Comparative Transient Stability Analysis of Power Systems Using ETAP and

Simulink: A Multi-Machine and Single Machine Infinite Bus Perspective

1
Ayushi Singh

1
Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Bharati Vidyapeeth College of Engineering,
Bharati Vidyapeeth Deemed to be University, Pune, India

Abstract

A key aspect of power system performance is transient stability, which makes sure the system is
synchronized both during and after disruptions like breakdowns. This paper compares two different
methods for transient stability analysis: A Single Machine Infinite Bus (SMIB) system simulated in
MATLAB/Simulink and a multi-machine four-bus system modelled in ETAP. A four-bus system goes
through a three-phase fault in the ETAP study, and the reaction of the system in terms of frequency,
bus voltage, and rotor angle is examined. A similar fault is applied to an SMIB system in the Simulink
study, focusing on the synchronous generator's load angle and stator current response. The results
demonstrate how both systems behave fluidly, how well simulation tools work for monitoring stability,
and how control mechanisms like governors, excitation systems, and FACTS (Flexible AC
Transmission Systems) devices contribute to stability. Power system engineers can design robust
systems to reduce transient instability with the help of this comparative analysis.

1. Introduction

Growing energy demands, the integration of renewable energy sources, and demands for dependable
operation in the face of problems have all contributed to the complexity of power systems. A vital part
of grid reliability is transient stability, which refers to the capacity of a power system to remain
synchronized following a significant disruption, like a fault. Historical occurrences such as the 2003
Northeast Blackout in the United States and the 2012 India Blackout, which affected over 620 million
people across 22 states due to grid overloading and failures, show how failure to maintain transient
stability can result in cascading failures and widespread blackouts.

Simulation tools, for example, ETAP and MATLAB/Simulink are widely utilized for investigating
transient stability, providing detailed insights into system dynamics via time-domain simulation. ETAP
is a powerful power system analysis software that excels at modelling multi-machine systems, whereas
Simulink, with its block-based modelling, is ideal for detailed dynamic simulations of systems such as
the Single Machine Infinite Bus (SMIB). This paper combines the two approaches to provide a
comprehensive understanding of transient stability in power systems.

In the first section of this paper, a four-bus power system with two generators is modelled in ETAP,
and a three-phase fault is introduced to investigate the system's transient response. In the second section,
a SMIB system is simulated using MATLAB/Simulink to investigate the transient behaviour of a
synchronous generator under a similar fault condition. The results are compared to highlight each tool's
strengths and practical applications in power system design.

2. Literature Review

Power system research has been centred on transient stability for many years. A fundamental
understanding of stability ideas is given by Kundur (1994), who highlights the significance of rotor
angle dynamics in preserving synchronism[1]. Simulation tools have been used in recent research to
mimic real-world systems and determine their stability limits.

2.1 Transient Stability Assessment Methods

Several methods exist for transient stability analysis, each with its advantages and limitations, as
summarized in Table 1.

Method Description Advantages Limitations

Time-Domain Numerical integration Accurate for complex Computationally intensive
Simulation of system equations systems, widely used in for large networks
over time tools like ETAP and
Simulink
Direct Lyapunov-based Faster, suitable for real- Requires precise
Methods techniques to assess time applications modelling and energy
stability function derivation
Energy Evaluates system Provides quick stability Less effective for multi-
Function energy before and margins machine systems
Approach after a disturbance
Table 1: Comparison of Transient Stability Assessment Methods

2.2 Case Studies from Existing Literature

 Influence of Fault Duration: Research indicates that extended fault durations result in
greater rotor angle deviations, which frequently contribute to instability.[2]
 FACTS Technology: The implementation of Flexible AC Transmission Systems (FACTS)
devices, such as SVC and STATCOM, has demonstrated an improvement in voltage stability
during transient events.[3]
 Integration of Renewables: Systems characterized by significant renewable energy
integration necessitate sophisticated control strategies to ensure transient stability, owing to
the inherent variability of these energy sources.[4]

3. System Models and Simulation Setup

This section details the two systems being analysed: a four-bus multi-machine system constructed in
ETAP and a Single Machine Infinite Bus (SMIB) system executed in Simulink. These models are
extensively used in power system analysis to study stability, fault response, and dynamic behaviour,
drawing on essential electrical engineering principles and a significant amount of existing research.

