Application of Synchrophasor Data
for Fault Detection during Power Swing
J. Ganeswara Rao and A.K. Pradhan, Senior Member, IEEE
Abstract—Distance relays are blocked during power swing.
However, if a fault occurs during power swing, it should be
detected and unblocking function should be invoked to clear the
fault as soon as possible. Detection of fault during power swing is
a challenging task. The technology of synchronized phasor
measurements has come of age and simplified the differential
protection scheme. Differential protection scheme using
synchrophasor data are applied in this paper to supplement the
available fault detection techniques to distance relay for fault
during power swing.
Index Terms—Distance relay, Power swing, Phasor
Measurement Unit, Synchrophasor, Transmission line faults.
I. INTRODUCTION
T HE apparent impedance computed by the distance relay
may fall within the operating zone due to large variations
in voltage and current during power swing. It causes undesired
tripping of transmission lines which may further lead to
subsequent outages and power blackout. Power Swing
Blocking (PSB) function is used to prevent unwanted distance
relay operation during swing and facilitates the power system
to maintain reliability. However, if a fault occurs during the
power swing, it should be detected and unblocking function
should be invoked to clear the fault as soon as possible.
For such purpose various fault detection techniques have
been applied to identify faults during power swing. A method
based on the sudden reduction of absolute value of the change
in rate of power swing-centre-voltage (PSCV) is available in
[3]. This method is able to detect the symmetrical faults
during swing but takes around two cycles. In [4] a
multiresolution analysis based on wavelet transform is applied
to detect symmetrical faults during power swing. A method
based on DC component of fault current is proposed to detect
fault quickly during power swing [5]. A method using the
difference between the derivative of the three-phase active
power and reactive power is applied to identify symmetrical
faults during power swing [6]. This method requires around
one and half a cycle for detection. As the nature of the power
swing is symmetrical, the symmetrical component techniques
are simultaneously used to identify unsymmetrical faults
during power swing. Using swing-centre-voltage and synthetic
The authors are with the Department of Electrical Engineering, Indian
Institute of Technology, Kharagpur, India-721302.
(email: ganeshjada@gmail.com; akpradhan@ee.iitkgp.ernet.in)
978-1-4673-0136-7/11/$26.00 ©2011 IEEE
negative sequence vector to detect symmetrical and
asymmetrical faults is available in [7]. The superimposed
current component calculated by comparing the present cycle
with previous cycle samples is proposed in [8]. The method is
simple and faster. It is difficult to set the threshold value for
the method as the superimposed current component is
significantly high during power swing. It fails to identify
symmetrical faults occurring at load angle close to 180⁰.
Phasor measurement units are increasingly being applied in
power systems for improved control, protection and
monitoring [9]-[10]. As the available techniques for fault
detection during power swing take around two cycles to detect
the faults, with a PMU reporting rate of 50/60 frames per
second and a dedicated communication system, it would be
feasible to use synchrophasor data for fault detection during
power swing. In many systems PMUs may be placed at
different buses for various applications such as monitoring,
diagnosis and control. It is the aim of this work to exploit such
a resource for possible protection applications. In this work
the synchrophasor data supplements the protection decision by
a distance relay during critical situations like power swing
when the relay is already blocked. The proposed scheme
detects the fault for the line during power swing by comparing
the synchronized current phasors obtained through PMUs
available at both the ends of a line. Otherwise, the PMU data
can independently decide the fault in the line which can be
used as a backup protection to the existing distance relay. It is
to be noted that the latency issue with PMU data (system of
Fig. 1) does not permit for primary differential protection for
the line and the distance relay is supplemented by such data.
This is demonstrated for a power system simulated in
PSCAD/EMTDC.
II. PROPOSED METHOD
With PMU reporting rate of 50/60 frames per sec for 50/60
Hz power system, at every cycle synchrophasors can be
obtained through dedicated communication system, which
would be compatible to slower protection decision like fault
detection during power swing. A power system is considered
as shown in Fig. 1, where the distance relay R1 at bus M
observes swing following a clearance of fault in line-2. Any
fault in line-1 during swing is to be detected by R1. The
positive sequence current phasors at both the ends are
obtained and the difference in phasors is calculated.
ID IM IN (1)
Where, IM is the positive sequence current flowing through
line-1 at bus M and IN is the positive sequence current flowing
through line-1 at bus N. The magnitude of differential current
ID is negligible during power swing and significantly high
for any fault in line-1. If the difference in positive sequence
current magnitudes of both the ends of the line becomes more
than a threshold value then the proposed algorithm declares a
fault in the line. The algorithm can able to detect both
negligible during power swing and significantly high at the
time of fault. The rate of change in swing-center-voltage is
significant during power swing and it is zero during the fault
period. The differential current phasors during the swing is
also negligible and significantly high throughout the fault
period. All three methods are able to identify the fault
correctly for this case.

