Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Guidelines For Current Transformers Selection For Protection Systems
Guidelines For Current Transformers Selection For Protection Systems
H. CURRENT TRANSFORMER TRANSIENT ANALYSIS Current transformer equivalent circuit is shown in Figure 1. ip
~+ RP n+=-+
2~
Rp, Lp lb. Ls - primary ;inding resistance and leakage inductance - secondary winding resistance and leakage inductance
I. INTRODUCTION CT performance characteristics are specified by ANSLIEEE Standard C57. 13-1993 [1]. However, this standard only covers CT behavior under steady state and symmetrical fault conditions. In an actual power system, short circuit currents may have a significant DC offset, which may saturate CTS that would not saturate under symmetrical fault conditions. Remanence in the CT core can also contribute to CT saturation. Therefore, it is necessamy to use additional techniques to estimate CT performance under fault conditions. The IEEE published the following documents on CT performance and application: 1) Power System Relaying Report 76-Chl 130-4 [2,3], and 2) IEEE Std C37. 110-1996, IEEE Guide for the Application of Current Transformers Used for Protective Relaying Purposes [4]. This paper compares the guidelines in these two documents and suggests modifications that will make CT selection easier and more realistically estimate CT time-to-saturation. Section II presents the theory of CT operation. Secticm III compares the two IEEE documents and proposes a modified method for CT selection. Guidelines are established to estimate CT time-to-saturation. Section IV includes laboratory tests and computer simulations of CT transient response. The Alternative Transients Program (ATP) was used for the computer simulations. ATP-based models, representing the protective relaying system and CTS, were developed. They have proven useful in solving actual industrial and utility distribution system problems.
Figure 1. Current Transformer Equivalent Circuit An ideal CT will operate with an ampere-turn balance:
ip. np = iv. n.,
(1)
where ip, is - CT primary and secondary currents np, n~ - number of primary and secondary turns An actual CT does not behave as an ideal transformer. The CT secondary voltage is generated by the rate of flux change in the core, To produce flux in the CT core, magnetizing (exciting) current is needed. This current introduces ratio and phase errors. The equation of an actual CT can be written as: v, 1 (2) where ip is primary current referred to the secondary, and im is magnetizing current.
p=;s+;m
The fundamental transformer equation (3) applies to all transformers including CTS. E==4.44BAnf where EBAfnRMS voltage on the secondary winding [V] flux density [T] core cross section [m*] fi-equency [Hz] turns ratio (3)
This equation can be used for steady state analysis, but in this form, is not suitable for transient analysis. For transient analysis, the CT equivalent circuit of Figure 2 applies.
0-7803-7173-9/01/$10.00 2001 IEEE 593 0-7803-7031-7/01/$10.00 (C) 2001 IEEE
id
RP
Lp :s-c>~l ir@
Ls
is
The most severe case is a full offset of short circuit current which is obtained for ~_ ~ = ~ and represented by 2 equation: - i(t) = IPgak[e cos(tot)] (7) Standards [1] specify CT behavior only under steady state and symmetrical fault conditions. CT ratio error is specified to be 10?4. or less for fault currents 20 times the CT rated current and specified load. CTS are designed to meet this requirement. But, if a symmetric fault current exceeds 20 times the CT rated current or if the fault current is smaller but contains a DC offset (asymmetric current), the CT will saturate and the secondary current will be distorted and have a reduced RMS value. Figure 4 demonstrates the levels of 600/5 A, C 100 CT saturation for different symmetric fault currents. CT ratio errors, calculated based on the current RMS value, at different saturation levels are correlated to CT operating points on the V-I curve.
mrl I mx
Rm Lm
01$
RI [t
Lm Es imx imr RI Rm
magnetizing inductance CTsecondary voltage magnetizing current, realctivecomponent magnetizing current, active component CT load (burden) including lead resistance iron loss equivalent resistance
Figure 2. Current Transformer (CircuitDiagram To simplifi CT tr~sient analysis, the C~ equivalent circuit of Figure 2 can be simplified as shown in Figure 3. CT parameters Rp, Lp, and Rm can be neglected. In the following analysis Ls was also neglected, although in some cases it may be taken into consideration. Inter-winding capacitance can also be neglected at the frequencies of interest to protection studies [5]. @ Es is ~~1
Current source
Q ------i-
T
Rb=Rs+Rl
03~
l___l_ lL_l_l_l Jl --l---l--l--t-l-l-l-i+- 1 -1-L -1+ -11-1+ -,J -,-1-!,.
