The Anatomy of a

Shermco Field NETA-Certified

Qualified to perform to

Service Engineer Protective

the highest standards

Reliable and Responsive

Part of a large international
team available 24/7
Trusted Advisor
Offering independent
service across all brands Relaying
Back by the Best
From the field, to our
Safety First
On record as an industry
Handbook
full-service rotating
apparatus services
leader in safe work practices
Volume 1

Cutting-Edge
Trained from utility
transmission to
low-voltage distribution

Published by InterNational Electrical Testing Association

Odds are, you wont find a job anywhere that a Shermco field service engineer cant handle.
As one of the worlds most respected electrical maintenance and testing companies,
Shermco delivers A+ service from utility transmission to low-voltage distribution.

Our experience in commercial, industrial, generation and specialized sectors, such as oil
refineries, pulp and paper, steel and wind power, uniquely qualifies us to handle the
largest, most complex assignments. Our people are trained on the latest technologies and
safety practices. And, we support them with full-service rotating apparatus services and a
large fleet of service vehicles, ready to respond 24/7.

Corporate Headquarters | 2425 East Pioneer Drive, Irving, Texas 75061 Why trust your vital power services to anyone less? Count on an industry leader. Published by
p. 972.793.5523, 888.SHERMCO | f. 972.793.5542 | www.shermco.com Visit www.shermco.com and learn more today. InterNational Electrical Testing Association
Protective
Relaying
Handbook
Volume 1

Published by
InterNational Electrical Testing Association
 Protective Relaying
Handbook
Volume 1

Table of Contents
Dynamic-State Relay Testing .....................................................................................1
A. T. Giuliante

Introduction to Dynamic Testing .............................................................................4

D. L. Tierney

Through-Fault Testing the Ultimate Test for Protection Schemes Prior to Energizing ........8
Roderic L. Hageman

Automated Test Point Calculations for Electronic Relay Testing and Coordination .......11
Lonnie C. Lindell and Steven R. Potter

Test & Maintenance Tips for Protective Relays ..........................................................14

Scott Cooper

Using 1op Characteristics to Troubleshoot

Transformer Differential Relay Misoperation ...........................................................16
Michael Thompson and James R. Closson

Motor Protection Fundamentals ............................................................................27

Bernie Moisey

Meaningful Testing of Numerical Multifunction Protection Schemes ........................30

Jay Gosalia

Using Dynamic Testing Techniques for Commissioning and Routine Testing

of Motor Protection Relays ....................................................................................35
Benton Vandiver III, P.E.

Commissioning Numerical Relays Part One ..........................................................37

James R. Closson and Mike Young

Steady State vs. Dynamic Testing ............................................................................44

Steven Stade

Published by

InterNational Electrical Testing Association

3050 Old Centre Avenue, Suite 102, Portage, Michigan 49024
269.488.6382
www.netaworld.org
Protective Relaying Handbook
Volume 1

Table of Contents (continued)

Dynamic State and Other Advanced Testing Methods

for Protection Relays Address Changing Industry Needs ...........................................46
Kenneth Tang

Acceptance Testing a Synch Circuit ..........................................................................51

Steven C. Reed, P.E.

Partial Differential Relaying ...................................................................................53

Baldwin Bridger, P.E.

Modern Relays and Software Provide Valuable Tools for Analysis ..............................54
Scott Cooper

Understanding and Analyzing Event Report Information ...........................................57

David Costello

NOTICE AND DISCLAIMER

NETA Technical Papers and Articles are published by the InterNational Electrical Testing Association. Opinions, views,
and conclusions expressed in articles herein are those of the authors and not necessarily those of NETA. Publication
herein does not constitute or imply any endorsement of any opinion, product, or service by NETA, its directors, officers,
members, employees, or agents (hereinafter NETA).
All technical data in this publication reflects the experience of individuals using specific tools, products equipment, and
components under specific conditions and circumstances which may or may not be fully reported and over which NETA
has neither exercised nor reserved control. Such data has not been independently tested or otherwise verified by NETA.
NETA makes no endorsement, representation, or warranty as to any opinion, product, or service referenced in this
publication. NETA expressly disclaims any and all liability to any consumer, purchaser, or any other person using any
product or service referenced herein for any injuries or damages of any kind whatsoever, including, but not limited to,
any consequential, special incidental, direct, or indirect damages. NETA further disclaims any and all warranties, express
or implied including, but not limited to, any implied warranty or merchantability or any implied warranty of fitness for a
particular purpose.
Please Note: All biographies of authors and presenters contained herein are reflective of the professional standing
of these individuals at the time the articles were originally published. Titles, companies, and other factors may have
changed since the original publication date.

Copyright 2009 by InterNational Electrical Testing Association, all rights reserved. No part of this publication may be
reproduced in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Protective Relaying Handbook Volume 1
Dynamic-State Relay Testing
NETA World, Winter1999-2000 Issue
by A. T. Giuliante
ATG Exodus
The traditional method of testing individual relay func-
tions using steady-state calibrations is no longer a viable
test method for testing modern multifunction relays. To-
day, relay designs include innovative numerical techniques
that enhance relay performance by combining a number of
measuring criteria and by optimizing the relays operation
for power system conditions. If these relays are tested under
the pseudo power system conditions created by steady-state
testing, problems in testing and understanding the relays
operation can occur. In addition, the time for testing in-
dividual elements would be excessive because of the time
required to reconfigure each individual element tested.
Relay Test Methods
A report from IEEE, Relay Per formance Testing, discusses
the methods of steady-state, dynamic-state, and transient
testing of modern relays. A steady-state test is defined as ap-
plying phasors to determine relay settings by slowly varying
relay input. Obviously, this test method does not represent
power system faults. Dynamic-state test is defined as simul-
taneously applying fundamental frequency components of
voltage and current that represent power system states of
prefault, fault, and postfault. Utilizing this technique results
in faster relay testing because, in most cases, relay elements
do not need to be disabled in order to test a relay function.
Transient testing is defined as simultaneously applying
fundamental and nonfundamental frequency components of
voltage and current that represent power system conditions
obtained from digital fault recorders (DFR) or electro-
magnetic transient programs (EMTP).
Dynamic Relay Testing
Dynamic relay testing means testing under true simulated
power system conditions. Depending on the level of testing
required, test values can be easily calculated with PC-based
short circuit or EMTP programs. For dynamic-state test-
ing, a short-circuit program would be used to calculate the
1
fundamental component of voltage and current values for
prefault and fault conditions. For transient simulations, an
EMTP program would be used to create waveforms that
represent the fault condition. Dynamic-state testing and
transient simulations provide a faster and more meaningful
way to test relays and relay systems. These techniques provide
the user with a far better understanding of how the relay
system performs and can aid both relay application and test
engineers in evaluating relay operations.
Dynamic-state testing is based on a power system model
that is used to simulate different events selected according
to the application. Events are played back through power
system simulators that also monitor scheme performance.
Each event is modeled to simulate conditions for the tested
relay circuit but only for the time period needed to test.
Why Use Dynamic-State Testing?
Modern relay systems are multifunction digital devices
that are designed to provide complete protection for a power
system component. Some of the newer designs have over
2,000 setting possibilities and require extensive configu-
ration and setting procedures. The traditional method of
testing individual steady-state calibrations, one at a time,
is no longer a viable method because of the excessive time
it would require to reconfigure for each individual element
tested. In addition, traditional test methods were designed
on the assumption that users did not have test equipment for
testing relays under power system conditions. So traditional
test procedures were developed using basic test equipment
components such as variacs, phase shifters, and load boxes.
With todays modern test equipment, power system con-
ditions can easily be simulated. By making a profile of the
operation of the scheme, malfunctions can be found faster
because it is easier to identify the changes in areas that do
not operate the way they are expected.
2 Protective Relaying Handbook Volume 1
Advantages of Dynamic-State Testing
Some of the advantages offered with dynamic-state test-
ing as compared to traditional test methods are:
Complete relay scheme tests
For each simulated power system event, the performance
of the complete relay scheme is tested. The high power
capability of power system simulators allows the user to
test the complete relay scheme. This provides a faster way
to test relays since relay settings or configuration need
not be changed as they would if individual circuits were
tested one at a time. The performance of all scheme re-
sponses, including unfaulted phase units, can be evaluated
since the model and simulators generate three-phase wye
voltages and currents. This allows the accurate modeling
of power system events. In addition, if the relay scheme
includes programmable logic, simulated events which test
how the complete system logic operates must be used to
assure the relay logic is performing as intended. Contact
races and operating and resetting of measuring units
may be common problems. Therefore, the complete relay
scheme needs to be tested as a whole to insure proper
operation and proper nonoperation under simulated
power system conditions.
Realistic relay operating time tests
The operating time of many line relay systems depends
upon the system impedance ratio (SIR). With dynamic-
state testing, different SIRs can be modeled to determine
the range of relay operating times. The traditional test
method never considers the affect of SIR on relay
performance.
Evaluation of future relay operations
The testing provides significant advantages of obtaining
more reliable test results which confirm the configu-
ration, settings and correct operation of the protection
scheme while significantly reducing test time. Since the
test results describe how the relay scheme operates under
power system conditions, the test data becomes a use-
ful relay performance database. When the relay system
is in service and operates for a power system event, its
performance can be compared to the relay performance
database to determine if the relay scheme has operated
correctly. Many companies have experienced that after
a questionable operation has occurred and a request for
investigation was made, no findings could be gained from
the steady-state test method in most cases since only the
set points of individual components were checked. To
meaningfully investigate a questionable operation, the
actual power system conditions at the time of the incident
need to be simulated to be able to observe the reaction
of the system as a whole.
What Is Needed for Dynamic-State Testing?
The test method involves testing the complete scheme
with dynamic-state simulations that model the power sys-
tem the relay scheme will protect. Computational programs
such as One Bus, One Liner, CAPE and other mathematical
calculation tools such as spreadsheets and Mathcad can be
used to model the power system in order to derive the fault
voltages and currents for the power system event.
Dynamic-State Test Procedure
1. Create a dynamic-state test plan.
The test plan for dynamic-state testing depends on the
type of protection to be tested and how it is configured.
The intent of the test plan is to test the relay schemes
operation under simulated dynamic-state conditions.
2. Calculate values for simulated fault conditions.
A power system model of a two-machine equivalent sys-
tem can be used to aid in the calculation of voltage and
current values for line relay testing. For the application
to be tested, line and source values are entered. Faults are
simulated on the model with varied fault locations, resis-
tances, and load flows according to the tests defined in
the test plan. Each case is a test that will characterize the
scheme operation for reach and direction (faults behind
and in front) and for the various zones and combinations
of zones. For reach tests, the fault locations are defined
according to the accuracy of the unit being tested. For a
zone one relay with plus-or-minus five percent accuracy,
an operation test would be defined at 95 percent of set-
ting (op case). A test for no operation would be defined
at 106 percent of setting (non-op case). These two cases
confirm the accuracy of the zone one relay. The reach tests
are conducted for phase and ground distance relays. For
phase distance tests, use a phase-to-phase fault type; for
ground distance tests, use a phase-to-ground fault type.
3. Make dynamic-state test cases.
Each test case requires three-phase voltage and current
values. For reach and direction tests for line relay schemes,
three states are usually defined for each test case. The
prefault state provides balanced three-phase voltages to
the relay long enough to stabilize the relay before a fault
is simulated. The prefault time assures that the relay will
have the correct memory circuit response. The test time
for the fault state must be long enough to operate the
tested zone of protection but short enough not to operate
the next overreach zone of protection. In this way, the
faulted zone can be tested without disabling the adja-
cent overreaching zones. The postfault time is required
to reapply restraint voltage after the test to prevent any
spurious operations.
Protective Relaying Handbook Volume 1 3
4. Playback with power system simulators.
Depending on how many relay functions are configured
there may be a number of cases to run. However, it only
takes seconds to run a dynamic-state test so that 150 tests
will take approximately five minutes. To run a steady-state
test with this amount of detail will take significantly lon-
ger because of all the communications that are required
with the relay to reconfigure its settings. Also, dynamic-
state testing gives true relay operating performance for
each power system event tested.

Conclusion
Dynamic relay testing has allowed users to significantly
decrease the amount of time needed for testing while in-
creasing the quality of the test and the documentation of
results. Dynamic relay testing has also provided the user
with the capability of developing an understanding of the
power system and the protection schemes function within
that power system. Utilities have used dynamic relay test-
ing to find problems that were unexplained with previous
test methods. Incident reports can now be meaningfully
investigated.

A.T. Giuliante is President and Founder of ATG Exodus. Prior to

forming his Company in 1995 Tony was Executive Vice President of
GEC ALSTHOM T&D Inc.-Protection and Control Division, which
he started in 1983. From 1967 to 1983, he was employed by General
Electric and ASEA. In 1994, Tony was elected a Fellow of IEEE for
contributions to protective relaying education and their analysis in
operational environments. He has authored over 35 technical papers
and is a frequent lecturer on all aspects of protective relaying. Tony is a
past Chairman of the IEEE Power System Relaying Committee 1993-
1994 and has degrees of BSEE and MSEE from Drexel University
1967 and 1969.
4 Protective Relaying Handbook Volume 1

Introduction to Dynamic Testing

NETA World, Winter1999-2000 Issue

by D. L. Tierney
Doble Engineering

Steady state testing is used to verify the settings for a relay

element. The test quantities are applied to the relay and held
steady for a predetermined time equal to or greater than the
operating time of the relay. If the relay does not respond, the
test quantities are raised or lowered by a small increment
less than the resolution of the relay. The test quantity is then
reapplied to the relay for the same predetermined time. This
procedure is repeated until the relay operates.

Figure 2 Dynamic State Waveforms

nonsteady state frequency components, magnitude, phase

Figure 1 Steady State Waveforms
The dynamic state test, on the other hand, is used to de-
termine the relays response to power system conditions. All
applied test quantities are simultaneously switched between
states. Each state represents a different steady-state power
system condition. One state may represent prefault condi-
tions, while the next represents the fault followed by the
postfault condition. More states may be added to represent
evolving faults or reclosing.
However, the dynamic state test does not include the
high frequency and dc components found in many faults.
To simulate a more realistic power system disturbance
requires a transient simulation test. This test contains the
relationships, and duration the relay will see, unlike the dy-
namic test which uses stepped sine wave states to simulate
the different power system conditions. The transient simu-
lation test uses continuous waveform for each test quantity.
The waveform itself contains the prefault and fault power
system conditions. These waveforms can come from actual
disturbances as recorded by digital fault recorders or the re-
lays themselves. Another source of transient waveforms can
be software programs such as Electro-Magnetic Transient
Program (EMTP) or MathCAD.
In the real world, relays respond to changing or transient
conditions. These dynamic conditions are not simulated
using stepped sine wave testing. Dynamic state testing
and transient simulation testing are effective test methods.
Because transient testing requires more complex data sets,
dynamic tests are far easier to prepare and produce better
results than steady-state testing. This article deals with the
dynamic state testing of protection systems.
Protective Relaying Handbook Volume 1
Figure 3 Transient Waveforms
Why use dynamic state testing?
Dynamic state testing can be used in every stage of relay
testing:
During evaluation testing, dynamic testing can be used
to simulate current reversal or power swings to compare
the performance of different relays.
During acceptance testing, dynamic testing can be used
to test internal relay elements such as blocking for loss
of potential with high loads, or testing the reset time of
the keying output when a fault changes from a forward
zone 2 to a reverse zone 3.
During commissioning testing, dynamic testing can be
used to test the relay in the protection system. For ex-
ample, fault can be applied to two relays at the same
time to test a back blocking scheme or breaker failure
scheme.
During troubleshooting, dynamic testing can be used
to simulate faults for which relays did not operate as
expected.
During routine testing, dynamic tests can be used for
rapid go/no-go testing of protection systems.
What equipment will you need to start
dynamic state testing?
To start dynamic state testing you are going to need two
basic pieces of equipment, dynamic state simulation software
and high power active sources.
Sources of data for dynamic state testing:
Data used in dynamic state testing can come from a number
of different sources:
Phasor fault calculations.
Two terminal line fault simulation software such as GE
Fault.
Multi-bus fault simulation software such as Aspen or
CAPE.
5
The relay event log on microprocessor relays or digital
fault recorders (DFR) can tell when to apply signals and
when to remove them. The DFR can also record the
magnitudes of the fault.
What If simulation. In the absence of DFRs or mi-
croprocessor relay event logs, the What If simulation
is used. Dynamic state simulations are written to test
what if the ground fault current was 200 amperes higher
then the fault simulation software said it was. What if
the relay did not receive breaker fail initiate until the
fault evolved from a single line-to-ground to a double
line-to-ground fault?
When constructing acceptance tests the relay instruc-
tion manual may contain part or all of the data needed
to construct the dynamic state acceptance test.
Getting started
Having the right software and equipment to run a dynamic
state test is only the start. How many sources are needed?
Are there enough test instruments to run the tests? How
can the protection system be tested in parts with a limited
number of sources? Can the entire scheme be tested at
once? How many states are needed to test a function of the
scheme? Which test leads are required and where do they
get connected? The following can help answer some of these
questions and more:
One-line diagram
Identify the quantity and type of relays and the num-
ber of sources.
From the relay type information, determine the re-
quired current, voltage, and control power of sources.
Relays located in different CT and PT strings will
require more sources.
Also from the relay type information, determine
source burden. If the burden exceeds the capacity of
a single source, consider breaking current strings and
using additional slaved sources.
Identify the type and number of dynamic state tests.
For example, add two states for each reclose cycle and
select appropriate state durations.
Identify relay settings and then calculate appropriate
test quantities to determine expected time delays.
Three-line diagram
Determine isolation points for sources to avoid feed-
ing active relaying.
Avoid backfeed potential transformers.
Determine injection points for current and potential
sources.
Relaying schematic
Writing the test plans and expected results:
What equipment is expected to operate?
6 Protective Relaying Handbook Volume 1
What equipment is not expected to operate?
What targets should the test produce?
How many cycles should a given state be?
What points should be isolated to avoid tripping in-
service equipment?
Identification of the type and number of dynamic state
tests based on number of trip paths shown in the sche-
matic.
Identification of the type and number of logic outputs.
Are the test instruments required to supply signaling
normally supplied by other equipment or devices that
can not be operated during the dynamic state test?
Connection Diagrams
Connection points for current and potentials
Connection points for logic outputs
In some cases, the physical location of devices
Choosing the correct number of sources
In any dynamic state test each state should contain the cor-
rect number of quantities for the protection system being
tested. Relay burdens and test instrument power ratings
must be taken into account when choosing the number of
sources required to run the test. Electromechanical relays
require more energy to operate than most solid-state and
microprocessor relays. In any case, energy requirements
climb with each relay added to a test.
In some cases, with a high-impedance ground, the neutral
must be broken and ground relays must be operated with
different sources.
The following is a typical list for voltage and current
sources when testing electromechanical impedance relays
with an electromechanical directional ground overcurrent
relay:
A-phase relaying voltage
B-phase relaying voltage
C-phase relaying voltage
A-phase relaying current
B-phase relaying current
C-phase relaying current
Polarizing voltage
Polarizing current
3Io or ground current
Choosing the correct number of states
The data should contain voltage and current values for pre-
fault conditions, fault conditions and postfault conditions.
In most cases prefault is set to normal load conditions
to allow the relay to stabilize. In the case of an electro-
mechanical distance relay the prefault state applies the
voltage polarization. In many microprocessor relays the
prefault period allows the relay to build voltage memory.
In some cases, the prefault is set to zero volts and cur-
rent to test switch-on-to-fault logic. Typical time dura-
tion for prefault is about 60 cycles.
Fault states vary in number from simulation to simula-
tion. If you are testing single line-to-ground fault with
no reclosing relay, a single fault state will do. If you are
testing with an evolving fault you will need one state for
each stage of the fault. The first state will have a single
line-to-ground fault for one or two cycles. The next state
will have a double line-to-ground for two, three, or four
cycles. A three line fault follows. This data should be as
close to real fault levels as practical. In some cases where
the fault occurs on a line close to a strong source, the
secondary current will approach levels that test equip-
ment can not provide.
Postfault usually occurs at the end of the dynamic state
test. However, postfault states can occur between fault
states also. In this case you are simulating the reclose
interval. In postfault state the breaker is open so the
line currents are zero. The voltages, on the other hand,
are either zero or full potential depending on where the
relay potential transformers (PT) are located, i.e., on the
line or on the bus.
Test lead considerations
When pushing high currents, the impedance of test leads
becomes a factor. There are several ways to minimize the
impedance of the test lead, but it can not be eliminated.
Keep the test leads as short as possible. Shorter test
leads have less impedance.
Do not use the instrument ground as the return path for
grounded-wye systems
Do not coil excess test leads. Coiling the test leads turns
them into an inductor. This inductance increases the
impedance of the test leads.
Twisted pairs could be used to cancel mutual induc-
tance. This inductance would otherwise increase the
impedance of the test leads.
Larger gauge test leads. Using a larger gauge test lead
will decrease the resistance of the test lead.
Test lead connection point considerations
Where the test leads are connected is one of the most im-
portant factors in dynamic testing.
When connecting test potentials always make sure you
will not backfeed potential transformers. Make sure the
PTs are isolated by pulling fuses, opening test switches,
or by whatever practices are used by your company.
Potential and current test leads should be connected to
test as much of the wiring in the scheme as possible. Re-
lays make up only part of the protection system scheme.
Protective Relaying Handbook Volume 1
Test switches, cutout switches, meters, transducers, dig-
ital fault recorders (DFR), relays from other schemes,
and wire make up the rest of the total scheme either as
part of the scheme or by sharing currents and potentials.
In any case they all can affect how a protection scheme
responds.
When testing breaker-and-a-half scheme one set of
current transformers (CT) will have to be disconnected
before the test can be conducted. Failure to do so will
give the test current multiple paths. As a result, the de-
vices under test will not receive the correct currents.
When testing protection schemes with a primary and
backup system or two primary systems one scheme at
a time, care should be taken to not disable or cause an
operation of the in-service scheme. Unless each system
has its own CTs, it is better, in this case, to jack the cur-
rents and potentials into the individual relays.
Logic output considerations
If your test requires using the relays digital inputs for emu-
lating contact closures, your test instrument will require
logic outputs.
Pay attention to the ratings of the device being driven
by the logic output relays. These can be low-power sig-
naling relays. Using them to trip or open high-power
devices such as trip/close coils can and will damage the
relays.
Study the scheme and connection diagrams well before
connecting the logic output contacts. Following are
things to avoid:
Connecting battery positive to battery negative.
Tying different battery banks together.
Backfeeding different devices. Make sure that only the
device(s) that are intended to operate are energized.
Is the device being driven by the logic output contacts
looking for dry contacts or wet contacts? In other words,
is the device supplying the voltage or is the test instru-
ment supplying the voltage?
Is the device being driven by the logic output contacts
looking for open-to-close, close-to-open, voltage-to-no
voltage, or no voltage-to-voltage transitions?
What am I forgetting?
Are you connected to the correct relay? This is the num-
ber one cause of misoperations during scheme testing,
misidentification of relays. Do not let this happen to
you. Take the time to mark off the adjacent relays so you
do not accidentally operate the wrong relay.
When testing protection systems with breaker failure
schemes or other similar schemes, isolation points for
these relays should be opened. These open isolation
points (cutoff switches or test switches) will prevent
7
tripping of in-service equipment in the event that the
breaker failure relays or similar relays operate.
Do not wait until you start testing to find out whether
your test leads are connected correctly or whether the
phases are rolled in the wiring. Turn on the potentials
and currents one at a time or together at different phase
angles and/or magnitudes. Then trace the quantities
through the PT and CT strings to verify each phase.
To trip the breaker or not to trip the breaker, that is the
question. The actual breaker should be tripped at least
once to ensure that the relay contacts can handle the
trip current. Reason number two to trip the breaker is
to ensure that the voltage drop across the wiring during
tripping is not a factor in the operation of the breaker
during a fault. Another reason is to test the breakers
a and b contacts connected to the protection scheme.
However, for all other breaker trips, the use of a breaker
simulator is recommended to save wear and tear on the
breaker, especially high-voltage breakers.
Many breaker simulators in use today are built around
a lockout relay. One problem with the lockout breaker
simulator is its speed. The lockout relay operates in less
then eight milliseconds. This is faster than most break-
ers and can give different test results when used instead
of operating the breaker. Therefore, time delay circuits
may be needed to slow down the tripping and the clos-
ing of lockout breaker simulator boxes.
When connecting the breaker simulator care should be
taken not to backfeed signals.
Do you want the station oscillograph or digital fault re-
corder to operate for each and every test? If not, you
may want to temporarily disconnect the triggers to de-
vices.
When testing schemes with transfer trip, operation of
local relays may cause the remote breaker to operate or
change state. Care should be taken to isolate these sig-
nals if you do not want to operate the remote breaker.
In a future issue of NETA World, a specific example with
connection details, source selection, and state calculations
will be presented.
Dennis Tierney has been a Senior Applications Engineer for Relay
Protection at Doble Engineering Company for approximately one year.
Prior to this position, for eleven years, Dennis worked at the Salt River
Project in Phoenix, Arizona, in relay protection, power quality and,
SCADA. Before working at the Salt River Project, he worked in HVDC
and Communications at the Los Angeles Department of Water and
Power. Dennis graduated from Arizona State University in 1982 with a
Bachelors of Science Degree in Electrical Engineering.
8 Protective Relaying Handbook Volume 1
Through-Fault Testing
the Ultimate Test for Protection
Schemes Prior to Energizing
PowerTest 2000
(NETA Annual Technical Conference)
Roderic L. Hageman
PRIT Service, Inc.
Concept
The concept of through-fault testing is not new to our
industry. Take, for example, primary injection testing of
low-voltage circuit breakers. Technicians routinely inject
fault level current through these breakers to verify pickup
and timing of the associated trip units. Most technicians
have learned that single-phase injection can create problems
with the ground fault elements, masking the pickup and
timing of the phase functions. If there is no way to defeat
the ground fault element at the trip unit, an injection in one
pole and out another will cause cancellation of the ground
fault current. Other through-fault tests are frequently made
on substation bus ground fault schemes and bus differential
schemes.
The fault current for all of these tests is typically provided
by a single-phase, high current test set that can deliver
thousands of amperes at a very low voltage. The procedures
are relatively safe due to the low voltage. Typically, one of
the primary hazards is the temperature rise of the test set
leads or connections.
For the same reasons that the procedures described above
are performed, similar tests are desirable for more sophis-
ticated protective relay and metering schemes. In these
schemes, phase angles are as important as current magnitude
for the correct operation of the scheme. A prime example
is that of a transformer differential scheme. The primary
current and the secondary current will differ, not only due
to the ratio of the protected transformer, but also due to any
other phase angle shifts caused by delta-wye configurations.
Electromechanical relays typically require that the current
transformer connections correct for the delta-wye shifts.
Modern microprocessor-based relays can be programmed
to account for the shifts internal in the relay.
However these corrections are made, it is desirable to
perform an overall system test to confirm that the design and
installation provide protection without nuisance tripping.
Source
In some cases utilities will actually stage faults on the
power system. This amounts to deliberately short circuiting
a transmission line or distribution feeder and energizing it
at normal voltage. Obviously, this could be damaging to
the system, and if the relaying systems do not work cor-
rectly, severe damage to the power system can occur. With
the prominence of modern computer-operated dynamic
test sets, GPS synchronizing, and end-to-end testing, the
need for this type of staged fault testing is decreasing
dramatically.
Although I have not seen it, I have heard of using sys-
tem generators to provide the desired level of fault current.
Because the power system impedance is primarily reactive,
fault currents require very little real power. If the generators
excitation system can be adjusted to produce a relatively low
voltage compared to the normal system voltage, fault current
can be controlled and kept to a reasonable magnitude.
A relatively easy way to provide the fault current and yet
control its magnitude is to use a low voltage source and the
impedance of a transformer to limit the fault current. This
transformer might be, for example, the actual transformer
in the part of the distribution system that is being tested.
If this is not convenient, a transformer of the appropriate
ratio, impedance, and kVA size might be available from a
rental agency.
Metering
In setting up the through-fault test procedure, it is
necessary to take into consideration the available meter-
ing. Older electromechanical phase-angle meters might
require 0.5 ampere or more to reliably determine phase
angle. Modern power meters typically have a sensitivity as
low as 50 milliamperes.
Protective Relaying Handbook Volume 1 9
It is convenient to use a polyphase power meter rather kVABase *1000
than the spaghetti jungle associated with all of the individ- Z Base =
ual meters necessary to monitor the full system. Additionally, 3 * Base
modern power meters have functions such as event memory,
printing facility, and even on-screen phasor diagrams.
18*1000
In the planning, do not forget to determine where and = = 2.818
how to obtain the signal sources that are to be measured. In 1.732*3,688
some cases, relay test switches or test plugs can provide the
secondary variables. In other cases, microprocessor-based Those with experience in per unit calculations will recognize
relays can actually provide the desired information either that ZBase is more easily calculated as:
directly on the relay display or via a computer.
(kVBase )2
Example Z Base =
MVA Base
The example comes from a 600 MW peaking station. A
partial one-line is shown in Figure 1. The test was performed
initially to assess problems with the 345 kV line differential 182
= = 2.817
scheme. However in the process, several problems with the 115
transformer differential schemes were uncovered.
There are several considerations when making the
Calculating the actual ohmic impedance of the transformer
calculations:
is as follows:
A. Current magnitude at all system voltages must be high
Zactual = ZBase * Zpu
enough to provide adequate current transformer sec-
ondary values to reliably register on available meter-
From the transformer nameplate we find the %Z and
ing.

