doble.

com

Effect of DC Offset on Instantaneous

Element Performance - Doble Engineering
Company
Doble Engineering Company
15–19 minutes

Introduction

Real world power system fault currents can contain varying amounts of exponentially
decaying DC offset from none to very high levels, depending on the system X/R ratio and the
fault inception angle. The fault inception angle in the real world is, of course, a random value.
The following diagram shows such a case for a phase-to-ground fault. Similar effects will
occur for phase-phase, 3-phase, and 2-phase-to-ground faults.

The highest DC offset will occur at fault inception angles of –90 and 90 degrees, and the
lowest DC offset will occur at 0 and 180 degrees. As the system X/R ratio increases, the time
for the DC offset to decay to zero becomes longer.
This DC offset can adversely affect the performance of relays. First, the pickup level and the
operating time can be affected, especially in those relays that do not employ digital filtering
techniques to remove the DC component. Note that this does not imply that digital relays are
necessarily immune to the effects of DC offset. A second effect is the possibility of CT
saturation causing distortion in the current, affecting the ability to operate and/or operate
time. Only the first of these two is discussed in this paper. The reader is directed to references
[2, 3, 4 and 6].

Test Results on an Instantaneous Overcurrent Element

To quantify the effects of DC offset, we took a 60Hz GE IAC51B electromechanical time-

overcurrent relay and measured the variation the pickup of the instantaneous overcurrent
element versus both fault inception angle and simulated system X/R. The prefault current was
set to zero.

The above graph shows the test results. One can see that the DC offset is caused by varying
fault inception angles can result in greatly reduced actual pickup level. The worst case of
pickup 25% below the nominal setting occurs at 90 and 270 (-90) degrees where the DC
offset is the highest. The 100% level represents the steady-state pickup level. There is a slight
difference between the steady-state pickup level and the maximum transient pickup level. In
addition, the higher the system X/R ratio the greater the increase in sensitivity.

Similarly, the operating time was measured under the same conditions. The following graph
shows the test results.
The operating time varies from approximately 1.4 to 2.5 cycles. There is less of a pronounced
effect on operation time compared to the pickup level, but there is a definite relationship. As
one would expect since the element is basically an RMS responding element, the faster
operation times tend to occur where there are high levels of DC offset (fault inception angles
near 90 and 270 (-90) degrees. In real-world situations, however, this may actually cause
delayed operation in cases where the DC offset causes CT saturation, and therefore waveform
distortion. Results showing these effects are discussed in references [2] and [4].

System X/R appears to have less of an effect, probably because of the relatively high-speed
operation of the element.

Test Results on an Instantaneous Transformer Differential Element

An ABB HU transformer differential protection relay’s instantaneous unit was tested in a

similar fashion varying fault inception angle and simulated system X/R, which in turn
simulated different levels of exponentially decaying DC offset.

The graph below shows that the actual measured pickup level is similar to the instantaneous
overcurrent element’s performance, with the lowest pickup levels at maximum DC offset
points of 90 degrees and –90 degrees, although the maximum reduction in pickup level is less
than 15%, compared to –25% on the IAC instantaneous element. The 100% level represents
the steady-state pickup level. There is a slight difference between the steady-state pickup
level and the maximum transient pickup level. System X/R does have an effect on
performance, but not as pronounced as on the IAC instantaneous element since the plots are
closer together for different X/R ratios.

Note that these results are despite statements in the manufacturer’s technical documentation
that the instantaneous unit responds “essentially only to the sine wave component of an
internal fault … The dc component of the fault is bypassed by the (relay’s internal)
transformer primary”.

The following graph below shows the operating time performance for the HU instantaneous
differential element versus fault inception angle. Again, the shortest operating times occur at
points of highest DC offset (90 degree and –90 (270) degree fault inception angle).
Note again a similar variation showing that the relay’s operate time can vary essentially by
100% (1 to 2 cycles) depending on the degree of DC offset in the fault current.

Test Results on a Digital Relay Instantaneous Overcurrent Element

Next, we tested a 60Hz SEL-121F relay 50H instantaneous overcurrent element in the same
fashion, with 3 trials for each 30-degree step. We measured the variation the pickup of the
instantaneous overcurrent element versus both fault inception angle and simulated system
X/R. The prefault current was set to zero.
The above graph shows the test results. The DC offset as caused by varying fault inception
angles caused only very minor (+/- 2%) variation in the pickup level compared to the 15 to
25% variation in the electromechanical elements. However, there was more scatter in the test
results likely due to the discrete sampling method used by the relay. The greatest deviation
from the setting occurs near 90 and 270 (-90) degrees where the DC offset is the highest,
similar to the electromechanical relay response. Varying X/R ratio had minimal effect on the
results. These results show the effectiveness of the digital filtering employed in the relay,
however also show that the filter is not a perfect one.

