Pear Let 1

Zero Sequence Mutual Induction in Double
Circuit Lines & Its Effect on Distance

Protection Relay Performance
PEARLet #1
Author: Pradeep Kumar Gangadharan
EEnnggiinneeeerreedd ttoo IInnnnoovvaattee

Protection Engineering And Research Laboratories
www.pearlabs.com
About PEARLet:
PEARLets are technical notes on specific topics in the area of Power System Protection. These
notes are designed to explain concepts that a power system protection application engineers
will encounter in their day-to-day professional careers. Through these PEARLets, PEARL
attempts to de-mystify many protection application phenomena, kindling interest in fresh
electrical engineers to purse a career as Power System Protection Application Engineer. At the
same time PEARLets are designed to be interesting to advanced protection application
engineers as a good supplementary source of knowledge (we deliberately call it
supplementary, as there is nothing to replace real practical knowledge gained on field).
To achieve this, PEARLets will include simple physical explanations with analogies, supported
by rigorous mathematical derivations and figures to support these explanations. Wherever
possible, numerical examples will be included to explain the concept.
The author of PEARLets assumes that the readers have a basic, undergraduate level
knowledge in electrical engineering. Wherever the author feels it necessary, some fundamentals
required to understand the topic of the document will be re-visited.
Organization of a PEARLet
All PEARLets will follow the following architecture, with some or all of the components listed
below;
> Introducing the topic, concept or issue to state the problem at hand.
> Brief overview of the problem and its significance to the given application
> List of the protection terms that are used in the document and their meaning
> Refresh background knowledge required to understand the concept
> A detailed analysis discussing various situations, highlighting all important influencing
factors.
> All known and generally adopted solutions.
> Reference to a list of published material including books, articles, papers etc.
Using PEARLet
PEARLets are organized in sections and sub-sections. The explanation of the concept flows in a
sequential order along the chapters. All equations, tables, figures are numbered uniquely across
the document. The following icons are used to highlight
Law / Definition
Analogies / Practical experience
Sub and final summaries
Copyright
All PEARLets are the property of PEARL. Members are free to download and use these
documents to enhance their knowledge and sharing with other interested people free of
charge. However these documents should not be used for commercial purposes or re-published
in any form.
PEARLet #1
Zero Sequence Mutual Induction in Double Circuit Rev.: A
Lines & Its Effect on Distance Protection Relay 12th June, 2006
Performance Author : Pradeep Kumar Gangadharan
Table of Contents
1.0 INTRODUCTION ...............................................................................................................................................4

2.0 ZERO SEQUENCE MUTUAL INDUCTION AND DISTANCE RELAYS.................................4
2.1. CAUSE OF ZERO SEQUENCE MUTUAL INDUCTION ...................................................................... 4
2.2. EFFECT ON DISTANCE RELAYS .................................................................................................... 5
3.0 DEFINITION OF TERMS: ............................................................................................................................5
4.0 REVIEW OF MUTUAL INDUCTION FUNDAMENTALS................................................................6
5.0 ANALYSIS OF THE EFFECT OF MUTUAL INDUCTION ON IMPEDANCE
MEASUREMENT [2]........................................................................................................................................9
5.1. PARALLEL LINE IN SERVICE AND FAULT AT REMOTE BUS Y..................................................... 11
5.2. PARALLEL LINE OUT OF SERVICE AND GROUNDED AT BOTH ENDS WITH FAULT AT REMOTE
BUS Y.......................................................................................................................................... 15
5.3. PARALLEL LINE IN SERVICE, WITH CURRENT FLOW IN THE OPPOSITE DIRECTION TO
PROTECTED LINE ........................................................................................................................ 18
5.4. PARALLEL LINE IS LOOPED-IN-LOOPED-OUT ........................................................................... 20
(i). Scenario 1: ....................................................................................................................... 23
(ii). Scenario 2: ....................................................................................................................... 25
(iii). Scenario 3: ....................................................................................................................... 25
6.0 VARIOUS SOLUTIONS AND THEIR LIMITATIONS ................................................................. 26
6.1. CARRIER AIDED SCHEMES BASED SOLUTION ........................................................................... 26
6.2. FIXED CORRECTION OF EARTH FAULT COMPENSATION FACTOR ............................................. 27
6.3. DYNAMIC COMPENSATION BY MEASURING PARALLEL LINE NEUTRAL CURRENT ..................... 28
7.0 NUMERICAL EXAMPLES ........................................................................................................................... 29
8.0 SUMMARIZING THE ANALYSIS ...........................................................................................................37
9.0 REFERENCES................................................................................................................................................... 39
©2006 Protection Engineering And Research Laboratories 3 Of 39

PEARLet #1
1.0 Introduction
Performance of distance relays on double circuit lines are affected by the fault
current flow in the parallel line. The zero sequence current flowing in the parallel line
will introduce an error in the phase to ground impedance measured by the relay on
the protected line. The error could be either positive or negative depending on the
relative direction of fault current flow in the parallel line with respect to the protected
line. This results in the distance relay under-reaching or over-reaching for faults
involving ground.
In this document this issue is explained from the basics and various scenarios are
discussed to help in understanding the problem better. This document will help the
reader to understand the causes of the problem, learn how to analyze any given
situation for effects of mutual induction and to decide what kind of corrective action
(if required) needs to be taken.
2.0 Zero sequence mutual induction and Distance relays

In a double circuit line configuration, two lines are strung on the same tower and run
parallel, in close proximity to each other for the entire or part of the distance
between two substations. In such a system, during faults, fault currents will flow in
both the lines. The amount and direction of fault currents in the two lines would
depend on the location of fault, type of fault and status of the lines (in service, out of
service, out of service and grounded, etc).
2.1. Cause of zero sequence mutual induction

The current flow in the parallel line will induce voltage in the protected line due to
mutual induction. The amount of voltage induced would depend on the tower
configuration, which determines the distance between the two lines on the tower.
Symmetrical component analysis is a very useful tool to analyze

unbalanced faults. Using symmetrical components any three phase
unbalanced signal (voltage or current) can be represented as three sets of
three phase signals, positive, negative and zero sequence. Positive and
negative sequence quantities are balanced, meaning their three phases will
have same magnitude and will be displaced by 120 deg. The zero sequence
quantities of all three phases are equal in magnitude and in phase.
Since positive and negative sequence currents are balanced, their net resultant flux
that links with the other line (protected line) to induce voltage would be very less
and is generally ignored. However since zero sequence currents of all the three
phases are in phase, they will have substantial net resultant flux to link with the
protected line and induce voltage in it.
In simple terms, only zero sequence current flowing in the parallel line will induce
voltage in the protected line (on the same tower). Thus the fault voltage measured
by the relay on the protected line would include this induced voltage, which causes
the impedance measured by the relay to be higher or lower (depending on the
polarity of the induced voltage) than the actual value.

