385 views

Uploaded by imadhuryya5023

- Termtestw.021 (1)
- abc
- Voltage Withstand test
- GGGHGGHGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG19-Dec-07 094403
- CHECKLIS TRANSFORMER .docx
- 2007furmath2
- A Power Quality Case Study-A Cement Industry.pdf
- Excel Lcc Calculation Transformer5
- Retail Bank Interest Rate Pass-Through the Turkish Experience
- 200 Top Electrical Engineering Interview Questions and Answers
- ABB-Electrical Installation Handbook 6th Edition 2010
- How To Design Capacitor Bank.doc
- Power Factor Improvement of Single Phase Ac Voltage
- Power Factor
- 202_17533_TIGHTENING
- 4. Engineering Economics
- Line Follower Robot 1
- Geafol 2010 Eng
- Dtmf Based Wireless Robot (2)
- Solution Rrb Sse 6

You are on page 1of 10

{The paper was first received 13th March, and in revised form \4th September, 1944. // was read before the TRANSMISSION SECTION

Uth December, 1944.)

SUMMARY

The overall annual cost ca (in ) of operating a transformer can

The object of the paper is to outline a simple and comprehensive be expressed as follows:

procedure for the practical application of the principles determining

ca = CR/100 + pW + gL/240 . . . . (1)

the economic selection of transformers. If some degree of uniformity

could be achieved in these calculations it would be of great advantage where C = first cost of transformer, in ,

to all concerned. Two aspects of the problem are considered: the

R = total rate of capital and depreciation charges, %,

relatively simple one relating to the purchase of transformers, and the

W total actual maximum demand of losses, in kW,

much more complex one dealing with the designing of transformers to

L = total actual annual energy loss sustained in the

satisfy specific economic requirements in individual cases. The

transformer, in kWh, and

formulae developed are supplemented by practical information on the

p,

q

represent

the power tariff at the place where the transselection of the correct values for the requisite coefficients. A statistiformer is situated, p being the maximum demand

cal survey is made of methods used hitherto by different buyers of

rate in /kW per annum and q the unit rate in

transformers for the capitalization of the transformer losses. Finally,

pence/kWh.

approximate values of the coefficients In the formulae for the capitalization of losses are suggested, which may be used in the absence of

In this expression the maintenance costs and any adminismore precise information.

trative charges are omitted, since they may be regarded as

practically independent of design and of the cost of the transformers.

The investment cost Cc (in ) of a transformer, including the

(1) INTRODUCTION

Although transformers represent a class of electrical apparatus capitalized value of the losses, is expressed by

with comparatively high efficiencies, the cost of the energy lost

C c = C + CL=C+{pJY

f $1/240)100//J

. (2)

in them is quite considerable. During a period of service of

The term C/., representing the capitalized value of the losses, is

5 to 10 years this loss can in certain cases equal the first cost of

installing a transformer. The selection of a transformer should the capital which, at an annual rate of capital charges equal to R,

therefore take into account not only its initial cost, but also will give an annual expenditure equal to the actual cost of the

the inherent power losses. Though recently more consideration transformer losses.

The total rate of the annual capital charges R is the sum of

is being given to these losses, there is still a lack of uniformity

in the methods used for their calculation. It would thus appear three components: the annual interest rate r,-, the insurance and

of value to review the principles of such calculation in order tax rate r, (the value of this item is so small that in comparing

to suggest a standard method of loss calculation on which an costs it can be safely neglected), and the annual depreciation

economic choice could be based when ordering a transformer. rate rd; thus:

To facilitate the practical application of the procedure outlined

(3)

in the paper, the derivation of all formulae used and the more

The annual depreciation rate rd represents equal annual paycomplex aspects of the problem are given in the three appendices

ments to a sinking fund, such that during the assumed useful life

in Section 10.

<2) ANNUAL OPERATING COST OF A TRANSFORMER; INVESTMENT COST, INCLUDING CAPITALIZED VALUE OF

LOSSES

For an economic comparison of transformers of the same

rating, but with different losses and different costs, such transformers being intended to work under identical conditions, one

of the two following methods can be used:

(a) The overall annual cost of operating the transformers can

be compared; this cost to cover the total capital and

depreciation charges and the annual cost of the transformer losses.

(b) The investment cost of the transformers can be compared

after adding the capitalized values of the transformer

losses over the probable life of the transformers.

These two methods are equivalent in application and validity.

They are normally both described as performing a "capitalization of the transformer losses," although only the second method

can be strictly described as such.

Transmission Section paper.

4

6

8

Interest Rate (rc)%

the sinking fund (n years), and at different rates of compound

interest (rc).

[125]

Authorized licensed use limited to: MADHAV INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY AND SCIENCE. Downloaded on June 21,2010 at 07:57:40 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.

126

first cost of the transformer, the deposits in the meantime bearing

compound interest at the rate i\, which may or may not be the

same as iy

la

o/

\

r -_.

d

(1 ) /v/100)"

1 /o

If, after // years, the transformer is to have a salvage value of

r/%, the rate of depreciation rd must be:

(100

d)

100

>\,

(1 I rJlOOf

u ratio of actual peak load to transformer rating,

z "load loss-factor" referred to the actual annual load

period of 8160y hours, and to the peak value of

the load. A precise definition and the physical

meaning of this "load loss-factor" are given in

Section 10.1.

For practical application the following empirical values of the

. "load loss-factor" z may be used:

I

Load factor /

formula (4) for zero salvage value, are represented by the curves

in Fig. 1, which permits easy interpolation. More exact figures

for a limited number of cases are given for convenience in the

following table.

TABLE OF ANNUAL RATE OF DEPRECIATION rd

(%)

(Sinking Fund)

..

10

0-8

Power factor at

peak load

10

0-8

0-6

0-4

0-2

00

0-6

04

0-2

00

0 055

0-107

0-148

0-177

0 194

0-200

0000

0000

0-000

0000

0-000

0-000

Load loss-factor c

1-000

1-000

1-000

1-000

1-000

1-000

0-660

0-710

0-750

0-778

0-794

0-800

0-400

0-472

0-528

0-568

0-592

0-600

0 195

0-269

0-326

0-367

0-392

0-400

Assumed

useful life

of plant

(ri) years

10

15

20

25

30

40

3"o

31/

5%

4"o

6%

7%

values can be read.

