(none)
This disclosure relates to distance protection of electric power delivery systems using time domain and frequency domain. More particularly, this disclosure relates to determining if a fault is located within a distance zone of protection or not using time-domain principles secured using frequency-domain principles. This disclosure also relates to improving speed and security of protection using both time-domain and frequency-domain principles.
Non-limiting and non-exhaustive embodiments of the disclosure are described, including various embodiments of the disclosure with reference to the figures, in which:
Electric power delivery systems are widely in facilitation of generation, transmission, distribution, and consumption of electric power. Such systems include a wide variety of equipment specifically designed for the purposes of electric power delivery. Such equipment is, at times, subject to conditions outside of the specified operating parameters thereof, which may result in damage to the equipment, interruption in the generation, delivery, or consumption of electric power, or similar damages. In order to mitigate against or even avoid such conditions, electric power delivery equipment and systems of equipment are often monitored using IEDs that gather information from the equipment, determine operating conditions, and take an action if the determined operating conditions are outside of acceptable parameters.
For example, a three-phase electric power transmission line of an electric power delivery system may be used to carry electric power on separate conductors over long distances at a high voltage. The conductors are insulated from each other and the ground. A failure of the insulation may occur for multiple reasons resulting in one conductor coming into electrical contact with another conductor or the ground. Such a failure is commonly referred as a fault. Such fault conditions may, if permitted to persist, cause further damage to the transmission line, and its surroundings, including property damage and human and animal life. An IED may be used to monitor such transmission line by obtaining electrical information from the transmission line such as, for example, voltages and currents of the transmission line. The IED may obtain the electrical information from one end of the transmission line, and may operate to detect fault conditions over a predetermined zone of the transmission line. If a fault condition is detected within the zone of protection on the transmission line, the IED may command a circuit breaker to open, removing electric power from the transmission line. Accordingly, the IED must detect the fault, the direction to the fault, and ensure that the fault is within a distance or zone of protection using the electrical information obtained and pre-determined line parameters before commanding the circuit breaker to open. Such monitoring in an IED by determining whether a fault is within a distance or zone of protection and commanding a circuit breaker to open may be performed using a protection element termed a “distance element”.
In general, a distance element may include several logical conditions (comparators) joined with an AND gate. For example, a quadrilateral distance element includes the reactance comparator, the right blinder comparator, the left blinder comparator (optionally), the directional comparator, and the phase selection comparator. A mho distance element includes the mho comparator, the phase selection comparator, and the directional comparator. The mho element can be further modified by optionally adding the reactance comparator or the blinder comparator. Performance of all individual comparators that make up a distance element is important for the performance of the element. Further, the speed and security of a distance element is especially affected by reach-sensitive comparators, which are responsible for distinguishing between faults located short of the distance element's reach point from faults located beyond the reach point. These may be embodied as the mho comparator in the mho element, and the reactance comparator in the quadrilateral element. To some degree it may also be embodied in the blinder comparator (resistive reach comparator).
Such IEDs may determine a fault condition and conclude that the fault is within the zone of protection (is between the IED and the distance element's reach point on the transmission line) using an operating signal SOP and a polarizing signal SPOL, which may be calculated using the measured voltage and current along with the line impedance as illustrated in Equations 1 and 2:
SOP=I*ZR−V Eq. 1
SPOL=VPOL Eq. 2
where:
The voltage V and current I may be selected based on the fault type from the three-phase quantities (VA, VB, VC, IA, IB, IC). The fault type may be determined from among phase-to-ground loops (AG, BG, CG) and phase-to-phase loops (AB, BC, CA). Phase selection logic may be used to determine the fault type for the phase quantities to be used by the distance element. For example, the phase selection logic may permit the AG loops to operate during phase A to ground faults; and may permit the AB loop to operate during phase A to phase B faults and phase A to phase B to ground faults.
In steady states, the operating and polarizing signals of the distance comparator are sinewaves. A comparator asserts its output if the SOP and SPOL are approximately in-phase, and it keeps the output deasserted if the SOP and SPOL signals are approximately out-of-phase. Typically, the operating threshold is drawn at 90 degrees: if the angle between the SOP and SPOL is less than 90 degrees in either direction, then the comparator asserts; and, if the angle is greater than 90 degrees, the comparator stays deasserted.
