1

Effects of GIC on Power Transformers and Power Systems

R. Girgis, Fellow, IEEE, K. Vedante, Senior Member IEEE

ABB Power Transformers
St. Louis, MO, USA

transformers when subjected to high levels of DC, are

Abstract: There is some misconception in the electric power
industry today that geo – magnetically induced currents (GIC)
have caused, and would cause, significant damage to the majority
of large and medium power transformers installed on power
grids in North America and around the world. The purpose of
this paper is to present, both qualitatively and quantitatively, the
true effect of GIC on power transformers, based on thorough
knowledge of power transformer design and performance. The
paper also provides concise explanation of the cases of
transformer failure / overheating reported in the published
literature to have been caused by GIC currents.
The paper demonstrates that, because of the nature of the GIC
currents, the great majority of power transformers would not
experience much overheating or damage due to even high levels
of GIC. Only some specific transformers could suffer some
winding damage due to high winding circulating currents if
exposed to high levels of GIC. The paper also presents the real
issue with GIC; namely, the narrow pulse of the magnetizing
current which results from part – cycle, semi – saturation of
transformer cores when subjected to high levels of GIC currents.
This one current pulse / cycle could cause relays and capacitive
components in power systems, such as SVC (s), to trip, which
may contribute to grid instability. Also, the current pulse is
associated with 2nd and higher order harmonics. As a result,
resonance may occur, differential relays may operate, and
stability of the grid may be compromised.
Keywords: Power transformers, Power Systems, Geo – magnetically
Induced Currents, GIC, DC.
I. INTRODUCTION
In order to understand the effect of GIC currents on power
transformers and power systems, this paper starts with
presenting the basic theory of the effect of DC on Power
Transformers. This includes presenting the phenomenon of
part – cycle, semi – saturation of transformer cores due to DC,
the resulting magnetizing current pulse, and the effect of this
core semi – saturation on temperature of transformer windings
presented. In section VI, a short discussion of the effect of
GIC on power systems is presented.
II. BASICS OF EFFECT OF DC ON POWER TRANSFORMERS
A. Phenomenon of Part – Cycle, Semi – Saturation of
transformer cores when subjected to DC
When a power transformer is subjected to DC, it results in
a unidirectional DC flux in the core. The magnitude of this
flux depends on the magnitude of the DC, number of turns in
the windings carrying the DC current, and reluctance of the
path of this DC flux. The result is that the DC flux adds to the
AC flux in one half – cycle and subtracts from the AC flux in
the other half – cycle; as illustrated in Figure 1 (a) below.
When large enough, or when the design flux density is high,
this leads to core peak flux densities in the magnetic core pre
– saturation range in one half of the cycle. As shown in Figure
1 (b) below, the B – H characteristics of the transformer core
materials is inherently very non-linear. For higher magnitudes
of DC, the core provides a very high reluctance to the DC
Ampere – Turns; resulting in a smaller flux density shift.
Correspondingly, the magnetizing current becomes a short
duration pulse with a high peak. Figure 2 presents the
calculated magnitudes and wave – shapes of the magnetizing
current which results as a consequence of a large 1 – Phase
power transformer being subjected to 3 different levels of DC;
namely, 6, 12, and 40 Amps. As can be seen from the figure,
the magnitudes of the peaks of these magnetizing currents are
5, 11, and 47 percent of the full load current, respectively.
Correspondingly, the magnitude of the percentage
magnetizing current in the absence of DC is a fraction of a
percent for this transformer. Also, the duration of this pulse is
only in the range of 1/10th to 1/12th of the cycle.
2.5
Flux Density vs Phase angle

& structural parts. In the following section, the paper presents

Bm, AC
a detailed discussion, supported by measured data, of the 2.0
Bm, (AC+DC)
nature of the GIC currents associated with GIC events. This is 1.5

followed by deriving the effect of GIC on transformers 1.0

Flux Density, Tesla

considering the nature of the GIC currents. Section IV

0.5
provides explanations of transformer failures / overheating
reported in the published literature as caused by GIC currents. 0.0
-90 -60 -30 0 30 60 90 120 150 180 210 240 270 300 330 360
In section V, actual measurements, made on full size power -0.5