B. Current magnitude must be at a level that does not %Z 10.5%

Zpm = = = 0.105
overload system components. 100 100
C. A source of sufficient kVA capacity and correct voltage
ZActual = 2.817 * 0.105
level must be available.
= 0.2958
The two most common three-phase low voltage systems
If we connect a 480Y/277V source to the 18 kV winding
in the United States are 208Y/120V and 480Y/277. This
and short circuit the 345 kV system, the following current
example was calculated knowing that a 1000 kVA, 480Y/277
will flow on the 18 kV system:
source was available on site for construction power.
V L-N
Calculation of Fault Current Fault
=
Calculations are made in per unit and usually most conve- Actual
niently on the transformer base of the transformer used as
the fault limiting impedance. 277 V
= = 936 A
MVA Base: Base Rating of GSU Transformer = 115 MVA 0.2958

VBase: GSU Primary = 345 kV on the 345 kV system current will be:
GSU Secondary = 18 kV
18 kV
MVA Base *1000 Fault
= 936* = 48.8 A
= kV
Base
3 *kV Base
Now let us check on some of the considerations we listed
115*1000 earlier. First, does our available source have sufficient
at 18 kV: Base
= = 3,688 capacity?
1.732*18
10
Source kVA = 3* Fault
*kV L-L
= 1.732 * 936 * 0.48
= 778 kVA
So our 1000 kVA source was large enough, but it was
prudent to remove existing loads; therefore, the tests were
planned for the lunch hour.
The electrical contractor installed a temporary run of
two 500 kcmil cables per phase with necessary barricades
and warning tape. Before the contractor installed the cable,
calculations were made to insure adequate current would
be available in the CT secondaries. The first problem was
uncovered here. The CT ratios on the 345 kV system were
not the same at each end of the protected line and could not
be made equal by tap selection. The coordination engineer
was notified and new settings were developed to accom-
modate the problem.
Calculation of CT Secondary Current
At the peaking station the 345 kV CTs were 1200/5
ratio:
Protective Relaying Handbook Volume 1
went very well. The actual current was almost exactly what
was calculated, and phase angle measurements confirmed
that the input currents to the line differential relays were as
indicated on the drawings.
Since the 87L currents appeared to be correct relative to
the drawings, we joined with the utility engineers to review
the entire scheme. It was determined that the problem was
with the design and not with the components. A convenient
place to reverse the polarity on one set of relays was located,
and that system was finally functional.
Once the main objective of the through-fault testing was
accomplished, the unexpected transformer differential relay
trip became the focus. A number of problems were found
with this system. First, the design engineer had reversed
the primary and secondary inputs causing an extreme ratio
mismatch. Further analysis of the event indicated one of the
three CTs on the primary winding was reversed in polarity.
This, despite the fact that the CTs had been tested for ratio
and polarity, and the secondary circuits had been injected
back to the relay.
Although this example is somewhat extreme in terms
of the number of problems found, typically, through-fault
testing will find a problem or problems in the protection
circuits.

Fault
48.8 A Roderic Hageman is President of PRIT Service, Inc. His firm has
Relay
= = = 0.2033 A provided consulting and testing for electric power distribution systems
CTR 240 for more than 25 years. He received his B.S. in Electrical Engineering
from Iowa State University and is a registered professional engineer.
At the transmission substation the 345 kV CTs were 2000/5 Mr. Hageman has served two terms as President of the InterNational
Electrical Testing Association (NETA) and nine years as a member of
ratio: NETAs Board of Directors. He has three times been named NETAs
Man of the Year and continues to be very active in NETA
48.8 A
Relay
= = 0.122 A
400

Both currents were larger than the minimum 50 mA re-

quired for reliable phase angle measurement by the meters
we were using.

The CTs on the 18 kV side at the peaking station were

8000/5 ratio and provided more than adequate current for
monitoring the 18 kV winding currents in the transformer
differential relays:

936 A
Relay
= = 0.585 A
1600

After checking that the through-fault current magnitude

was less than any of the components, we were finally ready
to proceed with the test. The source was turned on, and the
transformer differential lockout relay immediately tripped
the MOD. Fortunately, the transformer differential relay
had event recording, and it was soon apparent that there
were significant problems with the 87T circuits. Since the
utility engineers were waiting, we elected to disable the
87T and continue the tests on the 87L system. Those tests
 Our Goal: Partner with clients to enhance system safety and reliability
by providing leading edge independent electrical testing and
engineering services.

CE Power provides:
Protective Relay Testing and Calibration
Protective Relay Upgrade Services
Acceptance Testing
Commissioning Services
Equipment Repair, Retrofit and Upgrade
Preventive Maintenance
Power Monitoring
Arc Flash Hazard Analysis
Engineering Studies/Power System Evaluation

CE Power specializes in:

480V765kV
Plant
Substation
Alternative Energy

CE Power Solutions of Ohio CE Power Solutions of Wisconsin

4500 West Mitchell Avenue 24/7 Emergency Service Available Nationwide 3255 West Highview Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45232 Appleton, WI 51914
800.434.0415 800-434-0415 800.434.0415
513.563.6150 phone www.cepowersol.com 920.968.0281 phone
513.563.6120 fax 920.968.0282 fax
info@cepower.net info@cepower.net
Protective Relaying Handbook Volume 1 11

Automated Test Point Calculations

for Electronic Relay Testing
and Coordination
NETA World, Summer 2000 Issue
Lonnie C. Lindell and Steven R. Potter
SKM Systems Analysis, Inc.

Modern software can be used to automate relay set-

ting selection, documentation and test point specification. Test Point Calculation for Relay ABC
Whereas electro-mechanical relays are built to have a spe-
cific time-current characteristic, microprocessor-based relays Equation: T = AD/(MN-C) + BD + K
are available with programmable selections of time-current
curve shapes and a wide range of possible settings. To au-
tomate the generation of time-current curves necessary for Constants: A 7.7624
relay coordination and testing, most microprocessor-based B 0.02758
relays provide equations that can be used to generate the N 2.0938
curves. These equations can be used in simple spreadsheet K 0.028
programs to generate time-current curves and to calculate
test points with very little effort. The equations can also be
C 1
used in more sophisticated programs for relay coordination
and test point specification. Time Dial D 1
In its simplest form, a spreadsheet can automate calcu-
lation of test points. Spreadsheets can also be used to M Time
generate complete setting sheets to document a more ex-
tensive series of tests. It is important to note that a separate
Test Point @ 2 X = 2.430
spreadsheet may be required for each type of relay since the
equations, equation constants and setting ranges may vary Test Point @ 3 X = 0.920
between different relays. Often an existing spreadsheet will
require only minor changes to be tailored for a new relay. Test Point @ 5 X = 0.332
Using a spreadsheet to generate the test points directly
from the relay equation is substantially more efficient than
reading points from the relay curves. The spreadsheet is also
Figure 1 Sample spreadsheet for calculating test points
more consistent and more reliable than reading from the
curves. A simple spreadsheet example is shown in Figure 1.
In this sample spreadsheet, entering a time dial value au- Spreadsheets combined with scientific plotting programs
tomatically displays the calculated test points based on the can be used to plot the relay time-current characteristics
equation shown. New current multiples can also be selected by entering the relay equations. Mathematics and plotting
by simply changing the cells with M=2, M=3 and M=5 for software combinations such as MathCAD can also use
2, 3 and 5x current multiples. the relay equations to display the relay time-current char-
acteristics. While these methods can plot a single curve,
they stop short of providing complete relay coordination
and system protection functions.
12 Protective Relaying Handbook Volume 1
System protection software that can incorporate pub-
lished relay equations to generate time-current coordination
curves and specify relay test points is widely available. These
programs display damage and performance curves for power
system components such as motors, generators, transformers
and cables as well as time-current response curves for relays,
fuses, circuit breakers and other protective devices.
Figure 2 displays a sample coordination drawing that
includes low-voltage motor protection with a motor circuit
protector and thermal-magnetic breaker; feeder protection
with a fuse; and transformer protection with a relay and
medium-voltage breaker.
Figure 3 displays a sample coordination drawing that in-
cludes medium-voltage motor protection, feeder protection,
and transformer protection with a combination of relays.
The relays include both electromechanical and electronic
equation-based relays.
Many of the system protection and coordination pro-
grams can also generate relay test points. A sample report
that includes relay settings and test points is displayed in
Figure 3. The report was automatically generated by the sys-
tem protection and coordination program used to produce
the coordination drawing shown in Figure 3. Combining
the coordination, reporting, and test point generation in a
single application saves time and minimizes errors.

The important capabilities of system protection and relay

test point specification software include: Figure 2 Sample protective coordination drawing

Representation of device curves by equations and/or

tabular data
Coordination of devices at different voltage levels on
the same drawing
Tabular reports that include device settings and test
points
High quality output of protective coordination drawings
Large user-expandable library of protective device char-
acteristics.

Using software to automate relay setting selection, docu-

mentation, and test point specification offers several benefits
to design and test engineers and technicians:
It improves power system safety.
It improves power system reliability.
The use of standard equations and models reduces the
chance for human error.
It promotes consistent design and testing practices.
It provides a consistent presentation format which en-
hances understanding between multiple engineers and
technicians.
The use of standard software improves efficiency and
saves time and money.

Figure 3 Sample protective coordination drawing

Protective Relaying Handbook Volume 1 13

Device Name: Relay A Bus Name: Line 1, 69kV

Description: MULTILIN-SR745 Xfmr Relay-5A CT Sec Bus Voltage: 69000.0V
AIC Rating: N/A Fault Duty: 200000.0A
Current Rating: 300A / 5A Curve Multiplier: 1.00000
Setting: 1) OC Pickup 1.0 Test Points:
2) Mod Inverse 5.0 1.0 @2.0X, 3.787s
3) Inst OC Pickup 7.0 @4.0X, 1.909s

Device Name: Relay B Bus Name: Bus 1, 13.8kV

Description: WESTINGHOUSE-CO-7-50/51 Bus Voltage:
13800.0V
AIC Rating: N/A Fault Duty: 12000.0A
Current Rating: 1500A / 5A Curve Multiplier: 1.00000
Setting: 1) Tap 5.0 Test Points:
2) Time Dials 3.0 @2.0X, 2.150s
@5.0X, 0.970s

Device Name: Relay C Bus Name: Bus 1, 13.8kV

Description: WESTINGHOUSE-CO-11-50/51 Bus Voltage:
13800.0V
AIC Rating: N/A Fault Duty: 200000.0A
Current Rating: 600A / 5A Curve Multiplier: 1.00000
Setting: 1) Tap 5.0 Test Points:
2) Time Dials 5.0 @2.0X, 9.200s
3) INST (High) 35.0 @5.0X, 1.250s

Figure 4 Sample setting table including automatic relay test point specification

With these substantial benefits and a relatively small

investment in time and resources needed to implement
a software solution, there is no reason to use traditional
time-current curves for selecting relay test points for equa-
tion-based electronic relays. From simple spreadsheets to
sophisticated protective coordination software, using pub-
lished relay equation data will substantially automate system
protection and relay test point specification.

Lonnie C. Lindell is General Manager of SKM Systems Analysis, Inc.,

an electrical engineering company specializing in power system analysis
software development. He received a BS from the Iowa State University
School of Engineering and an MBA from the University of Phoenix. He
has over 15 years experience in the application of engineering computer
software, is active in education and engineering presentations, and is a
member of the IEEE.

Steven R. Potter is a senior support engineer for SKM Systems Analy-

sis, Inc. where he specializes in protective coordination and protection
equipment computer modeling. He received his BSEE from San Diego
State University. He has over eight years experience in the application of
engineering computer software, is active in engineering education, and
is a member of the IEEE.
14
Test & Maintenance Tips
for Protective Relays
NETA World, Winter 2000-2001 Issue
by Scott Cooper
Beckwith Electric
Beckwith Electric protective relays incorporate several
self-checking routines that continuously monitor critical
functions. When an internal fault is detected the relay safely
removes itself from ser vice and closes the diagnostic contact.
These self-test functions, however, can not determine the
integrity of a status input or trip circuit nor detect small
problems in CT or VT circuits. To verify the integrity of
these circuits, we recommend routinely checking the relays
metering during normal operation and performing the
diagnostic test procedure during outages. The output trip
circuits can be verified by exercising the output relays and
checking the external trip circuits for correct operation. This
combination of internal self-diagnostics, input verification,
and output testing assures that the relay is ready to protect
the system. This maintenance should be performed ac-
cording to each companys schedule. To prevent a layer of
Figure 1 Screen from IPSplot Oscillograph Analysis Software
showing a differential trip. The vertical variegated line in center indi-
cates the breaker tripping and subsequent Beckwith relay operation.
The suspected cause is a wiring problem in their CT circuit.
Protective Relaying Handbook Volume 1
insulating silver oxide from fouling the case contacts, we
recommend periodically reseating M-0420 and M-0430
relays in the drawout case.
One of the most useful and often overlooked diagnostic
features of our relays is the oscillographic recorder. With
the recorder, up to 170 cycles (96 cycles in the M-0420
and M-0430 relays) of prefault input waveforms can be
recorded automatically. The recorder may be triggered
manually or by the operation of any output or input com-
bination chosen by the user. Once triggered, this wave-
form data can be easily transferred from the relay using
the IPScom Communications Software. The waveform
may then be analyzed using the available IPSplot Os-
cillograph Analysis Software. The resultant data can be
a valuable tool in determining the root cause of a relay
operation.
If periodic functional testing is desired, consider that a
single-phase or even a three-phase test set can not duplicate
system conditions for a relay which has seven current inputs
and four voltage inputs. Consequently, the technician has
to disable or alter the setpoints of other functions to prevent
interference with the function under test. This could result in
the relay being placed back in service with a critical function
accidentally disabled. To minimize this possibility, use the
IPScom software shipped with the relay to save the relays
data file before testing. Then write the same file back to the
relay af ter testing. This practice can dramatically reduce the
possibility of setting errors while also providing a convenient
record of as found settings.
Successful functional testing of these relays involves a
few steps. First, study the functional description from the
relay instruction book, carefully noting any special features.
Second, connect the relay exactly as it will be connected
to the system. Third, isolate the function under test with
the IPScom softwares configuration screen. Fourth, apply
the nominal quantities and check the metering using the
IPScom softwares secondary metering screen. Finally, ap-
Protective Relaying Handbook Volume 1 15
ply the test quantities and check your results. If the results
are not satisfactory, check the secondary metering screen
again with the fault quantities applied. If incorrect, check
connections and inputs; if correct, check the function logic
description and testing instructions.
By performing this routine maintenance as required,
you are helping to ensure the integrity and reliability of
the protective relay.

