See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/365811236

Optimized Allocation of Fault Transmitters for Improving the Recloser-Fuse

Coordination

Article in Power Systems, IEEE Transactions on · January 2022

DOI: 10.1109/TPWRS.2022.3225270

CITATIONS READS
2 44

4 authors, including:

Petra Maria Bartmeyer Fernanda C L Trindade

University of Campinas University of Campinas
14 PUBLICATIONS 35 CITATIONS 93 PUBLICATIONS 743 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Fernanda C L Trindade on 08 December 2022.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 1

Optimized Allocation of Fault Transmitters for

Improving the Recloser-Fuse Coordination
Caio dos Santos , Student Member, IEEE, Petra M. Bartmeyer , Fernanda C. L. Trindade , Senior
Member, IEEE, and Christiano Lyra , Senior Member, IEEE.

Abstract—New technologies are currently delivering protective Tgk
devices that can enhance the design of protection coordination
in modern distribution systems. This paper proposes an integer
Lks
linear programming (IP) model to find the optimal location of a
time of fast recloser attempt to detect a phase-to-
ground fault at bus k.
binary matrix that indicates whether a bus k protected

on
Fault Transmitter (FT) in the distribution system. The proposed by an upstream fault transmitter s or not.
IP model provides the optimal FT allocation considering the Dmax maximum distance between a fault transmitter s and
minimization of sustained interruption frequency and momentary the upstream recloser.
interruption duration. A study of the appropriate number of FT
Smax maximum number of fault transmitter that can be
reveals the best alternative in the proposed adaptive protection
allocated into the network.

si
scheme. A Monte Carlo simulation with a richer representation
of stochastic fault scenarios is used for further evaluation of the N number of network customers.
solutions obtained with the proposed IP model. The combined nj number of downstream customers of fuse j | ∀j ∈ Ωf .
strategies allow full-scale studies of the optimal allocation of

r
FT in distribution systems. The results of studies using two test
ds distance between a fault transmitter s and the recloser.
systems certify the benefits of the proposed strategy in fuse-saving Functions:
coordination and in reducing the total duration of the momentary
interruption, which can cause power quality problems.
Index Terms—Allocation of fault transmitters, adaptive pro-
tection, integer linear programming, Monte Carlo simulation.
RT
IF

xs
Ve
total protection operation time.
average interruption frequency of the network.
Binary Variables:
fault transmitter allocation with the bus s.
ed
zks protection of node k by a fault transmitter s.
N OTATION yksj fuse-blowing for a fault at bus k that is protected by a
Optimization Model fault transmitter s and a fuse j.
Sets and Indexes:
itt

Monte Carlo Simulation

Ω∗s set of allocated fault transmitters.
Ωf , j set/index of fuses. Parameters:
Ωb , k set/index of protected buses. tsoff recovery time of fault transmitter out of operation.
pphg probability of a phase-to-ground fault.
bm

Ωs , s set/index of to allocate a fault transmitter.

W set of maximum number of fault transmitters for the p2ph probability of a phase-to-phase fault.
ϵ-constraint method p2phg probability of a phase-to-phase-to-ground fault.
Parameters: p3ph probability of a three-phase fault.
TFkj melting time of fuse j for a three-phase fault at bus k. Variables:
kt
Su

TFgkj melting time of fuse j for a phase-to-ground fault at type of a symmetric or an asymmetric fault at bus k.
bus k. sf number of saved fuses.
TSks time of fault transmitter s to detect a three-phase fault bf number of blown fuses.
at bus k. nf number of fast recloser attempts.
TSgks time of fault transmitter s to detect a phase-to-ground nd number of delayed recloser attempts.
fault at bus k. nt number of total recloser attempts; nt = nf + nd.
Tk time of fast recloser attempt to detect a three-phase tf kj melting time of fuse j for a fault at bus k.
fault at bus k. tf k minimum of {tf k1 , · · ·, tf kj }.
tsks time of fault indicator s to detect a fault at bus k.
The authors kindly acknowledge the support of the São Paulo Research
Foundation (FAPESP), Grants No. 2020/13578-4, 2016/08645-9, 2020/09838- tsk minimum of {tsk1 , · · ·, tsks }.
0, and 2021/11380-5, and the CNPq, Grants No. 422765/2021-0 and t̂k fast recloser attempts to detect a fault at bus k.
304373/2020-6.
The authors are affiliated with the University of Campinas – UNI- t̃k delayed recloser attempts to detect a fault at bus k.
CAMP, Campinas, Brazil (e-mail: cdsantos@ieee.org; fernanda@ieee.org; R electrical resistance of phase-to-ground and a phase-
chrlyra@unicamp.br), and the Mount Sinai Hospital Mount Sinai Heart, New
York, United of States (e-mail: petra.bartmeyer@gmail.com).
to-phase-to-ground faults.