_____________________________________________ -1.0

Dr. Ramsis Girgis is presently the R & D manager at the ABB

-1.5
Power Transformer plant, Saint Louis, MO.
Mr. Kiran Vedante is presently a Senior R &D Engineer at the -2.0

ABB Power Transformer plant, Saint Louis, MO. Phase Angle, Degrees

(a) Flux density shift in the core caused by DC

978-1-4673-1935-5/12/$31.00
Authorized licensed use limited ©2012
to: AmitabhIEEE
Sarkar. Downloaded on October 27,2023 at 19:31:29 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 2

(b) Part – Cycle, Semi – Saturation of Transformer cores

Fig. 1 – Effect of DC on transformer core magnetization
% Magnetizing Current vs Phase Angle
50%
Fig. 3 – Core DC flux path in various core types
45%

40% Figure 4 below presents the percentage magnetizing

Neutral DC = 6 Amps current drawn by two different types of transformers, one is a
% Magnetizing Current

35%
Neutral DC = 12 Amps large 1 – phase power transformer with a 3 – limb core and
30%
Neutral DC = 40 Amps the other is a large 3 – phase power transformer with a 3 –
25%
limb core. It can be seen that the magnetizing current drawn
20% by the 3 – phase, 3 – limb core is much smaller than the
15% magnetizing current drawn by the 1 – phase transformer for
10%
the same values of DC currents flowing through the windings
of these transformers.
5%
% Magnetizing Current vs DC Current
0%
8
0 30 60 90 120 150 180 210 240 270 300 330 360
Phase Angle, Degrees
7
Fig. 2 – Magnetizing current pulse due to DC current 3-Phase, 3-Limb Transformer
6
B. Factors affecting how much DC causes Semi – saturation 1-Phase Transformer
% M ag n e tizin g C u rren t

5
Core – type, core geometry, and core design
As mentioned earlier, the magnitude of the DC flux shift in 4
the core depends on the magnetic reluctance of the DC flux
path. Thus, the DC flux shift in a 3 – phase, 3 – limb core 3

form transformers would be the lowest of all core – types.

2
This is because this design offers an order of magnitude
higher magnetic reluctance to the DC Ampere – turns in the 1
Core – Tank magnetic circuit, refer to Figure 3 below. The
DC flux has to pass through the very high reluctance path 0
from the core top yoke to the tank cover, through the tank 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
DC Current/Phase
walls, and return to the bottom yoke through, again, the high
reluctance path from the tank bottom. All other core – types
offer much less reluctance to the DC Ampere – turns because Fig. 4 – Peak magnetizing current for 2 different core – types
the path of this DC flux is through the core; which has orders C. Harmonic content of the magnetizing current pulse
of magnitudes higher permeability, see Figure 3 below. Core Typically, 3 – phase transformers with 3 – limb cores will
material and type of core joint have some influence. However have narrower magnetizing current pulses under the effect of
this influence is small and depends on the core – type and the DC compared to corresponding magnetizing current pulses of
operating flux density in the core. This influence decreases transformers with other core – types. Figure 5 compares the
even further for high magnitudes of DC.

