Determination of model parameters of

synchronous machines
I.M. Canay, B.S., M.S.E.E., Ph.D.

Indexing terms: Simulation, Synchronous motors

Abstract: Until now, different assumptions have been made during the determination of model parameters
of synchronous machines from the characteristic quantities obtained from measurements (or calculations).
This can lead to considerable errors in the results of simulation for certain machines. The paper shows how
one can analytically compute these model parameters rigorously from characteristic quantities, without
making any simplifying assumptions or iteration. The pertinent additional measurements are given. Com-
parisons in four examples demonstrate the extent to which the common assumptions can affect modelling
a synchronous machine.

List of symbols then study the present level of technology, giving examples.
These comparisons with the established methods, which
IfG = airgap excitation current for rated
the author himself has also used in the past, should serve
voltage
to render a better understanding of the proposed improve-
Sn = rated power
ments.
ad'< aq = main reactance in the two axes
= armature leakage reactance The well known 'standard method', together with its
= Potier reactance improved version incorporating an iterative process, is given
= external reactance by the IEEE Working Groups in References 1 and 2. These
= characteristic reactance for faithful recommendations and other similar methods, with the usual
modelling of field winding assumptions that
xv * = reactance in d-axis with open damper
d
/JI^ rpl _ £
circuit y
d — •'do
" — T"
L etc.
d — do~l
x x
df> dD-> fD x = mutual reactances between armature Xd x
d
and field, armature and damper, field
and damper are used often in the technical literature, e.g. References
x v' v" \ synchronous, transient, and subtransient 2—5. These methods are based essentially on two simplifying
d,I ,xd >xd \
x x' x" I
=
reactances in d-axis and #-axis assumptions, which, when applied in the model identification,
c
rrTf rjnt t rrif rrit
= short-circuit time constants unnecessarily falsify the subsequent simulation, already in
d * di Q' Q the modelling phase [7].
rr*l rrttt rjpt rrtt f = open-circuit time constants
do ^ do ? QO s QO
= time constants of field winding and
7>TD
damper circuit in <i-axis First assumption
x
dc i dc>x reactances and time constants in <i-axis This is of a physical nature, and postulates: 'All mutual
= with xe = —xc (intermediates for calcu- reactances referred to the stator are equal to the main react-
lations) ance'
reactances and time constants in g-axis
x
qaixqa>xqa = with xe = — xa a (intermediates for x = x = x x
rril rrit I ad df dD ~ fD'
-* qa>* qa calculations)
which has practically no influence on the stator variables,
ojnd
= time, Laplace operator provided that the field voltage is not forced to change very
rapidly, e.g. with supplementary excitation damping control.
un = 2irfn = rated frequency However, it causes large errors in the field current during
dynamic processes, as has been explained earlier with a num-
1 Introduction ber of examples [6, 7 ] . The unacceptability of this assumption
Sophistication in machine modelling must keep pace with has already been recognised and elucidated in detail in many
the latest physical and mathematical advances. It is neither papers, e.g. References 9, 10, 14 and 15, and even in books
correct, nor reasonable, to take account of the finer machine [8]. Despite this, it is still encountered, probably because of
structural peculiarities, and at the same time to work with the following reasons:
rough mathematical simplifications which can introduce (a) because comparisons between the calculations and
error in the simulation results already at the modelling phase. measurements are being made only for stator variables and the
Thus, the degree of mathematical sophistication of the model field current is not checked
used must be in keeping with the extensive and expensive (b) because relatively slow processes are being investigated,
simulations. and therefore a model for the simulation of only slow pro-
In order to elucidate these correlations and to justify cesses is aimed at
the introduction of the new, relatively intricate equations, (c) because there are also machines which have no explicit
we will first review briefly the current simplifications and damper winding, and hence do not clearly exhibit the screen-
ing effect of the damper winding on the field current.
Paper 2383B (PI), first received 8th July 1982 and in revised form To illustrate the influence of this assumption, two examples
20th January 1983
The author is with BBC Brown Boveri and Co. Ltd., CH-5242 Birr,
are given here, which the reader himself can study and evalu-
Switzerland ate.
86 0143-7038/83/020086 + 09 $01.50/0 IEEPROC, Vol. 130, Pt. B, No. 2, MARCH 1983
 Fig. la shows the oscillograph record of a 3-phase sudden
short-circuit of a large turbogenerator having a generously
dimensioned damper winding. A careful analysis, based on
IEC or ASA recommendations [17, 18], yields the common
characteristic quantities, which are listed below the Figure.
A check calculation, based on the 'benchmark model' [1],
in which the parameters are determined exactly by using
