Modelling and Simulation of an Adaptive Differential Current

Protection Scheme for a Solar PV Microgrid

C. Louw*; C. Buque; Dr S Chowdhury#

*Electrical Engineering Department, University of Cape Town, South Africa, chrislouw@hotmail.com,

Thermal and Renewable Energy Division, Mott MacDonald, South Africa, claudiobuque@yahoo.com.br,
#
Electrical Engineering Department, University of Cape Town, South Africa, sunetra.chowdhury@uct.ac.za

Keywords: Microgrid, Solar PV Array, Adaptive
Differential Current, Relay Model, Protection Coordination
Abstract
This paper presents modelling and simulation of an adaptive
differential current protection scheme for a solar
photovoltaic microgrid which is capable of operating in both
grid-connected and islanded modes. The microgridtest
model comprises three photovoltaic generators, each
connected to a load. The entire microgrid is connected to the
main utility network through a static switch (SS). The
protection system contains differential relays which monitor
current parameters at specific points within the microgrid to
detect the fault. The settings of the relays are changed
through the relay operating algorithm to suit the current
mode of operation. The relays are effectively coordinated
through a central controller which uses differential current
to detect and isolate faults occurring in various zones.
island mode. Optimal DG sizing techniques have been
developed and can be used to efficiently size the microgrids
[8].
The microgrid network is supplied by three 100kW
photovoltaic arrays designated as PV-DG1 feeding Bus 1,
PV-DG2 feeding Bus 2 and PV-DG3 feeding Bus 3. The PV
array output is controlled depending on the mode of
operation. The PV Arrays voltage is stepped up to 22kV
through a 100kVA 3- phase 2-winding transformer. Authors
in [7] suggest the use of smart PV inverters with active and
reactive power capabilities, to assist in grid code compliance
during operation. These capabilities were included during
the modelling of the PV inverters for this paper.
Utility Grid

1. Introduction
5
The integration of renewable energy generation to existing
SS
power networks started through the use of distributed
generation. Once distributed generation became established R1_2 R1_1 R1_3
4
the concept of microgrids became more appealing. Globally, CB 2 CB 6 CB 10

the installed capacity of photovoltaic systems has increased

at a higher rate than what the development of grid codes was ZONE 1 FEEDER 2 ZONE 1 FEEDER 1 ZONE 1 FEEDER 3
able to cope with [7]. Theincreased popularityis due its
capability of acting in grid-connected mode, in which it can CB 3 CB 7 CB 11
R2_2 1 R2_1 R2_3 3
support the utility or island mode in which the islanded 2

microgrid can support itself. The microgrid concept, with CB 5

ZONE 2 CB 9
ZONE 2 CB 13
ZONE 2
distributed generators, is a great advancement for the power R3_2 R3_1 R3_3
industry but its use is limited due to the dynamic nature of
the current within the microgrid. It is for this reason that CB 4 CB 8 CB 12

