1916 IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery, Vol. 9, No.

4, Oclober 1994

A Method for Modeling Nonlinear Core Characteristics of

Transformers During Transients
Mehdi Vakilian and Robert C. Degeneff
Electric Power Engineering Department
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute .
Troy, NY 12180-3590

Keywords
“formers, Saturation, Lumped Parameter
Model, Nonlinear Model, Inductance Model, Transient
Reeponse, Computer Model , Inrush Current
Abstract
An EHV transformer’s insulation system must be
designed to withstand stresses generated during tran-
sient events. Computer models are employed for pre-
determination of these stresses. The lack of accurate
and consistent computer models for use by both util-
ities and manufacturers, is felt to contribute to the
relatively high failure rate of EHV transformers. This
paper develops a detailed nonlinear transformer model
and a solution method that improves the accuracy with
which the effect of the nonlinear characteristic of the
magnetic core during transients can be predicted. This
model is based on linearization of the core’s saturable
characteristic during solution time intervals. This pa-
per describes a nonlinear, single phase, detailed trans-
former model and its verification against measured
data.
1 Introduction
The insulation structure of a transformer is deter-
mined to a great extent by the transient voltages which
appear within the windings during impulse and
9 4 WM 004-2 PWRD A paper recommended and approved
by the IEEE Transformers Committee of the IEEE Power
Engineering Society for presentation at the IEEE/PES
1994 Winter Meeting, New York, New York, January 30
February 3 , 1994. Manuscript submitted August 2 ,
1993; made available for printing December 6, 1993.
switching surge. For a reliable design it is necessary
to know the voltage (as a function of time) appearing
across the insulation throughout the winding. The
designer needs to know the maximum voltages and
wave shapea between a large number of points for
greatly diversified structures for a wide range of ap-
plied waves, winding connections, and terminations.
Therefore, the reliability of a transformer’s insulation
design is dependent to a large degree on the accurate
determination of these responses in the design stage
and consequently on the computer models employed
PI.
1.1 Concerns
Utilities and manufacturers are concerned about
the high field failure rate of the EHV transformers (3%
per phase, per year [3]). While no single reason has
been idwtified as the cause, American Electric Power
(AEP) has observed that over 60% of the 800 KV
transformer failures on its system are directly related
to electrical breakdown of the unite’ insulation struc-
ture [5]. Itecent field measurements, [2], indicate that
transient waveforms impinging on the transformer ter-
minals are, to some extent, a function of both system
and transformer impedance characteristic. Therefore,
considerable emphasis must be placed on obtaining a
transformer model which properly reflects both the
nonlinear and lossy nature of the transformer, since
- these switching wave forms can drive the units into
saturation.
One major difficulty in transformer modeling for
electro-magnetictransients stems from the nonlinear-
ity of the iron core. In an effort supported by ABB
and AEP, work was undertaken to develop a detailed
nonlinear iron core transformer model.

