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: email@example.com
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 -. Reference  proposed a method for fault detection and classification in transmission systems using wavelet and fuzzy logic. Similarly, , ,  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  for power system disturbance classifier in transmission systems. Reference  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  for PQ disturbances was based on Discrete Wavelet Transform (DWT) and wavelet network. Reference  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 . Reference  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  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  did not cover the effect of noise disturbance on the model. The method proposed by  made use of Clark’s 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.
time information is lost and it is impossible to tell when an event took place. Section VI summarizes the conclusion. The energy of wavelet coefficient varies over different scales as per the
∑f (k )ψ
n − k 2m 2m
where f (k ) is a discrete signal. B. The original signal sequence f (k ) can also be represented by the sum of all components i.n (t ) is the wavelet function. One area in which the DWT has been particularly successful is transient analysis in power systems . ψ (n) is the mother wavelet (window function). . Another variant of WT is DWT.e the sum of all the details and the approximation at the last level of decomposition.The rest of this paper is organized as follows: Section II explains the principles of Wavelet Transform.n (t ) = 2
− (m / 2)
t − n)
where φ m. − ( m / 2) −m (3)
φ m . b (t ) so that if ψ (t ) has a unit length. 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. In implementing Multi-Resolution Analysis (MRA) for DWT. Wavelets are localized in both time (through translation) and frequency (through dilation). . b ) = 1 a
the number of coefficients. Many signals require a more flexible approach where the window size can be varied to determine the frequency or time more accurately. However. then its scaled version ψ a. Wavelet Transform The classical Fourier Transform (FT) is a frequency domain method. The mathematical expression for DWT is given by [17-20]:
DWT (m. 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. The CWT of a signal x (t ) is defined as . it transforms a signal from timebased to frequency-based one. II. b ( t ) would also have a unit length. a
−1 / 2
After each level of decomposition. Section V provides the results and discussion of this approach. That is. Approximations are the high-scale. Short Time (STFT) was introduced to correct the shortcoming of the FT.n ( t ) = 2
t − n)
ψ m. the sampling frequency is reduced by half. and ψ m. The CWT of a signal x (t ) is the integral of the product between x (t ) and the daughter-wavelets. A method such as WT capable of multiple resolutions in time and frequency and with a flexible window size is thereby required. Thus. 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.n (t ) is the scale function. high-frequency components of the signal produced by a high-pass filter with coefficient vector (g ) . low-frequency components of the signal produced by filtering with a low-pass filter with coefficient vector (h ) . n ) = 1 2m
f ( k ) = cD1 ( k ) + cA1 ( k ) = cD1( k ) + cD 2 ( k ) + cA2 ( k )
f ( k ) = ∑ cD j ( k ) + cAl ( k )
where cD is the detail at scale j and cA is the approximation at scale j. For example. the scaling and wavelet functions are obtained from . for two levels of decomposition. b is the translation factor (position along the time axis). . the lowpass filter output (approximation) is decomposed to produce the components of the next level. Section III describes the Power System Model. called motherwavelet. and l = 2. m and n are time scale parameters. WT can be implemented using the Continuous Wavelet Transform (CWT). These high-frequency components carry essential information that could be used to identify fault or abnormalities in power system network. The implementation of the fault detection and classification algorithm is outlined in section IV. the representation is:
the normalization value of ψ a. k 2m is the variable for shift. :
C(a. k is
. and 1 2m is the energy normalization component to ensure the same scale as the mother wavelet. which are the time translated and scale expanded/compressed versions of a function having finite energy.The details are the low-scale. Signal decomposition starts by passing the signal through a set of filters. a fixed time window is used. WAVELET TRANSFORM ANALYSIS A. The filters are given by : (5) φ (t ) = ∑ g ( n ) 2φ ( 2t − n )
ψ (t ) = ∑ h( n ) 2φ ( 2t − n )
∫−∞ x (t )ψ
t −b dt a
where ψ (t ) is the mother wavelet. 2m is the variable for scale. a is the scale factor. Feature Extraction Fault signals are known to contain transients and harmonics. Then.
