1078 IEEE Transactions on Power Apparatus and Systems, Vol. PAS-100, No.
3, March 1981
CURRENT TRANSFORMER AND RELAY PERFORMANCE IN THE PRESENCE OF GEOMAGNETICALLY-INDUCED CURRENTS
J. G. Kappenman
Member IEEE
Minnesota Power & Light Co.
Duluth, MN
ABSTRACT
Transient fluctuations in the earth's magnetic
field are caused by solar flares or other solar pheno-
mena. These geomagnetic field disturbances cause
quasi-dc geomagnetically-induced currents (GIC) to
enter a power system at grounded neutral points. The
GIC is usually of sufficient magnitude to cause half-
cycle saturation of large power transformers. GIC's
in excess of 100 amperes have been measured in trans-
former neutrals, and GIC's of over 200 amps per phase
can be expected on some autotransformers. This paper
presents the results of studies investigating the
effects of GIC upon current transformer and relay per-
formance. The average CT flux density and CT error
are examined in the presence of GIC. The effect of
GIC upon CT remanence is also presented. The tran-
sient performance of the CT is studied to determine
the reduced time-to-saturation from a combination of
GIC and DC fault offset. Relay performance is con-
sidered in two categories (1) relay misoperation
resulting from erroneous CT response, and (2) relay
misoperation resulting from GIC interaction with large
power transformers, notably differential protection.
1. INTRODUCTION
Transient fluctuations in the earth's magnetic
field have plagued many utilities for the last forty
years. Those utilities most susceptible to these
fluctuations are located in the upper latitudes of the
North American Continent, and are generally situated
in the area of igneous rock geology. The geomagnetic
field disturbances are usually triggered by solar
flares, although other solar phenomena is also respon-
sible.
The power system considered in this study is the
interconnected power systems of Manitoba Hydro
Electric Board, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Minnesota Power
and Light Company, Duluth, Minnesota, and Northern
States Power Company, Minneapolis, Minnesota. The
present interconnections between these power companies
are at the 230 kV level; however, in May, 1980, a 749
km (465 miles) 500 kV interconnection will be
completed between these companies. The intertie runs
528 km (328 miles) from the Dorsey 500/230 kV substa-
tion near Winnipeg, Manitoba to the Forbes 500/230 kV
substation on the Mesabi Iron Range near Duluth,
Minnesota. The line then extends another 220 km (137
miles) southward to the Chisago 500/345 kV substation
north of the Twin Cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul.
The intertie spans an area of igneous rock geology as
it traverses from southern Manitoba to northern
Minnesota. The past history of recordings on existing
230 kV interconnections has shown frequent occurrences
of geomagnetically-induced currents (GIC), and it is
80 SM 646-0 A paper recommended and approved by the
IEEE Power System Relaying Committee of the IEEE
Power Engineering Society for presentation at the
IEEE PES Summer Meeting, Minneapolis, Minnesota,
July 13-18, 1980. Manuscript submitted February 1,
1980; made available for printing May 1, 1980.
V. D. Albertson N. Mohan
Senior Member IEEE Member IEEE
Univ. of Minnesota Univ. of Minnesota
Minneapolis, MN Minneapolis, MN
expected that the magnitude of GIC will be more severe
on the new 500 kV intertie because of the greater
distance spanned by' the line and the lower line resis-
tances.
This paper discusses some of the study results of
the effects of GIC upon current transformers and relay
performance. The steady state and transient perfor-
mance of the current transformers are examined. The
amount of current transformer remanence and the
effects of GIC upon remanence are investigated. The
effects of GIC upon relay performance is investigated
in two broad categories, the indirect effects of GIC
on relay performance due to CT saturation, and the
direct effects of GIC upon relay performance
(transformer differential protection).
2. CT PERFORMANCE
2.1 Expected Levels of GIC, and CT Modeling
In order to accurately assess possible misappli-
cations of current transformers or relays, and the
effects that GIC could have upon them, it is first
necessary to know the expected maximum magnitudes of
GIC. It has been shown that the levels of GIC
expected at various locations for differing levels of
earth surface potential (ESP) can be predicted C1].
With this information, the relay engineer can design
the protective system to reduce the incidence of mis-
operation and provide for the highest accuracy
possible in measuring the transient response of the
system.
In earlier work, calculations were made of GIC
expected to occur for several geomagnetic disturbances
on the Minnesota Power & Light - Northern States
Power -Manitoba Hydro interconnected systems. ESP's
assumed for these calculation were as high as 6.2 V/km
(10 V/mile) for the east-west component and 0.6 V/km
(1.0 V/mile) for the north-south component. These
values were then impressed on a dc model (as seen by
GIC) of the interconnected power system and earth, and
the resulting high side and low side transformer
geomagnetically-induced currents were determined.
Table 1 shows the expected GIC that the CT's would
experience on the 500 kV and 230 kV sides of the
autotransformers at Dorsey, Forbes, and Chisago ter-
minals of the 500 kV line. As shown, these values
range up to 223 A of GIC per phase.
Table 1. GIC Magnitude in Amperes per Phase.
GIC Magnitude in Amps./Phase
High Side Low Side
Dorsey 223 31
Forbes 184 39
Chisago 31 11
Figure 1 shows the model used to simulate CT's in the
presence of simultaneous ac and dc excitation.
©) 1981 IEEE
 1079
decays rapidly (within several cycles) while GIC can
have periods on the order of minutes. Therefore, the
length of exposure of'the CT to the direct current, as
IB
.. _ well as the magnitude of the current, must be con-
sidered when evaluating the performance of the CT.
It has been shown by many that the presence of a
fault-induced dc offset causes an excursion in the
flux level of the CT [51. In the case of GIC, because
the periods are so long, the flux excursion can be
thought of as a steady-state dc offset from the normal
ac flux. The amount of offset is proportional to the
magnitude of the GIC.
The 'amount of dc offset for a certain level of
direct current is difficult to predict because of the
nonlinear nature'of the transformer core steel. Most
modern current transformers generally use silicon
steels which be in to saturate at a flux density of
around 1.55 Wb/md (100 kilolines/in2). As the direct
current increases, the CT dc flux offset will also
increase linearly until saturation'is reached. Up to
this point the do flux offset, or average value of
flux, can be approximated as the point corresponding
to the' average current 'on the magnetization curve.
Figure 1. Nonlinear
Once saturation has been reached, the average flux
CT Secondary Model

value can no 'longer be directly identified this

easily. Projecting the do flux offset by this method,
The input current Ip/N represents once saturation is reached, will yield higher values
current of the CT referred through of flux density than actually occur.
former with turns ratio equal
an

