IEEE PES PowerAfrica 2012 Conference and Exhibition
Johannesburg, South Africa, 9-13 July 2012
Fault Detection and Classification in a Distribution Network Integrated with
Distributed Generators
A.C. Adewole and R. Tzoneva
Centre for Substation Automation and Energy Management Systems
Cape Peninsula University of Technology, Cape Town, South Africa
Phone: +27 021-959-6459, Email: adewolea@cput.ac.za
Abstract - This paper develops a methodology for application in
distribution network fault detection and classification. The
proposed methodology is based on wavelet energy spectrum
entropy decomposition of disturbance waveforms to extract
characteristic features by using level-4 db4 wavelet coefficients.
Thus, few input features are required for the implementation.
Different simulation scenarios encompassing various fault types at
several locations with different load angles, fault resistances, fault
inception angles, and load switching are applied to the IEEE 34
Node Test Feeder. In particular, the effects of system changes
were investigated by integrating various Distributed Generators
(DGs) into the distribution feeder. Extensive studies, verification,
and analysis made from the application of this technique validate
the approach. Comparison with statistical methods based on
standard deviation and mean absolute deviation has shown that
the method based on log energy entropy is very reliable, accurate,
and robust.
Index Terms- Discrete wavelet transform, distribution network,
fault detection and classification, wavelet energy spectrum.
I. INTRODUCTION
The recent restructuring in electric power utilities over the
last decade has brought about the need for efficient
generation and transfer (transmission and distribution) of
electric power to load centers. The mode of power evacuation
is usually via overhead lines. Overhead lines are subject to
the forces of nature and other uncontrollable factors, thus
liable to faults.
An essential aspect of Abnormal Event Management
(AEM) is fault detection and diagnosis. In the past, most
research and development in power system faults detection
and diagnosis focused on transmission systems, and it is not
until recently with the introduction of stringent fault indices
by regulatory bodies that research on power system faults has
begun on the unique aspects of distribution networks. The
application of algorithms designed for transmission networks
when used for distribution lines are prone to errors because of
the non-homogeneity, presence of laterals/tap-offs, radial
operation, and load taps along distribution lines. Therefore,
there is the need for contingency plans to troubleshoot faults
and expedite service restoration in order to reduce downtime.
Many diagnostic methods have been developed and
proposed, but a perfect, dependable, and secure method is
still the objective of continuous research. Methods based on
Wavelet Transform (WT) for fault diagnosis were proposed
978-1-4673-2550-9112/$31.00 ©2012 IEEE
by [1]-[6]. Reference [7] proposed a method for fault
detection and classification in transmission systems using
wavelet and fuzzy logic. Similarly, [5], [8], [10] suggested
techniques using WT and Artificial Neural Network (ANN)
for transmission line fault detection and classification.
Another technique based on WT and Support Vector Machine
(SVM) was proposed by [11] for power system disturbance
classifier in transmission systems. Reference [12] presented a
methodology for the classification of Power Quality (PQ)
disturbances using Wavelet Packet Transform (WPT) and
fuzzy k-nearest neighbor classifier. A method by [13] for PQ
disturbances was based on Discrete Wavelet Transform
(DWT) and wavelet network. Reference [14] also presented a
WT and rule based method for power quality classification in
a transmission network. A method based on Hubbard­
Stratonovich (HS) transform and radial basis function neural
network was suggested by [15]. Reference [16] described a
method for fault detection and classification based on WT
decomposition of the transformed current values. The method
suggested the use of wavelet entropies for multi-agent fault
diagnosis in distribution networks.
Although, the method by [15] is fast because of the
reduction in the computational requirements, the use of level-
1 coefficients may fail to provide the appropriate transient
characteristics that truly represent the fault type/phase(s)
especially where there is mutual coupling between the
phases. Also, the technique described by [14] did not cover
the effect of noise disturbance on the model. The method
proposed by [16] made use of Clark's Transform to convert
the three phase current measurements to modal domain. The
disadvantage of this is the added computation that would be
required during implementation. In addition, the effects of
load angle, load switching, and capacitor switching were not
considered in the various literature reviewed.
In this paper, wavelet energy spectrum entropy based on
log energy is employed to detect and classify faults in a
typical distribution network. This is implemented by taking
into account the distinct nature of distribution networks and
network changes that are likely to occur. To validate the
proposed approach, extensive simulation studies are carried
out on the IEEE 34 Node Test Feeder Benchmark model at
different fault locations, fault resistances, fault inception
angles, load angle variations, load and capacitor switching,
and network topology changes.
The rest of this paper is organized as follows: Section II
explains the principles of Wavelet Transform. Section III
describes the Power System Model. The implementation of k2nt is the variable for shift, and 1/2//1 is the energy
the fault detection and classification algorithm is outlined in
normalization component to ensure the same scale as the
section IV. Section V provides the results and discussion of
mother wavelet.
this approach. Section VI summarizes the conclusion.
In implementing Multi-Resolution Analysis (MRA) for
DWT, the scaling and wavelet functions are obtained from
II. WAVELET TRANSFORM ANALYSIS [21], [22].
m m
A. Wavelet Transform rjJm,n (t)=2-( I2)rjJ(-2 t-n) (3)

