Downloaded from http://iranpaper.
ir
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but hashttp://www.itrans24.com/landing1.html
Optimal Protection Coordination for Microgrids
with Grid-Connected and Islanded Capability
Waleed K. A. Najy, H. H. Zeineldin, Member, IEEE, and W. L. Woon, Member, IEEE
Abstract—Microgrids can be operated either grid-connected to
reduce system losses and for peak shaving or islanded to increase
reliability and provide backup power during utility outage. Such
dual configuration capability imposes challenges on the design
of the protection system. Fault current magnitudes will vary
depending on the microgrid operating mode. In this paper, a
microgrid protection scheme that relies on optimally sizing fault
current limiters (FCL) and optimally setting directional over-
current relays is proposed. The protection scheme is optimally
designed taking into account both modes of operation (grid-
connected and islanded). The problem has been formulated as
a constrained non-linear programming (NLP) problem and is
solved using the genetic algorithm (GA) with the static penalty
constraint-handling technique. The proposed approach is tested
on two medium-voltage networks: a typical radial distribution
system and on the IEEE 30-bus looped power distribution sys-
tem equipped with directly-connected conventional synchronous
generators (CSG).
Index Terms—Directional overcurrent relay coordination, dis-
tributed generation, fault current limiters, short-circuit analysis.
I. I NTRODUCTION
P ROTECTION against faults is an essential requirement
when designing distribution systems. A good protection
coordination scheme is one that is able to isolate as little
of the system as possible when a fault occurs, so as to
avoid unnecessary disconnection of power to areas that are
unaffected by the fault. Protection coordination in this sense is
designing protection schemes such that each protective device
performs its primary function as quickly as possible, but in the
event that it fails, it should be backed up by another protective
device. Distribution systems are commonly radial where power
flows in one direction from the main substation to the loads
[1]. For such systems, overcurrent relays and fuses are used
as the main protection means. The unidirectional flow of fault
currents reduces the complexity of protection coordination.
The advent, and increasing popularity, of distributed gener-
ation (DG) in distribution systems has added to the complex-
ity of the protection coordination problem. Introducing DG
into the distribution system will cause changes in the short-
circuit magnitudes and directions, and therefore the existing
protection scheme may not be able to perform its coordination
function correctly [2]. In [3], it has been shown that the fault
current contribution will depend on the type of DG present
Copyright (c) 2012 IEEE. Personal use of this material is permitted.
However, permission to use this material for any other purposes must be
obtained from the IEEE by sending a request to pubs-permissions@ieee.org.
This work was supported and funded by the Masdar Institute of Science
and Technology. The authors are with the Masdar Institute of Science and
Technology, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates (email: wnajy@masdar.ac.ae;
hzainaldin@masdar.ac.ae; wwoon@masdar.ac.ae).
Copyright (c) 2011 IEEE. Personal use is permitted. For any other purposes, permission must be obtained from the IEEE by emailing pubs-permissions@ieee.org.
not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication.
in the system. For inverter-based DG units, the fault current
could reach approximately 1 per-unit (because of the controller
limiters). Directly-connected conventional synchronous gener-
ators, on the other hand, have a much more profound effect
on the short-circuit levels. In this paper, we will refer to the
latter type as CSG for simplicity.
The introduction of DG to distribution systems causes the
distribution system to increasingly resemble interconnected
transmission systems. For such interconnected systems, the
protection scheme is based on directional overcurrent relays
which are optimally set to ensure protection coordination. A
wide variety of methods has been proposed over the past few
decades to tackle this problem. Some approaches proposed
topology-based approaches like linear graph theory and loop
break-point relay locating [4]-[5]. Optimization methods be-
came the tool of choice for researchers, with the problem
being formulated as a linear programming problem and solved
using the simplex method and its variants [6]. More recently,
heuristic techniques have been proposed, with particle swarm
optimization (PSO) [7], the genetic algorithm (GA) [8]-[9],
evolutionary methods [10] and the harmony search algorithm
[11] all being implemented, where the problem was formulated
as a non-linear programming (NLP) problem. Studies that
investigate protection coordination for multiple system con-
figurations on a power system level were investigated in [12]
and [13]. The systems under study in these papers involved
multiple sources that were switched in and out of different
configurations. Optimization was performed using a hybrid
genetic algorithm [12] and interval linear programming [13].
Recently, the impacts of DG on distribution system protec-
tion have been analyzed [14]-[15]. In [14], it has been shown
that CSG can have an impact on protection coordination.
Inverter-based DG tend to have less impact since the mag-
nitude of the short circuit currents are low compared to CSG
[14]. Fault current limiters have been proposed as a means for
mitigating the impact of CSG on protection coordination [15].
In [16], protection coordination of a looped distribution system
was achieved by optimally setting directional overcurrent relys
in conjunction with the use of fault-current limiters (FCL) in
series with every CSG in the system. FCLs are series devices
that are considered to be invisible to the system under normal
operation, but that help limit the short-circuit current under
fault conditions. The protection system in [16] was optimally
designed assuming one possible DG configuration which is the
grid-connected mode.
The increasing penetration of DG in distribution systems has
led to the concept of microgrids. A microgrid can be viewed as
a group of DG sources that is operated either grid-connected
or islanded. Several studies have been conducted to investigate
 Downloaded from http://iranpaper.ir
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but hashttp://www.itrans24.com/landing1.html
the operation of power systems under either grid-connected or
microgrid configurations, or both, especially in the presence
of CSG [17]-[20]. This has been done in the context of control
[21]-[22], DG design [23], mitigation of harmonics [24] and
planning [25]. However, protection coordination of directional
overcurrent relays that takes into account both grid-connected
and islanded operation of microgrids has not been investigated
before.
This paper proposes the use of FCL, in series with the utility,
in conjunction with directional overcurrent relays to solve
the protection coordination problem in distribution systems
equipped with CSG with dual configuration capability. The
proposed method is applicable to meshed distribution systems
with CSG. The FCL size and optimal directional over-current
relay settings are optimally determined taking into account
both grid-connected and islanded mode of operation. The
problem is formulated as a constrained non-linear program-
ming (NLP) problem and is solved using GA. The proposed
approach was tested on a 9-bus radial distribution system and
the IEEE 30-bus looped distribution system.
Section II of this paper describes the formulation of the
optimization problem. Section III gives details of the genetic
algorithm, and the constraint-handling technique used. In
Section IV, details of the test system are presented, as well
as the implementation of GA. Section V presents the results
obtained, and in Section VI, conclusions are drawn. The paper
ends with an Appendix that contains further details on the
system setup and the optimization code parameters.
II. F ORMULATION OF THE P ROTECTION C OORDINATION
P ROBLEM
The operation time of an overcurrent relay (OCR) is an
inverse function of the short-circuit current passing through
it. This function is defined by two parameters, namely the
time-dial settings (T DS) of the relay, a tuning parameter,
and the pickup current (Ip ), which is the minimum value of
current above which the relay starts to operate. The inverse-
time characteristic function most commonly used is given by:
A In this way, the problem becomes one where the settings
t = T DS
( IIsc
p
)B −1
The constants A and B vary according to the type of OCR
used. It is assumed that inverse-definite minimum time (IDMT)
OCRs are being used, and therefore the constants A and B are
taken to be 0.14 and 0.02 respectively [7].
The objective is to minimize the coordination times of
all relays, while maintaining the conditions of protection
coordination. As was explained in Section I, two system con-
figurations (grid-connected and islanded) will be considered
in the problem. The objective function is taken to be the sum,
T , of the coordination times of all relays, which needs to be
minimized as follows:
C X
N X
M K
X X
M inimize T = (tpcij + tbcij
k
) (2)
c=1 i=1 j=1 k=1
where c is the system configuration identifier, with C being
the number of configurations considered, i is the fault location
Copyright (c) 2011 IEEE. Personal use is permitted. For any other purposes, permission must be obtained from the IEEE by emailing pubs-permissions@ieee.org.
not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication.
identifier, with the total number of fault locations investigated
being N , and j is the relay identifier, with the total number
of relays being M . The superscript p refers to primary relays,
while bk refers to backup relay k, with K being the number
of backup relays for each primary.
Also, the coordination condition needs to be satisfied, which
is that a minimum gap in time between the operation of
primary and backup relays, known as the coordination time
interval (CT I), must be maintained. In this paper, CT I is
taken to be 0.2 seconds. As will be discussed in Section
IV, there may be more than one backup relay for each
fault location, so some relays will have to satisfy several
coordination constraints per fault. Therefore the following set
of constraints is defined:
tbcij
k
− tpcij ≥ CT I ∀c, i, {j, k} (3)
where k is the backup relay identifier. Limits on the values
that T DS and Ip can take must also be set. Practically, Ip will
typically take only discrete values defined by the manufacturer,
but this condition is usually relaxed for simplicity. The value
of Ipi−min is chosen such that it is larger than the rated
load current by a significant margin. Therefore, the following
constraints are further defined:
Ipi−min ≤ Ipi ≤ Ipi−max , ∀i (4)
T DSi−min ≤ T DSi ≤ T DSi−max , ∀i (5)
The modified problem will involve the use of an FCL
installed at the grid side. This is the component that will
help reduce the amount of short-circuit current drawn from the
utility. FCLs can be resistive or inductive. In this work, FCLs
of the inductive type are used. The FCLs have fixed ratings
once they are installed into the system. Hence the following
constraint is introduced:
0 ≤ XF CL ≤ XF CLmax (6)
(1) T DSi and Ipi must be found for all relays i, as well as the
value of the fault-current limiting inductance XF CL that would
minimize the total operating time T for all considered system
configurations simultaneously, such that these settings will be
applicable irrespective of the microgrid mode of operation.
It must be noted, however, that because of their potentially
high values, FCLs cannot be present in the system during
normal operation since this can cause large voltage drops. For
this reason it is proposed to use FCL of the active type as
highlighted in [16]. Active FCLs are switched into the system
in the event of a fault and have negligible impedance during
normal operation.
The inclusion of XF CL will affect the system admittance
matrix Ybus , which will in turn affect the magnitudes of the
short-circuit currents. This will impact the optimal values of
T DS and Ip needed to achieve relay coordination. Hence, it
can be seen that the relay time response (and therefore the
optimal coordination time) is a function of XF CL . Because
XF CL will propagate into the Zbus matrix when Ybus is
 Downloaded from http://iranpaper.ir
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but hashttp://www.itrans24.com/landing1.html
not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication.

