Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
Presented at the
39th Annual Western Protective Relay Conference
Spokane, Washington
October 1618, 2012
I. INTRODUCTION
A balance between generated and consumed active power
exists during steady-state operating conditions and is
necessary for the stability of the power system. Power system
disturbances cause oscillations in machine rotor angles that
can result in severe power flow swings. Depending on the
severity of the disturbance and the actions of power system
controls, the system may remain stable or experience a large
separation of generator rotor angles and eventually lose
synchronism. Large power swings can cause unwanted relay
operations that can further aggravate the power system
disturbance and cause major power outages or blackouts.
A power swing blocking (PSB) function is available in
modern distance relays to prevent unwanted distance relay
element operation during power swings. The out-of-step
tripping (OST) function discriminates between stable and
unstable power swings and initiates network islanding during
loss of synchronism between power system areas.
Traditional PSB and OST functions may use dualquadrilateral characteristics that are based on the measurement
of the time it takes the positive-sequence impedance to cross
the two blinders. An extensive number of power system
stability studies may be required, taking into consideration
different operating conditions, in order to determine the
settings for the dual-quadrilateral PSB and OST functions.
This is a costly exercise, and we can never be certain that all
possible scenarios and operating conditions were considered.
The swing center voltage (SCV) method calculates the
positive-sequence SCV rate of change and does not require
any stability studies or user settings for the proper blocking of
relay elements. This method is well suited for long, heavily
loaded transmission lines that pose significant problems for
traditional power swing detection methods.
After reviewing some of the different methods used for
PSB and OST, this paper presents a performance comparison
between the traditional dual-quadrilateral method and the SCV
variation method for both PSB and OST. The performances of
both methods are analyzed using field data obtained from a
system disturbance and transient simulation data obtained
from a Real Time Digital Simulator (RTDS).
II. POWER SWINGS AND OUT-OF-STEP PHENOMENON
A power swing is a system phenomenon that is observed
when the phase angle of one power source starts to vary in
time with respect to another source on the same network. The
phenomenon generally occurs following a major disturbance,
like a fault, that alters the mechanical equilibrium of one or
more machines. A power swing is stable when, following a
disturbance, the rotation speed of all machines returns to
synchronous speed. A power swing is unstable when,
following a disturbance, one or more machines do not return
to synchronous speed, thereby losing synchronism with the
rest of the system.
A. Basic Phenomenon Using the Two-Source Model
The simplest network for studying the power swing
phenomenon is the two-source model, as shown in Fig. 1. The
left source has a phase angle advance equal to , and this
angle will vary during a power swing. The right source
represents an infinite bus, and its angle will not vary with
time. As simple as it is, this elementary network can be used
to model the phenomena of more complex networks.
Fig. 1.
Z1
V1S
ES
ZT
ZS
I1
ES E R
(1)
(2)
Z1
ZT
2
1 jcot ZS
2
(3)
dZ1
e j
jZT
dt
1 e j
X
B
ZL
dt
Electrical
Center
Z1
ZS
(6)
(7)
2
the rate of change of the Z1 impedance is finally expressed as:
ZT
dZ1
dt
2
4 sin
2
E R PB
(5)
1 e j 2 sin
P
R
d
dt
ZT
ZR
Z1
Trajectory
(4)
The precise equation for the center and radius of the circles
as a function of the ratio n can be found in [1].
(8)
(9)
1) Blinder Schemes
Fig. 5 shows an example of a single-blinder scheme. This
scheme detects an unstable power swing when the time
interval required to cross the distance between the right and
left blinders exceeds a minimum time setting. The scheme
allows for the implementation of OST on the way out of the
zone and cannot be used for PSB because the mho
characteristics will be crossed before the power swing is
detected. This method is most commonly implemented in
conjunction with generator protection and not line protection.
Left
Blinder
Right
Blinder
Load Point
Fig. 4.
Z1
Trajectory
Fig. 4 also shows that the higher the total impedance (ZT)
and slip frequency, the higher the minimum value of the Z1
impedance rate of change. Note that the region of importance
for PSB and OST is the flat segment of the curve in Fig. 4.
D. The Justification for Detecting Power Swings
There are two reasons why power swings should be
detected. First, they can lead to the misoperation of directional
comparison schemes, generation protection, or some
protection elements, such as Zone 1 distance, phase
overcurrent, or phase undervoltage. For these instances, a PSB
signal is needed to ensure the security of the elements.
