924

IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery, Vol. 11, No. 2, April 1996

POWER QUALITY ASSESSMENT VIA WAVELET TRANSFORM ANALYSIS

Surya Santoso (Student Member), Edward J. Powers (Fellow) and W. Mack Grady Senior Member) Department of Electrical and omputer Engineering The University of Texas at Austin Austin, Texas 78712-1084

Peter Hofmann (Member) Consolidated Edison Company New York, NY 10017

Abstract In this paper we present a new approach to detect, localize, and investigate the feasibility of classifying various types of power quality disturbances. The approach is based on wavelet transform analysis, p a r t i c d d y the dyadic-orthonormal wavelet transform. The key idea underlying the approach is to decompose a given disturbance signal into other signals which represent a smoothed version and a detailed version of the original signal. The decomposition is performed using multiresolution signal d e composition techniques. We demonstrate and test our prcposed technique to detect and localize disturbances with actual power line disturbances. In order to enhance the detection outcomes, we utilize the squared wavelet transform coefficients of the analyzed power line signal. Based on the results of the detection and localization, we carry out an initial investigation of the ability to uniquely characterize various types of power quality disturbances. This investigation is based on characterizing the uniqueness of the squared wavelet transform coefficients for each power quality disturbance. Keywords Power quality disturbances, wavelet transform analysis, multiresolution signal decomposition, uniqueness search.

1. I N T R O D U C T I O N

In recent years, concern over the quality of electric power has been increasing rapidly since poor electric power quality causes many problems for the affected loads, such as malfunctions, instabilities, short life time and so on. Poor quality of electric power is normally caused by power line disturbances such as impulses, notches, glitches, momentary interruptions, wavefaults, overvoltages, undervoltages, and harmonic distortion. In order to improve electric power quality, the sources and causes of such disturbances must be known before appropriate mitigating action can be taken. However, in order to determine the causes and sources of disturbances, one must have the capability to detect and localize those disturbances and further idenCify (classify) the types of disturbances. Manual procedurm

have been developed for this purpose; however, due to the large amount of effort required, such procedures are costly and inefficient. In the commercial market, the current state of the art with respect to detecting power quality disturbances is based on a point-to-point comparison of adjacent cycles [l]. The drawback of this approach is that it fails to detect disturbances that appear periodically such as flat-top and phase controlled load waveshape disturbances. Another approach to detect and identify disturbances is based on neural networks [2]. This approach seems appropriate in detecting and identifying a particular type of disturbance; however, due to its intrinsic nature, a specific neural network architecture is required to detect a particular type of disturbance. Therefore, this neural network will, in general, not be appropriate for detecting and identifying other types of disturbances. The use of continuous, wavelet transforms to analyze nonstationary harmonic distortions in power system has been envisaged in [3], although no results were presented. In this paper, we propose to utilize a dyadic-orthonormal wavelet transform analysis to detect and localize various types of power quality disturbances, including harmonic distortion [4]. The key idea underlying this approach is to decompose a given disturbance signal into other signals which represent a smoothed version and a detailed version of the original signal. Our preliminary results using simulated power line disturbances were published in [4]. In this paper, we apply our proposed techniques to the detection and localization of actual power quality disturbances measured by power line monitoring devices. The proposed technique appears to be robust for detection and localiz& tion purposes. We also investigate the uniqueness of the squared wavelet transform coefficients that will ultimately lead to an automatic scheme for classifying various types of power quality disturbances.
2.

WAVELET T R A N S F O R M ANALYSIS

95 SM 371-5 PWRD A paper recommended and approved by the IEEE Transmission and Distribution Committee of the IEEE Power Engineering Society for presentation at the 1995 IEEE/PES Summer Meeting, July 23-27, 1994, Portland, OR. Manuscript submitted December 29, 1994; made available for printing May 11, 1995.

