emtp simul(10)
TRANSCRIPT
-
7/27/2019 EMTP simul(10)
1/14
100 Power systems electromagnetic transients simulation
Equation 5.1 can be expressed as:
ik = etR/Lik1 +
1 etR/L
vk (5.2)
Although the exponential form of the difference equation can be deduced from the
difference equation developed by the numerical integrator substitution method, this
approach is unsuitable for most transfer functions or electrical circuits, due to the
difficulty in identifying the form of the exponential that has been truncated. The
root-matching technique provides a rigorous method.
Numerical integrator substitution provides a mapping from continuous to discrete
time, or equivalently from the s to the z-domain. The integration rule used will influ-
ence the mapping and hence the error. Table 5.1 shows the characteristics of forward
rectangular, backward rectangular (implicit or backward Euler) and trapezoidal inte-
grators, including the mapping of poles in the left-hand halfs-plane into the z-plane.If the continuous system is stable (has all its poles in the left-hand half s-plane) then
under forward Euler the poles in the z-plane can lie outside the unit circle and hence
an unstable discrete system can result. Both backward Euler and the trapezoidal rule
give stable discrete systems, however stability gives no indication of the accuracy of
the representation.
The use of the trapezoidal integrator is equivalent to the bilinear transform (or
Tustin method) for transforming from a continuous to a discrete system, the former
being the time representation of the latter. To illustrate this point the bilinear transform
will be next derived from the trapezoidal rule.In the s-plane the expression for integration is:
Y(s)
X(s)= 1
s(5.3)
In discrete time the trapezoidal rule is expressed as:
yn = yn1 +t
2(xn + xn1) (5.4)
Transforming equation 5.4 to the z-plane gives:
Y(z) = z1Y(z) + t2
(X(z) + X(z)z1) (5.5)
Rearranging gives for integration in the z-domain:
Y(z)
X(z)= t
2
(1 + z1)(1 z1) (5.6)
Equating the two integration expressions (i.e. equations 5.3 and 5.6) gives the wellknown bilinear transform equation:
s 2t
(1 z1)(1 + z1) (5.7)
-
7/27/2019 EMTP simul(10)
2/14
The root-matching method 101
Table5.1
Integratorcharacteristics
Name
Forw
ardrectangular
B
ackwardrectangular
Trapezoidal
(forw
ardEuler)
(implicit/backwardEuler)
Waveform
u
t
t
u
u
t
Integrator
yk=
yk1+
tfk1
yk=
yk1+
tfk
yk=
yk1+
t
2(fk+
fk1)
Differentiator
yk=
yk+1
yk
t
yk=
yk
yk1
t
yk=
2 t
(yk
yk1)
yk1
Approximationtos
s
z
1t
s
z
1
tz
s
2 t
(z
1)
(z+
1)
stoz-plane
j
Forward
rec
tangular
1
j
B
ackward
re
ctangular
1
1
j
Trapezoidal
rule
1
1
-
7/27/2019 EMTP simul(10)
3/14
102 Power systems electromagnetic transients simulation
Hence the trapezoidal rule and the bilinear transform give the same mapping between
the s and z-planes and are therefore identical.
Equation 5.7 can also be derived from an approximation of an exponential. The
actual relationship between s and z is:
z = est (5.8)
Hence
z1 = est (5.9)Expressing est as two exponential functions and then using the series approxima-tion gives:
z1
=est
=
est/2
est/2
(1 st/2)
(1 + st/2)(5.10)
Rearranging for s gives:
s 2t
(1 z1)
(1 + z1) (5.11)
which is identical to equation 5.7. Hence the trapezoidal rule (and many other inte-
gration rules for that matter) can be considered as a truncated series approximation
of the exact relationship between s and z.
5.3 z-domain representation of difference equations
Digital simulation requires the use of the z-domain, either in the form of a transfer
function or as an equivalent difference equation.
In the transfer function approach:
H(z) = a0 + a1 z1 + a2 z2 + + am zm
1 + b1 z1 + b2 z2 + + bm zm= Y(z)
U(z)(5.12)
or expressed as a two-sided recursion [2]a0 + a1 z1 + a2 z2 + + am zm
U(z)
=
1 + b1 z1 + b2 z2 + + bm zm
Y(z) (5.13)
Equation 5.13 can be implemented directly and without any approximation as a Norton
equivalent.
