www.ietdl.

org

Published in IET Electric Power Applications

Received on 9th August 2009
Revised on 5th November 2009
doi: 10.1049/iet-epa.2009.0192

ISSN 1751-8660

Effect of geomagnetically induced current

on the loss of transformer tank
B. Zhang1 L. Liu1 Y. Liu2 M. McVey3 R.M. Gardner3
1
North China Electric Power University, Beijing 102206, People’s Republic of China
2
Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, VA 24060, USA
3
Dominion Virginia Power, Richmond, VA 23220, USA
E-mail: electricity12345@126.com

Abstract: Geomagnetically induced current (GIC) can cause half-cycle saturation of transformer. The saturation can
increase the stray flux entering into transformer tank, so the tank loss will increase. This study presents a two-
dimensional finite element (2D FE) transformer model and the losses of tank wall, tank top and tank bottom are
computed, respectively. Based on the 2D FE magnetic field, the factors that influence the tank loss of
transformer with GIC are discussed. The influences of magnetic shunt, transformer types, step-up transformer or
step-down transformer, and transformer power factor on the tank loss are analysed in detail. As a consequence,
the transformer types and transformer power factor have large influence on the increase of tank loss caused by GIC.

1 Introduction eddy loss and the overheating of tank [7–9]. It is essential

Geomagnetically induced current (GIC) is caused by solar
activity, for example, sun flare [1]. The solar activity can
emit a lot of charged particles to the earth. The interaction
of the charged particles with the earth’s magnetic field
can produce auroral currents, which follow circular paths
around the earth’s geomagnetic poles at altitudes of 100 km
or more. These auroral currents disturb the earth’s normally
dormant magnetic field and when the disturbances are of
sufficient severity they are termed geomagnetic storms.
During geomagnetic storms, a potential difference is
induced on the surface of the earth because of the earth’s
geomagnetic field fluctuations. The resulting earth
surface potential (ESP) produces a current, known as
geomagnetically induced current (GIC), through the
grounded neutral of transformers and flowing along the
transmission lines. The frequency of GIC is very low, so it
can be treated as a quasi-DC [2]. GIC can cause DC bias
of the transformer. This results in a highly distorted
exciting current of transformer, dramatic increase in
transformer reactive power consumption, mis-operation of
relay and some other problems of power system [3 – 6].
The stray flux entering a transformer tank increases largely
because of the DC bias of transformer. It results in a large
to know how the loss of the transformer tank changes and
what factors will affect the change of tank loss with GIC in
order to reduce the effect of GIC on transformer tank. Loss
of transformer tank will increase with the increase of GIC
[10–13]. Some tests and simulations have been performed
to research the change of the tank loss with GIC. In [10],
the temperature rise of transformer subjected to GIC was
measured on a single-phase 735 kV transformer. The
temperature rise of transformer is analysed well and the
temperature rise of tank is measured, but it did not analyse
the tank loss in detail and it did not concern the influence
of load current on tank loss. Tay and Swift [11] measured
the total transformer loss because of GIC and the total tank
loss was computed by power balance equation. The tank loss
computed by power balance equation is not accurate because
the core loss is hard to obtain the accurate value and [11]
did not analyse the losses in tank different locations. Pavlik
et al. [12] calculated the total tank loss using the two-
dimensional finite element (2D FE) modelling technique.
The 2D FE modelling technique is relative accurate to
compute the tank loss, but [12] did not concern the factors
that would affect the tank loss and it did not analyse the
losses in tank different locations. In this paper, the losses of
tank in different locations and what factors will influence the
change of tank loss caused by GIC is studied.

