See

discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/269986617

Simultaneous impact of unified power flow

controller and off-shore wind penetration on
distance relay...
Article in IET Generation Transmission & Distribution November 2014
DOI: 10.1049/iet-gtd.2014.0066

CITATIONS

READS

45

3 authors:
Dr. Rahul Dubey

Subhransu Samantaray

Indian Institute of Technology Delhi

IIT Bhubaneswar, India

39 PUBLICATIONS 85 CITATIONS

135 PUBLICATIONS 1,417 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

SEE PROFILE

Bijaya Ketan Panigrahi

Indian Institute of Technology Delhi
355 PUBLICATIONS 4,015 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
Demand response aggregation at wholesale market level considering customer behaviour through
dynamic costing and temporal, event frequency constraints View project
Clean Energy (Carbon Capture Technology) and Renewable Energy (Concentrated Solar Thermal
Power) Integration in Power System Operation Planning with Thermal Energy Storage (TES) View
project

All content following this page was uploaded by Dr. Rahul Dubey on 24 December 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file. All in-text references underlined in blue are added to the original document
and are linked to publications on ResearchGate, letting you access and read them immediately.

www.ietdl.org
Published in IET Generation, Transmission & Distribution
Received on 28th August 2013
Revised on 19th March 2014
Accepted on 24th April 2014
doi: 10.1049/iet-gtd.2014.0066

ISSN 1751-8687

Simultaneous impact of unified power flow controller

and off-shore wind penetration on distance relay
characteristics
Rahul Dubey1, Subhransu Ranjan Samantaray2, Bijay Ketan Panigrahi1
1

Department of Electrical Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology, Delhi, India

Schools of Electrical Sciences, Indian Institute of Technology, Bhubaneswar, India
E-mail: sbh_samant@yahoo.co.in

Abstract: This study presents an analytical approach for nding the possible impacts of exible AC transmission system
(FACTS) devices such as unied power ow controller (UPFC) and off-shore wind penetration on distance relay
characteristics. Generating relay tripping characteristics is one of the challenging issues for transmission line distance relays as
the present day transmission systems is subjected to a more stressed environment with respect to power system operation.
Moreover, inclusion of FACTS devices such as UPFC in the transmission system seriously impacts the performance of the
distance relays as the apparent impedance changes. Furthermore, the reach setting of the relay is signicantly affected as the
relay end voltage uctuates continuously when off-shore wind-farms are connected to power transmission systems. Thus,
generating tripping characteristics for appropriate operating conditions is a demanding concern and the same has been
addressed in the proposed research work. Extensive testing is carried out in generating relay tripping characteristics with
possible variations under the operating conditions of UPFC and wind-farm and it is observed that the characteristics are
signicantly affected for different operating conditions. Furthermore, the performance of the derived relay characteristics is
validated on possible transmission line fault events and is found to work effectively.

Introduction

The operation of transmission lines including the exible AC

transmission system (FACTS) [1, 2] devices such as the
unied power ow controller (UPFC) [3, 4] has attracted
widespread attention as it improves the power transfer
capability in long transmission lines. On the other hand,
introduction of UPFC in a transmission line opens up new
challenges for distance relaying as the apparent impedance
of the line changes dynamically. Thus, the reach setting of
the relay is signicantly affected depending on the mode of
operation of the FACTS controller. Furthermore, integration
of off-shore wind farms [5] in power transmission systems
is increasing day by day and will be further enhanced in the
future. The most difcult part in wind farm is the
uncontrolled wind speed, leading to voltage and frequency
uctuations. The uctuating speed results in variations in
the output power as the output power of a generating unit
has a non-linear relationship with the wind speed and
beyond a certain speed limit the wind-farm cannot
contribute to the grid. Furthermore, because of varying
under/over voltage conditions some turbines may trip and
others may be in operation. Although considering the
impact of the penetration level on the relay setting, it is
observed that at a low wind farm penetration level, the
variation in grid-side equivalent impedance has an
insignicant effect on the tripping boundary [6], compared
IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., 2014, Vol. 8, Iss. 11, pp. 18691880
doi: 10.1049/iet-gtd.2014.0066

with higher wind farm penetration. Looking at the

possibility of extensive use of FACTS with wind
penetration in the modern power transmission network,
which may raise concerns on distance relay performance,
the impacts of FACTS and wind penetration on distance
relay characteristics need to be thoroughly addressed.
Protection measures for transmission lines have been
proposed including different FACTS controllers [710] and
the effect of UPFC location, fault resistance on the adaptive
setting is clearly observed [7] for distance relay operation.
Furthermore, more extensive studies on distance relaying
[911] have been carried out, considering a detailed model
of UPFC. Another protection scheme [12] is presented to
predict the trip boundaries of the conventional distance
relay in the presence of UPFC through the knowledge of
the control parameters of the UPFC. It computes the series
voltage and reactive current injection by the UPFC online
and these parameters are utilised for the adaptive trip
boundary prediction. Similarly, the protection issues
become critical as the transmission lines connecting wind
farms are subjected to a continuously changing
environment. Adaptive protection schemes for distribution
systems including wind source have been proposed in [13,
14]. The adaptive relay setting for transmission lines
including wind farm is proposed in [6] and the effect of
variations in wind farm parameters on the reach setting is
extensively studied. It is observed that the trip boundaries
1869

