1799

IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery, Vol. 9, No. 4, October 1994

EXTENSIVE EVALUATION OF HIGH PERFORMANCE PROTECTION RELAYS FOR THE

HYDRO-QUEBEC SERIES COMPENSATED NETWORK
Charles Gagnon, Member IEEE
IREQ, Institut de recherche &Hydro-Qukbec
Varennes, Canada J3X 1S1

Pierre Gravel, Non-member

Hydro-Qukbec
Montrkal, Canada HlN lJ4

Abstract - Thispaper reports on an extensivestudy to compare theperfomance of gpreselected highperfomwtce lineprotectionsystems on

the Hydm-Quibec series compemated netwodz. Thepaper fimt presents an evaluation of the commissioning aspects and manufacturing
quality of the tested relays. It then describes the simulated network, the
relay testing p m e d m , and the labomtory test results obtained on a
modem reaI time power system simulator

This paper givm an overview of the study performed and will present the laboratory test results for 84 030 cases. These tests were
conducted on a modem real time power system simulator. The
study began in April 1989 and finished in December 1990.

Published results of relay pefomance on series compensated lines are

s c m e and thispaperprovides valuable informationfor utilityprotection engineem.A total of 115 OOO network disturbances weresimulated
and recorded on 20 different 735 kV lines;functional test results for
84 030 cases arepresented in the paper The approach using real time
power system simulation proved to be an efficienttechniquefor evaluatingprotectionrelay p e f o m c e . The labomtory test results demortstmfedthat the two best protection principles to be applied on the
Hydro-Quibec series compensated netwonk are those based on current
differentialand segregated phase comparison. The analysis does not
take into account telecommupicatwnrequirements or other atemal
constmbzts.

Kevwords - Protection relay evaluation, Series compensation,

Relay performance, Real time power system simulation, Relay
commissioning, Relay manufacturing quality.
INTRODUCTION
As part of a major revision of its transmission system design criteria, Hydro-Qukbec has decided to implement seriescompensation
on 37 of its 735 kV lines. With the exception of 3 lines between the
Manicouagan and L b i s substations and 1 line between the Micoua
and Laurentides substations, the series compensation will be installed at the end of the lines. The series capacitor banks will be
protected by a system composed of zinc oxide varistors, controlled
spark gaps and bypass breakers. The series compensation will
range between 17 % and 44 % for a total of 15 OOO Mvars.
With this massive implementation of series compensation, existing
distance protection had to be replaced and Hydro-Qukbecs Protection Division decided to launch an extensive protection study
[l] in order to determine the most suitable line protection systems
for its network. Previous work on the subject has demonstrated
that protection of series compensated lines presents unique problems for the protection engineer and requires an in depth studyfor
each power system [2,3,4,5,6,7,8].

Although the results described in this paper are with reference to

the Hydro-Qu&ec system, the methodology of the test procedure
and some of the conclusions will find general applicability and
should prove to be of interest to other utilities.

PROTECTION RELAYS EVALUATED

Eight preselected high performance line protection systems were
evaluated. The operating principles of the tested relays are coded
with 2 letters and are listed below :
I)
I)
I)
I)
I)

Hybrid directional comparison

Segregated phase comparison
Current differential
Impedance with memory polarization
Superimposed directional

: ZH
: PC
: CD
: ZM
: SD

In the results tables and figures, the different relays are referred
to by their protection principle, followed by a serial number if there
were more than one of the same type.

COMMISSIONINGASPECTS EVALUATION
The relays were commissioned according to the manufacturers
recommendations. However, due to various problems experienced
during commissioning, it was decided to include this aspect in the
evaluation. Six different points were covered and each was evaluated on a scale of 1to 5, the perfect score being a 5.The qualitative evaluations associated with the marks assigned are described
below and the results are summarized in Table I.

Settings
5 :Settings are easy to calculate and to apply. No significantchange
was needed for the complete duration of the study.
4 : Settings are more complicated to achieve.
3 : Settings are relatively complicated and not all accessible on the
front panel of the relay. Therefore, for some relays, changes to the
settings anger programmable links have to be done directly on the
printed circuit boards.
2:Changes in the settings, using the power system simulator,were
needed to get a good performance of the relay.

94 WM 015-8 PWRD A paper recommended and approved

by the IEEE Power System Relaying Colamittee of the
IEEE Power Engineering Society for presentation at
Testing method
the IEEE/PES 1994 Wincer Meeting, New York, New York,
January 30 - February 3, 1994. Manuscript submitted 5. : Testing method is precise, clear, and easy to use.
August 2, 1993; made available for printing
4 : Testing method is less straight forward.
December 15, 1993.

3 :Testing method is complex and not readily applicable with the

testing facilities at hand.

d a : No available testing method at the time.

0885-8977/94/$04.00 0 1994 IEEE

1800

the evaluation was made in terms of marks from 1to 5 and the
qualitative evaluations for the marks assigned are given below.

'hble I. Commissioning aspects evaluation

Characteristic

Signalling

Testing
equipment

67

67 90

77

90

evaluation in % 63

67 68

Logic checking

5 : Some facilities are available on the relay to check a part of or

the entire logic by using front panel buttons or other apparatus.

-3 : Microprocessorbased relay with at least a cold start check and

continuous supervision to ensure a healthy microprocessor.

2:Part of the relay is microprocessor based with continuous supervision, but no other facilities for logic checking are available.

-1:No facilities at all for any kind of logic checking.

Characteristic

-5 : Characteristicvalues are easily controllable and precise.

4 : Characteristic is not amrate and difficult to check because
sometimes 2 or 3 characteristicsoverlap each other.

-3 :No characteristic; only threshold values are adjustable.

-2 :Difficultto check any kind of value that can be related to a characteristic or a threshold value.
Signalling
5 : Complete signalling is provided, either by encoded number or
LE.D. directly on the relay, by auxiliary relays, or via serial RS232
communication port.
4 : Sufficient signalling is provided to give details of the last fault
occurrence.
3 : Signallingis not sufficient.
2 : Signallingis poor. In some cases, only a LE.D. signal for a trip
command is issued from the relay without any kind of indication
of the faulted phases.
Testing equipment
5 :Easy to setup. Little equipment required to perform static tests.
4 :More complex set up required. Relationshipbetween measurements and the characteristic values is more difficult to establish.
3 : Difficult to simulate the right conditions to check the relay performance on a static basis.