IET Electr. Power Appl., 2010, Vol. 4, Iss. 5, pp. 373– 379 373
doi: 10.1049/iet-epa.2009.0192 & The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2010
www.ietdl.org
To compute the loss of the transformer tank, a 2D FE
model of a single-phase 500 kV transformer is built in this
paper. The loss of the transformer tank is computed based
on the 2D FE magnetic field analysis. In order to find the
effect of GIC on tank losses in transformer different
locations, the losses of the transformer tank top, tank
bottom and tank wall are computed, respectively. The
influences of magnetic shunt, transformer types, step-up or
step-down transformer, and transformer power factor on
the losses in tank different locations are studied.
2 2D FE model
GIC is related with the DC resistance of power grid and the
length of transmission line [1]. GIC is larger in the higher
voltage power grid because of the lower DC resistance
of higher voltage power grid and the longer distance of
higher voltage transmission line. According to the previous
researches on GIC, the GIC problems had occurred in
500 kV and above power grids mainly. Most of the 500 kV
and above transformers are bank of three single-phase
transformers, so a single-phase unit of a bank of three
transformers is chosen as the study object in the paper.
The loss of transformer tank is caused by the stray flux
entering into tank. In order to obtain the stray flux
distribution in the transformer with GIC exactly, the 2D
FE model of a single-phase 500 kV transformer has been
built and the loss of transformer tank has been computed
based on the 2D FE magnetic field analysis.
The large capacity transformer usually has magnetic shield
or shunt on the inner surface of tank reducing the loss of
tank. In this paper, the magnetic shunt on the inner
surface of the tank wall has been considered in the
transformer 2D FE model. The transformer 2D FE model
is shown in Fig. 1, and the relevant data of transformer are
given in Table 1. Fig. 2 shows the BH curves of the
materials of core and tank. The material of magnetic shunt
is the same as the core. It is clear that the magnetic
permeability of core and magnetic shunt is much larger
than the magnetic permeability of tank, as shown in Fig. 2.
Figure 1 Transformer 2D FE model and the flux density of
core without GIC
374
& The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2010
Table 1 Transformer data
Symbol Quantity Value
S rated power 223 MVA
f frequency 60 Hz
VH rated voltage of HV winding 512.5 kV
VL rated voltage of LV winding 24.0 kV
IH rated current of HV winding 376.8 A  2
IL rated current of LV winding 4646 A  2
m tank thickness 10 mm
Based on the stray flux entering into the transformer tank,
the losses of tank in different locations are computed.
Considering the approximate symmetry of transformer
structure, the total losses of tank wall and the total losses of
tank top and bottom are computed, respectively.
The core of transformer is designed to operate in the
unsaturated situation when the transformer operates
normally. The flux density distribution in core without
GIC when the flux linkage of core reaches its maximal
value is shown in Fig. 1. The maximal flux density of core
is around 1.68 T. As shown in Fig. 2, the core still operates
in the linear direction when the flux density of core is
1.68 T, so the core is not saturated without GIC. Table 2
shows the tank loss with rated voltage, different load
currents and no GIC. In Table 2, P1 refers to the peak
value of the tank wall loss and P2 refers to the peak value
of the total losses of tank top and bottom.
The stray flux entering into tank wall is determined by the
transformer winding currents and the losses of tank top and
tank bottom are determined by the magnetic permeability of
core mainly. When the transformer core is not saturated, the
magnetic permeability of core is large, so the stray flux
entering into the tank top and tank bottom is very little.
This results in the loss of tank wall is much larger than the
loss of tank top and tank bottom, as shown in Table 2.
The exciting current is very small when the core is not
saturated, so the tank loss is determined by the load current
Figure 2 BH curves of the material of core and tank
IET Electr. Power Appl., 2010, Vol. 4, Iss. 5, pp. 373– 379
doi: 10.1049/iet-epa.2009.0192
 www.ietdl.org

Table 2 Loss of transformer tank without GIC To step-down transformer:

Tank loss Load current iH ¼ iHL þ iE (4)

(% rated current)
110 100 90 80 iL ¼ iLL (5)

P1(kW) 23.5 19.1 15.6 12.4 where iHL is the load current in HV winding; iLL is the load
P2(kW) 1.55 1.30 1.06 0.84 current in LV winding; iE is the exciting current and it is
related to the extent of transformer DC bias.