Authorized licensed use limited to: Amitabh Sarkar. Downloaded on October 27,2023 at 19:31:29 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 3

% harmonic content for these two types of transformers. The Winding Hot Spot Temperature vs Time, 1-Phase Transformer
magnetizing current pulse in the 3 – phase transformer has 130
120
higher amplitudes of the lower order harmonics and much 110
lower amplitudes of the high order harmonics. For other core

Wdg Hot Spot Tempt, Degree C

100
– types, represented by the 1 – phase transformer data in 90

Figure 5, the magnetizing current pulse has much more 80

Idc = 20 Amps
uniform amplitudes among low and high order harmonics. 70
Idc = 30 Amps
60
Therefore, these transformers would have a significant content 50 Idc = 50 Amps

of higher order harmonics. Another observation from Figure 5 40

is that transformers, with other than the 3 – phase, 3 – limb, 30

core – type, have a much lower % of the 2nd order harmonic. 20

This is significant as lower levels of 2nd order harmonics 10

0
associated with the total primary current of the transformer 0 5 10 15 20 25 30

could give an erroneous message to the differential relay set at Time, Minutes

a low value of 2nd harmonic content to differentiate between

Fig. 6 – Winding Hot spot temperatures under DC
Inrush current events and a fault condition.
E. Calculation of hot spot temperature of structural parts
Harmonics Spectrum of Magnetizing Current under DC Conditions
16% The magnitude of this temperature rise depends on the core
construction, the operating / design flux density, and
14%
3 - Phase, 3 - Limb Transformer magnitude of DC current flowing through the windings. Once
12% 1 - Phase Transformer the core flux density reaches close to the saturation flux
density level of the core steel, there will be spillage of the core
% Harmonics Amplitude

10% flux outside the core. This results into additional flux linkages
to the structural parts, such as tie plates, yoke clamps, tank
8%
walls, tank cover, tank bottom, etc. This adds to the existing
6%
leakage flux due to load current and the high peak
magnetizing current pulse. The result is an additional increase
4% in temperature of these parts. Figure 7 below presents the
calculated hot spot temperature of a tie – plate for different
2% values of DC applied continuously for 120 minutes.
The figure shows that the hot spot temperature reached
0%
60 120 180 240 300 360 420 480 540 600 660 close to a final value within about 20 minutes from the
Harmonic Frequency, Hz application of the DC. This corresponds to the typical range of
Fig. 5 – Harmonic content of magnetizing current of transformers time constant of the metallic structural parts of transformers.
subjected to DC The increase in the hot spot temperature is still not significant
even after being subjected to a 50 Amps DC for 120 minutes
D. Calculation of increase in winding hot spot temperatures
continuously (32 C). Under actual GIC, however, this
The much higher magnetizing current, and the nature of its temperature rise will be much lower than shown below due to
wave – shape, produce correspondingly higher magnitudes of the very short duration nature of GIC (1 – 2 minutes). This is
leakage flux that is also rich in harmonics. This results in demonstrated in the following section of this paper.
appreciably higher eddy and circulating current losses in the Flitch-Plate Temperature vs Time
windings as well as the structural parts of the transformer but 160

a small increase in the total load losses of the transformer. 140

In Figure 6 below, calculated temperatures of the hot spot
Flitch-Plate Tempt, Degree C

in the windings of a 1 – Phase large power transformer are 120

presented when the transformer is subjected to 20, 30, and 50 100

Amps / phase DC currents for a 30 minute duration, while Idc = 20 Amps
80 Idc = 30 Amps
fully loaded. The figure shows that the hot spot temperature Idc = 50 Amps
reached close to a final value within about 5 minutes from the 60

application of the DC. This corresponds to the typical range of

40
the time constant of transformer windings. The increase in the
hot spot temperature is still not significant even after being 20

subjected to a continuous 50 Amps DC for 30 minutes. This 0

increase is only 12 º C. 0 20 40 60 80 100 120
Time, Minutes

Fig. 7 – Tie – plate hot spot temperature under DC

Authorized licensed use limited to: Amitabh Sarkar. Downloaded on October 27,2023 at 19:31:29 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.