Recent-publica-
to the

tions £33 provide equations to derive the dc flux off-

used. The do as well as ac components
set, or this offset can' also be determined from
current have been reduced by
RB and are the CT secondary
the CT
simulations as described later in this paper.
Consider an example illustrating this effect, and
include the lead and burden resistances
how various CT ratios influence the degree of satura-
ances, The relay current would IB
then
tion. Assume an ac'primary current of 10,000 A peak
exciting current drawn by the CT IE.
would
and a primary current component of 200 A of GIC;, in
exciting current branch of -the CT is modeled

addition, assume a constant one ohm resistive CT bur-

nonlinear inductor, using the
teristics for a typical high performance
saturation

den. For a CT with a ratio of 400:1 (i.e., 2,000:5),

the primary GIC current of 200 A has an effect equiva-
bushing CT shown on Figure lent 'to a secondary direct current of 0.5 A. Since
this direct curr'ent will -behave entirely as exciting
current, the approximate dc offset of the CTflux will
be as given by point A on figure 2. The ac components
of the primary current will be reduced to 25 A peak on
the secondary. To a
first approximation, assuming all
of this current acted as burden, current (ignoring the
CT exciting branch current for illustration,purposes)',
the maximum ac voltage excursion would be 25 V. The
flux excursion of the CT when combinedwith the dc
offset due to the GIC are shown as points A1 and A2 on
Figure 2. Although point A is at the knee point of
the CT saturation characteristic, the'total flux
excursion between points A1 and A2 is small so that

saturation characteristics are relatively linear over

that range. The total exciting current increases to
approximately 0.55 A when the flux excursion reaches
point A2 and decreases to0.45 A when the flux reaches
A1. The total exciting current is snall in
comparison to the total secondary current of 25 A. A
digital simulation was done modeling these conditions,
and the results of this simulation verified the
accuracy of the above approximation as Shown by the
exciting current in Figure 3(a). For the same con-
ditions, but eor a CT -with a 100:1 turns ratio, the
primary' GIC current component of 200 A is equivalent
to 2.0 A on the CT secondary. The approximate do off-
set due for this case is given as point D on Figure 2.
Figure 2. CT Secondary Saturation Characteristic

Again, this places the -d flux offset at the knee

point of the saturation characteristic. The ac com-
2.2 Steady-State CT Performance.
ponent of theQ exciting current is now 100 A peak,
Geomagnetically-induced currents
which, with a 1.0 burden could produce a maximum ac
voltage excursion of + 100 V (again ignoring the CT
saturation in the same manner as do

exciting branch current). For these secondary volt-

current. Usually, the do component
ages, the total ac flux excursion would then be be-
fault current will be much higher
tween points D1 and D2. This
show1s tht the exciting
in

the highest expected GIC.

current would be about 0.93 A at point Di and over 100
However,
1080
A at point D2. Obviously the CT is now saturated.
The total flux excursion between D1 and D2 will not
occur (being limited by saturation) and the error
current will be large. The actual exc'iting current
for this ca'se was determined from simulation and is
shown in Figure 3(b);.

I,I __- I X

1. I 0

I ., i L

20
3(a) 3(b)
z020 -

Figure 3. CT Exciting Current. Primary current is 10

kA peak ac and 200 A GIC. Burden is one wr 15
Ohm Resistive.
10-

(a) 4000:1 Ratio

(b) 100:1 Ratio t ~~~~~~~~~240:1|_____
I0~~~~~~~~~~~~~0:

As shown in figure (3b), the actual exciting 5

current only reaches a peak of about 7 A. This is
much smaller than the exciting current predicted by
the 'approximation. The predicted offset resulted in O0 40041 10
2 4- 6 '8
5-~-~-.-----~' - ~-- -- -- -- s

