Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 12


IEEE Transactions on Power Systems. Vol. 10. No. 3, August 1995

Standard Load Models for Power Flow and Dynamic Performance Simulation
IEEE Task Force on Load Representation for Dynamic Performance* System Dynamic Performance Subcommittee Power System Engineering Committee
Abstract - We recommend standard load models for power flow and dynamic simulation programs. The goal of this paper is to promote better load modeling and advanced load modeling, and to facilitate data exchange among users of various production-grade simulation programs. Flexibility of modeling is an important consideration.
For transient stability, longer-term dynamics, and small-disturbance stability programs, we recommend the structure of multiple load types connected to a load bus. Load types are static including discharge lighting, induction motors, synchronous motors, and transformer saturation. For each load type, multiple models may be connected to the bus. For longer-term dynamics programs, a model for LTC transformers is also recommended.

utilities, manufacturers, and consultants. The recommended models are implemented in large-scale, production-grade computer simulation programs used by utilities. There are over ten large-scale production-grade dynamic programs in use by utilities, and many more power flow programs. Individual utilities often use more than one program. Compatible models and data sets are essential.

Keywords - load modeling, power flow program, transient stability, voltage stability, long term dynamics, induction motors

A recent paper by the IEEE Task Force on Load Representation for Dynamic Performance [61 highlights the importance of load modeling in power system simulation studies. The paper describes different approaches and modeling practices used by electric utilities. In particular, the paper describes several alternative model structures. No recommendations, however, are made regarding standard models for industry use.
Currently, there are no standard models for system loads. Emerging utility challenges related to voltage stability (also termed load stability) have placed increased emphasis on better load models, and on standard load models. Partly in response to voltage stability simulation needs, several transient stability and longer-term dynamics programs are now integrated.


Nowadays, procedures are in place for exchange of power flow and dynamic simulation data among individual utilities, power pools, and reliability councils. These data exchange activities are greatly facilitated by IEEE committee work to standardize (or at least clearly define) models for generation and SVC equipment [1-51. The IEEE committee recommended models are developed by specialists from

*W. W.Price, chairman. Contributors to paper were C, W.Taylor (writer/editor), W.W.Price, G. J. Rogers, K. Srinivasan, C. Concordia, M. K. Pal, K. C. Bess, P. Kundur, B. L. Agrawal, J. F. Luini, E. Vaahedi, and B. K. Johnson.
9L S M . 579-3 PWRS A paper recommended and approved . . b j t h e IEEE Power s y s i e i Engineering Committee of t h e IEEE Power Engineering Society for presentation a t t h e IEEE/PES 1991 Summer Meeting, San Francisco, CA, July 24 2 8 , 1994. Manuscript submitted December 20, 1993; made a v a i l a b l e f o r p r i n t i n g May 3, 1994.

As power systems are designed and operated with less stability margin, the importance of good models and good data increases. Industry standard models facilitate the validation and certification of simulation software. Purpose of paper. This paper is a follow-up to the previous Task Force paper [SI, and recommends standard load models for power flow, transient stability, and longer-term dynamic simulation. The goal of this paper is two-fold:


to promote better load modeling, and advanced load modeling, - in widely used simulation programs; and to facilitate data exchange among users of various production-grade simulation programs.

0885-8950/95/$04.00 0 1994 IEEE


This paper is being coordinated with the work of the IEEE Power Systems Analytical Data Task Force.

what are loads'

as represented in largescale computer simulations, represent the aggregation of hundreds or thousands of individual component devices such as motors, lighting, and electrical appliances. Except for detailed voltage stability analysis, the aggregated load is usually the load as seen from bulk power delivery points, comprising several megawatts to tens of megawatts. In addition to load components, the aggregated load model approximates the effects of subtransmission and distribution system lines, cables, reactive power compensation, LTc transformers, distribution regulators, and even relatively small synchronous or induction generators.

necessary. In some cases, voltage sensitive loads, along with voltagdoad controls are represented (i.e.,load tap changer transformers or distribution voltage regulators). Generally, system frequency is assumed to be at rated value, although off-nominal frequency effects could be represented. Most power flow programs can model voltage sensitive loads as combinations of constant power and constant impedance loads. This, however, may require additional data preparation work:

Characteristics of good load models. In recommending load models, desirable characteristics include correspondence to physical loads and flexibility. As an example of a load model without physical correspondence, consider the following static model employed in several widely-used transient stability programs: P = v 2+ P - + P 3 (l+L,,Af) P O VO This is the 'ZIP' (constant impedance, constant current, constant power) model multiplied by a linearized frequency dependence term. A similar equation is used for reactive power. Since, for example, the resistive portion of physical loads is not frequency dependent, the model is not physically based.


