Electric Power Systems Research 204 (2022) 107701

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Electric Power Systems Research

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/epsr

Protection schemes for a battery energy storage system based microgrid

Ann Mary Joshua *, K. Panduranga Vittal
Department of Electrical & Electronics Engineering, NITK Surathkal, India

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: This paper evaluates directional and adaptive overcurrent protection schemes in microgrids. A microgrid sup­
BESS ported by a centralised Battery Energy Storage System (BESS) is chosen for the study. The stringent PQ controller
Microgrid of BESS will not allow it to dissipate into a fault, during its charging mode, causing the conventional directional
Protection
schemes to mal-operate. A direction estimation scheme using magnitude and angle of superimposed positive
Superimposed impedance
Directional
sequence impedance is proposed to address this issue in BESS. Further, two fault detection techniques are
Adaptive proposed for BESS integrated feeders. The Main Protection Unit (MPU) detects an internal fault when there is a
mismatch in the direction of relays at either end of a feeder. The second scheme uses adaptive overcurrent relay
settings. Since the fault current is limited with PQ control, the pickup current is calculated dynamically with this
control. Whereas a fixed pickup current is chosen, when the BESS inverter is voltage controlled. Simulations have
been carried out using MATLAB/SIMULINK software. The proposed schemes work well for bidirectional power
flows and in grid connected and standalone modes of microgrid operation.

1. Introduction exponential damping dc component, and remains unbalanced for

A desirable feature of a microgrid is that it should have the capability
to operate in isolation with the host network for long hours/days. The
advancements in energy storage (ES) and distributed generation (DG)
have made this possible. However, the LV distribution grid is not yet
geared up for large scale integration of ES and DG, mainly due to pro­
tection coordination issues. The major impediments in microgrid pro­
tection are bidirectional current flow and different fault behaviour of
inverter interfaced distributed generators (IIDGs) in different modes of
microgrid operation.
In grid connected mode (GCM), the voltage and frequency are
dictated by the grid and microgrid performs only ancillary services.
IIDGs are normally operated in current control (PQ control) in this mode
[1]. On the other hand, in islanded mode (IM) of operation, various DGs
or a master DG, preferably a dispatchable source, are responsible for
maintaining the voltage and frequency. The DGs employ voltage control
(V/F or Droop control) in this mode of operation. The current control
always tries to keep the output current at the target level by adjusting
the internal voltage of inverter. Hence the fault current from PQ
controlled inverters will be limited and balanced even for asymmetrical
faults [2]. In comparison, the fault current from voltage mode control
inverters is similar to that of a synchronous alternator. The fault current
from voltage-controlled inverters has a higher peak value, contains
asymmetrical faults.
The inverter control strategies modify the fault currents and voltages
and may affect healthy phases as well. The conventional relaying
schemes thus find limitations due to different short circuit levels,
absence of sequence components and bidirectional power flow [3,4].
Short feeder lengths and lack of sources with inertia in the islanded
mode of operation hinder distance relay application. Many of the pro­
posed protection schemes[14,15,18] use communication-based or
adaptive techniques [5].
The fault location identification is crucial in microgrids. If the fault is
internal to the microgrid, the faulty section must be isolated at the
earliest. For an external fault, the microgrid must remain connected to
the grid to satisfy LVRT requirements as per IEEE 1547-2018 [6].
Including direction feature will improve the sensitivity and selectivity of
protection schemes. Commercially available directional overcurrent
relays (DOCR) are 67 NEG and 67 POS. But these may malfunction in
IIDG feeders due to the lack of negative sequence components and
sources with large fault current [7]. The influence of IIDGs on fault
component based directional relays are presented in [8]. As IIDGs
possess variable impedance characteristics, the superimposed imped­
ance phase angle does not stay constant at 900 and hence mal-operate.
Different types of relays that depend only on current for direction
detection are reported in the literature. The advantage of such relays is

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: ann.187ee003@nitk.edu.in (A.M. Joshua).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.epsr.2021.107701
Received 26 October 2020; Received in revised form 2 October 2021; Accepted 28 November 2021
Available online 15 December 2021
0378-7796/© 2021 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
A.M. Joshua and K.P. Vittal Electric Power Systems Research 204 (2022) 107701