All lines 500m long;

inverted, it becomes very difficult and complex to formulate 12.47 kV 0.1529+j0.1406 ohm/km
3
2 4 5
equations and constraints in terms of XF CL . For this reason, R1 10 R2 R3 11 R4 R5 12 R6 R7 13 R8

heuristic techniques such as the genetic algorithm are often 500MVA

X/R=6 R18 R19
chosen in such a task due to their ease of implementation. T1
R17 S1 T2 T3

III. G ENETIC A LGORITHM FCL

20MVA
115kV/
2 MVA
0.9 PF
2 MVA
0.9 PF
2 MVA
0.9 PF
2 MVA
0.9 PF
DG1 DG2
12.47kV
A. Theoretical Background 1 6 7 8 9
R9 14 R10 R11 15 R12 R13 16 R14 R15 17 R16
The genetic algorithm (GA) is a popular heuristic optimiza-
tion technique usually applied when the problem is highly R20 R21

non-linear and of a high dimensional order. The idea behind T4 T5

it is based on biological genetics and the concept of ‘survival- PCC

2 MVA 2 MVA 2 MVA 2 MVA
0.9 PF 0.9 PF 0.9 PF 0.9 PF
of-the-fittest’. Successive generations inherit features from DG3 DG4

their parents in a random fashion through the crossover of

chromosomes. Also, certain changes, called mutations, may
occur to the structure of the chromosomes at random. It
is thought that through the process of evolution, successive
generations will breed ’better’ populations, since only the
fittest will survive.
In the frame of optimization, the algorithm is built such
that each chromosome is composed of a vector of possible
values of the variables to be found. Initially, a number of these
chromosomes are initialized at random, and designated as the
initial population. Through successive iterations, the fitness of
these chromosomes are evaluated, and a certain fraction of
the chromosomes having the best fitnesses are retained in the
next generation, with the rest discarded. These are replicated
to make up the population number. Then, crossovers and
mutations are applied on the chromosomes, and the process is
repeated for a given number of iterations. The chromosomes
eventually converge to an optimum. As with all heuristic
techniques, however, GA can be susceptible to being stuck in
local minima. Fortunately, this effect is less so in GA than with
other heuristic techniques such as particle swarm optimization
(PSO) with proper tuning of parameters, especially the number
of mutations, which introduce chromosomes randomly, hence
providing the capability of exiting local minima. Section IV
explains the implementation of GA as applied to the case study
in this paper in further detail.
B. Constraint-Handling Techniques
Heuristic methods have no explicit way of incorporating
constraints in their operation. Therefore, constraints are usually
incorporated into the objective function. Several methods have
been proposed for handling constraints [26]. In this paper,
the method of static penalties is implemented [27]. In this
method, violations in the constraints are penalized by including
them in the objective function. Depending on how strongly the
constraint must be satisfied, the violations are amplified by a
penalty factor with a suitable sign. As an example, suppose
the optimization problem to be solved is:
M inimize Z = f (X, Y )
Subject to X ≤ Y
X, Y ≥ 0
Since this is a minimization problem, violations in the
constraints must be calculated such that they are positive.
Thus, the problem can be transformed into
Copyright (c) 2011 IEEE. Personal use is permitted. For any other purposes, permission must be obtained from the IEEE by emailing pubs-permissions@ieee.org.
Fig. 1. Schematic of 9-bus test system with virtual nodes 10-17 shown
M inimize Z = f (X, Y )
+ λ1 .max(0, X − Y )
(10)
+ λ2 .max(0, −X)
+ λ3 .max(0, −Y )
where λ1 , λ2 and λ3 are penalty factors. The max functions
ensure that the constraints are penalized only if they are
violated.
IV. S YSTEM D ETAILS AND S IMULATION S ETUP
In this section, the two test systems under study are de-
scribed. The first is a section of a benchmark radial system
practically under use in Canada, while the second is the
distribution system portion of the IEEE 30-bus test system.
The latter was chosen to test protection coordination for
looped systems under two configurations simultaneously. A
brief introduction to the application of the GA algorithm to
the protection coordination problem is also presented in this
section.
A. Test Systems Under Study
1) Section of the Canadian Urban Benchmark Distribution
System: The first system tested is based on the Canadian
Urban Benchmark 4-bus feeder distribution system [28] and
is shown in Fig. 1. Two such feeders, rated at 8.7MVA and
0.1529+j0.1406 Ω/km are fed by the utility (short-circuit
MVA = 500MVA and X/R ratio = 6) through a 20MVA,
115kV/12.47kV transformer. Four DGs are connected at buses
4, 5, 6 and 9 on the system. The DG MVA ratings tested
in this paper range between 3MVA and 5MVA. The DGs
are connected through 12.47kV/480V transformers with MVA
ratings equal to those of the DGs. The loads shown in Fig. 1
are the rated loads.
(7) Each relay should be capable of operating for close-end
(8) and far-end faults within its zone. To account for both close-
(9) end and far-end faults (three-phase and single-line-to-ground
faults), in this paper, three-phase faults that occur midway
along the line are considered [29]. Therefore, eight additional
nodes are introduced at midway points in the system. A
short-circuit analysis was then performed at buses 10 to 17.
 Downloaded from http://iranpaper.ir
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but hashttp://www.itrans24.com/landing1.html
not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication.

Define DG MVA ratings and locations

14 R43 13
R29 R28 F30
F29
12 R42
Define:
F28 R27 N = number of iterations,
R32 FCL3
R26
CH = number of chromosomes,
R25
S = number of survivors,
C = number of crossovers, and
M = number of mutations
F27
N1 = number of relays
11 N2 = number of FCLs
10 R40 R24
R22 R23
F26 Initialize chromosomes randomly in L
dimensions (N1 for TDS, N1 for Ip and N2 for
3 R34 R11 FCL)
1 R8 R10 R36 5
F25
R9 R16 R17
F16 F18 R37 6 R39
R21 For N iterations do:
9
R18 R19 R20
F17
R35 F20
F15 4 R38 7 F24
R12 R13 F22 Update chromosomes with the new generation
R14 R15
R6 F19 R1 (first iteration simply copies the existing chromosomes)
R3
R5 R7 F21 F23 R2 R4

2 R33 8
R30 R31 Evaluate the objective function and the errors for unsatisfied
constraints for all chromosomes
R41

FCL1 FCL2
Choose the best S survivors, discard the remaining CH-S chromosomes
and replicate the survivors CH/S times
Fig. 2. IEEE 30-bus system
Perform C crossovers between 2C randomly chosen chromosomes

Due to the non-radial nature of the system, each fault is

Perform mutations on M
associated with up to two primary relays, one from each side.
Each of these primary relays is in turn associated with up
to two backup relays. This is best explained by an example. Make sure that the current best is in the next generation by replacing a
random chromosome with the current best before exiting the loop
Considering a fault at node 14, it can be seen that there are
two primary relays, R9 and R10. For R9, two backup relays
Max. iterations No
can be defined, namely R2 and R17. Similarly, for R10, the reached?
two backup relays are R12 and R20. In this way, a matrix
Yes
of branch short-circuit currents is created that will be used to
define the problem. Each of these currents is mapped to a relay Optimum total coordination time = objective function of current best

in the system, and hence constraints for relays are defined.