special protection schemes are required to ensure safe L2 L1 L3

operation in both modes of operation and to reduce the
possibility of damaging electrical equipment.
2. Microgrid Test System
2.1 Microgrid Model
A model of the 22kV test microgridsimulated in Matlabcan
be seen in Fig. 1. The utility generator produces electrical
power at a voltage of 120kV [1]. This voltage is then
stepped down by a 3-phase 2-winding transformer to the
distribution voltage level of 22kV at Bus 5. The
22kVdistribution voltage from the utility is then supplied to
the microgrid section through three distribution feeders of
varying lengths, with the default Matlab parameters being
used for simulation.
The loads connected to the microgrid network were chosen
to be purely resistive and less than the PV array capacity to
allow for there to be adequate capacity once operating in
1
PV-DG 2 PV-DG 1 PV-DG 3
Fig.1 Schematic Diagram of Microgrid Model
The microgrid network is connected to the utility through
the static switch (SS), between Bus 4 and Bus 5 as shown in
Fig. 1. The microgrid can operate in grid-connected mode if
SS is closed and in island mode if SS is open. The
respective PV arrays each supply the demand required by
the load connected to their own dedicated bus. This scheme
holds for both grid-connected and islanded mode.
Zones of protection are set up along each line within the
microgrid. Protection Zone 1 and Zone 2for all the feeders
are shown in Fig.1. These zones are protected from faults by
coordinating the relays along each line to trip the circuit
breakers (CBs) only within the faulted zone. Relays R1_1,
R2_1 and R3_1 along line 1, as well as all the other relays
along line 2 and line 3, each with their own current
transformerare also shown in Fig.1. The same zones and
relays are applied along each line within the microgrid.
Only 3-phase faults aresimulated within the zones because
they are the most severe and destructive faults that can
occur in a power network.
The grid-connected operation assumes that any excess
capacity produced by the PV arrays is fed back to the utility,
as would be the case for selling back capacity to the utility
or peak-shaving support for the utility. The utility supplies
the extra capacity needed if the PV arrays do not produce
enough capacity to supply the load in grid-connected mode.
This could happen due to insufficient irradiance.
2.2 Protection System Model
Differential current protection is a popular technique
proposed for microgrids and small transmission systems.
The technique uses the principle that under normal
conditions, the same current that enters a feeder will leave
the feeder; hence the differential current (defined as the
difference between the currents entering the feeder and
leaving the same) should be zero. However, this will not be
the case when a fault occurs, and a non-zero differential
current is used to detect a fault condition. Similar protection
systems are used in [2] and [3].
The technique measures the magnitude of the current
between two relays at each end of a feeder. The magnitude
of the currents are measured and subtracted from each other.
The absolute value of the subtracted value is used as an
indicator of a fault condition. The differential current will be
close to or equal to zero if all the current entering the feeder
leaves the feeder. Under fault conditions various sources
contribute to the fault from different paths thus increasing
the absolute value of the differential current to greater than
zero. The level of the differential current must be
predetermined to allow for the proper tripping of circuit
breakers. This is particularly effective in short transmission
lines where the line losses are minimal. The relay reaction
times are ideal for the simulated cases in this paper,
however an additional reaction delay would be included in
practical applications, to prevent tripping from false fault
detection and to comply with the industry standards.
The relay model designed to implement the differential
current protection is shown in Fig .2.
Fig.2 Differential Current Relay Model
2
The relay takes in the 3-phase current from each end of the
feeder. The 3-phase current is then converted into its RMS
value, and then its magnitude extracted. The two
magnitudes are then subtracted and the absolute value of the
subtracted values is then set as the differential current of the
feeder.
The varying levels of fault current and changes in network
configuration, produced during faults in both modes of
operation, as discussed in [4], implies that it is hard to
discriminate the differential current for certain feeders and
areas in the network. The low currents also mean that
opening or closing of circuit breakers could present
differential current whilst there is no fault, therefore it is
important to have efficient relay coordination in place.The
coordination methods presented in this paper are novel and
allow the differential protection system to adapt its settings
