Fifteenth National Power Systems Conference (NPSC), IIT Bombay, December 2008
Busbar Protection- A Solution to CT Saturation
P. Jena and A. K. Pradhan
Abstract: This work proposes a busbar protection scheme based on
phase changes in positive sequence current of incoming and
outgoing line current transformers (CTs). The angle differences of
during fault and prefault current signals of incoming and outgoing
CTs are the indicators of external or internal faults for bus bar
protection. The advantage of the method is that it does not use
magnitude information of the current and thus overcomes the CT
saturation issues. The performance of the technique was
investigated for a variety of operating conditions, for CT saturation,
CT ratio mismatch, different fault inception angles, for different
type of faults and for several bus-bar configurations.
Keywords- Digital busbar protection, phasor estimation, CT
saturation, DFT, Fault
I. INTRODUCTION
Differential protection schemes are applied for high voltage
busbars. Failure-to-trip on an internal fault, as well as false
tripping of a busbar during load service, or in case of an external
fault, both have disastrous effects on the stability of power
systems [1]–[2]. The challenge of bus differential protection is
the issue of false differential current due to CT saturation and
ratio mismatch [6].The busbar protection can be classified as
high impedance and low impedance types. High impedance
relays are used to provide low cost bus protection, but have
limitations due to complex arrangements and use of multi-ratio
current transformers. The low impedance measuring principle
employs the zone-selective differential current as the operating
quantity and the sum of the current magnitudes as the stabilizing
signal. The measuring principle must ensure protection with CT
saturation on external faults. A low-impedance busbar protection
operates during CT saturation by using a principle, which
discriminates between saturated and unsaturated waveforms [5].
Recently, many novel differential techniques have been proposed
to overcome CT saturation. For external faults, the differential
current should be zero, but errors caused by CT saturation can
result in a nonzero value. To prevent maloperation, the operating
threshold is raised by increasing the bias setting. Raising the bias
threshold has a detrimental effect on the relay sensitivity as it
prevents the detection of in-zone resistive faults [4]. The impact
of CT ratio-mismatch is countered by using percentage- bias
characteristics that reduces the sensitivity of the relay [6]. In [7]
Kang proposed a bus-bar current differential protection relay
suitable for use with measurement type current transformers. A
fault direction based techniques using a combined signal derived
from prefault voltage and fault current signals [8]. A wavelet
transform based technique has been used to derive significant
information from the observed current and voltage signals, which
is then suitably employed for protection. In [9], a technique is
proposed which is based on a feature signal extracted from the
original current value using the wavelet packet transform
method. Jiang used a protection scheme based on wavelet filter
banks to extract the windowed average energy spectrum of fault-
The authors are with the Department of Electrical Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur, India-721302.
akpradhan@ee.iitkgp.ernet.in
311
generated transients so as to distinguish between an internal fault
and an external fault [10]. In [11] Chen proposed a directional
differential bus-bar protection scheme, which employed a
wavelet-transform-based polarity detector. Kumar and Hansen
[12] developed a technique that uses multiprocessing and utilizes
the relationship between restraining and differential voltages and
a restraining factor. The above discussed algorithms do not have
inherent immunity to CT saturation.
This work proposes a digital relaying technique for busbar
protection using phase change in sequence current of incoming CT
currents and outgoing CT currents. The fundamental of the phase
change in sequence current is given in [3]. The angle differences
of during fault and prefault current signals of incoming and
outgoing CTs are the indicators of external or internal faults for
bus bar protection. The phasor concept is used to overcome the
current transformer saturation. The major advantage of the
proposed technique is that it does not require additional voltage
signal for discriminating internal and external faults. Another
advantage of the method is that it does not use magnitude
information of the current and thus overcomes the CT saturation
issues. The proposed algorithm has the potential to overcome the
CT ratio mismatch problem discussed in section IV. The positive
sequence component is used as such a component is available for
both unbalanced and balanced faults. The performance of the
technique is investigated for a variety of operating conditions; for
CT saturation, CT ratio mismatch, different fault inception
angles, for different type of faults and for several busbar
configurations.
II. PROPOSED METHOD
(i) The Basics
To demonstratre the principle a single phase power system is
considered as shown in Fig. 1. The bus to be protected is bus-B.
CT1 and CT2 are the two current transformer for the differetntial
protection. Ground faults are created at different locations of the
system; (Fx, Fy and Fz). The current waveforms as shown in
Fig. 2 are obtained through the 100: 5 CTs. Other three current
waveforms are measured by CT1 are for faults initiated at Fx, Fy
or Fz at 0.3sec. The current magnitudes are high for the three
fault cases but the fault currents change differently in phase.
Similar phase change is observed for different fault inception
angles. The corresponding phasor diagrams are shown in Fig. 3.
Similarly the currents measured by CT2 are shown in Fig. 4. It is
obsered that for faults at Fx and Fz (external faults with respect
to the bus-bar B) , the the phases of the currents measured by the
two CTs change in negative and positive direction respectively
with respect to the pre-fault current. Whereas for fault at Fy
(internal fault or bus fault) the phase change in current is positive
for CT1 and negative for CT2.The corresponding phasor
diagrams are shown in Fig. 5. From the phasor diagram it is clear
that for any external fault the phase change in sequence
component of incoming and outgoing current is either positive or
negative. Whereas for an internal fault the phase change for
 Fifteenth National Power Systems Conference (NPSC), IIT Bombay, December 2008