2) The IEEE 30-bus System: The distribution system of Fig. 3. Flowchart of GA implementation
the IEEE 30-bus test system [30] is shown in Fig. 2. The
distribution system is fed through three 50MVA 132kV/33kV
transformers connected at buses 2, 8 and 12. DGs are located
at various buses in the system as shown in Fig. 2 [16]. Each
DG is rated at 10 MVA, operates at unity power factor, and 1) Single-Configuration Problem: Each system is first ana-
feeds the system through a 480V/33kV step-up transformer. lyzed under a single configuration representing grid-connected
The system is equipped with 43 directional overcurrent relays operation. The system is powered by all primary distribution
(27 of those are on system lines, while the rest protect the substations, as well as all DGs. The optimization is carried
utility and DGs). out to find the values of T DS and Ip of each of the relays,
As with the 9-bus system, nodes are introduced at midway as well as the FCLs associated with each primary substation,
points on all lines (F15-F30), representing locations at which with the problem set to satisfy a single set of constraints as
fault analysis will be carried out. Once again, each fault described in Section II.
location is associated with two primary relays, and in one
case, three (F25). The number of backup relays for each 2) Dual-Configuration Problem: For this scenario, the opti-
primary relay varies depending on the fault location, as will mization is performed to satisfy two sets of constraints simulta-
be explained in Section V. The number of backup relays per neously. The first set is that involving the single-configuration
primary relay is larger due to the looped nature of the system. constraints, while the second represents constraints under
islanded operation. In this mode of operation, the utility is
absent, and the system is powered only by the DGs, with all
B. Scenarios Under Study
DGs assumed connected. Satisfying both sets of constraints
For each of the presented systems, two configurations are at once represents a more challenging problem than the one
tested. Essentially, a single production-consumption scenario posed by the single-configuration problem, since each relay
is studied, apart from the fact that the absence of the utility is will need to satisfy more constraints, potentially reducing the
mitigated for. size of the feasible region in the solution space.
Copyright (c) 2011 IEEE. Personal use is permitted. For any other purposes, permission must be obtained from the IEEE by emailing pubs-permissions@ieee.org.
 Downloaded from http://iranpaper.ir
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but hashttp://www.itrans24.com/landing1.html
For each system configuration (grid-connected and islanded)
Find Ybus (including FCL in Ybus for the grid-connected
matrix)
Perform short-circuit analysis on midway faults
For each fault location
Find all primary and backup short-circuit
current components for each fault location
Map each current component to the
relevant relay
Objective Function =
Sum of operating times of primary relays
+ Sum of operating times of backup relays
+ Lagrangian Multiplier * errors in unsatisfied
constraints
Objective Function
Fig. 4. Flowchart of method for finding the fitness function
C. GA Implementation
Fig. 3 and Fig. 4 show the implementation of GA used in
this paper. For each relay, two settings need to be determined,
namely T DS and Ip . If each system has N1 relays and
N2 FCLs then the total number of unknowns to be found
is L = 2N1 + N2 . This corresponds to 43 dimensions for
the 9-bus system and 89 for the IEEE 30-bus system. Each
chromosome will therefore be composed of L entries. The
general implementation is explained in Fig. 3. Fig. 4 explains
the procedure for evaluating the fitness function of each
chromosome. Every chromosome will need to satisfy two sets
of constraints - one for the case when the utility is feeding
the network (the grid-connected configuration) and one for
the islanded network (the islanded configuration). Only the
earlier of those will involve FCL. In the single-configuration
and the grid-connected part of the dual-configuration, every
chromosome will use a different XF CL . Therefore a new
Ybus must be calculated for every chromosome. Zbus is then
found, and short-circuit analysis is performed on midway fault
(virtual nodes 10-17 in the 9-bus system and F15-F30 in the
IEEE 30-bus system). For each fault location, all primary and
backup short-circuit current components are calculated. Each
of these currents is then mapped to its corresponding relays,
and the objective function is updated with the operation times
of primary and backup relays using the T DS, Ip and Isc , in
addition to the penalty factor-effected constraint values.
V. R ESULTS AND A NALYSIS
In this section, the results of the optimization problem
formulated above are reported. A discussion of the results is
Copyright (c) 2011 IEEE. Personal use is permitted. For any other purposes, permission must be obtained from the IEEE by emailing pubs-permissions@ieee.org.
not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication.
also included.
A. Results for 9-bus System
1) Single-Configuration Results: Table I shows the val-
ues of T DS, Ip and XF CL obtained from the optimization
problem in which only the grid-connected constraints are
considered, as well as the value of the objective function T
obtained.
Table II gives the optimal coordination times and XF CL for
the grid-connected-only problem for various DG capacities in
the first major column. It is seen that the values of XF CL are
very small. This shows that the single-configuration system
can be coordinated easily without the need for a fault-current
limiter. This is also consistent with the findings of past
literature in this field, where coordination was possible to
achieve without the need for supplementary equipment for a
single configuration. It is also noted that there is a slight but
consistent trend of decreasing operation time with increasing
DG capacity. The reason for the decrease is that higher DG
MVAs lead to higher short-circuit currents, and therefore
smaller relay operating times according to the inverse-time
characteristics of OCRs. The differences are, however, not
large because the majority of the short-circuit current is
contributed by the utility, and hence small increases due to the
DG will not change the operation times much, since at large
values of Isc the inverse-time characteristics are approximately
flat.
2) Dual-Configuration Results: Table III shows the values
of T DS, Ip and XF CL obtained from the problem taking into
account two system configurations simultaneously. The Table
also shows the value of the objective function T which is the
sum of the relay operation times for the grid-connected and
the microgrid systems.
The results for the problem involving both configurations
simultaneously are shown in the second major column of Table
II. Several things are important to note here. Firstly, it is seen
that contrary to those obtained with the single-configuration
problem, the values of XF CL when both sets of constraints
are included become significant. This is due to the fact that in
order to achieve coordination, the value of XF CL needs to be
high enough so as to limit the contribution to the short-circuit
current from the utility when it is present. This effectively
makes the system a microgrid under fault conditions, whether
the utility is present or not. The fact that the operation times
of the grid-connected system and the microgrid are close (for
example, 43.5 seconds for the grid-connected configuration
and 43.3 seconds for the microgrid configuration for 5MVA
DGs) shows that the two systems are electrically very close,
meaning that the utility contributes very little to the short-
circuit current. Another observation that can be made from
Table II is that there does not seem to be a clear trend in
the value of XF CL obtained, apart from the fact that it is
significant in all cases.
It can also be observed that the total operation time once
again decreases with increasing capacity, which is expected
since large capacities lead to large short-circuit currents, which
in turn lead to faster operation times according to the inverse-
time characteristics of OCRs.
 Downloaded from http://iranpaper.ir
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but hashttp://www.itrans24.com/landing1.html
not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication.

TABLE I TABLE IV
O PTIMAL T DS, Ip AND XF CL FOR THE S INGLE -C ONFIGURATION 9-B US O PTIMAL T DS, Ip AND XF CL FOR THE S INGLE -C ONFIGURATION
P ROBLEM WITH A DG C APACITY = 5MVA 30-B US P ROBLEM WITH A DG C APACITY = 10MVA