& The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2014

www.ietdl.org
of the relay are signicantly affected when the loading level,
source impedance, voltage level, frequency and so on varies.
Thus, there is a need to develop an effective protection
scheme for transmission networks which include
appreciable penetration of wind-farms and FACTS (UPFC)
together to meet the operational requirements.
Considering the aforementioned protection issues with
UPFC and wind farms in transmission lines, there is a
strong motivation to focus on the impact of UPFC and
wind farms on distance relay tripping characteristics. The
proposed paper focused on the simultaneous impacts of
both UPFC and wind farm [doubly fed induction generators
(DFIG)] on distance relay performance. The analytical
approach calculates the correct impedance to the fault point
including wide variation in system parameters and UPFC
such as the degree of compensation, power transfer angle,
fault resistance and fault location, at different wind
penetration levels with variation in different loading levels,
source impedance, voltage amplitude and so on. Moreover,
the UPFC and its inuence on distance relay performance
including the impact on the third zone of protection are
analysed. The method uses relaying end voltage and current
information for generating tripping boundaries and thus
facilitates easy implementation. In the present paper, only
lineground fault (mostly occurred) is considered for
quadrilateral characteristics of distance relay and for the rest
fault offset Mho relay characteristic.

2 System studied and apparent impedance

calculation
2.1 Schematic diagram of the system studied and
the corresponding equivalent model
The system studied in the proposed application includes wind
farms and UPFC connected to the power transmission system.
A number of wind generating units (wind farm) are connected
together at one end of the transmission line, as shown in
Fig. 1. The proposed paper includes UPFC at the middle of
the transmission line (between TL-1 and TL-2).
line-to-ground (LG) fault situation is analysed and the
corresponding apparent impedance is calculated for fault
before UPFC (not including UPFC) and after the UPFC
(including UPFC) as follows. The equivalent circuit model
is as shown in Fig. 2.
Considering the aforementioned transmission line network
with UPFC and wind farm, the calculation of apparent
impedance for fault before UPFC and after UPFC is carried
out with the following abbreviations: Eaw is the phase-a
wind source voltage, Ean is the phase-a grid voltage, Vaw is
the phase-a voltage at bus W where the relay is present,
Van is the phase-a voltage at bus N, Vas1 is the phase-a
voltage at bus S1, Vas2 is the phase-a voltage at bus S2, Esh
is the shunt voltage of the UPFC, rej is a factor for series
voltage of UPFC (r is the % injected voltage and is the
series injected voltage phase angle in degrees), h1 is the
voltage amplitude ratio (Vas1/Eaw), Iaw is the phase-a current

Fig. 2 Transmission system with wind farm and UPFC with all
parameters

at the relaying point W, I0w is the phase-a zero sequence

current at the relaying point W, I1wf is the phase-a
positive sequence current of the line between bus W and
fault point F, I2wf is the phase-a negative sequence current
of the line between bus W and fault point F, Ild is the
pre-fault current in the line without UPFC, I0f is the phase-a
zero sequence fault current, 1 is the power transfer angle in
degree, K0 is the zero sequence compensating factor, Z1sw is
the positive sequence source impedance of the wind farm,
Z0sw is the zero sequence source impedance of the wind
farm, Z1sn is the positive sequence source impedance of the
grid, Z0sn is the zero sequence source impedance of the
grid, Z1wn is the positive sequence impedance of the line
between bus W and N, Z0wn is the zero sequence
impedance of the line between bus W and N, Z1ws1 is
the positive sequence impedance of the line between bus
W and S1, Z0ws1 is the zero sequence impedance of the
line between bus W and S1, Z1ns1 is the positive
sequence impedance of the line between bus N and S1,
Z0ns1 is the zero sequence impedance of the line between
bus N and S1, Z1wf is the positive sequence impedance of
the line between bus W and fault point F, Z0wf is the zero
sequence impedance of the line between bus W and fault
point F, Z1nf is the positive sequence impedance of the line
between bus N and fault point F, Z0nf is the zero sequence
impedance of the line between bus N and fault point F,
Z1s1f is the positive sequence impedance of the line between
bus S1 and fault point F, Z0s1f is the zero sequence
impedance of the line between bus S1 and fault point F,
Z1s2f is the positive sequence impedance of the line between
bus S2 and fault point F, Z0s2f is the zero sequence
impedance of the line between bus S2 and fault point F and
Z is the sum of total positive-, negative- and
zero-sequence impedances.
The positive and zero sequence impedances from W side
are
Z1swf = Z1sw + Z1wf
Z0swf = Z0sw + Z0wf

Fig. 1 Transmission system including UPFC and wind farm

1870
& The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2014

IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., 2014, Vol. 8, Iss. 11, pp. 18691880
doi: 10.1049/iet-gtd.2014.0066

www.ietdl.org
Similarly, the positive and zero sequence impedances from
N side are

angle. Now Ild and Vafd can be obtained as follows



Eaw 1 h1 ejd1
Eaw Vas1
=
Ild =
Z1swf + Z1s1f
Z1swf + Z1s1f

Z1snf = Z1sn + Z1nf

Z0snf = Z0sn + Z0nf

and

Zs1 = shunt impedance of UPFC

a stands for phase-a as the calculations are for LG fault

condition.
1 stands for positive sequence.
0 stands for zero sequence.
2 stands for negative sequence.