Superimp current (A)

symmetrical and high resistance asymmetrical faults during 20

power swing. The technique being based on differential

principle is not affected by load angle variation and fault type. 10

The proposed method compared with superimposed current

component fault detection method and rate of change in swing 0
1.67 1.68 1.69 1.7 1.71 1.72 1.73 1.74 1.75 1.76
center voltage. The superimposed current component is

Rate of change SCV (V/s)

20
calculated by comparing present cycle with previous cycle
samples as mentioned in [8]. The swing center voltage will 0
vary with respect to angle between bus voltages (δ) during
-20
power swing and it is constant during fault period [1]. So, the
rate of change in swing center voltage will be zero during the -40
1.67 1.68 1.69 1.7 1.71 1.72 1.73 1.74 1.75 1.76
fault period.
20

Diff current (A)

III. SIMULATION RESULTS OF DOUBLE CIRCUIT LINE
10
In order to verify the proposed method a system with a
double circuit line shown in Fig. 1 is considered. The system
is simulated using PSCAD/EMTDC software. Phasor 0
1.67 1.68 1.69 1.7 1.71 1.72 1.73 1.74 1.75 1.76
Measurement Units are placed at the buses M and N. A Time (s)

disturbance is created by a three phase fault on Line-2 at point
F at 0.5 s which is cleared after 0.1 s by the opening of
breakers B3 and B4. As a result, line-1 experiences a power
swing. To test the method different faults are simulated at
different swing conditions in line-1 during power swing. Data
are collected at a sampling frequency of 1 kHz. The
performance of the proposed method is compared with the
Fig. 2. Three-phase fault at 1.72 s at 50 km in line-1
B. 3-phase fault at δ=130⁰ during fast swing
A three-phase fault is simulated at 4.5 s at 70 km from
relay R1 in line-1 during a swing (at δ=130⁰) and the
corresponding results are provided in Fig. 3.
Superimp current (A)

superimposed current component method and rate of change 20

in swing center voltage. Results for two critical cases of fault 15

detection during power swing are provided below following a 10

general case. 5
0
4.36 4.38 4.4 4.42 4.44 4.46
Rate of change SCV (V/s)

2000
Communication Link
0
PMU 1 PMU 2
-2000
B1 Line1 B2
-4000
4.36 4.38 4.4 4.42 4.44 4.46

~ R1
15
Diff current (A)

Line2 10

B3 B4 5
M F N
0
Fig. 1. The 280 km Double circuit Transmission System 4.36 4.38 4.4 4.42 4.44 4.46