I. I NTRODUCTION
ROTECTION systems planning and fault management
P procedures are in sustainable evolution due to new
technologies to detect or locate faults. As the technologies
available evolve, alternative methodologies arise to assess
the contribution of those devices in terms of reliability and
security issues.
The available technologies allow different methodologies to
evaluate the proper use of its functionalities and the quality
of the installation points. For instance, fault indicators are
traditionally used in fault location processes [1]– [3]. Adopting
fault indicators is challenging because their benefits strongly
depend on their allocation, as their number is limited due to
economic restrictions. The decision aspects on the allocation
sites make the fault indicator allocation problem a combinato-
rial problem, and the best candidate sites for fault indicators
can be delivered by heuristic computing techniques [4]- [7],
evolutionary computing [8], and commercial solvers [9], [10].
These previous papers are based on permanent faults and they
showed that the optimal allocation depends on the location of
protection devices and fault rates.
An improvement of fault indicators is the Fault Transmitter
(FT)-Fault Receiver (FR), which can help fault location, but
also aid adaptive protection. The set of equipment FT-FR
can speed up the overcurrent protection scheme by inhibiting
or forcing the operation of a protection device; in case of
permanent faults, the set of FT can also provide the fault
location information and support the network restoration time.
As in the fault indicator allocation problem, the choice of sites
ed
to allocate the FT devices strongly affects the performance
of the protection schemes, power quality indexes, and eco-
nomic aspects.
Few studies investigate the use of the set of equipment FT-
itt
FR to improve the operation time of overcurrent protection
in recloser-fuse coordination. The authors in [11] use FT-
FR combined with a protection device (for instance, recloser
or relay) to detect and send fault information using high-
bm
speed wireless communication. The information from FT-
FR equipment, combined with predefined settings, drives the
recloser in choosing the best response to clear a fault. As
detailed in [11], the set of equipment FT-FR can indicate that
a fault is on an unfused line section; therefore, the recloser
Su
allows a faster trip because there is no need to coordinate the
recloser operation with the fuse operation. These aspects can
make FT intuitive allocations but not as efficient as desired.
Because of that, the FT allocation problem is not addressed in
[11], as the installation buses of the equipment are defined by
hand, without guarantee of the best efficiency for the combined
FT-FR system and the protection devices.
The authors in [12] proposed an adaptive protection method-
ology based on optimization techniques. The proposal con-
siders the set of equipment FT-FR without optimize their
allocation into the network. In [12], the FT allocation problem
addresses the lateral branch fuses as installation bus candidates
and provides a decision-making based on the most usual con-
figuration for energy flow. A two-stage optimization strategy
is proposed: a mixed-integer linear programming model is
2
used to compute the phase protection settings, and a multi-
objective mixed-integer linear programming model is applied
to provide neutral protection settings. As result, the authors
in [12] show the improvement in the operation time of the
protection scheme, but they do not go further in the study of
the adequate number of equipment FT. The approach proposed
in [13] uses an integer linear programming model to deliver
better FT allocation sites. This approach is the birth of some
of the ideas developed in this paper; however, it neither studies
the appropriate number of equipment FT nor the three-phase
and phase-to-ground faults.
This paper proposes a new optimization strategy to address
the FT allocation problem as an adaptive protection approach
from a smart grid perspective. It proposes an integer linear pro-
gramming (IP) model that considers all the major information
on
of the protection scheme, adapting the protection coordination,
and using the set of equipment FT-FR proposed in [11] to
save fuses by improving the recloser-fuse coordination. An
optimal solution defines the places and the number of FT of a
given distribution system. The FR is considered to be installed
si
together with the substation relay and every recloser of the
distribution feeder. It can lead to forcing or inhibiting their
operation based on information provided by the FTs and preset
r
logic rules. The IP model considers all protection coordination
Ve
constraints, relying on three-phase and phase-to-ground faults
to represent the fault-state operation of the distribution system.
The benefits of increasing the number of FT are evaluated
using the Pareto frontier defined by the trade-offs between
the minimum interrupting time of the protection scheme and
the number of FT allocated into the distribution system. The
minimum interruption frequency is based on the number of
affected customers, as in the SAIFI index. The proposed
methodology can also be adapted to consider other decision
criteria such as line segment type (overhead, cable), terrain,
weather, age of equipment, and chemical pollutants. The 85-
bus and 1080-bus test systems from [14] are used to verify
the performance of the approach. The case studies and a
Monte Carlo simulation with a richer representation of the
stochastic nature of the faults certify the benefits of the
proposed strategy in fuse-saving coordination and in reducing
the total duration of the momentary interruption, which can
cause power quality problems.
The main contributions of this paper are as follows: a) the
design of an integer linear programming model that can reveal
optimized locations for a set of equipment FT; b) the proposal
of a multi-objective analysis for the FT allocation problem
to assess decisions about the maximum number of FT; and
c) the evaluation of the set of equipment FT-FR technologies
as alternatives to improve the coordination between recloser
and fuses in a smart grid perspective. The combined strategies
allow full-scale studies of the optimal allocation of FT in
modern distribution systems.
II. A N OVERVIEW OF P ROTECTION C OORDINATION
At the planning stage, the protection scheme is designed to
satisfy coordination and selectivity between a set of protection
devices to improve the network reliability and reduce the

Figure 1. Recloser-fuse coordination: (a) without DER; (b) with DER; and
(c) time-current curve of the recloser-fuse coordination.
number of affected customers. A common protection scheme
used in the distribution systems comprises a circuit breaker
system at the substation, reclosers distributed along the feeder,
ed
and fuses on laterals. A proper selectivity between these
devices assumes that the fault clearance should be performed
by the device closest to the fault location to isolate the
minimum faulty network section [15].
itt
Most of the faults are temporary, and they could be solved
with a simple reclosing operation [16]. Reclosers are designed
to handle a fast break-repair cycle by setting the number of
attempted break operations before shifting to a lockout stage.
bm
The utilities combine the fast and delayed time-current curves
for better coordination between the recloser and the down-
stream fuses on laterals. The following sections discuss the
traditional protection coordination scheme and the advantages
resulting from the proposed adaptive protection approach.
Su
A. Recloser-fuse Coordination
Recloser-fuse coordination is a common protection scheme
used by utilities to enlarge network reliability and secure
power supplies [17]. The efficiency of this scheme depends
on the proper setting of the coordination between recloser
and downstream fuses; the selected time current curves of the
recloser allow saving or blowing the fuses [18]– [20].
The key aspect of the recloser-fuse protection scheme is
to clarify the benefits and drawbacks to address the best
coordination. To save fuses, the first attempts of the recloser
are set to clear the fault faster than the melting time of the
fuses; consequently, to blow the fuses, the attempts of the
recloser are set to let the fuses blow first. In other words,
the fuse-saving philosophy causes less sustained interruptions,
3
compared to the fuse-blowing scheme. Moreover, note from
Fig. 1–a that fuse-blowing coordination decreases the network
area affected by permanent fault at bus 3, while a permanent
fault at bus 4 stays in the network longer because of the
delayed operation of the recloser. For the same case, the fuse-
saving coordination should increase the number of affected
customers for a temporary fault on any given bus (1, 2, 3, or4).
Considering the fuse-saving scheme, the proper coordination
between the recloser and the fuse is ensured if the fault current
is within imin and imax , in Fig. 1–c. Therefore, there is a
margin operating time of these two devices if a given fault
current (i) is between the minimum fault current (imin ) and
maximum fault current (imax ) — imin < i < imax . For any fault
current out of the current range, the following problems can be
observed: a fault current smaller than the imin may follow all
attempts of the recloser until blocking it and the fuse does not
on
melt; a fault current greater than the imax may follow the fuse
blow before or during the recloser attempts [21]. Figure 1–c
illustrates these ideas.
The integration of the distributed energy resource (DER)
si
into the network can contribute to the recloser-fuse miscoor-
dination [22]– [23]. The additional fault current contribution
from DER (i2 in Fig. 1–b) can make i greater than imax ,
r
which may cause the fuse to blow before the recloser opens
(i1 ≤ imax ≤ i) [24]– [25]. Figure 1–b and Fig. 1–c illustrate
Ve
these ideas.
B. Improving the Recloser-fuse Coordination
In the research mentioned previously, the fault indicator
provides the location of permanent faulted line sections to
decrease system restoration time. Improving the fault detection
and communication technologies, the set of equipment FT-
FR can also provide useful information to support utilities
in the distribution protection. The FT used in the proposed
strategy discussed in Sec.III can lead to monitoring loads,
locating faults, and improving automation of the protection
scheme. Reducing the fault-clearing time means less energy
not supplied, better power quality, and reduced equipment
damage [26].
The FT can inhibit or force the operation of a recloser
in real-time without changing the original overcurrent curve
settings. Figure 2 and Tab. I shows a comparison between
the original response of the recloser (Rcl.1) and the speedup
response allowed by using the set of equipment FT-FR with
the recloser (Rcl.2). In Fig.2, both schemes use four attempts
(two fast and two delayed) to clear the fault. The adapted
response, Rcl.2, is faster than Rcl.1, meaning that the fault
is cleared faster in Rcl.2 (t∗ < t). Note that the protection
scheme that combines FT-FR and the recloser provides a
faster response for three out of four attempts, improving the
performance of fast and delayed attempts. These scenarios are
detailed in Tab. I, which describes the expected operation times
of the original response, Rcl.1; the expected operation times
of the set of equipment FT-FR; and the expected operation
times of the set of equipment FT-FR with the recloser, Rcl.2.
Note that the operation times of Rcl.2 are the faster between
{Rcl.1, FT-FR}.
 4

