We have many 3 phase complex edges with single phase transformers on the vertexes in the middle and at the end of these complex edges. I say complex edge since that is what the geometric network called them, now that is Edge Policy of Any_Vertex in the utility network.
After a bit of testing I have concluded 4 options:
- Set Subnetwork Tap to the transformer while sacrificing terminals and the inability to place them at the end of the line. An option could be to create a second transformer type to connect at the end of a line. 1st; T-tap and 2nd; T-terminal.
- Give the transformer terminals while sacrificing our complex edges and tapping. This means we have to split each line from transformer to transformer. Without terminals the phase is filtered out downstream.
- Create 3 separate lines for each phase that will not require me to use terminals nor taps on the transformers.
- Offset the transformer and create a junction at its previous x,y location. I will need to create a junction-junction association. This is at the sacrifice of keeping my transformers in the current x,y location. This impacts visualization that we are used to. Assemblies could be created here in the stead but then I have to select by association to get the transformer information plus I have to configure another association with containment. This could result in a 2x or 3x more features that we currently have.
Our preference is option 2, since we can control the splitting and update lengths. However, I feel this is at a big cost since with this option many new segments will need to be maintained. One of the reasons for keeping transformers on the lines is simpler for my integrations that require a spatial location.
What have others done in this situation? Any other suggestions I missed?