that voltage sensors or potential transformers are not required, and

hence the cost of protection strategy is reduced. The phase difference
between the post fault current and prefault current is used to detect
whether the fault is in forward or reverse direction [9]. Muda and Jena
[10,11] have used phase angle difference between superimposed pos­
itive/negative sequence current and positive/negative sequence
pre-fault current for direction assesment. The limitations of these
methods [9–11] are that pre fault current status (whether current is
flowing upstream or downstream) needs to be updated every time,
which in turn may require voltage measurement. Moreover, direction
assessment criteria are not the same for downstream and upstream
power flow. Hooshyar and Iravani [7] proposed a new directional
element which uses different features for directional detection of sym­
metrical and asymmetrical faults. A protection scheme for microgrids Fig. 1. Microgrid topology.
using Superimposed Reactive Energy (SRE) is proposed in [12]. A PMU
assisted centralised protection scheme which uses Integrated Impedance comprises of a Solar Photovoltaic (PV) employing MPPT control, a
Angle (IIA) for detection of internal faults is proposed in [13].This centralised battery energy storage unit (BESS) and loads. All the com­
scheme requires the application of several synchrophasors and their ponents are connected to a 415 V busbar at the Point of Common
communication, which increases the cost. Coupling (PCC). The switch S facilitates the connection of microgrid to
There are mainly two approaches in adaptive overcurrent (AOC) the grid. During the grid-connected mode, all the DGs are operated in
protection. One method is to adjust the fault current seen by the relay. current controlled mode. PV uses DC link voltage control to transfer
The fault current of different DGs are multiplied by various impact maximum power and BESS employs PQ control to deliver/absorb a
factors to increase the fault current magnitude. Superimposed sequence preset power to/from the utility grid.
components are used in [10] and [11] for impact factor calculations. But When the microgrid is cut off from the utility grid, fixed power
this may lead to unnecessary tripping of PDs at mode transitions, as a control cannot maintain the voltage and frequency. The control of BESS
considerable amount of sequence components are present during switches to grid forming mode (V/F control) in islanded operation,
microgrid transitions. Another approach is to adjust the pickup or whereas the control of PV remains unchanged during both modes. This
operating current of relay depending on the presence or absence of grid enables the PV to deliver maximum output power. The modelling of
and different DGs [16]. A minimum fault current is assigned to each DG, BESS and itscontrol is detailed in [21–24]. The microgrid parameters are
and if present, this current is used to estimate pickup current, irre­ shown in Table 1.
spective of the controller type or microgrid mode. In [17], a dynamic
adaptive AOC relay which automatically adapts the pickup based on DG
status and Moving Average Window Filter(MAWF) line load is presented 2.2. Impact of controllers on fault behaviour of IIDGs
for load feeders.
Most of these schemes were validated on feeders integrating PV or The microgrid is operated in grid connected mode (GCM) up to 2.5 s
machine based DGs. How these schemes responds to faults, when IIDGs and after that in islanded mode (IM). The BESS operates as PQ-IIDG in
are PQ controlled and reference power set to negative value is not GCM and V/F-IIDG in IM. The battery is in charging mode during the
analysed. There are very few protection studies on microgrids inte­ entire operation. L-L faults of duration 0.5 s are applied at t = 1.5 s and
grating Battery Energy Storage Systems(BESS). at t = 3 s at location F1 in Fig. 1. The LL fault response of BESS is shown
The major contributions of this paper are in Fig. 2.
The fault response of PQ controlled BESS inverter varies significantly
• Investigation on the effect of various controllers on fault behaviour from the conventional. To understand its behaviour, PQ control is briefly
of BESS reviewed here. The PQ control consists of an outer power loop that
• A case of maloperation of conventional directional relays with BESS
integration is presented. Table 1
• To rectify this issue, a modified technique to estimate direction using Parameters of the Microgrid.
superimposed positive sequence impedance is proposed. The direc­
Grid Nominal voltage 11 kV
tion of relays on either end of a line is compared in the MPU(Main Rated frequency 50 Hz
Protection Unit). If there is a mismatch, a fault is detected.
Transformer Rated capacity 250 kVA
• An adaptive overcurrent protection scheme which uses positive Transformation ratio 11/0.415 kV
sequence current is also proposed. When the IIDG employs PQ con­ Loads L1 & L2 10 kW, 5 kVAR
trol, the proposed method calculates the pickup current based on L3 (variable) 40 kW, 20 kVAR
MAWF positive sequence power. Otherwise, a fixed pickup current is Li-ion battery
BESS Rated voltage 360 V
chosen.
Rated capacity 160 Ah
• The proposed schemes are validated for different faults, upstream Interface converter Buck Boost
and downstream power flows and in various modes of microgrid Generation Capacity 40 kW
operation by numerous simulations in MATLAB/SIMULINK. PV Voltage at MPP 580 V
System Current at MPP 58A
Interface converter Boost
2. Use case: protection challenges in microgrids DC bus Voltage 700 V
Capacitance 5 mF
This section elaborates a case study on a BESS based microgrid to VSI Rated voltage 415 V
identify the major protection challenges. Interface inductance 2.5 mH
Ripple filter Cf = 10μF; Rf = 5Ω
Resistance per km 0.315Ω
2.1. Microgrid topology
Lines Reactance per km 0.074Ω
Length of lines 1-3 2 km
The typical topology of a microgrid [19,20] is shown in Fig. 1. It