Similarly, the operating time was measured under the same conditions with 3 trials for each
30-degree step. The following graph shows the test results.
The operating time varies from approximately 1.3 to 1.8 cycles, only about one-half as much
of a spread compared to the IAC relay. Again faster operation times tend to occur where there
are high levels of DC offset (fault inception angles near 90 and 270 (-90) degrees. Again,
there was scatter in the test results compared to the electromechanical element, due to the
discrete sampling method used, and the actual output relay delay variation. System X/R
appears to have little of an effect.

Test Results on a Digital Relay Negative Sequence Overcurrent Element

Next, we tested a 60Hz SEL-321 relay 50Q instantaneous negative sequence overcurrent
element. The 3I2 pickup setting was 5A secondary, (i.e. 1.67A negative sequence current)
and we applied 1A prefault current a balanced 3-phase 15A fault at the MTA. The test was
first performed without DC offset simulation. The results are in the left figure below. The
digital trace on the bottom shows a momentary operation of the negative sequence
overcurrent element. In actual fact, the negative sequence current was zero for the entire
duration of the test.
The second test was performed with proper DC offset simulation representing a system time
constant of 50ms. The results are in the right figure above. Note that the negative sequence
overcurrent element did not operate.

By analyzing the relay event report further, insight can be obtained regarding the relay
operation. The graph below shows an analysis of the phase current magnitudes and computed
negative sequence current magnitude for the test #1 (without DC offset simulation). We can
see clearly that the relay measures a negative sequence current above the pickup level
(1.67A) shortly after the fault inception. Note also that the relay requires more than 1 cycle
before it measures the full fault current amplitude.
This is the transient response of the digital relay, in particular, the transient response of the
digital filters. The transient response is how the relay responds to a step change (in amplitude,
phase angle or both simultaneously). No relay is perfect; that is, no relay will measure an
instantaneous step change in amplitude or phase angle when a step change occurs in the AC
magnitude or phase angle. The relay must attempt to filter out noise, harmonics, and the DC
offsets without excessive phase delay to impact the operate time, and without excessive
overshoot that may cause overreach. These requirements, in principle, conflict with each
other, and a compromise must be settled upon by the designer [7].

In the first cycle of the fault, the relay is trying to estimate the magnitude and phase angle of
each current and voltage. The digital filters employed are designed with the assumption that
the current cannot change instantaneously due to the inductive nature of the power system,
and DC offsets will occur when the AC amplitude changes suddenly. In test #1 where the
simulated system time constant is 0, (unrealistic waveforms), the relay’s estimations of the
DC offset, give it inaccurate AC component estimations, resulting in a calculated non-zero
negative sequence current, which causes the 50Q element to operate. In test #2 where the
simulated system time constant is 50ms, (realistic waveforms), the relay’s estimations of the
DC offset, are more accurate, giving it more accurate AC component results and the 50Q
element does not operate.

In actual fact, when we analyzed the relay event report for test #2, we find that the relay still
measures some negative sequence current in the first cycle of the fault, but the level is low
enough that the 50Q element does not operate.
Note that even though we were testing an overcurrent element, voltages were also injected
since the 50Q element is supervised by a negative sequence impedance directional element.
Thus the transient response of the digital filters for the voltages also plays a part in the
performance of the relay in this case.

Note that the instantaneous negative sequence overcurrent element is generally not used for
tripping, so its transient performance is not of major consequence.

Test Results on a Digital Relay Distance Element

Finally, we tested a 60Hz REL512 line protection relay’s phase distance element. Using
classical testing methods* we measured the distance element characteristic first without and
then with proper DC offset on the current waveforms at a 90-degree fault inception angle.
The results are illuminating. When proper DC offset simulation was not performed, the relay
overreached significantly (9.8% at the MTA). The unrealistic sudden change in current at the
fault inception causes an incorrect estimation of the AC current quantities, leading to
momentary operation of the relay just after the fault inception. Note that this would not
happen in real-world fault current waveforms. [see Reference 8]

When proper DC offset simulation was performed with a 20ms time constant, the relay
characteristic was the circular as expected with negligible error. Typical test waveforms with
proper DC offset simulation are shown in the figure below.
It is interesting to note that in actual fact, the relay reach setting was 4 ohms and the relay has
a transient underreach of 3%. Steady-state testing showed that the steady-state reach was 3.92
ohms. For the purpose of comparison in this example, however, we drew the expected
characteristic with a reach of 3.8 ohms, since all tests were dynamic, simulating real-world
faults.

