SAFETY-78: maintenance drain at N=2 no longer stalls
checks / unit (pull_request) Failing after 17m13s
infra-pin / fresh (pull_request) Successful in 2s

At two inverters the drain pins its pack and the site target is split
around the pin. Below the pin the other pack had to charge, the allocator
refused the opposite directions, and the site sat at 0 W with an ARBITER
line every cycle (house below or above the drain rate, or a grid charge).

main.py now files a site limit `drain` (lo = what the pin places, at
P_MAINTENANCE) at N>=2 while a pack drains, so the other pack only adds
power in the same direction. A drain that cannot give power waits with
one log line. With battery modes on, no grid charge while a pack drains,
and the other battery's card says why. N=1 is byte-identical.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
This commit is contained in:
Claude
2026-09-29 19:52:51 +02:00
parent 5a4cdc273e
commit 5d27f8496f
18 changed files with 653 additions and 95 deletions
@@ -285,32 +285,11 @@ cross-inverter `lo > hi` contradiction at `arbiter.py:114`. The only line this
card changed there is **which** roster entry the claim is filed on: the one whose
state machine produced the result, rather than `inverters[0]`.
## 6. FOUND AND NOT FIXED: the site loop still contradicts a drain at N>=2
## 6. FIXED BY SAFETY-78: the site loop contradicted a drain at N>=2
Measured while wiring this card, and **pre-existing on `release/1.0` at
`2d025ee`** — the same drain filed on `inverters[0]` produces the identical
refusal with the two unit names swapped.
The maintenance SET **pins** its pack. The loop's target is a **site** claim.
When the site target is *below* the pin — a 2000 W drain while the house imports
less than that, which is most of a night — the only split that sums to the site
target asks the sibling to **charge** while the maintained pack **discharges**,
and `allocator.plan()` refuses it by name as circulating power. The refusal is
correct and fails safe: the whole site goes to 0 W with an `ARBITER: REFUSED`
line in the action log.
**The consequence an operator would see is a misdiagnosis.** The pack is held at
0 W while its state machine believes it is draining, so after 12 h the DRAIN
timeout fires and reports *"drain stuck"* — §12's words for a battery that is not
following commands. The battery is fine; the site refused to allocate.
**Why it is not fixed here.** The fix is to change what the site loop's target
*means* while a unit is pinned — regulate the meter using only the unpinned
packs — which is loop and allocator territory and changes the integrator's
subject. MAINT-05 moves which pack is pinned and nothing else about it. It is
pinned as a running check (`test_maintenance.py` part 12) rather than left as a
comment, so it cannot be forgotten or quietly tuned away, and it wants a card of
its own.
Found here and pre-existing: below the pin the other pack had to charge, the
allocator refused it and the site sat at 0 W. Fixed by a site `drain` floor;
see [[SAFETY-78]] (`DECISIONS/SAFETY-78-drain-at-two.md`).
## 7. FOUND AND NOT FIXED: `migrate_unit_keys()` has the same hole, and it is a LATCH
@@ -0,0 +1,38 @@
# SAFETY-78 - a maintenance drain at two inverters
**Status: DECIDED 2026-09-29.** Fixes MAINT-05 §6 (OPT-11 P1 F1, UX-13 P3
check 5, OPT-11 P3 F4). Tests: `test_safety78.py`.
**The defect.** At N>=2 the drain pins its pack (a unit SET at
`P_MAINTENANCE`) and the site target is split around the pin. Whenever the
site target was below the pin, the other pack had to charge. The allocator
refuses opposite directions (SAFETY-25 §0a, SAFETY-31), so the site went to
0 W and logged `ARBITER: REFUSED` every cycle. That covers a house below the
drain rate, a grid-charge trade, and a house above it too: after a refusal the
loop restarts from 0 W and its 400 W slew step is below the pin again.
**The fix.** While a pack drains at N>=2, main.py files a site limit
`drain`, `lo` = what the pin really places (`allocator.pin_w()`: the drain
rate inside that pack's own hard limits), at `P_MAINTENANCE`. So the site
target is never below the pin and the other pack only adds power in the same
direction. Opposite splits stay forbidden.
- The order is the arbiter's own: a safety SET (100) outranks the limit and
the pin, so everything parks; the peak floor (50) and the drain floor are
both applied, so the higher wins; a trade or the loop below the drain is
lifted to it.
- Below the drain rate the drained pack exports the rest, as the drain does at
N=1 (`maintenance.py`: "forced discharge, exports the surplus"). Holding it
to the house load would make N=2 drain differently from N=1; that is an
owner question, not this fix.
- A draining pack that can place nothing (a refusal, a stale link) adds no
floor, and the wait is logged once per episode.
- With battery modes on, no pack is a grid charger while another drains
(`modetrade.decide(draining=)`, why `cycle`), and the other battery's card
says why (`other_cycle`).
- Not filed at N=1, where the drain is the site SET itself: byte-identical
(`tools/safety78_identity.py`, which hashes the claims too).
**Not changed.** At N=1 a drain (60) still outranks the peak floor (50), so
the peak guard does not add to a drain there. That is pre-existing and kept by
the N=1 identity.