Original Article
Split Viewer
International Journal of Fuzzy Logic and Intelligent Systems 2023; 23(2): 130-139
Published online June 25, 2023
https://doi.org/10.5391/IJFIS.2023.23.2.130
© The Korean Institute of Intelligent Systems
Fuzzy Location Algorithm for Cross-Country and Evolving Faults in EHV Transmission Line
A. Naresh Kumar1, M. Chakravarthy2, M. Suresh Kumar3, M. Nagaraju4, M. Ramesha5, Bharathi Gururaj6, and Elemasetty Uday Kiran7
1Department of Electrical and Electronics Engineering, Institute of Aeronautical Engineering, Hyderabad, India
2Department of Electrical and Electronics Engineering, Vasavi College Engineering, Hyderabad, India
3Department of Space Engineering, Ajeenkya DY Patil University, Pune, India
4Department of Information Technology, University of the Cumberlands, Canada
5Department of Electrical, Electronics and Communication Engineering, GITAM (Deemed to be University), Bengaluru, India
6Department of Electronics and Communication Engineering, ACS College of Engineering, Bengaluru, India
7Department of Aerospace Engineering, Toronto Metropolitan University, Canada
Correspondence to :
A. Naresh Kumar (ankamnaresh29@gmail.com)
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) which permits unrestricted noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Fault protection is an important issue as it adversely affects the performance of conventional relays, particularly for cross-country and evolving faults in transmission lines. In this paper, a novel fault location algorithm for cross-country and evolving faults in extra high voltage transmission (EHVT) line using the fuzzy expert system (FES) is presented. The algorithm is based on the impedance values of relaying terminal fundamental component. In addition, the proposed FES is independent of communication links. It was designed using input variables via the IF-THEN rules and developed with the fuzzy MAMDANI structure. A triangular membership function was used to estimate the degree of inputs. MATLAB software was used to evaluate the error in the fault location for a 100-km, 400-kV, 50-Hz EHVT line. The FES algorithm yielded precise values. The test results were independent of the fault inception time, location, and type. The experimental results illustrate that the FES performed better than the other algorithms.
Keywords: Cross-country faults, Evolving faults, Fuzzy expert system
Conflict of Interest
No potential conflict of interest relevant to this article was reported.
Biographies
PDF
Standard view
Export citation
Share Article
Original Article
International Journal of Fuzzy Logic and Intelligent Systems 2023; 23(2): 130-139
Published online June 25, 2023 https://doi.org/10.5391/IJFIS.2023.23.2.130
Copyright © The Korean Institute of Intelligent Systems.
Fuzzy Location Algorithm for Cross-Country and Evolving Faults in EHV Transmission Line
A. Naresh Kumar1, M. Chakravarthy2, M. Suresh Kumar3, M. Nagaraju4, M. Ramesha5, Bharathi Gururaj6, and Elemasetty Uday Kiran7
1Department of Electrical and Electronics Engineering, Institute of Aeronautical Engineering, Hyderabad, India
2Department of Electrical and Electronics Engineering, Vasavi College Engineering, Hyderabad, India
3Department of Space Engineering, Ajeenkya DY Patil University, Pune, India
4Department of Information Technology, University of the Cumberlands, Canada
5Department of Electrical, Electronics and Communication Engineering, GITAM (Deemed to be University), Bengaluru, India
6Department of Electronics and Communication Engineering, ACS College of Engineering, Bengaluru, India
7Department of Aerospace Engineering, Toronto Metropolitan University, Canada
Correspondence to:A. Naresh Kumar (ankamnaresh29@gmail.com)
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) which permits unrestricted noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Abstract
Fault protection is an important issue as it adversely affects the performance of conventional relays, particularly for cross-country and evolving faults in transmission lines. In this paper, a novel fault location algorithm for cross-country and evolving faults in extra high voltage transmission (EHVT) line using the fuzzy expert system (FES) is presented. The algorithm is based on the impedance values of relaying terminal fundamental component. In addition, the proposed FES is independent of communication links. It was designed using input variables via the IF-THEN rules and developed with the fuzzy MAMDANI structure. A triangular membership function was used to estimate the degree of inputs. MATLAB software was used to evaluate the error in the fault location for a 100-km, 400-kV, 50-Hz EHVT line. The FES algorithm yielded precise values. The test results were independent of the fault inception time, location, and type. The experimental results illustrate that the FES performed better than the other algorithms.
