Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 7

Presentation 0.

Commissioning of a distributed busbar protection using a system-oriented

test in the field

Florian Fink, OMICRON electronics GmbH, Austria, florian.fink@omicron.at

Thomas Hensler, OMICRON electronics GmbH, Austria, thomas.hensler@omicron.at
Frank Trillenberg, NRM Netzdienste Rhein-Main GmbH, Germany, f.trillenberg@nrm-netzdienste.de
Jrg Kppel, ABB AG, Germany, joerg.koeppel@de.abb.com

existing one so that it could replace the old system

Abstract finally. A big advantage of the new numerical busbar
protection is its separate zero sequence current
In a substation in Frankfurt the existing busbar measurement and its dedicated zero sequence
protection is replaced by a new distributed numerical differential elements. The 110kV network for the city
busbar protection. Therefore the new busbar of Frankfurt (Main) is low-impedance grounded, so
protection is installed in parallel to the existing one that fault currents for single-phase-to-ground faults
and should replace it after commissioning. The new on the cable network are only slightly higher than the
busbar protection provides a separate zero sequence high load currents on the busbars. Using a dedicated
differential protection. Since the 110kV network for zero sequence differential element avoids an over-
the city of Frankfurt is low-impedance grounded, stabilization of the protection behaviour.
single phase to ground faults can cause fault currents
on the busbars, which are only slightly higher than the
load currents. Using a dedicated zero sequence
differential element does avoid an over-stabilization
of the differential protection.
With a system-oriented approach for testing the
distributed busbar protection it is possible to inject
currents into all field units simultaneously and
conduct a complete test of the whole protection
system. Within a new application software the
topology of the busbar is modelled, so that the all the
transient currents (optional voltages) can be
calculated for the different fault and operation
scenarios automatically using a dynamic network Figure 1: 110kV GIS in substation Kruppstrae
simulation. These signals can be applied to the
protection using multiple test devices, which are With a system-oriented approach for the test of this
time-synchronized using GPS, and all the reactions of distributed busbar protection it is possible to inject
the binary signals from both the central protection the test quantities into all distributed field units
unit and all field units can be analysed and assessed simultaneously using multiple test devices. So a
within the software immediately. complete system test of the whole protection system
Using an iterative closed-loop approach the test is possible. First in the new application software
software can simulate fault scenarios, where a correct OMICRON RelaySimTest the topology of the busbar as
reaction of the protection system is considered in the a primary system has to be modelled (see Figure 2).
transient simulation. A detailed analysis and Then the exact transient signals for the currents
assessment of the selective operation of the breaker- (optional even voltages) for all injection points for the
failure protection and the behaviour for faults in the different fault or operation scenarios are calculated
dead zone between the CT and the circuit breaker in from the test software using a network simulation.
the coupling field is possible. These transients can be injected to the protection
system immediately using multiple OMICRON CMC
test devices, which are time-synchronized using a
1 Introduction GPS-receiver. The binary inputs of the test devices
The utility Netzdienste Rhein-Main GmbH (NRM) did record the reactions of the central unit and all field
a retrofit project to replace a busbar protection in units for all these simulation cases, so that this can be
substation Kruppstrae in Frankfurt (Main), used for analysis and assessment in the application
Germany. Within this project the existing busbar software immediately.
protection was replaced by a distributed busbar
protection REB500 from ABB. Therefore first the new
protection system was installed in parallel to the

OMICRON 2015 International Protection Testing Symposium

Presentation 0.2

2.1 Binary signals from the separate

central unit
Since the central unit is calculating the overall
assessment of the protection system, the binary
signals annunciation alarm differential current,
annunciation busbar protection trip and
annunciation breaker failure were recorded there.
The central unit is located about 20m from the next
field unit, and from the next test device too. Therefore
an additional binary inputs/outputs extension device
OMICRON ISIO 200 was used. This devices allows the
recording of binary signals which are forwarded as
IEC 61850 GOOSE message using a simple network
Figure 2: Modelling of the busbar topology within the connection to a CMC test device, which are then,
application software together with the information from all binary signals
from the filed units, are accessible in the application
2 Test setup software.

