You are on page 1of 16


IEEE Transactions on Power Apparatus and Systems, Vol. PAS-100, No. 2, February 1981

Prepared by the IEEE Working Group on Computer Modelling of Excitation Systems.

M.L. Crenshaw (Chairman), K.E. Bollinger, R.T. Byerly, R.L. Cresap, L.E. Eilts, D.E. Eyre, F.W. Keay, P. Kundur, E.V. Larsen, D.C. Lee, J.F. Luini, R.G. Pillote, P.L. Dandeno (Power System Engineering Liaison). Others contributing to the work of this group are K.C. Bess, H.H. Chen and D.G. Ramey.

Excitation system models suitable for use in large scale system stability studies are presented in this paper. With these models, most of the excitation systems currently in widespread use on large, system connected generators in North America can be represented.
In 1968, models for the systems in use at that time were presented by the Excitation System Subcommittee, and have since been widely used by the indusWhile such models are still adequate for many try. types of system stability studies, improved models of those systems are presented which reflect current knowledge and modelling practices. In addition, several new excitation systems are now in use which cannot be adequately represented by the older models. Models for these systems are developed in the paper, as well as models for some of the stpplementary excitation control features commonly used with them.

The models are valid for frequency deviations of 5% from rated frequency and oscillation frequencies up to about 3 Hz. However, the analysis of subsynchronous resonance and the shaft torsional spectrum is beyond the scope of these models. Care should be taken in using them outside these limits.


The general functional block diagram in Fig. 1 indicates the various generator excitation subsystems which are customarily represented in electric power system studies. They include a terminal voltage transducer and load compensator, a voltage regulator, an exciter, excitation system stabilizing elements, and in many instances, a power system stabilizer. Models for all of these functions are presented in this paper. Other functions, such as volts-per-Hertz limiters, maximum excitation limiters, and underexcitation limiters, are not normally represented in large system studies and are not addressed in this report.

When the behaviour of synchronous machines is to be accurately simulated in power system stability studies, it is essential that their excitation systems be modelled in sufficient detail(l]. The desired models must be suitable for representing the actual excitation equipment performance for large, severe disturbances as well as for small perturbations.
An earlier IEEE Committee Report on Excitation System models[2] has provided a reference for manufacturers, owners and system analysts since 1968. It established a common nomenclature, presented mathematical models for excitation systems then in common use, and defined parameters for those models. This report is an extension of that work. It provides models for new types of excitation equipment not covered previously as well as improved models for older equipment. To some extent, the model structures presented are intended to facilitate the use of field test data as a means of obtaining model parameters. Although the earlier report contained typical model parameters, this report does not. The wide variety of parameters applicable to some of the models makes the definition of such typical data difficult.

Three distinctive types of excitation systems are identified on the basis of excitation power source:

Type DC Excitation Systems which utilize a direct current generator with a commutator as the source of excitation system power. Type AC Excitation Systems which use an alternator and either stationary or rotating rectifiers to produce the direct current needed for the generator field.



power is supplied through transformers and rec-





F 80 258-4 A paper recommended and approved by the -EEE Power Generation Committee of the IEEE Power ingineering Society for presentation at the IEEE PES W;inter Meeting, New York, NY, February 3-8, 1980. Manuscript submitted November 5, 1979; made available for printing December 28, 1979.

Fig. 1. General Functional Block Diagram for

Generator Excitation Control System

) 1981 IEEE

In addition, the following key accessory functions common to all excitation systems are identified and described:
* Voltage Sensing and Load Compensation * Power System Stabilizer

The terms "Excitation System Stabilizer" and "Transient Gain Reduction" are used to describe circuits in several of the models which affect the stability and response of those systems. The meaning of the terms and a description of some of the ways in which parameters of such circuits affect excitation system performance are discussed in Appendix D.

Fig. 2.

Terminal Voltage Transducer and Load Compensation Elements

ate voltage at a point part way through the step-up transformer. For these cases, Rc and Xc would take on the appropriate negative values.

A block diagram of the terminal voltage transducer and the load compensator is shown in Fig. 2. These model elements are common to all excitation system models described in this document.

only a value for Xc is required.

In most cases, the Rc component is negligible and

0), the block diagram reduces to a simple sensing cir-

When load compensation is not employed



cuit and comparator. The terminal voltage of the generator is sensed, and usually reduced to a dc quantity. While the filtering associated with the voltage transducer may be complex, for modelling purposes it can usually be reduced to the single time constant shown. For many systems, this time constant is very small and provision should be made to set it to zero.

Some compensator circuits act to modify terminal voltage as a function of reactive and real power, instead of reactive and real components of current. Although the model provided will be equivalent to these circuits only near rated terminal voltage, more precise representation has not been deemed worthwhile.

These and other forms of compensation are described in detail in Reference [3].


Few type DC exciters are now being produced, having been superseded by type AC and ST systems. There are, however, many such systems still in service. Considering the dwindling percentage and importance of units so equipped, the previously developed concept[21 of accounting for loading effects on the exciter by using the loaded saturation curve (Appendix C) is considered adequate.

The terminal voltage transducer output is compared with a reference which represents the desired terminal voltage setting. The equivalent voltage regulator reference signal, VREF, is calculated to satisfy the initial operating conditions. It will, therefore, take on a value unique to the generator load condition being studied. The resulting error signal is amplified as described in the appropriate excitation system model to provide the field voltage and subsequent terminal voltage to satisfy the steady state loop equations. Without load compensation, the excitation system, within its regulation- characteristics, attempts to maintain a terminal voltage determined by the reference signal. When compensation is desired, the appropriate values of Rc and Xc are entered. The input variables of generator voltage and current must be in phasor Care must be form for the compensator calculation. taken to ensure that a consistent per unit system is utilized for the compensator parameters and the generator current base.
This type of compensation is normally used in one of the following two ways:
When units are bussed together with no impedance between them, the compensator is used to create an artificial coupling impedance so that the units will share reactive power This corresponds to the appropriately. choice of a regulating point within the generator. For this case, Rc and Xc would have positive values. (This function can also be achieved in practice with interconnected compensators as described in Reference 3).