PEARLet #1
Since only the voltage induced by the zero sequence currents are substantial and can
cause significant mutual induction in a double circuit line, only the unbalanced faults
involving ground (which is the only case when zero sequence currents will flow) will
cause problems.
2.2. Effect on distance relays

Having seen the cause of induced voltage in the protected line, let us now
understand what happens as a result.
The magnitude and phase of the induced voltage in the protected line depends on
the magnitude and direction of zero sequence current flow in the parallel line. This
would in turn depend on factors like;
> Type of fault

> Fault location
> System configuration
> System impedances
> Status of the parallel line
The voltage measured by the distance relay will now include,

- the voltage drop in the line between the relay location and fault due to the
current flow in the protected line
- the zero sequence voltage induced by the parallel line.
Depending on the polarity of the induced voltage, the measured voltage can be
higher or lower than the voltage drop in the protected line.
Since the measured impedance by the relay is the ratio of the measured voltage and
fault current at the relay location, the zero sequence induced voltage can cause the
relay to measure higher (when the induced voltage is of same polarity) or lower
(when the induced voltage is of opposite polarity) impedance than actual. This will
result in the relay under-reaching or over-reaching.
Under-reaching can cause a particular zone element of the distance relay to not
operate for a fault well within its boundary, whereas over-reaching can cause the
zone element of the relay to operate for a fault outside its boundary.
3.0 Definition of terms:

Before getting started with the discussion we will define few terms, which will be
used throughout the document.
Distance relay: The distance relay whose measurement accuracy is being

analyzed, when the line it is protecting is subjected to
mutual induction due to the presence of a parallel line.
Double circuit line: Two, three phase transmission lines running on the same
tower. Unless specifically mentioned, both lines run parallel
on the same tower for the entire length between the two
stations (which are connected by them).

PEARLet #1
Protected line: Transmission line which the distance relay whose

measurement is being analyzed is protecting.
Parallel line: A Transmission which runs parallel to the protected line and
is strung on the same tower.
Loop-in-loop-out: A line running between two sub-stations, which is broken on
the way to connect to a third sub-station.
4.0 Review of mutual induction fundamentals

We will start with the review of electromagnetism. When current flows in a conductor
it produces a magnetic field around it. The magnetic field is in a plane orthogonal to
the plane carrying the current. The magnetic field forms closed flux lines. The
direction of the magnetic flux can be explained using the famous “Maxwell’s right
hand screw rule“, illustrated in figure 4.1. If the thumb of the right hand is aligned in
the direction of the current flow in a conductor, the direction of magnetic flux
produced by it is given by the direction of the curling fingers. When the current
flowing in the conductor is an alternating current, the magnetic field and the
resultant flux lines produced are also alternating.
Fig. 4.1: Direction of current flow and resultant magnetic field
We can use the knowledge of the above basic phenomenon to understand the
direction of induced voltage in a conductor placed in a magnetic field. Figure 4.2
shows a conductor carrying an alternating current I1, flowing from P1 to P2 as
marked. This current produces an alternating magnetic field around it and the
relative direction of the alternating magnetic flux lines (Φ1) is shown in figure 4.2.
When a secondary conductor is placed in this alternating magnetic field of the

primary conductor, the alternating flux lines will cut the secondary conductor
inducing voltage in it. This is defined by Faraday’s law. The polarity of the induced
emf can be understood by applying the Lenz’s law.

PEARLet #1
Fig. 4.2: Current flowing in a conductor and the magnetic flux produced around
Faraday’s law
The induced emf in a coil of N loops produced by a change in flux in a

certain time interval is given by:
dφ
e = −N
dt
Lenz’s law
The induced emf generates a current that sets up a magnetic field which
acts to oppose the change in magnetic flux.
Effect opposes the cause
Let us use Faraday’s and Lenz’s laws to understand the relative direction of the
induced emf in the secondary conductor. Figure 4.3 shows a secondary conductor
placed in the magnetic field of the primary conductor. When the alternating flux Φ1,

PEARLet #1
cuts the secondary conductor, an emf is induced in the secondary conductor, which
will cause a current (I2) to flow in it.
Fig. 4.3: Voltage induced in a secondary conductor placed in the magnetic field of a
primary conductor
Fig. 4.4: Relative directions of current flows and flux lines in primary and secondary
conductors – Lateral view

PEARLet #1
The direction of the magnetic field produced by the current I2 (which is the effect)
should be such as to oppose the magnetic field of the primary conductor (which is
the cause). The direction of flux Φ2 will be in opposition to Φ1, as illustrated more
clearly in figure 4.4, which is the lateral view of the setup shown in figure 4.3.
Applying Maxwell’s right hand rule we can get the direction of current I2, which would
be from S2 to S1, as marked in figure 4.3. For a current I2 to flow to the external
circuit in the direction marked, the polarity of the voltage E2 should be as shown in
the figure 4.3.
Now this is a place when some confusion can creep in. Remember that
always current flows from higher potential to lower potential through the
external connected load. Whereas in the source, current always flow from
lower to higher potential. In the discussion above the primary conductor is
the load for the voltage E1 and thus the current flows from the higher
potential P1 to lower potential P2. On the other hand the secondary
conductor is the source E2 (the voltage is produced in it due to induction),
thus the current in the secondary conductor (which is the source) flows
from lower potential S2 to the higher potential S1.
From this discussion it is clear that voltage would be induced in a secondary

conductor placed in the magnetic field of a primary conductor and,
- the magnitude of induced voltage would depend on the rate of change of flux that
links with the secondary conductor and the number of turns in the secondary
conductor.
- the polarity of the voltage induced in the secondary conductor would depend on
the direction of the current flow in the primary conductor.
We will use this understanding in the following sections to analyze the effect of
mutual induction on the performance of distance protection.
5.0 Analysis of the effect of mutual induction on impedance

measurement [2]
Let us start with the simple single ended system shown in figure 5.1. The system
shows a local source (Ex) and two parallel lines (Line 1XY & Line 2XY). The distance
(R) relay is protecting Line 1XY.
Fig. 5.1: A simple single system with double circuit transmission line

PEARLet #1
Figure 5.2 shows the equivalent positive, negative and zero sequence circuits of the
system shown in figure 5.1.
Fig. 5.2: Sequence equivalent circuit of the system shown in figure1
where,
Expn - Phase to neutral system source voltage

ZSX1 - System positive sequence source impedance
Z1XY1 - Positive sequence impedance of “Line 1XY”
Z2XY1 - Positive sequence impedance of “Line 2XY”
ZS2 - System negative sequence source impedance
Z1XY2 - Negative sequence impedance of “Line 1XY”
Z2XY2 - Negative sequence impedance of “Line 2XY”
ZS0 - System zero sequence source impedance
Z1XY0 - Zero sequence impedance of “Line 1XY”
Z2XY0 - Zero sequence impedance of “Line 2XY”
ZM0 - Zero sequence mutual inductance between the two lines (Line 1XY
& Line 2XY)
IR1, IR2, IR0 - Positive, negative and zero sequence currents at the relay location
VR1, VR2, VR0 - Positive, negative and zero sequence voltages at the relay location
IP0 - Zero sequence current flowing in the parallel line.
V1M0 - Zero sequence voltage induced in parallel “Line 2XY” due to zero
sequence current flowing in the protected line “Line 1XY”. The
value of this induced voltage is given by, V1M0 = IR0xZM0.
V2M0 - Zero sequence voltage induced in the protected “Line 1XY” due to
zero sequence current flowing in the parallel “Line 2XY”. The value
of this induced voltage is given by, V2M0 = IP0xZM0

