IEEE PES PowerAfrica 2012 Conference and Exhibition Johannesburg, South Africa, 9-13 July 2012

Fault Detection and Classification in a Distribution Network Integrated with Distributed Generators
A.C. Adewole and R. Tzoneva
Centre for Substation Automation and Energy Management Systems Cape Peninsula University of Technology, Cape Town, South Africa Phone: +27 021-959-6459, Email: adewolea@cput.ac.za
Abstract This paper develops a methodology for application in distribution network fault detection and classification. The proposed methodology is based on wavelet energy spectrum entropy decomposition of disturbance waveforms to extract characteristic features by using level-4 db4 wavelet coefficients. Thus, few input features are required for the implementation. Different simulation scenarios encompassing various fault types at several locations with different load angles, fault resistances, fault inception angles, and load switching are applied to the IEEE 34 Node Test Feeder. In particular, the effects of system changes were investigated by integrating various Distributed Generators (DGs) into the distribution feeder. Extensive studies, verification, and analysis made from the application of this technique validate the approach. Comparison with statistical methods based on standard deviation and mean absolute deviation has shown that the method based on log energy entropy is very reliable, accurate, and robust. Index Terms Discrete wavelet transform, distribution network, fault detection and classification, wavelet energy spectrum.

1.INTRODUCTION The recent restructuring in electric power utilities over the last decade has brought about the need for efficient generation and transfer (transmission and distribution) of electric power to load centers. The mode of power evacuation is usually via overhead lines. Overhead lines are subject to the forces of nature and other uncontrollable factors, thus liable to faults. An essential aspect of Abnormal Event Management (AEM) is fault detection and diagnosis. In the past, most research and development in power system faults detection and diagnosis focused on transmission systems, and it is not until recently with the introduction of stringent fault indices by regulatory bodies that research on power system faults has begun on the unique aspects of distribution networks. The application of algorithms designed for transmission networks when used for distribution lines are prone to errors because of the non-homogeneity, presence of laterals/tap-offs, radial operation, and load taps along distribution lines. Therefore, there is the need for contingency plans to troubleshoot faults and expedite service restoration in order to reduce downtime. Many diagnostic methods have been developed and proposed, but a perfect, dependable, and secure method is still the objective of continuous research. Methods based on

Wavelet Transform (WT) for fault diagnosis were proposed by [1]-[6]. Reference [7] proposed a method for fault detection and classification in transmission systems using wavelet and fuzzy logic. Similarly, [5], [8], [10] suggested techniques using WT and Artificial Neural Network (ANN) for transmission line fault detection and classification. Another technique based on WT and Support Vector Machine (SVM) was proposed by [11] for power system disturbance classifier in transmission systems. Reference [12] presented a methodology for the classification of Power Quality (PQ) disturbances using Wavelet Packet Transform (WPT) and fuzzy k-nearest neighbor classifier. A method by [13] for PQ disturbances was based on Discrete Wavelet Transform (DWT) and wavelet network. Reference [14] also presented a WT and rule based method for power quality classification in a transmission network. A method based on HubbardStratonovich (HS) transform and radial basis function neural network was suggested by [15]. Reference [16] described a method for fault detection and classification based on WT decomposition of the transformed current values. The method suggested the use of wavelet entropies for multi-agent fault diagnosis in distribution networks. Although, the method by [15] is fast because of the reduction in the computational requirements, the use of level1 coefficients may fail to provide the appropriate transient characteristics that truly represent the fault type/phase(s) especially where there is mutual coupling between the phases. Also, the technique described by [14] did not cover the effect of noise disturbance on the model. The method proposed by [16] made use of Clarks Transform to convert the three phase current measurements to modal domain. The disadvantage of this is the added computation that would be required during implementation. In addition, the effects of load angle, load switching, and capacitor switching were not considered in the various literature reviewed. In this paper, wavelet energy spectrum entropy based on log energy is employed to detect and classify faults in a typical distribution network. This is implemented by taking into account the distinct nature of distribution networks and network changes that are likely to occur. To validate the proposed approach, extensive simulation studies are carried out on the IEEE 34 Node Test Feeder Benchmark model at different fault locations, fault resistances, fault inception angles, load angle variations, load and capacitor switching, and network topology changes.

