You are on page 1of 10

APS | 2014

Test and Analysis of Protection Behaviour on Parallel Lines


with Mutual Coupling

Christopher Pritchard | OMICRON electronics GmbH


christopher.pritchard@omicron.at

Thomas Hensler | OMICRON electronics GmbH


thomas.hensler@omicron.at

1 Abstract
Most of the overhead lines within our transport networks are operated as double lines. During the
operation of these parallel lines, the electromagnetic coupling (mutual coupling) between the different
systems has a considerable impact on the fault impedances measured for single-phase faults. Using
new test software RelaySimTest, it is possible to investigate this impact for the different fault scenarios
with a transient network simulation and to analyse the behaviour of protection devices. In addition,
different possibilities and setting values to cope with mutual coupling within protection devices are
presented and compared. Finally, real line configurations with mutual coupling are investigated and
concepts for protection designs with good selectivity are discussed.

2 Introduction
Many overhead lines within our transport networks are operated with two, or even more, 3-phase
systems. Between parallel lines, both an electromagnetic (mutual) coupling within the same 3-phase
system and between two different 3-phase systems exists. Therefore, a current flow within one line
causes a voltage drop induced in the other lines. As explained in detail in [4], this effect can be described
using mutual coupling impedances. These coupling impedances, in the same way as zero sequence
impedances, can either be calculated in theory or determined with a measurement, as depicted in [5]
and [6].
For the following investigations of the protection behaviour on parallel lines with mutual coupling, it is
assumed that the lines are fully transposed and symmetrical, so that a discussion using symmetrical
components is possible. For the coupling impedances, simply average values from the individual
coupling impedances per line are used. The mutual coupling effect can then only be seen in the zero
sequence system, which is only for single phase to ground faults or faults with ground involved. This
simplification is also used within most of the protection devices, both for distance protection elements
and for fault location functions, and provides sufficient accuracy for practical purposes.

3 Model of a Parallel Line


To get a basic understanding of the impact of mutual coupling on parallel lines, first a simple model of a
simple parallel line should be considered.
For a simple single-phase fault, the fault loop for this LN-fault should be investigated. The voltage
measured at the relay location can be calculated as follows:

= + +

The neutral current is the same as the current within the faulty phase:

= = 3 0

1
APS | 2014

The current in the parallel line is INP and causes an additional voltage drop due to the mutual coupling.
As described in [3], the impedances within the zero sequence system or the grounding factor are defined
as follows:

0 = + 3
1 =
0 1
= =
1 31

For the mutual coupling through the parallel line, in a similar way the mutual coupling impedance or a
mutual coupling factor can be defined as follows:

0 = 3
0
= =
1 31

Then the voltage measured at the relay location is as follows:

= (1 + ) +

The impact of the mutual coupling on the impedance measured is determined by the last term. The
magnitude of this value depends on the mutual coupling impedance (or the mutual coupling factor) and
on the magnitude of the neutral current in the parallel line. However, the direction of the neutral current
in the parallel line is also very important. This direction determines whether the voltage measured is
higher or lower than the voltage without considering the mutual coupling.
The calculation of the fault currents IL and INP can be done using a network model which, taking into
consideration the different topologies, in-feed situations and fault scenarios, determines the transient
values of the voltages and currents.

4 Use Cases for Parallel Lines


For the following analysis of the protection behaviour on parallel lines, the different use cases have to
be distinguished. Therefore, both the topology of the parallel line and the different operating states have
to be considered.
For parallel lines the following topologies can be distinguished roughly as:
Parallel lines with common buses on both ends
Parallel lines with a common bus only on one end
Parallel lines without any common bus
Parallel line segments with tap lines
Parallel lines on different voltage levels

The different operating states of the parallel lines are also relevant for the behaviour of the protection
devices, whereby the following states have to be considered:
Parallel line in operation
Parallel line out of service and grounded

5 Requirements for Distance Protection


There are new requirements for protection devices on parallel lines due to the mutual coupling. The
effects of the mutual coupling should be considered both for the trip behaviour of distance elements and
for the fault locator.

2
APS | 2014

The following fault scenarios must be handled by the protection devices:


Correct tripping for faults on the own line
Correct behaviour for faults on the parallel line
Correct tripping and identification of the fault type for double faults and cross-country faults

The different zones in distance relays for line protection are mostly set with a time grading as shown in
Fig. 1. The reach of Z1 must be within the length of the own line. Additional zones, such as a zone Z1B,
which is often used for teleprotection schemes, should not reach beyond the length of the own line and
should always cover the first part of the following line too.