according to the modes of operation in microgrids.
2.3 Relay Coordination
In order to coordinate the relays, the level of fault current at
each relay within the microgrid is needed during both
operating modes. This is done by performing a fault study
which involved simulating a 3-phase fault within Zone 1
and Zone 2 along Feeder 1.Once thelevel of fault current at
each relay is obtained, the differential fault current between
each of the relays is calculated for Zone 1 and Zone 2 on
Feeder 1.The differential fault current between each relay is
then used to find a unique differential fault current between
specific relays which only occur when there is a fault in
Zone 1 or a fault in Zone 2 on Feeder 1. This unique
differential fault current between specific relays is then set
as a differential fault current limit within the relays. This
unique limit or condition means relays will now only trip
the faulted zone on Feeder 1, because each zone on Feeder 1
has its own unique differential fault current limit.This
method is developed to ensure the relays would be able to
distinguish between normal operating currents and fault
currents in both operating modes and false tripping would
be avoided. The differential fault current for Zone 1 on
Feeder 1 in both modes of operation is shown below.
Table 1: Differential Current Relay Coordination - Island Mode
RELAY NO FAULT OPERATION FAULT OPERATION
POSITION (A) (A)
R2_1 & R2_2 0.1 1.17
R2_1 & R2_3 0.1 1.17
R2_1 & R1_1 0.2 6
R2_1 & R3_1 2 0
Table 2: Differential Current Relay Coordination Grid-connected Mode
RELAY NO FAULT OPERATION FAULT OPERATION
POSITION (A) (A)
R2_1 & R2_2 0.25 0
R2_1 & R2_3 0.25 0
R2_1 & R1_1 0 6400
R2_1 & R3_1 2 0
Table 1 shows the values of the differential current between
specific relay positions during the simulated fault in Zone 1
on Feeder 1for island mode. The position of Zone 1 fault is
shown in Fig.3. The differential current between relay R2_1
and all the other relay positions is the difference between
the fault current contributions leaving each of the PV-DGs.
The fault current contribution of PV-DG2 and PV-DG3 is
greater than PV-DG1 because their loads are smaller. The
significant or uniquedifferential current, in island mode, is
the one between relaysR2_1 and R1_1. This indicates that a
fault is occurring between those two relays. The flow of
fault current for this case can be seen in Fig. 3below.
5
SS = OPEN
R1_1
4 differentiated with the current through R1_1. In this specific
CB 6
ZONE 1 FEEDER 1
FAULT
CB 7
1 R2_1 2 3
CB 9
ZONE 2
R3_1
CB 8
L2 L1 L3
PV-DG 2 PV-DG 1 PV-DG 3
Fig. 3 Fault Current flow for a Zone 1 fault in island mode
Fig. 3 clearly shows how the fault current contribution from
PV-DG 2 and PV-DG 3 combines and moves down Feeder
1 to contribute to the fault current which is measured at
R1_1. The fault current caused by PV-DG1 passes through
R2_1 which is why the differential current between these
two relay positions shows a visible difference. This unique
differential current can be seen in the grid-connected mode
as well, except the differential current is much higher, as
shown in Table 2, due to the fault current contribution from
the utility side.For a fault in Zone 1, the same relays are
used to measure the differential fault current, however the
magnitude of the differential fault current limit must differ
during each operating mode to avoid nuisance tripping.
The differential current can determine if a fault occurs on a
specific line by monitoring the current at both ends of the
line as shown in Table 1. The magnitude of the current from
a single source, or lack thereof, does not matter because of
the multiple sources present which will cause a difference in
fault current. This is crucial for inverter-based generation
where fault current is limited [5]. This is the reason for
using differential current as the primary protection system.
The limited fault current contribution and the knowledge of
the fault direction from each source allow for appropriate
conditions to be set which would indicate a fault on any
feeder and any zone on that feeder. These conditions can be
programmed into a central controller using combinational
logic. The specific relays and the magnitude of the
differential fault current between those relays, caused by a 3
phase fault, are found in Table 1 and Table 2. These values
set the differential fault current limit for each condition
3
specifically for this test microgrid. The conditions for a fault
in Zone 1 and Zone 2 for Feeder 1 are shown in Table 3
below.
Table 3: Primary Protection Fault Conditions for Feeder 1
Zone Island (A) Grid (A)
Zone 1 (R2_1)(R1_1)>1 (R2_1)(R1_1)>15
[(R2_1)(R2_2)>3]&& [(R2_1)(R2_2)>15] &&
Zone 2 [(R2_1) (R2_3) >3] && [(R2_1) (R2_3) >15] &&
[(R2_1)(R3_1)< 1] [(R2_1)(R3_1)< 1]
For Zone 1 fault in island mode, current through R2_1 is
test microgrid, the current through R1_1 will always be
greater than the current through R2_1 during a fault because
the other PV-DGs will combine their fault current and this
