A Review of Faults and Fault Diagnosis in
Micro-Grids Electrical Energy Infrastructure
James Hare, Xiaofang Shi, Shalabh Gupta and Ali Bazzi
Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering
University of Connecticut
Storrs, CT 06279, USA
Abstract—With the advancements of sensing, communication,
and control technologies, the existing power systems have evolved
with the development of Smart Micro-grids. Smart micro-grids
integrate information technology, communication technology and
power generation systems into one unified micro power system
for robust and reliable power. Current and future microgrids are
expected to have significant clean energy penetration with rising
environmental concerns. A critical problem in power systems
is the cascading effect of faults leading to severe failures and
blackouts unless timely protective actions are taken. As a recovery
mechanism, smart micro-grids are envisioned to detect these
critical changes and switch into island mode for continual power
generation and system stability. However, their electrical energy
infrastructure is also prone to faults and instabilities emphasizing
the need to develop real-time algorithms for self diagnosis that
can capture failure characteristics in the early phase of their
evolution using data collected from monitoring units. This paper
provides a comprehensive review that focuses on faults and
fault diagnosis methods in smart micro-grids with clean and
conventional generation systems as well as their interconnections.
I. I NTRODUCTION
Recent advancements of modern technologies in power
systems have facilitated the development of Smart Micro-
grids [1]–[3] that provide enhanced monitoring, communica-
tion, and control capabilities as compared to the traditional
power systems [4]. Smart micro-grids utilize the intelligence
characteristics of a smart grid to produce a micro power
system allowing for high system-level energy reliability in
terms of generation, availability, and load support. Due to
gradual growth of anomalies with the evolution of system’s
parameters, complexities arise leading to diminishing perfor-
mance. In this regard, smart micro-grids are envisioned to infer
critical changes in their own and larger power grids to which
they tie based on sensor data to make appropriate decisions
that facilitate maintenance for robust, reliable and sustainable
power generation by switching into island mode.
When faults occur in the traditional power system effects
tend to propagate throughout the system that can lead to power
disruptions causing huge impacts on society. These failures can
occur without early warning due to a wide range of possible
events such as equipment failures, animal/tree contacts, falling
trees, lightning strikes, malicious attacks, etc. [5]. On August
2003, Northeastern US and Ontario Canada experienced a
978-1-4799-5776-7/14/$31.00 ©2014 IEEE
Authorized licensed use limited to: PES University Bengaluru. Downloaded on January 14,2023 at 10:20:43 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
power blackout lasting four days starting in Ohio resulting in
cascading failures throughout the region. This affected about
50 million people resulting in an estimated economic loss
of around $4-$10 billion [6]. In the event of large failures,
smart micro-grids are envisioned to disconnect from the main
grid into island mode where they use clean and conventional
generation systems and energy storage devices to sustain
power and stability. Since smart micro-grids are now being
installed throughout the world [1], a comprehensive study is
needed that focuses on clean energy generation systems as
well as conventional systems with an emphasis on their faults
and early diagnosis of their failures.
Implementation of distributed sensing and communication
devices in a power grid provides an ability to observe different
states of the system, thereby allowing for robust control
and efficient use of power. Three types of commonly used
monitoring devices are: (1) Smart Meters [7], (2) Wireless
Sensor Networks (WSN) [8], and (3) Phasor Measurement
Units (PMU) [9]. The data produced by these devices provide
the necessary information about the health of the main power
grid as well as the clean and conventional power generation
systems within the smart micro-grid. Based on this, the
smart micro-grid possess the ability to detect changes in the
main grid to allow for autonomous reconfiguration between
island mode and grid connected mode to maintain optimal
performance and stability. Once in island mode, the objective
is to utilize these measurements for intelligent self-diagnosis
of failures and autonomous control for sustainable power
generation and distribution. For example, in an ideal scenario,
the prorogating effects of transmission line failures during the
Northeast Blackout of 2003 [10] would have triggered smart
micro-grids throughout the region to disconnect from the main
grid allowing for a decreased number of affected users. Thus,
the need for intelligent fault diagnosis methods is evident
in smart micro-grids for reconfiguration to island mode and
resilient control against their own generation system faults.
Fault diagnosis methods typically consist of model-based
and data-driven approaches. Model-based approaches require
validated models of the system with an accurate representation
of the failure effects under healthy and faulty scenarios. From
the models, training data can be generated for healthy/faulty
3325
 Fig. 1: Smart Micro-grid
scenarios and classification algorithms are developed for de-
tection and diagnosis. The data-driven approaches develop
classification algorithms in a similar manner except the data
used for training is generated from the physical system.
This review paper provides insight into the current trends
and approaches of fault diagnosis in smart micro-grids with
significant clean energy penetration while in island mode.
Communication and information technology is assumed to
have been provided to the smart micro-grid to allow for
switching between grid-connected and island mode. Faults
in clean energy generation systems, conventional systems as
well as their interconnections through cables and transmission
lines are reviewed to provide a high level understanding
of their failure modes and a comprehensive study of their
diagnosis methods. Many review papers discuss the feasibility
and futuristic aspects of the smart micro-grids [3], commu-
nication/monitoring issues [4], [11], [12], and control aspects
[13], [14] but do not discuss in detail the clean energy failure
modes and their diagnosis methods. This will aid in the
development of intelligent reconfigurable control actions based
on early fault diagnosis to improve the efficiency, reliability,
and resiliency of smart micro-grids in island mode.
