Electrical Power and Energy Systems 92 (2017) 156–166

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Electrical Power and Energy Systems

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ijepes

A protection scheme for microgrid with multiple distributed generations

using superimposed reactive energy
Syed Basit Ali Bukhari ⇑, Muhammad Saeed Uz Zaman, Raza Haider, Yun-Sik Oh, Chul-Hwan Kim
College of Information and Communication Engineering, Sungkyunkwan University, Suwon, Republic of Korea

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: With the growing integration of distributed generation, distribution networks have evolved toward the
Received 1 December 2016 concept of microgrids. Microgrids can be operated in either the grid-connected mode to achieve peak
Received in revised form 1 April 2017 shaving and power loss reduction or the islanded mode to increase the reliability and continuity of sup-
Accepted 3 May 2017
ply. These two modes of operation cause a challenge in microgrid protection, because the magnitude of
Available online 12 May 2017
fault current decreases significantly during the transition of a microgrid from the grid-connected mode to
the islanded mode. This paper proposes a protection scheme for the microgrid based on superimposed
Keywords:
reactive energy. The proposed scheme uses the Hilbert transform to calculate the superimposed reactive
Microgrid protection scheme
Superimposed reactive energy
energy (SRE). The sequence components of superimposed current are adopted to detect fault incidents in
Fault detection the microgrid. The faulty phase and section are recognised by using the directional characteristics of SRE
Fault location along with a threshold value. Moreover, a relay structure, which enables the proposed protection scheme,
High-impedance fault is designed. The significant feature of the proposed protection scheme is that it has the ability to protect
the looped and radial microgrids against solid and high-impedance faults. To verify the efficacy of the
proposed approach, extensive simulations have been carried out using the MATLAB/SIMULINK software
package. The results show that the proposed scheme successfully identifies and isolates various types of
fault in a microgrid and performs well with different fault resistances and fault locations.
Ó 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction nical obstacles, which need to be explored. Microgrid protection

In conventional power systems, power is generated centrally
and then transmitted to the customer end by using long transmis-
sion and distribution networks. In this case, power flows are unidi-
rectional in the distribution networks. Nowadays, mounting load
demand, developments in renewable energy technology and
increasing concerns on global warming have led to a new trend
of electricity production at the distribution level. These technolo-
gies are usually called distributed generation (DG) [1,2]. The intro-
duction of DGs at the distribution level decreases the power
transfer burden on the transmission and distribution networks
[3]. These new technologies have enabled the smaller distribution
networks called microgrids [4,5].
A microgrid is a small part of a power system which consists of
parallel DGs, energy storage devices and electrical/heat loads. It
can work in the grid-connected as well as the islanded mode, for
providing uninterrupted service to customers, and for improving
the reliability, operational optimality and power quality of the sys-
tem [6,7]. Microgrids offer various benefits, but present some tech-
⇑ Corresponding author.
E-mail address: s.basit41@skku.edu (S.B.A. Bukhari).
and its entities is a major obstacle [8].
The main problem related to microgrid protection is the protec-
tion during the islanded mode, when the microgrid works indepen-
dently of the main grid. In this case, the fault currents are small due
to the limited current-carrying capacity of power electronics
devices. The fault current is merely 2–3 p.u. of rated current in case
of inverter based DGs [9]. Thus, the traditional overcurrent protec-
tion, which relies on the assumption of high fault current, is insuf-
ficient for the protection of islanded microgrids. However, in the
grid-connected mode, the main grid also contributes to fault cur-
rent therefore, the magnitude of the fault current is significantly
larger. Although it is possible to use overcurrent relays for the pro-
tection of grid-connected microgrid, the existence of DGs alters the
direction and magnitude of fault current and hence compromise
the relay coordination.
A protection scheme for microgrid must ensure safe operation of
microgrid in both modes of operation and should take into account
(1) two-way power flow in distribution networks (2) presence of
looped feeders and (3) reduced fault current magnitude in the
islanded mode. As, traditional protection schemes mainly based
on overcurrent relays are ineffective in protecting microgrids.
Hence, there is a need for alternate schemes of microgrid protection.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijepes.2017.05.003
0142-0615/Ó 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
 S.B.A. Bukhari et al. / Electrical Power and Energy Systems 92 (2017) 156–166
Various schemes for microgrid protection have been developed
and reported in the literature [10,11]. In [12], the authors used a
central controller along with a digital relay to update the precalcu-
lated relay settings according to the operating mode of the micro-
grid. This scheme was upgraded by Coffele [13] who suggested an
online method to calculate the settings of adaptive overcurrent
relays. The developed scheme had the capability to automatically
adjust the settings of all overcurrent relays in response to the sta-
tus of DGs, operational mode of the microgrid and active networks
management. However, relatively sophisticated fault calculations
were required for microgrids operating in different modes. More-
over, the scheme was not suitable for high-impedance faults
(HIF). In a research by Mirsaeidi et al. [14], a central processing
unit-based protection scheme for microgrids was proposed. Pre-
fault and post fault positive sequence impedances of distribution
lines at both ends were calculated and compared to locate the
faulty section. However, the suggested scheme required complete
upgrading of the protection devices currently used in the distribu-
tion networks; moreover, the presented scheme was not able to
protect the microgrid against HIFs. In [15], Oureilidi and Konstanti-
nos suggested the switching of converter control from droop con-
trol to current control during faults in microgrid. The faulty section
was identified by measuring the fault current provided by each
converter. The scheme was only applicable to inverter-dominated
microgrid; moreover, it required some external energy source in
case of HIF. A travelling wave scheme based on mathematical mor-
phology filter was presented in [16]. Two different logics were
developed for microgrids with different configuration and topolo-
gies. The developed method was independent of fault resistance.
The scheme required accurate signal synchronisation and very high
sampling frequency, which is impractical due to lack of cost effec-
tive DSP hardware. In [17], the wavelet packet transform (WPT)
was suggested to detect and clear the faults in microgrids. The
scheme used a half-band digital high-pass filter to realize the
WPT. The authors did not consider HIFs and looped structure of
microgrids. A voltage-based protection strategy for microgrids
was proposed in [18,19]. The abc-dq0 transformation of voltage
was used to detect the fault incidents in microgrids. The scheme
was limited to islanded microgrids and solid faults. Moreover,
the scheme did not consider the microgrid with looped configura-
tion. The authors in [20] suggested the deployment of energy stor-
age devices in the islanded mode of microgrids to equalise the fault
current magnitude in islanded and grid-connected modes. How-
ever, the installation of such devices with high short-circuit capac-
ity was not economical. Zamani et al. [21] developed a protection
strategy by using negative and zero-sequence components to pro-
tect the microgrid against various types of faults. The scheme also
had a backup protection in case of communication failure. As the
scheme used zero sequence current as a directional element, it
required a grounding transformer inside the microgrid. In [22], a
differential protection scheme based on a statistical classifier has
been developed for microgrids. Various features from voltage and
current signals were obtained at both ends of a line in microgrids.
A learning-from-data feature selection approach was used to select
most useful subset of features among the ones obtained initially at
each relay point. Finally, a differential operation is applied to
selected features to detect and locate the faults in microgrids.
The scheme was implemented on islanded microgrids against solid
faults only. A protection scheme based on wavelet and data
mining-based approach was suggested by Mishra et al. [23]. The
statistical features of current waveform extracted by a wavelet
transform were used to develop the data-mining models. The fault
classification was conceded based on these models. The scheme
was applicable to inverter-interfaced DGs only.
The main limitations of above-mentioned schemes are that they
either protect the microgrids in one mode (islanded or grid-
157
connected mode) or consider radial configuration of microgrids
only. Some schemes, which protect the microgrids in both modes
of operation, are not suitable for HIFs. The schemes developed for
HIFs, require additional devices in microgrids; therefore, they
involve very high cost.
This paper proposes a novel scheme for the protection of micro-
grids based on superimposed reactive energy (SRE). In this paper,
SRE is defined as the integral of superimposed reactive power dur-
ing a specified period of time. A new fault detection ratio based on
sequence components of superimposed current is developed for
detection of fault incidents in microgrids. The proposed scheme
uses the Hilbert transform to calculate the SRE. The directions of
SRE flow at both ends of each feeder are employed to identify
the faulty line in a microgrid. This paper uses a threshold on SRE
of each phase to classify the faults. To validate the effectiveness
of the proposed scheme, extensive simulations are carried out
using MATLAB/SIMULINK software. The main contributions of this
paper are as follows:

