IEEE Power and Energy Magazine-May June 2021

Volume 19 • Number 3 • May/June 2021
magazine
Volume 19 • Number 3 • May/June 2021

www.ieee.org/power
on the
cover
36
©SHUTTERSTOCK.COM/LEOWOLFERT
©SHUTTERSTOCK.COM/JM1366
features
contents
20 M
icrogrid Protection 58 Practical Microgrid
Against Internal Faults Protection Solutions
By Dimitris Lagos, Vasileios Papaspiliotopoulos, By Scott Manson and Ed McCullough
George Korres, and Nikos Hatziargyriou 70 North Bay Hydro Microgrid
By Michael Higginson, Matt Payne, Keith Moses,
36 Influence of Inverter-Based
Peter Curtiss, and Stephen Costello
Resources on Microgrid
Protection (Part 1) 83 Status of Microgrid Protection
By Matthew J. Reno, Sukumar Brahma, and Related Standards and Codes
Ali Bidram, and Michael E. Ropp By Ward Bower and Tom Key
47 Influence of Inverter-Based Resources
on Microgrid Protection (Part 2)
By Michael E. Ropp
and Matthew J. Reno
94 columns &
departments
4 Editors’ Voice
10 Leader’s Corner
14 Guest Editorial
94 History
103
Erratum
104
Society News
105
Correction
106
Calendar
108
In My View
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/MPE.2021.3057945
may/june 2021 ieee power & energy magazine 1

magazine
Editor-in-Chief Editorial Board IEEE Periodicals/Magazines Department

Steve Widergren L. Barroso, J. Feltes, N. Hatziargyriou, T. Hong, 445 Hoes Lane, Piscataway, NJ 08854 USA
B. Johnson, B. Kroposki, D. Lew, M. Miller, Geraldine Krolin-Taylor, Senior Managing Editor
Immediate Past Editor-in-Chief D. Novosel, M. O’Malley, N. Ochoa, A. Orths, Janet Dudar, Senior Art Director
Michael Henderson C.E. Root, H. Rudnick, J.C. Smith, Gail A. Schnitzer, Associate Art Director
E. Uzunovic, S.S. Venkata Theresa L. Smith, Production Coordinator
Associate Editors Felicia Spagnoli, Advertising Production Manager
John Paserba, History Spanish Editorial Board
Enrique Tejera, Editor-in-Chief Peter M. Tuohy, Production Director
Antonio Conejo, Ning Lu, Barry Mather, Issues Kevin Lisankie, Editorial Services Director
Jianhui Wang, Submissions Editors: M. Baquedano, J. Cerda, G. Gonzalez
Dawn M. Melley, Senior Director, IEEE Publishing
Assistant Editor Advertising Operations
Erik Henson, Naylor Association Solutions IEEE prohibits discrimination, harassment, and bullying. For more infor-
Susan O’Bryan +1 352 333 3443, fax: +1 352 331 3525 mation, visit http://www.ieee.org/web/aboutus/whatis/policies/p9-26.html.
[email protected]
Promoting Sustainable Forestry
IEEE POWER & ENERGY SOCIETY (PES)

SFI-01681
The IEEE Power & Energy Society is an organization of IEEE members whose principal interest is the advancement of the science and practice of electric power generation,
transmission, distribution, and utilization. All members of the IEEE are eligible for membership in the Society. Mission Statement: To be the leading provider of scientific and
engineering information on electric power and energy for the betterment of society, and the preferred professional development source for our members.
Governing Board Technical Council IEEE Trans. on Energy Conversion, A. Tessarolo

F. Lambert, President V. Vittal, Chair, H. Chen, Vice Chair IEEE Trans. on Power Delivery, F. DeLeon
J. Bian, President-Elect D. Watkins, Secretary, F. Rahmatian, Past-Chair IEEE Trans. on Power Systems, N. Hatziargyriou
M. Armstrong, Vice President, Chapters IEEE Trans. on Smart Grid, C. Canizares
V. Vittal, Vice President, Technical Activities Technical Committee Chairs IEEE Trans. on Sustainable Energy, B. Chowdhury
B. Enayati, Vice President, Education K. Schneider, Analytical Methods for IEEE Open Access Journal of Power and Energy, F. Li
B. Pal, Vice President, Publications Power Systems IEEE Power & Energy Magazine, S. Widergren
W. Bishop, Vice President, Meetings J. Yagielski, Electric Machinery eNewsletter, S. Fattah
J. Romero Aguero, Vice President, Membership J. Yale, Energy Development & Power Generation Editor-in-Chief at Large, W. Xu
& Image B. Chalamala, Energy Storage & Stationary Battery Marketing, E. Batzelis
S. Bahramirad, Vice President, New Initiatives/ H. Geene, Insulated Conductors PES Representative to IEEE Press, K. Bhattacharya
Outreach D. Harmon, Nuclear Power Engineering Website, R. Rana
N. Hadjsaid, Treasurer K. Fodero, Power System Communications
J. Sykes, Secretary & Cybersecurity Meetings
S. Rahman, Past-President L. Lima, Power System Dynamic Performance Committee Chairs
D. Diaz, Region Rep., U.S. & Canada E. Hanique, Power System Instrumentation General Meeting Steering, W. Cassel
J. Milanovic, Region Rep., Europe, Middle East, & Measurements Joint Technical Committee Meeting Steering,
& Africa F. Li, Power System Operation Planning S. Ward
S. Leon, Region Rep., Latin America & Economics Technically Cosponsored Conferences Steering,
D. Sharafi, Region Rep., Asia & Pacific M. Yalla, Power System Relaying & Control A. Borghetti
G. Gonzales, Member-at-Large R. Melton, Smart Building, Load & Transmission & Distribution Conference &
R. Kappagantu, Member-at-Large Customer Systems Exposition Committee for North America
A. Sannino, Member-at-Large P. Fitzgerald, Substations Steering, C. Segneri
J. Yu, Member-at-Large S. Hensley, Surge Protective Devices Innovative Smart Grid Technologies North America,
K. Flowers, Switchgear J. Romero Aguero
IEEE Division VII Director B. Forsyth, Transformers Innovative Smart Grid Technology Conference–
M. Sanders S. Santoso, Transmission & Distribution Europe, D. Van Hertem
IEEE Division VII Director-Elect Innovative Smart Grid Technology Conference–
C. Cañizares Technical Council Coordinating Committees Asia, D. Sharafi
H. Sun, Energy Internet PowerAfrica Steering Committee, H. Louie
PES Executive Director D. Houseman, Intelligent Grid & Emerging Website, Open
Open Technology
D. Alexander, Marine Systems Education
Standing Committee Chairs A. Leon, Renewable Systems Integration Committee Chairs
Open, Constitution & Bylaws Power & Energy Education, A. Srivastava
M.T. Correia de Barros, Fellows Technical Council Standing Committees PES Scholarship Plus, J. Hoffman, C. Root
N. Hadjsaid, Finance F. Rahamatian, Awards PES University, L. Hennebury
A. Apostolov, History Open, Industry Education Website, Open
J. Bian, Long-Range Planning D. Watkins, Organization & Procedures
S. Rahman, Nominations & Appointments T. Burse, Standards Coordination New Initiatives and Outreach
H. Chen, Technical Sessions Committee Chairs
Region Representatives Open, Webmaster Executive Advisory Council, G. van Welie
D. Diaz, M. Gosalia, B. Gwyn, J. Khan, IEEE Smart Cities, D. Novosel
I. Kuzle, S. Leon, J. Milanovic, M. Papic, Publications IEEE Smart Grid, P. Wung
D. Sharafi, C. Wong, X. Wu Publications Board Chair, B. Pal IEEE Smart Village, J. Nelson
Chapter Committee Chairs Editors-in-Chief Industry Tech Support Leadership, D. Novosel
C. Diamond, Awards & Resources IEEE Electrification Magazine, L. Fan Media Engagement, D. Kushner
Z. Wang, Chapters Website IEEE Power Engineering Letters, M. Fotuhi- Website, K. Anastasopoulos
N. Nair, Distinguished Lecturer Program Firuzabad
Z. Wang, Electronic Communications
T. Ribeiro de Alencar, Student Chapters Coordinator IEEE Power & Energy Magazine
Membership & Image Committee Chairs IEEE Power & Energy Magazine (ISSN 1540-7977) (IPEMCF) is published bimonthly by the Institute of Electrical and
A. Vaccaro, Awards & Recognition Electronics E ngineers, Inc. Headquarters: 3 Park Avenue, 17th Floor, New York, NY 10016-5997 USA. Responsibility for the
S. Fattah, Humanitarian Activities contents rests upon the authors and not upon the IEEE, the Society, or its members. IEEE Operations Center (for orders, sub-
J. Benedict, Marketing scriptions, address changes): 445 Hoes Lane, Piscataway, NJ 08854 USA. Telephone: +1 732 981 0060, +1 800 678 4333.
M. Seif, Membership Development Individual copies: IEEE members US$20.00 (first copy only), nonmembers US$89 per copy. Subscription Rates: Society members
included with membership dues. Subscription rates available upon request. Copyright and reprint permissions: Abstracting is permit-
L.F. Gaitán, Social Media
ted with credit to the source. Libraries are permitted to photocopy beyond the limits of U.S. Copyright law for the private use of
J. Cardoso, Web Site Development patrons 1) those post-1977 articles that carry a code at the bottom of the first page, provided the per-copy fee indicated in the code
R. Li, Women in Power is paid through the Copyright Clearance Center, 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923 USA; 2) pre-1978 articles without fee.
S. Akar, Young Professionals For other copying, reprint, or republication permission, write Copyrights and Permissions Department, IEEE Operations Center, 445
Hoes Lane, Piscataway, NJ 08854 USA. Copyright © 2021 by the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc. All rights
reserved. Periodicals postage paid at New York, NY, and at additional mailing offices. Postmaster: Send address changes to IEEE
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/MPE.2021.3057946 Power & Energy Magazine, IEEE Operations Center, 445 Hoes Lane, Piscataway, NJ 08854 USA. Canadian GST #125634188
Printed in U.S.A.
2 ieee power & energy magazine may/june 2021

Bi-directional
data exchange
StationWare & PowerFactory

Interface StationWare and PowerFactory to optimise your protection settings!
Manage large numbers of different manufacturer-specific settings files using StationWare,

DIgSILENT’s centralised asset management system for primary and secondary equipment.
Analyse protection settings using PowerFactory, DIgSILENT’s leading power system analysis
software that provides everything from standard features to highly sophisticated applications.
STATIONWARE POWERFACTORY FOR PROTECTION

Central storage for power system equipment data Interface to StationWare
Central storage and management of manufacturer-specific Short-circuit trace tool
protection settings Short-circuit sweep and Protection Graphic Assistant
Historic view mode to review data for a specific point in time Modelling of all forms of signal comparison schemes
Management of business processes Extensive relay model library
Multi-user web application Different protection diagrams (I-t, R/X, time-distance,
Converters for more than 30 manufacturer-specific file formats differential protection curve, P-Q-limits)
Document library for effective file storage and management Protection Coordination Assistant
User-definable Python scripts and reports Protection Audit tool
For more information visit POWER SYSTEM SOLUTIONS

www.digsilent.de/products
MADE IN GERMANY
Serving more than 160 countries.
editors’ voice
Ning Lu and Steve Widergren
microgrid protection
rethinking reflexive action at the edge
O
OVER THE PAST TWO DECADES,
smart grid-related initiatives have directed
our gaze toward customers and the edge
of the system. Intelligent equipment and
processes now pervade the electric system.
They are dramatically affecting electricity
customer investments in smart equipment.
Initiatives are underway to reimagine dis-
tribution system operations. And this trend
is not stopping. While committed to devel-
oping issues on a diverse set of themes that
©SHUTTERSTOCK.COM/METAMORWORKS
cover the power and energy industry land-
scape, keeping our readers abreast of the
latest developments in integrating and co-
ordinating the operation of customer and
distribution system resources continues.
The microgrid concept represents a
collection of ideas for organizing operat-
ing principles and imagining new ways for
customer-managed systems to integrate a variety of situations. These agreements To do this, microgrids use operational
with the distribution system. The ideas recognize the different parties responsible mechanisms that support the reliable op-
recognize a boundary of responsibility for operations on either side of the inter- eration of the microgrid footprint as well
between the utility electric power system connection. While technical approaches as the electric grid infrastructure. The in-
and a collection of resources managed to achieve this coordination have been tegration of a large amount of distributed
by the customer (or a surrogate). While well demonstrated, there still are areas solar power and battery energy storage
people continue to debate the definition where experience and socialization of systems is accelerating microgrid tech-
of a microgrid, it usually involves an inte- ideas need to mature. nology development. This breakthrough
grated set of power-producing and power- In response to power system distur- technology aims to transform microgrid
consuming resources. With full capability, bances, safety is job one. Minimizing islanding operation from a tentative, emer-
a microgrid can either run independent of impacts to electric service follows close gency option used during system faults
the regional power system (island mode) behind. Whether faults occur in the mi- into a general solution for improving grid
or run synchronously with the power sys- crogrid or regional power system, ensur- reliability and resiliency in both normal
tem (connected mode), and smoothly tran- ing the protection schemes on either side and abnormal situations. By smoothly
sition between these two modes. of the interconnection respond properly switching between grid-connected and
The elegance of the concept lies with is critical to safely clear these disruptions grid-disconnected modes, microgrids
agreements on codes and standards of and minimize service interruptions. can supply loads and support grid servic-
operation that ensure safe, coordinated es as needed.
operation that designers can replicate in In This Issue One of the major hurdles for intercon-
A motivating factor for the microgrid connecting microgrids into the electric system
cept is to improve resiliency for withstand- is the effective integration of microgrid
Date of current version: 19 April 2021 ing high-impact, low-probability events. protection systems with the electric

Ready
To
ARC FLASH EV
EVALUATION
SwiTch? Design safer power systems while ensuring compliance with NEC,
OSHA, NFPA, IEEE, NESC, and CSA standards
Receive up to 60% off Fully integrated with Short Circuit, Over-Current Coordination,
and Equipment Evaluation modules
when you switch Evaluate alternatives quickly and easily to establish an optimal design
to SKM. Improve safety margins with user-definable arcing fault tolerance
Save time by automatically generating arc flash labels and work permits
You’ll also receive Determine required PPE levels instantly
free service to convert Increase flexibility by creating custom labels in any size with
competing software user-defined logos, text, comments, and field placement.
Avoid potential fines, post productivity, and increased insurance
projects over to SKM! and litigation costs.
Compare results from multiple project scenarios in a single table
ADDITIONAL SOFTWARE FROM SKM

DAPPER® Integrated Electrical Analysis Software. Comprehensive AUTO DESIGN Automatically sizes Cables, Transformers,
“The main advantage with Three Phase Short-Circuit Studies, Load Flow Study, Demand Load Buses, and Protective Devices to achieve proper size and
Study, Feeder and Transformer Sizing Study, Impact Motor Starting ratings that meets criteria limits set by the Equipment Evaluation
Power*Tools for Windows is Study, and Load Schedules. (Unbalanced Studies also available) study. Utilize user-defined Design libraries. Best suited for new system
designs or to resolve undersized and/or overdutied equipment for
its user-friendliness. PTW is CAPTOR® Time-Overcurrent Coordination. Graphical Time-Overcurrent
Coordination. Integrated with one-lines, short-circuit modules, Equipment existing systems. (Requires Equipment Evaluation module)
Evaluation, and Arc Flash. Comprehensive protective device library. I*SIM Dynamic Simulation and Transient Stability. Model, Simulate,
easy to use and the ready- and Analyze Dynamic Responses to Power System Electro-Mechanical
AUTO COORDINATION & EVALUATION Instantly identify
Disturbances. Includes Generator Sizing and Stability, Rotor Angle and
to-use standard models coordination and protection issues by evaluating each
Voltage Stability, Flux Level Machine Representation, Identify Fault
equipment for adherence to the National Electric Code (NEC).
Clearing Times. User Defined Graphical Models for Exciter, Turbine
enable you to speed up Automatically make changes to resolve violations.
Governor, PSS, and other controllers.
CABLE AMPACITY Accurate calculation of ampacity and
your work. Changing data is temperature rise in various power cable installations. Based DISTRIBUTION RELIABILITY Calculates the reliability indices of
individual load points and the overall distribution systems with either
on and fully compliant with IEC 60287.
simple and makes evaluating A_FAULT ANSI Short-Circuit Study. Three Phase Short-Circuit Study
radial or loop configuration.
based on the ANSI/IEEE C37 Standards. Separate solutions for low, DC SYSTEMS ANALYSIS Battery Sizing, Load Flow, & Short Circuit
different cases very easy.” medium and high voltage systems and for symmetrical, momentary Analysis. Evaluate all loading conditions for DC duty cycle loads and
and interrupting calculations. (Unbalanced Studies also available) AC emergency loads. Complies with IEEE std. 485, 1115, 399, 946,
and IEC std. 61660.
EQUIPMENT EVALUATION Equipment Evaluation Report. Automatically
compares short-circuit ratings, withstand ratings. Applies de-rating GROUND MAT Substation Ground Grid Design and Analysis. Optimizes
adjustments and user defined pass/marginal/failed criteria. Includes grid design using general purpose finite element algorithm for
error checking for input data and topology. potential analysis and graphical facilities to validate grounding
systems efficiency.
TMS Transient Motor Starting Simulation. Time-based motor starting
simulation with graphical output. Includes reduced voltage and Data Exchange Seamlessly share project data between
capacitor starting, graphical motor and load models. SKM projects and other third-party software. Exchange
format includes Tab Delimited, CSV, and SKM XML. Also includes
HI_WAVE Power Quality Investigation and Filter Design. Frequency
an interface to exchange data with Autodesk Revit and Intergraph
Scan, Harmonic Current, Voltage Distortion, Harmonic Load Flow and
SmartPlant Electrical.
Interactive Filter Design. Evaluate and correct harmonic distortions.
SKM Power*Tools Training Classes

Visit skm.com to find a class near you today! 101/102 Introduction to SKM Power*Tools
Hurry, classes fill up fast! 103/104 Intermediate Topics in SKM Power*Tools
201/202 Power System Application – Coordination & Arc Flash
Training more than five engineers? 204/205 Motor Starting and Harmonics
One Pearl Street
Email [email protected] for a 206 DC System Analysis & Arc Flash
Redondo Beach, CA 90277
personalized On-Site Training quote. 207 Grounding and Applications
1-800-500-4SKM
www.skm.com • [email protected] Chosen By The Top 40 eleCTriCal engineering Firms in The World
grid protection framework. Coordinated, ✔ general challenges to system pro- engineering society efforts. These in-
adaptive protection mechanisms ensure tection by microgrid integration volve the U.S. Department of Energy
safe and reliable operation on both sides ✔ unique challenges faced in mi- and include IEEE committees, work-
of the interconnection boundary. As an crogrids powered by inverter- ing groups, and standards organiza-
emerging issue, microgrid protection re- based resources tions. The collective effort of the parties
search is getting significant attention with ✔ solutions based on conventional involved is crucial for advancing mi-
a limited amount of field implementa- protection schemes crogrid protection technology.
tion experience. ✔ needs for developing new adap-
To shed light on the microgrid pro- tive protection schemes Leader’s Corner
tection topic from different angles, guest ✔ two potential protection approach- IEEE Power & Energy Society (PES)
editors Jim Reilly and Mani Venkata put es: centralized and decentralized President-Elect Jessica Bian and Wayne
together a diverse set of articles written ✔ combining microgrid control with Bishop Jr., IEEE PES vice president Meet-
by experts from universities, research protection ings, team up to review the dramatic
institutes, utilities, and engineering labo- ✔ advanced computing platforms changes that are taking place with PES-
ratories. These authors are steeped in pro- for supporting complex protec- sponsored meetings, conferences, and
tection design, microgrid modeling and tion schemes and functions lifelong learning offerings. In the wake of
control, field implementation, and code ✔ field experience obtained in mi- the pandemic, the Society had to respond
and standards development. They share crogrid design and operation quickly to restrictions on gatherings across
with us their knowledge on challenges ✔ modeling platforms for the test, the globe. Meeting organizers manage
and solutions in microgrid protection, development, and validation of to successfully navigate these challeng-
field implementations and problems en- new protection schemes ing circumstances. They are becoming
countered, pathways leading from present ✔ the necessity to revise existing more proficient in the use of online meet-
to future, as well as the ongoing evolution codes and standards and the need ing tools and virtual event planning.
of codes and standards. for new codes and standards. With leadership and volunteer sup-
Specifically, the six feature articles Finally, the “In My View” column port, our members continue to be able
discuss the following key topics: discusses ongoing governmental and to share their experiences and learn
TSAT-RTDS® INTERFACE (TRI) & TSAT-PSCADTM INTERFACE (TPI)
Offering a simple, user-friendly interface with extensive analysis options, DSAToolsTM is a suite
of software tools for both offline and online dynamic security assessment of power systems.
TSAT-RTDS® Interface and TSAT-PSCADTM Interface are advanced co-simulation platforms which
leverage the rich features of TSAT and RTDS®/PSCADTM.
Advantages
• Simulating power systems with over 8000
buses in real-time
• Creating complex wide-area control and
monitoring systems
• Full EMT simulation of microgrids
connected to bulk transmission network
represented in phasor domain
• Performing hardware-in-loop tests with
large system models
Experience and Support

• Consulting services for custom model
development and hardware-in-loop testing
• Engineers experienced in performing
transient stability and electromagnetic
transient simulation TRI & TPI
TSAT-RTDS® INTERFACE
TSAT-PSCADTM INTERFACE
RTDS® and PSCADTM are trademarks of Manitoba Hydro International.

from others. As an upside, the virtual tric power industry. He had a tendency Society News
environment enables greater involvement toward system-level perspectives that As reported in the “Leader’s Corner”
of people from different regions than in- included sociopolitical issues woven into column, conferences and events have
person meetings. In time, our ability to our profession’s technical challenges. All gone virtual this past year. A report
attend conferences and other events will that made him a valued member of our on the Transactive Energy Systems
return, but the recent lessons learned will board. He will be missed. Conference, held 7–10 December 2020,
have a lasting impact. They will provide shows no exception. The experience
opportunities for new experiences. History gained from earlier conferences not
While the book review column took a only supplied a stable platform for at-
Adieu, Gerry Sheblé, break this time around, “History” is back! tendees to hear prepared recordings but
Farewell This issue’s “History” column explores enhanced the interactive aspects of the
Gerry Sheblé, long-time IEEE Power & the evolution of wind energy in Den- meeting. The organizers made creative
Energy Magazine editorial board mem- mark. It puts in perspective the state of the use of online tools including live video,
ber, book reviewer, magazine contribu- technology, economic drivers, and politi- places for prepared comments, live chat,
tor, and IEEE Life Fellow, has died. He cal motivation to explain how top-down and virtual breakout rooms. This gave
passed away peacefully in his sleep after policy support and bottom-up initiatives participants the sensation of being colo-
enduring a rapid bout with cancer. He shaped the Danish wind power sector. cated while physically spanning multiple
had an eclectic relationship with indus- These factors supported the integration time zones.
try and academia, contributing to many of high penetrations of wind energy By rigorously keeping to an agen-
areas including energy management in the grid. This brief history of wind da covering various tracks, attendees
systems and electric power market ap- power in Denmark outlines key events used their options to review posters,
plications. He was a gentleman with an on a technological journey. It explains talk directly with authors, and engage
emphasis on the word “gentle.” That the early days of wind power through in moderated conversations with large
made him comfortably approachable the shock of the global energy crisis in numbers of their peers. The evolution
in personal conversations. He cul- the 1970s and the transition to large-
tivated a vast knowledge of the elec- scale efficient turbines of the present day. (continued on p. 103)
The next evolution in real-time simulation software
The RTDS® Simulator changed the world. Soon, its software will change yours.
Introducing: RSCAD® FX — the new and improved simulation software by RTDS Technologies Inc. Meet
the industry’s most advanced real-time modelling library, now with enhanced functionality, features,
and a new look and feel.
Launching Q2 2021, RSCAD FX will increase user productivity, helping power system innovators
achieve accurate and efficient real-time simulations and hardware-in-the-loop tests.
The RTDS Simulator is the world standard for real-time digital simulation, used globally for the closed-
loop testing of protection and control systems. Users can validate the performance of power system
devices, de-risk deployment, integrate novel systems, anticipate and mitigate negative interactions,
and optimize performance by connecting real devices to a simulated network. The result? Reduced
commissioning delays and increased reliability, resilience, and performance.
Learn more about RSCAD FX at www.rtds.com/RSCAD-FX
YOUR WORLD IN REAL TIME.

RTDS.COM
leader’s corner
Jessica Bian and Wayne Bishop Jr.
pivot to virtual
meetings, conferences, and lifelong learning
S
SO MUCH HAS CHANGED IN THE speaker. For the General Meeting and in a virtual environment. No need to
past year—how we get our food, get our all of our PES virtual conferences, it book a hotel room or plane ticket, but,
children to school, do our work, and has been important that these events instead, enjoy the technical programs
learn. IEEE Power & Energy Society be offered for the benefit of PES mem- of PES conferences from the comfort
(PES) meetings and conferences are no bers. We lowered the registration cost of your home and office. For example,
exception. Some keywords we heard in to US$99 for PES members and kept at the 2020 PowerAfrica Conference,
2020 were reposition, change, new nor- the technical presentations online until we had 347 attendees from 45 differ-
mal, shift, rethink, reset, change course, the end of August. After that, presenta- ent countries. In 2019, we had only 28
modify, reset, and, of course, pivot. tions were transferred to the PES Re- different countries represented. Please
Last year’s PES General Meeting source Center. Again, this was done as consider attending and experiencing a
had to pivot from a face-to-face meet- a service to our members. PES conference outside your Region.
ing to a virtual one in fewer than 100 Several other PES conferences also With all of the changes happening
days. This was the first major event for pivoted to a virtual format, including in the electric power industry, it is vital
PES that changed from in person to the following: to share this knowledge and expertise
virtual. It is also one of our largest con- ✔✔ Innovative Smart Grid Technol- with our members. This becomes even
ferences, after the biannual IEEE PES ogies (ISGT) Europe, which fo- more important during a pandemic,
Transmission and Distribution (T&D) cuses on smart grid technologies when most of us are not able to have
Conference and Exposition. Needless ✔✔ PowerAfrica the “water-cooler talks” and hallway
to say, it was not a small task, but, with ✔✔ Latin America T&D Conference informal conversations with colleagues
a very qualified team in place made ✔✔ PowerCon in Asia in the industry. Please know that PES
up of volunteers and PES professional ✔✔ Smart Cities Conference. is here for you now more than ever. We
staff supporting us every step of the When this column was written, fin- are your knowledge resource through
way, it resulted in a great event. A spe- ishing touches were being put on the the PES Resource Center, award-win-
cial thanks to General Meeting Steer- ISGT North America Conference on ning publications, virtual meetings and
ing Committee Chair William Cassel 16–18 February 2021. Normally, this conferences, tutorials, webinars, and
and his team for a job well done. conference would be held in Wash- more being held around the world.
The theme of the General Meeting ington, D.C., but this year’s gather- As a part of PES’s long-range stra-
was “Are Big Data, Machine Learning, ing is virtual, with exciting keynote tegic planning, the Society has been
and Electric Transportation Transform- speeches from offering what our members most need
ing the Grid?” There were more than ✔✔ Dennis Arriola, CEO of Avan- to learn over the decades. How long
2,200 attendees from 69 different coun- grid is your degree going to last? Back in
tries, 130 panel sessions, 617 papers ✔ ✔ Gil Quiniones, president and the 1960s, the half-life of knowledge
presented via video, and a very suc- CEO of New York Power Au- was a phrase attributed to economist
cessful PES members meeting and ple- thority Fritz Machlup, who studied, among
nary session. We were thrilled to have ✔ ✔ Eliot Mainzer, president and other things, the economic value of
David Murray, chief technology officer CEO of California Independent knowledge. It is the amount of time
from Hydro Québec, as our keynote System Operator. that elapses before half of the knowl-
If there is any silver lining to CO- edge in a particular area is superseded
VID-19, it is that you can now attend a or shown to be untrue. Machlup and
Date of current version: 19 April 2021 vast variety of global PES conferences others of his day discovered that, while

• •
• •
• •
an engineering degree acquired in 1930 need to spend five hours in each of ✔ develop stronger liaisons with
was useful for about 35 years, the half- those weeks gaining new technology, industry
life of an engineering degree earned mathematics, and scientific knowledge ✔ improve global presence and
in 1960 was only relevant for about 10 to remain technically current. strengthen participation
years because of the rapid development To meet members’ ongoing learn- ✔ increase coordination among tech-
of new technologies. ing needs, PES has been leading the nical activities, including stan-
In 2002, the National Academy of delivery of scientific and engineer- dards, meetings and conferences,
Engineering estimated that the half- ing information on electric power publications, and education
life of engineering knowledge was and energy and becoming the pre- ✔ promote diversified demograph-
somewhere between two and a half to fer red professiona l development ics of Chapters and membership
seven years. If you are an engineer or source. With the 17 PES technical ✔ grow lifelong learning offerings.
a computer professional, the danger of committees as a backbone, PES is Specifically, PES has been imple-
becoming technologically obsolete is our engineers’ ideal home to replace menting the following initiatives based
an ever-growing risk. that obsolete knowledge and remain on the five-year strategic plan to en-
To be an engineer is to accept the technically correct. hance career opportunities and values
fact that, in the future—always sooner In addition to education, PES’s long- for all PES members globally:
than one expect—most of the techni- range plan also focuses on our mem- ✔ add more industry tracks to gen-
cal knowledge you once worked hard bership and Chapter needs in technical eral meetings and T&D confer-
to master will be obsolete. To replace activities, including standards, meet- ences
that aging knowledge, assuming there ings and conferences, and publications. ✔ together with various organiza-
are 48 weeks a year to devote to knowl- The PES five-year (2019–2023) strate- tions, cosponsor one-day work-
edge replacement, an engineer would gies are as follows: shops and webinars on industry
megatrends and other relevant
topics
✔ develop short courses in local
languages
✔ increase participation in and
contribute to technical commit-
tees
✔ reinvigorate Chapter communi-
cation with members
Transformer ✔ expand the Distinguished Lec-
Bags ture Program support

✔ establish mentorship and coach-
ing programs
✔ increase industry involvement in
education programs
✔ expand student activities world-
wide.
As the power and energy industry
transforms, PES will continue to adapt
substation and grow existing lifelong learning of-
liners ferings, deliver timely technological

information, get members ready for in-
dustry transition, and give more power
to the future. We look forward to “see-
ing you” at this year’s virtual general
meeting on 25–29 July 2021.
p&e
1.800.231.6074
reefindustries.com

Transients, Stability & Load-flow
in the same software
• Perform multi-phase load-¬flow and time-domain (EMT) simulations

within the same environment, using the same dataset and schematic!
• The most user-friendly graphical interface!
• The fastest and most advanced time-domain software in the industry,
capable to simulate large scale transmission and distribution grids!
• Completely scriptable. Everything can be automated!
• Access to world class technical support, ready to help you and your team at
each step of your projects!
• The reference for EMT simulations
EMTP® is fastest, the most accurate and the most

numerically stable time-domain software in the industry
to simulate electromagnetic and electromechanical
transients in a large range of applications:
- Inverter-Based-Resources (IBR) - Stability
modeling - Power Quality
- Micro-grid simulations - Ferroresonance
- Black-start - Renewables, FACTS and HVDC...
- Insulation coordination
- Protection and relays
Get an 1-Hour call with an application engineer

Contact us at: emtp.com/ieeepes
emtp.com
guest editorial
Jim Reilly and S.S. (Mani) Venkata
its complexities & requirements
M
MICROGRIDS AROUND THE WORLD risen and their impact on grid reliability connection to the larger distribution
are evolving at a quick pace. They come has become a reality, microgrids have grid in islanded operation. Also, the
in many sizes and types, for a v ariety become a serious consideration for protection schemes, or at a minimum
of uses. With the integration of smart, utility system protection schemes. Mi- the protection system settings, must be
digital devices and technologies, real- crogrids may not lead to greater reli- changed and adapted when transition-
time, automated grid operation with ability and resiliency than that already ing from grid-connected to islanded
the human in the loop is a daunting delivered by existing networks, espe- modes of operation. These transitions
task. Eight years ago, this topic was cially mesh, unless protection is taken include those that require the design
the theme of the July/August 2013 into consideration. of adaptive protection systems. The
issue of IEEE Power & Energy Maga- combination of a large penetration of
zine. Two years later, the related topic System Protection: inverter-based DERs and an absence
of grid and microgrid resiliency was Art and Science of a strong grid in islanded operation
given comprehensive treatment i n System protection is both an art and mode results in a microgrid protection
the May/June 2015 issue. Continu- a science involving protective equip- design that significantly departs from
ing this theme on the development of ment, which is like a silent sentinel. the conventional power system protec-
m icrog r id tech nologies, t he July/ The protection of even a classical, pas- tion philosophy.
August 2017 issue covered microgrid sive, and radial distribution system has To allow islanded and autonomous
controllers, which define the micro always been incredibly challenging. operations, microgrids need to in-
grid’s operations and functionality. Practices vary widely even within a corporate local DERs, which include
This 2021 issue further continues the utility and especially so among utili- renewable energy resources (wind
microgrid theme with the challenging ties. Practices for microgrids are even and solar), and the associated electri-
topic of protection. more fluid and challenging. cal storage required for balancing
Microgrid protection has become a and firming intermittent generation.
topic of great interest as the number Consider System From this perspective, a microgrid is
of microgrids with prominent levels Protection: Integration a means to aggregate DERs. In the mi-
of inverter-based resources (IBRs), Complexities crogrid islanded operation, the local
storage, and managed loads has grown As modern technologies and distrib- distribution system is no longer con-
greatly along with the trend toward uted energy resources (DERs) with nected to the larger power grid provid-
new generation being connected to dis- energy storage and renewable generated by central generation. This makes
tribution networks. Microgrids them- ing resources become more prevalent the design of protection systems in an
selves are no longer diesel generators in electric power systems, operational islanded mode different from that in
connected to specific building loads complexity increases. Attention to sys- grid-connected mode.
in case of power outages. They have tem protection is a critical issue to pave DERs are mostly interconnected
evolved into complex entities that oper- the way for achieving safe, efficient, to the distribution grid using power
ate in parallel with the grid and provide and effective means of managing this electronic-based energy converters.
grid support services. As their im- emerging complex system. The chal- The presence of these types of DERs
portance in serving critical loads has lenges in microgrid protection design requires approaches to protection that
result from the combination of a high are different from those for conven-
penetration of DERs using power elec- tional rotating-machine-based DERs,
Date of current version: 19 April 2021 tronic interfaces and the absence of a such as combined heat and power,

MAKE IT A
SURE-BREAK
SEPARABLE SOLUTION
A significant SAFETY advance in Cable Accessories design

The new 28kV Sure-Break™ product line • Tested with a worst case, non-vented
mitigates the safety risk of partial vacuum bushing, to achieve Level 1 (highest)
flashover. performance requirements of IEEE Std 386™
Clause 7.5.2
• Two times the strike distance when
compared to traditional loadbreak elbows
Join our webinar • Insulated sleeve on probe end
June 16th | 2 pm EDT • Insulated layer over internal conductive
insert
AD03102E
For product inquiries, please contact your local

sales or customer service representative.
hubbellpowersystems.com
diesel, or small hydroelectric generators. project. In this article, the authors offer crogrids in both radial and second-
Among the significant differences are a unique perspective on microgrid pro- ary networks.
the limited fault-current capacity of the tection informed by lessons learned and In the fourth article, “Practical Mi-
inverters and the disparate design con- insights gained from a long tradition of crogrid Protection Solutions,” authors
siderations of the DER controllers. The experience in microgrid technology Scott Manson, engineering services
resulting performance is highly variable worldwide. More specifically, the ar- technology director at Schweitzer En-
and dependent on the design and imple- ticle explores the effects of different gineering Laboratories, Inc., and Ed
mentation choices. operational transitions McCullough, senior manager for Tesla
This issue presents of microgrids. It reviews Energy application engineering, pres-
the complexities and spe- The authors the characteristics of ent a new set of challenges to protec-
cific protection require- explain the power electronics-based tion in microgrids from the perspective
ments that are unique to generation on the perfor- of the impacts of IBR-connected sys-
microgrid systems, in behavior of mance of conventional tems on protection design principles.
both connected and is- protection schemes in The authors offer a set of solutions that
landed operating modes IBRs under internal fault cases as uses the computing platform embed-
as well as the transition faulted well as the pros and cons ded in programmable protective relays
between them. Adaptive of various protection to achieve adaptability. The article
protection is one of the conditions methods. The promis- explains technical challenges, such as
solutions to these coming prospects of adaptive supplying simulated inertia, limited
plexities discussed in the that present protection and the im- current contributions, and other firm-
articles. Fault conditions challenges portance of hardware-in- ware-based inverter behavior. It offers
arising from the power the-loop testing for the several common techniques to over-
electronic grid interfaces for microgrid acceptance of microgrid come them with programmable protec-
of fast energy convert- protection solutions are tive relays.
ers used for DERs and protection also highlighted. The fifth article is “North Bay
the coordination of com- system design. The next article is Hydro Microgrid,” by Michael Hig-
munication schemes are “Influence of Inverter- ginson, Keith Moses, and Peter Curtiss
some of the complexities Based Resources on of S&C Electric, Matt Payne, president
for microgrid protection that the au- Microgrid Protection,” by Matthew and chief operating officer of North Bay
thors explain. Reno and Michael Ropp from Sandia Hydro Services, Ontario, and Stephen
National Laboratories, Sukumar Brah- Costello of CIMA+. The authors pres-
Microgrid Protection: The ma from Clemson University, and Ali ent their operational experiences for a
Scope of the Articles Bidram from the University of New microgrid that was retrofitted from a
The articles in this issue are dedicated to Mexico. Since this is a topic of over- distribution system that was not engi-
exploring the topic of microgrid protec- arching importance, it was prepared in neered to support microgrids. The arti-
tion. The authors are leaders in the field; two parts—“Part 1: Microgrids in Ra- cle describes what protection challeng-
they are active in R&D with the nation- dial Distribution Systems” and “Part es were expected in the design phase
al laboratories in the United States and 2: Secondary Networks and Microgrid and how the protection system operates
the European Union, the studies of the Protection.” Advanced microgrids in the field. It also discusses the major
IEEE Power & Energy Society (PES) today include IBRs, and many mi- challenges in devising a robust protec-
Power System Relaying and Control crogrids have modes or conditions tion plan that included bidirectional
Committee, the IEEE Standards Asso- under which they are entirely ener- and variable fault current, power-export
ciation (SA), and CIGRE C6 Distribu- gized by them. The authors explain restrictions, and a need for fast protec-
tion. As guest editors, we are delighted the behavior of IBRs under faulted tion operation, including the ability to
that they agreed to share their insights conditions that present challenges for reliably detect utility events promptly
and research with us. microgrid protection system design. and protect the equipment from closing
The first article is “Microgrid Pro- There are special problems concern- out of phase. This article is a real-life
tection Against Internal Faults,” by ing the fault-current profile between example of the realities and importance
Dimitris Lagos, Vasileios Papaspilio- grid-connected and microgrid-island- of protection for microgrids that are in-
topoulos, George Korres, and Nikos ed modes and between IBR-dominant terconnected with the grid.
Hatziargyriou. Hatziargyriou was a key or rotating-machine-dominant con- Any discussion of microgrid protec-
contributor to one of the first microgrids figurations. Protection for IBR-based tion would be incomplete without an
in Europe on Kythnos Island in 2001, microgrids and solutions with differ- understanding of the role of standards.
and we offer our congratulations on ent controls for IBRs are identified In the sixth article, “Status of Microgrid
the 20th anniversary of this microgrid as key issues in the integration of mi- Protection and Related Standards and

Codes,” authors Ward Bower and Tom protection and dynamic control prob- ject of protection center stage. This “In
Key provide an overview of the stan- lems in microgrids. My View” column highlights R&D ac-
dards that are most pertinent to mi- tivities that focus on the challenges of
crogrids and protection. Among these Insights From microgrid protection and the strategic
are standards developed by the IEEE “In My View” Column importance to address protection in
SA, sponsored by committees in PES. The “In My View” column, “Microgrid microgrid-related research in the com-
For microgrid protection, PES’s Power Protection,” is authored by Dan Ton, ing years.
System Relaying and Control Com- manager of the Microgrid Program at
mittee sponsors the working group for the U.S. Department of Energy. The The View Ahead
IEEE Standard P2030.12, Guide for column explains the study of microgrid From conversations with academics,
the Design of Microgrid Protection protection in the context of the over- researchers, vendors, and utilities, we
Systems. Other IEEE SA standards all development of microgrids. The conclude that the needs for advanced
discussed in the article are the IEEE progression of microgrid technology microgrid protection schemes are ur-
1547 series for interconnection and goes from 1) stand-alone generators gent. Progress on codes and standards
interoperability, IEEE 2030.7/8 for for backup power to 2) grid-connect- for the seamless integration of mi-
microgrid controller functionality and ed entities with renewable generation crogrids is crucial for facilitating the
testing, and UL 1741 for inverter certifi- and storage that can be islanded dur- wide deployment of microgrid tech-
cations. The authors extend their survey ing power outages for resiliency to 3) nologies. Microgrid protection de-
to IEC TS 62898-3-1: Microgrids— providers of grid services and partici- pends on the interconnection topol-
Technical Requirements—Protection pants in markets. The evolution of the ogy. Connecting to meshed secondary
and Dynamic Control (2019), which microgrid concept now includes full networks in urban areas poses a
establishes new protection and dynamic microgrid integration with the electric greater challenge in microgrid protec-
control requirements to address fault power system, which brings the sub- tion than connection in suburban and
Eugenio Carvalheira
IEC 61850 is my topic … Engineering Manager
As an Engineering Manager in the Power Utility Communication field, I work on

exciting and trend-setting products. Through our developments, we can offer
efficient IEC 61850 testing tools for protection and SCADA engineers. One example
is DANEO 400, which uniquely records and analyzes all conventional signals and
GOOSE and Sampled Values on the substation communication network.
www.omicronenergy.com/puc

AD21013-IEC-61850-7x4.7-8-ENU.indd 1 2021-02-26 19:10:16
EVERYTHING YOU NEED IN ONE PLACE
Visit the IEEE PES Resource Center: resourcecenter.ieee-pes.org
The IEEE PES Resource Center is the most extensive library in the world
devoted exclusively to the power and energy industry.
You don’t have to be a PES member to access the Resource Center’s vast
array of content available to assist in your research, presentations, or
academic programs, and benefit your professional development!
PES Member Access: Most materials in the PES Resource Center

are free to society members - an important member benefit.
Non-PES Member Access: Discounted prices, for IEEE members, are
listed for each product. Non-members also have access to all the
products on the IEEE PES Resource Center.
Missed an issue of
Power & Energy or Electrification?
Download PES Magazines
Need to train yourself in

a specific area?
Watch Video Tutorials & Archived Webinars
Unable attend a PES conference?