incoming line current is positive and negative for outgoing line  I1c 
current. Ipre

A B C 'I x , y
FX CT1 CT2 FZ VA VA
~ ~  Ipre Ipre

Source-1 FY Source-2  VC 'I z VC

Fig. 1. Single phase two-source system I1Fy


50
I1Fx
40 Fault at FY  I1Fz I1cc
30 Fault at FZ (a) Fault at Fx and Fy (b) Fault at FZ

20
 Fig. 5. Phasor diagram showing different currents, I1Fx ,I1Fy and I1Fz - fault
components only and I1' and I1'' – fault currents (including load current) for CT2
Current (A)

10 Simillarly a single phase radial system is considered as shown in

0 Fig. 6. A line-to-ground fault has been created at t=0.3 sec.The
current waveforms measured by CT1 for internal and external
-10
Without fault faults with respect to busbar B are shown in Fig. 7.
-20

-30 Fault at FX A B C
FX CT1 CT2 FZ
-40
0.2 0.22 0.24 0.26 0.28 0.3 0.32 0.34 0.36 0.38 0.4 ~
Time(sec)
FY
Fig. 2. Current waveforms for external and internal faults at t=0.3 sec in
different directions of relay location, measured by CT1 Fig. 6. Single phase radial system
I1c 
The current waveforms for extenal faults(Fx and Fz) the phase
change is either zero(for Fx case) and phase change in negative
'Ix  direction(for Fz) with respect to the pre-fault current. But at the
VA VA same time the phase change in current for internal fault Fy is
Ipre Ipre negative for incoming current measured by CT1 and zero for
VC VC CT2 measured current, with respect to the pre-fault current. The
'Iy,z corresponding phasor diagram for the three cases are shown in
I1FZ Fig. 8. From the phasor diagrams it is clear that for external
I1Fx fault(Fx) the phase change in CT1 and CT2 current is zero and
negative for Fz as the fault position is downstream to both CT1
I1Fy I1cc and CT2. Whereas for internal fault(bus-B fault), the phase
(a) fault at Fx (b) fault at Fy and FZ change of CT1 current is negative and the phase change in CT2
Fig. 3. Phasor diagram showing different currents, I1Fx ,I1Fy and I1Fz - fault current is zero as the CT2 does not see any fault current for fault
components only and I1' and I1'' – fault currents (including load current) for CT1 at Fy. This information is usefull to differentiate the external and
internal fault with respect to the concerned bus bar relay by
40
deriving a directional feature as described above.
30
Fault at FZ 40

20 Without fault
 30 Fault at FZ
10
Current (A)

20
 0
Current (A)

Without fault
-10 10

-20
0

 -30 Fault at FX
-10
-40 Fault at FY Fault at FX and FY

-20
-50 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35 0.4
0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35 0.4 Time(sec)
 Time (sec)
Fig. 7. Current waveforms for external and internal faults at t=0.3 sec in
Fig. 4. Current waveforms for external and internal faults at t=0.3 sec in different directions of relay location, measured by CT1
 different directions of relay location, measured by CT2

