IEEE Transactions on Power Apparatus and Systems, Vol. PAS-99, No.
4 July/Aug 1980 1625
SUPPLEMENTARY DEFINITIONS ASSOCIATED TEST
METHODS FOR OBTAINING PARAMETERS FOR
SYNCHRONOUS MACHINE STABILITY STUDY
SIMULATIONS
- PREPARED BY THE TASK FORCE ON DEFINITIONS -
JOINT WITH POWER SYSTEM ENGINEERING &
ROTATING MACHINERY COMMITTEES
- POWER ENGINEERING SOCIETY -
P. L. DANDENO, ONTARIO HYDRO
WORKING GROUP & TASK FORCE CHAIRMAN
FELLOW, IEEE
ABSTRACT
Definitions are presented for synchronous machine operational
parameters, along with general descriptions of frequency response
test methods for obtaining such parameters.
The paper also provides a review of the manner in which conven-
tional stability constants have been derived or developed, and the
assumptions often made in their application.
These supplementary definitions provide additional data which
enable improved and more accurate synchronous machine models to
be derived for stability studies.
INTRODUCTION
The basic electrical "stability" constants which have been used for
many years were developed about 50 years ago by machine designers.
They evolved principally from the desire to provide information on
short circuit performance to system designers for circuit breaker and
protective relay applications. Gradually, in the period from 1935 to
1960 these short circuit constants were converted to a use beyond the
original intentions of the "creators" of such constants, principally
for the purpose of developing what became known as transient stability
power limits.
Such authors as Kilgore, Park and Robertson, Alger, Wright, and
Doherty and Nickle all contributed to these initial concepts in North
America. A paper published in a Supplement to the 1937 AIEE
Transactions by B. R. Prentice of the General Electric Company
provides a comprehensive summary of the philosophy described by the
aforementioned authors, as well as by others during the previous 10
years. The fundamental basis for practically all of the d and q axis
concepts, including the equivalent circuits for the synchronous
machines, in the English language technical literature, have these
authors as their source. Their work was, of course, solidified in texts
by Concordia and Lewis in North America and by Laible in Germany,
as well as by Adkins in the U.K.
The needs or requirements for changes in stability constant concepts
were recently delineated in some detail in a Joint Working Group paper
presented in 1977.1 The same paper outlined what had been attempted
F 79 647-9 A paper reccnmended and approved by the
IEEE Power System Engineering CaTnmittee of the IEEE
Power Engineering Society for presentation at the IEEE
PES Summer Meeting, Vancouver, British ColuTbia,
Canada, July 15-20, 1979. Manuscript submitted January
15, 1979; made available for printing May 22, 1979.
0018-9510/80/0700-1625$00.75 1980 IEEE
Authorized licensed use limited to: UNIVERSIDAD RIO CUARTO. Downloaded on April 30, 2009 at 14:47 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
IEEE JOINT WORKING GROUP ON DETERMINATION OF
SYNCHRONOUS MACHINE STABILITY CONSTANTS
TASK FORCE MEMBERS ARE: F.P. deMello (Power Tech.,
Inc.); R.D. Dunlop (American Elect. Power); A.T. Poray
(Ontario Hydro); S. Salon (Rensselaer Poly. Inst.); R.
chwenk (Westinghouse Electric Corp.); D.A. Swann (Gen-
eral Electric); S. U mans (Mass. Inst. Technology).
to realize some of these objectives and uses. Industry involvement
through the Electric Power Research Institute was also noted as a
result of the Joint Working Group's endeavours to accentuate the
necessity for determining improved stability parameters.
THEORETICAL BASIS FOR EXISTING DATA
The most widely used classical equivalent circuits for the d and q axis
of a synchronous machine use a per unit system which allows repre-
senting a common mutual inductance (Lad) between stator and rotor
windings as indicated in Figure 1.
This well known d-axis equivalent circuit of the synchronous
machine represents the stator winding, field winding and an equivalent
damper winding. For the case of solid rotor turbo-generators the solid
iron eddy current effects have been approximated by the equivalent
damper circuit.
Li
Lkd
rkd
d-AXIS
LI = stator leakage inductance
Lfl = field leakage inductance
Lkd = direct axis rotor equivalent leakage inductance
Lad = stator to rotor and field mutual inductance
rfd = field resistance
rkd = direct axis rotor equivalent resistance
FIGURE 1
It has been common practice in the past to calculate the resistances
and inductances of the above equivalent circuit using data from the
well known 3 phase short circuit test, or if not available, calculated
parameters provided by the manufacturer based on design information.
This test data or the calculated parameters are usually expressed in the
form of transient and subtransient reactances and time constants
meant to characterize the open circuit and short circuit response of
machine flux in accordance with ANSI standards.
The relationships between these equivalent circuit parameters and
the test data, or calculated parameters have commonly been expressed
as follows:(2,3)
 1626
Ld = Lad + Li = d-axis synchronous inductance REQUIREMENTS FOR MODEL AND DATA IMPROVEMENT
To match the test response characteristics most models derived so far
* Ld = L++Lad+Lfl = Ld- Ld2 = d-axis transient inductance have represented two windings on the rotor; namely field and one
amortisseur winding, respectively. Furthermore, tests have been gen-
erally restricted to yield direct axis information only. Hence there has
Ld = Li + + + 1 = d-axis subtransient inductance been a general lack of information on quadrature axis parameters.
Lad Lkd Lfl Consequently, the utilities have had to rely on calculated, rather than
measured, values for parameters in this axis. In view of the discrep-
ancies sometimes observed between simulated performance using the
Lffd
r_d
*Tao = rfd = d-axis field open circuit time constant d-axis models and test results, one is left with doubts regarding the
q-axis models and parameters which have not been verified by tests.
(1)
Experience has also shown that in some cases the two winding rotor
model has certain limitations in representing stability performance of
*Td =f (Lfl + LjLad1+ / = d-axis transient short circuit time certain types of machines.
lTd Lad ~constant
Thus it is clearly apparent that an improved method of testing and
model derivation is required to overcome the above mentioned prob-
*Tdo rd (Lkd + LfLad - d-axis subtransient open circuit lems. The need for "improved" electrical constants for stability
Lkdad + Lfj, time constant studies has been accentuated with the trend to higher reactance
machines, high reactance transmission systems and to increased
*Td=rI I ___
_
I 1 Li __1__=
Lkd + Lad
T= rk ~~kd d-axis subtransient short
+ 1 /circuit time constant
dependence on excitation control for stability. Concurrently the advent
of digital computers made it possible to examine those control effects
which require the simulation of dynamics over several seconds leading
to the need for greater accuracy of representation. In many situations
study of "first swing stability" has been replaced by studies of several
where Lffd = Lfl + Lad, and Lkkd = Lkd + Lad seconds of machine electric power and angle oscillations. The correct
estimation of field quantities during possible pole-slipping and
All inductances and resistances are in per unit and time constants in asynchronous operation of generators on a power system also requires
radians. more complex representation of generator models. Simulation of fast
Basically the open circuit field time constant has been expressed as response exciters in system studies has highlighted the fact that the
Lffd/rfd which is the time constant of the field winding assuming no coupling of the rotor field circuits to the stator was not the same as that
coupling effect of the damper winding (rkd = a>). of the rotor body circuits to the stator. As a result, a need also deve-
loped to know the properties of these circuits over a range of fre-
Similarly the open circuit subtransient time constant has been quencies. In terms of the generally accepted Park's formulation for
defined as
Ikd (Lkd + Ladf+Laf which would be the time constant
d-q-o modelling, this often translated into the need for a higher order
model representation of the direct and quadrature axes, as well as
of the damper winding (assuming eld resistance is zero). improved techniques for either calculating or measuring parameter
values for these models.
Whereas the time constants defined by these relationships can be Thus in many cases, in particular with respect to solid rotor iron
very close to the basic response time constants of the equivalent circuit, machines, it was thought that two rotor iron body circuits, in addition
especially when rkd > rfd, experience has revealed that significant to the field winding circuit, might better identify the direct axis equiva-
differences can occur between the values L' Td, T' Td and Tdo as
, 0, lent circuit used in studies. Similarly in the quadrature axis it has been
calculated from the above relationships and those derived from ANSI felt that certain types of rotor design could call for as many as three
defined tests. equivalent rotor body circuits, acknowledging, of course, that no field
With the machine represented by the equivalent circuit of Figure 1, winding exists in the quadrature axis.
the actual open circuit response of machine flux will be characterized The implication of the above on model structure is that in order to
by two time constants which are obtained from the roots of the charac- identify the third rotor winding, additional parameters are required,
teristic equation: in one or both axes, as well as the two time constants and three in-
ductances with which machines have commonly been characterized by
2 (Lad(Lfl the industry. The identification of additional parameters is trouble-
I +s
(Lffd+
fd
Lkkd
+