Second, in the case of an unstable swing, a network separation
is needed in order to avoid a network collapse. In this
instance, the OOS condition must be detected in order to
generate an OST signal.
Fig. 5.
Single-blinder characteristic.
Fig. 6.
Dual-blinder characteristic.
Fig. 8.
Zone 2
Power Swing
Blocking Blinder
Zone 1
5
Z1
5
Resistance in Secondary
Fig. 9.
ZS
Z
(1 S ) k E
V1S
ZT
ZT
V1R ZS ZL (1 ZS ZL ) k
E
ZT
ZT
(10)
where:
kE is the ratio of the magnitudes of the source voltages:
kE
ES
ER
(11)
(12)
ZL j0.1
We then end up with the following equation for the vector
ratio:
V1S 0.083 0.917
1
V1R 0.917 0.083
(13)
(t) 0 A et sin(t )
(14)
where:
0 is the initial phase difference.
is a damping constant.
is the angular frequency of the phase difference.
is the phase shift.
A is the oscillation amplitude.
A predictive algorithm is used to identify the phase angle
variation parameters and to determine stable or unstable
conditions.
More recently, [11] presents the implementation of three
functions based on synchrophasor measurements, the purpose
of which is to trigger a network separation after a loss of
synchronism has been detected. Positive-sequence voltagebased synchrophasors are measured at two locations of the
network, assuming that the two-source equivalent can model
the network. Following the measurement of the
synchrophasors, two quantities are derived: the slip frequency
SR, which is the rate of change of the angle between the two
measurements, and the acceleration AR, which is the rate of
change of the slip frequency. The three functions are defined
as follows:
Power swing detection is asserted when SR is not zero
and is increasing, which indicates AR is positive and
increasing.
Predictive OST is asserted when, in the slip frequency
against the acceleration plane, the trajectory falls in
the unstable region (see Fig. 12) defined by the
condition:
A R 78 _ Slope SR A Offset
(15)
U1 (Z Z1 ) T1
dZ
dt
Stable Swing
R1
R (
Unstable Swing
No Control
Action
Control Action
R1
R1
(16)
where:
U1 is the control variable.
Z is the apparent impedance magnitude at the relay.
Z1 and T1 are two settings that are derived from system
studies; Z1 is the impedance of the swing that is to be
tripped, and T1 is the slope that represents Rdot/R.
If we remove the impedance magnitude derivative term
from (16), an OOS trip is initiated when Z becomes smaller
than Z1 or when U1 becomes negative.
If we define a phase plane where the abscissa is the
impedance magnitude and the ordinate is the rate of change of
the impedance magnitude, (17) represents a switching line. An
OOS trip is initiated when the switching line is crossed by the
impedance trajectory from right to left. The effect of adding
the impedance magnitude derivative is that the tripping will be
faster at a higher impedance changing rate. At a small
impedance changing rate, the characteristic is equivalent to the
conventional OOS scheme.
dR
(17)
dt
In the R-Rdot characteristic, the impedance magnitude is
replaced by the resistance measured at the relay and the rate of
change of the impedance magnitude is replaced by the rate of
change of the measured resistance.
The advantage of this latter modification is that the relay
becomes less sensitive to the location of the swing center with
respect to the relay location.
More than one control law can be implemented in a relay
so that multiple switching lines can be implemented,
depending upon what is needed. For a conventional OST relay
without a rate of change of apparent resistance, augmentation
is just a vertical line in the R-Rdot plane offset by the R1 relay
setting parameter. The switching line U1 is a straight line
having slope T1 in the R-Rdot plane. System separation is
initiated when output U1 becomes negative. For low
separation rates (small dR/dt), the performance of the R-Rdot
scheme is similar to the conventional OST relaying schemes.
However, higher separation rates (dR/dt) would cause a larger
negative value of U1 and initiate tripping much earlier. In the
actual implementation, the relay uses a piecewise linear
characteristic consisting of two line segments rather than the
straight line shown in Fig. 13.
