Impacts of Substation Transformer Backfeed at High
PV Penetrations
Robert Mack, MD Sakib, Samir Succar
ICF
Fairfax, VA, USA – 22031
Bob.Mack@icf.com, Md.Sakib@icf.com, Samir.Succar@icf.com
Abstract—Increasing amounts of photovoltaic penetration
(PV) on the electric distribution system have given rise to a
number of challenges for electric utility companies. One of the
more frequent issues utilities will have to address is the potential
for a large amount of substation transformer backfeed stemming
from reverse power flow on distribution circuits. Excess PV
output on the distribution system during periods of minimum
daytime loading causes a number of issues for utility planning and
operation, such as temporary overvoltage conditions, the need for
protection schemes modifications, and equipment failure from an
increase in voltage regulation operations. The aim of this paper is
to summarize the considerations related to substation transformer
backfeed, how it affects common distribution system
configurations, and to also touch on opportunities for mitigating
the impact of these issues.
Keywords—Backfeed, substation transformer, minimum
daytime loading, photovoltaic.
I. INTRODUCTION
The increasing penetration levels of distributed generation
(DG) with variable output such as solar PV, and coincidence of
these systems’ max output with minimum daytime loading, have
already produced observed cases of substation transformer
backfeed on utility systems [1]. Substation transformer backfeed
has a number of planning and operational implications for
electric utilities such as the increased risk of sustained over-
voltage conditions during a line to ground fault that could be
potentially damaging to substation equipment i.e. exceeding
substation equipment’s thermal rating. Maintaining substation
voltage regulation equipment has also become an increasing
concern, as a result of the increased frequency of load tap
changer (LTC) operations due to PV variability with attendant
impacts on equipment life and utility costs.
II. SUBSTATION TRANSFORMER BACKFEED
Substation transformer backfeed is most likely to occur
during periods of minimum daytime loading because of the
coincidence between the peak output timing of PV modules and
daytime light load conditions. Under these conditions, localized
load is insufficient to consume all of the output from the local
PV capacity. It is also important to note that although PV
generation is largely the cause of substation transformer
backfeed, other forms of DG with variable output can contribute
to the range of issues described here. As a result of this
condition, power flows in the reverse direction towards the
substation, as opposed to from the substation to the distribution
feeders. Excess power then travels backward into the
transmission system from the distribution system via the
978-1-5386-2212-4/17/$31.00 ©2017 IEEE
substation power transformer. This phenomenon is knows as
substation transformer backfeed.
The distribution system’s configuration will greatly affect
how much of a concern substation backfeed is for each location.
Distribution systems in a network configuration typically have
the necessary protection schemes already in place for allowing
backfeed because they are designed with two way power flow in
mind [2]. Radially fed distribution systems that are tapped from
a single source on the transmission network are more susceptible
to the substation equipment issues related to excess distributed
generation because they are typically designed for power flow
from the transmission system only. The existence of reverse
power flow on radially fed substations has exposed a number
design challenges to substation equipment. All these design
changes will also affect future planning and operation of the
electric grid. This need to retrofit substations that have been
designed for unidirectional power flow to be upgraded to allow
for two-way power flow have also raised a number of economic
issues related to the cost of these upgrades [3].
Backfeeding through substation transformers can also result
in significant system losses because of the winding ratio bias of
the transformer [4]. The later sections will try to describe the
different system issues due to substation transformer backfeed
and will also present a few possible measures to eliminate
substation transformer backfeeding.
III. WHEN SUBSTATION TRANSFORMER BACKFEED IS LIKELY
TO OCCUR
PV systems will only contribute to backfeed if the total
installed capacity of PV on a feeder exceeds its minimum
daytime load. Otherwise power will continue to flow from the
high voltage transmission/sub-transmission system to the
distribution system. Utilities typically review the minimum load
of a substation transformer during normal system conditions and
also during an N-1 contingency scenario (i.e. adjacent feeder on
the same bus locked out) to determine when additional
protection may be needed. If the aggregate generation is equal
to or greater than this minimum value identified, additional
transformer protection may be required.
For stations where loading information is not readily
available, utilities would use an extrapolated percentage of the
transformer’s peak load to derive the minimum daytime loading
data. Since maximum output for solar PV systems occurs during
daylight hours, the daytime minimum loading is the most
appropriate metric for assessing the potential for backfeed
(without seasonal daylight adjustments) and is defined between
8AM and 4PM [5].
IV. SYSTEM ISSUES DUE TO SUBSTATION TRANSFORMER
BACKFEED
The extent to which substation transformer backfeed affects
distribution system planners and operators will vary greatly
depending on the existing system configuration. For example,
a substation with Wye-Wye connected transformers will not be
susceptible to temporary overvoltage conditions to the same
degree as a Delta-Wye connected transformer, even if both are
radially fed from the transmission system. Existing voltage
regulators, protection, and control equipment on both the
distribution circuits and the substation itself will also determine
the necessary upgrades to allow for some, or no, amount of
backfeed.
A. Temporary Overvoltage Conditions
Even in instances where excess PV is not an issue, the
existence of PV on a circuit can cause temporary overvoltage
issues for substations that are radially tapped off the
transmission system. For substations without the necessary
protection schemes to accommodate two way power flow, a
single line to ground fault for a substation with PV runs the risk
of damaging sustained overvoltage conditions [6] [7]. For
example the sustained overvoltage condition might cause
substation equipment such as buses and CTs to fail [8]. For
temporary overvoltage conditions as a result additional zero-
sequence current feeding into a ground fault, surge arrestors are
particularly vulnerable. They can typically handle transient
over-voltage conditions, but sustained over-voltage conditions
can result in equipment failure [9]. Installing an additional
grounding transformer would be one of the most common
solutions for limiting the additional zero-sequence current
contributing to the ground fault, however its effectiveness has
been debated and other solutions such as hardware and control
modifications have been also suggested [2], [6].
B. Load Tap Changer
Most distribution transformers use analog tap changers with
Line Drop Compensation (LDC) to regulate the voltage along
the distribution feeder. LDC regulates the voltage at a point on
a distribution system’s line or feeder downstream from the
transformer or regulator bus. LDC is used to make sure that the
end of the feeder does not encounter unacceptable steady-state
voltage under peak loading conditions. The control internally
calculates the line voltage drop between the controlled bus and
the load center using the input current (including the phase
angle) and the R and X values. The control then automatically
adjusts the band-center of the load tap changer (LTC) to
compensate the local voltage by the calculated voltage drop (If
the band-center setting is 119 V and the LDC voltage drop
calculation is 2 V, the new band-center will be 121 V. This
causes 121V to appear at the load center) [10].
LDC can magnify voltage impacts when combined with
other regulation equipment at high penetration of PV. Most
analog tap changer control systems cannot sense reverse power
flow on a substation transformer. In the event of power
978-1-5386-2212-4/17/$31.00 ©2017 IEEE
backfeeding through substation equipment, the LDC portion of
the line-tap changer will turn off. If the LTC cannot sense
reverse power-flow, the LTC will continue to incorrectly
regulate the voltage on the distribution system, causing voltage
violations on the distribution system resulting from incorrect
measured current [10]. As current flows in reverse through the
transformers, the bi-directional aspect or abilities of the LDC
must be disabled. The existing LTC will not be able to sense
reverse power flow and could cause adverse voltage conditions
on distribution feeders as well as upstream on the sub-
transmission level as a result of incorrect voltage regulation.
Figure 1 depicts the impact of substation transformer
backfeed on voltage regulation [3]. The figure shows how the
real power (kW) is reversed when the phenomenon of backfeed
occurs and how it affects the voltage regulator. Because of the
reverse flow, the voltage regulator regulates voltage in the
reverse direction. This might result in very low voltage
conditions at the tail end of the circuit. In order to mitigate
equipment lifespan reduction and incorrect voltage regulation
and advanced LTC transformer can be used to allow for greater
control over the voltage regulation operations. Advanced
regulating controls would allow the utility to set the LTC
settings to either block operations, or begin regulating in reverse
upon detecting reverse power flow [11].
Fig 1. Voltage regulation profiles based on regulation direction
C. Equipment Life
Large amounts of reverse power flow can also reduce the life
span of distribution system equipment by increasing the
frequency of operation, even if the amount of reverse power
flow is not great enough to cause backfeed through the
substation transformer. Variability in the amount of substation
transformer backfeed can increase cycling on the tap changer by
requiring changes in the transformer tap position in response to
impacts of changing PV output and circuit loading. Increases in
tap changer cycling increases will have significant impacts on
the expected equipment life of impacted LTCs. The number and
frequency of physical operations directly impacts the lifespan
expectation of this equipment [12]. For LTCs that on average
experience five daily operations, increasing LTC operations by
just two operations a day could reduce expected equipment
lifespan by approximately 40-50% [1], [12].
The same concept of a reduced life span due to the
intermittency of PV generation applies for voltage controlled
capacitor banks as well. The capacitor banks might be taken
offline and online within very small time-periods, similarly
increasing frequency of cap-bank operations and reducing the
life-span of the equipment.
D. Protection and Relaying
As PV penetration increases on the distribution system, basic
protection elements and design philosophies, may no longer
ensure the security and proper clearance of faults on distribution
networks. The prominence of radially configured systems has
led to many standardized and industry accepted protection
schemes. Higher penetrations of PV introduce the possibility
that bi-directional power flow might exceed standard design
criteria thresholds set by utilities and can also lead to sustained
fault currents resulting in a loss of relay co-ordination and
potentially damaging overvoltage conditions.
High PV penetration might also affect the transmission
system’s distance protection and will need to be reviewed. The
transmission side of a utility substation transformer is normally
connected in a delta configuration. A 59N relay may be used to
detect the L-G faults on the transmission system and a
directional over current relay can be used to identify ungrounded
faults on the transmission system.
Communication is one of the major challenges utilities face
with higher PV deployment. Existing communication and
network infrastructures were not designed to support bi-
directional power flow, non-radial feeds etc. A reliable and
secure means of communication needs to be maintained between
all devices. Care should be taken when updating, configuring,
managing and maintaining communication infrastructure both
for the PV and utility owned assets.
V. PREVENTING SUBSTATION TRANSFORMER
BACKFEEDING
A. Relaying on secondary networks
When backfeed is a concern on secondary distribution
networks, a minimum import relay (MIR), comparative relay
(CR) or reverse power flow relay (RPR) can be used to mitigate
concerns. Minimum import relays disconnect the PV from the
distribution network if the power flow from the utility drops
below a certain threshold value [13], [14]. This is one way to
mitigate backfeed conditions. An example utility practice of
this solution would be that the, “MIR relay shall trip or curtail
PV generation below set limits when retail customer’s service
load drops to less than 200% of PV system AC rating” [15].
Figure 2 illustrates aspects of the design philosophy of MIR
[15]. MIR relays are also especially suited for spot networks
experiencing high PV penetration [14]. For instances where PV
generation can be accommodated up to the service load, a
comparative relay can be installed to ensure that PV generation
978-1-5386-2212-4/17/$31.00 ©2017 IEEE
does not exceed 100% of the service load and cause backfeed
[15].
Fig 2. Minimum Import Relay diagram
Reverse power flow relays (RPR) (32) disconnect a PV
system if power begins flowing from the distribution system to
transmission system. Typical RPR settings produce lock out
when they detect power ceasing to flow or begins to flow in the
reverse direction [13]. To estimate the power level, the relay
measures current and power factor. As soon as the reverse
power level increases above the threshold, the relay triggers a
trip after a predefined time delay to prevent nuisance tripping.
Current RPR can also reduce nuisance tripping by measuring if
a signal is noisy or unstable. RPR will automatically re-set once
the power level falls below the set point minus the differential.
MIR, CR, and RPR eliminates backfeed based on real- time
monitoring. However, since RPR require a time-delay in
tripping the PV, it cannot be set for instantaneous operation.
B. Install a dynamically controlled inverter
A dynamically controlled inverter (DCI) will monitor the
amount of power flowing into the customer’s location using
current transformers (CTs) and reduce the amount of PV on the
feeder if the load decreases below a predetermined threshold.
The power flow is monitored at the main PCC (point of
common coupling) and a control signal is sent to the PV
inverter to initiate a reduction of output power if required [13],
[14]. This approach will allow for the interconnection of larger
PV systems since it enables curtailment and ramp down to
ensure reliable operation. The ability to curtail generation also
allows for the PV to generate within the system limits, without
having to reduce output to zero like in the relaying solutions.
The DCI system leverages the information obtained from
current transformers (CTs) to sense power flow and verify that
a minimum threshold of power is maintained from the grid,
through the distribution transformers. The inverters will track
the load on each of the three phases and curtail power from the
PV system, when the generating PV system current reaches
95% of the current on any phase [16]. DCI systems can also be
utilized for new smart grid-enabled distribution systems where
PV power contribution during certain periods will need to be
curtailed or ramped down.
C. Relays for Fault Backfeed Detection
Increased PV on the distribution system can significantly
impact existing protection schemes, since current protection
relays installed at the substation may not have directional
capabilities. If the existing station relays do not have bi-
directional protection, existing protection units may need to be
replaced/upgraded to include bi-directional relaying (67) [17].
To identify the direction of a fault, a relay requires a reference
to compare its line current to. This is known as the polarizing
quantity. The polarizing quantity is a reference point that the
relay compares the system condition against and will not
change direction regardless of the fault location. Most
directional overcurrent relays have two components, a
directional component, along with an overcurrent component.
To activate the “Trip” setting of the relay, the magnitude of the
overcurrent should exceed the threshold limit specified for a
certain time duration, and the direction of the fault must be
within the pre-set ‘trip’ region. The 67/51P (Directional Relay
with Phase Overcurrent protection) or 67/50P (Directional
Relay with phase instantaneous overcurrent protection) relays
can be used to detect backfeed from the transformer’s low side
to the high side. These relays operate by measuring current
flow on the transformer [18]. If the 67/50P element is used, a
slight time delay should be introduced to the 50P element to
account for any chance of transient backfeed during load
swings or when paralleling with other transformers [18].
Additional voltage transformers and potential transformers
(PTs) may need to be installed since, zero sequence voltage
(3V0) is obtained through the broken-delta secondary of
grounded-wye transformer configuration [17]. Modern
advanced micro-processor based relays are capable of
calculating 3V0 without any additional PTs or VTs.
To summarize, in order to prevent PV from backfeeding into
a fault in the distribution system, certain relays can be used:
• Directional/Reverse power (32P) for irregular power flow.
32P should not be set for instantaneous operation and there
should be a time delay setting to avoid nuisance tripping
• Directional Elements (67/51P, 67/50P, 67/51N, 67/50N,
59N for zero sequence voltage) for fault detection and
backfeed protection
978-1-5386-2212-4/17/$31.00 ©2017 IEEE
VI. INCREASING MINIMUM DAYTIME LOADING
In the case where some degree of substation transformer
backfeed is allowed, it is almost always largely dependent on
the ratio of PV generation output to the daytime minimum
loading. Although increasing the minimum daytime loading
will not address concerns with PV contributing to fault currents,
increasing the daytime minimum loading would allow the grid
to accommodate more PV as the would-be excess generation is
consumed by the increased load [19], [20]. There are a number
of current and future technologies that could be leveraged to
increase minimum loading in a way that is beneficial to the grid
in a number of ways. These technologies would include;
energy storage systems, and dispatch-able loads (commercial
load management, smart electric vehicle charging) [19-21]. If
the mentioned technologies could be used to increase minimum
daytime loading it could potentially address concerns with
substation transformer backfeed, peak load reduction, and also
increase the hosting capacity for areas where the lack of reverse
power flow enabling technologies are the greatest constraint.
It should be clear that energy storage systems and other
responsive loads by no means replace the functionality of the
needed protection schemes to compensate for two way power
flow. Energy storage and demand response practices could
only reduce the need for costly upgrades by alleviating reverse
power flow to an acceptable amount. The separation of
functionality between the necessary protection scheme
upgrades and adopting the aforementioned technologies is
critical because the cost of investing in either of these system
upgrades can vary by a large amount.
Summary of Substation Transformer Backfeed Mitigation Methods
Minimum Import Relay (MIR) Disconnects PV if the power flow from the utility
drops below a preset threshold value. Applicable
to networked distribution systems and spot
networks.
Reverse Power Flow Relay Disconnects PV if the power flow from the utility
(RPR) drops to zero or reverses direction. Applicable to
networked distribution systems and spot
networks. RPR can trip PV generation below set
limits when retails customer’s service load drops
to less than 200% of PV system AC rating
(mentioned above)
Dynamically Controlled This inverter controls the output of the PV system
Inverter (DCI) inverter(s) and is applicable to spot networks.
DCI can be used as a secondary measure to insure
that a minimum level of power flows back onto
the spot network and can also curtail PV output at
certain times or conditions.
Relays for Fault Backfeed Typically 67 or 51V relay can be used to detect
Detection supply fault and initiate PV separation. The
choice of a device for removing ground fault
backfeed should be a function of the type of
primary winding on the interconnection
transformer. For a grounded primary transformer
winding, a 51N neutral overcurrent relay or, in
some cases, a 67N ground direction relay should
be selected. For ungrounded interconnection
transformers, neutral overvoltage relays (59N,
27N relays) provide detection of supply ground
faults.
 VII. CONCLUSION
Substation transformer backfeed will be an increasingly
frequent issue utilities will need to address. The distribution
systems will require upgrades to either prevent PV from
backfeeding into the substation altogether, or to allow backfeed
at a substation level while maintaining system safety and
reliability. Utilities will need to strike a balance on the amount
of allowable backfeed to accommodate more PV on the grid,
and the cost of investing in reverse power flow enabling
technologies. The electric grid will now have to be designed
for bi-direction powerflow on the distribution system and if
backfeed is allowed, it should be under safe and reliable utility
practices to avoid the potential of creating an uneconomical,
oppositely located centralized generation system on the
distribution side, that frequently feeds upstream out of the
substation.