The operating and polarizing signals may be determined using time-domain principles or frequency-domain principles. Under time-domain principles, the operating signal sOP may be determined using Equation 3:
sOP=ν−ΔνREACH Eq. 3
where:
The operating and polarizing signals may be determined using frequency-domain principles using complex math to convert the current phasor I into the voltage drop across the reach impedance, subtracting this from the voltage phasor, and obtaining the phasor operating signal SOP. Alternatively, the instantaneous operating signal (using time-domain principles) may be passed through a phasor estimator to provide the frequency-domain SOP signal directly.
In yet other implementations, a reactance comparator may use the operating signal SOP according to Equation 1 and the polarizing signal calculated according to Equation 4:
SPOL=j*IPOL Eq. 4
where:
As mentioned above, a fault within the zone of protection is detected using the operating and polarizing signals implemented in various protective devices. For example, an electromechanical device may use electromechanical components to compare the operating and polarizing signals, and send a trip signal to a circuit breaker when appropriate. In other embodiments, microprocessor-based IEDs may be used to calculate phasors, and follow one or more of various approaches to determine a fault condition, including, for example: a) calculate the angle between the operating and polarizing signals directly and check it against the 90 deg threshold, b) calculate the torque Re(SOP·conj(SPOL)) and check if it is positive Re(SOP·conj(SPOL))>0, or c) calculate the m-value (where m is the per-unit distance to the fault) and check if it is lower than the per-unit reach setting. The various approaches differ in terms of operations required to complete and their computational burden. For example, the m-value method is computationally very efficient when implementing multiple zones with identical settings except the reach settings.
When using time domain, timers may be used to check how long the operating and polarizing signals sOP and sPOL are of the same polarity. After low pass filtering the sOP and sPOL signals are sinewaves. If they are perfectly in phase, they coincide (have the same polarity) for half a cycle in each half a cycle. If they are 90 degrees apart, they coincide for quarter of a cycle in each half cycle. If they are perfectly out of phase, they do not coincide at all. A rectifier may be used to detect instantaneous polarity (sign) of the sOP and sPOL signals. Simple logic including AND and OR gates may be used to detect if the sOP and sPOL signals are of the same polarity, and a timer may be used to check if the same-polarity situation lasted for longer than quarter of a cycle. If so, the time-domain distance comparator asserts.
The embodiments of the disclosure will be best understood by reference to the drawings, wherein like parts are designated by like numerals throughout. It will be readily understood that the components of the disclosed embodiments, as generally described and illustrated in the figures herein, could be arranged and designed in a wide variety of different configurations. Thus, the following detailed description of the embodiments of the systems and methods of the disclosure is not intended to limit the scope of the disclosure, as claimed, but is merely representative of possible embodiments of the disclosure. In addition, the steps of a method do not necessarily need to be executed in any specific order, or even sequentially, nor need the steps be executed only once, unless otherwise specified.
In some cases, well-known features, structures or operations are not shown or described in detail. Furthermore, the described features, structures, or operations may be combined in any suitable manner in one or more embodiments. It will also be readily understood that the components of the embodiments as generally described and illustrated in the figures herein could be arranged and designed in a wide variety of different configurations.
Several aspects of the embodiments described may be implemented as software modules or components or elements. As used herein, a software module or component may include any type of computer instruction or computer executable code located within a memory device and/or transmitted as electronic signals over a system bus or wired or wireless network. A software module or component may, for instance, comprise one or more physical or logical blocks of computer instructions, which may be organized as a routine, program, object, component, data structure, etc., that performs one or more tasks or implements particular abstract data types.
In certain embodiments, a particular software module or component may comprise disparate instructions stored in different locations of a memory device, which together implement the described functionality of the module. Indeed, a module or component may comprise a single instruction or many instructions, and may be distributed over several different code segments, among different programs, and across several memory devices. Some embodiments may be practiced in a distributed computing environment where tasks are performed by a remote processing device linked through a communications network. In a distributed computing environment, software modules or components may be located in local and/or remote memory storage devices. In addition, data being tied or rendered together in a database record may be resident in the same memory device, or across several memory devices, and may be linked together in fields of a record in a database across a network.
Embodiments may be provided as a computer program product including a non-transitory computer and/or machine-readable medium having stored thereon instructions that may be used to program a computer (or other electronic device) to perform processes described herein. For example, a non-transitory computer-readable medium may store instructions that, when executed by a processor of a computer system, cause the processor to perform certain methods disclosed herein. The non-transitory computer-readable medium may include, but is not limited to, hard drives, floppy diskettes, optical disks, CD-ROMs, DVD-ROMs, ROMs, RAMs, EPROMs, EEPROMs, magnetic or optical cards, solid-state memory devices, or other types of machine-readable media suitable for storing electronic and/or processor executable instructions.