The proposed scheme has the ability to protect the looped and
radial microgrid against solid and HIFs.

The scheme is valid for both islanded and grid-connected
microgrid and there is no need to modify the setting of relays
when the microgrid changes its mode.

The proposed protection scheme also offers backup protection
against faults in case of failure of main protection.
The rest of the paper is structured as follows. Section 2 illus-
trates the basic principle of the superimposed components, Hilbert
transform and SRE characteristics, which are the basis of the sug-
gested protection scheme. Section 3 explains the proposed scheme
in details. Exhaustive simulations are performed to test the effi-
ciency of the proposed protection in Section 4. Finally, the paper
is concluded in Section 5.
2. Basic principle
2.1. Superimposed components
Subsequent to short-circuit fault on any point in a microgrid,
the variables like current, voltage, power etc. may face significant
changes with respect to their corresponding prefault values. The
change in the variables due to a fault is known as the superim-
posed component/fault-imposed component. The superimposed
components appear due to the fault in the network. They keep fault
signature and are independent of the values under normal-running
conditions. Hence, any electrical variable during a fault comprises
two components: (1) a normal operating component and (2) a
superimposed component. Thus, any arbitrary variable xðtÞ during
a fault can be expressed as
xf ðtÞ ¼ xf i ðtÞ þ xpre ðtÞ ð1Þ
where xf ðtÞ, xpre ðtÞ and xfi ðtÞ are the fault, prefault and superimposed
components of variable xðtÞ respectively.
xf i ðtÞ ¼ xf ðtÞ  xpre ðtÞ ð2Þ
Eq. (2) shows that the superimposed component can be com-
puted by subtracting the normal or prefault component from the
fault component. Therefore, the superimposed component does
not appear under normal operation but exists if a fault occurs
within the microgrid. Superimposed components can be calculated
by using delta filters [24]. The simplest delta filter subtracts the
integral multiple delayed version of the input signal from the input
signal itself.
xf i ðtÞ ¼ xðtÞ  xðt  nTÞ ð3Þ
158 S.B.A. Bukhari et al. / Electrical Power and Energy Systems 92 (2017) 156–166

where T is the time period of the signal and n is an integer (n = 6 in The Hilbert transform-based instantaneous reactive power
this paper). In discrete form, the superimposed components can be using superimposed current and voltage can be computed as pro-
obtained by subtracting the present sample of an input variable posed in [25,26].
from its corresponding sample in the previous cycle.
^fi ðtÞ  ifi ðtÞ
qðtÞ ¼ v ð10Þ
xfi ½kTs  ¼ x½kTs   x½kTs  nT ð4Þ
where v^ fi ðtÞ represents the Hilbert transform of superimposed volt-
where T s is the sampling period, N is the number of samples per age signal and ifi ðtÞ represents the superimposed current; qðtÞ rep-
cycle and k is the sampling step (k ¼ 0; 1; 2; 3 . . .). resents the instantaneous reactive power. The SRE during time
period t can be obtained by integrating Eq. (10) over t as
2.2. The Hilbert transform Z Z
t t
Eq ðtÞ ¼ qðsÞds ¼ ^fi ðsÞ  ifi ðsÞds
v ð11Þ
This scheme uses the Hilbert transform to calculate the SRE, 0 0
which is the convolution of function f ðtÞ with the Hilbert transfer
The Hilbert transform-based SRE calculation method is advan-
function HðtÞ [25]. The Hilbert transfer function in the time domain
tageous over traditional calculation methods because it uses orig-
can be represented as
inal sampled current and voltage signals. Hence, computing the
HðtÞ ¼ 1=pt ; 1 < t < þ1 ð5Þ discrete Fourier transform of current and voltage signals for all har-
monics components is not required. Moreover, the proposed
Because HðtÞ is not an integrable function, the Cauchy integral is
scheme continuously obtains the SRE in real time, increasing the
used to define the Hilbert transform.
operating speed of the protection scheme, whereas conventional
Z
^fðtÞ ¼ fðtÞ  1=pt ¼ 1 P
þ1
fðsÞ computation methods need a complete cycle of the measured
ds ð6Þ
p 1 ts data [27].

where P is the principle value of the integral.

2.3. Characteristics of SRE during faults
The frequency response of the Hilbert transfer function can be
expressed as
8 To understand the characteristics of SRE during faults, a micro-
< þj; for x < 0
> grid having three buses and a load connected to bus B as depicted
H ðxÞ ¼ jsgn ðxÞ ¼ 0; for x ¼ 0 ð7Þ in Fig. 1a is considered. In order to develop an appropriate scheme
>
:
j; for x > 0 to protect microgrids with various configurations, microgrid
should be divided into small sections and each section (microgrid
As negative frequency does not exist in real-world applications, line) is protected independent of the other sections. To accomplish
the Hilbert transform can be considered as an all-pass filter except this, the downstream and upstream of each microgrid line can be
for DC components. It induces a 90° phase shift for all positive replaced by their equivalent circuits. During faults, the inverter
frequency components current is limited by its control system to 2–3 p.u. of the normal
The Hilbert transform can be represented in discrete form as load current and inverter behaves like a constant current source.
[26] Therefore, an inverter during faults can be represented by a con-
^f½n ¼ f½n  H½n stant current source along with an impedance. Ref. [28] well
ð8Þ
describes the equivalent circuit representation of inverters during
 faults. The other system components and load can also be replaced
0; for ev en v alues of n
H½n ¼ ð9Þ by their equivalent impedances [29]. The equivalent circuit repre-
2=np; for odd v alues of n sentation of a microgrid line is adopted from [30]. Fig. 1b shows

