IET Generation, Transmission & Distribution

Research Article

Real-time detection of vulnerable power ISSN 1751-8687

Received on 12th December 2019

system areas to geomagnetic disturbance

Revised 14th April 2020
Accepted on 8th June 2020
E-First on 23rd July 2020
doi: 10.1049/iet-gtd.2019.1871
www.ietdl.org

Mina Rezaei-Zare1 , Mohamadreza Ariannik2, Afshin Rezaei-Zare2

1Department of Computer Engineering, Behbahan Khatamalanbia University of Technology, Behbahan, 63616-47189, Iran
2Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, York University, Toronto, ON, M3J 1P3, Canada
E-mail: m.rezaei@bkatu.ac.ir

Abstract: This study proposes an approach for the fast and accurate identification of the vulnerable areas of the power system
to geomagnetic disturbance (GMD). The proposed method can be used for real-time situational awareness and preparedness in
power system control rooms and proactive mitigation of the GMD threats. In addition, it can be employed as an off-line GMD
vulnerability assessment tool for power system planning analysis. In this study, a generalised mathematical basis is presented to
find the maximum geomagnetically induced current (GIC) flow in the multi-zone earth structure based on the orthogonal GIC
components. Furthermore, a real-time frequency estimation method is developed based on wavelet transform to estimate the
frequency of the geomagnetic waveform for the maximum GIC calculation. The proposed approach is applied to the Ontario 500
and 230 kV transmission systems to identify the vulnerable equipment. The results are also compared with the angle sweep
results. The numerical results reveal that not only the proposed method is more accurate but also significantly faster than the
angle sweep method. Such prominent features introduce the proposed approach as a preferable method for real-time
applications and optimisation of power system operation during GMDs.

1 Introduction In this study, it is proved that by knowing the response of the

power system to only two perpendicular directions of the magnetic
Geomagnetic disturbance (GMD) is a kind of natural event that can storm, the maximum GIC and the storm angle at which the
induce a voltage in the ground layers and transmission systems and maximum GIC occurs can be obtained. Not only can the proposed
drive the geomagnetically induced current (GIC) in power grids. approach be applied to the transmission lines which have
Very low-frequency nature of GIC within 0.1–100 mHz range geographical distribution and direction, but also it can successfully
causes quasi-dc effects with detrimental consequences in the power identify the maximum GIC flow in the non-distributed equipment
system [1–7] and transformers [8, 9]. The March 1989 Hydro- such as transformers and substations. The concept of the two-
Quebec power system blackout due to GMD is a prominent event orthogonal-fields is also extended to the multi-zone (non-uniform)
that left nine million people without power for more than eight earth structure taking into account the frequency-dependency of the
hours. Thus, it is important to identify vulnerable areas of the earth's surface impedance. The developed method requires the
power system during GMD in real-time to maintain the power frequency of the GMD waveform, which is obtained by a real-time
system stability and prevent the equipment damage. wavelet transform-based frequency estimation method. The
The GMD vulnerability of the system and equipment highly proposed method is applied on the Ontario transmission system and
depends on the magnitude of the GIC. Thus, to ensure reliable the results are compared with the results of the angle sweep
operation of the power system during a solar storm, it is of great method.
significance to identify the vulnerable lines and transformers
carrying high GIC magnitudes and thereby save assets from the
failure and provide appropriate mitigating measures, during the 2 GIC flow in power system and earth model
GMD events. When the GMD occurs, the change of the earth magnetic field over
Depending on the direction of the induced electric field, also the earth surface induces a voltage in the ground, which is referred
referred to as the geoelectric field, different areas of power system to as geoelectric field, as denoted by E in Fig. 1. In the high-
subject to high GIC flow. Therefore, a primitive approach is to voltage transmission systems, transformer neutral points are
sweep all possible directions of the geoelectric field over a full- or connected to the ground grid of the substations. Thus, a closed
semi-circle angle, i.e. 360° or 180°, to find the maximum GIC flow circuit is formed for the induced voltage E through the
for each individual element of the system [10, 11]. However, such a transformers and the connected transmission lines, Fig. 1, and as a
method is time-consuming and its simulation time and accuracy result, the GIC can flow in the power system. The severity of GMD
depend on the angle step change. For offline studies, such depends on the induced voltage E and this voltage is in turn
drawbacks may not be a concern; however, they are not acceptable influenced by the earth structure and electrical conductivity.
in real-time applications or power system optimisations demanding Therefore, to obtain E, the earth should be modelled based on a
a high number of simulations. Therefore, a fast and efficient multi-layer structure as shown in Fig. 2, where the depth and
approach for accurate identification of the vulnerable elements of a electrical conductivity of the ith layer of the ground are denoted by
power system is required. di and σi, respectively. According to Faraday's law, the induced
An efficient approach is to find the maximum GIC flow based voltage results from a time varying magnetic field. Thus, the
on the two GIC magnitudes obtained from two orthogonal derivative of the magnetic field, dBm /dt, is considered as the input
geoelectric fields, e.g. northward and eastward. The only to-date
of the earth transfer function rather than the magnetic field Bm, as
approach of this type is the method presented in [1] which was
formulated as a part of the early GMD management tool developed shown in Fig. 2.
at Hydro One [2]. However, this method is only applicable to the The previous research works [12–17] have shown that if the
single-zone (uniform) earth model. magnetic field at the ground surface is measured and known, the
geoelectric field E can be obtained based on the frequency
IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., 2020, Vol. 14 Iss. 18, pp. 3838-3845 3838
© The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2020
 17518695, 2020, 18, Downloaded from https://ietresearch.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1049/iet-gtd.2019.1871 by North Carolina State University, Wiley Online Library on [28/03/2025]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
a multi-zone earth model compared with a uniform model ignoring
different earth layer structures in various geographical areas.

