Impact Analysis of Distributed Generation on

Protection Devices Coordination in Power

Distribution Systems
2021 IEEE PES Innovative Smart Grid Technologies Conference - Latin America (ISGT Latin America) | 978-1-6654-4421-7/21/$31.00 ©2021 IEEE | DOI: 10.1109/ISGTLATINAMERICA52371.2021.9543073

Cleberton Reiz, Jonatas Boas Leite

Dep. of Electrical Engineering
São Paulo State University
Ilha Solteira, Brazil
cleberton.reiz@unesp.br, jb.leite@unesp.br

Abstract—Integration of distributed generation in power
distribution networks provides many advantages and challenges
to electric power system. Among challenges are the increase in
levels of short-circuit currents and changes of power flow
direction. These characteristics can interfere in the interruption
capacity of protection devices, which are responsible for
maintaining the integrity of distribution networks. Therefore, it
is essential to understand the effects of distributed generation on
protection systems to determine strategies that aim to solve the
challenges imposed by this technology. The present work, first,
proposes the mathematical formulation to coordinate
overcurrent relays and fuse links, considering permanent and
temporary faults. The solution is obtained through a dedicated
genetic algorithm. Subsequently, this solution method is
analyzed under different levels of penetration of distributed
generators, allowing to identify points most susceptible to loss of
coordination.
Keywords—Power system protection, Power distribution
faults, Distributed generation, Circuit analysis computing, Digital
relays, Fuses
I. INTRODUCTION
Protection systems are fundamental for the safety of
distribution networks (DN) components, in addition to direct
impact in the continuity indices of energy supply service.
Parametrization of protection devices and their location in
power feeders should mitigate temporary faults and protect the
physical integrity of the DN against permanent faults,
reducing as much as possible the number, time and frequency
of consumers without power energy supply.
DNs are generally meshed and operate with radial
used, and techniques adopted to ensure the coordination and
selectivity.
From concepts of the specialized bibliography, this work
proposes a method to determine the coordination and
selectivity of protection devices in DNs through an
evolutionary algorithm. In addition, the impact of DGs on
DNs is assessed using different levels of DG penetration. The
developed and dedicated genetic algorithm (GA) determines
the parameters of 51P/N overcurrent relays, as well as their
time of operation in characteristic 50P/N, under restrictions of
coordination and selectivity among protection devices.
Parameters related to the specification of fuse links are also
determined by the GA. The solution provided by proposed
methodology is used to evaluate the impact of DGs on
coordination of the protection system.
II. PROTECTION SYSTEM COORDINATION
Short-circuit (SC) currents for different fault types allow
determining protection sensitivity. Nominal values for fuse
links must be greater than 1.5 times load current of their
respective branches and less than 25% of phase-to-ground
fault current with 20 Ω contact impedance, Ø . The same
fault intensity is used to coordinate fuses with overcurrent
relays, functions 51P/N and 50P/N. Linear interpolation
described in [1] is used to get the fuses behavior, modeled
using samples provided by manufacturer.
Operating curves of overcurrent relays are based on IEC
60255 [2]. The pickup current value, , for 51P is set between
TABLE I - Coordination Techniques Review
Analyzed Devices
Emphasis

topology. This configuration reduces project costs from the Method /

developed protection system. However, the presence of Reference Objective
1 2 3 4 5 6 software
distributed generation, despite providing several economic
and technical benefits, imposes new technical challenges for [1] D ✓ ✓ ✓ GA Allocation
distribution companies. Distributed generators (DGs) can [3] D ✓ Elec. Circ. Analysis
cause bidirectional flow in DNs and islanded operation. The [4] D ✓ ✓ ✓ PSCAD Analysis
increasing installation of DGs can make insufficient the [5] D ✓ ✓ GA Coordination
classic protection philosophy in DNs, requiring the [6] D ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ PSO Coordination
determination of new criteria and protection schemes. [7] D ✓ ✓ PSO Coordination
Several approaches are proposed in literature to avoid [8] D ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ PSO Allocation
losing coordination and selectivity among protection devices [9] D ✓ ✓ ✓ ATP Analysis
in DNs with coupled DGs. Table I contains a summary of [10] T ✓ ✓ GA Coordination
some proposals available in literature. We highlight the [11] T ✓ ✓ GA Coordination
protection devices in the protection scheme, the most suitable [12] D ✓ ✓ Fuzzy Coordination
network type for each methodology, methods or software D: Distribution systems T: Transmission systems
This study was financed in part by the Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento HGA: Hybrid GA PSO: Particle Swarm Optimization
de Pessoal de Nível Superior - Brazil (CAPES - Finance Code 001), 1: Fuse links 4: Distance Relays
Fundação de Amparado à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo – Brazil 2: Overcurrent relays 5: Recloser
(FAPESP Grants 2015/21972-6 and 2014/22377-1). 3: Directional relays 6: Fault current limiter