This review paper is organized as follows. Section II
provides a high level overview of the smart micro-grids by
discussing their electrical energy infrastructure, their corre-
sponding failures and their effects. Section III presents a com-
prehensive study of the state-of-the-art detection and diagnosis
methods of these failures, and section IV summarizes the
review by discussing the future work thats needed to improve
the detection and diagnosis of smart micro-grid failures.
II. S MART M ICRO - GRID E NERGY I NFRASTRUCTURE
The essence of smart micro-grids, as shown in Fig. 1,
includes the integration of sensing, communication and dis-
tributed power generation technologies to form a reliable and
efficient power system. allowing them to infer changes in the
main grid and switch to island mode for sustainable power
distribution through clean and conventional generation systems
3326
Authorized licensed use limited to: PES University Bengaluru. Downloaded on January 14,2023 at 10:20:43 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
and energy storage devices. Once in island mode, the micro-
grid must monitor its electrical energy infrastructure to ensure
robust and resilient power generation and distribution locally.
Wind turbines, PV panels, and fuel cells are common for clean
energy penetration while diesel generators are common in the
event clean energy generation system can not provide sufficient
power. Note that this paper addresses the electrical energy
infrastructure in terms of clean and conventional generation,
in addition to interconnections through cables and transmission
lines. Further work is desired to cover a wider variety of
distributed generation in addition to energy storage.
In order to detect the sudden changes in the main grid’s
measurement waveforms, sensing devices must be installed
throughout the grid for feedback control. The current sensing
devices used include Smart Meters [7], [15], WSN [8] and
PMU [9]. Smart Meters are used for monitoring the power
consumption of loads and allow for two-way communication
between the customers and providers. WSN are used to
capture failure characteristics of substations, power generation
systems, and transmission lines. WSN include temperature
sensors, vibration/strain sensors, breaker position indicators,
video cameras, etc. [4]. PMU are used to measure the phase
angles of the bus voltages to allow for the generation of
voltage and current waveforms. By including such hetero-
geneous sensors, many new and exciting fault detection and
diagnosis approaches can be utilized to evaluate the health
of the network. For example, vibration/strain sensors can be
placed on transmission lines to detect if there are unhealthy
loads on the lines which can lead to phase-to-ground failures.
The measurements are transmitted to monitoring stations using
wireless/wired transmission protocols [11], [12], [16] which
include cellular networks, ZigBee, wireless mesh, and power
lines. Thus, these sensing devices and diagnosis methods of
main grid instabilities can be utilized for proper, stable, and
resilient operation of micro-grids.
Once in island mode, smart micro-grids typically utilize
measurements generated from meters and non invasive sensing
devices to perform diagnostics and maintain performance. Be-
 TABLE I: Failures and Effects on Smart Micro-Grid’s Electrical Energy Infrastructure
Component Failures Effects Diagnosis Methods

Single line-to-ground, A fault current is WT [17], [18],

Cables and Double line to ground, introduced leading to ANN [19]–[22],
Transmission Lines Line-to-line, a tripped breaker SVM [23]–[26],
Fuzzy Logic [27], [28]

Module failure, Model-based approaches [29], [30],

PV Panel Cell degradation, Reduction in the Satellite images [31],
Cell open/short circuit, output power Machine Learning [32],
ECM and TDR [33]

Gearbox failures, Neural Network [34]–[36],

Generator failures, Decreased torque Fuzzy logic [36], [37],
Wind Turbine Power electronic failures, and excessive heat WT [38],
Rotors, blades, and hydraulic in the windings Fourier Transform [39]
Electric machine electrical failures

Membrane, Electrocatalyst, Model-based approach using

Fuel Cell Catalyst, Gas diffusion, Voltage drop in the ac impendence [40]–[43],
Bipolar plat and Sealing output of the cell State observers [44]
gasket degradation

Fuel leakage,
Bearing failure, Decreased Neural Network [45],
Diesel Generator Crankshaft failure, combustion State estimation [46],
Inter-turn and Inter-slot efficiency and PCA and K-NN [47]
short circuits, power generation
Rotor bending & eccentricity

fore diagnostic methods can be discussed, an understanding of
the faults that occur within their electrical energy infrastructure
must be understood. Table I summarizes the components
reviewed in the paper, their failures and effects.
A. Cables and Transmission Lines
Power cables and transmission lines are the essential in-
terconnections between power generation systems and loads
forming a unified micro-grid. Power cables are typically
installed underground while transmission lines are installed
overhead. Underground cables are subjected to mechanical
failures while overhead lines are exposed to natural events that
can cause failures such as lighting strikes, icing, short circuits,
overloading, equipment failure, aging, animal/tree contact, hu-
man actions, lack of maintenance, etc. [10], [48]. Three most
common failures are: i) single line-to-ground, ii) double line-
to-ground, and iii) line-to-line. Single/double line-to-ground
failures occur due to one/two phase(s) short circuiting to
ground from physical contact. Line-to-line failures occur due
to a short circuit between two phases and are caused by broken
insulators. This causes unhealthy spikes in the voltage and
current waveforms throughout the smart micro-grid.