Type DC1 Excitation System Model

This model, described by the block diagram of Fig. 3, is used to represent Field Controlled DC Commutator Exciters with continuously actirn volftage regulators (especially the direct acting rheostatic, rotating amplifier and magnetic amplifier types). Examples include:

Allis Chalmers

General Electric

Regulex regulator Amplidyne regulator GDA regulator Mag-A-Stat regulator Rototrol regulator Silverstat regulator
TRA regulator




When a single unit is connected through a significant impedance to the system, or when two or more units are connected through individual transformers, it may be desirable to regulate voltage at a point beyond the machine terminals. For example, it may be desirable to compensate for a portion of the transformer impedance and effectively regul-

Fig. 3.

Type DC1 - DC Commutator Exciter

The principal input to this model is the terminal voltage error -signal VERR from the Generator Terminal Voltage Transducer and Load Compensator Model described above.

The stabilizing feedback VF is subtracted and the power system stabilizing signal V5 is added to VERR. In the, steady-state these last two signals are zero, leaving only the terminal voltage error signal. The resulting signal is amplified in the regulaThe 'major time constant, TA, and gain, KA, tor. associated with the voltage regulator are shown incorporating non-windup limits typical of saturation or amplifier power. supply limitations. A discussion of windup and non-windup limits is provided in Appendix These voltage regulators utilize power sources F. that are essentially unaffected'by brief transients on the generator or auxil'iaries buses.' The time constants TB and T0 may be used to model equivalent time constants inherent in the voltage regulator; but ,these time constants are frequently small enough to be neglected-and provision should be made for zero input data. The voltage regulator output, VR is used to control the exciter, which may be either separately or self-excited as dis'cussed in-Appendix A. When a selfexcited shunt field is used, KE represents the setting of the shunt field rheostat.
Most of these exciters utilize self-excited shunt fields with the voltage regulator operating in a mode commonly t'ermed "buck-boost". The ma'jority of station operators manually track the voltage regulator by-periodically trimming the rheostat set point so as to zero the voltage regulator 'output. This may be simulated by selecting 'the value of KE so that, initial conditions' are satisfied with VR of zero, as described in Appendix A.The term SE represents exciter saturation as described in Appendix C and its value is a function of exciter output voltage EFD. The signal VF derived from EFD is normally used to provide excitation system stabilization as-discussed'in Appendix' D.

Type DC2 - DC Commutator Exciter regulators having supplies obvoltage ously acting tained from the generator or auxi7iaries bus voltage. It differs from Type DCl only in the voltage regulator output limits which are now proportional to VT. It is representative of solid state, controlled rectifier replacements for various forms of older mechanical and rotating amplifier equipments.

Fig. 4.

Type DC3 Excitation System Model

The systems discussed in the previous section are representative of the first generation of high-gain, fast-acting excitation sour'ces. The Type DC3 system is used to -represent' older systems, in particular those DC Commutator Exciters with non-continuously acting regulators that were commonly used before the development of the' continuously, acting varieties. Some examples'of these systems are:
General Electric Westinghouse

With GFA4 regulator With BJ30 regulator

The per unit system and the relationship between regulator limits and field voltage limits are developed in Appendix B. Type DC2 Excitation System Model

These systems respond at basically two different rates, depending upon 'the magnitude of voltage error. For small errors, adjustment is made periodically with a signal to a motor-operated rheostat. Larger errors cause resistors to be'quickly shorted or inserte'd and a strong forcing signal appl'ied to the exciter. Continuous motion of the motor-operated rheostat occurs for these' larger error signals even' though it is bypassed by contactor action. Fig. 5 illustrates this control action.
The exciter representation is similar to that_of previously described systems. Note that no excitation system stabilizer is represented. V RMAX

The model shown in Fig. 4 is used to represent Field Controlled DC Commutator Erciters with continuK v-


r C














Fig. 5.

Type DC3 Non-Continuously Acting Regulators








sKF i@sTF

Type ACl, Alternat:or-Rectifier Excitation System with Non-Co ntrolled Rectifiers and Feedback from Exci iter Field Current acteristic in the exciter output imposes a lower limit Depending upon the magnitude of voltage error, of zero on the exciter output voltage as shown in Fig. VERR, different regulator modes come into play. If 6. This model is applicable for'simulating the perthe voltage error is larger than the fast raise/lower formance of Westinghouse brushless excitation systems. contact setting, KV, (typically five per cent), VR MAX or VR MIN is applied to the exciter, depenFor large power system stability studies, the exding upon'the sign of the voltage error. For an absolute value of voltage error less than KV, the exciciter alternator synchronous machine can be represented by the simplified model shown here. The demagnetter input equals the rheostat setting VRH. The rheostat setting is notched up or down, depending upon izing effect of load current -(IFD) on the dynamics the sign of the error. The travel time representing of the exciter al'ternator output voltage (VE) is accounted for in the feedback path which includes the continuous motion of the rheostat drive motor is constant KD. This constant is a function of the exTRH. A non-windup limit is shown around this block, to rep,resent the fact that when the rheostat reaches citer'alternator synchronous and transient reactances either limit, it is ready to come off the limit immed[4,5]. iately when the input signal reverses. Additional refinements, such as dead band for small errors, 'have Exciter output voltage drop due to rectifier regulation is simulated by inclusion of the constant been considered, but were not deemed justified for the relatively few, older machines using these voltage reKC (which is a function of commutating reactance) gulators. and the approximation to the rectifier regulation curve FEX, as described in Appendix E. The model assumes that the quick raise-lower In the model, a signal VFE proportional to exlimits are the same as the rheostat limits. It does citer field current is derived from 'the summation of not'account for time constant changes in the exciter field as a result of changes in field resistance. The signals from exciter 'output voltage VE (multiplied field resistanc,e changes 'with rheostat movement and by the term KE + SE. where SE represents saturawith operation of quick action contacts. tion as described in Appendix C) and-IFD (multiplied by the demagnetization term Kn). The exciter field current signal VFE is' used as the input to the exciTYPE AC - ALTERNATOR SUPPLIED RECTIFIER tation system stabilizer'in the Type ACI model. EXCITATION SYSTEMS

Fig. 6.