Percentage annual depreciation rate (r(i) for zero salvage value after

n years

9-13

5-78

4-12

3-12

2-46

1-66

8-93

5-58

3-91

2-93

2-28

1-48

8-72

5-38

3-72

2-74

2-10

1-33

8-52

5-18

3-54

2-57

1-94

1-18

8-33

4-99

3-36

2-40

1-78

105

8-14

4-81

319

2-24

1-64

0-93

7-95

4-63

3-02

2-09

1-50

0-83

7-59

4-30

2-72

1-82

1-26

0-65

7-24

3-98

2-44

1-58

1-06

0-50

Percentage annual depreciation rate (r,,) for 10% salvage value after

i

j years

10

15

20

25

30

40

8-22

5-20

3-71

2-81

2-22

1-49

8-04

5-02

3-52

2-64

2-06

1-33

7-85

4-84

3-35

2-47

1-89

1-20

7-67

4-66

3-19

2-31

1-75

106

7-50

4-49

3-02

216

1-60

0-94

7-33

4-33

2-87

2-02

1-48

0-84

7-16

4-17

2-72

1-88

1-35

0-75

6-84

3-87

2-45

1-64

114

0-58

6-52

3-58

2-20

1-42

0-96

0-45

term 100//? in formula (2), is sometimes called the capitalization

factor, the capitalized value of the losses being obtained by

multiplying the annual cost of the losses by this term.

(3) VALUATION OF TRANSFORMER IRON AND COPPER

LOSSES

If a transformer has Wt kW iron loss, and it is excited for

8 760v hours per annum (v being the fraction of the year during

which the transformer is connected), and if the energy charges

amount to p per annum per kW of maximum demand plus

q pence per unit, the annual cost of the iron loss cai in will be:

4 8

-'- 36-5yq)

(5)

instance be substituted for the iron loss Wx.

Similarly, the annual cost of the copper loss cac in can be

expressed as:

36-5zyq)

(6)

04

00

Load Factor I

0-8

10

various power-factor values at peak load, with the reactive component of the load assumed constant throughout the load

variations.

Instead of expression (1) for the overall annual cost of operating

a transformer, the following expression is now more convenient

to use:

ca = CRJ100 f- WiKi + WLKC . . . . (7)

where the constants Kt and Kc, represent expressions in equations (5) and (6), as follows:

#, = (/>+ 36-5)?)

Kc = u2(p + 36- Szyq)

(8)

.

(9>

In the same way, expression (2) for the investment cost of the

Authorized licensed use limited to: MADHAV INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY AND SCIENCE. Downloaded on June 21,2010 at 07:57:40 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.

modified to:

C, - C -f- Q. = C +

iKi + WCKC)

(10)

TRANSFORMER MAGNETIZING CURRENT

AND TRANSFORMER REGULATION

Transformer magnetizing current and transformer regulation

have little influence on the subject under discussion, and in most

practical calculations they are neglected. A brief discussion will

show why they are omitted in these calculations.

Apart from being the source of loss of power in the transformer, as represented by the total iron loss plus the winding

copper loss due to the excitation current, the magnetizing current

also causes some additional copper loss in the wKble primary

system between the generators and the transformers. The

transformer magnetizing current, being largely a reactive current,

causes a decrease of power factor throughout the system; this

calls for higher current ratings of all elements in the system

between the power source and the transformer, and this in its

turn increases the capital expenditure for the whole system. The

time during which the additional loss caused by the magnetizing

current is incurred is the same as that for the transformer iron

loss, and this additional loss can therefore be included by suitably

increasing thefiguresfor the iron loss. Precise evaluation is not

possible in the majority of practical cases.

Where the power tariff includes a power-factor clause or an

additional charge for the reactive units (kVArh), the cost due to

a deterioration of the power factor in the system can be roughly

assessed. The additional loss referred to, and its cost, can

however be safely neglected, since in most cases it will not be

more than a few per cent of the iron loss of the transformer.

Incidentally, it should be noted that occasionally the expression

"capitalization of the magnetizing current" is incorrectly used,

capitalization of the transformer iron loss being really meant.

Sometimes a definition of the cost of transformer regulation is

attempted on the assumption that the voltage drop in the transformer causes a decrease in the actual power delivered to the

consumer. This procedure is not correct, because the loads are

seldom of the constant-impedance type but are usually of the mixed

constant-impedance and constant-power type. Moreover, the

voltage at the load should be regarded as a quality feature of the

power delivered, and therefore must be kept constant within

more or less narrow limits, irrespective of the degree of regulation of the transformers. In principle, the only coirect approach to the problem of capitalization of transformer regulation

would be to compare the increase in the first cost of the transformer, when designed with a lower degree of regulation, with

the admissible economies on copper sections of the transmission

lines, or with the economies feasible on any other voltageregulating equipment, the magnitude of such economies being

determined by the need for keeping the voltage constant at the

load. The above method, though perfectly sound in theory,

would be difficult and complicated to apply in practice.

In general, the selection of transformers on the basis of a

capitalization of their operating costs depends on a knowledge of

the relationship between the cost of the transformer and such of

its characteristics as losses, magnetizing current and regulation,

which determine the components of these operating costs. It is

already difficult to establish this relation in regard to the iron

and copper losses alone, so that it is quite impossible to derive any

expression of transformer cost as a function of the four interdependent variables: copper and iron losses, magnetizing current,

and regulation. Any such attempt would, moreover, introduce

an unnecessary complication, since a correct evaluation of the

127

satisfactory results in all practical cases.

(5) PRACTICAL APPLICATION OF THE PRINCIPLE OF

CONSIDERING TRANSFORMER LOSSES WHEN SELECTING

OR DESIGNING A TRANSFORMER

The economic choice of a transformer most suitable for

operation at a given point of a system can be based on a calculation of either its annual operating cost [equation (7)] or its

initial cost, including the capitalized value of the losses [equation (10)]. In both methods the constants R, p, q, v, //, /, z,

determining the capital charges, the power tariff and the load

characteristics, must be known or estimated. As these constants

can have different values, transformers of different characteristics must be selected not only for different systems, but also

for different positions in the same system, since the load characteristics and the power cost vary from point to point in a system

on passing from the generator to the consumer. Since the

use of the annual operating cost and the use of the initial cost

including the capitalized losses are equivalent, reference will

hereafter be made only to the first of these.

A purchaser of a transformer has merely to calculate the

annual operating cost ca for all the transformers quoted [using

equation (7)] and to accept the tender for which this cost is the

lowest. It is tacitly assumed here that, apart from cost and

losses, all the transformers are otherwise equivalent.

The task of the transformer manufacturer is usually more involved. A theoretically rigid solution of the problem will be

indicated here, which, though at first appearing complex, leads

finally to quite simple rules susceptible of easy application in

practice. If, with his inquiry, a customer has supplied the values

of all the coefficients (/?, p, q, v, u, /, z) he intends to apply when

comparing competitive tenders, the transformer manufacturer

will endeavour to offer a transformer design which will give the

lowest possible annual operating cost as calculated from the

customer's coefficients. This, of course, does not necessarily

mean the lowest selling price.

If the coefficients R, p, q, y, u, I, z, are constant for any particular case, the total annual operating cost of a transformer is a

function of three variables; i.e.:

ca = F{(C, Wh Wc)

(11)

These three variables are not independent, for the first cost of

the transformer (C) is itself a function of the iron and copper

losses; i.e.:

(12)

C = F2{Wh Wc)

Function (12) must be known if an exact solution of the

problem of economic design of a transformer is required. It can

be represented graphically by curves of the type shown in Fig. 3.

(Note: The curves in Fig. 3 and in the subsequent Figures are

based on approximate data, and are intended only as illustrations; no numerical values given in them should be used in

practical calculations; in particular, the prices of transformers

are only assumed values and do not represent current prices, being

roughly those ruling before the war.) It is convenient in practice

to replace one of the three variables, namely the copper-loss

figure, by the loss-ratio figure (WCIW{), which transforms the

curves in Fig. 3 to those in Fig. 4 or 5. The method of

plotting transformer price against iron loss for constant lossratios, used in Fig. 5, offers certain advantages, which will appear

in the sequel. It should be noted that the curves in Figs. 3, 4

and 5 have been extended over very wide ranges for all parameters, and far beyond normal practical values; this has been

necessary to make further deductions more illustrative. The

families of curves in Figs. 3, 4 and 5 are of course equivalent,

and from any one of these the two others can be easily deduced.

Authorized licensed use limited to: MADHAV INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY AND SCIENCE. Downloaded on June 21,2010 at 07:57:40 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.

128

Loss Ration Wi

2015 10

5 31 25 2O 15

200

200

Transformer

100 kVA_

11 kV

3-phase

50C/S

50

100

Iron Loss

Fig. 3.Transformer prices for various loss values.

Transformer IOOkVA.llkV

3-phajse, 50c/$

160

Fig. 5.Transformer prices for various loss ratios and iron-loss values.

(Transformer Price C)

100%126 5

42

Transformer

100 kVA, UkV. 3-phase,50c/s

0

150%

100

Iron Lo&s Wt

Fig. 4.Transformer prices for various loss ratios and iron-loss values.

50

of curves, the total annual cost of the transformer can be

calculated from equation (7) for different points of the curves

C = F2(WhWc) or C = F2(Wh WJW^. Curves of the total

annual operating costs can then be drawn; these again can be

plotted for different constant loss-ratio values or transformer

prices, the iron-loss or the transformer prices being plotted along

the abscissa as in Figs. 6, 7 and 8. These families of curves have

50

100

Iron Loss ?%

Fig. 6.Annual operating cost of transformer.

150

one feature in common, a double minimum, namely one minimum operating cost for each curve drawn for a constant loss ratio

or transformer price, and among these minima a specific minimum corresponding to one definite loss ratio or price. This last

3-phase, 50c/s

5/kW

0-4d./KWh

09

0535

0322

6% pa.

Iron Loss

Fig. 7. -Annual operating cost of transformer.

129

the price variation of transformers, as represented in Figs. 3, 4

and 5, is usually not readily obtainable, particularly if a wide

range of values is to be considered. Some indication of the

variations of transformer prices may be obtained by selecting

transformers with reduced losses, i.e. by underrunning relatively

larger units. This method is described in Section 10.2 (the curves

in Figs. 3, 4 and 5 have been partly deduced by this method).

The laborious analysis entailed by the above method may be

avoided by relying on two fundamental rules governing the variations of the annual operating cost of a transformer. A knowledge

of the general trends of these variations, indicated by the shapes

and relative positions of the curves in Figs. 6, 7 and 8, is helpful

in applying these rules. The two rules, discussed in detail in

Section 10.3, are as follows: (a) the minimum annual cost of the

losses in a transformer occurs when the annual costs of the iron

and of the copper losses are equal, and (b) the minimum total annual operating cost of a transformer is obtained when the annual

cost of the total losses is in a certain given ratio to the annual

capital charges; in most practical cases the economic ratio of

the cost of the losses to the capital cost is between 2 and 2 5,

being about 2-5 in the example represented in Figs. 6, 7 and 8.

Rule (a) leads directly to the economic loss ratio for the given

conditions of operation as defined by the values of the constants

p, q, v, u, I, z [equation (35) in Section 10.3], namely:

f^A

V Wj/Opt

P + 36-5^

u2(p + 36-5zyq)

Thus only the curve in Fig. 5 for the above ratio is needed for

calculating the corresponding curve in Fig. 8, this last curve being

the lowest and its minimum giving the solution required. Without the information embodied in Fig. 5, the trial-and-error

method must be used, with the aid of the second rule. For a

tentative design with the desired loss ratio, the annual capital

cost should be compared with the cost of the losses. If the

ratio of these two costs does not correspond

to that required by the second rule, at least

Transformer 100 kVA. 11 kV, 3-phase, 50 c/s.

an obvious indication will be obtained of what

p-5/kW 9=0-4d./kWh y-1 w-0 9

modifications in design are necessary to

#

Loss Ratio approach the requirements of the most economic design.

Wc:Wi

No conclusions can be drawn from Figs. 6, 7

and 8 on the rate of increase of the annual

operating cost on a deviation of the price of

the transformer, and the loss ratio, etc., from

their optimum values. This rate of increase

will depend largely on the values of the constants R, p, q, y, u, I, z, whereas the shape of

the different curves in Figs. 6, 7 and 8

obviously depends on the scales used in

plotting them.

