×
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS

Log In

Come Join Us!

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips Forums!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!
  • Students Click Here

*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.

Students Click Here

Jobs

Zero-Sequence estimate: use Reactance or Impedance?

Zero-Sequence estimate: use Reactance or Impedance?

Zero-Sequence estimate: use Reactance or Impedance?

(OP)
We have formulas that estimate the zero-sequence impedance for CORE transformers based on the positive sequence values as follows:

2-winding: Z0 = Z1 x 0.90

3-winding: ZHL0 = 0.85 x ZHL1
                ZHT0 = 0.75 x ZHT1
                ZLT0 = 0.90 x ZLT1
 
Should it be the impedance that is used for the estimate in these equations, or should it actually be the reactance that is used?  My understanding is that the resistance values don't change.

RE: Zero-Sequence estimate: use Reactance or Impedance?

I would use whatever X/R ratio you have for the positive sequence as an approximation.

If you use only X, the calculated X/R ratio at the fault can be misleadingly high.  

RE: Zero-Sequence estimate: use Reactance or Impedance?

(OP)
Thx for the reply, dpc...

That's not what I meant, 'tho.  We do have calculations for the resistance... what I mean is, does the derating of the positive sequence values apply to the X or the Z.  That is, should the equations instead be:

2-winding: X0 = X1 x 0.90

3-winding: XHL0 = 0.85 x XHL1
                XHT0 = 0.75 x XHT1
                XLT0 = 0.90 x XLT1

It may seem insignificant, but we have some tight breaker duties..

thx...

RE: Zero-Sequence estimate: use Reactance or Impedance?

It's not really a "de-rating" -it's just a multiplier.  If you use the same X/R ratio, as I suggested, then you are scaling both the X and the R by the same amount.  I would not just scale the X.  

BTW - if your breaker duties are so close to the rating that this will make a difference, you've got problems.  Also, the three-phase fault duties are generally the worst-case for breaker ratings, at least in the ANSI C37 world.  C37 allows for more line-to-ground fault current than three-phase.  I think it's 15% more for the 5 cycle value.  


RE: Zero-Sequence estimate: use Reactance or Impedance?

(OP)
Thx!!

RE: Zero-Sequence estimate: use Reactance or Impedance?

I believe that for core form xfmrs, if you apply Vo to the wye side, the core tends toward saturation, and what you get what I have heard referred to as a "phantom" tertiary current path. The phantom teriary is actually an increase in excitation current flowing in just the wye winding. The R in this phantom tertiary is the R of just the secondary wye winding, as compared to R of normal through current and fault current that includes both the primary and secondary winding resistances. I do not know how X/R of the phantom tertiary, but it there is some resistance resistance, and is not a pure reactance. I think you should use the mulitplying factors on Z rather than X, unless of course I have missed something.

RE: Zero-Sequence estimate: use Reactance or Impedance?

(OP)

thank you both for your follow-ups...

Red Flag This Post

Please let us know here why this post is inappropriate. Reasons such as off-topic, duplicates, flames, illegal, vulgar, or students posting their homework.

Red Flag Submitted

Thank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts.
The Eng-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.

Reply To This Thread

Posting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members!


Resources