Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 8

Maximum Allowable Distributed Generation

Considering Fault Ride Through Requirement and

Reach Reduction of Utility Relay
Dao Van Tu and S. Chaitusaney

Akihiko Yokoyama

Department of Electrical Engineering

Chulalongkorn University
Bangkok, Thailand

Department of Advanced Energy

The University of Tokyo
Tokyo, Japan

AbstractDistribution systems are changing from one-source

supplying structure into multi-source supplying structure with
participations of distributed generations (DGs). These changes
face problems caused by DGs. This paper considers typical
problems such as system operating limits, reach reduction of
utility relay, and fault ride through requirement from
distribution system operators (DSOs) in order to maximize DG
installation. A new fault calculation technique for a system with
inverter-based DGs is revised and employed in an algorithm
proposed for maximizing DGs. The IEEE 34 Node Test Feeder is
then used to illustrate the effectiveness of the algorithm in
determining the maximum allowable DG installed in this system.
Keywords-distributed generation; fault ride through; reach
reduction; maximization algorithm.



The strong increase in number of renewable-based

generating plants, with the advanced control technology,
impulses their role in power systems. Using a package of an
asynchronous generator along with an inverter to synchronize
the output with the power system is an upward tendency for
generating units in these plants. Such generating unit is known
as an inverter-based distributed generation (IBDG). Besides,
many combined heat and power (CHP) plants using
synchronous generators are still used in power systems and
named synchronous machine-based distributed generation
(SBDG) hereafter. From DGs owner perspectives, the
renewable energy should be exploited; hence, the installation
capacity of the DG is expected to be as large as possible.
However, the installation of DG may violate system operating
limits such as substation and line capacities, voltage limits and
causes other impacts dealing with protection system operations
[1]-[3]. A typical protection impact is relay reach reduction
which always occurs at any size of DG. This problem has been
analyzed in [3]-[4] considering the participation of SBDG in
distribution networks. Maximization of SBDG with
consideration of system operating limits and reach reduction of
relays was discussed in [5]. Nevertheless, there has been less
concern about IBDG. This motivates DG maximization in this
paper to consider not only the system operating limits but also
the relay reach reduction problem caused by the installation of
both SBDG and IBDG.

978-1-4673-4584-2/12/$31.00 2012 IEEE

In order to evaluate the reach reduction of utility relay, fault

currents through that relay should be determined. However, the
conventional fault calculation technique is no longer used for
this purpose due to the difference in modeling an IBDG from
an SBDG. Some researches negotiates this problem by
neglecting the fault current from the IBDG with an assumption
that the IBDG current is very small compared with the SBDG
current and the IBDG is isolated very fast after the fault
occurrence [6]-[7].
In fact, response of an IBDG to a fault occurring in the
utility system, which forms the contributed current, is
determined by the inverter control system. Additionally, this
control system is designed to comply with the requirement of
DSOs during fault. Recent grid codes require DGs to remain
connected to the network during fault, usually named fault ride
through (FRT) requirement [8]-[15]. It is therefore reasonable
to discuss FRT for analyzing impacts of DG on relay reach and
a new technique for calculating fault current in a distribution
system with both SBDG and IBDG.
The FRT requirement is introduced firstly in Section II.
Then, impacts of DG on reach reduction of utility relay are
analyzed in Section III with consideration of the FRT
capability. After revising a new fault calculation technique for
a system with IBDG in Section IV, a DG maximization
problem is formulated in Section V. Then, an algorithm to
solve that problem is also proposed. Lastly, a case study with
the IEEE 34 Node Test Feeder is performed in Section VI to
apply the proposed algorithm.




