SOURCE TYPE IMPACT OF DISTRIBUTED GENERATION

(DG) ON THE DISTRIBUTION PROTECTION

Mojtaba Khederzadeh*, Hamid Javadi*, Seyyed Mohammad Ali Mousavi*
*Electrical Engineering Department,
Power & Water University of Technology (PWUT),
Tehran, IRAN.
Corresponding Author: khederzadeh@pwut.ac.ir

Keywords: Distribution Generation (DG), Power System

Protection, Doubly Fed Induction Generator (DFIG),
Asynchronous Generator, Fault Current Limiter (FCL).

Abstract
The protection system design in common MV and LV
distribution networks is determined by a passive paradigm,
i.e. no generation is expected in the network. With distributed
sources, the networks get active and conventional protection
turns out to be unsuitable. In most cases, the issue is
investigated with synchronous generators, while other
generator types like Doubly Fed Induction Generators (DFIG)
or induction generators are also available. The capability of
the generators of DG systems to feed the fault during
disturbances would affect the results considerably. In this
paper, the important issues such as the ones mentioned above
are analyzed with different types of DG generators, and the
results are compared to highlight the impact of different DG
types on the specified issues. This study is useful from the
utilities' point of view, since it is not necessary to attract their
attention to the extreme conditions. Sometimes, the type of
the DG sources is so, that their contribution to the fault level
is negligible and can be ignored, while in some cases the
impact of another type of generator for DG is not negligible.

1 Introduction
Distributed Generation (DG) has been broadly used in recent
years to supply energy. The electric energy production from
DG is progressively taking an important part of the total
amount of the required energy in power systems. The
interconnection of DG brings a great change to the
configuration of the utility distribution network. The overall
problem when integrating DG in existing networks is that
distribution systems are planned as passive networks, carrying
the power unidirectionally from the central generation (HV
level) downstream to the loads at MV/LV level. The
protection system design in common MV and LV distribution
networks is determined by a passive paradigm, i.e. no
generation is expected in the network. With distributed
sources, the networks get active and conventional protection
turns out to be unsuitable. The following points will outline
the most important issues:

x Short Circuit Power and Fault Current Level

x Reduced Reach of Impedance Relays
x Reverse Power Flow and Voltage Profile
x Islanding and Auto Reclosure
x Coordination of the Overcurrent Relays
x Other Issues such as: Ferroresonance and Grounding.
In most cases, these issues are investigated with synchronous
generators, while classical synchronous generators are one of
the types that are used in power networks, while other
generator types like Doubly Fed Induction Generators (DFIG)
or induction generators are also available. The capability of
the generators of DG systems to feed the fault during
disturbances would affect the results considerably.
Normally, feeders are protected by directional inverse-time
overcurrent relays in looped distribution power networks. In
the absence of DG units, various methods are proposed in the
literature to coordinate these relays. In [1]-[2] and [3] linear
programming and non-linear programming are used for
solving the relay coordination problem, respectively. Genetic
Algorithms (GA) is used in [4] and Particle Swarm
Optimization (PSO) is applied in [5] for relay coordination.
The impact of DG on the system fault level is investigated in
[6]. The application of Fault Current Limiters (FCL) on the
integrity of the coordination of the relays is investigated in [7]
and [8]. In these references synchronous generators are used
as DG units.
In this paper, the relay coordination problem in the presence
of DG units is analyzed by utilizing different types of DG
generators. The results are compared to highlight the impact
of different DG types on the specified issue. This study is
useful from the utilities' point of view, since it is not
necessary to attract their attention to the extreme conditions.
Sometimes, the type of DG sources is so, that their
contribution to the fault level is negligible and can be ignored,
while in some cases the impact of another type of generator
for DG is not negligible.
The IEEE 30 bus system is used for the analysis. This sample
system consists of two voltage levels; the lower voltage level
is used to apply DG. The study is performed by selecting
different types of sources for the DG system and then the
impact of DG on different issues like fault level, overcurrent
relay coordination and etc., are analyzed and compared.