0885-8977/94/$04.00 0 1994 IEEE

- ~~

1.2 Literature Survey
P.A. Abetti recorded and classified essentially all
published data on the surge performance of trans
formers in his outstanding surveys [SI-[9] prior to
1964. Since Abetti’s last survey, many papers have
been published, primarily about computer modeling
for transients studies. These papers fall into two cate-
gories. The first is the application or use of the model.
The second deals with the computation of the model
elements and solution methods. These solution meth-
ods have developed along two parallel paths; time do-
main models [lo] [4] [20] and frequency domain models
[ll].To date, in spite of great effort spent in both ar-
eas, concern still remains about the industry’s ability
to model accurately the nonlinear, lossy transformer
characteristic for transient calculation. This concern
ia primarily because of the inadequacy of the induc-
tance model to reflect the nonlinear characteristic of
the core, and its inability to represent the frequency-
dependent loss characteristic of a core and coil. This
paper addresses the nonlinear core characteristic. A
subsequent paper addresses the losses with the non-
linear core characteristic.
The existing inductance models are broadly claa-
sified into three types; models which are built from
measured data [12],models which use the transformer
name plate, and a wide range of computational meth-
ods solving the related magnetic field problem.
The last claes can be divided into analytical meth-
ods to solve the magnetic problem combined with nu-
merical methods to compute the inductance parame-
ters [13], [14], [15], and models which employ finite-
element methods to determine the inductance param-
eters.
Among the inductance models which recognize the
effect of an iron core, Rabins [13] assumed an infi-
nite permeability for the iron core and expanded the
current density by a Fourier series. He used the en-
ergy method for inductance calculation. White [14]
assumed a fixed permeability for the iron core and
then solved the magnetic field problem of its coils
and core arrangement by employing Fourier integrals
for the expansion of the non-periodic current density.
Wilcox, et al [15] considered a linear, grain oriented
characteristic for the iron core, considered homoge-
neous conductivity 6 for the iron core and then com-
puted the impedance parameters as a function of fre-
quency. Their model is more suitable for frequency
domain modeling [111.
This survey emphasizes the fact that the indus
try still requires a general and robust methodology
for modeling the nonlinear lossy characteristic of a
1917
transformer’s iron core. It must allow sufficient de-
tail to capture the ranges of frequency observed in
power system switching operations, allow representa-
tion of ZnO, changes in syetem topology, and be gen-
eral enough to allow representation of layer, disk, and
helical core-form units and pancake type shell form
units. This paper describes a method that accom-
plishes these goals. The inductance model is based on
an extension of White’s [14] method, the solution is
in date variable form solved with the Gear method,
and the results have been verified against measure-
ment data.
2 Modeling The Nonlinear Core Char-
acteristic
A method of modeling the nonlinear, saturable,
characteristic of a transformer with an iron core is
presented. The strategy is to linearize the iron core
saturable characteristic within each solution time in-
terval. During each interval a specific linear prob-
lem is solved where the cores effect on the inductance
parameters may be different from the previous inter-
vals. The formulation presented is completely general
and has been adapted to address frequency dependent
losses and nonlinear system elements such aa ZnO and
switches.
2.1 Philosophy and Basic Assumptions
In a linear model of an iron-core transformer, the
permeability is assumed constant regardless of the
magnitude of the flux in the core. This assumption
allows the inductance model to remain constant, re-
gardless of the excitation level or past history. This
simplification is not possible when modeling the non-
linear characteristic, since the iron core will exhibit
different material properties due to past history and
instantaneous flux magnitude [12].
The philosophy of the nonlinear core model used
ia illustrated by a schematic model in Figure 1. The
upper branch represents the relationship between the
leakage flux, 61, which has a portion of its path out-
side the iron core and the total magnetomotive force,
MMF. The lower branch represents the relationship
between the magnetizing flux , &,, which is restricted
to the iron core path and MMF. Summing these two
components yields the total flux in the winding, # t .
The right hand side of this figure shows that the rel&
tive differential permeability, prd, can be determined
at each instant of time if dt and its relationship with
It, the reactive component of excitation are known.
Then bdcan be used to update the inductance model
1918

Figure 1: Transformer Nonlinear Core Model

uf
1

Figure 3: DC r$,-MMF Loop for a 500 MVA

765/345/34.5 KV Single Phase Autotransformer

2 can instead be expreseed as

Similarly the saturation characteristic in terms of dm

I
, I I va MMF must be expressed aa
IO R IN sa IW sm@ loon.

Magnetizing Force, (H(A/m) (4)

Figure 2: DC E H Curve
at time t. This work amumes that the magnetizing
flux hae a uniform pattern along the iron core path,
the magnetizing current is equal to the total MMF,
and the core hae only a saturable Characteristic (hye
teresis loopa are ignored). The iron core saturation
characteristic can be represented by a E H curve (Fig-
ure 2) or a (6,-MMF curve (Figure 3). It can be seen
in Figure 2 that aa the magnetiing flux increasee the
iron core proceeds toward saturation on the B-H (or
r$,,,-MMF) curve.
The well known definition of permeability aeeuming
a linear characteristic for the iron core, is
where :
Qm is the magnetizing flux in the core, weber
MMF is the total ampere turns of windings
In this caae the permeability of the iron core would
vary with H,and it will be defined aa ratio of B/H,
P ( H ) = PO * W H ) / H (5)
To properly reflect the nonlinear core characteristic
in time it is neceeaary to evaluate the relative perme-
ability of the iron core within each time interval and
use it to eatablish the iron core inductance matrix in
that interval. The differential, or incremental induc-
tance definition is applicable:

or where :
B = po.pcr.H (weberlml) (2) Ld is the differential inductance of an inductor
where: Based on this definition, the inductance voltage
po = 4rz10-' henrylmeter drop for a nonlinear inductance will be
is relative permeability