PEARLet #1
The way in which the three sequence circuits are connected depends on the type of
fault and its location[1]. As we discuss various situations, appropriate connections of
these three sequence circuits would be made. Similar sequence equivalent circuits
can be drawn for any given system. Once the sequence network connection is made,
it is very simple to calculate the fault currents and voltages at different locations
using simple circuit analysis techniques.
Trust me, sequence network is one of the easiest methods for steady state
study of unbalanced faults and requires very basic knowledge. For people
who are new to this, if you do it a couple of times, I am sure you will feel at
home with this. I am telling this from experience!!
On close observation of the three sequence networks, it can be seen that the mutual
induction is ignored in positive and negative sequence networks. As stated earlier
this is due to fact that the mutual positive and negative sequence impedances of a
double circuit line is very less compared to its self positive and negative sequence
impedances. The actual value depends on the tower configuration, but generally the
positive and negative sequence mutual impedances are as low as 1/12th of the self
positive and negative sequence impedances. On the contrary the zero sequence
mutual impedance can be as high as 2/3rd of the self zero sequence impedance,
which is a considerably high value and can affect the impedance measured by the
relay on the protected line in many cases.
As part of this analysis, we will study the effect of mutual induction on the
performance of the distance relay on the protected line, with the parallel line under
the following conditions:
1. Parallel line in service and current flowing in the same direction as in the
protected line.
2. Parallel line out of service and grounded at both ends by earth switches.
3. Parallel line in service and current flowing in the opposite direction.
4. Parallel line is looped-in-looped-out on the way.
Since the mutual induction is a problem for ground faults only, we will consider only
a single phase to ground fault (“A” phase to “Ground”) in our analysis.
5.1. Parallel line in service and fault at remote bus Y

Let us consider an “A” phase to “Ground” fault on bus Y of the system shown in
figure 5.1 and calculate the impedance measured by the relay. The parallel line “Line
2XY” is in service at that moment. The sequence circuit connection for this condition
is shown in figure 5.3.
Since the fault is at the bus “Y”, the fault impedance measured by the relay R should
be equal to “Z1XY1” (the positive sequence impedance of the line between the relay
and fault location).

PEARLet #1
Fig. 5.3: Sequence circuit connection for A-G fault at bus Y – Parallel line in service.
The impedance measured by the “AN” element of relay R (since it’s an “A” to
“Ground” fault) can be calculated using the expression,
V RAN
Z AN _ meas = - (1)
I RA + I RN × K
where,
ZAN – “A” phase to neutral fault impedance.

VRAN – “A” phase to neutral fault voltage at the relay location.
IRA – “A” phase fault current measured at the relay location.
IRN – Neutral fault current measured at the relay location.
K – Earth fault compensation setting given by.
Z 1 XY 0 − Z 1 XY 1
K= - (2)
3 × Z 1 XY 1
Z1XY0 – Zero sequence line impedance.
Z1XY1 – Positive sequence line impedance.

PEARLet #1
The “A” phase and “Neutral” currents at the relay location can be expressed as;
I RA = I R1 + I R 2 + I R 0
- (3)
I RN = 3 × I R 0
From the figure 5.3, we can write the expression for the “A” phase to neutral voltage
at the relay location as,
V RAN = VR1 + VR 2 + VR 0
= I R1 × Z1 XY 1 + I R 2 × Z1 XY 2 + I R 0 × Z1 XY 0 + V2 M 0
= I R1 × Z1 XY 1 + I R 2 × Z1 XY 2 + I R 0 × Z1 XY 0 + I P 0 × Z M 0
In a transmission line the positive and negative sequence impedances are equal, i.e.,
Z1XY1= Z1XY2. Applying this knowledge and also adding and subtracting the term (IR0 x
Z1XY1), we can re-write the expression for the fault voltage as,
V RAN = I R1 × Z1 XY 1 + I R 2 × Z1 XY 1 + I R 0 × Z1 XY 0 + I P 0 × Z M 0 + I R 0 × Z1 XY 1 − I R 0 × Z1 XY 1
= Z1 XY 1 × ( I R1 + I R 2 + I R 0 ) + I R 0 × ( Z1 XY 0 − Z1 XY 1 ) + I P 0 × Z M 0
- (4)
Substituting the values of VRAN, IRA, IRN and K from equations 2 to 4 in equation 1, we
get,
V RAN
Z AN _ meas =
I RA + I RN × K
Z1 XY 1 × ( I R1 + I R 2 + I R 0 ) + I R 0 × ( Z1 XY 0 − Z1 XY 1 ) + I P 0 × Z M 0
=
Z − Z1 XY 1
I RA + I RN × 1 XY 0
3 × Z1 XY 1
( Z1 XY 0 − Z1 XY 1 )
Z1 XY 1 × I RA + I RN × + I P0 × Z M 0
= 3
Z − Z1 XY 1
3 × Z1 XY 1
⎛ (Z − Z1 XY 1 ) ⎞
Z1 XY 1 × ⎜⎜ I RA + I RN × 1 XY 0 ⎟⎟ + I P 0 × Z M 0
⎝ 3 × Z1 XY 1 ⎠
=
Z1 XY 0 − Z1 XY 1
I RA + I RN ×
3 × Z1 XY 1
I P0 × Z M 0
= Z1 XY 1 + - (5)
I RA + I RN × K

PEARLet #1
The actual fault impedance is,
Z AN _ act = Z1 XY 1 - (6)
Comparing equations 5 and 6 we can see that the error in the measured impedance
due to mutual induction is;
I P0 × Z M 0
Error =
I RA + I RN × K
In this case the relay will under-reach by a factor of,
I P0 × Z M 0 Z
I P0 × M 0
I + I RN × K Z1 XY 1
%Underreach = RA × 100 = × 100
Z1 XY 1 I RA + I RN × K
- (7)
I PN × K M
= × 100
I RA + I RN × K
Where,
ZM0
KM - Mutual compensation factor, KM =
3 × Z1 XY 1
IPN - Parallel line neutral current, I PN = 3 × I P0
On analyzing equation 7 we can see that the degree of under-reaching due to mutual
induction depends on,
- The mutual compensation factor KM

- The ratio of the neutral current in the parallel line (IPN) to the compensated
current flowing in the protected line (IRA+IRN * K)
It is worthwhile to mention here that the neutral current flowing in the parallel line to
feed a fault at the remote bus will be very close to the neutral current flowing in the
protected line only if the two lines are of the same type and also originate and end
on the same bus at both substations. There can be instances when the parallel line
originates or/and ends at a bus different from that of the protected line and the bus
coupler between the buses is open. In such cases the fault current flow in the
parallel line is independent of the current flow in the protected line and only depends
on the strength of the source feeding the parallel line.

PEARLet #1
5.2. Parallel line out of service and grounded at both ends with fault
at remote bus Y
In the system shown in figure 5.1, when the parallel line is taken out of service and
grounded at both ends, the sequence circuits and their connection would be as
shown in figure 5.4 for an “A” phase to “Ground” fault at the remote bus Y.
Fig. 5.4: Sequence circuit connection for A-G fault at bus Y – Parallel line out of
service and grounded.
Comparing figures 5.3 and 5.4, the following differences can be noticed:
1. The parallel line’s positive and negative sequence impedances are left open and
thus will not have any influence on the fault current.
2. The zero sequence impedance of the parallel line is connected to ground potential
at both ends.
3. Only zero sequence current flows in the parallel line.
4. The zero sequence induced voltage in the parallel line (V1M0) which is due to the
zero sequence current flow in the protected line (IR0), is the cause for the zero
sequence current flow in the parallel line (IP0). This is unlike case 1, where the

