Pork
resistance
p3
ELECTRICAL
TESTER
Never mind the noise!
Dinesh Chhajer working on site in conjunction with their utility
- Manager, technical support group
Jill Duplessis
- Technical Marketing Manager
Electrical noise is an ever-present issue when trying
to make reliable and accurate measurements in
high-voltage substation environments and its an
issue that was proving especially problematic for
one very large investor owned utility (IOU) in North
America. In particular, the company was finding
it impossible to test bushing CTs on transformers
Bushing H1 X1
MRCT leads H1and Grounded Floating
Table 1 - Standard connections for H1 bushing CTs
New 800 kv test and development facility
Dr Sacha Markalous - General manager,
Hagenuk KMT
In response to the rapidly evolving test requirements
of utilities and other organisations that operate
HV and EHV power cables, Megger has opened a
major new test, development and manufacturing
facility in Radeburg, near Dresden in Germany.
This became operational in October 2014 and
is equipped to work on test and diagnostic
equipment for cables operating at up to 800 kV.
www.megger.com ELECTRICAL TESTER - February 2016
Solar
flares
p4-5
in 765 kV substations. Engineers from Megger,
counterparts, have now developed a complete and
effective solution to this challenging problem. The
subject utility, one of the largest in the USA with
over five million customers in 11 states, operates
numerous 765 kV substations. A crucial part of
the commissioning process for power transformers
at these substations is the testing of CTs. Despite
having tried instruments from several different
manufacturers, this IOU had been unable to find
equipment that would give reliable and repeatable
H0- Xo Y1 Y2
H2 Grounded Grounded
Within weeks of opening, Meggers new Radeburg
facility was used to present a seminar on HV DAC
(damped AC) testing, which offers a convenient
and cost-effective alternative to conventional
power frequency testing of cables. It also hosted
acceptance testing of a VLF (very low frequency)
burn unit supplied to Con Edison, and an R30
cable test van supplied to RTE-France.
The new facility significantly expands the scope
of Meggers operations in relation to cable test
Tesla
p7
The industrys recognised information tool
results. Measurements falsely showing ratio errors
of 100% and more were by no means unusual.
Having been made aware of the problem,
Megger engineers visited a substation where
tests needed to be performed urgently in
rainy weather on a single-phase 765 kV
autotransformer prior to energization. The
transformer is a 750 MVA 765/528 kV unit
with a 13.8 kV tertiary winding. It is sited
adjacent to 765 kV transmission lines that were
in operation and energised during testing.
The transformer has 17 CTs six on H1, four on
X1, two on H0-X0, three on Y1 and two on Y2.
Bushing H1 X1
MRCT leads H2 and grounded H1
Table 2 - standard connections for testing X1 bushing CTs
equipment, not least by extending the companys
in-house capabilities up to 800 kV. Initially, the
primary focus will be on the development and
evaluation of HV DAC test equipment. The overall
goal, however, is to develop practical equipment for
use where no satisfactory test solution is currently
available, such as on the long undersea HV and
EHV cables that are being used increasingly for
transmission links between regions and countries.
Published by Megger
February 2016
The majority of CTs have ratios of 3000:5, but there
are also some with ratios of 30,000:5. Tests were
carried out with the latest Megger MRCT relay and
current transformer tester , working in atrocious
conditions it was raining heavily and all work had
to be carried out under a tent.
Standard practice was followed when setting up
the test, with insulated wires from the top of the
bushings brought down to ground level for easier
connections. When testing was not underway, the
bushings were grounded through these wires.
The first tests were carried out on the H1 bushing
CTs. During the insulation resistance test, however,
the test set gave a warning that live voltage was
present on one of the bushings. Similar problems
were encountered when attempts were made to
test other CTs.
After carrying out further investigations, which
were hampered at all stages by the constant rain,
the engineers discovered that the root cause of the
measurement problems was that the H1 bushing was
acting as an antenna for electrical noise. To address
this problem, a directly connected grounding wire
was installed on the H1 bushing, even though this
bushing is also grounded via the test set.
Table 1 shows the connections made to test H1
bushing CTs. It is to be noted that H2 test lead of
the MRCT instrument was connected to X0 bushing
instead of X1 for the return path. Since the height of
X0 bushing is smaller than X1 bushing, the electric
noise interference could be reduced by using X0
bushing for return path.
With this arrangement, it was made possible to
make accurate measurements on all six CTs on the
H1 bushing. The worst-case error was just 0.029%,
and in most cases the error was well below 0.02%.
Continued on page 3
H0- Xo Y1 Y2
Floating Grounded Grounded
1