When the E H characteristic is not linear, Equation


The relative differential permeability is defined as
the slope of the line tangent to the B-Hcurve in Figure
2 at the operating point with magnetic field intensity
of H at time t
This value of relative differential permeability at a spe-
cific instant of time, t, is considered the relative per-
meability of the linearized iron core for the interval, t
to t+At. White's inductance model, [14] can then be
employed to determine the inductance parameters for
next solution interval.
2.2 Nonlinear Model Formulation
At each instant of time the core's flux density can
be evaluated; then the new relative reluctivity can be
determined. White's inductance model [14] can then
be used to compute the inductance parameters at each
instant of time.
The flux in each winding segment can be expressed
aa
P e l = [A'l"[fel (9)
where :
[fe] is the vector of winding flux linkages
[&I is the vector of winding fluxes
[A'] is the diagonal matrix of number of turns per
winding segment
Based on the assumptions discussed in section 2.1
4m = B * A (10)
MMF=K*H (11)
where
4m is the core magnetizing flux, weber
A is the equivalent core cross sectional area, ma
B is the flux density in the core, weber/ma
MMF is the total ampere turn, Ampere-turns
K is the equivalent length of the iron core, m
Substituting B from Equation 3, and H from Equ&
tion 11 in Equation 10 results in
dm = PoAFI(MMF/K)- (12)
To determine the operating point of the core on the
gaturation characteristic, 4m and MMF must be eval-
uated. For a set of winding segments with an iron core
it is derived in [12] that
[&][de] - &4m - M M F = 0 (13)
1919
where
[RI is the leakage path reluctance matrix
[&]is a row vector with elements Rei = cy=l Rij
Cy='=,
RT = c=1 Rsj
n is the total number of winding segments
&j are the elements of reluctance matrix [RI
Equation 13 relates the fluxes in the windings to
the magnetizing flux in the iron core and the total
ampere-turns.
The leakage path reluctance matrix can be evalu-
ated from White's inductance model. Then Equations
12 and 13 can be solved for the two unknowns d m and
MMF.
Recalling Equation 8, the relative differential per-
meability can be expressed as
Applying this value of relative differential permeabil-
ity, the inductance model can be recomputed for the
new operating point on the saturation characteristic.
Then the complete winding equivalent RLC lumped
circuit with the updated inductance parameters can
be solved, and a similar pro- is repeated for the
successive intervals.
2.3 The Solution Methodology
A lumped RLC network representing the transient
response of a transformer yields a system of ordi-
nary differential equations which are referred to as
stiff mathematically, i.e., their natural frequencies ex-
tend over a very wide range. To achieve a consistently
stable solution methods designed specifically for this
class of problem must be employed. C.W. Gear [16]
described a method which uses backward difference
formulas of the first to fifth order to solve these typea
of stiff systems. A system of O.D.E.'s for the FUC
network representing the transformer is
where:
[ic],currents in the winding segments
1920
(7)
I TOPOLOGY I C, = 16 p.
, ,+,
I
I ”0 I 3 Model Verification
Figure 4: Flowchart of Solution Routine
[e,], model’s nodal voltage vector
[fee]) windings’ flux-linkage vector
[r],the diagonal matrix of windings series resistance
[TI,the windings connection matrix
[TI‘,the transpose of [TI
[q, the nodal capacitance matrix (-[GI)
[U], a unity matrix
[I,],vector of current sources
[L],transformer inductance matrix at time t
[Ll], diagonal matrix of lumped inductors
[a],connection matrix of lumped inductors
[ill) vector of currents in the lumped inductors
[Gj, conductance matrix, for resistors connected
between nodes
Figure 4 shows a high-level flowchart of of solution
routine. The system of O.D.E.’s in Equation 15 is
solved by application of Gear’s method. The resul-
tant model not only allows an accurate representation
of the core’s nonlinear characteristic, but also allows
direct representation of frequency dependent losses,
ZnO, and switches. This is all possible due to the
,
R A 3 9 2 Ohms
R =10758Ohms
2
F.
4
c*=10 P. F.
Figure 5: Switching Surge Generator’s Equivalent Cir-
cuit
step-wise linear approach to the problem. This model
has been m c d u l l y used to model all form of wind-
ings for core form and shell form transformers.
The following compares computed response to that
measured for two nonlinear events: switching surge
response in factory teats and inrush response during
field energiaation. Both eventa were modeled for a
500 MVA 765/345/34.5 KV single phase core form
unit constructed by ABB for AEP (see Appendix H in
[17]). The circuit shown in Figure 5 was used to sim-
ulate the factory switching surge (1700 KV, 100/1000
ps) teat. With no residual core flux the core satu-
rates as shown in Figure 6. Figure 6 also shows the
variation of core relative reluctivity versus time. Dur-
ing the core saturation, the relative reluctivity of the
core is nearly 1.0, and a large current flows into the
H terminal. The change in slope on the tail of the
applied voltage (at about 1OOOps) corresponds to the
point where the core saturates. This change in slope
is due to the reduction of the transformer impedance
after saturation (air core) compared to the impedance
prior to saturation (iron core). Similar phenomena
are often experienced in factory tests [MI.For this
same transformer, measurements were made during
substation energization to record inrush current and
terminal voltages. The measured high voltage termi-
nal’s voltage waveform was applied directly to the high
voltage terminal of the nonlinear model. Figure 7 is
a comparison of the measured and calculated inrush
current for the first four cycles. The alignment of the
peaks is excellent. The deviation of the current’s re-
sponse near zero current is due to neglecting the core
hysteresis loop within the saturation curve. Fkference
[19] has compared the computational results of the in-
rush current when only a saturation characteristic is

