772

IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery, Vol. 9, No.2, April 1994

INSULATION COORDINATION FOR DELTA CONNECTED TRANSFORMERS

A . J . F. Keri Senior Member
Y . I . Muse Member
J. A . Halladay Member

American Electric Power Service Corporation Columbus, Ohio

Abstract It is common practice to install only phase to ground surge arresters for transformer insulation protection against electrical stresses. However, this may not adequately protect the delta connected transformer phase to phase winding insulation. High phase to phase overvoltages at the transformer terminals, due to capacitor switching, have been reported. This paper describes the excessive phase to phase overvoltages that can also occur due to wave propagation and surge transfer through transformers. This paper points out the need for surge arrester arrangements that protect both, phase to phase and phase to ground transformer insulations. Surge arrester arrangements, selection criteria, installation practices, and application considerations are discussed in this paper.

voltage(s) q*V, which have the same polarity at that location. (q is a coupling factor). The phase to phase stress is (1-q)V which is lower than the phase to ground voltage V. However, it will be demonstrated that due to the propagation effects of lightning strokes on transmission lines, the phase to phase overvoltages could exceed those for the phase to ground. These overvoltages could exceed station equipment insulation withstand levels, such as delta connected transformers at the line terminals. Surge propagation on transmission lines has been explained in references 14-61. When lightning strikes a conductor of a transmission line, it initiates current and voltage surges which propagate along the line. The voltage on each phase can be considered as the sum of line and ground modes, as shown in Figure 1. The ground modes on all phases have the same polarity. The line mode on induced phases have opposite polarity to the mode on struck phase. Mode voltages propagate along the line at different speeds. The ground mode travels at a slower speed and attenuates faster than the line mode. Thus, the line modes will separate from the ground mode as they travel along a transmission line. The induced voltages, which initially have the same polarity as the struck phase voltage, become of the opposite polarity as they propagate. The maximum phase to phase voltages, which are initially the difference between the absolute values of the peak voltages on the struck and the induced phases, will become the "sum" of the absolute values of the line mode voltages on the struck and the induced phases.
S T R w x RYSE LINE

Key Words: Insulation Coordination, metal oxide surge arresters, phase to phase protection, transformer, voltage transient, 6-surge arresters, 4-legged surge arresters.
1. Introduction

It has been American Electric Power's practice and the industry in general, to install only phase to ground surge arresters when providing transient surge protection to transformers. This practice is well known through out the utility industry. It provides an adequate protective margin when installed on wyegrounded transformer windings. However, this practice may not provide adequate protection for delta connected transformers and the transformers' tertiary windings. High phase to phase transformer winding stresses due to capacitor switching have been reported [1,2,3]. This paper demonstrates that the effect of wave propagation on transmission lines and surge transfer through transformers can also result in high delta winding overvoltages. The purpose of this paper is to discuss and recommend phase to phase, as well as phase to ground, protection against transient surges for delta winding transformers. The application of metal oxide surge arrester arrangements, that will protect both phase to phase and phase to ground transformer insulations, are described. Selection criteria for the 6-surge arrester, as well as the 4-legged surge arrester arrangements are presented. Installation practices and application considerations are discussed.
2.

uxx

ORXHDUm

Figure 1.

Line and Ground Mode Voltages Struck and Induced Phases

of

Wave Propagation Effect on Phase To Phase Voltage

Phase to phase lightning overvoltages, arriving at stations, were often considered to not exceed the phase to ground voltage Stresses. This idea had been based on the fact that when lightning strikes a phase conductor, it results in a voltage V, and the induced

93 SM 387-1 PWRD A paper recommended and approved by the IEEE Surge Protective Devices Committee of the IEEE Power Engineering Society for presentation at the IEEE/PES 1993 Summer Meeting, Vancouver, B.C., Canada, July 18-22, 1993. Manuscript submitted December 22, 1992; made available for printing April 5 , 1993. PRINTED IN USA

Figure 2 shows the aforementioned voltages, on a 138 kV untransposed transmission line. The system, consisting of a transmission line terminated at one end with the line surge impedance and the other end with a 138/13.2 kV transformer with delta connected primary, is modelled using EMTP [9]. The frequency dependent [Marti] line model, calculated at 50 k ~ z , is used [lo]. Corona effects are ignored since it could not be modelled reliably. The effects on voltages above corona onset level, however, are not significant enough to alter the analysis in this paper (121. A 1 x 50 ps, 3,45OA, lightning current was injected at 100 miles from the transformer. The lightning current level was selected such that it would result in the critical flashover voltage level, 760 kV, for the 138 kV transmission line, using 8 unit insulator strings. Figure 2 shows the struck phase and the induced phase voltages at the initial, the 50 mile point, and the transformer locations. The change in the polarity of the induced voltages can be observed by comparing the voltages at the initial location with the others. Note that the voltages arriving at the station will double due to the high transformer surge impedance relative to the line surge impedance. The maximum value Of these voltages to ground are 760 kV for the struck phase and 325 kV.for an induced phase.

0885-8977/94/$04.00 0 1993 IEEE

773
smw~pam
100 Mi 50 MI
STATION

IC

' It

"

g
0

At what distance does the peak of the line mode voltage separate from ground mode? The distance depends on the lightning and transmission line parameters. For example, Figures 3a and 3b show the struck phase and an induced phase voltages in the vicinity of the struck location, for the aforementioned 138 kV transmission line. It can be observed that the peak line mode voltage of 174 kV separates from the ground mode in about 12 miles. Note that the line mode voltage on the induced phase reaches 135 kV at 6 miles from station. Considering the doubling effect due to the transformer termination, and the arrester protective level of 240 kV, the lightning strike further than 6 or more miles will result in phase to ground voltages of opposite polarity between the struck phase and the induced phase, which will produce phase to phase voltage in excess of the transformer BIL (450 kV). At American Electric Power, an on-line Transient Monitoring System at Rockport Station has been installed [ll]. Figure 4 presents a simplified one-line diagram of the AEP Rockport station. The on-line Transient Monitoring System automatically records and stores voltage disturbances at all terminals of the T1, T2 and T3 transformers. The installation of the recording system was prompted by a large number of E W transformer failures at the Rockport station. Many field recorded lightning waveshapes have been analyzed. The waveforms agree with the aforementioned explanations of theoretical and EMTP results.