2
A.M. Joshua and K.P. Vittal
Fig. 2. LL Fault performance when BESS is in charging mode.
generates and limits the reference currents and an inner current control
to track the reference currents. The dq axis current reference setpoints of
the inner current controller [21] are given as
2 Pref .Vgd + Qref .Vgq
idref = 2 2
(1)
3 Vgd + Vgq
2 Pref .Vgq + Qref .Vgd
iqref = 2 2
(2)
3 Vgd + Vgq
where Pref and Qref are the active power and reactive power references.
Vgd and Vgq corresponds to the PCC voltages in d-q axis. Since BESS is
capable of delivering (discharging) and absorbing (charging) power, the
reference powers, as well as reference currents can take both positive
and negative values.
During a fault, the voltage drops. Hence the fault current references
as per Eqs. (1) and (2) increase to maintain the DG output power con­
stant. But due to the restrictions imposed by power electronic switches,
the current references are limited using limiters. PQ controlled inverters
with current limiters are therefore modelled as controlled current
sources [2,25].
Fig. 2a clearly shows that the short circuit current is limited when
BESS is PQ controlled. Whereas, voltage controlled BESS inverters pre­
serve voltage source characteristics by injecting higher fault currents.
3
Electric Power Systems Research 204 (2022) 107701
The output power of BESS inverter, depending on the limiter threshold,
slightly decreases as shown in Fig. 2c. Apart from this, there is variation
in the nature of fault response as well (Fig. 2b). The fault current tends to
be balanced even during an asymmetrical fault with PQ controlled
inverter. This is because of the current controller which targets to keep
the output current balanced by adjusting the inverter internal voltage.
Another instance, where the fault behaviour of PQ controlled BESS
differs from conventional sources is discussed here. Even during the fault
in GCM, the battery continues charging as shown in Fig. 2b. This is
because the PQ controller tries to maintain the same prefault power by
injecting current into the battery. Whereas in IM (with V/F control), the
battery is discharging during fault.
Directional protection design assumes that all DGs/grid inject cur­
rent into the fault. The basic principle of almost all directional relays is
that for a reverse fault, the current seen by the relay will lead the voltage
or prefault current. Therefore when F1 fault is detected in GCM, the
relay R13 will see reverse fault instead of a forward fault because the
current is leading. Whereas with V/F control, the battery current re­
verses its direction and dissipates into the fault and relay R13 records a
forward fault.
2.3. Major concerns
The major challenges in the protection of microgrid based on above
study are
• Variation in the level of short circuit current in GCM and IM. Though
in GCM, contribution of short circuit current from IIDGs is less, the
grid will provide high fault current.
• Bidirectional flow of current
• Lack of negative sequence components in the fault response of IIDGs
with PQ/current controllers. Many of the present controllers sup­
press the negative sequence components intentionally to improve the
transient response.
• PQ control will not allow DG to dissipate into a fault when the
reference power is negative, leading to directional relays’ mal-
operation.
3. Proposed protection schemes
The basic principle of superimposed positive sequence impedance for
direction estimation and the proposed algorithms for microgrid pro­
tection are elaborated in this section.
3.1. Superimposed positive sequence impedance
When a fault occurs, the corresponding voltages (V) and currents (I)
undergoes significant changes. The post fault quantities can be obtained
by adding the prefault quantities with these changes referred to as
superimposed or fault imposed quantities
Vpost = Vpre + ΔV (3)
Ipost = Ipre + ΔI (4)
Superimposed impedance can be defined as
ΔV
ΔZ = (5)
ΔI
Since positive sequence components exist for all types of fault, super­
imposed positive sequence impedance is used for fault direction
assessment. The pre-fault positive sequence network of a simple
microgrid with two sources EA and EB is shown in Fig. 3a. Relay di­
rections (RA and RB ) are as indicated in the figure. EF is the voltage at the
fault point prior to the fault. To obtain the superimposed network, all the
prefault voltage sources are short circuited and all network components
A.M. Joshua and K.P. Vittal
Fig. 3. Positive sequence networks.
are represented by their impedances. A voltage source with magnitude
equal to the pre-fault voltage and phase angle opposite to the prefault
phase angle is applied at the fault [26]. The superimposed positive
sequence network is obtained as shown in Fig. 3b
Forward Faults: For a fault F as shown in Fig. 3a, the superimposed
current seen by RA is same as the relay direction. Hence superimposed
positive sequence quantities seen by relay RA are
EF1
ΔIRA1 = (6)
(ZSA1 + ZAF1 )
ZSA1
ΔVRA1 = − ZSA1 ΔIRA1 = − EF1 (7)
ZSA1 + ZAF1
