Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
Contact author:
Thomas Ernst
GE Grid Solutions
4523 Jeremiah Rd
Cookeville, TN 38506
715-718-1384
thomas.ernst@ge.com
1.0: Abstract
The work horse of low‐impedance bus differential protection is the restrained percent differential
element but many modern microprocessor relays also include an unrestrained (AKA: high‐set or
instantaneous) element which, when not properly applied, can cause false trips. In this paper, we
explore the advantages and disadvantages of the use of unrestrained low‐impedance bus differential
protection including a look back at the history of bus differential and the evolution of the unrestrained
element. At the end the authors draw conclusions about the applicability of the element and cautions
associated with using it.
2.0: Introduction
The fundamental function of low‐impedance bus differential protection is the restrained percent
differential element. Modern microprocessor based relays have increased the popularity of restrained
low‐impedance bus differential elements since they are typically faster and offer more functionality than
microprocessor based high impedance bus differential elements. These modern microprocessor low‐
impedance differential relays are typically multi‐function relays, including over‐current, directional
control, metering and unrestrained (AKA: high‐set or instantaneous) differential elements. While this
multi‐functionality offers flexibility and versatility the unrestrained differential element can cause false
trips if not properly applied. In this paper, the authors explore the advantages and disadvantages of the
use of unrestrained low‐impedance bus differential protection including a look back at the history of
low‐impedance bus differential and the evolution of the unrestrained element. A case study of an actual
unrestrained bus differential element mis‐operation is used to illustrate the application concerns and
support the conclusions. At the end the authors draw conclusions about the applicability of the element
and cautions associated with using it.
Unrestrained Low‐Impedance Bus Differential – Should I Use It? Page 1
3.0: History of low impedance bus differential and the evolution of the unrestrained element
The earliest differential relays were differentially connected induction disc time over‐current devices.
The time delay was needed to handle inrush current on transformers and CT errors including saturation.
These were essentially low‐impedance unrestrained differential elements. For buses, the inverse time
characteristic appeared to be a good match since the larger faults operated faster. While this may be a
good strategy for internal faults, security against CT saturation on external faults required the time delay
be set for slow clearing, even on large faults. Since the relay had no way of distinguishing between
internal faults and external faults with CT saturation, the required tripping times were too long for good
bus protection.
Figure 1: One‐line diagram for the connection of a low‐impedance unrestrained bus differential using an inverse‐
time over‐current relay.
In the 1930’s it was seen that bus differential zones were prone to mis‐operations for external faults
using a simple overcurrent relay differentially connected the CTs. Prior to the establishment of
standards for instrument transformer performance, it was difficult to accurately predict the CTs’
operation during short circuits. Eventually it was observed that using a toroid design core with evenly
distributing windings on all the secondary winding’s taps allowed the user to neglect the CT’s series
reactance. Following this realization, there were several attempts to design relays that handled the
deficiencies in performance for transient behavior. One early attempt at applying a straight overcurrent
to the scheme utilized an evaluation of the time constant of the primary circuit, the available short
circuit current on the secondary and the standard error (< 10%) for a current generating 20 times
secondary rated current (20 * 5 or 100 amps secondary rating). [ref 1] This is still a criterion that we hear
about today and, at locations electrically remote from generating stations, this can be applied with a
margin for satisfactory results. It is well advised to look at the circuits that are connected to the bus and
the accuracy expected of the impedance modeling of the connected machinery and lines to assure that
the fault current X/R ratio is low.
Unrestrained Low‐Impedance Bus Differential – Should I Use It? Page 2
The next evolution in bus protection was the electro‐mechanical high impedance bus differential relay
(PVD, KAB, etc.). The high impedance relay scheme utilizes a voltage coil to measure error voltage and
avoid circulating error currents in its operating winding created by a saturated CT on an external fault.