a I
13
Figure 6: Applied Switching Surge and Relative F
b 4
luctivity
I(H) :A
I 1
TmEr
Figure 7: Computed Inrush Current vs. Measured
used versus an application of a backlash element for
the hysteresis loop, and has shown the same difference
shown in Figure 7. This deviation has no significant
effect on the value or the occurrence time of the cur-
rent peaks. Figure 8 compares the response of the
computed tertiary voltage versus the measured one.
There is an excellent match between the peaks and the
form of the tertiary voltage response. This comparison
shows that the model is well qualified to demonstrate
the actual variation of current as well aa the voltage
response when the nonlinear core characteristic haa a
substantial effect.
1921
Figure 8: Computed Tertiary Voltage vs. Measured
Summary and Conclusion
This paper presents a method for modeling the ef-
fect of a ponlinear core characteristic on the trans-
former internal voltage response. The model is baaed
on determining the magnetizing flux at an instant of
timb and using it to recompute the inductance model.
A system of O.D.E.’s was established for fhe nonlinear
transformer model, and by application of a stiff O.D.E.
solver, implementing Gear’s method, this system waa
solved.
The capability of the nonlinear model and solution
methodology are demonstrated by comparison to mea-
sured data. The method presented is completely gen-
eral and allows the modeling of frequency dependent
losses, ZnO, and switch-. This model has been suc-
cessfully used to model all forms of windings for both
core and &ell form transformers.
5 Acknowledgements
This reeearch waa supported by ABB Transmis-
tion and Distribution Power Incorporated and Ameri-
can Electric Power Service Corporation. The authors
would like to thank Dr. R. Girgis, Mr. E. Henrik-
sen, Dr. P. McKenny, Mr. J. Provanzana and Dr. J.
Schneider for their support and guidance.
References
[l] R. Degeneff, M. Vakilian, M. Gutierre;, P.
McKenny, R. Girgis, P. Soderberg, J. Schndder,
J. Provanzana, “Modeling Power Transformer For
Transient Voltage Calculations,” CIGRE Paper
l t 8 0 4 , 1998 Session.
1922
[2] Lee, K.H. and Schneider, J.M., “Rockport Tran-
sient Voltage Monitoring System: Analysis and
Simulation of Recorded Waveforms,” IEEE Trans.
on Power Delivery, Vol. 4, No. 3, pp. 17941805,
July 1989.
[3] “An International Survey on Failures in Large
Power Transformera in Service,” Final Report of
Working Group 05 of Study Committee 12 (Trans-
form ere), Eledra, Number 88, May 1983.
[4] R.C. Dugan, R. Gabrick, J. C. Wright and K.W.
Patten, “Validated Techniques for Modeling Shell-
Form EHV Transformers,” IEEE fins., Vol.
PWRD-4 , No. 2, April 1989, pp. 1070-1078.
[5] V.I. Kogan, J.A. Fleeman, J.H. Provanaana and
C.H. Shih, “Failure Analysis of EHV Transform-
em,” IEEE fins. in Power Delivery, April 1988,
pp. 672483.
[6] P.A. Abetti, “Bibliography on the Surge Perfor-
mance of Transform em and Rotating Machines,”
Dans. AIEE, Vol. 77 (1958), pp. 1150-1168.
[7] P.A. Abetti, “Survey and Classification of Pub-
lished Data on the Surge Performance of Trane
formers and Rotating Machines,” Trans. AIEE,
Vol. 78 (1959), pp. 1403-1414.
[8] P.A. Abetti, First Supplement to reference 8,
Dans. AIEE, Vol. 81 (1962), pp. 213.
[9] P.A. Abetti, Second Supplement to reference 8,
Dans. AIEE, vol. 83 (1964), pp. 855.
