Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Steur 02
Steur 02
1, JANUARY 2002
155
NOMENCLATURE
SC
IR
LV
HV
TC1, TC2
FEM
TOI
MMF,
Short circuit.
Inrush.
Low voltage (winding or coil).
High voltage (winding or coil).
Tap changer (winding or coil).
Finite-element method.
Theory of images (method).
Magnetomotive force (in ampere turns).
I. INTRODUCTION
heavy bolts. The dimensioning criteria for these support structures are usually the forces caused by the highest possible current peak which normally occurs under short circuit (SC) conditions. Therefore, type testing of transformers ask for SC tests
only, as it is assumed that this is the worst case with regard to
the maximum forces.
In the past, it was discussed very often in several panels to
what extend IR currents are a jeopardy for the transformer windings. As it is well known, the value of these IR currents occurring when energizing unloaded transformers can be in the same
order of magnitude as a fault current [1], thus producing significant electromagnetic forces. The difference to SC is that the IR
may last for several tens of seconds, whereas a fault normally is
cleared within tens of milliseconds. In addition, an IR situation
is much more frequently as this can be considered as normal
service operation.
Recent cases of insulation failures in power transformers
which were frequently energized under no load condition
support the suspicion of many people that IR currents have
a jeopardous effect. It is assumed that due to the unbalanced
MMF and high saturation of the transformer core local (axial)
forces under severe IR conditions, especially on the TC coils,
could exceed the values taken as dimensioning basis. So, it
seems likely possible that conductor and winding insulation is
damaged due to mechanical overstress at IR.
Although it is requested by many utilities that high IR currents shall indeed be avoided from a systems operation point of
view, possible damaging effects to the transformer itself have
rarely been investigated. To the authors knowledge, only one
paper deals with forces on transformer windings at IR conditions where it is shown that the windings exhibit fairly large
axial forces, exceeding those built up under short circuit conditions [2].
Out-of-phase synchronization may also cause unbalanced
MMF conditions in step up transformers. Force calculations
show that the axial forces in the windings can be two to ten
times higher than under SC conditions [3]. However, the
magnetic field pattern caused by such erroneous operations are
different to the ones at IR conditions, because when energizing
unloaded transformers the secondary (mostly the low voltage)
side is not excited at all.
A first rough estimation of the distribution of the radial magnetic field component along transformer coils was presented in
[4]. The results show that the local radial magnetic field at the
ends of tap changer coils to be up to 80% higher at IR compared
to SC conditions, assuming the IR current to be as high as the
SC current.
156
coil. Although in reality, the coils are rather complex in their mechanical structure, they are treated as solid cylindrical conductors here, so pressure and tensile stress are both possible inside
the coils. This is to be independent of any particular winding
support structure when calculating the forces for the purpose of
comparison.
Following these approximations the specific field calculation
method employed shall be explained along with the comparison
of 2-D and 3-D calculations. In addition, details of the method
used for calculating the axial and radial forces will be discussed
in the following sections.
A. Magnetic Field Calculation With FEM
Fig. 1. (a) Principal sketch of a transformers cross section with relevant force
directions (only coils on the middle leg shown); (b) cross section of 2-D FEM
model.
STEURER AND FRHLICH: THE IMPACT OF INRUSH CURRENTS ON THE MECHANICAL STRESS OF HIGH VOLTAGE POWER TRANSFORMER COILS
157
MMF in coil;
coils height
axial distance between points, correin Fig. 2
sponds to
radial component of on line
Note that although the employed software only allows equidistant points, this is not necessary for numerical integration. Fiwill give the total force distribunally, the sum of all three
tion in axial direction to
(7)
The external axial force on the coil, which is the resulting value
at the coils end (integration over the coils height), must be
in the
absorbed by axial suspensions. The maximum of
coil itself is usually much higher than the latter and gives the
dimensioning basis for the local stress, especially in regard to
buckling of windings.
2) Radial Pressure: In contradiction to the axial forces the
ones in radial direction shall not be summed up along the coils
height. In fact, they are better described by radial pressure stress
which must be supported either by the suspension or by the conductors themself in azimutal direction (tensile stress).
distribution along one of the
With the knowledge of the
, 2, 3 in Fig. 2) the local pressure on an cylindrical
lines (
stripe (with the radius and the height ) can be derived from
(5) to
(3)
(8)
That means the current density is azimutal only and constant
over the coils cross section (due to its subdivision into single
turns all carrying the same current). According to (1), that means
there are only axial and radial components of the forces.
Equations (4) and (5) show the axial and radial component of
the force along each of the three lines on an infinitesimal thick
) building
winding ( ) of one third of the coils thickness (
in Fig. 2.
the cross section
(4)
(5)
where
radial position of the line (
, 2, 3)
current density (constant) in the coil
coils thickness
radial and axial field component.
From (4) and (5) the axial and radial mechanical stress, local
and on the entire coil can be derived as it is explained in the
following two chapters.
158
Fig. 3.
Fig. 4.
Fig. 6.
Fig. 7. Ratio of axial forces and radial pressure at IR over SC against the ratio
IR current over SC current.
agreement between the 2-D (solid and broken lines) and 3-D
model (dotted lines; the discontinuities are due to a rather coarse
FEM mesh in 3-D). Fig. 4 shows the axial force distribution
at the coils end
along the TC2 coil, with the resulting force
to be approximately 20% higher at IR than at SC, although the
values (Fig. 3) are locally more than twice as
corresponding
. As the value
high. This is due to the assumption
at the coils lower end has a positive value the coil is subject to
an upward force.