The wavelet transform is a mathematical tool, much like a Fourier transform in analyzing a stationary signal, that decomposes a signal into different scales with different levels of resolution by dilating a single prototype function. The decomposition into scales is made possible by the fact that the wavelet transform is based on a square-integrable function and group theory representation. Furthermore, unlike

0885-8977~6/$05.00 1995 IEEE 0

925
the Fourier transform which gives a global representation of a signal, the wavelet transform, on the other hand, provides a local representation (in both time and frequency) of a given signal; therefore, it is suitable for analyzing a signal where time-frequency resolution is needed such as disturbance transition events in power quality. A mathematical definition follows. Let z(t) be a signal defined in L 2 ( R ) space, which denotes a vector space for finite energy signals. R is a real continuous number system. Such signals satisfy

Figure 1. Decomposition of co(n) into 2 scales Multiresolution Signal Decomposition and its Implementat ion The multiresolution signal decomposition (MSD) technique decomposes a given signal z ( t ) into its detailed and smoothed versions. In power quality disturbance signals, many disturbances contain sharp edges, transitions, and jumps. By using the MSD technique, the power quality (PQ) disturbance signal is decomposed into two other signals; one is the smoothed version of the PQ disturbance signal, and the other is the detailed version of the PQ disturbance signal that contains the sharp edges, transitions, and jumps. Therefore, the MSD technique discriminates disturbances from the original signal, and then analyses them separately. We will be precise in applying the MSD technique; however, we will not attempt to provide a rigorous mathematical description on the technique. A complete treatment of MSD theory can be found in [5, 61. Here, we briefly present the key ideas of the MSD theory and its implementation in the context of power quality disturbance detection. Let co(n) be a discrete-time signal recorded from a physical measuring device. This signal is to be decomposed into a detailed and smoothed representation. From the MSD technique, the decomposed signals at scale 1 are c l ( n ) and dl(n), where c1(n) is the smoothed version of the original signal, and &(n) is the detailed representation of the original signal co(n) in the form of wavelet transform coefficients. They are defined as

sp,

21 ..

Iz(t)12dt < 00.

(1)

The wavelet transform of z(t) is then defined as

J-00

where
+a&)

= lal-1'2+(--).

t-b

'

(3)

$(t)is the base function or the mother wavelet, the asterisk denotes a complex conjugate, and a, b E R,a # 0, are the
dilation and translation parameters, respectively. It should be pointed out that only those functions that have a zero net area can be used as a mother wavelet. This suggests that the transformation kernel of the wavelet transform is a compactly supported function (localized in time), thereby offering the potential to capture power quality disturbance transitions which normally occur in a short period of time. Since the transformation is achieved by dilating and translating the mother wavelet continuously over R, it generates substantial redundant information. Therefore, instead of continuous dilation and translation, the mother wavelet maybe dilated and translated discretely by selecting a = UT and b = nboa?, where a0 and bo are fixed constants with a0 > 1, bo > 0, m,n E 2, and 2 is the set of positive integers. Then, the discretized mother wavelet becomes
+m,n(t) = a;"'2+(

t - nboa?
ar

1,

(4)
c1(n) = C h ( k - 2n)co(k)
k

and the corresponding discrete wavelet transform is given b Y

DWT+z(m, = 4

where $ ~ ~ , is given in ( ) ~(t) 4. By careful selection of a0 and bo, the family of dilated mother wavelets constitutes an orthonormal basis of L2(R). An orthonormal basis is a basis that consists of a set of vectors S such that U . v = 0 for each distinct pair of u,v E S. The simplest choice of a0 and bo are ao = 2 and bo = 1. With this, the wavelet transform is called a dyadic-orthonormal wavelet transform. There are several implications of the orthonormal basis. The first is that there will be no information redundancy among the decomposed signals due to the orthonormal properties. The second is that with this choice of a0 and bo there exists an elegant algorithm, which is known as the multiresolution signal decomposition technique, to decompose a signal into scales with different time and frequency resolution.

sp,

4t)+&,n(t)dt,

(5)

(7)
where h(n) and g(n) are the associated filter coefficients ) that decompose ~ ( ninto cl(n) and d i ( n ) , respectively. The next higher scale decomposition is now based on the signal cl(n). The decomposed signal at scale 2 is given by
cz(n) = C
L

h ( k - 2n)c1(k)

(8)

(9) Higher scale decompositions are performed in the same way as described above. The implementation of the MSD technique is best described by Fig 1.