an average flux of 5.98 x 10-3 Wb vs. the actual dc

offset of only 3.95 x 10-3 Wb. However, the above
method can be easily used as a conservative design
guideline. The approximate relationship of the com-
bined dc offset and ac flux vs. the saturation charac-
teristic for 'other CT ratios can be determined from
the family of curves in Figure 2.
In these examples, the amount of saturation could
have been increased or decreased-not only by changing
the CT ratio, but also by a change in the CT burden or
in "the amount of GIC. A' number of simulations, were
done with various levels of GIC and various fmagnitudes
of CT burdens in order to develop design and appliba-
tion curves to aid in 'determining -- the relevant
accuracy of the CT' response in a steady-state con-
dition. Figure 4 shows' the relationship between per-
oent error of 'CT response and the burden resistance
for 10 kA peak of primary ac curreht with-400 A of GIC
superimposed. The relative differences for four dif-
ferent CT ratios are shown. Percent error is calcu-
lated as:
% Error =' x 100
Ip/N
IE = effective sinusoidal amplitude
exciting current.
N 2 1/2
= iS 1IEi
IEi = ith harmonic of the CT exciting current.
Ip/N = Primary CT current divided by CT
ratio.
BURDEN (OHMS)
Figure 4. Percent CT Error vs. Burden. 10 kA Peak AC
Primary Current
Figure 5 shows the percent -error of CT response
vs. the magnitude of GIC for 10 kA peak ac primary
current' and standard CT burden of 1.0 + j1.73 Q.
Again, the differences between 'various CT ratios are
shown. Error generally increases with an increase in
GIC for all CT ratios, however, the higher 'CT ratios
display better performance.
The average -CT flux (or the flux offset due to
GIC) can'be computed by a relatively simple means once
the model of the CT has been simulated. The instan-
taneous CT flux can be determined at each time step of
the simulation by integrating the CT secondary
voltage. The instantaneous flux values for each time
(1) step can be averaged over one' 60 Hz. cycle to deter-
mine the average' flux or offset flux' value. Figure 6
is the -average flux which 'will occur as the magnitude
of GIC increases. The flux i's about 6.75 x'1p-3 Wb at
f CT the theoretical knee point' for the 'saturation -charac-
teric given in Figure 2. As sh'own' in Figure 6, the
offset or 'average flux values can exceed 75% offset 'of
the knee point flux densities. The average flux vs.
GIC increases linearly until saturlation is reached.
For the lower CT ratios, the average flux densi'ty is
lower because a -degree of saturation is' occurring due
to the ac current as' well. .The flux offset i'n the CT
core will remain at these high values until the magni-
tude of the GIC decreases..
turns
 1081
2.3 CT-Remanence.
When the' CT is excited at these high average flux
densi~ties or flux offset for relatively long durations
of time, it is prudent to consider the effects that
GIC -could have upon the CT remanent flux. Normal
interruption of the, primary circuit with a GIC
superimposed on the power system could result in the
current interruption,in the CT at a significantly high
level of flux density. This results in a large
trapped flux or remanence.

w /
f

/ MINOR LOOP B
I--
z
w
C)
w
0. RESIDUAL -MINOR LOOP A

I I
I

G I C (AMPS) Figure 7. CT Offset .Minor Hysteresis Large and

Remanent Flux Mechanism.
Consider illustrative example.
another Again
Figure 5. Percent Error vs. GIC. 10 kA PEeak AC assume 10 kA peak primary ac current superimposed with
Primary Current. Standard 1.0 + ji. 73 Ohm 200 A' of GIC,- and a CT ratio of,400:1 with a one ohm
Burden. resistive burden. The exciting current for this case
was previously shown in Figure 3(a). These con-
ditions, when plotted on the RH curve for the CT,
would result in a minor hysteresis loop. A as shown in
7.Or 10o Figure 7. The minor loop A is only a small subset of
the;major CT hysteresis loop because of the relatively
6.0 small CT secondary voltages. When normal primary cir-
cuit interruption occurs, a CT trapped flux occurs
S.C 75 because the. 'exciting current lags the primary, current
O..... 9
in ti,Me- phase. 'The trapped flux will cause a
160:1 discharge current, through the burden resulting in a
as 4.0 I
W6
0 flux decay until H reaches a value of zero. This will
result in a residual flux Br in the CT. For higher
3.0
-'30
IVL I-
values of GIC, the minor, CT hysteresis loop will be
further offset, such as loop B on Figure 7. Again,
when. circuit interuuption occurs, the resulting resi-
,_ 2.0 240:1 dual flux will be even higher. Table 2 shows the
C) 25 expected levels of CT remanence which might occur for
400:1 various magnitudes of GIC, as determined using the
L.0
hysteresis modeling. and analytical methods of the
I 'I
Bonneville Power Administration '(BPA) Electromagnetic
0 50 100
I
IS0 250
200 300
I
350 4C
0 Transients Program (EMTP). Actual hysteresis charac-
GIC IN AMPERES teristics of typical CT core steel materials were used
for the hysteresis model. Table 2 gives the results
for a'400:1 .CT ratio; the percent remanent flux for
other CT ratios will not differ appreciably from those
listed. A smaller CT ratio will result in a larger
Figure 6. Average CT Flux vs. GIC. 10 kA P,'eak AC minor loop within the major loop, but the maximum
Primary Current. Standard 1..0 + j.1..73 Ohm value of B in the minor loop will approach the maximum
Burden. value of B in the major loop to about the same degree
for values of GIC that can be encountered.
 =
1082

Table 2. Percent CT Remanent Flux vs. GIC. CT VXN

Ratio 400:1. Standard Burden 1.0 + j1.73 K5
EQ _ (3)
Ohms. IlR2
GIC Ks = CT saturation factor.
Primary Amps. Per Phase Percent Remanent Flux
Vx = CT saturation voltage rms = 530.4 V.
50 17 .4
100 44.4 Ii = CT primary current rms = 7072 A.
200 74.8 N = CT turns ratio = 400.
300 75.6
400 77.8
R2 = CT secondary resistance = 1.0

