International Journal on Power Engineering and Energy (IJPEE)
(3)
ISSN Print (2314 – 7318) and Online (2314 – 730X)
Performance Evaluation of Generator-
Transformer Unit Overall Differential Protection
in Large Power Plant
Wael Yousef , IEEE Senior Member Mahmoud A. Elsadd
Power Generation Engineering and Department of the Electrical
Services Company, PGESCO Engineering, Faculty of Engineering,
Menoufia University
whyousef@pgesco.com mahmoud.elSadd@sh-
eng.menofia.edu.eg
Abstract-This paper investigates the performance of the
Generator-Transformer unit overall differential protection
function (Relay 87O). The Relay 87O is often required for
large power generation as a backup protection for Generator,
Generator Step-Up Transformer (GSUT), and Unit Auxiliary
Transformer (UAT) differential protection systems. Three
different methodologies of the relay settings covering all
possible design concepts are evaluated. Also, the relay setting
increasing the power generation stability and reliability of
Egyptian grid is recommended. The performance evaluation
of the relay has been conducted by using a dynamic model of
ATP/EMTP software for a large steam turbine synchronous
generator. The parameters of the selected generator are
obtained from the real data in Egyptian power generation
station. The performance of the relay is tested under major
system disturbances and abnormal operating conditions from
dependability, security, and reliability point of view. The
sample results of the assessment are declared and discussed.
Keywords- ATP/EMTP, Differential Protection, Power
Transformer, Protective Relay, Synchronous Generator,
Thermal Power Plant.
I. INTRODUCTION
The large thermal power generating units are a crucial
source for producing electric power in any power system grid.
Therefore, various protective devices protect the thermal
power generation plant to minimize the possibility of
occurring a damage, minimize the frequency and duration of
unwanted outages, and then increase the power system
stability [1-2]. However, Different real problems still
encounter the protection system of the power plant [3].
During a North American grid blackout in 2003, 13 types of
generating units’ relays were unnecessarily tripped. This mal-
operation leads to lost 290 units which are around 52.7 GW
[4-5]. Also, during a major system disturbance in western
American in 1996, 22.9 GW are lost due to tripping different
protective devices of the generation units. The cause of the
tripping were 22 cases for power plant problems, 6 cases for
excitation control/Field problems, and around 35 cases of
load rejection/power swing [6]. As a result, The IEEE rotating
Reference Number: JO-P-113
Vol. (9) – No.
July 2018
Almoataz Y. Abdelaziz, IEEE Senior Member
Mohamed A. Badr, IEEE Senior Member
Electrical Power and Machines Department,
Faculty of Engineering, Ain Shams University
almoatazabdelaziz@hotmail.com
sbadr4446@yahoo.com
machinery subcommittee and the power system relaying
committee recommended that the coordination between the
generation unit protections, system protection, excitation
control, and generator capability should be enhanced [7-8].
The differential relay is a reliable method for protecting
generators, transformers, large motors, buses, cables, and
transmission lines against the effects of internal faults. The
main benefits of this relay are the reliability and the speed for
isolating the faulty region. Large power generation protection
scheme needs adding a backup differential protection for
Generator, GSUT, and UAT including buses. The Generator-
Transformer unit overall differential protection is designed to
be a backup protection for generator and transformers.
Consequently, it requires being coordinated with a generator,
GSUT, and UAT differential relays by a time delay, pickup
current, and/or slop of restrained curve. Therefore, the
blinding of the relay during internal faults may occur. On the
other hand, the relay may unnecessarily trip in the normal
operating conditions or external system disturbances such as
synchronization, Full Load rejection, external faults, transient
system faults, reverse power, and power swing [9-13]
Generally, several researchers carried out a performance
evaluation for differential protection relay when it separately
protects the power transformer, transmission lines, and bus
bars [14-20]. In [14] the performance evaluation of busbar’s
differential protection relay under different fault scenarios
was presented via representing the relay with a combination
of biased differential protection algorithm with fast Fourier
algorithm. An experimental evaluation of power differential
relay for transmission line protection was presented in [15].
The evaluation was accomplished at a different power level
(changes in active and reactive power). The relay setting
values were determined from the line rating and parameters.
The performance evaluation and analysis of power
transformer differential protection relay were presented in
[16-20] using different methodologies under mal-operation
cases such as current transformers (CT) saturation, over
excitation, magnetizing inrush, and nonlinear load switch. Up
to date, the evaluation of the Generator-Transformer unit
overall differential protection performance is not covered.
869
International Journal on Power Engineering and Energy (IJPEE) Vol. (9) – No. (3)
ISSN Print (2314 – 7318) and Online (2314 – 730X) July 2018

