Aggregated Load and Generation Equivalent Circuit
Models with Semi-Empirical Data Fitting
Amritanshu Pandey1*, Marko Jereminov1*, Xin Li1, Gabriela Hug2,1, Larry Pileggi1
1

Dept. of Electrical and Computer Engineering
Carnegie Mellon University
Pittsburgh, PA

Abstract — In this paper we propose a semi-empirical modeling
framework for aggregated electrical load and generation using an
equivalent circuit formulation. The proposed models are based on
complex rectangular voltage and current state variables that
provide a generalized form for accurately representing any
transmission and distribution components. The model is based on
the split equivalent circuit formulation that was previously shown
to unify power flow, three phase power flow, harmonic power
flow, and transient analyses. Importantly, this formulation
establishes variables that are analytical and are compatible with
model fitting and machine learning approaches. The parameters
for the proposed semi-empirical load and generation models are
synthesized from measurement data and can enable real-time
simulations for time varying aggregated loads and generation.
Index Terms— aggregated load and generation, equivalent circuit
formulation, semi-empirical modeling, synchrophasors, unified
analysis.

I.

INTRODUCTION

Existing power flow and three-phase power flow algorithms
predominantly use variants of constant power models (PQ and
PV nodes) for aggregated load and generation modeling. The
fixed power injections/absorptions (P in PV node and P, Q in
PQ node) represented by these models are independent of the
complex voltage at the bus. This is in stark contrast to what is
observed in the field. For instance, it is shown in the B.C. Hydro
system that by decreasing the substation voltage by 1%, the
active and reactive power demand decreases by 1.5% and 3.4%,
respectively [7]. Therefore, for a more accurate power grid
analysis, a paradigm shift is needed for aggregated load and
generation models to include voltage dependency. In the past,
load models such as constant impedance load model, constant
current load model, polynomial load model, and exponential
load models [8] have been explored to address this problem.
However, all of these models fall short of a generalized
framework, as they are functions of complex voltage magnitude
only and are independent of the complex voltage angle at the
node with respect to the reference.
During normal grid operation, many nodes in the system
hold the voltage magnitude constant under varying operating
conditions. For instance, a generator node or a node with a

2

Power Systems Laboratory
ETH Zurich
Switzerland

reactive power-compensating device, e.g. STATCOM, static
capacitors represent a typical constant voltage magnitude node
to which aggregated loads and generation are connected. For
these nodes, the aggregated load and generation model must
also consider the voltage angle information, as the real power
injection or absorption at such nodes is independent of the
voltage magnitude. Therefore, the existing voltage dependent
load models may fail to accurately represent aggregated load or
generation connected to these nodes, as they are functions of
voltage magnitude only.
Bulk installations of phasor measurement units (PMUs) on
the transmission system and of remote terminal units (RTUs)
on the distribution system are now providing a tremendous
amount of actual electric load and generation data. In theory,
this collected grid data can be used to construct accurate semiempirical models for aggregated load and generation for power
flow studies. Furthermore, these models could be
automatically updated in near real-time with the latest
measurement data to facilitate unprecedented simulation
capabilities. Importantly, such models could assist with the
compliance with FERC Order No. 693 that requires
comparison of performance of the existing system in a
planning power flow model to actual system behavior [6].
Toward these goals, we propose a methodology that
represents the aggregated electric load and generation at a node
as an equivalent circuit. This method semi-empirically
formulates the generic aggregated load and generation model
template as a finite order Taylor expansion of real and
imaginary voltage and current state variables. Importantly,
these variables correspond to the equivalent circuit elements as
they are incorporated into the split-circuit formulation in [1][3], hence, they are analytical and suitable for application of
Newton-Raphson methods.
In the proposed formulation, each circuit node is
represented by expressions of rectangular complex voltage and
current variables and thus, the framework can represent the
aggregated load and generation as a function of both the voltage
magnitude and the voltage angle with respect to the reference.
Most importantly, the proposed framework models the
aggregated load and generation in terms of an equivalent circuit
that further allows us to apply circuit simulation methods (e.g.