Rearranging equation 5.13 gives:
Y(z) =
a0 + a1 z1 + a2 z2 + + am zm
U(z)
b1 z1 + b2 z2 + + bm zm
Y(z) (5.14)
-
7/27/2019 EMTP simul(10)
4/14
The root-matching method 103
The corresponding difference equation is:
y(kt) = (a0 u + a1 u1 + a2 u2 + + am um)
(b
1 y
1 +b
2 y
2 + +b
m y
m)
(5.15)The first term on the right side of equation 5.15 is the instantaneous term between
input and output, while the other terms are history terms. Hence the conductance is
a0 and the history term is:
a1u1 + a2u2 + + amum b1y1 + b2y2 + + bmym (5.16)Whereas in the s-domain stability is ensured if poles are in the left-hand half-plane,
the equivalent criterion in the z-plane is that the poles must reside inside the unit
circle.
In the transformation from the s to z-plane, as required by digital simulation, the
poles and zeros must be transformed correctly and this is the purpose of the root-
matching technique. In other words, to ensure that a difference equation is suitable
to simulate a continuous process the poles, zeros and final value of the difference
equation should match those of the actual system. If these conditions are met the
difference equations are intrinsically stable, provided the actual system is stable,
regardless of the step size. The difference equations generated by this method involve
exponential functions, as the transform equation z1 = est is used rather thansome approximation to it.
When integrator substitution is used to derive a difference equation, the polesand zeros usually are not inspected, and these can therefore be poorly positioned or
there can even be extra poles and zeros. Because the poles and zeros of the difference
equation do not match well those of the continuous system, there are situations when
the difference equation is a poor representation of the continuous system.
The steps followed in the application of the root-matching technique are:
1. Determine the transfer function in the s-plane, H(s) and the position of its poles
and zeros.
2. Write the transfer function H(s) in the z-plane using the mapping z=
est, thus
ensuring the poles and zeros are in the correct place. Also add a constant to allow
adjustment of the final value.
3. Use the final value theorem to compute the final value ofH(s) for a unit step input.
4. Determine the final value ofH(z) for unit step input and adjust the constant to be
the correct value.
5. Add extra zeros depending on the assumed input variation between solution points.
6. Write the resulting z-domain equation in the form of a difference equation.
The final value ofH(s) must not be zero to allow the final value matching constant
in H(z) to be determined. When that happens the final value is matched for a different
input. For example some systems respond to the derivative of the input and in such
cases the final value for a unit ramp input is used.
Appendix E (sections E.1 and E.2) illustrate the use of the above procedure with
a single order lag function and a first order differential pole, respectively. Table 5.2
-
7/27/2019 EMTP simul(10)
5/14
104 Power systems electromagnetic transients simulation
Table 5.2 Exponential form of difference equation
Transfer function Expression for Norton
H(s) = G1 + s
R = 1/kIHistory = et/ Itt
k = G (1 et/)
H(s) = G (1 + s )
R = 1/kIHistory = k et/ Vtt
k = G(1 et/)
H(s) = G s1 + s
R = 1/kIHistory = et/ Itt k Vtt
k = G (1 et/)
t
H(s) = G (1 + s1)(1 + s2)
R = 1/kIHistory = et/2 Itt k Vtt et/1
k
=
G (1 et/1 )
(1 et/2
)
H(s) = G 2n
s2 + 2 ns + 2n
R = 1/kIHistory = A Itt B It2t
k = G (1 etp1) (1 etp2)= G (1 A + B)
H(s) = G s2
ns2 + 2 ns + 2n
R = 1/kIHistory = k Vtt + A Itt B It2t
k = G (1 et
p1
) (1 et
p2
)t
= G (1 A + B)t
H(s) = G (s2 + 2 n + 2n)
sn
R = kIHistory = Itt
A
k Vtt +
B
k It2t
k = G (1 etp1) (1 etp2)
t
= G (1 A + B)t
-
7/27/2019 EMTP simul(10)
6/14
The root-matching method 105
gives expressions of the exponential form of difference equation for various s-domain
transfer functions.
In Table 5.2, A and B are as follows:
If two real roots ( > 1):
A = 2e nt
et n
21 + et n
21
B = e2 nt
If two repeated roots ( = 1):
A = 2ent
B=
e2nt
If complex roots ( < 1):
A = 2e nt cos
nt
1 2
B = e2 nt
By using the input form shown in Figure 5.13(a) on page 113, the homogeneous
solution of the difference equation matches the homogeneous solution of the dif-
ferential equation exactly. It also generates a solution of the differential equationsresponse that is exact for the step function and a good approximation for an arbitrary
forcing function.
5.4 Implementation in EMTP algorithm
The exponential form of the difference equation can be viewed as a Norton equivalent
in just the same way as the difference equation developed by Dommels method, the
only difference being the formula used for the derivation of the terms. Figure 5.1illustrates this by showing the Norton equivalents of a series RL branch devel-
oped using Dommels method and the exponential form respectively. Until recently
it has not been appreciated that the exponential form of the difference equation
can be applied to the main electrical components as well as control equations, in
time domain simulation. Both can be formed into Norton equivalents, entered in
the conductance matrix and solved simultaneously with no time step delay in the
implementation.