The IED 110 may include a plurality of protection elements such as a distance element 120 that may be embodied as instructions stored on computer-readable media (such as storage media 112) that, when executed on the processor 111, cause the IED to detect a fault within a zone of protection. The distance element may include instructions for signal processing 130, time-domain fault detector 140, and a frequency-domain fault detector 150. Upon detection of a fault within the zone of protection 162 using the time-domain fault detector 140 and the frequency-domain fault detector 150, the distance element 120 may include instructions to cause the IED to signal a circuit breaker 102 to open, removing electric power from being fed to the fault.
The IED 110 may be communicatively coupled to the power system 100 through current transformers and voltage transformers, i.e. it may receive stimulus 122 from the power system 100. The stimulus 122 may be received directly via the measurement devices described above and/or indirectly via the communication interface 113 (e.g., from another IED or other monitoring device (not shown) in the electrical power system 100). The stimulus 122 may include, but is not limited to: current measurements, voltage measurements, and the like.
Furthermore, the IED 110 may include a monitored equipment interface 132 in electrical communication with a piece of monitored equipment. As illustrated, the monitored equipment interface 132 is in communication with a circuit breaker 102. The monitored equipment interface 132 may include hardware for providing a signal to the circuit breaker 102 to open and/or close in response to a command from the IED 110. For example, upon detection of a fault within the zone of protection, the distance element 120 may signal the monitored equipment interface 132 to provide an open signal to the circuit breaker 102, thus effecting a protective action on the electric power delivery system. In certain embodiments, the protective action may be effected by additional or separate devices. For example, upon detection of the fault, the distance element 120 may signal the communication interface 113, which signals other devices (using, for example, the network 160, or signaling another device directly) regarding the fault, which other devices may signal a breaker to open, this effecting the protective action on the electric power delivery system.
The signals obtained from the electric power delivery system may be used to calculate voltage and current signals for use by the distance element. Line currents and voltages may be sampled at a rate suitable for distance protection, such as in the order of kHz. The samples may be aligned with a time input (not shown) in some embodiments. An analog-to-digital converter (ADC) 204 may create digital representations of the incoming line current and voltage measurements. The output of the ADC may be used in various algorithms. As described above, these voltage and current signals may be used to calculate the operating and polarizing quantities as described herein.
The distance element 200 illustrated starts with the time-domain operating signal sOP 202 and time-domain polarizing signal sPOL 204. The time-domain operating and polarizing signals sOP 202, sPOL 204 may be calculated according to several embodiments described herein. Orthogonal filters may be used to calculate real and imaginary parts (frequency-domain) from the time-domain operating and polarizing signals sOP 202, sPOL 204. That is, the time-domain operating signal sOP 202 may be filtered by a direct filter 206 to produce the real part of the frequency-domain operating signal SOP_RE 252, and the time-domain operating signal sOP 202 may be filtered by a quadrature filter 208 to produce the imaginary part of the frequency-domain operating signal SOP_IM 254. Similarly, the time-domain polarizing signal sPOL 204 may be filtered by a direct filter 210 to produce the real part of the frequency-domain polarizing signal SPOL_RE 256, and the time-domain polarizing signal SPOL 204 may be filtered by a quadrature filter 212 to produce the imaginary part of the frequency-domain polarizing signal SPOL_IM 258.
A time-domain comparator for the real parts 218 may receive the real parts of the operating and polarizing signals SOP_RE 252 and SPOL_RE 256 to determine whether the real parts of the operating and polarizing signals SOP_RE 252 and SPOL_RE 256 are of the same polarity. Comparator 218 asserts signal 282 when the real parts of the operating and polarizing signals are of the same polarity for the predetermined time. Similarly, a time-domain comparator for the imaginary parts 220 may receive the imaginary parts of the operating and polarizing signals SOP_IM 254 and SPOL_IM 258 to determine whether the imaginary parts of the operating and polarizing signals SOP_IM 254 and SPOL_IM 258 are of the same polarity. Comparator 220 asserts signal 284 when the imaginary parts of the operating and polarizing signals are of the same polarity for the predetermined time.
