2020 8th International Conference on Reliability, Infocom Technologies and Optimization (Trends and Future Directions) (ICRITO)
Amity University, Noida, India. June 4-5, 2020
Reliability Prediction of a Distribution Protection
Scheme Using Markov Model
Sahil Raj Vibhor Singh
Department of EEE, Department of EEE,
Birla Institute of Technology Birla Institute of Technology
Mesra, Deoghar, Mesra, Deoghar,
sahil.shivameps@gmail.com vibhors.gahlot@gmail.com
Abstract — Miscoordination between the protective
equipment leads to the system blackouts and weaken its
reliability. In a low voltage distribution system, the
cooperation between fuse and circuit breakers forms the
protection of distribution feeders. During a temporary fault,
the fuse melts and the system suffers from unnecessary black-
outs. In this paper, the replacement of fuse by a lateral circuit
breaker in a low voltage distribution system is proposed. The
effectiveness of the proposed scheme is evaluated by analyzing
the reliability using Markov Model. The result shows that
replacing the fuse with a lateral circuit breaker having auto re-
closer improves the reliability of the system for transient
faults.
Keywords— reliability assessment, Markov model,
distribution system
I. INTRODUCTION
The reliability of the distribution system is influenced by
the system vulnerabilities and decreased with unfavourable
conditions. For the reliable operation of a power system,
proper coordination between the protection equipment is
very necessary. In a distribution system, most of the faults
are temporary and removed itself as the time lapsed. Relays,
circuit breakers, and fuses are the protective devices
generally used in the low voltage distribution system to
protect from such transient faults. To interrupt any fault, the
co-ordination between these devices should be highly precise
[1]-[2]. The reliability of a distribution system degrades due
to the lack of proper feedback from these protective devices.
Different approaches have been adopted for the evaluation of
the reliability of distribution systems. In [3], the hidden
Markov model is used for the reliability assessment of
phasor measurement unit. The effectiveness of the proposed
method in [3] is validated through different case studies for
real-time applications. In [4], the distribution system
reliability is evaluated by the probabilistic technique utilizing
the segmentation concept. Petri-net based reliability
evaluation is discussed in [5] for a distribution system. In
literature, it is observed that Markov Modeling is a preferred
method of reliability assessment. Many authors have recently
worked for the reliability assessment using Markov
Modeling. In [6], a Markov model for a micro-grid is
developed. The micro-grid consists of wind and photovoltaic
generation. Different reliability indices are proposed and
based on those indices, the average outage frequency and
total outage time is calculated. In [7], a Markov model for
the current-carrying component and for consolidating the
effect of protection system failures into the power system is
proposed. The protection failures of the power system with
the Markov model are discussed. In [8], the power
978-1-7281-7016-9/20/$31.00 ©2020 IEEE
Authorized licensed use limited to: University of Canberra. Downloaded on October 05,2020 at 09:05:33 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
Nilesh Kumar Rajalwal Debomita Ghosh
Department of EEE, Department of EEE,
Birla Institute of Technology Birla Institute of Technology
Mesra, Deoghar, Mesra, Ranchi
nileshrajalwal@bitmesra.ac.in debomita.ghosh@bitmesra.ac.in
transformer protection’s reliability model is developed using
Markov modeling. In [9], Hierarchical Markov Model
(HMM) for the Distribution system’s reliability is proposed.
HMM reliability depends on system topology, coordinated
protection systems, and individual protection devices. Based
on the system’s topology HMM includes various failure
modes effects, isolation of faults and renewal of load by the
creation of the Markov Model. In [10], a Markov Model for
wind power generation (WPG) and battery storage system
(BSS) is proposed. The main component of WPG is a wind
turbine, DC/AC inverter and AC/DC rectifier and that of
BSS is battery bank, battery controller/charger and DC/AC
inverter. The reliability of WPG and BSS is analysed with
the help of the Markov Model. In [11], a computational
analysis of Special Protection System at Kolar HVDC
Station has been proposed to find out the most suitable
method to carry out reliability assessment between Markov
model Method and Fault Tree Analysis Method.
There are several other methods for reliability assessment
such as fault tree analysis in [12], Monte Carlo Simulation in
[13]. Petri-net in [14], Reliability block diagram in [15], etc.
In [16] these reliability assessment methods are also
compared. But Markov has a certain advantage over other
methods. Markov Model is a memoryless process as the
future state of the system does not depend upon its past states
and only depends upon the current state of the system. Due
to this characteristic, Markov simplifies the analysis and
reliability of the system can be evaluated more precisely.
Markov model can represent both repairs as well as failures
in the modeling process. Markov model is also suitable for
the inspection and repair of partially failed systems [17].
In this paper, the reliability assessment of a distribution
system considering transient faults is developed. In a low
voltage distribution system, a temporary fault on the laterals
may cause the melting of the fuse and form unnecessary
power interruptions in the laterals. In this paper, the
reliability of a distribution network with fuse and the main
circuit breaker is discussed for the transient fault condition.
For the reliability improvement, it is proposed to replace the
fuse with circuit breakers having auto-reclosers. As 95%
faults in the distribution systems are temporary in nature, the
proposed system shows high reliability compared to
traditional systems for temporary faults.
II. BRIEF OF MARKOV MODEL
Markov modeling is a stochastic and memoryless process
that depends only upon the present state of the system. A
Markov model consists of the possible states of the system,
the possible transition paths between those states, and the
868
 rate parameters of those transitions [18]. In reliability λ 3λ 2λ
analysis, the transitions usually consist of failures and repair
1 OK
rates. Each state in the Markov model is represented by a 2 OK 2F 3F
3 OK
bubble with the transition paths represented by arrows 1F

