1

Abstract-- Three-phase transformer models in EMTP-like

programs have been usually carry out through an association of
three single-phase transformers, without taking into
consideration the magnetic coupling between phases produced by
the yokes of the transformer ferromagnetic core. It has been
found, however, that this magnetic coupling is essential when
power system unbalanced phenomena are to be studied. In this
paper it is shown the simulation results of a comparative
investigation between two three-phase transformer models: one
represented by a bank of three single-phase transformers (no
magnetic coupling) and one that considers the magnetic coupling
between phases. Various situations of system imbalance are
simulated and discussed.

Index TermsMagnetic coupling; Three-phase transformer
modeling; Unbalanced system supply; Alternative Transient
Program; Transformer inrush; Unbalanced short-circuit
I. INTRODUCTION
he ATP (Alternative Transient Program) has became a
worldwide tool for studying electromagnetic transients in
power systems. Several mathematical models of electric
equipment have been developed to use in this program, most
of them can be found in the specialized literature.
Careful should be taken when choosing models to be used
in power system studies so the simulation results may not be
considered satisfactory. Appropriated models should be
chosen with base in the phenomena that will be investigated.
With respect to the representation of three-phase power
transformers, the great majority of the studies is usually
carried out using an association of three single-phase
transformers to compose the three-phase unit. This
arrangement is usually justified due to the difficulty to get the
necessary design data of the transformer to model it
appropriately. Unfortunately, this representation does not take
into account the strong magnetic coupling between phases
produced by the yokes ferromagnetic core in a three-phase
transformer. This coupling, however, plays a crucial role in
some kind of power system studies, mainly those in which
unbalanced phenomena are to be investigated.

H. S. Bronzeado is engineer in Companhia Hidro Eltrica do So

Francisco CHESF, Recife/PE/Brazil. (e-mail: hebron@chesf.gov.br e
bronzeado@ieee.org)
E. Saraiva is student of doctored in College of Electric Engineering of the
Universidade Federal de Uberlndia, Uberlndia/MG. (e-mail:
elise.saraiva@yahoo.com.br)
M. L. R. Chaves is teacher in College of Electric Engineering of the
Universidade Federal de Uberlndia, Uberlndia/MG. (e-mail: lynce@ufu.br)
In this paper it will be presented the simulation results of a
comparative investigation between two three-phase transformer
models: one represented by a bank of three single-phase transformers,
with no magnetic coupling between phases (Model 1), and one
considering this magnetic coupling produced by the yokes of a three-
limb ferromagnetic core (Model 2). Several simulations were
carried out with both models, including unbalanced supply,
unbalanced short-circuits and inrush transients.
II. ELECTRIC SYSTEM STUDIED
Fig. 1 shows the schematic diagram of the electric system
studied. The simulations were carried out with the program
ATP in the mode ATPDraw, using both transformer models
(with and without the magnetic coupling between phases) run
at the same time. The system voltage source is three-phase
source and nominal voltage of 230 kV. The electric system
equivalent is represented by a series inductance representing
systems with 1,000 MVA of short-circuit level. The series
resistance is set to 10% of the inductance. The load fed by the
transformers is a 50 MVA three-phase load with power factor
of 0.8 inductive and star-grounded connected.
The short-circuit simulations are carried out with the
transformer operating in steady state and the fault being
applied by inserting a resistance of 10 between phase-to-
ground, The blocks "RLC" are electric circuits of high
impedance used to reduce the numeric instabilities.



Fig. 1. Schematic diagram of the electric power system studied.

