CHAPTER 3

REVIEW OF POWER TRANSFORMER PROTECTION

SCHEMES

3.1. Introduction
Power Transformer is the nerve centre of any power distribution system. The
capacity of power transformers is generally decided from the data of the load survey.
The power transformers are the main equipment of the substation, while other
equipments are to associate with the functional aspects of the transformers. Any fault
on the transformer will operate Buchholz relay and differential relay. On action of
these relays, the transformer should not be charged. It should be isolated and all the
tests are to be conducted. The unit should be put into service only if tests confirm the
healthiness.
Generally the following are the possible faults in power transformers:
• Faults within the transformer tank
• Over heating
• Faults external to the transformer zone(through fault)
• Incipient faults
• Internal faults (To overcome these kind of faults Differential protection
schemes are provided )
• Over excitation (To overcome this kind of fault over fluxing relay is
provided)
• Turn to turn fault ,Arcs within the Oil(To overcome these kind of faults
sudden pressure relay schemes are provided )
Generally, for the purpose of discussion, transformer faults can be divided
into two main categories. They are:
(i) Through faults, i.e., overloads and external short circuits.
(ii) Internal faults, i.e., Faults in the transformer windings and connections.
Internal faults can be sub divided into incipient faults and heavy faults.

Incipient faults
The incipient faults are not serious in nature. But it should be deducted and
cleared as soon as possible before it develops into a major fault. These incipient faults
can be detected by periodical dissolved gas analysis test and then with the help of
portable partial discharge analyzer.
The major causes for incipient faults are:
• Poor electrical connection of conductors or core fault which causes limited
arcing under the oil.
• Coolant failure (clogged oil flow) which will cause a rise in temperature
even when the load is below the rated capacity.
In the recent trend, power transformer incipient faults are detected by using
Dissolved Gas analysis (DGA) method. So, in this research work investigations
are made on this method.

Heavy faults
This can be sub divided as:
• Multi phase and phase to earth faults within the transformer and outside
the transformer at HV, LV and tertiary terminals
• Short circuit between turns in HV and LV winding.
Heavy electrical faults will be detected by unit protection like Differential relays
and so investigations are made in transformer differential schemes.
Generally the following types of protection schemes are used for large power
transformers:
• High speed differential protection
• Restricted earth fault protection.
• Back up over current protection
• Buchholz protection
• Temperature protection
Depending upon the location, importance and rating of the transformers a
selection among the above protection schemes are made. Out of these, conventionally
differential protection and over current protection are used in most of the cases.
Therefore in this research work focus is made on incipient fault protection,
overcurrent protection and differential protection.

3.2. Incipient Fault Protection

Abnormal conditions can occur within a transformer due to several reasons.
Some of the possibilities are lightning, switching transients, mechanical flaws, and

20
chemical decomposition of oil or insulation. Some of them are incipient faults. The
incipient faults may be due to one or more of the causes shown in table 3.1. Incipient
faults of power transformers can be classified as Overheating of oil (OHO),
Overheating of cellulose (CD), Electrical arcing (HEDA) and Electrical corona
(LED).

Table 3.1. Correlation between power transformer incipient faults and causes

Faults
Causes Arcing Corona Overheating Overheating
of Cellulose of Oil
Winding turn-turn short circuit X - X -
Winding open circuit X - X -
Operation of build -in LTC X - - -
Winding Distortion - X X -
Loose connection to bushing
terminals, tap leads, terminal X X X -
boards
Free water or excessive moisture X
X - -
in oil
Floating metal particles X X - -
Loose connection to corona shields - X - -
Loose collars, spacers, core ground
straps, core hold down angle - X - -
(Braces)
Through fault - - X
Overloading - - X X
Damaged yoke bolt insulation - - - X
Rust or other damage on core - - - X

The life and service quality of the transformer gets increased with the
preventive and corrective maintenance, carried out at the appropriate time. The solid
insulation materials, used in the manufacture of transformer, are basically from
cellulose material and are hygroscopic in nature. The ageing or deterioration of the
solid or liquid insulation system is very much dependent on the operating temperature
and the level of oxygen, moisture and dust particles present in the air, breathed in by
the transformer during its service-life. Hence, it is imperative that the maintenance
schedule for the upkeep of the transformer needs to be focused on preservation of its
insulation system.
Generally all types of faults in a transformer result on the localized heating
and breakdown of the oil. Some degree of arcing will always take place in a winding
fault and the resulting decomposition of the oil will release gases such as hydrogen,