" 1

ficomme&tions. power flows represent snapshots in time along the power system,s dynamic trajectory. For the first, say, 30-60 seconds following a disturbance (lhe or generator outage), the loads are voltage sensitive like transient stability program load models. Therefore we recommend the load models be compatible with static models and data sets of companion dynamic simulation programs. Power flow programs should, optionally, be able to read load model data from dynamic program data files. Recommended models for dynamic simulation programs are presented below. For time frames of several minutes following a disturbance, loads are often considered constant power because of the action of LTC transformers and other load restoring equipment.
In voltage stability studies, consideration should be given to including equivalents for subtransmissiod distribution feeder impedances and reactive power compensation [9,271. If the load is modeled at the high-side bus of bulk power delivery transformers, the bulk power delivery transformer reactance (typically about 10%) and the distribution transformer reactance (typically 2-3%) is neglected. Representation of the additional impedance is especially important if much of the load is motors, or if the load is controlled to be constant power. For the area that is prone to voltage instability, representation of additional busses is required. (These considerations also apply to dynamic simulation.)

The above model is also limited in its flexibility. For example, field tests often show the reactive portion of the load to be very voltage sensitive (e.g., AQ/AV is 4-7 per unitlper unit) C71. This high voltage sensitivity may be due to distribution transformers operating in saturation. It is difficult to model such a high (and nonlinear) voltage dependency over the voltage range of interest with the above model. Better load models are required for relatively new problems such as voltage stability. With present-day and near future computer capabilities in mind, there is more reason than ever to increase model flexibility and fidelity.

Models for Dynamic Programs

Power Flow Program Models

We recommend models that can be used in transient stability, longer-term stability, and small-disturbance stability programs. For small-disturbance stability, the models may be linearized by the smalldisturbance stability program. Dynamic programs receive initial bus load ( P o+ j Q o ) and voltage magnitude (V,) from companion power flow programs. 3 . 1
Multiple loads on a bus concept

Due to voltage stability challenges, there is strong current interest in improved load models for power flow simulation. Although constant (voltage insensitive) loads are usually assumed for base cases, voltage sensitive loads need to be modeled for snapshots in time shortly following a disturbance. Expanded representation of subtransmission networks may be

Most dynamic programs allow multiple generators, multiple motor loads, and a single static load model


to be connected to a bus. We recommend generalization of this capability to allow multiple loads of various types on a bus.
Each individual load type (static, induction motor, synchronous motor, and transformer saturation) may have multiple representation. For example, a bus load may consist of one or more static models, one or more induction motors, and a synchronous motor. Small synchronous or induction generators embedded in the load area may also be connected to the bus. Each load type may have load shedding or disconnection logic.

In order to standardize on a single static model, we recommend the following model consisting of ZIP terms plus two voltage/f?equency dependent terms:

P v = K (-) PhCPO pz v o

2+ K . -V +K, P ' vo

Kpz = 1- (Kpi+K, +Kpl +K*)

where P,, is the fraction of the bus load represented by the static model. Q=K QhcQo

3 . 2

Static model for dynamic simulation

v 2+ K . -V +Kqc

In large-scale transient stability simulations, loads are typically modeled as purely static (algebraic) functions of voltage and frequency. As described in the Task Force paper [61, both polynomial ('ZIP) and exponential models are used. These models are continuous over the entire voltage range, except for program logic that may convert static load to impedances at voltages below 0.3-0.7 per unit. Normally, only one static model is required per bus. The load powers are functions of bus voltage and frequency. (Usually, the per unit voltage variation is much larger than the per unit frequency variation.) The active part of motor load is generally represented as voltage insensitive, with frequency sensitivity depending on the mechanical load characteristic. (It's better to represent the frequency dependence of the load directly rather than grossly approximating the effect as a generator damping term.)

V o

where Qhc is the fraction of the bus load represented by the static model.

