2011 International Conference on Recent Advancements in Electrical, Electronics and Control Engineering

Transient Stability Studies in SMIB System with Detailed

Machine Models
Dr. S. Kalyani

M. Prakash

Professor
Dept. of Electrical & Electronics Engineering
Kamaraj College of Engineering & Technology
Virudhunagar - 626001
kal_yani_79@yahoo.co.in

Assistant Professor
Dept. of Electrical & Electronics Engineering
Kamaraj College of Engineering & Technology
Virudhunagar 626001
prakash13688@gmail.com

G. Angeline Ezhilarasi
Research Scholar
Department of Electrical Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology Madras
Chennai - 600036
angel.ezhil@gmail.com

I.

Abstract This paper presents a detailed transient stability

analysis using various machine models. It highlights on the
accuracy of the approximated models of synchronous machines
for power system transient stability analysis. The transient
stability simulation is performed on a SMIB system
considering four different detailed models of generators and
the classical model. The exciter dynamics is represented by
IEEE Type 1 Exciter model in the detailed analysis. Exclusive
comparison of performance using various models is done.
Transient Stability Analysis and Critical Clearing Time (CCT)
is evaluated for specified fault at various locations.

INTRODUCTION

Stability of power systems continues to be of a major

concern in system operation [1]. This arises from the fact
that in steady state, the average electrical speed of all the
generators must remain the same anywhere in the system.
This is termed as the synchronous operation of a system.
Any disturbance small or large can affect the synchronous
operation [2]. The stability of a system determines whether
the system can settle down to a new or original steady state
after the transient disappears.

Keywords: transient stability, SMIB system, exciter, detailed

models, critical clearing time

Although stability is an integral property of the system,

for the purpose of analysis, it is divided into two classes,
viz., Steady-State or Small Signal Stability and Transient
Stability [3]. A power system is steady state stable for a
particular steady state operating condition if, following any
small disturbance, it reaches a steady state operating
condition which is identical or close to the pre-disturbance
operating condition. A small disturbance is the one for
which system dynamics can be analyzed from linearized
equations. The small (random) changes in the load or
generation belong to the class of small disturbances. A
power system is transiently stable for a particular steadystate operating condition and for a particular large
disturbance or sequence of disturbances if, following that
disturbance(s), it reaches an acceptable steady-state
operating condition. Faults like three phase short circuits,
resulting in sudden voltage dip are large disturbances and
require remedial action in the form of clearing of fault.

Nomenclature

Rotor angle in degrees

Angular speed of machine in rad/sec

Synchronous speed of machine in rad/sec
s
F
System frequency in Hz
H
Inertia constant of the machine in sec
Pm
Mechanical power input
Electrical power output
Pe
Stator resistance of the synchronous machine
Rs
Terminal Voltage of the synchronous machine
Vt
Xd(Xq) Direct (Quadrature) axis synchronous reactance
Xd(Xq) Direct (Quadrature) axis transient reactance
Ed(Eq) Direct(Quadrature) axis components of transient
internal voltage
Direct (Quadrature) axis components of terminal
Id(Iq)
current
I1d(I2q) Current Components of the Direct (Quadrature)
axis damper circuit.
1d(2q) Flux Linkage Components of the Direct
(Quadrature) axis damper circuit
Tdo(Tqo)Open-Circuit direct (Quadrature) axis transient
time constant
Tdo(Tqo)Open-Circuit direct (Quadrature) axis subtransient time constant
Exciter output voltage (applied to generator field)
Efd
Generator field current
Ifd
SE(Efd) Exciter Saturation function
Exciter Rate Feedback
Rf
Output Voltage of the Regulator
VR
Reference Voltage
Vref
TA,TF,TE Time constant of amplifier, stabilizing transformer
and exciter.
KF,KA,KE Gain of stabilizing transformer, amplifier and
exciter
Regulated input filter time constant
TR

It is important to note that, steady-state stability is a

function of only the operating condition, whereas transient
stability is a function of both the operating condition and the
disturbance(s). This complicates the analysis of transient
stability considerably. Transient Stability requires repeated
analysis for different disturbances that are being considered.
Transient stability analysis in a power system is concerned
with the power system's ability to remain synchronously
stable following a serious disturbance such as a three-phase
short-circuit. Present day transient stability analysis of
power system is mainly performed by simulations.
Calculation of critical clearing time (CCT) for a fault is a
major assessment in stability studies.
This paper presents the mathematical formulation of
different models of synchronous machine used in the
transient stability simulation. Synchronous machines are, in
general, expressed by d, q axis Park model in the
simulations [4]. There are several types of approximated
models. In this paper, we have considered the simple

