ISSN 2278-3091

Volume
Zaid Alhadrawi et al., International Journal of Advanced 9,inNo.1.4,
Trends 2020
Computer Science and Engineering, 9(1.4), 2020, 664 - 672
International Journal of Advanced Trends in Computer Science and Engineering
Available Online at http://www.warse.org/IJATCSE/static/pdf/file/ijatcse9391.42020.pdf
https://doi.org/10.30534/ijatcse/2020/9391.42020
4
An Adjustable Differential Protection Scheme for Microgrids
with Inverter-Based Distributed Generation
Zaid Alhadrawi 1, M. N. Abdullah 2, HazlieMokhlis 3
1
Department of Electrical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, University of Kufa, IRAQ,
[email protected]
1,2
Green and Sustainable Energy (GSEnergy) Focus Group, Faculty of Electrical and Electronic Engineering,
Universiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia, 86400 Parit Raja, BatuPahat, Johor, MALAYSIA,
[email protected]
3
Department of Electrical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, University Malaya, 50603 Kuala Lumpur,
MALAYSIA, [email protected]

 distribution network will be dispersed by multi-source

ABSTRACT systems. Moreover, the fault current magnitude of the
islanded mode is different from the grid-connected mode
This paper presents an adjustable differential protection [6],[7]. Therefore, the traditional overcurrent protection of a
scheme for microgrids with inverter-based distributed distribution network can no longer protect the microgrid.
generation. In this study, a microgrid protection schemehas Different microgrid protection schemes have been suggested
proposed based on positive sequence current and mode recently in the literature against faulty situations. The authors
detection to overcome the limitations of conventional of [8]-[10] proposed an adaptive scheme for a microgrid with
differential protection.The proposed protection scheme used a synchronous generators. The authors of [11] proposed a
fault current magnitude andundervoltage protection to protection centre to adaptively monitor the currents of the
distinguish between theislanded mode and the grid-connected feeder continuously. The measurements of each protection
mode. The fault currents and voltages retrieved at the two zone are collected in the microgrid protection centre via
ends are reprocessed to determine the faulty phase. Then, the communication links to detect the faults. Therefore, this type
differential of positive sequence current is used for fault of protection is expensive.The work in [12] adaptively
detection and isolation. The main feature of the proposed changed the protection settings of all overcurrent, which used
scheme is its ability to protect a microgrid for loop and radial optimum protection settings.The scheme suffers from the
topology in the islanded mode and the grid-connected mode complexity of calculations due to the change of microgrid
against all types of faults. Furthermore, the proposed scheme operation mode, unbalanced loads, and transients during the
reduces a computational burden and communication units and disconnection or connection of DG units.Other researchers
considers the unbalanced loads for most distribution have resorted to apply signal processing methods to sort the
networks. The effectiveness of the proposed scheme is proved fault and normal states. The papers [13]-[15] employed
by the PSCAD/EMTDC software simulation of a case study. Fourier transform to estimate the fundamental component of
The simulation results show the ability of the presented the inputs. Meanwhile, the studies [16]-[18] applied the
scheme. approach based on wavelet transform to protect microgrids
from different faults that may occur. The schemes need a
Key words:Microgrid, Differential scheme, Distributed correct signal synchronisation with high sampling frequency,
generation, inverter-based DG. which is unserviceable because the DSP (digital signal
processing) hardware is uneconomical. In addition, the
1. INTRODUCTION scheme suffers from high computational burden, leading to
slower response.Furthermore, differential protection
Microgrid has become a common term for distribution principles have been employed in the literature. The authors
networks that contain distributed generation (DG), of [19] discussed two main issues associated with microgrid
particularly inverter-based DGs (IBDGs) that are represented operation control and protection. They used a traditional
mainly by solar photovoltaic (PV) and doubly-fed induction differential relay at both sides of each line. This scheme is
generators (DFIGs) [1],[2]. The ability of a microgrid to very costly for a large system because it needs to connect all
operate in both modes, islanded and grid-connected, making it system devices to the control centre. The paper [20] suggested
more reliable and less expensive. In addition, a microgrid a protection scheme is mainly based on the differential
helps to reduce power losses in a power network, increase the relay.However, they did not consider the grid-connected
stability of the network, and enhance the power quality mode, loop configuration, double line to ground, and
[3]-[5].On the other hand, the power system is affected, line-to-line faults. A current differential protection was used
particularly the protection system, where the radial in [21]. The proposed scheme deals with many quantities (i.e.,
Ia, Ib, Ic, negative and zero currents); therefore, the scheme
requires more channels and creates computational burden.