Relay T DS(s) Ip (pu) Relay T DS(s) Ip (pu) Relay T DS(s) Ip (pu) Relay T DS(s) Ip (pu)
1 0.2763 0.1331 12 0.1035 0.1597 1 0.1069 0.6411 23 0.2548 0.1017
2 0.1713 0.1579 13 0.1764 0.0646 2 0.1397 0.3694 24 0.1364 0.0882
3 0.1803 0.1712 14 0.1194 0.1644 3 0.1234 0.5782 25 0.1397 0.1979
4 0.1001 0.3244 15 0.1001 0.0300 4 0.1497 0.0493 26 0.1255 0.0637
5 0.1132 0.1753 16 0.2418 0.0989 5 0.1000 0.0385 27 0.1002 0.0314
6 0.1001 0.3635 17 0.1838 0.3257 6 0.1229 0.3644 28 0.1001 0.0191
7 0.1001 0.0303 18 0.2324 0.1020 7 0.1065 0.5730 29 0.1730 0.0625
8 0.2395 0.0970 19 0.1263 0.1902 8 0.1000 0.0107 30 0.1435 0.2501
9 0.2478 0.1703 20 0.1562 0.1178 9 0.2775 0.1009 31 0.1365 0.2680
10 0.1000 0.2849 21 0.1789 0.1526 10 0.1006 0.5872 32 0.1385 0.2546
11 0.1794 0.2032 11 0.1002 0.1848 33 0.1127 0.3328
XF CL = 0.0186pu T = 34.29s 12 0.1435 0.2623 34 0.1932 0.1073
13 0.3208 0.0899 35 0.1069 0.2505
TABLE II 14 0.1075 0.4774 36 0.1395 0.1752
S UMMARY OF O PTIMAL C OORDINATION T IMES FOR S INGLE - AND 15 0.3407 0.0497 37 0.1830 0.1011
D UAL -C ONFIGURATION 9-B US P ROBLEMS FOR D IFFERENT DG
16 0.1570 0.2643 38 0.1081 0.2555
C APACITIES
17 0.2192 0.1617 39 0.1488 0.1668
Single-Configuration Dual-Configuration 18 0.1149 0.4294 40 0.2129 0.0839
DG
Capacity T XF CL T Tg Tµg XF CL 19 0.2094 0.1165 41 0.1698 0.1934
20 0.1694 0.1853 42 0.1052 0.3524
3 35.04s 0.0046pu 112.20 58.25s 53.95s 2.774pu
21 0.2624 0.1020 43 0.1003 0.2201
4 34.62s 0.0437pu 96.29s 47.41s 48.89s 1.486pu
22 0.1380 0.2359
5 34.29s 0.0186pu 86.78 43.46s 43.31s 1.540pu
XF CL1 = 1.3288pu XF CL2 = 1.5120pu
TABLE III XF CL3 = 1.0026pu T = 89.6837s
O PTIMAL T DS, Ip AND XF CL FOR THE D UAL -C ONFIGURATION 9-B US
P ROBLEM WITH A DG C APACITY = 5MVA

Relay T DS(s) Ip (pu) Relay T DS(s) Ip (pu) more complexity to the problem. A load-flow was performed
1 0.2321 0.1240 12 0.1435 0.1533 and the line currents obtained were used to set the values of
2 0.2414 0.1723 13 0.1677 0.0623 Ipmin to prevent the relays from picking up on load currents.
3 0.1473 0.1649 14 0.1489 0.1655 1) Single-Configuration Results: Table IV shows the values
4 0.1557 0.3065 15 0.1010 0.0305 of T DS, Ip and XF CL obtained from solving the single-
5 0.1025 0.1451 16 0.1255 0.1982 configuration problem with the IEEE 30-bus system, as well
6 0.2587 0.2192 17 0.1000 0.2405 as the optimum total coordination time for those values. This
7 0.1005 0.0308 18 0.2146 0.1474 system is investigated for a single and common DG capacity
8 0.1738 0.1696 19 0.1731 0.1826 value for brevity, having established the effect of the DG
9 0.1721 0.2099 20 0.2197 0.1087 capacity in the first test system. An optimal value of 89.7
10 0.2073 0.1884 21 0.1246 0.2112 seconds was obtained for the total coordination times of the
11 0.2217 0.0921 system due to all faults. The values of XF CL obtained for this
XF CL = 1.5403pu T = 86.78s
problem are relatively low compared to the dual-configuration
problem as will be seen later. They are, however, higher than
those obtained for the corresponding problem on the 9-bus
system, which can be attributed to the looped nature of the
In order to further validate the proposed method, an attempt system.
was made to solve the dual-configuration problem without
2) Dual-Configuration Results: Table V shows the values
using FCLs. A wide range of T DS and Ip bounds was tested,
of T DS, Ip and XF CL obtained from solving the dual-
but it was found that it was not possible to find a feasible
configuration problem with the IEEE 30-bus system, as well
solution satisfying all the constraints of the formulation in a
as the optimum total coordination time for those values. An
absence of FCLs.
optimal value of 187.6 seconds was obtained for the total
coordination times of the system due to all faults. Under
B. Results for the IEEE 30-bus System this dual-constrained problem, it is seen that the values of
In this part, the optimization task is attempted on a more XF CL increase significantly, with the FCL associated with
difficult test case, where power flow is not only potentially the distribution substation at bus 8 exceeding 7pu. By using
bidirectional on any given line, but also highly looped, adding very few FCLs, each associated with a distribution substation,
Copyright (c) 2011 IEEE. Personal use is permitted. For any other purposes, permission must be obtained from the IEEE by emailing pubs-permissions@ieee.org.
 Downloaded from http://iranpaper.ir
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but hashttp://www.itrans24.com/landing1.html
not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication.