21
carbon monoxide and light hydro carbons. When the fault is of a very minor type such
as a hot joint, gas is released slowly. But a major fault involving severe arcing may
cause rapid release of large volume of oil as well as vapour. Hence to protect from
this kind of faults Buchholz relay in conjunction with any pressure relief device are
conventionally used. In the recent past focus is made on preventive maintenance
action. As a result of various attempts to develop a technique that will detect the
transformer fault in its very incipient stage, Dissolved Gas Analysis (DGA) method
[37] was developed. The DGA test on oil of transformer in service, periodically,
reveals the healthiness of transformer and prediction of development of fault at the
initial stages. So, at present, a most widely used method is incipient fault protection
based on Dissolved Gas Analysis (DGA).

Dissolved Gas Analysis (DGA) methods

Dissolved Gas Analysis is a powerful diagnostic technique for detecting the
incipient faults, in oil-filtered equipments, particularly Power Transformers. An oil
filled transformer in operation is subjected to various stresses like thermal and
electrical, resulting in liberation of gases from the hydrocarbon mineral oil. The
components of solid-insulation also take part in the formation of gases, which are
dissolved in the oil. An assessment of these gases, both qualitatively and
quantitatively, would help in diagnosing the internal faults in the transformers. In this
method, fault diagnosis is done according to the concentration of the dissolved gases
and gas ratios. In this research work, certain AI techniques such as ANN and
ANNEPS are used to develop relaying algorithms for power transformer incipient
fault protection using DGA method.

3.3. Overcurrent Fault Protection

As the fault impedance is less than load impedance, the fault current is more
than load current. If a short circuit occurs the circuit impedance is reduced to a low
value and therefore large current accompanies a fault. Overcurrent relays sense such
fault current and also over-load currents. Overcurrent protection is that protection in
which the relay picks when magnitude of current exceeds the pickup level. The basic
element in overcurrent protection is an overcurrent relay. Overcurrent protection
includes the protection from overloads. Overloading of equipment means that it takes
more current than the rated current. Since short circuit currents are generally several

22
times (5 to 20 times) of full load current this type of protection also provides short-
circuit protection. Hence Overcurrent protection is widely used for motor protection,
transformer protection, line protection and protection of utility equipment.
Since most of 11kV, 22kV, 33kV, 66kV and 110kV feeders are radial,
normally overcurrent relays without directional feature are employed. For 110kV tie
feeders directional overcurrent relays are employed for transformer short circuit
protection. Transformers are provided with overcurrent protection against faults when
the cost of differential relays cannot be justified. However, overcurrent relays are
provided in addition to differential relays to take care of through faults and as back-up
to differential protection. While selecting the overcurrent protection of transformers,
the following aspects needs consideration:
• Magnetizing Inrush current
• Primary full load current
• CT requirements
These overcurrent devices are installed at strategic places in electric systems
to sense conditions that are considered to be abnormal. The sensitivity of an
overcurrent device is related to the ability to sense a fault when it really exists. The
selectivity of an overcurrent device is related to the ability of the system to select the
section of the power system that has a problem, and remove service from only that
section .This situation demands the proper and optimal coordination of overcurrent
relays in a power system.
Proper settings of protective relays are essential for the reliable operation of
electrical power systems, during both fault and normal system operating conditions.
The ideal relay operating characteristics can also be influenced by parasitic
phenomena, such as CT saturation.
Protection coordination requires serial steps. One suggested approach is to
first determine the fault conditions critical to evaluating coordination: the fault types,
the fault locations, and the system contingencies in effect. The next step is to
determine which devices need to be coordinated (i.e. the devices which offer primary
protection, and the devices which are acting in a backup mode for the given fault are
to be determined) for a given fault. The knowledge base would need data on system
topology and device locations and characteristics. The expert system would have to
call on an algorithmic procedure to determine device operating times for these critical