This paper presents the performance analysis of the Tests based on synchronized PMU measurements have shown
generator-transformer unit overall differential protection from glimpses of electromechanical wave propagation in the USA
dependability, security, and reliability point of view using the [3-4].
ATP/EMTP software. The evaluation of the protection relay
(87O) functions is accomplished using mass simulations A. The Algorithm
based on real technical parameters for large thermal power
A percentage differential function is applied to the
generation plant [21]. The results illustrate the behavior of the
fundamental component of the currents to decide whether an
protection functions against a wide variety of normal
internal fault occurs or not. The difference between the
operation and short-circuiting situations using the three
operating and restraining currents is a small value under
different relay settings (sensitive, balanced, and secure). The
normal operating conditions and external faults, while it
aim of this evaluation is providing the appropriate choice and
becomes a significant value under internal faults. The relay
better understanding of the differential protection settings of
with harmonic restraint is the most used protective scheme for
generator-transformer unit overall differential protection.
the generator, transformer, and generator-transformer unit
overall protection.
II. FUNDAMENTAL OF GENERATOR-TRANSFORMER
UNIT OVERALL DIFFERENTIAL PROTECTION
The operating current (Id) of current differential protection
can be obtained by:
The recommended unit overall differential zone covers both
the GSUT and the UAT as shown in Figure (1)[9-10]. In
some cases, the UAT may be excluded from the overall
differential scheme as in the alternate connection [22]. This
approach may introduce a blind spot in the protection of the (1)
UAT [9-10]. In this evaluation, the UAT consider within the
unit overall differential zone. The algorithm and settings of
the unit overall differential relay are illustrated in the where: N is the number of current transformers
following subsections. The restraining current (Ir) can be obtained by:

System Grid

(2)

HV BREAKER
where: k is a compensation factor, usually taken as 1 or 0.5.
The differential relay generates a tripping signal if the
operating current (Id) is greater than a percentage of the
restraining current (Ir) as follows:
GSUT

Tripping Area
GCB
UAT Iins

GENERATOR
Tripping Area
Alternative
with restrain
Id/Iref

87O

Auxiliary

IPU Blocking Area

Figure (1):Unit Overall Differential Scheme

Ir/Iref
Recently the spreading of disturbances in the power system
has been viewed by modeling the system as a continuum. Figure (2): Percentage Differential Curve

Reference Number: JO-P-113 870

International Journal on Power Engineering and Energy (IJPEE) Vol. (9) – No. (3)
ISSN Print (2314 – 7318) and Online (2314 – 730X) July 2018

Instantaneous Pickup (Iins):

(3)
where: SLP is the slope of the straight line which is divided
into two slopes (SLP = m1 or m2) and started from the
minimum pickup current value (IPU) as shown in Figure (2).
The relay operating region is located above the SLP
characteristic of (3), whereas the blocking region is below the
SLP characteristic. Digital differential protection relay uses
Discrete Fourier Transformation (DFT) filtration to extract
the fundamental differential current. The relay also checks the
harmonic percentage values in the operating region located
between the SLP curve and the current instantaneous line
(Iins).
B. The Settings
As matter of fact, there is no a specific setting stated in the
international standards for generator-transformer unit overall
differential protection but usually, a higher setting above the
generator and transformer differential protection setting is
used. The relay settings which are practically used by the
protection engineers and technologists are discussed in this
subsection as follows:
Pickup Setting (IPU):
The minimum pickup of the relay should be set at a level
greater than the measurement error that is likely to occur at
low load levels. The recommended range of the pickup
current is 15:35% of the full load current if the restraining
current range is 0:2 pu of Ir. Further, it shall be greater than
the pickup setting of the generator and transformers’
differential protections.
The differential relay provides the instantaneous protection
under high operating current magnitudes associated with
internal faults regardless the magnitude of the restraint
current or the harmonic component. The pickup threshold
setting should be set above the maximum external fault
current or the maximum inrush current according to
whichever is higher. Also, the setting should be below the
current that may result in CT AC saturation.
Harmonic Restraint:
Harmonic restraint is used to avoid undesired tripping by
the differential relay due to the flow of magnetizing inrush
currents when a transformer is energized (2nd Harmonic) or
overexcitation for generator/transformers occurs (5th
harmonic). The recommended setting range is 15:35% of
the current fundamental component for 2nd Harmonic and
10:30% of the current fundamental component for 5th
harmonic [23-25].
III. SIMULATED SYSTEM
Figure(3) shows the simulated Egyptian power generation
station containing a large steam turbine synchronous
generator, a GSUT, and a UAT. The rating, line voltage, and
the frequency of the large steam turbine synchronous
generator, respectively, are 834 MVA, 22 kV, and 50 Hz. The
generator is star-earthed through a (22/ 3/0.5 kV, 70 kVA)
neutral grounding transformer with a 2.56 ohm grounding
resistor. The generator excitation system is supplied from the