MANUFACTURING QUALITY EVALUATION

Given the opportunity of having all these relays on hand, a manufacturing quality evaluation was carried out. Four aspects were
covered in the evaluation and are presented in Table 11.As before,

Hardware
5 : New technology using integrated circuits and microprocessors.
Good quality for the printed circuit boards.
4 : Older technology.
-2 :Aging product for which it may be difficult to obtain spare parts.
Defective parts
5 : Relay was received in perfect operating condition.
4 :Relay was not fully operational due to either :problem of overheating components, problem with radio interference tests, wrong
resistors for a polarization circuit, different programming for 2
identical relays.
3 : Relay was not fully operational due to either :module out of
acceptable tolerance, defective component (integrated circuit,
diode, etc.), problem of duty cycle for some auxiliary relays, modules with wrong nominal current or basic frequency, errors in wiring, problems with crimped terminals inside the relay, diode matrix
different from the one given in the documentation.
Troubleshooting
4 :Error codes are given by the manufacturer to rapidly find and
replace a defective card or module. Difficult to replace a component due to a lack of documentation. Troubleshooting is possible
through buttons which allow a check of a part of or the entire logic
of the relay.
3 :No facilitiesavailable to perform troubleshooting. Information
is incomplete and/or contains errors.
2 :No facilitiesavailableto perform troubleshooting.Information
is incomplete, contains errors and is not fully applicable to the relays being tested.
Documentation
-5 :Documentation is clear, complete,and easily availablefrom the
manufacturer.
4 :Software documentation is incomplete, not always up to date,
contains errors, or is not compatible w$h the relay being tested.
3 : Information on wiring between cards and external connectors
is missing, electronicschematicsdo not correspond to the relay being tested.
2 : Major lack of documentation, not easily understandable, and
contains errors.
d a : Documentation was in preparation at the time the relay was
being tested.
Table 11. Manufacturingquality evaluation

1801

SIMULATION ASPECTS
Approach

Using a fully automatic test control procedure, supported by a highly specialized softwarepackage, it was possible to perform an average of 250 tests per hour, including all on-line data processing and
statistical analysis.

The power system simulation could have been done using off-line
digital transient simulation programs such as EMTP [9] or MOR- Network description
GAT [ 101. In such a case, the voltages and currents seen by the relayswould have been recorded and replayed at a speed correspond- The study was carried out using a model of the future series coming to real time. The waveforms would have been applied to the pensated Hydro-QuCbec system. The network included all 735 kV
relays using appropriate WA interfaces and power amplifiers lines and part of the 315 kV system. Equivalents were used for volt[ 10,11,12,13,14,15].The simulation time, however, would have age levels below 315 kV. Electromechanical oscillations were not
been relatively long. For example, a 6 cycle fault on the modeled represented for this study.
Hydro-QuCbec power system (Figure 1)using EMTP on a SPARC
The simulated network included :
station 1took roughly 30 minutes of CPU time.
Furthermore, based on IREQs past experience,performance evaluation of protection systemshas proved to be best achieved using
a statistical approach. The choice of lines studied, fault inception
angles, fault positions, types of switching operations, network parameters and configurations are all parameters that can influence
significantly the performance of some relays. The need to perform
a great number of network disturbances in order to obtain the best
possible sampling virtually imposes the need for the use of a fully
automated modem real time power system simulator. Of course,
the statistical approach does not eliminate the need for engineering judgement in choosing the tests to be performed.
The use of real time power system simulation for protective relay
testing has been discussed in [16,17,18,19,20],among others. The
IREQ digitally controlled real time power system simulator was
used to perform the present study. The hardware has been extensively described in [21]. System voltage levels are scaled down to
a nominal 100 V phase-to-phase on the simulator and an impedance scaling factor is selected to keep the fault current below 5 A.

74 lines of which 60 were 735 kV lines, 12were 315 kV lines

and 2 were 210 kV lines
I) 30 three-phase capacitor banks with ZnO varistor models
I) 37 fixed-tap transformers
31 shunt reactors
23 loads
# 18 network equivalents
12 voltage sources
2 filter banks (Radisson and Nicole? DC stations)
2 variable parameter lines mutually coupled, with variable
length and adjustable series capacitors and varistors.

*
*
*

The one-line diagram of the simulated Hydro-Qutbec system is

shown in Figure 1.Note that the studied lines (total of 13)represent
the lines on which the protection systems were evaluated.

NETWORK EQUIVALENTS (13)

