IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER DELIVERY, VOL. 22, NO.

3, JULY 2007 1965

Evaluation of a 3  Bolted Short-Circuit

on Distribution Networks Having Induction
Generators at Customer Sites
T. Sulawa, Z. Zabar, Senior Member, IEEE, D. Czarkowski, Member, IEEE, Y. TenAmi, Member, IEEE,
L. Birenbaum, Senior Member, IEEE, and S. Lee

Abstract—This paper addresses the effect of distributed genera-

tors, specifically squirrel cage induction generators, on 3 bolted
short-circuit fault currents to make sure that they do not interfere
with the interruption capability of circuit breakers. Results of a
laboratory experiment, and simulation results for 16 different in-
duction machines, including their feeder and transformer connec-
tions to the substation, are presented for a short-circuit at the sub-
station site. An equation was developed for the upper boundary
envelope of the current peaks contributed by the induction gener-
ators, and was used for successful comparison with simulation re-
Fig. 1. One-line diagram of an induction generator connected to the utility line.
sults. It is hoped that it can serve as a useful complement to the ex-
isting IEEE and IEC standards methods for calculating short-cir-
cuit currents of induction machines.
Index Terms—AC machines, distributed generation, fault anal-
ysis, induction generators, short-circuit calculations.

I. INTRODUCTION

E XISTING distribution systems were originally designed

to operate without any generation at customer sites. Now,
however, increasing numbers of generation sources are being in-
Fig. 2. Equivalent circuit per-phase of induction generator including the feeder/
transformer impedance leading to the short.

troduced into distribution systems. They can significantly affect

the flow of power and the voltage conditions at customer and
utility equipment. This study addresses the effect of distributed Therefore, it is important to determine the value of the induc-
generators, specifically squirrel cage induction generators, on tion generator’s current peaks under bolted short-circuit
bolted short-circuit fault currents. conditions at the circuit breaker location.
For example, Fig. 1 shows an induction generator connected One approach assumes that the induction generator short-cir-
to the utility distribution network at Load 1, with circuit breaker cuit current decays exponentially with a time-constant given by
protection. In the event of a fault, short-circuit current through [1]
the circuit breaker (CB2), in service before the induction gener-
ator was installed, could be increased by an additional current (1)
due to a contribution from the induction generator.
It is necessary to calculate these short circuit currents to be where , and
sure that they do not interfere with the interruption capability of
the circuit breaker. The generator parameters per phase are (see also Fig. 2): ,
For that reason, the utility needs a conservative (i.e., worst —stator resistance and leakage reactance; , —rotor re-
case) prediction of the induction generator’s contribution to sistance and leakage reactance referred to the stator; —the
the short circuit current, especially during the first few cycles. magnetizing reactance; is the (radian) line frequency; and
is the machine time-constant if the terminals are open-circuited.
Manuscript received December 22, 2005; revised September 18, 2006. This and are the resistance and reactance of the feeder/
work was supported by Consolidated Edison of NY. Paper no. TPWRD-00725-
2005.
transformer between the machine terminals and the short-cir-
T. Sulawa, Z. Zabar, D. Czarkowski, and L. Birenbaum are with the Poly- cuit. is the slip, , where is the machine
technic University, Brooklyn, NY 11201 USA (e-mail: zzabar@poly.edu). synchronous speed, and is the shaft speed.
S. Lee and Y. TenAmi are with Con Edison, New York, NY 10003 USA. For short-circuit calculation, (1) applies whether the ma-
Color versions of one or more of the figures in this paper are available online
at http://ieeexplore.ieee.org. chines act as generators or as motors [1]. For both modes of
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/TPWRD.2007.899773 operation, the mechanical speed remains nearly constant during
0885-8977/$25.00 © 2007 IEEE
1966 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER DELIVERY, VOL. 22, NO. 3, JULY 2007

