A New Three-Phase Transformer Modeling for Three-Phase Harmonic Analysis in

Distribution Systems
Thiago Martins de Morais

Carlos Alberto Canesin

Fabio Toshiaki Wakabayashi

UNESP Campus of Ilha Solteira

Av. Brasil Centro, 56
P.O. Box 31
Ilha Solteira SP
ZIP Code 15385-000
BRAZIL
Abstract This work presents a new three-phase transformer
modeling suitable for simulations in Pspice environment, which
until now represents the electrical characteristics of a real
transformer. It is proposed the model comparison to a threephase transformer modeling present in EMTP ATP program,
which includes the electrical and magnetic characteristics. In
addition, a set including non-linear loads and a real three-phase
transformer was prepared in order to compare and validate the
results of this new proposed model. The three-phase Pspice
transformer modeling, different from the conventional one
using inductance coupling, is remarkable for its simplicity and
ease in simulation process, since it uses available voltage and
current sources present in Pspice program, enabling simulations
of three-phase network system including the most common
configuration, three wires in the primary side and four wires in
the secondary side (three-phases and neutral). Finally, the
proposed modeling becomes a powerful tool for three-phase
network simulations due to its simplicity and accuracy, able to
simulate and analyze harmonic flow in three-phase systems
under balanced and unbalanced conditions.
Keywords Transformer modeling, Three-phase harmonic
analysis, Non-linear loads, Three-phase unbalanced systems.

One of the difficulties encountered in representing the

network in a three-phase diagram consist in the three-phase
transformer modeling. In [1] the Delta-Wye transformer, the
most common in distribution systems, is modeled with a
single-phase equivalent circuit, using a series R-L
combination representing the transformer impedance and,
due to its peculiar characteristic at eliminating triplen
harmonics, a shunt filter tuned to the third harmonic was
used to emulate this characteristic, since third harmonic are
usually much larger than others in the triplen group.
Though, besides this modeling is not so accurate for
representing the distribution system in a single-phase
diagram, it has some disadvantages such as the impossibility
of comparing the simulation results with field measurements,
and the possibility of analysis in different phases, considering
the real three-phase unbalanced systems.
Therefore, this paper presents the new three-phase
transformer modeling suitable for simulations in Pspice, and
presented in [4 and 5], in comparison to ATP model and also
contrasted with experimental results from a real transformer,
validating the presented model.

I. INTRODUCTION
Since the proliferation of electronic loads has increased in
a surprisingly rhythm, many changes to the network where
these loads are present have come along, including losses and
phenomena due to the high harmonic flow. To understand
these phenomena, different modeling methods have been
presented in the past years which differ in data acquisition,
modeling complexity, problems formulation and solution
algorithms. In addition, two basic modeling methods have
been used, probabilistic and deterministic, this last one in a
wide way due to its accuracy in representing the system
components and loads, and also because it permits
simulations in the frequency or time domain.
Most papers published until now have used single-phase
diagram representing the system [1 until 3], which brings
along the necessity of rough considerations such as balanced
phases, and in case of non-linear loads, they are considered
with the same harmonic spectrum (amplitudes and phase
angle). It is known that this situation does not represent the
system properly since the loads connected to them are
completely different and, consequently, so do the phase
currents.

0-7803-9252-3/05/$20.00 2005 IEEE

II. THREE-PHASE SYSTEM MODELING USED FOR

SIMULATIONS
In order to evaluate the three-phase transformer modeling
performance, a real three-phase distribution system was
modeled using devices such as voltage and current sources,
resistors and inductors available in Pspice program. A
diagram of the system used in the simulation is shown in
Figure 1.

1266

SE

VA

P1

P2

P3

P4

P5

P6

P7

VB
VC

a b c

a b c

a b c

S2

a b c

S1

a b c

a b c

S0

Fig. 1 The three-phase system modeling.

a b c

TABLE I
BASE VALUES USED FOR P.U. VALUES CONVERSION

The substation (SE) was represented using voltage sources

and the cable impedances were represented using a series RL combination specified according to the cable code and the
distance. Since the focus is in the analyses of the transformer
modeling, the loads were considered linear and concentrated
in six points (P1, P2, P3, P4, P5 and P7), except for one point
(P6), where the transformer model was inserted. The primary
linear loads were considered balanced and modeled using
series R-L combination connected in Wye configuration, as
shown in Figure 2.
The transformer model was inserted in point P6 where the
loads were connected in the secondary side. The non-linear
loads were modeled in two parts, a series R-L combination
representing the linear part, and an association of current
sources specified from the load characteristic harmonic
spectrum, as illustrated in Figures 3 and 4, respectively. The
DC voltage (Vn) is set with value 0V, used only as a
current sensor.

