Python PSS/E Simulation to Test Efficacy of Proposed PMU Based WAMS and Potential WAMPAC Applications

A PSS/E 32 model of a real section of the Northern Ireland electrical grid was dynamically controlled with Python 2.5. In this manner data from a proposed wide area monitoring system was simulated. The area is of interest as it is a weakly coupled distribution grid with significant distributed generation. The data was used to create an optimization and protection metric that reflected reactive power flow, voltage profile, thermal overload and voltage excursions. Step changes in the metric were introduced upon the operation of special protection systems and voltage excursions. A wide variety of grid conditions were simulated while tap changer positions and switched capacitor banks were iterated through; with the most desirable state returning the lowest optimization and protection metric. The optimized metric was compared against the metric generated from the standard system state returned by PSS/E. Various grid scenarios were explored involving an intact network and compromised networks (line loss) under summer maximum, summer minimum and winter maximum conditions. In each instance the output from the installed distributed generation is varied between 0 MW and 80 MW (120% of installed capacity). It is shown that in grid models the triggering of special protection systems is delayed by between 1 MW and 6 MW (1.5% to 9% of capacity), with 3.5 MW being the average. The optimization and protection metric gives a quantitative value for system health and demonstrates the potential efficacy of wide area monitoring for protection and control.

Bouyid v Belgium: The “minimum level of severity” and Human Dignity's Role in Article 3 ECHR

The Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights recently delivered an important judgment on Article 3 ECHR in the case of Bouyid v Belgium. In Bouyid, the Grand Chamber was called upon to consider whether slaps inflicted on a minor and an adult in police custody were in breach of Article 3 ECHR, which provides that ‘No one shall be subjected to torture or to inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment’. Overruling the Chamber judgment in the case, the Grand Chamber ruled by 14 votes to 3 that there had been a substantive violation of Article 3 in that the applicants had been subjected to degrading treatment by members of the Belgian police; it found that there had been a breach of the investigative duty under Article 3 also. In this comment, I focus on the fundamental basis of disagreement between the majority of the Grand Chamber and those who found themselves in dissent, on the question of whether there had been a substantive breach of Article 3. The crux of the disagreement lay in the understanding and application of the test of ‘minimum level of severity’, which the ECtHR has established as decisive of whether a particular form of ill-treatment crosses the Article 3 threshold, seen also in light of Article 3’s absolute character, which makes it non-displaceable – that is, immune to trade-offs of the type applicable in relation to qualified rights such as privacy and freedom of expression. I consider the way the majority of the Grand Chamber unpacked and applied the concept of dignity – or ‘human dignity’ – towards finding a substantive breach of Article 3, and briefly distil some of the principles underpinning the understanding of human dignity emerging in the Court’s analysis.