Electromagnetic Transient in Power System and Insulation Coordination Studies PDF

The University of British Columbia
Electric Power Group

Department of Electrical & Computer Engineering;
Power Systems Consultants, Vancouver, Canada
Switching and Lightning

Surges in Power Systems
Hermann W. Dommel
June 2012
Email: hermannd@ece.ubc.ca
Presentation Outline 2
• Closing and re-closing operations on transmission lines (line energization)
• Reduction of overvoltages in closing and re-closing operations on

transmission lines
• Computer models for closing and re-closing operations on transmission lines
• Examples for closing and re-closing operations on transmission lines
• Lightning surges
• Example for temporary overvoltages
• Examples for subsynchronous resonance
• Example for single-line-to-ground fault on transmission lines

Presentation Outline 3
• Example for transient recovery voltage
• Example for linear resonance after opening a transmission line in parallel

with another line
• Examples for steady-state coupling between parallel transmission lines
• Capacitor switching
• Inrush Currents
• Interruption of small inductive currents
• Real-time simulators, EMTP-type software
• Specific references, general references

Closing & Re-closing Operations on Transmission Lines 4
• Circuit breakers at both ends I and II cannot close simultaneously.
• Therefore, the voltage

surge travelling down f open-end = 250 Hz for 300 km
the line doubles
at the open end.
1
f openend 
4
• Low impedance
termination (dotted).
1
f lowZ 
2
• In reality, overvoltage can be >2.0 p.u. because:
• not infinite source in A (therefore reflections),

• line may have "trapped charge" from preceding opening operation,
• three poles do not close simultaneously,
• there are multi-velocity waves on a three-phase line (zero-sequence
wave speed is slower than positive sequence wave speed),
• etc.
• Approximate classification (from a paper by M. Erche [1]):


• Statistical distribution
• Overvoltage is not a single value, but statistically distributed because
overvoltage depends on Vsource at instant of closing,
• three poles do not close simultaneously.
• Closing times
• Many cases must be run with different circuit breaker closing times,
that are either varied
• statistically,
• or systematically.

• Cumulative frequency distribution

from 100 closing operations on
digital computers and transient
network analyzers (TNA’s).
• 2 % value is often used

to define overvoltage with
one number

• If insulation can withstand the 2 % overvoltage value, then 98 % of switching

operations will statistically be successful.
• 2 % of switching operations may statistically cause insulator flashover.
• By opening circuit breaker and re-closing again, arc will be extinguished
(self-restoring insulation).

Voltage/time curves
• Peak instantaneous overvoltage is not enough to say whether flashover
across insulator occurs.
• Waveshape is also determining factor.
• For nice laboratory impulses,
voltage/time curves can be obtained.
• Actual waveshapes are much more

complicated, but standard impulse
waveshapes are needed for laboratory testing,
to meet impulse test standards. t2
• There are flashover models, such as the

integral method, but rarely used: 
t1
v( t )  v0 dt  F

• Events in re-closing operations

• A fault occurs, usually in one phase.
• The transmission line is de-energized (switched off at one end, then on
other end).
• On unfaulted phases, the current is capacitive when remote end is
already switched off. Therefore, current and voltage are 90 ° out of
phase.
• When current interrupts at current zero, voltage on line is at its
maximum (say, at -1.0 p.u.).
• If circuit breaker re-closes when source voltage is at its opposite
maximum (say, at +1.0 p.u.), there is a voltage change of 2.0 p.u.
• This re-closing operation with “trapped” charge produces the highest
overvoltages.

• Events in re-closing operations

• The overvoltage is now 3.0 p.u.

Reduction of Overvoltages in Closing and Re-Closing 13
Operations on Transmission Lines
1. Controlled closing
• Contacts close at instant when voltage is close to zero across the

contacts.
• Requires some prediction of voltage across contacts.
• Prediction is easy with a sinusoidal voltage on the source side, and

• zero voltage on the line side,
• or dc voltage on the line side with trapped charge.
• Prediction is more complicated when re-closing into trapped charge

on a line with shunt reactors.

Reduction of Overvoltages in Closing and Re-Closing 14
1. Controlled closing
• Re-closing into trapped charge on a line with shunt reactors:
• In this case, there

is a beat phenomenon
in voltage across
contacts.
• Resonance between
shunt reactors and
line capacitance
usually somewhat
below 50 or 60 Hz).

Reduction of Overvoltages in Closing and Re-closing 15
2. Closing (pre-insertion) resistors

• Close contact I first, then II after 8 to 10 ms.
• From [1]:

Reduction of Overvoltages in Closing and Re-closing 16
3. Metal oxide surge arresters
• At both ends
• At both ends and middle.
4. Comparison from [2] & [3] (re-closing into trapped charge with shunt reactors):
(staggered closing = close 2nd and 3rd pole 8 and 16 ms later in 60 Hz system)

Computer Models for Closing and Re-closing 17
• Feeding network
• Simplest model is voltage source behind 50 Hz or 60 Hz “short-circuit
impedance”, both for positive sequence and zero sequence.
• This simple model is reasonable

if the feeding network is mostly
inductive, as in the case of
switching from a power plant:

• Feeding network
• If the feeding network is more complicated, CIGRE recommends to
represent the lines in detail one or two substations away from the
substation where switching is done.
• Beyond the one or two substations away, use the short-circuit
impedances to represent the rest.
• Some utilities prefer to represent the large system completely in detail
(Hydro-Quebec?).

• Feeding network as equivalent network

• A simplified version of an equivalent network recommended by CIGRE
uses the short-circuit impedance (resistance RSC and inductance LSC) in
parallel with the surge
impedance of the connected
lines, divided by the number
of lines, RS = Zsurge/n [4]:
• Frequency dependent network equivalent (“FDNE”) creates an R-L-C

network that has more or less the same frequency response as the
complete network, over the frequency range of interest. Starts from
frequency scan of complete network.

• Feeding network as equivalent network

• H. Singh and A. Abur developed a time domain model that reaches back
more in history [5]:
it   g 0vt   g1vt  t   g 2vt  2t   ...

• This can handle travel time delays on transmission lines more easily.
• Both FDNE and the time domain model are developed from the full
system.
• If the equivalent is not used very often, it may be best to work directly
with the full system.

• Circuit breaker
• Normally, the circuit breaker is represented as an ideal switch,
• with closing time specified,
• and closing taking place at the next time step n·Δt ≥ tclose, or in some
versions at n·Δt closest to tclose.
• For slow circuit breakers or circuit switchers, prestrike may have to
be taken into account.
Contacts start to close
Dielectric strength Electric closure

of contacts
t
Aiming point Voltage across
contact
• Transmission line; constant parameter model
• The simplest model is the constant parameter model with constant per-
unit length parameters R’, L’, C’, both in positive sequence and zero
sequence.
• In EMTP version that I am familiar with, R’ is not really distributed,
but lumped at both ends and the middle.
• Total resistance R  R' length must be much less than

characteristic impedance Zchar .
• A truly distributed resistance is a special case of line models with
frequency dependent parameters,
R'  jL'
because Z becomes frequency dependent: Z char 
jC'
• Transmission line; constant parameter model
• This model is often accurate enough for switching studies because
• frequencies are not very high (maybe to 10 kHz),
• positive sequence parameters are more or less constant in that
range.
• Zero seq. parameters are frequency dependent, but if three poles

close simultaneously, then there are no zero sequence surges.
• Transmission line, frequency-dependent parameter models
• Zero sequence parameters are very much frequency dependent.
• This dependence must be taken into account if there are noticeable

zero sequence currents and voltages in the transients.
• F. Castellanos and J. R. Marti [6] developed a frequency-dependent line
model by lumping R   jLint ernal   in many more places along
lossless line sections, and taking the frequency dependence of these
lumped impedances into account.
• R   jLint ernal   represents the resistances and internal
inductances of the conductors and of earth return.
• For three-phase lines, these impedances are 3*3 matrices.
• It works directly in the phase domain, without having to go through
transformation between phase and mode quantities.
• Well suited for un-transposed lines.
• This approach works for underground cables as well, with minor
modifications [7].
• Most EMTP models are based on fitting propagation factor e-γl and
characteristic impedance Zchar(ω) in the frequency domain.
• For both positive and zero sequence, find propagation constant
 R'    jL'    jC'
• With approach of J. R. Martí [8], calculate propagation factor A(ω) = e-γl
in frequency domain, & convert to weighting function a(t) in time domain.
• Before, we picked one history term
going back τ. Now we pick more,
using a weighting function a(t).
• For efficiency, recursive
convolution is used to sum
history points with a(t).
• The characteristic impedance was a pure
shunt resistance Z before. Now it is
frequency- dependent.
• Approximate Z   
R '    jL'  
j C '
with an R-C circuit, as shown at right.
• Straightforward for “balanced” (perfectly
transposed) lines.
• On un-transposed lines, transformation
matrix approximated as real and constant
(not good for double-circuit lines).