The time-domain comparators 218, 220 may be supervised by a sign consistency check 214, a level check 216, and the frequency-domain comparator 222. Specifically, the frequency-domain comparator 222 may receive the real and imaginary parts of the frequency-domain operating and polarizing signals SOP_RE 252, SOP_IM 254, SPOL_RE 256, and SPOL_IM 258 and output a frequency-domain fault detection signal 262 indicating that the operating SOP and polarizing SPOL signals are in phase.
The comparator of
As noted, the m value denotes a per-unit fault location. An m-value of unity would result from a fault at the reach point. Accordingly, if the m-value according to Equation 5 is less than unity, in comparator 318, then it is determined that the fault is within the mho comparator zone of protection, and signal 262 is asserted.
The frequency-domain comparator 222 (as may be embodied using any of the comparators of
To improve the frequency-domain comparators used in accordance with the several embodiments herein, the input voltage and current signals may be filtered. Furthermore, a short output timer may be used on the output (such as, for example, signal 262) to improve security.
In several embodiments herein, the frequency-domain principles may be used to supervise the time-domain comparators. Due to this supervisory function, the frequency-domain comparators do not require accurate phasors. Instead, to increase the speed of the frequency-domain comparators, real and imaginary parts on a shortened time scale may be calculated by shortening data windows for the orthogonal filters (e.g. filters 206, 208, 210, 212).
Returning now to the time-domain comparators 218, 220 of
The integrating timers 414, 416 may assert an output to OR 418 when the signals P (from AND gate 410) or N (from AND gate 412) are asserted for the predetermined times of the timers. In one embodiment, the integrating timers 414, 416 are set with a predetermined time corresponding to one quarter power system cycle. Accordingly, the matching polarities of the signals must coincide for a time duration longer than the equivalent of 90 degrees (one quarter power system cycle) to assert an input to OR gate 418. Upon asserting of either integrating timer 414, or 416, OR gate 418 asserts the time-domain comparator (real parts) output 282.
Similarly, as illustrated in
For speed, several embodiments herein apply coincidence timing to both the real and imaginary parts of the operating and polarizing signals. Depending on the point on wave, that is, the moment of the fault as it relates to the peaks and zero-crossings of the pre-fault voltage, either the real part of a phasor or the imaginary part of a phasor develops (i.e. tracks a fault condition) faster. Typically, when the real part is slow, the imaginary part is faster; and when the imaginary part is slow, the real part is faster. This relationship may be due to the real part being related to the signal value while the imaginary part being related to the signal derivative. It is observed that a sinewave has a zero value but a maximum derivative when crossing a zero, and has a maximum value but zero derivative when passing a peak.
As illustrated in
Although the time-domain comparators 218, 220 (and as illustrated in
Integrating timers, (e.g. timers 414, 416, 418, 422, 514, 516, 518, 522) may be implemented according to various timing architectures. In one embodiment, as illustrated in the timing diagram of
In each of the timing diagrams illustrated in
The implementations of the timer as illustrated in
As mentioned above, to improve speed, the instantaneous operating signals may be used in the time-domain comparator 218, and to increase security, an integrating timer may be selected. Thus, a security similar to that of frequency-based methods may be achieved with less filtering and faster operation. In one embodiment, with a sampling/processing rate of 2 kHz (a sampling period of 0.5 ms) is used. In this embodiment applied to a 60 Hz system, the coincidence timer would exhibit an angular granularity of 360*0.5/16.67=10.8 degrees. This results instead of the desired 4.17 ms coincidence timing (which is associated with a 90 degree comparator angle), the logic would perform either a 4 ms or a 4.5 ms timing. In certain embodiments, this error can be reduced by higher sampling/processing rates or detecting polarity changes between samples.
In other embodiments, accuracy problems such as that introduced in the example described above, may be solved by using the coincidence timer shorter than the exact 90 degrees and supervising the time-domain comparator with a frequency-domain comparator. For example, with the above sampling and processing rates, instead of using the ideal 0.25*16.67 ms=4.17 ms, the logic may use 4.0 ms (8× the 0.5 temporal resolution). This in turn will undesirably result in the distance shape larger than the one intended with the exact 90 degrees comparator.
To solve this inaccuracy in the distance element shape, certain embodiments herein use a frequency-domain comparator to supervise the time-domain comparators.
