Traveling Wave Fault Location in Protective Relays
Traveling Wave Fault Location in Protective Relays
Traveling Wave Fault Location in Protective Relays
= +
=
(12)
9
B. Testing Using a Physical Line Model
Additional verification was performed using the physical
single-phase transmission line model shown in Fig. 17.
Although less precise and significantly less versatile than
EMTP simulations, the physical low-energy transmission line
model offered the ability to test the entire system (including
the relay input CTs).
Fig. 17. Physical transmission line model.
The physical transmission line model was implemented
using a total of 500 sections to simulate a 38-mile line. The
custom card developed for this model is shown in Fig. 18. The
model operates at 48 V, 1 A with a maximum fault current
level of 5 A. Faults can be applied at three locations. Fig. 17
shows faults at 20, 60, and 100 percent of the line length.
Fig. 18. Transmission line model section used to simulate a 3.8-mile single-
phase segment. The thyristor-based fault model is visible at the lower right-
hand side. The complete line model uses 10 sections.
VI. FIELD INSTALLATION
A. Fault Location Experience
BPA owns and operates Goshen and Drummond
substations. The Goshen-Drummond line is operated at
161 kV, and according to the BPA system data book, its line
length is 72.77 miles. This transmission line is located in
eastern Idaho close to the Wyoming border (see Fig. 19). The
line shares a right of way with two other 161 kV lines for
approximately 4.75 miles. Then it shares the right of way with
another 161 kV line for the next 17 miles. The line was
originally built for 115 kV and was later upgraded to 161 kV
without changing conductors or insulators.
Targhee Tap
Swan Valley
Targhee
Goshen
Drummond
Idaho Wyoming
Fig. 19. Goshen-Drummond 161 kV line (blue) and neighboring 161 kV
lines (magenta).
After the 161 kV upgrade, the line experienced 40 faults in
the past five years. The most common causes of faults on this
line include the following:
- Galloping conductors clashing because of the wind.
- Farmers spraying fertilizers on the conductors and
insulators.
- Flying projectiles hitting the conductors and
insulators.
In the past, for a permanent fault, a lineman would drive
along the line until the fault was found. For a long line built
over rough terrain, this approach could cause a long outage.
Later, BPA used oscillographic records of faults to estimate
the fault location. BPA personnel calculated the impedance to
the fault from the fault voltages and currents and estimated the
fault location. This information would give the lineman a
starting point to look for the fault. For temporary faults,
linemen inspected every insulator looking for an indication of
where the flash occurred. With the advent of digital relays, the
relay would estimate the fault location based upon the
impedance and the length of the line. If either of these were
not accurate, then the location would not be accurate. Multiple
sections, different tower configurations, fault resistance,
system nonhomogeneity, and zero-sequence mutual coupling
challenge the accuracy of impedance-based fault locating
methods.
10
The Goshen-Drummond line is composed of four different
tower structures, as shown in Fig. 20. The line is spanned
across 18 sections. Table II shows the tower type and line
length associated with each section.
J30
27'GW
24.67'
18.67'
GMD = 27.13'
SC
18.67' 24.67'
GMD = 28.15'
DC
J7
GMD = 25.20'
SC
20' 20'
H33
7'
1
6
.5
5
'
15'
GMD = 15.65'
SC
GW
H18
GMD = 20.16'
SC
16' 16'
Fig. 20. Tower structures on the Goshen-Drummond line.
TABLE II
TOWER TYPE AND LINE SECTION LENGTH
Tower Type Length (miles)
H18 0.12
J30 21.05
J7 0.68
H33 11.63
J7 0.52
J7 0.25
J7 0.94
H33 2.22
J7 4.08
J30 0.79
J30 0.42
J30 0.08
J7 8.86
H33 5.41
J7 0.37
J7 1.27
H33 5.82
J7 8.27
Fig. 21 shows the one-line diagram that includes the
Goshen-Drummond line and relay CT connections. Notice
that the line termination at Drummond is an autotransformer.
Fig. 21. Transmission network that includes the Goshen-Drummond line.