• Much progress has been made, particularly for un-transposed lines,
mostly with phase domain based models:
• T. Noda, N. Nagaoka and A. Ametani [9] developed the ARMA model
(auto-regressive moving average).
• A. Morched, B. Gustavsen and M. Tartibi [10] developed the universal
model with vector fitting.
• B. Gustavsen [11] added many refinements.
• A. B. Fernandes and W. L. A. Neves included effects of shunt
conductance [14, 15].
• Etc.

• Trapped charge
• There are various ways to represent it, depending on EMTP version.
• Simulate the line opening, wait for trapped charge to settle to dc after some
oscillations, then close again. May require long simulation time.
• In version which I use, initial conditions can be read in, which override the ac
steady-state solution values. Example for line from 1 to 2 with phases A, B,
C, read in initial voltages in 1A, 1B, 1C, 2A, 2B, 2C, and read in zero initial
currents in 1A-2A, 1B-2B, 1C-2C.
• In older versions of EMTP, and maybe ATP, you can connect special voltage
sources Vmaxcos(ωt) with a frequency of 0.001 Hz, (Tstart =
5432.0?), to approximate dc (solving directly for dc requires extensive code
changes to handle ωL = 0 and 1/ωC = ).
Examples for Closing and Re-closing Operations on 30
Transmission Lines
• CIGRE test case for energization of 202.8 km long line from inductive
source [12]
• Source impedance (generator + transformer):

Rpos = Rzero = 6.75 Ω; Xpos = Xzero = 127 Ω at 50 Hz.
• Line: Z’pos = 0.04 + j 0.318 Ω/km at 50 Hz, C’pos = 11.86 nF/km;
Z’zero = 0.26 + j 1.015 Ω/km at 50 Hz, C’zero = 7.66 nF/km;
length = 202.8 km. Constant R’, L’, C’ assumed.
• Circuit breaker: closing times, with respect to instant when voltage in
phase A goes through zero from positive to negative;
TCLOSE-A = 3.05 ms, TCLOSE-B = 8.05 ms, TCLOSE-C = 5.55 ms.
Transmission Lines
source [12]
• Overvoltage at receiving end in phase B; computer results (dashed line)

superimposed on family of curves from transient network analyzer
results; time count starts when wave arrives at receiving end
Transmission Lines
source [12]
• This case did not have high frequencies, and constant parameter line
model and single
Π-circuit gave
almost identical
results.
• In general, I would
not recommend
Π-circuits (on
transient network
analyzers, switched
line was typically represented by cascade connection of 10 Π-circuits).
Transmission Lines
source [12]
• Trapped charge can increase or decrease the overvoltages.
• Depends on polarity of trapped
voltage.
Trapped charge Overvoltages

(p.u.) (p.u.)
A B C A B C
0.0 0.0 0.0 2.068 2.166 2.287
0.9 0.8 -0.8 1.368 1.538 1.342
-0.9 -0.8 0.8 3.086 3.172 3.469

Transmission Lines
• Energization of 400 km long line through closing resistors [13]

• This was a field test by CEMIG in Brazil.
• Line was switched from a power plant. No other lines were connected.
• Line had a three-phase shunt reactor at sending end.
S
P
Sending Receiving
T end end
S
P
T

Transmission Lines
• Modelling: (1) Find positive and zero sequence impedances looking into
power plant (generator with Xd”) , and then model as 3
coupled impedances.
(2) Model shunt reactor as 3 coupled impedances.
(3) Model line with constant parameters.
SOURCE REACTOR
Sending Receiving
[x] end end
[x]
Vs(t)
TRANSMISSION
BREAKER LINE

Transmission Lines

• Voltages at sending end.
solid line: field test

dotted line: simulation

Transmission Lines
• Voltages at receiving end.
solid line: field test

dotted line: simulation
• Going from constant to frequency-dependent parameter models did

not improve results much.
Lightning Surges 38
• The three main causes of lightning overvoltages:
• Backflashover: Lightning
stroke to tower or ground
wire produces overvoltage
on tower, which leads to
flashover across insulator to
line conductor
• Direct stroke to conductor
• Overvoltages induced into

line from nearby lightning
stroke to ground

Lightning Surges 39
• Simple single-phase study [40].

Lightning Surges 40
• Surge arrester characteristic (old silicon-carbide type with gap)

Lightning Surges 41
• Volt-time characteristic of 220 kV insulator string

Lightning Surges 42
• Results

Surge Function Sources (either Voltage or Current) 43
• Surge function, double exponential: v( t )  Vmax e t

e t

• Used in impulse testing, such as in 1.2/50 μs test.

• Impulse shape for 1.2/50 μs test:

• CIGRÉ surge function, with realistic convex front [41].

v( t )  k1t  k 2t n for 90 % of the front ,and
v( t )  k3e ( t t90 ) /  1  k 4 e ( t t90 ) /  2 for the tail .

• Standler function [42] for convex front and for short tail, such as 8/20 μs
impulse for surge arrester testing, which cannot be represented with
double exponential function n
t  t /  
v( t )  k     e
 

• Heidler function (for convex front; short and long tail) [43]
v( t )  k 
t /  1
n
e t /  
1  t /  
n
1

• Short tail issue discussed by R. B. Standler in [42. p.87] :
• Short tails (relative to front), such as 8/20 μs current impulse for

surge arrester testing, cannot be represented with double
exponential function.
• From my own tests, the shortest tail possible with the double
exponential function, using front time defined through 10 % and
90 % values, is 8/31 μs, with
α = - 69 730
β = - 111 059
Imax = 5.893 for a crest value of Icrest = 1.0.
• The shortest tail possible with the double exponential function, using
front time defined through 30 % and 90 % values, is 8/28 μs.

Other improvements to lightning surge studies 49
• M-phase line models*)

• I prefer lossless high-frequency approximation, with
2h D
Z surge self  60  ln , Z surgemutual  60  ln
r d
• Tower models for surges
• Models for insulator flashovers
• Surge arrester models*) Metal-oxide arresters without gaps nowadays
• Cable models*)
• Transformer models*)
_______________________________________________________
___
*) See IEEE PES Task Force on Data for Modeling System
Transients in: list of references (slide 102)
Lightning Surges 50
• Electricité de France used a surge generator in outdoor and indoor

substations to produce fast surges of the lightning type [39].

Example for Temporary Overvoltages 51
• Energization of a line terminated with transformer or shunt reactor

• Example from M. Erche [1]:
• This case is probably from American Electric Power Corp.

• Caused by resonances between harmonics from transformer
saturation and line capacitance.

• Overvoltages can last a long time.


• Nonlinear inductances do not keep peak voltages down.
• Part of the voltage around voltage zero is “cut out”, because of 90°
phase shift between flux and voltage.
• VRMS = f(IRMS) must be converted to flux linkage = f (current) (simplified
as 2-slope nonlinearity here)
• This “cut out” produces the harmonics.

Examples for Subsynchronous Resonance 54
• Interaction between mechanical resonances on turbine-generator shaft

system and on electric network side
• Occurs at frequencies below power frequency.
• Most likely to occur on steam turbines, if a transmission line with series
capacitors is switched.
• Unlikely to occur on hydro turbines because “stiffer” with higher
resonance frequencies.
• Can also be caused by control modes in nearby HVDC terminal.

• Interaction between mechanical resonances on turbine-generator shaft

system and on electric network side
• Example from General Electric Co. [17].

• First IEEE benchmark model [18, 20].

• First IEEE benchmark model, torque between generator & exciter.

• Second IEEE
benchmark
model [19, 21].

• Second IEEE benchmark model, shaft between generator and low

pressure steam turbine.

• Frequency-scan for impedance seen from power plant

• Helps to see whether potential for subsynchronous resonance exists.
• Example
from [26]:
• Measured: Short circuit was applied for a few cycles. Change in Δv, Δi
transformed from time domain to frequency domain, to obtain Z(ω).

Example for Single-Line-to-Ground Fault 61
on Transmission Lines
• When a single-line-to-ground fault occurs on a transmission line, there
will be overvoltages on the unfaulted phases (typically 1.6 p.u.)
• Frequency dependent line model is necessary, because there are large
zero sequence currents (Izero = Ipos = Ineg in fault current).
• Example [8]:

Example for Transient Recovery Voltage 62
• When circuit breaker opens to remove the fault, a “transient recovery

voltage” appears across the contacts.
• If rate of rise is too steep or amplitude is too high, circuit breaker may
restrike or re-ignite.
• Important to include stray capacitances of transformers, busbars, etc.
• Initial rate of rise used to be a problem in gas-insulated substations.
• Example
from [13, 25].
• Fault current:

• For simulation, one can either simulate complete event (fault initiation,
fault clearing).
• I prefer “cancellation method”, whereby a current is injected across

circuit breaker contacts that cancels the fault current.
• Starts from zero initial conditions.
• Network need only be represented to distance away where total
travel time > tmax (no reflections coming back beyond that point).

• Results for fault at 1.2 km from substation:
Solid line = field test; dotted line = simulation.