2.4 Transient CT Performance. Assuming no pre-fault CT remanence, for a fully

offset fault current of 10 kA, the time to saturation
The eff ect of remanence upon the transient determined for this CT from Figure 8 would be approxi-
response of current transformers has been reported in mately 230 ms. If the CT has a certain percentage
numerous previous references [5J. For illustration, remanent flux, a multiplier can be determined to
consider an example of computing the time-to- modify the CT saturation factor Ks. Then the reduced
saturation of a CT. Assume an ac primary current of time-to-saturation can be calculated for the CT, and
10 kA peak, a power system time constant of 0. 1 equation (4) defines the Ks multiplying factor A.
seconds, and a 400:1 CT ratio with a CT burden of one
ohm resistive. Figure 8 shows curves to determine the A 100 - % Remanence
time-to-saturation of the CT for various saturation (4)
100
factors K5 for a power system time constant of 0.1
seconds. The secondary time constant is derived by
equation (2) and in this case is approximately 1.0 Now assume for the previous case that the CT has a
seconds. remanence of 75%. From equation (4), the multiplier A
would be 0.25, resulting in K5 being reduced from 30
to 7.5. As shown in Figure 8, for this new value of
ts =
Ve
(2) Ks, the time-to-saturation for the CT has now been
IeR2 w reduced from 230 ms to about 18 ms.
The above analysis and the problems encountered
ts = secondary time constant. are familiar to relay engineers in designing a protec-
tive system to avoid saturation due to remanence.
However, the effects of remanence for a CT without dc
Ve= CT maximum secondary voltage = 25 V.
excitation (GIC) are only temporary. Once normal ac
Ie = CT maximum exciting current = 0.065 A. excitation is reapplied to the CT, the average resi-
dual flux of the CT may decay. Therefore, the most
R2 = CT secondary resistive burden = 1.0 serious consideration of remanence occurs in -the
application of high-speed reclosing, in which rema-
2 ir 60 = 377. nence can be left in the CT by normal interruption of
an offset fault current and followed by reclosing into
a permanent fault. As described earlier, normal
interruption with GIC present can also result in high
levels of remanence in the CT. However, what may be
more important is that in the presence of GIC the core
may be operating indefinitely at a high flux density.
When a power system fault producing a dc offset of the
same polarity occurs, then the core will begin to
saturate much sooner than normal. Again, equation (4)
0
can be used to determine the amount that the satura-
tion factor, Ks3, will be reduced by the presence of
I- GIC. Rather than using percent remanence in equation
Cl.I (4), the percent dc offset or average flux should be
0
z used to determine the multiplier. Again, consider the
0
Q latest example of 10 kA peak ac primary current with a
400:1 CT ratio with a full dc fault offset current.
Il- Now assume that prior to the fault, 200 A of GIC of
4) the same polarity as the fault offset is flowing in
the primary of the CT, as shown in Figure 5. This
would result in an offset flux of 65% of the satura-
tion flux density. The saturation factor multiplier A
10 100 would be 0.35, the saturation factor Ks would be
TIME TO SATURATION-ms reduced from 30 to 10.5. The new time-to-saturation
as determined from Figure 8 would be 30 ms vs. 230 ms
with no GIC present. For less than a full fault off-
set, the time to saturation of the CT would be between
30 ms and 230 ms. For fault offsets with polarity
Figure 8. CT Time-to-Saturation Curves. opposite to the pre-fault GIC flow, the time to
saturation would be increased beyond the normal time
The saturation factor K3 is defined in equation to saturation; in the above case, saturation would
(3) and for this case is equal to 30. occur after 230 ms or not at all if the offset decays
rapidly enough.
 1083
3. RELAY PERFORMANCE 3.3 GIC Effects upon Large Power Transformers.
3.1 Relay Performance as Affected by CT Reponse. GIC in a large power transformer behaves entirely
as an exciting current. Since the GIC has a constant
When considering the presence of GIC, the correct polarity in comparison to the 60 Hz power systems fre-
response of relays is dependent upon accurate response quency, it produces half-cycle saturation of the
from the current transformer. For most protection transformer. Because the magnitude of the GIC can
schemes, if the current transformer secQndary current greatly exceed the normal magnetizing current, the
is an exact replica of its primary current, then the exciting current waveform also becomes greatly
relay system should always operate properly. distorted.
Exceptions exist such that correct response of the CT
in the presence of GIC may still result in relay mis-
operation or degrade operation. This exception is the
differential protection of transformers (which will be
discussed separately). Smolinski C61 aptly identified
the large variety of relay misoperations due to CT
saturation that can be generally classified into three
types:
1. detection of a fault where non exists.
2. failure to detect a fault.
3. failure to detect a fault in an adequate time.
As discussed in earlier sections, the steady state
as well as the transient response of the CT must be
considered when evaluating relay performance. The
fact that the CT can contain a high residual flux due
to interruption of the CT with GIC present should also
be considered. On distance relaying, underreaching
may occur due to partial CT saturation. For faults
having a dc offset of the same polarity as the GIC,
the time to saturation of the CT can be substantially
reduced. The application of neutral CT's must be
especially considered on three-phase apparatus such as
transformers or reactors, since the magnitude of GIC
in the neutral CT may be three times higher than in (a) (b)
each phase.
3.2 Differential Relay Protection.
Figure 9. Transformer Exciting Current for 500/230 kV
Differential relaying of transformers, buses, and Single-Phase Autotransformer.
related ac apparatus has been a popular method used to
provide a completely selective protection of the
device. The protection provided will only cause relay (a) No GIC.
operation for faults inside its zone of protection. (b) 130 amps. GIC per Phase.
The basis of the protection scheme is to sum all
currents entering and leaving a device or zone of pro-
tection. If the sum does not equal zero (or a dif- Consider an example of one of the 500/230 kV
ferential current exists), the relay will operate. single-phase transformers used on the 500 kV intercon-
The presence of GIC can at times cause both loss of nection mentioned earlier. The transformer single-
security and a lack of dependability of these relay phase nominal rating is 240 MVA, the peak ac exciting
systems. Not only can CT saturation due to GIC (as current of the transformer on a 230 kV base at 1 per
described earlier) cause distortion of the CT output, unit voltage is 2.55 A. The levels of GIC predicted
but the GIC can cause considerable reactive power through these transformers can reach several hundred
requirements and generation of harmonics in the large amperes. Digital modeling of the transformer and
power transformers due to half-cycle saturation of the saturation characteristics as affected by GIC was done
transformer core. using the Bonneville Power Administration (BPA)
Since a form of differential relaying is usually Electromagnetic Transients Program (EMTP). Figure 9
used for protection of large power transformers, it is shows the comparison of expected transformer exciting
important to completely understand the effects that current with and without GIC C7]. Figure 9(b> shows
GIC may have upon the large power transformer. The the transformer half-cycle saturated exciting current
interactions of GIC not only with the CT, but also caused by an effective GIC of 130 A. As shown in this
with the large power transformer, must be considered figure, the exciting current is extremely saturated on
in order to accurately assess relay performance. The one-half of the ac cycle with peak current magnitude
presence, of GIC affects the transformer by causing approaching 1,000 A, compared to peak ac exciting
half-cycle saturation. This affects differential current of 4 A for no GIC. This resulting half-cycle
relay performance in two important ways: saturated exciting current has a large fundamental and
harmonic current content as shown in Figure 10, for
1. The transformer has increased reactive effective levels of GIC of 130, 67, and 5 amperes.
power requirements due to saturation. This exciting current produces noticeable distortion
of the total transformer current when combined with
2. The half-cycle saturated transformer the load current, as shown in Figure 1-1. As will be
exciting current will contain a discussed later, the harmonic components of the
significant amount of even and odd exciting current will tend to block relay operation.
harmonic currents.
 1084
As shown, the saturation of the CT can add small
amounts of harmonics to the burden current. Smaller
percentages of harmonics would be generated by the CT
for either smaller burdens or larger CT ratios.
500.0