11
B. Traveling Wave Device Installation
On April 4, 2012, BPA installed two relays with TW
locating capability on the Goshen-Drummond 161 kV line.
These relays are capable of exchanging TW information via a
64 kbps channel and estimating fault location in real time, but
the communications channels were not available at
installation. Therefore, we manually retrieved the
COMTRADE event records with TW information and
estimated the fault location after the occurrence of each fault.
The event records include the TW phase currents and time-
stamp information.
C. Propagation Velocity and Line Length
As previously mentioned, double-end TW fault location
relies on the line length and propagation velocity settings
along with the measured time difference between the arrival
times of the TWs captured at both terminals of the
transmission line. Typically, utilities have an estimate of the
line length based on the geographic or linear length or road
miles of the transmission line; some utilities consider line sag
in their estimates. Including the sag in line length estimates
reduces errors in the TW fault location.
We measured the propagation velocity based on the line
length and travel time of the waves. We estimated travel time
using the TW information that we captured during line
energization. We energized the line from Goshen while the
terminal at Drummond was open and captured the event
reports to determine the wave propagation velocity. Fig. 22
shows the phase currents and voltages captured at the Goshen
terminal sampled at 8 kHz.
Fig. 22. Phase voltages and currents captured during line energization from
Goshen.
The phase currents depicted in Fig. 22 show the pole
scatter and the sequence of pole closing: B-phase, C-phase,
and A-phase. Furthermore, we can observe that the B-phase
and A-phase poles closed near the peak of their corresponding
voltages, while the C-phase pole closed near the voltage zero
crossing. Fig. 23 shows the phase currents filtered using an
analog band-pass filter, preserving the high-frequency content
and rejecting the fundamental frequency content; the currents
are sampled at 1.56 MHz.
Fig. 23. TW phase currents captured during line energization.
Fig. 23 shows that there is no detectable transient
corresponding to the C-phase closing as the pole closed at near
voltage zero. The information in Fig. 23 can be used to
determine the pole scatter among the breaker contacts
accurately to hundreds of nanoseconds. This information can
be further used to determine if corrective breaker maintenance
is needed. We used the time stamps corresponding to B-phase
pole closing and the reflected wave from the open terminals to
calculate the propagation velocity. We show the propagation
velocity calculations in (13) and (14), with travel time equal to
790.605 microseconds and line length equal to 72.77 miles.
2 LL 1
LPVEL
Travel time c
= (13)
2 72.77 miles 1
LPVEL
790.605 s 186282.39705 miles/s
0.98821
=
=
(14)
D. Power System Faults and Fault Location Estimates
1) Event 1: C-Phase-to-Ground Fault
The first fault occurred on April 24, 2012. Fig. 24 and
Fig. 25 show the TWs captured at the Goshen and Drummond
terminals for the C-phase-to-ground fault.
Fig. 24. Phase currents at Goshen for the C-phase-to-ground fault at
67.91 miles from Goshen terminal.
A-Phase Closing
B-Phase
Closing
Reflection From
B-Phase Closing
12
Fig. 25. Phase currents at Drummond for the C-phase-to-ground fault at
67.91 miles from Goshen terminal.
The time stamps corresponding to the TW arrival obtained
from the event records include the following:
- Goshen: Twave
Gosh
= 24.089532202 seconds
- Drummond: Twave
Drum
= 24.089186645 seconds
Based on the measured TW arrival times, we estimated
from (11) a fault location of 68.19 miles from the Goshen
terminal. When the line crew patrolled the line, they found a
damaged insulator at 67.91 miles from the Goshen terminal.
Fig. 26 shows the damaged insulator. The line crew reported
that the cause of the insulator damage could be a flashover.
Fig. 26. Damaged insulator at 67.91 miles from Goshen terminal.
2) Event 2: B-Phase-to-Ground Fault
The second fault occurred on May 11, 2012. This
permanent fault was caused by a lead projectile hitting the
B-phase insulators at a high speed. Fig. 27 and Fig. 28 show
the high-frequency components of the phase currents captured
at both terminals.