PercentageSlopes (SLP):
The relay protection has a possibility of using two slopes
(m1, m2). The first one is used to lower levels of the operating
currents and the other is used to higher levels of the operating
currents. First slope’s setting is set to ensure the sensitivity
against the internal faults at normal operating current and
should be sufficiently high to treat the CT mismatch, errors
due to the accuracy of the CTs, current variation due to tap
changer operation, CT saturation in case of external faults, the
accuracy error of the relay, generator field current, and the
generator/transformer excitation current. Further, it should be
greater than the pickup setting of the generator’s and
transformers’ differential protection. The recommended
setting range is 15:30% of full load current. Second slope’s
setting is activated in the infinite region beyond the knee
point and should be set to ensure the stability under heavy
external fault conditions which could lead to high differential
currents as a result of CT saturation. The recommended
setting range is 50:80% of full load current. When using CT
with high saturation point, the same percentage of the slope
one can be used. Figure (3):Single Line Diagram of the Studied System

Reference Number: JO-P-113 871

International Journal on Power Engineering and Energy (IJPEE) Vol. (9) – No. (3)
ISSN Print (2314 – 7318) and Online (2314 – 730X) July 2018

generator terminals by a (22/0.96 kV, 9000 kVA) excitation
transformer as illustrated in Figure(3). The generator is
simulated using a universal synchronous machine with
manufacturers data input (UMSYN) subroutine in
ATP/EMTP. The generator is connected to the Generator
Circuit Breaker (GCB) through isolated phase bus to both
(22/500 kV, 861 MVA) Delta/Star-earthed GSUT and
(22/6.6/6.6 kV, 42 MVA) delta/star-earthed/star-earthed
UAT. System parameters are given in the Appendix and full
detailed data are presented in [21]. The Differential protection
current relay with harmonic restraint is simulated using
(W1RELAY87T) in ATP/EMTP with three different settings.
A model before the relay is used to calculate the phasor in
real and imaginary parts of a time domain signal by Fourier
transform algorithm.
Different settings are used to evaluate the performance of
the unit overall differential protection of the power generation
unit as shown in Figure(4) and Table (1). Based on the level
of differential current, three levels of the settings are
considered as follows:
Balanced Setting (S2):
It uses a setting between two above cases for pickup, slope
and harmonic to provide a balanced protection system for
security and stability as shown in Table (1).
High Secure Setting (S3):
It uses a maximum recommended setting for pickup and
slope with Minimum harmonic restraint to provide a
maximum security for the system as shown in Table (1).
The performance evaluation of the three different settings is
conducted via evaluating the reliability of each one. The
reliability can be defined as the ability to “not to fail” in its
function. The % reliability is 100 % if there no an incorrect
trip and number of correct trips are equal to a number of the
desired trips. Thus, the % reliability of each relay setting can
be calculated as;
%

Table (1): Relay Setting

(4)
Delay Pickup SLP-m1 SLP-m2 Harmonic

where no.: refers to the number.

15%
High (S1) 0 Sec 15% 15% 35% The % reliability of each relay setting combines both the %
(up to 2 pu)
dependability and % security. Dependability is the degree of
0.1 Sec
25% certainty that the relay will correctly operate. The %
Balance (S2) (up to 1 pu) 25% 50% 25%
dependability is 100 % if the relay trips under all desired trips
cases regardless the incorrect trip cases. Thus, the %
35%
Secure (S3) 0.2 Sec
(up to 0 pu) 30% 80% 15% dependability can be obtained as;

High Sensitive Setting (S1):

It uses the minimum recommended setting for both pickups
and slope with maximum harmonic restraint in order to
provide a maximum available sensitivity as depicted in Table (5)
(1).
On the other hand, the security can be defined as the degree
Id

Figure (4): Relay Setting

of certainty that the relay will not operate incorrectly. The %
security is 100 % if the relay does not incorrectly trip and

Reference Number: JO-P-113 872

International Journal on Power Engineering and Energy (IJPEE) Vol. (9) – No. (3)
ISSN Print (2314 – 7318) and Online (2314 – 730X) July 2018

thenumber of the incorrecttrips is equal to zero. Therefore, the Figure(6.a). Figure(6.b) and Figure(6.c) shows that the relay
% security can be estimated as; using the balance setting (S2) and secured setting (S3) are does
not sense this fault. Consequently, the balance and the
secured settings are the best setting for external fault and grid
disturbances as the setting values are very high and relay
avoiding to operate.
(6)

IV. EVALUATION RESULTS AND ANALYSIS

Different tested cases (150 cases) are selected based on

worst scenarios of either normal or faulty conditions.
Simulations have been divided into three main categories and
eight groups. The first category is the external faults. The
second one is the internal faults. The third one is the normal
operations such as load rejection and synchronization of
generator with the grid. Many of system and generator pre-
fault parameters are also investigated for max/min active
power during zero, minimum, and maximum reactive power
covering the generator capability curve limitation. The Figure (5): Relay Response under an External Fault
performance of the three sets had been tested under all
possible faults types which are single line to ground, double
line, double line to ground, and three line faults.
The response of the three settings under the, first category,
48 heavy external faults where 24 of these cases are
downstream the high voltage side of the GSUT transformer
and the others are downstream the Medium voltage side of
the UAT transformer are as follows. These faults are tested
under two different load levels. Both the balanced Setting (S2)
and high Secure Setting (S3) have immunity against these
external faults. On the other hand, the high sensitive setting
(S1) suffered from 12 false tripping cases where 6 cases were
downstream the GSUT transformer and the others were
downstream the UAT transformer as illustrated in Table (2).

Table (2): Simulation Results of External Fault Cases

Fault Type Pre-fault No. of False Trip
G N
Load S1 S2 S3 Figure (6): Relay Response under an External Fault
a) High Sensitive Setting b) Balanced Setting
1 12 Fault at GSUT HV side Light Load 1 0 0
c) High Secure Setting
2 12 Fault at GSUT HV side Full Load 5 0 0
The response of the three settings under the second
3 12 Fault at UAT LV side Light Load 3 0 0 category, 72 of internal low current fault cases are between
the generator and GSUT/UAT transformers low voltage side.
4 12 Fault at UAT LV side Full Load 3 0 0 These faults are tested under two different load levels. All
Total No. of Mal-operations 12 0 0
settings have failed cases to detect these internal faults. 48 of
these cases not detected by secure setting (S3) and 11 cases by
48 Accuracy 75% 100% 100% balanced setting (S2) and 4 cases by high sensitive setting (S1)
as shown in Table (3). The majority of mal-operation for low
Note: G denotes group number; N denotes the number of voltage side of UAT as the current at fault it’s very small and
cases studied related to same group tests; and No. number. near to normal load current (when compared to generator
capacity). Two mal-operation for (S3) during single-line-to-
Figure(5) illustrates the performance of the relay using ground fault at GSUT Low voltage side (generator terminal)
(S1, S2, and S3) under three-phase external fault occurred at result from transformer delta connection as isolate a zero
the medium voltage side of the UAT transformer. Under this sequence component from the network side. In addition to the
condition, a false tripping is recorded as illustrated in generator grounded through a transformer, only phase-to-