As discussed below, static models for dynamic load

components should be used cautiously. Representation of loads by exponential models with exponent values less than 1.0 (or by equivalent polynomial models) in a dynamic simulation is questionable [Ell.

A further feature of the recommended static model applies to the voltage/frequency dependent (fourth and fifth) terms in equations 1 and 3. The nominal load power is linearly reduced to zero starting at a specified threshold voltage (Val, Va2); the power is zero for voltage below a second threshold voltage (vbl, vb2). Nominal load power is ramped up for voltage recovery. See Figure 1. Referring to $3.3, this models the extinction and re-ignition of discharge lighting. This feature could also be used to model some loads with electronic power supplies.
Data to be exchanged for each static model are listed in Table 1. Note that K and K are computed rather than entered. Tabfe 2 provilfzes data description.

Recommendations. As discussed in the introduction, the model should be sufficiently flexible t o allow several forms of representation. Reference 6 describes several good candidate models.

Discussion. The model provides the flexibility to In the following equations, Po and Qo are the initial model various types of loads. For instance, the freactive and reactive load powers from the power flow quency dependent terms could be used for static repbase case; they may be termed the nominal load resentation of two types of motors. Alternatively, the powers meaning the load power at initial voltage and frequency dependent terms could be used to reprefrequency [231. P and Q are the consumed load pow- sent a motor and also fluorescent lighting. In softers as a function of voltage and frequency. In longer- ware such as EPRI's LOADSYN program [13,321, term dynamic simulations, Po and Qo could be func- the flexibility facilitates accurate aggregation of the estimated load composition. tions of time; see 93.10.



Dynamic induction motor models

Fig. 1. Characteristic of discharge lighting or other discontinuous load as a function of voltage. Referring to Equations 3 and 4, there is obviously a problem if the load is unity power factor at initial voltage and frequency, but not unity power factor at other voltages and frequencies. This can be avoided by separating the load and reactive power compensation. A dynamic program could automatically correct for unity power factor initial conditions by assuming the load is, say, 0.99 power factor lagging, with reactive power compensation applied to match the initial conditions. See Appendix A for fbrther discussion. On a global rather than individual bus basis, most programs have provisions to convert all static load to constant impedance at very low voltage (0.3-0.7 per unit). This helps solution iterations to converge, and is consistent with the physical fact that near nominal load cannot be consumed at abnormally low voltage.

About 57% of the US. electricity consumption goes to power motors, mostly integral horsepower threephase induction motors I101 . Over a decade ago, Undrill and Laskowski presented very strong arguments for representing major blocks of induction motor load by dynamic models including both inertial and rotor flux dynamics [U.With todays computer capabilities and numerical techniques, there is little reason to represent large motor equivalents with static models. Lack of dynamic motor models are suspected to be a major source of discrepancies between field measurements and large-scale simulation results. Motors that have difficulty reaccelerating following faults affect voltage recovery of important busses. Inertia effects are important in studies involving fiequency excursions. Rotor flux transients affect damping of oscillations 1111. Taylor showed that motor dynamics, including rotor flux dynamics, is important in undervoltage load shedding program design [121. Compared to a static constant power load, dynamic motor models improve numerical performance of simulation programs. Particularly for explicit integration methods, however, the time step must be small enough. In the absence of specific data, typical data sets for aggregated motors are available from the EPRI LOADSYN project 113,141, and other sources [15,161. Use of typical motor data sets is better than using static models 1111. Table 1 provides data extracted from the LOADSYN reports. Because of significantly different characteristics, it may be desirable to model equivalents for both small and large motors 113-161. For small motors, representation of inertia dynamics only, without rotor flux dynamics, may be sufficient 1211.
An important input parameter is the machine load-

Discharge lighting

Discharge lighting may represent up to 20% of commercial load [61. Various types of discharge lighting (fluorescent, mercury vapor, sodium vapor) are essentially static, but extinguish during low voltage. Upon voltage recovery, they will re-ignite after a short time delay. Although the extinction and re-ignition may have a hysteresis characteristic, a single-valued power voltage relation is normally used for modeling numerous individual lamps in transient stability programs. An exponential model is used above a certain voltage such as 0.8 per unit. Below a certain voltage such as 0.7 per unit, all lamps are extinguished with power set to zero. Between the two voltages, the nominal power is ramped to zero 115,161. The re-ignition delay is ignored. Referring to the static model ($3.2) and Figure 1, discharge lighting can be represented by the voltage/ frequency dependent terms using the load ramp down parameters.