Vafd = 3Rf + Z I0af

The line diagram of the power system with LG fault at F

(before UPFC) through a fault resistance Rf shown in
Fig. 3. The voltage and current information are retrieved at
the relaying point W. The apparent impedance measured
at W for fault occurring at F (before UPFC) is the same
as the wind farm connected to plane transmission [6]
ZAPP = Z1wf +

3Rf
= Z1wf + DZ (1)
Gld + 2G1 + G0 (1 + K0 )


where DZ = 3Rf / Gld + 2G1 + G0 (1
+ K0 ) is the error term

due to fault resistance, K0 = (Z0wf Z1wf )/Z1wf =
(Z0wn Z1wn )/Z1wn , G1 = Z1snf /(Z1swf + Z1snf ) is the
positive sequence distribution factor, G0 = Z0snf /(Z0swf +
Z0snf ) is the zero sequence distribution factor and G1 = G2
are the negative sequence distribution factors.
Calculation of Gld: The pre-fault voltage at W without
including UPFC is given as
Eaw Z1swf Ild = Vafd

(2)

where Vafd is the phase-a voltage at the fault is point and Ild is
the pre-fault current in the line.
Now
Vas1
= h1 ejd1
Eaw

(3)

where Vas1 and Eaw represent the equivalent voltage source at

two ends, h1 is the amplitude ratio and 1 is the power transfer

(5)

Using (3)(5) in (2) Eaw can be expressed as follows



Eaw
2.2 Apparent Impedance calculation for fault
before UPFC (050% length of transmission line)

(4)

 

3Rf + Z I0f Z1swf + Z1s1f


=
Z1s1f + Z1swf h1 ejd1

(6)

Furthermore, using the value of Eaw in (6), Ild can be obtained

as
Ild = Gld I0f

(7)

where




3Rf + Z 1 h1 ejd1

Gld = 
Z1s1f + Z1swf h1 ejd1

(8)

2.3 Apparent impedance calculation for fault after

UPFC (5185% length of transmission line)
The line diagram of the power system for LG fault after the
UPFC (fault at F) with fault resistance of Rf is shown in
Fig. 4. The voltage and current information are retrieved at
the relaying point at W.
The pre-fault voltage at S2 can be represented in terms of
the voltage at S1 as follows


V
Vas2 = 1 + reju Vas1 = as1
Cs1

(9)

where Cs1 = /1 + rej.

Furthermore, Vas2 can be represented in terms of sequence
components and voltage at the fault point (Vf ) as



Vas2 = Vf + I1wf Z1s1f + I2wf Z2s1f + I0wf Z0s1f + Ild Z1s1f
(10)

Fig. 3 Equivalent circuit representation for fault before UPFC

IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., 2014, Vol. 8, Iss. 11, pp. 18691880
doi: 10.1049/iet-gtd.2014.0066

1871

& The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2014

www.ietdl.org


Eaw 1 h1 ejd1
Eaw Vas1
=
Z1sw + Z1ws1
Z1sws1

Ild =

Is1 =
Ild

Vas1 Esh Eaw h1 ejd1 Esh

=
Zs1
Zs1

(13)

(14)

= Ild Is1

Now the voltage at the fault point Vafd can be expressed as

Vafd = Vas2 Z1s1f Ild

(15)

Further simplication of (15) using (9), (13) and (14) results

(see (16))

Fig. 4 Equivalent circuit representation for fault after UPFC

where (see (17))

A similar expression can be derived for Vaw as

Vas1 = Eaw h1 ejd1 = Gvs1 I0f


Vaw = Vas1 + I1wf Z1ws1 + I2wf Z2ws1 + I0wf Z0ws1 + Ild Z1ws1




= Cs1 Vf + I1wf Z1s1f + I2wf Z2s1f + I0wf Z0s1f + Ild Z1s1f



+ I1wf Z1ws1 + I2wf Z2ws1 + I0wf Z0ws1 + Ild Z1ws1
(11)
Now the apparent impedance (ZAPP) for fault after the UPFC
can be obtained as (see (12))

Eaw =

Gvs1 I0f
h1 ejd1





jd
Eaw 1 h1 ejd1
Gvs1 I0f 1 h1 e 1
Ild =
=
Z1sws1
Z1sws1
h1 ejd1

(18)
(19)
(20)

Ild = Gld I0f

(21)



Gvs1 1 h1 ejd1
Gld =
h1 ejd1
Z1sws1

(22)

where

Furthermore, the pre-fault current Ild and shunt current Is1

can be obtained as

Vaw
Iaw + K0 I0w






Cs1 Vf + I1wf Z1s1f + I2wf Z2s1f + I0wf Z0s1f + Ild Z1s1f + I1wf Z1ws1 + I2wf Z2ws1 + I0wf Z0ws1 + Ild Z1ws1
=
I1wf + I2wf + I0wf + Ild + K0 I0wf

 







 G0 Z0ws1 + Cp Z0s1f Z1ws1 + Cs1 Z1s1f 1 + K0 + Cs1 Z1pf Gldd Gld + 3Rf


= Z1ws1 + Cs1 Z1s1f +
Gld + 2G1 + G0 1 + K0

ZAPP =





V
3Rf + Z I0f = as1 Z1s1f Ild Is1
Cs1
 




Eaw 1 h1 ejd1
Eaw h1 ejd1
Eaw h1 ejd1 Esh

I0f =
Z1s1f

3Rf + Z
Z1sws1
Cs1
Zs1




1
1 h1 ejd1
1
1
jd1

I0f = Eaw h1 e Z1s1f

3Rf + Z
h1 ejd1 Z1sws1 Zs1
Cs1 Z1s1f
Zs1 Iaw h1 ejd1


3Rf + Z I0f
Eaw h1 ejd1 = Vas1 =



Z1s1f (1/Cs1 Z1s1f ) + (1 h1 ejd1 /h1 ejd1 Z1sws1 ) (1/Zs1 ) + (1/Zs1 Iaw h1 ejd1 )


