IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER DELIVERY, VOL. 23, NO.

4, OCTOBER 2008 1805

Exploring the IEEE Standard C37.118–2005

Synchrophasors for Power Systems
K. E Martin, D. Hamai, M. G. Adamiak, S. Anderson, M. Begovic, G. Benmouyal, G. Brunello, J. Burger,
J. Y. Cai, B. Dickerson, V. Gharpure, B. Kennedy, D. Karlsson, A. G. Phadke, J. Salj, V. Skendzic, J. Sperr,
Y. Song, C. Huntley, B. Kasztenny, and E. Price

Abstract—IEEE Standard 1344–1995 [1] on measurement of

synchronized phasors of power system currents and voltages has
been revised and published as IEEE Standard C37.118–2005 [2].
This paper has been prepared by the IEEE Working Group who
developed the revised version. The purpose of the paper is to
acquaint the power engineering community of the availability and
content of this new standard, highlight some of the key differences
between the old and new versions, and introduce several applica-
tions of this powerful technology.
Index Terms—Global positioning system (GPS) synchronized
phasor, phasor measurement unit (PMU), power system measure-
ments, synchrophasor, wide-area measurements.

I. C37.118-2005 SYNCHROPHASOR STANDARD

HIS section provides an overview of the new IEEE Stan-

T dard C37.118-2005, and summarizes its main points. The
standard was approved in September 2005 and published in
Fig. 1. Synchrophasor definition and angle convention.

April 2006. It is available from IEEE in either PDF or printed

form.
A. Overview
The standard covers synchronized phasor measurements
used in electric power systems. It defines the measurement
convention, provides a method of determining the precision
of measurements, and provides requirements for measurement
performance under steady state conditions. It also defines data
communication formats for real-time data transmission. The
document introduces the concept of a phasor measurement unit
(PMU)—a device making, communicating, and potentially
storing these synchronized measurements. Compliant PMUs
should be interchangeable with each other by providing equiv-
alent measurements when supplied with identical steady-state
input signals, and communicating these measurements in a
standardized way.
B. Basic Concept of a Synchrophasor
Synchrophasors, or synchronized phasor measurements,
provide a means of referring the phasor representation of a
Manuscript received June 5, 2007. First published April 3, 2008; current ver-
sion published September 24, 2008. Paper no. TPWRD-00320-2007.
Working Group H-11 of the Relay Communications Subcommittee of the
IEEE Power System Relaying Committee.
This work was prepared by Working Group H-11 of the Relay Communi-
cations Subcommittee of the IEEE Power System Relaying Committee of the
Power Engineering Society.
Color versions of one or more of the figures in this paper are available online
at http://ieeexplore.ieee.org.
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/TPWRD.2007.916092
0885-8977/$25.00 © 2008 IEEE
power system voltage or current to an absolute time reference.
This absolute reference is provided in the form of a common
timing signal by high-accuracy clocks synchronized to coordi-
nated universal time (UTC) such as the universally used global
positioning system (GPS).
Using the synchronized clocks as a reference, a PMU cre-
ates the phasor representation (complex number) of a constant
sinusoidal signal as shown in Fig. 1. The reporting instant, rep-
resented by a timetag, defines the reference for the phasor rep-
resentation of the measured sinusoidal input. The relationship
between the reporting instant and the phasor representation is
such that the phase angle of the phasor is equal to the angular
separation between the reporting time and the peak of the sinu-
soid. For example, in Fig. 1(a), the peak of the signal coincides
with the timetag yielding the angle measurement of 0 , while in
Fig. 1(b), the signal crosses zero at the timetag yielding a
measurement in accordance with the synchrophasor standard.
Determined with respect to an arbitrary timing signal, the
phasor angle by itself has no particular significance. However,
if all PMUs use the same timing reference, their measurements
are comparable, and the phase angle differences between pha-
sors are accurate. As most applications seek to know the phase
angle differences between various phasors, the PMU output pro-
vides an invaluable input to monitoring, protection, and control
functions in a power system.
C. Requirements for Compliance
Compliance with IEEE Standard C37.118 requires making
phasor measurements that meet the synchrophasor definition
1806
within one of two accuracy classes, and conforming to the com-
munication protocol for reporting measurements. A particular
PMU may have additional capabilities (above and beyond those
required for compliance with the standard) in the realm of ac-
curacy, communication, reporting rates, frequency range, noise
suppression, etc. These capabilities may be of interest to certain
applications and they are not considered to affect the compli-
ance requirement of the standard.
1) Measurement Convention: Synchrophasor is defined as a
complex number representation of the fundamental frequency
component of a voltage or current, with an accompanying
time-tag defining the time instant for which the phasor mea-
surement is performed. The standard mandates the phase angle
convention as depicted in Fig. 1. The definition does not depend
on position of the data window used to produce the phasor
estimate, and is unambiguous under offnominal frequencies.
In fact, C37.118 does not refer to frequency when defining a
synchrophasor.
A conforming PMU must also provide a choice of reporting
rates, from ten reports per second up to half the nominal system
frequency (25 or 30/s, respectively). The reporting times shall
begin at the top of second (xx.000000 s) as defined by the time
reference, and be evenly spaced through the second.
PMUs must also provide estimates of frequency and rate of
change of frequency (df/dt), as part of the PMU output data
stream. The standard does not specify how these estimates are
to be calculated.
2) Measurement Accuracy: The standard defines accuracy
as a vectorial difference between the measured (MEAS) and
expected (IDEAL) value of the phasor for the measurement at a
given instant of time (k). This is defined as the total vector error
(TVE)
% (1)
TVE blends together three possible sources of error: magni-
tude, angle and timing. For example, if a given PMU synchro-
nized perfectly with the reference time and exhibits no angle
error, 1% of error in magnitude will translate into 1% of TVE.
Without timing and magnitude errors, an angle error of 0.573
corresponds to 1% of TVE. When all error is caused by inaccu-
racy of time synchronization, 31.8 s at 50 Hz, and 26.5 s at
60 Hz would cause 1% TVE.
The standard allows for two levels of accuracy compliance:
Level 1 and Level 0. Both call for TVE below 1%, but Level 1
is more stringent by imposing more challenging test reference
conditions in terms of frequency range ( 5 Hz versus 0.5 Hz
for level 0, for example), magnitude range, signal distortions,
etc.
The standard does not specify the method of measurement,
or other factors such as the sampling rate, algorithms, or syn-
chronization method. Instead, it mandates the same output—to
within 1% of TVE—under a wide range of reference condi-
tions. This allows manufacturers to use different measurement
methods while assuring conformance with the result under a
range of basic performance.
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER DELIVERY, VOL. 23, NO. 4, OCTOBER 2008
Frequency measurement accuracy (including rate of change
of frequency) is not specified in the standard. However, experi-
ence has shown that PMUs are among the best frequency trans-
ducers available, delivering accuracy of a few millihertz (typi-
cally 1–3 mHz) with a measurement window of a few cycles.
The standard does not specify PMU performance require-
ments under transient conditions. This means that under nonsta-
tionary conditions such as a fast frequency ramp, various PMUs
will produce outputs that may differ despite their conformance
to either of the two accuracy classes of the standard. Refer to
Section III of this paper for considerations regarding perfor-
mance of PMUs under dynamic conditions.
3) Communications Protocol: The standard defines a pro-
tocol for communicating synchrophasor measurements in real-
time from a PMU to a phasor data concentrator (PDC)—a device
archiving and presenting the PMU data to various applications.
This protocol can also be used for cascading PDCs when aggre-
gating the data streams from different regions of the monitored
power system.
The protocol is “lightweight” in that it has only few mes-
sage types with few options, is implemented in a single layer,
and splits the real-time data stream from occasional exchange
of configuration information.
If the PMU supports real-time data communication, confor-
mance to the standard requires that it support the five frame
types defined in the standard: Data frame (binary); two config-
uration frames (binary); header frame (ASCII); and command
frame (binary).
Once turned on by a start command, data frames are sent
continuously from the PMU to the host system. PMU numer-
ical outputs may be formatted either as a 16-b integer or 32-b
floating-point numbers (IEEE Std. 754–1985). In addition to
synchrophasor and frequency measurements mandated by the
standard, other analog values (quantities such as power flows)
and digital status words (for example, breaker status) may op-
tionally be included in the data frame. The standard does not
specify how these other quantities are measured or time tagged.
Configuration and header frames describe the PMU config-
uration. They are transmitted whenever requested by the host,
which will usually occur at system startup or upon change of
PMU configuration. Configuration frames are a fixed binary
structure that is machine readable, which allows relatively auto-
matic system configuration. Two configuration frames are used:
1) the first describes the full capabilities of a given PMU and 2)
with the other, the capabilities are configured at a given time.
Header frames are unstructured text intended for human read-
able information.
The command frame is sent by the host to the PMU to start or
stop transmission, or request configuration data in the form of
configuration or header frames. Unused bits in these commands
are reserved and may be used for further command information
in future revisions of the standard. A new extended frame com-
mand type is provided for user-defined functions such as PMU
configuration or remote controls.
The C37.118 protocol may be used with any communications
medium or system, including serial ports (EIA—232 or—485,
for example) and Ethernet over wire or fiber optic cable. When
used with a lower-level protocol such as TCP/IP or UDP/IP,
MARTIN et al.: EXPLORING THE IEEE STANDARD C37.118–2005
IEEE C37.118 requires that the data frame as defined in the
standard be transmitted in its entirety, including the cyclic re-
dundancy check (CRC). Implementation over lower level pro-
tocols is prescribed in the normative Annex I of the standard. It
states how the C37.118 message frames are to be mapped into
communication protocols, specifically RS-232 and IP protocol.
It also specifies default port numbers for IP protocol; 4712 for
TCP and 4713 for UDP.
D. Additional Guidance Provided in Annexes
With the exception of Annex I, all annexes are “informative,”
which means they are not binding but guide the user in better
understanding of the standard. Annex A presents a useful bib-
liography of documents relevant to the subject. Annex B clar-
ifies and illustrates the use of CRC generators and provides a
sample algorithm for calculating the CRC. Annex C provides
further information on time-tagging with examples related to
different computation codes. Annex D contains examples of all
message types with sample data. Annex E discusses sources of
precise time synchronization for synchrophasor measurements.
Annex F details time communication formats and presents an
expanded IRIG-B format for improved time communication.
Annex G suggests sample benchmark for testing synchropha-
sors under transient conditions. Annex H explains the notion of
TVE and gives examples of TVE calculations for various mag-
nitude, phase and timing errors.
E. System Integration
The new standard includes a unit ID identifying the message
source or the destination for commands. These IDs are 16-b inte-
gers. Assignment of values is left up to the user, so coordination
is required when utility data is exchanged throughout an entire
grid.
The new standard does not require using any specific data
transmission method or protocol; this is left up to manufacturers
and users. It does specify how data messages are to be encapsu-
lated within a protocol, and gives examples for the IP protocol
and RS232 serial communication. Within the IP protocol, TCP
or UDP can be used.
There are four bits set aside in the data frame to allow affixing
a security suffix. This was done to allow future changes which
may be needed for evolving industry standards for substation
automation and corresponding protocols.
II. DIFFERENCES BETWEEN IEEE 1344 AND
C37.118 SYNCHROPHASOR STANDARDS
This section provides an overview of differences between the
new synchrophasor standard (IEEE Standard C37.118–2005
[2]) and the previous one (IEEE Standard 1344–1995 [1]).
These standards follow a consistent approach to the subject,
but differ in a number of details. Synchrophasor measurement
in IEEE 1344 was defined in terms of waveform sampling,
timing, and the basic phasor definition. Data communication in
1344 was incompletely specified, and much was left up to the
manufacturer and the user.
C37.118 covers the same basic elements as 1344, but the syn-
chrophasor is defined unambiguously, various parameters of the
1807
protocol are more completely specified, and several new data
categories have been added. New annexes have been added to
provide clarification and guidance. These changes are summa-
rized in this section.
A. Definition of a Synchrophasor
Instead of defining synchrophasor, 1344 introduced a con-
vention for synchrophasor representation for a sinusoidal input
signal at the rated frequency of 60 or 50 Hz. According to the
previous standard, the synchrophasor angle is reported as zero
if the sample corresponding to the start of the data window used
in phasor calculation falls on the maximum of the signal wave-
form. This created an ambiguity under offnominal frequency
conditions. The standard did not mandate the position of the
window with respect to the absolute time reference, but pointed
in one of its annexes (C.2—Alternate time-tagging) to three pos-
sible solutions: time-tagging based one the first, middle or last
sample in the phasor calculation data window. With this ap-
proach, although a phasor measurement could be defined un-
ambiguously at the rated frequency, at offnominal frequency the
convention for phasor representation was difficult to apply and
interpret.
In the new standard, definitions for both a phasor and
synchrophasor are introduced and match the previous con-
vention for nominal frequency inputs. The ambiguity of the
phasor representation at offnominal frequency is completely
removed—the definition does not refer to frequency or position
of the data window, but rather to a time shift between the
waveform positive peak and the reporting instant expressed as
a part of full cycle (rotation). All compliant PMUs will respond
the same to offnominal frequencies: the phasor angles will
rotate at a rate that is the difference between the nominal and
measured signal frequencies (e.g., a 61 Hz signal on a 60 Hz
system will appear to rotate at radians/s).
The old standard did not have any accuracy requirement other
than the sampling pulse accuracy (1 s). The new version uses
an aggregated measure, TVE, of magnitude, angle and timing
errors (1%).
B. Time-Tagging Specifications
By avoiding references to data window and frequency the
new standard is more precise in stating what a synchrophasor
measuring system should do under offnominal frequency condi-
tions. The time tag is defined by the measurement time and TVE
requirements rater than the data window and sample times.
The new standard states that the measured phasor should cor-
respond to the signal at the input terminals of the PMU. Thus,
any phase or amplitude shift that occurs inside the PMU must
be compensated for and not reflected in the measured phasor.
C. Communications Protocol
The old and new standards differ moderately in the area of
data communications. In particular:
1) Message Framework: The same four message types are
used in C37.118 as were used in 1344: data, configuration,
header, and command. Several fields have been added, such as
sync and frame size words, to simplify decoding.
1808
All messages now include an identification code. This simpli-
fies implementations using a network where all messages arrive
on the same physical medium. The second-of-century (SOC)
has been updated to the UNIX model where it starts at 1970
rather than at 1900. This gives 99 years before the SOC count
rolls over to 0 (in 2106). The sample count field has been ex-
tended to allow a fraction-of-second expression. The check-sum
is always a 2 B CRC–CCITT that is more clearly defined in an
annex with examples.
Since the original synchrophasor standard was published,
Ethernet has become a widespread communication medium for
power applications. The new standard specifies applications
with Ethernet (Annex I), and mandates that messages must be
included in their entirety when being sent by serial communica-
tions or in a stacked protocol such as the Internet protocol (IP).
2) Data Frame: The data frame is similar to that of the old
standard. The principal differences are that analog data could
also be a part of the data frame in the new standard, and certain
features have been added which facilitate handling data from
multiple PMUs at the PDC level. This last feature adds repeated
status and measurement fields for each PMU in a single frame.
3) Configuration Frame: The new standard uses the Config1
frame to describe the complete data set that can be provided
by the PMU, and Config2 frame to describe the data set cur-
rently being sent. Digital masking has been added for the digital
data, and fields for naming individual channels (bits) have been
provided.
4) Header Frame: Being a free-format, informational,
human-readable description of the PMU configuration, capa-
bilities, and parameters, the header frame has not been changed
with the exception of the overall framing changes described in
Section 3.A of the standard.
5) Command Frame: The command frame also has been ex-
panded with the framing changes described in Clause 6.2 of
the standard. The old commands are retained, and a new ex-
tended frame command has been added. This new command
is user-configurable. For example, it can be used to remotely
change PMU configuration or to send control signals to a PMU
to implement a closed-loop control system.
III. MEASUREMENTS UNDER TRANSIENT CONDITIONS
Transients are nonsteady-state conditions that may occur in a
power system. Transients could be roughly classified as 1) elec-
trical transients, or 2) electromechanical transients. The former
are caused by faults and other switching operations, whereas dy-
namic movement of rotors of generators and motors following
power system disturbances cause the latter.
Phasor measurement under transient conditions is of interest
to many phasor measurement applications. Annex G of the
standard suggested several benchmark tests for evaluating
synchrophasor measurement under the transient conditions.
This section discusses phasor measurements under both types
of transient conditions and the effect of antialias filtering. It
should be noted that this discussion is not part of the new
standard, but is provided here for the understanding of phasor
measurement under transient conditions.
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER DELIVERY, VOL. 23, NO. 4, OCTOBER 2008
Fig. 2. Phasor transition during electrical transients.
A. Electrical Transients
These transients are generally short-lived, and do not affect
speeds of machine rotors. When the phasor measurement data
window contains portions of pre and postdisturbance signals,
the measured phasor is ambiguous. Consider an idealized elec-
trical transient shown in Fig. 2, where the input signal has a step
change due to some switching operation. When the data win-
dows are entirely in the pre or posttransient periods, the mea-
sured synchrophasors reflect the two states of the system. How-
ever, when the data window spans the transient event, the phasor
measurement is a combination of states that is not clearly de-
fined within the current context.
Phasors calculated during electrical transients often display a
step change in phase angles (for example, between phasors 1 and
3 in Fig. 2). In estimating system frequency as a rate of change
of the phase angle, such abrupt changes in phase angles lead to
frequency estimates exhibiting sharp spikes. This is indeed the
frequency as observed from the waveform, but may not reflect
any changes in the machine rotor speeds. This fact should be
borne in mind when frequency estimates (including the rate-of-
change of frequency estimates) are used.
B. Phasor Measurements During Electromechanical
Disturbances
Synchrophasor measurements under electromechanical
system transients can be better understood when considering
the following signal model:
(2)
where the cosine function acts as a modulator for the input.
is a “magnitude” signal, and is the “phase” signal, both
embedded in the input.
One particular case of (2) is the steady state
(3)
During electromechanical transients, the magnitude and
phase angles of phasors change rather slowly as compared to
the nominal power system frequency. Therefore, when con-
sidering a short observation window of at most a few power
frequency periods, the phasor magnitude and rotation speed
are almost constant. As the rotor speeds in modern power
systems may deviate from synchronous speed by 0.1–5 Hz, the
phase angle behavior during the phasor estimation window is
approximately linear.
MARTIN et al.: EXPLORING THE IEEE STANDARD C37.118–2005 1809

Fig. 3. Illustration of phasor aliasing.

C. Interfering Frequencies and Phasor Aliasing

The process of reporting synchrophasors is equivalent to sam-
pling the phasor information, so it is subject to the classical
Nyquist theorem. When expecting a frequency component of
in the phasor magnitude or angular position, one needs to ensure
that the phasor is reported at not less than twice that frequency Fig. 4. PMU coverage of the power system network.
or else aliasing would occur as shown in Fig. 3.
The standard specifies the “interfering frequencies” condi-
tion to impose appropriate antialiasing filtering when reporting
phasors.
User-controlled filtering options in practical implementations
allow balancing speed, accuracy under noise, and response to
interfering frequencies. These options impact the response of
the PMUs under transient conditions.

IV. APPLICATIONS OF SYNCHROPHASORS

Following are a number of applications that demonstrate how
synchrophasors may be used to improve system operation. Ap-
plications may be implemented to address localized or system-
wide issues.

A. State Estimation
State estimation is a process that determines the state of the
power system to allow the system operator to make better deci-
sions aimed at maintaining power system security in the face of
various contingencies. Improvement in the accuracy of the state
estimation of the power system network is one of the most im-
mediate benefits of PMU application.
The state estimation technology currently in use evolved in
the 1960s. It uses measurements that do not require a common
reference: power system active power and reactive power flow
measurements, voltage magnitude, etc., collected over a fairly
long interval, to estimate the power system state. The process
combines the measurements with the network model to find
the variables of interest by solving nonlinear equations by
numerical iterations. The process may take several minutes
or longer to converge to a solution, is prone to errors in the
network parameters, and often diverges during those evolving
disturbances when a good state estimation is needed most. The
industry is constantly developing methods to improve state
estimation accuracy.
The application of a sufficient number of time-tag synchro-
nized PMUs across the system will improve state estimation so-
lutions to the point that the process becomes one of state mea-
surement. Consider the placement of PMUs at busses G, J and
S on the power system shown in Fig. 4.
The PMU at bus S measures the voltage phasor (amplitude
and angle), , and current phasors , and
Having these phasor quantities and an accurate system model,
the voltage phasors at the remote busses M, P, R, and T can
Fig. 5. Power-voltage (PV) curve.
be directly calculated with linear equations (“indirectly mea-
sured”). These buses are therefore defined as “observable” to
bus S, the PMU location [3].
Similarly the placement of PMUs at busses J and G define
regions X and Y where the state is accurately measured either
directly or indirectly. The remaining buses E, N, L and Q are
not considered “measurable” with the current PMU placement.
The number of adjacent busses that are not measurable (directly
or via calculations with linear equations) defines the “depth of
nonobservability” for a system with partial PMU coverage. It is
optimum to place the PMUs in such a way to maintain a uniform
depth of “nonobservability.” For this configuration the depth of
nonobservability is one and state voltage and current quantities
at the unobservable busses can be estimated by linear interpola-
tion with reasonable accuracy.
Power system state-vector determination from PMU mea-
surements offers the most precise method yet for obtaining real-
time static and dynamic information about the condition of the
network [4].
B. Voltage Instability
Visual tracking of the system proximity to an insecure voltage
. condition with a power-voltage (PV) curve may be done using
synchrophasor data. Fig. 5 shows a typical PV curve developed
from transmission corridor and load impedance data [5]. The
1810
Fig. 6. Steady-state stability limit with power transfer curve.
PV curve is characterized by having two possible operating so-
lutions for , one stable and one unstable, for a given delivered
power up to a maximum deliverable power of . accuracy.
As the transmission corridor and load impedances change,
the shape of the PV curve also changes affecting the maximum
deliverable power . This may place the operating point
for the delivered power very near , such that sub-
sequent system or load changes will cause a voltage collapse.
The real-time visualization of the PV curve and operating point
can be implemented with the corridor’s model and the real-
time measurement of voltage and current synchrophasors at both
ends of the transmission line or corridor. This will provide ex-
cellent visibility of transmission corridor, and enable system
operators to correct shortages of reactive power with genera-
tion rescheduling, reactive load compensation, load shedding,
or other available remedies. The assessment of voltage stability
and associated power margin could also be done on any meshed
network monitored in real-time with a state estimator. Although
PMUs are not essential, the time scales of interest make them a
very desirable platform for such an application.
C. Transient Transfer Capability Margin
Voltage synchrophasors measured by PMUs at both ends of
a transmission corridor make it possible to track the operating
point between two areas on a traditional power transfer curve
(Fig. 6).
When the operating point is in the proximity of a poten-
tially unstable condition as defined by , preventative actions
may be taken. is the maximum permissible steady state op-
erating point that is [pre]defined by the existing system state and
potential unstable system configurations that might exist after a
system event. If is greater than , then the premise is that
the system will likely become unstable for certain system events
that may require operation at points greater than is the
critical operating per the equal area criterion).
PMU measurements can also be used to provide improved
out-of-step protection for the power corridor of Fig. 6: voltage
phasors at the two ends allow real-time prediction of the out-
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER DELIVERY, VOL. 23, NO. 4, OCTOBER 2008
come of an evolving swing. Based on this prediction better
out-of-step blocking and tripping decisions can be made [6].
Similar calculations can be done when the transfer capability
margin is being investigated between two parts of the power
system, each of which can be represented by an equivalent ma-
chine, by using the equal area criterion or suitable extensions of
this criterion.
D. Line Parameter Calculation
PMUs deployed at both ends of a transmission line and
measuring both currents and voltages facilitate online tracking
(measurement) of line parameters. Performed continuously,
such measurement accounts for seasonal and temperature
changes. With enough natural unbalance, or when performed
during faults, the measurement will yield not only the pos-
itive-sequence impedance, but negative- and zero-sequence
impedance as well.
More sophisticated line models (e.g., -sections) can also be
applied with the synchronized measurements so that the voltage
profile across the line may be determined [7].
Direct measurement of line impedances allows detecting
errors in databases used by short circuit, state estimation and
other application packages, as well as improved fault location
E. Transmission Line Thermal Monitoring
Loading of transmission lines is often constrained by thermal
limits rather than stability concerns. There is a chance that
changes in the line resistance that reflect conductor heating
and sagging can be accurately measured using synchronously
measured voltages and currents at both ends of the line (see
previous subsection).
A PMU-based approach may complement or replace existing
devices that measure the transmission line’s thermal capacity to
provide an early warning in case of overload, dynamically con-
trol transmission line capacity, and provide indirect estimation
of line sagging [8], [9].
F. Real-Time Control and Protection Systems
Synchrophasors provide an ideal measurement for real-time,
wide-area control applications. As discussed previously, they
provide a direct measure of system phase angles, an important
indicator of system stability. Beyond single phase or posi-
tive-sequence voltage phasors, PMUs also provide current
phasors, frequency and its rate-of-change, all of which can be
used for control applications. Using the C37.118 communica-
tion protocol, measurements can be sent long distances over
standard communication systems in 1–2 cycles. This is fast
enough for many System Integrity Protection Systems (SIPS)
and system controls. Reference [10] in which a prototype
control using phasor voltage magnitude measurement as an
indication of voltage swing demonstrated an improvement in
an SIPS security margin. In the same project, an alternative
method using VAR flow calculated from voltage and current
phasors also showed improved security. Phase angle seems to
be an ideal measurement for this type of application. Another
approach for this same project using interarea phase angle
calculated from phasors has also been proposed [11].
Phase angle between busses as shown in Fig. 6 is determined
by voltage, power flow, and transmission corridor impedance.
MARTIN et al.: EXPLORING THE IEEE STANDARD C37.118–2005
While usually considered for indicating power flow, phase angle
can also indicate topology changes that require control actions.
This approach is used in another demonstration SIPS control
scheme [12].
G. System Oscillation and Small Signal Analysis
System oscillations can be monitored and analyzed using
phasors reported at an adequate rate (see Section III-C). For
example, a 30/s reporting rate (15 Hz Nyquist rate) allows a
filtered measurement bandwidth of 4–8 Hz, covering most sig-
nificant system oscillations. Prony or Eigen analysis can be used
to determine the system oscillation modes from the measured
data. Comparison of mode values indicates unit participation,
and modal damping [13], [14]. This information can be used