Reference Number: JO-P-113 873

International Journal on Power Engineering and Energy (IJPEE) Vol. (9) – No. (3)
ISSN Print (2314 – 7318) and Online (2314 – 730X) July 2018

phase, or three-phase faults can be detected by the differential

protection [23]. The remaining three mal-operation cases are
for three-phase fault and six cases are for phase-to-phase
faults at GSUT LVside with (S3) setting and generator full
load. On the other hand, only one mal-operation case occurs
for phase-to-phase at GSUT LV side with (S2) setting and
generator full load.
TABLE (3): Simulation Results of Internal Fault Cases
Fault Type Pre-faults No. of No-Trip
G N
Load S1 S2 S3
1 12 Fault at GSUT HV side Light Load 0 0 6

2 12 Fault at GSUT HV side Full Load 0 4 9

3 12 Fault at GSUT LV side Light Load 0 0 9
4 12 Fault at GSUT LV side Full Load 2 4 12
5 12 Fault at UAT LV side Light Load 0 0 3
Figure (8): Relay Response in Internal Fault
a) High Sensitive Setting b) Balanced Setting
6 12 Fault at UAT LV side Full Load 2 3 9
c) High Secure Setting
Total No. of Mal-operations 4 11 48
The response of the three settings under the third category,
72 Accuracy 94.4% 84.7% 33.3%
30 of normal operation scenario for load rejection and
synchronization. The load rejection cases are tested under full
Figure(7)show the performance of the relay using (S1, S2,
load and 60% of full load with the unit run back to house load
and S3) under three-phase internal fault occurred at high
(group 1) and zero load (group 2). The high sensitive setting
voltage GSUT transformer side. Under this condition, the
(S1) have false tripping cases with all groups of these normal
relay tripped instantaneous without time delay for high
operation scenarios. The setting is failed to prevent false
sensitive setting (S1). On the other hand, the setting (S2) and
tripping with all load rejection (house load) cases and 4 cases
value within tripping zone but the relay trips with delay after
of load rejection (zero load). 18 synchronization cases are
0.38 seconds after fault as shown in Figure(8). The relay with
tested when closing the GCB at different angles from -10 to
secure setting (S3) does not trip during three line internal fault
+10 degree and voltage tolerances ±5% of rated voltage. 8 of
at GSUT high voltage side. The sensitive setting is the best
these cases has false tripping with the high sensitive setting
setting for internal faults as the setting values are low high
(S1) as shown in 0
and relay avoiding a block operation. The balance setting can
consider a reliable but with time delay. Table (4): Normal Operation Cases
1500 Fault Type No. of Mal-Operation
Phase A
G N
Phase B S1 S2 S3
Phase C
S1 1 6 Load Rejection to House Load 6 0 0
S2
S3 2 6 Load Rejection to Zero Load 4 0 0
1000
3 18 Synchronization 8 0 0

Total No. of Mal-operations 18 0 0

30 Accuracy 40% 100% 100%

500

0
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500
Restraint Current (A)

Figure (7): Relay Response in Internal Fault

Figure (9): Active and Reactive Power(Load Rejection to
House Load)

Reference Number: JO-P-113 874

International Journal on Power Engineering and Energy (IJPEE) Vol. (9) – No. (3)
ISSN Print (2314 – 7318) and Online (2314 – 730X) July 2018

72 Internal Fault 4 11 48
30 Normal Operation 18 0 0

Total No. of Mal-operations 34 11 48

150 Accuracy 77.3% 92.6% 68%

Correct Trip 68 61 24
Incorrect Trip 30 0 0
Figure (10): Voltage Per-Unit (Load Rejection to House Desired Trip 72 72 72
Load)
Total Trip 98 61 24

