4th GCC CIGRE International Conference, Manama (Bahrain), 10.-12.11.

2008 Conference Proceedings Report 06

INSTRUMENT TRANSFORMER DIMENSIONING: PAST AND FUTURE

J. JAEGER
UNIVERSITY OF ERLANGEN GERMANY

A. BACHRY, D. BRAISCH, R. KREBS

SIEMENS AG GERMANY

Keywords: instrument transformers, current and potential transformer dimensioning, power system protection, secondary engineering, protection coordination

necessity of the new perspective for the instrument transformer dimensioning is accentuated.

1 Introduction
As the development of digital measurement and protection equipment has progressed over the last years, the criteria used for sizing the necessary instrument transformers have changed as well. Whereas in the past, due to the high burden of electromechanical relays, it was the rated power of the current transformers (CT) and potential transformers (PT) that was the crucial parameter. Nowadays, it is the transient performance of instrument transformers that has gradually become the over-riding influence within the digital world of relays, measuring and controlling devices. Firstly, due to paradigm change in the technology of the power system substations the traditional usage of high VA-rated instrument transformers can become even dangerous both for themselves and for the secondary circuits and equipment connected to them. Secondly, the reduction of the switchgear dimensions, especially Gas Insulated Switchgear (GIS), leads to a reduction of the available instrument transformer compartments. That is the reason why the volume of the instrument transformers have to be optimized and adapted to the actual needs of modern measurement and protection equipment connected to them. This paper shows in structured form the state-of-the-art of the instrument transformer dimensioning. Thereby the physical behaviour and the standards regarding instrument transformers are shortly discussed and the

2 Current Behaviour

Transformers

Physical

In order to understand the standards and give a background to them the physical behaviour of the current transformer must be shortly mentioned at first. The most important is the fact that a CT due to its physics always tries to draw such a secondary current Is through its secondary circuit that equalizes the magnetic flux p or induction Bp excited by the primary current Ip (Figure 1). It means that each current transformer is forced to introduce such a secondary current Is so that the secondary magnetic flux s. linked with it equalizes at every point of time the primary flux p.

Figure 1: Simplified equivalent of an ideal CT

Siemens AG, Energy Sector, Power Technologies International, Freyeslebenstrasse. 1, 91058 Erlangen, Germany

The primary core flux for sinusoidal quantities is given by eqation (1): Ip p = w p 0 r AFe (1) l Fe and the secondary core flux by eq. (2) respectively: I s = ws 0 r s AFe (2) l Fe with

= B AFe (3) where B is magnetic flux density, AFe is the core crosssectional area, lFe is the mean length of magnetic path and wp, ws are the number of primary and secondary windings, respectively. For ideal conditions as shown simplified in Figure 1, where winding resistance and leakage flux were totally neglected, one can write the equation for the core flux: p s = m = 0 or : p / s = 1 (4) Considering the relation in eq. (4) and using eq. (1) and eq. (2) one can write the following relation:
Ip Is = ws wp

the higher the primary current, the higher voltage must be induced to allow the secondary current flow. In practice the construction of the CT for a simple design is close to the one presented in Figure 2, where the primary conductor is going symmetrically through the iron core. On this iron core there are windings wounded symmetrically over the core that build secondary winding of such CT-core. For the comparison to the simplified CT equivalent in Figure 1 the length of magnetic path lFe and the core cross-sectional area AFe are shown in Figure 2, correspondingly. The inductance of such CT can be described A L = 0 r ( H ) ws 2 Fe (9) l Fe where 0 is the absolute permeability = 4 10-7 H/m and r is the relative permeability of the material used. In case of iron, r is a non-linear function of the magnetic field H and varies usually between 1000 and 50000.

