Yes, internally, it is converted to a p.u. value. The susceptance is specified as the MVAr injected at a voltage of 1 p.u., so simply dividing that number by the MVA base gives the appropriate p.u. susceptance.
Ray > On Mar 21, 2019, at 4:16 PM, Jubeyer Rahman <[email protected]> wrote: > > I have one confusion, on page 145 (Matpower manual for 7.0b1) in Table B-1, > it says the shunt susceptance is in MVAR , is that correct? If yes, so is > there any internal conversion for that for running power flow? > > On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 9:09 AM Ray Zimmerman <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > Voltages and impedances are specified in p.u. in the case file data, but > powers in MW and MVAr. That is, the conversion done internally, is simply to > divide all of the powers by the baseMVA. > > If you were to specify the powers in p.u. and set the baseMVA to 1, you > should get the same solution, with the solution powers also expressed in > per-unit, of course. Internally, it would be solving everything with the same > values. > > Ray > > > On Mar 20, 2019, at 9:36 PM, Jubeyer Rahman <[email protected] > > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > Is there any chance for wrong results, if I convert every parameters(Pg,Qg, > > Pmax, Qmax, etc.; every possible power flow data) that could be transformed > > into per unit and call the runpf in matpower? > > > > My point of confusion is, in usual case data file, only the voltages are > > given in per unit and all other parameters are usually given in actual > > units, and runpf is applied on that type of case file; is there really an > > internal conversion of the given data? > > > > Regards, > > Jubeyer > > >