• Initial rate of rise becomes worse if fault farther away from substation
(“short-line fault”
or “kilometric fault”).
• Fault moved from

1.2 km to 8.0 km:
• Fault current
decreases 13.7%.
• Initial rate of rise
increases.

Example for Linear Resonance after Opening a 66
Transmission Line in Parallel with another Line
• Can be studied as a steady-state case at power frequency (60 Hz or 50

Hz)
• Best transmission line model is Π-circuit.
• For complicated transposition schemes, use one Π-circuit for each
section.
• Example from planning study at Bonneville Power Administration:

• Can be studied as a steady-state case at power frequency (60 Hz or 50

Hz)
• Varying L of shunt reactor showed possibility of
resonance between coupling
capacitance and L.
• L was changed somewhat to avoid
resonance at 60 Hz.
• Resonance is more likely to occur at
harmonic frequencies in such cases.
rated current 132 A
rated inductance 6.09 H

• A similar case that actually happened on a 345 kV line that was close to
an energized 138 kV line is reported in [31] and [32].
• A case of what might happen on a 765 kV line close to an energized

345 kV line is discussed in [33] for these situations:
• No transpositions on both lines.
• 345 kV line transposed.
• 765 kV line transposed.
• Both lines transposed.

Example 1 for Coupling between 69
Parallel Transmission Lines
• Three circuits in parallel are modelled as five nine-phase Π-circuits

• Coupling is capacitive.
• Steady-
state
case.


• A double-circuit line is modelled as a cascade connection of twelve

six-phase Π-circuits.
• Coupling is inductive [23].
• Steady-state case.

• Results from one of many tests.

• From B. C. Hydro and Power Authority [24]
• Steady-state case.
• A large zero sequence voltage was induced into a 138 kV line from
adjacent 500 kV lines.
• It distorted the 2½-element revenue metering schemes of two large

industrial customers supplied from the 138 kV line.
• The two customers were overcharged 3.5% for 15 years.
• They received refunds of Can. $ 4 million.
• The metering scheme was changed.

Capacitor switching 74
• Switching capacitances off

• When switching a capacitor or unloaded transmission line off, the
capacitance remains charged up.
• 2.0 p.u. overvoltage

across contacts half a
cycle after opening.
• Modern SF6 circuit
breakers are less likely
to restrike than older
circuit breakers.

• Energization of capacitors
• Voltage on capacitor cannot change instantaneously, because it is
determined by integral: t
vt   v0  

1
i  du
C
0
Equivalent circuit for EMTP
studies.
• If voltage is originally zero, bus voltage collapses to zero temporarily

after switching on.
• Creates voltage collapse on bus, as well as high inrush currents into
capacitor bank.

• High dv/dt, v, and i may create
problems.
• From Brunke and Schockelt [16]:

• Reduction of transients with:
• Closing (pre-insertion) resistors.
• Synchronous (controlled) closing, close to zero voltage across
contacts.
• Current-limiting reactors in series with capacitor.

• Effect remote from substation where capacitors are switched

• In case shown here, it may have caused phase-to-phase insulation
failure 56 km away in a phase-shifting transformer [22].
• Field test
and
simulation:

• Back-to back switching of capacitors

• Back-to-back switching: one capacitor bank is energized, and another
capacitor bank next to it is switched on.
• This is worst condition, as seen in previous case.
• I analyzed a failure where an induction motor was switched on, close to

another running induction motor, in a pipeline pumping station.
• Both had capacitors connected for power factor correction.
• When second motor was switched on with vacuum contactor, the
contacts welded together, and contactor could no longer be opened.
• After complicated modelling of induction motors, capacitors, etc., it
turned out to be so simple I could have solved it with a slide rule.

• Both induction motors were 5 m apart through a cable.

• Both had a 600 kVar capacitor, rated 4.16 kV (line-to-line), 83.3 A.
• One energized capacitor discharged into the capacitor of the motor being
switched on, through whatever inductance is between them.
• Creates a very high inrush current, which welded the contacts in this
case.

• Simulation:
• A current-limiting reactor would solve the problem.

• A more likely problem in such cases is overvoltages created by re-

ignitions when opening the vacuum contactor.
• This is caused by tendency of vacuum contactors or circuit breakers to
chop currents (see next slide).
• Surge capacitor on load being switched helps to prevent re-ignition (not
an issue in my case).

Inrush Currents 83
• When an unloaded transformer is energized, high “inrush currents”

may occur that are higher than rated current.
• Cause is the nonlinear magnetizing inductance, with its nonlinear

curve for flux λ = f(i).
• Modern circuit breakers close with high speed. Closing at v = 0 is as

probable as closing at v = Vmax (slow contacts used to prestrike close to
Vmax).
• Since flux is integral of voltage

t
 ( t )   ( 0 )  v  du
0
we get 2 p.u. flux if we close
at v = 0, assuming the residual
flux λ(0) at t = 0 is zero.

Inrush Currents 84
• Residual flux can make the inrush current higher or lower.
• There may also be high-frequency overvoltages in energizing three-

phase banks if the closing times are more than 5 ms apart. This may
have caused damages recently.

Inrush Currents 85
• The inrush current also depends on the tap position of the load tap changer,
and by positioning it conveniently, the inrush currents can be reduced.
• If other transformers are already in operation close to the one being

energized, there is “sympathetic interaction” between them that influences
the inrush currents [35].
• By monitoring the flux in the transformer, and by controlling the closing of the
circuit breaker contacts, it becomes possible to close at just the right
moment to reduce the inrush current to very small values similar to the
steady-state exciting current ([36], [37], [38]).

Inrush Currents 86
• Example from CIGRE Working Group [34]:

Inrush Currents 87
• Example from CIGRE Working Group [34]:

Interruption of Small Inductive Currents 88
• Problem is “current chopping” in circuit breaker opening
• Tendency to “chop” if current is small (because

of falling v(i) characteristic of arc, arc voltage
becomes high when current becomes low).
• Small current is not the problem, but high derivative di/dt.
• Can cause overvoltages

di
L as .
dt
• Maximum overvoltage
factors when interrupting
magnetizing currrent of
high voltage transformers [1].

Interruption of Small Inductive Currents 89
• Can also happen when switching off reactor-loaded transformers.
• Vacuum circuit breakers have tendency to chop even at higher currents.

• For CIGRÉ reports, see [27], [28], [29], [30].

Real-time simulators 90
Playback
A “simple” way to test protective relays is to play back

simulation results through amplifiers. There is no feedback
from relay that may cause other actions.
Real-time simulators
(not my expertise; J. R. Marti works on it in UBC).
Commercially available:
• RTDS (Manitoba, Canada)
• Hypersim (Quebec, Canada)
• OPAL (Quebec, Canada)
• etc.
EMTP-Type Software 91
• BPA EMTP. Bonneville Power Administration may use

ATP now.
• UBC MicroTran. Owned by University of British

Columbia. Website: www.microtran.com.
• DCG/EPRI EMTP. Was developed from BPA EMTP by

Development Coordination Group and EPRI. First
commercialized as EMTP96 by Hydro One in Toronto,
Canada, then as EMTP-RV by TransÉnergie Technologies
(subsidiary of Hydro Quebec), and now by CEA
Technologies Inc. (www.emtp.com).

EMTP-Type Software 92
• ATP (Alternative Transients Program). Free, but requires

a license. EMTP developers cannot get it.
• PSCAD and EMTDC from Manitoba HVDC Research

Centre (www.pscad.com).
• DigSILENT from Germany (www.digsilent.de).
• NETOMAC (Siemens).
• SABER for power electronics.
• SPICE, PSPICE for electronics.
• Etc.
The End 93
Thank you for your attention!

Any Questions?

References 94
[1] K. Ragaller, editor, Surges in High-Voltage Networks. Plenum Press, New York, 1980,
p. 63-97.
[2] K. Froehlich, C. Hoelzl, M. Stanek, A.C. Carvalho, W. Hofbauer, P. Hoegg, B.L. Avent,
D.F. Peelo, J.H. Sawada, “Controlled closing on shunt reactor compensated
transmission lines - Part I: Closing control device development - Part II: Application of
closing control device for high-speed autoreclosing on BC Hydro 500 kV
transmission line”, IEEE Trans. Power Delivery, Vol. 12, No. 2, pp. 734-746, April
1997.
[3] CIGRE Working Group 13.07, “Controlled switching of HVAC circuit breakers –
Benefits and economic aspects”, ELECTRA No. 217, pp. 37-47, Dec. 2004.
[4] CIGRE Working Group 33.02, Guidelines for representation of network elements
when calculating transients. Technical Brochure CE/SC GT/WG 02, 1990.
[5] H. Singh and A. Abur, “Multi-port equivalencing of external systems for simulation of
switching transients”, IEEE Trans. Power Delivery, Vol. 10, No. 1, pp. 374-382, Jan.
1995.
[6] F. Castellanos and J. Martí, “Full frequency-dependent phase domain transmission
line model”, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., Vol. 12, pp. 1331-1339, Aug. 1997.