Access Conference Videos & Presentations
Time to update your license?

Earn Continuing Education Credits
Want access to in-depth

technical materials?
Download Complete Technical Reports

rural areas, where existing protection nology, such as advanced sensors and cessity for safe, reliable, and resilient
schemes can be extended and adapted faster communication networks, to pro- grid operation.
to IBRs. vide transformational solutions where
Sophisticated solutions (such as the traditional ones may be infeasible or Acknowledgments
use of differential relays that sense the become too expensive. Microgrid protection is not an every-
phase differences between the current We see control and protection becom- day topic and is not easily explained to
entering and leaving the feeder) may be ing more integrated, especially as they a broad audience. In putting this issue
needed where overcurrent-based solu- concern IBRs. Since inverter controls together, we are fortunate to have had
tions do not detect faults or coordinate drive the fault response, fault detection the support of Editor-in-Chief Steve
with the system. As always, there are and classification can be derived from Widergren and the technical and edi-
compromises concerning costs and the these controls. As the microgrid is torial assistants, Ning Lu and Susan
extent of technology deployed. For ex- likely to have a controller, the control- O’Bryan. Their guidance helped give
ample, ideally, every feeder section has ler may also include protection func- clarity to presenting this complex topic.
a primary zone for protection to provide tions that can be implemented through We wish to thank the authors for their
quick-acting and selective clearing of a communication. patience through the editorial process
fault within its boundary. Also, backup In the foreseeable future, microgrid and their dedication to this issue. In-
protection can be installed to isolate the capabilities will be aggregated to par- deed, the result is a set of articles that
faulty section of the system in case the ticipate in wholesale electricity mar- brings the urgent needs for advancing
primary protection does not function kets and supply a wide range of grid microgrid protection schemes and the
properly. However, applying such de- services at the distribution and trans- significance of developing microgrid
sign principles to every feeder section mission levels. To enable that future, protection codes and standards to a
would be cost-prohibitive in practice. the coordination of microgrid protec- broad audience in the power systems
Smart grid research and product de- tion systems with interconnected dis- engineering community.
p&e
velopment will bring additional tech- tribution system protection is a ne-
World Leader in Developing

BIGWOOD SYSTEMS, INC. Powerful and Field
Field-Proven
www.bigwood-systems.com
+1.607.257.0915 On--line and Off
On Off--line Tools
[email protected] for Power Grid Modeling, Analysis, Assessment,
NY, USA
Head Office Branch Offices Enhancement and Optimization
Ithaca, NY Taipei, TWN | Beijing, CHN
Innovation prevails!
Network Applications for the Control Center

“Bigwood Systems’ Online Voltage • Real-time and Look-ahead Static and Dynamic Security
Stability product is simply the best in the Assessment (patented screening, ranking, and detailed
field.” - CAISO Project Leader analysis)
“BSI On-line Transient Stability • Reactive Power Reserve Monitoring, Management &
Assessment is a superb product.” Enhancement
- TEPCO Manager
• Actionable Control Recommendation engine to
“The BSI VAR Management System is a
eliminate violations and mitigate unstable contingencies
best practice tool for all utilities.” • New-Generation State Estimation for Transmission and
- SERC Audit Staff
Distribution Networks with a low number of measurements
using SCADA & PMU data
• Global Optimal Power Flow (for over 250,000 control variables with
AC/DC constraints)
• Distribution Network Management Tools
• Renewable Energy Forecasting, Uncertainty Modeling,
Representation & Management
• Advanced Measurement-Based Power System Modeling
(Generation, Transmission & Load)
World-Wide Customer Base
Over 40 electrical utilities served world-wide, including long-standing
customers such as California ISO, PJM Interconnection, Tokyo Electric
Power Company, Tennessee Valley Authority, and UK Power Networks,
among others. BSI’s advanced technology, innovation and satisfied
customers are key differentiators.

Microgrid
Protection Against
Internal Faults
G
HIN
LIS
UB
MP
G RA
Y IN
DB
SE
ICEN
GEL
IMA
M
MICROGRIDS HAVE GAINED SIGNIFI-
Challenges in Islanded and cant interest over the last 20 years and are per-
ceived as key components of future power
Interconnected Operation systems. Microgrids are defined as distribution
networks with distributed energy resources
(DERs) (e.g., distributed generators, storage
devices, and controllable loads) operating in
a controlled and coordinated way. Moreover,
microgrids should have clear electrical bound-
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/MPE.2021.3057950 aries and the ability to operate connected
Date of current version: 19 April 2021 to the main power network or islanded. The
20 ieee power & energy magazine 1540-7977/21©2021IEEE may/june 2021

coordinated control of microgrid resources increases energy efficiency, minimizes the overall energy con-
sumption, and reduces the environmental impacts of energy production. At the same time, the ability of
microgrids to seamlessly transition to islanded operation when upstream network faults occur increases
the reliability and resilience of the customer supply. Furthermore, microgrids have been adopted as prom-
inent and viable solutions for rural electrification in developing countries, isolated areas, or areas with
weak power transmission infrastructures.
Microgrid implementations are faced with challenges in their control, operation, and protection. Next to
control issues, protection has drawn the attention of researchers and industry since microgrid advantages
can be jeopardized if protection against faults proves deficient. The main challenges arise from the pres-
ence of multiple short circuit current sources due to the installation of distributed sources in traditionally
passive distribution networks, various fault current levels in different operational modes (islanded and grid
connected) of the microgrid, and the limited short circuit current contribution by power electronic (PE)-
interfaced energy sources. The coordination of fault ride-through curves and protection schemes is also an
issue that can affect the overall microgrid stability in islanded operation.
DC microgrids share similar concerns with ac microgrid protection. The different operational character-
istics of dc circuit breakers and the requirement of faster fault clearance times compared to ac systems need
to be carefully considered. This article focuses on the challenges of ac microgrid protection, provides an
overview of the different protection methods, and presents the adaptive protection methodology as well as a
novel laboratory testing procedure for microgrid protection scheme evaluation.
Challenges in Microgrid Protection

In addition to the common characteristics of standard protection schemes, namely sensitivity, selectivity,
and speed, microgrid protection should also adapt to changing operating conditions. The most significant
concerns are the maloperation of protective devices, like protection blinding and sympathetic tripping, low
short circuit currents, the uncertain behavior of PE-interfaced units, and the lack of grounding.
The first challenge is protection blinding caused by the integration of DERs. Microgrids are part of
the distribution level of the power system where the protection schemes rely on overcurrent protective
devices, such as fuses and relays. This long-established protection technique might be inadequate for
microgrid protection since it depends only on the short circuit current magnitude for the unidirectional
behavior of the short circuit currents, i.e., from the upstream network to the fault. This might not be the
case in a microgrid. Figure 1 illustrates a microgrid that can operate in two modes: grid connected or
islanded. The circuit breakers are controlled by their respective protective relays. The presence of DERs
in different locations of the feeders provides additional fault current sources, altering the magnitude and
direction of fault currents coming from the upstream network. For example, as depicted in Figure 1, in
the event of a fault between buses 5 and 6, the short circuit current (i.e., I CB6) flowing from the photo-
voltaic (PV) through circuit breaker CB6 to bus 5 may lead to a reduction of the short circuit current
from the upstream network (i.e., I CB4). Therefore, the speed, or even the sensitivity, of the respective
upstream protective device, i.e., the relay controlling CB4, may fail to recognize the fault, the effect of
which is known as protection blinding.
The second challenge is the sympathetic tripping that impairs the selectivity of microgrid protection
schemes. Sympathetic tripping refers to the operation of a protective relay to a fault beyond its protection
zone. The unintentional operation is triggered by the DER backfeed current contribution to the fault, caus-
ing an outage of a healthy part of the system. The basic principle of sympathetic tripping is explained in
Figure 1 for the same fault between buses 5 and 6. During the short circuit, the wind turbine feeds a short
circuit current I CB14 to I CB4 in the direction of I CB12 . In the case of a large wind turbine current, the relay
controlling CB12 might command the circuit breaker to trip before the relays controlling CB7 or CB4 take
action. Thus, opening CB12 causes the disconnection of a healthy feeder.
The third challenge, especially for islanded microgrids dominated by the PE-interfaced generation,
is the drastically reduced short circuit current level. PE-interfaced units can contribute only about
By Dimitris Lagos, Vasileios Papaspiliotopoulos,

George Korres, and Nikos Hatziargyriou

1–1.5 times their nominal current during short circuits characteristic refers to symmetrical faults only. Hence, the
for a limited time. This leads to major differences in the required response of PE-interfaced units to unbalanced
expected fault current levels when the microgrid is grid faults is not defined in the majority of grid codes, and, thus,
connected or islanded. the determination of the expected short circuit currents
The fourth challenge is the ambiguity in the short circuit under unbalanced fault conditions is ambiguous. In this case,
current contributed to by PE-interfaced units. During short PE-interfaced units contribute to faults based on vendor-spe-
circuits, the behavior of these units is dictated by the imple- cific control algorithms, which are rarely disclosed.
mented control algorithms that limit their current during Another source of uncertainty is the power factor of the
faults to protect their switching elements. This is different short circuit current provided by PE-interfaced generators.
than synchronous generators, whose fault current contribu- During the fault, the active power is fixed at a prefault level,
tion is caused directly by the electromagnetic fluxes trapped while the reactive power should follow the requirements of
in their windings. Several standards and grid codes have Figure 2(b). Therefore, the prefault conditions, voltage sag
included functionalities that address the operation of PE- due to the fault, and nominal current of the PEs can result
interfaced DERs during faults, especially those connected in short circuit currents of similar magnitudes (close to the
to transmission systems. The most common and widely nominal current) but different power factors.
applicable requirement is the fault ride-through capability, Figure 3 presents the case of a fault between buses 5
which is expressed as a voltage to the time-after-fault curve, and 6 that causes a voltage sag below 50%. In this event, a
depicted in Figure 2(a). As long as the operating point at the reactive current contribution equal to 100% of the nominal
connection of a DER unit is above this curve, the unit should current is added to the prefault active current. To maintain
remain connected. the current of the converter below its thermal limit, a cur-
Many grid codes require a reactive current injection for rent limitation strategy has to be implemented in the DER
voltage support during a fault, as illustrated in Figure 2(b), controller, giving priority either to the active or reactive
which depicts the requirements of the Greek operating component. The different power factors considered in this
code for noninterconnected islanded power systems. This case represent the various prefault conditions and current
Circuit Circuit
Breaker Closed Breaker Open Bus 5 Bus 6
L Load PV Photovoltaic ICB4 ICB7
CB4 CB5 CB7 CB9 CB10

WT Wind Turbine Utility Grid
Batteries Energy ICB6
B PEs
Storage
Grounding Fault
Transformer CB6 CB8 CB11
Fault Current
L L
ICB2
PV
CB1 CB2 Bus 3 Bus 4

ICB12
Utility Grid
Bus 1 ICB14
CB20 CB14 CB16 CB19

Grounding
Transformer
L L
ICB3
WT
Distribution Grid CB3 Microgrid
Bus 2 B
figure 1. The impact of a DER presence in microgrid protection.

limitation strategies deployed in the DER controller. More Fault Ride-Through and Protection
specifically, the priority given to the active or reactive com- System Coordination
ponent by the DER controller affects the short circuit cur- A major concern in microgrid operation is the impact of
rent power factor. The overall current I CB7 sensed by CB7 topology changes on short circuit currents and the coordina-
is higher if the current I CB4 provided by the upstream net- tion of fault ride-through requirements with the protection
work has a similar angle to the fault current I PV . Figure 3 system. The latter can be crucial for the overall system sta-
demonstrates how the power factor of the short circuit cur- bility, especially for microgrids in permanent islanded mode
rent contribution from PE-interfaced generation units and (off-grid microgrids). Off-grid microgrids serve physical
the inductive (X) to resistive (R) ratio of the lines affect the islands or geographically remote areas that are isolated from
total fault current magnitude. the interconnected distribution system. The high production
All in all, the representation of PE-interfaced units in costs based on diesel units and the potential renewable energy
short circuit studies is not straightforward. Unlike the mod- sources (RESs) frequently available offer attractive incen-
els universally adopted for synchronous generators, the tives for their transformation to off-grid microgrid systems.
contribution of PE-interfaced units is affected by operating The configuration of a typical islanded microgrid with
conditions, grid code requirements (e.g., fault ride through high RES (primarily PVs and wind generators) penetration
and current contribution in voltage sags), and the control is presented in Figure 4(a). To achieve high RES penetra-
algorithms deployed to meet these requirements. Incompat- tion, battery storage units are required. All of these units
ibility between the applied protection scheme and the fault (i.e., the RESs and storage) are interfaced by the PEs. In
ride-through requirements can pose a significant threat to traditional island systems, diesel generators are responsible
the microgrid stability as demonstrated in the “Fault Ride- for fault current contribution, and the protective devices are
Through and Protection System Coordination” section. set accordingly to achieve fast fault clearing times. Typical
Last but not least, the grounding issue becomes an emerg- existing protection schemes consist of relays on the feeders
ing issue in microgrid protection. The ground connection (controlling CB4 and CB12) and fuses on the lateral lines.
provided by the main grid, i.e., the grounded neutral of the The increasing penetration of PE-interfaced units, how-
power transformer, is lost during the islanded operation of ever, significantly reduces the available fault currents.
the microgrid, resulting in ineffective ground fault protec- In Figure 4(b), the current characteristics of the protective
tion. Therefore, provisions for an alternative ground connec- devices as well as the short circuit current contribution of
tion should be made. This can be achieved by installing a the battery unit and the diesel generator of the island system
grounding transformer at the main bus of the microgrid [bus of Figure 4(a) are presented. It is seen that when the diesel
2 in Figure 3(a)], which is connected to the network only in generators are not in operation, the typical relay settings and
case of the loss of mains (i.e., when CB1 or CB2 is open) fuse time-current characteristics lead to a very slow pro-
by an appropriate interlocking scheme between the trans- tection response. Moreover, changes in the topology of the
former’s circuit breakers (i.e., CB1 and CB2) and grounding islanded microgrid can significantly affect the fault current
transformer circuit breaker (i.e., CB20). levels due to the different behavior of the units.
IQ: Reactive Current

100 IQ
IN: Nominal Current
90 ∆V: Voltage Deviation IN
80 VN : Nominal Voltage
Voltage (%)
Greek –50% –10%

60 Noninterconnected
Islands –10%
Germany ∆V
40 VN
20
15 –100%
0
0.15 1.5
0 0.5 1 2 2.5
Time (s)
(a) (b)
figure 2. (a) Typical fault ride-through characteristics and (b) the wind turbine dynamic reactive current contribution
during a fault.

At the same time, even with the diesel generator con- critical voltage sags due to the short lengths of lines in an
nected, the coordination between the protection settings and island. A proper fault ride-through curve should be selected
the fault ride-through capabilities of PE units causes seri- to prevent the immediate disconnection of PE units, while
ous concerns. During a fault, all generating units experience the protection settings should ensure that the fault is cleared
Circuit Circuit
ICB4 ICB7
L Load PV Photovoltaic
Batteries Energy ICB6
B PEs
Storage
Grounding Fault
Transformer CB6 CB8 CB11
Fault Current L L
ICB2
PV
CB1 Bus 3 Bus 4

CB2

Utility
Grid
Bus 1
CB20 CB14 CB16 CB19

Grounding
Transformer
L L
WT
Distribution Grid CB3 Microgrid
Bus 2
B
(a)
480
Current Through CB7, ICB7 (A)
460
440
420
X/R Ratio = 1
400 X/R Ratio > 1
X/R Ratio < 1
380
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
PV Short Circuit Current Power Factor
(b)
figure 3. (a) A simplified microgrid model and (b) the impact of the wind turbine short circuit current angle to the fault
current (ICB7).

before the fault ride-through limit is exceeded. Improper operates with PE-interfaced units (wind turbine and battery
coordination can lead to unit disconnections, thus jeopardiz- storage) at a penetration level of more than 60%, while the
ing the overall system security. diesel generator covers the rest of the energy demand. When
Such a case is presented in Figure 5. A symmetrical fault the fault occurs, all of the generating units experience a high
occurs in the island microgrid operating with high PE-inter- voltage sag [Figure 5(a)], which is below the fault ride-through
faced unit penetration. Before the fault inception, the system requirements imposed by the Greek noninterconnected
Circuit Circuit Bus 5 Bus 6

Breaker Closed Breaker Open
ICB4
CB4 CB5 F1 CB7
WT Wind Turbine Diesel
Generator
Batteries Energy
B PEs
Storage F2 F3
Fault Current Fault CB6

Fuses
L L
ICB2
PV
CB1 CB2 Bus 4

Bus 3
CB8 CB9 F5 CB11

Diesel
Generator Bus 1
F6 F7
CB10
L L
WT
ICB3
Off-Grid Microgrid CB3
Bus 2 B
(a)
100
Battery
Energy
Time to Trip (s)
Storage Diesel
10
1
Feeder
Relay (CB4)
Fuse 1 (F1)
0.1 Fuse 3 (F3)
50 75 100 200 300

Current (A)
(b)
figure 4. (a) An off-grid island microgrid and (b) the impact of topology changes in the protection system performance.

island code for PE-interfaced units. Therefore, both the The latter can be achieved by increasing their pow-
battery energy storage and wind turbine are disconnected er rating or by applying extensive cooling of their
almost instantly, before the fault is cleared. After the fault switching devices. Both options lead to high invest-
clearance, the diesel generator remains the only operating ment costs.
unit, which cannot take over the total load. As a result, the 2) Replace the existing passive protective devices with
frequency drops [Figure 5(b)], causing load shedding or numerical protective relays, which provide advanced
even blackout. This example illustrates the importance of a protection functionalities, and deploy adaptive protec-
coordinated response of microgrid sources under fault con- tion based on the microgrid state.
ditions for operation security.
Directional Overcurrent Relays
Protection Schemes for Microgrids State-of-the-art industrial relays can distinguish the flow
As demonstrated in Table 1, there are mainly two options to direction of fault currents using directional overcurrent ele-
deal with low short circuit currents in islanded microgrids. ments. These elements determine the voltage and current
1) Increase the short circuit current levels. This can be phasors and compare their angles to decide if the fault occurs
done by installing a source of high short circuit cur- forward or backward, serving as a reliable solution against
rent, e.g., a flywheel, to satisfy the operating settings sympathetic tripping. Directional overcurrent relay elements
of fuses and overcurrent relays or by increasing can be used to detect the direction of positive, negative, or
the fault current capability of PE-interfaced units. zero-sequence currents.
Wind Turbine Voltage

Fault Ride-Through Curve
51
120 Diesel and Battery Energy Storage Voltage
110 50.5 Frequency
100
90 50
Frequency (Hz)
80
Voltage (%)
49.5
70 Frequency
60 49 Collapse
Fault
50 Fault
48.5 Clearance
40
30 48 DER
20 Disconnection
47.5
10
0 47
1.8 2 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3 1.8 2 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3
Time (s) Time (s)
(a) (b)
figure 5. (a) Voltage sags for operating units during a three-phase short circuit and Greek noninterconnected island sys-
tems fault ride-through requirements and (b) the microgrid frequency response.
table 1. A comparison of the approaches to microgrid protection.

Approach Advantages Disadvantages
Increase short circuit current levels
• Install source of high short circuit • Fewer modifications required in the • Increased investment costs
current (e.g., flywheel) protection system • Reduced flexibility on future
• Oversize PE generation • Experience since flywheel and microgrid upgrades
synchronous condensers have already
been used for many years
Advanced protection schemes
• Deploy digital relays in the system • Lower investment costs • Reliability concerns
• Introduce adaptive protection • Increased flexibility (configurable • Higher complexity
techniques protection devices) • Requires a retrofit of the existing
protection schemes

The main drawback is their dependence on the mag- the limit of zone 2. However, as the PV current becomes more
nitude of the short circuit current. Therefore, sensitiv- reactive (the power factor decreases), the estimated impedance
ity issues introduced by the large variation of short cir- by the distance relay is severely affected, leading to relay over-
cuit current levels due to topology or operational mode reach. A trip signal is issued to CB4, thus instantaneously dis-
changes are not resolved. Also, the unconventional nature connecting an unfaulty line and the PV.
and power factor of fault current contribution from PE- The ambiguity in the operation of a PE-interfaced unit
interfaced units can cause directional elements to fail. during unbalanced fault conditions may adversely affect the
impedance calculation as well. Furthermore, distance relays
Distance Relays may be proven ineffective as a protection scheme for short
A common alternative to directional overcurrent relays is lines where the discrimination between in-zone and out-of-
distance relays, which can detect the direction of the fault zone faults is difficult. Hence, distance relaying is not a prac-
current and are not affected by its magnitude. Distance tical solution for microgrid protection.
relays are applied for transmission line protection, and their
operation is based on the impedance seen as calculated from Differential Protection
the measured voltage and current. Differential protection schemes have also been proposed
The measured impedance is compared with a locus in the for microgrid protection. The scheme compares the current
R–X diagram, which defines the reach of the protection zone. flowing in and out of the protected equipment with a given
The measured impedance is an indicator of the fault location threshold to determine whether to isolate the protected ele-
since the R and X values of the line increase in proportion ment. The comparison of current is performed by two devices
to the distance of the fault. If the measured value lies within located at the buses where the terminals of the protected ele-
this locus, it is interpreted as an in-zone fault, and a trip sig- ment are connected. Each device compares its local current
nal is issued to the respective circuit breaker. Distance relays measurement with the measurement sent by the device on
operate with one instantaneous zone as primary protection the other end. Measurements are transmitted through a com-
and additional time-delayed zones that serve as backup pro- munication network based on Ethernet, fiber optic, power
tection for forward or backward faults. line carrier, or wireless communication technologies.
The settings of distance relays are dependent on the zones When applied for line protection, differential relays may
that they are designed to protect. Typical values for the first be located in remote locations. The installed communication
zone are 80–85% of the feeder length on which the relay network will inevitably introduce communication delays
is placed. This 15–20% safety margin is usually considered and package drop issues to the transmitted signals. This
to provide reliable operation against measurement errors of can lead to unsynchronized data gathered by the differen-
the current and voltage, deviations between the considered tial relays, which can affect the protection performance. For
and actual line parameters, and relay inaccuracies. A second line protection, technologies like fiber optics are required
zone protects 100% of the feeder length plus 50% of the next to ensure that high-bandwidth communication between the
feeder. A third zone could cover both the protected and the devices is established. Conventional line differential protec-
second line as well as 25% of the third line. Figure 6(b) pres- tion, as applied in transmission systems, can be applied in
ents the first two zones in the R–X plane of a distance relay, microgrids to protect distribution feeders with no loads con-
which uses quadrilateral characteristics. nected along them (e.g., lines connecting power or storage
Infeed and outfeed currents of a DER in a microgrid can stations with a load center).
lead to underestimation or overestimation of the fault location Other novel differential protection approaches are based
by the distance relay. In the island microgrid of Figure 4(a), on the communication between conventional protection
illustrated here as Figure 6(a), a three-phase symmetrical devices, e.g., directional overcurrent relays. Such a microgrid
fault occurs at 30% of the line, i.e., line 2, connecting buses 5 protection scheme based on the differential protection prin-
and 6. It is considered that the relay controlling CB4 located ciple is illustrated in Figure 7(a), which is equivalent to a
in the line, i.e., line 1, connecting buses 2 and 5, operates with zone selective interlocking scheme.
the characteristics of Figure 6(b), where zone 1 covers 80% In Figure 7(a), the relays located at the line ending and
of line 1, and zone 2 covers 100% of line 1 and 50% of line 2. receiving ends provide the main protection of the feeders,
The current magnitude I CB4 measured by the relay of CB4 e.g., the relay controlling CB15 and CB17 for the line con-
can be affected by the presence of the PV and the power fac- necting buses 3 and 4. Directional overcurrent or simple
tor of the PV fault current. overcurrent relays can also be installed at DERs and load
To illustrate possible miscalculations of a distance relay, the connection points, respectively, for short circuit protection,
measured impedances for different values of fault resistance e.g., controlling CB14 and CB16 for wind turbine and load
and power factors of the PV during the fault are presented in disconnection. The main protection against faults along
Figure 6(b). The magnitude of the PV fault current remains the the line is achieved through communication between the
same in each case. When the PV operates at unity power factor, relays on their ends. Directional overcurrent relays can be
the measured impedance is slightly affected, moving closer to employed at every circuit breaker on a feeder, transmitting a

Circuit Circuit
ICB4
Batteries Energy
B PEs
Storage
Feeder Relay IPV

Fault CB6 CB8 CB11
Protection Zone 1
Feeder Relay Fault Current L L
Protection Zone 2
PV
CB1 CB2
Bus 3 Bus 4

Diesel Bus 1
Generator
CB14 CB16
CB19
L L
WT
Bus 2 CB3
Off-Grid Microgrid
B
(a)
Bus 6
1.2 PV On, Rf Increase, Power Factor = 1

Zone 2
1
Line 2 PV
On PV Off, Rf Increase
Bus 5
0.8 ,R
fI
nc
re
X (Ω)
as
0.6 Zone 1 e,
Po
PV we
we
Po
rF
On r Fa
PV ow
0.4 ac
P
, R cto
Line 1 to
O er F
r=
n, a
fI r=
R cto
0.
nc
fI r
9
re 0.7
nc =
0.2
as
re 0.
as 8
e,
e,
Bus 2
0
0 2 4 6 8 10
R (Ω)
(b)
figure 6. (a) The distance relay (R3) protection zones and (b) the calculated impedance for different fault resistance val-
ues and DER power factors during fault. Rf: fault resistance.

Circuit Circuit
L Load PV Photovoltaic ICB4 ICB5 ICB7 ICB9 ICB10
WT Wind Turbine Utility Grid CB4 CB5 CB7 CB9 CB10

Batteries Energy
B PEs
Storage
Fault Current Fault CB6 CB8 CB11
ICB6
Main Feeder Backup L L
Protection Protection
PV
ICB2
CB1 CB2 Bus 3 Bus 4
ICB12 ICB13 ICB15 ICB17 ICB18
Utility Grid
Bus 1
ICB14
CB14 CB16 CB19
CB20
Grounding
Transformer ICB3 L L
WT
Bus 2
CB3
Distribution Grid B Microgrid
(a)

Batteries Energy
B PEs
Storage
Fault Current Fault CB6 CB8 CB11
Main Feeder L L
Protection
PV
CB1 CB2
Bus 3 Bus 4

Utility Grid
Bus 1
CB14 CB16 CB19
CB20
Grounding
Transformer L L
WT
CB3
Bus 2 Microgrid
Distribution Grid B
(b)
figure 7. (a) A differential protection scheme for microgrids and (b) the operation of the main feeder protection. (Continued)

Batteries Energy
B PEs
Storage
Fault Current CB6 CB8 CB11
Fault
Backup L L
Protection
PV
CB2
CB1 Bus 3 Bus 4

Utility Grid
Bus 1
CB14 CB16 CB19
CB20
Grounding
L L
Transformer
WT
CB3
Bus 2
Distribution Grid Microgrid
B
(c)
figure 7. (Continued) (c) The operation of the backup feeder protection.
status signal to the relay at the other end of the line when respectively, and their respective breaker fails to operate, those
a forward in-zone fault (or a blocking signal for out-of-zone relays can send a signal to the upward relays, e.g., the relays con-
faults) is detected. However, a trip signal is issued to the asso- trolling CB13 and CB15, to trip and clear the fault. Topological
ciated circuit breaker of the relay only if it detects a forward changes can also affect the overall differential protection scheme.
fault, e.g., the relay at CB15, and at the same time receives a For example, if CB10 and CB18 are open, the relays controlling
signal from a remote-end relay, e.g., the relay at CB17. CB9 and CB17 will not experience fault currents, and they will
For example, if a fault occurs between buses 3 and 4, the maintain blocking to their pairs even if faults inside their pro-
relays at CB15 and CB17 will detect a forward fault. Both tected zone (lines) occur. The differential protection of a line can
will send a command to each other that will allow the relays be enabled or disabled based on the status of its respective circuit
to trip their circuit breakers and disconnect the faulty feeder breakers. In the previous case, the relays of CB10 and CB18 can
[Figure 7(b)]. On the contrary, relays controlling CB10 and send their status to the relays of CB9 and CB17, respectively, to
CB12 will also detect a forward fault. However, they do not stop or start the blocking procedure of their pair. Therefore, if
receive a signal to trip from the relays at the other end of their the relay controlling CB10 informs the relay controlling CB9 to
respective lines (relays at CB13 and CB18) because those stop blocking the relay controlling CB7, the line between buses
relays detect a reverse fault. Therefore, CB12 and CB10 will 5 and 6 is solely protected by the overcurrent element of the relay
not trip, and the faulted feeder only will be isolated. controlling CB7.
Communication between the devices can also assist in Differential schemes increase the protection reliability if
the deployment of backup protection schemes that address proper communication infrastructure is used. Also, they require
breaker failures or topology changes. In the previous exam- digital devices that can execute basic protection functions, sup-
ple, if CB15 or CB17 fails to open, the respective relays will port communication protocols, and offer the flexibility to design
transmit a tripping command to the upstream relays that the logical equations on which they operate.
control CB13 and CB18 and to relays controlling the gen- Industrial substation communication protocols, mainly
eration that will remain in the faulty region, e.g., the relay IEC 61850 and especially its generic object-oriented sub-
controlling CB14. The operation is presented in Figure 7(c). station event (GOOSE) feature, can be deployed for such
If a fault occurs in the zone of the relays protecting distributed schemes. GOOSE messaging can be deployed for the peer-
generators or loads, e.g., the relays controlling CB14 and CB16, to-peer communication required for differential protection

since it facilitates direct information exchange between operating conditions of the microgrid are performed before
protective devices. The protocol accepts any type of data the adaptive protection system deployment. Based on the
(binary or analog signals) and guarantees that they are solution of an optimization problem, an adequate set of set-
transmitted at a speed on the scale of a few milliseconds. ting groups for the protective devices for each operating
High-bandwidth communication networks are required state is determined offline. During the online operation, the
to facilitate such fast interaction using the appropriate type of central controller receives the required signals, e.g., circuit
medium, such as optical fibers. Thus, one major disadvantage breaker statuses, to identify the current microgrid configura-
of differential protection schemes is the high expected costs tion and, if necessary, change the active setting group of the
associated with such a communication infrastructure. Espe- relays via a low-bandwidth communication channel as pre-
cially in a microgrid with a considerable number of nodes sented in Figure 8(a).
and lines, the required communication infrastructure can be The main advantage of centralized adaptive protection is that
quite complex. all of the information is available to the central controller, which
Last but not least, the protection scheme cannot be based can optimally select the adequate setting groups of the relays. Its
entirely on differential protection since the communication main drawback is its lower reliability because the central con-
networks can fail or suffer from cyberattacks. Therefore, troller is a single point of failure. Thus, any malfunction of the
even when differential protection is used, redundant pro- central controller affects the operation of the adaptive protection
tection schemes based on typical relay functionalities that scheme. Another disadvantage is the requirement of a complex
respond to local measurements need to be installed. wide area network for the communication of the central control-
ler with every device in the microgrid.
Adaptive Microgrid Protection Distributed approaches have also been proposed for the
One of the most promising approaches for microgrid pro- online operation of adaptive protection. Local controllers
tection is adaptive protection. It requires numerical relays, installed at different microgrid locations update the set-
mainly directional overcurrent relays with several setting tings of their respective relays based on the information they
groups that can be parameterized locally or remotely by receive from local devices and their interaction with neigh-
control signals according to the current microgrid topology. boring controllers. A distributed architecture for adaptive
The communication infrastructure must also implement an protection is presented in Figure 8(b). Its main advantage is
adaptive protection system; however, communication inter- the increased reliability since there is no single failure point.
action is not needed during faults. Protection is therefore Also, the communication infrastructure is simpler since the
based on the local functions of the relays. Communication local controllers use a wide area network to communicate
is necessary only to update the relays’ setting group when only with their neighbor controllers and a local network to
the configuration of the microgrid changes. Since low-band- update their setting groups. The main drawback is that a
width communication technologies can be used, the cost and relay might select a suboptimal setting since the state of all
complexity of the communication network are reduced com- microgrid components is unknown.
pared to differential protection schemes.
Adaptive protection schemes can be implemented with Test Systems for Protection Scheme
centralized and distributed architectures. In the centralized Testing and Validation
architecture, the setting groups can be updated based on The performance of an adaptive protection system must be
calculations performed online or offline. For online calcula- evaluated before deployment to avoid design gaps that could
tions, a central controller receives the required signals, e.g., jeopardize personnel safety or power asset integrity. The adap-
circuit breaker statuses, to identify the current microgrid tive protection system should be tested for both islanded and
topology. Then, a local computer executes fault simulations grid-connected operational modes, changes in microgrid topol-
at different microgrid locations, and, according to the calcu- ogy with the connection and disconnection of DERs, different
lated fault currents, the proper setting group is activated, e.g., behavior of PE-interfaced generation units during faults, mul-
by solving an optimization problem that aims to minimize tiple load levels, and various types of faults in diverse locations.
the operation times of the protective devices. Finally, digital An evaluation based on software simulations offers the
signals are sent to the relays via a low-bandwidth commu- flexibility to examine various scenarios, but it does not con-
nication system. The main drawback of this approach is the sider, or cannot model precisely, the conditions encountered
requirement for a simulation engine in the central controller in the real application. For example, it is not known how the
to perform the short circuit calculations in real time, which commercial relay implements the protective functions, how
might increase the total cost and adversely affect the reli- much time it requires to conduct calculations, and what time
ability of the protection system. Also, it requires new calcu- delay is introduced between the tripping command of a relay
lations when a change in the microgrid occurs, thus delaying and the opening of the associated circuit breaker. Therefore,
the setting group update in the relays. pure software-based evaluation lacks important information
For the offline approach of a centralized adaptive pro- to evaluate the performance of an adaptive protection system
tection scheme, short circuit calculations for all possible under real conditions.

Central Controller
Bus 5 Bus 6
CB5 CB7 CB10
CB4 CB6 CB11

CB9
CB8
L Bus 4 L
PV Bus 3
Utility
CB13 CB15 CB18
Grid
CB12
Bus 1 CB17
Grounding L L
Transformer
Distribution Grid CB20 CB3 WT Microgrid
Bus 2 B
Circuit Breaker Closed Circuit Breaker Open Utility Grid PEs Grounding Transformer
L Load PV Photovoltaic WT Wind Turbine B Batteries Energy Storage Communication Network
(a)
IED IED
IED
IED IED
Bus 5 Bus 6
CB5 CB7 CB10
CB4 CB6 CB11

CB9
CB8
L Bus 4 L
PV Bus 3
Utility CB13 CB15 CB18

Grid
Bus 1 CB12 CB17
Grounding L L
Transformer
Distribution Grid CB20 CB3 WT Microgrid
Bus 2 B
Circuit Breaker Closed Circuit Breaker Open Utility Grid PEs Grounding Transformer
L Load PV Photovoltaic WT Wind Turbine B Batteries Energy Storage Local Area Wide Area
Network Network
(b)
figure 8. The (a) centralized and (b) distributed adaptive protection system architecture for microgrid protection.
IED: intelligent electronic device.