the iterative method recommended there, yields, in the behav-
iour of the field current, a large deviation from the measure-
ment, in spite of the exact calculation method used.
—t
0.5 0.5
Fig. 1 Comparison between measurement and simulation for two
machines
top: Oscillograph record of i and if during a 3-phase sudden short-
circuit on no load
bottom: Simulation of if according to Reference 1
a Turbogenerator with damper winding; 1450 MVA, 24kV, 1800
rev/min
xd = 1.803 xj = 0.442 xd = 0.328
xaa= 0.232 Td = 1.497 7^ = 0.035
b Salient-pole machine with laminated poles and damper winding;
7.5 MVA, 15.5kV, 1500 rev/min
xd = 1.77 x'd = 0.254 X'H = 0.155
xaa= 0.089 Td = 0.87 7^ = 0.07
Fig. \b shows an extreme case for a salient-pole machine
having a damper winding. In this case, the alternating-current
component of the measured field current is much larger than
the computed value, although the model parameters were
precisely calculated, without approximations, by applying
the iterative method according to Reference 1.
A mere mathematical correction of the armature leakage
reactance xaa, to obtain good agreement, even with the
field current [13], would necessitate that, for the turbo-
generator in Fig. la,
//.
%ao Xd•
and, for the salient-pole machine in Fig. Ib,
xaa<0\
must be inserted. This procedure seems to the author to be
a suppression of the physical realities. The quantity xaa is,
as is well known, clearly defined, calculable, and is also meas-
ureable, although it calls for expensive measurements. One
cannot arbitrarily choose it without changing its physical
significance.
Second assumption
'Only the field winding contributes to the transient quanti-
ties!'
This is a mathematical simplification which has been used
since the Park's equations were introduced. It is suitable for
many machines, and, probably for this reason it has also
been retained in Reference 2. In an analogous fashion, how-
ever, it has also been applied to the quadrature axis with
IEEPROC, Vol. 130, Pt. B, No. 2, MARCH 1983
two time constants [ 1 - 3 ] , regardless of whether this simpli-
fication is also valid for the quadrature axis.
Machines exist, however, which have smaller transient time
constants, and, in such cases, the aforesaid assumption can
lead to large discrepancies [2,7]. Fig. 2 illustrates the in-
fluence of this simplification for a machine given by the
data in Reference 1. Plot (i) shows the short-circuit current
behaviour corresponding to the characteristic values x'd,T'd, etc.,
listed below the Figure. Now, with this assumption, if the
model parameters are calculated as explained in the standard
method, e.g. References 2 and 3, and then the short-circuit
current is simulated, plot (ii) is obtained. The large discrep-
ancy, which can be seen in the plot, arises from the fact that
this so-called 'model' yields a transient reactance of approxi-
mately 0.1355 (^xd), instead of 0.162. Consequently, the
purely mathematical error in x'd is 25% already in the model-
ling phase!
—t 0.5
Fig. 2 Simulation of stator current during sudden 3-phase short-
circuit on no load
Machine data from Reference 1
xd = 1.79 x j = 0.169 x'A xd == 0.135
u.i
= 0.13 = 4.3 032
( i) Behaviour conforming to Tkr,
input=data
0.
(ii) Standard model
Such simplifying assumptions, once quite acceptable for
hand calculations, are no longer justifiable for present-day
simulations using powerful computers.
Once the necessary characteristic quantities are known,
either from measurements or from calculations, it is quite
possible to determine all parameters — without making any
simplifications or using iterative methods. This paper describes
a relatively simple but generally valid method which can also
be applied to models having more than two rotor circuits
in each axis. In this paper, however, we will confine ourselves
to two rotor circuits in each axis.
2 Equivalent circuits as model basis
Equivalent circuits are an aid for representing the magnetic
coupling between the armature winding and the rotor circuits.
Fig. 3 shows the circuits for both axes [7].
Whereas the quadrature-axis circuit represents only the
function
xq(p) = (1)
the direct-axis circuit must satisfy not only
(l+pTd)(l+pTd') _ ju
xd(p) = xd (2)
(l+pTdo)(l+pTd'o) id
87
but also
G(p) =
(uf = 1 for IfG)
It is congruent to emphasise here that, of course, because
of the first assumption mentioned earlier, the exact equations
given in Reference 1 (eqns. 1 — 14) satisfy xd(p) and xQ(p),
but not G(p).
The armature resistance ra can be determined by simple
measurement. If the current-dependent stray load losses are
to be included in the model, this can be represented quite
aptly by an appropriate resistance ra ~ parallel to xaa (shown
dotted in Fig. 3).
tuted in the place of xaa. As a consequence, the parameters
will assume other values, but the model, i.e. functions xd(p),
G(p), will not be changed. Then, however, the damper circuit
and the main field circuit in Fig. 3a would lose their physical
interpretation.
It will now be assumed that ra,xaa, and the synchronous
(3)
reactances xd,xQ are known. Our aim will thus be to deter-
mine the remaining parameters of the equivalent circuit in
Fig. 3. These are:
for the d-axis,
x
rc> xDc> xfc> rD > rf
and for the q-axis,

3 Determination of parameters
3.1 Direct axis
The transient and subtransient quantities
' Til II J Till
xd,Td,xd andTd
are known, either from calculations or from measurements
according to IEC or ASA recommendations [17,18].
Theoretically, the open-circuit time constants Tdo, Tdo
•<:::> can be used instead of the short-circuit time constants Td and
T'd [1—3], but the latter are to be preferred, because the
measurement of Tdo and Tdo is often erroneous, owing to
<Q2
saturation of the main field. For the model, the unsaturated
values must be used, as for jcd and xQ, because the saturation
'aq of the main field is considered separately in the simulation.
r
Q2
r
Ql The operator xd(p) is completely defined by the quantities
xd,xd, Td, Td and xd. This follows from the expression given
below, which represents the basic definition of xd and x'd , in
accordance with ASA or IEC standards.
Fig. 3 Equivalent circuits as an aid to represent magnetic couplings 1 pTd
in synchronous machines
x
a Direct axis XdiP) dJl+pTd
b Quadrature axis
Reference values for the field winding: 1 1
x
ad,IfG f° r current (4)
s x
n/ adJfG for
voltage \x'd' xd]\+PTd'

It is intended that the equivalent circuit in Fig. 3 should and in the time domain
represent the airgap field behind reactance xaa in the model.
In salient-pole machines, the armature leakage reactance JCOCT
can be somewhat different in each axis (xaa, d, xaa, q) because x
d(P)j x
d \x'd x
d
of the difference in tooth-top leakage. In practice, however,
the two are generally taken as equal since their difference is
(4a)
small. x
d
The value of xaa can, of course, be determined with the
help of a measuring coil encompassing the airgap field; how- If eqn. 4 is now expressed with a common denominator and
ever, the installation of such a coil is very expensive. As there equated with eqn. 2, then this yields the sum and the product
is no pressing reason to make the measurement, usually only of the open-circuit time constants, as given below:
the calculated value is available. As mentioned, xaa serves as
an intermediate in the calculations, only to obtain the in-
fluence of saturation of the airgap field, and is not necessary
for modelling functions xd(p), xQ(p), and G(p). In case one do = dx4r*+[i-x4 + x4.\n
x
(5)
xd xd
would work with a wrong value of xaa, then, only the influ-
ence of saturation of the main field will be falsified but not rpll rpl rpl I
the aforesaid functions of the linearised machine. For example, lp
do — 1
d 1
d (6)
do x
d
if the hypothetical field behind the Potier reactance xp must
be obtained, e.g. in order to consider the saturation influence With the help of these equations, one can now precisely
according to the established method, then xp can be substi- determine Tdo and Tdo, or, if these are known, then T'd and
88 IEEPROC, Vol. 130, PL B, No. 2, MARCH 1983
Td, without making any simplifying assumptions. These circuit is absent, but a new stator reactance xc appears in
equations also hold good, without any restrictions, for the place of xaa. The quantity xc should not be considered as
g-axis quantities. a kind of armature leakage reactance. It depends on the
One can go even further and exactly calculate the resulting design of the rotor and of the damper winding, and hence
short-circuit time constants T'de, Tde, as well as the reactances will be referred to as the 'characteristic reactance'. Quantities
x
de> x'de>x'de f ° r a u m t having external reactance xe. One xc and xrc have a simple relationship. They can be either
writes calculated or measured [12] and will be treated in the next
Section. For the moment, it will be assumed that xc, the
fifth stator parameter, is known.
— xde
(l+pTdo)(l+pTd'o)