The industrys recognised information tool
Contents
Never mind the noise!......................................p1,3
Dinesh Chhajer - Manager, technical
support group &
Jill Duplessis - Technical Marketing Manager
New 800 kv test and development facility.........p1
Dr Sacha Markalous - General manager,
Hagenuk KMT
Current transformers in electrical diagnostics....p2
Dr Stan Zurek, MSc, PhD, SMIEEE - Manager of
magnetic development
Ill have a 100 bacon sandwich, please!..........p3
Keith Wilson, electrical engineer
Megger host transformer and switchyard event in
Pennsylvania.........................................................p3
Greg Valdez - Marketing communications
manager
Karen Becerril - CSA marketing specialist
The impact of GIC on electric power systems..p4-5
Jill Duplessis - Global technical marketing manager
& Editor
Need an update fast? Grab a power webinar!..P5
Yier Toh - Marketing engineer
Pushing past the limitations of power factor testing
(part 2)...............................................................P6-7
Robert Breazeal - Southern California Edison
Jill Duplessis - Global technical marketing
manager & Editor
Questions and Answers - Circuit breaker ...........p8
Five lesser-known facts about Tesla....................p8
Keith Wilson, electrical engineer
When you have finished with
this magazine please recycle it.
The rights of the individuals attributed in Electrical Tester to be
identified as authors of their respective articles has been asserted
by them in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents
Act 1988. Copyright Megger. All rights reserved. No part
of Electrical Tester may be reproduced in a retrieval system, or
transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical,
photo-copying, recording or otherwise without the prior written
permission of Megger.
To request a licence to use an article in Electrical Tester, please
email electricaltester@Megger.com, with a brief outline of the
reasons for your request.
All trademarks used herein are the property of their respective
owners. The use of any trademark in this text does not imply
trademark ownership rights in such trademarks, nor does use
of such trademarks imply any affiliation with or endorsement of
Electrical Tester by such owners.
A printed newsletter is not as interactive as its email equivalent
so to help you find items quickly on www.megger.com, we have
underlined key search words in blue.
Views expressed in Electrical Tester are not necessarily
the views of Megger.
The word Megger is a registered trademark
Editor Jill Duplessis
E electricaltester@megger.com
Megger Limited
Archcliffe Road Dover Kent CT17 9EN
T +44 (0)1304 502100
E electricaltester@megger.com
www.megger.com
2 ELECTRICAL TESTER - February 2016 www.megger.com
Current transformers in electrical
diagnostics
Fig 8 - The double-clamp method in use
Dr Stan Zurek, MSc, PhD, SMIEEE
- Manager of magnetic development
In the first part of this article, which appeared in an
earlier issue of Electrical Tester, we looked at the
use of CTs in evaluating the condition of electrical
insulation, particular in relation to portable
appliance testing (PAT testing). In this second and
concluding part, we consider the role of CTs in
earth resistance measurement. Note that Figures
1 to 3 appeared with and relate to the first part
of the article, which can still be accessed on line.
Earth Resistance
CTs are very useful in the diagnostics of earth or
ground resistance. A large building or installation
can have multiple earthing points (Fig. 4). Each
earthing electrode needs regular inspection. The
equivalent electric circuit is such that all the earth
resistances are connected in parallel. If there are
sufficiently many branches, the circuit simplifies to
a single resistance in a loop (Fig. 5), and just three
branches allow good indication of problematic
earth point.
For instance, let us assume that a good electrode
has a resistance of 1 and a faulty value is
10 . There are two good electrodes and one
faulty electrode. Then measurement at a good
electrode will give Rx = 1 + 1||10 = 1.9 , but
measurement at the faulty electrode will give Rx =
10 + 1||1 = 10.5 . Therefore, the faulty electrode
is easily identified. The values are more accurate
with more parallel branches.
The measurement would be very simple (applying
Ohms law) if it could be carried out directly.
However, direct measurement is not possible
because this would mean introducing a break
in the loop shown in Fig. 5b. This is undesirable
for safety reasons, because if a fault occurred in
the installation while the loop was broken, large
potential could appear and could endanger the
operator or any other personnel in the vicinity of
the equipment. Moreover, after re-connection there
could be still doubt about the quality of connection.
A method is therefore needed where the
measurement can be carried out in a non-
invasive way. This can be achieved with clamp-on
current transformers (Fig. 6). One of the greatest
advantages of these devices is that they can be
clamped around a conductor without breaking the
current path and accurate measurements of AC
currents can be made.
Even contactless resistance measurement
simplifies to the application of Ohms law. Under
normal conditions the resistive component of
impedance is dominant; capacitive and inductive
contributions can be neglected. Therefore,
voltage applied to the circuit generates a
current that is inversely proportional to the
resistance. Measuring AC current with a clamp-
on CT is fairly easy. It requires only the CT and
an ammeter connected to its output. The
ELECTRICAL
TESTER
Fig 4 - An electrical installation with multiple
earthing points
difficulty lies in the application of a known voltage
to a continuous circuit. However, this can be
achieved by using a voltage transformer (VT).
A CT without anything connected to its output is
in fact a step-up VT. So if the secondary winding of Fig 5 - Equivalent circuit of installation with
multiple earthing points (a) and simplified
such a transformer is driven with AC voltage, then
equivalent circuit (b)
the device becomes a step-down VT.
The CT shown in Fig. 6 has a ratio of 1000:1 so an
AC current of 1 A in the primary cable produces 1
mA of the output current. But the same device can
be used as a VT, and if driven from the secondary
side the ratio is still 1000:1, so 1 V applied to
the secondary winding will induce 1 mV in the
primary cable. Combining VT and CT allows the
measurement of resistance value in the loop.
The principle is shown in Fig. 7 and a practical
instrument in Fig. 8.
For this particular instrument the voltage applied
is 30 V at 128 Hz. If the loop resistance is 1 ,
this will generate a loop current of 30 mA, which Fig 6 - An example of a clamp-on CT
will be stepped down to 30 A by the CT. The test
instrument can measure the voltage applied to the
VT and the output current of the CT, and the ratios
of the VT and CT are constant. Hence, in this case
the loop resistance can be calculated as:
Rx = VVT (ICT 10001000)
where: VVT = voltage applied by the instrument
to the VT and ICT = output current from the CT as
measured by the instrument.
Fig 7 - Principle of the double-clamp method
It is also possible to integrate both transformers (VT
and CT) into a single device (Fig 9). This instrument
operates on the same principle as that discussed
above, with two small differences: a higher
operating frequency is used because the cross-
section area of the cores is smaller, and there is an
additional magnetic shielding between the internal
VT and CT to improve measurement of small
currents in the proximity of the energised VT core.
The resistance range is from 0.05 to 1500 .
Thus, the CT has to be able to detect currents from Fig 9 - An integrated double-clamp instrument,
less than 20 A to 1 A, because the induced loop and a close up of the jaws
voltage is at the level of 30 mV. Such measurement
must be performed in the presence of much greater The other application is a contactless measurement
leakage currents, which might be present due to of earth resistance with multiple grounding
the connection to the 50 Hz (or 60 Hz) network. electrodes. A current transformer in normal mode
Summary is used for current detection. Voltage is injected
by driving a current transformer from its secondary
Current transformers are used for precise
side so that it behaves like a voltage transformer.
measurements relevant to safety and reliability in
The loop resistance can be thus calculated from
electrical installations.
the known voltage and measured current. The
Two examples were discussed in this series two transformers (voltage and current) can be
of articles. The first shows the use of current integrated into a single instrument, to produce an
transformers in portable appliance testing where easy-to-use handheld device.
the leakage current in non-isolated devices needs to
be detected differentially at the level of 0.0001% In essence, the versatility and performance of current
or 1 ppm (10 A in 10 A). Only current transformers transformers mean that many of the instruments
are capable of performing such measurement with used for testing and diagnostics of electrical
sufficient accuracy without using very expensive insulation and earthing can be made smaller, lighter,
instrumentation or components. safer, more reliable and less expensive.
 ELECTRICAL
The industrys recognised information tool TESTER
Never mind the noise! Bushing
MRCT leads
H1
H1 and grounded
X1
H2
H0- Xo
Floating
Y1
Grounded
Y2
Grounded

Continued from page 1
Testing the CTs on the X1 bushing created an
additional challenge, since the ground connection
from H1 could not be removed because of the level
of electrical noise. The standard connections for the
test set, shown in Table 2, could not be used as this
would have created a ground loop (since H1 test
lead is grounded at the test set). A slightly modified
connection arrangement, shown in Table 3, was
adopted. This has the effect of giving test results that
have incorrect polarity, with 180 phase angle, but it
is easy to allow a fix for this.
The results for the X1 bushing CTs showed slightly
higher errors worst case 0.24% than those for
the H1 CTs. This was because the height of the X1
bushings made the measurements more susceptible
to the effects of electrical noise induced by the
nearby live transmission lines. Nevertheless, the
accuracy was still very good, and the utility engineers
were completely satisfied with the measurements.
A similar approach was used for measurements
on the X0 bushing CTs, while for tests on the Y1
and Y2 bushing CTs all H1, X1 and X0 bushings
Table 3 - Modified connections for testing X1 bushing CTs
were shorted and grounded together. In all cases,
accurate and repeatable results were obtained easily
and quickly.
The IOU engineers who witnessed the CT testing
in the 765 kV transmission substation were very
favourably impressed not only by the performance
of Meggers MRCT test set, but also by its speed of
operation. Once the initial noise-related issues had
been addressed, all the IEEE C57.13.1 recommended
tests (saturation, ratio, polarity, winding resistance
and CT demagnetization) were completed on
all 17 CTs in less than three hours, despite the
difficult working conditions. Based on their previous
experience, these IOU engineers had expected these
tests to take between one and two full days.
This experience has demonstrated conclusively that
the Megger MRCT current transformer analyser
is capable of delivering dependable and accurate
results in high voltage substations where the high
levels of electrical noise make it impossible for other
instruments to operate correctly.

