2048

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON MAGNETICS, VOL 31, NO 3, MAY 1995

Calculation of Zero Phase Sequence Impedance for Power Transformers using Numerical Methods
Roger Allcock and Scott Holland
Brush Transformers Ltd, Po Box 20, Loughborough, Leicestershire, England, LE11 1HN.
'

Lawrence Haydock
Department of Electrical Engineering , The Nottingham Trent University, Burton Street, Nottingham, England, NG1 4BU.

Abstract -- This paper aims to demonstrate an approach to the calculation of zero phase sequence impedance for power transformers using finite element numerical methods. Specifically concentrating o n 3-limb, core type, YNyn connected transformers where n o accurate analytical solution is available. An understanding of the physical factors affecting the calculation have been considered. Actual test results are presented.

the normal (positive sequence) impedance, which is derived from the transformer's leakage field. It is the impedance caused by the field created by the currents flowing in the same direction and rotation in all three phases. Transformers have many connections [2] & [3], but in this text we shall concentrate on the two most common, the Delta Wye and the Wye Wye, with the neutrals connected to earth. Figure 1 shows the Wye Wye transformer connection and figure 2 shows the Delta Wye connection.
I1

I. INTRODUCTION The accurate prediction of the zero phase sequence impedance of Wye Wye connected transformers is very important for power system designers, from a cost point of view as well as a safety point of view. It is also one of the more difficult calculations for a transformer design engineer to master and so new developments are always being sought. Finite Element methods have been utilised by the authors for some time in the design and analysis of power transformers [ 11. The same methodology is now to be used in the difficult area of the prediction of zero phase sequence impedance.
11. BACKGROUND

Figure 2 : Delta Wye (Dyn) transformer connection.

In the Delta Wye case the zero phase sequence impedance is normally about 90% of the normal positive sequence impedance of the transformer, i.e. the 'normal' leakage impedance. This is due to the Delta winding being able to circulate transformed zero phase sequence currents from the secondary side. In the YNyn connection, with an infinite system on the primary side, the primary circuit can be considered as open circuit, since there is no circuit for the induced zero phase currents to flow. The impedance presents itself as a simple impedance per limb or per phase to earth and is used by system engineers in deciding values for neutral point reactors or resistors for protection co-ordination. Most companies use some form of experimental data to form a method of statistical prediction, but as designs are constantly updated and improved upon, this can present problems.
1 1 FLUX FLOW 1.

In restricted or solidly earthed systems when a short circuit fault occurs the zero sequence fault current flows as shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1 : Zero sequence fault current flow in Wye Wye (YNyn) connected transformer. If we ignore earth fault resistors, reactors or system impedances, then the zero phase sequence currents 'see' an impedance at the transformer terminals, this impedance is known as the zero phase sequence impedance. It is unlike
Manuscript received July 6, 1994.

For the Delta Wye case, the value of the zero phase sequence impedance, as previously stated, is easy to calculate once the local leakage impedance is known. However when we consider the actual flux flow in the Wye Wye connection it will be seen for a 3-limb core that the calculation of this value by classical methods is much more difficult. Consider figure 3:

0018-9464195$04.00 @ 1995 IEEE

2049

neatly all the flux produced by the windings, flows through a ak very small skin in the t n wall. Since:

For mild steel at 50Hz, the skin depth is approximately ." The skin depth of aluminium is much equal to 05. greater, lOmm or so, therefore the flux is not constrained to the surface of the material and this should be accounted for when considering the calculations.
Hv
LV

v. FINITE ELEMENTTo THIS PROBLEMAND THEIR FORMULATIONS APPLICATION

2 - 0 and 3-0 Vector Potentialformulation For a 'complete' solution the full formulation of the circuit in both 2-D and 3-D would be

Figure 3 : FE Plot showing flux lines from 3 phase, 3-limb transformer. The problem with this calculation stems from the complex nature of the magnetic field set-up during a fault condition. It can be seen that due to the currents flowing in the same direction and in phase the flux is in the same direction for each limb. This means that the only way of making a circuit is to return via free-space or through the tank wall, which for power transformers is often made of al mild steel. The tank wl may saturate only very locally making inductive calculations by classical methods almost impossible. The tank can be constructed of aluminium and this case will be discussed. The flux also flows through, or along the surface of, components such as clamps and other metallic smctures. For the 5-limb core the problem of local tank wall saturation does not occur since the flux flows in the two outer limbs as shown in figure 4.