The double busbar substation Kruppstrae has ten 2.2 Communication to the test devices
active bays, where one ABB REB500 field unit is For the communication between the test devices, the
installed each. Into each field unit a CMC test devices binary input/output extension device and the
injects one current triple and records the binary controlling PC, an Ethernet network was built up in
signals for trip, annunciation busbar trip and the substation. The application software can control
annunciation breaker failure. Because the CMC test all 6 CMC test devices using this network, replay the
devices are capable to output two current triples, for calculated transient current signals on the
some cases one test device was used to inject into two corresponding test devices and record all binary
neighbouring field units. signals.

fild units




central unit
Laptop with
RelaySimTest analog- and binary signals

Ethernet connections

Figure 3: Scheme of the test setup

OMICRON 2015 International Protection Testing Symposium

Presentation 0.3

For the time synchronization of the CMC test devices 2.3 Overview of the equipment used
a GPS-receiver CMGPS 588 was used, which provides
a precise time synchronization using IEEE 1588 PTP In total the following equipment was used:
(Precision Time Protocol) over the existing Ethernet 6 OMICRON CMC test devices
connections. The CMGPS 588 device operates as an 1 binary input/output extension device
IEEE 1588 grandmaster clock, which forwards the OMICRON ISIO 200
time information to all CMC test devices over the 1 switch Hirschmann Mach 1040
network. For the Precision Time Protocol the IEEE 1 GPS-receiver OMICRON CMGPS588
1588 power profile was used, which requires a PTP-
about 300 m Ethernet cable (including 5
transparent switch, so that the required time
Ethernet cable reels),
precision ( 100 ns) can be guaranteed between all
more than 100 measurement leads, many
switch ports.
with length of 6 and 10 m
a huge number of power cables and extension
socket outlets

Figure 5: The complete equipment for the protection

testing did fit into a small van

2.4 Configuration of the binary

input/output extension device ISIO
Figure 4: CMC test device connected to one ABB
REB500 field unit
After all test devices were built up and connected, the
GOOSE configuration for the ISIO 200 was done for
The overall setup with the 6 synchronized injecting the connected CMC device. Then the annunciations
CMC test devices was distributed over a distance of from the central unit could be recorded by the CMC
more than 60 m within the substation (see Figure 8). test device.
Thanks to the support from the managing coach of the
team of protection engineering, Uwe Weisenstein, the
complete setup could be done within not much more
than 3 hours.
The preparation of the overall test was very detailed
and important. Within a table all the necessary
equipment was listed and each test devices was
already marked for its used location.

Figure 6: Binary input/output extension device ISIO

200 connected to the central unit

OMICRON 2015 International Protection Testing Symposium

Presentation 0.4

3 Wiring check
Next the check of the wiring had to be done. Therefore
unsymmetrical currents were injected into one or two
bays using only one test device. This should show,
that the currents are measured correctly on the
individual field units and that the corresponding
binary signals can be recorded by the CMCs.

3.1 Simulation of CB and isolator

For the simulation of the circuit breaker and isolator
positions NRM has developed a simulation box (see
Figure 7). This box was connected with each field unit
using a multi pin connector. Then it was possible to
control all necessary operating positions for the
complete substation almost as easy as within a
control room. For the tests the same operating
positions are taken over into the network topology of
the test software accordingly.