Generating plants should make a contribution to network

support in not only normal operation but also transient states
as an upward tendency. To carry out that mission, generating
plants must be connected in an event of network disturbances
and contribute a dynamic support to the utility system if
possible. The way of passing through the fault or other
disturbances, which cause the voltage drop at the point of
common coupling (PCC), without being disconnected from the
network, is called fault ride through capability.
Most grid codes are issued for transmission networks.
Some of them, e.g. German [8], Denmark [9], and Ireland

IPEC 2012

[10], have specific FRT requirement for distribution networks.

Because this paper envelops DGs which are connected to such
networks, the FRT and the dynamic network support
requirements are briefly summarized aiming to bring the
research closer to industrial practice.

Voltage, %

There is usually a distinction between SBDG and other DG

types. For instance, German grid code clarifies DG into two
types: type-1 and type-2 generating unit. A type-1 generating
unit is an SBDG which is connected directly to the network.
All others generating plants, e.g. wind turbines, PV systems,
fuel cells, are type-2 generating units. General requirements of
FRT capability in distribution networks are as the following
technical terms.

not to disconnect from the network in the event of

network faults.

to support the network voltage during a network

fault by feeding a reactive current into the

not to extract from the medium-voltage network

after fault clearance more inductive reactive
power than prior to the occurrence of the fault.

Time, ms

Ireland type A

Ireland type B, C, D, E

Figure 1. FRT curves from Irish grid code [10]

These terms are detailed as FRT curves for all generators

and dynamic network support requirement for type-2
generator units.
A. Fault ride through curves
The first term is detailed in the fashion of FRT curves, e.g.,
curves for type-2 generator units from Irish grid code in Figure
1. If voltage at the PCC drops to a value above the borderline,
the DG must remain connected to the network. For instance,
wind farm power station type B, C, D, and E must remain
connected during the first 625 ms even voltage drops at value
of 15%. For the next duration from 625 ms to 1000 ms, if the
voltage recovers linearly from 15% to 40%, the wind farm
must not be disconnected from the network. After this duration,
if the voltage drops at the value less than 80%, the wind farm
can be disconnected.
B. Dynamic network support
The renewable-based generating plants with type-2
generating units are being required to play roles more actively
in power systems to which they are connected. One of them is
about network support so that not only remaining connection
but also injecting reactive current is required during the fault
period. For instance, Irish distribution code requires the wind
farm power station to provide current during voltage dips as

Active power is provided in proportion to retained


Reactive current is maximized without exceeding

generating unit limits.

The maximization of reactive current shall continue for at

least 600 ms or until the distribution system voltage recovers
within the normal operational range of the distribution system.

Figure 2. Reactive current requirement during voltage dips [8]

The German grid code for distribution system requires the

supported reactive current in corresponding to the voltage drop,
i.e., 2% of the rated current per percent of the voltage drop. If
needed, the DG must support the reactive current of 100% of
rated current as shown in Figure 2.
When the reactive current IR is less than 100% of the rated
current, the active component is generally expected to be as
large as possible so that DG current and generated active power
do not exceed current limit and available active power from the
primary source, respectively. Therefore, the active component
of IBDG current ranges from 0 to the pre-fault value; whereas,
the reactive component ranges from 0 to 1 p.u. (rated current).
As a conclusion of this section, SBDG and IBDG are
required to remain connected to the utility system through a
fault period under predetermined conditions. Additionally, an
IBDG reacts as a current source during the fault. Thus, it is
reasonable to consider the FRT requirement in determining the
maximum allowable generating units, including SBDG and
IBDG, installed in a utility system.