© 2017 IEEE. Personal use of this material is permitted. Permission from IEEE must be obtained for all other uses, in any current or
future media, including reprinting/republishing this material for advertising or promotional purposes, creating new collective works,
for resale or redistribution to servers or lists, or reuse of any copyrighted component of this work in other works.
Published in: Green Energy and Systems Conference (IGSEC), 2016 IEEE, DOI: 10.1109/IGESC.2016.7790066

SPICE [5] and its many derivatives [4]) to solve the system,
such as those that are used today to simulate circuits with
billions of circuit components.
Our equivalent circuit formulation for aggregated load and
generation models represents a modeling template for such
elements, and like other circuit abstractions, can be combined
hierarchically to build larger aggregated models. Regression
techniques can be used to determine the optimal coefficients for
a specific instance of a template model, wherein the mean
squared error is minimized between the measured currents and
voltages of the system and the predicted currents and voltages
of the system.

reference). The load models proposed in (1) through (4) fail to
capture the aggregated load characteristics for such nodes. In
addition, any form of aggregated generation or distributed
generation (DG) that is required to maintain a constant voltage
magnitude at its node cannot be represented by existing
aggregated load/generation models. Furthermore, these
existing models are not compatible with transient analysis and
other power systems analyses [13].

We refer to our models as Generation and Load
Abstractions using Semi-empirical Surfaces, and describe the
GLASS model for an induction motor (IM) and an aggregated
load bus in the IEEE 390 Bus test system. Simulations are run
for both the semi-empirical GLASS models and the existing
physics based load models using our prototype split-circuit tool,
Simulation with Unified Grid Analyses and Renewables
(SUGAR). Lastly, results are compared to validate the accuracy
of the developed semi-empirical models.
II.

LIMITATIONS OF EXISITING AGGREGATED LOAD AND
GENERATION MODELS

At high voltage levels in the power grid, the loads must be
aggregated to develop models that are suitable for computer
analysis of the entire power system. Until recently, large
portions of the steady-state analysis for a power grid relied on
constant power load models for these aggregated
representations. These constant power load models, however,
have been found to be inadequate for accurate planning and
security studies of the grid [8], [12]. To this effect, alternative
load modeling approaches were proposed by [8] that can better
capture the true behavior of the aggregated loads in the power
system. These approaches model loads as a function of voltage
magnitude and compute the load model parameters using
measurement data from the grid. For example, the ZIP model
represents the load as a mixture of constant current, constant
impedance, and constant power load:
𝑃𝑍𝐼𝑃 = 𝑃0 [𝑎𝑝 𝑉 2 + 𝑏𝑝 𝑉 + 𝑐𝑝 ]
2

𝑄𝑍𝐼𝑃 = 𝑄0 [𝑎𝑞 𝑉 + 𝑏𝑞 𝑉 + 𝑐𝑞 ]

(1)
(2)

Similarly, the form of the exponential model for aggregated
loads is given by:
𝑃𝑒𝑥𝑝 = 𝑃0 [𝑉 𝑝𝑣 ]

(3)

𝑄𝑒𝑥𝑝 = 𝑄0 [𝑉 𝑞𝑣 ]

(4)

Even though these load models (e.g. ZIP model,
exponential model, etc.) are a significant improvement over
traditional constant load models, they are still insufficient for
accurately capturing certain scenarios. For example, Fig. 1
illustrates the complex voltage characteristics of a PV node in
a power flow case study where the real power load connected
to the PV node is varied from 100 MW to 650 MW. The graph
shows that the real power absorbed by the PV node is
independent of the voltage magnitude at that node and can be
represented as a function of voltage angle (with respect to the

Figure 1: Complex voltage profile on PV node with variable real power
injection

In the following sections, we will address these limitations
and develop a semi-empirical aggregated load and generation
model that can represent any aggregation of load and
generation in the system.
III.