A B C
CB-2U CB-2D CB-1D Main Grid
CB-1U
Line-2 Line-1

Transformer MGPR-2U MGPR-2D MGPR-1U MGPR-1D

DER VSC Converter

(a) Load

Upstream Upstream B C Downstream Downstream

Equivalent Equivalent Equivalent Equivalent
source Impedance MGPR-1U MGPR-1D Impedance source
Line-1

CB-1U
CB-1D
Upstream Equivalent F2 F1 Downstream
Circuit (b) Equivalent Circuit

Fig. 1. Microgrid test system. (a) Single-line diagram. (b) Upstream and downstream equivalent circuits of Line-1.
 S.B.A. Bukhari et al. / Electrical Power and Energy Systems 92 (2017) 156–166 159

the downstream and upstream equivalent circuits of Line-1 of the The SRE at bus B for one cycle can be computed as
microgrid shown in Fig. 1a. Faults F1 and F2 represent the forward Z 2p=x
and reverse faults in the microgrid with respect to the relay MGPR- EBq ¼ ^Bfi ðtÞ  iBfi ðtÞ dt
v ð16Þ
1U respectively. 0

2.3.1. SRE flowing through Bus B during fault F1 Xu p

EBq ¼  V2 ð17Þ
As explained earlier, that the sum of the superimposed and pre- Xu þ Xa m x
fault quantities gives the total variation at all point in the network. According to Eq. (17), the sign of SRE flowing through bus B for
In addition, the superimposed network is a network with all volt- fault F1 is negative. Thus, if a relay computes the value of SRE as
age sources set at zero. The superimposed voltage at fault point is less than zero, the fault is considered as a forward fault with
therefore zero before the initiation of fault transient. Thus, the respect to that relay.
voltage of the fictitious superimposed source at fault point is equal
in magnitude and opposite in sign to the prefault voltage at the 2.3.2. SRE flowing through bus B during fault F2
fault point. The superimposed quantities and their network repre- For the fault at point F2 (reverse fault for relay at bus B), the
sentation are well explained in [24,31]. subsequent superimposed network is shown in Fig. 3.
The change in relay point current and voltage due to a fault can
be obtained by zeroing all the pre-fault voltage sources and repre- diBfi ðtÞ
ðLu2 þ Lab þ Ld Þ ¼ Dvfi ¼ Vm sinðxt þ hÞ ð18Þ
senting all the load and system components by their equivalent dt
impedances. Hence, for the fault at point F1 (forward fault for relay where Lu2 is the equivalent inductance between bus B and fault F2,
at bus B), the superimposed network of the microgrid shown in whereas Lab and Ld represents equivalent inductances of Line-1 and
Fig. 1 is drawn in Fig. 2. For easiness, only the inductive parts of the downstream circuit respectively.
impedances are reflected. Moving the time origin to the fault initi-
Vm
ation point and assuming the prefault voltage at fault point equal iBfi ðtÞ ¼ ðcosðxt þ hÞ  coshÞ ð19Þ
toV m sinðxt þ hÞ, the superimposed current and voltage at bus B Xu2 þ Xab þ Xd
can be computed as
Xd þ Xab
diBfi ðtÞ vBfi ðtÞ ¼  Vm sinðxt þ hÞ ð20Þ
ðLu þ La Þ ¼ Dvfi ¼ Vm sinðxt þ hÞ ð12Þ Xu2 þ Xab þ Xd
dt
where iBfi ðtÞ is the superimposed current at bus B; Lu and La repre- The Hilbert transform of voltage signal v
^ Bfi ðtÞ can be computed
sent the upstream equivalent inductance and line inductance by shifting its angle by 90°.
between bus B and fault F1 respectively. Xd þ Xab p
^Bfi ðtÞ ¼ 
v sinðxt þ h  Þ ð21Þ
Vm Xu2 þ Xab þ Xd 2
iBfi ðtÞ ¼ ðcosh  cosðxt þ hÞÞ ð13Þ
Xu þ Xa The SRE at bus B for one cycle will be

vBfi ðtÞ ¼ Lu

diBfi ðtÞ
¼
Xu
Vm sinðxt þ hÞ ð14Þ
Xd þ Xab p
EBq ¼ V2 ð22Þ
dt Xu þ Xa Xu2 þ Xab þ Xd m x
The Hilbert transform of voltage signal v
^ Bfi ðtÞ can be computed According to Eq. (22), for the fault at point F2, which is a reverse
by shifting its angle by 90° as given below: fault for the relay at point B, the value of SRE is positive.
Xu  p
^Bfi ðtÞ ¼ 
v Vm sin xt þ h  ð15Þ 2.3.3. Threshold setting
Xu þ Xa 2
A threshold value for SRE is essential to avoid nuisance tripping
during disturbances. Eqs. (17) and (22) imply that the value of SRE
will be different for different fault locations. Hence, selecting a
B i iCfi C threshold for SRE is challenging. To address this problem, this
Bfi
Lu Ld paper defines SRE coefficients, which will be used for fault direc-
Lb tion determination and fault phase classification. The SRE coeffi-
La
cients can be obtained for each phase as
vBfi vCfi
Eqa Eqb Eqc
Kqa ¼ ; Kqb ¼ ; Kqc ¼ ; ð23Þ
if Eqmax Eqmax Eqmax
vfi =- vfpre
Eqmax ¼ MaxðjEqa j; jEqb j; jEqc jÞ ð24Þ
Fig. 2. Superimposed network of the microgrid for fault F1. where Eqa , Eqb ,Eqc and K qa , K qb ,K qc are the SREs and SRE coefficients
for phase A, B and C respectively. During the fault, the maximum
absolute value of SRE coefficients is equal to 1. Hence, a forward
fault is detected if the value of any coefficient at a specific relay
B C
L u1 L u2 i Bfi i Cfi point is 1. When the SRE coefficient for any phase is greater than
L ab Ld
a threshold, the phase is considered as a faulty phase. In this study,
the threshold is assumed to be 0.2.
v Bfi v Cfi
if 3. Proposed protection scheme