(5)

which describes the law of Ampere-turn balance and is the basics of the whole CT performance [1]. That means that no magnetizing flux m is inside of an ideal CT core, or, in other words, ideal working-conditions for a CT are given when its core is fully balanced and no magnetic flux is present. In reality, there are no ideal conditions as described above. There exists always some secondary burden as resistance or impedance, e.g. at least the inner secondary winding burden, which causes a voltage drop in the secondary circuit. Thereby, the total linked flux (coil flux) relevant in the secondary circuit is m, s = ws m = ws Bm AFe (6) where the inner induced voltage on the secondary CT side equals to: d m, s dBm (7) Um = dt dt The magnetizing curve measured from the secondary side in steady-state conditions usually with RMS values describes the non-linear magnetic characteristic (eq.(8) and Figure 4) of the iron core on the shunt inductance L. U m = f (I m ) (8) Practically, the current transformer during its duty of core-balancing by drawing the secondary current through the secondary circuit always has to overcome a couple of burden. In other words it is forced to magnetize itself (i.e. the magnetizing flux in the core m0) to produce such a voltage (on the inductance L) that draws the secondary ampere-turns current which equalizes the ampere-turns of primary current. Such burden for the CT are internal impedance of the secondary winding and the total impedance that is connected to its secondary clamps (i.e. wire and instrument burden). Thereby, the higher the burden or

Figure 2: Typical design of CT within GIS switchgear At this stage, for the simplicity, the influence of leakage inductance as well as the inductance of the secondary wires and the inductance of the input burden of the instrument/relay are neglected. The first assumption cannot be made if for example the distance between primary winding and core is high and the primary winding has unsymmetrical layout with respect to the core or there exists close proximity to return or neighbouring conductors. All those issues will be treated in foregoing papers and are mentioned here only for the sake of completeness. For almost all practical purposes the performance of CT can be described by its simplified equivalent circuit shown in Figure 3.

Ip
primary clamps

Ip
Kn Kn

Is

Rct

Is
secondary clamps

Im
L
U m (Im )

Rb

connected burden

Figure 3: Simplified equivalent circuit of a CT

The current ratio Kn of the CT is the ratio of primary Ipn and secondary Isn nominal currents: Kn = Ipn /Isn. This is symbolized in Figure 3 by the ideal transformer. The nonlinear magnetic characteristic of the iron core is described by the shunt inductance L on the electrical side. The typical magnetizing curve Um (Im) of this shunt inductance L is shown in Figure 4. Before the secondary current reaches the CT secondary clamps and the connected burden it passes the internal resistance Rct.(so called: internal CT burden).

magnetizing current may be required to ensure enough fault sensitivity, for example: I knee I m, max (11) More detailed information about practical hints how to proceed with CT dimensioning within IEC class PX (BS X) will follow in the next papers. At this stage the dimensioning process of the current transofrmer can be finished. So that at least the following main physical data of the equivalent circuit must be given on the rating plate: Ipn, Isn ,Uknee, Iknee, and Rct. 3.2 IEC protective class P and IEC measuring class The CT description within IEC class P standard is a little bit different. The retrospective look to the past generation of the secondary protection and measuring equipment used within power systems brings more light to the idea behind the nameplate parameters of the IEC class P CTs. Namely, those devices had much more burdens than nowadays. It was necessary to feed the secondary equipment with sufficient power in order to generate enough electromagnetic force that moves the elements (moving-iron or moving-coil) inside electromechanical relays. Therefore, usage of higher secondary current was indispensable. So CTs with 5A nominal current have been used for many decades. During development process of the electromechanical relays-technology the hunger for VAs was a little bit reduced so that also CT with 1A nominal secondary current appeared. Nevertheless, in the past the CTs were used to feed protection cubicles full with electromechanical relays and therefore burden was the useful term used in the CT nomenclature, however, physically, it is the impedance (when cos <0.8) or resistance that should be mentioned for simplicity. One should note that the following relation is essential: (12) Sb = Rb Isn2, which implies that 30VA for a 5A CT equals to 1.2 , and for a 1A CT equals to 30 . Summarizing, for the CT nameplate the straight-forward idea was to put there such nominal power Sbn that will be needed to feed typical protection cubicle and in addition to provide information about some multiple of the nominal current that CT will be able to transform without too high current error (which is described by the CT error class) due to excessive saturation. In this way on the nameplate of IEC class P the following parameter have to be specified: Ipn, Isn ,Ksscn, and Sbn. , where
K sccn = I psc I pn