Dependability (1) 94.44% 84.72% 33.33%

Security (2) 69.38% 100% 100%
Reliability (3) 66.67% 84.72% 33.33%

Figure (11): Relay Response (Load Rejection to House Load)
a) High Sensitive Setting b) Balanced Setting
c) High Secure Setting
Figure(11) illustrates the performance of the relay using
(S1, S2, and S3) under full load rejection occurred after the unit
run back to house load. In this case, the voltage increase up
to 140% of rated voltage until generator excitation control
system as shown in Figure(10). Under this condition, a false
tripping is recorded for high sensitive setting (S1) as
illustrated in
Figure(11). Consequently, the balanced and secured settings
are the best setting for normal operation and system
disturbance condition as the setting values are very high and
relay avoiding to operate.
The dependability, security, and reliability evaluation are
performed based on (4), (5), and (6) and recorded in Table (5)
under all studied cases. The % dependable of the three
settings S1, S2, S3 is 94.44, 84.72, and 33.33 %, respectively.
On the other hand, % security of the three settings S1, S2, S3 is
69.38, 100, and 100 %. Consequently, the % reliability of the
three settings S1, S2, S3 is 66.67, 84.72, and 33.33 %. Finally,
the engineering relay setting designer can use accuracy,
dependability, security, and reliability percentage in Table (5)
as a guideline to understanding the advantage and
disadvantage of each setting.
Table (5): Summary of Simulation Results
No. of Mal-Operation
N Fault Type
S1 S2 S3
48 External Fault 12 0 0
V. CONCLUSION
This paper mainly focuses on the performance evaluation
of all possible settings of unit overall differential protection.
The investigation is accomplished under normal and
abnormal operating conditions. The results showed that the
sensitive setting suffered from the unnecessary trip under
certain normal operations and external faults conditions. On
the other hand, the secure and balanced settings suffered from
both disability in avoiding faulty blocking and low-speed
tripping under certain internal fault conditions.
The high sensitive setting provides high sensitivity for the
relay with 94.44 % dependability percentage, whereas it is
accurate with 77.3% accuracy and it is reliable with 66.67 %
due to lowing the security percentage. The balanced setting
can avoid the mal-operation cases of the high sensitive setting
under external or normal operation conditions, whereas it
suffered from mal-operation under other internal fault cases
with 92.6% accuracy recording % dependability equal to
84.72 %. The secured setting can also avoid all mal-operation
under external or normal operating conditions but with less
accuracy (68%) and dependability (33.33 %) percentages
under internal fault conditions compared with the balanced
setting. Finally, the engineering relay setting designer can use
accuracy percentage presented in this paper as a guideline to
understanding the advantage and disadvantage of each
setting. Coordinating the unit overall differential protection is
the main future prospective work.
VI. REFERENCES
[1]
Das, A., Dhar, S., Royburman, S., &Sanyal, A., The
Efficacy of Generator Protection under Sudden Loss
of Excitation using Offset-type MHO-relay. Journal
of the Institution of Engineers (India): Series B,
98(1), 115-120, 2017
[2]
S. Patel et al., Performance of generator protection
during major system disturbances, IEEE Trans.
Power Deliv., vol. 19, no. 4, pp. 1650–1662, 2004
[3] G. Roger Bérubé, Les M. Hajagos, Coordination of
Under Excitation Limiters and Loss of Excitation

