1108

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRY APPLICATIONS, VOL 26. NO. 6. NOVEMBERIDECEMBER 1990

Simulation of Protective Relay Performance

Under Short-circuit and Transient Swing
Conditions
ATHANASAKI E. EFTHYMIADIS, OLAF E. ROENNSPIESS,

Abstract-Most methods of relay coordination are based on fixed

values of fault current for setting protective relays, regardless of the fact
that fault currents are time-dependent. In industrial power systems,
significant swings can occur and these increase the errors introduced by
the established assumptions. The results of alternative transient calculation procedures are presented. These take into consideration the decay
of current with time and can therefore be used to identify the sensitivity
of the coordination setting and potential cases of difficulty.

INTRODUCTION

ROTECTION coordination involves matching the nonlinear protective device characteristics to the time-varying
fault currents in a way that will produce an appropriate
sequence of switching operations and will protect the network
against a variety of potential fault conditions. Device nonlinearities and time dependence of currents make the basic relay
simulation problem complex enough. Consideration of all
likely fault conditions and outages will frequently lead to
conflicting settings and requires repeated solutions to establish an acceptable compromise setting. To reduce the design
problem to manageable proportions, it is necessary to adopt
some simplifying assumptions.
In the majority of cases, power generation is electrically
remote from the load centers and loads are predominantly
static. In these circumstances the transmission network
impedance becomes the controlling factor for fault currents,
and therefore they can be considered to have a constant value
for the times relevant to relay operation and fault clearance.
This leads to further simplification in the procedure since
relay performance can be specified using characteristics based
on constant relay currents. The widely accepted validity of
this assumption has lead to time-current characteristics being
the standard, and the only readily available data for relays,
most coordination programs are thus based on this assumption.
Paper PID 90-25, approved by the Petroleum and Chemical Industry
Committee of the IEEE Industry Applications Society for presentation at the
1989 Petroleum and Chemical Industry Technical Conference, San Diego,
CA, September 11-13. Manuscript released for publication March 8, 1990.
A. E. Efthymiadis is with the Electrical Energy and Power Systems
Group, Department of Electrical Engineering and Electronics, University of
Manchester Institute of Science and Technology, P.O. Box 88, Sackville
Street, Manchester, M60 IQD England.
0. E. Roennspiess is with The M.W. Kellogg Company, Three Greenway
Plaza, Houston, TX 77046.
J . A. Guerra is with the Faculty of Electrical and Electronic Engineering,
National University of Engineering, Aptdo. 1301, Lima 100 Peru.
IEEE Log Number 903853 1.

AND

JAIME A. GUERRA

Constant fault currents cannot be regarded as a good

assumption for conditions in industrial power systems that
have large proportions of motor loads, and particularly where
there is local generation. In these cases, motor ratings are
frequently comparable to those of the generators, and consequently motor starting requirements will generally involve
close interconnection of the system, higher fault levels, and
faster fault clearance times. The complexity of the relay
coordination problems compels us to continue using the
constant fault current assumption for these networks. It is
essential, however, that we use an appropriate choice of
machine reactances for these calculations and also that we
establish alternative simulation procedures that can give a
measure of the errors which may be involved.
It is clearly quite feasible to model the performance of a
relay in sufficient detail to include electrical and mechanical
transients. However, this would require additional data, which
would be very difficult to obtain. Also, the improvement in
the modeling accuracy would be swamped by the system
parameter tolerances. The most promising approach is to
introduce improvements in simulation that can be achieved
with more effective use of data that is already available. This
was the approach adopted in the procedures described herein.
The relay setting and coordination procedure is based on
the dynamic short-circuit calculation method [I], which models synchronous and induction machines using a continuously
variable time-dependent reactance derived from the d-axis
subtransient, transient, and synchronous reactances and time
constants, and from motor start-run parameters. The coordination is performed along paths and in a sequence that is
specified by the engineer by a graphic interactive procedure.
This maintains generality and permits use in fully interconnected networks with multiple sources and motor loads.
Features include the display of coordination margins, tripping
times for selected fault types and locations, etc. The standard
manufacturers' relay and fuse characteristics are used to
derive models that can take the currents calculated at each
step of the transient stability calculation and use them to
simulate relay performance under system swings that may
occur following faults, motor starts, load changes, etc.
MODELING
OF PROTECTIVE
DEVICES
Relay and fuse characteristics are stored in a special
database and are identified by unique type numbers. For
overcurrent relays the information comprises the available