A. 3-phase fault at δ=70⁰ during slow swing

A three-phase fault is simulated at 1.72 s at 50 km from
relay R1 in line-1 during a swing (at δ=70⁰). The two
conventional methods and the proposed method are applied
and the corresponding results are provided in Fig. 2. It is
observed that the superimposed current component is
Time (s)
Fig. 3. Three-phase fault at 4.45 s at 70 km in line-1
It is observed that the superimposed current component has
significant value during power swing as compared with
previous case in Fig. 2. Further, the values before and during
the fault are comparable. Fig. 3 is clearly shows that the index
value of the superimposed current component is significantly experiences a power swing. For the purpose of simulating this
less and fails to identify the fault. The rate of change in swing- method, two PMUs are assumed to available at bus 9 and bus
center-voltage method is also takes significant time to identify 6 (may be for different applications). Any fault in line 9-6
the fault. Whereas the differential current method is able to during the power swing is to be detected using synchronized
identifies the fault correctly with one phasor data. Of course, current phasors obtained through PMUs. To test the proposed
the dynamic plot for current differential does not include method different type of faults are simulated in line 9-6 during
communication delay. This example clearly demonstrates the power swing. Data are collected at sampling frequency 1.2
accuracy of the proposed method over conventional kHz. The performance of the proposed method is compared
techniques. with the superimposed current component method and rate of
change in swing center voltage.
C. Line-to-ground fault at δ=170⁰ during fast swing
A line-to-ground fault is simulated at 4.3 s near 120 km Bus-2 Bus-7 Bus-8 Bus-9 Bus-3
from relay location with a fault resistance of 100 Ω during
swing (at δ=170⁰). The results for the case are provided in Fig.
4. The current flowing through the line is increases, as the
˜ ˜
angle between two buses increases. If a fault occurs at that
instant the increase in current due to fault is less. From the
Bus-5 Bus-6
figure it is observed that the index value of superimposed
current is marginally high only for short duration in the initial
period of fault. The rate of change in swing-center-voltage
does not provide a high index value to conclude the fault. On
Bus-4
the other hand, the proposed current differential approach
detects the fault with few phasors of fault data as evident from
the result.
Bus-1

˜
10
Superimp current (A)

Fig. 5. WSCC 9 bus system

5
A. 3-phase fault at δ=100⁰ during slow swing
0
A three-phase fault is simulated at 2.45 s at middle of the
4.15
x 10
4
4.2 4.25 4.3 4.35 4.4
line 9-6 during a slow power swing of frequency 2 Hz at a
Rate of change SCV (V/s)

1
separation angle δ=100⁰. The results for the case are provided
0.5
in Fig. 6. It is observed from the figure that the superimposed
0
current component is significant at the time fault and able to
-0.5 detect the fault correctly. The rate of change in swing-center-
-1
4.15 4.2 4.25 4.3 4.35 4.4
voltage is zero for fault duration and identifies the fault
30 correctly. The difference in current phasors is negligible
during power swing and significantly high during the fault
Diff current (A)

20
period.
10
25
Superimposed current (A)

20
0
4.15 4.2 4.25 4.3 4.35 4.4
Time (s) 15

Fig. 4. High resistance line-to-ground fault at 4.3 s at 120 km in line-1 10

IV. SIMULATION RESULTS OF WSCC 9 BUS SYSTEM 0

2.2
x 10
6
2.25 2.3 2.35 2.4 2.45 2.5 2.55 2.6
Rate of change in SCV (V/s)

In order to verify the proposed technique WSCC 9 bus 2

system is considered. Single line diagram of the system is 0

shown in Fig. 5. The system is simulated using

-2
PSCAD/EMTDC software. Transmission lines are modeled
with distributed parameters in the simulation. Generators are -4
2.2 2.25 2.3 2.35 2.4 2.45 2.5 2.55 2.6

modeled with one axis flux decay dynamics and exciters are 50
Differential current (A)

modeled as IEEE type-1 exciter. For this study a distance

40

30
relay considered at bus-9 of the line 9-6. For the purpose of 20
simulating power swing, a three-phase fault is assumed to 10

occur in line 5-4 at middle of the line. The fault is cleared in 0

0.3 seconds by opening the line breakers at both ends of the

2.2 2.25 2.3 2.35 2.4 2.45 2.5 2.55 2.6
Time (s)