ing in per unit of motor MVArating. This determines the motor load factor defined as M W loadinghated MVA. Surveys in the US. have shown that motors purchased individually (not part of an appliance) are typically oversized [lo]. This practice, while uneconomical, improves system dynamic performance.
An alternative to routine representation of motors is

sensitivity studies for each new situation to be simulated. The sensitivity studies involve simulation

* Although large motors dominate energy use, peak load condtions could be dominated by smaller three-phase and single-phase air conditioning motors. See reference 20.


with and without dynamic motor models.

Recommendations. Reference 11 and 22 provide equations for modeling induction motors.

Models representing three-phase motors with a single rotor circuit in each axis are generally appropriate for aggregated motors in large-scale simulations (third order model with slip and d, q axis internal voltage or flux as state variables). For data exchange, however, we recommend the flexibility to represent both simpler models and more detailed models. The simpler model is an option to represent slip dynamics only, and uses the same equivalent circuit data. More detailed models are recommended for representation of double cage and deep-bar rotor types of motors, and for representation of saturation of leakage inductances and magnetizing inductance. More detailed models may be required for representation of large industrial motors including power plant auxiliaries, especially if motor starting or stalling (i.e., high current) is involved 130,313. The basic recommended model, with rotor dynamics included, automatically tracks changes in system frequency. In the simple model with only inertial (slip) dynamics, this automatic tracking is lost, and for use in simulations where the frequency changes significantly, the motor terminal bus frequency should be used to compute slip to modify the steadystate equivalent circuit. Based on references 22 and 30-31, Figures 2 - 4 show equivalent circuits for single-cage, deep-bar, and double-cage motors. Parameters are defined in Table 2 except for D, and Dr which are saturation coefficients that are computed internally from saturation current 122,301. Figure 5 shows a general purpose saturation model that is used with Figures 2-4 to represent magnetizing inductance saturation. The motor's fraction of initial bus active load is an input parameter. The corresponding initial reactive power load is computed during model initialization. Differences between motor reactive power and bus initial reactive power (portions of Q,) unused by other load types) are resolved by adding shunt reactive power compensation. In order to facilitate flexibility and compatibility of programs, the recommended mechanical torque model is:

Fig. 2. Single-cage induction motor steady-state equivalent circuit.

Fig. 3. Deep-bar induction motor steady-state equivalent circuit.

Fig. 4 . Double cage induction motor steady-state equivalent circuit. tion may trip motors at low voltage. We recommend provision to trip a percentage, Ptfip,of motor load for low voltage, VI, lasting a specified time, TI. Table 1 lists mandatory and optional data exchange parameters. Table 2 provides data description. Table 3 provides typical data for use in large-scale simulations [13,141. Induction generators are often embedded in load areas. Except for mechanical loaaprime mover data, the same induction machine models and data sets should be used for induction generators. There is current research in modeling single-phase induction motors and variable speed drives in dynamic programs. These models are outside the scope of this paper.

Dynamic synchronous motor models

1- ( A + B + D )


Motor starter ac contactors or undervoltage protec-

Synchronous motors sometimes need to be represented. The most obvious need is for pumped storage plants. Synchronous machine models are available in all programs. The only requirement is the mechanical load torque model.


Recommendations. The recommended load torque model is the same as the induction motor load torque model given by Equations 6 and 7.
Similar to synchronous generators, the fraction of initial active and reactive bus load are input parameters.

For longer-term dynamics, load restoration by LTC transformers and distribution voltage regulators may need to be modeled. Tap changing regulates load-side voltage, and thereby voltage sensitive load.
Loads with voltage controlled by tap changers require LTC transformer representation in the power flow case. Additional buses may be required compared to traditional representation. Modeling for longer-term voltage stability analysis usually requires expanded representation of subtransmission, and equivalents for distribution 1231. Figure 6 shows a typical situation involving a bulk power delivery LTC transformer.
High voltage bus Distribution equivalent, 2 = %lo%

Transformer saturation

Distribution transformers, which may be considered part of the load, normally operate with significant magnetizing induction saturation. Many field tests show large voltage sensitivity of reactive power load following voltage changes. For small changes, reactive power may change as the third to seventh power of voltage.