References 95
[7] Ting-Chung Yu and José R. Martí, “A robust phase-coordinates frequency

dependent underground cable model (zCable) for the EMTP”, IEEE Trans.
Power Delivery, Vol. 18, pp. 189-194, Jan. 2003.
[8] J. R. Marti, “Accurate Modelling of Frequency-Dependent Transmission Lines in
Electromagnetic Transient Simulations”, IEEE Trans. on Power Apparatus and
Systems, vol. PAS 101, No.1, pp. 147–157, January 1982.
[9] T. Noda, N. Nagaoka and A. Ametani, “Phase Domain Modeling of Frequency-
Dependent Transmission Lines by Means of an ARMA Model”, IEEE Trans. Power
Delivery, vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 401-411,January 1996.
[10] A. Morched, B. Gustavsen and M. Tartibi, “A Universal Model for Accurate
Calculation of Electromagnetic Transients on overhead Lines and Underground
Cables”, IEEE Trans. Power Delivery, vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 1032-1038, July 1999.
[11] B. Gustavsen, “Validation of frequency dependent transmission line models”, IEEE
Trans. Power Delivery, vol. 20, no. 2, pp. 925-933, April 2005.
[12] CIGRÉ Working Group 13.05, “The calculation of switching surges. Part I. A
comparison of transient network analyzer results”, ELECTRA No. 19, pp. 67-78,
Nov. 1971.

References 96
[13] C.A.F. Cunha and H.W. Dommel, “Computer Simulation of Field Tests on the 345
kV Jaguara-Taquaril line”, (in Portuguese), Paper BH/GSP/12, Presented at “II
Seminario Nacional de Producao e Transmissao de Energia Eletrica” in Belo
Horizonte, Brazil, 1973 (English translation by D.I. Cameron).
[14] A. B. Fernandes anad W. L. A. Neves, “Phase-domain transmission line models
considering frequrency-dependent transformation matrices”, IEEE Trans. Power
Delivery, vol. 19, pp. 708 - 714, April 2004.
[15] A. B. Fernandes and W. L. A. Neves, “Transmissioin line shunt conductance from
measurements”, IEEE Trans. Power Delivery, vol. 19, pp. 722 - 728, April 2004.
[16] J. H. Brunke and G. G. Schockelt, “Synchronous energization of shunt capacitors
at 230 kV”, presented at 1978 IEEE Power Engineering Society Winter Power
Meeting, New York, N. Y., Jan. 29 – Febr. 3, 1978, paper no. A 78 148-9.
[17] D. H. Baker, “Synchronous machine modeling in EMTP”, IEEE Course Text “Digital
Simulation of Electrical Transient Phenomena”, No. 81 EHO 173-5-PWR, IEEE
Service Center, Piscataway, N.J., 1980.

References 97
[18] IEEE Task Force, "First benchmark model for computer simulation of
subsynchronous resonance", IEEE Trans. Power App. Syst., vol. PAS-96, pp. 1565-
1572, Sept./Oct. 1977.
[19] IEEE Task Force, "Second benchmark model For computer simulation of
subsynchronous resonance", IEEE Trans. Power App. Syst., Vol. PAS-104, pp.
1057-1066, May 1985.
[20] Microtran Factsheet No. 1, “Subsynchronous Resonance - Test Case 1”, April 2003
(available on website www.microtran.com; click on “Tech Spot”).
[21] Microtran Factsheet No. 2, “Subsynchronous Resonance - Test Case 2”,
April 2003 (available on website www.microtran.com; click on “Tech Spot”).
[22] R. M. Hasibar, “Examples of electromagnetic transients studies using the BPA
EMTP”, Course Notes, EMTP Short Course, University of Wisconsin, Madison,
Wisconsin, 1987. Follow-up paper describing transformer failure: R. S. Bayless,
J. D. Selman, D. E. Truax, and W. E. Reid, “Capacitor switching and transformer
transients”, IEEE Trans. Power Delivery, Vol. 3, pp. 349-357, Jan. 1988.
[23] W. G. Peterson, R. M. Hasibar, and D. C. Gentemann, “Grand Coulee – Raver
500 kV double circuit line test July 15-16, 1980”, Div. of System Engineering,
Bonneville Power Administration, Portland, OR, U.S.A.

References 98
[24] M. B. Hughes, “Revenue metering error caused by induced voltage from adjacent
transmission lines”, IEEE Trans. Power Delivery, Vol. 7, pp. 741-745, April 1992.
[25] H. W. Dommel, Case Studies for Electromagnetic Transients. Microtran Power
System Analysis Corp., Vancouver, Canada, Sept. 1993.
[26] M. B. Hughes, R. W. Leonard, and T. G. Martinich, “Measurement of power system
subsynchronous driving point impedance and comparison with computer
simulations”, IEEE Trans. Power App. Syst., Vol. PAS-103, pp. 619 – 630, 1984.
[27]CIGRE Working Group 13.02, "Interruption of Small Inductive Currents, Chapters 1
and 2", ELECTRA No. 72, pp. 73-103, CIGRE, Paris, Oct. 1980.
[28]CIGRE Working Group 13.02, "Interruption of Small Inductive Currents, Chapters 3,
Part A", ELECTRA No. 75, pp. 5-30, CIGRE, Paris, March 1981.
[29]CIGRE Working Group 13.02, "Interruption of Small Inductive Currents, Chapters 4,
Part A", ELECTRA No. 101, pp. 13-39, CIGRE, Paris, July 1985.
[30]CIGRE Working Group 13.02, "Interruption of Small Inductive Currents, Chapters 4:
Reactor Switching: Part B: Limitation of Overvoltages and Testing", ELECTRA
No. 113, pp. 51-74, CIGRE, Paris, July 1987.

References 99
[31] M. J. Pickett, H. L. Manning, and H. N. Van Geem, “Near resonant coupling on EHV
circuits: I – Field investigations”, IEEE Trans. Power App. Syst., Vol. PAS-87, pp.
322-325, Febr. 1968.
[32] M. H. Hesse and D. D. Wilson, “Near resonant coupling on EHV circuits: II –
Methods of analysis”, IEEE Trans. Power App. Syst., Vol. PAS-87, pp. 326-334,
Febr. 1968.
[33] J. J. LaForest, K. W. Priest, A. Ramirez, and H. Nowak, “Resonant voltages on
reactor compensated extra-high-voltage lines”, IEEE Trans. Power App. Syst., Vol.
PAS-91, pp. 2528-2536, Nov. 1972.
[34] B. Holmgrem, R.S. Jenkins, and J. Riubrugent, “Transformer inrush current”, CIGRE
Report 12-03, 1968.
[35] H.S. Bronzeado, P.B. Brogan, and R. Yacamini, “Harmonic analysis of transient
currents during sympathetic interaction”, IEEE Trans. on Power Systems, Vol. 11,
pp. 2051-2056, Nov. 1996.
[36] J. H. Brunke, and K. J. Fröhlich, “Elimination of transformer inrush currents by
controlled switching, Part I”, IEEE Trans. Power Delivery, Vol. 16, pp. 276-280, April
2002.

References 100
[37] J. H. Brunke, and K. J. Fröhlich, “Elimination of transformer inrush currents by

controlled switching, Part II”, IEEE Trans. Power Delivery, Vol. 16, pp. 281-285, April
2002.
[38] E. Portales and A. Mercier, on behalf of CIGRÉ Working Group A3.07, “Controlled
switching of unloaded power transformers”, ELECTRA No. 212, pp. 39-47, Feb.
2004.
[39] M. Rioual, “Measurements and computer simulation of fast transients through indoor
and outdoor substations”, IEEE Trans. Power Delivery, Vol. 5, pp. 117-123, Jan.
1990.
[40] J.R. Marti and H.W. Dommel, "Line models for lightning studies," Trans. Engineering
and Operating Division, Canadian Electrical Association, Vol. 28, 1989, 15 pages.
[41] CIGRÉ Working Group 33.01, Guide to Procedures for Estimating the Lightning
Performance of Transmission Lines. CIGRÉ Techn. Brochure Ref. 63, Paris 1991.
[42] R. B. Standler, Protection of Electronic Circuits for Overvoltages. Wiley-Interscience,
New York, N.Y. 1989.
[43] F. Heidler, "Analytische Blitzstromfunktion zur LEMP-Berechnung (analytical
lightning current function for LEMP calculations)", Paper No. 1.9, ICLP-
Proceedings, Munich 1985.
General References 101
In addition to the specific references quoted before, advice for Electromagnetic