EQUIVALENT CIRCUIT MODEL APPROACH

The equivalent circuit approach to generalized modeling of
power system’s steady-state response, i.e. power flow and
three-phase power flow, was recently introduced in [1]-[3]. It
was shown that each of the power system components could
be translated to an equivalent circuit model based on
underlying relations between current and voltage state
variables without loss of generality. Moreover, in order to
ensure the analyticity of nonlinear complex governing circuit
equations, they are split into real and imaginary parts. This
splitting of complex equations corresponds to splitting of the
complex equivalent circuit into two sub-circuits, i.e. a real and
an imaginary, that are coupled by the controlled sources, and,
hence permits the application of the Newton Raphson method
to solve the circuit equations.
As an example of split-circuit modeling, consider a
traditional governing equation that is used for a constant PQ
load model:
𝐼̃𝑙 =

𝑃𝑙 − 𝑗𝑄𝑙
𝑉̃𝑙∗

(5)

The equation in (5) can be represented by a complex
nonlinear voltage controlled current source, however, it
contains the nonanalytic complex conjugate operator that
would prevent the application of the Newton Raphson method
for solving the equivalent circuit in which it was included.

Instead, we split this function into real and imaginary parts,
which corresponds to an equivalent circuit model given by (6)
and (7):
𝐼𝑅𝑙 =

𝑃𝑙 𝑉𝑅𝑙 + 𝑄𝑙 𝑉𝐼𝑙
2
𝑉𝑅𝑙
+ 𝑉𝐼𝑙2

(6)

𝐼𝐼𝑙 =

𝑃𝑙 𝑉𝐼𝑙 − 𝑄𝑙 𝑉𝑅𝑙
2
𝑉𝑅𝑙
+ 𝑉𝐼𝑙2

(7)

These nonlinear split-circuit equations are further
linearized via first order Taylor expansion in order to derive
the complete linearized equivalent split-circuit. For instance,
the Taylor expansion of the real load current in (6) about the
(𝑖 + 1)𝑡ℎ iteration is given by:
𝑖+1
𝐼𝑅𝑙
=

𝜕𝐼𝑅𝑙
𝜕𝐼𝑅𝑙
𝑖+1
𝑖
|𝑉 𝑖 ,𝑉 𝑖 (𝑉𝑅𝑙
| 𝑖 𝑖 (𝑉 𝑖+1 ) + 𝐼𝑅𝑙
)+
𝑅𝑙
𝐼𝑙
𝜕𝑉𝑅𝑙
𝜕𝑉𝐼𝑙 𝑉𝑅𝑙 ,𝑉𝐼𝑙 𝐼𝑙
𝜕𝐼𝑅𝑙
𝜕𝐼𝑅𝑙
| 𝑖 𝑖 (𝑉 𝑖 ) −
| 𝑖 𝑖 (𝑉 𝑖 )
−
𝜕𝑉𝑅𝑙 𝑉𝑅𝑙 ,𝑉𝐼𝑙 𝑅𝑙
𝜕𝑉𝐼𝑙 𝑉𝑅𝑙 ,𝑉𝐼𝑙 𝐼𝑙

(8)

The first term in (8) represents a conductance, because the
real load current is proportional to the real load voltage;
however, the second term is proportional to the imaginary load
voltage, and therefore, is represented by a voltage controlled
current source. The remaining terms are all dependent on the
known values from the previous iteration, so they can be
lumped together and represented by an independent current
source. The complete symmetric equivalent split-circuit model
of the PQ load is shown in Fig. 2.

Following the same approach, each of the power system
components can be represented in the equivalent split-circuit
framework. Moreover, as introduced in [1]-[3], our equivalent
circuit formulation based on current and voltage state variables
enables the generalized modeling of any physics-based
component, including complex renewable devices, as well as
any practical form of nonlinear load model. This generalized
modeling capability thereby enables the development of
standardized accurate and robust aggregated electrical load and
generation models that we further develop and characterize in
the following sections.
IV.