Reverse Faults: The fault current and hence the superimposed current
seen by relay RB for the same fault F is opposite to the relay direction.
EF1
ΔIRB1 = − (8)
(ZFB1 + ZSB1 )
ZSB1
ΔVRB1 = ZSB1 ΔIRB1 = − EF1 (9)
ZSB1 + ZFB1
The sign of superimposed positive sequence current seen by a relay is
positive for a forward fault and negative for a reverse fault. Whereas the
sign of superimposed positive sequence voltages is negative for both
faults. Hence, the superimposed positive sequence impedance (ΔZ1 ) is
negative during a forward fault and positive during reverse fault. The
parameter cos∠(ΔZ1 ) can be used to identify the sign of superimposed
impedance. If it is positive, it implies that sign of ΔZ1 is positive and
hence a reverse fault. This criterion is valid for upstream and down­
stream power flows.
3.2. Main protection unit (MPU)
In the main protection scheme, the direction of power flow at end
relays of a feeder are estimated. A sign = 1 is assigned for forward flow
and a sign = -1 assigned for reverse flow. When there is an internal
feeder fault, the end relays show a contradiction in direction [9,27]. In
case of an external fault or at microgrid transitions, the end relays
indicate the same direction. When a mismatch in the signs are noted, the
trip signals are issued to their corresponding breakers instantaneously,
without waiting for an overcurrent fault detection. This helps to isolate
the faulty location very fastly. If there is any communication error be­
tween the relays or if any relay failed to operate, the adaptive over­
current relays will offer back up protection.
An adaptive approach is proposed for ascertaining the relay direc­
tion. When the DG is PQ controlled and reference power set to negative
value as discussed in Section 2.2, the directional relay may mal-operate.
To rectify this, another condition is added to identify a reverse fault. The
magnitude of superimposed positive sequence impedance |ΔZ1 | must be
less than a threshold value |Zth | for a RF. This threshold value is calcu­
lated by assuming the closest bolted forward fault. Since the fault cur­
rent from current controlled inverters is limited, |ΔZ1 | cannot go below
the threshold during forward faults. But, voltage controlled inverters
possess higher fault currents and hence this magnitude criteria may fail.
4
Electric Power Systems Research 204 (2022) 107701
Hence this criterion is dispensed for conventional generators and IIDGs
with grid forming control.
The main protection scheme and the procedure for direction esti­
mation are shown in Fig. 4. The computations can be done at any
particular relay by fetching data (current phasor) from the adjacent
relay or at a central microgrid protection unit (which collects all relays
information). As current controlled inverters experience changes in their
terminal voltages due to their control, PCC voltages are used for
superimposed impedance calculations. A common voltage will also
ensure that the trip signals are issued only when there is a current
reversal in any of the relays of the line to be protected.
3.3. Adaptive overcurrent (AOC) protection strategy
The fault current contribution from IIDGs in grid following mode will
be limited. Grid is the major short circuit current contributor in this
mode. Whereas in grid forming mode, the fault current will be similar to
that of synchronous alternators. It is proposed to calculate the pick up
current dynamically when the fault contribution is only due to current
controlled inverters and proceed with conventional pickup settings in
the presence of voltage controlled inverters/grid. When the inverter is
PQ/current controlled, the fault pickup is calculated as follows :
1. The positive sequence power at relay locations are computed using a
Moving Average Window (one cycle) Filter.
∑
N
P1mov− = P1i (10)
av
i=1
V1 I1
P1 = 3 × √̅̅̅ × √̅̅̅ (11)
2 2
P1mov-av is the moving average power seen by the relay in one cycle.
Here i is the sample number and N the number of samples in a cycle
2. The peak value of fault pickup is then calculated as
|P1mov− av |
Ipickup = a × (12)
3
2
× E1
where a is a constant usually between 1.5 to 2, since the limiters in
current controlled inverters limit the fault current to 1.5-2.0 pu. E1 is
also a constant fixed at the positive sequence PCC voltage. Since PCC
voltage is 415 V L-L, E1 is chosen as 339 V.
As mentioned earlier, if the current is limited in PQ controlled in­
verters, P1mov-av will decrease during fault. Then the pick up current will
also reduce as in Eq. (12), thus ensuring operation of the protection
devices(PDs) during fault. Whereas synchronous alternators or voltage
controlled inverters behave as constant voltage source during fault and
inject high current into the fault. So in these cases, P1mov-av will increase
and the calculated fault pickup may increase excessively. Therefore
conventional pickup setting must be chosen for voltage controlled
inverters.
The highlight of this method is that the pickup current adjusts
A.M. Joshua and K.P. Vittal Electric Power Systems Research 204 (2022) 107701