664
Zaid Alhadrawi et al., International Journal of Advanced Trends in Computer Science and Engineering, 9(1.4), 2020, 664 - 672

Also, the authors did not consider the fault current magnitude 2. DIFFERENTIAL PROTECTION METHOD FOR
variation due to microgrid modes, fault types, and unbalance MICROGRID FEEDERS
loads that lead to the blinding of protection or false tripping. A
differential protection scheme based on the differences in the Differential protection method has been widely used as
current frequency components was proposed in [22] to detect the main protection of an electrical unit such as a generator,
and isolate faults for the islanded mode only. Also, [23] used a bus, transformer, or power line due to its great performance.
differential scheme based on symmetrical components with a The method is one of the highest sensitive and powerful
central communication system for the islanded microgrid. methods of presenting protection against faults for the
Fuzzy process was used in [24] with the Hilbert space-based islanded mode and grid-connected mode [1]. The concept of
power theory to enhance differential protection performance. differential protection is uncomplicated, where it is based on
The scheme was limited to the grid-connected microgrid and the fact that any fault inside an electrical apparatus would
neglected the islanded mode. A positive sequence current result in the current entering the apparatus to be different than
proposed in [25] instead of the phase current presented into the current leaving the apparatus. Thus, the two currents can
the differential protection. The most important limitations of be compared and a trip output can be issued if the difference
this scheme are the scheme ignored the islanded mode and exceeds the threshold value. Consider a system shown in
disregarded the most common fault type (i.e., single-phase Figure 1. The current coming in the first end (I1) must be
fault). After a careful study of the protection schemes similar with the current leaving the second end (I2). The two
accessible in the literature, it is concluded that differential currents do not remain equal when a fault occurs between the
schemes are a suitable method to protect a microgrid. This is two ends. Alternatively, one could form an algebraic sum of
because the schemes can overcome the problems of the two currents entering the protected apparatus as presented
coordinating a large number of series protections and low in (1):
fault current supply from inverted-based DGs.However, there
are problems associated with this scheme, which are related to = + (1)
the fault current magnitude difference as a result of the change Under a normal operation, ideally, the magnitude
of operation mode, fault types, or unbalance loads that lead to ofdifferential current should be zero. In practical, it has a
the blinding of protection or false tripping. Furthermore, a small value, both under healthy conditions and external faults
conventional differential relay normally employs three due to the current transformer error, ratio mismatch, or line
differential units to cover all fault types; therefore, it requires charging current [26].Until recently, the differential
more channels and creates computational burden. In addition, protection method has not been applied for line protection due
the aforementioned schemes have not been examined for to the distances involved. For a three-phase line, six
other expected disturbances; hence, the schemes could fail to communication links would be required: one for the neutral,
operate correctly during non-fault events. The protection one for each phase, and two for tripping the circuit breakers.
centre used by several previous schemes caused additional However, as computers are becoming more diffused and
cost as multi-channels are required to connect all protection communication is more developed, line current differential
devices. Therefore, it is necessary to find a suitable protection protection has become popular [27]. The application of
scheme capable of solving these problems.This paper current differential protection to microgrid lines requires the
proposed an adjustable differential scheme for microgrid consideration of problems associated with this scheme, which
protection based on positive sequence current and detection are related to the fault current magnitude difference to avoid
mode to overcome the limitations of conventional differential the blinding of protection or false tripping. In this paper, a
protection. The proposed scheme is able to protect looped and modified differential current protection that used the
radial microgrids under all possible circumstances in both differential of positive sequence current for both feeder sides
operation modes. The effectiveness of the proposed scheme is is proposed.
provedby PSCAD/EMTDC software simulation of case study.
The main contributions of this scheme are as follows: 3. PROPOSED PROTECTION SCHEME
•Reducing computational burden and communication units.
•Considering both modes of microgrid operation (i.e., This paper suggests a comprehensive protection scheme that
grid-connected and isolated). is able to protect any type of microgrid for all possible
•Detecting and identifying the faulty line in a microgrid configurations against various types of faults. The proposed
during high penetration of inverter-based DG. protection scheme used a fault current magnitude
•The ability of dealing with radial and loop configuration, and andundervoltage protection to distinguish between the
avoiding the need to modify protection devices with each islanded mode and the grid-connected mode. The fault
configuration. currents and voltages retrieved at the two ends are reprocessed
The remaining of the paper is arranged as follows. The to determine the faulty phase. Then, the differential of
background of differential protection is presented in Section 2. positive sequence
Section 3 debates the proposed protection scheme. Section 4 current is used for fault detection and isolation. The
discusses the test system and the simulation results. Finally, in procedures of the proposed scheme are presented in Figure
Section 5, the principal conclusions of this study are 2.The proposed scheme consists of two parts. The first part is
presented. the mode detector to choose the appropriate settings and the
second part is the fault detection as shown in Figure 3.