U1 (R R1 ) T1
R (/s)
t
SCV t 2Esin t
cos
(18)
Voltage (pu)
(19)
d SCV1
E1 d
sin
dt
2
2 dt
(21)
where:
|VS| is the magnitude of locally measured voltage.
is the angle difference between VS and the local
current, as shown in Fig. 16.
The quantity of Vcos was first introduced by Ilar for the
detection of power swings [14].
Fig. 17. SCV1 and its rate of change with unity source voltage magnitudes.
Fig. 16. Vcos is a projection of local voltage, VS, onto local current, I.
SCV1 E1 cos
2
(20)
Z1 Magnitude ()
Fig. 20. Z1 impedance magnitude plot for the stable power swing.
10
Parameter
Value
L1 positive-sequence impedance
( secondary)
18.8687.19
3000:1
3000:1
Load impedance
180
1.2 Hz
4.5 to 8.5 Hz
The results of the simulation for the SCV PSB method are
shown in Fig. 25, Fig. 26, and Fig. 27. Both techniques detect
the power swing condition and block accordingly.
The SCV method for detecting a power swing is slower
than the dual-quadrilateral method. This is seen by comparing
Fig. 24 with Fig. 25. It is slower because of the slow rate of
change of the SCV. This is confirmed when studying Fig. 26.
11
Zone 7
Zone 6
Power Swing
Becomes Unstable
Im(Z1)
Z1 Impedance Trajectory
After Fault Clearance
Z1 Impedance Trajectory
From Load to Fault
Re(Z1)
Fig. 29, Fig. 30, and Fig. 31 show the results from the
unstable power swing using the SCV method. Again, both
techniques detect the power swing condition in about the same
amount of time.
1) Example 1
The first field event relates to a substantial power swing
that took place on the network of a South American country in
January 2005 and lasted for about 2 seconds. The event report
ER 1 was recorded by the relay protecting a 76.67-kilometer
120 kV transmission line with the following secondary
impedance characteristics:
Z1 2.0571
Z0 6.7772
12
20
15
7
10
6
4
2
0
3
5
0.397 s
10
0.371 s
0.179 s 0.154 s
15
20
20
15
10
10
15
20
Real Part of Z1 ()
Fig. 32. Phase voltages and currents during the power swing for ER 1.
100
50
0
End at 0.45 s
50
Start at 0 s
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
200
Fig. 35. OOS and phase mho logic signals for ER 1 (dual-quadrilateral
method).
100
100
200
300
Real Part of Z1 ()
13
20
15
Start Zone
10
0
3
0.359 s
10
0.141 s
15
20
20 15 10
10
15
20
Real Part of Z1 ()
Fig. 39. Phase voltages and currents during the power swing for ER 2.
100
50
End at 0.55 s
Start at 0 s
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
200
pu Volts
100
0
100
200
Real Part of Z1 ()
300
2) Example 2
The second field event is from the same network as the first
event and happened on the same day during the same power
swing. The event report ER 2 was recorded by the relay
protecting the adjacent 182.17-kilometer line and at the same
voltage level as before, 120 kV. The line had the following
secondary impedance characteristics:
Z1 4.8771.2
Z0 16.0872.26
10
4
2
0
3
10
End at
0.55 s
20
Start at 0 s
30
40
40
30
20
10
10
20
Real Part of Z1 ()
30
40
14
PSB
RST
DOSB
SSD
SLD
Start Zone
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
Time (s)
Fig. 42. OOS and phase mho logic signals for ER 2 (dual-quadrilateral
method).
15
16
17
Fig. 49 and Fig. 50 show the TOWO method for both the
dual-quadrilateral and the SCV techniques. The OST bit
asserted and tripped the relay during the first slip cycle, as
expected with TOWO. It is necessary to perform extensive
system studies to determine if the power system can withstand
depressed voltage long enough for the power swing to be
detected and tripped. Consideration of the voltage levels at the
slowest swing rate will help to determine if TOWI is
appropriate.
18
VA R (t) 2 65sin(2f R t R )
ZS 286
ZL 7.884
Voltage (V)
(22)
Fig. 52. Plot of the voltages and currents for a simulated power swing
condition.