8.0
7.0
200.0 _
6.0
5.0
00.0o_
a.
4.0
CL,
r
w
50.0 3.0
0

w 400 AMPS GIC

2.0_
a

4
20.0
z
z a:
w
10.0 3
I) z

a
1.0
S2 5.0 _ 0.9
z
0
s 0.8

ir 0.7

0.6
2.0 _
0.5
I--
'U

0.4
0 5 10 15 20
HARMONIC ORDER - - a.
0.3

0.2k_
Figure 10. Harmonic Content of Exciting Current for
500/230 Kv Autotransformer Due to GIC.
I I I I
2 3 4 5 6
ORDER OF HARMONICS

750

50ot
Figure 12. Harmonic Content of Burden Current Due to
Half-Cycle CT Saturation Caused by GIC.
25C The increased power transformer exciting current
TIME IN
MILLISECONDS manifests itself in the transformer by increased reac-
A O tive power consumption. The reactive power can be
Z 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 calculated as shown in reference 1 by equation (5):

-250

N 2 1/2
-500
Q - V E.1 Ii (5)

-750 Q = reactive power.

V = rms value of sinusoidal voltage.
-b000O

Ii = rms value of the ith harmonic component

Figure 11. Magnetizing plus Load Current for 500/230
kV Autotransformer with 130 A GIC per
Phase.
To a lesser extent, the CT can generate harmonics
in its output due to its own half-cycle saturation.
Figure 12 shows the percentage harmonics in the burden
current for a 160:1 CT ratio with a 10,000 A peak ae
primary current and a standard burden of 1.0 + j1.73
ohms. Two levels of primary GIC magnitude are shown.
exeting current.
N = highest harmonic studied.
As shown in reference 1, and based on actual
measurements made, the increased transformer reactive
power requirements for high values of GIC are very
high. The reactive power requirements do not change
significantly with increased loading of the trans-
former. As will be shown, the increased reactive
power requirements produces a current differential
 1085
effect regardless of whether the reactive power is
supplied from only one or from both of the two voltage
systems connected to the transformers.
3.4 Transformer Percentage Differential Relay Types.

Most applications of differential protection of

transformers use a percentage differential scheme with
harmonic restraint. The percentage restraint improves
the security of the relay so that operation would not
occur from small differentials resulting from external
faults. The harmonic restraint feature allows the
relay to detect the difference between transformer
magnetizing inrush and an internal fault by examining
the amount of harmonic current present. Most modern
relay systems will operate for a differential on the
order of 25% or higher. At the same time, if the per-
centage of harmonics in the differential current is
20% or more, the relay is restrained from operating. 0
Two basic schemes of harmonic restraint are used in w
cc

the industry, one uses all harmonics in the restraint, a

4
and the other uses only the second harmonic for z
restraint. Most of the percentage differential pro-
tection schemes employ an instantaneous trip feature
to provide immediate relay operation for heavy inter-
nal faults. I-
a
3.5 Differential Relay Performance.
A model of a large power transformer was developed
to determine the performance of a differential relay
when the transformer is subjected to a combination of Ur
various loads and various magnitudes of GIC. A
500/230 kV autotransformer with a three-phase rating
of 720 MVA was simulated. The system connected to the
230 kV winding of the transformer is modeled by an
equivalent impedance and voltage source, and voltage
of the transformer was maintained near 1.0 per unit.
The loading of the transformer was achieved by a
variable impedance on the 500 kV terminals. A har-
monic analysis was performed on the 230 kV and 500 kV
phase currents to calculate the percentages of dif-
ferential and harmonics occurring because of GIC.
Figure 13 shows the relationship between load current
and operating current as detected by the differential
relay resulting from differing levels of GIC. The
type of relay used for this calculation assumed that
the second harmonic restrained and that all other fre-
quencies acted upon the operating coil. The highest
differentials occur as the load current of the trans-
former decreases and the magnitude of the GIC Figure 13. Operating Currentvs. Through Current for
increases. Also shown in figure 13 are the approxi- DifferentialRelay for Various GIC.
mate percent differential operating zones that might
be used. The differentials in some cases could be
high enough to cause relay operation. Shown in the
figure are three different operating zone levels to The results of these simulations imply that har-
simulate different settings for differential protec- monic restraint on the differential-relay system is
tion. The three settings shown are 15%, 25% and 50%. necessary in order to prevent an undesired relay
For differentials above these levels, unless operation. Harmonic restraint has been used in most
restrained by harmonics, the relay would operate. applications of transformer differential protection,
Figure14
shows the percentage of harmonic restraint so that undesired operations due to GIC would not be
for the simulations shown in Figure 13. The second expected. However, several consequences of the har-
harmonic component only of the relay operating current monic restraint circuitry and its interaction with the
is used in theharmonic restraint circuitry. The protective devices may hinder operation of the relay
usual restraint level used for harmonic restraint is in the presence of GIC when an operation is desired.
approximately 20%. For all cases considered in Figure As shown in Figure 14, the percentage harmonic
13 in any of the three operating zones, a relay opera- restraint can become very high. This tends to desen-
tion would be restrained because of the high levels of sitize the relay. Internal faults may not be detected
harmonic restraint as shown in Figure 14. Results until enough fault current builds to either reduce the
similar to those shown in Figures 13 and 14 are percent harmonic restraint or until a level is reached
obtained for a relay using all harmonics in the har- at which operation occurs due to instantaneous trip.
monic restraint circuit and only fundamental frequency Some low-level faults may be undetected until the GIC
in the operating circuit of the relay. For this type has subsided. At best, the relay operating time will
of relay, the only sigrnificant differences were be increased because of the time necessary for the
slightly higher harmonic restraint percentages. fault current to overcome the harmonic restraint
current.
1086
system, the relay engineer can assess any possible
protection problems and modify the design to improve
security and dependabiltiy of the protection system.