Fig. 1: Distance protection on parallel lines

Due to the mutual coupling depending on the magnitude and direction of the neutral current in the
parallel line, either an increase or a decrease of the measured impedance within the relays is possible.
An increased impedance can cause an underreach of the distance protection function. A decreased
impedance measured can cause an overreach of the distance protection function.
For distance protection, it is now a requirement that there is no overreach for zone Z1 and that there is
no underreach for zone Z1B. Therefore, appropriate measures have to be established within the
protection device and its settings.
For distance protection using teleprotection schemes, the correct coordination of both protection devices
on both ends of the line also has to be considered. This is particularly important during the opening of
circuit breakers on the different ends of the lines, which must not occur at exactly the same time, no
incorrect transfer trip of the remote end should happen.

6 Parallel Line with Common Buses in Operation


The most simple and most common topology used is one with a simple double line with common buses
on both ends, as shown in Fig. 2.

Fig. 2: Parallel line with common buses

First a fault on the own line should be investigated. The direction and the magnitude of the neutral
current in the parallel line INP depends on the infeed conditions on both ends of the line. Therefore, we
consider the two extreme cases. For a single infeed on the left hand side, as shown in Fig. 3, IN and INP
have the same direction.

3
APS | 2014

Fig. 3: Parallel line with common buses and single infeed on the left hand side

The maximum value for INP occurs for a fault at the remote end of the line, which is at 100% of the line
length. There a considerable underreach of the impedance measurement is possible. A calculation with
a simulation of a line with real values will deliver an apparent impedance of 5.4 for a line length of 4,
which corresponds to an underreach of about 35%.
For a single infeed on the right hand side, as shown in Fig. 4, IN and INP have different directions.

Fig. 4: Parallel line with common buses and single infeed on the right hand side

The maximum value for INP again occurs for a fault at the remote end of the line, which is at 100% of
the line length. Now a considerable overreach of the impedance measurement is possible. A calculation
with a simulation of a line with real values will deliver an apparent impedance of 2.6 for a line length
of 4, which corresponds to an overreach of about 35%.
For faults on the parallel line, different situations for the distance protection can occur depending on the
fault location. Faults close to the relay location are mostly seen in the backward direction and faults
close to the remote end of the line are seen as faults on the successor line.

7 Parallel Line Out of Service and Grounded


A completely different situation for the protection devices occurs when the parallel line is out of service
and grounded on both ends, as shown in Fig. 5.

Fig. 5: Parallel line out of service and grounded

Due to the grounding of the parallel line, an induced neutral current in the parallel line can flow through
the line and the effect of the mutual coupling can no longer be neglected.
For faults on the own line, a considerable overreach of the impedance measurement is possible. A
calculation with a simulation of a line with real values will deliver an apparent impedance of 3.3 for a
line length of 4, which corresponds to an overreach of about 17.5%.
For adequate measures for this scenario, it has to be considered that the CTs on the lines are mostly
installed before the line groundings, so that a measurement of the induced neutral current in the parallel
line is not possible when the parallel line is out of service and grounded.

4
APS | 2014

8 Double Faults on Parallel Lines


For most ground faults on parallel lines, it is not only a single phase that is involved. Double faults, where
different phases of different parallel lines are involved (cross-country faults), are also quite common.
Even different combinations of the involved phases and ground are possible.

Fig. 6: Double faults on parallel lines

These faults pose an additional challenge for the protection devices. The fault loops for the selection of
the fault type must be recognized correctly, even taking into consideration the mutual coupling effect. In
addition, the arc resistances of the faults can make the selection of the correct fault loop even more
complicated. The relay behaviour can best be verified with RelaySimTest, which allows the simulation
of a topology and of fault scenarios, as shown in Fig. 6.
A separate investigation and test for the behaviour with single pole tripping should be made. Especially
if a teleprotection scheme and single pole tripping on both ends is used, teleprotection signals for single
phase transfer trips should be considered, so that both protection devices can make a coordinated
decision on the involved phases for double faults on the line. These scenarios should be verified using
an end-to-end test where both protection devices are involved.

9 Current Reversal during Opening of a Circuit Breaker


For distance protection using teleprotection, the coordination of the protection devices on both ends has
to be correct, as already mentioned with the requirements. As the protection devices always have slightly
different trip times and because the circuit breakers durations to open a pole are also different (even
depending on the fault inception angle), it is possible that a situation can occur where a circuit breaker
on one end of the line is already open but the other end is still closed. This scenario is shown in Fig. 7.

