance branch is still named 4.1.x, shouldn't it be named 4.1.0?

Copy link
Contributor

@HansOlsson HansOlsson left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks good, but might add annotation(Evaluate=true); to the parameter as it normally should be evaluated.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
create new reference results create new reference results enhancement New feature or enhancement L: Electrical.Machines Issue addresses Modelica.Electrical.Machines L: Magnetic.FundamentalWave Issue addresses Modelica.Magnetic.FundamentalWave
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Numerical issue in IMC_YD
5 participants