B. Photovoltaic (PV) Panels
PV panels generate renewable energy [49], [50] from so-
lar radiation. They consist of glass, metals, polymers and
semiconductors [51]. Failures associated with PV panels are
cell, module and by-pass diode failures. Cell failures consist
of degradation failures, open/short circuited cells and hot-
spot failures that occur due to corrosion/mechanical loads,
cell interconnections, and natural occurrences. Module failures
include open/short circuits, glass breakage, and delamination
typically caused by manufacturing defects, mechanical loads
(e.g., snow, wind or hail), and reduction in bond strength
respectively. By-pass diode failures occur due to overheating
of the diode. These failures cause a gradual reduction in the PV
panels’ output power over time resulting in declining voltage
and current waveforms throughout the smart micro-grid.
C. Wind Turbines
Wind turbines are subject to failures in the following
subsystems: i) Gearbox and bearing, ii) Generator, iii) Power
electronics and electric control, and iv) Rotors, blades and
hydraulic control [52], [53]. Gearbox and bearing faults are
the leading cause of wind turbine failures. They are caused
by corrosion and mechanical defects leading to a reduced
efficiency. Generator failures are caused by bearing, stator,
and rotor faults and lead to unbalanced harmonics, reduction
in efficiency, decreased average torque and excessive heating
of the windings. Power electronics and electric control failures
occur due to semiconductor device faults caused by short/open
circuits and gate drive circuit faults. Rotors and blades fail due
to corrosion, mechanical damages and manufacturing defects.
Corrosion leads to cracked rotors while mechanical damages
caused by ice, lighting, insects, etc. can lead to roughness on
the blades’ surface causing a loss in efficiency and change in

3327

Authorized licensed use limited to: PES University Bengaluru. Downloaded on January 14,2023 at 10:20:43 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 Fig. 2: Fault Detection and Diagnosis Methods for Smart Micro-Grid Components
stiffness. Hydraulic control failures cause a reduction of fluid
due to air contamination resulting in a leak causing failures
in the rotor blades and bearings. Detailed failure mode and
effects analysis has been presented in [54]. Since these failures
lead to a reduced efficiency and torque of the generator, their
effects on the smart micro-grid are observed through decreased
voltage and current waveforms similar to the PV panels.
D. Fuel Cells
Typically the Proton Exchange Membrane (PEM) fuel cells
are used to generate clean electric power from the chemical
energy emitted from the reaction of hydrogen and oxygen.
They consist of membrane, electrocatalyst, catalyst, and gas
diffusion layers which are subject to degradation failures
[55]. The membrane can fail due to mechanical, thermal
and chemical degradations. Mechanical degradations cause
perforations due to improper membrane electrode assembly
and humidity cycling. Thermal degradations are caused by
a change in hydrations (flooding and dehydrating) due to
operating temperatures beyond the operating range. Chemical
degradations are formed by the presence of foreign cationic
ions due to combustion between hydrogen and oxygen. The
electrocatalyst and catalyst layers degrade due to a reduction
of proton ions on the anode side or corrosion of catalyst carbon
which leads to a decrease in catalyst activity. The gas diffusion
layer degrades from an increase in water absorption causing
a decay in performance. Other failures include Bipolar plate
and Sealing Gasket degradation. Bipolar plate degradation
is caused by corrosion and leads to a drop in the output
voltage. Sealing gasket degradation results from force retention
compression loss leading to plate electrical shorting. Just as the
failures of the PV Panels and Wind Turbines, the degradation
failures cause a decrease in the voltage and current waveforms
that are observed in the smart micro-grid.
E. Conventional Generators
Conventional generation systems are used as alternative
power sources in the event of power grid failures. Typically
diesel generators are used for back-up power but as environ-
mental concerns grow, natural gas will start becoming the most
3328
Authorized licensed use limited to: PES University Bengaluru. Downloaded on January 14,2023 at 10:20:43 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
common back-up power generation source. This paper focuses
on a review of the faults of the diesel generator. They convert
diesel fuel into torque, driving the turbine of an electric gener-
ator to produce electrical power. Very little research has been
reported on the types of failures for diesel generators, however
their engine and electric generator failures have been reviewed.
Diesel engines are subject to fuel leakage, bearing failures,
and cracked crankshaft failures [56]. A cracked crankshaft
is caused by corrosion/poor assembly and can lead to an
inability to generate rotational energy [57], [58]. Fuel leakage
causes a decrease in gas pressure leading to a reduction in
the combustion efficiency [59]. Bearing failures are caused by
mechanical loads, wear and etching [60]. Electric generator
failures consist of rotor and stator failures. The stator fails
due to single/multiple phase short circuits, inter-turn short
circuits, saturation, and winding grounding. Rotor failures
consist of inter-turn and inter-slot short circuits, rotor bending
and eccentricity. These cause unbalanced air-gap voltages and
line currents, reductions of efficiency, excessive heating, and
disturbances in the current, voltage and flux waveforms. The
effects seen on the smart micro-grid are similar to that of the
PV panel, wind turbine and fuel cell faults where the current
and voltage waveforms decline.