Current is circulated in the secondary of the saturated CT from the current contributions from the other
CTs. The saturated CT does not replicate its primary current but is assumed to have a shorted
magnetizing branch whereby the primary is shunted and the secondary current from other CTs is also
shunted. The voltage drop from the CT summation point to the saturated CT is the error voltage that is
considered and a margin is selected and a voltage threshold is set to establish a trip voltage. To protect
the operate circuit from transient overvoltage a nonlinear resistor is installed. In many designs an over‐
current element is placed in series with the nonlinear resistor to measure leakage current. A current
threshold can be set for the leakage current that corresponds to the trip voltage plus a margin derived
from the nonlinear resistor’s characteristic plot. [ref 2]
Figure 2: Connection diagram for the high impedance bus differential relay
The electro‐mechanical low impedance restrained bus differential was developed to improve security
during external faults (CA, IFD, NBD, etc.). Each winding current is passed through restraint coils on the
induction unit (IU) which produce a restraining torque. The differential current is passed through an
operate coil on the IU to produce an operating torque. If the operating torque exceeded the restraining
torque the relay operates. These relays operate with no intentional delay. However, even though the IU
only needs to rotate a few degrees, the operating time is highly variable as a function of the restraining
torque with operating times from 0.07 – 0.7 seconds (see Figure 3: Operating time of typical electro‐
mechanical low impedance bus differential relay).
Unrestrained Low‐Impedance Bus Differential – Should I Use It? Page 3
Figure 3: Operating time of typical electro‐mechanical low impedance bus differential relay
Electro‐mechanical low impedance bus differential relays did not include an instantaneous unrestrained
differential element operated by the differential current only. The IFD relay does have an instantaneous
unit operated by the differential current but it is used as a fault detector check‐zone for the restrained
element and does not trip the bus directly.
During the brief reign of analog electronic relays, several analog electronic high impedance bus
differential relays were offered (BE1‐87B, SBD, RADSB) but the authors have only found one example of
a restrained analog electronic bus differential relay (RADSS). This is an electronic relay that makes use of
a hybrid type of circuit that allows for CTs of different ratios and classes to be utilized in a differential
scheme. This is a medium impedance relay rather than a low impedance relay. All CTs are brought to the
relay and auxiliary windings are provided for the CT ratios to be taken to the comparator. An analog
electronic comparator evaluating operate vs. restraint is made in similar fashion to through current
restraint relays. No unrestrained element was provided.
Unrestrained Low‐Impedance Bus Differential – Should I Use It? Page 4
With the introduction of microprocessor based relays the restrained low impedance bus differential
relay came into popular use. Microprocessor based restrained low impedance bus differential elements
have much faster and more consistent operating times than their electro‐mechanical predecessors and
are typically faster than microprocessor based high impedance bus differential elements. Considering
the ability to capture all the CT waveforms and to run security check zones such as directional checks
and CT saturation detection, the microprocessor based low impedance restrained bus differential is fast
becoming the preferred method of protecting HV and MV buses.
4.0: Modern Unrestrained Low Impedance Bus Differential
As with most microprocessor based relays, the modern low impedance restrained bus differential is a
multi‐function device including such things as over‐current with directional control and metering. Most
manufacturers also offer an unrestrained bus differential element. As discussed earlier, there was no
electro‐mechanical counterpart to this unrestrained element other than the use of a simple inverse time
over‐current relay connected differentially. While the authors found no clear information on the reason
behind offering an unrestrained bus differential element, the idea might have come from the
transformer differential relay where the unrestrained or instantaneous element has long been used to
trip a faulted transformer during in‐rush when the restrained element is severely restrained or blocked.
Of course, this issue does not directly apply to buses since they do not exhibit notable in‐rush when
energized. There is a sensitivity concern with any restrained differential during external faults when the
restraint current is very high causing a corresponding high differential current tripping threshold.
Considering that transformers often fail during external faults; this desensitization can cause delayed
tripping on such transformer failures. This is not a serious problem for restrained bus differential since
external faults do not typically cause internal bus faults. The one exception would be an internal fault in
a bus boundary breaker that trips to clear an external fault. In this case, the external fault essentially
evolves into an internal fault and there will be no significant additional operating time as the restrained
element moves between the restraint and trip regions. Regardless of the origins of the modern
unrestrained bus differential element, the use of it cannot be justified by the fact that the manufacturer
provides it. Nor can the user assume that the element will be useful and secure for the user’s application
if the manufacturer’s setting examples are followed. Like all elements in multi‐function relays, the user
takes ultimate responsibility for the decision to use the element and to be sure that the settings
selected are applicable to the installation and that the application is secure.