Keywords: Cross-country faults, Evolving faults, Fuzzy expert system
Fig 1.
Download
Flow chart of proposed algorithm.
Fig 2.
Download
Input “ZA” degree of fuzzy membership functions.
Fig 3.
Download
Output “DA” degree of fuzzy membership functions.
Fig 4.
Download
Test results of FES during evolving fault.
Fig 5.
Download
Test results of FES during cross-country fault.
Fig 6.
Download
Fault classification of FES during evolving fault (a), cross-country fault (b), and shunt fault (c). presented in this analysis.
-
Table 1 . Rules for FES.
Rule No IF Part THEN Part ZA ZB ZC DA DB DC 1 ZF10 ZF10 ZF10 DF10 DF10 DF10 2 ZF10 ZF10 ZF9 DF10 DF10 DF9 ⋮ ⋮ ⋮ ⋮ ⋮ ⋮ ⋮ 9 ZF10 ZF10 ZF2 DF10 DF10 DF2 10 ZF10 ZF10 ZF1 DF10 DF10 DF1 11 ZF10 ZF9 ZF10 DF10 DF9 DF10 12 ZF10 ZF9 ZF9 DF10 DF9 DF9 ⋮ ⋮ ⋮ ⋮ ⋮ ⋮ ⋮ 19 ZF10 ZF9 ZF2 DF10 DF9 DF2 20 ZF10 ZF9 ZF1 DF10 DF9 DF1 21 ZF10 ZF8 ZF10 DF10 DF8 DF10 22 ZF10 ZF8 ZF9 DF10 DF8 DF9 ⋮ ⋮ ⋮ ⋮ ⋮ ⋮ ⋮ 89 ZF10 ZF2 ZF2 DF10 DF2 DF2 90 ZF10 ZF2 ZF1 DF10 DF2 DF1 91 ZF10 ZF1 ZF10 DF10 DF1 DF10 92 ZF10 ZF1 ZF9 DF10 DF1 DF9 ⋮ ⋮ ⋮ ⋮ ⋮ ⋮ ⋮ 99 ZF10 ZF1 ZF2 DF10 DF1 DF2 100 ZF10 ZF1 ZF1 DF10 DF1 DF1 101 ZF9 ZF10 ZF10 DF9 DF10 DF10 102 ZF9 ZF10 ZF9 DF9 DF10 DF9 ⋮ ⋮ ⋮ ⋮ ⋮ ⋮ ⋮ 109 ZF9 ZF10 ZF2 DF9 DF10 DF2 110 ZF9 ZF10 ZF1 DF9 DF10 DF1 111 ZF9 ZF9 ZF10 DF9 DF9 DF10 112 ZF9 ZF9 ZF9 DF9 DF9 DF9 ⋮ ⋮ ⋮ ⋮ ⋮ ⋮ ⋮ 899 ZF2 ZF1 ZF2 DF2 DF1 DF2 900 ZF2 ZF1 ZF1 DF2 DF1 DF1 901 ZF1 ZF2 ZF10 DF1 DF2 DF10 902 ZF1 ZF2 ZF9 DF1 DF2 DF9 ⋮ ⋮ ⋮ ⋮ ⋮ ⋮ ⋮ 999 ZF1 ZF1 ZF2 DF1 DF1 DF2 1000 ZF1 ZF1 ZF1 DF1 DF1 DF1
-
Table 2 . Test results of FES during two-location faults for various inception times.
Fault time (ms) Fault-1 Fault-2 A-Phase B-Phase C-Phase DA MAE DB MAE DC MAE 30 A-g at 25 km B-g at 81 km 25.09 0.09 80.76 0.24 100 - 50 B-g at 37 km C-g at 59 km 100 - 37.17 0.17 59.06 0.06 70 C-g at 16 km A-g at 67 km 67.41 0.41 100 - 15.61 0.39 90 A-g at 25 km BC-g at 71 km 25.18 0.18 71.01 0.01 71.08 0.08 110 B-g at 48 km AC-g at 95 km 95.37 0.37 47.68 0.32 95.33 0.33 130 C-g at 07 km BC-g at 21 km 21.06 0.06 21.36 0.36 07.15 0.15
-
Table 3 . Test results of FES during three-location faults for various inception times.