at this time. The larger the load current, the larger the tank
loss, as shown in Table 2.
GIC only flows through the winding that is connected
to the ground. In this paper, the connection type of the
transformer winding is YN/d, so the GIC can only flow
through the high voltage (HV) winding. In this transformer
model, the GIC excitation is imposed on the HV winding.
3 Loss of transformer tank
with GIC
GIC can cause the half-cycle saturation of transformer.
When the core is saturated, the magnetic resistance of core
will increase dramatically, so there will be more stray flux
entering into the tank. This will result in large eddy current
loss in the tank.
3.1 Factors influencing the tank loss
The magnetic shunt on the inner surface of tank wall will
prevent the stray flux entering into the tank wall because of
its higher magnetic permeability, so the magnetic shunt
will have an important impact on the tank loss with GIC.
Besides the magnetic shunt, the stray flux entering into
tank is related to the HV winding current, low voltage
(LV) winding current and the magnetic permeability of
core. So the tank loss can be expressed as (1).
P ¼ f (iH , iL , m) (1)
where P is the tank loss; iH is the HV winding current; iL is
the LV winding current; m is the magnetic permeability of
core and f is a function of iH , iL and m.
In (2) – (5), iHL , iLL and iE are all the significant vectors.
iHL has a phase angle difference w1 with the voltage of HV
winding and iLL has a phase angle difference w2 with the
voltage of LV winding. w1 and w2 are the same and they
are related with the load type and the parameter of power
grid. In electric power engineering, w1 and w2 are expressed
by the transformer power factor. The exciting current iE
lags behind the excitation voltage 908. Therefore the HV
winding current iH and LV winding current iL are not only
related with the magnitudes of iHL , iLL and iE , but are
related with their phase angle differences.
According to (1)– (5), besides the magnetic shunts, the
loss of transformer tank caused by GIC is influenced by
the transformer types, step-up transformer or step-down
transformer and the load current.
3.2 Effects of magnetic shunt
Magnetic shunt is used to reduce the tank loss and prevent
the tank from overheating. Based on the transformer 2D
FE model, the influence of magnetic shunt on tank loss is
studied. In this 2D FE magnetic field analysis, the load
current is set as rated current and the phase angle
difference between load current and winding voltage is
assumed as 08.
Based on the stray flux entering into the tank, the tank loss
is calculated. In order to analyse the effect of GIC on the
losses in different tank locations, the total loss of the tank
wall and total loss of tank top and bottom are computed,
respectively. The average value of transformer tank loss
without shunt and with shunt is shown in Fig. 3.

In (1), m is related to the DC bias of transformer affected

by GIC. GIC can be treated as a DC current, so the stray flux
caused by GIC can be treated as a DC stray flux and it cannot
result in eddy current loss in tank. Ignoring GIC, in (1), HV
winding current iH and LV winding current iL can be
expressed as (2) – (5).

To step-up transformer:

iH ¼ iHL (2)