combined current passes through R1_1.This means a
differential current will always be present during a fault in
Zone 1 on Feeder 1, as seen in Fig. 3. This is not a typical
characteristic of microgrids and is only identified through
detailed analysis of the power network design. The limit of
greater than 1A is chosen for the island condition because
the normal operating current or no fault differential current
is 0.1A, and the differential fault current exceeds 1A, as
seen in Table 1. This will ensure a trip signal is sent only if
the differential fault current is greater than the no fault
differential current and that the trip signal is sustained while
the fault occurs. The grid-connected condition for Zone 1 is
the same except the limit on the differential current is set to
15A, three times the normal rated current. This is done to
ensure no unnecessary tripping would take place. It also
limits the amount of fault currentallowed in the network
from the utility which improves the protection on network
equipment.If the differential current is less than 15A during
a fault in grid connected mode the relays will not pick-up
the fault. The differential current limit of 15A for grid
connected mode can be adjusted if a more sensitive setting
is required. However, the differential currents caused during
the initial stages of switching between operating modes or
the time it takes those differential currents to settle to a
steady state, will determine by how much the limit can be
adjusted.The higher the setting the less the likelihood of a
nuisance trip. To eliminate this non-detection zone, a
voltage based protection system could be included as a
back-up protection system.
The conditions for a fault in Zone2 on Feeder 1 differentiate
the currents through R2_1 and R3_1 as well as the currents
through R2_1, R2_2 and R2_3. The fault currents through
R2_1 and R3_1 will flow toward the Zone 2 fault and will
be the same which means the differential current will be
zero between them, as seen in Fig 4. This condition however
is not sufficient for a trip signal because for a fault in Zone 1
all the fault current from the PV-DG1 flows towards the
fault, as seen in Fig. 3, which means the current through
R2_1 and R3_1 will be the same, hence the differential
current will also be zero. This means that if the condition for
a fault in Zone 2 is kept as only the differential current
between R2_1 and R3_1, a fault in Zone 2 would send trip
signals toboth Zone 1and Zone 2 circuit breakers. This is
not wanted so an additional condition is set for Zone 2
meaning only once both conditions are met a trip signal will
be sent to the Zone 2 circuit breakers. The additional
condition is that the differential current between R2_1 and
R2_2 must be greater than 3A.Based on the results of 3-
phase fault studies, the limit is chosen to be greater than the
maximum differential fault current seen between R2_1 and
R2_2 during a fault in Zone 1 but less than a differential
fault current of 5A seen for a fault in Zone 2. This ensures
this condition will only be true for faults in Zone 2. The
value of 3A is only applicable to the network being
investigated, however a similar methodology could apply to
other networks. This will be the case for a fault in Zone 2
because the current from PV-DG1 will not go past R2_1 so
the differential current between R2_2 and R2_1 will be
greater than the same measurement for a fault in Zone 1.
5 PV-DG1 is supplied from below R2_1. Once the fault is
SS = OPEN
4
R1_1
CB 6
ZONE 1 FEEDER 1
CB 7
1 R2_1 2 3
CB 9
ZONE 2
FAULT
R3_1
CB 8
3 Testing Methodology and Case Studies
3.1 Test Case 1: Fault in Zone 1 on Feeder 1 - SS Open
A 3-phase fault is applied in Zone1 on Feeder 1 while SS is
open, indicating island mode. The detection and isolation of
this fault is crucial for microgrid operation in island mode.
Before fault inception at the point shown in Fig.3, the
voltage at each bus during island mode is expected to be the
nominal RMS voltage, while the currents at each bus are
expected to be close to zero since all the PV-DGs are set to
equal capacity as the load demand. The fault, however,
limits each PV-DG to supply twice their maximum current
rating, which is seen on each bus. The simulation is run for
1s, with predetermined islanding occurring at 0.3s, relay
thresholds switch to island mode, and the fault occurs from
0.5s to 0.6s.
The fault currents from PV-DG 2 and PV-DG3 combines to
feed the fault from above R1_1, while the fault current from
detected a trip signal is sent to CB6 and CB7 at the ends of
Feeder 1. This will isolate the faulted section, so no current
can be fed to the fault from either side of the feeder. PV-
DG 1 will now be islanded from the islanded microgrid but
should still supply Load 1. Feeder 2 and Feeder 3 will still
be connected to each other and can share excess load.
Frequency deviation is kept at a minimum in the microgrid
by matching the respective PV-DGs with their loads [6].

