A Coordinated Electric System Interconnection Review—the utility’s deep-dive on technical and cost impacts of your project.
Challenge: Frequent false tripping using conventional electromechanical relays
Solution: SEL-487E integration with multi-terminal differential protection and dynamic inrush restraint
Result: 90% reduction in false trips, saving over $250,000 in downtime
| Category | Metric |
|---|---|
| VPP capacity (Lunar Energy) | 650 MW |
| Lunar funding raised | US$232 million |
| Data center BESS example | 31 MW / 62 MWh |
| ERCOT grid-scale batteries | 15+ GW |
| LDES tenders (H1 2026) | Up to 9.3 GW |
| Lithium-ion share of LDES by 2030 | 77% |
| FEOC initial threshold | 55% |
| BESS tariff rate (2026) | ~55% |
| Capacity gain from analytics | 5–15% |
ERCOT Dynamic Model Improvements Under PGRR 085:
Raising the Standard for Model Accuracy, Validation, and Hardware Benchmarking in ERCOT
February 18, 2026 | Blog
Executive Overview
Accurate dynamic models are the foundation of reliable grid planning and operations. With increasing penetration of inverter-based resources (IBRs), energy storage resources (ESRs), and advanced transmission equipment, modeling errors no longer result in minor study discrepancies — they can create real operational risks.
PGRR 085 – Dynamic Model Improvements strengthens ERCOT Planning Guide Sections 5.7.1 and 6.2 by introducing:
- Mandatory model quality testing
- PSCAD hardware benchmarking
- Parameter verification reports
- Defined submission timelines
- Cross-platform consistency requirements (PSS®E and PSCAD)
This revision directly supports Reliability and Operations Subcommittee (ROS) goals to improve dynamic modeling processes
Why PGRR 085 Was Necessary
Historically, planning models often differed from:
- Actual field-implemented settings
- Hardware performance
- Behavior across simulation platforms
ERCOT uses:
- PSS®E for general planning stability studies
- PSCAD for weak grid and subsynchronous resonance (SSR) analysis
PGRR 085 formally establishes the expectation that model response shall be consistent across platforms to the extent of platform capability
The business case identifies three major goals
- Ensure consistency between model software platforms
- Ensure accuracy between models and actual hardware
- Ensure ERCOT uses high-quality, accurate system models
Major Requirements Introduced by PGRR 085
1. Dynamic Model Submittals During FIS
Under Section 5.7.1, Interconnecting Entities (IEs) must provide:
- Appropriate dynamic models
- Results of model quality tests
- Associated simulation files
- Compatibility with ERCOT standard tools (PSS®E, TSAT, VSAT, SSAT)
If no compatible model exists:
- The IE must work with vendors or consultants
- The model must be incorporated into standard libraries
This eliminates proprietary black-box barriers to system-wide modeling.
2. Model Quality Testing (Section 6.2)
Whenever a new or updated dynamic model is submitted, model quality testing is required.
Required Tests
A. Flat Start Test
Validates:
- Proper initialization
- No oscillations under no-disturbance conditions
B. Small Voltage Disturbance Test
Applies:
- Step increase and decrease at POI
Demonstrates voltage control and reactive response.
C. Large Voltage Disturbance Test
- For IBRs/ESRs → Apply VRT profile
- For synchronous machines → Apply fault at POI
D. Small Frequency Disturbance Test
Step change in frequency to test governor/active power response.
E. System Strength Test
IBRs must be tested under varying short circuit ratios .
This ensures:
- Stability under weak grid conditions
- Robust inverter controls
3. PSCAD Hardware Benchmarking for IBRs
IBRs must provide unit model validation results demonstrating that the PSCAD model accurately represents inverter hardware behavior through structured PSCAD model validation for inverter-based resources.
Required PSCAD validation tests include:
- Voltage step response
- VRT testing
- System strength testing
- Phase angle jump test
- Subsynchronous test
These tests are hardware-type based and may be reused across projects using the same inverter model.
This is a major reliability enhancement.
4. Parameter Verification Reports
Facility owners must provide verification reports confirming:
- Model parameters match field-implemented settings
- Site-specific tuning values are documented
Required Timeline
For Generation Resources and ESRs
- At commissioning
- 12–24 months after commissioning
- Every 10 years minimum
- After settings changes
For Transmission Elements:
- Within 2 years of energization
- Every 10 years thereafter
5. Ongoing Obligations
Resource Entities must provide updated dynamics data when:
- Equipment is replaced
- Settings are changed
- Field tests indicate model inaccuracies
Implications for Inverter-Based Resources (IBRs)
IBRs face the most rigorous requirements:
- PSCAD hardware validation
- System strength testing
- Aggregated modeling requirements
- VRT performance validation
- Cross-platform consistency
Given the grid’s shift toward inverter dominance, this is both necessary and overdue
Implications for Transmission Service Providers (TSPs)
TSPs must provide dynamic models for:
- Load shedding relays
- FACTS devices (SVC, STATCOM)
- DC ties
- VFTs
- Tap-changing transformers
This creates modeling parity between generation and transmission.
Why This Matters for Reliability
Poor dynamic modeling can result in:
- Undetected instability
- Overestimated short circuit strength
- Inaccurate SSR analysis
- Improper reactive planning
- Misleading stability margins
PGRR 085 directly addresses these risks.
Engineering Best Practices for Compliance
To align with PGRR 085:
- Maintain a model governance program
- Track site-specific tuning parameters
- Align commissioning reports with model parameters
- Maintain PSCAD and PSS®E version control
- Develop repeatable model test scripts
- Schedule periodic model audits
The Long-Term Impact
PGRR 085 moves ERCOT toward:
- Hardware-aligned modeling
- Cross-platform validation
- Lifecycle compliance
- Stronger weak-grid analysis
- Higher confidence in interconnection studies
As IBR penetration increases, these requirements will become industry standard.
25 Technical FAQs on PGRR 085 Dynamic Model Improvements
1. What is the primary purpose of PGRR 085?
To improve model accuracy, hardware validation, and cross-platform consistency in ERCOT planning studies
2. Which sections of the Planning Guide were revised?
Sections 5.7.1 and 6.2
3. Are PSCAD models mandatory for IBRs?
Yes, including unit model validation benchmarking
4. What is a model quality test?
Simulation tests verifying correct initialization and dynamic response under disturbances
5. What is a flat start test?
A no-disturbance initialization validation test
6. What is required for large disturbance testing?
VRT testing for IBRs; POI fault testing for synchronous resources
7. How often are plant verification reports required?
At commissioning, within 12–24 months, and every 10 years
8. Do Transmission Owners have model requirements?
Yes, including dynamic device models and verification reports
9. What is the system strength test?
Testing IBR models under varying short circuit ratios
10. Must models match field settings?
Yes parameter verification documentation is required
11. Are user written models allowed?
Yes, with required manuals and unrestricted machine ID allocation
12. What if no compatible model exists?
The IE must work with vendors to develop one
13. When must dynamic models be submitted?
During the FIS process
14. Are aggregated IRR models allowed?
Yes, if compliant with Protocol Section 3.10.7.2
15. What happens if equipment settings change?
Updated models and verification reports must be submitted
16. Is dynamics data confidential?
Yes, considered Protected Information
17. What is PSCAD hardware benchmarking?
Validation comparing model output to actual inverter test results
18. What is the phase angle jump test?
A PSCAD validation test verifying inverter dynamic response
19. Are sensitivities required?
Yes voltage setpoint, real power, and reactive power sensitivities must be assessed
20. Are simulation files required?
Yes, associated files must accompany test results
21. What planning tools must models support?
PSS®E and PSCAD environments
22. When are transmission device reports required?
Within two years of energization and every 10 years thereafter
23. What happens if data is not submitted?
It may delay studies or result in cancellation
24. Are model updates required during operations?
Yes, when field conditions or equipment change
25. Why is cross-platform consistency critical?
ERCOT uses different tools for different study types; inconsistent models undermine study credibilit