3 GMD signature and requirements for real-time

measurement and simulation
The effective mitigation of the GMD impacts on power systems
requires real-time measurements and calculations. In general, the
GMD mitigation approaches can be classified into two main
groups. The first group typically comprises the installation of the
Fig. 1 Flow of GIC in transmission lines and transformers due to GIC blockers to prevent the flow of GIC in power systems [10, 11,
geoelectric field induced in ground 18]. The mitigation approaches of this group require high capital
investments and maintenance and the electric power utilities prefer
to minimise the number of such installations. However, the second
group of mitigation approaches, which are more viable, is based on
the real-time measurements and calculations. Such methods are
flexible and inexpensive and mainly include operational measures
such as system topology change and switching manoeuvres, which
are carried out by the operators in the power system control rooms.
To have clear insight into the feasibility of the real-time GMD
monitoring and mitigation by the power system operators, two
factors determine the available time of the operators to make a wise
decision on what type of operational action should be pursued. One
of the factors is imposed by the disturbance behaviour and how fast
it varies, and the second factor is the required system
computational burden. A close look at the past recorded events
shows that the disturbance can reach the peak intensity from a
moderate level within less than a minute and even a more rapidly
varying behaviour can be observed for the direction of the
Fig. 2 Obtaining the geoelectric field E from the transfer function of the geoelectric field [1]. As a result, the operator time for detection of
multi-layer earth model H(s), based on the measured magnetic field Bm at the high GIC flows in the system is less than one minute and no
the ground surface prediction can be made in advance.
For real-time calculation of the geoelectric field and the
resultant GIC flows in the power system, the earth magnetic field
should be measured and sent to the control room in real-time.
Fig. 5 illustrates a typical measurement site and the main required
hardware for collecting and transferring data to the control room.
The earth magnetic field is measured by a three-dimensional
magnetometer sensor installed at the depth of 1–1.5 m
underground. With a waterproof enclosure, such an underground
installation provides more thermally stable ambient for the sensor
and to some extent makes it less sensitive to the outside interfering
objects. The sensor is installed on an adjustable tripod in the
enclosure for alignment with the earth's magnetic poles, and its
measured signal is sent to signal conditioner for noise removal and
signal amplification. The output magnetic field signals of the signal
conditioner are sent to real-time unit (RTU) to convert to digital
signals, buffer, and finally transmit to the power system control
room via a communication channel. RTU is also equipped with a
global positioning system and a master clock for time
synchronisation and time stamping the measurement samples.
Fig. 3 Five distinct geographical zones in Ontario
4 Mathematical basis for the calculation of
response of the earth model shown by the transfer function H(s) in maximum GIC magnitude and geoelectric field
Fig. 2. With the change of the magnetic field as the input signal, angle
the induced electric field E can be obtained from the earth transfer
function as the output [12–17]. The details of deriving the earth For the GMD vulnerability assessment, the maximum GIC
transfer function from the earth model are given in [12, 16], and magnitude and the corresponding geoelectric field angle at which
thus not repeated here. the maximum GIC flow occurs should be determined. In this
A realistic earth model can be constructed based on the soil section, the mathematical methods applicable to uniform and non-
properties of different geographical zones embedding the power uniform earth models with uniform magnetic field are presented for
system. Consequently, a non-uniform (multi-zone) earth model is the identification of the vulnerable equipment and power system
formed with each zone modelled by a multi-layer soil structure of areas.
Fig. 2. For Ontario, the geological studies have identified five
distinct geological zones with different earth structures, as shown 4.1 Uniform earth model
in Fig. 3. Fig. 4 depicts the magnitudes and phase angles of the five
zones transfer functions [17] forming the Ontario multi-zone (non- The only closed-form mathematical approach for finding the
uniform) earth model, studied. Fig. 4 clearly shows noticeable maximum GIC, which was first developed for Hydro One GMD
different responses of the five zones to the magnetic field management system [2], which is also presented in [1]. This
disturbance. Fig. 4 also reveals that for example at about 10 mHz, approach is frequency independent and can be only applied to the
the geoelectric field generated in Zone-4 is more than twice those uniform earth model. In a uniform earth model, all parts of the
of Zone-1 and Zone-2. These further highlights the significance of earth respond to the magnetic field change, similarly. Although the
earth transfer function is frequency-dependent, the geoelectric field

IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., 2020, Vol. 14 Iss. 18, pp. 3838-3845 3839
© The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2020
 17518695, 2020, 18, Downloaded from https://ietresearch.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1049/iet-gtd.2019.1871 by North Carolina State University, Wiley Online Library on [28/03/2025]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
Fig. 4 Transfer functions of Ontario five-zone (non-uniform) earth model versus frequency; top: magnitudes, bottom: phase angles

Fig. 5 Transferring the measured magnetic field data from magnetometer to power system control room

originally represented as phasors, i.e. with magnitude and phase

angle, can be reduced to scalar quantities represented by their
magnitudes, only.
Owing to the scalability of the GIC results with E, a general
practice is to find the maximum GIC flow for a given geoelectric
field intensity, e.g. 1 V/km. For the purpose of GIC calculation
with a given geoelectric field, the power system is represented as a
dc network. Furthermore, the induced geoelectric fields can be
represented as dc voltage sources in series with the transmission
lines instead of being placed in the ground, as recommended by
North American Electric Reliability Corporation [7]. For a power
system with the given equipment parameters, the only variable
affecting the GIC magnitude is the geoelectric field direction or the
geoelectric field angle. The final network solution is obtained from
Fig. 6 Vector diagram of two orthogonal GIC solutions and the resultant the superposition of the system responses to the two orthogonal
maximum GIC in the uniform earth model excitation components as shown in Fig. 6. In other words, only two
system solutions are sufficient to find the maximum GIC flows in
of all parts of the power system is obtained based on the same all system equipment.
transfer function. Thus, in the uniform earth model and at any Fig. 6 shows two perpendicular directions West–East and
frequency of interest, if the geoelectric field is taken as the known South–North, hereafter referred to as x and y directions,
quantity, the GIC solution is frequency independent, and the GICs respectively, to decompose the geoelectric field by taking x-
flowing in all parts of the system and equipment are in phase. As a direction as the reference for the geoelectric field angle. The
result, the geoelectric fields and associated GICs, which should be components of the geoelectric field E in x and y directions are Ex

3840 IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., 2020, Vol. 14 Iss. 18, pp. 3838-3845
© The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2020
 17518695, 2020, 18, Downloaded from https://ietresearch.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1049/iet-gtd.2019.1871 by North Carolina State University, Wiley Online Library on [28/03/2025]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
and Ey, respectively. GICx and GICy are assumed to be the GIC whether or not the solution point is an actual extremum point. This
solutions, when the system is subjected to the electric field Ex and is due to the fact that in a multi-variable function, both extremum
Ey, respectively. The quantity of interest can be the GIC flow in and saddle points result in zero gradient. The discrimination
any transformer, line, or ground grid of a substation of interest. between the two can be found by calculating Hessian matrix, H, to
The maximum magnitude of GIC, i.e. GICmax, and the determine the characteristics of the critical point
associated geoelectric field orientation/direction, θmax, at which the
∂2GIC ∂2GIC
GICmax occurs are obtained as
∂t2 ∂t∂θ
H t, θ = (6)
GICmax = GIC2x + GIC2y (1) ∂2GIC ∂2GIC
∂θ∂t ∂θ2
and
The calculated critical point is a maximum point if it satisfies
GICy
θmax = tan−1 (2) det H tmax, θmax > 0 (7)
GICx

Equations (1) and (2) can be applied to both spatially distributed If the global maximum point is desired, the angular frequency ω
elements such as transmission lines and lumped elements such as should also be added as the third unknown parameter in (4) and the
transformers. Furthermore, (1) and (2) can also be applied for resulting equations should be solved for three unknowns. However,
finding the maximum GIC flow in any section or parts of frequency is typically preferred to serve as an input parameter
equipment such as the GIC flow in the series winding of an obtained from the observed behaviour of the geoelectric field.
autotransformer of interest.
5 Time-frequency analysis
4.2 Multi-zone earth model During a GMD event, the measured magnetic flux density, B, on
Unlike the uniform earth model, in the multi-zone (non-uniform) the earth surface changes with a variable frequency. As mentioned
earth model, the transfer function and, therefore, the induced in Section 4.2, the frequency of the geomagnetic field is used for
voltages of the zones are different in magnitude and phase angle finding the maximum GIC flows in the power system. In this
and both of these quantities are frequency dependent. Therefore, a section, the available methods for an instantaneous time-frequency
real-time frequency estimation is required for extracting the analysis of the signals are discussed and their effectiveness are
frequency of geomagnetic field waveform, which is discussed in compared, as applied to 13 March 1989 GMD event.
Section 5. When the dominant frequency of the disturbance is
known, the magnitude and angle of the induced voltage, i.e. 5.1 Review of time-frequency analysis methods
geoelectric field, can be calculated for each geological zone, Several methods are available for the time-frequency analysis
according to the transfer function characteristics similar to those among which short time Fourier transform (STFT) and continuous
depicted in Fig. 4 for Ontario. wavelet transform (CWT) are the prominent ones. In the STFT
Similar to the uniform earth model, in the non-uniform model, method, a symmetric sliding window g t is defined and shifted
it is computationally more efficient to find the maximum GIC, only across the signal. The Fourier transform of the samples within each
based on two orthogonal solutions. The first step is the calculation window yields a localised frequency decomposition that
of GICx and GICy based on an appropriate method such as the corresponds to the time of the midpoint sample inside the window.
piecewise layered earth modelling approach described in [17]. STFT of a function x t ∈ L2 ℝ is calculated as follows [19]:
However, not only GICx and GICy are different in magnitude but
also they represent different phase angles due to the different +∞
transfer functions of the geological zones. Thus, in the non-uniform STFT x τ, f = x, gt, f = ∫ x t g t − τ e− j2π f t dt (8)
earth model approach, GICx and GICy are phasor quantities rather −∞