0093-9994/90/1100-1108$01.OO 0 1990 IEEE

'

1109

EFTHYMIADIS er al. : PROTECTIVE RELAY PERFORMANCE

17.

17

1-1 38kv

loo0
2 1-13 8

Fig. 1.

Initial load conditions for test network. Load flow results-busbar

plug and time dial settings, five or more points of the

time-current characteristic for the maximum time multiplier
setting, a representative number of time multiplier-operation
time pairs for a given current, and different time multiplier
settings, and finally, the maximum relay reset time. These
characteristics are curve-fitted to polynomials, the coefficients of which are stored. The maximum curve-fitting error
arising from this mathematical model is calculated and displayed as a warning. Significant errors usually arise only as a
result of data input errors. Fuse characteristics are organized
and stored in a similar way.
Differential, distance, and undervoltage protection schemes
can also be modeled in the dynamic simulation. Distance
relay types with impedance, angle, time range, and shape
factor data are again stored in the data base.

COORDINATION
PROCEDURE
Devices are coordinated along a path specified by the user
either graphically or by name. The primary to backup coordination time interval ti is set as a linear function of the
primary relay operation time 1,. The pickup current level Ib
of the backup device is a multiple of the primary device
pickup current I,. The value of constants A , B , and C are
user-defined and depend on whether a relay is backing up
another relay or a fuse, i.e.,

ti = A

+ Bt, and I,

> CI,.

Default values are

A
A

=
=

0.25,
0.15,

B
B

N7
1.006

0.25,

0.40,

C
C
C

=
=
=

1.3 for relay to relay

3.0 for relay to fuse
2.0 for fuse to fuse.

pu volts and line MW loading

For each path specified, the algorithm calculates appropriate

settings, compares these with any presets or previously calculated path settings and, where a conflict is identified, the user
is required to make a choice between the newly calculated
and previous settings.
This procedure involves no preconceived coordination patterns. It is therefore applicable to any system configuration
and can accommodate any coordination policy the user wishes
to adopt, i.e., generality is achieved at the expense of automation. When settings are available, they can be input
directly as data and will allow the remaining facilities to be
used.

TRANSIENT
RELAYMODELING
The transient solution uses the full d-q axis synchronous
machine representation and a two-cage representation based
on starting and running rotor impedances for the induction motors. The machine differential equations are solved
by numerical integration using the trapezoidal method. It can
therefore be seen that, although the short-circuit and transient
calculations are related machine models, the detail of the
models and the methods of solution are very different.
In transient studies it is common practice to specify the
required network switching disturbance and to represent the
response of the protection schemes by specifying further
preset switching operation in the relevant branches. This
presumes that the assumptions implicit in the calculated relay
settings are satisfied and that the system will perform in an
ideal manner. It is also assumed that the engineer has interpreted the protection performance correctly and has input
entirely accurate and consistent constraints in the coordination and stability stages of the simulation studies. This is a

1110

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRY APPLICATIONS, VOL. 26. NO. 6. NOVEMBERIDECEMBER 1990

2 1-13 a

22-138

N7

38

'

N 152

NM2

J
Fig. 2.

Fault MVA flows into three-phase fault at GEN 3. Fault level and maximum phase flows (MVA) at T = 500 ms.