Transient Studies can also be found in the following publications:
IEEE Publications:
J. A. Martinez-Velasco, editor, Computer Analysis of Electric Power System Transients.
IEEE Press, Piscataway, NJ, U.S.A., 1997. Collection of papers on 619 pages.
IEEE PES Special Publication, Modeling and Analysis of System Transients. IEEE
Catalog No. 99TP133-0, IEEE Operations Center, Piscataway, NJ, U.S.A., 1998.
Put together by a Working Group chaired by A.J.F. Keri:
i Modeling and Analysis of System Transients Using Digital Programs - Introduction (A.J.F. Keri, A.M. Gole)
1. Digital Computation of Electromagnetic Transients in Power Systems: Current Status (J.A. Martinez-Velasco)
2. Modeling Guidelines for Power Electronics in Electric Power Engineering Applications (K.K. Sen and L. Tang, H. W. Dommel, K.G. Fehrle,
A.M. Gole, E.W. Gunther, I. Hassan, R. Iravani, A.J.F. Keri, R. Lasseter, J.R. Marti, J.A. Martinez, M.F. McGranaghan, O.B. Nayak, C.
Nwankpa, P.F. Ribeiro)
3. Modeling Guidelines for Low Frequency Transients (R. Iravani, A.K.S. Chandhury, I.D. Hassan, J.A. Martinez, A.S. Morched, B.A. Mork, M.
Parniani, D. Shirmohammadi, R.A. Walling)
4. Modeling Guidelines for Switching Transients ( D.W. Durbak and A.M Gole, E.H. Camm, M. Marz, R.C. Degeneff, R.P. O'Leary,
R. Natarajan, J.A. Martinez-Velasco, Kai-Chung Lee, A. Morched, R. Shanahan, E.R. Pratico, G.C. Thomann, B. Shperling, A.J.F. Keri,
D.A. Woodword, L. Rugeles, V. Rashkes, A. Sarshar)
5. Modeling Guidelines for Fast Front Transients (A.F. Imece, D.W. Durbak, H. Elahi, S. Kolluri, A. Lux, D. Mader, T.E. McDermott,
A. Morched, A.M. Moussa, R. Natarajan, L. Rugeles, E. Tarasiewicz)
6. Modeling Guidelines for Very Fast Transients in Gas Insulated Substations (J.A. Martinez and D. Povh, P. Chowdhuri, R. Iravani,
A.J.F. Keri)
7. Modeling and Analysis of Transient Performance of Protection SystemsUsing Digital Programs (A.K.S. Chaudhary and R.E. Wilson,
M.T. Glinkowski, M. Kezunovic, L. Kojovic, J.A. Martinez)
8. Bibliography on Modeling of System Transients Using Digital Programs (J.A. Martinez-Velasco and T. E. Grebe)

IEEE Power Engineering Society, Tutorial on Electro- magnetic Transient Program

Applications to Power System Protection. A. Tziouvaras, Course Coordinator. IEEE
Catalog No. 01TP150.
IEEE PES Task Force on Data for Modeling System Transients, “Parameter
Determination for Modeling System Transients – Part I: Overhead Lines; Part II:
Insulated Cables; Part III: Transformers; Part IV: Rotating Machines; Part V: Surge
Arresters; Part VI: Circuit Breakers; Part VII: Semiconductors”, IEEE Trans. on
Power Systems, Vol. 20, pp. 2038-2094, July 2005.
Books (compiled with help from Dr. Luis Naredo):
H. H. Skilling, Transient Electric Currents. McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., 1937.

H. A. Peterson, Transients in Power Systems. Dover Publications, Inc., New York,
1966 (ISBN 0-486-61685-1).
R. Rüdenberg, Electrical Shock Waves in Power Systems. Harvard University Press,
1968.
J. P. Bickford, N. Mullineux, and J. R. Reed. Computation of Power-System
Transients. IEE Monograph Series 18, Peter Peregrinus Ltd., London, UK, 1976.

W. D. Humpage, Z-Transform Electromagnetic Transient Analysis in High Voltage

Networks. IEE Power Engineering Series 3, Peter Peregrinus Ltd., London, UK,
1982 (ISBN 0-906048-79-6).
A. Greenwood, Electrical Transients in Power Systems, 2nd edition. John Wiley & Sons,
1992.
P. Chowdhuri, Electromagnetic Transients in Power Systems. Research Studies Press
LTD, 1996; John Wiley and Sons, Inc. (ISBN 0 86380 180 3).
L. van der Sluis, Transients in Power Systems. John Wiley and Sons, LTD, 2001 (ISBN
0 471 48639 6).
N. Watson and J. Arrillaga, Power Systems Electromagnetic Transients Simulation. The
Institution of Electrical Engineers, United Kingdom, 2003.
L.C. Zanetta Jr., Transitórios Eletromagnéticos em Sistemas de Potencia (in
Portuguese). Editora da Universidade de Sao Paulo, Sao Paulo - SP, Brazil, 2003.
Antonio E. A. Araújo and Washington L. A. Neves, Transitórios Eletromagnéticos em
Sistemas de Energia (in Portuguese). Editora de Universidade Federal de Minas
Gerais, Brazil, 2005.
Juan A. Martinez-Velasco, Power System Transients: Parameter Determination. CRC
Press LLC; 1st edition (Oct 2 2009).
Antonio Gómez Expósito, Análisis y operación de sistemas de energía eléctrica,

McGraw Hill, Madrid, Spain 2002.
Antonio Gómez-Expósito, Antonio J. Conejo, Claudio Cañizares, Electric Energy
Systems – Analysis and Operation. CRC Press, Boca Raton, Florida, USA, 2009.
H. W. Dommel, EMTP Theory Book, 2nd edition. Microtran Power System Analysis
Corp., Vancouver, Canada, 1992, latest update January 2005 (there is probably an
ATP edition from what I delivered to Bonneville Power Administration in 1986).
J. C. Das, Transients in Electrical Systems; Analysis, Recognition, and Mitigation.
McGraw-Hill, New York, N. Y., U.S.A., 2010.
M. A. Ibrahim, Disturbance Analysis for Power Systems. IEEE Press and John Wiley &
Sons, Hoboken, N. J., USA, 2012. This 718-page book contains many cases of
disturbances that were recorded on digital fault recorders.

June 18, 2012
New Orleans, Louisiana
IEEE PES Short Course

Electromagnetic Transients in Power System and Insulation
Coordination Studies
Insulation Coordination
Studies
Douglas Mader
dmader@bellsouth.net
©Copyright Douglas Mader, all

rights reserved
Insulation Coordination Process
 IEC Standard 60071-1 (2010)
3rd edition published 2006 (amended in 2010)
terms and concepts defined
standard withstand values defined (up to 1200 kV)
standard tests defined
 IEEE Standards C62.82.1 (2010)

rights reserved
 IEC Standard 60071-2
published December 1996
application guide for 60071-1
 IEEE Standard 1313.2-1999 (R2005)

rights reserved
IMPORTANT TERMS
AND THEIR
RELATIONSHIPS
EMTP-RV
Representative Overvoltage
STRESS
Coordination Factor Performance Criteria

kcd
k cs
Coordination Withstand Voltage
ka
Safety Factors ks
Required Withstand Voltage

STRENGTH
Tables IEC 60071-1
Rated or Standard Insulation Level
Selection of performance
©Copyright criterion leadingMader,
Douglas to the coordination
all
factor is heart of problem
rights reserved
Insulation Coordination
The selection of the dielectric strength of equipment

in relation to the voltages which can appear on the
system for which equipment is intended, taking into
account the service environment and the
characteristics of available protective devices.

rights reserved
System Characterization
Um - The highest voltage for equipment
Range I - Um < 245 kV
Range II - Um > 245 kV

rights reserved
 For the purposes of insulation coordination,

overvoltages are divided into four classes:
 Temporary Overvoltages (power frequency)
• Phase-to-Earth and Phase-to-Phase

• Longitudinal

rights reserved
 Next,
 Slow-Front Overvoltages
Phase-to-Earth and Phase-to-Phase

rights reserved
 And finally…
 Fast-Front Overvoltages
 Combined Overvoltages
Phase-to-Phase
Longitudinal – in phase and out-of-phase

rights reserved
81\211.pre

Source – IEC 60071-1
rights reserved
Determining Overvoltage Stresses
After discussing the various overvoltage stresses,

their origins, and typical values, we will explore
examples of overvoltage calculation and use a
model 230 kV system and computer simulation to
illustrate

rights reserved
 Temporary Overvoltages (TOV)
 Origins
Earth Faults (Phase-Earth)

Load Rejection
Ferroresonance
Harmonic resonance
Transformer Inrush
Machine Self-Excitation

rights reserved
TOV Determines Insulation Design
 Usually, especially for long distance transmission,

load rejection following loss of system synchronism
results in the highest temporary overvoltage.
 Generally desirable to limit 1-second value to 1.5 per
unit of rated rms voltage.

