Ferroresonance Overvoltages and its Mitigation

In PEA Distribution Network

Cunyi Yu, Nit Petcharaks, Preecha Sakarung
Faculty of Engineering
Dhurakijpundit University
10210 Bangkok, Thailand
Tel. (662) 9547300(EXT:585) Fax 9547356

Pradit Fuangfoo
Research Division
PEA
Bangkok
Tel.5905701, Fax:5894859

Email: yuc@ait.ac.th , nitp@dpu.ac.th and preecha@dpu.ac.th

E-mail: mgrrsd@pea.or.th

Arwut Takkabutra
Surge Protection Division
Precise Co. Ltd.
Bangkok
Tel.9614510 Fax: 9614500

E-mail: arwut<kandam@mozart.inet.co.th

the reliability of distribution network are getting more

and more important. In addition every Power Utility
has own particular case therefore the investigation is
still necessary.

Abstract
This paper presents the main results related to the
Ferroresonance Overvoltages and its Mitigation in
PEA Distribution Network. The study was carried out
with two steps: First to find the factors that could
affect on the ferroresonance overvoltages. Second, to
find the methods which can mitigate the
Ferroresonance Overvoltages. Two methodologies
have been adopted: Field test and Simulation.
Research results indicated that the Ferroresonance
Phenomena are existed on the PEA distribution
network. The Peak Value of Ferroresonance
Overvoltages could reach about 2.2 p.u. for 22 kV
network (with Arrester). These Ferroresonance
Overvoltages could also last a longer time period that
depended on the switching time duration. The
different switching phase angle can obtain the
different Ferroresonance Overvoltage for energization
.However the Ferroresonance Overvoltage of deenergization is nothing to do with the switching phase
angle, but depends on the charged capacitance
(including the Transformer Size and Line length,
secondary capacitor bank). So many Transformers on
a feeder it will be easier to cause the Ferroresonance.
Many methods have been investigated and
recommended to mitigate the Ferroresonance
Overvoltages. Study also indicated that ZnO gapless
Arrester can effectively clamp and damp the
Ferroresonance Overvoltages. However from the long
run point of view a special specification of Arrester
should be considered.
Keywords
Ferroresonance, Overvoltage, Energization, Deenergization, Surge arrester.

In recent years there were a lot of events related to

Surge Arresters failure occurred in PEA distribution
network. It is suspected that these events are related to
the Arrester failure under the Ferroresonance
Overvoltages that was either the Surge Arrester
Quality Problems or the inherent network Problems.
A research Project has been established from
September 1999 to investigate the causes of these
events and the methods to mitigate the events. The
research team was consisted of three organizations:
The Power System Engineering Research Center,
Dhurakijpundit University; The Research Division,
Provincial Electricity Authority; The Surge Protection
Division, Precise Electric MFG. Co., Ltd.
The study was divided in two steps: First to find the
factors that could affect on the ferroresonance
overvoltages. Second, to find the methods which can
mitigate the Ferroresonance Overvoltages. Two
methods have been adopted: Field test and Simulation.
Two field tests have been carried out in PEA
distribution network: First Field Test was carried out
at Phuthamonthon, Nakorn Pathom in 30 October
1999. The Second Field Test was carried out at
Sanpatong, Chiang Mai in 30 March 2000.
MT (Micro Tran) version of EMTP has been used for
simulation.
Field Tests and Simulation results confirmed that the
Ferroresonance Phenomena exists in the PEA
Distribution Network. It is easy to cause the
Ferroresonance Overvoltages under certain conditions
(such as: Single phase switching, certain length of
overhead line, and delta connection of Transformers
primary winding). Results also indicated that the ZnO
gapless arresters are effectively to clamp and damp
the Ferroresonance Overvoltages.