978-1-4577-2149-6/11/$26.00 2011 IEEE

459

2011 International Conference on Recent Advancements in Electrical, Electronics and Control Engineering

classical model and four detailed models of machine

representation. The detailed model includes Model 1.0
(Flux-Decay Model) having no damper circuit, Model 1.1
(Two-Axis Model) with one q-axis damper circuit, Model
2.1 having one damper circuit both in d-axis and q-axis,
Model 2.2 which has one d-axis damper circuit and two qaxis damper circuits. Stator transients are neglected in all of
the four models considered. The exciter dynamics is
represented by the IEEE Type 1 Exciter model in the
simulation [5]. The IEEE Type 1 excitation system
represents a majority of the excitation systems in service
and is widely used. The accuracy of different synchronous
machine models are evaluated by performing simulations
for three phase short circuit fault in a model SMIB system.

dEq'
dt

1
Eq' ( X d X d' ) ( I d I1d ) + E fd
'
Td 0

(3)

dE d'
1
= ' E d' + ( X q X q' ) ( I q I 2 q )
dt
Tq 0

(4)

d 1d
1
= ' ' 1 d + E q' ( X
dt
Td 0

d 2 q

II. POWER SYSTEM MODELS

This section describes in brief the differential equations
governing the dynamic behavior of the system generator and
the excitation system [1-6].

dt

'
d

X ls ) I d

(5)

1
2 q E d' ( X q' X ls ) I q
''
Tq 0

(6)
where

A. Generator Model

I1d =

The highest model (Model 2.2) of the synchronous

machine includes the field circuit and the damper circuit in
the dq coordinates. With certain valid approximations it
reduces to classical model

X d ' X d ''

( X d ' X ls )

I 2q =

A.1 Model 2.2

The dynamic circuit of the synchronous machine in
the sub-transient mode is shown in Fig. 1. This is the sixth
order machine model, which includes field circuit (fd) and
one damper circuit (1d) on d - axis and two damper circuits
(1q, 2q) on the q-axis [6]. This is the highest accurate model
considering dynamics in the rotor circuits of both d-axis and
q-axis, neglecting only the effect of stator transients. The
differential equations governing this model are represented
by Equations (1) to (6). This model is preferred to study the
damping contribution of power system stabilizers used for
transient stability improvement.

1d =

( + ( X
1d

X q ' X q ''

(X

' X ls )

'
d

X ls ) I d Eq'

( + ( X
2q

'
q

(7)

X ls ) I q + Ed'

(8)

X d ' X ls
( X d '' X ls ) E'
d + X d '' I d

( X d ' X d '')
( X d ' X ls ) q
(9)

2q =

X q ' X ls
( X q '' X ls ) E '
q + X q '' I q +
( X q ' X ls ) d
( X q ' X q '')
(10)

A.2 Model 2.1

This is the fifth order model which includes two
rotor circuits on d - axis (a field circuit and a damper circuit)
and one damper circuit (1q) on q-axis. The differential
equations governing this model are represented by equations
(1) to (5). The I2q component in equation (4) is absent as the
dynamics created by 2q damper circuit are neglected in this
model. It is also a sub-transient model, the synchronous
machine dynamic circuit being same as shown in Fig. 1
Fig. 1 Synchronous machine sub-transient dynamic circuit

d
dt

d
f
=
dt
H

( Pm

A..3 Model 1.1

This model includes only the rotor circuit on d
axis (field winding, fd ) and one rotor circuit on q axis
(damper winding, 1q). It is the simpler and commonly used
detailed model representation in stability studies. It is a
fourth order model including equations from (1) to (4)
neglecting the quantities pertaining to 1d and 2q circuits.
Exciter dynamics can be easily incorporated in this model.
This model is also referred to as two-axis model in
literature. The synchronous machine dynamic circuit is the

(1)

Pe

(2)

460

2011 International Conference on Recent Advancements in Electrical, Electronics and Control Engineering

same as shown in Fig. 1 with a single modification. As this

model is a transient model, the Xd in the dynamic circuit of
Fig. 1 is replaced by transient reactance, Xd, of the
machine.

but with some modifications can also represent the static

exciters. The first block (TR) represents the voltage setting
circuit, the second block (KA) represents the automatic
voltage regulator, the third (KE) with attendant saturation
function represents the self-exciter main exciter and finally
the derivative stabilizing loop (KF). In most instances, the
time constant TF is small enough to be neglected. The
dynamics of exciter, as seen from Fig. 2, is represented by
differential equations given by equations (11) to (13). The
output of the regulator, VR, is limited. It is to be noted that
the limits on VR also imply limits on Efd. The saturation
function SE = f (Efd) represents the saturation of exciter.

