A Tutorial for Applying the Alternative Transients
Program (ATP) to Protection Analysis
Morgan Brimstein, Aaron Findley, P.E., and Jared Mraz, P.E.
POWER Engineers, Inc.
Abstract— ATP-EMTP, based on the work of Dr. Hermann
Dommel and Dr. Scott Meyer, is a royalty free software called
Alternative Transients Program (ATP) that incorporates much of
the capability of commercial electromagnetic transient analysis
software but isn’t as well known outside of academia. There are
three separate programs that, when used together, provide a
complete ATP-EMTP suite: ATP Analyzer, the electromagnetic
transients analysis tool; ATP Draw, a graphical ATP modeling
tool; and PlotXY, which provides powerful plotting of ATP binary
output. ATP provides the capability to model simple to complex
electrical systems and run various transient simulations. The
process to download and install ATP is complicated, so a brief
introduction to software setup is given.
A common usage of ATP is to model self and mutual
impedances of transmission lines for use in line relay setting and
power flow simulation programs. ATP gives very accurate
impedance solutions without the chore of hand calculations or
building symmetrical component calculations. Once the model is
constructed, ATP allows the user to easily adjust parameters if
changes occur during the line design or as-build process and
perform what-if analysis.
ATP also has the capability to model power system
components and instrument transformers in greater detail than
typical steady-state analysis software. ATP also has some built-in
protective relay models for commonly used elements such as time
overcurrent, differential, and distance elements. This allows the
user to study protection system operation during transient
conditions. Simulation results, such as secondary currents and
voltages, can be exported in COMTRADE format from ATP and
“played back” to a microprocessor-based relay using commonly
available test sets to test the operation of the relay under various
conditions. This can be advantageous for engineers who do not
have access to hardware in the loop (HIL) simulators but have a
need to simulate relay response to non-sinusoidal waveforms and
other complex system phenomena.
This tutorial will cover using ATP for line modeling and some
example line modeling applications such as line constants and
OPGW sizing. This tutorial will also cover how ATP can be used
to provide “proof-of-concept” for protection system operation
when HIL simulations aren’t practical or available. Results of
ATP simulations will be compared against results of HIL
simulation for recently completed testing of a zone interlocking
scheme.
For protection engineers, ATP is a powerful tool that may be
used to improve accuracy and decrease time spent performing
power system calculations.
1
I. INTRODUCTION TO ATP
The Alternative Transients Program (ATP) is a universal
program system for digital simulation of transient phenomena
of electromagnetic as well as electromechanical nature. With
this digital program, complex networks and control systems can
be simulated. ATP has been continuously developed through
international contributions by Drs. W. Scott Meyer and Tsu-
huei Liu, the co-Chairmen of the Canadian/American EMTP
User Group. ATP licenses are free of charge for all who have
not engaged in EMTP commerce and can be obtained from the
Canadian/American EMTP User Group, or an authorized
regional users group. ATP licensing is mandatory prior to
receiving any materials. Following the license agreement
approval by an authorized user group, you are eligible to use
the ATP program and all ATP related tools. The Appendix of
this paper has a tutorial on how to install ATP. This is not the
only resource available for install instructions and installation
can be customized.
ATPDraw is a graphical, mouse-driven preprocessor to the
ATP version of the Electromagnetic Transients Program
(EMTP) on the MS-Windows platform. The program was
written in Borland Delphi 2007 and runs under Windows
9x/NT/2000/XP/Vista as well as under emulators in LINUX. In
ATPDraw, the user can construct an electrical circuit by
selecting components from the various device menus illustrated
in the figures below.
II. SYSTEM MODELING TUTORIAL
This section serves as a reference to the very initial stages
of system modeling using ATP. This may vary depending on
the analysis the user is building a model for. The figures below
show some typical equipment that would be used in a basic
system model. Right clicking in the blank area of the ATPDraw
screen will give the user the options shown in Figure 1.
The following paragraphs will summarize the tools and
components that are discussed in this paper and some of the
most useful features. Please note there are many other
components in the menu in Figure 1 that have not been used for
this paper’s application but could be useful.
Probes and 3 phase will give the user the opportunity to
place probes which can monitor node or branch current and
voltages. In the Probe dialog, the user can specify the number
of phases of a probe and which phases will be illustrated in the
graphical output file.
Figure 1: ATP models
Figure 2: Probe menu
Branch Linear is a tool that allows the user to place a
resistor, capacitor, or inductor into their system model while
branch non-linear has multi-phase nonlinear R and L
components, and nonlinear inductors which includes an input
for the initial conditions for the flux linkage.
Lines/Cables is used to build transmission line models.
These can be applied to a variety of studies including but not
limited to line constants calculations or an Optical Ground Wire
(OPGW) thermal analysis.
Transformers and power system tools will be the most
widely discussed feature in this paper. Transformers provides
several options for single and three phase transformers as well
as hybrid transformers, and saturable transformers. Analyzing
CT saturation and CCVT transients starts with the transformer
building feature. Power system tools is where the user can add
protective relay components.
After the user runs a simulation, ATP provides various
options for viewing the results. The commands for running the
simulation and viewing results are found under “ATP” as
shown in Figure 3.
Figure 3: Running ATP
One feature of ATP is PlotXY which is a program used to
make plots that pull data from the current and voltage probes
which allows the user to plot those variables in a graph. Once
“Run ATP” is selected, and the model successfully completes
the simulation, the user can select “run Plot” to be able to select
the specific current and voltage variables of interest. The
PlotXY function is shown in Figure 4.
Another way to obtain results from ATP is in the .lis file
which is produced upon running a simulation. This file is
typically stored on your computer C drive in the ATP folder
that is created when installing the software. The .lis file will
provide the user with simulation solutions including the
susceptance and impedance matrix for LCC components.
2