The parameter calculations for the two transformer models
were carried out in a way so that both models could represent
essentially the same three-phase transformer. i.e., they should
present the similar characteristics of sequence zero and in
short-circuit impedances, just differing for the detail of the
magnetic coupling between phases.
A comparative investigation on three-phase
transformers modeling with and without
magnetic coupling between phases

H. S. Bronzeado, CHESF; E. Saraiva, UFU; M. L. R. Chaves, UFU, and J. C. de Oliveira, UFU
T
2

The parameters of the transformer models were based on
the design data of a 100 MVA; 230/138 kV three-phase
transformer with both high and low voltage windings
connected in star-grounded. The values of the short-circuit
impedance, as well as of the sequence zero impedance were
around 10% (nominal base). The hysteresis cycle was
assumed to have 50% of iron losses.
III. SIMULATION RESULTS
Various system conditions were simulated using both
transformer models, with the results being compared. The
following situations were simulated:
No-loaded and loaded transformer fed by a unbalanced
supply (one-phase and two-phase supply);
No-loaded Transformer in steady state fed by a balanced
electric system under unbalanced short-circuit;
No-loaded transformer during inrush transients.
A. No-loaded and loaded transformer fed by a unbalanced
supply (one-phase and two-phase supply)
These simulations were carried out with the transformer
models being fed by only one phase, or two phases of the
electric power system. It were considered the cases with no-
loaded transformer and also with the transformer feeding a
three-phase balanced load star-grounded connected.
1) Case SN-1A, no-loaded transformer fed by only one
phase (phase A, associated to the lateral column of the
ferromagnetic core)

(f ile REGIME_YY_FASEA_27_02_08. pl4; x-v ar t) v : BANCFA v :BANCFB v :BANCFC
0,04 0,05 0,06 0,07 0,08 0,09 0,10
[s]
-200
-150
-100
-50
0
50
100
150
200
[kV]

a) Model 1 - Without magnetic coupling.
(f ile REGIME_YY_FASEA_27_02_08.pl4; x-v ar t) v :3COLFA v :3COLFB v :3COLFC
0,04 0,05 0,06 0,07 0,08 0,09 0,10
[s]
-200
-150
-100
-50
0
50
100
150
200
[kV]

b) Model 2 - With magnetic coupling

Fig. 2. Voltage in the primary windings of the transformer models- Case
SN-1A

Fig. 2 shows the waveforms of the voltages obtained in the
primary windings of the two transformer models when fed by
only the phase (A) associated to the winding of the lateral
column of the three-limbed ferromagnetic core. As expected,
a significant difference between the waveforms produced by
the models can be observed. In the Model 2 (with magnetic
coupling) induced voltages appears in the phases B and C
terminals, while in the Model 1 (without magnetic coupling)
there is no induced voltage in those phases. The secundary
voltages in the two models have the same behavior of the
primary voltages.
It can be observed that the induced voltage in the phase C
(Model 2) is smaller than that in the phase B. This happens
because the magnetic path length between the phases A
(where the magneticmotriz source is applied lateral column)
and phase C (the other lateral column) is longer than the
magnetic pathlength between phases A and B (central
column).
2) Case SN-1B, no-loaded transformer fed by only one
phase (phase Bassociated with the central column of the
ferromagnetic core)
This case is similar to the previous one (SN-1A), only
differentiating by the feeding phase that now is phase B,
which is associated to the winding of the central column of the
ferromagnetic.
Fig. 3 shows the voltage in the primary winding of the
Model 2. The voltage in the winding in the Model 1 is not
shown because it has similar behavior to the of the previous
case (Fig. 2a).

(f ile REGIME_YY_FASEB_27_02_08.pl4; x-v ar t) v :3COLFA v :3COLFB v :3COLFC
0,04 0,05 0,06 0,07 0,08 0,09 0,10
[s]
-200
-150
-100
-50
0
50
100
150
200
[kV]

Model 2 - With magnetic coupling

Fig. 3. Voltage in the primary windings of Model 2 - Case SN-1B

It is observed from Fig. 3b that the induced voltages in
phases A and C (Model 2) present the same magnitude and
waveshape. This happens because the magnetic path lengths
between phases B (where the magnetigmotriz source is
applied) and A, and phases B and C are the same, with the
magnetic flux being divideded equally into these magnetic
paths.

3

3) Case SN-2AB, no-loaded transformer fed by phases A
and B together.