CONSTANT IMPEDANCE AND

MOTORLOAD

&

. . .7

~~~

LEGEND

CHU7

CONSTANT IMPEDANCE LOAD

FILTERS (2)
DOUBLE CIRCUIT LINE
STUDIED LINES (TOTAL OF 13)
RECORDED LINES (TOTAL OF 7
735 KV BUS

~~

Figure 1. One-line diagram of the simulated Hydro-QuEbec network

MTG7

ARN7

1802
The recorded lines (total of 7) are those for which tests were performed, but without the relays being evaluated. This was done to
record voltage and current waveforms which could be replayed for
additional testing in the future.
The network simulation included transformer saturation, mutual
coupling between lines, varistor models, spark gap and bypass
breaker models, line breakers, and other system components. Lines
were represented by IT sections,approximatelyone for every 50 km.
The voltage signals were measured on the bus side of the series capacitor banks, as will be the case in the real network.

4 different type of faults :3GG, L-G,L-L and L-L-G. The fault

impedancewas close to 0 ohms. Typically, 4 intemal fault positions
were used: beginning of the line (0 km), at 25 km from the series
capacitor bank on the protected line, and directly on both sides of
the series capacitor bank. Intemal faults were applied first without
gap flashing and then using two different gap operation times :5.0
and 16.67ms. Gap flashingwas allowed only for faults at 25 km and
directly at the series capacitor bank.

Extemal faults had a duration of 20 cycles and the fault was eliminated by the fault breaker, without line opening. These tests also
comprised 50 switching operations and the same 4 types of fault.
The simulated network was validated using EMTP for the frequen- The fault impedance was again close to 0 ohms. Typically, 10 to 20
cy responses and fault currents. All networkequivalents,forvoltage different fault positionswereused for every line studied. Gap flashlevels below 315 kV, were validated up to 450 Hz. Load flows ob- ing for extemal faults was addressed in the same manner as for intained on the simulator were regularlyvalidated against numerical temal faults.
load flows to ensure a precision greater than 1% for the voltage
amplitudesand 1degree for the voltage angles. More than 70 mea- Specific and pammetric tests
surement points were monitored daily to validate the network.
These tests were performed mainly on one line which proved to
Relay testing procedure
be particularlyproblematical for the studied relays during the basic
tests. This line was the Abitibi - La Vkrendiye series compensated
Since 8 different line protection systems were tested simultaneous- line (see ABI7-LvD7 in Figure 1).The following tests were perly, open-loop testing was performed. The relays were connected to formed using the latter as the protected line :
the simulator, one at each end of the protected line, using high fidelity current and voltage power amplifiers.For every switching op- SDecific tests :
eration, an automaticprocedure compared the waveforms seen by
the relays with those measured on the simulator to detect any malLine switching without faults
function or unacceptableperformance of the amplifiers.No signifiLine switching onto load
cant problem was encountered regarding this aspect.
Series capacitor bank switching
To test the relays, a variable parameter line model (VPLM) was
Line switching onto faults
used. Thisline was composed of an increased number of IT sections,
one for every 12.5km, thus giving a frequency response valid up to
Shunt inductance switching
2OOO Hz in positive sequence for lines averaging 250 km. The
Power transformer energization
VPLM was composed of a double circuit mutually coupled line,
Gap firing for extemal faults
with variable series compensation. Gap models were triggered on
apre-defined time basis and not from an on-line measurement sysFaults on parallel line with delayed breaker opening,
tem; the reason being that the varistor energy levels for gap triggerincluding current reversals
ing were not known at that time. Telecommunication between the
Evolving faults
relays was simulated through a direct link with a rise time delay of
25 ms and a drop-out time delay of 100 ms.
Fault clearing
Faults with system frequency at 58.5 and 61.5 Hz
A fully automatictesting procedure allowed the execution of a wide
range of tests and statistical analysis. The test control program
Effect of a sudden increase in the load current
made it possible to automatically vary the fault position, the network configuration, inception angle, fault type, gap triggering time, Parametric tests :
fault duration, and other sequenceparameters. It automaticallyrecorded and stored in the result data base (see RDB in the DataproI) Intemal and extemal faults at every 25 km with gap flashing
cessing section) all waveforms and relay signals corresponding to
at 10 and 25 ms
worst case operations. Afterwards, it was always possible to repeat
I)
Increase
of series compensation from 30 % to 70 %
the problematic tests with exactly the same conditions for fine tun# Reductionof the short-circuit level using different network
ing of the settings and in depth study of the relay behavior.
configurations and resistive faults of 10 SZ
Tests description
This protection study was divided into 2 parts. First, basic tests were The last 2parametric tests (increase of series compensation and reperformed on 13 carefully selected lines of the 735 kV Hydro- duction of the short-circuit level) were also conducted on the MonQukbec 1993network, winter configuration (Figure 1).The second tagnuis - Amaud 735 kV line (see MTG7-ARN7 in Figure 1). In
part comprised specific andparametric tests [22] on the same net- addition, tests were conducted with resistivefaults of 75 SZ in order
to evaluate the sensitivity limit of each protection scheme. These
work with some variation in configuration.
results are not included in the paper.
Basic tests
Using the digital playback system and the waveform data base
Intemal faults had a duration of 20 cycles, with the opening of the created during this study (see WDB in the following section), the
line between the 18th and 19th cycles. Since 8 line protection sys- impact of measuring elements such as capacitive voltage transtems were tested simultaneously, the trip commands from the re- formers was also evaluated for the selected relays [23,24,25]. This
lays were not used to open the line breakers, but were all recorded. is part of the second phase of the study, which ended in 1992.The
For every fault position, 50 tests were repeated for different values corresponding test descriptions and results are not presented in
of the initial point-on-wave from Oo to 360' in steps of 7.2' for this paper.

1803

Data processing
A total of 128 recording channels were used during the full duration of this study. The sampling rate was 5000 samples per second
per channel and the acquisition period was 500 ms. On-line data
processing and statistical analysis software performed the following calculations :
Protection system results

AI (kA)

I) Relay operating times, per phase, for each switchingoperation

I) Number of operations in a defined time window : 0-4
cycles, 0-18 cycles, and during fault clearing
I) Statisticaldistribution of relay operating times :standard
deviation, minimum, maximum, and mean values
I) Transient-state impedance trajectory (see Figure 2)
I) Impedance trajectory in the (AI) vs (AV) plane for superimposed directional relay (example shown in Figure 3)
Network results

Line voltages and currents : peak and rms values

Voltage across and current through the capacitor bank varistors
Fault voltages and currents : peak and rms values
SteadY-state
line impedance as Seen by the
Zero crossing time delay of line current during fault
Rate of
and
energylevel in the
protecting the capacitor banks
The current and voltage waveforms, as well as relay signals, were
all recorded on optical disks in accordance with predefined criteria. For intemal faults, for example, only the waveforms and relay
signals corresponding to the fault switchingfor which the relayoperating time was maximum were saved. For extemal faults,the criteria was based on the minimum operating time of the relays.