The lessons of this example are applicable to latter generations of digital line, bus, and
transformer protection relays that all use sub-cycle tripping algorithms and are sensitive to
fault inception angle and dc offset. Sub-cycle protection algorithms allow for faster clearing
times, improving power system stability as well as more secure protection trip/block
decisions before the onset of CT saturation due to DC offsets. In general, these algorithms are
fundamental to the design of the protection elements and cannot simply be disabled if sub-
cycle tripping is not required. If proper, realistic DC offset current waveforms are not
simulated they may not operate as expected, exhibit delayed operation, or even seem to mis-
operate.

* Note: At the beginning of this section we referred to “classical testing methods.” By this, we mean
methods that vary current and voltage and do not base the injected values on an actual power system
model. These test methods typically result in a measured “steady state” characteristic which is a mho
circle passing through the origin. When a power system model with properly simulated source impedance
and fault resistance is used to calculate the injected values, the real world expanded characteristic of the
relay is measured, as shown in the test results graph below. When a power system model is used, and DC
offset is not simulated, similar overreaching behavior to that measured with classical test methods is
observed, but to a lesser extent due to the more realistic AC fault quantities. Thus, the test performed
using classical testing methods without DC offset simulation can be regarded as the worst case, unrealistic
test conditions.
Conclusions

1. Electromechanical instantaneous overcurrent elements are most sensitive under

conditions of high X/R and high DC offset (fault inception angles of 90 and –90
degrees). Actual pickup levels of up to 25% below the nominal setting need to be
accommodated for in protection design.
2. Maximum operate times for electromechanical instantaneous overcurrent elements
will occur at fault inception angles of 0 and 180 degrees, and minimum operate times
will occur with high DC offset (fault inception angles near 90 or –90 degrees)
assuming that no CT saturation occurs.
3. Digital relays employing discrete sampling and digital filters are much more immune
to the effects of DC offset and varying fault inception angles than electromechanical
elements. However the filters are not perfect, and some variation in performance due
to fault inception angle should be expected.
4. Latter generations of digital line, bus, and transformer protection relays use sampled
data, sub-cycle tripping algorithms, that by design assume real-world DC offset
current waveforms. If proper, realistic DC offset current waveforms are not simulated
they may not operate as expected, exhibit delayed operation, or even seem to mis-
operate.

References

1. Stringer, N.T., The Effect of DC Offset on Current-Operated Relays, IEEE

Transactions on Industry Applications, Jan/Feb 1998, Volume 34, Issue 1
 2. A. Kojovic, T.R. Day, Application of Real-Time Power System Simulators for
Testing Protective Relay System Operational Characteristics, 1999 IEEE
Transmission and Distribution Conference, New Orleans, LA.
3. Tziouvaras, J. Roberts, et. al., The Effect of Conventional Instrument Transformer
Transients on Numerical Relay Elements, 2001 Western Protective Relay Conference,
Spokane WA.
4. Naodovic, A. Abur, et. al., Influence of Instrument Transformers on Power System
Protection, Texas A&M University, 2005, available at
http://txspace.tamu.edu/handle/1969.1/2330
5. E. Zocholl, G. Benmouyal, How Microprocessor Relays Respond to Harmonics,
Saturation, and Other Wave Distortions, SEL technical paper
6. Manta Test Systems, MTS-2170 Version 3.4 User’s Manual, 2005
7. O. Schweitzer III, D. Hou, Filtering for Protective Relays, 47th Annual Georgia Tech
Protective Relaying Conference, 1993.
8. Price, ABB Application Note AN-40L-99 Overreaching of the Impedance
Characteristic Using Automated Testing, ABB Substation Automation and Protection
Division, 1999 (Note: What the author describes as “automated testing” should be
interpreted as dynamic testing)
9. Manta Test Systems, MTS-5000 User’s Manual, 2005

Back To Blog