926
3.

DETECTION AND LOCALIZATION OF POWER QUALITY DISTURBANCES

0 10

In this section we apply the multiresolution signal decomposition technique to localize and discriminate a disturbance from its background signal. We also provide physical insight into the detection processes. into Figure 1 shows the decomposition of signal ~ ( n ) cl(n) and &(n) using filters h(n) and g ( n ) , respectively. These filters determine the wavelet used to analyze the signal co(n). If one chooses filters h(n) and g ( n ) with four coefficients as tabulated in [6], then one will use the socalled Daubechies wavelet with four filter coefficients (or Daub4 for the sake of brevity). Filters h(n) and g ( n ) form a family of scaling 4(t)and wavelet $(t) functions, so that

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

-200 O

10

20 I 30

40

50r

60

70

* 80

90

100 I

0
n

(4
I I O I I I I I

-20

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Other choices of filter coefficients are possible such as ones with 6,8,10, etc, coefficients, and with such choices the analyzing wavelets are called Daub6, Daub8, and DaublO, etc, respectively. The choice of the analyzing wavelet will be discussed in the next section. After the signal co(n) is filtered by h(n) and g ( n ) , it is then decimated by a factor of two according to (6) and (7), respectively. The resulting signal from h(n)is cl(n), a smoothed version of the original signal ~ ( n ) because filter h(n)has a low pass frequency response. Concerning signal d l ( n ) , one can think of it as the difference between the origand inal signal ~ ( n ) the smoothed signal cl(n). In other words, signal &(n) contains the details that have been removed from signal c1(n).Signal dl (n)is called the wavelet transform coefficient at scale one. The time resolutions of c1 ( n )and dl (n)are now half that due of ~ ( n ) to the decimation by a factor of two. As a result, if co(n) has N sample points for the entire observation time, then signals cl(n) and &(n) will have N / 2 sampling points for the same observation period. The localization (in time) of disturbances is fairly straightforward because it employs only filtering and decimation by a factor of two. This straightforwardness is due to the nature of the orthonormal wavelet transforms and is highly desirable from a practical point of view. Underlying this straightforward process, one should keep in mind that the physical understanding of the detection and localization described in (6) and (7) is given by f(t)4l,n(t)dt = -.L

time (msec)

Figure 2. Disturbances localization using the MSD technique. (a) The original voltage disturbance signal co(n). (b) The signal d l ( n ) , the detailed version of co(n). (c) The signal c ~ ( n ) , the smoothed version of ~ ( n ) . The signal & ( n ) the de(d) , tailed version of c1(n). (e) The signal cz(n), the smoothed version of c1(n).
f ( t ) in (14) can be thought of as a dummy signal generated by a linear combination of co(n) with the scaling function at scale zero. Therefore, any disturbances in co(n) will appear in f ( t ) as well. Substituting (10) and (11) into (12) and (13), respectively, yields

S .\/z
n

CO

f ( t ) d ( ; - n ) d t (12)

--oc)

where

(13)

From (15), it is understood that c,(n) is simply a smoothed version of the original signal CO, since h(n) has a low pass fr-equency response. From (16), d l (n)contains only higher frequency components of the signal CO because g ( n ) has a band pass filter response. In practice, the construction of f(t) is not necessary, but it is useful in understanding the physics of the detection and localization process as indicated in (12) and (13). Figure 2a shows a recorded power line voltage from a monitoring device. The original signal co(n) is then decomposed into its detailed version d l ( n ) signal (Fig. 2b) and its smoothed version c1( n )(Fig. 2c). The detailed signal dl ( n ) clearly indicates the occurrence of the disturbance event. Further, signal c1 (n)is decomposed into its detailed version &(n) (Fig. 2d), and its smoothed version cp(n) (Fig. 2e).

927
The disturbance waveform Dec.15, 1994 at 09:06:47 Local Time

'""0 5 0
-5
Figure 3. Daubechies' wavelets with (a) 4 filter coefficients and (b) 6 filter coefficients.