In the same manner, Fig. 5 shows the axial force distribution
along the HV coil. In contrary to the TC coils, the force mainly
is compensated within the coil with an inner peak of axial presapproximately 30% more at IR. However, the resure stress
summed up over the coil is three times higher
sulting force
at IR than at SC and even in the opposite direction.
, the radial pressure stress
For the chosen ratio
, which is proportional to , is smaller at IR compared to SC
in the HV coil, but approximately the same in the TC coils as
shown for TC1 in Fig. 6.
According to [1] and unpublished information of transformer
may vary from 0.15 to 0.6.
manufacturer, the ratio
Therefore, in Fig. 7, the ratio of peak ( ) and resulting ( )
STEURER AND FRHLICH: THE IMPACT OF INRUSH CURRENTS ON THE MECHANICAL STRESS OF HIGH VOLTAGE POWER TRANSFORMER COILS
159
IV. DISCUSSION
It stands to reason that many energization operations with
even smaller IR currents which produce forces in the order of
SC forces might cause damage on the windings because the mechanical stress appears more frequently and with a much longer
duration (as stated in the Introduction). So windings and coils
may be damaged seriously, although the results of this work
show that forces in the coils of a typical power transformer are
about the same or a little smaller at the highest possible IR current compared to those at the rated SC current. It seems likely
possible that these damages are mostly in the form of reduction
of insulation capability (attrition of winding and conductor insulation material) and, therefore, may cause insulation failures
a certain time span after the occurrence of high IR currents.
This work also encourages for further research work on calculation of mechanical forces in transformers at excitation conditions caused by switching transients. Although results will be
similar for the comparison of the overall mechanical stress at IR
and SC conditions, state-of-the-art high sophisticated 3-D modeling and transient analysis should be employed to investigate
on the interaction between the phases and windings on different
legs.
Concerning the method of calculation of electrodynamic
forces in transformer windings under unbalanced excitation
conditions (such as IR), it seems advisable to pay extra caution
when using programs based on the theory of images. It
is likely possible that these programs lead to wrong results
because of certain simplifications and assumptions made there
for the field calculation which are not fulfilled at unbalanced
MMF conditions with high saturation of the iron.
V. CONCLUSION
The results of this work, based on magnetic field calculations
on a 2-D FEM model of a real 268 MVA three-legged step up
transformer show clear evidence that the axial electrodynamic
forces in the windings calculated with the maximum possible IR
current are in the same order of magnitude as with the rated short
circuit current. Magnetic field values in the coils region have
been double checked with results from a 3-D FEM model with
MVA
kV
kV
The HV and LV coils are shifted 0.5% of the coils height against
each other (to represent the worst case of mechanical tolerance).
Table I shows the partitioning of the magnetic excitations
at the coils for the filed calculations at IR and SC. With
A
as the nominal exciting MMF of the HV coil and
, the individual MMFs for SC and
the SC ratio
IR were calculated as follows:
(10)
(11)
160
REFERENCES
TABLE I
PARTITIONING OF MMFS USED FOR FIELD CALCULATIONS
[1] W. Schmidt, Vergleich der groesstwerte des Kurzschluss-und Einschaltstromes von Einphasentransformatoren, ETZ-A, vol. 79, no. 21,
pp. 801806, 1958.
[2] A. I. Lure and A. B. Vasilev, Calculation of magnetic field and electrodynamic strength of transformers under magnetising current inrush,
Elec. Technol., pp. 2335, 1992.
[3] C. M. Arturi, Force calculation in transformer windings under unbalanced mmfs by a nonlinear finite-element code, IEEE Trans. Magn.,
vol. 28, pp. 13631366, Mar. 1992.
[4] J. Brunke and M. Steurer, Contribution to question 1.4 on report 13.110
cigre 1998, in Proc. CIGRE Conf., Paris, France, Sept. 1998.
[5] J. Brunke, Elimination of transient inrush currents when energizing unloaded power transformers, Ph.D. dissertation, ETH, Zurich, 1998.
[6] V. S. Chuprikov, V. A. Kuzmenko, A. I. Lure, and A. N. Panibrates,
Reducing the switching current of transformers, Russ. Elec. Eng., vol.
68, no. 2, pp. 3340, 1997.
[7] MAXWELL Program Documentation, 1997.
[8] R. Kuechler, Die Transformatoren. Berlin, Germany: Springer-Verlag,
1956.
Fig. 8. (a) Four approaches for the 2-D representation of the yokes; (b)
reduction of equivalent height by ratio of arc sections (top view on upper yoke
with middle leg underneath).
stronger with than in (B). The shape (D) finally chosen for
2-D representation follows:
(13)
is proportional to the ratio of the cirwhere the height
) over the corresponding arc of radius
cumference (
covered by the real yoke ( ) as shown in Fig. 8(b).
This approach seemed the most reasonable because the comparison of significant field values showed good concordance
between the 2-D and 3-D models. The outer leg is modeled as a
cylinder with a wall thickness of
(14)
derived from the demand to have the same cross section for the
magnetic flux as the middle leg.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The authors wish to express their sincere thanks to SIEMENS
AG/Nrnberg for providing the data of the transformer, Prof.
H. Brechna from ETH Zurich, and Dr. E. Schmidt from
TU-Vienna, for the numerous and stimulating discussions.