978-1-6654-4421-7/21/$31.00 ©2021 IEEE

Authorized licensed use limited to: UNIV ESTADUAL PAULISTA JULIO DE MESQUITA FILHO. Downloaded on October 12,2022 at 11:28:50 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 1.2 to 1.5 times the load current at the overcurrent relay objective function (OF) as is given in (7). The first part of the
branch, and 0.1 to 0.3 times the load current for 51N. The equation includes the sum of operating times for 50/51P/N of

and ! for relays, and for fuses). An " factor multiplies

maximum phase-to-phase SC current in the relay branch is each relay, and of fuses installed in the DN (represented by
used to calculate the operating time of the characteristic 51P.

# , $ , % , & , and ' are relevance coefficients, as well.

The operating time of 51N is calculated through a phase-to- the operating times to adjust its relevance in the OF. Factors

Parameters () and (* refer to the quantities of relays and

ground SC current without contact impedance. Moreover, the

fuses, respectively. Parameters (+), (+)*, and (+* are the

operating time for a phase-to-ground fault with high
impedance is performed for both units, phase and ground,
51P/N. Coordination restrictions of reclosers and fuse links numbers of pairs of relays, relays-fuses and fuses respectively.
are based on [13].
protection devices. Coordination times , , , , Δ
In (7), other parts represent coordination times between
Fig. 1 (a) shows an example system with two fuses, F1
(protected device) and F2 (protector device). The coordination are related to relays and are calculated using (8)-(10),
between fuses is ensured using (1), where the total-clearing
are represented by Δ and Δ
respectively. Coordination times between relays and fuse links
(TC) fuse time, , is less than or equal to 75% of the ./01 ./01
, and are
minimum-melting (MM) fuse time, .
between fuses are represented by Δ
obtained using (11) and (12), respectively. Coordination times
./01
0,75 Ø
≥ Ø
(1) and calculated using

the coordination of the 2- ℎ pair of protection devices is not

(13). If any coordination time is less than zero, it implies that
In Fig. 1 (b), the coordination and selectivity between
acting as a penalty in the OF. Otherwise, the penalty is null.
adequate. Thus, the expression will result in a positive value,
overcurrent relay and fuse is guaranteed by (2) and (3) for
functions 50P/N and 51, respectively. The coordination factor
of characteristic 50, , considering two operations 50,
.

BC = min F" GH( + )+H L+

has a value of 1.35. The coordination time, , considers
!
a safety margin between devices operating time, is usually set
to 0.3s. K K

Ø
≥ Ø (2) +# H MNΔ − OΔ ONP + $ H MNΔ − OΔ ONP +
K K
Ø
≥ Ø
+
+Q H MNΔ − OΔ ONP +
(3)

K
.
In Fig. 1 (c), there is an example system with two (7)
+% H MNΔ − OΔ ONP +
./01 ./01
relays/reclosers, R1 and R2. Coordination and selectivity
between relays are achieved through (4), (5), and (6). Values
K
.
defined for coordination times , , and are
+& H MNΔ − OΔ ONP +
0.02s, 0.02s, and 0.3s, respectively. ./01 ./01

≥ +
Ø Ø K
(4) .

+ ' H MNΔ − OΔ ONPR

./01 ./01
Ø
≥ Ø
+ (5)
K
Ø
≥ Ø
+
Δ = − −
(6)
=
(8)

Δ = − −
It is important to highlight that only protection devices
=
(9)
with characteristic 79 use the coordination criteria in (4) and
(5) with 50TD function. Protection devices composed only by Δ = = − − (10)
overcurrent relays have no intentional delay, acting only on
Δ = − −
./01
=
instantaneous characteristic (50) for three-phase SC currents. (11)

Δ = −
A. Mathematical Formulation ./01
= (12)
, = 0,75 −
./01
The problem of optimized coordination of reclosers, fuses,
and overcurrent relays is mathematically modeled by = (13)

F1 F2 B. Genetic Algorithm
a) Sub
The solution technique for coordination and selectivity of
protection devices uses a dedicated GA, which is simple and

GA population can vary the mutation rate, ' , according to

R1 F1 solve non-linear problems with low processing time [10]. The
b) Sub
(14). This propose prevents solutions in which a large portion

individuals, > . In (14),

R1 R2 of their genes are equal concerning other population
c) Sub is an adjustment factor that

process, while ?@ is a maximum mutation factor. A 00 is the

allows defining a minimum mutation rate throughout the GA
Fig. 1 – Example systems with different configurations of protective
devices. number of similar solutions in the i-th generation.