Side
Primary
Secondary

Side

Primary
(SE P7)

Secondary
(S0 S2)

The system data were represented in p.u. values, obtained

from the base values shown in Table I, and are shown in
Tables II until V. All the system components were
represented basing in real values, except the secondary loads
which were composed with hypothetical values presenting a
high non-linear content, where the loads concentration values
for S0 and S1were the same, and for S2 it was doubled.

Segment
SE P1
P1 P2
P2 P3
P3 P4
P4 P5
P5 P6
P6 P7
Line
S0 S1
Neutral
Line
S1 S2
Neutral

Parameter
R [p.u.]
L [p.u.]
0.075m
0.403
0.208m
1.044
0.202m
1.015
0.035m
0.176
0.136m
0.684
0.102m
0.513
0.090m
0.452
0.178
0.793m
0.283
0.764m
0.406
1.808m
0.646
1.742m

TABLE III
LINEAR LOAD PARAMETERS CONNECTED TO PRIMARY SIDE
Parameter
R [p.u.]
L [p.u.]
20.04
25.75m
3.30
4.24m
0.51
0.85m
1.23
2.02m
4.05
6.65m

28.75
47.26m

Point
P1
P2
P3
P4
P5
P6
P7

a b c

TABLE IV
LINEAR LOAD PARAMETERS CONNECTED TO SECONDARY SIDE

Fig. 2 Primary linear load.

r

Point
t

S0

S1

vn

Fig. 3 Linear part of secondary loads.

S2

iTotal

iTotal
a

Vb [kV]
13.8
0.22

TABLE II
LINE PARAMETERS

A. Parameter values for the simulated system

Sb [MVA]
1
1

"x"

...

iTotal

t
n

I1

vr

I2

...

B. The three-phase Pspice transformer modeling

In

vs

vt

Line r
Line s
Line t
Line r
Line s
Line t
Line r
Line s
Line t

Parameter
R [p.u.]
L [p.u.]
59.20
73.22m
80.40
37.60m
107.22
50.14m
157.74
112.12m
153.44
148.16m
74.00
91.54m
85.24
82.30m
148.00
183.06m
157.74
112.12m

vn

Fig. 4 Non-linear loads represented by harmonic current sources

associations.

The usual transformer model used for simulations in

Pspice environment is based in inductance coupling. Though,
this modeling is not efficient when used for simulating large
systems with many transformers, and also due to its delta ()
configuration in primary side, since the program does not
accept a closed loop constructed only with inductances. So, a
new model [4] was conceived using voltage dependent
voltage source and current dependent current source in antiparallel, as presented in Figure 5. The DC voltage sources
Vpa, Vpb, Vpc, Vsn and Vsense are used as current sensors and
then specified with value 0V.

1267

TABLE V
NON-LINEAR LOAD PARAMETERS CONNECTED TO SECONDARY SIDE
Load
Concentration
Point

Harmonic
Order
1
3
5
7
9
11
13
15
1
3
5
7
9
11
13
15

S0 and S1

S2

Phase r
Amplitude
Phase angle
[p.u.]
[ ]
0.016248
0
0.012627
162
0.008275
-15
0.003415
152
0.002560
-29
0.001596
146
0.000479
-66
0.000448
85
0.032497
0
0.025255
162
0.016553
-15
0.006832
152
0.005122
-29
0.003194
146
0.000958
-66
0.000897
85

Phase s
Amplitude
Phase angle
[p.u.]
[ ]
0.015398
120
0.011787
172
0.007342
236
0.003682
-68
0.002300
-9
0.001621
49
0.000946
90
0.000749
53
0.030798
120
0.023575
172
0.014686
236
0.007366
-68
0.004602
-9
0.003243
49
0.001893
90
0.001497
53

vpa

Phase t
Amplitude
Phase angle
[p.u.]
[ ]
0.015249
240
0.011881
158
0.008221
98
0.004721
20
0.003304
-59
0.001800
230
0.000408
127
0.000447
61
0.030499
240
0.023764
158
0.016444
98
0.009441
20
0.006611
-59
0.003602
230
0.000816
127
0.000894
61

V
prim

prim

i sec

vpb

Vsense

b
Vsec

vpc
E

t
n

F
RN

vsn

Fig. 5 Pspice transformer modeling.