1. INTRODUCTION
Ferroresonance has been a long-standing concern of
distribution engineers, first with the introduction of 25
kV-class overhead rural systems in some countries in
the 1950s. [1] The factors which caused the
Ferroresonance Overvoltage and the methods to
mitigate the Ferroresonance Overvoltage have been
investigated. However it still has been investigated in
recent years. [2, 3, 4] This may be in recent years the
distribution network has been rapidly developed in
many developing countries. The economics and thus

Many methods have been investigated to mitigate the

ferroresonance Overvoltages. Based on the study the
recommendations for the present and future have been
made.

24 (EECON-24) . 22-23 2544

193

2. FUNDAMENTALS
Ferroresonance is a Resonance Phenomena between a
capacitance and an iron core, and thus nonlinear
inductor. In a power system the iron core inductor is
usually the magnetizing branch of a transformer. The
capacitance could be the natural capacitance of the
overhead line (or under-ground cable).
In power systems, ferroresonance usually refers to a
series resonant condition. The series circuit is
established during single phase switching condition
(including the Energization and De-Energization
switching) and its occurrence is dependent on the
configuration of the circuit, such as the delta
connection of a transformer winding and with certain
length of lines. A system may also experience
ferroresonance overvoltages if some abnormal system
condition, such as a single line fault, cutout Fuse
blowing. Figure 1. shown the diagram of series
ferroresonance.

Figure 2. Diagram to cause the Ferroresonance

while Single-phase Switching.

This circuit can be simplified as following series

resonance circuits:

L
L

L
C

E
C

Figure 1. Diagram of Series Ferroresonance

where L the magnetizing inductance of transformer
iron core;
C the capacitance of line or cable;
E the voltage source.

Cd

Figure 3. Diagram for Simplified

Ferroresonance Circuit.
This diagrams can be summarized as following
diagram:
L

Under usual condition:

EA

CdA

1
L >
C
Where =2f ,However, when

L =

Cd

Figure 4. Diagram of Simplified

1
C

Ferroresonance occurred.

In power systems following circuits are susceptible to

cause the Ferroresonance:

Under certain conditions the ferroresonance

overvoltages can be caused. In the diagram the CdA is
the capacitance of switching line (say, phase A) to
ground. It is no affected on the ferroresonance of
energization due to the voltage of CdA is forced by
voltage source. Therefore it can be neglected in the
Energization. However the CdA will joint the
ferroresonance while de-energization (see Fig. 9).

24 (EECON-24) . 22-23 2544

194

De-energization Overvoltages are higher. This is true

either with surge arrester or without arrester.

3. FIELD TEST
Two Field Tests have been carried out. The First one
is the case of only one Transformer with 100m line
length. The Second Field Test covered four
Transformers with different sizes on a feeder. Figure
5.shows the Diagram of First Field Test.
SW11

SW22

3. The highest value of Ferroresonance Overvoltage

occurred at the case of without Surge Arrester but with
Capacitor Bank when single phase been de-energized.
The Overvoltage peak value could reach 2.26 p.u.
However when with Arrester the highest value was
only 1.7 p.u.

160 kVA

/Y

4. The Ferroresonance Overvoltage Value was slightly

less when the switch location changed from SW11 to
SW22. This may be the distance different was only
about 100 m (SW22 is located 2 m from Transformer).

CBank
40 kVAR

Figure 6. is the diagram of Second Field Test.

Figure 5. The Diagram of First Field Test

Table 1 is the Results of First Field Test.

T6 : 50 kVA
(13.2 km)

Table 1. Summary of First Field Test Results

Switching at
CB
Ar
Power
SW11
SW22
N
Y
Energi.
0.91
1.00
N
N
Energi.
0.92
1.10
N
Y
De-Energi.
1.26
N
N
De-Energi.
1.37
0.96
1.10
Y
Y
Energi.
1.0
Y
N
Energi.
1.0
1.0
Y
Y
De-Energi.
1.70
Y
N
De-Energi.
2.26
2.06
2.19
Note: Energi. Energization;
De-Energi. De-Energization;

T7 : 50 kVA*
(15.8 km)

10.1km

G
T4 : 500 kVA*
(10.6 km)
Figure 6. Diagram of second Field Test

Y with device; N without device;

CB - Capacitor Bank; Ar Arrester.

