Are there any saint networks/model ready datasets available that are smaller than enet39 - something that may be more realistic for a lunar power system network (both geographically and nodally)?
Hi @smeloney,
Thank you for your question! Currently, the set of Model Ready Datasets publicly available to Free Trial users is limited to the ENET39, the ENET138, and the Tutorial models. My top recommendation would be to stick with the ENET39 unless it is absolutely necessary to change the topology of the network. Please keep in mind that the geospatial data is purely suggestive and has no impact whatsoever on the modeling results. If the background map is distracting, you could simply turn off the Base Map visualization. However, if you must reduce the size of the model, I have a couple of recommendations for you to choose from.
Option 1: Prune the ENET39
You could easily remove a few “tails” from the ENET39 to reduce the number of nodes from 39 to 26. You can do this simply by right-clicking on all of the branches you want to delete and select delete branch(es). This will automatically also delete the nodes and the externals connected to them. I would recommend exercising some care in deleting those externals and perhaps first moving them to the main part of the network before deleting that section.
Option 2: Use the ENET138
If the geographic size of the network is what is most important, you could use the ENET138. While it has many more nodes (138 as opposed to only 39), it represents a much smaller system from a geographic perspective. However, please consider your modeling objectives before switching to this dataset; the ENET138 dataset represents a distribution feeder, not a bulk transmission system. While it is possible the ENET138 may align better with what you are imagining for your dataset, it is also possible that it is not well suited for your project because in its current form it does not represent an electric power market. Although it would be possible to modify it as such, this would require some work should it be necessary.
Best of luck with your project!
Excellent thank you! Why do you suggest to exercise caution deleting the externals? I was originally thinking of deleting all of them in order to add my own generators… Are there any specific issues for me to be aware of in doing this?
Hi @smeloney,
The note to exercise caution is just to ensure that you don’t unintentionally break something in the model, and then not know how to go about fixing it. The ENET39 has been thoughtfully constructed for PCM and ACPF scenarios (have you run an ACPF on this model yet?) across a range of operating conditions. When making modifications, whether adding/deleting/editing externals, its possible you may cause an infeasibility in the PCM, or a divergent ACPF, scenario. That said, we welcome and encourage you to make as many changes as you like. Go wild!
An incremental approach to making changes is helpful here. For instance, after making a few modifications, re-execute your scenario to make sure everything still functions. This way, if something is broken, it will be simple to identify the culprit change. I highly recommend this from an educational perspective, as it will help you gain intuition about the model, and a general understanding about the types of expected variation in results due to particular changes.
Have fun, and remember you can always get a fresh model of the ENET39 (or ENET138) from the forum!