Skip to content
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

CIM ApparentPower vs QUDT ComplexPower #43

Closed
VladimirAlexiev opened this issue Sep 13, 2024 · 4 comments
Closed

CIM ApparentPower vs QUDT ComplexPower #43

VladimirAlexiev opened this issue Sep 13, 2024 · 4 comments
Labels
ontology Pertains to ontology representation unit Units of measure, quantityKinds

Comments

@VladimirAlexiev
Copy link
Collaborator

cim:ApparentPower  a qudt:QuantityKind ;
  qudt:applicableUnit cim:UnitSymbol.VA;
  skos:broader quantitykind:ComplexPower. # ApparentPower is a sub-concept of ComplexPower
cim:UnitSymbol.VA skos:exactMatch unit:V-A

But is it true?

  • In QUDT, unit:V-A applies to quantitykind:ComplexPower
  • If you google "ApparentPower vs ComplexPower", you can find electrical textbooks that define them as follows:
    • ComplexPower is the vector sum of real power and reactive power.
    • ApparentPower is the magnitude of complex power.
  • Despite the name ComplexPower: units apply to magnitudes, not to vectors
  • QUDT defines ComplexPower as "under sinusoidal conditions, is the product of the phasor U representing the voltage between the terminals of a linear two-terminal element or two-terminal circuit and the complex conjugate of the phasor I representing the electric current in the element or circuit"
  • CIM defines ApparentPower as "Product of the RMS value of the voltage and the RMS value of the current."
  • To me (not being an electrical engineer), these definitions are "close enough"

Questions:

  • is it skos:broader or maybe even skos:exactMatch
  • Do we need to submit ApparentPower as a new QuantityKind to QUDT?
@VladimirAlexiev VladimirAlexiev added ontology Pertains to ontology representation unit Units of measure, quantityKinds labels Sep 13, 2024
@griddigit-ci
Copy link
Collaborator

Looks good, but we need to dive in definitions. The complex power can be expressed as P+jQ where P is the active and Q reactive power. the S - apparent power we exchange is the module of this

the complex power can be expressed as sqrt(P^2+Q^2)<ctan(Q/P), where the < is the angle part. I think we do not want the angle but just the module

We need to see an example of ComplexPower in QUDT maybe that will get clearer

@VladimirAlexiev
Copy link
Collaborator Author

QUDT refers to https://www.electropedia.org/iev/iev.nsf/display?openform&ievref=131-11-39,
and has these details (in addition to those above):

  qudt:latexDefinition "$\\underline{S} = \\underline{U}\\underline{I^*}$, where $\\underline{U}$ is voltage phasor and $\\underline{I^*}$ is the complex conjugate of the current phasor."^^qudt:LatexString ;
  qudt:latexSymbol "$\\underline{S}$"^^qudt:LatexString ;

So it also calls it S.
Even though it talks of complex numbers, the unit V-A applies to magnitudes, not to vectors.
So it has to be the same thing.

@VladimirAlexiev
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Answered in qudt/qudt-public-repo#970: QUDT has ApparentPower (I overlooked it). Fixed that section.

VladimirAlexiev added a commit to VladimirAlexiev/Inst4CIM-KG that referenced this issue Sep 16, 2024
@steveraysteveray
Copy link

By the way, @VladimirAlexiev, this topic happens to be what I used in explaining how we compute qudt:applicableUnit triples. See https://github.com/qudt/qudt-public-repo/wiki/Advanced-User-Guide#4-computing-applicable-units-for-a-quantitykind

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
ontology Pertains to ontology representation unit Units of measure, quantityKinds
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants