IEEE Transactions on Power Apparatus and Systems, Vol.PAS-98, No.
2 March/April 1979 369
VERIFICATION OF SYNCHRONOUS MACHINE MODELING IN STABILITY STUDIES: COMPARATIVE
TESTS OF DIGITAL AND PHYSICAL SCALE MODEL POWER SYSTEM SIMULATIONS
R. D. DUNLOP, MEMBER, IEEE
AMERICAN ELECTRIC POWER SERVICE CORPORATION
NEW YORK, NEW YORK
Abstract - The adequacy of digital models of synchronous machines in
conventional transient stability programs has been of continuing interest and
concern to engineers involved in system planning and operating studies. To
verify the adequacy of such models a comparative test approach is taken by
running a series of tests on the AEP Transient Stability Program and on the
MIT Physical Scale Model facility which closely approximates actual system
dynamic performance characteristics. The paper summarizes the results of these
studies and shows good correlation between the two simulations. Also, the
results confirm the findings of others that existing models and associated
parameters may need to be improved for certain types of dynamic performance
studies and operating conditions.
INTRODUCTION
There has been a concern about the adequacy and accuracy of simulation
methods used in power system stability studies. Direct comparison between
field tests and simulation methods has been considered the most desirable
approach to verification of the models used in system transient stability studies
today. However, it is not practical or feasible to subject actual generating
units and the power system to the kind of disturbances which can produce
unstable operation. From an operating point of view, the risk of possible damage
to the turbine-generator or steam supply system and the concern about loss of
service to customers make it very difficult to justify isolating a portion of the
system for such tests. Beyond this, it is very costly to carry out such tests and
to install sufficient monitoring so as to adequately capture all relevant data.
Also, it is not practical or economically feasible to install in-service monitor-
ing which is sufficient in detail and response characteristics to capture the
very severe disturbances which occur most infrequently.
The question about adequacy of existing simulation technology can be
viewed in two dimensions. Firstly, how accurate are the basic modeling ap-
proaches used to simulate the synchronous machine and associated control
systems? Secondly, how accurate are the parameters which are used in these
models to carry out system stability studies? There has been a continuing and
perhaps growing confidence in the mathematical formulation of the problem and
the simplifying assumptions made so as to carry out transient and dynamic
stability studies on large scale systems. However, a recent paper by Dandeno
for the Joint Working Group on Determination of Synchronous Machine Stability
Study Constants provides a convenient summary of the growing concern that the
parameters used to represent the synchronous machine may not be adequate for
the wide range of applications of transient stability programs in use today.
(1) As noted in that paper, this concern is based on the results of some field
testing-- the most notable being the Northfleet Exercise (2) carried out in 1969--
and of comparisions between conventional models and very sophisticated math-
ematical models. (3, 4).
The answer to the question of adequacy of simulation methods can also be
viewed in more than one way. First, how accurate are the results of such studies
as measured in terms of rotor angle swings, generator stator and field currents,
terminal and field voltages, etc? Secondly, and the authors believe most impor-
tantly, are the basic decisions regarding power system design and operation
affected to any significant degree by the inaccuracy of the simulation method?
For example, in transient stability studies an error of a few degrees in maximum
rotor angle swing may translate into a fraction of a cycle in terms of critical
clearing time for a given test disturbance. On the other hand, the decision
regarding the system design and operation may require stability margins measured
F78 023-4. A paper recommended and approved by the IEEE Power
System Engineering Committee of the IEEE Power Engineering Society
for presentation at the IEEE PES Winter Meeting, New York, NY,
January 29-February 3, 1978. Manuscript submitted September 6,
1977; made available for printing November 1, 1977.
0018-9510/79/0300-0369$00.75 @
A. C. PARIKH, MEMBER, IEEE
in cycles rather than fractions of cycles. The assumptions required to produce
efficient economical analytical tools together with the data uncertainty suggest
that there will always be some discrepancy between simulation results and
actual system performance. Accordingly, the adequacy of the simulation tools
should always be judged in terms of how the study results will be used to arrive
at system design and operating decisions.
When the decision was made several years ago by American Electric Power
to support the development of physical scale model power system at the
Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) in the Electrical Power Systems
Engineering Laboratory (EPSEL), it was envisioned that one of the primary
benefits would be in the area of verifying, enhancing and developing simulation
technology through comparative testing on the physical model power system.
The MIT-EPSEL model power system, designed to provide an accurate and
direct physical reproduction of the electromechanical dynamic performance of
real-world power systems, can be subjected repeatedly to the kind of severe
disturbances which could not be permitted in any field test program on an actual
operating system.
In this paper, the authors are reporting on the results of an extensive
testing program for comparison of the physical model power system with the
digital simulation which is commonly available in conventional power system
stability programs. The purpose of this testing program was to verify the ade-
quacy and accuracy of a conventional stability analysis program for a variety of
disturbances and initial operating conditions with emphasis on the more severe
disturbances which are common to transient stability studies. The discussion of
the study and results will be preceded by a brief review of the pertinent aspects
of digital simulation methods and the MIT-EPSEL physical model power system
as they relate to the purpose of these studies.
DIGITAL MODELS IN STABILITY PROGRAMS
The mathematical models which are used to represent the synchronous
machine and associated control systems in conventional transient stability
programs involve certain approximations. These approximations arise partly out
of a wish to determine the electromechanical dynamic performance of very large,
multi-machine power systems. Accordingly, it is desirable to reduce the com-
plexity of the generator models and system representation to the point where a
large number of machines can be represented but within the constraint that an
"acceptable" level of accuracy is obtained which will lead to meaningful
judgements about the design and operation of the system.
The question then arises as to the adequacy of the simulation methods
used in conventional stability programs. In this section, some of the principal
assumptions that are commonly employed in reducing the complexity of digital
simulation models in power system stability programs will be discussed.
First of all, the transmission network which couples the machines together
is represented by its steady-state positive sequence equivalent comprised of
lumped parameters at the nominal steady state frequency of the system. This is
generally acceptable because the electromechanical oscillations of the machines
are of much lower frequency than the fundamental (60 Hertz) frequency of the
electrical system. Then, the network can be described by algebraic equations,
and the solution of the network equations is greatly simplified. Thus, at each
step in the step-by-step solution of the system dynamic equations, a steady-state
load flow solution of the network equations is performed - - taking into account
the instantaneous node voltages as provided by a solution of the swing equation
at each dynamic node,and possibly accounting for nonlinear loads as appropriate.
Unsymmetrical fault conditions are generally simulated by connecting to the
detailed positive sequence network lumped equivalent circuits representing the