312
 Fifteenth National Power Systems Conference (NPSC), IIT Bombay, December 2008

 'I x 
The positive sequence network of a three phase system being
VA VA similar to its single phase model, the phasor diagrams as depicted
 Ipre earlier are valid for positive sequence components of current for
Ipre
similar three phase system. Thus the rule enumerated in table 1 is
VC 'I y , z VC valid for positive sequence current of any three phase system. To
 implement the scheme, flow diagram of Fig. 11 is used. A fault
I1FZ
detector unit triggers the phasor estimation technique to provide
 (a) fault at Fx
(b) fault at Fy and FZ
prefault and fault positive sequence phasors and the power flow
I1Fy I cc 
1 direction. The power flow direction helps to decide on the
incoming and outgoing current.
Fig. 8. Phasor diagram showing different currents, I1Fx ,I1Fy and I1Fz - fault
components only and I1' and I1'' – fault currents (including load current) for CT1 Table-1 Rule base for discriminating external and internal fault
Similarly the currents measured by CT2 are given in Fig. 9 and
the corresponding phasor diagram is provided in Fig. 10. From Fault zone Sign of phase change in Sign of phase change in
the phasor diagram it is clear that for external faults (Fx, Fz) the current measured by current measured by
incoming current outgoing CT
phase changes of CT1 and CT2 positive sequence currents are
either zero or negative and for internal fault(Fy) the above said Fx (external faults) Positive/ zero Positive/zero
phase changes are negative and positive. For three phase system
the analysis has been done and the corresponding rule base is Fz (external faults) negative negative

given in table1. Fy (internal fault) negative Positive/zero

60

50
Fault at FY Start
 40
Fault at FZ
30
 20
Acquiring voltage and current data
Current (A)

10
 Fault detector
0

 -10 Without fault  Direction of power flow

Fault at FX
-20
  Pre and fault phasor estimation
-30
0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35 0.4
Time(sec)
 
Fig. 9. Current waveforms for external and internal faults at t=0.3 sec in different Computation of positive sequence
directions of relay location, measured by CT2 component
 
'I x , y 
VA Calculation of total incoming and
 VA  outgoing currents
Ipre Ipre

 VC 'I z VC Computation of angle difference

(a) fault at Fx and Fy

Applying rule-External or internal fault
I1Fz I1cc
(b) fault at FZ Decisions
Fig. 11. Flow diagram for finding external and internal fault for bus bar B
Fig. 10. Phasor diagram showing different currents, I1Fx ,I1Fy and I1Fz - fault
components only and I1' and I1'' – fault currents (including load current) for CT2

Table 1 dictate the rule for the differential bus bar protection
scheme. For external fault the phase changes in sequence current
of CT1 group and CT2 group are either both are positive or
negative for a two-source system. For internal fault the phase
change is positive for CT1 group positive sequence current and
negative for CT2 group current. Similarly for radial system for
external fault the phase changes of positive sequence current of
incoming and outgoing CTs are either zero or negative. For
internal fault the corresponding phase changes are negative and
zero.
III. RESULTS
Three systems are considered to evaluate the performance of the
proposed protection algorithm. In the simulation nonlinear model
of CT is considered. In all the cases one-cycle DFT is applied to
estimate the phasors with 1 kHz sampling rate. Positive sequence
components are estimated with phase-A as reference. In the
proposed method the phase angle is estimated using arctan
function for four-quadrant option; -ʌ to ʌ (atan2 function in
matlab). The phase angle difference of fault and prefault phasors,

313
 Fifteenth National Power Systems Conference (NPSC), IIT Bombay, December 2008

as discussed in the phasor diagrams, is limited to -ʌ to ʌ. In some Results given in table 2 depicts that even with severe CT
cases this angle difference calculated by this way will exceed the saturation the results obtained obey the rule base given in table 1.
mentioned limit. In that case 2ʌ should be subtracted or added to
the difference if it exceeds ʌ or – ʌ limit respectively. CASE-2 multi-input multi-output radial system