Hardware-in-the-loop (HIL) simulation is a valuable tool of different scenarios in a safe laboratory environment, and
that bridges the gap between pure digital simulations and so on), while the industrial hardware relays operate under
the field deployment of hardware. The backbone of a HIL realistic conditions, such as response delays and noise in the
simulation platform is a real-time digital simulator, which is signals. This setup can reveal features not visible in pure
a powerful computing platform that performs power system simulations, facilitating the deployment progress of the pro-
simulations in real time. This capability can facilitate the tection scheme.
testing of controllers and relays in real-time conditions. HIL HIL configurations have been used by certain utilities that
simulations with intelligent electronic devices are usually operate a real-time digital simulator to connect replicas
referred to as control-HIL to distinguish them from power- of controllers (an exact copy of the actual control system
HIL, where physical power equipment is connected to the installed on site) of significant PE-based equipment, e.g., high
simulator through a power amplifier. Therefore, the benefits voltage dc and flexible ac transmission system applications,
of HIL simulation are maintained in the case of control- to evaluate its interaction with existing control and protection
HIL as well (e.g., flexibility in the modeling, performance systems. Such features are valuable for microgrids dominated
Circuit Circuit
B Batteries Energy CB6 CB8 CB11

Storage PEs
Fault
L L
CB1 CB2
PV
Bus 3 Bus 4
Utility Bus 1
Grid CB13 CB15 CB17 CB18
CB12 CB14 CB16 CB19
L L
Bus 2 WT
Simulated System CB3
B
Trip Command
Differential
Real-Time Relay
Digital Voltage and
Simulator Current
Waveforms
Differential
Relay
Trip Command
Circuit
Breaker Setting
Status Group Change
Signals Central Signals
Controller
figure 9. HIL testing of an adaptive protection system.

by PE-interfaced units. Industrial
PV On PV Off
protection equipment manufactur-
103 ers also perform HIL tests to vali-
date the performance and fine-tune
their equipment according to each
application’s characteristics.
102
A HIL testbed for the testing
the adaptive protection system has
been implemented at the Elec-
tric Energy Systems Laboratory
of the National Technical Univer-
101
Time to Trip (s)
sity of Athens. The proposed tes-

X: 932.1
tbed consists of a real-time digital
Y: 2.231
simulator, industrial multifunction
Relay CB4 (51P) X: 2,210 directional relays, and a program-
100 CTR = 800/5 mable logic controller. The overall
Y: 0.5536
IEC C2 (VI) setup is presented in Figure 9. The
A = 13.5, B = 1, C = 0
Ipu = 2.06 A, TD = 0.1
examined microgrid is simulated
by the real-time digital simula-
10–1 tor, while hardware relays receive
current and voltage measurements
at their respective locations, e.g.,
CB4, and send tripping commands
10–2 at the respective circuit breaker.
103 104 The programmable logic control-
Fault Current (A) ler plays the role of the central-
(a) ized controller that facilitates the
103 adaptive protection system. It col-
lects circuit breaker statuses and
updates the active setting groups
of protective relays whenever nec-
102 essary based on the current topol-
ogy, e.g., PV or wind turbine on/
off, grid reconfiguration.
Using this testbed, sympathetic
101
tripping and protection blinding
Time to Trip (s)
have been investigated. In Fig-

ure 10(a), the settings of the relay
controlling CB4 as well as its mea-
Relay CB12 (51P) sured currents are presented when
100 X: 1,510 X: 3,950
CTR = 800/1 the PV at bus 5 is on and off for
Y: 0.377 Y: 0.4279
IEC C1 (SI) a symmetrical fault on bus 6. The
A = 0.14, B = 0.02, C = 0 presence of the PV causes a reduc-
Ipu = 0.45 A, TD = 0.15
tion in the current observed by the
10–1 Relay CB4 (51P) relay controlling CB4, resulting
CTR = 800/5
IEC C2 (VI)
in longer fault detection times.
A = 13.5, B = 1, C = 0 Sympathetic tripping is observed
Ipu = 2.06 A, TD = 0.1 in Figure 10(b), displaying the
10–2 settings and currents measured
102 103 104 by the relay controlling CB4 and
Fault Current (A) CB12 for a symmetrical fault on
(b)
bus 6. When relay controlling
CB12 operates as an overcurrent
figure 10. (a) Sympathetic tripping and (b) protection blinding cases performed in relay without a directional feature,
HIL. CTR: current transformer ratio; Ipu: pickup current; TD: time dial. it disconnects the unfaulty feeder

can lead to severe security and reliability issues. State-of-
PV On PV Off the-art relays can address certain challenges, e.g., direc-
100
Setting Group 1 tional overcurrent relays can avoid sympathetic tripping, but
Setting Group 2 they are not able to deal with different fault current levels.
Time to Trip (s)
10 Distance relays can address different fault current levels,

t = 2.239 s
I = 0.932 kA but their performance is degraded when a downstream DER
t = 0.555 s contributes to the fault. Differential protection schemes can
1 I = 2.12 kA address microgrid protection issues, but communication net-
t = 0.912 s work latency makes them less robust, and higher investment
I = 0.932 kA
0.1 costs are required, e.g., the provision of high-bandwidth
500 1,000 2,000 5,000 10,000 communication infrastructure. Adaptive protection appears
Fault Current (A) as a promising technique for the secure and reliable opera-
tion of microgrids. An adaptive protection scheme calculates
figure 11. The effect of topology changes on different set- optimal setting groups for each microgrid operation mode
ting groups of the relay controlling CB4. offline. Then, in real-time operation, the setting group for
each relay can be selected based on the current operation
table 2. A comparison between the theoretical and mode of the microgrid.
experimental results. Alternatively, the proper setting groups are calculated
online for the current microgrid topology by executing fault
Calculated HIL R3
R3 Tripping Tripping calculations at different locations. Finally, the importance of
Case Time (s) Time (s) advanced HIL testing for the acceptance of microgrid pro-
PV off, adaptive protection 0.555 0.580 tection solutions cannot be overstated. They provide a realis-
system inactive tic environment for a detailed evaluation of the performance
PV on, adaptive protection 2.239 2.255 and robustness of novel protection schemes under real oper-
system inactive ating conditions.
PV on, adaptive protection 0.912 0.938
system active For Further Reading
N. Hatziargyriou, Ed., Microgrids: Architectures and Con-
and the wind turbine. Relay settings, namely, pickup current, trol. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley, 2014. doi: 10.1002/9781118720677.
time dial, inverse-time characteristic, and current transformer fmatter.
ratio, are also illustrated in Figure 10 for the involved intelligent V. A. Papaspiliotopoulos, G. N. Korres, V. A. Kleftakis,
electronic devices. and N. D. Hatziargyriou, “Hardware-in-the-loop design and
The performance of an adaptive protection system was optimal setting of adaptive protection schemes for distri-
also evaluated. In this case, the central controller identifies bution systems with distributed generation,” IEEE Trans.
the current microgrid status and modifies the setting groups Power Del., vol. 32, no. 1, pp. 393–400, Feb. 2017. doi:
of the relays. In Figure 11, the change in the setting group 10.1109/TPWRD.2015.2509784.
of the relay controlling CB4 is observed to avoid protection A. Hooshyar and R. Iravani, “Microgrid protection,”
blinding. Under the new setting group, the relay can identify Proc. IEEE, vol. 105, no. 7, pp. 1332–1353, July 2017. doi:
the fault significantly faster. The fault clearing time for each 10.1109/JPROC.2017.2669342.
case is presented in Table 2. As expected, the actual fault S. Beheshtaein, R. Cuzner, M. Savaghebi, and J. M.
clearing times in the simulation are higher than the calcu- Guerrero, “Review on microgrids protection,” IET Gener.
lated ones from the time-overcurrent characteristics due to Transm. Distrib., vol. 13, no. 6, pp. 743–759, Mar. 26, 2019.
delays introduced in the setup. doi: 10.1049/iet-gtd.2018.5212.
Final Note Biographies

The majority of microgrids are dominated by PE-interfaced Dimitris Lagos is with the National Technical University of
generators and can be operated either interconnected or Athens, Athens, 15780, Greece.
islanded from the main grid. The changes in the operational Vasileios Papaspiliotopoulos is with the National Tech-
mode (grid connected or islanded) and DER connections nical University of Athens, Athens, 15780, Greece.
(switch on/off), the low-fault current contribution, and the George Korres is with the National Technical University
unconventional behavior of PE-based generation adversely of Athens, Athens, 15780, Greece.
affect the performance of conventional protection schemes Nikos Hatziargyriou is with the National Technical Uni-
applied in distribution networks. Moreover, in islanded versity of Athens, Athens, 15780, Greece.
microgrids, the improper coordination between protection
p&e
systems and the fault ride-through requirements of the DER

M
MICROGRIDS ARE BEING DEPLOYED AT A RISING RATE, PRIMARILY
as a means of increasing power system resilience. Commonly, a microgrid
today includes at least some inverter-based resources (IBRs), and many
microgrids have modes or conditions under which they are entirely
energized by IBRs. Most microgrids today are deployed on radial
distribution circuits, but it is conceivable that they could also be
considered for deployment on secondary network systems.
Under faulted conditions, IBRs have significantly different
behavior from rotating machines, and this difference intro-
duces new challenges for microgrid protection system design.
The fault current properties of IBRs create a significant differ-
ence in the fault current profile between grid-connected and
microgrid-islanded modes and between IBR-dominant or rotat-
ing machine-dominant configurations. These variations also
impact the conventional phasor-domain short circuit analysis
used to design such systems.
This article is the first in a two-part series on the influence of
IBRs on microgrid protection. In part one, the focus is on microgrids
deployed on radial circuits. This article discusses some of the chal-
lenges related to the protection of IBR-based microgrids and presents
some ongoing research and solutions in the area. The different controls
Influence of
Inverter-Based
Resources on
Microgrid Part 1:
Microgrids in
Protection
Radial Distribution
Systems

Date of current version: 19 April 2021

By Matthew J. Reno, Sukumar Brahma,
Ali Bidram, and Michael E. Ropp
for IBRs (i.e., grid forming and grid following) protecting circuit elements in IBR-based microgrids in
© SH
are discussed to present how their short current this way.

UTT E
RSTO C
signatures and dynamic response under faults 1) Microgrids can be fed by multiple distributed sources.
impact microgrid protection. The protection of conductors, transformers, and other
K.C OM/LE OWOL FERT
circuit elements must thus be designed for any feasible

Challenges in Microgrid combination of sources, and fault current directions
Protection and magnitudes may change accordingly.
Recently, microgrids have gained much atten- 2) The fault current produced by IBRs does not lend
tion in the electric power industry due to 1) their itself easily to traditional overcurrent methods of fault
capability for improving power system reliability detection and isolation.
and resiliency, 2) their impact on increasing the • The semiconductor switching devices of inverters are
use of renewable resources, 3) the reduced cost of intolerant of overcurrent, requiring IBRs to limit
distributed energy resource (DER) equipment, and their fault current contributions to, typically, on the
4) the continuing evolution of applicable codes and stan- order of 1.1–1.5 per unit (pu) of the inverter’s nom-
dards. As a result, it is expected that microgrid deployment inal current rating. IBRs do not produce the large
worldwide will grow significantly over the next several years. fault currents typical of utility sources or synchro-
Most microgrids today are created by reconfiguring systems nous generators.
that started as radial distribution systems at the facility or • IBRs often limit their fault current using means that
community level. cause the output waveform to be nonsinusoidal. The
Small conventional generators (e.g., diesel and natural gas) harmonic content in the waveform will generally
remain important in microgrids due to their performance be IBR specific, as it depends on how the firmware
properties, relatively low cost, and availability. However, achieves the current limiting. Protection systems must
most microgrids today obtain at least some fraction of their be tolerant of this harmonic content.
energy from variable-generation resources like photovolta- • The phase angle between the IBR’s fundamental
ics (PVs), and energy storage systems (ESSs) are becoming output current and fundamental terminal voltage is
nearly ubiquitous in microgrids, as they allow the optimal set by the IBR’s programming, and, thus, there are
operation of small generators as well as higher integration no generic means for predicting it.
of variable-generation resources, and they can be used to This article addresses the challenges related to the pro-
improve the system’s performance when transitioning from tection of inverter-based microgrids and reviews some ongo-
on-grid to off-grid mode. ing research and solutions in the area. Different types of IBR
Nearly all renewable energy systems and ESSs are IBRs, topologies and controls are elaborated, and the challenges
meaning that they are connected to the ac power system of inverter-based microgrid protection are highlighted. The
via a dc–ac converter called an inverter (the term inverter solutions for the protection of microgrids with a high pen-
is commonly used even for the bidirectional dc–ac con- etration of IBRs are discussed.
verters used in ESSs). The inverter’s behavior is largely
software defined, providing a high level of flexibility as IBR Overview
well as unique performance characteristics and opportu- The behavior of IBRs under faulted conditions is strongly
nities. Today, there are microgrids in operation that are determined by the inverters that interface the primary power
energized entirely by IBRs, and even those that include source (i.e., renewable energy sources or ESSs) to the ac
rotating generators are often operated in IBR-only modes system. In this section, some fundamentals of inverters are
under certain conditions. briefly reviewed to provide background.
Microgrids, like all power systems, require protection
that de-energizes and isolates faults before they can harm Topologies
health or property. The protection of traditional distribu- In general, inverters are divided into single- and three-
tion systems is designed with the underlying assumption phase categories. Single-phase inverters are mostly used
that the system is fed by one source (a substation) and has for lower-power applications (typically fewer than 15 kW)
a radial topology. They are protected by overcurrent func- and in single-phase microgrids. Three-phase inverters are
tions and devices. However, two key challenges arise in used to integrate larger generation sources to the primary

systems (i.e., the portion of the system that operates at the because an ungrounded transformer blocks grid-side zero-
microgrid’s primary voltage). sequence voltages from reaching the inverter, and, thus, the
inverter’s built-in protection cannot “see” these. The trans-
Single-Phase Inverter Topology former itself will impact the zero-sequence current available
A basic inverter circuit topology called an H-bridge is shown during asymmetrical faults.
in Figure 1. The inverter itself comprises four switches, Many commercial inverters today use a more complex
S 1-S 4, and an inductor–capacitor (LC) low-pass filter. This circuit topology called a neutral-point-clamped (NPC) con-
inverter is serving a resistive load R and, thus, is shown in verter. NPC converters have differences in their faulted
an off-grid mode, in which case it would be operated as a behaviors from the standard H-bridge configuration. For
grid-forming inverter. example, an NPC converter does not require that the trans-
former between the IBR and grid be ungrounded on the
Three-Phase Inverter Topology IBR side, so a transformer can be used through which the
A three-phase H-bridge inverter connected to a larger utility is inverter can “see” and respond to zero-sequence voltages
shown in Figure 2. The inverter now has six switches, S 1-S 6 . from the grid side. Details of the types and operation of
The dc voltage Vb is required to be larger than the peak of the NPC converters can be found in the “For Further Reading”
ac voltage on the inverter output terminals. When there is a section of this article.
utility voltage source on the right, this inverter does not reg-
ulate the magnitude and frequency of its output voltage, as Types of Inverter Controls
those are controlled by the utility grid. Instead, the inverter is Inverter controls can be broadly grouped into two main cat-
operated in the so-called grid-following mode. Most invert- egories of grid-forming and grid-following inverters. These
ers using the topology shown in Figure 2 require that the are described in Table 1, and block diagrams of each type are
transformer between the IBR and grid be ungrounded on the shown in Figure 3.
IBR side. This can have a significant impact on protection Grid-forming inverters regulate voltage and frequency
at their point of interconnection. When there are multiple
sources sharing responsibility for frequency regulation, fre-
quency droops are commonly used, which provide a slope
+
of the frequency setpoint versus the power output from the
S1 S3 L
generator. The frequency droop ensures the frequency sta-
+ bility of the microgrid while sharing active power among
Vdc
L Vac IBRs. Grid-forming inverters are also equipped with voltage
S2 S4 C R
droops to accommodate a coordinated voltage regulation in
– – the microgrid while sharing reactive power among IBRs.
Grid-following inverters are equipped only with power and
figure 1. A diagram of a single-phase H-bridge inverter. current control loops, which facilitate their operation as
controllable sources of active and
reactive power.
+ Generator Step-Up
S1 S3 S5 Devices and Materials
+ vL – Transformer
The switch type and semiconductor
Vdc Cdc switch material used in an inverter
iL impact the types of protection pos-
S2 S4 S6 C Grid
– sible in power systems energized by
that inverter. The most commonly
used controlled switches in today’s
figure 2. A three-phase H-bridge inverter connected to a utility grid.
inverters are silicon insulated-gate
bipolar and metal–oxide–semicon-
table 1. The types of inverter controls. ductor field-effect transistors.
Regulated Appearance to the Silicon has a bandgap of about
Category Application Quantities Rest of the System 1.1 eV. It is abundant and well under-
Grid Connecting to a power Magnitude of the Power-controlled stood, and processing techniques
following system regulated by other active and reactive current source are highly mature. However, the
generation resources power injection with limits material properties impose certain
Grid Connecting to a power system Magnitude and Regulated voltage limitations on the performance of
forming in which the system must be frequency of the source with silicon switching devices. Switches
regulated by the inverter voltage current limits
made from semiconductors with

The inverter’s behavior is largely software defined,
providing a high level of flexibility as well as unique
performance characteristics and opportunities.
wider bandgaps, such as silicon carbide (2.3–3.3 eV) and gallium current available from IBRs and potentially make protec-
nitride (3.4 eV), could have significantly higher operating volt- tion more challenging.
ages, higher operating temperatures, lower on-state resistances,
and faster device switching. Challenges Posed by IBRs
Higher-frequency switching and higher-voltage operation are for Microgrid Protection
especially desirable for power electronics. The higher switching DERs in general, and IBRs in particular, pose different chal-
frequency permits the use of smaller components in the low-pass lenges to the protection system. At the distribution system
filter that extracts the 60-Hz component from the switched wave- level, they can cause several issues, such as sympathetic
form, and higher-voltage operation can lead to greater operating tripping, coordination loss, protection blinding, and failed
efficiency through reduced resistive losses and new application autoreclosing. In general, the challenges associated with pro-
opportunities for solid-state transformers. These advantages tecting IBR-based systems stem from the fact that IBRs do
likely will cause wide bandgap use in inverters to accelerate. not exhibit conventional synchronous-machine short circuit
Higher switching frequencies could lead to more precise behavior, including transient, subtransient, and steady-state
control over individual pulses of energy injected from the responses. In the following sections, we elaborate on the pro-
inverter into the power system, and that precision of control tection challenges associated with IBRs in more detail.
could one day facilitate the development of novel protec-
tion techniques in IBR-energized systems. However, the IBR Fault Current Signatures
trend toward higher-voltage converters might also lead The reliance of IBRs on semiconductor switches and the fact
to lower-current designs that would further reduce the fault that IBR fault currents are largely determined by their nested
Inverter
P/Q/Power Factor Power Control Internal Current
Setpoint Output Filter
Loop Control Loop
Current Measurement
P and Q Voltage and Current Measurement

Calculator
(a)
Inverter
Internal Voltage Internal Current
Output LC Filter
Control Loop Control Loop
Current
Measurement
Voltage
Measurement
Frequency Phase Lock Loop
Setpoint
Voltage and Current
Voltage Setpoint Frequency and Voltage P and Q Measurement
Droop Control Calculator
(b)
figure 3. IBR control diagrams: (a) grid-following and (b) grid-forming inverters.

Microgrids, like all power systems, require protection
that de-energizes and isolates faults before they can harm
health or property.
control systems lead to IBRs having specific fault current sig- but have different time constants, they may interact with
natures. These unique features include the following. one another.
Limited Fault Current Magnitude Different Sequence Components

To protect semiconductor switches, most inverters include In grid-following IBRs, the control loops are designed to
both hardware and software switch current limiters that keep suppress the negative-sequence current component, result-
the IBRs’ fault current level low. The maximum steady-state ing in negative-sequence currents that are typically less than
fault current produced depends on design parameters and 10% of the positive-sequence value, which can cause protec-
varies from one IBR to another. Once a fault is applied, the tion systems to behave unpredictably. Grid-forming invert-
inverter current exhibits a very short transient (lasting fewer ers can generally inject higher levels of negative-sequence
than two 60-Hz cycles) and then returns to a steady-state currents for unbalanced grid operation, but not all inverters
fault current that is typically around 1.1–1.5 pu of the invert- in the microgrid may be controlled this way, which can make
er’s current rating. This is generally true whether an inverter predicting inverter fault current contribution and protection
is grid forming or grid following. design challenging.
The fault current transients depend on the inverter con-
trollers as well as the thermal rating of power electronics Nonlinear Fault Current Contribution
switches. Some inverter manufacturers are working on Inverter fault current limiters also make the fault currents
increasing the magnitude and duration of the fault current nonlinear. This can impact the conventional phasor-domain
(especially for islanded grid-forming inverters), but even at short circuit analysis, which relies on the linear-equivalent
2–3 pu fault current, it can be difficult to distinguish in-rush Thevenin model of sources. Moreover, many inverters limit
or motor-start events from a fault condition. their peak output currents by manipulating the pulsewidth
modulation to lower the peaks of the output current, result-
Control-Determined Current–Voltage Phase Angle ing in a flat-topped waveform. The unwanted harmonics on
When a fault occurs that causes the IBR terminal voltage the voltage and current values can lead to challenges in cal-
to become low, the magnitude of the fault current produced culating their fundamental values.
by grid-forming and grid-following inverters is essentially Importantly, grid-forming inverters used for microgrid or
the same. Both types will reach the inverter’s current limit off-grid applications may be designed to produce negative-
and hold there, as explained earlier, but the current–voltage and zero-sequence currents. Unlike typical grid-following
phase angles may be significantly different. PV inverters, to support unbalanced microgrid applications,
For example, a grid-forming inverter will increase the grid-forming inverters control voltage and frequency instead
magnitude of its output current as part of its effort to reac- of limiting negative-sequence injections. For example, in
quire its voltage setpoint, and, at the same time it will in Figure 4, for a single-line-to-ground fault, conventional pro-
general move toward higher current–voltage phase angles tection designs expect that zero-sequence current (I 0) equals
(higher reactive power). In contrast, a grid-following inverter positive-sequence current (I 1) equals negative-sequence
increases its output current magnitude as it attempts to reac- current (I 2). For a grid-following inverter, there is no zero
quire its active power setpoint, but while it is still on-grid, sequence current and only limited negative-sequence current
the current–voltage phase angle will be set by the IBR’s reac- during the fault because of the inverter controls, but the grid-
tive-power programming, which may set a limit anywhere forming inverter responds as expected for more conventional
from zero to the IBR’s reactive power limit. sequence current injections.
When a grid-following inverter is isolated on a faulted Similar experimental tests were performed for the grid-
system, the IBR will change its frequency as it attempts forming inverter for double-line-to-ground faults, where the
to adjust its current–voltage phase angle, and this fre- inverter I 1 injection equaled the sum of I 0 and I 2, as expected,
quency change will typically be sufficient to trip the and line-to-line faults, where the inverter I 1 current equaled
grid-following IBR, but it may also interfere with fixed- I 2 as expected. This fact can be especially challenging
frequency root mean square measurements. Furthermore, when designing microgrid protection schemes because
if multiple IBRs all are providing reactive power support the inverter-based generation may switch between control

To protect semiconductor switches, most inverters include
both hardware and software switch current limiters
that keep the IBRs’ fault current level low.
modes when the microgrid transitions between grid-connected used for detecting nonsymmetrical faults is highly
and islanded operation. compromised under the high penetration of IBRs.
For example, in grid-connected mode, both a PV inverter ✔✔ Protection system coordination: High penetrations of
and an energy storage inverter may use current-controlled IBRs distributed throughout the system can impact
grid-following inverter controls with no zero- or nega- the coordination of fuses, reclosers, and overcurrent
tive-sequence injections. During the microgrid transition to protection relays due to the fault current injections from
islanded operation, the PV inverter will likely stay in grid- multiple locations. Furthermore, because IBRs will
following control mode, but the energy storage inverter may produce, essentially, a fixed current into a fault, there is
be designed to transition to grid-forming mode and, thus, no decrease in available fault current as a fault becomes
able to inject negative- and zero-sequence current. more electrically distant from the IBR, and coordina-
tion must rely on varying time delays only. Depending
Impacts of IBR on Conventional on the utility practice, a minimum coordination time
Protection Schemes interval should be met between primary and backup
The unique fault current characteristics of IBRs can ad overcurrent devices, independent of the fault locations,
versely impact the performance of conventional protec- state of the microgrid, or dispatch of the energy sourc-
tion schemes. es in the microgrid. The fault currents from the high
✔ ✔ Impact of IBRs on overcurrent protection: The penetration of IBRs may change the tripping times of
low-fault-current contribution from IBRs can ad- primary and backup protection relays and violate the
versely impact the operation of overcurrent protection minimum required coordination time interval. IBRs
devices. This impact is more salient in an islanded can also adversely impact fuse-saving schemes.
microgrid, where no fault
current is supplied from the
upstream grid, and the mi-
Sequence Currents (pu)
crogrid IBRs are the sole 1.5

Fault
source of fault currents. Un- 1.25
der this scenario, the con- 1
ventional overcurrent devic- 0.75 No Negative- or
es fail to detect and isolate 0.5 Zero-Sequence
Current
microgrid faults if the fault 0.25
current that they sense is 0
below their current pickup 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08 0.09 0.1 0.11 0.12
Time (s)
settings, and it is difficult to
(a)
choose overcurrent settings
Sequence Currents (pu)
1.5
that provide sufficient sen-
1.25
sitivity and selectivity.
✔✔ Impact of IBRs on directional 1
protection: The potentially 0.75
unpredictable negative-se - 0.5
I0 = I1 = I2
quence cu r rent of I BRs 0.25
significantly impacts the 0
0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08 0.09 0.1 0.11 0.12
performance of protection Time (s)
schemes that highly rely on (b)
this quantity, for example, in
determining the direction of Positive Negative Zero
faults. Moreover, the perfor-
mance of negative-sequence figure 4. The experiment results for a single-line-to-ground fault applied to a three-
overcurrent relays that are phase (a) grid-following and (b) grid-forming inverter.

Simulation Challenges for IBR or constant power factor control modes) in terms of their
Short Circuit Analysis impact on current–voltage phase angles
The protection system design must be informed by a reliable ✔✔ model the IBR’s phase lock loop and droop control
short circuit study of the microgrid. Conventionally, protec- characteristics
tion software packages perform short circuit studies in the ✔✔ produce proper levels of zero- and negative-sequence
phasor domain assuming linear Thevenin equivalent short fault currents
circuit models. Unfortunately, those linearized models tend ✔✔ account for the IBR’s fault ride-through capability.
not to closely represent the fault current behaviors of IBRs.
Recent efforts by the IEEE Power & Energy Society’s Power Microgrid Protection Solutions for IBRs
System Relaying and Control Committee, under Working
Group C24, have helped create phasor-domain short cir- Overview of Inverter Operation Under Faults
cuit models of IBRs, where IBRs are included in the fault Figure 5 shows a simulation of a grid-forming inverter in
analysis as nonlinear elements defined simply by their output an islanded grid with a line-to-ground fault starting at 8.0 s
characteristics. Though industrial programs have shown and removed after 0.15 s. The voltage and current plots at the
good results with this approach on transmission systems with inverter terminal illustrate that the system recovers to prefault
limited IBR penetration, there are still many challenges with conditions in a reasonable timeframe. Inverter 1 is a grid-form-
convergence under very high penetration of IBRs and with ing, 1,500-kVA, 480-V inverter with a current limit of 1.5 pu.
simulating grid-forming inverters and isolated microgrids. The current limit is shown by the light blue line in Figure 5
IBR protection simulation packages can be categorized at a current peak of 3,827 A. Inverter 2 is a grid-following,
into iterative and time-domain solutions. In general, to cor- 1,000-kVA, 480-V inverter with a current limit of 1.1 pu, or a
rectly represent IBRs in protection studies, the IBR model in peak current shown in the graph of 1,871 A.
the protection software should be able to Figure 5 shows that the inverters respond according to
✔✔ model the IBR current limitations with their non- design, with the grid-forming inverter 1 providing unbal-
linearities anced currents both before the fault for the unbalanced
✔✔ include different IBR control modes (i.e., grid forming load and during the single-line-to-ground fault. On the
and grid following) other hand, the grid-following inverter 2 always provides
✔✔ account for different IBR reactive power or voltage sup- a balanced current with no negative-sequence current. The
port control modes (e.g., constant active/reactive power inverters are connected with a delta/Yg 480-V/4.16-kV
4
0.5
2
Current (kA)
vA
Voltage (kV)
vB
0 vC 0
vpos
vneg –2
–0.5
–4
7.95 8 8.05 8.1 8.15 8.2 8.25 8 8.1 8.2 8.3 8.4
Time (s) Time (s)
(a) (b)
0.5
2
iA
Current (kA)
Voltage (kV)
iB 1
iC
0 0
Ipos
Ineg
–1
Ilimit
–2
–0.5
7.95 8 8.05 8.1 8.15 8.2 8.25 8 8.1 8.2 8.3 8.4
Time (s) Time (s)
(c) (d)
figure 5. Inverter behavior during a phase A to ground fault in islanded mode. (a) Grid-forming inverter terminal
voltage, (b) grid-forming inverter output current, (c) grid-following inverter terminal voltage, and (d) grid-following
inverter output current.

Importantly, grid-forming inverters used
for microgrid or off-grid applications may be designed
to produce negative- and zero-sequence currents.
transformer, so the ground fault on phase A results in higher However, while undervoltage relaying readily indicates
voltages on phase C on the delta inverter side of the trans- the existence of a fault, it does not work well in iden-
former. Simulating this fault behavior for the dynamics, tifying the fault’s location. Figure 6 shows the pu volt-
sequence currents, and transient voltages is crucial to ana- ages at all buses for phase A-to-ground fault in the IEEE
lyze the protection of microgrids. 13-node system.
The change in the voltages at all nodes is large enough
Exploring Traditional Protection Options to detect a fault in the system, both at the IBR terminal or at
for IBR-Fed Microgrids any bus in the system. However, the values of the voltages
There are three objectives to protecting any power system: at all buses are very similar. The differences in the highest
1) detecting a fault, 2) determining the location of the fault on and lowest voltage magnitudes are about 2% for the A–G
the feeder, and 3) de-energizing the fault before equipment fault, 2.3% for the three-phase fault, and 3.1% for the
is damaged while interrupting the smallest possible number A–B fault. This difference is too small to provide a reli-
of loads. Traditional distribution system protection schemes able means of discerning the fault location. Voltages are
achieve all three objectives using coordinated overcurrent so close because physics dictates the voltage at the fault
protection, the design of which relies on the assumption that point be drawn to a low value, and the system currents are
the system is radial and fed only from an infinite bus. quite small, so the voltage drops across feeders are quite
An IBR-fed microgrid may have multiple sources, hav- small. This creates a situation where a fault anywhere in
ing bidirectional fault currents that are severely limited in the system will be certainly sensed through undervoltage
magnitude. Therefore, the traditional distribution protection at every bus, but no discrimination is available to identify
schemes that heavily depend on fuses and reclosers are not the faulted section.
expected to work well in IBR-sourced microgrids. For this
reason, more sophisticated protection schemes have been Distance Protection
explored regarding their suitability for the protection of dis- Distance protection works well in transmission and is
tribution system microgrids. The suitability of such protec- attractive because it can be implemented without commu-
tion schemes is discussed in the following subsections. nications, but it is generally difficult to apply in distribu-
tion even when there is no microgrid. For example, it is
Increasing the Available Fault Current usually challenging to use distance protection for feeders
One of the most straightforward options that can be con- with laterals due to problems of overreach into protective
sidered is to increase the microgrid fault current to the zones at different impedances. In a branching radial dis-
point at which coordinated overcurrent protection becomes tribution system, the recloser protection zone may extend
effective. This solution is most viable in cases in which the only a short distance to a fuse on one lateral but much
microgrid sources are located at one source bus and not dis- farther down a different lateral before the next protec-
tributed throughout the microgrid. One way to increase the tive device. Since the boundaries of all taps inside the
fault current frequently used in microgrids today is to install protective zone are not equal distances or impedances,
excess inverter capacity (usually twice the expected peak
load requirement or more) so that the IBR plant provides
substantially higher fault currents. This option can work, 0.155
but it significantly increases the cost of the IBR plant and 0.15
microgrid. Another method being actively explored is the 0.145
0.14
use of synchronous condensers as fault-current sources in
pu
0.135
microgrids. While this approach shows high promise, it also 0.13
significantly increases costs, and it can have some detrimen- 0.125
tal effects on microgrid dynamics. 0.12
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
Bus Numbers
Undervoltage Protection
Under voltage relaying has attracted some attention figure 6. The phase A voltages throughout the IEEE 13-node
because it can be implemented without communications. system for a phase A-to-ground fault.

the distance protection will underreach or overreach dif- currents at the sending and receiving ends of the line. Note
ferent branches. that the current is unbalanced before the fault due to unbal-
Another challenge with distance protection is that dis- anced loads in the microgrid. Also, there are some loads
tributed load along the length of the feeder causes the error in between the two sensors, so the difference is not exactly
to be even larger. With any sort of load or generation inside zero before the fault. When a line-to-line fault (phase A
the protective zone, the distance to the fault will be miscal- to phase B) is applied inside the protection zone at 0.9 s, the
culated because distance protection assumes that impedance low-fault-current IBR-based microgrid does not increase cur-
to the fault can be calculated using its voltage and current, rents significantly at the receiving or sending end, but the fault
which does not account for other current flows into the fault appears in the difference.
or protection zone. There is excellent current discrimination provided by
Moreover, a highly unbalanced system can cause issues the differential principle, despite the distributed load. This
with load encroachment into the distance protection zone, method is found to be the most reliable in both detecting
challenges for the directional elements with unbalance, and the fault and locating the faulted section. Since it works for
errors in the impedance calculations performed in distance low fault currents from both ends, it would obviously work
relays. For example, for a phase A to phase B line-to-line in the grid-connected mode or with synchronous sources in
fault, the impedance calculation would calculate the dif- the system since these would provide much higher fault cur-
ference in voltage between phases A and B divided by the rents. Depending on the size and amount of load inside the
difference in current between A and B to calculate the differential protection zone, the differential can still have
impedance to the fault. This type of calculation does not challenges in islanded inverter-based systems, where the
work if there is an unbalanced load that creates a nonzero fault current may be only a few times higher than the load
difference in the current between A and B. inside the zone.
The example shown in Figure 7 is a true differential
Differential Protection scheme in which the current at one end of the zone is sub-
Figure 7 shows the currents measured at two locations in a tracted from the current at the other. While effective, this
microgrid used for differential protection by subtracting the scheme requires high-speed data communications between
500
Phase A
Current (A)
250 Phase B
Phase C
0
–250
–500
0.85 0.9 0.95 1 1.05 1.1 1.15 1.2
Time (s)
(a)
500
Phase A
Current (A)
250 Phase B
Phase C
0
–250
–500
0.85 0.9 0.95 1 1.05 1.1 1.15 1.2
Time (s)
(b)
1,000
750 Phase A
Current (A)
500 Phase B
250 Phase C
0
–250
–500
–750
–1,000
0.85 0.9 0.95 1 1.05 1.1 1.15 1.2
Time (s)
(c)
figure 7. The currents for a phase A to phase B line-to-line fault inside a differential protection zone when an IBR-based
microgrid is in island mode: the (a) sending end, (b) receiving end, and (c) differential currents.

the end points. In distribution systems, differential protec- The conceptual design of microgrid adaptive protec-
tion is typically implemented in the form of a fault location, tion is illustrated in Figure 8. The adaptive protection
isolation, and service restoration (FLISR) system. In most relies on the microgrid communication network to 1)
FLISR systems, the end points of the protected zones trans- monitor the latest status of the microgrid (e.g., tie-line,
mit only a status flag indicating whether a fault current was IBR, and local circuit breaker statuses; the latest protec-
detected at that location, reducing the demands on the com- tion relay settings; and so on) and 2) send the modified
munications system. settings to the protection relays once a system condition
Indications are that this method will work well in IBR- change is detected.
sourced microgrids, but FLISR requires a communications Adaptive protection can be added as a module to the
network as well as breakers, relays, and associated transduc- microgrid control center. The adaptive protection module
ers at both ends of every protected zone. For this reason, a contains the short circuit model of the microgrid and updates
FLISR system that provides a high degree of accuracy in it in real time using the latest monitored information. Once
fault location and minimizes the amount of load being inter- the short circuit model is updated, different approaches,
rupted can become quite expensive. including logic, model, or learning schemes, can be utilized
to find new settings for the protection relays.
Adaptive Protection
One of the promising solutions to address the protection of Effectively Protecting IBR-Fed Microgrids
microgrids is adaptive protection. It is a real-time system Many conventional protection methods, such as coordi-
that can modify protective actions according to changes in nated overcurrent, directional relaying, or distance relay-
the system’s condition. More specifically, in microgrids, ing, may not be reliable in microgrids energized by IBRs
adaptive protection can change the protection scheme and or even by multiple distributed rotating machines. Differ-
settings during mode changes from grid-connected to ential protection can work equally well in grid-connected
islanded operation with updated short circuit current values and islanded modes, even in the presence of distributed load
depending on if the grid is available to provide higher levels along feeders, but the cost of upgrade for implementing dif-
of fault current. ferential protection can be prohibitive. Differential protec-
To this end, the settings of the protection relays should tion requires breakers at both ends of every protected zone,
change immediately after the islanding happens (e.g., associated current transformers and relays, and high-speed
the pickup of the overcurrent protection relays should communications between them. Absorbing this expense is
be much lower than the grid-connected mode). Adap- an issue not addressed in the current financial models used
tive protection can significantly help with protecting the by utilities.
microgrid during and after the transition from grid-con- To alleviate this concern, a suboptimal form of differ-
nected to islanded mode. ential protection can be adopted at the cost of selectivity.
Relay Relay Relay
Microgrid Comm DER

Control Center Hub DER
Tie Breaker
DER
DER
Relay Relay
figure 8. Adaptive protection in microgrids. Comm Hub: communications hub.

