Feeder Automation within the Scope of Substation Automation
Jiyuan Fan, Senior Member, IEEE Xiaoling Zhang
Beijing Sifang Automation
Beijing, China
ABSTRACT--This paper presents the
commonly used approaches to feeder
automation (FA) and introduces a practical
approach to implementing feeder automation
that is virtually a simple extension of the
substation automation by covering the feeders.
FA is usually implemented either based on a
centralized approach or a distributed approach.
Normally a distributed approach is simple and
flexible. It can be implemented in a small
scale but can only provide limited FA
functions. Instead, a centralized approach is
capable of providing complete FA functions
but requires large scale implementation. The
approach presented in this paper is of the
advantages of both the distributed solutions
and the centralized solutions. It can achieve all
FA objectives without requiring additional
communication and hardware facilities
compared to the automated distributed
solutions, e.g., the IntelliTeam approach [2 ].
Index Terms — Feeder Automation,
Distributed Solutions, Distribution
Automation.
1. Introduction
Feeder automation is an important part of
the distribution automation and has received
considerable attention over the last few years.
Many approaches have been proposed and
implemented in power utilities worldwide.
These approaches can be classified into three
categories: Semi-automatic solutions,
distributed solutions [2] and centralized
solutions [1]. The semi-automatic solution is
very simple and is purely based on the
1­4244­0178­X/06/$20.00 ©2006 IEEE
automatic feeder line switches. It does not
involve long distance communications at all
and, therefore, can only implement very
limited functions of feeder automation. The
distributed solution tackles the problem by
organizing the automated feeder line switches
into groups or teams [2]. The neighboring
teams communicate locally to detect and
isolate faulted feeder sections and quickly
restore the service to the healthy sections. The
whole process is completed based on
predefined local logics. It does not require the
knowledge of feeder network topology and
therefore its operation does not rely on the
centralized master station in the control center.
This approach significantly improves the FA
functionalities but is still subject to some
limitations. The centralized solution is actually
a full scale distribution automation system. It
requires the full knowledge of the distribution
network and relies on the communication with
the control center. This approach can
implement all feeder automation functions but
requires big initial investment and normal
operation cost.
This paper introduces a practical approach to
feeder automation. It is simply an extension of
the substation automation by implementing
the feeder automation as part of the SA system.
This solution can achieve all FA objectives
without requiring additional communication
and hardware facilities compared to the
automated distributed solutions.
2. Objectives of Feeder Automation
607 PSCE 2006

