Modelling of Battery Energy Storage Systems under

Faulted Conditions: Assessment of Protection Systems

Behaviour
F. M. Gatta, A. Geri, S. Lauria, M. Maccioni, A. Codino

G. Gemelli, F. Palone, M. Rebolini

Department of Astronautics, Electric and Energy Engineering

Sapienza University of Rome
Rome, Italy
marco.maccioni@uniroma1.it

TERNA Rete Italia S.p.A.

Rome, Italy
francesco.palone@terna.it

AbstractThe paper present a preliminary study of the

protective relays of a 10 MW sized battery energy storage
system (BESS) recently installed by TERNA, the Italian TSO. A
complete model of the system, including inverters, has been
implemented in ATP-EMTP in order to assess the behaviour of
protective relays during symmetric and asymmetric faults.
Results show that ground fault protection of MV feeders can be
performed by zero-sequence non-directional overcurrent relays,
obtaining a correct fault selection even for fault resistances in
the k: range. Phase-to-phase and three-phase fault selection can
be performed by means of overcurrent relays: an inverter
current limiting control under fault conditions has to be
implemented to avoid the system shutdown. Lastly, HV-level
faults have been simulated during BESS-supplied, islanded
operation, evidencing very low fault current contributions,
depending on the actual share of battery modules operating at
the time of fault, with less modules giving worst results.
Index TermsFault analysis, inverter transient behaviour,
protective relays, storage system.

I.

INTRODUCTION

Several large Battery Energy Storage Systems (BESSs) are

currently being installed by different European, Asian and
American transmission system operators (TSOs), in order to
allow a more satisfactory integration and wider exploitation of
renewable energy sources in the HV transmission grid. A
BESS system is connected to the ac network by means of a
Power Conditioning System (PCS), which includes a voltage
source converter (VSC) with a dedicated transformer and in
some cases a dc/dc converter between the battery system and
the ac inverter. BESSs are envisaged to facilitate the
integration of the renewable energy sources in the
transmission network; they might be used to perform other
network services such as black-start and islanded operation
during network restoration.
The presence of several static converters in a small, weak
subnetwork could significantly affect the transient response in

case of fault condition, making it necessary to assess the

protection systems behaviour when the fault is fed only by
static converters whose transients exhibit a large harmonic
content which could lead to protection maloperation. For this
reason TERNA, the Italian TSO, started out, in collaboration
with Sapienza University of Rome, a research project
focused on the transient behaviour of the static conversion
system, named CONSTAT (STATic CONversion). In
particular, the project aims at assessing the transient behaviour
of PCSs during symmetric and asymmetric faults, at first by
developing ATP-EMTP and Real Time Digital Simulator
(RTDS) transient models, and then reproducing the protection
system behaviour using TERNAs RTDS simulator, which
allows to verify the behaviour of actual protection relays.
Results will be ultimately validated by experimental tests on
TERNAs facilities.
The paper deals with the fault analyses and the assessment
of protection system behaviour of a newly installed BESS
owned by TERNA and located in Codrongianos, Sardinia,
code-named Storage Lab [1]. A steady state study of singlephase-to-ground and phase-to-phase fault currents in the ac
portion of the system has been carried out at both MV and HV
level, relying at first on symmetrical components.
Subsequently, simulation models of the system have been
implemented, first an equivalent Simulink model (especially
focused on the PCS) and then a complete ATP-EMTP model.
The latter has been used to check previous fault calculations
and to carry out a preliminary evaluation of relay
performance.
II.