Case-1 A three phase two-source system CT4 I4

A 132 kV, 50 Hz three phase two-source system as shown in Fig. CT5 I5

12 is considered to evaluate the performance of the proposed
protection algorithm; system simulated through PSCAD. The CT
ratio considered in this case is 1000:5. Here the sampling
frequency is considered 1 kHz. A three-phase fault has been
created at t=0.3 sec at three positions (Fx, Fy and Fz) with
respect to the relay placed at bus B. the corresponding results are
given in table 2. Here for external faults (Fx, Fz) the phase
change in sequence component of CT1 and CT2 group currents is
either positive (i.e. 1.67 rad. for Fx) or negative (i.e. -1.16 rad.
for Fz) and for internal fault(Fy) for CT1 group is negative(i.e. -
1.16 rad) and for CT2 group is positive(i.e. 1.67 rad). So the
results obtained here obey the rule base given in table1. The
current waveforms shown in Fig 13 are distorted because the CT
1 is being saturated.
Ipre
A B
FX CT1
~
FY
Fig.12. Single line diagram of three phase two-source system
40
30
20 Ic
10
Current (A)
I1 CT1
~ CT6 I6
I2 CT2
~ CT7 I7
I3 Fx CT3
~ CT8
Fz I8
Fy
Fig. 14. Single line diagram of 132 kV ,50 Hz system
A 132 kV, 50 Hz three phase radial system as shown in Fig. 14 is
considered to evaluate the performance of the proposed
protection algorithm; system simulated through PSCAD. The CT
ratio considered in this case is 1000:5. Here the sampling
C frequency is considered 1 kHz. A three-phase fault has been
CT2 FZ
created at t=0.3 sec at three positions (Fx, Fy and Fz) with
~ respect to the relay located at bus B. the corresponding results
are given in table 3. Here for external faults (Fx, Fz) the phase
change in sequence component of CT1 and CT2 group currents is
either zero (i.e. 0.03 rad. , for Fx) or negative (i.e. -1.10 rad. for
Fz) and for internal fault(Fy) for CT1 group is zero(i.e. -0.06
rad.) and for CT2 group is negative(i.e. -1.20 rad.). Form the
result it is clear that the rule base given in table 1 holds good.

Table 3 Results for three-phase fault at Fx, Fy and Fz, t=0.3 sec.
0

Ib Fault/ Fault current Prefault Angle

-10
sensor phasor current Difference
-20 phasor (rad)
Ia Mag Angle Mag Angle
-30 (A) (rad) (A) (rad)
Fx/CT1 group 4.04 -2.12 7.59 -2.15 0.03
-40
0.24 0.26 0.28 0.3 0.32 0.34 0.36 0.38 0.4
Time(sec) Fx/CT2 group 4.04 -2.12 7.59 -2.15 0.03
Fig. 13. Current waveforms for Fx at t=0.3 sec, measured by CT1 Fz/CT1 group 17.88 3.03 7.59 -2.15 -1.10
Table-2 Results for three-phase fault at Fx,F yand Fz, t=0.3 sec. Fz/CT2 group 17.88 3.03 7.59 -2.15 -1.10
Fy/CT1 group 42.73 2.93 7.59 -2.15 -1.20
Fault/ Fault current Prefault current Angle Difference
sensor phasor phasor (rad) Fy/CT2 group 42.73 -2.21 7.59 -2.15 -0.06

Mag (A) Angle Mag (A) Angle CASE-3 A multi-input multi-output system
(rad) (rad)
Fx/CT1 group 20.89 -0.23 2.12 -1.90 1.67 A 132 kV, 50 Hz three phase multi-source system as shown in
Fx/CT2 group 20.89 -0.23 2.12 -1.90 1.67 Fig. 15 is considered to evaluate the performance of the proposed
Fz/CT1 group 26.32 -3.06 2.13 -1.90 -1.29 protection algorithm. The CT ratio considered in this case is
Fz/CT2 group 26.32 -3.06 2.13 -1.90 -1.16 1000:5.
Fy/CT1 group 26.32 -3.06 4.21 -2.07 -1.16
Fy/CT2 group 20.89 -0.23 4.21 -2.07 1.67

