Magnetics Transformer
Magnetics Transformer
I. INTRODUCTION
ESIGNING power transformers, as a major and key apparatus of electric power systems, is very important, because their breakdown results in costly repair or replacement.
This may lead to temporary loss of electrical power at very high
cost [1]. One of the threatening factors for power transformers
is inrush current at the energizing time, which has particularly
undesirable affects on its windings and may gradually ruin the
transformer. In the design of power transformers, short-circuit
conditions are considered the worst conditions to determine the
dimensions. In many cases, the amplitude of the inrush current
can be equal to the short-circuit current [1], but since inrush
current lasts longer in the system its repetition can seriously
damage the windings. Perhaps short-circuit and inrush current
seem similar, but they are completely different from the core
magnetizing point of view. In the short-circuit case, a large current passes the primary and also secondary, while inrush current passes only the primary winding and secondary winding is
normally open-circuit at no-load [2]. On the other hand, magnetizing current in the steady-state operation is only 1% to 2%
of the rated current, while inrush current could tend to 10 to 20
times the rated current [3]. There are many papers concerning
the nature of the inrush current in power transformers [3][5],
but radial and axial electromechanical forces exerted on the
windings of the transformer are rarely studied [1], [2]. In [2],
mechanical forces within the windings built up under inrush current of a single-phase transformer are evaluated using the Hopefield neural network (HNN) energy minimization technique, and
it has been shown that almost always-positive radial forces build
up in the LV winding during an inrush current when HV winding
FAIZ et al.: 3- AND 2-D FINITE-ELEMENT COMPUTATION OF INRUSH CURRENT AND SHORT-CIRCUIT ELECTROMAGNETIC FORCES
591
TABLE I
SPECIFICATIONS AND DIMENSIONS OF PROPOSED THREE-PHASE
THREE-LEGGED CORE-TYPE TRANSFORMER
sions and specifications of the proposed transformer are presented in Fig. 1 and Table I. For modeling the transformer, the
following have been considered.
1) In 3-D modeling, the core with real dimensions and laminated exactly similar to the actual core of transformer (to
exclude the eddy current effects in a real core) is simulated. In the 2-D modeling of three legs, core cross section
is taken to be square shape, and in the single leg modeling
the core is assumed similar with that reported in [1].
2) To simplify the 2-D modeling, cross sections of the windings are considered and the windings depths are not taken
into account. However, this simplification reflects the inherent characteristic of the 2-D modeling which causes a
small error. Unit length in z-direction is considered for the
force calculations by 2-D model; to obtain the actual force
the calculated force is multiplied by the length of the transformer in z-direction.
592
Fig. 3. Scheme of the modeled transformer: (a) 3-D, (b) zoomed of the top
right of transformer, (c) meshed three-leg 2-D, and (d) meshed single-leg, 2-D
with modified core.
passing through the windings is necessary. Since phase currents in the transient conditions of the inrush current is not
symmetrical, similar to the normal case, current of three phases
must be separately calculated. Current of any phase of energizing transformer is obtained by transient analysis of the 2-D
three-legged model.
IV. FLUX AND INRUSH CURRENT ESTIMATION
In the analysis of a transformer using the time-stepping finite-element method (TSFEM), the voltage applied to the terminal of the transformer is considered as the required input
value and primary phase current is evaluated as the unknown
FAIZ et al.: 3- AND 2-D FINITE-ELEMENT COMPUTATION OF INRUSH CURRENT AND SHORT-CIRCUIT ELECTROMAGNETIC FORCES
593
By substituting in (4)
(6)
(7)
Since the right-hand side of (7) is sinusoidal, the response of
the equation has an exponential transient component,
and a
sinusoidal steady-state component, , and
(8)
(9)
(10)
is the initial phase of . At the no-load condition, flux
almost 90 delay, therefore
(11)
is the maximum amplitude of the steady-state flux. At
, thus
flux is equal to the residual flux
(2)
(12)
(13)
has
(14)
(15)
Referring to (15), the worst case occurs when the transformer
is energizing and voltage is at
and
has maximum negative amplitude. So, the three-phase 2-D modeled transformer
has been energized at zero angle of the voltage and the maximum negative residual flux.