µ j is the mean at scale j . The waveforms were generated with a sampling rate of 128 samples per cycle.. hydro. instant k . 2. 30o.1509
Phase B -1.2722 0. and three phase (3 Ph. or customer load levels . 20Ω. 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.. The wavelet energy of a signal at scale j and instant k is given as -: E jk = D j ( k )
Fig. Simulations were done to discriminate between transients due to switching conditions from load and capacitor switching.). and on the laterals. two phase-to-ground (2 Ph.
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 . DGs can be implemented with wind turbine. Fault resistances (R f ) of 0Ω. the Mean Absolute Deviation of a signal is given as:
MAD = 1 N
Dynamic electromagnetic transient simulation of different fault types involving Single Phase-to-ground (1 Ph. IEEE 34 Node Test Feeder. Mean Absolute Deviation (MAD) is the mean of the absolute deviations of the data set from the mean of the data.
Table 1. The fault inception angle θ fa is the phase angle of phase A voltage at the fault inception time. 1 shows the IEEE 34 Node Test Feeder. The integration of DGs into a distribution network often causes protection coordination issues .8746
1 N ( 2 ∑ D jk − µ j ) N − 1 k =1
Similarly. etc. PV.7719
PHASE C -0. . 
At scale j . 3.9 kV. 5Ω.2032 -0.) faults were performed. and fault inception angles ( θ fa ) of 0o. Base Case IEEE 34 Node Test Benchmark Feeder The distribution network used is the IEEE 34 Node Test Feeder. Distributed generation refers to the electric power generation (usually between 5kW and 10MW) at the consumption end of a distribution network. Load angle variations of 0o. Node Voltage Relative Error vs. The generated power is integrated to the distribution network at the substation.3210 0. III. These simulations were carried out at different locations at an interval of 10% along the main feeder.energy distribution in the signal. 45o. 2. and N is the number of instants. N The log energy entropy of the signal at scale j is:
W EEj =
∑ log E jk
Standard Deviation σ 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. instants k is:
Relative Error (%) Minimum Maximum Average
Phase A -5. It shows the statistical dispersion of a data set. POWER SYSTEM MODEL
used in the simulations. 60o. and 100Ω. The relative error of the node phase voltages is shown in Table 1.-g).5Ω. two Phase (2 Ph. 1.. 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. 10Ω. B.5586 1. 60o. Wavelet energy is the sum of the square of WT coefficients. at 95% of the main feeder. 90o were also carried out.
A. The standard deviation of the signal at scale j . Fig. feeder. 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.2325 2.-g). the instants = 1.
. fuel cells. and 90o were
∑ D jk − µ j
where D jk is the detail coefficient at scale j .0307 3. It is a long feeder operated at 60Hz with unbalanced loading and nominal voltage of 24.
2241.1294 . The voltage profile plot shows the impact of the integration of DG into the feeder. there was an increase in the short circuit current at various nodes in the feeder. Each fault has its characteristic feature or signature by which its faulted phase(s) can be identified.(11). .8365 . Level-4 was chosen as the level of interest for both fault detection and classification because the best results for log energy entropy. the parameters of the synchronous generators were based on previous work carried out by .4830 . Similarly.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
The studies carried out in this paper did not assign any specific energy source to the DG. Also. 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
Ph. while Node 836-2 refers to lateral 836-840. h 2 = 0. The connection of the generator to the grid was via a 500kVA step-up transformer. . Vab(p. The fault detection module compares the computed level-4 entropy values with a predetermined threshold (ζ ) for each
IV. another test case was simulated with smaller DGs co-located in the network at nodes 840 and 844 respectively.1. g 4 = 0. node 840 (along the main line) and node 844 (one of the laterals) were used with a 20% penetration level one at a time. the fault type and faulted phase(s) module is triggered to perform the classification tasks.98
0. a plot of the short circuit currents at various nodes are shown in Fig. Nodes 836-1 refers to lateral 836-862. Feature Extraction Various simulations were carried out in DIgSILENT PowerFactory. The fault detection module is activated first and on detection of a fault condition. A plot of the voltage profile is given in Fig. The predetermined threshold (ζ d ) is carefully
0. and for its good performance in power system studies as reported by . These coefficients are: g 1 = 0. h3 = −0.97
0. 3.95 800
Fig. and mean absolute deviation at levels-1 to -6 were computed using (9) .4830
h1 = −0. 3. standard deviation. The waveform plots of the three phase and zero sequence currents were exported to MATLAB as ASCII files. h 4 = −0.2241. The transformer impedances were also set equal to the transformer at node 832 (XFM-1). Short Circuit Current for the various Case Studies
0. g = 0. standard deviation. . These files are decomposed into coefficients using db4 level-6.1294 The particular level of decomposition to use is based on the wavelet spectra. However. Furthermore.
of the phases. 4. Design of Rule Based Detector and Classifier The proposed algorithm in this paper is implemented with software subroutines written in MATLAB.