negative and zero sequence equivalent circuit of the system as viewed from the
point of fault.
The synchronous machine models are based on the Park's equations
formulation whereby the differential equations relating instantaneous currents,
voltages and flux linkages in the stator (a-b-c) are transformed into a rotor
reference frame (d-q-o) resulting in differential equations with constant rather
than time varying coefficients. (5, 6). The solutions of these equations, together
with others representing field and damper circuits, yields instantaneous flux
1979 IEEE
370
and current quantities which are used to determine the electromagnetic torque
developed by the machine. This torque is then used in the basic swing equation,
in conjunction with mechanical and damping torques acting on the rotor, to
determine the rotor motion of each machine being represented. The influence of
system disturbances and switching conditions and of each machine on the others
is represented through the quazi-steady-state equations of the network.
Since the network, as noted earlier is represented by steady-state algebraic
equations, only fundamental frequency effects can be represented in the machine
stator circuits which are interconnected with the system. This means that the
transient d-c and harmonic components in the stator (a-b-c) currents, as produced
by system disturbances and switching operations, cannot be accounted for in
large scale transient stability programs. Mathematically, this is accomplished
by neglecting the so-called "transformer voltage" terms, P'd and po, in the
Park's equation formulation of the synchronous machine equations. (7)%he end
result is that the computed electromagnetic torque for each machine contains
only the slowly varying component as produced by the symmetrical, fundamental
frequency component ofthe stator currents acting with the corresponding transient
field current. The higher frequency transient oscillations in the electrical
torque, which exists in actual machines due to the transient d-c and harmonic
components in the stator currents are not computed. However, these higher
frequency transient components - being oscillatory in nature about the expected
value of the torque - do not affect the determination of rotor angle swings to a
very significant degree. In some programs, the damping torques which are
associated with these a symmetrical andnegative sequence currentsare estimated
in a separate calculation and included with torques acting on the rotor to produce
less conservative results. (6) This latter correction has not been included in the
comparative studies discussed in this paper.
In addition to the questions of how the above simplified models may affect
the accuracy of stability studies, there is the further question of whether the
steady-state and transient parameters of the machine which go into the models
are adequate for the wide range of conditions to which generators are subject in
dynamic performance studies being carried out analytically with conventional
transient stability programs. Reference 1 points out some of these questions
and concerns. For the purposes of these comparative studies, the reactances and
time constants used in the digital simulation were based on parameters which
were measured or calculated for the MIT model machine in accordance with
present industry standards. Thus, the results derived from these studies are
obtained using the same kind of data which is generally made available by the
manufacturer. Both transient and subtransient effects were represented in the
digital simulation.
The influence of the excitation control system is incorporated in the
differential equations associated with the field circuit of the machine. The
response of the excitation system to feedback voltage regulator control is repre-
sented by standard IEEE models.(8) Since the comparative studies were primarily
aimed at investigating the adequacy of the synchronous machine models used in
conventional transient stability programs, a similar model was used to represent
excitation control on the MIT physical scale model machine also.
Prime mover and speed governor control was not represented in the com-
parative studies. In all cases the mechanical power input was held constant at
the initial value for both the digital program and the physical model machine.
PHYSICAL SCALE MODEL SYSTEM
The MIT-EPSEL model system is described in references 9 and 10. It now
consists of four accurate, laboratory-sized three-phase alternators which have
been carefully designed to reproduce the electrical characteristics of specific
large, solid-rotor turbogenerators. One of these alternators is designed to operate
as a separate unit or it can be connected in cross-compound with an identical
unit to simulate the 1300 MW units which are being installed on the AEP system
today. Each generator includes models of the excitation and prime mover systems
with controls, generator step-up transformers, and a circuit breaker model.
The generating units can be interconnected with each other and to the
3-phase laboratory source (infinite bus) by means of some 400 miles of 765 and
345-kV transmission line models and autotransformers. The transmission system
can be assembled in many configurations with circuit breakers, shunt compensation
and load models and with monitoring units at various location to measure instan-
taneous 3-phase voltages, currents as well as real and reactive power.
The generator model used in this study is a physical scale model of one
of four 907 MVA,tandem-compound units on the AEP system. The model generator
has a power scale factor of approximately 106. The details of this design are
covered in reference 9 and the electrical parameters are given in the next section
of the paper.
The model machines are driven by a d-c motor whose torque is controlled
by an electronic analog of the speed governor and prime mover system. (10) In
these comparative studies the mechanical input power to the model machines
was held constant so as to be consistent with similar assumptions made in the
digital simulation.
The regulator-exciter system for each machine is also provided by a detail-
ed electronic analog model of the actual regulator-exciter system. (10) However,
for the purposes of these comparative studies, a simplified analog model was
constructed to simulate the standard IEEE type model which is used typically
in transient stability studies. Thus, excitation control was instituted in both
the digital studies and in the model machine studies in the same manner so that
any differences in study results could be related primarily to the synchronous
machine representation rather than to differences in excitation control models.
The rotor angle position was monitored by means of a special monitoring
device. (10) This rotor angle monitor produces a voltage signal which is pro-
portional to the angle between the q-axis of the rotor and some reference voltage
in the system. This corresponds to the same quantity which can be derived from
the output of digital transient stability programs.
There were two principal advantages in using the physical scale model
system in these comparative studies. Firstly, the electrical performance is
similar in every essential respect to a real large scale generator, but the MIT
model power system can be subjected to a wide variety of disturbance conditions
and to a level of severity which could not be permitted in real system tests.
Secondly, with the model power system it is convenient to isolate the speed and
excitation control systems and cause them to behave in the same manner as
digital simulations which are commonly used in transient stability programs.
Thus,the adequacy and accuracy of the digital models of the synchronous machine
can be investigated under conditions where the differences in auxiliary devices
are minimized.
SYSTEM CONFIGURATION AND DISTURBANCES STUDIED
Figure 1 describes the one machine - infinite bus system configuration
used for the comparative study. The circuit breaker B is normally open and is
closed only to provide a line reclosing operation. The physical scale model
of Big Sandy Unit 2 has parameter values (saturated) as shown in Table 1;
these values are also used as the basis for the digital simulation. (9)
Fig. 1
One machine - infinite bus
test system
TABLE I
Generator Data*
Xd 1.93 Td 5.2 sec
.23 Td .026 sec
.195
Tqo .81 sec
Xq 1.77 Tq .027 sec
Aq
x1 .50 .0107
.30 H 3.74 KWSec/kVA
XI .17
*Values in Per Unit in Generator Base
 371

