Improved simulation of HVDC converter transformers in electromagnetic transient programs J.Arrillaga W.Enright NR. Watson AR.Wood Indesing terms Ek sromagnetc transient, Converter transformer, Siaaion Abstract: In electromagnetic transient simulation HVDC converter transformers are normall represented as magnetically independent single- phase units. However, three-limb converter transformers are often used in HVDC schemes Single-phase and three-limb three-phase transformer models are derived using a unified magnetic equivalent circuit concept. The new models are verified with laboratory and field Gata. Also, a comparison is made between the transient performance of HVDC converters with conventional and proposed transformer models 1 Introduction The conventional representation of HVDC converter transformers in electromagnetic transient pr assumes a uniform flux throughout the core legs and yokes, each phase modelled as a magnetically inde- pendent unit. Moreover, the primary and secondary winding leakages are combined and the magnetising current placed on one side of the resultant series leak- age reactance. Among the proposed alternatives for calculating core flux are the use of the core closest to the core [I] and an equal division of the magnetising current between the primary and secondary windings, However, some HVDC schemes use three-limb core transformers and their representation as independent phase units is likely to affect the accuracy of the solution, particularly when simulating unbalanced conditions. ‘A. three-limb three-phase transformer model has recently been proposed [2] which derives an clectric circuit dual from a magnetic circuit equivalent that inchides air and steel flux paths. Although the core leg, yoke and zero-sequence paths are individually represented, the individual winding leakages are still lumped together and the question of the subdivision of the magnetising components between the windings is not resolved. IEE, 197 IEE Proceedings online 90. 19970849 Paper fist sev 20th May and in evs form 20th August 1996 W, Baright is withthe Betty Comporation of New Zealand 4. Arilaga, NR Watson and AR. Wood are with the University of Canterbury; Christchurch, New Zeakind This paper describes a new equivalent circuit based on unified magnetic theory, which is generally applica ble to three-phase multi-limb transformers. The new model is incorporated in the electromagnetic transients, (EMTDC) program [3] and its response to HVDC dis turbances is compared with that of the conventional converter transformer model. 2 Single-phase model In power system studies transformer core and leakage fluxes are often considered separately, as shown in Fig. 1. This approximation permits the use of superpo- sition and thus combines the linear leakage reactance with a linearised Norton equivalent of the magnetising current. This combination has been used to derive har- monic domain models of the single-phase [4] and three- limb [5] three-phase transformers, respectively; in these cases the primary and secondary voltage average was used to calculate the core flux, while the magnetising current was halved and placed on both sides of the transformer leakage admittance network. Fig. Singphae rarsforme fax pats separate magnetic paths 2.1 Unified magnetic equivalent circuit The magnetic circuit shown in Fig. 2, is based on Steinmet2’s ‘exact’ model, and leads to the unified magnetic equivalent circuit (UMEC) of Fig. 3. In this alternative there is no need to specify in advance the distribution of magnetising current components which, as will be shown later, is determined by the transformer internal and external circuit parameters. Moreover, all the elements of the equivalent circuit can be derived purely from the conventional manufacturers specifications, The two MMF (magnetomotive forces) sources in Fig. 3, ic. Ny\(®) and Nsie), represent the windings individually, and the winding voltages »j(Q) and ¥3()) are used to calculate winding-limb fluxes @y(?) and (0, respectively IEE Proc Gener Dram, Distrib, ob HA, Mo, 2, Mech 997ci Fig.2 Singk-phse wansformer fax pals, wld magnele pak Fig,3 Unie mene quien co or spa tnsformer Py and P2 represent the permeance of the transformer winding limbs and Py the permeance of the transformer yokes. Core permeance is