 This is because the maximum TOV determines the
required rating of surge arresters. The switching and

lightning impulse protective level are determined in
turn by the arrester rating. These protective levels in
turn determine the insulation design and cost.
 Can usually be achieved by an optimum mix of series
and shunt compensation including SVC in some

cases, and avoiding low harmonic order resonances
rights reserved
Representation of TOV
A one minute duration power frequency overvoltage:
- a maximum value
- a set of peak values
- a complete statistical distribution

rights reserved
Slow-Front Overvoltages (SFOV)
 Origin
Line energization and reclosing

Faults and fault clearing
Load rejection
Switching of inductive and capacitive currents
Slow front lightning overvoltages (of minor importance)
Important particularly in range II

rights reserved
Representation of SFOV
Surge Arrester Protection


- deterministic method
- truncation values if Ups > Ut
- Ups if Ups < Ut
No Surge Arresters

- deterministic method
- truncation values
- statistical method

rights reserved
Statistical Representation of SFOV
 (no surge arrester limitation)
Usually characterized by a statistical (Weibull or

Gaussian) probability distribution of standard switching
impulses (250/2500 us) with the following parameters:

rights reserved
Statistical Representation of SFOV
 Distribution Definition
Ue2 - overvoltage phase-to-earth in per unit

having 2% probability of being exceeded
Up2 - same as Ue2 but phase-phase
Se - standard deviation of the distribution
phase-earth in per unit
Sp - standard deviation of the distribution
phase-phase in per unit
Ut = U50 + 3S (truncation)(Weibull)

rights reserved
SFOV Studies
 Per Unit Base
2
Um  phase-to-earth peak
3

rights reserved
Fast-front Overvoltages (Lightning)
a) Begins with lightning current probability distribution

and front time probability distribution and a spacial
distribution of stroke termination points.
b) Because of separation effects, each piece of

equipment has a different representative
overvoltage which is a statistical quantity.

rights reserved
Selection of Surge Arresters
TOV1
 - 1 second temporary overvoltage capability
- basis of application (ANSI)
- IEC uses 10 seconds
- gives one point on the "No-Prior-Energy"

curve

rights reserved
 Determine TOV1 (10)
- use computer simulation to determine TOV envelope

and arrester energy for such origins as
- load rejection
(model complete machine and controls)
- transformer inrush
- ferroresonance
- dynamic overvoltage associated with HVDC
- determine earth fault factor from X1 X0 R0

rights reserved

rights reserved
Coordination Withstand Voltage
 Performance criteria, coordination factor, and the

selection of the Coordination Withstand Voltage
UCW = kC · Urp kcd  Deterministic

kcs  Statistical
 For temporary overvoltage (Power Frequency)

 Kcd = 1.0.
- main considerations are pollution and

extreme wind.

rights reserved
UCW for SFOV with Surge
Arrester Limitation
For Equipment protected by surge arresters
use deterministic or conventional method


select arrester rating by temporary overvoltage


for slow front overvoltages


- by EMTP-RV studies, determine protective level

Ups at equipment

rights reserved
UCW for SFOV with Surge
Arrester Limitation
 For Slow Front Overvoltages
If Ups < 0.7 Ue2  kcd = 1.1 for phase-earth

or if Ups < 0.5 Ue2  kcd = 1.1 phase-phase
If 0.7 < Ups/ Ue2  1.2 use graph (p - e)

If 0.5 < Ups/ Ue2  0.9 use graph (p - p)
This adjustment to kcd takes into account the skewing of

the probability distribution due to the control by the
arrester.
Note also that where the degree of limitation of Ue2 by

arresters is large, the limited values of Up2 can approach
2xUps. ©Copyright Douglas Mader, all
rights reserved
KCD for SFOV Limited by SA
81\211.pre

rights reserved
Self-Restoring Insulation
Application of Weibull Distribution to "m"

Insulations m 1+X
5
4
Pm = 1 - (1 - P)m yielding Pm(X) = 1 - 0.5
and
Zm = Z/m1/5
and
U50m = U50 - 4(Z - Zm ) = U50 - 4Z (1 - 1/m1/5)

rights reserved
81\211.pre

Source – IEC 60071-2 rights reserved
Example: - 100 insulators
- For each, U50 = 1600 kV
Z = 100 kV
Then: - Zm=100 / (100)1/5 = 39.8 kV
and - U50m= U50 - 4 (Z - Zm) = 1600 - 4 x (100 - 39.8)
= 1359.2 kV
P(u)% 50 16 10 2 1 0.1 0
U (kV) 1600 1500 1475 1400 1370 1310 1200

Um(kV) 1359 1319 1308 1280 1268 1244 1200

rights reserved
SFOV UCW for Unprotected Equipment
 i.e. No Surge Arrester Protection
applies in particular to slow-front overvoltages
Usually consists of self-restoring insulation
kC determined by a risk-of-failure calculation

Ut
R=  f(U) P(U) dU
U50-4z
Computer calculation (laborious)

rights reserved
SFOV UCW for Unprotected Equipment
81\211.pre

rights reserved
Simplified Statistical Method for SFOV
 Simplified by relating risk-of-failure to the ratio of the voltages

corresponding to two reference probabilities.
 the statistical withstand voltage
U90 = U50 - 1.3Z
 the 2% overvoltage U2
 KCS = U90 /U2
statistical coordination factor
 Choice of KCS is the key performance criteria.

rights reserved

rights reserved Source – IEC 60071-2
 Example  100 insulators

Let Ue2 1200 kV Se = 100kV
 For one insulator

U90(10% F.O. prob.) = 1475 kV
KCS = 1475 = 1.23
1200
R = 10-5
 For 100 insulators

U90 = 1308 kV
KCS = 1308 = 1.09
1200
R = 10-3 ©Copyright Douglas Mader, all
rights reserved
UCW for FFOV with Surge Arrester Limitation
Fast Front Overvoltages
 For fast-front overvoltages kcd = 1.0 and the

protective level at the equipment takes into
account separation effects, which can be quite
large at higher values of Um

rights reserved
UCW with Surge Arrester Limitation
 For simple arrangements of equipment with close-by

arresters and terminal capacitance less than a few
hundred picofarads, we would expect the protective
level at the equipment to approach:
Ucw = Up + 2ST

Up = arrester lightning impulse protective level
S = steepness in kV/s
T = equivalent time in microseconds
= + a1 + a 2 + 
c
c = light speed in m/s (~ 300)
rights reserved
Effect of Separation Distance

rights reserved
Safety and Correction Factors
 Correctionand safety factors are applied to
obtain the Required Withstand Voltage
 Altitude Correction (IEC 721-2-3 (1990))
Applied to external (atmosphere-exposed)

insulation
ka = bm H m
b = e(H/8150)
} ka = e
8150
H = altitude in meters
rights reserved
Exponent ‘m’ for
Altitude Correction Factor
For switching-impulse required withstand:
m is determined from the figure as a function of

UCW and the insulation configuration

rights reserved
81\211.pre

rights reserved
For lightning impulse required withstand and short-

duration power-frequency withstand voltages of air gaps:
m
 = 1
For polluted insulator continuous power frequency

withstand:
m
 = 0.5 - 0.8 (standard units - fog units)

rights reserved
Mixed Insulation at High Altitudes
 If ka >1.05 the required withstand voltage of

external insulation can be greater than that for the
internal.
Example transformer winding versus bushings


Either:

- over design the internal insulation

- external insulation separately tested on a
dummy
- air clearances equal to or greater than tables
A1 - A3.

rights reserved
Required Withstand Voltage
 Safety Factors
aging
unknowns
tolerances - assembly, quality control, installation
test dispersion
External Insulation kS= 1.05
Internal Insulation kS = 1.15
Then URW = ka kS UCW
* may be up to 1.2 or more for GIS in Range II

rights reserved
Conversion of URW to
Standard Test Voltages
 In range I, we specify and test
short-duration power frequency withstand


lightning impulse withstand


 In range I, we must convert the required switching

impulse withstand voltage into an equivalent short-
duration power-frequency withstand voltage or
lightning impulse withstand voltage.
Table 2 of IEC 60071-2 Section 5.2 provides

conversion factors.
rights reserved
81\211.pre

rights reserved
 In range II, we specify
switching impulse withstand voltage phase-earth and


phase-phase
 lightning impulse withstand voltage
We must convert the required power frequency

withstand voltages phase-earth and phase-phase to
an equivalent switching impulse withstand voltage.
Table 3 of IEC 60071-2 Section 5.2 provides


conversion factors.
rights reserved
81\211.pre

rights reserved
Rated/Standard Insulation Level
 Select a set of standard insulation values closest to

each of the values of URW for the various
overvoltage classifications.
 Where possible, design the insulation to

correspond to a Standard Insulation Level which is
defined as a set of rated insulation levels related as
a group to Um and corresponding to one line in the
IEC tables.

rights reserved

rights reserved

rights reserved
June 18, 2012
New Orleans, Louisiana
Electromagnetic Transients in Power System and Insulation

Coordination Studies
Study Examples Using EMTP
Douglas Mader
dmader@bellsouth.net
1
Circuit Breakers and
Switches
EMTP Models for Circuit Breakers
 Ideal Switch
 Acts as an ideal Switch:
Impedance = 0 before current zero

Impedance =  after current zero
 Assumes - Prospective currents and voltages are

unaffected by the interruption process
itself
 Has primary use in breaker specification and
overvoltage studies 2
Switches
EMTP Models for Circuit Breakers
 Simple time controlled

 Closes at t ≥ t
close
 Opens at t ≥ t
open and current < Imargin or at the next
zero crossing if Imargin = 0
 Heuristic (Statistical and Systematic)

Models the externally-observed circuit breaker
operation - pole spread, restrike, reignition, prestrike