An instantaneous operating signal 202, if only lightly filtered to maintain speed of operation, may exhibit transients in the input signals 252 and 254 for the time-domain comparators 218 and 220. As is illustrated in
In the illustrated embodiment, the time-domain comparators 218, 220 use the sign consistency check 214 to supervise outputs 282 and 284.
In terms of raw and filtered signals, the logic of
The signal 818 to operate normally may be implemented as allowing the integrators (such as, for example, integrating timers 414, 416, 422, 514, 516, 522) to operate normally. The signal for application of additional security 820 may be implemented as de-asserting the inputs to the integrating timers with the effect of causing them to reset or integrate down—depending on the timing scheme explained in
Returning now to the additional security checks, a level check 216 may check a level of the operating signal to supervise the output of the distance element.
In alternative embodiments, different logical tools may be used for additional or reduced security. For example, the AND gate 902 may be replaced by an OR gate, such that one or more of the frequency-domain comparator signal 262, level check 908, or the sign consistency check signal 818 are required for AND gates 410, 412, 510, or 512 to assert, in addition to the signals from the positive and negative blocks as detailed above.
In yet another embodiment, the sign consistency check may be used to assert two different and parallel integrating timers. The operate normally signal 818 may be used in a first integrating timer of the time-domain comparators to integrate a first operate signal, and the signal to apply additional security 820 may be used in a second integrating timer of the time-domain comparators to integrate a second operate signal (both assuming that the other conditions for starting and running the integrating timers are also met). The outputs of the first and second integrating timers may be used to determine if a fault is detected 262. For example, the second integrating timer (associated with the additional security signal 820) may require a higher operate threshold (longer assert time), thus adding some additional security. In this example, the output indicating a fault detected 262 may be asserted if either the first or second integrating timers assert their outputs.
In various situations, a comparator may be asserted prior to a fault. For example, where a quadrilateral element is used, a reactance comparator may be asserted before the fault. For such, the load impedance is typically below the reactance setpoint. If so, the load will assert the output of the reactance comparator. A mho comparator under heavy load conditions may assert as well (the mho distance element is not operating because it is typically blocked by the load encroachment logic, but the mho comparator itself may be permanently asserted on load). If the mho or reactance comparator is permanently asserted on load, it may have less security margin for a subsequent fault external to the zone of distance protection. The integrating timers are at non-zero values due to the pre-fault load and they may integrate up and operate faster than when integrating from zero.
To address such pre-fault integrating, a disturbance detector may be used to reset integrating timers.
As described above, when the operating signal is small, the operation of the distance element for faults within the zone of protection may be delayed or prevented. It may be beneficial, therefore to allow operation based on the frequency-domain comparator alone, but using a sufficiently long time delay for security.
For completeness,
The disclosure of the embodiments herein may apply the sign consistency check to the real part of the operating signal, but, in various embodiments, not to the imaginary part (e.g., the output from 818 may not flow to AND gates 510, 512). This comparison is convenient because the instantaneous operating signal sOP is time-coherent with the real part of the filtered operating signal SOP_RE and the two can be directly compared. To compare the imaginary part of the frequency-domain operating signal SOP_IM for sign consistency, it would require calculation of the time derivative of the sOP signal. The operation of taking a time derivative increases noise and that noise may lead to incorrect signaling (i.e. asserting the need for more security when it is not necessary). However, in accordance with several embodiments herein, the sign consistency check may be applied to one, both, or neither of the real and imaginary time-domain comparators 218, 220.