The rest of this paper is organized as follows: Section II explains the principles of Wavelet Transform. Section III describes the Power System Model. The implementation of the fault detection and classification algorithm is outlined in section IV. Section V provides the results and discussion of this approach. Section VI summarizes the conclusion. II. WAVELET TRANSFORM ANALYSIS A. Wavelet Transform The classical Fourier Transform (FT) is a frequency domain method. That is, it transforms a signal from timebased to frequency-based one. Thus, time information is lost and it is impossible to tell when an event took place. Short Time (STFT) was introduced to correct the shortcoming of the FT. However, a fixed time window is used. Many signals require a more flexible approach where the window size can be varied to determine the frequency or time more accurately. A method such as WT capable of multiple resolutions in time and frequency and with a flexible window size is thereby required. The windowing in WT automatically uses short time intervals for high frequency components and long time intervals for low frequency components by using scale and shift techniques. WT can be implemented using the Continuous Wavelet Transform (CWT). The CWT of a signal x (t ) is the integral of the product between x (t ) and the daughter-wavelets, which are the time translated and scale expanded/compressed versions of a function having finite energy, called motherwavelet. The CWT of a signal x (t ) is defined as [17], [18]:
C(a, b ) = 1 a

the number of coefficients, 2m is the variable for scale, k 2m is the variable for shift, and 1 2m is the energy normalization component to ensure the same scale as the mother wavelet. In implementing Multi-Resolution Analysis (MRA) for DWT, the scaling and wavelet functions are obtained from [21], [22]. ( m / 2) m (3)

m ,n ( t ) = 2

(2

t n)

m,n (t ) = 2

(m / 2)

(2

t n)

(4)

where m,n (t ) is the scale function, and m,n (t ) is the wavelet function. Wavelets are localized in both time (through translation) and frequency (through dilation). The first scale covers a broad frequency range at the high frequency end of the spectrum and the higher scales cover the lower end of the frequency spectrum. Signal decomposition starts by passing the signal through a set of filters. Approximations are the high-scale, low-frequency components of the signal produced by filtering with a low-pass filter with coefficient vector (h ) .The details are the low-scale, high-frequency components of the signal produced by a high-pass filter with coefficient vector (g ) . The filters are given by [22]: (5) (t ) = g ( n ) 2 ( 2t n )
n

(t ) = h( n ) 2 ( 2t n )
n

(6)

x (t )

t b dt a

(1)

where (t ) is the mother wavelet, a is the scale factor, b is the translation factor (position along the time axis), a
1 / 2

is

After each level of decomposition, the sampling frequency is reduced by half. Then, the lowpass filter output (approximation) is decomposed to produce the components of the next level. The original signal sequence f (k ) can also be represented by the sum of all components i.e the sum of all the details and the approximation at the last level of decomposition. For example, for two levels of decomposition, the representation is:

the normalization value of a, b (t ) so that if (t ) has a unit length, then its scaled version a, b ( t ) would also have a unit length. Another variant of WT is DWT. One area in which the DWT has been particularly successful is transient analysis in power systems [1], [2], [19]. This is because it acquires the transient features and accurately analyzes them in both the time and frequency contexts at different frequency bands with different resolutions. The mathematical expression for DWT is given by [17-20]:
DWT (m, n ) = 1 2m

f ( k ) = cD1 ( k ) + cA1 ( k ) = cD1( k ) + cD 2 ( k ) + cA2 ( k )

f ( k ) = cD j ( k ) + cAl ( k )
j =1
j l

(7)

where cD is the detail at scale j and cA is the approximation at scale j, and l = 2. B. Feature Extraction Fault signals are known to contain transients and harmonics. These high-frequency components carry essential information that could be used to identify fault or abnormalities in power system network. The energy of wavelet coefficient varies over different scales as per the

f (k )
k

n k 2m 2m

(2)

where f (k ) is a discrete signal, (n) is the mother wavelet (window function), m and n are time scale parameters, k is

energy distribution in the signal. Wavelet energy is the sum of the square of WT coefficients. The wavelet energy of a signal at scale j and instant k is given as [23]-[25]: E jk = D j ( k )
2

Fig. 1. IEEE 34 Node Test Feeder.