PEARLet #1
zero sequence current in the parallel line was due to the fault zero sequence
current. Thus the zero sequence current in the parallel line flows in the opposite
direction when compared to the zero sequence current flow in the protected line
(observe the current flow direction marked in figure 5.4).
5. The polarity of the zero sequence voltage induced in the protected line (due to
the zero sequence current flow in the parallel line) is opposite to its own zero
sequence voltage (observe the induced voltage polarity marking in figure 5.4).
Following a similar procedure as in case 1, the “A” phase to “Ground” fault voltage at
the relay location can be derived and expressed as,
V RAN = Z1 XY 1 × I RA + I R 0 × ( Z1 XY 0 − Z1 XY 1 ) − V2 M 0 - (8)
The zero sequence induced voltage in the protected line (V2M0) is given by,
V2 M 0 = I P 0 × Z M 0 - (9)
The zero sequence current flow in the parallel line (IP0) is given by,
V1M 0
I P0 = - (10)
Z 2 XY 0
The zero sequence induced voltage in the parallel line (V1M0) is given by,
V1M 0 = I R 0 × Z M 0 - (11)
Using equations 9 to 11 in equation 8, the equation for the fault voltage becomes,
V RAN = Z1 XY 1 × I RA + I R 0 × ( Z1 XY 0 − Z1 XY 1 ) − V2 M 0
= Z1 XY 1 × I RA + I R 0 × ( Z1 XY 0 − Z1 XY 1 ) − I P 0 × Z M 0
- (12)
V
= Z1 XY 1 × I RA + I R 0 × ( Z1 XY 0 − Z1 XY 1 ) − 1M 0 × Z M 0
Z 2 XY 0
2
ZM0
= Z1 XY 1 × I RA + I R 0 × ( Z1 XY 0 − Z1 XY 1 ) − I R 0 ×
Z 2 XY 0

PEARLet #1
The measured “AN” impedance now becomes,
V RAN
Z AN _ meas =
I RA + I RN × K
2
ZM0
Z1 XY 1 × I RA + I R 0 × ( Z1 XY 0 − Z1 XY 1 ) − I R 0 ×
Z 2 XY 0
=
Z1 XY 0 − Z1 XY 1
I RA + I RN ×
3 × Z1 XY 1
⎛ (Z − Z1 XY 1 ) ⎞ Z
2
- (13)
Z1 XY 1 × ⎜⎜ I RA + I RN × 1 XY 0 ⎟⎟ − I R 0 × M 0
⎝ 3 × Z1 XY 1 ⎠ Z 2 XY 0
=
Z − Z1 XY 1
3 × Z1 XY 1
2
Z
I R0 × M 0
Z 2 XY 0
= Z1 XY 1 −
I RA + I RN × K
In this case the measured impedance is less than the actual impedance (Z1XY1). This
will cause the distance relay to over-reach. The percentage over-reach is given by
Z M 02
I R0 ×
Z 2 XY 0 Z × ZM0
I R0 × M 0
I RA + I RN × K Z 2 XY 0 × Z1 XY 1
%Overreach = × 100 = × 100
Z1 XY 1 I RA + I RN × K
ZM 0
I RN × × KM
3 × Z 2 XY 0 - (14)
= × 100
I RA + I RN × K
ZM0 K
= × M × 100 (assumiing I RA = I RN )
3 × Z 2 XY 0 1 + K
We can understand the factors that influence the degree of over-reaching by
analyzing equation 14. The main factors are,
> Ratio of the mutual compensation factor KM to the line earth fault compensation
factor plus 1 (K+1)
> The ratio of the zero sequence mutual impedance to three times the parallel line
zero sequence impedance.
A point worth noting here is that there is no requirement to measure the parallel line
neutral current (as was required in case 1) to estimate the degree of over-reach.
Just by knowing the values of zero sequence mutual impedance and zero sequence
impedance of parallel line we can estimate the error and thus compensate for it. We
will utilize this fact later when we discuss various solutions.

PEARLet #1
5.3. Parallel line in service, with current flow in the opposite

direction to protected line
In some situations we can have a condition where current flow in the parallel line is
in the opposite direction to that of the protected line. This can happen when the
parallel line is terminated on a bus different from the one on which protected line is
terminated and the bus coupler between the two buses is open. If there are in-feeds
at the remote bus, then during faults on one of the buses of the remote substation,
current flow directions in the protected and parallel lines can be opposite. Figure 5.5
shows such a system and figure 5.6 shows the sequence network connection for an
“A” phase to “Ground” fault at remote bus “Y1”.
Fig. 5.5: Two ended system with the remote bus-coupler open.
Since we have not considered any fault resistance in this case, the expression for
fault voltage at the relay location will be the same as given in equation 8, which is
again listed below,
V RAN = Z1 XY 1 × I RA + I R 0 × ( Z1 XY 0 − Z1 XY 1 ) − V2 M 0
Since the zero sequence current in the parallel line now depends on the strength of
the remote source connected to bus “Y2” (the value of Z2S0), the zero sequence
induced voltage on the protected line is fairly independent of its own zero sequence
current. This is unlike in case 2, where the zero sequence induced voltage was a
function of its own zero sequence current (see equation 14). Thus the fault voltage
at the relay location for this case can be written as,
V RAN = Z1 XY 1 × I RA + I R 0 × ( Z1 XY 0 − Z1 XY 1 ) − I P 0 × Z M 0 - (15)

PEARLet #1
Fig. 5.6: Sequence circuit connection for A-G fault at the remote bus of a two ended
system – Parallel line in of service with fault current flow in opposite direction.
The measured “AN” impedance in this case can be written as,
V RAN
Z AN _ meas =
I RA + I RN × K
Z1 XY 1 × I RA + I R 0 × ( Z1 XY 0 − Z1 XY 1 ) − I P 0 × Z M 0
=
Z − Z1 XY 1
3 × Z1 XY 1
⎛ (Z − Z1 XY 1 ) ⎞
Z1 XY 1 × ⎜⎜ I RA + I RN × 1 XY 0 ⎟⎟ − I P 0 × Z M 0
⎝ 3 × Z1 XY 1 ⎠
=
Z − Z1 XY 1
3 × Z1 XY 1
I P0 × Z M 0
= Z1 XY 1 − - (16)
I RA + I RN × K

PEARLet #1
Again as in case 2, the measured impedance in this case also is less than the actual
value, causing the relay to over-reach. The percentage over-reach for this case is
given by,
I P0 × Z M 0 Z
I P0 × M 0
I + I RN × K Z1 XY 1
%Overreach = RA × 100 = × 100
Z1 XY 1 I RA + I RN × K - (17)
I PN × K M
= × 100
I RA + I RN × K
On analyzing equation 17 we can see that the degree of over-reaching due to mutual
induction depends on,

- The ratio of the neutral current in the parallel line (IPN) to the compensated
current flowing in the protected line (IRA+IRN * K)
Also note that the parallel line neutral current depends primarily on the strength of
the source feeding it.
5.4. Parallel line is looped-in-looped-out

Once in a while a situation may occur where a line is broken in between two
substations and taken to a third substation to form what is called a “Loop-in-loop-
out” (LILO) system. The degree of influence the parallel line can have on the
protected line relay measurement would depend on the distance for which both lines
run parallel. The system being discussed here is shown in figure 5.7 below.
Fig. 5.7: Double circuit line with LILO and source on all three ends.

PEARLet #1
In the system shown in figure 5.7, the protected “Line XY” goes from bus X to bus Y
(over a distance of “d” km) The parallel line which is running on the same tower is
broken at point “T” (at a distance of “d1” km from bus X) and taken to another bus
“Z” (over a distance of “m1” km). A line from bus “Z” goes to bus “Y” to complete
the “Loop-in-loop-out” (over a distance of “m2”+”d2” km). This is a very common
arrangement in a LILO system. It has to be noted that the “Line XZ” runs parallel to
the protected line from bus X to point T. Whereas from point T to bus Y, the “Line
ZY” becomes the parallel line. Both these segments will induce zero sequence
voltages in the protected line during ground faults. Usually in such applications the
distance d1+d2=d and m1=m2, but this is not always true and entirely depends on
the line construction.
The magnitude and polarity of the zero sequence voltage induced in the protected
line would depend on the magnitude and direction of current flowing in each of the
two parallel line segments. As you would have guessed by now, there are many
possibilities for this depending on the relative strengths of the three sources and
fault location.
To proceed with our analysis, we will consider a fault at bus Y (as in the earlier
cases). This gives us three possible scenarios of fault current flow in the parallel line.
They are shown in figure 5.8.

