Don´t include a barrier device

[YulissaCamacho]

Hello everyone:

Our team is currently setting up a workflow in which we need certain open devices to not have a subnet name after updating the specific subnet. I wanted to use this option:

And uncheck this option in the set subnet definition tool, but the problem is that the device in question is a transformer and has a terminal. The note in the documentation says that it does not work with devices that have terminals.

My question is: is there another way to do this?

[RobertKrisher]

I've never heard of someone opening a transformer before ... but if you modeled the fuse (overhead) or elbows (padmounted) of the transformer as open that should work. However, this means that the transformer will be de-energized.

If the transformer is actually energized on that subnetwork, but you don't want the subnetwork name to be populated, then I'll need to know more about why and what you're attempting to accomplish.

[YulissaCamacho]

In their current system, the client is accustomed to operating the transformer bank to perform certain calculations with service points. Our AP models the banks as Assemblies, which cannot be opened/closed, so we operate the transformer.

We need a way for it not to inherit the subnetworkname, since service points are linked to their bank by an attribute and the subnetworkname is used to know whether those customers are also connected or not. This is a reduced version of the original network where service points and service lines are not shown (they are not in the network) due to performance issues.

[RobertKrisher · Accepted solution]

This is currently not possible with the software, but if you model the fuses or elbows on the high side of the transformer as a separate device, you can open that device to isolate the transformer.

[RobertKrisher]

@YulissaCamacho does this customer's model use propagation? if so, you can set the phasing of the  transformer to de-energized to force the transformer to not participate in the subnetwork.