10
I

20
I

30
I

40
I

50
I

60
I

70
I

EO
I

90
I

1M)

10
I

20
I

30
I

40
I

50
I

60
I

70
I

EO
I

90
I

100

101

Both Figs. 2b and 2d indicate the disturbance information. Note that signal c l ( n ) is a smoothed version of co(n), and likewise signal c2 (n) is a smoothed version of c1 (n). Higher scale decomposition is performed by following similar procedures.

201

4.

CHOICE OF ANALYZING WAVELETS

-20'

10

'

20

30

40

'

50

60

70

EO

90

"

100

As mentioned earlier, the choice of analyzing wavelets plays a significant role in detecting and localizing various types
of power quality disturbances. This is especially true when considering one- or two-scale signal decompositions. As presented in [4], for short and fast transient disturbances, Daub4 and Daub6 wavelets are better, while for slow transient disturbances, Daub8 and Daub10 are particularly good. However, the selection of an appropriate mother wavelet without knowing types of transient disturbances (which is always the case) is a formidable task. Therefore, instead of creating algorithms to select appropriate wavelets (which surely adds complexity to the main problem), we utilize one type of mother wavelet in the whole course of detection and localization for all types of disturbances. In doing so, higher scale signal decomposition is needed, i.e, four-scale signal decomposition. At the lowest scale, that is scale 1, the mother wavelet is most localized in time and oscillates most rapdily within a very short period of time. As the wavelet goes to higher scales, the analyzing wavelets become less localized in time and oscillate less due to the dilation nature of the wavelet transform analysis. As a result of higher scale signal decomposition, fast and short transient disturbances will be detected at lower scales, whereas slow and long transient disturbances will be detected at higher scales. Hence, we can detect both fast and slow transients with a single type of analyzing wavelet. The wavelet transforms are performed by dilating (expanding) a mother wavelet in the course of analysis, rather than by contracting the mother wavelet. Therefore, we choose Daub4 (Daub6 is a good candidate as well) because it is the most localized, i.e. compactly supported, in time. Daub4 and Daub6 wavelets are shown in Fig 3. The utility of the Daub4 as a mother wavelet in power quality assessment is demonstrated in the next section.

10

20

30

40

50

60

time (msec)

70

80

90

100

Figure 4. Wavefault disturbance detection using D a u M . (a). T h e voltage disturbance signal. (b), (c), (d), and (e). T h e W T C s a t scales 1, 2, 3, and 4, respectively.

5.

RESULTS

In this section, we apply and test the proposed detection and localization technique presented earlier using actual PQ disturbances. These disturbances were recorded at two different locations within a high-rise commercial building

in Manhattan, NY. The significant disturbances that were recorded over the two month period are presented in this paper. One of the events has already been presented in Fig. 2a. Wavefault disturbance recorded on December 15, 1993 at 09:06:47 Local Time Figure 4a shows a time-series of wavefault disturbances. Figures 4b, c, d, and e show the wavelet transform coefficients (WTCs) at scales m = 1, 2, 3, and 4, respectively, analyzed using the Daub4 wavelet. From Figs. 4b to e, we observe that many WTCs have small values compared to the absolute highest value at each corresponding scale, and there are only a few WTCs with relatively high values. Specifically, in Fig. 4b, there are only very few WTCs with high values, while the rest have very small and random values. Those WTCs with high values indicate the disturbance events, while those small and random WTCs indicate that the disturbance signal contains electrical noise. In other words, the disturbance contains not only power quality disturbances but also electrical noise. If the disturbance signal contains only power quality disturbances (in this case of the wavefault disturbance) and is otherwise noise-free, the WTCs have high values (which indicate the disturbance events) and small but regular patterns (because the disturbance signal minus the disturbance itself has a regular pattern) [4]. However, the detection results presented in Figs. 4b to e are, by and large, not easy to observe due to the presence of noise. Therefore, in order to enhance the detection outcomes, we utilized the squared WTCs at each scale. Figure 5a shows the same disturbance signal as in Fig. 4a. Fig-