kd rfdrkd LfiLkd)
(2)
and not the time constants Tdo and Tdo as defined above. These exact
expressions are found in Appendix I where it is shown that the differ-
ences vanish when rkd > rfd.
Although these facts have been recognized and expressions can be
readily derived to relate the ANSI defined parameters to the equivalent
circuit parameters above, this potential ambiguity in the use of
approximate and exact expressions of L', T' and Tdo needs to be 0
clarified.
Stability programs which use equations (1) to relate the Figure 1
parameters to T' Tdo and Ld require that the ANSI standard defined
0,
values of these parameters be adjusted prior to being used in these
programs.
Similar expressions have been used for the q-axis and since the ratio
of resistances of the two equivalent windings in the q-axis is much less
than the ratio in the d-axis, the discrepancy between the roots charac-
terizing the q-axis response and the reciprocal of the time constant
Tqo and Tjo, defined in analogous fashion to Tao and Tdo, is much
more pronounced.
These are approximate expressions.
2
some when considering short circuit test data, or for that matter, stator
voltage decrement testing. This indicates that supplementary methods
of obtaining the direct and quadrature axis parameter data are
required.
APPLICATION OF FREQUENCY RESPONSE METHODS TO
MODEL DERIVATION
One possible method whereby the above objectives could be achieved
is by the use of frequency response methods to derive the appropriate
transfer functions describing the response of machine flux to stator
current and field voltage disturbances.
Since 1973, an increasing and heightened interest has been engen-
dered in North America by the possibility of obtaining improved
machine electrical stability constants through the application of
frequency response methods. Many approaches were considered, and
measurement techniques underwent several development phases. Work
was concentrated on turbo-generator measurements, and some
machines were investigated both under loaded conditions and at
standstill.

Authorized licensed use limited to: UNIVERSIDAD RIO CUARTO. Downloaded on April 30, 2009 at 14:47 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.