"

Yf
TIME (me)

325. 00

10

Figure 2 .

struck and Induced Phase Voltages Along 138 kV Line.

Surge arresters at the station will limit the struck and induced phase to ground voltages to the protective level (about 240 kV taken at 5 kA for an 87 kV MCOV rated arrester, assuming a grounded system). Therefore, the phase to phase voltages are about 480 kV at the station, which exceed the transformer basic insulation level (BIL) of 450 kV. Note that phase to phase voltages do not exceed phase to ground voltages if the lightning strikes the arrester location, since this results in voltages with the same polarity.
780.c
'
' '

1300

'so0

..:

SULLI\/AN

T3

Figure 4 .

Simplified One-Line Rockport Station.

Diagram

of

00

TIME (ma)

0.10

Figure 3a.

Struck Phase ( C ) voltage In Vicinity of Initial Lightning

the

Figure 5 shows a sample of a shielding failure on phase C of a 765 kV line 88 miles from the recording instrument. The lightning waveshapes clearly indicate the propagation effect; namely, the opposite polarity of the line mode voltages between the struck and induced phases. It may be of interest to state that back flashovers of a phase to a tower also produce the same phenomenon of opposite polarity voltages.

3.

Surge Transfer Effect on Transformer Windings

Field recorded waveforms show that a surge impinging at a transformer terminal could result in high phase to phase overvoltages at delta windings. These waveforms show that a surge entering the 765 kV terminal of the T3 transformer will severely excite the natural frequency oscillations at the 34.5 kV tertiary windings. Figure 6 presents the corresponding voltage response across T3's phase C-A tertiary winding. It is interesting to note that the tertiary response to the fast front lightning surge (with no "overvoltage") at the 765 kV terminal (Figure 5) is a switching surge type oscillation (about 2 ICHz), with a peak value twice the nominal phase to phase value. Also, note that the transient magnitude increases about 3 cycles (of 2 kHz) after the lightning surge initiates the tertiary

-174.

00

TlME (ma)

0.1

Figure 3b.

Induced Phase ( A ) Voltage In the Vicinity of Initial Lightning.

774
oscillation. This is due to the reflection of the lightning wave from the Sullivan station and back to the Rockport station, which reinforces the tertiary oscillation. voltage (MCOV), the grounding coefficient, and the arrester- equipment insulation coordination protective ratios, as specified in ANSI/IEEE Standard C62.22. Also, the MOSA rating is based on the expected level and duration of the system temporary overvoltage (TOV). The most common TOV's occur on the unfaulted phases during a line to ground fault. In general, the existing practices for arrester selection at delta connected transformers, considering various system grounding conditions, are as follows: 1. Arresters, with MCOV rating corresponding to the maximum phase to ground system voltages, are utilized at the delta winding of transformers which are connected to a well grounded system. The system grounding coefficient should be low enough such that the voltage rise on the unfaulted phases during fault conditions do not exceed the arrester TOV rating. Arresters, with MCOV rating corresponding to the maximum phase to phase system voltages, are applied at the delta winding of transformers which are connected to ungrounded systems. These arrester ratings are selected when delta side faults to ground are not designed to clear. Arresters, with MCOV rating in between the maximum phase to ground and the phase to phase voltage levels, are utilized for poorly grounded systems. The arrester rating is governed by the expected level and duration of the TOV.

-1875-

-looO1

INDUCED PHASE A

1875

2.

B
m
W

4 0.0 p

3.

3
-1875

- -400
8001

INDUCED PHASE

1875-

These practices may not adequately protect the phase to phase insulation of delta winding transformers, as described in sections 2 and 3 and shown in the following Tables 2 and 3 .

1
5.
Insulation Coordination An insulation coordination study was conducted for delta connected transformers, with various system configurations, in accordance with ANSI/IEEE C62.22. Table 1 shows a manufacturer's station class surge arrester MCOV ratings and protective levels for front of wave (FOW), switching impulse protective level (SPL), and the maximum discharge voltage (lighting impulse protective level: LPL) for an 8x20 ps, 5 k~ current waveform.
1.9 Table 1 Typical Surge Arrester Characteriatica

STRWKPHASEC

-1875-

TIMEOW) 50

-2mJ

'

TIME (ms)

Figure 5.

Field Recorded Lightning Waveforms at T3 Transformer's 165 kV Windings.

MCOV
Rating

pow

LPL

(kv-rms)
8.4 12.7

(kV crest)
29 44 53 77 85 101 110 128 135 160 239 287 477

(kv c r e s t ) 24 37
44 63 70 83 91 106 115 134 200 240

SPL (kV c r e s t )
20 31 37

15.3
22 24.4 29 31.5 36.5 42 be 73 87 146
TIME (MS)

53
59 70 76 88 98 113 169 204 349

-150-

'

399

TlME(MS)

Figure 6.

Field Recorded Waveforms Of Transformer Voltage Across T3 Tertiary Windings.

