Contribution to IEEE PES, Oct 2010, Gothenburg

Amorphous Metal Core Material Shows Economic and

Environmental Benefits when Pre-existing Transformers are to
be Replaced within Vattenfall Groups Distribution Network
Anders Eliasson, Henrik Elvfing, V. R. Ramanan, Member, IEEE
Abstract This paper describes Amorphous Metal core
Distribution Transformers (AMDT) and its potential to obtain
economic and environmental benefits when pre-existing
transformers are to be replaced. Vattenfalls ambition is to
decrease losses within the Vattenfall Groups distribution
network, thus contributing to the environment and economy, and
hence confirm that this is an important issue for Vattenfall.
Distribution transformers within the Vattenfall Groups
distribution network in Sweden, Germany and Poland are
investigated and presented in three different business cases that
consider the current sizes, quantities, ages and load utilization.
The inventory of the distribution transformers used at Vattenfall,
indicates that conventional transformers of fairly high loss types
have been selected over low loss types. Choosing low loss
amorphous transformers when pre-existing transformers are to
be replaced, means that the CO2 emission will be significantly
reduced. AMDT have the potential to reduce transformer noload losses by up to 70% compared to conventional technology.
This paper discusses the general aspects of AMDT transformer
losses as well as the importance of using the Total Ownership
Cost (TOC) method to determine the economic benefits
whenever a unit is to be purchased.
Key words - distribution transformer, amorphous metal core
transformer, CO2 emissions, environment, total ownership cost
TOC

I. INTRODUCTION

t is estimated that the no-load losses of conventional

distribution transformers account for 25% of all technical
losses in the grid [1]. In Sweden, the average load for a
conventional distribution transformer varies between 10
60% throughout the year. The no-load losses are consequently
a large portion of the total amount of losses. Research has
found that new types of transformers made by amorphous
metal material can reduce the no-load losses by anywhere
between 60 - 70% [2] compared to conventional transformers.
The Amorphous Metal core Distribution Transformers
(AMDT) used in a joint cooperation between Vattenfall and
ABB with the aim of lowering the losses in the distribution
networks within Vattenfall, reduce the transformer no-load
losses by up to 70% compared to conventional technology.
The purpose of this paper is to describe distribution
transformers made of amorphous metal core material and its
potential to obtain economic and environmental benefits when

A. Eliasson is with Vattenfall Power Consultant, Gullbergs strandgata 6,

41661 Gteborg, Sweden (e-mail: anders.eliasson@vattenfall.com)
H. Elfving is with Vattenfall Power Consultant, sterlnggata 60, 461 34
Trollhttan, Sweden (e-mail: henrik.elfving@vattenfall.com)
V. R. Ramanan is with ABB Inc., 940 Main Campus Drive, Raleigh, NC
27606, USA (vr.v.ramanan@us.abb.com)

pre-existing transformers are to be replaced. The overall

objective is to decrease losses within the Vattenfall Groups
distribution network. Distribution transformers in Sweden,
Germany and Poland are investigated and presented in three
different business cases that consider the current sizes,
quantities, ages and load utilization.
The Total Ownership Cost (TOC) method has been used
for the economic evaluation, which is a value calculated to
quantify the total economic cost of the transformer including
the purchase price and the costs of losses during a certain
number of years in operation. The TOC method takes future
operating cost of a unit over its lifetime, brought back into
present day cost, to be added to its purchase price.
The evaluation of environmental impact of amorphous
transformers has been taken from a medium-term perspective,
with the use of carbon condensing power plants of new
standard.
II. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS
Energy conservation and CO2 emission reduction must be
the focus for environmental sustainability. Globally, today 30
billion tons of CO2 are released to the atmosphere per year.
The CO2 concentration of the atmosphere has risen from a
pre-industrial value of 280 ppm to 387 ppm in the year 2009.
With the emerging economies consuming more energy and
the increasing global population, this trend is accelerating.
The electrical energy system contributes to the CO2 release,
since most electrical power is generated through nonrenewable energy sources as in coal, oil and natural gas fired
plants [3].
A healthy ecological system is realizable on a large scale
only if finally the economics are also right. Governments can
support this process by introducing efficiency standards,
subsidies, or taxations. For the future, an increase of
electricity costs is expected, which is related to an increasing
demand for electric energy. In turn, an increase in the price of
primary energies is to be expected, spurring intermittent
generation from renewable energy sources, likely leading to
an increase in CO2 taxation. Already today, energy saving
programs and energy efficiency requirements are being driven
both by global and local initiatives [4], highlighting that a
reduction of CO2 emission is vitally necessary. The reduction
of losses is therefore one important factor for having an
economical electricity supply system.
Amorphous metal core distribution transformers are an
important step in the search for economically and
environmentally sustainable growth in the electric power
industry. Reduction in transformer losses from AMDT not
only saves the current availability of electricity but also helps