GENERATION AND LOAD ABSTRACTIONS USING SEMIEMPIRICAL SURFACES

Any power grid device that can be accurately characterized
by current and voltage state variables can be incorporated in
the equivalent circuit formulation. This formulation further
enables the development of “Bottom-up” and “Top-down”
semi-empirical GLASS models that can provide more accurate
and robust capabilities for modeling the aggregated load and
generation in the system as compared to the existing
measurement based modeling approaches (PQ, ZIP, etc.) [8].
a) “Bottom-up”GLASS model for Induction Motor
We use an induction motor (IM) to demonstrate how the
semi-empirical ‘bottom-up” model can be extracted from the
physics based equivalent circuit of the IM and utilized for
power flow and three-phase power flow analyses.

Figure 4: Equivalent circuit representation of an IM connected to an
electrical power grid.
Figure 2: Equivalent split-circuit PQ load model

We have further shown that the previously derived splitcircuit model for a PQ load [3] can be used in the three-phase
power flow, where the three-phase equivalent can be obtained
by connecting the per-phase equivalent circuit in Wye or Delta
configuration. The three-phase grounded-Wye PQ load model
is illustrated in Fig. 3 as an example.

As shown in Fig. 4, the IM equivalent circuit as described
in [10] consists of a linear RL network and a nonlinear slip (𝑠)
dependent resistance. The nonlinear slip dependent resistance
is a function of real and imaginary components of the input
voltage, 𝑉̃ for a given load torque. The relationship between
slip and the input voltage is implicitly defined by (9) and can
be explicitly obtained by solving the quadratic equation:
𝛾1 𝑠 2 + 𝛾2 (𝑉𝑅 , 𝑉𝐼 )𝑠 + 𝛾3 = 0

(9)

where constants 𝛾1 , 𝛾3 and a non-linear function of real and
imaginary voltages - 𝛾2 (𝑉𝑅 , 𝑉𝐼 ) are defined as:
2 (𝑅 2
2
𝛾1 = 𝑋𝑚
𝑠 + 𝑋𝑠 )
2
𝛾2 (𝑉𝑅 , 𝑉𝐼 ) = 𝑋𝑚
[2𝑅𝑠 𝑅𝑟 −

(10)
3𝑝𝑅𝑟
(𝑉 2 + 𝑉𝐼2 )]
2𝜔𝑠 𝑇𝑒 𝑅

2)
𝛾3 = 𝑅𝑟2 (𝑅𝑠2 + 𝑋𝑠2 + 2𝑋𝑠 𝑋𝑚 + 𝑋𝑚

Figure 3: Equivalent split-circuit of a three-phase grounded-Wye PQ load

(11)
(12)

Here, 𝑝, 𝜔𝑠 , 𝑇𝑒 represent the number of poles, synchronous
speed in rad/s and electric torque of the induction motor in N.m,
respectively.

As described by (9)-(12), the slip-dependent element from
Fig. 4 can be replaced with a nonlinear voltage dependent
resistance, further making the equivalent circuit dependent
only on complex current and voltage state variables. Thus, the
IM equivalent circuit can be reduced and represented by a
nonlinear voltage dependent admittance 𝑌(𝑉𝑅 , 𝑉𝐼 ) = 𝑢(𝑉𝑅 , 𝑉𝐼 )
+j 𝑣(𝑉𝑅 , 𝑉𝐼 ) (see Fig. 5) that further defines the relationship
between the input state variables as:
𝐼𝑅 + 𝑗𝐼𝐼 = (𝑉𝑅 + 𝑗𝑉𝐼 )[𝑢(𝑉𝑅 , 𝑉𝐼 ) + 𝑗𝑣(𝑉𝑅 , 𝑉𝐼 )]

(13)

represented by functions of current and voltage state variables,
and fit the model using finite order Taylor expansion. The
governing equation of the model can be obtained from the
generalized two-dimensional Taylor expansion:
𝑁

𝑛

𝑛=0

𝑘=0

1
𝑛
𝑛−𝑘
𝑘
𝛢𝐶 = ∑ { ∑ ( ) 𝛻𝛢𝑛𝑘
(𝛣𝐼 − 𝛣𝐼 0 ) }
𝐶 (𝛣𝑅 − 𝛣𝑅 0 )
𝑛!
𝑘

where ∇Α𝑛𝑘
𝐶 is given as:
∇Α𝑛𝑘
𝐶 =

Figure 5: Reducing the Equivalent IM circuit to obtain the relationship
between input state variables