Instead of protecting every feeder section, subsystems can and islanded modes of operation, including mode transition.
be protected. An island can be subdivided into multiple sub- Many traditional protection schemes have drawbacks, but
areas, each of which can be treated as a zone for differen- communication-based options, including differential protec-
tial protection. This will significantly reduce the expense, tion and adaptive protection, can emerge as potential solu-
although with decreased selectivity. Most of these issues tions to protect such microgrids.
may also be relevant to islands at the subtransmission level,
but the topology and existing transmission infrastructure Acknowledgments
may better absorb the cost of upgrades compared to dis- We thank Jacob Mueller and Nicholas S. Gurule of Sandia
tribution systems. For example, such systems would have National Laboratories for their contributions to the figures
breakers at both ends of lines already available. This is also used in this article.
true for urban distribution feeders that operate in a ring-
main configuration. For Further Reading
Since the local protection options are either limited J. Rodriguez, S. Bernet, P. K. Steimer, and I. E. Lizama, “A
or unreliable, communication-enabled protection options survey on neutral-point-clamped inverters,” IEEE Trans. Ind.
can be considered. Since microgrids would typically have Electron., vol. 57, no. 7, pp. 2219–2230, 2010. doi: 10.1109/
a communication infrastructure and a controller, this TIE.2009.2032430.
approach could be feasible. For example, the actual dif- S. S. Venkata, M. J. Reno, W. Bower, S. Manson, J. Reil-
ferential function can be integrated with the microgrid ly, and G. W. Sey Jr., “Microgrid protection: Advancing the
controller to reduce the expense of relays. However, pro- state of the art,” Sandia National Lab., Alberquerque, NM,
tection-related data must get priority in the communica- SAND2019-3167, 2019.
tion network. This option may adversely affect the speed A. Haddadi, M. Zhao, I. Kocar, U. Karaagac, K. W. Chan,
of differential protection, but due to low fault currents, this and E. Farantatos, “Impact of inverter-based resources on
may not pose a problem. negative sequence quantities-based protection elements,”
Adaptive protection using directional overcurrent relays IEEE Trans. Power Del., vol. 36, no. 1, 2020. doi: 10.1109/
exploiting the communication platform of microgrids can TPWRD.2020.2978075.
modify protective actions according to system condition T. Kauffmann et al., “Short-circuit model for type-IV
changes. Since the fault profile is different in grid-con- wind turbine generators with decoupled sequence control,”
nected and islanded modes, the focus in this approach is to IEEE Trans. Power Del., vol. 34, no. 5, pp. 1998–2007, 2019.
provide two different sets of settings for each relay to work doi: 10.1109/TPWRD.2019.2908686.
under these modes. Adaptive protection using only direc- L. Che, M. E. Khodayar, and M. Shahidehpour, “Adaptive
tional overcurrent relays can work as long as the fault con- protection system for microgrids: Protection practices of a
tribution from inverters is large enough to be distinguish- functional microgrid system,” IEEE Electrific. Mag., vol. 2,
able from other events like peak load and in-rush current, no. 1, pp. 66–80, 2014. doi: 10.1109/MELE.2013.2297031.
but the adaptive protection can also change the protection M. Ropp and M. J. Reno, “Influence of inverter-based
scheme of the microgrid when in islanded mode to other resources on microgrid protection: Part 2,” IEEE Power &
schemes, such as distance protection, voltage-restrained Energy Mag., vol. 19, no. 3, pp. 47–57, 2021.
overcurrent, or communication-assisted approaches, that S. Brahma, “Protection of distribution system islands fed
will work with low fault currents. by inverter-interfaced sources,” in Proc. IEEE PES Pow-
erTech 2019, Milan, Italy.
Conclusions T. Patel, P. Gadde, S. Brahma, J. Hernandez-Alvidrez,
System protection has been developed and refined through and M. Reno, “Real-time microgrid test bed for protection
decades of experience to protect system components and and resiliency studies”, in Proc. North American Power
maintain stability against the fault response of synchronous Symp. 2020, Tempe, AZ, April 2021.
generators, which is typified by dangerously high magni-
tudes of fault currents and rapidly changing angles. Fault Biographies
currents from IBRs are in the range of overloads, and they do Matthew J. Reno is with Sandia National Laboratories, Al-
not have rotating parts, which obviates the issue with angu- buquerque, New Mexico, 87185, USA.
lar instability. However, legacy protection systems designed Sukumar Brahma is with Clemson University, Clemson,
to tackle traditional fault responses become unreliable in the South Carolina, 29634, USA.
presence of IBRs. Inside inverter-based microgrids, more Ali Bidram is with the University of New Mexico, Albu-
complications arise due to the change in the very topology querque, New Mexico, 87131, USA.
that is assumed to underpin its protection. Michael E. Ropp is with Sandia National Laboratories, Al-
This article provides insights into the stable operation and buquerque, New Mexico, 87185, USA.
fault response of inverters at up to 100% penetration of IBRs
p&e
in a distribution system microgrid, both for grid-connected

Influence of
Inverter-Based
Resources
on Microgrid
Protection
Part 2: Secondary Networks
and Microgrid Protection
S
SECONDARY NETWORKS ARE DEPLOYED WHEN
exceptionally high-reliability electric service is
required for specific loads. Secondary network pro-
tection makes extensive use of the fact that the avail-
able fault currents in such systems are typically very
high. Also, most faults in secondary networks must
be isolated from both sides, which requires some
special considerations. Today, microgrids are also
being deployed as a means of increasing power sys-
tem resilience on radial circuits. Many microgrids
are energized exclusively by inverter-based resources
(IBRs), either all the time or under certain operational
conditions. The protection of IBR-sourced microgrids
By Michael E. Ropp
and Matthew J. Reno
© SH U
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/MPE.2021.3057952 T TER STO F ER T
C K . C O M / L E OW O L
may/june 2021 1540-7977/21©2021IEEE ieee power & energy magazine 47

Secondary networks have been in use for more than a century,
and today they serve hundreds of urban downtown areas
and thousands of individual facilities.
is entirely different from that of secondary networks. IBRs a collection of distributed energy resources (DERs) and
are often distributed throughout a system, their fault currents loads within a defined boundary that have been planned and
are generally low, and the current flow is not unidirectional. designed to operate in either a grid-parallel mode or to dis-
Thus, if it were ever contemplated to deploy a microgrid on a connect and operate in an off-grid mode when desired. Many
secondary network, significant system protection challenges microgrids are in operation, with all known examples con-
would have to be overcome. structed on previously radial circuits (no loops and meshes).
This article is the second in a two-part series about the Microgrids may be powered by any combination of DERs,
influence of IBRs on microgrid protection. It briefly dis- including rotating machines and IBRs. The use of local
cusses secondary networks and IBR-sourced microgrids and sources reduces the level of vulnerability to disruptions in
then delves into the protection of both types of systems, the the transmission system. Microgrid protection is an evolving
difficulties that would need to be surmounted in protecting field in which several challenges must be solved. Microgrids
a secondary network containing an IBR-sourced microgrid, must be protected in both on- and off-grid modes, and the
and potential approaches to addressing these issues. available fault current and its properties may vary greatly
between those configurations through time. This is espe-
Background cially true for microgrids sourced entirely by IBRs, noting
Secondary networks are a nonradial, three-phase power that most microgrids deployed today fall into this category
system topology that provides redundancy in a distribution for at least some portion of their off-grid operation. Also, if
system so that loads have a continuous connection to alterna- a microgrid’s sources are distributed instead of centralized,
tive feeders. Thus, secondary networks provide an extremely there are additional protection challenges.
high continuity of electric power service against disturbances If one were to contemplate creating a microgrid on a sec-
in the distribution network, although they are still vulnerable ondary network, these two sets of protection requirements
to interruptions in the transmission systems above them. would collide in a way that creates unique and particularly
Secondary networks are so named because they operate at a difficult challenges. In this article, secondary networks and
“secondary voltage,” usually 120/208 V or 277/480 V in the microgrids, especially IBR-sourced microgrids, are briefly
60-Hz world. Secondary networks have been in use for more described along with their protection challenges. The task of
than a century, and today they serve hundreds of urban down- deploying a microgrid on a secondary network is described,
town areas and thousands of individual facilities worldwide. and potential protection approaches are discussed. DC
Secondary network protection is a mature field. Because of microgrids, while important, are not addressed.
the redundant paths to the source, these networks tend to have
low source impedances and very high fault current avail- Secondary Networks
ability, and secondary network protection is often designed
around (and to take advantage of) this fact. Also, because Topology of Secondary Networks
secondary networks contain loops and meshes, most of their Secondary networks are grouped into two main categories:
faults must be isolated from both sides, which requires spe- grid and spot. These are briefly described in the following.
cial considerations in the protection system design.
It is also possible to conceive of a “primary network” in Secondary Grid Networks
which loops and meshes at a medium voltage (MV), such as Secondary grid networks are used to serve dense urban
15 kV, are used to provide redundancy in the power path and areas, such as downtowns and business districts. They are
achieve continuity-of-service improvements. Many of the sometimes called street networks because the cables in the
general principles discussed here concerning secondary net- grid are usually laid out under, and thus follow, the streets in
works would also apply to such a “primary network.” Since the area. They may also be referred to as area networks and
almost no distribution systems today are designed to operate downtown networks. Figure 1(a) presents the topology of a
in this way, this possibility is mentioned only as a future typical secondary grid network. A single main three-phase
consideration and discussion item. service is shown at the top, but a grid network can have more
Microgrids are another means to provide higher-reliabil- than one. This secondary grid network has N primary feeders
ity electric service and increased power system resilience. and K secondary mains, all three phase. The main service
According to IEEE Standard 2030.7-2018, a microgrid is and primary feeders are all operated at MV (a distribution

voltage). Every primary feeder has a connection through a or 120/208-V service. A typical secondary spot network is
network unit (NU) to every secondary main. A schematic of described in Figure 2. All the conductors are three phase.
an NU is shown in Figure 1(b). The NU is a subsystem that A single main service is shown at the top, but secondary
contains the three-phase network transformer (NT) that steps spot networks can have more than one. The main service
the voltage from MV to low voltage (LV), or a secondary supplies N primary feeders, which are colored differently to
voltage, and a network protector (NP) that includes a direc- make the diagram easier to read. Each primary feeder, in turn,
tional power relay (defined in IEEE Standard C37.2-2008 as serves an NU that connects to a single secondary main. Each
an “IEEE function 32” device), a phase angle relay (“IEEE secondary main serves a three-phase load bus, also called a
function 78”), and the associated circuit breaker (CB). The collector bus or a paralleling bus. Load buses are tied together
secondary mains are typically operated at a utilization volt- via normally closed (NC) switches. Some spot networks use
age (usually 120/208 V or, in a few cases, 480/277 V). fast-acting CBs instead of NC switches to provide fault isola-
tion on the load bus.
Secondary Spot Networks
A secondary spot network is a smaller system designed to Protection of Secondary Networks
provide multiple redundant paths for the power flow from
a primary service circuit to a single facility or load. Spot General Protection Strategy
networks do not provide the same extensive redundancy The following are two key aspects of the secondary network
as grid networks, but they are considerably less expensive. protection strategy that are important to the discussion of
Secondary spot network systems usually provide 277/480-V DERs and microgrids:
P, Q Main Service (MV)
P, Q CB CB P, Q
Primary Feeder 1 (MV)
Primary Feeder N (MV)
NU NU
To Primary Feeder
P, Q NU P, Q NU
NT
Secondary
Main 1 (LV) NU = 32
Loads Loads
NP
Loads
78
P, Q P, Q
To Secondary Main
Loads
(b)
Secondary
Main K (LV)
Loads Loads Loads
(a)
figure 1. A typical secondary grid network without DERs: (a) the network topology, showing the directions of the active
(P) and reactive (Q) power flows, and (b) a network unit (NU). CB: circuit breaker; LV: low voltage; NP: network protector;
NT: network transformer.

1) Protection against faults on secondary network con- Protection against faults on the conductors between the
ductors tends to rely on the high fault current levels primary feeder CBs and the NT also requires that the fault
typically available in such systems. be isolated from both sides. A fault on a primary feeder can
2) Protection against faults on the primary feeders relies, be directly fed from the main service as well as through the
in part, on the unidirectional current flow in the NUs. secondary network, which forms a loop back to the main ser-
Consider first the protection of secondary network mains vice on the “downstream” side of the fault. This is illustrated
and conductors against fault currents. This typically takes in Figure 3, which shows the spot network in Figure 2 with
advantage of the available fault currents in secondary net- a fault to ground on primary feeder N. In Figure 3, the CBs
works, which tend to be very high. Fuses and cable limit- and NUs have been numbered. The gold arrows show fault
ers are common in the secondary mains of both spot and current flowing to the fault from both sides. In secondary net-
grid networks. For certain cable faults, especially in grid works, the primary feeder fault is isolated from the main ser-
networks, the fault current is so high that the cable itself vice by the usual overcurrent functions in the primary feeder
acts as a fuse, and the fault “burns clear.” Because there are CB (CB 3), and from the NU (NU 3) on the “downstream”
many source points within a secondary network, a fault on side of the fault by the reverse power function (function 32)
any secondary main must be isolated from both sides. Also, in NU 3’s NP.
in ac systems with voltages below 150 V, arcs tend to self- The reverse power function commonly uses a sensitive set-
extinguish because the voltage is too low to maintain them. ting to ensure that the NP just downstream from the primary
Thus, in grid networks operated at 120 V, many arcing faults side fault (the green one in Figure 3) will trip on the reverse
will resolve themselves. current before any of the other NPs trips on the forward fault
P
Main Service (MV)
CB CB CB
Feeder N
Feeder 1
Feeder 2
Primary
Primary
Primary
(MV)
(MV)
(MV)
To Primary Feeder
NT
NU NU NU
NU = 32
P, Q P, Q P, Q NP
78
To Secondary Main
(b)
Main 1 (LV)
Secondary
Main 2 (LV)
Main N (LV)
Secondary
Secondary
P, Q P, Q P, Q P, Q
NC NC NC NC
Tie Tie Tie Tie

Loads Loads Loads
(a)
figure 2. A typical secondary spot network without DERs: (a) the circuit topology, showing the P, Q power flow direc-
tions, and (b) an NU. NC: normally closed switch.

Because the available fault currents in secondary networks
are so high, arc flashes can be a significant concern,
particularly in systems operating at 480 V.
current. In fact, the reverse power function is often set to be Microgrids

able to detect the magnetizing current of the associated NT A microgrid is an intentional power island that 1) has a clearly
so that it will trip the NP if its associated primary feeder defined electrical boundary and 2) is planned, controlled, and
CB opens for any reason. When planning and implement- protected so that it can operate in either a grid-parallel or an auton-
ing a secondary network, the NTs must be sufficiently well omous (off-grid, or intentional islanding) mode. Microgrids are
matched so that circulating currents between them are kept typically deployed to improve the reliability of electric service
to a minimum, partly to avoid heating and also to enable to areas that, for one reason or another, suffer from below-aver-
the use of reverse power flows for protection, as described. age reliability, and they are installed in facilities where there is
Because the available fault currents in secondary networks an on-site energy source that can be readily adapted to provide
are so high, arc flashes can be a significant concern, particu- power if the main grid supply is lost. Microgrids have demon-
larly in systems operating at 480 V. For this reason, some strated their reliability enhancement benefits in multiple appli-
NPs offer a feature called active arc flash mitigation that cations. For example, the Borrego Springs microgrid serves a
can be turned on when maintenance is being performed. community at the end of a long radial circuit across difficult
Essentially, this feature sensitizes the NPs to forward cur- terrain that is frequently impacted by storms, and the combined
rent, reducing the forward current rating to be just barely heat and power (CHP)-based microgrids at Princeton Univer-
above the load current to limit the incident energy that might sity and New York University enabled the campuses to keep the
be delivered to an arcing fault. lights on during Hurricane Sandy.
Main Service (MV)
CB 1 CB 2 CB 3
Feeder 1
Feeder 2
Feeder 3
Primary
Primary
Primary
(MV)
(MV)
(MV)
NU 1 NU 2 NU 3
Main 1 (LV)
Secondary
Main 2 (LV)
Main 3 (LV)
Secondary
Secondary
NC NC NC NC
Tie Tie Tie Tie

Loads Loads Loads
figure 3. A spot network with a fault on primary feeder N, showing fault current paths sourcing current from both sides
of the fault.

The combined heat and power-based microgrids
at Princeton University and New York University enabled
the campuses to keep the lights on during Hurricane Sandy.
Microgrids Sourced by Rotating Machines known to determine the phase angle. An iterative solu-
Some microgrids are energized by diesel- and gas-powered tion is required to model this mathematically.
generators as well as by rotating turbomachines driven 3) Many IBRs limit their fault current magnitude by shav-
by steam plants. For low-impedance symmetrical faults, ing the output current waveform peaks. For these IBRs,
rotating machines typically provide subtransient fault cur- the fault current is highly nonsinusoidal. This may cause
rents ranging from six to 10 times their rated current for problems, such as errors in root-mean-square measure-
approximately six cycles, assuming that they are effec- ments and the tripping of ground fault sensors.
tively grounded. For this reason, microgrids that are served 4) IBRs can trip during fault events on various internal
exclusively or primarily by rotating generators can usually triggers, such as frequency measurement errors and
use standard time–overcurrent protection, although care software-applied limits on maximum phase jumps
must be taken to ensure that such a defense is triggered (phase-locked-loop errors).
quickly enough, preferably within the subtransient period.
Also, it is common, although not universal, that all gen- Distributed Versus Centralized Microgrids
erators are connected to a microgrid at the same source A centralized microgrid has all its power sources connected
bus and not d istributed across the network. In some such at a single source bus. A distributed microgrid has multiple
cases, this centralization further simplifies the system pro- source buses. The protection of a distributed microgrid is
tection by making the coordination of time–overcurrent more difficult than that of a centralized one because the
protection possible. In addition, centralization can make it safety system must continue to operate properly for all feasi-
possible to use directional elements to enable the defense ble combinations of sources. This is true regardless of whether
to work both on and off grid. Together, these factors sug- the distributed sources are rotating or IBRs. Also, a dis-
gest that the protection of microgrids sourced by rotating tributed microgrid has the potential to separate into islands
machines can, in general, be achieved using existing tech- centered around each source bus, and the protection system
niques and devices. must deal with that situation and with any recombination of
the islands back into the microgrid.
Microgrids Sourced by IBRs
Microgrids sourced entirely or primarily by IBRs pose a differ- Protection Challenges for Microgrids
ent set of protection challenges. These difficulties are covered in Secondary Networks
in detail in the first part of article, “Influence of Inverter-Based Today, microgrids are usually deployed to provide con-
Resources on Microgrid Protection,” by Reno et al, in this issue. tinuity of service in the event of a loss of the main utility
For the purposes of this article, there are four key challenges that source. It is conceivable that if a facility already served by
arise in IBR-sourced microgrids, as described in the following: a secondary network has an on-site power source, such as
1) IBRs generate limited fault current (grid-forming in- steam and CHP plants, the operator might consider creating
verters typically produce less than twice their rated a microgrid based on that resource to provide power dur-
current into a fault, with most supplying only about ing a catastrophic event that knocks out all primary service.
1.1–1.5 times their rating). This is an inherent limitation If there is sufficient generation capacity to provide power
of IBR hardware since s emiconductor switches can be to nearby facilities, it is also possible that the boundary of
quickly damaged by overcurrent. In some microgrids, this microgrid could extend, thus including a portion of the
this drawback is mitigated by providing much more secondary network. Based on the foregoing, two key chal-
inverter capacity than required to serve the loads, lenges must be overcome if a microgrid were to be deployed
thereby increasing the available fault current. This, of on a secondary network. The first arises if the microgrid
course, comes at a cost. DERs cause a reverse power flow through the NUs. Figure 1
2) The phase angle between an IBR’s fault current and details a network without DERs and indicates that the power
the voltage at the point of current injection depends on flow through the NPs is unidirectional. In Figure 4, DERs
how the IBR is programmed. IBRs will typically have have been added to the same grid, and now the power flow
a specific LV reactive power response so that they will through the NPs can be in either direction, as shown by the
adjust the phase angle of their output current, depend- P, Q arrows in Figure 4. This reverse power flow must be
ing on the voltage, meaning that the voltage must be differentiated from the reverse fault current flows, and there

needs to be a way to disconnect the NT from the secondary to have a protection system that isolates and deenergizes the
network if it becomes separated on its primary side. fault in both cases.
The second challenge involves large differences in the avail- Microgrids B, C, and D have more than one point of
able fault current from a secondary network and that available interconnection with the larger grid. If they were combined
from an IBR-sourced microgrid. Figure 5 depicts the grid net- into one networked microgrid, the resulting system would
work in Figure 4 sectionalized into four microgrids. Microgrid enjoy the reliability benefits of the local sources and of hav-
A is a single DER feeding one facility on a dedicated bus. Thus, ing redundant power paths at the distribution level. However,
it might not contain any secondary network conductors within there would be additional challenges in the coordination of
its boundary. Microgrids B, C, and D involve a DER in one part the transition from on grid to off grid and back. Grid-to-
of the secondary network serving a load in another part, and off-grid transitions can be characterized in two ways. Open
as a result, there are secondary network conductors that form a transitions are those in which a microgrid is deenergized
portion of each of these microgrids. The fault current availabil- and then black-started in the off-grid mode. Closed transi-
ity on these conductors will be dramatically different between tions, which are sometimes called seamless transitions, are
the grid-connected and off-grid modes, yet it remains necessary those in which the voltage and frequency in a microgrid are
P, Q DER
Main Service (MV)
CB P, Q CB
P, Q
DER
P, Q NU NU
P, Q
NU P, Q NU
P, Q DER
Secondary
Main 1 (LV)
DER
Loads
DER
Loads
Loads
Loads
DER DER
Secondary
Main K (LV)
Loads Loads Loads
figure 4. A secondary grid network with DERs added (indicated by the red arrows). The DERs are larger than the loads
served, and thus the power flow through the NUs can now be bidirectional under normal operating conditions, as
indicated by the P, Q arrows.

maintained within specified limits during the transition and must deal with the resulting outage by placing any highly
in which the network never “goes dark.” If, for example, a sensitive loads on uninterruptible power supplies.
closed transition was wanted for microgrid D, then all the The situation for secondary spot networks is a bit simpler,
switches shown in green would have to open simultaneously. but the challenge is similar. Figure 6 shows the secondary
Various delays may make such an operation difficult, and spot network from Figure 3 sectionalized into two microgrids
there is also the possibility that switches may stick (fail to energized by DERs. Microgrid A includes a single load and
open). Furthermore, a closed transition requires that some DER on the same secondary bus, and microgrid B involves
fast-acting resource within the microgrid (usually an energy DERs on one secondary bus serving a load on another sec-
storage resource) must quickly assume the voltage and fre- ondary bus. The secondary bus breakers labeled O are open
quency regulation, and there are generally costs associated in this configuration. The same two situations arise here as
with achieving this functionality. Closed transitions are cer- for the secondary grid network: if the DERs are large enough,
tainly achievable and needed in some situations, but open there is the possibility of a reverse power flow through the
transitions are typically simpler, and the equipment and NPs, and the fault current available while off grid will be sig-
design costs are often lower. During an open transition, one nificantly different from that available in the grid-connected
DER
Main Service (MV)
CB CB
DER
NU NU
NU NU
DER C
Secondary
Main 1 (LV)
DER
Loads
DER
Loads
A
B Loads
Loads
DER DER
Secondary
Main K (LV)
Loads Loads Loads
figure 5. A secondary grid network sectionalized into four microgrids, labeled A, B, C, and D. The dot–dash lines indi-
cate the microgrid boundaries. The gray portions of the system are outside the microgrids.

mode, especially if the DERs are IBRs. In addition to the according to Kirchoff’s current law. If it is not zero, then
fault detection and isolation challenges, there are some needs some current is being “lost” from the zone defined by the
in the area of overvoltage protection. For example, most NTs current transducers, indicating a fault or other problem and
are connected with a delta winding on the primary feeder enabling appropriate action to be taken.
side. With this configuration, it becomes possible for DERs Differential relaying is routinely used on equipment
on the secondary network to support a ground fault overvolt- such as transformers and transmission lines, and it is a
age on the primary feeder side of the NT. Means must be mature and reliable technology. It can be applied in radial
provided to prevent this, such as including a primary side distribution in the form of a fault location, isolation, and it
zero-sequence overvoltage function in the NP. is a mature and service restoration system, but in the case
of a secondary network, multiple zones must be protected.
Potential Solutions to the For example, looking at the system in Figure 4, the protec-
Protection Challenges of tion system must prevent reverse current from back-feeding
Microgrids in Secondary Networks through the secondary network into any fault on any primary
At present, the most widely discussed alternative to the feeder but also into any fault on any section of the main ser-
reverse power protection challenge described previ- vice. However, the basic principle is the same, and, at least
ously is a system of communications-linked digital relays in theory, differential protection could be applied regard-
implementing various forms of differential defense. Differ- less of the types and distributions of microgrid sources. The
ential protection uses measurements of all current inflows primary drawback is a high cost because the differential
to (or outflows from) a piece of equipment or circuit section. scheme must have transducers on all current inflow/outflow
The vector sum of all of these current flows should be zero, points from all zones along with communications to take
DER
Main Service (MV)
CB CB CB
DER
Feeder N
Feeder 1
Feeder 2
Primary
Primary
Primary
(MV)
(MV)
(MV)
NU NU NU
Main N (LV)
Main 1 (LV)
Main 2 (LV)
Secondary
Secondary
Secondary
DER
DER DER
O O NC O
Tie Tie Tie Tie

Loads Loads Loads
A B
figure 6. A secondary spot network sectionalized into two microgrids, labeled A and B. The dot–dash lines indicate the
microgrid boundaries. The gray portions of the system are outside the microgrids. O: open secondary bus breakers.

the measured values to a processor or relay. It has also been 1) Time of arrival: This family of techniques relies on the
proposed to asynchronously connect microgrids to second- fact that when a fault occurs on a line, it creates elec-
ary networks using ac–dc–ac power electronic interfaces to tromagnetic waves that propagate in both d irections
enable the control of power exports and fault current char- at essentially the speed of light and that reflect from
acteristics and that could have the added benefit of reducing various boundaries in the faulted circuit. The arrival
the arc flash risk. However, this would entail a consider- times of these electromagnetic waves can be used to
able cost, and adding the ac–dc–ac converters to the power provide a distance-relaying fault location function
path could have adverse reliability impacts. This would be on the circuit and trigger appropriate action. Time-
a critical consideration, given that the purpose of secondary of-arrival techniques were first developed to facili-
networks is to provide high-reliability service. tate extremely fast protection of transmission circuits
For the problem of low fault current availability from against faults relatively far from the relay’s measure-
IBRs, the solution most frequently applied at present is to ment point, and they have been highly effective in that
significantly increase the total inverter megavolt–ampere role. However, the transmission circuits protected by
capability in the IBR plants. For example, an IBR plant time-of-arrival techniques tend to be much longer than
designed to serve 10 MVA of a load may use 20-MVA, or distribution circuits (transmission line lengths com-
higher, inverters to provide more fault current. This has obvi- monly used in studies of time-of-arrival techniques are
ous cost ramifications, and, even then, it is generally a good ≥100 km, whereas most distribution circuits are shorter
idea to conduct electromagnetic transient simulations with a than 20 km). Also, transmission circuits protected by
detailed, code-based, manufacturer-specific inverter model time-of-arrival methods tend to be much simpler than
to ascertain whether the protection system will respond as distribution circuits, with far fewer tap points and in-
intended under all conditions. In summary, there exist solu- terfaces. Thus, in a distribution circuit, during a fault
tions to the key challenges, but they tend to be quite expen- one typically observes dozens of arrivals of primary
sive and complex. There is a need for research that leads to and reflected electromagnetic waves within the first
the development of new solutions that offer effective pro- few microseconds, making the use of the time of ar-
tection at a lower cost. Some of the potential pathways that rival very difficult in distribution.
might lead to promising developments in advanced solutions 2) Waveshape: The waveshape-based traveling wave
to these protection challenges are described in the following. techniques make use of the frequency dependency of
circuit impedances. When the electromagnetic waves
Technologies for Very Low-Cost mentioned in the preceding propagate from a fault,
Differential Protection their waveshape is altered by the fact that the line acts
As noted, various members of the differential protection fam- as a filter, changing the relative magnitudes of various
ily are widely viewed as the most viable solutions for the frequency components. The degree to which the wave-
protection of IBR-sourced microgrids. Preliminary results shapes change can be used to estimate how far along
suggest that, from a technical perspective, differential protec- the line a wave has propagated and thus to provide a
tion should work within certain conditions, and in the future, distance-to-fault estimate. Several variants of this tech-
this technique may be demonstrated within a wider variety of nique have been reported in the literature. The approach
system configurations with DERs. The primary obstacle to has been shown to work on transmission circuits, but
the wider use of differential methods is cost. This could be like the time-of-arrival technique, it would be very dif-
addressed with new, inexpensive relays and associated trans- ficult to apply in distribution. The two main reasons are
ducers/sensors for distribution use, and low-price, cyberse- that 1) the frequency-dependent parameters of the dis-
cure, burst-tolerant, reconfigurable communications systems. tribution line would need to be known with precision,
and they typically are not, and 2) in distribution, the line
New Protection Techniques length across which electromagnetic waves travel is so
and Associated Hardware short that the frequency filtering effect is negligible.
Alternative protection techniques may still prove effec- Although there are difficult challenges to overcome,
tive in protecting IBR-energized microgrids in secondary traveling wave techniques remain an active area of research
networks. Potential candidates are described next, but this because they have some highly desirable properties. The
should not be taken as an exhaustive list, and innovation in most obvious one is that traveling wave techniques can
this area of protecting IBRs and microgrids in secondary enable protection to be extremely fast, but other properties
networks is key. make traveling wave solutions intriguing for IBR-sourced
systems and secondary networks. For example, traveling
Traveling Waves wave solutions do not rely on high-magnitude fault cur-
Traveling wave-based protection is already in commercial rents; they detect a fault itself, not the system’s response to a
use in transmission. Two main types have been described in fault. This means that traveling wave techniques could still
the literature, and they are discussed in the following: work in fault current-limited, IBR-sourced power systems.

Also, the distance-relaying function provided by traveling- tion would be required, and participation by IBR and relay
wave techniques could be used to enable a relay to deter- manufacturers would be essential.
mine whether a reverse current through an NP is feeding
a primary side fault (trip) or is simply normal IBR-sourced Conclusions
current back-feeding the grid (do not trip). Both families This article discussed power system protection in the presence
of traveling-wave techniques for distribution would benefit of two technologies designed to improve power system reli-
from hardware development in the areas of extremely high- ability: secondary networks and microgrids. It was shown
sampling-rate meters and optical sensors that have faster that each technology is effective on its own in improving
responses than electromagnetic transducers do and that do reliability. Also, because each technology provides a unique
not suffer from magnetic saturation. reliability benefit (secondary networks via redundancy in
the power path at distribution points and microgrids via the
Undervoltage Relaying use of local sources), there is some incentive to use the two
When a local fault occurs within a microgrid in either on- technologies together. Unfortunately, there are compatibil-
or off-grid mode, the voltage on the affected circuit usually ity challenges, particularly in the area of protection. These
falls to a low level, commonly lower than 0.2 pu (noting that difficulties are magnified if a microgrid uses IBRs and if
high-impedance faults are a separate, challenging issue). its sources are distributed instead of centralized. The arti-
Thus, undervoltage relaying should give a reliable indication cle discussed some potential pathways toward protection
of the existence of a fault, but because the voltage gradients technologies that overcome these challenges and enable
along the circuit will be small, undervoltage relaying has DERs and microgrids to be successfully deployed on sec-
difficulty indicating the location of the fault. Still, prelimi- ondary networks.
nary results suggest that this technique might have a role to
play in the protection of microgrids, particularly those pow- For Further Reading
ered by distributed IBRs, and work in this area is ongoing. M. Behnke et al., Secondary network distribution systems
background and issues related to the interconnection of dis-
Machine Learning of System Conditions tributed resources, National Renewable Energy Lab., Gold-
It has been demonstrated that machine learning techniques en, CO, Tech. Rep. NREL/TP-560-38079, 2005.
can be used in distribution system protection. On radial dis- E. Greenwald, Electrical Hazards and Accidents: Their
tribution circuits, when appropriate training sets are available, Cause and Prevention. New York: Wiley, 1991.
several classifications and clustering techniques are effective J. Domin and T. Blackburn, Protective Relaying Princi-
in enabling a relay to distinguish between in-zone and out-of- ples and Applications, 4th ed., Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press,
zone faults by using only local measurements. These classifiers 2014.
“learn” the circuit through training data sets for each potential E. Sortomme, S. S. Venkata, and J. Mitra, “Microgrid
system configuration and several different event types. These Protection using communication-assisted digital relays,”
data sets are typically derived from batches of simulations on IEEE Trans. Power Del., vol. 25, no. 4, pp. 2,789–2,796,
the circuit. The need for high-quality data sets is a challenge 2010. doi: 10.1109/TPWRD.2009.2035810.
to the use of machine learning in protection, particularly for R. Salcedo et al., “Benefits of a nonsynchronous mi-
nonradial systems and for structures that have variable bound- crogrid on dense-load LV secondary networks,” IEEE
aries, such as networked and ad hoc microgrids. Trans. Power Del., vol. 31, no. 3, pp. 1,076–1,084, 2016. doi:
10.1109/TPWRD.2015.2420594.
Techniques Assisted by the Inverters Used in DERs M. J. Reno, S. Brahma, A. Bidram, and M. Ropp, “In-
As is discussed in the Part 1 article, a dependence on IBRs fluence of inverter-based resources on microgrid protection:
creates certain challenges for protection system designers. Part 1,” IEEE Power Energy Mag., vol. 19, no. 3, pp. 36–46,
However, the unique capabilities of IBRs could also provide 2021.
opportunities for new, holistic protection system designs in M. Ropp, M. Reno, W. Bower, J. Reilly, and S. S. Ven-
which the source IBRs actively participate in the protec- kata, “Secondary networks and protection: Implications for
tion scheme. In particular, IBRs have a unique ability to DER and microgrid interconnection,” Sandia National Lab-
change their output current in predictable ways in response oratories, Albuquerque, NM, SAND2020-11209, November
to system conditions, for example, by changing the negative 2020.
sequence component and by adding specific low-order har-
monics. These changes in the output current could provide Biographies
a crude means of communicating to other system elements, Michael E. Ropp is with Sandia National Laboratories, Al-
such as relays, the conditions detected by the IBR, and the buquerque, New Mexico, 87185, USA.
information passed in this way could be harnessed to cre- Matthew J. Reno is with Sandia National Laboratories,
ate a cooperative system control and protection system. To Albuquerque, New Mexico, 87185, USA.
p&e
realize such a holistic design, inverter response standardiza-

Practical
By Scott Manson
and Ed McCullough
Microgrid Promises and
Protection
Challenges
Solutions
M
MICROGRIDS AND INVERTER-BASED RESOURCES
(IBRs) offer an exciting promise of clean, renewable, and resil-
ient energy. However, these emerging technologies pose a new
set of challenges due to simulated inertia, limited overload
current contributions, firmware-based inverter behavior, and
more. This article explains some of these challenges and shares
several common techniques used to overcome them with pro-
grammable protective relays (PPRs).
The prevalence of IBRs is expected to continue to grow in
microgrids and electric utility grids as governments and corpo-
rations pursue aggressive renewable energy goals that necessi-
tate the integration of batteries, photovoltaics (PVs), wind, and
nonfossil-fueled energy sources. The decarbonization of elec-
tricity generation requires electric power systems to function
with variable numbers of conventional rotating synchronous
generators and/or IBRs online.
Protection systems keep society functioning by isolating
faults and mitigating disturbances, thereby keeping critical
infrastructure online and protecting the environment, pro-
cesses, revenues, assets, and human lives. Uptime (reliability)
is directly related to quality of life. Humans are directly pro-
tected by removing fault currents and indirectly protected by
keeping hospitals powered, ship systems online, and military
facilities operational and safeguarding assets, such as elec-
tric power system conductors, transformers, motors, and the


processes that produce revenue. What store, factory, or home The control and protection of microgrids are highly inter-
can operate without electric power? dependent, and to solve this challenge, modern PPRs have
PPRs are the microprocessor devices most closely cou- taken on a larger role than traditional PPRs for utility grids.
pled to all utility grids and microgrids. PPRs are required Depending on the application, PPRs are placed in switch-
to protect life, the environment, and assets from damage gear, the yard, or a control room. PPRs contain large num-
on both utility grids and microgrids. PPRs commonly per- bers of protocols and physical hardware input/output, allow-
form only protection functions on utility grids, whereas they ing them to control and monitor inverters simultaneously
commonly provide both protection and control functions to circuit breakers, tap changers, and so on. As shown in
on microgrids. PPRs are digital protective relays with user- Figure 1, a PPR interrupts currents by tripping circuit break-
programmable logic, synchronized metering, oscillographic ers, and it reconnects to the system by closing breakers once
data collection, sequence-of-events collection, high-speed synchronization is confirmed. A PPR and/or a combination
communication protocols, and so forth. PPRs came to the of inverter controls may also control (dispatch) inverters,
market in the mid-1990s as high-voltage transmission-class monitor inverters to enhance protection, and simultaneously
digital protective relays and have evolved into small-form- provide comprehensive situational awareness through visual-
factor devices for the industrial and medium-voltage dis- ization, archiving, oscillography, and error-logging systems.
tribution market. PPRs for small microgrids are frequently This consolidation of more features into fewer electronic
used as both a protective relay and microgrid controller. For devices is a proven method for improving a power system’s
larger microgrid jobs, PPRs provide a hard-wired physical resilience and reliability and has been employed to overcome
connection for remote and centralized microgrid controllers. microgrid protection challenges.
This consolidation of func-
tionality has also reduced the
costs of operating installed
microgrids. For example, a single
PPR can replace a programmable
logic controller, load-sharing
system, digital automatic volt-
age regulator, digital governor,
on-load tap changer controller,
automatic transfer switch con-
troller, computer, fault recorder,
oscilloscope, (multiple) single-
function relays, and so forth.
Because PPRs are the most reli-
able microprocessor-based elec-
tronics on the power system and
protection is mandatory, it is
natural that PPRs replace other
lower-reliability components.
This article provides several
solutions for a low-cost, reli-
able, and safe PPR-based pro-
tection system for microgrids.
It shows that using PPRs allows
the user to increase the use of
inverters and renewable gener-
ation sources without impact-
i n g t h e s a fe t y of h u m a n s ,
processes, equipment, or the
environment. To fully realize
the advantages of this, the engi-
©SHUTTERSTOCK.COM/LUCADP
neers designing microgrids and

selecting IBRs, circuit break-
ers, switchgear, and cyberse-
curity systems must be experi-
enced in PPR techniques.