calculated using the hyper- bbola B-H characteristic representation described in the Appendix. If the total length of core surrounded by windings Ly has a uniform cross-sectional area Ay, then UMEC branches 1 and 2 have length Ly = Ly L/2 and cross-sectional area Ay = Ap = A, The upper and lower yokes are assumed to have the’same length L, and cross-sectional area A,. Both yokes are repre- sented by a single UMEC branch of length Ls = 2L, and area 4s = 4,. Leakage permeances P, and Ps are obtained from open and short-circuit tests and there- fore the effective lengths and cross-sectional areas of their leakage paths are not required inte “he igtt Fig. Sirgleplase vangirner mode, UMEC PSCAD-EMIDC satel, elects cet ‘The magnetic circuit of Fig. 3 can be represented by the Norton equivalent of Fig. 4, which is suitable for electromagnetic transient implementation, The MMF across each branch of the circuit in Fig. 3 can be ‘written in vector form as = [N]i- [RIS Q) IEE Proc Gene, Transm, Dis, Vl. 148, No 2, March 1997 Eqn. 1 can be rewritten as 6 = [P\IN - 6) @) At each node the flux must sum to zero, stated as (ayo =0 (3) Application of the branch-node connection matrix to the vector of nodal MMF gives the branch MMF [AlPnote = 8 (4) Multiplying eqn. 2 by (4]? and substituting in eqns. 3 and 4 gives [AT [PINT - [A] (PILADnoae ©) Solving eqn. 5 for Oyay and multiplying both sides by [A] gives [Albnode = AMC TPAD AVTPIINE (6) Substitution of eqn. 4 into eqn. 6 allows eqn. 2 to be written as = [MINT @ where (a) = (1) - (PIA PAD fa YP) If the vector of branch flux is partitioned into the set that contains the branches associated with each trans- former winding then eqn, 7 becomes bs = [Mas] [Naslis (8) where @, is the vector containing the winding flux and gy, i, is the vector containing the winding current iy and ia, [My] a square permeance matrix and [Nj @ iagonal mattix of winding turns. If trapezoidal integration is used to relate the trans- former winding voltage to the winding flux, the deriva- tion will be suited for use in an electromagnetic ‘transient program [6]. The winding voltage is related to the winding flux by 8.lt) = 860-09 + Mv, IAG) +8400— 49) @) where Ar is the simulation time step and, the vector of winding voltage », and v,, Each winding voltage is used to caleulate the corresponding winding-limb flux. ‘Combining eqns. 8 and 9 gives the Norton equivalent [Neala(t) + ine (10) where Mel = (Mltas) * SEN, and etal (Stet (t= Ath+d.(t— a) 2.2 Experimental verification ‘The test system shown in Fig, 5 is used for the experi- mental verification of the new model. A 10kW sine- ‘wave generator suplies the test transformer, which is loaded with a series resonant circuit tuned to the Fifth harmonic. The fifth harmonic impedances of the test wit are Zonace = 03 + j180.642 = 05a 18.540 18.542 Rye = 052 Zot = 0.364 - (0.83012 mosine wave resonant Generate {ost transformer Teed Zeource Renin iXgrim sec Roce shit Zioad Gent * FB ee) a 19-5 Laboratory experimental set yp In the absence of other harmonic sources the magnetis- ing current fifth harmonic component will divide between the primary and secondary windings according to Steinmetz’s exact ratio, ie. eSincteracy = Libel _ (25H [inpriml — [Bszeee | source + Revi + IXiprenl (43) [a8(9Xivee + Reve + Zious)| which for the numerical values of the experimental sys- tem yields K = 112. Alternatively, the current division constant obtained by Steinmetz approximate equivalent is [Zeource + Rorim| LiXiprim + 0G Xtece + Rece + Zicad)] 497 KSimeeseree) (12) Measured and simulated ratios of fifth harmonic cur- rent between the primary and secondary windings are shown in Table 1 ‘Table 1: Measured and simulated primary and secondary fifth harmonic magnetising current Experimental UMEC Conventional Tm aooTmAY 242 (mA) TTT mA) lio) 48.0(mA) —-27.0(mA)_.54(mA) Ler mginl 12.0, nz. 498 The simulation results, obtained with the EMTDC program for the UMEC and conventional transformer ‘models are close to those predicted by eqns. 11 and 12. Because hysteresis and core loss have not been included, the actual levels of fifth harmonic predicted by the UMEC model do not exactly match the experi- mental results. However, for modern HVDC converter transformers with highly efficient core material, the inaccuracies caused by excluding hysteresis and core loss representation should be less significant. 