than scalar and as shown here, this results in a set of equations to

where τ and f denote the time shift in the window and frequency
be solved to find the maximum GIC.
components, respectively. Considering the prior knowledge about
Similar to the single-zone earth model, the maximum GIC can
the frequency content of the GMD events, a suitable window is
be formulated according to the projection of the x and y field
expected to have a frequency response with a steeply decreasing
directions, as shown in Fig. 6. At a given frequency of interest ω,
magnitude. This window ensures that the main frequency
the calculated GICx and GICy can be represented by phasors I x /φx
components of the GMD event are detected. Since the same
and Iy /φy, respectively. The total GIC can be given by window is shifted through the function, a constant time-frequency
resolution is obtained in this method. In this regard, CWT is
GIC(t, θ) = I xcos(ωt + φx)cos(θ) proposed as an alternate method that provides different resolutions.
(3)
+I ycos(ωt + φy)sin(θ) CWT of a function x t is calculated by projecting it on a set of
wavelets ψ τ, a, scaled and translated by a and τ, and the resultant
Thus, the GIC in the multi-zone earth structure is a multi-variable CWT is given by [19]
function of frequency and two-phase angles. The maximum GIC
magnitude and corresponding direction are given by the extremum +∞
1 ∗ t−τ
of the two-variable function GIC(t,θ)
W x τ, a = x, ψ τ, a = ∫ x t ψ dt (9)
−∞ a a

∂GIC ∂GIC The wavelets are constructed by scaling and translating a mother
∇GIC = , = 0, 0 (4)
∂t ∂θ wavelet ψ and its complex conjugate ψ ∗. The scaling parameter
enables CWT to yield a variable time-frequency resolution, unlike
which results in the following set of equations: the STFT method. An increase in scale a leads to an expanded
wavelet, which provides a higher-time resolution and a lower-
I xcos(ωt + φx)sin(θ) − Iycos(ωt + φy)cos(θ) = 0 frequency resolution. Each scale corresponds to a pseudo-
(5)
I xsin(ωt + φx)cos(θ) + Iysin(ωt + φy)sin(θ) = 0 frequency f p by [20]

The set of (5) can be solved and the corresponding critical solution fsfc
fp = (10)
point (tmax, θmax) is deduced for the next step evaluation to check a

IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., 2020, Vol. 14 Iss. 18, pp. 3838-3845 3841
© The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2020
 17518695, 2020, 18, Downloaded from https://ietresearch.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1049/iet-gtd.2019.1871 by North Carolina State University, Wiley Online Library on [28/03/2025]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
where f s and f c denote sampling frequency and mother wavelet
centre frequency in Hz, respectively.
Wigner–Ville distribution (WVD) is the third instantaneous
time-frequency method analysed in this study [19]. WVD has been
introduced before the CWT and is more similar to the STFT than to
the CWT. It is calculated as follows:
+∞
t ∗ t
WV x τ, f = ∫ x τ + x τ − e− j2π f t dt (11)
−∞ 2 2

This distribution function maps the energy concentration in the

time-frequency plot. If the energy of x t is concentrated at a
specific coordinate on the time-frequency plot, the WVD has a
corresponding concentration at the same coordinate. Nevertheless,
WVD lacks the positivity, which is a fundamental property
required for an appropriate time-frequency analysis. Moreover,
when a signal comprises different components, interference terms
[19] are generated due to the quadratic nature of the WVD. A
smoothed pseudo-Wigner–Ville (SPWV) distribution is proposed
to cope with the aforementioned difficulties by applying two
windows, g and h [21]
+∞ +∞
t ∗ t
SPWV x τ, f = ∫ ∫ g t − τ h t × x τ + x τ−
−∞ −∞ 2 2
(12)
− j2π f t
e dt dτ