Scott Cooper, Field Service Engineer, joined Beckwith Electric

Co. in 1997. His responsibilities include training, commissioning, and
troubleshooting protective relays for customers. He is also instrumental
in testing new relay products and custom-engineered systems. Scott was
previously an electronics technician at Beckwith testing protective relays
and conducting failure analysis and individual component evaluations.
He is a member of IEEE.
16 Protective Relaying Handbook Volume 1

Using Iop Characteristics

to Troubleshoot Transformer
Differential Relay Misoperation
PowerTest 2001
(NETA Annual Technical Conference)

Michael Thompson and James R. Closson

Basler Electric

Abstract When a transformer differential relay operates

with no obvious transformer fault, system operators have
a serious decision to make. Is there a transformer fault, or
did the relay operate incorrectly? Testing the transformer
requires significant time, with the associated direct and
indirect costs to do so. On the other hand, reenergizing
a faulted transformer can lead to catastrophic equipment
failure. This scenario of a questionable transformer operate
occurs more often than we would like to think, particularly
during the equipment commissioning process.
Several conditions can cause differential relay false trip-
ping. These conditions can cause false trips from external
faults, or simply increased transformer loading. Some in-
dication is needed that the relay is not operating as desired Figure 1 General Differential Principle
before an incorrect operate happens. A potential problem
can be identified by monitoring the operating condition of Differential relaying offers the highest selectivity and,
the differential relay. Indications provided by this monitor- therefore, the highest speed and most secure type of system
ing can serve as a warning if the settings or connections are protection. In theory, a differential relay compares the cur-
not correct. rents into and out of the protected zone. If the sum of the
This paper will explore the issues contributing to trans- currents is not zero, the relay will operate. This is shown in
former differential false trips, and suggest methods to al- the phasor diagram, Figure 2.
leviate this issue. The sum of the currents is identified as the operate
(Iop) or unbalance current. The relay does not acknowledge
conditions external to the protected zone. Accordingly,
Reviewing Differential Relaying Principles coordination delay times are not necessary, and sensitivity
When assessing relay system operation, a basic under- can be optimized.
standing of differential relay operation is necessary. A sum-
mary of the concepts follows:

Figure 2 Phasors of Ideal Non-Fault Condition

Protective Relaying Handbook Volume 1
Differential relaying relies on the quality of the incoming
currents from current transformer secondaries. Therefore,
CT performance is of particular concern in this application.
Although the relay must be desensitized to ensure security
for all non-fault conditions, it must remain highly sensi-
tive to faults within the zone of protection. To accomplish
this, a fixed minimum pickup setting is commonly used, as
well as percentage restraint. Percentage restraint increases
the amount of unbalance, or operate, current needed to
actuate the relay based on the current flowing through the
protected equipment. The restraint setting, or slope, defines
the relationship between restraint and operate currents (See
Figure 3). Relays vary in the way they define the restraint
value in the calculation of Iop/Irestraint percentage ratio. Two
common methods are to take the average of the two cur-
rents (current entering the zone and current exiting the
zone) or to take the maximum of the two currents to use
in the percentage ratio.
Figure 3 Percent Restraint Characteristic
Transformer Differential Specifics
Transformer differential relaying does have some com-
plications, which can be the source of errors in connections
and set-up. As noted, differential relaying is based on vir-
tually balanced current into and out of the protected zone.
However, a transformer is not a balanced current device.
The currents into and out of a transformer will differ by
the inverse of the transformers voltage ratio. Thus, the as-
sociated currents need to be adjusted to represent a balance
during non-fault conditions. To a great extent, this adjust-
ment can be accomplished with the selection of the system
current transformers. The final balancing is accomplished in
the relays TAP settings. The TAP settings scale the input
currents, effectively defining per unit values. The success of
this balancing is measured by the mismatch, which is the
percentage difference between the ratio of the currents seen
by the relay and ratio of the relay taps.
17
Figure 4 Transformer Differential Relaying
There are also conditions on the power system that create
unbalance currents in a transformer but do not represent
transformer faults. When system voltage is applied to a
transformer at a time when normal steady-state flux should
be at a different value from that existing in the transformer,
a current transient occurs, known as magnetizing inrush cur-
rent. The differential relay must detect energization inrush
current and inhibit operation. Otherwise, the relay must
be temporarily taken out of service to permit placing the
transformer in service. In most instances this is not an op-
tion. The harmonics in faults are generally small. In contrast,
the second harmonic is a major component of the inrush
current. Thus, the second harmonic provides an effective
means to distinguish between faults and inrush.
Almost every transformer differential relay available
inhibits operation based on the 2nd harmonic content of
the energization current. A parallel high set operate level
is included to ensure that larger faults will still be detected
during energization. The high set, unrestrained element is
also provided to ensure operation for a heavy internal fault
such as a high side bushing flashover. This high grade fault
may result in CT saturation, which can generate signifi-
cant harmonics that may restrain the sensitive harmonic
restrained element. This is shown in Figure 5.
External faults can also cause unbalanced currents in a
power transformer, depending on the transformers connec-
tions. A Wye connected transformer winding can act as a
power system ground source, providing ground current to
external faults. This unbalanced current must be blocked
from the differential circuit to ensure relay security. This
blocking is usually achieved by a Delta connection in the as-
sociated relay input transformer circuit, which traps the zero
sequence (ground) current component. This delta connection
can be achieved either with the current transformers, or, if
an option, within the transformer differential relay itself.
18
Figure 5 Simplified Block Diagram
An important issue with transformer differential relaying
is the phase shifts inherent in most transformer connections.
A delta connection in a power transformer affects a 30
phase shift in the associated currents. Since the differen-
tial relay compares the currents on an instantaneous basis,
this phase shift will create an unbalance, which must be
compensated. This compensation is usually achieved with a
corresponding delta connection in the CT secondary circuits
and must be coordinated with any zero sequence blocking
connections required.
Protective Relaying Handbook Volume 1
Many transformers are connected with delta windings
on the high side and wye windings on the low side. This
provides isolation between the power system voltages and
a ground source for detecting faults on the low voltage side.
The three-line drawing, Figure 6, shows a delta/wye trans-
former with the associated phase shifts. In this example,
the phase shift is accomplished by connecting the CTs on
the wye side in a delta configuration. The required phase
shift compensation can also be accomplished within the
differential relay. This is desirable for several reasons. Prob-
ably the most important of these is that it allows the CTs
to be connected in wye, making them easier to connect and
verify during installation.
Protective Relaying Handbook Volume 1
Figure 6 Phase Shifts in Transformers
The presence of a Load Tap Changer (LTC) in trans-
formers will also affect differential relay operation. Usually,
these taps provide the possibility of modifying the voltage
ratio 10% for voltage or Var control. This ratio variance,
in turn, varies the current ratios. This variation is usually
within the security margin provided by the relays restraint
characteristic. For a given LTC position, the ratio of operate
current to restraint current will remain constant, as shown
in Figure 7.
Figure 7 Operate Characteristics with Proper Configuration
(10% Mismatch)
19
Connection Concerns
Almost all nuisance trips associated with transformer
differential relay applications can be attributed to incorrect
relay settings or CT connections or mismatch. During a
through-fault condition, the differential operating current
due to mismatch can approach the current rating of the
transformer. These typical mistakes will be discussed, along
with their effects on relay performance.
For each case discussed, the TAP settings are presumed
to be set to the transformers full load current. This defines
the 1 per unit value to be equal to full load. This is the easiest
setting to calculate, and simplifies analysis. The minimum
pickup of the transformer differential relay is taken as 0.35
times TAP for this discussion, or when Iop = 35% of trans-
former full load, given the defined setting. A restraint slope
of 40% of maximum restraint current is assumed. The % of
Maximum characteristic is preferred because it uses infor-
mation from the best performing CT to restrain the relay.
A relay using % of Average restraint current would provide
different results but the concepts are the same. In modern
numerical differential relays, the restraint characteristic may
be user-selectable.
20
Single Restraint Input
If one set of current transformers is not connected to the
differential relay or the current transformers are shorted out,
the differential relay acts as an overcurrent relay. Given this
scenario, I op = I restraint.
Figure 8 Transformer Differential Phasors with Missing Input
Current
When the single input current exceeds the minimum
pick-up the relay will operate. So for this scenario, the trans-
former will trip at 35% of full load under this condition.
Figure 9 Operate Characteristic with Missing Input Current
Current Transformer Lead Reversal
Reversing a current transformer lead, or group of leads,
is the simplest mistake made when wiring a new panel or
upgrading a protection system. Since the differential relay
compares the transformer currents, CT polarity is extremely
important. When a CT lead is reversed, the resulting unbal-
ance current is double the normalized load current. That is
Iop = 2 * I load. Assuming balanced currents (proper TAP
settings), Iop = 2 * I restraint. This is shown in the phasor
diagram, Figure 10.
Figure 10 Transformer Differential Phasors with Reversed Input
Current
Protective Relaying Handbook Volume 1
Under this condition, increased loading will cause the
relay to operate. This operation will occur when Iop exceeds
35% of transformer full load (based on the setting presump-
tions). This will be when the load (restraint) current reaches
17.5% of full load (or 17.5% of TAP setting). This condition
is plotted on the characteristic graph in Figure 11.
Figure 11 Operate Characteristic with Reversed Input Current
There are two problems that can occur with phase shift
compensation. The engineer performing the work can forget
to apply compensation or compensation can be incorrectly
applied.
When a transformer includes a phase shift, a correspond-
ing adjustment must be made in the relay scheme. This is
generally accomplished by connecting the relay input cur-
rents in delta, and can be done either at the CT inputs or
within the relays circuitry. The proper correction is shown
in phasor diagram in Figure 12.
Figure 12 Transformer Differential Phasors with Proper Phase
Shift Adjustment
If phase shift compensation is not performed when the
application requires it, there will be a resulting Iop in the
relay. As load increases, the relay will begin to see an unbal-
ance. The differential relay will interpret this unbalance as
a fault and operate. Phasor analysis, Figure 13, shows that
an uncompensated 30 phase shift will cause an unbalance
current that is approximately half the normalized load cur-
rent. That is Iop = 0.5 * I load.
Figure 13 Phasor Diagram with Missing Phase Shift
Protective Relaying Handbook Volume 1 21
If this condition exists, the relay will operate with in-
creases in load, unless the restraint slope setting is larger
than 50%. The relay will operate when Iop exceeds 35% of
transformer full load (based on the previous setting pre-
sumptions). This will occur when the load (restraint) current
reaches 68% of full load (or 68% of TAP setting). Figure 14
shows this situation.

Figure 16 Phasor Diagram with Wrong Phase Shift

The relay will operate when the load (restraint) current

reaches 35% of full load (or 35% of TAP setting) as shown
in Figure 17. This is a similar level of load to the scenario
where one side of the differential zone is completely missing
as shown in Figure 9.

Figure 14 Relay Operate Characteristic with Missing Phase Shift

Another error can occur by incorrectly applying a phase

shift. For example, shifting the relay input on the delta side
of a delta/wye transformer. While the required phase angle
adjustment is achieved, the necessary zero sequence blocking
is not provided. In this case, the differential relay will operate
for external ground faults on the wye side of the transformer.
This condition is not detectable by taking readings under
balanced loading conditions. The other incorrect shift is a
phase shift in the wrong direction.
As shown in Figure 15, there are two ways to apply a delta
connection. Each affects a 30 phase shift, but in different
directions. If the wrong connection is applied, it will result
in a 60 difference rather than proper phase compensation.
Again, this will cause a non-fault, or false, Iop, and the relay Figure 17 Operate Characteristic with Wrong Phase Shift
will operate with increasing load. Phasor analysis, Figure 16,
shows that a 60 difference in the relay currents will cause
an unbalance current equal to the normalized load current. Transposed Tap Settings
That is I op = 1 * I load. Incorrect TAP settings can occur when the TAP settings
for the relay are transposed. That is, the high side TAP setting
is applied to the low side input, and vice versa. The resulting
relay performance will depend on how closely matched the
current signals into
the relay are. If the
currents into the
relay are very close,
the TAP settings
will also be similar,
and relay security
may not be affect-
ed. However, if the
inputs are substan-
tially different, the
resulting unbalance
will likely cause the
Figure 15 Two Delta Applications relay to operate and
cause a nuisance
trip.
22 Protective Relaying Handbook Volume 1
For example, presume a condition where the currents
to the relay are 3.8 amps on the high side and 4.2 amps
on the low side. The proper relay TAP settings would be
3.8 for the high side input and 4.2 for the low side input.
If the settings are transposed, the current magnitudes will
be incorrectly scaled. This results in a mismatch of 22%, as
shown below.

Mismatch = (current ratio) - (TAP ratio)

smaller of above Figure 18 Characteristic with Bad Tap Settings

with proper settings:

Mismatch = (3.8/4.2) - (3.8/4.2) = 0%
(3.8/4.2)
with transposed settings:
Mismatch = (3.8/4.2) - (4.2/3.8) = 22%
(3.8/4.2)

In this example, the security of the relay will depend

on the setting of the restraint slope. At a slope setting of
15%, the relay will operate on increasing load, when the I
restraint exceeds about 1.6 multiples of TAP or at 160 % of
transformer full loading. At a slope setting of 40%, it would
not operate on load. However, the security margin would be
reduced by this mismatch. Figure 18 shows this example.
Figure 19 Relay Operate Characteristic
3 Factor Neglected In Tap Settings with Missing 3 Factor in Taps

Another TAP setting problem that can occur is to

overlook the magnitude increase associated with a delta
connection in the current circuit. This is a by-product of
the phase shift adjustment, and must be taken into ac-
count. The magnitude shift is the square root of 3, or 1.73.
This magnitude compensation must be included if the
delta compensation is achieved with CT connections. It
may or may not be required if the delta compensation is
achieved internal to the relay. Care must be taken to review
the operating characteristics of the relay in question when
calculating tap factors. This problem is mitigated in some
numerical relays that are capable of automatically calculating
their own tap adjust factors.
Using the previous example of 3.8 and 4.2 as the currents
into the relay, assume that the 4.2 amps current requires a
phase shift. The delta compensated 4.2 amps is now effec-
tively 4.2*1.73=7.3 amps for the differential element. Thus,
for the delta side of the transformer, 3.8 amps = 1PU and,
for the wye side of the transformer 7.3 amps = 1PU. The
proper current ratio is now (3.8/7.3) rather than (3.8/4.2).
If the protection engineer overlooks this, the resulting
mismatch will be:
Mismatch = (3.8/7.3) - (3.8/4.2) = 73%
(3.8/7.3)
This will clearly cause a problem. The relay will operate at
48% of transformer full load current in this case. The effect
of this setting error is shown in Figure 19.
Checking and Troubleshooting
Differential Circuits
Field personnel can apply the lessons noted in this pa-
per in order to troubleshoot CT connections and rectify
problems. For example, a quick simple check of measuring
the current in the operate coil of the differential relay may
be sufficient to detect the gross problems described such as
reversed polarity or one CT completely missing. However,
many of the problems identified result in relatively small
mismatches.
This check also does not acknowledge the fact that the
relay can adjust for magnitude mismatch by its tap settings.
For example, a properly designed differential relay circuit
with one tap set at 5 amps and the other set at 10 amps
would result in 5 amps of operate current under full load
balanced conditions. On one side of the zone 5 amps =
1PU, while on the other side of the zone 10 amps = 1 PU.
In electromechanical relays, Ioperate is the sum of the currents,
which would be 10 5 = 5 amps for this example.
A better approach is to measure and record both the mag-
nitude and angle of the restraint currents at each terminal
of the relay. For example, the criteria should be:
The ratio of the magnitudes of the restraint current on
each phase should be equal to the ratio of the magni-
tudes of the tap settings.
Protective Relaying Handbook Volume 1
High _ Side _ Current High _ Side _ Tap
Low _ Side _ Current Low _ Side _ Tap
The currents on each phase relay should be nearly ex-
actly 180 out of phase.
Differential Current Monitoring as a
Diagnostic Tool
Modern relays with internal phase compensation do
not allow the field engineer to do it the old way with phase
angle and magnitude readings. It is necessary to see the
values seen by the differential element after they have been
manipulated inside of the relay, and this cannot be done by
direct measurement. Other methods must be employed.
As this paper has noted, there are many connection or
setting problems that can cause incorrect operations in
transformer differential relays. The task is to detect these
problems before an incorrect relay operation. Differential
current monitoring is a diagnostic function designed to aid
in the installation and commissioning of differential relays,
especially on transformer banks. This function attempts to
identify and prevent false trips due to incorrect polarity,
incorrect angle compensation, or mismatch.
During transformer commissioning, it would be particu-
larly useful to analyze the system installation and create a
record of the settings and measured currents. The differential
current monitoring function can create a differential check
record like the sample shown in Figure 20. These records
are also useful when comparing the present system char-
acteristics to the characteristics at commissioning during
troubleshooting to determine if something has changed.
The differential check record shown in Figure 20 is an
example of a differential current check record developed by
a numerical differential relay. This particular example is from
an actual installation. The names and dates on the record
have been changed. Upon putting load on the transformer
bank after installing the upgraded protection, the differential
relay alarmed, triggering the diagnostic routine to generate
this report, and tripped. The relays trip outputs were not
connected at the time.
The first grouping of information in the record is the
date and time the record was captured and the basic relay
identification. The second grouping is a record of the CT
and transformer connection settings and the 87 (differential)
settings that were entered by the user. The third grouping is
a report of the tap and angle compensation factors that the
relay is using for each of the three phase CT input circuits.
It is important to note that the angle compensation cannot
be entered manually. The angle compensation is calculated
by the relay based on the CT and transformer connections.
Additionally, the tap compensation setting may be entered
manually or automatically calculated.
23
As mentioned earlier in the paper, a transformer delta
winding can be configured in two ways: Delta IA-IB or
Delta IA-IC. The type of delta and the normal phase se-
quence of the system determines whether the phase shift
will be +30 degrees or 30 degrees. From the information
in the report, it can be noted that the user has described
the transformer winding connected to CT circuit 1 of the
relay as a delta with DAB (Delta IA-IB) connections; and
the transformer winding connected to CT circuit 2 of the
relay is described as a wye configuration. This would be
a pretty safe assumption based on the fact that an ANSI
standard delta high-side/wye low-side transformer uses this
configuration so that the low side lags the high side by 30
degrees when system phase sequence is ABC.
The fourth grouping of information in the record at-
tempts to identify polarity and angle compensation errors by
looking at the phase angle differences of compared phases.
The differential alarm is set whenever the minimum pickup
or the slope ratio exceeds the differential alarm, percent of
trip setting. If the differential alarm is set and neither the
polarity alarm nor the angle compensation alarm is set, a
mismatch error is identified indicating that the most likely
cause of the alarm is incorrect tap settings. In this example,
the record clearly identifies that the problem appears to be
with the angle compensation.
The fifth grouping of information (MEASURE-
MENTS) displays the measured and calculated currents
at the time of the differential record trigger. The relay
measures secondary current and develops the tap and phase
compensated currents for use by the differential element.
Primary current (MEASURED I PRI) is calculated simply
as the secondary current multiplied by the CT turns ratio.
Secondary current (MEASURED I SEC) is the current
actually measured by the relay. Angle compensated current
(ANGLE COMPENSATED I) is the measured secondary
current with phase compensation applied. Tap compensated
current (TAP COMP I) is the tap and phase compensated
current actually used by the differential function. From
this information, it is easy to see how the relay goes about
compensating for magnitude and angle differences between
the two sides of the zone of protection.
The final two lines of the report give the most critical
information. IOP is the operating current. SLOPE RATIO
is the ratio of IOP to the restraint current (in this case it is
the maximum of the two TAP COMP I currents). These
values should be compared to the settings shown earlier
in the report to determine if the relay is in a trip or alarm
condition.
Figure 21 shows the A phase currents before and after
compensation plotted on a polar graph. From the informa-
tion in Figures 20 and 21, it is easy to see that the internal
phase compensation is the opposite of what it should be
and that the currents were shifted 30 degrees the wrong
way. In this installation the transformer being protected
was actually a delta IA-IC/wye configuration and that the
low side leads the high side by 30 degrees. Changing the
transformer connection parameters in the relays settings,
corrected the problem.
24
This facility of modern relays can also be used to simplify
commissioning and documentation. To verify correct CT
circuit connections, internal phase, zero sequence and tap
compensation settings for the differential functions, load
should be placed on the protected zone and a differential
check record triggered, recorded, and examined. The check
record can then become a permanent relay commissioning
record.
Summary
Differential protection is simple in concept. Measure the
current that goes in versus what goes out. If there is a dif-
ference, there must be a short circuit within the protected
zone and a trip should occur. When the protected zone
includes a transformer, the situation is not so simple and
Annoted Differential Check Record
Figure 20 Annotated Differential Check Record
Protective Relaying Handbook Volume 1
special considerations must be made. One of the greatest
challenges is compensation for phase angle and magnitude
differences. The paper describes the effects of many of the
possible errors that can be made in installing and checking
out a transformer differential circuit.
Proper installation checks and final in-service readings
can detect these problems and ensure reliable and secure op-
eration. The paper describes these traditional final in-service
checks. However, with modern solid state and numerical
differential relays, traditional checkout procedures may not
be capable of detecting all possible errors. For this type of
relay, diagnostic routines and reporting functions can make
up for this. It is important for the relay technicians and
engineers to make use of these advanced features to ensure
proper operation of the protection system.
Protective Relaying Handbook Volume 1 25

Figure 21 In-Service Current Circuit Verification Form

26 Protective Relaying Handbook Volume 1

Bibliography
1. Blackburn, J. Lewis, Protective Relaying Principles
and Applications, Second Edition, Marcel Dekker,
Inc., New York, 1998
2. ANSI/IEEE C37.91-1985, IEEE Guide for Protective
Relay Applications to Power Transformers
3. Criss, John, and Larry Lawhead, Using Transformer
Differential Iop Characteristics to Measure Near-Trip
Conditions, Protective Relay Conference at Georgia
Institute of Technology, April 1997.

Jim Closson received his BS from Southern Illinois University at

Carbondale, and an MBA from the University of Laverne. Prior to
rejoining Basler Electric as a Protection and Control Product Manager,
he served as a Regional Application Engineer for Basler Electric. He has
also held managerial and sales positions with Electro-Test, Inc. and ABB.
He has taught courses on Electrical Power Systems Safety, Ground Fault
Applications and Testing, and Power System Maintenance. Mr. Closson
is a Senior Member of the IEEE and serves on the Power Distribution
Subcommittee for the Pulp and Paper Industry Committee of the IAS
and on the Transportation Subcommittee for the Petrochemical Industry
Committee of the IAS.

Michael Thompson served nearly 15 years at Central Illinois Public

Service Co. where he worked in distribution and substation field opera-
tions before taking over responsibility for system protection engineering.
He received a BS, Magna Cum Laude from Bradley University in 1981
and an MBA from Eastern Illinois University in 1991. During his years
at Bradley University, Mike was involved in the cooperative education
program and worked in electrical engineering and maintenance at a
large steel and wire products mill. Mike is Senior Product and Market
Manager for the Protection and Control Product Line at Basler Electric.
Mr. Thompson is a member of the IEEE.
The Anatomy of a
Shermco Field NETA-Certified
Qualified to perform to

Service Engineer Protective

the highest standards

Reliable and Responsive

Part of a large international
team available 24/7
Trusted Advisor
Offering independent
service across all brands Relaying
Back by the Best
From the field, to our
Safety First
On record as an industry
Handbook
full-service rotating
apparatus services
leader in safe work practices
Volume 1

Cutting-Edge
Trained from utility
transmission to
low-voltage distribution

Published by InterNational Electrical Testing Association

Odds are, you wont find a job anywhere that a Shermco field service engineer cant handle.
As one of the worlds most respected electrical maintenance and testing companies,
Shermco delivers A+ service from utility transmission to low-voltage distribution.

Our experience in commercial, industrial, generation and specialized sectors, such as oil
refineries, pulp and paper, steel and wind power, uniquely qualifies us to handle the
largest, most complex assignments. Our people are trained on the latest technologies and
safety practices. And, we support them with full-service rotating apparatus services and a
large fleet of service vehicles, ready to respond 24/7.