Fig. 5 presents the inrush current in the HV windings in which
asymmetry of the three phase currents is obvious. As shown in
the figures, the inrush current has been damped after 300 ms
and the primary winding current tend to its rated value. At the
first instant, the maximum current passes two phases of the HV
winding, the amplitudes of the obtained currents were applied
to the simulated models.
(4)
VI. ELECTROMAGNETIC FORCE CALCULATIONS
is the primary winding turn number, is the total
where
flux consisting of the steady-state and residual fluxes, is the
primary winding resistance, is the primary winding current,
and is the voltage initial phase. In the steady-state, the total
, which depends on the magnetiflux depends on ,
zation characteristic of the core. If transformer operates within
the linear region of the magnetization characteristic (above the
knee of the curve), then
(5)
594
and the other regions are different, for example, Fig. 7 shows
the radial and axial flux density in the inner surface of the LV
winding along lines 1 and 2 in Fig. 6. So the windings are divided into 12 segments in azimuthally direction to include these
variations, and forces are obtained in 120 000 parts. The height
of these elements is identical, thus
(17)
(18)
Consequently, the resulting axial force at the coils end is
(19)
where is the radius of any layer of the winding,
is the
is the
flux density in the segment th of th winding, and
, for 2-D models
winding thickness.
and for 3-D model
.
To check the model accuracy, the number of the nodes and
elements in the FE computations are changed and the forces on
the middle leg LV winding within 2-D three-legged model are
determined. In the force calculation the end points and inner
and outer surfaces of the windings are important, and the mesh
is changed by varying the number of elements in these points.
The results have been summarized in Table II. It is noted that
a similar procedure is used for force calculation in the case of
short circuit.
VII. COMPARISON OF 2-D AND 3-D MODELS
Fig. 5. Inrush current in the HV winding: (a) phase a, (b) phase b, and
(c) phase c.
and the force for each part is obtained. The flux density distribution in the windings indicates that it varies along the coil thickness. Therefore, evaluation of force on different layers of the
winding is necessary. At this end, in 3-D model the windings
are divided into 10 parts along their radial. In the 3-D model,
the flux density in the regions of the windings under the yoke
Figs. 811 show the axial and radial forces developed by the
inrush current in the HV and LV winding of 3-D and 2-D threelegged and 2-D single-legged models. These forces have been
obtained in the middle leg and along the height of windings.
These figures show that the forces calculated in 2-D models are
significantly different from those obtained from the 3-D model.
Fig. 8 presents the axial force on LV winding in which the
maximum axial forces on HV winding calculated by both 2-D
models are almost the same but they differ about 40% from
that calculated in 3-D model. Fig. 9 shows that the maximum
axial forces calculated in three-phase, 2-D and one-phase, 2-D
models differ 36% and 45% from that obtained by 3-D model.
Fig. 10 shows that the maximum radial forces on LV winding
FAIZ et al.: 3- AND 2-D FINITE-ELEMENT COMPUTATION OF INRUSH CURRENT AND SHORT-CIRCUIT ELECTROMAGNETIC FORCES
595
TABLE II
FORCES ON LV WINDING IN THE MIDDLE LEG FOR DIFFERENT MESH
NUMBERSTWO-DIMENSIONAL [FIG. 3(c)]
64% and 68% from that obtained by 3-D model. These figures show that both 2-D models have an insufficient accuracy in
forces calculation, particularly for the radial forces. In the onephase, 2-D model only one phase has been modeled, meaning
that the axisymmetry of current has been ignored and this is
the major reason for the low accuracy in this case. Although
in three-phase, 2-D model, the shape of the coils has been taken
into account while calculating the forces, this has been ignored
in the flux density and forces calculations on LV winding.
596
Fig. 12. Axial forces due to inrush current and short circuit current applied on
LV winding.
Fig. 13. Axial forces due to inrush current and short circuit current applied on
HV winding.
Since the force obtained in 2-D and precise 3-D model differ
considerably, and on the other hand, the difference between the
flux density under and outside of the core yoke is not visible
in 2-D modeling, in order to investigate the forces developed
by the inrush current in power transformer precisely and their
comparison with the forces obtained for short circuit, 3-D model
is used.
Figs. 1215 show 3-D model analysis of the forces in the
transformer windings in the short circuit and inrush current
modes. Figs. 12 and 13 indicate that the axial forces applied to
the LV and HV windings when inrush current is about 45% and
36% larger than the corresponding forces in short circuit case.
