1

Power System Automation Lab

Overcurrent Protection for the

IEEE 34 Node Radial Test Feeder
Hamed B. Funmilayo, James A. Silva and
Dr. Karen L. Butler-Purry
Texas A&M University
Electrical and Computer Engineering Department
 2

Introduction
Major use of the benchmark radial test
feeders -- provide load-flow data for validating
load-flow results from existing/novel load-
flow algorithms
Extend Current IEEE 34 node test feeder
Provide overcurrent protection, considering off-
the-shelf protective devices
Make available for studies under new scenarios
(such as DG impact)
 3

Work Reported in This Paper

Model of Test feeder in DIgSILENT
PowerFactory 13.1 and conduct LF and
SC studies
Coordination studies for temporary and
permanent faults for various fault
situations
Select OCP devices for the test feeder
 4

IEEE 34 Node Radial Test Feeder

Developed by DSA Subcommittee
Majority at 24.9 kV (one 4.16kV lateral)
Total load: 2060 kVA at 0.86 pf
Long, unbalanced radial system

IEEE 34-Node Test Feeder system (modified from [1])

[1] Radial Test Feeders - IEEE Distribution System Analysis Subcommittee

 5

Over Current Protective Devices

Modeled in DIgSILENT
1 recloser, 12 fuses
Fuse saving for fuses 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, and 11
 6

Maximum and Minimum Fault Currents

Comparison of Maximum Fault Comparison of Minimum Fault
Current to IEEE TF Results Current to IEEE TF Results
Faulted IEEE* DIgSILENT DIgSILENT Faulted IEEE* DIgSILENT DIgSILENT
Node (A) (A) % Error Node (A) (A) % Error
800 718.60 678.60 5.57 800 479.30 459.00 4.24
808 526.50 510.20 3.10 808 309.40 322.26 4.16
816 335.40 329.94 1.63 816 213.50 205.49 3.75
824 313.00 310.50 0.80 824 195.10 194.06 0.53
854 272.90 276.40 1.28 854 175.90 173.68 1.26
832 223.10 217.70 2.42 832 146.20 140.55 3.86
858 217.70 213.30 2.02 858 143.00 138.06 3.45
834 211.30 208.40 1.37 834 139.30 135.19 2.95
836 206.90 204.40 1.21 836 136.50 132.71 2.78
840 206.10 203.61 1.21 840 136.00 132.27 2.74
890 406.50 440.10 8.27 890 94.10 87.94 6.55
 7

Recloser and Fuses Types

Recloser
Recloser's coordination range must provide adequate time to sense all
downstream faults.
Fuse Saving mode used
A triple single-phase electronic recloser was used
Load side fuses
Similar types of fuse links were selected for all branches within the
same nominal current range
Voltage rating equal to or higher than the maximum bus voltage at the
fuse location
Interrupting current rating larger than the maximum symmetrical fault
current at the fuse location
Type K, T and X expulsion fuse links
 8

Step Down Transformer (XMF-1) Fusing

A type T external expulsion cutout on the primary side

The voltage rating equal to or greater than the voltage at transformer's
location
The ampere rating equal to or greater than the anticipated normal
loading level
The symmetrical short-circuit interrupting rating equal to or greater
than the maximum fault current
Be able to withstand the inrush current generated when
transformer is energized
Be able to protect against transformer faults and secondary
side faults (through faults)
Serve as backup device by coordinating with the OCP device
downstream of the lateral
 9

Capacitor Bank Fusing

Group fusing method is used. (One fuse
protects the capacitor bank)
Promptly isolate the failed capacitor unit on
the line prior to any other protective device
on the system
1-phase grounded fault current without fault
impedance is assumed as the capacitor fault
value.
 10

Settings for Recloser and Load Side Fuses

Recloser Settings Minimum Fault Current Observed at the Recloser
No. of Instantaneous Trips 1 For The Minimum Fault At Each Lateral
Recloser Faulted Lateral If recloser (A)
No. of Delay Trips 2
Node Node number DIgSILENT
Nominal Voltage 14.4 kV, L-N 800 810 1 321.79
Minimum trip rating 100 A 800 822 2 168.90
800 826 3 218.89
Instantaneous trip curve type 103 800 856 4 179.82
Delay trip curve type 134 800 888 5 61.08
800 864 6 126.36
Load Side Fuse Settings 800 848 7 165.82
800 838 8 166.88
24.9 kV, L-L or
Nominal Voltage Rating 800 Cap- 844 7 167.93
4.16 kV, L-L
800 Cap- 848 7 165.82
Nominal Current Rating of Each Based on each 800 840 11 165.88
Fuse branchs current
 11

Coordination Studies
Two terms for OCP operation
Primary device
Near to the fault and first to clear the fault
Secondary (backup device)
Backup of the primary device
Coordination between recloser and fuse
For temporary fault, K factor is used
For permanent fault, fuse operates prior to reclosers delay trip
Coordination between fuse and fuse
Max clearing time of primary fuse will not exceed 0.75 times the
minimum melting time of the secondary fuse
 12

Fault Case Studies

Fault on main feeder
Fault on ordinary laterals
Fault on laterals with reactive compensation
Faults on laterals with step-down transformer
 13

Fault on ordinary laterals

Recloser operates on its
instantaneous trip for
temporary fault
For permanent fault,
Delayed curve of recloser (backup)
fuse operates to clear
the fault and isolates the
lateral

Fuse melting time

Instantaneous trip of recloser

Recloser-Fuse coordination for min fault at 810

 14

Discussion of Results
RECLOSER-FUSE COORDINATION TIME INTERVALS FROM DIGSILENT
 15

OPD List for the Test Feeder

 16

Summary/Conclusions
A conventional overcurrent protection and
coordination scheme was implemented on IEEE 34
Node Test Feeder computer model in DIgSILENT
The final list of selected OCP was provided
Coordination was achieved for different cases
This may be used for easy comparison and
assessment of future overcurrent protection studies
regarding radial distribution system with or without
additions such as DG
 17

Acknowledgement
The authors would like to thank F. J. Verdeja
Perez, J. Mendoza, S. Duttagupta, M. Marotti,
K. Mansfield, T. Djokic, and H. E. Leon for their
contributions, along with the assistance of
Prof. W. H. Kersting.
This work was supported in part by the U.S.
National Science Foundation under Grant ECS-
02-18309.
Paper no. TPWRD-00792-2007.
 18

Contact information:
Dr. Karen L. Butler-Purry
Email: klbutler@tamu.edu