For tests conducted at the MIT laboratory, the local power system serves as the
infinite bus, whereas for the digital simulation, the infinite bus is modelled by a
machine with a very large inertia constant and with a constant voltage behind
the equivalent system reactance. The time step used for the digital simulation
was 1 cycle (60 Hz base) and no saturation characteristic was included.
performance without excitation controland c) dynamic performance with excitation
control. For some selected cases, field current plots for both the AEP and the
MIT simulations are also included.
Steady State Performance

Two sets of tests were conducted - one with the generator operating with
constant field excitation, and the other with the excitation system represented
bythe IEEE Type 1(8) exciter-regulator model shown in Figure 2. The mechanical
input torque was held constant for all the tests.
The results of the AEP and the MIT simulations for the one machine -
infinite bus test system configuration showed good comparison of the generator
terminal voltage and the line flows for the six different load levels. However,
as shown in Table 11, the comparison of rotor angles for these initial conditions
showed some discrepancy in the results for identical operating conditions.
Notice that the pattern of difference in rotor angle values has one trend in the
sense thatthe difference is larger for a leading or a lagging power factor loadings
than the unity power factor load. Also, for higher load level (0.9 pu) the apparent
discrepancy is larger.

TABLE 11
Comparison of Initial Rotor Angle between
MIT Physical Scale Model and
AEP Digital Computer Simulation
INITIAL INITIAL ANGLE, ANGLE
Tr .003 Kf 5 .092 evf
Se (Vf ) sAe LOADING DEGREES DEVIATION
K0a 50 Tf a 1.16 A-8x10-5 P + jQ,pu AEP MIT
T0- .02 Kez-.06 B 2.1 .9 +j.41 44.6 40.0 4.6
vm- 1.0 Te .57
z
.9+jO 60.6 58.0 2.6
.9 -j.19 70.6 67.0 3.6
Fig. 2 .3 +j.7 13.7 11.9 1.8
IEEE Type 1 excitation system model .3+jO 30.4 30.3 0.1
.3 -j.41 73.2 72.0 1.2
The contingencies that were evaluated in this study are:
1) Three-phase-to-ground fault at the machine terminals. The major conclusion that can oe drawn from Table 11 is that the computed
initial values of the rotor angle, determined from a digital model, are consistantly
2) Line reclosing. largerthanthat measured at MIT.The reason for this requires further investigation
in the parameter values used for the digital simulation, particularly the value
3) Breaker opening/reclosing (Breaker A) - momentarily disconnects the of quadrature-axis synchronous reactance Xq. Also, the influence of saturation
unit from the system. characteristics in both the direct and the quadrature axes as a function of load-
ing should be accounted for in some satisfactory manner.
It should be noted that although contingency type 3, above, provides a good test
for the purposes of digital model verification, such a reclosing operation would Dynamic Performance Without Excitation Control
not be intentionally permitted on the actualpower system because of the potential
damage which could result from the out-of-phase synchronization of the machine. Three phase faults:
To encompass a wide range of credible operating conditions, the following An initial series of three-phase-to-ground fault tests was conducted on the
initial conditions in per unit on the generator base were selected for this study. model system. For these tests, the fault was applied at the machine terminals
These initial condition values were established at the infinite bus for all tests. for 5 cycles duration in Cases 1 to 5 and for 10 cycles in Case 6. For Case
6, the 5-cycle fault time did not produce any noticeable oscillations and hence
1. .9 + j.41 pu 4. .3 + j.7 pu the 10-cycle fault time was selected. For these tests, rotor angle (Q-axis angle)
and the field current were recorded.
2. .9 + jO pu 5. .3 + jO pu
3. .9 - j.19 pu 6. .3 - j.41 pu Analysis of the MIT model results indicated that the application of three
phase faults at the machine terminals results in an initial deceleration of the
machine-a phenomenon not generally observed on a conventional digital transient
Some of these loadings, particularly the reactive power levels, may result stability program. Table Ill lists the initial backswing observed on the physical
in unacceptable voltage levels at the machine terminals. The loadings were scale model.
selected primarily to provide for a wide range of initial operating conditions.
This wide range of initial load levels also encompasses the transients whose TABLE Ill
characteristics are determined by both direct and quadrature-axis properties.
Rotor Backswing as a Function of Initial Loading
DISCUSSION OF RESULTS for Three Phase Fault at Machine Terminals*

Introduction INITIAL LOADING, PER UNIT BACKSWING

CASE # INFINITE BUS MACHINETERMINAL DEGREES
In this section are discussed the test results derived from tests on the .9 +j.41 .9 +j.6 10
MIT Physical Scale Model and on the digital simulation provided by the AEP 2 .9+jO .9 +j.16 4
Transient Stability Program. The rotor angle of the Big Sandy model generator
which is used for comparison purposes is defined- as the angular difference 3 .9 -j.19 .9 -j.02 2
between the quadrature-axis of the machine model and a reference voltage 4 .3 +j.7 .3 +j.81 29
phasor. For these results, the reference voltage is a bus voltage at, or elec- 5 .3 +j 0 .3 +j.02 14
trically close to, the infinite bus. Before tests are performed on the physical 6 *3 -i.4 1 .3 -j.36 4
scale model the rotor angle is adjusted to zero degrees for the no load operation.
The discussion is divided intothree parts:a) steady state performance, b) dynamic *Fault cleared in 5 cycles in Cases 1-5, 10 cycles in Case 6.
372

The reason for the unexpectedly high values of backswing in the MIT
results is not very clear. It seems that the stator resistance partially explains --AEP

this. The digital simulation of three phase faults showed no apparent backswing ------MIT
43'.
except for Case 4 (0.3 +j0.7 p.u. loading) where the backswing was very small
(=10). Upon repeating this case with three times the nominal value of stator
resistance, a backswing of about 17° resulted which is still low compared with
the model value of 290. However, in all cases there was a noticeable reduction 36
I\
in the magnitude of the oscillation.