Fault Fault Cleared

On
Rcl.1 Fast Fast Delayed Delayed
Off

t0 t Time [ms]
Δ0 Δ1 Δ2 Δ3
ts off
ts off
ts off
Fault Cleared*
On
FT-FR
Off

On
Rcl.2
Off

t0 t* Time [ms]
Δ*0 Δ*1 Δ*2 Δ*3

Figure 2. Example of improving the protection coordination (the crosshatched areas represent the time required for the FT to communicate with the FR and
operate the recloser — ∆∗0 ).

on
Table I The IP model uses information about three-phase and phase-
C OMPARISON OF OPERATION TIMES . to-ground faults to provide the optimal topology for a set
of FT. The proposed model is an approximation for the real
Expected
Adapted behavior as it excludes the stochastic nature of the; it is only
Attempt Operation Times Faster

si
Response — Rcl.2
Rcl.1 FT-FR considered the worst-case scenario. Thus, it is unnecessary to
consider all the information about faults (for instance, phase-
1 ∆0 ∆∗0 FT-FR ∆∗0
∆∗0 + tsoff ∆∗1 = ∆1 to-phase and phase-to-phase-to-ground faults) as it entails

r
2 ∆1 Rcl.1
3 ∆2 ∆∗0 + tsoff FT-FR ∆∗2 = ∆∗0 + tsoff an extra computational burden without translating into better
∆∗0 + tsoff ∆∗3 = ∆∗0 + tsoff
4 ∆3 FT-FR

Because of the FT-FR communication recovery time (tsoff ),

which appears after the circuit is interrupted [27], it can be
observed that the second fast attempt of the recloser (∆1 ) is
ed
faster than the operation time of the set of equipment FT-FR
and recloser represented by the sum between tsoff and the FT-
FR time (∆∗0 ) in the second attempt — ∆1 < ∆∗0 + tsoff ;
therefore, the recloser operates first, FT-FR are turned off
itt
Ve
solutions.
In addition, the IP model only considers the most used net-
work configuration to provide the optimal locations for the set
of equipment FT. As with real protection scheme applications,
a change in the network configuration should be addressed
by the proper adjustment of the overcurrent curve settings
of the protection devices (for instance, recloser and digital
relays), ensuring efficient fault coverage for different network
configurations [28]. After installing the set of equipment FT,
the performance of the protection scheme should present minor

before completing the short-circuit current detection, and the
∆1 and ∆∗1 times are equal. It is worth remarking that the set
of equipment FT-FR forces the recloser to open only when ∆∗0
or ∆∗0 + tsoff is shorter than the coincident attempt time of the
bm
changes when considering temporary reconfiguration. In case
of having a new permanent configuration of a given network,
the IP model can deliver new optimal locations for reinstalling
the set of equipment FT considering that FT can be easily

overcurrent curve settings ( ∆0 , ∆1 , ∆2 , and ∆3 ). Note that relocated, as discussed in [27].

the improvement from t to t∗ depends on recloser settings,
communication time between FT and FR with the recloser, A. Addressing Protection Zones
tsoff , and fault extinction. The recloser and the fuses geographical disposition usually
does not provide enough information to allocate the FT in a
Su

III. T HE IP M ODEL FOR THE FT A LLOCATION P ROBLEM
The proposed model assumes a greenfield perspective in the
planning of the adaptive protection coordination and supposes
that the set of equipment FT-FR can improve the time response
of the recloser-fuse selectivity [11]– [13]. The parameters of
the set of protection devices (recloser and fuses) are defined
for the first attempt of three-phase and phase-to-ground faults
before integrating the DER and, consequently, the time current
curves of this equipment set have preset values. Another
assumption is that the DER contributes to the fault current
if this event occurs in any bus of the set Ωb . It is also worth
remarking that the proposed IP model aims to provide optimal
sites for FT allocations on a given topology of the distribution
system; the FR location is considered fixed with the substation
recloser.
radial distribution system. The sites of essential customers and
facilities with low reliability can point to allocation priorities;
however, this information is not always available.
The solution space of the allocation of the FT problem is
represented by all downstream buses of the recloser (Ωs ),
where the benefit to allocate a FT is evaluated. Note that
the cardinality of the set Ωb is the same as Ωs , and the
greater the number of buses in the protection zone of the
recloser, the higher computational burden entailed. The FT
protection zones depend on the presence of DER. In radial
networks without DER, the set of buses downstream from the
FT define the protection zone. For radial networks with DER,
the protection zone is given by Ωs because of the possibility
of direct and reverse current flows. Both cases can be tackled
by commercially available equipment FT [27].

B. Objective Function
The objective function (1) represents the average interrup-
tion frequency of the distribution system for all the customer
units and the total operation time of the protection scheme
to eliminate faults, considering distribution systems initially
without DER. The average interruption frequency of the
network, IF, is computed by the number of blown fuses
that switch off the downstream customers from the network;
scenarios where the recloser is blocked are not considered by
the IP model, because the proposal is focused on the first
attempt of the recloser. The protection operation time, RT,
considers the topology of the network and the set of allocated
FT to estimate the total operation time for the three-phase
and phase-to-ground faults in all downstream buses of the
recloser (Ωb ). Note that the objectives IF and RT are not
conflicting; therefore, a given solution that reduces the total
operation time also reduces the number of blown fuses. The
use of RT and IF in (1) aims to a broader evaluation of the
FT locations.
min {IF + RT} (1)
The average interruption frequency of the distribution sys-
tem (IF) is computed according to the blown fuses (yksj )
and the number of customers in the whole network (N ) and
each downstream bus of the fuses j (nj ). In (2), the binary
variable yksj indicates that a given fault (three-phase or phase-
to-ground) at bus k is seen by the fault transmitter s and
blows the fuse j; note that the number of customers nj is
computed for all nodes that are protected by an upstream
ed
fuse j. The IEEE Standard 1366-2012 [29] defines the SAIFI
as the average number of customers disconnected from the
network for a given period (greater than 5 minutes). The use
of the SAIFI enables the IP model to consider the effects of a
given fault without considering the time required to reconnect
itt
the affected customers; it is assumed that fuse replacement
requires more than 5 minutes. Although the reconnecting time
could be included in the formulation, it would add much
complexity to a model that already requires a large number
bm
of details.
1 X X X
IF = nj yksj (2)
N a fault indicator is imposed. Constraint (9) limits the number
k∈Ωb s∈Ωs j∈Ωf
Equation (3) computes the total interrupting time, as the
Su
time attempts of the recloser for the three-phase (Tk ) and
phase-to-ground (Tgk ) faults and each allocated FT also con-
sidering the time to detect three-phase (TSks ) and phase-
to-ground (TSgks ) faults. All information about the electrical
characteristic of the short-circuit current magnitude is com-
puted during the preprocessing step, the times Tk and Tgk are
computed from the IEC 60255 Standards [30], and the times
TSks and TSgks are provided as proposed in [11]. The RT
component of the objective function comprises two terms: the
first computes the operation time of the adaptive protection
scheme (zks = 1), while the second term considers the full
recloser operation time (zks = 0).
X X
RT = [(TSks +TSgks )zks +(Tk +Tgk ) (1 − zks )] (3)
k∈Ωb s∈Ωs
5
C. FT Allocation Constraints
The IP model considers using the set of equipment FT-FR to
minimize (2)–(3). The constraint sets that relate the objectives
to the FT allocation problem are described in (4)–(11).
TSgks zks + Tgk (1 − zks ) − TFgk ≤ M yksj ,
∀k ∈ Ωb , s ∈ Ωs , j ∈ Ωf (4)
TSks zks + Tk (1 − zks ) − TFk ≤ M yksj ,
∀k ∈ Ωb , s ∈ Ωs , j ∈ Ωf (5)
X
zks ≤ 1, ∀k ∈ Ωb (6)
s∈Ω
zks ≤ xs , ∀k ∈ Ωb , s ∈ Ωs (7)
max
ds xs ≤ D ∀s ∈ Ωs
on
, (8)
X
xs ≤ Smax
(9)
s∈Ω
zks ≤ Lks , ∀k ∈ Ωb , s ∈ Ωs (10)
si
zks , yksj , xs ∈ {0, 1}, ∀k ∈ Ωb , ∀s ∈ Ωs , ∀j ∈ Ωf (11)
Constraint sets (4)-(5) compute the operation of the protec-
tion coordination for phase-to-ground and three-phase faults,
r
respectively. In both equations, the fuse j blows if its melting
Ve
time for a fault at bus k is shorter than the fast recloser
attempts and the communication time between FT and FR,
s, that detects the same fault (yksj = 1); otherwise, the fault
is cleared and the distribution system returns to the steady-
state operation (yksj = 0). Note that in (4)-(5) the time of the
recloser is only computed when there is no FT s which detects
the same fault at bus k (zks = 0); otherwise, the time of the
recloser is not considered (zks = 1). Additionally, M is a large
constant value that assures the inequalities (4)-(5) whenever
yksj = 1 (for instance M = max{TSgks , Tgk }. Equation (6)
limits to one the number of FT that can protect the bus k. This
constraint set secures that the recloser only be activated by the
FT with the smallest detection time regarding the presence of
DER in the network. Constraint set (7) uses the variable zks
to relate the protected bus k to the location of FT (xs ). In (8),
the maximum wireless coverage distance (Dmax ) to allocate
of allocated FT (xs ) in the network — the study described
in Sec. III-E shows the appropriate value of Smax . Constraint
(10) imposes the network configuration, i.e., that a fault at bus
k can only be detected by a fault indicator allocated at bus s if
Lks = 1. In (11) the binary nature of the variables zks , yksj ,
and xi are imposed.
D. Proposed IP Model
To sum up, the FT allocation optimization problem that
reveals the best location for FT is given by (12).
min (1)
subject to: (4) − (11) (12)
Commercial solvers for integer linear programming prob-
lems can deliver optimal solutions for (12).

