Magnetising Inrush Current of Low-Voltage Iron Core
Three Phase Power Reactors
Emil CAZACU
Lucian PETRESCU
Electrical Engineering Department
University POLITEHNICA of Bucharest
Bucharest, Romania
emil.cazacu@upb.ro, lucian.petrescu@upb.ro
Abstract— The paper presents the quantitative evaluation of the
magnetizing inrush current initiated at the connection instant of
various three phase iron core reactors to a low-voltage power
network. An analytical approach is adopted, which bases on the
ferromagnetic coils circuit model and its time domain transient
characterization. Thus, the solutions of the corresponding
nonlinear differential equation system allow extracting the main
inrush current features: waveform signature, amplitude and
duration. The major power quality issues generated by the three
phase reactors energizing process are also investigated and
additionally some inrush current mitigation techniques are
suggested.
Index Terms— Inrush current, Iron core reactors, Magnetic
saturation, Time domain analysis.
I. INTRODUCTION
Most of the power system devices such: transformers, iron
core reactors, all kinds of electric motors, capacitors banks and
many others, surge a significant current at their energizing
instant usually termed as inrush current [1-3]. The basic
phenomenon that generates the inrush current is specific to
each connected power equipment and may fundamentally
differ from one device to another.
The amplitude of the inrush current could even excide 30
times the devices rated current producing excessive
electrodynamic and thermal stress both to the switched
equipments and the network [4-6]. Due to these high peak
values of the inrush current, other power facilities already
connected to the same low-voltage (LV) power distribution
system may also experience sympathetic interactions [7, 8].
Supplementary, the protection and control devices should be
properly adjusted in order to discriminate the inrush current
from fault currents – e.g. short circuits [9, 10]. The latter is
particularly significant since the nuisance tripping of the
mains circuit breaker may lead to a critical power availability
issue. Finally, the power quality of the LV distribution
network in which the power equipment is switched on, is
being severely affected during the energizing process [11-13].
Thus, immediately after the commutation, high order
978-1-4673-6487-4/14/$31.00 ©2014 IEEE
843
harmonic attendance dominates the spectrum of the mains
current and voltage waveforms. Unbalances are also generated
since most of the inrush currents waveforms of the three phase
power devices exhibit severe asymmetries.
Unfortunately, most of the power equipment
manufacturers do not indicate any specifications considering
the inrush current characteristics. Consequently, the
predetermination (when possible) of the inrush current peak-
value and its duration becomes an important data for a proper
use, protection and maintenance of the LV electric installation.
The inrush current issues are very important and require a
special treatment in order to avoid its above-mentioned
undesirable consequences.
The paper limits its investigation to the inrush current
generated by the powering of the iron core three phase
reactors to a LV power distribution network. Due to its
generation principle it is being also known as magnetizing
inrush current [14-16]. Relying on the circuit model of the
ferromagnetic coils, their time domain transient state
characterization is performed. Thus, solving the corresponding
nonlinear differential equation system, the current time
variations, for all the three phases, immediately after the
commutation, are obtained. The proposed method requires the
electric parameters per phase of the iron core reactors;
especially the inductance current nonlinear function. The latter
is essential for the computation accuracy. The study mainly
focuses on evaluating the inrush current essential features such
waveform, peak value and duration of the switched-on iron
core three phase reactors. Additionally some aspects regarding
the inrush current generating power quality issues are also
investigated and different mitigation techniques are proposed.
II. MAGNETIZING INRUSH CURRENT GENERATION
The high-value magnetizing inrush current surged by iron
core three phase power reactors at the energizing moment is
mainly caused by the H-B nonlinear characteristic of the
ferromagnetic core [16, 17]. That could also be express in
terms of the strong nonlinear phase inductance dependence of
the absolute value of the current intensity.