3Rf + Z I0f
=



Z1s1f (1/Cs1 Z1s1f ) + (1 h1 ejd1 /h1 ejd1 Z1sws1 ) (1/Zs1 ) + (1/Zs1 Csh )

(12)

(16)

= Gvs1 I0f

Gvs1 =



3Rf + Z


Z1s1f (1/Cs1 Z1s1f ) + (1 h1 ejd1 /h1 ejd1 Z1sws1 ) (1/Zs1 ) + (1/Zs1 Csh )

1872
& The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2014

(17)

IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., 2014, Vol. 8, Iss. 11, pp. 18691880
doi: 10.1049/iet-gtd.2014.0066

www.ietdl.org
the trip boundaries

The pre-fault current Ild at S2 can be obtained as


Vas2 Vafd 
AsZ1s1f = Z1s2f
Z1s1f
(V /C ) Vafd
= as1 s1
Z1s1f




(Gvs1 /Gs1 ) 3Rf + Z I0f

=
Z1s1f

Vas1
= h1 ejd1 = 0.9565ej11.225 ,
Eaw

Ild =

= Gldd I0f

Z0sw = 1.5 Z1sw ,

Z1wn = 36.8ej86 ,
Csh = Vas1 /Esh ,
(23)

where

Gldd =




(Gvs1 /Gs1 ) 3Rf + Z

Z1s1f

(24)

Here, Ild and Ild are the pre-fault currents in the line, assuming
that the UPFC is placed between S1 and S2 with a shunt
current of Is1. Vafd is the phase-a voltage at the fault point,
Esh is the voltage of the shunt source with impedance Zs1
and Csh is the ratio between phase-a voltage magnitude
|Vas1| and the magnitude of shunt voltage |Esh|. The
impedances Z1sws1 and Z1sns1 are the net positive sequence
impedances between W S1 and N S1, respectively.

Result and analysis

3.1 Initial conditions for generating tripping

boundaries
The trip boundaries are set for different operating conditions
of the wind farm and UPFC, together. Initially, the values of
the voltage and impedances are chosen as follows for setting

Z1sn = 10ej85 ,

Z0wn = 111.8ej83 ,

Z1sw = 20ej85 ,
Z0sn = 1.5 Z1sn
Vas2 = (1 + reju )Vas1 ,

Zs1 = 0 + j0.1

Fig. 5 shows the trip boundaries for faults before (050%

length of transmission line) and after (5185% length of
transmission line) UPFC in the transmission line including
the wind farm placed at the incoming end. It is observed
that the trip boundaries are at different zones in the RX
plane indicating the effect of UPFC on the line. To decide
the trip boundaries, different fault resistances (Rf ) and
locations (length of the line) such as Rf = 0100 and
length = 0%, Rf = 0 and length = 050%, Rf = 0100
and length = 50%, Rf = 100 and length = 050%, Rf = 0
100 and length = 51%, Rf = 0 and length = 5185%,
Rf = 0100 and length = 85% and Rf = 100 and length =
5185% have been considered and the resulting trip
boundaries are shown in Fig. 5. Fig. 6 shows the trip
boundaries when only wind farm is present in the
transmission line. Thus, Fig. 5 shows the trip boundaries,
consisting of two closed trip boundaries in the presence of
UPFC, one for fault before and another for fault after the
UPFC. Similarly, when the effect of UPFC is removed by
setting the parameters accordingly, only one trip boundary
is resulted as shown in Fig. 6, indicating the presence of
wind farm only. Furthermore, variations in operating
parameters of wind farm as well as UPFC and the effects of
both on the trip boundaries are studied as presented in the
following sub-sections.

Fig. 5 Trip boundaries including both wind farms and UPFC

Fig. 6 Trip boundaries for wind farm with no-effect of UPFC 1 = 20, h1 = 0.9565
IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., 2014, Vol. 8, Iss. 11, pp. 18691880
doi: 10.1049/iet-gtd.2014.0066

1873

& The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2014

www.ietdl.org

Fig. 7 Trip boundaries for varying wind farm loading levels 1 = 20, 11.255 and 8 with h1 = 0.9565

Fig. 8 Trip boundaries for varying wind farm voltage levels h1 = 1.05, 0.9565 and 0.9 with 1 = 11.255

Fig. 9 Trip boundaries for varying source impedance of wind farm as depicted in Table 1

3.2 Effect of variations in wind farm parameters on

the trip boundaries (without UPFC)
This section deals with the impact of variations in wind farm
parameters on the trip boundaries without considering the
effect of UPFC. Fig. 7 shows the trip boundaries for
different loading levels. It is observed that when the value
of 1 decreases, the trip boundary is at a larger side
compared with a higher value of 1. The other way, when
1 is less, the generation of wind farm becomes lower
and, for lower end generation, the trip boundaries must be
set at a larger value. Although considering the effect of
varying load level on the trip boundary as shown in Fig. 8,
it is observed that when the amplitude factor h1 changes,
there is substantial change in the operating trip boundaries
of the relay. Thus, the relay trip boundaries are affected by
the voltage variation in the grid side.
The effect of source impedance is one of the important
considerations as it directly indicates the volume of wind
farms connected to the transmission system. The wind farm
sources are smaller in size and a group of them collectively
1874
& The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2014

harness bulk power from a large area. The number of such

units functioning at a time varies depending on the
withdrawal of the number of units at high/low wind speed
or over/under voltage situations [11]. The equivalent source
impedance of the generators will change depending on the
number of units connected to the bus at a time. Fig. 9
shows the variation in trip boundaries when the sequence
impedance is increased by six times in case-2 compared
with that of case-1 (Table 1). This indicates that when the
wind-farm penetration level increases in the transmission
system, the relay must be set at higher side.

