-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 62
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Flow direction and compressors #562
Comments
Dear @OriolRaventos, thank you for raising the issue. I will try to make the quick fix concerning the docs you mentioned wrt. the sink. Concerning your question, I am not quite sure how you did interpret the results from the res_pipe table, but in my case, the velocity as well as volume flow and "mdot_from_kg_per_s" are given as negative values, indicating that the flow is directed from the "to_junction" to the "from_junction". Probably, the resulting table is not the most intuitive to interpret, I would be happy to take suggestions on improving it. What concerns me is that the ext_grid result is positive, which seems to be a consequence of the "sign" of the component being positive. Is this intended, @SimonRubenDrauz ? If so, we need to change the documentation, otherwise the component model, as the result is positive in case of mass flow leaving the system. Regarding your other question, could you provide an example? Did you just replace p_bar=15 by t_k=300 (or similar) in your script? In that case, what happens is that the hydraulic connectivity check will not find any node with a boundary condition for the pressure, setting everything out of service (you should be getting a logger output stating that junctions and pipe nodes are set out of service). Then your pipeflow is corrupted and doesn't work anymore. However, this would be a very simple case to identify and just stop the pipeflow with an adequate error message. Didn't we have similar issues already, @SimonRubenDrauz ? So, you will always need one node with fixed pressure level, which is what the ext_grid provides in case it is a "p" or "pt" ext_grid. If you would like to set both pressure and temperature, you can give both parameters, in that case the calculation should converge. I hope that helps. Kind regards |
Dear @dlohmeier, Thank you very much for your quick response. Let me give you a short feedback:
Thanks again for all you help. This clarifies my issues. I'll wait a couple of days, in case you want to add any other input and then I will close the Issue. |
Dear @OriolRaventos and @dlohmeier,
I hope I was able to answer all of your questions. Best regards! |
Thank you very much. That claifies all my points. About the signs. I do think that it would be more natural to keep the PandaPower convention. Please, feel free to close this issue. I leave it open in case you want to link it to future change in the sign convention in the code. Thank once again! |
If I understand corretly from the documentation:
Possible typo: In the documentation of the sink, I guess there is a typo on the Component Table Data, since gives a Value Range for mdot_kg_per_s a$\leq 0$ , but it should be $\geq 0$ . See here.
Now, I cannot understand the results of the following simple 3-node example derived from here.
After running the flow simulation:
I got the following flow for the diferent components:
and I ask myself how can it be to have a +0.04 flow from 9 to 10 in the pipe, when at 10 there is a source of +0.04?
A somehow unrelated question: I tried to implement the external grid fixing the temperature instead of the pressure and it never converged for whatever values I gave. I also tried to substitute the external grid by a simple source with mass flow of 0.03 (and many other values) but it didn't converge either.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: