You are on page 1of 32

What Accuracy Can We

Expect from the SingleEnded Fault Locator?


Zhihan Xu, Zhiying Zhang
GE Digital Energy

Texas A&M Relay Conference 2015

Outline
Introduction to five single-ended fault
location methods applied in relays
Factors affected location accuracy
Suggestions to understand location
results
Field case study

Single-ended Fault Location


Advantages
Easy and straightforward to implement
Simple and not significantly increase
computation burden
No requirement for communication
channels and remote data
No need for system model analysis
Reasonable and acceptable result

Single-ended Fault Location


Disadvantages
Amount of measurements is less than
the one available for multiple-ended
location methods
In order to reduce the number of
unknown variables and then solve the
location equations, some assumptions
are always applied
Method error is induced when some of
assumptions are not satisfied.
4

Location Method 1 Takagi


Eliminate the effect of load current
Reduce the effect of fault resistance
m

*
Im VG I sup

*
Im Z L1 I G I sup

Fault Type

VG

IG

Isup

AG
BG
CG
AB, ABG

VAF
VBF
VCF
VAF VBF

IAF
IAF
IAF
IAF

BC, BCG

VBF VCF

IBF ICF

CA, CAG

VCF VAF

ICF IAF

+ k3I0F
+ k3I0F
+ k3I0F
IBF

IAF IApre
IBF IBpre
ICF ICpre
(IAF IApre) (IBF
IBpre)
(IBF IBpre) (ICF
ICpre)
(ICF ICpre) (IAF
IApre)

ABC
Any of phase-phase
faults
Assume
system
is homogeneous

Location Method 2 Modified Takagi


(I0)
Use zero sequence current distribution
factor to compensate nonhomogeneity
I
Z Z Z
D0

F0

IG0

G0

H0

L0

Z H 0 (1 m) Z L 0

d 0 0

Im VG 3I G 0 e j0
m
*
Im Z L1 I G 3I G 0 e j0

For an ideal homogeneous system

Im VG 3I G 0
m
*
Im Z L1 I G 3I G 0

Location Method 3 Modified Takagi


(I2)
Use negative sequence current
distribution factor to compensate nonhomogeneity
Z Z Z
I
D2

F2

IG2

G2

H2

L2

Z H 2 (1 m) Z L 2

d 2 2

Im VG I G 2 e j 2
m
*

Im Z L1 I G I G 2 e j 2

For an ideal homogeneous system

Im VG I G 2
m
*
Im Z L1 I G I G 2

Location Method 4 Eriksson


Utilize the source impedance
parameters to overcome the reactance
error caused by fault resistance, load,
or system non-homogeneity
V
Z
K1

m 2 m Re( K1 ) Re( K 2 ) RF Re( K 3 ) 0

I G Z L1

H1

Z L1

VG Z H 1

1
I G Z L1 Z L1

I G Z G1 Z H 1

K3
1
I G Z L1
Z L1

K2

m Im( K1 ) Im( K 2 ) RF Im( K 3 ) 0

Fault Type

VG

IG

IG

AG
BG
CG
AB, ABG
BC, BCG
CA, CAG
ABC

VAF
IAF + k3I0F
VBF
IBF + k3I0F
VCF
ICF + k3I0F
VAF VBF
IAF IBF
VBF VCF
IBF ICF
VCF VAF
ICF IAF
Any of phase-phase faults

1.5(IAF I0F) 1.5(IApre I0pre)


1.5(IBF I0F) 1.5(IBpre I0pre)
1.5(ICF I0F) 1.5(ICpre I0pre)
(IAF IBF) (IApre IBpre)
(IBF ICF) (IBpre ICpre)
(ICF IAF) (ICpre IApre)

Location Method 5 Loop


Reactance
A-G fault
B-CXFault
m

X A_ E

V
AF
I AF

A_ E

X L1

sin( V I )
1 ( K XE

IE
K RE sin( V E )
I AF

I
I
K RE ) E cos( E I ) K XE K RE E
I AF
I AF

X B_C
2

X B_C
X L1

VBF I BF sin( VB I B ) VCF I CF sin( VC IC )


2

I BF 2 I BF I CF cos( I B I C ) I CF

VBF I CF sin( VB I C ) VCF I BF sin( VC I B )


2

I BF 2 I BF I CF cos( I B I C ) I CF

V AF V AF V I AF I AF I

V AF V AF VA VBF VBF VB VCF VCF VC

I E I E E ( I AF I BF I CF )

