Transmission Line Applications of Directional Ground Overcurrent Relays

By Rick Taylor TRC, Inc.

Presented to 65th Annual Protective Relaying Conference

Georgia Tech University Atlanta, Georgia

May 11, 2011

Transmission Line Applications of Directional Ground Overcurrent Relays By Rick Taylor TRC, Inc.
Abstract Directional Ground Overcurrent Relays have been an essential component in protection of transmission lines for as long as any of us have been around. Their role has been to provide protection for ground faults by applications that have included an instantaneous element in combination with an inverse time overcurrent element. Recent years have seen a rapid evolution in transmission line protective relays to microprocessor based transmission relays that provide a wide variety of functions that include both phase and ground impedance relay elements. The widespread availability of ground distance protection has led many companies to de-emphasize, or even stop using, directional ground overcurrent protection. The emphasis on modern microprocessor relays has also resulted in a significant portion of existing DGOC relays not having been regularly evaluated or maintained to assure proper settings and applications. This paper will review the roles DGOC relays will continue to play and provide guidance to help achieve proper applications. DGOC Relays in Modern Transmission Line Protection Schemes The purpose of this paper is to re-define and upgrade the roles of directional ground overcurrent relays in association with modern microprocessor-based protection systems. Many associated technologies and application concepts or concerns are provided by other Power System Relaying papers, including the D24 Working Group paper that is approaching completion. 50N Applications The traditional application of 50N elements for transmission line protection was to provide instantaneous protection for as much of the line as possible with minimal risks of overreaching the end of the line. Unlike a zone 1 impedance based protection element, the amount of line covered by the 50N is subject to day-to-day variations due to changes in system sources or transmission paths. In addition, permanent changes to sources or transmission paths, in most cases, increase available ground fault levels. The effects of the permanent increases are to increase 50N reach, reducing margins or resulting in overreach of the line. If line protection provides ground distance elements, 50N application can be removed or reduced to a backup role. If redundant ground distance is applied on the line, 50N applications provide minimal or no advantage and continue to risk overreach due to system changes.

50N Settings Optimization As previously discussed, the goal of 50N applications is to provide instantaneous protection of as much of the line as possible with low risk of overreach. Several settings determination concepts have been used. A conservative approach provides a setting based on a percentage increase in the Line End fault current determination. The added percent is user defined margin, but typically 15%-25%.

A less conservative approach provides a setting based on a percentage increase in the Remote Bus Fault current determination. This fault value is typically lower than the Line End value resulting in more instantaneous coverage of the line. Once again, the margin would typically be 15%25%. The optimized method to determine the setting uses a modified version of the Remote Bus method. [Shown in Figure 1] This method applies a fault at the Remote Bus with the strongest source other than the protected line removed. If the remote bus only has one additional source, investigation of sources one or two tiers removed from the remote bus can be used to identify the source most affecting the Remote Bus current contribution from the protected line. This contingency Remote Bus fault current is multiplied by the margin percentage chosen by the user.

sequential tripping could occur when the fault in just beyond the 50N coverage from one end of the line, but within the coverage from the opposite end of the line. The opposite end tripping will create a line end open condition, which may have the effect of increasing the fault current from the end that had not been able to trip. If this increased fault current allows the 50N to detect the fault, the total clearing time can fall into the 8 12 cycle range, depending on relay and breaker operating times. Additional 50N Applications Since modern microprocessor relays normally provide 50N elements, effective use of these elements can be made to provide coverage for Switch On To Fault [SOTF] applications. SOTF is provided to accommodate re-energization of a transmission line on which a fault exists. If the voltage sources into distance relays are inadequate, the 50N, accompanied by a 50P, can provide high speed fault tripping for these faults. Their settings for this application should ideally see any faults on the line. Since the line was de-energized, the remote end is open eliminating possibility of overreaching. Another application for the 50N and the 50P elements would be the protection for faults that occur during a condition of Loss Of Potential [LOP] to the relaying. LOP can result in impaired or lost capability of directional relaying operation. Applying non-directionalized 50N and 50P elements, either in an under-reaching or over-reaching application, can be used to assure the ability to trip for the LOP condition. Time delay is often used to increase security.

FIGURE 1 This method is considered optimized because it provides the most protected line coverage for the worst case contingency. Single contingency analyses are widely accepted as legitimate compromises in protection, as well as planning, studies.