PPRs are required to protect life, the environment,
and assets from damage on both utility grids
and microgrids.
This article starts with a summary of the common protec- Inverter Fault Current Limitations
tion challenges posed by implementing microgrids using some Figure 2 shows a relative comparison of the total fault current
form of an IBR, and then it provides several common types of produced by a synchronous generator versus an equally rated
microgrid protection solutions proven on projects worldwide. continuous inverter. The fault current produced by generators
dynamically changes as a function of fault duration. The first
Inverter Challenges few cycles of a fault are characterized by very high currents,
This section points out some of the most common chal- followed by slightly lower currents. Protection engineers sim-
lenges that inverter implementation poses for both utility and plify these changes by assuming artificial impedances behind
microgrid protection and control systems: limited fault cur- an ideal voltage source. These impedances are the transient
rent, negative-sequence current contribution, the influence reactance ( X l ) and subtransient reactance (X m ). The transient
of battery state of charge, inverter response time, load inrush reactance is the value used for coordination of most protec-
current, and frequency tracking. These examples indicate tive relays to a traditional synchronous generation-driven
that the power and flexibility of inverter digital controls can power system (from approximately 1900 to today).
be harnessed with a clear set of standards to ensure consis- As Figure 2 shows, inverter currents during faulted-
tent behaviors and coordination with PPRs. circuit conditions are radically different from those of syn-
chronous generators. Fault currents produced by inverters
fall into two general categories: 1) silicon short-term limits
PPR Inverter and 2) longer-term thermal limits posed by the heat sink and
Visualize thermal management control. Inverters reduce their current
Control from the silicon to the thermal limit after the silicon time.
Microprocessor
Relay Monitor Some inverters stop commutating after sustained operation
I
at the long-term thermal limit. Others reduce voltage to
Transformer maintain current within limits and only trip if the resulting
Protect voltage dips below acceptable limits.
Circuit Breaker
Power electronic devices are permanently damaged
Current Transformer when silicon current limits are exceeded. Thus, firmware in
the inverters strictly limits this current, and for this reason,
Potential Transformer
the silicon limit is sometimes referred to as either a hard-
ware or surge limit.
figure 1. PPRs providing protection, control, and monitoring. Thermal limits are commonly adapted in inverter firm-
ware using real-time measurements of aluminum heat sinks
and cooling water jackets. Because the hardware associated
Fault Current per Unit of Nameplate
with heat removal is expensive, the thermal limit is often the

8 X ″ Subtransient Reactance driving factor in overall inverter construction costs.
X ′ Transient Reactance
Inverter Negative-Sequence
5 Current Contributions
The totalized inverter fault current limit is calculated as the sum
of positive-sequence current (I1) and negative-sequence current
Silicon (I2) (see Figure 3). Zero-sequence currents are most commonly
2 suppressed in inverters. The level of I2 differs greatly between
Thermal
1 inverters and generators. Generators naturally provide signifi-
cant levels of I2, whereas I2 in the inverters is subject to the con-
Silicon Stop Commutation trol loops and current limits programmed in firmware.
Limit Time Time (Optional)
In general, most grid-interactive inverters do not pro-
Time
vide I2; however, that is changing. I2 is an important quan-
figure 2. The fault current of inverters versus generators. tity for some conventional protection methods because

negative-sequence elements are excellent for detecting fault must be confirmed. Modern inverters are digitally controlled,
direction and for the supervision of high-speed tripping ele- switch in the tens of kilohertz, and are therefore capable of
ments. I2 levels in a circuit are an effective way to identify millisecond response times. However, actual inverter fault
unbalanced faults. Protection engineers have depended on response behavior is a function of supplier firmware, and
I2 for decades in their designs at transmission-level voltages. behavior may also be impacted by site-specific configura-
tion and dynamically adjustable parameters. The authors
Battery State-of-Charge Influence
Fault current delivered by a generator is primarily a function
of physical electromagnetic interactions, whereas inverter I2
behavior is governed by software, and firmware and may be
Negative-Sequence Current (p.u.)

5 Generator
limited under certain conditions. Figure 4 gives an example of a Currents
battery system with batteries offline or mostly discharged.
Under these conditions, the operational capability of the
inverter is reduced. Thermal issues, battery problems, a low
state of charge, and having parallel inverters out of service
are all reasons why inverter fault current may be reduced.
Note that the high-power factor fault condition shown in Fig-
1 Inverter
ure 4 is of high-resistive faults and/or low-inductive power
Currents
systems associated with microgrids. Transmission and dis-
tribution systems have mostly reactive current during faults, 1 5 I1
lower voltage systems like microgrids can have high power Positive-Sequence Current (p.u.)
factor (highly resistive) faults.
figure 3. A relative comparison of the positive- and
One option to prevent the reduction of fault currents is to
negative-sequence components of fault current: inverter
ensure that batteries do not enter low-charge states so that the
versus generator.
current limiting displayed in Figure 4 does not occur. This
charge buffer must be considered in the sizing of batteries for
both economic and fault-related limitations. It is important to
monitor steady-state and transient current-delivering capabili- Reactive
ties of each IBR. PPRs are often used to directly control and Current
Current
Fault
monitor each IBR system and generator to make certain that Capability
Current
effective protection and control margins are maintained. Region
Inverter Response Time Active

Another consideration is the inverter response time. Table 1 Current
summarizes the typical response time of conventional controls
and protection. Governors and engine fuel systems respond to
a power system’s frequency decay within approximately 1 s.
Generator automatic voltage regulators typically respond in Battery SoC Dynamic Limits
fewer than 0.2 s to voltage disturbances; time-overcurrent
protection operates in 0.1–7 s load-shedding systems prevent figure 4. Inverter fault current restrictions. SoC: state
power system blackouts in a few power system cycles. Dis- of change.
tance protective relays identify faults and command circuit
breakers to trip in under a cycle, and traveling-wave relays
detect and identify fault locations in only a few milliseconds. table 1. The device times.
This timescale of controls and protection is not an accident; Device Typical Response Time (s)
these scales were designed into the power system to ensure a
Governor 1
smooth coordination between the controls and the protection
equipment, which allows protective relays to isolate faults Automatic voltage regulator 0.2
before controllers overreact or shut down. Time-overcurrent protection 0.1
Inverter designs are relatively new, whereas utility power
Load-shedding protection 0.04
protection and controls are a complex, interwoven set of
functionalities designed and perfected during the last 100 Distance protection 0.01
or more years. Although inverter behavior is not constrained Traveling-wave protection 0.002
by the same physical limitations as generators, the coordina-
Inverter Variable
tion of inverter time constants with other system components

Inverter currents during faulted-circuit
conditions are radically different from those
of synchronous generators.
have found significant advantages in the close cooperation nameplate power before voltage sagging occurs. Note that
between protection and inverter control engineers. motor and load rotational speed and load characteristics vary
Rotating generator sets (gensets) have significant iner- considerably, and the typical values of 50 and 15%, respec-
tial (kinetic) energy storage, whereas inverters do not store tively, are meant to be representative. The nature of motor
any kinetic energy. Gensets are synchronous generators loads such as inertia and speed-related load characteristics is
that are shaft coupled to an engine (prime mover) and have, that they can cause large variability in these estimates. Cir-
historically, been the primary power-producing equipment cumstances such as motor pole count, motor X/R (the ratio of
for the utility grid. For example, a 500-kW, reciprocating the system reactance to the system resistance) ratios (electri-
gas engine-driven genset has an inertia of roughly 1 s; this cal time constants), mechanical load characteristics, and con-
equates to the energy storage of full-rated power for 1 s. tactor sensitivity can all affect successful cold-load pickup.
A 500-kW, reciprocating gas genset would therefore have Further modeling can determine more accurate numbers.
500 kJ of stored kinetic energy at rated speed. Note, how- Figure 5 depicts the root-mean-square current required for
ever, that such a generator must slow down to 0 Hz to facili- a direct online (DOL) motor start. After some initial inrush,
tate the harvesting of this stored inertial energy. the DOL motor gathers kinetic energy as it gains speed. Dur-
ing this time, the DOL absorbs a much larger amount than
Load Inrush Current rated power; after a start time of a few seconds, the motor
Inverters with batteries store many orders of magnitude more and load are up to speed and the current consumed is the load
energy than rotating conventional gensets; however, the rate power. Inverters limit current during large motor starts that
at which this energy can be released to the power system exceed the overload capability of inverters, which may result
is limited by silicon current and heatsink thermal limits. in unwanted voltage sag or unsuccessful load energization.
Gensets, on the other hand, store limited amounts of kinetic Focusing on the “Inrush” of the motor start of Figure 5, the
energy, which is readily available for fast-starting loads. The magnetic inrush plot shows that the current waveforms in the
result is that gensets can reliably start direct-coupled motor first few cycles have a large dc offset. This dc offset is due to
loads up to 50% of their nameplate power, whereas invert- magnetic remanence in the steel of transformers, motors, and
ers (unless purposely built with surge capability) can reli- other magnetic devices; remanence is predicated by the point
ably start only direct-coupled motor loads up to 15% of their on wave of the voltage signal when the circuit breaker (or
Current Current
Inrush
dc
Kinetic
Energy
Buildup
Load Power
Time Time
X/R Time Constant

(a) (b)
figure 5. (a) The motor cold-load pickup and (b) magnetic inrush. X/R: the ratio of the system reactance to the system
resistance.

The industry is strongly advised to move all inverters
to a grid-forming-with-droop mode of operation
with limited or no frequency-tracking dependence.
contactor) to the motor or transformer was last opened. This islanded microgrid, and several challenges arise. In overload or
phenomenon becomes more pronounced in larger transform- faults, this particular battery IBR produces a 120% surge cur-
ers closed onto an energized bus than in DOL motors, but the rent for 10 s and then a 100% current indefinitely; during this
physics are the same. The dc offset decays at a rate described overload, the inverter voltage is held at a low level, and after
by the X/R ratio of a power system. Larger X/R ratios make the 5 s (configurable), the inverter stops commutating. The PV IBR
dc component last longer; for example, high-efficiency trans- is continuously limited to a 100% current at a lower than 0.8
formers with small R and large X are the most prolonged and power factor. When grid connected, the utility grid is capable
difficult for inverters. X/R ratios range from 4 to 50 for power of producing fault currents at approximately eight times the
systems, with typical microgrids having roughly 15. This dc nominal current rating of interconnection. Because normal
component can cause momentary current requirements of two feeder loading so closely resembles the fault current capability
times or greater the nominal transformer current. Ironically, a of the islanded IBR, the reclosers downstream of the IBR must
less efficient power transport system (greater resistance and be prompted to dynamically switch to more sensitive (different)
lower X/R ratios) has fewer dc offset problems. Resistance can protection when islanded; however, there is no communications
be added or inverters can be programmed to emulate this resis- infrastructure connecting the downstream reclosers.
tance. As discussed later in this article, islanded inverters can One solution to this problem is for the PPR at the utility
ramp and avoid magnetic inrush altogether. disconnection point to communicate a frequency reference
shift to a battery energy storage system inverter. This higher
Frequency-Tracking Failures frequency prompts the downstream recloser relays to shift
Frequency-tracking failures in grid-following inverters have a to more sensitive and different protection settings, all with-
history of causing instability and lost revenue for power sys- out the cost or complexity of a communications system. This
tems. As shown in Figure 6, some types of inverters track the ability of inverters to quickly shift system frequency is one
power system’s frequency; however, during ac faulted-circuit advantage of a low-inertia power system. Note that this same
conditions, the ac voltage waveform is suppressed and the technique is possible with lower-inertia-distributed gensets
inverter cannot accurately track the frequency. This puts the but can take -roughly 0.5-s longer than inverters. A similar
inverter into the position of having to “guess” the power sys- frequency-shifting technique is used in Germany to force
tem. Note that inverters with no dependence on “tracking” the IBRs offline without communication.
power system’s frequency offer a more resilient response.
When inverters fail to accurately track the power system’s
frequency, they will phase shift away from the power system
and then trip offline (stop commutating). This may happen dur- +
ing power system transients, switching operations, or faulted- dc ac
circuit events. Thus, even the best protection system cannot stop –
some inverters from demonstrating unreliable behavior. For this Park
reason, the industry is strongly advised to move all inverters to a Transformation PWM
A
grid-forming-with-droop mode of operation with limited or no Vd DQ
B
frequency-tracking dependence. This necessitates moving the Modulator
Vq ABC C
industry away from grid-following standards.
Further IBR challenges not addressed in this article
include human error and preferences, Park and Clarke trans- δ ~60 Hz
dt 4 kHz
forms, excessive control complexity, a lack of transparency
regarding intended firmware behavior, and disparate (and Best-Guess
Frequency
contradictory) industry inverter standards. Frequency
Tracking
Adapting Protection
Without Communication figure 6. The inverter frequency tracking “guessing” the
In this example, a battery and a PV IBR on a distribution feeder power system’s frequency and phase angle. PWM: pulse-
are islanded by an upstream protection event; this forms an width modulated; DQ: direct and quadrature.

Adapting Protection (i.e., PPRs). PPRs are placed at all load feeders, at each gen-
With Communication erator, and at the battery. The genset and battery inverter PPRs
In this example, an industrial facility with eight parallel are programmed to control, dispatch, start, stop, and monitor
gensets and a battery is configured such that no single set of the gensets and inverters; these same relays communicate their
time-overcurrent curves can distinguish load from faults for status to downstream load and feeder relays. Downstream
all operational conditions. During low-process load condi- relays are programmed to dynamically revise their protection
tions, gensets are sequentially turned off for fuel economy settings as the available fault currents change. By using this
and reduced emissions; the number of gensets online can dynamic protection methodology, PPRs enable the plant to
vary from zero to eight. The plant load varies from 200 to meet both environmental and human safety requirements.
1,800 A, and every genset contributes 1,500 A (transient
reactance) fault duty. The battery inverter is sized at 300 Incorporating Old Switchgear
A continuous, produces 600 A of surge current and 300 A Into a New Microgrid
thermal overload current (see Figure 2), and is configured Adding renewable or battery-backed generation commonly
to stop commutation at 4 s. Eight gensets produce 12,000 A requires the modification of existing switchgear and that the
combined fault current, and with the battery online, the total modified gear be updated to the latest regional safety stan-
fault current is equal to or greater than 12,300 A for 4 s. dards. By replacing older single-function relays with PPRs,
By selecting many small gensets that can be turned off, end users reduce costs and can make microgrids viable by
the operators designed the facility to use minimal fuel (hence, eliminating the need to buy new gear.
minimal carbon dioxide emissions) and sized the battery to National Electric Code-sensitive earth ground require-
allow the facility to operate without gensets at low-load condi- ments must be met to ensure human safety. Arc-flash incident
tions. Although optimally designed for carbon emissions and energies are minimized with PPR light-detection elements.
minimal environmental impact, the facility cannot be safely Gear must be retested and approved for reenergization by
energized because the single-function protective relays chosen regulatory entities. PPRs have onboard light sensors to detect
cannot be set to prevent nuisance trips during high-load periods arc-flash events, substantially reducing energy by tripping
and also sensitive enough to detect faults when a single genset upstream circuit breakers. PPRs also have onboard sensi-
or battery inverter is online. This is a case where energizing tive earth-ground fault calculation and protection algorithms
this facility would endanger human life or false trip the facility not available in single-function relays and possess onboard
during high-load conditions at great cost to the operation. This oscillography recordings to show inspectors that they are
is a typical microgrid problem that is solved by dynamically functioning correctly.
modifying the protection of PPRs.
A common solution to this problem is to replace single- Using Existing Gensets
function protection devices with multifunction, programmable, to Improve Resiliency
microprocessor-based relays with high-speed communication If loads in an islanded microgrid exceed renewable pro-
duction for a prolonged period, the battery system’s stored
Load energy will eventually be depleted. The solution to this prob-
lem requires an on-site genset with sufficient stored fuel and/
or a utility connection.
Many facilities have large, stranded investments in
standby gensets with automatic transfer switches, as pre-
sented in the conventional solution in Figure 7(a). Large
Automatic
campuses can have hundreds of gensets and an automatic
Transfer Switch transfer switch on each building; however, these switches
(a) inherently isolate gensets from the grid and prevent them
Load Standby Power from participating in a microgrid. These gensets are there-
fore stranded assets.
In the improved PPR solution shown in Figure 7(b), the
Circuit
Breakers genset can be used to participate in energizing a campus
microgrid by eliminating the automatic transfer switches and
installing a PPR to control the generator and grid breaker.
This configuration enables the relay to seamlessly synchro-
Programmable
nize the generator to a grid to support demand-charge-avoid-
Protective Relay
ance techniques and to improve the resilience of a renewable
(b)
(inverter-based) microgrid. The relay also commonly has
figure 7. Using PPRs to build a microgrid from existing remote communication with a central microgrid control-
gensets. (a) Conventional and (b) improved. ler and can natively dispatch, start, stop, and monitor the

older genset. Distribution utilities, however, may not permit reconfiguration if any grid section is faulted and isolated.
the paralleling of generators with the utility grid and may Differential protection relays are used for all cables, buses,
require mechanical interlocks to prevent paralleling. transformers because differential elements are insensitive to
PPRs are easily justified as the lowest cost solution for the varying (and nondeterministic) fault levels of IBRs. The
this challenge because the protection must be upgraded to relays at the PCC automatically open (island) the facility and
allow the genset to parallel with the power system. PPRs automatically resynchronize the PCCs by communicating
are readily programmed for this function. The elimination of with IBR relays via a dispatch message. IBRs are dispatched
the automatic transfer switches removes a common point of for optimal resilience by distributed PPRs. These systems
failure and improves the reliability metrics on the microgrid. are designed with layered redundancies and provide the most
reliable microgrid power for critical infrastructure.
Preventing Outages Caused
By Intermittent Energy Helping Inverters
The increasing penetration of nondispatchable (intermittent) With Transformer Energization
energy reduces inertial ride through (frequency resilience) The magnetic inrush of transformers must be considered
and increases the volatility of the power system. For exam- when energizing an islanded microgrid powered by IBRs.
ple, if a microgrid is reliant on PV generation to meet load As depicted in Figure 5, this inrush can have a large dc com-
demand, a cloud-shading event during a moment of high ponent that falls away as a function of X/R. Depending on
load can cause an outage. To avoid this, off-grid renewable the X/R value, this phenomenon can reach several times the
microgrids are designed such that PV generation nominal rated transformer current, which typically ranges from a few
power is sized from six to eight times the average load to cycles to 0.5 s. This phenomenon challenges the surge limits
achieve renewable targets. Similarly, battery-discharge capa- of inverters associated with silicon limitations.
bility is sized from three to four times the peak load. Increasing the difficulty of this problem are the U.S. meth-
A low-cost solution to prevent unwanted, wide-scale outages ods of sizing transformers for building service entrances,
is to balance the load to the inverter capability by automatically where transformers are sized not for load but for the full rat-
shedding (tripping off) noncritical loads such as refrigeration, ing of the downstream conductors and transformer. There-
heating, ventilation, and so forth. This load shedding must be fore, on average, transformers at service entrances are sized
accomplished within the silicon-limit time of the inverters (Fig- at more than two times the maximum loading of a building.
ure 2) to ensure that the facility does not black out. PPRs are The most common solutions to the magnetization chal-
readily programmed to provide this load shedding. PPRs placed lenge are
at the PV inverter and at the battery inverter communicate the ✔✔ flux-management methods
overload event to the downstream load relays, which, in turn, ✔✔ point-on-wave switching
trip the load. PPR load-shedding actions are performed within ✔✔ bypass systems
one cycle (fewer than 16.7 ms) to ensure that inverters do not ✔✔ synchronous condensers or generators
move into a thermal-limiting mode or stop commutating. PPRs ✔✔ oversized inverters
must communicate with the battery systems to understand real- ✔✔ simultaneous techniques.
time overload current capability.
Flux Management
Building a Resilient Microgrid By using a flux-management method to reduce the trans-
A resilient microgrid can tolerate disturbances and keep crit- former inrush problem of inverters, the inverters adjust the
ical loads online. Resilient microgrid designs use the most
advanced, high-speed PPR and communication systems to
make certain that critical loads stay online, providing the Prime
highest resilience possible. PCC1 PCC2 Power
Figure 8 provides an example of a resilient power system. PV Battery
This architecture is used by oil- and gas-producing facilities,
research facilities, and other mission-critical loads. In Figure 8, PPR PPR PPR PPR PPR
there are two points of common coupling (PCCs) sized to ensure
PPR PPR PPR PPR PPR
that each can carry full facility loading. Prime power turbine-
drive gensets operate on a full-time basis, balancing the PCC
tie flow to near zero, guaranteeing a fully redundant source of PPR PPR
power for the island if the utility is lost. PVs and batteries are
used to reduce fuel costs and offset the utility demand charges
associated with the daily load variations of the facility.
PPRs are placed at each genset, PV, battery, PCC, feeder, figure 8. A resilient power system topology. PCC: point of
bus coupler, and load. PPRs provide automatic power system common coupling.

Cold-load pickup schemes for microgrids are called load-
reacceleration systems or black-start systems, and they add
loads incrementally over time to prevent overloading IBRs.
voltage and/or frequency of the voltage waveform. For exam- circuit breaker wear and closing times change. Certainly,
ple, some inverters linearly ramp the voltage and frequency at these methods can be improved through direct flux measure-
a constant ratio. Others fix the frequency but ramp the voltage. ment and power electronic closing circuits; however, this is
These techniques work fine with inverters from the same sup- a costly solution.
plier designed to start together, but coordination is required
for large grid-connected infrastructure where several IBRs Bypass Systems
may be attempting to simultaneously re-energize a grid. In As shown in Figure 9, a bypass system balances the flux
sizing inverters for flux management, a conservative estimate before energization through a tertiary (third) winding. For
is to size them from one to two times the transformer rating. this style of black-start mitigation, PPRs should be pro-
Modern PPRs are commonly used to isolate sensitive grammed to provide full transformer protection during this
loads during these flux-managed start-ups. Voltage and fre- sequence of events. This technique has proven to be more
quency deviate from nominal during the reenergization of an robust and requires less maintenance than the point-on-wave
islanded microgrid using a flux-management method. This technique. On the downside, this method is costly due to the
may cause contactors to chatter and power electronic power extra circuit breaker, custom transformer, and reactor.
supplies and uninterruptible power supplies to go into alarm
mode for off-nominal conditions. Older protective relays Synchronous Condensers or Generators
will not track frequencies and voltages and their protection Synchronous condensers or generators can be added to pro-
elements may not function as desired. vide magnetic inrush demand over the inverter overload
capability. This is a reliable and simple solution that can
Point-on-Wave Switching correct magnetic inrush problems. Additional PPRs must be
The point-on-wave technique attempts to “remember” where purchased to start, control, and protect the condensers and/
the flux in one or more of the steel legs of the core was left at or generators from damage. For some islanded microgrids,
the last de-energization. The point-on-wave technique uses a synchronous condensers have been used to improve the sta-
PPR to control a special circuit breaker with individual clos- bility margins and fault ride-through capability of inverter-
ing of each phase; this enables each phase to be closed inde- dominated microgrids.
pendently at voltage zero crossings to limit inrush. There
are, however, two main challenges of this system: Oversized Inverters
✔✔ how best to properly estimate the flux from indirect Although inverters can energize large transformers using a
voltage and current measurements when de-energiza- flux-management method, voltage and frequency will likely
tion occurs deviate from nominal during a black start. In scenarios
✔✔ how best to maintain the millisecond-accuracy close where this voltage ramp is not acceptable, inverters can be
timing of the point-on-wave closing system with con- oversized to overcome magnetic inrush challenges. Invert-
ventional circuit breakers. ers can be sized to provide reactive power beyond the real-
These systems incur the cost of the specialty single-phase power limit of the battery cells.
circuit breaker and require regular human recalibration as
Sequenced Technique
This technique involves distributing the transformer inrush
among multiple inverters and sequencing the energization of
PPR
downstream transformers. With this method, each inverter is
CB1 controlled by a PPR via a time-synchronized start.
In the simultaneous method, high-speed communica-
tion is not required among PPRs because events are pre-
CB2
progrmmed to start at a certain time, either from the relay
front panel, remotely, or from a supervisory control and
Bypass System
data acquisition (SCADA) system. Note that SCADA sys-
tem communication can be performed at a very low data
figure 9. The bypass system of transformer energization. rate and thus at a low cost. Downstream PPR automatically

closes circuit breakers after detecting healthy voltages for a PPRs (i.e., PPR2 and PPR3) sufficient time to open their
few seconds. This is the simplest, lowest cost, and most reli- reclosers. PPR1 issues a start (possibly in coordination with
able technique because no new equipment is required. It also a magnetic inrush mitigation system). The PPR at each cir-
allows the mixing of different inverters of differing sizes, cuit breaker and recloser then sequentially re-energizes its
manufacturers, and feature sets. adjacent device one at a time. This is done without com-
munication as the PPR detects the upstream energized line
Helping Inverters With Cold-Load Pickup and starts an internally programmed timer, which closes the
Cold-load pickup problems are fundamentally different from reclosers in sequence, i.e., PPR2 follows PPR1, and PPR3
magnetic-energization issues. Cold-load pickup is a function follows PPR2.
of spinning up inertial components or capacitors, whereas
magnetic inrush is a function of remanent flux. Load pickup is Grid Forming With Droop
in-phase current (real power) and energy consuming, whereas There are two common control modes of grid-scale inverters:
magnetic inrush is out-of-phase currents (reactive power) and grid forming and grid following. The grid-following control
doesn’t require energy. For example, DOL motor starting can method uses a frequency-tracking algorithm (see Figure 6)
have magnetic inrush followed by a significant level of cur- and requires attachment to a large power system with signifi-
rent required to speed up the rotating mass of the rotor and of cant inertia and very slow changing frequency. In contrast,
the mechanical load. The time-integrated area of this inrushing the grid-forming control method typically assumes that the
power is the stored kinetic energy of the rotating mass. Cold- inverter is the sole proprietor of frequency control, and no
load pickup for microgrids also includes power electronic utility or large isochronous-driven generators are attached.
loads with inrush currents. Neither the isochronous grid-forming technique nor the
Whereas magnetic inrush phenomena challenge the grid-following technique work for all power system condi-
surge capacity of the inverter’s silicon, the effects of cold- tions. Attaching a pure isochronous grid-forming inverter
load pickup challenge the thermal withstand capability of to a high-inertia utility power system will invariably cause
the inverter’s (Figure 2). Thermal withstand limits are deter- the inverter to trip offline due to under or overcurrent condi-
mined by aluminum heat sinks and the cooling system of tions. Grid-following inverters will not energize an islanded
the inverter. A few options for mitigating inverter cold-load microgrid alone because grid-following methods require a
pickup challenges are to slow-changing grid frequency. PPRs can certainly be pro-
✔✔ purchase inverters rated for full inrush current (over- grammed to switch inverters from grid-forming to grid-fol-
sized, relative to nominal load) lowing modes, but there is a more robust solution than this.
✔✔ supplement inverters with a kinetic energy storage One solution for transitioning between grid-connected
system, such as synchronous generators or flywheels and islanded operation is to place the inverter permanently
(incurs additional capital and operating costs) into a grid-forming mode with droop-control. Many IBRs
✔✔ use soft-start or variable-speed drives (expensive) to and generators have inherent droop-control capabilities, but
mitigate load inrush currents PPRs can also be used to provide droop functionality. Droop
✔✔ program PPRs to lessen the system inrush currents control works in both grid-connected and islanded modes
with reacceleration or pickup schemes (low cost and without changing the inverter modes.
simple).
Cold-load pickup schemes for microgrids are called load- Adapting Relaying
reacceleration systems or black-start systems, and they add to Variable-Load Composition
loads incrementally over time to prevent overloading IBRs. The load composition of modern microgrids can vary con-
Both types of systems are fully automatic and programmed into siderably, causing voltage instability, frequency-regulation
PPRs. The systems that bring the
power system from the ground up
are called black-start systems and
commonly rely on fast-acting die-
sel-reciprocating engines to operate
Inverter PPR 1
before incrementally adding loads.
In the utility distribution feeder
system (Figure 8), the PPR at PPR 2 PPR 3
each circuit breaker and recloser
opens its adjacent devices upon de-
energization. In Figure 10, PPR1 Recloser Recloser
Load Load Load
(or a microgrid site controller) at the
inverter IBR issues a stop command
to the inverter, allowing downstream figure 10. A cold-load pickup problem solved with PPRs.

problems, and challenges to conventional protection meth- tuned to work with power systems that are dominated by
ods. When microgrids are paralleled to a utility power sys- impedance loads.
tem, the effects of load composition are reduced due to the Constant power loads decrease their current as the
losses associated with traditional power generation, trans- voltage increases. Constant power loads behave in an
mission, and distribution. When microgrids are islanded, the opposite way in response to constant impedance loads.
effects of variable-load composition can significantly impact Constant power loads thereby commonly destabilize the
protection systems. To explain this phenomenon, researchers gensets and IBRs that were tuned for a constant-imped-
have categorized loads into constant impedance (Z), constant ance power system.
current (I), constant power (P), and motor loads. To drama- To further demonstrate the effect that variable-load com-
tize the stark difference in how load types require inverters positions have on inverters, consider how typical motor loads
and generators to respond, contrast a constant impedance consume power as a function of frequency (see Figure 12). As
and constant power load. the frequency increases, these loads consume more power.
As presented in Figure 11, impedance loads increase As the frequency decreases, they reduce power consumption.
their current consumption as voltage increases. Impedance DOL loads provide a form of “brakes” to a power system’s
loads in the power system are the cables, lines, transform- frequency excursion and enable slow-acting conventional
ers, heating systems, and losses associated with electric generator governors and automatic voltage regulators to sta-
power transport. Inverters, governors, automatic voltage bilize a power system. They offer a similar advantage to any
regulators, and conventional systems are designed and IBR: IBRs and gensets are much easier to tune with a DOL-
dominated load composition. However, DOL loads can be
challenging to start with inverters because of inrush associ-
I ated with cold-load pickup issues.
Constant Impedance Load Load composition is the relative ratio of impedance,
constant power, constant current, and motor loads. Because
constant current loads are rare, microgrid designers focus
on impedance, constant power, and motor loads. Table 2
lists a simplified example of the most common load types.
Constant Power Load In this case, load composition varies significantly in the
V two formations (topologies) of the same microgrid. This
can occur, for example, if a large data center drops off a
figure 11. Constant impedance and constant power loads.
local microgrid, or if large agriculture motor pumps are
added to a circuit.
The effects of variable-load composition have frequently
P been observed to challenge controls and protection systems.
Protection engineers working on complex microgrids are
advised to understand and adapt their protection systems to
these variations. Electromagnetic transient hardware-in-the-
loop studies are a convenient way to explore these interac-
tions; these simulations simulate the power system with a
real-time update typically faster than 80 µs. This high-speed
simulation done in real time allows IBRs and PPRs to be
tested as if they were attached to a real power system.
To understand the effect that variable-load composition has
Hz on protection, take the example of underfrequency elements
60
that are ubiquitous in PPRs today. Frequency-tripping ele-
figure 12. Motor loads. ments are used for detecting open-circuit conditions, islanded
load-shedding systems, and to meet industry frequency ride-
through requirements at utility interconnection points. Many
table 2. Variable-load composition. microgrids require that frequency pickup times be selected
that can handle multiple load compositions. The most com-
Microgrid Impedance Constant
Topology Loads Power Motors mon solution is to adapt the frequency pickup and setpoints
dynamically if there are large load-composition changes.
Agriculturally 60% 0% 40%
dominated
Testing Microgrid Protection Systems
Data center 50% 50% 0% Testing is required to ensure that systems can safely be ener-
dominated
gized and meet project-functional requirements. Commissioning

and testing live microgrids is best done with time-syn- presented in Table 3 is mandatory for successful debug-
chronized PPRs at every IBR and utility point of coupling. ging during commissioning.
PPRs natively satisfy the microgrid testing standard (IEEE Site-acceptance testing involves witnessing events like
2030.8-2018); Table 3 summarizes the data-collection islanding, synchronization, and safety testing, such as
requirements of this standard. These data are collected by National Electrical Code-required sensitive earth-ground
the PPR and sent to a computer to be preserved for the testing, and so on. Because of the inherent interdependence
life of the microgrid. These data-collection methods pre- of PPRs and IBRs in the microgrid, it is strongly advised
serve event data, including islanding, synchronizing, loss that dynamic load banks be employed during final site-
of IBR, faults, open circuits, dispatch controls, and reac- acceptance testing. For example, to ensure that there are no
celeration, and are essential for any successful microgrid. underfrequency or directional element-protection misopera-
There are several phases of the microgrid testing process, tions, load banks are used to test full-load acceptance and
including hardware in the loop, commissioning, and site rejection on each IBR.
acceptance. The data collection presented in Table 3 is used
to document the protection and control system for all phases Conclusion
of testing and commissioning. There are two choices with inverter-based microgrids: 1)
Hardware-in-the-loop testing may be used to vali- Purchase oversized inverters or introduce additional devices
date PPR controls and protection systems in the lab. The (such as synchronous condensers) to recreate the fault cur-
microgrid, including its inverters, gensets, excitation sys- rent levels, inertias, and negative-sequence behaviors of syn-
tems, load composition, mechanical loads, and engine chronous generators; or 2) reduce the cost and complexity
fuel/air delivery systems, is modeled in an electromag- by using advanced inverters and PPRs, as described in this
netic transient model and computed in real time. Utility article. The authors predict that the rapid proliferation of
electric power systems are usually simulated as a single, PPRs and IBRs as renewable energy integrators will become
large, synchronous generator with properly tuned inertia increasingly competitive in a market driven by low cost and
and reactance. A simple Thévenin circuit model of a util- mandated reliability.
ity is not adequate because it does not contain the inertial,
transient, or subtransient effects of a real utility. Accurate For Further Reading
simulations are necessary to ensure that the PPR at the S. Manson, B. Kennedy, and M. Checksfield, “Solving tur-
PCC adequately tracks frequency, can identify open-cir- bine governor instability at low-load conditions,” in Proc.
cuit upstream conditions, and that adaptive protection sys- 62nd Annu. Petrol. Chem. Ind. Techn. Conf., Houston, TX,
tems are functional under all topologies and all combina- Oct. 2015, pp. 1–9. doi: 10.1109/PCICON.2015.7435099.
tions of online/offline IBRs. E. Limpaecher, R. Salcedo, E. Corbett, S. Manson, B.
Commissioning is done by protection experts after the Nayak, and W. Allen, “Lessons learned from hardware-in-
equipment is installed but before the power system is ener- the-loop testing of microgrid control systems,” in Proc. Grid
gized. During this phase, the wiring, current transformers, Future Symp., Cleveland, OH, Oct. 2017, pp. 1–6.
voltage transformers, circuit-breaker controls, synchroniza- S. Manson, K.G. Ravikumar, and S.K. Raghupathula,
tion programming, and the IBR controls inside the PPR are “Microgrid systems: Design, control functions, modeling,
tested with current- and voltage-injection tools. Loop checks and field experience,” in Proc. Grid Future Symp., Reston,
are performed to make certain that all of the signals, wiring, VA, Oct. 2018, pp. 1–8.
and communication systems are correct. The data collection “1,200 MW fault induced solar photovoltaic resource in-
terruption disturbance report: Southern California 8/16/2016
Event,” NERC, Atlanta, GA, June 2017.
table 3. IEEE Standard 2030.8-2018. W. Du, R. H. Lasseter, and A. S. Khalsa, “Survivabil-
ity of autonomous microgrid during overload events,” IEEE
IEEE 2030.8-2018
Requirement PPR Solution Usage Trans. Smart Grid, vol. 10, no. 4, pp. 3515–3524, Apr. 2018.
doi: 10.1109/TSG.2018.2829438.
Sequence of Sequence of Time-stamped
events events records recordings of all IEEE Standard for the Testing of Microgrid Controllers,
PPR decisions IEEE Standard 2030.8-2018, Aug. 24, 2018.
Event COMTRADE Faster than a 4-ms
oscillography event records sample-rate data Biographies
collection of all the Scott Manson is with Schweitzer Engineering Laboratories,
disturbances Inc., Pullman, Washington, 99163, USA.
Continuous data IEEE C37.118 Slower than a Ed McCullough is with Tesla Energy, Palo Alto, California,
collection synchrophasors 16-ms sample-rate 94304, USA.
collection for the
life of the microgrid p&e


North Bay
Hydro Microgrid
Innovative Protection of a Complex System


N
NORTH BAY HYDRO SERVICES INC., AN AFFILIATE OF NORTH BAY HYDRO DISTRIBU-
tion Limited, set out to deploy Canada’s first utility-scale microgrid, completing the project in 2019
The North Bay, Ontario, company wanted to build a more resilient grid to support the community in
case of an emergency. In conjunction with the community, the microgrid’s development helped form
a community hub that benefits the city of North Bay during both normal and emergency events
(see Figure 1).
A simplified single-line diagram of the North Bay Community Energy Park (CEP) microgrid is
provided in Figure 2. The microgrid has two points of interconnection with the local utility system
providing a redundant supply resilient to some upstream line or transformer faults. Only one of the two
utility interconnection breakers (CB1 and CB2) is closed at any time. The microgrid supplies electricity
and heat to three facilities: the YMCA Aquatic Center, Thomson Park, and Memorial Gardens. In an
emergency, these buildings serve as a gathering space that can supply shelter for members of the com-
munity. Examples of the equipment found at the CEP are shown in Figure 3.
To ensure that the microgrid can maintain operations independent from the grid, the microgrid
includes the following distributed energy resources (DERs):
✔ two combined heat and power (CHP) natural gas generators, each rated 265 kW
✔ one battery energy storage system, rated 250-kW ac, 274 kWh
✔ solar photovoltaic (PV) systems totaling 8-kW ac.
In this article, DERs are defined by the IEEE Standard 2030.7 definition: “Sources and groups of
sources of electric power that are not directly connected to the bulk power system; they include both
generators and energy storage technologies capable of exporting power.” The microgrid DERs supply
maximum electrical power of 788 kW. The CHP generators also produce thermal energy, which is used
©SHUTTERSTOCK.COM/LESTER BALAJADIA
to heat the community facilities.

