2017 IEEE PES Innovative Smart Grid Technologies Conference - Latin America (ISGT Latin America).
Quito, Ecuador
Novel Protection Schema for a Radial Microgrid
System
Diego Pilaquinga, Marcelo Pozo
Departamento de Automatización y Control Industrial
Escuela Politécnica Nacional
Quito-Ecuador
{diego.pilaquinga, marcelo.pozo}@epn.edu.ec
Abstract—The improved use of renewable power
generation and the coordinated connection with electrical
networks and loads bring a new concept, the microgrids. In
general, a microgrid can operate in both grid connected mode
and islanding mode. Ensuring the continuity of protection in
both operation modes is a great technical challenge. Dealing
with different short circuit currents level depending on the
operation mode as well as ensuring selectivity and sensitivity
are the issues of the proposed protection scheme. The present
work presents a microgrid protection scheme for a three bus-
bar radial microgrid which includes energy storage and a
static compensator (STATCOM). Protection strategy is based
on the implementation of bi-directional overcurrent relays and
includes over- and under-voltage and frequency relays as
back-up protection. The main restriction is perhaps a
limitation in normal working at 80% of the rated current of
the converter-based generator, leaving the 20% remaining to
overcurrent detection. In the other hand, an impedance
measurement method is used to perform the islanding
protection. Results show that the protection scheme detect
effectively the islanding condition and also isolate three-phase
faults applied in each bus-bar.
Keywords— Microgrid protection, fault analysis,
distributed generation
I. INTRODUCTION
Since the early years of the use of electricity, several
forms of power generation have been developed to supply
the global demand. The dependence on fossil fuels and
further demand for energy, not only electrical, has been
linked to growing carbon dioxide emissions [1]. The impact
on the environment has been widely debated and has
motivated many countries to engage in the development of
alternatives clean energy. In the case of power generation,
for instance from fossil fuels or nuclear power, the wasted
by-products generated are not environmentally friendly.
Thus, the renewable generation has become more important
in the recent years. Usually, the meaning of the term
“renewable energy sources” is related to solar photovoltaic
energy, the solar thermal energy, the wind energy, the fuel
cells and the hydraulic energy, which have a reduced adverse
impact on the environment. However, the use of renewable
generation implies the migration from traditional centralized
generation to the implementation of distributed energy
resources (DER).
978-1-5386-3312-0/17/$31.00 ©2017 IEEE
The arrangement of DER near to a consumption point, to
electrical loads and to storage devices at low or medium
voltage, operating as a small network, is referred to a
microgrid [2]. A structure of a microgrid is shown in Figure
1. The advantages of a microgrid are: low transmission
losses, local power supply, reduced operation cost, and local
reliability improvement. However, due to the fact that the
distribution system is being transformed from a passive to an
active network, some technical challenges in terms of
control, management and protection have arisen [3].
Microgrid protection is perhaps the most challenging
task. The microgrid should be able to operate in a non-
autonomous way, when interconnected to the grid, and in an
autonomous way, when disconnected from the main grid [4].
In the first scenario, the protection should act selectively,
isolating a small portion of the microgrid until the fault is
corrected. While in the second case, the protection system
must quickly isolate the microgrid from the main grid,
allowing operation as an islanding system, ensuring a
continuous supply [5]. In all cases, the electrical protections
must switch as fast as possible to prevent the transients.
However, electrical protection design in an active
distribution system is not as simple as a passive one.
Bidirectional currents can flow through the protection
elements during normal working, but in a fault, further
complexity arises once islanding occurs since the high short
circuit current levels provided by utility grid are not supplied
anymore [6].
Although intentional islanding has some benefits, i.e.
ensuring continuity of supply when disturbances occur in the
main grid, unintentional islanding can cause many problems
in terms of safety, grounding, power quality, voltage,
frequency interference and frequency stability, thereby
resulting in instantaneous reclosing [7], [8]. Therefore, the
protection system should be able to protect the microgrid
against islanding by sensing the disconnection or absence of
the main grid and ensure a safe reclosing [9].
In order to guarantee continuous operation of the
microgrid, a number of alternating solutions has been
proposed to face the possible protection problems due to
external faults. One of them is the Adaptive Protection
Scheme which is based on the dynamic modification of the
relays settings depending on the operation mode of the
microgrid that is grid connected or islanding. The principle
of differential current between two distant points has also
2017 IEEE PES Innovative Smart Grid Technologies Conference - Latin America (ISGT Latin America). Quito, Ecuador