665
Zaid Alhadrawi et al., International Journal of Advanced Trends in Computer Science and Engineering, 9(1.4), 2020, 664 - 672

Where Ii is the threshold value of positive current in the island

CT1 CT2 mode and Igis the threshold value of positive current in the
Electrical Apparatus
grid-connected mode.

3.2 Fault detection

This stage is based on the differential protection
I1 Ir R I2
principle as mentioned earlier in Section 2. It can overcome
the problems of coordinating a large number of series
Figure 1: Differential Protection Principle protections and low fault current supply from inverted-based
DGs.However, it has a fixed threshold value that leads to
3.1 Mode detection misoperationor protection under-reach as a result of changing
Although the differential protection scheme can deal Table 1:Symmetrical Components Associated with Each
with small fault currents efficiently, a misoperation may occur Type of Fault
if the scheme is not adjusted accurately due to disconnected
DG, transients, or load changes.A microgrid is isolated from Fault Type Sequence Component
the main grid by opening the main circuit breaker at the PCC. Single line to ground (SLG) Positive + Negative + Zero
A whole communication network is required to inform all Line to line (LL) Positive + Negative
protective devices in the microgrid and this approach is
expensive. In this paper, the undervoltage and overcurrent Line to line to ground (LLG) Positive + Negative + Zero
principle is relied on to deal with each mode independently
Three phases to ground Positive
without using a communication network, where the voltage
and current of each phase are monitored simultaneously. In
order reduce calculation complexities and communication Start
channels, a sequence analyser is used to transform abc
quantities to positive, negative, and zero sequences. Only
positive sequence is employed as the sequence is available in
all types of faults as shown in Table 1. Measure I and V
at two sides of line
The positive sequence component can be decomposed from
three phase systems as shown in (2) and (3):
Extract I+
1
= ( + + )(2)
3 No
= ( + + )(3) No V < V threshold
°
Where = and , are the positive voltage and
positive current sequence, respectively. Yes

The scheme provides monitoring of system voltages and

Calculate ∆I+ based
compares it with a specified voltage threshold. For normal I + ≥ I Grid Yes
on grid threshold
operation, the voltages are within permissible limits but
during fault, the voltages fall below a specified threshold.
This is implemented using a logical circuit comparator No
thatassigns an output value of "1" when the voltage drops and
an output value of "0" for normal phase voltage. I island≤ I + < I
The magnitude of fault current varies with microgrid Grid
circumstances, particularly mode of operation and fault type.
Therefore, this study proposed a method that allows the
Yes
protection scheme to adapt its settings automatically
according to the operation modes. The faulted current Calculate ∆I+ based
threshold is stored for each type of fault for both operation on island threshold
modes. The magnitude of fault current (I) is within the two
ranges as shown in (4) for the island mode and (5) for the
grid-connected mode: Trip Signal
≤ < (4)
≥ (5) End