Contribution to IEEE PES, Oct 2010, Gothenburg

to reduce future generation needs. This, in turn, will help to

reduce CO2 and other noxious gas emissions, providing a
further benefit to the environment.
ABB has done a life cycle analysis of benefits from AMDT,
seen in Fig. 1. The GaBi v.4.3 [5] and EcoInvent [6] databases
were used and specific input for amorphous metal was
received from the production company.
Liquid-immersed amorphous metal core transformer
Liquid-immersed low loss standard transformer

Relative Environmental Impact

100%

80%

60%

40%

20%

0%
20%

30%

40%

50%

Transformer Load

Fig. 1. Global warming potential of an amorphous metal core transformer with

respect to standard low loss (BkA0) liquid-filled transformer as a function of
transformer load.

The environmental impact of the high efficiency AMDT is

substantially lower, about 40% at typical distribution
transformer loading conditions, compared to the impact of a
standard transformer. The environmental impact of the
transformer is dominated by the use phase and the much lower
no-load loss of the amorphous core.
III. TRANSFORMER LOSSES
Transformer losses are grouped into two types: no-load loss
(P0) which is always present and constant during normal
operation, and load loss (Pk) which is loss incurred during
transformer operations and is load dependent. The primary
components of load loss are high voltage and low voltage
resistive winding losses (I2R), stray losses, and lead and
bushing losses. Total loss is the summation of P0 and Pk.
The use of amorphous metal in distribution transformers
allows transformers with significantly reduced no-load losses.
A comparison of standard liquid-filled transformers and
amorphous metal core transformers shown in Table 1, for
representative designs, and indicates the significant no-load
loss reduction by up to 70%. AMDT technology is an
enabling technology for meeting highest efficiency
requirements.
IV. AMORPHOUS METAL CHARACTERISTICS
Amorphous metal contains no crystalline structure, and is
produced by rapid solidification (at 106 K/s) from the alloy

melt. For application in distribution transformers, these

materials are alloys containing Fe, Si, and B. The amorphous
metal sheets are about 25 m thick.
In a transformer core material, losses may be considered as
comprising two major components: hysteresis loss and eddy
current loss. The former reflects the ease of magnetization of
the material when the core is energized, and the latter results
from internal currents generated in the material. The absence
of a crystalline structure in amorphous metal allows easy
magnetization of the material, leading to lower hysteresis
losses. The eddy current losses are also lower in amorphous
metal due to a combination of its low thickness and a high
electrical resistivity of 130 -cm compared to the 51 -cm
in Regular Grain Oriented (RGO) silicon steels. Thus,
amorphous metal has a much lower total loss than even the
best grades of RGO steel. This advantage is directly reflected
in reduced transformer no-load losses, as illustrated in Table
1.
TABLE 1
COMPARISON OF NO-LOAD LOSSES BETWEEN STANDARD REGULAR GRAIN
ORIENTED (RGO) DISTRIBUTION TRANSFORMERS AND AMORPHOUS METAL
(AM) CORE DISTRIBUTION TRANSFORMERS, FOR VARIOUS TRANSFORMER
RATINGS.