An important point to note in connection

with the above analysis is that in function (12)

and in Figs. 3, 4 and 5 representing this function, the price and the loss variations have

been assumed as being due only to dimensional

changes in designs; no such factors as the use

of different materials (aluminium in place of

copper, or different grades of steel, etc.), or

different manufacturing and overall costs have

been taken into account. Hence, the minimum

value of the transformer operating cost

applies for the price variations as given, e.g.,

200

100

125

175

150

by the data in Fig. 5. If different materials

Transformer Price

can be used in construction or the manufaccx

turing and overall costs can be modified, a

Fig. 8.Annual operating cost of transformer.]

indicate the parameters (price and loss values) of the most

economic transformer design. In Figs. 6, 7 and 8 a curve is

drawn through the minima of the individual curves, the lowest

point of this curve being the solution required.

This method, while offering a theoretically rigid solution, is

43

42

130

different solution may be found for the most economic transformer design; this must be checked by using data suitably

modified from those in Fig. 5, and proceeding as before.

In the example analysed in Figs. 3-8, the point corresponding

to the most economic transformer design is indicated by K on

all curves, while the point S corresponds to the standard design

for the given case, i.e. to 100% price and loss values, and a

3 1 loss ratio. Reference lines drawn at the bottom of Fig. 5

allow the total loss figures for different designs to be read off,

and thus the corresponding efficiencies to be calculated.

(6) INFLUENCE OF VARIOUS CONSTANTS

For a given relationship between the initial transformer cost

and its losses, e.g. of the type represented by the curves of

Figs. 3, 4 or 5, the most economic choice of a transformer, as

represented by Figs. 6-8, can be made only if the coefficients

R, p, q, y, u, I, z, are assumed constant. It will therefore be instructive to examine, at least qualitatively, how variations in the

values of these coefficients will affect economic selection for a

given price/loss relationship for the transformer.

With other values unchanged, an increase in the total rate of

the capital charges R, i.e. an increase in the interest rate and/or a

decrease in the assumed life of the transformer, will displace the

optimum point K in Figs. 6-8 towards the comparatively cheaper

transformer designs, i.e. towards those having higher losses; this

results from the requirement that there shall be a definite ratio

between the annual capital charges and the cost of the losses.

The same requirement shifts the economic choice of a transformer

towards cheaper designs also with decreases in the power tariff

(factors p and q): in the time the transformer is excited during

the year (>); in the load factor / and therefore in the load lossfactor z; and in the ratio u of the actual peak load to the transformer rating. The changes in the values of /, z, it, besides

affecting the economic selection of specific total losses and of

the transformer price related with this figure, also influence the

choice of the most economic ratio of copper to iron losses. With

each of these constants equal to unity, the kW loss figures for

iron and for copper should be equal; if the values of /, z, u

decrease, the copper loss must become greater than the iron loss

so as always to fulfil the condition of equality between the annual

costs of the two types of loss.

With the loss ratio determined by /, z and w, as well as by

p and q, the total loss is proportional to the iron loss. The value

of the latter at which the annual operating cost is an optimum,

i.e. for the point K in Figs. 6 and 7, will depend on the ratio of the

interest charged on capital R to the power tariff: the higher this

ratio, the higher the iron-loss figure for the optimum design of

transformer.

In view of the wide range of numerical values which the factors

R, P, q, X, it, I, z, can assume in practice, and with the price/loss

relationship depending on the transformer type and size, as well

as on the transformer manufacturer and on general economic

conditions, such as the costs of raw materials and of labour, etc.,

it is neither practicable nor possible to establish a numerical relationship between the most economical loss value and the ratio

^/(P* <?) For a given price/loss relationship, the above dependence could theoretically be represented diagrammatically

in the manner shown in Fig. 9.

(7) CURRENT PRACTICE OF TRANSFORMER USERS FOR

CAPITALIZATION OF LOSSES

For the capitalization of losses, transformer users in this

country and abroad mostly favour equation (7) for calculating

the annual cost of operating.

In 10 cases out of the 25 examined, the three coefficients in

equation (7) were given directly. The coefficients of equation (10)

tariffs (curve*2*for

energy cost lower than

curve V, etc.)

Total Economic Transformer Loss

Curves for various values

of loss-ratio (or of the

combination of values

urve V for lower lossratio, orforhigher values

of V a n d /".than

curve "a".

Fig. 9

for the total investment cost, including the capitalized loss values,

were given in only three cases. In 16 cases auxiliary data

referring to the load factor, the power tariff, the capital interest,

etc., were given; this allowed the coefficients in either of the two

formulae to be deduced, but in four of these cases it was indicated

that the capitalized value of the losses had to be considered. In

two cases the copper losses were neglected. In most cases the

load factor was given, though in a few it was the actual load lossfactor. A simplified representation of the daily load curve was

given in some cases to permit the load factor to be estimated.

The interest rate on capital varied between 3-5 and 10%, 4%

being the most frequent. The assumed life of the transformers

was 20 years in nearly all cases. A good average value for the

total capital charges may be taken as 8% per annum. The load

factors varied between 0 25 and 1 0, with an average around 0 4.

The greatest variations were found in the power tariffs with m.d.

rates from 0 to 5-7 per kW and with unit rates from 0 1 to

l-8d./kWh. In some cases a different unit rate was used for

the copper and iron losses to allow for the fact that the copper

losses occur mainly during the peak-load periods; in general,

this is taken care of by the two-part tariff. Owing to the wide

variations in power costs, the factors Kt and Kc in equation (7)

showed very wide variations: Kt between 3-13 and 66 per kW

of iron loss, and Kc between 0-78 (or even zero) and 26-2

per kW of copper loss.

(8) CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Of the two equivalent methods available for making an economic selection of transformers, namely the comparison of the total

annual operating costs and that of the total investment cost including the capitalized value of the transformer losses, the first

method is the more popular and appears to be the more comprehensive. It may be applied in the form of equation (7) and

will give accurate results if the values of the constants R, p, q,

y, u, z (or /), are properly chosen. To compare several transformers having different prices and losses, it is sufficient to calculate the annual operating cost for each case, using equation (7).

The more complicated problem of finding the most economic

design of transformer to meet given operating conditions is

analysed in detail in Section 5; the main practical conclusions

reached are that the economic choice of the loss ratio of the

transformer must be such as to ensure that the annual costs of

the iron loss and of the copper loss will be the same, the

total losses for the transformer being fixed by the condition that

the total annual cost of the losses shall be about 2-5 times the

total annual capital cost.