1
I

I l l 1

10.o--

I I

:
:

I
I

;
;

I
I

:
:

I
I

'

::

II

'\

1
I
\

>

\ss

4
I

1.0:-

'

\\

.. .'..'.\'
.. \.
'

- -5
---____--___--------

DEVICE AT:
B R A N C H
LOC
SEND.BB RECV BB ( S /R)

- 10-15MVA 12-4.16k S
10-15MVA R
2.2-13.8 R
1-138kv 2.2-13.8
,
1.0
10.0
I

( O I l

Fig. 3.

1 2 -.-.- -_
- - -_ _ _ _
3 ____
4 --5 _ _

TRACE
TRACE
TRACE
TRACE
TRACE

I I I I I

100.0

I ( ( I(

1000.0

Coordinated relay performance curves in path to bus GEN 3. Phase-overcurrent protection

FAULT MVA

1111

EFTHYMIADIS et al.: PROTECTIVE RELAY PERFORMANCE

IPU

m'ol

-60.0

Fig. 4 .

Calculated short-circuit current waveform for GEN 3 three-phase fault. Red phase

TABLE 1
COMPARISON
OF CALCULATED
TIME-OVERCURRENT
RELAYFAULT
CLEARING
TIMES
USINGFIXEDCURRENT
( T = 500 MS)A N D TRANSIENT
VARYING
CURRENT
PROCEDURES
Calculated Primary Relay
Clearing Times (ms) Based on
Fault
Location

3-IND
4-SYN M
GEN 1

N6
GEN 3
N 9.1
N 17.1
N 15.2.1
N 15.1

Nominal
Voltage
kV

Short-circuit Current
at T = 500111s

Transient
Relay Model

13.8
13.8
13.8
13.8
4.16
2.4
0.48
0.48
0.48

143
149
159
153
267
142
103
94
0.792

149
152
163
155
268
150
111
103
0.803

'

Nore: All times include a 50-ms circuit-breaker operation time

reasonable expectation, but not a certainty, and it can offer

little or no additional confidence in the design produced. The
better alternative is to have the coordination data read and
reinterpreted by the transient simulation program, and to
provide any consequent switching operations automatically as
an independent confirmation of the protection system's response to the disturbance in the context of the transient
conditions.
The relay model used here is quite simple: when a sufficiently large fault current is flowing, the relay advances and
is considered to rotate at a constant speed over each time
step. Travel forward is at the rate A t l t , , where A t is the
step interval and t , is the tripping time for the present time
multiplier setting (TMS).
The relay resets at a rate of
At
( i ' - 1)TMS.t,

where i is the pu current and t , is the resetting time at

TMS = 1.
The relay is assumed to advance towards tripping, to stop,
or to reset depending on the level of the current, expressed as
a percentage of the pickup value. British Standards define the
threshold for resetting at 70% and operation at 130%, but
other margins can be set if required. The present relay
position is calculated at each time step. The relay advance is
expressed on a per-unit scale, where 0 indicates a relay in the
steady state; when 1 per-unit advance is reached, the trip
signal is given and the circuit breaker operates after an
appropriate delay, which is also user defined. A fixed breaker
operation time, which can be user-defined for each busbar, is
added to the tripping time to obtain the overall protection
operation time at which a branch is opened.
Operation of fuses is modeled in a similar way. Operation
is divided into two time intervals of pre-arcing and arcing

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRY APPLICATIONS, VOL. 26. NO. 6. NOVEMBEWDECEMBER 1990

1112

SYNC

MACHINE
ROTOR
ANGLE

(DEGREES)

Fig. 5 . Initial display for transient analysis showing machine swings and switching operations.

times derived from the sets of fuse time/current characteristics held in the database. Here the curve-fitting, which may
be split into three sections, can accommodate complex characteristics.
AND DYNAMIC
PROTECTION
COORDINATION
PERFORMANCE
CALCULATION
RESULTS