Fig. 4. Proposed logic of MPU.

automatically with the load as shown in Fig. 8. With the switching of
new loads, P1mov-av will increase and hence the pickup current increases
and vice versa. This method indirectly uses voltage based protection but
avoids unnecessary tripping during load switching. As soon as the AOCR
relay picks up, the superimposed impedance components are captured to
arrive at the direction decision. However the trip signals are issued only
if the fault persists one cycle after AOCR pickup. The microgrid mode of
operation, which can be ascertained by the position of switch S in Fig. 1
should be communicated to the relays to switch between different
settings.
4. Results and discussions
The proposed schemes are implemented using MATLAB/ SIMULINK.
A sampling rate of 20 samples/cycle is used for phasor estimation using
DFT. Superimposed components are computed using a delta filter. In a
delta filter, a delayed (by 3 cycles) input signal is subtracted from the
input signal itself. The microgrid is operated in GCM up to 2 s and at t =
2 s, it transfers to IM. The schemes are validated for both forward power
flow and reverse power flow by charging or discharging the battery in
both modes. Some cases are demonstrated below:

Fig. 5. MPU performance for an LLLG fault in GCM.

5
A.M. Joshua and K.P. Vittal
4.1. Performance of main protection unit
4.1.1. Fault performance when BESS is PQ controlled and grid-connected
A three phase to ground fault is simulated in location F1 at 1.0 s
when the battery is charging (Pref = − 10 kW) and in GCM. Fault resis­
tance is 0.05 Ω. The battery will continue charging even during the fault.
Since there is no direction change associated with fault, ∠ΔZ1 of both
relays R13 and R31 varies between (-90 ◦ , 90 ◦ ) as in Fig. 5c for more
than one cycle after fault inception. The conventional techniques will
indicate a reverse fault in both relays. However, the superimposed
impedance magnitude is more than threshold impedance in R13 and
hence the proposed scheme will indicate the sign of ΔZ1 as 1 (Forward
Fault). Relay R31 gives a sign=-1 (as |ΔZ1 | is less than the threshold)
indicating a reverse fault. Thus there is a mismatch in the signs of R13
and R31, and the fault is detected within half cycle.
4.1.2. Performance under HIF when BESS is voltage controlled in
standalone mode
To assess the performance of MPU unit for a high impedance fault
(HIF), the system is operated in islanded mode. Further, a single line to
ground fault with a fault resistance of 10 Ω is initiated at F1 while
battery is in charging mode. It is clear from Fig. 6a that current in relay
R13 which is contributed by BESS (V/F controlled inverter in IM) is
asymmetrical. In contrast, the current (Fig. 6b) in relay R31 contributed
by PV (current controlled inverter) remains symmetrical for a SLG. Since
it is a HIF, there is no significant variation in the fault current magni­
tude. The faulted phase current in relay R13 reverses and the argument
of superimposed impedance of R13 exceeds -90 ◦ as in Fig. 6c. Thus the
sign computed by R13 is -1 indicating a forward fault. Contrary to this,
R31 calculates +1 indicating a reverse fault. The proposed MPU scheme
can thus detect faults within a half cycle, excluding communication
delays.
4.2. Performance of adaptive overcurrent scheme
A LL fault is simulated from 1 s to 1.5 s in GCM and from 2.5 s to 3 s in
IM to evaluate the performance of proposed strategy. Since BESS em­
ploys current controlled inverter in GCM, pickup current is calculated
dynamically. As the voltage dips during fault and the fault current is
limited in this mode, P1mov-av decreases. The computed pickup current
decreases as shown in Fig. 7a. Since the positive sequence current seen
by relay R13 exceeds the pickup, the overcurrent relay will act. When
Fig. 6. MPU performance for a HIF fault in islanded mode.
6
Electric Power Systems Research 204 (2022) 107701
BESS employs voltage control, fixed pickup is used as shown in Fig. 7b.
4.3. Performance of the proposed schemes to other system disturbances
The MPU unit remains insensitive to other disturbances like micro­
grid transitions, DG disconnection, load switchings, variations in DG
penetration level etc. The current direction seen by BESS feeder relays
R13 and R31 remains same for all the above cases. These relays will
witness a direction change only when an internal fault occurs.
The pickup current in proposed AOC scheme adjusts itself with
changing system conditions as shown in Fig. 8. At t = 2.0 s, the
microgrid transits from GCM to islanded mode and BESS shifts from
charging to discharging operation. The pickup setting changes from
fixed to dynamic when BESS shifts to V/f mode. To simulate a load
change, an additional load of 15 kW and 5 kVAR is inserted at t = 2.3 s
in L3 to an existing load of 30 kW and 5 kVAR. However, the AOC
scheme may not detect single phase high resistance faults. The voltage
drop will be negligible in such case and hence the positive sequence
power and thus computed pickup current remains almost constant.
4.4. Relay coordination
The proposed MPU offers high selectivity and instantaneous pro­
tection. If a fault occurs in feeder 1-3, the MPU will issue instant trip
signals to breakers of R13 and R31. If MPU fails or if fault is external, the
AOC scheme of R13 and R31 will offer backup protection. Time delayed
definite time overcurrent relays are used for AOC scheme implementa­
tion. To validate the AOC scheme, the trip signals issued by MPU are not
applied to the CBs and hence fault is remaining in the system. For relay
coordination, a delay time of 0.3 s is set for R31 and 0.6 s for R13. If the
fault is persisting or R31 does not operate, then R13 will offer backup.
Similarly when a fault occurs at the load L3, the individual relay R33
should act first. If it fails, AOC schemes in R13 and R31 will offer backup.
Three phase faults were simulated at locations F1 (at the midpoint of
BESS feeder 1-3), F2 (at PCC) and F3 (at load L3) to validate the pro­
posed schemes. Like previous cases, the fault is simulated at 1 s in GCM
and at 2.5 s in IM with a fault resistance of 0.05Ω. Considering a
communication delay of 3ms (extreme case), the time at which trip
signals are issued by primary and backup protection are tabulated in
Table 2. The MPU will issue trip signal only if the fault is internal to the
BESS feeder. If the fault is external, AOC protection scheme will issue
trip signals to R13 and R31 breakers with a coordination time of 0.3 s.
A.M. Joshua and K.P. Vittal Electric Power Systems Research 204 (2022) 107701