Applying the first window h, decreases the interference terms, and

provides a pseudo-WVD, while the latter window g, causes an
improvement in the resolution and smooths the distribution in time. Fig. 7 Time-frequency analysis of the measured magnetic field (Bx) during
13 March 1989
5.2 Investigating time-frequency decompositions (a) CWT scalogram, (b) STFT spectrogram, (c) SPWV distribution

The CWT, STFT, and WVD methods are implemented on Bx data

measured during 13 March 1989 for an instantaneous time-
frequency analysis, and the transforms are depicted in Fig. 7.
Unlike the noticeable frequency decomposition of the CWT
scalogram, a poor decomposition is observed in the spectrogram of
STFT as well as in the WVD. To cite an instance, in Fig. 7b and c,
the components with the highest power all have a frequency below
0.1 mHz during the 24 h period, whereas some of the components
with the highest power have a frequency >0.1 mHz in the CWT
scalogram. Moreover, the CWT method has provided a frequency
decomposition with a higher resolution compared to the other two
methods. This implies the superiority of CWT over the other two
methods.
The induced geoelectric field is calculated based on the
derivative of B as shown in Fig. 2. Therefore, CWT of dBx /dt Fig. 8 Instantaneous frequency of the derivative of the magnetic field
signal recorded during 13–14 March 1989 is [22, 23] computed (dBx/dt) during 13–14 March 1989, showing severe fluctuations in the
using a synchrosqueezed wavelet transform to sharpen the time- estimation
frequency resolution. Several frequency components with different
magnitudes are available in the derivative signal at each moment. impulse response filter is designed as an alternative to the wavelet
Frequency of the signal samples that correspond to a specific order denoising to filter out the high-frequency contents. Various filters
of power are called ridges and represented in a time-frequency plot. can be adopted for this purpose among which a Savitzky–Golay
The ridge with the highest power is extracted from the scalogram filter [24] of order 3 is selected. The reason is that this filter less
and shown in Fig. 8. This frequency ridge is not capable of suppresses the peak's amplitude of the Bx signal compared with the
providing an accurate instantaneous frequency due to the severe
other filtering methods, while it smooths the signal considerably. In
fluctuations that are introduced to the ridge.
this approach, in addition to the Savitzky–Golay filter that is
Noting that the time derivative of B signal includes the same
considered for Bx, the extracted frequency ridge is modified in two
frequency contents as the original signal except for the dc
component, the frequency estimation can be applied to the B signal stages. First, the frequency signal is despiked and then the
instead of its derivative. Furthermore, any component of the frequency signal is applied to a median filter to obtain more stable
magnetic field, e.g. Bx, By, or Btotal can be used for extracting the results. The principle of a median filter is to slide a window along
the signal and replace the midpoint with the median value of
frequency. To this end, the Bx signal captured during 13–14 March
samples that lie inside the window [25]. The filtered Bx signal is
1989 is first denoised using the wavelet denoising method. The
plotted along with the frequency ridge in Fig. 9. The instantaneous
frequency ridge is then extracted from the synchrosqueezed
frequencies are more stable than the frequency ridge shown in
wavelet transform of Bx. However, the simulation results which are
Fig. 8. As a third comparison, the global peak of the frequency
not presented here show relatively noisy frequency estimation, as signal coincides with the peak of the GMD event for the signal
well. pairs depicted in Fig. 9, unlike the non-filtered signals in Fig. 8.
A more powerful tool than the wavelet denoising is required to The correlation between the frequency and dBx /dt signals is
efficiently smooth the Bx signal. Therefore, a low-pass finite
investigated near their global peak in Fig. 10 shown by a green

3842 IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., 2020, Vol. 14 Iss. 18, pp. 3838-3845
© The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2020
 17518695, 2020, 18, Downloaded from https://ietresearch.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1049/iet-gtd.2019.1871 by North Carolina State University, Wiley Online Library on [28/03/2025]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
frequency should be obtained from the approach of Section 5.
However, without loss of generality and simplicity, the simulation
results of this section are based on an arbitrary frequency of 1
mHz. The single-zone earth model has been extensively simulated
in the published technical literature. Thus, only the multiple zone
method is evaluated.
In the control room of a real power system, the real-time
measurements of the voltages, currents, active–reactive powers,
and some harmonics are available from SCADA and other local
and wide-area measuring systems. Thus, the real-time GIC tool
does not require calculating these quantities. Instead, it should
calculate the GIC flows in the system and identify the vulnerable
areas and equipment carrying high GICs to assist the system
operators in making timely decision and actions, during a GMD
Fig. 9 Filtered Bx signal versus its modified instantaneous frequencies event.
during 13–14 March 1989 In the simulation results of this part, the earth model with the
geographical zones of Fig. 3 and the transfer function
characteristics of Fig. 4 [17] are used. The developed numerical
algorithm is applied to the Ontario power transmission system with
more detailed information presented in [2], including about 530
power transformers and more than 800 transmission circuits. The
power system is represented by the corresponding dc network
based on typical dc resistances of the transformers, transmission
lines, and substation ground grids, respectively, assumed to be 0.2
Ω/phase for transformers, 0.064 Ω/km for 230 kV lines and 0.013
Ω/km for 500 kV transmission circuits, and 0.2 Ω for the substation
ground grids. With the known induced voltage Ex and Ey on the
line east-west length Lx and north-south length Ly, respectively, the
total induced voltage Tot on each line is obtained and can be
converted to its equivalent Norton equivalent current source Idc for
the standard nodal analysis