ALGORITHM FOR FAULT DETECTION AND CLASSIFICATION
A. g 3 = 0.99
. and mean absolute deviation were obtained at that level. Voltage Profile of the various Case Studies
B. 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. Also. The lowpass filter (g ) and highpass filter (h ) of the db4 have four coefficients.u)
300 200 100 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Fig. the transformer winding was changed to deltastar type based on the recommendations by  on optimal transformer winding types for DGs.8365 . compact support in the time domain. Thus. The log energy entropy. 2. Level-4 Short C ircuit C urrent for C ase S 480Hz. The placement and sizing of the DGs were based on -.
and A. and C respectively. (ζ ) . Therefore. & WEE(b ) > (ζ cb) & WEE (c ) > (ζ cc ) → BC Fault R6: if WEE (a) > (ζ ca ) . the fault classification module is triggered for fault type classification and faulted phase(s) identification. B. WEE (c ) for the three phases is greater than ζ dp . Fault
2 Ph.-g classification. & zero sequence currents waveforms
DWT level -6 decomposition using db4 mother wavelet
Select level -4 detail coefficients
WEE p . 5.
WEE p > ζ dp
A-g. 5. BC. where ζ da . fault conditions.
ζ db . and 2Ph. p ∈( A. & (WEE(b ) ) > (ζ cb) & WEE (c ) < (ζ cc ) → AB-g Fault R8: if WEE (a) < (ζ ca) .
RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
ζ dc = 100. The patterns observed through exhaustive simulations were used to draw up the rules for the algorithm. Line-to-ground faults exhibited higher zero sequence entropy ( WEEI 0 ). ζ da = 100.-g Phase Fault?
3 Ph. In particular. B. and system parameters. Fault is detected when any of the computed
wavelet entropy values WEE (a ).-g faults. ζ db = 100. WEE (b). CA-g
2 Ph. & WEE(b) < (ζ cb) & WEE (c ) > (ζ cc ) → CA-g Fault R10: if WEE (a) > (ζ ca) .
Select the next event
Select 3Ph.chosen to ensure that the algorithm would be able to accurately discriminate between faults and normal switching events. the line segments at the beginning and at the extreme end of the feeder were studied. WEE (b ). B. B. & (WEE(b) ) > (ζ cb) & WEE (c ) > (ζ cc ) → BC-g Fault R9: if WEE (a) > (ζ ca) . BC-g. WEE (c ) are the computed level-4 log energy entropy values for phases A. & WEE (b ) < (ζ cb) & WEE (c ) > (ζ cc ) → CA Fault R7: if WEE (a) > (ζ ca) . When fault is detected. & WEE (b ) > (ζ cb) & WEE (c ) < (ζ cc ) → B-g Fault R3: if WEE (a) < (ζ ca) . Flowchart of the Proposed Algorithm
(ζ ) .-g faults were classified using the values of WEEI 0 .
The criteria for fault classification are: R1: if WEE (a) > (ζ ca) . B. is a flow chart for the implementation of this algorithm. Results
The proposed method was tested using several fault cases comprising of various fault types. & WEE(b) > (ζ cb) & WEE (c ) > (ζ cc ) → 3Ph.C ) . and ζ dc are the entropy value thresholds for phase A. & WEE(b ) < (ζ cb) & WEE (c ) > (ζ cc ) → C-g Fault R4: if WEE (a) > (ζ ca) . In this particular case. where WEE (a ).WEE I 0
Compute log energy entropy
p ∈ A. Fault. & WEE(b) < (ζ cb) & WEE (c ) < (ζ cc ) → A-g Fault R2: if WEE (a) < (ζ ca) . & WEE (b ) > (ζ cb) & WEE (c ) < (ζ cc ) → AB Fault R5: if WEE (a) < (ζ ca) . and C. and (ζ ) are the fault classification thresholds for cb cc phases A. 2Ph. this formed the basis for 2Ph. thus. faults with values of WEEI 0 > -250 will be classified as 2 Ph. and 2Ph. C respectively and was set to 100. Fig. C-g
Single Phase Fault? Yes
AB. Phase Fault ?
faults for 10% to 95% of the main feeder.56 5.06 -282.04 9.95 2.9 144.66
σ (c )
6. fault distance. 6.86 8.54 5. θf = 0o) Method No Fault (0o) Load Angle 62.69 13. is a visualization of the distribution or spread of 2 Ph.09
MAD (a )
MAD (c )
MAD(I 0 )
19.75 0.105 3.03 42. Fig.18
MAD (a )
MAD (c )
MAD(I 0 )
188.40 0.57 0.16 9.091 2Ph.87 6.83 1.21 51. Statistical methods have been reported to show good performance in power system analysis [34-39].30 12.42 45.73
σ (c )
13.10 5.23 2.86 6.16 4.53 2.20 2.055 165.67 -440.Fig.77 0.87 159.01 2.18 -142.94 -451.24 3.03 146.07 0.73 33.81 0. Fault for DG1 Case Study
The effects of the following were considered: Fault resistance.5 136.28
WEE (a ) WEE (b )
WEE (c ) WEE (I 0 )
σ (a ) σ (b ) σ (c ) σ (I 0)
MAD(a ) MAD(b ) MAD(c ) MAD(I 0 )
Table 3.80 0.27 4.33 34.82 2.88 0. From the results obtained through several simulation cases.45 2.11 4.95 4. A-B 188.13 13.17 3. This shows that the fault types are quite distinguishable from one another.69 12.23 25.61 5.44 8.14 3.22 138.52 3.88 127.83 13.34 61.74 8.72 4.63
2.12 No Fault (60o) Load Angle 26.63 27. 6.91
3.68 3.449 -820.34 3.01
-279.20 2.85 4.85 4.48 2. Distribution Plot of 2Ph.67 2.25 0.14 No Fault (90o) Load Angle 64.09
σ (I 0)
4.33 4. and the integration of DGs.63 4.76 47.92 5.45 -474. standard deviation and mean absolute deviation respectively.17 2.38 -136.83 0.48
σ (I 0)
0.74 53. A-B-g 213.22 36.4
21.87 1.24 Load Switching 59.90 1.93 0.16 -506.95 159.20 73.38 10.16 -255.64 5.12 1. DG1 Case Study at 10% of the Main Feeder (Rf = 0Ω.15 11.89 20.79 3.45 -414.03 3.20 126.93 9.45 0. the
faulted phase was seen to have the highest log energy entropy.62 2Ph.59 -414.13 0. laterals 820-822.08 1.03 137. θf = 60o) Case Study Base Case DG1 DG2 DG3
WEE (a ) WEE (b ) WEE (c ) WEE (I 0 )
3.39 1. B-C Fault at Line 846-848 (Rf = 2.51 5.55 3.65 83.69 3.99 2.84
6.55 22.11 4.67
1.39 38.90 185.11 3.87
0.00 2.25 1.47
-69.11 0.09 180.01 1. The text in bold signify the faulted phase(s).88
6.78 1. C-A-G Fault at Line 820-822 (Rf = 5Ω.04 4.02 -282.94 3.92 0.76 9.27 0.06
Table 4.94 46.82 122.22 4.2 8.57 20.84 13.36 -132.99
194.00 2.94 1.41 26.91 3Ph.11 1. Discussion
. θf =30o) Case Study Base Case DG1 DG2 DG3
WEE (a ) WEE (b ) WEE (c ) WEE (I 0 )
1.56 8.23 32.64 12.12 0.04
2.41 165. 217.38 4.75 0.31 229.54 19.73 32.42 2.2 -165.21 2.29 18.81 -82. A-g 219.48 14.35
170. fault inception angle.