v fi = - v fpre This paper proposes a protection scheme for microgrids using

SRE and sequence components of superimposed current, thus pro-
Fig. 3. Superimposed network of the microgrid for fault F2. tecting the microgrid against various types of faults in both
160 S.B.A. Bukhari et al. / Electrical Power and Energy Systems 92 (2017) 156–166
islanded and grid-connected modes. The proposed scheme uses
microprocessor-based relay to detect fault incidents and to isolate
the faulty sections in a distinctive way. A relay structure hereafter
referred as the microgrid protection relay (MGPR) is developed,
which enables the proposed scheme. The current and voltage sig-
nals at each end of the line are processed locally through the MGPR
installed at that end. After detection of a fault in the microgrid, the
faulted section is recognised by a suitable logic, which is based on
communication between various MGPRs. Consequently, based on
the type of fault, appropriate trip signals are sent to the related cir-
cuit breakers. The next subsections explain the proposed scheme in
detail.
3.1. Fault detection strategy
As stated earlier, microgrids can operate in both grid-connected
or islanded mode and the magnitude of fault current decreases sig-
nificantly during microgrid transition from being grid-connected
to islanded mode. Thus, detecting a fault in the islanded mode is
difficult. This paper proposes a new scheme that is based on the
sequence components of current. However, these components
are also present under normal operating conditions because most
of the distribution systems are inherently unbalanced in nature,
and may cause the mal-operation of the protection scheme. The
problem becomes more complex in the case of HIFs or even for
faults in the islanded mode. To address the problem, in this study,
we use sequence components of superimposed current. The ratio
of sequence components of superimposed current and prefault
current can be defined as the fault ratio because this ratio only
appears during a fault and can be expressed as
ji1fi j þ ji2fi j
Fr ¼ ; ð25Þ
ji1pre j þ ji2pre j
where ji1fi j and ji2fi j are the rms values of positive and negative
sequence components of superimposed current, whereas ji1pre j and
ji2pre j are the rms values of positive and negative sequence compo-
nents of current before the occurrence of fault. Ideally, this ratio
should be equal to zero under normal operation because superim-
posed components appear only during faults. However, practically
F r will not be zero under normal condition due to the load variation
and inherently unbalance nature of distribution network. When a
fault hits the microgrid during the grid-connected mode, the value
of F r changes significantly. Therefore, the system imbalance is not of
much importance and F r can be used to detect faults in the grid-
connected mode. However, during the islanded mode and HIFs
the F r may not be necessarily larger so, the system imbalance can
cause nuisance tripping. Thus, one cannot ignore the system imbal-
ance during the islanded mode and HIFs. The system imbalance is
defined by a ratio known as ‘‘system imbalance ratio” and can be
computed as proposed in [21].
ji0pre j þ ji2pre j
Rn ¼ ; ð26Þ
ji1pre j
During normal operation, the system imbalance ratio is usually
less than 20% [21,32]. Hence, a new ratio, which also takes into
account the prefault system imbalance ratio, can be expressed as
Fr
RFD ¼ ; ð27Þ
Rn
The fault ratio F r cannot exceeds the system imbalance ratio
under normal operation. Therefore, RFD can retain a maximum
value 1 under normal operation. However, during faults RFD will
be much greater than one. Therefore, the value of RFD is less sensi-
tive to system imbalance and can efficiently be used to detect fault
incidents. To further desensitise the protection scheme from load
disturbances and to avoid nuisance tripping a threshold RFDðthÞ is
used. When the value of RFD exceeds this threshold for a definite
period of time, the occurrence of fault is recognised and a proper
action will be taken based on the proposed protection scheme
(described in the next section). In this paper, the threshold is
assumed to be 2.5.
3.2. Communication-aided fault location
In this study, we use the directional characteristics of SRE to
identify the fault location. As explained in Section 2.3, SRE will
be negative for forward faults and positive for reverse faults. Thus,
we can discriminate between reverse and forward faults. When a
fault incident is detected by the relay, the directional element
waits for a short prespecified time to obtain the stable fault direc-
tion. This time delay is necessary to prevent the fluctuations in SRE
direction due to the frequent energy exchange between capacitive
and inductive elements at the start of the fault transient process. In
this study, the time delay is set to two power frequency cycles. This
time is adequate for a stable direction outcome.
A fault in one section can be a forward fault for many relays;
hence, to avoid nuisance tripping and to improve the selectivity
of the scheme, the faulty line is identified by communicating infor-
mation among different MGPRs. After receiving information from
other MGPRs, an MGPR installed at a line determines through a
suitable logic whether the fault is in its zone or not. The logic
mechanism is explained in the following section.
3.3. Main and backup protection
In the proposed scheme, a communication link is developed
between three adjacent MGPRs. Each MGPR sends two signals to
other MGPRs: (1) a fault detection signal SDet which shows whether
or not the MGPR has detected a fault incident in its region and (2) A
fault direction signalSDir which gives the direction of fault from the
MGPR prospective. The signals SDet and SDir are the binary codes as
depicted in Table 1.
In the meantime, each MGPR also receives the signals sent by
other two adjacent MGPRs and determines through an appropriate
logic mechanism the zone in which a fault has occurred. Each
MGPR is designed with two protection zones: (1) main protection
zone and (2) backup protection zone. To understand the concept, a
part of the microgrid considered in Fig. 1a is redrawn in Fig. 4 with
protection zones of MGPR-1D.
Table 1
Binary codes of fault detection and fault direction signals.
Signal name/signal value 1 0
SDet Fault detected No fault
SDir Forward fault (FF) Reverse fault (RF)
Zone 2 Zone 1
C
A B
CB-2U CB-1U CB-1D
CB-2D
Line-2 Line-1
MGPR-2D
MGPR-2U MGPR-1U MGPR-1D
Load
Fig. 4. Protection zones of MGPR-1D.
 S.B.A. Bukhari et al. / Electrical Power and Energy Systems 92 (2017) 156–166 161

Zone 1: It is the main protection zone of MGPR-1D covering
Line-1. The relay operates immediately when a fault occurs in
this zone.
Zone 2: MGPR-1D operates as a backup protection for this zone.
Therefore, for any fault in this zone, the relay operates after a
prespecified time delay. The time delay is necessary and allows
the main protection of zone 2 to operate first. This time delay
must be greater than the operating times of the primary protec-
tion relay and the circuit breaker associated with primary
protection.
The fault zone identification logic for MGPR-1D is shown in Fig. 5.
It is clear from Fig. 5 that MGPR-1D not only receives the signals (SDet
andSDir ) from MGPR-1U to recognise faults in main protection zone

A B
CB-2D C
CB-2U CB-1U CB-1D
Line-2 Line-1
MGPR-2U MGPR-2D MGPR-1D
MGPR-1U
S Det(1D) S mz(trip)
S Dir(1D)
Load S Det(1U)
FF Trip
Communication Link S Dir(1U) Main Protection Unit

TD Backup
S bz(trip)
Communication Link S Det(2U).

S Dir(2U)
Backup Protection Unit

Fig. 5. Fault zone identification logic for MGPR-1D.