Authorized licensed use limited to: UNIV ESTADUAL PAULISTA JULIO DE MESQUITA FILHO. Downloaded on October 12,2022 at 11:28:50 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 A 00
' = − ( − )
the new population replaces the current, the next generation
?@
> ?@ (14)
established number of generations, >a .
begins, and the GA repeats this process until it reaches a pre-

The coding of population individuals has the number of

genes dependent on the number of protection devices installed
in the DN. The characteristic 50/51P is coded using four genes
for each relay, four genes are used to 50/51N, and two for each
fuse link. Fig. 2 shows an example of the proposed encoding
and the genes arrangement on the chromosome.
The initial procedure of the genetic algorithm generates a
randomly controlled initial population, respecting the
constraints for each gene, which are indicated in (15)-(21).
Restrictions (15)-(19) are specific to the genes of i. to v.,
respectively. Most of 50 and 51P/N restrictions of overcurrent
relays are the same, that is, genes ii. to iv. and vi. to viii. use
(16) to (18), in this order. Restriction (20) imposes current
limits for the gene ix., while (21) limits the types of available
fuses. Both restrictions are based on the preferential fuses of
K and T types. Restrictions (17), (20), and (21) are integer
type, while others are continuous.
1,2 ?@
U ? ≤ + !
≤ 1,5 ?@
U ?
III. RESULTS
Proposed method is implemented in C++ programming
language because of its speed and computational efficiency.
Simulations are performed in a 135 bus test DN. Simulations
are performed on a computer with an Intel® Core ™ i7-8700
CPU @ 3.20GHz and 16GB of memory. Other information
about this paper and tested system is found in [14].
A. GA Solution Proccess
parameterization ", #, $, Q, %, &, and ', whose values are
The GA resolution process depends on factors of
equal to 15, 70, 90, 90, 60, 90, 60, in that order. The number
of generations, population, and maximum and minimum
mutation rates are defined as 1000, 900, 0.009, and 0.002,
respectively. The achieved sum of operating times is equal to
23.029 s. In order to assess the quality of used model for the
variable mutation scheme, a test is performed considering a
(15) fixed rate of 0.005. The obtained solution for the objective

0,05 ≤ WXY ≤ 1,00

function is 28.077s.
(16)
1 ≤ WZ+[ ≤ 4
Fig. 3 illustrates a comparative graph with two line charts
(17) showing the progress of OF during the execution of the GA.
0,02 ≤ t ]^
≤ 0,50
This figure presents the results obtained after 100th generation,
(18) because the OF value before is very high, making hard the
0,1 ?@
U ? ≤ + !
≤ 0,3 ?@
U ? (19)
graphical analysis. The GA with variable mutation decreases

1≤ ≤8
, (20)
1 ≤ WZ+[ ≤ 2
(21)
GA has the first generation initialized calculating the
operating times of protection devices for each individual in
current population. These times are calculated using IEC
60255 for overcurrent relays and linear interpolation for fuse
links. In the following procedure, coordination times between
pairs of devices are calculated, indicated by (8) to (13), to later
calculate the OF by (7). The best solution, or fitness is stored,
rates of recombination and mutation are calculated, and the
selection process begins.
In the recombination stage, the process is performed by
randomly choosing one, or two points in the pair of individuals
selected to exchange information between them. If the choice
is only one point, the genetic crossover occurs from the chosen
point until the end of the vector, while by choosing two points,
the crossover occurs from one point to another.
Mutation process allows modifying the gene of any
individual, within limits established from (15) to (21). Finally,
until reaching 345.44s, this value takes into account the
multiplicative factors. The minimum OF value using the fixed
mutation rate is 421.15s. OF results and its progression show
the feasibility of using the proposed variable mutation rate.
B. Protection Devices Coordination
The configuration found by the GA for reclosers/relays is
shown in Table II, while the fuse characteristics are indicated
in Table III. Coordination times , , ,
and are defined as 0.3s, 0.2s, 0.02s, 0.02s and
1.35, respectively. The latter value is normally used when two
automatic reclosing is performed.
relays R3, R6 and R7 ( b c and d c , respectively), for
Table II shows the operating times in characteristic 50 of
phase and neutral units, have values very close to the
minimum allowed by (18). The absence of other downstream
devices provides more clearance to R6 and R7 relays
restrictions, allowing the GA to achieve solutions close to
0.02s. The same occurs with relay R3, but in this case there is
a 25T fuse downstream that did not impose restrictions on the
coordination of respective recloser.

