1

2006 IEEE PES Transmission and Distribution Conference and Exposition Latin America, Venezuela

Numeric Simulation of the Magnetic Flux in a

Power Transformer
J. A. Rojas, and J. R. Varela, Member, IEEE

2
’ u ((1 / P )’ u A ) Je  jZVA  Z A 1
where:

TABLE I
EQUATION VARIABLES

A: magnetic vector potential

V: electrical conductivity
Z: power frequency
P: permeability
Je : source current density
Index Terms—FEA, leakage flux, magnetic potential, open
circuit test, short circuit test.  jZA: induced current density
Z 2 A: displacement current density
I. INTRODUCTION
To undertake a study of this nature it should be carried out
T HE purpose of this work is validating a numeric model of
a real power transformer, by means of the Finite Element
Analysis application (FEA). Once the model is obtained
a nonlinear analysis for solving the differential equation (1).
B. Finite Element Analysis (FEA)
different studies could be carried out to predict the behavior of
The finite element analysis is a numerical technique for
the core for different operation conditions.
obtaining approximation solutions to boundary value
problems of mathematical physics. In this method, a physical
The applied methodology is based in the use of special
object is conceived as made up of a finite number of pieces,
software (FLUX2D) that solves problems of electromagnetic
each one of these can be analyzed for separate according to
fields in two dimensions based on the FEA. Previous
the physics laws. Therefore, each physical variable in the
simulations experience indicates that the software offers very
whole object can be expressed as a sum of finite elements and
approximate results compare to the experimental results of
each finite element represents the contribution of each one of
electromagnetic phenomena.
the pieces.
The application of the FEA gives a general equation of
The solution of the differential equation (1) by means of
easy application for the calculation of the magnetic potential
the method of finite element it is based mainly, in subdividing
in the transformer core and then by means of mathematical
the complicated field region into a uniform or non uniform
operators the different electric and magnetic variables are
number of elements which are connected via nodes in order to
calculated in the model. For the validation of the model both
define the properties of the materials of the region under
the obtained results from the simulations of the computational
study. The values of the excitement sources are then defined
model and the results obtained from the routine tests
as well as the boundary conditions. For the case in two
performed to the transformer at the factory were compared.
dimensions the boundary condition more used is the Dirichlet,
They were similar.
where the value of the variable taken in the boundary is
generally zero Weber. For this model it was taken as boundary
II. THEORETICAL FUNDAMENTS
the interior face of the tank.
A. Electromagnetic Field in Transformers
The matrix representation of each element and the potential
The electromagnetic fields inside the transformer are
in each element were calculated approximately by an
governed by the following nonlinear differential equation [2]:
interpolation function. Then, all the matrix representations of
the elements are assembled, completing the condition that the
potential is continuous among the adjacent elements. To
1-4244-0288-3/06/$20.00 ©2006 IEEE
 2

achieve this, matrix operations are applied. Fig. 2.

The approximate solution of the magnetic potential is Series

winding
obtained by the solution of the following matrix equation: Vacuum,oil

Common
SxA I 2  winding
Core
Regulating
winding
Where S is the complex matrix whose coefficients are
functions of the geometry of the region considered, material Tertiary
properties, boundary conditions and angular frequencies; I is winding Boundary

the currents vector and A is the magnetic potential vector.

Due to the magnetic characteristic of the core, the matrix

Fig. 2. Regions and mesh to the autotransformer model in FEA.
equation is non-linear, therefore, its solution is found by
means of iteratively methods.
For the characterization of the core material it was required
the use of special software FLUX2D. It allows introducing the
III. THEORETICAL FUNDAMENTS
magnetization characteristic in a manual way. The model
A. Transformer parameters allows defining in a quick and simple way the characteristic
The simulations were carried out on a single-phase power B-H of the ferromagnetic material. This model closely follows
autotransformer of three winding, 60 Hz whose rated the asymptotic approach of the saturation curve. The
characteristics are: mathematical formula used for this model is defined [4]:

» Rated power: 150 MVA, rated power 3th winding: 25 H  1  ( H  1) 2  4 * H * (1  a )

MVA. B( H ) P *H  J * a a a
3
0 S 2 * (1  a )
» Four coils: Series, Common, Tertiary, Regulating.
» Rated voltages: (400/ 3 ) / (230/ 3 ) +/- 7 x 1.143 % / 34.5
where:
kV.
Pr  1
» Three limbs core with the coils windings in the central Ha P0 * H *
JS
limbs.
JS : saturation flux density [Tesla]
The internal configuration of main winding of P r : initial permeability (Curve linear zone)
autotransformer is shown in the Fig. 1. P 0 : air permeability

a : adjust coefficient to the characteristic (0 y 0.5)

H1

X1 Y1
Series
winding

Tertiary
winding
Regulating
winding
Common
winding

Y2

H0X0

Fig. 1. Internal configuration of main winding of the power autotransformer.

B. Transformer model Fig. 3. Core magnetic characteristic (JS=2 Tesla, Pr =18000, a =0,2).

Once obtained the geometry of the transformer to be

studied the discretion of the domain in study should then be
carried out. In some cases due to the symmetry of the main
object it is recommended to represent a fraction of the
geometry, in this study, it was built only half of the core. See
To simulate the tests it was necessary to couple external
electric circuits to the model of finite elements of the
autotransformer. In this study circuits or circuits equations
were coupled to perform simulations. The model used to
simulate the windings of the transformer in the associate
 3

electric circuit was “Coil conductor” model. In this model the

induced currents are very small (worthless) [4].

IV. RESULTS

A. Results of the open circuit test simulation

The test simulation is used to verify the characteristic open
circuit curve of the autotransformer.

The excited winding was the tertiary winding (34.5 kV).

The electric circuit associated to the model of finite elements
is shown in the Fig. 4.

Fig. 6. Equipotential lines of magnetic flux in the open circuit test. (Voltage
source 34.5 kV, and phase angle 90º).
SOURCE:
SOURCE: Voltage a.c.
a.c.
Voltage:
Voltage: Parameter
Tertiary V rms The maximum value of magnetic flux in the core for the
winding test simulation obtained by the FLUX2D software is 1.14531
Turns:
Turns: 113
Resistance d.c.:
d.c.: Weber. This value compared to the calculated value of
0.021289 ohm 1.14606 Weber is very close with a percentage difference of
0,065%.between them.

Fig. 7 shows the flux density magnitude of 1.69 Tesla at

rated voltage in the central limb of the core for finite element
Fig. 4. Electric circuit for simulation of open circuit test. model. This value compared to the calculated value of 1.682
Tesla is very similar. The value of flux density given in the
Open circuit curve adjusted with Flux2D vs Open circuit curve after the
dielectric tests.
design review of the autotransformer is 1.689 Tesla.
50000

45000

40000

35000
Voltage (V r.m.s)

30000

FLUX2D Fabricante
Experimental
25000

20000

15000

10000

5000

0
0 10 20 30
Current (A r.m.s)

Fig. 5. Experimental open circuit characteristic curve vs. simulated curve in

FLUX2D.
Fig. 7. Maximum flux density in the central limb of the core for open circuit
test simulation.
Fig. 6 shows the distribution of the equipotential lines of
magnetic flux in the autotransformer core, for a voltage in the
tertiary of 34.5 kV and a phase angle of 90º. B. Results of the short circuit test simulation
The main reason for simulating the short circuit test was to
obtain the short circuit impedance, of the autotransformer, the
losses in the copper, the leakage reactance and to observe the
lines of leakage flux in the core. Electric circuits were
configured for the short circuit test likewise for open circuit
test. The different tests were:

Test # 1:

Source winding: H1-H0X0 (see internal configuration Fig.