Algorithm 1: The Pareto Frontier for Smax
input : Ωf , Ωb , and Ωs
output: Pareto Frontier
1 // Creating the Smax candidates
2 define: W = {1, 2, · · · , |Ωs |}
3 for w ∈ W do
4 set: Smax = w
5 // Solving the proposed IP model
6 RTw ← solution of (3) from the IP model (12)
7 save point (w, RTw ) of Pareto Frontier
E. Searching for an Appropriate Value for Smax
The decision on the maximum number of FT (Smax ) de-
pends on the available technology and should consider the
coverage of the most significant number of customers in
the network [9]. The conflict between the network coverage
and the number of FT allocation entails a complex decision-
making problem. The multi-objective approach proposed here
is an alternative to assess these problems; the main building
blocks are the total interrupting time of protection coordina-
tion (RT).
The purpose is to obtain the trade-off between the mini-
mization of RT and the number of FT to allocate into the
distribution systems (Smax ). The rationale behind the study
of the multi-objective approach is that the trade-off curve
provides information that would help utilities to decide on
the appropriate number of FT allocation to be allocated; this
decision will be based on the expected number of fuses saved
ed
and the total affected customers.
The trade-off curve (Pareto frontier) can be obtained with
an ϵ-constraint approach [31]– [32], where the total time of
the protection coordination represented in (3) remains as the
itt
objective function to be minimized and the maximum number
of allocated FT (Smax ) is limited in (12).
To obtain the Pareto frontier, the multi-objective optimiza-
tion process considers different scenarios for the number of
bm
FT Smax . The Smax value varies in the set W , composed by
numbers between a single device (say, w = 1) and w = |Ωs |
(a safe upper bound). For each value of Smax , the associated
interrupting time of protection scheme RTw is computed
with (3). Algorithm 1 summarizes the computational process
Su
to reveal the trade-off between RT and number of FT.
IV. E VALUATION WITH M ONTE C ARLO S IMULATION
The optimal solution for the FT allocation problem delivered
by the IP model is certified with a Monte Carlo simulation,
which considers a rich representation of stochastic scenarios
and uses three complementary procedures. The first procedure
(Sec. IV-A) selects the sequence of fast and delay attempts
of the recloser. The second procedure (Sec. IV-B) defines the
nature of the faults. The third procedure (Sec. IV-C) computes
the times of the adaptive protection operation with the set
of equipment FT-FR to evaluate if the fuse is saved for the
designed scenario. The three procedures are detailed in the
next sections.
6
A. Setting the Recloser Operation
The first procedure simulates the recloser attempts by
defining the number of fast (nf) and delayed (nd) current
curves, always considering fast curves first. The total number
of recloser attempts (nt) is defined as nt = nf + nd, where
nf ∈ {1, 2} and nd ∈ {0, 1, 2}. The parameters for the recloser
operations are based on protection standards and selected with
a random uniform distribution.
B. Drawing the Location and Nature of the Fault
The second procedure draws the location (k), the type of
fault (k t ), and computes the fault current magnitude using
short-circuit analysis. Both approaches are random and drawn
from given data: location k is selected from the options in the
set Ωb , and the type of the fault k t is defined from the closed
on
interval [0%, 100%]. For the type of fault, the classification is
based on the value of k t and accurate probabilities of occur-
rence of a phase-to-ground (pphg ), phase-to-phase-to-ground
(p2phg ), phase-to-phase (p2ph ), and three-phase fault (p3ph ).
si
The probability values used here are provided as input to the
method. To compute the fault current magnitude, the phase-
to-ground and phase-to-phase-to-ground fault studies consider
r
a random uniform distribution for fault resistance of up to
Ve
40 ohms.
C. Evaluating the Performance of the Protection Scheme
After drawing the recloser attempts and the fault character-
istics, the third procedure provides the benefits of the allocated
FT to the protection scheme by computing the total operation
time for all the simulations (RT), saved fuses, and blown
fuses. The measurement of the benefits is based on the saved
fuses after all recloser attempts provided by the combination
between nd and nf. The Monte Carlo study evaluates the
cases according to the next two hypothesis: the first case
considers that the set of recloser attempts only comprises fast
operations (nt = nf and nd = 0); the second case considers
both the fast and the delayed operations (nt = nf + nd)
performed by the recloser to detect and, if possible, clear the
fault. Note that phase-to-phase and phase-to-phase-to-ground
faults must have detection times shorter than those used by
the proposed IP model; phase-to-ground and three-phase faults
may have detection times less than or equal to the detection
times addressed by the IP model.
In the first case, considering nf = 1, the fuse is saved if the
minimum time to detect the fault between the fast attempt
of the recloser (t̂k ) and the communication time between
FT and FR (tsk ) is lower than the melting time of the fuse
(tf k ); otherwise, the fuse blows. To simulate recloser multiple
attempts, the circuit is disconnected at least once; therefore,
the recovery time tsoff is added to the communication time
between FT and FR (Sec. II-B) and the contribution of the
DER to the fault is not considered for computing the following
detection time because the anti-islanding protection is assumed
to disconnect the DER reclosing. In this case, the fuse is
considered saved if the minimum time to detect the fault
between t̂k and tsk +tsoff is lower than tf k ; otherwise, the fuse
 7

