2014 IEEE Innovative Smart Grid Technologies - Asia (ISGT ASIA)
Phase Comparison Protection for Distribution
Networks with High PV Penetration
Tan G. M. Alvin, Izham Z. Abidin, H. Hashim, A. A. Zainul Abidin
College of Engineering, Universiti Tenaga Nasional, Malaysia
Abstract - With the availability and reduced cost of renewable
energy sources such as Solar PV, distributed generation (DG)
becomes an increasingly common practice in harnessing these
energy sources. However, a high level of penetration of the
energy sources in the distribution network will cause issues
such as reverse power flow and the disruptions to the
coordination of existing protection system. This paper looks
on how reverse power flow will affect the tripping times of
overcurrent relays and its effect on the coordination of the
protection system. This paper also investigates on the
possibility of using the phase comparison protection method
to improve the coordination of the protection system in a
high PV penetration environment.
Index Terms – Distributed Generation, phase comparison
protection, reverse power flow
I. INTRODUCTION
With the cost of energy around the world steadily increases,
consumers are looking for cheaper alternative solutions for their
electrical needs. Renewable energy sources such as Solar PV and
wind energy are becoming increasingly accessible and affordable
to the consumers and are connected to the grid as distributed
generations (DG). The integration of DG into distribution brings
some issues to the utilities such as reverse power flow and
disruption to the coordination of the protection system [1] [2].
A typical distribution network has power flowing in a single
direction from the grid to the load. However, the introduction of
DG into the distribution network allows for the power to flow in
the reverse direction when the power provided by the DG is
higher than the consumed power at the load. These distribution
networks are usually protected by a combination of fuses and
overcurrent relays. These protection devices are coordinated
through current discrimination. Overcurrent relays further down
the distribution line is more sensitive to a fault at the end of the
line compared to the relay closer to the source. The tripping time
of the relays are determined by the fault current flowing through
the relay. A lower fault current indicates a longer distance of the
fault from the relay and thus the overcurrent relay produces a
longer tripping time. However, with DGs in the distribution
network, distance from the fault may no longer be the sole reason
for lower fault current levels. DGs may also contribute in feeding
the fault and thus lowering the fault current flowing from the grid
978-1-4799-1300-8/14/$31.00 ©2014 IEEE
which subsequently causes the overcurrent relays to be less
sensitive and produce a longer tripping time [3] [4]. Thus the
coordination of the tripping time between the overcurrent relays
are disrupted and certain sections of the distributed network will
be isolated incorrectly.
This issue becomes more critical when considering renewable
energy sources such as PV and wind which have variable power
outputs depending on the time of the day and climate condition.
While tropical countries such as Malaysia has solar irradiance
between 800 to 1000 W/m2 and ambience temperature of up to
40°C, making it ideal for Solar PV, this condition is not
maintained throughout the day [5]. Weather variables such as
cloud cover and rain will further dampen the power output of PV
panels [6]. This creates a degree of unpredictability in the output
of the PV. As a result, depending the time of the day and weather
conditions, the network will have different direction of power
flow. High levels of PV penetration will cause drastic shifts in
the system condition between the period when the PV produces
no power and when the PV is operating at its peak capacity.
Current practice on DGs limits the output power of DG to
minimize the effect of reverse power flow. Some research
proposes the management of reverse power flow through the
application of controllable loads [7]. However, this translates to
untapped potential energy supply. Considering the growing
demand for energy in the world and the increase of
environmental awareness among consumers, utilities should look
into ways of increasing the adaptability of current protection
system in anticipation of future distribution networks which
consist of varying power flows.
II. METHODOLOGY
The simulation for this paper is done in MATLAB/Simulink.