(8)

Simulation of the power system was carried out using DIgSILENT PowerFactory and the steady state load flow results were validated with the results from IEEE 34 node benchmark system in [26]. The relative error of the node phase voltages is shown in Table 1.
Table 1. Node Voltage Relative Error vs. [26]

At scale j , the instants = 1, 2, 3, ..., N The log energy entropy of the signal at scale j is:
W EEj =

log E jk
k

(9)

Standard Deviation is a statistical measure of distribution or spread in a data set and it is derived from the square root of the variance in a data set. Mean Absolute Deviation (MAD) is the mean of the absolute deviations of the data set from the mean of the data. It shows the statistical dispersion of a data set. The standard deviation of the signal at scale j , instants k is:

Relative Error (%) Minimum Maximum Average

Phase A -5.2032 -0.0307 3.1509

Phase B -1.5586 1.2722 0.7719

PHASE C -0.2325 2.3210 0.8746

1 N ( 2 D jk j ) N 1 k =1

12

(10)

Similarly, the Mean Absolute Deviation of a signal is given as:

MAD = 1 N
k =1

Dynamic electromagnetic transient simulation of different fault types involving Single Phase-to-ground (1 Ph.-g), two Phase (2 Ph.), two phase-to-ground (2 Ph.-g), and three phase (3 Ph.) faults were performed. These simulations were carried out at different locations at an interval of 10% along the main feeder, at 95% of the main feeder, and on the laterals. Fault resistances (R f ) of 0, 2.5, 5, 10, 20, and 100, and fault inception angles ( fa ) of 0o, 30o, 45o, 60o, and 90o were

D jk j

(11)

where D jk is the detail coefficient at scale j , instant k , j is the mean at scale j , and N is the number of instants. III. POWER SYSTEM MODEL

used in the simulations. The fault inception angle fa is the phase angle of phase A voltage at the fault inception time. Simulations were done to discriminate between transients due to switching conditions from load and capacitor switching. Load angle variations of 0o, 60o, 90o were also carried out. The waveforms were generated with a sampling rate of 128 samples per cycle. B. Modified IEEE 34 Node Test Benchmark Feeder Three cases which involved the integration of Distributed Generators (DGs) into the benchmark model were studied in this paper. These include: DG1 case study: maximum load + 20% of DG installed at node 840 DG2 case study: maximum load + 20% of DG installed at node 844 DG3 case study: maximum load + 10% of DGs installed at node 840 and 844 respectively. Distributed generation refers to the electric power generation (usually between 5kW and 10MW) at the consumption end of a distribution network. The generated power is integrated to the distribution network at the substation, feeder, or customer load levels [27]. DGs can be implemented with wind turbine, hydro, PV, fuel cells, etc. The integration of DGs into a distribution network often causes protection coordination issues [28]. Case studies involving the integration of DGs into the IEEE 34 node test feeder were carried out to investigate the ability of WT based log energy entropy to correctly detect and classify faults even after DGs were integrated.

A. Base Case IEEE 34 Node Test Benchmark Feeder The distribution network used is the IEEE 34 Node Test Feeder. It is a long feeder operated at 60Hz with unbalanced loading and nominal voltage of 24.9 kV. Fig. 1 shows the IEEE 34 Node Test Feeder.

1.01 DG Cas e 1 DG Cas e 2 DG Cas e 3 B as e Cas e

Max Short Circuit Current/(A)

800 700 600 500

N-808

The studies carried out in this paper did not assign any specific energy source to the DG. Also, the parameters of the synchronous generators were based on previous work carried out by [28]. The connection of the generator to the grid was via a 500kVA step-up transformer. The transformer impedances were also set equal to the transformer at node 832 (XFM-1). However, the transformer winding was changed to deltastar type based on the recommendations by [27] on optimal transformer winding types for DGs. The placement and sizing of the DGs were based on [28]-[31]. Thus, node 840 (along the main line) and node 844 (one of the laterals) were used with a 20% penetration level one at a time. Furthermore, another test case was simulated with smaller DGs co-located in the network at nodes 840 and 844 respectively. A plot of the voltage profile is given in Fig. 2. Similarly, a plot of the short circuit currents at various nodes are shown in Fig. 3. Nodes 836-1 refers to lateral 836-862, while Node 836-2 refers to lateral 836-840. The voltage profile plot shows the impact of the integration of DG into the feeder. Also, there was an increase in the short circuit current at various nodes in the feeder. V oltage P rofile