I AF I AF I A

I BF I BF I B

I CF I CF IC

Factors Snapshot in Ideal


Conditions

Completely homogeneous system, ideally


transposed line, constant earth resistivity,
zero fault resistance, negligible shunt
capacitance, and steady state

Very small location error (within

10

Factors Load Current


Increase load current

Very small location error (within

11

Factors Fault Resistance


10 and 50 ohms fault resistance

3 Takagi & Eriksson: within 0.04%


Loop Reactance:
Under estimate
12
Larger resistance or longer distance, larger error

Factors Zero Sequence Impedance


Zero sequence impedance is mostly
dependent on the earth resistivity, which
varies with the earth materials and soil
types

13

Factors Zero Sequence Impedance


Location error using zero sequence
impedance calculated with 100 ohm*m earth
resistivity

14

Factors Zero Sequence Impedance


Earth resistivity < general average earth
resistivity
Location error is inversely proportional to the
earth resistivity
The smaller resistivity, the larger error
Always under-estimate

Earth resistivity > general average earth


resistivity
Location error is nearly proportional to the earth
resistivity
The larger resistivity, the larger error
Always over-estimate

The longer fault distance, the larger location


15
error

Factors Non-homogeneous
Ignoring non-homogeneity

Location error increased

16

Factors Non-homogeneous
Applying accurate source impedances

Small error
Under-estimate for far-end faults
17

Factors Weak Infeed


Stronger terminal

Small error
Negligible error for a homogeneous system18

Factors Weak Infeed


Weak terminal

Large error
Negligible error for a homogeneous system19

Factors Line Shunt Capacitance

Quite small error


Over-estimate

20

Factors Untransposed Line

Over-estimate for SLG faults


Under-estimate for phase-phase faults

21

Factors Untransposed Line


Three-phase faults

Small error when using average of three


phase-phase loops

22

Factors Zero Sequence Mutual


Coupling
No compensation entirely parallel

Large error, especially for faults located at the 2nd


half section
Over-estimate for both lines in service
23
Under-estimate for one line switched off and

Factors Zero Sequence Mutual


Coupling
With compensation

Small error
24

Understanding Commons in
Methods

It has been approved in mathematics and


simulations that location results obtained by
Traditional Takagi
Modified Takagi using zero sequence current
Modified Takagi using negative sequence current
Eriksson

will be similar, if the system is


Homogeneous,
Balanced, and
Identical pre-fault and during-fault currents for
unfaulted phases
25

Understanding Suggestions
If two location results independently
calculated at both terminals using the
same single-ended location method,
Fault distance calculated at the weak
terminal has quite large error if the
system is non-homogeneous.
If both terminals are strong, the smaller
value is more accurate.
If both terminals are strong, the stronger
terminal has the more accurate distance
if the fault is located among the middle
zone of line.
26

Understanding Summary of
Influence

A detailed table is given in the paper


to summarize the influence, including,
Load current
Fault resistance
Earth resistivity
Non-homogeneity
Weak infeed
Line capacitance
Transposition
Parallel circuit
27

Understanding Correction Chart


Plot measured fault location versus actual
fault location by compensating for known
system errors
Build system model
and line model
Apply faults
Calculate fault
distance using the
specified fault location
method
Plot the chart
28

Understanding Field Case


True fault distance: 24.14 km (0.493 pu of 49
km)
Calculated distance and location error:
Methods

Results at local
terminal

Results at remote
terminal

Takagi

24.340 km / 0.49%

23.007 km / -2.23%

24.370 km / 0.55%

23.180 km / -1.87%

24.942 km / 1.72%

24.520 km / 0.86%

24.315 km / 0.44%

22.949 km / -2.35%

23.958 km / -0.28%

22.261 km / -3.75%

Modified Takagi
(I0)
Modified Takagi
(I2)
Eriksson
Loop Reactance

Stronger terminal is more


accurate

29

Understanding Field Case


Influencing Factors
Factors

Three Takagi &


Eriksson

Loop Reactance

Fault resistance
Line
capacitance
Transposition
Earth resistivity
Parallel circuit
Nonhomogeneity
(ignoring)
Weak infeed

No effect

Under-estimate

Negligible

Negligible

Over-estimate
Unknown
Not applicable
Over-estimate

Over-estimate
Unknown
Not applicable
Under-estimate

Not applicable

Not applicable

Overall

Over-estimate

Under-estimate

30

Conclusions
The accuracy of each fault locator
method is examined for different fault
types and power system conditions
under different influencing factors.
Suggestions are presented to better
understand, analyze and validate fault
locator results.
Influencing factors are summarized to
describe a scope of effects.
A field case is studied.
31

Thank You
Questions?