928
The disturbance waveform Dec.15, 1994 at 09:06:47 Local Time The disturbance waveform Dec. 23. 1993 at 10:07:40 Local Time

-'"U

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100
(W

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100
(b)

0 0 401
20 -

10
I

20
I

30
I

40
I

50
I

60
I

70
I

80
I

90
I

100
I
-

0 0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

(d

2001

"0 40001

10
I

20
I

30
I

40
I

50
I

60
I

70
I

80
I

90
I

100
1

100 0 2000
1000-

"
n

10
I

20
I

30
I

40
I

50
/

60
I

70
I

80
I

90
I

100
- (e)

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0 '

10

20

30

4?ime51msJj,

70

80

90

100

Figure 5 . Wavefault disturbance detection using Daub4. (a) The voltage disturbance signal. (b), (c), (d), and (e) The squared WTCs at scales 1 2, 3, and 4, respectively. ,

Figure 6 . Wavefault disturbance detection using Daub4. (a) The voltage disturbance signal. (b), (c), (d), and (e) The squared WTCs a t scales 1 2, 3, and 4, respectively. ,

ures 5b to e show the squared WTCs at each scale. These spikes are now much easier to distinguish from the background, making disturbances easier to recognize. Now, let us discuss the detection results. From Fig. 5a, we see that sharp wavefault disturbances occur in the vicinity of 31 and 49 msec. In the time intervals around 32-40, 50-57, 65-72, and 83-90 msec, the wavefault disturbances are mild (i.e., not as drastic as the first two events mentioned earlier). The squared WTC (SWTCs) at scale 1 show the occurrence of "sharp" events of wavefault disturbances. This is because at scale 1, the analyzing wavelet is most localized, and therefore the wavelet transform picks the disturbances that have the most severe or the most rapid transitions. On the other hand, the SWTCs at scales 2, 3, and 4 show mild wavefault disturbances. Note that each spike of the SWTCs corresponds to some disturbance event in the signal. Wavefault disturbance recorded on December 23, 1993 at 10:07:40 Local Time Figure 6a shows a disturbance waveform that has a very rapid oscillation disturbance (high frequency) before time 30 msec, and is followed by a slow oscillation disturbance (low frequency) after time 30 msec. The SWTCs at scales 1, 2 and 3 catch these rapid oscillations, while scale 4 catches the slow oscillating disturbance which occurred after time 30 msec. Note that the high SWTCs persist at the same temporal location over scales 1, 2, and 3. Wavefault disturbance recorded on February 2, 1994 at 10:32:43 Local Time The disturbances shown in Fig. 7a contain one rapid fault and one slow fault at times 21 and 80 msec, respectively.

The rapid fault is detected at scales 1 through 3, although the disturbance lasts only for approximately a hundredth of a millisecond. This shows that the wavelet transform analysis is a robust disturbance detector. The spike at scale 4e indicates the disturbance due to a slow fault near time 80 msec. Note also that the relatively high SWTCs persist for over the first three scales at the same temporal location, and there is no adjacent high SWTC values at each scale as in the SWTCs of the previous disturbance case shown in Figs. 4b, c, and d. Impulse disturbance recorded on December 18, 1993 at 23:09:07 Local Time The disturbance shown in Fig.8a is an impulse disturbance type caused by the notching of a DC elevator motor drive. Figures 8b to e show detection results of the impulse disturbance events. The events are detected across all scales. From the disturbance signal in Fig. 8a, it is clear that impulse disturbances appear almost periodic. The detection result at scale 1 shows that the disturbances indeed occur almost periodically. At this scale, there are several high value SWTCs, and many more smaller SWTCs. Those with higher SWTC values indicate that the impulses occur faster or have more sudden jumps compared to those with lower SWTC values. This is because the analyzing wavelet at scale 1 is the most localized. Therefore, it matches the "most localized impulse". At scale 2, we observe that there are also several high SWTCs and many low value SWTCs. Those with high value SWTCs at this scale have relatively small values at scale 1. This is because the analyzing wavelet is wider than that of scale 1, therefore the impulses that have approxi-