SYSTEM DESCRIPTION

Fig. 1 shows the one-line diagram of the Storage Lab

system in Codrongianos. It consists of ten different BESSs,
each rated 1 MW, employing different battery technologies
such as Li-Ion (4 types installed) and ZEBRA (2 types
installed). BESSs are subdivided in two groups of five, as
shown in Fig. 1. Each BESS has its own PCS (composed by
four 250 kVA rated power inverters), step-up LV/MV

978-1-5090-2320-2/16/$31.00 2016 IEEE

transformer (1.25 MVA, 15 kV/0.55 kV, Yd connected) and

dedicated MV cable line. The 15 kV busbar is then connected
to the regional 150 kV ac subtransmission grid through a 40
MVA, 150 kV/15.6 kV transformer (Yy connected). A
grounding transformer (GT) with a 385-550 : resistor
(depending on temperature) provides a ground path for the
otherwise ungrounded 1.7 km long MV system connected to
the 15 kV busbar; high-resistance neutral grounding was
chosen as a simple means in order to limit ground fault
currents while avoiding large temporary overvoltages [2]-[4].
The neutral grounding arrangement and simple system
configuration allow to dispense with the sophisticated relaying
systems foreseen in recent Italian MV smart grid application
[5]-[7]. A spare grounding transformer-resistor complex is
also installed. Table I summarizes the main features of the
Storage Lab system components.
PCSs use different VSC topologies depending on the
manufacturer, generally relying on two-stage solutions which
allow to control battery output independently from the ac-side
voltage. Good part-load efficiency, as well as the fulfillment
of ac-side power quality requirements (in conjunction with
harmonic filters if necessary) is traded for the slightly higher
full-load efficiency of single-stage interfaces.

B. Symmetrical Components System Model

The symmetrical components-based model was used to
study single-phase faults. With regard to ac-side quantities,
positive and negative sequence impedances are obtained

Figure 1. One-line diagram of the Storage Lab system.

TABLE I.

III.

SIMULATION MODELS

Different models of the whole system have been set up

during the course of the study. At first, a simplified steadystate model based on symmetrical components was used to
evaluate single phase-to-ground fault currents for different
configurations, i.e. considering Storage Lab system either
connected to the HV network or islanded. In both cases,
simulations were carried out considering zero to ten PCSs in
operation. Subsequently, an equivalent model was developed
in the Simulink environment by using embedded components.
At last, a full ATP-EMTP model of the system has been
implemented and used in all simulations.
A. Preliminary Considerations about the Fault Ridethrough of Storage Lab Inverters
A fault analysis of the Storage Lab must take into account
the fault response of the inverters, governed by the individual
inverters control systems. In principle, those should follow
national grid code prescriptions. Italian standard CEI 0-16 [8],
dealing with HV- and MV-connected inverters, does not
currently cater for the short circuit contribution (an update to
the standard, including reactive low-voltage ride-through
provisions, is currently underway). At present, the standard
only requires the inverters "ride-through" faults without
disconnecting from the network, in order to resume the power
injection as soon as the fault is cleared. This does not preclude
the inverter shutting down due to its own internal overcurrent
(or current rate-of-rise) protective settings. In the Storage Lab,
this occurs for phase-to-phase and three-phase faults occurring
anywhere in the system, with inverters tripping within 2-3 ms;
single-phase faults, instead, do not trip the inverters on
overcurrent: unbalanced operation continues with current
magnitude and phase dictated by the control system.

15 kV
cables
400 mm2
2

70 mm

rd
(:/km)
0.090

xd
(:/km)
0.12

cd
(nF/km)

0.342

0.11

210

Nn
(MVA)
40/45

Vsc
(%)
11.5

PCu
(%)
0.36

TransVn1/Vn2
formers
PS
150/15.6
PCS
GT

MAIN STORAGE LAB COMPONENTS DATA

15/0.55

1.25

390

Z0=0.9+j6 :; Rn=385 :