A.4 Model 1.0

This model is a further approximation of the twoaxis model described above. This model is derived based on
the assumption that the term Tq0 is sufficiently small and
hence the 1q damper dynamics on the q-axis also being
neglected. Therefore, this is a third order model containing
only the field circuit (fd) dynamics on the d axis and none
in the q axis. The system behavior in this model
representation is governed by equations (1) to (3). The
machine dynamic circuit being the same as Fig. 1, with Xd
replaced by Xd. This model is suitable for operational
planning studies like selective contingency analysis, where
the time factor is more crucial. This model is commonly
referred as one-axis flux decay model in literature.

dE fd
dt
dR
dt

A.5 Classical Model

It is the simplest model of the synchronous
machine. In this model, the synchronous generator is
represented by a constant voltage source behind d-axis
transient reactance. In this model, the voltage is assumed
constant, only its phase angle changes. It is obvious that the
changes in the flux linkages and the transient saliency are
neglected. This model is very useful for the first swing
transient stability study, involving a short period of study
say one second or less. It is a second order model governed
by two dynamic state variables (, ) represented by
equations (1) and (2). Exciter dynamics cannot be
incorporated in this model.

=
=

1
( K E + S E ( E fd ) E fd ) + V R
TE

1
R
TF

KF
E
TF

fd

(11)

(12)

dVR 1
KK
= VR + KARF A F Efd + KA (Vref Vt )
dt TA
TF
(13)
with the limit constraints

V Rm in V R V Rm a x
III.

E mfd in E

fd

E mfd a x

SIMULATION RESULTS

Fig. 3 shows a SMIB model system used for

simulation study, in which a synchronous generator is
delivering power to infinite bus through a double circuit
transmission line taken from [2]. The generator and exciter
parameters and system data are also shown in Fig. 3. A
remote power station connected to a load centre through a
long transmission line can be approximated by a SMIB
system. This simplification of a SMIB system enables one
to gain insights into the dynamic behavior of a synchronous
generator. The simulation is performed for a 3LG fault
(three phase short circuit fault) occurring at different
locations on line L2 at t = 1 sec and the fault is cleared by
tripping the faulted line. Table I shows the initial steady
state (pre-fault) values obtained for generator and exciter
variables determined for different dynamic machine models
for the given system parameters. The generator variables
and exciter variables, describing the system dynamic
behavior at any time instant, are called the state variables.
The pre-fault values for these state variables are obtained by
equating the system dynamic equations for the
corresponding model to zero and solving them with known
data. The numerical integration technique adopted for
solving the system dynamic equations in each model is the
4th order RK method.

B. Excitation System Model

The excitation system of synchronous generators
and motors has an extreme effect on the system stability.
The main objective of the excitation system is to control the
field current of the synchronous machine. The field current
is controlled so as to regulate the terminal voltage of the
machine. The basic schematic of IEEE Type 1 Excitation
system is shown in Fig. 2.

Fig. 2 IEEE Type I Excitation System

The IEEE Type 1 excitation system [5] represents a

majority of excitation systems and is widely used in
dynamic study. It essentially represents the rotating exciters

461

2011 International Conference on Recent Advancements in Electrical, Electronics and Control Engineering

1sec in the middle of the line L2 (X = 50%) and cleared by

line tripping. As seen from Fig. 4, when the fault is cleared
at 1.170 sec, the system loses stability. Hence, the Critical
Clearing Time is predicted as 1.160 sec, where the system is
oscillatory stable. The responses of the power angle and
terminal voltage of the generator obtained by numerical
simulation for each detailed model stated above is shown in
Fig. 5. The curves in Fig. 5 are drawn for the 3LG fault
located at X = 10% from send end of Line L2 and fault
clearing time being the Critical Clearing time as shown in
Table II for the concerned model. Fig. 6 and Fig. 7 shows
the time response of generator dynamic variables (, , Ed,
Eq) and exciter dynamic variables (Vt, Efd, Rf, Vr)
respectively for the model SMIB system obtained by
simulation for a 3LG fault at X=25% from sending end bus
of Line L2. The fault clearing time is assumed as the Critical
Clearing Time (CCT) equal to 1.140 sec, seen from Table II.