The test system network used for this simulation is a
representation of a typical radial 11kV distribution network
which is common in Malaysia. The network consists of five loads
each with its individual and unique load profile and two DGs
represented by the Solar PV blocks as shown in Figure 1. The
output power of the Solar PV is capped at 1 MVA which is the
typical limit for the distribution transformer in Malaysia to
simulate high levels of PV penetration. The Solar PV blocks are
placed at the load block closest to the source (Load A) and the
load block in the middle of the distribution line (Load C). This is
to maximize the effect of reverse power flow on the grid source
216
 2014 IEEE Innovative Smart Grid Technologies - Asia (ISGT ASIA)
Figure 1.
and to create a scenario where the power will flow both upstream
and downstream from the PV.
There are 10 relays in the test system network. Relay A, B, C,
D, and E are overcurrent relays which will collect data from the
distribution network and determine the tripping time for its
corresponding circuit breaker. Relay H, I, J, K, and L only
collects data from the network for analysis purposes.
The test system network is simulated to mimic the system
condition at the time of 12.00 p.m. when the Solar PV is
operating at its maximum capacity. The simulation is done for 20
seconds with the fault triggered at 5 seconds after simulation
starts. Two types of faults will be simulated, ground fault and
high impedance fault. The high impedance fault will have a fault
impedance of 40 ohms which will not create a voltage drop low
enough to trip the PV breakers which have been configured in
accordance to the recommended settings in IEEE Std 929-200
IEEE Recommended Practice for Utility Interface of
Photovoltaic (PV) System. The tripping time for overcurrent
relays will be measured and analyzed.
III. PHASE COMPARISON PROTECTION
In response to the need of a protection system capable of
adapting to changing power flows, this paper proposes a new
protection system which is a hybrid of overcurrent and phase
comparison protection. Phase comparison protection is a form of
differential protection which is generally used in the protection of
transmission lines and transformers. Phase comparison protection
operates by comparing the phase difference between two relays
[8]. When fault occurs between the two relays, there is a
measurable difference in phase between the two relay. The phase
comparison protection detects this difference and trips the circuit
breakers at both relays. When the fault occurs outside the
217
Test system network
protection zone of both relays, the phase comparison protection
will detect almost no difference in phase between the relays. As
such the relays will not trip in the event of a through fault. While
this relay provides an excellent unit protection and fault locating
method, it does not coordinate with other protection devices in
the system as it does not detect faults outside its own protection
zone.
However, by taking advantage of the communication
capabilities of a Smart Grid, this protection system could be
modified to perform coordinated tripping in a distributed
network. Data collection through the use of Smart Grid will
become essential in determining the health of the power system
network. The concept protection system proposed in this paper is
one way Smart Grid technology could be utilized to provide
protection to the power system network. High speed
communication between electrical installations will enable a
complete overview of the system condition and allow a
centralized control system provide the appropriate response to
any system anomalies.
Conventional phase comparison relays will compare the
phase difference to a set value determined by the protection
engineer. However, in a distribution network with renewable DG,
the phase difference between two relays may exceed the set value
even when fault does not occur. In the case of having a DG in the
middle of a radial distribution network as shown in Figure 1,
Relay C and D will show a large difference in its current phases
even when fault does not occur as the power is flowing both
upstream and downstream from the PV. Therefore, in this paper,
the phased difference measured will be compared with another
value which is the value of the phase difference before the fault.
Simulation results from Figure 2 to 7 will show the proof behind
 2014 IEEE Innovative Smart Grid Technologies - Asia (ISGT ASIA)