line 4-5. As a result, the distance relay at bus 9 in line 9-6 Fig. 6. Three-phase fault at 2.45 s at middle of the line 9-6.
B. Line-ground fault at δ=150⁰ during fast swing It is observed that the superimposed current component is
A line-ground fault is simulated at 3.97 s at middle of the less than 10 A, which is less than the index value of
line 9-6 at δ=150⁰ during a fast swing and the corresponding superimposed current during power swing in previous case as
results are provided in Fig. 7. The current will increase as the shown in Fig. 7. It clearly shows the problem in setting the
angle between two areas increases during power swing. It is threshold value for the superimposed current component
observed from the figure that the superimposed current is method to detect fault during power swing. The rate of change
significant during power swing and it is high for small in swing-center-voltage takes two cycles to conclude the fault.
duration at the instant of fault. This method may fail to detect On the other hand, the differential current is negligible during
the fault. The rate of change in SCV is zero throughout the power swing and significantly high though out the fault
fault period and able to detect the fault correctly. The period.
proposed method identifies the fault with few phasors of fault
data as evident from the result (of course communication V. CONCLUSION
delay has to be added to detection time). It is noticed that available fault detection methods for
distance relays have limitation during power swing.
Superimposed currnet (A)

20

15 Synchrophasor data of the two ends of a line are applied for

10 detection of fault during power swing using current
5
differential principle. The method assumes that PMUs are
available at both the ends of a line for other purposes. The
0
3.6
x 10
5
3.65 3.7 3.75 3.8 3.85 3.9 3.95 4 4.05 4.1
proposed method tested for a double circuit line and WSCC 9
1
bus system at different fault scenarios during power swing. It
Differential current (A) Rate of change in SCV (V/s)

-1
is found that the technique is accurate and can supplement the
-2 distance relay for fault detection during power swing. Of
-3 course such PMU data can be used as backup protection to the
-4
3.6 3.65 3.7 3.75 3.8 3.85 3.9 3.95 4 4.05 4.1
existing relaying schemes. The constraint for the method is the
40 latency compatibility with PMU data transfer.
30

20 APPENDIX
10 The parameters of the 400 kV system.
0
3.6 3.65 3.7 3.75 3.8 3.85 3.9 3.95 4 4.05 4.1
Equivalent Generator G:
Time (s) 600MVA, 22 kV, 50 Hz, inertia constant = 4.4 MW/MVA.
Fig. 7. Line-ground fault at 3.97 s at middle of the line 9-6. Xd = 1.81 p.u., X"d = 0.3 p.u., X"d = 0.23 p.u., T"do = 8 s.,
T"do = 0.03 s., Xq = 1.76 p.u., X"q = 0.25p.u., T"q0 = 0.03 s.,
C. 3-phase fault at δ=150⁰ during slow swing Ra = 0.003 p.u., Xp (Potier reactance) = 0.15 p.u.
A three-phase fault is simulated at 1.8 s at middle of the Transformer:
line 9-6 during a slow power swing of frequency 2 Hz at a 600MVA, 22/400 kV, 50 Hz, Δ /Υ, X = 0.163 p.u.,
separation angle δ=150⁰ and the corresponding results are Xcore = 0.33 p.u., Rcore = 0.0 p.u., Pcopper = 0.00177 p.u.
provided in Fig. 8. Transmission lines:
5 Line length (each) = 280 km
Superimposed current (A)

4 Positive sequence impedance (Z1) = 0.12 + j 0.88 Ω/km

3 Zero sequence impedance (Z0) = 0.309 + j 1.297 Ω/km
2
Positive sequence capacitance (C1) = 1.0876 x 10-8 F/km
1
Zero sequence capacitance (C0) = 0.768 x 10-8 F/km
0
CT ratio = 600/5A
1.7 1.72 1.74 1.76 1.78 1.8 1.82 1.84 1.86 1.88 1.9
PT ratio = 400kV/110V
Rate of change SCV (V/s)