It was expected that this inconsistency in backswing should show some ,, .9+j.41
differences in predicting the critical switching time (CST) between the two 28.8

simulations. The critical switching time (CST) was determined for the heavy
loading conditions (Cases 1-3) in both simulations. In Cases 2 and 3 (0.9+j0
and 0.9-j.19, respectively), where the observed backswing (Table 111) was not
significant, both simulations predicted the same CST; that is, 13 cycles and 60.4° Xe =192pu(S OPEN)
10 cycles, respectively. However, for Case 1 (0.9 +j 41 per unit), the physical Xs .055pu(S CLOSED)
scalemodel CST was 19 cycles,whereasthe digital simulation CST was 16 cycles.
53.2
This observed backswing, which appears to be excessive in the physical
scale model results for close-in three phase faults, requires further investigation.
In the real-world situation, one generally considers the closest fault as the fault '_I .9 +O
46e
occuring on the high side of the generator step-up transformer. Including the
step-up transformer in the simulation, and faulting the secondary side, it was
found that the MIT results did not show a significant amount of backswing. One
explanation for the backswing is found in the analysis of the impact of the 73.

excessive subtransient current and the associated losses on the total energy Cl)

balance in the machine during the three phase fault. w

w

The single phase conventional transient stability program is not likely to r-

produce a correct backswing effect during the severe disturbance such as three w
.9-j.19
a
phase faults. The structure of the conventional stability program does not
account for the dc offset and the second harmonic effects. Modification of the w
-J
nominal value of stator resistance partially accounts for the energy balance (9 370
z
during the fault but leads to an increase in the effective damping for the sub-
sequent swing and therefore does not satisfactorily explain the results observed cr

on the physical model. 0

I--
cr
0
Line Reclosing:
Initially the line reactance is .192 pu and a second line is switched in
parallel. The new total effective reactance between the machine and the infinite
IIA¢~~~" I

.3+j.7
bus becomes .055 pu and no further system changes occur.
.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0

Figure 3 shows the comparison of the transient oscillations, following the TIME, SECONDS
line reclosing event,as measured at MIT and as computed by the AEP simulation.
As discussed earlier under steady state performance, the differences in the 30.2d'
values of initial rotor angle between the two simulations require further investi-
gation.
For easier comparison of the transient results, refer to Figure 4 where the 26.64 .3+jO
MIT results have been shifted to coincide with the AEP results at time zero.
Essentially these curves should be now interpreted as changes from the initial
va lues.
The results show reasonable correlation for the initial period. Case 4 with 76°
initial loading of 0.3 +jO.7, appears to have slightly different final steady state
values in the two simulations. There is also a phase shift in all cases with the
digital computer results lagging the model machine values. 58° .3-j.41

Breaker Opening/Reclosing: Fig. 3

Comparison of dynamic response following a line reclosing operation as a

For these tests the breaker A is opened and reclosed after a few cycles. function of different initial operating conditions between the AEP digital
This disconnects the generator from the system for a few cycles. As noted and the MIT physical scale model simulations.

earlier, this is not a normal system operation. In the event that the generator
breaker opens for any reason, it is locked out and does not reclose so as to The comparative studies were also run to determine the critical switching
prevent out-of-phase synchronization. For the test system, however, this dis- time of selected cases. For 0.9+jO per unit loading (Case 2), both the simulations
turbance was selected essentially to produce machine dynamics which are predicted CST between 13 and 14 cycles. For 0.3 +jO per unit loading (Case 5),
different than those produced by simple a line switching operation. For the 0.9 CST's predicted were between 31 and 32 cycles and between 32 and 33 cycles
per unit loading (Cases 1, 2, 3) the. breaker is reclosed after 5 cycles, and for for the MIT and the AEP simulations, respectively.
the 0.3 per unit loading (Cases 4, 5, 6) The breaker is reclosed after 10 cycles. For comparison purposes, Figure 6 shows the rotor angle plots for both

the simulations with 13 cycle breaker reclosure for Case 2 (0.9 +jO. per unit
The plots of rotor angles as a function of time for this disturbance are
loading), and 25 cycle breaker reclosure for Case 5 (0.3 +jO per unit loading).
shown in Figure 5 for both the AEP and MIT simulations. For easier comparision Figures 7 and 8 compare the field current response for both the simulations for
of transient oscillations, as discussed earlier in the case of line reclosing Case 2 and Case 5, respectively.
operation, the initial rotor angles of the MIT simulation are coincided with the
AEP simulation. dynamic response comparison of figure 6 shows
The that the computed

natural frequency of oscillation is lower than the measured value. The field

The general agreement between the results is good especially for the first
current comparisions of figures 7 and 8 show remarkable similarity in the wave

1.5 to 2 seconds. The model machine appears to have slightly higher damping
and there is also a slightly higher natural frequency particularly for the lightly shape. The overall comparison of the rotor angle, critical switching time and

loaded (0.3 per unit) cases. the field cujrent between the two simulations is found to be
satisfactory.
 373

AEP
----MIT
- AEP
---- MIT

.9+j.41
S

Xe*.192pu(S OPEN)
Xe = .192 pu
Xe*.055pu (S CLOSED)

.9+jo

w
w

(r
CD
w

(0

z
.9-j .19
4

.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 834.2'-

0
im-
0
TIME, SECONDS .9- j .19 ( 5 CYCLES)

Io(0 I. Ij I;

-6.1° .3+j.7 (10CYC;LES)