Figure 4: PlotXY
III. CURRENT TRANSFORMER SATURATION
Current transformers are a critical component in protection
systems, transforming primary system current down to a level
that is suitable for input to a protective relay (usually 1A or 5A).
Current transformers using an iron core have a nonlinear
magnetizing reactance. Under steady state conditions current
transformers typically operate well below saturation however,
during high current faults and faults with significant DC offset,
the core of a current transformer can saturate. During saturation
the secondary current will no longer be an exact replica of the
primary current and the resulting error can be problematic in
critical protection functions.
The performance of current transformers is commonly
documented via the ANSI/IEEE accuracy class. The ANSI
rating provides sufficient information to estimate the likelihood
a CT will saturate based on the available fault current and
secondary burden. By definition, an ANSI C200 CT is capable
of delivering 200V to a standard burden, at 20 times rated
secondary current without experiencing more than 10% error.
Using the C-rating, burden, fault current, and X/R ratio an
estimate of the likelihood of saturation can be obtained using
equation 1, from [1].
1 ∗ (1)
Where:
• If = the current in primary amps.
• Ipri = the primary current rating of the CT (e.g. 3000A
for a 3000:5 CT).
• Zb = the total secondary burden including the relay,
leads, and CT resistance.
• Zstd = is the sum of the accuracy class burden and CT
internal resistance.
• A value of Vs greater than 20 indicates the CT is
expected to saturate.
The ANSI accuracy rating provides a good initial screening
for potential saturation, though it is generally conservative. A
more detailed assessment of CT performance can be obtained
from the CT excitation characteristic, which is also readily
available in most cases. The excitation characteristic plots the
relationship between the secondary excitation current and
voltages. An example excitation characteristic is shown in
Figure 5.
Figure 5: CT excitation curve
The excitation curve can be used to model the CTs non-
linear magnetizing reactance. A simplified CT model is depicted
in Figure 6 showing the CT primary and secondary impedances,
an ideal transformer, and the magnetization branch.
Lp Ls
Rp Rs
Lm Rm Burden
Figure 6: CT equivalent circuit
ATP includes a saturable transformer model, TRAFO_S,
that can simulate the nonlinear characteristic of the CT core
based on current and voltage data available from the excitation
characteristic.
The Single phase, saturable transformer model can be found
in the transformer drop down menu of ATPDraw, the inputs to
the model include the primary and secondary impedances, as
well as RMS current and voltage points from the excitation
characteristic.
3
 The saturable transformer model is convenient for modeling available fault currents to simulate the performance of a CT over
CT performance because the saturation characteristic can be the first few cycles of a fault.
entered directly from the excitation curve. The program includes
a sub-routine to convert these RMS current and voltage pairs
into peak current-flux pairs for the simulation. There are some
limitations to this model; it does not include any hysteresis and
cannot account for any remanence in the CT core. Despite these
limitations the model provides good results for the type of
significant saturation scenarios that would be of interest in most
protection studies. [2].

Figure 8: TRAFO_S model excitation characteristic

Figure 7: TRAFO_S Attributes

ATP places the magnetizing branch on the primary winding

of the model, therefore the secondary winding resistance, turns
ratio, and saturation information will be entered on the primary
winding of the model. With the secondary winding connected to
the simulated fault current source.
The excitation characteristic can be entered as pairs of RMS
current and voltage points by selecting the “RMS” checkbox in
the Attributes window. Under the characteristic tab, the number
of points can be selected and entered directly from the excitation
curve. Entering between 6-10 points provided good results
during model validation.
After the data entry is completed, the model can be
interconnected to a larger simulation. The lead resistance and
relay burden will be modeled on the primary side of the
transformer model (representing the CT secondary) separately
using the RLC components available in the ATP component
library. The secondary side of the transformer model
(representing the CT primary) can be interconnected to an
equivalent source or larger overall system model. The final three Figure 9: ATP CT model
phase CT is shown in Figure 9.
The following information was used to compare the results
Once constructed it is important to validate the model of the two models:
performance. This can be done using a combination of hand
calculations, simplified cases in other software, or by • Fault Current 11,200A rms
reproducing the conditions under which the I-V characteristics • X/R ratio of 37.2
were determined [3]. In the first example, the performance of the • Burden of 4 ohms
CT model developed in ATP is compared with the CT Saturation • Secondary winding resistance of 1.14 ohms
Calculator [4] made available by the Power System Relaying • Turns ratio of 400:1
and Control Committee (PSRC). This tool has been well vetted
• Excitation characteristic from Figure 5
and takes information from the CT excitation characteristic and

4
 For ATP an equivalent source was modeled to provide the
required 11.2 kA fault current with an X/R ratio of 37.2 to match
the information directly entered into the Excel based model
provided by the PSRC. The resulting CT saturation was
compared to an ideal (non-saturated) secondary current in both
models and showed good agreement.
Figure 10: CT saturation validation
An alternative method for validating the CT model is to
recreate the excitation characteristic using the CT model and
voltage source. The curve is constructed by applying RMS
voltages from the excitation curve to the transformer model and
documenting the resulting excitation current. The simple circuit
for this test is depicted in Figure 11.
Figure 11: Excitation test circuit
The simulation was run 10 times at voltages from 2.6V to
330V. The resulting excitation current waveforms were
recorded, and the RMS value of the current was plotted against
the RMS excitation voltage applied. The reconstructed
excitation characteristic using 10 points (blue) in Figure 12
closely matches the current and voltage pairs taken from the
characteristic (red) in Figure 5.
Once validated, the CT model can then be incorporated into
the larger overall study. Depending on the nature of the study
the secondary currents can be observed directly or saved in a
transient format and injected into a physical device using a relay
test set.
Figure 12: RMS Voltage and Current input pairs (red), and
simulation outputs (blue)
IV. CCVT TRANSIENTS
Coupling Capacitor Voltage Transformers (CCVT) are
common on higher voltage transmission systems. CCVT’s use
a capacitive voltage divider to step the system voltage down to
an intermediate level and apply a traditional potential
transformer to further reduce the voltage to levels suitable for
protective relay inputs.
HV Bus
C1
Lt
Vm PT
C2
FSC Burden
Figure 13: CCVT simplified equivalent circuit
The intermediate voltage is typically around 11 kV and can
be determined from the capacitance values using the following
relation
∗ (2)
A tuning inductor (or compensating inductor) is placed at
the intermediate voltage and in combination with the step down
transformer (PT), inductance forms a series resonant circuit to
compensate for the phase shift introduced by the capacitor.
The value of the total inductance required can be estimated as
5
 (3) The size of the main CCVT capacitors is easily obtainable
! " #$ ∗! # from the nameplate however, the exact impedances of the FSC
components and secondary transformers are not typically
The tuning inductor can be determined by subtracting the reported on manufacturer drawings and must be requested from
PT inductance from the total. the manufacturer.