i. Pickup current of phase relay units; 580

OF (variable mutation)
OF with multiplicative factors

ii. TMS value for phase units;

iii. Curve type for phase units; 540 OF (fixed mutation)
iv. Operating time of reclosers 50TD phase units;
v. Pickup current of ground relay units; 500
vi. TMS value for ground units;
460
vii. Curve type for ground units;
viii. Operating time of reclosers 50TD ground units; 420
ix. Nominal fuses current;
x. Curve type of fuses. 380

e1 e1f C1 eg egf Cg 340

100 300 500 700 900
i. to iv. v. to viii. ix. to x. … i. to iv. v. to viii. ix. to x. Generation
Fig. 2 –Example of chromosome encoding. Fig. 3 – OF progression value for different mutation rates.

Authorized licensed use limited to: UNIV ESTADUAL PAULISTA JULIO DE MESQUITA FILHO. Downloaded on October 12,2022 at 11:28:50 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 (k) WXY WZ+[ Protector element Δt t
TABLE II - Relays Configuration
]^
3
Relay 10
F6 F5 and F7 R5
R2 0.017
R1 (P) 328.90 0.393 NI 0.112 F5 F7
R3 0.883 2
10 F6
R2 (P) 272.82 0.319 NI R4, F2 0.008 0.092

time (s)(s)
R3 (P) 34.33 0.630 VI F1 - 0.020

de atuação
R4 (P) 207.93 0.244 NI R5, F3, F4 0.002 0.068 1 Coordination range
10
0.028
R5 (P) 170.43 0.145 NI R6, F5, R7, F7 0.045
0.002

Acting
R6 (P) 12.74 0.050 NI - - 0.023 0

Tempo
10 R5(51)
R7 (P) 57.77 0.050 NI - - 0.020
0.001 1Ø
R1 (N) 29.66 0.925 NI R2, R3 0.108 -1 Imin
0.522 10 1.35xR5(50)
R2 (N) 27.28 0.743 NI R4, F2 0.001 0.088
R5(50)
R3 (N) 3.27 0.597 NI F1 - 0.021
R4 (N) 23.29 0.566 NI R5, F3, F4 0.084 0.062 -2
10 2 3
0.208 10 10
R5 (N) 14.20 0.405 NI R6, F5, R7, F7 0.042 Electrical current (A)
0.201
R6 (N) 1.07 0.051 NI - - 0.020 Fig. 4 – Coordination and selectivity: R5(N), F5, F6 and F7.
R7 (N) 4.81 0.050 NI - - 0.020
protected section by R7. The operating times between the
Table III shows the rated current of 40A is adopted for relays in characteristic 50P satisfies the coordination time
most fuses, with the majority of K type and two fuses of T type established in (3), with the safety margin indicated by the
closer to the substation. Fuses F1 and F6 are the only ones horizontal line dashed in red. Besides, the operating time of
with a lower rated current, where F5 is protected by F6. The relay R7 (51P) for a phase-to-phase fault in its section is also
inclusion of fuses T type offers the GA greater flexibility to above the respective safety margin, as indicated in (10).
satisfy the associated restrictions. F2 is an example of this, C. Impact on Protection Devices Coordination considering
where the choice of the 40K fuse is infeasible for (19), while Different Penetration Levels of DGs
the use of the 40T fuse is feasible and has less impact on
coordination compared to the next available K type fuse, 65K. The SC currents used in the model restrictions are shown
in Fig. 5 with 10 and 50% penetration because other levels of
Fig. 4 shows an example of coordination between the evaluated currents are within that range. Vertical red dashed
recloser (R5) and two fuses (F5 and F7), as well as the lines represent penetration levels.
coordination between fuses F5 and F6. Horizontal red dashed
line represents the actuation curve of F5 and F7 plus . Five synchronous DGs were considered in the system and
Minimum coordination range is the lowest SC current which are installed on buses 46, 102, 112, 128, and 135. The first test
R5 characteristic 51 remains coordinated with fuses F5 and considers 10% of penetration with power equally distributed
F7. The maximum range is limited by the maximum current among DGs. This value is increased by 10% for each
which R5 (50) remains coordinated with the respective fuses. subsequent test, up to 50%.