Table 1 Summary of varying source impedance of the wind

farm
Cases
1
2

Z0sw

Z1sw

h1ej1

30ej85
180ej85

20ej85
120ej85

0.9565ej11.225
0.9565ej11.225

IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., 2014, Vol. 8, Iss. 11, pp. 18691880
doi: 10.1049/iet-gtd.2014.0066

www.ietdl.org

Fig. 10 Trip boundaries for varying the position of UPFC as depicted in Table 2 with detailed parameters

3.3 Effect of variation in UPFC parameters on the

trip boundaries with wind farm parameters kept
unchanged
This sub-section deals with the impact of variations in the
UPFC parameters on trip boundaries whereas the
parameters of the wind farms are kept unchanged (h1 =
0.9565 and 1 = 1.225). Fig. 10 and Table 2 show the trip
boundaries for two cases at different locations of UPFC,
keeping the shunt and series parameters constant. It is
observed that the relay must be set at higher value for the

Table 2 Summary of varying the position of UPFC

Cases
1
2

Positions of UPFC

rej

Csh

at relay point
at middle point

0.2ej0
0.2ej0

1.002
1.002

UPFC placed at the relaying point (case-1) compared with

case-2, where the UPFC is placed at the middle of the
transmission line, as shown in Fig. 10. Thus, the trip
boundaries are signicantly affected when the location of
the UPFC is changed in the transmission line. It can be
observed that when the UPFC is placed at the middle of the
line, there are two trip boundaries required for fault
occurring before and after the UPFC. However, when the
UPFC is placed at the relaying point, only one trip
boundary is generated as fault always occurs after the
UPFC in the line.
The trip boundaries in case of variations in shunt
parameters (Csh) of UPFC, keeping series parameters (rej)
xed, are shown in Fig. 11. It is observed that the relay
setting is affected largely in terms of the reactance which is
reected on the trip boundaries. Fig. 12 shows the effect of
variation in series parameters on the trip boundaries,
keeping the shunt parameter of the UPFC xed. It is
observed that at different values of r and , the trip

Fig. 11 Trip boundaries for variation in UPFC shunt part parameter with series parameter being constant and Csh = 0.998, 1.0, 1.002 with
rej = 0.2ej0 with UPFC placed at middle of the line

Fig. 12 Trip boundaries for variation in UPFC series part parameter with shunt parameter being constant rej = 0.2ej120, 0.1ej0 and 0.4ej270
with Csh = 1.001 with UPFC placed at middle of the line
IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., 2014, Vol. 8, Iss. 11, pp. 18691880
doi: 10.1049/iet-gtd.2014.0066

1875

& The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2014

www.ietdl.org

Fig. 13 Trip boundaries for variations in wind farm loading level and UPFC series element parameter as depicted in Table 3 with UPFC
placed at middle of the line

boundaries are signicantly affected. The trip boundaries for

each case contain two trip boundaries, one for fault before and
another for fault after the UPFC, as shown in Figs. 11 and 12,
respectively. The trip boundaries for fault before UPFC are
overlapping for all three cases as fault occurs before the
UPFC (as the UPFC is not included in fault path), whereas
the trip boundaries are different for fault after UPFC (as the
UPFC is included in the fault path), with variations in shunt
and series parameters of UPFC.

3.4 Combined effect of wind farm and UPFC on the

trip boundaries
The most important issue is to set the trip boundaries in the
presence of both wind farm and UPFC, together. Fig. 13
shows the trip boundaries with varying 1 (wind farm
parameters) and r (series injected voltage of UPFC). It is
observed from the two cases (as mentioned in Table 3) that
the relay requires a higher setting in case-1 compared with
case-2. Case-1 considers lower 1 (means lower wind
generation) and lower r (means lower series injected
voltage), requiring a larger setting of the relay. Tripping
boundaries with variation in h1 (wind parameter) and Csh
(UPFC shunt parameter) are shown in Fig. 14 (for cases 1
and 2 as mentioned in Table 4). It is observed that case-1

needs a larger relay setting compared with case-2, keeping

series injection contact.