blows. Note that the times of fuse and the set of equipment FT- Algorithm 2: Monte Carlo Simulation
FR are computed as the minimum value of the sets of the of input : Ωf , Ωb , Ω∗s , sf ← 0, and bf ← 0
fuse times {tf k1 , · · ·, tf kj|j=|Ωf | } and the fault indicator times output: RT, sf, and bf
{tsk1 , · · ·, tsks|s=|Ωs | } for the given type of fault k t . 1 iter ← 0
The second case considers the fast and delayed operations 2 while iter < max_iter do
(nt = nf + nd) performed by the recloser to detect and 3 // First procedure
may clear the fault of the network. The fuse is considered 4 nf ← randomly uniform choose from {1, 2}
saved if the minimum time to detect the fault between the 5 nd ← randomly uniform choose from {0, 1, 2}
delayed attempt of the recloser (t̃k ) and the communication 6 // Second procedure
time between FT and FR (tsk +tsoff ) is lower than the melting 7 k ← randomly uniform choose from Ωb
time of fuse (tf k ); otherwise, the fuse blows. The worst case 8 kt ← randomly uniform choose from [0, 100%]
here is represented by the delayed attempt of the recloser and 9 if kt ≤ pphg then
10 R ← randomly uniform choose from [0, 40]
the communication time between FT and FR after the network 11 kt is a phase-to-ground fault
is out during the last attempt of the recloser. 12 else if pphg < kt ≤ (pphg + p2phg ) then
For both cases, when the fuse is saved, the protection 13 R ← randomly uniform choose from [0, 40]
kt is a phase-to-phase-to-ground fault

on
operation time is computed by the equations A1, A2, and A3 14
(Alg. 2 lines 28, 34−35, and 43−45, respectively), focusing on 15 else if (pphg +p2phg ) < kt ≤ (pphg + p2phg + p2ph ) then
evaluating the benefits to speed up the protection coordination 16 kt is a phase-to-phase fault
17 else
time for temporary faults. In contrast, the IF objective is only
18 kt is a three-phase fault
computed when the fuse is blown, disregarding the network

si
restoration time. Algorithm 2 summarizes the computation 19 Compute the fault current magnitude
process of the Monte Carlo simulation. 20 // Third procedure
21 tf k ← min{tf k1 , · · · , tf kj }

r
22 tsk ← min{tsk1 , · · · , tsks }
V. T ESTS AND R ESULTS 23 if nd = 0 then

The model (12) was coded in the mathematical program-

ming package JuMP from Julia language [33] and solved
with the optimization solver Gurobi [34] on a computer with
Intel® Core™ i7-10700F CPU @ 2.90GHz × 16, 64bits with
24
25
26
27
28
29
Ve t̂k ← time of fast recloser attempt for kt
if nf = 1 then
if min{t̂k , tsk } < tf k then

else
sf ← sf + 1

RT ← RT + min{t̂k , tsk } + 2[ms] (A1)
16GB using Ubuntu 20.04. The solver Gurobi delivered an
ed
30 bf ← bf + 1
optimal solution within seconds for all the instances. The
31 else
case study considers the placement of FT in two different
32 if min{t̂k , tsk + tsoff } < tf k then
test systems: 85-bus and 1080-bus benchmark; all data of the 33 sf ← sf + 1
distribution systems are provided by [14]. Table II shows the RT ← RT + (min{t̂k , tsk }
itt

34
recloser parameters, the protection coordination settings, and 35 +(nf − 1) · min{t̂k , tsk + tsoff } + nt · 2[ms])
the electrical distance between the DER and the substation (A2)
for both test systems. For instance, the maximum electrical 36 else
37 bf ← bf + 1
distance in the 85-bus is 19.6940 Ohms (the distance from
bm

Tab. II represents about 77.8% of the maximum value) and 38 else

in the 1080-bus system is 26.2307 Ohms (the distance from 39 t̂k ← time of fast recloser attempt for kt
Tab. II represents about 50.8% of the maximum value). 40 t̃k ← time of delayed recloser attempt for kt
The reclosers are located at the substations and the time cur- 41 if min{t̃k , tsk + tsoff } < tf k then
42 sf ← sf + 1
rent curves are mapped into the Standard Inverse characteristic
43 RT ← RT + (min{t̂k , tsk }
Su

curve from the IEC 60255 [30]; the time multiplier settings are 44 +(nf − 1) · min{t̂k , tsk + tsoff }
defined as 0.05 for fast attempts and 0.15 for delayed attempts 45 +nd · min{t̃k , tsk + tsoff } + nt · 2[ms]) (A3)
(a safe coordination for the downstream fuses). The recloser 46 else
intervals (contacts open) are defined as 2 [ms] to compute the 47 bf ← bf + 1
total operation time. Table III shows the bounds of sets Ωf
48 iter ← iter + 1
and the number of fuses in each network. For the 85-bus test
system, a total of 7 fuses are used to cover 68% of the buses
on laterals. For the 1080-bus test system, a total of 40 fuses
are used to cover 71% of the buses on laterals. adopted from [11] tsoff = 50 [ms]. The value of M in equation
Having defined the recloser branch, the cardinalities of sets (4) and (5) is |Ωb | × |Ωs | × |Ωf |, as indicated in Sec. III-C.
is defined as |Ωb | = |Ωs | = 80 for the 85-bus test system and The probabilities of the event of faults are defined as stated
|Ωb | = |Ωs | = 1079 for the 1080-bus test system. The maximum in [35]; the values are as follows: pphg = 70%, p2ph = 15%,
distance between the recloser and a given FT (Dmax ) and the p2phg = 10%, and p3ph = 5%.
detection times of the communication time between FT and FR The following subsections present the four studies per-
(TSk and TSgk ) are computed as presented in [11]; it is also formed for each test system. The first study (Sec. V-A) applies
 8

on
r si
1080-bus test system.

Table II
Ve
Figure 3. Solutions of the adaptive protection scheme with the set of equipment FT-FR and recloser-fuse coordination: a) 85-bus without DER; b) 1080-bus
without DER; c) 85-bus with DER; d) 1080-bus with DER; e) the Monte Carlo simulation for the 85-bus test system; f) the Monte Carlo simulation for the

equipment FT-FR obtained in the studies described in Sec. V-A

ed
I NITIAL DATA FOR THE P ROBLEM . and Sec. V-B are available in the repository [36]. These
topologies show the solutions of both test systems considering
Test Phase Neutral DER Electrical
System Pick-up [A] Pick-up [A] Distance [Ohms] only the values of Smax axis shown in Fig. 3–e (85-bus) and
Fig. 3–f (1080-bus).
85 217.00 50.00 15.3215
itt

1080 241.00 50.00 13.2172

A. Using the FT Allocation Approach without DER
The first study on the FT allocation problem is shown for the
Table III
sake of comparing instances. The presence of the DER is not
bm