The values of the constants R, p, q, y, u, I and z, vary between

131

wide limits, but the data for their determination are as a rule (10) BOGH, A.: "Valuation of Annual Losses of Conveiter and

easily obtainable. The following approximate values of the

Traasformer Stations by Means of Load Curves," World

constants of equation (7) are suggested for estimating purposes,

Power Conference, 1930, Paper No. 331.

these applying to current conditions in this country:

(11) BOLTON, D. J.: "The Economic Rating of Motors and Trans(a) For large transformers in power stations and main subformers," Journal I.E.E., 1944, 91, Part II, p. 195.

stations :

ca 0 08C } 10 Wi I - 4 8 Wc

. . per annum (14)

(10) APPENDICES

with (approximately) p 3 per kW, q 0-2d./kWh, y = 1,

(10.1) Valuation of Copper Losses

it

0-9, I

secondary substations:

ca 0-08C ! 12Wi \3-8IVc . . per annum (15)

with (approximately) p = 4 per kW, q = 0-3d./kWh, y 0-8,

w - 0-9, / 0-4, z - 0195, i ? - 8 % .

(<) For medium and small industrial transformers and for

distribution transformers:

per annum (16)

ca~- 008C I

with (approximately)/? 5 per kW, q -= 0-4d./kWh, y = 0-8,

u = 09,l

0-4, z = 0-1955 R= 8%.

(d) For small transformers with power rates corresponding to

retail lighting tariffs:

per annum (17)

ra=---0-08C

with (approximately) p = 10 per kW, q = ld./kWh, y = 1,

// = 0-9, /~=0-3, z - 0 - 1 1 5 , J? = 8%.

In spite of the obvious accuracy and simplicity of the methods

described for the capitalization of transformer losses, their use

so far has been very limited. In many cases the difficulty of

obtaining sufficient capital for investment purposes has made it

necessary to choose the cheapest transformers, although it is

realized that their overall operating costs will not be the lowest.

In other cases, the advantages of selecting transformers on the

basis of lowest operating costs are not sufficiently appreciated,

and a preference is shown for an apparently cheaper apparatus.

It is hoped that the present analysis of the practical aspects of

the problem will encourage the economic selection of transformers and the more frequent application of sound economic

criteria when purchasing transformers.

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

(6)

(7)

(8)

(9)

(Referring to Section 3)

When the load on a transformer (or on any other electrical

equipment having copper losses) varies over a period 7", e.g. in

the manner shown in Fig. 10A, the total copper losses during this

period can be expressed as:

Lc = zwcpT kWh

(18)

where wcp is the copper loss in kW corresponding to the peak N.p

of the variable load, and z is the "load loss-factor." The value

of this factor is defined from the above as:

wctdt

ifdt

N?dt

(19)

1JT or

wcpT or

cp

where wct, f,, N,, are the instantaneous values at a time / of the

copper loss, the current and the load respectively, and Jp is the

current at peak load.

When the actual load curve is known, e.g. as in Fig. 10A, the

load loss-factor z can always be evaluated by drawing the curve

of the squares of the loads (Fig. 10B) and calculating the ratio of

Time

T 8760 hr O

t

Time

T

(9) BIBLIOGRAPHY

LENARD, P.: " L'evaluation et la capitalisation des pertes

Fig. 1 0 A

Fig. 10B

dans les transformateurs," International Conference on

Large High-Tension Electric Systems, 1937,1, Paper 101. the surface under the curve to the surface of the rectangle Np2T.

WOI.F, M.: "Die Berechnung der elektrischen Verluste bei This is correct only with a constant power factor throughout the

schwankenden Lastverhaltnissen in Netzen und Energie- period of load changes; otherwise a kVA or a current curve must

wandlern auf Grund von Erfahrungswerten," Elektro- be used in place of the kW load curve.

technische Zeitschrift, 1931, 52, p. 1267; 1932, 53, p. 1005. In most practical cases, either the actual or the anticipated load

VIDMAR, M.: "Der wirtschaftliche Aufbau des Transforma- curves are not available, or the method indicated for determining

tors," Elektrotechnik und Maschinenbau, 1933, 51, p. 69. the load loss-factor is considered too laborious. The load is then

VIDMAR, M.: "Le probleme economique dans la con- characterized by its load factor / only, this being the ratio of the

struction des transformateurs," Comptes rendus du actual power consumption (kWh) during the period T to the

congres international d'electricite, Paris, 1932, 5, p. 977. product of the peak load and the period T:

THIESSEN, W.: "Berechnung und Bewertung von UmspanT

nerverlusten," Elektrizitdtswirtschaft, 1935, 34, p. 765.

N,dt

SANDOR, L.: "Calculation of capitalization of transformer

(20)

1

=

losses," Elektrotechnika, 1941, 34, pp. 19, 26 (in HunNpT

garian).

In other words / is the ratio of the mean load during the period

BOLTON, D. J.: "Electrical Engineering Economics,"2nd ed.,

T to the peak load Np.

1936, chap. 9 (Chapman and Hall, Ltd.).

For calculating the copper losses a relation must be established

REED, E. G.: "The Essentials of Transformer Practice,"

between the load loss-factor z and the load factor /. For a given

2nd ed., 1927, chaps. 23-25 (Chapman and Hall, Ltd.).

WILD, E. E.: "Transformers," 1940, chap. 9, pp. 7-10 value of/, z can assume different values between the two extremes

of zmax = / and zm,-n I2, depending on the shape of the load

(Blackie and Sons, Ltd.).

132

equal to Np during the time / T, and the minimum value to a

constant load INp during the time T; in both .cases the load

factor / is the same. An analysis of many actual load curves

with different load factors and for different supply undertakings,

as well as for different points in the same system, indicates that

the load loss-factor for given load-factor values varies within

only very narrow limits. A load loss-factor value can hence be

allocated to every load-factor value with an accuracy sufficient

for all practical purposes. Different values of z have been given

by various authors; the following figures by M. Wolf (see

Reference No. 2) appear to be the most recent:

the duration of the load and its peak value, and z' the annual

load loss-factor for the copper watt-loss at the rated load.

The load factor / as used for the evaluation of transformer

losses must always be determined for the load on the transformer

itself, for there may be a great difference between the load factor

of the whole system and that of any individual transformer.

