# Distribution Transforir

Workshop 10-Feb 98 Kathi Epp ing. 

## ier 

# Distribution Transform r

.. Workshop . ' . IO'Feb 98 

### Kathi Epping

## CONSENSU;; STANDARL;,

ANSI. C57.12. 90-1993 , "IEEE Standards s Test Co d

### e' for Li ui - I ersed D istribution, Power and , egulating Transfo rmers an d IEEE Guide for Short Circuit Testing of D istribution. and Power Transformers" ANSI 057. 12.91-1995 , " IEEE Standard Test C o de for Dry-Typ e D istribution and Power Transformers" ANSI C57-.12.00-1993,-"IEEE Standard General require m ents for Liquid-Immersed Distribution, Power and Regulating Transformers"' ANSI 057.12.01-1989, "IEEE Standard General Requirements for. Dry-Type Distribution and Power Transformers, including those with Solid Cast and/or Resin-Encapsulated Windings"" 

### CON,SENSUS 

## STANDARDS

\ \ ., ANSLC57.12.90-1993, "IEEE Standards Test Code for LiquidImmersed Distribution, Power and 'Regulating Transfomiers and IEEE Guide for Sliort Circuit Testing.ofDistributionand Power " Transformers" ' , , " • 'ANSI C57.l2.91-1995, "IEEE Standard Test Code for Dry-Type Distribution and Power Transformers" • ANSI'**C57.12.00-1993,"I~EE** Standard General requirements for Liquid-Immersed Distribution, Power and Regulating Transformers"
., ANSI C57.12.01-1989, "IEEE Standard GeneralRequirements for, Dry- Type Distribution and Power Transformers, includingthose with Solid Cast and/or**Resin-Encap~ulated** Windings" -I 

# Unofficial I s



### NEMA Draft TP 2, "Standard Test Method for Measuring the Energy Consumption of Distribution Transformers" IEEE PC57. 123, "Draft Guide for Transformer Loss Measurement" 

# ... Unofficial tand rds
• NE:MA Draft 

### TP 2, "Standard Test Method for Measuring.the Energy Consumption of

.Distribution Transfonners" • ·IEE·E PC57.123,."Draft Guide for .

. Transfonner Loss Measurement"··Are the consensus standards appropriate for

referencing as the DOE-required test practice? • Is the clause-by-clause referencing of ANSI standards. in. the NIST Draft, pp. 16-20, too detailed? Should it be abbreviated by referencing only the appropriate sections in the two test codes those describing dc resistance, no-load

- loss, and load loss measurements-and alluding to the specific causes where exceptions are made? 

# Consensus tandards
• Are the consensus standards**approp~iate** for referencing as**th~_QOE-required** test practice? • Is theclause-by-clause**r~ferencing** ofANSI standards in-the NIST Draft, pp. 16-20, too _ detailed? Should it be abbreviated by referencing - only the appropriate sections inthe two test codes-those <.iesctibing dc resistance, no-load -loss, -and load loss measurements- __ and alluding to the- specific clauses where exceptions are- made?

# Conse1 u s Stanza

Should additional relevant standards now in preparation and approval stages, such as 

### IEEE PC57. 123/D 1 A "Draft Guide for Transformer Loss Measurement" & NE TP2 be considered additional or alternative references? Will they add to the knowledge base of the already existing consensus 

### standards or enhance the user convenience? 

# .Consensus tandards

- . . . . 

### • .·Should additional relevant standards now in preparation and C!pproval stages,. such as--
/ . 

### IEEE PC57.123/Dl.l "Draft Guide for Transformer Loss Measurement" & NEMA 

### TP...2be considered additional 

## or alternative ' references? Will they add to the knowledge

.base ofthe already existing consensus-· standards or enhance the user convenience?

# Basic Model

Basic model means all units of a given type of covered equipment (or class thereof) manufactured by a single manufacturer and, with respect to distribution transformers, which have the same rating, have electrical characterist i cs that are essentially identical, - and do not have any differing physical or electrical characteristics which .affect energy consumption or efficiency. 

# Basic 

# Model Definition
• Basic model means all units of a given type of covered equipment (or class thereof) manufacture.d by a single manufacturer and, with respect to distribution transformers,_ which have '. the same rating, have electrical characteristics that are essentially**identical,~** and do not have anydiffering physical or electrical characteristics which affect energy consumption or efficiency.· .'