PEARLet #1
Fig. 5.8: Different fault current flow possibilities in a LILO parallel line.

PEARLet #1
(i). Scenario 1:
In this situation, the fault current flow in the parallel line is also in the same direction
as that of the protected line. This will happen when the local source is much stronger
than the two remote sources and/or the source Z is electrically much closer to the
remote bus “Y”. The equivalent circuit and their connection for this situation for an
“A” phase to “Ground” fault is shown in figure 5.9.
Fig. 5.9: Sequence circuit connection for A-G fault at the remote bus of a two ended
system – Parallel line LILO with fault current flow in same direction.

PEARLet #1
The expression for the fault voltage at the relay location for this scenario can be
written as,
V RAN = Z1 XY 1 × I RA + I R 0 × ( Z1 XY 0 − Z1 XY 1 ) + I PXT 0 × a1Z M 0 + I PTY 0 × a 2 Z M 0
where,
a1 – Per-unit length for which the line segment XT is in parallel with the
protected line.
d1
a1 = , {d1<d}
d
a2 – Per-unit length for which the line segment TY is in parallel with the
protected line.
d2
a2 = , {d2<d}
d
If the LILO is made at the two adjacent towers, then we can write a2 as,
(d − d1) d1
a2 = = 1−
d d
Thus,
d1 ⎛ d1 ⎞
V RAN = Z1 XY 1 × I RA + I R 0 × ( Z1 XY 0 − Z1 XY 1 ) + I PXT 0 × × Z M 0 + I PTY 0 × ⎜1 − ⎟ × Z M 0
d ⎝ d ⎠
- (18)
The expression for the measured impedance can be written as,
V RAN
Z AN _ meas =
I RA + I RN × K
d1 ⎛ d1 ⎞
Z1 XY 1 × I RA + I R 0 × ( Z1 XY 0 − Z1 XY 1 ) + I PXT 0 × × Z M 0 + I PTY 0 × ⎜1 − ⎟ × Z M 0
=
d ⎝ d ⎠
Z − Z1 XY 1
3 × Z1 XY 1
⎛ (Z − Z1 XY 1 ) ⎞ d1 ⎛ d1 ⎞
Z1 XY 1 × ⎜⎜ I RA + I RN × 1 XY 0 ⎟⎟ + I PXT 0 × × Z M 0 + I PTY 0 × ⎜1 − ⎟ × Z M 0
⎝ 3 × Z1 XY 1 ⎠ d ⎝ d ⎠
=
Z − Z1 XY 1
3 × Z1 XY 1
d1 ⎛ d1 ⎞
I PXT 0 × × Z M 0 + I PTY 0 × ⎜1 − ⎟ × Z M 0
= Z1 XY 1 +
d ⎝ d ⎠
I RA + I RN × K
- (19)
As in case 1, in this case also the measured impedance is higher than the actual
impedance, causing the relay to under-reach. The percentage under-reach is given,

PEARLet #1
d1 ⎛ d1 ⎞
I PXT 0 × × Z M 0 + I PTY 0 × ⎜1 − ⎟ × Z M 0
d ⎝ d ⎠
I RA + I RN × K
%Overreach = × 100
Z1 XY 1
d1 Z M 0 ⎛ d1 ⎞ Z
I PXT 0 × × + I PTY 0 × ⎜1 − ⎟ × M 0
d Z1 XY 1 ⎝ d ⎠ Z1 XY 1
= × 100 - (20)
I RA + I RN × K
d1 ⎛ d1 ⎞
I PXTN × + I PTYN × ⎜1 − ⎟
=
d ⎝ d ⎠
× K M × 100
I RA + I RN × K
On analyzing equation 20 we can see that in this case the degree of under-reaching
due to mutual induction depends on,

- The product of the parallel line neutral current at the local end and the fraction of
the total distance for which the lines run parallel from the local end.
- The product of the parallel line neutral current at the remote end and the fraction
of the total distance for which the lines run parallel at the remote end.
- The ratio of the sum of the above products to the compensated current flowing in
the protected line (IRA+IRN * K).
(ii). Scenario 2:
In this situation, the fault current flow in the parallel line is in the opposite direction
to that of the protected line. This will happen when the bus coupler between the bus
at which the remote source is connected and the faulted bus at station “Y” is open.
In this case the impedance measured by the distance relay will be similar to that
shown in equation 19 except for the sign of the zero sequence induced voltage.
Hence resulting in reduced impedance measurement and causing the relay to over-
reach. This is shown in equation 21.
d1 ⎛ d1 ⎞
I PXT 0 × × Z M 0 + I PTY 0 × ⎜1 − ⎟ × Z M 0
Z AN _ meas = Z 1 XY 1 −
d ⎝ d ⎠
- (21)
I RA + I RN × K
The over-reach factor will be identical to that given in equation 20.
(iii). Scenario 3:
In this scenario, the fault current flows in the two sections of the parallel lines are
different. In the local part of the parallel line (segment XT), the fault current flows in
the opposite direction to the fault current flow in the protected line. In the remote
section of the parallel line (segment TY), the fault current flows in the same direction

PEARLet #1
as the current flow in the protected line. This will happen when the source Z is much
stronger than the local source and/or is electrically closer to the local source.
The measured impedance in this case would be
d1 ⎛ d1 ⎞
I PXT 0 × × Z M 0 − I PTY 0 × ⎜1 − ⎟ × Z M 0
Z AN _ meas = Z1 XY 1 −
d ⎝ d ⎠
I RA + I RN × K
This brings up a very peculiar condition to our discussion. Three situations can arise:
d1 ⎛ d1 ⎞
(a) I PXT 0 × > I PTY 0 × ⎜1 − ⎟ ; The measured impedance will be less than the
d ⎝ d ⎠
actual impedance, causing the distance relay to over-reach.
d1 ⎛ d1 ⎞
(b) I PXT 0 × < I PTY 0 × ⎜1 − ⎟ ; The measured impedance will be more than the
d ⎝ d ⎠
actual impedance, causing the distance relay to under-reach.
d1 ⎛ d1 ⎞
(c) I PXT 0 × = I PTY 0 × ⎜1 − ⎟ ; The measured impedance will be same as the
d ⎝ d ⎠
actual impedance and there will be no effect on the relay due to mutual induction.
6.0 Various solutions and their limitations

The problem of zero sequence mutual induction affecting the distance protection
relays has been known for a very long time. As can be expected there are different
solutions available with each having its own limitations. In this section we will see
few of the most widely used solutions. I am sure that there would more solutions out
there in the field.
6.1. Carrier aided schemes based solution

One solution is to allow the carrier aided distance protection schemes to take care of
the under-reaching / over-reaching problem introduced due to zero sequence mutual
induction.
This solution is based on the assumption that for a fault in the protected line, the
current flow in the parallel line will be in one direction for the entire length. In such a
case if one end relay on the protected line under-reaches, then the other end relay
will over-reach. Thus a Permissive Over Reach (POR) transfer trip scheme would
provide instantaneous protection for the entire length of the protected line.
This will work well for faults in the protected line section with the parallel line
running for the entire length of the protected line (cases 5.1, 5.2 & 5.3). However,
for faults on the remote bus or after it, with current in the parallel line flowing in the
opposite direction (as in cases 5.2 & 5.3), the relay on the protected line can over-
reach. The over-reaching can be more severe when the parallel line is out of service