between the states. Fig.1 represents the two states of a single 0 1 2 3

μ1
component and the transition path connects these states. The μ2
rate parameter of the transition from State 0 to State 1 is μ3
represented by λ.
Fig. 2. State Diagram of Four States
State 0: 䃚 State 1:
Healthy Failed From the Markov model of fig. 1, a transition matrix has
been formed and represented below.

Fig. 1. State Diagram

െߣ ߣ Ͳ Ͳ
ߤଵ െሺߤଵ ൅ ͵ߣሻ ͵ߣ Ͳ
ሾ‫ܣ‬ሿ ൌ ൦ ൪
A Markov model has the following properties when it ߤଶ  Ͳ െሺߤଶ ൅ ʹߣሻ ʹߣ
enters into state i [11]: ߤଷ  Ͳ Ͳ െߤଷ

1. The amount of time ܶ௜ processed in a state i is In steady-state, the sum of all the probabilities will be one, it
represented by ߣ௜ in the Markov model. can be expressed as: ܲ଴ ൅ ܲଵ ൅ ܲଶ ൅ ܲଷ ൌ ͳ
From the eq. (5),
2. When a process leaves state i and enters in next state j, it 
will enter with some probability ܲ௜௝ [11]. Here, ͳ ߣ Ͳ Ͳ
௥ ͳ െሺߤଵ ൅ ͵ߣሻ ͵ߣ Ͳ
ߑ௝ୀ଴ ܲ௜௝ ൌͳ (1) ሾܲ଴ ǡ ܲଵ ǡ ܲଶ ǡ ܲଷ ሿ ൦ ൪
௝ஷଵ ͳ Ͳ െሺߤଶ ൅ ʹߣሻ ʹߣ
ͳ Ͳ Ͳ െߤଷ
i.e. the sum of all the probabilities equal to one.
ൌ ሾͳǡͲǡͲǡͲሿ
3. Now defining transition rate ܽ௜௝ such that:
Above equation is solved to find the steady-state
ܽ௜௝ ൌ ߣ௜ ൈ ܲ௜௝ for all i ≠ j. probabilities of the states, and the state probabilities are
given below:
4. Definingߙ௜ ൌ σ௥௝ୀ଴ ܽ௜௝ (2)
௝ஷ௜
ܲ଴ ൌ ͲǤͻͻͷ ܲଵ ൌ ͶǤͺͺ ൈ ͳͲିଷ
5. The transition rates ܽ௜௝ can be arranged in a matrix form
ܲଶ ൌ ͹Ǥ͵ ൈ ͳͲିହ ܲଷ ൌ ͹Ǥ͵ ൈ ͳͲି଼
and expressed as eq. (3)
ܽ଴଴ ‫ܽ ڮ‬଴௥ For the mentioned example, the value of ߣ and ߤ are
ܽ௜௝ ൌ ൥ ‫ڭ‬ ‫ڰ‬ ‫ ڭ‬൩ (3) assumed such thatߣ ൌ ͷǤͲ ൈ ͳͲିସ per hour and ߤ ൌ ͳͲିଵ
ܽ଴௥ ‫ܽ ڮ‬௥௥
per hour [18]. The final reliability can be calculated by
where the diagonal elements are following the eq. (6).
௥
ܽ௜௜ ൌ െߣ௜ ൌ െߑ௝ୀ଴ǡ௝ஷ௜ ܽ௜௝ (4)
ܴ ൌ ͳ െ  ሺܲ‫ݏ݁ݐܽݐݏ݁ݎݑ݈݂݂݅ܽ݋ݕݐ݈ܾܾ݅݅ܽ݋ݎ‬ሻ (6)
6. The state probabilities are determined by using eq. (5). III. RELIABILITY ASSESSMENT CONSIDERING FUSE AND
ܲ௜ ൈ ܽ௜௝ ൌ ܷ௜ (5) CIRCUIT BREAKER IN LATERALS
Fig. 3 shows a low voltage distribution system having
A sub-system is represented in fig. 2 for understanding
two laterals. Each lateral have a fuse and the system have a
the Markov modeling for the reliability assessment. This
main circuit breaker.
sub-system has three identical and independent channels
with failure rate λ. Since the channels are identical, it
suffices to define four states. Table I shows the states of the From CBM
considered sub-system. Substation

Fuse Fuse

TABLE I. STATES FORMATION

Load
State State description Load

0 Three channels are functioning

1 Two channels are functioning and one is failed
2 One channel is functioning and two are failed
3 Three channels are failed
Fig. 3. Distribution Feeder
Any fault in the lateral will melt the fuse in that lateral
and interrupt the power flow to a load of that lateral. If the