 Under normal operating conditions of the reactors, the core
magnetic flux density value lies around the “knee” point of the
electrical steel magnetization curve. Immediately after the L1 ( i1 )
device is powered on, due to the transient process and the v1 (t ) i1 (t ) R1
laminations remnant induction, the core magnetic flux may
reach more than twice its rated value [18, 19]. Consequently, a
current of extremely high amplitude will flow through the v2 ( t ) i2 (t )
L2 ( i2 ) R2
reactors’ windings. The so generated reactors core overfluxing
decays rapidly and the steady-state current (rated current) is
reached after only a few periods time of the applied voltages. L3 ( i3 )
v3 ( t ) i3 (t ) R3
The main features of this magnetizing inrush current
(amplitude and duration) are influenced by the following
factors [4, 5, 16]:
Figure 1. Adopted circuit model of the three phase iron core reactors.
• The parameters of the electric power source (effective
voltage values and frequency) and the point on the Relying on the above developed iron core reactors circuit
voltage waveform at which the device is powered on model, the currents time evolution through the device three
(switching angle)
phase windings – denoted by i1 (t ), i 2 (t ) and i 3 (t ) , are to be
• Magnetic core characteristics along with the predicted. Immediately after the commutation instant they do
amplitude and polarity of the core remanent flux represent the reactors investigated inrush currents.
before the energizing moment. Hence, using the Kirchhoff's circuit laws, the differential
equations that describe the circuit transient state
• Ohmic resistance of the primary winding circuit.
characterization can be derived:
• Geometry of the iron core three phase power reactors
• Inductance and resistance of LV electric distribution ⎧v1 (t ) − v2 (t ) = R1i1 (t ) − R2i2 (t ) +
network along with its short circuit power at the ⎪ d i (t ) d i (t )
common coupling point. ⎪ [ ] [
+ L1 i1 (t ) 1 − L2 i2 (t ) 2 ,
dt dt
]
⎪
Various power equipments (sources, filters, switchboards ⎪
v
⎨ 2 ( t ) − v 3 ( t ) = R i
2 2 ( t ) − R i
33 ( t ) + (1)
etc.) also contain various iron core reactors or small ⎪ d i2 (t ) d i (t )
transformers that often experiences commutation process. The ⎪ [
+ L2 i2 (t )] dt
[
− L3 i3 (t ) 3 ,
dt
]
electric behaviors and principle of the inrush currents of these ⎪
devices are similar to those investigated in the next chapters. ⎪⎩i1 (t ) + i2 (t ) + i3 (t ) = 0,
The predicted magnetizing inrush current time variation
might be an excellent indicator concerning the most effective [ ] [ ]
where L1 = L1 i1 (t ) , L2 = L2 i2 (t ) , L3 = L3 i1 (t ) are the per[ ]
mitigations techniques that should be adopted for a given phase current dependent inductances and R1 , R 2 , R 3 per
particular case [20-25]. phase ohmic resistance, respectively. The positive phase
sequence voltages of the LV distribution network have the
III. INRUSH CURRENT EVALUATION – TRANSIENT CIRCUIT effective value V , angular frequency ω and initial angular
MODEL
phase α 0 :
As we underlined in the previous sections, the reactors
inrush current parameters are strongly influenced by the core
magnetic materials characteristics. Unfortunately, for the
⎧
majority of the ferromagnetic core reactors such magnetic data ⎪v (t ) = V 2 sin(ωt + α ),
are not indicated by the manufacturer. Consequently, the ⎪ 1 0
develop model of the device cannot directly take into account ⎪ ⎛ 2π ⎞
the magnetic materials description (B-H curve). Thus, a per ⎨v 2 (t ) = V 2 sin⎜ ωt + α 0 − ⎟, (2)
phase lamped circuit model is suggested that also considers ⎪ ⎝ 3 ⎠
the reactors nonlinearity via a specific inductance current ⎪ ⎛ 2π ⎞
dependence – Fig. 1. The latter can be easily obtained by a ⎪v 3 (t ) = V 2 sin⎜ ωt + α 0 + ⎟
⎩ ⎝ 3 ⎠
prior measurement procedure using proper test equipment
such a power choke tester [26]. That is also able to indicate We assume that during the energizing process the mains’
the per phase reactors ohmic resistance. voltages (2) remain constant in terms of their amplitude and
Accordingly, the reactors inductance variation with the waveform. That is to be expected when at that certain point of
current absolute value can be approximated by an the LV network, the source has a high value of the short-
interpolation procedure. Second order piecewise spline circuit power [7].
functions could be selected, which fits very well to the current The nonlinear differential equations system described by
inductance dependence allure. (1), can precisely and quite fast solved by Runge-Kutta-