To more correctly represent reactive power demand as seen from the bulk power network, i t may be desirable to have compatible transformer saturation models in both stability and power flow programs.
Transformer saturation will limit fundamental frequency temporary overvoltages. Accurate evaluation of potentially damaging temporary overvoltages, however, require evaluation by electromagnetic transients programs.

XE 10%



Recommendations. Figure 5 shows the recommended model. This model is also used to represent induction motor magnetizing inductance saturation (83.4).The transformer exciting current as a function of voltage is represented by a piecewise linear characteristic.
Table 1lists data exchange parameters and Table 2 provides data description.

Fig. 6. LTC transformer and distribution equivalent for voltage stability simulation.

Recommendations. Figure 7 shows the recommended model. Provision is made for line drop compensation. North American practice is to start tap changing after an initial time delay, Td,,, of 30-120 seconds. Tapping then continues until the voltage is within a bandwidth. The mechanism delay, T , , between tap steps is typically 5-10 seconds. If desired, intentional time delay, Tdl, between tap steps can be modeled.
Typical North American data is +lo% voltage tap limits, 5/8% voltage tap steps (+16 steps), and 2-4 volts bandwidth based on 120 volts. Reference 23 provides additional information, including European practices (a limitation of the recommended model is that inverse-time relay control of tap changing is not included). Note that the model is discontinuous, involving both pure time delays and deadbands. This has implications for small-disturbance analysis. Table 1 lists data exchange parameters and Table 2 provides data description.



2 VI--G -

Slope of region 1 Slope of region 2 Slope of region 1 Slope ofregion 3


Excitation current

Fig. 5. Saturation function for induction motors and transformers.


Models for load shedding

Load tap changing transformers

This is actually a network rather than a load model.

Underfrequency or undervoltage load shedding models are required for some dynamic and quasidynamic simulations. The simplest assumption is to


h h h

i i i

8 Qa, I - $3




O d d

II 9


' r l



Table 1: Load Model Types and Data Exchange Parameters


Synchronous motor Discharge lighting Transformer saturation LTC transformer

See text See static model 10,Vi, - V2, - GI, - Gq I Rc, a m Tal - x c-, DB, E, T --- Ttn a. Bus nameds) and kV identification not included.

trip each part of the load according to its proportion of the total load. Sometimes it may be desirable to trip specific components (static load, motor load, etc.).

response of a large number of individual loads. For low voltage, constant energy loads cause loss of load diversity. Individual loads stay on longer. The low voltage period may start after tap changer controls reach boost limits. Time constants may be as short Most underfrequency relays have no intentional as several minutes [17,18,251. First order (single time delay, but have operating times of 6-9 cycles. time constant) models have been proposed to model Several steps of underfrequency load shedding may aggregated constant energy loads 117,273. More comneed to be represented at a single bulk power deliv- plex physically-based models have been impleery bus. mented in a longer-term dynamics program [221. The Undervoltage relays normally trip load after signifi- loads are assumed to be unity power factor and only cant time delay [121. An inverse time delay (volt- active power dynamics are modeled. second integrating) relay may be used. In highly detailed studies, several constant energy Circuit breaker operating times are usually 5-15 cycles. In some installations, underfrequency or undervoltage relays trip lines with tapped load, rather than tripping load directly [121. Models are provided in several existing programs. Automatic load restoration following recovery of frequency or voltage is also applied by some utilities. This may be important in preventing overfrequency as a result of overshedding [291. load models with different time constants could be used at a bus. For example, older homes, highly insulated homes, and other constant energy loads (water heating, cooking, industrial heating) could be represented with W e r e n t time constants. Thermostatically-controlled air conditioner loads are essentially constant power load (load restoration by induction motor action). Therefore thermostatic control usually need not be modeled. Recently, several generic first-order dynamic models have been proposed for longer-term voltage stability simulation [18,23,25,26,281.These models approximate both active and reactive power dynamics of aggregated loads. Depending on the time constant, load restoration dynamics by induction motors, load tap changers, or constant energy mechanisms can be approximated. Because of limited experience with these models, and because data exchange between different programs is unlikely to be needed in the near future, we do not recommend standard models in this paper.
3.10 Load changes as a function of time