2 Directional Relay Coordination Method

The objective of relay coordination in a looped distribution
network is determination and setting of the primary and backup relay pairs. The operating time of a relay is a function of
the setting parameters and the fault current seen by the relay.
The equation used for the time versus current of the relay is as
follows:

I fi
A
(1)
t T DS
 B ,M i
C
(
)
1
M

I
i
Pi

where t is the relay operating time in seconds, TDS is the time

dial setting, IPi is the relay pick-up current, If is the fault
current; A , B, and C are constants. The pick-up current is
determined between a minimum value (1.2In) to a maximium
value (2In). TDS is also determined between a minimum a

ti: operating time of relay i for a fault near relay i,

tb, tm: the operating time of the primay and back-up relay,
respectively, for a fault at the protected region of relay i,
CTI: coordination time interval between primary and back-up
relays,
1, 2, 3: weighting factors; selected as 100, 10 and 0.1
respectively,
2, 3: parameters for considering the interference of the
primary and back-up relay; both of them are selected as 100,
F1, F2: denotes a fault near the primary relay and a fault at
the end of the protected zone of the primary relay,
respectively.
Fig. 1 shows a simple system comprising of a DG unit at bus
B3. As can be seen from this figure, a fault at bus4 is
composed of two currents, Ifs from the network and IfDG from
the DG unit. Relay A is coordinated based on Ifs , so in this
condition the coordination is lost.

maximum value based on (3):

I Pi min d I Pi d I pi max
T D S i m in d T D S i d T D S i m ax

(2)
(3)

The relation between the primary and back-up relays is

asserted as follows:

t j ,i  t i t CT I j ,i ....... i , j N

(4)

where ti is the operating time of the primary relay i and tj,i is

the operating time of the back-up relay j for the fault in the
protected region of relay i . The operating time of the back-up
relay is calculated as (5):

T D S

I f j ,i

j ,i

j ,i

 B ;
 1

Figure 1: The impact of DG on the setting of Relay A.

3 Sample System
The sample system used for the simulation is presented in
Fig. 2. It is composed of two voltage levels 132kV and 33kV.
The distribution system is fed from three 132/33 kV
substations located at buses 1, 12 and 27. Each feeder is
protected by two directional overcurrent relays located at the
feeder ends. There are 39 relays at the distribution level in
this sample system.

(5 )
I Pj
Ifj,i is the fault current passing from the back-up relay j for a
fault in the protected region of relay i.
j ,i

The objective function of the total operating time of the relays

is as follows:
F1
F1
F1
O.F D1 (ti ) 2  D 2 ('t mb
 E 2 ('t mb
 't mb
))2

F2
F2
F2
D3 ('t mb
 E3 ('t mb
 't mb
))2

(6)

where 'tmb is as (7):

't mb
where:

t b  t m CTI

(7)
Figure 2: IEEE 30 bus sample system used for simulation.

The relays have standard inverse characteristics based on

IEC-255-3 standard as depicted in (1) with A=0.14, B=0 and
C=0.02. Eleven busses are considered as candidates for the
DG unit installation in this sample system. These busses are
10, 12 and 27 as substation busses and 15 to 19, 21, 24 and 30
as load busses.

4 Simulation Results
Three different generator types are considered: synchronous
generator, asynchronous generator and doubly fed induction
generator (DFIG). The synchronous generators are 10 MVA
with 0.9 power factor lagging. Their transient reactance is
0.15 p.u. based on the nominal power of the machines. The
specifications of different generators are tabulated in Table 1.
Four asynchronous generators are considered in each selected
bus for DG installation. The set of four asynchronous
generators are connected to the network by a step-up
transformer with 6.6kV/33kV ratio, 10 MVA size and 5%
leakage transformer. The specifications of asynchronous
generator and DFIGs are the same, in order to easily compare
them.

When the fault is far from the DG units, then this difference is
negligible. For example, when the DG units are installed at
bus 24, for a fault on bus 30, the injected fault currents from
the synchronous, asynchronous and DFIG generators are
213A, 202.9A and 202.2A, respectively, that 135.2%, 129.3%
and 130.6% of nominal currents of the related units, installed
at bus 24.
Fig. 3 shows the CTI for the relays that experience lack of
coordination after installation of DG units at bus 24. As can
be deduced from this figure, the indicated primary and backup relay pairs had acceptable CTI before DG application,
while their CTIs are reduced after that, and in some instances
the CTI becomes negative, which means the back-up relay
operates before the primary relay.