314
 Fifteenth National Power Systems Conference (NPSC), IIT Bombay, December 2008

I1 Fx CT1 I3 Fz
CT3
~ ~ Table-5 Results for A-G fault
CT4 I4
I2 CT2
~ ~ Fault/ Fault current Prefault current Angle
Fy sensor phasor phasor Difference
(rad)
Fig. 15. Single line diagram of 132 kV, 50 Hz system
Mag Angle Mag Angle
(A) (rad) (A) (rad)
The corresponding results are given in table 4 for power flow Fx/CT1 group 6.9 -2.17 7.59 -2.15 -0.02
from bus-A to bus-C. The phasor angle differences for both the Fx/CT2 group 6.9 -2.17 4.96 -2.15 -0.02
CT groups are positive (1.53 rad.) for fault at Fx. For external
Fz/CT1 group 9.43 -2.48 4.96 -2.15 -0.33
fault at Fz, the phase changes for both the CT groups are
Fz/CT2 group 9.43 -2.48 4.96 -2.15 -0.33
negative(-1.44 rad). Whereas for internal fault the phase change
Fy/CT1 group 14.07 -2.69 4.96 -2.15 -0.54
of CT1 group current is negative(i.e. -1.44 rad.) and for CT2
Fy/CT2 group 14.07 -2.20 4.96 -2.15 0.05
group current is positive(i.e. 1.53 rad.) as shown in table 4, which
clearly discriminates the external and internal fault with respect
to the relay bus. Here the rule base given in table1 holds good. (ii) Effect of Severity of CT Saturation and CT ratio mismatch

Table-4 Results for three-phase fault Fx, Fy and Fz, t=0.3 sec. With severe CT saturation and CT ratio mismatch, the proposed
algorithm is tested by taking the system given in Fig. 13. A-B-G
Fault/ Fault current Prefault current Angle  fault is created at 0.2 sec. The corresponding results are given in
sensor phasor phasor Difference table 6. From the results it is clear that for both the cases the rule
(rad) base holds good. The phasor angle differences for both the CT
Mag Angle Mag Angle groups are equivalent to zero( 0.00 rad.) for fault at Fx. For
(A) (rad) (A) (rad) external fault at Fz, where the phase changes for both the CT
Fx/CT1 group 56.28 -0.38 4.96 -1.91 1.53 groups are negative(-0.84 rad). Whereas for internal fault the
Fx/CT2 group 56.28 -0.38 4.96 -1.91 1.53
phase change of CT1 group current is negative(i.e. -1.11 rad.)
and for CT2 group current is equivalent to zero (i.e. 0.03 rad.).
Fz/CT1 group 56.76 2.93 4.96 -1.91 -1.44 Here the rule base given in table1 holds good.
Fz/CT2 group 56.76 2.93 4.96 -1.91 -1.44
Fy/CT1 group 56.76 2.93 4.96 -1.91 -1.44
Table-6 Results for A-B-G fault at Fx, Fy and Fz, at t=0.2 sec.
Fy/CT2 group 56.76 -0.38 4.96 -1.91 1.53
Fault/ Fault current Prefault current Angle
sensor phasor phasor Difference
IV. DISCUSSIONS (rad)
Mag (A) Angle Mag Angle (rad)
Here the proposed algorithm is tested for different fault types, at (rad) (A)
different fault inception angles, at severe CT saturation and CT Fx/CT1 5.13 -2.10 6.73 -2.10 0.00
ratio mismatch conditions. Fx/CT2 5.13 -2.10 6.73 -2.10 0.00
Fz/CT1 10.34 -2.94 6.73 -2.10 -0.84
(i) Fault type Fz/CT2 10.34 -2.94 6.73 -2.10 -0.84
Fy/CT1 21.82 3.09 6.73 -2.10 -1.11
For different type of faults the proposed algorithm is verified and Fy/CT2 6.73 -2.10
21.82 -2.13 0.03
it is found that the above mentioned rule base holds good for 