fuse will not melt, the main circuit breaker will trip and
supply to both the laterals will be disturbed.

869

Authorized licensed use limited to: University of Canberra. Downloaded on October 05,2020 at 09:05:33 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 TABLE II. STATES FORMATION
λ2
State Description
State 0: State 1: S0 A fault occurs with initially CBL at a close state.
Normal Failed
S1 Protection equipment action starts as the command is
given to Safety Devices with CBL at a close state.
λ1
S2 With time delay the CBL does not open leading to
Permanent Fault Condition.
Fig. 4. Marko Model of Fig. 3 S3 CBL open process starts as auxiliary circuit activation
command is given with CBL dead time interval and CBL is
Fig. 4 represents the Markov model of the protection still at close state.
scheme. A fuse cannot discriminate between a permanent S4 CBM operates at permanent fault condition.
and a temporary fault and thus will melt for all the S5 The recloser process of CBL starts after auxillary circuit
conditions. In some distribution systems, these fuses are activation command is given with relay circuit actiation.
replaced by the circuit breaker. The distribution system with S6 Recloser process of CBL starts after auxiliary circuit
a circuit breaker at laterals is represented in fig. activation command is given with relay circuit activation
with dead time interval.
The fuse in laterals of distribution system represented in
S7 Normal State with CBL at closed state.
fig. 3 is replaced by the lateral circuit breakers having auto
S8 Recloser of CBL occurs after relay circuit is activated with
re-closers as shown in fig. 5. It is considered that in case of
CBL at closed state.
occurrence of a fault on the laterals, the circuit breaker CBL
S9 CBL is commanded to open including dead time interval
operates to clear the fault. Most of the fault that occurs is a
after reclosure process.
temporary fault, which is cleared by the successful operation
S10 After activation of auxiliary circuit recloser of CBL occurs
of the re-closer of the circuit breaker. If CBL fails to clear
with CBL commanded to close which currently is at open
the fault due to failure of the circuit breaker itself, then fuse
status.
operates to clear the fault. In this way, the protection scheme
S11 CBL opens after dead time interval for recloser of CBL.
is enhanced. Also, the undesired tripping of the main circuit
S12 Recloser CBL is commanded with CBL currently at open
breaker CBM can be prohibited, leading to the least
status.
interruption of the adjacent laterals.
S13 CBL is commanded to open which leads to the opening of
CBM
CBL.
S14 Auxillary circuit is activated and CBL is commanded to
From
Substation close with currently at open state.
CB1 CB2
TABLE III. TRANSITION RATES