Recommendations. To limit the scope and length of this report, we do not recommend specific models and data exchange parameters. Industry activity to define standard relay models for dynamic programs would be valuable.
3.9 Dynamic constant energy load models and generic dynamic load models

For simulation of wintertime voltage stability situations, thermostatically-controlled conductance (heating) load is important. Other loads such as water heating, industrial heating, and cooking are either automatically or manually controlled to deliver constant energy.
In most cases, we are interested in the composite

For longer-term dynamics, facility to ramp or otherwise change the load as a function of time is


Table 2: Dynamic Data Description

Fraction of total active or reactive nominal (initial) load. Per unit of active load that is constant current. Per unit of active load that is constant. Per unit of active load that is voltage and frequency sensitive (term 1 ) . Per unit of active load that is voltage and frequency sensitive (term 2).



Induction motor

Frequency sensitivity (term 1). Voltage sensitivity exponent (term 2). Frequency sensitivity (term 2). Per unit voltage at which load starts to be ramped to zero (Figure 1). Per unit voltage at which load is set to zero (Figure 1 ) .

Dynamic order of model: 1,3,or 5. Motor rated MVA. MVA and Pfmct determines motor load factor. Motor rated voltage; may be different than power flow bus rated voltage. I Motor and motor load inertia in MW-s/MVA.

a. Only data for active load is described; reactive load data is similar-see equations 1-4. b. Tap range and tap step size is assumed to available from the companion power flow program data.


Table 3: Typical Induction Motor Data [13,14Ia

I 0.064 I 0.091 I 2.23 I 0.059 I 0.071 I 0.2



I 0.34 -

I 0.8

a. Data is suitable for large-scale simulations where motors do not stall Type 1: Small industrial motor. : Large industrial motor. Type 2 Type 3:Water pump. Type 4: Power plant auxiliary. Type 5:Weighted aggregate of residential motors. Type 6 :Weighted aggregate of residential and industrial motors. Type 7 :Weighted aggregate of motors dominated by air conditioning.

required. For example, morning load pickup may be critical in voltage stability analysis. The load changes may be different for different load classes (residential, commercial, industrial). This can be done by changing the Po and Qo of individual busses or load types. It may also be desirable to change load on a zone or area basis. This is a desired feature of longer-term dynamics programs [231. Implementation details and data exchange are outside the scope of this paper.

Val= 0.8, v b l = 0.7 (fluorescent lighting) Kp2 = 0.5, npv2= 0.1,npn= 1 . 9 ,ngv2= 0 . 5 ,nqn= 1 . 2
(small induction motor) The power factor of heating is 1 . 0 ,the power factor of fluorescent lighting is 0.9 (Q = Ptang = 0.969 MVAr), and the power factor of the small induction motor is 0.83(Q = Ptan4 = 1.344MVAr).As a fraction of Qo, Kql= 0.4845 and Kq2= 0.672 (additional input data). Using equation 5,qz = -0.1516is computed internally (capacitive shunt compensation to resolve the mismatch between the load component power factors and the forecasted reactive power). Kpz is computed to be 0.3.

Example Based on Load Composition

Typical data values were summarized as part of the EPRI LOADSYN computer program development [131.This data is now available in a textbook C271. There are also many other sources of data. In some cases, the data may be the aggregate response of load components as determined by system measurements.

Static and dynamic model. Data for the static portion of the load is: Pfrac = Qfrac = 0.5, K p i = Kpc = Kp2 =K q i = Kqc= Kqz=

As an example, assume a load delivery point consists of 30% heating (space heating, cooking, water heater, clothes dryer, etc.), 20% fluorescent lighting, and 50% small industrial motors with load factor of 0.6. The total load is forecasted to be Po + j Q o = 1O+j2 MW. Using the LOADSYN data values, the standard load model data is as follows. All static model. Based on equations 1-5, the data is:
Pfrac = Qfrac = 1 . 0 K p i = Kpc= Kqi = Kqc = 0

Kpl= 0.4, Kql=0.969,npvl= 1 . 0 ,n

fl = 1.0,nqvl= 3.0,nqfl= -2.8, va1= 0.8, v b l = 0.7duorescent lighting) Computed internally, Kpz = 0.6, Kqz = 0.031.