Although the impact of SBDG on relay reach reduction was

widely discussed [1]-[4], the problem dealing with IBDG has
not received enough concerns. This section firstly updates the
model of IBDG for fault calculation from the previous works
[16]-[17] with consideration of the FRT requirement mentioned


in Section II. Then, impacts of SBDG and IBDG on relay reach

reduction are analyzed.
A. Impacts of SBDG on relay reach reduction
The utility breaker and recloser are set to see a certain
distance down the radial feeder. This is sometimes referred to
as the reach of the device [1]. The reach is determined by the
minimum fault current that the device can detect. As an
example, when DG is connected between the recloser and the
fault as shown in Figure 3, fault currents at the relaying points
(both the utility and recloser sides) will decrease in comparison
with the fault currents before adding DG. Therefore, both
relays will react as if the fault occurs further down the feeder,
possibly outside their protection zones, and consequently they
will not operate. This problem is defined as the relay reach

Figure 3. Reach reduction illustrations

An SBDG is conventionally represented by a constant

voltage source connected in series with an impedance. The
larger the DG is, the smaller this impedance becomes. A large
SBDG can cause a significant reduction in the current from the
substation. Particularly, the smaller the impedance is, the more
the current is reduced. This reduction shortens the protected
area set for the utility relay as detailed in [4].
B. Impacts of IBDG on relay reach reduction
Model of an IBDG depends on how it responds to voltage
drops at the PCC. If the control system of the IBDG responds
to only the positive sequence voltage at the PCC to keep the
power output constant, current from the IBDG will be always
symmetrical because it contains most positive-sequence
component. As a result, its fault model participates in only the
positive-sequence network. Additionally, the IBDG current is
limited by a threshold value to protect power electronic
components. If the dynamic network support requirement is
considered, the model depicted in Figure 4 can be used. Under
fault condition, the IBDG is controlled to inject a constant
current IG into the utility system to satisfy the DSOs
requirement. Consequently, the IBDG is only modeled by the
constant current source in parallel with the filter capacitor Cf
instead of a full model proposed in [16]-[17].
A simple system consisting of one system bus (substation)
and one IBDG bus is used here to evaluate the impact of the
IBDG on the relay reach. When a three-phase fault occurs in
the system, the network representation is illustrated in Figure 5.
Impedances from the substation and the IBDG to the fault point
are Zsf and ZGf, respectively. In order to meet the dynamic
network support requirement, the IBDG contributes a reactive
current IG. Impacts of IBDG on current from the substation IS
are evaluated as follows.
The substation voltage VS after installing the IBDG is
generally the same as before and it is assumed to be 1 p.u. for
fault calculation. If IG = jK (fully reactive current support), Zsf =
jXsf, and Zf = Rf, currents from the substation before and after
installing IBDG are given by (1) and (2), respectively.
The change of the current from the substation before
installing IBDG, IS, and after installing IBDG, IS, is analyzed
as follows. The real part of IS, shown in (2), decreases with

Figure 4. Modified model of an IBDG for network support requirement





Fault point






Figure 5. Representation of a simple system with one IBDG during fault

a term, KRfXsf, compared to the correlative part of IS, shown in

(1), but the imaginary part of IS increases with KR2f.
Therefore, the current from the substation after installing
IBDG, IS, may decrease or increase in absolute value
compared with the current before installing IBDG, IS. Although
constant K is so small that IS is not much different from IS,
the IBDG presents a different impact from the SBDG for a
three-phase fault. This change will be illustrated in Section VI.

IS =

I S'

R 2f

X sf2

R f KR f X sf
R2f + X sf2

X sf
R 2f

+ X sf2

X sf + KR2f
R2f + X sf2




Conventional fault calculation techniques [18] do not

encompass characteristic of IBDG response. There are more
accurate techniques which have been developed and proposed
recently. One of them is based on the load flow technique [16][17], [19].
Fault calculation technique used in this section has an
assumption that at an instant of the transient duration at which
the fault calculation is performed, the total power generated
from all sources is balanced with the total power dissipated by
all impedances. In [16]-[17], a load flow-based fault calculation
was proposed for a system with penetration of both SBDG and
IBDG. It is summarized in Figure 6 with the updated IBDG
model in Subsection III.B as a tool for a maximization
algorithm in the next section.