The development of equivalent circuit models from such tests
requires that the test data be presented in the form of operational
inductances and transfer functions involving two or more poles and
zeros. For example, an expression for Ld(s), the direct-axis operational
inductance might be:
_
Ld(s)-Ld Ldo
+ sT)( +
sT2)(l + sT3)
(1(1 + sT4)(1 + sT5)(1 + sT6)
These operational inductances, and transfer functions, can be
approximated by rational polynominals whose degree depends on the
number of rotor circuits required in the model. Thus in the above
example three rotor winding circuits are implied. The resulting co-
efficients of these polynominals can then be related to the chosen
model to obtain the fundamental elements of that model. Based on this
technique the elements of such an equivalent circuit form the self and
mutual inductances and resistances of the inductance and resistance
matrices and thus apply directly in the general equation
1627
pararmeters resulting from such tests, which are considered essential in
describing the dynamic response of synchronous machines.
DEFINITIONS OF SYNCHRONOUS MACHINE OPERATIONAL
PARAMETERS FOR SMALL SIGNAL RESPONSE
These definitions are the principal ones which power system analysts
have found convenient when describing the response of synchronous
machines. They generally express the relationship between one machine
variable and another. The principal definitions listed below are those
applicable to the behaviour of synchronous machines, and follow from
the well-known concept of direct and quadrature axis stator and rotor
machine representations. The following operational equations show
how the parameters are related to each other.
Thus AWd(s) = G(s)A&efd(s) - Ld(s) A
aid(s)
APq(s) =
Lq(s) *Aiq(s)-

[e] = s([L] * [i]) - [r] * [i] The sign convention in the above operational equations corresponds
This makes the model more flexible in that more or less complicated to the d-q axis formulations proposed by R. H. Park4, which are also
structures can be considered without much difficulty. This also has the embodied in these widely accepted machine equations:-
advantage that saturation, which is generally assumed to affect the
stator to rotor mutuals (Lad and Laq), can be applied readily, yielding eq = dT
dt O - ra iq
w'Pd
the appropriate change in the effective time constants when the
machine is on load. ed = dWfd
dt -WW4q - ra id
Among the advantages claimed for the frequency response approach
at standstill is that the tests are safe and relatively inexpensive to make.
Furthermore, information about the quadrature axis, as well as the efd = -t+ rfd *ifd
direct axis of the machine may be obtained. Critics of this method have
correctly pointed out that, up to the present time, no conclusive recom- The above sign convention also corresponds to the assumption that
mendations have been forthcoming about the appropriate rotor or the quadrature axis leads the direct axis. It should be noted that this
stator current (or saturation) levels at which the tests should be per- differs with the sign convention adopted in the second edition of IEEE
formed. It is the general concensus that the standstill frequency dictionary' where the direct axis leads the quadrature axis, and where
response test data obtained with relatively low stator current measure- flux linkages are denoted by A (lambda) rather than by the well estab-
ments, results in operational inductances which are slightly lower than lished ip (psi).
the "unsaturated" values. The latter values ideally should correspond
to "air gap line" saturation characteristics. The following definitions are proposed:-
Frequency response tests with the machine at rated speed and on or Ld(s) The direct-axis operational inductance. It is the ratio of the
off the line are more difficult and expensive, but are proving to yield Laplace transform of the direct-axis armature flux linkages to
additional information to that obtained at standstill. The off-line the Laplace transform of the direct-axis current, when all rotor
frequency response tests at rated speed provide an opportunity to windings are short circuited.
assess the consequences of rotational effects on the above operational
inductances and transfer functions. In addition, the saturation effects Lq(s) The quadrature-axis operational inductance. It is the ratio of
of field excitation on these functions in the range of rated stator the Laplace transform of the quadrature-axis armature flux
voltage can be obtained. linkages to the Laplace transform of the quadrature-axis
current, when all the rotor windings are short circuited.
The on-line frequency response tests also provide some indication of
rotational effects on the generator inductances and time constants. G(s) The stator to field transfer function. It is the ratio of the
Furthermore the differences in mutual coupling between the stator and Laplace transform of the direct-axis flux linkages to the Laplace
field compared to the stator to rotor slots and iron body are believed transform of the field voltage, with the armature open circuited.
to be affected by rotor saturation. Thus these differences in mutual
coupling, which may be identified by standstill frequency response MEASURABLE PARAMETERS
measurements (and also analytically by designers) may have to be
modified to account for rotor saturation. The methods suggested for In addition to the three basic definitions listed above there are other
this are indirect, since identification techniques are used which consist operational impedances or transfer functions which may be observed
in comparing the magnitude and phase angle of certain "unsaturated" or measured. If one considers the machines as a two port network for
quantities calculated from standstill test data to similar quantities both the direct and quadrature axes (Figure 2),
measured on site. This comparison is effected by adjusting certain o direct axis
direct and quadrature axis rotor circuit quantities derived from the Ai'Pd stator and
standstill tests. The adjusting is terminated when the calculated quan- Aid rotor Aifd Aefd
tities approximate the on-site measurements. These on-line measurable
quantities often consist of finite changes in terminal voltage, machine
o -L_parameters
power and reactive power or field current compared to the finite input
changes in field voltage at rated terminal voltage conditions. o- quadrature 0
When frequency response concepts are envisaged, information is pre- *- axis
sented over an appropriate range of discrete frequencies. Operational Awq Ailq
.&Wq Ai
stator and
quantities can then be chosen to describe or approximate these discrete 0 rotor 0
values. As described above, these operational quantities yield informa- parameters
tion which enables a chosen equivalent circuit to be derived. In the
following section definitions are given for a number of operational FIGURE 2