23
faults. A final step would look for possible corrective actions when a mis-
coordination occurs between devices for a particular fault. Some alternatives might be
to change the device’s pick up, reach, or timer, or possibly even to upgrade the
protective device.
In some protection coordination situations, human experts have different
opinions on the correct action to take. In such cases, it would be desirable to apply the
expert system for alternative solutions. Today protection coordination is a design and
planning problem rather than an operational problem. Electro mechanical relays do
not have provision for remote setting during operation. Their settings cannot usually
be changed for different load conditions or changes in configuration. With the
customer driven power system and changes in system configuration, the protection
coordination can be viewed as an operational problem of adaptive protection device
setting. Emerging technologies such as digital and microprocessor based relays will
have provision for real time remote setting and can be employed in adaptive
protection coordination. The domain of protection coordination involves heuristics
and experience and is well suited for AI approach [10].
Hence, optimal coordination of directional overcurrent relays using the
advanced Evolutionary programming is done in this research work. Owing to the huge
variety of protective relays from different manufacturers and technologies, the
approach must be flexible. Moreover the approach must cater for the old, electro-
mechanical relays, static relays as well as the modern digital protective relays. The
developed method of optimizing coordination of DOCR satisfies these requirements.
Moreover existing conventional Electro mechanical inverse overcurrent relays
exhibit limited flexibility and poor accuracy and cannot cater to the modern complex
relaying demands. Hence microprocessors controlled relay shall be designed with
features like CT ratio selection, plug setting multipliers etc. Also variety of relay
characteristics, viz. IDMT, very inverse, extremely inverse and earth fault relay can
be realized from a single relay unit. On experimental basis, in this research work the
AI techniques such as Fuzz logic and neural approaches are used for modeling
conventional IDMT characteristics of overcurrent relaying system.

3.4. Differential Protection

Transformer internal faults are very serious since there is always the risk of
fire. These internal faults can be classified into two groups.

24
(i) Electrical faults which cause immediate serious damage but generally
detectable by unbalance of current of voltage.
(ii) Incipient faults which are initially minor faults causing slowly developing
damage. These are not detectable at the winding terminals by unbalance.
It is important that the faulted transformer be isolated as quickly as possible
after the fault has occurred. The reason is not only to limit the damage to the
transformer, but also to minimize the length of time of low voltage in the system. A
prolonged period of low voltage may result in loss of synchronization between
rotating machines. This may cause other relays to operate and initiate sequential and
necessary tripping.
Mostly the universal protective scheme for the faults within the transformer
uses transformer differential relay. This relay is the principle form of fault protection
for transformers rated 5 MVA and above. Differential relaying usually involves the
detection of an imbalance in current flow into and out of a protected area.
These relays, however, cannot be as sensitive as differential relays used in generator
protection, because they are subject to several factors not ordinarily present for
generators that cause mal-operation.

Problems Associated With the Conventional Transformer Differential Protection

The advances in the transformer differential protection have involved many
disturbing compromises between the basic requirements of service protection and
limitation of equipment damage. These limitations have become increasingly felt as
the art of system protection has progressed, and the standards of service have been
raised.
Major factors that can cause mal-operation of transformer differential relays
are:

• Different voltage levels including taps, which result in different primary

currents in the connecting circuits.
• Possible mismatch of ratio among different current transformers
• A 30 degree phase-angle shift introduced by transformer Wye-delta
connections.
• Magnetizing inrush currents and over excitation due to over fluxing which a
differential relay considers as internal faults.

25
 Transformer protection is further complicated by a variety of equipment
requiring special attention, multiple winding transformer banks, zigzag transformers
etc.
Moreover, in a transformer differential relay, the current comparison is complicated
by the following factors:
• Current transformer ratios connecting to the power transformer mismatch.
• There may be phase shift between the power transformer primary and
secondary windings.
• The power transformer may have a tap changer on one of its winding.
• The CT can saturate under through fault conditions, giving an effective ratio
error.
• When a power transformer is energized, inrush current flows for a short time
into the energized winding.
• Over fluxing of the transformer can give rise to exciting current flowing in
only one winding.