been used in Differential Protection Schemes but the main other hand, the reactive average compensator STATCOM
issue is perhaps the high dependence in the communication model (SH1) has been designed by means of an inner current
networks and the way to improve its reliability. Another loop and an outer PI voltage loop to control the reactive
scheme, like Voltage Based Protection, uses the Park power injected at BUS-3.
transform to change the three-phase voltages into the d-q
frame being the sensitivity to small voltage changes the
major difficulty to deal with. Finally, the ability of
communication in protection relays has also been considered
to propose a Communication-Assisted Protection Scheme in
which centralized, distributed and decentralized
communication networks are used but it considers some
technical features that are not available in modern protection
devices. [10]
As can be seen, some of the actual protection schemes
are communication dependant. The aim of this paper is to
present a strategy to protect a radial microgrid against short
circuit events in the grid connected mode and islanding mode
with a minimum communication needs. As a further Fig. 1. Microgrid scheme with protection relays.
protection against unsafe reclosing, islanding detection will
be included in the design. Finally, the proposed protection TABLE I. SYSTEM PARAMETERS
scheme will be evaluated using a model developed in System
Matlab®. System Quantities Values Values
Quantities
System Frequency 50 Hz Base Power 20 MVA
II. SYSTEM TOPOLOGY
Battery
In general, distribution systems are connected following Base Voltage 22 KV sourced
a radial structure. Loop close feeders could be present, but inverter DER2
normally are in open mode and only change to closed mode Base Impedance
24.2Ÿ Rated voltage 22 KV
(Xbase)
to give an alternative path to avoid a faulty section.
Therefore, a radial microgrid shown in Figure 1 is preserved Transformer T1 Rated Power 5 MVA
and used as case of study for the present work. Short circuit
Primary Voltage 110 KV (L-L) Xbase
impedance Xsc
A. System description Secondary Voltage 22 KV (L-L) STATCOM
The considered microgrid is supplied from the main grid Rated Power 20 MVA Rated voltage 22 KV
of 110 KV by means of a feeder line of 2km and connected Rated short circuit
to a transformer (T1) to decrease the voltage into a 400 KW Rated Power 3 MVA
power ǻPkt
distribution level of 22 KV. A circuit breaker CB0 has been Rated short circuit Short circuit
16.20% Xbase
included to disconnect the main source and simulate voltage ǻVkt impedance Xsc
islanding. The microgrid is formed by three bus-bars (BUS Connection type ǻ-Y11g Load 1
1-3), in which are linked electrical loads (Load 1-3). A 0.1153+j0.00148
5MVA synchronous generator (DER1) is connected at BUS- Feeder impedance Rated Power 4 MVA
Ÿ/Km
1. A 5MVA converter interfaced with battery source (DER2) Feeder 1 long 2 Km Power Factor 0.92
is connected at BUS-2 and a 5MVA static shunt compensator
STATCOM (SH1) is connected at BUS-3 to compensate the Feeder 2 long 2 Km Load 2
voltage dip and to improve the stability of the system. The Feeder 3 long 5 Km Rated Power 1.5 MVA
power of the DERs selected in the function of the entire
Synchronous
microgrid can operate alone, in case of islanding mode. Full generator DER1
Power Factor 0.95
parameters of the microgrid elements are given in Table I.
Rated voltage 22 KV Load 2
B. Model design in MatLab® Rated Power 5 MVA Rated Power 2 MVA
The model was performed with special emphasis on the Short circuit
0.2 Xbase Power Factor 0.85
short circuit contribution of each element of the microgrid, impedance Xsc
in case of faults. Acceptable active power, reactive power
and voltage levels in the microgrid bus-bars were also III. PROTECTION SCHEME
considered in the design model and to test and to validate the In general, a microgrid protection should operate
proposed solutions, different scenarios were considered. effectively in the grid connected mode, separating the faulty
The parameters of the main grid, distribution transformer section when an electrical fault exterior to the system occurs.
and constant impedance loads were set according to the However, the main criterion of the protection operation is
values stated in Table I. The DER1 is a 480V synchronous when the microgrid changes the operation to islanding mode.
generator connected to a transformer T2 (ǻ/Y-480V/22KV), The operation philosophy recommended by IEEE 1547 in
while the operation of the DER2 was emulated using an ideal case of islanding consists of: detect it in maximum 2s and
480V three phase source followed by a transformer T3 (ǻ/Y- then separate the microgrid from the main grid and shutting
480V/22KV). In both, DER1 and DER2, the resistance and down their DERs, when a fault is detected inside of it.