Ill have a 100 bacon sandwich, please!

Keith Wilson, electrical engineer
When you next power up your trusty ohmmeter,
its unlikely that your intention will be to measure
the resistance of a lump of pork or bacon. Things
were rather different back in 1935, however, when
Evershed and Vignoles, one of the predecessor
companies of Megger, sponsored the publication
of a paper with the somewhat surprising title The
Electrical Resistance of Pork and Bacon.
So what was it all about? A bored development
engineer who just happened to plunge his test
probes into his breakfast sandwich and then
decided to share the results with the world?
No! As you might expect, there was a very good
reason for writing the paper and for carrying out
the research that underpinned it.
In an effort to justify this not inconsiderable effort,
the paper points out that meat had been preserved
by curing for many years, but that back in 1935
at least there were few scientific controls over the
curing process. In essence, the meat was pumped
with a suitable pickling fluid, then placed on a
dry-salt stack or placed in a pickling tank. The only
guide to when the curing process was complete was
experience or to cut off a small piece of meat and
taste it, which gave a very rough guide to the salt
content.
measuring the resistance of the meat would
provide a reliable indication of salt penetration
and hence the progress of the curing process. His
first experiments were carried out with a supply
derived from the AC mains and rectified with a
thermionic valve. The current in the meat was
measured with a milliammeter and the resistance
calculated using ohms law.
The results were less than satisfactory, as
electrolysis meant that chlorine was liberated at
the test probes and this discoloured the meat. For
subsequent experiments, a valve oscillator running
at 1 kHz (1,000 c/s in those days!) was used, and
the resistance measurements were carried out
with a modified version of a Wheatstone bridge.
Now the results were encouraging, showing
a definite and repeatable, albeit non-linear,
relationship between the resistance of the meat
and the salt content of the pork. So far, so good,
but using a valve oscillator and a Wheatstone
bridge with headphones as null detector was quite
clearly not exactly an optimum solution in a busy
meat processing plant.
Evershed and Vignoles therefore designed a much
more practical method of measuring the resistance
of the meat and, with startling originality dubbed
this the Meg Salinity Tester. It probably wont
come as much of a surprise that this was based
on the popular hand-cranked Megger insulation
tester of the period.

Neither of these options was particularly
satisfactory, but it was important to ensure that
the meat was properly cured otherwise it would
spoil and quickly become unfit for consumption.
Bear in mind that few homes at this time had
refrigerators, so domestic purchasers at least were
heavily dependent on the proper processing of
meats to guard against the risk of food poisoning.
To address this issue, the author of the paper,
F H Banfield, decided to investigate whether
To quote the official description, The instrument
consists of a hand generator and ohmmeter
combined in a one case. It is used in conjunction
with a special probe, the principle of operation
being shown in the diagram. The deflection of the
ohmmeter movement, which depends on the ratio
of the currents in the current and potential coils,
gives the resistance directly. The rotary converter
and the rectifier enable alternating currents to
be used in the testing circuit, thus eliminating
electrolytic action at the electrodes.
Unfortunately, the paper gives no indication of
the commercial success or otherwise of the Meg
Salinity tester so its impossible to say whether
these instruments were produced in quantity and
widely used, or whether they remained little more
than a curiosity.
The whole concept of the tester does, however,
conjure up a rather appealing visual image of an
inspector at a pork processing plant wandering
around and occasionally probing a piece of meat
while cranking an instrument that must have looked
for all the world like a Megger insulation tester!
(Grateful thanks to the Archive Department of the
IET, which provided access to the paper on which
this article is based.)

Megger hosts workshop for EPRI TSUG in Pennsylvania

Greg Valdez - Marketing communications
manager
Karen Becerril - CSA marketing specialist
On July 20, 2015, which brought near record-setting
high temperatures in the greater Philadelphia PA
area, Megger hosted a one-day workshop for
the Electrical Power Research Institutes (EPRI)
Transformer and Switchyard Users Group (TSUG) at
the Megger facilities in Norristown, Pennsylvania. The
event kicked off the organizations meetings which
convened the following day. Meggers initiative to
share their electrical testing expertise and the latest
development of electrical testing technologies was
enthusiastically welcomed by the group.
The Megger workshop was divided into two parts
a morning substation best practices seminar and
afternoon factory tours and live demonstrations.
Attendees first appreciated a preview of Meggers
deep technical competencies in the morning,
delivered through a series of presentations at
the meetings venue, the Hilton Philadelphia at
Penns Landing. A variety of subjects were covered,
including substation safety, battery maintenance
and testing, MV cable VLF testing and diagnostics,
winding resistance measurements and frequency
response techniques.
From the hotel, attendees were bused to Meggers
Valley Forge facility where they split into groups
according to preferred application interests,
including transformers, relay, circuit breaker and
high current injection applications, and enjoyed
hands-on demonstrations. Meggers relatively
new (2001) and expansive 60,000 square foot
manufacturing and engineering facility, which
produces world-class portable instruments for
transformer, cable fault, battery, and power quality
diagnostics, comfortably accommodated the
guests and demonstrations.
Attendees were offered the opportunity to try the
DELTA4000 variable frequency insulation power
factor/dissipation factor (tan delta) test set, the
personnel knowledge and capabilities related
MTO250 portable transformer ohmmeter (winding
to large power transformers and associated
resistance test instrument with demagnetizing
switchyard equipment. The group is involved in
capability) and the groundbreaking TRAX multi-
the collection, dissemination, and development of
functional substation test instrument, amongst
maintenance and troubleshooting processes and
many others. The event gathered over 50 attendees
other activities related to large power transformers
and created many opportunities for networking
and associated switchyard equipment. EPRI
and to set the foundation for future business
conveyed their enthusiasm for Meggers support,
relationships.
perceived to be instrumental to the success of the
EPRIs TSUGs primary goals are to support and event and expressed their desires to collaborate
promote activities that will increase power plant again with Megger in the future.