V p( ) = V p( ) p( )

where Iinv,ref is the reference current expected at the output of

the IBDG; Ithres indicates the threshold current of the control
system of the IBDG as detailed in [16]-[17], VPCC indicates the
positive-sequence voltage at the PCC of the IBDG, and Vlimit
indicates the voltage limit accepted for a normal condition.

p = 1, n, p s

The IBDG occupies in only the positive-sequence network

as modeled in Figure 4. In case of a three-phase fault, Zeq is
equal to Zf, and the representation of positive-sequence network
is identical to the representation of real phase network.

Pp( ) = Ppscheduled Pp( )

Pp( ) = Ppscheduled Pp( )

Q p min Q (p ) Q p max

Q (p ) = Q pscheduled Q (p )

The circuit comprising Z0kk, Z2kk, and Zf is then solved with

the known V1k to obtain all sequence components of the fault
current I0k, I1k, and I2k. Because the IBDG does not participate
in zero and negative-sequence networks, the corresponding
sequence current is used to compute all bus sequence voltages
in a similar way to the conventional fault calculation. Besides,
all bus positive-sequence voltages are known, so they are used
to compute line sequence currents. Lastly, these line sequence
currents are superposed to generate line currents during fault.

max P ( ) = max Pp( ) , max Q ( ) = max Q (p ) , p = 1, n


( max P( ) ) & ( max Q ( ) )


A large DG may cause the utility relay to lose its

protective functions as analyzed in Section III. It is also a
reason of overloading or overvoltage problem in normal
operation of utility systems. This section proposes an
algorithm to maximize DG without disturbing the utility relay
reach and the system operating limits as well. The maximum
allowable DG is considered as a total size of all DGs
regardless of DG types.

J1( ) , J 2( ) , J 3( ) , J 4( )

P ( k ) J ( k )
p = 1
Q ( k ) J ( k )

( k +1) = ( k ) + ( k )

( k +1)
= V p( )


(k )

J 2( ) p

(k ) V (k )

(pk +1) = p( k )

( k +1)
= V p( )

( k +1) = ( k ) + ( k )

( k +1)
= V p( ) + V p( )

Figure 6. New algorithm for fault calculation

The algorithm starts with forming a sequence network

connection, which is circuited from positive, negative, and
zero-sequence networks depending on what the fault type is.
However, the sequence network connection here is different
from the conventional algorithm. The positive-sequence
network is not replaced by an equivalent impedance; whereas,
the circuit consisting of the equivalent zero-sequence
impedance Z0kk, the equivalent negative-sequence impedance
Z2kk, and the fault impedance Zf, is replaced by an equivalent
impedance Zeq.
The admittance matrix Ybus is performed and sequencecomponents of bus voltages and line currents are computed
with an iteration technique.
For simplicity, an IBDG is modeled as a PQ source in the
first iteration. It is changed to a current source with fully
reactive support, IIBDG = j1 p.u. if one of the following
conditions occurs.
|Iinv,ref|  |Ithres|


|VPCC| < |Vlimit|


A. Protection systems of utility and DG interconnection

A utility system concerned in this paper was designed in a
radial configuration with one main feeder and some lateral
feeders. The main feeder is protected by an overcurrent relay
placed at the feeder starting point (substation busbar). Before
installing DGs, the pick-up value of the overcurrent relay is set
larger than the current through the relay under the maximum
load [20]. When a fault occurs inside the protected zone, fault
current exceeds the pick-up value causing the relay to trip.
Because of the FRT capability enforcement, both SBDG
and IBDG must employ a voltage transformer combined with
a timer to observe the changes of voltage at the PCC.
Consequently, voltage relays can be applied to protect DGs
[21]-[22]. Thus, reach reduction problem is not a concern of
these relays. The following algorithm for determining
maximum allowable DG will consider the reach reduction of
utility overcurrent relay and the operating limits of utility
B. Algorithm for maximizing DGs
Without loss of generality, each group of SBDG and IBDG
is represented by one respective unit. The maximum DG must
retain the reach reduction of utility relay with consideration of
the FRT requirement and the system operating limits. The
maximization problem is formulated as follows.