Rating
(kVA)

No-Load Losses (W)

RGO

AM

Loss Reduction

Single Phase
20
64%
30
54%
35
67%
55
65%
75
63%
95
60%
Three Phase
300
505
200
60%
500
725
220
70%
750
1125
355
68%
1500
2170
725
67%
2500
2750
745
73%
Comparison with lowest no-load loss specifications (A0) in
IEC EN50464-1 with some three phase AM designs
Rating
AM design
Ao (W)
Loss Reduction
(kVA)
(W)
100
145
75
48%
250
300
110
63%
400
430
170
60%
800
650
330
49%
15
25
50
75
100
167

55
65
105
155
200
235

Due to the presence of boron, amorphous metal has a lower

(1.56 T) saturation induction than RGO silicon steels (2.1 T).
Therefore, the design induction with amorphous metal is
lower than that available from RGO materials. As a result,
amorphous core transformers often have a larger core crosssectional area, resulting in a larger transformer footprint.
Studies have also shown benefits from AMDT in the

Contribution to IEEE PES, Oct 2010, Gothenburg

presence of harmonics. When non-linear loads are present, the

current and voltage waveforms will become distorted. The
extent of contamination by harmonics is characterized
numerically as Total Harmonic Distortion (THD) which has
implications on reduced power quality. Larger values of THD
indicate greater waveform distortion. The presence of THD
raises the losses in distribution transformers. However, the
increases in losses with amorphous metal are much lower than
with conventional silicon steel [4], [8]. Additional annual
energy savings are realized from the deployment of AMDT in
applications subjected to high THD.
V. LOSS VALUATION
Distribution transformers are very much standardized.
These transformers have a nominal rating of up to 2,500 kVA,
which is conventional of oil-immersed types or dry isolation
types. Oil- immersed transformers are most frequently used in
the distribution networks. Different types of material can be
used for the core and winding. The price of the material is
dependent on the quality and a higher price for material means
that the quality is better, resulting in reduced losses.
When selecting a transformer, a variety of costs may be
considered: first costs, life cycle costs, and costs including all
additional infrastructure costs. Life cycle costs include
capitalization of the transformer losses. This is usually done
by using the TOC approach, in which the future operating
costs of a transformer over its lifetime, brought back into
present day cost, is added to its purchase price as in (1).
TOC = Price + [A (/W) x P0 (W)] + [B (/W) x Pk (W)] (1)
where A and B are specific valuations assigned to no-load
(P0) and load losses (Pk) wherein the losses are accounted by
their financial impact, capitalized for an expected payback
period for the transformer. These valuations, among other
considerations, depend on the costs of electricity, the costs for
providing the lost power, and on the utilization of the
transformer.
Manufacturers today have different types of transformers
categorized by their considered loss valuation (/kW). If the
loss valuation is low, then the optimal transformer is a high
loss type and vice versa. The relationship between load losses
and no-load losses can also differ depending on the load
profile.
When buying a distribution transformer, these matters are
to be considered. The question is how high should the loss
valuation be to get the amorphous core material to be the most
economical when considering TOC? If only price were
considered, the amorphous core material could not compete
due to prices that are normally 20-30% higher than
conventional transformers.
The valuation of losses must be done if amorphous core
material can be considered as a viable economic alternative.
The question is how high or low should the loss valuation be
and how it affects the type of transformer to be chosen. The
loss valuation for no-load losses, factor A in (1) can be
calculated using the amount of years it will be in operation,
electrical price for this point in time and the interest accrued

during its lifetime. If a real interest of 5% is taken, and an

electrical price of 0.04 /kWh and 30 year lifetime are
considered, the valuation of no-load losses will be
approximately 5,400 /kW.
The load loss valuation, factor B in (1) is more complicated.
If the transformer would be loaded 100% of the time over the
life of the product, the no-load losses and load losses would
be valuated the same. If the transformer is loaded 50%, the
load losses would be valuated 25%, and so on. The load
profile is not stable, so the square of load profile has to be
intergraded to find out the load loss evaluation. For reference,
the load losses will have 20% and 10% in relation to no-load
losses, which are typical values for distribution networks and
give comparison depending on the load profile. 20% can be
typical for a town distribution and 10% for the countryside.
To make a more accurate valuation, aspects such as rest
value, margin losses for overhead network, dimension of
overhead network etc. will also be considered. Sensitivity
analyses for changes in electrical price and load conditions
must also be done. One important aspect is how the real
interest is set, which has a very high influence on the TOC
valuation.
VI. DISTRIBUTION TRANSFORMERS USED WITHIN VATTENFALL
From an investigation of distribution transformers used in
Sweden, Poland and Germany the total quantities and the most
common ratings of the transformers, as well as their
tendencies to load utilization (Pmax/Sn) are presented in
Table 2.
TABLE 2
TOTAL QUANTITIES AND MOST COMMON RATINGS OF DISTRIBUTION
TRANSFORMERS USED IN SWEDEN, POLAND AND GERMANY, AS WELL AS THEIR
TENDENCIES TO LOAD UTILIZATION.