As we mentioned earlier, the restrained low impedance bus differential characteristic was developed to
deal with CT errors including saturation. With high region 2 slope settings, this element is quite secure
against mis‐operations by itself. Add directional supervision and CT saturation detection and this
modern restrained element is extremely secure against mis‐operations during external faults. So why
would a user want to apply an unrestrained bus differential element? One advantage of the
unrestrained element is that it is slightly faster than the restrained element for high level internal faults.
In the electro‐mechanical world, this would have been a significant advantage since the restrained
element’s operating time was highly variable. However, the speed of the restrained element in the
modern microprocessor relay is faster and more consistent. Since both the restrained and unrestrained
elements operate on the fundamentally filtered waveforms, the operating time of the unrestrained is
typically on the order of 2 – 4 milliseconds faster than the restrained element. Considering that the
operating time of the restrained element is typically in the range of 12 – 20 milliseconds, the increased
speed of the unrestrained element is not significant in most applications.
Unrestrained Low‐Impedance Bus Differential – Should I Use It? Page 5
The unrestrained element has several application concerns. The user needs to clearly define what
problem they are looking to solve before they enable the unrestrained element. Unlike transformer
restrained differential elements, the restrained bus differential element will operate for any fault where
the unrestrained element will operate so there are no “holes” which we need the unrestrained element
to fill. Consequently, there is not a compelling reason to enable the unrestrained element if the speed of
the restrained element is adequate for system stability. The biggest concern with any differential
element is CT saturation. CT saturation can occur because of very high fault current magnitudes.
Generally, this is predictable and the pickup of the unrestrained element can be set higher than the
expected differential current caused by CT saturation. However, CT saturation can also occur due to DC
off‐set and remnant flux. The remnant flux problem is especially concerning as it is difficult to predict
and can cause unexpected high differential current during an external fault. This high differential current
can exceed the unrestrained element pick‐up, causing a false trip. The security of the unrestrained
differential element can be improved with supervision by a directional element but this will negate
speed advantage that the unrestrained element has over the restrained element.
5.0: Case Study: Unexpected Operation of a 115 kV Unrestrained Bus Differential Element during an
external Fault.
The substation where the fault occurred includes two 115 kV yards owned by different utilities. The
service one‐line diagram is shown in Figure 4. The first 115 kV yard owned by the first utility is a double‐
breaker configuration with five bays and two main busses: East and West. The second 115 kV yard
owned by the second utility is a main‐and‐transfer bus configuration with four bays. The main 115 kV
bus of the second yard is tied to 115 kV East bus of the first yard via a normally closed tie breaker, 9999.
Further, a normally open transfer breaker, 9990, on the 115 kV East bus in the first yard can be used to
carry load on any of the elements in the second 115 kV yard via the transfer bus.
Each of the 115 kV busses in the first 115 kV yard are protected with dual bus differential. The metering
and relaying (M&R) one‐line diagrams for the 115 kV West bus primary and secondary relays are shown
in Figure 5 and 6, respectively. The primary protection for each bus is a high‐impedance high‐speed bus
differential scheme using a solid‐state technology based relay. The secondary protection for each bus is
a low‐impedance high‐speed bus differential scheme using a microprocessor based relay. In the
secondary low‐impedance protective scheme, both the restrained and unrestrained bus differential
elements were applied. All of the breakers in this first 115 kV yard are 3000 ampere type with multi‐
ratio bushing current transformers (CTs) that are C800 class with a full tap of 1200/5. Each bus
protection scheme uses dedicated CTs set at the full tap of 1200/5.