Pre fault Pos., System Rn

Neg. and Zero Imbalance
Seq. Est. Ratio Est. Fault
iabc i012(pre) Detection Yes=1 SDet(1D)
RFD≥RFD(Th)
ratio RFD No=0
Super Impd. ifi(abc) Pos., Neg. and
Est.
Comp Est. Zero Seq. Est. ifi(012)
Fault Ratio Est. Fault Detection Unit

Eqa SRE Coefficients Est. Kqa

vabc Super SRE Est. Is
HT. Eqb Kqa, Kqb,
Impd. for each (Kqa=-1, or Yes =1
Est. Eqc and Kqc TD SDir(1D)
Comp Est. Phase Kqb Kqb=-1, or No=0
Est.
Kqc=-1)?
Max(|Eqa|,
ifi(abc) Kqc
|Eqb|, |Eqc|).
Est.
Fault Direction Unit

SDet(1D) Smz(trip)
SDir(1D)
SDet(1U)
Communication Port

FF Trip
Main Protection Unit
SDir(1U)
SDet(2U)
TDBackup
Sbz(trip) Fault Zone Identification
SDir(2U) Backup Protection Unit Unit
FF Trip
Yes=1 Phase A trip
Kqa |Kqa|≥0.2
No=0
Yes=1 Phase B trip
Kqb |Kqb|≥0.2
No=0
Yes=1 Phase C trip
Kqc |Kqc|≥0.2
No=0
Fault Classification Unit Tripping Unit

Fig. 6. Simplified schematic diagram of MGPR-1D for a microgrid shown in Fig. 1a.
162 S.B.A. Bukhari et al. / Electrical Power and Energy Systems 92 (2017) 156–166

Main Grid

69kV

MGPR : Microgrid Protection Relay.

Tr-1
CB : Circuit Breaker.
24.9kV
Tr. : Transformer.
1 PCC
CB-12 : DG protection.
MGPR-12

Line-12
500-kw

4km
Photovoltaic Park

CB-21 300-kW Synchronous

Generator
2 MGPR-21
CB-25 CB-23 CB-27
MGPR-25 MGPR-23 MGPR-27

3km
Line

Line-23
-27
2km 0.5km
-25
0.4kV Line
CB-52 CB-72
MGPR-52 CB-32 MGPR-72
24.9kV F3 7
5 MGPR-32
3
CB-56 CB-78
24.9kV CB-34 Load-3
MGPR-56 MGPR-78

Line-78
MGPR-34
0.4kV

6km
500-kw
Line-34

Photovoltaic Park
0.4kV

3km

CB-87
MGPR-87
8
CB-89

Line-89
MGPR-89 Load-4
F2
4km

3km
CB-43
Line-56

MGPR-43
4 CB-98 F5
CB-46 MGPR-98
MGPR-46 9
Load-2 CB-910
F4
MGPR-910 Load-5
Line-910

8km
3km

-46
Line F1
CB-109
CB-65 CB-64 MGRR-109
MGPR-65 10
MGPR-64
6
24.9kV

640-KW Wind Farm

0.4kV
Load-1

Fig. 7. Single-line diagram of the study microgrid.

but also receives the signals from MGPR-2U to operate as a backup
protection for Line-2. If MGPRs located at both ends of Line-1 detect
a fault as a forward fault then the main protection zone (Line-1) is
considered as faulty and a trip signal SmzðtripÞ will be issued. On the
other hand, if MGPR-1D detects a fault as a forward fault whereas
MGPR-1U identifies it as a reverse fault then the fault zone identifi-
cation unit of MGPR-1D check the status of the fault at MGPR-2U by
its received signals. If MGPR-2U recognises the fault as forward fault
then the backup protection zone is regarded as faulty and after a pre-
specified time delay, backup protection unit generates a trip signal
SbzðtripÞ . Finally, the trip signals (SmzðtripÞ and SbzðtripÞ ) from main and
backup protection units are combined using OR logic operation to
obtained the forward fault (FF) trip signal.
The proposed protection scheme can be implemented with the
communication facilities of a smart grid. Wireline or wireless com-
munication can be used as a communication medium for the pro-
posed scheme. With the progression in wireless communication,
standard technologies are offered for local area metropolitan area
and wide area. Wireless communication has many advantages over
wire communication, including fast development, high mobility and
low cost. Wireless signal transmission requires 0.1 ms for a distance
less than 30 km, which is acceptable for most of the distribution sys-
tem applications. Synchronised phasor measurements are required
when the distance is greater than 30 km. In this study, communica-
tion delay is taken as 3 ms to simulate a more severe condition.
3.4. Microgrid protection relay (MGPR)
To implement the proposed protection scheme, a relay
structure is designed. Fig. 6 shows the schematic diagram of
 S.B.A. Bukhari et al. / Electrical Power and Energy Systems 92 (2017) 156–166 163

MGPR-1D for a microgrid presented in Fig.1a. Each MGPR has five
units: ‘‘fault detection unit”, ‘‘fault direction unit”, ‘‘fault zone identi-
fication unit”, ‘‘fault classification unit” and ‘‘tripping unit”.
3.4.1. Fault detection unit
This unit generates fault detection signal SDet to be sent to other
relays. The fault detection unit benefits from superimposed com-
ponents and the proposed fault detection ratio, as described in Sec-
tion 3.1. This unit is supposed to detect all types of faults including
HIFs in both grid connected and islanded modes of operation.
3.4.2. Direction determination unit
This unit is designed to identify the right direction of the fault.
The output of this unit SDir is sent to the other relays to discrimi-
nate the faulty line. SDir is also used in the fault zone identification
unit (to be explained next) to identify a faulted zone. The direction
determination unit takes advantage of SRE described in Section 2.3.
The SRE identifies the correct direction not only for solid faults but
also for HIFs.
3.4.3. Fault zone identification unit
This unit is responsible for operating the relay when a fault
occurs in main or backup protection zones. The unit receives
SDet and SDir signals sent by other relays and determines through
an appropriate logic mechanism (described in Section 3.3) the zone
in which a fault has occurred. A time delay is provided for the
backup protection operation to allow the main protection of the
faulty zone to operate first. After that time delay, the relay will
send a signal to the circuit breaker to open the fault, if the fault
is still present. The backup trip signal is sent after a time delay of
0.3 s.
3.4.4. Fault classification unit
To enhance the proficiency of the proposed protection scheme,
single-phase tripping capability is also considered. After the iden-
tification of the faulted zone by the fault zone identification unit,
the fault classification unit classifies the fault by comparing the
absolute value of SRE coefficients for each phase with the prespec-
ified value, i.e., 0.2. If the value of the SRE coefficient for any phase
is greater than this threshold, the phase is considered as a faulty
phase; otherwise, it is a healthy phase.
farm. The photovoltaic parks and the wind farm are connected
through power electronics converters.
A droop control strategy is used for all DGs so that the microgrid
can work in both modes without controller mode switching and is
adopted from [33]. A synchronisation algorithm is also integrated
in the control strategy of each DG for resynchronisation of the
microgrid with the main grid. The microgrid is interfaced to the
main grid through a 69/24.9 kV Dyn transformer and each DG
source is connected through a 0.4/24.9 kV transformer.
4.2. Case studies
A complete fault analysis for all locations in the study microgrid
is executed. The fault types considered in this study include single-
line to-ground (SLG) faults, line-to-line faults (LL), double-line-to-
ground faults (DLG), three-phase faults and HIFs. Moreover, the sit-
uations of circuit breaker and MPGR failures are also simulated to
validate the effectiveness of backup protection. The tests are per-
formed under two different scenarios: grid-connected mode and
islanded mode. In addition, the looped case is developed by simu-
lating the fault on Line-46 of the study microgrid. Due to the lim-
itation of space, only few simulation results are included in this
paper.
4.2.1. Results for solid faults
Let us assume that a solid fault impacts the Line-46 of the study
microgrid in the islanded mode of operation. The purpose of this
case study is to verify the efficacy of the proposed scheme when
the microgrid operates in the islanded mode. The current, fault
detection ratio and SRE coefficients for this case at MGPR-46 are
shown in Fig. 8. It can be depicted from the figure that the value
of SRE coefficient for faulty phase is 1. The SRE coefficients are
obtained after 2 cycles delay. This delay allows the directional ele-
ment to obtain the stable fault direction. The results for grid con-
nected mode when a three phase fault impacts the Line-89 of