Recent Trends in Transformer Differential Protection

Since the magnetizing inrush current phenomenon is transient, stability can be
maintained by providing a small time delay. In 1960s, an instantaneous relay shunted
by a fuse (kick fuse) was introduced. This kick fuse was chosen so as to carry the
inrush current without blowing. Only in the event of an internal fault the fuse may
blow and permit the relay to operate. In 1970s, induction pattern relays of the IDMT
type which provided suitable time delay during switching conditions was developed.
The prime drawback of using this low-set relay was the low speed operation under
fault conditions. Gradually the need for quicker operation of a relay made way to
develop relays with immunity to magnetizing inrush currents. Later in 1980s, the
following technique was employed i.e. the current curve during the magnetizing
inrush current contains pronounced harmonics, whereas internal fault current is
sinusoidal. A relay was designed to operate under fault conditions, restraining all the
harmonic frequencies when fundamental frequency was predominant. However, over
excitation resulting from over voltages due to sudden tripping of major loads or under
frequencies caused heavy magnetizing currents which cause inadvertent relay
tripping. To overcome this difficulty in early 1990s, a reputed manufacturer came out
with the solution of detecting over excitation by measuring fifth harmonic component

26
of differential current, and a fixed percentage of fifth harmonic restraint was
introduced as an added feature to the relay.
At present, the whole idea of development of transformer differential
protection is focused on tackling the magnetizing inrush current phenomenon and the
restraint feature provision to various harmonics.
Hence recent basic methods to stabilize differential relay during magnetic
inrush condition are:
• Harmonic restraint / blocking
• Wave shape identification
• Voltage restraint
Traditionally second harmonic is used to block the relay from operation during
inrush condition. But this resulted in a significant slowing of the relay operation
during heavy internal faults. To overcome this in mid 1990s, one manufacturer came
up with a new waveform recognition technique to detect magnetic inrush. In that case,
inrush current waveform is characterized by a period of each cycle, simultaneously in
all the three phases, where its magnitude is very small (nearly zero). By measuring the
time of this period of low current, an inrush condition was identified. In spite of this
relays, unwanted tripping occurred during switching on load.
For several decades power transformer protection schemes had experienced
many changes and arrived to employ fully numerical technology in late 1990s. With
the advent of technological advancements in the digital applications, it is now
possible to provide powerful protection algorithms within the cost effective hardware
modules for dedicated differential protection applications. The features and
advantages provided by these devices have proved beneficial in quicker isolation of
faults resulting in stability of power system under abnormal operating conditions.
In conventional digital technology a transformer differential protection is a
biased differential protection to which restraints and high-set threshold must be added
in order to obtain correct operation in all circumstances. The restraint is therefore vital
when the transformer is energized and when it is used in an over fluxed situation. The
most popular solution is to measure second and fifth harmonics of the differential
current. The restraint threshold for these harmonics can be adjusted in most cases.
Actually these adjustments make the user to determine the compromise between

27
stability (on inrush) and sensitivity (on pre-existing faults). However technical
progress should allow protection manufacturers to do this kind of adjustment. [38].
Hence, in this research work, the new approaches with AI techniques are
developed to achieve stability with much consistent and lower operating times, yet
retaining a high degree of through fault stability. This modern relay shall provide the
events with real time and recording of disturbance recordings. Also it provides total
accessibility for protection, data acquisition and control.

3.5. Conclusion
This chapter provided a bird’s eye view of the various existing schemes which
have ample applications for power transformer protection. In the subsequent chapter,
detailed description of the AI techniques proposed for power transformer protection in
this research work is discussed.

28
Module 10 : Differential Protection of Bus, Transformer and Generator

Lecture 39 : Transformer Protection

Introduction

Differential protection of transformer was introduced in lecture 2. Traditionally, it involves establishing

circulating current through a pair of matched CTs installed on the primary and secondary winding of the
transformer. If there is no internal fault in the transformer, zero current flows through the differential
overcurrent element. However, in case of an internal fault, the CT secondary currents are not matched
and hence the differential current is not zero. This causes the overcurrent element to pick up and
operate the circuit breakers to isolate the transformer.