PEARLet #1
and grounded (case 5.2). When the parallel line is LILO, then situations explained in
case 54, scenarios 2 and 3a can also cause over-reaching for faults beyond the
protected line. This can only be addressed by reducing the zone 1 setting of the
protection relay accounting for the worst case scenario.
This may not be advisable in many situations as then a large section of the protected
line will depend on the carrier aided scheme for instantaneous fault clearance.
However to address the issue when the parallel line is grounded, the only option is to
reduce the setting. Multiple setting groups can be used with a dedicated group for
this situation, which is switched using the parallel line earth switch.
6.2. Fixed correction of earth fault compensation factor

This is a rather crude, but sometimes effective solution. In this solution the earth
fault compensation of the distance relay is set accounting for the zero sequence
mutual compensation also. That is the earth fault compensation of the distance relay
is set as,
Z 0 − Z1 Z M 0
K Eff = K + K M = +
3 × Z1 3 × Z1
where,
Z1 – Positive sequence impedance of the protected line

Z0 – Zero sequence impedance of the protected line
ZM0 – Zero sequence mutual inductance between the two lines
With this compensation the impedance measured by the relay for a fault at the
remote bus becomes (referring to figure 5.3),
V RAN
Z AN _ meas =
I RA + I RN × (K + K M )
=
⎛Z − Z1 XY 1 ZM0 ⎞
I RA + I RN × ⎜⎜ 1 XY 0 + ⎟
⎝ 3 × Z1 XY 1 3 × Z1 XY 1 ⎟⎠
( Z1 XY 0 − Z1 XY 1 ) Z
Z1 XY 1 × I RA + I RN × + I PN × M 0
= 3 3
Z1 XY 0 − Z1 XY 1 ZM0
I RA + I RN × + I RN ×
3 × Z1 XY 1 3 × Z1 XY 1
⎛ (Z − Z1 XY 1 ) ZM 0 ⎞
Z1 XY 1 × ⎜⎜ I RA + I RN × 1 XY 0 + I PN × ⎟
⎝ 3 × Z1 XY 1 3 × Z1 XY 1 ⎟⎠
=
Z − Z1 XY 1 ZM0
I RA + I RN × 1 XY 0 + I RN ×
3 × Z1 XY 1 3 × Z1 XY 1
= Z1 XY 1
{only if I PN = I RN }

PEARLet #1
As you would have realized by now, this will only work if the neutral current in the
parallel line is equal to the neutral current in the protected line and also in the same
direction. This will be true only when the fault is on or beyond the remote bus with
the remote bus coupler closed.
The biggest problem with this solution is that since this is a static compensation
(done once via setting), when the parallel line current is different, the correction can
be erroneous. The worst case is when the neutral current in the parallel line is in the
opposite direction to neutral current in the protected line.
For this reason, though used in some application in earlier days, this is not an
advisable remedy.
6.3. Dynamic compensation by measuring parallel line neutral

current
In this solution, dynamic compensation is provided for the zero sequence mutual
induction. This is done by measuring the neutral current flowing in the parallel line
and using this to offset the error in measurement. The relay is set with both the self
earth fault compensation (K) and mutual zero sequence compensation (KM). The
relay measured impedance for a remote bus fault is then given by,
VRAN
Z AN _ meas =
I RA + I RN × K + I PN × K M
=
Z − Z1 XY 1 ZM0
I RA + I RN × 1 XY 0 + I PN ×
3 × Z1 XY 1 3 × Z1 XY 1
( Z1 XY 0 − Z1 XY 1 ) Z
Z1 XY 1 × I RA + I RN × + I PN × M 0
= 3 3
Z1 XY 0 − Z1 XY 1 ZM0
I RA + I RN × + I PN ×
3 × Z1 XY 1 3 × Z1 XY 1
⎛ (Z − Z1 XY 1 ) ZM0 ⎞
Z1 XY 1 × ⎜⎜ I RA + I RN × 1 XY 0 + I PN × ⎟⎟
⎝ 3 × Z 3 × Z 1 XY 1 ⎠
= 1 XY 1
Z1 XY 0 − Z1 XY 1 ZM0
I RA + I RN × + I PN ×
3 × Z1 XY 1 3 × Z1 XY 1
= Z1 XY 1
This is the correct fault impedance. This type of compensation works effectively for
all faults in the protected line and faults beyond the remote bus.
However this kind of compensation can result in the relay mal-operating for close-up
faults on the parallel line. This is particularly true when the local source is very
strong, in which case the zero sequence current in the parallel line can be very high
as compared to the zero sequence fault current in the protected line. In such cases
the relay can wrongly decide the fault (which is on the parallel line, which is actually

PEARLet #1
in the reverse direction for the relay) as a forward fault and trip in zone 1 instead of
reverse zone. The numerical example in the next section illustrates this problem.
One way to overcome this problem is to apply a cut-off limit on the zero sequence
mutual compensation. Some relays implement this by providing zero sequence
mutual compensation only when the parallel line neutral current to protected line
neutral current ratio is within a limit. A typical value of 1.5 is recommended as this
limit. Sometimes this limit is provided as a setting in the relay [3].
Thus if,
IPN/IRN < limit,Î Zero sequence mutual compensation applied.
IPN/IRN > limit,Î Zero sequence mutual compensation is not applied.
7.0 Numerical examples

In this section few numerical examples are discussed to reinforce the analysis in the
earlier sections.
Example 1:
In the system shown in figure 7.1, a fault occurs at 80% of the line 1XY. Parallel line
in service and present for the whole length. We will calculate the impedance
measured by the relay RX1 and RY1 with and without zero sequence mutual
compensation.
Fig. 7.1: Two ended double circuit line with fault at 80% of the protected line
The system parameters are as given below,
Source :
System voltage = 230 kV
ZSX1 = ZSY1 = 40 ∠85° Ω Î Positive sequence source impedances
ZSX0 = ZSY0 = 120 ∠80° Ω Î Zero sequence source impedances
Line:
Line length = 100 km
ZL1 = 0.4 ∠80° Ω Î Positive sequence line impedance
ZL0 = 1.2 ∠75° Ω Î Zero sequence line impedance

PEARLet #1
ZMO = 0.8 ∠75° Ω Î Zero sequence mutual impedance of line
For a solid “A” phase to “Ground” fault at 80% of the protected line from Bus X, the
voltages and currents at the two relay locations can be calculated. The simplest way
is to draw the sequence network and calculate the sequence currents and voltages
and then the phase values. The values obtained for this fault are given below.
At relay RX1 location:

VRXA = 53. 782 ∠-3.45° kV ; IRXA = 877.55 ∠-80.82°A
VRXB = 140.65 ∠ -129.12° kV ; IRXB = IRXC = 0 A
VRXC = 142.03 ∠ 128.67° kV ; IRXN = IRXA + IRXB + IRXC = 877.55 ∠-
80.82°A
At relay RY1 location:

VRYA = 23.079 ∠-3.76° kV ; IRYA = 1864.3 ∠-80.82°A
VRYB = 151 ∠-134.71° kV ; IRYB = IRYC = 0 A
VRYC = 154.87 ∠133.31° kV ; IRYN = IRYA + IRYB + IRYC = 1864.3 ∠-
80.82°A
The A phase to neutral loop impedance measured by relay RX1 will be,
VRXA
Z RX _ AN =
I RXA + I RXN × K
Where,
Z 0 − Z1
K= = 0.6686∠ − 7.49°
3 × Z1
53782∠ − 3.45°
Z RX _ AN =
877.55∠ − 80.82° + 877.55∠ − 80.82° × 0.6686∠ − 7.49°
= 36.8052∠79.8204°Ω
Since the actual fault is at 80%, the measured impedance should have been
ZRX_AN act = 0.4 ∠80° x 100 x 0.8 = 32 ∠80° Ω
Thus the relay RX1 will under-reach and see the fault well outside zone 1.
Similarly we can calculate the impedance seen by the remote relay RY1. The value
obtained is,
23079∠ − 3.76°
Z RY _ AN =
1864.3∠ − 80.82° + 1864.3∠ − 80.82° × 0.6686∠ − 7.49°
= 7.4345∠780.06°Ω

PEARLet #1
The actual impedance that should have been measured by RY1 is,
ZRY_AN act = 0.4 ∠80° x 100 x 0.2 = 8 ∠80° Ω
And here we see that the relay RY1 over-reaches and will surely operate in zone 1.
The characteristics of both end relays, the measured and actual impedances are
shown in figure 7.2.
X End Relay Y End Relay
50 Measured50Impedance
Actual Impedance
40 40
jX jX
30 30
20 20
10 10
0 0
R R
-10 -10
-10 0 10 20 -10 0 10 20
Fig. 7.2: Actual and measured fault impedances due to zero sequence mutual
induction
If a permissive over-reach transfer trip scheme was used (where zone 2 start
element is used to send carrier), both end relays would trip instantaneously.
If the relays RX1 and RY1 were provided with mutual compensation, then it would
have been fed with the parallel line neutral current also. The parallel line mutual
current at both ends are calculated from the fault calculation as,
Parallel line neutral current at end X is, IPXN = 329.22 ∠ -79.64° A
Parallel line neutral current at end Y is, IPXN = 329.22 ∠ 100.36° A
Now the impedance measured by the relay RX1, which is provided with zero sequence
mutual compensation would be,

PEARLet #1
V RXA
Z RX _ AN =
I RXA + I RXN × K + I PXN × K M
Where,
ZM0
KM = = 0.6667∠ − 5°
3 × Z1
53782∠ − 3.45°
Z RX _ AN =
877.55∠ − 80.82° + 877.55∠ − 80.82° × 0.6686∠ − 7.49° + 0.6667∠ − 5° × 329.22∠ − 79.62°
= 32∠80°Ω
Similarly the impedance measured by the compensated relay RY1 is,
23079∠ − 3.76°
Z RY _ AN =
1864.3∠ − 80.82° + 1864.3∠ − 80.82° × 0.6686∠ − 7.49°0.6667∠ − 5° × 329.22∠100.36°
= 8∠80°Ω
Figure 7.3 below shows the correct impedance measured by the compensated relays.
X End Relay Y End Relay
50 Measured50Impedance
Actual Impedance
40 40
jX jX
30 30
20 20
10 10
0 0
R R
-10 -10
-10 0 10 20 -10 0 10 20
Fig. 7.3: Actual and measured fault impedances by zero sequence mutual
compensated relays

PEARLet #1
These measured impedances are exactly equal to the actual fault impedances. Thus
it is clear that relays provided with dynamic zero sequence mutual compensation (by
measuring the parallel line current) will measure the correct fault impedance.
Example 2:
In this example I will illustrate how a zero sequence mutual compensated relay can
potentially mal-operate for close-up faults on the parallel line. I will use the same
system given in figure 7.1 and consider a “A” phase to ground fault at 5% of the
parallel line from Bus X.
The fault voltage and currents measured by relay RX1 is given as,
VRXA = 10.898 ∠ -4.91° kV

IRXA = 546.71 ∠ 99.89°A Î Leading fault current angle indicates fault is in
the reverse direction
IRXN = 546.71 ∠99.89°A
The neutral current on the parallel line (which is given to the relay RX1 for mutual
compensation) is calculated as,
IPXN =2337 ∠-81.34° A
The impedance seen by the “A” phase to neutral element of relay RX1 (with zero
sequence mutual compensation) can be calculated as,
V RXA
Z RX _ AN =
10898∠ − 4.91°
=
546.71∠99.81° + 546.71∠99.81° × 0.6686∠ − 7.49° + 0.6667∠ − 5° × 2337∠ − 81.34°
= 16.74∠85.95°Ω
From the value of impedance measured we can see that relay RX1 will operate in
zone 1. Figure 7.4 shows the actual and measured impedance seen by the relay RX1
for this case.
This illustrates the point we discussed in section 6.3 of mal-operation with un-
monitored zero sequence mutual compensation. As we discussed in that section if we
control the compensation based on the ratio of the parallel to own zero sequence
current then in this case zero sequence compensation would not have been done
(since IPXN/RRXN = 2337/546.71 = 4.27 > 1.5).
Without zero sequence mutual compensation, the relay RX1 would have seen the fault
as a reverse fault as is shown in the calculation below.

PEARLet #1
V RXA
Z RX _ AN =
10898∠ − 4.91°
=
546.71∠99.81° + 546.71∠99.81° × 0.6686∠ − 7.49°
= 11.971∠ - 101.80°Ω
X End Relay
jX
Measured Impedance
35
Actual Impedance
30
25
20
15
10
0
R
-20 -15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25
Fig. 7.4: Relay seeing a reverse fault on the parallel line as a forward fault
Example 3:
This example is used to illustrate the effect of zero sequence mutual induction and its
compensation when the parallel line runs only for a part of the total line length. We
will use the system shown in figure 7.5 to illustrate this case. The values of system
parameters are same as that given in example 1. The only difference is that the
parallel line runs only to a distance d1 on the same tower.
The impedance between bus Y and Z will decide the amount of fault current flowing
in the parallel line.
We will consider a single phase to ground fault at bus Y with d=100km, d1= 50km.
Also we will consider that the sum of impedances ZXZ+ZZY = 5*ZXY.

PEARLet #1
Fig. 7.5: Two ended double circuit line with parallel line only for a fraction of the
protected line length
The fault current and voltage at relay R location can be calculated as,
VRXA = 60.102 ∠ -2.80° kV

IRXA = 867.636 ∠ -79.73°A
IRXN = 867.636 ∠ -79.73°A
The neutral current flowing in the parallel line is,
IPXN = 173.527 ∠-79.73° A
The impedance seen by the “A” phase to neutral element of relay RX1 (without zero
sequence mutual compensation) can be calculated as,
V RXA
Z RX _ AN =
I RXA + I RXN × K
60102∠ − 2.8°
=
867.636∠ − 79.73° + 867.636∠ − 79.73° × 0.6686∠ − 7.49°
= 41.60∠79.92°Ω
The fault is at bus Y, which means the actual impedance should have been 40Ω. Thus
the relay will under-reach in this case.
Providing zero sequence mutual compensation would help in this case, however the
mutual compensation factor KM has to be set considering the fact that the parallel
line only runs on the same tower for a part of the protected line. Thus in this case
the KM setting should be,

PEARLet #1
d1 Z M 0
KM = × = 0.3334∠ − 5°
d 3 × Z1
The measured and actual impedance in the impedance plane and the relays zone 1
characteristics is shown in figure 7.6.
X End Relay
60 Measured Impedance
Actual Impedance
jX
50
40
30
20
10
R
0
-20 -10 0 10 20 30 40 50
Fig. 7.6: Relay under reaching due to mutual induction from parallel line which runs
on the same tower for 50% of the line.
Now if we calculate the impedance measured by the relay provided with zero
sequence mutual compensation with the above KM we get,
V RXA
Z RX _ AN =
60102∠ − 2.8°
=
867.636∠ − 79.73° + 867.636∠ − 79.73° × 0.6686∠ − 7.49° + 0.3334∠ − 5° × 173.527∠ − 79.33°
= 40∠80°Ω
Figure 7.7 shows the measured and actual impedance when the relay is provided
with the zero sequence mutual compensation with the corrected KM.