To remove all the numerical oscillations when the time step is large compared to
the time constant, the difference equations developed by root-matching techniquesmust be implemented for all series and parallel RL, RC , LC and RLC combinations.
The network solution of Dommels method is:
[G]v(t) = i(t) + IHistory (5.17)
-
7/27/2019 EMTP simul(10)
7/14
106 Power systems electromagnetic transients simulation
2LR+
t
IHistory =
IHistory IHistory
ikm (t) ikm (t)
vkm (t)
i(tt) + v (tt) IHistory= e tR / L
i (tt)
mm
k k
Dommels method Exponential form
R
(1e tR / L)
(1tR/(2L))
(1+tR/(2L)) (1+tR/(2L))
(t/(2L))
Figure 5.1 Norton equivalent forRL branch
Structurally the root-matching algorithm is the same as Dommels, the only differ-
ence being in the formula used for the derivation of the conductance and past history
terms. Moreover, although the root-matching technique can also be applied to single
L or C elements, there is no need for that, as in such cases the response is no longer
of an exponential form. Hence Dommels algorithm is still used for converting indi-vidual L and C elements to a Norton equivalent. This allows difference equations,
hence Norton equivalents, based on root-matching methods to be used in existing
electromagnetic transient programs easily, yet giving unparalleled improvement in
accuracy, particularly for large time steps.
In the new algorithm, IHistory includes the history terms of both Dommels and the
root-matching method. Similarly the conductance matrix, which contains the conduc-
tance terms of the Norton equivalents, includes some terms from Dommels technique
and others of the exponential form developed from the root-matching technique.
The main characteristics of the exponential form that permit an efficientimplementation are:
The exponential term is calculated and stored prior to entering the time step loop. During the time step loop only two multiplications and one addition are required
to calculate the IHistory term. It is thus more efficient than NIS using the
trapezoidal rule.
Fewer previous time step variables are required. Only the previous time step currentis needed for an RL circuit, while Dommels method requires both current and
voltage at the previous time-step.
Three simple test cases are used to illustrate the algorithms capability [3]. The
first case shown in Figure 5.2 relates to the switching of a series RL branch. Using
a t = time step ( being the time constant of the circuit), Figure 5.3 showsthe current response derived from Dommels method, the exponential method and
-
7/27/2019 EMTP simul(10)
8/14
The root-matching method 107
Vdc =100V
t=0.01s
R =1.0
L=0.05mH
Figure 5.2 Switching test system
Current(amps)
0.0008 0.0011 0.0014 0.0017 0.002
Time (s)
Exponential form Dommels method Theoretical curve
40.0
60.0
80.0
100.0
0.0
20.0
Figure 5.3 Step response of switching test system fort =
continuous analysis (theoretical result). At this time step, Dommels method does not
show numerical oscillations, but introduces considerable error. The results shown in
Figure 5.4 correspond to a time step of t = 5 ( = 50s). Dommels methodnow exhibits numerical oscillations due to truncation errors, whereas the exponential
form gives the correct answer at each solution point. Increasing the time step to
-
7/27/2019 EMTP simul(10)
9/14
108 Power systems electromagnetic transients simulation
0.0
20.0
40.0
60.0
80.0
100.0
120.0
Current(amps)
Time (s)
Exponential form Dommels method Theoretical curve
0.0005 0.001375 0.00225 0.003125 0.004
Figure 5.4 Step response of switching test system fort = 5
Current(amps)
Time (s)
Exponential form Dommels method Theoretical curve
0.0
20.0
40.0
60.0
80.0
100.0
120.0
0 0.001 0.002 0.003 0.004
Figure 5.5 Step response of switching test system fort = 10
t = 10 results in much greater numerical oscillation for Dommels method, whilethe exponential form continues to give the exact answer (Figure 5.5).