Objective function: Max: PDG = PSBDG + PIBDG


System operating limits constraints

DGs: p.f. = const.


Substation transformer: Ssub Ssub max
Lines: |Iline i| Iline i max
Buses: Vbus i min Vbus i Vbus i max

Reach reduction constraint

Ifault (utility) > Ipick-up (utility)
where Ipick-up(utility) indicates both phase and ground
overcurrent pick-up values of the utility relay; Ifault(utility)
indicates the maximum phase current (out of three phase
currents) in case of phase overcurrent function and the residual
current (the sum of three phase current vectors) in case of
ground overcurrent function. For a fault inside the protected
zone, at least one of the two functions should operate.
Among various optimization techniques, Tabu search
method is employed here because it prevents the move from
falling back into a previously emerged local optimum and it
shows a visibility in searching process [5], [23]-[24]. With
such searching technique, the next checking point (the
neighborhood of the current point), from which the next
solution will be drawn, is redefined based on the conditions
that classify certain moves as Tabu. After each searching
process, one best neighborhood can be attained. It becomes the
best optimum if the corresponding objective function value is
less than the current best optimum. If the current best optimum
is not updated after a predefined number of iteration, the
algorithm will stop. A flow chart representing the Tabu search
algorithm is illustrated in Figure 7.
The algorithm operates with the settings as follows: the
Tabu list size is 10, the maximum number of iteration which
the current best optimum is not updated is 10, and the
aspiration criterion is set as the maximum value of the
objective function found so far. The current best optimum is
set to the standing point first. Then, neighborhoods are
generated randomly with radius R and filtered by using both
the DG capacity limits (6) (7) and the Tabu list to form a
candidate list in descending order of the objective function
values. If the aspiration criterion is satisfied, a point is added
to the candidate list even it is in the Tabu list. If the highest
point in the candidate list does not satisfy the constraints (8)
(11), the next PDG (the next highest point) will be selected for
checking. This process is repeated until a point satisfies all
constraints and it will be the best neighborhood. That point
now becomes a new initial point and it is added into the Tabu
list. If its objective function value is larger than the current
best optimum, that point will replace the current best
optimum. The above process is repeated until the stopping
criteria are reached.
Running the checking block Satisfy constraints?
comprises two steps: running load flow for the system
operating limits constraints and calculating fault current for
the reach reduction constraint. As analyzed in Section III, if
the FRT requirement is considered, the IBDG will contribute a
constant current during fault period. The fault calculation
technique summarized in Section IV is therefore employed at
this step instead of the conventional one for testing operation
of the utility relay.

Figure 7. Algorithm for DG maximization



The proposed algorithm in Section V is applied to

maximize DGs installed in the IEEE 34 Node Test Feeder.
Data of this feeder are presented in [25]. Although this feeder
has some unbalanced laterals, unbalanced spot loads, and
unbalanced distributed loads, it can be simplified to be a
balanced three-phase system with 20 loads of 2.05 MVA in
total for applying the proposed algorithm. A lateral feeder
including Buses 21, 22, and the transformer XFM-1 at Bus 20
is not required to be protected by the utility relay placed at Bus
1. The reason is that this feeder is at lower voltage (4.16 kV)
and assumed to be protected by fuses in XFM-1 substation.
A. Simulation settings
An SBDG is assumed to be connected at Bus 15; whereas,
an IBDG is assumed to be connected at Bus 32 as shown in
Figure 8. Both of them are limited in size from 0.1 MW to 2
MW. The SBDG and the IBDG have power factors of 0.9 and
1, respectively. Two transformers in wye-grounded/delta
connection are used to connect DGs to the utility system. In
this paper, all calculations are performed in per unit system
identified by Sbase = 2.5 MVA and Vbase = 24.9 kV.


System operating limits constraints are listed as follows.