In addition, although
While specific embodiments and applications of the disclosure have been illustrated and described, it is to be understood that the disclosure is not limited to the precise configurations and components disclosed herein. Moreover, principles described herein may also be utilized for protecting an electric system from over-frequency conditions, wherein power generation would be shed rather than load to reduce effects on the system. Accordingly, many changes may be made to the details of the above-described embodiments without departing from the underlying principles of this disclosure. The scope of the present invention should, therefore, be determined only by the following claims.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
3585298 | Liberman | Jun 1971 | A |
3670240 | Maranchak | Jun 1972 | A |
3878460 | Nimmersjö | Apr 1975 | A |
3890544 | Chamia | Jun 1975 | A |
3956671 | Nimmersjö | May 1976 | A |
4053816 | Nimmersjö | Oct 1977 | A |
4063162 | Lanz | Dec 1977 | A |
4063164 | Lanz | Dec 1977 | A |
4063165 | Lanz | Dec 1977 | A |
4165482 | Gale | Aug 1979 | A |
4183072 | Takagi | Jan 1980 | A |
4251770 | Schweitzer, Jr. | Feb 1981 | A |
4254444 | Erikson | Mar 1981 | A |
4296452 | Eriksson | Oct 1981 | A |
4342064 | Wilkinson | Jul 1982 | A |
4344142 | Diehr | Aug 1982 | A |
4351011 | Liberman | Sep 1982 | A |
4371907 | Bignell | Feb 1983 | A |
4377834 | Eriksson | Mar 1983 | A |
4438475 | Haley | Mar 1984 | A |
4475079 | Gale | Oct 1984 | A |
4499417 | Wright | Feb 1985 | A |
4500834 | Ko | Feb 1985 | A |
4618933 | Vitins | Oct 1986 | A |
4626772 | Michel | Dec 1986 | A |
4766549 | Schweitzer | Aug 1988 | A |
4797805 | Nimmersjö | Jan 1989 | A |
4800509 | Nimmersjö | Jan 1989 | A |
4825326 | Andow | Apr 1989 | A |
5083086 | Steiner | Jan 1992 | A |
5140492 | Schweitzer, III | Aug 1992 | A |
5198746 | Gyugyi | Mar 1993 | A |
5367426 | Schweitzer, III | Nov 1994 | A |
5446387 | Eriksson | Aug 1995 | A |
5481195 | Meyer | Jan 1996 | A |
5515227 | Roberts | May 1996 | A |
5572138 | Nimmersjö | Nov 1996 | A |
5682100 | Rossi | Oct 1997 | A |
5729144 | Cummins | Mar 1998 | A |
5796258 | Yang | Aug 1998 | A |
6222711 | Hori | Apr 2001 | B1 |
6239959 | Alexander | May 2001 | B1 |
6341055 | Guzman-Casillas | Jan 2002 | B1 |
6417791 | Benmouyal | Jul 2002 | B1 |
6434715 | Andersen | Aug 2002 | B1 |
6477475 | Takaoka | Nov 2002 | B1 |
6525543 | Roberts | Feb 2003 | B1 |
6597180 | Takaoka | Jul 2003 | B1 |
6601001 | Moore | Jul 2003 | B1 |
6662124 | Schweitzer, III | Dec 2003 | B2 |
6798211 | Rockwell | Sep 2004 | B1 |
6845333 | Anderson | Jan 2005 | B2 |
6944554 | Kim | Sep 2005 | B2 |
7119546 | Cautereels | Oct 2006 | B2 |
7174261 | Gunn | Feb 2007 | B2 |
7345862 | Schweitzer, III | Mar 2008 | B2 |
7535233 | Kojovic | May 2009 | B2 |
7714735 | Rockwell | May 2010 | B2 |
7733094 | Bright | Jun 2010 | B2 |
8315827 | Faybisovich | Nov 2012 | B2 |
8410785 | Calero | Apr 2013 | B2 |
8502542 | Couture | Aug 2013 | B2 |
8525522 | Gong | Sep 2013 | B2 |
8598887 | Bjorklund | Dec 2013 | B2 |
8655609 | Schweitzer | Feb 2014 | B2 |
8675327 | Kasztenny | Mar 2014 | B2 |
8781766 | Schweitzer | Jul 2014 | B2 |
8990036 | Schweitzer | Mar 2015 | B1 |
9257827 | Calero | Feb 2016 | B2 |
9316671 | Johannesson | Apr 2016 | B2 |
9470748 | Schweitzer | Oct 2016 | B2 |
9594112 | Schweitzer | Mar 2017 | B2 |
9627881 | Schweitzer | Apr 2017 | B2 |
9755673 | Hellmann | Sep 2017 | B2 |
9941684 | Calero | Apr 2018 | B2 |
10090664 | Schweitzer | Oct 2018 | B2 |
10310004 | Schweitzer | Jun 2019 | B2 |
10310005 | Schweitzer | Jun 2019 | B2 |
20010012984 | Adamiak | Aug 2001 | A1 |