3 Standards for Current Transformers

Starting the discussion of the international standards describing CTs it is worthy to discuss at first IEC class PX standard [2], former British Standard (BS) class X, since it is defined very close to the physical description presented above. 3.1 IEC protective class PX Within this standard a characteristic knee point on the magnetizing curve is defined, where a voltage rise by 10% leads to a current rise of 50% (Figure 4). This knee point voltage and the corresponding current are given on the rating plate. In addition, the secondary winding resistance Rct as inner burden is given for 75C. At the secondary terminals any external burden Rb may be connected. The specification of such burden is not subject to this standard.

U m [Vrms ]
1.1U knee

U knee

1.5 I knee

I knee

I m [ Arms ]

Figure 4: Magnetizing curve of the shunt inductance of the CT in Figure 3; Knee-point definition acc. to IEC Standard, class PX It is to underline here that this CT class describes the CT in a very clear physical manner giving the parameter of the magnetizing characteristic of inductance L and the internal burden Rct (Figure 3). The typical requirement of a protection device for CT dimensioning is for example:
U knee I psc, max Kn (Rct + Rb )

(13)

(10)

where the maximum detectable short-circuit current Ipsc,max on the CT secondary side must not lead to a voltage drop higher than the knee point voltage in order to avoid too high error of the secondary current due to magnetic saturation. Furthermore, the limit of the

is the overcurrent factor and Ipsc is the primary symmetrical short-circuit current. In such way, the typical 5P20 30VA has often been used. It is very important to recognize that no other parameter is necessary to describe the CT behaviour for the symmetrical short-circuit current. Indeed, when CT is burdened with operating burden that is close to the rated one on the nameplate, the overcurrent factor will be

similar to the indicated one on the nameplate, so the information about the internal burden Rct. is not necessary. Such definition of the IEC class P CT can be seen as a heuristic description of the CT behaviour at nominal operating conditions of the CT, which are in turn defined by its nominal burden. This is the most important issue considering IEC class P specification. The exact definition of IEC class P is specified by maximum transformation errors for the nominal current Ipn and a well defined overcurrent Ipsc when the nominal burden Sbn is connected to the terminals [2]. This is shown in the following table. Table 1 Definition IEC class P, acc. to IEC 60044-1, Edition 1.2 (2003)
Accuracy Class 5P 10P at Nominal current Ipn Current error i [%] 1 3 Phase displacement [min] 60 not specified at Overcurrent Ips=Ksscn Ipn Composite error c [%] 5 10

4 Dimensioning of IEC class P CTs; Example for 1 A and 5 A cores

As an example a traditional 5P20, 30VA CT will be considered. 4.1 CT with 1 A secondary nominal current At first it is assumed that this CT has the secondary nominal current Isn of 1 A and the internal resistance Rct equals to 5 . In Figure 5 the error diagram (error c versus overcurrent factor Kssc ) is given for this CT.
( Rct = )