III. FAULT D ETECTION AND D IAGNOSIS M ETHODS
The fault diagnosis methods, shown in Figure 2, for smart
micro-grid electrical energy infrastructure are reviewed below:
A. Cables and Transmission Lines
The three major tasks for protection of cables and trans-
mission lines require accurate detection, diagnosis, and local-
ization of the failure. Typically, protective relays and circuit
breakers are installed to prevent line failures from cascad-
ing throughout the distribution system by monitoring the
voltage and current waveforms. The breakers compare these
waveforms with their expected values to detect if the power
should be disconnected. A model-based approach to study
these waveforms using Artificial Neural Networks (ANN)
have been reported [19]–[22], [22], [61]–[64] for detecting
and diagnosing single/double line-to-ground or line-to-line
failures. ANN are trained to map the waveforms from a variety
of failure conditions to a binary sequence that indicates the
presence or absence of the fault. By testing different lines
throughout the grid, ANN can diagnosis the specific line that
failed. This approach can be computational expensive if there
are a large number of transmission lines throughout the grid
making smaller distribution systems more favorable. Another
approach employs the frequency and time components of the
voltage and current waveforms using the Wavelet Transform
(WT) [17], [18] for diagnosing line failures. This approach
uses an orthogonal projection to map the signals into a 2-
dimensional domain to capture the signal behavior at different
scales and at different time shifts.
Machine learning methods including classifiers such as the
Support Vector Machine (SVM) have also been proposed [23]–
[26] for line failure diagnosis and localization. SVM projects
the signal to a high dimensional space using a kernel function.
In this higher dimensional space, the classifier finds the
optimal hyper planes that separate the different types of fault
classes for high classification accuracy. fuzzy logic techniques
have also been considered for line failures [27], [28] utilizing
the three-line current measurements at each breaker. These
techniques develop logical rules about the properties of the
failures to aid in diagnosis. Identifying the location of faults
within cables has been achieved through impulse-current [65]
where they send impulses through the cable and monitor the
spike locations. Other methods follow similar approaches by
monitoring the reflection of waves throughout the cable [66],
[67]. Utilizing these approaches, the smart micro-grid possess
the ability to identify unhealthy waveforms and take a control
action to maintain power distribution and stability.
B. PV Panels
Detection of PV panel failures require measurement wave-
forms of the output power, voltage, and current. Most fault
detection and diagnosis techniques found in literature use
model-based approaches [29]. These methods utilize a val-
idated simulation model to learn the healthy characteristics
of the system to allow for a comparison with the real-time
physical measurements. Module failures can be detected and
diagnosed by computing the power loss between the real-
time measurements and the simulated waveforms [30], [68].
Chouder and Silvestre developed a logical tree structure for
fault isolation using the DC current and voltage ratios between
the measured and expected waveforms. Chao et al. [32] found
that the power loss information captures the best characteristics
of one module fault within 1 − 5 different branches consisting
of 10 modules connected in series. A diagnostic approach that
uses extension theory was proposed to develop matter element
models to define disjoint sets that capture the failure response.
This method was compared with different machine learning
approaches like Multilayer Perceptron-Back Propagation Neu-
ral Networks and K-Means clustering. Module degradation
analysis for short-circuit current, open-circuit voltage and
maximum output power was achieved by comparing reference
values with data collected from an operating platform [69].
3329
Authorized licensed use limited to: PES University Bengaluru. Downloaded on January 14,2023 at 10:20:43 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
Hot spot module failures were identified by calculating the
correlation between measurement waveforms and simulated
faulty waveforms [70]. A data-driven approach was taken by
Takashima et al. [33], [71] by using two approaches, the earth
capacitance measurement (ECM) and time-domain reflectome-
try (TDR). ECM is used to detect and isolate disconnections in
module strings while TDR is used to detect degradations and
string positions based on the change of voltage waveforms.
Other approaches [31], [72] used satellite images to see the
performance of the panels and to diagnosis module string
failures. This allows for an alternative method for monitoring
the state of the panels and does not require the installation of
monitoring units to measure the output waveforms.
C. Wind Turbines
Wind turbine fault detection and diagnosis methods have
been studied thoroughly in many review papers [52], [53].
Model-based techniques have been developed for gearbox fault
detection [34]–[36] using neural network models. They utilize
vibration, wind speed, temperature, and output power realiza-
tions to compare the expected output with the actual system’s
performance. Diagnosis techniques using fuzzy logic [36],
[37] are often employed using knowledge-based reasoning
to develop rules that diagnose gearbox and rotor failures. A
data-driven approach using frequency analysis have also been
studied. The discrete and continuous time wavelet transforms
[38] and fourier transform analysis [39] of the vibration, wind
speed, output power, voltage and current were used to detect
and diagnose gearbox and electrical winding failures. This
approach was also used to monitor blade stiffness [73] by
investigating normalized slices of the bicoherence of the output
power waveform. Acceleration enveloping signal processing
was performed by Hatch et al [74] and has proven successful
in detecting bearing failures. They were able to identify that
damaged bearings demonstrated much larger sensitivity in the
acceleration envelope then a healthy specimen. Through the
increasing use of WSN, many techniques have been utilized
to diagnose wind turbine failures.