iL ¼ iLL þ iE (3) Figure 3 Average values of tank loss per cycle

IET Electr. Power Appl., 2010, Vol. 4, Iss. 5, pp. 373– 379 375
doi: 10.1049/iet-epa.2009.0192 & The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2010
www.ietdl.org
In Fig. 3, the effect of transformer DC bias is expressed
by the DC flux magnitude of HV winding caused by GIC.
P12noshunt is the total loss of the tank wall without
magnetic shunt; P12shunt is the total loss of the tank wall
with magnetic shunt; P22noshunt is the total loss of tank top
and bottom without magnetic shunt; P22shunt is the total
loss of tank top and bottom with magnetic shunt.
As shown in Fig. 3, the magnetic shunt on the inner
surface of tank wall can greatly reduce the loss of tank wall,
but it can increase the loss of tank top and tank bottom
little. Without shunt, some of the stray fluxes will make
the tank top, tank wall, tank bottom and transformer core a
magnetic circuit, magnetic circuit A. But with shunt,
because of the magnetic permeability of shunt is much
higher than tank wall, as shown in Fig. 2, these stray fluxes
will make the tank top, shunt, tank bottom and core as a
magnetic circuit, magnetic circuit B. Fig. 4 is the stray flux
distribution at the junction of tank wall and magnetic
shunt. As shown in Fig. 4, most of stray flux will leave the
tank wall and enter into the shunt at the junction of tank
wall and shunt. The total magnetic resistance of magnetic
circuit B is lower than the magnetic resistance of magnetic
circuit A, so with magnetic shunt, more stray flux will enter
into tank top and tank bottom. So with the increase of
GIC, the total loss of tank top and tank bottom with
magnetic shunt is little larger than that without magnetic
shunt.
3.3 Extent of transformer DC bias and
transformer type
Based on the 2D FE model, the stray flux distributions with
different magnitude of transformer DC bias and transformer
type are simulated.
In this 2D FE magnetic field analysis, the load current is
set as rated current and the phase angle difference between
load current and winding voltage is assumed as 08. The
basic data of step-up and step-down transformers are the
same and it is shown in Table 2. The average value of tank
loss with different magnitude of transformer DC bias and
transformer type is shown in Fig. 5.
Figure 4 Stray flux at the junction of tank wall and shunt
376
& The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2010
Figure 5 Average values of tank loss per cycle
In Fig. 5, Pua1 and Pda1 are the average values of tank wall
losses of step-up and step-down transformers, respectively;
Pua2 and Pda2 are the average values of the total losses of
tank top and bottom of step-up transformer and step-down
transformer, respectively.
As shown in Fig. 5, the transformer type, step-up or step-
down transformer, has large influence on the loss of tank wall
than on the total loss of tank top and tank bottom. The loss
of tank wall is determined by the transformer winding
currents mainly. For step-down transformer, the exciting
current is included in the HV winding current, but for
step-up transformer, it is included in the LV winding
current. The exciting current will be very large when the
DC flux is large, so the transformer types have relative
great influence on the loss of tank wall. As shown in
Fig. 5, the average loss of tank wall of the step-up
transformer is smaller than that of the step-down
transformer. The larger the DC flux is, the larger the
average loss of tank wall of step-down transformer is than
that of step-up transformer.
As the DC flux increases, the magnetic permeability of
core will decrease largely because of the half-cycle
saturation of transformer core, so more stray flux will enter
into tank top and bottom. Therefore the losses of tank top
and bottom greatly increase, as shown in Fig. 5. The
greater the DC flux, the larger the losses of the tank top
and bottom. The transformer type has little effect on the
losses of tank top and bottom. This is because the stray
fluxes entering into tank top and bottom are determined
for the most part by the magnetic permeability of
transformer core, not by the transformer winding currents.
The losses of tank wall in different transformer type with 0
and 250 Wb DC flux are shown in Figs. 6 to 7.
Without DC flux, the exciting current is very small, so the
transformer type has little or no effect on tank wall loss at this
time, as shown in Fig. 6. When the half-cycle saturation of
the core occurs because of DC flux, the loss of tank wall
will change in a half-cycle of the winding current and it
IET Electr. Power Appl., 2010, Vol. 4, Iss. 5, pp. 373– 379
doi: 10.1049/iet-epa.2009.0192