3.4.5. Tripping unit

The last phase of decision making in the MGPR is accomplished
in the tripping unit. It receives signals from the fault zone identifi-
cation unit and the fault classification unit, and determines
whether or not a trip signal should be sent to the relevant circuit
breaker.

4. Simulation results

To validate the efficacy of the proposed protection scheme and

the MGPR, extensive simulations have been performed by using
the MATLAB/SIMULINK software package. The details of the simu-
lated microgrid, which, hereinafter, is stated as ‘‘study microgrid”,
and the simulation case studies, are presented in the following
sections.

4.1. Study microgrid

Fig. 7 illustrates the single-line diagram of the study microgrid.

The basic structure of this system and its parameters are obtained
from [14,32]. The operating voltage of the microgrid is 24.9 kV. The
system contains two photovoltaic parks of capacity 500 kW, a syn- Fig. 8. Simulation results at MGPR-46 for SLG fault at Line 46 of the study microgrid
chronous machine of capacity 300 kW and a 640 kW-capacity wind in islanded mode.
164 S.B.A. Bukhari et al. / Electrical Power and Energy Systems 92 (2017) 156–166

Fig. 9. Simulation results at MGPR-89 for three-phase fault at Line 89 of the study
microgrid in grid connected mode. Fig. 10. Simulation results at MGPR-46 for DLG HIF at Line 46 of the study
microgrid in islanded mode.

study microgrid are shown in Fig. 9. These results are obtained at

MGPR-89 of study microgrid.
Table 2 reports the operating relays, the operating times of the
main and backup relays, fault detection ratio and SRE coefficients
for selected scenarios at various locations in the study microgrid.
It can be observed from Table 2 that the proposed fault detection
ratio RFD is above the threshold and hence detects fault incidents
successfully. Moreover, the faults are first cleared by the main pro-
tection relay and in the case of primary protection failure; the
backup relay sends a trip signal after 0.3 s. The main and backup
protections are designed in such a manner that the smallest part
of the microgrid is isolated in response to the fault. The proposed
protection scheme clears all types of faults in the islanded mode
within 73 ms. The faulty section in the grid-connected mode is iso-
lated rapidly as compared to the islanded mode. This is because the

Table 2
Simulation results of various types of solid faults at different locations in the microgrid working in the islanded mode and the grid connected mode.

F.T F.L Main protection operation Back up operation

Grid connected mode (GCM) Islanded mode (IM) GCM IM
Op. MGPR RFD SRE coefficients Toper (ms) RFD SRE coefficients Toper (ms) Op. MGPR Toper (ms) Toper (ms)
Kqa Kqb Kqc Kqa Kqb Kqc
AG F1 46 170.9 1 0.04 0.02 68.6 24.01 1 0.03 0.04 72.2 34 368.6 372.2
64 187.7 1 0.01 0.02 68.5 14.72 1 0.03 0.02 72.5 56 368.5 372.5
F3 23 205.1 1 0.04 0.05 68.0 26.50 1 0.04 0.03 72.0 12 368.0 372.0
32 22.2 1 0.01 0.04 72.3 12.50 1 0.05 0.06 72.6 43 372.3 372.6
BG F5 89 317.3 0.05 1 0.02 68.0 21.67 0.01 1 0.02 72.3 78 368.0 372.3
98 54.90 0.01 1 0.01 70.6 24.40 0.03 1 0.02 71.3 109 370.6 371.3
BCG F4 56 297.8 0.01 0.64 1 68.1 37.10 0.04 0.90 1 71.2 25 368.1 371.2
65 58.25 0.01 0.61 1 70.5 11.20 0.01 0.88 1 72.7 46 370.5 372.7
ABG F2 34 156.8 0.52 1 0.09 68.9 26.91 0.81 1 0.03 72.0 23 368.9 372.0
43 46.09 0.51 1 0.01 70.8 10.54 0.82 1 0.03 72.8 64 370.8 372.8
ACG F5 89 515.0 1 0.02 0.63 67.5 37.42 0.94 0.04 1 71.2 78 367.5 371.2
98 99.40 1 0.04 0.94 69.5 34.45 0.93 0.03 1 71.5 109 369.5 371.5
BC F1 46 325.8 0.03 1 0.955 67.9 34.75 0.04 0.95 1 71.5 34 367.9 371.5
64 359.0 0.04 1 0.95 67.7 20.13 0.03 0.95 1 72.4 56 367.7 372.4
AB F3 23 410.0 0.98 1 0.03 67.5 38.45 0.95 1 0.01 71.1 12 367.5 371.1
32 41.84 0.97 1 0.01 70.9 10.50 0.94 1 0.02 72.8 43 370.9 372.8
ABC F4 56 315.4 0.84 1 0.98 68.0 47.80 0.9 0.97 1 70.8 25 368.0 370.8
65 67.80 0.82 1 0.850 70.0 11.49 0.91 0.99 1 72.6 46 370.0 372.6
ABCG F1 46 378.9 0.823 1 0.99 67.6 38.50 0.86 0.96 1 71.1 34 367.6 371.1
64 344.4 0.82 1 0.93 67.7 24.00 0.86 0.95 1 72.2 56 367.7 372.2
F3 23 425.8 0.85 1 0.94 67.5 11.50 0.90 0.96 1 72.6 12 367.5 372.6
32 45.35 0.87 1 0.95 70.7 42.40 0.89 0.94 1 70.9 43 370.7 370.9

F.T = Fault Type. F.L = Fault Location. Toper = Relay Operating Time Op. = Operating.
 S.B.A. Bukhari et al. / Electrical Power and Energy Systems 92 (2017) 156–166 165

Table 4
Effect of reactive power compensation devices on proposed scheme.