III. EFFECTS OF GIC ON POWER TRANSFORMERS
In order to accurately determine the capability of a
transformer to GIC, one needs to consider the nature of the
signature of the GIC current as well as magnitudes and time
duration involved with a GIC event.
Typical signature of GIC Currents
Figs. 8 & 9, below, present two different examples of GIC
signatures; one is estimated [1] based on the original
measured VAR consumption at the PSE&G Salem Generating
station during the K9 GIC event on March 13, 1989. The
other is a recent signature obtained at a generating station in
southern Manitoba, Canada during a GIC event in February,
2011.
Fig. 8 – GIC current at Salem Generating station in 1989
Fig. 9 – Measured GIC at a Generating station in
Southern Manitoba, Canada in February 2011
As it is demonstrated in these two figures, a Solar magnetic
event is associated with GIC which is quasi DC characterized
by high levels of DC as well as a few much higher peaks that
have very short time duration. For example, in Fig. 8 above,
the GIC signature shows mainly several consecutive narrow (a
few minutes duration) peaks of 20 amps magnitude over a
period of 90 minutes along with two high peaks of 80 & 100
Amps of about 2 minute duration each. Similarly in Fig. 9, the
GIC event is characterized by a number of narrow peaks of <
5 amps magnitude for a total accumulative duration of 5
minutes and one 8 amps peak of < 1 minute duration.
Authorized licensed use limited to: Amitabh Sarkar. Downloaded on October 27,2023 at 19:31:29 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
4
Calculation of the effect of GIC currents
Due to the short duration of the high peaks of GIC (1 – 2
minutes) and the fact that the duration of the resulting
magnetizing current pulse is only in the range of 1/10th to
1/12th of a cycle, the actual duration of the resulting core part
– cycle, semi – saturation, and associated high peak pulses of
the core magnetizing current, is only a few seconds. Hence,
the increase in temperature rises in the transformer windings
due to GIC would be expected to be at least an order of
magnitude lower than that estimated based on continuous
duration DC currents. The same is true for temperature rises in
the core and structural parts. This is because the thermal time
constants of windings and metallic structural parts are much
higher than the application time of the current pulse and
associated leakage flux in the transformer.
In order to illustrate the above, a profile of GIC per Figure
10 (a) below was assumed and winding hot spot temperature
was calculated for a fully loaded large 1 – phase power
transformer when subjected to this assumed GIC current
profile. The assumed GIC profile is a base level of 100 Amps
/ phase (300 Amps for a 3 – phase bank) followed by 2 minute
duration very high level GIC pulses of 400 Amps / phase
(1200 Amps for a 3 – phase bank) every 30 minutes. This GIC
profile / magnitudes is almost 5 times that experience at the
Salem Generating Station caused by the K9 GIC event of
March 13, 1989.
The calculated winding temperatures due to the GIC profile
of Figure 10 (a) are presented in Figure 10 (b) below. It can be
seen from the figure that:
1. The temperature rise of the winding hot – spot due to
the base 100 Amps is about 7º C; which when added to
the winding hot spot temperature of 110 º C at full
load results in a total hot spot temperature of 118 º C.
2. The temperature of the winding hot – spot, due to the 2
minute duration of 400 Amps / phase of GIC,
increases by about 35 C; resulting in a hot spot total
temperature of about 152 C. The temperatures will be
much lower when the transformer is not fully loaded
and / or ambient temperature is lower than 30 C. Such
winding hot spot temperatures for such a short
duration would not cause any appreciable damage of
the windings, structural parts, or loss of insulation life
of the transformer. In fact. Industry Standards allow
much higher winding hot spot temperature levels for
much longer times under emergency loading
conditions.
3. After the 2 – minute duration, the hot spot temperature
of the windings goes back down to the original
temperature existing before that pulse of GIC. In fact,
it takes only about 3 minutes for this to happen as the
time constant of the windings is only several minutes.
4. The duration of that pulse of winding temperature rise
is only a few minutes; which would not result in any
damage to the windings of this transformer anyway.