%& &' − *+ (4) The step-down transformer can be modeled using the same
saturable transformer model used to simulate the CT. For this
Both the tuning inductor and the potential transformer will application the saturation characteristics of the core are
have a small amount of capacitance that would be modeled in represented in less detail using the excitation current and
parallel with each component. The amount of capacitance is voltage from the no-load loss test as a single point for the
small, not as readily available, and can often be neglected in magnetization characteristic.
protection studies involving near nominal frequencies.
For the tutorial, typical data [5] was obtained to represent
CCVT’s will include a ferroresonance suppression circuit the simplified CCVT model.
(FSC) designed to dampen oscillations that may occur between
the circuit capacitance and the non-linear inductance of the TABLE I. CCVT TYPICAL DATA
potential transformer’s iron core. The FSC can be in the form Parameter Value
of an LC circuit tuned to the power system frequency (active
C1 2920 pF
FSC) or as a resistive load connected permanently or through a
spark gap to the secondary of the PT (passive FSC). C2 82000 pF
Lt 58 kW
PT Turns Ratio 6584/115
PT L primary 2997 W
PT R primary 400 W
Cf Lf
PT L secondary 0.001 W
PT R secondary 0.001 W
Gap
0.01421 A,
PT magnetization
Rf 13.7867 Wb
R 5.5 W,0.01 H,
Lf Rf Cf (RLC)
8 uF,
LF (RL) 3.9 W, 0.394 H
Figure 14: Typical active (left) and passive (right) FSC designs
Rf 40 W
FSCs, in particular active FSC circuits, can have a Burden 1000 W
significant impact on the transient response of the CCVT and
should not be neglected in protection studies.
This simplified model would be suitable for most protection
To represent FSC circuits using ATPDraw, the linear RLC studies interested in transient responses that would be observed
components can be configured to represent each side of the by relays immediately following a system fault. For
filter, the inductance is split out as two inductors representing investigations that involve frequencies higher than 500Hz or
each side of the tap, with a capacitance to one side, and the that are concerned with ferroresonance, additional modeling
associated resistances. may be required to account for the effects of stray capacitances
and the presence of any drain coil. A more detailed nonlinear
core model for the step-down transformer that includes
remanence, should also be used. A more comprehensive
discussion of CCVT modeling is provided in [2].

Figure 15: ATP FSC model

6
 Figure 16: Simplified CCVT model
Options for validating the performance of a CCVT model
can be difficult outside of laboratory environment or having
recorded event data for comparison. At a minimum, the model
can be benchmarked against another vetted model to rule out
any obvious errors in data entry or highlight any unexpected
results. The model presented here follows a format that is
commonly used in other transient analysis software packages.
For comparison, a simple bolted fault scenario was simulated
using the model constructed in Figure 16 as well as the built in
CCVT model provided by a commercial software package.
The CCVT simulation results show good agreement
between the two models which is expected given the similarity
in modeling approach.
The transient oscillation of CCVTs in response to a fault is
most often a concern for distance elements which may
transiently overreach on systems where the faulted voltage is
significantly depressed. With an expanded system model the
CCVT model can provide a reasonable approximation of the
expected secondary voltages. The output of these simulations
can be saved in COMTRADE format and played back into a
relay to observe the distance element response to the transient
after any initial signal processing. The process of saving results
to a COMTRADE format for playback will be covered in
section VII of this tutorial.
Figure 17: Comparison of CCVT model response
V. TRANSFORMER MODELING AND INRUSH SIMULATIONS
Power transformers are one of the most common
components installed on the power system. They are used for a
wide variety of applications including generation plants,
transmission substations, and distribution substations.
Transformers can be modeled in conventional steady state
analysis programs for use in short circuit, load flow and
coordination studies. One limitation of these steady state
models is that they are not able to model the transient
performance of the transformer under conditions such as
transformer inrush. This makes it difficult to determine how an
overcurrent relay, impedance-based relay, or current
transformer might respond to a transformer energization event.
ATP provides the user with the ability to model both non-
saturable transformers (similar to steady state programs) and
saturable transformers. This paper is focused on modeling using
ATP’s Hybrid Transformer model.
A. Transformer Modeling Example
In this section, we will walk through the steps taken to
model a transformer with the following parameters:
7
 • High-Side Voltage: 13.8 kV
• Low-Side Voltage: 416 V
• Rating: 3.6 MVA
• Winding Configuration: Delta-Wye-Impedance
Grounded
• Impedance: 8.33% at 3.6 MVA
The hybrid transformer model can be used to create a
reasonably accurate model of a transformer using input data
that is readily available from a transformer test report.
Additional information on the hybrid transformer model is
available in the ATPDraw User’s Manual [6], and background
information on the hybrid transformer implementation and
validation is available in [7]. Figure 18 shows the input data
related to the transformer structure, winding connections, and
ratings. Hybrid transformers can be modeled with as many as
four windings. There are also several options for the core type
which can be used to produce a more accurate model of the
transformer. Transformer winding configurations include delta,
wye, auto, and zig-zag. Of particular importance is the winding
sequence option shown in the lower middle of Figure 18. Note
that the lower-voltage winding is typically closest to the core to
reduce insulation requirements. It is very important to model
the winding sequence correctly. The authors noticed significant
differences in performance during inrush depending on the
winding sequence used.
Figure 18: Transformer Structure, Ratings, and Connections
The input data for the transformer inductance, resistance,
capacitance, and core parameters can be based on either the
design parameters of the transformer, test report values, or
typical values. The authors used the “Test Report” option to
model the inductance, resistance, and transformer core. Figure
19 below shows the series inductance and reactance values. The
impedance and load losses can be entered directly from the test
report. Typical values were used for the transformer
capacitances since these are not typically provided in a test
report. For frequencies below approximately 2kHz these
capacitance values have little impact on the results and can
often be omitted from protection studies. For higher frequency
studies investigating lightning transients, transient recovery
voltage, or other high frequency events, the capacitance of the
transformer cannot be neglected [7].
Figure 19: Impedance Parameters
The excitation characteristic for the transformer is
accounted for in the modeling of the core parameters. Limited
data points from transformer open circuit tests can be input
directly into the ATP component as shown in Figure 20. The
authors noted that the model may not converge if too many
voltage, loss, and average current points from the open circuit
test are input into the hybrid transformer component. The model
converged more successfully when the series of points between
90% and 120% of nominal voltage were used.
Figure 20: Hybrid Transformer Core Parameters
After entering the values from the transformer test report
into the component and using typical values where appropriate,
the advanced core settings dialogue box can be opened. The
advanced settings allow the user to adjust the type of
nonlinearity used for modeling the excitation characteristic.
The advanced core settings also include an option to “add final
segment” that extrapolates the excitation characteristic into the
saturation region. The author’s found this extrapolation to be
very useful in producing realistic inrush current magnitudes.
The “typical values” options for the transformer parameters
should be used with careful engineering judgement. Similarly,
use of the “design parameters” option require very detailed
information about the transformer dimensions and the materials
used for the core and windings.
8
B. Model Validation Example
The transformer model should be checked for
reasonableness to verify that it is behaving as expected. Short-
circuit tests can be performed to verify that the impedance of
the transformer has been modeled correctly. This can be done
by connecting a time-controlled switch to the secondary
winding of the transformer and initiating a three-phase fault as
shown in Figure 21 below. The results can then be compared to
hand calculations, or fault simulation results from steady state
analysis software.
Figure 23: Load Flow Test Circuit