__
L__
L_
L_l_l t- -1-llll
LLl_l
L-
__L.
CTratio _f_l.
z
g
P +
------
1v
-----
---
----
____
__
-L
_]_
,,
,,,
;W
Rh The magnetizing branch Lm is a non-linear element. It can be estimated from the CT V-I characteristics which is readily available. The Rb value is alscl usually provided. Lm and Rb data is sufficient to develop CT models. The most important transient condition to be considered for CT operation is an asymmetric short circuit current since, due to the DC component, the CT will saturate at lower currents than for symmetrical short circuit currents. The short circuit current can be expressed as: i(l) = Z&.k[sin(ax+ a p) + sin(a fp)e ] where i(~ - current instantaneous value @ak - current peak value lx fault incidence angle - phase angle between vc)ltageand current T: - primary circuit time constant
0-7803-7173-9/01/$10.00 2001 IEEE
101
102
CT Prima~ Current[A] (referredto the secondary)
103
HI. METHODS FOR CT SELECTION The IEEE published two documents on CT performance and application. This section compares these documents and suggests modifications to their guidelines for CT selection. These methods estimate if a CT will saturate under fault conditions, but they do not indicate the intensity of saturation and its possible impact on relay operation. Additional analysis is required to study the impact of CT saturation on relay protection.
Method #1: To make CT transient analysis easier for users, the Power System Relaying Report 76-Chl 130-4 [2,3] includes guidelines for CT selection. R fh-st defines a saturation factor (K.s)as
(6)
~,=fi=
-.r
Vk
(8)
v,
% &
secondary voltage (Vs) for a symmetrical fault. A higher Ks value indicates a greater safety margin. Report [2] includes a family of Ks curves that can be used to estimate CT transient response based on the Ks value from which the time to CT saturation can be determined. Figure 5 shows an example of Ks curves for primary circuit time constant T ,=20 ms and current transformer time constants T2=0.1, 0.3, 0.6, 1, 2, and 10 s. If the Ks value exceecls the curve for a particular Tz, the CT will not saturate. T2 . 10 , 1 1111111 1111111 I 1111111 10 s ,,, ,!, ,, _ _-J_ LLl_lll ,. I I LIJIJl_. J 9 T1=20ms 1
Z %
-
Ks curves in reference [2] are developed based on Equation 12. Comparison of Ks curves for T1=20 ms and T,=l s obtained using Equation 11 with the Ks curve from reference [2] (Equation 12) is shown in Figure 6. The maximum value of Equation 11 defines the Ks above which the CT will not saturate. Therefore, a straight line was drawn starting from the maximum value. Also, the beginning part- of the Ks curves (dotted lines in Figures 5 and 6) are not drawn based on Equation 12 but were adjusted to represent more realistic CT response since Equation 12 g;ves more pessimistic results in that region. The report does not explain this adjustment.
1
8 7
; a
6 r ~-+~~:{;:l-r
1111111
TTITITl--r
~,
~ m
11111/li
~._ 7
7_____
)
1 ! 111111
0.3, 0.15
11111
TrT
?-?? l!l! I !
FITl~ 111
II
:EiLl&Mwdl
L-4LLLIL UI.. -! LL.AI. AI
-l-1
10
100
1000
Time to Saturation
[ins]
10
100
1000
Time to Saturation
[ins]
Figure 6. Saturation Factor (Ks) Curves for T1=20 ms and T,=l S Figure 7 shows a family of Ks curves for T1=0.02, 0.04, 0.06, 0.08, and 0.1 s and TJ= 0.1, 1, and 10 s developed based on reference [2].