Figs. 14 and 15 show the distribution of radial forces in LV and
HV windings. As seen the radial force on the LV winding in
short circuit case is about 40% larger than the corresponding
force in inrush current condition, while the maximum radial
force on HV winding in short circuit case is about 1/3 that of
inrush current.
VIII. CONCLUSION
In order to examine the radial and axial electromechanical
forces developed by the inrush current and short-circuit, 2-D
and 3-D FEM models were presented. The results show that
the forces obtained from 2-D models are considerably different
Fig. 14. Radial forces on LV winding due to inrush and short circuit currents.
Fig. 15. Radial forces on HV winding due to inrush and short circuit currents.
FAIZ et al.: 3- AND 2-D FINITE-ELEMENT COMPUTATION OF INRUSH CURRENT AND SHORT-CIRCUIT ELECTROMAGNETIC FORCES
[6] C. M. Arturi, Force calculation in transformer windings under unbalanced mmfs by a non-linear finite element code, IEEE Trans. Magn.,
vol. 28, no. 2, pp. 13631366, Mar. 1992.
[7] H. Kojim, H. Miuata, S. Shida, and K. Okuyama, Buckling strength
analysis of large power transformer windings subjected to electromagnetic force under short circuit, IEEE Trans. Power App. Syst., vol.
PAS-99, no. 3, pp. 12881297, May 1980.
[8] T. Y. Qiu, Q. J. Qiu, and X. Z. Hong, Numerical calculation of short
circuit electromagnetic force on the transformer winding, IEEE Trans.
Magn., vol. 26, no. 2, pp. 10391041, Mar. 1990.
[9] T. Renyuan, L. Yan, L. Dake, and T. Lijian, Numerical calculation
of 3D transient eddy current field and short circuit electromagnetic
force in large transformers, IEEE Trans. Magn., vol. 28, no. 2, pp.
14181421, Mar. 1992.
[10] A. Kladas, M. P. Papadoppoulos, and J. A. Tegopoulos, Leakage flux
and force calculation on power transformer windings under short-circuit: 2D and 3D models based on the theory of images and the finite
element method compared to measurements, IEEE Trans. Magn., vol.
30, no. 5, pp. 34873490, Sep. 1994.
[11] K. Najdenkoski and D. Manov, Electromagnetic forces calculation on
power transformer windings under short circuit, Int. J. Comput. Math.
Electr. Electron. Eng., vol. 17, no. 1/2/3, pp. 374377, 1998.
[12] S. Salon, B. LaMattina, and K. Sivasubramaniam, Comparison of assumptions in computation of short circuit forces in transformers, IEEE
Trans. Magn., vol. 36, no. 5, pp. 35213523, Sep. 2000.
[13] G. B. Kumbhar and S. V. Kulkarni, Analysis of short-circuit performance of split-winding transformer using coupled field-circuit approach, IEEE Trans. Power Del., vol. 22, no. 2, pp. 936943, Apr.
2007.
[14] S. L. Ho, Y. Li, H. C. Wong, S. H. Wang, and R. Y. Tang, Numerical
simulation of transient force and eddy current loss in a 720-MVA power
transformer, IEEE Trans. Magn., vol. 40, no. 2, pp. 687690, Mar.
2004.
[15] Vector Field Software Documentation, 2005.
[16] W. Xu, S. G. Abdulsalam, Y. Cui, and X. Liu, A sequential phase
energization technique for transformer inrush current reduction, IEEE
Trans. Power Del., vol. 20, no. 2, pt. 1, pp. 950957, Apr. 2005.
Manuscript received September 20, 2006; revised January 26, 2008. Corresponding author: J. Faiz (e-mail: [email protected]).
597
Bashir Mahdi Ebrahimi received the B.Sc. and M.Sc. degrees in electrical
power engineering from the University of Tabriz, Tabriz, Iran, in 2001 and 2006,
respectively. He is working toward the Ph.D. degree in the Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran. His research interests are electrical machines modeling and fault diagnosis.
Tahere Noori received the B.Sc. degree in electrical engineering from Iran University of Science and Technology, Tehran, Iran, in 2003 and the M.Sc. degree
in electrical power engineering from the Department of Electrical and Computer
Engineering, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran, in 2006.
She is now with Moshaver-Niro Company working as a consultant engineer
in Tehran, Iran.