The coordination range shown in Fig. 4 includes the high-
impedance phase-to-ground SC current. However, this
coordination does not secure the protection of the 50N
characteristic in a phase-to-ground fault without impedance.
An interval of this size is complex to coordinate, so only the
51N function is configured for this type of fault.
Considering the parameterization of relays obtained by the
model and presented in Table III, it is possible to calculate the
coordination times and OF for different levels of DG
penetration using IEC 60255. Tests are performed with the
GA considering the five penetration levels and maintaining
the parameters established in the test without DGs.

In Fig. 4, it can be seen that the coordination of F5 with F6 In simulation with only 10% penetration, the solution
is ensured since the operating times of F5 are longer than F6 obtained without DGs becomes infeasible due to characteristic
with a safety margin, as indicated in (13). This condition
allows F6 to melt first whenever the fault occurs in its 3
10
protected section, reducing the number of consumers not R5 R7
R5
supplied. 2
10
Fig. 5 shows the coordination between relays R5 and R7. Coordination range
R7
time (s)(s)

The minimum and maximum coordination range are

de atuação

1
determined by the high impedance SC current that sensitizes 10
R5 and the maximum phase-to-phase fault current in the
Acting

Chi[ WZ+[ Δ (N)

TABLE III - Fuses Parameters
Tempo

./01
10

F1 25 T 0.0001 -1
F2 40 T 0.0129 10
R5(50)
F3 40 K 0.5434 R7(50)+0.02
F4 40 K 0.5578 -2 R7(50)
F5 40 K 0.0009 10 2 50% 10% 3 10% 50%
10 10
F6 15 K -
F7 40 K 0.0034 Electrical current (A)