VIII. REFERENCES
[1] E. Stewart, J. MacPherson, S. Vasilic, D. Nakafuji and T.
Aukai, "Analysis of High-Penetration Levels of
Photovoltaics into the Distribution Grid on Oahu,
Hawaii," NREL, 2013.
[2] R. Salcedo, X. Ran, F. de Leon, D. Czarkowski and V.
Spitsa, "Long Diration Overvoltages due to Current
Backfeeding in Secondary Networks," IEEE
Transactions on Power Devlivery, Vol. 28. No. 4, 2003.
[3] J. D. McDonald, B. Wojszczyk, B. Flynn and I. Voloh,
"Distribution Systems, Substations, and Inegration of
Distributed Generation," in Electrical Transmission
Systems and Smart Grids, Springer, 2013, pp. 8-68.
[4] Siemens Energy Sector, "Power Engineering Guide,
Edition 7.0 Chapter 5," Siemens Aktiengesellschaft
Energy Sector, Erlangen Germany, 2012.
[5] O. Comstock, "Solar photovoltaic output depends on
orientation, tilit, and tracting," Today In Energy, 19
November 2014. [Online]. Available:
http://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=18871.
[Accessed 26 10 2016].
[6] H. Ghoddami and A. Yazdani, "A Mitigation Strategy for
Temporary Overvoltages Caused by Grid-Connected
Photovoltaic Systems," IEEE, 2015.
[7] V. Madani, R. Das, F. Aminifar, J. McDonald, S. S.
Venkata, D. Novosel, A. Bose and M. Shahidehpour,
"Distribution Automation Strategies Challenges and
Oppurtunities in a Changing Landscape," IEEE, 2015.
[8] R. F. Arritt and R. C. Dugan, "Distributed Generation
Interconnection Transformer and Grounding Selection,"
IEEE, 2008.
978-1-5386-2212-4/17/$31.00 ©2017 IEEE
[9] R. Walling, "Grounding and Overvoltage Requirements
for Distributed Generation (Wind and Solar)," IEEE-
PES.
[10] J. H. Harlow, "Load Tap Changing Control," Beckwith
Electric Company, North Largo.
[11] Jauch, Tom; Beckwith Electric Company, Inc.,
"Maximizing Automatic Reverse Power Operations With
LTC Transformers & Regulators," IEEE, 2005.
[12] D. Savenije, "SDG&E: If you're not prepared for the
change, it's too late," Utility Dive, 24 February 2015.
[Online]. Available:
http://www.utilitydive.com/news/sdge-if-youre-not-
prepared-for-the-change-its-too-late/366979/. [Accessed
26 October 2016].
[13] M. Coddington, B. Kroposki, T. Basso, K. Lynn, D.
Sammon, M. Vaziri and T. Yohn, "Photovoltaic Systems
Interconnected onto Secondary Network Distribution
Systems - Success Stories," NREL, 2009.
[14] K. Anderson, M. Coddington, K. Burman, S. Hayter, B.
Kroposki and A. Watson, "Interconnecting PV on New
York City's Secondary Network Distribution System,"
National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Golden
Colorado, 2009.
[15] Xcel Energy, "NSPM Network Connected PV
Recommended Practice," Xcel Energy, 2014.
[16] M. H. Coddington, D. B. Kroposki, T. Basso, D. Berger,
K. Crowell, J. Hayes, NREL and Peak Power Engieering,
Inc, "Performance Of A Dynamically Controlled Inverter
In A Photovoltaic System Interconnected With A
Secondary Network Distribution System," IEEE, 2011.
[17] G. Antonova, M. Nardi, A. Scott and M. Pesin,
"Distributed Generation and Its Impact on Power Grids
and Microgrids Protection," IEEE, 2012.
[18] J. G. Andrichak and S. C. Patel, "Polarizing Sources For
Directional Ground Relays".
[19] B. Palmintier, R. Broderick, B. Mather, M. Coddington,
K. Baker, F. Ding, M. Reno, M. Lave and A.
Bharatkumar, "On the Path to SunShot: Emerging Issues
and Challenges in Integrating Solar with the Distribution
System," NREL, Golden, CO, 2016.
[20] M. E. Alam, K. M. Muttaqi and D. Sutanto, "Distributed
energy storage for mitigation of voltage-rise impact
caused by rooftop solar PV," IEEE, 2012.
[21] Idaho National Laboratory, "What is the Controllable
Electrical Demand from Residential EVSE in the San
Diego Region," The EV Project, Idaho Falls, 2015.