reactance values were carefully set to match the appropriate However, a microgrid would be improved if it can operate in
short circuit current contribution on one hand, and on the both operation modes: in faults mode and islanding mode.
2017 IEEE PES Innovative Smart Grid Technologies Conference - Latin America (ISGT Latin America). Quito, Ecuador
A. Islanding protection
Islanding protection scheme is required inter alia to avoid
an out of phase connection. Once the loss of the mains
condition is detected, the Islanding Protection Relay (IPR)
should disconnect the microgrid from the mains by means of
CB1. Then, if the main grid is again present, the appropriate
microgrid control could synchronise with the grid and re-
close CB1 safely.
The loss of mains detection is performed by the
impedance measurement at a specific harmonic of voltage
and current transients [11].
Fig. 2. Impedance measurement circuit at POM for ݊ order harmonic.
The voltage transient can be generated by the transitorily
connection of a shunt resistor (Rsh) across the Point of
Measure (POM) and thus, the short circuit current and
voltage reduction at n harmonic can be used to estimate ݄௡ :
ܸ‫݄ݐ‬ே (1)
ܼ‫݄ݐ‬௡ ൌ
‫݄ݐܫ‬௡
where ܸ‫݄ݐ‬௡ is the voltage at POM, while ‫݄ݐܫ‬௡ is the current
across the shunt inductor for the ݊-harmonic. The schematic
of the used circuit is shown in Figure 2, where ܼ‫ݏ‬௡ is the
equivalent source impedance and ܼ݉௡ is the equivalent
microgrid impedance at the n order harmonic.
The ideal switch closes when the voltage angle ߱‫ ݐ‬is
placed around the 165º and 178º. The signals of ܸ௧௛ and ‫ܫ‬௧௛
measured at POM in the islanding condition are analysed by
a Fast Fourier Transform (FFT) in order to identify the high
energy harmonics, and thus to measure the impedance at the
n-harmonic. As result, the 15th harmonic is high enough to
be considered in the impedance measurement, while the
corresponding current harmonic level is acceptable enough
to be taken into account. The estimated impedance resulting
for an islanding starting at ‫ ݐ‬ൌ ͲǤʹ‫ ݏ‬is presented in Figure 3.
A fault condition in the microgrid causes disturbances
and a sharp fall in the voltage ܸ‫݄ݐ‬௡ which is reflected in the
impedance measurement, with a high impedance value at the
beginning and then a sharp decreasing at almost zero (as is
shown in Figure 4). Therefore, the detection is blinded while
the fault is present. Then, if the impedance values measured
are out of a normal range, a prudent time to wait for the fault
clearing by the microgrid protection is required. However, if
the impedance ܼ‫ ݄ݐ‬remains higher after 1.5s (maximum
time taken to act main protection), the islanding protection
system acts, being a back-up of the microgrid protection.
Fig. 3. Estimated impedance waveform at 750Hz or 15th harmonic.
Fig. 4. Estimated impedance waveform at 750Hz with fault at BUS-1.
B. Overcurrent protection
The overcurrent protection system considered to aisle the
faulty section of the microgrid is shown in Figure 1. The
overcurrent protection system included the Overcurrent
Protection Relays OCR1, OCR2 and OCR3, which act under
CB1, CB2 and CB3 respectively, while relay OCR_DER1
protects DER-1 by disconnecting CB-DER1. The
overcurrent protection of DER-2 and SH-1 has not been
considered due to both being attached by means of
converters to bus-bars. The current contribution to the fault
is then negligible, and the protection based on overcurrent
detection cannot be used as they rather rely on their own
internal protection. In fact, the behaviour of these converters
against faults depends on the manufacturer. Thus, the
converter capabilities of supplying a continuous fault current
have been assumed.
The design of the protection scheme for the microgrid
was done off-line and different electrical faults were applied
to each bus-bar under all the possible working configurations
of the microgrid, taking into account the maximum currents
across the circuit breakers CB1, CB2 and CB3 in steady state
and a minimum fault currents. These values are summarised
in Table II, where ‫ܫ‬௠௔௫ǡ௡ǡௗ is the maximum current levels
under normal operation, and ‫݂ܫ‬௠௜௡ǡ௡ǡௗ , is the minimum fault
current level through the CB-݊ሺ݊ ൌ ͳǡʹǡ͵ሻ in the ݀current
direction (݀ ൌ ‫ܨ‬ǡ ݂‫ ݀ݎ݋݀ݎܽݓݎ݋‬ൌ ܴǡ ‫)݁ݏݎ݁ݒ݁ݎ‬.
As expected, the fault contribution of DER-2 becomes a
problem. For example, the maximum reverse current that
could flow through CB-2 would be their rated value of
0.25pu, which coincides with the minimum reverse fault
current that the same CB could stand. Thus, there would be
no way to determine the faulty condition in the reverse
direction. To solve this issue, and considering that DER2 is
2017 IEEE PES Innovative Smart Grid Technologies Conference - Latin America (ISGT Latin America). Quito, Ecuador