Fig. 27. Phase currents at Goshen for the B-phase-to-ground fault at
38.16 miles from the Goshen terminal.
Fig. 28. Phase currents at Drummond for the B-phase-to-ground fault at
38.16 miles from the Goshen terminal.
The time stamps corresponding to the TW arrival obtained
from the event records include the following:
- Goshen: Twave
Gosh
= 36.832684476 seconds
- Drummond: Twave
Drum
= 36.832667109 seconds
We estimated a fault location of 37.98 miles from the
Goshen terminal. The line crew found the fault at 38.16 miles
from the Goshen terminal. Fig. 29 shows one of the damaged
insulators in the insulator string.
Fig. 29. Damaged insulator at 38.16 miles from the Goshen terminal.
Damaged
Insulator
13
3) Event 3: B-Phase-to-Ground Fault
The third fault was on May 26, 2012. Fig. 30 and Fig. 31
show the high-frequency components of the phase currents
captured at both terminals.
Fig. 30. Phase currents at Goshen for the B-phase-to-ground fault at
66.86 miles from the Goshen terminal.
Fig. 31. Phase currents at Drummond for the B-phase-to-ground fault at
66.86 miles from the Goshen terminal.
Based on the prestrikes recorded at the Goshen terminal, it
is suspected that the fault was due to lightning. The time
stamps corresponding to the TW arrival obtained from the
event records include the following:
- Goshen: Twave
Gosh
= 32.815358756 seconds
- Drummond: Twave
Drum
= 32.815023378 seconds
We estimated a fault location of 67.25 miles from the
Goshen terminal. The line crew found the fault at 66.86 miles
from Goshen.
4) Summary of Results
Table III provides the fault location reported by the relay
based on TW measurements and the actual fault location
reported by BPA. The errors between the TW-based estimated
distances and the BPA reported distances are attributed to the
nonuniformity of the line sag due to terrain elevation changes
and differences in tower structures. BPA is working on
providing accurate line length estimates to include line sag.
TABLE III
REPORTED FAULT LOCATIONS AND ASSOCIATED ERRORS
Event
Number
Faulted
Phase
TW-Based
Estimated
Distance
BPA
Reported
Distance
Error
1 C 68.19 miles 67.91 miles 0.28 miles
2 B 37.98 miles 38.16 miles 0.18 miles
3 B 67.25 miles 66.86 miles 0.39 miles
VII. CONCLUSION
Adding TW-based fault location to line protective relays
improves their fault locating capability compared with relays
that use only impedance-based fault locating methods.
Relays that use TWs and impedance-based methods to
estimate fault location provide results independent of the fault
incidence angle. These relays provide fault location at the line
terminals within a couple of seconds without the need for an
additional computer and software.
Field cases demonstrate that relays with TW fault locating
capability can locate faults to within a tower span in
applications including lines with mutual coupling.
Furthermore, there is no need for additional secondary wiring
and communications equipment when TW-based fault location
is part of the line differential relay.
VIII. REFERENCES
[1] T. W. Stringfield, D. J. Marihart, and R. F. Stevens, Fault Location
Methods for Overhead Lines, Transactions of the American Institute of
Electrical Engineers Part III: Power Apparatus and Systems, Vol. 76,
Issue 3, April 1957, pp. 518530.
[2] D. J. Marihart and N. W. Haagenson, Automatic Fault Locator for
Bonneville Power Administration, proceedings of the 1972 IEEE
Power and Energy Society Summer Meeting, San Francisco, CA,
July 1972.
[3] M. Ando, E. O. Schweitzer, III, and R. A. Baker, Development and
Field-Data Evaluation of Single-End Fault Locator for Two-Terminal
HVDC Transmission Lines, Part I: Data Collection System and Field
Data, IEEE Transactions on Power Apparatus and Systems,
Vol. PAS104, Issue 12, December 1985, pp. 35243530.