Quantities

Most
common
rating [kVA]

Load
utilization
[%]

Sweden

41,600

100

48-55

Poland

8,500-9,000

250/400

30

Germany

13,500

630

50

Business
case

In the Swedish distribution network, the most frequently

used transformer size is 100 kVA. About 14,600 transformers,
out of the approximately 41,600 installed transformers with
rated power between 50 kVA and 1250 kVA are of the 100
kVA rated power size. Furthermore, about 12,800 of the total
amount of transformers are rated lower than 100 kVA. Due to
power quality issues, Vattenfall Distribution Nordic have
decided that all transformers being replaced are done so with
transformers at least 100 kVA. Therefore, it could be assumed
that the amount of 100 kVA transformers in the Swedish
network will increase by time. Higher nominal power levels
for transformers means lower impedance and higher shortcircuit power in the low-voltage networks. In Sweden there is
also a trend of acquiring 100 kVA transformers with higher
load loss specifications than those purchased thirty years ago.

Contribution to IEEE PES, Oct 2010, Gothenburg

Today, two thirds of the total amounts of transformers in

Sweden have a rated power of 100 kVA or less.
In Poland, there are about 8,500-9,000 distribution
transformers in the range of 63-630 kVA, with the most
common sizes being 250 kVA and 400 kVA. These stand for
about two thirds of the total number of transformers. The
transformers in Poland are mostly oil-immersed. Dry type
transformers are only used occasionally for situations where
there are specific environment requirements. The size of a
transformer is selected on the expected load condition with
room to consider future demand increases. This will then
represent 0.7-0.8 of the nominal rated power of the
transformer. If the expected load in an area is 290 kVA, the
selected transformer will be 400 kVA. The average load
utilization based on seasonal measurements for sample
distribution transformers MV/LV is 30%.
In Germany, there are about 13,500 distribution
transformers in the range of 160-1,250 kVA, and the most
common size is 630 kVA, which accounts for over 60% of the
total number of transformers.
VII. POTENTIAL FOR REDUCING LOSSES
As mentioned previously, Vattenfall Distribution Nordic in
Sweden have decided that the minimum size of new
transformers should be at least 100 kVA due to power quality
issues. This means that the load utilization on this size of
distribution transformers will probably be rather low and the
no-load losses will take a bigger portion of the total losses.
Given that two thirds of the distribution transformers in
Sweden have a rated power of 100 kVA or less, it is of great
importance that total losses are considered whenever a
transformer is to be replaced. Based on the relative low load
utilization in each country, there is a potential for lowering the
losses by considering the choice of rating when a transformer
is to be selected.
The most frequently used transformers in Poland and
Germany have a rating of 400 kVA and 630 kVA
respectively. Both old and new transformers have relatively
high losses which indicate that there is big potential for
lowering the losses in these networks by purchasing low loss
types of transformers, using the TOC method along with a
well-conceived valuation of losses.
VIII. POTENTIAL FOR REDUCING CO2 EMISSION
A comparison between typically new conventional
transformers installed in Vattenfalls distribution network
during 2009 and amorphous transformers shows the potential
for a reduction of both CO2 emissions and energy losses. The
comparison was carried out by using data on the most
commonly occurring transformer sizes in Sweden, Poland and
Germany installed during 2009 and data from the amorphous
transformers counterpart taken from the CICED2008 [9] study
as shown in Table 3. The no-load losses and the load losses
for new conventional transformers placed in Poland and
Germany are higher than the tabled values in column CK and
DK, using the European standard EN 50464-1 by CENELEC.
This will classify the transformers as high loss types.