Figure 5. Saturation Factor (Ks) and Time to Saturation for Primary Circuit Time Ccmstant T,=20ms and Different Current Transformer Time Constants (TJ The procedure used to obtain Ks curves was as follows: Using the CT equivalent circuit of Figure 2, flux density in the CT core for a resistive burden was approximated with Equation 9:
n The second term of Equation 11 has a maximum vah~e for sin(cot)= -1. Therefore, the pessimistic value for Ks is:
Figure 7. Saturation Factor Curves vs. Primary Circuit (T,) and CT Time Constants (TJ Comments: Figure 7 indicates that for a CT with higher time constant T,, a higher value of Ks is required to avoid CT saturation. This is p@ correct since the CT time constant increases when Rb decreases. This incorrect result occurs because the variable Rb exists on both sides of Equation 12. When calculating Ks curves, only the Rb on the right side of Equation 12 was handled as a variable. However, when
K., = co ::TI(e-k-e-)+]
(12)
applying Ks curves, this error becomes corrected because Ks must be first calculated from Equation 8, which includes Rb. For a CT, Ks is higher with a smaller Rb and Ks is smaller with a higher Rb. Ks is then checked against the Ks curves in Figure 7 and the results become more realistic. Even though the fwst part of the Ks curves was adjusted downward (dotted line, Figures 5 and 6), they still give more pessimistic results than actual CT transient response in that region.
Method #2: IEEE Std C37. 110-1996 [4] further simplifies
Figure 9 shows a C800 CT time to saturation for a fault 20 times the rated current, T1=0.02 s and Rb=O.5 Q and 1 Q. In this case, the CT will not saturate for Rb=O.5 Q but will saturate for Rb= 1 Q afler 50 ms. Figure 10 extends the results over a range of T1. 100C I I 1111111 I 1111 !111 I I 11111!1 I 1111111
900 ~ 800 _~~l_l~ll~l__l_l_l~l~l[_J I 11111111 I I I 1111111 11111 [11 _~~~l~l~l__l_l_l~l~l~_ I I 1111!11 I I JLIHlll__l_Ll_lulL i 1111111 I 11111!1 I I 1111111 1111111
k=Rb[+He-A 6)
CT transient analysis by assuming T, to be infinite on the right side of Equation 12. This re,duces Equation 12 to equation 13:
[
s :
I 1111111
600 -r
Ill
Trlnrr[-i-r7
lr-TITll
I TITltrI TITlllT,
lT]l-(-r!7
1 !111111 i-,-r I 1 !111111 I 1111111 ,nflm 1111111
.? g
~~o --,
,,,
,,,,,
Ks=coTI le
-L)
I 1111111
I I _l... I
l!ll
[11
(J
1 +1
(13)
,(JO -LLLI Ill I-I
,~3
,@2
18
Id
ts=-T,.lrI
()
l-~
=-T,.in
aTI
1-.=.
-1
xl RI
(,4)
C800 CT
a! % =
T,=* mRI
~ .= ~ :
I I 300-l
and resistance up to the fault. Equation 141 is included in [4]. Comments: In Equation 14, Tz was assumed to be infinite which suggests Lm+Ls=cc or Rb=O. ,Again, this assumption was applied only to Tz of Equation 12, not to Ks which is also dependent on Rb. This produces pessimistic results for CTS having small time constants such as auxiliary CTS and CTS with low saturation voltages. This is shown in the next section.
Proposed Method (Method #3): This paper proposes using
100[+4
I I
-1OC 10-3
(y2
to
1(P
Time
Saturation [s]
Vk instead of Ks (Equation 12) or t, (Equation 14) since it makes it easier to visualize how a CT will perform. For determining the CT time-to-saturation, the use of two equations (Equations 15 and 16) is also proposed. From Equation 11, Vk can be expressed as shown in Equation 15.
