v

GEC A L S T H O M

T&D

THE EFFECTS OF HARMONIC DISTORTION ON EQUIPMENTS.

BY : P C BENNETT V DARLEY S M ABBOTT

Introduction

The brief for this portion of the Colloquium is to discuss the effects of harmonics on
equipments. We trust you will accept that as this contribution was prepared within a
Transformer Engineering Department the illustrations used to show the effects
concern transformers.

It is a truism that all transformers are affected by harmonics given that any power
system is contaminated to some degree by them. What is of interest and concern
are the extremes, albeit known and in most cases predictable extremes.

Some loads are known as classical harmonic generators so far as transformers are
concerned. Any transformer connected to a Converter load or an Electric Arc
Furnace is by definition connected to a harmonic generator. In the case of the
Converter harmonic levels maybe variable, predictable and even controllable. In
the case of an Arc Furnace the uncontrolled nature of the arcs during certain times
of the melting process produces wholly unpredictable and randomly generated
harmonic currents.

In order to demonstrate the effects of harmonics on transformers two illustrations

are proposed. Firstly a case study of what happens when the effects, very
regrettably, are not predicted. Secondly how, with modern standards and computer
aids, the effects can be predicted, incorporated into the design and demonstrated
by appropriate thermal tests.

CASE STUDY. EFFECT OF HARMONICS

The case study concerns a 12 pulse full wave 30kA Rectifier transformer with a
rating of approximately 30 MVA.. The unit was manufactured in the early 1970's.

One of the initial Design decisions was how to achieve the required 12 pulse
operation from a single transformer equipment. Two methods are possible and
have been used to build operational units. One method uses two individual
transformer core and windings housed in a single tank. One transformer will have
its low voltage winding delta connected the other unit will be star connected. These
30 degree shifted outputs are each connected to 6 pulse full wave Converters
which are in turn parallelled. The alternative is to assemble and axially displace
both sets of windings onto a single 3-limb core. There are a number of economical

0 1997 The Institutionof Electrical Engineers.

511 Printed and published by the IEE, Savoy Place, London WC2R OBL, UK.
and physical reasons, not of immediate interest, that make this the preferred
alternative and the one concerned in the case study

The connections of the main unit are shown in Diagraml. Some details are missing.
The regulator scheme that varies the main unit input voltage and any phase shifts to
the primary windings that multiply the individual unit 12 pulse output to that
required for the complete installation. Some details are shown. The half wave flux
resetting saturable reactors used for fine voltage control because, in the example,
these were mounted with the main unit.

By convention with power transformers the outermost and hence visible windings
are those associated with the HV circuits. With heavy current Converter units this
convention is reversed so the outer windings are those of the LV circuit which, for
our case study is convenient, given that the problem is associated with these
windings. The photograph (Diagram2) shows the original transformer with the
transductor assembly mounted above the main unit.

In the initial design 16 parallel connected disc coils formed the LV star winding
assembled in the top halve of the core whilst 20 parallel disc coils formed the LV
delta in the bottom portion of the core. The question was how do these parallel
coils share the fundamental and harmonic currents? It was known that the
fundamental component of the load current did not share equally between the
discs. Prior to computer programs the distribution formulae had been established
from tests on models. It was thought that the harmonic components of the load
current, of which the 5'h, 7'h, 1 1th and 13'h were the most significant, would share
in a similar manner.

Unfortunately this was not so. The table of test results (Diagram3a) shows that the
pair of disc coils adjacent to the central gap between star and delta carry a
disproportional share of the harmonic current. The result of this sharing was a
significantly increased rate of life usage of the paper insulation on these coils.

Improvement was in two stages. In the first balancing reactors were introduced in
series with the central coils. The improvement is shown on in the expanded table of
test results. (Diagram3b) Secondly field plotting computer programs were
developed that permitted a full analysis of both the fundamental and harmonic
current sharing for any winding geometry. This resulted in replacing the disc
winding with helical type coils. The further improvement in current distribution when
added to the test result table (Diagram3c) shows the original and final current
sharing. The photograph (Diagram4) of the new arrangement is not visibly much
different from the original, however as the diagram (DiagramS) illustrates not only
does this arrangement improve current sharing it significantly lowers the main unit
copper losses. This is mainly due to the reduction in eddy current losses especially in
the coils adjacent to the central gap.

The motto of this admittedly somewhat old story is to know during the design stage
that (a) there are harmonics (b) their magnitude and (c) where they flow within the
windings. This requirement is as valid today as it was when the lesson was originally
learnt.

512
ALLOWING FOR THE AFFECT OF HARMONICS.

We may now assume that the value of the harmonics to which the transformer
is to be subjected are known, explore how their affects maybe allowed for at
the design stage and how traditional thermal tests maybe modified to
demonstrate compliance

Firstly another truism, harmonic currents generate heating affects over and
above those of the fundamental currents assumed in conventional
transformers. To make adequate allowance for the additional heating affects it
is necessary to understand what elements within the transformer are affected.
The diagram (Diagram6) illustrates the basic temperature rise characteristics
of a unit designed to present BS/IEC standards. Three temperature
components are guaranteed, two openly and one hidden. The 'Top Oil'
temperature rise and the 'Average Winding Rise by Resistance' are
guaranteed and thermal tests are conducted to show compliance. The
average winding rise is the sum of the Mean Oil rise and a 'Winding
Gradient' which is deduced from a resistance cooling curve taken at the end
of the thermal test.

There is a third important but hidden element namely the 'Hot Spot
temperature' within the transformer. As it name implies this is the hottest
temperature usually of insulation on a portion of winding conductor and
permitted to be 98 C. to present BS/IEC standards. Traditionally this value
has been calculated by adding 10%to the 'average ' gradient and adding this
to the Top Oil rise and the yearly ambient temperatures.

