Electrical Power and Energy Systems 74 (2016) 134–141

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Electrical Power and Energy Systems

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ijepes

Low-order dynamic equivalent estimation of power systems using data

of phasor measurement units
M. Shiroei a, B. Mohammadi-Ivatloo b,⇑, M. Parniani a
a
Center of Excellence in Power System Management and Control, Department of Electrical Engineering, Sharif University of Technology, Tehran, Iran
b
Faculty of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Tabriz, Tabriz, Iran

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: This paper utilizes data measured by phasor measurement units (PMUs) to extract a low-order dynamic
Received 16 May 2014 equivalent model for power system stability studies. The estimated model is a 2-order model for syn-
Received in revised form 27 May 2015 chronous machines. This model has the advantage of simplicity of classical model and considerably
Accepted 9 July 2015
reduces the oversimplifying error of classical model. This method offers an alternative approach to ana-
lytical model reduction techniques based on the detailed system models. The proposed method uses the
synchronized bus voltage and current phasors measured by PMUs. Using post disturbance data, electrical
Keywords:
and mechanical parameters of the equivalent generator are estimated sequentially. Furthermore, a new
Phasor measurement unit
Model estimation
approach for estimation of two-machine and single machine infinite bus (SMIB) equivalent systems are
Power system model reduction presented for analysis of electromechanical oscillations. To evaluate the performance of the proposed
Power system oscillations approach, simulations are performed on a two area 13-bus test system and real measured PMU data.
Simulation results show that the estimated model can represent the dynamic behavior of the studied
system with good approximation.
Ó 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Introduction methods [7]. The main drawback of measurement based approach

With the development of electrical industry, the scales of power
systems have become larger than ever. Owing to the dimension of
interconnected power systems, it is often impractical to represent
the entire system model in detail. Therefore, reduced order
dynamic equivalents are used to represent groups of generators
or external systems [1].
Many efforts are devoted to reduce power system model using
analytical approach [1–4]. Analytical approaches based on the con-
cept of coherency have the benefit of saving power system struc-
ture. However, these approaches need detailed parameters of all
power system machines and elements. Due to continuous variation
of system parameters and changing environment of nowadays
power system, analytical approach may not be a good choice for
model reduction. To overcome this shortcoming and take system
structure and parameters changes into account, measurement
based approaches have been proposed [5,6].
Measurement-based methods use dynamic responses of system
disturbance to estimate dynamic equivalent parameters. The
unknown parameters of the dynamic equivalent model can be
determined using identification and parameter estimation
⇑ Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: shiroei@ee.sharif.edu (M. Shiroei), mohammadi@ieee.org
(B. Mohammadi-Ivatloo), parniani@sharif.edu (M. Parniani).
is their need for fast dynamic response of power system.
Fortunately, modern power systems use wide area measurement
system (WAMS) [8,9] that utilize phasor measurement unit
(PMU) as a basis for data gathering system. PMUs measure phasors
of voltage, current and frequency with a time stamp in the time
interval down to 20 ms. A review of application of PMUs to power
system operation and PMU placement methods has been provided
in [10]. Therefore from organization point of view, there would be
no concern about gathering fast dynamic response of power sys-
tem. In [5,11], a new method for parameter estimation using neu-
ral network has been presented. Wavelet transform is used in [12]
for identification of inter-area oscillations using measured data by
PMU. Third-order synchronous generator model estimation is pre-
sented in [13,14]. In these methods, transfer function of the
machine is calculated by linearizing its equations about the oper-
ating point and estimating the parameters. These methods have
limited accuracy because of linearization error. Power system
Thevenin model estimation for use in voltage stability evaluation
is performed in [6]. This method uses continuously changing oper-
ating data in power system for parameter estimation. Reference
[15] equivalences two sides of a tie line by two classical machines
and estimates their parameters by neglecting the damping effect.
This approach uses the inter-area oscillation components in the
bus voltages resulting from disturbances. The main attributes of
measurement based methods are the ability to aggregate several

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijepes.2015.07.015
0142-0615/Ó 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
 M. Shiroei et al. / Electrical Power and Energy Systems 74 (2016) 134–141 135

coherent or non-coherent groups of generators without requiring a Nonlinear Least Square-1 (NLS1)
large data set. According to Fig. 1, relationship between the internal voltage
In this paper, a new measurement based method using synchro- and the terminal voltage can be stated as follows:
nized phasor measurements is presented. Dynamic equivalent of 0
E\d  jX d I ¼ U ð1Þ
the external system viewed from the measured bus is identified
in the form of classical or second-order model of synchronous gen- where, U and I are the generator terminal voltage and current pha-
erator. Estimation of the model parameters is done in two simple sors. By separating real and imaginary parts, (1) is divided into two
steps. At the first step, electrical parameters of equivalent machine equations as presented in the following.
are estimated. Mechanical parameters are estimated in the next
step. Estimation of electrical parameters is carried out by two U j  E sinðdÞ
Ir ¼ ð2Þ
methods. In one method, using non-linear least square, electrical X 0d
parameters of the machine and its internal voltage angle are esti-
mated together. In the other method, electrical parameters are U r  E cosðdÞ
Ij ¼ ð3Þ
estimated without estimation of the internal angle, which is calcu- X 0d
lated after estimation of the transient reactance. The latter method
is faster, while the former yields more accurate results. Machine where, U r ; U j ; Ir and I j are real and imaginary parts of terminal
modelling is then extended to model the prevailing tie-line oscilla- voltage and current, respectively. Considering the last m samples,
tions using SMIB and two-area equivalent. the above equations can be rewritten as following.
The remainder of the paper is organized as follows. In
E sinðdi Þ þ X 0d Iri  U ij ¼ 0 i ¼ 1; . . . ; m ð4Þ
Section ‘The equivalent machine parameter estimation’, estimation
of the classical model is formulated and presented with two
methods. Section ‘Illustration using the SMIB system’ and E cosðdi Þ þ X 0d Iij  U ri ¼ 0 ð5Þ
Section ‘Estimation of external power system dynamics for a
With 2m equations in (4) and (5) only m þ 2 variables, i.e. E; X d and
two-area system’ provide simulation results of these methods on
di ; i ¼ 1; . . . ; m are unknown. If m  2 then the set of equations will
the SMIB and two-area systems. In Section ‘Estimation of external
be over determined and can be calculated using the following non-
power system dynamics for a two-area system’, it is also shown
linear least square optimization:
how to identify a two-machine or SMIB equivalent model to inves-  
tigate tie-line inter-area oscillations. The application of estimation  E sinðd Þ þ X 0 Ir  U j 
 1 d 1 1 
approach on the real data is presented in Section ‘Application on  
 E cosðd1 Þ þ X 0 I j  U r 
the real PMU data’. Conclusions are given in Section ‘Conclusion’.  d 1 1 
 
Min  ..  ð6Þ
0 
E;X d ;di  . 

 E sinðd Þ þ X 0 Ir  U j 
 m d m m 
The equivalent machine parameter estimation  
 E cosðdm Þ þ X 0 I j  U r 
d m m

The classical or the second-order model of synchronous In (6) a suitable choice for initial conditions can be
machine is the simplest model that can be used in electromechan- ~ In the above least square formulation,
E ¼ 1; X 0d ¼ 0:2 and di ¼ \U.
ical dynamics analysis. This model offers considerable computa-
with m sets of measurements, the Jacobian matrix has the size of
tional simplicity; it allows the transient electrical performance of
ðm þ 2Þ  ðm þ 2Þ. Therefore, by increasing the number of mea-
a machine to be represented by a simple voltage source with fixed
surement sets, computational effort will increase progressively.
magnitude behind an effective transient reactance as shown in
Fig. 1 [16]. This model has good performance in determining the
Nonlinear Least Square-2 (NLS2)
first swing stability [17]. When the system is subjected to a distur-
In the least square formulation of (6) with m sets of measure-
bance, parameters of the classical model can be estimated using
ments, m unknowns are the generator internal angle (d) corre-
post disturbance data. The electrical parameters of the model to
sponding to the individual samples. The following formulation
be estimated are the generator internal voltage (E), transient reac-
removes these variables from the optimization problem. By assum-
tance (X 0d ) and the variable rotor phase angle (d). The mechanical
ing the terminal voltage phasor as the angle reference, (1) is
parameters to be estimated are damping coefficient K d and inertia rewritten as:
constant (H). As stated above, the generator internal voltage is
0
assumed to be constant but the rotor phase angle varies from E\d0 ¼ U þ jX d I ð7Þ
one sample to the other.
By decomposing the current term (I) into real and imaginary parts,
Estimation of the classical model can be divided into two steps:
Eq. (7) can be written as follows:
estimation of the electrical parameters and estimation of the
mechanical parameters. 0 j
E\d0 ¼ U þ jX d ðIr þ jI Þ ¼ ðU  X 0d I j Þ þ jðX 0d Ir Þ ð8Þ

where Ir and I j are the real and imaginary part if I. By calculating

Estimation of electrical parameters squared absolute value of the two sides of above equation, the
following equation can be obtained.
In this work, two different formulations for estimation of elec- 2 2 2 2 2
trical part of classical model are presented. E2 ¼ U 2  2X 0d UI j þ X 0d I j þ X 0d Ir ¼ U 2 þ 2X 0d Q þ X 0d I2 ð9Þ

where, Q is the generator reactive power output (Q ¼ UI j ) and I is

Fig. 1. Circuit diagram of a classical model of a synchronous generator.
 qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
2 2
the magnitude of generator output current I ¼ ðIr þ I j Þ .
With m sets of measurements, there will be m equations with
only two unknown variables E and X 0d . Therefore, two measure-
ment samples would be sufficient to solve the equations. For more
136 M. Shiroei et al. / Electrical Power and Energy Systems 74 (2016) 134–141

accurate estimation of parameters using m samples (m > 2), the practice, the steady state value of Pelec is not constant and changes
following least square error optimization should be solved: continuously. In this case the moving average value of
 2  pre-disturbance P elec can be used for determination of Pmech .
 U þ ðX 0 Ir Þ2 þ 2X 0 Q  ðE1 Þ2 
 1 d 1 d 1  Another solution for this problem is to assume Pmech as an unknown
 
min  ..  ð10Þ variable and to modify the least square formulation of (14) to

E;X 0d  . 
 include P mech as an unknown variable to be estimated.
 U 2 þ ðX 0 Ir Þ2 þ 2X 0 Q  ðE Þ2 
m d m d m m

The next step is to calculate the angle difference between the

internal voltage and the terminal voltage. Illustration using the SMIB system
!
X 0d Ir
d0 ¼ tan1 ð11Þ In this section, simulation results on the SMIB system are sam-
U  X 0d I j pled and taken as the measurement data to estimate its machine
parameters using the proposed algorithms. All the simulations
By adding the terminal voltage angle (measured by PMU) to d0
are carried out using the Power System Toolbox [19]. At first, to
the internal rotor angle will be obtained as d ¼ h þ d0 ; where h is
validate the accuracy of the proposed methods, the machine in
the angle of terminal bus voltage i.e., h ¼ \U. In the NLS2 formula-
the SMIB system is simulated with classical model. The system
tion, the size of Jacobean matrix is 2  2, i.e. this formulation is
parameters are given in Appendix ‘SMIB system parameters’. To
independent of the number of sample sets. Therefore, by increasing
simulate a disturbance on the system, a three phase fault with
the number of measurement sets, the surplus calculation time will
duration of 0.05s is applied on the line connecting the machine
be minimal. On the other hand, unlike to NLS1 method, simultane-
to infinite bus. NLS1 and NLS2 methods are implemented on the
ous estimation of d is not included in NLS2 method. Hence, the
post disturbance generator terminal voltage and current phasors.
NLS1 method has a better performance on the description of
To simulate PMU data flow, the sampling time interval is
machine or external system dynamic behavior.
selected to be 30 sample/s. It should be noted that the sampling
After estimation of the equivalent internal angle, mechanical
rate of currently installed PMUs is varying from 12 sample/s to
parameters of the equivalent machine can be estimated.
60 sample/s. The sensitivity of estimation method is investigated
by changing the sampling time. It is observed that the estimation
Estimation of mechanical parameters performance has negligible sensitivity to change of sampling rate
in this range. Therefore, the sampling interval is selected to be 30
The swing equation of synchronous machine is used to describe sample/s in the simulated test cases. From the large number of
variations of the rotor angle d during disturbance. simulations, it is observed that selecting data window equal or
2 greater than 3 times than the smallest system oscillation frequency
2H d d K d dd
þ ¼ Pmech  Pelec ð12Þ is enough for estimation approach. In the SMIB test system, data
w0 dt 2 w0 dt
window is selected to be 3.3 s or 100 samples.
where, P mech and Pelec are the mechanical power input and electrical In this test case, the estimated model and original system have
power output of machine, respectively. K d is damping coefficient the same order and it is expected that the estimated parameters be
and H is inertia constant. Using the estimated internal angle (d0 ) equal to the original simulated machine parameters. Table 1 shows
from NLS1 or NLS2 method, (12) can be used to estimate H and the estimation results for this case. As it can be observed from this
K d . Before then, however (12) should be transformed to a discrete table, the estimation error is negligible. The little error is due to the
form using the Bilinear or Tustin method [18]. In this method the effect of Tustin linearisation error.
operator dtd is substituted with T2 z1, where z is operator of z trans- In the second test, the machine is simulated with detailed
zþ1
form and T is sampling period. The discrete form of (12) is: model. The purpose of this test is to investigate the results of the
proposed methods on a more realistic system. Detailed model
2H 4 kd can represent the actual behavior of the generators with less error.
ðdðn þ 2Þ  2dðn þ 1Þ þ dðnÞÞ þ ðdðn þ 2Þ  dðnÞÞ
w0 T 2 w0 By applying a fault on the SMIB system, the resulting current and
¼ ½Pa ðn þ 2Þ þ 2Pa ðn þ 1Þ þ P a ðnÞ ð13Þ voltage phasors are considered as PMU data and used to estimate
classical model parameters. The estimated parameters are shown
where, Pa is the acceleration power and is equal to Pmech  P elec . With in Table 1. The results show that, the estimated parameters of
m set of measurement (m P 4) the parameters H and K d can be NLS1 and NLS2 are different from each other and from the original
estimated using the following linear least square optimization: classical model parameters. It should be mentioned that the esti-
  mated model is a classic model while the original model is a
 2H €d þ K d d_ ¼ P 
 w0 1 w0 1 a1 
detailed machine model with order of 6. The difference between
 
 .. 
Min  .  ð14Þ
H;K d  
 2H € Kd _ 
 w dm þ w dm ¼ Pam  Table 1
0 0
Parameter estimation results for classical and detailed generator model for SMIB test
where, case.

Parameters X 0d (pu) H Kd
€di ¼ 4 ðdði þ 2Þ  2dði þ 1Þ þ dðiÞÞ
T2 ð15Þ
Original Value 0.3 6.5 2
2 Classic Model
d_ i ¼ ðdði þ 2Þ  dðiÞÞ Estimated value (NLS1) 0.3 6.4801 1.9905
T
Estimation error (NLS1) % 0 0.306 0.2502
It should be mentioned that in the classical representation of Estimated value (NLS2) 0.3 6.4922 2.002
synchronous machine, Pmech is assumed to be constant, i.e. the gov- Estimation error (NLS2) % 0 0.12 0.1
ernor control is not taken to account. The steady-state or Detailed Model
pre-disturbance value of P elec can be used for Pmech to satisfy the Estimated value (NLS1) 0.2604 7.3 14.152
Estimated value (NLS2) 0.1745 8.044 15.388
equality of P elec and Pmech in pre-disturbance time window. In
 M. Shiroei et al. / Electrical Power and Energy Systems 74 (2016) 134–141 137

7.15 Table 3
Detailed Model
NLS1 Model Parameters of the estimated equivalent machine from Bus 3, Bus 13 and SMIB of
Machine Active Power (p.u)

NLS2 Model Buses 3&13, at three levels of loading.

7.1 Classic Model
Parameters Estimated values of detailed
7.05 model
150 MW 300 MW 450 MW
7
Reduced from Bus 3 X 0d 1.0724 0.5904 0.4504
H 5.0609 8.9874 10.8035
6.95
Kd 1.5065 3.0221 4.7076

6.9 Reduced from Bus 13 X 0d 0.0341 0.0354 0.0372

H 7.4861 12.751 11.714
Kd 2.3191 3.5984 3.1138
6.85
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Reduced from 3&13, SMIB X 0d 1.2165 0.7358 0.5976
Time (sec) H 6.546 8.2198 10.6673
Kd 1.3952 2.1778 2.7576
Fig. 2. Generator active power oscillations.

Estimation of external power system dynamics for a two-area

1.0002 system
Classic Model
1.0002 Detail Model
NLS1 Model
1.0001 In this section, the algorithm presented in Section
Machine Speed (p.u)

1.0001
1 mate the external power system dynamics for a two-area system.
1 Fig. 4 shows the single-line diagram of the two-area system. This
0.9999
0.9999
0.9998
0.9998
0 1 2 3
Time (sec)
Fig. 3. Generator speed oscillations.
estimated and original model accounts the effect of higher order
dynamics.
In order to validate the estimation results, similar disturbance is
applied on the SMIB system with detailed model, with the original
second-order model, and with the second-order NLS1 and NLS2
estimated models. Active power and speed a oscillations of gener-
ator are shown in Figs. 2 and 3, respectively.
From Figs. 2 and 3 one can observe that NLS1 and NLS2 esti-
mated parameters are better approximations of the detailed gener-
ator model with respect to the original classical model, and yield
oscillations very close to the oscillations of detailed model. In other
words, the estimated parameters are changed in such direction to
compensate the difference between the second-order model and
the detailed model, and represent the effect of higher order
dynamics on the oscillatory mode. Characteristics of the oscillatory
modes with different models of the SMIB system are shown in
Table 2. These modes are extracted by applying Prony method in
the time response of 0 to 5 s on the post-disturbance oscillations
of active power [20]. As shown in the Table 3, damping ratios
(DR) of NLS1 and NLS2 models are approximately equal, but the
oscillation damping frequency (DF) in the NLS1 model is more
accurate than the other.
Table 2
Oscillatory mode for different models of SMIB system.
Model k DR error (%)
Detailed 0:435  5:784j
Classic 0:086  5:916j
NLS1 0:497  5:779j
NLS2 0:493  5:828j
NLS2 Model
‘The equivalent machine parameter estimation’ is extended to esti-
system consists of two identical areas connected through a rela-
tively weak tie [20]. Each area includes two generating units that
are strongly connected together (G1, G2 and G3, G4). As a result,
G1 and G2 form a coherent group and G3 and G4 form another
coherent group. When exposed to an external disturbance, the gen-
4 5 6 7 8 9 erators in one coherent group will swing in unison with each other
and against the other coherent group [15]. This system is a good
example to demonstrate application of the proposed method. The
system data are given in [15].
Suppose that we are interested in studying the dynamics of
Area-2, and thus represent G3 and G4 in detail. Therefore, Area-1
consisting of G1 and G2 can be viewed as an external system from
Bus 3. The reduced system diagram is shown in Fig. 5.
At the first step, to estimate the external system dynamic
parameters (Geq parameters), post-disturbance data should be
acquired. A three-phase short circuit fault with duration of 0.05 s
without any line switching is applied at Bus 101 to simulate a dis-
turbance on the two-area system. The post-disturbance voltage of
Bus 3 and current of the line 3–101 are used as the input data to
NLS1. This means that at least one PMU must be installed at Bus
3 or Bus 101. Table 3 shows the results of estimating the Geq
parameters. The parameter estimation is performed at three levels
of loading.
Also, Table 4 compares the dominant oscillation mode (k) of the
system reduced system at three levels of loading. From Table 3 it
can be observed that, in the most of cases but not in all cases, when
the loading level increases, X 0d decreases and H and K d increase.
There is one case that the trend is not true. In this case, unlike to
the other cases, that power is coming to the reference bus. In this
situation, the estimation of X 0d tends to zero and be very small.
Since X 0d cannot be a negative parameter, it cannot change and
decrease anymore. Therefore, X 0d will be estimated near zero. It
should be mentioned that in this case X 0d tends to be negative in
the optimization procedure, but we have limited it’s lower limit
to zero. Therefore it cannot exceed its limit. This limitation changes
the monotonic trend for estimation values of other parameters
DF error (%) such as H and K d . In addition, as shown in Table 4, the final results
– – show lower accuracy and performance compared with other cases.
80.67 2.282 As can be observed from Table 4, even in the large error of the pro-
16.67 0.086 posed method in some cases, the provided results are more accept-
12.4 0.761
able with respect to INA technique. Consequently, in most cases,
138 M. Shiroei et al. / Electrical Power and Energy Systems 74 (2016) 134–141

Fig. 4. Single-line diagram of the two-area power system.

3.25
Detailed Model
3.2 Estimated Reduced Model
Analytically Reduced Model
3.15

3.1

3.05

2.95

2.9

2.85

2.8

2.75
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Fig. 6. Disturbance response of the detail model, analytically reduced model and
estimated reduced model.

Fig. 5. Simplified structure of the two-area system reduced from Bus 3.

shows disturbance response of the detailed model, analytically
reduced model and estimated reduced model. As shown in Fig. 6,
the estimated model presents more acceptable results in compar-
the output of the proposed method is more reliable with respect to
ison with the analytically reduced model.
analytical approach. In order to provide better comparison with
From the results of Table 4, it can be concluded that estimation
classical model, the simulation result of two-area system that ana-
error of oscillation frequency is more than damping estimation
lytically reduced by inertia aggregated technique (INA) [21] is also
error, and the error of damping ratio decreases by increasing the
added. By this way, the performance of the estimated reduced
loading of the tie-line.
model with analytically reduced model can be compared. Fig. 6

Table 4
Disturbance response of the two models at three levels of loading to three-phase fault on Bus 101.

Tie line loading

150 MW 300 MW 450 MW
k-Detailed model 0:0726  3:5442j 0:0724  3:4568j 0:0738  3:2739j
INA reduced model k-Reduced model 0:0554  7:2268j 0:0551  7:2345j 0:0551  7:2237j
DR error (%) 62.569 62.8120 62.8120
DF error (%) 103.905 104.1222 103.8175
Reduced from Bus 3 k-Reduced model 0:0731  4:4895j 0:0774  4:0866j 0:0876  3:8983j
DR error (%) 20.49 6.9548 0
DF error (%) 26.6703 18.2184 19.0732
Reduced from Bus 13 k-Reduced model 0:0757  5:3714j 0:0786  4:4469j 0:0886  4:1102j
DR error (%) 31.22 15.31 4
DF error (%) 51.544 28.644 25.54
Reduced from3&13, SMIB k-Reduced model 0:0663  3:255j 0:0663  3:561j 0:0847  3:4205j
DR error (%) 0.5 11 10.22
DF error (%) 8.1553 3.027 4.477
 M. Shiroei et al. / Electrical Power and Energy Systems 74 (2016) 134–141
Fig. 7. Steps of reducing two-area system into two machine system.
So far, to overcome some drawbacks of estimation of power sys-
tem from one side, a new technique is presented. In the new
approach, we have reduced the external system, viewed from the
measurement bus, to an equivalent classic machine model. It is
also possible to reduce and replace both sides of the tie-line, and
convert it to a two-machine or a SMIB system. This process is
explained in the following.
Reduction of the system into two-machine system
For model reduction from both sides of a tie-line, the terminal
bus voltages and the tie-line current must be known. In the case
of two-area system, to reduce the system from Buses 3 and 13,
U 3 ; U 13 and I313 must be measured. If impedance of the line 3–
13 is known, then only one PMU is required at Bus 3 or 13.
Otherwise, at least two PMUs should be installed. The required
steps for reducing the two-area system to an equivalent
two-machine system are shown in Fig. 7. As it is clear from this fig-
ure, part of the system that is connected to each terminal of the
tie-line is modelled by an equivalent machine.
Part 2 of Table 3 shows the implementation result of the
approach on the two-area system. Similar to the previous sections,
simulation is performed for three-phase fault on Bus 101 at three
levels of line loading.
Extraction of the dominant mode of oscillations in response to
the three phase fault on Bus 101 is done to examine accuracy of
the estimated two-machine model. The results are presented in
part 2 of Table 4. It can be observed that in this case, error of the
estimated frequency of inter-area oscillations is not low. An alter-
native approach is proposed in the following, to improve this
drawback.
The standard two-area network data are used to perform simu-
lation for this study. There are two loads on buses 4 and 14. With
100 MVA as system base, the allocations of loads are presented in
Table 5. As shown in this table, in this paper the allocation of load
on buses 3 and 13 are changed to study the effect of line loading.
Table 5
Load allocation among the buses.
Tie line loading Load-4 Load-14
1.5 9.611 15.249
3 8.186 16.674
4.5 6.826 18.034
139
Therefore, by studying the effect of line loading, the effect of differ-
ent load allocations are also investigated, automatically.
Reduction of the system into SMIB system
It is well known that a two-machine model can be transformed
to an equivalent SMIB model with similar dynamic characteristic
[22]. Here, we are going to take a different approach, and identify
a SMIB equivalent directly. For this purpose, the electrical equiva-
lents of either sides of the tie-line are first estimated as for the
two-machine equivalent explained earlier. Next, one of the internal
buses is selected as the phase reference and assumed as infinite
bus. Mechanical parameters of the equivalent machine, located
on the other bus, are then estimated. Fig. 8 shows the proposed
estimation process.
In Fig. 8, Bus 2 is selected as the reference or infinite bus and the
internal angle of Bus 1 is referred to that bus. Then, mechanical
parameters of equivalent machine are estimated only for machine
1, i.e.:
d0 1;...;n ¼ d1;...;n  d1;...;n ð16Þ
1 2
2
2HSMIB d d0 K SMIB dd0
þ ¼ P mech  Pelec ð17Þ
w0 dt2 w0 dt
Part 3 of Table 3 also shows the implementation results of SMIB
model reduction for the two-area system.
Part 3 of Table 4 shows characteristics of the oscillatory mode in
the equivalent SMIB model, and compares it with that of the orig-
inal system. Comparison of part 2 and 3 of Table 4 reveals that the
SMIB equivalent is more accurate than the estimated two-machine
model. Thus, it is more suitable, and yet simpler, for evaluating
tie-line transients.
Application on the real PMU data
In this section PMU data measured in a western interconnection
power system is used for simulation purpose. Current and power of
Malin-Round Mountain transmission line and bus voltage are mea-
sured with the rate of 20 sample/s during the serious breakup of
August 10, 1996 [23]. Application of estimation approach on the
real PMU data are carried out to assess the effectiveness of pre-
sented approach on the practical system data. Since, only PMU data
from one bus is available, estimation of reduced SMIB or reduced
two machine model is not possible. In this case, only external
140 M. Shiroei et al. / Electrical Power and Energy Systems 74 (2016) 134–141

Fig. 8. Steps of reducing the two-area system into a SMIB system.

Table A.6
Parameters of detailed generator model of SMIB.

Xd X 0d X 00d T 0d0 ðsÞ T 00d0 ðsÞ Xl Ra

1.8 0.3 0.2 0.8 0.03 0.2 0.0025
Xq X 0q X 00q T 0q0 ðsÞ T 00q0 ðsÞ H Kd
1.7 0.55 0.24 0.4 0.05 6.5 2

system for a 25 s time window. The online mode estimation is also

employed to extract the system oscillation mode. For the selected
time window, the real system gives k ¼ 0:0334  1:77j, where
the estimated system gives k ¼ 0:0294  1:71j. These results
prove the performance of the proposed approach for a real system.
Fig. 9. Active power oscillation from real PMU data for August 10 trip.

system dynamic estimation is possible. Fig. 9 shows the active
power oscillation of Malin-Round Mountain transmission line dur-
ing the breakup.
It should be noticed that extraneous data outliers and high
order components are filtered out before implementing the pro-
posed method. Fourth order Butterworth filter with cut off fre-
quency of 5 Hz is used to eliminate measurement noise and high
order outliers. After filtering, the data are fed into NLS1 method
to extract external system dynamic.
The output of estimation process are X 0d ¼ 0:5367; H ¼ 55:02
and K d ¼ 46:13. Since the external system viewed from PMU is a
large power system, obtaining high value for H and K d is justifiable.
In order to investigate the performance and accuracy of the pro-
posed approach, the output of estimated system is compared with
real system. Fig. 10 shows power oscillation of estimated and real
Real System
Estimated Model
1.4
1.39
1.38
1.37
1.36
1.35
Conclusion
In this paper, estimation of a second order or classical model of
external power system, viewed from an arbitrary bus, using PMU
data was presented. Two different formulations with nonlinear
least squares optimization were proposed to calculate the equiva-
lent model parameters. One of these algorithms yields more accu-
rate results, whereas the other is computationally less demanding.
Implementation of these methods on a SMIB and a two-area sys-
tem showed their performance and effectiveness. The paper also
presented the procedure for estimation of a two-machine or a
SMIB equivalent model to study electromechanical transients on
a tie-line.
The proposed methods are applicable for online evaluation of
small signal stability, inter-area oscillations and transient stability
margin of power system. However, while the basic approach is
straightforward and comprehensive, the parameter identification
algorithm may be improved to yield more accurate results.
Appendix A. SMIB system parameters
Parameters of the SMIB system are presented in Table A.6.
Parameters of the generator are provided in PU in 900 MVA base.
The line reactance in 100 MVA base is X line ¼ 0:1 PU.
References