Data for the dynamic (motor) portion of the load is:

Pfrac = 0.5,Order = 3, MVA = 8.33, R, = 0.31, X , = 0.10,R , = 0.018,X , = 0.18, X, = 3.2, X, = Xr = 0, H = 0.7, A = 1.0, B = 0
The initial motor reactive power is computed based on the terminal voltage, active power, and equivalent circuit parameters. Shunt compensation is internally added to resolve mismatch with the forecasted reactive power; the shunt compensation is

KPI- 0.2, npvl= 1.0, npfl= 1.0, nqvl = 3.0, nqfl= -2.8,


combined with the Kqz term. With more complex load mixtures, a computer program such as LOADSYN can be used for aggregation and for computing data for the models.


We recommend standard load models for power flow and dynamic simulation programs. Static models are suitable for power flow simulations, and for dynamic simulations at locations where results are not sensitive to load modeling. We recommend induction motor models for use at locations where results are sensitive to load modeling. We also recommend models for longer-term dynamic simulations. Table 1 summarizes the data to be exchanged for the several types of models and Table 2 provides data description.

Referencedselected Bibliography

1. IEEE Standard 1110-1991, ZEEE Guide fir Synchronous Generator Modeling Practices in Stability Analyses, 1991. 2. IEEE Standard P421.5-1992,IEEE Recommended Practice for Excitation System Models for Power System Stability Studies, 1992. 3 . IEEE Committee Report, T)ynamic Models for Fossil Fired Steam Units in Power System Studies, IEEE Zkansactions on Power Systems, Vol. 6,No. 2,pp. 753761,May 1991. 4 . IEEE Committee Report, Hydraulic Turbine and Turbine Control Models for System Dynamic Studies, IEEE h n s a c t w n s on Power Systems, Vol. 7, No. 1, pp. 167-179,February 1992. 5. IEEE Committee Report, Static Var Compensator Models for Power Flow and Dynamic Performance Simulation, paper 93 WM 173-5PWRS,IEEEPES 1993 winter meeting. 6 . IEEE Committee Report, Load Representation for Dynamic Performance Studies, IEEE lFansactions on Power Systems, Vol. 8 ,No. 2,pp. 472-482,May 1993. 7 . CIGRE Task Force 38-02-05, Load Modelling and Dynamics, Electra, pp. 124-142, May 1990. 8. M. K. Pal, discussion of An Investigation of Voltage Instability Problem, by N. Yorino et al., IEEE Dunsactions on Power Systems, Vol. 7 ,No. 2,pp. 600-611, May 1992. 9. K.Walve, Modeling of Power System Components at Severe Disturbances, paper 38-18,Proceedings of CIGRE, 1986. 1 0 . S.Nadel, M. Shepard, S.Greenberg, G. Katz, A. T. de Almeida, Energy-EfficientMotor Systems: A Handbook on Technology, Programs, and Policy Opportunities, American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy, Washington, D.C., 1991. 11. J. M. Undrill and T. F. Laskowski, Model Selection and Data Assembly for Power System Simulation, IEEE fiansactions on Power Apparatus and Systems, Vol. PAS-101, No. 9,pp. 33334341,September 1982.