3. Three-phase three-limb transformers 3.1 UMEC generalisation ‘An extension of the single-phase UMEC concept to the three-phase transformer, shown in Fig. 6, leads to the three-limb three-phase representation shown in Fig. 7, where’ Pi to Pe are the actual permeances of the transformer ‘winding-limbs mm P; to Pix’ are leakage permeances (obtained from ‘open and short-circuit tests) P13" and Py’ are the permeances of the yokes Pis' to Py;* are zero-sequence permeances (obtained from in-phase excitation of all three primary or second- ary windings) [2] As for the single-phase case there is no nced to specify in advance the distribution of magnetising current amongst the windings. Br i FF 87 f en ae “f va nel a q 35 819 el bl bs] Fi i Fig.6 | UMEC EMIDC tree phase treelind wansformer model pa pe Batt) get Pi Ses 7 asi) Fig.” Magnetic eqibalat croai for UMEC EMTDC theephawe ebolnt rare made 'ss%5%s"¥%5%55[] CP) Yee Fg %25"V36 658) TBE Proe-Goner Transm, Dish, Vol. 1, No.2, March 1597MMEF sources Nyi(t) to Nei(t) represent each trans former winding individually, and winding voltages ¥(0) to re(0) are used to calculate winding-limb flux 9() to ge(t), respectively. The permeances of the UMEC of Fig. 7 are used to derive the elements of the admittance ‘matrix in the electric Norton equivalent, ie. a(t) vin Mia Mas waa Yas Yio] P(E] Pinar aft) Yar Yaa Yas Yor tos Yoo || t2(t)| | ins s(t) |_| vox v2 vss vou vas yoo | | vat) || inao ia(t) var ver yas oa Yas yas | | alt} |") ines is(t) Ys1 Ysa ss Use wos vse || v(t}! | ines, a(t) Ler veo ves vex ves weet Lug(t) os) Matrix [¥_] is symmetric and this Norton equivalent can be implemented in the EMTDC program as shown, in Fig, 8, where only the blue phase network of a star- ‘grounded transformer is shown. Trapezoidal integration is now applied to the six transformer windings to calculate the winding-limb flux vector g(t ~ Ar). Once the previous time step winding current vector i(t ~ AZ) is formed, the flux leakage elements of 9,(t ~ AZ) can be calculated @r{t At) = Pr(Min(t- ANE AHP) (14) a(t At) = Pa(Naia(t— At) da(¢— ANP) (15) dolt— AD) = P(Mislt— At) — &(t-— ANP) (16) Gro(t — At) = Pro(Naia(t — At) ~ da(t— At)Ps) (17) dult = A) = Pu(Nris(t — At) ~ ds(t— At) Fs) (18) dualt— At) = Pia(Naio(t ~ At) ~ dn(t~ At)Ps) (19) The zero-sequence elements of ¢,(1 ~ At) are calculated using the MMF [oop sum around the primary to sec- ondary winding-limb and zero-sequence branch, stated as dist — At) =Pis(Niii(t — At) + Noio(t — At) ~ b(t - ADP, - galt - AQP) dro(t ~ At) =Pio(Nria(t — At) + Nois(t - At) ~ Galt - ADPs— dxlt- ANP) (21) dart — At) =Pyr(Nyig(t — At) + Naio(t — At) — s(t — At)Ps ~ do(t — At)Ps) (22) Finally, the yoke flux is obtained using the flux sum- mation’at nodes N; and NN, stated as dis(t— At) = di(t— At) — dr(t— At) ~ dus(t~ At) (23) dult—Ad) = dot At)— b(t At) - dur(t— At) (24) (20) 3.2 Application to HVDC converters To demonstrate the influence of the transformer core representation in electromagnetic AC/DC studies the proposed UMEC model is used to compare the tran- sient behaviour of HVDC converters with three single- phase and multi-timb transformers. For a realistic com- parison the alternative transformer models must draw similar magnetising currents in the steady state. How- ever, itis difficult to achieve a perfect match because threc-limb transformers use less core steel and their phases are unbalanced. Accordingly the parameters of the single-phase transformers of the Benmore convert- ers have been modified to derive an equivalent three- limb UMEC model of similar parameters, as shown in {EB Proc-Gone. Drm, Dist, Vo. 144, No. 2. March 1997 the Appendix. A comparison of the steadyestate mag- netising currents of both cases (using the UMEC model) is shown in Figs. 9 and 10 with ten percent overvoltage. The three-limb red, yellow and blue mag- netising currents are 0.078KA, 0.067KA and 0.078kA, respectively as compared with 0.086KA for the three phases of the independent transformer banks 0.20, 1 current kA, ‘Ooo Gee O08 aS? 0096 0700 time, ‘0.080 adet 088 092 nose Od time, Fig. 10, Romane seadrsie er valage tranformer negation re ps = fei ie aera 4 4 <7 qq a 4 oat odes site os oa times F.g.31, Beene grap comcion peter