both balanced and unbalanced faults. In the system as shown in

Fig. 13 , a A-G type fault is created in external and internal zones
at t = 0.2 sec. The corresponding results are given in table 5. The
phasor angle differences for both the sensors are equivalent to
zero (-0.02 rad.) for fault at Fx. For external fault at Fz, where the
phase changes for both the sensors are negative(-0.33 rad).
Whereas for internal fault the phase change of CT1 group current
is negative(i.e. -0.54 rad.) and for CT2 group current is equivalent
to zero (i.e. 0.05 rad.). the results show that even with severe CT
saturation the proposed algorithm works well. Here the A-G type
fault is considered, where the rule base given in table 1 holds
good.
V. CONCLUSION
This work proposes a digital relaying technique for busbar
protection using phase change in sequence current of incoming CT
currents (CT1 group currents) and outgoing CT currents (CT2 group
currents). The angle differences of above said current signals are
the indicator of external fault and internal fault. The phasor
concept is used to overcome the current transformer (CT)
saturation. The proposed technique is not using voltage signal for
discriminating the internal and external faults. The proposed
technique also overcomes the CT saturation and CT ratio
mismatch problem.

315
 Fifteenth National Power Systems Conference (NPSC), IIT Bombay, December 2008

VI. REFERENCES

[1] P. M. Anderson, Power System Protection. New York: IEEE Press, 1999.
[2] H. W. Funk and G. Ziegler “Numerical busbar protection, design and
service experience,” in Proc. Int. Conf. Developments in Power System
Protection, pp. 131–134,1997.
[3] A. K. Pradhan, A. Routray and G. S. Madhan, “Fault direction estimation in
radial distribution system using phase change in sequence current,” IEEE
Trans. on Power Del. , vol. 22 , no. 4, pp. 2065 – 2071, 2007.
[4] S. P. Valsan, and S. K. Swarup, “Computationally efficient wavelet-
transform –based digital directional protection for busbars,” IEEE Trans. on
Power Del. , vol. 22 , no. 3, pp. 1342 – 1350, 2007.
[5] F. Andow, N. Suga, Y. Murakami, and K. Inamura, “Microprocessor based
busbar protection relay,” in 5th Int. Conf. on Developments in Power
System Protection, IEE Pub. no. 368, pp. 103–106,1993.
[6] M. S. Sachdev, T. S. Sidhu, and H. S. Gill, “A busbar protection technique
and its performance during CT saturation and CT ratio-mismatch,” IEEE
Trans. Power Del., vol. 15, pp. 895–901, 2000.
[7] Y. C. Kang, U. J. Lim, S. H. Kang and P. A. Crossley, “A busbar
differential protection relay suitable for use with measurement type current
transformers,” IEEE Trans. Power Del., vol. 20, no. 2, pt. 2, pp. 1291–
1298, 2005.
[8] M. M. Eissa, “A novel digital directional technique for bus-bars protection,”
IEEE Trans. Power Del., vol. 19, no. 4, pp. 1636–1641, 2004.
[9] M. M. Eissa, “High-speed differential busbar protection using
waveletpacket transform,” Proc. Inst. Elect. Eng., Gen., Transm. Distrib.,
vol. 152, no. 6, pp. 927–933, 2005.
[10] F. Jiang, Z. Q. Bo, M. A. Redfern, G.Weller, Z. Chen, and D. Xinzhou,
“Application of wavelet transform in transient protection-case study:
Busbar protection,” in Proc. 7th Inst. Elect. Eng., Int. Conf. Developments
in Power System Protection, pp. 197–200, 2001.
[11] Z. Chen, Z. Q. Bo, X.-n. Lin, and B. R. J. Caunce, “Integrated line and
busbar protection scheme based on wavelet analysis of fault generated
transient current signals,” in Proc. Int. Conf. Power System Technology,
PowerCon, vol. 1, pp. 396–401,2004.
[12] A. Kumar and P. Hansen, “Digital bus-zone protection,” IEEE Computer
Applications in Power, vol. 6, no. 4, pp. 29–34, 1993.

Ashok Kumar Pradhan teaches at Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur.

His research area of interest includes power system protection, wide area
measurement tehnology and power quality.

Premalata Jena obtained her M. Tech. degree in Electrical Engineering from

Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur India in 2006 and presently she is
pursuing for Ph.D at Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur. Her research
area is Power System Protection.

316