Figure2: Flow Chart of the Proposed Scheme

666
Zaid Alhadrawi et al., International Journal of Advanced Trends in Computer Science and Engineering, 9(1.4), 2020, 664 - 672

Mode detector
V(abc) Sequence V+ Threshold
Island mode
analyzer Comparator

Threshold
Island Grid connected Setting
I(abc) Sequence I+ Threshold mode
analyzer Comparator
Grid

I1(abc) Sequence I1+ Fault detection

analyzer
Threshold Trip
∆I+ Comparator Signal
I2(abc) Sequence I2+
analyzer

Figure 3:Schematic Diagram of the Proposed Scheme

Grid

69 KV / 24.9 KV

B1

L1 4 Km

B2

L2 0.5 Km
2 Km L3 3 Km L4

B3 B4 B5

PV
Load 1
PV
L8 6 Km

L6 3 Km B6

L5 4 Km Load 2
L9 3 Km
B8
B7
Load 4
L7
Load 3
8 Km
L10 3 Km

B9 B10

Load 5
WT

Figure4: Microgrid Case Study

667
Zaid Alhadrawi et al., International Journal of Advanced Trends in Computer Science and Engineering, 9(1.4), 2020, 664 - 672
1.00
4. SIMULATION RESULTS 0.90
0.80
0.70
To verify the validation of the proposed scheme, the 0.60

Current (kA)
microgrid test system of Figure 4 was performed using 0.50
0.40
PSCAD/EMTDC software. The voltage level of the studied 0.30
system was 24.9 kV and the operating frequency was 0.20
0.10
maintained at 50 Hz. The microgrid was connected to the grid 0.00
with a main circuit breaker that can be opened to simulate the Sec 0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00
effect of the islanded operation mode. As shown in this figure, (a)
the microgrid is connected to the main grid by a 69 kV/24.9
kV Dyn transformer. It also contains two photovoltaic 1.00
systems (640 KVA) and one wind turbine (504 KVA) that are 0.50

Voltage (p.u)
connected with the power network through a power electronic 0.00
inverter circuit [28], [29]. Each DG source is interfaced
-0.50
through a 0.4/24.9 kV transformer. Radial and loop
configuration can be achieved when the circuit breakers of L6 -1.00

are opened or closed. All types of faults (including SLG, LL, -1.50
LLG, and three phases to ground) were applied to the test the sec 0.140 0.160 0.180 0.200 0.220
microgrid for different locations in both islanded and (b)
grid-connected operation modes. In order to analysis
performance of the protection scheme, different scenarios 0.250
were simulated. 0.200

Current (KA)
0.150
4.1 RADIAL CONFIGURATION IN GRID-CONNECTED MODE
0.100
The objective of this scenario is to verify the
effectiveness of the proposed scheme during the 0.050

grid-connected mode for radial configuration of the 0.000

Sec
microgrid. In this case, the protection scheme has successfully 0.000 0.100 0.200 0.300 0.400 0.500 0.600 0.700 0.800

isolated all types of faults in the microgrid. The protection (c)

relays detect all faults for different locations and send the trip 1.50

signal to relevant circuit breakers. In order to study the 1.00

performance of all relays, the trip commands were 0.50
intentionally blocked, and thus the fault remained active. A 0.00
SLG fault was occurred at line L5 with fault resistance is 10 Ω -0.50
at simulation time is 0.2 S. In this case, the RMS current value -1.00
of the faulted phase (a) raised to 0.8 KA while the voltage -1.50
dropped to 0.55 p.u as shown in Figure 5 (a) and 5 (b) Sec 0.000 0.100 0.200 0.300 0.400 0.500