844
Fehlberg method [27]. Additionally, in order to consider the points is obtained as Fig. 3 illustrates (circular markers). The
worst case scenario in terms of inrush current amplitude, it is inductance–current nonlinear variation is approximated by a
assumed that the switching instant occurs at the zero crossing piecewise second order spline interpolation function that is
line of the first phase’s voltage ( α0 = 0 ). also represented in Fig. 3 with a solid curve.

After the three phase currents time evolution computation,

the magnetic stress within each iron core reactors phase can
also be quantitatively predicted:

[ ]
Φ k (t ) = Lk ik (t ) ⋅ ik (t ), k = 1,3. (3)

The here proposed inrush currents predetermination

procedure can be efficiently implemented in a general purpose
computation environment. Hence, a flexible computation tool
is available that could be easily adapted for investigation of a
variety of iron core reactors dynamic regime. It is important to
underline that the method’s accuracy is very sensitive to the
iron core nonlinear current-inductance description.

IV. NUMERICAL RESULTS – CASE STUDY

The presented computation method of the inrush currents
for the iron core three phase reactors was systematically
Figure 3. Reactor inductance current variation.
tested. We particularly focus our investigation on iron core
devices used in LV power factor correction (PFC) units for
Considering the power network of 230 V effective phase
variable capacitive loads. These particular loads are usually
voltage and 50 Hz frequency, the nonlinear differential
caused by the presence of power electronic converters [28,
equation system (1) is numerically solved. Hence, the three
29]. Figure 2 illustrate the basic principle of PFC equipments
phase inrush currents time evolution is computed. Figure 4, 5
in which the reactors are switched-on by a control and
and 6, depicts their waveforms immediately after the
command block that continuously monitors the network line
commutation.
parameters.
v1 (t )

v2 ( t )
Variable
v3 ( t ) capacitive
load

Low Voltage
Installation

Control and Comand

Block
i1 (t ) i2 ( t ) i3 ( t )

L( i1 ) L( i 2 ) L( i 3 )
Iron Core
Three Phase
Reactors
Figure 4. Computed inrush current time variation for the first phase.
R R R

Figure 2. The power factor correction principle of a variable capacitive

load.

In our further presentation, we select such a three phase

reactor with a magnetic core out of nanocrystalline alloy with
high saturation flux density. The device rated current is 7 A
with a corresponding per phase inductance of 60 mH. Because
of the reactor symmetry, it’s per phase parameters are
considered to be identical. Hence, the ohmic resistance is
R1 = R2 = R3 = R = 0.2 Ω . The inductance-current
relationship: L1 = L2 = L3 = L i (t ) is determined by a [ ]
measurement process, and thus a finite number of pair of Figure 5. Computed inrush current time variation for the second phase.