62 30
ZS 2.886
150
Impedance ()
Current (A)
Z1
100
50
Impedance
Trajectory
Load
80
60
40
20
20
40
60
80
100
R
19
Impedance ()
20
IX. REFERENCES
[1]
[2]
[3]
[4]
[5]
[6]
[7]
[8]
[9]
[10]
[11]
[12]
[13]
[14]
[15]
[16]
C. R. Mason, The Art and Science of Protective Relaying. John Wiley &
Sons, Inc., New York, 1956.
N. Fischer, G. Benmouyal, and S. Samineni, Tutorial on the Impact of
the Synchronous Generator Model on Protection Studies, proceedings
of the 35th Annual Western Protective Relay Conference, Spokane,
WA, October 2008.
G. Benmouyal, D. Hou, and D. Tziouvaras, Zero-Setting Power-Swing
Blocking Protection, proceedings of the 31st Annual Western
Protective Relay Conference, Spokane, WA, October 2004.
D. Hou, S. Chen, and S. Turner, SEL-321-5 Relay Out-of-Step Logic,
SEL Application Guide (AG97-13), 2009. Available: http://www.
selinc.com.
IEEE Power System Relaying Committee WG D6, Power Swing and
Out-of-Step Considerations on Transmission Lines, July 2005.
Available: http://www.pes-psrc.org.
J. Mooney and N. Fischer, Application Guidelines for Power Swing
Detection on Transmission Systems, proceedings of the 32nd Annual
Western Protective Relay Conference, Spokane, WA, October 2005.
J. Holbach, New Blocking Algorithm for Detecting Fast Power Swing
Frequencies, proceedings of the 30th Annual Western Protective Relay
Conference, Spokane, WA, October 2003.
Q. Verzosa, Realistic Testing of Power Swing Blocking and Out-ofStep Tripping Functions, proceedings of the 38th Annual Western
Protective Relay Conference, Spokane, WA, October 2011.
G. Benmouyal, E. O. Schweitzer, III, and Armando Guzmn,
Synchronized Phasor Measurement in Protective Relays for Protection,
Control, and Analysis of Electric Power Systems, proceedings of the
29th Annual Western Protective Relay Conference, Spokane, WA,
October 2002.
Y. Ohura, M. Suzuki, K. Yanagihashi, M. Yamaura, K. Omata, and
T. Nakamura, S. Mitamura, and H. Watanabe, A Predictive Out-of-Step
Protection System Based on Observation of the Phase Difference
Between Substations, IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery, Vol. 5,
No. 4, October 1990.
A. Guzmn, V. Mynam, and G. Zweigle, Backup Transmission Line
Protection for Ground Faults and Power Swing Detection Using
Synchrophasors, proceedings of the 34th Annual Western Protective
Relay Conference, Spokane, WA, October 2007.
C. W. Taylor, J. M. Haner, L. A. Hill, W. A. Mittelstadt, and
R. L. Cresap, A New Out-of-Step Relay With Rate of Change of
Apparent Resistance Augmentation, IEEE Transactions on Power
Apparatus and Systems, Vol. PAS-102, No. 3, March 1983.
J. M. Haner, T. D. Laughlin, and C. W. Taylor, Experience with the
R-Rdot Out-of-Step Relay, IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery,
Vol. 1, No. 2, April 1986.
F. Ilar, Innovations in the Detection of Power Swings in Electrical
Networks, Brown Boveri Publication CH-ES 35-30.10E, 1997.
D. A. Tziouvaras and D. Hou, Out-of-Step Protection Fundamentals
and Advancements, proceedings of the 30th Annual Western Protective
Relay Conference, Spokane, WA, October 2003.
W. A. Elmore, Out-of-Step Relaying System Selection, Silent
Sentinels, RPL 76-3, Westinghouse Electric Corporation,
September 1976.
X. BIOGRAPHIES
Normann Fischer received a Higher Diploma in Technology, with honors,
from Witwatersrand Technikon, Johannesburg, in 1988, a BSEE, with honors,
from the University of Cape Town in 1993, and an MSEE from the University
of Idaho in 2005. He joined Eskom as a protection technician in 1984 and was
a senior design engineer in the Eskom protection design department for three
years. He then joined IST Energy as a senior design engineer in 1996. In
1999, he joined Schweitzer Engineering Laboratories, Inc. as a power
engineer in the research and development division. Normann was a registered
professional engineer in South Africa and a member of the South Africa
Institute of Electrical Engineers. He is currently a member of IEEE and
ASEE.