respectively. The current value within grid-connected range,

therefore themode detector in the proposed scheme choose the (d)
setting of grid-connected mode. The difference between the
positive current of the two feeder ends current increase to Figure5:SLG Fault at L5 in Grid-Connected Mode/ Radial
0.252 KA so the trip signal was generated. Figure 5 (c) and 5 Configuration (a) Magnitude Fault Currents (b) Three-Phase
Voltages (c) Positive Current Differential (d) Trip Signal
(d) show the ∆I+ and trip signal respectively.
4.3 RADIAL CONFIGURATION IN ISLAND MODE
4.2 LOOP CONFIGURATION IN GRID-CONNECTED MODE
The loop structure provides additional reliability. For In this case, the fault current level decreased
the faults on any feeder line, the loads supplied power significantly due to the disconnection from the main
fromanother side and will remain in service. The loop grid, and the source of generation present is only
configuration is achieved by closing the circuit breakers of IBDGs.The objective of this scenario is to verify the
line L7. The objective of this scenario is to verify the
effectiveness of the proposed scheme during the effectiveness of the proposed scheme during the
grid-connected mode for loop configuration of the microgrid. islanded mode for radial configuration of the microgrid.
Also,the proposed scheme identified all faults typefor In this case, the protection scheme has successfully
differentlocation. Figure6. shows LL fault at L6.
isolated all types of faults in the microgrid.In this
scenario, the difference from grid-connected where the
current magnitude is small.

668
Zaid Alhadrawi et al., International Journal of Advanced Trends in Computer Science and Engineering, 9(1.4), 2020, 664 - 672

Ia Ib IC Ia Ib Ic
0.90
0.80
0.0250
0.70
0.60 0.0200
Current (kA)

Current (kA)
0.50
0.0150
0.40
0.30 0.0100
0.20
0.0050
0.10
0.00 0.0000
Sec 0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60 Sec 0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40
(a) (a)

1.00 1.00

0.50 0.50
Voltage (p.u)

Voltage (p.u)
0.00 0.00

-0.50 -0.50
-1.00 -1.00

-1.50 -1.50
sec 0.120 0.140 0.160 0.180 0.200 0.220 0.240 sec 0.140 0.160 0.180 0.200 0.220

(b) (b)
0.450 0.0060
0.400
0.0050
0.350
0.300 0.0040

Current (KA)
Current (KA)

0.250
0.0030
0.200
0.150 0.0020
0.100
0.0010
0.050
0.000 0.0000
Sec 0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 Sec 0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50
(c) (c)

1.20 1.50
1.00
1.00
0.80
0.60 0.50
0.40 0.00
0.20 -0.50
0.00
-0.20 -1.00
-0.40 -1.50
-0.60 Sec 0.100 0.125 0.150 0.175 0.200 0.225 0.250 0.275
Sec 0.100 0.150 0.200 0.250 0.300
(d)
(d)
Figure7: SLG Fault at L5 in Islanded Mode/ Radial Configuration
Figure 6:LL Fault at L6 in Grid-Connected Mode/ Loop
(a) Magnitude Fault Currents (b) Three-Phase Voltages (c) Positive
Configuration (a) Magnitude Fault Currents (b) Three-Phase
Current Differential (d) Trip Signal
Voltages (c) Positive Current Differential (d) Trip Signal
4.4 LOOP CONFIGURATION IN ISLAND MODE
A SLG fault was occurred at line L5 with fault resistance is 10 The objective of this scenario is to verify the
Ω at simulation time is 0.2 S. In this case, the RMS current effectiveness of the proposed scheme during the
value of the faulted phase (a) raised to 0.015 KA while the grid-connected mode for loop configuration of the microgrid.
voltage decreased significantly as shown in Figure7 (a) and 7 This case is largely similar to the loop structure when the grid
(b) respectively. The current value within island range, is connected. However, the transients are smaller due to the
therefore the mode detector in the proposed scheme choose lower short circuit capacity of the system. Figure8. show fault
the setting of island mode. The difference between the
current magnitudes, the voltages, the differential of positive
positive current of the two feeder ends current increase to 4 A
so the trip signal was generated. Figure7 (c) and 7 (d) show current, and tripping signal waveforms, respectively for a
the ∆I+ and trip signal respectively. LLG fault at L9.