www.megger.com ELECTRICAL TESTER - February 2016 3


The industrys recognised information tool
The impact of GIC on electric power
Jill Duplessis - Global technical marketing
manager & Editor
In the last issue of Electrical Tester, we examined
what GIC (Geomagnetically Induced Current) is
and why it occurs. In this article, we look at the
potential impact of GIC on power systems and, in
particular, on transformers.
The source of nearly all of the operating and
equipment problems attributed to a geomagnetic
disturbance is the reaction of susceptible
transformers to the presence of GIC. The first order
effects of GIC are those on the transformer and
the second order effects of GIC are those on the
power system.
First Order Effects of GIC
The excitation current of a transformer represents
the continuous energy required to force
transformer action, in other words, to make the
transformer behave as a transformer. It is largely a
reactive current (usually dominated by an inductive
contribution known as the magnetizing current)
and it is typically very small usually less than 1%
of the transformers rated operating current as
transformers are very efficient devices. Under normal
steady-state conditions, the excitation current of a
transformer is symmetrical (balanced between the
positive and negative peaks of its waveform) as
shown in Figure 1 where the excitation current is
shown in blue on the bottom vertical axis.
For economic reasons, the peak ac flux in the
power transformer (given by the blue waveform on
the left side of Figure 1) is designed to be close
to the knee (or magnetic saturation point) of the
magnetization curve (shown by the black curve in
Figure 1) so that nearly the full magnetic capabilities
of the transformers core is used during operation.
When a core operates below its saturation point,
practically all of the magnetic flux created by the
excitation current is contained in the core. The
magnetic reluctance of the core is low because the
core steel is an excellent conduit for magnetic flux.
Accordingly, the magnetization losses are low (i.e.,
a small Ih in Figure 2) and the (shunt) magnetizing
inductance is high, resulting in a very small
magnetizing current, Im. The excitation current
is the vector sum of these current contributions,
Ih and Im. The inductive volt - amperes - reactive
(VAR) requirements of the transformer are
very low. Moreover, with non - saturated core
magnetization, the transformer voltage and
current waveforms contain very low harmonic
content.
During a GIC event, a quasi - dc current enters the
ground-connected neutral of the transformer and
splits equally between phase windings (on multiple
phase winding transformers). If the zero-sequence
reluctance of the transformer is low, the GIC biases
the operating point on the magnetization curve to
4 ELECTRICAL TESTER - February 2016 www.megger.com
one side (see the top black dashed line in Figure
1). This bias causes the transformer to enter the
saturation region in the half cycle in which the ac
causes a flux in the same direction as the bias. This
effect is known as half - cycle saturation. When the
core saturates, it has reached the limit of its ability
to carry a magnetic field; any field beyond the limit
leaks out of the core and passes through the
space around the core (air/oil) as leakage flux.
While the magnetic reluctance of the core is still
low, the reluctance of the portion of the magnetic
circuit outside the core is high. This results in a
much - reduced value of shunt inductance and
a large shunt current (Im) flows through the
magnetizing branch. The inductive volt - amperes -
reactive (VAR) requirements of the transformer can
become very high (see the red excitation current
pulse given a DC offset on the bottom vertical axis
in Figure 1). With saturated core magnetization,
the transformer voltage and current waveforms
contain very high harmonic content.
Problems can occur with differential protective
relays that are looking to see balanced primary
and secondary currents. The transformer
protection may trip as the primary current becomes
disproportionately large (drawing increasingly more
reactive current) compared to the secondary current.
Leakage flux is always present in a transformer that
is carrying load. Because of the problems that it
can otherwise cause, transformer manufacturers
design and build their transformers such that the
anticipated leakage flux is managed and has
minimal impact on the long-term operation and
life of the transformer. Leakage flux, however,
is never anticipated from the excitation of the
transformer. The high peak magnetizing current
pulse (red in Figure 1) produces correspondingly
higher magnitudes of leakage flux (as given by the
red waveform on the left side of Figure 1) that is
also rich in harmonics.
The influence of excessive leakage flux on the
transformer is generally thermal. Leakage flux in
transformers that links any conductive material
(including transformer windings and structural
parts) will cause induced currents that result in
almost immediate localized, unexpected, and
severe heating due to resistive losses. Paint burning
off transformer tank walls might be considered an
asset owners best-case example!
Transformer designs that include core bolts are a
concern because, should the stray flux link such
bolts located at the bottom of the windings and
cause the surrounding oil to heat to 140C, this
could result in bubble evolution that ultimately
leads to transformer failure. For any given design,
a finite element analysis will reveal the leakage
flux paths and weaknesses, if any, in the design.
If a transformer is lightly loaded, and therefore its
operating leakage flux is light compared to its full
load rated flux, the unit may be able to handle the
additional leakage flux introduced by GIC.
Figure 1:Part Cycle, Semi Saturation of Transformer Cores
I
Zp = Rp + jXp Ip
0 0I
Ip
Ep Ih ZM
Magnetisation
(Core) loss
Figure 2: Transformer Equivalent Circuit
In summary, a saturated transformer becomes a
reactive energy sink, an unexpected inductive load
on the system, and behaves more like a shunt
reactor. Transformer differential protective relays
may trip and take the transformer out of service.
Excessive leakage flux can result in detrimental
overheating, or in some designs, winding damage
due to resulting high winding circulating currents.
Separately, the magnetizing current pulse of a GIC
inflicted transformer injects significant harmonics
into the power system. The resultant impact of
these changes in the transformer(s) constitutes the
second order effects of GIC.
Second Order Effects of GIC
Many agree that the more concerning impacts of
GIC are its indirect effects on the power system
and its components. The effect of a transformer
morphing into a shunt reactor on the power system
is best understood after a review of shunt reactors
and capacitors.
Shunt capacitor banks are used to offset
inductive effects on the power system (to
support voltage) while shunt reactors are used to
offset the effects of capacitance on the system
(to reduce voltage). Typically, shunt capacitors
are switched in during periods of high load, and
shunt reactors are switched in during periods of
light load. The same effects can be achieved,
within rating limits, by varying the excitation of
generators, i.e., operating them as synchronous
condensers. Static VAR compensators (SVCs),
which combine capacitor banks and reactors,
provide similar compensation and voltage
support, with very fast automated controls.
Many power systems once had dedicated
synchronous condensers (rotating machines).
However, capacitor banks are cheaper and as
capacitor technology advanced to the point
where reliability became excellent, synchronous
condensers were retired.
Inductive reactance, which is expressed by XL
= 2fL, indicates that as inductance, L, goes
down, inductive reactance drops. Saturated
transformers have low shunt magnetizing
inductance so they draw high currents; they
look like shunt reactors on the system, dragging
down the system voltage.
ELECTRICAL
TESTER
Zs = Rs + jXs
Is
I I
Im E p Es Es
Magnetisation
(Core) inductance
Capacitive reactance is expressed by XC =
1/(2fC). From this, it is easy to see that a
capacitor presents as an open circuit (infinite
impedance) to DC current; this underpins the
effectiveness of series capacitor blocking in
very long transmission lines as a GIC mitigation
strategy. In contrast, as frequency goes up,
capacitive reactance drops so capacitor banks
have lower impedances to harmonics and draw
larger currents when harmonics are present.
While saturated transformers draw large
currents, forcing system voltage down and
potentially overloading long transmission lines,
capacitor banks also draw large currents due to
the presence of harmonics, partially offsetting
the inductive effects. Essentially, the saturated
transformers are in a tug - of - war with the
capacitors on the system. Modern shunt
capacitors have very low loss and are therefore
less susceptible to transient heating damage
due to excess current. However, large currents
may affect other components in capacitor bank
installations, resulting in damage and unwanted
tripping. Voltage imbalance and overvoltage
protection may also be fooled by harmonic
voltage spikes and cause unwanted trips.
Finally, overcurrent protection may also operate
spuriously in the face of harmonic currents.
Similar issues may apply to SVCs. Harmonic
filters for SVC banks create parallel resonances,
which can exacerbate voltage disturbance issues
and result in tripping of the protection devices.
Rotating machines have fairly high thermal
inertia, so generators operated as synchronous
condensers have a higher probability of
staying on line. However, generators can also
be affected by GIC currents. These effects
include additional heating, damage to rotor
components, increased mechanical vibrations
and torsional stress due to oscillating rotor flux
caused by increased negative sequence harmonic
currents. The harmonic content of negative
sequence currents can also cause relay alarming,
erratic behaviour or generator tripping. If VAR
resources are exhausted during a GMD event,
specifically capacitive voltage support, voltage
collapse can occur.