Up to now, the model configuration represents the

electrical characteristics of a real transformer, in other words:
turns ratio, triplen confinement and Joule losses.
C. The three-phase ATP transformer modeling
ATP (Alternative Transient Program), a well-know tool for
electrical circuit simulations is remarkable for its excellence
in representing electromagnetic phenomena. Its transformer
modeling, BCTRAN routine, is based on matrix modeling
and capable to represent the electrical and magnetic
characteristics of a real transformer. A schematic diagram of
the transformer model in ATP is shown in Figure 6.
This transformer modeling is remarkable for its accuracy
in representing the electromagnetic phenomena, however all
transformer parameters are required as input data. To
represent the magnetic characteristic, the saturation curve
must be inserted, and the curve data may be entered as
(flux) versus IRMS or if entered the curve with VRMS versus
IRMS parameters, there is a routine named SATURA, which
converts the VRMS versus IRMS parameter values to (flux)
versus IRMS.
The input data of a real transformer (112.5 kVA) present
in the modeled system is shown in Table VI.

III. PSPICE VERSUS ATP MODELING RESULTS

The system modeling is the same for both Pspice and ATP
simulations. So, the only difference is in the transformer
modeling, since the Pspice model emulates only the electrical
characteristics (up to now). In order to evaluate this modeling
performance, the voltage and current harmonic contents and
waveforms processed by both modeling are compared.
Once primary voltages presented low harmonic content it
is interesting to compare the voltage waveforms processed by
both models at the secondary side.
Figure 7 shows the voltage waveforms in secondary side
and Table VII shows the harmonic content of each phase,
comparing both model performances.

1268

A11

N1

N2

A21

A12

A22
N1

N3

An1

An2

Fig. 6 ATP transformer diagram.

TABLE VI
SATURABLE TRANSFORMER INPUT DATA

[p.u.]
1,0

Electrical parameters
Power
Vprim
112.5 MVA
13.8 KVA

Vsec
220/127 V

0,5

Rm
529 k

Magnetizing branch
Flux
0.238 mWb

Imag
0.0471 A

Winding data
Primary
R
11.87

R
3.02 m

L
18.27 H

-1,0
0

Saturable curve
VRMS (V)
120
140
160
180
200
220

A TP

Phase t

Phase s

-0,5

Secondary

L
71.88 mH

Pspice
Phase r

IRMS (A)
0.42
0.49
0.58
0.72
1.11
2.95

3 /2
/2

Fig. 7 Voltage waveforms in transformer secondary side.

[p.u.]
0,2

0
-0,1
-0,2

/2

3 /2
Fig. 8 Primary currents in Pspice simulation.

[p.u.]
0,2

1
3
5
7
9
11
13
15

ATP
c

0
-0,1
-0,2
0

/2

3/2

Fig. 9 Primary currents in ATP simulation.

Phase s
Pspice
ATP
Amp.
%
Amp.
%
[p.u]
Fund.
[p.u]
Fund.
0.805
100
0.8021
100
0.0361
4.48
0.0275
3.43
0.0386
4.79
0.028
3.49
0.0268
3.33
0.0194
2.42
0.0208
2.58
0.0154
1.91
0.0186
2.31
0.0132
1.64
0.0127
1.58
0.0089
1.11
0.0114
1.41
0.0084
1.05

1269

0,1

TABLE VII
VOLTAGE HARMONIC CONTENT AT SECONDARY TRANSFORMER SIDE
Phase r
Pspice
ATP
Amp.
%
Amp.
%
[p.u]
Fund.
[p.u]
Fund.
0.8036
100
0.8000
100
0.0381
4.74
0.0284
3.55
0.0426
5.30
0.0307
3.84
0.0251
3.12
0.0177
2.21
0.0223
2.78
0.0169
2.11
0.0177
2.20
0.0129
1.61
0.0067
0.83
0.0046
0.57
0.0064
0.80
0.0049
0.61

Pspice
c

0,1

Based on the harmonic spectrum presented in Table VII, it

is observed that the results obtained with Pspice and ATP
modeling present good similarities, both in qualitative and
quantitative results. The little difference observed is due to
the magnetic characteristic represented in the ATP model,
which makes a little more difficult the harmonic flow to the
secondary side, but it is notable this difference does not
influence the results significantly.
Besides the accuracy in representing harmonic voltage
distortion just observed, another interesting analysis is
toward the triplen confinement since this is an evident
characteristic of the Delta-Wye connections in distribution
transformers. As the secondary loads were modeled based on
current sources associations, and then, not dependable from
the voltage sources distortions, this analysis is focused in the
primary side, permitting the analysis of the transformer
modeling triplen confinement performance.
Figures 8 and 9 show the primary current waveforms
resulting in Pspice and ATP simulations respectively.
It is observed that, through the waveform comparisons, the
confinement characteristic was properly represented by the
proposed model. Table VIII presents similar values for simulations in Pspice and ATP, confirming the accuracy of this
new model in representing the confinement of triplens.