The industrial power system used to compare static and

dynamic short-circuit analysis procedures by the authors [ 11
and other [2] is used again to extend the comparison to
protective relay settings and performance calculations. The
system diagram, with values of bus voltages, in per-unit, and
branch MW flows, is shown in Fig. 1. The diagram has been
redrawn to introduce additional nodes, which allows the
study of a wide range of fault conditions. Some additional
data have also been entered to define the protection arrangements for the system. In every other respect the network and
data are exactly as before. For completeness, key system data
are given in the figure of the appendix.
Different protection devices can be located at the sending
and receiving ends of each branch. The objectives here did
not require the introduction of a large number of different
devices. Arrangements were therefore kept simple to facili-

tate easier understanding of the conditions. An inverse-type

overcurrent relay has been placed in each branch of the
network except at the 480 level and below, where very
inverse relays have been used for the motor circuits and fuses
for the light busbars. Differential unit protection schemes
were specified for each of the main transformers and the
associated feeder cables. Some of the induction motors were
assumed to have undervoltage protection set to operate when
the voltage collapsed to 0 . 8 pu or less for more than 200 ms.
Suitable overcurrent relay settings were calculated using
the coordination facilities and by basing the calculation on
fault currents calculated for the usual time, t = 500 ms. The
coordination was executed with two objectives: to attain
realistic fault clearing and coordination time intervals and to
provide results in a range that would permit valid comparisons to be made.
A representative set of results for the coordination procedure is given for bus GEN 3. Fig. 2 shows the fault current
flows in the system for a three-phase fault of 199 MVA at
GEN 3. Fig. 3 shows the relay performance curves and
coordination achieved for the devices in the path from GEN 3
to the utility bus, 1-138 kV. Finally, Fig. 4 gives confirmation that the fault current seen by the relay has an exponential
decay.

EFTHYMIADIS

el al.:

STEP NUMBER = 8 5
TIME = 0 . 1 1 0 0
____-_____-__-_____-______________
SYNCHRONOUS MACHINES
BUSBAR
M/C
ROTOR
POLE
NAME
NO.
ANGLE
PRS
DEGREES SLPD
1-138kv

GEN 1
GEN 2
GEN 3
4-SYN M

N 12.1
N 11.1
N8:Z.l
N8.1.2
N 9.2
N15.2.1

1.
2
3
3
4
5
6
7
7

-0.08*
29.87
11.75
11.75
-83.24
-49.24
-49.61
-75.43
-75.43
-115.51
-89.42

1113

PROTECTIVE RELAY PERFORMANCE

ROTOR
SLiP
P.U.

0-2.860E-5
0 -0.0047
0 -0.0147
0 -0.0147
0 -0.0217
0 -0.0067
0 -0.0051
0 -0.0168
0 -0.0168
0 -0.0423
0 -0.0272

MAXIMUM ITERATIONS PER STEP

HECH.
POWER

PCUER OUTPUT
ACTIVE
REACTIVE

Pm

38.504
15.414
7.200
7.200
-0.612
-0.936
-0.654
0.011
0.011
-0.068
-0.176

-1.658
14.026
5.020
5.020
-3.982
-1.989
-1.291
-1.291
-1.291
-0.679
-0.288

STEP LENGTH

27

TERM.
VOLTAGE
P.U.

MVAR

TERM.
CURRENT
P.U.

0.801
0.135
0.379
0.379
0.136
0.379
0.389
0.116
0.116
0.116
0.375

192.014
1.247
10.855
10.855
1.690
1.406
1.043
0.367
0.367
0.083
0.098

0.0013

24.444
11.478
3.439
3.439
1.319
0.446
0.316
0.317
0.317
0.092
0.054

ITS/PRINT

FIELD
VOLTAGE
P.U.

FIELD
CURRENT
P.U.