[%]
Ip

K sscn FSn

I p Is ; I pn I sn

Is

Rbn
2 Sbn [VA] = Rbn I sn

Sb = Sbn

Sb << Sbn

It can be seen from Table 1 that CT class P is specified for nominal primary current, as well. The most important issue is to keep in mind that the exactness specified at Ipn can only be guaranteed by the CT manufacturer, when the CT is burdened with rated burden Sbn. As a further remark, one must consider that the error values given in the table for the overcurrent behaviour are maximum allowable errors, which fall in practice always below the limits specified. So, practically, in the last column the limits should be written as 5 and 10, respectively. Definition for measuring classes according to IEC are based on the same principle, namely, on the nominal CT conditions that are defined by its nominal burden Sbn. The only differences are as follows: 1. Accuracy (current error i and phase displacement ) is specified for more working points that lie not only at the nominal current Ipn but start below it up to slightly above the nominal current (e.g. at 1%, 5%, up to 120% of Ipn). 2. Instead of overcurrent factor, an instrument security factor (FS) is specified, at which the composite error must be at least 10%. This is to protect the connected measuring devices against too high over-currents. Thereby, the most important are the following remarks: Ad. 1. The accuracy class of metering CT can be only maintained when the CT is burdened with operational burden Sbo that lies between 25% .. 100% of its nominal burden Sbn, and Ad. 2. The nominal instrument security factor FSn is defined at nominal working conditions of the CT, i.e. when the CT is burdened with its nominal burden Sbn.

Figure 5: Error diagram for IEC class P CT with 1A secondary nominal current: 5P20, 30VA, Rct =5 and relation to IEC measuring class Remembering the fact that the error limits for protective classes in Table 1 are maximum values, the actual errors have to be lower. This is a minimum requirement for dimensioning of protective class CTs and it is shown in Figure 5 by the grey area with description 5P20 It can be also understood as forbidden area for the error of such protective-core CT. The CT manufacturer has to verify by test that these requirements are fulfilled. Before the test he will estimate the characteristic accuracy limiting point Ual(Ial) on the magnetizing curve. For class P the maximum error current Ial as magnetizing current at nominal overcurrent factor Ksscn can be estimated from the accuracy class (Figure 6) according to equation (14): I al = c K sscn I sn (14) which in our example leads to: I al = 5% 20 1 A = 1 A (15) The corresponding calculated accuracy limiting voltage Ual can be estimated, as well, using equation (16) : U al = K sscn I sn ( Rct + Rbn ) (16) which for the analyzed CT will lead to: U al = 20 1A (5 + 30 ) = 700 V (17) with nominal burden Rbn in calculated from eq. (12):
S 30VA Rbn = bn = = 30 2 I sn (1 A) 2

(18)

The actual magnetizing curve has to be higher than this calculated point for the worst case. An exemplary of such curve is shown in Figure 6.

U m [Vrms ]
875 V

1A CT

U FS

700 V U al

Now, for a 5A CT the nominal burden of 30 VA equals to 1.2 . The calculated magnetizing curve can be constructed analogously, too, using equations (14), (16), and (18). In such way one can find the results, as shown in Figure 8.
U m [Vrms ]

U FS

I al 1A

I FS 2.5 A

I m [ Arms ]

U al

Figure 6: Magnetizing curve of the CT from Figure 5 The protective class 5P20, 30 VA in this example may also fulfill a measuring class if desired, for example: 0.5FS25, 30 VA, where for the instrument security factor FS the error must be at least 10% in order to protect measuring devices against too high overcurrents by limitation of the CT secondary current. This is a maximum requirement for dimensioning of measuring class CTs and it is shown in Figure 5 by the grey area with description 0.5FS25 It can be also understood as forbidden area for the error of such measuring-CT. A similar approach is applied for the factor of security FS. The magnetizing curve has to be lower than the point UFS(IFS) shown exemplarily in Figure 6. Acc. to IEC standard the winding resistance Rct is usually not given on the rating plate because this calculation is done by the CT manufacturer only. Normally, the CT should be dimensioned and ordered by the customer for the maximum detectable shortcircuit current Ipsc,max which leads to the nominal overcurrent factor Ksscn whereas the nominal burden should be slightly higher than the actual total burden Rbo. Up to here, no winding resistance Rct is needed, since it was assumed that the CT is burdened with an actual burden that is close to its nominal burden, i.e. 30 VA, which means for 1A CT 30. 4.2 CT with 5 A secondary nominal current Now, also a 5P20, 30VA CT will be considered. However, for comparison, the CT has the secondary nominal current Isn of 5 A. The internal resistance Rct will be assumed to be 0.3 . As this CT shall fulfil the same IEC class P standard its error diagram (Figure 7) can be constructed analogously to the 1A CT.
( Rct = )