Figure 6 Tank wall loss with 0 Wb DC flux
a Tank wall loss of step-up transformer
b Tank wall loss of step-down transformer
will remain practically unchanged in the other half-cycle, as
shown in Fig. 7.
Fig. 8 shows the LV winding current of step-up
transformer and HV winding current of step-down
transformer with 0 and 250 Wb DC fluxes. The peak value
of exciting current will be large when DC bias occurs and
will make the winding current change greatly, as shown.
The loss of tank wall is related to the changing rate of
stray flux in the tank wall and the stray flux is related to
the winding currents; therefore, the loss of tank wall is
related to the changing rate of winding current.
As shown in Fig. 8a, for the step-up transformer, the large
exciting current caused by GIC will result in a slope change
of the LV winding current. Based on the slope change of the
LV winding current with DC flux, the LV winding current
can be divided into three sections every cycle, Section a,
Section b and Section c, as shown in Fig. 8a. The slope
change of the LV winding current in Section a compared
with the slope of the LV winding current with no DC flux
is determined by the peak value of exciting current and it
will change the loss of tank wall compared with the loss
with no DC flux and the loss of tank wall will reach a peak
point A, as shown in Fig. 7a; The slope change of the LV
winding current in Section b will also change the loss of
tank wall and the loss of tank wall will reach another peak
point B, as shown in Fig. 7a; In Section c, the slope of LV
IET Electr. Power Appl., 2010, Vol. 4, Iss. 5, pp. 373– 379
doi: 10.1049/iet-epa.2009.0192
www.ietdl.org
Figure 7 Tank wall loss with 250 Wb DC flux
a Tank wall loss of step-up transformer
b Tank wall loss of step-down transformer
winding current remains practically unchanged; therefore,
the loss of tank wall will not change compared with the
loss of tank wall with no DC flux and it will reach a peak
value C. The peak value C is nearly the same as the peak
value of the loss of tank wall without GIC, as shown in
Fig. 7a.
For a step-down transformer, the exciting current changes
the slope of HV winding current. Based on the slope change
of HV winding current, the HV winding current can also be
divided into three sections every cycle, Section a, Section b
and Section c, as shown in Fig. 8b. There are also three
peak points in the curve of tank wall loss, point A, point B
and point C, as shown in Fig. 7b. This is also because of
the slope change of HV winding current caused by the
increase of exciting current. Since the directions of stray
fluxes caused by HV winding current and LV winding
current are opposite, the change of the loss of tank wall of
a step-down transformer is different from the change of the
loss of tank wall of a step-up transformer, as shown in Fig. 7.
3.4 Power factor of transformer
The angle difference between exciting current and winding
current can also influence the loss of transformer tank with
GIC. In this paper, the angle difference between exciting
current and winding current is expressed as power factor.
377
& The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2010
www.ietdl.org
Figure 8 Winding current with 250 Wb DC flux
a LV winding current of step-up transformer
b HV winding current of step-down transformer
With the same 2D FE model, the influence of power factor
on tank loss is studied. Fig. 9 shows the average value of tank
loss with different magnitude of transformer DC bias when
the power factor is 0.9.
In Fig. 9, the definitions of symbols are the same with
Fig. 5. Comparing Figs. 5 and 9, with the same DC flux,
the average values of tank loss are different for power
factors 0.9 and 1.0, so the power factor does have
important influence on the tank loss. When the magnitude
Figure 9 Tank loss with power factor 0.9
378
& The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2010
Figure 10 Tank loss with different power factors
of transformer DC bias is larger, the tank loss become
larger and the influence of power factor on tank loss will be
larger.
Fig. 10 shows the tank loss with different power factors
when the DC flux is 320 Wb. As shown in Fig. 10, the
influence of transformer type on tank loss is larger with
lower power factors. With the increase of power factor, the
loss of the tank wall and the total loss of the tank top and
bottom will all increase, no matter what transformer type.
4 Conclusion
This paper presents the effect of GIC on the losses of tank
in different locations and the factors that influence the loss
of transformer tank. Based on a 2D FE transformer model,
the loss of tank wall and the total loss of tank top and
bottom are calculated. The following observations can be
made based on this study:
† the magnetic shunt on the inner surface of tank wall can
greatly reduce the loss of tank wall, but it can increase the
loss of tank top and tank bottom little;
† the transformer type, step-up or step-down transformer,
has an important influence on the loss of tank wall, but less
influence on the total loss of tank top and bottom. With
the same DC flux, the loss of tank wall of step-down
transformer is larger than the loss of tank wall of step-up
transformer;
† power factor also has an important influence on the tank
loss with GIC. With the increase of power factor, the loss
of tank wall and the total losses of tank top and bottom
will all increase, regardless of the transformer type.
Based on the above results, the GIC may cause larger
temperature rise of tank in the step-down transformer than
the temperature rise of tank in the step-up transformer.
The power factor of transformer is usually larger in the
higher voltage power grid, so the effect of GIC on the tank
loss of transformer used in the higher voltage power grids
may be larger.
IET Electr. Power Appl., 2010, Vol. 4, Iss. 5, pp. 373– 379
doi: 10.1049/iet-epa.2009.0192