-(mI2) 1jJ(2-mt-n)
The classical Fourier Transform (FT) is a frequency 1jJm,n (t)=2 (4)
domain method. That is, it transforms a signal from time­
based to frequency-based one. Thus, time information is lost where At
rm�
(t) is the scale function, and 'lj
Ym�
(f) is the wavelet
and it is impossible to tell when an event took place. Short function.
Time (STFT) was introduced to correct the shortcoming of Wavelets are localized in both time (through translation)
the FT. However, a fixed time window is used. Many signals and frequency (through dilation). The first scale covers a
require a more flexible approach where the window size can broad frequency range at the high frequency end of the
be varied to determine the frequency or time more accurately. spectrum and the higher scales cover the lower end of the
A method such as WT capable of multiple resolutions in time frequency spectrum. Signal decomposition starts by passing
and frequency and with a flexible window size is thereby the signal through a set of filters. Approximations are the
required. The windowing in WT automatically uses short high-scale, low-frequency components of the signal produced
time intervals for high frequency components and long time by filtering with a low-pass filter with coefficient vector
intervals for low frequency components by using scale and
shift techniques.
(h) .The details are the low-scale, high-frequency
components of the signal produced by a high-pass filter with
WT can be implemented using the Continuous Wavelet
coefficient vector (g) .
Transform (CWT). The CWT of a signal X(t)is the integral of
The filters are given by [22]:
the product between X (t)and the daughter-wavelets, which
¢(t) = 2: g(n)fi¢(2t - n) (5)
are the time translated and scale expanded/compressed n
versions of a function having finite energy, called mother­
wavelet. 1jJ(t) = 2: h(n)fi¢(2t - n) (6)
n
The CWT of a signal X (t) is defined as [17], [18]: After each level of decomposition, the sampling frequency is

C(a,b)= �f+ooX(t)lfJ ( t - b ) dt reduced by half. Then, the lowpass filter output

vial -00
a (1)
(approximation) is decomposed to produce the components of
the next level. The original signal sequence f(k) can also be
)
where 1jJ (t is the mother wavelet, a is the scale factor, b is
represented by the sum of all components i.e the sum of all
1/2 the details and the approximation at the last level of
the translation factor (position along the time axis), l a l - is
decomposition. For example, for two levels of
the normalization value of 1jJ a, b(t)so that if1jJ(t)has a unit decomposition, the representation is:
length, then its scaled version 1jJ a, b(t)would also have a unit f(k) =cD!(k) + CA1(k) = cD!(k) + cD2(k) + CA2(k)
length. I

Another variant of WT is DWT. One area in which the f(k) =

2: cD) (k) + cA, (k) (7)
H
DWT has been particularly successful is transient analysis in
power systems [1], [2], [19]. This is because it acquires the where cD; is the detail at scale} and cAt is the approximation
transient features and accurately analyzes them in both the at scale}, and 1=2.
time and frequency contexts at different frequency bands with
different resolutions. B. Feature Extraction

DWT(m, n) � = 1
f
f(k}lp
(
n - k2m
2
m
)
The mathematical expression for DWT is given by [17-20]:
(2) Fault signals are known to contain transients and
harmonics. These high-frequency components carry essential
information that could be used to identify fault or
where f(k) is a discrete signal, lfJ(n) is the mother wavelet
abnormalities in power system network. The energy of
(window function), m and n are time scale parameters, k is wavelet coefficient varies over different scales as per the
the number of coefficients, 2111 is the variable for scale, energy distribution in the signal. Wavelet energy is the sum
of the square of WT coefficients.
 The wavelet energy of a signal at scale j and instant k is Simulation of the power system was carried out using
given as [23]-[2S]: DIgSILENT PowerFactory and the steady state load flow
results were validated with the results from IEEE 34 node
Eik=IOj(k)12 (8) benchmark system in [26]. The relative error of the node
phase voltages is shown in Table 1.
At scale j , the instants = J, 2, 3, ... , N
Table 1. Node Voltage Relative Error vs. [26]
The log energy entropy of the signal at scale j is:

WEEj = fl09Ejk (9) Relative Error

(%)
Phase A Phase B POASEC

Minimum -5.2032 -1.5586 -0.2325

Standard Deviation a is a statistical measure of distribution
Maximum -0.0307 1.2722 2.3210
or spread in a data set and it is derived from the square root of
the variance in a data set. Mean Absolute Deviation (MAD) Average 3.1509 0.7719 0.8746

is the mean of the absolute deviations of the data set from the
mean of the data. It shows the statistical dispersion of a data
set.
The standard deviation of the signal at scale j , instants k is:
)
Dynamic electromagnetic transient simulation of different
fault types involving Single Phase-to-ground (1 Ph.-g), two
Phase (2 Ph.), two phase-to-ground (2 Ph.-g), and three phase
(3 Ph.) faults were performed. These simulations were carried

� 1: (Djk - ,u}
1 2 out at different locations at an interval of 10% along the main
(1 N
2 /
OJ =
(10) feeder, at 9S% of the main feeder, and on the laterals. Fault
1
resistances (R,)of OQ, 2.SQ, SQ, IOQ, 20Q, and 100Q, and
Similarly, the Mean Absolute Deviation of a signal is given fault inception angles(ef) of 0°, 30°, 4So, 60°, and 90° were
as:
used in the simulations. The fault inception angle efa is the
(11) phase angle of phase A voltage at the fault inception time.

where 0 jk is the detail coefficient at scale j , instant k, Ii

j
is
Simulations were done to discriminate between transients due
to switching conditions from load and capacitor switching.
Load angle variations of 0°, 60°, 90° were also carried out.
the mean at scale j , and N is the number of instants.
The waveforms were generated with a sampling rate of 128
samples per cycle.
III. POWER SYSTEM MODEL
B. Modified IEEE 34 Node Test Benchmark Feeder
A. Base Case IEEE 34 Node Test Benchmark Feeder
Three cases which involved the integration of Distributed
Generators (DGs) into the benchmark model were studied in
The distribution network used is the IEEE 34 Node Test
this paper. These include:
Feeder. It is a long feeder operated at 60Hz with unbalanced
loading and nominal voltage of 24.9 kV. Fig. 1 shows the
•
DG1 case study: maximum load + 20% of DG
IEEE 34 Node Test Feeder. installed at node 840
•
DG2 case study: maximum load + 20% of DG
installed at node 844
•
DG3 case study: maximum load + 10% of DGs
B22 installed at node 840 and 844 respectively.
Distributed generation refers to the electric power
820
generation (usually between SkW and IOMW) at the
1142
consumption end of a distribution network. The generated
power is integrated to the distribution network at the
�''''''''Z .. 816
834 BtiO
substation, feeder, or customer load levels [27]. DGs can be
implemented with wind turbine, hydro, PV, fuel cells, etc.
862 The integration of DGs into a distribution network often
800
810 causes protection coordination issues [28].
1138
Case studies involving the integration of DGs into the IEEE
34 node test feeder were carried out to investigate the ability
of WT based log energy entropy to correctly detect and
828 830 854 856
classify faults even after DGs were integrated.
The studies carried out in this paper did not assign any
Fig. 1. IEEE 34 Node Test Feeder. specific energy source to the DG. Also, the parameters of the
 synchronous generators were based on previous work carried time domain, and for its good performance in power system
out by [28]. The connection of the generator to the grid was studies as reported by [11], [12], [32], [33].
via a 500kVA step-up transformer. The transformer The lowpass filter (g) and highpass filter (h ) of the db4
impedances were also set equal to the transformer at node have four coefficients. These coefficients are:
832 (XFM-l).
g1 0.1294, g2 0.2241, g3 0.8365, g4 0.4830
However, the transformer winding was changed to delta­
= = = =

star type based on the recommendations by [27] on optimal h1 = -0.4830, h2 0.8365, h3

= = -0.2241, h4 = -0.1294
transformer winding types for DGs. The placement and sizing
of the DGs were based on [28]-[31]. Thus, node 840 (along The particular level of decomposition to use is based on the
the main line) and node 848 (one of the laterals) were used wavelet spectra. The log energy entropy, standard deviation,
with a 20% penetration level one at a time. Furthermore, and mean absolute deviation at levels-l to -6 were computed
another test case was simulated with smaller DGs co-located using (9) - (11). Level-4 was chosen as the level of interest
in the network at nodes 840 and 848 respectively. A plot of for both fault detection and classification because the best
the voltage profile is given in Fig. 2. Similarly, a plot of the results for log energy entropy, standard deviation, and mean
short circuit currents at various nodes are shown in Fig. 3. absolute deviation were obtained at that level. Level-4
Nodes 836-1 refers to lateral 836-862, while Node 836-2 corresponds to the frequency range of 240Hz to 480Hz.
refers to lateral 836-840. The voltage profile plot shows the Short Circuit Current for Case Studies
1000 r-o
impact of the integration of DG into the feeder. Also, there 0 c."l'
co co N Node
was an increase in the short circuit current at various nodes in
=