Figure 2. Phase difference between Relay B and C with ground fault Figure 5. Phase difference between Relay B and C with high
impedance fault

Figure 3. Phase difference between Relay C and D with ground fault

Figure 6. Phase difference between Relay C and D with high
impedance fault

Figure 4. Phase difference between Relay D and E with ground fault

Figure 7. Phase difference between Relay D and E with high

impedance fault

218
 2014 IEEE Innovative Smart Grid Technologies - Asia (ISGT ASIA)
this concept. The simulation is done by introducing a fault at
Load C where the PV is connected. The phase difference
between the relays where the fault is located is measured and
compared with the phase difference at other sections of the
network. Two types of fault will be simulated, a ground fault and
a high impedance fault.
From the simulation results, it can be observed that the difference
in phase difference before and after the fault is minimal for both
types of faults when the relays are upstream from the fault. The
difference in phase difference is less than 0.5 rads for both cases.
However, we can see that the difference in phase difference is
notably larger when the fault is in between two relays. Both cases
display shifts in phase difference of between 2 to 4 rads. In the
case of relays downstream for the fault, huge shifts in phase
difference in some phases could be observed for the ground fault
simulation while no observable difference in phase difference
could be seen in the high impedance fault. This shows that the
system is experiencing instability during ground fault
downstream from the fault.
By taking advantage of this difference in phase difference
before and after the fault, fault location could be easily
determined. In this paper, fault location is determined by these
three conditions.
1. Current magnitude exceeds overcurrent limit.
2. Difference in phase difference between two relays before
and after the fault exceeds a certain threshold.
3. Phase difference between two relays exceeds through
fault threshold.
The proposed protection will consist of three parts. The first
part will be the overcurrent module which will detect fault
currents above acceptable operating levels. This module will
detect the fault in the system and starts the operation of the other
modules which will determine the location of the fault. The
second module will be the through fault module which will
determine the location of the fault in most cases. Similar to how
conventional phase comparison relay works, it compares to phase
difference between two relays with a predetermined reference
value. Fault location is determined when the phase difference is
greater than the reference value. The third module is to determine
fault locations which the second module could not accurately
detect. This module will periodically sample and store the phase
difference value between two relays. When fault occurs and
signal is sent from the first module, this module will compare the
new phase difference value with the most recent stored phase
difference value. Fault location is determined when the
difference of the two values is greater than 0.5 rads. The fault
location is determined when the output from the three modules
are TRUE.
Since this method is only effective within the protection zone
of two relays, a centralized control unit is required to coordinate
the tripping time between the circuit breakers. This is where
Smart Grid communication technologies will play a part. The
relays in this method will not be individual devices which
219
calculate the tripping time for their corresponding circuit breaker.
Instead, it will be sensors for the central control unit. Data from
relays all over the network could be collected to provide a more
complete analysis of the system condition. The zones will be
determined from the location of the relay sensors.
The algorithm which determines the fault location needs to
check each section of the line in sequence from upstream to
downstream of the radial distribution line. This is due to the
unreliable nature of the data downstream from the fault. Once the
fault location has been determined, the centralized protection
system could assign the correct tripping times for each circuit
breaker in the system. The circuit breaker closest to the fault will
location will be assigned with the shortest tripping time while the
next closest circuit breaker will be tripped after a predetermined
grading margin and so forth.
Compared to existing methods of distribution network
protection systems, this method is unique as it provided a varying
reference value to determine the location of the fault. Existing
methods compare values such as current and phase with a
predetermined set value to determine the location of the fault.
However, with the integration of renewable DGs such as Solar
PV, the system will experience reverse power flows and
reduction of fault current levels which will render the existing
methods ineffective. The proposed method uses a historical
comparison to compare the phase difference before and after the
fault which creates a dynamic reference value which changes
with the system. This allows the protection to be more adaptable
and provide better system security.
IV. SIMULATION RESULTS
The test system network in Figure 1 is simulated under with
both the standard overcurrent protection and the phase
comparison protection. Both protection systems will be tested
under ground fault and high impedance faults conditions. Faults
are simulated at 2 locations, Load E and Load C.
Figure 8. Overcurent relay tripping times for ground fault at Load E
 2014 IEEE Innovative Smart Grid Technologies - Asia (ISGT ASIA)

Figure 9. Overcurrent relay tripping times for high impedance fault Figure 12. Overcurrent relay tripping times for ground fault at Load C
at Load E

Figure 10. Phase comparison relay tripping times for ground fault at Figure 13. Overcurrent relay tripping times for high impedance fault
Load E at Load C

Figure 11. Phase comparison relay tripping times for high impedance
fault at Load E
Figure 14. Phase comparison relay tripping times for ground fault at
Load C