a storage supply and capable of supplying more power than the maximum load current (‫ܫ‬௠௔௫ǡ௡ǡௗ ሻand 0.9 times the
required by Load-2 and Load-3, the maximum current minimum fault current has been usedሺ‫݂ܫ‬௠௜௡ǡ௡ǡௗ ሻ. The
supplied in normal working is limited to 80% (0.20pu) of substantial variation of the current fault between the two
their rated value, thus allowing a margin of 0.05pu to detect operation modes suggests the use of a very inverse time
faults. Is important to emphasise that this limitation does not characteristic curve.
affect the normal operation of the DER-2, as this action will
only limit in the rare case when DERs feed the main grid for C. Voltage and frequency protection
the case of all microgrid loads being disconnected. The voltage and frequency protections (VFR) are located
independently in each bus-bar and in the DER, working both
TABLE II. CURRENT THROUGH CB1, CB2 AND CB3. together with the overcurrent protection. In fact, the voltage
Current Current and frequency protections act as back-up of the overcurrent
Circuit Parameter Parameter protection. The voltage and frequency protections are
Breaker (pu) (pu)
especially helpful to trip CB-DER2 and CB-SH1, as for both
‫ܫ‬௠௔௫ଵி 0.37 ‫ܫ‬௠௔௫ଵோ 0.50
an overcurrent is not possible. In addition, the protection was
CB1
‫݂ܫ‬௠௜௡ଵி 3.86 ‫݂ܫ‬௠௜௡ଵோ 1.28 performed by using definite time characteristics, taking into
‫ܫ‬௠௔௫ଶி 0.17 ‫ܫ‬௠௔௫ଶோ 0.20 account a safety margin of േͳͲΨ of the nominal voltage
CB2 ሺܸ௡ ሻ, and േʹΨ of the nominal frequency (݂௡ ). The
‫݂ܫ‬௠௜௡ଶி 1.29 ‫݂ܫ‬௠௜௡ଶோ 0.25 protection time was graded to avoid the disconnection of two
‫ܫ‬௠௔௫ଷி 0.1 ‫ܫ‬௠௔௫ଷோ N/A adjacent circuit breakers. It’s important to emphasise that to
CB3 avoid mis-operation of overcurrent relays, the voltage or
‫݂ܫ‬௠௜௡ଷி 0.25 ‫݂ܫ‬௠௜௡ଶோ 0.15
frequency protection cannot work before the microgrid
overcurrent protection. Therefore, the protection time would
start after the maximum operation time of OCRs (i.e. 1s).
The required protection relay needs to operate two
Following these guidelines, a grading time of 0.3s starting
different settings; both depend on the fault direction.
from the 1rst was used. The operation curves for voltage and
Therefore, the most suitable protection device is a numerical
frequency protections are shown in Figure 5.
relay. It is important to mention that under the scheme of the
Figure 1, between relays, is not necessary to use
communication.
In accordance with IEC60255, the normalised operation
of the IDMT relays follows (2):
‫ܥ‬ (2)
‫ݐ‬ൌ ή ܶ‫ܵܯ‬
‫ ܫ‬ఈ
ቀ ቁ െͳ
‫ܫ‬௦