Reference Number: JO-P-113 875

International Journal on Power Engineering and Energy (IJPEE)
ISSN Print (2314 – 7318) and Online (2314 – 730X)
Relays with Generator Capability, in Proceedings of
the IEEE Power and Energy Society General
Meeting, 2009
[4] M. Elsamahy, S. O. Faried, and T. Sidhu, Impact of
Midpoint STATCOM on Generator Loss of
Excitation Protection, Power Deliv. IEEE Trans.,
vol. 29, no. 2, pp. 724–732, 2014
[5] M. Elsamahy, S. O. Faried, T.S. Sidhu, R. Gokaraju,
Enhancement of the Coordination between
Generator Phase Backup Protection and Generator
Capability Curves in the Presence of a Midpoint
STATCOM using Support Vector Machines, IEEE
Transactions on Power Delivery, Vol. 26, No. 3,
pp. 1841-1853, July 2011
[6] North American Electric Reliability Council
(NERC), Technical Analysis of the August 14,
2003, Blackout: What Happened, Why, and What
Did we learn?, July 2003.
[7] M. Elsamahy, S. O. Faried, and R. Gokaraju, Impact
of Midpoint Statcom on The Coordination between
Generator Distance Phase Backup Protection and
Generator Capability Curves, presented at the IEEE
Power Energy Soc. Gen. Meeting, Minneapolis,
MN, USA, 2010.
[8] C. J. Mozina, M. Reichard, and Z. Bukhala,
Working Group J-5 of the Rotating Machinery
Subcommittee of the Power System Relay
Committee, Coordination of generator protection
with generator excitation control and generator
capability, Proc. IEEE Power Eng. Soc. Gen.
Meeting, FL, pp. 1–17, 2007.
[9] IEEE Guide for AC Generator Protection,IEEEStd
C37.102-2006.
[10] IEEE Guide for Protecting Power Transformers,
IEEE Std C37.91-2008.
[11] Boldea, Ion., The Electric Generators Handbook-
Synchronous Generators. CRC Press, 2015
[12] IEEE Guide for Abnormal Frequency Protection for
Power Generating Plants, IEEE Std C37.106-2003.
[13] C. Mozina and J. Gardell, IEEE tutorial on the
protection of synchronous generators (second
edition, IEEE Power Eng. Soc. Special Publ. IEEE
Power Syst. Relay. Committee, 2011.
[14] Xu, X., H. Li, and H. Wen., Performance evaluation
of busbar protection schemes under different fault
scenarios, Power Electronics and ECCE Asia
(ICPE-ECCE Asia), 9th International Conference
on. IEEE, 2015.
[15] Darwish, H. A., et al., Experimental evaluation of
power differential relay for transmission line
protection, Power Systems Conference and
Exposition, PSCE'09. IEEE/PES. IEEE, 2009.
[16] Tavares, Karla Antunes, and KleberMelo Silva.
"Evaluation of power transformer differential
protection using the atp software." IEEE Latin
America Transactions,pp. 161-168, 2014.
[17] H. Weng and X. Lin, Studies on the unusual
Reference Number: JO-P-113
Vol. (9) – No. (3)
July 2018
[18] X. Lin, H. Weng, P. Liu, B. Wang, and Z. Bo,
Analysis of a sort of unusual mal-operation of
transformer differential protection due to the
removal of external fault, IEEE Trans. Power
Deliv., vol. 23, no. 3, pp. 1374–1379, 2008.
[19] Guzman, Armando, et al., A current-based solution
for transformer differential protection. I. Problem
statement, IEEE Transactions on power delivery,pp.
485-491, 2001.
[20] Guzman, Armando, et al. A current-based solution
for transformer differential protection. II. Relay
description and evaluation, IEEE Transactions on
Power Delivery, pp. 886-893, 2002.
[21] W. Yousef, M. A. Elsadd, A. Y. Abdelaziz and M.
A. Badr, Simulation of large thermal power plant
for protection purposes using
ATP/EMTP,Nineteenth International Middle East
Power Systems Conference (MEPCON), pp. 1183-
1189, 2017.
[22] Blackburn, J. Lewis, and Thomas J. Domin,
Protective relaying: principles and applications.
CRC press, 2015.
[23] SIEMENS SIPROTEC 7UT6 “Differential
Protection Relay”, User Manual V4.0, 2017.
[24] General Electric, G60 Instruction Manual for 7.6
Product version ”G60 Generator Management
Relay”, V AF2, 2017.
[25] ABB, Distribution Automation Handbook, Section
8.12; Generator Protection”, 2010.
Appendix
Network Parameters:
500 kV±10%, 50 Hz ±2.5%.
Generator Parameters
Steam Turbine Synchronous Generator with static
excitation 834 MVA, 22 ± 5% kV, 50 Hz, 3000 rpm
with power factor ranges: 0.85 lagging to 0.9 leading.
Grounding transformer (22/ 3)/0.5 kV, 70 kVA, 97.65
kVA, 50 Hz with grounding resistor 2.56 , 195.3 A,
500 V
Static Excitation system according to IEEE 421
connected to generator main bus 5722 A/561 V at full
load
Generator Step Up Transformer Parameters:
Bank of three single phase transformer connected Y/
861 MVA, 50 Hz, 500/22 kV, 15% impedance.
876
International Journal on Power Engineering and Energy (IJPEE) Vol. (9) – No. (3)
ISSN Print (2314 – 7318) and Online (2314 – 730X) July 2018

Unit Auxiliary Transformer Parameters:

Three winding, three-phase transformer /Y/Y, 42/24/24
MVA, 50 Hz, 22/6.6/6.6 kV, 15% impedance, low
voltage wining connected to ground through neutral
grounding resistance 6.35 .

Reference Number: JO-P-113 877