x0
r0
c0
(:/km) (:/km) (nF/km)
1
0.12
390

0.11

210

Connection
HV: Y

MV: y

MV:
wye

LV:
delta

zig-zag

straightforwardly from network components (150 kV network

equivalent, HV/MV transformer, MV cables). The
symmetrical components representation of inverters depends
on the adopted inverter control strategy: two main control
strategies are generally implemented: P/Q control and V/f
control. P/Q control is widely used in grid-connected
installations, whereas V/f control is adopted in islanding
operation [9]. Symmetrical components representation of P/Q
controlled inverters is given, for instance, in [10], both in
normal operation and in fault conditions. Since islanding
operation of Storage Lab is allowed, V/f control strategy has
been adopted. Fig. 2 shows the positive and negative sequence
circuits, in fault conditions, used in this study: in the positivesequence, inverters contribute with the impedance of the threephase harmonics filters (made of the inductance Lf and
capacitance Cf in figure) installed just upstream of the MV/LV
interfacing transformer, whose short circuit impedance is
accounted by the inductance Lcc,Tr. In the negative-sequence
circuit in Fig. 2b, the voltage generator is short-circuited, since
only positive-sequence voltages are imposed by the control.
Regarding the zero-sequence impedance, it only consists of
the aggregate zero-sequence capacitance of the MV network,

i.e. the grounding transformer zero-sequence impedance Z0,GT

in series with three times the neutral earthing resistor Rn.
C. Simulink Model
The Simulink model, shown in Fig. 3, is a simplified
network with one equivalent inverter, a MV/LV transformer

by line faults studies [11]-[15]. Figure 4 compares Simulink

and ATP-EMTP single-phase-to-ground fault simulation
results (fault at B3 of Fig. 3, i.e. at MV busbars of the MV/LV
interface transformer), showing a good agreement.

Figure 3. Simulink model of a simplified network for comparison with

ATP-EMTP model.

Figure 2. Sequence circuits of the inverter.

and a MV cable line supplying the 15 kV busbars, where a

load and the grounding transformer are also connected.
The Simulink model, built from library blocks, was mainly
a tool to debug/validate the ATP-EMTP model, which was
subsequently used to simulate in detail the system behaviour
during faults. The batteries, together with the dc/dc converter,
are simulated as an ideal 1050 V direct voltage source; the dclink RLC filter is represented in its entirety. A "universal
bridge" block was used to simulate the line-side inverter, an
IGBT-based voltage source converter using sinusoidal PWM:
the latter was reproduced by means of a "discrete PWM"
block, with 2050 Hz carrier frequency and a modulation index
equal to 0.85 in normal operation. The line-side L-C filter was
represented by means of a 3-phase series-connected R-L
element (R=1 m:, L=0.289 mH) and a delta-connected, 3phase shunt capacitor bank (C=140 PF). "Three-phase
transformer inductance matrix", with the appropriate
parameters, was used for both the MV/LV transformer and the
grounding transformer; the MV busbar-connected, balanced
resistive load was sized to match the rated inverter output.
D. ATP-EMTP Model
In the ATP-EMTP model, inverters are simulated as ideal
three-phase IGBT bridges, with instantaneous turn-on and
turn-off; the line-side filter consists of linear, lumped R, L, C
elements. The Yd-connected 15 kV/0.55 kV transformer is
made of three single-phase "saturable transformer"
components; the neutral of the 15 kV zig-zag-connected
grounding transformer is grounded via a 385 : resistor. The
internal inverter overcurrent protection is implemented by
turning off all IGBTs when the current magnitude in one arm
exceeds the overcurrent threshold setting, Imax. As bolted faults
within the substation precincts are involved, the substation
grounding system was not modeled in the detail often required

Figure 4. Comparison between Simulink (a) and ATP_EMTP (b) model in

case of single-line-to-ground fault.

IV.

RESULTS

A. Single-phase-to-ground Faults: Storage Lab Islanded

Results of ATP-EMTP simulations of single-phase-toground MV faults are summarized in Table II. Cases were run
considering the Storage Lab either connected to the 150 kV
HV network or not, and different number of PCS in operation
(at least one must be active when the Lab is islanded). The
1LG fault current in the small MV system varies very little

along the whole spectrum of simulated conditions, being

practically constant at 22.6 A (bolted faults), due to the highresistance neutral grounding, whose fault current contribution
nevertheless "swamps" the small capacitive currents supplied
by the system.
During 1LG faults, the zero-sequence current of the
faulted MV feeder practically coincide with one-third of the
fault current, whereas all healthy feeders zero-sequence
currents are also approximately constant at about 0.06 A. The
1LG fault current If thus can be quickly estimated by

case the peak current supplied by each inverter is about 360 A,

lower than internal 400 A (peak value) overcurrent threshold.
Fig. 5b shows the current contribution of each inverter (peak
TABLE II.

I0,f (A)

150 kV
network

If (A)

10

Connected

where Rf is the fault resistance.

Following established practice, 1LG fault protection of
MV feeders can be performed by zero-sequence nondirectional overcurrent relays. The ample difference between
faulted and healthy feeder current magnitudes allow a current
fault selection even for Rf values in the k: range. Given the
zero-sequence current threshold I0,t, the maximum fault
resistance, Rf,Max, allowing fault selection is

If

R f , Max

Un
3 ( Rn  R f )

Un
3If

 Rn

(1)

# of PCS in
operation

SINGLE-LINE-TO-GROUND FAULT CURRENTS IN THE

ISLANDED STORAGE LAB

Healthy
lines

Faulted
line

GT
line

~ 22.6

~ 0.06

~ 7.5

~ -7.5

Connected

~ 22.6

~ 0.06

~ 7.5

~ -7.5

Connected

~ 22.6

~ 0.06

~ 7.5

~ -7.5

10

Not
connected

~ 22.6

~ 0.06

~ 7.5

~ -7.5

Not
connected

~ 22.6

~ 0.06

~ 7.5

~ -7.5

Not
connected

~ 22.7

~ 0.06

~ 7.5

~ -7.5

(2)

As an example, the credible I0,t values {0.5, 1, 1.5} A yield

Rf,Max = {5388, 2500, 1549} :. I0,t settings could be even
lower, considering the 0.06 A healthy feeder zero-sequence
current in case of bolted faults. Some practical considerations
are in order:
x

the faulted feeders relay should also turn off the

attendant PCS, which would otherwise continue
supplying the fault;

the very short (30 m long) feeder connecting the

grounding transformer to the MV busbars cannot be
protected by the above described zero-sequence
overcurrent relays. 1LG faults would be picked up by
the non-selective, delayed zero-sequence overvoltage
relay (59N) in care of busbar 1LG faults.

B. Single-phase-to-ground Faults during Energization of

the HV Network
One of the issues investigated at the Storage Lab is the
energization of isolated HV network portions, by means of the
storage system. It must be pointed out that, given the Italian
HV subtransmission network structure, the neutral grounding
status of such parts of the network might be isolated, instead
of the standard solidly grounded solution. In this context,
several faults have been simulated in either of the two 150 kV
overhead lines connected to the HV/MV transformer
supplying the Storage Lab. Simulation of a 1LG fault at the
remote end of the 17.2 km long Codrongianos-Chilivani 150
kV overhead line show a fault current peak value
approximatively equal to 16 A, as reported in Fig. 5a. In order
to supply such current, and to avoid inverters tripping which
would cause the loss of the entire MV system, it is necessary
that at least 3 PCSs (i.e. 12 inverters) are in operation: in this

Figure 5. a) Single-phase-to-ground fault current at the remote end of the

Codrongianos-Chilivani 150 kV overhead line. b) Fault current contribution
of each inverter (4 PCSs in operation).

value about 275 A), when 4 PCS are operated. The behaviour
of HV-side distance protective relays, which in turn is
determinant in the fault clearance, is not taken into account at
this stage of the study.

C. Phase-to-phase and Three-phase Faults: Storage Lab

Islanded
Phase-to-phase and three-phase faults occurring anywhere
in the system cause inverters tripping after 2-3 ms, due to the
400 A overcurrent threshold. In order to avoid such issue, it is
necessary to control inverters during faults, limiting the
contributed current. A number of possible current control
strategies for inverters operating on a faulty grid are available
in literature [16]; in this paper, however, the focus is on
network protection implications, rather than current control
models of inverters during faults. From this point of view, a
simple current control has been implemented by means of
TACS to limit the current to its rated value, varying the
modulation index of the PWM block as soon as the value of
the peak current exceeds the 400 A threshold. The choice of
the aforementioned current limit value has depended on the
behaviour of protective relays, in order to employ traditional
protective settings such as overcurrent relays.

Single-phase-to-ground faults anywhere in the MV

system do not cause the inverters tripping on
overcurrent.

Ground fault protection of MV feeders can be

performed by zero-sequence non-directional
overcurrent relays, which allow a correct fault
selection even for fault resistances in the k: range.

Fig. 6a reports the current (peak value is about 540 A) in

the fault location for a three-phase fault on a MV feeder
connecting a PCS to the PS transformer, when all PCSs are in
operation, whereas Fig. 6b shows the fault current contribution
corresponding to each inverter, when the current limit is
applied (peak current about 375 A). When n PCS are in
operation, the current measured by protective relays of the
faulted MV feeder is the contribution of the n-1 PCSs
connected to healthy feeders: a simple overcurrent relay may
be used, with a threshold equal to two times the rated current
of each PCS. In this case, however, fault selection is possible
only if at least 3 PCSs are in operation.
Regarding phase-to-phase faults, same considerations
remain valid.
D. Three-phase Faults during Energization of the HV
Network
A three-phase fault at the remote end of the CodrongianosChilivani 150 kV overhead line has been simulated during the
energization of the HV network by means of the BESS (all
PCSs are in operation). Fig. 7 reports the fault current: the
very low peak value of about 55 A is obtained, complying
with the 375 A current limit (peak value) contributed by each
inverter. If only 2 PCSs are in operation, the peak value fault
current decreases to about 11 A, lower than the single-phaseto-ground fault current value. The behaviour of HV-side
distance protective relays is not considered at this stage of the
study.

Figure 6. a) Three-phase fault current for a MV feeder fault (all PCSs are in
operation). b) Fault current contribution of each inverter.
100
I (A)
75
50
25
0

V.

CONCLUSIONS

A preliminary study of the protective relays of a BESS,

connected to the TERNA 150 kV sub-transmission network in
Codrongianos, Sardinia, has been presented. An ATP-EMTP
model of the whole system, including inverters, has been
developed with the aim to calculate the inverters current
contributions during single-phase-to-ground, phase-to-phase
and three-phase faults, occurring at either MV or HV level;
HV faults were studied considering a 150 kV overhead line
islanded and supplied by the BESS. Main results are
summarized below:

-25
-50
-75
-100
0.50

0.52

0.54

0.56

0.58

time (s)

0.60

Figure 7. Three-phase fault current at the remote end of the CodrongianosChilivani 150 kV overhead line (all PCSs are in operation).

If a single-phase-to-ground fault happens during the

HV network energization, a minimum defined
number of inverters must be operating to avoid BESS
shutdown.
Phase-to-phase and three-phase faults anywhere in
the system cause the inverter tripping on overcurrent:
a current limit under fault conditions has to be
implemented to avoid the system shutdown.

Phase-to-phase and three-phase fault selection is

obtained by means of overcurrent relays.

HV line protection during BESS-supplied, islanded

operation is troublesome and is being currently
investigated.

Future will be focused on reproducing the protective relays

behaviour using TERNAs RTDS simulator, in order to test
the protection system both at MV and HV level: results will be
validated by experimental tests on TERNAs facilities.
REFERENCES
[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

A. Al, S. Gionco, F. Palone, M. Rebolini, and R. Polito, "Sistemi di

automazione e soluzioni impiantistiche per i sistemi di accumulo
elettrochimici per la rete di trasmissione nazionale," (in Italian)
LEnergia Elettrica, vol. 91, pp. 47-58, Jul.-Aug. 2014.
F. M. Gatta, A.Geri, S. Lauria, and M. Maccioni, "Analytical prediction
of abnormal temporary overvoltages due to ground faults in MV
Networks," Electric Power System Research, vol. 77 n. 10, pp. 13051313, Aug. 2007.
A. Cerretti, F. M. Gatta, A. Geri, S. Lauria, M. Maccioni, and G.
Valtorta, "Temporary overvoltages due to ground faults in MV
networks," in Proc. 2009 IEEE PowerTech Conf., Bucharest, Romania,
Jun. 2009.
A. Cerretti, F. M. Gatta, A.Geri, S. Lauria, M. Maccioni, and G.
Valtorta, "Ground Fault Temporary Overvoltages in MV Networks:
Evaluation and Experimental Tests," IEEE Trans. Power Delivery, vol.
27 n. 3, pp. 1592-1600, July 2012.
A. Capasso, R. Calone, R. Lama, S. Lauria, and A. Santopaolo,
Ground fault protection in ENEL distribuzione's experimental MV
loop line, in Proc. 12th IET International Conference on Developments

[6]
[7]

[8]
[9]

[10]

[11]

[12]

[13]
[14]
[15]

[16]

in Power System Protection (DPSP 2014), Copenhagen, Denmark, 31

March 3 April 2014.
S. Lauria, A. Codino, and R. Calone, Protection system studies for
ENEL Distribuzione's MV loop lines, in Proc. 2015 IEEE PowerTech
Conf., Eindhoven, Netherlands, 29 June 2 July 2015.
R. Calone, A. Codino, F. M. Gatta, A. Geri, R. Lamedica, S. Lauria, M.
Maccioni, and A. Ruvio, Cross-country fault protection in Enel
Distribuziones experimental MV Loop Lines, in Proc. 19th Power
Systems Computation Conference (PSCC 2016), in press.
Regola tecnica di riferimento per la connessione di Utenti attivi e
passivi alle reti AT ed MT delle imprese distributrici di energia
elettrica (in Italian), CEI 0-16, Dec. 2014.
A. Andriollo, R. Benato, M. Bressan, S. Dambone Sessa, F. Palone, and
R. M. Polito, "Review of Power Conversion and Conditioning Systems
for Stationary Electrochemical Storage," Energies, vol. 8, pp. 960-975,
Feb. 2015.
C. A. Plet, M. Graovac, T. C. Green, and R. Iravani, "Fault Response of
Grid-connected Inverter Dominated Networks," in Proc. 2010 IEEE
Power and Energy Society General Meeting, Minneapolis, Minnesota,
USA, July 2010.
F. M. Gatta, A. Geri, S. Lauria, and M. Maccioni, Backflashover
Simulation of HV Transmission Lines with Enhanced Counterpoise
Groundings, Electric power Systems Research, vol. 79, pp. 1076
1084, July 2009.
F. M. Gatta, A. Geri, S. Lauria, and M. Maccioni, Equivalent lumped
parameter -network of typical tower grounding systems for linear and
non-linear transient analyses, in Proc. IEEE PowerTech Conf.,
Bucharest, Romania, June 28thJuly 2nd, 2009.
G. Parise, F. M. Gatta, and S. Lauria, Common grounding system, in
Proc. IEEE Ind. Commercial Power Syst. Tech. Conf., May 812, 2005,
pp. 184190.
F. M. Gatta, A. Geri, S. Lauria, and M. Maccioni, Simplified HV
tower grounding system model for backflashover simulation, Electric
power Systems Research, vol. 85, pp. 16-23, 2012.
F. M. Gatta, A. Geri, S. Lauria, and M. Maccioni, Generalized picircuit tower grounding model for direct lightning response
simulation, Electric power Systems Research, vol. 116, pp. 330-337,
2014.
A. V. Timbus, P. Rodriguez, R. Teodorescu, M. Liserre, and F.
Blaabjerg, "Control Strategies for Distributed Power Generation
Systems Operating on Faulty Grid," in Proc. 2006 IEEE International
Symposium on Industrial Electronics, Montreal, Quebec, July 2006,
vol. 2, pp. 16011607.