caren efor, nd Ya dcetonb Somerir nanos ig = HA a ee carte = clanFagg, fone sae cma eh won Po Pfs em ae The ability of the EMTDC program and UMEC transformer models to simulate the steady-state per- formance of the Benmore converter when operated as a group connected station are shown in Figs. 11 and 12. ‘The Figures show that the simulated voltage and cu rent waveforms (dotted line) are very close to the field test results (continuous line); the simulated waveforms of the two alternatives (single banks and multi-limb) were found to be indistinguishable. Finally, the group-connected converter system was used to demonstrate the use of the multi-limb model the red, yellow and blue valves commutate off. After the circuit breaker is opened conduction does not cease until the fault current in each phase passes through 210. 20 1g current kA cog wea ers A re aw Aten es 10" = le under transient conditions, The test system, shown in Fig. 13, was subjected to a single-phase fault at the B converter terminals and details of the fault, circuit § breaker, by-pass valve, ete, are given in the Appendix. sev 42293 ro ciceuit 5g * 2 Mee rg wake] LA, Ca CY OpimSi + poe times * a bes 15. Comsrter ensormer soning caret, 16KY red phase to $ SOAS 10K Ek clon ep 30 ia sored Via ha the le rd phase-t-ground faut Fig.18 Coneniona cmsererransfrer configuration ane set sem 1 ‘: 4 a 3{? |? The fault is applied to the 16kV busbar (time = 7 7 7 10s), the converter is blocked and the bypass valves ut vst vst fired two cycles Inter (time = 1.045). ‘The cireuit- com breaker opens two and a half eycles after the fault (time = 1.053). The circuit-breaker recloses after 0.038 and the converter is deblocked three cycles after the reclose (time = 1.143) The three-phase bank and three-limb three-phase Yy0 converter transformer primary currents ig, are shown in Figs. 14 and 15, respectively. In this winding configuration the single-phase bank is not affected by the presence of the fault. However, significant fault currents flow in the primary windings of the three-limb three-phase converter transformer. Between fault initiation and converter blocking the fault current is superimposed on the converter currents. ‘Once blocking is ordered, and the bypass valve is fired, 104 Fig.16 siavarsnaed tire inborn Jax ransom, rod Pai grail apn tbe Cte fae” Consider only the transformer primary windings as shown in Fig. 16 and the corresponding phasor diagram of Fig. 17. The reference phasor is the three- limb primary winding red-phase voltage J, prior to the fault. During the fault, instead of the nominal flux i, the shorted red-phase causes the sum of the yellow and blue-phase flux gs and gs, respectively to pass into the {BB Proc-Goer Tana Distt, Vol 4, No 2, Mark 1897red-phase winding-limb, This flux gf is equal in ‘magnitude, and 180° out of phase, to the nominal flux 1. Near rated voltage V7 is induced in the red-phase winding, and the fault current [flows from the yellow and blue phases through the mainly inductive transformer primary winding impedance. i FiG.17 Value, cent ad fe phir dro for, argued BET nr tn hi ipo current kA 1a times 1B Come oor winding int, fas covery, he Pike ek Fray erent wr Se reve ae. ae Fig. 19 Comertr rasormer winding current, fa recovery, dhe IB doesn Th pana caren ure: Foe eve "eg ohae The waveforms of Figs. 14 and 15 are continued in Figs. 18 and 19 for the period following the circuit- breaker reciose (time = 1,085). The three-phase bank incrush currents are symmetrical (Fig. 18), while the BE Proc-Gener. Troma, Dar, Vl. 144 No.2, Mach 1987, three-limb three-phase (Fig. 19) in-rush currents are asymmetrical. The maximum in-rush current peak of the Yy0 three-phase bank is greater than that of the three-limb three-phase equivalent. When the converter is deblocked (time = 1.145) the in-rush currents are superimposed on the converter currents. 