TABLE V TABLE VI
O PTIMAL T DS, Ip AND XF CL FOR THE D UAL -C ONFIGURATION 30-B US R ELAY O PERATION T IMES OF R ELEVANT R ELAYS FOR M IDWAY FAULTS
P ROBLEM WITH A DG C APACITY = 10MVA IN A G RID -C ONNECTED C ONFIGURATION ON THE 9-B US S YSTEM FOR
DG C APACITY = 5MVA FROM THE D UAL -C ONFIGURATION P ROBLEM
Relay T DS(s) Ip (pu) Relay T DS(s) Ip (pu)
Fault Operation times of relays in sec. (p = primary, b = backup)
1 0.1439 0.4278 23 0.1924 0.1778
location p b1 b2 p b1 b2
2 0.1440 0.3352 24 0.1199 0.1335
3 0.1204 0.5310 25 0.1016 0.2549 R1 R10 R17 R2 R4
10
4 0.1405 0.0431 26 0.1219 0.0680 0.7397 1.1886 1.1725 1.2927 1.5151
5 0.1001 0.0391 27 0.1001 0.0311 R3 R1 R4 R6
11
0.5581 0.7581 1.4519 1.6579
6 0.1220 0.3647 28 0.1013 0.0186
R5 R3 R6 R8 R18
7 0.1258 0.3579 29 0.1174 0.1285 12
0.3724 0.5744 1.6112 1.8125 1.8114
8 0.1005 0.0100 30 0.1065 0.2605
R7 R5 R18 R8 R19
9 0.1001 0.5150 31 0.1046 0.2514 13
0.1835 0.3843 1.8498 1.7513 1.9541
10 0.1575 0.3471 32 0.1165 0.2508
R9 R2 R17 R10 R12 R20
11 0.1019 0.1663 33 0.1956 0.1114 14
0.7427 1.3357 1.1723 1.1489 1.3521 1.3491
12 0.1452 0.2954 34 0.1486 0.1420
R11 R9 R20 R12 R14
13 0.1007 0.4788 35 0.1012 0.2285 15
0.5700 0.7714 1.3707 1.3106 1.5133
14 0.1131 0.4604 36 0.1573 0.1579
R13 R11 R14 R16
15 0.1708 0.2490 37 0.1724 0.1248 16
0.3827 0.5848 1.4796 1.6839
16 0.1492 0.2106 38 0.1176 0.2292
R15 R13 R16 R21
17 0.1820 0.2486 39 0.1471 0.1737 17
0.1880 0.3913 1.6350 1.8425
18 0.1561 0.2444 40 0.1433 0.1538
19 0.2980 0.0509 41 0.1056 0.2497
140
20 0.1098 0.3402 42 0.1957 0.1096
GA
21 0.2705 0.0864 43 0.1097 0.2041 PSO

22 0.1014 0.2599 130

XF CL1 = 5.8477pu XF CL2 = 7.1062pu

XF CL3 = 1.6044pu T = 187.5686s 120
Objective function

110

it is possible to achieve optimal relay settings that satisfy the

coordination constraints, and that apply to two configurations 100

simultaneously.
As with the 9-bus system, the dual-configuration problem
was attempted on the IEEE 30-bus system with no FCLs. The
problem proved to be even more difficult, yielding large values
of constraint violation errors.
It is worth mentioning at this point that the results presented
above for both the 9-bus and the 30-bus systems are specific
to the two configurations described. In other words, the relay
settings are fixed, once optimized, and are not meant to adapt
to DGs switching in and out of the system or to subsections of
the above systems. Such adaptive settings would require either
some kind of communication infrastructure in the system, or
reliance on equipment more intricate than regular overcurrent
relays.
C. Breakdown of Relay Operation Times
Tables VI and VII show a breakdown of the relay op-
eration times due to midway faults on all lines on the 9-
bus system and the IEEE 30-bus system respectively. These
tables were obtained from the grid-connected portion of the
dual-configuration problem for each system. Similar tables
can be obtained for the single-configuration problem and the
microgrid portion of the dual-configuration problem. These
tables will be very similar to those presented, and will not be
included here for brevity.
Copyright (c) 2011 IEEE. Personal use is permitted. For any other purposes, permission must be obtained from the IEEE by emailing pubs-permissions@ieee.org.
90
80
0 500 1000 1500
Iteration number
Fig. 5. Convergence of GA and PSO
The operation times were obtained by performing a short-
circuit analysis on the systems for each fault location. Branch
currents were then obtained, and the operation times were
found by substituting the optimal solution values of T DS, Ip
and XF CL to calculate the operation time of each relay. As
was discussed earlier, it is seen from the tables that the primary
relays on the networks have a varying number of backup relays
each (one or two on the 9-bus system, and up to six on the
IEEE 30-bus system). It is observed that all primary-backup
relays are correctly coordinated within the 200ms set for CT I.
D. Comparison with particle swarm optimization (PSO)
The analysis in this paper was done using both GA and PSO
in parallel. It was found that GA consistently outperformed
PSO under all test systems and configurations. Fig. 5 shows the
convergence of the GA and PSO algorithms to their respective
 Downloaded from http://iranpaper.ir
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but hashttp://www.itrans24.com/landing1.html
not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication.

TABLE VII
R ELAY O PERATION T IMES OF R ELEVANT R ELAYS FOR M IDWAY FAULTS IN A G RID -C ONNECTED C ONFIGURATION ON THE IEEE 30-B US S YSTEM FOR
DG C APACITY = 10MVA FROM THE D UAL -C ONFIGURATION P ROBLEM

Fault Operation times of relays in sec. (p = primary, b = backup) Operation times of relays in sec. (p = primary, b = backup)
location p b1 b2 b3 b4 b5 b6 p b1 b2 b3 b4 b5 b6
R5 R9 R12 R30 R33
F 15
0.1595 0.8208 0.8891 1.0310 0.8602
R8 R6 R16 R22 R34
F 16
0.1178 0.8455 0.7692 0.8287 0.9237
R6 R12 R30 R33 R9 R16 R22 R34
F 17
0.5126 0.7375 0.7130 0.7132 0.4601 0.6606 0.6617 0.7370
R10 R6 R22 R34 R16 R18 R36
F 18
0.5867 0.7894 0.7877 0.8079 0.4915 0.6961 0.8744
R7 R9 R30 R33 R12 R14 R35
F 19
0.5038 0.7240 0.7901 0.7540 0.5405 0.7405 0.8016
R17 R10 R36 R18 R2 R37
F 20
0.6133 0.8136 0.8228 0.5200 0.7202 0.7635
R13 R7 R35 R14 R1 R38
F 21
0.5492 0.7511 0.7720 0.4744 0.6755 0.9933
R2 R15 R20 R21 R23 R31 R41 R19 R17 R37
F 22
0.5593 1.1896 1.6444 2.3301 1.3155 1.2049 1.2029 0.5578 0.7601 0.7655
R1 R19 R20 R21 R23 R31 R41 R15 R13 R38
F 23
0.5016 0.7147 0.7348 1.1534 0.7784 0.7033 0.7053 0.5967 0.7984 0.8073
R3 R15 R19 R21 R23 R31 R41 R20 R4 R23 R39
F 24
0.4842 0.6918 0.7001 0.6842 0.6844 0.6878 0.6899 0.4397 1.9774 0.6844 0.7891
R4 R15 R19 R20 R31 R41 R21 R3 R39
0.2911 0.7380 0.7312 0.4934 0.7397 0.7416 0.5648 0.7657 0.7754
F 25
R23 R11 R25 R40
0.6278 0.8491 0.8283 0.8663
R11 R6 R16 R34 R22 R4 R21 R25 R40
F 26
0.2889 1.0608 0.9322 0.9760 0.3942 0.6563 1.0585 1.1727 1.1093
R24 R4 R11 R21 R40 R25 R29 R32 R42
F 27
0.3368 0.5386 0.7303 1.0217 1.5143 0.4488 0.8118 0.6500 0.6491
R26 R24 R32 R42 R29 R43
F 28
0.2818 0.5275 0.8165 0.7403 0.5480 0.7488
R27 R24 R29 R32 R42
F 29
0.1688 0.5031 0.9856 0.7584 0.7104
R28 R26 R43
F 30
0.1662 0.3705 0.8662