and, from the polynomial in the numerator, two simple

relationships are obtained:

ft
de
x
d ~t~ xe
D2
_ , „ x'd + Xe
TL
de — 1 Hn
do 1 do (8)
Xd +Xe

The solution of these equations yields T'de and Tde. From

the already known resolution of eqn. 4, but in this case for
l/xde(p), one obtains also the resulting reactances, as given x
dc x dc x
dc x dc
below: X '-X
x x
dc dc
" x
dc-xd'c
A
dc
x
de x
d x
e (9)
rrtf rjntt
1 J
de~ de
x
de x
de (10)
de D
•do
r" l-\ -4- \ T"
lHn — U + — lde
x
de I Fig. 5 Representation ofxd(p) by equivalent circuits
n n . a Without an explicit field circuit
Xde — Xd -r Xe (11) b Conforms to Fig. 4, including xc

For xe = 0, eqns. 10 and 5 are identical. The approximation

on the left side of eqn. 10 is to be considered only as an The derivation of the equations for determining the para-
orientation; it is not recommended for the modelling. meters begins with eqn. 4. This representation, which is
The four values xd,xd, T'd and Td alone are not sufficient simply a mathematical resolution, is the basis for the defini-
to determine the five parameters xrc, xDc, xfc, rD and rf in tion of the transient and subtransient values in the ASA and
Fig. 3a. If the simplifying assumption 1 is to be avoided, IEC standards. The circuit shown in Fig. 5a is based on eqn.
then the value of a fifth quantity is indispensable. For this 4, and therefore represents exactly the reactance operator
purpose, measurement of the very small resistance Rf of the xd(p). Branches Dl and D2 are, however, fictive, i.e. they do
field winding is not suitable. We recommend using this value not physically represent the field winding and the damper
only as a check. circuit. Here, the transfer function G(p) between the stator
By using a simple transformation, the equivalent circuit in and circuit Dl is not satisfied. If, however, by a suitable
Fig. 3a can be brought into the form shown in Fig. 4 [6, 7 ] . transformation, i.e. without changing xd(p), this circuit is
Here, xrc, the reactance in the main current path of the rotor brought to the form given in Fig. 4, then the problem is
solved, because the simple relationship between the elements
of this circuit and the required parameters xDc, xfc, etc. are
x
c X
fc = kx «c
r = krf
f
, 1 |_^M •_
—1 « already known in Fig. 4. For this purpose, we can first think

L
i
1 of a reactance (— xc) included in the stator circuit, i.e. we
consider the machine with an external reactance (xe =—xc)
= kx
Dc integrated in the unit. The resulting reactances and the time
x _ X T constants of the unit can now be calculated from eqns. 7 to

r
c
X kr
11, without any simplifying assumptions, by inserting xe =
D
— xc. The equivalent circuit for the reactance operator xd(p)
— xc, for this unit, is given in Fig. 5b (to the right side of the
dotted line). If, now, reactance + xc is inserted in the stator
Fig. 4 Equivalent circuit of direct axis without xr
circuit, we obtain the desired circuit for the original machine,
Reference values for field winding: as shown in Fig. 4. Thus, the problem is solved, since, with
(xd —x^)IfQ for current
Sn/(xd —xc)IfG f T
° voltage
the help of the transformation equations given in Fig. 4,
1 1 1 all parameters can be determined. The pertinent equations
= L
are collected in Table 1, which gives a complete summary
x
c x
aa x
ad x
rc of the new method. It should be repeated here that xaa is
necessary only when considering the saturation of the main
(xd - xc\ field. When this influence is not to be considered, any other
k —
x
ad random value can be taken instead of xao, in which case

IEEPROC, Vol. 130, Pt. B, No. 2, MARCH 1983 89

 Table 1: Equations for determining parameters of direct axis
Input xd, xaa, x'd, x'd, xc, T'd, Td