(f ile REGIME_YY_FASEAB_27_02_08. pl4; x-v ar t) v : BANCFA v : BANCFB v :BANCFC
0,04 0,05 0,06 0,07 0,08 0,09 0,10
[s]
-200
-150
-100
-50
0
50
100
150
200
[kV]

a) Model 1 - Without magnetic coupling
(f ile REGIME_YY_FASEAB_27_02_08. pl4; x-v ar t) v : 3COLFA v : 3COLFB v : 3COLFC
0,04 0,05 0,06 0,07 0,08 0,09 0,10
[s]
-200
-150
-100
-50
0
50
100
150
200
[kV]

b) Model 2 - With magnetic coupling

Fig. 4. Voltage in the primary winding of the Models 1 and I Model 2 -
CaseSN-2AB
Fig. 4 shows the voltage in the primary winding of Model 1
and Model 2. It can be observed Fig. 4b that the induced
voltage in phase C (Model 2) is complete, with all the (three)
voltages in the primary winding (and also in the secondary
winding) being balanced. In the Model 1, as expected, there
is no induced voltage in phase C (Fig. 4a). Only the voltages
in the winding of phases A and B fed by the source are shown.
4) Case SL-1A, loaded transformer fed byonly one phase
(A).
In this case the transformer is fed only by one phase (A),
with a balanced three-phase load being inserted in the
tranformador secondary windings through the simultaneous
closing of a thre-phase switching. Fig. 5 showsthe voltages
and currents in the primary and secondary windings in the two
transformer models.
It can be observed from Fig. 5 that in both transformer
models the voltage of phase A, which is the voltage of the
supply system, remains unaffected with the load connection.
However, the induced voltages in phases B and C of Model 2
change when the load is inserted, becoming voltages of the
same magnitude and phase. The currents in phases B and C in
the secondary windings of Model 2 (see Fig. 5e) also have the
same magnitude and phase angle, being displaced 180 degrees
in relation to current in the phase A. In the Model 1, there are
no voltage induced in phases B and C and, therefore, there are
not currents in those winding.


(f ile REGIME_YY_FASEA_CARGA_27_02_08.pl4; x-v ar t ) v :BANCFA v :BANCFB v :BANCFC
0,04 0,05 0,06 0,07 0,08 0,09 0,10
[s]
-200
-150
-100
-50
0
50
100
150
200
[kV]

a) Voltage in the primary windings ( Model 1)
(f ile REGIME_YY_FASEA_CARGA_27_02_08.pl4; x-v ar t ) v :3COLFA v : 3COLFB v :3COLFC
0,04 0,05 0,06 0,07 0,08 0,09 0,10
[s]
-200
-150
-100
-50
0
50
100
150
200
[kV]

b) Voltage in the primary windings (Model 2)
(f ile REGIME_YY_FASEA_CARGA_27_02_08.pl4; x-v ar t) c:FONT1A-BANCFA c:FONT1B-BANCFB
c: FONT1C-BANCFC
0,04 0,05 0,06 0,07 0,08 0,09 0,10
[s]
-300
-200
-100
0
100
200
300
[A]

c) Current in the primary windings (Model 1)
(f ile REGI ME_YY_FASEA_CARGA_27_02_08.pl4; x-v ar t ) c:FONT2A-3COLFA c: FONT2B-3COLFB
c: FONT2C-3COLFC
0,04 0,05 0,06 0,07 0,08 0,09 0,10
[s]
-300
-200
-100
0
100
200
300
[A]

d) Current in the primary windings (Model 2)
(f ile REGI ME_YY_FASEA_CARGA_27_02_08. pl4; x-v ar t ) c:BT_3CA-CAR3CA c: BT_3CB-CAR3CB
c: BT_3CC-CAR3CC
0,04 0,05 0,06 0,07 0,08 0,09 0,10
[s]
-300
-200
-100
0
100
200
300
[A]

e) Current in the primary windings (Model 2)

Fig. 5. Voltage and current in the primary and secondary windings of the
Model 1 and Model 2 Case SL-1A, loaded transformer.

