advanced search

Ground-Fault Relay Protection Schemes

Nov 15, 2004 10:33 AM, By David Murray, IPC Resistors, Inc.

Improve your customer’s system performance by exceeding the minimum safety requirements of the NEC

Find more articles on Ground Fault

To be competitive, some electrical contractors often supply low-voltage (LV) service entrance switchboards and switchgear that meet the minimum safety requirements of the National Electrical Code (NEC). The Code stipulates that a ground-fault relay must be installed on the service entrance for services with a rating higher than 1,000A. This relay shall be set for no more than 1,200A, and it shall trip the service entrance breaker.

As related to safety, this is a great improvement over earlier requirements of the Code, which did not call for any ground-fault relay. However, it must be noted that this level of ground sensing and time delay protection arrangement provides limited coordination with any possible downstream protective devices. As a result, when the main service entrance device trips the entire building suffers a blackout.

So what can you do to improve the overall protection and coordination of the power delivery system? Let’s take a look at some other options you have to improve system performance and better serve your customer.

As per Code requirements, all 3-phase, 4-wire circuits, where the neutral is distributed and used for the load(s), must be solidly grounded. As a matter of habit, many designers and installers also solidly ground 3-phase, 3-wire systems. In such systems, the ground-fault sensing relays, which are installed at various levels throughout the distribution network, are time-current coordinated.

Where there are multiple levels (i.e., zones) in the power system, there is a need for coordination of the zones so that, whenever possible, the higher levels are unaffected by downstream faults. The branch circuits are like tree branches, and all of the relays will “see” the fault current in a particular branch when the fault is downstream.

Typically, you achieve coordination by setting protective relay time-delays progressively higher, with upstream relays set to maximum delays so as to prevent nuisance tripping of the breaker. However, should a fault develop at a high level and require the time delay to expire before clearing the fault, this set-up can cause unnecessary damage to downstream equipment.

This design approach raises the cost of the overall system due to the large number of ground-fault sensing relays required. It also brings about longer relay operating times due to the increased time delay settings associated with the time coordination of the multiple protective devices on the system. The source relay has the longest delay in order to prevent the main relay from tripping first.

Fig. 1 shows a time-coordinated system of ground-fault relays in a low-voltage distribution arrangement. Its relay scheme operates as follows:

• GFP-1 responds after a time delay of 12 cycles to any ground fault that hasn’t been cleared by GFP-2 or GFP-3.

• GFP-2 responds after a delay of 6 cycles to any fault that hasn’t been cleared by GFP-3.

• GFP-3 responds instantaneously to any fault on the branch circuit it protects.

In this scheme, the time delays necessary for conventional time-current coordination may compromise equipment protection. For example, in the event of an arcing ground fault in these solidly grounded systems, the circuit is tripped with delay, resulting in potentially unacceptable damage.

An alternative arrangement is to use zone-selective instantaneous protection (ZSIP), where the ground-fault sensing relays are all set for instantaneous trip protection and the downstream relay will signal the upstream relay in the upper zone that it will clear the fault and block the upstream relay from tripping. This scheme provides coordination with instantaneous clearance of arcing faults, thus preventing major damage at all levels in the system.

Fig. 2 shows a distribution system with ZSIP. This type of system works as follows:

• GFP-1 responds instantaneously to ground faults on the line side of GFP-2.

• GFP-2 responds instantaneously to faults on the load side of its location to the line side of GFP-3 and sends a restraining signal to GFP-1.

• GFP-3 responds instantaneously to faults on its load side and sends a restraining signal to GFP-2.

On 3-phase, 3-wire low-voltage systems where solid grounding is specified, high-resistance grounding may be offered to improve power continuity, eliminate damage due to ground faults, improve coordination and selectivity, and provide a system that enables safe operation and low maintenance costs.

As a designer or installer you can take a proactive approach with your customers and recommend that better coordination and protection of electrical equipment can result in less equipment damage and fewer widespread outages. The choice is yours.

Murray is consultant and technical support manager for IPC Resistors, Inc., in Mississauga, Ontario, Canada.

Want to use this article? Click here for options!

© 2012 Penton Business Media, Inc.

---

Acceptable Use Policy blog comments powered by Disqus

Browse Back Issues Select an Issue EC&M Magazine | April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 1, 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 1, 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 1, 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 1, 2006 May 1, 2006 April 2006 March 1, 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 1, 2004 January 1, 2004 December 1, 2003 November 1, 2003 October 1, 2003 September 1, 2003 August 1, 2003 July 1, 2003 June 1, 2003 May 1, 2003 April 1, 2003 March 1, 2003 February 1, 2003 January 1, 2003 December 1, 2002 November 1, 2002 October 1, 2002 September 1, 2002 August 1, 2002 July 1, 2002 June 1, 2002 May 1, 2002 April 1, 2002 March 1, 2002 February 1, 2002 January 1, 2002 December 1, 2001 November 1, 2001 October 1, 2001 September 1, 2001 August 1, 2001 July 1, 2001 June 1, 2001 May 1, 2001 April 1, 2001 March 1, 2001 February 1, 2001 February 1, 1995 January 1, 2001 December 1, 2000 November 1, 2000 October 1, 2000 September 1, 2000 August 1, 2000 July 1, 2000 June 1, 2000 May 1, 2000 April 1, 2000 March 1, 2000 February 1, 2000 January 1, 2000 December 1, 1999 November 1, 1999 October 1, 1999 September 1, 1999 August 1, 1999 July 1, 1999 June 1, 1999 May 1, 1999 April 1, 1999 March 1, 1999 February 1, 1999 January 1, 1999 December 1, 1998 November 1, 1998 October 1, 1998 September 1, 1998 August 1, 1998 July 1, 1998 June 1, 1998 May 1, 1998 April 1, 1998 March 1, 1998 February 1, 1998 January 1, 1998 December 1, 1997 November 1, 1997 December 1, 1996 November 1, 1996 October 1, 1996 September 1, 1996 August 1, 1996 July 1, 1996 June 1, 1996 May 1, 1996 April 1, 1996 March 1, 1996 February 1, 1996 January 1, 1996 December 1, 1995 November 30, 1995 November 1, 1995 October 1, 1995 September 1, 1995 August 1, 1995 July 1, 1995 June 1, 1995 May 1, 1995 April 1, 1995 March 1, 1995

browse e-newsletters