Daubechies 4 (db4) is one of the most used wavelet in power system disturbance analysis and it was chosen for this research because of its orthogonality, compact support in the time domain, and for its good performance in power system studies as reported by [11], [12], [32], [33]. The lowpass filter (g ) and highpass filter (h ) of the db4 have four coefficients. These coefficients are: g 1 = 0.1294 , g = 0.2241, g 3 = 0.8365 , g 4 = 0.4830
2

h1 = 0.4830 , h 2 = 0.8365 , h3 = 0.2241, h 4 = 0.1294 The particular level of decomposition to use is based on the wavelet spectra. The log energy entropy, standard deviation, and mean absolute deviation at levels-1 to -6 were computed using (9) - (11). Level-4 was chosen as the level of interest for both fault detection and classification because the best results for log energy entropy, standard deviation, and mean absolute deviation were obtained at that level. Level-4 Short C ircuit C urrent for C ase S 480Hz. corresponds to the frequency range of 240Hz to tudies
N-800 N-832 1000 900 N = Node Bas e Cas e DG Case 1 DG Case 2 DG Case 3

N-836-1 9

Ph. Vab(p.u)

300 200 100 0 1 2 3 4 5 6

0.98

0.97

0.96

Nodes
Fig. 4. Short Circuit Current for the various Case Studies

0.95 800

810

820

830

840

850

860

870

880

890

Node
Fig. 3. Voltage Profile of the various Case Studies

B. Design of Rule Based Detector and Classifier The proposed algorithm in this paper is implemented with software subroutines written in MATLAB. The fault detection module is activated first and on detection of a fault condition, the fault type and faulted phase(s) module is triggered to perform the classification tasks. Each fault has its characteristic feature or signature by which its faulted phase(s) can be identified. The fault detection module compares the computed level-4 entropy values with a predetermined threshold ( ) for each
d

IV.

ALGORITHM FOR FAULT DETECTION AND CLASSIFICATION

A. Feature Extraction Various simulations were carried out in DIgSILENT PowerFactory. The waveform plots of the three phase and zero sequence currents were exported to MATLAB as ASCII files. These files are decomposed into coefficients using db4 level-6.

of the phases. The predetermined threshold ( d ) is carefully

N-836-2 10

0.99

400

N-854

N-816

N-824

N-858

N-834

chosen to ensure that the algorithm would be able to accurately discriminate between faults and normal switching events. In this particular case, da = 100, db = 100, and A. Results

V.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

dc = 100. Fault is detected when any of the computed

wavelet entropy values WEE (a ), WEE (b ), WEE (c ) for the three phases is greater than dp . p ( A, B,C ) . where da ,

The proposed method was tested using several fault cases comprising of various fault types, fault conditions, and system parameters. In particular, the line segments at the beginning and at the extreme end of the feeder were studied.
Initialization

db , and dc are the entropy value thresholds for phase A, B, and C respectively. When fault is detected, the fault classification module is triggered for fault type classification and faulted phase(s) identification. The patterns observed through exhaustive simulations were used to draw up the rules for the algorithm. Fig. 5. is a flow chart for the implementation of this algorithm.
The criteria for fault classification are: R1: if WEE (a) > ( ca) , & WEE(b) < ( cb) & WEE (c ) < ( cc ) A-g Fault R2: if WEE (a) < ( ca) , & WEE (b ) > ( cb) & WEE (c ) < ( cc ) B-g Fault R3: if WEE (a) < ( ca) , & WEE(b ) < ( cb) & WEE (c ) > ( cc ) C-g Fault R4: if WEE (a) > ( ca) , & WEE (b ) > ( cb) & WEE (c ) < ( cc ) AB Fault R5: if WEE (a) < ( ca) , & WEE(b ) > ( cb) & WEE (c ) > ( cc ) BC Fault R6: if WEE (a) > ( ca ) , & WEE (b ) < ( cb) & WEE (c ) > ( cc ) CA Fault R7: if WEE (a) > ( ca) , & (WEE(b ) ) > ( cb) & WEE (c ) < ( cc ) AB-g Fault R8: if WEE (a) < ( ca) , & (WEE(b) ) > ( cb) & WEE (c ) > ( cc ) BC-g Fault R9: if WEE (a) > ( ca) , & WEE(b) < ( cb) & WEE (c ) > ( cc ) CA-g Fault R10: if WEE (a) > ( ca) , & WEE(b) > ( cb) & WEE (c ) > ( cc ) 3Ph. Fault. where WEE (a ), WEE (b), WEE (c ) are the computed level-4 log energy entropy values for phases A, B, and C. ( ) ,
ca
Select the next event

Select 3Ph. & zero sequence currents waveforms

DWT level -6 decomposition using db4 mother wavelet

Select level -4 detail coefficients

WEE p ,WEE I 0

Compute log energy entropy

p A, B,C

No

WEE p > dp
Yes

Fault?