845
 Figure 6. Computed inrush current time variation for the third phase.
One can notice that the maximum inrush current amplitude
is experienced by the first phase since the corresponding phase
voltage firstly crosses the zero line. Its peak value reaches
72.4 A after 9.5 ms from the energizing process. This value
exceeds 10 times the device rated current and generates
significant thermal and mechanical stress within the reactor.
Fortunately, the duration of this phenomenon is very short and
the currents decay rapidly after just a few periods’ times. Most
of the reactors can withstand a finite numbers of
commutations but gradually their initially design features are
affected.
Since the ferromagnetic core reactor saturation plays a
significant role in the inrush current generation mechanism,
Figs. 7, 8 and 9 present the magnetic flux stress time variation
experienced by the reactors’ phases during 10 period time
intervals after the powering instant.
Figure 7. Computed magnetic flux time variation for the first phase.
Figure 8. Computed magnetic flux time variation for the second phase.
846
Figure 9. Computed magnetic flux time variation for the third phase.
For a LV distribution network these important transient
currents may considerably disturb the mains power quality.
Thus, due to their special waveforms, the system voltages are
affected by odd harmonic attendance in their spectrum. Also,
during the commutation process, the phase voltages have
different effective values and hence an appreciable unbalance
issue is initiated. These undesirable effects spread out to the
entire low-voltage network and the well-functioning of other
equipments, connected to the same network, is endangered. In
order to avoid that, when connecting powerful reactors, either
the shorts circuit power at the common coupling point should
be increase, or some inrush current mitigations techniques
must be adopted.
The simplest inrush current limiter devices are the ohmic
resistances connected during the energizing process in series
with the reactors windings. In spite of their simplicity they
efficiently mange to attenuate the surged currents great peak
values. Other inrush current protection devices are negative
temperature thermistors (NTC) that can be continuously
connected to the reactors winding since their resistance is very
low in continuously mode operation [22]. Active inrush
current limiters, such dedicated soft starter [30, 31], are
required when huge power core reactors are powered on to a
LV network, which also supplies sensitive or critical
equipments. Before, one can make a selection for any of the
aforementioned inrush current mitigation devices, a
predetermination of reactor inrush current features is
mandatory.
V. CONCLUSIONS
The inrush current problem of a low-voltage three phase
iron core reactor was examined. The computation method
considers the device circuit model and numerically solves the
nonlinear differential equations system that derives from its
transient state characterization. Thus, the predetermination of
the inrush currents amplitude and waveform of the reactors’
phases was accomplished. Supplementary, the magnetic flux
stress within the reactor core during the commutation was also
evaluated. The power quality issues initiated by this transient
process were qualitatively discussed along with some inrush
current mitigation procedures.
Thanks to the method simplicity, a variety of
ferromagnetic core devices widely used in LV electric
installations can be analyzed in terms of their inrush current.
 Extensive simulations were performed revealing the
method sensitivity to the inductance–current variation
description. Hence, the results accuracy is strongly influenced
by the nonlinear characterization of the reactor core
ferromagnetic material. The device phase inductance current
dependence, which is being often indicated by a finite number
of measured pair of points, must especially cover the heavy
saturation area of the iron core.
The method can be improved in terms of its preciseness
by adopting a hysteresis model for the reactor iron core
characterization. That advanced material description will lead
to an even more accurate inrush current waveforms
predetermination. The future work will also try to address the
problem of phase connection type of the reactors windings.
Thus, the wye and delta phase connections influence on the
mains inrush current features are to be quantitatively
investigated.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The work was supported by a grant of the Romanian
Ministry of National Education, UEFSCDI, project number
PN-II-PT-PCCA-2011-3.2-0373.
REFERENCES
[1] A. L. Shenkman, Transient Analysis of Electric Power Circuits
Handbook, Springer, Netherlands, 2005, p. 345.
[2] B. van Dam, V. Cuk, J. F. G. Cobben, and W. L. Kling, " A low-
voltage hybrid switch for laboratory experiments", in Proc. 15th
International Conference on Harmonics and Quality of Power
(ICHQP), pp. 59 - 63, Hong Kong, 17-20, June 2012.
[3] N. Rajakovic, A. Semlyen, “Investigation of the inrush phenomenon: a
quasi-stationary approach in the harmonic domain”, IEEE Trans.
Power Delivery, vol. 4, issue 4, pp. 2114 - 2120, Oct 1989.
[4] X. Wang and M. R. Iravani “Energization transients of shunt reactors,”
IEEE Trans. on Power Delivery., vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 1626 - 1631, Nov
1997.