Authorized licensed use limited to: UNIVERSIDAD RIO CUARTO. Downloaded on April 30, 2009 at 14:47 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
1628
certain relationships may be envisaged between stator and rotor When viewed from the field terminals the following impedances
quantities. In the following two sections certain specific parameters and transfer functions can be obtained. Where Aid is specified as zero
will be described which may be measured with the synchronous it implies that the stator windings are connected to infinite impedance
machine at standstill, or at rated speed. These are parameters cor- sources; where Aed is specified to be zero it is implied that the stator
responding to perturbations about a specified operating point, and as windings are connected to zero impedance sources.
such, are expressed as a transfer function, where the input is the per-
turbing variable, as might be used in an on-site test. Appropriate Thus Zfdo(s) = Aefd(s)
procedures for converting stator quantities to d- and q-axis quantities Aifd(s) Aid -0 This is the
driving open
point circuit field
impedance
must be utilized.6
Zfd(s) - Aefd(s)
This is the short circuit field
Aifd(s) Aed 0 driving point impedance
MEASURABLE PARAMETERS AT STANDSTILL Aid(s) |Aed - This is the field to stator transfer
and H(s) = sAifd(s)
The three principal parameters are noted below, which relate to the function
three definitions listed above.
Zd(s) The direct-axis operational impedance equal to Ra + sLd(s), It is to be noted that, for measurements at low frequencies, the stator
where Ra is the d.c. armature resistance per phase. It is also resistance is a controlling factor. The practical problem of shorting the
hAd(s)
Afid(s) Aefd -0 three stator terminals to ensure that ed is virtually zero, and that the
shorting resistance is much less than Ra, should not be overlooked.
It should also be noted that parameters measured at standstill may be
Zq(s) The quadrature-axis operational impedance equal to Ra + sLq(s) different from those at rated speed due to the effect of centrifugal
where Ra is the d.c. armature resistance per phase. It is also forces on contact resistances in the rotor circuits.
Aiq(s) MEASURABLE PARAMETERS AT RATED SPEED
The above two quantities are the stator driving point impedances. The following observable and measurable impedances and transfer
Strictly speaking, the stator resistance should be considered as a functions may be obtained with the synchronous machine at rated
function of frequency. However, in frequency response measurement speed under various operating conditions. Stator resistance at rated
techniques, Ra > coLd at extremely low frequencies, and predominates speed is insignificant compared to the machine reactances; with the
in the measurement of Zd(s). At frequencies in the range from 1 Hertz added stipulation that the rate of change of flux linkages are ignored
to 100 Hertz where the d.c. value of Ra may not strictly apply, in the measurements, the following relationships hold:
Ra << cLd, and the assumption of using the d.c. value of Ra is also The direct axis operational inductance is Ld(s),
quite justifiable.
I Aeq(s) Af
The third quantity is given by the relation Ld(s) = coo Aid(s) Iefd=

The quadrature axis operational inductance is Lq(s),

G(s) = Aefd(s) Aid 0, and/or
Lq(s) = coo1 Aed(s)
Aiq(s)
G(s)= sefd(s) Aid = 0
The variations in Aed and Aeq would usually require that a second
machine be available electrically nearby, for the purpose of sinu-
While the above quantities are consistent with the definitions in the soidally varying the terminal voltage of the machine being tested.
previous section, an alternative method of measuring this parameter
is suggested as follows:
G(s)
G
= 1s)k Aeq
I (s) Aistator
eq(s) Aistator = 0; Aeq(s)
= 0Aeqs=variation of stator voltage
on open circuit
G(s) = s,Aid(s) Aefd = 0 In the above equations, co is the rated electrical speed of the machine.
Other measurable machine quantities are obtainable during a
The advantage of the latter form is that it can be measured at the normal range of loadings, and such quantities are useful in adjusting
same time as Zd(s). direct and quadrature axis models obtained at standstill. They may be
obtained by sinusoidally varying the input to an excitation system
Typical test results of magnitudes of Zd(s) and sG(s) are shown in voltage (error) summing junction, or, by some other means sinusoidally
Figure 3. The magnitudes of Ld(s) derived from the Zd(s) test results, varying the machine excitation voltage (efd).
including phase angles, are plotted in Figure 4.
Other observable direct axis impedances and transfer functions are SUMMARY & CONCLUSIONS
listed below for completeness. Where Aifd is specified to be zero, it Past experience has shown that generator models derived from
implies that the field winding is connected to an infinite impedance standard manufacturers data and using standard procedures may not
source; if Aefd is specified to be zero, it implies that the field winding adequately simulate the dynamic performance of these generators
is connected to a zero impedance source when compared to actual tests. Novel methods of obtaining direct and
quadrature axis equivalent circuit parameters are presently being
dS Aifd =
Zdo(s) = Aid(s)
This is the open circuit stator
evaluated by a number of utilities and manufacturers on the North
Aifd driving point impedance American Continent. These methods entail the measurement of opera-
tional inductances and stator/rotor transfer functions of a generator
This is the stator to field transfer over a range of discrete frequencies, with the generator rotor at
Yaf(s) =
A ed(s) Aefd 0
admittance
standstill. They are therefore a radical departure from the existing
methods which employ transient decay measurements of generator
voltage or current. The operational inductances and transfer functions
This is the stator to field transfer can be readily translated into an equivalent circuit which can then be
Zafo(s) = - d()
A id(s) Aifd = 0 impedance used in simulation studies.

Authorized licensed use limited to: UNIVERSIDAD RIO CUARTO. Downloaded on April 30, 2009 at 14:47 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 1629
This document defines the most important operational parameters 5. IEEE Standard Dictionary of Electrical and Electronics Terms,
which can be obtained from such tests and extends the scope by 2nd edition. J. Wiley and Sons, 1978.
defining similar parameters from frequency response tests with the 6. Watson, W. and Manchur, G.: "Synchronous Machine Operational
generator at or near rated speed and various operating conditions. Impedances from Low Voltage Measurements at the Stator Ter-
minals", IEEE Power Apparatus and Systems, Vol. 93, No. 3,
May/June 1974, pp. 777-784.
7. Shackshaft, G.: "New Approach to the Determination of Synchro-
nous Machine Parameters from Tests", Proc. IEE, 1974, 121, (11),
pp. 1385-1392.