the first few cycles after the short. The machines are assumed Thereafter, for simplification, we neglected in (3) and
to have squirrel cage rotors. made . Equation (3) becomes
Although very simple and useful, this approach does not com-
pletely describe the event, because it does not take into consid- (4)
eration the dc component of the stator currents associated with
the short-circuit phenomena. Also, it does not include the effect In retrospect, this procedure is justified by the validity of the
of the resistance of the machine stator, or the resistance of results, as demonstrated in Sections III–VI of the paper.
the feeder/transformer. Equation (4) suggests that the first current peak may exceed
An approach that does take into account the effect of the dc the amplitude of the ac component by as much as a factor of
stator currents on the total short-circuit current is described in 2. The initial magnitude of the ac component itself can be de-
IEEE Standards C37.010-1999 and C37-013-1997 [2], [3]; in termined in terms of the transient reactance (1). In practice,
the IEC Standard 60909-0 [4]; in a book by St. Pierre [5]; and , and . Therefore
in a paper by Huening [6]. Procedures are presented there that
describe in detail how to calculate short-circuit currents of in- (5)
duction machines following a short-circuit at the terminals. A
sample calculation is presented in Section VI. The voltage behind the transient reactance is a voltage pro-
A third approach, one that underlies the work of this paper, portional to the rotor flux linkage [1], [5]. When the machine
uses as a starting point for evaluating bolted short-circuit operates as a generator, the pre-short-circuit terminal phase-
currents for an induction generator, the governing equations for voltage . Therefore, using would yield a con-
the generator. These are formulated in terms of the flux linkages servative solution. The value of the short-circuit inductance is
between stator and rotor [7]. Using this approach, the equation .
for the short-circuit current finally becomes Concerning the time constant of the dc component—At
normal machine startup, the stationary rotor sees a synchro-
nously rotating magnetic field. In the present instance, the rotor
(2) is spinning, but it also sees a synchronously rotating magnetic
field, this time established by the set of 3 dc stator currents.
The coefficients , , and depend mainly on what Therefore, for the dc components, the equivalent circuit in Fig. 2
Nasar terms the transient, sub-transient, and synchronous was used, but with . That is
reactances of the induction generator [7]; , , and are
time-constants; is the line frequency; and is a reference (6)
angle. The first term in (2) is the dc component, which is
especially important during the first few cycles.
The time constant of the ac component is given by (1).
The envelope (upper boundary) for the current peaks of the
Since ; and , that equation
oscillatory waveform (2) would be (conservatively assuming
may be simplified as follows:
)

(3) (7)

Although it is an accurate representation of the short circuit From (6) and (7)
current, (3) utilizes internal parameters of the machine that are
not available to the customer. Furthermore, it is seen that several
(8)
time constants are involved, so that a single time constant, by
itself, is not sufficient to represent the current decay during a
short. and are generally of the same order, as suggested by the
Sections II–VI discuss: peak currents during a short-circuit; entries in Table I. However, one might expect that the difference
simulation techniques; laboratory experiment test results; between the two would depend on the design class, as defined
sample calculations; and some concluding remarks. in NEMA Standard MG1-2006, “Motors and Generators.” To
be definite, we shall assume that for the sake of anal-
II. CALCULATION OF THE PEAK CURRENTS DURING A SHORT ysis. The value of depends on the feeder and the line trans-
To estimate the relative values of the coefficients , , and former, but it would be of the same order as . That suggests
in [7, Eq. 5. 80], sample data on p. 204 were used, thus: a practical range for : .
(here , , and are the “sub-transient,” “transient,” and Here, the emphasis is on urban systems. In rural systems,
“synchronous” inductances) however, where long feeders may be encountered, would
be larger, and the value of correspondingly greater.
Finally, from (4), the envelope of the upper boundary of the
peak currents during a bolted short-circuit may be rewritten
as

(9)
SULAWA et al.: EVALUATION OF A BOLTED SHORT-CIRCUIT 1967

TABLE I
MACHINE AND LINE PARAMETERS

Fig. 3. Block diagram of the MATLAB/Simulink graphic code.