DGs: 0.1MW PSBDG 2 MW, p.f. = 0.9

0.1 MW SIBDG 2 MW, p.f. = 1

Substation transformer: Ssub 2.5 MVA

Lines: |Iline i| 57.97 A

Buses: 22.41 kV Vbus i 27.39 kV

necessary of considering the utility reach reduction as a

constraint in maximizing SBDG size.

Figure 8. IEEE 34 Node Test Feeder

The utility breaker is controlled by an overcurrent relay.

For phase overcurrent function, the pick-up value is 1.86 p.u.
which is 2.3 times the maximum load current (0.81 p.u.) [4],
[20]. The pick-up value of the ground overcurrent function is
set to 0.65 p.u. which is 0.35 times the phase overcurrent pickup value. The ground overcurrent function operates in
corresponding to the residual current which is a vector sum of
all three phase currents. The reach reduction constraint is
performed by the followings.


(utility)} > 0.65 p.u.

I residual

phase A, B ,C
I fault

As discussed in Section III, IBDG installation also presents

impact on utility relay reach reduction even that the change is
small. Table I shows the reduction of the fault current through
the utility relay in percent of that fault current before installing
IBDG. The IBDG is assumed to operate at the maximum
active power output and unity power factor before the fault. A
three-phase fault occurs at Bus 29 through the impedance of
20 . It can be seen that the larger the IBDG is, the higher the
reduction becomes in this case. Although the highest reduction
in this fault case is quiet small, it still has an effect on the total
maximum DG which is determined by the reach reduction

phase A
I fault
I pick

(utility)} > 1.86 p.u.

The reach reduction constraint is satisfied if at least one of

the above inequalities is satisfied.
B. Results and discussions

I residual
I pick

1) Impact of SBDG and IBDG on utility relay reach

During the transient period, which usually lasts from 0.5 to
2 seconds after the fault instant, an SBDG can be modeled as a
voltage source connected in series with an impedance. This
impedance represents the transient reactance of an SBDG. At a
larger size of the SBDG, the respective transient reactance is
smaller and vice versa. So, fault current from an SBDG is
higher if the SBDG size is larger, causing current flowing
through the utility relay smaller. Installation of a large SBDG
causes significant reduction in the reach of the utility relay as
illustrated in Figure 9. The reductions of both phase and
residual currents from Bus 1 to Bus 2, which are also the fault
currents through the utility relay, increase when the SBDG
increases from 0 (system without SBDG) to 2 MW in size. It
can be seen that when the SBDG exceeds 0.6 MW, the phase
overcurrent function cannot detect the fault but the utility relay
still senses the fault with the ground overcurrent function.
When the SBDG exceeds 1.5 MW, both of the two functions
cannot sense the fault and the feeder is not protected.
The utility relay reach reduction is illustrated clearer when
single line-to-ground fault is assumed to occur consequently
from Bus 1 to Bus 34 as shown in Figure 10. The utility relay
can protect whole feeder before installing the SBDG except
Buses 21 and 22 as explained at the beginning of this section.
After installing 2 MW SBDG, the protection zone is reduced
from Bus 34 to Bus 20 as in Figure 11. At this bus, both phase
and residual currents through the utility relay are below the
respective overcurrent pick-up values, causing the relay to be
blind to the fault. This illustration is evidence for the