[lo] R.C. Degenef€, T.J. Blalock, C.C. Weisebrod,
Dansient Voltage Calculation in finsformer
Windings, General Electric Technical Information
Series, No. 80PTD006,1980.
[ll] D.J. Wilcox, T.P. McHale, “Modified Theory of
Modal Analysia for the Modeling of Multiwinding
Transformers,” IEE Pmceedings-C, Vol. 139, No.
6, November 1992, pp. 505-512.
[12] D.N. Ewart,“Digital computer simulation model
of a steel-core transformer,” IEEE %tu., Vol.
PWRD-1, N O & July 1986, pp. 174183.
[13] L. Rabins, Yllansformer Reccctance Calculation
With Digital Computer,” AIEE Dana., Vol. 75,
July 1956, pp. 261-267.
1141 W.N. White, Inductance models of power trans-
formers, General Electric Technical Information
Series, No. 78PTD003, April 1978.
[15] D.J. Wilcox, W.G. Hurley and M.Conlon, “Cal-
culation of Self and Mutual Impedances B e
tween Sectiona of Transformer Windings,” IEE
Proceedings4 , Vol. 136, No. 5, September 1989,
pp. 308-314.
[le] A.C. Hindmarsh, Gear Ordinary Differential
Equation System Solher, Lawrence Livermore Lab-
oratory, CA, August 20, 1972. UCID-30001, Rev.-
2 Computer Documentation.
[17] M. Vakilian, A Nonlinear Lumped Parameter
Model for Dansient Studies of Single Phase Core
Form lhnsformers, Ph.D. Thesis, August 1993,
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, New York
[18] A.C. Franklin, The J d P Dansformer Book,
11th edition, Chap. 15, pp. 351-367.
[19] J. Sterael and Th. Weber, “Improved Model Rep-
reeenting the Nonlinear Behavior of Three-phase
Transformers,” Presented at IEEE Winter Meet-
ing, February 1993, Columbus, Ohio.
[20] F. de Leon and A. Semlyen, “Complete Trans-
former Model For Electromagnetic Transients,”
Presented at IEEE Winter Meeting, February
1993, Columbus, Ohio.
Robert C. Degeneff (M’67,SM’84,F’93) was
born in Ann Arbor, Michigan on July 9, 1943. He re-
ceived his B.M.E.from GMI in 1966 and his M.Eng
D.Eng. in 1967 and 1974, reepectively from RPI in
Electric Power Engineering. He joined General Elec-
tric’s Large Power Transformer Department aa a Se-
nior Development Engineer and was promoted in 1978
to Manager of the Advanced Electrical Development
Unit. In 1981 he joined the Electric Utility Systems
Engineering Department aa Manager of the HVDC
Engineering Subsection and in 1985 aseumed the po-
sition as Manager of the Software Services Section. In
1989 he joined the faculty of RPI as a Professor of
Electric Power Engineering. He haa published over
three doaen papers, several chapters in books, and
holds three patente.
Mehdi Vakilian was born in Tehran (Iran), on
October 24, 1955. He received a BSc. degree in Elec-
trical Engineering from Sharif University of Technol-
ogy (Tehran), in 1978. From 1979 to 1980 he attended
a Mater program in Electric Power Eng. at Univer-
sity of Manchester Institute of Science and Technol-
ogy (U.K.).From 1980 to 1983 he worked with Iran’s
Power Generation and Transmission Company (TA-
VANIR) aa a power trammission engineer and then
aa manager of transmission system. Wom 1983 to
1985 he worked with Iran’s Ministry of Energy in plan-
ning training courses for power transmission engineers
where he waa involved in publishing several books. He
received a MSc. in Electric Power Engineering from
Sharif University, in 1986 and joined the faculty of
Electrical Engineering Department of this university.
He received a Ph.D. from RPI in August 1993.