The industrys recognised information tool
er systems
GIC flows in lines
Transformer half-cycle saturation
Harmonics Transformer heating
P&C incorrect Capacitor bank or SVC
operation tripping - loss or reactive
support
Generator overheating
and tripping
GIC Simulations
Figure 3: Effects of GIC in a High Voltage Transmission Network (from NERC)
NERCs 2012 Special Reliability Interim Report:
Effects of Geomagnetic Disturbances on the Bulk
Power System provides a block diagram that
illustrates the effects of GIC, culminating in a threat
to system voltage and angle stability (Figure 3).
Special Dispensation about the
Effects of GIC on CTs and protective
relays
It is important to have accurate measurements of
system state during abnormal operating conditions.
For these purposes, the industry has predominantly
relied upon conventional instrument transformers
such as a current transformer (CT); a potential (or
voltage) transformer, which may be inductive (PT/
VT) or capacitive (CCVT); or a combined current
and voltage instrument transformer. An instrument
transformer (IT) is intended to reproduce in
its secondary circuit, in a definite and known
proportion, the current or voltage of its primary
circuit with the phase relations and waveforms
substantially preserved. The electromagnetically
induced current or voltage waveform(s) in the
secondary circuit(s) of the IT should then be of
an easily measurable value for the metering or
protective devices that are connected as the load,
or burden, on the IT.
In as much as a traditional, ferromagnetic IT has a
magnetic core, ITs are influenced by GIC much like a
power transformers. If an IT is pushed to a non - linear
region of its saturation curve (i.e., its operating curve),
due, for example, to a DC flux shift, the accuracy of
the IT will significantly decline. While it is true that ITs
typically operate at lower magnetization levels than
power transformers because reading accuracy must
be maintained in the face of large fault currents (i.e.,
they have more built - in margin on the curve), there
is no way of knowing whether the magnitude of GIC
in the system will saturate the core despite its margins,
or if remanence was pre - existing in the core and
already compromising the ITs performance. In short,
there will always be uncertainty about the reliability of
system state measurements provided by ferromagnetic
instrument transformers during a GIC event.
Moreover, when currents and voltages become rich
in harmonics, even if the IT is not operating in a
saturated state, the accuracy of the measurements
will decline. Unfortunately, there is no on - line
method of validating whether the instrument
transformer is operating in a non - saturated state
and, therefore, within its window of accuracy (i.e.,
the pseudo - linear region of its saturation curve at
50 or 60 Hz) or in a saturated state and, therefore,
outside the realm in which it can accurately
reproduce measurements.
It must also be remembered that protective relays
operate based only on their inputs. If a CT, for
example, is supplying a distorted waveform due to
the effects of harmonic saturation, the relay may
respond in a different, and unwanted, way than it
does to nearly sinusoidal inputs.
www.megger.com ELECTRICAL TESTER - February 2016
Reactive power loss
Voltage control, limits
contingency management
Voltage and angle
stability
Power system simulations
FERC/NERC Regulation
Federal regulations designed to protect the electric
grid in the USA from the potentially severe and
widespread impact of a geomagnetic disturbance
(GMD) are in the process of being adopted. Following
several years of study, the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission (FERC) initiated a rulemaking in 2012,
the first of its kind, directing NERC to develop and
submit for approval Reliability Standards to protect
the grid from the impact of GMDs.
In Order No. 779, FERC determined that the
risk posed by GMD events, and the absence of
Reliability Standards to address GMD events,
posed a risk to system reliability that justified its
precedent - setting order directive to NERC to
develop Reliability Standards to address the issue.
To expedite the standards - setting process, FERC
ordered NERC to develop mandatory standards in
two stages, both of which are now underway.
In the first stage, FERC directed NERC to submit
Reliability Standards that required owners and
operators of the bulk-power system to develop
and implement operational procedures to mitigate
the effects of GMDs to ensure grid reliability.
These operational procedures were considered a
first step to address the reliability gap and were
approved by FERC in June 2014. These standards
became mandatory on January 1, 2015.
In the second stage, FERC directed NERC to provide
more comprehensive protection by requiring entities
to perform vulnerability assessments against a
benchmark GMD event and develop appropriate
mitigation strategies to protect their facilities against
GMD events. These strategies include blocking GICs
from entering the grid, instituting specification
requirements for new equipment, and isolating
equipment that is not cost effective to retrofit.
The standard to implement the second phase of
NERCs GMD program is known as TPL-007-1. As
of November 2015, FERC continues to deliberate
over its approval. The initial Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking (NOPR) comment period, which closed
in May 2015, was extended until October 22, 2015
to allow for additional commenters to submit their
views regarding the GMD benchmark. FERC ordered
NERC to make changes to the proposed standard
including: refining its definition of the benchmark
event; requiring the installation of monitoring
equipment wherever there are reliability gaps;
and setting deadlines for completion of corrective
actions. FERC is also considering shortening NERCs
proposed 5-year period for compliance.
Need an update fast?
Grab a power webinar!
Yier Toh - Marketing engineer
Knowing how difficult it can be for professional
engineers and technicians to refresh their
knowledge of testing techniques and to keep up-
to-date with the latest developments in the field,
Megger produces a series of monthly webinars
each year that provide concise information about
carefully chosen key topics. The 2015 series of live
webinars has concluded, but the good news is that
the recordings are available online. So, if youd
like a convenient way to enhance your testing
knowhow without even leaving your desk, why
not take a look?
The topics in the 2015 webinar series are:
Basics of recloser testing
Applications of time-domain reflectometry
Medium and high voltage circuit breaker
testing
GPS/IRIG-B timing methods for end-to-end
relay testing
Battery testing for compliance with NERC
standards
Chasing medium voltage cable faults in
branched networks
Detecting cable deterioration before the
fault
The importance of demagnetising
transformer cores
Guide to low resistance testing
Improvements in transformer winding
resistance testing
Each webinar lasts for around an hour, but five-
minute samples of all of them are available on
YouTube, so its easy to try before you buy
even though all webinars are absolutely free to
view. To check out the YouTube clips, simply go
to Meggers YouTube channel at http://www.
youtube.com/meggerUS. You can always find the
latest information on all previous and upcoming
webinars on our webinar landing page at www.
megger.com/webinars.
As an example of the type of content youre likely
to find in these webinars, lets take a look at the
battery testing and NERC standards webinar.
This starts with an overview of battery basics,
ELECTRICAL
TESTER
including definitions
of key terms and a
discussion of battery
types. It then covers
failure modes for
various types of
batteries, such as sulphation and hard/soft shorts
in lead-acid batteries, and separator deterioration
in nickel-cadmium types.
This introductory section is followed by an
examination of the importance of maintaining
batteries regularly, to ensure that conditions such
as blocked ventilation systems and corrosion are
detected before they lead to a breakdown or, in
the worst cases, a catastrophic failure.
The IEEE standards applicable to various battery
types are introduced before the second half of the
seminar moves on to consider the importance of
compliance with mandatory NERC requirements.
Test methods that will ensure compliance is
achieved are explained in detail, with full coverage
given to the benefits and limitations of impedance
testing, as well as to the correct procedures for
discharge testing, which is the only completely
dependable way of measuring battery capacity.
The webinar concludes with information about
recording, analysing and trending test results.
If all of this sounds interesting, but the topic you
particularly want to see isnt in the list, it may be
coming up in 2016 because we listened to your
suggestions when planning the next series. Heres a
sneak preview of some of the new topics:
Insulation diagnostic methods for
transformers and bushings
Advanced end-to-end testing
Partial discharge and tan delta
measurements for improving grid resiliency
Improving the efficiency of transformer
commissioning
Advances in high-current injection testing
More topics will soon be added to the list, so
check Meggers webinar landing page frequently
for details, especially if you want to participate
in the live webinars to interact with Meggers
subject matter experts. Based on overwhelming
feedback from our webinar attendees, in 2016,
we will extend the Q&A segment by 30 min after
the conclusion of the webinar. This way you can
stay online and chat with the presenter to get your
questions answered.
For power professionals, Megger webinars are
the fastest, most convenient, and most reliable
way to keep up to date on trending technical
developments and best practices in the industry.
You dont even have to leave the comfort of your
office to participate!
Links:
www.youtube.com/meggerUS
www.megger.com/webinars
5
 ELECTRICAL
The industrys recognised information tool TESTER