## Ba s ic M

-on vie

### w i 

### fo r 

### a "bas i 

### c model , 

### " do you ant i 

### c i p ate s i g 

### n i fi 

### can t 

### d i 

### ffi c 

### ul ti 

### e s in 

### group i 

### ng-you r p r

### od u 

### cts i 

### nto b as i 

### c r tho 

## se manu

### facturers having i tem

### s , a per model, would it po ssi b 

### le . . numb er of * 

### is ' I nto f am i 

### l ie s s 6 f ba si c models, ®, group in g m any act ua l product i on' t h e s.a no mi nal kVA, rat in g i n one family of - mod els? 

# Basic 

# Model
• In view of such a definition for a "basic model,"

- , do you anticipate significant difficulties in

, ' grouping your products into:basic models?
,. For those manufacturers having only**~** few itemsper model, would it be possible to combine a ' number ofmodels into families ofbasic models, e.g.,'grouping many actual production 'models of the s_amenominal kV A rating in one family of' models?

### • Would it be possible to combine similar

manufacturing models, e.g., having the same nominal kVA rating, in one "basic model" by using normalized loss data? 

# Basic· od 1 ...

, 

### • Would it be possible to combine similar manufacturing models, e.g., having the same nominal kVA rat'ing, in one "basic model" by using normalized los's data?

### "Loss Percentage (LP)" defined as



### =100[1+(ALwhere AL represents actual measured total losses, and ML represents mandated maximum total losses Such an approach appears to be valid for X1 1 manufacturing models having sim ilar variability for (AL/Mt)0**~** 

# .

Basic Model- normalized losses • "Loss Percentage (LP) " defined as.· LP== 100 [1 +(

### AL- ML )/ML 

### • where AL. represents actuall11easured total

.. losses, andML represents mandated 

### maximum total losses - • Such an approach appears to be valid for all .. manufacturing· models having similar variability for (AL/ML).

## ampling r an

Please provide comments on the two sampling plans DOE is considering for compliance testing. 

### Please describe other approaches you believe DOE should consider. 

# Sampling Plan • Please provide COlTIlTIents on the two. sampling plans DOE 

### is considerin.g for cotnplianc.e. testing . • ' Please describe other approaches you

. believe DOE 

### should consider.

## Measure of Energy C o n

• Are there any strong reasons why efficiency should not be used? • Should other: measures of energy consumption be considered: e.g., loss power normalized relative to output kVA, ether onper unit basis or percentage basis? • Is reporting of efficiency and losses at reduced loading levels appropriate for an energy conservation standard? 

# easure ofEnergy Consumption
• ,Are**th~re** any strong reasons why efficiency

- -should not be used? • Should other'measures of energy consumption be considered: e.,g., loss power normalized relative

.to output kV A, eithe:r on per unit basis or " percentage basis? • Is reporting 

### ofefficiency and losses at"reduced loading levels appropriate for an 'energy conservation standard?

### What specific requirements - in the NIST

draft test procedure are , causing c oncern about significant additional burden i ^^ , used 

### by testing requirements? 

# Industry urden

, - 

### ..• What specific requirements· in 

### the.NIST



### . draft test procedure are 

### causing concern . ab-out significant additional burden imposed

. by testing requirements?

. 1

## Reference T IIT

### ID tt^

# ratu j,(



### 20 ° C for No Load, both Liquid-Immersed & Dry Type • Single Reference Temp. . of 75°G for Load for Dry-Type 55°C for Liquid-Immersed at 50% Load**~** . .


# . Reference Temp ratures • 20 0 

## e for No Load, both Liquid-Immersed Dry-Type .• Single Reference Temp.of75°C for Load for Dry-Type 

### • 55°e for Liquid-Immersed at 50% Load

## Correc

• Using G.57.12.90 Load loss correction due to phase angle f w both liquid and dry-type No load loss corrected to reference temperature of 20oC 

# Corrections

- - . . 

### . -Using C.57.12.90 • Load loss correction due to phase angle for both liquid and dry-type



### - No load loss corrected to reference temperature of 200C . > •

.**:~.**

## Quality Ass

C57. i 2.00 Measurement Uncertainty Are - there concerns - about applying measurement accuracy requirements to dry ype transformers (as is now done for liquid-immersed) and about including a clause for guidance from ISO 9001-1993 on measurement quality assurance procedures? 

## Quality Assurance • ·C57.12.00 Measurement Uncertainty·
I _ " .

- . 

### Tolerances •. Are there concerns about applying measurement accuracy requirements to dry- ...• type transformers .(as is now done for liquid-immersed) and about including a .

. . 

### clause for guidance_from ISO '900,1.-1993 on 

### ··measurement quality assurance procedures?

. , "