Table 2.03 1.13 1 Ph.71 38.16 3. Tables 2-4 show some of the results obtained for log energy entropy.52 3. The proposed method based on wavelet log energy entropy is compared with that based on features from Standard Deviation σ and Mean Absolute Deviation (MAD) of the WT decomposition.51 2.54 2.89 17.5Ω.87 3.13 Capacitor 844 Switching 77.07 154.82 1.87 3.46 5.52 3. and 846-848 respectively for DG1 case study using log energy entropy.12 1.99 2.41 30.94 3.
“A Novel Fault Locator based deviation of the WT decomposition show that the method on the Detection of Fault Generated High Frequency Transients”. Johns. θf = 0 Rf = 100Ω.08 2.39
σ (c )
. Bo. Vol. Tables 2-4 show the results obtained at fault locations close to the upstream substation.G. It is also immune to varying fault location. away from the upstream substation respectively. and Distribution. θf = 0o
5.93 2. No.67
MAD (b )
MAD (c )
MAD(I 0 )
3.M. Gaouda. pp.A.31 3. Entries 3 and 4 were wrongly denoted as ‘no fault’ respectively. and fault inception angles. Comparisons REFERENCES with statistical feature extraction methods based on computation of standard deviation and mean absolute 1 Z. the various fault types were quite distinguishable for all the case studies. accuracy and speed of operation. A National Research Foundation (NRF) UID62364 “Substation rule based method was used afterwards for fault detection and Automation and Energy Management Systems”.43 5.16 1.57 4. Aggarwal. The authors classification tasks respectively. and steady-state system operation when log energy entropy. 1999. The values obtained for σ 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. 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.85 10.K.
This paper proposes an accurate approach for fault detection and classification of fault types and faulted phase(s) ACKNOWLEDGEMENT in distribution networks. 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.T. the values of σ and MAD showed a corresponding decrease in value for faults with high resistances and for faults located far away from the substation. Salaina M. Vol. different entropy values were obtained for different combination of fault resistances and fault inception angles for the same location.K. the faulted phase is associated with values many times greater than the healthy/unfaulted phase(s). A. Redfern. No.21
1. For all the methods presented.Y.39 2. 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 = 0Ω.205 ft.17
2. that did not affect the detection and classification performance since the results obtained per fault types were apparently above the pre-defined thresholds. This implies that σ and MAD are influenced by fault resistance and fault location. capacitor switching. M. accurate. and A.35
3. and mean absolute deviation were used as inputs. 434. Tables 3 and 4 show the results for faults at various fault inception angles and fault resistances. Oct.The algorithm was able to differentiate between fault events and ‘no fault’ conditions like load switching. Various scenarios were simulated using DIgSILENT PowerFactory. proposed method based on wavelet log energy entropy accurately detects and classify the fault type. 73-79.55 4. 146. and at a location 189. it 2 Z. No. signals”. IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery. and M. 14. Weller. 1469-1476.30 2. Table 5 illustrates some of the errors obtained when using σ and MAD. Developments in Power System Protection. θf = 0o Rf = 0Ω. 197-200. and is independent of system conditions/changes. It has been shown to be suitable 3 A. Sultan. θf = 0o Rf = 100Ω. it can be used to aid existing protection equipment in fault diagnosis. Entry 2 was also misclassified as A-B fault. 1.