Pushing past the limitations of po

Robert Breazeal - Southern California Edison
Jill Duplessis - Global technical marketing
manager & Editor
This is the second part of an article discussing how
Southern California Edison (SCE) has successfully
adopted methods based on electrically dividing
the insulation of power transformers into sections
to facilitate testing. The first part of this article
appeared in the November 2015 edition of
Electrical Tester, which is available on the Megger
website, and introduced cross-check tests and
open DETC tests as methods to sectionalize the
insulation beyond the typical segmentation (e.g.,
CH, CHL and CL on a two-winding transformer).
This second part describes cross-check and open
DETC test procedures, the transformer winding
configurations for which these methods are most
effective, and provides a case study wherein
these methods provided useful supplemental
information to help characterize the problem at
hand in a faulted transformer.
CROSS-CHECK TESTS
Unlike the preparation required for traditional
power factor testing, transformer windings are not
short-circuited for Cross-check tests. Therefore,
when voltage is applied to a bushing terminal, (1)
the winding is now being excited and (2) voltage
distributes non-uniformly across the winding.
Highest voltage stress is placed upon the insulation
closest to the energized terminal. In this way, the
CH (for example) insulation system measured in
a traditional overall power factor test by shorting
all 3 phase windings together, can now be
sectionalised into thirds. It is expected, therefore,
that the results (mA, Watts and capacitance) for
the 3 (segmented) cross-check tests should add to
equal the results measured in the traditional overall
power factor test. It is noted here that cross-check
tests for the CL insulation system are not provided
because in many cases, the current requirement to
excite the low voltage winding is greater than most
field portable test instruments can provide.
GST Per Phase (CH): One primary terminal is
energized while guarding the other two terminals
and X0. (X1, X2 and X3 bushings are floated.)
The DETC is left on tap. The sums of the watts,
milliamps, and capacitances for all three tests
should match the overall CH values. The GST per
phase may be performed at up to rated voltage
provided the guarded excitation current does not
exceed the output of the test equipment. The H1,
H2, H3 tests are designated as ICH1, ICH2, and
ICH3 respectively.
UST Per Phase (CHL): One primary terminal is
energized while guarding the other two terminals.
Output from X0 terminal is measured. X1, X2 and
X3 bushings are floated. The DETC is left on tap.
The sums of the watts, milliamps, and capacitances
for all three tests should match the overall CHL
values. The UST crosscheck may be performed at
up to rated voltage provided the guarded excitation
current does not exceed the output of the test
equipment. H1, H2 and H3 tests are designated as
ICHL1, ICHL2, and ICHL3 respectively.
OPEN DETC TESTS
In the cross-check tests above, the visibility of an
anomaly is proportional to its proximity to the
voltage source. In the open DETC protocols, the
entire section of energized winding is at the same
potential since the low voltage winding terminals
are short-circuited. This enables the detection of
anomalies in the centre of the winding, which may
be difficult to pinpoint with the cross-check tests.
This sectionalisation of the primary also enables the
technician to determine the location of an anomaly
in relation to the DETC. If a fault in the centre of a
primary winding radially propagates sufficiently to
involve numerous coil layers, it may be detectable
as seen from both sides of the open DETC.
Open DETC GST (Table 3): DETC is placed at a
midway position between taps. One primary
terminal is energized while guarding the other
two primary terminals and all secondary terminals
(LV winding short-circuited). The sums of the
watts, milliamps, and capacitances for all three
tests should match the overall CH values. The
DETC open GST crosscheck is performed at a
maximum of 500 volts. H1, H2 and H3 tests are
designated as CH1, CH2, and CH3 respectively. In
this configuration individual sections of the delta
primary are isolated and energized. If an anomaly
is suspected to be located in the centre portion of
a winding, the open DETC test will determine the
location of the anomaly in relation to the DETC.
Open DETC UST (Table 3): DETC is placed at
a midway position between taps. Secondary
terminals are short-circuited and energized at the
same voltage as in the overall test. One primary
terminal is measured while guarding the other
two terminals. The sums of the watts, milliamps,
and capacitances for all three tests should match
the overall CHL values. The tests are designated in
terms of the primary terminal that is measured. H1,
H2 and H3 tests are designated as CHL1, CHL2,
and CHL3 respectively.
TRANSFORMER CONFIGURATIONS
AND LIMITATIONS
Delta-Wye Configuration: The ideal test subject is
a delta-wye configuration with a three-leg core.
Delta-wye is the only configuration on which the
entire set of supplemental tests may be performed
without geometry-induced errors. In distribution
core configurations, the CH2 measurements for
the centre phase are inaccurate because the core
configuration severely impedes current flow for CH
per phase tests.
however is not possible if the exciting current
Delta-Delta Configuration: If a cross-check,
per-phase test is performed on a three-phase required by the secondary winding is beyond the
capacity of the test equipment.
winding with a delta secondary, the primary
exciting current induces circulating currents in the
Wye-Wye Configuration: The wye secondary
secondary, which make it impossible to collect
configuration enables the cross-check, per-phase
accurate data. The open DETC tests (Table 3) are
CH and CHL tests to be performed as given in Table
the only supplemental tests that may be used on
4. With the wye primary configuration only one
this configuration.
primary winding is energized per test when each
Wye-Delta Configuration: The open DETC GST phase terminal is energized, making the protocol
test is the only protocol guaranteed to yield usable a true per-phase test. While the CH0 and CHL0
data with this winding configuration. Open DETC
tests are not useful for localization of anomalies,
UST tests may not yield useable data because the
the data is used to compare the sums of watts,
secondary winding interface is normally located
mA, and capacitances to the overall values. For the
between the DETC and neutral. When the cross-
reasons stated in the wye-delta section above, the
check, per-phase protocol is performed on the
open DETC UST test may not yield useable data.
wye-delta configuration, the unit must be treated
as a delta-wye, meaning that the tests must be The open DETC GST test may be performed, as
performed by energizing the X winding. This table 5 shows.
Mode Energize Ground Guard UST Measurement
1 GST HV LV ICH + ICHL
2 GST HV LV ICH
3 UST HV LV ICHL
4 GST LV HV ICL + ICLH
5 GST LV HV ICL
6 UST LV HV ICLH
7 GST H1 H2,H3,X0 - X1,X2,X3 ICH1

