Modern Selectivity Techniques

for LV systems, beyond the

Time-Current-Curve

Marcelo E. Valdes, PE
GE Industrial Solutions
Too Coordinate or Not to Coordinate

Whether 'tis nobler in the study to suffer

the trips & faults of outrageous incoordination
or to take arms against an arc flash sea
And by opposing end them.
 In an arc flash conscious world
• Should we perform a study to optimize
coordination ?
• Should we perform a study to optimize
protection ?
• Why do study graphics show coordination
but not protection ?
• Which is more important ?
 Tradition & Change
• Some call it an art and a science…
• A study in compromise…But
– National electrical code
– Electrical safety ( NFPA70E, IEEE 1584, OSHA )
– Business needs Well…
– Technology Sort of …
Demands both
 Traditional coordination
• Based on nesting time current curves
• All values RMS
• All behavior explained by a time-current-
curve
• Tolerance handled multiple ways…
Very conservative… or is it?
Based on bolted faults… but the real hazard are arcing faults !
Old fashioned !!!
 CURRENT IN AMPERES

1000

100
150A
800A LVPCB

Traditionally
Overcurrent protective

TIME IN SECONDS
devices are selected to
10

protect conductors & allow

300HP

normal continuous & normal

0.10
transient currents to flow
0.01
50 100 1K 10K 100K
But…
1M

1.tcc Ref. Voltage: 480V Current in Amps x 1

 Often Compromises
CURRENT IN AMPERES

1000

800A LVPCB
1000.00

Selectivity
150A
100

100.00

or

TIME IN SECONDS
10

10.00

Protection

Seconds
1

or
1.00

0.10
8 calories

0.01
both 0.10

50 100 1K 10K 100K 1M

1.tcc Ref. Voltage: 480V Current in Amps x 1

0.01
100 1,000 Amperes 10,000 100,000
Accomplish Both… it is possible
Beyond the time current curve
• Peak-let-through analysis
• Energy Nesting
• Energy measurement and proxies
• Zone based protection
– Differential
– Zone-Selective-Interlocking
 Peak-Let-Through Analysis
Adjustable
IOC
• Uses the known current limiting
characteristics of a downstream
device to derive IOC setting for
upstream device.
• Assumes upstream IOC is a simple
Current limiting
instantaneous current threshold
OCPD comparator
 How IOC works 1000
CURRENT IN AMPERES

800A LVPCB

• Sensitive to “instantaneous” currents 100

• Calibrated to the symmetrical peak

• User sets to 10kA RMS, Electronics
10

really set to 14.1kA instantaneous A ! 1

• Most conservative way to set

• CB tested @20% PF…no guarantee fault
0.10

=20% PF, so to protect for “all”… 0.01

10kA PU = 14,100A peak

100 1K 10K 100K 1

1.tcc Ref. Voltage: 480V Current in Amps x 1

Peak at PF=20%  2.183 x rms

 Using Current Limitation
Current limiting OCPD operating
in their CL range will limit peak

Amperes
of the current they allow to flow
while interrupting to lower (peak- 0.0000 0.0042 0.0083

let-through) than would have

flowed otherwise (prospective). Seconds

Whether Fuse or CB, behavior is similar.

Let-Through Curve Peak at test PF
Peak for symmetrical
• Graph of peak current
allowed by an interrupting Let-
OCPD versus “prospective” Through
fault current at test PF &
worst closing angle.
• For CB, drawing represents
worst phase !
• For fuses a “1” phase event… 3 phase, 1 or 2 fuses
may be slower
 Available Ibf = 30kA Quiz Peak at PF = 20% ~ 2.183 x RMS
Required PU 
13kA
20 x 2.183 /1.41  31kA RMS

1
Available Ibf = 20kA RMS, X/R=4.9
2
X

1) What do you set IOC on CB1 to be selective with CB2? (CB is NOT
current limiting) PU  20X 1.83/1.41  31kA RMS
Ignoring tolerance
for simplicity
2) If CB 2 is Current Limiting, what can you set CB1 to?
PU  13/1.41  9.3kA RMS
 How used?
• Adjustable electronic TU upstream
• CL CB/Fuse downstream
• Knowing CL peak-let-through curve
• Commonly done in IEC markets
• How many manufacturer’s selectivity
tables were created
 I2t (Peak let-
through Energy Nesting
Energy) =
area under Ibf • Fuses:  thermal energy… if
1
curve
fuse 2 total I2t let-through <
Ipeak (let-
through)
than fuse 1 melting energy 
fuses are selective
2 • CB version works the same but
with mechanical energy
Melting Arcing