Tdo, Tdo from eqns. 5 and 6

x
dc Xd ~x
x'dc x"d—*c
T'dc Tdo) xc/xdc

T'dc T'dc T"dc — ~rdo Tdo xdc/xdc

x
T'dc — T'dc
x'dc dc
xdc
o - \\ +— \rdc
Xdc,

*ad
x
dc
x
'dcxdc (xad\2
x
Dc
x x
dc dc \xdcj
x
dc xdc I xad
x
dc ~xdc \xdc

r
f xfc/u>nT'dc

x
ad + xrc + xfc x
f x
dc
Tps = or-^-
rfojn rfu>n xdc

x
ad + xrc +x
Dc or (1 + xdclxdc — xdclx'dc) T'dc

x
Dc
= 'dc

x
dc
x
dc -

Xf, f i or H Xf or RfTf = Xf[Sl] luin

xZd'fc

Table 3: (/-axis — model parameters (salient-pole machine. Fig. 1b)

Input: x'd = 0.254 x'd = 0.155 Td = 0.87 Td = 0.07
Table 2: </-axis — model parameters (turbogen.. Fig. 1a) xd = 1.77 xaa= 0.089 xr = -0.0776

Input: x'd = 0.442 x'd = 0.328 Td = 1.497 Td = 0.035 Method Standard [2] IEEE (iterative) [1 ] New
xd = 1503 xaa= 0.232 xc = 0.318 x
rc -0.152
— —
x
Dc 0.110 0.105 0.672
Method Standard [2] IEEE (iterative) [1] New
Model x
fc 0.183 0.200 0.328
x
rc — — 0.0914 r 0.00763 0.00736 0.0266
D
x
Dc 0.177 0.173 0.0116 0.000979 0.00106
r
f 0.000956
Model x
fc 0.242 0.251 0.171
rD 0.0217 0.0214 0.00871 x 0.242 0.254 0.254
'd
r 0.000788 0.000809 0.000856
f
rd 0.882 0.870 0.870
x
'd 0.436 0.442 0.442 rd 0.0691 0.0700 0.0700
Result T'do 6.706 6.333 6.337
rd 1.509 1.497 1.497
0.104 0.110 0.110
T'do
rd 0.0347 0.0350 0.0350
Tf 6.06 5.67 6.18
Result T'do 6.274 6.143 6.143
TD 0.747 0.772 0.263
T'do 0.0459 0.0469 0.0469
lf~/'fo 3.92 3.58 7.00
Tf 6.107 5.973 5.681
TD 0.213 0.216 0.509
* As established in References 6 and 7, the characteristic reactance xc
If-flfo 1.906 1.842 0.357 is, in general, negative in salient-pole machines. This leads to a negative
value of x r c .

90 IEEPROC, Vol. 130, Pt. B, No. 2, MARCH 1983

Table 4: d-axis — model parameters (machine in Reference 1, Fig. 2) circuit quantities (see xDc, rD, TD), and correctly reproduce
Input: x'd = 0.169 x'd == 0.135 rdo = 4.3 Tdo = 0.032 the measured value of/^~//fo.
The parameters calculated by the iterative method (without
*d = 1.79 xaa-= 0.13
xc), lead to a large error in the time constant TD of the
Method Standard [2] IEEE (iterative) [1] = New method resulting damper circuit, so that, in Table 2, it turns out much
with assumption xc = xaa smaller (0.216s instead of 0.509s); whereas, in Table 3 it is
x — -
much larger (0.772s instead of 0.263 s).
rc
With the new method, the resulting field-winding resistance
x
Dc 0.00574 0.00546
0.0732 ft in Table 2 agrees well with the value of 0.071ft
Model Xfc 0.0399 0.0618 (24°C) measured before the test run.
r
D 0.00371 0.00407
r
f 0.00105 0.00141 Comments on Table 4 (example from Reference 1)
Because of the missing value of xc, the new method cannot
*'d 0.1355 0.169 be applied. However, for the hypothetical case, withx a o = xc,
T'd 0.409 0.400 one obtains the same result as with the iterative method.
0.0254
n 0.0259 For the field circuit of this machine, which has a relatively
Result T do 5.404 4.300 small transient time constant T'd, the standard calculation
Tdo 0.0255 0.032 yields values (see xfc, rf, Tf) which differ markedly from
Tf 1.216 3.246 those obtained with the exact solution.
TD 4.213 1.085 The apparently harmless simplifications lead to an incorrect
1.556 1.235 model which yields a transient reactance
lf~flfo