L2 L1 L3

PV-DG 2 PV-DG 1 PV-DG 3

Fig. 4 Fault current flow for a Zone 2 fault in island mode

The conditions set in Table 3allows for protection of each

zone on Feeder 1. Different relays positions can then be
used to set conditions and coordinate fault protection on any
of the feeders and in any of the zones.

The flow diagram in Fig.5 shows the operation procedure

for the protection system. In order to determine the
microgrid mode of operation during simulations, the 3-
phase current, Iabc_B5, through Bus 5 is measured.
However, in practice the state of the static switch, open or
closed, would be used to determine the mode of operation.
This means no current would flow to the microgrid during
island mode or when the PV-DGs fully supply the loads
requirements in either mode of operation. The protection
systems trip signal will finally pass through the sample and
hold block which holds the trip signal at 0, keeping the
circuit breaker open until the simulation ends.

Fig. 5 Relay Coordination Procedure

4
3.2 Test Case 2: Fault in Zone 1 on Feeder 1 - SS Closed 4 Results and Discussion
A 3-phase fault is applied in Zone1 on Feeder 1 while SS is 4.1 Test Case 1: Fault in Zone 1 on Feeder 1 - SS Open
closed, indicating grid-connected mode. Before fault
1.5
inception, the voltage at each bus during grid-connected
1
mode is expected to be the nominal RMS voltage,

Signal
0.5
maintained by the synchronous utility generators, while the
0
currents are expected to vary according to the irradiance.
-0.5
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Time (s)
Since SS is closed relay thresholds will not switch to island Fig. 5 Relay Trip Signals for Test Case 1
mode thresholds. The fault current of each PV-DG is limited
to approximately twice its max rating so it is expected that Current at Bus 1
most of the fault current will be supplied by the utility. The 4

amount of the fault current is expected to be higher. Fault

Current (A)
2

detection takes place according to the relay logic of Table 3 1

(Zone 1; grid-connected mode). 0

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5
Time (s)
0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1

Current at Bus 2

The simulation is run for 1s with the fault occurring from

5

0.5s to 0.6s. The currents from Bus 1, Bus 2 and Bus 3 will

Current (A)
3

be shown to highlight the faults effect on the generators 1

before, during and after the fault event.

0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Time (s)

Current at Bus 3
5

3.3 Test Case 3: Fault in Zone 2 on Feeder 1 - SS Open 4

Current (A)
3

This case tests a fault on the PV-DG (Zone 2 fault as shown 1

in Fig.4) while in island mode. There will be a power 0

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5
Time (s)
0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1

mismatch once the PV-DG is removed causing possible

network instability. The most important factor of this fault is
the protection the PV-DG and to see how the protection
system operates under network instability.
The trip signals for this fault aretriggered by R2_1 and R3_1
and are sent to CB 7 and CB 8, respectively. CB 7 will
disconnect Load 1 from the microgrid while CB 8 removes
the PV-DG. This test will be a successif the protection
scheme accurately detects the fault and isolates the fault.
Islanding occurs at 0.3s, relay thresholds switch to island
mode, and the fault occurs from 0.5s to 0.6s.
3.4 Test Case 4: Fault in Zone 2 on Feeder 1 - SS Closed
In this case the protection scheme is tested against a fault on
a PV-DG while in grid connected mode. The trip signal in
grid connected mode will only be sent to CB 8
disconnecting PV-DG 1. This is done by removing the CB 7
trip signal. In the island mode version of this fault, seen in
Test Case 3, two trip signals are sent to avoid power
mismatches in the network. All power mismatches will be
dealt with by the utility generators which will supply or
absorb any excess power. This test will be a success if the
protection scheme accurately detects the fault and isolates
only the faulted area. The fault occurs from 0.5s to 0.6s.
Fig. 6 Currents for Bus 1, Bus 2 and Bus 3 for Test Case 1
The fault occurring at Zone 1 on Feeder 1 is detected and
the trip signal sent to the circuit breakers, CB6 and CB7, as
shown in Fig. 5. This shows that once islanding takes place
the differential current thresholds was set to the island mode
thresholds, otherwise it would not have detected the fault. It
must also be noted that the trip signal for the same zone
along the adjacent feedersdoes not trip. The relay takes
0.0047s to detect the fault and then sends the trip signal to
the correct CBs. This shows that the relay properly detected
the fault and coordinated the correct CBs to isolate the
fault. Islanding takes place at 0.3s.The fault occurs at 0.5s.
The fault is detected and isolated by removing the faulted
section withCB6 and CB7. PV-DG1 is now disconnected
from the islanded microgrid but it still supplies Load1
through Bus1.
The current from each PV-DG is shown to be near zero, as
seen in Fig. 6. This is because all the current from each PV-
DG is fed to its respective load. This means the bus shows
little or no current. The small current seen in the grid-
connected mode is the excess power which is fed back into
the utility. Also the near zero current in island mode shows
that the PV-DGs and their loads are correctly matched
which maintains the frequency while in island mode.