D. Fuel Cells
Fault detection and diagnosis methods for fuel cells typ-
ically use a model-based approach while looking into the
ac impedance measurements. Membrane degradation detection
for flooding and drying has been studied using a model-based
approach [40]–[43] by comparing real measurements of the
ac impedance with data generated by a validated model of
a healthy cell. Using the membrane resistance, polarisation
resistance and diffusion resistance as features for monitoring
the fuel cell’s state of health, Fouquet et al. [40] found that
flooded and dried cells generate data that form clusters that
are clearly separable in the feature space allowing for reliable
diagnosis. For the compressor motor, cell flooding and air
leakage failures, Escobet et al. [42] also found separable
clusters while evaluating the residuals between theoretical
and actual measurements of the excess oxygen, compressor
current, speed, and voltage outputs. Ingimundarson et al.
[75] studied a model-based detection technique for detecting
chemical degradations causing hydrogen leaks which can lead
to combustion failures. They calculate the rate of change in
the anode pressure and leak area of the anode to identify fault
signatures that allow for detection based on an adaptive alarm
limit. Since only the output power, voltage and current are
measurable, the state observer techniques have been developed
for fault detection. Arcak et al. [44] developed an observer to
estimate the partial pressure of hydrogen in the anode channel
of the fuel cell which can be used for membrane degradation
diagnosis. A data-driven approach for fault diagnosis using
a Bayesian network [76] was used to detect the failures of
the compressor motor system. Bhambare et al. [77] used
a data-driven approach based on symbolic dynamics and
Probabilistic Finite State Automata (PFSA) to diagnose the
carbon monoxide (CO) content in hydrogen streams.
E. Conventional Generators
Most detection and diagnosis methods for diesel genera-
tors uses the data-driven approach. However, a model-based
approach using neural networks [45] for the intake system,
injection, and combustion module failures was used by com-
puting residuals between real and theoretical measurements
of the engines roughness. Rotor and stator fault diagnosis
was achieved through parameter estimation based on available
measurements [46]. Signal processing approaches using the
time and frequency domain of the vibration measurements
were analyzed for generator fault diagnosis [78]. Machine
learning approaching for stator and rotor failures have also
been analyzed using the k-Nearest Neighbor (K-NN) classifier
on data transformed to the feature space using Principle
Component Analysis (PCA) [47].
IV. C ONCLUSION AND F UTURE W ORK
Fault detection and diagnosis of smart micro-grids is very
critical to improve the performance and reliability of power
distribution. Early diagnosis of failures of components within
the distribution system facilitates condition based monitoring
and autonomous reconfiguration to reduce repair time and
costs while minimizing cascading failures. This paper reviews
the different failures modes and effects that can occur in the
electrical energy infrastructure of a smart micro-grid with
high renewable penetration and the state-of-the-art detection
and diagnosis methods currently used. Although many ap-
proaches have been studied, there are still many faults that
need improved diagnostic strategies to truly make the modern
power systems Smart. Interaction between the micro-grid and
main grid information and communication infrastructure is
essential for smart micro-grids, and further research addressing
a wider array of energy technologies than those presented
here, in addition to related information and communication
technologies, would be essential for the development robust
and accurate fault diagnosis methods.
3330
Authorized licensed use limited to: PES University Bengaluru. Downloaded on January 14,2023 at 10:20:43 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
R EFERENCES
[1] T. S. Ustun, C. Ozansoy, and A. Zayegh, “Recent developments in
microgrids and example cases around the world a review,” Renewable
and Sustainable Energy Reviews, vol. 15, no. 8, pp. 4030–4041, 2011.
[2] H. Farhangi, “The path of the smart grid,” IEEE Power and Energy
Magazine, vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 18–28, 2010.
[3] X. Fang, S. Misra, G. Xue, and D. Yang, “Smart grid: The new
and improved power grid: A survey,” IEEE Communications Surveys
Tutorials, vol. 14, no. 4, pp. 944–980, 2012.
[4] Y. Yang, D. Divan, R. Harley, and T. Habetler, “Power line sensornet -
a new concept for power grid monitoring,” in IEEE Power Engineering
Society General Meeting, 2006.
[5] L. Xu, M.-Y. Chow, J. Timmis, and L. Taylor, “Power distribution
outage cause identification with imbalanced data using artificial immune
recognition system (airs) algorithm,” IEEE Transactions on Power
Systems, vol. 22, no. 1, pp. 198–204, 2007.
[6] DOE, “Final report on the august 14, 2003 blackout in the united states
and canada,” U.S.-Canada Power System Outage Task Force, 2004.
[7] H. Li, R. Mao, L. Lai, and R. Qiu, “Compressed meter reading for delay-
sensitive and secure load report in smart grid,” in IEEE International
Conference on Smart Grid Communications, 2010, pp. 114–119.
[8] V. Gungor, B. Lu, and G. Hancke, “Opportunities and challenges of
wireless sensor networks in smart grid,” IEEE Transactions on Industrial
Electronics, vol. 57, no. 10, pp. 3557–3564, 2010.
[9] S. Chakrabarti and E. Kyriakides, “Optimal placement of phasor mea-
surement units for power system observability,” IEEE Transactions on
Power Systems, vol. 23, no. 3, pp. 1433–1440, 2008.
[10] M. Kezunovic, “Smart fault location for smart grids,” IEEE Transactions
on Smart Grid, vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 11–22, 2011.
[11] V. Gungor, D. Sahin, T. Kocak, S. Ergut, C. Buccella, C. Cecati, and
G. Hancke, “Smart grid technologies: Communication technologies and
standards,” IEEE Transactions on Industrial Informatics, vol. 7, no. 4,
pp. 529–539, 2011.