Selection of CT Turns Ratio

Let the transformer turns ratio given

by and the corresponding CT
ratio be given by and as
given in fig 39.1. Then,
Current in CT - 1 primary =

Current in CT - 1 secondary =

Current in CT - 2 primary =

Current in CT - 2 secondary =

If there is no fault, then with proper connections account for the CT polarity, we should obtain circulatory
current through CT secondary.
Hence,

Selection of CT Turns Ratio (contd..)

i.e, or (1)

If the transformer (to be protected ) is working on tap T as shown in fig 39.2, then the above equality
has to be modified as follows:

(2)
Example
 Let the primary of the transformer winding has 1000 turns while secondary has 500 turns. If the primary
CT ratio is 100:5, find the CT ratio required in the secondary side to establish circulatory current scheme.

Ans: =1000, and =20

From equation (1), we get

Thus, a suitable secondary CT ratio would be 200:5.

Example (contd..)

Remarks 1: Sometimes due to ‘odd turns ratio' involved in primary, it may not be possible to obtain
matching CTs on the secondary. In such situations ‘auxiliary CTs' are used either on primary or secondary
(or both sides) to obtain circulatory currents in absence of internal faults. Primary of the auxilliary CT is
connected in series with secondary of main CT. Secondary of auxilliary CT participates in the circulating
current scheme.

Remark 2: The circulating current scheme described above has been traditionally used with
electromechanical and solid state relays. However in case of numerical relays, such physical connections
are no more required. Given turns ratio and CTs ratio and , one can work out the
expected current in secondary of transformer (in absence of internal fault). Hence, auxiliary CTs become
redundant and the transformer connections are simplified drastically. Thus, with numerical relaying most
of the hardware connections and circulatory currents can be easily accounted in software. Further, with
digital protection systems differential protection can be implemented by either 'sample by sampe'
comparison or by first computing the phasors and then comparing them.

Phasor computation approach will involve a delay equal to the time required for moving window to latch
on to post fault phasor. Conversely, 'sample by sample' comparison approach can be faster but it is more
prone to picking up to noise or trannsients. Hence, even it has to be slowed down by 'polling scheme'. In
this scheme, we increment a winter, whenever large enough differential is detected. If counter is positive
and differential is below threshold, we decrement the counter. If the counter 'ensures as threshold, a trip
decision is issued.
 Example (contd..)
Remark 3: When dealing with three phase transformers, the transformer connections like Y-Y or
also play a role in determining CT secondary interconnections to establish circulating current scheme.
This is because of the phase shifts typically of the order of that result in the line currents when we
move from primary to secondary side of the power transformer. Fig 39.3 shows the typical connections
for star-delta transformer bank for establishing the circulatory currents. The study of the circuit brings
out the following important rule for interconnection of CT secondary for transformers: “If the power
transformer winding are connected in Y configuration, use configuration for corresponding CT
secondary interconnections" (and vice-versa).
Remark 4: With numerical relays such interconnection complexity can be easily handled in software.
After, specifying the turns ratio and the phase shift from primary to secondary, it should be possible to
work out the expected secondary differential current by simple calculation.

Role of Percentage Differential Protection

So far, our discussion has focused on an ideal transformer. However, practical transformers and CTs pose
additional challenge to protection.

The primary of transformer will carry no load current even when the secondary is open circuited. This will
(1)
lead to

differential current on which the protection scheme should not operate.

It is not possible to exactly match the CT ratio as per equation (1). This would also lead to differential
(2)
currents under

healthy conditions.
 If the transformer is used with an off nominal tap, then differential currents will arise as equation (2) is
(3)
not satisfied

even under healthy conditions. However, tap position can be read in numerical protection scheme and
accounted by equation (2). This would make the numerical protection scheme adaptive.

To prevent the differential

protection scheme from picking
up under such conditions, a
percentage differential
protection scheme is used. (see
fig 39.4 )
It improves security at the cost
of sensitivity. Notice an offset of
to account for the no load
current. The current on the x-
axis is the average current of
primary and secondary winding
referred to primary. It indicates
the restraining current while the
corresponding difference on Y-
axis represents the differential
current. For reference current
direction see fig 39.1.

The differential protection will pick up if magnitude of differential current is more than a fixed percentage
of the restraining current.