The main objectives of feeder automation
include:
1. Automated fault detection, isolation and service
restoration (FDIR): This is the most important
function of feeder automation. For a fully
automated feeder, the faulted feeder section
can be detected, isolated and restored the
service for the healthy sections within 20-30
seconds.
2. Transformer and feeder load transferring and
balancing: This allows FA to automatically
transfer loads among feeders or substation
main transformers to balance feeder loads or
main transformer loads.
3. Transformer and feeder phase load balancing:
This allows FA to balance main transformer
and feeder load among three phases.
4. Scheduled sectional service interruption for
maintenance: This allows the user to isolate a
feeder section remotely for maintenance
without interrupting the service to other
sections.
3. Existing Approaches
The commonly used approaches to
implementing feeder automation are in
three categories: semi-automatic
solution, distributed solutions and
centralized solutions.
3.1 Semi-automatic Solution
This approach is purely based on the
built-in logics in feeder sectionalizing
switches. It works in the following sequence:
when a fault occurs in a section of the feeder,
the feeder breaker trips and the sectionalizing
switches along the feeder line open
automatically due to loss of power. When the
feeder breaker recloses, the individual
sectionalizing switches automatically close
back consecutively with a predefined time
608
delay after each switch is energized in
sequence. When the switch that feeds the
faulted section is closed, the feeder breaker
will trip again and this switch is detected as
the nearest switch to the fault and will be
opened again and locked out for prohibiting
from future auto-closing. After a certain time
delay, the feeder break will reclose again and
the healthy up-stream sections are restored by
the sectionalizing switches automatically,
while the faulted section and the down-stream
sections will remain de-energized for problem
fixing and manual restoration. The advantage
of this approach is that it can properly restore
the service of up-stream sections without
requiring sophisticated communication and
control facilities. However, it cannot report the
fault location and cannot restore the service
for the down-stream sections automatically
either.
3.2 Distributed Solution
One of the widely accepted distributed
solutions of feeder automation is the so called
IntelliTeam method [2]. This approach
organizes the auto-switches into teams which
are configured with certain local intelligent
logics for FDIR. It is based on the local
communication among the team members and
the neighboring teams. The team configuration
can be remotely set in the control center and
then downloaded to the individual switches.
Compared to the semi-automation approach,
this approach can fully resolve the problem of
FDIR. One of the advantages of this approach
is that it does not require the knowledge of
system topology and other network parameters.
It can be deployed in small scales, e.g., feeder
by feeder. But it is not effective to achieve
other FA objectives, e.g., the load transferring
or phase balancing, etc. Another disadvantage
of this approach is its natural feature of
sophisticated team configuration, especially
when network reconfiguration is carried out
frequently for loss reduction or maintenance.
3.3 Centralized Solution
The centralized solution of feeder
automation is really part of the full
distribution automation [1]. This approach
requires the full knowledge of the distribution
network, including the network topology and
operation parameters. The FA functions are
centrally implemented and all automatic
switches are controlled by the control center.
This approach fully relies on the
communication facilities between the
individual switches and the control center. The
disadvantage of this approach is its
requirement of large scale implementation.
4. FA: an Extension of SA
The proposed solution of feeder
automation by this paper is a semi-centralized
approach which is virtually an extension of the
substation automation (SA) by covering the
connected feeders. Normally, a substation is
automated prior to its feeders. It is in nature
that the feeder automation can be
implemented within the scope of SA by
extending the communication network to
cover the automated feeder switches. Each
substation will be responsible for monitoring
and controlling the feeders within its scope, as
shown in Fig. 1.
However, in a real distribution system a feeder
may be connected to several other feeders
609
through normally opened tie-switches that
may belong to other substations. Under certain
operation conditions, some of the feeder
sections of one feeder may be fed by other
feeders due to network reconfiguration for
maintenance, fault restoration or load
transferring. This makes the SA based feeder
automation a challenging task in practical
implementations. This problem can be well
resolved by installing a dual feeder terminal
unit (FTU) on a tie-switch linking two feeders
that belong to two different substations. The
dual FTU will allow both substations to
monitor and control the tie-switch. It can also
allow both sides to download the basic
information about the operation condition of
the feeder, such as the available capacity for
picking up more loads. This information can
be read and used by the other side to carry out
load transferring or service restoration.
The FA unit in each SA master station is
responsible for monitoring and controlling its
own feeder switches, while the tie-switches
are monitored and controlled by both sides.
The FA unit is also modeled with the network
topology of all feeders in its scope. Simple
operational logics are proposed to deal with
the typical operation scenarios:
Scenario 1: Assume the study feeder operates
under its normal configuration and a fault
occurs in a feeder section, as shown in Fig. 2.
Sub A Sub B
FB A FB B
(A)
N.O.
Tie-Switch T
 The tie-switch capacities are calculated at both
sides by the corresponding FA modules in the
two substations and are downloaded to the
dual FTU for other side to read.

Scenario 2: Assume a few feeder sections of

the study feeder in substation A are supplied
by the feeder in substation B due to load
transferring. A fault occurs in one of the
transferred sections, as shown in Fig. 3.
Sub A Sub B

FB A FB B

(A)

SW C
N.O.
F

SW D SW E tie-switch T

It can be seen from the figures that the FDIR Sub A Sub B

operation is executed in the following

procedures:
1. The faulted information is reported back
FB A FB B
to the SA master station with the feeder
breaker tripping signal and the fault (B)

indicating flags from the associated FTUs

along the feeder (Fig.2. (B)). SW C

2. The FA unit in the SA master station F

N.O.