The arrester data applied for higher system voltage levels, such as 161, 230, 345, 500 and 7 6 5 kV, are not presented since these systems utilize grounded transformers only. Table 2 shows the insulation coordination protective ratios for delta winding transformers connected to ungrounded (or could become ungrounded) systems using transformer BIL, and the arrester characteristic data as shown in Table 1. The phase to phase insulation withstand of each delta winding is tested by the manufacturers per ANSI/IEEE C57.12.90 Standard, by grounding one terminal and applying impulse test voltages to the other terminal. Thus, the test voltages for phase to phase and phase to ground insulations are equal and checked simultaneously. The transformer withstand level to arrester protective level ratios consist of chopped withstand wave ( C W ) to front of wave (FOW), basic lightning impulse insulation level (BIL) to lightning impulse protective level (LPL), and basic switching impulse insulation level (BSL) to switching protective level (SPL). The arresters are

The twice phase to phase nominal tertiary voltage is easily exceeded for more severe lightning surges. In most cases, the transformer tertiary windings are protected by the phase to ground surge arresters. It will be demonstrated that these surges and this type of practice result in little or no protective margin for the phase to phase windings.
4.

Existing Practice

For many years AEP has been installing arresters connected phase to ground regardless of the transformer winding connection or the system grounding coefficient. Although very limited phase to phase protection have been used on the AEP system, results of this recent analysis will justify a wide application. Selection of the phase to ground metal oxide surge arrester (MOSA) rating is based on the maximum continuous operating

775
connected phase to ground at each terminal of the delta winding transformer, to create a series connection of two arresters for each winding. Therefore, each winding is protected by two series connected arresters. It should be noted that each arrester is rated for maximum phase to phase voltage, since the system is ungrounded, and it is assumed that line to ground faults will not be cleared. As indicated in Table 2, the transformer winding insulation for 34.5 kV to 138 kV systems are not protected. In addition, the 13.2 kV system is not adequately protected because the W / F O W ratio is 1.14 inatead of the minimum 1.20 as specified in the standard. It is assumed that the arresters are transformer mounted; hence, surge arrester lead length and separation distance between the arrester and transformer are not considered.
I n s u l a t i o n Coordination POT D e l t a Connected Transforme1 I n s t a l l e d on ungrounded System8 system voltage (kV-rms)

Figure 7 .

A ) The 6-Surge Arresters and B) The

4-Legged Surge Arresters combination of two phase to neutral arresters. For example, phase A to B insulation is protected by phase A to neutral, and phase B to neutral arresters. Surge arrester selection criteria, application considerations, and failure consequences will be discussed in the following sections.

MCOV
Rating (k V - m )

Transf. BIL. (kV-CREST)

ProtBCtive Ratios. W/FOW BIL/LPL BSL/SPL

6.1

Sizing Surge Arresters

a) The 6-surge arrester arrangement

13.2
34.5

34.5 46 69 138 138 138

15.3 36.5 36.5 46 73 146 146 146 = 1.1 X 811

110 150 200 250 350 450 550

650

1.14
.64

.E5 .86 .81 .52 .63 .75

1.25 .71 .94 .93 .E8

.56

1.23 .71
.94

.92
.E6 .54 .65

.76 .81

.77

The phase to phase surge arrester MCOV rating should be equal to or slightly greater than the maximum phase to phase system voltage. The arrester capability should be also checked for any expected M V ' s . The phase to ground surge arrester should be selected based on the standard phase to ground requirements. Table 6A, which includes results of subsequent analysis, shows typical phase to phase and phase to ground arrester MCOV ratings and the protective ratios for ungrounded systems. b) The 4-legged surge arrester arrangement

F,iW

BSL = . 8 3

X BIL

Table 3 shows the arrester insulation coordination protective ratios for delta winding transformers connected to wye-grounded systems. As stated before, each delta winding is protected by two arresters connected in series. The protective ratios are better than those in Table 2 since these arresters are rated for phase to ground system voltages. Even with these phase to ground rated arresters, the protective ratios for the 34.5 kV (with 150 kV BIL) and 138 kV (with 450 and 550 kV BIL) transformers are not adequate.

A simplified selection procedure for rating phase

e
I n s u l a t i o n Coordination

For D e l t a Connected Transformer I n s t a l l e d

on --Grounded Systems

system Voltage (kv-rmn)

McOv
Rating (kv-rme)

Transf. BIL (kV-Cre8t)

BIL/LPL BSL/SPL --C'W/poW

P r o t e c t i v e Ratios

13.2 34.5 34.5

46

8.4
24,4

69 136 138 136

24.4 31.5 46 87 87 87

110 150 200 250 350

450 550 650

2.09 0.97 1.30 1.25 1.20 0.86 1.05 1.25

2.29 1.07 1.40 1.37 1.31 0.94 1.15 1.35

2.28 1.06 1.40 1.37 1.29 0.92 1.12 1.32

to neutral and neutral to ground surge arresters is as follows. During normal and balanced system conditions, the voltage on the neutral surge arrester is zero, and the phase to neutral arresters are stressed to the phase to ground system voltages. Thus, each phase to neutral surge arrester MCOV rating should be equal to (or slightly higher than) the maximum phase to ground system voltage. The neutral to ground surge arrester MCOV rating should be selected such that the sum of the phase to neutral and neutral to ground arrester MCOV'8 meets or exceeds the same requirements as the standard phase to ground arresters. An important criterion is that the phase to neutral plus the neutral to ground surge arrester MCOV ratings should be selected to withstand the overvoltages which the unfaulted phases will be subjected to during a phase to ground fault. For example: Assume a 69/13.2 kV transformer connected delta and wye-grounded on the primary and secondary, respectively. The transformer is connected to a nominal 69 kV (72 kV maximum) ungrounded system. I n general, the MCOV ratings can be selected based on the following steps. Phase to Neutral arrester MCOV = (72/J3) kV = 41.6 kV A standard arrester MCOV rating available is 42 kV. Neutral to ground arrester MCOV = 72 - 42 = 30 kV A standard arrester MCOV rating available is 31.5 kV. Table 68 shows typical arrester MCOV ratings and protective ratios for the 4-legged arrester configuration.