[4] M. Ando, E. O. Schweitzer, III, and R. A. Baker, Development and
Field-Data Evaluation of Single-End Fault Locator for Two-Terminal
HVDC Transmission Lines, Part II: Algorithm and Evaluation, IEEE
Transactions on Power Apparatus and Systems, Vol. PAS104,
Issue 12, December 1985, pp. 35313537.
[5] M. A. Street, Delivery and Application of Precise Timing for a
Traveling Wave Powerline Fault Locator System, proceedings of the
22nd Annual Precise Time and Time Interval (PTTI) Applications and
Planning Meeting, Vienna, VA, December 1990, pp. 355360.
[6] P. F. Gale, Overhead Line Fault Location Based on Travelling Waves
and GPS, proceedings of the Precise Measurements in Power Systems
Conference, Arlington, VA, October 1993.
[7] M. Aurangzeb, P. A. Crossley, and P. Gale, Fault Location on a
Transmission Line Using High Frequency Travelling Waves Measured
at a Single Line End, proceedings of the 2000 IEEE Power Engineering
Society Winter Meeting, Vol. 4, Singapore, January 2000,
pp. 24372442.
14
[8] D. A. Tziouvaras, J. Roberts, and G. Benmouyal, New Multi-Ended
Fault Location Design for Two- or Three-Terminal Lines, proceedings
of the 7th International Conference on Developments in Power System
Protection, Amsterdam, Netherlands, April 2001.
[9] K. Zimmerman and D. Costello, Impedance-Based Fault Location
Experience, proceedings of the 31st Annual Western Protective Relay
Conference, Spokane, WA, October 2004.
[10] B. S. Guru and H. R. Hiziroglu, Electromagnetic Field Theory
Fundamentals. PWS Publishing Company, Boston, MA, June 1997.
[11] P. Moreno, P. Gmez, J. L. Naredo, and J. L. Guardado, Frequency
Domain Transient Analysis of Electrical Networks Including Non-linear
Conditions, International Journal of Electrical Power & Energy
Systems, Vol. 27, Issue 2, February 2005, pp. 139146.
[12] D. E. Hedman, Propagation on Overhead Transmission Lines I: Theory
of Modal Analysis, IEEE Transactions on Power Apparatus and
Systems, Vol. 84, Issue 3, March 1965, pp. 200205.
[13] S. A. Schelkunoff, The Electromagnetic Theory of Coaxial
Transmission Lines and Cylindrical Shields, The Bell System Technical
Journal, Vol. 13, No. 4, October 1934, pp. 532579.
[14] D. Hou and J. Roberts, Capacitive Voltage Transformers: Transient
Overreach Concerns and Solutions for Distance Relaying, proceedings
of the 22nd Annual Western Protective Relay Conference, Spokane,
WA, October 1995.
[15] E. O. Schweitzer, III, Evaluation and Development of Transmission
Line Fault-Locating Techniques Which Use Sinusoidal Steady-State
Information, proceedings of the 9th Annual Western Protective Relay
Conference, Spokane, WA, October 1982.
[16] T. Takagi, Y. Yamakoshi, M. Yamaura, R. Kondow, and
T. Matsushima, Development of a New Type Fault Locator Using the
One-Terminal Voltage and Current Data, IEEE Transactions on Power
Apparatus and Systems, Vol. PAS101, Issue 8, August 1982,
pp. 28922898.
[17] B. Kasztenny, B. Le, and N. Fischer, A New Multiterminal Fault
Location Algorithm Embedded in Line Current Differential Relays,
proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Developments in
Power System Protection, Birmingham, UK, April 2012.
[18] H. Lee, Development of an Accurate Travelling Wave Fault Locator
Using the Global Positioning System Satellites, proceedings of the 20th
Annual Western Protective Relay Conference, Spokane, WA,
October 1993.
[19] D. A. Douglass, Current Transformer Accuracy With Asymmetric and
High Frequency Fault Current, IEEE Transactions on Power Apparatus
and Systems, Vol. 100, Issue 3, March 1981, pp. 10061012.