S ET OF FUSES .
considered in the computation of the parameters used in the
Test System
Lower Upper
Number of Fuses
IP model, and the fuse-saving coordination is adopted in the
Bound of Ωf Bound of Ωf protection scheme for both test systems. Set W consists of all
85 15K 50K 7 candidates in Ωs for the 85-bus test system and a small portion
1080 15K 40K 40 of the Ωs for the 1080-bus test system; the last assumption
Su

analyzes the original set (Ωs ) without entailing great losses in

the proposed IP model (12) using the test system without
DER and varying the value of Smax in W = {1, · · · , |Ωs |},
as described in Algorithm 1. The second study (Sec. V-B)
evaluates the effect of DER in the FT allocation problem; it
uses the same instance of the first study (Smax ∈ W ). The
third study (Sec. V-C) uses the results of the first and second
studies to provide the appropriate value of Smax for each test
system. The Monte Carlo simulation (Algorithm 2) is used to
evaluate the quality of the sites for the Smax obtained in the
previous study, as detailed in Sec. V-D. In addition, a further
study is addressed in Sec. V-E to analyze how reconfiguration
affects the proposed adaptive protection approach. Details of
the location of the recloser, the set of fuses, and the set of
the definition of the Pareto Frontier.
The variation of RT in (3) and saved fuses with the increase
in the FT are given in Fig. 3–a and Fig. 3–b for the 85-bus
and 1080-bus test systems, respectively. The results illustrate
the benefits of relying on the proposed strategy to allocating
FT for both networks. The extra number of FT reduces the
RT value; however, the greater the number of Smax , the lower
the individual contributions of each fault indicator to the RT
function. Figure 3–a and Figure 3–b also show that the number
of saved fuses does not change with the adaptive protection
scheme, showing that the original protection schemes are
properly working; the reference number of saved fuses of both
networks indicates the sum between the three-phase and phase-
to-ground faults (2 × Ωb ).

B. Using the FT Allocation Approach with DER
These instances assume that one 5 MW synchronous DER
connected via power transformer using a delta connection
for medium voltage and grounded-wye connection for lower
voltage — synchronous generators allow a worst case scenario,
because they may cause significant effect on the short-circuit
current. The electrical distances between the substation and
the DER are defined in Tab. II; for the 85-bus system, there
is the upstream fuse of the DER. A real database is used to
obtain the impedance of the generators; the voltage levels are
observed under the critical limit after connecting the DER to
the networks (say, less than 1.05 per unit).
Note that the contribution of the DER to the faults unable
the proper coordination between recloser and downstream
fuses; however, using the set of equipment FT-FR and recloser
can improve the selectivity time and save fuses. A small
number of FT provides greater benefits to save fuses in both
test systems, and from four devices, the original protection
selectivity is established. The RT function has improvements
with fewer FT than in the first study case (without DER),
showing that using the set of equipment FT-FR and recloser
approach can handle the presence of the DER to provide the
quality places of the FT and improve the performance of the
protection scheme. Figure 3 – c and Fig. 3 – d illustrate these
results. As observed in the previous study, the number of FT
increases, and the location of the devices moves from regions
close the DER to positions closer to the lateral fuses.
C. Considering an Appropriate Value of Smax
ed
The first two studies showed the benefits of the adaptive
protection approach when considering three-phase and phase-
to-ground faults. These results indicate the maximum number
of FT (Smax ) to be allocated by the IP model. The values
itt
of Smax are provided from the benefits of the RT objective
and saved fuses for both test systems, and also considering
the coverage
 rate (CR)  of the Pareto frontier, defined as
w |Ωs |
CR = RT − RT / (|Ωs | − w); small CR values mean
bm
that the inclusion of an extra IF (w + 1) will not entail major
improvements in the RT objective. The shadow sites in Fig. 3–
a and Fig. 3– b represent Pareto efficient solutions, meaning
that none of the solutions are superior in both objectives to
the other solutions in the area. The values in the shadow area
Su
are used to set the upper bound of Smax values with the best
CR for both test systems – 14 for the 85-bus and 15 for the
1080-bus. Considering the presence of DER, the maximum
benefits are stated with a small number of FT (see Fig. 3–c
and Fig. 3–d). Combining the results with and without DER,
the Smax can vary from 4 to 14 for the 85-bus test system and
from 4 to 15 for the 1080-bus test system. The appropriate
values of Smax for both distribution systems are verified by
the Monte Carlo simulation described in Sec. V-D.
D. Using the Monte Carlo Simulation
The Monte Carlo simulations consider 10 thousand (Fig. 3-
e) and 100 thousand (Fig. 3-f) iterations to assess the quality
of the topologies delivered by the IP model (12) to 85-bus
9
Table IV
C ROSS - INSTANCE COMPARISON .
Test Base Case Planned Case Utopian Case
System IF RT IF RT IF RT
85 320.51 61.73 18.11 50.91 18.11 50.75
1080 327.26 720.61 55.46 510.90 54.22 508.73
and 1080-bus test systems considering DER, respectively. The
results provided by the Monte Carlo simulations show that the
IP model (12) is robust in proposing fault indicator topologies
to adapt the protection scheme. However, as mentioned be-
fore, the optimal number of FT can only be defined when
considering the stochastic behavior of faults introduced by the
Monte Carlo simulation. From the results in Fig. 3, Smax = 11
on
provides the best curve coverage rate when considering 85
and 1080-bus systems; therefore, this value is used in the
Monte Carlo simulations. These topologies of FT provide a
17.52% reduction in the RT and a 94.34% reduction in the
IF objective compared to the original protection scheme of
si
the 85-bus test system (without FT). In comparison, the 1080-
bus test system has a 29.10% reduction in the RT objective
r
and a 83.05% reduction in the IF objective compared to
the original protection scheme (|Ω∗s | = |Ωb |). These results
Ve
reinforce that the proposed methodology for the allocation of
the fault indicator is effective in reducing the total interrupting
time and frequency. Note from Tab. IV that the Planned Cases,
Smax = 11, have IF and RT similar to the Utopian Cases —
Smax = |Ωs |.
Figure 4 illustrates the locations of the set of equipment
FT-FR and the existing of protection devices (say, recloser
and fuses) in the planned scenarios for the 85 and 1080-bus
systems. The locations were drawn by NetworkX 2.6.2 — a
Python package for the study of the structure, dynamics, and
functions of complex networks [37].
As discussed before, scenarios that do not include the DER
result in the sprayed location of the set of equipment FT along
the feeder (Fig. 4–a and Fig. 4–c), which allows the detection
of a great number of faults; therefore, more customers can be
protected, and a significant number of saved fuses is achieved.
A feeder with DER causes changes the locations of the set
of equipment FT from the previous scenarios; now, the new
locations are mostly arranged close to the bus where the DER
is installed, as illustrated in Fig. 4–b and Fig. 4–d. In case of
serial location, the devices in series can detect the same fault,
but the FR will only process the FT signal closest to the fault.
Also, note from Fig. 4–b and Fig. 4–d that the equipment FT
far from the DER was correctly located in spots where it is
possible to detect the contributions of the substation and DER
to the short-circuit current.
E. Addressing the Configuration Changes
The feeder reconfiguration can change the direction and
magnitude of current flows and the downstream current flow
magnitude; consequently, the overcurrent protection settings
for the most used network configuration may not always
provide a proper protection to the entire network. When