x'd = 0.1355! instead of 0.169,

the model will appear different, but the operator xd(p) will
remain the same. a transient open-circuit time constant
These equations have been applied to the three examples
mentioned in the Introduction. The results are listed in Tables Tdo = 5.404! instead of 4.3,
2, 3 and 4.
a field time constant
Comments on Tables 2 and 3
For these machines, the results obtained using the standard Tf = 1.216! instead of 3.246
method [1,2] with its well known simplifying assumptions
and the iterative method in Reference 1, do not differ from and a damper time constant
each other. Although the characteristic quantities determined
by calculating back from the parameters by using the iterative TD = 4.213! instead of 1.085
and the new method lead to the original values, the approxi-
mate method leads to certain discrepancies, which, in this Thus, this standard model does not represent the given mach-
case, are small. ine, but a fictive one whose damper time constant TD is
With the exact iterative method, however, the ratio If~/Ifo, larger than the field time constant Tf\
as given in Table 2, is five times as large as the measured
values in Fig. la, whereas, in Table 3, it is only about half,
as in Fig. \b. 3.2 Quadrature axis
The parameters obtained by the new method differ from Here it is again assumed that the four characteristic values
x
those by the old methods, particularly concerning the damper- 'q,x'q, T'Q and Tq are known. They can be determined from

Table 5: Equations for determining parameters in quadrature axis

Input: xq, xaa, x'q, x"q, Tq, T'q

Tqo' Tqo f r o m e< ns 5 a n d

^ -
Xn rt X f\

•qa — * q ^~ Tq) xq/xqa Tqo)

iqa
T T" — T' T" x" /x
qa ~ ' qo qa

'qa 'qa

+Tqo- M + — \Tqa
*qa

qa

IEEPROC, Vol. 130, Pt. B, No. 2, MARCH 1983 91

Table 6: q-ax\s — model parameters (machine in Reference 1) straight line (Fig. 6b) whose extrapolation to t = 0 gives
Input: x'q = 0.228 x'q == 0.2 = 0.85 ir'go = 0.05 the initial amplitude of the alternating component of the
'go
field current having frequency fn. From this, one determines,
*q = 1.71 xaa--= 0.13 as the fifth measured quantity, the ratio
Method Standard [ 2 ] IEEE (iterative) [ 1 ] = new method
a = (12)
x
Qi 0.104 0.329
Model XQ2 0.245 0.0942 For this ratio, the theory yields
r
Qi 0.00526 0.0141
'«.
0.0182 0.00819 G(js)
(13)
l
X'q 0.2037 0.228 fo

rq 0.128 0.107
Result n 0.0390 0.0463
2ifjt)
'go 1.076 0.850
'go 0.0395 0.050

special short-circuit tests [16], which are included in the

IEC standards (Publ. 34-4A in Reference 17).
The parameters of the equivalent circuit in Fig. 3b can be
determined in the same way as for the c?-axis. Since, in this
case, only zQ = ra + pxq(p), i.e. the impedance seen from
the stator, has to be modelled and no additional conditions
must be satisfied; therefore, now xc can be substituted by
xaa in the equations for the direct axis. In Table 5, these
equations are summarised in a sequence, according to which
the g-axis quantities can be computed. Therein, the auxiliary
values xqa, T'qa and Tqa represent physically the transient
reactance and the short-circuit time constants of the q-axis
of the machine with an external reactance xe = — xaa.
The open-circuit time constants are calculated by using
r
the same equations as for the d-axis.
The iterative method in Reference 1, if carried out with a
low truncation error, yields the same results as the analytical 2i. (t)
T
method given in Table 5.
Table 6 illustrates the extent to which the usual simplifi-
cations can affect the quadrature-axis model. Depending on
the method chosen, the parameters of the equivalent circuit Fig. 6 Determination of xc from field current during 3-phase sudden
vary widely. When the characteristic quantities are calculated short-circuit on no load
backwards from these parameters, we find that the approxi-
mated parameters used for the simulation yield a transient
reactance of Inserting the reactances and time constants, eqn. 13 assumes
the following form:
x'q = 0.204! instead of 0.228 + ja>nTdc
(l+junTd)(l+jconTd') ' dc
and a transient open-circuit time constant of l
fo