Load Load
Transition Rates Values
λ0 0.001
λ1 0.001
Fig. 5. Distribution Feeder λ2 0.001
λ3 2.5e-06
A. Formation of the Markov Model λ4 0.0001
Based on the proposed conditions, a Markov model is λ5 0.0001
generated for Fig.5 and represented in Fig.6. The formation λ6 1.67e-05
of States is in Table II. The values associated with the λ7 1.67e-05
transition are shown in Table III. λ8 1.845e-06
λ9 0.00001
λ11
λ7 λ6 λ10 0.001
λ9 λ10 S7 S14 λ11 0.001
S4

λ8 S2 B. Reliability Assessment using the proposed Markov

λ5
S13 model
λ0
S0 S1 λ3 λ2 λ4 For the Markov Model proposed in Fig.6, a probability
S5 S10 λ5
λ1 λ6 matrix and transition matrix can be formed. The probability
S3 λ3 S8 matrix can be given by:
λ3
λ2 S6 S12 ሾܲሿ ൌ ൣܲ଴ ǡ ܲଵǡ ܲଶ ǡ ܲଷǡ ܲସǡ ܲହǡ ܲ଺ǡ ܲ଻ǡ ଼ܲǡ ܲଽǡ ܲଵ଴ǡ ܲଵଵǡ ܲଵଶǡ ܲଵଷǡ ܲଵସ ൧
λ4 λ3
S9 Here, Pi represents the probability of all the states.
λ6
S11 The transition matrix [A] will be a 15 X 15 matrix and
represented in eq. (7)
Fig. 6. State Representation

870

Authorized licensed use limited to: University of Canberra. Downloaded on October 05,2020 at 09:05:33 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 1 ߣ଴ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 െሺߣ଼ ൅ ߣଵ ሻ ߣ଼ ߣଵ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 0 െߣଽ 0 ߣଽ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 െሺߣଷ ൅ ߣଶ ሻ 0 ߣଷ ߣଶ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 0 െߣଵ଴ 0 0 ߣଵ଴ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 0 0 െߣଶ 0 0 ߣଶ 0 0 0 0 0 0

1 0 0 0 0 0 െሺߣଷ ൅ ߣସ ሻ 0 ߣଷ ߣସ 0 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 0 0 0 0 െߣଵଵ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
[A]=
1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 െߣସ 0 ߣସ 0 0 0 0 7
1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 െሺߣଷ ൅ ߣ଺ ሻ ߣଷ ߣ଺ 0 0 0