Sequential Tripping of 50N Elements When reasonable line coverage can be achieved by the 50N application settings, the total clearing time for both ends of the faulted line may be significantly reduced by the sequential tripping. An example of

51N Applications Unlike the 50N elements, the 51N protection should not be reduced, or eliminated, by the application of ground distance protection. The 51N applications should be essentially the same for terminals protected by one or

more ground distance schemes or terminals protected by systems not providing ground distance protection. It is important to establish that ground faults protection is a partnership. For terminals with ground distance protection, the partnership is between the Zone1 element and the 51N. For traditional phase distant only systems, the partnership is between the 50N and the 51N. The primary purpose of 51N applications should be to optimize protection sensitivity while providing coordination to avoid security violations. The emphasis on sensitivity should be complemented by reduced concerns regarding the time necessary to provide coordinated tripping. Pickup [Tap] selection is very much a user choice. Transmission systems are designed to minimize 3Io by using delta connections for load transformers and by use of transmission line transpositions. However, some level of 3Io would be normal. Exposure to 3Io could also be attributed to transmission line switching or possibly to open phase conditions. The experiences of your company should guide this tap selection. The setting pickup level for each transmission voltage, ideally should be based on primary, rather than secondary, current levels. Using consistent primary currents, typically [100 amps 400 amps] for tap selection assists coordination.

and the amount of fault current seen at individual locations. Infeed can be a tool to assist coordination. Figure 2 below shows a line from Terminal A to Terminal B. Terminal B has several sources connected to the bus. One of the Terminal B lines experiences a fault. The 51N on the faulted line must be properly coordinated with the 51N at Terminal A [and any other source terminal]. Point of Coordination Traditional coordination practices have involved placing the fault just in front of the remote relay and checking the coordination with the relay being set. This practice fails to take advantage of the 50N unit applied at the remote line terminal.

FIGURE 2 The point of coordination should be based on the coverage provided by the instantaneous protection, either the 50N or the Zone 1. This principle establishes that line faults that result in more current than the 50N setting or fall within the reach of the Zone 1 will be tripped instantaneously and will not require coordination with Terminal A. With Terminal B fault point of coordination now located nearer to the remote terminal, the coordination with Terminal A has gained two advantages. Advantage one is the total fault current has been reduced at both Terminal B and for the contribution from Terminal A. This reduction results in higher trip times for both relays making

51N Coordination The coordination of 51N elements for transmission systems is quite different from the coordination for radial lines or the application of one or two source loop systems. The primary difference is the INFEED that results from multiple sources to a bus or substation. The term INFEED refers to the contribution made by each source to a fault. If these contributions combine on their path to the fault, the combination affects the total fault current

coordination margins easier to achieve. The second advantage is frequently much more significant. Moving the fault out the line increases the effects of the INFEED. INFEED effects often results in easy coordination with large margins. However, to assure good coordination is established, the strongest source of INFEED should be removed to establish the recommended coordination settings. Application/Coordination of Settings A helpful hint in establishing a coordinated system of ground overcurrent protection is the proper selection of your starting point. If the strongest bus in the system to be coordinated is identified, the coordination process should begin by choosing the remote terminal of one of the lines out of this strong bus. The 51N tap and time dial should be selected based on a good principle. The 51N trip time for the highest fault current it will experience should be the time delay applied to a Zone 2 relay or 0.3 seconds, whichever is higher.

The settings developed for looking into the strong bus should be tested. To test, remove the strongest other source into the remote bus and apply faults at the appropriate points of coordination for the other lines served by the remote bus. Once this coordination is verified, continue coordination by backing away from the strong bus. If infeed busses are encountered, a choice must be made for one of the lines to continue the coordination process, ultimately ended by backing into the original strong bus or another bus of significant strength. This process works, but has a tendency to spread like spilled milk. My experience indicates that the higher the voltage of the system being coordinated, the easier the process. The reason for this is usually fewer choices of paths to coordinate. However, lower voltage coordination is typically contained by busses with auto-transformers connecting to higher voltages. These busses also make good starting points for coordinating. Summary The application of directional ground relays for protection of transmission systems will continue to be a viable option for many years to come. Instantaneous DGO elements can be effectively replaced by redundant applications of ground distance protection. 51N elements continue to provide increased sensitivity and should remain a part of protection unless applications of quadrilateral or equivalent impedance based elements are employed.

FIGURE 3