669
Zaid Alhadrawi et al., International Journal of Advanced Trends in Computer Science and Engineering, 9(1.4), 2020, 664 - 672

4.5 UNBALANCED LOAD

Usually the loads are unbalanced in the 0.90
Ia Ib IC

distributionnetworks, so this issue should be taken into 0.80

0.70
consideration when proposing a protection system. The 0.60

Current (kA)
0.50
proposed scheme 0.40
Ia Ib Ic 0.30
0.0450 0.20
0.0400 0.10
0.0350 0.00
0.0300 Sec 0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80
Current (kA)

0.0250
0.0200 (a)
0.0150
0.0100
0.0050
0.0000 1.00
Sec 0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 0.50

Voltage (p.u)
(a) 0.00

-0.50

1.00 -1.00

0.50 -1.50
Voltage (p.u)

sec 0.120 0.140 0.160 0.180 0.200 0.220 0.240

0.00

-0.50 (b)
-1.00
0.90
-1.50 0.80
Sec 0.140 0.160 0.180 0.200 0.220 0.70
0.60

Current (KA)
(b) 0.50
0.40
0.30
0.0050 0.20
0.10
0.0040
Current (KA)

0.00
0.0030 Sec 0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80
0.0020 (c)
0.0010
1.25
0.0000
1.00
Sec 0.000 0.050 0.100 0.150 0.200 0.250 0.300 0.350 0.75

(c) 0.50
0.25
0.00
1.25
-0.25
1.00
-0.50
0.75
0.50 Sec 0.100 0.150 0.200 0.250 0.300
0.25
0.00
(d)
-0.25
-0.50
Figure9: Three-Phase Fault at L6 in Grid-Connected Mode/ Radial
Sec 0.100 0.150 0.200 0.250 0.300 Configuration for Unbalanced Load (a) Magnitude Fault Currents (b)
Three-Phase Voltages (c) Positive Current Differential (d) Trip
(d)
Signal

Figure8:LLG Fault at L9in Islanded Mode/ Loop Configuration (a) 5. CONCLUSION

Magnitude Fault Currents (b) Three-Phase Voltages (c) Positive
Current Differential (d) Trip Signal
Microgrid protection is a challenge typically due to the
growing penetration of DGs, particularly inverter-based DGs.
based on the positive current component to fit with this issue.
Therefore, traditional protection schemes are not appropriate
This scenario examined the proposed scheme validity for
for a microgrid system. This requires finding
unbalanced load during grid-connected and island modes for
alternativeprotection to isolate the faulty zone of network in a
radial and loop configuration. For example, a three-phase
minimum possible time. This paper proposed a
fault occur at line L6 in grid- connected mode for radial
comprehensive scheme for an inverter-based microgrid. In
configuration. Figure9 shows the ability of proposed scheme
this scheme, the fault current level and undervoltage
to detect the fault and isolate it. Also, Figure10 shows a SLG
protection are used to distinguish between the islanded mode
fault was occurred at line L5.
670
Zaid Alhadrawi et al., International Journal of Advanced Trends in Computer Science and Engineering, 9(1.4), 2020, 664 - 672

and the grid-connected mode. In addition, the differential of REFERENCES

positive sequence current is used to detect and isolate the 1. B. Han, H. Li, G. Wang, D. Zeng and Y. Liang. A virtual
faulted zone. The proposed multi-terminal current differential protection scheme for
Ia Ib Ic
0.0225 distribution networks with inverter-interfaced
0.0200 distributedgenerators,IEEE Trans. Smart Grid,Vol. 5 pp.
0.0175
0.0150 5418–5431, Septemper 2018.
Current (kA)