20020165462 | Westbrook | Nov 2002 | A1 |
20030099070 | Macbeth | May 2003 | A1 |
20040189317 | Borchert | Sep 2004 | A1 |
20040230367 | Miller | Nov 2004 | A1 |
20040230387 | Bechhoefer | Nov 2004 | A1 |
20050151659 | Donovan | Jul 2005 | A1 |
20060012374 | Kojovic | Jan 2006 | A1 |
20060198065 | Guzman-Casillas | Sep 2006 | A1 |
20060239602 | Li | Oct 2006 | A1 |
20070041137 | Thompson | Feb 2007 | A1 |
20070086134 | Zweigle | Apr 2007 | A1 |
20070103006 | Zushi | May 2007 | A1 |
20080077336 | Fernandes | Mar 2008 | A1 |
20080143344 | Focia | Jun 2008 | A1 |
20080239602 | Kasztenny | Oct 2008 | A1 |
20090230974 | Kojovic | Sep 2009 | A1 |
20090231769 | Fischer | Sep 2009 | A1 |
20100002348 | Donolo | Jan 2010 | A1 |
20110058285 | Wibben | Mar 2011 | A1 |
20110063761 | Kasztenny | Mar 2011 | A1 |
20110068803 | Calero | Mar 2011 | A1 |
20110173496 | Hosek | Jul 2011 | A1 |
20110264388 | Gong | Oct 2011 | A1 |
20120086459 | Kim | Apr 2012 | A1 |
20120182657 | Narendra | Jul 2012 | A1 |
20130021039 | Bjorklund | Jan 2013 | A1 |
20130096854 | Schweitzer | Apr 2013 | A1 |
20130100564 | Zhang | Apr 2013 | A1 |
20130241622 | Zerbe | Sep 2013 | A1 |
20140074414 | Schweitzer, III | Mar 2014 | A1 |
20140236502 | Calero | Aug 2014 | A1 |
20150233976 | Johannesson | Aug 2015 | A1 |
20150255978 | Chen | Sep 2015 | A1 |
20160077149 | Schweitzer | Mar 2016 | A1 |
20160077150 | Schweitzer, III | Mar 2016 | A1 |
20160084893 | Schweitzer | Mar 2016 | A1 |
20160187406 | Liu | Jun 2016 | A1 |
20160266192 | Burek | Sep 2016 | A1 |
20170012424 | Schweitzer | Jan 2017 | A1 |
20170082675 | Schweizer | Mar 2017 | A1 |
20170117701 | Johannesson | Apr 2017 | A1 |
20170146613 | Schweitzer | May 2017 | A1 |
20170307676 | Gaouda | Oct 2017 | A1 |
20170356965 | Guzman-Casillas | Dec 2017 | A1 |
20180034265 | Naidu | Feb 2018 | A1 |
20180083437 | Schweitzer, III | Mar 2018 | A1 |
20180106849 | Burek | Apr 2018 | A1 |
20180136269 | Schweitzer, III | May 2018 | A1 |
20180145505 | Li | May 2018 | A1 |
20180212421 | Schweitzer, III | Jul 2018 | A1 |
20180292448 | Schweitzer | Oct 2018 | A1 |
20180301894 | Ha | Oct 2018 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
226210 | Dec 1986 | EP |
241832 | Jul 1990 | EP |
164711 | Dec 1991 | EP |
244649 | Apr 1992 | EP |
627085 | Dec 2005 | EP |
1463755 | Feb 1977 | GB |
9519060 | Jul 1995 | WO |
2007135073 | Nov 2007 | WO |
2010099585 | Sep 2010 | WO |
2013119315 | Aug 2013 | WO |
Entry |
---|
Harshad Mehta, Fault Location Techniques for High-Voltage DC Lines, EPRI EL-4331 Project 2150-1, 1985. |
Masaoki Ando, Edmund O. Schweitzer III, R. A. Baker, Development and Field-Data Evaluation of Single-End Fault Locator for Two-Terminal HVDC Transmission Lines, IEEE Transactions on Power Apparatus and Systems, vol. PAS-104, No. 12, 1985. |
Masaoki Ando, Fault Location Techniques for HVDC Lines: Analysis, Development, Simulation, and Field-Data Evaluation, 1984. |
P.F. Gale, Overhead Line Fault Location Based on Travelling Waves & GPS, 1993. |
Harry Lee, Development of an Accurate Transmission Line Fault Locator Using the Glabal Positioning System and Satellites, 1994. |
Hewlett Packard, Traveling Wave Fault Location in Power Transmission Systems, Application Note 1285, 1997. |
Michael A. Street, Delivery and Application of Precise Timing for a Traveling Wave Powerline Fault Locator System, 1990. |
Sergio Luiz Zimath, Marco Antonio Ramos, Jayme Silva Filho, Joaquim Moutinho Beck, Nei Mueller, Traveling Wave-Based Fault Location Experiences, 2010. |
Qualitrol Corporation, Telefault TWS Traveling Wave Fault Locator, Qualitrol Brochure 2004. |