Figure 9. Method #3 to Estimate CT Time to Saturation (CT Class: C800, Fault current: 20 times the rated current, T1=0.02 s, CT Burden: 0.5 Q and 1 Q) -= ____ -l---~-11
I,lnw ....
-- - , .L-~
--~
r,
----,
----
-- ~ 120w l-,
.
~ s 1ooo- ! -.1 --T
A /
_!.
1--
- ;-- 1
--
-;-_
IfauM=20x I rated
C800 cl .-
?,---j --
k=R[++A-e-AFsin(u)l 15)
-!. -1
400 ---1 _U le
z .= ; J b
800 6oo- --
J. --, I
-4
-~-l
--,
/7- -;--G
11 .=-_ -
Rb=0,5.0 __;
-_!
I I
--:--
2oo- -:
&i(/ .
:=.
-y
.-
__
where L =
n
ip
..-_e
--
--------
0.01
0,04
- -. -_ ----Q -
:____
0.06
0.04 0.02
0.03
0.02
0.01 0
To estimate CT time to saturation, Equation 15 is used as is, with sin(cot) until its first peak as shown in Figure 8, This gives more realistic CT response for this time range. After the first peak, sin(mt)=-1 is assumed which represents a pessimistic value as given in Equation 16.
Figure
10.
C800 CT Time to Saturation Curves using Method #3 for a 20 Times Rated Current Fault vs. the CT Vk, Tl, and Rb=O.5 Q and Rb=l f2
A comparison of Methods #1 and #2 to Method #3 is shown in Figure 11. Method #2 gives the most pessimistic results for CTS with lower Vk suggesting the CTS will saturate faster than in actual practice (the portion of the curve from 1 ms to 10 ms in Figure 11). Method #1 has slightly corrected this portion of the curve. Method #3 uses sin(ot) in this range which gives results closer to results obtained by testing actual CTS. Methc~d#2 also incorrectly suggests that in some CT applications, CTS need higher V~ to avoid saturation than Method #1 and Method #3 wlhich give more realistic results.
performed at different current levels. Figures 13 to 15 compare tested and simulated CT responses with Rb=2 Q and 6 kA and 10 kA faults with T1=30 ms. The tested and simulated waveforms are very similar, verifying the computer modeling. Figure 16 shows the simulated primary test current (24 kA full-offset) and the CT secondary current. The estimated time to saturation using these different methods are presented in Figure 17 and Table 1.
_r, 1111111 . .. . . I 1 1 1! -i 11111 1 1 111! 111 L---- 1 1111111 _--_! 1 1111111 1 1 111! 111 1 11111111 t 11111111 -1-l _lJ.lLI -t+l+l 1 1111!11 I --rrnt-ir 1 I 1 I I )11111
1200/5A CT
I 1 I
Tl-tl-rl--T I I -----
_~~~lql]l::~:l:lg~l~l~
I I 111111 :1:~~11~1~ L_ J_ LL!_l LIL +-l-+tHt.ll HHEHE L ! ___ 111111 1111111 LIL ,,1, ,, r 1 1 I i 111111 1 111111 I 111111 t---l
l-l
II II
11111
..-
II II +-I
II
~ & z ? .LIJu __l_l_l -t-l+Htt -1-14HU l-++ -1-44 +l+l-tl-*U UI- I 1111111 1 1111111
-1-1+ +-l-l
+1+11--
L-I-! 4LIL! L-4l-&uu 1 _____ t 1111111 _____ I 1 1! 111111 I LIJl_(l-_J. -t_l_l LILIL__l_LL1-l 1111 ! 1411,,,,,, ,,!, Illllllf!tllllll -1,~?,?,r-~r+~v,
1 -. 1 1 ~.