1000 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
800 The authors wish to thank Mr. G. B. Ostroski and
R. E. Ohman of Minnesota Power and Light Comany for
600 initiation and their continued interest in this
project. Our special thanks to L. H. Perry of
400 Minnesota Power and Light Company for sharing his con-
siderable knowledge in the area of relay and protec-
300 tion systems. We are also indebted to Minnesota Power
and Light Company, Manitoba Hydro Electric Board,
Northern States Power Company, and the 'Electric Power
z 200
z. Research Institute (contract RP #1205-1) for financial
and technical support.
.I-
a:
0 REFERENCES
- 100 1. V. D. Albertson, J. G. Kappenman, N. Mohan and G.
A. Skarbakka, "Load-flow Studies in the Presence
s

of Geomagnetically-Induced-Currents", IEEE Paper

w 60 F79-702-2, presented at the 1979 Summer Power
Meeting, Vancouver, B.C.
C
4 2. H. W. Domnel, "Digital Computer Solution of
20 Electromagnetic Transients in Single and
30
Multiphase Networks", IEEE Transactions on Power
Apparatus and Systems, Vol. PAS-88, pp. 388-398,
April 1969.
L 3. L. Bolduc, J. Aubin, "Effect of Direct Currents in
Power Transformers: Part I, A General Theoretical
Approach, Part II, Simplified Calculation for
-0 400 800 1200 1600 2000 2400 Large Power Transformers", Electrical Power
THROUGH CURRENT IN AMPERES Systems Research, Vol. 1, pp. 291-304, 1978.
4. E. E. Conner, E. G. Greb, E. C. Wentz, "Control
of Residual Flux in Current Transformers", IEEE
Figure 14. Percent Harmonic Restraint versus Transactions on Power Apparatus and Systems, Vol.
Through Current for Various GIC. PAS-92, No. 4, July/August 1973, pp. 1226-1233.
5. "Transient Response of Current Transformers", by
the Power Systems Relaying Committee of the IEEE
4. CONCLUSIONS PES, IEEE Publication 76 CH 1130-4 PWR, Jan. 1976.
This paper shows that geomagnetically-induced 6. W. J. Smolinski, "Design Considerations in
currents can produce distorted response of a current Application of Current Transformers for Protective
transformer and cause relay misoperation. Current Relaying Purposes", IEEE Transactions on Power
transf ormer error will be increased when measuring a Apparatus and Systems", Vol. PAS-92, No. 4,
sinusoidal current when a GIC is superimposed. Better July/August 1973, pp. 1329-1336.
performance can be achieved if higher CT ratios and
lower burdens are used. For GIC superimposed on a 7. N. Mohan, J. G. Kappenman, and V. D. Albertson,
symmetrical fault current, a CT ratio and burden can "Harmonics and Switching Transients in the
be chosen to provide satisfactory accuracy for Presence of Geomagnetically-Induced Currents",
relaying purposes. CT remanence near 75 percent can IEEE Paper F79 694-1, presented at the 1979 Summer
occur for normal interruption of a primary current Power Meeting, Vancouver, B.C.
with GIC superimposed. The average CT flux (dc flux
offset) can also exceed 75 percent of its knee point
value for relatively small amounts of continuous
direct current. The high remanence and high CT flux
(dc flux offset) can result in a reduced time-to-
saturation, if the CT is subjected to a dc fault off-
set of the same polarity as the GIC.
In most cases, correct relay operation will occur
if current transformer response is accurate. If CT
saturation occurs due to GIC or a combination of GIC
and dc fault offset, then relay misoperations can be
expected. As discussed in this paper, accurate
current transformer response can still result in lack
of security and lack of dependability in the applica-
tion of transformer differential protection.
These results are intended to serve as a guideline
for relay and protection engineers. Knowing the
expected values of GIC which may occur on the power