These excitation systems use an ac alternator and either stationary or rotating rectifiers to produce the direct current needed for the generator field. Loading effects on such exciters are significant and the use of generator field current as an input to these model allows their effects 'to be accurately represented. While -few of these systems (Type AC4) allow negative field forcing, most do not supply' negaFor studies involving induced tive field current. negative field current (eg asynchronous operation) more detailed modelling is required.
Type AC1 Excitation System Model The model shown in Fig. 6 represents the Field Controlled Alternator Rectifier Excitation System designated Type AC1. This excitation system consists of an alternator ma'in exciter with non-controlled rectiThe exciter does not employ self-excitation fiers. and the voltage regulator power is taken from a source not affected by external transients. The diode char-

Type AC2 Excitation System Model

AC2, represents a High Initial Response Field Controlled Alternator-Rectifier Excitation System. The alternator m,ain exciter is used with non-controlled rectifiers. The Type AC2 model is similar to that of
Type AC1 except for the inclusion of two additional exciter field current feedback loops simulating exciter time constant compensation and exciter field curThis model is rent limiting elements respectively. applicable for simulating the performance of Westinghouse High Initial Response Brushless excitation systems.

The model shown in Fig. 7, designated as Type

The exciter time constant compensation consists of a direct negative feedback (v.) around the exciter field time constant reducing its effective value and thereby increasing the bandwidth of the excitation system small signal response. The KB KHj time constant is reduced by the gain (1



Fig. 7.

Type AC2, High Initial Response Alternator-Rectifier Excitation System with Non-Controlled Rectifiers and Feedback from Exciter Field Current
tion from regulator control to limiter control of excitation at the limit point. As explained by the description of the LV gate function in the nomenclature, excitation is controlled by the more negative of the two control signals.

of the compensation loop and is normally more than an order of magnitude lower than the time constant without compensation.
To obtain high initial response with this system very high forcing voltage (VR MAX) is applied to the exciter field. A limiter sensing exciter field current serves to allow high forcing but limits the current. By limiting the exciter field current, exciter output voltage (VE) is limited to a selected value (VLR) which is usually determined by the specified excitation system response ratio. The output signals from the voltage regulator (VA) and time constant compensation (VH) elements are compared with the output signal (VL) from the limiter in control logic circuitry which functions to provide a sharp transi-

Type AC3 Excitation System Model


The model shown in Fig. 8, represents the Field Alternator Rectifier Excitation System designated Type AC3. This excitation system includes an alternator main exciter with non-controlled rectiThe exciter employs self-excitation and the fiers. voltage regulator power is derived from the exciter output voltage. Therefore, this system has an additional non-linearity, simulated by the use of a multi-


Fig. 8.

Type AC3 Alternator Rectifier Exciter

plier whose inputs are the voltage regulator command signal, VA, and the exciter output voltage, EFD, times KR. This model is applicable to systems such as the General Electric ALTERREX excitation - systems employing static voltage regulators. For large power system stability studies, the exciter alternator synchronous machine model is simplified. The demagnetizing effect of load current (IFD) on the dynamics of the exciter alternator output voltThe feedback path inage (yE) is accounted for. cludes the constant KD, which is a function of the exciter alternator synchronous and transient reactances.


These excitation systems utilize transformers to convert voltage (and also current in compounded systems) to an appropriate level. Rectifiers, either controlled or non-controlled, provide the necessary direct current for the generator field.
While many of these systems allow negative field voltage forcing, most do not supply negative field

(e.g. asynchronous operation) more detailed modelling is required.



For studies involving induced negative field

Exciter output voltage drop due to rectifier regulation is simulated by inclusion of the constant KC (which is a function of commutating reactance) and the approximation to the regulation curve FEX, as described in Appendix E.
In the model, a signal proportional to exciter field current VFE is derived from the summation of signals from exciter output voltage VE (multiplied by the term KE + SE, where SE represents saturation as described in Appendix C) and IFD (multiplied by the demagnetization term KD).

voltage is very high.

For many of the static systems, exciter ceiling For such systems there are additional field current limit circuits, not shown in these models, which protect the exciter and the generator rotor.

The excitation system stabilizer also has a nonlinear characteristic. The gain is KF with exciter output voltage less than EFDN. When exciter output exceeds EFDN, the value of this gain becomes KN.
Type AC4 Excitation System Model

The Type AC4 Alternator Supplied Controlled Rectifier Excitation System illustrated in Fig. 9 is quite different from the other Type AC systems.

Fig. 10.

Type ST1 Potential Source-Controlled Rectifier Exciter

Type ST1 Excitation System

The computer model of the Type STI Potential Source Controlled-Rectifier Exciter excitation system shown in Fig. 10 is intended to represent all systems in which excitation power is supplied through a transformer from the generator terminals (or the unit's auxiliaries bus) and is regulated by a controlled rectifier. The maximum exciter voltage available from such systems is directly related to the generator terminal voltage (except as noted below).
In this type of system, the inherent exciter time constants are very small and exciter stabilization as such is normally not required. On the other hand, it may be desirable to reduce the transient gain of such systems for other reasons, as described in Appendix D. The model shown is sufficiently versatile to represent Transient Gain Reduction implemented either in the forward path via time constants TB and TC (in which case KF would normally be set to zero), or in the feedback path by suitable choice of rate feedback parameters KF and TF. Voltage regulator gain and any inherent excitation system time constants are represented by KA and TA. In many cases the internal limiter following the summing junction can be neglected, but the field voltage limits which are functions of both terminal voltage (except when the exciter is supplied from an auxiliaries bus which is in turn not supplied from the generator terminals) and generator field current must be modelled. The representation of the field voltage limits as linear functions of generator, field current is possible because operation of the rectifier bridge in such systems is confined to the mode 1 region as described in Appendix E. In addition, for most transformer fed systems KC is quite small, permitting the term to be neglected for many studies.





sTc -II + #


K ]A/ _FD I


Fig. 9.

Type AC4 Alternator Controlled Rectifier Exciter

This high initial response excitation system utilizes a full thyristor bridge in the exciter output circuit. The voltage regulator controls the firing of thyristor bridges. The exciter alternator uses an independent voltage regulator to control its output voltage to a constant value. These effects are not modelled, however transient loading effects on the exciter alternator are included. Exciter loading is confined to the region described as mode 1 in Appendix E and loading effects can be accounted for by using the exciter load current and commutating reactance to modify excitation limits. The excitation system stabilization is frequently accomplished in thyrstor systems by a series lag-lead network rather than through rate feedback (Appendix D). The time constants TB and TC would be used to simulate this control function. The overall equivalent gain and the time constant associated with the regulator and/or firing of the thyristors would be simulated by KA and TA respectively.
Systems utilizing this simulation model include the General Electric ALTHYREX and Rotating Thyristor Excitation systems.