4

5) Case SL-2AB, loaded transformer, fed by phases A and
B together

(f ile REGI ME_YY_FASEAB_CARGA_27_02_08. pl4; x-v ar t ) v :3COLFA v : 3COLFB v : 3COLFC
0,04 0,05 0,06 0,07 0,08 0,09 0,10
[s]
-200
-150
-100
-50
0
50
100
150
200
[kV]

a) Voltage in the primary windings (Model 2)

(f ile REGIME_YY_FASEAB_CARGA_27_02_08.pl4; x-v ar t) c:FONT2A-3COLFA c:FONT2B-3COLFB
c: FONT2C-3COLFC
0,04 0,05 0,06 0,07 0,08 0,09 0,10
[s]
-300
-200
-100
0
100
200
300
[A]

b) Current in the primary windings (Model 2)

(f ile REGIME_YY_FASEAB_CARGA_27_02_08.pl4; x-v ar t) c:BT_3CA-CAR3CA c: BT_3CB-CAR3CB
c:BT_3CC-CAR3CC
0,04 0,05 0,06 0,07 0,08 0,09 0,10
[s]
-300
-200
-100
0
100
200
300
[A]

c) Current in the secondary windings (Model 2)

Fig. 6. Voltages and currents in primary and secondary windings (Model 2)
Case SL-2AB, loaded transformer

In this case, the transformer is fed by phases A and B, and
the three-phase balanced load is inserted after 50 ms from the
simulation begining through the simultaneous a three-phase
switching. Fig. 6 shows the voltages in the primary windings
and of the currents in the primary and secondary windings in
Model 2.The voltages and currents in Model 1 are not shown
as they have a trivial behavior, only existing in the winding
that are fed by the system (phases A and B). This means that
a part of the load (phase C) will not be supplied when this
model is used. This is not what happens in reality.
However,in the Model 2 all three voltages exist, with that
of phase C being an induced voltage. In this case, the load is
supplied by unbalanced voltages, with the currents being also
unbalanced.


B. Short-circuit to ground applied between the voltage
source and the transformer
The behavior of the transformer models was also
investigated with the power system under unbalanced faults
applied in the supply system between the voltage source and
the transformer. The faults were phase A-to-ground, phase B-
to-ground and phases A-B-to-ground.
In all these cases it can be seen that the Model 1 does not
feed faults through the transformer windings. Conversely, it is
observed that the Model 2 fed a part of the short-circuit
currents through the transformer windings. These currents are
shown in Fig. 7 (case of a fault between phase A-to-ground).
As it can be noted, these currents have the characteristics of
sequence zero currents, flowing in the neutral of the
transformer.
As the current behaviors in another short-circuit
simulations are very close to that shown in Fig. 7. It is
important to point out that these currents may cause
undesirable operations of transformer differential protection,
unless they are filtered.

(f ile CC_YY_AT_27_02_08.pl4; x-v ar t) c:FONT2A-3COLFA c:FONT2B-3COLFB c:FONT2C-3COLFC
0,04 0,05 0,06 0,07 0,08 0,09 0,10
[s]
-1500
-1000
-500
0
500
1000
1500
[A]


Fig. 7. Primary winding currents in Model 2 Phase A-to-ground short-
circuit between the voltage source and the transformer.


C. Transformer transient inrush
Several simulations of transformer energizing were carried
out by using both models with and without the presence of the
residual flux in the transformer core. The transformer
energizing was always performed through the primary
windings (high voltage). In the simulations with the
simultaneous energizing of the three phases, the switch poles
were closing 50 ms from the simulation beginning. . In the
non simultaneous energizing, the first pole is closed 50 ms
after the beginning and the other poles are closed after 2 ms of
the previous pole closing. For instance, first pole (phase A)
closed at 50 ms, then the phase B will be closed at 52 ms and
the phase C at 54 ms.
1) Case 1 - TR0-SIM-A, simultaneous transformer
energizing with residual flux equal to zero.
In this case, the energizing of the transformer primary
windings were realized simultaneously, when the voltage in
phase A was passing through zero going positive. Fig. 8
5

shows the currents in the both transformer models. As the
residual flux was zero and the energizing was done at phase A
zero crossing, the current in this phase will presented the
highest peak values.
It is important to note that the currents in Model 2 interact
to each other. This may reduce the peak value of the inrush
currents. In Model 1, a total independence is observed among
the currents, with the peaks of the inrush currents being higher
than those in Model 2.