Harmonic
order

Phase t
Pspice
ATP
Amp.
%
Amp.
%
[p.u]
Fund.
[p.u]
Fund.
0.8046
100
0.802
100
0.036
4.48
0.0271
3.38
0.0429
5.33
0.0303
3.78
0.034
4.22
0.0245
3.06
0.0297
3.69
0.022
2.74
0.0203
2.53
0.0145
1.81
0.0053
0.65
0.0041
0.51
0.0065
0.80
0.0048
0.60

TABLE VIII
CURRENT HARMONIC CONTENT AT PRIMARY TRANSFORMER SIDE
Harmonic
order
1
3
5
7
9
11
13
15

Phase a
Pspice
ATP
Amp.
%
Amp.
%
[p.u]
Fund.
[p.u]
Fund.
0.0859
100
0.0867
100
0.0053
6.20
0.0050
5.81
0.0284
33.1
0.0287
33.1
0.0149
17.4
0.0149
17.2
0.0019
2.21
0.0019
2.21
0.0053
6.21
0.0054
6.2
0.0031
3.65
0.0030
3.49
0.0010
1.17
0.0011
1.21

Phase b
Pspice
ATP
Amp.
%
Amp.
%
[p.u]
Fund.
[p.u]
Fund.
0.0813
100
0.0822
100
0.0068
8.38
0.0068
8.22
0.0326
40.1
0.0328
40.0
0.0131
16.1
0.0132
16.0
0.0056
6.91
0.0057
6.95
0.0076
9.35
0.0076
9.25
0.0015
1.87
0.0014
1.73
0.0007
0.89
0.0008
0.91

TABLE X
RC LOAD VALUES

It is important to note that even with Delta-Wye

connection, there is presence of triplen harmonics in primary
side properly represented due to the unbalanced loads in
secondary side, as shown in Table V.

Load
Phase r
Phase s
Phase t
3-Phase Rectifier

Single-Phase
Rectifiers

IV. PSPICE VERSUS REAL TRANSFORMER RESULTS

From the model validation compared to ATP program, it is
presented now the comparison of Pspice results to a real
transformer performance. It was prepared a laboratory
experience using a real Delta-Wye transformer (220V/110V).
For a sinusoidal voltage source, it was used a three-phase
voltage source in primary side. In secondary side it was
connected a three-phase half-wave center-tapped diode
rectifier and at each phase terminal point, it was connected
single-phase half-wave diode rectifier with different power,
causing the system to be unbalanced. The set prepared in
laboratory is shown in Figure 10.
Tables IX and X present the impedance and load values
used in the Figure 10.
Current waveforms in transformer secondary side were
measured and obtained their harmonic spectrum for each
phase. From the current harmonic spectrum, it was associated
current sources specified from 1 to 30 harmonic orders.
In order to verify the new transformer modeling accuracy
compared to a real transformer, it is analyzed the primary
currents processed by both, presented in Figures 11 and 12,
VA

TRANSFORMER

IA prim

VB

IB prim

VC

IC prim

Phase c
Pspice
ATP
Amp.
%
Amp.
%
[p.u]
Fund.
[p.u]
Fund.
0.0860
100
0.0865
100
0.0022
2.58
0.0026
3.02
0.0307
35.7
0.0308
35.6
0.0166
19.3
0.0167
19.3
0.0037
4.35
0.0039
4.46
0.0050
5.85
0.005
5.83
0.0020
2.26
0.002
2.31
0.0004
0.48
0.0005
0.53

Parameter
R
C
150
220F
100
100F
50
150F
100
330F

and also in Table XI where the harmonic contents are

compared.
Based on Figures 11 and 12 it is possible to observe that
the new transformer model is also in agreement when
compared to a real transformer measured currents. The little
differences in the waveform shapes are due to the
transformer impedances and also due to not representing the
magnetic characteristics.
10,0
[A ]

Pspice
b
c

5,0
0
-5,0
-10,0

Ir sec

Issec

/2

3 /2
2
0
Fig. 11 Primary transformer currents in Pspice simulation.

It sec
In

10 ,0
[A ]

M ea sur em en t
a
b
c

5,0

Fig. 10 Laboratory set for measurements.

0

TABLE IX
LINE IMPEDANCE VALUES
Line
Line r
Line s
Line t

-5 ,0

Parameter
R
15
24
27.5

L
120.7mH
116.7mH
118.0mH

-10,0
0

1270

3 /2
/2

Fig. 12 Primary transformer measurement.