Corporate Headquarters | 2425 East Pioneer Drive, Irving, Texas 75061 Why trust your vital power services to anyone less? Count on an industry leader. Published by
p. 972.793.5523, 888.SHERMCO | f. 972.793.5542 | www.shermco.com Visit www.shermco.com and learn more today. InterNational Electrical Testing Association
Protective Relaying Handbook Volume 1
Motor Protection Fundamentals
PowerTest 2001
(NETA Annual Technical Conference)
Bernie Moisey
Northern Alberta Institute of Technology
Summary
To enter set points into modern management type motor
protection relays for a specified motor the end user must be
familiar with all of the motor characteristics and is able to
interpret the technical data supplied by the manufacturer.
Without this knowledge the protection scheme could result
in one that over or under protects the motor.
Motor Specifications
The following motor data could be considered minimum
requirements for a protection scheme on a large motor:
Horse power; voltage rating; full load speed; type of motor;
frequency; full load torque; breakdown torque; locked rotor
torque; service factor; NEMA design; insulation class; sym-
metrical locked rotor amps at rated voltage; type of enclo-
sure; maximum temperature rise at specified load; ambient
temperature; kVA code; current at 100%, 75%, 50% and
no-load; power factor at full load; no-load and locked rotor
current; efficiency; cold and hot safe stall time; power factor
correction data; load inertia; rotor inertia; load torque dur-
ing the acceleration period; time-current and hot and cold
thermal limit curves; motor starting and accelerating curves;
speed curves at different voltages; performance curves; per-
missible starting sequence; minimum time between starts;
number of starts per hour and residual voltage data.
Symmetrical Components
Most microprocessor based motor protection relays use
symmetrical components in thermal and unbalance algo-
rithms. Some relays estimate positive, negative and zero
sequence quantities while others use the actual sequence
equations. A good understanding of these fundamentals is
required to select appropriate set points and to design test
circuits to verify relay operation.
27
Voltage
The voltage on the nameplate of a motor may differ from
the system nominal voltage, i.e. 4000 volts on the nameplate
connected to a 4160-volt system. In most cases when the
motor is started, the voltage at the motor terminals will sag.
To ensure that sufficient voltage is present to accelerate the
load the starting voltage must be calculated and then limits
set with an under voltage relay. If the voltage sags on start
the locked rotor/starting current will decrease. Because the
motor is driven into saturation at rated starting voltage, the
starting current is not directly proportional to voltage. This
must be considered when entering set points for locked rotor
protection. Setting alarm set points for current unbalance
requires that one must be able to determine an acceptable
current unbalance by converting the normal system voltage
unbalance to current unbalance. Set points are also required
for over voltage and reclosing when the residual voltage is
present.
Grounding
Electrical systems may be ungrounded, direct or solidly
grounded, low impedance grounded and high impedance
grounded. In all cases the magnitude of the charging cur-
rent or the line to ground fault current must be known. The
ground element of the relay must be connected to detect
this abnormal condition and disconnect the motor as quickly
as possible.
The two most common methods of connecting ground
relays to the system are using a zero sequence current
transformer and the residual connection. In each connec-
tion it is possible for the ground element to receive a false
signal, which could result in the motor being taken off line.
Compensation must be considered when determining set
points to minimize nuisance trips. The residual connection
uses three current transformers. False ground fault signals
can occur due to unbalanced phase burdens, asymmetrical
starting current and the normal mismatch of the three cur-
28
rent transformers. Compensation for these false signals can
be achieved by increasing the pick up or by increasing the
time delay. False signals can enter the ground relay through
the zero sequence connection. If any triplen harmonic is
present in the primary circuit this will pass through the
zero sequence current transformer and appear as a ground
fault. When two motors are connected to the same bus, the
running motor can trip out when the other motor is started.
A sagging bus voltage combined with the residual voltage
and noise that is generated during the starting sequence
can result in a trip. Compensation for the zero sequence
connection is achieved by a short time delay set point, not
instantaneous.
In high impedance grounded systems, the neutral limit-
ing resistor limits the fault current to a magnitude of 1 to
10 amps. High impedance faults may be difficult to detect
and low set points may result in false trips. When this is
the case, the use of a low pick up directional relay with an
angle of maximum torque, current leading voltage should
be considered.
Thermal Limit Curves
Large motor manufacturers include thermal limit curves
as part of the specifications. One is called the cold thermal
limit curve and the other is referred to as the hot thermal
limit. The cold thermal limit curve is the limit of the mo-
tor when the motor temperature is equal to or less than
the specified ambient, usually 400 C. The hot thermal limit
curve is the thermal limit of the motor when it is operated
in the maximum ambient temperature, at specified rise and
specified load.
All thermal limit curves consist of the following three
curves: locked rotor; failure to accelerate and running over-
load. The locked rotor and failure to accelerate are voltage
dependent. These limit curves usually are plotted on semi-
log paper and the slope of the hot curve can be different from
the slope of the cold curve. When the limit curve is given for
a motor that can be started at two different voltages, 100%
voltage and 80% or 90% voltage, the locked rotor thermal
curve appears as a straight line and the failure to accelerate
thermal limit curve is for the lower starting voltage. When
the starting voltage is determined for a specific motor, the
limit curves must be altered to reflect this condition. The
time between the cold safe stall time and the hot safe stall
time can be of short duration, long duration or, in the case
of a motor that is ring limited, the hot safe stall time can
be equal to the cold safe stall time. Also the acceleration
time can be greater than the safe stall time.
Thermal Protection
Thermal protection includes protecting the motor dur-
ing starting, acceleration and running. Manufactures of
microprocessor based motor protection relays will supply
I2t protection curves that are available in a database and
the end user selects one that fits the motor characteristics.
Other manufacturers allow the end user to generate a cus-
tom I2t protection curve. This is accomplished by entering
Protective Relaying Handbook Volume 1
time current values in a look-up table. The custom curve
provides flexibility and results in a more reliable protection
scheme.
When designing the thermal protection scheme the
engineer or technologist must determine the degree of
protection. Is the motor to be over protected or allowed
to operate at the maximum thermal limit? To accomplish
this, an understanding of the relays thermal algorithm is
required. Microprocessor relays allow the I2t protection
curve to move downwards when the motor temperature
increases. This is accomplished by multiplying all values in
the time current look-up table by a constant. The complete
protection curve moves up or down by the same proportion.
The thermal algorithm can be biased by stator RTD inputs
or if RTDs are not used the biasing is accomplished with a
full load thermal capacity reduction set point.
Hot and cold thermal limit curves can be parallel or
have different slopes and may have acceleration time that
is greater than the safe stall time. In each case care must
be taken to insure that the motor is protected in all three
modes of operation, i.e. the I2t protection curve must never
intersect the thermal limit curve. Where motors have a
variable starting voltage and a long acceleration period, one
may consider selecting a motor protection relay that has a
voltage dependent I2t protection curve. When using this
type of relay it is necessary to manipulate the thermal limit
curve supplied by the motor manufacturer or at the time of
ordering the motor, request limit curves for minimum and
maximum starting and accelerating voltages. Motors with
acceleration times greater than the safe stall time may fail
to restart after a normal shutdown. If this situation arises
then it is necessary to adjust the thermal algorithm so that
the hot motor inrush current does not intersect the I2t
protection curve.
Protection Phase Current
Set points are required for over current conditions that
result from three phase and phase-to-phase faults that may
occur on the load side of the current transformers. Mechani-
cal jam or rapid trip set points may be required to prevent
the motor from stalling when maximum or breakdown
torque is exceeded. Under current protection may be used
as secondary protection to protect the mechanical load from
damage, i.e. a pump that uses the product as lubrication. A
phase sequence set point may also be required. By entering
the proper sequence the relay now has the ability to select
the proper symmetrical component equations and prevent
operation in the reverse direction. When using an instan-
taneous element to clear faults insure that the disconnect
has the required interrupting capacity. For some contactor
applications it may be necessary to disable the instantaneous
device. Also the asymmetrical starting current must be al-
lowed for. If the sensitivity is too great, a small difference
between the starting current and the maximum three-phase
fault current, consider using differential protection. Differ-
ential protection requires that all six leads from the motor
be accessible.
Protective Relaying Handbook Volume 1
Unbalanced Protection
Most microprocessor type motor protection relays have
two types of unbalanced protection. One type uses alarm
and trip set points. The other type of unbalanced protec-
tion involves biasing the thermal algorithm. When the
motor draws an unbalanced current, the relay will calculate
an equivalent balanced current that will produce the same
motor heating. This equivalent current, not the actual motor
current is used to determine the trip time. The equivalent
current must be greater than the pick up for the algorithm to
be enabled. Depending upon the manufacturer of the relay
the K factor, a ratio of negative sequence rotor resistance to
positive sequence rotor resistance may be pre-determined
or entered by the users.
The ambient temperature plus the rise under ideal con-
ditions plus the rise due to the unbalanced current drawn
determines the temperature of a motor. The temperature rise
due to unbalance depends upon the amount of unbalance
and the amount of load on the motor. Care should be taken
to prevent the motor from being disconnected when it is not
stressed. Most algorithms have flexibility that allows the end
user to determine at what percent unbalance and percent
overload the algorithm is enabled. Motors with a service
factor of 1.0 have the I2t protection curve enabled at 1.15
times the full load current, while a 1.15 service factor motor
allows the protection curve to be enabled at 1.25 times the
full load current. By entering the appropriate service factor
as a set point the relay then determines at what unbalance
the algorithm is enabled. Other relays allow a set point to
be entered as to when the protection curve can be enabled.
Typical values for enabling the protection curve are 1.01
to 1.25 times the full load current of the motor. Knowing
the unbalanced algorithm equation allows the protection
engineer to calculate the percent unbalance that is required
to enable the algorithm. A typical equation is,
2 2
Ie I1
I2
K
I2 is per unit negative sequence current.
Ie is the equivalent current calculated by the relay when the
motor draws unbalanced current.
I 1 is per unit positive sequence current, or load
component.
K is the ratio of negative sequence rotor resistance to posi-
tive sequence rotor resistance.
IEEE states that for every 3% voltage unbalance the
temperature rise of the motor will increase 25%. Motor
protection relays do not use voltage unbalance in algorithms,
they use current unbalance. An approximation of converting
voltage unbalance to current unbalance is, for every 1% volt-
age unbalance at the terminals of the motor, the percent current
29
unbalance will be approximately equal to the per unit starting
current expressed as a percent.
Control
The emergency start feature allows the operator to restart a
hot motor by resetting the thermal algorithm to zero percent
thermal capacity used. In some cases the relay will not allow
an emergency restart if the motor temperature exceeds the
stator RTD trip set point.
Start inhibit, when enabled, prevents a restart until sufficient
thermal capacity is available. Thermal capacity required to
start the motor is a learned feature.
Acceleration timer, when enabled, will lock out the motor if
it does not come up to speed in the specified time.
Backspin timer prevents a restart when the direction of motor
rotation is opposite to the norm, i.e. a down hole pump.
Time between starts, is a set point that controls the minimum
time between when the motor is first started and when
another start is allowed.
Anti jogging, when enabled, prevents a series of rapid start-
stop operations. It can be used for a lock out condition that
prevents a restart when residual voltage is present.
`Phase reversal prevents the motor from starting in the
wrong direction.
Some relays have auxiliary contacts and logic that allow
the motor to start on a reduced voltage, i.e. wye-delta, auto-
transformer, etc.
Starter failure is a signal from the starter to the relay that
implies that the contacts have changed state. This is the
same as the 52b contact signal of an electrically operated
breaker.
Conclusion
To properly protect a motor the end user must be familiar
with the motor characteristics and load requirements. An
understanding of the microprocessor based motor protec-
tion relay algorithms allows for flexibility. Do not disable
algorithms because you do not understand them.
Reference
Concepts of Motor Protection written by B.H. Moisey
Bernie Moisey has been an instructor at the Northern Alberta Insti-
tute of Technology for 33 years and is currently teaching in the power
systems and protective relaying section. Bernie has presented motor
protection seminars in Canada, United States, South America, and
Australia. He acts as a consultant for major manufacturers of protective
relays designing and upgrading protection algorithms. He is actively
involved in application engineering.
30
Meaningful Testing of Numerical
Multifunction Protection Schemes
PowerTest 2001
(NETA Annual Technical Conference)
Jay Gosalia
Doble Engineering Company
Introduction:
Generally, an electromechanical relay is a single function
module. Multiple electromechanical relays wired together
create a complete protection scheme. Electromechanical
relay design is not very complex and is relatively easy to test.
Traditionally, complete protection scheme testing was not
done. Test engineers tested each individual component of
the scheme and assumed that if the individual component
worked correctly then the complete scheme worked cor-
rectly. This is true to some extent as the scheme is relatively
simple; hence, the assumptions stated above provided sat-
isfactory results.
Advances in Digital Signal Processing technology and
microprocessor design allow the user to do more with
protection today than older technology provided. These
advances now allow the complete protection scheme to
be designed by combining different protection functions
in software logic. With modern, high-power computers,
the protection designer accurately simulates power system
conditions using tools like EMTP, ATP, etc. to develop
new protection methodology. This new methodology pro-
vides efficient protection where protection functions are
implemented using a numerical algorithm. Protections
are now designed to work effectively under power system
disturbance. Efficient protection is not the only benefit of
this advanced technology. Additionally, these advances allow
the protection designer to put a host of different features in
a box resulting in a reduction of the protection packaging
size. Numerical multifunction protection provides a myriad
of different options to cover a wide range of applications.
Changing the software logic functions to customize the
protection scheme for the individual application is easy.
The degree of customization available to the user depends
upon the design of the protection scheme. This flexibility
improves the functionality of the protection multi-fold, and
at the same time makes the protection scheme complex.
This added complexity increases the possibility that the
Protective Relaying Handbook Volume 1
engineers will commit errors in the protection configuration.
The relatively complex protection design poses a number of
challenges for the relay test instruments. The traditional test
methods will not be sufficient to evaluate the performance
of multifunction numerical protection. A Protection test
instrument should provide the functionality to enable the
user to evaluate the capability of the multifunction digital
protection scheme.
This paper describes how to test multifunction numeric
protection effectively. It also discusses test instrument
requirements for testing and evaluation of multifunction
protection schemes. Use of todays technological advances
in the personal computers, in testing and in the evaluation
of a protection scheme under actual power system condition
using COMTRADE standard and simulation programs like
EMTP and ATP are discussed in this paper.
Numerical Protection Functions
and Settings:
Numerical protection provides a host of protection
schemes along with control and metering functions in
one package. The user configures the protection to suit the
application by enabling certain functions and disabling
unnecessary functions. The connection between the various
functions is done through software links. Software links are
equivalent to a wiring connection between the protection
elements in an electromechanical protection scheme. The
difficult part to the user is that unlike electromechanical
schemes, in numerical protection it is not apparent which
elements are active or how they are interconnected. In nu-
merical protection, these details are only available via Hu-
man Machine Interface (HMI) if provided or by connecting
a PC, typically via serial port, to the protection. Some of the
line protection scheme can have setting parameters as high
as 250. Understanding how to calculate settings and how to
implement the various function links are not trivial tasks.
Protective Relaying Handbook Volume 1
To apply the protection for the application, perform the
following tasks:
Enable the required protection elements
Disable the protection elements which are not required
Calculate the settings for all required protection ele-
ments
Set up the links between various protection elements
typically using the software function links
Assign output contacts for trip, close, control, and an-
nunciation functions
Assign logic inputs for various functions
Configure the protection for metering display and set
up communication option to SCADA or sub-station
automation system if required
These tasks require careful evaluation of the application
and a good understanding of the capability of the numerical
protection. Once this task is completed, the user needs to
create an application verification plan to confirm that the
protection meets the intended need.
Dynamic-State Testing:
As described above, numerical protection provides many
protection and control functions in one box. It is not an easy
tack to verify the proper setting and functionality of each
individual function. Traditional Steady-state Testing of an
individual function requires the protection element under
test to be isolated and at the same time to deactivate the oth-
er protection element, so that it does not interfere with the
protection function under test. Reconfiguring the protection
typically allows user to test protection using Steady-State
techniques. Some of the numerical protection can be put
in a diagnostic mode or test mode, which facilitates testing
of the protection element for Steady-State Test. This is a
time consuming task and requires intimate knowledge of the
protection scheme. To verify the application, Dynamic-State
Testing of the protection is the logical choice.
To simplify the testing of numerical protection Dynamic-
State Testing can be used. Dynamic-State Testing means
testing under simulated power system conditions. A report
from IEEE Power System Relaying Committee entitled
Relay Performance Testing discusses how Dynamic-State
Testing and transient simulations provide a far better under-
standing of how the protection system performs. By making
a profile of the operation of the scheme, malfunctions can be
found faster because it is easier to identify the changes in ar-
eas that do not operate the way they are expected. Dynamic-
State Testing allows fundamental frequency components to
switch synchronously and thereby represent power system
events. The synchronous switching between the pre-fault,
fault, and post-fault conditions allows users to simulate a
power system event easily and quickly. Dynamic-State Test-
ing does not simulate transient components of the power
system event. In most applications, this may be acceptable,
as what is being verified is the configuration of the scheme,
31
protection algorithm, and interaction between the various
elements of the numerical protection. Some modern-line
protection schemes use a superimposed component to de-
tect the direction of the fault. For such type of protection,
transition between two states of the Dynamic-State simula-
tion needs to be examined to confirm that transition from
one state to other state does not create problems with the
protection. Figure 1 shows the functional block diagram for
Dynamic-State Testing of a protection scheme.
Protection
Under Test
Source Protection
Inputs Outputs
Power System Logic
Simulator Inputs
State change
V I
Definition
Power System State Simulation
Controls Sources and outputs
Figure 1 Functional Block Diagram for Dynamic Testing of a
Protection Scheme
Dynamic-State Testing, as mentioned above, controls the
voltage and current applied to the protection under test. By
simulating voltage and current phasors for various states of
the power system, protection response can be analyzed. The
transition from pre-fault to fault to post-fault state can be
programmed by the user by monitoring the response from
the output contacts of the protection. During every state,
logic outputs can be controlled to simulate events like carrier
signal, breaker position, etc. Dynamic-State Testing, thus
by controlling current/voltage phasors, logic outputs and
monitoring protection output contact response in a real time
can simulate power system events accurately which allows
user to test protection response easily.
Distribution Numerical Protection
Scheme:
Consider the typical distribution numerical protection
scheme, which includes the following protection functions
in a package.
Device 51 phase and ground time over current func-
tions (Directional or non-directional)
Device 50 high set over current protection typically
protection provides 2 high set over current protection
Device 79 Multi shot auto-reclose function
Device 25 Sync check function
Device 87 Bus differential protection
Device 50 BF Breaker fail protection scheme
Device 81 under and over frequency protection
32
Some other protection functions may include load-shed-
ding scheme, VT/CT supervision functions, and Cold start
supervision. Discussion of the complete protection scheme
and its application is beyond the scope of this paper.
Protection Testing: How Much And
When?
Before applying the protection scheme, testing needs
to be performed to confirm the suitability of the scheme
for the application. When testing a protection scheme, it
is important to test the configuration, which is intended to
be the configuration in service. It is impossible to test all
possible configurations for the scheme. For evaluation of the
protection scheme, it is necessary to check the configura-
tion that exercises the maximum elements of the scheme.
Another question that arises here is when and how much
testing should be done when the firmware of the protection
changes? The manufacturer of the digital protection scheme
upgrades the protection firmware time to time. The reason
for these changes can be a problem fix or improvement
in the protection performance. This practice is going to
continue, as such changes most of the time do not require
changes in the hardware or scheme wiring. It is mostly the
software changes. When protection is in the service and
firmware changes are required, then the protection scheme
should be at least tested to ascertain the proper operation
of the protection. Figure 2 describes how some functions
of a distribution protection scheme can be tested using
Dynamic-State Testing.
52a BFR
Trip
&
I
Current
Detector Breaker Fail
Timer
Trip
Protection
Algorithm
Figure 2 Typical Breaker Fail
Breaker Fail Protection:
Breaker fail protection provides the protection when a
breaker fails to trip. Protection senses the fault and issues
a trip command. If the breaker fails to clear the fault, the
breaker fail timer times out, and if the protection contin-
ues to sense current through the breaker, then it provides
breaker fail output. The breaker fail output contact generally
picks up the lock-out relays to trip the associated breaker
to clear the fault. Figure 2 shows a typical block diagram
of breaker fail logic.
To test breaker fail protection properly, the following pow-
er system conditions should be simulated:
Breaker fail condition
Protective Relaying Handbook Volume 1
Normal trip condition
Delayed breaker trip condition
Dynamic-State Testing can simulate all of the above con-
ditions. Dynamic-State Testing allows the user to simu-
late a power system event by creating different states of
the power system.
First state of the test simulates the normal load condi-
tion, which is Pre-Fault State. This condition should be
simulated for time sufficient for protection to come to a
quiescent state.
Fault State should follow the pre-fault condition by
simulating fault current and fault voltages. Test instru-
ment in this state should monitor the response of the
output contacts from the protection scheme. The pro-
tection test instrument should monitor trip output and
breaker fail output contacts along with other protection
contact outputs.
Program the test instrument to simulate Post-Fault
State on sensing the operation of breaker fail output
contact. It is important that the test instrument should
monitor all or as many output contacts as possible of
the protection scheme. This allows the user to analyze
the protection performance by checking response of the
output contacts. The user can compare the protection
response with the expected response to analyze the op-
eration.
By programming the transition from Fault State to Post-
Fault State on trip contact, normal trip condition can be
simulated. The test instrument should be able to simulate
breaker operation by simulating breaker trip and close op-
eration with applicable delays like three-cycle trip time and
five-cycle close time. Programming breaker trip time to a
desired value can simulate delayed breaker trip. The effect of
the 52a contact on the logic can be analyzed by simulating
52a contact from the test instrument. Similarly, if the logic
is effected by any other logic input the test instrument could
simulate the same.
By recording the transition of protection contacts, pro-
tection trip time, and breaker fail time delay, the resetting
time of the current detectors and the breaker fail margin
time can be measured. These parameters are very important
for the proper operation of the breaker fail protection. As
mentioned above by monitoring as many output contacts
as possible the proper operation of the protection scheme
can be ascertained.
Bus Protection Logic:
One common feature in distribution numerical protec-
tion is simple bus protection logic. Microprocessor based
protection allows simple logic bus protection to be included
for distribution protection. Figure 3 describes the simple
bus protection logic.
Protective Relaying Handbook Volume 1
Incomer
Block Trip
F1
F2
A B C be programmed to simulate different power system events
Figure 3 Simple Bus Protection Logic
Protection at the incomer provides backup for A, B, and
C feeder protections. Close up fault on any of the feeders A,
B, or C (Fault F2 in the above figure), both feeder and back
up protections high set element will pick up. If the fault is
close up then it is difficult to be distinguished by back up
protection as bus or feeder fault. The typical logic employed
checks that if high set element of incomer protection picks
up and receives no block operation from the feeder protec-
tion then it is a bus fault. (Refer to the Fault at F1 in Figure
3.) Incomer protection should trip the incomer breaker
after a delay of 50-mSec (or any time set by the user). This
assumes that this is a radial system.
Testing of this logic at the incomer protection can be accom-
plished by Dynamic-State Testing. The first step is to define
the states of the power system to simulate the feeder fault.
First state of the test simulates the normal load condi-
tion, which is Pre-Fault State.
Fault State should follow the pre-fault condition by
simulating fault current and fault voltages. Test instru-
ment in this state should simulate the block-input sig-
nal using logic output.
Program the test to simulate Post-Fault State on sens-
ing the operation of trip output contact. During this
state normal voltage and no current should be provided
which simulates breaker open condition.
By not exercising the block signal, a bus fault can be
simulated. Refer to the Fault at F1 in Figure 3. During this
condition, monitor all the output contacts to analyze the
response of the incomer protection for the feeder fault. Test-
ing of such type of scheme is relatively simple when all the
elements of the scheme are available for testing. However, it
may not be feasible all the time to have a complete scheme
available, typically when evaluating the protection for ap-
plication in the lab. Therefore, if a complete scheme is not
available, Dynamic-State Testing can simulate the operation
of the protections not available during evaluation.
Accurate control of logic outputs for Dynamic-State
Testing allows user to simulate various fault conditions for
protection scheme. For this purpose, an adequate number
33
of logic outputs should be available. When all of the logic
outputs are independent of each other, they provide ample
flexibility for simulation of any power system event the
user conceives.
Numerical Protection Reclosing Logic:
Testing and evaluating the Reclosing logic in the mul-
tifunction protection requires control of multiple inputs
to the protection and monitoring various output signals
from the protection on time basis. The test instrument can
such as transient fault, permanent fault, three-phase fault,
multiphase fault, single-phase fault or combination of any of
the above. During the fault simulation, the test instrument
can be programmed to simulate breaker closing/tripping
operation, operation of other associated control and protec-
tion element by controlling logic outputs of test instrument.
During the simulation, test instrument can be programmed
to record the protection response, which can be evaluated
by the user.
Numerical Line Protection:
Numerical line protection provides many enhanced
functions for the effective protection of the transmission
line. Over and above the 3-zone 3-phase, phase and ground
impedance protection, numerical protection can provide the
following enhanced functionality:
Switch on to the fault
Power swing blocking
VT/CT supervision
Long memory
Reclosing and Synchrocheck functions
Time over current back up
Breaker fail protection
Distance to fault function
Dynamic-State Testing tests the above functions easily
by simulating power system phasors, controlling logic out-
put for simulation of power system events and recording
protection response. Dynamic-State Testing allows users
to create test plans independent of the protection manu-
facturer. Dynamic-State Testing simply simulates power
system conditions and allows users to analyze the response
of the protection.
Transient Testing:
To test state-of-the-art protection such as a super-
imposed directional comparison protection, some special
capabilities are expected from the test instrument. This type
of protection operates very fast and works on the transient
component during the fault. For such a protection type,
Dynamic-State Testing may not be adequate. Transient
Testing provides the accurate simulation of power system
34
events. It is an important tool the user has, to perform a
thorough evaluation of protection scheme operation. Tran-
sient Testing can be performed using the data created by an
EMTP program or data recorded by DFRs. To check such
types of protection, Transient Simulation should be used.
Actual DFR record or an EMTP/ATP generated record
can be used to test such type of protection. COMTRADE
data files help the user to perform Transient Testing. Mod-
ern DFRs and digital protection can record power system
events in a COMTRADE data format. It is also possible to
create COMTRADE data files from simulation programs
such as EMTP and ATP. The COMTRADE format is a
collection of data around an event point, recorded at regular
time intervals, to define the characteristics of voltage, current
and the status of digital channels before, during and after
an event. High playback rate of the transient event using
COMTRDADE data is necessary to simulate a power
system event accurately. Test instrument should be able to
play the transient data at high playback rate. To simulate
dc-offset, dc-coupled amplifiers are required for Transient
Testing. EMTP/ATP can generate transient data at 50-mi-
crosecond intervals to simulate a transient event accurately.
This requires that the test instrument play back the data at
rate of 20 kHz. Test instruments, which can play transient
data at this rate, can easily have a bandwidth of six kHz,
which is adequate for simulation of transient conditions.
Along with the control of the voltage and current values on
a sample-by-sample basis, an instrument should be able to
simulate logic output with 0.1-mSec accuracy and should
be able record response of the protection with 0.1-mSec
accuracy. The ability of test instrument to record multiple
inputs and timers along with the ability to control logic
outputs with 0.1-mSec accuracy is very important in testing
modern multifunction numerical protection.
Test Instrument Requirements:
A test instrument should provide a sufficient number
of logic inputs, in order to allow the user to monitor mul-
tiple contact output from the protection under test. The
numerical protections output contacts are typically under
software control. The output contacts can be allocated to
perform different functions depending on the application.
To evaluate the protection performance, it is important
to simulate power system conditions, record, and analyze
the status of all output contacts during test interval. It is
important to ensure that the contacts, that operated were
supposed to operate, and that the contacts that did not
operate were not supposed to operate. At the same time it
is necessary to ensure that pick up and drop out timings of
the contacts are as expected. The instrument should also be
able to start multiple timers to analyze the timing sequence
of the various events. To simplify the analysis of the event,
the timer should be able to be started and stopped by the
user by defining the trigger where trigger definition includes
logical combination of inputs.
Protective Relaying Handbook Volume 1
Summary:
Advances in the microprocessor and digital signal pro-
cessing technology allow the user to employ multifunction
numerical protection for the protection of power system
apparatus. Modern state-of-the-art protections are de-
signed to work under power system conditions. Software
logic provides enormous flexibility to the user to design
protection logic for the application. To properly test and
evaluate the protection for the application, Dynamic-State
Testing or Transient Testing should be used. Dynamic-State
Testing simulates power frequency phasors, which can be
useful in evaluating the protection algorithm. Transient
Testing simulates power system events accurately by the
simulation of transient conditions. The simulation of power
system conditions, includes simulation of voltage and cur-
rent values along with the simulation of the events like
breaker operation, carrier signals, etc. Numerical protection
can only be tested effectively by playing back such events.
The modern test instrument employs similar technology
as used in the protection, which allows simulation of the
power system events easily and effectively. A modern test
instrument provides dc-coupled amplifiers with adequate