(f ile ENERGIZACAO_YY_1_27_02_08.pl4; x-v ar t) c:FONT1A-BANCFA c:FONT1B-BANCFB
c:FONT1C-BANCFC
0,05 0,06 0,07 0,08 0,09 0,10 0,11
[s]
-1800
-1200
-600
0
600
1200
1800
[A]

a) Model 1 - Without magnetic coupling

(f ile ENERGI ZACAO_YY_1_27_02_08. pl4; x-v ar t ) c: FONT2A-3COLFA c: FONT2B-3COLFB c: FONT2C-3COLFC
0,05 0,06 0,07 0,08 0,09 0,10 0,11
[s]
-1800
-1200
-600
0
600
1200
1800
[A]

b) Model 2 - With magnetic coupling

Fig. 8. Current in the primary windings of Model 1 and Model 2
Case 1 - TR0-SIM-A

2) Case 2 - TR0-NSIM-A, non-simultaneous transformer
energizing, residual flux equal to zero
This case differs from the previous one just for the times of
closing phases B and C, which now do not close
simultaneously with phase A. Fig. 9 shows the currents in
both transformer models. It should be noted that the current
peaks in the phase A in the two models remain basically with
the same values as the energizing was done basically at the
same conditions (zero crossing of phase A voltage and
residual flux equal to zero).
(f ile ENERGIZACAO_YY_2_27_02_08.pl4; x-v ar t) c:FONT1A-BANCFA c: FONT1B-BANCFB
c:FONT1C-BANCFC
0,05 0,06 0,07 0,08 0,09 0,10 0,11
[s]
-2000
-1500
-1000
-500
0
500
1000
1500
2000
[A]

a) Model 1 - Without magnetic coupling

(f ile ENERGIZACAO_YY_2_27_02_08.pl4; x-v ar t) c:FONT2A-3COLFA c:FONT2B-3COLFB c:FONT2C-3COLFC
0,05 0,06 0,07 0,08 0,09 0,10 0,11
[s]
-2000
-1500
-1000
-500
0
500
1000
1500
2000
[A]

b) Model 2 - With magnetic coupling

Fig. 9. Current in the primary windings of Model 1 and Model 2
Case 2 TR0-NSIM-A
3) Case 3 - TR0-NSIM-A, non-simultaneous
transformer energizing, residual flux different from zero
(f ile ENERGIZACAO_YY_6_27_02_08.pl4; x-v ar t) c:FONT1A-BANCFA c:FONT1B-BANCFB
c:FONT1C-BANCFC
0,05 0,06 0,07 0,08 0,09 0,10 0,11
[s]
-3000
-2000
-1000
0
1000
2000
3000
[A]

a) Model 1 - Without magnetic coupling

(f ile ENERGIZACAO_YY_6_27_02_08.pl4; x-v ar t) c:FONT2A-3COLFA c:FONT2B-3COLFB c:FONT2C-3COLFC
0,05 0,06 0,07 0,08 0,09 0,10 0,11
[s]
-3000
-2000
-1000
0
1000
2000
3000
[A]

b) Model 2 - With magnetic coupling

Fig. 10. Current in the primary windings of Model 1 and Model 2
Case 3 - TR0-NSIM-A
6