Applying the split-circuit approach [1]-[3], the nonlinear
complex current from equation (13) is split into real and
imaginary currents. The equations for these currents are
described via nonlinear functions of real and imaginary voltage
state variables:
𝐼𝑅 = 𝑉𝑅 𝑢(𝑉𝑅 , 𝑉𝐼 ) − 𝑉𝐼 𝑣(𝑉𝑅 , 𝑉𝐼 ) ⟶ 𝐼𝑅 = 𝑓𝑅 (𝑉𝑅 , 𝑉𝐼 )

(14)

𝐼𝐼 = 𝑉𝐼 𝑢(𝑉𝑅 , 𝑉𝐼 ) + 𝑉𝑅 𝑣(𝑉𝑅 , 𝑉𝐼 ) ⟶ 𝐼𝐼 = 𝑓𝐼 (𝑉𝑅 , 𝑉𝐼 )

(15)

We further expand and approximate these nonlinear
functions with a finite order Taylor expansion to obtain the two
dimensional nth order polynomial expression given as:
𝑁

𝑛

𝑛=0

𝑘=0

1
𝑛
𝑛−𝑘
𝑘
𝐼𝐶 = ∑ { ∑ ( ) ∇𝐼𝐶𝑛,𝑘 (𝑉𝑅 − 𝑉𝑅 0 )
(𝑉𝐼 − 𝑉𝐼 0 ) }
𝑛!
𝑘

(16)

where 𝐶 represents the subscript placeholder for real (𝑅) or
imaginary (𝐼) parts of the state variables and 𝑁 is the order of
Taylor expansion used to accurately approximate the nonlinear
function, and is dependent on desired error function. The ∇𝐼𝐶𝑛,𝑘
and the binomial coefficients are defined as:
𝑛

∇𝐼𝐶𝑛,𝑘

=

𝜕 𝐼𝐶 (𝑉𝑅 , 𝑉𝐼 )
𝜕𝑉𝑛−𝑘
𝜕𝑉𝑘𝐼
𝑅

|

(17)
𝑉𝑅 0 ,𝑉𝐼 0

𝑛
𝑛!
( )=
(𝑛 − 𝑘)! 𝑘!
𝑘

(18)

Grouping all of the constant terms together yields the
approximated expressions for both real and imaginary
currents:
𝐼𝐶 = 𝑔1𝐶 + 𝑔2𝐶 𝑉𝑅 + 𝑔3𝐶 𝑉𝐼 + 𝑔4𝐶 𝑉𝑅 𝑉𝐼 + 𝑔5𝐶 𝑉𝑅2 + 𝑔6𝐶 𝑉𝐼2 ⋯

(19)

𝑔𝑖𝐶 coefficients

where the optimal values for
will be determined
by the standard least-squares fitting techniques [9].
b) “Top-down”Generic GLASS model for Aggregated
Load and Generation
Without loss of generality, we base “Top-down” GLASS
models on the assumption that the steady-state response of
every aggregated load and generation abstraction can be

(20)

𝜕𝑛 Α𝐶 (Β𝑅 , Β𝐼 )
𝜕Β𝑛−𝑘
𝜕Β𝑘𝐼
𝑅

|

(21)
Β𝑅 0 ,Β𝐼 0

The GLASS model captures load or generation as a
function of voltage or current. By choosing the {Α𝑅 , Α𝐼 } as a set
of current state variables, real and imaginary voltages are
defined as dependent state variables {Β𝑅 , Β𝐼 } and by choosing
the {Α𝑅 , Α𝐼 } as a set of voltage state variables, real and
imaginary currents are defined as dependent state
variables {Β𝑅 , Β𝐼 }.
Following the same methodology as in the derivation of the
induction motor model, the expansion from (20) can be written
in the following compressed form:
𝛢𝐶 = 𝑔1𝐶 + 𝑔2𝐶 𝛣𝑅 + 𝑔3𝐶 𝛣𝐼 + 𝑔4𝐶 𝛣𝑅 𝛣𝐼 + 𝑔5𝐶 𝛣𝑅2 + 𝑔6𝐶 𝛣𝐼2 …