A-g, B-g, C-g

Single Phase Fault? Yes

Print Result

AB, BC, CA

2 Ph. Phase Fault ?

AB-g, BC-g, CA-g

2 Ph.-g Phase Fault?

3 Ph. Fault

Fig. 5. Flowchart of the Proposed Algorithm

( ) , and ( ) are the fault classification thresholds for cb cc phases A, B, C respectively and was set to 100. 2Ph. and 2Ph.-g faults were classified using the values of WEEI 0 . Line-to-ground faults exhibited higher zero sequence entropy ( WEEI 0 ), thus, this formed the basis for 2Ph. and 2Ph.-g classification. Therefore, faults with values of WEEI 0 > -250 will be classified as 2 Ph.-g faults.

Fig. 6. Distribution Plot of 2Ph. Fault for DG1 Case Study

The effects of the following were considered: Fault resistance, fault distance, fault inception angle, and the integration of DGs. Fig. 6. is a visualization of the distribution or spread of 2 Ph. faults for 10% to 95% of the main feeder, laterals 820-822, and 846-848 respectively for DG1 case study using log energy entropy. This shows that the fault types are quite distinguishable from one another. From the results obtained through several simulation cases, the

faulted phase was seen to have the highest log energy entropy. The text in bold signify the faulted phase(s). Statistical methods have been reported to show good performance in power system analysis [34-39]. The proposed method based on wavelet log energy entropy is compared with that based on features from Standard Deviation and Mean Absolute Deviation (MAD) of the WT decomposition. Tables 2-4 show some of the results obtained for log energy entropy, standard deviation and mean absolute deviation respectively.

Table 2. DG1 Case Study at 10% of the Main Feeder (Rf = 0, f = 0o) Method No Fault (0o) Load Angle 62.16 9.76 47.94 -451.03 3.68 3.00 2.75 0.20 2.12 1.82 1.80 0.12 No Fault (60o) Load Angle 26.74 53.38 10.59 -414.94 3.42 2.87 3.12 0.23 2.08 1.87 1.77 0.14 No Fault (90o) Load Angle 64.64 12.03 42.45 -414.94 3.16 3.11 3.03 1.83 1.94 1.90 1.83 0.24 Load Switching 59.2 8.42 45.45 -474.87 3.67 2.99 2.75 0.20 2.12 1.82 2.57 0.13 Capacitor 844 Switching 77.73 32.71 38.67 -440.38 4.34 3.45 2.81 0.21 2.53 2.11 1.88 0.13 1 Ph. A-g 219.22 36.65 83.38 -136.23 25.86 6.54 5.87 6.83 13.55 3.52 3.17 3.62 2Ph. A-B 188.20 126.39 38.16 -506.73 33.23 32.69 3.27 0.13 13.30 12.95 2.25 0.091 2Ph. A-B-g 213.95 159.20 73.36 -132.63 27.21 51.15 11.57 20.69 13.54 19.51 5.44 8.91 3Ph. 217.055 165.31 229.449 -820.41 26.33 34.50 42.89 17.84 13.48 14.29 18.33 4.28

WEE (a ) WEE (b )
WEE (c ) WEE (I 0 )

(a ) (b ) (c ) (I 0)

MAD(a ) MAD(b ) MAD(c ) MAD(I 0 )

Table 3. B-C Fault at Line 846-848 (Rf = 2.5, f =30o) Case Study Base Case DG1 DG2 DG3
WEE (a ) WEE (b ) WEE (c ) WEE (I 0 )

(a)
1.79 3.52 3.52 3.84

(b)
6.11 4.85 4.63 4.66

(c )
6.56 5.16 4.72 4.56

(I 0)
0.45 0.13 0.11 0.09

MAD (a )

MAD(b )

MAD (c )

MAD(I 0 )

19.94 46.34 61.89 20.01

154.22 138.03 137.41 165.35

170.03 146.82 122.88 127.53

-279.02 -282.16 -255.06 -282.67

1.54 2.17 2.51 2.73

3.95 4.88 3.105 3.09

4.10 5.48 2.99 2.87

0.25 1.93 0.07 0.06

Table 4. C-A-G Fault at Line 820-822 (Rf = 5, f = 60o) Case Study Base Case DG1 DG2 DG3
WEE (a ) WEE (b ) WEE (c ) WEE (I 0 )