The MATLAB code [8] calculates the behavior of the induc-

tion generator from a set of four electrical and two mechanical
differential equations. The electrical set uses the - axis rep-
resentation of the machine, and its equivalent circuit parame-
ters. The mechanical set involves the electromagnetic and shaft
torques, and the speed. The two systems are interconnected by a
7th equation relating the electromagnetic torque to the electrical
quantities.
Sixteen machines, ranging in size from 2.2 kW to 4 MW,
including their corresponding feeder/xfmr lines, were simulated
using the Simulink code (see Section V), for a bolted
short-circuit fault near the substation bus. The purpose was to
It follows that the instantaneous value of the short circuit cur- compare the simulation results with the results using (9). The
rent is (see also (2)) parameters of these machines are listed in Table I.
The parameters of the first machine (Table I) were obtained
(10)
experimentally in the laboratory. The parameters for machines
The current peaks occur with a fixed interval of s be- 2 to 13 (but not #12) were taken from an EPRI report [9]. Ma-
tween successive peaks. However, the instant of the first peak chines #12, 14, 15, and 16 were designed by Tom Hammer, con-
is not well defined because the time when the bolted sultant for the Ideal Electric Co., Mansfield, OH. Of interest in
short-circuit occurs is totally random. From (10), it is seen that this regard is an extensive table listing parameters for 22 ma-
the instant of the first current peak is a function of , but chines over the size range 0.0067 to 6000 HP [10].
it also depends on the dc time-constant . Suppose that is The combined line and transformer impedances, Rext and
very large. Then, both exponential terms in (10) are nearly 1 Xext in Table I, were scaled to correspond to the power and
(for the first few cycles after the short-circuit); so that voltage ratings of each machine, based on actual feeder/xfmr
, and the first peak occurs in half a period. For data provided by Consolidated Edison of New York.
60 Hz, this would be 8.333 ms. To get a better idea of the value Machines 8, 10, 11, 13, and 16 (Table I) had a synchronous
of , graphs of the bolted short-circuit currents for 16 speed of 900 rpm; all the other machines, 1800 rpm.
machines of Table I were examined for various values of , and The simulation results for the line currents of a bolted
for values of longer than half a cycle. For all of these cases, short-circuit on the feeder of machine #1 operating at full load
it was found that the first peak occurred about 7 ms after the prior to the short are shown in Fig. 4.
short-circuit. Therefore, the time at which the th current peak The ratio of peak current during the short (first peak after the
occurs is approximately short in Fig. 4) to the peak current at steady state (prior to the
short) is
(11)
(12)
III. SIMULATION RESULTS
The ratio of the third current peak to the first is (see Fig. 4)
MATLAB/Simulink software was used to simulate the net-
work shown in Fig. 1. The graphical representation of the sim-
(13)
ulation is shown in Fig. 3.
Block #1 represents the utility bus; Block #2 represents the
That means, the value of the peak current of the third cycle de-
short-circuit switch; Block #3 triggers the short circuit; Blocks
cayed to 13% of its first cycle peak.
#4 are the diagnostic units; Blocks #5 operate as oscilloscopes;
Block #6 represents the resistance and inductance of the feeder/
xfmr; Block #7 represents the feeder capacitance; Block #8 rep- IV. LABORATORY EXPERIMENT
resents the passive load; and Block #9 represents the induc- A one-line diagram (Fig. 5) represents the laboratory exper-
tion generator. To stabilize the shaft speed, a feedback loop was iment that was conducted on machine #1 (Table I). This was
used. intended to be a scaled-down version of an actual system.
1968 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER DELIVERY, VOL. 22, NO. 3, JULY 2007

Fig. 6. Laboratory test results for the line currents following a 3 0  bolted
short-circuit on the feeder of machine #1 in Table I.

Fig. 4. MATLAB simulation results for the line currents following a 3 0 That means, the peak value of the current of the third cycle
bolted short-circuit on the feeder of machine #1 in Table I. decayed to 15% of its first cycle value in the laboratory, com-
pared to 13% in the computer simulation (13).
The close agreement, for machine #1, between experi-
mental results and the MATLAB simulation, suggested that the
Simulink code was a valid way of predicting the bolted
short-circuit currents. Therefore, it appeared to be worthwhile
to use it for different size machines, for comparison with results
obtained using (9).

V. ADDITIONAL MATLAB RESULTS

An additional 15 machines were simulated using the
MATLAB/Simulink code, with the machine and feeder param-
eters listed in Table I. The results are summarized in Table II,
Fig. 5. Laboratory setup.
where
first current peak after the short-circuit;
pre-short-circuit steady-state peak current in gen;
To measure the short-circuit current of the induction gener- third current peak after the short-circuit.
ator, the utility line must first be connected to it in order to pro-
vide excitation. But, to avoid impressing short circuit conditions For comparison, for all 16 machines, these quantities were re-
directly on the actual utility line, we simulated that source by calculated using (9) and (11), and the results were also included
using a static ac power supply (model 360AMX, Pacific in Table II. For every case, the same value of the coefficient
Power Source) that was connected in parallel with a resistive , 3.5, was used. This value was chosen as the average of the
load (R in Fig. 5). This way, the resistor absorbed the active 16 actual values of listed in Table II. It is seen that the ra-
power that would otherwise have been supplied to the utility by tios and obtained by simulation and by use of (9)
the induction generator preliminary to the short circuit. are in good agreement. It is noted, however, that for machine
The induction generator (Fig. 5) was driven by a dc motor #5, , much greater than 3.5. If is used for
at constant speed. It supplied power to a passive load 2.2 kW calculation, is obtained, much closer to the sim-
and lagging, and to the utility line. The feeder/ ulation value of 0.39. For all the other entries in Table II, the
xfmr parameters were represented by a resistor, a reactance and degree of agreement suggests that the ratios and
a capacitor. A three-phase power analyzer (model ACE 2000, are relatively insensitive to the choice of . On the other hand,
Rochester Instrument Systems) was used to collect the test data for current peaks beyond the 3rd, the actual value of needs to
and transfer that information to a PC. be used, rather than 3.5, as in Table III.
The result of a bolted short circuit (performed by the For the first peak , for all 16 machines, the difference be-
switch in Fig. 5) is shown in Fig. 6. tween the result from (9) and the MATLAB result was calcu-
The ratio of the first peak current after the short to the peak lated. That difference was 5% or less, except for machine #1
current at steady state (prior to the short) is (10%), machine #5 (9%), and machine #15 (8%).
As another measure of the difference between the two results,
a quantity
(14)