Etot 1
Idc = = E L + EyLy (13)
Fig. 10 dBx /dt signal and instantaneous frequency of the filtered Bx Rdc − line Rdc − line x x
during the peak of the GMD event on 13–14 March 1989
The resultant dc network can be solved using the nodal solution
Table 1 Comparison between the simulation results of the approach for the bus dc voltages
proposed method and angle sweep method for system
transformers carrying the highest GIC levels [Vdc] = [G]−1[Idc] (14)
Transformer Maximum GIC Maximum GIC angle, °
magnitude, A where [Vdc] denotes the nodal bus dc voltages, [G] is the
Proposed Angle Proposed Angle conductance matrix, and [Idc] is the nodal Norton equivalent
method sweep method sweep current matrix resulting from the induced voltages. With the known
method method nodal dc voltages, the GIC flow in the entire power system can be
dθ = 1° dθ = 1° calculated.
T293 180.092 179.376 163.689 163 The developed algorithm is applied to the Ontario power
T294 180.092 179.376 163.689 163 transmission system with 1013 transmission buses and the results
T410 168.064 168.064 93.7996 94 are compared with those of the angle sweep method. In the angle
T263 157.144 157.129 114.075 114
sweep method, to cover/sweep all directions and due to the
symmetry, the geoelectric field orientation within the range of 0–
T229 149.253 149.248 139.379 139
180° is simulated with the angle step change of 1°. Based on the
T4 148.958 148.944 56.554 57 obtained dc voltages, the GIC flows in transformers, lines, and
T477 142.838 142.831 32.494 32 substation ground grids are calculated. For transformers, the
T478 142.838 142.831 32.494 32 effective GIC is calculated based on the GIC flows in all
T350 142.627 141.929 95.442 95 transformer windings resulting in the net GIC injected into the
T80 140.851 140.828 131.472 131 transformer and contributing to the transformer magnetising the
current dc component. The final results are subsequently evaluated
for identifying the vulnerable equipment carrying the highest GIC
flows. A smaller sweep angle step-change yields more precise
oval, since this region is of the highest interest from the maximum
results, however, at the cost of a significant increase of the CPU
GIC point of view. Fig. 10 shows that the frequency ridge follows
time, which is not reasonable.
the abrupt changes in dBx /dt that occurred after 25 h. Moreover,
Tables 1 and 2, respectively, compare the highest GIC flows in
this figure reveals that the high amplitude changes in the dBx /dt are transformers and transmission circuits, obtained from the proposed
of high–frequency content and thus less contribute to the method and the angle sweep method. The simulations are
geoelectric field, due to the low-pass frequency response of the performed with the base geoelectric field magnitude of 8 V/km in
earth transfer function (Fig. 4). Zone-1, Fig. 3. The results show the accuracy of the developed
calculation approach for finding the maximum GIC flow and the
6 Simulation results corresponding geoelectric field angle. In fact, the developed
method can calculate the maximum GIC and the corresponding
The developed multi-zone earth model of Ontario with the overlaid
geoelectric field angle to any desired decimal point precision,
transmission system is simulated to investigate the performance of
without a tangible increase of the CPU time.
the developed analytical method of Section 4.2. The disturbance

IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., 2020, Vol. 14 Iss. 18, pp. 3838-3845 3843
© The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2020
 17518695, 2020, 18, Downloaded from https://ietresearch.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1049/iet-gtd.2019.1871 by North Carolina State University, Wiley Online Library on [28/03/2025]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
Table 2 Comparison between the simulation results of the maximum GICs and the associated phase angles in the entire
proposed method and angle sweep method for system Ontario transmission system. This makes the proposed approach a
transmission lines carrying the highest GICs preferable method in real-time applications, and for intense
Transmission Maximum GIC Maximum GIC angle, calculations with a high number of simulations which are typically
Line magnitude, A ° required for the optimisation of power system operation during
Proposed Angle Proposed Angle GMDs.
method sweep method sweep Figs. 11 and 12 illustrate the variations of GIC in a few
method method vulnerable transformers and transmission lines as a function of the
dθ = 1° dθ = 1° GIC frequency, taking into account a typical GIC frequency range
of 0.1 mHz to 0.1 Hz [1]. In this analysis, the base geoelectric field
L531 513.898 513.891 93.623 94
of 8 V/km is assumed in Zone-1 at all frequencies, and the
L214 479.393 479.382 102.361 102 geoelectric field of the other zones are obtained from the
L65 389.064 389.057 13.0937 13 characteristics of Fig. 4. Owing to different responses of the other
L66 388.608 388.115 13.0937 13 zones, the geoelectric fields applied on the power system in
L830 366.768 366.767 111.136 111 different areas are different. According to Fig. 4, at the frequencies
L831 366.768 366.767 111.136 111 <1 mHz, Zone-5 and at the higher frequencies, Zone-4 generates
L834 307.356 307.285 14.4913 15 the highest geoelectric fields.
The overall behaviour of the Ontario multi-zone structure
L835 307.810 307.038 14.4913 15
results in the increase of the GIC magnitudes in the vulnerable
L69 303.573 303.212 162.668 162 transformers and transmission lines up to about 0.02 Hz.
L71 303.573 303.212 162.668 162 Furthermore, the order of the ranked equipment carrying high GIC
is changed with the frequency, as shown in Figs. 11 and 12. For
instance, although T293 is identified in Table 1 as the transformer
with the highest GIC at 1 mHz, the frequency scan of Fig. 11
represents it as the fourth highest in the frequency range of 3–10
mHz with a significant increase of the GICs in transformers T410
and T4. Such frequency scans provide useful indications of the
GIC amplification in power systems as a function of frequency.
The overall behaviour of the Ontario multi-zone structure
results in the increase of the GIC magnitudes in the vulnerable
transformers and transmission lines up to about 0.02 Hz.
Furthermore, the order of the ranked equipment carrying high GIC
is changed with the frequency, as shown in Figs. 11 and 12. For
instance, although T293 is identified in Table 1 as the transformer
with the highest GIC at 1 mHz, the frequency scan of Fig. 11
represents it as the fourth highest in the frequency range of 3–10
mHz with a significant increase of the GICs in transformers T410
and T4. Such frequency scans provide useful indications of the
GIC amplification in power systems as a function of frequency.

7 Conclusion
Fig. 11 Variations of the highest transformer GICs with frequency based
on 8 V/km geoelectric field in Zone-1 In this study, a fast analytical method for identifying the vulnerable
power system areas to GIC is proposed. The vulnerability is
assessed based on the high GIC carrying power equipment during a
GMD. The two-orthogonal-fields based method has been extended
to the multi-zone earth model and the mathematical bases are
presented for finding the maximum GIC magnitude and the
associated geoelectric field angle in the multi-zone earth model.
Since the earth's response to the GMD is frequency-dependent,
various real-time frequency estimation methods are reviewed and
the associated simulation results are compared when applied to the
March 1989 GMD event. As a result, a wavelet-transform-based
method is proposed for real-time estimation of the dominant
frequency of the geoelectric field, and the corresponding signal
conditioning such as de-spiking and filtering are also discussed.
The developed approach has been applied to the Ontario
transmission system including 230 and 500 kV voltage levels and
the results have been validated based on the results of the angle
sweep method, which is a time-consuming approach. The
numerical results reveal that not only the proposed method is more
accurate but also significantly faster than the angle sweep method.
Comparing the proposed and angle-sweep approaches, the
Fig. 12 Variations of the highest transmission line GICs with frequency
superior performance of the proposed method has been well
based on 8 V/km geoelectric field in Zone-1
demonstrated by solving the entire Ontario transmission system
consisting of 1013 high-voltage transmission buses. While the
The simulation results of Tables 1 and 2 also indicate that for
angle sweep method takes 15 min and 38 s on a computer with 3
having a vulnerability assessment, if one decides to employ the
GHz CPU, 32 GB RAM, the proposed method takes only 3 s to
angle sweep method, the results of 1° step angle are sufficiently
find the maximum GICs and the associated phase angles in more
accurate for engineering decision making. However, in addition to
than 500 transformers, about 800 transmission circuits, and about
higher accuracy, the performance of the proposed method is
200 transmission substation ground grids. Such prominent features
significantly higher than the angle sweep method. While the angle
introduce the proposed approach as a preferable method for real-
sweep method takes 15 min and 38 s on a computer with 3 GHz-
time applications. Furthermore, even in the offline studies where
CPU, 32 GB-RAM, the proposed method takes only 3 s to find the