=f (IN) FE EXX



Type ST2 Compound Source Rectifier


While for the majority of these excitation sysa fully controlled bridge is employed, the model is applicable to semi-controlled systems as well, in which case the negative ceiling is set to zero.

Type ST2 Excitation System Model

Some static systems utilize both current and voltage sources (generator terminal quantities) to comprise the power source. These Compound Source Rectifier Excitation Systems are designated Type ST2, and are modelled as shown in Fig. 11. It is necessary to form the exciter power source from a phasor combination of terminal voltage VT and terminal current IT. Rectifier loading and commutation effects are accounted for as described in Appendix E. EFD MAX represents the limit on the exciter voltage due to saturation of the magnetic components. The regulator controls the exciter output through controlled saturation of the power transformer components. TE represents the integration rate associated with the inductance of the control windings.
One example of such a system is the General Electric static excitation system, frequently referred to as the SCT-PPT or SCPT system.

Examples of type STI excitation systems


Canadian General Electric Silcomatic Exciters Solid State Canada Westinghouse Thyristor Exciter Westinghouse Type PS Static Excitation Systems with type WTA or WHS regulators
For most of these systems, the cosine characteristic relating thyristor firing angle to bridge output is compensated for by an inverse-cosine function between regulator output and firing angle. In such systems the gain KA is a constant and is independent of In a few systems, this inexciter supply voltage. verse-cosine compensation is not employed and the term KA becomes a cosine function, dependent on supply The STl model can be used to approximate voltage. these systems for some types of studies, but more accurate representation may be required for others.

Type ST3 Excitation System Model

within the generator (which may be expressed as phasor

combinations of generator terminal voltage and curVG MAX

Some static systems utilize internal quantities







Source Controlled Rectifier Exciter

Fig. 12.

Type ST3 Compound

rent) to form the source of excitation power. Such Compound Source Controlled-Rectifier Excitation Systems employing controlled rectifiers in the exciter output circuit are designated Type ST3 and are represented by the model shown in Fig. 12.
The excitation system stabilizer for these systems is provided by a series lag-lead element, represented by the time constants TB and TC. An inner loop field voltage regulator is comprised of the gains KA and KG and the time constant TA. Rectifier loading and commutation effects are accounted for as discussed in Appendix E. The EFD MAX limit is established by the saturation level of power components. Systems of this type include the General Electric GENERREX and Shunt-Thyristor excitation systems.


[1] R.T. Byerly and E.W. Kimbark, "Stability of Large





Intensive effort to improve dynamic stability of power systems has resulted in the widespread use of other regulator input signals in addition to terminal voltage. These signals are chosen to provide positive damping to machine-system oscillations and to damp tie line oscillations[1,,6]. In synchronous condenser applications, the objective is most frequently to minimize voltage swings.



Fig. 13 shows the generalized form of such a Power System Stabilizer. Some common stabilizer input signals VSI are: accelerating power, speed, frequency and terminal voltage.



some input signals is incorporated by constants, A1 through A6. This, however, does not suggest the use of results from these models beyond 3 Hz. The filter representation is included only in order to properly account for gain and phase contributions in the frequency range up to 3 Hz. Programs should allow for zero input of parameters A1 to A6 (or for bypassing of this block).

(greater than 3 Hz) filters, which may be needed for








Electric Power Systems', New York IEEE Press, 1974. "Computer Representation of Excitation Systems", IEEE Committee Report, IEEE Transactions on Power Apparatus and Systems, Vol PAS-87, June, 1968, pp 1460-1464. A.S. Rubenstein, W.W. Walkey, "Control of Reactive KVA with Modern Amplidyne Voltage Regulators", AIEE Transactions, Part III, Power Apparatus and Systems, 1957, pp 961-970. R.W. H. Ferguson, Herbst, R.W. Miller, "Analytical Studies of the Brushless Excitation System", AIEE Transactions, Part III, Vol 79, pp 1815-1821, February, 1960. "Transfer Characteristics H.W. of Gayek, Brushless Aircraft Generator Systems", IEEE Transactions on Aerospace, Vol 2, No 2, pp 913-928, April, 1964. "IEEE Guide for Identification, Testing and Evaluation of the Dynamic Performance of Excitation Control Systems", IEEE Std. 421A-1978, IEEE, New York, NY. "Criterion and Definitions for Excitation Systems for Synchronous Machines", IEEE New York, NY, IEEE Standard 421-72, December, 1972. "Practices and Requirements for Semi-Conductor Power Rectifiers", ANSI Standard C34.2-1968 (R1973), ANSI, New York, NY. R.L. Witzke, J.V. Kresser and J.K. Dillard, "Influence of AC Reactance on Voltage Regulation of 6 - Phase Rectifiers", AIEE Transactions, Vol 72, pp 244-253, July, 1953.

[10] "Excitation System Dynamic Characteristics", IEEE Committee Report, IEEE Transactions on Power Apparatus and Systems, Vol. PAS-92, pp 64-75, January/February, 1973.

[11] L.L. Freris, "Analysis of

The next two blocks allow two stages of lead-lag compensation. Stabilizer gain is set by the term Ks and signal washout is set by the time constant T5.

a Hybrid Bridge Rectifier", Direct Current, pp 22-23, February 1966.

Stabilizer output can be limited in various ways, not all of which are shown in Fig. 13. This model shows simple output limits. For some systems the

stabilizer output is removed if the generator terminal voltage deviates outside a chosen band (not shown). In other systems (not modelled here) the stabilizer output is limited as a function of generator terminal voltage.



explicitly in the nomenclature but are represented by the appropriate subscript (max or min)
on the variable.

and minimum


of parameters are not

The stabilizer output VS, is added to the terminal voltage error signal at the location shown in the various excitation system diagrams.


PSS high frequency filter constants exciter output voltage f ield voltage)


+AAsA2s ) (I +As + + A3s Ahs g AF2seq u


- value of

High Frequency Filters


EFD at which feedback gain


rectifier loading factor

generator field current


normalized exciter load current

- voltage regulator gain


Fig. 13.

Power System Stabilizer


second stage regulator gain



rectifier loading factor related

commutating reactance



internal signal within regulator


demagnetizing factor, function of exciter alternator reactances

exciter constant related to self-excited field

exciter field current limit reference

exciter low voltage limit reference
rate feedback input variable



- excitation control system stabilizer



voltage regulator output


- inner loop feedback constant


exciter field current feedback gain

voltage regulator reference voltage (determined to satisfy initial conditions)

power system stabilizer output (in per unit equivalent of terminal voltage)


gain of exciter field current limit current circuit gain coeff icient first stage regulator gain gain of the exciter low voltage limit signal



power system stabilizer input


generator terminal voltage and current respectively generator terminal voltage and current respectively


- potential circuit gain coefficient


- phasor

constant associated with regulator and alternator field power supply system stabilizer gain


reactance component of load compensation

reactance associated with


- power









- resistive component


of load

- potential circuit phase angle


exciter saturation function


TA,TB,TC - voltage regulator time constants

- exciter

- defined as (A)(B)

constant (integration rate associated with exciter control)

B constant

- excitation control system stabilizer time

- regulator input filter time constant


-.p L


T1, T3
T2, T4

- rheostat travel time

- Low Value Gate if A<B, C = A

- PSS lead compensating time constants - PSS lag compensating time constants
- PSS washout time constant


A>B, C = B



_ _P.H


High Value Gate if A>B, C = A


regulator internal voltage

available exciter voltage
compensator voltage output

A<B, C


exciter voltage back of commutating



voltage error signal

excitation system stabilizer output


Separately Excited Exciter
A schematic diagram of a separately excited dc exciter is shown in Fig. A* 1. ES is the voltage across the exciter field and any external field resistance. Rf comprises the resistance of the field winding including any external field circuit resistance. Ex is the exciter output voltage.

signal proportional to exciter field



inner loop voltage feedback exciter field current feedback signals


Base exciter resistance Rgb = Rg

Base exciter current Ifb =


Hence, in per unit equation (A.4) becomes

Fig. A. 1.

Separately Excited DC Exciter

If =

Ex + Rgb SeEX


Referring to Fig. A.1,

and equation (A.1) becomes




Rf + Lf


(A. 1)


In the above equation, Lf represents the incremental inductance of the field circuit. The, exciter may be driven from the generator shaft or may have a separate drive; however, the effects of speed variation are considered negligible and constant speed is assumed in either case.

If gb

+ J


dlf Tt

(A. 6)

where Exb is the base of E

The saturation function Se can now be defined in per unit and the per unit saturation function SE is the one defined in Appendix C.

Ex is a nonlinear function of If as shown by the exciter load saturation curve in Fig. A.2 and the relationship can be expressed as follows:
If =



Rgb Se

(A. 7)







dEX dt

(A.7) and (A.8) into

Substituting equations (A.5), (A. 6),


Ex E+



(A. 9)

LfMu Lf


(A. 10)

Fig. A.2.

Exciter Load Saturation Curve

Where Exo is the value of Ex then

the operating point,

As shown in Fig. A. 2, Rg is the slope of the exciter load saturation curve near Ex = 0. AIf represents the additional current required due to saturation and is related to the saturation function Se (in amps/volt) as follows:




Lfu Rgb


(A. 11)

In block diagram form:


into (A.2),


Substituting equation (A.3)


0.- E x


+ SeEX

In order to express the above equations in the following base quantities are defined:


Base exciter voltage Exb = exciter voltage which gives rated open circuit generator voltage air gap line

Fig. A. 3.

Separately Excited DC


This can be reduced to -the following form used in the models for Type DC1 and DC2 exciters:



Fig. A.5.
Fig. A.4.
DC Exciter Block Diagram

Self-Excited DC Exciter




Assuming that Ea represents the voltage of an amplifier in series with the exciter shunt field or an equivalent series- voltage from a multi-winding type exciter,
= Ex Esscx




+ Ea


VR Efd

Rf SE/b

IHence, (A. 12)







It is seen that adjustment of Rf affects the feedback path including the saturation function SE. Where Rf /Rgb is not close to unity, the term SE should be used in place of SE in the appropriate mOdels. The constant TE in the forward loop remains unaffected by changes in Rf. One possible function is:






Fig. A.6.

Self-Excited D.C. Exciter

This reduces to the form shown in Fig. A.4, where


(A. 13)


where A and B are constants describing the saturation function and are defined by specifying the value of SE for two points on the saturation curve. Another possible functional form of the saturation function is:



(A. 18)

VR 5
Efd =


xSE Ex



Effective Time Constant

Neglecting changes,




VR( 5)


1 + sTE/KE


Since the self-excited case is derived directly from the separately-excited case, it follows that the above representation adequately accounts for changes in exciter field -resistance in this instance as well*. The effect of periodic adjustment of the rheostat set as to zero the voltage regulator output point (VR) is' to' change Rf and hence to change KE and the' saturation' function SE. The initial 'value of the saturation function (SEO) is related to the initial field voltage as given by equation (A.13) or (A.14). The value of KE required to produce an initial steady-state value of Ea (or VR) equal to

zero is:


effective time constant is TE/KE Lf uRf Both exciter gain and the effective time constant change with Rf
Self-Excited Exciter
excited dc exciter.



(A. 19)

Fig. A.5 shows

schematic diagram of


In the above analysis, the excitation system parameters have been normalized by choosing one per unit exciter field current as that which produces rated generator open circuit voltage on the linear portion of the loaded exciter saturation curve. Alternately,

justifiable normalizations can be developed by the choice of different base parameters or values.


Generator currents and voltages in system studies represented by per .unit variables. They are generally derived using the non-reciprocal per unit system in which one per unit generator terminal voltage is defined to be rated voltage, and one per unit stator current is rated current, one per unit generator field current is that current required to produce rated generator terminal voltage on the generator air gap line[7], and one per unit generator field voltage is the corresponding field voltage.

Dif ferent computer programs have represented exciter saturation with different mathematical expressions. In general, the saturation function defined adequately by two points. To be consistent, the procedure suggested is to establish two v.oltages at which to specify SE and then use these as data for The form of the saturation function computer input. is not defined here, but rather considered to be a part of the particular computer program used.



Excitation system models must interface with generator models at both the stator and field terminals. Signals which are summed with the per unit generator terminal voltage at the input to the voltage regulator must of necessity be compatible per unit, variables. The exciter output current must be in per unit on the generator field current base, and exciter output voltage must be in per unit on the generator field




voltage base.