The low-side voltages from the load flow test are shown in
Figure 24. The peak magnitude was found to be approximately
324 V, which equates to an RMS magnitude of 229.1 VL-G, or
95.4% of nominal. The high-side currents are shown in Figure
25. The peak current was found to be 204 A, which equates to
an RMS magnitude of 144.2 A, or 95.7% of the transformers
rated current. The voltage drop across the transformer is
Figure 21: Through-Fault Simulation Setup reasonable considering the transformer impedance and the
amount of load current.
For the example system, the source impedance is modeled
with a resistance of 0.04 Ohms and an inductive reactance of
0.381 Ohms. The transformer impedance is 1.194 + j4.241
Ohms. Based on these impedances, a three-phase fault on the
secondary of the transformer should result in high-side currents
of 1,665 A. Figure 22 shows the high-side currents obtained
from the ATP model during a low-side three-phase fault. The
peak current magnitude was found to be 2,352 A, which equates
to a current magnitude of 1,663 A, indicating that the
transformer’s impedance has been modeled correctly. Similar
tests can be performed for other fault types such as phase-phase
and single-line-to-ground faults.

Figure 24: Low-Side Voltage from Load-Flow Test

Figure 22: High-Side Currents from ATP Simulation for Three-

Phase Through-Fault

Another good test of the transformer model is a simple load

flow check. For this example, a load was modeled on the
secondary of the transformer with an impedance of
0.04326+j0.02095 Ohms. At nominal voltage, this load would
be 3.6 MVA, which is the transformer’s maximum rating. The
circuit used for this test is illustrated in Figure 23.
Figure 25: High-Side Currents from Load Flow Test
C. Transformer Inrush Simulation Example
One of the limitations of the hybrid transformer model is
that it does not account for residual flux upon simulation
startup. As a work-around to the limitation, an arrangement as
shown in Figure 26 can be used. In the simplified example