(22)

To obtain the generalized equivalent split circuit model we
further linearize the nonlinear functions in (22) around the
values obtained in the (𝑖 + 1)𝑡ℎ iteration:
Α𝑖+1
𝐶 =

𝜕Α𝐶
𝜕Α𝐶
| 𝑖 𝑖 (Β 𝑖+1 ) +
| 𝑖 𝑖 (Β𝑖+1 ) + Α𝑖𝐶
𝜕Β𝑅 Β𝑅 ,Β𝐼 𝑅
𝜕Β𝐼 Β𝑅 ,Β𝐼 𝐼
𝜕Α𝐶
𝜕Α𝐶
| 𝑖 𝑖 (Β 𝑖 ) +
| 𝑖 𝑖 (Β 𝑖 )
−
𝜕Β𝑅 Β𝑅 ,Β𝐼 𝑅
𝜕Β𝐼 Β𝑅 ,Β𝐼 𝐼

(23)

Defining the real and imaginary voltages as dependent
variables, i.e. {Β𝑅 , Β𝐼 } → {𝑉𝑅 , 𝑉𝐼 }, {Α𝑅 , Α𝐼 } → {𝐼𝑅 , 𝐼𝐼 }, the
expressions in (23) can be represented by the equivalent split
circuit shown in Fig. 6. From the figure, the terms dependent
on
the
voltage
across
the
respective
circuit,
𝜕I
𝜕I
i.e. 𝜕V𝐶 |V𝑖𝑅 ,V𝑖𝐼 (V𝑅𝑖+1 ), 𝜕V𝐶 |V𝑖𝑅 ,V𝑖𝐼 (V𝐼𝑖+1 ) and the terms dependent on
𝑅

the
i.e.

𝐼

voltage
𝜕I𝐶
𝜕V𝑅

|V𝑖 ,V𝑖 (V𝐼𝑖+1 ) ,
𝑅

𝐼

across
𝜕I𝐶
𝜕V𝐼

the

other

circuit,

|V𝑖 ,V𝑖 (V𝑅𝑖+1 ) are represented by a
𝑅

𝐼

conductance and a voltage controlled current source
respectively. Furthermore, the terms dependent on the values
from the previous iteration are lumped together and are
represented by an independent current source. Similarly,
defining the currents as dependent variables can be further
translated into the equivalent circuit presented in Fig. 7. In this
figure, the terms dependent on the current through itself, i.e.
𝜕V𝐶
𝜕V
| 𝑖 𝑖 (I 𝑖+1 ), 𝐶 |I𝑖 ,I𝑖 (I𝐼𝑖+1 ) and the terms dependent on the
𝜕I I𝑅 ,I𝐼 𝑅
𝜕I
𝑅 𝐼
𝑅

𝐼

current in the other circuit, i.e.

𝜕V𝐶

𝜕V
| 𝑖 𝑖 (I 𝑖+1 ), 𝐶 |I𝑖 ,I𝑖 (I𝑅𝑖+1 )
𝜕I𝑅 I𝑅 ,I𝐼 𝐼
𝜕I𝐼 𝑅 𝐼

are

represented by a resistor and a current controlled voltage
source respectively, while the terms dependent on the values
from the previous iteration are lumped together and replaced
by an independent voltage source.

the simulation results from the GLASS model closely match
the synthetic measurement data. Furthermore, the graph in
Fig. 8 shows the ability of the GLASS model to capture the
true system conditions under external disturbances. For
example, the GLASS model predicts the correct load currents
of IM for a torque change at t=5 sec when the load torque of
the motor is doubled. Table 2 documents the real and
imaginary voltages and currents that were used to plot the
graphs in Fig. 8. The data shows the accuracy to within three
significant digits. Importantly, this comparison demonstrates
the high accuracy of the GLASS model for a range of voltages
that were initially not used to create the model.