In case of a poorly grounded system, the MCOV of arresters rated in between the phase to ground and the phase to phase voltage levels, is utilized when the system is designed to clear delta side faults. Protective ratios with these arrester ratings will be worse than those in Table 3 and better than those in Table 2. It should be noted that protective ratios will be worse if intermediate class arresters are used, instead of station class.
6.

surge Protection

6.2 Computer Results

Delta connected transformer windings can be protected by directly connected phase to ground and phase to phase surge arresters. This would require a total of six (6) surge arresters for a three phase bank (Figure 7A). As an alternative, a 4-legged surge arrester arrangement may be applicable (Figure 7B). Three arresters are connected from the three phases to a common neutral, and one arrester is connected from neutral to ground. Each phase to ground insulation is protected by the series combination of a phase to neutral arrester, and the neutral to ground arrester. For example, phase A to ground is protected by phase A to neutral, and the neutral to ground arresters. Each phase to phase insulation is protected by the series The application of both, the 6-surge arrester and the 4-legged surge arrester arrangements is studied in order to limit the conditions such as those described in sections 2 and 3. The shielding failure case on the Rockport-Jefferson 765 kV line as well as the transformer terminated 138 kV transmission line case described in these sections are analyzed, using EMTP. a) Shielding failure (surge transfer) case

The system shown in Figure 4 is modelled. The 765 kV transmission lines are represented by a three phase frequency dependent, distributed parameter line (Marti

776
model) with its parameters calculated at 50 kHz. The line reactors, transformers, and metal oxide surge arresters, including their non-linear effects, are modelled using manufacturer's data. Source equivalent impedance matrices are calculated from short circuit studies. The modelled system is verified using the field recorded shielding failure waveforms at the Rockport T3 transformer 765 kV terminal and the transformer's tertiary response, as shown in Figures 5 and 6, respectively. The simulation of a 1x50 &is, - 8.3 kA lightning current initiated near the Phase C positive peak of the 60 Hz waveform, 88 miles from the Rockport station, resulted in a close agreement with the field waveform at the 765 kV terminal of the T3 transformer. However, the tertiary response is very sensitive to the specific parameters used for the transformer T3 model. Initially, a manufacturer developed model consisting of a 15 x 15 matrix was used without a satisfactory match to the tertiary waveforms. It was determined that a more accurate voltage magnitude and transient frequency response could be obtained by modelling the transformer winding leakage impedances, the non-linear magnetizing branch, and an appropriate transformer terminal to ground and terminal to terminal capacitance overlay. Figures 8 and 9 show the EMTP calculated waveshapes which compare well with the corresponding field . For example, the magnitude waveshapes, Figures 5 and 6 of the peak tertiary voltage and the transient frequency are 2.0 pu and 2.0 kHz for the field and 2.09 pu and 2.09 kHz for the calculated wave shapes, respectively (1.0 pu = 34.5 42 kV). a fault clearing provision, 36.5 kV MCOV phase to ground arresters would be selected. Similar results are also obtained by using 4legged surge arresters, rated 22 kV MCOV phase to neutral and 10.2 kV MCOV neutral to ground. The maximum level is reduced to 2.44 pu, which results in a protective ratio of 1.39. In this case the margin is lower compared to the 6-arrester application. This is due to the effective higher phase to phase rated arresters (2x22 kV = 44 kV MCOV) used for the 4-legged technique compared to the 36.5 kV MCOV for the 6arrester configuration.
Table 4 Tranaformer Tertiary Protection For surge Transfer (pu)* Surge Arrester kV-MCW Connection RM9
31.5 36.5 31.5 22 10.2

Phase to ground A

A-B

Phase to phase B-C C-A

Phase to ground 2.99 &Arresters Phase to phase Phase to ground 2.08 4-Legged Phase to neutral Neutral to ground2.13

1.43

2.93

2.26

1.56

3.39

1.89

1.95

1.78

1.64

2.06

1.51

2.14

1.79

1.43

2.44

1 . 0 pu for phase to ground = 34.5 J2/J3 k v . 1 . 0 pu for phase to phase = 34.5 4 2 kV.

b) Transformer Terminated 138 kV Transmission Line (wave propagation case) The system described in section 2 was used to demonstrate the effect of a 6-arrester arrangement in reducing the phase to phase overvoltages resulting from wave propagation. A 1 x 5 0 ps, 3450 A lightning current was arbitrarily injected on phase C, 50 miles from the transformer. Table 5 shows the phase to ground and the phase to phase overvoltages at the transformer terminal for the standard phase to ground, the 6-arresters, and the 4-legged arrester schemes. Surge arresters ratings were selected depending on system grounding conditions (grounded vs. ungrounded). As was stated earlier, the standard 87 kV MCOV rated phase to ground connected arresters do not protect phase to phase insulation Table 5 adequately (2.39 pu overvoltage = 466 kV).

-m Figure 8 .

STRUCK PWSE C TIME 0 "

1.Q

00

EMTP Computer Model of Struck Phase (C) Lightning Waveform at T3 765 kV Winding.

Table 5 1 1 Transformer Protection for Propagated Overvoltages (pu) Surge Arrester MCW Connection W R M 8 1. Grounded System
3.10 2.52 1.95 8.14 2.17 1.01 .75 5.50 2.36 6.00 2.39

Phase to ground B C

A-B

Phase to phase B-C C-A

none
87

phase to ground 6-Arresters phase to phase phase to ground Ungrounded Syetem

1.97

TIME (ms)

50

146 87

1.65

1.60

2.17

.70

1.98

2.05

Figure 9.