solutions for the two-configuration problem with 5MVA DGs
using the 9-bus system. It can be observed that GA converges
to a better solution in a faster time. This trend was consistently
observed with all problems attempted. A possible explanation
for this is that the high dimensionality of the problem makes
PSO susceptible to being stuck in a local minimum at a very
early stage of the run. This is due to the fact that in high
dimensions, distances become insignificant compared to the
volume of the solution space, and it becomes increasingly
difficult for the PSO velocity components to converge to the
best answer. This also explains the slow convergence rate. GA,
on the other hand, performs crossovers in all dimensions at
once based on the fitness function.
VI. C ONCLUSION
The concept of the microgrid is quickly taking root not
only in the research community, but also on the agendas of
Copyright (c) 2011 IEEE. Personal use is permitted. For any other purposes, permission must be obtained from the IEEE by emailing pubs-permissions@ieee.org.
utilities, power system component manufacturers and policy
makers. Microgrids, by definition, should be operational both
grid-connected and islanded. Consequently, it is essential to
design microgrids such that they perform satisfactorily in
both modes of operation. This paper tackles this issue from
the point of view of protection. In this paper a microgrid
protection scheme that is based on optimally sizing FCLs and
optimally setting directional overcurrent relays is proposed,
taking into account the microgrid grid connected and islanded
mode operation simultaneously. Fault current limiters of the
inductive type are located at the main interconnection point
of the microgrid to the main grid. Inserting the FCL as an
optimization parameter in the protection coordination problem
affects the system admittance matrix which allows for changes
in the fault current levels. Thus, the results show that it is
possible to have one optimal relay setting that satisfies both
micro-grid modes of operation with the proposed scheme. In
 Downloaded from http://iranpaper.ir
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but hashttp://www.itrans24.com/landing1.html
not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication.