In second field test total 7 cases have been tested. It

included: cases with one, two, three and four
Transformers, Energization and De-Energization,
different line lengths, with and without Capacitor
Bank.

As the study is on the distribution network, therefore

the p.u. value is defined as:

1p.u . =

T5 : 100 kVA
(10.5 km)

Ar8.2

22 2
= 17 .9629 18 kV
3

Table 2. is a part Results of Second Field Test.

Table 2. Sample of Second Field Test Results
(Case of Two Transformers in parallel)
(p.u.)
Case No.
Case 4.
Transformer (kVA)
500 + 100
Line Length (km)
11
Capacitor Bank
N
Power
Phase
A
B
C
1.0
Energi.
A
2.20
2.20
1.0
1.0
Energi.
B
2.20
1.0
1.0
1.0
Energi.
C
1.0
1.0
De-Energi.
C
2.20
1.0
De-Energi.
B
2.20
2.10
0
0
0
De-Energi.
A
Note: Energi.: Energization
De-Energi.: De-Energization.

From the First Field Tests following conclusions can

be drawn:
1. All case results indicated that there was no
Ferroresonance
Overvoltage
occurred
for
Energization. This may be due to the random of
ferroresonance by closing phase angle for energization
(see
Simulation).
But
the
Ferroresonance
Overvoltages can reach about 2.26 p.u. for DeEnergization.
2. For the case of Transformer with capacitor bank in
secondary winding (According to the PEA Regulation,
30% of transformer size is taken), the Ferroresonance
of Energization will rarely be caused. However the

24 (EECON-24) . 22-23 2544

195

The Second Field Test Results can be summarized as

following:
1). From Results we observed that the Ferroresonance
Overvoltages for the energization can be caused in
some cases only. The case of Multi-Transformer in
Feeder seems easier to occur. However, the
Ferroresonance often occurred when De-Energization
by cutout Fuse. The Peak value reached about 2.20 pu.
At the same time the Hum noise can be heard from the
relative Transformer. Even for the Transformer with
500kVA size (22 kV voltage level) the Ferroresonance
Overvoltage could be occurred when the line length is
about 10.6 km.
2). All results also clearly indicated that for the
Energization (A B C) after phase A closed,
Ferroresonance Overvoltages appeared at both phase
B and phase C. These Overvoltages will be maintained
until relevant phase closed. The Phase C experienced
the longest Overvoltages (last closed phase). However
for the case of De-Energization the Ferroresonance
Overvoltages occurred at each opened phase until the
last phase (Phase A) opened.

Table 3. Comparison between Field Test and

Simulation
(Line length: 10 km, With Arresters, Without CBank)
100 kVA
Transformer
A
B
Phase
1.0
Energi.
De-Energi.
1.0
Energi.
De-Energi.
Note: Energization: A B C;
De-Energization: C B A.
Field Test
(Second)
Simulation

1.0
2.2
1.0
2.2

(p.u.)
C
2.22
2.2
2.2
2.2

The results shown that the peak values of

Ferroresonance Overvoltages calculated by simulation
quite well agree with those of Field tests. The
Waveform of Ferroresonance Overvoltages from
Simulation also well agree with Field Test. Figure 7
shown the recorded Ferroresonance Overvoltage
waveform from Field Test. Figure 8 is the simulated
Ferroresonance Overvoltage waveform (Energization).

3). During second field test all Arresters on the feeder

encountered many times Ferroresonance Overvoltages
in the half a day (including Energization and DeEnergization). Majorities of Arresters successfully
withstood the applied Ferroresonance Overvoltages,
and clamped it to a lower value (2.2 p.u.). Only
Arrester (at Phase C of Ar8.2, see Figure 7.) was
failure in case 5. This Arrester has been used for many
years.
4. SIMULATION

Figure 7. Recorded Field Test Waveform of

Energization

MT (Micro Tran) of EMTP version has been used to

simulate the Ferroresonance phenomena in
Distribution Network.
The main items simulated are:
Effect of energization phase angle;
Effect of de-energization phase angle;
Single Transformer and Multi Transformers,
Effect of with and without Capacitor Bank in
Secondary.
Results from energization with different phase angles
shown that there is different Overvoltage value in
different closing phase angle. The highest value could
reach 2.23 p.u. However for the de-energization there
is no any differences between different switching off
angle. In all simulation we always take the worst
phase angle for the Energization.
To confirm the results from simulation the comparison
has been made. Table 3.shown the comparison.