At this point a small digression. Transformers maybe overloaded and the rule
governing such operation states, in it's simplest form, that for every 6 C.
above 98 C. hot spot temperature the life of a transformer is halved and
doubled for every 6 O C. below. In the practical application of transformers
users seldom operate units continuously at their nameplate rating,
manufacturers seldom achieve the permitted rises (here the Charles Dickens
rule applies; winding rise by test 64.5 -result Happiness; winding rise by test
65.5 - result misery) and finally the BS/IEC assumes a 20 C. average
ambient temperature which somewhat overstates the case so far as the UK is
concerned. The combination of these factor results is a safety margin sufficient
to cater for a degree of harmonic contamination that maybe present in a
transformer connected to the power system.

To return to the main theme. Harmonics affect each of the three temperature
elements referred to above. Firstly they increase the total loss generated and
hence affect the oil rise elements and the size of the cooling plant. Secondly
they increase the winding eddy losses and so increase the average winding

513
gradient above that obtained solely from the fundamental current. Thirdly the
hot spot gradient maybe increased. In this respect studies have shown that
the traditional 10% increase of the average gradient to obtain the hot spot
value may not be sufficient and a values up to 30% appear more reliable.

A number of standards exist that incorporate calculations for harmonic affects.

Initially these were ANSI/NEMA standards but IEC1378 will be the European
standard and this will be used to illustrate an actual example. The subject
transformer, manufactured and tested recently, has a DC current rating of 45
kAmps.. The photograph (Diagram7) shows the core and windings of the 12
pulse unit with Star/Delta secondaries complete with transdudors in the half
wave circuit.

The principles on which the new lECl378 Part1 is based are:

(1) the transformer nameplate rating is based on the fundamental components

of the voltage and DC current. The usual copper loss and impedance
guarantees are based on this rating and tested to IEC76 methods to show
compliance.
(2) the harmonic current levels to which the transformer is to be subjected shall
be agreed.
(3) the division between winding eddy loss and the other stray losses shall be
assumed to be as the design intention.
(4) the winding eddy loss enhancement factor shall vary as the square of the
harmonic number.
(5) the stray loss enhancement factor shall vary as the 0.8'h power of the
harmonic number.

In the example the basic fundamental current losses of the tested transformer
are shown in the diagram. (Diagram8) Core and Transductor losses have
been removed for simplicity. Historically thermal testing with these losses was
all that was required and any additional loss enhancement was at the
discretion of the manufacturer.

The new proposal requires agreed harmonics and the enhancement factors
for the eddies and strays for the agreed harmonics of the example are as the
diagram. (Diagram9) These factors when applied to the tested losses at
fundamental current produce the final loss levels required for thermal tests.
The diagram records the harmonically loaded values. (Diagram10) The mean
and top oil rises are established using the losses calculated in this manner.
The current used to establish the winding gradients during the latter part of
the thermal test is a value that would produce the sum of the fundamental
current losses plus the harmonic eddy losses of the winding under
consideration. The standard therefore provides a method by which
harmonically loaded transformers maybe verified by tests prior to being
subjected to actual Converter waveshapes,
A word of caution. The approach is crucially dependent upon agreeing a
reasonable average level of harmonics. The simple solution of defining
harmonics as those of a classical square wave will for many applications result
in oversized cooling plant and transformer windings. In the example used the
increase in overall losses by using the harmonics of a square wave are shown
in the diagram. (Diagram11)

Finally lECl378 will ultimately be in two parts. Partl as we have seen is aimed
mainly at low voltage Industrial Converter applications whilst Part2 is primarily
for HV DC applications. The loss analysis approach is basically the same for
both but with an additional copper loss test at higher frequency (150/250 Hz)
so that the winding eddy and structural steel stray losses maybe separated
with a reasonable degree of accuracy. This approach was not proposed for
Partl because some transformers in the scope of the standard will be small in
MVA and not all manufacturers have dual frequency test facilities.
hh
A a
PRIMARY
WINDING
SECONDARY
WINDING -0

TRANSFORMER
CONNECTION
12 PULSE
3O k A

TRANSDUCTOR
 sc
BAL CI 0

Fundamental 1.4
1.5
2.
2.9
CURRENT WINDING I
Fundamental Star I
I
1.4 I
1
1.1
Delta I
%
1.5 , lf! 1.1
Star b 2.8 ! 2.2
t
Delta
 0 No

CURRENT ING !
Fundamental tar 1.4 1.1 1
E
1.05
f

elta f
B 1.5 1.1 I
I
1.05
Harmonic Star 11 2.8 2.2 E
E
i
1.5
t
elta 2. 2. 1 1.3
 BIAGRA M 4.

5/11
1.o

1.o 0.65

17
 20°C YEARLY

I I AVERAGE

r HOT SPOT
GRADIENT

5/13
 I

5/14 I
 12R EDDIES STRAYS TOTAL

HV 40 9 49

LV 60 11 71

BUSBARS 45 10 55

STRAYS 70 70
TOTAL 145 20 80 245
 T S
1.o
5 0.15 0.0225 0.56
7 0.1 0.01 0.5
0.05 0.0025 0.3
0.04 0.0016 0.27
0.02 0.12
0.01 0.0001 I 0.0
1.0371 t
!
Gl
4 v3 m m w
E-r v3 m m 00
0
-
E-r

el 4
4 00

F1
?4 el
U d- 40

m
pr:
4
m
*X m
a
Ep

5/17
a
a m
4 cn

d- m
4 m

m 1A m
d- a d-

m
&
4

p7

5/18