Discussion
W.P. Seitlinger (ELIN Transformatoren GmbH, Weiz, Austria):
It was the practice in our transformer design
department to use a different model (and
calculation method) for the investigation of
nonlinear effects than for the calculation of
high frequency transients. Saturation effects
do determine for example the waveshape and the
peak value of the inrush current, they gener-
ate additional stray flux components and eddy
current losses in case of extremly high over-
excitation or also in the case of DC in the
windings, generated by geomagnetical effects
or by DC-converters in the neighbourhood.
All of these effects produce harmonics of the
current, but a satisfactory representation is
possible with a model with a frequency range
up to about 1 kHz. Fundamental resonance
frequency oscillations need not to be repre-
sented. More important is an appropriate
modelling of the nonlinear magnetic charac-
teristic of the core and its linkage with the
windings.
On the other hand, the investigation of oscil-
latory transients (e.g. lightning impulse,
resonance phenomena, . . . ) needs a model with
a bandwith of at least 100 kHz, while the
effect of saturation does not (or not very
much) influence the behaviour of these tran-
sients. The assumption is that resonance fre-
quencies are determined mostly by the short
circuit impedances between windings or winding
parts, therefore a change in the reluctance of
the core does not change the resonance fre-
quencies significantly.
With these considerations in mind a combina-
tion of a nonlinear model with a high frequen-
cy model seems not to be that important. The
paper under discussion presents such a com-
bined model, though the bandwith of this model
is not clearly defined. The results presented
in the paper are encouraging regarding the
modelling method, but it seems that they still
do not show the need for such a model.
We feel however that there can exist critical
phenomena in the field which require this
combined transformer model. We also have
investigated the possible connection of satur-
ation effects with high frequency transients
in transformer windings, and we also found
that oscillatory transients can be generated
by the extremly nonlinear characteristic of
the core. The magnitude of such transients
seemed not to be critical however in the cases
investigated so far.
A typical case which might call for more
attention in the future is the de-ener-
gization of a transformer. Here the combina-
tion of the nonlinear magnetic characteristic
of the core with the capacitance of the trans-
former and the bus can result in non'sinuso-
idal oscillations of the de-energized trans-
former terminals. A sudden increase of the
noise level together with remarkable voltage
peaks after de-energization of a transformer
was reported in one case. We could resolve the
questions of the client and simulate these
phenomena by using a transformer model similar
to that presented in the paper discussed. We
think therefore that a nonlinear oscillatory
1923
transformer model will be very useful for the
analytical investigation of such or similar
phenomena. There is no doubt that some pos-
sible critical situations can only be iden-
tified with this advanced modelling method.
Another interesting point is the residual flux
in the core, which was not taken into account
in the presented paper, but can be incor-
porated probably without too much effort. It
is very likely that the residual flux after
de-energization is influenced by the os-
cillatory behaviour of the open terminals.
Here again an appropriate transformer model
could provide the means to investigate the
magnitude and the distribution of the residual
flux in a 3-phase transformer core.
Manuscript received February 16, 1994.
Francisco de L e b (Instituto Polikknico Nacional, Mexico): The
authors have presented a very interesting paper in the time domain
modeling of the nonlinear, saturable, iron-core for the study of
electric transients involving transformers. They should be
commended for their constant effort in the improvement of
transformer modeling.
In the paper the effects of hysteresis and eddy currents were
completely neglected. In this discusser's experience the magnetic
effects of hysteresis, except for the initial condition due to
remanence, can be neglected altogether since the hysteresis loop is
very narrow for power transformers. Neglecting the losses due to
hysteresis Seems to be reasonable for most transients with a few
exceptions where the losses may have a significant effect in the
damping of the transient. Examples are studies of magnetizing
current chopping and ferroresonance. However, the assumption of
uniform distribution of the flux along the lamination width imposes
a serious limit in the maximum frequency for which the model can
be used, perhaps to a few kilohertz. Not only the losses are not
taken into account, but neither are the magnetic effects due to eddy
currents. The example presented in the paper is the evaluation of
inrush currents, where the hysteresis losses are directly absorbed
by the source and do not contribute to the transient damping. One
should realize that inrush currents are not of a very high frequency
nature, then there is no need to include the effects of eddy currents
in the simulations. The authors have announced a forthcoming
paper related to nonlinear losses. Will they analyze the eddy
currents as well? How will they handle high frequency transients?
I would like to bring into the discussion a physical iron-core
model, which is consistent with the principle of duality, presented
simultaneously in references [A] and [B]. The model is capable of
representing high frequencies together with saturation (and possibly
hysteresis) s i q e each inductance corresponds to a flux path. Such
a model is shown in Figure A. The parameters of the model are
Figure A. Nonlinear Cauer Model
1924
computed differently in [A] and [B], but in both cases only the
lamination width and its saturation characteristics are needed. In
[A] the selected state variables are the fluxes, which are a more
natural choice for the analysis of nonlinear iron-cores. Is there any
special reason for using differential inductances instead?
Finally, there are two typographical errors in the flow chart of
Figure 4, the number of the equation (4.6A) should be (15) and
equation (3.27,28) should be (lo), (11).
[A] F. de Le6n and A. Semlyen, "Time Domain Modeling of
Eddy Current Fffects for Transformer Transients," IEEE