(10.2) Underrunning as a Means for the Economic Selection of

Transformers

(Referring to Section 5)

Usually the price variations for a transformer with iron and

copper losses varying independently over a sufficiently wide

Load factor /

1 0

0 9

0- 8

0- 7

0 6

0 5

0 4

0- 3

0- 2

0 1

0 0

1 0

0 815

0- 66

0- 525

0 40

0 29

0 195

0- 115

0- 055

0 02

0 0

The factor /, and hence also the factor z in the above table,

are deduced from kW loads; as a result these values of z can be

used only when the power factor of the load remains constant

during the period of load variations. This does not hold in

most practical cases, so that it becomes advisable to simulate

actual conditions more closely, namely by assuming that under

a varying load the reactive component of the load remains constant. The values of z, depending on the power factor during

the peak load, are then those given in the table in Section 3 and

in Fig. 2 (these values are also taken from Wolf's paper). It

should be noted that when the power factor is constant throughout load variations, values of z must be taken corresponding to

unity power factor at peak load in Fig. 2 and in the Table in

Section 3.

Incidentally, the load loss-factor z is equal to the square of the

product of the load factor / and the form factor / of the loadcurve,/being the ratio of the r.m.s. value of the load curve (NB)

to its mean value (NM)'>

z = l2/2

(21)

This can be proved by a further transformation of equation

(19), thus:

T

N2dt

=

^o

NT

-Nj^

N

_

^Np'J

^NMy

The load loss-factor z can hence also be obtained from empirical data interrelating / and /.

Sometimes empirical formulae are used giving the relationship

between z and /, e.g. the following expression:

z = 0-2/ +0-8/2

(22)

The results obtained may be close enough to the empirical figures

quoted above, provided the power factor can be assumed constant. Otherwise, better results will be obtained by using the

values of z in the Table in Section 3.

The factors / and z always refer to the actual duration T of

the load and to its peak value Np. When calculating the copper

losses, it is usual to extend the calculation over a period of one

year (8 760 hours) and to use the copper watt-loss Wc corresponding to the nominal rating P of the transformer, thus:

T = 8 760^ hours

. . . . .

(23)

(24)

NP uP kilowatts

(25)

Whence

wcp = u2Wc

giving the copper losses as:

Lc = 8 160zu2Wcy = 8 76Oz'Wc . . kWh (26)

where z' = zu2y, z being the actual load loss-factor referred to

range, are not easy to obtain. The selection of the most economic transformer is then partly possible by considering a series

of transformers of similar design but of different ratings. The

transformers in a series usually have a constant copper/iron

loss ratio, at least over a narrow range about the kVA figure for

which the transformer is to be chosen. The prices for a standard

series of transformers can be easily obtained. The object of the

present method is to reduce the losses in a transformer by using

a design from the standard series, but with a rating higher than

normally corresponding to the anticipated maximum load.

If the working load is N{ kVA, the direct choice of a transformer from the standard series would give a rating Pl N{ kVA,

with full-load copper loss of Wcl and iron loss of Wix kW.

Assume that a higher rating is selected, namely P2 = */>, kVA;

its full-load losses will be Wc2 and Wi2 respectively. Owing to

similarity in design, the loss ratio will be the same in the two

cases, thus:

Wcl/Wn = Wc2/Wi2 = constant . . . (27)

The transformer of rating P2 will have to work only on a maximum load of N1 kVA, i.e.

N^Pi^PJx

(28)

be Wc2/x2, the iron loss remaining unchanged at Wi2. The iron

loss can be 'reduced by decreasing the flux density in the core,

for instance by increasing the number of turns on both windings

by, say, -y/m times; in this modified transformer of rating

P'2 = P2kVA, the number of turns will be t'2 = t2\/m.

This

y/m reduction in flux density will reduce the iron loss m times,

thus:

W(2 = Wnlm

(29)

To keep the dimensions of the transformer, and therefore the

price, unchanged, the -y/m increase in turns must be accompanied by a similar decrease in the copper sections. The resistance of the windings will therefore increase (\Zm)(-\/m) = m

times. Finally, the copper loss of the transformer of rating P2

on load Ni will be:

(30)

while the loss ratio will be:

. (Wc2/Wi2) =

(3D

then m2/x2 = 1, hence m x; i.e. increasing the transformer

rating x times makes it necessary to increase the number of turns

y/x times. This modified transformer of rating P2, on maximum load Nlt will have the same efficiency as the transformer

of rating P2, on full rated load, i.e. larger than the transformer

of rating P{ = Nx.

If a change of the loss ratio is also required:

K2lW;2={\ln).{WclIWi2)

= {\lnXWcXIWi{).

133

<C

250

. (32)

then

m2lx2~]/n or x = m. \/n

. . . (33)

For every value of the coefficient n chosen, different, interrelated values of m and x are possible.

The practical application of this method will be illustrated by

an example. Fig. 11 gives prices, efficiencies, and iron and

200

250

97 - "

Standard Transformers

3-phage. 50c/s

II kV

H.:ty-31-constan1

Wc

200

08

05

Fig. 12

Wi

150

100

200

kVA

Fig. 11

the use of transformers whose frames are larger than standard.

Applying the method to smaller frames to get cheaper transformers with larger losses would not be reasonable, not only

out of consideration of the cooling conditions, but also because

with the increase in flux densities the iron losses would increase

more rapidly than the square of the flux density; the increase in

the magnetizing current would also become prohibitive.

300

Values

(Referring to Section 5)

(10.3.1) The losses in a transformer can be expressed apbetween 100 and 300 kVA with a loss ratio of 3- \. In Fig. 12

curves are computed from the data in Fig. 11, in which the price proximately as follows:

of the transformer is plotted against the iron loss for different

Wc = m{n kW and IV, --= m 2 E 2 kW

constant loss ratios. The data in Fig. 12 refer to a 100-kVA

load. Point A is for the standard design without underrunning where m{ and m2 are constants. For a transformer of a given

(Pi = ^ 1 0 0 kVA). Other points for the same loss ratio are kVA output, N, / = m3N, hence W ^ = mvm2P-E^ = mxm^nlNobtained by assuming underrunning and the condition x = m; = constant = m4. According to equations (5) and (6), the

thus at point B: ^ = P'2 = 150kVA;;c = 150/100= l-5;m = x annual cost of the total losses will be:

- 1 - 5 . From Fig. 11, for P 2 = 1 5 0 k V A , J^ 2 = 0 > 87kW,

36-5.V?)

ca = cai

the price C2 = 163-4, and Wi2 = Wi2/m = 0-87/1-5 = 0-58,

the last two figures being the co-ordinates of point B in Fig. 12.