where t is the relay operation time, ‫ܫ‬௦ is the current pick-up,

‫ ܫ‬is the actual current measured and TMS is the Time
Multiplier Setting. Optimal protection can be achieved with
an adequate setting of ‫ܫ‬௦ and TMS. In the traditional relays, Fig. 5. Operation curves for voltage and frequency relays.
the values of TMS are in the range of 0.1 to 1 [12]. However,
numerical relays offer flexibility in their programming and IV. RESULTS
could accept values under or above the range stated. The
A. Grid connected mode evaluation
values of the constants ‫ ܥ‬and Į depend on the curve
For the case of “Grid Connected Mode Evaluation”, a
characteristics.
solid three phase to ground fault on each bus-bar at t=2s is
TABLE III. OVERCURRENT RELAYS SETTINGS applied. The active and reactive power of DERs, bus-bar
voltages, CB currents and trip signals are measured
Pick-up Dial Operating individually. The waveforms for a fault applied in the BUS-
Relay Direction current (Is) (TMS) time (s)
1, in the BUS-2 and in the BUS-3 are shown in Figure 6, 7
Forward 0.44 0.459 0.9 and 8 respectively. In all cases, the fault is effectively aisled
OCR-1
Reverse 0.60 0.007 0.1 by using the tripping signals given by the corresponding
protection relays. Once the fault is cleared, the voltage in the
Forward 0.21 0.101 0.3 unfaulty bus-bars is stabilized and continues supplying the
OCR-2
Reverse 0.24 N/A 0.2 energy to the load by the DERs. It is important to notice that
the voltage drop caused by the absence of voltage or power
Forward 0.14 0.005 0.1
OCR-3 control is still in the allowed ranges.
Reverse 0.05 0.120 0.9
B. Islanding mode evaluation
The relay grading margin, namely the time at which the Next, the microgrid protection scheme was evaluated
discrimination is achieved by varying the time delay between when the main grid is disconnected at the instant ‫ ݐ‬ൌ ͲǤʹ‫ݏ‬.
two adjacent relays, was performed taking into account a In all cases the islanding was detected at ‫ ݐ‬ൌ ͲǤͶʹ‫ ݏ‬and gives
typical discrimination time of 0.3s. This time was performed the trip signal to CB1. Therefore, the operation time of
separately for forward and reverse directions. The values islanding protection is 0.22s which should be less that
shown in Table III were used to set the inverse time and maximum time detection, stablished by IEEE1547 i.e. 2s.
instantaneous relay elements. A security margin of 1.2 times
 2017 IEEE PES Innovative Smart Grid Technologies Conference - Latin America (ISGT Latin America). Quito, Ecuador

After that, a three-phase fault is applied to each bus-bar at The importance of back-up relays is evidenced when the
the instant ‫ ݐ‬ൌ ͲǤͷ‫ ݏ‬to observe their respective response. fault is applied in BUS-2. As shown in Figure 11, OCR3
does not work due to the fault current provided by SH1
becomes extinguishing and decreasing below their pick-up
value. This time, VFR3 acts at last instance. Then the
persistent low voltage present in BUS-2 causes that DER2
stops supplying fault current at ‫ ݐ‬ൌ ʹ‫ ݏ‬when CB-DER2 is
opened by the signal of VFR-DER2.

Fig. 6. Waveforms for a fault at BUS-1 in grid connected mode.

Fig. 8. Waveforms for afault at BUS-3 in grid connected mode.

Fig. 7. Waveforms for a fault at BUS-2 in grid connected mode.

The waveforms for faults in BUS-1, BUS-2 and BUS-3

are shown in the Figures 9, 10 and 11 respectively. Despite
the low short circuit current levels, the faulty section is aisled
allowing the remaining ones to work properly with the
corresponding DERs.