Useful for overvoltage studies (statistical overvoltage
distribution)
Interrupts also as an ideal switch
3
Switches
Ideal Switch – Random/Systematic
 By combining the statistical distribution of overvoltages

with the statistical properties of breakdown strength of
insulation, it becomes possible to determine a risk of
flashover or insulation failure
 Let Pd (U) be the known probability of flashover for a

known overvoltage U. and let p(U) be the probability of
occurrence of an overvoltage of magnitude U. The overall
risk of failure is then:

R= Pd(U) p(U) dU
- 4
Switches
Point on Wave delay
 Toffset = 1./f ((1-X) Dmin + X Dmax)

360.
 X is a random uniformly distributed number between 0 and 1
 Dmin and Dmax are the min. and max. angles

respectively of a window in a sinusoidal waveform of
frequency f
5
Switches
Typical Parameter Values and Practical Advice
 Typical Pole Spans 6-10 ms (3.5-5.5 for newer spring-

hydraulic mechanisms
Standard Deviation 1-1.67 ms (.6-.8 ms)
Mean Closing Time 16-20 ms
 Higher statistical overvoltages associated with larger pole

span
 Make sure minimum absolute close time after random

calculation is > 0.0
 Typically 200 shots used 6

If you have a fast machine use more for better accuracy
Switches
Typical Parameter Values and Practical Advice
 Select the ideal switch output tab option to get the

actual switching times of the worst case and re-run it
to observe the waveshape
 For point on wave use uniform law
 Use Gaussian law for closing times at ±3 std dev
7
Switches
Pre-insertion Resistors in Breakers
 Common method of reducing line switching or capacitor

switching overvoltages
 Typical Insertion Time 7-10 ms
Must be no less than twice the line travel time
 Simulated by an independent statistical auxiliary contact

in series with the resistor and a statistical main shorting
contact dependent on the auxiliary contact with mean
closing time 7-10 ms. The standard deviation of the
auxilliary contact is typically half that of the main contact.
8
Switches
Preinsertion Resistors
A R
A. Auxilliary Contact
B. Main Contact
R. Resistor
9
Switches
Test System for Lab Exercises
x"=.0546
5
4 50MVA
200
0.9PF
11kV 222MVA 1
10% 61MVAC
200
10
2 9.1%
220 kV 10% 193km
400MVA
16km 200 MVA
9.1% 0.9PF
200MVA 500MVA
7 145km 24km 12 13 200MVA
220kV 220kV 66kV 50MVAC

9.1% 11kV
11
180
9.1%
x"=.02186 500MVA 100MVA 11kV X"=.08744
6
500 220kV
11kV 220kV
97km
x"=.1421 8
290km
50 230kV SYSTEM
50MVA
9.1% 290km
GENERAL FEATURES
200 10
MVA 220kV
DRAFT\DJM\PAKGEN.PRE
0.9PF
Switches
Example
 Set up a statistical three phase switch to leave a

trapped charge on line 1-2 by opening and another
to reclose the line against trapped charge. (Make a
subcircuit). Obtain the overvoltage distribution at the
BUS2 end.
 Add a pre-insertion resistor to the reclosing breaker

and repeat.
 Capacitor Switching 11
Switches
Transient Recovery Voltage
 Breakers rated in terms of magnitude and rate of rise
 ANSI and IEC standards have now been harmonized

with IEC 62271-100, but studies for older ANSI
breakers need to respect the applicable edition of
C37
 Indoor and Outdoor breakers distinguished
 Prospective TRV envelope is best simulated by

EMTP ideal switch 12
Switches
 IEC Rating method is also divided into two groups at Um=100

kV, the same as ANSI.
 The 2-parameter test characteristic applies to Class S1 and S2

breakers rated at or below 100 kV and the parameter values are
obtained from Tables 1 and 2 of 62271-100:
 Uc = is a function of Um Uc
 t3 is function of Um
 t3 = T2/1.138
 td,t',u' allow for the
U'
effect of bus/breaker
capacitance
0 td t' t3
13
Switches
Transient recovery Voltage
 Above 100 kV, the 4-parameter test characteristic applies and

parameters are obtained from Tables 3, 4, and 5 of 62271-100:
 U1 = 0.8 Uc
 t1 is function of Um Uc
 t2 = 3t1
U1
U'
0 td t' t1 t2 14
Switches
Simple Circuit for Overdamped TRV
300 mH 100 km
E cos ωt
~
15
Switches
Simple Circuit for Underdamped TRV
With With Short Line Fault
3 mH 1 km
E cos ωt
~ .25 uF
16
Switches
 Important for Initial rate of rise to represent the bus

side capacitances. Distributed parameter lines may
be necessary for extensive buswork
 Breaker capability curve can be generated in Controls

and plotted against the actual TRV
 Entergy actual example
17
Lightning Overvoltages
Modeling and Analysis
 Three causes - all associated with overhead lines

1. Backflashover
2. Direct Strokes to Phase (shielding failure)
3. Induced (nearby strokes to ground)
 Direct strokes to station are usually ignored because

perfect shielding via masts or wires is assumed.
 Studies focus primarily on line performance

(backflashover and shielding failure events) and
arrester application
© Douglas J. Mader 18
 Backflashover
 Above typically about 50 kA strokes to towers or

overhead ground wires can produce voltages on the
tower high enough to cause flashover of the line
insulation.
 Steep wavefront surge imposed on the affected phase

conductor which is attenuated in steepness and
magnitude through propagation by earth resistance and
corona
 Reflections from adjacent towers and the footing act to

limit the overvoltage peak as does coupling to phase
conductors. © Douglas J. Mader 19
Shielding Failure
 Occur when a flash misses the shield wires or tower
and terminates directly on a phase conductor.

 Prospective overvoltage at stricken point is:
I Zs
V = + V60 (t)
2
V60 = instantaneous power frequency voltage
Zs = conductor surge impedance
 Most involve strokes of a few kA but can involve

subsequent strokes of greater magnitude (<80 kA)
and steepness than first stroke but with shorter tail
Shielding Failure
IEEE 1243-1997 (R2008)
 S = 10•I.65 (m, kA) (Love)
 I = 0.029S1.54 (kA, m)
 ß = 0.36 + .168 In (43 - [hG+ hφ)]/2)
(hG+ h φ) /2 < 40 m
 ß = .55S h > 40 m
Important Parameters (CIGRE)
lI - Initial Crest Current

l
F - Final Crest Current
T - Tail Duration
h
t
d30= T30 /.6 = Rise time from 30% of peak to 90% of peak of lI
S
m = maximum steepness (at crest of lI )
 All parameters are generally approximated by log-normal

distributions
 Lightning stroke has a concave wavefront
T10 T30
T[us]
ITrig
Tan 10
I10
TANG
I30 (Sm)
Definition of front parameters for a
lightning current impulse of negative
polarity
I[ka]
I90
II
PEAK
IF
• CIGRE Distribution for Key Parameters
Modeling Guidelines
 Stroke Modelling
 Modelled generally as an ideal current source.
 Stroke Surge Impedance is an inverse function of

peak current (up to ~35 - 40kA)
Zst = 6897 – 158.45IF (Mazur & Ruhnke 2001)

(3000 ohms at 25 kA)
 Double exponential type models inadequate.

Modeling Guidelines
 Stroke Modelling
 Simulation of concave wavefront is important for

lightning protection.
Peak current amplitude
Maximum steepness at 90% of current peak.
Average steepness between 30% and 90% of
current peak.
 Tail is important
Tail duration
 (energy).
Concave Front
l = At + Btn
where t = time in µs
n = 1 + 2(SN -1) (2 + 1/SN)
SN = Smtf / l
tf = front time
= td30
1 l
A = 0.9 n - Sm
n -1 tn
B = 1 [Sm tn - 0.9 l ]
tnn (n-1)
tn = 0.6 tf 3SN2 /(1 + SN2 )
Tail
l = l1e-(t-tn)/t1 - l2 e-(t-tn)/t2
th = time to half value
t1 = (th - tn )/ ln 2
t2 = 0.1 l / Sm
l1 = t1 t2 Sm + 0.9 l
t1 -t2 t2
l2 = t1 t2 Sm + 0.9 l
t1 -t2 t1
Approximations
 IEEE (5 kA < l < 200 kA)
1
P
l
=
1 +
l 2.6 log I = 0.30
31
P =
1
log S= 0.20
S S 4
1 +
24
 Ramp function front at Sm to lpeak

 Ramp function tail from I
peak through th
Adequate for studies and can easily be used in hand

calculations © Douglas J. Mader 31
For steel towers model tower as a distributed single

phase lossless line with surge impedance: (Chisholm
1985)
Ravg
Zavg = 60 In cot ( (
1 tan -1
2
h1+ h2 ))
where
r1 h2 + r2 (h1 + h2) + r3 h1
Ravg =
r1 = Tower Top Radius (m) h1 + h 2
r2 = Tower Midsection Radius (m)
r3 = Tower Base Radius (m)
h1 = Height from Base to Midsection (m)
h2 = Height from Midsection to Top (m)
(based on surge impedance of conical sections)
Tower Surge Impedance
 Propagation velocity in towers can vary from 70%

of light speed in broad cross-section lattice steel
towers with many cross arms to just under lighjt
speed in tall towers with narrow cross section
 Surge impedance of guy wires should be evaluated

separately and placed in parallel
 Surge impedance of a vertical wire of length h/2 is

about 10% more than that of a horizontal wire at
h/2 © Douglas J. Mader 33
Earth Electrode Model
 Model the footing resistance and transient response