for conventional distribution network as well as modified network with DGs. 25-27th Mar. the
algorithm was able to accurately distinguish between the healthy phase(s) and the faulted phase(s).00 2. Although. fault resistance. and network topology changes. However. a lateral. and R. For fault detection and classification using log energy entropy.86 1. R. robust.43 5.30 2.A.97 0..98 3. “Power
Quality Detection and Classification using Wavelet-Multiresolution Signal Decomposition”.34
2. Also. “Accurate fault location technique for provided accurate results irrespective of load angle variation. standard deviation. IEE Conference Publication. Table 2 present some of the values obtained for fault detection at 10% of the main feeder (Line 806-808). Transmission. Bo. It was observed that the are grateful for the financial support. 4. 1997. pp.99 4.35
σ (I 0)
1.M. As a result of its simplicity. That is. Jan.25 2.12 9.25 5.05 2. Cliildiaoi. IEE Proceedings of Generation.Q. Entry 1 of Table 5 was misclassified as ‘no fault’. G.53 1. pp. Furthermore.K. Simulation plots and entropy results showed the existence of mutual coupling in the phases especially for faults in close proximity to the DG location.88 3. distribution system using fault-generated high-frequency transient voltage load and capacitor switching.1999. based on log energy entropy is very reliable.02
Communication. Poyraz. “Fault Detection and Classification in EHV Transmission Line Based on Wavelet Singular Entropy”. Goswami. Vol.K.C. “Power Quality Problem Classification Based on Wavelet Transform and a Rule-Based method”. Ekici. “Fault classification and location using HS Transform and radial basis function neural network”. and N. and A. Gopinath. M. Qingquan. Youssef. Masoum. Brito.N. “Fault Diagnosis in Distribution Networks with Distributed Generation.Dec 1. Devi. Panigrahi. pp. Electrical Power and Energy Systems. IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery. Pandi. S. Available: http://www. 406-411. C. 81. “Optimal feature selection for classification of power quality disturbances using wavelet packet-based fuzzy k-nearest neighbor algorithm” IET Generation. “Detection and classification of power quality disturbances using discrete wavelet transform and wavelet networks”. 2009. Kale. 501–507. 2009.S. G.V.M. 21.ewh.Q Goncalves.V. S. and A. Ling. B. Panda. Zhou. 4. vol. Shibin. S.B. S. L. pp. Xiaoqin. Zhengyou. IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery. B. Transmission. Vol. 3. IEEE International Conference on Power and Energy (PECon 2010). 13th International Conference on Harmonics and Quality of Power. H. 2010. Dash. M. No. Machado. 2207-2232. Electric Power Systems Research. Proceedings of 2011 International Conference on Signal Processing.P.G. pp. Mahanty. Pozzebon. S. Sathiya Priya.V. 1-6. 2pp. Power Electronnics. and Z. 753755. Christy X. 193–205. Premrudeepreechacharn. 2002. Chuah. Jamali. vol.K. Poyraz. and F. P. Prentice-Hall.K. 25. Sydulu. 1645–1658. “Wavelet Based Detection of Power Quality Disturbance . G. Engineering and Technology. Vol. “A fuzzy logic based fault classification approach using current samples only”. IEEE Power Eng. Applied Soft Computing. 2008.610615. Iss. pp. pp. C. Kumarappan. B. Machines and Drives.K.M. No.A.” IET Electronics Letters. pp. 2011. O. pp. pp. IEEE Power Engineering Society General Meeting. Costa. “Induction machine test case for the 34-bus test feeder: a wind turbine time domain model”.K. No. 1496-1501. Rama Rao. R. M. 402–410. 22. A. pp. S. N. “Detection and Classification of Faults on Parallel Transmission Lines using Wavelet Transform and Neural Network”. 157-162.S. 296–306. 2007. 1-11. No. Vol. de Mello. pp. Measurement. and R.K. pp. R. K. pp. Singapore. Ghaffarzadeh. 28. A. Karthikeyan . No.M. Vol. Dugan and W. 2006. K. 927-931. Brito. E. Electrical Power and Energy Systems. Vol. R. 2006. Nucci. N. Expert Systems with Applications. 2010. Zhengyou.. Paolone. Dutta Gupta. 18. IEEE Power Engineering Society General Meeting. Herley. Vol. 2937–2944. pp. 2008. “On the use of continuous-wavelet transform for fault location in distribution power systems”. Li.R. IEEE Distribution System Analysis Subcommittee. D. IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery.34. P. Computing and Networking Technologies (ICSCCN 2011) pp. Yilmaz. April 2003. “ Classification of voltage sag. 16-18 April.A. 397–403. IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing. Samaan. pp. Z. Samantaray. Panigrahi and V. and P. Butler-Purry. and G. 897–905. pp. No. “Study of a new method for power system transients classification based on wavelet entropy and neural network”. L. Barker. Malaysia. swell and harmonics using S-transform based modular neural network” 14th International Conference on Harmonics and Quality of Power (ICHQP). Funmilayo. Zhiqian. M. K. pp. No. and K. 1 – 6. A. K. “Real-time detection of faultinduced transients in transmission lines. Zavadil.W. “Power Quality Problem Classification using Wavelet Transformation and Artificial neural Network” IEEE PES Power Systems Conference and Exposition. IET Science. F. Yildirim. “Induction machine test case for the 34bus test feeder-description”. P. pp. 1992. B.M. pp. 2011. Vol. M. D. Chilukuri.S. Kuala Lumpur. B. Venkatesh. V. Radial Test Feeders [Online]. Electric Power Systems Research Vol. S. Power Engineering Conference IPEC.H. H. 1999. 33. 2000. A. R. Burrus. “Power system transient classification for protection relaying”. 49-57.