3844 IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., 2020, Vol. 14 Iss. 18, pp. 3838-3845
© The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2020
 17518695, 2020, 18, Downloaded from https://ietresearch.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1049/iet-gtd.2019.1871 by North Carolina State University, Wiley Online Library on [28/03/2025]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
intense calculations with numerous simulations are required, such [12] Boteler, D.H., Pirjola, R.J.: ‘The complex-image method for calculating the
magnetic and electric fields produced at the surface of the earth by the auroral
as the optimisation of power system operation during GMDs, the electrojet’, Geophys. J. Int., 1998, 132, (1), pp. 31–40
proposed method can significantly increase the overall [13] Pirjola, R.: ‘Geomagnetically induced currents during magnetic storms’, IEEE
performance of the solution algorithm. Trans. Plasma Sci., 2000, 28, (6), pp. 1867–1873
[14] Boteler, D.H.: ‘Geomagnetically induced currents: present knowledge and
future research’, IEEE Trans. Power Deliv., 1994, 9, (1), pp. 50–58
8 References [15] Boteler, D.H., Pirjola, R., Trichtchenko, L.: ‘On calculating the electric and
magnetic fields produced in technological systems at the earth's surface by a
[1] North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC): ‘Effects of ‘wide’ electrojet’, J. Atmos. Sol.-Terr. Phys., 2000, 62, (14), pp. 1311–1315
geomagnetic disturbances on the bulk power systems’ (Special Reliability [16] Marti, L., Rezaei-Zare, A., Boteler, D.: ‘Calculation of induced electric field
Assessment Interim Report, NERC, USA, 2012) during a geomagnetic storm using recursive convolution’, IEEE Trans. Power
[2] Marti, L., Rezaei-Zare, A., Yan, A.: ‘Modelling considerations for the hydro Deliv., 2014, 29, (2), pp. 802–807
one real-time GMD management system’. 2013 IEEE Power & Energy [17] Marti, L., Yiu, C., Rezaei-Zare, A., et al.: ‘Simulation of geomagnetically
Society General Meeting, Canada, 21–25 July 2013, pp. 1–6 induced currents with piecewise layered-earth models’, IEEE Trans. Power
[3] Marti, L., Rezaei-Zare, A., Narang, A.: ‘Simulation of transformer hotspot Deliv., 2014, 29, (4), pp. 1886–1893
heating due to geomagnetically induced currents’, IEEE Trans. Power Deliv., [18] Yang, P.-H., Li, Y., Liu, L.-G., et al.: ‘Optimal placement of grounding small
2013, 28, (1), pp. 320–327 resistance in neutral point for restraining voltage fluctuation in power grid
[4] Guillon, S., Toner, P., Gibson, L., et al.: ‘A colorful blackout: the havoc caused by geomagnetic storm’, IET Gener. Trans. Distrib., 2019, 13, (8), pp.
caused by auroral electrojet generated magnetic field variations in 1989’, 1456–1465
IEEE Power Energy Mag., 2016, 14, (6), pp. 59–71 [19] Mallat, S.G., Peyré, G.: ‘A wavelet tour of signal processing: the sparse way’
[5] Girgis, R., Vedante, K.: ‘Effects of GIC on power transformers and power (Academic Press, Amsterdam, 2009, 3rd edn.)
systems’. 2012 IEEE/PES Transmission and Distribution Conf. and [20] Taebi, A., Mansy, H.A.: ‘Time-frequency distribution of seismocardiographic
Exposition (T&D), Orlando, FL, USA, 5–10 July 2012, pp. 1–8 signals: a comparative study’, Bioengineering, Basel, Switzerland, 2017, 4,
[6] North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC): ‘Geomagnetic (2), p. 32
disturbance planning guide’, 2013 [21] Hlawatsch, F., Auger, F.: ‘Time-frequency analysis’ (ISTE, London, UK,
[7] North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC): ‘Application guide: 2008)
computing geomagnetically-induced current in the bulk-power system’, 2013 [22] Auger, F., Flandrin, P., Lin, Y.-T., et al.: ‘Time-frequency reassignment and
[8] Aboura, F., Touhami, O.: ‘Effect of the GICs on magnetic saturation of synchrosqueezing: an overview’, IEEE Signal Process. Mag., 2013, 30, (6),
asymmetric three-phase transformer’, IET Electr. Power Appl., 2017, 11, (7), pp. 32–41
pp. 1306–1314 [23] Daubechies, I., Lu, J., Wu, H.-T.: ‘Synchrosqueezed wavelet transforms: an
[9] Zhao, Y., Crossley, P.A., David, T.: ‘Impact of dc bias on operating empirical mode decomposition-like tool’, Appl. Comput. Harmon. Anal.,
performance of current transformers’, J. Eng., 2018, 2018, (15), pp. 930–934 2011, 30, (2), pp. 243–261
[10] Etemadi, A.H., Rezaei-Zare, A.: ‘Optimal placement of GIC blocking devices [24] Schafer, R.: ‘What is a Savitzky–Golay filter? [lecture notes]’, IEEE Signal
for geomagnetic disturbance mitigation’, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., 2014, 29, Process. Mag., 2011, 28, (4), pp. 111–117
(6), pp. 2753–2762 [25] Pratt, W.K.: ‘Digital image processing’ (John Wiley & Sons, Inc., Hoboken,
[11] Rezaei-Zare, A., Etemadi, A.H.: ‘Optimal placement of GIC blocking devices NJ, USA, 2007), pp. 271–278
considering equipment thermal limits and power system operation
constraints’, IEEE Trans. Power Deliv., 2018, 33, (1), pp. 200–208

IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., 2020, Vol. 14 Iss. 18, pp. 3838-3845 3845
© The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2020