12. C. W. Thylor, Concepts of Undervoltage Load Shedding for Voltage Stability, ZEEE h n s a c t w n s on Power Delivery, Vol. 7,No. 2,pp. 480488,April 1982. 13. General Electric Company, Load Modeling f i r Power Flow and Dansient Stability Computer Studies, EPRI Final Report EL-5003, January 1987.(Four volumes; describes LOADSYN computer program. Volume 2 is a load modeling reference manual.) 1 4 . F. Nozari, M. D. Kankam, and W.W.Price, Aggregation of Induction Motors for Transient Stability Load Modeling, ZEEE hnsactions on Power Systems, Vol. 2, No. 4,pp. 10961103,November 1987. 15. H.K.Clark, T. F. Laskowski, k Wey Fo, and D. C. 0. Alves, Voltage Control in a Large Industrialized Load Area Supplied by Remote Generation, paper A 78 558-9, IEEEPES 1978 Summer Meeting. 16. H.K. Clark and T. F. Laskowski, kansient Stability Sensitivity to Detailed Load Models: a Parametric Study, paper A 78 559-7,IEEEPES Summer Meeting, Los Angeles, July 1621,1978. 17. Klaus-Martin G d ,Dynamic Simulation of Voltage Collapse Processes in EHV Power Systems, Proceedings: Bulk Power System Voltage Phenomena-Voltage Stability and Security, EPRI EL-6183, Section 6.3, January 1989. 18. D. Karlsson, K .Lindbn, I. Segerqvist, and B. Stenborg, Temporary Load-Voltage Characteristics for Voltage Stability StudienField and Laboratory Measurements, CIGR& paper 38-204,1992. 19. M. S .Calovic, Modeling and Analysis of Under-Load Tap Changing Transformer Control Systems, ZEEE Dansactions on Power Apparatus and Systems, Vol. PAS-103, NO. 7,pp. 1909-1915,July 1984. 2 0 . B. R. Williams, W. R. Schmus, and D. C. Dawson, Iransmission Voltage Recovery Delayed by Stalled Air-conditioner Compressors, IEEE Dansactions on Power Systems, Vol. 7 , No. 3, pp. 1173-1181, August 1992. 2 1 .S . Ahmed-Zaid, M. W e b , and W. W. Price, FirstOrder Induction Machine Models Near Voltage Collapse,* International Workshop on Bulk Power System Voltage Phenomena: Voltage Stability and Security, Deep Creek Lake, Maryland, pp. 403-410,4-7August 1991. 22. P. Kundur, Power System Stability and Control, McGraw-Hill, 1994. 2 3 . CIGRG Task Force 38-02-10, Modelling of Voltage Collapse Including Dynamic Phenomena, CIGRE Brochure No. 75,1993. 24. W. W. Price, D. B.mapper, N. W. Miller,A. Kurita, and H. Okubo, A Multi-Faceted Approach to Power System Voltage Stability Analysis, CZGRk, paper 38-205, 1992. 25. D. Karlsson, and D. J. Hill, Modelling and Identification of NonLinear Dynamic Loads in Power Systems, IEEEPES paper 93 W M 171-9PWRS. 26. W. Xu and Y. Mansour, Voltage Stability Analysis Using Generic Dynamic Load Models, I E E W E S paper 93 WM 185-9PWRS. 27. C. W. Taylor, Power System Voltage Stability, McGrawHill, 1993. 28. D. J. Hill, Nonlinear Dynamic Load Models with Recovery for Voltage Stability Studies, IEEE %ns-


actions on Power Systems, Vol. 8 , No. 1, February

1993. 29. C. W.Taylor, F. R. Nassief, and R. L. Cresap, Northwest Power Pool Transient Stability and Load Shedding Controls for Generation-Load Imbalances,IEEE Dansactions on Power Apparatus and Systems, Vol. PAS-100, pp. 3486-3495, July 1981. 30. G. J. Rogers and D. Shirmohammadi, Induction Machine Modelling for Electromagnetic Transient Program, IEEE lhnsactions on Energy Conversion, Vol. EC- 2 ,No. 4 ,pp. 622-628,December 1987. 31. G.J. Rogers and D. S . Benaragama, An Induction Motor Model with Deep-Bar Effect and Leakage Inductance Saturation, Archiv fur Ekkhtechnik, Vol. 60,pp. 193-201,1978. 32. W.W.Price, K.A Wirgau, A. Murdoch, J. V.Mitsche, E. Vaahedi, and M. A El-Kady, Load Modeling for Power Flow and Transient Stability Computer Studies, IEEE lhnsactions on Power Systems, Vol. 3 ,No. 1, pp. 180-187,February 1988.

The base values used in developing model parameters from field tests could have different meanings. For instance, base power could be transformer or load MVA rating. Most commonly, however, the base values are the initial values of active and reactive power.

A particular problem occurs if the initial measured reactive power is very small. Then computing per unit reactive power, Q/Qo, becomes erratic. (The meaning of exponents nqvl and n m in Equation 3 if obtained by tests is AQ/AV per unitlper unit.)
In providing data from field tests, the instrumentation and the methods used for obtaining parameters should be clearly described. Because prevailing practice and nearly all data sets are based on use of Po in computing per unit active power and Qo in computing per unit reactive power, we recommend this convention in equations 1and 3. S6me experts, however, recommend either use of So (apparent power) as the base for both active and reactive power, or use of Po as the base for reactive power. This avoids difficulties when reactive power is small or zero.

Appendix A: Base Values for Load Data

Equations 1and 3 contain base values for active and reactive power, and voltage. In the computer world, the base values are from a solved power flow.