900 Z Z _ Base Case

the feeder.
Voltage Profile co
0
_ DG Case 1
;;( 800
q> _ DG Case2
$' z
c
• DG Case 1
Q)
....
700 _ DG Case3
DG Case 2 ....
:::J
1.
�.�. -+--�----r---+----r� DG Case 3 () 600
+.-¥: .... :!::
Base Case :::J
() 500
.... <0 "'" "'"
N L{)
0.99 (3
400
C9
z
q>
z
q>
z C}J
t::
�

co "'" c.b <0

,..-...

� 0 L{) (') (') (')

KK ."'-KKK _ :f., _K £
c. q> q> q> q>
w' '" 300
(f) z z z z
'E .•-!!-. • •
. .
. '�. •
C1l 0.98 �.�.�. ><
C1l
> ..' 200
>.
�
�

.
a... y )( .- Ii

I I I I
.. II- ..
.- ... 100
0.97

0
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

--- --- _·..r�·#·!y____'_r_

0.96
... Nodes

'-_'---'7 ---'- _ ·�_·:!;o-· �· _ (_,.

Fig. 4. Short Circuit Current for the various Case Studies

0.95
800 810 820 830 840 850
----'-
4-
•••

860
--------
--'----
870
�
--'
880
�
890
r.
B. Design ofRule Based Detector and Classifier
Node
Fig. 3. Voltage Profile of the various Case Studies
The proposed algorithm in this paper is implemented with
software subroutines written in MATLAB. The fault
IV. ALGORITHM FOR FAULT DETECTION AND detection module is activated first and on detection of a fault
CLASSIFICATION condition, the fault type and faulted phase(s) module is
triggered to perform the classification tasks. Each fault has its
A. Feature Extraction characteristic feature or signature by which its faulted
phase(s) can be identified.
Various simulations were carried out in DIgSILENT The fault detection module compares the computed level-4
PowerFactory. The waveform plots of the three phase and entropy values with a predetermined threshold (;; d) for each
zero sequence currents were exported to MATLAB as ASCII
files. These files are decomposed into coefficients using db4 of the phases. The predetermined threshold (;; d) is carefully
level-6.
chosen to ensure that the algorithm would be able to
Daubechies 4 (db4) is one of the most used wavelet in
accurately discriminate between faults and normal switching
power system disturbance analysis and it was chosen for this
research because of its orthogonality, compact support in the events. In this particular case, ?- = 100, ?- = 100, and
Sda Sdb
r = 100. Fault is detected when any of the computed v. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
""de
wavelet entropy values lIVEE(a) , lIVEE(b) , lIVEE(c) for the A. Results
three phases is greater than r . p E (A B C). where r ,
""dp , , ""da The proposed method was tested using several fault cases
r , and r are the entropy value thresholds for phase A, B, comprising of various fault types, fault conditions, and
""db ""de
system parameters. In particular, the line segments at the
and C respectively.
beginning and at the extreme end of the feeder were studied.
When fault is detected, the fault classification module is
triggered for fault type classification and faulted phase(s)
identification. The patterns observed through exhaustive
simulations were used to draw up the rules for the algorithm. Select 3Ph. & zero
sequence currents
Fig. 5. is a flow chart for the implementation of this waveforms

algorithm.
The criteria for fault classification are:
Rl: if lIVEE(a) >(r ), & WEE(b)< (r ) & liVEE(e) < (r )--->
S ea S cb S ec

A-g Fault
R2: if WEE(a) «�c ), & WEE(b) >(�cb) & liVEE(e) «�cc) --->
.
B-g Fault
R3: if WEE(a) «�c ), & WEE(b) < (�Cb)& liVEE(e) >(�cc) --->
.
C-g Fault
R4: if WEE(a) >(�c ), & WEE(b) > (�Cb) & liVEE(e) «�cc)--->
.
Yes
AB Fault
R5: if WEE(a) «�c ), & WEE(b) >(�cb) & liVEE(e»(�cc) --->
. Single Phase
BC Fault Fault?