Fig. 7. Adaptive settings of relay R13.

due to very high short circuit current from grid. In IM, when there is a
significant contribution from BESS, the AOC protection in relays R13
and R31 will detect the fault. R13 and R31 must respond to faults in IM,
because there is a significant contribution to the fault from BESS and
chances of R33 not responding in IM to fault F3 due to reduced fault
current is also present.

4.5. Comparison of proposed direction assesment with an existing method

Fig. 8. R31 pickup adapting to system changes in AOC scheme.
The fault F3 at load L3 in GCM is not detected by the relays R13 and R31.
This is because in GCM, major contributor to the faults is grid. The in­
dividual relays connected at the load branch can easily detect the fault
The technique in [10] could not assess the fault direction accurately
when BESS is operating as a PQ controlled inverter and charging as
shown in Table 3. Moreover, the direction assesment rules are different
for forward power flow (BESS discarging) and reverse power flow (BESS
charging). Hence current based directional relays are not suitable for
BESS feeders. The proposed technique will record a reverse fault in grid
following mode only when the superimposed impedance magnitude is
less than threshold impedance; which is set as 0.1 Ω.

Table 2
Performance of the proposed schemes for various faults.
Fault Microgrid Battery Fault Proposed Proposed AOCR

Location Mode Mode Initiation MPU R13 R31

Tf (s) Ttrip (s) Ttrip (s) Ttrip (s)

GCM Discharging 1 1.011 1.607 1.312

GCM Charging 1 1.011 1.615 1.311
F1 IM Discharging 2.5 2.509 3.015 2.811
IM Charging 2.5 2.506 3.117 2.814
GCM Discharging 1 No Trip 1.619 No Trip
GCM Charging 1 No Trip 1.613 No Trip
F2 IM Discharging 2.5 No Trip 3.119 2.806
IM Charging 2.5 No Trip 3.12 2.812
GCM Discharging 1 No Trip No Trip No Trip
GCM Charging 1 No Trip No Trip No Trip
F3 IM Discharging 2.5 No Trip 3.123 2.807
IM Charging 2.5 No Trip 3.124 2.814

