Dear Professor Zimmerman,
Thank you so much for your help.
Kind Regard,
Naime
On Wed, Apr 21, 2021 at 7:23 AM Ray Daniel Zimmerman
wrote:
> Sorry, the ‘halved" and “doubled” language was confusing, except in the
> context of identical parallel lines.
>
> For lines with parameters r1, x1, b1
Sorry, the ‘halved" and “doubled” language was confusing, except in the context
of identical parallel lines.
For lines with parameters r1, x1, b1 and r2, x2, b2, the equivalent values for
the parallel set would be rt, xt, bt, where …
rt = 1 / (1/r1 + 1/r2)
xt = 1 / (1/x1 + 1/x2)
bt = b1 + b2
Dear Professor Zimmerman,
Thank you for your time.
Please confirm if my understanding is correct.
For this duplicate branch
77 80 0.017 0.0485 0.0472 0 0 0 0 0 1 -360 360;
77 80 0.0294 0.105 0.0228 0 0 0 0 0 1 -360 360;
1/r_t =1/ 0.017 +1/ 0.0294 ---> r_t=0.0108 *OR* r_t = (0.017 + 0.0294)/2
In general, the line ratings RATE_A, etc, would also equal the sum of the
individual line ratings, but in this case the capacity limit is not given
(interpreted as unlimited) so no change.
However, a quick correction … while the total impedance (r and x) are halved,
the total line charging (b)