V X -1 x A + a -d=A V J
P
at

.... (2).

Figure 4 : FE Plot showing flux lines from 3 phase, 5-limb transformer. 1v. MILD STEEL STRUCTURES With the skin depth of mild steel being so relatively thin, then this must be taken into account when studying zero phase sequence flux flow for 3-limb cores. Essentially

The geometry of a power transformer is asymmetrical, so the 2-D solution could not be accurately used. For the 3-D case, the solution presents a major problem, since the amount of memory required to complete the solution would be very large for a large power transformer model of 60,OOO elements or so. It is simply the hardware speed and memory size required that stops us using this method at present. However using this method would yield the field components and losses in a form that is generally easier to understand. The same equations would be used as in the 2D case,without the need for mixed formulations, or other more memory efficient schemes. For the present the use of a solver using the reduced scalar potential yields time efficient results [4]. Eddy current regions can be treated with a more general set of equations, like the 2D case, or the use of surface impedance may be beneficial. For small skin depths, as in materials such as mild steel, then the use of surface impedance enables relatively large models to be solved without going to the expense of modelling the solid forms of components such as tank walls. The authors have used a reduced scalar potential formulation, which uses magnetic shells as the means of excitation. The advantage of this method is that the model is relatively easy to 'construct' without the need for thin 'cuts' in the core, as with other solvers using mixed formulations. The chief disadvantage, however, is that the coil excitation is not particularly well modelled and the Biot-Savart method offered by other solvers may give greater accuracy. This is particular in leakage field situations, but in the case of zero phase sequence studies it was thought that either method would be accurate, since most of the flux is contained in the core and only leaks out at the yokes and then penetrates the t n wall. ak

2050

VI. CIRCUIT FORMULATION Other methods of analysing the problem can be used, one method is the DMLEEC (Distributed Magnetic Linked ElectricalEquivalent Circuit) method [5] where the magnetic permeances are represented by capacitors in a circuit solver such as SPICETM.Here we have to resolve a few basic circuits.
Magnetic Paths : Figure 5 below shows an example of a DMLEEC, where the magnetic capacitances represent the three core legs. The other conductance/capacitor networks ak represent the t n wall and eddy losses of the transformer.

E=-U2

1 2

.... (3).

In our case this means calculating the energy in the system, then dividing the energy by three and use the phase current to calculate the per-phase reactance. If the lossy components need to be included to yield the real part of the impedance, then 12R values for the coils can be used and the tank wall loss can be divided by three. Dividing the tank wall losses by three is the only method that the authors feel will give reasonable results, even though the split of losses may not be exactly three. It is then simply a case of using

X=2xfL

.... (4)

Figure 5 : Example of a simplified DMLEEC for a 3 phase, 3 limb transformer. Equally, distributed reluctance circuits should work in this way [6].
Eddy Current Paths: This is a more difficult area to resolve. The winding will have some kind of eddy current loss, which will be proportional to the flux (or current squared) in some way. One could lump it as a simple limited resistance or make it more complex as one wished. For zero phase impedance it would be best to use a lumped formulation. However if it was part of an overall study, one may have the model split up into smaller elements anyway. The eddy current elements need not be frequency responsive for our case and so this makes the overall model simpler. But, they should be responsive to flux changes or at least assume an r.m.s. value. Another important part may be the winding eddies may not be significant in forming the real part of the impedance, but as will be shown later, experience shows that the tank wall plays a great part in the impedance / inductance calculation and so should not be ignored.

to calculate the reactance component of the impedance. From the preceding paragraphs it would seem that to calculate the main component of the impedance, the reactance, one needs to calculate the field in the system as far as the t n wall boundary. This is not quite the case, since ak the effective permeability of the tank wall is very important in the calculation. In early calculations the authors set the tank wall boundary by setting a Neumann boundary (3-D reduced scalar potential - similar to a Dirichlet in a 2-D vector potential system) in line with the dimension of the inner surfaceof the tank wall. In some cases this gave some close results, but in others the accuracy was not good. The solution to the problem seemed to be to model the t n wall with a permeable region. In three dimensions the ak authors used linear permeabilities which yielded unrealistic flux densities in the tank wall. It became apparent that the mild steel could well be saturating locally and these effects had to be taken into account. The use of non-linear permeable regions presented problems since the computation times would be very long. Another approach is to use a non-linear surface impedance function to represent the saturating material, this is detailed further in [7] & [8]. As an alternative t equation (3) the use of o

1 =-Is A.J.ds 2

.... (3,

can be used. The third method is to calculate the flux linking the coils and use

E = -a%
at

NL

....(6),
.... (7).

which in our case becomes;

VII.