.3+jO

76

58e .3-j.41

Fig. 4
Similar to Fig. 3 but with the exception that the initial value of rotor angle
of the MIT simulations adjusted with the AEP simulations.
Dynamic Performance with Excitation Control
As exptained in the previous section, three phase faults at the machine
terminals resulted in a higher initial backswing than had been expected for the
model machine. Thus, no attempt was made to simulate three-phase faults for
the generator operating with exciter-regulator dynamics until the backswing
phenomenon is investigated further. Other disturbances - line reclosing and
breaker opening/reclosing - were simulated to compare the dynamic behavior of
the generator under the influence of the exciter-regulator system.
The excitation system model for these simulations is shown in Figure 2.
The parameter values of this model, as shown in this figure, are supplied by
the manufacturer of the generator. The saturation function, Se('4 ), is derived
from the Semax and Se.75max values as defined in the reference 8.
Figures 9 and 10 show the comparision of the Q-axis angle between the
physical scale model and the digital simulations for the line reclosing and the
breaker opening and reclosing operations, respectively. For the line reclosing
cases the comparision between the two simulations is quite reasonable for the
first swing. However, for subsequent swings the comparison is tenuous. The load
composition has a direct bearing on the difference that exists between the two
/' .3-j.41 (10 CYCLES)
53.68" J
Fig. 5
Comparison of dynamic response following a breaker opening/reclosing
operation as a function of different initial operating conditions between
the AEP and MIT simulations. The reconnect time indicated in paren-
thesis. The initial rotor angle of MIT simulation adjusted with the AEP
simulation.
simulations. These differences are greater for the inductive load than the
capacitive load.
It is mentioned earlier that no saturation effects were included in the
machine model for the digital simulations. To investigate the discrepancy found
with higher inductive load for the line reclosing case, Case 1 (0.9+jO.41 per
unit) was repeated with the saturation characteristics of the machine included
in the digital simulation. Eventhough this did not change the frequency of
oscillations too much, the inclusion of saturation effects made the comparision
of both the simulations reasonable in terms of final steady state rotor angle. For
breaker opening and reclosing cases (Figure 10) the comparision between the
two simulations is reasonable.
The comparision of CST between the two simulations was made for 0.9 and
0.3 per unit, unity power factor initial conditions for the breaker opening/re-
closing operation. The values determined were 13 cycles versus 14 cycles and
31 cycles versus 32 cycles for 0.9 per unit and 0.3 per unit load, respectively
374
AEP

a)
C,)
a-
n

'

z
cr
0
C)
-J
w

3
TIME, SECONDS
.3+ jO (25 CYCLES) 8
b)
= 6
a.
z4
w
:
X D
-J
wO

Fig. 6
Comparison of dynamic response following a breaker opening/reclosing
operation for the AEP and the MIT simulations for the initial loading
and the reconnect time shown in the parenthesis. 1.0 2.0 3.0
TIME, SECONDS
Fig. 8
Field current response following breaker opening/reclosing operation for
8A a) the initial loading of 0.3 + jO per unit. Breaker reclosed after 25 cycles.
a) MIT simulation
b) AEP simulation
un 6A
a.

with the lower figures determined by the digital simulation. Figure 9 and 10
F 4A
11 i ipli. show that the digital simulations have a lower natural frequency of oscillation.
w

cr
11 I..".
CONCLUSIONS
2A The MIT physical scale model facility has provided a means to investigate
0

a .. 1,iI
the adequacy and accuracy of synchronous machine models which are widely
1,
,I
.I' 1.1 "
used in large-scale analytical tools such as the digital transient stability
w

1.
program. Tests were performed on the model power system for a wide variety of
.,, ,
T 3 disturbance conditions and to a level of severity which would not be feasible
TIME, SECONDS on an actual operating system. The results of these tests were compared with
8 simulations carried out on the AEP digital transient stability program. The
authors believe that the comparative test approach presented in this paper
b,) leads to the following conclusions:
a.
D6
(1) Mathematical models of synchronous machines as they are used in
Z 4 conventional transient stability programs are adequate for a wide variety of
c]
a2 power system stability analysis. Observed inaccuracies in the rotor angle
transients and machine electrical performance are generally in the conservative
direction and quite insignificant - particularly in view of the level of stability
-j margin, expressed in terms of initial power or critical switching time, which are
wO0 commonly used in arriving at meaningful conclusions in system planning and
L&.
I operating studies.
-_
0 1.0 2.0 3.0
TIME, SECONDS (2) There is evidence from these studies that a proper accounting for
Fig. 7 saturation in both d- and q-axis reactance parameters can lead to improved
Field current response following breaker opening/reclosing operation accuracy in the digital simulations for both steady state and transient perform-
for the initial loading of 0.9 + jO per unit. Breaker reclosed after 13 ance. In particular, those operating conditions which result in a greater reliance
on quadrature-axis simulation were more inaccurate. This suggests that account-
cycles. ing for saturation in q-axis representation is of greater importance. Such improve-
a) MIT simulation
b) AEP simulation ments will be beneficial primarily in the area of steady-state and dynamic
 375
stability evaluations rather than in the area of first-swing transient stability
AEP
analysis. MIT
Xe* .92pu
(3) The initial backswing of the rotor angle following close-in, severe
faultconditions cannot be simulated accurately in conventional transient stability
program.s because only the symmetrical part of the stator current is accounted 61
for. The degree of backswing produced in the MIT model generators
-

to appears

be excessive and further investigation is warranted. As practical matter, how-

a

ever, the backswing phenomenon is generally of minimal im portance

dynamic performance analysis because it disappears as
3-phase
soon as
in

the
system
./
43 -
'

" X /
fault is moved to the high side of the step-up transformer beyond or
the where

exposure
model
is more likely. This is also true in the
machines.
of the
case MIT
scale physical

MIT
25
25
v .9+j.41(5 CYCLES)

3720 2~~~~~~~~~*.192pu (S OPEN)

,;----_X _.055pu(SCLOSED)

.9+jo (5 CYCLES)
60.40
w

53.2I
0~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~u 0.i. .5 2.D 3.0 25
5cn 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5
TIME,MESECONDD 3.0 1.A
10

TIME, S.3Ojo6
C n

IJ7 4<2- 56F (l CYCLES)