Table 1: Specifications of different DG units used

DG Type
Synchronous
Induction
DFIG

S
(MVA)
10
2.5
2.5

P
(MW)
9
2.25
2.25

Power
Factor
0.9
0.9
0.9

No. of
Units
1
4
4

Table 2 shows the fault current of different DG types for

some fault locations. It is worth noting that the fault currents
indicated in Table 2 are the sum of the 4 units, measured at
the HV side of the step up transformers. As can be seen from
Table 2, if the DG is installed at bus 24 and there is a fault at
the same bus, then the fault currents are 878.5A, 689.5A and
724.9A, respectively, which are 558%, 439.4% and 461.4%
of the nominal currents of the associated units. As can be seen
from Table 2, the most coordination issues occur for the
synchronous generators, and then the DFIG and asynchronous
generators.

Figure 3: Coordination Time Intervals of the primary and

back-up relay pairs that experience lack of coordination.
Fig. 4 shows the number of relay pairs that lose coordination
when DG units are applied at the pre-specified buses. As can
be seen, the number of relay pairs is higher when the
synchronous generators are used, as expected. This figure
clearly shows the impact of synchronous generators on the
coordination issue of the relays.

Table 2: Maximum load and fault currents for some DG

locations

Load
Current
(A)

Fault
Location

DG Type

Bus10

Bus24

---

Synchronous

170.4

157.5

---

Induction

153.6

156.9

--Bus24

Fault
Current
(A)

Bus30

DG Location

DFIG

153.8

157.1

Synchronous

357.6

878.5

Induction

345.4

689.5

DFIG

356.2

724.9

Synchronous

170.5

213

Induction

175.8

202.9

DFIG

176.3

205.2

Figure 4: number of relay pairs with lack of coordination in

the sample system for different DG types and locations.

5 Determination of DG Units Penetration Level

When the DG units have small sizes, the impact of increase in
short circuit levels may be negligible, so the coordination of
the directional overcurrent relays would be kept intact.
Therefore, it is important to find out the sizes of the DG units
in order to keep the integrity of the coordination of the
primary and back-up relay pairs.
Fig. 5 shows the CTI of relays 9 and 7 versus the increase in
the capacity of DG units installed at bus 10. As can be
deduced from this figure, the permissive increase of the
synchronous DG units installed at bus 10 is 11.61 MVA
thereby the coordination of the relays is maintained.

Figure 5: The impact of DG capacity on the integrity of

coordination of the relays.
The same procedure can be used for the other pre-specified
busses and DG types. Table 3 shows the maximum
permissive capacity of the DG units with different types on
the pre-specified busses that does not disturb the relay
coordination. As can be deduced from this table, the
penetration level is generally higher for asynchronous and
DFIG with respect to synchronous generators.
Table 3: DG penetration level on all the pre-specified busses
DG Penetration (KVA)
DG
Location

Synchronous
1*Unit

Induction
4*Unit

DFIG
4*Unit

Bus10

11610

14100

12600

Bus12

14450

16700

13400

Bus15

1180

1300

1400

Bus16

2010

2300

2400

Bus17

1690

1900

2000

Bus18

1110

1000

1300

Bus19

690

600

800

Bus21

300

320

340

Bus24

570

600

760

Bus27

2330

2520

3240

Bus30

2210

2760

3520

From Table 3, it implies that the DG type affects the

penetration level. In this study, the synchronous generators
are aggregated as one equivalent machine.
Table 4 shows the permissible DG capacity on different
busses for different DG types in percent of the maximum load
of the distribution system (116MVA and 0.9 power factor
lagging).
Table 4: DG Penetration level of the pre-specified busses in
percent of the total distribution system load
DG
Location

DG Penetration (%Load of Total

Distribution System)
Synchronous
Induction
DFIG

Bus10

10.01

12.16

10.86

Bus12

12.46

14.4

11.55

Bus15

1.02

1.12

1.21

Bus16

1.73

1.98

2.07

Bus17

1.46

1.64

1.72

Bus18

0.96

0.86

1.12

Bus19

0.59

0.52

0.69

Bus21

0.26

0.28

0.29

Bus24

0.49

0.52

0.66

Bus27

2.01

2.17

2.79

Bus30

1.91

2.38

3.03

As can be deduced from Table 4, DG units as synchronous

generators have a more severe impact on the short circuit
level, so the penetration level is less than the other types of
DG. DFIG has a higher penetration level, except for the
busses 10 and 12 that have nearby synchronous condensers.