Figure 8: Six CMC test devices injecting into the whole

protection system in a synchronized way

4.1 Verification of the network

The test document for RelaySimTest has been
prepared in the office upfront. Therefore NRM
provided all the relevant network data and
parameters, such as the detailed topology of the
substation, an overview of all the short circuit
currents within the 110kV network as well as details
of the low-impedance start point grounding. Using
Figure 7: Simulation box from NRM to simulate the network infeeds and passive loads the load flow and
isolator and CB positions maximum as well as minimum short circuit currents
were adjusted within the software. With the
4 Simulation of fault scenarios possibility to input capacitances at the network
infeeds, the capacitances of the remaining cable
After finishing the setup for the tests, the following network and the resulting zero sequence currents
tasks could be done quite easy. Within RelaySimTest could be simulated. These values were discussed once
the network simulation was adapted to the again on site and verified, because they are the basis
corresponding testing task, at the simulation box the for the following tests.
corresponding isolator positions were set so that
finally all the test shots could be executed. A rewiring 4.2 Extended wiring check using
or change of the configuration was not necessary simulation of stable load flow
anymore, which obviously eliminated a major source
Next the standard operation positions of the topology
for errors.
was set with the simulation box and within the test
software. The topology was documented within the
test report as a comment for later tests. To verify
completely, that all test devices are connected
correctly and the configuration of the system fits to
the network simulation, a stable load flow was put out
for 30 seconds. Additionally is was possible to check
the data from the network simulation with the data in
the online monitor of the central unit. A wrong

OMICRON 2015 International Protection Testing Symposium

Presentation 0.5

configuration of one of the CT star point directions

could be found and fixed immediately. Additionally it
could be verified, that the protection system stays
stable for the various load flow scenarios.

4.3 Tested fault scenarios

Overall the following fault scenarios were tested:
Different faults on both busbars
Goal: Verification of the protection zone
Faults on each busbar segment
Goal: Verification of the protection zone
Fault within the dead zone in the coupling field Figure 9: Simulation of the fault scenarios using
Goal: Verify that the fault in the dead zone is RelaySimTest in the substation
recognized correctly from the central unit
and that the second busbar is tripped
additionally with some time delay
Test of the circuit breaker failure
Faults outside of the protected area protection using Iterative-Closed-
Goal: Verification of the stability for external Loop function
Faults outside of the protection area with The Iterative-Closed-Loop function of RelaySimTest
external start of the breaker failure function has been proven as useful new test possibility for this
case too. Since breaker events within the simulated
Therefore a breaker failure from an external
primary system cannot be applied within the
protection relay was simulated using a binary output
simulation in real-time, RelaySimTest does repeat the
of the test device. This signal was then applied to the
simulation until no more new changes of the CBs are
corresponding field unit during the simulation.
done by the protection system. In this example the
Internal faults with breaker failure protection circuit breaker failure protection could be tested. If
Goal: Simulation of the fault events with and the Iterative-Closed-Loop function is active a
without Iterative-Closed-Loop normal trip of the protection system is received:
Faults with invalid position of the tie isolators Fault inception trip command from the protection
Goal: Verification of the behaviour of the system opening of the circuit breaker in the
protection system when a busbar tie simulation reset of the trip command from the
isolator has a different physical position protection system
then what is reported at the central unit
If the Iterative-Closed-Loop function is turned off, the
5 Analysis of fault scenarios following case occurs:
Fault inception trip command from the protection
For the fault scenarios the trip times of the system trip of the breaker failure protection
corresponding field unit and of the central unit were
analysed. Depending on the type of fault the Since here the circuit breaker is not opened by the
assessment based on the trip time and/or no trip was simulation, the protection system will still recognize
done. The corresponding binary signals could be the simulated fault current which results in the
evaluated either visually directly or measured and correct trip of the breaker failure protection.
assessed automatically. Therefore after a test case all
the relevant information was available to do an 6 Problem of not selective trips
assessment and document this within a report.
for single-phase-to-ground
During the protection testing the following two
problems could be observed together with single-
phase-to-ground faults on one of the busbars:
the affected busbar was tripped with a delay
time of about 70 ms
additionally the not affected busbar was tripped