I al

I FS

I m [ Arms ]

Figure 8: Magnetizing curve of the CT from Figure 7 Comparing the results of calculations for the examples shown the following can be stated: 1. Only form the VA-rating no-one can draw conclusions about CT performance, so the statement: the more VA the better CT is completely false 2. Considering nominal burden of the CT from the example shown it can be observed that 30VA seems to be right nominal burden for a 5A CT (wire and devices connected have total resistance of <1.2, which nowadays looks reasonable). However, for the 1A CT the 30VA (i.e. 30) seems to be too high nominal burden considering modern digital relays and measuring instruments. As a result of this the CT works underburdened. The consequences of this be then analyzed in the next chapter. 3. For the performance the CT magnetizing curve should be always analyzed. So the usage of resistances and voltages is the right way. On the contrary, the usage of power (burden) and overcurrent factor can be misleading. How far misleading it is, the current practice by the dimensioning of the CTs shows very clearly, whereas high VA for 1A CT are now the less suitable state-of-the-art.

5 Dimensioning practice: Past and Future

As described above, in the past, electromechanical protection relays worked with 5 A nominal current and had burdens up to many VAs. The potential transformers have also supplied many relays in the protection cubicles. Nowadays, the power consumption of the modern digital relays is hundredth times lower. Unfortunately, the dimensioning practice of the instrument transformer has not been changed through the years. Therefore, a new perspective is necessary to be given for the instrument transformers dimensioning practice. This is discussed in this chapter. At first, Table 2 presents an overview on power consumption of current and voltage input circuits of the secondary instruments comparing old-technology with the new one [3].

[%]
Ip

K sscn FSn

I ; s I pn I sn

Ip

Is

Rbn
2 Sbn [VA] = Rbn I sn

Sb = Sbn

Sb << Sbn

Figure 7: Error diagram for IEC class P CT with Isn=5A 5P20 30VA, Rct =0.3

Table 2 Input circuits power consumption of relays

Description Power consumption for input Current Voltage VA VA

electro-

Current measurement (moving-iron) Voltage measurement (moving-iron) Power-factor meas. O/C protection Distance prot. (MV) Distance prot. (HV)

0.1 - 1.6 0.9 - 4 3.8 2 15 - 20 - 30 3 - 30 2 - 6 - 20 0.1 - 6 4 - 11 0.35 - 1.35 0.05 - 0.1 (1A CT) ~0.3 (5A CT) 13 - 120 35 - 120 1.4 4.4

calculation the winding resistance must be known. Considering the CT data from the example in section 4.1: 5P20 30VA with Rct =5 (Figure 5 and Figure 6) it can be written:
U al = K sscn I sn (Rct + Rbn ) = K ssco I sn ( Rct + Rbo ) = 700 V

(20)

mechanical Power meter

static

O/C protection Line diff. prot. Distance prot. Digital protection and measuring devices

This calculated accuracy limiting voltage Ual influences directly the size of the iron core according to eq.(6) and eq. (7) and provides the possibility of CT core optimization especially in small GIS CT compartments. Eq. (20) leads to:
R + Rbn 5 + 30 = 20 = 93 K ssco = K sscn ct 5 + 2 .5 Rct + Rbo