change

vaGstors

tots;

series compensated line

Montagnais

Montagnais

' I U

-400

-200

250

AV (kv)
Figure 3. Fault trajectory in the (AI) YS (AV) plane
for superimposed directional relay
Immediately following each test, the acquired data was processed
to decide if any of the chosen criteria were met. If so, the voltage
and current waveforms, the relay signals along with the calculated
results were stored. This selectivityensured that only critical cases
were kept for further analysis.These selected cases were automatically documented and stored in a result data base (RDB), which
allowed for easy access and display.
During this study, another goal was to create a waveform data base
(WDB) for series compensated networks. Consequently, all voltage and current waveforms were recorded on optical disks for all
network disturbances performed. For every test, 15 signals were
stored in the WDB :the fault application time signal, and the current and voltage waveforms at both ends of the line, including the
neutral currents. A total of 115 000 network disturbances were recorded on 20 different 735 kV lines of the simulated HydroQuCbec network.
The RDB and WDB represent a total of 40 Gbytes of valuable information stored on optical disks. Of this 40 Gbytes, 17 Gbytes are
used for the voltage and current waveforms of the WDB and the
remaining 23 Gbytes contain the processed data, selected waveforms, and relay signals of the RDB.

$ . I

FUNCTIONAL TEST RESULTS

Published results of relay performance under transient conditions
for series compensated lines are scarce and cover only a limited
number of network disturbances and relay types [3,4].

The functional tests results presented in this paper cover the 8 preselected high performance line protection systems analyzed during
the study. The tabulated cases do not take into account the tests
performed in order to fine-tune the relay settings and study in
depth specific cases of relay malfunctions or particular behavior.
Evaluation of the 735 kV line protection systemswas based on Hydro-QuCbec's new design criteria which can be summarized as follows :

50

R (ohms)--,

100

Figure 2. Transient-state fault impedance trajectory

I) The two main criteria for protection systems are always&pendability and security. For Hydro-QuCbec,due to its network topology, securitv is the most critical design factor.

1804
I) Maximum fault clearance time is typically 5 cycles for the
line end near the fault and 6 cycles for the far end. For lines
near the generating stations, a maximum of 4 cycles is allowed to clear the end near the station if a heavy close-in
fault should occur during periods of peak load.
r) Phase selectivityis needed for reclosingpurposes only. All
tripping initiated by the line protection relays will be threephase, and a reclosing order will be transmitted to the line
breakers only when a single-phase fault is detected.
With respect to the analysis regarding the dependability of relay
performance, it is important to note that phase selectivitywas not
considered, and that only relav omrati~lgtimes under 4 cvcles
were tabulated as correct operation.

Basic test results

The basic test results are presented in Table III at the end of the
paper and are summarized in Figures 4 and 5.
Of the 59 800 intemal and atemal faults peqonned overall, only 2
line protectionsystems achieved a pegonnance of 100 %for both dependability and security :
r) PC
: Segregated phase comparison
r) CD2 : Current differential
Two other lineprotectionsystems exhibited a perfomance higher than
99.0 %for both dependability and security :
r) SD1 and SD2 : Superimposed directional
Specific and parametric test results
These test results are presented in Table IV also at the end of the
paper and are summarized in Figures 6 and 7. As the results demonstrate, these tests were more severe.
Of the 24 230 casesperforrmed ovemll, only one lineprotectionsystem
achieved ape$ormance of 100 %for both dependability and security:
r) CD2 : Current differential
The second best pegonnance was 98.60 % for dependability and
99.92 % for security and was achieved by :
r) PC
: Segregated phase comparison

In third rank, two line protection systems exhibited a performance

higher than 95.0 %for both dependability and security :
r) SD1 and SD2 : Superimposed directional

Relay problems encountered during dynamic testing

Even with all the commissioningtests previously done, some additional problems were found during dynamic testing. These included :
I) Incorrect memory polarization percentage used
r) Incorrect synchronization with the network frequency
I) Incorrect or absence of fault indication on the relay display
Some relay malfunctions resulted in setting changes or relay hardwardsoftware modifications. Without detailing all of them, the
most significant ones are listed below :
r) Addition of filtering for the input circuits
r) Addition of directional elements
I) Software upgrade to correct design problems
r) Improvement of the memory voltage polarization
I) Modification of the detection and tripping logic
These modifications were done throughout the study when problems were encountered. Each time, a limited number of tests were
repeated to ensure that previously obtained results remained valid.

CONCLUSIONS
Relay performance
In order to draw conclusions regarding the test results, the focus
is placed on the relay protection principles and not on the discrepancies between the manufacturers. By combining Table III and
N,the final evaluation for the tested relay is obtained. These results, summarizedin Figures 8 and 9, give the global relay performance for the 84 030 cases performed. Refemng to these figures, the
following conclusion can be made:
Without taking into account telecommunication requirements or
other external constraints, the laboratorytest results show that the
two best protection principles to be applied on the Hydro-Qukbec
series eompensated network are :
Current differential
Based on CD2 results :
Dependability on 24 200 cases : 100.0 %
Security on 59 830 cases
: 100.0 %
r) Segregated phase comparison
Based on PC results :
Dependability on 24 200 cases
Security on 59 830 cases

: 99.30 %
: 99.96 %

Commissioning
With regard to the relay commissioningaspects,the main concem
is the qGality and availability of the documentation.Complete documentation is essential in order to successfullyperform calculation
and implementationof relay settings, logic checking, characteristic
validation, and relay troubleshooting.
Another important area of concern is the correction of problems
and implementationof new developments for microprocessorbased
d a y s through new softwm versions. This gives rise to new concerns
regarding relay validation before field operation. It is the authors'
opinion that comprehensive testing will be needed before a relay software venion is changed in the field.
Manufacturing quality
Regarding the relay manufacturing quality, four major observations are made. First, the hardware ranges from good to excellent.
Second, troubleshooting facilities are not always available for the
user. Third, it is still possible to have defective components even
if the relay has been through the manufacturer's quality control.
Finally,the documentation is not always complete or easy to obtain
from the manufacturers.
General conclusion
Real time power system simulation proved to be an efficient technique to evaluate protection relay performance. The importance
of performing a great number of tests is demonstrated by the test
results presented in Tables I11 and IV. In many instances, problems
with dependability and security of the relays occurred in only a
small percentage of cases for each type of test performed. As aconsequence, if the scope of the study and the number of tests performed had been reduced, many or even most of the problems encountered might well have been missed. It should be pointed out
that the relays being tested in this study were all recommended by