1.34 [1] Ishchenko A, Myrzik J, Kling W. Dynamic equivalencing of distribution

networks with dispersed generation using Hankel norm approximation. IET
1.33 Gener Transm Distrib 2007;1:818–25.
0 5 10 15 20 [2] Podmore R. Development of dynamic equivalents for transient stability
studies, EPRI, Report Project 763; 1997.
Fig. 10. Active power oscillation obtained by the estimated model and the real [3] Arredondo JMR, GarciaValle R. An optimal power system model order
system oscillation. reduction technique. Int J Elect Power Energy Syst 2004;26:493–500.
 M. Shiroei et al. / Electrical Power and Energy Systems 74 (2016) 134–141
[4] Chow J, Galarza R, Accari P, Price W. Inertial and slow coherency aggregation
algorithms for power system dynamic model reduction. IEEE Trans Power Syst
1995;10:680–5.
[5] Rahim A, Al-Ramadhan A. Dynamic equivalent of external power system and
its parameter estimation through artificial neural networks. Int J Elect Power
Energy Syst 2002;24:113–20.
[6] Parniani M, Chow J, Vanfretti L, Bhargava B, Salazar A. Voltage stability analysis
of a multiple-infeed load center using phasor measurement data. In: Power
systems conference and exposition, PSCE ’06; 2006. p. 1299–1305.
[7] Ljung L. System identification: theory for user. Prentice Hall; 1987.
[8] Dou C xia, Zhang X zhong, Guo S liang, Mao C-C. Delay-independent excitation
control for uncertain large power systems using wide-area measurement
signals. Int J Elect Power Energy Syst 2010;32:210–7.
[9] Ju P, Qin C, Wu F, Xie H, Ning Y. Load modeling for wide area power system. Int
J Elect Power Energy Syst 2011;33:909–17.
[10] Nazari-Heris M, Mohammadi-Ivatloo B. Application of heuristic algorithms to
optimal PMU placement in electric power systems: an updated review. Renew
Sustain Energy Rev 2015;50:214–28.
[11] Shakouri H, Radmanesh HR. Identification of a continuous time nonlinear state
space model for the external power system dynamic equivalent by neural
networks. Int J Elect Power Energy Syst 2009;31:334–44.
[12] Shiri F, Mohammadi-ivatloo B. Identification of inter-area oscillations using
wavelet transform and phasor measurement unit data. Int Trans Elect Energy
Syst 2014. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/etep.1994.
141
[13] Ju P, Ni L, Wu F. Dynamic equivalents of power systems with online
measurements. Part 1: Theory. IEE Proc Gener Transm Distrib
2004;151:175–8.
[14] Yu Y nan, El-Sharkawi M, Wvong M. Estimation of unknown large power
system dynamics. IEEE Trans Power App Syst PAS-98 1979:279–89.
[15] Chow J, Chakrabortty A, Vanfretti L, Arcak M. Estimation of radial power
system transfer path dynamic parameters using synchronized phasor data.
IEEE Trans Power Syst 2008;23:564–71.
[16] Kundur P. Power system stability and control. McGraw-Hill; 1994.
[17] Sauer W, Pai M. Power system dynamics and stability. Prentice Hall; 1997.
[18] Franklin G, Powell J, Workman M. Digital control of dynamic
systems. Addison-Wesley; 1998.
[19] Chow J., Rogers G. Power system toolbox for MATLAB, Cherry Tree Scientific
Software; 2007.
[20] Smith J, Fatehi F, Woods C, Hauer J, Trudnowski D. Transfer function
identification in power system applications. IEEE Trans Power Syst
1993;8:1282–90.
[21] Chow J. Time-scale modeling of dynamic networks with applications to power
systems. Lect Notes Control Inf Sci, vol. 46. Germany: Springer; 1982.
[22] Kimbark E. Power system stability. Wiley IEEE Press; 1995.
[23] Kosterev D, Taylor C, Mittelstadt W. Model validation for the August 10, 1996
WSCC system outage. IEEE Trans Power Syst 1999;14:967–79.