3.1 Four-Bus System in ETAP

The ETAP model comprises a four-bus power system, which is a simplified yet accurate
representation of a multi-machine network commonly used to explore power system dynamics,
load flow, and fault responses. Multi-machine systems are crucial for understanding the
complexities of real-world interconnected grids, where synchronous generators, transformers,
and transmission lines function under different operating scenarios. Kundur (1994) highlights
the importance of these systems in analysing transient stability, as they capture the
electromechanical interactions among generators following disturbances such as faults. The
four-bus system analysed in this study includes the components specified in Table 2.
 Component Details
Four-Bus Network Meshed topology for small-scale grid studies.
Generating Units - Gen 1: 10 MW, 11 kV, Inertia Constant 0.6
- Gen 2: 10 MW, 11 kV, Inertia Constant 0.8
Transformers - T1: 11/110 kV, 80 MVA
- T2: 11/110 kV, 65 MVA
Transmission Line - Length: 1.6 km
- Resistance (R): 0.47466 Ω
- Reactance (X): 0.89813 Ω
- Susceptance (B): 4.8711
Loads Two loads connected at different buses, representing consumer demand.
Table 2: Four-bus system components

The system is initialized with the following operating conditions:

Generator Data:
Parameter Gen 1 Gen 2
Power Output (MW) 10 10
Rotor Angle (°) 58.13 0
Field Voltage (pu) 1.5 1.6
Speed (RPM) 1800 1800
System Frequency (Hz) 60 60

Bus Data:
Bus Voltage (kV) Voltage (% of Nominal) System Frequency
(Hz)
Bus 1 11 99.3% 60
Bus 2 110 99.3% 60
Bus 3 11 100% 60
Bus 4 110 99.29% 60

Figure. 1

A three-phase fault is introduced at one of the buses with the following parameters:

 Fault Type: Three-phase fault.

 Fault Location: Bus.
 Fault Start Time: 2 seconds.
 Fault Clearing Time: 2.1 seconds.
 Figure. 2

The simulation is conducted in ETAP to capture the rotor angle and bus voltage.

3.2 Single Machine Infinite Bus (SMIB) System in Simulink

The Simulink model represents an SMIB system, a simplified setup to study the dynamic behaviour of
a synchronous generator connected to an infinite bus. The model includes:

 Synchronous Machine: Modelled in per-unit (pu) values, outputting stator voltage, rotor
speed, load angle, and active power.
 Hydraulic Turbine and Governor: Regulates mechanical power (Pm) with an initial power
(Pe0) and reference power (Pref) of 0.75 pu.
 Excitation System: Maintains terminal voltage (VT) at 1 pu using field voltage (Vfd).
 Three-Phase Source (Infinite Bus): Operates at 60 Hz with constant voltage and frequency.
 Transmission Line: Modelled as a series RLC load.
 Three-Phase Fault: Simulates a short circuit to study transient response.

The simulation runs for 30 seconds in phasor mode, with the fault applied to observe the load angle
and stator current response.

Figure 3: Simulink Model of the SMIB System

4. Results and Discussion

This section presents the results from both studies, including observations and comparisons.

4.1 Transient Stability Analysis in ETAP

The ETAP simulation provides insights into the four-bus system’s response to a three-phase fault.
4.1.1 Rotor Angle Deviation

The rotor angles of both generators are observed to evaluate the transient stability of the four-bus
system. To determine the synchronism between Generator 1 (referred to as Gen5 in ETAP) and
Generator 2 (Gen6 in ETAP), the analysis focuses on the relative rotor angle, which is the difference
between the rotor angles of the two generators. Generator 1, characterized by a lower inertia constant
of 0.6, displays more significant oscillations than Generator 2, which has an inertia constant of 0.8. The
relative rotor angle (Gen 1 - Gen 2) begins at 58.13 degrees (with Gen 1 at 58.13 degrees and Gen 2 at
0 degrees), reaches a maximum of approximately 180 degrees following the fault, and subsequently
experiences damped oscillations, stabilizing around 50 degrees after 10 seconds.

The simulation lasts for 10 seconds, during which a three-phase fault occurs at 2 seconds and is cleared
at 2.1 seconds. The response of the relative rotor angle is graphed throughout this period to illustrate
the system's behaviour before, during, and after the fault. The peak relative angle of 180 degrees
signifies that the system is nearing a loss of synchronism, marking a critical stability threshold.
Nevertheless, the following damped oscillations indicate that the system remains transiently stable,
although the elevated peak angle underscores the necessity for enhanced damping strategies.

Figure 4: Rotor Angle Deviation of Generators in ETAP.

4.1.2 Bus Voltage Profile

The occurrence of a fault leads to a marked reduction in bus voltages, with the voltage at the faulted
bus dropping to almost zero. Once the fault is cleared, the voltages start to recover, but they initially
show oscillatory behaviour before achieving stability. The bus that is closest to the fault, for instance,
Bus4, suffers the greatest voltage decrease, whereas the other buses experience more moderate
variations.