(a)
13.04 9.76 9.56 8.91

(b)
3.27 4.11 4.01 2.73

(c )
13.74 8.86 8.93 9.35

(I 0)
4.85 4.24 3.92 0.18

MAD (a )

MAD(b )

MAD (c )

MAD(I 0 )

188.90 185.5 136.9 144.4

21.41 30.55 22.69 12.99

194.09 180.87 159.07 154.47

-69.81 -82.18 -142.2 -165.48

6.61 5.46 5.22 4.63

2.14 3.00 2.39 1.88

6.64 5.04 4.92 5.04

2.01 1.78 1.40 0.09

B. Discussion

The algorithm was able to differentiate between fault events and no fault conditions like load switching, capacitor switching, and steady-state system operation when log energy entropy, standard deviation, and mean absolute deviation were used as inputs. Tables 2-4 show the results obtained at fault locations close to the upstream substation, a lateral, and at a location 189,205 ft. away from the upstream substation respectively. Table 2 present some of the values obtained for fault detection at 10% of the main feeder (Line 806-808). Tables 3 and 4 show the results for faults at various fault inception angles and fault resistances. For all the methods presented, the faulted phase is associated with values many times greater than the healthy/unfaulted phase(s). For fault detection and classification using log energy entropy, the various fault types were quite distinguishable for all the case studies. Furthermore, the thresholds used for the fault detection and classification for the base case performed well even for the DG cases without the need to review these thresholds. Simulation plots and entropy results showed the existence of mutual coupling in the phases especially for faults in close proximity to the DG location. However, the

algorithm was able to accurately distinguish between the healthy phase(s) and the faulted phase(s). Although, different entropy values were obtained for different combination of fault resistances and fault inception angles for the same location, that did not affect the detection and classification performance since the results obtained per fault types were apparently above the pre-defined thresholds. The values obtained for and MAD after the integration of DGs were not completely useful for fault classification because there were similarities between the values obtained for faulted phase(s) in one location and the values for healthy phase(s) at another location. Table 5 illustrates some of the errors obtained when using and MAD. Entry 1 of Table 5 was misclassified as no fault. Entry 2 was also misclassified as A-B fault. Entries 3 and 4 were wrongly denoted as no fault respectively. Also, the values of and MAD showed a corresponding decrease in value for faults with high resistances and for faults located far away from the substation. This implies that and MAD are influenced by fault resistance and fault location.

Table 5. Features Using Standard Deviation and Mean Absolute Deviation Case Study DG1 DG1 Base Case Base Case Location Line 834-842 Line 834-842 Line 828-830 Line 834-842 Fault Type A-g B-g A-g A-g Fault Parameters Rf = 0, f = 0o Rf = 0, f = 0 Rf = 100, f = 0o Rf = 100, f = 0o
o

(a)
5.12 9.25 5.43 5.35

(b)
3.85 10.25 2.98 3.39

(c )
3.55 4.05 2.88 3.35

(I 0)
1.99 4.39 2.08 2.67

MAD(a )

MAD (b )

MAD (c )

MAD(I 0 )

3.43 5.31 3.46 3.34

2.57 4.53 1.93 2.17

2.30 2.30 2.00 2.21

1.16 1.97 0.86 1.02

VI.

CONCLUSION

This paper proposes an accurate approach for fault detection and classification of fault types and faulted phase(s) ACKNOWLEDGEMENT in distribution networks. Various scenarios were simulated using DIgSILENT PowerFactory. DWT was implemented in MATLAB to decompose the three phase and zero sequence This research work is funded by the South African current waveforms using db4 level-4 detail coefficients. A National Research Foundation (NRF) UID62364 Substation rule based method was used afterwards for fault detection and Automation and Energy Management Systems. The authors classification tasks respectively. It was observed that the are grateful for the financial support. proposed method based on wavelet log energy entropy accurately detects and classify the fault type. Comparisons REFERENCES with statistical feature extraction methods based on computation of standard deviation and mean absolute 1 Z.G. Bo, A.T. Johns, and R.K. Aggarwal, R.K., A Novel Fault Locator based deviation of the WT decomposition show that the method on the Detection of Fault Generated High Frequency Transients. based on log energy entropy is very reliable, accurate, robust, Developments in Power System Protection, IEE Conference Publication, No. 434. pp. 197-200. 25-27th Mar. 1997. and is independent of system conditions/changes. That is, it 2 Z.Q. Bo, G. Weller, and M.A. Redfern, Accurate fault location technique for provided accurate results irrespective of load angle variation, distribution system using fault-generated high-frequency transient voltage load and capacitor switching, and network topology changes. signals. IEE Proceedings of Generation, Transmission, and Distribution, Vol. It is also immune to varying fault location, fault resistance, 146, No. 1, pp. 73-79, Jan. 1999. and fault inception angles. It has been shown to be suitable 3 A.M. Gaouda, M.M.A. Salaina M.K. Sultan, and A.Y. Cliildiaoi, Power
Quality Detection and Classification using Wavelet-Multiresolution Signal Decomposition. IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery, Vol. 14, No. 4, pp. 1469-1476, Oct.1999.