TABLE 3
DATA ON THE MOST COMMONLY OCCURRING TRANSFORMER SIZES IN
SWEDEN, POLAND AND GERMANY AND NEW AMORPHOUS TRANSFORMERS.

Power
[kVA]

Year

Installed
in

100
400
630

2009
2009
2009

Sweden
Poland
Germany

New
New amorphous
conventional
transformer
transformer
NoLoad
Load
No-load
load
losses
losse
losses P0
losses
Pk
s Pk
[kW]
P0
[kW]
[kW]
[kW]
0.215 1.6
0.075
1.5
0.56
4.8
0.2
4.3
0.538 8.18
0.32
6.2

Two load profiles, previously stipulated for distribution

transformers placed either in town or at the countryside were
used in the comparison. This means that the load loss
valuation is 20% and 10% in relation to no-load losses
respectively. Due to the deregulated European electricity
market the change in electricity production and use is assumed
to affect the European marginal electricity production. In this
comparison the marginal electricity production is assumed to
be coal condensing power with a fossil CO2 emission factor of
0.723 kg/kWh electricity, which represents condensing power
plants of new standards in a medium term perspective [10],
[11]. The result from the comparison is seen in Table 4.
TABLE 4
ANNUAL SAVINGS IN CO2 EMISSIONS WHEN AN AMORPHOUS CORE
TRANSFORMER IS SELECTED TO REPLACE A PRE-EXISTING CONVENTIONAL
TRANSFORMER

Power
rating
100
kVA
400
kVA
630
kVA

Countryside load
profile
10%
Energy
CO2
[kg]
[kWh]

Town load profile

20%
Energy [kWh]

CO2 [kg]

1,314

950

1,402

1,013

3,592

2,597

4,030

2,913

3,664

2,649

5,379

3,889

The annual savings in CO2 emission by choosing

amorphous transformers instead of conventional ones are
significant, and are noted to depend on the load profile. Since
the load losses between the two types of installations are
different, this is as expected.
IX. POTENTIAL FOR ECONOMIC BENEFITS
To evaluate if there are any economical benefits by using
transformers with amorphous core material instead of
traditional transformers, a comparison have to be made and
prices and losses have to be found. Two studies will be
presented and evaluated, one from USA [12] and one from
China [9]. The study from USA only shows the total
efficiency. For the Chinese study, both types of losses are

Contribution to IEEE PES, Oct 2010, Gothenburg

included. If loss valuation is added, the studies will also show

the most economical choice considering prices and losses. The
way to compare is to summarize the purcase price and the
price for losses for each specified unit.
From the ANPOR public meeting [12], the following is
compiled in Table 5 using the TOC method with the addition
of loss valuation.
TABLE 5
TOTAL EVALUATION OF DIFFERENT TYPES OF 50 KVA TRANSFORMERS IN
USA.

Type of
transformer
Price
No-Load losses
Load losses
Evaluated
no-load losses
Evaluated
load-losses
10%/20%
Total evaluation
10%/20%