1).
 4

Short circuit winding: X1-H0X0

Power base: 150 MVA TABLE V
LOSSES I2R TEST #1. TEMPERATURE: 28.5 º C
Voltage base: 400/ 3 kV
Test temperature: 28.5 ºC L osses I 2 R
L osses I 2 R D eviation
T ap (kV ) M anufacturer
FL U X2D (kW ) P ercentage
(kW )
Test # 2: 248.402 108.36 108.38 0.02 %

230.000 118.31 118.23 0.068 %

Source winding: H1-H0X0 (see internal configuration Fig.
211.598 152 151.46 0.36 %
1).
Short circuit winding: Y1-Y2
TABLE VI
Power base: 25 MVA LOSSES I2R TEST #2. TEMPERATURE: 28.5 º C
Voltage base: 400/ 3 kV
Test temperature: 28.5 ºC Losses I2R
Losses I2R Deviation
Tap (kV) Manufacturer
FLUX2D (kW) Percentage
(kW)
Test # 3: 400.000 15.44 15.43 0.065 %

Source winding: X1-H0X0 (see internal configuration Fig. TABLE VII

1). LOSSES I2R TEST #3. TEMPERATURE: 26.5 º C
Short circuit winding: Y1-Y2 Losses I2R
Power base: 25 MVA Losses I2R Deviation
Tap (kV) Manufacturer
FLUX2D (kW) Percentage
(kW)
Voltage base: 230/ 3 kV
248.402 17.91 17.91 0%
Test temperature: 26.5 ºC
230.000 18.86 18.86 0%

The results obtained in the simulations of short circuit test 211.598 20.59 20.57 0.097 %
are indicated on the following table:
Leakage Reactance:
Calculation of short circuit Impedance:
TABLE VIII
TABLE II LEAKAGE REACTANCE TEST #1
SHORT CIRCUIT IMPEDANCE TEST #1
Leakage Leakage Leakage
Zcc % Inductance Reactance Reactance Deviation
Zcc % FLUX2D Deviation Tap (kV)
Tap (kV) Manufacturer FLUX2D FLUX2D Manufacturer Percentage
a 28.5 ºC Percentage
28.5 ºC (Henry) (%) (%)
248.402 5.12 % 5.1 % 0.39 % 248.402 4.91264*10-2 5.2 % 5.12 % 1.56 %

230.000 4.78 % 4.84 % 1.25 % 230.000 4.56360*10-2 4.84 % 4.78 % 1.26 %

211.598 4.81 % 4.83 % 0.42 % 211.598 4.58403*10-2 4.86 % 4.81 % 1.04 %

TABLE III TABLE IX

SHORT CIRCUIT IMPEDANCE TEST #2 LEAKAGE REACTANCE TEST #2

Zcc % Leakage Leakage

Zcc % FLUX2D a Deviation Leakage
Tap (kV) Manufacturer Inductance Reactance Deviation
28.5 ºC Percentage Tap (kV) Reactance
28.5 ºC FLUX2D Manufacturer Percentage
FLUX2D (%)
(Henry) (%)
400.000 6.22 % 6.1 % 1.93 %
400.000 0.3452243 6.1 % 6.22 % 1.93 %

TABLE IV TABLE X
SHORT CIRCUIT IMPEDANCE TEST #3 LEAKAGE REACTANCE TEST #2

Zcc % Leakage Leakage

Zcc % FLUX2D a Deviation Leakage
Tap (kV) Manufacturer
26.5 ºC Percentage
Inductance Reactance Deviation
26.5 ºC Tap (kV) Reactance
FLUX2D Manufacturer Percentage
FLUX2D (%)
248.402 5.19 % 5.05 % 2.70 %
(Henry) (%)
248.402 0.1020687 5.46 % 5.19 % 5.20 %
230.000 5.28 % 5.1 % 3.41 %
230.000 9.5370*10-2 5.1 % 5.28 % 3.41 %
211.598 5.38 % 5.19 % 3.53 %
211.598 9.5074*10-2 5.08 % 5.38 % 5.57 %

The distribution of the Leakage flux in the core of the

Losses in the Copper (I2R):
autotransformer is also obtained from the test simulation. Fig.
 5

8 and Fig. 9 show the equipotential lines of flux that link the VI. APPENDIX
series and common windings (leakage flux). Complementary figures:

Fig. 8. Leakage flux. Source winding: H1-H0X0, Short circuit winding: X1-
H0X0, rated tap, Phase angle 0º. Fig. 10. Definition of “Grid” or mesh used to obtain the flux density and
magnetic variables in the core.