for conventional distribution network as well as modified network with DGs. As a result of its simplicity, accuracy and speed of operation, it can be used to aid existing protection equipment in fault diagnosis.

4 5

6 7 8

10 11

12

13

14

15 16 17 18

19

20 21 22

A. Abur, and F.H. Magnago, Use of time delays between modal components in wavelet based fault location Electrical Power and Energy Systems, No. 22, pp. 397403, 2000. K. Gayathri, N. Kumarappan, and C. Devi, An Apt method for Fault Identification and Classification on EHV Lines using Discrete Wavelet Transform. Power Engineering Conference IPEC, Singapore, pp. 217222, 3-6 Dec., 2007. O.A.S. Youssef, Combined Fuzzy-Logic Wavelet-Based Fault Classification Technique for Power System Relaying. IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery, Vol. 19, No. 2, pp. 582-589. 2004. R.N. Mahanty, and P.B. Dutta Gupta, A fuzzy logic based fault classification approach using current samples only. Electric Power Systems Research, No. 77, pp. 501507, 2007. K.M. Silva, B. A. Souza, and N.S.D. Brito, Fault Detection and Classification in Transmission Lines based on Wavelet Transform and ANN. IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery, Vol. 21, No. 4, pp. 20582063, 2006. V.S. Kale, S.R. Bhide, P.P. Bedekar and G.V.K. Mohan, Detection and Classification of Faults on Parallel Transmission Lines using Wavelet Transform and Neural Network. World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology, No. 46, pp. 927-931, 2008. M. Geethanjali, M. and K. Sathiya Priya, Detection and Classification in Transmission Lines. International Conference on Control, Automation, Communication and Energy Conservation, pp. 1-7, 4-6 June, 2009. S. Ekici, S. Yildirim, M. Poyraz, Energy and entropy-based feature extraction for locating fault on transmission lines by using neural network and wavelet packet decomposition, Expert Systems with Applications, No.34, pp. 29372944, 2008. B.K. Panigrahi and V.R. Pandi, Optimal feature selection for classification of power quality disturbances using wavelet packet-based fuzzy k-nearest neighbor algorithm IET Generation, Transmission, Distribution, Vol. 3, Iss. 3, pp. 296306, 2009. M.A.S. Masoum, S. Jamali, N. Ghaffarzadeh, Detection and classification of power quality disturbances using discrete wavelet transform and wavelet networks. IET Science, Measurement, Technolology. Vol. 4, Iss. 4, pp. 193205, 2010. H.K. Chuah, P. Nallagownden, and K.S. Rama Rao, Power Quality Problem Classification Based on Wavelet Transform and a Rule-Based method. IEEE International Conference on Power and Energy (PECon 2010), Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, pp. 1-6, Nov 29 - Dec 1, 2010. S.R. Samantaray, P.K. Dash, G. Panda, Fault classification and location using HS Transform and radial basis function neural network, Electric Power Systems Research, No. 76, pp. 897905, 2006. El-Zonkoly A.M. Fault Diagnosis in Distribution Networks with Distributed Generation, Smart Grid and Renewable Energy, pp. 1-11, February 2011. M. Vetterli and C. Herley. Wavelets and Filter Banks: Theory and Design. IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing. Vol. 40, No. 9, pp. 2207-2232, Sep. 1992. A. Borghetti, S. Corsi, C.A. Nucci, M. Paolone, L. Peretto, and R. Tinarelli, On the use of continuous-wavelet transform for fault location in distribution power systems. Electrical Power and Energy Systems, No. 28, pp. 608617, 2006. A.S. Yilmaz, A. Subasi, M. Bayrak, V. M. Karsli, E. Ercelebi, Application of lifting based wavelet transforms to characterize power quality events. Energy Conversion and Management, No. 48, pp. 112 123, 2007. S. Ekici, S. Yildirim,M. Poyraz, A transmission line fault locator based on Elman recurrent networks. Applied Soft Computing, pp.341347, 2009. S. Burrus, R.A. Gopinath, and H. Guo, Introduction to Wavelet and Wavelet Transform: A Primer. Prentice-Hall, 1998. J.C. Goswami, and A.K. Chan, Fundamental of Wavelets: Theory, Algorithms and Application. John Wiley & Sons, 1999.