TABLE XI
CURRENT HARMONIC CONTENT AT PRIMARY TRANSFORMER SIDE
Harmonic
order
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15

Phase a
Pspice
Measurement
Amp.
%
Amp.
%
[p.u]
Fund.
[p.u]
Fund.
3.617
100
3.622
100
1.894
52.4
1.898
52.4
0.455
12.6
0.442
12.2
0.582
16.1
0.489
13.5
0.316
8.73
0.480
13.2
0.181
5.00
0.125
3.46
0.296
8.19
0.296
8.17
0.060
1.67
0.084
2.33
0.136
3.77
0.138
3.81
0.067
1.86
0.060
1.65
0.032
0.88
0.029
0.79
0.054
1.49
0.057
1.58
0.042
1.16
0.045
1.24
0.009
0.25
0.008
0.22
0.036
1.01
0.032
0.88

Phase b
Pspice
Measurement
Amp.
%
Amp.
%
[p.u]
Fund.
[p.u]
Fund.
2.112
100
2.467
100
1.866
88.4
1.728
70.0
0.433
20.5
0.616
25.0
0.850
40.2
0.862
35.0
0.320
15.1
0.415
16.8
0.388
18.3
0.369
15.0
0.265
12.5
0.200
8.12
0.056
2.66
0.080
3.25
0.129
6.09
0.144
5.82
0.068
3.20
0.060
2.43
0.038
1.78
0.047
1.91
0.081
3.82
0.085
3.45
0.028
1.35
0.030
1.21
0.035
1.68
0.039
1.57
0.034
1.60
0.031
1.24

From Table XI, it is notable that the similarity with the

amplitudes confirms that the new modeling is able to
represent a real transformer in Pspice simulations.

REFERENCES
[l]

V. CONCLUSIONS
This paper presented the new three-phase Pspice
transformer modeling performance compared to ATP and
also to a real transformer, with unbalanced and non-linear
loads, presenting currents with high harmonic contents.
The results compared were in agreement even with ATP
transformer modeling, which includes the magnetic
characteristics, as with a real transformer used in a laboratory
experience. The waveforms of voltages (and of currents)
presented similar shapes and consequently similar amplitude
values, validating the new Pspice transformer modeling.
Therefore, the new proposed modeling becomes a
powerful tool for three-phase network simulations due to its
simplicity and accuracy, able to simulate and analyze
harmonic flow in three-phase systems under balanced and
unbalanced conditions.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The authors would like to thank to CNPq and CAPES for
supporting this work.

Phase c
Pspice
Measurement
Amp.
%
Amp.
%
[p.u]
Fund.
[p.u]
Fund.
3.125
100
3.359
100
2.191
70.1
2.417
72.0
0.203
6.50
0.217
6.45
0.988
31.6
1.026
30.5
0.561
17.9
0.666
19.8
0.327
10.5
0.358
10.6
0.194
6.22
0.221
6.59
0.050
1.59
0.065
1.93
0.098
3.13
0.081
2.42
0.128
4.08
0.106
3.17
0.076
2.43
0.073
2.16
0.029
0.92
0.017
0.52
0.047
1.50
0.044
1.31
0.038
1.22
0.048
1.41
0.020
0.63
0.030
0.91

Y. Wang, R. M. OConnell and G. Brownfield,

Modeling and prediction of distribution system voltage
distortion caused by nonlinear residential loads, in
IEEE Trans. on Power Delivery, vol. 16, no. 4, Oct.
2001, pp. 744-751.

[2] E. Thunberg and L. Sder, A Norton approach to

distribution network modeling for harmonic studies, in
IEEE Trans. on Power Delivery, vol. 14, no. 1, Jan.
1999, pp. 272-277.
[3] E. Thunberg and L. Sder, A harmonic Norton model
of a real distribution network, in Proceedings of the
1998 International Conference on Harmonics and
Quality of Power, 1998, pp. 279-284.
[4] C. A. Canesin, F. T. Wakabayashi, A. A. C. Figueiredo,
Model of / Three-Phase Distribution Transformer,
Suitable for Simulations in Pspice and Analyses of
Harmonic Currents, Considering Unbalanced Nonlinear
Loads, in VI IEEE INDUSCON, 2004, in CD Rom.
[5] C. A. Canesin, F. T. Wakabayashi, A. A. C. Figueiredo,
Simulation of three-phase distribution systems with
unbalanced nonlinear loads, using Pspice, in COBEPBrazilian Power Electronics Conference, 2005.

1271