power along with 8 to 16 isolated logic inputs and outputs.
Such a high number of inputs and outputs are necessary
to test numerical protections effectively. Response time of
such inputs and outputs should be on the order of 100 mi-
croseconds. To simplify the analysis of protection response,
test instrument provides timing functionality where time
interval can be recorded for user specified events. The start
and stop functionality of the timer based upon the logical
combination of inputs further simplifies the protection
response evaluation.
References:
1. ANSI/IEEE C37.111.1991 Standard Common For-
mat for Transient Data Exchange (COMTRADE) for
Power Systems
2. IEEE Special Publication # 96TP115-0 Relay Perfor-
mance Testing, Power System Relaying Committee,
Report of Working Group I 13.
3. Jodice, J.A. and Giuliante, A.T., A New Philosophy for
Protection Diagnostics, Proceedings of the Sixty-Third
Annual International Conference of Doble Clients,
1996, Section 6-7.
Jay Gosalia is presently working at Doble Engineering Company as
Product Manager: Diagnostic Instruments. He has over 22 years of ex-
perience in the power engineering field, 17 of which have been dedicated
to the development and marketing of protective relays. Before joining
Doble Engineering, he was the US Sales and Marketing Manager at
GEC Alsthom T&D, Protection and Control Division for 13 years.
Prior to GEC, he worked at ABB in the Circuit Breaker Division as a
design and development engineer. Mr. Gosalia, an active member of the
IEEE Power System Relaying Committee, has authored several technical
papers on protective relays. He has a BS in electrical engineering and
MS in computer science.
Protective Relaying Handbook Volume 1
Using Dynamic Testing Techniques
for Commissioning and Routine
Testing of Motor Protection Relays
NETA World, Summer 2001 Issue
by Benton Vandiver III, P.E.
Omicron electronics Corp. USA
Traditional methods of testing modern motor protection
relays applied to large motors can be a daunting task due to
the specific motor data required to determine the numerous
relay settings for proper protection. The use of a modern
three-phase test system and recording/playback of dynamic
test files can provide many timesaving and analytical advan-
tages resulting in reduced costs when commissioning motor
protection and later routine testing.
Traditional approach
and inherent problems
Applying a motor protection relay typically requires
specific knowledge of approximately 40 parameters of a
large motor as a minimum. Calculations are required to
determine the actual settings to be used in the modern motor
protection relay (comprising 50-150 settings) based on the
motor data and its actual application. It is not uncommon
to apply a motor to a power system where the nominal
system voltage differs from the motor nominal rating. This
alone affects several critical settings necessary to adequately
protect the motor. Improper settings will result in over or
under protection resulting in various problems.
These complexities make testing very difficult with con-
ventional single-phase test sets. Even traditionally defined
tests using a three-phase test set can not prove the settings
are correct for actual operating conditions of the motor in
its application. Ramped output of voltage(s) and current(s)
or even a sequence of static output states simulating start,
load acceleration, and full load scenarios do not represent
the actual power system conditions. The numerous variables
and system parameters cause simple test calculations to fall
short in verifying correct motor operation and protection for
the specified application. Creating realistic values for testing
voltage sag, zero-sequence voltage, negative-sequence cur-
rent, asymmetrical starting current, or locked-rotor current
35
settings, just to mention a few, is nearly always an educated
guess. A more precise and predictable test method would
certainly be preferred.
The dynamic testing approach
Utilities have always understood the advantages of dy-
namic fault testing to verify system protection schemes. Due
to the technical advancements in modern protection relays
and their needs for dynamic waveforms to prove their ap-
propriate protection operation, the dynamic testing method
is becoming the only testing choice. Large, expensive power
system simulators have been used for these tests in the
past. In recent years, advanced DSP technology and power
electronics now provides this capability in cost-effective,
portable, modern three-phase test systems.
This test method utilizes the IEEE Comtrade Transient
Data Exchange standard as the source of the dynamic test
files. These Comtrade files can be produced using PC-based
mathematical power system modeling programs or directly
captured transient events from the actual power system
using several available recording devices (fault recorders,
protective relays, power quality monitors, digital meters,
etc.). Evaluating a system misoperation or testing new pro-
tection ideas is easily performed using these dynamic files.
By replaying the recorded files with a modern three-phase
test set to the protection relay, the dynamic response can be
analyzed based on the expected response.
It is this method of recording the power system wave-
forms, their analysis, and replaying the recorded dynamic
Comtrade files which can simplify the challenge of testing
a modern motor protection system. The calculation of criti-
cal motor protection settings for each application becomes
uniquely deterministic, for instance, based on direct analysis
of the recorded waveforms during a motor start sequence.
This test procedure is surprisingly simple, and future routine
tests become virtually automatic.
36
Getting the dynamic data
As noted, sources to obtain the dynamic waveform test
files may be more readily available than we think for the
motor protection testing challenge. Modern motor protec-
tion relays are capable of capturing the measured voltage
and current waveforms in oscillography files. These can
easily be converted or directly exported in the Comtrade
file format for use by most modern test sets. Other system
devices like power quality meters are typically applied
in these applications and also can be used to capture the
waveform data required. Other sources may include digital
fault recorders, multifunctional digital meters, and power
quality analyzers.
The newest three-phase test systems, however, are also
capable of monitoring and capturing these power system
waveforms, essentially becoming a digital fault recorder. This
then provides an all-in-one testing solution for the modern
motor protection scenario.
A new motor protection testing
procedure
Based on available technology and information, it is
obvious that quality data eliminates the guesswork of cal-
culating the critical settings for a modern motor protection
application. One such approach would be:
1) Use base motor data and known power system data to
enable the minimum protection in the motor protec-
tion relay and still allow safe motor starts.
2) Capture the motors voltage and current waveforms,
(preferably in Comtrade format) during the typical
commissioning procedures. The more start and run
scenarios the better. Save each scenario as a separate
file.
3) Use analysis software to view the captured motor
starts. Determine critical settings by measuring actual
voltage sag, maximum starting current, acceleration
time, current unbalance, CT mismatch, negative-se-
quence current, zero-sequence voltage, full-load cur-
rent, and other actual performance data.
4) Use the actual performance measurements to then
make the calculations required for the remaining set-
tings of the motor protection relay.
5) Replay the Comtrade test files to the motor protec-
tion relay and assess it for correct response and opera-
tion.
6) Utilize the editing features of the analysis software
and modify copies of the recorded Comtrade files to
decrease/increase voltage and current values to fault
levels, increase full-load current, increase acceleration
times, etc. and save as additional test files.
7) Playback these fault files to the motor protection re-
lay and ensure it protects the motor as expected.
8) Place the motor in service with confidence the pro-
tection is optimized.
Protective Relaying Handbook Volume 1
9) Save all Comtrade test files and compile a total test
plan for this motor protection. When the next rou-
tine test is scheduled, recall the test plan and replay
them to verify the relays correct response.
10) Concurrently, during the routine maintenance, record
any new motor starts for use in motor performance
assessment.
Eliminate the trial and error and reduce
testing time
By utilizing the recorded dynamic files of the motor,
the proper settings are directly determined by analysis, and
the motor is spared the needless exercise of unnecessary
motor trips, starts, and lockouts. Proper motor protection
settings for thermal damage is easily determined from the
actual negative-sequence current and zero-sequence voltage
values determined from the same analysis of the test files.
Commissioning of new motor installations is dramatically
reduced using this new procedure. Simultaneously, bench-
mark performance data for both the dynamic file capture
procedure and comparing them to the original commission-
ing dynamic test files, measuring key parameters.
This also provides the inherit ability to perform a rou-
tine test automatically using the saved commissioning test
plan. The advantage of utilizing the identical test files and
expecting the same relay test results is obvious. This also
establishes a repeatable historical trend of the relays per-
formance, which is only possible by consistently using the
identical test files.
Conclusion
This procedure has been used in actual commissioning of
several large motor protection schemes that resulted in:
Significantly reducing the total commissioning test time
and time to in-service.
The advantage of utilizing actual motor/system perfor-
mance data to determine the protection settings that
eliminated over/under protection issues.
Grounding and unbalance problems were identified and
resolved before the motors were placed in service, again
saving potential downtime.
Availability of dynamic commissioning data, where fu-
ture comparative analysis has the potential to identify
trends before problems result.
Benton Vandiver III, P.E. is currently Technical Director for OMI-
CRON electronics Corp. USA in Houston, TX. A 1979 BSEE gradu-
ate of the University of Houston, his primary responsibilities include
market-focused product development, strategic sales, test application
development, and product training for Omicron products in North and
South America. An IEEE member, he has authored or co-authored many
technical papers for various conferences and journals in North America
over his 23 years in the power systems industry.
Protective Relaying Handbook Volume 1
Commissioning Numerical Relays
Part One
(See Protective Relaying Handbook Volume 2 for Part Two)
NETA World, Summer 2001 Issue
by James R. Closson and Mike Young
Basler Electric Co.
Modern numerical relays have many new features that
were not available in electromechanical or analog designs.
These new features include setting groups, programmable
logic, and adaptive schemes. Although these features make
numerical relays very powerful, they also create a need for
reviewing commissioning methods. Although there are
several references regarding commissioning of electrome-
chanical relays, there are no written standards that address
the testing and commissioning of multifunction, numerical
protective relays. Therefore, most methods employed today
are based on experience. Although there are many methods
that give good results, this article suggests one approach for
changes to commissioning tests and revised documentation
of relay settings.
Commissioning protective relays requires three primary
tasks relay personnel should perform:
Calibration of the relays
Functional tests
In-service readings
Relay calibration confirms that the relay will respond
according to design and set point when voltage and/or cur-
rents are applied at the relay terminals. Functional testing
confirms that the proper breakers trip or close according to
the design when the relay contacts close. The functionality
of all ac and dc schemes should also be checked. Finally,
in-service readings are taken as soon as the equipment is
placed in service and has load current flowing. In-service
readings confirm that, with a given load present, the proper
voltages and currents appear at the relay terminals.
37
Calibration and functional testing of relays must be done
before the equipment is placed in service. In-service readings
must be taken immediately after load is on the equipment.
The equipment is not released to the dispatcher or plant
operator until the in-service readings are correct.
There are other commissioning tasks important to pro-
tective relays such as testing instrument transformers, meg-
gering control cables, confirming transformer taps, and so
on. However, this paper will focus on calibration, functional
testing and in-service readings as areas directly affecting the
commissioning of numerical relays.
For the purposes of this paper, electromechanical and
solid-state relays will be referred to as traditional devices
while multifunction, microprocessor-based designs will be
referred to as numerical. Although there are significant
differences in electromechanical and solid-state devices, the
methods used for testing and commissioning are similar,
whereas numerical relays must be approached differently.
Commissioning Traditional Relays
Relay calibration is performed using the manufacturers
instruction manual and the relay setting sheets. In the simple
overcurrent example provided in Figure 1, the setting sheet
would include identifying information about the station
name, the feeder number, and relay model numbers.
The actual settings are:
CT ratio
50 element tap
51 element tap
51 element inverse time curve selection
51 element time dial.
38
Figure 1 Overcurrent circuit ac schematic
This information will readily fit on one sheet of paper.
Setting records, in either hard copy or electronic form, are
easily stored. Once the settings are determined, they are ap-
plied to the relays by selecting taps, adjusting dials, or setting
switches. Secondary current values are then injected into
the relay using a test set. Pickup of the 50 and 51 elements
is checked against the settings, and adjustments are made
to bring the relay within calibration limits. Timing tests of
the 51 elements are also made to ensure the time dial and
curve settings are correct. The output contacts are monitored
during these tests to verify relay operation.
Functional testing, also called circuit tests or trip check-
ing, is another keystone activity of commissioning. This is
not the place to cut corners. The intent is to confirm that the
protection and controls work as intended and also that they
have no unintended consequences. Making checks to see
that the design works right is called a positive test. Making
checks to see that the design does not work incorrectly is
called a negative test.
Positive Tests
When the phase overcurrent relays in Figure 2 operate,
the circuit breaker will trip directly. In order for the ground
relay to trip the breaker, the cutout switch must be closed.
Each overcurrent relay element is operated one at a time to
confirm that each works. The relay contact should be forced
to close with the test set instead of applying a jumper across
the contact. Targets are confirmed after each trip.
Open the ground cutout switch, then attempt to trip
with the ground relay; the breaker should not trip. With
the ground relay trip contact still closed, turn the ground
cutout switch back on and confirm that the breaker trips.
This proves the cutout switch prevented tripping. These are
all positive tests.
The negative tests are more difficult to define. The relay
engineer must look for ways the circuit could operate in
an unintended manner. For example, when the circuit in
Figure 2 is taken out of service, the fuses are pulled or the
switch is opened.
Protective Relaying Handbook Volume 1
Figure 2 Simple overcurrent circuit dc schematic
If the fuses are not correctly labeled, the wrong circuit
could be de-energized. Personnel working on the circuit
could be harmed or inadvertently cause the breaker to trip
because the fuses were labeled incorrectly and control power
was never removed from the circuit under test. This is an
unintended consequence that would not be discovered by
confirming only that the circuit operates correctly under
normal conditions.
Negative Tests
Figure 3 is an example of a circuit similar to the one in
Figure 2 with the drawing changed to reflect a circuit wiring
error. Rather than the ground cutout switch being present
only in the ground relay circuit, it is now in the tripping
circuit for all relays. If the same positive testing procedure
were followed as before, this wiring error would not be
found. All relay test results would be positive, including
cutout switch actuation while testing the ground relay. If
testing were terminated at this point, this wiring error would
go undetected. The ground cutout switch would open all
tripping circuits when operated.
A negative test can be performed by confirming that the
phase relays trip the circuit breaker while the ground cutout
switch is in the open position. Complete negative testing
involves checking every possible combination and permu-
tation in the circuit. Although not extremely difficult in a
simple circuit, it can become very complex when there are
20 to 30 circuit elements. Because it may not be practical
to check every possible combination, test engineers should
concentrate on the ones that are most common, such as
incorrect wiring or identification.
Protective Relaying Handbook Volume 1
Figure 3 Miswired overcurrent circuit dc schematic
In-Service Readings
The purpose of in-service readings is to verify that the
correct quantities of current and/or voltage appear in the
relay. In-service tests are performed with a phase angle me-
ter, voltmeter and ammeter. The in-service check will prove
the ac wiring, CT and VT ratio, the direction the relay is
looking, phasing, direction and magnitude of switchboard
metering, and direction and magnitude of SCADA meter-
ing. Several weeks of manpower are invested to get a line
terminal ready for commissioning. Therefore, the value of
an hour expended to perform a complete in-service test is
inexpensive insurance.
Prior to releasing equipment for service, power flow
in the primary bushings must be determined in or-
der to compare it to secondary values. Using Figure
4 as an example, current readings can be taken in the
A-phase primary bushing with a tong ammeter on its ex-
tension stick. Secondary current and phase angle readings
can then be taken in the current coil of the relay with an
ammeter and phase angle meter. By taking the CT ratio into
account and comparing the two current readings, CT ratio
and appropriate current to the relay coil can be verified. The
phase angle reading compares A-phase current to a refer-
ence voltage to prove the relay is looking at the polarity of
A-phase current and not some other phase. When these
readings are confirmed to be correct, the equipment can be
released for service.
39
Figure 4 In-service readings
Commissioning Numerical Relays
Although the same basic steps apply to commissioning
numerical relays, the nomenclature changes somewhat.
Where springs and drag magnets or extender boards pro-
vided the ability to calibrate traditional relays, the modern
numerical relay is calibrated at the factory before shipment.
Therefore, the numerical relay can only be checked or tested
to ensure that it operates within the parameters specified
by the manufacturer. Because numerical relays contain a
variety of functions (86, 27, 59, 50/51, etc.), functional
testing takes on a new meaning. Providing a stimulus and
observing the response of each function within the numeri-
cal relay becomes a function test. With this in mind, our
commissioning steps are:
Relay tests/checks
Functional tests
In-service readings
Todays relay engineer must make adjustments to testing
techniques to accommodate the enhanced capabilities of
numerical relays. These adjustments to technique must con-
sider multiple setting groups, custom internal logic schemes,
built in logic switches, dynamic setting capability, internal
phase compensation, diagnostic screens, communications,
security, oscillography, alarms, and more.
Relay Calibration
As noted before, calibration of numerical relays is usu-
ally not required since there are no adjustments to be made.
There are no trim pots, switches, or selectors with which to
make settings and adjustments. If the relay does not operate
within tolerance there is no way to adjust it, so calibration,
as we know it, can not be made. However, each relay should
be checked to make sure it is operating correctly. Second-
ary injection is still used to make the test, and the output
contacts still should be monitored.
40
Most numerical relays allow a combination of entering
the data from the front panel (human machine interface)
or through a serial port using a personal computer (PC). To
realize the full potential and capabilities of numerical relays,
the user must have computer skills in order to interface the
relay with a PC. In some cases, such as programming logic
schemes, utilization of a PC is a must.
Because there is a single algorithm instead of in-
dividual measuring elements, there is no need to re-
peat testing on every phase or every zone. It should
be sufficient to test A-phase zone 1, B-phase zone 2,
C-phase zone 3, etc. However, automated relay testing can
speed up the process so there is no significant time penalty
for testing all phase combinations.
Impedance relays respond to dynamic conditions differ-
ently than steady state conditions. These relays should be
tested accordingly, using dynamic testing.
Because the numerical relay has extended capabilities,
there are more settings to apply. Most numerical relays are
multifunction devices that have several relaying functions
built into one box, thus adding to the number of settings for
each relay. Relay engineers and technicians should think of
these devices as systems rather than individual relays because
they often include switches, metering, control, and wiring
(in the form of logic schemes). It will become apparent that
documentation of the settings will become an important
factor in correct commissioning of the numerical relay.
Dynamic Testing
For complex schemes such as distance, secondary injec-
tion with steady state values does not provide the informa-
tion needed prior to commissioning. The response of these
systems can only be measured with tests that simulate the
power system: prefault load, fault condition with transients,
and postfault conditions. These test cases can be simulated
with software or oscillography files recorded during actual
fault conditions and replayed to the relay. Testing the logic
one function at a time in these complex schemes would
be extremely time consuming and still may not prove the
scheme works. There are many timing and coordination is-
sues that can be proven only by testing the scheme exactly
as it will be when it is in service.
If the test cases are played with the help of an automated
test set and the entire line protection panel is connected
to the test set, then the entire battery of tests can be made
without reconnection.
By applying a series of faults that change incrementally,
balance points can be confirmed for every fault type and
every phase combination. Since the testing is dynamic, it is
not necessary to disable elements for testing as with steady
state. It is always preferable to do the testing exactly as the
scheme will be in service.
The performance of the distance elements changes with
the source impedance ratio (SIR). By running additional
tests with a variety of SIRs, the performance of the trip-
ping elements can be measured and compared against fac-
tory performance expectations. This set of data also gives
Protective Relaying Handbook Volume 1
baseline information that can be used in future tests to see
if the scheme is still performing the same as when first
installed.
Software is available to generate the more than 100 files
needed to run all the cases. These files can then be combined
with automated test equipment to run the cases in succession
and record the results. This is, by far, the most cost effective
method with meaningful results.
The emphasis of automated testing is on relay character-
istics. Control functions, such as external cutout switches,
autoreclosing, and SCADA, must still be checked as part
of commissioning. If the user has standard schemes and has
the ability to program the automated testing, these control
features could be added to the automated test schemes
with prompts to turn on or turn off controls as part of the
automated testing and reporting.
Communications-aided schemes can be very difficult to
test under actual system conditions because the real com-
munication signals have channel delay and attenuation
characteristics that are difficult to simulate under test. The
true proof is to allow the test equipment to communicate via
satellite so the fault signal is given to both ends simultane-
ously. Any other method except for staged fault testing will
leave questions about how the communications channels
will coordinate with each other.
Disabling Elements For Testing
Testing multifunction relays may require that certain
elements be disabled to accommodate testing. For example,
if a simple 50/51 function has both time and instantaneous
elements programmed to the same output contact, it may be
necessary to disable the 51 element to get an accurate pickup
value on the 50 element. Although not a difficult chore in
most relays, it does require changing the relay from the in-
service setting to perform the test. The preferred method
of testing any circuit or relay is to test it exactly as it will
be when it is in service. Making changes to the in-service
settings after they are loaded into the relay requires that the
setting be changed back. This may be risky because there
may be dozens of settings that need to be changed.
One alternative is to begin by loading a copy of the in-
service settings in the relay and disable elements for test-
ing as the need arises. Rather than trying to reverse all the
changes when testing is complete, load the original copy of
the in-service settings back in the relay. This will ensure that
the relay is returned to its as-found settings.
The relay engineer should be ever mindful that disabling
elements within the numerical relay is akin to removing
conductors connecting traditional relays in order to test
one of the relays in the switchboard. Forgetting to replace
the conductors once testing is completed would have
severe consequences. Failing to remember to return the
numerical relay logic to its original setting can have the
same consequences.
Protective Relaying Handbook Volume 1
In applications where the same testing scheme will be
used repeatedly, it may be more convenient to create a set-
ting group dedicated for testing. The relay set points within
this setting group can be the same as the in-service group,
with elements programmed to individual output contacts
where needed for testing.
Testing Setting Group Change
The ability to have several groups of relay settings that
can be dynamically activated manually or automatically to
meet the needs of the system may be one of the most pow-
erful features of numerical relays. When system conditions
change, the relay is alerted and the settings are changed
instantly. There is no need to compromise a setting to fit
two different system conditions
In many applications there may only be a need for one or
two setting groups, leaving the remaining groups without
settings. If the relay should inadvertently be programmed to
switch to an unused setting group, the relay would essentially
be out of service. This is another instance where making the
negative test is very important. Even though settings and
schematics show no setting group change, negative tests
should be performed to ensure there are no unintended
consequences of switching to an unused group.
Perhaps the easiest method is to identify any automatic
or dynamic functions during the setting and commissioning
process. They can then be set and tested to operate when
needed and not operate when not needed. It is the lack of
a negative test that can lead to trouble on an automatic
feature. For example, if a setting group were accidentally
programmed to change groups five minutes after the 51 ele-
ment reaches 70 percent of pickup, it might not be noticed
during testing. After installation, once the load reaches this
threshold and five minutes has expired, the relay will switch
to another setting group with no programmed settings.
In some applications there may be no need to utilize set-
ting group changes. However, the setting sheet still should
list the setting group change and whatever set points or
commands are needed to program it for no setting group
change. Although the setting group change function is not
used, it is important to document it so the setting engineer
and the commissioning engineer both have identified the
function for inclusion in the testing and commissioning.
Leaving it off the setting sheet because the function is not
needed may mean it will not be checked at all. In this case
a setting of zero is important.
If any setting groups are not used, copy the in-service
group settings to all other unused groups. If the relay in-
advertently switches to one of those groups, it will still be
in service with operational settings. When more than one
setting group is used, copy the normal setting to all of the
groups that are not used.
41
Dynamic or Adaptive Characteristics
Dynamic or adaptive characteristics should be handled
in a similar manner as setting group changes. Any pre-
programmed feature of the relay that can make dynamic
changes to the relay while it is in service should be called
out on the setting sheet so it can be confirmed during com-
missioning even though it may not be used. These features
may be used to cut out instantaneous or ground elements
for relay coordination or change the set point of a protection
element. If they are identified on the setting sheet, they can
be tested to confirm that they operate as intended and do
not operate when not wanted.
Testing Programmable Logic
Multifunction relays have, in one box, the equivalent of
several single function relays that would be found on the
traditional relay panel. The functional schematic of the tra-
ditional relay is determined by the wiring from one device
to the next. In the numerical relay, the programmable logic
takes the place of the wiring. Therefore, programmable logic
should be treated the same as switchboard wiring. Logic dia-
grams should be drawn out and documented on blueprints
and included in the construction package or settings file.
When functional testing is performed as part of commis-
sioning, testing of the programmable logic should be taken
as seriously as functional testing traditional schemes.
Programmable logic can be saved and transmitted to
the relay electronically, sometimes in the same file as the
settings. Saving programmable logic to a file in advance
of commissioning is a time saver. However, it should not
supplant the need for a hard copy of the logic diagram.
The logic diagram is an important document used during
commissioning and as a permanent record in the substation
drawings for troubleshooting.
Figure 5 shows a typical programmable logic scheme
for basic overcurrent protection. This is the level of detail
required to perform functional tests. Based on this infor-
mation, the commissioning engineer can begin with the
inputs and confirm that input 1 changes as the breaker 52b
contact changes state and that the relay correctly identifies
the status of the breaker. Input 3 cuts out the ground and
negative sequence relays, and so on. Notice that there are
enough output contacts to program the 51 element to out-
put 1 and the 50 element to output 2. In this example, the
need to disable elements for testing as previously discussed
is eliminated.
The logic should be tested just as functional testing would
be for traditional relays. That means confirming that all
inputs, outputs, relay function blocks, logic gates, controls,
alarms, and switches perform as intended and do not operate
with unintended consequences. This means identifying and
performing all positive and negative tests.
The sequence of events feature of numerical relays can be
used to help sort out the results of logic testing to confirm
that the correct elements are asserted, logic has functioned
correctly, and timing is correct.
42 Protective Relaying Handbook Volume 1
tripping duty and reporting
via a mechanical target. The
seal-in unit will stay picked
up as long as trip current is
flowing to the trip coil.
The output contacts of a
numerical relay are usually
individually sealed relays
rated for 30 ampere trip-
ping duty. However, they
will break less than one
ampere and will be dam-
aged if opened while trip
current is flowing. The out-
put contacts are initiated
by the internal trip logic
of the relay and, therefore,
are independent of trip
current. To avoid damag-
ing output contacts used
for trip and close duty, a
hold-up circuit is typically
provided that will allow
Figure 5 Typical programmable logic scheme output contacts to remain
closed for 10 to12 cycles
Once a numerical logic scheme has been completely regardless of what the logic is doing. Once a trip or close
checked out, it is not necessary to repeat the internal logic has been initiated, the contact should remain closed long
testing every time that scheme is used. The scheme is re- enough to complete the breaker operation. This type of set-
peated verbatim electronically. However, inputs, outputs, and ting is easily overlooked and may not be discovered until the
operational settings must be checked every time. relay is in service. This is another item that should be added
to the setting sheet document so that it can be properly
Testing External Inputs programmed and checked during commissioning.
In some cases, the targets of numerical relays have pro-
Most numerical relays use optical isolators (optos) to grammable features such as report last target, report all
condition the input circuits as shown in Figure 5. These targets, report initial fault targets, ignore certain targets,
optos have some dc voltage that defines their threshold of etc. Electromechanical targets are cumulative. That is, if
operation. Typically, this threshold is somewhat higher than multiple system faults occur since the relay targets were last
half the battery voltage but below the minimum expected reset, there is no way to determine which targets went with
dc bus voltage. which fault. Numerical relays, on the other hand, normally
If the plant or substation battery system is ungrounded report only the targets for the most recent fault. Previ-
with typical battery ground monitoring systems applied, ous target data can be retrieved from event data. Because
tests should be performed to confirm that the opto would there may be settings or logic associated with targets, this
not operate with a full positive or negative battery ground information should also become a part of the setting and
between the opto and an external field contact. On a 130 commissioning procedure.
volt dc system, full battery ground between the external field
contact and the opto would result in half battery voltage of
65 volts dc to the opto. After the input is tested for proper Making Changes to Existing Settings
operation at normal battery voltage, the test should be re- If a setting change is implemented after the relay is placed
peated at half battery voltage to confirm the opto will not in service, how much testing should be done? First, the field
operate. It should be noted that some relays have internal engineer should be armed with the existing settings and
jumpers used to set the opto threshold. This, too, should be the new settings in both electronic format and hard copy
taken into consideration. printout. Th is is useful in the event questions arise about the
as-found settings and also provides a means of returning
Testing Targets And Output Contacts to the old settings if problems are encountered installing
the new ones.
Traditional electromechanical relays commonly use
trip and seal-in units in conjunction with the main relay
contacts. The main contacts are normally not rated for
tripping duty, so the combination trip and seal-in provide
Protective Relaying Handbook Volume 1 43
After downloading the existing settings from the relay
and comparing them to the original commissioning as-left
settings, any discrepancies identified should be documented.
A misoperation caused by an initial wrong setting may well
be the purpose for implementing the setting changes.
If the two existing setting files match, the new settings
can be applied to the relay. Although settings are typically
applied electronically through a Com. Port, some relay
manufacturers offer provisions for settings application via
a front panel keypad. Regardless of which method is used,
all items that have been changed should be tested. If the
change is a relay set point, then secondary injection testing
is required. If the change is in the relays programmable
logic, then a functional test should be performed. If the
instrument transformer inputs have been disturbed, then
in-service tests should be done.