1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 െሺߣହ ൅ ߣ଺ ሻ 0 ߣ଺ ߣହ 0

1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 െߣଷ ߣଷ 0 0

1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 െߣହ 0 ߣହ

1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 െߣ଺ ߣ଺

1 0 0 0 0 0 0 ߣ଻ 0 0 0 0 0 0 െߣ଻

Eq. (5) represents the relation between the transition rate
matrix and the state probability matrix. For Markov Model
shown in Fig. 6, the eq. (5) can be reframed in eq. (8)
ሾܲሿ ൈ ሾ‫ܣ‬ሿ ൌ ሾܷሿ
Here, ሾܷሿ is a single entry matrix and can be represented
by:
ሾܷሿ ൌ ሾͳͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲሿ
Eq. (8) is solved and the probabilities of all states are
calculated and shown below:
ܲ଴ ൌ ͲǤͲͲʹ, ܲଵ ൌ ͲǤͲͲͳͻ, ܲଶ ൌ ͲǤͲͲͲ͵,
ܲଷ ൌ ͲǤͲͲͳͻ, ܲସ ൌ ͲǤͲͲͲͲͲ͵, ܲହ ൌ ͲǤͲͲͲͲͲͶ,
ܲ଺ ൌ ͲǤͲͳͻ, ܲ଻ ൌ ͲǤͲͲʹ, ଼ܲ ൌ ͲǤͲͲͲͷ,
ܲଽ ൌ ͲǤͳͲ, ܲଵ଴ ൌ ͲǤͲͲͲͶ, ܲଵଵ ൌ ͲǤ͹,
ܲଵଶ ൌ ͲǤͲͳͺ, ܲଵଷ ൌ ͲǤͲͲʹ, ܲଵସ ൌ ͲǤͳͳ
In the fig. 6, three states are represented by different
colours i.e. states S5, S8 and S12. All these three states are
possible failure states and others are healthy one. S5 and S8
are states due to interlocking failure of the circuit breaker
whereas S12 is a vulnerable state due to time delay which
can be overcome by varying the transition time of circuit
breaker. Interlocking failure of circuit breaker is a condition
in which circuit breaker receives two commands
simultaneously at a given time which cannot be overcome.
Therefore, S5 and S8 affect the overall reliability of the
system and can be calculated as per the eq. (6),
ܴ ൌ ͳ െ ܲହ െ ଼ܲ ൌ ͲǤͻͻͻͶͻ͸
The reliability assessed by the Markov model for system
shown in fig. 5 is 99.9496 %.
C. Comparing the reliability of proposed and existing
models
In this section, first the reliability of the protection
system shown in fig. 3 is discussed. It is clear that the fuse in
the laterals will melt for permanent as well as transient
faults. Melting of fuse during transient faults is not a reliable
situation and laterals suffer from unnecessary blackouts. In
the proposed scheme shown in fig. 5, the fuse is replaced
with a circuit breaker having auto-reclosers. The reliability
assessment of the proposed system shows that during a
transient fault condition, the operation of auto-recloser
reduced the unnecessary tripping in the laterals.
IV. CONCLUSION
(8)
In this paper, a lateral circuit breaker is proposed in the
low voltage distribution system. The reliability of the
existing system has a fuse in the lateral is discussed for the
transient fault. The reliability of the proposed scheme having
a lateral circuit breaker with auto re-closer in place of a fuse
is determined using the Markov model. For reliability
assessment, the state transition matrix of the distribution
system protection scheme is formed and the probabilities of
all the states of protection scheme are calculated. The final
result shows that the proposed scheme has high reliability for
transient as well as permanent fault conditions.
REFERENCES
[1] A. Zamani, T. Sidhu, & A. Yazdani, “A strategy for protection
coordination in radial distribution networks with distributed
generators”, In IEEE PES General Meeting, pp. 1-8, July 2010.
[2] S. Conti, “Analysis of distribution network protection issues in
presence of dispersed generation”, Electric Power Systems
Research, vol. 79, no.1, pp. 49-56, 2009.
[3] C. Murthy, A. Mishra, D. Ghosh, D. S. Roy, & D. K. Mohanta,
“Reliability analysis of phasor measurement unit using hidden
Markov model”, IEEE Systems Journal, vol. 8, no.4, pp. 1293-1301,
2014.
[4] Y. M. Atwa, & E. F. El-Saadany, “Reliability evaluation for
distribution system with renewable distributed generation during
islanded mode of operation” IEEE Transactions on Power
Systems, vol. 24, no.2, pp. 572-581, 2009.
[5] Rani Kumari, Debomita Ghosh, Dusmanta Kumar Mohanta, “Petri
Net Based Reliability Evaluation Considering Distribution System
Protection Coordination” International Conference on Computer,
Electrical & Communication Engineering, IEEE, India, Jan. 18-19,
2019.
[6] X. Liu, Y. Wang, C. Song & H. Qu, “Reliability assessment of micro-
grid based on Markov model”, IEEE PES Asia-Pacific Power and
Energy Engineering Conference, APPEEC, pp. 2434-2437, October
2016.
[7] K. Jiang, & C. Singh, ”New models and concepts for power system
reliability evaluation including protection system failures”, IEEE
Transactions on Power Systems, vol. 26, no.4, pp. 1845-1855, 2011.
[8] H. Seyedi, M. Fotuhi, & M. Sanaye-Pasand, “An extended Markov
model to determine the reliability of protective system”, IEEE power
India conference, pp. 5, April 2006.
[9] R. E. Brown, S. Gupta, R. D. Christie, S. S. Venkata, & R. Fletcher,
“Distribution system reliability assessment using hierarchical Markov
modeling”. IEEE Transactions on power Delivery, vol. 11, no.4, pp.
1929-1934, 1996.
[10] H. Khazraj, F. F. da Silva, C. L. Bak, & M. Hajibashi, “Markov
Model of Renewable Resources for Reliability Assessment of