Unrestrained Low‐Impedance Bus Differential – Should I Use It? Page 6
Figure 4: Service One‐line Diagram of the Substation
Figure 5: M&R One‐line Diagram for the 115 kV West Bus Primary Differential Relay
Unrestrained Low‐Impedance Bus Differential – Should I Use It? Page 7
Figure 6: M&R One‐line Diagram for the 115 kV West Bus Secondary Differential Relay
The 36/48/60 MVA 115/44/7.2 kV autotransformer bank #2 is protected with two 115 kV high‐side
breakers (9922 and 9992) and single 44 kV low‐side breaker (4651). This autotransformer bank is
protected with dual transformer differential schemes. Both the primary and secondary protection for
this autotransformer bank employ dual‐slope percentage transformer differential schemes using
microprocessor based technology from different manufacturers. In addition to the transformer
differential scheme, the secondary protection also includes high‐side backup time‐delay phase distance
and tertiary overcurrent schemes. The M&R one‐line diagrams in Figure 5 and 6 show the CTs used for
autotransformer bank primary and secondary differential relays. Phase and ground overcurrent
protection is applied at the 44 kV low‐side using electromechanical relays.
As mentioned above, the dedicated bushing CTs used for the 115 kV West secondary low‐impedance
bus differential relay are class C800 and set at the full tap of 1200/5. The saturation voltage (VS) for
these CTs is approximately 440 V. The burden (RS) on the CTs used for this relay from breaker 9922 is
approximately is 2.88Ω. The maximum unsaturated symmetrical fault current is as follows:
440
_ 152.78
2.88Ω
The maximum symmetrical fault current via breaker 9922 external to the 115 kV West bus zone of
protection is approximately 20,000 primary amperes, and it occurs for a 3‐phase fault at the 115 kV
high‐side bushings of the autotransformer bank #2.
20000
83.33
240
Unrestrained Low‐Impedance Bus Differential – Should I Use It? Page 8
Since this maximum symmetrical fault current is below the maximum unsaturated current calculated
above, the CTs should adequately reproduce the maximum fault current. That is, the CT will be in the
linear region for this maximum and the exciting current or magnetizing will be minimal, below 1
secondary amperes. However, other factors such the DC offset component of the primary fault current
and the remnant flux in the core may limit the linear operation of the CT significantly. Because of such
factors, the CT may saturate for AC currents below the maximum unsaturated value calculated. The
unrestrained element pickup on the 115kV West bus secondary low‐impedance differential was securely
set based on the manufacturer recommendation and taking into account checks and margins for errors
from AC saturation, DC offset, and DC saturation. The magnetizing current of the saturated CT will
appear as a differential current. Assuming that 50% the maximum fault current calculated above would
show as magnetizing and therefore error differential current, the unrestrained element pickup should
set above the following value.
83.33
_ 41.67
2 2
Using a 20% security margin, the unrestrained differential element pickup was set as follows:
A phase‐to‐ground (B‐G) fault took place on a pot head at the 44 kV low‐side of the autotransformer
bank #2. This fault was cleared by the low‐side overcurrent protection; the low‐side breaker, 4651,
tripped and auto‐reclosed. Twenty minutes later, a second phase‐to‐ground (B‐G) fault at the 44 kV low‐
side of the autotransformer took place and then evolved into 115 kV high‐side phase‐to‐phase to
ground (B‐C‐G) fault within the autotransformer tank. The location of the high‐side B‐C‐G fault is shown
in Figure 7. All of the 115 kV breakers on the 115 kV West bus in addition to the 44 kV breaker, 4651,
tripped. It must be noted that the 115 kV breaker, 9992, was out of service at the time of this event.
Event records and relay targets indicated the following relays operated for this fault:
1. The autotransformer bank 2 primary differential relay
2. The autotransformer bank 2 secondary differential relay
3. The 115 kV West bus secondary low‐impedance differential relay
Unrestrained Low‐Impedance Bus Differential – Should I Use It? Page 9
Figure 7: Location of the Evolving B‐C‐G 115kV High‐Side Fault
A review of the event records from the transformer bank 2 relays indicated that both relays operated for
the phase‐to‐phase to ground (B‐C‐G) fault internal to the zone of the protection. The magnitude of the
fault current was approximately 19,000 A at the 115 kV level. The fault was external to the zone of
protection of the 115 kV West bus secondary relay but the unrestrained element on the 115 kV West
bus secondary low‐impedance differential relay operated incorrectly. The restrained element on this
secondary relay did not operate due to the saturation detector and directional check algorithms that
supervise it. In addition, it must be noted that the 115 kV West bus primary high‐impedance relay did
not operate for this external fault.