0
FI-
0

NOE
.3+ j.7 (1 CYCLES)
32.20
1

28.60I N

25 L .3+JO

Fig. 9
Comparison o dynamic response between the AEP andthe MIT simulations. 15 .3)
.+j PL(10
1 YLS
CYLs)
Similar to Fig. 4 with the exception that the generator is equipped with
IEEE type 1 excitation system.
Fig. 10
Comparison of the dynamic between the AEP and the MIT simu-
lations. Similar to Fig. 5 withresponse
the exception that the generation is equipped
with IEEE type 1 excitation system.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors wish to Acknowledge the contributions -of Or. S. Virmani who
participated in this project while on the staff of the AEP Service Corporation. We
are also grateful for the assistance provided by staff members of the MIT-EPSEL
in carrying out the physical scale model power system simulations.
RFRNE
(1) P.L. Dandeno, "Synchronous Machine Stability Constants - Requirements
and Realizations," presented at the 1977 Winter Power Meeting, New York,
NY, Jan. 30-Feb. 4, 1977, Paper No. A77-210-8.
(2) A. Chorlton and G. Shackshaft, "Comparison of Accuracy of Methods for
Studying Stability - - Northfleet Exercises," Report of CIGRE Study Commit-
tee 32, Working Group 3, February, 1971.
376
(3) I.M. Canay, "Causes of Discrepancies on Calculation of Rotor Quantities
and Exact Equivalent Diagrams of the Synchronous Machine," IEEE Trans-
action on Power Apparatus and Systems. Vol. PAS 88 July 1969, pp. 1114-
1120.
(4) W.B. Jackson and R.L. Winchester, "Direct-and Quadrature-Axis Equivalent
Circuits for Solid-Rotor Turbine Generators," IEEE Transaction on Power
Apparatus and Systems, Vol. PAS 88, July 1969, pp. 1121-1136.
(5) W.A. Lewis, Principles of Synchronous Machines, Illinois Institute of Tech-
nology, Chicago, Illinois, 1958.
(6) E.W. Kimbark, Power System Stability - Vol. III, John Wiley and Sons, Inc.,
New York, 1956.
(7) D.W. Olive, "Digital Simulation of Synchronous Machine Transients," IEEE
Transactions on Power Apparatus and Systems, Vol. PAS 87, August 1968.
(8) IEEE Committee Report, "Computer Representation of Excitation Systems,"
IEEE Transactions on Power Apparatus and Systems, Vol. PAS 87, June
1968, pp. 1460-1464.
(9) G.L. Wilson and S.D. Umans, "A Model Power System - Part - Design of
the Model Generator," Paper C75-174-8, presented at the IEEE Winter
Power Meeting, New York, NY, January 26-31, 1975.
(10) S.D. Umans, J. Szajner, and G.L. Wilson, "A Model Power System - Part 11-
Design of System Elements and Test Results," Paper C75-173-0, presented
at the IEEE Winter Power Meeting, New York, NY, January 26-31, 1975.
Raymond D. Dunlop (M'60) was born
on August 4, 1938 in Showhegan, Main. He
received the B.S.E.E. degree from the
University of Maine, Orono, in 1960, and
the M.S. and Ph. D. degrees in electrical
engineering from Illinois Institute of Tech-
nology, Chicago, in 1963 and 1969, respec-
tively.
He was employed in 1960 by the
Central Illinois Electric and Gas Company,
Rockford, Illinois. In 1961, he received the
Power Systems Fellowship at the
Institute of Technology and worked for the
Department of Electrical Engineering as an
Instructor from 1962 to 1966. Since 1966,
he has been employed by the American
Electric Power Service Corporation, New
York, N.Y., where he presently holds the position of Head, Technical and Special
Studies Section in the Bulk Transmission Planning Division. His responsibilities
include analysis and simulation of bulk power systems for evaluation of dynamic
performance, steady state and transient over-voltages, transmission line charac-
teristics, and his particular area of interest is in assessment of the electro-
mechanical dynamic performance of large interconnected power systems.
Dr. Dunlop is a member of IEEE, CIGRE, Tau Beta Pi, Sigma Xi, and Phi
Kappa Phi.
Ashwin C. Parikh (M'77) was born in
Bhavnagar, India, on July 9, 1942. He
received the B.E. degree in electrical
engineering from University of Bombay,
India, in 1963; and the M.S. degree from
University of Missouri, Columbia, Mo.,
in 1970.
From 1963 to 1969, he worked pri-
marily with Siemens India Ltd., Bombay,
India, as a Design and Application Engineer
in their Electric Motor Division. He join-
ed the American Electric Power Service
Corporation in 1970, where he is a Senior
Engineer in the Bulk Transmission Plan-
ning Division. His primary interest is in
the area of research and developmental
work related to modeling techniques and
performance of rotating machines as affected by power system dynamics and
power plant design.
Discussion
F. P. de Mello (Power Technologies, Inc., Schenectady, NY): The
authors are to be commended for preparing this very informative paper
on validation of calculated results versus tests on a physical scaled
model machine. There is no doubt that a great deal can be achieved with
such an approach in the development and verification of models for
synchronous machines.
At the model scale, various techniques can be used for parameter
identification, such a frequency response, without the problem of ex-
tremely low signal power levels relative to machine rating which must be
used when similar techniques are applied on full scale machines.
In general we feel that the results show very satisfactory cor-
respondence between tests and calculations. In regard to the discrepan-
cy in steady state rotor angle we suspect that this may be due to satura-
tion. To permit a better insight on possible causes for the differences it
would be helpful if the authors would describe in a block diagram or a
set of equations the generator model that was used in the calculations.
Was some account for saturation made in the q axis?
The question of the back swing during the fault observed for cases
with low initial power, appears to be due to the 60 Hz losses in the rotor
occasioned by the d.c. offset in phase currents. Since stability programs
do not normally include this effect, it might be very instructive to con-
duct simulations which include differential equation treatment of stator
and network to properly account for this effect.
We hope the authors will pursue further this subject of validation
of models with test results. Such information represents a significant
contribution of the technology of power system dynamic simulation.
Manuscript received Februay 13, 1978.
T. J. Hammons (Consultant to Mawdsley's Ltd., Dursley, Glos. GLII
5AE, U.K. currently visiting Professor of Electrical Engineering,
McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada): The authors have
Illinois
made a valuable addition to the literature on synchronous-generator
models where comparative tests on the adequacy and accuracy of both
digital and physical scale model power system simulations have been
outlined. They have shown that mathematical models of synchronous-
generators as used in conventional transient stability programs are ade-
quate for a wide variety of system stability analyses, since observed in-
accuracies in rotor angle transients and in machine electrical perfor-
mance is generally on the conservative side, such errors being insignifi-
cant in arriving at meaningful conclusions in system planning and
operating studies in so far as comparison between physical scale model
and conventional digital simulation is concerned.
The authors pose questions on the unexpected high values of
backswing which they have observed in the MIT physical model follow-
ing close-up 3-phase short-circuits. Experience obtained in designing
and operating the Glasgow installation indicates that high backswing is
influenced by high short-circuit losses characterised by high stray losses
together with higher winding copper losses following the 3-phase short-
circuit which is applied close to the stator terminals of the machine.
Resistance of leads with the effective resistance of short-circuiting reac-
tors (which invariably possess effective p.u. resistances many times
higher than the transformers and transmission lines they simulate),
together with the resistance of solid-state fault application switches if
these are employed, can exert a noticeable and significant influence on
close-up fault backswing response.
Table A illustrates the effect stray losses etc. have on backswing of
a salient-pole micro synchronous-generator which constitutes part of
the Glasgow installation. Details of this system are summarized in
references A and B. Backswing was monitored by using a high-
resolution rotor angle transducer which employed an optical encoder.
512 measurements of rotor angle are made each cycle. A digital-to-
analogue convertor enables a practically instantaneous indication of
transient rotor angle (and rotor backswing) to be obtained.
Columns 'a' and 'b' relate to computer simulations of a 5.00 cycle
3-phase short-circuit with clearance applied at the generator stator ter-
minals. A 5-winding single-machine-to-infinite-busbar model where
 377
TABLE A
Salient pole Micro Synchronous Generator:
Effect of stray losses etc. on rotor backswing following a symmetrical 3-phase short-circuit with clearance at the
stator terminals for generator supplying full load current at unity power factor.
Computer simalation Experimental
Duration of applied short-circuit, cycles 5.00 7.50 7.50

a b c d e g h

mnachine rating, kVA

stator resistance ra
|3.000 300|
0.0050 0.0164
3.000
0.0050
3.000
0.0164
3.000
0.0164
3.000
0.0164
3.000
0.0164
3.000
0.0164
transmission system resistance rt 0.036 0.036 0.036 0.036 0.0036 0.036 0.036 0.036
matnitod
durat ion
of rotor backswin.fg, 8 b deg (elect.)
o-f rotor 'acksviing t , cycles
0.589
2.45
0.808
2.95
0.589
2.45
0.806
2.95
0.808
2.95
1.270
2.95
1.600
3.60
--
--
initial rotor angle to infiniXe busbar 60, deg 62.43 62.03 62.43 62.03 61.47 62.03 62.0 62.0
mr.aximumr rotor anule to _rnfirite busbar 8n' deg 89.3 86.2 113.0 109.01 107.7 -- -- 105.0
inertia cm)nstant l, kWL-s/kVA 3.27 3.27 3.27 3.27 3.27 2.08 2.08 3.27

All machine parameters etc. are p.u. on machine apparent power rating (A). Short-circuit applied at stator ter-
minals, Z,, = (0.0005 + jO.000O)p.u.
Reactance stator terminals/infinite busbar X, = 0.3175.
Machine constants: Xd = 1.500, Xq = 0.980, X. = 0.113, Xd = 0.350, Xd = 0.210, X' = 0.200, Td = 1.270*, Td"
= 0.040, Tq = 0.032. Exciter time constant = 0.8s. Voltage regulator gain k, = 200, stabilising network phase ad-
vance time constant T, = 0.lOs, phase lag time constant Tp = 0.05s. Magnetising reactance saturation, gover-
nor/turbine dynamics simulated. Governor droop = 4.0%
*With time constant regulator.