The same is true for structural parts, except that the
temperature rise will be even smaller for these structural parts
as their time constant is higher than that of the windings.
Idc
100 Amps
(0,0)
30
Winding Hot Spot Temperature vs Time
160
140
Winding Hot Spot Tempt, Degree C
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
0 10 20
(b) Calculated Winding Hot Spot Temperature
Fig. 10 – Winding Hot Spot Temperature for GIC profile above
IV. REPORTED TRANSFORMER DAMAGE / OVER – HEATING
CONTRIBUTED TO GIC
Reference [1] reports several of those cases. Figure 11 below
shows a picture of the one shell form transformer that
experienced significant overheating of the windings of a GSU
transformer at a PSE&G Generating power station at Salem,
NJ during the March 13, 1989 K9 GIC event that injected
extremely high GIC currents shown in Figure 8 of this paper.
The transformer did not actually fail but was taken out of
service a week later because of significant gassing.
Fig. 11 – Winding series – connection overheating in PSE&G
Transformer caused by the March 13, 1989 GIC Event
Authorized licensed use limited to: Amitabh Sarkar. Downloaded on October 27,2023 at 19:31:29 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
5
This is an old Shell form transformer that had an old
winding design that made it susceptible to overheating caused
by high circulating current when subjected to high levels of
GIC currents. This winding design was originally optimized
400 Amps 400 Amps for the leakage flux pattern typically associated with normal
loading and operating conditions. During this high GIC event,
the high GIC current caused part – cycle, semi – saturation of
the core; during which the leakage flux pattern changed and
resulted in very high circulating currents in the series
100 Amps 100 Amps connection of the LV windings of this transformer [2, 3]. Same
design transformers at PSE&G experienced similar
overheating, although to a lesser degree. This old generic
2 30 2 30 Time, Minutes design of the LV winding was already changed since the early
seventies. The newer design minimizes circulating currents in
(a) Simulated GIC current
this winding in general as well as under the conditions of core
semi – saturation associated with high levels of GIC.
Another case reported in Reference [1] is a Shell – form
Transformer that had tank wall heating during the same GIC
event. In the construction of such shell – form transformers,
wood slabs are placed between the core and tank walls. These
areas of the tank walls are, therefore, cooled by air only on
one side. Under GIC conditions, when the core goes through
the short periods of semi – saturation, part of the main flux in
the core and the windings leakage flux travel to the tank wall
causing localized eddy losses in the tank. Being blanketed by
the wood slabs these regions of the tank start to overheat.
30 40 50 60 70 80
Additionally, it should be noted that this temperature increase
Time, Minutes
had not resulted into any real consequences to transformer
except discoloration of the tank paint at the tank regions
opposite to the wood slabs on the inside of the tank walls [4].
Improvements made to this type of construction allow better
cooling of the tank walls.
Another case of overheating damage reported to have been
caused by GIC is the case of several EHV core form power
transformers in South Africa; where overheating of the HV
leads was observed. At that time, the manufacturer of these
transformers investigated the cause of the lead overheating
and it was realized at the time that these leads were over –
insulated which did not allow proper oil flow in these leads
resulting in the overheating. The high pulses of magnetizing
current that these transformers experienced during the very
high GIC event there could have contributed some to the
overheating. It was concluded that overheating could have
also been already there before the GIC event.
Also, Reference [1] included a statement that within 2
years of the 1989 GIC event, 11 nuclear plants experienced
failures of several Generator Step – Up transformers (GSUs)
but no details were given. During that period, a number of
GSU failures have been studied in detail and were found to be
caused by back – feed mode operation. In this mode of
operation, the generator step – up transformers are not
sufficiently protected from switching and lightning surges.
Also, the generator is not connected and, hence, the electrical
damping in the electric circuit is very low making it
vulnerable to electrical circuit and winding resonances.