SW D SW E tie-switch T
detects the fault location and issues
tripping commands to the adjacent
switches of the faulted section to isolate
the fault (Fig.2. (B)).
3. FA unit issues a control command to
reclose the feeder breaker to restore the
service for the healthy upstream sections
(Fig. 2 (C)).
4. FA unit checks the capacity of the
tie-switch connected to another substation
feeder and issues a control command to
close the switch if its capacity is sufficient
to pick up the load (Fig.2. (B)).

610
It can be seen from Fig. 3 that the FDIR
function is carried out by the FA units in both
substations. The detailed procedures are
described as follows:
1. the fault occurs at location F and feeder
breaker B trips right away.
2. Because the fault is occurred at the study
feeder side of tie-switch T that is out of
the scope of substation B, the FA unit in
substation B opens tie-switch T to isolate
the fault (Fig. 3 (B)).
3. FA unit in substation B recloses the feeder
breaker FB to restore the service for
feeder B (Fig. 3 (C)).
4. At the same time, the FA unit in
substation A receives the fault report from
switches E and tie-switch T, from which it
identifies the faulted section and isolate
the fault by opening switches E and D
(Fig. 3 (B)).
5. It then closes tie-switch T and C to restore
the service for the remaining healthy
sections, as shown in Fig. 3(C).
Scenario 3: Assume a few feeder sections of It can be seen from Fig. 4 that the FDIR
the study feeder in substation A are transferred function is carried out by the FA unit in the
to another feeder and a fault occurs in one of study feeder substation with the following
the remaining sections, as shown in Fig. 4: procedures:
1. The fault occurs at location F and feeder
breaker A trips right away.
2. FA unit in substation A detects the fault
location and issues control commands to
open switches B and C to isolate the fault
(Fig. 4. (B)).
3. FA unit in substation A closes the feeder
breaker A to restore service to the
upstream feeder sections (Fig. 4. (C)).
4. FA unit in substation A checks the
capacity of feeder B based on the data
from tie-switch T and figure out the
capacity of switch D. If available, it closes
switch D to restore service to the healthy
downstream sections, as shown in Fig.
4(C).

611
The proposed approach can also effectively
solve the problems of other FA objectives in a
similar way as to solving FDIR problems.
5. Conclusion
This paper presented a basic analysis of
the existing FA solutions, including the
semi-automatic approach, distributed
approach and centralized approach, and
introduced a practical approach that is of the
advantages of both distributed and centralized
solutions without involving additional
software complexity and hardware demands
compared to the distributed solution. This
approach can be easily implemented as an
extension of the substation automation
function.
6. References
[1]. Gary Ockwell, “Implementation of
Network Reconfiguration for Taiwan Power
Company”, IEEE PES general meeting
proceeding, 2003, #0-7803-7989-6/03.
[2]. D. M. Staszesky, D. Craig, C. Befus,
612
“Advanced feeder Automation Is Here”, IEEE
Power&Energy Magazine, Sept./Oct. 2005
[3]. J. Y. Fan, L. Zhang, J. D. McDonald,
"Distribution Network Reconfiguration:
Single Loop Optimization," IEEE/PES Trans.
On Power Systems, Vol. 11, No. 3, August
1996, pp 1643-1647.
[4]. W. H. Kersting, “Distribution System
Modeling and Analysis”, CRC Press, 2002.
ISBN: TK3001.K423 2001.
Jiyuan (Ji-Yuan) Fan (SM’95) received Ph.D.
degree in ECE from Clarkson University,
Potsdam, New York in 1989. He worked with
Advance Control Systems for more than 12
years. He is currently with Beijing Sifang
Automation in Beijing, China.
Xiaoling Zhang received MS. degree in ECE
from Wuhan University, China in 2003. She
worked with Shanghai TEPIA Technology Co.,
Ltd. in 2003-2004. She joined Beijing Sifang
Automation in 2004.