Amperes
Time Time
Clearing 0.0000 0.0042 0.0083

Time
Seconds
 Energy Nesting Selectivity
• For fuses it requires a ~ 2:1 ratio between
fuses of similar types & same manufacturer
• For CBs it requires a ratio ~2.6:1 & same
manufacturer
• Both tested & published by manufacturer
Advanced “proprietary” Techniques
• Each manufacturer may have their own,
probably reflected in published selectivity
tables
• One manufacturer’s method follows
“Waveform Recognition” a proxy for
measuring energy; allows variable
settings in upstream CB/trip
 Waveform Recognition
Advantages
• Allows adjustment of upstream IOC
• Same PU regardless available Ibf
• Can be seen on TCC, does not need tables
Disadvantages
• Manufacturer specific
• Voltage specific
• Requires testing to verify
Proxy for measuring energy waveform
• Each MCCB (& fuse) has characteristic
1000.00

250A CL MCCB
current & energy limitation capability
• ETU has to recognize “it” (waveform
100.00

Set upstream IOC

recognition) 10.00
> than this line
• Threshold independent of available Ibf

Seconds
or upstream mechanical platform 1.00

• Only cares “which” downstream CL

OCPD it needs to recognize 0.10

• Required threshold can be “drawn” on

the MCCB’s TCC (voltage dependent) 0.01
100 1,000 10,000 1
Amperes

No tables or calculations
 Interpreting the 1000.00

Upstream 
800A LVPCB
WFR curve 100.00

• Upstream ETU “interprets”

current waveform curve
overlap does not matter! 10.00

• IOC threshold ~10kA

Seconds
• Also shows selectivity may 1.00

stop at 85kA
• Current limitation “V
dependent” 0.10

Does not matter if CB is large

or small, old or new, X or Y 0.01
100 1,000 10,000 100,000
Amperes
 1000.00

Different CB types 800A MCCB

• Since threshold depends on upstream
current limitation of
100.00

downstream device (fuse or

CL CB) & upstream trip unit’s 10.00

capability to recognize it,

Seconds
upstream CB may be any
• How far selectivity extends 1.00

may be affected by presence

& type of override
• For this 800A MCCB the 0.10

override (~30kA) has no

effect & may be ignored 0.01
100 1,000 10,000 100,000
Amperes
 What does the TCC tell us
• Curve is drawn in amperes and time…
• But trip unit interprets waveform
• We have to do the same… overlap does not matter
if we know the upstream threshold is set correctly
for the downstream current limiting device
• Need to look at curves differently communicate
how devices relate to each other, not how they
relate to the observer
 Solutions build up
1) Small/med. OCPD selective with energy nesting
2) Smaller/medium OCPD selective under LVPCB &
large MCCB using WFR
Larger devices ?
3) Electronics  improved protection no sacrifice
in protection
– Zone interlocking
– Differential (87B)
ZSI  Recent improvements  better solution than before…
Differential  not necessarily too expensive or complex for LV
 ZSI Types
• Delay – traditional ST & GF
• Instantaneous
• Threshold
• Shape
• Directional inhibit
• Cross Voltage
Zone-Selective-Interlocking (ZSI)
Receives signal &
• Identify fault location, Improve incorporate into trip logic

protection, usually not improve

before committing to trip
 alters protection timing
selectivity
• How it is wired affects how it works ! Trip

• Not easy to change or test in the field

• Within “a” piece of equipment, or Trip
from equipment to equipment
• Usually hardwired circuits. Or via IEC X
61850 or other serial communications Signal sent when
threshold 1st exceeded
Blocking signal: Signal from lower tier to upper tier. Alters
upper tier’s operating characteristics to allow lower tier to
take care of the fault. A.k.a. “Restraint” signal
Restrained: Operating parameters associated with blocked,
selective or backup performance. Coordinated curves
Unrestrained: Operating parameters associated with
unblocked or in-zone protective performance. Provides
protection
Self-restraint: When the Trip Unit sends the blocking signal
to itself, essentially always operating it in the Restrained
mode.
 100.00

Interlocking & time 10.00

In-Zone protection
• If 2 CB sense current over threshold (unrestrained upper tier)
1.00

simultaneously the lower tier MUST

Seconds
send signal, upper tier must receive
1000.00 1000.00
0.10

& process signal before “upper” tier

reacts (commits) 100.00
0.01
100.00

100 Amperes 1,000 10,000 100,000

• Instantaneous ZSI is 10.00 10.00

possible if Restrained Short Time

Restrained Short Time
& Instantaneous
Instantaneous is not 1.00 1.00
Seconds

Seconds
“too” fast, & restraint
is “fast enough”
0.10 0.10

0.01 0.01
100 Amperes 1,000 10,000 100 100,000
Amperes 1,000 10,000 100,000
 How much shift is needed ?
ST shift
1000.00 1000.00 1000.00