Figure 8 shows the unfiltered waveforms for the restraint inputs to the autotransformer bank 2
differential relay from the 115 kV high‐side, breaker 9922, and the 44 kV low‐side, breaker 4651, in
addition to the digital elements. It is easily noted from the waveforms in Figure 8 that all the B and C
phase CTs were saturated to some degree. It was also evident from the oscillography in Figure 8 that the
bank 2 transformer differential operated on the unrestrained element; the restrained element did not
operate due to blocking caused by significant second harmonic content in the differential current
apparently created by the saturated CT secondary waveforms.
Unrestrained Low‐Impedance Bus Differential – Should I Use It? Page 10
Figure 8: Unfiltered Oscillography from Bank 2 Transformer Differential Relay
Figure 9 shows the waveforms from all the restraint inputs to the 115 kV West bus secondary low‐
impedance relay on B and C phases in addition to the digital elements within the relay. Figure 10 shows
the differential and restraint current magnitudes for the B and C phases for the same relay. It is noted
that waveforms from the B and C phases on breaker 9922 show significant signs of distortion due to
saturation. The 115 kV West bus secondary low‐impedance relay incorrectly operated on the
unrestrained differential element on the B‐phase differential zone; the same element on the C‐phase
differential zone did not operate. Further, the restrained elements on both phases did not operate due
to blocking from the saturation detection and directional check algorithms that supervise them.
Unrestrained Low‐Impedance Bus Differential – Should I Use It? Page 11
Figure 9: 115 kV West Bus Secondary Differential Relay B and C Phase Current Waveforms
Unrestrained Low‐Impedance Bus Differential – Should I Use It? Page 12
Figure 10: 115 kV West Bus Secondary Differential Relay B and C Differential and Restraint Magnitudes
Figure 11 includes the waveforms for the B and C phase restraint inputs from breaker 9922 wired to the
115 kV West bus secondary low‐impedance differential relay. It was obvious that both CTs showed some
degree of saturation. The saturation of the B‐phase CT is much worse than C‐phase although the peak
current magnitude is 20 kA on C‐phase versus 15 kA on B‐phase. Figure 12 shows the phasor diagrams
for the restraint inputs for the B‐phase differential zone before and after the initiation of the 115 kV B‐C‐
G fault. Note that the phasor diagram after the initiation shows significant change in the phase angle of
the B‐phase current from breaker 9922 (shown as L5 in Figure 12), which likely represents another sign
of acute saturation of the CT. It is important to mention here that the CTs wired from breaker 9922 to
the 115 kV West bus differential relay are identical and have similar secondary wiring; therefore, one
would expect similar response.
Unrestrained Low‐Impedance Bus Differential – Should I Use It? Page 13
Figure 11: 115 kV West Bus Secondary Differential Relay waveforms from BKR 9922 B and C CTs
Figure 12: 115 kV West Bus Secondary Differential Relay B‐Phase Phasors
Unrestrained Low‐Impedance Bus Differential – Should I Use It? Page 14
There was extensive testing done by both the owner and the relay manufacturer to confirm the initial
conjecture of saturation resulting in a major bus trip and outage. The oscillography of the relays, while
very informative, is subject to some filtering response and some gaps. There are indications of
significant waveform distortions. Information lacking on the oscillography and needing confirmation
included: CT polarity, ratio, remnant flux. The tests performed were the routine tests as those outlined
in IEEE 57.13, specifically the excitation test for turn‐turn insulation and core health, primary to
secondary ratio tests, and polarity tests. Further, secondary conductor insulation testing as well as single
point grounding was performed. The results of all of these tests confirmed there were no latent defects
in the circuits. All plots for the CTs on the 9922 breaker were confirmed to have similar knee point
voltage and were consistent with the C‐800 classification. Tests were also performed on the relay with
secondary currents of 90 amperes were injected into the relay elements and were seen to remain stable
for external fault simulation. This test was made in addition to the normal pickup and through current
restraint tests. The relay was returned to the manufacturer where it was subjected to the full set of
acceptance tests used to confirm that the A/D circuits performed correctly and that the waveforms
captured in the oscillography were accurate representations of the actual waveforms experienced. The
results of all the testing solidified the initial conclusion that a long time constant transient as a
consequence of point on wave for fault inception in a high X/R network source likely occurred and
fooled the unrestrained differential element to trip.