[12] B. Akyol, H. Kirkham, S. Clements, and M. Hadley, “A survey of
wireless communications for the electric power system,” Prepared for
the US Department of Energy, 2010.
[13] R. Zamora and A. K. Srivastava, “Controls for microgrids with storage:
Review, challenges, and research needs,” Renewable and Sustainable
Energy Reviews, vol. 14, no. 7, pp. 2009–2018, 2010.
[14] N. Lidula and A. Rajapakse, “Microgrids research: A review of experi-
mental microgrids and test systems,” Renewable and Sustainable Energy
Reviews, vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 186–202, 2011.
[15] D. Hart, “Using ami to realize the smart grid,” in IEEE Power and
Energy Society General Meeting - Conversion and Delivery of Electrical
Energy in the 21st Century, 2008, pp. 1–2.
[16] V. C. Gungor and F. C. Lambert, “A survey on communication networks
for electric system automation,” Computer Networks, vol. 50, no. 7, pp.
877–897, 2006.
[17] J.-A. Jiang, P.-L. Fan, C.-S. Chen, C.-S. Yu, and J.-Y. Sheu, “A
fault detection and faulted-phase selection approach for transmission
lines with haar wavelet transform,” in IEEE PES Transmission and
Distribution Conference and Exposition, vol. 1, 2003, pp. 285–289.
[18] M. Solanki and Y. H. Song, “Transient protection of ehv transmission
line using discrete wavelet analysis,” in IEEE Power Engineering Society
General Meeting, vol. 3, 2003, pp. 1868–1873.
[19] K. Silva, B. Souza, and N. S. D. Brito, “Fault detection and classification
in transmission lines based on wavelet transform and ann,” IEEE
Transactions on Power Delivery, vol. 21, no. 4, pp. 2058–2063, 2006.
[20] M. Kezunovic and I. Rikalo, “Detect and classify faults using neural
nets,” IEEE Computer Applications in Power, vol. 9, no. 4, pp. 42–47,
1996.
[21] C.-H. Kim, H. Kim, Y.-H. Ko, S.-H. Byun, R. Aggarwal, and A. Johns,
“A novel fault-detection technique of high-impedance arcing faults in
transmission lines using the wavelet transform,” IEEE Transactions on
Power Delivery, vol. 17, no. 4, pp. 921–929, 2002.
[22] E. Tayeb and O. Rhim, “Transmission line faults detection, classification
and location using artificial neural network,” in International Conference
and Utility Exhibition on Power and Energy Systems: Issues Prospects
for Asia, 2011, pp. 1–5.
[23] R. Salat and S. Osowski, “Accurate fault location in the power transmis-
sion line using support vector machine approach,” IEEE Transactions
on Power Systems, vol. 19, no. 2, pp. 979–986, 2004.
[24] P. Dash, S. R. Samantaray, and G. Panda, “Fault classification and sec-
tion identification of an advanced series-compensated transmission line
using support vector machine,” IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery,
vol. 22, no. 1, pp. 67–73, 2007.
[25] U. Parikh, B. Das, and R. Maheshwari, “Combined wavelet-svm tech-
nique for fault zone detection in a series compensated transmission line,”
IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery, vol. 23, no. 4, pp. 1789–1794,
2008.
[26] U. B. Parikh, B. Das, and R. Maheshwari, “Fault classification technique
for series compensated transmission line using support vector machine,”
International Journal of Electrical Power and Energy Systems, vol. 32,
no. 6, pp. 629–636, 2010.
[27] B. Das and J. Reddy, “Fuzzy-logic-based fault classification scheme
for digital distance protection,” Power Delivery, IEEE Transactions on,
vol. 20, no. 2, pp. 609–616, April 2005.
[28] A. Ferrero, S. Sangiovanni, and E. Zappitelli, “A fuzzy-set approach to
fault-type identification in digital relaying,” IEEE Transactions on Power
Delivery, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 169–175, January 1995.
[29] S. K. Firth, K. J. Lomas, and S. J. Rees, “A simple model of pv system
performance and its use in fault detection,” Solar Energy, vol. 84, no. 4,
pp. 624–635, 2010.
[30] A. Chouder and S. Silvestre, “Automatic supervision and fault detection
of pv systems based on power losses analysis,” Energy conversion and
Management, vol. 51, no. 10, pp. 1929–1937, 2010.
[31] A. Drews et al., “Monitoring and remote failure detection of grid-
connected pv systems based on satellite observations,” Solar Energy,
vol. 81, no. 4, pp. 548–564, 2007.
[32] K.-H. Chao, S.-H. Ho, and M.-H. Wang, “Modeling and fault diagnosis
of a photovoltaic system,” Electric Power Systems Research, vol. 78,
no. 1, pp. 97–105, 2008.
[33] T. Takashima, J. Yamaguchi, K. Otani, T. Oozeki, K. Kato, and
M. Ishida, “Experimental studies of fault location in pv module strings,”
Solar Energy Materials and Solar Cells, vol. 93, no. 6, pp. 1079–1082,
2009.
[34] Q. Huang, D. Jiang, L. Hong, and Y. Ding, “Application of wavelet
neural networks on vibration fault diagnosis for wind turbine gearbox,”
in Advances in Neural Networks. Springer, 2008, pp. 313–320.