0.998
1.483
1.413
1.413
2.291
1.567
1.788
2.449
2.449
2.550
3.529

0.998
7.251
5.227
5.227
6.452
2.743
3.473
5.046
5.045
3.204
5.405

64

POWER
FACTOR

0.1966
0.9967
0.5528
0.5528
-0.3406
-0.5543
-0.5311
0.0291
0.0299
-0.6338
-0.8745

LINE-FLOWS
SENDING-END ------------)
CURRENT
POWER
P.U.
P(m)
Q(WAR)

(------------

SENDING RECEIVING O/C.PROT.STATE,PU

BUSBAR
BUSBAR
SEND.DEV REC.DEV
2.2-13.8 N 6
12-4.16k GEN 3
11-4.16k
2.2-13.8 2.1-13.8
2 . 1 - 1 3 . 8 GEN 1

GEN 2

1.01173
0.19931
0.19931
0.13173
0.56145

0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000

VOLTAGE
P.U. ANGLE
0.135
0.379
0.379
0.135
0.135

-54.5 40.675
3.439
-19.5
3.439
-19.5
9.836
-54.5
-54.5 11.478

50.91
-7.20
7.20
-13.01
-15.41

RECEIVING-END -----------)
VOLTAGE
CURRENT
POWER
P.U. ANGLE
P.U.
P(m)
Q(MVAR)

(-----------

2 0 . 2 5 4.48E-4
-10.85
0.379
10.86
0.379
-2.51
0.135
-1.23
0.135

1 2 . 8 4 0 . 6 7 5 3.211E-3
-19.5
3.439
-7.20
7.20
-19.5
3.439
-54.5
9.836
-13.01
-54.4 1 1 . 4 7 8
-15.41

0.18
-10.86
10.85
-2.52
-1.25

.......................................................................................................................
LINE OF IMPEDANCE 0 . 0 1 4 5 5 tJ 0 . 1 6 0 0 0 P.U. SWITCHED OUT BETWEEN BUSES N 6
AND 8 . 2 - 2 . 4 k AT TIME 0 . 1 1 0 0 SECONDS
DUE TO THE OPERATION OF UNIT PROTECTION, SCH. NO. 2; LINE MONITORED AT RECV. END: (TRIPPING TIME = 0 . 0 6 0 0 SEC)
AT TIME 0 . 1 1 0 0 SECONDS
LINE OF IMPEDANCE 0 . 0 0 3 0 8 tJ 0 . 0 0 1 2 1 P.U. SWITCHED OUT BETWEEN BUSES 2 . 2 - 1 3 . 8 AND N 6
DUE TO THE OPERATION OF UNIT PROTECTION, SCH. NO. 2; LINE MONITORED AT SEND. END: (TRIPPING TIME = 0 . 0 6 0 0 SEC)

STEP NUMBER

151

TIME = 0 . 2 0 0 0

MAXIMUM ITERATIONS PER STEP

STEP LENGTH

28

ITS/PRINT

0.0013

80

SYNCHRONOUS MACHINES
BUSBAR
NAME

M/C
NO.

1-138kv

GEN 1
GEN 2
GEN 3
4-SYN M
N 12.1
N 11.1
N8.2.1
N8.1.2

N 9.2
N15.2.1

1'
2
3
3
4
5
6
7
7
8
9

ROTOR
POLE
ANGLE
PRS
DEGREES SLPD
-0.14'
24.60
-7.66
-7.66
-95.46
-62.36
-61.13
-103.40
-103.40
157.21
-126.45

ROTOR
SLIP
P.U.

0-4.154E-5
0 -0.0010
0 -0.0046
0 -0.0046
0
0.0101
0 -0.0059
0 -0.0060
0 -0.0098
0 -0.0098
-1
-0.0553
0 -0.0083

POWER OUTPUT

MECH.
POWER

ACTIVE
Mw

30.411
7.271
0.186
0.186
-12.096
-2.474
-1.453
-2.367
-2.367
0.027
-0.518

-1.658
14.026
5.020
5.020
-3.982
-1.989
-1.291
-1.291
-1.291
-0.679
-0.288

REACTIVE
MVAR
37.387
0.474
0.542
0.542
-3.490
0.771
0.578
-0.141
-0.146
-1.151
-0.249

TERM.
VOLTAGE
P.U.

TERM.
CURRENT
P.U.

FIELD
VOLTAGE
P.U.