OMICRON 2015 International Protection Testing Symposium

Presentation 0.6

For other fault types this non-selectivity could not be The network calculation within the software provides
observed. In the beginning this false behaviour could all the test quantities and using a complete setup with
not be interpreted. After analysis of the fault various test devices almost all substations can be
recordings from the central unit of the protection it tested.
was obvious, that there was a wiring error in the
It could be shown, that smaller deviations, such as the
Holmgreen-circuit within the coupling field. The
wiring error described above, could not be found by a
terminals of the ground currents were connected
classical parameter test. If it is necessary to inject
wrong, so that the single-phase-to-ground fault
currents at three locations simultaneously, classical
currents over the coupling were interpreted wrong,
parameters tests are at its limits. For the utility NRM
which resulted in the false behaviour described
this was the first time to test a busbar protection in
detail in the field. For the future it will be considered
to apply this approach for every new commissioning.
7 Advantages of a simulation-
based test in addition to a Literature
parameter test [1] Ziegler, G.: Numerical Differential Protection
The setting parameters of a protection relay are Principles and Applications, Publicis Publishing,
important and relevant for the function of a 2nd Edition, 2012
protection system. To verify that these values, [2] ABB: Distributed busbar protection REB500 -
calculated from the network calculation, work Operation Manual, 9th Edition (valid for software
correctly within the protection relay and are set version V7.60), ABB, 2011
correctly, is the main task of a classical parameter test
during commissioning. In a complex protection
system, as within a busbar protection, these
parameters are linked with a high number of logical
functions, which makes the overall test of the whole
system considerably
more difficult.
Therefore complex
tables have to be made,
where all the fault
cases which have to be
tested are described
and where all the
values to inject are
calculated individually.
This process can take
up to a whole week for
a bigger substation and
due to the numerous
rewirings necessary
and the manual
calculation of the test
quantities this is a huge
effort and very prone
to errors.
RelaySimTest offers
the possibility to
automate this test. The
effort to setup the test
is quite high (see
Figure 3), but if it is
done correctly once, a
complete system test
can be conducted in a
relatively short time,
without the need to
change the test setup.
Figure 10: Simulation of an inside fault with RelaySimTest

Figure 11:
OMICRON 2015 International Protection Testing Symposium
Figure 12:
Presentation 0.7

About the Authors

Dipl.-Ing. (FH) Florian Fink Dipl.-Ing. (FH) Jrg Kppel
was born 1983 in Bergisch was born 1973 in Erzhausen /
Gladbach / Germany. He Germany. He studied Electrical
received his diploma in Power Engineering at the
Electrical Power Engineering at University of Applied Science
the University of Applied in Darmstadt / Germany,
Science in Cologne in 2009. where he received his diploma
From 2009 until 2012 he in 1997. From 1997 until 2010
worked as project engineer for he worked for ABB Germany in
Cegelec / Germany and from the area of power system
2012 to 2013 as planning protection and control focused
engineer for InfraServ Knapsack / Germany. Since on busbar protection. Since 2010 he is working in
2013 he is working for OMICRON electronics in project engineering for protection with a main focus
product management as an application engineer for on busbar protection.
power system protection.

Dipl.-Ing. Thomas Hensler

was born in 1968 in Feldkirch
/ Austria. He received his
diploma (Masters Degree) in
Computer Science at the
Technical University of Vienna
in 1995. He joined OMICRON
electronics in 1995 where he
worked in application software
development in the field of
testing solutions for protection
and measurement systems. Additionally he is
responsible for product management for application
software for protection testing.

Dipl.-Ing. Frank Trillenberg

was born 1971 in Berlin. He
studied Electrical Engineering
at the Technical University in
Berlin, where we received his
diploma in 1999. From 1999 to
2010 he worked as a project
engineer for Balfour Beatty
Rail GmbH. Since 2010 he is
working for Netzdienste
Rhein-Main as a project and
operations manager for secondary protection.

OMICRON 2015 International Protection Testing Symposium