APPENDIX
For synchronous machines, three-phase short circuit tests or stator
decrement tests with the field winding closed are, in general, the source
of data from which equivalent circuit models, like the one shown in
Figure 1, are derived. Such tests yield transient and subtransient in-
ductances and time constants which can be used to calculate the more
fundamental resistances and inductances of the various windings
represepted in these "two winding" models.
For example, the parameters pertaining to the open-circuit response
of the machine represented by the equivalent circuit in Figure 1 are
L' , Ld, Tao and Tdo. These can be obtained from the stator voltage
and rotor field current decrements which result when the machine's
source of excitation is suddenly removed and the field winding is
shorted. In his treatment of the various tests from which machine
parameters can be derived, Shackshaft7 shows that the relevant opera-
tional expressions for the variables in this open-circuit test are

et(s) =D(s) eto

ifd(5) = Nf(s)* (Al)

D(s) eto
where eto is the initial stator terminal voltage and N(s), Nf(s) and D(s)
are the operational equations whose coefficients are related directly to
the elements of the equivalent circuit in Figure 1. Using the same
nomenclature as in the main text, these operational equations are
expressed by
N(s) = As2 - Bs - C
- --

FIGURE 4 -d AXIS
A S2 +(
Nf(s) = Lad LadC\
~~drfd,/ (A2)
OPERATIONAL
1.cU0 INDUCTANCE
CALCULATED FROM D(s) = s2 + sD + C
)Zds) TEST POINTS
0.1 --
OIFIELD SHO where A= Ldli +
RTED)_ - Ld +Ld + Ld
0.5 -__ Lad LfI Lkd
d AI
0 -X-
- -l - - -
TEST POINTS
-_ _ -
_ - -

__ kd- Lad2 (rfd + rkd)

B =[ rfd + rkd Ld rfdrkd rfdrkd
Lad(LfI + Lkd) + Lf,Lkd
SON N VAI C=- rfdrkd
.05! --
22KV TURRO ALTERNATOR
Lad(Lfl + Lkd) + Lf Lkd
FRErENCY- ERTZ
.0?.w1 _I 01 .10 I- 1.0 _ 10 0 3 0 16 D= + LkkdA C
\rfd rkd/
It can be seen that D(s) is the characteristic equation (2) whose roots
should give the open circuit time constants Tdo and Tdo. Once these
REFERENCES roots are obtained the solution of equations (Al) can be obtained by
1. "Synchronous Machine Stability Constaiits-Requirements and using standard inverse Laplace transform techniques. Thus a solution
Realizations"-Joint Working Group Paper A77-210-8 (P. L. of D(s) is essential to the problem. It can be seen that D(s) is a second
Dandeno, Chairman) presented at the 1977 PES Winter Meeting. order polynomial of the form
2. Concordia, C.: "Synchronous Machines" (Wiley, 1951).

3. Adkins, B.: "The General Theory of Electrical Machines" (Chap- s2+bs+c=O

man & Hall, 1957). which has roots
4. Park, R. H.: "Two-Reaction Theory of Synchronous Machines;
Generalized Method of Analysis-Part I" Transactions AIEE- b b1
S = -- -+ 4c)l/2
tI --
1929 Volume 48, p. 716.