F.T F.L Op. MGPR RFD SRE coefficients Toper (ms)

Kqa Kqb Kqc
AG F4 56 173.4 1 0.07 0.09 68.6
65 36.7 1 0.05 0.06 72.0
BG F5 89 288.5 0.01 1 0.08 68.1
98 56.9 0.01 1 0.01 70.5
BC F2 34 188.1 0.05 1 0.95 68.5
43 53.08 0.07 1 0.93 70.7
ACG F5 89 523.2 1 0.03 0.59 67.5
98 103.5 1 0.07 0.98 69.5
ABG F1 46 365.5 0.48 1 0.09 67.7
64 359.0 0.48 1 0.07 67.7
ABC F4 56 352.4 0.82 1 0.83 67.7
65 74.35 0.82 1 0.84 70.0
ABCG F1 46 370.9 0.81 1 0.93 67.6
64 338.7 0.81 1 0.93 67.9

Fig. 11. Simulation results at MGPR-89 for three-phase HIF at Line-89 of the study
microgrid in islanded mode.
fault current magnitude in the grid-connected mode is much
higher than the islanded mode.
4.2.2. Results for high impedance faults
HIFs are difficult to detect in the microgrid particularly when
HIFs occur in the islanded microgrid. Many utilities and research-
ers use 40 O resistance as the maximum reasonable resistance
for HIFs [21]. However, in this study, various cases with resistance
up to 200 O are considered to simulate more severe conditions. The
method used for modelling HIFs is adapted from [34].
To check the performance of proposed scheme for HIF in looped
configuration of microgrid, a DLG HIF is simulated at Line-46 of the
study microgrid in the islanded mode. The simulation results
obtained at MGPR-46 are depicted in Fig. 10. The variation in SRE
coefficient are because the HIFs introduce nonlinearity and asym-
metry in fault currents. It can be depicted form Fig. 10 that the pro-
posed scheme successfully detects and locates the HIFs in the
study microgrid.
A three-phase HIF is also simulated at Line-89 of the study
microgrid to test the performance of proposed scheme in radial
configuration. The simulation results obtained at MGPR-89 are
shown in Fig. 11. It can be observed from Fig. 11 that the fault
detection ratio and SRE coefficients are above the threshold and
hence the proposed scheme has the ability to protect the radial
microgrid against HIFs.
The results for selected scenarios in both grid-connected and
islanded modes are given in Table 3. It can be observed from Table 3
that the proposed scheme successfully detects the HIFs but is
relatively slower as compared to solid faults in islanded and
grid-connected modes. Nevertheless, the speed of operation of
the proposed scheme is still less than 0.1 s, which is acceptable
for distribution systems protection.
4.2.3. Effect of reactive power compensation
The proposed scheme uses the directional characteristics of SRE
for fault location and fault classification. The proposed scheme is
also tested on a system with reactive power compensation. To

Table 3
Simulation results of various types of high impedance faults at different locations in the microgrid working in the islanded mode and the grid connected mode.