R6: if WEE(a » (�c ) & WEE(b)«�ro> & liVEE(e»(�cc) --->

. '

CA Fault
R7: if WEE(a) >(�c ), & (WEE(b) >(�cb) & liVEE(e)«�cc) --->
.
AB-g Fault
R8: if WEE(a) «�c ), & (WEE(b) >(�cb) & liVEE(e) >(�cc) --->
.
BC-g Fault
R9: if WEE(a) >(�c ), & WEE(b) «�cb) & liVEE(e) >(�cc) --->
.
CA-g Fault
R IO: if WEE(a) >(�c ), & WEE(b) >(�cb) & liVEE(e»(�cc)--->
.
3Ph. Fault. Fig. 5 . Flowchart of the Proposed Algorithm

where lIVEE(a) , lIVEE(b) , lIVEE(c) are the computed level-4 Distribution Plot of 2Ph. Faults for DG1 Case Study

log energy entropy values for phases A, B, and C. (r ) ,

"" ea
(r ) , and (r ) are the fault classification thresholds for
"" eb "" ee
phases A, B, C respectively and was set to 100.
2Ph. and 2Ph.-g faults were classified using the values
ofWEEIO. Line-to-ground faults exhibited higher zero
sequence entropy (WEEIO), thus, this formed the basis for
2Ph. and 2Ph.-g classification.
Therefore, faults with values of WEEIO> -250 will be
classified as 2 Ph.-g faults.
-' 10
o
WEEa
o
2
4 20
WEEb 3

Fig. 6. Distribution Plot of 2Ph. Fault for DG 1 Case Study

 The effects of the following were considered: Fault
resistance, fault distance, fault inception angle, and the
integration of DGs. Fig. 6. is a visualization of the
distribution or spread of 2 Ph. faults for 10% to 95% of the
main feeder, laterals 820-822, and 846-848 respectively for
DG1 case study using log energy entropy. This shows that the
fault types are quite distinguishable from one another. From
the results obtained through several simulation cases, the
faulted phase was seen to have the highest log energy
entropy. The text in bold signify the faulted phase(s).
Statistical methods have been reported to show good
performance in power system analysis [34-39]. The proposed
method based on wavelet log energy entropy is compared
with that based on features from Standard Deviation a and
Mean Absolute Deviation (MAD) of the WT decomposition.
Tables 2-4 show some of the results obtained for log energy
entropy, standard deviation and mean absolute deviation
respectively.

Table 2. DG 1 Case Study at 10 % of the Main Feeder (Rt= 00, 8t = (/')

No Fault No Fault No Fault Load Capacitor 1 Ph. 2Ph. 2Ph. 3Ph.

Method (0°) Load (60°) Load (90°) Load Switching 844 A-g A-B A-B-g
Angle Angle Angle Switching
WEE(a) 62.16 26.74 64.64 59.2 77.73 219.22 188.20 213.95 217.055

WEE(b) 9.76 53.38 12.03 8.42 32.71 36.65 126.39 159.20 165.31

WEE(e) 47.94 10.59 42.45 45.45 38.67 83.38 38.16 73.36 229.449
-451.03 -414.94 -414.94 -474.87 -440.38 -136.23 -506.73 -132.63 -820.41
WEE(lO)

3.68 3.42 3.16 3.67 4.34 25.86 33.23 27.21 26.33

O(a)
3.00 2.87 3.11 2.99 3.45 6.54 32.69 5l.l5 34.50
O(b)
2.75 3.12 3.03 2.75 2.81 5.87 3.27 11.57 42.89
O(e)
0(10) 0.20 0.23 1.83 0.20 0.21 6.83 0.13 20.69 17.84

MAD(a) 2.12 2.08 1.94 2.12 2.53 13.55 13.30 13.54 13.48
MAD(b) 1.82 1.87 1.90 1.82 2.11 3.52 12.95 19.51 14.29
MAD(e) 1.80 1.77 1.83 2.57 1.88 3.17 2.25 5.44 18.33

MAD(lO) 0.12 0.14 0.24 0.13 0.13 3.62 0.091 8.91 4.28

Table 3. B-C Fault at Line 846 -848 (Rt= 2.50, 8t =3(/')

Case WEE(a) WEE(b) WEE(e) WEE (I 0) O(a) O(b) O(e) 0(10) MAD(a) MAD(b) MAD(e) MAD(lo)
Study

Base 19.94 154.22 170.03 -279.02 1.79 6.11 6.56 0.45 1.54 3.95 4.10 0.25
Case
DGI 46.34 138.03 146.82 -282.16 3.52 4.85 5.16 0.13 2.17 4.88 5.48 1.93

DG2 61.89 137.41 122.88 -255.06 3.52 4.63 4.72 0.11 2.51 3.105 2.99 0.07

DG3 20.01 165.35 127.53 -282.67 3.84 4.66 4.56 0.09 2.73 3.09 2.87 0.06

Table 4. C-A-G Fault at Line 8 20 -8 22 (Rt= 50, 8t = 6(/')

Case WEE(a) WEE(b) WEE(e) WEE (I 0) O(a) O(b) O(e) 0(10) MAD(a) MAD(b) MAD(e) MAD(lo)
Study

