energies

Article
Mutual Coupling Compensation Techniques Used for Distance
Protection of Parallel Lines †
Michael O Donovan 1, * , Noel Barry 1 , Joe Connell 1 and Eoin Cowhey 2

1 Department of Electrical and Electronic, Munster Technological University, Bishopstown,

T12 P928 Cork, Ireland; [email protected] (N.B.); [email protected] (J.C.)
2 Electricity Supply Board, Rosbrien Rd, V94 A5D2 Limerick, Ireland; [email protected]
* Correspondence: [email protected]
† This paper expands on a version of our paper published in 2020 55th International Universities Power
Engineering Conference (UPEC), Torino, Italy, 1–4 September 2020, pp. 1–6.

Abstract: When a distance relay protects a transmission line located on a dual circuit tower, a
coupling effect will occur between the two circuits. Transposition of the circuits can reduce the
mutual impedances, but this does not cater to the zero-sequence mutual coupling impedance during
earth faults. As a result, the impedance measured by a distance relay under phase-to-earth fault
conditions in these circumstances will not represent the correct impedance to the fault point unless
these effects are taken into account. On multi-circuit lines, primarily if they operate in parallel, a zero-
sequence mutual coupling should be considered when calculating settings for distance protection
function. A 220 kV parallel line sharing the same tower was analysed using DigSilent Power Factory
in the simulations. Phase-to-earth faults in different configurations were analysed on this system,
and the reach of the protection relay was then estimated for operation. The results confirm how a



protection relay can overreach and underreach in a distance protection scheme due to the influence

 of mutual coupling.
Citation: O Donovan, M.; Barry, N.;
Connell, J.; Cowhey, E. Mutual Keywords: mutual coupling; earth fault; distance protection; mutual compensation
Coupling Compensation Techniques
Used for Distance Protection of
Parallel Lines. Energies 2021, 14, 1982.
https://doi.org/10.3390/en14071982 1. Introduction
Mutual coupling of overhead lines occurs when two or more circuits are in close
Academic Editor: Gianfranco Chicco
proximity in the same corridor. Parallel circuits are widely utilised in transmission networks
to improve the reliability and security of the system. Today, environmental conditions
Received: 13 February 2021
and planning restrictions are forcing utilities to install more and more parallel lines. This
Accepted: 1 April 2021
Published: 2 April 2021
configuration imposes a unique problem for the associated line protection relays [1]. The
vast majority of the short circuits that occur in the transmission system are phase-to-earth
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral
faults [2]. The mutual coupling between parallel lines complicates power systems analysis.
with regard to jurisdictional claims in
It also complicates the setting of overhead line protective relays, particularly for earth fault
published maps and institutional affil- protection. The mutual coupling has a substantial impact on impedance protection, which
iations. will ultimately result in suboptimal impedance settings.
Some factors that influence the amount of mutual coupling are the characteristics
of the transmission line (conductor type, tower configuration and spacing), grounding
(earthing) and the direction of the current [3]. The length that the lines are in parallel and
if the line is homogenous (fed from the same busbar) or non-homogenous contribute to
Copyright: © 2021 by the authors.
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
mutual coupling. Distance relays and fault locating algorithms generally assume that the
This article is an open access article
line is homogeneous [4] from terminal to terminal.
distributed under the terms and
Several types of relays can protect transmission lines; however, the most common
conditions of the Creative Commons practice to protect transmission lines is to equip them with distance or impedance relays [5].
Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// The setting of distance relays and fault location equipment is of the utmost importance
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ for protecting transmission lines in the event of a fault. According to [6], approximately
4.0/). 65% of the misoperations occurred due to incorrect settings/logic/design errors, relay

Energies 2021, 14, 1982. https://doi.org/10.3390/en14071982 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/energies

Energies 2021, 14, 1982 2 of 15

failures/malfunctions and communication failures. Impedance protection is vulnerable

to both underreaching and overreaching of distance zones due to the current direction
of single line-to-ground (SLG) faults. Within the relay, the setting called the mutual
compensation factor (km0 or k-factor) gives the relationship between the line and the earth
impedance. It can also be used in the calculation of the location of the fault [7]. The
relay’s maloperation from incorrect settings can be overcome when the line parameters are
modelled or measured to verify or replace the calculations. An error in the determination
of the k-factor will cause zone over or underreach [8].
Under certain conditions, earth faults can cause distance relays to overreach. A relay
overreaches when the measured impedance is less than the distance to fault impedance.
Measuring an impedance less than the actual distance to a fault impedance can cause the
relay to operate for a fault in the wrong protection zone.
The number of possible configurations of parallel lines combined with mutual cou-
pling makes their protection a challenging problem. In commercial relays, the available
methods for the determining and setting of k-factors are diverse.
A 220 kV transmission systems was analysed using DigSilent/Power Factory in
the simulations. Mutual coupling between the parallel lines was modelled using actual
conductor geometry. Compensation techniques were implemented to overcome the extent
of likely reach errors in a distance protection scheme. The results confirm the reach errors
in a distance protection scheme and the need for compensation techniques when designing
distance protection schemes in parallel-line topologies.

2. Background
The input to the distance protection relay are the phase voltages and line currents
transformed with voltage and current transformers, as shown in Figure 1. If a fault occurs
on the protected line, the fault currents and voltages are monitored at the protection relay.
The voltage drop along the transmission line is equal to the product of the fault current Ie
and the impedance fault Za .

Figure 1. Distance protection principle.

Distance relays must be compensated against the coupling effect between parallel
lines since the current flowing in one phase of one line induces voltage onto adjacent phases
of the other parallel line. This will otherwise affect the measured impedance under fault
conditions. However, in the case of phase faults in one line, this is remedied by taking the
difference between relevant phase quantities. For example, the impedance Zbc apparent to
the b and c phase elements of a relay is calculated from [9]:

Vb − Vc
Zbc = (1)
Ib − Ic
Energies 2021, 14, 1982 3 of 15

However, in the case of an earth fault, the residual compensation factor, k0 , must
be used,  
1 ZL0
k0 = −1 (2)
3 ZL1
where ZL0 is the zero-phase sequence line impedances and ZL1 is the positive phase
sequence line impedances.
The apparent impedance seen by the relay for an earth fault in phase a is

Vph−e
Za = (3)
I ph + k0 Ie

where Za is the relay phase to earth impedance, Vph−e is the phase to earth short-circuit
voltage at the relay located on the faulted phase, Iph is the short-circuit current in the faulted
phase and Ie is the earth fault current.
The correct operation of earth fault elements in distance relays is highly dependent
on the correct application of k0 . Various relays vendors have different forms of naming,
defining and applying these factors [10].

2.1. Modelling Overhead Line Mutual Coupling

The 220 kV overhead lines’ mutual coupling is modelled based on their geometry of
the conductors’ corresponding characteristics. The geometry is entered in PowerFactory
using the X–Y coordinates of the phase conductors and ground wires, and the DC-resistance
and bundling configuration must also be entered. The tower geometry used in the study of
the 220 kV network is depicted in Figure 2. Geometrical mean radius (GMR) and the line’s
outer diameter are provided from a manufacture’s datasheet. The specific earth resistance
for the earth return path is assumed to have a typical value of 100 Ω/m, for a system
frequency of 50 Hz. The maximum expected primary fault resistance for single phase-to-
earth faults could also be calculated using the Warrington’s formula for arc resistance [11].

Figure 2. Conductor types and tower geometry of a 220 kV transmission line.

2.2. Quadrilateral Operation Characteristic for Distance Protection

For earth-fault distance protection, fault resistance coverage is quite essential. A strong
source with a short line typically does not result in adequate fault resistance coverage.
Therefore, a polygonal (quadrilateral) characteristic can be used that allows independent
reach settings and resistance coverage. A typical quadrilateral characteristic is shown in
Figure 3. This characteristic is constructed using two directional characteristics, a reactance
characteristic (X+) and a resistance characteristic (R+).
Energies 2021, 14, 1982 4 of 15

Figure 3. Quadrilateral characteristics with zones of distance protection.

The impedance characteristic of most modern distance protection devices, both digital
and numerical distance protection relays, use this characteristic to adjust their resistive
and reactive reach independently. The quadrilateral characteristic allows for the setting
of the resistive reach (R+) of the phase-to-phase measuring elements and the phase-to-
earth measuring elements separately. By setting the compensate earth and mutual earth
factors, the effects of zero-sequence mutual coupling on parallel operating lines can be
accommodated. The quadrilateral impedance characteristics are highly flexible in terms of
fault impedance coverage for both phase and earth faults [12].
During normal load conditions, the distance relay measures an apparent impedance
according to the actual voltage and current at the relay location. Under normal conditions,
the load angle (φLoad ) lies in the range of ±30◦ . The apparent impedance is proportional to
the load impedance ZLoad . Meanwhile, during fault occurrence, the impedance value jumps
to a much smaller short-circuit impedance. The value depends on the distance between the
location of the relay and the fault. Moreover, the fault resistance RF present in the faulted
point will shift the fault impedance because it adds a resistive component to the measured
impedance, as shown in Figure 3. To incorporate for the effects of a close-in fault, α1 is set
to 115◦ , and the directional angle α2 for distance protection is adjusted to −15◦ [13].
Because of measurement errors, Zone 1 reach is usually set to 70–85% of the circuit
length [14]. Generally, a grading factor of 85% is used for numerical relays. The factor of
85% is selected to consider measurement errors, inaccuracy of line impedance data and
transducer errors. Zone 1 operates with no intentional time delay.
Zone 2 on a distance relay, where possible, should reach 20% beyond the line end. The
Zone 2 reach must be set to cover the protected line plus 50% of the shortest adjacent line
or 120% of the protected line, whichever is the greater [15]. Zone 2 usually has a time delay
of approximately 0.4 to 0.5 s.
Zone 3 is mostly used as a back-up zone for Zone 1 and Zone 2. Zone 3 can also be
used as a reverse function as back-up protection for busbars and transformers.

2.3. General Considerations for Parallel Lines

One of the most common problems, as shown in Figure 4 concerning distance pro-
tection of parallel lines ending at the same bus without mutual compensation, can be
summarised as follows [16]:
• A tendency to underreach when both lines A and B are energised.
• A tendency to overreach when one of the lines is disconnected and earthed at
both ends.
Energies 2021, 14, 1982 5 of 15

Figure 4. Parallel circuit fed from both ends.

The coupling impedance Zmo between the zero-sequence systems of two lines with an
earth-wire is estimated using the following equation [17]:

Ω
 
πµ0 υ
Zmo = · f + jµ0 · f ·ln
4 Dab km
 
−4 S
µ0 = 4π ·10 Ω· (4)
km
r
ρ
υ = 658
f
where υ is the depth of penetration in the ground, f is the frequency in Hz, ρ is the specific
resistance in Ω/m and Dab is the spacing in meters between the two conductors.
Alternatively, Zmo can be measured using test equipment when a line is out of service.
For the typical case of parallel lines A and B of length l, connected at the local and
remote busbars, as shown in Figure 4, the apparent impedance Za of line A seen by the
ground distance function for an earth fault in phase a is [18]

Zm0 x
·
x x 3· ZLa 2l − x
Za = · ZLa + · ZLa (5)
l l 1 + k0

For the protection of phase-to-earth faults, a measuring error occurs. In general, the
error appears because the parallel line earth current (Ie-b = 3 I0 ) induces a voltage Ie-b ×
(Zm0 /3) into the fault loop.
From Equation (5), it can be deduced [16]:
• The error is proportional to the mutual coupling factor Zmo /3 ZLa .
• The error increases with the parallel line earth current Ie-b in relation to the relay
current Iph -a + k0 Iea .
• The relay underreaches when the parallel current Ie-b is in phase with Iph-a and Ie-a .
• The relay overreaches when Ie-b and Iph-a /Ie-a have opposite signs.
Short-circuit models are critical to developing settings and studying the effects of
elements on the system. Simulations demonstrate that a relay, using fixed settings to protect
85% of the total line length, protects at a specific moment only 50% of the line, while at
another moment its actual coverage is more than 100%, depending on the power system
configuration [19].
For lines having only one supply at one end of the line, these values become even
worse. The actual coverage is so widespread that the relay settings must be adapted to the
double-circuit line’s operation mode.
In the following analysis, different scenarios and switching states of the parallel line
system and the measured impedances are discussed. In each case, for a fault at the end of
the parallel line, the following assumptions are made:
• The phase current and zero-sequence current of the protected line are equal (Iph−a = 3 I0 )
Energies 2021, 14, 1982 6 of 15

• The parallel line residual current is equal to the residual current of the protected line.

2.3.1. Double-Circuit Lines with Lines A and B Operated in Parallel

When zero sequence currents flow in the same direction in both lines, the measured
impedance is too large, and the distance relays underreach, as shown in Figure 5. The
measured impedance for a fault at the end of the parallel line is:
 
Zm0
Za = ZLa + (6)
3(1 + k 0 )

Figure 5. Both circuits in parallel operation fed from a single source.

2.3.2. Double-Circuit Lines with Lines B Disconnected and Earthed at Both Ends
The worst case regarding the effects of zero sequence mutual coupling on distance
relays’ performance is the overreaching. This occurs when the parallel circuit is out of
service and earthed at both ends, as shown in Figure 6.

Figure 6. Parallel circuit switched off and earthed on both ends.

The apparent impedance seen by the relay in this case is

!
2
Zm0
Za = ZLa − (7)
3ZL0 (1 + k0 )

In this case, the earth fault current of the energised circuit can induce current flow
in the opposite direction in the earth loop of the earthed circuit, causing the distance
protection of the energised circuit to overreach. The distance protection overreaches as
the earth impedance is reduced due to the parallel connection of both lines’ zero-sequence
systems.

2.3.3. Double-Circuit Lines with Line B Disconnected (One or Both Ends Isolated)
With only one of the parallel circuits connected, the energised circuit’s distance protec-
tion measures the fault impedance correctly, as shown in Figure 7.

Za = ZLa (8)
Energies 2021, 14, 1982 7 of 15

Figure 7. Parallel circuit disconnected (one or both ends isolated).

Modern distance protection devices often include an adaptive function to compensate

for parallel lines’ mutual influence in case of earth faults. If the parallel line compensation
function has been enabled, then the parallel line’s residual current will be included in the
distance and directional measurement.
To compensate a ground distance relay such that the effect of the zero-sequence
mutual coupling on its reach is minimal, another current transformer (CT) is needed. The
distance protection has another measuring input to which the parallel line’s earth current
is connected, as shown in Figure 8.

Figure 8. Mutual compensation using the zero-sequence current from line B into the ground distance
relay in line A.

2.4. Source Impedance Ratio

The source impedance ratio (SIR) is the ratio of the source impedance, looking back
from the relay location to the forward line impedance as shown in Figure 9a. It is a measure
for the magnitude of the faulted-loop voltage seen by the relay. IEEE C37.113, [20] classifies
line length based on SIR as follows:
• Long line (SIR < 0.5)
• Medium line (0.5 < SIR < 4)
• Short line (SIR > 4)
Short transmission lines present a challenge for distance protection settings. The
protection relay can find it difficult to differentiate between an inner and outer zone
fault. In recent years, SIRs have increased due to the growing amount of inverter-based
generation. A high effective SIR will reduce the fault current, which will cause a reduced
fault voltage.
The distance element’s accuracy will be impacted if the fault voltage drops below a
certain voltage level. The source impedances can vary according to network configurations,
such as adding new generation and other system elements. Distance relays should be
tested for a range of SIR conditions encountered from different network configurations.
It can be seen from Figure 10 that for a SIR = 0.5, the voltage at the relay (R) will be
67% of the nominal value. Also, when the SIR > 4, the relay’s voltage is less than 20%
nominal. As shown in Figure 10, a SIR above 30 decreases measurement accuracy and
results in an incorrect distance relay operation.
Energies 2021, 14, 1982 8 of 15

Figure 9. (a) Relationship between source-to-line ratio of a power system, (b) SIR < 0.5; (c) SIR > 4 [21].

Figure 10. Variation of relay voltage with the system source-to-line impedance ratio [18].

The polarisation voltage measurement used by some relays can be taken from the
faulted phase voltages (self-polarisation) or a scaled vector of the positive sequence voltage
(cross-polarisation) [22].
When a fault is close to the protection relay, memory filters are often used to overcome
the problem of voltage drop. Most intelligent electronic devices (IEDs) use the technique of
healthy phase voltage polarisation combined with memory voltage polarisation. Memory
voltage polarisation uses pre-fault voltage during certain type of faults. Quadrilateral relays
tend to use an adaptive polarisation approach; they select the most suitable polarisation
voltage depending on system configurations, fault case, magnitude of voltages and elapsed
time after fault inception [23].

3. Results
To demonstrate the effects of mutual coupling, a simulation was conducted using
DigSilent PowerFactory, as shown in Figure 11. It includes three 220 kV busbars and two
transmission lines 50 km long, coupled at the same tower and feed from a common busbar.
Energies 2021, 14, 1982 9 of 15

An external grid feeds a 200 MW load connected by the two coupled lines and a single
220 kV line, also 50 km long. The protection relay vendor uses a particular definition to
determine the compensate earth faults and mutual coupling effects. Instead of directly
using the k0 and km0 values as per the usual definition, it decouples the resistive and
inductive components. Table 1 contains the overhead line data with the mutual zero-
sequence values calculated from PowerFactory.

Figure 11. Schematic single-line diagram of a 220 kV transmission system.

Table 1. Overhead line parameters.

Line Data Ω/km

Positive sequence reactance X1 0.4437
Positive sequence resistance R1 0.0378
Zero-sequence reactance X0 1.3680
Zero-sequence resistance R0 0.1786
Mutual zero-sequence reactance Xm0 0.9243
Mutual zero-sequence resistance Rm0 0.1408

The compensate earth factor k0 can be calculated from knowing

 
RE 1 R0
= −1 (9)
RL 3 R1
 
XE 1 X0
= −1 (10)
XL 3 X1
The mutual earth factor km0 can be calculated from knowing
 
RM 1 R M0
= −1 (11)
RL 3 R1
 
XM 1 X M0
= −1 (12)
RL 3 X1
The CT used has a 1200/1 A ratio, and the voltage transformer was 220 kV/100 V.
The line impedances were converted to the secondary side of the instrument transformers
using
Vsec I prim
Zsec = · · Z prim (13)
Vprim Isec
As shown in Figure 12, the distance protection relay slot includes a CT-mutual mea-
suring (CTI4) input to which the earth current of the parallel line was connected.
Energies 2021, 14, 1982 10 of 15

Figure 12. Slot definitions in protection relay with mutual coupling CT_L2 included.

Table 2 shows the distance protection settings for Zones 1 to 3. Within DigSilent
PowerFactory, and using the IEC 60909 method, an SLG fault, shown in Figure 13, was
performed at 10% intervals of line A with the parallel line energised and de-energised,
from where the relay is.

Table 2. Distance relay protection setting parameters.

Grading (Reach) +Rreach Ω +Rph-ph Ω +Xph-e Ω Time Delay (s)

Zone 1 18.85 10.89 19.89 0.0
Zone 2 26.62 12.79 21.79 0.3
Zone 3 66.54 16.00 25.00 0.6

Figure 13. Single line-to-ground (SLG) fault at line A with line B disconnected.

3.1. Simulation Results

The short-circuit sweep time-distance diagrams are shown in Figure 14, from which it
can be seen that the reach of the relay changes depending on the parallel line configuration.
The short-circuit sweep displays the variation of network parameters with respect to the
fault location.
Figure 14a shows that mutual coupling may increase or decrease the apparent impedance
based on the fault’s location.
Energies 2021, 14, 1982 11 of 15

Figure 14. Short-circuit sweep (a) Both lines connected and (b) line B disconnected.

3.1.1. Analysis of an SLG at 80% on Line A with (a) Line A and B Connected and (b) Line B
Disconnected. (Compensated)
An SLG fault is applied at 80% of the line. Mutual compensation has been applied.
Figure 15a shows that when both lines are in service, the relay correctly measures the fault
impedance. With line A compensated and line B disconnected, the relay of the energised
circuit measures the fault impedance correctly, as shown in Figure 15b. The relay correctly
operated for a fault in Zone 1 for both scenarios.

Figure 15. R-X plot for an SLG fault at 80% of line A, with (a) both lines connected (b) line B disconnected.

3.1.2. Analysis of an SLG at 80% on Line A (No Mutual Compensation)

To see the effect of the mutual coupling on the relay impedance measurement, the
mutual earth factor values were set to zero without the proper compensation. Alternatively,
the reference CT in the adjacent line can be disconnected. Line B was disconnected and
earthed at both ends.
Figure 16a shows a resulting apparent impedance of 22.74 Ω for a line length of
17.86 Ω. This corresponds to an underreach of about 27%. It was observed that the fault
(80%), this time determined by the relay, to be outside of Zone 1.
Figure 16b shows a different apparent impedance for the protection relay when one
of the parallel lines is out of service and earthed on both ends. An SLG fault on the in-
service line shows a considerable overreach of the impedance measurement is possible.
The resulting apparent impedance of 13.94 Ω for a line length of 17.86 Ω corresponds to an
overreach of about 22%.
Energies 2021, 14, x FOR PEER REVIEW 12 of 15
Energies 2021, 14, 1982 12 of 15

(a) (b)
Figure 16. R-X plot for an SLG fault at 80%, with (a) both lines A and B, connected with no compensation (b) line B dis-
connected and earthed with no compensation.

Figure 16b shows a different apparent impedance for the protection relay when one
of the parallel lines is out of service and earthed on both ends. An SLG fault on the in-
service
(a) line shows a considerable overreach of the impedance (b) measurement is possible.
The resulting apparent impedance of 13.94 Ω for a line length of 17.86 Ω corresponds to
Figure 16.
Figure 16. R-X
R-X plot
plotfor
foran
anSLG
SLG fault
faultatat80%,
80%,with
with(a)(a)
both lines
both A and
lines B, connected
A and with
B, connected no compensation
with (b) line
no compensation B dis-
(b) line B
an overreach of about 22%.
connected andand
disconnected earthed with
earthed no no
with compensation.
compensation.
3.1.3. Analysis of an SLG at 80% on Line A, with (a) Line A and B Connected and (b)
Figure 16b shows a different apparent impedance for the protection relay when one
3.1.3.BAnalysis
Line of an SLG
Disconnected, withata 80%
Faulton Line A, with
Resistance of 18(a)ΩLine A and B Connected and (b) Line
(Compensated)
of the parallel lines
B Disconnected, withisaout of Resistance
Fault service andofearthed on both ends. An SLG fault on the in-
18 Ω (Compensated)
According
service line showsto Warrington’s
a considerable formula, the of
overreach maximum expected
the impedance fault resistance
measurement for an
is possible.
SLG According to
fault wasapparentWarrington’s
calculated formula,
to be 18 Ω. the maximum expected fault resistance forwas
an
The resulting impedance ofThis
13.94isΩnow
for aincluded in the
line length SLG fault
of 17.86 path. It
Ω corresponds to
SLG fault was calculated to be 18 Ω. This is now included in the SLG fault path. It was
observed that of
an overreach relay operated
about 22%. correctly for both scenarios, as shown in Figure 17.
observed that relay operated correctly for both scenarios, as shown in Figure 17.
3.1.3. Analysis of an SLG at 80% on Line A, with (a) Line A and B Connected and (b)
Line B Disconnected, with a Fault Resistance of 18 Ω (Compensated)
According to Warrington’s formula, the maximum expected fault resistance for an
SLG fault was calculated to be 18 Ω. This is now included in the SLG fault path. It was
observed that relay operated correctly for both scenarios, as shown in Figure 17.

(a) (b)
Figure
Figure 17.
17. R-X
R-Xplot
plotfor
forananSLG
SLGfault at at
fault 80%, with
80%, (a) (a)
with both lineline
both A and B connected
A and and and
B connected faultfault
resistance of 18 of
resistance Ω 18
with
Ω com-
with
pensation (b) line B disconnected.
compensation (b) line B disconnected.

3.1.4. Analysis of (a) an SLG at 80% on Line A with Both Lines Connected, and (b) with
3.1.4. Analysis of (a) an SLG at 80% on Line A with Both Lines Connected, and (b) with
Line
Line BB Disconnected
Disconnected and
and Earthed
Earthed with
with aa Fault
Fault Resistance
Resistance ofof 18
18 Ω
Ω (No
(No Mutual
Mutual Compen-
sation
(a) Applied)
Compensation Applied) (b)
Energies 2021, 14, x FOR PEER REVIEW 13 of 15
Figure 18a
18a shows
shows an
an SLG
SLG fault
fault is
is applied
applied at
at 80%
Figure 17. R-X plot for an SLG fault at 80%, with (a) both line A and B connected and of
Figure 80% of line
line
fault AA with
with both
resistance 18 lines
both
of Ωlines
withconnected.
connected.
com-
Figure 18b shows
Figure
pensation (b) line B disconnected. shows the
theresult
resultofofLine
LineB Bdisconnected
disconnected and earthed.
and Mutual
earthed. Mutualcompensation
compensationhas
beenbeen
has removed for both
removed cases.
for both cases.
3.1.4. Analysis of (a) an SLG at 80% on Line A with Both Lines Connected, and (b) with
Line B Disconnected and Earthed with a Fault Resistance of 18 Ω (No Mutual Compen-
sation Applied)
Figure 18a shows an SLG fault is applied at 80% of line A with both lines connected.
Figure 18b shows the result of Line B disconnected and earthed. Mutual compensation
has been removed for both cases.

(a) (b)
Figure 18.
Figure 18. R-X
R-X plot
plot for
for an
an SLG
SLG fault
fault at
at 80%,
80%, with
with (a)
(a) both
both line
line A
A and
and BB connected
connected and
and fault
fault resistance
resistance of 18 Ω
of 18 Ω with
with no
no
compensation (b)
compensation (b) line
line BB disconnected
disconnected and
and earthed
earthed at
at both
both ends.
ends.

It was observed that the fault (80%) was outside of zone 1 as shown in Figure 18a.
Figure 18b shows that overreaching occurs of the relay again. This is due again to the
mutual coupling effect.
For comparison, Table 3 shows the results obtained in the simulation for different
scenarios.
Energies 2021, 14, 1982 13 of 15

It was observed that the fault (80%) was outside of zone 1 as shown in Figure 18a.
Figure 18b shows that overreaching occurs of the relay again. This is due again to the
mutual coupling effect.
For comparison, Table 3 shows the results obtained in the simulation for different
scenarios.

Table 3. Result of simulations for a compensated and uncompensated double-circuit line (RF = 0 Ω).

Fault Location Line A No Compensation both With Compensation both No Compensation One Line
(50 km) Lines Connected (% Error) Lines Connected (% Error) Earthed (% Error)
10% 2.20 0.00 −2.78
20% 4.57 0.00 −5.58
30% 7.20 0.03 −8.36
40% 10.31 0.06 −11.13
50% 13.74 0.08 −13.76
60% 17.60 0.11 −16.70
70% 22.18 0.14 −19.47
80% 27.45 0.17 −22.45
90% 33.67 0.21 −25.03
100% 41.90 0.80 −27.41

4. Discussion
Due to the zero-sequence mutual coupling, and depending on the feeding arrange-
ment, the neutral current’s magnitude and direction in the parallel line, a distance protec-
tion relay will either overreach or underreach.
When both parallel lines are in service, and an earth fault occurs on one of the lines,
a considerable increase in the apparent impedance measurement is possible. A single
line-to-ground fault at 90% of the line corresponds to an underreach of about 34%. The
maximum value occurs for a fault at the remote end (100%) of the line length.
When one of the parallel lines is taken out of service and earthed, an induced neutral
current can flow through the line. A considerable decrease of the apparent impedance
measurement is possible for a single line-to-ground earth fault on the in-service line.
Simulations of the line show a decrease in the apparent impedance for a line length. A
single line-to-ground fault at 90% of the line corresponds to an overreach of about 25%.
Zero-sequence coupling compensation can overcome many of the distance relay
problems on double-circuit lines. The compensation of the parallel lines’ mutual effects
by referencing the residual current from the parallel line into the distance relay of the
protected line is complex and can lead to incorrect operation and testing. Further, many
system configurations will defeat this method of compensation. It is also impossible to
compensate when several lines are in parallel or when a line is out of service.
Most distance protection relays accommodate a setting value for the mutual coupling
impedance. This allows the relay to compensate without using a coupling CT and avoiding
any under or overreach of any tripping zone.
IEDs will allow the use of different setting groups to be accommodated for different
line scenarios. However, this will require a thorough study and simulation of the system to
accommodate the different settings. In the future, the IEC 61850 communication standard
should implement a method of updating settings to adapt the relay to a different network
and feeding arrangement.
The COMTRADE file standard can be used to exchange various types of fault, test and
simulation data between a protection relay and DigSilent. The COMTRADE files generated
from simulations can be used to test the distance relays. The files can be played back to
distance protection relays to determine if they operate correctly for different scenarios.
Energies 2021, 14, 1982 14 of 15

5. Conclusions
Inaccurate zero-sequence impedance settings caused by mutual coupling strongly
affects zone reaches, and the accuracy of distance protection relays in the event of a
single line-to-ground fault. This distance protection relay must be compensated for the
coupling between parallel lines to avoid maloperation during faults and different system
configurations.
Techniques such as referencing the residual current from the parallel line are complex
and are impossible to use when several lines are in parallel or when a line is out of service.
The calculation of Z0 is influenced by the soil return path properties, such as soil
resistivity, and other parallel buried conductors such as cables and pipes. All of these
properties are estimated and therefore, can make the calculation inaccurate.
The best way to ensure that the distance protection relay settings are correct requires a
thorough knowledge of the relay’s reach and system configurations and actual measure-
ment values of Z1 and Z0 .

Author Contributions: Methodology, simulation, writing—original draft preparation, M.O.D.; Re-

view and editing, supervision, N.B., J.C. and E.C. All authors have read and agreed to the published
version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research received no external funding.
Data Availability Statement: Data is contained within the article.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References
1. O’Donovan, M.; Cowhey, E.; Barry, N.; Connell, J. The Effects of Mutual Coupling Compensation on Distance Protection of
Parallel Lines. In Proceedings of the 2020 55th International Universities Power Engineering Conference (UPEC), Torino, Italy,
1–4 September 2020; pp. 1–6.
2. Holbach, J.; Vadlamani, V.; Lu, Y. Issues and Solutions in Setting a Quadrilateral Distance Characteristic. In Proceedings of the
2008 61st Annual Conference for Protective Relay Engineers, College Station, TX, USA, 1–3 April 2008; pp. 89–104.
3. Tziouvaras, D.A.; Altuve, H.J.; Calero, F. Protecting mutually coupled transmission lines: Challenges and solutions. In Proceedings
of the 2014 67th Annual Conference for Protective Relay Engineers, College Station, TX, USA, 31 March–3 April 2014; pp. 30–49.
4. Das, S.; Santoso, S.; Gaikwad, A.; Patel, M. Impedance-based fault location in transmission networks: Theory and application.
IEEE Access 2014, 2, 537–557. [CrossRef]
5. Donovan, M.O.; Cowhey, E.; Barry, N. Application oriented testing of power transmission lines and fault clearing. In Proceedings
of the 2016 51st International Universities Power Engineering Conference (UPEC), Coimbra, Portugal, 6–9 September 2016; pp.
1–6.
6. Bian, J.J.; Slone, A.D.; Tatro, P.J. Protection system misoperation analysis. In Proceedings of the 2014 IEEE PES General Meeting |
Conference & Exposition, National Harbor, MD, USA, 27–31 July 2014; pp. 1–5.
7. Sellwood, V.; Klapper, U.; Kruger, M.; Kaiser, S. A new technique for setting distance protection and fault location by measurement
of transmission line system impedance characteristics. In Proceedings of the 8th IEE International Conference on AC and DC
Power Transmission, London, UK, 28–31 March 2006; pp. 197–199.
8. Hulka, L.; Klapper, U.; Putter, M.; Wurzer, W. Measurement of line impedance and mutual coupling of parallel lines to improve the
protection system. In Proceedings of the CIRED 2009-20th International Conference and Exhibition on Electricity Distribution-Part
1, Prague, Czech Republic, 8–11 June 2009; pp. 1–4.
9. Moore, P.J.; Muhalhel, K.; Booth, C. Distance relay behaviour on mixed voltage, double circuit lines. In Proceedings of the 2008
IET 9th International Conference on Developments in Power System Protection (DPSP 2008), Glasgow, Scotland, 17–20 March
2008; pp. 649–653.
10. Sorrentino, E. Comparison of five methods of compensation for the ground distance function and assessment of their effect on
the resistive reach in quadrilateral characteristics. Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst. 2014, 61, 440–445. [CrossRef]
11. Terzija, V.V.; Koglin, H. New approach to arc resistance calculation. In Proceedings of the 2001 IEEE Power Engineering Society
Winter Meeting. Conference Proceedings (Cat. No.01CH37194), Columbus, OH, USA, 28 January–1 February 2001; Volume 782,
pp. 781–787.
12. Schweitzer, E.O.; Kasztenny, B. Distance protection: Why have we started with a circle, does it matter, and what else is out there?
In Proceedings of the 2018 71st Annual Conference for Protective Relay Engineers (CPRE), College Station, TX, USA, 26–29 March
2018; pp. 1–19.
Energies 2021, 14, 1982 15 of 15

13. Hong, Q.; Booth, C.; Dyśko, A.; Catterson, V. Design of an intelligent system for comprehensive validation of protection settings.
In Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Development in Power System Protection 2016 (DPSP), Edinburgh, UK,
7–10 March 2016; pp. 1–7.
14. O’Donovan, M.; Cowhey, E.; Barry, N.; Connell, J. Assessment of Power Swing Blocking Functions. In Proceedings of the 2020
55th International Universities Power Engineering Conference (UPEC), Torino, Italy, 1–4 September 2020; pp. 1–6.
15. Eirgrid. ALL-ISLAND TRANSMISSION SYSTEM PERFORMANCE; Ireland. 2014. Available online: https://www.eirgridgroup.
com/site-files/library/EirGrid/All-Island-Transmission-System-Performance-Report-2019.pdf (accessed on 21 May 2020).
16. CIGRE. Modern Distance Protection Functions and Applications; CIGRÉ: Paris, France, 2008.
17. Siemens. Applications for SIPROTEC Protection Relays; Siemens AG: Munich, Germany, 2005.
18. Worldwide, A.G. Network Protection & Automation Guide; Alstom Grid: Saint-Ouen, France, 2011.
19. Jongepier, A.G.; Sluis, L.v.d. Adaptive distance protection of a double-circuit line. IEEE Trans. Power Deliv. 1994, 9, 1289–1297.
[CrossRef]
20. IEEE Guide for Power System Protection Testing; IEEE Std. C37.233–2009; IEEE: Piscataway, NJ, USA, 2009; pp. 1–124. [CrossRef]
21. Thompson, M.J.; Somani, A. A tutorial on calculating source impedance ratios for determining line length. In Proceedings of the
2015 68th Annual Conference for Protective Relay Engineers, College Station, TX, USA, 30 March–2 April 2015; pp. 833–841.
22. Brusilowicz, B.; Schulz, N.N. Polarizing Voltage Generating Method for Distance and Directional Protection Elements. IEEE Trans.
Power Deliv. 2021, 36, 74–83. [CrossRef]
23. Ziegler, G. Numerical Distance Protection: Principles and Applications, 4th ed.; John Wiley & Sons: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2011; p. 419.