Figure 9. Utility relay current changes in a single line-to-ground fault at Bus


phase A
I fault

I residual
I pick
I pick

Figure 10. Utility relay reach before installing SBDG

0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5

phase A
I fault

I residual

I pick









Standing point

I pick



Figure 12. An example for generating neighborhoods

Figure 11. Utility relay reach reduction after installing SBDG = 2MW

2) Maximum allowable DG
There is a maximum IBDG in corresponding to a specific
SBDG for installing in the tested system in order to satisfy the
system operating limits constraints. Table II lists such 11 pairs
of (SBDG, IBDG). The total maximum size ranges from 1.8
MW to 2.3 MW. If the IBDG is large in power, e.g., 2 MW,
the corresponding maximum SBDG will be small in power,
i.e., 0.3 MW, and vice versa.
The maximization algorithm starts with a random selection
of DG capacity (PSBDG = 0.1 MW, PIBDG = 0.2 MW) as an
initial point. From this point, a neighborhood is created by
varying the discrete capacity of each DG. In this case study,
DG capacity is varied discretely with the step 0.1 MW. So, if
the radius is chosen as R = 3, the furthest neighborhood is
(30.1 = 0.3 MW) far from the standing point. For instance, in
Figure 12, there are 12 neighborhoods generated from the
standing point (PSBDG = 0.1 MW, PIBDG = 0.2 MW). Whenever
a move is selected, the point at the opposite direction (the
previous point) will be added in the Tabu list.
In order to determine the maximum allowable DG, all
types of fault (three-phase, single line-to-ground, double lineto-ground, and line-to-line faults) are sequentially applied to
each bus in the system (from Bus 1 to Bus 34) for each
checking point (PSBDG, PIBDG) as the algorithm illustrated in
Figure 7. The new fault current calculation in Figure 6 is
applied to calculate fault current for checking the operation of
the utility relay. At each iteration, a best neighborhood is
selected from a standing point. Figure 13 illustrates a trace
through 7 best neighborhoods from the standing point (PSBDG =
0.1 MW, PIBDG = 0.2 MW) after 7 first iterations. The
optimum (PSBDG = 0.3 MW, PIBDG = 2 MW) is reached from
the initial point (PSBDG = 0.1 MW, PIBDG = 0.2 MW) after next
10 iterations because there are no more updates. The final
result shows that the maximum allowable DG is 2.3 MW at
which (PSBDGmax = 0.3 MW, PIBDGmax = 2 MW). According to
Table II, although the pair (PSBDG = 0.5 MW, PIBDG = 1.8 MW)
has the sum of 2.3 MW, it is not the maximum allowable DG.
The reason is that the reach reduction constraint is not satisfied


Figure 13. A path from the initial point to the optimum point

at this point. That is, the utility relay cannot sense a single
line-to-ground fault at Bus 34 with both phase and ground
overcurrent functions.
It should be noted that the maximum allowable DG is
found as a sum of all DG capacities. However, the proposed
algorithm in this paper can identify exactly the allowable
capacity for each DG.


Without IBDG

IBDG size, MW





Utility relay current, p.u.






Reduction, %







Generation, MW


































An algorithm has been proposed to determine the
maximum allowable size of DGs including SBDG and IBDG
for their installations into the utility system.
DG installation presents impacts on the utility system:
SBDG causes the prominent reach reduction for the utility
overcurrent relay, causing a part of the feeder to become
unprotected; whereas, IBDG has remarkable effects on utility
relay reach reduction. The occurrence of IBDG brings about
the necessary of a new fault calculation technique which is
compatible with the IBDG model as a constant current source.
The maximum installation capacity of DG obtained from
the proposed algorithm assures the capability of detecting
faults for the utility relay under the impacts DGs on fault
current considering the fault ride through requirement. The
system operating parameters are set in constraints so that these
parameters must be maintained inside the limited ranges
during the normal operation of the system with the identified
maximum installed DG.
This work was supported in part by the Higher Education
Research Promotion and National Research University Project
of Thailand, Office of the Higher Education Commission