Fig. 9. Leakage flux. Source winding: H1-H0X0, Short circuit winding: X1-
H0X0, rated tap, Phase angle 90º.

V. CONCLUSIONS Fig. 11. Magnitude of field in the central limb of core, phase angle of 90º,
simulation of open circuit test.
The digital model of the power autotransformer is validated
comparing the results of the simulations between short circuit
and open circuit tests using the technique of the finite element, Permeability
with the practical results of these tests obtained from the
routine test performed to the transformer at factory by the
manufacturer. The distribution of the lines of magnetic flux in
the core was obtained for each case.

The differences observed in the simulation of the open

circuit test regarding the main reference is mainly to the fact
that in a two (2) dimensions study it is not possible to
represent exactly the yokes and the lateral limb for this type of
autotransformer (core type). As a result of this limitation the
density of flux is not constant in whole core. Fig. 12. Permeability in the central limb of core, phase angle 90º, simulation
of open circuit test.
The results obtained in the short circuit test are very close
to the values taken as reference; this is due to the similarity of VII. ACKNOWLEDGMENT
the geometrical model of the winding and the central limb To CIAP. This work was performed at its facilities
with the real geometry of the autotransformer. including the use of all its resources. Also to the Engineers
Cesar Pernalete and Omar Rojas for their support, and to the
It is recommended to perform these studies, with a tool that Engineer José Luís Lucena, professor of the Electrical
allow building the geometry of the transformer in three engineering department of the UNEXPO Vice-rectorado
dimensions. This will allow comparing between the results Barquisimeto.
obtained in the study in two dimensions (2D) with that
obtained in three dimensions (3D).
 6

VIII. REFERENCES
[1] H. Estévez and Alexander Millan. "Determinación de los parámetros de
las máquinas sincrónicas de polos salientes del proyecto hidroeléctrico
Caruachi mediante el método de elemento finito" presented at the 2nd
Journey of electric enginneering, Puerto Ordaz, Venezuela, 2003.
[2] H. Wang, K. Butler. “Finite Element Analysis of Internal Winding Faults
in Distribution Transformers”. IEEE Transactions On Power Delivery,
Vol 16, No. 3, p 422. 2001.
[3] W. Kaplan. “Matemática avanzada para estudiantes de ingeniería”.
Massachusetts, 1981.
[4] FLUX2D, “User’s Guide Version 7.3x”. Magsoft, USA. 1998. p 159.

IX. BIOGRAPHIES

Jairo Rafael Varela Mendoza, was born in San

Cristóbal, Táchira state, Venezuela, 8th the
September of 1958. Graduated as Electrical Engineer
and Master of Science in Engineering of Electric
systems, Summa Cum Laude, at the Polytechnic
Institute of Donetsk, Ukraine, in 1986. He has
worked for CVG Electrificación del Caroní
(EDELCA) since 1987. At the moment, he works as
expert in transformers in the Center of Applied
Research of EDELCA.

José Antonio Rojas Pernalete, was born in

Barquisimeto, Lara state, Venezuela, 1th the
November of 1980. Graduate as Electrical Engineer,
in the Universidad Nacional Experimental
Politecnica “Antonio José de Sucre” of
Barquisimeto, Venezuela, in 2004. He has worked
for CVG Electrification of the Caroní (EDELCA)
since 2004. At the moment, he works as Engineer of
Investigation and Tests in the Center of Applied
Research of EDELCA.