1000

0 ACKNOWLWDGEMENT
-1000 The authors are thankful to Department of Science and
-2000 Technology, New Delhi for sponsoring the project-
-3000
“Protecting power system using wide area measurements
1.7
30
1.72 1.74 1.76 1.78 1.8 1.82 1.84 1.86 1.88 1.9
(WAM)”, No. 100/IFD/631/2009-2010 through which the
research was conducted
Differential Current (A)

20

REFERENCES
10
[1] IEEE Power System Relaying Committee of the IEEE Power Eng. Soc.,
0
“Power swing and out-of-step considerations on transmission line,” Rep.
1.7 1.72 1.74 1.76 1.78 1.8 1.82 1.84 1.86 1.88 1.9
PSRC WG D6., Jul. 2005. [Online]. Available: http://www.pes-psrc.org
Time (s)

Fig. 8. Three-phase fault at 1.8 s at middle of the line 9-6.

[2] G. Benmouyal, D. Hou and D. Tziouvaras, “Zero-setting power swing
blocking protection,” The 31st Annual Western Protective Relay
Conference, Washington, 2004.
[3] B. Su,. X. Z. Dong, Z. Q. Bo, Y. Z. Sun, B.R.J Caunce, D. Tholomier
and A. Apostolov, “Fast detector of symmetrical fault during power
swing for distance relay,” IEEE Power Eng. Soc. Gen. Meet., Vol. 2,
pp.1836 – 1841, 2005.
[4] Chengzong Pang and Mladen Kezunovic, “Fast distance relay scheme
for detecting symmetrical fault during power swing,” IEEE Trans.
Power Deliver, Vol. 25, Issue 4, pp. 2205-2212, Oct 2010.
[5] H. Kazemi Karegar and B. Mohamedi, “A new method for fault
detection during power swing in distance protection,” IEEE ECTI-CON
2009, Vol. 01, pp. 230-233, 2009.
[6] L. Xiangning, Z. Qing, L. Wenjun, W. Kecheng and W. Hanli, “A fast
unblocking scheme for distance protection to identify symmetrical fault
occurring during power swings,” IEEE Power Eng. Soc. Gen. Meet.,
pp.1-8, 2006.
[7] S. Jiao, Z. Bo, W. Liu and Q. Yang, “New principles to detect faults
during power swing,” Developments in Power System Protection
Conference, IEEE, pp. 515-518, 2001.
[8] A. P. Apostolov, D. Tholomier, S. H. Richards, “Superimposed
components based sub-cycle protection of transmission lines,” Power
Systems Conference and Exposition, IEEE PES, vol.1, pp. 592 – 597,
2004.
[9] J. De La Ree, V. Centeno, J. S. Thorp, A. G. Phadke, “Synchronized
phasor measurement applications in power systems,” IEEE Trans. Smart
Grid, Vol. 1, Issue 1, pp. 20-27, 2010.
[10] P. V. Navalkar, S. A. Soman, “Secure remote backup protection of
transmission lines using synchrophasors,” IEEE Trans. Power Del., Vol.
26, Issue 1, pp. 87-96, 2011.
BIOGRAPHIES
J Ganeswara Rao obtained his B. Tech degree in Electrical Engineering from
Institution of Engineers (India), Kolkata in 2008 and obtained his M. Tech
degree in Power System Engineering from Indian Institute of Technology
Kharagpur, India in 2011. Presently he is pursuing for Ph.D. degree at Indian
Institute of Technology Kharagpur. His research area is Power System
Protection.
Ashok Kumar Pradhan (SM’10, M’94) received Ph.D. in Electrical
Engineering from Sambalpur University, India in 2001. He has been with the
Department of Electrical Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology,
Kharagpur, India since 2002. He has served at the Department of Electrical
Engineering, University College of Engineering Burla, India from 1992-
2002. Dr Pradhan is a recipient of the Young Engineer Award, Indian
National Academy of Engineering, India in 2001. His research interest
includes Power System Relaying and Monitoring.