T'qo = 1.076! instead of 0.85 (xd — xc) (xd — xc — xdc)

I
(14)
x
dxdc
In other words, the 'standard model' does not represent the
given machine. The initial value of If ~ can also be calculated from the equiva-
lent circuit in Fig. 4. A simple calculation for if —If/IfG(xd —
4 Measurement of xc xc) in Fig. 4., with a stator supply of u =Ifo/IfG yields
The characteristic reactance JCC can be either calculated or
determined directly from the measurement of the alternating
current transfer between the stator and the field winding. This l
fo
can most easily be done by making the following measure-
x x
ments: d c
(15)
x
dc
4.1 Measurement of alternating component of field current
during 3-phase sudden short circuit on no-load in which we have
The 3-phase sudden short-circuit test for determining x'd, x'd,
T'd and T'J is made in accordance with References 17 and 18. =i = r
d\
In order to obtain xc from this test, an oscillograph record
of the field current behaviour is also made (Fig. 6a). Eqns. 14 and 15 are identical.
The amplitude of the alternating component if~ is plotted Reactance JCC must tally with the other measured values
as a function of time on semilogarithmic paper. This yields a x'd,xd, Td and Td. Therefore, it is recommended that xc be

92 IEEPROC, Vol. 130, Pt. B, No. 2, MARCH 1983

determined exactly from these equations by iteration. One There is a simple relationship between b and a:
starts with an approximate value (see eqn. 17) and varies
xc until the value of the ratio a as calculated back agrees with b \llln b
a = (22)
the measured value. This type of solution, which earlier was x
+JXdl\ IfG 'd IfG
not practically possible, can now be made easily using a
desk-top calculator. It is especially suitable for turbogenerators Using the equations in Section 4.1, xc can now be determined.
which have no explicit damper winding (damping action is
caused by the solid-iron rotor) and therefore have a relatively 5 Remarks
high value of rdx.
In practice, however, eqn. 15 (or eqn. 14) can, by remain- The mathematical models which have so far been derived are
ing within the scope of the accuracy of measurement, be valid for simulating processes where the field circuit is closed.
simplified by assuming that If the field circuit is open, or if it behaves at times as though
open (e.g. with a rectifier excitation, where the current during
x'd-xc and cjnTdc > 1 a dynamic process tends to flow in the negative direction, but
is blocked by the rectifier), then, in actual machines with
This leads to solid-iron rotors or pole cores, a new effect arises [7]. In such
cases, the alternating current can flow, either in the slot
x
d ~ xd xd ~xc walls, or in the pole faces, instead of in the field winding,
a ^ n i c (16) because, in solid-iron rotors, these parts constitute a closed
x x x
d d c circuit encompassing the alternating field. This circuit acts
yielding, in parallel to the field winding and, because it occupies the
same spatial position, has practically the same main and
i _ n leakage inductances as the field winding. Hence this circuit
x x
xv " d d
d —xvc (17) can be represented in the equivalent circuit, as indicated by
(xd-x'd)(c/a)-xd dashed lines in Fig. 3a, as an eddy-current resistance r^. This
with physical effect is given very little attention in the technical
literature. Because rf is much smaller than r^, the current
remains in the field winding, as long as the circuit is closed.
1 ,lxd-Xd-axd
(18) The value of rfE can also be measured during the standstill
1+ ;—77
\ axd Td u>n tests [12]. Although rfE is frequency dependent, and not
purely ohmic, it can be taken as a constant resistance for
The factor c represents an approximate correction to account use in the simulation programs. The rotor overvoltage calcu-
for the influence of the ohmic resistance of the damper lations will then yield results on the safe side.
circuit. Experience over some years has shown that this
approximation yields better results than the one given in
Reference 12. 6 Conclusions
When, instead of using the amplitude of the alternating All the parameters necessary for modelling the synchronous
current, one works with the jump at t = 0, which involves an machine can be exactly determined, without making any
additional measurement of the pertinent phase angle [12], •simplifying assumptions, from the characteristic values:
it is even possible to give an exact 2nd-order equation for
x
d ~xc- I II
x x x x
As a check, one should note here that the alternating d d d
component of field current cannot be arbitrarily small, but for the direct axis,
should satisfy the following condition:
rpl rpll
x Q Q
Q Q
d ~x'd
a
min (19)
x
d for the quadrature axis and xaa.

