SCHOOL OF COMPUTING AND ENGINEERING SCIENCES

BACHELOR OF SCIENCE IN ELECTRICAL AND ELECTRONICS

ENGINEERING(BSEEE)
BEE 4223: POWER SYSTEMS ENGINEERING II
LAB 1: UNSYMMETRICAL POWER SYSTEMS FAULT ANALYSIS
GROUP 5

NAME S/NO SIGN

ANGELA ACHOLA 124910

EVANS MUNYAO 144067 EM

MONIQUE SANKAY 121356 MS

Lecturer: Eng. Humphrey Odero

January 2025
Abstract
This report delves into the behavior of a 5-bus, 2-generator power system subjected to
unsymmetrical fault conditions, utilizing the PowerWorld Simulator. Faults analyzed include
single-line-to-ground (SLG), double-line (LL), and double-line-to-ground (LLG). The simulation
investigates fault currents, voltage profiles, and the influence of transformer winding
configurations on system stability. Key findings demonstrate the critical role of fault types, fault
locations, and transformer configurations in determining the severity and impact of faults,
providing insights into effective fault management strategies.

i
 Contents
Abstract .......................................................................................................................................... i
Contents .......................................................................................................................................... ii
List of Figures ............................................................................................................................ iii
1. Chapter one: Introduction ................................................................................................ 1
1.1 Objectives ............................................................................................................................. 1
1.2 Theoretical Background .................................................................................................... 1
2. Chapter Two: Case Study ............................................................................................... 11
2.1 Apparatus/Tools .................................................................................................................. 11
2.2 Methodology ................................................................................................................... 11
3. Chapter 3: Results ............................................................................................................... 13
3.1 Simulated Results................................................................................................................ 13
3.2 Discussion of Results ...................................................................................................... 13
4. Chapter 4: Conclusion ..................................................................................................... 18
5. Chapter 5: Recommendations and References .............................................................. 19
5.1 Recommendations ............................................................................................................... 19
5.2 References ....................................................................................................................... 19
6.0 Appendix ......................................................................................................................... 20
6.1 Pictorial samples of results ................................................................................................. 20

ii
List of Figures
Figure 1 View of a Fault occurrence and effects ............................................................................ 1
Figure 2 Fault flow chart................................................................................................................. 3
Figure 3 L-G Fault .......................................................................................................................... 5
Figure 4 L-L Fault ........................................................................................................................... 6
Figure 5 DLG Fault ......................................................................................................................... 7
Figure 6 5-bus 2-generator power system ..................................................................................... 11
Figure 7 Simulation in the software .............................................................................................. 11
Figure 8 Transformer Configuration ............................................................................................. 15
Figure 9 Fault current at buses 1 and 5 ......................................................................................... 16
Figure 10 Phase voltages at buses 1 and 5 .................................................................................... 17

iii
 1. Chapter one: Introduction
[1]Faults in power systems represent one of the most critical challenges to maintaining stable and
reliable operations. These faults, which disrupt the normal functioning of the system, can cause
significant damage to equipment, unbalance the network, and lead to widespread outages.
Understanding the behavior of a power system under fault conditions is therefore essential for
effective design, protection, and operation.
This lab focuses on unsymmetrical faults, which include single-line-to-ground (SLG), double-
line (LL), and double-line-to-ground (LLG) faults. These fault types are more frequent in real-
world systems than symmetrical faults and have varying impacts depending on their location,
severity, and system configurations. By simulating these faults in a controlled environment, we
aim to understand their characteristics and derive practical insights into fault management.
It aims at analysing the impact of unsymmetrical faults on all-buses power systems using the
PowerWorld Simulator.

1.1 Objectives
1. To quantify fault currents for different fault types and locations within the system.
2. To analyze voltage profiles at various buses during fault conditions.
3. To evaluate the influence of transformer winding configurations on fault characteristics
and system response.
4. To compare simulation results with theoretical calculations for validation and accuracy.
1.2 Theoretical Background

Figure 1 View of a Fault occurrence and effects

Fault Analysis Basics and theory

[2]Fault analysis in power systems involves studying the currents and voltages during abnormal
operating conditions. Unsymmetrical faults disrupt the balance in a three-phase system,

1
necessitating the use of symmetrical components for effective analysis. Symmetrical components
divide the system into:

• Positive Sequence: Represents balanced, three-phase system operation.

• Negative Sequence: Represents unbalance caused by faults.

• Zero Sequence: Accounts for ground currents during SLG and LLG faults.

2
Symmetrical components are not physically separate; they are simply mathematical
representations of unbalanced currents or voltages that exist in the system.

Voltages

𝑽𝒂 = 𝑽𝒂𝟏 + 𝑽𝒂𝟐 + 𝑽𝒂𝟎

𝑽𝒃 = 𝑽𝒃𝟏 + 𝑽𝒃𝟐 + 𝑽𝒃𝟎

𝑽𝒄 = 𝑽𝒄𝟏 + 𝑽𝒄𝟐 + 𝑽𝒄𝟎

Currents

𝑰𝒂 = 𝑰𝒂𝟏 + 𝑰𝒂𝟐 + 𝑰𝒂𝟎

𝑰𝒃 = 𝑰𝒃𝟏 + 𝑰𝒃𝟐 + 𝑽𝒃𝟎

𝑰𝒄 = 𝑰𝒄𝟏 + 𝑰𝒄𝟐 + 𝑰𝒄𝟎

The operator 𝑎 in symmetrical components is a mathematical tool that, when applied to a vector,
rotates it by 120 º in the positive (anticlockwise) direction while maintaining its magnitude. The
operator 𝑎 is defined as:

𝒂 = ∠𝟏𝟐𝟎∘

Types of Faults in Power Systems

Figure 2 Fault flow chart

3
1. Symmetrical Faults
Symmetrical faults are balanced faults where all three phases of the system are affected equally.
These faults, although rare, are the most severe and can cause significant damage to equipment.
a. Line-to-Line-to-Line-to-Ground Fault (LLL-G Fault):
This fault occurs when all three-phase conductors experience a short circuit with each other, and
one or more of the phases also makes contact with the ground. Such faults result in:
✓ Significant electrical disturbances.
✓ Increased safety risks to personnel and equipment.
✓ Potential damage to system components.
b. Line-to-Line-to-Line Fault (LLL Fault):
In this fault condition, the three-phase conductors are short-circuited together without any
ground connection. Key impacts include:
✓ Large fault currents that can damage equipment.
✓ Severe electrical disturbances in the system.
✓ Safety hazards due to high energy release.

2. Unsymmetrical Faults
Unsymmetrical faults are unbalanced disturbances where one or more phases are affected, while
the remaining phases continue to operate normally.
✓ Majority of faults that occur are considered unsymmetrical, meaning they mostly affect
only one or two phases, rather than all three phases equally
✓ Not balanced
✓ Fault current and voltage differ for each phase
a. Line-to-Ground Fault (L-G Fault):
This occurs when one conductor comes into contact with the ground or neutral conductor
due to insulation failure. Characteristics include:
✓ Unequal current flow in the phases.
✓ Potential damage to insulation and nearby equipment.
✓ Significant electrical disturbances and safety risks.

4
 Figure 3 L-G Fault

If the fault occurs at phase a as shown in figure, the fault current is given by:

𝑰𝒇
𝑰𝒂𝟏 = (𝟏 + 𝒂 + 𝒂𝟐 )
𝟑

𝑬𝒂
𝑰𝒂𝟏 =
𝒁𝟏 + 𝒁 𝟐 + 𝒁𝟎
𝟑𝑬𝒂
𝑰𝒇 = 𝑰𝒂 = 𝟑𝑰𝒂𝟏 =
𝒁𝟏 + 𝒁𝟐 + 𝒁𝟎
For the healthy phases,

𝑽𝒃 = 𝑽𝒂𝒐 + 𝒂𝟐 𝑽𝒂𝟏 + 𝒂𝑽𝒂𝟐

𝑽𝒄 = 𝑽𝒂𝒐 + 𝒂𝟐 𝑽𝒂𝟐 + 𝒂𝑽𝒂𝟏

5
b. Line-to-Line Fault (L-L Fault):
This type of fault occurs when two conductors are short-circuited. Implications of this fault
include:
✓ Unbalanced current distribution in the system.
✓ Reduced system efficiency and potential equipment damage.
✓ Localized disturbances in the affected part of the system.

Figure 4 L-L Fault

Let assume an L – L fault occurs on phase-b and phase-c as shown in figure, the
boundary conditions are:
𝐼𝑎 = 0
𝐼𝑓 = 𝐼𝑏 = −𝐼𝑐

𝑉𝑎0 = 0
𝑉𝑏 = 𝑉𝑐
𝐼𝑏 = −𝐼𝑐 = 𝐼𝑎0 + 𝑎2 𝐼𝑎1 + 𝑎𝐼𝑎2
The fault current is given by
𝑬𝒂
𝑰𝒇 = (𝒂𝟐 − 𝒂)
𝒁𝟏 + 𝒁𝟐
For the healthy Phase:
𝑉𝑎 = 𝑉𝑎0 + 𝑉𝑎1 + 𝑉𝑎2 = 2𝑉𝑎1
For faulty phase:
𝑉𝑏 = 𝑉𝑐 = 𝑉𝑎0 + 𝑎2 𝑉𝑎1 + 𝑎𝑉𝑎2 = (𝑎2 + 𝑎)𝑉𝑎1

6
 c. Double line to ground fault (DLG Fault):
Double line to ground fault occurs when two phases short-circuited and grounded.
✓ Significant current flows through the faulted phases.
✓ Severe unbalanced conditions in the system.
✓ Increased likelihood of equipment damage and system instability.

Figure 5 DLG Fault

Let the fault occur at phase b and c as shown in the figure on the right, the boundary
conditions are:

𝐼𝑎 = 0
𝑉𝑏 = 𝑉𝑐 = 0
𝐼𝑏 + 𝐼𝑐 = 𝐼𝑓
𝐸𝑎
𝐼𝑎1 =
𝑍 𝑍0
𝑍1 + (𝑍 2+ 𝑍 )
2 0

𝑍0
𝐼𝑎2 = −𝐼𝑎1
𝑍2 + 𝑍0
𝑍2
𝐼𝑎0 = −𝐼𝑎1
𝑍2 + 𝑍0

7
 𝑉𝑎1 = 𝐸𝑎 − 𝐼𝑎1 𝑍1
𝑉𝑎2 = −𝐼𝑎2 𝑍2
𝑉𝑎0 = −𝐼𝑎0 𝑍0
The heathy phase:
𝑉𝑎 = 𝑉𝑎0 + 𝑉𝑎1 + 𝑉𝑎2
𝐼𝑏 = 𝐼𝑎0 + 𝑎2 𝐼𝑎1 + 𝑎𝐼𝑎2
𝐼𝑐 = 𝐼𝑎0 + 𝑎𝐼𝑎1 + 𝑎2 𝐼𝑎2
The fault current is given by:

𝑰𝒇 = 𝑰 𝒃 + 𝑰𝒄

8
Overall causes of faults
1. External Causes
❖ Natural Events:
✓ Lightning strikes cause overvoltage surges.
✓ High winds leading to power lines contact or snapping.
✓ Heavy rainfall, flooding, or snow causing insulation failure.
✓ Earthquakes damaging underground cables or power infrastructure.

❖ Animal Interference:
✓ Birds, rodents, or other animals coming into contact with energized components.

❖ Vegetation:
✓ Tree branches falling on overhead lines or encroaching near conductors.
2. Mechanical Causes
❖ Wear and Tear:
✓ Aging equipment like cables, transformers, and insulators failing due to prolonged use.

❖ Physical Damage:
✓ Construction activities (e.g. digging) damage underground cables.
✓ Vehicles colliding with power poles or substations.

❖ Loose Connections:
✓ Improper connections at joints or terminals causing overheating and sparking.
3. Electrical Causes
❖ Overloading:
✓ Excessive demand on circuits or equipment leading to overheating and insulation failure.

❖ Short Circuits:
✓ Direct contact between two conductors of different phases or between a conductor and
ground.

❖ Insulation Failure:
✓ Breakdown of insulation material due to aging, overheating, or physical damage.
4. Environmental and Maintenance Issues
❖ Contamination:
✓ Dust, salt deposits, or pollution reducing the insulation strength of equipment.

❖ Moisture:

9
 ✓ High humidity or water ingress into electrical systems causing short circuits or
flashovers.

❖ Poor Maintenance:
✓ Lack of regular inspections, cleaning, or timely replacement of aging components.

❖ Improper Grounding:
✓ Faulty or inadequate grounding leading to unsafe fault currents.
5. Operational and Design Issues
❖ Human Errors:
✓ Incorrect operation of switches, relays, or other equipment.
✓ Faulty installation or repairs leading to weak points in the system.

❖ Improper Design:
✓ Inadequate system capacity or failure to account for peak load conditions.

❖ Protection System Failures:

✓ Malfunctioning relays or circuit breakers failing to detect and isolate faults.

10
 2. Chapter Two: Case Study
The 5-bus 2-generator power system shown in Fig. 1 will be studied

Figure 6 5-bus 2-generator power system

2.1 Apparatus/Tools
✓ Power World Simulation Software
✓ A Laptop capable of running the Power World Simulation Software and data recording
✓ Reference books and notes for analysis
✓ books and notes for analysis

Figure 7 Simulation in the software

2.2 Methodology
System Initialization
1. Load the 5-bus system configuration into PowerWorld Simulator.

11
 2. Define system parameters:

H Generator Data: Input per-unit values for reactances.

H Line Data: Include sequence impedances for each transmission line.

H Transformer Data: Configure leakage reactances and winding configurations.

Fault Simulation
1. Simulate faults at buses 1 through 5 for each fault type:

H Single Line to Ground Faults.

H Line to Line Faults.

H Line to Line Ground Faults.

2. Record:

H Fault currents at the faulted bus.

H Voltage profiles at all buses.

3. Modify transformer configurations and repeat simulations to observe changes in fault

characteristics.
The system loads at P3 = 80 MW, Q3 = 40 MVAr and P2 = 800 MW, Q2 = 280 MVAr.
Set the pre-fault voltages for generator buses at 1.05 pu.
The generator, transmission line, and transformer data are given in Table 1. All parameters are in
per unit on 100 MVA base, and 15 kV and 345 kV bases at buses 1 & 3 and 2, 4, & 5,
respectively.
Component Positive sequence
impedance
G1 0.045
G3 0.0225
L2-L4 0.1
L2-L5 0.05
L4-L5 0.025
T1 0.02
Table 1 System data

12
 3. Chapter 3: Results
3.1 Simulated Results
https://drive.google.com/file/d/13dCIkPpbRKKfeaC0LR6Hnzub_ufSQhqw/view?usp=sharing

3.2 Discussion of Results

3.2.1 Fault Current Analysis

1. Single-Line-to-Ground Fault (SLG):

• The highest fault current occurred at Bus 1 (223.32 kA). This is expected as Bus
1 is directly connected to a generator, and its low impedance allows significant
current to flow during a fault.
• Fault currents decreased progressively at other buses, with Bus 5 showing the
lowest fault current (3.21 kA). The reduction in fault current is due to increased
impedance from the fault location to other buses.
2. Double-Line-to-Ground Fault (LLG):
• Fault currents during LLG faults are lower compared to SLG faults. For example,
at Bus 1, the LLG fault current is 134.25 kA, which is approximately 40% lower
than the SLG fault current.
• This difference arises because LLG faults involve ground paths that limit the
zero-sequence current contribution, reducing the overall fault current.
3. Double-Line Fault (LL):
• The highest fault current for LL faults occurs at Bus 1 (118.14 kA). This is due to its
direct connection to the generator, providing a low-impedance path for fault currents.
• The current is lower than the SLG fault current because LL faults do not involve
zero-sequence components, which significantly increase fault currents in SLG
scenarios.
• Fault current magnitudes decrease with the distance from the faulted bus. For
example, Bus 5 shows the lowest current (2.65 kA) due to higher series impedance
from Bus 1 to Bus 5.

4. Observation:
• Fault current magnitudes are highly dependent on the fault type and location. SLG
faults, due to their reliance on zero-sequence currents, typically result in the
highest currents.

13
 • Generators closer to the fault location contribute more significantly to fault
currents.
Voltage Profile Analysis
1. Voltage Dip During SLG Faults:
• At Bus 1 (faulted bus), the phase voltage drops to 0.00 p.u., indicating a
complete collapse of voltage at the fault location.
• Neighboring buses (e.g., Bus 2 and Bus 3) experience partial voltage dips, with
values ranging between 0.23 p.u. and 0.70 p.u.. This partial dip reflects the
system's impedance limiting the extent of voltage reduction.
2. Phase Voltage Distribution:
• The results demonstrate a characteristic unbalanced phase voltage pattern during
SLG faults, with one phase experiencing a complete drop and the others retaining
partial voltage levels.
3. Observation:
• Voltage profiles during faults reveal that buses closer to the fault experience
steeper voltage dips, while remote buses retain more of their pre-fault voltage
levels.

Phase Voltages During LL Faults:

1. Voltage Collapse at Faulted Bus:
o At Bus 1, the voltages of the faulted phases drop to 0.00 p.u., while the unfaulty
phase retains normal voltage. This pattern reflects the unbalanced nature of LL
faults.
2. Voltage Reduction at Neighboring Buses:
o Neighboring buses (e.g., Bus 2 and Bus 3) experience partial voltage dips, with
values ranging from 0.21 to 0.67 p.u.. The degree of dip decreases as the buses
are farther from the faulty location.
3. Phase Voltage Behavior:
o The unbalanced nature of LL faults creates significant voltage asymmetry. The
faulted phases experience sharp voltage drops, while the unaffected phase remains
close to its pre-fault value.

14
 3.2.2 Transformer Configuration Impact

Figure 8 Transformer Configuration

1. Grounded Wye-Delta Configuration:

• This configuration effectively limited fault currents, with the fault current at Bus
1 being 223.32 kA. The grounding in the wye connection helps dissipate fault
currents through the neutral, reducing the impact on other system components.
2. Delta-Delta Configuration:
• Fault currents were highest under this configuration, with 245.56 kA at Bus 1.
The lack of a grounded neutral path allows higher zero-sequence impedance,
resulting in increased fault current levels.
3. Wye-Wye Configuration:
• The fault current for this configuration was 211.34 kA, lower than the grounded
wye-delta and delta-delta configurations. The presence of grounding in both
windings distribute the fault current more effectively.
4. Observation:
• Transformer configurations significantly influence fault current magnitudes and
voltage profiles. Grounded configurations are more effective in limiting fault
impacts.

15
 3.3 Some Graphical analysis for buses 1 and 5
The graphs provided illustrate two distinct datasets: fault currents and phase voltages
at Bus 1 and Bus 5. Here's an analysis of each:
Fault Currents at Buses 1 and 5

Figure 9 Fault current at buses 1 and 5

1. Observation:
❖ The SLG (Single Line-to-Ground) fault currents are significantly higher than the
LL (Line-to-Line) fault currents at both buses.
❖ At Bus 1, the SLG fault current is much larger (~223 kA) than the LL fault
current (~129 kA).
❖ At Bus 5, both types of fault currents are considerably lower than at Bus 1. SLG
fault current drops to ~6.4 kA, and LL fault current is ~5.1 kA.
2. Analysis:
❖ The sharp decrease in fault current from Bus 1 to Bus 5 could indicate the
increasing impedance or distance from the fault source as we move towards Bus
5.
❖ The high SLG fault current at Bus 1 suggests it is closer to the generation source
or a low-impedance path for ground faults.
❖ Fault current magnitudes show a proportional relationship to fault severity, with
SLG faults being the most severe due to the involvement of a ground path.

16
Phase Voltages at Buses 1 and 5

Figure 10 Phase voltages at buses 1 and 5

1. Observation:
❖ Phase A voltage shows an increasing trend from Bus 1 to Bus 5, with values
rising from ~0.866 pu to ~0.94 pu.
❖ Phase B and Phase C voltages remain relatively stable, with a slight increase from
~0.866 pu at Bus 1 to ~0.879 pu at Bus 5.
2. Analysis:
❖ The increasing trend in Phase A voltage toward Bus 5 might reflect voltage
regulation mechanisms compensating for the fault or variations in system
impedance.
❖ The stability of Phase B and C voltages suggests that the faults predominantly
impacted Phase A or were localized in their effects.
❖ Voltage drops at Bus 1 could imply proximity to the faulted area, leading to
higher voltage deviations due to the fault's influence.

17
 4. Chapter 4: Conclusion
❖ Fault Location: Fault current magnitude was highest at Bus 1 due to its direct
connection to the generator, which has the lowest impedance.
❖ Fault Type: SLG faults resulted in the highest fault currents due to the presence of zero-
sequence currents. LLG faults displayed lower fault currents due to the inclusion of
ground paths.
❖ Transformer Configurations: Grounded wye-delta configurations effectively limited
fault currents, while delta-delta allowed higher fault currents.
❖ Fault currents are highly influenced by the fault type and location within the system.
❖ Transformer configurations significantly impact fault current magnitudes and voltage
stability.
❖ Voltage dips are most severe at the faulted bus and reduce progressively at neighbouring
buses.

18
 5. Chapter 5: Recommendations and References
5.1 Recommendations
❖ Grounded transformer configurations should be prioritized for distribution systems to
minimize fault impacts.
❖ Relay coordination studies should be conducted to ensure accurate and timely fault
isolation.
❖ Advanced dynamic simulations should be conducted to study transient fault behaviors.

5.2 References

[1] D. Glover, Power Systems analysis and design.

[2] C. Singh, P. Jirutitijaroen and J. Mitra, Introduction to Power System Reliability, 2019.

19
 6.0 Appendix
6.1 Pictorial samples of results

20
21