Figure 5: Bus Voltage Profile in ETAP

4.1.3 Observations

 The system demonstrates transient stability, with both generators successfully re-establishing
synchronism.
  Generator 1's lower inertia causes more pronounced rotor angle variations, emphasizing the
significance of inertia in ensuring stability.
 Voltage recovery at the bus experiencing the fault is slower, indicating a need for voltage
support mechanisms, such as FACTS devices.
 While frequency variations remain within permissible boundaries, implementing further
control measures, such as Power System Stabilizers, could enhance damping.

4.2 Transient Stability Analysis in Simulink (SMIB System)

The Simulink simulation examines the transient stability of a Single Machine Infinite Bus (SMIB)
system, which serves as a simplified yet essential model for analysing the dynamic behaviour of a
synchronous generator linked to a vast power network. This SMIB configuration includes a
synchronous generator, represented by the Synchronous Machine pu Fundamental block, connected to
an infinite bus via a transmission line. A three-phase fault is introduced to replicate a significant
disturbance. The infinite bus symbolizes a large, stable power system maintaining constant voltage and
frequency (60 Hz), while the synchronous generator features a hydraulic turbine and governor for speed
regulation, along with an excitation system for voltage management. The system initially operates at a
real power output of 0.75 pu, with the terminal voltage (VT) maintained at 1 pu (Vref = 1 pu) by the
excitation system.

The simulation lasts for 30 seconds to observe the system's performance before, during, and after a
fault. A three-phase fault is initiated at the start of the simulation (0 seconds) close to the generator's
terminal on the transmission line and is cleared after 0.1 seconds, simulating a significant but brief
disturbance. This duration is specifically chosen to assess the system's ability to sustain synchronism
without surpassing the critical clearing time, typically between 0.1 and 0.2 seconds for a Single Machine
Infinite Bus (SMIB) system with standard parameters. The fault results in a rapid decrease in terminal
voltage and a considerable increase in stator current, which triggers dynamic adjustments from the
governor (to modify mechanical power) and the excitation system (to alter field voltage, Efd) in order
to restore stability.

The assessment of the SMIB system's transient stability relies on three essential metrics: the load angle
(delta), which denotes the rotor's angular position concerning the infinite bus; the field voltage (Efd),
which captures the excitation system's reaction to voltage changes; and the stator current, which reflects
the electrical stress on the generator during fault conditions. Together, these metrics provide an in-depth
perspective on the system's dynamic behaviour, showcasing the relationship between mechanical
(governor) and electrical (excitation) control systems in maintaining synchronism. The results from the
simulation indicate that the SMIB system is capable of withstanding the fault, with all parameters
eventually returning to steady-state values, thus confirming transient stability.

4.2.1 Load Angle (Delta) Response

The load angle, also known as the rotor angle (delta), signifies the angular difference between the rotor
of the synchronous generator and the infinite bus, serving as a vital measure of transient stability. A
significant rise in delta during a fault can result in a loss of synchronism if the angle surpasses 180
degrees. In this simulation, the load angle begins at a steady-state value of 0 degrees, reflecting the
initial operating condition (Pe0 = 0.75 pu). Upon the occurrence of a fault at 0 seconds, the electrical
power output plummets to nearly zero due to the short circuit, while the mechanical power input from
the turbine remains unchanged, leading to an acceleration of the rotor. Consequently, the load angle
experiences a swift increase, reaching a peak of 150 degrees within the first 2 seconds. Once the fault
is cleared at 0.1 seconds, electrical power is restored, and the load angle exhibits damped oscillations,
dropping to -50 degrees around 5 seconds before ultimately stabilizing back to 0 degrees by 30 seconds.

The substantial initial swing of 150 degrees signifies a major disturbance; however, the system
maintains stability as the angle does not exceed the critical limit of 180 degrees. The damped oscillatory
response following the fault is influenced by the governor's adjustments, which align mechanical power
with electrical power, along with the excitation system's regulation of internal voltage, facilitating the
restoration of synchronism. The return of the load angle to 0 degrees indicates that the SMIB system
effectively upholds transient stability.

Figure 6: Load Angle Response in Simulink

4.2.2 Stator Current Response

The stator current serves as an indicator of the electrical stress experienced by the synchronous
generator during a fault event. Prior to the fault, the stator current remains constant at 0.75 per unit (pu),
which aligns with the initial power output (Pe0 = 0.75 pu) at a terminal voltage of 1 pu. Upon the
occurrence of the fault at 0 seconds, a short circuit leads to a dramatic surge in current, reaching 6 pu
as the generator attempts to deliver the fault current. Once the fault is cleared at 0.1 seconds, the stator
current exhibits oscillations due to the dynamic interplay between the generator and the infinite bus,
ultimately stabilizing at 1 pu by the 5-second mark, signifying a return to normal operational conditions.

The sharp increase in stator current during the fault underscores the intensity of the disturbance, while
the swift stabilization following the fault illustrates the efficiency of the excitation system and governor
in reinstating normal operating conditions. The behaviour of the stator current, in conjunction with the
responses of the load angle and field voltage, offers a comprehensive view of the system's transient
stability.