25 26 27 28
29 30 31 32 33 34
H. No. 2156-2163. No. and C.S. Perera. Conf Pub No. 2009. and J. 2010. 77. Ercelebi. Dash. 1482–1490. Subasi. H. V.S.S.L. 3. No. 2006. 1-4. Panda.D. No. “Power Quality Analysis Using S–Transform”. J.B.4 5
6 7 8
15 16 17 18
20 21 22
A. J. El-Zonkoly. 46. 48.D. Panigrahi. 217222.A Case Study”. Magnago. 4-6 June. S. and H. P. World Academy of Science. A. Chan. “Fundamental of Wavelets: Theory. 1-6.org/soc/pes/dsacom/testfeeders. “Detection and Classification in Transmission Lines”.F. Yildirim. February 2011. Borghetti. 19. McDermott. Tinarelli. 112– 123. 40. and B. S. pp. N. El-Zonkoly A. Electric Power Systems Research. Nallagownden. R. pp. 1-7. and N.html. G. B.R. Mohan. May 2010.E. “Wavelets and Filter Banks: Theory and Design”. Silva. 1-4. “A transmission line fault locator based on Elman recurrent networks”. 608–617. P.pp. Vetterli and C. 2006. 2008. Jeno Vedamani S. 487. IEEE Power Engineering Society General Meeting. F. 2000. Bhide. Zhiqian.G. S. and Q.. No. Jun. “Determining the impact of distributed generation on power systems: part 1 – Radial power systems”. Communication and Energy Conservation.ieee. “Power Quality Analysis and Classification using a Generalized Phase Corrected Wavelet Transform”. pp. John Wiley & Sons. 2007. and K.Q. M. Ekici. Sep. C. 3.341–347. H. 2006.. In Proc. and K. Distribution. T. 2010. G.K. Technolology.” Smart Grid and Renewable Energy. International Conference on Control. 2010. Karsli. ICHQP. 4. Geethanjali. Bedekar and G. 3-6 Dec. Nov 29 . IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery. Santoso. 1-5. 4. Summer Meeting. Automation. 2004. “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). M. Silva. pp. M. pp. “Fault diagnosis in distribution networks with distributed generation”. Pena. Rajapakse. Guo. 1. Soc. Souza. “Energy and entropy-based feature extraction for locating fault on transmission lines by using neural network and wavelet packet decomposition”. 20582063. Algorithms and Application”. Dash. 2007. Iss. 76. 1998.A. “Introduction to Wavelet and Wavelet Transform: A Primer”. M. Peretto. A.R. S. “Induction machine test case for the 34-bus test feeder-steady state and dynamic solutions”. 582-589. Souza. Kanitpanyacharoean.S Siva Sarma.S. pp. Corsi. Abur. pp. pp. “Combined Fuzzy-Logic Wavelet-Based Fault Classification Technique for Power System Relaying”. 1-7. Gayathri. P. Proceedings of 39th North American Power Symposium. 2011. pp. “Impact of Distributed Generation on the IEEE Node Radial Test Feeder with Overcurrent Protection”. “Application of lifting based wavelet transforms to characterize power quality events”. Sheng. pp. J. S. “Use of time delays between modal components in wavelet based fault location” Electrical Power and Energy Systems. 2006. 4. pp. 2007. Kersting. A. 2. B. 9.A. 2004.
. Bayrak. W.H.C. N. pp. M. “Fault Detection and Classification in Transmission Lines based on Wavelet Transform and ANN”. Energy Conversion and Management. “An Apt method for Fault Identification and Classification on EHV Lines using Discrete Wavelet Transform”.A.