15

(21)

numerical

0.1 - 0.3

A big difference can be observed between the burdens of electromechanical relays and numerical relays used nowadays. Therefore in the past high nominal burden have been chosen for both CTs and PTs. Unfortunately, this approach still continuous to be applied nowadays. Coming back to the examples from section 4 it is now clear that in the past the typical operating burdens Sbo of up to 20 .. 30 VA were the result, because relays that were connected consumed many VAs. Furthermore, as the relay pick up setting was rarely higher than 20 Ipn the standard CT 5P20 30 VA has been used for many purposes. The DC component of the short-circuit current, which is very critical for CT saturation within the first cycles after fault inception, has been considered for special cases only due to slower operation times of the relay. Nowadays, modern digital protection devices work with 1 A nominal current and have burdens lower than 0.1 VA so only the burden of secondary wiring is the most significant one. Maximum operation times have been shortened to a few milliseconds up to a few cycles, so the DC component must be now considered by an additional transient dimensioning factor Ktd [4]. The typical requirement of a protection device for CT dimensioning will now be:
K sscn K td I psc, max I pn

As a result the requirement of actual overcurrent factor Kssco 80 is fulfilled. Such practice is still used nowadays as a state-of-the-art. Often it is assumed that for class P protective cores it has no significant drawbacks against the straight-forward way (i.e. 5P80 2.5VA). But the two following issues must be pointed-out: 1. Using under-burdened protective CT with turncompensation and measuring CTs (see below) can exceed the error at nominal current (the error curve is lower for lower burdens than nominal burden dotted curve shown in Figure 5). 2. Using under-burdened CTs with small current ratio Kn can damage the connected relays in case of strong close-in fault (very high secondary current that flow on the CT secondary due to high Kssco). These two critical and very important facts have to be considered in the same way for the factor of security FS for measuring classes, too. The operating factor of security FS0 for the under-burdened measuring CT from our example can be calculated:
R + Rbn 5 + 30 = 25 = 116 FS o = FS n ct 5 + 2.5 Rct + Rbo

(22)

(19)

Considering CT Data as from example in section 4.1 and assuming Ktd = 4, the CT with 5P80 should be specified (4 20 = 80). Assuming that the real operational burden Rbo is less than 2.5, which is almost true in the new GIS switchgears, the straightforward specification should be 5P80 2.5VA. However, as a state-of-the-art for class P CTs at first some arbitrary burden is chosen as nominal burden (e.g. 30VA) then the calculation of the actual operational overcurrent factor Kssco is done since the CT is connected to a small burden only (<2.5VA). When the connected operational burden Rbo is much lower than nominal burden Rbn the actual overcurrent factor Kssco rises up because the fix accuracy limiting voltage Ual of the CT is reached for higher currents than nominal overcurrent indicated on the nameplate as Ksscn. For this

That means that the CT will be surely in saturation for more than 100 times the nominal current! Such very high operating factor of security FS0 can be dangerous to the connected devices, especially in the case of low current ratios. Here the nominal burden cannot be chosen arbitrary for the same CT. As already mentioned above, for measuring classes, the new error curve may exceed also the accuracy limit for nominal currents (Figure 5 dotted line), because acc. to IEC these limits are required to be valid only for burdens between 25% .. 100% of its nominal burden Sbn. This requirement leads very often to additionally installed resistors in order to compensate too low burdens, which is surely a dangerous practice of introducing new elements into the secondary circuit of a CT and should be abandoned. Such additional resistive introduce a risk as day may be damage by overcurrents and lead to interruption of the CT secondary circuit. Furthermore a general drawback must be mentioned for the sake of completeness. When a CT 5P20, 30 VA is used for the real burden of approx. 2.5VA (instead of 5P80, 2.5 VA), the conversion of the overcurrent factor must be done, as shown above. For this purpose the