Base 188.90 21.41 194.09 -69.81 13.04 3.27 13.74 4.85 6.61 2.14 6.64 2.01
Case
DGI 185.5 30.55 180.87 -82.18 9.76 4.11 8.86 4.24 5.46 3.00 5.04 1.78

DG2 136.9 22.69 159.07 -142.2 9.56 4.01 8.93 3.92 5.22 2.39 4.92 1.40

DG3 144.4 12.99 154.47 -165.48 8.91 2.73 9.35 0.18 4.63 1.88 5.04 0.09
B. Discussion
The algorithm was able to differentiate between fault events
and 'no fault' conditions like load switching, capacitor
switching, and steady-state system operation when log energy
entropy, standard deviation, and mean absolute deviation
were used as inputs. Tables 2-4 show the results obtained at
fault locations close to the upstream substation, a lateral, and
at a location 189,205 ft. away from the upstream substation
respectively. Table 2 present some of the values obtained for
fault detection at 10% of the main feeder (Line 806-808).
Tables 3 and 4 show the results for faults at various fault
inception angles and fault resistances. For all the methods
presented, the faulted phase is associated with values many
times greater than the healthy/unfaulted phase(s). For fault
detection and classification using log energy entropy, the
various fault types were quite distinguishable for all the case
studies. Furthermore, the thresholds used for the fault
detection and classification for the base case performed well
even for the DG cases without the need to review these
thresholds. Simulation plots and entropy results showed the
existence of mutual coupling in the phases especially for
faults in close proximity to the DG location. However, the
algorithm was able to accurately distinguish between the
healthy phase(s) and the faulted phase(s). Although, different
entropy values were obtained for different combination of
fault resistances and fault inception angles for the same
location, that did not affect the detection and classification
performance since the results obtained per fault types were
apparently above the pre-defined thresholds.
The values obtained for a and MAD after the integration
of DGs were not completely useful for fault classification
because there were similarities between the values obtained
for faulted phase(s) in one location and the values for healthy
phase(s) at another location. Table 5 illustrates some of the
errors obtained when using a and MAD. Entry 1 of Table 5
was misclassified as 'no fault'. Entry 2 was also misclassified
as A-B fault. Entries 3 and 4 were wrongly denoted as 'no
fault' respectively. Also, the values of a and MAD showed a
corresponding decrease in value for faults with high
resistances and for faults located far away from the
substation. This implies that a and MAD are influenced by
fault resistance and fault location.

Table 5 . Features Using Standard Deviation and Mean Absolute Deviation

Case Location Fault Fault Parameters O(a) O(b) O(c) 0(10) MAD(a) MAD(b) MAD(c) MAD(lO)
Study Type
DGl Line 834-842 A-g R(= Og, 0( = if 5.12 3.85 3.55 1.99 3.43 2.57 2.30 1.16
DGl Line 834-842 B-g R(= Og, 0( = if 9.25 10.25 4.05 4.39 5.31 4.53 2.30 1.97
Base Case Line 828-830 A-g R(= lOOg, 0( = if 5.43 2.98 2.88 2.08 3.46 1.93 2.00 0.86
Base Case Line 834-842 A-g R[= lOOg, 0[ = if 5.35 3.39 3.35 2.67 3.34 2.17 2.21 1.02