Table 3
Direction Assesed for Internal Fault (F1) - Comparison.
Grid Connected Islanded Mode

BESS BESS BESS BESS

Method Feature Used Discharging Charging Discharging Charging

R13 R31 R13 R31 R13 R31 R13 R31

H Muda Angle between SI-PSQ

et al. [10] & prefault PSQ currents -64.19 134.4 -39.31 -28.12 -10.3 193 111.08 -67.98
Decision F R R R F R F R
|ΔZ1 | (in GCM only) 2.432 0.075 1.808 0.052
Proposed ∠ΔZ1 (both modes) -111.45 76.006 88.31 76.52 -129.6 36.88 -137.7 41.31
Decision F R F R F R F R

F-Forward Fault, R-Reverse Fault, SI PSQ - superimposed positive sequence

7
A.M. Joshua and K.P. Vittal
5. Conclusion
This paper analysed the fault response of IIDGs with different control
techniques. The results showed that the available direction relaying
schemes fail in feeders integrating PQ-controlled IIDGs with reverse
power flow capability such as BESS. A modified criterion is proposed for
assessing fault direction. The MPU uses the direction estimated by the
feeder end relays for detecting an internal fault. The MPU is simple,
selective and valid for high impedance faults. But, it requires time
synchronised communication.
The AOC scheme is proposed as a backup to the MPU. This scheme is
also simple and can detect all types of fault. It employs a fixed pickup
setting for voltage controlled inverters and a dynamic setting for current
controlled inverters. Both the schemes were validated on BESS feeders
for forward (discharging) and reverse power flows (charging) in grid
connected and islanded modes of microgrid operation.
CRediT authorship contribution statement
Ann Mary Joshua: Conceptualization, Methodology, Software, Data
curation, Writing – original draft, Visualization, Investigation. K. Pan­
duranga Vittal: Writing – review & editing, Supervision, Project
administration.
Declaration of Competing Interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
the work reported in this paper.
References
[1] Q. Fu, A. Nasiri, A. Solanki, A. Bani-Ahmed, L. Weber, V. Bhavaraju, Microgrids:
architectures, controls, protection, and demonstration, Electr. Power Compon.
Syst. 43 (12) (2015) 1453–1465, https://doi.org/10.1080/
15325008.2015.1039098.
[2] Z. Shuai, C. Shen, X. Yin, X. Liu, Z.J. Shen, Fault analysis of inverter-interfaced
distributed generators with different control schemes, IEEE Trans. Power Deliv. 33
(3) (2018) 1223–1235, https://doi.org/10.1109/TPWRD.2017.2717388.
[3] A.A. Memon, K. Kauhaniemi, A critical review of ac microgrid protection issues and
available solutions, Electr. Power Syst. Res. 129 (2015) 23–31, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.epsr.2015.07.006.
[4] A. Chandra, G.K. Singh, V. Pant, Protection of ac microgrid integrated with
renewable energy sources - a research review and future trends, Electr. Power Syst.
Res. 193 (2021) 107036, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.epsr.2021.107036.
[5] S.C. Vegunta, M.J. Higginson, Y.E. Kenarangui, G.T. Li, D.W. Zabel, M. Tasdighi,
A. Shadman, AC microgrid protection system design challenges-a practical
experience, Energies 14 (7) (2021), https://doi.org/10.3390/en14072016.
[6] Ieee standard for interconnection and interoperability of distributed energy
resources with associated electric power systems interfaces (2018).
[7] A. Hooshyar, R. Iravani, A new directional element for microgrid protection, IEEE
Trans. Smart Grid 9 (6) (2018) 6862–6876, https://doi.org/10.1109/
TSG.2017.2727400.
[8] K. Jia, Z. Yang, Y. Fang, T. Bi, M. Sumner, Influence of inverter-interfaced
renewable energy generators on directional relay and an improved scheme, IEEE
Electric Power Systems Research 204 (2022) 107701
Trans. Power Electron. 34 (12) (2019) 11843–11855, https://doi.org/10.1109/
TPEL.2019.2904715.
[9] A. Ukil, B. Deck, V.H. Shah, Smart distribution protection using current-only
directional overcurrent relay. IEEE PES Innovative Smart Grid Technologies
Conference Europe (ISGT Europe), 2010, pp. 1–7, https://doi.org/10.1109/
ISGTEUROPE.2010.5638909.
[10] H. Muda, P. Jena, Sequence currents based adaptive protection approach for DNs