100.00
X
100.00 100.00
maintains 3
X levels of
selectivity,
10.00 10.00 10.00

X
Instantaneous
Seconds

Seconds
Seconds

All unrestrained
1.00 1.00 1.00
In-Zone 2 upper restrained 1 upper restrained
protection only 2… if there
0.10 0.10 0.10
is a 50kA fault &
1 CB fails, is
selectivity really
0.01 0.01 0.01
1,000 Amperes 10,000 100,000 1,000 Amperes 10,000 100,000 1,000 Amperes 10,000 100,000

PU, in amperes, does not change… must be nested left

to right to make up for sensing tolerance that important?
Can result in pickups > than expected arcing current
1000.00 1000.00
Shifting Threshold, T-ZSI
• Upper tier shifts just
enough to get out of the
100.00 100.00
X
way of tolerance overlap
• User sets protection PU,
10.00 10.00 but may overlap PU below
for more sensitive
protection
Seconds

Seconds

shift
1.00 1.00 automatically
• ETU logic sets up other PU
automatically;
0.10 0.10
1  blocking,
1  restrained operation
0.01 0.01
1,000 Amperes 10,000 1,000 100,000
Amperes 10,000 100,000
 Threshold-ZSI User-Set
protective PU
User sets “1” threshold 10.00
• Trip units set “2” PU
Automatic Automatic

Seconds
• Lower “blocking PU” just low Blocking PU Restrained PU
enough to not overlap
• Upper “restrained” PU that 1.00

does not overlap

• Arbitrates in- & out-of-zone PU
0.10
• Forces selectivity & allows
more sensitive in-zone
protection
0.01
1,000 Amperes 10,000 100,000
1000.00 1000.00
Threshold ZSI
1000.00
Curves out of
X the way based
100.00 100.00 100.00
on fault location
X Pickup & delay
shifted
X
10.00 10.00 10.00 Overlap after
shift only an

Seconds
Seconds

Seconds

issue if a CB
1.00 Enough shift1.00to maintain 1.00 fails to operate
selectivity regardless of
fault location but tight IF a CB fails to
backup always kept as well
operate is
0.10 0.10 0.10
additional
selectivity that
important ?
0.01 0.01 0.01
1,000 Amperes 10,000 1,000
100,000Amperes 10,000 1,000
100,000 Amperes 10,000 100,000

All unrestrained 2 upper restrained 1 upper restrained

1000.00
ZSI not curve shape dependent 1000.00

100.00 100.00

Downstream Only thresholds

ST pickup
10.00
matter 10.00

Upstream
Delays & shape can
Upstream GF
GF pickup be shifted
1.00 1.00 & ST shifted
Seconds

Seconds
0.10 0.10

0.01 0.01
100 Amperes 1,000 10,000 100,000 100 Amperes 1,000 10,000 100,000

1 level of GF selective with branch’s phase protection

 Too low a pickup?
• Motors always start 1 at a time
X
• MCC feeder set to handle 2 M
FLA + 1 M LRA
• During fault all 3 regenerate
together
• Regenerative current could
exceed PU of MCC feeder M M M
 Solution
• Set threshold > expected
peak load and > potential
peak regenerative
current
• Use Directional-ZSI to
inhibit restraint when Issue restraint signal
power is reversed if power is forward,
Inhibit restraint if
power is reversed
 ZSI Types, Summary
• GF • Shapes can change
• ST • Downstream Delay
• Instantaneous can </= upstream
• Threshold • Restrained delays
• Directional (inhibiting) can overlap
 What about medium voltage?
51 • Can extend selectivity & fast AF
52 52 87T
87T protection to MV level
50 • 87T works well by itself if the CTs
ZSI can be accommodated
ZSI • Some relay(s) 87T & 50 can be
combined using ZSI blocking
ZSI ZSI
WFR • Multiple 50/51 elements with can
WFR ZSI to achieve similar results

Energy nesting
Distance, burden, transformer inrush, CT
size & class must be considered
 Modern MV CB
• More compact CB available CB
from most manufacturers installed
• All 3 cycles, or better! below
• Retrofits with = footprint as traditional
traditional switches switch
• MV relays with LV protection +
ZSI, hardwired, IEC 61850, or
other protocols
• Modern relays are fast!
1,000.00 1,000.00

Optimizing cross voltage ZSI?