871

Authorized licensed use limited to: University of Canberra. Downloaded on October 05,2020 at 09:05:33 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 Distribution Systems”, IEEE International Conference on
Environment and Electrical Engineering and 2018 IEEE Industrial
and Commercial Power Systems, pp. 1-6, Europe, June 2018.
[11] C. Murthy, A. Mishra, D. Ghosh, D. S. Roy, & D. K. Mohanta,
“Reliability analysis of phasor measurement unit using hidden
Markov model”, IEEE Systems Journal, vol. 8, no. 4, pp. 1293-1301,
2014.
[12] Y. Y. Hong, L. H. Lee, & H. H. Cheng, “Reliability assessment of
protection system for switchyard using fault-tree analysis”, In IEEE
International Conference on Power System Technology, pp. 1-8,
October 2006.
[13] Y. Zhao, Y. Tang, W. Li & J. Yu, “Composite Power System
Reliability Evaluation Based on Enhanced Sequential Cross-Entropy
Monte Carlo Simulation”. IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, vol.
34, no. 5, pp. 3891-3901,2019
[14] N. Tazi, E. Chatelet, A. G. Aissaoui & Y. Bouzidi, “Reliability
Analysis of Wind Turbines Using Petri Nets”, In IEEE 7th
872
Authorized licensed use limited to: University of Canberra. Downloaded on October 05,2020 at 09:05:33 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
International Conference on Renewable Energy Research and
Applications, ICRERA, pp. 858-864, October 2018.
[15] B. Boussahoua & A. Elmaouhab, “Reliability Analysis of Electrical
Power System Using Graph Theory and Reliability Block Diagram”,
In IEEE Algerian Large Electrical Network Conference CAGRE, pp.
1-6, February 2019.
[16] R. Benabid, D. Merrouche, A. Bourenane & R. Alzbutas, “Reliability
Assessment of Redundant Electrical Power Supply Systems using
Fault Tree Analysis, Reliability Block Diagram, and Monte Carlo
Simulation Methods”, In IEEE International Conference on Electrical
Sciences and Technologies in Maghreb CISTEM, pp. 1-7, October
2018.
[17] Mark A. Boyd, An Introduction to Markov Modeling: Concepts and
Uses, NASA Ames Research Centre, 1998.
[18] M. Rausand, Reliability of Safety-Critical Systems: Theory and
Applications, Wiley Publication,2014.