Fig. 7: Current reversal during opening of a circuit breaker

A fault on the parallel line close to the relay location is seen in backwards direction first. After the opening
of the circuit breaker on the parallel line, caused by the protection relay for the parallel lines which

5
APS | 2014

operates instantaneously, a current reversal occurs temporarily for the relay on the non-faulty line. This
situation persists until the circuit breaker on the other end of the faulty line is open too.
Due to the current reversal effect, the relay recognizes the fault on the other line in forward direction
temporarily (and even within zone Z1B), which can cause a transfer trip for the relay on the remote end.
In this case, a transfer trip for the remote end should not happen, because this will result in a
nonselective switch-off of the non-faulty line. Within the protection devices, the teleprotection signal for
the transfer trip has to be blocked temporarily for this case.

10 Topologies with Separate Buses or with Tap Lines


In real life, the topologies of parallel lines are not always as simple as discussed in the previous
examples. In many cases, parallel lines are connected to different buses with different infeeds or
individual line segments are in parallel only for a certain section. Examples for such arrangements are
shown in Fig. 8 and Fig. 9.

Fig. 8: 3-terminal line with parallel lines

Fig. 9: Parallel line with multiple tap lines

For the design of the protection concept, for the commissioning and for the protection testing, this real
topology should be modelled and simulated. The mutual coupling between the individual line segments
must also be simulated, to be able to verify the correct protection behaviour on parallel lines. The
different mutual coupling impedances can be measured individually or approximated from the overall
values. RelaySimTest allows such a modelling and simulation of all relevant fault scenarios.

11 Measures for Distance Protection


The different protection devices offer quite different possibilities to cope with the mutual coupling both
within the behaviour of their distance protection elements and for their fault locator functionality.

6
APS | 2014

A quite obvious measure is the effective consideration of the neutral current from the parallel line, which
is routed to the protection device with an additional current input. With a setting value for the mutual
coupling impedance, the relay is able to eliminate the term caused by the mutual coupling for the
impedance measurement and can avoid any under- or overreach of any tripping zone.
For the neutral current from the parallel line, an additional current input in the relay is necessary and
more effort for the wiring within the substation is caused, which results in higher costs. Due to the
distance to the CTs or to the protection devices for the parallel line, a separate wiring of the parallel
neutral current is sometimes not possible. The higher burden for the CT also has to be considered.
In new substations using IEC 61850, where digital transmission of CT and VT data using IEC 61850-9-
2 sampled measured values is used, the problems with the wiring and the higher burden are no longer
relevant. For the purpose of fault location, even a transfer of the neutral current from the parallel line
using IEC 61850 GOOSE, or any other communication channel, is also possible.
Important for the commissioning of such a relay is, of course, the correct setting value for the mutual
coupling impedance. The different vendors of protection devices use quite different definitions and
formulas for the mutual coupling, such as mutual coupling impedances in natural or symmetrical
components or mutual coupling factors as complex values or in real and imaginary parts (Attention to
the factor of 3 difference between Z0M and ZM !). It is advised that this setting value is verified during
commissioning. In addition, the correct direction of the additional current input for the neutral current
from the parallel line has to be checked.
If there is no possibility for a measurement of the neutral current from the parallel line, other measures
can be considered, as discussed in [2]. Therefore, an adjustment of the grounding factors for trip and/or
overreach zones can be made, so that the effect of the mutual coupling is handled together with the
grounding compensation. For a fault at 100% of the line length, the neutral current in the parallel line is
about the same as the neutral current of the own line, so that a correction of the k-factor with the mutual
coupling factor seems reasonable. On the other hand, this is only valid for a single infeed situation and
should be considered carefully and tested thoroughly.
In many cases, the following strategy is recommended. An underreach of the tripping zone is accepted
and an underreach of the overreach zone is avoided with a separate k-factor for zone Z1B.
For the different operation conditions of a parallel line, parallel line in operation or out of service, different
setting groups in the relay can be used, which are switched accordingly. For teleprotection schemes,
provision to block a transfer trip during current reversal has to be provided.