In the past, several different bases have been used to normalize regulator output voltage. Similar excitation systems having essentially the same performance characteristics can have quite different parameters depending on the choice of the base for regulator output. The per unit system for the exciter described in Appendix ,A will have the advantage of maintaining the physical significance of the exciter time constant.

Fig. C. 1.

Exciter Saturation Characteristic

In general, the following would be specified:


The exciter saturation function SE is defined as a multiplier of per unit exciter output voltage to in increase the e,xciter excitation represent Fig. C.1 requirements because of 'saturation.e, illustrates the calculation -of a particular value of At a given exciter output voltage, the SE. quantities A, B, and C are defined as. the exciter excitation required to produce .,that output voltage on the constant-resistanc.e-load saturation, curve, on the air gap line, and on the n,o load saturation curve respectively. The constant-resistance-load saturation curve is used in defining SE for DC-commutator exciters and SE is given by

Saturation Func t ion Designation

DC-Commutator Exciter Voltage


Alterna'tor-Rectifier Exciter Voltage




Since saturation effects are most significant at higher voltages, the values of SE will be specified at or near the ceiling exciter voltage and at a lower value, commonly at 75% of that level.
In some cases, for example a self-excited dc exciter, the ceiling voltage may not ,be precisely known In such. cases, SE1 corbecause i.t depends on KE. responds to a specified value of exciter voltage near its expected maximum value.- In providing saturation data, 5E1'5E2' and the corresponding exciter voltages should be specified.



Note that when exciter field resistance is significantly different from exciter base resistance an


adjusted value. of SE' described in Appendix A.






Et ITATION CONTROL SYSTEM STABILIZATION AND TRANSIENT GAIN REDUCTION "Excitation Control System Stabilizer" -is a term used to describe the principle exciter feedback circuit. The feedback signal, normally derived from generator field voltage 'or its equivalent (Fig. 3), is used to partially compensate for the exciter time constant and allow stable operation of the excitation control system with higher steady state regulator gain settings[1O].. This feedback is required for stable off-line operation for many of the excitation systems which have significant time constants. While historically employed for off line stabilization, this stabilizer can be used to modify the on line performance of the generato'r.


is given by

The no-load saturation curve is used in defining for alternator-rectifier exciters and here SE



The reason for using the no-load saturation curve for alternator-rectifier exciters is because exciter regulation effects are accounted for by inclusion of synchronous reactance and commutating reactance voltage drops in the model.

With high initial response excitation systems, stabilizing is not normally required with the generator off-line. For on-line operation it may be desirable to reduce the voltage regulator loop gain at high frequencies to minimize the negative contribution of the regulator to power system damping. This is particularly applicable where damping is not enhanced by the use of a power system stabilizer.
Mode III operation, the inherent delay angle (e) is fixed at 30' and the commutating angle (A) varies from 600 to 1200[9].

Such a "Transient Gain Reduction" can be represented in the models by suitable choice of lag-lead time constants in the forward path of the excitation regulator (TB and TC in Fig. 10) or equivalently by choice of suitable parameters (KF and TF) in the exciter stabilizing path.

The equations characterizing these three modes of operation define the rectifier regulation as a function of commutation voltage drop as rectifier load current is varied from no load to the short circuit value[9]. The rectifier regulation characteristics defined by these equations can be plotted as a smooth curve as shown in figure E. 1.

The quantities, EFD, IFD' VE and KC are all in per unit on the a-c generator field base. For computer simulation purposes, the curve of figure E.1 is defined by three segments. The equations are derived in [11].


All a-c sources which supply rectif ier circuits, with either controlled or non-controlled rectifiers, have an internal impedance which is predominantly inductive. The effects of this impedance are to alter the process of commutation of current between conducting rectifiers and produce a decrease in rectifier average output voltage as rectifier load current increases. The source reactance from phase to neutral
which opposes the transfer of current between rectifiers is defined as the commutating reactance[8].



Commutating reactance has the effect of preventing instantaneous transfer of current from one rectifier to another. Thus, commutation requires a finite time which is defined by the commutating or "overlap" angle (uL) and also, depending on the magnitude of load current produces an inherent delay defined by an angle (ar) (note that this angle is not the delay angle associated with controlled rectifiers) in the start of the commutation process. Both of these angles are expressed in electrical degrees[8].
Most rectifier circuits applied in excitation systems are six phase double-way circuits, also referred to as three phase full wave bridge circuits [8]. It has been shown that this type of circuit may operate in one of three different modes as the load current of the rectifier is varied from no load to the short circuit value [9]. The mode of operation is dependent upon the product of commutating reactance and load current; i.e., commutation voltage drop.









In Mode I operation, the commutating angle (A) increases from 0 to 600 and the inherent delay angle (a) is zero with increasing load current. In Mode II operation, the commutating angle (Cu) is fixed at 60' but the start of commutation is delayed by the inherent delay angle (ca) which varies from 0 to 300. In

Fig. E.1.
Rectifier Regulation Characteristic

Fig. E.2.

Rectifier Regulation Equations

The models described in the paper differentiate The functions between windup and non-windup limits. of these two types of limits are illustrated in Figs. F.1 and F.2, which show the effects of the limits on the output of a block whose transfer function has a single time constant. It should be noted that in the case of a windup limit, the variable y is not limited. Therefore, the output variable x, when it hits a limit, cannot come off the limit until y comes within In the case of a non-windup limit, the the limits. variable y is limited. To be at a limit y=A or y=B, With this implies input u>A or u< B respectively. limiter, the output comes off the limit as soon as the input u re-enters the range within the limits defined by B<u<A.

Fig. F. 1.