PRACTICAL EXPERIENCE WITH FINITE ELEMENT SOLUTIONS

L=-NO

Rere are three basic ways of calculating the reactance of a coil or series of coils. The first is the energy in the system and uses

This method is when energy loss, such as etc., is being considered fully. The problems of material non-linearity and other associated problems, previously discussed also apply to this method.

205 I

VIII. TESTRESULTS
Actual tests have been carried out on a number of power transformers. The transformers tested were, 3-limb, core type power transformers with mild steel tanks, copper windings and insulated with BS148 mineral oil. The transformem are detailed further in Appendix II. The test results in Table I below show that the F.E. method is reliable in the prediction of zero phase sequence impedance for a range of transformer ratings. TABLE:Results of Analysis I Transformer FE-Enerpy 1 10.8 Wph I 2 1 9.6 Wph =-Flux 11.0 Wph 9.9 Wph Tested 9.9 Wph 8.8 Wph.

[3]

[4]

[a
[a

[7l
[81 _ _ [9]

E FURTHER CONSIDERATIONS .
Another interesting and important component to this calculation is when magnetic screens or shunts are employed. The use of these devices tends to increase the zero Dhase sequence impedance, since the permeance of the flux iath is generally increased due to the higher permeability of the materials involved. The use of fhte elements has been very successful in determining the effects of tank wall shunts in the calculation of zero phase sequence impedance, in particular with the use of 3-D non-linear solutions.

Blume, L.F., Boyajian, G., Camilli, A., Lennox, T.C., Minneci S. and Montsinger, V.M., "Transformer engineering: A treatise on the theory, operation and application of transformers". Book, Chapman & Hl,Ltd. 1951. al A. Coulson, M.A., Preston, T.W. and Reece, A.B.J., "3-Dimensional finite element solvers for the design of electrical equipment", IEEE Trans. Mag. Vol. 2, No. 6,2476-2479,1985. Holland, S.A., Haydock, L., "Transient loss Analysis of power transformers using magnctic and electric equivalent circuits", 12-301, CIGRE 1992 Session, Paris, France. Turovski, J., "The design of magnetic screens for power transformer tanks", Elektrichestvo, N0.2, pp.4045, 1971. Agarwal, P. D., "Eddy current losses in solid and laminated iron". Am. Inst. elect. Engrs 78, Part 11, pp. 169-179, 1959. Stoll, R. L., "The analysis of eddy currents". Book, Clarendon Press, 1974.Jones, K., "Optimisation of experimental data". Journal - Intemational Laboratory, November 1986.
APPENDIX I : LIST OF SYMBOLS

X. CONCLUSIONS
The application of the finite element method to the calculation of zero phase sequence impedance has been adequately demonstrated. The practical problems posed in such a situation has been discussed and some factory test results have been demonstrated. This type of work has been shown to be complex in nature, but with the correct application of the techniques described, success can be achieved. The main obstacles to a relatively more simple method exists in the size and complexity of large 3-D finite element models and the restriction of hardware and software. The work is being accelerated with the use of tools such as F.E.D. (Factorial Experimental Design) which allows relatively few experiments to be used to derive a more complex set of equations 191.
REFERENCJS

APPENDIX II : TEST TRANSFORMER DETAILS

[l]

[2]

Holland, S.A., Haydock, L. and OConnell, G.P., "Calculating stray losses in power transformers using surface impedance with finite elements", IEEE.Trans. Mag. V01.28, No.2, 1355-1358, 1992. A.C. Franklin and D.P. Franklin, "The J&P transformer b o A practical technology of the power ok transformer". Book, Butterworths, 11th Edition, 1983.