Overview of Supplementary Tests 8 GST H2 H1,H3,X0 - X1,X2,X3 ICH2

9 GST H3 H1,H2,X0 - X1,X2,X3 ICH3
10 UST H1 H2,H3 X0 X1,X2,X3 ICHL1
11 UST H2 H1,H3 X0 X1,X2,X3 ICHL2
12 UST H3 H2.H3 X0 X1,X2,X3 ICHL3
Table 2: Overall and Cross-Check Per-Phase Tests for Delta-Wye Transformer Configurations*

Test Mode Energize Guard UST Measurement

1 GST H1 H2,H3, X0,X1,X2,X3 - ICH1
2 GST H2 H1,H3, X0,X1,X2,X3 - ICH2
3 GST H3 H1,H2, X0,X1,X2,X3 - ICH3
4 UST X0,X1,X2,X3 H2,H3 H1 ICHL1
5 UST X0,X1,X2,X3 H1,H3 H2 ICHL2
6 UST X0,X1,X2,X3 H1,H2 H3 ICHL3
Table 3: Open DETC Tests

Test # Mode Energize Guard UST Measurement

1 GST H1 X0,H2,H3 ICH1
2 GST H2 X0,H1,H3 ICH2
3 GST H3 X0,H1,H2 ICH3
4 GST H0 X0,H1,H2,H3 ICH0
5 UST H1 H0 X0 ICHL1
6 UST H2 H0 X0 ICHL2
7 UST H3 H0 X0 ICHL3
8 UST H0 H1,H2,H3 X0 ICHL0
Table 4: Cross-Check, Per-Phase Tests for Wye-Wye Configurations (DETC on Tap)

6 ELECTRICAL TESTER - February 2016 www.megger.com

 ELECTRICAL
The industrys recognised information tool TESTER

power factor testing (part 2)

Wye-Wye Autotransformer and 3 Phase Regulators:
The cross-check, per-phase method is used in
this configuration to investigate questionable CH
values. As in the other configurations, the sum of
the watts, milliamps, and capacitances from the
cross-check tests should equal the respective values
from the overall test. Cross-check, per phase tests
are performed as given in Table 6.
CASE STUDY: Root cause failure
analysis of a 69 kV substation
transformer with secondary
ground fault
The #2 South B Bank from Tulare Substation was
removed from service. Relay targets had indicated
a differential fault on C phase. Substation
personnel performed insulation resistance tests on
the transformer which indicated that the unit had
failed. At this point the transformer was cut off the
pad and sent to the SCE Large Apparatus Repair
Facility for further testing.
Ratio test results were within specification with no
indication of abnormalities. Insulation resistance tests
yielded values of 605 M, 7.35 G, and 48 M for
CHL, CH, and CL respectively. Exciting current tests
were successfully performed at 10kV. Overall power
factor test results are shown in Table 7.
Among other problems, it was noted that the CHL
power factors on lines 3 and 6 deviated by nearly
0.1%. The assumption was made that a voltage
dependent problem was present as a result of the
failure. A power factor tip-up test was performed
for CHL, CH, and CL (Figure 1).
The test data revealed power factor tip-up
values of approximately 0.16 and 0.4% for CHL
and CH respectively, most likely due to carbon
contamination. CL power factor on the other hand
increased dramatically as voltage was increased
to 10 kV. The tip-up test in conjunction with the
insulation resistance values indicated the CL as
the principle fault location. The exciting current
and ratio tests however did not indicate the
phase in which the fault originated. The standard
supplementary tests were performed to obtain
per phase power factor values for GST and UST C phase secondary winding had sustained a
tests. The unit was constructed with a standard 3
leg core configuration, which allowed for collection
of accurate GST and UST cross-check data.
Elevation of CH3 in combination with depression
of CHL2 values indicated conclusively that the CL
fault occurred in the C phase winding (H2-H3).
Because the CHL fault for C phase was indicated
in CHL2, this verified that the H2 lead jumper
enters the C phase primary winding at the inside
edge of the primary winding adjacent to the
inter-winding barrier. The CH fault was not detected
to a significant degree in the CHL2 test, therefore
it may be deduced that the location of the fault
was in close proximity electrically to the end of the
C phase winding from which the H3 bushing
lead originates.
Because the fault occurred in C phase, the CH1
and CHL1 per phase values accurately reflected the
condition of the primary windings away from the
fault zone. The H1 lead is not common to C phase,
making any C phase anomaly invisible as seen from
CH1 and CHL1 measurements.
For procedural reasons, the DETC could not be
operated. If the DETC could have been placed
between taps, the open DETC per phase protocol
would have been performed which negates the
power factor shift as seen in the standard per
phase protocol (resulting from the CL ground fault)
and yields accurate per phase power factor data.
The winding was untanked and a physical
inspection was performed. As expected the
ground fault in proximity to the interwinding
barrier, validating the CHL2 value. It was also
discovered that the C phase static shield had
failed validating the CH3 value (which indicated
CH damage in close proximity to the H3 lead).
Conclusion
The strength of the per-phase protocol is the
localisation of incipient problems to their respective
windings, but other methods such as dissolved gas
analysis and sweep frequency response analysis
should also be employed in order to determine the
physical basis of the anomaly.
A thorough understanding of the winding
arrangement and internal geometry is essential
for proper interpretation of the per-phase data.
Winding arrangements and internal connections
will vary significantly, depending on size and
voltage class of unit.
They may be performed in cases where the CH
or CHL are elevated above the baseline values
obtained in the commissioning tests. Another
tool that SCE uses to investigate problems is a
recommended routine screening test known as
the Narrow-band dielectric frequency response test
(DFR) test (also called variable frequency power
factor). This will be the focus of the last part of this
series in the next issue of ET.
* Table 1 is in Part 1 of the series.