929
The disturbance waveform Feb. 2, 1994 at 10:32:43 Local Time The disturbancewaveform Dec. 18, 1993 at 23:09:07 Local Time

0 50001

'LWW

10
I

20
I

30
I

40
I

50
I

60
I

70
I

80
I

90

100

I 1

I
100
1 (c)

"0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

"0
10000
5

10

20
0

30

40
0

50

60

70
0

80

90

"0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0'
10000

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100
(d)

5000
0 '
10 20
30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0 0
10000

10
I

20
I

30
I

40
I

50
I

60
I

70
I

80
I

90
I

100

5000 -

0 0
Figure 7. Wavefault disturbance detection using Daub4. (a) T h e voltage disturbance signal. (b), (c), (d), and (e) T h e squared W T C s a t scales 1, 2, 3, and 4,respectively.

10

h,
20

30

4Iime f&secfO

70

80

90

100

Figure 8. Wavefault disturbance detection using Daub4. (a) T h e voltage disturbance signal. (b), (c), (d), and (e) T h e squared W T C s a t scales 1, 2, 3, and 4,respectively.

mately the same width as the analyzing wavelet have higher values. We also observe that there are several SWTCs that persist at the same temporal position over two or more scales, for example near 26 msec at scales 3, 4, and 5. This is because the disturbance is impulse-like. If this disturbance is to be detected using point-to-point comparison, it may not be detected as well, because the disturbances appear almost periodically. The results presented here are not the only types of disturbances that can be detected. Many other types such as momentary interruptions, sags, and surges, can be detected and localized using the proposed method. 6.

UNIQUENESS SEARCH: PREPARATION FOR PQ DISTURBANCE CLASSIFICATION

In power engineering, problems of power quality are not limited only to detection and localization of disturbances. Far more important is the ability to classify various types of PQ disturbances as well. At this moment, few, if any, publications have proposed methods to automatically classify a broad range of PQ disturbances. In this section, we illustrate the potential use of wavelet transform analysis as a tool for classifying PQ disturbances. The key idea in using wavelet transform analysis for classifying PQ disturbances is based on the uniqueness of the WTCs for each disturbance signal. However, since most power line signals contain electrical noise, the search for uniqueness of each PQ disturbance is based on the squared wavelet transform coefficients at each scale. After the

uniqueness of each PQ disturbances is found, then an a p propriate classification tool (e.g., neural networks) can be employed for classification purposes. In this section we will present initial results concerning the uniqueness issue only. Appropriate classification methodologies are currently under consideration. Now, let us make a comparison of the SWTCs of the disturbance signals presented in Fig. 5a, Fig. 6a, Fig. 7a, and Fig. 8a in order to search for uniqueness. The SWTCs of the disturbance signal presented at Fig. 5a have the following features. At scale 1,the highest SWTCs are approximately 10 units, and there are only two high SWTCs values. In scales 2 and 3, there are several high values of SWTCs immediately following the temporal locations of the higher values of SWTCs at scale 1. The SWTCs for disturbances presented at Fig. 6a have the following properties: at scale 1,there are two adjacent high value SWTCs (in the range of hundreds units); likewise for scale 2 and for scale 3, but with a different range of magnitudes. These high SWTCs persist at the same temporal location for 3 scales. Comparing these values of SWTCs, it is clear that the two disturbances are different. Moreover, the value at each corresponding scale (e.g., compare SWTCs at scale 1 of Fig. 5b and scale 1 of Fig. 6b) also indicates the difference. Now, let us find the uniqueness of the SWTCs from the disturbance shown in Fig. 7a. At scales 1, 2, and 3, there is essentially only one high value SWTC that appears in three consecutive scales at the same temporal location. Moreover, the range of the SWTCs of these scales are different from those of the previous two sets of SWTCs (e.g., compare the ranges of SWTCs in Fig 5b, Fig. 6b, Fig. 7b; Fig 5c,