Authorized licensed use limited to: UNIVERSIDAD RIO CUARTO. Downloaded on April 30, 2009 at 14:47 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 1630
These expressions become fairly cumbersome and difficult to handle sponds to a phase angle of 450. On the other hand, a series R, L equiva-
when the coefficients "b" and "c" are substituted by the actual co- lent circuit has a 900 phase angle at X -+ oo. Even several such circuits in
efficients of D(s) in (A2). Without much loss in accuracy, the solution parallel will not change this situation, but they will improve the fitting
can be made simpler by making the assumption that in most practical at lower frequencies. The number of required parallel R, L branches will
clearly be a compromise based on needs for accuracy and simplicity.
cases - <K 1, in which case the roots reduce to But, in many cases, a single R, L parallel branch will not be enough.
b2 2. On the use of simple time constants. As pointed out in the
c paper, these may be satisfactory in the d-axis, but are inadequate in the
Si = -b q-axis. In fact, the separation of test results into, say, two exponential
components is (theoretically) correct only if the time constants are the
s2 = -b roots of the characteristic equation (2). These roots can be calculated
Referring back to equations (A2) this results in the following: exactly, without having to assume that rkd > rfd which would produce
the simple classical approximations. A correction of these values, as
shown in the Appendix, only serves to produce analytically calculable
Si = _ Lffd +Lkkd better approximations. However, in fact, only numerical values are
rfd rkd (A) needed, and they can be obtained accurately, even for a characteristic
equation of higher degree.
2= Lad(Lkd + Lfl) + LkdLfl AX 3. On the problem of fitting. In the time domain, we are looking
= - rfdrkd (Lffd + Lkkd1 for an expansion of the form 2; tiesit, where both Pi and ai are un-
rfd rkd/ known. This is a nonlinear problem difficult to solve: even if a Newton-
Raphson program is used, its success will depend on a good initial guess.
In Table I of reference 7, these two time constants are proposed as Only a low order model could be obtained in this way.
revised "definitions" for Tdo and Tdo. These expressions are more The other alternative for fitting is using rational polynominals in a
complex than the conventional ones of equations (1) in the main text. frequency domain approach. According to Fig. 2 we have a 2 X 2 trans-
By making the assumptions that during the transient period rkd = , fer matrix for the d-axis:
and during the substransient period rfd = o, the simplified expressions
for the time constants become:
(L ffd
H(s) H= (s) H22(s)1
( rffd ) The rational fitting is given by
I1 LadI N (s)
= Lrkd kd + Lad Lfjj D (s)- Hij (s) , (i, = 1,2)
These are the expressions for Tdo and Tdo as shown in equations (1).
Using the roots derived in (A3) the following expression is obtained
for the time-domain solution of et(s) from equations (Al). which has to be satisfied for several sk = .w0k. Note that D(s) is the same
for all i,j. Hij (wk) being known from measurements, we have
et La -t/Tdo + (1jLa~ -tTd
eto k Ld( \Ld Ld)/6 N1(i wk) =1 j(i k)D(iwk)
where
NJ12 k) = H12 (i k)D(iwk)
2
Lffd Lkkd Lad (rfd + rkd) ()
N22 iwk) H22(i k)D(iwk)
Ld LdB Ld rfd rkd Ld rfdrkd
CLffd
rfd
(Lffd
\
+ Lkkd
/
Only three equations have been written for each wk because, for a
passive system, only three of the transfer functions Hij are independent.
rfd rkd
We have thus a system of redundant linear equations Ax = b, where x
Ld =ALd=L+
i 1 1 1 represents the n coefficients of the polynominals Nij (s) and D(s), and
+ +
Lad Lfj Lkd A an m X n (m > n) matrix of known coefficients. A least square solu-
tion is obtained easily by a modified Gram-Schmidt algorithm. It is
important to note, that no iterations are required and, therefore, there
Whereas the expression for Ld is the same as in equations (1), this is are no convergence pro6lems. Of course, if the order of D(s) is selected
not so for Ld. To obtain the conventional definition of Ld it is suf- too high, ill conditioning may occur, but this will indicate that a lower
ficient to make the assumption rkd =X in equation (A4). order approximation is sufficiently accurate.
Thus it is clear, that the frequency domain approach is superior to
time domain identification, in terms of reliability and accuracy.
The above presentation of the frequency domain fitting served not
Discussion only to show that synchronous machine modelling is conceptually and
practically on much more solid basis using the approach of the paper,
Adam Semlyen (University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada): This is avery but it also intends to emphasize a detail of practical importance. This is
important paper. It emphasizes the need, and indicates the way, for the the following.
transition from classical synchronous machine modelling to a modern, In the d-axis there exists a transfer matrix consisting of three in-
more satisfactory approach. dependent elements, all with the same polynomial denominator. The
Classical models, such as the one in Figure 1, are of low order, and selection of input and output variables and, accordingly, of a specific
simple parameters (as given in equations (1)) are used to describe their matrix H(s) is not unique. For instance H(s) can be the (symmetrical)
behaviour. These parameters are obtained from time domain tests or admittance matrix, or the two-port matrix with A, B, C, D constants
design data. (AD - BC= 1), or something else. Transition from one form to the other
The user of today expects that his model should conform to the is usually possible. I feel that the admittance matrix form has the ad-
existing body of knowledge in control and identification theory. It vantage of strictly proper (order of numerator smaller than order of
appears that (1) low order modelling, (2) time constants defined on denumerator) elements, resulting in smooth step responses and state
intuitive basis and with simplicity in view, and (3) time domain identifi- space realization in the form t = Ax + Bu, y = Cx + Du with D = 0.
cation, are all unsatisfactory if more accuracy is pursued. These facts are Clarification on the following problems would therefore be appreciated.
shown in the paper but, I feel, some comments may be useful. a. Have the authors special preference for the transfer functions
1. On modelling of solid rotor field phenomena by an equivalent Ld(s) and G(s) selected in the paper, and what is the justification?
damper winding only. It is known that, at increasing frequencies, the b. Would it be appropriate to add a third transfer function, to
equivalent resistance and reactance become almost equal. This corre- produce information on ifd?

Authorized licensed use limited to: UNIVERSIDAD RIO CUARTO. Downloaded on April 30, 2009 at 14:47 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.

c. Is it appropriate to stress that the elements of the transfer
matrix should have the same denominator, or should they be permitted
to have different denominators and a common (rather high order) de-
nominator be produced later, at the stage of realization of the circuit
model and/or of the related state equations?
Finally, I wish to commend the authors for their valuable contribu-
tion to synchronous machine modelling. It represents a major application
of rational fitting in the frequency domain, to low order dynamic model-
ling of high dimensional systems, including the infinite dimensional case
of problems with distributed parameters.
Manuscript received July 30, 1979.
D. R. Brown (University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas): This paper
provides a much needed summary of important assumptions and rela-
tionships pertinent to synchronous machine modeling. I would like to
make one comment, raise one question and offer one suggestion.
First the comment. The paper infers that frequency response tech-
niques for determining lumped circuit representations for the direct and
quadrature axes are preferable alternatives to "generator models derived
from standard manufacturers data and using standard procedures." In
fact, it is not difficult to show that representation of the combined
effects of the rotor results in an impedance proportional to /i for a
solid iron rotor machine. No lumped circuit representation can fit this
characteristic exactly. An infinite number of circuit configurations can
be proposed which will fit the characteristic in an approximate way, but
if the resulting short circuit time constants and reactances associated
with such a representation are not consistent with the results we would
see on an actual short circuit test, serious errors can result. This problem
is illustrated clearly in [ 1] where an analytical solution for the short
circuit current waveform taking into account the /Tcharacteristic is set
forth. Test results described in [ 1] are shown to be consistent with the
developed solution. However it can be seen from the results presented
in [I] that a two time constant representation for the direct axis actually
affords a better fit to the short circuit current waveform when we con-
sider practical time frames of interest. It can be further shown that the
instantaneous electrical torque waveforn will be in error by approxi-
mately the same amount that the stator current waveform is in error 12] .
Thus, if these variables (instantaneous stator current and instantaneous
electrical torque) are of interest, time domain tests will quite likely
yield necessary data more easily than frequency response tests. The time
domain tests described in [3] are non-destructive in nature and include
determination of quadrature axis parameters.
Frequency response measurements may be a preferable way of
determining parameters for models used in transient and dynamic
1631
IEEE Trans. on Power Apparatus and Systems, Vol. 92, Mar/April
1973, pp. 5 74-582.
Manuscript received August 13, 1979.
Emilio Ferrari (ENEL, Centro Ricerca di Automatica - Milano, Italy):
In the paper is mentioned the possibility that the generator parameters
measured with the frequency response at standstill are different from
those at the rated speed, due to the effect of centrifugal forces on con-
tact resistances in the rotor circuits.
I would like to know if such differences have actually been ob-
served in some cases, and what is their amount.
In Italy we made some measurements [ 1] with the frequency re-
sponse method considered in the paper both with generator running
and at standstill and we did not observe any difference in the results. It
may be noted, however, that in our measurements the comparison was
possible only for direct axis results, as the measurements at synchronous
speed were performed (at no load and in short circuit) by sinusoidally
varying the reference of the excitation control system. However,
measurements were made for all direct axis transfer functions, including
the one between field voltage and field current.
Incidentally, our experience confirms the convenience of frequency
response methods for the identification of the transfer functions
describing the parameter linearized model.
REFERENCES
[1] Arcidiacono, V., "Methods and experimental results for the iden-
tification of large alternator mathematical model" (in Italian) -
LXXX Riunione Annuale AEI/XXIII Convegno Nazionale ANIPLA
-Settembre 1979-Paper N. 151.
Manuscript received August 7, 1979.
Jack L. Dineley (University of Newcastle upon Tyne, U.K.): The aim of
variable-frequency standstill tests on synchronous generators is to
produce a useful stator-based mathematical model of the generator from
tests which are relatively cheap and easy to make, and the mathematical
model should be suitable for use in computer studies of multi-machine
trUtSAArWi"S
flitJ I?
ItSl OS5l M
fD:ltc:'C
I _