R. C. Dugan and T. E. McDermott, "Operating conflicts for

distributed generation on distribution systems," in Proc. Rural
Electric Power Conf., pp. A3/1-A3/6, 2001.
[2] R.A. Walling, R. Saint, R.C. Dugan, J. Burke, and L.A. Kojovic,
Summary of Distributed Resources Impact on Power Delivery
Systems, IEEE Trans. Power Del., vol. 23, no. 3, pp. 16361644,
Jul. 2008.
[3] E.J. Coster, J.M.A. Myrzik, B. Kruimer, and W.L. Kling,
Integration Issues of Distributed Generation in Distribution
Grids, in Proc. of the IEEE, vol. 99, issue 1, 2011.
[4] Dao Van Tu and S. Chaitusaney, Relay sensitivity approach for
maximizing Distributed Generation, in Proc. TENCON 2011 2011 IEEE Region 10 Conf., pp. 1010 - 1014, 2011.
[5] Dao Van Tu, S. Chaitusaney, and A. Yokoyama, Maximization of
Distributed Generation by Considering System Operating Limits
and Protection Reach Reduction as Constraints, IEEJ Trans.
Electrical and Electronic Engineering, Supplementary 2012 (to be
[6] S. Boljevic and M. F. Conlon, "Fault Current Level Issues for
Urban Distribution Network with High Penetration of Distributed
Generation," in Proc. The 6th Conf. on the European Energy
Market, pp. 1-6, 2009.
[7] L. Freris and D. Infield, Renewable Energy in Power Systems, First
Edition, Great Britain: A John Wiley & Sons, 2008.
[8] Guideline for generating plants connection to and parallel
operation with the medium-voltage network, Bundesverband der
Energie- und Wasserwirtschaft e. V. - BDEW, June 2008.
[9] Danish technical regulations for the properties and the control of
windturbines, Wind Turbines Connected to Grids with Voltages
below 100 kV, May 2004.
[10] Irish distribution code, ESB Networks, Oct. 2007.
[11] Requisitos de respuesta frente a huecos de tension de las
instalaciones de produccion de regimen especial, PO 12.3. REE,
Spain, Nov. 2005.
[12] Scottish Grid Code, Scottish Hydro-Electric Transmission Ltd,
Scottish TSO.


[13] The grid code, issue 3, rev. 24, National Grid Electricity
Transmission plc, UK, Oct. 2008.
[14] Wind Power Facility, Technical Requirements, Grid Code from
Alberta Electric System operator, Canada.
[15] Interconnection for wind energy-nal rule, Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, USA, June 2005.
[16] Dao Van Tu, S. Chaitusaney, and A. Yokoyama Fault Current
Calculation in Distribution Systems with Inverter-based
Distributed Generations, IEEJ Trans. Electrical and Electronic
Engineering, 2012 (to be published).
[17] Dao Van Tu and S. Chaitusaney, Impacts of Inverter-based
Distributed Generation Control Modes on Short-circuit Currents in
Distribution Systems, in Proc. The 7th Conf. Industrial Electronics
and Applications, Jul. 2012.
[18] Hadi Sadaat, Power System Analysis, Second Edition, New York:
McGraw-Hill, 2004.
[19] J. Tant and G. Deconinck, Inverter Modelling Techniques for
Protection Studies, in Proc. The 3rd IEEE International
Symposium on Power Electronics for Distributed Generation
Systems, pp. 187-194, 2012.
[20] IEEE Guide for Protective Relay Applications to Distribution
Lines, IEEE Standard C37.230-2007, Feb. 2008.
[21] A. T. Moore, Distributed Generation Protection Overview,
Literature Review for ES 586b University of Western Ontario,
May 2008.
[22] H. Leite, P. Ramalho, B. Silva, and R. Fiteiro, Distributed
Generation protection scheme to permit ride-through fault - Part
1&2, in Proc. The 20th International Conf. and Exhibition on
Electricity Distribution, Part 1: pp. 1-4, Part 2: pp. 1-9, 2009.
[23] F. Glover, Tabu Search Part I, ORSA J. Computing, vol. 1, no.
3, 1989.
[24] F. Glover and M. Laguna, Tabu Search, Kluwer Academic
Publishers, 1997.
[25] Distribution Test Feeders, IEEE PES Distribution System Analysis
Subcommittee, Available: