Impact of replacement of conventional Recloser with PulseCloser

Conventional recloser stresses the circuit with current fault every time they reclose into a fault. After clearing a fault, a conventional recloser simply recloses the interrupters to continuously test the presence of the fault. If the fault is still there, the interrupters are tripped again. Then, after a time delay, the interrupters are reclosed. During reclosing operation of Automatic Recloser, including the faster recloser one, powerful transient processes occurs and significant amount of energy is feeding the fault, resulting in system-damaging and voltage sags. Replacing conventional recloser with PulseCloser one minimizes these effects and creates the possibility to use multiple reclosing even when traditional autoreclosing can not be allowed.PulseCloser Technology drastically reduces overcurrent stress on the system. Once the PulseCloser interrupts a fault, it sends the impulses to intelligently tests for current fault before reclosing. The relative let-through energy of a pulseclosing operation is typically less than 2% of a conventional reclosing operation. Pulseclosing is superior to conventional reclosing. It greatly reduces stress on system components as well as voltage sags experienced by customers’ upstream fault.This paper analyzes transient processes during simulation of operation of traditional recloser and PulseCloser type. Simulations are performed using ATP software. The simulations show the remarkable difference in current versus time during fault testing in the transmission line equipped with conventional recloser and PulseCloser. The analysis justifies the replacement of Conventional Recloser with PulseCloser one.