3.5

Effect on Ra and Xa calculation

The corresponding effects on resistance (Ra) and reactance

(Xa) during the lineground (phase-a to ground) fault
situation have been obtained for different operational
conditions. Table 5 shows the calculation of Ra and Xa
when UPFC placed at relay location and fault location is
45% of the line from the relaying point (in this case fault
Table 4 Summary of varying wind farm voltage level and
UPFC shunt parameter
Cases

h1ej1

rej

Csh

1
2

1.1ej15
0.9ej15

0.1ej50
0.1ej50

0.998
1.002

Table 5 Apparent impedance calculation for fault at 45% of the

line with RF = 10 with UPFC installed at relay point
= 0

= 90

= 270

Ra ,

Xa,

Ra ,

Xa,

Ra,

Xa,

8.2912
7.9395
7.5999
7.2772
6.9732
6.6883

8.7389
8.4818
8.2132
7.9437
7.6792
7.4232

8.2912
8.5395
8.8009
9.0786
9.3632
9.6378

8.7389
8.3953
8.0608
7.7127
7.3318
6.9074

8.2912
8.0394
7.7587
7.4229
7.0130
6.5224

8.7389
9.1098
9.5143
9.9439
10.3773
10.7869

Table 3 Summary of varying wind farm loading level and

UPFC series parameter
Cases
1
2

h1e

j1

0.985ej4
0.985ej25

re

Csh

0.1ej120
0.4ej120

1.001
1.001

0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5

Fig. 14 Trip boundaries for variations in wind farm voltage level and UPFC shunt element parameter as depicted in Table 4 with UPFC
placed at middle of the line
1876
& The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2014

IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., 2014, Vol. 8, Iss. 11, pp. 18691880
doi: 10.1049/iet-gtd.2014.0066

www.ietdl.org
Table 6 Apparent impedance calculation for fault at 75% of the line with RF = 10 with UPFC installed at middle point of transmission
= 0

0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5

= 90

Ra,

Xa,

Ra ,

Xa,

Ra,

Xa,

16.3411
15.4694
14.6774
13.9588
13.3063
12.7125

19.7495
20.1085
20.3557
20.5246
20.6379
20.7109

16.3411
15.8793
15.3887
14.9073
14.4531
14.0279

19.7495
18.9158
18.2294
17.6620
17.1803
16.7560

16.3411
16.7187
16.9500
16.9819
16.7834
16.3523

19.7495
20.7417
21.8763
23.1094
24.3769
25.6082

Table 7 Summary of apparent impedance for varying with

r = 0.4 for UPFC installed at middle point of line and fault at 75%
of the line
,

RF = 5
ZAPP,

RF = 50
ZAPP,

0
60
120
180
240
300

7.3384 + 21.0856i
7.5332 + 20.1031i
7.8072 + 19.6519i
9.6016 + 16.9870i
11.2852 + 22.5030i
8.1128 + 22.4261i

49.9177 + 18.8469i
51.9941 + 9.9386i
61.7751 + 4.0433i
75.9319 + 12.3815i
68.0891 + 30.1250i
54.4740 + 27.4714i

Table 8

Summary of apparent impedance for different fault

locations when UPFC installed at far end of transmission
Fault locations, %

0
5
15
25
35
45
65
75
85
90

= 270

RF = 5
ZAPP,

RF = 50
ZAPP,

3.7517 0.1120i
4.0335 + 1.6817i
4.3291 + 3.4717i
4.6406 + 5.2573i
4.9703 + 7.0379i
5.3211 + 8.8127i
5.6964 + 10.5808i
6.1007 + 12.3410i
6.5393 + 14.0917i
7.0189 + 15.8312i

31.9333 0.1283i
33.1621 + 1.4198i
34.4750 + 2.9483i
35.8822 + 4.4552i
37.3952 + 5.9382i
39.0279 + 7.3945i
40.7964 + 8.8211i
42.7199 + 10.2144i
44.8214 + 11.5704i
47.1289 + 12.8842i

always occurs after the UPFC) with fault resistance RF = 10

, series injected voltage r varies from 0 to 0.5 with series
injected voltage phase angle = 0, 90, 270. It is observed
from Table 5 that when = 0, then the value of Ra and Xa
decreases with increase in the value of r. Further when =
90 then the value of Ra increases and Xa decreases with an
increase in the value of r. Similarly, when = 270, the
value of Ra decreases and of Xa increases with an increase
in the value of r. The complete statistics (Ra and Xa) for

fault at 75% of the line with UPFC placed at the middle of

the transmission line (50%) are depicted in Table 6 (RF =
10 , = 0, 90, 270 and r varies 00.5). It is observed
from Table 6 that when = 0, Ra decreases and Xa
increases with increase in the value of r. Furthermore, when
= 90, then the value of Ra and Xa decreases with an
increase in the value of r. Similarly when = 270, Ra
decreases for the value of r up to 0.3 and increases between
r = 0.4 and 0.5. Under this condition, Xa increases with an
increase in the value of r. The results depicted in Table 7
show the value of Ra and Xa when varies between 0 and
300 at r = 0.4 and UPFC placed at the middle of the
transmission line (50%) with fault location at 75% of the
line. Table 8 shows the value of Ra and Xa when the UPFC
is placed at the far end of the transmission line and fault
location varies from 0 to 80% of the line. In this case, fault
always occurs before the UPFC. It is clearly observed from
the results depicted in Table 5 through Table 8 that the
presence of UPFC introduces a capacitive or inductive
reactance to the line depending on the value of , r and
fault location. Fig. 15 presents variations in Ra and Xa for
different fault resistances at a xed power system operating
condition and Fig. 16 presents the corresponding values for
variation in wind farm loading level 1. It is observed that
the post fault values of Ra and Xa, which effectively results
the tripping decision, are greatly affected for the fault at
different locations with variations in UPFC series injected
voltage, phase angle, wind farm loading level and UPFC
locations.