Other cases were reported in Reference [5] of significant
winding overheating in a number of large core form power
transformers in S. Africa during the period between 2003 and
2004. These incidents were found to coincide with failures
caused by the phenomenon of the conducting Copper
Sulphide forming and causing failures of transformers world –
wide; related to the Sulphur content in the mineral oil used in
these transformers. It is believed that higher temperatures in
the windings, caused by GIC, could have accelerated the
formation of Copper Sulphide in these transformers; which
would have contributed to the experienced winding damage.
However, the magnitudes of the GIC reported to have been
associated with these incidents do not seem to be high enough
to cause much winding overheating.
One transformer in New Zealand that was reported in
Reference [6] as having failed one minute after a GIC event is
believed to have been caused by System instability associated
with the GIC event. Similarly, it was reported by HQ in
reference [6] that two large power core form transformers
were subjected to external faults during the GIC event and are
believed to have been caused by over – voltages due to
System instability. Also, Reference [7] reports on two
transformer failures in National Grid in Britain after a GIC
event but no details were given to ascertain that claim. Finally,
in Reference [8], account is given of a number of 400 kV
large power core form transformers in southern Sweden that
were subjected to high levels of GIC in the October 2003 GIC
event. No transformer damage was reported; including a 3 –
Phase transformer that was subjected to an estimated peak of
330 Amps of GIC in the neutral. The authors of this paper
reported that a 20 – 50 minute black out occurred in the
Malmo area which was caused by the tripping of a 130 kV
line resulting from the operation of a relay that had a higher
sensitivity to the 3rd harmonic than to the fundamental
frequency.
It is to be noted here that, as in the case of the Salem shell
form transformer, core and shell form transformers with
special winding arrangements and construction could
experience large levels of circulating current and suffer some
winding damage if these transformers are subjected to very
high levels of GIC that would cause core part – cycle, semi –
saturation. These types of transformers will need to be
investigated and identified on an individual basis.
V. ACTUAL MEASUREMSNTS OF EFFECT OF DC / GIC
Two full size experiments were performed by Hydro
Quebec [9] and FIN Power [10] where very large 1 – phase and
3 – phase power transformers were injected with high levels
of DC (75 Amps for 20 minutes and up to 200 Amps for 30
minute intervals; respectively). Temperature rises were
measured in windings and structural parts of the transformers.
It was found that the temperature rises were in a reasonable
range in spite of the high levels of DC applied continuously
for long durations. As concluded by these studies, even high
levels of GIC currents should not cause transformer damage.
Authorized licensed use limited to: Amitabh Sarkar. Downloaded on October 27,2023 at 19:31:29 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
6
An earlier experimental study of the effect of DC on power
transformers was conducted by Tokyo Electric Power
Corporation, in collaboration with Toshiba, Hitachi, and
Mitsubishi [11]. The study tested several small scale models of
core form as well as shell form transformers with different
core – types. Based on the measurements performed on these
models, measurements were made on two large – Scale
models of 1 – phase, 3 – limb 1000 MVA / 550 KV core form
and shell form transformers. These transformers were tested
with DC levels of up to 66 Amps; which corresponds to 400 –
600 Amps / phase for the corresponding full size transformers.
The DC was applied for up to 30 minutes continuous. The
leakage flux and temperatures were measured in windings and
structural parts of these transformers. The maximum
temperature rise measured after 30 minutes of applying such
large magnitudes of DC continuously was approximately 110
C in both the Tie – plate for the core form transformer and the
core support in the shell form transformer. As suggested in the
paper, these temperature rises would have been 1/10th of these
values if the Tie plates and the core support were made of non
– magnetic steel. Also, the very short duration of GIC would
not allow hot spot temperatures to rise to a fraction of these
temperatures. The study, again, concluded that because of the
short duration of these temperatures, the transformer life
would not be appreciably affected.
It is very important to note here that all testing performed
on full size transformers or scale models, applied DC current
continuously for 20 minutes and up to 2 hrs. The measured
temperature rises were still in a very reasonable range. Also,
as demonstrated in section III above, a high amplitude GIC
duration of 1 – 2 minutes and the time constants of windings
& structural parts being in the range of 5 – 15 minutes,
respectively, winding and structural parts temperatures would
not increase to any significant levels. Also, as Reference [10]
suggested, because of the short duration of these temperatures,
transformer insulation life would not be appreciably affected.
VI. EFFECT OF GIC ON POWER SYSTEMS
As presented earlier in this paper, part – cycle, core semi –
saturation is associated with a high magnitude narrow
magnetizing current pulse once per cycle. This represents high
levels of VAR pulse requirement on the power system causing
system voltage distortions. Also, the narrow current pulse
causes capacitive components on the system, such as static
VAR compensators, etc. to increase their currents and may
become overloaded and trip, which may contribute to grid
instability. Moreover, the magnetizing current pulse is
associated with high harmonics, and as a result, resonance
may occur and stability of the grid may be compromised due
to the creation of virtual zero at some point and opening of
lines. Also, as observed from Figure 5 of this paper,
transformers with other than the 3 – phase, 3 – limb core –
type have a much lower % of the 2nd order harmonic. This is
significant as lower levels of 2nd order harmonics associated
with the total primary current of the transformer could give an
erroneous message to the differential relays set at a low value