Discussion
L. Masson, L. Bolduc, and J. Aubin (IREQ, Varennes, Quebec,
Canada): The paper constitutes a very valuable and extensive contribu-
tion to the study of problems associated with the operation of CT and
relays in presence of GIC. This work relies upon numerous previous
works on transformer and autotransformers, so we would like to offer
the following comments:
1. The causes of remanence in current-transformer are numerous: in-
rush current in power transformer, asymmetrical fault, GIC and
direct durrent from other sources. These effects are permanent
until the occurrence of an external phenomenon occurs, like in-
rush current in opposite polarity or demagnetization on a routine
base. The best solution appears to be the introduction of an air
gap in the CT core. This solution was chosen for Hydro-Quebec
James Bay network. This air gap reduces remanence by a large ex-
tent and it also reduces sensitivity to direct currents.
2. The authors point out very rightly that the harmonic restraint is a
proper solution to avoid differential relay misoperations in case of
inrush current or direct current.
3. The effects of GIC on autotransformers should be less severe than
the case for transformers since part of the direct current escapes
through the low voltage terminal rather than flowing throughout
the entire transformer winding.
4. On Fig. 10, the vertical axis caption should indicate that these
values apply for crest to crest values of harmonic current.
Reference 3 of the paper provides such calculation.
5. In our opinion, the value of 223 A (500 kV-network) for GIC cur-
rent appears to be very pessimistic since it is based on an earth sur-
face potential of 6.2 V/km: this last value seems to be about twice
too high for the area under study. In fact, the highest GIC
measurement reported by the authors is 100 A in the neutral of a
three-phase transformer. We understand this means that 33 A
flows in each phase (230 kV network). Could the authors com-
ment further on these points?
Manuscript received July 10, 1980.
L. H. Perry, (Minnesota Power & Light Co., Duluth, Minnesota): The
authors are to be congratulated on an interesting and informative
paper. Previously, many unsupported statements were made of the ef-
fects of GIC on power systems and power system relaying, but in this
paper the authors have made a quantitative analysis. As usual, the
quantitative analysis shows the problems were greatly exaggerated.
Are not the breaks in the curves for the 100-1 and 160-1 ratio current
transformers in Figure 4 due to the location of the calculated data? And
would not smooth curves through these points be more realistic?
CT remanence has been successfully ignored by relay engineers in the
past. From the data in this paper, we may continue to ignore this
phenomenon. A time to saturation of 18 milliseconds is still one cycle
-time enough for high speed relays. Once tripping has started, further
response of the relay is of no importance. Of course, this does mean us-
ing high speed direct tripping units.
The last section of this paper is not so reassuring. True, one may
usually expect proper operation of transformer differential relays dur-
ing GIC currents, but it does appear a few misoperations could be
desirable. An exciting current of 1000 amperes will certainly not result
in a long lived transformer. Do the authors plan to continue their in-
vestigation of GIC currents to analyze the effects of such on power
transformers?
Manuscript received July 11, 1980.
J. D. Aspnes (University of Alaska, Fairbanks, Alaska): The authors
have presented an excellent detailed paper on the effect of GIC on cur-
rent transformers and relays. I would appreciate the authors' comments
on the following:
A local substation containing a 138kV, 24MVA autotransformer
situated at the end of a 166km transmission line uses the sum of three
phases of tertiary winding current (through Ct's) to drive several protec-
tive relays. Relay loops RMS current appears to be minimally affected
by GIC measured in the autotransformer neutral. The relay current
1087
monitor has not been in place during a period of large geomagnetic ac-
tivity, but one's initial reaction is that CT saturation and remanence
problems so well discussed in your paper could be alleviated by driving
CT's with tertiary transformer windings in certain applications.
Manuscript received August 11, 1980.
J. G. Kappenman, V. D. Albertson, and N. Mohan: We are grateful to
all of the discussors for their interest and discussions that constitute
valuable additions to the paper.
We agree with Messrs. Masson, Bolduc, and Aubin that an air gap in
the CT core reduces remanence and direct-current sensitivity of the CT.
However, air gap cores will only carry a very small burden and could be
significantly more expensive because of the increased core cross-section.
Air gap cores also will not correct the problem of relay misoperations
due to relay response to fundamental and harmonic currents generated
by half-cycle saturation. Transformer differential protection was one
such case discussed in the paper. We have also recently experienced
several relay misoperaitons on the 500 kV line due to low-level har-
monics being picked up as a negative sequence current in a negative se-
quence time-overcurrent backup protection scheme. If no filtering is
provided, the second, five and eight harmonics generated by half-cycle
saturation will be picked up as negative sequence by any relay system
designed to detect negative sequence quantities. In general, we believe
the best solution to CT and relay problems due to GIC is to prevent the
flow of GIC in the power system.
Regarding point number 2 mentioned by the discussors, there is no
disputing that harmonic restraint is necessary in transformer differen-
tial protection. However, it may be worth considering a change in the
method of restraint to improve operation and lower the restraint levels
experienced due to GIC (from 100% to l0007o as shown in Figure 14 of
the paper). The percent of harmonic restraint in transformer differen-
tial schemes is calculated'by comparing the level of harmonic current. If
the percentage restraint were calculated by comparing the harmonic
current with the total transformer current, then the high restraint levels
shown in Figure 14 would not occur and relay response time for internal
faults would not be delayed.
In Figure 10 of the paper, the vertical axis should be interpreted as
crest or peak values, but not as peak-to-peak or crest-to-crest values.
The data for Figure 10 was obtained by modelling the actual saturation
characteristic of a 500/230 kV autotransformer.
Regarding GIC in autotransformers, on power systems that have
many autotransformers connecting the various voltage levels, the GIC
will usually be greater in the autotransformers than in the isolated-
winding transformers on the system. This is because of the direct con-
ducting path, through the series part of the winding between the two
different voltage levels, that allows GIC contributions from more
grounding points on the power system. It is also true of
autotransformers that the winding currents cannot be deduced from a
knowledge of the neutral current because the GIC in the series and com-
mon protions of the winding can be in the same direction, or in opposite
directions, depending on the complete power network topoloy.
Regarding the values of GIC used in the studies, values were used that
represent worst-case (i.e., most severe geomagnetic storm) conditions.
In an earlier study conducted during the peak of the previous solar flare