ed
itt
bm
Figure 4. Solutions of the FT allocation problem based on the recloser and fuses locations: a) 85-bus without DER; b) 1080-bus without DER; c) 85-bus
with DER; d) 1080-bus with DER.
Su
considering the installation of equipment FT, the lower ac-
curacy of the adaptive protection scheme is a possibility
that must still be thoroughly observed. The study addressed
here investigates how the reconfiguration affects the adaptive
protection approach. The computational tests were designed
as following: (i) the reconfiguration is evaluated by adding
a feeder portion at a given network bus; (ii) the radiality
of the distribution network is preserved after changing the
configuration; (iii) the minimum voltage magnitude of the
network, v min , must be within a safety operation range (say,
0.93 p.u. ≤ v min ≤ 1.03 p.u.); and (iv) the bus where the
feeder portion is connected must be protected by at least one
upstream FT. The case that an FT is transferred to another
circuit after reconfiguration is not addressed in this study.
10
on
r si
Ve
The 85-bus test system is used in this study. A feeder portion
(see Fig. 5) that represents an 11-bus feeder with 381.90 kVA
of demand (10.6% of the 85-bus demand) is transferred to
the distribution system with the adaptive protection scheme
already set. Regarding the previous aspects, there are 40 fea-
sible reconfiguration scenarios without DER and 38 with DER.
For each feasible scenario, the Monte Carlo simulation is
used to verify the performance of the proposed adaptive
protection scheme after changing the network configuration;
the simulation parameters are the same stated in Sec. V-D
and the FT locations are illustrated in Fig. 4–a and Fig. 4–b,
with Smax = 11.
Under the evaluation conditions, the simulation studies
show that the reconfiguration does not significantly affect the

x09 x08 x10 x11
Feeder
x07 x04
Bus
x x01 x02 x03 x05 x06
Figure 5. The feeder portion transferred.
performance of the proposed adaptive protection scheme. The
fault detection times with and without the set of equipment
FT varied up to 1% of the feasible scenarios in comparison
to the original configurations (without and with DER). The
protection scheme with equipment FT outperforms the tradi-
tional scheme (without FT) for all reconfiguration scenarios
evaluated in this investigation. The average reduction of these
new scenarios for the RT objective is 13.83% for the case
without DER and 17.28% for the case with DER; in the
original network configuration, the cases without and with
DER provide reductions of 13.46% and 17.52%, respectively.
For the IF objective, no changes were observed in its
results for the different configurations evaluated without DER;
therefore, the allocated set of equipment FT has saved fuses
for all fault scenarios that may be affected by short-circuit
currents. For the scenarios with DER, fewer fuses are saved
after changing the network configuration, which provide an
average of a 6.27% reduction in the IF objective compared
to the original protection scheme of the 85-bus test system
(without FT).
ed
VI. C ONCLUSIONS
An integer linear programming (IP) model for solving the
allocation of fault transmitters (FT) and fault receivers (FR)
into distribution systems has been developed. The model
itt
considers the integration of a set of equipment FT-FR to
the traditional overcurrent equipment to adaptive protection
coordination, while the objective function minimizes the pro-
tection operation time and the average interruption frequency
m
of the network. The IP model considers three-phase and phase-
to-ground faults. To assess decisions about the maximum
number of FT, the strategy to reveal the Smax is used to
b
obtain the Pareto front considering the total number of FT,
the protection operation time, and the saved fuses. A Monte
Su
Carlo simulation is applied to further improve the solution with
a richer representation of the stochastic nature of the faults; it
also validates the adaptive protection coordination obtained by
using the set of equipment FT-FR approach. The case studies
put the approach into perspective with two test systems for the
allocation of FT. A complementary study shows that under the
evaluated conditions the reconfiguration does not significantly
affect the performance of the proposed adaptive protection
scheme.
All pieces considered, the proposed approach is flexible,
robust, and scalable. Flexible because it allows the design of
FT allocation plans for distribution systems with and without
distributed energy resources (DER); robust in the sense that it
always gives feasible optimized FT allocation plans; scalable
because it can address both small and large scale problems.
11
The next steps in this research will address the modeling of
anti-islanding protections and the islanding operation schemes.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors are indebted to Eng. Paulo Lima from the
Schweitzer Engineering Laboratories for the helpful comments
and for allowing them to draw upon his expertise in the set
of equipment FT-FR technologies. The authors also kindly
acknowledge the suggestions of their colleagues of the Energy
Network Optimization Laboratory.
R EFERENCES
[1] F. J. Muench and G. A. Wright, “Fault indicators: Types, strengths amp;
applications,” IEEE Trans. Power App. Syst., vol. PAS-103, no. 12, pp.
3688–3693, 1984.
[2] J.-H. Teng, W.-H. Huang, and S.-W. Luan, “Automatic and fast faulted
on
line-section location method for distribution systems based on fault
indicators,” IEEE Trans. Pow. Syst., vol. 29, no. 4, July 2014.
[3] A. Shahsavari, S. M. Mazhari, A. Fereidunian, and H. Lesani, “Fault in-
dicator deployment in distribution systems considering available control
and protection devices: A multi-objective formulation approach,” IEEE
Trans. Pow. Syst., vol. 29, no. 5, 2014.
si
[4] C.-Y. Ho, T.-E. Lee, and C.-H. Lin, “Optimal placement of fault
indicators using the immune algorithm,” IEEE Trans. Pow. Syst., vol. 26,
no. 1, 2011.
[5] M. de Almeida, F. Costa, S. X. de Souza, and F. Santana, “Optimal
r
placement of faulted circuit indicators in power distribution systems,”
Elec. Power Syst. Res., vol. 81, no. 2, pp. 699–706, 2011.
Ve
[6] H. O. Cruz and F. Bertequini Leão, “Optimal placement of fault
indicators using adaptive genetic algorithm,” in IEEE General Meeting,
July 2017, pp. 1–5.
[7] S. Shi, B. Zhu, A. Lei, and X. Dong, “Fault location for radial
distribution network via topology and reclosure-generating traveling
waves,” IEEE Trans. Smart Grid, vol. 10, no. 6, pp. 6404–6413, 2019 .
[8] W. F. Usida, D. V. Coury, R. A. Flauzino, and I. N. da Silva, “Efficient
placement of fault indicators in an actual distribution system using
evolutionary computing,” IEEE Trans. Pow. Syst., vol. 27, no. 4, 2012.
[9] J. S. Acosta, J. C. López, and M. J. Rider, “Optimal multi-scenario,
multi-objective allocation of fault indicators in electrical distribution
systems using a mixed-integer linear programming model,” IEEE Trans.
Smart Grid, vol. 10, no. 4, pp. 4508–4519, 2019.
[10] M. Farajollahi, M. Fotuhi-Firuzabad, and A. Safdarian, “Simultaneous
placement of fault indicator and sectionalizing switch in distribution
networks,” IEEE Trans. Smart Grid, vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 2278–2287,
2019.
[11] K. Hao, S. V. Achanta, J. Fowler, and D. Keckalo, “Apply a wireless
line sensor system to enhance distribution protection schemes,” in 70th
Annual Conference for Protective Relay Engineers, 2017, pp. 1–11.
[12] F. B. B. Rolim, F. C. L. Trindade, and M. J. Rider, “Adaptive
protection methodology for modern electric power distribution
systems,” Journal of Control, Automation and Electrical Systems,
vol. 32, no. 5, pp. 1377–1388, Aug. 2021. [Online]. Available:
https://doi.org/10.1007/s40313-021-00774-1
[13] C. d. Santos, P. M. Bartmeyer, and C. Lyra, “Allocation of fault
indicators for adaptive protection schemes,” in IEEE Innovative Smart
Grid Technologies Conference - Latin America, 2019, pp. 1–6.
[14] LaPSEE, “Testing systems,” Laboratory of Electrical Power System
Planning, www.feis.unesp.br/lapsee, Tech. Rep., 2021.
[15] R. Brown, Electric Power Distribution Reliability, ser. Power Engineer-
ing (Willis). CRC Press, 2017.
[16] N. Bayati, H. R. Baghaee, A. Hajizadeh, and M. Soltani, “A fuse saving
scheme for dc microgrids with high penetration of renewable energy
resources,” IEEE Access, vol. 8, pp. 137 407–137 417, 2020.
[17] IEEE, “IEEE recommended practice for protection and coordination of
industrial and commercial power systems (ieee buff book),” IEEE Std
242-2001 (Revision of IEEE Std 242-1986), pp. 1–710, Dec 2001.
[18] B. Hussain, S. M. Sharkh, S. Hussain, and M. A. Abusara, “An adaptive
relaying scheme for fuse saving in distribution networks with distributed
generation,” IEEE Trans. Power Del., vol. 28, no. 2, pp. 669–677, 2013.
[19] M. Abdi-Khorsand and V. Vittal, “Modeling protection systems in time-
domain simulations: A new method to detect mis-operating relays for
unstable power swings,” IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 32, no. 4, pp.
2790–2798, 2017.
 12