winding resistance Rct is needed which must be asked additionally at the CT manufacturer. Summarizing, there is no need to choose the nominal burden much higher than the connected one and an overcurrent factor much lower than the required one from the physical point of view. Such practice can lead to some dangerous or unwanted issues, like: for non-gapped protective cores, (like IEC class P) in cases of turn-compensated CTs and smallratio CTs for gapped protective cores (like IEC class PR, TPY, TPZ): Importance of the correct VA-rating in general, otherwise secondary time constant and transient behaviour changes Measuring CTs: Accuracy issue and necessity for secondary current limitation in case of fault in the primary system; dangerous practice of adding an resistor into the secondary circuit to reach the accuracy of high VA-rated CTs. Potential transformers: Accuracy issue and raise of resonance danger by under-burdened PTs. Some issues need further explanations and are therefore shortly commented in the next subsections. 5.1 High VA-rated Small Ratio CTs As a short example from a medium voltage switchgear, the transient behaviour of 100 A/1 A CT, 5P20, 10 VA, with assumed internal resistance Rct of 0.5 will now be analyzed. In this example it is assumed that the actual operating burden equals to 1 , which corresponds to burden of a digital relay (0.05 VA) that is connected via approx. 80m 4mm2 copper wire (0.9 ) to the CT clamps. Using eq. (21) the operating accuracy limiting factor Kssco is calculated:
R + Rbn 0.5 + 10 = 20 = 140 K ssco = K sscn ct 0.5 + 1 Rct + Rbo

It can been observed that the under-burdened CT delivers very high current to the relay (Figure 9). Its instantaneous peak value reaches more than 500 A and the steady-state rms value is close to 300 A. Such a portion of energy is very dangerous and may damage the connected digital relay, where the input circuits of such relay cannot handle such currents. Exemplarily, the current inputs of the used digital relay are limited to 250 A peak current and 100 A steady-state rms current for 1 s. In general, such critical situations occur for busbars with high short-circuit power and feeders with low rated currents, where low CT ratios are chosen. This fact is also valid for the HV substations. Such situations require detailed analysis that includes strong co-operation with the CT manufacturer and worst case considerations. More details on this subject will follow in foregoing publications. For the purpose of this paper the strong relation between traditional practice of CT dimensioning should be underlined. Due to unnecessarily high VA-rating of the CT an unclear and confusing situation appears. The risk of such high currents can be easily seen and counter-measured if the corresponding CT will be ordered as 5P20, 1.5VA, as a typical medium voltage CT core. 5.2 Gapped-cores CTs In cases when some protection approach limits the usage of classic methods of instrument transformer design it is often impossible to obtain good and usable results with classic non-gapped cores. This is the case, for example, with high values of fault current, low values of current transformer transformation ratio and high network time constants. E.g. for auto-reclosing the hysteresis and remanence of the iron core have to be taken into account. The standards organizations have reacted to the changing circumstances in the methods of sizing current transformers as shown in IEC Standard [4], which classifies a number of current transformer classes, such as TPS, TPX, TPY and TPZ, for transient operation. Thereby cores TPY and TPZ are gapped cores, whereby their transient operation is specified through several parameters. Moreover with amendment 1 in Year 2000 to the Standard [2] a gapped anti-remanence core class PR was introduced, as well. Especially for gapped cores (IEC class PR, TPY, TPZ) the time constant of the CT secondary circuit Ts
Ts = L Rct + Rbn

(23)

Figure 9 shows the transient behaviour of the CT for 40 kA primary short circuit current with 50 ms primary time constant and fault inception angle of 0. The simulation of the CT transient behaviour was carried out using the transient simulation module of the software tool CTDim [6].
primary current secondary current

(24)

Figure 9: CTDim Simulation of transient behaviour of IEC CT 100/1 5P20 10VA, Rct =0.5 on Ipsc=40 kA with Tp=50 ms

is the key parameter for the transient performance and must be much lower than for non-gapped CTs (class P, TPX, PX, TPS). If such CTs are connected to too low burdens than nominal burden, the time constant rises up and the desired performance wont be fulfilled. Such cases may lead to critical situations, when not considered carefully.