Amorphous
core type
and Cu
winding
1,540
40 W
720 W
216

Core type
M2 and Cu
winding

Core type
M6 and Al
winding

1,190
130 W
880 W
702

1,050
200 W
1,400 W
1,080

390 /
780

470 /
940

760 /
1,520

2,146 /
2,536

2,362 /
2,832

2,890 /
3,650

The values for prices and efficiency are estimated from plot
diagrams. (Losses from the total efficiency are a ratio of 1/7
between no-load losses and load losses for traditional type of
distribution transformer, and a ratio of 1/18 for amorphous
type.) The transformers have 50-kVA nominal ratings and are
liquid-filled single-phase type. The evaluation from Table 5
shows that the most expensive transformer (amorphous core
type and Cu- winding) is the most economical choice in the
view of losses and price. In this case, the amorphous core type
transformer will give the lowest total ownership cost
independently of the load profile. Both no-load and load
losses have the lowest values for the amorphous core type
transformer. The ratio between the two types of losses can be
optimised by the manufacturer, designed to fit the actual load
profile. For instance, the no-load losses can be lowered and
load losses increased for amorphous transformer at a fixed
price, which means better conditions at low load.
In CICED2008 [9] the price, load losses and no-load losses
are compared for distribution transformers 100 kVA to 2,500
kVA, classified as SBH15 and S11 type transformers. SHB15
is an amorphous core type and S11 is a typical low loss
traditional liquid filled distribution transformer. Table 6 is
compiled from this information, for a couple of representative
ratings. Loss evaluations are calculated in the same way as the
previous method. The evaluation also shows the most
expensive transformer (amorphous core type) to be the most
economic choice considering losses and price. If a higher loss
valuation will be used, the advantages for amorphous core
material will be even greater.
From these two studies, the amorphous core material has
economic advantages and shows, in this way, to be the best

preferable option, although a relatively conservative loss

valuation is used. For the manufacturer, it is also a question as
to how to adjust the transformers considered losses to
optimise it for the customers needs.
TABLE 6
TOTAL EVALUATION OF DIFFERENT TYPES OF 100 KVA AND 500 KVA
TRANSFORMERS IN CHINA.

Type of
transformer

100
kVA
AMDT
(SBH15)

Price
No-Load
losses
Load losses

3,450
75 W

Evaluated
no-load
losses
Evaluated
load-losses
10%/20%
Total
evaluation
10%/20%

100
kVA
Conven
tional
(S11)
2,980
200 W

500 kVA
AMDT
(SBH15)
9,360
240 W

500
kVA
Conven
tional
(S11)
7,980
680 W

5,150 W

5,150 W

405

1,500
W
1,080

1,290

3670

810 /
1,620

810 /
1,620

2,780 /
5,560

2,780 /
5,560

4,665 /
5,475

4,870 /
5,680

13,430 / 14,430 /
16,210 17,210

1,500 W

X. CONSIDERATIONS FOR TRANSFORMER SELECTION

A. Influence of loading conditions
Generally, amorphous transformers seem to have more
advantages at low load profiles. In case the load profile is low,
for instance 5% or less, a smaller conventional transformer
should be an alternative. If the load profile is high at 30% or
more a larger transformer should be a better alternative. The
comparison in Table 7 will show how the selection of a
conventional distribution transformer will be affected,
regarding transformers size. All load losses are converted to
100 kVA nominal ratings. The same loss valuation as previous
is used and the 50 kVA converted to 100 kVA is supposed to
fulfil the temperature rise test at 100 kVA, which cannot be
done without extra cooling capacity. The comparison is to
show how different load profiles will affect the dimensioning
of the transformer. The added price for added cooling capacity
for the 50 kVA transformer to fulfill the 100 kVA
transformers temperature rise conditions is not included. The
200 kVA transformer will also have a lower price considering
the lower need of cooling capacity. Total evaluation for the
different sizes and load conditions of the transformers were
related to the 100 kVA model for clearer evaluation purposes.
The higher impedance for smaller transformers must always
be taken into consideration due to electrical quality aspects.
The evaluation from Table 7 shows two extreme cases for
load valuation 5% and 30% and for different sizes (more or
less material) for the transformers. In extremely low load
profiles, a smaller transformer will be a better choice, and if
the load profile is very high, a larger transformer can be a

Contribution to IEEE PES, Oct 2010, Gothenburg

better alternative. In normal cases, the load profile will be in

the range of 10-20% in relation to load losses. In these cases,
any significant changes in size selection criteria is not
supported.
TABLE 7
TOTAL EVALUATION FOR DIFFERENT SIZES AND LOAD CONDITIONS FOR
TRANSFORMERS. ALL TRANSFORMERS REFERENCE TO THE 100 KVA
TRANSFORMER.