5
4.2 Test Case 2: Fault in Zone 1 on Feeder 1 - SS Closed shown in Fig. 9. This shows that once islanding takes place
1.5
the differential current thresholds was set to the island mode
1
thresholds, otherwise it would not have detected the fault.
The relay takes 0.0146s to detect the fault and sends the trip
Signal

0.5
0 signal to the correct CBs. This shows that the relay detected
-0.5
the fault and coordinated the correct CBs in order to isolate
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Time (s)
the fault.
Fig. 7 Relay Trip Signals for Test Case 2
The fault which occurs on PV-DG1 is removed from the
Current at Bus 1
network by CB 8 opening. CB 7 disconnects Load 1 from
3
the microgrid. This was done to avoid power mismatch in
the microgrid. The expected rise and fall in fault current
Current (A)

1
once the fault occurs and is isolated can be seen in Fig. 10.
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Time (s)

Current at Bus 2
20 Current at Bus 1
15
15
Current (A)

Current (A)
10
10

5 5

0 0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Time (s) Time (s)
Current at Bus 3 Current at Bus 2
20 6

15

Current (A)
Current (A)

4
10
2
5

0 0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Time (s)
Time (s)
Current at Bus 3
6

Fig. 8 Currents for Bus 1, Bus 2 and Bus 3 for Test Case 2
Current (A)

The fault occurring at Zone 1 on Feeder 1, while in grid 0

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1

connected mode, is detected and the trip signal sent to the Time (s)

circuit breakers, CB6 and CB7, as shown in Fig. 7. It must

Fig. 10Currents for Bus 1, Bus 2 and Bus 3 for Test Case 3
be noted that the trip signal for the same zone along the
adjacent feeders does not trip. This shows that the grid-
connected thresholds are adequate. The relay takes 0.0006s The power for PV-DG1 reduces to zero after the fault
to detect the fault and then sends the trip signal to the occurs but this is due to it supplying the fault. The rest of
correct CBs. the microgrid network is stable but the quality of the supply
is slightly reduced.
The fault current seems like it is exclusively supplied by the
utility because fault currents are extremely large but the 4.4 Test Case 4: Fault in Zone 2 on Feeder 1 - SS Closed
inverter-based PV-DGs are supplying the fault as well. Feeder 1: Zone 4 Trip Signals
ThePV-DGs fault current is limited to twice their rated 1.5
1
current which is insignificant compared to the utility fault
Signals

0.5

current but it is still being supplied. Fig. 8 shows the twice 0

limited fault current supplied by PV-DG 2 and PV-DG 3 -0.5

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5
Time (s)
0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1

during the fault and it shows currents are equal before and Fig. 11 Relay Trip Signal for Test Case 4
after the fault. This is the excess power being supplied to the
utility. The current at Bus 1 remains almost zero indicating The fault occurring at Zone 2 on Feeder 1 is detected and
PV-DG 1 is only supplying its load. the trip signal sent to the CB8 as shown in Fig. 11. This
indicates that the grid-connected thresholds are adequate.
4.3 Test Case 3: Fault in Zone 2 on Feeder 1 - SS Open The relay takes 0.0009s to detect the fault and then sends
1.5
p g
the trip signal to the correct CBs. This shows that the relay
1
properly detected the fault and coordinated the correct CBs
Signal

in order to isolate the fault.

0.5

-0.5
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Time (s)
The fault which occurs on PV-DG 1 is removed by CB 8
Fig. 9 Relay Trip Signals for Test Case 3
opening. Load 1 is still connected to the microgrid. Load 1
is now supplied by the utility since PV-DG1 was removed
The fault occurring at Zone 2 on Feeder 1 is detected and
once CB 8 opened. The fault occurs at 0.5s which leads to
the trip signal sent to the circuit breakers, CB8 and CB7, as
the expected initial current increases shown in Fig. 12.