[20] M. A. Redfern, S. C. Terry, F. V. P. Robinson, and Z. Q. Bo, A
Laboratory Investigation Into the use of MV Current Transformers for
Transient Based Protection, proceedings of the 2003 International
Conference on Power Systems Transients (IPST), New Orleans, LA,
SeptemberOctober 2003.
[21] A. M. Elhaffar, Power Transmission Line Fault Location Based on
Current Traveling Waves, doctoral dissertation, Helsinki University of
Technology, Finland, March 2008.
[22] D. J. Spoor, J. Zhu, and P. Nichols, Filtering Effects of Substation
Secondary Circuits on Power System Traveling Wave Transients,
proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Electrical Machines
and Systems (ICEMS), Vol. 3, September 2005, pp. 23602365.
[23] M. Kezunovic, L. Kojovic, V. Skendzic, C. W. Fromen, D. Sevcik, and
S. L. Nilsson, Digital Models of Coupling Capacitor Voltage
Transformers for Protective Relay Studies, IEEE Transactions on
Power Delivery, Vol. 7, Issue 4, October 1992, pp. 19271935.
[24] L. V. Bewley, Traveling Waves on Transmission Systems. Dover
Publications, Mineola, NY, 1963.
IX. BIOGRAPHIES
Stephen Marx received his BSEE from the University of Utah in 1988. He
joined Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) in 1988. He is presently the
District Engineer in Idaho Falls, Idaho, for BPA. He has over 25 years of
experience in power system protection and metering. He has been a lecturer at
the Hands-On Relay School in Pullman, Washington, since 2007. He is a
registered professional engineer in the state of Oregon. He is a member of
IEEE and has authored and coauthored several technical papers.
Brian K. Johnson received a Ph.D. degree in electrical engineering from the
University of Wisconsin-Madison in 1992. He is currently a professor in the
ECE Department at the University of Idaho, Moscow. His interests include
power electronics, power system protection, and modeling and simulation of
power system transients. Dr. Johnson is a professional engineer in the state of
Idaho.
Armando Guzmn received his BSEE with honors from Guadalajara
Autonomous University (UAG), Mexico. He received a diploma in fiber-
optics engineering from Monterrey Institute of Technology and Advanced
Studies (ITESM), Mexico, and his MSEE and MECE from the University of
Idaho, USA. He served as regional supervisor of the Protection Department in
the Western Transmission Region of the Federal Electricity Commission (the
Mexican electrical utility company) in Guadalajara, Mexico, for 13 years. He
lectured at UAG and the University of Idaho in power system protection and
power system stability. Since 1993, he has been with Schweitzer Engineering
Laboratories, Inc., in Pullman, Washington, where he is a fellow research
engineer. He holds numerous patents in power system protection and
metering. He is a senior member of IEEE.
Veselin Skendzic is a principal research engineer at Schweitzer Engineering
Laboratories, Inc. He earned his BS in electrical engineering from FESB,
University of Split, Croatia; his Masters of Science from ETF, Zagreb,
Croatia; and his Ph.D. from Texas A&M University. He has more than
25 years of experience in electronic circuit design and power system
protection-related problems. He is a senior member of IEEE, has written
multiple technical papers, and is actively contributing to IEEE and IEC
standard development. He is a member of the IEEE Power Engineering
Society (PES) and the IEEE Power System Relaying Committee (PSRC) and
a past chair of the PSRC Relay Communications Subcommittee (H).
Mangapathirao (Venkat) Mynam received his MSEE from the University
of Idaho in 2003 and his BE in electrical and electronics engineering from
Andhra University College of Engineering, India, in 2000. He joined
Schweitzer Engineering Laboratories, Inc. (SEL) in 2003 as an associate
protection engineer in the engineering services division. He is presently
working as a lead research engineer in SEL research and development. He
was selected to participate in the U.S. National Academy of Engineering
(NAE) 15th Annual U.S. Frontiers of Engineering Symposium. He is a senior
member of IEEE.
2013 by Bonneville Power Administration, University of Idaho, and
Schweitzer Engineering Laboratories, Inc.
All rights reserved.
20130309 TP6601-01