Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 5

ENGINEERING.

com
Eng-Tips Forums
Tek-Tips Forums

Home > Forums > Electrical / Electronic Engineers > Activities > Electric power &
transmission & distribution Forum

Inter-trip Requirement In Question


2

thread238-157949
Share
Forum

Search

FAQs

Links

MVPs

nightfox1925 (Electrical)
(OP)
21 Jun 06 06:09
Our design contractor is presently designing an 11kV double-ended substation with
normally closed bus tie and supplied to two separate feeders from another 11kV
substation (no transformers in between). As a standard protection scheme, our design
contractor provided directional phase and ground overcurrent relays on both
downstream 11kV incomers + a non-directional phase and ground overcurrent relays.
In the upstream 11kV feeeders, non-directional phase and ground overcurrent relays
where also provided. In addition, a pilot wire type (line Differential) unit protection is
provided. The protection scheme is also provided with inter-tripping schemes (mutual
trip of upstream and downtream breakers) on both directional and non-directional
schemes.
Now, our client advised as to remove the inter-tripping schemes since directional and
pilot wire type unit protection is provided which I disagree. For an incoming line cable
fault, inter-trip between upstream and downtsream breakers is a must. Can anyone
provide me with more second opinions to back me up.
GO PLACIDLY, AMIDST THE NOISE AND HASTE-Desiderata

davidbeach (Electrical)21 Jun 06 12:13


You client believes that belts are enough and he doesn't also need suspenders. The
line differential will clear any line faults by tripping the breakers at both ends. If that
works, every time, there is no need for the inter-trip (transfer trip). But what happens
on a line fault while the line differential is out of service (relays have to be tested
occasionally)? In that case, without transfer trip, you will have sequential
tripping. The breaker nearer the fault will see more fault current and trip faster; after
that all the fault current will come from the remaining end of the line and then it will
trip.
So, all faults will still be cleared, even without the line differential, but if the line
differential fails, line faults will take longer to clear than they would if the transfer trip
were included.

nightfox1925 (Electrical)
(OP)
22 Jun 06 00:46

Another point I noticed is that if we assume there is a cable fault on the line
(assuming the differential relay is out of service or failed) then the downstream
directional relay (67) would set to trip the assosciated downstream incomer while the

upstream breaker (where the 51 relay is located) will trip with a set time delay.
Eventually, if inter-trip is provided, the fault clearance within the cable zone will be
faster (due to the directional relay tripping) and that is what I require for this
protection zone. The upstream 51 will serve as back-up for both incoming cable fault
and a downstream bus bar fault.
GO PLACIDLY, AMIDST THE NOISE AND HASTE-Desiderata

nightfox1925 (Electrical)
(OP)
22 Jun 06 04:42
In addition, I have suggested to provide an electrical interlock between the upstream
breaker and the downstream breaker such that everytime the upstream circuit
breaker opens,the downstream circuit breaker trips (via send trip relay at the
upstream breaker). My point is that either the upstream breaker is opened
(manual/fault trip) the downstream breaker trips to avoid current backfeed.
In my opinion, I do not agree with my client's concept that the downstream 67 relay
will take care if sombody manually opens upstream. This relay should respond to a
true cable fault within its zone of protection and not to an upstream manual breaker
opening. If such inter-trip is not provided, then during manual switching of the
upstream breaker, the 67 actuates and sends a wrong alarm signal of a fault. Both
upstream and downstream breakers are in separate substation with a very significant
distance (5kM).
Are both technical justification acceptable. Need your second opinion.
Respectfully...

GO PLACIDLY, AMIDST THE NOISE AND HASTE-Desiderata

jghrist (Electrical)22 Jun 06 09:38


If someone manually opened the upstream breaker under a no-fault condition, why
would the downstream 67 actuate? Under a no-fault condition, is it important for both
breakers to open if one is manually opened? Why?
Your scheme would require a separate communications channel, assuming that you
want it to work when the differential is out of service. I'm not sure I see the need; the
client's proposed system seems to handle tripping both breakers under fault
conditions. If the differential is out of service, tripping will be slower (with upstream
51), but would the extra speed of tripping be worth the cost and complication of an
inter-tripping scheme?
If there is only one incomer in service, or if the bus tie is open, then the downstream
67 relay would not see a fault. In this situation, your inter-trip scheme would not
speed up tripping of the upstream breaker anyway.
If you need fast tripping of both breakers under fault conditions with the differential
out of service, I would suggest installing a 67 for the upstream breaker and using a
POTT scheme. This seems like unnecessary goldplating for an 11 kV system to me,
but it wouldn't cost much more than an intertripping scheme.