6
Once the fault zone is isolated the voltage across the fully protected. This proves that the technique is appropriate
microgrid is maintained by utilities synchronous generators. for use in medium voltage photovoltaic microgrid systems.
The current spikes at the start of the fault, all the PV-DGs
supply fault current, and then the currents reduce to the Acknowledgements
nominal currents value once the faulted zone is isolated.
However, current through Bus 1 is almost 10 times greater The authors gratefully acknowledge the support and
than that of Bus 2 and Bus 3 due to the utility supplying infrastructure for the research work that was provided by the
fault current, which is shown in Fig. 12. The loads are now Electrical Engineering Department, University of Cape
supplied by the power generated by PV-DG 2 and PV-DG 3 Town, South Africa.
while the utility supplies any remaining load.
Current at Bus 1
References
100

[1] P Giroux, G Sybille, C Osorio, and S Chandrachood. (2012, January)

Current (A)

50
MathWorks. [Online].
0
www.mathworks.com/matlabcentral/fileexchange
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5
Time (s)
0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
/34752-grid-connected-pv-array
20
Current at Bus 2
[2] A.N. Milioudis, G.T. Andreou, and D.P. Labridis, "High Impedance
15 Fault Evaluation Using Narrowband Power Line Communication
Current (A)

10 Techniques",IEEE Trondheim PowerTech, pp. 1 - 6, 2011.

5
[3] E. Sortomme, S.S. Venkata, and J. Mitra, "Microgrid Protection
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 Using Communication-Assisted Digital Relays", IEEE Transactions
on Power Delivery, vol. 25, no. 4, pp. 2789-2796, October 2010.
Time (s)

Current at Bus 3
20

15
[4] C. Buque, O. Ipinnimo, S. Chowdhury, S.P. Chowdhury, Modelling
Current (A)

10 and simulation of an Adaptive Relaying Scheme for a Microgrid,

5 IEEE PES General Meeting, San Diego, USA, pp. 1-8, 2012.
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 [5] C. Buque, S. Chowdhury, Adaptive Protection for a Microgrid with
Time (s)
PV Generation, 12th International Conference on Sustainable Energy
Technologies (SET-2013), Hong Kong, pp. 1550-1561, August 2013.
Fig. 12 Currents for Bus 1, Bus 2 and Bus 3 for Test Case 4
[6] C. Buque, S. Chowdhury, S.P. Chowdhury, Modelling and
simulation of reverse power relay for loss of mains protection of
5 Conclusion distributed generation in microgrids, 2013 IEEE Power and Energy
Society General Meeting (PES), Vancouver, Canada, pp. 1-5,July
2013
Test Cases 1 and3show that the primary protection system
[7] M. Braun, T Stetz, R Brundlinger, et al., Is the distribution grid
detects and isolates all the faults in Zone1 and Zone2 whilst ready to accept large-scale photovoltaic deployment? State of the art,
in Island mode. The total capacity supplied by the PV-DGs progress, and future prospects, 26th EU PSVEC, Hamburg,
are matched with the load demand to ensure there is little Germany, pp. 681 697, 2011
frequency deviation. The currents from the PV-DGs are [8] M. Di Silvestre, G. Graditi and E. Sanseverin, A Generalised
stable and only contribute to the fault current while a fault Framework for Optimal Sizing of Distributed Energy resources in
Microgrids Using an Indicator-Based Swarm Approach, IEEE
occurs. Once the fault is removed the current quickly Transactions on Industrial Informatics, vol. 10, No.1, pp. 152-162,
stabilizes to their nominal values. Test Case 3 indicates that February 2014
once a fault is detected on the PV-DG, the PV-DG must be
immediately disconnected and turned off to avoid damaging
the PV-DG.
The differential fault currents in the microgrid while in grid-
connected mode are almost 50 times larger than the fault
currents in island mode. Test Case 2and Test Case 4 show
that the primary protection system detects and isolates all
the faults in Zone1and Zone2 whilst in grid connected
mode. This shows that the grid-connected conditions and
limits are accurate in detecting faults. Test Case 4 shows
that once the fault on the PV-DG is isolated the load is
supplied by the utility. The PV-DG must be immediately
turned off to avoid damaging the PV-DG.The voltage in
grid-connected mode is maintained by the synchronous
generators of the utility.

Finally, the use of differential currents to detect faults is an

accurate and robust technique which is mostly indifferent to
the low currents in inverter-based generation. The protection
systems added ability to adapt its settings according to the
microgrids mode of operation means the microgrid will be