4 Performance assessment of the relay

during fault and power swing
4.1 Impact of wind farm and placement of UPFC on
impedance trajectory
Wind speed varies continuously throughout the day resulting
in the uctuation in wind farm output power. When such a

Fig. 15 Ra and Xa at the reach point for variation in fault resistance

IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., 2014, Vol. 8, Iss. 11, pp. 18691880
doi: 10.1049/iet-gtd.2014.0066

1877

& The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2014

www.ietdl.org

Fig. 16 Ra and Xa at the reach point for variation in wind farm loading level

farm is connected to the grid in the presence of UPFC on the

line, the transmitted power and the relay end voltage (with
respect to grid voltage) uctuate continuously. The output
power of a generating unit has a non-linear relationship
with the wind speed [i.e. Pm aVw3 , where Pm is the power
extracted from the wind in watts; Vw (m/s) is the wind
speed at hub height upstream of the rotor]. Therefore the
frequency and voltage uctuations occur because of wind
speed variation. Fig. 17 presents the apparent impedance
trajectory for fault (AG) after the UPFC. It is observed
that the trajectory settles down faster with normal source
compared with the uctuating wind farm. The performance
of the generated distance relay characteristics is tested for
fault after the UPFC (75% of the line) and faults before the
UPFC (35% of the line) are shown in Figs. 18 and 19,
respectively. It is observed that the UPFC will remain at
work in the case of fault after the UPFC because of
co-fuelling of short-circuit (the short-circuit current owing

through the UPFC is smaller and the UPFC may remain at

work). The impact of voltage compensation for the faults
including UPFC is also shown in Fig. 18 and it is observed
that the trajectory is still away from the characteristics,
which is desired. On the other hand, impedance trajectory
enters the tripping boundaries for fault before the UPFC
(for faults with different fault resistance) and the relay
performs satisfactorily for faults with a fault resistance of
up to 100 .
The proposed distance relay is tested on the power system
model developed according to [9] including only lineground
(AG fault) fault situation. Initially, the three phase voltages
and currents are retrieved and passed through anti-aliasing
low-pass lters, and then the phasors are extracted using
full cycle discrete Fourier transform. Furthermore, after
computing the positive, negative and zero sequence
components from the estimated phasors, the apparent
impedance for the measuring units (AG fault situation) is

Fig. 17 Impact of wind farm on apparent impedance trajectory for faults after UPFC

Fig. 18 Impedance trajectory for faults after UPFC with and without voltage compensation
1878
& The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2014

IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., 2014, Vol. 8, Iss. 11, pp. 18691880
doi: 10.1049/iet-gtd.2014.0066

www.ietdl.org

Fig. 19 Impedance trajectory for faults before UPFC for different fault resistances

evaluated. In this paper, MATLAB/SIMULINK (SimPower

System) is used to model the 500 kV, 300 km long
transmission system with UPFC and off-shore wind-farm
integration. The parameters of the system are UPFC: 500
kV, 100 MVA UPFC, wind farm: DFIG type, 575 V, 9
MW, grid: 500 kV, 8500 MVA (short circuit level), 60 Hz.
4.2

Performance of the relay during power swing

When the power system (Fig. 1) is subjected to power swing

[1517], 1 may keep changing from 0 to 360. The relay
must not respond to power swing and must effectively work
for faults during the power swing. The relay performance
during the power swing and the fault during power swing
are shown in Figs. 20 and 21, respectively. Fig. 20 shows
the apparent impedance trajectory seen by relay R during
the fast swing with a frequency of 6 Hz. The power ows
and bus voltage are equal in values for the system with and
without UPFC. The impedance circle corresponding to the
compensated line has different centres and radii from an

uncompensated line [4]. The conventional power swing

blocking (PSB) scheme often utilises the concentric
characteristic method [18]. In the PSB scheme, the outer
characteristic (ZPSB) is an offset Mho relay characteristic
which is concentric with zone-3 of the distance relay.
During the power swing, the apparent impedance trajectory
traverses from the ZPSB to zone-3, slower than a fault
condition. The correct setting for the PSB time delay is
observed to be between 2 and 3 cycles (with wind farm and
UPFC) and 4 cycles (with wind farm only) after extensive
stability studies. It is clearly observed that the impedance
trajectory does not enter into the tripping zone for only
power swing case and enters into the tripping zone in the
case of fault during power swing. This improves the
reliability of the relay over the existing relays.

Discussion

The proposed paper generated distance relay tripping

characteristics in the presence of UPFC and wind farm

Fig. 20 Impedance trajectory during power swing

Fig. 21 Impedance trajectory for fault during power swing

IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., 2014, Vol. 8, Iss. 11, pp. 18691880
doi: 10.1049/iet-gtd.2014.0066

1879

& The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2014

www.ietdl.org
including wide variations in the operating parameter of wind
farm and UPFC. It is observed that in the case of wind farms
only, one trip boundary is generated whereas two trip
boundaries are generated for UPFC placed at the middle of
the transmission line to accommodate faults before and after
the UPFC on the transmission line. This includes different
test conditions such as (i) variation in wind parameters
while removing the effect of UPFC, (ii) variation in UPFC
parameter keeping wind parameters unchanged and (iii)
varying the parameters of both wind farm and UPFC
together. It is observed that the trip boundaries are
signicantly affected when the wind farm and UPFC (shunt
and series) parameters are changed.
It is further observed that the proposed relay is highly
reliable and effective for generating tripping characteristics
of distance relay including both UPFC and wind farms in
the transmission line. The performance of the relay during
power swings and faults during power swings denitely
enhances the ability to handle other conditions which may
be close to fault situations. The proposed approach uses the
relaying end voltage and current information, and therefore
is simple and easier to implement on the digital signal
processing/eld-programmable gate array board for
developing the distance relay module. Furthermore,
penetration of inverter-based distributed resources (solar
farms) limits the fault current level and needs different relay
settings compared with the induction generator-based wind
farms. The proposed paper is extensively focused and tested
for phase-earth (lineground) fault situation, which is most
likely to occur on the transmission system. However, the
future paper will include the phasephase faults along with
ground-fault situations to build a comprehensive distance
relay module. Furthermore, online adaptive relay setting of
distance relays for FACTS-based transmission systems with
a high penetration of both wind and solar farms is being
considered and will be reported separately.