This result is in close agreement with the simulation result (12). (16)
The ratio of the third current peak to the first is
was defined for the first five peaks. Here, is the differ-
(15) ence between the two th peak currents as obtained by the two
SULAWA et al.: EVALUATION OF A BOLTED SHORT-CIRCUIT 1969

TABLE II
SUMMARY OF RESULTS FOR ALL 16 MACHINES

Fig. 7. MATLAB simulation results for the line currents following a 3 0

bolted short-circuit on the feeder of machine #7 in Table I.

TABLE III
SIMULATION VS. (9) RESULTS FOR I

Fig. 8. Comparison between simulation and (9) results on machine #7.

Numerical values for the first five current peaks for

machine #7 were also calculated using the MATLAB simula-
tion, and are shown graphically as the dashed curve in Fig. 8.
For comparison, (9) and (11) were used to calculate the upper
boundary of the peak currents for the first 5 cycles during a
bolted short-circuit (see Section VI). The results are shown
in Fig. 8 as the solid curve. Good agreement between the two
curves is seen.
Unlike the procedure of IEEE Standard C37-010 (see
Section VI), this paper uses one equation to predict the current
methods. was calculated for each of the 16 machines, and is peaks that follow a bolted short circuit on induction
listed in Table II. generators of any size, including their feeders and transformers
In particular, consider the results for generator #7, for which leading to that short.
the short circuit current waveforms are shown in Fig. 7.
The ratio of peak current during the short (first peak after the VI. SAMPLE CALCULATIONS
short in Fig. 7) to the peak current at steady state (prior to the
Two calculation samples are presented below for a
short) is
bolted short circuit on an induction generator. The first uses
IEEE Standard C37-010 [3], and the second uses the method
presented here. Generator #7 (Table I) was selected for these
samples.
The ratio of the third current peak to the first is 1) Short-Circuit Calculations Using IEEE Std. C37-010: As
a conservative approach, the Standard concentrates on the first
current peak that follows the short. It offers a simplified method
1970 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER DELIVERY, VOL. 22, NO. 3, JULY 2007

to obtain that first peak current using an ratio multiplied circuit, it may take about one cycle for the breaker to open, but
by a correcting factor, where is the operating phase-voltage the current arc may not be extinguished until the 5th cycle.
at the fault, is the system reactance leading to the fault, and Table III quantifies the difference between the 5th current
a correcting multiplier adjusts for the dc component during the peaks as calculated by simulation and by (9) using the
fault. The simplified methods of Sect. 6.4.1, Table 7, and Sect. actual value of . It is seen that the largest difference is 30%,
6.3.1 of the Standard were used here. except for machine #3 (60%) for which .
Locked rotor reactance
VII. MITIGATION OPTIONS
Our study also suggested that the contribution of the induc-
Modified reactance for closing and latching duty, for the tion generator during a short could be reduced by the use of two
size and r/min of the machine mitigation techniques.
1) Parallel connection of generators. The smaller the power
rating of an induction generator, the shorter the duration
of the current decay. For instance, a bolted short
Feeder/transformer reactance circuit on a 4 MW generator (machine #15 in Table II)
System reactance leading to the fault leads to a current ratio , but for a fault on
a 1 MW generator (machine #12 in Table II) that current
ratio is . Therefore, connecting four 1 MW
ratio: generators instead of a single 4 MW unit would provide an
To account for the asymmetry caused by the dc component, the improvement of about 12%.
peak current in the first 0.5-cycle is (Table 7 in the Standard, 2) Addition of series reactance. Connecting a reactance
footnote d) per-phase in series with the terminals of the induction
generator (on the customer side) would reduce the initial
value of both the ac and the dc components ((5), leading to
smaller short-circuit current peaks. For instance, following
This, then, is the peak current that is contributed by induction a short on a 4 MW generator (machine #15 in Table II),
generator #7 to the fault, in accordance with the IEEE Standard. the first current peak, our simulation indicates, is 1515 A
Additional details are presented in Sect. 6.3.2 of the IEEE (not shown in the paper); with a series reactance that is
Standard. equal to the stator leakage reactance, the peak was only
2) Short-Circuit Calculations Using (9) of This Paper: The 1059 A (a 30% improvement).
procedure offered here (assuming in (9) provides the There are three additional effects associated with an added
following. series reactance that should be noted.
DC time constant is (6) 1) DC time constant will increase (6). For instance, without
considering any power-factor correcting capacitors, an
added series reactance equal to the stator leakage re-
actance increased the time constant by about 30% (not
AC coefficient is (5) shown in paper).
2) Terminal voltage of the induction generator will need to
be smaller to maintain rated value at the PCC (point of
common coupling).
First current peak at 7 ms is (9) 3) Reactor itself would be a bulky construction, and may
need capacitors to supply reactive power.