EMTP computer Waveform of Transfer Voltage Across T3 Tertiary Winding (C-A)

11.
none

3.10

2.52

8.14 3.58

1.01

5.50 3.81

6.00

146

phase to ground 6-Arresters phase to phase phase to ground

3.37

3.03

.78

4.00

After verifying the EMTP model, the magnitude of lightning current is increased in order to obtain the highest possible surge level at the 765 kV terminal of the T3 transformer, 2.15 pu, since it is limited by (1.0 pu = 765 J2/J3 kV). Table 4 surge arresters. presents the tertiary response; namely the peak phase to ground and phase to phase voltages. In spite of the tertiary phase to ground surge arresters, the winding C-A peak voltage is 3.39 pu (165.4 kV). The reason for this 2 kHz type overvoltage was explained in section 3. The switching surge withstand of the tertiary is 166 kV and thus, practically no margin exists. The overvoltage,with the application of 6 arresters (3 phase to phase arresters rated 36.5 kV MCOV and 3 phase to ground arresters rated 31.5 kV MCOV), is presented in Table 4. The 31.5 kV MCOV rating was selected assuming timely clearing of faults without exceeding arrester TOV capability. The maximum tertiary winding voltage is 2.06 pu (100.5 kV) resulting in a 1.65 protective ratio. Note that without

146 146

2.30

2.27

3.57

.76

2.01

2.04

87 73

4-Legged phase to neutral neutral to ground2.38 2.27 3.83 .70 2.35 2.37 (neutral to ground arrester voltage.- 200 k V )

1 . 0 pu for phase to ground = 138 */2/63 kV 1 . 0 pu f o r phase to phase = 138 4 2 kV

shows that the 6-arrester technique reduces the overvoltage to 2.05 pu (400 kV) which results in a 1.13 protective ratio for a 4 5 0 kV BIL and 1.38 for a 550 kv BIL. It should be noted that, for a grounded system, the 4-legged arrangement does not provide any advantage over the standard phase to ground installation since both utilize 87 kV MCOV rated arresters, connected phase to neutral and phase to ground, respectively. However for an ungrounded system, Table 5 shows that the 41

777
legged technique reduces the phase to phase overvoltage from 4.00 pu to 2.37 pu (462 kV). Thus, for the 3,450 A lightning current, the 4-legged arresters provide a protective ratio of 1.19 for transformers with 550 kV BIL. Also, in this case the 4-legged arresters provide a lower protective margin compared to the 6-arresters. This results from the higher effective phase to phase rated arresters (2x87 = 174 kV MCOV) selected for the 4-legged technique compared to the 146 kV MCOV for the 6-arrester scheme.
1.
TRANS BUSHING

Application consideration

Surge arrester application methodology revisions on delta connected transformer windings for voltage ratings up to and including 145 kV are recommended. Figures 7A and 7B show the 6-arrester and the 4-legged arrester configurations simplified one lines, respectively. Figures 10A and 10B show possible connections to the transformer bushings for the 6arrester and the 4-legged arrester assemblies. The advantages of the 4-legged surge arresters over the 6surge arresters assemblies are the installation requirements, and the cost.

Figure 11.

EHV Single Phase Transformer Mounted Phase to Phase and Phase to Ground Arresters.

/
TO TRANS. BUSHINGS

/,

TO TRANS. BUSHINGS

Tables 6A and 68 show the protective ratios with 6-arresters and 4-legged station class surge arresters installed at a delta transformer bank, which is connected to an ungrounded system with voltages ranging between 13.2 kV and 138 kV. The phase to ground arrester ratings are selected assuming that the system is not designed to clear line to ground faults. Table 6A shows that the 6-arrester arrangement provides excellent protective ratios except for the 138 kV transformer with 450 kV BIL.
Table 6A I n s u l a t i o n coordination w i t h 6-Arresters f o r D e l t a Connected Transformers Phaae Nominal to System Phase M C W Voltage (kV) (kV) 13.2 15.3 34.5 36.5 34.5 36.5 48 40 69 73 138 146 138 146 138 146 Phase

S.A.

to
Ground MCOV (kV] 15.3 36.5 36.5 40 73 146 146 146

Typical
Transf BIL

(w)
110 150 200 250 350 450 550 650

TO TRANS. BUSHINGS

Figure 10A.

The 6-Surge Arrester configuration on Pedestal (Top and Front View).

Phase t o Phase Protective Ratio CWI/FOW BIL/LPL BSL/SPL 2.20 2 ?.A7 - .5 . 1.29 1.42 1.41 1.72 1.89 1.89 1.72 1.87 1.04 1.61 1.75 1.72 1.04 1.13 1.07 1.27 1.30 1.31 1.50 1.63 1.55
~ ~~

Table 68 I n s u l a t i o n Cmrdination With 4-Legged Arreeters f o r D e l t a Connected Tranefomers

Phase

Neutral

$ z F B u s

Nominal

to
Mmv

to
M C W

system

Neutral Ground

INSUL.

Voltage

(kv)
13.2 34.5 34.5 40 69 138 130 130

(kv) (kv)
0.4 22 22 29 43 87 87 87 0.4 15.3 15.3 19.5 31.5 73 73 73

Typical Teansf Phase to Phase BIL P r o t e c t i v e Ratio W/FOW BIL/LPL BSL/SPL (kvl

110

150
200 250 350 450 550 650

2.09 1.07 1.42 1.36 1.43 0.06 1.05 1.25

2.29 1.19 1.59 1.51 1.52 0.94 1.15 1.35

2.28 1.17 1.57 1.48 1.40 0.92 1.12 1.32

Figure 10B.