The microgrid is capable of operating grid tied (interconnected with the local utility system) and
islanded (separated from the local utility system). The microgrid can seamlessly transition between
these two operational states during both planned (e.g., the operator manually initiating transition)
and unplanned events (e.g., the external utility system faults while grid tied). This feature enables the
CEP’s buildings to maintain their critical power supplies, even when the surrounding area experi-
ences an outage.
North Bay CEP Microgrid Protection Challenges

When designing a microgrid, protection challenges are expected because the grid was not initially
designed to support the addition of microgrids. For the CEP microgrid, the major challenges to devis-
ing a robust protection plan included the following items:
✔ bidirectional and variable-fault current
✔ power-export restrictions
✔ a need for fast protection operation
✔ an ability to detect utility events promptly
✔ reliably protect the equipment from closing out of phase.
The North Bay CEP microgrid is the fi rst of its kind in Canada. The microgrid’s complexity required sophisti-
cated and reliable microgrid protection. Microgrid protection is one of the most critical components of the overall
microgrid. In all power systems, protection is responsible for detecting and isolating faults promptly. Protec-
tion functions are critical to guarantee safe operation and minimize damage to equipment when a fault occurs.
Microgrids often include costly DERs and switchgear, which make protection a necessary feature to ensure the
equipment’s integrity.
In a microgrid, detecting faults can be more challenging for the reasons outlined in the next section. Protecting this
microgrid involved several challenges typical of microgrids. The following challenges were most significant in shap-
ing the CEP microgrid protection design.
By Michael Higginson, Matt Payne, Keith Moses,

Peter Curtiss, and Stephen Costello

Directional overcurrent typically uses phase-angle
differences between voltage and current to
determine the direction.
Limitations of Conventional, Nondirectional At the CEP microgrid, fault-current levels while islanded
Overcurrent Protection are significantly lower than fault-current levels while grid
Nondirectional overcurrent protection trips when current tied. When the microgrid’s transformers are initially ener-
levels are higher than normal. This is the most frequently gized, they draw higher-than-normal currents to magnetize
used protection method in distribution systems and behind- the transformer core in a phenomenon called transformer
the-meter utilization systems. Nondirectional overcurrent magnetizing inrush. With a strong source, transformer mag-
protection devices typically include fuses and molded-case netizing inrush can exceed 10 times the normal full-load
circuit breakers. Distribution switchgear and reclosers are current. Normal current levels during transformer magnetiz-
also typically set to trip on nondirectional overcurrent. This ing inrush while grid tied could exceed fault-current lev-
protection strategy activates protection only when fault els while islanded. This means that overcurrent protection
current levels significantly exceed the normal operating settings that reliably detect faults while islanded may not
current. Fault-current levels in a microgrid can vary signifi- be secure while grid tied, and overcurrent protection set-
cantly when the system is in grid-tied or islanded operation. tings secure while grid tied may not reliably detect faults
DERs can also impact fault-current levels, which make con- while islanded.
ventional, nondirectional overcurrent protection difficult to Furthermore, directional overcurrent protection is needed to
use in a microgrid of this nature. selectively coordinate protection. In contrast to conventional,
nondirectional overcurrent protection, which considers only
the current magnitude, directional overcurrent considers cur-
rent and voltage phase angles to determine the direction of
N the fault-current flow. For example, consider a scenario of
North Bay Community islanded operation where both of the CEP microgrid’s CHP
Energy Park W E
generators are running. Protection at each generator must be
S directional to determine whether the fault is on the protected
generator or elsewhere in the microgrid, a fact that cannot be
Fraser St Chippewa Creek determined by current magnitude alone.
Directional overcurrent protection in microgrids is also
YMCA a challenge. Directional overcurrent typically uses phase-
angle differences between voltage and current to determine
the direction. In microgrids, faults can cause the system fre-
Kinsmen Way
quency to vary, sometimes rapidly. Changes in frequency

Community can challenge phase-angle estimation.
Energy
Park Power-Import Minimization and
Thomson Export Restrictions
Chippewa St
Park Many electrical utility bills are structured to include a

demand charge based on the maximum power demanded
North Bay
Memorial
or imported by the site loads and an energy charge based
Gardens on the total energy consumed or imported. To reduce the
Sports site’s electrical utility costs, the CEP microgrid is config-
Kinsmen Way
Arena ured to minimize both peak demand and the total energy
imported. At this site, power export (on-site power produc-
tion exceeding site load demands) is allowed for only a
limited duration.
To meet both the power-import objective and export
constraint, DERs are dispatched within the microgrid
figure 1. A map of the North Bay Hydro Community to maintain a low level of import. However, with a low-
Energy Park microgrid area. import level, the microgrid may be incorrectly prompted

to export power when the load suddenly decreases, as Fast microgrid protection operation is also criti-
shown in Figure 4. cal in response to faults while grid tied. For example,
if a close-in bolted fault occurred on one of the three
Protection-Speed Requirements microgrid load circuit circuits (i.e., downstream of CB7,
Microgrid protection must also operate very quickly in CB8, or CB9) while grid tied with the CHP generators
response to both local and external utility system faults. running, the local microgrid protective relay and circuit
Microgrid DERs have low inertia, which can result in rapid breaker must clear this fault promptly so that the CHP
DER frequency changes when faults are present. To ensure generators’ frequency and phase angle do not signifi-
a stable response to a fault in a low-inertia microgrid, the cantly shift from prefault conditions, which would result
microgrid protection must operate very quickly to separate in generator damage.
all the fault-current sources (including the utility system and Fast and communication-based microgrid protection
microgrid DERs) from the faulted components. For example, operation is also preferred for protection coordination while
if there was a fault on the circuit serving North Bay’s Thomson grid tied. The microgrid’s 600-V switchgear introduced mul-
Park load while islanded, the microgrid frequency is expected tiple series-connected protective devices (e.g., CB1, CB2,
to rise, and the voltage will be depressed. The CHP genera- CB7, CB8, and CB9) between the existing load circuit break-
tors will accelerate while the voltage depression will cause ers in the community facilities and the upstream transformer
the grid-following inverters, in this case, the PV invert- protective fuses. Although the existing overcurrent protec-
ers, to trip offline. Therefore, the fault must be interrupted tion was selectively coordinated using time grading, there
promptly by the local microgrid protection on CB9 to limit was an insufficient time interval to coordinate these new
the generators’ acceleration, allowing a stable recovery protective devices with the utility’s distribution system and
while continuing to serve the unfaulted microgrid load cir- existing load overcurrent protection. Using only time grad-
cuits without interruption. ing to selectively coordinate the protection, especially if
Utility
44 kV
Legend:
12 kV
Multifunction Relay
R
(Microprocessor Based)
R 52 CB52-1
K Key Interlock
12 kV 12 kV
600 V 600 V
Microgrid
R CB1 (Point of Interconnection) CB2 R
K
600-V Switchgear Bus
R CB3 R CB4 R CB5 R CB6 R CB7 R CB8 R CB9
ac ac
dc dc
Battery
CHP CHP Solar Memorial YMCA Thomson
System
265 kW 265 kW 8 kW Gardens Park
250 kW
Customer Loads
figure 2. A simplified single-line diagram of the CEP microgrid. CB: circuit breaker; CHP: combined heat and power.

(a) (d)
(c)
(b) (e)
figure 3. The North Bay Hydro CEP equipment. (a) CHP generators, (b) the Solar Flower PV, (c) the CEP welcome sign,
(d) the main power transformers, and (e) the battery energy storage system.
CEP microgrid, a transformer

600 with a delta high-voltage wind-
ing and wye-grounded, medium-
500 Total Load voltage winding is used between
the subtransmission and distribu-
400
tion systems (see Figure 2). This
300 Sum of Generator and Battery Output transformer configuration can
(kW)
challenge the detection of line-

200 to-ground faults on the subtrans-
Net Power Import
mission system, particularly if the
100
upstream subtransmission protec-
0 tion operates before the DERs are
Power Export Due to
Sudden Load Decrease
tripped offline.
–100 Also, detection and tripping
12:45 12:55 13:05 13:15 13:25 13:35 13:45 13:55 14:05 14:15 for various abnormal conditions
Time of Day were required, including voltage
or frequency excursions, uninten-
figure 4. A chart showing the system’s response to a sudden load decrease.
tional islanding (e.g., if a switch
was operated without a fault),
traditional coordination time intervals are considered, would and single open-phase conditions. The microgrid’s limited
require upstream utility system protection to be significantly import objective causes a generation-to-load ratio of nearly
delayed. These system conditions require adapting protection one, which can complicate passive anti-islanding protec-
settings and using sophisticated coordination techniques to tion techniques. Passive anti-islanding protection detects
maintain selective protection coordination while grid tied unintentional islanding based on measured signals (e.g.,
and islanded. voltage and frequency) without attempting to influence
these parameters by adjusting the power output. Examples
Detecting Utility System Events of common passive anti-islanding protection functions
To maintain a safe utility power system operation, microgrid include undervoltage, overvoltage, underfrequency, and
protection must respond promptly to utility events. At the overfrequency elements.

Local generation can also challenge the detection of and control. Generators have had to meet very strict tech-
single open-phase conditions, which are commonly detected nical requirements, which, in most cases, are expensive
using negative- or zero-sequence overvoltage protective and time-consuming. Direct-transfer trip systems using
elements. These operating quantities can be reduced in dedicated communication paths between the utility supply
microgrids with operating local generation because of the substation and the generator are still commonly required
generators’ low negative-sequence impedance. for most generators above 1 MW. An independent, utility-
grade protection relay for passive anti-islanding protection is
Synchronism and Antiparalleling Protection often required at the point of common coupling to the util-
In microgrids, synchronism check protection is another critical ity system, regardless of whether these protection functions
component. If two sources in the system are paralleled with- already exist within the generation systems.
out synchronization, one or both, along with other equip- In the past five years, there has been greater collaboration
ment, can be damaged. between utilities and power generators with a recognition
Based on the system topology, certain breakers or switches that the traditional utility customers’ needs are changing and
are not intended to be closed if sources are energized on both DERs are becoming commonplace. Projects like the North
sides of an open breaker or switch. In these applications, the Bay CEP microgrid are demonstrating that early and con-
microgrid protection is set to prevent closing if voltage is tinuing collaboration between DER developers and utilities
present on both sides of an open breaker or switch. can inspire out-of-the-box thinking and joint efforts toward
the development of microgrids and DERs.
Utility Protection Standard
Progression and Microgrids Protection System at
Utility feeder protection standards in Ontario were designed the North Bay CEP Microgrid
decades ago, predominantly for radial feeders with unidirec- The North Bay CEP microgrid is a 600-V system. The DERs,
tional power flow. The basic functions of these protection loads, and utility are all interconnected through a single 600-V
systems remain in place today, with modifications mostly switchgear assembly. In Figure 2, CB1–CB9 are all a part
designed to ensure that the utility distribution systems are of the same 600-V switchgear; because of this, much of the
not adversely impacted by distributed generation. microgrid protection system is contained within this switch-
Distributed generation projects have developed at a rapid gear. Each circuit breaker in the switchgear, whether it connects
pace in Ontario since 2005, mainly due to regulatory policy to a DER (CB3, CB4, CB5, or CB6), a load feeder (CB7, CB8,
and economic incentives. Increasing levels of distributed or CB9), or the utility (CB1 or CB2), has its own protective
generation have required distribution utilities to adapt to and relay that measures the voltage and the current. The protective
accommodate all types of large and small generators placed relay can also trip or close the breaker when necessary. These
on Ontario utility systems based on the technical and eco- microprocessor-based, multifunction protective relays come
nomic advantages of the generators, which, in some cases, with custom logic capability and use IEC 61850—a standard
did not align with the technical requirements of the utility. for power system communication protocols—Generic Object-
Many Ontario utilities took the approach of allowing a Oriented Substation Event (GOOSE) messaging to exchange
limited amount of generation to interconnect on each feeder discrete signals. GOOSE messaging is defined by IEC 61850
or station, considering the technical impacts to circuit capac- and can be used for high-speed protection communications.
ity, voltage regulation, flicker, short circuit contributions, fault In GOOSE messaging, devices publish a message, and other
detection, and isolation. From a protection perspective, there devices subscribe to that message. This publish/subscribe
are many concerns with integrating distributed generation, method is used to transmit multiple messages from each relay
including to every other microgrid relay in the system.
1) How can it be made certain that generators will be In addition to the protections provided in the low-volt-
automatically and quickly isolated from the feeders age switchgear, each DER has its own built-in protection.
before the station breaker recloses? The DERs’ integral protection is set up by the DER equip-
2) Can traditional overcurrent-based feeder protection ment supplier to protect the DER itself. When designing the
offer acceptable sensitivity and clearing times to end- microgrid, this built-in protection was considered a backup
of-line feeder faults, considering the generator short to the protection provided in the 600-V switchgear.
circuit contributions? Another protective element that exists outside the low-
3) How can power quality be assured with generators voltage switchgear is the anti-islanding protection required
connecting anywhere along a feeder and operating on by the local utility interconnection. North Bay Hydro Dis-
their own parameters? tribution Limited, like most utilities, requires that the DERs
As the owners of the distribution system, utilities have connected to the utility must be disconnected from the util-
the responsibility of maintaining the safety, reliability, and ity power system as quickly as possible when a fault or out-
efficiency of their assets. These responsibilities have gener- age occurs on the utility circuit. This ensures that the DERs
ally led utilities to take a conservative approach to protection will cease contributing fault current so that the fault can

be extinguished on the main grid. It also guarantees that a DER breakers, power and fault current may flow in both
now-isolated portion of the utility feeder is not inadvertently directions depending on the operating conditions. There-
energized by the DERs. fore, the system detects and isolates faults using a directional
The relaying scheme uses directional and nondirectional blocking scheme, which utilizes directional overcurrent and
overcurrent elements, communications, voltage elements, communication-based blocking signals to minimize fault-
and frequency elements to quickly, selectively, and securely clearing time while maintaining selectivity. The CHP gen-
detect and isolate faults under both grid-connected and erators are protected using directional overcurrent, voltage,
islanded microgrid operation. This relaying scheme protects and frequency protection elements. The load feeders and
the microgrid during faults within the microgrid and during other equipment are primarily protected using phase and
faults on the utility system. ground overcurrent protection.
For faults downstream of the main load feeder break-
Protection Response to Faults ers while grid connected, the CHP generators and battery
Within the Microgrid energy storage system are expected to ride through the
When the microgrid is operating in islanded mode, the fault and remain online. The PV inverters may trip because
primary protection of the microgrid, including DERs, is of the inverters’ voltage- and frequency-based anti-island-
based around a combination of the directional overcurrent, ing protection.
voltage, and frequency elements in the low-voltage switch-
gear relays. Protection Response to Faults
While islanded, fault-current levels are substantially on the Utility System
reduced from the fault-current levels during grid-con- When grid connected, microgrid DERs can contribute to
nected operation, so some of the overcurrent elements utility system short circuit faults. The microgrid’s DERs
intended to identify and isolate these faults are set more can also unintentionally island sections of the utility sys-
sensitively than when in grid-connected mode. To navi- tem outside of the microgrid during a loss-of-source event.
gate this wide range of fault currents, different protection In Figure 5 is an illustration of the possibility of uninten-
elements, which depend on whether the microgrid is in tional islanding.
grid-connected or islanded mode, are applied. The relays Loss of source refers to a utility outage condition with
are programmed to automatically change which protection no coincident short circuit fault. The microgrid protection
elements are used based on whether the microgrid is grid system is designed to interrupt DER contributions to utility
connected or islanded. If either interconnection breaker system faults not cleared by other utility system protection
(CB1 or CB2) is closed, then the microgrid is grid tied. If devices and to avoid unintentionally islanding utility system
both interconnection breakers are open, then the microgrid circuits outside of the microgrid.
is islanded. When a utility fault or loss-of-source condition is detected,
When faults occur on the 600-V microgrid system while the relays will trip either the interconnection breaker (CB1
islanded and with the CHP generators online, the fault cur- or CB2) or the DER breakers depending on the microgrid’s
rent supplied by the microgrid’s sources is high enough to operating conditions at the time of the event. The protection
selectively coordinate, resulting in the fault clearing and response to utility system events and the determination of
isolating of only the faulted circuit segment. The CHP gen- which breaker(s) to trip is part of the microgrid’s seamless,
erators and battery energy storage system are expected to unplanned islanding protection scheme.
ride through faults and remain online. The PV inverters
are expected to trip offline based on their voltage and fre- Seamless, Unplanned Islanding
quency protection functions during fault conditions in the Seamless, unplanned islanding refers to the ability of a
microgrid while islanded. microgrid to maintain power to the three customer circuits
When the microgrid is connected to the utility source, (i.e., Thomson Park, the YMCA, and Memorial Gardens)
the general protection principles typically enforced in small during an unplanned utility outage or disturbance. To achieve
generator interconnects are applied. The utility provides a this, the microgrid must transition to island mode as soon
certain amount of available fault current, and the primary as a utility event is detected, without interruption. Essen-
protection of the utility system and microgrid, including tially, the microgrid functions similarly to an uninterrupt-
DERs, is based around overcurrent elements. When faults ible power source.
occur, whether on the utility system or within the microgrid,
protective relays are programmed to respond to these fault The Traditional Microgrid Response
conditions to protect the microgrid and utility equipment to Utility System Events
and personnel. As presented in Figure 6, the normal state of the CEP
When faults occur while grid connected, selective coor- microgrid is grid connected, with the CHPs supplying most
dination and fault isolation are achieved through different of the load. A small amount of power is consistently imported
operations. On the microgrid’s interconnection breakers and from the utility as a buffer to avoid exporting power.

First, consider how a microgrid would respond to a util- tied to islanded mode. In this way, the lights stay on, but the
ity outage if it could not seamlessly island in unplanned microgrid is islanded.
events. A typical response is to trip the DERs but keep
the customer loads connected to the utility system, with How Seamless, Unplanned Islanding
the expectation that the utility power may be restored Was Implemented
momentarily via reclosing or restoration. In this typical There were three key components necessary to success-
response, if the utility outage persists, then the microgrid fully implement seamless, unplanned islanding at the North
will be isolated from the utility by opening the intercon- Bay CEP, the first of which was the microgrid controller.
nect breaker. When the microgrid is isolated, it can be Because the microgrid controller has a complete picture of the
energized in islanded mode by starting and paralleling microgrid, it can determine whether a seamless, unplanned
the DERs and then connecting microgrid loads. This transfer to island mode would be successful if attempted. This
response can take a few minutes and includes waiting for is referred to as the determination of transfer readiness.
the utility power supply to be restored and black starting The second piece is the protective relays. The microgrid
the islanded microgrid. needs the relays to quickly detect and isolate problems in the
By contrast, microgrids that can do seamless, unplanned utility supply. In this context, quickly means within a few
islanding in response to a utility fault do so not by tripping power system frequency cycles.
the DERs but by immediately tripping the interconnection Finally, the DERs must be capable of switching from
breaker. When the interconnection breaker trips, the DERs their grid-tied mode of operation to their islanded mode
must continue to supply power while transitioning from grid while continuing to supply power. At the CEP microgrid,
Utility Supply Substation
CB52-2 A portion of the utility system

44-kV Utility Feeder Line
52 may become unintentionally
islanded when the utility
feeder breaker CB52-2
(or any other device between
CB52-2 and CB1 or CB2)
44 kV is opened. System protection
12 kV must prevent unintentional
islanding.
52
Microgrid
CB1 (Point of Interconnection) CB2
ac ac
dc dc
Customer
Loads
figure 5. A diagram depicting the possibility of unintentional islanding.

this requires the CHPs to switch from power set point con- supplied by the DERs. The microgrid sources must be able
trol to isochronous control while continuing to supply power. to accept that load step without shutting down and without
The CHP controls do this automatically based on the status an objectionable change in voltage or frequency. Lithium-
of the interconnection breaker. ion battery systems excel at accepting load because they can
typically change the power output rapidly across their full
Role of the Microgrid Controller in range within milliseconds. Natural gas CHPs take longer
Seamless, Unplanned Islanding to accept load because changing the engine power output is
The microgrid controller decides whether the microgrid is more gradual, taking up to several seconds to ramp from no
transfer ready, and it communicates this status to the protec- power output to rated power output. Therefore, if the bat-
tive relays. As shown in Figure 7, three key quantities can be tery system is not available for dispatch, then the microgrid
examined to determine the transfer readiness: controller must check whether the amount of power flowing
1) total load from the utility is within the CHPs’ load-acceptance capa-
2) online generation capacity (also known as spinning bility before considering the microgrid to be transfer ready.
reserve)
3) power flow from the utility. Role of the Protective Relays in
Microgrid loading and online generation capacity are Seamless, Unplanned Islanding
important factors in determining transfer readiness because Protective relays are used to quickly detect problems in the
the load must not exceed the available generation. To under- utility system. The microgrid protection strategy must detect
stand why the power flow from the utility is an important two types of utility problems: short circuit faults on the util-
factor in determining transfer readiness, consider what will ity and a loss of source.
happen when the interconnection breaker trips. The power When the relays detect a utility problem (either a fault or
that the utility was providing now suddenly needs to be a loss of source), the relays respond with one of two actions
Utility
44 kV
Legend:
12 kV
Multifunction Relay
R
R 52 CB52-1
K Key Interlock
12 kV 12 kV
600 V 600 V
Microgrid
50 kW K
200 kW 200 kW ac 8 kW ac
dc dc
Battery
CHP CHP Solar Memorial YMCA Thomson
System
265 kW 265 kW 8 kW Gardens Park
250 kW
Customer Loads
figure 6. A typical power flow under normal operating conditions.

depending on the transfer-ready signal they receive from the utility line feeding the CEP substation by measuring each
microgrid controller. If the microgrid is transfer ready, the 44-kV phase-to-ground voltage. Upon detecting a fault or
relays trip the microgrid interconnection breaker (CB1 or other condition requiring the generation sources to be dis-
CB2) and thus initiate a seamless transfer to island mode. If connected from the utility, the relay sends a trip signal to the
the microgrid is not transfer ready, the relays trip the DER relays in the microgrid’s 600-V switchgear.
breakers. Then, the microgrid controller follows the tradi- Additional protection for detecting 44-kV faults is pro-
tional approach of waiting to see whether the utility comes vided by directional overcurrent protection elements in
back before committing to black start the island. the 600-V interconnection breaker relays and the relays on
The faults on the 44-kV utility circuit serving the CEP CHP feeder breakers. When a fault occurs on the 12.47-kV
substation are detected using several methods. The primary or 44-kV utility systems, up to 200% of the rated current
method uses a communication-based, direct-transfer trip may be supplied by the inverter-based DERs and up to 600%
protection system. When the utility protective relay detects of the rated current may be supplied by CHP generators.
a fault on the 44-kV utility line supplying the microgrid, Depending on the location and nature of the fault, DERs
it sends a trip signal to the protective relays in the 600-V typically supply enough fault current to be dependably and
switchgear. The relays route the signal to the appropriate cir- securely detected by the relays in the low-voltage switchgear.
cuit breaker(s) based on the seamless, unplanned islanding Short circuit faults on the utility can be detected using a
scheme as described previously. directional blocking scheme, with the blocking signals sent
A relay in the 44-/12-kV substation supplying the over GOOSE messages. Figure 8 shows how the directional
microgrid provides backup protection for detecting faults on blocking scheme is applied. The relay on the interconnection
the 44-kV utility line. This relay detects faults on the 44-kV breaker (CB1 or CB2) detects that the fault is on the utility
Utility
44 kV
Legend:
12 kV
R Multifunction Relay
R 52 CB52-1
K Key Interlock
12 kV 12 kV
600 V 600 V
Microgrid

3) Power Imported
From Utility K
ac ac
dc dc
CHP Battery
CHP Solar Memorial YMCA Thomson
265 kW System
265 kW 8 kW Gardens Park
250 kW
1) Total Load
2) Online Generation Capacity
figure 7. The transfer-readiness considerations for the CEP microgrid seamless transition.

system based on the fault-current direction. If the microgrid The rate of change of frequency settings for the CEP
is transfer ready, the relay trips the interconnection breaker microgrid was selected based on power system simulations.
and sends blocking signals to the generator breakers (CB3 They were validated by performing actual microgrid system
and CB4) to prevent them from tripping. tests in which the utility was intentionally disconnected by
The protection schemes described previously are sup- opening an upstream device while the CHPs were running
plemented by loss‑of‑source protection in the relay on the grid tied.
interconnection breaker (CB1 or CB2). The loss-of-source
protection scheme intends to detect conditions in which the Successful Seamless, Unplanned Transition Event
utility feeder is disconnected without a coincident short A few months after the microgrid was successfully com-
circuit fault on the utility system. missioned, a utility event occurred, and the microgrid suc-
To detect a loss-of-source event quickly, the microgrid cessfully transitioned seamlessly from grid tied to islanded
cannot simply use undervoltage protection because the operation. On 15 July 2019, a fault occurred on the subtrans-
microgrid sources may continue to energize the local utility mission circuit to which the microgrid is connected. The
system for a brief time after the loss of the utility connection. microgrid DERs supplied fault current, which was detected
In our solution, the relays detect loss-of-source conditions promptly by the directional overcurrent element in the inter-
primarily using the rate-of-change-of-frequency protec- connection relay. Figure 9 depicts the relay current and volt-
tion. When the utility is disconnected, the rate of change of age measurements during the fault, including the measure-
frequency works because the DERs must pick up the addi- ments before the event and after the microgrid separated
tional load formerly being supplied by the utility. Initially, from the utility system. The current shown is the output of
this power comes from the inertia of the CHP’s rotational one CHP generator as recorded by the relay on CB3. Both
mass, causing the CHP’s rotational speed to decrease. Con- the microgrid and utility voltages were measured by the
sequently, the microgrid’s frequency also decreases. relay on interconnection breaker CB1.
Utility
Fault
44 kV
Legend:
12 kV
R Multifunction Relay
R 52 CB52-1
K Key Interlock
12 kV 12 kV
600 V 600 V Microgrid

Fault Current
(Trip) K
Block
Tripping
Fault Fault
ac ac
Current Current
dc dc
CHP CHP Battery Memorial YMCA Thomson
Solar
265 kW 265 kW System Gardens Park
8 kW
250 kW
Customer Loads
figure 8. A utility fault-detection example.

Seamless, unplanned islanding is achieved
through a combination of control and
protection systems.
Figure 9 shows how the current supplied by the DERs after tens of seconds, and significant power export causes
increased substantially when the fault occurred. After a trip within 1 s. If these limits are exceeded, all three of
approximately seven power system cycles, the intercon- the DERs (the CHPs, PV, and battery) are tripped offline.
nection breaker opened to disconnect the microgrid from This approach maintains the utility power to the loads while
the utility system. During the fault, the DERs’ voltage was removing DER contributions.
depressed. Following the disconnection of the microgrid To avoid this protective trip event, the microgrid control-
from the utility system, the microgrid voltage recovered ler must adjust the power output of the DERs to maintain a
while the utility voltage collapsed. positive power flow from the utility. This is achieved through
After this successful operation, the microgrid operated in the following control actions:
island mode for approximately 2 h. The microgrid was then ✔✔ For gradually changing loads, the microgrid controller
successfully resynchronized with the utility to return it to has user-defined set points that allow microgrid opera-
grid-tied operation. tors to set a minimum and maximum net power-import
target. The microgrid controller measures the total
Microgrid Control Interactions net power input every few seconds. Any time the net
With Protection power input is below the defined minimum or above
As previously described, the protection design of the 44-kV the defined maximum, the microgrid controller issues
utility system and the additional 600-V backup protection new set points to the CHP generators. This method as-
for this microgrid provides a comprehensive solution for sumes that the CHP reaction time to a new set point is
keeping DERs and other equipment protected in the event sufficient for maintaining a positive net power import.
of a fault. However, protective relays only react to faults or ✔✔ For dramatic load changes, the battery energy stor-
other undesirable system conditions. When combined with age system is used. One of the primary loads in the
a secondary-level control architecture, the entire microgrid microgrid is approximately 150 kW and runs in a re-
can act proactively to avoid potential faults or other undesir- peated, but unpredictable, cycle throughout the day.
able conditions. Seamless, unplanned islanding is achieved This 150-kW load step and corresponding 150-kW
through a combination of control and protection systems. load rejection occur approximately every 2–3 h. The
Power-export protection and asset-availability functions also microgrid controller must command the battery en-
use a combination of both control and protection systems. ergy storage system to quickly charge during the load
Power-Export Protection
While Grid Connected
When the microgrid is connected 2,000
Output Current of One CHP Generator
to the utility source, it is prohib-
Amps (RMS)
1,500
ited from continuously exporting
1,000
power. The available DER assets
have more capacity than requir 500
ed to supply the loads and could 0
export as much as 300–400 kW 0.4
back into the 44-kV utility system.
0.3
kV (RMS)
The microgrid controller must con-

0.2 Microgrid Voltage
stantly adjust the set points of the
0.1 Utility Supply Voltage
DERs to avoid pushing power back
into the utility system. 0
Power export is measured at 49.2 49.4 49.6 49.8 50
the point of interconnection (CB1 Time (s)
or CB2) and defined in two lev-
els in the protective relays: any figure 9. The voltage and current plots showing the transition from the grid-connected
active power export causes a trip to the microgrid islanded mode.

rejection, using the battery energy storage system as closable, or otherwise usable. For example, if the relay is
a replacement load to avoid a power-export protec- being operated locally and does not permit remote sig-
tion trip. nals, the microgrid controller will not attempt to open
✔✔ Once the load rejection has been replaced by the or close it and will also not attempt to energize DERs
load of the battery energy storage system charging, downstream of the switch.
the microgrid controller can slowly adjust both the
battery energy storage charging set point and the Conclusion
CHP power output to maintain the net power im- The North Bay CEP microgrid incorporates many protec-
port within the minimum and maximum limits. This tion strategies typical of microgrids and addresses sev-
permits the CHPs to slowly ramp to their new set eral unique challenges. These challenges were overcome
points without risking a power-export trip, and, at using innovative microgrid protection techniques, and
the same time, it allows the net power import to be this microgrid system provides key considerations to help
as close to the limit as possible, thus reducing over- improve microgrid protection strategies for future proj-
all utility charges. ects. The CEP microgrid’s protection system uses adaptive
relaying, directional overcurrent, IEC 61850 GOOSE mes-
Asset Availability saging, a fast directional overcurrent blocking scheme, and
The protective devices on individual DERs will protect other techniques to protect the microgrid. The microgrid
DERs during faults. In a fashion similar to that of power- controls and protection work together to fulfill some of
export protection, the microgrid controller also acts as a the microgrid use-case objectives. The sophisticated North
proactive protection device to avoid energizing a DER when Bay CEP microgrid protection enables this innovative
it is likely to experience an issue. The microgrid controller microgrid to operate safely and resiliently while supplying
performs this proactive protection by reading error condi- continuous power to the community it serves.
tions from the DER and using an internal and user-settable
flag to mark a DER as available or unavailable. For Further Reading
While grid connected, the DER may report an error that “Microgrid protection systems,” IEEE Power & Energy
does not cause a protective trip but may be indicative of a Society, Piscataway, NJ, Tech. Rep. PES-TR71, July 2019.
future problem. These errors include a lost communica- “Impact of IEEE 1547 standard on smart inverters and
tion connection, the operator marking the DER as unavail- the applications in power systems,” IEEE Power & Energy
able, and the DER’s failure to respond to issued commands. Society, Piscataway, NJ, Tech. Rep. PES-TR67, Aug. 2020.
Upon recognizing that error, the microgrid controller can M. Higginson, K. Moses, B. Harwig, P. Curtiss, and H.
act quickly to remove the DER from the microgrid. Once Tiwari, “Microgrid seamless transitions between grid-tied
removed, additional DERs may be energized to replace the and islanded operation: A case study,” in Proc. 2020 IEEE/
functionality, if additional assets are available. For the two PES Transm. Distrib. Conf. Exposi. (T&D), pp. 1–5. doi:
CHP generators, that would mean dispatching one generator 10.1109/TD39804.2020.9299920.
to replace the loss of another. M. R. Islam and H. A. Gabbar, “Analysis of Microgrid
This functionality also extends to user-settable values. In protection strategies,” in Proc. 2012 Int. Conf. Smart Grid
the case where microgrid operators determine that one DER (SGE), pp. 1–6. doi: 10.1109/SGE.2012.6463969.
must be curtailed for maintenance or other runtime consid- A. Bernstein, J. L. Boudec, L. Reyes-Chamorro, and
erations, they can set the availability flag in the microgrid M. Paolone, “Real-time control of microgrids with explicit
controller and allow the microgrid controls to spin up addi- power setpoints: Unintentional islanding,” in Proc. IEEE
tional resources and curtail the unavailable DER. Eindhoven PowerTech, July 2015, pp. 1–6. doi: 10.1109/
In the North Bay CEP microgrid, there is only one PTC.2015.7232750.
battery energy storage system, and its important func-
tions cannot be replaced by any of the other DERs. To Biographies
avoid the risk of a protective-export protection trip, the Michael Higginson is with S&C Electric Company, Chicago,
microgrid controller automatically adjusts the minimum Illinois, 60626, USA.
and maximum net power-import limits when the battery Matt Payne is with North Bay Hydro Services Inc., North
energy storage system is marked as unavailable. This Bay, Ontario, P1A 0B4, Canada.
allows for routine maintenance work to happen while Keith Moses is with S&C Electric Company, Chicago,
other DERs are still providing power, reducing overall Illinois, 60626, USA.
costs for microgrid operators. Peter Curtiss is with S&C Electric Company, Chicago,
DER availability is an important consideration, but Illinois, 60626, USA.
equally important is switch availability. The microgrid Stephen Costello is with CIMA+, Sudbury, Ontario, P3G
controller reads specific information from each relay 117, Canada.
p&e
to determine whether the switch it controls is openable,

©SHUTTERSTOCK.COM/MATHIAS ROSENTHAL
Status of
Microgrid
Protection Supports
Integration
Protection and
Related Standards
and Codes
M
M ICRO GR I DS ARE BECOM-
i ng a sign if ica nt aggregation of
distributed energy resources (DERs)
By Ward Bower and Tom Key that improves the reliability and
resilience of the power delivery sys-
tem. Most of the early microgrid
experience occurred in behind-the-
meter applications for installations
Date of current version: 19 April 2021 with critical loads and significant
may/june 2021 1540-7977/21©2021IEEE ieee power & energy magazine 83

backup power and load prioritization requirements. Very suc- ✔✔ the ride-through during out-of-specification utility
cessful systems that include campus and utility applications conditions
have been operational for up to and exceeding a decade. For ✔✔ reaction times to out-of-specification conditions.
these early systems, available codes and standards consisted Progress toward standards for these interconnection issues
mostly of adapted device-level legacy emergency and standby has been good, but more is needed to handle the complexity
power requirements. Grid interconnection and efficient, safe of microgrids and control of functions such as transitions and
operating requirements were improvised via programmed associated protection. The coordination of standards for DER
computers, and the protection focus was the microgrids them- delivery and protection is an area that still requires attention
selves. The larger microgrid installations often required quali- in the standards community. Existing standards, codes, man-
fied staff trained to monitor and operate the systems. dates, and regulatory requirements have multiple interdepen-
New mandates for interconnection and operation, typi- dencies that do not provide fully collaborative and coordi-
cally on individual utility infrastructure and at state levels, nated stipulations. There is a need to develop and understand
are spurring calls for novel protection schemes. The increase all requirements and interdependencies as they relate to each
in microgrid deployments requires a stepped-up evolution of standard. It is important to understand that each requirement
protection standards that is compatible with the integration has some level of direct, combined, or indirect impact on
of distribution networks. Microgrid protection is discussed in protection. The indirect impact often includes changes in the
“Microgrid Protection: Advancing the State of the Art” (see the functionality response speed and even the reliability of the
“For Further Reading” section). That report discusses many devices covered by the standard.
aspects of microgrid defense and addresses the complexity of This article includes tables that indicate the status of many
microgrid systems-related protection—and standards. standards and provide a level of relevancy for each. A familiar
Compared to less complicated grid-following technolo- analogy is used in the tables to indicate the standards’ relevance.
gies used for older solar photovoltaic systems, microgrids It employs three familiar categories: foundational, structural, and
that incorporate grid-forming technologies present a new set building block. The foundational category can be seen as equiv-
of challenges to grid integration and protection. Device and alent to the foundation of a building, which includes concrete,
control standards are being developed as discussed in this arti- reinforcement components, and compacted soil. The structural
cle. Microgrid protection is especially complex in that, when category is equivalent to the steel beams that hold the building
operating in on-grid modes, compatibility with legacy safety together. The building blocks include many aspects of function-
schemes is needed. When operating off grid in islanded modes, ality, such as electrical systems, plumbing, and stairs. This anal-
microgrid protection must stand on its own. In this article, we ogy provides the reader with a picture of the interdependencies
explore the status of codes and standards that support protec- that create a functional building. The same picture can be used to
tion within microgrids and when interconnected with utility better understand that protection does rely on foundational stan-
infrastructures. Objectives for both modes include dards, and that without the structural and building blocks, protec-
✔✔ maintaining power quality and power continuity tion will not work. With an understanding of the purpose of the
✔✔ seamlessly transitioning microgrids onto and off tables, this article addresses the standards, codes, product certi-
the grid fications, compatibility requirements, and mandates that are the
✔✔ maintaining microgrid and distribution system pro- most relevant to protection. It includes a combination of legacy
tection and safety and new standards and codes that are compatible for today’s and
✔✔ operating with coordinated and independent dispatch- future installations.
ing capabilities
✔✔ utilizing continuous, fast, and reliable communication Evolving Protection and Interoperability
for dispatching and controls Standards for Microgrids
✔✔ coordinating load controls for all practical applications International and domestic standards and codes already exist
✔✔ maintaining safety for components, local systems, and for the protection of most electric power system (EPS) equip-
interoperable connections. ment and subsystems. Several of the standards and codes,
Along with the updated IEEE Standard 1547-2018 speci- such as those of IEEE and the International Electrotechnical
fying interconnection requirements at a reference point of Commission (IEC), are updated according to regularly sched-
applicability, which is the location where its interconnec- uled cycles, and they are written by volunteers who include
tion and interoperability performance requirements apply, experts from utilities, industry, and other stakeholder organiza-
there is an increased emphasis on DER grid support functions. Many standards and codes are regularly updated, while
tions that include reliability, resilience, power quality, com- complementary standards are being developed on accelerated
munication, and cybersecurity. Some of the compatibility schedules to try to stay current with the smart grid functional-
requirements that are being implemented, but remain to be ities and devices in DERs and microgrids.
addressed, include The U.S. Department of Energy Office of Electricity
✔✔ the expected behavior during start-ups and black starts Delivery and Energy Reliability has been an important
✔✔ responses to an abnormal grid leader in promoting research and development; demonstration

programs; and the crafting of standards for microgrid systems, Several requirements have been phased in through time
applications, and protection. The agency’s support helps to to help encourage the installation of more solar and energy
encourage collaboration and, very importantly, as fea- storage. An important mandate is that new solar and stor-
tured in this article, the drafting and upgrading of standards age installations must use inverters that interact with distri-
and codes for system designs and installations. Microgrids bution networks. These inverters are critical components in
have evolved for more than a decade, with the term advanced microgrid systems, and interconnection rules can be extended
microgrid referring to microgrids compatible with new smart to them. Inverter features include volt/volt-ampere reactive
grid technologies (in particular, two-way communications) support functions that provide voltage controls through the
and inverter-based renewable generation and storage (as com- in-phase current and reactive current elements of back-fed
pared to the past prevalence of generators). The players, advo- power. The dynamic volt/volt-ampere reactive support and
cates, standards, and activities for real and predictive growth ride-through capabilities add much needed synthetic inertia
for advanced microgrids that lead to new protection require- to the distribution system. Synthetic inertia can be analogous
ments and standards are shown in Figure 1. to that provided by mechanical generators when connected to
an EPS. This is an important feature to have when consider-
Utility and Mandated Requirements ing protection. Inverter requirements that create challenges
for Microgrids and DERs for the protection of loads and EPSs include soft starts that
This article focuses on standards for design, installation, and lessen the impact of extremely variable power back-fed to the
applications. Mandates apply to legislated rules for instal- utility, displacement power factor support, and inverter ride-
lations, interconnection and interoperability, performance, through to handle EPS disturbances.
metering, and communications of microgrids in many U.S. In mid-2019, grid-connected inverters were mandated in
states. Among the first is Rule 21, which governs the Califor- California to have an Internet Protocol for communications,
nia Public Utility Commission’s jurisdictional interconnec- which is a set of standardized rules enabling computers to com-
tions. Rule 21 is a tariff that describes the interconnection, oper- municate on a network. Communication capabilities facili-
ating, and metering requirements for generation facilities to be tate utility control and aggregation control. Aggregators and
connected to a utility’s distribution system. It sets rules for the inverters communicating with utilities are to use the new IEEE
performance, function, metering, and communications of gen- 2030.5, Standard for Smart Energy Profile Application Proto-
eration and storage facilities. It was originally adopted in 1982 col, guidelines for communications, monitoring, and control.
and has undergone three major updates since 2000 to establish
a more standardized analysis and procedures for the intercon- Interconnection of a Microgrid
nection of DERs. Rule 21 is not a protection requirement but The interconnection and interoperability of microgrids and
provides a well-defined procedure for technical screening to DERs with EPSs are guided by national and international
enable “fast-track reviews” as well as a more detailed study standards. They specify electrical functionalities, general
process for larger and more com-
plex interconnections. It continues
Microgrid Growth Players
to evolve through the Smart Inverter
Working Group, which meets regu- Primary Advocates*
Primary Advocates*
larly to develop recommendations • U.S. Departments of Energy and Defense
for advanced inverter functional- • U.S. Department of Homeland Security ced d
van an
ity requirements. One aspect of • National Laboratories and Testing Labs Ad grids n
• State Agencies for Smart Grid R&D ro tio
this evolution is the consideration Mic rotec
• Electric Utilities and Industry P
of additional functionalities and
complexities related to energy stor-
ity
age and inverter-based resources in Activities* tric
E lec
microgrids. Technical functions and R&D, Security, f s
e o ion
Protocols, Testing, Tools,
O ffic licat
value limits set by Rule 21 include and Specifications y pp
erg A
✔✔ technical operating param- f En New
to —
eters en &D
a rtm rid R
✔✔ certification and testing cri- ep og
. D icr Standards Developments*
teria U.S M • IEEE
Primary Advocates*
✔✔ technical requirements for • IEC