0.0125
0.0100
2. A. A. Kamoona, A. N. alfadli, and I. A. Alshabeeb.New
0.0075 method for oc relay coordination,J. Electr. Comput. Eng.,
0.0050
0.0025 Vol. 2020, pp. 1–11, May 2020.
0.0000 3. D. A. Gadanayak and R. K. Mallick.Microgrid
Sec 0.000 0.050 0.100 0.150 0.200 0.250 0.300 0.350
differential protection scheme using downsampling
(a) empirical mode decomposition and Teager energy
operator, Electr. Power Syst. Res.,Vol. 173, pp. 173–182,
1.50
August 2019.
1.00 4. E. Sortomme, S. S. Venkata and J. Mitra.Microgrid
0.50 protection using communication-assisted digital relays,
Voltage (p.u)

0.00 IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery, Vol. 4, pp.

-0.50 2789–2796, Octoper 2010,
-1.00 5.M.S. Ibbini and A.H. Adawi.Analysis and design of a
-1.50 maximum power point tracker for a stand-alone photo
sec 0.140 0.160 0.180 0.200 0.220 voltaic system using simscape,Int. J. Adv. Trends Comput.
Sci. Eng., Vol. 8, no.1, pp. 54 - 56, 2019
(b)
6. A.Vandana, R.Mohan, A. Abdul, B. Sujatha and B. N.
0.0060 Kishore.Fault detection in three phase transmission line
0.0050 using wavelet transform algorithm,Int. J. Adv. Trends
0.0040 Comput. Sci. Eng., vol. 8, no.1, pp. 82 - 84, 2019
Current (KA)

0.0030 7. P. Mahat, Z. Chen, B. Bak-Jensen and C. L. Bak.A simple

0.0020 adaptive overcurrent protection of distribution systems
0.0010 with distributed generation, IEEE Trans. Smart Grid, vol. 2,
0.0000 no.3, pp. 428–437, septemper 2011.
Sec 0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50
https://doi.org/10.1109/TSG.2011.2149550
8. L. Felimar, B. Torrizo, A. Don and M. Africa.Utilizing
(c) MINLP-based Hourly dispatch optimization on a
droop-controlled islanded microgrid,Int. J. Adv. Trends
1.50 Comput. Sci. Eng., vol. 8, no.5, pp. 2464 - 2469, 2019
1.00 https://doi.org/10.30534/ijatcse/2019/91852019
0.50 9. E. C. Piesciorovsky and N. N. Schulz.Comparison of
0.00 programmable logic and setting group methods for
-0.50 adaptive overcurrent protection in microgrids,Electr.
-1.00
Power Syst. Res.,vol. 151, pp. 273–282. October 2017.
-1.50
Sec
10. E. C. Piesciorovsky and N. N. Schulz.Fuse relay
0.140 0.160 0.180 0.200 0.220 0.240 0.260 0.280
adaptive overcurrent protection scheme for microgrid
(d) with distributed generators, IET Gener. Transm. Distrib.,
vol 11, no. 2, pp. 540–549, 2017.
Figure10: SLG Fault at L5 in Islanded Mode/ Loop Configuration
11. O. V. Swathika and S. Hemamalini.Prims-aided
for Unbalanced Load (a) Magnitude Fault Currents (b) Three-Phase Dijkstra algorithm for adaptive protection in microgrids,
Voltages (c) Positive Current Differential (d) Trip Signal IEEE Journal of Emerging and Selected Topics in Power
Electronics, vol. 4, no. 4, pp. 1279-1286, 2016.
method does not depend on a central protection. To confirm 12. F. Coffele, C. Booth and A. Dyśko.An adaptive
the effectiveness of the suggested scheme, many cases were overcurrent protection scheme for distribution networks,
simulated in both islanded and grid-connected operation IEEE Trans. Power Deliv., vol. 30, no. 2, pp. 561–568, 2015.
modes for loop and radial configurations. Using 13. D. S. Kumar, D. Srinivasan and T. Reindl.A fast and
PSCAD/EMTDC simulation software, the scheme has been scalable protection scheme for distribution networks with
confirmed to be accurate, selective, safe, and has reliable distributed generation, IEEE Trans. Power Deliv., vol. 31,
operation of protective devices in all zones for all cases. no. 1, pp. 67–75, 2016,.
14. S. Kar, S. R. Samantaray and M. D. Zadeh.Data-mining
model based intelligent differential microgrid protection
scheme, IEEE Systems Journal, vol. 11, no.2, pp.
1161–1169, 2017.