0.960
0.844
0.803
0.803
0.840
0.803
0.806
0.701
0.701
0.701
0.732

5.020
0.864
0.071
0.071
1.499
0.323
0.194
0.338
0.338
0.164
0.078

0.998
1.483
1.413
1.413
2.291
1.567
1.788
2.449
2.449
2.550
3.529

FIELD
CURRENT
P.U.
'

0.998
1.034
0.900
9.900
6.929
2.130
2.344
5.256
5.256
4.821
7.331

POWER
FACTOR

0.6310
0.9979
0.3242
0.3242
-0.9608
-0.9547
-0.9291
-0.9982
-0.9981
0.0234
-0.9014

LINE-FLOWS
(------------

SENDING RECEIVING O/C.PROT.STATE,PU

BUSBAR
BUSBAR
SEND.DEV REC.DEV
2.2-13.8 N 6

1.00001

0.00000

VOLTAGE
P.U. ANGLE
0.844

-7.1

SENDING-END ------------)
CURRENT
POWER
P(MW)
Q(MVAR)
P.U.
0.000

0.00

0.00

INDUCTION MOTOR NO.

4 AT BUS N 9 . 1

SWITCHED OUT AT TIME 0 . 2 1 0 0 SECONDS

INDUCTION MOTOR NO.

4 AT BUS N 9 . 1

LOCKED-OUT AT TIME 0 . 2 1 0 0 SECONDS

SWITCHED OUT AT TIME 0 . 2 1 0 0 SECONDS

INDUCTION MOTOR NO.

5 AT BUS N 8 . 1 . 1

INDUCTION MOTOR NO.

5 AT BUS N8.1.1

LOCKED-OUT AT TIME 0 . 2 1 0 0 SECONDS

INDUCTION MOTOR NO.

6 AT BUS N 8 . 2 . 2

SWITCHED OUT AT TIME 0 . 2 1 0 0 SECONDS

INDUCTION MOTOR NO.

6 AT BUS N 8 . 2 . 2

LOCKED-OUT AT TIME 0 . 2 1 0 0 SECONDS

INDUCTION MOTOR NO.

7 AT BUS N 1 1 . 2

SWITCHED OUT AT TIME 0 . 2 1 0 0 SECONDS

INDUCTION MOTOR NO.

7 AT BUS N 1 1 . 2

LOCKED-OUT AT TIME 0 . 2 1 0 0 SECONDS

~ C E I V I N G - E N-----------)
~
VOLTAGE
CURRENT
POWER
P.U. ANGLE
P.U.
P(Mw)
Q(MVAR)

(-----------

0.000

168.2

0.000

0.00

0.00

1114

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRY APPLICATIONS, VOL. 26, NO. 6. NOVEMBERIDECEMBER 1990

Calculations were performed to determine the overall fault

clearing times for faults at each bus in the system. Short-circuit current calculations were for t = 500 ms (30 cycles).
Circuit-breaker operation times were assumed to be 50 ms.
Representative results for fault clearing times of the primary
relays at various fault locations are given in Table I. It will
be noted that there is close agreement between the two sets of
results at all voltage levels. The largest differences occur at
the 480-V level and reach a maximum of 9 % .
It should be pointed out that the 153/155 ms operation
time for the relay nearest bus N 6 was obtained by blocking
the operation of the differential unit protection associated
with the transformer and cable, of which N 6 is the junction.
Setting the differential protection to operate with a 50-ms
delay and running a dynamic simulation of the "6 fault
generated the display of Fig. 5, which shows the rotor swing
angles of the synchronous machines in the system and the
switching operations (short vertical lines) that occur during
the study time. It is clear that with the fault incidence at 10
ms the differential protection operates as expected at 110 ms
and clears the fault. However, one of the synchronous motors
is continuing to decelerate and a further switching operation
occurs at 210 ms. Fig. 6 show sections of the listing, giving
further details of the calculation. Fig. 6(a) shows that at the
fault clearance time, the relay associated with GEN 1 has
seen the fault, has advanced 0.56 per unit towards tripping,
but has an adequate margin and will clearly now reset. All
other relays are below this level. Fig. 6(b) shows that the
2 10-ms switching relates to the operation of undervoltage
protection, which has disconnected induction motors 4, 5, 6,
and 7.