220
 2014 IEEE Innovative Smart Grid Technologies - Asia (ISGT ASIA)
Figure 15. Phase comparison relay tripping times for high impedance fault at
Load C
From Figure 8 and 12, it can be seen that under ground fault
condition, the overcurrent relays work as intended. The relay
closest to the fault will produce the shortest tripping time and it is
closely followed by the next closest relay. However, we can see
that the coordination of the relays is compromised under the high
impedance fault condition as shown in Figure 9 and 13. The fault
current provided by the DG lowers the fault current detected by
Relay C1 which causes the tripping time it produces is longer
than the tripping time of Relay B1. Relay A1 does not even trips
as the relay is unable to detect the fault current due to the DGs
feeding into the fault.
The phase comparison relays on the other hand works as
intended for both the ground fault and high impedance fault as
shown in Figure 10, 11, 14 and 15. The fault location is correctly
determined by the centralized protection system and the correct
tripping times could be assigned to each circuit breaker. Since the
tripping times are definite in nature, the tripping time could be
assigned as short as possible to ensure fast tripping in the event
of a fault. The phase comparison protection system are also
unaffected by the varying value of fault current and is able to
provide the same tripping times for both the ground fault and
high impedance fault.
Another feature provided by the phase comparison relay is
this ability to isolate the faulted section of the line from the rest
of the system. In a typical distribution network, fault is fed by the
grid upstream. However, with the addition of DGs into the
system, there is a possibility of fault being fed by a DG located
downstream from it. Overcurrent relays are not designed to
detect downstream fault and does not trip the circuit breaker
downstream from the fault. Phase comparison relays on the other
hand trips both ends of its protected zone. As shown in Figure 14
and 15, both relay C1 and D1 trips at the same time and isolates
the faulted section. This ensures the DG is able to continue to
operate in a microgrid environment until supply is reconnected
from the grid.
221
V. CONCLUSION
From the simulation results shown above, it can be observed
that the existing overcurrent protection is insufficient to provide
total protection to the distribution network when DG is
introduced. During high impedance fault conditions, the fault
current level is low enough that the current feeding from the DG
is significant enough to effect the calculation of the tripping time
by the overcurrent relay. This paper shows that existing
impedance based protections are no longer appropriate when
DGs are integrated into the distribution network.
However, with some modifications to existing phase
comparison relays, it is possible to provide such a protection with
the help of Smart Grid communication technologies. This paper
shows how a centralized protection system could be realized
using Smart Grid and its improvements to the efficiency and
reliability of the protection system.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The research team would like to acknowledge the Ministry
of Energy, Green Energy and Water Malaysia (KeTTHA) and
Department of Higher Education for funding this research
(20120230 FRGS). The team would also like to extend their
thanks to Universiti Tenaga Nasional for providing the facilities
and making this research possible.
REFERENCES
[1] Cipcigan, L.M., Taylor, P.C., "Investigation of the reverse power flow
requirements of high penetration of small-scale embedded generation," IET
Journal of Renewable Power Generation, vol. 1, no. 3, 2007.
[2] Driesen, J., Belmans, R., "Distributed Generation: Challenges and Possible
Solutions," Power Engineering Society General Meeting, vol. IEEE, p. 8,
2006.
[3] Boljevic, S.; Conlon, M. F., "Fault Current Level Issues for Urban
Distribution Network with High Penetration of Distributed Generation,"
Energy Market, 2009. EEM 2009. 6th International Conference on the
European, pp. 1-6, 2009.
[4] Lin Xia; Lu Yu-ping; Wang Lian-he, "The study of the protection revision
method based on the DG effect to protection sensitivity," Sustainable
Energy Technologies, 2008. ICSET 2008. IEEE International Conference
on, pp. 186 - 191, 2008.
[5] Rahman, H. A., K. M. Nor, M. Y. Hassan, S. Thanakodi, M. S. Majid, F.
Hussin, "Modeling and simulation of grid connected Photovoltaic System
for Malaysian climate using Matlab/Simulink," Power and Energy
(PECon), 2010 IEEE International Conference, vol. IEEE, pp. 935-940,
2010.
[6] Phimmasone, V.; Kondo, Y.; Kamejima, T.; Miyatake, M., "Evaluation of
extracted energy from PV with PSO-based MPPT against various types of
solar irradiation changes," Electrical Machines and Systems (ICEMS),
2010 International Conference on, p. 2010, 487-492.
[7] Hatta, Hiroyuki, Masahiro Asari, and Hiromu Kobayashi, "Study of energy
management for decreasing reverse power flow from photovoltaic power
systems," Sustainable Alternative Energy (SAE), 2009 PES/IAS
Conference, vol. IEEE, pp. 1-5, 2009.
[8] Kasztenny, B.; Voloh, I.; Udren, E.A., "Rebirth of the phase comparison
line protection principle," Protective Relay Engineers, 2006. 59th Annual
Conference for, p. 60, 2006.