In Volume 2 of the Protective Relaying Handbook series,

part two will cover in-service testing, documentation and
using the numerical relay as a commissioning tool.

Jim Closson received his BS from Southern Illinois University at

Carbondale, IL, and an MBA from the University of Laverne, Laverne,
CA. Prior to joining Basler Electric as a protection and control product
manager, he served as the companys regional application engineer. He
has also held managerial and sales positions with Electro-Test, Inc.
and ABB. He has taught courses on electrical power systems safety,
ground fault applications and testing, and power system maintenance.
Mr. Closson is a senior member of the IEEE and serves on the Power
Distribution Subcommittee for the Pulp and Paper Industry Commit-
tee and on the Transportation Subcommittee for the Petrochemical
Industry Committee.

Mike Young received an MBA from Rollins College and a BSET from
Purdue University. He worked for Wisconsin Electric Power Company
as a relay engineer and for Florida Power Corporation as a field relay su-
pervisor for 21 years. He has authored and presented numerous papers on
protective relaying at technical conferences across the United States. He
is currently Principal Application Engineer for Basler Electric, a member
of the IEEE, and is involved in several working groups of the IAS.
44
Steady State vs. Dynamic Testing
NETA World, Summer 2001 Issue
by Steven Stade
Universal Power Products, LLC
The introduction of microprocessor-based relays has cre-
ated the need to examine existing test practices that have
been adopted over the years for electromechanical relays.
Although protection philosophies have not changed, the
achievement of those philosophies is accomplished in dif-
ferent methods between the two types of relays.
When building a protection scheme utilizing electro-
mechanical type relays, a physical layout can be designed
and tested on how the process will eventually occur. For
example, coils are energized to create an electrical force to
close a mechanical contact. This will operate other devices
in a similar manner that will eventually accomplish the
desired task. With this type of arrangement, each step has
to be proven to give confidence of correct operation. The
major device to be proven is the relay itself.
Electromechanical relays, by nature, are devices that use
electrical and mechanical energy to operate. If any part of
that operation fails, the unit will not function correctly. To
prove the correct operation of the device as intended, cur-
rents and/or voltages must be applied to the relay to simulate
actual load conditions. Instructions from relay manufactur-
ers and past experiences generally have established testing
practices utilizing a steady-state testing environment.
The use of microprocessor-based relays requires a protec-
tion scheme to leave the physical layout environment that
has typically been used and enter a digital world. When
viewing a schematic of the design, all that may be seen is a
trip contact that will operate a downstream device. Viewing
the schematic will not give any details of what creates the
trip contact to operate. More information is necessary. This
idea carries over into the testing environment. Traditional
testing methods may not give all the information needed to
prove all the details are in place to produce the desired result.
That is because a great deal of the process is being handled
with a microprocessor chip, based on settings typically con-
trived by an engineer and entered by field personnel.
Protective Relaying Handbook Volume 1
To prove the correct operation of the microprocessor-
based relay, three basic items need to be proven: accuracy
of the CT and/or PT inputs of the relay, operation of the
output contacts, and the correct entry and utilization of set-
tings stored in memory by the microprocessor chip. In short,
it is now required to work in a digital world to determine if
input received from a CT and/or PT can produce a desired
response to an output contact.
To accomplish this task, the use of a dynamic-state envi-
ronment may take precedence over the standard steady-state
environment. It is no longer a requirement to raise operating
values in a manner to verify mechanical relay operations.
It is more important to initiate faults that represent true
system conditions to verify the relay will respond as desired.
Inputs, outputs, and programming can be proven with cor-
rect operation of the relay.
Settings are engineered to produce an output for a par-
ticular condition. In the microprocessor-based relay, many
settings entered in the relay must be coordinated to work
with each other in order to create the desired output. To
test the pickup of a particular element may prove the correct
operation of that element but in many cases will not prove
it will function as expected in a system fault. A fault needs
to be placed on the relay to prove the element actually will
produce a desired output. This can be performed quickly
and efficiently by the use of a dynamic state test. It applies
the fault condition and waits on relay response. Steady-state
testing can be attempted to perform this function, but it
will not always give the response expected. The relay may
recognize the conditions placed on the relay as abnormal
and actually cause the relay to not operate.
Dynamic-state testing can be designed to prove the de-
sired accuracy of the relay at the same time the relay is tested
to operate for particular fault conditions. Assume that a five
percent tolerance is allowed for an element. Apply a fault at
a value five percent under the expected pickup. Follow this
Protective Relaying Handbook Volume 1 45
with a fault at five percent above expected pickup. If the the application may have measures available to automati-
element does not operate during the first test and operates cally calculate fault conditions based on the settings of the
during the second test, it is proven that the element does relay. Test set manufacturers generally build software that
operate as expected within the tolerance allowed. is compatible to their equipment. Available to the market
One major issue involved in the testing of microproces- is also a company that specializes in software that com-
sor-type relays is the amount of elements that will create municates with a variety of test sets available from various
a trip condition to the relay output. It becomes an issue to manufacturers.
determine the best method of how to isolate and prove par- Programs have become very involved with companies that
ticular elements. Should elements be temporarily disabled have adopted dynamic-state testing processes. The process
and enabled later, or should elements be directed to an involves the engineering department and field department
isolated output contact? In making such a judgment, how working together as a team to produce effective results.
do you insure the integrity of the test? These questions can Many engineering departments have incorporated a fault
bring about the consideration of a dynamic-state test. With simulation program based on their electrical system. These
some understanding of the protection environment, dynamic programs are used to help configure relay settings based
tests can be assembled to isolate elements based on the fault on actual system conditions that should be monitored by
conditions applied to the relay. Zones of protection, zone the relay. With the ability of the fault simulation program
timers, ground elements, etc. can all be isolated for testing, to calculate fault conditions, the conversion to secondary
and the integrity of the testing procedure is protected. Iso- values can configure any dynamic-state test desired. While
lating contacts by use of a fault condition must hold true. applying the dynamic state test conditions, incorrect opera-
If a window of operation is not available for an element to tions have located misapplication of the relay settings. As
operate, what is the use of that element? a result, the company has been able to create more solidity
Dynamic-state testing is a process that applies currents in relay setting practices.
and/or voltages to a relay in states to simulate actual fault Both steady-state testing and dynamic-state testing have
conditions. The most basic dynamic test is a two-stage a place in the testing environment. As the world of protective
dynamic test with use of a prefault and fault condition. It relaying is evolving, testing practices have to evolve with it.
begins by applying currents and/or voltages in a state that As with any other new process that is introduced, there is
simulates the system in a normal operating state. After a a learning curve involved. But adopting new processes can
predetermined time, all channels will be revised to apply be beneficial and cost effective as an end result.
conditions to the relay that simulates a fault on the system.
Outputs from the relay will be monitored or timed to verify
expected operation. Steven Stade is a protection maintenance specialist for Universal
A three-stage dynamic test utilizes prefault, fault, and Power Products, Tulsa, Oklahoma. He has over 15 years experience
in relay testing and maintenance. Formerly with Central South West
postfault conditions. It functions in the same manner as a Services now American Electric Power, he managed enterprise-wide
two-stage dynamic test, only after the prefault and postfault testing practices and implemented various software applications to the
condition, the voltage and/or current outputs are revised changing maintenance environment.
to a third state after the output condition occurs. The third
state should represent the condition of the system after
operation of the output contact. What is monitored is the
reaction of the relay.
Multistage dynamic tests can be used to simulate reclos-
ing situations or to represent special situations that may be
need to be applied to the relay.
Dynamic-state testing can be performed effectively with
a combination of todays testing equipment and available
software. A variety of test set manufacturers assemble test-
ing equipment utilizing three-phase voltages and currents.
Many of these test sets are also internally designed to
perform dynamic state test conditions. Use of three-phase
currents and voltages becomes important as many micro-
processor relays require such inputs to recognize the test
condition as an actual fault.
Although test sets are built to emulate three-phase power
systems and perform dynamic test conditions, it can be
a time consuming process to set up conditions manually.
To increase efficiency and productivity, the utilization of
software becomes an important issue. Software can be used
to store fault data, apply the conditions to the test set, and
store results in a database. Depending on the software itself,
46 Protective Relaying Handbook Volume 1

Dynamic State and Other Advanced

Testing Methods
for Protection Relays Address
Changing Industry Needs
NETA World, Summer 2001 Issue
by Kenneth Tang
Manta Test Systems

Protective relay testing has become increasingly complex
recently, reflecting continued changes in the industry and
protective relay technology. Many technicians and engineers
have been confused not only about how to test and how
often to test but what to test. In particular, testing needs
for traditional electromechanical devices versus new intel-
ligent and adaptive processor-based protective relays are
sometimes similar and sometimes different depending upon
whom you ask. There is general agreement that the newer
processor-based or digital relays require dynamic testing to
verify some functions/elements. However, in actual practice
the type of testing performed even on the same model of
relay varies significantly from company to company. In order
to try to clear up this confusion, lets first look at the types
of dynamic testing available.
uses sinusoidal waveforms with instantaneous changes in
phase, amplitude, or frequency (or combinations of all three)
possibly combined with linear ramps of these parameters.
This has been an accepted method for testing distance
relays for quite some time, but it has become necessary even
for distribution relays with such features as cold-load pickup
blocking and block on expiration of voltage memory. Some
elements such as power swing blocking and frequency decay
respond only to changes in the input quantities not to their
steady state values.

Types of Dynamic Testing

Dynamic on/off
This is the most elementary type of dynamic testing,
started by wiring a switch in series with the test voltage
and/or current sources.
This type allowed one to test the relay response to an
off-to-on or on-to-off step change in voltage/current. This
has been done since long ago to measure, for example, the Figure 1
operating time of an overcurrent or overvoltage relay. This
can also be used to check the response of an impedance Dynamic with controlled FIA and dc offset
relay to a zero voltage forward or reverse fault, or a switch
This type of testing recognizes that real-world fault cur-
onto fault condition.
rents have an exponentially decaying dc offset. The rate of
decay depends on the system L/R ratio. The magnitude of
Dynamic state the offset depends on both the prefault and fault current
This type of testing recognizes that power system voltages magnitude and angle and the fault incidence angle. The fault
and currents undergo sudden and gradual changes in phase, incidence (or inception) angle (FIA) is the electrical angle
amplitude, and frequency. Therefore, dynamic-state testing of the waveform at which the fault occurs. (See Figure 3).
Protective Relaying Handbook Volume 1 47

Figure 2

Figure 4

Not only the operate characteristic but the operate time

Figure 3 depends on the source impedance and actual fault condi-
tions. Figure 5 shows that the operate time of a typical
distance relay is not constant but increases sharply near
The response of modern relays with digital filtering can
the end of its reach and will shift up or down depending
vary depending on these waveform characteristics. Some
on the source-to-line impedance ratio (SIR). Testing the
distance relays operate in one cycle or less and can only be
operate time of a distance relay using an arbitrary choice of
tested with controlled FIA and properly simulated dc offset.
fault voltage and fault current gives results which can not
There have been cases of design deficiencies being discovered
be related to the expected performance.
in digital relays by applying this type of testing.