Figure 6: GLASS equivalent split circuit for voltage dependent variables

Figure 7: GLASS equivalent split circuit for current dependent variables

V.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

As a proof of concept, the proposed semi-empirical
modeling formulation of aggregated load and generation in the
power grid is validated with two study cases: i) steady-state
analysis of an IM using the “Bottom-up” GLASS model; ii)
steady-state analysis of the IEEE 390 test system using the
“Top-down” generic GLASS model.
In the first study case, the steady-state behavior of the IM
is simulated by a GLASS model that is based on the third order
Taylor expansion. In order to compute the GLASS model
coefficients, synthetic measurement data was first created by
running time-domain simulations on the physics based model
of IM in SUGAR. The generated synthetic measurement data
was then used as an input into the MATLAB optimization
toolbox [14],[15] to generate the model coefficients. Some
data examples of the GLASS model’s coefficients computed
from synthetic measurement data are shown in Table 1. Once
the semi-empirical GLASS model for IM was developed,
simulation was run on it for different source voltages and load
torques and the results from the simulation were compared
against the synthetic measurement data from time-domain
simulations in SUGAR.
TABLE 1: IM GLASS TEMPLATE COEFFICIENTS FOR LOW TORQUE
AND HIGH TORQUE MODEL
Model
Low
Torque
High
Torque

IR
II
IR
II

𝑔1𝐶
63.483
-30.235
106.950
-69.319

𝑔2𝐶
-0.345
0.212
-0.591
0.486

𝑔3𝐶
#
#
#
#

𝑔4𝐶
#
#
#
#

𝑔5𝐶
0.001
-0.001
0.001
-0.001

𝑔6𝐶
#
#
#
#

𝑔7𝐶
-7.09E-07
6.72E-07
-1.21E-06
1.19E-06

𝑔8𝐶
#
#
#
#

Note: # represents coefficients that are inconsequential for this simulation as a result of
measured VI being of zero magnitude

Comparison between the fundamental frequency component
of the source voltage and load current for the GLASS model
simulation and the synthetic measurement data is presented in
Fig. 8. The high accuracy of the GLASS model is validated as

Figure 8: Comparison of GLASS results for the IM against synthetic
measurement data created using SUGAR’s IM model

TABLE 2: COMPARISON OF RESULTS BETWEEN THE GLASS LOAD
MODEL FOR THE IM AND THE SYNTHETIC MEASUREMENT DATA OF
THE IM
Model Type

Real
Voltage
(VR)

Imag.
Voltage
(VI)

Real
Current
(IR)

Imag.
Current
(II)

Load
Torque
(TL)

GLASS
Syn. Meas.
GLASS
Syn. Meas.
GLASS
Syn. Meas.
GLASS
Syn. Meas.
GLASS
Syn. Meas.

375.59
375.59
356.81
356.81
347.42
347.42
338.03
338.03
375.59
375.59

0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00

11.31
11.36
11.95
11.95
12.28
12.27
12.62
12.61
18.27
18.20

-13.03
-13.09
-12.54
-12.54
-12.28
-12.27
-12.02
-12.01
-13.89
-13.89

10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
20
20

Note: The numbers in bold represent the extrapolated results of the GLASS load
model for the IM

For the second case study, the individual loads in the IEEE
390 Bus test system as seen from the source node are
aggregated using the generic GLASS model. Time-domain
simulations were first performed on the IEEE 390 Bus test
system in EMTP-RV [11] to generate synthetic measurement
data. The synthetic measurement data was then used to
compute the generic GLASS model coefficients using the
MATLAB optimization toolbox. Once the coefficients for the

GLASS model were computed for the IEEE 390 bus
aggregated loads, a simulation was run to simulate a sudden
voltage drop in the system due to a disturbance on the source
node. The plots in Fig. 9 present the simulation results that
compare the voltages and currents between the synthetic
measurement data collected from the source node in EMTPRV simulation and those produced by the GLASS model for
the aggregated load. The results from the plot show that the
steady-state load currents produced by GLASS model closely
match the synthetically measured load current in the EMTPRV simulation environment.