Type of transformer

50 kVA

100 kVA

200 kVA

Price
No-Load losses
Load losses
Evaluated no-load
losses
Evaluated loadlosses 5%/30%
Total evaluation
5%/30%

2,500
130 W
3,500 W

3,300
200 W
1,500 W

4,400
340 W
700 W

700

1,080

1,840

950 /
5,670
4,150 /
8,870

400 /
2,430
4,780 /
6,810

190 /
1,130
6,430 /
7,370

Amorphous type transformers seem to have more

advantages at low load profiles. Depending on the load
profile, construction of the amorphous core transformer can be
adjusted to optimise performance.
B. Price influence
For distribution transformers, the price is very dependent on
the raw material prices. The prices for raw material are
generally the same for all producers, which means the selling
price will not differ so much between the manufactures.
Changes in raw material prices will then have big influence
for the transformer prices. The USA studies [12] show the
copper price has increased by approximately 80% between
2001-2004, with the iron price not nearly as affected and
amorphous material increased by approximately 10%.
When a transformer is designed, many factors are
considered. For example, if the price of copper has increased,
it can be worthwhile to have better core materials. The
optimisation of a transformer considers factors such as energy
prices, raw material prices and load demands. These factors
together give the losses for the transformer.
Currently, some manufacturers state that the amorphous
core material transformer is up to 40% more expensive than
its conventional counterpart, while others have nearly no
added price. The American [12] and Chinese [9] studies show
the price for amorphous transformers to be 15-30% higher
than for conventional ones. Loss valuation and declaration of
losses should be done on an individual basis to determine true
price comparisons.
XI.

JOINT COOPERATION BETWEEN VATTENFALL AND ABB

Vattenfall and ABB have started a joint cooperation project

regarding amorphous transformers, with the aim to investigate
the potential for lowering the losses in the distribution
networks within Vattenfall. In the early parts of the study, two
existing transformers will be exchanged. The locations are
chosen to validate the performance under different load
conditions. For Vattenfall, the project will add practical
experiences to the theoretical analyses of amorphous

transformers. The overall main objective for Vattenfall is to

establish experience with new technologies and secure that
Vattenfall stay in a leading position evaluating and
contributing to environmentally friendly and energy efficient
products. The result is to give relevant directions/guidance for
a possible revision of technical requirements on distribution
transformers as well as guidance for capitalization of losses
based on different load cases. Lower total costs are predicted.
XII. COMMENTS AND CONCLUSIONS
There is a big potential for lowering the losses in the
networks of interest in this paper. Typically data provided by
Vattenfall in Poland and Germany indicated that conventional
transformers of fairly high loss types are selected instead of
low loss types. The number of 100 kVA transformers in
Sweden will increase over time as stipulated previously due to
power quality issues. A higher short circuit power is requested
in the low voltage network which means that the short circuit
impedance of the transformer has to be reduced. For
conventional types of transformers, a conflict will occur
between low impedance and low load losses; if impedance
decreases, the load losses will normally increase. This conflict
will not have such high influence for amorphous type of
transformers due to the already low level of no-load losses.
As stipulated previously, a comparison of the initial cost
between an amorphous transformer and a conventional
transformer cannot be the only factor used in determining the
value of the purchase. The total cost of a transformer during
its lifetime, including the cost of losses has to be considered.
In the selection of a new transformer, when evaluating the
choice between amorphous core or traditional type, the factors
considered in the evaluation play a significant role. If
electrical prices are expected to increase in future, the
amorphous material will show to have more benefits. Higher
loss valuation will always benefit those materials with lower
specified loss properties, and hence, gives amorphous
transformers an advantage from a TOC perspective. The
amorphous type will, in many cases, be the best economic
choice, especially if high no-loss valuation is used.
To maximize the economic and environmental benefits of
an amorphous transformer, several other critical elements
have to be recognized. It has been mentioned that transformer
owners have to use the TOC method whenever a transformer
is to be purchased. In this way they will take control over the
total cost. Future electric costs have to be seriously evaluated
as well as the expected increase on power demands in the area
of interest. Evaluation regarding benefits of lower transformer
temperature (due to lower no-load losses) has also to be
considered. Finally, the environmental benefits from an
amorphous core transformer, with a reduction in CO2
emission has been clearly indicated in this paper.
Amorphous distribution transformers have long been in
operation in North America and Asia. The construction and
technical aspects are considered to be well known. Some
European manufacturers have just started to manufacture
amorphous transformers. In fact, manufacturers all over the
world are tending toward the use of amorphous core material
for distribution transformers.