Windup Limiter

System Equations:



If B ( y < A, then x-y If Y > A then x-A If Y < B , then x=B

H. H. Chen (Westinghouse Electric Corporation, East Pittsburgh, PA): The Committee is to be commended for its comprehensive compilation and reporting on the many new concepts of excitation system modeling. This report is especially appropriate during a period when greater emphasis is being placed throughout the industry on the performance evaluation of excitation systems through the use of digital simulations. Formerly used to model the brushless excitation system, the IEEE Type I Model lacks the representation of rectifier regulation, a-c exciter armature reaction, and auctioneering logic. With the inclusion of these representations in the new IEEE Type ACI and AC2 Models, brushless excitation system operation under transient conditions can be more accurately simulated. In the IEEE Type ACI and AC2 models, the exciter saturation is defmed by the no-load saturation function, and the exciter internal voltage VE is the no-load voltage as determined by the saturation function. The brushless exciter output voltage, EFD, is simulated as the no-load voltage reduced by the armature reaction KD IFD and the rectifier regulation, FEX. Since the exciter armature reaction and the rectifier regulation are a function of the generator field current, system disturbances causing changes in the field current will produce corresponding changes in the armature reaction and rectifier regulation. Due to these operational characteristics of the ACI and AC2 Models, the exciter output voltage will differ from that obtained if the Type 1 Model is used. The difference will depend on the contribution of the generating unit to the system disturbance, and a + 20% difference in the exciter output voltage is not unlikely, if each model was used in separate studies with the same disturbance. In our experience in modeling the ACI and AC2 excitation systems, we have found there is a potential difficulty when simulating the rectifier regulation. For the initialization of the simulation, -values of IFD (0) and EFD (0) are known, while the unknown (Figure E.i) is VE. A suggested procedure is to define the slope of a straight line passing through the origin equal to the ratio of EFD (0) and IFD (0). The initial operating point is determined as the intersection of the straight line and the curve. With a value for the ratio of EFD/VE or (KC IFD)/VE, the value of VE is directly obtained. Subsequent calculations of EFD, given VE nad IFD, can be made in a straightforward manner by applying the equations of Figure E.2. The complexities incorporated in the Type ACI and AC2 Models may be of special interest to only certain prospective users or planners.


Typical Model Parameters for the Westinghouse Brushless Excitation System


1. T b1


=OSec 400

* EFD Max= 3.9 p.u.

Non-Windup Limiter

= 0.02 Sec
0.0 P.u.

Fig. F.2.


System Equations:
f =

set to 0


= 0.03

1.0 Sec
1800 Rpm 8.2


TR = 0 Sec KA = 400 TA= 0.02 Sec KE= 1. KF = .03 TF = 1.0 Sec TB = TC = 0.0 Sec KC= 0.2 KD= 0.38
3600 Rpm
VR Max VR Mn SE Max

If y=A and f>O, then dy/dt is If y=B and f<O, then dy/dt is otherwise dy/dt = f B < y < A



to 0


1800 Rpm
8.2 -7.4 .12 .03

In the models considered in the paper, some of the integrator blocks also have limits. These are of the non-windup type and their function is similar to that illustrated in Fig. F.2. In this case, however, the expression for the function f would correspond to that of an integrator block.

VR Max VR Min SE Max TE

= = = = =



= = = .1











*Values given assume EFD (full load) EFD (full load)

value by

3.0 p.u. If not, multiply *

Manuscript received February 19, 1980.

For those who wish to relate simulated variable values of the excitation system with measured values, the Type ACI and AC2 Models should clearly be used. Also, those who wish to evaluate the performance of one type of excitation system with another, or one response ratio with another, will fmd the increased accuracy of the new models desirable and to be of sufficient advantage to warrant the effort needed to modify existing computer codes. Furthermore, when conducting transient dynamic stability studies where high response excitation systems are implemented, the use of the new models will show improved unit stability performance than when the Type 1 Model is employed. In the majority of excitation system simulations, as in the analyses of units with different 0.5 response ratio excitation systems, or for large multimachine power system planning studies, the Type I Model is probably of sufficient accuracy. In anticipation of requests by utilities and analytical groups for typical brushless excitation system parameter values for the Type ACI Model, tabulations of the typical values for the Type ACI and Type 1 Models are shown in the accompanying table. It is not practical to tabulate typical values of parameters for the Type AC2 system because of the wide variation in the parameter values. Data for specific applications will have to be developed on an individual basis.
R. T. Byerly and F. W. Keay (Westinghouse Electric Corporation, East Pittsburgh, PA): The Committee Report correctly states in Appendix C that several different bases have historically been used to normalize regulator output. Model parameters in the regulator and exciter depend on the choice of this base, and simple comparisons of models employing different bases can be misleading. To emphasize this point, the two sets of parameters in Table A, though apparently quite different, are in fact identical descriptions of the same voltage regulator and exciter. The left hand column of Table A corresponds to the middle column of Table I in reference 2. The equivalence of these two sets of parameters can be verified using the voltage regulator and exciter equations for the type DCI model of Figure 3. For simplicity, ignore the stabilizer signal and assume that TB and TC are zero. Then





Normalized Model Parameters 400.0 114.3 0.050 0.050 3.50 1.00 -3.50 -1.00 0.950 0.271 0.220 0.063 0.950 0.271 -0.170 -0.049 4.50 4.50

It should also be noted that the models for rotating d.c. exciters with self-excitation are incrementally unstable for sufficiently small values of EFD. This may be significant in adapting them for use in linear analysis. Possible problems can be avoided by selecting KE in accordance with equation (A. 14) of Appendix A.
Manuscript received February 20, 1980.
D. B. Seely and M. L Spence (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Portland, OR): It has been evident to those involved in system studies that as the studies became more sophisticated, adequacy of some of the presently used excitation models was questionable. It appears that the committeeproposed models go a long way towards addressing these inadequacies. It is unfortunate that under-excitation limiters and other similar excitation system "accessories" were not addressed in the report, since these components are frequently part of the modeling problem. Nonetheless, the report is a commendable undertaking and undoubtedly some topics left untouched in this report will be addressed by the industry, as the need becomes more apparent. We would be interested if there are plans to develop guides to verify rapidly through field measurements, the necessary parameters for the models utilized to represent in-service excitation systems. The discussor's own organization has a number of excitation systems currently represented by calculated data. Our estimate of the manpower effort to verify model data of these systems with techniques described in current industry guides is discouragingly high. We suspect that excitation models and field verification guides may go through several more evolutions as more sophisticated test equipment becomes available in conjunction with "high power" analytical techniques.

(1 + STA) VR





R (2) (SE + K + STE) EFD Assume that these are normalized equations utilizing a base for the voltage regulator output corresponding to the left hand column of parameters in Table A. The regulator output base for parameters in the right hand column is 3.5 times the base applicable to the left hand column since VRMjAX and VRMIN, which represent the same physical variable in both columns, differ by that ratio. Normalized equations corresponding to the right hand column can be obtained by dividing VR in equations (1) and (2) by 3.5, observing that bases for VERR, VF, and EFD are not to be altered. Thus
(1 + STA) (VR/3.5)

Manuscript received February 25, 1980.