the manufacturers as their best protection systems for the HydroQuCbec series compensated network.
Finally, a waveform data base (WDB) containing 115 000 network
disturbanceswas created.'This WDB, in conjunction with a digital
playback system, has already proved to be very useful in evaluating
the impact of instrument transformers, relay modifications, software upgrades, and new relays on the market.

1805

BIOGRAPHIES
Charles Gapnon was born in Montreal, Canada and graduated in
electrical engineering (B.Sc.) from Sherbrooke University. In 1985,
he joined the Research Institute of Hydro-Qutbec (IREQ) as a research engineer in the Network Analysis Software Department
where he performed software development mainly for short-circuit calculation,power line fault probability, and harmonic analysis
programs. In 1987,he worked for BBC in the Power System Protection Department. In 1988, he returned to IREQ in the Network
Simulation Department to perform network and protection studies. From 1989to 1990,he was responsible for network simulation
and relay performance tests for the evaluation of protection systems for the Hydro-Qutbec series compensated network. Since
1990, he has been responsible for the AC & DC Network Study
Group in the Network Simulation Department.
Pierre Gravel was born in Thetford Mines, Canada in 1948.He received his technician degree from Institut de Technologiede TroisRivikres in 1968. From 1968 to 1971, he worked with Northern
Electric on communication hardware. Since then, he has worked
with Hydro-Qutbec on validation and approval of protection systems. From 1989 to 1992, he was responsible for the technical aspects of the protection systems under test for the Hydro-Qutbec
series compensated network.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT
This study was made possible through a strong team effort. The
authors gratefully acknowledge the contributions of Gilbert Sybille, Jean Lemay, and Jean-Claude Soumagne from the Network
Simulation Department (IREQ) and Clermont Gagnon, JeanPierre Benoit, Jean-Louis Rousseau, Rent Lord, and the late Raymond Reed from the Protection Department (Hydro-Qutbec).

REFERENCES
[ 11 L. Champagne, J.-P Benoit, Protection of Hydro-Qutbecs
Series Compensated Lines, CEA Conference, May 1991.

[9] Electromagnetic Transient Program (EMTP) Rule Book,

EPRI EL-64214, Vol. 1,2, Research Project 2149-4, June 1989.
[lo] F! Bornard, P. Erhard, P. Fauquembergue, MORGAT : A
Data Processing Program for Testing Transmission Line Protective
Relays, IEEE lh Power Delivery, Vol. 3, No. 4, October 1988,
pp. 1419-1426.
[ll] M. Kezunovic, et. al., DYNA-TEST Simulator for Relay
Testing Part I : Design Characteristics, IEEE Trans.Power Delivery, Vol. 6, No. 4, October 1991, pp. 1423-1429.
[12] M.A. Redfern, R.K. Aggarwal, A.H. Husseini, A Personal
Computer Based System for the Laboratory Evaluation of High
Performance Power System Protection Relays,ZEEE Tram. Power
Delivery, Vol. 6, No. 4, October 1991, pp. 1402-1408.
[13] J. Esztergalyos,J. Nordstrom, T.H. Short, IC Martin, Digital
Model Power System,IEEE ComputerApplications in Power, Vol.
3, NO.3, July 1990, pp. 19-24.
[14] M. Koulischer, et. al., A Comprehensive Hardware and Software Environment for Development of Digital Protection Relays,
Intl. Conference on Power System Protection, Singapore, 1989.
[15] M.E. Carr, G.J. Barrow, K.P. Wong, A Computer Controlled
Protection Test System,Journal of Electrical and Electronic Engineering, ZE & IREE, Australia, Vol. 7, No. 3, September 1987, pp.
178-183.
[16]M. Kezunovic,et. al., Transients Computation for RelayTesting in Real Time, IEEE Conference, Paper No. 93 SM 383-0
PWRD, Vancouver, 18-22 July 1993.
[17]P.G. McLaren, R. Kuffel, R. Wierckx, J. Giesbrecht, L. Arendt,
A Real Time Digital Simulator for Testing Relays, IEEE Pans.
Power Delivery, Vol. 7, No. 1,January 1992, pp. 207-213.
[18] G.E. Alexander, J.G. Andrichak, S.B. Wilkinson, Analog vs
Digital Modeling of Power Systems,Western Protective Relay Conference, October 1989.

[2] R.J. Marttila, Performance of Distance Relay Mho Elements

on MOV-Protected Series-Compensated Transmission Lines,
IEEE Trans. PowerDelivety, Vol. 7, No. 3, July 1992,pp. 1167-1177.

[19]G. Nimmersjo,B. Hillstrom, 0.Werner-Ericlisen, G.D. Rockefeller, A Digitally-Controlled, Real Time Analog Power System
Simulator for Closed Loop Protective Relaying Testing, ZEEE
Emis. Power Delivery, Vol. 3, No. 1, January 1988, pp. 138-152.

[3] A. Newbould, I.A. Taylor, Series Compensated Line Protection :System Modelling &Relay Testing,IEE Conference Publication on Developments in Power System Protection, No. 302, Edinburgh, 11-13 April 1989, pp. 182-186.

[20] J.L. Carel, M. Souillard, G. Borgonovo,E

! Lionetto, High
Speed Line Protection Performance Investigatedby Transient Network Analyser, CIGRE, Report 34-10, 1984.

[4] R.G. Coney, G.H. Topham, M.G. Fawkes, Experience and

Problems with the Protection of Series Compensated Lines, IEE

Conference Publication on Developments in Power System Protection, No. 302, Edinburgh, 11-13 April 1989, pp. 177-181.
[5] G.E. Alexander, J.G. Andrichak, S.D. Rowe, S.B. Wilkinson,
Series Compensated Line Protection : A Practical Evaluation,
Western Protective Relay Conference, October 1988.

[6]A. Tureli, S. Carneiro, S.S. Hazan, A.M. da Silva, Comparison

of Protection Schemes Applied to Series Compensated Long
Lines,IEE ConferencePublication on Developments in Power System Protection, London, 10-12 June 1980, pp. 221-225.
[7] M.M. Elkated, W.J. Cheetham, Problems in the Protection of
Series Compensated Lines, IEE Conference Publication on Developments in Power Systeni Protection, No. 185, 1980, pp. 215-220.
[8] J. Berdy, Protection of Circuits with Series Capacitors,AIEE
Tlnnsuctions on PowerApyurutus and Systenis,Vol. 81, Pt 111,Febmary 1963, pp. 929-935.

[21]J. BClanger, L. Vaughan, Hydro-QuCbec Technology for the

Simulation of Very Large and Complex Transmission Systems,
8th CEPSI Conference, Singapore, 5-9 November 1990.
[22] CIGRE Report, Evaluation of Characteristics and Performance of Power System Protection Relays and Protective Systems,
CIGRE SC 34 W G 04, January 1986.
[23]M. Kezunovic, C.W. Fromen, S.L. Nilsson, Digital Models of
Coupling Capacitor Voltage Transformers for Protective Relay
Transient Studies,IEEE Trans. PowerDelivety,Vol. 7, No. 4, October 1992, pp. 1927-1935.
1241 J.R. Lucas, PG. McLaren, W.W.L. Keerthipala, R.P Jayasinghe, Improved Simulation Models for Current and Voltage
Transformers in Relay Studies, IEEE Puns. Power Delivery, Vol.
7, No. 1, January 1992, pp. 152-159.
[25] S.E. Zocholl, WC. Kotheimer, An Analytic Approach to the
Application of Current Transformers for Protective Relaying,
43th Anniial Geotgia Tech. Protective Relciy Conference,Atlanta. 3-5
May 1989.

1806

Table 111. Relay performance for the basic tests

See also Figures 4 and 5

Lines Studied

Criteria

L44MAN7-LEv7

Dependability
security

LA2MAN7-MIc7

Dependability
SecUrity

L39 CHU7-MTG7

Dependability
security

MTG7--7

Dependability
Security

LA1 MIC7-ARN7

Dependability
Security

L3 NEM7-ABI7

Dependability

L14ABI7-cHI7

Dependability
Security

L27 JAC7-CH07

Dependability
Security

(","','

1 I
I 1
1 93x3;: I

CD1
%

CD2
%

ZM1
%

ZM2

Dependability
Security

SD1
%

SD2
%

Number
ofcases

91.50
100.0

100.0
100.0

100.0
100.0

100.0
100.0

100.0
100.0

98.50
100.0

97.50
100.0

99.00
88.00

800
800

91.00
100.0

100.0
100.0

100.0
100.0

100.0
100.0

100.0
97.95

100.0
100.0

100.0
100.0

100.0
100.0

800
4200

100.0
100.0

85.00
100.0

100.0
100.0

96.00
98.73

94.00
96.00

95.88
99.86

100.0
100.0

1600
2200

I I

100.0
100.0

90.00
100.0

93.50
82.50

99.81
100.0

1 I
99.75
100.0

1600
2600

99.94
100.0

100.0
100.0

100.0
100.0

99.88

99.50

99.94
100.0

I I
99.69
100.0

1600
2400

99.94
100.0

100.0
100.0

83 19
100.0

88.44
99.70

100.0
100.0

I I
99.94
99.83

1600
3000

100.0
99.75

100.0
100.0

100.0
100.0

99.83
99.57

99.17
99.75

99.50
99.84

400
4600

I I

100.0
100.0

100.0
100.0

99.81
97.37

100.0
100.0

95.50
92.84

95.21
98.20

99.75
