[Security analysis] Contingency consequences in results

[sylvlecl]

• Do you want to request a feature or report a bug?

Feature.

• What is the expected behavior?

We need to be able to know which equipments have actually been tripped by a contingency defined in security analysis input. Currently, that information cannot be retrieved outside of the security analysis provider.

• What is the motivation / use case for changing the behavior?

Being able to assess the consequences of a simulated contingency : what equipments have been tripped ? Did we "lose" some loads or some generators ?

• Design

The information would appear in the PostContingencyResult for each contingency. It would mainly be a list of IDs of tripped equipments.

To be decided:

• what kind of equipments should appear in the list ? All, even switches and all kinds of disconnected injections ?
• do we include only equipments that are completely off ? I mean, if an equipment is disconnected from the main network, but still connected to a smaller, "valid" (~ has some generator to hold voltage), network, do we include it ? Opinion : no.

The API should provide a method to identify those equipments based on a Network and a Contingency, to expose the logic, and so that it can be re-used by implementations that need it (DefaultSecurityAnalysis).