with distributed energy resources, IET Gener. Transm. Distrib. 11 (2017) 154–165,
https://doi.org/10.1049/iet-gtd.2016.0727.
[11] H. Muda, P. Jena, Superimposed adaptive sequence current based microgrid
protection: a new technique, IEEE Trans. Power Deliv. 32 (2017) 757–767, https://
doi.org/10.1109/TPWRD.2016.2601921.
[12] S. Basit, A. Bukhari, M. Saeed, U. Zaman, R. Haider, Y.-s. Oh, C.-h. Kim,
A protection scheme for microgrid with multiple distributed generations using
superimposed reactive energy, Int. J. Electr. PowerEnergy Syst. 92 (2017)
156–166.
[13] N.K. Sharma, S.R. Samantaray, PMU assisted integrated impedance angle-based
microgrid protection scheme, IEEE Trans. Power Deliv. 35 (2020) 183–193.
[14] H.J. Laaksonen, Protection principles for future microgrids, IEEE Trans. Power
Electron. 25 (12) (2010) 2910–2918.
[15] M.A. Haj-ahmed, S. Member, M.S. Illindala, S. Member, The influence of inverter-
based DGs and their controllers on distribution network protection, IEEE Trans.
Ind. Appl. 50 (4) (2014) 2928–2937, https://doi.org/10.1109/TIA.2013.2297452.
[16] T.S. Ustun, C. Ozansoy, A. Ustun, Fault current coefficient and time delay
assignment for microgrid protection system, IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 28 (2013)
598–606, https://doi.org/10.1109/TPWRS.2012.2214489.
[17] R. Jain, D.L. Lubkeman, S.M. Lukic, Dynamic adaptive protection for distribution
systems in grid-connected and islanded modes, IEEE Trans. Power Deliv. 34 (2019)
281–289, https://doi.org/10.1109/TPWRD.2018.2884705.
[18] A. Oudalov, A. Fidigatti, Adaptive network protection in microgrids(2009).
[19] Y. Levron, J.M. Guerrero, Y. Beck, Optimal power flow in microgrids with energy
storage, IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 28 (3) (2013) 3226–3234, https://doi.org/
10.1109/TPWRS.2013.2245925.
[20] D. Minh, S.-l. Chen, K.-y. Lien, Y.-r. Chang, Y.-d. Lee, Investigation on transient
behaviours of a uni-grounded low-voltage AC microgrid and evaluation on its
available fault protection methods: review and proposals, Renew. Sustain. Energy
Rev. 75 (February 2016) (2017) 1417–1452, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
rser.2016.11.134.
[21] M. Farrokhabadi, S. Knig, C.A. Caizares, K. Bhattacharya, T. Leibfried, Battery
energy storage system models for microgrid stability analysis and dynamic
simulation, IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 33 (2018), https://doi.org/10.1109/
TPWRS.2017.2740163.
[22] J.-Y. Kim, J.-H. Jeon, S.-K. Kim, C. Cho, J.H. Park, H.-M. Kim, K.-Y. Nam,
Cooperative control strategy of energy storage system and microsources for
stabilizing the microgrid during islanded operation, IEEE Trans. Power Electron.
25 (12) (2010) 3037–3048, https://doi.org/10.1109/TPEL.2010.2073488.
[23] I. Serban, C. Marinescu, Control strategy of three-phase battery energy storage
systems for frequency support in microgrids and with uninterrupted supply of local
loads, IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 29 (9) (2014) 5010–5020, https://doi.org/
10.1109/TPEL.2013.2283298.
[24] A.M. Joshua, K.P. Vittal, Transient behavioural modelling of battery energy storage
system supporting microgrid. IEEE International Conference on Power Electronics,
Smart Grid and Renewable Energy (PESGRE2020), 2020, https://doi.org/10.1109/
PESGRE45664.2020.9070389.
[25] W.-M. Guo, L.-H. Mu, X. Zhang, Fault models of inverter-interfaced distributed
generators within a low-voltage microgrid, IEEE Trans. Power Deliv. 32 (1) (2017)
453–461, https://doi.org/10.1109/TPWRD.2016.2541344.
[26] S.M. Hashemi, M.T. Hagh, H. Seyedi, Transmission-line protection: a directional
comparison scheme using the average of superimposed components, IEEE Trans.
Power Deliv. 28 (2013) 955–964, https://doi.org/10.1109/
TPWRD.2012.2226609.
[27] S. Biswas, P.K. Nayak, A fault detection and classification scheme for unified power
flow controller compensated transmission lines connecting wind farms, IEEE Syst.
J. (2020) 1–10, https://doi.org/10.1109/JSYST.2020.2964421.