F. R. Schleif and J. R. Schurz: The updating and expansion of excitation system models given in this paper is a timely and highly tiseful contribution, particularly in supplying more realistic models of the more recent type excitation systems which are currently being
While we have not yet acquired enough experience with the newer models to warrant comment on them at this time, some experience in relating field measured parameters with constants of the older Type DCI model may be informative to others having occasion to make use of that model. The most complicated part of the DCI model is the exciter representation. We have found understanding of this part of the model to be considerably helped by the expansion shown in figure 1, which was initially developed to facilitate relating parameters of the model to characteristics of the apparatus measured in the field [ 1]. From this expansion, several revealing things become evident. TE is not itself a time constant but an integration time. The time constant that results from the net feedback around the basic integration is not TE but TE/a where a is the difference in slope between the rheostat line -KE and the saturation function at tlhe operating point. Similarly, gain of the exciter model is not necessarily 1, as often supposed, but is actually I/a and numerically ranges from about 1.5 to about 6, depending upon the exciter saturation and the field rheostat setting. Thus, a substantial amount of the overall gain of the regulatorexciter combination is represented in the exciter and only the remainder, not the total, is correctly assignable to the regulator. A comment relating to most of the models is that in the excitation system feedback function, sKF/(l + sTF) is actually the product of a



- VF)





+ KE +

STE)/3.51 EED


changing the voltage regulator output base changes model parameters as indicated, and the equivalence of the two data sets is apparent. Note that the parameters of the right hand column of Table A are identical to those in the left hand column of Table I of reference 2. Equation (2) indicates that there is a unique regulator output base which, together with the conventional generator field voltage base, will preserve the real physical parameters of the exciter in the normalized model. Any other regulator output base will result in model parameters different from those of the real exciter. The excitation system models corresponding to the first and second columns of Table I in reference 2 have essentially the same dynamic performance characteristics, even though the model parameters are quite different.

Equivalent sets of model parameters for a particular voltage regulator and exciter. Differences in parameters are attributable to different voltage regulator output bases. Values of saturation are at seventy-five percent of ceiling and at ceiling for the specified value of KE.

For a self-excited DC exciter, the relationship shown in equation (A. 18) will then become: KE = 1.0 -R gb/Rf


Efd = Ex

TE= Lfu/Rf VR= Es Rgb/Rf

(A. 18)



Note that the constant TE is equal to Lfu divided by Rf which is the physical time constant for the exciter. Note also that the gain Rgb/ Rf must be included with the regulator parameters. Unless this gain is provided for otherwise, the adjustment of the field resistance Rf will effect the constant TE, the regulator gain and the regulator limits. The method of normalizing the data presented in this discussion has- the advantage of maintaining the physical significance of the exciter parameters but at the sacrifice of losing the physical significance of the regulator parameters as the conversion constant Rgb/Rf is not provided for directly in most stability program models.
Manuscript received February 28, 1980.

Fig. 1. Expansion and Transformation of Exciter Model to Measurable Parameters.

true gain which we may call KD and the stabilizer time constant TF. The fact that the time constant is so frequently taken as 1 second often makes the numbers correspond and obscures the true nature. Actually, the performance of many excitation systems is benefilted by making the stabilizer time constant greater than 1 second. When this is done, a larger KF appears to be required. Expressed as KD x TF, the damping loop gain proportions retain normal appearance.


E. J. Warchol, F. R. Schleif, W. B. Gish, and J. R. Church, "Alinement and Modeling of Hanford Excitation Control," IEEE Transactions on Power Apparatus and Systems, vol. PAS-90, No. 2, March-April 1971, pp. 714-724.
Manuscript-received February 25, 1980.

K. C. Bess (Western Systems Coordinating Council, Salt Lake City, Utah): Appendix B of the Committee Report states in the last sentence "The per unit system for the exciter described in Appendix A will have the advantage of maintaining the physical significance of the exciter time constant." This statement is incorrect. In order to make this a correct statement both sides of equation (A. 1 1) should be multiplied by Rgb/Rf:
R gb

M. L. Crenshaw: The interest expressed by the discussors is gratifying and contributes greatly to the usefulness of this report. As the Working Group developed these new, more complex models, it was apparent that neither existing computer programs nor data banks would be converted immediately. Thus a different identification system was adopted from that used in original report [2]. For many studies, the models in reference [2] and the corresponding data will suffice. Even the + 20% difference between old Type I and new Type ACl and -AC2 models quoted by Mr. Chen, will in most cases be satisfactory. The Working Group could not reach a consensus regarding the inclusion of "typical" data for the various excitation systems. Some challenged the concept of such a tabulation in view of normal design variations and on going changes in design criteria. Other members felt that derived data from field measurements should ultimately be included in data banks. The comment by Mr. Bess is indeed correct, when TE represents the time constant of the entire exciter field circuit. The situation is further confused by the exciter designer, who most frequently defines the exciter time constant as the ratio of field inductance to field resistance, excluding external resistance. Messrs. Schleif and Schurz present an especially useful derivation for relating model parameters to measurable characteristics at various operating points. They correctly observe that the simpler expression, KF, adopted by the Working Group presents a compromise. Greater clarity could have been obtained from a more control design oriented term, KDTF, as the feedback numerator Messrs. Byerly and Keay address a problem that has troubled analysts for some time, essentially one of rapid data verification. Choosing base quantities as outlined in Appendix A will at least allow this checking of parameters on a consistent basis. Messrs. Seely and Spence address some rather key issues. The general consensus of the Working Group was to restrict the models to the voltage regulating and power system stabilizer control functions. Long term disturbances and severe off-frequency operation do indeed require either special models or adjusted data for satisfactory answers to be ob tained. Their comments on manpower required for field testing of excitation systems are valid. The impact of control system performance on overall utility system design and performance must provide the economic justification for such efforts. It is the intent of this Working Group to assess user experience with these new models after several years. A decision will then be made as to the development of an IEEE Standard which would receive periodic review for additions and modifications. There is strong interest in IEC for the development of similar models on a broader base.
Manuscript received October 30, 1980.







For a separately excited DC exciter, the relationship between the parameters in Figure A.4 and the parameters in equation (A. 11) as given in equation (A. 12) will then become:


(A. 12)

E fd