99.95

96.38
100.0

99.94
100.0

99.75
100.0

98.50
100.0

I 1
1 I
I I
98.94
100.0

80 46
.lOb.O
LMo7-ALB7

~~

Relay types evaluated

I I
100.0
100.0

100.0
100.0

1 1 1
99.38
91.04

100.0
100.0

I I I
100.0
100.0

100.0
100.0

I ii::1 I
92.69
98.80

I I 1
100.0
100.0

100.0
100.0

I I I
100.0
100.0

99.94
100.0

1::!i I 1
I I

I I
I I
99.88
99.95

1600
3 800

I I
99.92
99.93

2400
4400

I 1
99.00
100.0

1600
2 200

600
4 600

L13 NEM7-ALB7

Dependability
Security

GLOBAL

Dependability

EVALUATION

I ;I; I

1600
3000

600

100.0
100.0
100.0

5 200
90.24
100.0

100.0
100.0

97.72
98.11

96.95
97.82

99.35
99.96

99.76

17000

99.73

42 800

1807

Table n! Relay performance for the specific and parametric tests

See also Figures 6 and 7

Test description

Criteria

%
-

Security

55.00

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

80

Security

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

96.25

52.50

80

Series capacitor bank

switching

Security

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

800

Line switching
onto faults

Dependability
Security

88.06
100.0

98.89
100.0

360
480

100.0

100.0

180

100.0

100.0

150

96.52

100.0

100.0

100.0

94.13

88.91

99.57

95.22

460

99.38

100.0

100.0

100.0

99.90

97.50

100.0

99.38

960

78.60
98.40

99.20
100.0

67.20
99.10

100.0
100.0

90.50
89.40

77.10
93.00

76.00
96.00

93.60
95.20

1000
1000

98.82

170

99.69
99.48

640
960

99.53
98.44

640
960

99.41

510

PC

CD1

CD2

ZM2
%

SDI

Number
of cases

ZM1
%

Line switching
without faults
Line switching
onto load

ZH

SD2
%

%
I

Shunt inductance
switchine
Power transformer
energization

Security

Gap firing for

external faults

Security

Faults on parallel line

with delayed breaker
opening at one end

Security

Evolving faults

Dependability
Security

Fault clearing

Security

83.53

100.0

100.0

Faults with system

frequency at 58.5 Hz

Dependability
Security

100.0
97.81

100.0
100.0

81.88
99.27

Faults with system

frequency at 61.5 Hz

Dependability
Security

85.62
97.81

100.0
99.90

82.50
99.06

Sudden increase
in the load current

Security

100.0

100.0

100.0

Internal & external faults

at every 25 km with gap
flashing at 10 and 25 ms

Dependability
Security

100.0
99.11

100.0
100.0

1920
3 040

Increase of series
compensation
from 30 % to 70 %

Dependability
Security

83.75
97.65

93.12
99.56

960
2 720

Reduction of the shortcircuit level with different

network configurations
and resistive faults of 10 SZ

Dependability
Security

Security

100.0
100.0
100.0

GLOBAL
EVALUATION

Dependability
Security

I
85.40
99.16

t
89.38
96.81

98.60
99.92

81.02
99.46

100.0

98.82

93.12
96.25

90.94
87.71

99.53
99.06

1 1 I I :1 I
100.0
100.0

83.59
80.00

100.0

99.81
99.98

91.18

I I I I 1
I

90.59
99.36

92.97
94.58

100.0

I
I

100.0

I
I

100.0

I I I 1 I
I I I I 1
100.0
100.0

83.59
96.47

78.07
98.42

97.03
99.64

97.32
97.97

1680
4 480

100.0

88.70
95.51

85.71
97.46

95.84
99.40

97.58
96.77

7 200
17 030

100.0

1808
I
S D2

I
99.73 %

SD2

SD1

ZM2
ZM1
CD2
CD1
PC

ZH

90

92

94

96

98

lO%

100%

Figure 4. Dependability relay performance for the basic tests

Total of 17 000 cases

SD2

97.58 %

Figure 5. Security relay performance for the basic tests

Total of 42 800 cases

SD2

66.77%

ZM2
ZM1
CD2
CD1
PC

ZH

94

Figure 6. Dependability relay performance for the

specific and parametric tests
Total of 7 200 cases
I

I
98 67 %

S D2
I

7
Z M2 h

91.33%

95

96

97

98

0%

99

Figure 7. Security relay performance for the

specific and parametric tests
Total of 17 030 cases

SD1
ZM2

ZM3
CD2
CD1

ZH

80

85

90

95

Figure 8. Global dependability relay performance

Total of 24 200 cases

100%

99.96%

IJ

98.22 %

95

96

97

98

99

Figure 9. Global security relay performance

Total of 59 830 cases

100%

1809

DISCUSSION
WALTER L. HINMAN, RFL Electronics Inc., Boonton Twp, NJ:
The authors, and all those involved in this extensive study and report, are to be commended. This report serves a very useful purpose to the electric power industry. Several questions arise :
1. The relay systems with the best performance are PC (segregated phase comparison) and CD2 (one of the two currentdifferential schemes). CD2 out-performs the other current differential
scheme (CD1) by a wide margin with regard to dependability. Was
CD2 a segregated phase system and CD1 a composite quantity system?
2. If the answer to the previous question is yes, do the authors
believe that the main reason for the superiority of CD2 over CD1
is the possibilityof severe seriesphase impedanceunbalance on series compensated lines? (An example would be an internal
3-phase fault with unequal gap flashing causing significant circulating zero-sequence and negative-sequence currents creating restraint on composite quantity schemes).
3. If the answer to question 1is yes, was the ability of the CD2
scheme to correctly target all fault types considered significant?
If the CD2 schemedid not include a G (i.e., 3 IO) target, was this
considered a disadvantage?
4. The two highest rated systemsare current-only schemes, and are

not affected by voltage reversals on series compensated lines. Do

the authors believe that this is a significant factor (perhaps the
main factor) in their favorable rating?

5. The PC and both CD schemes inherently block during system

swings (i.e., out-of-step conditions). This would seem to be an important advantage. The report does not mention the testing of the
relays during simulated swings. Is this considered for future testing?
6. The parametric tests included resistive ground faults as high as
75 ohms. Some protective systems are claimed to operateup to 300
ohms (or higher) primary ground fault resistance. Will ground
faultswith resistance higher than 75 ohms be considered for future
testing?
7. The PC system is described as segregated phase comparison. It is assumed that this system incorporates offset keying to
take care of internal faults with out-feed. During tests with high
out-feed (for example, resistive ground faults near a strong terminal with heavy through load), was it found necessary to use a high
level of offset? To retain good sensitivityunder equal infeed conditions, was it nepsary to use different offset levels at both relays?
8. The first paragraph at the top of page 6 of the paper refers to
maximum fault clearing times of 5 cycles and, for heavy close-in
faults, 4 cycles. It is assumed that this includes breaker time as well
as relay time. The paper then says: relay operating times under
4 cycles were tabulated as correct operations. Even if one-cycle
breakers were simulated, this would give clearing times of 5 cycles,
which does not meet the 4 cycle requirement. Would the authors
clarify this? Also, doesnt 4 cycles seem slow for acceptable pilot
relay times? Shouldnt a scheme that provides relay times of 1-2
cycles be given some rating credit over one that has trip times of
3-4 cycles?
9. Continuing on the subject of operating speed, the paper (page
4) says: telecommunicationsbetween the relays was simulated
through a direct link with a rise time delay of 25 ms and a dropout
delay of 100 ms. Does this mean that any permissive trip scheme
had to have a local relay time of 2 1/2 cycles, or less, so that when
the channel time of 25 ms (1 1/2 cycles) is added, the total time is
4 cvcles, or less?

10. When the phase comparison (PC) and current differential

schemes (CD1 and CD2) were evaluated, was a channel delay of
fixed 25 ms assumed? For the PC scheme, was the shift from space
to mark 25 ms and the shift from mark to space also 25 ms?

11. Reviewing Table IV and Figures 4 through 9, it is seen that one

system, namely CDY, has a perfect (100.0) score. Some people
believe that per-phase current differential schemes (such as CD2)
have theoretical advantages over other pilot protection systems,
particularly on series compensated lines. The results of this study
seem to support this belief. However, these advantages are often
