Revision history [back]
 | 1 | initial version |
REGCA1 generator and branch VAR mismatch
Hi,
This is a problem in PSSE V34 dynamic simulation. I have a PV farm at bus 1. The PV farm is modeled by REPCA1+REECA1+REGCA1. A transformer branch connect bus 1 to bus 2.
In the initial condition, Qpvfarm (the MVAR output of the PV farm)=Qbranch (branch MVAR flow from bus1 to bus2), which is okay.
I applied a contingency to change a STATCOM output of the system (the STATCOM is not related to PV farm). After the contigency, Qpvfarm is significantly different from Qbranch, which seems to be a bug of the software.
A hint for this mismatch, my PV farm has 0 MVAR output, should not have the capability to regulate its terminal voltage. But the resulting terminal voltage after contingency is a ramping pattern (should be a step in this case).
Did anyone meet the same problem? Or have any idea for this? Thanks
| | 2 | retagged |
REGCA1 generator and branch VAR mismatch
Hi,
This is a problem in PSSE V34 dynamic simulation. I have a PV farm at bus 1. The PV farm is modeled by REPCA1+REECA1+REGCA1. A transformer branch connect bus 1 to bus 2.
In the initial condition, Qpvfarm (the MVAR output of the PV farm)=Qbranch (branch MVAR flow from bus1 to bus2), which is okay.
I applied a contingency to change a STATCOM output of the system (the STATCOM is not related to PV farm). After the contigency, Qpvfarm is significantly different from Qbranch, which seems to be a bug of the software.
A hint for this mismatch, my PV farm has 0 MVAR output, should not have the capability to regulate its terminal voltage. But the resulting terminal voltage after contingency is a ramping pattern (should be a step in this case).
Did anyone meet the same problem? Or have any idea for this? Thanks
| | 3 | retagged |
REGCA1 generator and branch VAR mismatch
Hi,
This is a problem in PSSE V34 dynamic simulation. I have a PV farm at bus 1. The PV farm is modeled by REPCA1+REECA1+REGCA1. A transformer branch connect bus 1 to bus 2.
In the initial condition, Qpvfarm (the MVAR output of the PV farm)=Qbranch (branch MVAR flow from bus1 to bus2), which is okay.
I applied a contingency to change a STATCOM output of the system (the STATCOM is not related to PV farm). After the contigency, Qpvfarm is significantly different from Qbranch, which seems to be a bug of the software.
A hint for this mismatch, my PV farm has 0 MVAR output, should not have the capability to regulate its terminal voltage. But the resulting terminal voltage after contingency is a ramping pattern (should be a step in this case).
Did anyone meet the same problem? Or have any idea for this? Thanks