[20] M. Izadi, A. Safdarian, M. Moeini-Aghtaie, and M. Lehtonen, “Opti- Fernanda C. L. Trindade (M’13, SM’22) received the Ph.D. degree in
mal placement of protective and controlling devices in electric power electrical engineering from the University of Campinas, Campinas, Brazil
distribution systems: A mip model,” IEEE Access, vol. 7, pp. 122 827– (2013), where she is currently an Associate Professor. Her research interests
122 837, 2019. include distribution system automation, monitoring, and protection. She has
[21] S. Santoso and T. A. Short, “Identification of fuse and recloser operations been Associate Editor of the IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery and IEEE
in a radial distribution system,” IEEE Trans. Power Del., vol. 22, no. 4, Power Engineering Letters since 2021.
pp. 2370–2377, 2007.
[22] R. C. Dugan and D. T. Rizy, “Electric distribution protection problems
associated with the interconnection of small, disperesed generation
devices,” IEEE Trans. Power App. Syst., no. 6, pp. 1121–1127, 1984.
[23] A. F. Naiem, Y. Hegazy, A. Y. Abdelaziz, and M. A. Elsharkawy,
“A classification technique for recloser-fuse coordination in distribution
systems with distributed generation,” IEEE Trans. Power Del., vol. 27,
no. 1, pp. 176–185, 2012.
[24] P. Barker and R. De Mello, “Determining the impact of distributed
generation on power systems.” in Power Engineering Society Summer
Meeting, vol. 3, 2000, pp. 1645–1656 vol. 3.
[25] A. Fazanehrafat, S. Javadian, S. Bathaee, and M.-R. Haghifamt, “Main-
taining the recloser-fuse coordination in distribution systems in presence
of dg by determining dg’s size,” in 9th International Conference on

on
Developments in Power System Protection, 2008, pp. 132–137.
[26] E. Purwar, S. P. Singh, and D. N. Vishwakarma, “A robust protection
scheme based on hybrid pick-up and optimal hierarchy selection of
relays in the variable dgs-distribution system,” IEEE Trans. Power Del.,
vol. 35, no. 1, pp. 150–159, 2020.
[27] “SEL wireless protection system: SEL-FT50 fault transmitter,

si
SEL-RP50 fault repeater, and SEL-FR12 fault receiver.”
https://selinc.com/products/FT50/, 2021.
[28] J. M. Gers and E. J. Holmes, Protection of electricity distribution
networks. IET, 2004, vol. 47.

r
[29] IEEE, “IEEE guide for electric power distribution reliability indices,”
IEEE Std 1366-2012 (Revision of IEEE Std 1366-2003), pp. 1–43, 2012.
[30] M. A. Dumitrescu, Network Protection and Automation Guide: Protec-
tive Relays, Measurements & Control. Alstom Grid, 2002.
[31] S. Ruzika and M. M. Wiecek, “Approximation methods in multiobjective
programming,” Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications, vol.
126, no. 3, pp. 473–501, Sep 2005.
[32] M. Ehrgott, Multicriteria optimization. Springer Science & Business
Media, 2005, vol. 491.
Ve
Christiano Lyra (SM’01) finished high school as an AFS exchange student
in Philadelphia, PA, USA, in 1970. He received a B.Sc. degree in Electrical
ed
[33] I. Dunning, J. Huchette, and M. Lubin, “Jump: A modeling language for Engineering from the Federal University of Pernambuco, Brazil, in 1975, and
mathematical optimization,” SIAM review, vol. 59, no. 2, pp. 295–320, an M.Sc. and a Ph.D. degree in Electrical Engineering from the University
2017. of Campinas (UNICAMP), São Paulo, Brazil, in 1979 and 1984, respectively.
[34] Gurobi Optimization, LLC, “Gurobi Optimizer Reference Manual,” Following a brief career at the Power Company of the São Francisco River, he
2021. [Online]. Available: https://www.gurobi.com joined the Faculty of UNICAMP in 1978, where he is a Professor of Electrical
[35] W. E. Company, Electrical Transmission and Distribution Reference Engineering and has served as the head of the Department of Systems
itt

Book. Central Station Engineers of The Westinghouse, 1964.
[36] P. Bartmeyer, “Locations of protection devices and fault transmitters,”
https://github.com/petrabartmeyer/fault_transmitter_receiver, 2021.
[37] A. A. Hagberg, D. A. Schult, and P. J. Swart, “Exploring network
structure, dynamics, and function using networkx,” in Proceedings of
bm
Engineering, Director of the Graduate Program in Electrical Engineering,
Dean of the School of Electrical and Computer Engineering, a councilman at
UNICAMP Press, and a member of the Board of Trustees of the University.
He coordinates the Institute for Advanced Studies (IdEA) and the Laboratory
for Energy Network Optimization (LABORE).

the 7th Python in Science Conference, G. Varoquaux, T. Vaught, and

J. Millman, Eds., Pasadena, CA USA, 2008, pp. 11 – 15.
Su

Caio dos Santos (S’19) received a B.Sc. degree in Electrical Engineering

from the Federal University of Santa Maria, Santa Maria, Brazil, in 2017, and
the M.Sc. degree in Electrical Engineering from the University of Campinas
(UNICAMP), São Paulo, Brazil, in 2020. He is currently a Ph.D student
at UNICAMP, and his research interests span the areas of power systems
optimization, expansion and operation planning of power systems, and modern
power systems.

Petra M. Bartmeyer received an M.Sc. and a Ph.D. degree in Applied Math

and Electrical Engineering from the University of Campinas, Brazil, in 2016
and 2020, respectively. She is currently a Data Engineering at Mercado Libre
developing optimization algorithms for e-commerce.

View publication stats