considered to be theoretical only, because of communications- related problems that may occur in the real world. These problems
may include:
Large throughput required. (Especiallylarge throughput required if all phases and ground are compared separately).
Precisechannel delay measurement and compensation
required. This challenge becomes even more difficult
whenever the outgoing and return delays may be different, making round trip delay measurements inexact.
In the abstract of the paper, the authors have said that the analysis
does not take into account telecommunications requirements
-. Do the authors plan communications testing to complement
the relay testing reported in this paper? Since the directional
comparison schemes (W,ZMl,ZM2, SD1 and SD2) place less
stringent demands on the communications channel than do the
phase comparison and current differentialschemes,when communications testing is included,the overall results may indicate a closer horse race than do the results of this report, by itself. Would
the authors care to present their opinion on this?

M.G. ADAMIAK and G.E. ALEXANDER, GE Protection and

Control, Malvern, PA :
The authors are to be congratulated for developing a comprehensive plan for testing line protection schemes. As the authors stated,
a large number of test cases are required to ensure that the evaluation will provide meaningful results.
The authors indicate that the relay trip circuits were not used to
remove the faults, but the faults all had a 20 cycle duration. This
mode of operation essentially transforms the model power system
into a playback system as no interaction between the relays and
the power system is permitted. Consider a high resistance fault
near one line end. A distance type relay at the remote terminal
may not see this fault until the breaker closest to the fault opens.
The simulation technique used by Hydro-Qukbec does not allow
such sequential operation of the line protection. Also, the high resistance faults, especially those producing sequential breaker operation, may result in trip times longer than the 4 cycle limit chosen
by the authors. It is unlikely that slow clearing of these low current
faults could affect the system stability. Could the authors indicate
if extending the window for correct trips would improve the dependability of the protections?
The series capacitor protective gap circuit should be modeled in
the simulation to provide the relay systems with the correct currents and voltages. The use of a simple time delay to flash the
gaps may not be appropriate for the high performance protection
schemes that were being tested. Similarly,to restrict gap operation
to those faults at 0 and 25% of the line may not be correct. Even
though the steady state fault current indicate that the gaps will not
operate, in actuality, the low frequency transients on the system
may cause the capacitor protection to operate.

1810

The authors choice of a 25 ms channel seems to be inconsistent

with the use of high performance protection. Will the relays actually be applied with such slow channels,or will typical high speed
channels be used? If high speed relaying channels were used in
the testing, would the ranking be affected? The authors indicate
that telecommunicationsrequirementswere not taken into consideration in the testing of the phase comparison and current differential systems. Were the phase comparison and current differential
systems communicating over channels of similar speed and quality
as the distance and directional relay schemes? The security and
dependabilityof current only schemes such as the phase comparison and currentdifferentialsystems are highly dependent upon the
channel performance. For example, a phase comparison system
that employs an AM channel in the blocking mode will suffer reduced security when the channel is attenuated during external
faults. Similarly,a tripping scheme may have reduced dependability due to channel problems during intemal faults. Will HydroQu6bec initiate a similar evaluation program that includes the
relay channel performance?
The authors stated that the network simulation included transformer saturation. Did it also include CT saturation? If it was included, did the authors consider cross-bus faultssimilar to those
shown in Figure 1. In this case, even though the fault current in
the line is low, the current in each CT at Station B can be very large.
For thesefaults,if one of the CTs at Bsaturates,the phase comparison and current differentialsystems may see a large operating signal for an extemal fault.

0
Figure 1. Differentially protected line

CHARLES GAGNON, IREQ, Institut de recherche dHydroQukbec, Varennes, Canada, and PIERRE GRAVEL, HydroQukbec, Montrkal, Canada :
The authors would like to thank Messrs.Hinman, Adamiak and
Alexander for the interest they have shown in the paper and for
their insightful comments and questions which have surely contributed to the enhancement of the paper.

Theauthon willjirstaddress the questionsmised by M EWdterL. Hinman :

1.Indeed, CD2 was a segregated phase system and CD 1was a composite quantity system.

2. Within the test program performed, it was observed that asymmetrical faults near the series capacitorline side,without gap flashing, caused serious lackof dependability for the compositequantity
system CD1. Cases of severe series phase impedance unbalance,
for security performance evaluation, such as gap misfiring on one
phase of the protected line during external faults, were also performed. Table IV presents the corresponding results under Gap
firingfor extemal faults. Neither the CD 1nor the CD2system had
problems for the simulated cases.To sum up, the superiority of the
CD2 system over the composite quantity system CD1 is due to a
number of reasons, which are not related to cases of severe series
phase impedance unbalance. For example, casesof evolving faults
and asymmetricalfaults near the series capacitor line side, without
gap flashing, proved to be most problematical to the CD1 system
(seeTable III and IV for more details).
3. On its 735 kV system, Hydro-Qu6bec allows only three-pole
tripping and reclosing. However, reclosing is permitted only for
single-phm faults. Consequently, relay phase selectivityis a very
important aspect for Hydro-Qu6bec Regarding phase selectivity,
the CD2system exhibitedexcellentbehavior. The fact that forphase-to-ground and phase-phase-to-ground faults, the CD2 system
did not include a ground target, was not considered a disadvantage
for Hydro-Qu6bec
4. It was indeed observed that the two highest rated systems,based
on the laboratory test results presented in this paper, are current
only schemes.It is a fact that these systems are not affected byvoltage reversals, subsynchronous resonances appearing on the voltage waveforms and also capacitive voltage transformer response.
These are certainly significant factors which contribute to their favorable rating. However, it shouldbe noted that the superimposed
directional schemes (SO),which use voltages and currents, also
performed quite effectively as shown in figures 4 to 9.

5. It should be noted that impedance schemeswere selected as time

delayed backup protection. These systems along with the lwaprimary protection systems selected,are planned to be tested forpower swings on the IREQ power system simulator,during the current
year. The inherent blocking of the PC and both CD schemes during power swings is indeed an important advantage for HydroQu6bec
6. High resistance ground faults are not foreseen for the HydroQu6bec power system and therefore, were not included in the testing. Howver, for other power systems which have the possibility
of high resistance ground faults, these tests would have to be performed. During the Hydro-Qu6bec study, ground faultswith resistance of 75ohms were performed only as a performance limit indication. Note that these tests were not tabulated in Table I11and W.
7. For cases with high out-feed, seen more particularly with series
compensation levels increased to 70 %, it was indeed necessary to
use different levels of offset at both relays in order to obtain good