Fig. 3 SMIB Model System

Generator Data
Xd = 1.7572;Xd = 0.4245; Xd = 0.23;Xq = 1.5845;Xq =
1.04; Xq = 0.50;
Tdo= 6.66s; Tdo = 0.03s;Tqo= 0.44s;Tqo = 0.06s;Ra =
0.00327;H = 3.542s;
Exciter Data
KA=400;KE=1.00;KF = 0.05;TA = 0.025;TE = 0.35;TF = 0.35;
Efdmax = 6.0;Efdmin = -6.0;Vrmax = 0.2;Vrmin = -0.2;
Saturation Characteristics
Asat = 0.03; Bsat = 0.693;Ksd = Ksq =1;S(Efd) = Asat eBsat Efd
(All quantities are specified in pu)
Table I Initial Conditions (Pre-fault Values) of the SMIB System

Classical
Ed =
1.0864, 0
= 34.550

Generator Variables
Model
Model
Model
Model
1.0
1.1
2.1
2.2
Vd = 0.6726, Vq = 0.8063, Id = 0.3823,
Iq = 0.4253
Ed = 0.2315, Eq = 0.9700 , 0 =
61.480, Pe0 = 0.6011
E = 1.0882
E = 1.0649, 1d
= 0.8077
2q = 0.6738

Exciter
Variables
Efd =
1.4795, Ifd
= 1.4795
Vr =
1.6073, Rf
= 0.2114
Vref =
1.0540

Fig. 4 Swing Curves of the Model SMIB System (Classical Model)

Table II shows the results of the transient stability

simulation performed on the model SMIB system shown in
Fig. 3 for different machine models considered. The fault is
assumed to occur at various locations from the sending end
bus of Line L2. The critical clearing time (CCT), as shown
in Table II, is obtained by repeating the simulation for many
fault clearing times and observing the nature of the swing
curve. Critical clearing time gives a picture of the maximum
allowable time up to which the fault can persist in the
system, without creating loss of synchronism. At a
particular fault clearing time instant, the rotor oscillations of
the system generator increases continuously, indicating loss
of synchronism. One time step before this fault clearing
time is recorded as Critical Clearing Time (CCT). All the
values in Table I and Table II are represented in pu.

Fig. 5 Swing Curves and Terminal Voltage Curves of Model

SMIB System (with Detailed Models)

The swing of rotor angle oscillations simulated for

different fault clearing times considering the simple
classical machine model without exciter dynamics is shown
in Fig. 4. The three phase fault is applied at a time instant of

462

2011 International Conference on Recent Advancements in Electrical, Electronics and Control Engineering

Table II Transient Stability Simulation Result of SMIB System under Different Machine Models
Fault

Model Type

Loc

CCT
(secs)

X = 10 %

X=0

(X)

X = 25 %
X=50%
X=80%

Ed

Eq

(deg)

(r/s)

(pu)

(pu)

1d (pu)

Exciter Variables at CCT

2q (pu)

Efd

Rf

Vr

(pu)

(pu)

(pu)

Classical

1.100

40.73

316.55

Model 1.0

1.080

65.22

316.02

0.9641

-1.9314

0.2231

-18.075

Model 1.1

1.150

78.63

318.15

0.2559

0.9735

-6.0000

0.24

-29.129

Model 2.1

1.130

72.46

317.35

0.2497

0.9715

0.8061

-6.0000

0.2487

-42.925

Model 2.2

1.110

67.65

316.55

0.2815

0.9713

0.8063

-0.681

-6.0000

0.2383

-36.592

Classical

1.120

42.73

316.74

Model 1.0

1.110

67.91

316.40

0.9749

3.7663

0.2045

8.8071

Model 1.1

1.100

67.84

316.37

0.2023

0.9727

3.7709

0.2045

8.8692

Model 2.1

1.150

73.16

317.06

0.195

0.9743

0.8082

5.3815

0.2005

9.1456

Model 2.2

1.120

68.58

316.41

0.1567

0.9733

0.8083

-0.663

4.5945

0.2022

10.341

1.140

44.64

316.84

Model 1.0

1.130

69.13

316.37

0.9748

3.4712

0.2057

5.9907

Model 1.1

1.140

71.57

316.66

0.2013

0.9738

3.7324

0.2052

5.3151

Model 2.1

1.210

79.64

317.28

0.1946

0.9758

0.8082

5.0927

0.2022

3.6256

Model 2.2

1.170

72.82

316.61

0.1464

0.9747

0.8083

-0.661

4.6820

0.2028

5.8373

Classical

1.160

46.65

316.92

Model 1.0

1.150

70.25

316.32

0.9754

3.4423

0.206

4.6614

Model 1.1

1.170

73.73

316.64

0.1998

0.9745

3.7022

0.2056

3.6255

Model 2.1

1.250

82.30

317.11

0.1941

0.9767

0.8082

4.7843

0.2034

1.1538

Model 2.2

1.190

72.82

316.33

0.1448

0.9751

0.8083

-0.661

4.542

0.2034

4.4962

Classical

1.150

47.11

316.90

Model 1.0

1.140

69.63

316.33

0.9759

3.7921

0.2049

6.2487

Model 1.1

1.150

71.90

316.56

0.1978

0.974

4.0787

0.2043

5.6542

Model 2.1

1.220

79.90

317.17

0.1910

0.9761

0.8083

5.5957

0.2009

4.1777

Model 2.2

1.170

71.84

316.39

0.1423

0.9747

0.8083

-0.660

4.9753

0.2019

6.7031

Classical

1.130

44.92

316.77

Model 1.0

1.120

68.27

316.31

0.9757

3.997

0.204

8.5919

Model 1.1

1.120

69.40

316.45

0.1975

0.9733

4.2189

0.2035

8.3634

Model 2.1

1.170

74.76

317.03

0.191

0.9749

0.8083

5.8725

0.1994

8.5393

Model 2.2

1.140

70.03

316.44

0.1449

0.9739

0.8084

-0.661

5.1386

0.2010

9.7602

Classical

X=90%

Generator Variables at CCT

463

2011 International Conference on Recent Advancements in Electrical, Electronics and Control Engineering

taking a model SMIB system. The performance and accuracy of each

detailed model are compared in terms of critical clearing time. The
classical model gives more error, because the decay of field flux is
neglected in this model. Model 2.2, although more accurate model
including the effect of all damper circuits, has resulted in more
unstable responses than Model 1.1 showing a contradictory result.
Hence, it is concluded that Model 1.1 (Two Axis Model) is more
suitable to analyze transient stability of synchronous machines.

REFERENCES
[1]

[2]
[3]

[4]
[5]

[6]

Fig. 6 Response of Generator Variables (, , Ed, Eq) of SMIB

System (Fault at X=25%, cleared at CCT=1.140 sec)

Fig. 7 Response of Exciter Variables (Vt, Efd, Rf, Vr) of SMIB

System (Fault at X=25%, cleared at CCT=1.140 sec)

IV. CONCLUSION
This paper presents the mathematical formulation of
various approximated models of detailed machine representation. The
dynamics of exciter is incorporated in all the detailed models. The
excitation system considered in this paper is IEEE Type 1 excitation
system. The dynamics of a synchronous generator is illustrated by

464

W. Kimbark, Power System Stability, Elements of Stability

Calculations, New York, John Wiley and Sons Publications, vol. I,
1948.
K. R. Padiyar, Power System Dynamics Stability and Control, BS
Publications, Second Edition, 2008.
IEEE Task Force on Terms and Definitions, Proposed Terms and
Definitions for Power System Stability, IEEE Transactions on Power
Apparatus and Systems, Vol. PAS-101, No. 7, July 1982, pp.1894 1898.
M. Pavella and P. G. Murthy, Transient Stability of Power Systems:
Theory and Practice, John Wiley and Sons Publications, New York.
IEEE Committee Report, Excitation System Models for Power
System Stability Studies, IEEE Transactions on Power Apparatus
and Systems, Vol. PAS-100, No. 2 , pp.494 509,1981
Peter W. Sauer and M. A.Pai, Power System Dynamics and
Stability, Prentice Hall, New Jersey, 1998.