Transactions on Power Delivery, Vol. 8, No. 1, January
1993, pp. 271-280.
[BJ E.J. Tarasiewicz, A S . Morshed, A. Narang, and E.P.
Dick, "Frequency Dependent Eddy Current Models for
Nonlinear Iron Cores", IEEE Transactions on Power
Delivery, Vol. 8, No. 2, May 1993, pp. 588-597.
Manuscript received February 17, 1994.
R C. Dugan (Electrotek Concepts, Knoxville, TN): I would like
to congratulate the authors for this excellent paper, which
makes a strong contribution to the understanding of modeling
nonlinear elements, particularly transformers, during transients. I
would like the authors to comment on a couple of issues.
I can understand clearly the importance of the previous con-
tributions of the authors in establishing a good reduced linear
model of the transformer for estimating insulation stresses within
the winding. However, I am still not.clear about what design
changes might be made as a result of the nonlinear modeling.
Do the authors have evidence that would clearly link the nonlin-
ear behavior of the transformer to specific failure modes during
transients? It would appear from Figure 6 that the transient
would have to be one that persists at least for 1000 psec with
sufficient energy remaining to cause damage in order to bring
the nonlinear elements into play. What types of transient events
should we be concerned about?
The authors present as verification of their model the com-
puted tertiary terminal voltage (Figure 8). I have noticed that it
is much easier to match terminal responses in layer-wound and
shell-form transformers than it is to determine the values within
the winding. I have suspected that this was due to a discontinuity
in the capacitance network that often appears at this point in
the winding resulting in a particular frequency dominating the
response. How certain can we be about the accuracy of the
model by comparing measured and computer terminal responses
to a transient event? And how is the nonlinear behavior of the
transformer likely to affect this accuracy?
Manuscript received March 1, 1994.
M. Vakilian and R C. Degeneff In response to Mr. Dugans
question about the changes in transformer design that might
result from the use of this program we would have to say that it
is to soon to know. The work reported in this paper was the first
part of a two part effort. This initial step was to produce a
transients program that would accurately reflect the nonlinear
characteristic of the transformer core and coil during switching
surge wave events. The second part of the research was to create
reduced order models using the nonlinear detailed model result-
ing from part one as a starting point and create a reduced order
model that would be suitable for use in EMTP 11, 21. The
perceived need for these two parallel research areas was a result
of the higher than normal failure rate for 500 and 765kV
transformers. It was felt that wave forms actually generated on
the system are often considerably different that those used for
proof testing in the factory. Additionally, these wave forms could
not be predicted with any degree of assurance with the trans-
former models typically used in EMTP system studies since they
are generally valid up to the first resonance. The strategy behind
this work was to create a more accurate reduced order trans-
former model (in the switching surge range) and use it within
EMTP. The results from these studies, which would be per-
formed by the utility, would then be used during the transformer
design stage to assess if the design was adequate not only for the
normal factory proof-test wave forms but also for the wave forms
generated on the system which a function of the transformer-
transmission system interaction. Steps are being taken to intro-
duce the reduced models in EMTP, however, the entire issue
has not been fully investigated.
Mr. Dugan's second question about the ability of this model
(or any model) to match a physical response points out an
important concern. We have observed that three issues need to
be correctly addressed to achieve an accurate computation of
the transient response. First, the model must be of sufficient
detail so that a lumped parameter approximation is valid, e.g.,
the highest frequency of interest would have a period at least
ten times larger that the travel time of the largest winding
segment in the model. Second, the model must be discretized in
a manner that produces a uniform RLC structure. This may be
difficult when modeling a realistic transformer winding. The
third is that the R , L , and C of the model must be computed
accurately. We have found that if all three of these conditions
are met matching the internal or terminal response can be
achieved with equal accuracy. We used the tertiary response in
this paper because we only had the measured response for the
high, common, and tertiary terminals and we have found that
the tertiary was the most sensitive to modeling errors.
Dr. Seitlinger's asked about the bandwidth of the model. The
detail of the model is under the control.of the user and as such
the effective bandwidth can vary from transformer model to
model. This control is established by varying the number of
turns in each winding section modeled. The basic goal of this
work was to produce a program that accurately would compute
the response of the transformer to the nonstandard switching
surge wave forms. This would require the model to be valid from
say three to 50kHz. In a future paper we will discuss the
modeling of the frequency characteristics of losses, the capaci-
tance network, and the inductance model. Dr. Seitlinger's com-
ments about the changes in losses as the core saturation changes
adds to the challenge of constructing a wide band time domain
model. To construct a model that responds correctly requires
not only a correct analytic expression but also a knowledge of
how the structure responds physically over a very wide frequency
and core flux envelope. This data in not aiways known precisely
and suitable approximations must be made.
We agree with Dr. Seitlinger's comments on the applicability
of the program to study events on the system that are different
than what might normally be tested in the factory proof testing
process. This was the precise reason this work was initiated. The
residual flux can be modeled with this method but due to the
length of the paper this was not explored in any detail. The
solution method is of a form that can be extended to three phase