Dynamic system model-based testing

This type of dynamic testing is one step closer to simu-
lating real-world conditions. It recognizes that relays are
applied in specific power system configurations, all of which
have their own particular characteristics. It has been shown
that modern protection relays (line protection, in particular)
have both static and dynamic characteristics. The dynamic
characteristic is the one that actually performs under real
fault conditions. All properly designed distance relays to-
day (electromechanical or digital) use some form of cross
polarization and memory polarization in order to improve
security for zero voltage faults and reverse bus faults and Figure 5
to improve fault resistance coverage. These relays have a
dynamic characteristic dependent on source impedance, It is not practical to do this testing manually; therefore,
load flow, fault resistance, relay design, and other factors. automatic testing programs are available from some test
A typical characteristic is shown in Figure 4. In order to equipment manufacturers for this purpose. Figure 6 shows
measure this, fault voltage and current waveforms must be an example. Effects of load flow, mutual coupling, and fault
calculated using a system model that takes into account the resistance on the relay operation can also be evaluated with
sequence impedances of the source and line and the source these programs.
voltage(s). In addition, the fault quantities must be stepped Directional relays can also have complex characteristics
from their prefault values to their fault values in order to test depending on the type of polarization they employ, the
dynamic characteristics which are memory based. system configuration, and the type of fault conditions. These
characteristics can also be effectively tested using these same
48
Figure 6
automatic test programs. This method of testing can be used
as a unified approach across many different types of relays
because it presents relays with fault scenarios regardless of
their design or operating principle.
Fault playback
Fault playback testing recognizes that real world fault
waveforms contain dc offsets, harmonics, transients, noise,
etc. Fault playback testing replays actual fault waveform
recordings (or computer-simulated waveforms) into a
relay and measures its response. Certain elements, such as
high-impedance ground fault detection elements, are best
tested in this way because these waveforms are not normal
sinusoids. The device is presented with a very close approxi-
mation to the real world waveforms, limited by the accuracy
and resolution of the original recording and its sample rate.
Some people may not consider this as dynamic testing but
classify this as transient testing, apart from dynamic testing.
However, the point is that it is one step closer to simulating
the real world.
End-to-end testing
End-to-end testing is the testing of transmission line
protection systems using GPS time synchronized simulta-
neous injection of test waveforms at two (or more) remote
terminals that are connected together by a communications
Protective Relaying Handbook Volume 1
channel. The waveforms may be sinusoidal waveforms as
described above in dynamic state testing or may be tran-
sient waveforms described above in fault playback testing.
In end-to-end testing, we can perform testing which was
not possible by testing a single relay or terminal, such as
simulating race conditions such as those that occur in cur-
rent reversals.
The primary benefit of this type of testing has been the
ability to simultaneously test protection settings, logic,
auxiliary relays, communication equipment, and the com-
munications channel for a complete line protection.
Closed loop testing
In this type of testing, the stimulus waveforms change
dynamically based on the response of the device under test.
A simple case of this may be testing a multishot autoreclos-
ing relay. A more complex case may be testing the clearing
sequence for a multiterminal line where the fault voltages
and currents change after each breaker opens in succes-
sion. Not only the waveform shape but also its duration
are regarded as important in simulating real-world fault
scenarios. This type of testing is typically done with large
simulators but some types of portable test equipment have
some of these capabilities built in.
Protective Relaying Handbook Volume 1
Figure 7
What Type of Dynamic Testing
Should Be Done?
In deciding the type of dynamic testing that should be
done, the most important consideration is: What is the test
trying to prove?
a) Does the specific device meet its published
specifications?
b) Is a specific installation of the device set properly and
functioning as expected?
c) Does the design meet the general needs of the
application?
d) Has the device performance changed or degraded?
e) Does the device work properly as part of an entire
system?
f ) Does the design meet the specific needs of an
application?
Traditionally, users have been focused on purposes a, b,
and d in the above, but now the trend is toward focusing on
purposes b, e, and f. Why? Manufacturers of relays are per-
forming intensive type-testing to verify their designs. They
are providing built-in self-test features. Digital technology
has led to higher overall relay reliability. As a result, many
companies are moving toward simplifying commissioning
and periodic maintenance tests. Once the basic protection
software algorithms have been verified, they should not need
to be reverified unless, of course, there is a software upgrade.
The characteristics should not change or degrade with time.
Tests should still be done to ensure that the relay settings
and logic are correct and that the relay is wired correctly
49
in the system. Some basic functional
tests with the relay installed in the
system, monitoring the actual trip (or
other) output and with the in-service
settings should suffice. We have seen
people test with test settings meant
for the convenience of some test pro-
gram which have no relationship to the
in-service settings. This may prove a or
c in the list but does nothing for the
other objectives.
On the other hand, the complexity
of newer devices means that there are
more things to go wrong and more
combinations of conditions that may
cause different or unexpected behavior.
Digital relays can embody extreme
complexity by employing digital
memory, counters, timers, and soft-
ware algorithms. These can base their
operation on multiple inputs, quanti-
ties calculated from these inputs, and
a memory of the past values of these
inputs and calculated quantities. An example is a motor
protection relay that employs thermal memory and adjusts
the overload protection curve based on the measured heat
accumulated in the motor. This has led to more thorough
and complicated relay testing by users to evaluate devices
for their particular application.
There is a general trend toward the dynamic system model
based testing, end-to-end testing, and fault playback test
methods. This is for a number of reasons:
These methods check the performance of the protec-
tion system as a whole, not individual elements.
Many functions can be tested simultaneously and
faster.
These methods present the relay system with condi-
tions that it will likely encounter in its application.
These tests have a wider coverage, including, in some
cases, objectives a, b, d, e, and f in the list and generally
do not repeat tests performed by the manufacturer.
Certain key aspects can only be tested using these
methods
This is not to say that other types of testing will diminish;
they will continue to have a useful place. An understanding
of the device and the system being tested is important to
help one choose the applicable method.
Consideration should also be given to what test hardware
and software is required, how much time it will take, and
whether one has sufficient training and knowledge to not
only set up the test cases but to evaluate the correctness of
the results.
50 Protective Relaying Handbook Volume 1

Summary
Many dynamic test methods are at our disposal today.
Choosing the right method requires an understanding of
the methods themselves, an understanding of the design of
the devices being tested and their specific application, and,
most importantly, clarity about the purpose of the testing
to be performed.

References
MTS-1700 Universal Protective Relay Test System Opera-
tion Manual, Manta Test Systems, 2000
Application Note: Practical Mho Distance Relay
Testing with the MTS-1710, Manta Test Systems, 1995
Testing Impedance Characteristics of Transmission Line Re-
lays, Elmo Price, Georgia Tech Protective Relay Con-
ference, May 1999.
Testing Modern Protective Relays, R.J. Martilla, Canadian
Guide to Protection and Control, 1999
Relay Performance Testing, IEEE Power System Relaying
Committee, 1996

Kenneth Tang is the Technical Support Manager at Manta Test

Systems, a supplier of advanced electronic test products and services for
electrical power system protection, control, and measurement.
Protective Relaying Handbook Volume 1
Acceptance Testing a Synch Circuit
NETA World, Summer 2001 Issue
by Steven C. Reed, P.E.
Electric Power Systems
On any new electrical installation startup, acceptance
testing is an important step to ensure the correct operation
of protective equipment and the safety of personnel. Syn-
chronization circuits are some of the most critical parts of
any electrical distribution system, especially the first time
they are put into use. If for any reason there is an error in the
engineering, application, or wiring there is a great concern
for the safety of personnel and possible equipment damage.
There can be no short cuts in the startup of a synchroniza-
tion circuit.
Basic Description
A synchronization relay (25) is used to verify that the
voltages on either side of a breaker are within appropriate
voltage magnitude and phase relationship prior to initiating
a breaker close. The voltage comparison is made between the
bus and the line. See Figure 1 for a basic example. The relay
close circuit will operate after an enable signal is received
from each of the following circuits: voltage difference, phase
difference, voltage monitor, and time delay. The voltage
difference (delta voltage) setting compares the magnitude
of the bus voltage to the line voltage. If the delta voltage
is less than the set limit, it enables a close signal for the
voltage difference. If the magnitude of the voltage differ-
ence is exceeded between the line and the bus, the breaker
close signal will be blocked. The phase difference setting
measures the phase angle between the line and bus voltage.
If the measured angle is less than the window setting, the
phase difference setting will be enabled. If the phase-angle
reading between the bus and line voltage is greater than
plus or minus the window setting, the close circuit will be
blocked. The voltage monitor setting allows programmable
options that may best suit the system operating conditions,
such as allowing breaker closure for live line, dead line, live
bus, and dead bus.
51
Live line (LL) enabled when the line
voltage is greater than the setting.
Dead line (DL) enabled when the line
voltage is less than the setting.
Live bus (LB) enabled when the bus
voltage is greater than the setting.
Dead bus (DB) enabled when the bus
voltage is less than the setting.
The time window setting is an adjustable time delay that
allows the relay close circuit to be enabled after all previous
conditions have been met.
Pre-Energization Tests
Before any work is performed the field technician must
review the manufacturers literature to gain a full under-
standing of the design and capabilities of the relay. The en-
gineering drawings shall be compared to the manufacturers
literature as a way of confirming the correct use of the relay.
The coordination study settings shall also be reviewed to
verify the correct overall use and design (for example, LL,
DL, LB and DB). After the relay operational review has
been completed, each component of the synchronization
circuit should be tested on the line side and bus side.
1. Insulation and ratio test of any PT or CCVT.
2. Insulation test and verification of secondary wiring.
3. Verify proper secondary grounding at the PT or
CCVT.
4. Verify proper primary and secondary phasing of the
line and bus PTs.
5. Calibrate synchronization relay in accordance with
settings.
52 Protective Relaying Handbook Volume 1

Energization Tests
Although any problems should have been detected in
the pre-energization tests, the synch system is not ready
to be utilized. Assuming a generator is on the line side of
the synchronization system, it is not worth risking dam-
age to the generator should a mistake be made during the
verification of the synchronization scheme. A back-up plan
should be in place for verification that the synchronization
scheme is correct. As an example of the various methods for
verification, we will assume the following: a generator is on
the line side of the synch system, the synch system is set up
across a generator breaker, and a step-up transformer feeds a
high-voltage transmission breaker. The synchronization relay
PTs are connected on the line and bus side of the generator
breaker. There are three acceptable procedures allowing for
correct verification in this case: isolation from utility grid
while the generator runs, a backfeed from utility while the
generator is isolated, or the use of two sets of phasing sticks Figure 1 Connections for a Typical Application
(least desirable).
The first method is the isolation from the utility grid. The
generator may be started, and the generator breaker closed
onto dead bus only! The high-voltage transmission breaker All necessary industry, site, and customer safety standards
will have already been opened, locked, and tagged out. The should be followed, such as the use of blast suits, since this
open transmission breaker will isolate the generator from is considered hot work. Location of the monitoring will be
the utility system. Most likely three PTs will be located on critical for personnel safety but must be determined based
the line side and load side of the generator breaker. Verify on each job and rating of equipment. This procedure will
voltage through phase angle measurements at the synch take at least four technicians to complete: two technicians
relay. No voltage should exist between similar phases (Line (minimum) with phasing sticks, one (with radio) monitor-
A-Bus A, Line B-Bus B, and Line C-Bus C). Obtain proper ing both phasing sticks, and one (with radio) monitoring
voltage readings from line-to-ground and phase-to-phase synchronization process. It should be determined that the
on the line and bus feeds. Verify that the synch system is synch relay will allow closure of the breaker just before the
operating in accordance with all set parameters. voltage at both phasing sticks is zero. If both phases are
The second method is to backfeed the utility system by in synch, the third phase must also be in synch. The synch
isolating the generator. A portion of the generator bus will relay should never allow closure unless both phasing sticks
need to be removed to allow a backfeed from the utility sys- show zero voltage. During this entire process the genera-
tem. Proper clearances and safety standards need to be met tor breaker close scheme should be disabled as a protective
prior to the initiation of this test. The high-voltage breaker measure.
will be closed, backfeeding the step-up transformer. The gen- After the pre-energization and energization tests have
erator breaker needs to be closed (temporary adjustment to been completed, a new synchronization scheme can be oper-
the breaker-closing scheme), to backfeed the generator bus. ated with full confidence that it is within proper operating
This allows both the line and bus PTs to be energized. Most conditions.
likely three PTs will be located on the line side and load side
of the generator breaker. Verify voltage through phase angle
measurements at the synch relay. No voltage should exist be- Steven C. Reed has a BS in electrical engineering from Villanova
University, a MBA from the Olin School of Business at Washington
tween similar phases (Line A-Bus A, Line B-Bus B, and Line University in St. Louis, and has professional engineering licenses in
C-Bus C). Obtain proper voltage readings from line-to- multiple states. Steve has worked at Electric Power Systems for 12 years
ground and phase-to-phase on the line and bus feeds. Verify and served as a field engineer, system protection engineer, and now serves
that the synch system is operating in accordance with all as regional manager. He is a NETA Certified Technician Level III.
set parameters.
The third method may need to be utilized if either of
the other two energization procedures can not be met. This
method is the least desirable due to the number of personnel
required and risks of electrical hazards. Two sets of phasing
sticks should be used to monitor the line and bus voltage.
The line side is fed from the generator. The bus side is fed
from the utility. One phase set will monitor voltage on the
line side and the bus side of A-phase. The second phase
set will monitor the line side and bus side of C-phase.
Protective Relaying Handbook Volume 1 53

Partial Differential Relaying

NETA World, Summer 2001 Issue

by Baldwin Bridger, P.E.

Powell Electrical Manufacturing Co.

Partial differential relaying is a form of overcurrent nates one step of coordination, since the same relays serve
relaying frequently used to detect main bus overcurrent both the main and the tie breakers without compromising
faults and to back up feeder overcurrent relaying. The basic coordination. This reduces the time delay required for the
circuit is shown in the one-line diagram. Note that this is a main breaker relays and improves the chances of getting
double-ended substation with two main breakers and a tie good coordination with upstream relays which are often
breaker. The partial differential relaying concept can not be on the utility system serving the substation. This improved
used on a straight radial distribution system. coordination is the principal benefit of partial differential
True bus differential relaying compares all currents en- relaying.
tering and leaving a switchgear bus. Within the limits of
the accuracy of the CTs and the relays, true bus differential
relaying will detect all faults on the protected bus. Since all Reprinted with permission of Powell Electrical Manufacturing Co.
currents are taken into account, the relays can be very fast.
Bus differential relaying, however, provides no backup to
the feeder overcurrent relaying, so additional overcurrent Baldwin Bridger, PE, is recently retired Technical Director of Powell
relays are required on main and tie breakers to provide this Electrical Manufacturing Co., Houston, Texas. He has worked as an
backup function. Also, high speed bus differential relaying engineer and engineer manager in the design of low- and medium-volt-
can be quite expensive, and many switchgear users do not age switchgear since 1950, first at GE and since 1973 at Powell. He is
a Fellow of IEEE and a past president of the IEEE Industry Applica-
feel that it is economically justified. tions Society
Partial differential relaying sums the currents entering
or leaving a switchgear bus through main and tie breakers.
If a fault exists on the protected bus, the currents will add
in the relays, but if fault current is flowing through the bus
to a fault on another bus, the currents will subtract and
the relays will not respond. If the fault is on a feeder, the
partial differential relays will act as backup to the feeder
overcurrent relays.
Similar protection can be obtained by using separate
overcurrent relays on each main and tie circuit breaker.
However, proper coordination of the overcurrent protection
requires that the tie breaker relays coordinate with the feeder
relays and that the main breaker relays coordinate with the
tie breaker relays for a total of three steps of relaying at this
bus. Using the partial differential circuit, however, elimi-
54 Protective Relaying Handbook Volume 1

Modern Relays and Software

Provide Valuable Tools for Analysis
NETA World, Fall 2001 Issue
by Scott Cooper
Beckwith Electric Co.

In the past, the only indications of a trip were an alarm,

a target flag, and a tripped breaker or lock-out relay. There
was no data to aid in determining what happened, how it
happened, or the extent of the damage. This often resulted in
days of unnecessary testing and inspections or, worse, plac-
ing faulted equipment back on line, which can be a safety
hazard or can cause further equipment damage.
This article discusses present-day fault recording and
failure analysis using modern digital relay technology. Unlike
their electromechanical and static predecessors, digital relays
provide a number of valuable tools to aid in determining
exactly what happened and the extent of damage.
To provide appropriate indication for the operators, the
relay front panel prominently displays some basic informa-
tion: the relays operational status, current trip state, and
the function tripped during the most recent event. More
Target History:
detailed target event information may be retrieved via the Screen from Beckwith Electrics IPScom Communication Software
keypad interface as well as remotely via PC or PLC systems. showing a relays target history during testing. The left panel shows the
Unlike traditional alarm panels which are wired directly to events available and the right panel displays the I/O status, line side
relays, these systems may use RS232, RS485, or modem currents, and targets in the selected event.
communication connections and a variety of communication
protocols to interrogate the relay. Currently, detailed trip
data may be accessed, processed, and appropriately displayed In addition to the target data, most digital relays also
to operators, technicians, engineers, and management in incorporate some form of waveform recorder or oscillograph
different locations. record. The oscillograph record can be used to identify the
The troubleshooting process normally starts with the sequence of events, aids in verifying the validity of the
sequence of events record. Each target is stored in order and relays operation, and speeds troubleshooting by helping to
is identified by a time stamp which corresponds to the relay identify the faulted phase or component. Oscillographs can
clock time of the first trip. In installations where multiple also provide necessary data for engineers adjusting a relay
devices are present, all time stamps may be automatically set point to overcome a normal transient. In the event of
synchronized using an IRIG-B network. To prevent data an actual fault, oscillographs provide insight on how far a
loss, event data is stored in nonvolatile memory in case of parameter was out of specification and for how long. This is
input power interruption to the relay. Typically, relays can often crucial data for determining what testing or inspec-
automatically store 24 or more separate trip events, depend- tions are needed after an incident. Of course, if the worst
ing upon the application. Each trip event may contain a should happen, the data may be used as evidence in court.
number of individual targets that are identified as being During normal relay operation, the relay continuously
either picked up or tripped. At the inception of each event, saves waveform and I/O data to RAM. After an oscillograph
digital relays also log I/O status and metering quantities. event is triggered, that portion of memory is reserved. The
Protective Relaying Handbook Volume 1
resultant waveform data may then be downloaded to a PC
and saved as a file for analysis. In the event that redundant
or overlapping relays are used, both oscillograph record-
ers should be set to trigger if either relay trips. Inevitably,
in the event of an actual fault, one relay will trip first and
open the breaker, while the other relay may not have the
opportunity to time out even if the same settings are used
on both. For generator protection, this is especially true with
slow developing faults or abnormal operating conditions
such as loss of field (40) or volts per hertz (24). A second
oscillograph can also help confirm a suspected incorrect
trip or relay failure.
Inadvertent Energization:
Screen from Beckwith Electrics IPSplot Oscillograph Analysis
program showing an actual generator inadvertent energization. From
the trace, we verified a secondary current equal to 24A for a period of 4
cycles before the relay and breaker opened the circuit. Input 1 shows the
indicated breaker position, output 2 shows the Beckwith relay tripping.
The cause of this event was operator error.
To analyze the event waveforms, one must obtain the
relay settings, target information, and review oscillographs
from the event. Next, study the target information to
determine what function tripped first. Finally, use the os-
cillograph record to calculate the associated values at the
time of the trip. The waveform can also be used to verify
that the relay is operating correctly. Relay or input circuit
problems can be indicated by waveforms that are inconsis-
tent with actual generator operation. For example, was a
corresponding neutral voltage or current recorded during a
51V inverse time overcurrent operation? Once the validity
of an operation is established, the waveforms can be used
for system troubleshooting. For example, identification of
a miswired CT circuit is easy with an oscillograph of the
differential trip.
55
59N:
Screen from IPSplot Oscillograph Analysis program showing an actual
generator stator ground fault. After the trip, meggering the stator could
not verify the problem. However, from the trace, the operators could see
arcing and breakdown, so more testing was ordered. The stator subse-
quently failed high potential test. Having an accurate oscillograph record
probably prevented this trip from being dismissed as a relay problem,
and serious machine damage was averted.
Since the oscillograph records both pre- and posttrigger
data, the record can also be used to verify proper trip circuit
operation. This is easily accomplished by comparing the
relay trip time mark, the breaker open indication, and the
cessation of currents. This process verifies that the breaker
indicated open and did, in fact, open within the anticipated
operating time. Oscillograhs can also be used to check for
breaker problems like unequal pole operation.
After analysis, resultant oscillograph files may be convert-
ed to the Comtrade format (see Transformer Inrush figure)
for playback using modern test equipment. Comtrade is a
common waveform file format used by most test equipment
manufacturers. This capability provides a new and exciting
means to evaluate equipment based on actual fault condi-
tions. In the past, the scope of normal relay testing did not
include the harmonics, dc offsets, and CT saturation that
may be present in actual operation. This playback capabil-
ity can be used to verify that a relay operates correctly for
an actual system fault. It can also be used to verify a relay
does not improperly trip during plant transients (see Relay
Comparison graph).
56 Protective Relaying Handbook Volume 1
Modern digital relay technology provides valuable tools
for determining the cause and extent of trip events and
faults. By using fault recording and failure analysis functions
available in digital protective relays, users can save time and
money by eliminating unnecessary testing and inspections
and avoiding equipment damage.

Scott Cooper, Field Service Engineer, joined Beckwith Electric

Co. in 1997. His responsibilities include training, commissioning, and
troubleshooting protective relays for customers. He is also instrumental
in testing new relay products and custom-engineered systems. Scott was
previously an electronics technician at Beckwith for two years testing
protective relays and conducting failure analysis and individual compo-
nent evaluations. He is a member of IEEE and served in the US Navy
for six years in the nuclear reactor controls division. He has served as a
senior technician with Seapower Engineering.

Transformer Inrush:
Screen from Omicrons Transview Analysis program showing a black
start. The left panel shows the distorted waveforms are the result of
energizing a bank of load transformers. The right panel shows the har-
monics present. The 100 percent dc offset and harmonics were causing
the installed generator relays differential element to trip.