addition, without the FCL, it was found that it is difficult [15] A. Girgis and S. Brahma, “Effect of distributed generation on protective
to set the relays optimally to satisfy both micro-grid modes device coordination in distribution system,” in Power Engineering, 2001.
LESCOPE ’01. 2001 Large Engineering Systems Conference on, 2001.
of operation. The proposed approach was tested on a typical [16] W. El-Khattam and T. Sidhu, “Restoration of directional overcurrent re-
radial distribution system and on the IEEE 30-bus looped lay coordination in distributed generation systems utilizing fault current
power distribution system equipped with CSG and the results limiter,” Power Delivery, IEEE Transactions on, vol. 23, no. 2, pp. 576
–585, 2008.
for both systems highlight the effectiveness of the proposed [17] H. Wan, K. Li, and K. Wong, “An adaptive multiagent approach to
method. A key issue that requires further investigation in protection relay coordination with distributed generators in industrial
the future is whether the coordination times proposed in this power distribution system,” Industry Applications, IEEE Transactions
on, vol. 46, no. 5, pp. 2118 –2124, sept.-oct. 2010.
paper allow sufficient time for CSG to ride through faults [18] S. Chaitusaney and A. Yokoyama, “Prevention of reliability degradation
and remain stable. The possibility of generator control designs from recloser-fuse miscoordination due to distributed generation,” Power
that allow for more flexible protection coordination schemes Delivery, IEEE Transactions on, vol. 23, no. 4, pp. 2545 –2554, oct.
2008.
is an intriguing one. Also, since the method proposed in this [19] E. Sortomme, S. Venkata, and J. Mitra, “Microgrid protection using
paper tackles meshed distribution systems with synchronous communication-assisted digital relays,” Power Delivery, IEEE Transac-
DG, it may not be effective in a system that is dominated tions on, vol. 25, no. 4, pp. 2789 –2796, oct. 2010.
[20] S. Brahma and A. Girgis, “Development of adaptive protection scheme
by converter-based DG and energy storage devices due to the for distribution systems with high penetration of distributed generation,”
low fault current contribution of the latter. Therefore, further Power Delivery, IEEE Transactions on, vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 56 – 63, jan.
work would be needed to develop a coordination method that 2004.
[21] I. Balaguer, Q. Lei, S. Yang, U. Supatti, and F. Z. Peng, “Control for
is suitable for such a system. grid-connected and intentional islanding operations of distributed power
generation,” Industrial Electronics, IEEE Transactions on, vol. 58, no. 1,
R EFERENCES pp. 147 –157, 2011.
[22] J. Guerrero, J. Vasquez, J. Matas, L. de Vicuna, and M. Castilla,
[1] A. Chowdhury and D. Koval, Power Distribution System Reliability:
“Hierarchical control of droop-controlled AC and DC microgrids-a
Practical Methods and Applications. Wiley-IEEE, Mar. 2009.
general approach toward standardization,” Industrial Electronics, IEEE
[2] B. Hussain, S. Sharkh, and S. Hussain, “Impact studies of distributed
Transactions on, vol. 58, no. 1, pp. 158 –172, 2011.
generation on power quality and protection setup of an existing distribu-
[23] Y. Hsieh, J. Chen, T. Liang, and L. Yang, “Novel high step-up DC-
tion network,” in Power Electronics Electrical Drives Automation and
DC converter for distributed generation system,” Industrial Electronics,
Motion (SPEEDAM), 2010 International Symposium on, 2010, pp. 1243
IEEE Transactions on, 2011.
–1246.
[24] Y.-R. Mohamed, “Mitigation of dynamic, unbalanced, and harmonic
[3] N. Nimpitiwan, G. T. Heydt, R. Ayyanar, and S. Suryanarayanan,
voltage disturbances using grid-connected inverters with lcl filter,”
“Fault current contribution from synchronous machine and inverter based
Industrial Electronics, IEEE Transactions on, vol. 58, no. 9, pp. 3914
distributed generators,” Power Delivery, IEEE Transactions on, vol. 22,
–3924, sept. 2011.
no. 1, pp. 634 –641, jan. 2007.
[25] D. Hung, N. Mithulananthan, and R. Bansal, “Multiple distributed gen-
[4] H. Sharifian, H. Askarian Abyaneh, S. Salman, R. Mohammadi, and
erators placement in primary distribution networks for loss reduction,”
F. Razavi, “Determination of the minimum break point set using expert
Industrial Electronics, IEEE Transactions on, vol. PP, no. 99, p. 1, 2011.
system and genetic algorithm,” Power Delivery, IEEE Transactions on,
[26] Z. Michalewicz and M. Schoenauer, “Evolutionary algorithms
vol. 25, no. 3, pp. 1284 –1295, 2010.
for constrained parameter optimization problems,” Evol. Com-
[5] Q. Yue, F. Lu, W. Yu, and J. Wang, “A novel algorithm to determine
put., vol. 4, pp. 1–32, March 1996. [Online]. Available:
minimum break point set for optimum cooperation of directional protec-
http://dx.doi.org.proxy1.athensams.net/10.1162/evco.1996.4.1.1
tion relays in multiloop networks,” Power Delivery, IEEE Transactions
[27] Z. Cai and Y. Wang, “A multiobjective optimization-based evolutionary
on, vol. 21, no. 3, pp. 1114 –1119, 2006.