[35] A. Zaher, S. McArthur, D. Infield, and Y. Patel, “Online wind turbine
fault detection through automated scada data analysis,” Wind Energy,
vol. 12, no. 6, pp. 574–593, 2009.
[36] M. C. Garcia, M. A. Sanz-Bobi, and J. del Pico, “Simap: Intelligent
system for predictive maintenance: Application to the health condition
monitoring of a windturbine gearbox,” Computers in Industry, vol. 57,
no. 6, pp. 552–568, 2006.
[37] P. Caselitz and J. Giebhardt, “Rotor condition monitoring for improved
operational safety of offshore wind energy converters,” Journal of Solar
Energy Engineering, vol. 127, no. 2, pp. 253–261, 2005.
[38] W. Yang, P. Tavner, and M. Wilkinson, “Condition monitoring and fault
diagnosis of a wind turbine synchronous generator drive train,” IET
Renewable Power Generation, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 1–11, 2009.
[39] M. Wilkinson, F. Spinato, and P. Tavner, “Condition monitoring of
generators: Other subassemblies in wind turbine drive trains,” in IEEE
International Symposium on Diagnostics for Electric Machines, Power
Electronics and Drives, 2007, pp. 388–392.
[40] N. Fouquet, C. Doulet, C. Nouillant, G. Dauphin-Tanguy, and B. Ould-
Bouamama, “Model based pem fuel cell state-of-health monitoring via
ac impedance measurements,” Journal of Power Sources, vol. 159, no. 2,
pp. 905–913, 2006.
[41] T. Kurz, A. Hakenjos, J. Krämer, M. Zedda, and C. Agert, “An
impedance-based predictive control strategy for the state-of-health of
pem fuel cell stacks,” Journal of Power Sources, vol. 180, no. 2, pp.
742–747, 2008.
[42] T. Escobet, D. Feroldi, S. De Lira, V. Puig, J. Quevedo, J. Riera,
and M. Serra, “Model-based fault diagnosis in pem fuel cell systems,”
Journal of Power Sources, vol. 192, no. 1, pp. 216–223, 2009.
[43] S. De Lira, V. Puig, J. Quevedo, and A. Husar, “Lpv observer design for
pem fuel cell system: Application to fault detection,” Journal of Power
Sources, vol. 196, no. 9, pp. 4298–4305, 2011.
[44] M. Arcak, H. Gorgun, L. M. Pedersen, and S. Varigonda, “A nonlinear
observer design for fuel cell hydrogen estimation,” IEEE Transactions
on Control Systems Technology, vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 101–110, 2004.
[45] F. Kimmich, A. Schwarte, and R. Isermann, “Fault detection for modern
diesel engines using signal-and process model-based methods,” Control
Engineering Practice, vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 189–203, 2005.
3331
Authorized licensed use limited to: PES University Bengaluru. Downloaded on January 14,2023 at 10:20:43 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
[46] S. Bachir, S. Tnani, J.-C. Trigeassou, and G. Champenois, “Diagnosis
by parameter estimation of stator and rotor faults occurring in induction
machines,” IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics, vol. 53, no. 3,
pp. 963–973, 2006.
[47] M. Biet and A. Bijeire, “Rotor faults diagnosis in synchronous generators
using feature selection and nearest neighbors rule,” in IEEE International
Symposium on Diagnostics for Electric Machines, Power Electronics
Drives, 2011, pp. 300–306.
[48] M. Paolone, E. Petrache, F. Rachidi, and et al., “Lightning induced
disturbances in buried cables - part ii: experiment and model validation,”
IEEE Transactions on Electromagnetic Compatibility, vol. 47, no. 3, pp.
509–520, 2005.
[49] J. M. Pearce, “Photovoltaics a path to sustainable futures,” Futures,
vol. 34, no. 7, pp. 663–674, 2002.
[50] M. A. Green, “Photovoltaics: technology overview,” Energy Policy,
vol. 28, no. 14, pp. 989–998, 2000.
[51] C. Ferrara and D. Philipp, “Why do pv modules fail?” Energy Procedia,
vol. 15, pp. 379–387, 2012.
[52] B. Lu, Y. Li, X. Wu, and Z. Yang, “A review of recent advances in
wind turbine condition monitoring and fault diagnosis,” in IEEE Power
Electronics and Machines in Wind Applications, 2009, pp. 1–7.
[53] Z. Hameed, Y. Hong, Y. Cho, S. Ahn, and C. Song, “Condition
monitoring and fault detection of wind turbines and related algorithms:
A review,” Renewable and Sustainable energy reviews, vol. 13, no. 1,
pp. 1–39, 2009.
[54] H. Arabian-Hoseynabadi, H. Oraee, and P. Tavner, “Failure modes and
effects analysis (fmea) for wind turbines,” International Journal of
Electrical Power and Energy Systems, vol. 32, no. 7, pp. 817–824, 2010.
[55] J. Wu, X. Z. Yuan, J. J. Martin, H. Wang, J. Zhang, J. Shen, S. Wu,
and W. Merida, “A review of pem fuel cell durability: degradation
mechanisms and mitigation strategies,” Journal of Power Sources, vol.
184, no. 1, pp. 104–119, 2008.