VI. CONCLUSION for conventional distribution network as well as modified

This paper proposes an accurate approach for fault
detection and classification of fault types and faulted phase(s)
in distribution networks. Various scenarios were simulated
using DIgSILENT PowerFactory. DWT was implemented in
MATLAB to decompose the three phase and zero sequence
current waveforms using db4 level-4 detail coefficients. A
rule based method was used afterwards for fault detection and
classification tasks respectively. It was observed that the
proposed method based on wavelet log energy entropy
accurately detects and classify the fault type. Comparisons
with statistical feature extraction methods based on
computation of standard deviation and mean absolute
deviation of the WT decomposition show that the method
based on log energy entropy is very reliable, accurate, robust,
and is independent of system conditions/changes. That is, it
provided accurate results irrespective of load angle variation,
load and capacitor switching, and network topology changes.
It is also immune to varying fault location, fault resistance,
and fault inception angles. It has been shown to be suitable
network with DGs. As a result of its simplicity, accuracy and
speed of operation, it can be used to aid existing protection
equipment in fault diagnosis.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
This research work is funded by the South African
National Research Foundation (NRF) UID62364 "Substation
Automation and Energy Management Systems". The authors
are grateful for the financial support.
REFERENCES
Z.G. Bo, AT Johns, and R.K. Aggarwal, R.K., "A Novel Fault
Locator based on the Detection of Fault Generated High Frequency
Transients". Developments in Power System Protection, lEE
Conference Publication, No. 434. pp. 197-200. 25-27th Mar. 1997.
2 Z.Q. Bo, G. Weller, and M.A. Redfern, "Accurate fault location
technique for distribution system using fault-generated high-frequency
transient voltage signals". lEE Proceedings of Generation,
Transmission, and Distribution, Vol. 146, No. 1, pp. 73-79, Jan. 1999.
3 A.M. Gaouda, M.M.A. Salaina M.K. Sultan, and A.Y. Cliildiaoi,
"Power Quality Detection and Classification using Wavelet-
 Multiresolution Signal Decomposition". IEEE Transactions on Power
DelivelY, Vol. 14, No. 4, pp. 1469-1476, Oct.l999.
4 A. Abur, and F.H. Magnago, "Use of time delays between modal
components in wavelet based fault location" Electrical Power and
Energy Systems, No. 22, pp. 397-403, 2000.
5 K. Gayathri, N. Kumarappan, and C. Devi, "An Apt method for Fault
Identification and Classification on EHV Lines using Discrete Wavelet
Transform". Power Engineering Conference IPEC, Singapore, pp. 217-
222, 3-6 Dec., 2007.
6 O.A.S. Youssef, "Combined Fuzzy-Logic Wavelet-Based Fault
Classification Technique for Power System Relaying". IEEE
Transactions on Power DelivelY, Vol. 19, No. 2, pp. 582-589. 2004.
7 R.N. Mahanty, and P.B. Dutta Gupta, "A fuzzy logic based fault
classification approach using current samples only". Electric Power
Systems Research, No. 77, pp. 501-507, 2007.
8 K.M. Silva, B. A. Souza, and N.S.D. Brito, "Fault Detection and
Classification in Transmission Lines based on Wavelet Transform and
ANN". IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery, Vol. 21, No. 4, pp. 2058-
2063, 2006.
9 V.S. Kale, S.R. Bhide, P.P. Bedekar and G.V.K. Mohan, "Detection and
Classification of Faults on Parallel Transmission Lines using Wavelet
Transform and Neural Network". World Academy of Science,
Engineering and Technology, No. 46, pp. 927-931, 2008.
10 M. Geethanjali, M. and K. Sathiya Priya, "Detection and Classification
in Transmission Lines". International Conference on Control,
Automation, Communication and Energy Conservation, pp. 1-7, 4-6
June, 2009.
11 S. Ekici, S. Yildirim, M. Poyraz, "Energy and entropy-based feature
extraction for locating fault on transmission lines by using neural
network and wavelet packet decomposition", Expert Systems with
Applications, No.34, pp. 2937-2944, 2008.
12 B.K. Panigrahi and V.R. Pandi, "Optimal feature selection for
classification of power quality disturbances using wavelet packet-based
fuzzy k-nearest neighbor algorithm" lET Generation, Transmission,
Distribution, Vol. 3, Iss. 3, pp. 296-306, 2009.
13 M.A.S. Masoum, S. Jamali, N. Ghaffarzadeh, "Detection and
classification of power quality disturbances using discrete wavelet
transform and wavelet networks". lET Science, Measurement,
Technolology. Vol. 4, Iss. 4, pp. 193-205, 2010.
14 H.K. Chuah, P. Nallagownden, and K.S. Rama Rao, "Power Quality
Problem Classification Based on Wavelet Transform and a Rule-Based
method". IEEE International Conference on Power and Energy (PECon
2010), Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, pp. 1-6, Nov 29 - Dec 1, 2010.
15 S.R. Samantaray, P.K. Dash, G. Panda, "Fault classification and location