671
Zaid Alhadrawi et al., International Journal of Advanced Trends in Computer Science and Engineering, 9(1.4), 2020, 664 - 672

15. S. B. Bukhari, R. Haider, M. S. Zaman, Y. Oh, G.Cho and

C. Kim.An interval type-2 fuzzy logic based strategy for
microgrid protection, Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst., ,
vol. 98, pp. 209–218, June 2018.
16. X. Li, A. Dysko and G. M. Burt.Traveling wave-based
protection scheme for inverter-dominated microgrid
using mathematical morphology, IEEE Trans. Smart Grid,
,vol. 5, no.5, pp. 2211–2218, 2014.
17. S. A. Saleh, R. Ahshan, M. S. Abu-Khaizaran, B. Alsayid
and M. A. Rahman.Implementing and testing d-q
WPT-based digital protection for microgrid systems,
IEEE Transactions on Industry Applications,vol. 50, no.3,
pp. 2173–2185, 2014.
18. J. J. Yu, Y. Hou, A. Y. Lam,and V.O. Li.Intelligent fault
detection scheme for microgrids with wavelet-based deep
neural networks, IEEE Trans. Smart Grid,vol. 10, no. 2, pp.
1694–1703, 2017.
19. H. H. Zeineldin, S. Member and M. M. Salama,
Distributed generation micro- grid operation : control
and protection, Power Systems Conference,Clemson, SC,
USA,March 2006, pp. 105-111.
20. S. Conti, L. Raffa and U. Vagliasindi. Innovative
solutions for protection schemes in autonomous MV
micro-grids,Int. Conf. Clean Electr. Power,Capri, Italy, June
2009, pp. 647-654.
21. M. Dewadasa. 'Protection of microgrids using
differential relays,' Univ. Power Eng. Conf., Brisbane, QLD,
Australia, Sept. 2011 pp. 1–6.
22. A. Soleimanisardoo, H. K. Karegar, and H. H. Zeineldin,
Differentialfrequency protection scheme based on
off-nominal frequency injections for inverter-based
islanded microgrids, IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid, vol.
10, no. 2, pp. 1–8, 2019.
23. E. Casagrande, W. L. Woon, H. H. Zeineldin and D.
Svetinovic,A differential sequence component protection
scheme for microgrids with inverter-based distributed
generators, IEEE Trans. Smart Grid, vol. 5, no.1, pp. 29–37,
2014.
24. A. H. Abdulwahid and S. Wang, A new differential
protection scheme for microgrid using Hilbert space
based power setting and fuzzy decision processes, IEEE
11th Conf. Ind. Electron., Hefei, China, June 2016, pp. 6–11.
25. H. Gao, J. Li, and B. Xu, Principle and implementation
of current differential protection in distribution networks
with high penetration of DGs, IEEE Trans. Power
Deliv.,vol. 32, no.1, pp. 565–574, 2017.
26. A. T. Johns and S. K. Salman, Digital protection for
power systems, IET, 1st edn. 1995, pp. 190-199
27. S. H. Horowitz and A. G. Phadke, Power system relaying,
John Wiley & Sons Ltd, 4th edn. 2014, pp. 158-160.
28. S. Mirsaeidi, D. M. Said, M. W. Mustafa,M.H.
Habibuddin and K.Ghaffari,A protection strategy for
micro-grids based on positive-sequence
impedance,Distributed Generation and Alternative Energy
Journal, vol. 31, no.3, pp. 7-32, 2016.
25. S. Mirsaeidi and M. W. Mustafa, A protection strategy
for micro-grids based on positive-sequence component,
IET Renewable Power Generation, vol. 9, no. 6, pp. 600–609,
2015.
https://doi.org/10.1049/iet-rpg.2014.0255
672