4 Conelus The proposed unified magnetic equivalent circuit (UMEC) eliminates the need for approximations such as the dependence of core flux on a single transformer winding, the arbitrary placement of magnetising cur- rent, the uniform core flux assumption and lumped leakage reactance. The single-phase UMEC model has been shown to be representative of the Steinmetz exact equivalent circuit. The simulated division of magnetis- ing current between the UMEC transformer model windings has been verified in a laboratory test system, The steady-state and transient performance of three- phase bank and three-limb three-phase converter trans- formers have been compared. Under steady-state con ditions both transformer types produced similar waveforms, However, when a single-phase to ground fault is applied to the converter transformer primary busbar significant fault currents flow in all_ primary phases of the three-limb transformer, yet no fault cur- rents flow in the three-phase bank. 5 Acknowledgments ‘The authors wish to thank K. Devine, N. Frampton, and the Electricity Corporation of New Zealand for the financial support of this project. They are also grateful for the technical support of Trans Power New Zealand, and especially the help of P. Thompson and of K. Smart of the University of Canterbury, 6 References 1 DOMMBL, H.W. “Transformer model in the simulation of lectromapictic transient Procadings of Sth. Power syst mpuin conernce, Cambrige, United Kingdom. 1915 p. sree 2. STUBHM, D4L: ‘Thwe-pase transformer core modeling. Teche al report. North Dakota State Uniemsty. 183 3 “Biseremagnete. trensenssuiaton " program manual Manitoba HVDC Rescerch Contre Winnipeg Canad, 1988 4 ACHAVE, ARRILLAGA, J, MEDINA AY and SEMLYEN, ‘AS "General treme of reference Yor analy of harmon dato: ton in systems with multiple transformer noniearsies, IEE roe: Gover Trane Disib, 198, 136, (9) pp Ta 5 MEDINA,A and ARRILLAGA, J "Genernieed modeling of Dower transformers nthe hammonie Goma’ TBE Trans. Pover Dolly, 1999, 7.13, pp 1438-1463 6 DONMEL, FLW" "Bigital computer simulation of clctomag oi trtnsiens in single and multiphase networks, /EEE Trae Power Appar Sys, 1969, PAS, CD, pp. 388393 7 Appendix Benmore generator parameters rating 112.5MVA voltage 16.0kV frequency 501z, x 0.1820p.u, R, 0,0042p.u, Converter transformer data type star-star, and star-delta rating 187.SMVA primary voltage 16kV secondary voltage 110kV Xam ten 0.113 p.u, (625MVA base)B-H curve representation ‘The hyperbola approximation eqn. 25 provides a pre- ferred match to experimental characteristics in both the saturated and unsaturated regions By = (on Hy + bs ~ Be) onaHn + ba ~ Bs) ~ bibs (25) where B Hy UMEC branch k flux density UMEC branch k magnetising force 0.021 = slope of unsaturated region 3.0e-5 = slope of saturated region 0.0 = ordinates to the origin of asymptote to by = 1.63 = ordinates to the origin of asymptote to my © =19 = correction term UMEC single-phase bank converter transformer winding limb length 3.59m winding limb area 0.4536? yoke length 2.656m, yoke area 0.4536m? Primary winding turns number (star-star and star-delta) 65 turns secondary winding turns number (star-star) “450 turns secondary winding turns number (star-delta) 780 turns Ly (star-star and star-delta) 0.254mH, Ly (tar-stae) U.8mH Ly: (star-delta) 35.6mH UMEC three-limb three-phase converter transformer ¥y0 swinding-limb length 359m winding-limb area 0.4536? yoke length 2.656m yoke area 0.4536? primary winding turns number 65 turns secondary winding turns number 450 turns P, 5.8528 5.85e-8 Pissei7 5.8508 connection matrix 100000 o 10000 oo 1000 [cl=]o 0 0 1 0 0 000010 000001 0-10-10 -1 UMEC three-limb three-phase converter transformer ¥all ‘winding limb length 3.9m winding limb area 0.4536m2 yoke length 2.656m yoke area 0.4536" primary winding turns number 65 turns secondary winding turns number 780 turns Prot 585-8 Psson2 5.8508 Pasig 5.8528 connection matrix 10000 0 o 1 0-100 oo 1000 l=}o 0 0 1 0-1 000010 0-10 001 Converter model parameters PLO proportional gain 10.0 PLO integral gain 100.0 PLO input reference variable 0 smubber resistance 24000 smubber capacitance 0.29uF thyristor on resistance 0.019 thyristor off resistance 1.062 forward voltage drop 0.001kV Forward break-over voltage 1.0eSkV ‘minimum extinction time 0.0us Circuit-breaker parameters breaker open resistance 1.0260 breaker closed resistance 0.0052 ‘open possible if current flowing? no Bypass valve parameters smubber resistance 24000 saubber capacitance 01uE thyristor on resistance 0.0052 thyristor off resistance 1.062 forward voltage drop 0.001kV forward break-over voltage 1.0€5kV ‘minimum extinetion time 0.0us IEE Proc Gener, ronms Ditrts, Vol. 14, No, 2, Mach 1997