• Underwriters Laboratories/Test Laboratories
inverters • State Agencies for Renewable/Alternative Energy
✔✔ provisions specific to net • National Fire Protection Association
energy metered facilities
* Note: There are others. These are example lists.
✔ ✔ metering and monitoring
requirements. figure 1. Microgrid growth on the path to protection.

electrical and safety codes, standards for physical construc- flows and communications. Communications are often hard-
tion, product safety rules that include functionality oper- wired, but implementations now use more wireless connec-
ating points, and state and local regulations and mandates. tions, which have improving quality and security. Optical fiber
Further, the interrelationships of the requirements vary is a desirable but more expensive communication media that
significantly from country to country, state to state, city provides inherent security and speed. The diagram shows that
to city, and, often, utility to utility. Smart grid technologies interoperability requirements are becoming more complex,
and microgrids use communication, such as power line carri- and device compatibility is a new challenge to incorporating
ers, wireless systems, the Internet, and, recently, optical fiber, secure communications to optimize one or more microgrids.
in newer and larger installations. Methods to improve control The aggregator shown in the figure can be used for a single
and monitoring functions when connected to EPSs are con- microgrid that employs wireless and hardwired communica-
tinuously being improved and implemented. It is noted that tions, and it can be used to gather the information provided by
the communications ensuring that all systems are compat- many microgrids. Its output can be used to provide improved
ible can have beneficial and detrimental impacts on protec- protection and optimize the value of the combination of
tion. Many monitoring and measurement systems and devices microgrids. Incorporating it provides an advantage in that
depend heavily on wireless communications, communication components within a microgrid can be modularized without
methods, and protocols. The wide use of new communication sacrificing the protection functionalities and interoperability
technologies is covered by numerous standards, but communi- with the utility distribution system.
cations for direct applications to protect microgrids and inter- Control categories associated with the interconnection of
connected EPSs are in various and early development stages. microgrid networks to an area EPS are provided in Figure 3.
A simplified block diagram depicting the interconnection The device-level functions deliver control in microseconds
of a generic microgrid connected at a point of interconnection to seconds. They are considered the primary control of a
is shown in Figure 2. It is based on the requirements provided microgrid. The local area and microgrid supervisory con-
in the standard specifying the functions of microgrid control functions act in seconds to days and can be taken as
trollers, IEEE 2030.7. It is provided as an example of power the secondary control. The grid-interactive control functions
Microgrid Components
Hardwired
Aggregator Communications Electrical Production
Analyzer and Distribution
Optimizer Network Rotating
Generation
(Dispatchable)
Power Flow
Renewable and
Energy Point of Combined Heat and
Management Interconnection Power Resources
System (Curtailable)
Intelligent
Breaker
Electrical and
Breaker
Thermal Energy
Control Module
Storage
(Dispatchable)
Microgrid Controller and
Control System
(Centralized or Distributed) Reports Direction and
Magnitude of Power Flow
Controllable
Loads
(Dispatchable)
* All Components and Subsystems Can Be Accessed With Wireless Communications
Represents Component Subsystems That May Be Modularized
figure 2. A conceptual virtual system for microgrids and DERs that can be used in a mesh network.

operate in minutes, days, or weeks. The three levels of was not allowed in IEEE Standard 1547-2003 but is required
compatible controls work together to provide a safe, reli- in IEEE Standard 1547-2018, which provides requirements
able, functional interconnection that is coordinated accord- for grid support. It includes requirements relevant to intercon-
ing to standards and known characteristics of an EPS with nections and interoperability regarding performance, operation
interconnected microgrid elements. It is important to know safety, maintenance, and security. It also provides specific pro-
the range of times related to these three levels of control tection related requirements such as trip timing, ride-through
to understand the related protection functions. New and limits, grounding compatibility, and when to cease to ener-
updated standards will be a necessity as advanced hardware gize. It does not specify or cover mandates for the protection
and control capabilities are introduced. of devices and interconnected EPSs. However, it has spurred
Standards for microgrids and the formation of an IEEE activity for protection-related guides and stipulations that are
Standards Association (SA) working group to develop a being developed within IEEE standards groups.
guide to microgrid protection are forging a pathway to
understanding and addressing safety needs. The protec- Protection-Related Standards
tion standard will lead to the identification of requirements, Included in the IEEE 2030 Series
rules, certifications, and compatibilities. Extensive testing The IEEE 2030 series of standards provides guidance, recom-
using standards and certification will assure safe and reliable mended practices, and requirements for devices and systems.
operations of microgrids and interconnected EPSs. Isolating They facilitate smart grid functionalities, such as voltage ride-
faults is fundamental to protection. Examples of the interde- through, voltage control, and microgrid functionalities when
pendencies of standards used for designing and deploying connected to an EPS. The original IEEE Standard 2030.5 has
microgrid systems that are interconnected with a local or been extensively modified and updated to provide for utility
area EPS and compatible with the important interdependen- management of the end-user energy environment. New provi-
cies appear in Figure 4. sions include demand response, load control, time-of-day
pricing, management of distributed generation, and electric
Applicable IEEE Standards vehicles. It offers an up-to-date standard for test procedures
IEEE standards cover many of the interconnection, interop- that includes compatibility with the Smart Energy Profile 2.0 (a
erability, compatibility, and electrical conformance aspects of communications protocol). The use of protocols helps to deter-
electrical system operations. Individual standards, series mine methods for more consistent operations that incorporate
of standards, and internationally harmonized standards are newer protection methods.
often applied to ensure the stable and safe operation of sys- The IEEE 2030.7-2017 and IEEE 2030.8-2018 standards
tems and components connected to EPSs. Legacy and newly were recently approved and exclusively address microgrid
developed standards are available for operations and protec- controllers. They do not prescribe protection schemes de
tion. Figure 4 illustrates a family of IEEE and closely related ployed within microgrids, including the safety functions of
standards that influence microgrid products, system designs, individual components and assets. Nor do they mandate the
and, recently, microgrid protection. More detail is provided in adaptation of protection schemes in transitions from grid-
Tables 1–3, which collectively offer an overview of commonly connected to islanded modes and the protection coordina-
used IEEE standards for microgrid and DER component and tion that may be required with the distribution grid. They do
system specification, testing, and
operations. Many of the standards
apply directly to microgrids using
photovoltaics, wind, and the asso-
ciated energy storage systems that Grid Interactive Control Functions
provide a stabilized and dispatch- Tertiary
Control Microgrid
able supply of energy.
Secondary Supervisory Control Functions
IEEE 1547-2018, Interconnec-
Control
tion and Interoperability of Dis-
tributed Energy Resources With Local Area Controller
Functions
Associated Electric Power Systems
Interfaces, is the most protection- Primary Device-Level Controller
relevant IEEE standard. Based on Control Functions
operational experience and the
proliferation of DERs, the standard
Subsecond 5–10 min One Day to
was extensively updated in 2018.
One Week
The revisions were a major shift
for interconnections to EPSs, in that figure 3. Hierarchical control interactions that impact protection from IEEE Standard
support from interconnected DERs 2030.7.

describe transitions involving EPSs, and those shifts affect microgrid installations in California. The mandates for
conditions such as the fault response, coordination, and the compliance to IEEE 2030.7 for microgrid specifications are
trip response when interconnected with an EPS as well as expanding to commercially funded projects. Taken together,
fault detection, clearing, voltage control, and frequency. these two standards enable flexibility and the customization
All are critical functions that support the ability to protect of the components and control algorithms to be specified,
microgrids and interconnected EPSs. certified, and deployed in microgrids, without sacrificing
The approved standards are being adopted and refer- and limiting advanced functionality and c ompatibility.
enced by regulators, utilities, microgrid developers, and Protection is being addressed in IEEE P2030.12, Draft
stakeholders. State regulators and utilities refer to them for Guide for the Design of Microgrid Protection Systems.
interconnection rulemaking and requirements as well as IEEE P2030.12 is being developed by the IEEE SA’s Guide
for considering any microgrid-related tariffs for reliability for the Design of Microgrid Protection Systems Working
and resiliency. Compliance with the standards is now being Group. The document is intended to be an IEEE guide for
required in requests for proposals and final contracts for “the design of microgrid protection.” It is sponsored by the
Revised Updated Legacy Standards and Codes Relevant to Microgrid Protection
IEEE 1547-2018
Interconnection and IEEE 1547.1-2020
Interoperability Test Procedures for UL 1741 Supplement
• EPS Interconnection DER Interconnection SA and SB
Technology Specifications/ Inverters, Converters, NFPA 70 (NEC)-2020
• Type tests: Response
Performance Priorities, Operation Controllers, and Interconnection National Electrical Code for
• Reactive Power and Parameters, Voltage System Equipment for Use the Installation of Safe
Voltage Control and Frequency Support, With Distributed Energy Electrical Systems
• Response to EPS Synchronization, Resources
• Contains Physical Component
Abnormal Conditions Unintentional Islanding, • Used in Conjunction With Requirements, Such as
• Power Quality and Many More IEEE Standard 1547 and Ampacity, Voltage Ratings,
• Islanding • Interoperability Tests, Supplements IEEE Locations, Allowable
• DERs on Distribution Production Tests, Standard 1547-1 for Thermal Levels, and More
Secondary, Area, Street, Monitoring Tests, Smart Grid Testing • New/Revised Requirements
and Spot Networks and Protocol Mapping • Certified Products Are for Microgrids, Microgrid
• Information Exchange Intended to be Installed Operating and Interconnection
Protocols per NFPA 70 (NEC) Devices, Means of
• Covers Power Systems Disconnection, and so on
That Combine Independent • Energy Storage Systems,
Power Sources With System and Installation
Inverters, Converters, Requirements, Inverters,
and Interconnection and Charging Requirements
System Equipment – Note: Extensive NEC
Changes Were Too
Numerous To List Here
Recent Standards Applicable to Microgrid Installations
IEEE 2030.7-2018 IEEE 2030.8-2019 IEEE P2030.12

Standard for Specification Standard for the Testing Draft Guide for the Design
of Microgrid Controllers of Microgrid Controllers of Microgrid Protection
Systems
• Microgrid Structure • Microgrid Control System
• Functional Requirements Core Function Testing Proposed Topics May Include
for the Controller • Functional Testing of But Are Not Limited to:
• Dispatch Requirements the Core Operations • Objective and Challenges
• Transition Functions • Dispatch Function Testing • Protection System Design
• Microgrid Description • Transition/Dispatch Considerations
• Objectives of Microgrid and Functions Testing • Types and Structures of
Controller • Metrics for Testing Microgrid Systems
• Implementation of the • Compliance Testing • Modes of Protection
Control System • Control System Coordination
• Communication Structures
figure 4. Selected families of standards that influence microgrid applications. NFPA: National Fire Protection Association;
NEC: National Electric Code.

IEEE Power & Energy Society Committee on Power Sys- IEC Standards and
tem Relaying and Control. The IEEE SA approved the Technical Specifications
project authorization request on 27 September 2018. The The IEC is a worldwide organization for the preparation and
working group has begun the document and is aggres- publication of international standards for all electrical, elec-
sively conducting meetings every two months to acceler- tronic, and related technologies. The IEC Technical Specifica-
ate its development for acceptance in or before Decem- tion (TS) 62898 series provides general guidelines and technical
ber 2022. Table 2 lists microgrid-related standards in the requirements for microgrid projects. IEC TS 62898-3-1:2019,
IEEE 2030 series. Microgrids—Part 3-1: Technical Requirements—Protection and
Dynamic Control, establishes new protection and dynamic con-
Other IEEE Microgrid trol requirements to address fault protection and dynamic control
and Protection-Related Standards problems in microgrids. It covers the following:
Many IEEE standards have been written to provide guides, ✔✔ fault detection strategies
recommended practices, and requirements for generation, ✔ ✔ general technical requirements for protection in
storage, and protection related to EPSs that are intercon- microgrids
nected with DERs and microgrids. One standard that is pro- ✔✔ dynamic control for transient and dynamic distur-
tection specific is detailed in Table 3. bances in microgrids
table 1. The IEEE 1547-related standards that are the most pertinent to microgrid protection.
IEEE Standard Title Protection Relevance and Description Notes
IEEE 1547- IEEE Standard for Foundational category This is a complete revision of IEEE
2018, Interconnection and This standard provides most of the basic Standard 1547-2003. It brings
active Interoperability of requirements for consistent and safe interconnection rules in line with efforts
standard Distributed Energy interconnections that can be made with to implement a smarter, more distributed
Resources With the compatibility of legacy protection grid. Interim requirements to allow
Associated Electric schemes and the development of new modifications of previous interconnection
Power Systems safety standards. (2003) rules were applied. This note is
Interfaces provided because a significant number of
utilities in the United States still use the
older 2003 standard.
IEEE 1547.1- IEEE Standard Structural category This new guide specifies the type,
2020, Conformance Test The relevance to protection is that testing production, commissioning, and
active Procedures for Equipment to validate IEEE Standard 1547-2018 periodic tests and evaluations to confirm
standard Interconnecting provides data for performance, set conformance with IEEE Standard 1547.
Distributed Energy points, accuracy, and consistency that
Resources With Electric will be compatible with or impact the
Power Systems and operations of protection methods and
Associated Interfaces equipment.
IEEE 1547.2- IEEE Application Guide Building block category A new IEEE P1547.2, Draft Application
2008, for IEEE Standard This standard guides the application of Guide for IEEE Standard 1547 for
under 1547: IEEE Standard IEEE Standard 1547-2018 to designs and Interconnecting Distributed Resources
revision for Interconnecting installations. A thorough understanding is With Electric Power Systems, is being
Distributed Resources necessary when analyzing and applying drafted as an update to include IEEE
With Electric Power IEEE Standard 1547 to interconnection Standard 1547-2018 requirements.
Systems protection. The protection will be better
designed and installed by understanding
the requirements.
IEEE 1547.7- IEEE Guide for Building block category This standard provides alternative
2013, Conducting Distribution This version of IEEE Standard 1547.7 is approaches and good practices for
active Impact Studies for provided here because many utilities engineering studies of the potential
standard Distributed Resource still use IEEE Standard 1547-2003 for impacts of single and aggregate DERs
Interconnection interconnection requirements. Impacts, interconnected to the electric power
such as reverse current and ground fault distribution system. An understanding of
detection, apply to smart grid protection impacts and potential disruptions applies
and legacy (2003) requirements. to improving protection.
IEEE P1547.9, Guide to Using IEEE Building block category The requirements for this new standard
new standard Standard 1547 for Energy storage in systems connected must be compatible with interconnected
project Interconnection of Energy to EPSs is becoming an important distribution system protection.
Storage Distributed element for EPS support that will, in
Energy Resources with turn, be important considerations for
Electric Power Systems compatibility with legacy and new
protection methods.

✔✔ fault protection for microgrids validated via nationally and internationally approved laborato-
✔✔ communication requirements for microgrid central- ries. Increasingly, several standards for listing and certification
ized protection. have been harmonized to address the needs for equipment and
IEC TS 62898-3-1 focuses on the differences between conven- system requirements in the many variations of international
tional power system protection and new solutions for safety electrical distribution systems. The most common harmonized
functions specific to microgrids. The complexity of protec- standards pertinent to the protection of microgrid systems are
tion systems for microgrids can be very different depending addressed in the following sections related to standards writ-
on architectures and interconnections. For example, protec- ing laboratories. It is important to note that no Underwriters
tion systems are different for microgrids connected to resi- Laboratory (UL) standard directly addresses protection; certi-
dential low-voltage grids and meshed transmission grids. fication processes and testing need to consider compatibilities
with legacy and evolving protection that will apply to inter-
Product Safety Standards connected DERs and microgrids. The UL 3001 standard cur-
Listings and certifications are somewhat synonymous meth- rently being developed and described in Table 4 is an example
ods to ensure that components, devices, subsystems, and of increasing relationships between different standards.
systems have been evaluated for safety and common perfor- These product standards are more than just older mechan-
mance requirements. Listings and certifications are typically ical safety rules. Those associated with DERs, intermittent
table 2. The IEEE 2030 standards that are the most applicable to microgrids and protection.
IEEE 2030.5- IEEE Standard for Structural category This standard is often applied to
2018, Smart Energy Profile This standard enables utility management state mandates for communication
active Application Protocol of end-user energy environments, protocols that can be tied to protection.
standard including demand response, load State mandates are tied to important
control, time-of-day pricing, distributed standards, such as IEEE 1547-2003 for
generation, electric vehicles, and so on. It interconnections and UL 1741 smart
is structural because it can be used to aid inverter requirements.
the protection of the grid and microgrids.
IEEE 2030.7- Standard for the Foundational category This standard provides functional
2017, Specification of Microgrid This standard provides all the functional specifications for microgrid controllers
active Controllers specifications for microgrid controllers. and is coupled with IEEE Standard 2030.8
standard These specifications guide the for testing. The functional specifications
performance of the microgrid and the include transition timing and waveform
output characteristics that can directly quality, two fundamental areas that affect
affect protection processes. protection processes.
IEEE 2030.8- Standard for the Testing Structural category This standard provides testing
2018, of Microgrid Controllers This standard is tied to IEEE 2030.7 requirements for microgrid controllers
active and covers the testing of microgrid covered by IEEE 2030.7, with the
standard controllers. same dependencies and guidance for
protection.
IEEE Distributed Energy Foundational category This standard project guides the
P2030.11, Resources Management The functional specifications for DER development of functional specifications
project Systems Functional management systems will be important for DER management systems. It includes
underway Specification factors in designing and deploying guiding principles for the application and
protection for DERs and microgrids. deployment of DER management systems
The management system will provide that, in turn, will interact to varying
controls for coordinating system degrees with protection systems.
operations that may interact with
protection methods.
IEEE Draft Guide for the Foundational category This project encompasses the design
P2030.12, Design of Microgrid The resulting selection and design and selection of protective devices and
project Protection Systems guidance will facilitate the deployment the coordination for various modes of
underway of protection systems through different microgrid operation, including grid-
approaches to detect problems and connected and islanded modes and
protect microgrids. The standard will related transitions between modes.
address protection configuration and
challenges, protection system structures,
modes of operation, system coordination,
requirements for microgrid energy
management, and communication system
structures.

exports of energy, and EPS interconnections provide criti- Distributed Resources with Electric Power Systems, and IEEE
cal set points for exporting and importing power, response 1547.1, Standard for Conformance Test Procedures for Equip-
times, and methods to validate components and systems for ment Interconnecting Distributed Resources With Electric
listing. It is noted that these new product standards apply Power Systems. The requirements specified in UL 1741 include
to components, equipment, subsystems, and systems. One ✔✔ power systems that combine other alternative energy
example of a listing that includes several areas of testing and sources with inverters, converters, charge controllers,
disciplines is UL 1741, Standard for Inverters, Converters, and interconnection system equipment in system-
Controllers, and Interconnection System Equipment for Use specific combinations that include protection, such as
With Distributed Energy Resources. The UL 1741 require- overvoltage and frequency
ments cover inverters, converters, charge controllers, and ✔✔ products that are intended to be installed according
interconnection system equipment intended for use in util- to the National Electrical Code (National Fire Protec-
ity-interactive standard (grid-connected) power systems and tion Association 70) and that often require protective
islanded systems. Utility-interactive inverters and converters devices that are considered to be protection for an in-
are typically intended to be operated while connected to an terconnection or system
EPS to supply power to common loads. ✔✔ references to the nearly 100 UL standards that are used
To illustrate some of the complexity and interplay of com- to certify hardware and software applicable to utility-
patible and linked standards, utility-interactive standard equip- interactive inverters, protection devices, and systems.
ment requirements are intended to supplement and be used in A new UL 3001 standard is being developed that will apply
conjunction with IEEE 1547, Standard for Interconnecting to components and systems associated with DERs and
table 3. The IEEE C37 protection-specific standard.

IEEE C37.106- IEEE Guide for Abnormal Structural category This guide was developed to assist
2003, Frequency Protection for This guide provides information for protection engineers with applying
active Power Generating Plants applications of relays based on 2003 relays for the protection of generating
standard products. Updates appear to be overdue plant equipment from damage caused
for attention. by operations at abnormal frequencies,
including overexcitation.
table 4. The UL standards applicable to microgrid systems and protection.

UL Standard Title Protection Relevance and Description Notes
UL 1741, Standard for Inverters, Structural category This standard is for product certification.
active Converters, Controllers, This standard provides specifications Certification provides operation safety
standard and Interconnection for characteristics that can impact and compatibility information that can
System Equipment for interconnection operations and safety, be related to devices and processes,
Use With Distributed including protection settings and including protection. This standard is
Energy Resources operation details. being harmonized as UL 62109 for
compatibility with IEC 62109. It is written
to be compatible with the California
Public Utility Commission Rule 21, which
focuses on smart inverter functionality.
UL 1741 Supplement SA— Structural category UL 1741-SA and UL 1741-SB add to
Supplement A, Grid support—Utility The combined extensions of UL 1741 product safety standards that lay out
UL 1741 interactive equipment provide for the testing and performance manufacturing (including software) and
Supplement B, Supplement SB— requirements of the conversion devices product requirements for inverters that are
active Compatibility with IEEE used in DERs and microgrids. They more capable of meeting requirements for
standards 1547.1 will aid in designing protection EPS out-of-spec excursions and improving
methodologies and systems. EPS reliability.
UL 3001, Safety Standard for Structural category UL 3001 is a listing standard that is
under Distributed Energy and This a new product safety standard based on systems installed by qualified
development Storage Systems for DERs and storage systems, which persons following the instructions and all
are often called microgrids. Listing applicable codes and standards. Hence, a
systems will provide insight into the listed product is evaluated for safety and
characteristics of DER and microgrid selected functionality.
functionalities that facilitate protection.
UL: Underwriters Laboratory.

microgrids, where compatibility with protection will be Conclusions
considered while developing listing testing procedures. It The increased deployment of DERs, energy storage, and
builds on the requirements of UL 1741, UL 1741 Supplement microgrids is fueling the need for, and the development of,
A, and UL 1741 Supplement B, which are all listing stan- standards to integrate these technologies into the electric
dards related to IEEE 1547-2018. Table 4 provides a list of grid. In the first wave, we see relatively mature standards for
UL standards that apply to various aspects of system protec- the performance, testing, and certification of grid-following
tion with DER interconnections. DERs. With the ability of microgrids and storage to form
grids, a whole new set of standards is now necessary. As
Communication and Cybersecurity discussed in this article, there is progress toward addressing
Considerations for Protection communication, control, interoperability, and related cyber-
Microgrid protection engineers often depend on communica- concerns. However, there is a major standards development
tion systems for critical protection data and control informa- challenge ahead to address complex system compatibility and
tion. Ethernets used in business and home Internet connections protection issues.
are vulnerable to frequent interruptions and hacking from DER-related standards that are available, under develop-
outside sources and are unacceptable for secure microgrid ment, and in process have been described in this article. Most
communications. Protection schemes for microgrids must be are crafted via a consensus process and require stakeholder
hardened, and cybersecurity policies, plans, and procedures and subject matter expert input and agreement. Multifaceted
must be implemented on operational technology. microgrid systems bring an added dimension to both the
Advanced communications are required for new protection breadth and the required detail of the standards development
strategies. Examples include signaling and dispatch requests, process. There will be an increased need for coordination
the coordination of transitions with microgrids and DERs, and harmonization. The challenges and opportunities are
phasor measurement units for EPS stability, adaptive loads, as vast as the adoption of advanced microgrids and related
resource logic for predictive and economic schemes, and cus- technologies that are an important part of the evolution to a
tomized logic for fault detection and mitigation processes. smarter, less centralized grid.
These communications must be reliable and secured to foil
cyberattacks. There will be instances where one-way commu- For Further Reading
nications on dedicated hardwired lines and optical lines will S. Venkata, M. Reno, W. Bower, S. Manson, J. Reilly, and
be necessary to ensure cyberattack immunity. Isolated feed- G. Sey Jr., “Microgrid protection: Advancing the state of the
back will be required as well. The self-diagnosis of anomalies art,” Sandia National Lab., Albuquerque, NM, Tech. Rep.
within communications hardware and throughout connected SAND2019-3167, Mar. 2019.
equipment must be included. A drawback of any communica- M. Ropp, M. Reno, W. Bower, J. Reilly, and S. S. (Mani)
tion system is the need for cybersecurity, which adds complex- Venkata, “Secondary networks and protection: Implications for
ity. Systems must also be able to operate without communica- DER and microgrid interconnection,” Sandia National Lab.,
tions, albeit in some curtailed but safe fashion. Albuquerque, NM, Tech. Rep. SAND2020-11209, Oct. 2020.
One advanced communication method involves mesh A. Maitra, J. Simmons, B. Seal, and R. Sarfi, Grid In-
networks to support the monitoring of individual systems teractive Microgrid Controllers and the Management of
and the provisioning of inputs to ancillary protection Aggregated Distributed Energy Resources: Relationship of
systems. Mesh networks have been used for microinvert- Microgrid Controller with DERMS and Utility DMS. Palo
ers with photovoltaic systems employing ac modules and Alto, CA: EPRI, 2015.
microinverters, where each device can communicate with W. Bower et al., “The advanced microgrid—Integration
its neighbor. When adding hundreds or thousands of micro- and interoperability,” Sandia National Lab., Albuquerque,
inverters to a utility distribution system with protection NM, Tech Rep. SAND2014-1535, Feb. 2014.
devices, the communications and reactions in a mesh net- “Office of Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability
work are fast and accurate. The topology of a mesh network and National Energy Technology Laboratory, Microgrid Re-
provides monitoring and control redundancy and multiple search, Development, and System Design,” U.S. Dept. of
pathways for more reliable information exchanges. The Energy, Washington, D.C., Funding Opportunity No. DE-
concept supports adaptive protection schemes and detect- FOA-0000997, Jan. 31, 2014.
ing and mitigating faults, with each device reporting its
status to a nearby system or to an aggregator that, in turn, Biographies
determines where problems are located. Isolating faults is Ward Bower is with Ward Bower Innovations, Albuquerque,
fundamental to protection. Most devices in a system use the New Mexico 87111, USA.
received information to either block or permit an action to Tom Key is with the Electric Power Research Institute,
quickly isolate faults. An aggregator (shown in Figure 2) Knoxville, Tennessee, 37932, USA.
can conduct an analysis to determine which devices to trip
p&e
while recording an event.

Get Published in the New
IEEE Open Access Journal of
Power and Energy
Submit a paper today to the

premier new open access journal
in Power & Energy.
Your research will benefit from
the IEEE marketing launch and
5 million unique monthly users
of the IEEE Xplore® Digital Library.
Submit your paper today!

Visit ieee-pes.org/oa-journal
to learn more.

history
Katinka Johansen
wind energy in Denmark

a short history
T
THIS HISTORY OF WIND ENERGY
in Denmark describes how top-down This issue’s “History” column on wind energy in Denmark explores top-
policy support and bottom-up initia- down policy support and bottom-up initiatives that shaped the Danish wind
tives shaped the Danish wind power power sector. From the early days of wind power, to the global energy cri-
sector, ultimately facilitating the in- sis in the 1970s, and up to the present day, this history article outlines key
tegration of wind energy in the grid. events, advancements, and milestones on the technology and policy time-
From the early days of wind power,
line in Denmark.
innovative entrepreneurs tinkered
Our author of this month’s article is Katinka Johansen. She is with the De-
with and improved upon the emergent
partment of the Built Environment at Aalborg University, Copenhagen, Den-
wind power technologies, but coal
and oil remained the prioritized fuels mark. The department is rooted in the field of engineering, but it also con-
for the almost entirely energy import- tains important and comprehensive elements from the social sciences and
dependent country. After the economic the humanities.
shock of the global energy crisis in the Katinka has a Ph.D. degree in social psychology with research interests
1970s, the Danish government focused spanning energy transitions, environmental governance, and research design.
on energy efficiency, independence, We welcome Katinka Johansen for the first time to our “History” pages.
and diversification and sought alter- John Paserba,
natives to oil. Proactive antinuclear Associate Editor, “History”
movements called for alternatives to
nuclear power.
As environmental awareness in-
creased, the energy policy goals trans-
lated to the integration of renewable Wind Energy in of its private-sector jobs are within the
energy resources in the grid. Already Denmark wind power industry and supply chain.
popular among the public, cooperatively Denmark, a small Nordic country, Denmark is part of the highly inte-
owned wind farms emerged throughout is well known for wind energy, wind grated Nordic electricity market, and
the country. However, as the onshore power technologies, and wind farms. the energy and technology mix in the
wind power technologies grew to in- The country is also known for its high country is varied.
dustrial scale and height, support for ly flexible and interconnected domes- Denmark is naturally rich in wind
specific local wind farm projects could tic power system as well as for inte- resources. The Danes have harvested
no longer be taken for granted. Mean- grating large amounts of renewable wind power for centuries, and various
while, the offshore wind power sector energy resources (mostly wind power) early wind-powered technologies have
matured, and the price of offshore wind into the energy system in a relatively been popular throughout history. This
power generation decreased. This brief short time. account explores the modern history of
historical account aims to describe the In 2019, wind power accounted for wind power in Denmark. It outlines
complex technological journey of the almost 50% of the total national elec- the early development of wind power
wind power sector in Denmark. tricity consumption in Denmark. The technologies, describes key histori-
country currently produces the high- cal events and political decisions
est amounts of wind power per capita on this technological journey, and
Date of current version: 19 April 2021 in the world, and approximately 2.3% tells how wind power technologies

gradually grew to industrial- Electricity Company (D.V.E.S.)
scale height and production ca- i n 19 0 3. D.V. E . S. e d u c a t e d
pacity (see Table 1). electricians on how to establish
small electricity plants pow-
The Early Days: ered by wind throughout the ru-
Wind Power for ral parts of Denmark and thus
Rural Development contributed to the early electri-
Poul la Cour (born 1846) was a fication of the country. In 1918,
Danish pioneer of wind power 120 wind-powered electricity
and a prominent figure in the plants delivered 3% of the total
Danish enlightenment move- national electricity use, and as
ment. His visionary idealism many as 20,000–30,000 private
would become pivotal for the farms used small private wind
early electrification of Denmark. turbines for powering pumps,
La Cour constructed the first chainsaws, grinders, threshing
wind turbine that produced elec- machines, and so on. Howev-
tricity in 1891, and he imagined er, the diesel motor and, later,
how rural populations could har- electr ical motors gradually
vest wind energy for mechaniza- took over.
tion and modernization of farm- Inspired by airplane pro-
ing practices and for warmth and pellers, J. Jensen and P. Vind-
light (Figure 1). figure 1. An early wind turbine, 1891. (Source: ing designed more aerodynamic
La Cour and 21 par tners Poul la Cour Fonden and the Poul la Cour Mu- wind turbine wings i n 1919.
established the Danish Wind seum; used with permission.) Other local entrepreneurs and
making life visibly safer

BIRD DIVERTERS POWER LINE MARKERS LOW LINE MARKERS
FireFly® & BirdMark® SpanGuard TM & SpanLite TM QuikMark TM & SpanMark TM

The most effective bird diverters Mark any line. Anywhere. Saving lines & saving lives.
in independent studies. Standard & self-illuminated markers. Snaps directly onto live lines.
800-722-8078 • pr-tech.com
6874
tinkerers also experimented with
the emergent wind power technolo-
the energy effic ie n c y of t h e m o s t
common wind turbines at the time.
The Danes
gies, and this wind power innovation With a 43% efficiency rate in harvesting have harvested
was encouraged by the state. During the power of wind, the propeller wind
1919–1926, the Danish association for turbine was ranked as the best. Practi- wind power
the use of wind power was granted state
support, and the Danish State evaluated
cal and theoretical wind power-related
research topics were debated enthusiasti-
for centuries,
and various
table 1. Timeline: A brief history of wind power in Denmark.
early wind-
Year Key Events and Political Decisions
powered
1891 Wind turbine by Poul la Cour technologies
1903 Danish Wind Electricity Company (D.V.E.S.) founded have been
1914 1914–1918: World War I
popular
1919 Wind turbine with aerodynamic wings; design J. Jensen and P. Vinding
1939 1939–1945: World War II
throughout
1950 The Vester Egesborg turbine history.
1952 Application for Marshall Plan support for wind power research
cally in the national engineering journal
1963 Silent Spring, book by Rachel Carson The Engineer (in Danish: Ingeniøren).
1973 90% of the total national energy consumption based on imported oil See Figures 2 and 3.
1973 First international energy crisis
Postwar Enthusiasm
1976 Danish Energy Agency established During World War II, wind turbines
1978 The Tvind turbine, the largest in the world at the time again provided a welcome source of
power as energy resources were scarce.
1979 Second international energy crisis
However, general interest in wind pow-
1979 Public protests against nuclear power er dwindled quickly as energy imports
1979 Danish Energy Policy 1979 normalized after the war.
After the shock of war, agricul-
1985 Parliamentary decision: “no” to nuclear
tural, medical, and technological ad-
1987 The Brundtland Report vances generated optimism about the
1990 Energy 2000, the first plan for low-carbon energy transitions in the world future. The collective experiences of
wartime resource and energy scarcity
1991 Vindeby Offshore Wind Farm, the first offshore wind farm in the world
served as a reminder of fuel depen-
1992 United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change dency. The Danish government set out
1997 The Kyoto Protocol implements objectives of the United Nations Framework to develop and improve the electricity
Convention on Climate Change grid, prioritized coal imports for cen-
2000 13% of the total national electricity consumption supplied by wind power
tralized electricity generation, and
accepted hydropower from Norway.
2004 Energy Agreement However, importing coal proved chal-
2006 An Inconvenient Truth, book by Al Gore lenging under the postwar political
frictions: coal imports from the East-
2008 2008–2011: Energy Agreement and Renewable Energy Act
ern Bloc countries proved unstable,
2010 Anholt Offshore Wind Farm; the largest in the world at the time and coal imports from the Western
2012 2012–2018: Energy Agreement Bloc countries were costly.
The economists in the Organisation
2015 Paris Agreement signed by 197 countries
for European Economic Co-operation
2018 46.9% of the total national electricity consumption supplied by wind power rightly predicted that the European re-
2018 Energy Agreement construction work after the war would
lack sufficient energy resources, and they
2019 Climate Act
discussed the use of wind power as an

alternative. The Danish authorities asked ticed a noninterventionist and rather 1970s, the price of oil had increased
the Danish Association of Electricity relaxed approach to ensuring future exponentially. The economy deteriorat-
Plants to establish a wind power com- fuel supplies. ed, and unemployment soared. Short-
mittee and applied for Marshall Plan The oil crisis in the 1970s was a term government mediatory measures
support in 1952 (the Marshall Plan was shock and a wake-up call, and it high- comprised, for example, car-free Sun-
an American aid program for Europe af- lighted the extreme energy import de- days. Throughout society, everybody
ter World War II). The goal was further pendency of the country. By the late suffered from the effects of the energy
research in wind power-related technolo-
gies. Nuclear power was seen by some as
a symbol of modernization and prog-
ress and as a viable energy alternative.
The Danish research station for nuclear
power, Risø, was opened in 1958.
The Gedser turbine was erected in
1957. This wind turbine was based on
New & Enhanced in EasyPower 10.4

research by Johannes Juul, a student of
la Cour. However, wind power research
in Denmark was no longer recom-
mended in 1962 because the price of Single Phase
electricity from the Gedser turbine was · Single phase modeling and analysis including short
double the price of electricity gener- circuit, equipment duty, arc ﬂash, device
ated from coal or oil. Juul opposed this coordination and TCC plots.
decision. He emphasized the benefits
of locally harvested energy resources
Updates for NFPA 70 (NEC) 2020 and NFPA 70E 2021
versus energy import dependency. He
· New and updated tables, labels and libraries to
also suggested that wind turbines could
support updated standards.
become a future national export (see Revit® Integrator Updates
Figures 4 and 5). · This release includes support for Revit 2021 and
several other integration enhancements.
The Global Energy Productivity and Usability Improvements
Crisis · Multiple enhancements including quantity based
The 1960s were characterized by the in- demand factor, TCC improvements, and error report
ternational race for the moon, Vietnam improvements.
War, hippie movement, Cuban Missile
Crisis, and civil rights movement. The
EasyPower Power System Analysis

release of the book Silent Spring by
Rachel Carson in 1963 marked the be-
ginning of growing international envi-
ronmental awareness and concern, and
antinuclear movements mobilized. As Easy As
In Denmark, the 1960s were char-
· Easy to Learn
CURRENT IN AMPERES X 100 AT 480 VOLTS
.5 .6 .8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 100 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1000 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10000
1000 1000
800 TX-2 800
FLA
acterized by an economic upswing,

600 600
500 500
0.15
400 400
300 TX-2 300

1 / 1.288 MVA
200 13.8 - 0.48 kV 200
6%
18.71
100 BL-1 100 Upstream Upstream Electrode Est Arc Flash Working Incident
80 GE AKR-50 80
Arc Fault Arc Fault Electrode
TX-2 Bus Name Bus kV Trip Device Trip Device Equip Type Configuration Gap Boundary Distance Energy
60 1000 / 1288 kVA 1600/1760 60 Name Function (mm) (inches) (inches) (cal/cm2)
50 6% 50
.13
BUS-3 13.8 R-6 51/50 Open Air VOA 152 32.1 + 26 1.7
24
40 SWG-4 40
· Easy to Use
30 BL-3 30 BUS-7 13.8 R-7 51/50 Open Air VOA 152 30.5 + 26 1.5
a healthy economy, and the growing

GE AKR-30H
20 800/400 20 M-1 0.48 BL-3 Other HCB 32 31.6 + 18 3.8
1.90
MAIN SWG 3.8 R-18 51/50 Switchgear VCB + HCB 152 189.3 + 18 59.3
BL-1
10 GE MVT-Plus 10 REFINER 2.4 R-7 51/50 Switchgear VCB + HCB 104 261.9 + 18 122.8
17.58
Sensor = 1600
TIME IN SECONDS
TIME IN SECONDS
8 8
Plug = 1600 SWG-4 0.48 R-6 51/50 Switchgear VCB + HCB 32 213.2 + 18 135.1
6 6
Cur
Cur Set = 1.1 (1760A)
.48
5 5 MCC-1 0.48 BL-2 MCC VCB 25 53.6 + 18 6.9

LT Band = 1
19
M-1
R R
4 4
STPU = 2.5 (4400A) BL-5 MCC-2 0.48 BL-3 MCC VCB 25 53.1 + 18 6.8
3 ST Delay = Int
Int 3
C-H HFD
ST Delay I²t = Out PNL-1 0.208 FS-2 Panel VCB + HBB 25 48.2 + 18 7.1
2 Override = 50000A 225/150 2
PNL-2 0.208 PNL-1 Panel VCB 25 57.8 + 18 7.7
Danish welfare state. Oil was inexpen-

1 1
.8 .8
.6 BL-3 .6
d
.5 GE MVT-9 .5
Risk Hazar
.4 Sensor = 800 .4
and Shock
Plug = 800 BL-1
Arc Flash priate PPE Required

.3 Cur
C ur Set = 0.5 (400A) .3
· Fast Results
18627A
LT Band = 1 C-6
Arc Flash and Shock
.2 Inst
Inst = 4 (3200A) .2
1 - 400 kcmil CU
Appro
TX-2
Appropriate PPE Risk Hazard
Incident Energy coverall
Boundary
Required
.1 1000 / 1288 kVA .1
Flash Hazard inches - Arc Flash rated

pants or arc
.08 INRUSH .08
4’ - 0” cal/cm at
18
arc rated 4’ - 0”
BL-5 2
.06 .06
Flash Hazard Boundary
shirt and
Cutler Hammer Series C
6.0 6.0
sive, abundant, and easy to transport.