Fig. 9. Waveforms for a fault at BUS-1 in islanding mode.

 2017 IEEE PES Innovative Smart Grid Technologies Conference - Latin America (ISGT Latin America). Quito, Ecuador
Fig. 10. Waveforms for a fault at BUS-2 in islanding mode.
Fig. 11. Waveforms for a fault at BUS-3 in islanding mode.
V. CONCLUSIONS AND FUTURE WORKS
The simulation results show that the protection scheme
proposed is capable to detect external fault conditions and
separate the faulty bus-bar in both operation modes: grid
connected and islanding. The main limitation of the design
was the ability to deal within the negligible fault current
contribution by the converter-fed battery, which was
restricted to the 80% of their rated normal operation current.
In addition, due to the fact that back-up protection was
performed considering the maximum operation time of
primary protection, the extension of the microgrid by the
inclusion of additional bus-bars suggests that the operation
time for back-up protection needed to be increased, which
could compromise the stability of the microgrid. For those
reasons, while the proposed protection scheme performs
well for small microgrids, further analysis is required in
terms of feasibility for implementation in a long microgrid.
Future works should involve incorporating the protection
strategy into a controlled microgrid and then into an
operational microgrid, and testing the performance using the
methodology criteria to establish the settings for each
protection relay.
REFERENCES
[1] M. Kuo and S. Lu, “Design and Implementation of Real-Time
Intelligent Control and Structure Based on Multi-Agent Systems in
Microgrids,” in Energies, vol.6, no. 11, 2013, pp.6045-6059
[2] E. Sortomme, S. Venkata and J. Mitra, "Microgrid Protection Using
Communication-Assisted Digital Relays," IEEE Transactions
on Power Delivery, vol.25, no.4, Oct. 2010, pp.2789-2796
[3] G. Buigues, A. Dysko, V. Valverde, V. Zamora and E. Fernandez,
"Microgrid Protection: Technical challenges and existing
techniques," Renewable Energy and Power Quality Journal, vol.6,
no.11, 2013, pp.1280-1292.
[4] C. Schwaegerl and L. Tao, “The Microgrids Concept,” in
Microgrids: Architectures and Control, John Wiley and Sons Ltd,
Chichester, United Kingdom, 2013
[5] A. Oudalov and A. Fidigatti, “Adaptive Network Protection in
Microgrids, ” International Journal of Distributed Energy Resources,
vol.4, no.3, Dec. 2008, pp.201-225
[6] K. Zheng and M. Xia, "Impacts of microgrid on protection of
distribution networks and protection strategy of microgrid," in 2011
International Conference on Advanced Power System Automation
and Protection, vol.1, Oct 2011, pp.356-359
[7] P. Mahat, Z. Chen and B. Bak-Jensen, "Review of islanding detection
methods for distributed generation," in Third International
Conference on Electric Utility Deregulation and Restructuring and
Power Technologies, April 2008, pp.2743-2748
[8] N.K. Choudhary, S.R. Mohanty and R.K. Singh, "A review on
Microgrid protection," Electrical Engineering Congress (iEECON),
Mar 2014, pp.1-4
[9] Joon-Ho Choi, Soon-Ryul Nam, Hae-Kon Nam and Jae-Chul Kim,
"Adaptive protection schemes of Distributed Generation at
distribution network for automatic reclosing and voltage sags," IEEE
International Conference on Sustainable Energy Technologies, Nov
2008, pp.810-815
[10] K. Sarwagya and P. K. Nayak, "An extensive review on the state-of-
art on microgrid protection," 2015 IEEE Power, Communication and
Information Technology Conference (PCITC), Bhubaneswar, 2015,
pp. 862-866
[11] B. Lui, “Advanced ROCOF protection of distribution systems,”
Ph.D. dissertation, Dept. Elect. Eng., Nottingham Univ.,Nottingham,
UK, 2012
[12] M.S. Almas, R. Leelaruji, L. Vanfretti,"Over-current relay model
implementation for real time simulation & Hardware-in-the-Loop
(HIL) validation," IECON-38th Annual Conference on IEEE
Industrial Electronics Society, Oct. 2012, pp.4789-4796