General observation about this fault condition:
1. CTs on breaker 9922 wired to the 115 kV West bus secondary low‐impedance differential relay,
the B and C phases, were heavily saturated during this fault. The fault magnitude was under
maximum symmetrical current that can be reproduced without saturation based on the CTs’
class and manufacturer provided data. Extensive testing process proved the CTs were healthy,
had the correct secondary wiring, and should have operated within the provided specification.
Therefore, it is concluded that the CTs were heavily saturated due to remnant magnetization
caused by the sequential faults. That is, immediately prior to the erroneous trip of the 115 kV
West bus secondary low‐impedance differential relay was a transformer through‐fault event,
and the interruption for that through‐fault left remnant flux on the CTs. The remnant
magnetization coupled with high offset and long decay time for the subsequent fault at the 115
kV high‐side of the transformer bank 2 created an even greater excursion into saturation
beyond the contemplated margin that was part of the original setting calculation.
2. On the 115 kV West bus low‐impedance differential relay, the restrained differential element
did not erroneously operate under the same heavy saturation conditions for which the
unrestrained element erroneously tripped. The restrained element did not over‐trip because of
the supervision provided by the saturation detection and directional check algorithms, which
both worked as expected for this heavy saturation external fault conditions.
3. The unrestrained differential element on the 115 kV West bus differential relay, as with other
manufacturers, is only 2 – 4 milliseconds faster as compared to the restrained element.
However, this extremely minor gain in speed comes at greater cost of reduced security. Such
security risks were found to be unjustified. Therefore, it was decided to disable the unrestrained
differential element in the low‐impedance bus differential at this location and all other location
where low‐impedance differential elements.
Unrestrained Low‐Impedance Bus Differential – Should I Use It? Page 15
4. While we rely on the good engineering practices of manufacturers, we also accept the real‐life
issues with analog‐digital conversion and the filtering. Filtering is time dependent and the
sampling rate rejects higher order harmonics. There are response characteristics in magnitude
and phase. The input circuits are analog and the auxiliary transformers and hardware based
filters are designed to be simple pass through functions that should not contribute to error.
Phase shift is possible but not expected. However, in this type of fault, the phase to ground
fault evolving to phase to phase to ground in a partial cycle following a low side‐transformer
fault, it is reasonable to expect that the unrestrained high set element is subject to significant
error from the severely saturated CT that produces the current. The simple design of the
unrestrained differential element allows it to be fast but appears to be insufficient to
discriminate for this fault. While all networks produce a response that will have some error in
phase and magnitude and we expect that the relay is designed correctly to provide for most
situations without tripping on external faults, it is clear that the standard setting calculation
method identified in the manual does not contain adequate margins for this unique type of
evolving fault.
5. In spite of the heavily saturated CTs and distorted waveforms, the unrestrained transformer
differential elements on the relays protecting bank 2 operated correctly as backup functions for
the restrained transformer differential elements, which were inhibited by second harmonic
blocking. In contrast, the unrestrained differential element in the 115 kV West bus secondary
differential relay incorrectly operated for this condition. That is, while the unrestrained
differential element provides indispensable backup function and is well suited for the
transformer protection applications, the unrestrained differential element serves no necessary
function and carries serious security risks in the bus protection applications.