Relay Comparison:
Excel Spreadsheet comparing the tripping performance of two digital
relays from different relay manufacturers. The above transient was
captured and played through the two relays using an Omicron 256-6
test set. From the graph, the differential element of relay B can be set
to more sensitive and is much more tolerant to the black start transient
than the currently installed relay A. Accurately identifying the problem
and proving the solution quickly solved this customers problem.
Protective Relaying Handbook Volume 1 57

Understanding and Analyzing

Event Report Information
NETA World, Fall 2001 Issue
David Costello
Schweitzer Engineering Laboratories, Inc.

When faults or other system events occur, protective re- This article supports efforts through a real-world example
lays record sampled analog currents and voltages, the status which demonstrates the process of changing raw data into
of optoisolated inputs and output contacts, the state of all useful information.
relay elements and programmable logic, and the relay set-
tings. The result is an event report, a stored record of what How to Analyze an Event Report
the relay found, and how and why it responded. Readily
1. Understand the expected or desired operation
available information, product instruction manuals, and
assistance from analytic software equips the user with the 2. Collect event reports and other information
necessary tools to determine if the response of the relay 3. Look for possible exceptions and/or unexpected
and the protection system was correct for the given system elements
conditions.
Each time the power system faults and relays capture data, 4. Compare actual operation to expectations
the results are ready-made test reports. By analyzing the ac- 5. Utilize manufacturers data and software
tual relay and system performance, utilities are saving money
by extending or eliminating traditional routine tests. 6. Develop and test solutions
Regulatory agencies require the installation of disturbanceThis example is a step-by-step tutorial on analyzing
monitoring equipment and postfault event analysis. Relays an event report, valuable lessons, and problem resolution.
with event reporting help meet these requirements. Before analyzing event report details, begin with a basic
understanding of what took place, or what should have. This
Information recorded in relay event reports are valuable
for testing, measuring performance, analyzing problems, andprocess generally involves reviewing the relay settings and
logic, obtaining the relay history report, and gathering any
identifying deficiencies prior to causing a misoperation. The
additional information that may be helpful (for example,
ability to quickly and accurately analyze event data is useful.
known fault location, targets from other
1st Event Report: relays, breaker operations, SCADA and
CARNALL CCT.# 2522 SN# 96143025 Date: 8/25/99 Time: 11:54:43.479 personnel records). The event report is
Event : AB T Location: 0.12 Shot: 0 Targets: INSTABQ used to verify that the actual operation
Currents (A pri), ABCQN: 3766 3551 239 6124 20 matches the expected operation.
Historical information was down-
2nd Event Report: loaded from a distribution relay that had
CARNALL CCT.# 2522 SN# 96143025 Date: 8/25/99 Time: 11:54:44.083 to be closed by SCADA after tripping
Event : CG T Location: 0.21 Shot: 0 Targets: INSTCQN to lockout. The relay controls a recloser
Currents (A pri), ABCQN: 0 3 3932 3930 3931 which is mounted on a steel stand within
the substation and powered from the
3rd Event Report: substation dc battery. Daily routine
CARNALL CCT.# 2522 SN# 96143025 Date: 8/25/99 Time: 12:09:41.758 requires utility employees to investigate
Event : ABC Location: 5.67 Shot: 2 Targets : all out of the ordinary events, including
Currents (A pri), ABCQN: 443 654 403 478 105 failures to automatically reclose and
lockout events.
58 Protective Relaying Handbook Volume 1
The pickup of the 50H element is (30
Partial Display of As Set Settings for CARNALL CCT.# 2522 SN# 96143025
amperes secondary) (CTR=120:1),
CTR =120.00
or 3600 ampere primary. We should,
79OI1 =900 79OI2 =2700
therefore, expect the initial INST A B
79RST =600 M79SH =11011
trip target for a 3766 ampere fault.
50C =99.99
The next expected sequence for this
50NL =99.00
relay is to open the recloser, time on
51NP =12.00 51NTD =15.00 51NC =3 51NRS =N
the first reclosing open interval, then
50L =99.99 50H =30.00
automatically reclose. The first reclose
51P =5.01 51TD =2.50 51C =4 51RS =Y
attempt should be after an open delay
52APU =0 52ADO =0 TSPU =0 TSDO =0
of 900 cycles, or 15 seconds (79OI1 set-
TKPU =0 TKDO =0 TZPU =0 TZDO =0
ting). However, the second event is an
S(123) =
instantaneous C-to-G trip only 0.604
A(12) =
second after the first event. What would
B(12) =
cause a fault to occur during a recloser
E(34) =
open period during timing our first
F(34) =
reclose attempt? The analytic software
K(1234) =
plots of the first (Figure 1) and second
L(1234) =
(Figure 3) event reports confirm our sus-
A1(1234) =
picion of a recloser failure and flashover
A2(1234) =
inside the recloser tank.
V(56) =
In Figure 1, the initial A- to B-phase
W(56) =
fault is evident. The first digital element
X(56) =
to assert is the 51P time-overcurrent
A3(1346) =
pickup, the most sensitively set element.
A4(2346) =TCMA
This triggers the event report as expected
TR(1246) =50H+51T
by the ER = 51P setting. To determine
RC(1246) =TF
which element caused the trip, identify
ER(1246) =51P
the point in time where the trip as-
TDUR =5 TFT =30
serts (OUT T) and look for any other
IN1 =DC IN2 =DT IN3 =TCM IN4 =RE
element transitions at the same point.
IN5 = IN6 =52A
The pickup of the instantaneous phase
overcurrent element, 50HP, asserts at
the same instant the trip output asserts,
while the 51P element is shown picked up but still timing to
trip. The 79 reclosing element prepares to time to a reclose
by changing from the reset state to the cycle state when the
relay trips. IN6, programmed to monitor a 52a auxiliary
contact, comes open two cycles after the trip indicating
the recloser has opened. After adjusting the scaling on the
C-phase current channel in the analytic assistant software
(Figure 1), we can see that the C-phase interrupter did not
open fully as current continues to flow.
The trip coil monitor, IN3 = TCM, is an optoisolated
input wired as a voltage divider to monitor the health of
the trip coil (refer to Figure 2). When the recloser is closed
and the trip output contact is not asserted, the TCM input
allows a few milliamperes of current to flow through the
trip coil. The voltage drop is across the relay TCM input
Figure 1 C-Phase Interrupter Fails to Open because the input has a much higher impedance than the
trip coil (roughly 1000 times greater). In the first five cycles
In order to understand normal relay operation, examine of Figure 1, the TCM is asserted, indicating the trip circuit
the output contact logic and determine what elements in was intact. At the time of trip, the TCM input deasserts,
the relay are actually used in this application. In this relay, initially because of the closed trip contact and then because
we notice that only two elements are programmed to cause a of the open 52a auxiliary in the trip circuit.
trip (TR equation), the nondirectional phase instantaneous
50H element and phase time-overcurrent 51T element.
Protective Relaying Handbook Volume 1 59
component magnitudes are calculated. At the end of the first
event, the C-phase current is only 0.42 ampere secondary
(3IO = Ia + Ib + Ic = 0.412 A, as well). As set, the overcurrent
elements used for tripping and those not used for tripping
are set much too high to see the 0.412 ampere phase and
residual current flowing through the failed interrupter, so
the trip failure logic, as set, is ineffective.
In this relay, the elements which unlatch the trip output
and trip failure timing are the same elements that prevent
the reclosing relay from resetting after an automatic reclose.
Set a residual overcurrent element 50NL to 0.25 ampere
secondary to provide sensitive breaker failure supervision
for unbalanced faults. The event reports in the history of the
relay are reviewed to insure normal load unbalance is not
greater than (0.25 ampere secondary) (CTR=120:1), or
Figure 2 Trip Coil Monitor
30 amperes primary. With this setting, our trip failure logic
would have detected the unbalanced condition as a result
In the second event, the failed interrupter flashes over to
of the stuck C-phase interrupter. Programming an output
the recloser tank 0.604 second after the first trip occurred. In
to close when a trip failure (TF) is detected could provide
Figure 3, you can see the 79 reclosing element immediately
a trip to a back-up protective device (the transformer dif-
goes to lockout. The relay is designed to drive its reclosing
ferential relay), assert an alarm to the SCADA system to
element to lockout if a trip occurs before reclosing has been
initiate maintenance, and prevent a more intense fault.
attempted. This prevents reclosing after a flashover across an
Supervising the trip failure element with a phase over-
open pole or internal tank failures such as this. Therefore,
current relay is more challenging in this relay but can still
the operation of the relay was correct, and the cause of the
be done. The maximum prefault load current in the relays
failure to reclose was a recloser failure condition.
history of events was 130 amperes primary, or 1.08 amperes
The information gathered in the first two events indicates
secondary. If we set any element other than 50C in this relay
that C-phase carried current for at least 0.721 second (the
below load, our reclosing relay will be prevented from reset-
difference between the trigger times of each report, 0.604
ting (the trip and trip failure unlatch elements are the same
second, plus 7 additional cycles of fault data in event two).
elements used to allow the recloser to reset). The logic and
The fault current seen for the majority of this time was only
wiring in Figure 4 allow a sensitive 0.5 ampere secondary
around 50 amperes primary. Could a recloser failure element
setting for 50C to be used for phase current supervision of
have been used to clear this fault before it developed a more
the trip failure logic while not interfering with the reclos-
severe 4000 ampere fault?
ing reset logic.

Figure 4 Recloser Trip Failure Logic for

Phase Faults Below Load

We assume that the C-phase interrupter eventually

opened because no backup protective device operated and
the beginning of the third event (see Figure 5) indicates the
C-phase current is zero. The dispatcher instructed a local
switchman to report to the substation because the SCADA
Figure 3 Failed C-Phase Interrupter Flashes to Ground
system indicated the recloser was open and in lockout. Ap-
proximately 15 minutes after the initial trip, the third event
The recloser failure element as set in this relay is only
captures the SCADA close operation. By noticing that IN4
intended to cancel reclosing. The TF or trip failure bit asserts
(reclosing enable) is deasserted, we verify that the switch-
if none of the overcurrent elements in the relay (with the
man manually turned automatic reclosing off. By noticing
exception of the 50C element) have dropped out TFT cycles
that IN1 (direct close) is asserted, we verify that SCADA
after a relay trip is initiated. If the overcurrent elements
was used to remotely close the recloser once. The recloser
drop out, the trip failure element stops timing. Using the
closed without incident.
analytic assistant software, phase current and symmetrical
60 Protective Relaying Handbook Volume 1
Figure 5 indicates the cold load inrush and the brief
pickup of the 51P time-overcurrent element. A cold load
pickup scheme can be enabled through settings such that
it is automatically put in service when the recloser is open
and locked out for a long period of time. After a success-
ful close, the scheme automatically adjusts to the original
settings. When the scheme is active, the relay modifies the
pickup of the phase time-overcurrent element to a higher
value while keeping the same curve and time dial settings
to maintain coordination with upstream devices.

Figure 5 SCADA Close of a Failed Distribution Recloser

The third event emphasizes the importance of using a

manual close delay. In newer recloser controls and substa-
tion relays, front panel operator controls are built in so that
traditional control switches can be eliminated. For safety, the
user may add a settable time delay to the operation of the
front panel operator controls. This delay allows an operator
to initiate a manual close by pushing the close button and
then walking away to a safe distance before the close signal
is actually sent by the relay to the recloser or breaker. The
associated red close LED flashes as the timer counts down.
This safety improvement can be made in older relays such as
the one in this example by wiring the manual close switch
contact to a programmable relay input and time-delaying
the close output with programmable logic as follows. See Figure 7 Cold Load Pick-Up Scheme Improves Security
and Maintains Coordination
Figure 6.
To enable the cold load pickup
S(123) = IN5 IN5 is energized by a momentary manual close switch
scheme, an element called 52BT that
TSPU =0 TSDO = 300
follows the recloser status is used. 52BT
K(1234) = IN5
is the inverse of 52AT (see Figure 8).
TKPU =0 TKDO = 315
With the settings shown, the modified
L(1234) = ST
pickup will be in service for 52APU
V(56) = KT*!L
time, a settable value. After the time
A4(2346) =V A4 is a time-delayed close output from the relay to the
expires, the pickup is forced back to the
close coil
original value. If 52ADO exceeds all re-
closing relay open interval time settings
(79OI1, 79OI2, etc.), the cold load pickup scheme will be
disabled through the reclose cycle. The 52AT element drops
out, and the 52BT element asserts when 52ADO expires
after the recloser goes to lockout. The 52ADO is effectively
the loss-of-diversity time delay. The 52APU is effectively the
time limit before minimum pick-up is restored following
a close operation.

Figure 6 Delayed Manual Close Setting

Option Improves Safety
Protective Relaying Handbook Volume 1 61
This was a B-to-G trip. The reclose operation
50L =7.50 was successful for the fault. Had a reclose failure
51P =5.00 51TD =2.50 51C =4 51RS =Y not occurred, an investigation of the first event,
52APU =30 52ADO =3600 since it appeared at first glance to be a normal trip
B(12) =51T and reclose event, also may not have happened.
C(12) =50L Further investigation proves that the C-phase
F(34) =52BT interrupter experienced a problem during the
G(34) =52AT
initial trip as well. During that event, however,
X(56) =B*C*F
the reclose occurred before the fault evolved into
Y(56) =B*G
a larger problem. Utilizing the analytic software
TR(1246) =X+Y
to calculate phase current and symmetrical com-
ponent magnitudes indicates there was sufficient
current (1.3 A C-phase and 3I0) to assert the revised recloser
failure logic.

Conclusion
In summary, analysis of this series of event reports:

Reviewed the anticipated protection system behavior

Figure 8 Effect of 52APU and 52ADO Settings on Relay Word
Bits 52AT and 52BT
The relay generated ten event reports in just over 20
minutes according to its history. In addition to the three
events reviewed here, there were six event reports triggered
by brief downstream B-to-G faults. The oldest event in the
history buffer was time stamped 11:47:33.395 (shown in
Figure 9).
Figure 9 Another Failure of the Interrupter Recorded
by Event Reports
for a given fault.
Used simple analysis techniques and analytic software
to unravel complex event details.
Verified correct operation of the relay.
Revealed a recloser failure and the need for maintenance
on the C-phase interrupter.
Showed two occurrences of the breaker problem, indi-
cating that event analysis can expose problems such as
these before they become more extreme.
Identified a weakness in the as-set trip failure settings
and provided data to develop an improved set of settings
and logic that would have identified this problem the
first time, notified SCADA, and locked out the problem
equipment.
Highlighted the need for safety improvements through
breaker failure logic, local and remote indication, manu-
al close operation safety delays, and failed recloser lock-
out.
Indicated multiple faults in the same vicinity, suggest-
ing a problem at a specific line location requiring fur-
ther investigation (trees invading line).
Demonstrated the need for cold load pickup logic to
prevent misoperation on inrush.
Illustrated the power of multifunction relays and pro-
grammable logic in developing solutions to each prob-
lem identified in the event reports (i.e., the power to
solve all problems exists in the relay already installed).
62 Protective Relaying Handbook Volume 1
The analytic assistant software used to create the oscil-
lographic images generated COMTRADE files used to
reproduce the fault sequence through test equipment into
relays in the laboratory. By doing this, the improved logic
solutions shown proved to function correctly, solving prob-
lems for the actual system fault using the existing relay. The
event report files are stored as documentation for regulatory
agencies and as proof of relay operations test.
For more information, please download the technical
paper Understanding and Analyzing Event Report Infor-
mation at http://www.selinc.com/techpprs.htm.

David Costello has a BS in electrical engineering from Texas A&M

University. From 1991 to 1996 he was employed with Central Power and
Light and Central and Southwest Services, Inc., where he worked as a
system protection engineer. In 1996, he joined Schweitzer Engineering
Laboratories, Inc. (SEL) as a field application engineer. He currently holds
the position of Regional Service Manager and is responsible for SEL
customer support in the Southcentral and Southwest United States.
 NETA Accredited Companies
The following is a listing of all NETA Accredited Companies as of August 2011.
Please visit the NETA website at www.netaworld.org for the most current list.

A&F Electrical Testing., Inc...................................................................................Kevin Chilton

Advanced Testing Systems ............................................................................Patrick MacCarthy
American Electrical Testing Co., Inc. ......................................................................Scott Blizard
Apparatus Testing and Engineering ....................................................................... James Lawler
Applied Engineering Concepts .................................................................... Michel Castonguay
Burlington Electrical Testing Company, Inc. ........................................................... Walter Cleary
C.E. Testing, Inc. ........................................................................................... Mark Chapman
CE Power Solutions of Wisconsin, LLC............................................................. James VanHandel
DYMAX Holdings, Inc. ....................................................................................... Gene Philipp
Eastern High Voltage ....................................................................................... Joseph Wilson
ELECT, P.C. .................................................................................................Barry W. Tyndall
Electric Power Systems, Inc. .................................................................................. Steve Reed
Electrical and Electronic Controls ..................................................................... Michael Hughes
Electrical Energy Experts, Inc............................................................................... William Styer
Electrical Equipment Upgrading, Inc. .......................................................................Kevin Miller
Electrical Maintenance & Testing, Inc........................................................................ Brian Borst
Electrical Reliability Services ..................................................................................Lee Bigham
Electrical Testing, Inc. ................................................................................. Steve C. Dodd Sr.
Elemco Services, Inc. ...................................................................................... Robert J. White
Hampton Tedder Technical Services ....................................................................... Matt Tedder
Harford Electrical Testing Co., Inc. ................................................................... Vincent Biondino
High Energy Electrical Testing, Inc..................................................................... James P. Ratshin
High Voltage Maintenance Corp. ........................................................................... Eric Nation
HMT, Inc. .........................................................................................................John Pertgen
Industrial Electric Testing, Inc. ........................................................................ Gary Benzenberg
Industrial Electronics Group ................................................................................. Butch E. Teal
Industrial Tests, Inc. .............................................................................................. Greg Poole
Infra-Red Building and Power Service ............................................................ Thomas McDonald
M&L Power Systems, Inc. .................................................................................. Darshan Arora
Magna Electric Corporation ................................................................................... Kerry Heid
Magna IV Engineering Edmonton ...................................................................Jereme Wentzell
Magna IV Engineering (BC), Ltd. ........................................................................ Cameron Hite

Setting the Standard

MET Electrical Testing, LLC .......................................................................... William McKenzie
National Field Services...................................................................................... Eric Beckman
Nationwide Electrical Testing, Inc. ...............................................................Shashikant B. Bagle
North Central Electric, Inc. ...............................................................................Robert Messina
Northern Electrical Testing, Inc. .......................................................................... Lyle Detterman
Orbis Engineering Field Service, Ltd. ....................................................................... Lorne Gara
Pacific Power Testing, Inc. ...................................................................................Steve Emmert
Phasor Engineering ........................................................................................... Rafael Castro
Potomac Testing, Inc. ........................................................................................... Ken Bassett
Power & Generation Testing, Inc.......................................................................... Mose Ramieh
Power Engineering Services, Inc. ..................................................................... Miles R. Engelke
POWER PLUS Engineering, Inc. ...................................................................Salvatore Mancuso
Power Products & Solutions, Inc. ........................................................................ Ralph Patterson
Power Services, LLC ........................................................................................ Gerald Bydash
Power Solutions Group, Ltd ...........................................................................Barry Willoughby
Power Systems Testing Co. ............................................................................... David Huffman
Power Test, Inc. ..............................................................................................Richard Walker
POWER Testing and Energization, Inc. ............................................................... Chris Zavadlov
Powertech Services, Inc. ................................................................................... Jean A. Brown
Precision Testing Group .................................................................................... Glenn Stuckey
PRIT Service, Inc. ........................................................................................ Roderic Hageman
Reuter & Hanney, Inc....................................................................................... Michael Reuter
REV Engineering, LTD ................................................................................ Roland Davidson IV
Scott Testing, Inc................................................................................................Russ Sorbello
Shermco Industries ............................................................................................... Ron Widup
Sigma Six Solutions, Inc. ....................................................................................... John White
Southern New England Electrical Testing, LLC ................................................. David Asplund, Sr.
Southwest Energy Systems, LLC .......................................................................Robert Sheppard
Taurus Power & Controls, Inc. ............................................................................... Rob Bulfinch
Three-C Electrical Co., Inc.................................................................................James Cialdea
Tidal Power Services, LLC ....................................................................................Monty Janak
Tony Demaria Electric, Inc. ............................................................................ Anthony Demaria
Trace Electrical Services & Testing, LLC ...................................................................Joseph Vasta
Utilities Instrumentation Service, Inc. ........................................................................Gary Walls
Utility Service Corporation.................................................................................. Alan Peterson
Western Electrical Services ......................................................................................Dan Hook

Setting the Standard

 About NETA
NETA (InterNational Electrical Testing Association) is an association of leading electrical testing companies;
visionaries, committed to advancing the industrys standards for power system installation and maintenance
to ensure the highest level of reliability and safety.
NETA is an accredited standards developer for the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) and defines
the standards by which electrical equipment is deemed safe and reliable.
NETA is also the leading source of specifications, procedures, testing, and requirements, not only for
commissioning new equipment but for testing the reliability and performance of existing equipment.

QUALIFICATIONS OF THE TESTING ORGANIZATION

An independent overview is the only method of determining the long-term usage of electrical apparatus and
its suitability for the intended purpose. NETA Accredited Companies best support the interest of the owner, as
the objectivity and competency of the testing firm is as important as the competency of the individual technician.
NETA Accredited Companies are part of an independent, third-party electrical testing association dedicated to
setting world standards in electrical maintenance and acceptance testing.

Hiring a NETA Accredited Company assures the customer that:

The NETA Technician has broad-based knowledge this person is trained to inspect, test, maintain, and
calibrate all types of electrical equipment in all types of industries.
NETA Technicians meet stringent educational and experience requirements in accordance with ANSI/NETA
Standard for Certification of Electrical Testing Technicians, (ANSI/NETA ETT).
A registered Professional Engineer will review all engineering reports.
All tests will be performed objectively, according to NETA specifications, using calibrated instruments traceable
to the National Institute of Science and Technology (NIST).
The firm is a well-established, full-service electrical testing business.

CERTIFICATION
NETA Certified Technicians conduct the tests that ensure that electrical power equipment meets the ANSI/NETA
standards stringent specifications.
Certification of competency is particularly important in the electrical testing industry. Inherent in the
determination of the equipments serviceability is the prerequisite that individuals performing the tests be
capable of conducting the tests in a safe manner and with complete knowledge of the hazards involved. They
must also evaluate the test data and make an informed judgment on the continued serviceability, deterioration,
or nonserviceability of the specific equipment. NETA, a nationally-recognized certification agency, provides
recognition of four levels of competency within the electrical testing industry in accordance with ANSI/NETA
Standard for Certification of Electrical Testing Technicians, (ANSI/NETA ETT).

Setting the Standard