9
below, a source is connected to the hybrid transformer through
two time-controlled switches. The upper switch is closed at the
start of the simulation and is configured to open at a zero
crossing of the source voltage. The lower switch is configured
to close a short time after the first switch opens. When the upper
switch opens, the core flux in the transformer will be near a
peak due to the core flux effectively being the integral of the
terminal voltage. To produce a worst-case inrush current, the
lower switch is closed at a subsequent zero crossing in the
opposite direction. This drives the core into saturation and
causes the transformer to draw a substantial inrush current. The
switch timing is illustrated in Figure 27.
Figure 26: Inrush Simulation Setup
Figure 27: A-Phase Voltage and Switch Open and Close Times
The authors observed excessive noise in the phase voltages
in the simulation that was mitigated by the addition of a 10kΩ
shunt resistor, which can be seen added downstream of the
switches in Figure 26 below. When adding shunt or series
impedances to smooth out voltage or current waveforms in
ATP, care should be taken to size them such that they do not
impact the overall results of the simulation (e.g. high
impedances for shunt components and low impedances for
series components).
The results of the inrush simulations can be checked by
comparing the results to typical rules of thumb for maximum
transformer inrush. A peak inrush current of 8-10 times the
transformer’s nominal current rating is often used as a rule of
thumb for the worst-case inrush current magnitude. Figure 28
10
shows the inrush currents obtained in ATP for the test
transformer described above. The inrush simulation was
performed with the transformer unloaded. The peak inrush
current magnitude was found to be 1,420 A, which is 9.43 times
the nominal current rating of the transformer. This fits within
the typical range for a power transformer. The maximum
theoretical inrush current for a transformer can be requested
from the transformer manufacturer. For our case, the
manufacturer’s documentation listed the maximum inrush
current as 1,342 A. The maximum inrush current observed in
the ATP model was within 5.5% of the manufacturer’s
published theoretical maximum inrush current. Given the
number of approximations made during modeling with the
hybrid transformer component, the ATP model yielded
satisfactory results.
Figure 28: Results of Inrush Simulation in ATP
VI. LINE MODELING
A. Line Constants
ATP can be used to perform line constant calculations which
can then be used to set distance protection in line relays. The line
constant study is based on the electrical and physical
characteristics of the transmission line. ATP allows the user to
make specific data inputs to create accurate susceptance and
impedance matrices for self and mutual coupling. Some key
parameters are listed in Table II.
TABLE II. KEY LINE PARAMETERS
Maximum Operating Voltage
Conductor Spacing
Conductor Type
Conductor Sag
Line Length
Earth Resistivity
1) LCC templates
In this part of ATPDraw, the user can specify the geometric
and material data for an overhead line or a cable. There is no
limit to how many phases can be added to the LCC template.
This feature is beneficial when there are several lines running
parallel to one another which would affect the mutual coupling.
The Bergeron and Pi Models are most commonly used for
the LCC template inputs as shown in Figure 29. The Pi model
is best used for shorter lines (~ less than 50 miles) and
calculating line constants, whereas lines longer than 100 miles
exhibit the distributed effects of the electrical parameters very
significantly. Therefore, a distributed parameter representation
(Bergeron model) is recommended.

Figure 30: LCC data tab

Figure 29: LCC template menu

In the model tab, select Overhead Line for the system type,
and the # of phases. When skin effect is checked, the user is
prompted to enter the DC resistance on the next tab. When this
is not checked, use AC resistance. ATP has internal equations to
convert between AC and DC resistance. Since skin effect is
expected to occur, it's a good practice to check this box and use
the DC resistance. When skin effect is checked and using DC
resistance, only the outer radius of the conductor is necessary.
Since the current flows on the outside of the conductor, the inner
radius is not used in the calculations and can be set to zero. If a
conductor is bundled, select “Auto Bundling” and the user will
be prompted to add in the number, spacing, and angle of the
conductor in the data tab. ATP uses Carson's Line Impedance
method.
Under the data tab for the LCC is where the user will enter Figure 31: LCC model view
the information of the line shown in Figure 30.
B. OPGW
The outer radius (Rout) of the line has the largest effect on
During an earth fault (Single or Double Line to Ground
the line resistance. The phase spacing affects the inductance of
type), return current will flow through the OPGW. The return
the line. The line height "Vtower” and “Vmid” which is the sag,
current can be very high, only limited by the available short
affects the electromagnetic fields on the ground. Select “View”
circuit current, parallel fault paths, tower footing resistances,
for a graphical representation of the conductors as shown in
and other line characteristics. The high return current flow
Figure 31.
causes heating that can cause damage to the internal fiber strands
of the OPGW. OPGW heating limits tend to be lower than other
conductors because of the thermal sensitivity of the optical
fibers. OPGW manufacturers publish thermal limits as a kA2-
sec value that should not be exceeded.