Fault time (ms) Fault-1 Fault-2 Fault-3 A-Phase B-Phase C-Phase DA MAE DB DA MAE DB 20 A-g at 13 km B-g at 22 km C-g at 69 km 12.88 0.12 21.92 0.08 69.01 0.01 40 A-g at 19 km B-g at 56 km C-g at 93 km 19.11 0.11 56.07 0.07 93.31 0.31 60 A-g at 87 km B-g at 42 km C-g at 08 km 87.23 0.23 41.90 0.10 08.19 0.19 80 A-g at 93 km B-g at 78 km C-g at 15 km 92.77 0.33 78.29 0.29 14.79 0.21 100 A-g at 35 km B-g at 06 km C-g at 83 km 35.38 0.38 06.22 0.22 83.16 0.16 120 A-g at 02 km B-g at 18 km C-g at 27 km 1.88 0.12 17.81 0.19 27.15 40.15
-
Table 4 . Test results of FES during evolving for various fault locations.
Location (km) Fault-1 Fault-2 A-Phase B-Phase C-Phase DA MAE DB DA MAE DB 6 A-g at 5 ms AB-g at 15 ms 6.08 0.08 5.95 0.05 100 - 18 A-g at 15 ms AC-g at 25 ms 18.06 0.06 100 - 18.06 0.06 42 B-g at 35 ms BA-g at 45 ms 42.30 0.30 42.28 0.28 100 - 55 C-g at 45 ms CA-g at 55 ms 55.12 0.12 100 - 54.82 0.18 63 C-g at 55 ms CB-g at 65 ms 100 - 63.01 0.01 63.03 0.03 70 A-g at 26 ms ABC-g at 36 ms 70.21 0.21 70.23 0.23 70.18 0.18 88 A-g at 36 ms ABC-g at 46 ms 87.71 0.29 88.02 0.02 88.02 0.02 98 A-g at 46 ms ABC-g at 56 ms 98.07 0.07 98.06 0.06 97.98 0.02
-
Table 5 . Test results of FES during evolving faults for various fault locations.
Location (km) Fault-1 Fault-2 A-Phase B-Phase C-Phase DA MAE DB DA MAE DB 12 AB-g at 5 ms ABC-g at 15 ms 11.92 0.08 11.89 0.11 12.01 0.01 64 BC-g at 15 ms ABC-g at 25 ms 64.14 0.14 64.18 0.18 64.09 0.09 33 CA-g at 25 ms ABC-g at 35 ms 32.80 0.20 32.79 0.21 32.92 0.08 44 AB-g at 35 ms ABC-g at 45 ms 44.02 0.02 44.12 0.12 43.97 0.07 88 BC-g at 45 ms ABC-g at 55 ms 88.15 0.15 88.06 0.06 88.00 0.00 26 CA-g at 55 ms ABC-g at 65 ms 26.22 0.22 26.23 0.23 26.11 0.11
-
Table 6 . Test results of FES during shunt faults for various inception times and faulty locations.
Fault time (ms) Faults Location (km) A-Phase B-Phase C-Phase DA MAE DB DA MAE DB 23 A-g 4 4.23 0.23 100 - 100 - 43 B-g 25 100 - 24.83 0.17 100 - 63 C-g 98 100 - 100 - 97.81 0.19 83 AB-g 52 52.21 0.21 52.22 0.22 100 - 103 BC-g 74 100 - 73.99 0.01 74.04 0.04 123 CA-g 49 49.22 0.22 100 - 49.12 0.12 143 ABC-g 82 81.96 0.06 82.04 0.04 82.01 0.01
-
Table 7 . Comparison of the proposed algorithm with other algorithms.
Study Faulty type Given inputs Function of protection Algorithm used MAE (%) Ben Hessine and Ben Saber[2] Shunt faults Sending terminal currents Fault classification and location SVM 0.22 Jamil et al. [23] Multi-location and transforming faults Single end current and voltage signals Fault location regardless of fault classification ANN 0.9 Bouthiba [18] Shunt faults Single end current and voltage signals Fault detection, classification, and location ANN 0.74 Barman and Roy [8] Short circuit faults Current and voltage Fault section identification, classification, and location ANFIS 1.3 Swetapadma and Yadav [17] Inter circuit and phase to ground faults Source end currents and voltages Fault location Decision tree regression 0.9 Swetapadma and Yadav [20] Cross-country and evolving faults Currents and voltages Fault location regardless of fault classification ANN 1 Roostaee et al. [15] Cross-country faults Zero-sequence currents Fault location First-zone distance relaying 5 Proposed algorithm Cross-country and evolving faults Single terminal impedances Fault location regardless of fault classification FES 0.41
