Optimal Recloser Setting, Considering Reliability and

Power Quality in Distribution Networks

Rashid Niaz Azari, Mohammad Amin Chitsazan, Iman Niazazari

To cite this version:

Rashid Niaz Azari, Mohammad Amin Chitsazan, Iman Niazazari. Optimal Recloser Setting, Consid-
ering Reliability and Power Quality in Distribution Networks. American Journal of Electrical Power
and Energy Systems, 2017, 6 (1), pp.1-6. <10.11648/j.epes.20170601.11>. <hal-01552223>

HAL Id: hal-01552223

https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01552223
Submitted on 1 Jul 2017

HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est

archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents
entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non,
lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de
teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires
abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés.
American Journal of Electrical Power and Energy Systems
2017; 6(2): 1-6
http://www.sciencepublishinggroup.com/j/epes
doi: 10.11648/j.epes.20170601.11
ISSN: 2326-912X (Print); ISSN: 2326-9200 (Online)

Research/Technical Note
Optimal Recloser Setting, Considering Reliability and
Power Quality in Distribution Networks
Rashid Niaz Azari1, *, Mohammad Amin Chitsazan2, Iman Niazazari2
1
Department of Electrical Engineering, Azad University, Sari, Iran
2
Department of Electrical Engineering, University of Nevada, Reno, USA

Email address:
[email protected] (R. N. Azari), [email protected] (M. A. Chitsazan), [email protected] (I. Niazazari)
*
Corresponding author

To cite this article:

Rashid Niaz Azari, Mohammad Amin Chitsazan, Iman Niazazari. Optimal Recloser Setting, Considering Reliability and Power Quality in
Distribution Networks. American Journal of Electrical Power and Energy Systems. Vol. 6, No. 1, 2017, pp. 1-6.
doi: 10.11648/j.epes.20170601.11

Received: March 5, 2017; Accepted: March 14, 2017; Published: March 27, 2017

Abstract: Reclosers and fuses are the commonplace protective devices in distribution networks. A recloser can prevent
long-time outages by clearing temporary faults before operation of the fuses in the system. Thus, it decreases the rate of
long-term outages and improves system reliability and power quality. Despite positive features of reclosers, each operation of a
recloser causes a momentary voltage interruption that exacerbates power quality. Nowadays, power quality issues have become
more important because of the increasing use of sensitive equipment to voltage interruptions. According to the mentioned
concerns, it seems necessary to set reclosers to strike a balance between power quality and the effectiveness of fuse saving
scheme. Thus, we proposed a method to set reclosers. Due to the random nature of faults, the proposed method is stochastic based
on the Monte Carlo method. The proposed method determines the optimal number of operations, reclosing intervals, and
protection zones. The proposed method efficiency is evaluated according to the simulation results, and the proposed method is
capable of establishing an optimal trade-off between power quality and protection efficiency.
Keywords: Power Quality, Recloser, Reclosure, Reliability

statics provided in [8] shows that 70-90% of faults on

1. Introduction overhead lines are temporary. Therefore, reclosers can
Nowadays, there is an increasing demand for high-quality improve the reliability of distribution networks. Previously,
and reliable electrical energy and protection systems play a interruptions shorter than a few minutes were not considered
significant role in the improvement of the system reliability as a source of worry to the most of the customers [9]. As
[1], [2]. With integrating different energy resources and loads permanent outages were the main concern of utility operators,
such as wind turbines and electric vehicles in smart grids [3] protection systems were designed to decrease the system
the system protection is of utmost importance. Since the average interruption frequency index (SAIFI), system average
consequences of low-standard electrical energy impose a interruption duration index (SAIDI), and consequently the
considerable economic loss on customers as shown in [4] and energy not supplied (ENS) [8]. In order to achieve these goals,
[5] that special post-fault tasks are required for minimization the fuse-saving scheme (also referred to as feeder selective
of the economic losses. As an example, the cost of power relaying) was employed. In this scheme, reclosers operate
interruptions to U. S. customers is $79 billion annually faster than the other overcurrent protection (OCP) devices to
(divided into sustained outages: 33%, momentary outage: clear temporary faults [7], [8]. The fuse-saving scheme
67%) [6]. Faults are the major source the interruptions in decreases permanent outages, however, increases the number
distribution networks [7]. Overcurrent protection is the most of momentary voltage interruptions. Nowadays, electronic
common protection system in distribution networks. The devices such as microcomputer-based devices and adjustable
2 Rashid Niaz Azari et al.: Optimal Recloser Setting, Considering Reliability and Power Quality
in Distribution Networks

speed drivers are sensitive to momentary voltage interruptions operating sequences for reclosers, it is more appropriate that
[8]. Therefore, short-time voltage interruptions result in operating sequence (shuts) of a recloser are selected based on
extensive sensitive load shutdowns. It has been reported that the network specifications. Reclosers affect the system
momentary outages account for two-third (52.3 billion dollars reliability and power quality in three ways as follows,
per year) of the overall power interruption cost in the USA 1) The effect of the shot number: each fast-shot gives
[11], [12]. This indicates the main drawback of the fuse-saving temporary faults a chance to be cleared without causing a
scheme that decreases SAIFI at the expense of an increase in permanent outage. Therefore, if the number of fast-shots
momentary average interruption frequency index (MAIFI). is increased, permanent outages, and consequently,
Thus, some utilities employ the fuse-blowing scheme (also SAIFI will decrease. On the other hand, as the number of
known as instantaneous relay blocking) The fuse-blowing fast-shots increases, a less number of loads can withstand
scheme decreases MAIFI, however, at the expense of an the repetitive momentary voltage interruptions [23]. It
increase in SAIFI and SAIDI. The effect of reclosers on leads to an increase in momentary outages and MAIFI.
system outages has been studied in several publications. In 2) Reclosing interval: reclosing interval is defined as the
[13], a technique proposed to identify the number, type, and open-circuit time between an automatic opening and the
location of the protective devices to reduce only SAIFI. succeeding automatic reclosure [1]. According to (1) and
Reference [13] is extended in [14] by using a goal Figure 1, as reclosing interval increases, Risk of Arc
programming approach to improve MAIFI. As discussed in Re-ignition (RAR) will decrease [24], [25].
[15], a non-linear binary programming solution is utilized to
minimize the outage costs in distribution networks. In [16], Δ ,Δ (1 )
non-linear binary programming model is used to reduce both
SAIFI and SAIDI. In [17], the effects of protective devices on
different indices such as MAIFI, SAIFI, SAIDI, and cost of
ENS are studied, and it is shown that the cost of ENS is a more
precise index than the other indices. Previous authors
addressed many aspects of protection system to improve the
system reliability. However, the effects of recloser settings, on
system reliability and power quality, have not been studied in
the literature. Hence, in this paper, we studied the effects of
reclosers and proposed an approach based on the Monte Carlo
method to set reclosers in distribution networks. The method
is also applicable to be implemented in smart micro-grids
since the energy resiliency is highly considered in smart grids
[18-21]. The objective of the proposed method is
minimization of total outage costs by establishing a trade-off
between transient and permanent outages. In this regard, this
paper aims at finding: 1) the optimum reach (zone) of a
recloser, 2) the number of fast shots, and 3) and the reclosing
time intervals. The concerned problem involves many Figure 1. The probability distribution function related to reclosing dead
parameters with random nature such as fault location, fault times.
type, fault resistance, and fault nature (i.e., temporary or
permanent.) Thus, a stochastic computational method is Where is the switching surge frequency distribution,
employed. As the Monte Carlo method has proven to be a ,∆ is the transient flashover probability at different
beneficial statistical computational technique in attaining auto-reclosing dead times, and are the minimum
approximate answers to the stochastic problems with complex and maximum switching over voltages. It is concluded from (1)
and non-linear parameters [22]. The outcomes of simulations and Figure 1 that longer reclosing intervals lead to less
indicate a decrease in outage costs resulted by the proposed permanent outages caused by temporary faults. However, each
device withstands an specific duration of voltage interruptions.
method in which the recloser settings are optimally selected
Therefore, by increasing reclosing intervals, more equipment
without new investment costs. This paper is organized as
will be dropped out. 3) Reach (Zone) of reclosers: according
follows: In Section 2, the recloser and system outage features
to [26], and referring to Figure 2(a), the reach (or zone) of a
are described. In Section 3, the proposed method is described. recloser is defined as a section of a power network that the
In Section 4, the case study and simulation results are recloser operates for faults inside it before the other protective
presented and discussed, and in Section 5, conclusion is stated. devices, while devices outside operate before the recloser. In
other words, the fuse-saving scheme is used inside the reach
2. Reclosers and Systems Outages while the fuse-blowing scheme is employed for the faults
outside the reach. The reach (zone) of a recloser, contrary to
Reclosers exert considerable influence on both transient differential or distance protection, is dependently settable.
and permanent outages. Although there are some typical That is, the wideness of a recloser reach is related not only to
 American Journal of Electrical Power and Energy Systems 2017; 6(1): 1-6 3

its own curve but also to the time. time or time interval) [27], [13].
Current characteristics (TCC) curves of downstream The faults outside a reach cause a permanent outage for the
protective devices. Referring to Figure 2(a) and (b), we can loads downstream since a recloser clears temporary faults
change the reach of the recloser by moving its fast-shot curve inside its zone. However, an extension to the reach of a
in selectivity diagram. For example, referring to Figure 2, if recloser results in a decrease in permanent outages. On the
we decide that the recloser saves all the fuses in Reach 1, its other hand, fast operations of a recloser cause momentary
fast-shot curve must be placed below the minimum melting voltage interruptions for downstream loads and it is highly
time (MMT) curve of F1. In order to extend the recloser zone probable that these interruptions cause momentary outages,
to reach 2, then the fast-shot must be placed below the MMTs especially for sensitive loads. Therefore, as the reach of a
of F1, F2, and F3. However, it is not always possible to place a recloser extends the number of the momentary outages in the
recloser fast-shot curve below all the fuse MMTs, considering system increases.
errors, delays, and grading time (also called as discrimination

Figure 2. (a) The reaches (zones) of a recloser. (b) The recloser time-inverse curves.

such data are inefficient as the input uncertainties may be

3. The Proposed Method ignored, while a stochastic method handles those uncertainties.
The main goal of the proposed approach is to minimize the In order to incorporate uncertainties the Monte Carlo method,
total outage cost resulted from a recloser and also to strike a a computational algorithm relying on repeated random
balance between transient and permanent outages. Optimal sampling to obtain numerical results is used in the proposed
setting of a recloser involves parameters with random natures method. The optimum settings for a recloser are achieved
such as fault location, fault type, fault resistance, and fault through the following steps and the flowchart is shown in
nature (temporary or permanent). These inputs are obtained Figure 3.
based on historical data. Therefore, deterministic analyses of 1. At first, one of the possible combinations of reclosing
4 Rashid Niaz Azari et al.: Optimal Recloser Setting, Considering Reliability and Power Quality
in Distribution Networks

interval, the number of shots and recloser reach is chosen

as settings of the recloser.
2. Faults with random characteristics are generated,
considering the following points:
a) Fault location: The probability of fault
occurrence in each line is selected using the
available statistical data.
b) Fault resistance: different fault resistances from
zero (solid fault) to 100 ohms are considered.
c) Fault type: the probability of different fault types
(e.g., SLG, LL, LLG, and 3L) are selected based
on available statistical data.
d) Fault nature: between 70% to 90% of faults in
aerial lines are permanent. However, this value
should be in line with the available statistical
data available for the system under study.
3. The costs of transient and permanent faults are calculated.
The cost of transient faults are calculated as
∑%#&' "# $# # (2)

Where "# , $# and # are, respectively, power consumption,

restoration time and energy cost for load ( and ) is the Figure 3. The flowchart of proposed method.
number of loads that suffer momentary outages. Cost of the
permanent outage (ENS cost) is also calculated using (3) as 1. By repeating the steps 2 and 3, faults are generated and
follows the costs are calculated. This procedure is repeated until
the Mont Carlo method converges for each possible
* "+ $, (3)
recloser setting.
Where "+ is total power consumption of the downstream 2. Finally, the recloser settings that result in the lowest total
loads, $, and are restoration time of the network and cost among all possible settings is selected as the
energy cost, respectively. optimum settings.

4. Case Study

Figure 4. The schematic of the test system. The possible recloser zones are shown with numbers 1 to 4. The lengths of lines are in kilometer.
 American Journal of Electrical Power and Energy Systems 2017; 6(1): 1-6 5

The single-line diagram of the system under study is Table 4. ITIC curves for the three categories of loads.
depicted in Figure 4. In this network, fuses have been used to Withstanding duration (S)
protect lateral lines and a recloser has been installed in the Magnitude of Voltage sag (P. U)
A B C
substation. Table 1 and Table 2 show the line parameters and 0 0.02 0.3 1
load data, respectively. The type of transformers is DYn and 0.5 0.2 0.5 1.5
0.7 0.5 1 2
its ratio is 20/0.4 kV. Four possible settings for the recloser
0.8 10 12 15
are considered as follows: Case 1: two fast shots with a
1.5-second reclosing interval. Case 2: one fast shot with a
1.5-second reclosing interval. Case 3: two fast shots with a 5. Conclusion
0.5-second reclosing interval. Case 4: one fast shot with a
Reclosers are the essential part of the power system and can
0.5-second reclosing interval. The total number of faults in
prevent long-term outages by detecting and interrupting
this network is considered as 15 faults per year and the
temporary faults. Due to the quick operation of reclosers, some
probabilities of different fault types are as follows: LG =
power quality issues may happen in the system. In this paper, a
75%, 2LG = 17%, 3LG = 3%, 2L = 3%, and 3L = 2%. In
Monte Carlo based method has been proposed for setting
addition, 80% of faults in this network are temporary. Table 3
reclosers. In this method the optimal number of operations, the
presents the percentage of temporary faults that are cleared
reclosing intervals, and the protection zones is determined. The
in each recloser shot according to the reclosing interval. The
simulation results validate the efficiency of the proposed method.
probability of fault occurrence in each line is proportionate
to the line length.
The fault resistance has a normal distribution with a mean
value of 5 Ω and a standard deviation of 1 Ω [7]. The loads References
based on their sensitivity to power quality problems (i. e., [1] Gers, J. M., and Holmes, E. J., “Protection of electricity
voltage sag and momentary voltage interruption) are classified distribution networks,” IET Press, 1998.
into three categories as follows: (A) Highly sensitive, (B)
[2] M. A. Chitsazan, A. M Trzynadlowski, “Harmonic Mitigation
medium sensitive, and (C) low sensitive as shown in Table 4.
in Interphase Power Controllers Using Passive Filter-Based
The energy cost and the average duration of supply restoration Phase Shifting Transformer”, Energy Conversion Congress and
for this network are 150 $/(MW·Hour) and 2.5 Hour, Exposition (ECCE), 2016 IEEE, pp. 1-5, Sep. 2016.
respectively. The average cost of shots is considered as $10
[3] I. Niazazari, H.A. Abyaneh, M. J. Farah, F. Safaei, andH.
per shot [17]. By setting a number of shots and reclosing
Nafisi,“Voltage profile and power factor improvement in
interval based on the abovementioned cases and repeating the PHEV charging station using a probabilistic model and
proposed Monte Carlo method temporary and permanent flywheel,” In Electrical Power Distribution Networks (EPDC),
outage costs, and case 3 is selected as the optimum setting for 2014 19th Conference on pp. 100-105. May. 2014.
the recloser in the test system.
[4] R. Jalilzadeh Hamidi and H. Livani, “A travelling wave-based
fault location method for hybrid three-terminal circuits,” IEEE
Table 1. Line impedance per length.
PES-GM, pp. 1-5, Jul. 2015.
Parameters 1, 2 Sequence Impedance Zero Sequence
per Length (Ohm/ km) Impedance (Ohm/ km) [5] R. Jalilzadeh Hamidi, H. Livani, “Traveling wave-based fault
Resistance (R) 0.45 0.6
location algorithm for hybrid multi-terminal circuits,” IEEE
Reactance (X) 0.36 1.59 Trans. Power Delivery, Vol. 32, No. 1, pp. 135-144, Feb. 2017.

[6] Koner, P., and Ledwich, G.: ‘SRAT-distribution voltage sags

Table 2. Active and reactive power of connected loads. and reliability assessment tool’, IEEE Trans. Power Delivery,
2004, vol. 19, pp. 738–744.
Bus Num P (MW) Q (MVAr) Bus Num P (MW) Q (MVAr)
1 0.6 0.25 8 0.6 0.25 [7] Patne, N. R., and Thakre, K. L., “Effect of transformer type on
2 0.65 0.5 9 0.35 0.09 the estimation of financial loss due to voltage sag–
3 0.55 0.38 10 0.45 0.15 PSCAD/EMTDC simulation study”, IET Generation,
4 0.65 0.5 11 0.35 0.09 Transmission & Distribution, 2010, vol. 4, pp. 104–114.
5 0.32 0.15 12 0.56 0.24
[8] IEEE Std C 37.60-2012, ‘High-voltage switchgear and control
6 0.35 0.09 13 0.56 0.24 gear - Part 111: Automatic circuit reclosers and fault
7 0.56 0.24 14 0.35 0.09 interrupters for alternating current systems up to 38 kV’, 2012.

Table 3. Clearance probability of temporary faults in each recloser shot. [9] Math H. Bollen, “Understanding power quality problems:
voltage sags and interruptions,” Wiley-IEEE Press, ISBN:
One Fast Shut Tow Fast Shuts 9780470546840, 2000.
Reclosing Clearance Clearance Clearance
Interval (S) Probability Probability in Probability in [10] M. A. Chitsazan, A. M Trzynadlowski, “State Estimation of
(%) First Shut (%) Second Shut (%) Power Systems with Interphase Power Controllers Using the
0.8 80 50 10 WLS Algorithm”, Energy Conversion Congress and
1.5 80 80 15 Exposition (ECCE), 2016 IEEE, pp. 1-5, Sep. 2016.
6 Rashid Niaz Azari et al.: Optimal Recloser Setting, Considering Reliability and Power Quality
in Distribution Networks

[11] Koner, P., and Ledwich, G. ‘SRAT-distribution voltage sags Controller”, Proceedings of the World Congress on
and reliability assessment tool’, IEEE Trans. Power Delivery, Engineering and Computer Science 2012 Vol II, WCECS 2012,
2004, vol. 19, pp. 738–744. October 24-26, 2012, San Francisco, USA.

[12] Williams, C., McCarthy, C., and Cook, C. J.: ‘Predicting [20] R. Jalilzadeh Hamidi, H. Livani, S. H. Hosseinian, and G. B.
reliability improvements’, IEEE Power and Energy Magazine, Gharehpetian, “Distributed cooperative control system for
2008, vol. 6, pp. 53-60. smart microgrids,” Electric Power System Research, Vol. 130,
pp. 241-250, 2016.
[13] Soudi, F., and Tomsovic, K., ‘Optimized distribution protection
using binary programming’, IEEE Trans. Power Delivery, 1998, [21] J. Chen and Q. Zhu, "A Game-Theoretic Framework for
vol. 13, pp. 218–224. Resilient and Distributed Generation Control of Renewable
Energies in Microgrids," IEEE Trans. Smart Grid, Vol. 8, No. 1,
[14] Soudi, F., and Tomsovic, K. ‘Optimal trade-offs in distribution 2017.
protection design’, IEEE Trans. Power Delivery, 2001, vol. 16,
pp. 292-296. [22] S. Mark and S. Mordechai, “Applications of Monte Carlo
method in science and engineering,” INTECH, 2011.
[15] Bupasiri, R., Wattanapongsakorn, N., Hokierti, j., and Coit, D.
W. ‘Optimal electric power distribution system reliability [23] Martinez, J. A., and Martin-Arnedo, J. ‘Voltage sag studies in
indices using binary programming’, Annual Reliability and distribution network–part II: voltage sag assessment’, IEEE
Maintainability Symposium, 2003, pp. 556-561. Trans. Power Delivery, 2006, vol. 21, pp. 1679–1688.

[16] Zambon, E., Bossois, D. Z., Garcia, B. B., and Azeredo, E. F.: [24] G. Celli, Emilio GHIANI, Fabrizio Pilo, Sergio Tedde,
‘A novel nonlinear programming model for distribution “Extending switching reclosing time to reduce interruptions in
protection optimization’, IEEE Trans. Power Delivery, 2009, distribution networks,” C I R E D, 21 St. International
vol. 24, pp. 1951–1958. Conference on Electricity Distribution Frankfurt, 6-9 June 2011.

[17] Haakana, J., Lassila, J., Kaipia, T., Partanen, J., “Comparison [25] G. Celli, E. Ghiani, F. Pilo, S. Tedde, “A probabilistic fault arc
of Reliability Indices from the Perspective of Network reignition model for mv distribution networks,” 17-th Power
Automation Devices,” IEEE Trans. Power Delivery, Vol. 25, Systems Computation Conference, Stockholm Sweden -
No. 3, pp. 1547–1555, 2010. August 22-26, 2011.

[18] V. Sarfi, I. Niazazari, and H. Livani, "Multiobjective fireworks [26] COOPER, Analysis of distribution systems reliability and
optimization framework for economic emission dispatch in outage rate, R280-90-7, 2004.
microgrids." North American Power Symposium (NAPS),
2016, pp. 1-6, Nov. 2016. [27] Jamali, S., and Shateri, H. ‘Optimal siting of recloser and
sectionalizers to reduce non-distributed energy’, IEEE PES
[19] M. A. Chitsazan, G. B. Gharehpetian, M. Arbabzadeh,” Transmission and Distribution Conference and Exhibition:
Application of Voltage Source Convertor in Interphase Power Asia and Pacific, Dalian, China, 2005, pp. 1–7.