It is important to point out that the value of the residual flux
in the transformer models with magnetic coupling between
phases has only sense before closing of the first pole of the
switch as the magnetic interaction between phases modifies
the initial value of the residual flux in the other phases. In the
models without the magnetic coupling this does not happen,
with the initial residual flux in each phase remaining until the
switch pole of the associated winding is closed.
IV. CONCLUSIONS
This paper has shown the results of a comparative study of
two types of representations of three-phase transformers with
and without the magnetic coupling between phases...
With base in the simulation results of a 100 MVA, 230/138
kV three-phase transformer with both high and low voltage
windings being connected in star-ground, it was found that the
magnetic coupling between phases is of fundamental
importance in the representation of three-phases transformers,
mainly if unbalanced phenomena in power systems are to be
investigated.
It was also found that in short-circuit simulations involving
phase-to-ground, the model without magnetic coupling is
completely inadequate and has presenting false results.
With respect to the inrush simulations, in general, the
model without the magnetic coupling between phases
presented inrush current peaks higher than those obtained with
the model with magnetic coupling. This may generate
operational restrictions in the critical cases.
The lower inrush currents in the model with magnetic
coupling between phases may happen due to the interaction
produced by this coupling which helps to demagnetize in
someway the ferromagnetic core.
The magnetic coupling between phases investigated in this
work represents the effect of the yokes of the three-limbed
ferromagnetic core of a three-phase transformer. This core
type produces an effect equivalent to virtual transformer
tertiary windings connected in delta.
V. REFERENCES
[1] SARAIVA, E., CHAVES, M. L. R. e BRONZEADO, H.
Methodology proposal to implement in the ATP program the hysteresis
cycle in a three-phase transformer model, (in Portuguese), XVIII
SNPTEE, Curitiba 2005.
[2] Chesf R&D Project (CHESF /FAU /UFU) Controlled switching of
three-phase power transformers, (in Portuguese); Chesf, 2002-2004.
[3] YACAMINI, R. and BRONZEADO, H. Transformer inrush
calculation using a coupled electromagnetic model, IEE Proc. Sci.
Meas. Technol., V.141, no 6, November/1994.
[4] CHERRY, E. C. The Duality Between Interlinked Electric and
Magnetic Circuits and the Formation of Transformer Equivalent
Circuits, Proc. Of the Physical Society, V. (B) 62, pgs 101-111,
February/1949.
[5] SARAIVA, E. Three-limbed transformer modeling base on the
magnetic flux distribution in the core, considering the effect of
hysteresis cycle (in Portuguese), MSc Thesis - UFU - Uberlndia -
2004.
[6] ENRIGHT, W. O. B., NAYAK; G. D., IRWIN; J. ARRILAGA - An
Electromagnetic Transients Model Transformers Using Normalized Core
Concept, International Conference on Power Systems Transients
(IPST97), Seattle, June 22-26, 1997, pp. 93-
VI. BIOGRAPHIES
Herivelto de Souza Bronzeado
Born in Remgio, PB, on April 2, 1952. MSc (1993)
University of Aberdeen, Scotland and Graduation
(1975) UFCG (old UFPB), Campina Grande, PB.
Company: Compania Hidro eltrica do So
Francisco - CHESF since 1975.
Engineer of the area of quality of the electric power
and manager of Projects of P&D of CHESF.
Coordinator of the Committee of Estudos C4 of
Cigr-Brazil and of the Captulo PES/IAS/PELS,
Northeast 1, of IEEE.

Elise Saraiva
Born in Uberlndia, MG, on November 19, 1976.
Master's degree (2004): UFU Uberlndia-MG and
Graduation in Electric Engineering (2001): UFU
Uberlndia-MG. Now it is student of doctorate for
the Universidade Federal de Uberlndia - UFU.





Marcelo Lynce Ribeiro Chaves
Born in Ituiutaba, MG, on October 03, 1951.
Doctorate (1995): Unicamp Campinas SP; Master's
degree (1985): UFU Uberlndia-MG and Graduation
in Electric Engineering (1975): UFU Uberlndia-MG
Company: Universidade Federal de Uberlndia -
UFU.