Ro = 2 g ln (11.838g2/A) (Chisholm 2001)
Ro = low current earth resistance (Ω)
g = geometric sum of length + width + depth (m)
ρ = resistivity of earth (-m)
A = total surface area of electrode (m2)
Earth Electrode Model
 Add a contact resistance correction term


Rc = L (Chisholm 2001)
L = total length of all the wires in the grid
 For concrete piers use the area of the concrete in

the previous equation and the contact resistance
based on the resistivity of concrete (70-250 ohm-
meters)
Line Insulators
 Represent by flashover in parallel with capacitance

 Capacitance for suspension units ~ 80 pF/unit
 Simulate flashover characteristic by built in leader
development, equal area integration models or

 Volt-time curve models built using controls
CIGRE volt-time curve:

V =
[ 400 + 710
]
d (kV)
t.75
d = gap in metres
0.2 µs < t < 16 µs

Line Insulators
 Leader Development Model:
tc = time to breakdown = ti + ts + tl
ti = corona inception time (assumed=0)
ts = streamer propagation time
1/ts = 1.25(E/E50)-0.95 (1/usec)
E = max gradient in gap before breakdown (kV/m)

E50 = average gradient at CFO
Line Insulators

For tl
dL/dt = K V(t)(V(t)/(g-L) - Eo) (kV,m)
V(t) = voltage across the gap in kV

L = leader length in m
g = gap length in m
Line Insulators
Gap Config. Polarity K(m2/kV2sec) Eo(kV/m)
Air Gaps,Post + 0.8 600

Insulators - 1.0 670
Cap and Pin + 1.2 520

Insulators - 1.3 600
Line Insulators
Integration Model (d < 2m):
DE =to ʃ t(UAB(t) - Uo)k dt UAB > Uo
When the area reaches DE, at t=tf , flashover is

initiated
Voltage Uo corresponds approximately to the voltage

defining the dielectric withstand of an air gap subjected
to a conventional lightning impulse of +ve polarity
Corona Attenuation and Distortion
 Important for proper calculation of lightning

overvoltages coming into a station from an overhead
line
 Complex phenomena - difficult to simulate accurately

over a wide range of line physical parameters
 Affects mainly the wavefront by introducing a time

delay to the peak and a reduction in the steepness
which become more pronounced with increasing
propagation distance
 Few laboratory measurements available to provide

data (Maruvada, et al IEEE 1977) - cage data only
 Most models start with the assumption of a cylinder

surrounding the conductor in corona. The cylinder
represents the boundary of the ionization (space
charge, attachment and recombination processes)
 The corona onset or inception voltage is constant for a

given conductor configuration, however time lags
associated with the electron avalanche process can
delay the onset for faster wavefronts such as lightning
 The total capacitance within the region of ionization

increases dynamically as a result of particle
redistribution
 Time domain models must be distributed at discrete

intervals between short (50 m or less) sections of
distributed line.
 Can be costly in terms of computer resources (time

and memory).
 A number of models similar in approach have been

prepared (Suliciu, Gary, etc.).
 EMTP-RV uses a quasi three-phase Suliciu model

Substation Components
 Model substation busbar sections as untransposed distributed

parameter lines between bus supports but if distance between
supports < 3m, combine sections
 Between each section lump the bus insulator and support structure
capacitance - for cap& pin:
123kV - 80 pF
400kV - 120 pF less (10-50) for post/NCI

765kV - 150 pF
 Make sure sections accurately locate major equipment
 Model large lumped capacitances such as
CVT = 4 - 10 nF, the higher values with lower

voltages)
Magnetic PT ~550 pF
CT = 150-1000 pF with increasing voltage
Dead Tank Breaker ~50pf each side to ground
6-10 pF longitudinal
Live Tank Breaker 5pF to ground, 10pF longitudinal
Plus any grading or TRV capacitors
Bus support structures - three phases 100 ohm Zs
- one phase 300 ohm Zs

- ground resistance 0.1 ohm
 Cables and GIS:
 Be careful to model short cables and GIS bus section

lengths accurately and watch out for voltage buildup
(standing waves) if any cables/bus sections can be
fed single-ended
Watch out for voltages between sheath and ground.

These are usually the most critical and should be
modeled using an untransposed cable with
transformation matrix evaluated at high frequency.
Any cross bonding and sheath ground
resistance/arrester protection must be included.
 Modeling Guidelines for GIS
 Bus sections are lossless DP lines with Z typically

50-60 ohms and propagation velocity about 95% of
light speed.
 Accurate overall length is important, however

rigorous spacer to spacer resolution is only
important for VFT analysis. For lightning, try to
avoid representing individual bus sections of less
than 3 metres as DP lines. Divide and lump the
spacer capacitance at each end of each bus
section.
 spacers - ~ 20 pF
magnetic PT - ~ 100 - 300 pF (400-800 kV)
closed circuit breaker - DP line of the length of the
breaker, velocity of .95c and Z calculated from

average diameter of breaker conducting elements
from end to end. Add lumped phase-earth caps.
Open circuit breaker - same but divided at open
contact and grading capacitors across opening.

Model closing resistor as separate breaker.
Disconnectors - include length as DP line
add shunt cap of ~25-50 pF

surge arrester capacitance ~ 100-200 pF

cable terminals ~ 60-80 pF plus length as DP line
SF6-Oil bushing ~ gas filled ~20-40 pF
~ capacitive ~ 100-300 pF
ground switch ~ 20-40 pF
Elbow - additional ~ 20-40 pF
Bus end - additional 3-5 PF for spherical shield
 Power transformers
 If possible use wideband transformer model esp. for

surge transfer studies where winding ratio > 10:1, if
not use the L-C matrix unless you do parametric
study
 As a minimum, model transformers as input

capacitance including bushings [typical HV-G values
of large units are 4 - 40 nF (shell) 1 - 20 nF (core)]
in shunt with surge impedance of about 5000 ohms
 Consider possible open breaker conditions and lines

out of service © Douglas J. Mader 52
IEEE SPDC WG 3.4.11 Model

(Station Class or IEC Class 4-5)

Electromagnetic Transient in Power System and Insulation Coordination Studies PDF

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Electromagnetic Transient in Power System and Insulation Coordination Studies PDF

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

The University of British Columbia

Electric Power Group

Switching and Lightning

• Closing and re-closing operations on transmission lines (line energization)

• Reduction of overvoltages in closing and re-closing operations on

• Computer models for closing and re-closing operations on transmission lines

• Examples for closing and re-closing operations on transmission lines

• Example for temporary overvoltages

• Examples for subsynchronous resonance

• Example for single-line-to-ground fault on transmission lines

The University of British Columbia

• Example for transient recovery voltage

• Example for linear resonance after opening a transmission line in parallel

• Examples for steady-state coupling between parallel transmission lines

• Interruption of small inductive currents

• Real-time simulators, EMTP-type software

• Specific references, general references

The University of British Columbia

• Circuit breakers at both ends I and II cannot close simultaneously.

• Therefore, the voltage

• In reality, overvoltage can be >2.0 p.u. because:

• not infinite source in A (therefore reflections),

• Approximate classification (from a paper by M. Erche [1]):

The University of British Columbia

The University of British Columbia

• three poles do not close simultaneously.

The University of British Columbia

• Cumulative frequency distribution

• 2 % value is often used

The University of British Columbia

• If insulation can withstand the 2 % overvoltage value, then 98 % of switching

The University of British Columbia

• Actual waveshapes are much more

• There are flashover models, such as the

The University of British Columbia

• Events in re-closing operations

The University of British Columbia

• Events in re-closing operations

The University of British Columbia

• Contacts close at instant when voltage is close to zero across the

• Requires some prediction of voltage across contacts.

• Prediction is easy with a sinusoidal voltage on the source side, and

• Prediction is more complicated when re-closing into trapped charge

The University of British Columbia

• In this case, there

The University of British Columbia

2. Closing (pre-insertion) resistors

The University of British Columbia

The University of British Columbia

• This simple model is reasonable

The University of British Columbia

The University of British Columbia

• Feeding network as equivalent network

• Frequency dependent network equivalent (“FDNE”) creates an R-L-C

The University of British Columbia

• Feeding network as equivalent network

it   g 0vt   g1vt  t   g 2vt  2t   ...

The University of British Columbia

Dielectric strength Electric closure

• Total resistance R  R' length must be much less than

• Zero seq. parameters are frequency dependent, but if three poles

• This dependence must be taken into account if there are noticeable

• Transmission line, frequency-dependent parameter models