1) In LV systems ZSI part of a packaged solution by “1”
100.00 100.00

manufacturer. Timing & signals tested & known.

2) In a hybrid system signal compatibility, timing of blocking
10.00 10.00

signal & blocking timing requirements of receiving device

must be also known. Need to model! 1.00
1.00
MV 50 blocking
timing requirement
0.10 0.10

0.01
Blocking signal 0.01
from ST & Inst. ZSI
function in
0.001
downstream CB 0.00 1
Analog commit
1,000 10,000 100,000 1,000 10,000 100,000
 Understand - signal out & in
10.00

LV CB, LV Main or feeders

1.00

Maximum ST PU tolerance
• Blocking signal Model
Maximum IOC PU tolerance
• If T-ZSI is used red
0.10
Maximum Ibf
pickup shifts left by PU
tolerance
0.01

Blocking signal from ST

Minimum PU tolerance if using T-ZSI
0.00
1,000 10,000 100,000
& Inst. ZSI function in
downstream CB
 Understand - signal out & in
10.00

MV has: MV Relay & CB

1.00
1) Fault recognition MV 50
time blocking timing
requirement
2) I/O &Logic CB clear
0.10

processing time
3) Output contact time Relay output
0.01

4) + CB operation &
Fault Recognition t
Clearing time
0.00
1,000 10,000 100,000
 100.00
Need to know MV Relay
• “real” IOC commit time
10.00 • I/O timing & logic timing
Adjust pickup • communication timing
1.00
• CB’s response timing
Relay commit = 1.33 X Pickup/Ifault
+ I/O Logic time = 1/8 cycle
0.10
+ Output SS contacts = 1/8 cycle

Adjust delay + Tolerance = 1/8 cycle

0.01
+ CB operating time = 3 cycles
blocking signal below logic
time device may be blocked Time  to current… an “inverse”
0.00 1
1,000 10,000
function… NOT SIMPLE DEFINITE TIME
100,000
 Relay IOC and LV applications
• Relay IOC algorithm is “instantaneous”
• If delay is added it remains instantaneous
• It resets if current drops below threshold
• Intermittent fault current can potentially
never trip the relay
• LV faults are more often intermittent than
MV faults are…
 References
IEEE papers on selectivity by M. E. Valdes et al:
• Advances in Protective Device Interlocking for Improved Protection and Selectivity, IEEE IAS
Transactions 2014
• Traditional Time - Current Curves Are Not Enough, Adding I^2t Considerations, IEEE IAS
Transactions 2013
• Optimized Instantaneous Protection Settings: Improving Selectivity and Arc-Flash Protection, IEEE
IAS Magazine, 2012
• Method for Determining Selective Capability of Current-Limiting Overcurrent Devices Using Peak
Let-Through Current; What Traditional Time-Current Curves Will Not Tell You, IEEE IAS
Transactions 2010
• Selectivity Analysis in Low-Voltage Power Distribution Systems With Fuses and Circuit Breakers,
IEEE IAS Transactions 2010
• Enhanced selectivity and protection via modern current- limiting circuit breakers, Industrial and
Commercial Power Systems Technical Conference, 2005 IEEE
Others on selectivity:
• Larsen, Ed; A new approach to low-voltage circuit breaker short-circuit selective coordination,
IEEE Industrial and Commercial Power Systems Technical Conference, 2008
 References
IEEE papers on substation protection by M. E. Valdes et al:
• CONSIDERATIONS FOR DIFFERENTIAL PROTECTION IN LV BUSES, IEEE Petroleum and Chemical
Industry Technical Conference (PCIC) 2015
• Arc Flash Hazard Reduction at Incoming Terminals of LV Equipment, Arc Flash Hazard Reduction at
Incoming Terminals of LV Equipment 2014
IEEE papers on Single Processor Concept by M. E. Valdes et al:
• The single-processor concept for protection and control of circuit breakers in low-voltage
switchgear, IEEE IAS Transactions 2004
• Ground-fault detection in multiple source solidly grounded systems via the single-processor
concept for circuit protection, IEEE IAS Transactions 2006
• Finding fault - Locating a ground fault in low-voltage, high-resistance grounded systems via the
single-processor concept for circuit protection, IEEE IAS Magazine, 2007
• Zone Based Protection for Low Voltage Systems; Zone Selective Interlocking, Bus Differential and
the Single Processor Concept, Industrial and Commercial Power Systems Technical Conference,
2008
Questions ?