Transformer Mounted 4-Legged Arrester Configuration.

Surge

If single phase transformers are used to achieve the delta connection, the separation effect due to the required long leads needs to be considered. For example, the EHV single phase transformers on the AEP system are installed about 75 feet apart. The tertiary winding terminals are brought to a common structure, via underground cables. This may result in a separation distance of up to 400 feet for the 6-arrester or the 4legged arrester assemblies. The large separation distance will reduce the effect of the arresters. In this situation a phase to phase arrester and phase to ground arresters at the terminals of each single phase winding should be used (Figure 11). Another alternative is increasing the tertiary winding BIL so that the protection of the two series arresters (connected phase to ground) will provide the standard protective ratios to the transformer winding.

Table 68 shows that the 4-legged surge arresters provide good protective ratios for all system voltages except for 34.5 kV with 150 kV BIL and 138 kV transformers with 450 kV and 550 kV BIL. In comparison, however, the 6-arrester assembly provides better phase to phase protective ratios than the 4-legged arresters. Note that the phase to ground protection, with the 6arresters is the same as that for the standard phase to ground connected arresters. The phase to ground protection, with the 4-legged arresters, is more than adequate except for the 138 kV transformer with 450 kV and 550 kV BIL.
8 .

Failure Consequences

AEP's experiences with MOSA have been excellent over the last 12 years. There has been no failure due to arrester design weakness. Thus the MOSA failure should be a rare occurrence, at worst. Obviously, a component failure in the 6-arrester arrangement would result in a phase to phase or a phase to ground fault. However, it should be pointed out that a failure of any

778
of the 4-legged arresters may result in the failure of all units. The failure of the remaining arresters will depend on arrester TOV capability and the fault clearing time. For example, a failure of a phase to neutral arrester (fail short) will subject the other phase to neutral arresters to phase to phase system voltage. Without timely clearing, this may cause arrester thermal runaway and result in failure of the other arresters. Another point to consider is that failure of a phase to phase arrester in the 6-arrester assembly or failure of a 4-legged arrester installed on the transformer tertiary may subject the transformer windings to high through fault current and mechanical forces.
9.

11.

K. H. Lee, J. M. Schneider, "Rockport Transient Voltage Monitoring System," IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery, Vol. 4, No. 3, July 1989. A. Ametani, H. Motoyana, "A Linear Corona Model," EMTP Newsletter, 1987. Biographies A. J. F. Keri (SM) received his Ph.D. degree in Electrical Engineering from the University of Missouri in 1972 and MBA from the Ohio University in 1985.

12.

11.

Conclusions

This paper demonstrates that the common practice of phase to ground connected surge arresters may not adequately protect delta connected transformers. Field recorded waveforms and computer calculated results are used to show that excessive voltage stresses at the phase to phase windings of transformers can occur due to the lightning wave propagation phenomenon or by the surge transfer through a transformer. For example, the results show that for a 138 kV line, lightning strikes further than 6 miles can produce phase to phase voltages in excess of a transformer's 450 kV BIL. The application of the 6-metal oxide surge arrester arrangement is recommended. It protects both the phase to ground and the phase to phase insulations. The application of the 4-legged surge arrester arrangement is also introduced as an alternative. For certain transformer BIL levels, it may be a cost effective means of insulation protection. Selection criteria, installation practices, and application considerations are presented for both 6-arrester and 4-legged arrester schemes. 10. References R. A. Jones, H. S. Fortson, Jr., "Consideration of Phase to Phase Surges in the Application of Capacitor Banks, I' IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery, Vol. PWRD-1, NO. 3, July, 1986. L. Lishchyna, R. H. Brierley, "Phase to Phase Switching Surges Due to Capacitor Energization," Canadian Electrical Association, 1986 Transactions of Engineering & Operations, V25, Paper No. P 86SP-148. R. P. O'Leary, R. H. Harner, "Evaluation of Methods for Controlling the Overvoltages Produced by the Energization of a Shunt Capacitor Bank," CIGRE 1986 Session Paper no. 13-05. L. V. Bewley, "Traveling Waves on Transmission System," John Wiley and Sons, 1951. J. R. Carson, "Wave Propagation in Overhead Wires With Ground Return," Bell System Technical Journal, Vol. 5, 1926. D. E. Hedman, "Propagation on Overhead Transmission Lines I-Theory of Model Analysis; I1 - Earth Conduction Effects and Practical Results," IEEE Transactions, Vol. PAS-84, 1965. T. Udo, "Minimum Phase to Phase Electrical Clearances for Substations Based on Switching Surge and Lightning Surges,'I IEEE Transactions, Vol. PAS-85, August, 1966. J. Panek, M. Sublich and H. Elahi, "Criteria for Phase to Phase Clearances of HV Substations," IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery, Vol. 5, No. 1, January, 1990. H . W. Dommel, "Digital computer Solution of Electromagnetic Transients in Single and Multiphase Networks," IEEE Transactions, Vol. PAS88, No. 4, April, 1969. J. R. Marti, "Accurate Modelling of FrequencyDependent Transmission Lines in Electromagnetic Transients Simulation," Proc. IEEE Power Industry Computer Applications Conference, Philadelphia, PA, 9 pages, May 1981.

