Again on line parameters (compare #31)

[ceraolo]

This is a companion ticket of #31. that one referred to data present in Examples.Data.Lines, this one refers to the two lines in AC3ph.Lines.Parameter.RXline.
Here there is an evident mistake in V_nom: 1 V is totally unrealistic.
But how to correct the mistake? A typical HV line has a characteristic impedance that ranges between 200 and 450 ohm. We can reverse-engineer the data to find the characteristic impedance in case of two values.
Under the hypothesis that resistance and reactance values are correct (and only V_nom is wrong), we compute Zc=sqrt(X/B)=sqrt(1/0.025)=6.325 p.u.

1. V_nom=66 kV => Znom=66^2/100=43.56 ohm => Zc=276.086 ohm
2. V_nom=132 kV => Zc=132^2/100=174.24 => Zc=1102.068 ohm.
   Both voltage levels IEC standard (60038)

So, to conclude:

1. data in Examples.Data.Lines should be given along with the associated geometry, as I did in a first case (More rational transmission Line data #31)
2. data in AC3ph.Lines.Parameter.RXline may be just "generic realistic examples with round numbers. In this case, the values already present for reactances and susceptances are ok. V_Nome should be set to 66 kV.
3. the power transfer example, that is linked to AC3ph.Lines.Parameter.RXline data should be modified so that the voltage at the two ends is 66 kV.

If this is done, I could supply a description of PowerTransfer, with plots and phasors, that shows nice compliance of the results with theory.