Complications of Magnetizing Inrush

We now plan to show that even percentage

differential protection scheme will misclassify the
inrush current as fault current. This is because
during inrush, secondary current is negligible (zero
if secondary is open circuited), while primary
current can be as high as 10 - 20 times the full
load current. Thus some kind of restraint function
is required to inhibit the pick up on inrush.
Traditionally, this restraint is based upon second
harmonic content in primary which discriminates a
fault from the inrush condition.

Alternatives in numerical relaying also include voltage restraint used in integrated substation protection
scheme and flux restraint scheme. Before, discussing these schemes further, we will review the origin of
magnetizing inrush phenomenon.

Consider the circuit in fig 39.5. The switch is closed at t = 0. By Faraday's law, we have

, with

and

(3)
Complications of Magnetizing Inrush (contd..)

For simplicity, let us assume that . i.e. core is initially demagnetized. Then, the post
energisation flux wave form in the core is shown in fig 39.6.

Complications of Magnetizing Inrush (contd..)

This wave form is quite different from what we obtain by steady state analysis as shown in fig 39.7.

During steady state analysis, we can replace by and the corresponding steady state phasor

equation is given as follows:

i.e,

and (4)

Complications of Magnetizing Inrush (contd..)

Thus, it is clear that peak flux during energization is twice as high as the steady state peak sinusoidal

value. Depending upon the residual flux, it can be even higher. Now, , where is the knee

point flux density of core. Thus, during energization, the core is driven deep into saturation. The resulting
H and hence magnetizing current can be very high (up to 20 times full load current). This current is
known as inrush current of transformer. So far, we have assumed . But in general,
depends upon the remnant flux in the core and H can be anywhere between and . Hence,

during energization will vary from to . Fig 39.8 visualizes the nature of the inrush current.

Complications of Magnetizing Inrush (contd..)

Our analysis so has a discrepancy. As per our analysis, flux and current wave shape in fig 39.6 should
persist till infinity i.e. it should represent the steady state flux and current waveform in the core.
However, we also know that steady state flux and current waveform is as per fig 39.7. The resulting
discrepancy is a consequence of our simplifying assumption viz, core is ideal and the winding is non
resistive. If we also model the winding resistance, we would observe that the voltage available at the
ideal transformer primary terminals would reduce drastically due to large voltage drop in the winding
impedance during inrush condition. Consequently, the effect should propagate and reduce flux in the
core. If the flux in the core reduces, so would magnetizing current. Thus, each cycle would have smaller
 magnetization current peak and the magnetizing current and flux would finally approach the one
produced by steady state phasor equation.
To summarize the discussion so far,
1. Transformer when energized can be subjected to large inrush currents.
2. Inrush current can trip differential protection of transformers.
Some methodology to detect inrush has to be devised and transformer differential protection has to be
inhibited from tripping during this condition.

Detection of Inrush Current and Overexcitation Condition

Appreciable differential current can result due to either inrush or overexcitation of transformer. When a
transformer is overexcited, then from the relationship , we can infer that peak
sinusoidal flux is large. This implies that transformer core will be driven into saturation for an interval in
each half cycle. Due to this, there would be distortion from the sinusoidal magnetization current. During
saturation, the corresponding magnetizing current can be quite large and on the resulting differential the
protection system may issue a trip decision by confusing overexcitation for an internal fault. Hence, in
practice restraint has to be provided for both overexcitation and inrush current condition. There are three
possible ways in which this can be achieved.

(1) Harmonic Restraint

Analysis of the current waveform indicates that inrush current is rich in second harmonic and current
during overfluxing has a large fifth harmonic component. Thus, if we compute the second and fifth
harmonic current in , then, we can provide following logic for restraining operation of
differential protection. Restrain operation of differential protection if

1. for restrain (No load magnetization current)

or

2.

(Where is the slope of the % differential characteristics)

Detection of Inrush Current and Overexcitation Condition (contd..)

(1) Harmonic Restraint (contd..)