11
 Contingency conditions increase the portion of the total fault
current flowing through the OPGW or increase the time the
OPGW is exposed to fault current. A contingency most often
considered is a broken overhead shield wire (OHSW) where
more fault current would be forced onto the OPGW. Figure 32
shows a double circuit with an OPGW and a shield wire
modeled. A series of switching and current probes are placed
along segments of the line to determine fault currents.
Figure 32: Double circuit model with OPGW
The set up illustrated in Figure 32 has the fault occuring at
the first span from the substation which should result in the
12
highest fault currents, however, breaking the transmission line
into spans of about two miles and placing faults at either end of
the line as well as midline is recommended to determine the
worst case fault scenario. The resistances shown on each span is
the tower footing resistance to provide a fault current path to
ground. The LCC template will also be updated to include the
phases for the OPGW/OHSW in order to make an electrical
connection in the ATP model. The program also allows the
OPGW/OHSW to be modeled as continuously grounded or
segmented. That can be used to check if segmenting the
OPGW/OHSW is economically attractive compared to a
continuously grounded shieldwire system.
The simulated fault current and breaker clearing times are
the parameters that will have the most impact on the OPGW
thermal rating.
The inductance of the transmission line may impose a DC
component on the short circuit current producing an
asymmetrical current. The DC offset decays relatively quickly
(within a few cycles) but can have a significant impact on
heating while present. The DC offset is a function of the system
X/R ratio for the fault condition considered and the timing of the
fault initiation.
An addition of an OPGW requires iterative fault current
analysis to ensure the OPGW will not be damaged during
normal operating conditions.
VII. COMTRADE OUTPUT
COMTRADE, the Common Format for Transient Data
Exchange, is a structure for storing and exchanging transient
data from simulations, test results, and event records. The
format and structure are detailed in IEEE C37.111-2013. A
COMTRADE record will typically have three files:
• The data file (.dat)
• A configuration file (.cfg)
• An optional header/information file (.hdr/.inf)
The files may be in a binary or readable ASCII format.
COMTRADE is widely supported by most transient analysis
software (including ATP), relay event reports, and relay test
equipment. Test sets often include the ability to read in transient
data in COMTRADE format and play back currents and
voltages from the file into a relay.
To save results of a simulation in COMTRADE format two
options exist. The results can be saved directly from the PlotXY
program by selecting the desired quantities and using “Save
vars.” Then select “.CFG” as the file format:
 Figure 33: Saving COMTRADE results
Note that depending on the step size of the simulation, the
sample rate for the event file may be too high for test equipment
to replay. You can adjust the ATP setting “Plot freq” under ATP
Output Settings to effectively down sample the output. A Plot
Freq setting of 2, for example, would output every 2 samples
from the simulation to the output file.
Another option is to use the COMTRADE tool found in the
“probes” menu. This tool offers additional configuration of the
output file, trigger time for the record, sampling frequency, and
scaling factors for the analog quantities. The recorder requires
the three phase inputs be mapped to each analog input channel;
the number of channels is selectable within the device menu.
13
Figure 34: COMTRADE Model
Under the COMTRADE tab the following fields are
available:
• id, automatically populated based on the input node
• ccbm, circuit component name, this will modify
(append) to the analog name
• ph, power system phase
• unit, the units to display for the analog value
• a, channel multiplier (typically 1)
• b, channel offset (typically 0)
• skew, from the start of the sample period (typically 0)
• prim, instrument transformer primary turns
• sec, instrument transformer secondary turns
• P/S, indicates the analog is in primary (P) or secondary
(s) quantities.
 Using prim, sec, and P/S settings may alter the way the
COMTRADE data is presented depending on the specific test
equipment or viewing software settings.
The default settings for the COMTRADE model assumes
the first three analog channels are three-phase voltages and the
second three channels are three-phase current inputs. ATP may
not automatically recognize that an input is a current or voltage.
To manually set this, use the Edit Definitions button and
navigate to the nodes tab. There the “Kind” of input node can
be defined directly with 2 corresponding to a voltage node, and
1 representing a current node.
Figure 35: Configure current and voltage nodes
Selecting the help button in this tab will bring up a full list
of “Kind” options for reference.
Following a simulation, the output file is written to the same
location as the model by default. ATP does not use the optional
.HDR file, only the .CFG and .DAT files will be written. The
results can be previewed within ATP by hitting the “View”
button at the bottom of the model attributes tab. This can be
useful to quickly verify the results were recorded as expected.
VIII. APPLICATION EXAMPLE
A practical use of ATP simulation results is to test the
transient response of a protective relay, similar to what is done
during hardware in the loop (HIL) testing. While closed-loop
testing cannot be performed using ATP, open loop playback of
ATP simulation results can provide valuable insight into a
relays response to system transients. Several HIL tests were
recently performed to evaluate the response of residual ground
overcurrent elements employed in a zone-selective interlocking
scheme applied on the medium voltage system at a large
industrial facility. A series of tests were performed to observe
the response of these residual ground elements to transformer
inrush as documented in [8]. A similar power system was
modeled in ATP. A single line of the system is shown in Figure
14
36. The system model includes an equivalent utility source, a
230kV/13.8kV step-down transformer, the main distribution
bus, and a series of downstream transformers. The utility source
was configured to provide a short circuit current of
approximately 15 kA. The 230kV/13.8kV transformer was a
delta-wye, 60 MVA transformer, with 16% impedance. The
main transformer’s core and capacitance parameters were
modeled using the “typical values” option in the Hybrid model.
The current transformers for the relay under test were modeled
as 2000:5 C200 CTs and followed the same approach described
in section III. The medium voltage potential transformers were
approximated using a resistive voltage divider. Twelve 3.6
MVA distribution transformers were included in the model and
were configured as described in Section V.
Figure 36: Sample system
The objective of the tests was to check the response of a
residual ground overcurrent relay that would be installed on the
main breaker at this industrial installation. Of particular
concern was the ground overcurrent relay’s response during
energization of the twelve distribution transformers. To
simulate the worst-case inrush current, two switches were
modeled as described in Section V. The upper switch was used
to establish residual flux in the transformers, and the lower
switch was used to re-energize. The current transformers were
modeled in series with the lower switch such that they would
capture the inrush current waveform. The PT secondary voltage
and CT secondary current were captured in a COMTRADE
record for playback with a test-set. Figure 37 shows the CT
secondary currents captured during the simulation.
 Figure 37: ATP output

Figure 38 shows the results of the COMTRADE playback

to a protective relay. The upper plot shows the filtered phase
currents, the second plot shows the measured phase current
magnitude, and the third analog plot shows the harmonic
content extracted by the relay from the current waveforms. The
top four digital traces show the harmonic blocking functions
asserting, which is expected during an inrush event. The lower
digital trace shows the residual ground overcurrent element Figure 38: Relay event from COMTRADE playback of ATP file
picking up due to severe CT saturation. Tripping is restrained
in this case by both the harmonic blocking function and the
absence of residual voltage.

A similar energization case was performed using HIL

simulation with the same relay interfaced to a real time
simulation of the same power system. The results of the HIL
simulation are shown in Figure 39. The current and harmonic
magnitudes in Figure 39 differ slightly from those in Figure 38,
but are very similar. The relay response during the HIL
simulation is also very similar to that observed during
COMTRADE playback.