Contribution to IEEE PES, Oct 2010, Gothenburg

Two separate loss and price evaluations, one done in USA

and the other from China, have proven the amorphous type to
be the best alternative using the TOC method. Estimated
lifetime, weight, size, maintenance etc is not evaluated and
considered the same for both types of transformers. Load
losses are nearly the same for both types and this will make
the comparisons easier because the load profile will not have
any influence.
Prices and losses for the European models can only be
approximated. Some manufacturers indicate purchase prices in
the range of up to 40% higher for amorphous core
transformers than prices for the conventional counterpart.
From these preliminary approximations, the amorphous model
seems to have less advantages than those manufactured in
Asia and in North America, by the TOC vantage point. Each
purchase of an amorphous transformer in Europe must be
evaluated individually using the TOC method to determine
economic benefits. In the future, the prices and losses for
amorphous transformers manufactured in Europe are
estimated to become more competitive due to higher demand
volumes and improved manufacturing processes, making
these amorphous transformers a viable alternative. Improved
manufacturing processes can also affect the advantages for
transformers of higher nominal power.
XIII. REFERENCES
[1]

Amorphous sheet core transformers under experimentation on the

ERDF network. CIRED2009 Session 1, Paper no 0090
[2] W.J. Ross, T.M. Taylor, H. Ng. Amorhous metal transformer cores save
energy and capacity investment, GE Industrial and Power system, USA,
Electrical Power Research Institute, USA.
[3] E. Stryken Energy Efficient Distribution Transformers, Proc. 17th
Conf. on Electric Power Supply Industry, CEPSI 2008, Macau
[4] Examples of mandates or standards requiring high efficiencies in
distribution transformers are: US Department of Energys mandated
National Efficiency Standard, Australias Hi efficiency 2010, Indias 4
and 5 Star programs, Chinas SH15 standard, and the AkA0 standard in
Europe.
[5] GaBi v.4.3 LCA tool and database, www.gabi-software.com
[6] EcoInvent database v.2.0, www.ecoinvent.ch
[7] Transformer (Core Loss) Performance Under Harmonic Conditions,
ERDA Report (Electrical Research and Development Association,
Vadodara, India, July 2000)
[8] R. Hasegawa and D. C. Pruess, in Proc. IEEE Power Engineering
Society, (Summer Meeting, July 2001)
[9] Exploration on energy-saving effect of amorphous transformers
extended in Nanning based on theoretical analysis and Total Owning
Cost methods (TOC). CICED2008 Technical Session4 Distributed
power generation and integration technology
[10] Swedish District Heating Systems and a Harmonised European Energy
Market - Means to Reduce Global Carbon Emissions. Dissertations No.
795, Sjdin, J. 2003, Institute of Technology, Department of Mechanical
Engineering, Linkping University, Sweden.
[11] Hansson, H., Larsson, S.-E., Nystrm, O., Olsson, F., Ridell, B., 2007.
Elforsk report 07:50, Elforsk AB, Stockholm, Sweden (In Swedish).
[12] Energy Conservation Standards for Distribution Transformers, ANPOR
Public Meeting, Energy Analysis. Building Technologies Program
Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy. U.S. Department of
Energy. September 28, 2004.

7
A Eliasson received his M.Sc. degree in electrical
engineering (power systems, 2009) from Chalmers
University of technology, Sweden. In 2009 he joined
Vattenfall Power Consultant AB. He is now project
manager for different R&D projects as well as MV and
HV substation projects.

H Elfving received his M.Sc. degree in

electricalengineering (power systems, 1993) from
Chalmers University of technology, Sweden. In 1998 he
joined Vattenfall Power Consultant AB. He is now
senior specialist within power system analysis, power
transformer technology and power quality.

V R Ramanan (M79) received his Ph. D. in Physics

from Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA. He
has been with ABB since 1993, where he has managed
various R&D and Product Development activities. He is
now the Global Project Manager for amorphous
distribution transformers. Ramanan was with Allied
Signal Inc. from 1979 to 1992, where his research was
focused on materials design and application
development for amorphous metal technology.