Conclusions

The proposed research is focused on generating distance relay

tripping boundaries for transmission lines including wind
farm and UPFC, together. The difculties appear as wind
speed varies with time, affecting the power and voltage at
the relaying point. Similarly, the function of UPFC in the
transmission line brings serious problems with respect to
relaying as the apparent impedance to the fault point gets
changed. The possible impact of UPFC and wind farm on
the distance relay characteristics at wide variations in
operating parameters is extensively studied and it is
observed that the tripping characteristics are signicantly
affected. Furthermore, the performance of the relay with
different fault situations with wide variations under
operating conditions of wind farm, UPFC shows the
efcacy over the existing distance relays. This further helps
in devising online adaptive distance relay setting for
FACTS-based transmission network with wind penetration
and improves the reliability of the distance relay performance.

1880
& The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2014

Acknowledgments

The research work has been supported by Prime Ministers

Fellowship for Doctoral Research, being implemented
jointly by Science & Engineering Research Board (SERB)
and Confederation of Indian Industry (CII), with industry
partner Robert Bosch.

References

1 Hingorani, N.G., Gyugyi, L.: Understanding FACTS concepts and

technology of exible AC transmission systems (IEEE Press,
New York, 2000)
2 Song, Y.H., Johns, A.T.: Flexible AC transmission systems (IEEE
Press, New York, 1999)
3 Gyugyi, L., Schauder, C.D., Torgerson, S.L., Edris, A.: The unied
power ow controller: a new approach to power transmission control,
IEEE Trans. Power Deliv, 1995, 10, (2), pp. 10881097
4 Working Group B5.15 no. 359, Modern Distance Protection Functions
and Applications, CIGRE Brochure, October 2008
5 Adams, J.: Impact of high penetration of wind on power system
operations. IEEE Power & Energy Society General Meeting,
PES09, 2009
6 Pradhan, A.K., Joos, G: Adaptive distance relay setting for lines
connecting wind farms, IEE Trans. Energy Conver., 2007, 22, (1),
pp. 206213
7 Dash, P.K., Pradhan, A.K., Panda, G., Liew, A.C.: Adaptive relay
setting for exible AC transmission systems (FACTS), IEEE Trans.
Power Deliv., 2000, 15, (1), pp. 3843
8 Albasri, F.A., Sidhu, T.S., Verma, R.K.: Performance comparison of
distance protection schemes for shunt-FACTS compensated transmission
lines, IEEE Trans. Power Deliv., 2007, 22, (4), pp. 21162125
9 Zhou, X., Wang, H., Aggarwal, R.K., Beaumont, P.: Performance
evaluation of a distance relay as applied to a transmission system with
UPFC, IEEE Trans. Power Deliv., 2006, 21, (3), pp. 11371147
10 Khederzadeh, M.: UPFC operating characteristics impact on
transmission line distance protection. Proc. IEEE PES General
Meeting, Pittsburgh, PA, July 2008, pp. 16
11 Samantaray, S.R.: Decision tree-based fault zone identication and
fault classication in exible AC transmissions-based transmission
line. IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., 2009, 3, (5), pp. 425436
12 Seethalekshmi, K., Singh, S.N., Srivastava, S.C.: Synchrophasor
assisted adaptive reach setting of distance relays in presence of
UPFC, IEEE Syst. J., 2011, 5, (3), pp. 396405
13 Jang, S.I., Choi, J.H., Kim, J.W., Choi, D.M.: An adaptive relaying for
the protection of a wind farm interconnected with distribution networks.
Proc. IEEE PES Transmission Distribution Conf. Exposition, 712
September 2003, vol. 1, pp. 296302
14 Brahma, S.M., Girgis, A.A.: Development of adaptive protection
schemes for distribution systems with high penetration of distribution
generation, IEEE Trans. Power Deliv., 2004, 19, (1), pp. 5663
15 Paudyal, S., Ramakrishna, G., Sachdev, M.S.: Application of equal area
criterion conditions in the time domain for out-of-step protection, IEEE
Trans. Power Deliv., 2010, 25, (4), pp. 600609
16 Rao, G., Pradhan, A.K.: Differential power based symmetrical fault
detection during power swing, IEEE Trans. Power Deliv., 2012, 27,
(3), pp. 15571564
17 Dubey, R., Samantaray, S.R.: Wavelet singular entropy-based
symmetrical fault-detection and out-of-step protection during power
swing, IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., 2013, 7, (10), pp. 11231134
18 Moravej, Z., Pazoki, M., Khederzadeh, M.: Impact of UPFC on power
swing characteristic and distance relay behavior, IEEE Trans. Power
Deliv., 2014, 29, (1), pp. 261268

IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., 2014, Vol. 8, Iss. 11, pp. 18691880
doi: 10.1049/iet-gtd.2014.0066