the latest machine learning methods that could enable models
that include speculative variables. The ultimate goal would be
models that enable automated real-time simulation wherein
measurement-based load and generation models can be
updated in near real-time to assist with system operation,
reliability, and security.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
This research is funded in part by the CMU-SYSU
Collaborative Innovation Research Center and the SYSUCMU International Joint Research Institute.
REFERENCES
[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]
Figure 9: Comparison of GLASS results for the IEEE 390 Bus Test Case with
synthetic measurement data created using EMTP-RV

[7]

Table 3: GLASS COEFFICIENTS FOR IEEE 390 BUS TEST CASE

[8]

Complex Var.
IR
II

𝑔1𝐶

𝑔2𝐶

𝑔3𝐶

0.0932
-0.170

-8.86E-04
-0.0012

0.0014
-0.0035

[9]

[10]

VI.

CONCLUSION AND FUTURE WORK

In this paper, we developed aggregated load and generation
models for power system analyses based on a semi-empirical
modeling approach. It was shown that finite order Taylor
expansion with the use of complex rectangular voltage and
current state variables could model any power grid component
that is described by such variables.
As future work, we propose to extend our aggregated load
and generation modeling framework to model time
dependencies for aggregated loads and frequency dependent
aggregated non-linear loads for harmonic balance analysis. We
further plan to explore better data fitting capabilities based on

[11]
[12]

[13]

[14]

[15]

D. M. Bromberg, M. Jereminov, L. Xin, G. Hug, L. Pileggi, “An
Equivalent Circuit Formulation of the Power Flow Problem with Current
and Voltage State Variables”, PowerTech Eindhoven, June 2015.
M. Jereminov, D. M. Bromberg, L. Xin, G. Hug, L. Pileggi, “Improving
Robustness and Modeling Generality for Power Flow Analysis” T&D
Conference and Exposition, 2016 IEEE PES.
M. Jereminov, D. M. Bromberg, A. Pandey, L. Xin, G. Hug, L. Pileggi,
“An equivalent circuit formulation for three-phase power flow analysis
of distribution systems” T&D Conference and Exposition, 2016 IEEE
PES.
L. Pillage (Pileggi), R. Rohrer, C. Visweswariah, Electronic Circuit &
System Simulation Methods, McGraw-Hill, Inc., New York, NY, USA,
1995.
Nagel, L. W, and Pederson, D. O., SPICE (Simulation Program with
Integrated Circuit Emphasis), Memorandum No. ERL-M382, University
of California, Berkeley, April 1973.
Order No. 693, United States of America Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission.
J. R. Marti, H. Ahmadi, and L. Bashualdo, “Linear Power Flow
Formulation Based on a Voltage-Dependent Load Model,” IEEE Trans.
Power Delivery, vol. 28, issue: 3, April 2013.
Electric Power Research Institute, “Measurement-Based Load
Modeling-Final Report, September 2006”.
T. Strutz, Data Fitting and Uncertainty (A practical introduction to
weighted least squares and beyond). 2nd edition, Springer Vieweg,
2016.
P.Kundur, Power System Stability and Control, McGraw-Hill, Inc.,
New York, NY, USA, 1994.
EMTP-RV. EMTP-RV. 2011.
Power System Model Validation, A White Paper by the NERC Model
Validation Task Force of the Transmission Issues Subcommittee, North
American Reliability Corporation (NERC), December 8, 2010.
A. Pandey, M. Jereminov, X. Li, G. Hug, L. Pileggi, “Unified Power
System Analyses and Models using Equivalent Circuit Formulation”
Innovative Smart Grid Technologies, 2016 IEEE PES.
Coleman, T.F. and Y. Li. "An Interior, Trust Region Approach for
Nonlinear Minimization Subject to Bounds." SIAM Journal on
Optimization, Vol. 6, 1996, pp. 418–445.
Marquardt, D. "An Algorithm for Least-squares Estimation of
Nonlinear Parameters." SIAM Journal Applied Mathematics, Vol. 11,
1963, pp. 431–441.