nightfox1925 (Electrical)
(OP)
24 Jun 06 01:30

"If someone manually opened the upstream breaker under a no-fault condition, why
would the downstream 67 actuate? Under a no-fault condition, is it important for both
breakers to open if one is manually opened? Why?"
jighrist, I am under the thinking that opening the upstream circuit breaker (say for
some maintainance purposes) would draw a back feed current to flow to the 67 relay
due due to a normally closed bus tie at the downstream circuit breaker. This will give
a false 67 fault condition if this happens. Furthermore, if an authorized person would
conduct some maintainance, it is convenient to send a trip signal to the downstream
circuit breaker in order to de-energize the cable circuit and operate the cable
grounding switch. What's your opinion.
Respectfully...
GO PLACIDLY, AMIDST THE NOISE AND HASTE-Desiderata

jghrist (Electrical)24 Jun 06 22:24


If there is no fault, what current would flow in the downstream breaker if the upstream
breaker is open? Is there load tapped between the upstream and downstream
breakers? Maybe I am misunderstanding the system.
Is it like this?
Source 1
Source 2
|
|
X Upstream Bkr 1
X Upstream Bkr 2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
X Downstream Bkr
X Downstream Bkr
|
|
--+---------X-------------+-Tie Bkr
If remote operation is desired, why not use SCADA to open the downstream breaker. I
would not depend on an intertrip scheme to de-energize a cable circuit that I was
working on. I'd want to make sure the breaker was open and tagged out and the
ground switch closed.

nightfox1925 (Electrical)
(OP)
25 Jun 06 00:38
jghrist, your diagram is correct. The source side feeder circuit breakers are connected
to a double ended switchgear with NC bus tie (same as downstream switchgear) and
some of its associated feeder breakers are also connected to other substations.
I stand corrected. You are right, no reverse current would flow if the upstream breaker
opens during no-fault condition. What is present is just a voltage at the load end
terminals of the upstream breaker.
In this case, our client is correct about one point: No send trip is required if the
upstream breaker is manually opened. However, I still see for a need to have a
send/receive trip caused by protective devices on a fault within the incoming cable
zone (due to the line differential and directional overcurrent).
How about if a power transformer is inserted in between and the voltage level is say

11kV / 3.3kV? Will a reverse current flow be seen by the downstream directional relay
since circulating current may flow through the transformer secondary?
GO PLACIDLY, AMIDST THE NOISE AND HASTE-Desiderata

jghrist (Electrical)25 Jun 06 15:05


As davidbeach pointed out, both breakers would trip for a line differential operation,
without intertrip. If the differential relays are out of service, the backup relays will
both operate, but slower.
I'm not sure where you would be inserting the transformer such that circulating
current would flow. If there are two transformers, one on each incomer, and the
primary of one were de-energized by its upstream breaker opening, I don't see where
current would circulate.

nightfox1925 (Electrical)
(OP)
26 Jun 06 00:26

You may be right jghrist, no circulating current will flow (to correct myself). The issue
of directional relay operation when the upstream circuit breaker is open will not
happen.
With this I would only observe that the automatic tripping of the downstream circuit
breaker due to opening of the upstream circuit breaker is an additonal safety measure
to ensure that there is no voltage present within the cable zone during maintainance.
By the way, the two breakers (upstream and downstream) are in separate substations
and both owned and maintained by the plant.
Any other comments and recommendations to add. Thanks for all the support...
respectfully.
GO PLACIDLY, AMIDST THE NOISE AND HASTE-Desiderata

davidbeach (Electrical)26 Jun 06 10:46

Quote (02101972):
With this I would only observe that the automatic tripping of the downstream circuit breaker due
to opening of the upstream circuit breaker is an additonal safety measure to ensure that there is
no voltage present within the cable zone during maintainance.

Doesn't matter. There is "voltage present" on the interconnecting line until breakers
at both ends have been racked out or the disconnecting switches have been opened,
and tags and grounds have been applied. No one working in the line will rely on the
breaker at the other end having been tripped.

Reply To This Thread


Posting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.
Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members!

Join | Indeed Jobs | Advertise

Copyright 1998-2015 ENGINEERING.com, Inc. All rights reserved.


Unauthorized reproduction or linking forbidden without expressed written permission.