About the Author:
Sonny Patel P.E. EC
IEEE Senior Member
In 1995, Sandip (Sonny) R. Patel earned his Electrical Engineering degree from the University of Illinois, specializing in Electrical Engineering . But degrees don’t build legacies—action does. For three decades, he’s been shaping the future of engineering, not just as a licensed Professional Engineer across multiple states (Florida, California, New York, West Virginia, and Minnesota), but as a doer. A builder. A leader. Not just an engineer. A Licensed Electrical Contractor in Florida with an Unlimited EC license. Not just an executive. The founder and CEO of KEENTEL LLC—where expertise meets execution. Three decades. Multiple states. Endless impact.
Services

Let's Discuss Your Project
Let's book a call to discuss your electrical engineering project that we can help you with.

About the Author:
Sonny Patel P.E. EC
IEEE Senior Member
In 1995, Sandip (Sonny) R. Patel earned his Electrical Engineering degree from the University of Illinois, specializing in Electrical Engineering . But degrees don’t build legacies—action does. For three decades, he’s been shaping the future of engineering, not just as a licensed Professional Engineer across multiple states (Florida, California, New York, West Virginia, and Minnesota), but as a doer. A builder. A leader. Not just an engineer. A Licensed Electrical Contractor in Florida with an Unlimited EC license. Not just an executive. The founder and CEO of KEENTEL LLC—where expertise meets execution. Three decades. Multiple states. Endless impact.
Leave a Comment
We will get back to you as soon as possible.
Please try again later.