He joined American Electric Power in 1972 and was involved with protection and relaying of stations and transmission lines for the first two years. He transferred to the Research Section in 1974 where he has been involved with power system overvoltage calculations, system harmonics investigation, field tests, single phase switching techniques, transmission line loss reductiontechniques, insulation coordination studies and equipment failure analysis. Dr. Keri has taught for 14 years a variety of graduate and undergraduate courses at the Polytechnic Institute of New York, Ohio University and Columbus State Community College. He has been a consultant to Power Companies in Venezuela, Korea and Brazil. Dr. Keri holds a Professional Engineer license, and is a member of several and chairman of one Working Group of IEEE. He is also a member of Eta Kappa Nu and Tau Beta Pi. He holds a U . S . Patent on single phase switching compensation. Yasin I. Musa (M) was born in Palestine on March 30, 1949. He received a Bachelor of Electrical Engineering Degree from City College of New York in 1977. He completed the General Electric Power Systems Engineering course in Schenectady, New York in 1981. He joined American Electric Power in 1974, where he is presently a senior Electrical Engineer in the Electrical Station Project Section. In addition to substation engineering and design responsibilities, he is involved in specification and application of surge arrester, insulation coordination and station grounding mat design. Mr. Musa is a member of the IEEE Surge Protective Devices Committee and active in various working groups of this committee. He is also the chairman of The Arrester Protection and Coordination Transformer Insulation Working Group. James A. Halladay (M) was born in Bayside, N.Y. on March 20, 1948. He received the B.E.E. and M.S.E.E. degrees from The Ohio State University in 1973 and 1974, respectively. Mr. Halladay has been employed by the American Electric Power Service Corporation since 1974 in the Electrical Research and Technical Services Division. Recent responsibilities have included development of EMTP computer models for single-phase 765 kV switching surge evaluation, lightning phenomena and protection, and distribution transformer and system analysis. He is, presently, the principal transient analysis engineer for the Rockport 765 kV Station Transient Voltage Monitoring System [TVMS]. Mr. Halladay is a member of IEEE and has authored and coauthored IEEE papers. He is a registered professional engineer in the State of Ohio.

1.

2.

3.

4. 5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

779
DISCUSSION
JOHN B. POSEY, Ohio Brass Co., Wadsworth, OH:

coupled to the high voltage windings than a low voltage impedance tertiary.
Manuscript received August 2, 1993.

The authors have described an extension of the practice previously used to protect low voltage motors to higher voltage systems. Use of this practice will be interesting to observe. The authors have selected an 87kV MCOV arrester rating for a 138kV phase-to-neutral 4-leg connection, with a 73kV MCOV rated arrester selected for the neutral-to-ground component. Thus the total line-to-ground MCOV is 160 kV as shown by Table 6B. Did the authors consider using an 88kV rating instead of 87kV? This will allow the neutral-toground arrester rating to be 57kV, and total phase-to-ground MCOV becomes 145kV. This allows the 4-leg arrester to provide the better ,phase-to-ground protection of a 6-leg scheme for 550kV and 650kV BIL transformers, as in Table 6A, with little reduction in phase-to-phase protection. Figure 10B illustrates mounting of a 4-leg to arrester, possibly as a retrofit transformers with three brackets for arrester mounting. For 138kV, each 108kV rated siliconcarbide intermediate class arrester weighed about 270 pounds, a set about 810 pounds. Since a modern polymer housed station class arrester weighs only 99 pounds, the weight of all four legs and a horizontal support will be under 500 pounds, and can be supported by the center bracket alone making the two outer insulators redundant. Similarly, the weight of six polymer housed station class arresters configured as Figure 10A weigh 595 pounds compared to 530 pounds for one silicon carbide station class arrester. Perhaps all six can be mounted on an existing pedestal origionally sized for one porcelain housed arrester. Can the authors comment?
Manuscript received August 2, 1993.

JOHN E. HARDER (ABB Power T&D Co. Inc., Bloomington, IN): The title of the paper 'Insulation Coordination for & a ! Connected Transformers" and the emphasis of the paper suggest that special arrester configurations should be usedfor delta connectedtransformer windings. The argument appears to be based on the premise that no voltage capability in excess of the BIL is given for phase-to-phasesurges. Is it not also possible that the space between the high voltage coils on a 3 phase wye connected transformer does not exceed the BIL? It is possible that the high voltage ends of wye connected windings might be physically close to each other in a 3 phase transformer? Wouldn't the same argument apply requiring special arrester connections for all 3 phase transformers? There is a large number of 3 phase delta connected dry type transformers with a 60 kV BIL operating on 12.47 to 13.8 kV systems. With the 10 to 12 kV gap type silicon carbide arresters which have been used for years, the sparkover would be in the range of 35 to 50 kV. Twice this value would be substantially higher than 60 kV, suggesting gross miscoordination. Most of the insulation failures which have come to the attention of this discussor are end turn failures, not phase-to-phase flashovers. There is a very large population of transformers which are "at risk" based on the premise of this paper. Considering the large number of transformers in service with a rather low failure rate, it would seem imprudent for the industry to provide special arrester connections for all 3 phase transformers plus all single phase auto-transformerswith delta connected windings in 3 phase systems. Based on the authors' rather detailed study of this matter, can they identify a sub-set of this population which is very highly at risk and deserves this special attention? The concept of BIL is a delightfully simplistic construct. It is also a specification of a test wave which, along with transformer industry standards, specifies a certain set of tests that the transformer is required to pass. In service, however, a transformer essentially never sees a BIL shaped wave. Transient overvoltages are expected in a wide variety of sizes, shapes, and polarities and are expected to occur at various points of wave on the power frequency voltage. When selling a transformer, it would seem that the transformer supplier would be expected to provide a transformer which would survive in service when protected in the traditionalway with phase-to-groundarresters coordinated with the stated BIL; except in the event that the purchaser and supplier agree to extraordinary arrester protection. It would seem that the study and paper should be titled "Insulation Requirements for Three Phase Transformers for Phase-toPhase Overvoltages",and that the emphasis should be placed on providing adequate insulation, with the suggested arrester arrangements being provided only as a non-standard alternate. Often only the transformer manufacturer is in a position to know what internal clearances, resonances, coupling, etc. might be involved and what the required coordination might be. It would seem to be the responsibility of the transformer manufacturer to specify non-standard overvoltage protection if it is required.