F.L F.T Rf (O) Op. MGPRs Grid connected mode Islanded mode
RFD SRE coefficients Toper (ms) RFD SRE coefficients Toper (ms)
Kqa Kqb Kqc Kqa Kqb Kqc
F1 AG 50 46 35.85 1 0.07 0.04 71.4 13.30 1 0.01 0.05 72.6
64 39.38 1 0.08 0.03 71.1 9.25 1 0.01 0.02 72.8
100 46 19.55 1 0.09 0.08 72.4 8.78 1 0.01 0.01 72.9
64 20.49 1 0.09 0.09 72.3 6.40 1 0.01 0.01 73.0
200 46 11.23 1 0.02 0.08 72.7 5.18 1 0.02 0.02 73.1
64 11.23 1 0.03 0.06 72.8 4.05 1 0.02 0.01 73.2
F5 BCG 50 89 124.6 0.04 0.70 1 69.4 20.04 0.05 0.88 1 72.3
98 23.42 0.02 0.91 1 72.3 23.05 0.02 0.82 1 72.3
100 89 69.79 0.02 0.75 1 68.4 12.40 0.06 0.87 1 72.6
98 13.10 0.05 0.80 1 72.6 13.10 0.05 0.88 1 72.5
200 89 36.65 0.06 0.75 1 71.4 7.02 0.04 0.85 1 73.0
98 08.02 0.04 1 0.82 72.9 8.02 0.05 0.82 1 73.0
F3 ABCG 50 23 41.67 0.83 0.93 1 70.9 22.90 0.8 0.91 1 72.3
32 10.25 0.85 0.94 1 72.8 10.40 0.82 0.93 1 72.8
100 23 26.45 0.84 1 0.93 72.0 14.88 0.78 0.90 1 70.8
32 07.25 0.86 1 0.94 72.9 5.98 0.81 0.92 1 73.1
200 23 15.45 0.85 1 0.93 72.5 8.65 0.80 0.92 1 72.9
32 04.23 0.82 1 0.93 73.2 3.18 0.81 0.92 1 73.3
166 S.B.A. Bukhari et al. / Electrical Power and Energy Systems 92 (2017) 156–166
simulate this effect, three capacitor banks each of 500 kvar are
placed at buses 4, 6 and 7. The synchronous generator is discon-
nected from bus 7 in this case. The results are shown in Table 4.
It can be observed from the table that the proposed scheme pro-
vides a stable SRE direction in the presence of reactive power com-
pensation devices.
5. Conclusion
Microgrids have been developed to meet the power quality and
reliability requirements of customers. However, the development
of microgrids has been complemented with major challenges.
One major problem related to microgrids is the need to design
an effective protection strategy which can work in both the grid-
connected and the islanded modes of operation. This paper pro-
posed a protection scheme for microgrids based on SRE. The SRE
was computed by the Hilbert transform. A new ratio based on
the sequence components of superimposed current and prefault
current was developed to detect both solid and high-impedance
faults in the microgrid. The directional characteristics of SRE were
adopted to identify the faulty section. The proposed scheme does
not need adaptive relay setting for islanded and grid-connected
modes of operation. Finally, to validate the efficacy of the sug-
gested protection scheme, several simulations were performed.
Simulation results indicated that the suggested scheme can effi-
ciently protect the microgrid against solid and high-impedance
faults in both radial and looped configurations.
Acknowledgement
This work was supported by the National Research Foundation
of Korea (NRF) grant funded by the Korea government (MSIP) (No.
2015R1A2A1A10052459).
References
[1] Lin X, Zhang R, Tong N, Li X, Li M, Yang D. Regional protection scheme designed
for low-voltage micro-grids. Int J Electr Power Energy Syst 2015;64:526–35.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijepes.2014.07.050.
[2] Mathur A, Das B, Pant V. Fault analysis of unbalanced radial and meshed
distribution system with inverter based distributed generation. Int J Electr
Power Energy Syst 2017;85:164–77. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.
ijepes.2016.09.003.
[3] Bayat A, Bagheri A, Noroozian R. Optimal siting and sizing of distributed
generation accompanied by reconfiguration of distribution networks for
maximum loss reduction by using a new UVDA-based heuristic method. Int J
Electr Power Energy Syst 2016;77:360–71. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.
ijepes.2015.11.039.
[4] Ma J, Wang X, Zhang Y, Yang Q, Phadke AG. A novel adaptive current protection
scheme for distribution systems with distributed generation. Int J Electr Power
Energy Syst 2012;43:1460–6. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijepes.2012.07.024.
[5] Tan X, Li Q, Wang H. Advances and trends of energy storage technology in
microgrid. Int J Electr Power Energy Syst 2013;44:179–91. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1016/j.ijepes.2012.07.015.
[6] Gu W, Wu Z, Bo R, Liu W, Zhou G, Chen W, et al. Modeling, planning and
optimal energy management of combined cooling, heating and power
microgrid: A review. Int J Electr Power Energy Syst 2014;54:26–37. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijepes.2013.06.028.
[7] Bakar AHA, Ooi B, Govindasamy P, Tan C, Illias HA, Mokhlis H. Directional
overcurrent and earth-fault protections for a biomass microgrid system in
Malaysia. Int J Electr Power Energy Syst 2014;55:581–91. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1016/j.ijepes.2013.10.004.
[8] Laaksonen HJ. Protection principles for future microgrids. IEEE Trans Power
Electron 2010;25:2910–8. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TPEL.2010.2066990.
[9] Nimpitiwan N, Heydt GT, Ayyanar R, Suryanarayanan S. Fault current
contribution from synchronous machine and inverter based distributed
generators. IEEE Trans Power Deliv 2007;22:634–41. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1109/TPWRD.2006.881440.
[10] Mirsaeidi S, Mat Said D, Wazir Mustafa M, Hafiz Habibuddin M, Ghaffari K. An
analytical literature review of the available techniques for the protection of
micro-grids. Int J Electr Power Energy Syst 2014;58:300–6. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1016/j.ijepes.2014.01.032.
[11] Hosseini SA, Abyaneh HA, Sadeghi SHH, Razavi F, Nasiri A. An overview of
microgrid protection methods and the factors involved. Renew Sustain Energy
Rev 2016;64:174–86. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2016.05.089.
[12] Oudalov A, Fidigatti A. Adaptive network protection in microgrids. Int J Distrib
Energy Resour 2009;5:201–26.
[13] Coffele F, Booth C, Dyśko A. An adaptive overcurrent protection scheme for
distribution networks. IEEE Trans Power Deliv 2015;30:561–8. http://dx.doi.
org/10.1109/TPWRD.2013.2294879.
[14] Mirsaeidi S, Mat Said D, Mustafa MW, Hafiz Habibuddin M. A protection
strategy for micro-grids based on positive-sequence component. IET Renew
Power Gener 2015;9:600–9. http://dx.doi.org/10.1049/iet-rpg.2014.0255.
[15] Oureilidis KO, Demoulias CS. A fault clearing method in converter-dominated
microgrids with conventional protection means. IEEE Trans Power Electron
2016;31:4628–40. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TPEL.2015.2476702.
[16] Li X, Dyśko A, Burt GM. Traveling wave-based protection scheme for inverter-
dominated microgrid using mathematical morphology. IEEE Trans Smart Grid
2014;5:2211–8. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TSG.2014.2320365.
[17] Saleh SA, Ahshan R, Abu-Khaizaran MS, Alsayid B, Rahman MA. Implementing
and testing–wpt-based digital protection for microgrid systems. IEEE Trans Ind
Appl 2014;50:2173–85. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/IAS.2011.6074471.
[18] Tumilty RM, Brucoli M, Burt GM, Green TC. Approaches to network protection
for inverter dominated electrical distribution systems. In: Power electron
mach drives 2006 3rd iet int conf on, IET; 2006. p. 622–6. http://dx.doi.org/10.
1049/cp:20060183.
[19] Al-Nasseri H, Redfern MA, Li F. A voltage based protection for micro-grids
containing power electronic converters. In: 2006 IEEE power eng soc gen
meet. IEEE; 2006. p. 1–7. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/PES.2006.1709423.
[20] Jayawarna N, Jones C, Barnes M, Jenkins N. Operating microgrid energy storage
control during network faults. In: 2007 IEEE int conf syst syst eng. IEEE; 2007.
p. 1–7. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/SYSOSE.2007.4304254.
[21] Zamani MA, Yazdani A, Sidhu TS. A communication-assisted protection
strategy for inverter-based medium-voltage microgrids. IEEE Trans Smart
Grid 2012;3:2088–99. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TSG.2012.2211045.
[22] Casagrande E, Woon WL, Zeineldin HH, Svetinovic D. A differential sequence
component protection scheme for microgrids with inverter-based distributed
generators. IEEE Trans Smart Grid 2014;5:29–37. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/
TSG.2013.2251017.
[23] Mishra DP, Samantaray SR, Joos G. A combined wavelet and data-mining based
intelligent protection scheme for microgrid. IEEE Trans Smart Grid
2016;7:2295–304. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TSG.2015.2487501.
[24] Benmouy G, Roberts J. Superimposed quantities: their true nature and
application in relays. WA USA SEL USA: Schweitzer Engineering Laboratories,
Inc. Pullman; 1999.
[25] Poularikas AD. Transforms and applications handbook. CRC Press; 2010.
[26] Cui T, Dong X, Bo Z, Juszczyk A. Hilbert-transform-based transient/intermittent
earth fault detection in noneffectively grounded distribution systems. IEEE
Trans Power Deliv 2011;26:143–51. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/
TPWRD.2010.2068578.
[27] Luo S, Dong X, Shi S, Wang B. A directional protection scheme for HVDC
transmission lines based on reactive energy. IEEE Trans Power Deliv
2016;31:559–67. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TPWRD.2015.2461450.
[28] Orozco-Henao C, Bretas AS, Leborgne RC, Herrera A, Martinez S. Fault location
in distribution network with inverter-interfaced distributed energy resources
in limiting current. In: Harmon qual power ICHQP 2016 17th int conf on, IEEE;
2016. p. 231–6. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/ICHQP.2016.7783424.
[29] Saadat H. Power system analysis. WCB/McGraw-Hill; 1999.
[30] Mirsaeidi S, Said DM, Mustafa MW, Habibuddin MH, Ghaffari K. Fault location
and isolation in micro-grids using a digital central protection unit. Renew
Sustain Energy Rev 2016;56:1–17. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.
rser.2015.10.162.
[31] Johns AT, Salman SK. Digital protection for power systems. IET; 1997.
[32] Mirsaeidi S, Said DM, Mustafa MW, Habibuddin MH, Ghaffari K. A protection
strategy for micro-grids based on positive-sequence impedance. Distrib Gener
Altern Energy J 2016;31:7–32. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/
21563306.2016.11744002.
[33] Zamani MA, Yazdani A, Sidhu TS. A control strategy for enhanced operation of
inverter-based microgrids under transient disturbances and network faults.
IEEE Trans Power Deliv 2012;27:1737–47. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/
TPWRD.2012.2205713.
[34] Sortomme E, Venkata SS, Mitra J. Microgrid protection using communication-
assisted digital relays. IEEE Trans Power Deliv 2010;25:2789–96. http://dx.doi.
org/10.1109/TPWRD.2009.2035810.