Figure 39: Event record from past project

15
 IX. ATP RELAY COMPONENTS
ATP has several built-in protective relay components for
functions such as overcurrent, time-overcurrent, quadrilateral
distance, mho distance, differential, over/undervoltage and
over/underfrequency. A detailed introduction to these
components is outside the scope of this paper. These
components can be useful for getting a general idea for how a
relay might respond to a system disturbance. Care should be
taken when using these components as the algorithms employed
by the generic models in ATP may not align with the
implementation for a given manufacturer’s relay. The models
can be modified and/or refined, but this can be a time-
consuming and difficult task if the user is not familiar with
ATP’s programming language. Open-loop testing using a
COMTRADE export from ATP played back to an actual relay
is a more efficient and effective method for gauging relay
performance.
X. CONCLUSION
ATP is a free tool that provides the capability to model
simple and complex electrical systems and run various transient
simulations. It allows engineers to model power system
components in greater detail than typical steady-state analysis
software. Using ATP, protection engineers can quickly
calculate transmission line parameters from physical data; as
well as investigate the impacts of CT saturation, transformer
inrush, and other complex phenomena on protection system
performance.
Model validation is an important part of any transient
simulation. It's possible to produce simulation results that
appear reasonable but may not match reality. Hand calculations,
test reports, and simplified cases in other software should all
serve to validate a transient model prior to applying the results
of a simulation.
The output of a simulation can be exported in COMTRADE
format from ATP and “played back” to a microprocessor-based
relay using commonly available test sets in an open-loop
format. This can be advantageous for engineers who do not
have access to hardware in the loop (HIL) simulators but have
a need to verify a relays response to complex system conditions.
While this type of testing does not provide all the features of a
closed loop environment, it can be used to generate very similar
results to HIL testing on a smaller and less expensive scale.
XI. APPENDIX – ATP INSTALLATION
This appendix provides guidance on installing ATP. In
order to obtain the installation files from www.atpdraw.net, the
user must first become licensed. The license application form
can be found at www.eeug.org. The steps below will guide the
reader through a manual setup of ATP and ATPDRAW. This
setup was tested in Windows 10. The specific steps here are
intended for new users. Experienced users may find various
ways to customize setup. Screenshots are from version 7.0 of
16
ATPDraw. Setup of the previous stable version (6.3) looks very
similar.
The following ATP files were obtained prior to the
installation process:
• ATP Core Engine Version: tpbigi64.exe and
tpgigi64.exe files (4/26/2020 from
www.eeug.org)
• ATPDraw stable version: 7.3 with patch 1
(5/8/2021, source: www.atpdraw.net)
• PlotXY program files (August 2020, source:
www.ceraolo-plotxy.ing.unipi.it)
• ATPDraw 7.3 User’s Manual: Preliminary
Release No. 1.0 (May 2021, source:
www.atpdraw.net)
A. Step 1 – Remove undesired versions of ATPDraw
Uninstall or delete undesired versions of ATPDraw. A
computer that previously had ATPDraw will likely have a
configuration file (ATPDraw.ini) located at:
‘C:\Users\username\AppData\Roaming\atpdraw\’. This file
stores the default folder structures and program settings. If you
want different folder structures or program settings to be loaded
on program startup you will need to manually remove the
residual configuration file. Once deleted, a new configuration
file will automatically be created when a new version of
ATPDraw is launched. Note that the ‘AppData’ folder may be
hidden. Instructions to show hidden files can be found online.
It is possible to have multiple versions of ATPDraw on your
computer. However, they share the same .ini file.
Consequently, if the installed versions are very different,
having multiple versions may not work well. If an installation
is not working properly, one fix may be to completely remove
all ATP/ATPDraw instances and start over with a clean install.
B. Step 2 – Create folder structure
Create the folders where the ATP core engine, ATPDraw,
and PlotXY will be installed as shown in Table III. Historically
ATP has had difficulty with spaces in path names (e.g.
C:\Program Files\...). Recent versions of ATPDraw seem to
have overcome this problem, but it is something to be aware of
if you run into path name problems. Note that ATPDraw model
files (.acp files) cannot have spaces in the filename or the
program will crash.
TABLE III. ATP FOLDER STRUCTURE
Folder Function
C:\ATP\ Root directory
This will be the folder
where the ATP core
C:\ATP\atpintl64\
engine is stored.
 Folder Function D. Step 4 – Setup ATPDraw
This will be the folder Navigate to the C:\ATP\ATPDraw\ folder and run
where ATPDraw is Atpdraw.exe. When prompted, allow creation of folders that do
C:\ATP\ATPDraw\
stored. not exist (click “All”).

This will be the folder
where the plot program,
C:\ATP\PlotXY\
PlotXY, is stored.
C. Step 3 – Extract Files to Respective Folders
Obtain the ATP core engine zip file. The file used for this
tutorial was atpintl64.zip. Extract the zip file contents into the
folder C:\ATP\atpintl64\. This unpacks several files, including
another zip file called “armafit”. Perform an ‘extract here’
function to unpack the armafit file into the same
C:\ATP\atpintl64\ folder.
Obtain the ATPDraw zip file (the image file, not the setup
file). The version used for this tutorial is
ATPDraw73_Image.zip. ATPDraw is the graphical user
interface and must be linked to the core ATP engine (done in a
later step). Extract the zip file contents into the folder
C:\ATP\ATPDraw\. Since these are image files, no setup utility
is necessary; they are executable upon extraction.
ATPDraw.net has a setup file option for download. Use of that
option is not covered here, but much of the configuration will
be similar.
Click the ‘ATP’ menu option at the top of the ATPDraw
program window then select ‘Setup ATP connection’ (ATP
setup Wizard) from the drop-down menu. You should get the
window shown in Figure 40. Match the paths and selections
shown. If already checked, uncheck the radio box for ‘Set
externally (in bat-file or Windows)’. This causes the ‘Same as
Solver’ option to appear. The ATP core engine can be either
tpbigi64.exe or tpgigi64.exe. The difference between these two
files is that the ‘gig’ version allows models with larger
component counts. Normally the ‘big’ version is sufficient, but
if you get errors from exceeding component limits in a large
model you can try the ‘gig’ version. It is possible to compile
versions with custom component limits, but that is beyond the
scope of this document. For most cases, one of these pre-
compiled files will be adequate. The final step is to click “Save”
and then “Ok”.

Extract available patches into the ATPDraw folder and

allow the unzip utility to overwrite existing files.

As mentioned in Step 1 you can have more than one version

of ATPDraw, but they will share the same configuration file
(ATPDraw.ini) and will therefore point to the same subfolders,
ATP core engine file, and PlotXY program. Consequently, the
versions of ATPDraw will have to be similar. Versions that are
too far apart may not call for the same folder structure or
settings. The developer of ATPDraw recommends that each
instance of ATPDraw (and accompanying files and subfolders)
get its own folder under the root ATP folder. This means that
Step 4 above would be changed to show creation of multiple
folders. For example: C:\ATP\ATPDraw63\ and
C:\ATP\ATPDraw73\.