This expression can be easily derived from eqn. 15, by insert- The usual simplifications, such as
ing
x
dc ~ xd x x T'do =-T'd = Tf\ xd = xd ! etc.
c c ~ xd x
d\ x
d
and can lead to a model which would differ significantly from
x x
the actual machine.
*d d d The characteristic reactance xc is indispensable for a
I rptll
(20)
X
d T
d ">n realistic modelling of the field circuit and can be found by
measuring the alternating-current transfer between the stator
and the field winding. The methods for measuring the other
4.2 Measurement of alternating-current transfer at standstill quantities are already given in the IEC Standards.
At standstill, the stator is fed line-to-line at rated frequency.
The rotor is in the <i-position, with the field winding short- 7 References
circuited. The stator current Ia^ and field current If~ are
measured. 1 IEEE Task Force: 'First benchmark model for computer simulation
of subsynchronous resonance', IEEE Trans., 1977, PAS-96, pp.
1565-1572
(21) 2 IEEE Task Force: 'Supplementary definitions and associated test
methods for obtaining parameters for synchronous machine stabi-
lity study simulations', ibid., 1980, PAS-99, pp. 1625-1633
IEEPROC, Vol. 130, Pt. B, No. 2, MARCH 1983 93
 3 DE MELLO, F.P., and HANNETT, L.H.: 'Validation of synchro-
nous machine models and derivation of model parameters from
tests', ibid., 1981, PAS-100, pp. 662-672
4 HAMMONS, T.J.: 'A low frequency transfer function for open-
circuited and loaded synchronous generators', Electr. Eng. Trans.
Aust., 1976, 12, pp. 25-35
5 MURGOWSKY, H.: 'Parameterbestimmung fur Synchronmaschinen
aus charakteristischen Betriebsdaten und -kennlinien', Elektrie,
1980, 34, pp. 69-72
6 CANAY, I.M.: 'Causes of discrepancies on calculation of rotor
quantities and exact equivalent diagrams for the synchronous mach-
ine', IEEE Trans., 1969, PAS-88, pp. 1114-1120
7 CANAY, I.M.: 'Extended synchronous machine model for calcu-
lation of transient processes and stability', Electr. Mach. & Electro-
mech., 1977,1, pp. 137-150
8 ADKINS, B.: 'The general theory of alternating current machines'
(Chapman and Hall, 1975)
9 TAKEDA, Y., and ADKINS, B.: 'Determination of synchronous-
machine parameters allowing for unequal mutual inductances',
Proc. IEE, 1974, 121, (12), pp. 1501-1504
10 SHACKSHAFT, G.: 'New approach to the determination of syn-
chronous-machine parameters from tests', ibid., 1974, 121, (11),
pp. 1385-1392
94
11 SALVATORE, L., and SAVINO, M.: 'Experimental determination
of synchronous machine parameters', IEE Proc. B. Electr. Power
AppL, 1981, 128, (4), pp. 212-218
12 CANAY, I.M.: 'Experimentelle Ermittlung der Ersatzschemata
und der Parameter einer idealisierten Synchronmaschine', Bull.
SEV, 1972,63, pp. 1137-1146
13 UMANS, S.D., MALLICK, J.A., and WILSON, G.L.: 'Modeling
of solid rotor turbogenerators', IEEE Trans., Pts. I and II, 1978,
PAS-97, pp. 269-291
14 EDELMANN, H.: 'Berechnung von Modelldaten fur die Simula-
tion von Synchronmaschinen im Verbundbetrieb aus gemessenen
naten', ETZ-Arch., 1981, 3, (2), pp. 47-51
15 BANDOPADHAYA, R.N., SUBBA RAO, V.S., and RAJU, G.S.:
'Mathematical models of synchronous machine with unequal mutual
reactances', Electr. Mach. & Electromech., 1981, 6, pp. 171-184
16 CANAY, I.M.: 'Ein neues Verfahren zur Bestimmung der Querach-
sengrossen von synchronmaschinen', ETZ-A, 1965, 86, pp. 561-
568
17 IEC: 'Recommendations for rotating electric machinery'. Publ.
344A, 1967; Publ. 344A, 1972
18 IEEE: 'Test procedures for synchronous machines', (115), 1965
IEE PROC, Vol. 130, Pt. B, No. 2, MARCH 1983