Measurement Test kV mA Watts %PF

ICH + ICHL 10.0 35.367 3.423 0.958
ICH 10.0 10.605 1.65 1.540
Figure 1 Power Factor Voltage Tip-up for failed 69 kV bank
ICHL 10.0 24.756 1.794 0.718
ICL + ICLH 5.0 69.377 10.759 1.535
Test # Mode Energize Guard Measurement ICL 5.0 44.615 9.300 2.064

1 GST H1 H2,H3,H0,X0,X1,X2,X3 ICH 1 ICLH 24.752 1.557 0.623

2 GST H2 H1,H3,H0,X0,X1,X2,X3 ICH2 Table 7 Overall Power Factor Results 69 kV Bank

3 GST H3 H1,H2,H0,X0,X1,X2,X3 ICH3
Measurement Test kV mA Watts %PF CAP (pF)
4 GST H0 H1,H2,H3,X0,X1,X2,X3 ICH0
ICH1 5.0 3.373 0.187 0.555 894.6
Table 5: Standard DETC Open Per-Phase Tests for Wye-Wye Configurations
ICH2 5.0 3.301 0.096 0.292 875.7
ICH3 5.0 3.898 1.128 2.894 1033.7
Tests Mode Energize Guard Float Measurement
10.572 1.411 2804.0
1 GST H1 H2,H3,H0XO X1,X2,X3 ICH1
ICHL1 5.0 8.109 0.185 0.228 2150.9
2 GST H2 H1, H3,H0XO X1,X2,X3 ICH2
ICHL2 5.0 8.535 1.119 1.311 2263.7
3 GST H3 H1,H2, H0XO X1,X2,X3 ICH3
ICHL3 5.0 8.101 0.207 0.256 2148.9
4 GST H0XO H1,H2,H3 X1,X2,X3 ICH0 24.745 1.511 6563.6
Table 6: Per Phase Tests for Wye-Wye Autotransformers and 3 Phase Regulators Table 8 Cross-Check, Per Phase Winding Power Factor Tests 69 kV Bank

www.megger.com ELECTRICAL TESTER - February 2016 7

 ELECTRICAL
The industrys recognised information tool TESTER

Q&A
Circuit breakers are at the heart of every modern power system and, to ensure those
systems are properly protected, it is essential that the breakers should operate correctly
when called upon to do so. This means that regular testing is vital, so its unsurprising
that our technical support team often receives questions on topics relating to breaker
testing. These are a few of the things were asked most frequently.

Q: When measuring the resistance of
circuit breaker contacts, the results obtained
are often considerably higher than the figures
quoted by the manufacturer. Why is this and
what can be done about it?
A: By far the most common reason for
these unexpectedly high readings is that the test
current used in making the measurement is too
low. To obtain dependable results, its essential to
use a test current of 50 A or more. The breaker
manufacturers literature, or the standard to
which the breaker is being tested, will provide
more detailed guidance. This need for high
current testing means that a general-purpose low-
resistance ohmmeter that uses only a modest test
current is unlikely to be suitable for measuring the
resistance of circuit breaker contacts.
Q: Can contact resistance be measured
with the safety earths still connected to the
breaker?
A: Yes, if the test equipment used is
confirmed by the manufacturer as being suitable
for dual-ground testing. It is important to check
this point carefully, however, as by no means all
circuit breaker test sets meet this requirement. This
throughout the opening and closing operations,
is because, as weve seen, the instrument must
inject large currents into the breaker in order to
produce dependable results. For all but the best
specified instruments this can be challenging in the
case of dual-ground working, where a substantial
proportion of the available current is typically this point all of the test current is carried by the
shunted via the path provided by the two ground arcing contacts.
connections. A short time later, the resistance will increase
Q: What is dynamic resistance almost to infinity as the arcing contacts open.
measurement (DRM) for circuit breaker By noting the time between the operation of the
main contacts and the arcing contacts, it is possible
contacts and what can it reveal about the
to deduce the remaining length of the arcing
condition of the contacts?
contacts something that could otherwise only
A: DRM essentially means measuring
be determined by dismantling the breaker. This
the resistance of the circuit breaker contacts
technique does, of course, rely on the availability
of dependable information about the motion of
and then plotting the resistance against time. The the breaker contacts during operation, but Megger
plot obtained during the opening operation is circuit breaker test sets like the TM1800 provide
particularly informative. It will show a step change facilities for accurate motion analysis as well as for
in resistance as .the main contacts open, since at DRM and support for dual-ground testing.

Five lesser-known
facts about Tesla
Keith Wilson, electrical engineer
Weve written about Nikola Tesla before in
Electrical Tester, but this enigmatic figure,
who some regard as the true father of
todays electrical technology, continues to
hold a strange fascination, not least for
those who work in the electrical sector. We
are, therefore, presenting some of the lesser-
known facts about this doughty pioneer.
Nikola Tesla is famous for his inventions
as well as his quirks, typical for a genius of
his stature. He was born during a lightning
storm, and the rest of his life was just as
extraordinary. He pursued science relentlessly
and envisaged a world where scientific
research improved and enriched peoples
lives for generations to come.
Tesla is famous for his contributions to the
design of the modern alternating current
electricity system, but there is much more
that meets the eye for this eccentric figure!
So, without further ado, lets take a look at
the top five lesser-known facts, myths and
trivia about the great man.
1. Tesla might well have been the
actual inventor of the radio
A somewhat disputed and controversial fact,
Tesla is believed to have created one of the
first practical applications for radio waves,
which had been predicted by Heinrich
Hertz. His invention involved a remote-
controlled boat with an antenna. Tesla was
able to change its direction by transmitting
radio waves to the boat, where they were
translated into mechanical movements of
its rudder. This invention coincided with
Marconis wireless transmissions over the
Atlantic, leaving many in doubt about who
discovered radio waves first.
2. He foresaw the ecological decline of
the planet
A keen observer of the world around him,
Tesla understood early on that consumerist
society was on the up and that humans were
using the Earths resources at an alarming
rate. And, as agriculture and farming are the
greatest pollutants and destroyers of natural
habitats today, Tesla was right in assuming
that a vegetarian diet would be far less
burdening for mother Earth: There is no
doubt that some plant food, such as oatmeal,
is more economical than meat, and superior
to it in regard to both mechanical and mental
performance. Such food, moreover, taxes
our digestive organs decidedly less, and, in
making us more contented and sociable,
produces an amount of good difficult to
estimate.
3. He would have been diagnosed
with OCD by todays standards
It is widely held that Tesla suffered from a
form of obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD).
He hated touching things that appeared to
be dirty (even hair!), which may be linked to
the health scares he experienced in his youth
when he was bed-bound with cholera.
He also hated jewellery, pearls and anything
round! As a dapper young man himself, Tesla
had very rigid aesthetic beliefs and somehow
round items did not fit in his vision of beauty
and being well dressed. An anecdote says
that he was so appalled by pearl jewellery
that he refused to speak to women wearing
it. He even sent his secretary home once for
the same reason!
documents and experiments and, to He also considered gender equality to be a
Later in life he developed an obsession with this day, they remain classified. Which force for good in the world, and foresaw
the number three, which meant that he begs the question of what exciting new the increasing importance of women in the
would circle a building three times before inventions has the world lost out on in the workforce and society. He postulated that:
entering it. last seventy years?
the female sex [is] endowed with no less than
4. The US Government still keeps 5. He was a humanist and supported men. But the female mind has demonstrated
some of his inventions classified gender equality a capacity for all the mental acquirements
In the days of Oculus Rift and artificial Throughout his life, Tesla was simply and achievements of men, and as generations
intelligence, what could Tesla have possibly uninterested in capitalising on his inventions ensue, that capacity will be expanded; the
invented that is so significant it has to be and unlike Edison, wasnt too troubled by the average woman will be as well educated as
kept away from the public, decades after business aspect of scientific discoveries. He the average man, and then better educated,
his death? After his passing in 1943, the believed in doing good things for mankind () Woman will ignore precedent and startle
Office ofAlien Propertyseized many of his and improving peoples lives above all else. civilization with their progress.

8 ELECTRICAL TESTER - February 2016 www.megger.com