Obtain the PlotXY zip file. The latest version used for this
tutorial was PlotXY-2020-Aug-Win.zip. PlotXY is the plotting
program most used with ATPDraw though there are other
options. Extract the zip file contents and copy them into the
folder C:\ATP\PlotXY\. The contents of the zip file may extract
into a single subfolder. Copy/cut all the contents out of this
folder and paste them directly into the C:\ATP\PlotXY\ folder.
Figure 40: ATP setup wizard

On the main ATPDraw screen go to the ‘Tools’ menu

item, then select ‘Options’ from the drop-down menu. Set

17
the data in the tabs per the guidelines in Figure 41, Figure 42,
and Figure 43. The “General” tab is not shown and can be
left at default. In the “Preferences” tab, you may need to
delete the Armafit path. This file is needed for the “Noda”
transmission line model. Pi, Bergeron, and JMarti are the
primary models that are typically used so the Armafit entry
can be left blank. After finishing, click ‘Save’ at the bottom
of the ATPDraw Options window, then click ‘Apply’, and
finally click ‘ok’.

Figure 43: View/ATP Tab

Finally, add a link between ATPDraw and the PlotXY

Figure 41: Preferences Tab
program for convenience. Select ‘File’ => ‘New from the main
menu to open a blank file. There is no need to enter anything or
save this file, but a file must be open for the next step to work.
Go to the ‘ATP’ menu item on the main screen and click ‘Edit
Commands’ to get the window shown in Figure 44. Click
‘New’ and enter “PlotXY” as the name. Click the radio button
for ‘Current PL4’ and enter the path to the ‘PlotXY.exe’ file as
shown. Click ‘Update’ and ‘Exit’. Go to the ‘Tools’ menu item
from the main ATPDraw screen and select ‘Save Options’.

Figure 42: Files and Folders Tab

Figure 44: Edit Commands Window

The final step is to apply any patches that may be

available. These are occasionally released on

18
www.atpdraw.net. These are generally released as zipped XIII. BIOGRAPHIES
image files of the ATPDraw.exe file. Copy the zipped image Aaron Findley, P.E. is a protection engineer with POWER
file to the same location as the existing ATPDraw.exe file Engineers and is based out of Vancouver, Washington. While
and extract it to the same location. Click ‘Yes’ when a pop- at POWER, Aaron has worked on a wide variety of protective
up window asks for confirmation of file replacement. relaying projects ranging from distribution protection up to
EHV series compensated line protection and RTDS
modeling/testing. His background also includes substation
XII. REFERENCES
design and grounding system analysis. He earned his bachelor’s
degree, summa cum laude, in energy engineering from the
[1] M. J. T. a. B. H. Ariana Hargrave, "Beyond the Knee Oregon Institute of Technology in 2010 and is currently
Point: A Practical Guide to CT Saturation," in 44th registered as a Professional Engineer in California and a
Annual Western Protective Relay Conference, member of IEEE.
Spokane Washington, 2017.
[2] IEEE Power System Relaying Committee, Jared Mraz, P.E. earned his B.S. degree, summa cum
"Mathematical Models for Current, Voltage, and laude, in electrical engineering from the University of Idaho in
Coupling Capacitor Voltage Transformers," IEEE 2007. Upon graduation, he joined the SCADA and
Transactions on Power Delivery, pp. 62-67, January Analytical Services group at POWER Engineers in
2000. Clarkston, Washington. He has spent the past 14 years
performing a variety of electrical system studies, with an
[3] R. Folkers, "Determine Current Transformer
emphasis on protective relaying. His experience includes
Suitability Using EMTP Models," in Western
protective relaying for distribution, transmission,
Protective Relay Conference, Spokane Washington,
generation, and industrial applications, as well as testing of
1999.
protection and control schemes using Real Time Digital
[4] IEEE Power System Relaying Committee, "CT SAT Simulation. Jared is a registered professional engineer in
Calculator (PSRC)," 30 Dec 2001. [Online]. Washington, Texas and Louisiana and is a member of the
Available: http://www.pes- WPRC planning committee.
psrc.org/kb/published/reports/CT_SAT%2010-01-
03.zip. [Accessed 2002]. Morgan Brimstein is a protection and infrastructure design
[5] I. P. S. R. Committee, "EMTP Reference Models for studies engineer with POWER Engineers in Boise, Idaho. She
Transmission Line Relay Testing," 2005. graduated with her B.S. degree in Electrical Engineering from
[6] L. P. F. P. Hans Kristian Høidalen, ATPDraw Version Boise State University and has worked for POWER for the last
7.0 for Windows User's Manual, 2019. 5 years. During her time at POWER, she has performed various
protection and arc flash studies for several refineries and
[7] B. A. M. F. G. D. I. N. C. Hans K. K. Høidalen,
primarily focuses on line design studies such as insulation
"Implementation and verification of the Hybrid
coordination, line impedance calculations, OPGW thermal
Transformer model in ATPDraw," in International
analysis, EMF, Corona, and substation grounding studies.
Conference on Power Systems Transients (IPST’07),
Lyon, France, 2007.
[8] A. F. N. M. C. S. D. D. R. T. B. Jared Mraz, "Impacts
of Transformer Inrush Current on CT Performance
and Residual Ground Overcurrent Protection," in
Western Protective Relay Conference, Spokane WA,
202.
[9] "IEEE 738-2012 Standard for Calculating the
Current-Temperature of Bare Overhead Conductors,"
IEEE, 2013.
[10] USDA, "Bulletin 1724E-100, Design Manual For
High Voltage Transmission Lines," USDA, 2015.
[11] IEEE Power Engineering Society, "Tutorial on
Electromagnetic Transient Program Applications to
Power System Protection," in Power Engineering
Education Committee, 2000.

19