cycle from 1969-1972, the maximum recorded GIC in a transformer
neutral went off-scale at 100 amperes; however, that maximum cannot
be applied to the system of this paper which considers the new 500 kV
line. Also, in an isolated-winding transformer, it is true that the phase
currents in each wye leg will be one-third of the neutral current, but this;
same statement cannot be made for a grounded-wye autotransformer
for both the series and common windings, as mentioned earlier.
We continue to feel that an earth-surface potential (ESP) of 6.2
V/km (10 volts/mile) is a realistic value for worst-case geomagnetic
phenomena for the latitudes and geological conditions of the
geographical area being studied. Actually, for the system under study,
as described in Reference 1 of the paper, the power system was divided
into three regions according to latitude. The value of 6.2 V/km was
assumed for the most northern region, north of the U.S. - Canada
border, and lower values were assumed for the southerly regions.
Also, a value of approximately 6.2 V/km was corroborated during
the geomagnetic storm of August 4, 1972, at a more southerly latitude
than the power system studied in this paper. During the August 4, 1972
storm, the Bell System experienced an outage on the 248 km (154 miles)
L4 coaxial cable between Plano, Illinois and Cascade, Iowa. An
analysis of the outage indicates that an ESP of approximately 6.5 V/km
 1088
(10.4 volts/mile) was required to cause a high-current shutdown of the
dc-to-dc converters that provide power-to the,coaxial cable (1).
In'response to Mr. Perry, statements in earlier paperspon geomagnetic
storm effects on power systems and power system relaying were based
on (1) documented instances of power system or relaying events caused
by geomagnetic phenomena, (2) opinions of knowledgeable industry
engineers in specific topick areas, and (3) analy'ses using the modelling,
computer, and. transient network analyzer techniques available at that
time.. This paper will either substantiate.or modify some of the previous
assumptions that were made.
We believe that severe geomagnetic storms do present'some serious
operatipg, relaying, and system security probleips to power systems in
latitudes and geological areas where the effects are enhanced. We have
attempted to present these effects known to industry at large, as factual-
ly as possible.
Smoother.curves would indeed be expected in Figure 4 if calculations
had been made at more points. However, the kneepoints shown in the
curves are the most significant. data. We would suggest that CT
remanence and offset be evaluated in a case by case an'alysis. In the ex-
ample mentioned in the paper, saturation time was reduced from 230
msec to 18 msec. However, for other systems, the time-to-saturation
may be reduced to a fraction of a cyclre, We will continue to make
available results of our investigations of- effects of GIC on power equip-
ment and systems and attempts to mitigate GIC,
We agree with Dr. Aspnes that CT saturation and remanence due to
GIC will be eliminated if the CT's are driven with tertiary current. It is
difficult to comment further on the method without knowing the details
of -the tertiary relaying scheme and its function in the overall
transformer, protection scheme. We are uncertain.if the teriary winding
mentioned in this instance is a blind tertiary or one that supplied some
load. The. third harmonic current circulating in the tertiary is affected
by GIC in the transformer, because there are documented cases of ex-
cessive third harmonic current'in tertiary win4ings with GIC present in
the main windings. We encourage him to publish the results of his
studies in this area.
We agree with Dr. Aspnes that CT saturation and remanence due to
GIC. will be eliminated. if the CT's are driven with tertiary current. It is
difficult to comment further on the method without knowing the details
of, the tertiary relaying scheme and its function, in the overall
transformer protection scheme. We are uncertain if the tertiary winding
mentioned in this instance is a blind tertiary or one that supplied some
load. The third harmonic current circulating in the tertiary is affected
by GIC in the transformer,. because there are documented.cases of ex-
cessive third harmonic current in tertiary windings with GIC present in
the main windings. We encourage him to publish the results of his
studies in this area.
REFERENCE
[1] C. W. Anderson'III, L. J. Lanzerotti, and C. G. MacLennan,
"Outage of the L4 System and the Geomagnetic Disturbances of 4
August 1972", The Bell System Technical Journal, Vol. 53, No. 9,
November 1974, pp. 1817-1837.
Manuscript received September 10, 1980.
John C. Kappenman (M'77 was born July 23, 1954 in Sioux Falls
South Dakota. He gratuated with High Honors from South Dakota
State University in i976 with a Bachelor of Science degree in Electrical
Engineering.
He joined, Minnesota Power. and Light Company of Duluth, Min-
nesota in 1977 as an Assistant Transmission Planning Engineer. In
197.8, hXe was promoted to the_position of Special Studies Engineer. His
work consists of transient over-voltage and insulation coordination
studies and also load-flow, transient, and dynamic stability studies on
EHV systems.
He is a member.of IEEE and the Power Engineering Society. He is
Chairman of the Student Activities Committee for the Arrowhead Sec-
tion of IEEE. He is also a member of the honor societies of Eta Kappa
Nu, Tau Beta Pi, and Phi Kappa Phi.
Vernon D. Albertson received the B.S.E.E. degree from the North
Dakota Stat,e University-in 1950, the M.S.E.-E. degree from the Univer-
sity of Minnesota in 195-6, and the Ph.D. in Electrical Engineering from
the University of Wisconsin in 1962.
His industrial experience includes work as a test engineer and field
engineer for General Electric Company, system planning engineer for
Otter Tail Power Company, summer assignments'and consultant.to
Northern States Power Company, and Communications Officer in the
U.S. Air Force.
He has been a faculty member at the North Dakota State University
and the University of Wisconsin, and is presently Professor of Electrical
Engineering at the University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Mn..
Dr. Albertson is a senior member of the IEEE, and is a member of
Eta Kappa Nu, Tau Betta Pi, Phi Kappa Phi, and the ASEE.' He has
served as Chairman of the Region 4 Student Activities Committee, and
as Chairman of the Power Engineering Education Committee.
Nirendra'Mohan (M'73) was born in India on Ovctober 5, 1946. He
received the B.' Tech degree from the IIT, Kharagpur. and M.S. degree
in electrical engineering from the University of New Brunswick, Canada
in 1967 and 1969, respectively. In 1972, the received the M.S. degree in
nuclear engineering and in 1973 the Ph.D. degree in electrical engineer-
ing, both from the University of Wisconsin, Madison.-
From 1973 to 1974 he was a postdoctoral fellow. at the University of
Wisconsin and frQm 1974 to 1975 a project associate with the Wisconsin
Superconfductive Energy Storage Group. Since the end of 1975, he has
been an Assistant Professor of Electrical Engineering at the University
of Minnesota, Minneapolis. His research areas of interest include
HVDC transmission, electromagnetic transients on power systems,
power electronics, energy storage devices, pulsed power conditioning,
and wind electric systems.
He holds two patents andbhas provided consultation both locally and
abroad in the general area of High Voltage DC.
Dr. Mohan is a member of the IEEE. He is a member of the executive
committee of the IEEE-Twin Cities section.