5 Acknowledgments
This work is supported by the National Natural Science
Foundation of China (50677020, 50477039) and the
National High Technology Research and Development
Program (‘863’ Program) of China (2007AA04Z425).
These authors would like to thank Mohammed
Alfayyoumi, Michael L. Lamb of Dominion Virginia
Power for many valuable suggestions and SMIT
Transformer for providing the transformer data.
6 References
[1] KAPPENMAN J.G. , ALBERTSON V.D.: ‘Bracing for the
geomagnetic storms’, IEEE Spectr., 1990, 3, pp. 27– 33
[2] ALBERTSON V.D.: ‘Geomagnetic disturbance causes and
power system effects’. IEEE PES Special Panel Session
Report, 90 TH0291-5 PWR, 12 July 1989
[3] KAPPENMAN J.G.: ‘Transformer dc excitation field test and
results’. IEEE PES Special Panel Session Report, 90 TH0291-5
PWR, 12 July 1989
[4] KAPPENMAN J.G. , ALBERTSON V.D., MOHAN N. : ‘Current
transformer and relay performance in the presence of
geomagnetically-induced currents’, IEEE Trans. Power
Appar. Syst., 1981, 3, (PAS-100), pp. 1078 – 1088
[5] ERINMEZ I.A., KAPPENMAN J.G., RADASKY W.A.: ‘Management of
the geomagnetically induced current risks on the national
grid company’s electric power transmission system’,
J. Atmos. Sol.-Terr. Phys., 2002, 64, pp. 743 – 756
[6] DONG X., LIU Y., KAPPENMAN J.G.: ‘Comparative analysis
of exciting current harmonics and reactive power
IET Electr. Power Appl., 2010, Vol. 4, Iss. 5, pp. 373– 379
doi: 10.1049/iet-epa.2009.0192
www.ietdl.org
consumption from GIC saturated transformers’. Proc. 2001
IEEE Power Engineering Society Winter Conf., Columbus,
USA, January 2001, pp. 318 – 322
[7] PRICE P.R.: ‘Geomagnetically induced current effects on
transformers’, IEEE Trans. Power Deliv., 2002, 10, (17),
pp. 1002 – 1008
[8] TAKASU N., OSHI T. , MIYAWAKI F. , SAITO S. , FUJIWARA Y.: ‘An
experimental analysis of DC excitation of transformers by
geomagnetically induced currents’, IEEE Trans. Power
Deliv., 1994, 4, (9), pp. 1173 – 1181
[9] LU S., LIU Y.: ‘Study of power transformer excitation
under GIC’. Proc. 36th Midwest Symp. Circuits and
Systems, Detroit, MI, USA, August 1993, pp. 879– 882
[10] PICHER P. , BOLDUC L., DUTIL A., PHAM V.Q. : ‘Study of the
acceptable DC current limit in core-form power transformers’,
IEEE Trans. Power Deliv., 1997, 1, (12), pp. 257–265
[11] TAY H.C. , SWIFT G.W.: ‘On the problem of transformer
overheating due to geomagnetically induced currents’,
IEEE Trans. Power Appar. Syst., 1985, 1, (104), pp. 212– 219
[12] PAVLIK D., JOHNSON D.C., GIRGIS R.S.: ‘Calculations and
reduction of stray and eddy losses in core-form
transformers using a highly accurate finite element
modeling technique’, IEEE Trans. Power Deliv., 1993, 1,
(8), pp. 239– 245
[13] IEEE Transmission and Distribution Committee
Working Group on Geomagnetic Disturbances and
Power System Effects: ‘Geomagnetic disturbance effects on
power systems’, IEEE Trans. Power Deliv., 1993, 7, (8),
pp. 1206–1216
379
& The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2010
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without
permission.