The curves for other loss ratios are obtained by using the

Since Wc = mJlV,: ca = msWt + w6w4/W^-. To arrive at

relation x

mVn; e.g. for the loss ratio 2-5, = 3 1/2-5

the minimum value of ca: dcJdW{ ~ m5 m6m^W^ = 0;

----- 1 -24. Other values for m give further points of the curve, with m = W W we obtain finally:

4

c

h

e.g. for m - 1-25, JC = 1-25 VI-24 = 1 -393; P'2 = P2 = 1-393

x 100=139-3kVA. From Fig. 11,^-2 = 0-81 kW,C 2 =156,

m6We

(34)

and W[2 - 0-81/1 -25 = 0-65 kW, the last two figures being the

co-ordinates of point C in Fig. 12. As a check on the above: i.e. for the annual cost of total losses to be a minimum the annual

Wc2 = 2-55 (from Fig. 11), W' = 1-25 x 2-55/1-392 = 1-64 cost of the iron loss must be equal to that of the copper loss.

The above also determines the most economic loss ratio of the

kW, and 1-64/0-65 = 2-5.

The set of curves in Fig. 12, similar to those in Fig. 5, maybe transformer:

used to find the most economic size of transformer for given

36-5yg)

(35)

working conditions.

134

z = 1, and with u 1, we get WL ~ Wf, the well-known condition for the optimum efficiency of a transformer; the

instantaneous and annual efficiencies are, of course, equal with

unity load factor.

(10.3.2) The most economic ratio of annual cost of total

losses to annual capital charges can be found as follows:

The total annual running cost of a transformer is: ca n^C

I n2W, where C is the first cost, W is the total losses, and nx

and n2 are constants. To obtain the most economic solution,

some changes will have to be made in the design of the transformer; these will reduce the losses with an increase in price, or

vice versa. The changes in design can be characterized by a

factor r, defined below, and certain variations in price and losses

by the powers s and -- t affixed to this factor. The annual cost

22

of the modified design will then be:

A

w /

dr

or

,-i-i

^o

(36)

i.e. the total annual cost of the losses ought to be equal to s/t

times the annual capital charges.

M. Vidmar (Reference 3) assumes an increase of r times

in all the linear dimensions of a transformer as a means of

design change, and further that such increase will raise the price

of the transformer in proportion to the third power of r (i.e. s = 3),

whereas the losses will decrease inversely with r (i.e. / = 1).

Therefore s\t 3. Actually Vidmar's assumption of the increase in transformer cost is exaggerated through not taking into

account all the dimensions depending only on the voltage rating,

and all the supplementary items of approximately constant cost.

A value of s between 2 and 2-5 would seem to be more correct.

Evidence of this can be found by making use of the method of

underrunning transformers as described in Section 10.2.

Taking r as the coefficient of increase of transformer rating

in comparison with the standard rating, corresponding to the

load, when underrunning the transformer, the prices for the

standard series shown in Fig. 11 increase as /*, i.e. s = \,

whereas for diminution of the losses it is easily found that / lies

between and | . In Fig. 13, curve 1 gives the total losses for

the different kVA ratings of the standard series of transformers

in the example taken. Curve 2 gives the losses when underrunning r times the transformers with the nominal load of 100kVA;

by a suitable change in the number of turns the losses are reduced

to W\r. Curves 3 and 4 are also shown; these pass through the

point r --= 1, Wlr = 1VU for Nt = 100 kVA, and satisfy the relations Wfr ~ WJr'< and W/r = WJr} respectively, thus showing that the value of / does lie between i and | . .

The values of the coefficients s and / determining the law of

variation of transformer cost and losses will be different for

different transformer designs and makes, and in a strict analysis

they ought to be specially determined for each case. The ratio

sit, however, will not vary very much, and for all practical purposes it can be safely taken as between 2 and 2-5; in the above

example, with s = i and t -= 1/4-5, it is 2-25.

t

\

1OO

200

300 kVA

Fig. 13

Additional evidence can be provided by considering a particular series of standard transformers of 50, 75, 100, 150

and 200 kVA, in which the weights of active materials are

540, 700, 890, 1160 and 13601b, i.e. the weights increase

as 1 : 1-3 : 1-65 : 2-15 : 2-52. The increase in linear dimensions would be the cube root of these values, namely

1 : 109 : 1-18 : 1-29 : 1-36. Pre-war prices were 93, 110,

126, 163 and 190, i.e. they increased in the proportion

1 : 1 18 : 1 36 : 1 75 : 2-05. Taking the increase of the linear

dimensions as / times, and the price increase as rs times,

values of s are 1 8, 1 85, 2- 2, 2- 34. The total losses are 1 56,

2-12, 2-64, 3-56, 4 50 kW, i.e. they are in a proportion

of 1 : 1-36 : 1-69 : 2-28 : 2-88. When underrunning the

transformers these losses will change in the proportion

50/50 : 50/75 : 50/100 : 50/150 : 50/200; they will then be as

1 : 0-9 :0-82 :0-76 :0-72; if this is to be defined by

i--', t will be 1-2,

1-2,

109,

s/t

they refer to comparatively small kVA ratings.

It is worth noting that sit cannot equal unity as in Kelvin's

law, where:

A = aC + bW\ A' = aCx + bW/x; dA'/dx = aC bWlx* - 0,

This case of equality between loss cost and capital charges

applies only when the price grows proportionally and the losses

decrease inversely with some coefficient x, which is not true of

transformers.

Mr. G. F. Kennedy: Through a wealth of mathematical

formulae, the author has arrived at two important conclusions.