Figure 7: Stator Current Response in Simulink

4.2.3 Field Voltage Response

The field voltage (Efd) of the synchronous generator within the Single Machine Infinite Bus (SMIB)
system, regulated by the excitation system, ensures that the terminal voltage (VT) remains close to 1
per unit (Vref = 1 pu). This section analyses the behaviour of Efd throughout a 30-second simulation,
during which a three-phase fault occurs at 0 seconds and is resolved at 0.1 seconds.

At the outset, Efd is stable at 1.5 pu, which supports VT at 1 pu (Pe0 = 0.75 pu). When the fault occurs,
VT experiences a decline, prompting Efd to surge to 3 pu within 0.5 seconds in an effort to restore the
voltage. After the fault is cleared, Efd exhibits oscillations that correspond to the behaviour of the load
angle (as discussed in Section 4.2.1), ultimately stabilizing at 1.5 pu by the 20-second mark as the
system regains stability.

The swift increase in Efd during the fault plays a crucial role in maintaining synchronism by enhancing
the internal voltage, while the subsequent oscillations indicate the dynamic interaction between the
excitation system, the governor, and the power system. Efd's return to 1.5 pu signifies the successful
recovery of the SMIB system, in alignment with the responses of the load angle and stator current.

Figure 8: Field Voltage Response in Simulink

4.2.4 Observations

 The SMIB system demonstrates transient stability, as the load angle stabilizes at a constant
value.
 The significant initial deviation in load angle (150 degrees) reflects a critical fault; however,
the system's damping features, including the governor and excitation system, maintain
synchronism.
 The spike in stator current validates the fault's effect, while the following stabilization
corresponds with the recovery of the load angle.
 The observed damped oscillatory behaviour indicates successful control measures, yet the
pronounced initial swing suggests opportunities for enhancement through supplementary
damping mechanisms.

4.3 Comparative Analysis

 System Complexity: The ETAP analysis represents a multi-machine environment, illustrating

the interactions among generators, whereas the Simulink analysis concentrates on a single
machine, offering an in-depth examination of synchronous generator behaviour.

 Response to Fault: Both systems demonstrate transient stability; however, the SMIB system
experiences more significant initial fluctuations in load angle (150 degrees) compared to the
 ETAP system (120 degrees for Generator 1), likely due to the absence of additional damping
from other machines in the simpler configuration.

 Control Mechanisms: The Simulink framework is enhanced by the inclusion of a governor

and excitation system, while the ETAP framework could achieve greater stability through the
integration of FACTS devices or Power System Stabilizers (PSS), as indicated in the proposed
mitigation strategies.

 Simulation Tools: ETAP is more appropriate for analysing multi-machine systems and real-
world engineering scenarios, while Simulink is superior in providing detailed dynamic
modelling and control design capabilities.

5. Mitigation Strategies

Based on the results, the following strategies can enhance transient stability:

 FACTS Devices (SVC, STATCOM): Improve voltage stability and reduce fluctuations in
both systems.
 Power System Stabilizers (PSS): Enhance damping of oscillations, particularly in the ETAP
system where Gen 1 shows larger swings.
 Adaptive Protection Schemes: Intelligent relays can dynamically adjust settings to maintain
stability, especially in multi-machine systems like the ETAP model.

6. Conclusion and Future Work

This study demonstrates the transient stability behaviour of a four-bus multi-machine system in ETAP
and an SMIB system in Simulink under three-phase fault conditions. Both systems are found to be
transiently stable, with the ETAP system showing the impact of generator inertia on stability and the
Simulink system highlighting the role of governors and excitation systems in damping oscillations. The
comparative analysis underscores the complementary strengths of ETAP and Simulink in power system
studies.

Future work can explore:

 Hybrid Simulations: Combining ETAP and Simulink for more comprehensive stability
analysis.
 Renewable Integration: Studying the impact of solar and wind power on transient stability in
both systems.
 AI-Based Prediction: Using machine learning to predict transient instability and optimize
control strategies.

This research provides a foundation for further studies in transient stability analysis and mitigation,
contributing to the design of more resilient power systems.
References

[1] P. Kundur, Power System Stability and Control, McGraw-Hill, 1994.

[2] A. A. Fouad and V. Vittal, Power System Transient Stability Analysis Using the Transient Energy
Function Method, Prentice Hall, 1992.
[3] N. G. Hingorani and L. Gyugyi, Understanding FACTS: Concepts and Technology of Flexible AC
Transmission Systems, Wiley-IEEE Press, 2000.
[4] M. A. Pai, Energy Function Analysis for Power System Stability, Kluwer Academic Publishers,
1989