algorithm for constrained optimization,” Evolutionary Computation,
[6] P. Bedekar, S. Bhide, and V. Kale, “Optimum coordination of overcurrent
IEEE Transactions on, vol. 10, no. 6, pp. 658 –675, 2006.
relays in distribution system using dual simplex method,” in Emerging
[28] E. Dick and A. Narang, “Canadian urban benchmark distribution
Trends in Engineering and Technology (ICETET), 2009 2nd Interna-
systems,” CANMET Energy Technology Centre Varennes, Natural
tional Conference on, Dec. 2009, pp. 555 –559.
Resources Canada, Tech. Rep. CETCVarennes 2005-121 (TR), July
[7] M. Mansour, S. Mekhamer, and N.-S. El-Kharbawe, “A modified particle
2005.
swarm optimizer for the coordination of directional overcurrent relays,”
[29] A. Urdaneta, R. Nadira, and L. Perez Jimenez, “Optimal coordination of
Power Delivery, IEEE Transactions on, vol. 22, no. 3, pp. 1400 –1410,
directional overcurrent relays in interconnected power systems,” Power
2007.
Delivery, IEEE Transactions on, vol. 3, no. 3, pp. 903 –911, Jul. 1988.
[8] P. Bedekar, S. Bhide, and V. Kale, “Optimum coordination of overcurrent
[30] Power Systems Test Case Archive, Univ. Washing-
relays in distribution system using genetic algorithm,” in Power Systems,
ton., Seattle, WA, March 2006. [Online]. Available:
2009. ICPS ’09. International Conference on, 2009, pp. 1 –6.
http://www.ee.washington.edu/research/pstca/
[9] P. P. Bedekar and S. R. Bhide, “Optimum coordination of directional
overcurrent relays using the hybrid GA-NLP approach,” Power Delivery,
IEEE Transactions on, vol. 26, no. 1, pp. 109 –119, 2011.
[10] C. So and K. Li, “Time coordination method for power system protection
by evolutionary algorithm,” Industry Applications, IEEE Transactions
on, vol. 36, no. 5, pp. 1235 –1240, 2000.
[11] M. Barzegari, S. Bathaee, and M. Alizadeh, “Optimal coordination of
directional overcurrent relays using harmony search algorithm,” in En-
vironment and Electrical Engineering (EEEIC), 2010 9th International
Conference on, May 2010, pp. 321 –324.
[12] A. Noghabi, J. Sadeh, and H. Mashhadi, “Considering different network
topologies in optimal overcurrent relay coordination using a hybrid GA,”
Power Delivery, IEEE Transactions on, vol. 24, no. 4, pp. 1857 –1863,
2009.
[13] A. Noghabi, H. Mashhadi, and J. Sadeh, “Optimal coordination of
directional overcurrent relays considering different network topologies
using interval linear programming,” Power Delivery, IEEE Transactions Waleed K. A. Najy received the B.Sc. degree in Electrical Engineering from
on, vol. 25, no. 3, pp. 1348 –1354, 2010. the University of Sharjah, United Arab Emirates, in 2009. He is currently
[14] P. Barker and R. De Mello, “Determining the impact of distributed pursuing his M.Sc. degree in Engineering Systems and Management from the
generation on power systems. i. radial distribution systems,” in Power Masdar Institute of Science and Technology, United Arab Emirates. His main
Engineering Society Summer Meeting, 2000. IEEE, 2000. research interests are distributed generation and applied signal processing.
Copyright (c) 2011 IEEE. Personal use is permitted. For any other purposes, permission must be obtained from the IEEE by emailing pubs-permissions@ieee.org.
 Downloaded from http://iranpaper.ir
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but hashttp://www.itrans24.com/landing1.html
not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication.

10

H. H. Zeineldin (M’06) received the B.Sc. and M.Sc. degrees in Electrical
Engineering from Cairo University, Egypt, in 1999 and 2002, respectively.
In 2006, he received his Ph.D. in Electrical and Computer Engineering from
University of Waterloo, Ontario, Canada. Dr. Zeineldin worked for Smith and
Andersen Electrical Engineering Inc. where he was involved with projects
involving distribution system design, protection and distributed generation.
He then worked as a Visiting Professor at the Massachusetts Institute of
Technology (MIT), Cambridge. Currently, he is an Associate Professor with
the Masdar Institute of Science and Technology in Abu Dhabi, UAE. His
current interests include power system protection, distributed generation, and
deregulation.
Wei Lee Woon (M’08) received a B.Eng. in Electronic Engineering with
first class honours from UMIST, UK (now merged with the University of
Manchester) in 1997, and his PhD in 2002 from the Neural Computing
Research Group at Aston University, Birmingham, UK. Upon graduation
he joined the Malaysia University of Science and Technology (MUST) as
an Assistant Professor, where he served until 2007. He subsequently joined
Masdar Institute of Science and Technology (Abu Dhabi, UAE). Dr. Woon
has also worked as a Visiting Researcher at the Massachusetts Institute of
Technology and at the RIKEN Brain Science Institute in Tokyo. His research
interests include technology mining, analysis of distributed generation systems
and EEG signal analysis.

Copyright (c) 2011 IEEE. Personal use is permitted. For any other purposes, permission must be obtained from the IEEE by emailing pubs-permissions@ieee.org.