6.0: Conclusions
The fundamental function of low‐impedance bus differential protection is the restrained percent
differential element. Modern microprocessor based relays have increased the popularity of restrained
low‐impedance bus differential elements since they are typically faster and offer more functionality than
microprocessor based high impedance bus differential elements. These modern microprocessor low‐
impedance differential relays are typically multi‐function relays, including over‐current, directional
control, metering and unrestrained (AKA: high‐set or instantaneous) differential elements. While this
multi‐functionality offers flexibility and versatility the unrestrained differential element can cause false
trips if not properly applied. The unrestrained differential element in transformer protection is clearly
needed as a means of tripping a failed transformer when the restrained element is severely restrained
or blocked during energization. There is no similar concern with bus differential since the restrained
element is expected to operate for all internal faults where the differential current exceeds the
minimum pick‐up. The only clear advantage that the authors have found of the unrestrained bus
differential element is that it is typically 2 – 4 milliseconds faster than the restrained element. The user
must seriously consider weather this slight speed advantage justifies the security risks associated with
the unrestrained bus differential element.
Unrestrained Low‐Impedance Bus Differential – Should I Use It? Page 16
7.0: References
[1] "Current Transformer Concepts", Zocholl and D. W. Smaha, 46th Annual Georgia Tech Protective
Relay Conference, Atlanta, GA, April 1992
[2] “Instantaneous Bus‐Differential Protection Using Bushing Current Transformers”, Seeley, Von
Roeschlaub, AIEE Vol 67 PP 1709‐ 1718, 19486+9
[3] “Considerations in Applying Ratio Differential Relays for Bus Protection”, R. M. Smith, W. K.
Sonnemann, G. B. Dodds, AIEE Transactions Vol 58, June 1939, PP 243 – 306.
[4] “Relaying Current Transformer Applications”, Gabriel Benmouyal, Jeff Roberts and Stanley Zocholl,
WECC Relay Working Group, June 10, 2014
[5] “Selecting CTs to Optimize Relay Performance”, Gabriel Benmouyal, Jeff Roberts and Stanley Zocholl,
1996 Pennsylvania Electric Association Relay Committee Fall Meeting, September 1996.
8.0: Biographies
Ernest Poggi: Ernest Poggi received his BSEE from the University of Lowell (Lowell Technological
Institute) in 1976. He has been involved in the design and operation of power system substations and
system protection equipment and study work for 41 years including time with Florida Power & Light, Tri
State G&T and Xcel Energy in Colorado, where he is a registered Professional Engineer in the State of
Colorado. He was the Lead Engineer on the Lamar HVDC Converter Station. He has co‐authored papers
delivered to Western Protective Relay Conference and CIGRE.
Mohamed M. Omer: Mohamed M. Omer is a Senior System Protection Engineer at Xcel Energy. He
has been with Xcel Energy in the system protection engineer since 2010. Prior to joining Xcel Energy,
Mohamed has been with PPL Electric Utilities as Relaying and System Analysis Engineer. He received
his Bachelor of Science (2006) and Master of Engineering (2008) in Electrical Engineering from
Pennsylvania State University. He is a registered Professional Engineer in the State of Colorado and a
member of the IEEE Power and Energy Society.
Thomas Ernst: Tom Ernst is a P&C Technical Application Engineer for the GE Grid Solutions North
American Commercial team. He has been with GE since 2011 supporting the Grid Automation
Protection and Control Portfolio. Prior to joining GE, Tom has been with Minnesota Power as a
Supervising Engineer, Delta Engineering International as a Manager of Electrical Engineering, HDR
Engineering as a Manager of Electrical Engineering and Northern States Power as a Supervising
Engineer. He received his Bachelor of Science in Electrical Engineering from the University of
Minnesota in 1978 and his Master of Science in Power Systems from Michigan Technological
University in 2008. He is a registered Professional Engineer in the State of Minnesota and a long-time
member of the IEEE Power and Energy Society and Professional Communications Society.
Unrestrained Low‐Impedance Bus Differential – Should I Use It? Page 17