using HS Transform and radial basis function neural network", Electric
Power Systems Research, No. 76, pp. 897-905, 2006.
16 EI-Zonkoly A.M. "Fault Diagnosis in Distribution Networks with
Distributed Generation," Smart Grid and Renewable Energy, pp. 1-11,
February 2011.
17 M. Vetterli and e. Herley. "Wavelets and Filter Banks: Theory and
Design". IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing. Vol. 40, No. 9, pp.
2207-2232, Sep. 1992.
18 A. Borghetti, S. Corsi, e.A. Nucci, M. Paolone, L. Peretto, and R.
Tinarelli, "On the use of continuous-wavelet transform for fault
location in distribution power systems". Electrical Power and Energy
Systems, No. 28, pp. 608-617, 2006.
19 A.S. Yilmaz, A. Subasi, M. Bayrak, V. M. Karsli, E. Ercelebi,
"Application of lifting based wavelet transforms to characterize power
quality events". Energy Conversion and Management, No. 48, pp. 112-
123, 2007.
20 S. Ekici, S. Yildirim,M. Poyraz, "A transmission line fault locator
based on Elman recurrent networks". Applied Soft Computing, pp.341-
347, 2009.
21 S. Burrus, R.A. Gopinath, and H. Guo, "Introduction to Wavelet and
Wavelet Transform: A Primer". Prentice-Hall, 1998.
22 J.e. Goswami, and A.K. Chan, "Fundamental of Wavelets: Theory,
Algorithms and Application". John Wiley & Sons, 1999.
23 H. Zhengyou, F. Ling, L. Sheng, and B. Zhiqian, "Fault Detection and
Classification in EHV Transmission Line Based on Wavelet Singular
Entropy". IEEE Transactions on Power DelivelY, Vol. 25, No. 4, pp.
2156-2163, 2010.
24 H. Zhengyou, H.E. Shibin, G. Xiaoqin, C., Jun, Z., Zhiqian, and Q.
Qingquan, "Study of a new method for power system transients
classification based on wavelet entropy and neural network". Electrical
Power and Energy Systems, Vol. 33, pp. 402-410, 2011.
25 A.M. EI-Zonkoly, "Fault diagnosis in distribution networks with
distributed generation". Electric Power Systems Research Vol. 81, pp.
1482-1490, 2011.
26 IEEE Distribution System Analysis Subcommittee. Radial Test Feeders
[Online]. Available:
http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/pes/dsacom/testfeeders.htmi.
27 P. Barker, R.W. de Mello, "Determining the impact of distributed
generation on power systems: part I - Radial power systems". In Proc.
IEEE Power Eng. Soc. Summer Meeting, Vol. I, pp. 1645-1658, 2000.
28 J.A. Silva, H.B. Funmilayo, and K.L. Butler-Purry, "Impact of
Distributed Generation on the IEEE Node Radial Test Feeder with
Overcurrent Protection". Proceedings of 3911. North American Power
Symposium. pp. 49-57, 2007.
29 R.C. Dugan and W.H. Kersting, "Induction machine test case for the 34-
bus test feeder-description". IEEE Power Engineering Society General
Meeting, pp. 1-4, 2006.
30 S. Santoso, and Z. Zhou, "Induction machine test case for the 34-bus test
feeder: a wind turbine time domain model". IEEE Power Engineering
Society General Meeting, pp. 1-4, 2006.
31 N. Samaan, T. McDermott, B. Zavadil, and 1. Li, "Induction machine
test case for the 34-bus test feeder-steady state and dynamic solutions".
IEEE Power Engineering Society General Meeting, pp. 1-5, 2006.
32 N. Perera, and A.D. Rajapakse, "Power system transient classification
for protection relaying". 13th International Conference on Harmonics
and Quality of Power, ICHQP, pp. 1 - 6, 2008.
33 F. B. Costa, B. A. Souza, and N. S. D. Brito, "Real-time detection of
fault-induced transients in transmission lines," lET Electronics Letters,
pp. 753-755, May 2010.
34 P.K. Dash, M.V. Chilukuri, B.K. Panigrahi, "Power Quality Analysis
and Classification using a Generalized Phase Corrected Wavelet
Transform". Power Electronnics, Machines and Drives, Conf Pub No.
487, pp.610-615, 16-18 April, 2002.
35 P. K. Dash, B. K. Panigrahi, and G. Panda, "Power Quality Analysis
Using S-Transform". IEEE Transactions on Power DelivelY, vol. 18,
No. 2pp. 406-411, April 2003.
36 W. Kanitpanyacharoean, S. Premrudeepreechacharn. "Power Quality
Problem Classification using Wavelet Transformation and Artificial
neural Network" IEEE PES Power Systems Conference and Exposition,
vol. 3, pp. 1496-1501. 2004.
37 G.G. Pozzebon, G.G. Pena, A.F.Q Goncalves, R.Q. Machado, "Neural
Classification of Power Quality Disturbances: An Application of the
Wavelet Transform and Principal Component Analysis" 9th IEEE/IAS
International Conference on Industry Applications (INDUSCON), pp. \-
6. 2010.
38 e. Venkatesh, D.V.S.S Siva Sarma, M. Sydulu, " Classification of
voltage sag, swell and harmonics using S-transform based modular
neural network" 14th International Conference on Harmonics and
Quality of Power (ICHQP), pp. 1-7, 2010.
39 J. Christy X. Jeno Vedamani S. Karthikeyan , "Wavelet Based Detection
of Power Quality Disturbance - A Case Study". Proceedings of 2011
International Conference on Signal Processing, Communication,
Computing and Networking Technologies (ICSCCN 2011) pp. 157-162,
2011.