3. [For restraining inrush current]

(Where is the magnitude of second harmonic)

or

4. [For restraining overexcitation]

(Where is the magnitude of fifth harmonic)

Typically, and are the percentage harmonic restraint and would depend upon type of transformer
and steel. For numerical relays, the design of anti aliasing filters also affects the choice of above
parameters. During any transient (including the fault condition), harmonics develop much more rapidly
than the fundamental and hence, typically numerical relays are restrained for about a cycle indirectly by
these transients. Typical setting for used in practice are 10, 20 or 30%.

(2) Voltage Based Restraint

In an integrated substation protection system, it is reasonable to assume availability of bus voltage

measurement for transformer protection without extra cost of VT. Then, voltage measurement can be
 used to restrain the operation of differential protection scheme on inrush or overexcitation. Traditionally,
this has been referred in literature as “tripping suppressor” as it suppresses tripping function. If the
voltage signal is high, the relay is restrained if

or (5)

(6)

or (7)

(8)

Detection of Inrush Current and Overexcitation Condition (contd..)

(2) Voltage Based Restraint (contd..)

Expressions 5, 6 and 7 are self explanatory.
The last restraining function is known as the transient monitor function. The transient monitor function
is used to qualify the purity of data. Typically, in a numerical relaying set up, with moving window
algorithm, there are a certain number of windows in which both pre fault and post fault data points are
present. Any phasor computation done with them is meaningless because the window does not fit with
either prefault or post fault signal. Under such condition, the residual error ( sample) between
estimated (reconstructed) and measured signal is quite high. For a half cycle window with 6 samples in

it, . When is greater than threshold value , then tripping decision should be inhibited.

(3) Flux Restraint Scheme

Fig 39.9 shows the flux current plane associated with no fault and internal fault regions. It is difficult to
evaluate the actual flux in the core, because the initial condition is unknown. It depends also upon the
remanant flux. Fortunately, to distinguish no fault (or external fault) from the internal fault, we are
 interested in the slope of curve rather than the actual values.

Detection of Inrush Current and Overexcitation Condition (contd..)

(3) Flux Restraint Scheme (contd..)

This can be easily worked out as follows.

Let the voltage at the terminal of the transformer be v(t), current i(t) and let L be the leakage inductance
of the winding. If we neglect the resistance of the winding, then,

Using trapezoidal rule of integration, we get

(9)

From the above equation (9) we can deduce the following generic relationship.

(10)

Operation on the unsaturated region of magnetizing curve produces large value of slope . Since, the

fault or overexcitation (saturated) regions have smaller slopes, we can now distinguish internal

fault from the saturation condition by following counter scheme.

If current differential indicates trip and , increment counter.

else if and , then

else if and , then

If there is an internal fault in the system, then will monotonically increase and once crosses a

known threshold, trip decision will be issued. On the other hand, during inrush or over excitation the

will alternate between low slope and high slope region depending upon whether the core is in saturation
or not. Thus, the counter will indicate a small tooth kind of behavior with being below the
threshold value. Hence, operation of the different protection scheme would be restrained in this region.

Remark 5: We have illustrated the basic principle so far using a single phase transformer for simplicity.
However, in practice, we use both three phase two winding and three phase three winding (primary,
secondary and tertiary) transformers. The basic principle of differential protection is the same but we now
have to scale up to multiple phases. For a three phase (two winding) transformer, there would be 3 trip
currents (one per phase) and three restraining currents (one per phase). For three phase three winding
transformers, two restraining per phase are required.
 Review Questions

1. What are auxiliary CTs? Why are they used?

2. What are the advantage of numerical relaying over other relaying schemes in differential protection?

3. Show that maximum flux during energization can vary from to 3 .

4. What are the various restraint schemes used?

The primary winding of a transformer has 2000 turns and CT ratio is 600:5. The secondary has 10000
5.
turns and is
working on a tap of 60%. Find out CT ratio required for secondary side to establish circulating current
scheme.
Explain how reliability is obtained by polling scheme in the 'sample by sample' comparison approach for
6.
differential

protection.

Recap
In this lecture we have learnt the following:

How to select CT turns ratio for differential protection application.

Percentage differential protection.

Magnetizing inrush current and its complications.

Detection of inrush current and overexcitation current.

Different restraint schemes in use.

Applications to 3 phase transformers.