stability studies. As is shown in [4] relatively low order models are

generally adequate for transient stability studies. This raises the question.
Can the authors recommend frequency ranges over which such models
should closely match measured frequency response characteristics?
Also, how does one determine frequency ranges of interest for dynamic
stability studies?
Figures 3 and 4 of the paper are of considerable interest in that
they provide measured frequency response data for a 589 MVA turbo
alternator. I would like to suggest that the authors provide in their
V\
closure a similar curve for the quadrature axis (if available) along with
information regarding the saturation levels at which all such curves were
taken. If standard short circuit and open circuit time constants and re-
actances could also be furnished for the same machine a benchmark
i1C VUtLO Cttci?E!T (iMPs)
model would be made available which would stimulate further study in lt IS Sce9
this fruitful area. t5t ;wA,
tILDIUC --
-

REFERENCES 305

[1] P. Bharali and B. Adkins, "Operational Impedances of Turbo-

,Xc!/ .,f. V
generators with Solid Rotors," Proceedings of the IEE, vol. I11O,
No. 12, Deaember 1963, pp. 2185-2199.
[2] D. R. Brown and P. C. Krause, "Modeling of Transient Electrical
V/
277 2,
Torques in Solid Iron Rotor Turbogenerators," IEEE Trans. on II ~~~~~~~~~~~~~ II -~~~--
h/\>
-mM

Power Apparatus and Systems, Vol. 98, No. 5, Sept/Oct. 1979,

pp. 1502-1508.
[3] Y. Yu and H. A. M. Moussa, "Experimental Determination of
Exact Equivalent Circuit Parameters of Synchronous Machines,"
IEEE Trans. on Power Apparatus and Systems, Vol. 90, Nov/Dec 186
1971, pp. 2555-2560. IO*.t (MF.CA'ATTS)
[4] P. L. Dandeno, R. L. Hauth and R. P. Schulz, "Effects of Syn-
chronous Machine Modeling in Large Scale Stability Studies," Figure 1.