of the % 2nd harmonic content to differentiate between Inrush
current events and a fault condition.
VII. CONCLUSIONS
¾ High levels of GIC could cause part – cycle, semi –
saturation of transformer cores. This results in a short
duration, high peak pulse of magnetizing current.
¾ Because of its short duration, in the great majority of the
cases, even high levels of GIC would not cause damaging
overheating of neither windings nor structural parts of
power transformers.
¾ Only transformers, core form or shell form, where part –
cycle, core semi – saturation would cause high winding
circulating currents would be susceptible to significant
winding overheating when the transformer is subjected to
high levels of GIC. The significant overheating of the
series connection of old design shell form transformers at
PSE&G during the 1989 GIC storm was an example of
this group of transformers.
¾ Other cases of significant overheating and winding
damage, reported in the published literature as have been
caused by GIC, were found to have been caused totally,
or partially, by other effects, or by system instability
experienced during a GIC event.
¾ The main impact of GIC is on the system instability it
could cause due to high levels of VARS and significant
current harmonics as a result of transformer core part –
cycle, semi – saturation.
VIII. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors of this paper would like to acknowledge technical
and editorial comments provided by Mr. Juan Castellanos of
GE Prolec, Mr. James McIver of Siemens, and Mr. Mohamed
Diaby of EFACEC. The authors also would like to thank Mr.
Mats Bernesjo for his help during the production and
submission process of this document.
IX. REFERENCES
[1] John Kappenman, “Geomagnetic Storms and Their
Impacts on the U.S. Power Grid”, Report # Meta-R-319
by Metatech Corporation submitted to Oak Ridge
National Laboratory, Pages 1-197.
[2] Ramsis Girgis & Chung-Duck KO, “Calculation
Techniques And Results Of Effects Of GIC Currents as
Applied to Two Large Power Transformers”, IEEE
Transactions on Power Delivery, Vol. 7, No. 2, April
1992, Page 699-705.
[3] Ramsis Girgis, Chung-Duck KO, and Dennis Scott,
“Analysis of Transformer Overheating due to
Geomagnetic ally Induced Currents”, Proceedings of the
American Power Conference, Vol. 153 II, 1992, pp1167.
[4] Phil Gattens and R. M. Waggel; “Investigation of
Transformer overheating due to Solar Magnetic
Authorized licensed use limited to: Amitabh Sarkar. Downloaded on October 27,2023 at 19:31:29 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
7
Disturbances”, IEEE Special Panel Session Report, July
12, 1989
[5] C. T Gaunt, G. Coetzee, “Transformer failures in regions
incorrectly considered to have low GIC-risk”, Mat Post
07, 3rd European Conference on MV & HV Substation
Equipment, Nov 15-17, 2007, Lyon, France, Proceedings
of Power Tech, July 15, 2007, Lausanne, Switzerland
[6] Jean Beland, Kevin Small, “Space Weather Effects on
Power Transmission Systems: The Cases of Hydro-
Quebec and Trans power New Zealand Ltd,” Proceedings
of the NATO Advanced Research Workshop on Effects
of Space Weather on Technology Infrastructure, NATO
Science Series, Vol 176, 2004
[7] A. Erinmez, J. G. Kappenman, W. A. Radasky:
“Management of the geomagnetically induced current
risks on the National Grid Company’s electric power
transmission system,” Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-
Terrestrial Physics, 64, 2002, p743-756
[8] M. Wik et al, “Space weather events in July 1982 and
October 2003 and the effects of geomagnetically induced
currents on Swedish technical systems”, Annales
Geophysicae, 27, 1775-1787, 2009.
[9] P. Picher, L. Bolduc et al, “Study of the acceptable DC
current limit in core-form Power Transformers”, IEEE
Transactions on Power Delivery, Vol. 12, No. 1, January
1997, Page 257-265.
[10] Matti Lahtinen & Jarmo Elovaara, “GIC Occurrences and
GIC Test for 400 kV System Transformer”, IEEE
Transactions on Power Delivery, Vol. 17, No. 2, April
2002, Page 555-561.
[11] Nobuo Takasu et al, “An experimental analysis of DC
excitation of Transformers by Geo - magnetically Induced
Currents”, IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery, Vol. 9,
No. 2, April 1994, Page 1173-1182.
X. BIOGRAPHIES
Dr. Ramsis S. Girgis (F'93) is presently
the Research & Development manger at
the Power Transformer Division of ABB
located in St. Louis, Missouri. He is also
the leader of the global ABB R&D
activities in the area of “Transformer
Core Performance”. Dr. Girgis received
his Ph.D. degree from the University of
Saskatchewan, Canada, in Electrical
Engineering in 1978. He has over 40
years of R&D experience in the area of power, distribution,
and high frequency transformers, rotating machines, and pulse
power components. He has published and presented over 60
scientific papers in IEEE, IEE, CIGRE, and other international
journals. He co-authored chapters in two electrical
engineering handbooks on transformer design and transformer
noise. He is presently the chairman of the IEEE Transformers
Standards “Audible Sound and Vibrations” Working Group.
 8