[5] M. Jamali, M. Mirzaie, and S. A. Gholamian, “Calculation and
Analysis of Transformer Inrush Current Based on Parameters of
Transformer and Operating Conditions”, Electronics and Electrical
Engineering, vol. 109, no. 3 , pp. 17-20, 2011.
[6] S. Wiak "A method of calculation of transient electromagnetic field in
non-linear ferromagnetic medium". Journal of Computational and
Applied Mathematics, Archiv für Elektrotechnik, vol. 68, issue 2, pp.
113-120, 1985.
[7] V. Vaddeboina, G. Taylor, and C. Proudfoot, "Switching large
transformers on weak transmission networks — A real time case
study", in Proc. 47th International Universities Power Engineering
Conference (UPEC), pp. 1 – 6, London, 4-7 Sept. 2012.
[8] H. S. Bronzeado, P. B. Brogan and R. Yacamini, “Harmonic Analysis
of Transient Currents During Sympathetic Interaction”, IEEE Trans.
Power Del., vol. 11, no. 4, pp. 2051- 2056, Nov. 1996.
[9] R. Hamilton, “Analysis of Transformer Inrush Current and Comparison
of Harmonic Restraint Methods in Transformer Protection”, IEEE
Trans. Industry Applications, vol. 49, issue 4, pp. 1890 - 1899, July-
Aug. 2013.
[10] T. Sridevi, K. R. Reddy, and N. L. J. Syamala, " Harmonic analysis of
inrush current using fast fourier transform", in Proc. International
Conference on Power Energy and Control (ICPEC), pp. 520 - 524, Sri
Rangalatchum Dindigul, 6-8 Feb. 2013.
[11] M. Nagpal, T.G. Martinich, A. Moshref, K. Morison, and P. Kundur
“Assessing and limiting impact of transformer inrush current on power
847
quality,” IEEE Trans. Power Del., vol. 21, no. 2, pp. 890-896, Apr.
2006.
[12] J. F. G. Cobben, S. Bhattacharyya, J. M. A. Myrzik, and W. L. Kling, "
Integrated approach for power quality requirements at the point of
connection", in Proc. 9th International Conference on Electrical Power
Quality and Utilization (EPQU), pp. 1 – 5, Barcelona , 9-11 Oct. 2007.
[13] J. Arrillaga, N. R. Watson, Power System Harmonics, John Wiley &
Sons, 2nd Edition , 2003, p.64.
[14] Y. Wang, S.G. Abdulsalam, and W. Xu, “Analytical formula to
estimate the maximum inrush current,” IEEE Trans. Power Delivery,,
vol. 23, no. 2, pp. 1266-1268, Nov. 2008.
[15] M. G. Vanti, S. L. Bertoli, S. H. L. Cabra, A. G. Geren, Jr., and P. Kuo-
Peng, “Semianalytic Solution for a Simple Model of Inrush Currents in
Transformers,” IEEE Trans. Magn., vol. 44, no. 6, pp. 1270–1273, June
2008.
[16] E. Cazacu, V. Ioniţă, and L. Petrescu, "An improved method for the
inrush current evaluation in single phase power transformers", in Proc.
8th International Symposium on Advanced Topics in Electrical
Engineering (ATEE), pp. 1 - 6, Bucharest, 23-25 May 2013.
[17] S. J. Chapman, Electric Machinery Fundamentals, Mcgraw Hill Higher
Education; 4th Edition, 2005, pp. 134-140.
[18] P. Ferracci, “Power Quality” - Cahier Technique no. 199, Schneider
Electric, Octomber 2001.
[19] E. Cazacu, V. Ioniţă, and L. Petrescu, “Transformer inrush current
predetermination for distorted waveform voltage supply”, Rev. Roum.
Sci. Techn. – Électrotechn. et Énerg., vol. 58, no. 3, pp. 242–251, July-
Sep. 2013.
[20] J. H. Brunke, and K. J. Fröhlich, “Elimination of transformer inrush
currents by controlled switching - part I: Theoretical considerations,”
IEEE Trans. on Power Delivery, vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 276-280, April
2001.
[21] J. H. Brunke, and K. J. Fröhlich, “Elimination of transformer inrush
currents by controlled switching - part II: Application and performance
considerations,” IEEE Trans. on Power Delivery, vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 281
- 285, April 2001.
[22] R. A. Dougal, “Current-limiting thermistors for high-power
applications,” IEEE Transactions on Power Electronics, vol. 11, no. 2,
pp. 304 – 310, 1996.
[23] B. Kovan , F. de Leon , D. Czarkowski , Z. Zabar, and L. Birenbaum
"Mitigation of inrush currents in network transformers by reducing the
residual flux with an ultra-low-frequency power source", IEEE Trans.
on Power Delivery, vol. 26, no. 3, pp. 1563 -1570, July 2011.
[24] Y. Cui, S. G. Abdulsalam, S. Chen, and W. Xu, “A sequential phase
energization method for transformer inrush current reduction—Part I:
Simulation and experimental results,” IEEE Trans. on Power Delivery,
vol. 20, no. 2, pp. 943–949, Apr. 2005.
[25] W. Xu, S. G. Abdulsalam, Y. Cui, and Xian Liu, “A sequential phase
energization method for transformer inrush current reduction—Part II:
Theoretical Analysis and Design Guide,” IEEE Trans. on Power
Delivery, vol. 20, no. 2, pp. 950–957, Apr. 2005.
[26] ED–K Electronics Development, Power choke tester - DPG10 - Series.
[Online]. Available: http://www.powerchoketester.com/pages/products
[27] E. Hairer, C. Lubich, and M Roche, The Numerical Solution of
Differential Algebraic Systems by Runge-Kutta Methods. Springer-
Verlag Berlin Heidelberg, 1989.
[28] H. A. Hamid, "Transients in reactors for power systems compensation,"
Ph.D. dissertation, School of Engineering, Cardiff University, 2012.
[29] C. H. da Silva, R. R. Pereira, L. E. Borges da Silva, G. L. Torres and
R.B. Gonzatti, “A Hybrid Active Var Compensator (HAVarC)”, Proc.
2010 14th IEEE International Conference on Harmonics and Quality of
Power, pp. 1 - 5.
[30] M. Konstanzer, “Process and device for reducing the inrush current
when powering an inductive load,” U.S. Patent 5479086 A, Dec 26,
1995.
[31] M. Konstanzer, “Method and apparatus for avoiding power-up current
surge,” U.S. Patent 5517380 A, May 14, 1996.