II ++
111111111111
1 , I I lL~ 1~1
LLLIJU I 111111 ----I 111111 -I 1! 1111 1111111 -r-rrb7n Iltllll l-+ +1+1+ Iltllll
1 I I
I I I
In
0.01
0.1
Current [A]
10
I lr@
Figure 11. Comparison between Met!hod#3 and Methods #1 and #2 to Estimate CT Transient Behavior
IV. LABORATORY TESTS AND COMPUTER SIMULATIONS Paper [5] presented laboratory tests and computer simulations for a 600/5 A, C 100 CT and simulations for a 2000/5 A, C800 CT and demonstrated how tinle-tosaturation can be determined usin,g the three methods discussed in Section III. Paper [5] also included an example of time-to-saturation estimation for an auxiliary CT. This paper compares three methods 10 determine the timeto-saturation for a 1200/5 A current transformer for different fault current levels. Time-to-saturation curves are plotted in the same figure to demonstrate the impact of currents on CT saturation and show what CT saturation voltage is necessary to avoid saturation. Laboratory tests and computer simulations were performed. The ATP transient analysis program was used to simulate Cr transient behavior. Computer simulations were particularly usefid to investigate a CT transient behavior in the current range that was not tested in the laboratory. The transient responses of the CT models were compared to laboratory tests to confirm their accuracy.
4.1. 1200/5 A CT Transient Response
Figure
,1 , 1
1, ! t
,, 1
Figure 13. Recorded and Simulated Primary CT Test Current (10 kA, Fully Offset, T1=30 ms)
120
,00 --k
I
#!w--;---;
1
I
I
___l. I
I
I
loyx~=y__
I i
~40_-~ : ~ 20 --:
U 0 -{ -20 ---:
111,1,
I i!
-----l___
,. --,
~--t
-,1
0.02
0.04
0.1
0.12
0.14
0.16
14.
Figure 12 shows the measured V-I curve for a 1200/5 A CT. Several laboratory tests with full-offset currents were
0-7803-7173-9/01/$10.00 2001 IEEE
Recorded and Simulated Secondary CT Current (10 kA, Fully Offset, T,=30 ms)
70
Table 1. Time-to-Saturation for a 1200/5 A CT, T1=30 ms Time-to-Saturation [msl 6kA 10kA l2~kA 9* 4.0* - Method #1 [2] 23
W
0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08
Time [s]
J
6.5
2.0 6.7
0.1
0.12 O.1.t
Comments: Table 1 indicates that both Method #1 and Method #2 are more pessimistic than Method #3, whose results are closer to both tested and simulated results.
Figw-e 15. Recorded and Simulated Secondary CT Current (6 kA, Fully C)ffsct,T1=30 ms) 70 60 50 40 ~ 30 : ~ 20 5 u 10 0 -lo -20
V. CONCLUSIONS This paper compares two methods for selecting CTS published in IEEE documents on CT performance and application. Proposed modifications to these methods are suggested to make CT selection easier and to obtain a more realistic prediction of CT time-to-saturation. All three methods predict if a CT will saturate under fault conditions, but they do not indicate the intensity of the saturation or its possible impact on relay operation. Additional analysis is required to study the impact of CT saturation on relay protection.
References
& i2:m3
0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08 0,09
Time [s]
Figure 16. Simulated Primary ancl Secondary CT Currents (24 kA, Fully C)ffset,T1=30 ms)
2000 -+-I
I+HI+I - 24kA +
1+1 H--l
kl-l-l+l
-...
10 Time lmsl 100 1000 ------- ..
200
!lllllll! 111
10 Time [ins] ..
100
Figure
Engineer for Cooper Power Systems at the Thomas A. Edison Technical Center. He has a Ph.D. degree in power systems with specialties that include protective relaying, testing, digital modeling, and systems analysis. Dr. Kojovic is included on the roster of experts for United Nations Development Organization (UNIDO) and is a registered Professional Engineer in the State of Wisconsin. Dr. Kojovic has authored more than 100 technical papers.