The second test circuit, shown in Figure 5.6, consists of a RLC circuit with a
resonant frequency of 10 kHz, excited by a 5 kHz current source. Figures 5.7 and 5.8
-
7/27/2019 EMTP simul(10)
10/14
The root-matching method 109
Sine-wave excitation
5 kHz or 10 kHzLC
f=2
1
L= 0.2533mH
R = 1
C= 1F
=10kHz
Figure 5.6 Resonance test system
Voltage(volts)
0.0001 0.0004 0.0007 0.001
Time (s)
Exponential form Dommels method
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Figure 5.7 Comparison between exponential form and Dommels method to a 5 kHzexcitation for resonance test system. t = 25 s
show the voltage response using 25s and 10s time steps, respectively. Consid-erable deviation from the expected sinusoidal waveform is evident for Dommels
method. Figure 5.9 shows the comparison when the excitation contains a 10 kHz
component of 1 A peak for a time-step of 10s. At that frequency the inductance and
capacitance cancel out and the exponential form gives the correct response, i.e. a 2 V
peak-to-peak 10 kHz sinusoid on top of the d.c. component (shown in Figure 5.10),
whereas Dommels method oscillates. The inductor current leads the capacitor voltage
by 90 degrees. Therefore, when initialising the current to zero the capacitor voltage
should be at its maximum negative value. If the capacitor voltage is also initialised to
zero a d.c. component of voltage (|V
| =I/C) is effectively added, which is equiv-
alent to an additional charge on the capacitor to change its voltage from maximum
negative to zero.
A third test circuit is used to demonstrate the numerical problem of current chop-
ping in inductive circuits. A common example is the modelling of power electronic
-
7/27/2019 EMTP simul(10)
11/14
110 Power systems electromagnetic transients simulation
Voltage(volts)
0.0001 0.0004 0.0007 0.001
Time (s)
Exponential form Dommels method
0
14
28
42
56
70
Figure 5.8 Comparison between exponential form and Dommels method to a 5 kHzexcitation for resonance test system. t = 10 s
V
oltage(volts)
Time (s)
Exponential form Dommels method
5
5
15
25
35
0.0001 0.0004 0.0007 0.001
Figure 5.9 Comparison between exponential form and Dommels method to 10 kHz
excitation for resonance test system
-
7/27/2019 EMTP simul(10)
12/14
The root-matching method 111
Voltage(volts)
0.0001 0.0004 0.0007 0.00114.4
14.8
15.2
15.6
16
16.4
Time (s)
Exponential form
Figure 5.10 Response of resonance test system to 10 kHz excitation, blow-up ofexponential forms response
100V
(RMS)VLOAD
= 50s
L=0.05mH
R = 1
Figure 5.11 Diode test system
devices such as diodes and thyristors. Although the changes of state are constrained to
occur at multiples of the step length, the current falls to zero between these points [4];
thus the change occurs at the time point immediately after and hence effectively turn-
ing the device off with a slight negative current. To demonstrate this effect Figure 5.11
uses a simple system where an a.c. voltage source supplies power to an RL load via a
diode. Figure 5.12(a) shows the load voltage for the exponential form and Dommels
method using a time-step of 500s. This clearly shows the superiority of the expo-
nential form of difference equation. The numerical oscillation at switch-off depends
on how close to a time point the current drops to zero, and hence the size of negative
current at the switching point. The negative current at switching is clearly evident in
the load current waveform shown in Figure 5.12(b).
-
7/27/2019 EMTP simul(10)
13/14
112 Power systems electromagnetic transients simulation
Voltage(volts)
Time (s)
Current(amps)
Time (s)
40
10
20
50
80
110
140(a)
(b)
0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08 0.09 0.1
Exponential Form Dommels method
Exponential form Dommels method
40
0
40
80
120
160
0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08 0.09 0.1
Figure 5.12 Response to diode test system (a) Voltage (b) Current
These three test circuits clearly demonstrate the accuracy and stability of the
exponential form of the difference equation regardless of the time step.
5.5 Family of exponential forms of the difference equation
In the root-matching technique used to derive the exponential form of a difference
equation the poles and zeros of the s-domain function are matched in the z-domain
-
7/27/2019 EMTP simul(10)
14/14
The root-matching method 113
u (t) u (t) u (t) u (t)
t t t t
(a) (b) (c) (d)
Figure 5.13 Input as function of time
u 1y
R
L
G
R
R
1+ sL
1
Gs
G
1 +s
1 +s
H(s) =I(s)
V(s)H(s) =
==
Figure 5.14 Control or electrical system as first order lag
function. Extra zeros are added based on the assumed discretisation on the input,
which is continuous [5]. Figure 5.13 shows some of the possible discretisations
and these result in a family of exponential forms of the difference equation. The
root-matching technique is equally applicable to equations representing control or
electrical systems [6]. For each of the discretisation types, with reference to the first
order lag function shown in Figure 5.14, the use of the root-matching technique
expressed as a rational function in z1 produces the following exponential formdifference equations.
Input type (a):
y(z)
u(z)= b/a(1 e
at)(1 z1eat)
Input type (b):
y(z)
u(z) =b/a(1
eat)z1
(1 z1eat)Input type (c):
y(z)
u(z)= b/(2a)(1 e
at)(1 + z1)(1 z1eat)