In a transmission grid, synchronous generators could sometimes be controlled with Q value instead of U value. These generators need to be modelled in pandapower as sgen for powerflow analysis. However, for shortcircuit calculation, these generators need to be handled as synchronous generator and thus needs to be modeled as gen. This behaviour caused inconsistency in pandapower network for pf and sc analysis. There are two possible way to properly solve the inconsistency:
- Support pq generator in gen table (similar to "slack" and add extra column "q_mvar")
- Support generator sc parameter in sgen table
The advantage of the first would be more elegant for the user, but the pd2ppc functionality needs to be double checked as well as e.g. the behaviour of such generator in OPF.
The advantage of the second would be more simple to implement and only the pd2ppc process for sc calculation needs to be updated, but the sgen table would be more complicated and might also cause misunderstanding.
Additional discussions on the topic are very welcome! @rbolgaryn @lthurner
In a transmission grid, synchronous generators could sometimes be controlled with Q value instead of U value. These generators need to be modelled in pandapower as sgen for powerflow analysis. However, for shortcircuit calculation, these generators need to be handled as synchronous generator and thus needs to be modeled as gen. This behaviour caused inconsistency in pandapower network for pf and sc analysis. There are two possible way to properly solve the inconsistency:
The advantage of the first would be more elegant for the user, but the pd2ppc functionality needs to be double checked as well as e.g. the behaviour of such generator in OPF.
The advantage of the second would be more simple to implement and only the pd2ppc process for sc calculation needs to be updated, but the sgen table would be more complicated and might also cause misunderstanding.
Additional discussions on the topic are very welcome! @rbolgaryn @lthurner