J. L. Koepfinger (Duquesne Light Company, Pittsburgh, PA): The authors demonstrate the need to study the insulation coordination study of the tertiary winding of an autotransformer. Note is made of the comment that the tertiary response to a surge is very sensitive to specific parameters use for modeling the transformer. The authors were very fortunate to have a high speed transient data capturing system. This provides a means to calibrate the model that normally is not available. It is desirable to conduct EMTP studies versus field measurement of transient voltage, however, the studies are only useful if the model represents the "real world conditions." Based upon this work, could the authors elaborate on how they would model a transformer for which field records of response to surge was available. Do the authors have any opinion on the impact of transformer design upon the surge transfer from the high voltage windings to the tertiary? For example is there any difference between a transformer with a high impedance tertiary than a low impedance tertiary? Generally a high impedance tertiary is more loosely

780

The authorspaper uses study results to support a hypothesis that certain transformers are at risk. It would seem to be much more valuable to the transformer industry if these results could be generalized to indicate to the transformer industry what phase-to-phase voltages may be expected to appear on the system based on the study results. The paper is a very interesting one. The insulation coordination issue raised is important and the supporting field data and study results are nicely done. The authors are to be commended for their presentation.
Manuscript received August 6, 1993.

ground protection. We also agree that the use of polymer housed arresters has the advantages of the lighter weight and simpler assembly. It must be ensured, however, that the polymer performance stands up to that of the porcelain housing. Mr. Harder discussed actual phase to phase withstand capability of the transformers. Neither the transformer manufacturers nor the ANSI standards specify phase to phase withstands above those presented in the paper. Considering the failure cost, it seems prudent to protect the transformers for the given withstand levels, as opposed to accepting risks for higher than the specified insulation levels. For example, an investigation of the AEP delta connected transformers shows that since 1986, 19 percent of the failures occurred during lightning storms. Phase to ground insulation of these transformers were properly protected by line to ground arresters. We believe that the proposed phase to phase protection will reduce failures by protecting against surges due to the wave propagation and the surge transfer phenomena, as well as others, such as, the capacitor switching overvoltages.

M. Dameniza (University of Queensland, Australia): If field experience shows that lightning is a significant cause of damage to phase-to-phase insulation of delta connected transformers, then the authors paper will open a pandoras box in the fields of impulse testing and insulation coordination of transformers. It has long been assumed that the current techniques of establishing transformer insulation levels with phase-to-ground impulse testing has led to excellent lightning performance in the field when the transformers are protected by properly coordinated phase-to-ground surge arresters. This assumption is thought to apply both for surges incident from a line to a winding and for surges transferred from other windings (in the latter case, surge arrester protection is required for both the incident and transferred surges). So my first question to the authors is-have they any evidence of lightning induced transformer failures attributable to damage of phase-to-phase insulation? My own (and extensive) experience with delta/star connected distribution transformers indicates that such insulation damage is not a significant cause of failure (Dl, and its references published in Australian Journals). My second question arises from an assessment of the risks for such failures as demonstrated by the information given in the authors paper. Do the authors agree with my assessment of the following two matters:i) The example of surges from distant lightning illustrated in Figs. 4 and 5 constitute a trivial magnitude of stress on the transformer insulation. ii) The EMTP modelling for the 138kV line propagation of lightning surges, and illustrated in Figs. 2 and 3, ignores the ameliorating effects of impulse corona. Yet all sound insulation coordination practice is based on significant front prolongation (and some magnitude attenuation) of lightning surges as they travel the last one to two miles into a substation. This practice is based on extensive and reliable field tests of prolongation and attenuation of impulse voltage applied to representative lines.

Mr. Koepfinger points out difficulties with transformer modelling. With the recent studies, it is expected that the manufacturers will be able to supply accurate models based on detailed design parameters [All. If the frequency sweep response of the fully constructed transformer terminals are available, the synthesized technique may result in accurate terminal models [A2]. As pointed out in the paper, the best duplication of the tertiary field waveforms that we obtained, for that surge, was by using the leakage impedances, terminal capacitances and the non-linear magnetizing branch. In regards to the value of the tertiary impedance, transformer terminal frequency sweeps exhibit highly non-linear responses. Thus, a general statement for a terminal response to all frequencies can not be made.
Mr. Darnvenizas question on failures due to lightning was addressed above. Regarding the field recorded waveforms, Figures 5 and 6, the authors intent are only to illustrate the line propagation phenomena, to show surge transfer amplifications, and to verify the accuracy of the computer generated waveforms. These waveforms are definitely not the worst case conditions. The last comment is on corona effect which is not included because a reliable model does not exist, and its effect above corona onset level is not significant enough to alter the analysis in this paper. References Al.

Reference D1. M. Danveniza and Dr. Mercer. Lightning Protection of Pole Mounted Transformers. IEEE Trans. on Power Delivery, Vol. PWRD-4, April 1989, pp. 1087-1095.
Manuscript received August 11, 1993.

R. C. Degeneff, et al, Modelling Power Transformers For Transient Voltage Calculations, CIGRE 1992 session, paper no. 12-304.
A. Morched, L. Marti, J. Ottevangers, A High Frequency Transformer Model For EMTP, IEEE 1992 Summer Power Meeting, paper no. 92SM 359-0-PWRD, Seattle, WA, July 12-16, 1992.

A2. A. J.F. KERI, Y. I. MUSA, J.A. HALLADAY: We are appreciative of the valuable comments presented by the discussors. We agree with Mr. Posey that the 57 kV rated MCOV compared to the 7 3 kV results in a better phase to

Manuscript received October 4, 1993.