VIII. CONCLUDING REMARKS

Second current peak at ms is (9)
This paper has addressed the effect of distributed generators,
specifically squirrel cage induction generators, on bolted
short-circuit fault currents. An equation, (9), was developed for
the envelope (upper boundary) of the current peaks of the de-
Third current peak at ms is (9) caying oscillatory waveform following the short.
Laboratory tests were conducted on a small 2.2 kW induction
machine subjected to a bolted short-circuit. Results for the
currents were compared with a MATLAB simulation, and also
with predictions using (9). Good agreement was obtained.
3) Short-Circuit Calculations of the 5th Current Peak: In Simulation results for short-circuit current peaks for 15 ad-
Section V, results in Table II suggest that the 1st and 3rd current ditional induction machines, including their feeder and trans-
peaks following a bolted short-circuit may be calculated with former connection to the substation, were presented. These re-
reasonable accuracy using (9), with . But, subsequent sults were also compared with predictions from (9), with favor-
peaks may also be of interest. For instance, following a short able agreement.
SULAWA et al.: EVALUATION OF A BOLTED SHORT-CIRCUIT 1971

These findings suggest that (9) might serve as a helpful ad- [9] F. Goodman, Engineering Guide for Integration of Distributed Genera-
junct to the methods outlined in the current IEEE and IEC Stan- tion and Storage into power Distribution Systems EPRI Rep. 1000419,
Palo Alto, CA, 2000.
dards for calculating bolted short-circuit currents for in- [10] R. Stern and D. W. Novotny, “A simplified approach to the determina-
duction machines. tion of induction machine dynamic response,” IEEE Trans. Power App.
Syst., vol. PAS-97, no. 4, pp. 1430–1439, Jul./Aug. 1978.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
T. Sulawa, photograph and biography not available at the time of publication.
The authors would like to express their deep appreciation to
E. Chebli of Con Edison for his skillful guidance.
REFERENCES Z. Zabar (SM’81), photograph and biography not available at the time of pub-
[1] A. E. Fitzgerald, C. Kingsley, and S. D. Umans, Electric Machinery, lication.
5th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1990, ch. 6.
[2] IEEE Standard for AC High-Voltage Generator Circuit Breakers Rated
on a Symmetrical Current Basis, IEEE Std. C37.013, 1997, Sec. 7 “Ap-
plication guide”. D. Czarkowski (M’97), photograph and biography not available at the time of
[3] IEEE Application Guide for AC High-Voltage Circuit Breakers Rated publication.
on a Symmetrical Current Basis, IEEE Std. C37.010, 1999, Sec. 6:
“Short-circuit considerations”.
[4] IEC Short-Circuit Currents in Three-Phase A.C. Systems—Part 0: Cal-
culation of Currents IEC 60909-0, 2001-07, Sec. 3.8 & 4.7; also IEC Y. TenAmi (M’04), photograph and biography not available at the time of pub-
TR 60909-1, 2002-07, Sect. 2.9. lication.
[5] C. S. Pierre, A Practical Guide to Short-Circuit Calculations Thomson-
Shore, 2001, Sec. 4.4, 6.5, 9.7.
[6] W. C. Huening, “Calculating short-circuit currents with contributions
from induction motors,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl., vol. IA-18, no. 2, pp.
85–92, Mar./Apr. 1982. L. Birenbaum (SM’02), photograph and biography not available at the time of
[7] S. A. Nasar and J. Boldea, Electric Machines, Dynamics. New York: publication.
Macmillan, 1986, ch. 5.
[8] Asynchronous Machine in MATLAB Mathworks [Online]. Available:
http://www.mathworks.com/access/helpdesk/help/toolbox/physmod/
powersys/asynchronousmachine.html. S. Lee, photograph and biography not available at the time of publication.