.05 .05
HFD Arc-rated cal/cm2 at 18 inches
cover is removed
BL-3
- Arc Flash Incident
.04 .04
Frame = 225A (150AT)
Hazard when
29249A
.03 Trip = 150 .03 Energy
kV Shock
0.48 Limited Approach 0.48
.02
BL-5
.02
kV Shock Hazard
PANEL PANEL PANEL 3’ - 6” Restricted
Approach 3’ - 6” when cover is removed
20574A
27B) Limited Approach
1’ - 0” (Fed By:1’ - 0” ONLYRestricted
t Name: MCC-23A CONFIGURATION Approach
.01 .01
.5 .6 .8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 100 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1000 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10000
Equipmen SYSTEM Equipment Name:
CURRENT IN AMPERES X 100 AT 480 VOLTS NORMAL
VALID FOR VALID FOR NORMAL
SWG-4 (Fed By:
18A)
SYSTEM CONFIGURATION
ONLY
It required minimal initial investments,

and for these reasons, oil was the pri-
oritized fuel. Living standards im- Try instantly online or download a free demo copy at:
proved throughout society. Consump- www.EasyPower.com/demo
tion grew, and carpooling flourished.
Industry transitioned to oil, and the oil
demand increased. In the early 1970s, ®
more than 90% of nationally consumed
Power made easy.
fuels were imported from the Middle
East, and the Danish government prac-

crisis. In Denmark, the energy crisis revived in-
terest in harvesting locally available wind power.
Individual enthusiasts, local initiative groups, and
small private companies experimented with the
emergent wind power technologies, and they often
did so via private funding and at personal risk.
Top-Down and
Bottom-Up Support
for Wind Power
In response to the energy crisis, Danish authori-
ties initiated longer-term energy policy initiatives,
broadly captured via the headlines of energy diver-
sification, energy efficiency, and energy indepen-
dence. More specifically, this entailed diversifying
the fuel and technology mix in the energy system,
harvesting locally available energy resources (e.g.,
wind and solar), and reducing the national energy
figure 2. A wind turbine (1920), designed by J.C.H. Ellehammer.
consumption overall. The primary goals were to (Source: Danish Museum of Science and Technology; used with
reduce energy import dependency and protect permission.)
the national economy. Mirroring the ideology of
the growing Danish welfare state, these policy
initiatives were also designed to provide stable
s Meets FAA Specifications!

Color – Size – Shape!
– International Orange
s Tested and approved by
major power companies!
s Thousands still in service
after 40 years
s Universal attaching! Fits any
wire .1" to 1"!
s Installs in 5 minutes!
s Withstands hail!
s No maintenance! Does not
slip, oscillate, chafe, cause
electrolysis or harmonic
vibration.
s Ships in halves nested.
9, 12, 20, 24, 30, and 36" balls
& special sizes available
Call now 573-796-3812

ext. 2001
Fax 573-796-3770
www.tanawiremarker.com figure 3. The wind motor factory in Lykkegaard, part of Gislev
TANA WIRE MARKERS
electricity works (1923). (Source: Danish Museum of Science and
P.O. Box 370, California, MO 65018
Technology; used with permission.)
98 ieee power &1energy magazine

634276_Tana.indd 23/03/13 10:38 AM may/june 2021
of the East–West divide, fears of the in- renewables were also celebrated as
creasingly accepted reality of climate alternatives to nuclear. Drawing upon
change lingered. Environmental di- the rich Danish history of coopera-
sasters repeatedly made the headlines, tives from various sectors in society,
and scientists talked of environmental local initiative groups organized as
degradation and mass extinctions. In wind farm cooperatives had already
1987, the Brundtland Report was invested in and jointly financed small-
published by the World Commission er wind farms or wind turbines. As
on Environment and Development. the wind turbines grew in size and
In Denmark, the economy suf- production capacity, this Danish wind
fered after the international energy farm cooperative movement quickly
crisis. Environmental awareness grew, spread throughout the country.
and antinuclear sentiments were pre- During the 1980s, researchers pre-
dominant among the public. Envi- sented numerous scenarios for the fu-
ronmentalists and nongovernmental ture of the Danish electricity grid. One
organizations, researchers and energy such scenario envisioned an electricity
experts, inventors, and local commu- system based on locally harvested wind
nities sought alternatives. From the power and Norwegian hydropower. An-
bottom up, renewables, for example, other suggested that 240,000 wind tur-
figure 4. The Gedser wind turbine
wind and solar, were widely support- bines, sited along the Danish coastline,
(1957). (Source: Danish Museum of
Science and Technology; used with ed as locally available “green” and could supply more than half the elec-
permission.) sustainable energy resources. These tricity consumed in the country. In
and affordable energy supplies for all

Danish citizens.
In the 1970s, the Danish govern-
ment gradually introduced measures
supportive of the then-embryonic
wind power industry: a wind power
POSITION VACANT
feed-in tariff was introduced in 1976,
Siemens Chair
wind power research was supported,
Syed Babar Ali School of Science and
and wind turbines certified from a
Engineering (SBASSE), LUMS
Danish test center received 30% sub-
sidy support. The energy crisis led to The Syed Babar Ali School of Science and Engineering (SBASSE)
Lahore University of Management Sciences (LUMS), Pakistan invites
renewed interest in the Gedser tur- applications at the rank of Associate or Full Professor to occupy an
bine, and from the bottom up, local endowed chair position in the area of power electronics, electrical
initiative groups emerged. In 1977, the power systems, and energy conversion. Of particular interest to the
small fishing village of Klitmøller on school are various green technologies including renewable energy
generation, design of energy storage, and optimization. We are
the west coast of Denmark planned looking for an internationally recognized scholar possessing a strong
and deployed a wind farm with eight publication record, supervision experience of graduate students, and
turbines with the aim of supporting the ability to acquire competitive research funding. Experience in the
the electricity and heating of entire design and delivery of innovative academic programs with a genuine
passion for teaching, mentorship, and program building, and a proven
village. The largest wind turbine in track record of professional leadership and service to the community
the world at the time, the Tvind tur- are essential credentials. The successful candidate is expected to
bine (900 kW), was raised in 1978. establish a world-class research group, collaborate with other centers
Wind turbines gradually increased of excellence and departments at the School, acquire major research
funding and help diversify the curriculum. This endowed position
in size and efficiency, and in 1979, a carries a professorial rank appointment at the department of Electrical
small Danish company called Vestas Engineering, a competitive salary package, and a research fund.
commenced the mass production of LUMS is an equal opportunity employer that offers an excellent work
them. 1979 was also the year of the environment for professional growth. The application should include a
second international energy crisis. cover letter, an up-to-date CV, research & teaching statements, to be
sent to [email protected] with the subject Siemens Chair Search
2021. Anticipated start date is July 1st, 2021. However, this search
A Public “No” to Nuclear will continue until the appropriate candidate is identified. For more
While the fall of the Berlin Wall information, please visit http://www.lums.edu.pk/sbasse
marked the official and hopeful ending

1985, the Danish government final- newables, and instructed electricity com- The Environmental Turn in
ly—and conclusively—voted “no” to panies to develop and deploy 100-MW Danish Energy Planning
nuclear power in the future Danish wind power by the year 1990. In 1987, The United Nations Framework Con-
energy system. In 1986, a nuclea r close to Vordingborg in Denmark, the vention on Climate Change was ad-
disaster devastated Chernobyl in the largest wind farm in Europe at the opted in 1992, and the Kyoto Protocol
Soviet Union. time was connected to the grid (five was adopted in 1997, implementing
From the top down, r e n ewa bl e turbines at 750 kW each). Technolo- its objectives.
energy technology R&D was sup- gies for wind power generation at sea The wind power industry in Denmark
ported by the Danish State: the govern- were taking form, and in 1987, the was gaining momentum. Wind turbines
ment engaged in wind power R&D Government Committee for Offshore grew in height, and their energy efficien-
programs, subsidized the harvest of re- Wind Farms was established. cy improved. The wind power capacity
in the grid increased accordingly. In the
1990s, Danish energy and environmen-
tal politics were intertwined. Minister
of the Environment Svend Auken pri-
oritized green growth and sustainable
development and introduced a plan for
greenhouse gas reductions—initiatives
that would also benefit the Danish wind
power industry.
In 1993, the minister encouraged lo-
cal councils to start the process of mu-
nicipal wind farm planning. From the
mid-1990s, state subsidies encouraged
replacing older and inefficient onshore
wind turbines with modern wind power
technologies, and in 1996 the electricity
companies were instructed to increase
existing onshore wind power capacity
by a total of 900 MW by the year 2005
(see Figures 6 and 7).
Wind Power Generation

at Sea
The very first offshore wind farm in the
world, Vindeby Offshore Wind Farm (11
turbines at 0.45 MW each), was connect-
ed to the grid in 1991. In 1995, the Off-
shore Commission revealed five poten-
tial offshore wind farm sites of authority
interest in Danish maritime territories,
and in 1997, Auken, now minister of the
Environment and Energy, surprisingly
promised the world 750 MW of offshore
wind farm capacity at a World Wild-
life Fund meeting in Washington, D.C.
A 1997 report documented that o ffshore
wind power generation was now much
cheaper than previously anticipated, and
in 1998, the ministry instructed electric-
ity companies to develop five Danish
offshore wind farms with a total capac-
figure 5. The Gedser wind turbine: 200 kW, 38 m/s, wind catchment area 450 m2, ity of 750 MW.
diameter 24 m. (Source: Danish Museum of Science and Technology; used with By the late 1990s, small or large
permission.) wind farm cooperatives and individuals

still owned most of the 6,300 wind tur- and sometimes political support for energy resources in the energy system,
bines in Denmark. As the efficiency municipal wind farm planning initia- the Renewable Energy Act (REA) gath-
of wind power technologies improved, tives was lacking. ered all renewable energy technology-
public utilities also started investing in In 2008, the winds of political change related legislation into one comprehen-
wind farms (see Figure 8). favored the planning and deployment of sive legal framework. REA comprised
renewable energy technologies—and four policy measures promoting local
Growing Resistance wind farms—yet again. A broad politi- engagement in and acceptance of new
to Wind Farms cal coalition Energy Agreement outlin- local wind farms among the local public.
The twin towers terror attack on 11 ing future low-carbon energy-transition For example, future wind farm “neigh-
September 2001 in the United States processes and initiatives was negotiated, bors” would be offered the opportunity
shadowed the turn of the century, and and wind farm planning was prioritized. to invest in wind farm shares (minimum
in 2006, messages from the docu- Supporting the integration of renewable 20% of the wind farm project) according
mentary An Inconvenient Truth by
Al Gore and Davis Guggenheim hit
the headlines.
In 2000, approximately 13% of
the total national electricity consump-
tion in Denmark was produced by the
power of the wind. With a produc-
tion capacity of approximately 2 MW,
the total height of the newest onshore
wind turbines now exceeded 100 m at
the tips of the wings. As these modern
wind power plants grew in height and
number, they also became more promi-
nent throughout the Danish landscape.
The turn of the century was not
favorable for renewable energy tech-
nologies in Denmark. With the right-
wing government in power from 2001,
incentives supportive of renewables
were cut back, policies were uncer- figure 6. The Rødby Fjord Wind Farm, Denmark, 3 MW. (Courtesy of Vestas
tain, and the now-liberalized electric- Wind Systems.)
ity market fluctuated. As the modern
wind turbines grew to industrial-scale
height and capacity, technical and legal
complexities increased accordingly as
did the investments and risks involved.
Owners of these industrial-scale wind
farms were typically private investors,
companies, external developers, utili-
ties, or public/private partnerships. The
role and importance of the bottom-up
wind farm cooperative movement from
the early days of wind power dwindled.
Historically, wind power and wind
turbines had been popular among the
Danish public. However, plans for lo-
cal wind farms became a source of
social controversy. Support for local
wind farm projects could not be taken
for granted. Groups in opposition to
specific local wind farm projects mo-
bilized, stories of resistance to local figure 7. The Hvide Sande Wind Farm, Denmark, 3 MW. (Courtesy of Vestas
wind farms frequently made the news, Wind Systems.)

12 MW
300 m
9 MW
200 m 7 MW
4 MW
2 MW
100 m 1.2 MW
1–12 kW 0.5 MW
19th Century 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020
figure 8. Wind turbines throughout the decades. (Courtesy of Claus Nielsen, Aalborg University, Copenhagen, adapted
from Bloomberg NEF 2017; used with permission.)
to predefined REA criteria. Compensa- eration at sea decreased drastically in lation: When Denmark Got Wings: The
tion for potential reduction in property the following years. Thus, as onshore Wind Turbine History). Copenhagen,
value due to wind farm proximity could (and near-shore) wind farm opposition Denmark: Narayana Press, 2018.
also be granted according to REA crite- became the new normal, ambitions for K. Sperling, F. Hvelplund, and B. V.
ria. The REA policy measures have been large-scale wind power generation moved Mathiesen, ”Evaluation of wind power
adjusted and refined over the years. further offshore. planning in Denmark—Towards an
integrated perspective,” Energy (Ox-
The Offshore Wind Power Conclusion ford), vol. 35, no. 12, pp. 5443–5454,
Sector Matures This brief history of wind power in Den- 2010–2012. doi: 10.1016/j.energy.2010.
As onshore wind farms faced more fre- mark describes how the emergence and 06.039.
quent opposition, offshore wind turbine the evolution of Danish wind energy F. Hvelplund, P. A. Ostergaard, and
technologies matured, and the offshore technologies were supported by a bot- N. I. Meyer, ”Incentives and barriers
wind power industry grew. Horns Rev toms-up innovative drive, the coopera- for wind power expansion and system
1 offshore wind farm was connected to tive culture and values, and by top-down integration in Denmark,” Energy Pol-
the grid in 2002 (80 wind turbines at policy support. This shows how govern- icy, vol. 107, pp. 573–584, Aug. 2017.
2 MW each). It was the largest offshore ment policy ambitions for energy inde- doi: 10.1016/j.enpol.2017.05.009.
wind farm at the time. In 2010, Anholt pendence and energy diversification, N. I. Meyer, ”Learning from wind
offshore wind farm became the largest public antinuclear sentiments, and grow- energy policy in the EU: Lessons from
offshore wind farm in the world (111 ing environmental awareness gradually Denmark, Sweden and Spain,” Environ.
wind turbines at 3.6 MW each). translated to the focus on, and support Governance Policy, vol. 17, no. 5, pp. 347–
In continuation of the 2008 Energy for, locally available renewables, most 362, Sept./Oct. 2007. doi: 10.1002/eet.463.
Agreement, the 2012–2020 broad po- notably wind power. With the advent “Energy policies of IEA countries:
litical coalition Energy Agreement also of power-to-X technologies, and with Denmark 2017,” International Energy
comprised multiple, ambitious low-car- various large-scale energy infrastruc- Agency, Paris, France, 2017.
bon energy-transition goals, including ture planning initiatives on the drawing K. Johansen and P. Upham, ”The
plans for a 450-MW offshore coastal board, the future for wind power and the post-normal politics and science of
wind farm tender. The government wind power industry in the country of wind power planning: Evidence from
did not predict the level of social, po- Denmark looks promising. a Danish near-shore wind farm ten-
litical, and legal controversy that would der,” Energy Res. Social Sci., vol. 53,
follow in the wake of these planned For Further Reading pp. 182–193, July 2019. doi: 10.1016/j.
wind farms close to the Danish coast. P. Flemming, Da Danmark fik Vinger: erss.2019.02.007.
p&e
However, the costs of wind power gen- Vindmøllehistorien 1978–2018, (Trans-

editors’ voice (continued from p. 8)
of virtual gathering is advancing at a ogy areas to continue to cross these pag- guest editors and authors significantly
quick pace. Post COVID-19, meetings es. This includes topics such as energy contributed to the quality of the mate-
will never be the same. conversion, transmission and distribu- rial presented. Thanks to Assistant Edi-
tion equipment, system operations, and tor Susan O’Bryan for her editing and
Parting Words planning, along with the methodologies management efforts. We appreciate the
To keep with current industry trends, and tools that support them. efforts of Associate Editor John Pas-
this magazine featured more articles We are grateful to Jim Reilly and erba in arranging another engaging his-
that were distribution- and customer Mani Venkata for assembling the ar- tory column and the professional staff
system-oriented in its recent past than any ticles for this issue. Thanks also to the at IEEE Publishing for making us look
other technical area. Although proposals authors and their valuable efforts to good. Finally, thank you to past Editor-
for future issues reflect themes consistent develop the featured articles. Associate in-Chief Mike Henderson for his coun-
with this trend, please expect the broad Editor Ning Lu led the technical review. sel and guidance.
p&e
spectrum of power and energy technol- Her constructive engagement with the
Erratum
Due to a production error, in Figure 1 of [1], the years Reference
on the x-axis were incorrect. The corrected figure is print [1] J . Matevosyan, S. H. Huang, P. Du, N. Mago, and R. Guiyab,
ed below. “Operational security: The case of Texas,” IEEE Power
Energy Mag., vol. 19, no. 2, pp. 18–27, March-April
Date of current version: 19 April 2021 2021. doi: 10.1109/MPE.2020.3043611.
60,000
57,902
57,001
Cumulative Wind MW Installed Cumulative Wind MW Planned
55,000 Cumulative Solar MW Installed Cumulative Solar MW Planned
49,989
50,000 15,435 15,833
45,000 9,576
40,000 3,633 3,633

35,992 3,633
35,000 1,529
3,633 12,961 13,461
(MW)
30,000 11,805
26,141 5,854
25,000 23,634 2,281
21,766 1,857
1,068
20,000 18,228
16,147 566
15,000
12,898
10,771 11,221 23,860
24,976 24,976 24,976 24,976
10,000 20,698 21,777
15,857 17,662
12,729
5,000 10,698 11,100
0
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023
(Year)
figure 1. The ERCOT installed and planned generation capacity as of 30 September 2020. The cumulative megawatt
p&e
(MW) planned include projects with signed interconnection agreements.

society news
Karen Studarus
TESC2020
providing an engaging virtual format
O
ORIGINALLY PLANNED FOR PORT-
land, Oregon, 2020’s IEEE Power &
Energy Society (PES) International
Transactive Energy Systems Confer-
ence and Workshop (TESC2020), “Ar-
chitecting a Resilient Transactive Grid,”
shifted to a virtual format due to the
COVID-19 pandemic. Ten sessions,
held 7–10 December 2020, were hosted
in partnership with the GridWise Ar-
chitecture Council, welcoming 151 at-
tendees from 14 countries.
TESC2020 was the seventh time
this conference and workshop was
held. It consistently features lively
discussion and debate among the
participants that fuel insight and col-
The keynote panel featured U.S. Department of Energy Program Managers Erika
laboration. Organizers worried that
Gupta, Chris Irwin (top right), and Alejandro Moreno.
this vibrancy would suffer in a virtual
meeting environment and worked to
preserve the in-person energy. IEEE,
the GridWise Architecture Council,
and participants stepped up this year
to preserve attendee engagement; they
set up the virtual venue tools with ca-
pabilities to keep the attendees in a
shared space. The meeting featured an
agenda of online panel sessions with
live video discussions and recorded
video present at ions wit h l ive a nd
moderated question-and-answer ses-
sions where the presenter addressed
attendee comments from chat boxes.
Attendees also had the option to par-
ticipate in two tutorials on transactive
energy and grid architecture.

Sessions, such as “Drivers of Change,” included presentations and discussions,
Date of current version: 19 April 2021 encouraging interaction among attendees.

Starting with a keynote panel fea-
turing U.S. Department of Energy Pro-
gram Managers Chris Irwin, Alejandro
Moreno, and Erika Gupta, each of the
eight sessions featured a simultaneous
broadcast to all attendees of a prere-
corded panel presentation with a video
of all speakers. Immediately following
the recorded presentation was a live
web meeting discussion session. In the
web meeting, the same panelists had a
moderated talk with attendees partici-
pating by audio, video, and text mes-
saging. Participation was high, with Attendees were able to interact using online text-based comments.
each web meeting session drawing up
to 75 participants, a large number of the thumbnails of each paper on the scheduled for May 2022, and organiz-
whom both turned on their cameras interactive meeting website. While the ers might even consider keeping the
and contributed to lively side-channel experience was not the same as talk- virtual conference format, given the
conversations using the online chat ing with one another the way one wan- success of the engagement and quality
tool. Seven 90-min sessions followed ders around at an in-person venue, the of the discussion at TESC2020.
the keynote: “Drivers meeting successfully
p&e
of Change,” “Business kept attendees engaged
Models and Value Re- Organizers during the scheduled
alization,” “Regulation
and Policy,” “System
worried that this meeting times. The
quality of the papers
Design and Architec- vibrancy would was high, but feedback
ture,” “Resilience,”
“System Implemen- suffer in a
on the “poster session”
for m at wa s m i xe d. Correction
tation Strategies and
Examples,” and “Vi-
virtual meeting Many attendees voiced
their enjoyment of the In the September/October 2020 issue
sions for Participa- environment small group breakouts of IEEE Power & Energy Magazine,
tion.” They featured that were hosted to get page 89 of [1] misstated the power
presentations and fa- and worked to to know the authors. capacity of the plant at 200,000 hp.
cilitated discussion.
TESC2020 also fea-
preserve the in- As virtual conferences
are not going away, the
It should read 20,000 hp.
tured virtual “posters.” person energy. organizers will seek to Reference

Authors appeared in make more opportu- [1] D. Tiku, “Moh ra Hydro Plant:
recorded 5-min videos nities available for a Light of the valley” [History], IEEE
of slide presentations. The videos were mix of formal and spontaneous small Power Energy Mag., vol. 18, no. 5, pp.
supplemented with PDFs. Tools that sup- group breakout rooms in the future. 88–99, 2020. doi: 10.1109/MPE.2020.
ported text-based question-and-answer All 2020 conference keynote ad- 2999792.
discussions were available throughout dresses, panel presentations, tutorials,
the event, and during the 2-h window, recorded sessions, and papers are avail- Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/MPE.2021.3058709
each author hosted a live web meeting able through the IEEE PES Resource
to address questions. Attendees could Center. The next IEEE PES Transac-
p&e
pop in and out of these sessions from tive Energy Systems Conference is

calendar
PES meetings
for more information, www.ieee-pes.org
T
THE IEEE P OW E R & E N E RGY Sa n-Roma n, tomas.gomez@comillas IEEE PES Innovative Smart Grid
Society’s (PES’s) website (http://www .edu, https://www.powertech2021.com/ Technologies Latin America (ISGT
.ieee-pes.org) features a meetings section, LA 2021), 15–17 September, Lima, Peru,
which includes calls for papers and July 2021 virtual event, contact Jorge Lafitte,
additional information about each of IEEE PES General Meeting (GM [email protected]
the PES-sponsored meetings. Please 2021), 25–29 July, virtual event, con-
check the conference website for the tact Roseanne Jones, roseanne.jones@ October 2021
most current information and any ven- ieee.org, https://pes-gm.org/2021/ IEEE PES Innovative Smart Grid
ue changes due to the pandemic. Technologies Europe (ISGT Europe
August 2021 2021), 18–21 October, Espoo, Finland,
May 2021 IEEE Electric Ship Technologies contact Pourakbari Kasmaei Mahdi,
IEEE International Conference Symposium (ESTS 2021), 4–6 August, [email protected]
on Electrical Machines and Drives Arlington, Virginia, United States,
(IEMDC 2021), 16–19 May, Hartford, virtual event, contact Julie Chalfant, November 2021
Connecticut, United States, virtual [email protected], https://ests21.mit.edu IEEE PES Asia-Pacific Power and
event, contact Ali Bazzi, alibassi@ Energy Engineering Conference
ieee.org, http://iemdc-conference.org/ IEEE PES/IAS PowerAfrica (Power- (APPEEC 2021), 21–23 November,
Africa 2021), 23–27 August, Nairobi, Thiruvananthapuram, India, contact
June 2021 Kenya, virtual event, contact Hum- Boby Philip, [email protected]
IEEE Transportation Electrification phrey Muhindi, h . m u h i n d i@i e e e
Conference and Expo (ITEC 2021), 23– .org, https://ieee-powerafrica.org/ December 2021
25 June, Chicago, Illinois, United States, IEEE PES Innovative Smart Grid
virtual event, contact Rebecca Krish- September 2021 Technologies Asia (ISGT Asia 2021),
namurthy, rebecca.k@rna-associates IEEE PES GT&D International 5–8 December, Brisbane, Australia,
.com, https://itec-conf.com Conference and Exposition, Istan- contact Tapan Saha, [email protected]
bul (GTD), 14–17 September, Istanbul,
IEEE PowerTech Madrid (PowerTech Turkey, contact Omer Usta, usta@ieee For more information on additional tech-
2021), 27 June–2 July, Madrid, Spain, .org, https://ieee-gtd.org/ nical committee meetings, webinars, and
virtual event, contact Tomas Gomez events, please visit our IEEE PES calendar:
2021 IEEE PES GT&D International https://www.ieee-pes.org/meetings-and
Conference and Exposition, Istanbul, -conferences/conference-calendar.
is postponed until the Spring of 2023
p&e
Date of current version: 19 April 2021 due to pandemic conditions.

in my view (continued from p. 108)
and fault-current characteris- reconfiguration and self-healing capa- and functional requirements of mi-
tics than rotating machines. bilities, but this also creates challenges crogrid architectures, the process of
2) Distribution of resources across to protect a meshed system. For exam- determining DER short circuit current
the microgrid: Each combination ple, networking two or more microgrids requirements, protection schemes,
of sources has different fault re- together provides additional economic and interconnection types could be
sponse characteristics. and reliability benefits, and new protec- better defined.
3) Bidirectional flows: Distribution tion schemes will have to be developed
system protection was designed to coordinate these types of intercon- IEEE Power & Energy
for only radial faults for pow- nections. Microgrids on downtown sec- Society Support for
e r f lows in one direction, but ondary networks with a meshed circuit, Microgrids
most microgrids will have their such as those in some urban downtowns, The IEEE Power & Energy Society
sources in a different location, present different protection challenges. (PES) has been working to bring new
which will present fault currents Today, the protection of meshed net- microgrid protection technologies and
going in the other direction in works is based in part on an assumption solutions to system protection overall.
both grid-connected and island of unidirectional current flow through Specifically, the Microgrid Protection
modes. certain parts of the system, and few vi- Working Group, under the PES Power
4) Design of protection systems: able alternatives to this approach are System Relaying and Control Commit-
The design of protection systems presently available. Protection challeng- tee, is bringing new insights to special
for a microgrid in islanded op- es arise when microgrids operate on a protection schemes, remedial actions
erating mode is different from portion of a mashed network. The DERs schemes, monitoring technologies, and
the connected operating mode. in the microgrid can interfere with a net- control systems. New technologies that
Moreover, it is necessary to con- work protector auto-reclosing scheme to have a bearing on protection system
sider protection during the tran- the point that it may not reclose because performance during abnormal power
sition between these two opera- the network voltage or phase angle is system conditions are being studied
tional modes, which may require outside the permissive closing bound- with respect to microgrids, both re-
two different sets of protection ary. Further, DERs within the microgrid mote and grid connected, in radial and
schemes and quick switching be- can cause inadvertent islanding if net- secondary networks. Furthermore, a
tween the two schemes. work protectors trip on reverse power working group has been formed in the
The interconnection of DERs to from the DER. These are highly conse- IEEE Standards Association specifi-
distribution networks, as individual quential considerations when develop- cally for microgrid protection, IEEE
devices, presents one set of challenging protection schemes for microgrids p2030.12, Guide for the Design of Mi-
es to protection. DERs within mi- in secondary networks in major cities. crogrid Protection Systems, sponsored
crogrids, connected to distribution R&D into any or all of these is- by the Power System Relaying and
networks as systems, present a differ- sues could provide valuable advance- Control Committee. This guide will
ent set of issues. Therefore, system ments in the protection of microgrids cover the design and selection of pro-
protection solutions may need to vary in secondary networks. Examples are tective devices and the coordination
under different operational configu- technologies for low-cost differential between their modes of operation.
rations. For example, when inverters protection of IBRs in microgrids. My appreciation goes out to IEEE
are used in microgrids, they need to The ability to use inverter capabili- Power & Energy Magazine for publish-
be designed to be compatible with ties to assist in fault detection and iso- ing an issue on the ever-important topic
all modes of operation and provide lation has not been studied sufficiently of microgrid protection and bringing
quality power equal to or better than at this time, and research into that pos- the work of several valuable initiatives
that of the utility. sibility would be of high value. Beyond to the attention of its readership.
this, inverters and protection could be
Protection for Microgrids co-designed in a more holistic system- For Further Reading
on Secondary (Meshed) level process to provide a cooptimized M. Ropp, M. J. Reno, W. Bower, J. Reil-
Networks generation and protection system. This ly, and S. S. (Mani) Venkata, Secondary
Most microgrids installed today have a possibility and its potential cost-benefit networks and protection: Implications
single point of interconnection, but the tradeoffs should be explored further. for DER and microgrid interconnec-
electric power grid continues to become A microgrid connected to a meshed tion, Sandia National Lab., Albuquer-
more interconnected and meshed over network still must deal with reverse que, NM, Tech. Rep. SAND2020-1120
time. The fractal grid of the future pro- flow through network protectors. By 9692985, Nov. 2020.
vides reliability and resilience through developing frameworks for the design p&e

in my view
Dan Ton
R&D to meet the challenges to come
T
THE DEDICATION OF AN ENTIRE A major goal of the microgrid pro- search priorities. These successes as
issue of IEEE Power & Energy Magazine gram has been to develop promising well as the emerging issues are sum-
to microgrid protection is recognition of new solutions to integrating microgrids marized in the articles in this issue
the heightened importance of both mi- capable of of IEEE Power & Energy Magazine.
crogrids and protection in the electric ✔✔ operating in parallel with the util- In most of the articles, the authors
power industry. The importance of mi- ity distribution system discuss emerging issues and propose
crogrids is reflected in their ability to ✔✔ transitioning seamlessly to an is- some possible solutions for tackling
enhance the resilience of critical facilities landed power system them. R&D to resolve these issues is
against high-impact events, such as those ✔✔ operating safely and reliability still very much a work in progress.
caused by extreme weather. These days, as islanded power systems. The contents of the articles show that
microgrids often employ multiple distrib- Solutions for microgrid protection are these research priorities remain valid
uted energy resources (DERs) from re- critical for this integration to take place. today for microgrid protection as both
newable energy sources, most commonly the main grid and microgrids are see-
solar in combination with storage. The Strategies for Microgrid ing higher penetration of inverter-
protection system is a critical component Protection in the based DERs while facing an ever-grow-
of power system operation and respon- Microgrid Program ing need for resiliency.
sible for identifying faults in the system When the microgrid program developed
or microgrid and isolating them before its strategy for advanced microgrids in Unique Protection
additional equipment is damaged. Mi- early 2011, five areas for R&D in mi- Requirements of Microgrids
crogrids are often connected to electric crogrid protection were identified as Today, in microgrids as well as in dis-
power distribution networks and oper- priorities. These areas are tribution systems, major challenges
ated interactively with distribution utili- 1) the architecture of protection for come from the high penetration of
ties, making microgrid protection and the emerging (smart) grid and inverter-based resources (IBRs) and
protection coordination with the main microgrids ever-changing microgrid configura-
grid increasingly complex. Another lay- 2) new digital protective devices tions and controller designs. The mi-
er of protection complexity is added if and solutions croprocessor relays of the past must
a microgrid is deployed on a secondary 3) the integration of new, faster de- be adapted to the needs of protecting
distribution network. vices with existing slow devices the microgrids as well as the distri-
Although the main function of mi- 4) the design of the protection bution networks in systems with high
crogrid protection is to isolate faults in schemes and the coordination of penetrations of IBRs. The starting
grid-connected or isolated modes, pro- all devices to meet the philoso- point for this adaptation in microgrids
tection is also a key consideration for the phy and objectives of smart grid begins with its unique protection re-
transition mode, transferring to/from operations quirements, which are different from
the connection to the utility. During the 5) the protection of the microgrid typical radial distribution protection re-
transition, the compatibility and coordi- in both grid-connected and is- quirements in four key ways.
nation of system protection devices are landed modes of operation and 1) Prevalence of power electronic
critical; without them, the microgrid the transition between opera- sources: Microgrids have signifi-
would be in danger of collapsing. tional modes. cantly different time constants
Now, 10 years later, there has been
Date of current version: 19 April 2021 great progress in pursuing these re- (continued on p. 107)

advertisers index
The Advertisers Index contained in this issue is compiled as a service to our readers and advertisers: The
publisher is not liable for errors or omissions although every effort is made to ensure its accuracy. Be sure
to let our advertisers know you found them through IEEE Power & Energy Magazine.
Company page# URL Phone

ASPEN, Inc. CVR4 www.aspeninc.com +1 650 347 3997
Bigwood Systems, Inc. 19 www.bigwood-systems.com +1 607 257 0915
CYME CVR 2 www.eaton.com/cyme +1 800 361 3627
DIgSILENT GmbH 3 www.digsilent.de/products
EasyPower LLC 97 www.EasyPower.com/demo
EMTP 13 www.emtp.com
ETAP 11 etap.com/microgrid +1 949 900 1000
Hubbell Power System 15 www.hubbell.com
Lahore University of Management

Sciences (LUMS) 99 www.lums.edu.pk/sbasse
Omicron Electronics 17 www.omicronenergy.com/puc
P & R Technologies 95 www.pr-tech.com +1 800 722 8078
Powertech Labs, Inc. 6 www.dsatools.com
PowerWorld Corporation 8 www.powerworld.com +1 217 384 6330
PSCAD a product of MHI 7 pscad.com
Reef Industries 12 reefindustries.com +1 800 231 6074
RTDS Technologies, Inc. 9 www.rtds.com/RSCAD-FX
SKM Systems Analysis, Inc. 5 www.skm.com +1 800 500 4SKM
Tana Wire Markers 98 www.tanawiremarker.com +1 573 796 3812
445 Hoes Lane, Piscataway, NJ 08854
IEEE power & energy magazine representative

Erik Henson
Naylor Association Solutions
+1 352 333 3443, fax: +1 352 331 3525
[email protected]

IEEE Power and Energy Magazine-May June 2021

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

IEEE Power and Energy Magazine-May June 2021

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

IEEE Power and Energy Magazine-May June 2021

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Volume 19 • Number 3 • May/June 2021

Volume 19 • Number 3 • May/June 2021

Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/MPE.2021.3057945

may/june 2021 ieee power & energy magazine 1

Editor-in-Chief Editorial Board IEEE Periodicals/Magazines Department

IEEE POWER & ENERGY SOCIETY (PES)

Governing Board Technical Council IEEE Trans. on Energy Conversion, A. Tessarolo

2 ieee power & energy magazine may/june 2021

StationWare & PowerFactory

Manage large numbers of different manufacturer-specific settings files using StationWare,

STATIONWARE POWERFACTORY FOR PROTECTION

For more information visit POWER SYSTEM SOLUTIONS

4 ieee power & energy magazine may/june 2021

ADDITIONAL SOFTWARE FROM SKM

SKM Power*Tools Training Classes

TSAT-RTDS® INTERFACE (TRI) & TSAT-PSCADTM INTERFACE (TPI)

Experience and Support

RTDS® and PSCADTM are trademarks of Manitoba Hydro International.

Learn more about RSCAD FX at www.rtds.com/RSCAD-FX

YOUR WORLD IN REAL TIME.

10 ieee power & energy magazine may/june 2021

Bags ture Program support

liners ferings, deliver timely technological

12 ieee power & energy magazine may/june 2021

• Perform multi-phase load-¬flow and time-domain (EMT) simulations

EMTP® is fastest, the most accurate and the most

Get an 1-Hour call with an application engineer

14 ieee power & energy magazine may/june 2021

A significant SAFETY advance in Cable Accessories design

For product inquiries, please contact your local

16 ieee power & energy magazine may/june 2021

As an Engineering Manager in the Power Utility Communication field, I work on

may/june 2021 ieee power & energy magazine 17

PES Member Access: Most materials in the PES Resource Center

Need to train yourself in

Unable attend a PES conference?

Time to update your license?

Want access to in-depth

Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/MPE.2021.3069358

World Leader in Developing

Network Applications for the Control Center

may/june 2021 ieee power & energy magazine 19

20 ieee power & energy magazine 1540-7977/21©2021IEEE may/june 2021

Challenges in Microgrid Protection

By Dimitris Lagos, Vasileios Papaspiliotopoulos,

may/june 2021 ieee power & energy magazine 21

CB4 CB5 CB7 CB9 CB10

CB1 CB2 Bus 3 Bus 4

CB20 CB14 CB16 CB19

figure 1. The impact of a DER presence in microgrid protection.

22 ieee power & energy magazine may/june 2021

IQ: Reactive Current

Greek –50% –10%

may/june 2021 ieee power & energy magazine 23

CB1 Bus 3 Bus 4

CB12 CB13 CB15 CB17 CB18

CB20 CB14 CB16 CB19

24 ieee power & energy magazine may/june 2021

Circuit Circuit Bus 5 Bus 6