Authorized licensed use limited to: UNIVERSIDAD RIO CUARTO. Downloaded on April 30, 2009 at 14:47 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 1632
power systems. It is therefore necessary to derive the simplest possible
equivalent circuit of this model that can achieve the desired accuracy.
Quite independently of the Working Party, we at the University of
Newcastle upon Tyne in the North of England have produced from
variable-frequency standstill tests a model which is similar to that shown
by Paul Dandeno, in his Figure 1, i.e. with two windings in both direct-
and quadrature axes, but we have not found it essential to include a
cross-mutual inductance.
We have been able to derive parameters which give a good computer
match of oscillation of power and induced field current for a site test
which involved a step-function change in the impedance between the
generator and the system, i.e. switching a short line. The induced field
airrent is perhaps the most difficult to get accurately.
I present the curves we have computed, and suggest that no further
complexity of equivalent circuit is needed to simulate these tests, and
that it may not be necessary to include a cross-mutual inductance.
To obtain our equivalent circuit, we used a step-by-step frequency
sensitive matching approach. Much worse matches can be obtained if
the parameters of the equivalent circuit are not carefully adjusted. At
Newcastle we would welcome details of further site tests on generators
for which variable frequency stand-still data is available, so that we can
check our method and report back to the P.E.S. meetings.
Manuscript received August 13, 1979.
P. L. Dandeno, A. T. Poray and S. D. Umans: On behalf of the Task
Force on Definitions: The authors wish to thank the discussers for their
interest in this paper and for their comments and questions.
We note that most discussers have made some specific comments
on the appropriateness of various machine model structures and methods
of parameter determination from tests. Whereas these issues certainly
deserve continued study, this was not the prime intention of our paper.
Nor did we wish to imply that the test procedures proposed are the only
ones by which parameters should be obtained. Our purpose was to sug-
gest a method which was relatively inexpensive and which appears
reliable, and, most importantly, overcomes some of the physical limita-
tions of existing procedures for obtaining parameters for models,
particularly in the quadrature axis. Hence, the emphasis is on definitions
of test quantities rather than on model structure. The latter is very much
the choice of the particular user as to what complexity of machine
representation he requires whereas the former can be specified quite
generally for all to use as they see fit. However, we feel that the issues
raised are of significance and thus merit our reply.
Profs. Semlyen and Brown have commented that solid iron rotor
representation by simple parallel combinations of R and L branches is
likely to be inadequate in most practical cases, because it is not possible
to match the rotor impedance, particularly phase angle, at various fre-
L(s)z2. (1+s1.8)(1+S.05)C1+8.007)
d 12 (1+s7 .6)(l+s.08)Cl+S.009)
2. '
2.
____ _ __
1.-
L_
JI
-~
1.0- la140
I1U
==========================
0
Authorized licensed use limited to: UNIVERSIDAD RIO CUARTO. Downloaded on April 30, 2009 at 14:47 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
quencies by this simple approach. Our experience points to a contrary
view; in most practical cases adequate rotor representation is achieved
by using this concept of lumped parameters, and such models do in fact
match the phase angles quite well over a fairly wide frequency range
(.001 - 100 Hz). Furthermore, we have found that in all cases con-
sidered so far, the phase angle does not approach 45 with increasing
frequency but rather follows the pattern indicated in Figures A and B.
These show both the magnitude and phase angles of Ld(s) and Lq(s)
obtained from measurements on the 589 MVA turbogenerator, referred
to in Figures 3 and 4 of the paper, over a range of .001 to 100 Hz. The
"standard" data for this machine can be obtained by consulting the
Joint Working Group Chairman.
Profs. Semlyen and Brown have also made comments regarding
time domain methods of parameter measurement. It was, and is, not
our intention to discourage this type of approach. Most problems stem-
ming from time domain (decrement) type tests have been due mainly to
the assumptions made when using the data to derive the models, as
indicated by Shackshaft(7), rather than from the inadequacy of the
tests themselves. However, it is also quite a well-known fact that in
most practical cases, due to the nature of the decrement test data, it is
only possible to identify two principal time constants. Often the precise
determination of the smaller time constant is difficult since subtransient
effects are more or less over by 2 or 3 cycles. For many machines this
will be adequate, but some cases exist which require more detailed in-
formation. In spite of this, the time domain approach offers a method
which can yield useful models, particularly if the data is interpreted
correctly.
The issue of the "cross-mutual" inductance, raised by Prof. Dineley,
continues to be one which results in considerable discussion. Its function
is simply to account for the fact that the mutual inductance between
the rotor and stator windings is not necessarily the same as that between
the rotor field winding and the solid rotor equivalent dampers. It is not
justifiable theoretically to simply ignore its presence (ie, by assigning to
it a zero value). As a practical matter, there are undoubtedly cases where
its calculated value is small, and this certainly would justify neglecting
it. The results reported by Prof. Dineley appear to identify such a case.
Experience shows that in some cases, its value is such that neglecting it
significantly affects model performance.
We agree with Prof. Semlyen that the use of a third parameter may
certainly be appropriate, and the practicality of this should be investi-
gated. As he correctly points out three independent parameters uniquely
specify the properties of a linear, passive two-port network. We have
indicated on page 4 of our paper a number of quantities available from
standstill frequency response tests which can be grouped to give the re-
quired transfer matrix with three parameters. However, it is our opinion
that for most practical purposes two parameters will suffice, although
efforts should be made to validate this, and hence our use of the two
parameters Ld(s) and G(s). This compares with the use made by Shack-
- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~-5
-4-
_ EL~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~L
11111_W
/ ~~~~~~~~~~~ANG.LrE
bTEST POINTS
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 25
/~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~3
11111 -
sZ t
--1
-
FREQUENCY
- LI
H T
IIILI
 1633

L (s) =2.03 (1.+sO.9) (1+sO.09) (1+sO.006)

l l l rr=
l lT (1+sl.9) (1+sO.20) (1+s.Ul)IT

2.
111T1 _ _ _
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~15
(P
___ _
MANGLE POINTS
TEST
5;4
2.

S.

I1.
z It IT T W I /rA I15R
II I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

'Iu 3 I X 4 .. IUEFIGURE B
0. 5 - ini - v

0 01
~11 ~ ~~~~~~~
V 0v 1
~FREQUENCY I- nni 1.0 10~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~I
* V 20 35
& V _ V 5.0
w.v 805100
V V . V V

shaft(7) of stator and rotor quantities when developing models from obtained at standstill and with the machine at rated speed. These differ-
short circuit and stator decrement tests. The question of stressing ences were observed in d-axis responses only but it is quite probable that
similarity of denominator (or numerator in some cases) in the functions the q-axis would be similarly affected. This work is presently being in-
of H(s) is resolved by ensuring that the elements of the transfer func- vestigated under an EPRI contract, RP997 Determination of Syn- -

tions are consistent with the model structure.
In response to the question raised by Prof. Brown it is our experi-
ence that for most power system stability purposes, 0.05 to 5.0 Hz fre-
quency range is the most important range over which the machine model
is expected to match closely the measured results. Our experience is based
on test results conducted to date and we suggest this to be the best
source of information regarding the natural mode of system response.
Finally, in response to M. Ferrari's question we advise that in one
case considered so far differences have been observed between responses
chronous Machine Stability Study Models.
We would also like to point out to our discussers and to others
interested in this subject that several related technical papers, including
authorship by various Joint Working Group members, are planned for
submission in the near future to IEEE Power Engineering Society, and
these should summarize as well as highlight the several findings of the
RP 997 project.
Manuscript received March 5, 1980.

Authorized licensed use limited to: UNIVERSIDAD RIO CUARTO. Downloaded on April 30, 2009 at 14:47 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.