930
Fig. 6c, Fig. 7c; and Fig 5d, Fig. 6d, Fig. 7d). Finally? for the disturbance signal shown in Fig. 8a, the SWTCs are spread out across scales 1, 2 , and 3, and appear periodically, but also with different ranges of SWTCs values compared to all other disturbances described earlier. Therefore, based on these observations, it appears that uniqueness vectors for each disturbance case can be proposed. Of course, the uniqueness search described above is preliminary, but is presented to illustrate our approach to the classification problem. Currently, rigorous uniqueness searches to find general unique features for each disturbance are being conducted. Upon identifying these features, a wavelet domain power quality disturbance dictionary can be set up to enable classification of each disturbance case.

[3] P. F. Ftibeiro, Wavelet transform: an advanced tool for analyzing non-stationary harmonic distortions in power systems, in Proceedzngs of the IEEE International Conference on Harmonzcs in Power Systems, Bologna, Italy, September 1994.

[4]S. Santoso, E.J. Powers, and W.M. Grady, Electric power quality disturbance detection using wavelet transform analysis, in Proceedings of the IEEE-SP International Symposzum on Tzme-Prequency and TzmeScale Analysis, Philadelphia, PA, Oct. 25-28, 1994, pp. 166-169.

7.

CONCLUSION

[5] S.Mallat, A theory for multiresolution signal decomposition: the wavelet representation, IEEE Trans. on Pattern Anal. and Mach. Intell., vol 11, pp. 674-693, July 1989.
[6] I. Daubechies, Ten Lectures on Wavelets, SIAM, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 1992.
Surya Santoso, (S95) is a research assistant at the University of Texas at Austin. He is working towards his Ph.D in Electrical and Computer Engineering. His current interests are non-stationary signal analysis, orthogonal transforms, time-frequency and time-scale analysis (wavelet transform analysis) with application to power system engineering, turbulence studies in fusion plasmas, and higher order statistical signal processing. Edward J. Powers, (F783),is a professor of Electrical and Computer Engineering, and Director of the Electronics Research Center at the University of Texas at Austin. His primary professional interests involve the innovative application of digital higher-order statistical signal processing in the analysis, interpretation, and modeling of random data characterizing nonliner physical phenomena and systems. W. Mack Grady, (SM83), is a professor of Electrical and Computer Engineering at the University of Texas at Austin. His areas of interest include power system analysis, power system harmonics, power quality, and short term load forecasting. He is the chairman of the IEEE PES General Systems Subcomittee and a registered professional engineer in Texas. Peter Hofmann received his BSME from Newark College of Engineering. Mr. Hofmann manages Con Edisons Manhattan Customer Service Power Quality group. During his eleven years at Con Edison, he has had Distribution Engineering and Operations experience in both overhead and underground network systems.

We have tested and demonstrated the use of wavelet transforms for detecting various power line disturbances. This approach appears to be quite powerful in detecting and localizing various types of power quality disturbances. The basis of a possible disturbance classification scheme, using the squared wavelet transform coefficients, is also described. We are currently conducting extensive work to establish a general uniqueness for each disturbance signal. Our initial studies lead us to believe that wavelet transforms offer great potential as a new tool for automatically classifying power quality disturbances. 8.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

The wavelet analysis techniques utilized in this paper were originally developed under the auspices of the Texas Atomic Energy Research Foundation to study transient phenomena in fusion plasmas. Experimental data were collected by Consolidated Edisun Company, New York, as part of a research project on active power line conditioners sponsored by the Electric Power Research Institute and the Empire State Electric Research Corporation. The project is being conducted by PQES, Inc., San Ramon, CA. The encouragement of Mr. Marek Samotyj, EPRI, and Mr. Tejindar Singh, PQES, is especially appreciated.

REFERENCES
[l] A. McEachern, Handbook of Power Szgnatures. Basic Measuring Instruments, Foster City, CA, 1988.

[2] N. Kandil, V. K. Sood, K. Khorasani, and R. V.Fate1, Fault identification in an AC-DC transmission system using neural networks, IEEE Runs. on Power Systems, vol. 7, no.2, pp. 812-819, May 1992.