23

24

25 26 27 28

29 30 31 32 33 34

H. Zhengyou, F. Ling, L. Sheng, and B. Zhiqian, Fault Detection and Classification in EHV Transmission Line Based on Wavelet Singular Entropy. IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery, Vol. 25, No. 4, pp. 2156-2163, 2010. H. Zhengyou, H.E. Shibin, G. Xiaoqin, C., Jun, Z., Zhiqian, and Q. Qingquan, Study of a new method for power system transients classification based on wavelet entropy and neural network. Electrical Power and Energy Systems, Vol. 33, pp. 402410, 2011. A.M. El-Zonkoly, Fault diagnosis in distribution networks with distributed generation. Electric Power Systems Research Vol. 81, pp. 14821490, 2011. IEEE Distribution System Analysis Subcommittee. Radial Test Feeders [Online]. Available: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/pes/dsacom/testfeeders.html. P. Barker, R.W. de Mello, Determining the impact of distributed generation on power systems: part 1 Radial power systems. In Proc. IEEE Power Eng. Soc. Summer Meeting, Vol. 1, pp. 16451658, 2000. J.A. Silva, H.B. Funmilayo, and K.L. Butler-Purry, Impact of Distributed Generation on the IEEE Node Radial Test Feeder with Overcurrent Protection. Proceedings of 39th North American Power Symposium. pp. 49-57, 2007. R.C. Dugan and W.H. Kersting, Induction machine test case for the 34bus test feeder-description. IEEE Power Engineering Society General Meeting, pp. 1-4, 2006. S. Santoso, and Z. Zhou, Induction machine test case for the 34-bus test feeder: a wind turbine time domain model. IEEE Power Engineering Society General Meeting, pp. 1-4, 2006. N. Samaan, T. McDermott, B. Zavadil, and J. Li, Induction machine test case for the 34-bus test feeder-steady state and dynamic solutions. IEEE Power Engineering Society General Meeting, pp. 1-5, 2006. N. Perera, and A.D. Rajapakse, Power system transient classification for protection relaying. 13th International Conference on Harmonics and Quality of Power, ICHQP, pp. 1 6, 2008. F. B. Costa, B. A. Souza, and N. S. D. Brito, Real-time detection of faultinduced transients in transmission lines, IET Electronics Letters, pp. 753755, May 2010. P.K. Dash, M.V. Chilukuri, B.K. Panigrahi, Power Quality Analysis and Classification using a Generalized Phase Corrected Wavelet Transform. Power Electronnics, Machines and Drives, Conf Pub No. 487, pp.610615, 16-18 April, 2002. P. K. Dash, B. K. Panigrahi, and G. Panda, Power Quality Analysis Using STransform. IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery, vol. 18, No. 2pp. 406-411, April 2003. W. Kanitpanyacharoean, S. Premrudeepreechacharn. Power Quality Problem Classification using Wavelet Transformation and Artificial neural Network IEEE PES Power Systems Conference and Exposition, vol. 3, pp. 1496-1501. 2004. G.G. Pozzebon, G.G. Pena, A.F.Q Goncalves, R.Q. Machado, Neural Classification of Power Quality Disturbances: An Application of the Wavelet Transform and Principal Component Analysis 9th IEEE/IAS International Conference on Industry Applications (INDUSCON), pp. 1-6. 2010. C. Venkatesh, D.V.S.S Siva Sarma, M. Sydulu, Classification of voltage sag, swell and harmonics using S-transform based modular neural network 14th International Conference on Harmonics and Quality of Power (ICHQP),pp. 1-7, 2010. J. Christy X. Jeno Vedamani S. Karthikeyan , Wavelet Based Detection of Power Quality Disturbance - A Case Study. Proceedings of 2011 International Conference on Signal Processing, Communication, Computing and Networking Technologies (ICSCCN 2011) pp. 157-162, 2011.

35 36

37

38

39