5.2 Under-burdened Potential Transformer Some remarks with respect to the instrument transformer dimensioning practice should be also given with respect to potential transformers. Within IEC there exists a Standard [5] describing inductive potential transformers that are, with exception of ultra-high voltage air-insulated switchgears, the state-of-the-art within the electrical power systems. Here the paradigm change took place too and nowadays almost exclusively digital equipment is connected to them. However, the practice of sizing the PT remained unchanged. Considering the values given in Table 2 for the power consumption in the PT circuits the same, as for the CTs can be stated. Namely, the PTs that are currently ordered are extremely under-burdened. The PT manufacturer designs and produces a PT with e.g. a nominal burden of 100 VA, whereas in the substation only several VA or sometimes below 1VA is then connected. As a result dangerous situation is introduced. The PT was designed (together with its accuracy turncompensation and anti ferro-resonance measures) to some nominal burden. Now it is burdened with very low burden, i.e. close to the open clamps conditions. This has the following drawbacks: 1. The accuracy class cannot be guaranteed (acc. to IEC these accuracy is valid only for burdens between 25% .. 100% of its nominal burden Sbn). This, in turn, leads very often to additionally installed parallel resistors in order to compensate too low burdens, which is surely no good practice. 2. Increase of resonances or ferro-resonances danger due to under-burdening of VT secondary circuit and detuning of anti-resonance counter-measures (if applicable). In the last years the number of resonance or ferro-resonance phenomena has increased, and it can be partially explained by the traditional sizing approach mentioned above.

dimensioning, the required lower burden and high overcurrent factor are converted to a high nominal burden and low overcurrent factor via the often unknown winding resistance. This conversion is a long way around and totally unnecessary for P class CTs without turn compensation. For measuring CTs class and protective CT class with turn compensation operational burdens much lower than nominal burden can violate the requirements of the accuracy class. Moreover, it was shown, that a mixture of high rated powers of CTs with modern low burden relays may lead to a damage of the secondary equipment, especially when small-ratio under-burdened CTs are used. The remark and the background information that the problems of resonances within under-burdened PT circuits raise in the last time was given, as well. Summarizing, it is strongly recommended that the current practice of instrument transformer dimensioning should be abandoned and CT and PT nominal burdens should be chosen appropriately to the operational burden with a realistic safety margin included. More information related to the subject of CT and PT dimensioning within the modern digital relaying and measuring technology also with relation to other standards like ANSI will be described in the foregoing publications.

References
[1] M. E. Korponay, Application Guide to IEC Standard IEC 44-6 (1995) [2] International Standard: IEC 60044-1, Instrument transformers Part 1: Current transformers, Edition 1.2, (2003) [3] Interessengemeinschaft Energieverteilung (ABB, AEG, Siemens): Auslegung und Ausfhrung von Strom- und Spannungswandlerkreisen (1992) [4] International Standard: IEC 44-6, Instrument transformers Part 6: Requirements for protective current transformers for transient performance, First Edition , (1992) [5] International Standard: IEC 60044-2, Instrument transformers Part 2: Inductive voltage transformers, Edition 1.2, (2003) [6] CTDim: Software Program for Current Transformer Dimensioning; www.siemens.com/ctdim

6 Conclusions
The paper described different instrument transformer definitions acc. to IEC Standard with relation to the physics of an iron-cored current transformer. The background of instrument transformer dimensioning with 5A sec. currents and requirements of electromechanical relays was presented, in comparison to 1A sec. currents and modern numerical relays. Thereby, different protection functions with their requirements and their impact on the dimensioning of instrument transformers in the past and today were described and discussed. In the past protection and measuring devices connected to current transformers had much higher burdens than nowadays. Nominal burdens of CTs had been chosen accordingly. Nowadays device burdens are much lower but CT nominal burdens are still ordered traditionally very high and nominal overcurrent factors too low. As the accuracy limiting voltage (or knee point voltage) is the physical quantity which is important for CT