[56] I. Craighead and T. Gray, “Investigation of diesel generator shaft
and bearing failures,” Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical
Engineers, Part K: Journal of Multi-body Dynamics, vol. 218, no. 3,
pp. 153–158, 2004.
[57] R. Pandey, “Failure of diesel-engine crankshafts,” Engineering failure
analysis, vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 165–175, 2003.
[58] F. J. Espadafor, J. B. Villanueva, and M. T. Garcı́a, “Analysis of a diesel
generator crankshaft failure,” Engineering Failure Analysis, vol. 16,
no. 7, pp. 2333–2341, 2009.
[59] J. Yang, L. Pu, Z. Wang, Y. Zhou, and X. Yan, “Fault detection in a
diesel engine by analysing the instantaneous angular speed,” Mechanical
systems and signal processing, vol. 15, no. 3, pp. 549–564, 2001.
[60] “Timken bearing damage analysis with lubrication reference guide,”
2011.
[61] M. Solanki, Y. H. Song, S. Potts, and A. Perks, “Transient protection
of transmission line using wavelet transform,” in Seventh International
Conference on (IEE) Developments in Power System Protection, 2001,
pp. 299–302.
[62] H.-T. Yang, W.-Y. Chang, and C.-L. Huang, “A new neural networks
approach to on-line fault section estimation using information of protec-
tive relays and circuit breakers,” IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery,
vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 220–230, 1994.
[63] T. Dalstein and B. Kulicke, “Neural network approach to fault classifi-
cation for high speed protective relaying,” IEEE Transactions on Power
Delivery, vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 1002–1011, 1995.
[64] R. N. Mahanty and P. Gupta, “Application of rbf neural network to
fault classification and location in transmission lines,” IEE Proceedings
Generation, Transmission and Distribution, vol. 151, no. 2, pp. 201–212,
2004.
[65] P. Gale, “Cable-fault location by impulse-current method,” in Proceed-
ings of the Institution of Electrical Engineers, vol. 122, no. 4. IET,
1975, pp. 403–408.
[66] S. Potivejkul, P. Kerdonfag, S. Jamnian, and V. Kinnares, “Design of a
low voltage cable fault detector,” in IEEE Power Engineering Society
Winter Meeting, vol. 1. IEEE, 2000, pp. 724–729.
[67] E. Bascom III, D. Von Dollen, and H. Ng, “Computerized underground
cable fault location expertise,” in Proceedings of the IEEE Power
Engineering Society Transmission and Distribution Conference. IEEE,
1994, pp. 376–382.
[68] D. Stellbogen, “Use of pv circuit simulation for fault detection in pv
array fields,” in IEEE Photovoltaic Specialists Conference. IEEE, 1993,
pp. 1302–1307.
[69] A. Ndiaye, C. M. Kebe, P. A. Ndiaye, A. Charki, A. Kobi, and
V. Sambou, “A novel method for investigating photovoltaic module
degradation,” Energy Procedia, vol. 36, no. 1, pp. 1222–1231, 2013.
[70] A. Houssein, N. Heraud, I. Souleiman, and G. Pellet, “Monitoring and
fault diagnosis of photovoltaic panels,” in IEEE International Energy
Conference and Exhibition (EnergyCon), 2010, pp. 389–394.
[71] T. Takashima, J. Yamaguchi, and M. Ishida, “Fault detection by sig-
nal response in pv module strings,” in IEEE Photovoltaic Specialists
Conference, 2008, pp. 1–5.
[72] S. Stettler, P. Toggweiler, and J. Remund, “Spyce: satellite photovoltaic
yield control and evaluation,” in 21st European Photovoltaic Solar
Energy Conference, Dresden, Germany, 2006.
[73] W. Q. Jeffries, J. Chambers, and D. Infield, “Experience with bico-
herence of electrical power for condition monitoring of wind turbine
blades,” IEE Proceedings Vision, Image and Signal Processing, vol. 145,
no. 3, pp. 141–148, 1998.
[74] C. Hatch, “Improved wind turbine condition monitoring using acceler-
3332
Authorized licensed use limited to: PES University Bengaluru. Downloaded on January 14,2023 at 10:20:43 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
ation enveloping,” Orbit, vol. 61, pp. 58–61, 2004.
[75] A. Ingimundarson, A. G. Stefanopoulou, and D. A. McKay, “Model-
based detection of hydrogen leaks in a fuel cell stack,” IEEE Transac-
tions on Control Systems Technology, vol. 16, no. 5, pp. 1004–1012,
2008.
[76] L. A. M. Riascos, M. G. Simoes, and P. E. Miyagi, “On-line fault
diagnostic system for proton exchange membrane fuel cells,” Journal
of Power Sources, vol. 175, no. 1, pp. 419–429, 2008.
[77] K. Bhambare, S. Gupta, M. Mench, and A. Ray, “A carbon monoxide
sensor in polymer electrolyte fuel cells based on symbolic dynamic
filtering,” Sensors and Actuators B: Chemical, vol. 134, no. 2, pp. 803–
815, 2008.
[78] Y. Li, P. W. Tse, X. Yang, and J. Yang, “Emd-based fault diagnosis for
abnormal clearance between contacting components in a diesel engine,”
Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing, vol. 24, no. 1, pp. 193–210,
2010.