Gabriel Benmouyal, Jeff Roberts, Superimposed Quantities: Their True Nature and Application in Relays, Oct. 1999. |
Elhaffar, Power Transmission Line Fault Location Based on Current Traveling Waves. TKK Dissertations 107, Espoo 2008, Helsinki University of Technology. Department of Electrical Engineering, Dec. 2008. |
Reason International, Inc., Traveling Wave Fault Location in Power Transmission Systems, White Paper. |
Carlos Alberto Dutra, Rafael Rosar Matos, Sergio Luiz Zimath, Jurandir Paz De Oliveira, Joao Henrique Monteiro De Resende, Joaquim Americo Pinto Moutinho, Fault Location by Traveling Waves: Application in High Impedance Events. |
N. Fischer, V. Skendzic, R. Moxley, J. Needs, Protective Relay Traveling Wave Fault Location, Feb. 9, 2012. |
E. O. Schweitzer, III, Jeff Roberts, Distance Relay Element Design, Apr. 1993. |
Fernando Calero, Distance Elements: Linking Theory with Testing, Oct. 21, 2008. |
Armando Guzman, Joe Mooney, Gabriel Benmouyal, Normann Fischer, Transmission Line Protection System for Increasing Power System Requirements Apr. 8, 2002. |
Borghetti, et al, “On the use of continuous-wavelet transform for fault location in distribution power systems.” International Journal of Electrical Power & Energy Systems. Nov. 2006. |
Maher M.I. Hashim, Hew Wooi Ping, V.K. Ramachandaramurthy, Impedance-Based Fault Location Techniques for Transmission Lines, Sep. 2009. |
Zheng et al., Study on Impedance-Traveling Wave Assembled Algorithm in One-Terminal Fault Location System for Transmission Lines, Apr. 2008. |
Gabriel Benmouyal, Karl Zimmerman, Experience With Subcycle Operating Time Distance Elements in Transmission Line Digital Relays, Presented at the 37th Annual Western Protective Relay Conference Oct. 2010. |
Edmund O. Schweitzer, III, Armando Guzman-Casillas, Mangapathirao Venkat Mynam, Veselin Skendzic, Bogdan Kasztenny, Stephen Marx, Locating Faults by the Traveling Waves They Launch, Feb. 10, 2014. |
Toshio Tahagi, Jun-Ichi Baba, Katauhiko Usmura, Tishiaki Sakaguchi, Fault Protection Based on Travelling Wave Theory—Part I Theory, Jan. 24, 1977. |
Schweitzer III, Edmund O.; Kasztenny, Bogdan “Distance Protection: Why Have We Started With a Circle, Does It Matter, and What Else Is Out There?” IEEE 2018. Originally presented at the 44th Annual Western Protective Relay Conference, Oct. 2017. |
He, Baina, Yunwei Zhao, and Hengxu Ha. “A Novel Wave Based Differential Protection for Distributed Parameter Line.” TELKOMNIKA Indonesian Journal of Electrical Engineering TELKOMNIKA 11.9 (2013): 5097-104. |
Tang, Lanxi; Dong, Xinzhou; Shi, Shenxing; Wang, Bin; “Travelling Wave Differential Protection Based on Equivalent Travelling Wave”, 13th IET International Conference on Developments in Power System Protection (DPSP 2016), Mar. 7-10, 2016. |
Solveig Ward, Comparison of Quadrilateral and Mho Distance Characteristic, Oct. 26, 1999. |
Jeff Roberts, Edmund O. Schweitzer, III, Renu Aurora, Ernie Poggi, Limits to the Sensitivity of Ground Directional and Distance Protection, May 15, 1997. |
Fernando Calero, Armando Guzman, Gabriel Benmouyal, Adaptive Phase and Ground Quadrilateral Distance Elements, Dec. 14, 2009. |
James Hubertus, Joe Mooney, George Alexander, Application Considerations for Distance Relays on Impedance-Grounded Systems, Sep. 12, 2007. |
Joe Mooney, P.E., Jackie Peer, Application Guidelines for Ground Fault Protection, 1997. |
PCT/US2019/033694 Patent Cooperation Treaty, International Search Report and Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority, dated Aug. 2, 2019. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20200088780 A1 | Mar 2020 | US |