He is the past Chairman of the IEEE Transformers Standards

“Performance Characteristics” Sub Committee and past
Technical Advisor representing the US National Committee in
the IEC Technical Committee 14.

Mr. Kiran B. Vedante (SM’2006) was

born in India on June 24, 1971. He
completed his Diploma in Electrical
Engineering from Mumbai Technical
Board in 1989, Bachelor of Engineering,
and Master of Engineering degrees in
1989 & 1992; respectively from VJ
Technological Institute (Mumbai
University); all in Electrical Engineering. He worked for
various renowned Transformer companies like Siemens, USA,
Pennsylvania Transformers, USA, and Crompton Greaves
Limited, India for more than 19 years. Kiran has extensive
work experience in Design and Development of EHV Power
Transformers up to 315 MVA, 400 kV and Shunt Reactors up
to 80 MVAR, 420 kV. He was involved in the Development
of Reactive type Load Tap Changer and also in the design of
Specialty Transformers. He also has work experience in the
System Studies and design of Power distribution systems
(Substations design etc.) for various Industrial Plants. In 2008,
Kiran joined the Power Transformers Remanufacturing
department of ABB Inc. in Saint Louis, MO; where he is now
a senior R&D Engineer. His present research work is mainly
focused in the area of - Core performance and Effects of
GIC/DC on Power Transformers. He is an active member of a
number of Working Groups and Task Forces in IEEE
Transformer Standards Committee and a member of IEEE
PES.

Authorized licensed use limited to: Amitabh Sarkar. Downloaded on October 27,2023 at 19:31:29 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.