PEARLet #1
X End Relay
60 Measured Impedance
Actual Impedance
jX
50
40
30
20
10
R
0
-20 -10 0 10 20 30 40 50
Fig. 7.7: Correctly compensated relay measuring correct impedance.
This example illustrates the point that even if the parallel line runs only for a part of
the total line on the same tower, still it can induce voltage to cause error in the
measurement of the protected line relay. The amount of error would depend on the
magnitude of neutral current and the distance for which the lines run parallel. Also
when the compensation is provided, KM should be set to a fraction corresponding to
the distance for which the lines form a double circuit.
8.0 Summarizing the analysis

The analysis and discussions in this PEARLet elucidates the effect of zero sequence
mutual induction on the performance of distance relays on a double circuit line.
Different system conditions are discussed and their effects are analyzed. The
following can be summarized from this discussion.
a) Zero sequence mutual induction cause the distance relays to under-reach or

over-reach.
b) Under-reaching or over-reaching would depend on the direction of zero
sequence current flow in the parallel line.
c) The amount of error would depend on the zero sequence mutual impedance,
the amount of neutral current in the parallel line and the distance for which the
lines run parallel on the same tower
d) Different solutions are available with their own limitations as tabulated below

PEARLet #1
Solution Caution
Do the correction for the mutual This assumes that the zero sequence
induction by changing the earth fault currents in the protected and parallel
compensation. lines are equal. This will only be true
when the two lines are identical and
run parallel for the entire length and
with the faults at the remote bus or
beyond. Can cause severe problems
when the neutral current in the
parallel line is in the opposite
direction.
Î Not a recommended solution and

very rarely used.
Allowing the POR transfer trip scheme Can overreach for faults on the
to take care remote bus. The worst case is when
the parallel line is out of service and
grounded at both ends
Î Can be taken care by reducing the

zone 1 setting by an error factor
(refer equation 14 in section 5.2).
Multiple setting groups of numerical
relays can be used to set this in a
different group and enable it using
the parallel line earth switch
Dynamic compensation by measuring Works well for almost all applications
the parallel line current even when the parallel line runs only
for a part of the protected line. But
has a potential to mal-operate for
close-up faults on the parallel line.
Î Overcome by controlling the

mutual compensation based on the
ratio of parallel line neutral current to
the protected line neutral current.
Typically when the ratio is greater
than 1.5, compensation is disabled.
The most widely used solution for this globally, is to not provide zero sequence
mutual compensation for distance protection and to allow the POR scheme to provide
instantaneous protection to the entire line length. To take care of the over-reaching
problem when the parallel line is grounded, the zone 1 setting is reduced in a
different setting group and switched by the parallel line earth switch auxiliary
contact.
However for fault location where accuracy of measured impedance is important for
the entire line length (unlike the distance protection where the concern of accuracy is
at the boundary of the zones), it is recommended to provide a dynamic zero

PEARLet #1
sequence mutual compensation by providing the parallel line neutral current also as
input to the device.
9.0 References
[1] Paul M. Anderson, “Analysis of Faulted Power Systems”, A John Wiley & Sons,
Inc., Publication, 1995.
[2] ALSTOM, “Network Protection & Automation Guide”, 2002.
[3] AREVA, “MiCOM P443 – Application Guide”

Pear Let 1

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originalbeschreibung:

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Pear Let 1

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Zero Sequence Mutual Induction in Double

Circuit Lines & Its Effect on Distance

Author: Pradeep Kumar Gangadharan

EEnnggiinneeeerreedd ttoo IInnnnoovvaattee

1.0 INTRODUCTION ...............................................................................................................................................4

©2006 Protection Engineering And Research Laboratories 3 Of 39

2.0 Zero sequence mutual induction and Distance relays

2.1. Cause of zero sequence mutual induction

Symmetrical component analysis is a very useful tool to analyze

©2006 Protection Engineering And Research Laboratories 4 Of 39

2.2. Effect on distance relays

> Type of fault

The voltage measured by the distance relay will now include,

3.0 Definition of terms:

Distance relay: The distance relay whose measurement accuracy is being

©2006 Protection Engineering And Research Laboratories 5 Of 39

Protected line: Transmission line which the distance relay whose

4.0 Review of mutual induction fundamentals

Fig. 4.1: Direction of current flow and resultant magnetic field

When a secondary conductor is placed in this alternating magnetic field of the

©2006 Protection Engineering And Research Laboratories 6 Of 39

The induced emf in a coil of N loops produced by a change in flux in a

Effect opposes the cause

©2006 Protection Engineering And Research Laboratories 7 Of 39

©2006 Protection Engineering And Research Laboratories 8 Of 39

From this discussion it is clear that voltage would be induced in a secondary

5.0 Analysis of the effect of mutual induction on impedance

©2006 Protection Engineering And Research Laboratories 9 Of 39

Fig. 5.2: Sequence equivalent circuit of the system shown in figure1

Expn - Phase to neutral system source voltage

©2006 Protection Engineering And Research Laboratories 10 Of 39

5.1. Parallel line in service and fault at remote bus Y

©2006 Protection Engineering And Research Laboratories 11 Of 39

ZAN – “A” phase to neutral fault impedance.

©2006 Protection Engineering And Research Laboratories 12 Of 39

©2006 Protection Engineering And Research Laboratories 13 Of 39

The actual fault impedance is,

In this case the relay will under-reach by a factor of,

- The mutual compensation factor KM

©2006 Protection Engineering And Research Laboratories 14 Of 39

©2006 Protection Engineering And Research Laboratories 15 Of 39

©2006 Protection Engineering And Research Laboratories 16 Of 39

The measured “AN” impedance now becomes,

©2006 Protection Engineering And Research Laboratories 17 Of 39

5.3. Parallel line in service, with current flow in the opposite

©2006 Protection Engineering And Research Laboratories 18 Of 39

The measured “AN” impedance in this case can be written as,

©2006 Protection Engineering And Research Laboratories 19 Of 39

- The mutual compensation factor KM

5.4. Parallel line is looped-in-looped-out

©2006 Protection Engineering And Research Laboratories 20 Of 39

©2006 Protection Engineering And Research Laboratories 21 Of 39

©2006 Protection Engineering And Research Laboratories 22 Of 39

©2006 Protection Engineering And Research Laboratories 23 Of 39

V RAN = Z1 XY 1 × I RA + I R 0 × ( Z1 XY 0 − Z1 XY 1 ) + I PXT 0 × a1Z M 0 + I PTY 0 × a 2 Z M 0

©2006 Protection Engineering And Research Laboratories 24 Of 39

- The mutual compensation factor KM

The over-reach factor will be identical to that given in equation 20.

©2006 Protection Engineering And Research Laboratories 25 Of 39

The measured impedance in this case would be

6.0 Various solutions and their limitations

6.1. Carrier aided schemes based solution

©2006 Protection Engineering And Research Laboratories 26 Of 39