Figure 8. Simulated Waveform of Energization

24 (EECON-24) . 22-23 2544

196

To find methods mitigating the Ferroresonance

Overvoltages some simulations have been carried out.
That included changing the transformer primary
winding connection (from delta to wye connection),
multi-phases switching synchronously, effect of line
length, effect of switching with certain loads, etc.
As an example, Table 4. shown the Effect of switching
with certain load.
Table 4. Effect of Switching with certain Load
(Transformer: 160 kVA, with Arresters, no CBank,
Switching at SW11, See Figure 4-1.)
(p.u.)
Phase
No Load
160 with 1 % Load
160 with 5 % Load
160 with 10 % Load

A
0
0
0
0

B
2.00
1.00
1.00
1.00

C
2.00
1.00
1.00
1.00

Note: De-Energization (C B A);

All results with load for the Ferroresonance
Overvoltages shown that only a few oscillations
(overshoots), and 5% of load is proper for mitigating
Ferroresonance Overvoltages.

PEA (B A C for Energization) the Arrester at

Phase C is always stressed the longest time duration of
Ferroresonance Overvoltage. Therefore Arrester at
Phase C has the highest possibility to be damaged.
For the case of De-Energization (C B A), the
equivalent diagram should be as following (Figure 9):
For the de-energization (opening sequence: C B
A), after phase C (Terminal C) opened, phase A and B
(or Terminal A and Terminal B) are still forced by
voltage source EA and EB, respectively (Figure 9).
Therefore the CdA and CdB could be neglected in the
de-energization equivalent circuit diagram. The
ferroresonance will be occurred between phase C
inductance (LCA and LCB) and capacitance CdC. Figure
10. is the de-energization equivalent circuit diagram.
This is similar with Figure 1. The Overvoltage
appeared only on Terminal C. Next, after Terminal B
opened, then the Ferroresonance Overvoltage
appeared on both Terminal C and Terminal B.
Terminal A will still keep the normal operation
voltage. These overvoltages (voltage on Terminal C
and Terminal B) will be remained until Terminal A
opened.

5. DISCUSSION
From the Field Tests and Simulations
phenomena can be explained as following:

some

As above mentioned in second Field Test. According

to the Regulation of PEA the normal operation
sequence is: B A C for Energization, and C A
B for De-Energization. Therefore, Phase C always
encountered the longest period of Ferroresonance
Overvoltage. This may be the reason why most failure
Arresters was on the Phase C.

C
LCA

EC

LCB
LAB

CdC

CdA

CdB
EA

Meanwhile from these facts the conclusion can be

drawn that the switch (either energization or deenergization) time duration should be as short as
possible to reduce the maintaining time of the
Ferroresonance Overvoltages, thus to reduce the
possibility of arrester damaged.
When the phase A of transformer (or say Terminal A)
be energized through a line, the voltage on CdA, thus
terminal A is fixed by voltage source EA (see Fig.4).
Therefore the CdA could be neglected in the
energization equivalent circuit diagram. However,
voltage to ground at Terminal B and Terminal C (or
voltage on CdB and CdC) are the same each other due
to the symmetrical structure of transformer. Therefore
the equivalent circuit will be as Figure 4. This is the
similar with Figure 1. When the ferroresonance
occurred, the overvoltage on CdB and CdC will rise to
the same value. The ferroresonance overvoltage will
be remained until Phase B and Phase C be energized
respectively. For the existed operation procedure of

Figure 9. Diagram of Ferroresonance Circuit for

De-Energization

CdC

Figure 10. Diagram of Series Ferroresonance

for De-Energization.