CONCLUSION
The comparison of the static and dynamic short-circuit
calculation procedures [ 11 has shown that the dynamic procedure, with enhanced machine modeling, produces results that
agree well with national standards and minimizes the engineering design effort, with only a small increase in computational overhead. Results presented here compare calculated
time overcurrent relay settings and tripping times, based on
the dynamic short-circuit calculation, with fault clearing times
obtained by modeling the relays using a traditional step-bystep dynamic analysis procedure. These two very different
methods of calculation yield results that are in close agreement. They therefore reaffirm the validity of the dynamic
short-circuit calculation procedure and also offer evidence
that the practice of basing the setting of time overcurrent
relays on fault currents relating to time t = 500 ms is well
founded.
The paper also demonstrates how inclusion of protection
setting and transient modeling facilities in power system
CAD packages offers the opportunity to include automatically
and reliably the effect of the protection in any subsequent
transient studies of the system. The main benefit is that this
can highlight omissions or sensitivities in the protection
arrangements.
The additional computation effort required to provide these
facilities is small and can be handled by the present generation of workstations without a detectable increase in computation time. It therefore seems appropriate to encourage the
development and validation of such facilities which automate
what was previously applied virtually as codes of practice.

APPENDIX

GENERATOR DATA
BUSBAR

ID

1-1 38kv
GEN 1
GEN 2
GEN 3
4-SYN H
N 12.1
N 11.1
N8.2.1
N8.1.2
N 9.2
N15.2.1

1
2
3
3
4
5
6
7
7
8

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9

TYPE

138.000
13.800
4.160
13.200
4.000
4.000
2.300
2.300
0.460

N.PARALLEL

1
2
3
3
4
5
6
7
7
8
9

GEN-MW

GEN-WAR

VOLT-PU

-1.66
14.00
5.00
5.00
-4.00
-2.00
-1.30
-1.30
-1.30
-0.70
-0.30

-1.88
3.00
1.50
1.50
0.50
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25

1.000

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1

100.000
23.529
9.357
5.800
2.890
1.940
1.949
0.392
0.154

0.02564
0.00300
0.00700
0.00650
0.00810
0.01060
0.01020
0.01710
0.01790

0.07692
1.48400
1.33500
2.80600
1.56900
1.92600
3.02700
1.32000
1.49700

0.10

999.9000
4.0000
2.0000
2.0000
2.0000
2.0000
2.0000
2.0000
2.0000

0.0769
0.1540
0.1370
0.3760
0.3630
0.2820
0.3850
0.3470
0.3170

TILITY
5.1150
3.5690
4.2640
3.1460
2.9260
3.9860
1.1970
1.2300

0.1020
0.0960
0.2300
0.2330
0.1760
0.2010
0.1970
0.1960

0.0230
0.0210
0.5122
0.0195
0.0135
0.0159
0.0220
0.2604,

0 POLE
2 POLE

'

1115

EFTHYMIADIS et al.: PROTECTIVE RELAY PERFORMANCE

APPENDIX
(Continued)