to assure system security, locate and resolve control problems,
and validate system models. In addition, a low level probing
signal can be used to excite particular oscillation modes [15].
This can provide operational security to be sure critical modes
are damped. Synchronized phasors provide the high-accuracy
and low noise measurements required for these applications.
V. OTHER SYNCHROPHASOR STANDARDS
A. Synchrophasor Standard in China
Research on synchrophasor technology in the People’s Re-
public of China started in 1994. However, it was not until 2002
that PMU and wide area monitoring systems (WAMS) gained
wide acceptance and application development started. The com-
mercial PMU/WAMS systems are manufactured according to
“The Technological Specification of Power System Real-time
Dynamic Monitoring Systems.” The specification, based on an
early draft of C37.118, standardizes the general architecture,
basic functions, communication interfaces and other related is-
sues of PMU/WAMS [16].
B. IEC Synchrophasor Standard
IEEE Standard C37.118 is expected to become an interna-
tional standard. At this time there is no attempt to create a com-
peting standard, but rather to use the IEEE version under the
“dual logo agreement” between IEEE and IEC. This encourages
development, creates a global application space for the manu-
facturers, will lead to improved cost and performance, and allow
faster maturity rate for the PMU technology.
VI. CONCLUSION
This paper has described the principal features of the revised
synchrophasor standard. The reader must remember that the
1811
paper is not a substitute for the actual standard, which is the ulti-
mate authority as to what constitutes compliance. The main dif-
ferences between the old and the new standards have also been
pointed out. The paper also provides a preliminary discussion of
PMU responses to electrical and electromechanical transients.
This paper discussed several prospective applications for the
PMU technology with significant benefits for system operation
and integrity.
The Working Group hopes that this standard will serve the
industry well for years to come.
REFERENCES
[1] IEEE Standard for Synchrophasors for Power Systems, IEEE Std.
1344-1995 (R2001).
[2] IEEE Standard for Synchrophasors for Power Systems, IEEE Std. C37.
118–2005 (Revision of IEEE Std. 1344–1995).
[3] R. F. Nuqui and A. G. Phadke, “Phasor measurement unit placement
techniques for complete and incomplete observability,” IEEE Trans.
Power Del., vol. 20, no. 4, pp. 2381–2388, Oct. 2005.
[4] A. G. Phadke, J. S. Thorp, and K. Karimi, “State estimation with phasor
measurements,” IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. PWRD-1, no. 1, pp.
233–241, Feb. 1986.
[5] M. Larsson, C. Rehtanz, and J. Bertsch, “Real-time voltage stability
assessment for transmission corridors,” presented at the IFAC Power
Plants and Power Systems Control Conf., Seoul, Korea, 2003.
[6] V. Centeno, J. De La Ree, A. G. Phadke, G. Michel, J. Murphy, and
R. Burnett, “Adaptive out-of-step relaying using phasor measurement
techniques,” IEEE Comput. Appl. Power, vol. 6, no. 4, pp. 12–17, Oct.
1993.
[7] C.-S. Chen, C.-W. Liu, and J.-A. Jaing, “A new adaptive PMU based
protection scheme for transposed/un-transposed parallel transmission
lines,” IEEE Trans. Power Del., vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 395–404, Apr. 2002.
[8] M. Weibel, W. Sattinger, P. Rothermann, U. Steinegger, M. Zima, and
G. Biedenbach, “Overhead line temperature monitoring pilot project,”
in CIGRE General Session, Paris, France, Aug. 27–Sep. 1, 2006, pp.
B2–311.
[9] E. Price, “Practical considerations for implementing wide area moni-
toring, protection and control systems,” presented at the 59th Annu.
Conf. Protective Engineers, College Station, TX, Apr. 2006, Texas
A&M Univ.
[10] C. W. Taylor, D. C. Erickson, K. E. Martin, R. W. Wilson, and V.
Venkatasubramanian, “WACS—Wide-area stability and voltage con-
trol system: R&D and online demonstration,” in Proc. IEEE, May 2005,
vol. 93, no. 5, pp. 892–906.
[11] D. Hu and V. Venkatasubramanian, “New wide-area algorithms for
detecting angle instability using synchrophasors,” presented at the
Western Protective Relay Conf., Spokane, WA, Oct. 2006.
[12] E. Martinez, N. Juarez, A. Guzman, G. Zweigle, and J. Leon, “Using
synchronized phase angle difference for wide-area protection and con-
trol,” presented at the Western Protective Relay Conf., Spokane, WA,
Oct. 2006.
[13] P. Kundar, G. J. Rogers, and M. Klein, “A fundamental study of inter-
area oscillations in power systems,” IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 6,
no. 3, pp. 914–921, Aug. 1994.
[14] K. E. Martin, “Phasor measurements in the WECC,” presented at the
IEEE T&D Show, Panel on Phasor Measurements—Systems Applica-
tions, Dallas, TX, May 2006.
[15] J. F. Hauer and M. J. Besir, “Interim report of WSCC summer 2000
staged system tests and validation studies” Oct. 2000, WECC Modeling
Working Group.
[16] X. Xie and Y. Xin, “WAMS applications in Chinese power system,”
IEEE Power Energy Mag., vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 54–63, Jan./Feb. 2006.