cores of general configuration, but the present paper is only for
single phase units.
Dr. de Leon was correct in his comments that hysteresis losses
~
have been completely ignored. For the data presented in this
paper the [ r ] and [GI matrices were constructed for the particu-
lar comvutation and remained constant for the subseauent cal-
culation. A subsequent paper will explore the effect of modeling
the frequency dependent characteristics of R, C, and L. In this
manner the effect of the flux penetration in the core as a
function of wave shape will be addressed simultaneously with
losses. We agree with Dr. de Leon that flux would be a more
natural choice for the analysis of nonlinear core characteristics,
however, this project had a number of goals and the method
used had ‘to successfully address each of them. These included
constructing
” a solution method that was comuatible with an
existing transformer production design tool, being able to model
1925
ZnO, and constructing a reduced model that would be compati-
ble with EMTP using the detailed model as a starting point. The
method that addressed the majority of these issues was the one
presented in this paper.
References
1. M. Gutierrez, R. Degeneff, P. McKenny, and J. Schneider,
“Linear, Lumped Parameter Transformer Model Reduction
Technique,” Presented at the IEEE-PES Summer Meeting,
Vancouver, B. C., July 18-22, 1993.
2. R. Degeneff, M. Gutierrez, M. Vakilian, “Nonlinear, Lumped
Parameter Transformer Model Reduction Technique,” To
be Presented at the IEEE-PES Summer Meeting, San Fran-
cisco, Ca., July 24-28, 1994.
Manuscript received May 24, 1994.