both generator transformer and grid system impedance is incorporated
with that of the generator stator impedance, and where direct and
quadrature-axis magnetising reactance saturation effects together with
all Pip terms are simulated is employed throughout (C). Column 'a' cor-
responds to the case where the d.c. stator resistance is used, while col-
umn 'b' includes an allowance for stray losses of 0.0114 p.u.
corresponding to full-load volt-ampere output, losses being assumed
proportional to the stator current squared. This factor is discussed in
reference A. It allows for a leakage-flux saturation factor of 0.60. It was
deduced experimentally from a rated-voltage stator short-circuit tran-
sient rotor angle characteristic, and relates to an unloaded machine.
It will be observed that simulation at stray losses at this magnitude
results in the amplitude of rotor backswing rising by 37'lo, while its
duration until the initial load angle is reached increases by 20%. The
subsequent swing of load angle to infinite busbar in this case is 3.1 deg.
lower.
Column 'c' and 'd' confirm that the backswing is independent of
the duration of the applied short-circuit. The amplitude of the subse-
quent swing is again influenced noticeably by the stator resistance.
Comparison of column 'd' with column 'e' indicates that the transmis-
sion system resistance does not have a significant influence on peak
rotor angle displacement. Reducing the transmission resistance r, to
1/10 of the original value (to a value which is realistic of large H.V. net-
works) results in a change of peak rotor displacement angle of only 1.4
deg. Stator resistance and micromachine stray losses therefore have a
much more significant influence on transient rotor angle response.
Column 'f' corresponds to column 'd' with the total Machine iner-
tia reduced to that of the generator alone (2.08 kW-s/kVA). This
simulation takes into consideration the semi-flexible chain coupling
which is a design feature of some micro-synchronous-generators. For
small rotor displacements it is the generator inertia which is appropriate
whereas for larger swings the combined system inertia is relevant. Thus,
shaft dynamics of large turbine generators are simulated more
realistically by fitting a semi-flexible chain coupling between the
synchronous-generator and the d.c. driving machine unless special
modeling using analogue or digital simulation to control driving motor
torque is adopted to represent shaft dynamic effects in a solid-coupling
Machine.
Comparison of computer predictions with the experimental results
depicted in columns 'g' and 'h' indicate that better correspondence
under high generator load and excitation conditions would be obtained
by use of a higher stray loss factor (say 0.019) p.u.) (A). Duration of
rotor backswing depends to a large extent on the electrical losses within
the stator and rotor of the Machine, together with losses in the short-
circuiting leads and switch. These losses may be reduced (i) by making
the resistance of the connecting leads as low as possible, (ii) by employ-
ing mechanical switches in preference to solid-state switches where
switch losses are significant, (iii) by using high Q-factor reactors in
simulating transformers etc., and (iv) by incorporating negative
resistance devices in both the damper and field circuit windings of the
Micro Machine (B).
Although increased stray losses following a short-circuit are par-
tially compensated for by reduced core losses as the flux linking the
rotor and stator windings collapses, stray losses are significantly higher
and predominate. The most onerous conditions regarding rotor
backswing occur under high-excitation conditions and correspond to
higher short-circuit currents. However, 3-phase faults at the stator ter-
minals of large synchronous-generators are unrealistic, and other fac-
tors such as end-winding forces and shaft torsional limitations may
alleviate serious consideration being given to this type of disturbance.
Faults at the HV side of the generator transformer are more represen-
tative of the more onerous condition which should be considered as a
criterion for power system design. Under these circumstances, rotor
backswing resulting from short circuit losses is reduced to about 1/4 of
the respective values depicted in Table A. These values should prove to
be quite acceptable in extrapolating fault study investigations at least
using the Glasgow or similar Micro Machines.
It would appear from the data reproduced in Table I that the effec-
tive stator resistance of the MIT Machine is 0.0107 p.u. Does this
resistance take into consideration stray losses, and if so, what factor has
been employed? Our experience is that resistance of leads to the point
of application of the fault can also exert a significant influence on
machine transient response. Under these circumstances, every effort
should be taken to keep this resistance to as low a p.u. value as possible.
Were solid-state switches employed to apply the three-phase short-
circuit? If so, could some comparative values be given for rotor back-
swing depicted in Table III where a conventional switch with no effec-
tive contact resistance is employed for applying the short-circuit?
Although initial backswing following close-in faults is difficult to
simulate adequately in conventional multi-machine transient stability
programs on account of the symmetrical part of the stator current tran-
sient only being represented, no problem exists in simulating pip terms
for 3-phase short-circuit with clearance faults relating to single-
machine-to-busbar configurations. Could the authors indicate what ef-
fect neglecting the pip terms has on (i) rotor backswing for (a) bolted
stator terminal faults, and (b) three-phase short circuits at the HV side
of the generator transformer, and (ii) on dynamic response following a
3-phase short-circuit with clearance.
378
The influence of both direct- and quadrature-axis magnetising Regarding the question of backswing, we do point out in our paper
reactance saturation effects on rotor backswing and on Machine tran- that the single phase conventional transient stability program does not
sient response could also be illustrated. account for the transient d-c offset and second harmonic effects and
therefore does not compute the losses in the machine correctly during
REFERENCES severe fault conditions. Beyond this, Hammons points out that the
physical scale model machines may have high stray losses together with
(A) Hammons, T. J. and Parsons, A. J.; "Design of a Micro- high copper losses in the stator or fault switches.
alternator for power system stability investigations". Proc. IEE, As noted in the paper, some experiments with increased stator
Vol. 118, (10), 1971, pp. 1421-1441. resistance produced a higher initial backswing but also contributed to
(B) Hammons, T. J.; "Micro-synchronous-generator system for the excessive damping on subsequent swings. This leads us to suspect that
simulation of large turbine-generators with two-axis and conven- either the lack of losses associated with dc offset (60 Hz rotor losses) or
tional excitation systems". Rev. Gen. Elect., Vol. 83, (12), 1974, the stray loss effects, both of which cannot be modeled directly in the
pp. 843-857. conventional transient stability program, are the sources of the high
(C) Hammons, T. J., and Winning, D. J.; "Comparison of syn- backswing observed with the physical scale model. Accordingly,
chronous machine models in the study of the transient behaviour deMello's suggestion of using a complete differential equation model of
of electrical power systems. " Proc. IEE, Vol. 118, (10), 1971, pp. the stator and network would be the next logical step in discriminating
1442-1458. Discussion; Vol. 119, (9), 1972, pp. 1329-1337. between the two remaining concerns.
In the final analysis we feel that the proximity of severe faults on
Manuscript received February 28, 1978. the generator terminals is not a practical concern. Faults on the system
side of the step-up transformer do not show noticeable backswing and
R. D. Dunlop and A. C. Parikh: The authors wish to thank the to neglect it is, at most, slightly conservative. Therefore from the view-
discussers for their observations and comments. We concur with the point of system planning and operating studies, the backswing
observation by Mr. deMello that the frequency response technique is phenomenon does not deserve primary attention.
also a viable approach for parameter identification. We agree that the We do intend to continue our present comparative test approach
major problem in making measurements for large full scale generators for verification of synchronous machine modeling techniques in various
stems from the difficulty in creating sufficiently high flux levels. system studies. One next attempt will be to verify machine modeling
However, the physical scale models do not entail this limitation due to practices in a system configuration comprising of more than one
their small size. Some work of this nature has been carried out on these machine.
model machines at MIT. (A)
With regard to the steady state rotor angle discrepancy, we would REFERENCE
like to state that we did not include the effect of saturation in our digital
simulations. We do believe that this discrepancy will decrease if the A. S. D. Umans, J. A. Mallick and G. L. Wilson, "Modeling of Solid
saturation effects are included; a major question remains concerning an Rotor Turbogenerators: Part I - Theory and Techniques; Part II -
adequate method for doing this. As requested by Mr. deMello, we in- Example of Model Derivation and Use in Digital Simulation",
clude Figure A., to show the generator model used in the calculations. IEEE Transactions on Power Apparatus and Systems Vol.
The AEP Transient Stability Program is capable of handling saturation PAS-97, No. 1, pp. 269-291.
effects along both the d- and q- axis.
Manuscript received August 9, 1978.

Fig. A. The d- and q- axis generator model used in the AEP digital
simulations for transient stability calculations.