6 Application of the Fault Current Limiter on

the Integrity of Relay Coordination
In order to maintain the integrity of the relay coordination
irrespective of the DG size, a fault current limiter could be
applied. Figure 3 shows the lack of coordination of seven
relay pairs when DG units as synchronous generators are
installed on bus 24. As can be seen, CTI of relays 22 and 1
have the worst condition. If a series reactance as a fault
current limiter is applied with the DG unit, then the lack of
coordination of the relays would be alleviated.
Fig. 6 shows the CTI variation versus the series reactance of
the fault current limiter. As can be deduced from this figure,
the increase in the series fault current limiter reactance
enhances the CTI of relays 22 and 1. It is worth noting that
increasing the series reactance more than a critical value may
lead to the non-convergence of the power flow. The
permissive maximum reactance is X=j94, for which the CTI
of relays 22 and 1 would be 0.236s. The CTI enhancements
for the other relay pairs with synchronous generator DG unit
on bus 24 are presented in Fig. 7. In this case, the relay pairs
(22, 1) and (24, 1) are improved to the required CTI.

Table 5: Comparison of the required series reactance of fault

current limiter for different DG types and locations
DG
Location

Figure 6: Variation of CTI for relay pair (22, 1) for different

fault current limiter reactance with synchronous DG unit
on bus 24.

Reactance of the FCL ()

Synchronous

Induction

DFIG

Bus10

Bus12

Bus15

96.5

---

---

Bus16

64.5

43

64

Bus17

77

46.5

51.5

Bus18

94.5

---

52.5

Bus19

---

---

---

Bus21

---

---

---

Bus24

---

---

---

Bus27

42

27

28.5

Bus30

42

23.5

25

References
[1] Alberto J. Urdaneta, Harold Restrepo, Saul Marquez,
"Coordination Of Directional OverCurrent Relay Timinng Using
Linear Programming" , IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery, Vol.
11, No. 1, January 1996.
[2] Bijoy Chattopadhay, M.S.Sachdev, T.S.Sidhu, "An On-Line
Coordination Algorithm For Adaptive Protection Using Linear
Programming Technique", IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery,
Vol. 11, No. 1, January 1996.

Figure 7: The variation of CTI enhancement for primary and

back-up relay pairs by reactance series fault current
limiter for synchronous generator as DG unit on bus 24.
Table 5 shows the required series reactance of the fault
current limiter used for different DG types and for all the prespecified busses for DG installation. The empty cells indicate
that series reactance can not be useful in the related cases. No
fault current limiter is required for locating DG on bus 10 and
12, since the relays are already coordinated for the specified
amount of DG penetration.

7 Conclusion
In this paper, the coordination of directional overcurrent
relays is analyzed with different types of DG generators. The
results are compared to highlight the impact of different DG
types on this issue. It is shown that the effect of synchronous
generator as DG unit is more pronounced than the other types
of generators like DFIG and asynchronous. It is also shown
that the integrity of relay coordination can be preserved by
using series reactance fault current limiter. The impact of
other types of FCLs is under investigation by the authors.

[3] Dinesh Birla, Rudra Prakash Maheshwari, and H. O. Gupta, "A

New Nonlinear Directional Overcurrent Relay Coordination
Technique, and Banes and Boons of Near-End Faults Based
Approach", IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery, Vol. 21, No. 3,
Jul. 2006
[4] Cheng-Hung Lee and Chao-Rong Chen, "Using Genetic
Algorithm for Overcurrent Relay Coordination in Industrial Power
System", 14th International Conference on Intelligent System
Applications to Power Systems, ISAP 2007.
[5] Mohamed M. Mansour, Said F. Mekhamer, and Nehad El-Sherif
El-Kharbawe, "A Modified Particle Swarm Optimizer for the
Coordination of Directional Overcurrent Relays", IEEE Transactions
on Power Delivery, Vol. 22, No. 3, Jul. 2007.
[6] Gerald T. Heydt, Anjan Bose, "Consequences of Fault Currents
Contributed by Distributed Generation", Power Systems Engineering
Research Center, PSERC Publication, 06-21, June 2006.
[7] G. Tang, M. R. Iravani, Application of a Fault Current Limiter
to Minimize Distributed Generation Impact on Coordinated Relay
Protection", International Conference on Power Systems Transients
(IPST05) in Montreal, Canada on June 19-23, 2005. Paper No.
IPST05 158
[8] Walid El-Khattam, Tarlochan S. Sidhu, "Restoration of
Directional Overcurrent Relay Coordination in Distributed
Generation Systems Utilizing Fault Current Limiter", IEEE
Transactions on Power Delivery, Vol. 23, No. 2, Apr. 2008.