INDUCTION MOTOR DATA

BUSBAR

ID

N 17.2
N 16.1
N 19.2
N 20.2
N 17.1
N15.2.2
N 9.1
N8.1.1
N8.2.2
N 11.2
N 12.2
3-IND

1
1
1
1
2
3

TYPE

TYPE

N.PARALLEL

1
1
1
1
2
3
4
5

RAT-KV

8
9

2.300
4.000
4.000
13.800

PMECH-MW

5
25
5
4
1
1
1
1

RAT-MIA

0.835
0.878
1.767
4.275

0.150
0.600
0.125
0.100
0.055
0.075
0.225
0.700

MAG-X

6.304
3.860
3.820
4.161

ST-R-PU

ST-X-PU

ROT-R-PU

0.0159
0.0085
0.0159
0.0106
0.0059

0.0990
0.1050
0.0990
0.0815
0.1400
0.1410
0.1400
0.1400
0.1350

0.0156
0.0114
0.0126
0.0103
0.0125
0.0078
0.0125
0.0112
0.0042

ROT-X-PU ST-ROTR
0.1790
0.2050
0.1750
0.1340
0.0820
0.0870
0.0820
0.1090
0.0750

ZSQ-X-PU

TAPSTART

MIN-TAP

TAP-STEP

0.0402
0.0409
0.0349
0.0276
0.0271
0.0204
0.0271
0.0254
0.0127

ST-ROTX

INERT-C

0.0616
0.0479
0.0655
0.0678
0.0383
0.0400
0.0383
0.0545
0.0339

0.50000
0.50000
0.50000
0.50000
0.50000
0.50000
0.50000
0.50000
0.50000

COMMENT

POLE
POLE
POLE
POLE
POLE

TRANSFORMER DATA BASE

TYPE

RESIS-PU

REAC-PU

1
2
3
4
5
6

0.00273
0.00333
0.00546
0.01000
0.01125
0.01333

0.06000
0.06000
0.06000
0.06000
0.04500
0.04000

ZSQ-R-PU

MAX-TAP

RAT-MIA

1.00
0.50

Fig. A-I.

WNDG-CON

COMMENT

.16/ .48

Key test system data.

REFERENCES
[l] 0. E. Roennspiess and A. E. Efthymiadis, A comparison of static
and dynamic short circuit analysis procedures, IEEE Trans. Ind.
Appl., vol. 26, no. 3, pp. 463-415, May/June 1990.
[2] J. R. Dunh-Jacobs, B. P. Lam, and R. P. Stratford, A comparison
of ANSI based and dynamically rigorous short circuit calculation
procedures, IEEE PCIC-87-3, Sept. 1987.

Athanasaki E. Efthymiadis received the B.Sc.,

M.Sc.Tech., and Ph.D. degrees. He grew up in
Thessaloniki, Greece. He studied electrical engineering at Durham University, England.
In 1956, joined Metropolitan Vickers Electrical
Company, Manchester, to work on instrumentation
and control. A growing interest in power system
simulators brought him to research at the University of Manchester Institute of Science and Technology, where he is now a Senior Member of the
Electrical Energy and Power Systems Group. He
teaches power system analysis and modeling at the B.Sc. and M.Sc. degree
levels and likes to do research that addresses real engineering problems. His
research is in the CAD and on-line control areas and usually takes the form
of cooperative, sponsored projects for the UK utilities, oil, and shipbuilding
industries.

Olaf E. Roennspiess was born in Germany in

1952 and was raised in New York City. He graduated from Cornell University in 1974. He received
the B.S. degree in electrical engineering.
He started work for Bechtel in Louisville, KY,
as an Electrical Design Engineer. After working
for the construction and process industries in Saudi
Arabia and Alaska, he joined M.W. Kellogg in
Houston. An interest in power systems analysis led
him to explore options for improving the companys
in-house electrical analytical capabilities. This resulted in the acquisition of state-of-the-art power systems simulation software. He is currently a Project Engineer responsible for the electrical power
and control systems technologies.
Mr. Roennspiess is a Registered Professional Engineer in the states of
Texas and Louisiana
Jaime A . Guerra was born in Lima, Peru, on
October 7, 1948. He received the B.Sc. degree
from the National University of Engineering (Universidad Nacional de Ingenieria) at Lima, Peru, in
1974. From 1982 to 1987 he was enrolled for
postgraudate studies at The University of Manchester Institute of Science and Technology, Manchester, England, where he received the M.Sc. degree in 1984 and the Ph.D. degree in 1988. His
of interacPh.D. research involved the application
..
tive computer graphics in the simulation of power
system protection.
Since graduation, he became a member of the Faculty of Electrical
Engineering and Electronics at this University, where he is currently a
Professor of electrical machines and power systems.