24 (EECON-24) . 22-23 2544

197

EB

6. CONCLUSIONS

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

After theoretical study, field tests and simulations the

conclusions from the research can be drawn as
followings:
(1). It is very high possibility that the Ferroresonance
Phenomena occurred on the PEA Distribution
Network (22 kV system) due to the all existed primary
winding connection of distribution transformer (Delta
connection), longer line length and switching by a
single phase cutout Fuse. When the Ferroresonance
occurred the voltage could rise to 2.0 2.2 p.u. (With
Surge Arresters) and also can keep a longer time
duration. At the meantime a hum noise could also be
heard from the Transformer.

The Research Team that consists of the

Dhurakijpundit University (DPU), the Provincial
Electricity Authority (PEA) and Precise Electric MFG.
Co., Ltd. The Research Team has carried out this
Project from September 1999 to June 2000. We would
like to express their sincere appreciated to the people
who made contributions to the Research Work, and
field test particularly, to Mr. Pongsak Harnboonyanon,
the Manager of Research Division, PEA; Mr. Ekarat
Kandam, the Manager of Surge Protection Division,
PRECISE Co. for their interesting, favorable
discussion, and strong support. It would be impossible
to complete the Research Project without their
support.

This is probably the major reason why so many events

occurred and a lot of Surge Arresters damaged.
According to the PEA operation regulation (B A C
for Energization and C B A for De-Energization)
Arrester at Phase C always encountered the longest
time duration of Ferroresonance Overvoltages. This
may be the reason why most Arresters failed on Phase
C.
(2). The Ferroresonance Overvoltages can be caused
by single phase Energization and also by single phase
De-Energization (including the event of a single-phase
ground). Ferroresonance Overvoltages can be occurred
not only on the small size Transformer (say 160 kVA),
but also the large size Transformer (say 500 kVA)
while the line length is about 10 km.
(3). Gapless ZnO Surge Arresters can effectively
clamp and damp the Ferroresonance Overvoltages.
However multi number, particular the longer time
duration of Ferroresonance Overvoltages applying to
the Gapless Arrester could result in it damaged. As the
Peak Value of Ferroresonance Overvoltages usually
less than the breakdown value of gap the gapped
Arresters could have less opportunity to be damaged.
But the insulation of distribution transformer and
underground cable may be decayed.

REFERENCES
[1] R.A.Walling and et al. FERRORESONANCE
OVERVOLTAGES IN GROUNDED WYE-WYE
PADMOUNT TRANSFORMERS WITH LOWLOSS SILICON-STEEL CORES, IEEE Trans. PD,
Vol. 8, No. 3, July 1993, pp.1647 1660
[2] Thomas A. Short, APPLICATION OF MOVs
IN DISTRIBUTION ENVIRONMENT, IEEE Trans.
PD, Vol. 9, No. 1, January 1994, pp.293 305
[3] R.A. Walling, R.K.Hartana and et al.
PERFORMANCE OF METAL-OXIDE ARRESTER
EXPOSED
TO
FERRORESONANCE
IN
PADMOUNT TRANSFORMERS, IEEE Trans. PD,
Vol. 9, No. 2, April 1994, pp.788 795
[4] S. Lam Du and et al OVERVOLTAGES ON
DISTRIBUTION SYSTEMS, IEEE Trans. PD,
1998

(4). Simulation Results quite well agree with the

results from Field Test. There are many possible
methods to mitigate the Ferroresonance and
Ferroresonance Overvoltages. For instance, as the
primary winding connection of distribution
transformer cant be changed at moment, use the
three-phase synchronously switching, such as
Reclosure, to replace the cutout Fuse in some
particular place; Constraining the total switching time
while the cutout Fuse is used; Switching with certain
percent load (about 5%) and so on can effectively
mitigate the Ferroresonance Overvoltages.

24 (EECON-24) . 22-23 2544

198