12 Test of the Protection Behaviour with Mutual Coupling


For the design of the protection concept and for the commissioning of relays for parallel lines, a
simulation of the mutual coupling is necessary. Therefore, first a modelling of the real line configuration
is required.
With RelaySimTest, it is possible to define parallel lines with common or separate buses, the mutual
coupling between different line segments has to be specified, and a simulation based on this data, which
considers the mutual coupling effects, has to be done. Even more complex topologies such as parallel
lines with tap lines or 3-terminal lines with parallel lines should also be possible.
Using a network simulation, the transient signals for voltages and currents at the relay locations should
be calculated and for the test an injection of the neutral current from the parallel line into an additional
current input of the relay must be possible.
Different tests of the relevant fault scenarios for the different operating states and infeed/load conditions
have to be done, such as:
Parallel line in operation or grounded
Faults on the own line, on the parallel line, on the successor line and double faults or cross-country
faults
Single infeed, double infeed and strong/weak infeeds on both ends
Simulation of superimposed load flow and arc resistances

7
APS | 2014

For protection devices using teleprotection between the two ends of the line, an end-to-end test, which
involves both protection devices and which is based on the simulation of the common real topology, is
advised.

13 Summary
For the protection behaviour on parallel lines the following issues are relevant:
The impact of the mutual coupling with parallel lines on the behaviour of the distance protection
cannot be neglected
Zero sequence and mutual coupling impedances should be determined with a measurement in the
field
The protection concept and protection settings should consider this
Testing of the protection devices using the real topology and with real fault scenarios, including the
effects of the mutual coupling, is necessary
The flexible RelaySimTest test software for the simulation of these scenarios allows a realistic test
Testing of the protection behaviour with teleprotection and mutual coupling involved requires end-
to-end tests

With the new test software RelaySimTest, which allows a simple modelling and simulation of the real
situation, an effective test is possible and a better protection concept and secure operation is
reasonable.

14 References
[1] Apostolov, A.; Tholomier, D.; Sambasivan, S.; Richards, S.: Protection of Double Circuit
Transmission Lines. Texas A&M Protective Relaying Conference 2007; College Station, USA
[2] Caldero, F.: Mutual Impedance in Parallel Lines Protective Relaying and Fault Location
Considerations. Schweitzer Engineering Laboratories Technical Paper 2008; Pullman, USA
[3] Kaiser, S.: Different Representations of the Earth Impedance Matching in Distance Protection
Relays or What Impedance Does a Digital Distance Protection Relay Measure? OMICRON User
Meeting 2004; Friedrichshafen, Germany
[4] Klapper, U; Apostolov, A.; Kruger, M.; Kaiser, S.: Improving Distance Protection Performance
Through Line Impedance Measurements. APAP 2007; Jeju, Korea
[5] Luxemburger, R.; de Villiers, W.: Calculation and Verification of Distance Protection Settings
Based on Line Impedance Measurements. PAC World Conference 2013; Dublin, Ireland
[6] Luxemburger, R.; de Villiers, W.: Negative K-Factor Setting for Power Cables Explained via
Sequence Impedance Measurements. Jicable 2011, Versailles, France

8
APS | 2014

About the Authors

Dipl.-Ing. (FH) Christopher Pritchard was born in 1982 in Dortmund /


Germany. He received his diploma in Electrical Engineering at the
University of Applied Science in Dortmund in 2006. He joined OMICRON
electronics in 2006 where he worked in application software development
in the field of testing solutions for protection and measurement systems.
christopher.pritchard@omicron.at

Dipl.-Ing. Thomas Hensler was born in 1968 in Feldkirch / Austria. He


received his diploma (Masters Degree) in Computer Science at the
Technical University of Vienna in 1995. He joined OMICRON electronics in
1995 where he worked in application software development in the field of
testing solutions for protection and measurement systems. Additionally he
is responsible for product management for application software for
protection testing.
thomas.hensler@omicron.at

9
OMICRON is an international company serving the electrical power industry with
innovative testing and diagnostic solutions. The application of OMICRON products
allows users to assess the condition of the primary and secondary equipment on
their systems with complete confidence. Services offered in the area of consulting,
commissioning, testing, diagnosis and training make the product range complete.

Customers in more than 140 countries rely on the companys ability to supply leading-
edge technology of excellent quality. Service centers on all continents provide a broad
base of knowledge and extraordinary customer support. All of this together with our
strong network of sales partners is what has made our company a market leader in the
electrical power industry.

For more information, additional literature,


and detailed contact information of our
worldwide offices please visit our website.

www.omicron.at | www.omicronusa.com OMICRON