Authorized licensed use limited to: UNIV ESTADUAL PAULISTA JULIO DE MESQUITA FILHO. Downloaded on October 12,2022 at 11:28:50 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 allowable value. The coordination time for the pair , b
51P of R7, which is coordinated close to the minimum
without DGs and with 10% of DGs penetration are 0.002s and
-0.0023s, respectively. If penetration levels increase, the
current injected into the DN is increased, the current injected
by the substation is reduced, and DGs contribution to SC
currents increases. Therefore, the coordination solution
obtained for the case without DGs becomes more infeasible as
increase the penetration levels. Fig. 5 shows that the phase-to-
phase fault current used to sensitize R7 increases with higher
levels of DGs penetration. The opposite occurs with the SC
current for high impedance phase-to-ground fault.
If penetration levels increase, other coordination problems
between relays R4 and R5 (51P), , l This loss of
begin to emerge. After 30%, there is a loss of coordination
coordination is related to the 16% increase in phase-to-phase
SC currents downstream from R5. This increase reduces the
operating time of R4 and R5, not reaching the safety margin
of 0.3s.
Fig. 6 shows the coordination values of relays R5 and R7
in characteristic 51P for all levels of DGs penetration. The
vertical axis on the left is related to the pairs of relays 1, 3, 4,
5, and 6, while the vertical axis on the right is exclusive to the
pair of relays number 2 since the coordination time between
R1 and R3 is larger.
Tests performed and Fig. 6 clarify some important aspects.
The increase in SC current levels is one of the main
responsible for the failure of protection system coordination.
All pairs of relays have their coordination time affected as the
demand supplied by DGs increases. In the first pair of relays
(R1 and R2) the opposite effect occurs, since the current
observed by these devices becomes smaller as the DG
penetration levels increase.
IV. CONCLUSIONS
This work proposes a method for coordination and
selectivity of protection devices using a dedicated genetic
algorithm with a variable mutation rate. The proposed
methodology considers the main protection devices of DNs:
overcurrent relays, reclosers, and fuses. Moreover, an analysis
of the DGs impact on DNs under different penetration levels
is performed, considering the solution provided by the GA
without DGs coupled to the network.
The proposed methodology allows obtaining a good
solution for the DN without DGs. However, the results show
the difficulty of maintaining the coordination of the protection
system if part of the demand is supplied by DGs. The massive
insertion of DGs requires further study to mitigate these
negative effects.
REFERENCES
[1] E. M. Campitelli, L. G. W. Da Silva, R. A. F. Pereira and J. R. S.
Mantovani, "Interactive System for Placement and Coordination of
Overcurrent Protective Devices," 2006 IEEE/PES Transmission &
Distribution Conference and Exposition: Latin America, Caracas,
2006, pp. 1-6, doi: 10.1109/TDCLA.2006.311636.
[2] IEC, IEC 60255-151 – Measuring Relays and Protection Equipment –
Part 151: Functional Requirements for Over/under Current Protection,
2009.
[3] L. Yuping, H. Lidan, W. Ji’an, W. Gang, and X. Guangting, “A study
on effect of dispersed generator capacity on power system protection,”
Authorized licensed use limited to: UNIV ESTADUAL PAULISTA JULIO DE MESQUITA FILHO. Downloaded on October 12,2022 at 11:28:50 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
Fig. 6 – Coordination time progress of 51P
2007 IEEE Power Eng. Soc. Gen. Meet. PES, 2007, doi:
10.1109/PES.2007.385527.
[4] S. A. A. Shahriari, A. Yazdian, and M. R. Haghifam, “Fault current
limiter allocation and sizing in distribution system in presence of
distributed generation,” 2009 IEEE Power Energy Soc. Gen. Meet. PES
’09, pp. 1–6, 2009, doi: 10.1109/PES.2009.5275298.
[5] M. H. Aslinezhad, S. M. Sadeghzadeh, and J. Olamaei, “Over current
relays protective coordination in distribution in presence of distributed
generation,” Int. J. Tech. Phys. Probl. Eng., vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 40–46,
2011.
[6] H. H. Zeineldin and W. Xiao, “Optimal fault current limiter sizing for
distribution systems with DG,” IEEE Power Energy Soc. Gen. Meet.,
pp. 1–5, 2011, doi: 10.1109/PES.2011.6038967.
[7] W. M. S. Bernardes, F. M. P. Santos, E. N. Asada, S. A. Souza, and M.
J. Ramos, “Ajuste otimizado de relés direcionais de sobrecorrente via
Particle Swarm Optimization,” XIX Brazilian Congr. Autom. (CBA
2012), no. February 2015, pp. 4573–4580, 2012, doi:
10.13140/2.1.1294.4160.
[8] F. G. K. Guarda, G. C. Junior, and C. D. L. Da Silva, “Fault current
limiter placement to reduce recloser-fuse miscoordination in electric
distribution systems with distributed generation using multiobjective
particle swarm optimization,” IEEE Lat. Am. Trans., vol. 16, no. 7, pp.
1914–1920, 2018, doi: 10.1109/TLA.2018.8447357.
[9] L. F. F. Gutierres, G. Cardoso, and G. Marchesan, “Recloser-fuse
coordination protection for distributed generation systems:
Methodology and priorities for optimal disconnections,” 12th IET Int.
Conf. Dev. Power Syst. Prot. DPSP 2014, pp. 1–6, 2014.
[10] M. H. Marcolino, J. B. Leite, and J. R. S. Mantovani, “Optimal
Coordination of Overcurrent Directional and Distance Relays in
Meshed Networks Using Genetic Algorithm,” IEEE Lat. Am. Trans.,
vol. 13, no. 9, pp. 2975–2982, 2015, doi: 10.1109/TLA.2015.7350048.
[11] F. B. Bottura, W. M. S. Bernardes, M. Oleskovicz, and E. N. Asada,
“Setting directional overcurrent protection parameters using hybrid GA
optimizer,” Electr. Power Syst. Res., vol. 143, pp. 400–408, 2017, doi:
10.1016/j.epsr.2016.09.017.
[12] A. E. C. Momesso, W. M. S. Bernardes, and E. N. Asada, “Fuzzy
adaptive setting for time-current-voltage based overcurrent relays in
distribution systems,” Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst., vol. 108, no.
January, pp. 135–144, 2019, doi: 10.1016/j.ijepes.2018.12.035.
[13] K. Pereira, B. R. Pereira, J. Contreras, and J. R. S. Mantovani, “A
multiobjective optimization technique to develop protection systems of
distribution networks with distributed generation,” IEEE Trans. Power
Syst., vol. 33, no. 6, pp. 7064–7075, 2018, doi:
10.1109/TPWRS.2018.2842648.
[14] C. Reiz, J. B. Leite, Impact Analysis of Distributed Generation on
Protection Devices Coordination in Power Distribution Systems.
Additional data for protection devices and distribution network used.
https:/ github.com/ClebertonReiz/Additional_data-ISGT2021-
C.Reiz_and_J.B.Leite