One is that in considering the merits of two transformers the

annual costs of the copper losses should more or less equal the

annual cost of thefixedloss, and the other is that the total annual

cost of losses should be about 2-5 times the total capital charges

on the transformer. These two points should considerably

simplify the consideration of transformer tender prices. There

- Termtestw.021 (1)Uploaded bychuck4301
- abcUploaded bySaheli Mazumder
- Voltage Withstand testUploaded bymshahidshaukat
- GGGHGGHGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG19-Dec-07 094403Uploaded byrobin0903
- CHECKLIS TRANSFORMER .docxUploaded byKarthick Natrajan
- 2007furmath2Uploaded bykleo0
- A Power Quality Case Study-A Cement Industry.pdfUploaded bygtgreat
- Excel Lcc Calculation Transformer5Uploaded bySergio Provenzano Junior
- Retail Bank Interest Rate Pass-Through the Turkish ExperienceUploaded byrunawayyy
- 200 Top Electrical Engineering Interview Questions and AnswersUploaded byraj
- ABB-Electrical Installation Handbook 6th Edition 2010Uploaded bySimon Condor
- How To Design Capacitor Bank.docUploaded byAbdul Aziz
- Power Factor Improvement of Single Phase Ac VoltageUploaded byAmar Dixit
- Power FactorUploaded bytyutyu
- 202_17533_TIGHTENINGUploaded byvda
- 4. Engineering EconomicsUploaded bytahera aqeel
- Line Follower Robot 1Uploaded bySunil Jaiswal
- Geafol 2010 EngUploaded byAntonio Marques
- Dtmf Based Wireless Robot (2)Uploaded byRajasekar Panneerselvam
- Solution Rrb Sse 6Uploaded byKamal
- Pages From SBI Clerk Exam PaperUploaded bySanjeev Sharma
- Excel Sheet Load ListUploaded byErdinc
- Ulises, Tony, Littman 28411Uploaded byJuan Martin
- IE Rules for DP StructureUploaded byDipak Bandyopadhyay
- The Soul Company of Coral GablesUploaded bySunmy Aziz
- Business Administration 10Uploaded byZermina Sharif
- MO13 Round 2 Theory and Practice MCQsUploaded bypatidarbhagwati
- Remote Digital ClockUploaded byArdhika Dhennis Putra Ananda
- TransformerUploaded byadevirgie
- Study the BarUploaded byJyoti Sukhija

- Microsoft Excel as a Tool for Solving Multicriteria Decision ProblemsUploaded byOtto Heinrich Wehmann
- 35 - Some Case Histories of Site Efficeincy and Index Testing of Hydraulic Machines - Hydro 2004Uploaded byimadhuryya5023
- da_demUploaded byimadhuryya5023
- Stream HydrologyUploaded byeunice ruby macabasa
- Chapter 4Uploaded byAnjna Singhal
- Electricity Wheeling AgreementUploaded byimadhuryya5023
- Turbulent Vortex SheddingUploaded byimadhuryya5023
- Vatavuk-solution of TransientsUploaded byimadhuryya5023
- BHEL.pdfUploaded byimadhuryya5023
- 1332 Eapp Master Plan 2014 Volume 2 Data ReportUploaded byimadhuryya5023
- TI-IE-036 C Paint Spec Alstom ChinaUploaded byimadhuryya5023
- RapUploaded byimadhuryya5023
- H-6746 00 Mef 00 001 Dc b Paint Spec TashidingUploaded byimadhuryya5023
- Sapthadharo Small Hydro Electric Project (3X6 MW).pdfUploaded byimadhuryya5023
- 1332 Eapp Master Plan 2014 Volume 1 Main ReportUploaded byimadhuryya5023
- Ieee691-2001. Guide for Transmission StructureUploaded byAlexis Fernandez Cordova
- Lightning Protection Guide - Complete - DeHNUploaded byNeilfred Sio
- CRGO2Uploaded byimadhuryya5023
- gl_ii-1-2_eUploaded bysabanim
- KarmanUploaded byimadhuryya5023
- CRGO3.pdfUploaded byimadhuryya5023
- Osaka UniversityUploaded byAhmad Ghaniy Muzakki
- stayvane3Uploaded byimadhuryya5023
- CRGO1.pdfUploaded byimadhuryya5023
- Volume VII Power Transmission Line Design.pdfUploaded byimadhuryya5023
- IRC-SP-91 GUIDELINES FOR ROAD TUNNELS.pdfUploaded byimadhuryya5023
- Tower.frenchUploaded byManivel Subramanian
- IPDS Guidelines Ver21 311214Uploaded byimadhuryya5023
- Fatigue of Turbine.pdfUploaded byimadhuryya5023

- Finance Basic 101.pdfUploaded byNavneet Priye
- 10_musharakah muanaqisah_meera.pdfUploaded byBisma Ramadhan
- MbaUploaded bypradeepnaik11
- DTI Financial Statements 2015-16Uploaded byeep
- Trend Strategist Handbook - Option TradingUploaded bybigtrends
- Martin and Anthony on AminoilUploaded byBello Folakemi
- Draft Mount Greylock Regional School District AgreementUploaded byiBerkshires.com
- SBM esejiUploaded byamira
- Case2Uploaded byches
- 399608Uploaded byAhmad S Jazar
- Netscape Valuation for IPO...PV of FCFsUploaded byJunaid Elias
- Banking Comp FrameworkUploaded bykrisdaryadi4014
- Security Analysis & Portfolio Management ( MCQ,s & Short Answers )Uploaded byHamid Ilyas
- Farm Costing Budgeting Bool KeepingUploaded byfruitfulluft
- Deep Value Investing - C. Mayer - July 2018Uploaded byChris Mayer
- Mr.kulanathaUploaded bySubhawickrama Chamin
- RFCUploaded byAditya Mathur
- Alternative Distribution Channels in IndiaUploaded byDinesh Godhani
- SEC Money Market Reform - Final Rule.pdfUploaded byScott Wright
- fin 360 week 2Uploaded byagarza92
- internship-report.docxUploaded byRaziya Shrestha
- Advanced Financial Management R. KitUploaded byMhasibu Mhasibu
- ASB & Associates ProfileUploaded byAnand Jain
- Annual Consolidated Accounts-2009Uploaded byRabia Chaudhary
- Crocs Case AnalysisUploaded bysiddis316
- GuidelinesUploaded byAbeerAlgebali
- VBA for Financial Engineering Course OverviewUploaded byJose Ondo
- Answer June 2013Uploaded bymohansaf
- Research Analyst Credit Private Equity In New Jersey Resume Eric SchnurUploaded byEric Schnur
- Pwc Current Issues in Income Tax Accounting Us Gaap and Ifrs Pt 1Uploaded byAMIT