dependability.
8. For heavy close-in faults requiring a maximum clearing time of
4 cycles, it is important to mention that overcurrent relays were
also tested during the course of the study. These are intended to
be added on lines near the generating stations. Typical operating
times of the tested overcurrent relays are 1to 1.5 cycles allowing
clearing times below 4 cycles. With respect to relay operating
speed, the 4 cycle criteria was chosen as a guideline,but in fact the
average operating time of each relay was the key element in the
analysis. Also, operating times of 4 cycles can seem slow for pilot
relays, but it is important to note that the telecommunication total
rise time delay simulated was very long (25 ms) and corresponds
to the longest possible delay on the Hydro-QuCbec telecommunication network including the tone units. Relay operating speed is

1811
an important point, but for Hydro-Qukbecs needs, Security is the
key factor. For equal security performance, the fastest relays have
indeed received some rating credit in the final analysis.

9. Yes,to obtain a relay operating speed of 4 cycles at the remote

end, the local relay time had to be less than 2.5 cycles considering
the 25 ms telecommunication delay simulated during the study.
10. No telecommunication delayswere assumed for the phase comparison (PC) and current differentialschemes(CD1, CD2). It is important to note that the 25 ms rise time delay is largely attributed
to Hydro-Qukbecs use of very secure tone units (typically 15-20
ms). These tone units are designed more for security than for
speed, and because of this, they require a minimum impulseduration to recognize the permissive signal as valid. Added to this 15-20
ms, the longest transmission loop represents another few ms.
Since the PC and CD schemes include their own telecommunication equipment and would use direct links on Hydro-Quebecs
telecommunication network, the maximum transmission delaycan
thereforebe neglected. It is important to note that neither PC nor
CD schemes can be connected to a looped link. Indeed, this would
entail an inordinate risk of reliability loss for the PC relays when
one of the microwave links in the looped circuit changed paths. In
addition, connecting the CD relays to a looped link would rapidly
overload Hydro-Qukbecs microwave telecommunication network [l]. It should be kept in mind that the objective of the study
was to evaluate the performance of the selected line protection systems on Hvdro-Ouebecs network. Therefore,characteristicsof its
telecommunication network and protection philosophy had to be
taken into account in the evaluation.
11.Indeed, communications testing for the CD2 scheme was performed and published separately. Reference [26] describesthe test
program conducted to validate the reliabilityof the entiretelecommunication set-up. The final choice for Hydro-Qukbec series
compensatedline protection systemstook into account the laboratory test results presented in this paper, along with the telecommunication requirements and other external constraints presented in
[l]. As stated in this reference, based solely on the simulation results, the CD2 and PC relays provided the best performance and
would be Hydro-Quebecs choice for primary protection. However, the telecommunications constraints ruled out this type of
scheme. Hydro-Qu6bec opted for the CD2 and SD1 relays as the
two primary protective systems. The CD2 relay will be connected
to the direct microwave link, whereas the SD1 will be connected
to the looped link. Considering that these two primary protection
systems are entirely dependent upon telecommunication links,
Hydro-Qukbec decided to add time delayed backup protection.
That backup will be provided by using one of the distance relays
with memory polarization (ZMl,ZM2) which were tested on the
real-time power system simulator. See reference [l] for more details.
The authors will now address the questions raised by Messrs. M.G.
Adamiak and G.E.Alexander :
The authorsare pleased to note that the discussers share their view
point regarding the number of test cases to be run in order to obtain meaningful results for protection relay evaluation.
The discussershave made some comments on the open-loop technique used for testing the relays. Although the power system simulator does allow for the relay trip signals to open the faulted line,
this function was not used since the objective was to test the eight
preselected line protection systems Simultaneously. Closed-loop
testing for every line protection relay evaluated would certainly
have been desirable, but was considered to be impractical for the
objective and scope of our study.

On the subject of sequentialtrippingfor high resistance faults near

one line end, it is important to note that with the protection
schemes used by Hydro-Qukbec, these sequential operations are
impossible. Indeed, the permissive overreach schemes (without
any instantaneous first zone), the current differential relays, the
phase comparison relays and the superimposed directional relays
(without instantaneous elements) cannot operate sequentially. Finally, extending the window for correct trip,using the same
open-loop technique,would probably not improve the general dependability of the tested line protection systems.
Regardinggap operation on a predefined time criteria, the authors
believe it is a sound evaluation technique based on a parametric
approach. Worst relay performances were obtained in cases without any gap operation. In general, gap operation during the transient state of the fault improved relay performances. During the
course of thisstudy, two different typical gap operating times were
used (5.0 and 16.67 ms) for internal fault positions near the series
capacitorbank. It should be pointed out that Hydro-Quebecs design criteria assume the following rules : absolutely no gap operation permitted for external faults,possible gap operation for internal faults. A detailed study was performed on the IREQ real-time
power system simulator to evaluate the energy constraints for internal and external faults for Hydro-Qukbec series compensated
network. The simulated faults had a duration of 6-7 cycles, followed by a single pole breaker failure for an additional 10 cycle duration. The study results showed that gap operation for internal
faults at 0 and 25 % of the line from the uncompensated end was
never seen and thus considered highly improbable. Furthermore,
the energy dissipation levels of the ZnO varistors take into account, in addition to the normal security margin, provisions for the
future Hydro-Quebecsystem. Moreover, the objectiveof the study
was also to find a line protection system which would be as insensitive as possible to network parameter changes and ga_ D.
Such a line protection system should therefore be easy to set, dependable, and above all, very secure given Hydro-Qukbecs network topology.
The d i m e r s questions relating to telecommunications are addressed in the response to questions 10 and 11of the previous discussion by Mr. Hinman. On the subject of high speed relaying
channels, the use of such channels would not have changed the
overall ranking of the tested line protection systems. However,
performance for the impedance and superimposed directional relays would have been improved with regard to relay operating
speed.
Finally, regarding current transformer (CT) saturation, this was
not a concern to Hydro-Qukbec owing to the speufications of the
electricalcharacteristicsof the CTs installed on the 735 kV system.

The authors wish to close this discussion by thanking Mz Jean-Piem

Benoit who contributedgreatly to thisdiscusSin throughmuch crpprciated technicalerchangesonthesubject. Mz Benoit is with the Protection Department ofHydro-Quibec and was responsiblefor the analysis of the simulator test mults for sacral of the relays.

REFERENCES
[XI A. Sauve, M. Le-Quang, A. Lavallte, Testingof Series-Compensated Line Protection System with Telecommunications,CEA
Conference, April 1992.
Manuscript received May 2, 1994.