NETA World Journal | Winter 2020

SPRING2013 WINTER2020

CHALLENGES IN

TRANSFORMER PROTECTION TESTING

INVESTIGATING AN ELECTROMECHANICAL DIFFERENTIAL RELAY MISOPERATION PAGE 52 TESTING TECHNIQUES FOR PROTECTION-CLASS CURRENT TRANSFORMERS PAGE 62 TESTING AND COMMISSIONING A DISTRIBUTION RECLOSER IN GRID-TIE SOLAR FARMS PAGE 72

Introducing

Rentals and Leasing

When you need it. Where you need it.

Megger Rentals and Leasing is the newest way to get access to Megger’s extensive line of electrical testing equipment, our technical expertise and our history of experience in the industry.

When you rent with Megger, you partner with a leader in electrical testing that will provide you with: Expert technical support Reliability in our equipment and our knowledge of electrical testing A one-stop-shop built on our extensive range of test solutions Contact us today to get your hands on the best electrical testing equipment in: Protection and Relay Testing Instrument Transformer Testing Cable Test and Diagnostics

1.800.728.6269

rentals@megger.com

Insulation Testing Low-Resistance Testing Battery Testing

us.megger.com/rentals

TABLE OF CONTENTS

WINTER2020 · VOLUME 42, NO. 4 FEAT URES

COVER S T O RY

52

Investigating an Electromechanical Differential Relay Misoperation Alex Rangel, Saber Power Services, LLC

62

Testing Techniques for Protection-Class Current Transformers

Dinesh Chhajer and Sughosh Kuber, Megger USA

40

72

Testing and Commissioning a Distribution Recloser in Grid-Tie Solar Farms Mohit Sharma, Megger, and Luis Montoya, PE, FlexGen Power Systems formerly ABM

Challenges in Transformer Protection Testing While the basic premise of transformer differential protection is straightforward, features found in relay algorithms compensate for challenges presented by the transformer differential application. This article describes typical functional differential tests and their challenges and presents a system-based alternative that reduces challenges and ensures settings are adequate. Instructions for setup and execution are accompanied by test cases, and the benefits and drawbacks of systembased testing are compared.

Scott Cooper, OMICRON electronics

72

COVER PHOTO: © ISTOCKPHOTO.COM/PORTFOLIO/MINEMERO

TABLE OF CONTENTS

NETAWORLD

•

3

TABLE OF CONTENTS IN EVERY ISSUE

CAP CORNER

7

President’s Desk

98

NFPA 70E and NETA

108 Insights & Observations — CAP Spotlight

Scott Blizard, American Electrical Testing Co., LLC NETA President

10

19

24

30

32

Looking at NFPA 70E 2021 — Part 1 Ron Widup and James R. White, Shermco Industries

Relay Column

Combustion Turbine Generator Trip Analysis Steve Turner, Arizona Public Service Company

Safety Corner

Basic Fall Protection Paul Chamberlain, American Electrical Testing Co., LLC

Tech Quiz

Protective Relaying James R. White, Shermco Industries

Advancements in the Industry

PF Measurements on Complete Stator Windings Mathieu Lachance, OMICRON electronics Canada

AEMC Instruments: Over 125 Years of Technical Heritage and Innovation in Test Instrumentation

SPECIFICATIONS AND STANDARDS 112 ANSI/NETA Standards Update IMPORTANT LISTS 119 NETA Accredited Companies 126 Advertiser List

Tech Tips

Ground Testing Procedures Jeff Jowett, Megger

INDUSTRY TOPICS 84

Impact of SFRA Setup Issues on Transformer Frequency Response

Michael D. Wolf, PE, Doble Engineering Co.

92

4

•

Understanding and Avoiding Battery Failure

Rodrick J. Van Wart, AVO Training Institute, Inc.

WINTER 2020

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Nobody Works Harder For You Than Protec We understand that you need experienced people to align you with the proper electrical test and measurement equipment, in the right place at the right time.

That’s why we are the number one choice for mission critical equipment, where time, quality and service are vital.

Electrical test equipment is our specialty your satisfaction is our passion.

For a Quote Call 844-776-8320 Rental and Sales

Protec is your source for electrical test equipment rental and sales, working with leading manufacturers to offer flexible daily, weekly, and monthly lease rates. If you are not sure what equipment best fits for your needs, call us for a consultation and quote. Our support line is open 24 hours and we can deliver equipment immediately in case of emergency.

Calibration Services

Our calibration labs Dallas and Chicago offer NISTtraceable calibration services for all makes and models of electrical test and measurement equipment. Our qualified technicians will ensure that your electrical test instruments are working at peak performance and meet all manufacturer standards. Quick turnaround is standard, with most equipment completed in 5 business days or less.

Asset Management

Eliminate your overhead and minimize equipment downtime with Protec’s asset management services. We customize a unique solution for your business to store, calibrate and maintain your equipment for whenever you need it. Receive analytics for ROI, yield and utilization to drive educated business decisions.

National Headquarters

1517 W Carrier Pkwy, Ste 116 Grand Prairie, TX 75050

Los Angeles

2935 E Ricker Way Anaheim, CA 92806

Houston

14251 Gulfstream Park Drive Webster, TX 77598

Chicago

1501 Wright Blvd Schaumburg, IL 60193

Reno-Tahoe

924 Greg Street Sparks, NV 89431

Denver

12050 E 45th Ave, Ste 400 Denver, CO 80239

Atlanta

880 Veterans Memorial Hwy Mableton, GA 30126

New York City

70 Triangle Boulevard Carlstadt, NJ 07072

The Electrical Test and Measurement Equipment Rental Experts Large Enough To Serve Your Needs, Small Enough to Care

protecequip.com

3050 Old Centre Road, Suite 101 Portage, MI 49024 Toll free: 888.300.NETA (6382) Phone: 269.488.NETA (6382) Fax: 269.488.6383 neta@netaworld.org www.netaworld.org executive director: Missy Richard NETA Officers president: Scott Blizard, American Electrical Testing Co., Inc. first vice president: Eric Beckman, National Field Services second vice president: Scott Dude, Dude Electrical Testing, LLC secretary: Dan Hook, Western Electrical Services, Inc. treasurer: John White, Sigma Six Solutions, Inc. NETA Board of Directors Ken Bassett (Potomac Testing, Inc.) Eric Beckman (National Field Services) Scott Blizard (American Electrical Testing Co., Inc.) Jim Cialdea (CE Power Engineered Services, LLC) Scott Dude (Dude Electrical Testing LLC) Dan Hook (Western Electrical Services, Inc.) David Huffman (Power Systems Testing) Alan Peterson (Utility Service Corporation) Chasen Tedder, Hampton Tedder Technical Services John White (Sigma Six Solutions) Ron Widup (Shermco Industries) non-voting board member

Lorne Gara (Shermco Industries) NETA World Staff technical editors: Roderic L. Hageman, Tim Cotter assistant technical editors: Jim Cialdea, Dan Hook, Dave Huffman, Bob Sheppard associate editor: Resa Pickel managing editor: Carla Kalogeridis copy editor: Beverly Sturtevant advertising manager: Laura McDonald design and production: Moon Design NETA Committee Chairs

conference: Ron Widup; membership: Ken Bassett;

Delivering Powerful Reliability Solutions ✔ Power System Acceptance Testing ✔ Commissioning and Start-up ✔ Maintenance ✔ Coordination and Arc Flash Studies ✔ Troubleshoot and Repair ✔ Training and Engineering Services ✔ Planning and Operations Support Reversed ✔ Project Management Sigma Six Solutions, Inc. 2200 West Valley Hwy North, Suite 100 | Auburn, WA 98001 | Sales: 425-293-1239 www.sigmasix.com

promotions/marketing: Scott Blizard; safety: Scott Blizard and Jim White; technical: Alan Peterson; technical exam: Dan Hook; continuing technical development: David Huffman; training: Eric Beckman; finance: John White;

nominations: Alan Peterson; alliance program: Jim Cialdea; association development: Ken Bassett and John White

© Copyright 2020, NETA

NOTICE AND DISCLAIMER

NETA World is published quarterly by the InterNational Electrical Testing Association.

Opinions, views and conclusions expressed in articles herein are those of the authors and not necessarily those of NETA. Publication herein does not constitute or imply endorsement of any opinion, product, or service by NETA, its directors, officers, members, employees or agents (herein “NETA”).

All technical data in this publication reflects the experience of individuals using specific tools, products, equipment and components under specific conditions and circumstances which may or may not be fully reported and over which NETA has neither exercised nor reserved control.

Such data has not been independently tested or otherwise verified by NETA. NETA MAKES NO ENDORSEMENT, REPRESENTATION OR WARRANTY AS TO ANY OPINION, PRODUCT OR SERVICE REFERENCED OR ADVERTISED IN THIS PUBLICATION. NETA EXPRESSLY DISCLAIMS ANY AND ALL LIABILITY TO ANY CONSUMER, PURCHASER OR ANY OTHER PERSON USING ANY PRODUCT OR SERVICE REFERENCED OR ADVERTISED HEREIN FOR ANY INJURIES OR DAMAGES OF ANY KIND WHATSOEVER, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE, SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL, DIRECT OR INDIRECT DAMAGES. NETA FURTHER DISCLAIMS ANY AND ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OF IMPLIED, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, ANY IMPLIED WARRANTY OF FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. ELECTRICAL TESTING SHALL BE PERFORMED ONLY BY TRAINED ELECTRICAL PERSONNEL AND SHALL BE SUPERVISED BY NETA CERTIFIED TECHNICIANS/ LEVEL III OR IV OR BY NICET CERTIFIED TECHNICIANS IN ELECTRICAL TESTING TECHNOLOGY/LEVEL III OR IV. FAILURE TO ADHERE TO ADEQUATE TRAINING, SAFETY REQUIREMENTS, AND APPLICABLE PROCEDURES MAY RESULT IN LOSS OF PRODUCTION, CATASTROPHIC EQUIPMENT FAILURE, SERIOUS INJURY OR DEATH.

PRESIDENT’S DESK

WELCOME TO THE WINTER EDITION This edition of NETA World features articles on electrical power system protection. Protection schemes covering feeder, generation, transmission, and transformers may have many similarities, but they often contain specific functions or schemes unique to that type of equipment.

Be sure you check out this edition’s four feature articles: • “Challenges in Transformer Protection Testing,” by Scott Cooper of OMICRON electronics • “Testing Techniques for Protection-Class Current Transformers,” by Dinesh Chhajer and Sughosh Kuber, Megger USA • “Testing and Commissioning a Distribution Recloser in Grid-Tie Solar Farms,” by Mohit Sharma of Megger and Luis Montoya, PE, of FlexGen Power Systems, formerly ABM • “Investigating an Electromechanical Differential Relay Misoperation,” by Alex Rangel of Saber Power Services, LLC It is presently October 2020, and the country is in the middle of a COVID-19 virus resurgence.

NETA Member Companies and their technicians throughout the United States and in Canada have been identified as essential workers as they help support and maintain our nation’s critical infrastructure. Be sure to follow your company’s and customers’ safety policies for the COVID-19 pandemic. The policy should include many of the preventative measures to limit the spread of the COVID-19 virus that have been communicated by the CDC in the United States and by the Public Health Agency of Canada. Be safe, and err on the side of caution.

Mark your calendars for PowerTest 2021, the premier electrical maintenance and safety conference on March 8–12, 2021. This will be the first hybrid conference in NETA’s history! If you are unable to attend PowerTest 2021 in person, NETA will provide an opportunity to attend virtually. This portion of the event will allow people to interact on a web-based platform rather than meeting in a physical location.

Online sessions will include feature webinars and webcasts as well as opportunity for NETA Certified Technicians to receive CTDs for attending virtually. Call the NETA office for details on CTD and CEU credits offered for attending the virtual portion of PowerTest 2021. Be sure you register to ensure a spot among the leaders in the electrical testing industry.

Coach safe behavior….Live injury and disease free every day!

Scott A. Blizard, President International Electrical Testing Association Safety First…No One Gets Hurt!

PRESIDENT’S DESK

NETAWORLD

•

7

Superior Service for Optimal Performance Whether you need startup services, ongoing maintenance, or emergency response you need a partner you can trust.

Rely on Vertiv’s Electrical Reliability Services’ team for expertise, responsiveness, and safety.

• • •

Consistent quality, service-delivery process Proactive customer communication and project management National, regional, and local service center availability

To learn more, visit ERS.Vertiv.com or call 877-468-6384 Experts Available Across Six Centers of Excellence: Commissioning | Electrical Engineering | DC Power Testing and Maintenance | Protection and Controls | Compliance

Vertiv™ and the Vertiv logo are trademarks or registered trademarks of Vertiv Group Corp. All other names and logos referred to are trade names, trademarks or registered trademarks of their respective owners.

Vertiv-ERS-COE-AD-2-EN-NA-8x5.25.indd 1

12/07/2019 4:01:37 PM

Absolute confidence. Every time.

You can count on us for specialized experience in healthcare, data center, office complex, and commercial acceptance and maintenance testing. Absolutely. Power generation, petrochemical, oil & gas, and heavy industries also look to us for high demand services such as start-up commissioning, maintenance testing, shut-down and turnarounds, and breaker shop repair. Get started today.

Toll Free 1+ (855)767-4446 8100 West Little York | Houston, Texas 77040 Email: Alan Postiglione | apost@absolutetesting.com | www.absolutetesting.com

Like us on:

THE NFPA 70E AND NETA

LOOKING AT NFPA 70E 2021: PA R T 1 B Y R O N WIDUP an d J AM ES R. WH IT E, Shermco Industries

In this issue of NETA World, we begin to explain some of the major changes in the 2021 edition of NFPA 70E. So whether you love the 70E, or find it a challenge and don’t want to deal with it…because your life at work is mandated by it, and you know what that means: Do it or else!

But that is not the case. NFPA 70E is a standard and is not mandatory. However, your company has the option of making parts of it their policy, which would then be mandatory for you. Companies often adopt all or part of the 70E because the 70E Committee includes representatives from 26 companies, including NETA, in the formation of the content for the standard, and it contains the latest thinking and information available concerning electrical safety and safe work practice. Your company wants you to go home to your family

10

• WINTER 2020

uninjured. NFPA 70E only covers electrical safety and nothing else.

So familiarize yourself with the latest changes to the 2021 edition of the 70E. Here are a few of the changes.

ARTI CLE 100 There are very few revisions in Article 100, Definitions. Let’s start with a definition that has not changed: Arc Rating. The important portion of the definition is in Informational Note No. 1: LOOKING AT NFPA 70E 2021: PART 1

THE NFPA 70E AND NETA

The familiar tag in Figure 2 causes some confusion, since it seems to be for arcrated clothing; it even shows an arc thermal performance value (ATPV). The tag references NFPA 2112, which is a valid standard, but not for arc-rated clothing or PPE. NFPA 2112 is for flash fires, and that type of clothing is required for petrochemical facilities. This clothing, if properly marked, could be dualrated as arc-rated and for flash fires, but both would need to be shown on the label.

ASTM F1506-10a 6.3 Garments shall be labeled with the following information:

6.3.2 6.3.6

6.3.1 Tracking identification code system,

6.3.5

6.3.2 Meets requirement of Performance Specification F1506,

PPE Selection Advice: If the garment

states compliance with ASTM F1506-10a but the label is not correct, buyer beware!

6.3.3 Manufacturer’s name, 6.4.4 Size and other associated standard labeling,

6.4.4

6.3.3

6.3.5 Care instructions and fiber contents, and

6.3.1

6.3.6 Arc rating (ATPV) or arc rating (Ebt)

Figure 1: ASTM F1506-Required Label

Look for these numbers when purchasing clothing or PPE: • NFPA 70E, of course

Figure 2: Confusing Label — Not Arc-Rated

• NFPA 2112: flash fires only • ASTM F1506: arc-rated clothing always marked with ASTM F1506, may also be marked ASTM F1509/F1509M, and be dual-rated with NFPA 2112 if properly marked • ASTM F2178/2178M: arc-rated face shields, balaclavas, and hoods • ASTM F1891: arc-rated rainwear • ASTM F2675/2675M: arc-rated hand protection • CSA Z462: Canada’s NFPA 70E-equivalent standard LOOKING AT NFPA 70E 2021: PART 1

Definition Revisions Revisions to NFPA 70E are shown in legislative text: Deleted language is shown in red and crossed through, and added text is shown underlined. All definitions are in Article 100, Definitions.

Deleted. The definitions for Accessible, Readily Accessible, and Branch Circuit were deleted.

None were used in NFPA 70E. Arc Rating. Although the definition for arc rating did not change, revisions were made to the Informational Notes to make them consistent with ASTM language and to provide clarity: NETAWORLD

•

11

COURTESY OBERON, A DIVISION OF CHATSWORTH PRODUCTS

Some technicians or purchasing agents have purchased the incorrect clothing, thinking it was arc rated, only to find out it is for flash fires (refineries and pipelines). Clothing and PPE rated for an arc flash has a tag on the inside of the clothing similar to Figure 1, which is from Oberon, a major supplier of arc-rated clothing and PPE.

ASTM F1506-10a Performance Standard

COURTESY SHERMCO INDUSTRIES

PHOTO: © WWW.SHUTTERSTOCK.COM/G/PINYO+PROMPRASERT

• Informational Note No. 1: Arc-rated clothing or equipment indicates that it has been tested for exposure to an electric arc.

Flame resistant clothing without an arc rating has not been tested for exposure to an electric arc. All arc-rated clothing is also flame-resistant.

THE NFPA 70E AND NETA • The previous content in Informational Note No. 2 was moved to Informational Note No. 3: Breakopen is a material response evidenced by the formation of one or more holes in the innermost layer of arc-rated material that would allow flame to pass through the material.

• Informational Note No. 3: EBT is defined in ASTM F1959/F1959M, Standard Test Method for Determining the Arc Rating of Materials for Clothing, as the incident energy (cal/cm2) on a material or a material system that results in a 50 percent probability of breakopen. Breakopen is defined as a hole with a material response evidenced by the formation of one or more holes of a defined size [an area of 1.6 cm2 (0.5 in.2) or an opening of 2.5 cm (1.0 in.) in any dimension] in the innermost layer of arcrated material that would allow thermal energy to pass through the material.

Balaclava. (Sock Hood): An arc-rated hood head-protective fabric that protects the neck and head except for a small portion of the facial area of the eyes and nose.

Informational Note: Some balaclava designs protect the neck and head area except for the eyes while others leave the eyes and nose area unprotected.

Figure 3 shows a typical balaclava. Note that a properly fitted balaclava will not be tight, but will fit loosely, as shown. A tight-fitting balaclava will reduce the arc rating. Many companies we’ve visited had only one balaclava for all their qualified persons. This is incorrect and places their workers at risk.

12

• WINTER 2020

COURTESY REECE LIFE CRITICAL SAFETY PRODUCTS

• Informational Note No. 2: ATPV is defined in ASTM F1959/F1959M, Standard Test Method for D etermining the Arc Rating of Materials for Clothing, as the incident energy (cal/cm2) on a material or a multilayer system of materials that results in a 50% probability that sufficient heat transfer through the tested specimen is predicted to cause the onset of a second degree skin burn injury based on the Stoll curve.

Figure 3: Balaclava and Arc-Rated Face Shield Not all balaclavas are arc-rated. A balaclava is any type of head covering that has an opening for the face and/or eyes. A ski mask is considered a type of balaclava. A visit to any of the Internet providers will show a wide variety of balaclavas that are not arc-rated, but wool.

Wool would be fuel for the fire.

Barrier. A physical obstruction that is intended to prevent contact with equipment or energized electrical conductors and circuit parts or to prevent unauthorized access to a work area.

The Committee believed the last portion of the definition was unnecessary.

Electrically Safe Work Condition. An Informational Note was added for Electrically Safe Work Condition.

• Informational Note: An electrically safe work condition is not a procedure, it is a state wherein all hazardous electrical conductors or circuit parts to which a worker might be exposed are maintained in a deLOOKING AT NFPA 70E 2021: PART 1

THE NFPA 70E AND NETA energized state for the purpose of temporarily eliminating electrical hazards for the period of time for which the state is maintained.

Informational Notes are not mandatory but contain information directly related to whatever it may be part of. This Informational Note states that putting equipment into an electrically safe work condition is not a procedure; it is a process, which is ongoing. The purpose is to maintain a deenergized state to protect the worker. The word “temporary” and the phrase “for the period of time for which the state is maintained” were added to emphasize that this is not a permanent change; it is only in effect during the task being performed and will be returned to its normal, energized state.

This is Second Revision language. In the First Revision, the language was somewhat different.

This type of revision happens often during the meetings. A change will be made during the First Revision; then, a Public Comment will come in and a change will be voted to make further revisions in the Second Revision.

Fault Current Available. An additional Informational Note No. 3 was added to the definition for Fault Current, Available: • Informational Note No. 3: The available fault current varies at different locations within the system due to the location of sources and system impedances.

When a definition is used in the NEC (NFPA 70), it will be noted at the end of that definition as [70:100] where 100 is the NEC Article it will appear in.

Switchgear Equipment, Arc-Resistant.

Equipment designed to withstand the effects of an internal arcing fault and that directs the internally released energy away from the employee.

A number of revisions were made to this definition. First, the name was changed to acknowledge that more types of arc-rated equipment are being manufactured.

Two new Informational Notes provide where to obtain more information.

• Informational Note No. 1: An example of a standard that provides information for arc-resistant equipment is IEEE C37.20.7, Guide for Testing Switchgear Rated Up to 52 kV for Internal Arcing Faults.

• Informational Note No. 2: See O.2.4 (9) for information on arc-resistant equipment.

Voltage, Nominal. A new Informational Note was added to this definition.

• Informational Note No. 3: Certain battery units are rated at nominal 48 volts dc but have a charging float voltage up to 58 volts.

In dc applications, 60 volts is used to cover the entire range of float voltages.

Of course, any impedances in the path of the fault current will reduce it, sometimes by quite a bit. It depends on the impedance.

Pretty self-explanatory, although note that OSHA considers 50 volts and above as an electrical hazard. OSHA has stated they will not accept higher voltages, even if they are in a standard.

Receptacle. A receptacle is a contact device installed at the outlet for the connection of an attachment plug, or for the direct connection of electrical utilization equipment designed to mate with the corresponding contact device. A single receptacle is a single contact device with no other contact device on the same yoke. A multiple receptacle is two or more contact devices on the same yoke. [70:100]

Working on Electrical Conductors or Circuit Parts. Intentionally coming in contact with energized electrical conductors or circuit parts with the hands, feet, or other body parts, with tools, probes, or with test equipment, regardless of the personal protective equipment (PPE) a person is wearing. There are two categories of “working on”: Diagnostic (testing) is taking readings or measurements of electrical equipment, conductors,

LOOKING AT NFPA 70E 2021: PART 1

NETAWORLD

•

13

THE NFPA 70E AND NETA

METHOD TO SEPARATE DIAGNOSTICS FROM REPAIR: IF ONLY A TEST INSTRUMENT IS USED, IT IS DIAGNOSTIC. IF A TOOL IS BEING USED, IT IS REPAIR.

There are no major revisions to this definition, except to separate the two categories of “working on” — diagnostic (testing) and repair — to clarify their differences. It is worthwhile to mention that any change to a piece of equipment, even tightening screws on a terminal block, would be considered repair.

This is brought up because some supervisors and technicians don’t believe that tightening screws is repair. Use this simple method to separate diagnostics from repair; If only a test instrument is used, it is diagnostic. If a tool is being used, it is repair.

Figure 4a and Figure 4b show an event caused by this misunderstanding of the definition.

The supervisor had to leave for another part of the job. The apprentice technician was told only to tighten things “that were not hot.” The apprentice mistakenly used a 1,000-volt-rated tester to test a 4,160-volt potential transformer (PT) to see if it was energized. Things did not go well, and the apprentice suffered serious burns.

Figure 4a: What He Tested

14

• WINTER 2020

A LI TTLE REORGANI Z ATI ON, A GA IN NFPA 70E again reorganized to make 70E easier to use and to place information in its proper place.

Article 110 includes some major changes: • 110.1 Priority (used to be 105.4) • 110.2 General [used to be 120.2(A)] • 110.3 (used to be 130.2) Electrically Safe Work Condition • 110.4 [used to be 130.2(A)] Energized Work • 110.5(A) (used to be 110.1) Electrical Safety Program • 110.6 (used to be 110.2) Training Requirements • 110.7 (used to be 110.3) Host and Contract Employer’s Responsibilities • 110.8 [used to be 110.4(A)] Testing Instruments and Equipment • 110.9 (used to be 110.5) Portable Cordand Plug-Connected Equipment PHOTOS COURTESY JOSEPH J. ANDREWS, PE ELECTRICAL SAFETY RESOURCES, INC.

USE THIS SIMPLE

or circuit parts with approved test equipment that does not require making any physical change to the electrical equipment, conductors, or circuit parts. repair Repair is any physical alteration of electrical equipment, conductors, or circuit parts (such as making or tightening connections, removing or replacing components, etc.).

Figure 4b: What He Should Have Tested LOOKING AT NFPA 70E 2021: PART 1

THE NFPA 70E AND NETA • 110.10 (used to be 110.6) Ground-Fault Circuit-Interrupter (GFCI) Protection • 110.11 (used to be 110.7) Overcurrent Protection Modification.

• 110.12 (new) Equipment Use Article 130 also saw some major reorganizational changes: • 130.1 General • 130.2 Energized Electrical Work Permit • 130.3 Open • 130.4 Shock Risk Assessment • 130.5 Arc Flash Risk Assessment • 130.6 Open • 130.7 Personal and Other Protective Equipment • 130.8 Other Precautions for Personnel Activities • 130.9 Work Within the Limited Approach Boundary or Arc Flash Boundary of Overhead Lines

0 Section 110.1 Priority Hazard elimination shall be the first priority in the implementation of safety-related work practices.

0 Informational Note No. 2: An electrically safe work condition is a state wherein all hazardous electrical conductors or circuit parts to which a worker might be exposed are placed and maintained in a zeroenergy de-energized state, for the purpose of temporarily eliminating electrical hazards. See Article 120 for requirements to establish an electrically safe work condition for the period of time for which the state is maintained. See Informative Annex F for information regarding the hierarchy of risk control and hazard elimination.

Committee Statement An example of a Committee statement is shown below. This is not done for every revision; it is only shown as an example of how the Committee justifies the revisions made.

At this point, NFPA staff could leave 130.3 and 130.6 open, or they could decide to renumber the entire article(s). The NFPA Manual of Style allows articles to be left open for future use. The only way to be sure is to view the actual 2021 70E. Readers will have to do what everyone else will do: Wait and see.

This second revision improves clarity in the informational note by replacing the undefined term “zero energy” with the defined term “deenergized.” In addition, language is added to clarify that elimination is achieved by disconnecting and isolating from energy sources all electrical conductors or circuit parts to which a worker might be exposed in the area where work is to take place. Additionally, it is clarified that this de-energization is a temporary state and exists only during the period for which the electrically safe work condition state is maintained. This informational note correlates with the purpose of NFPA 70E which is to provide a “practical” safe working area for employees relative to the hazards arising from the use of electricity.

Deep Dive. Section 110.1 Priority was moved from Article 105 to bring more prevalence to it. The Committee believed it was a better fit in 110, as we did with the other changes in section order. Some changes were made to its Informational Note:

Some of the revisions being made are from the First Revision based on Public Comments or Committee discussions. This is a fairly common occurrence and demonstrates the thought (and discussions) that go into all Public Inputs and Public Comments. We always have a reason for

• 130.10 Underground Electrical Lines and Equipment • 130.11 Cutting and Drilling • 130.12 Cutting, Removing or Rerouting of Conductors

LOOKING AT NFPA 70E 2021: PART 1

NETAWORLD

•

15

THE NFPA 70E AND NETA a revision. It isn’t done on a whim or without thought and discussion.

The Second Revision version of NFPA 70E and all Committee Statements are available on www.NFPA.org/70E/nextedition. The First Revision is only available during the Public Comment period. People ask why the Committee takes some action, and the comments are there to answer that question.

C ONC LUSION This column has tried to explain some of the workings of the NFPA 70E Committee. The work is certainly not taken lightly by the Committee members. We make all efforts to ensure the 70E is easier to use, clearer on its intent, and contains the most effective safety requirements.

The changes made to the 2021 edition on NFPA 70E are not as far-reaching as those in the 2015 and 2018 editions. The above

revisions and their explanations are only the beginning of this series of columns explaining the revisions made for the 2021 edition. Some of the changes are covered in this article.

Part 2 in the Spring 2021 issue will cover additional detail, and more information will be presented in this ongoing series of 70E & NETA columns. We hope this is helpful to all our readers, many of whom depend on NFPA 70E for their jobs.

We hope it helps the field technicians, owners, and supervisors of both NETA accredited companies and non-NETA entities understand and interpret NFPA 70E better. Following the requirements of the 70E, whether mandated or not, will prevent injuries and possible fatalities.

REFERENCES Joseph J. Andrews, PE. “Case History — Who’s at Fault?” Electrical Safety Resources, Inc. IEEE Electrical Safety Workshop 2002.

Ron Widup and Jim White are NETA’s representatives to NFPA Technical Committee 70E, Electrical Safety Requirements for Employee Workplaces. Both gentlemen are employed by Shermco Industries in Dallas, Texas, a NETA Accredited Company.

Ron Widup, Senior Advisor, Technical Services and Vice Chairman of the Board of Directors, has been with Shermco Industries since 1983. He is a member of Technical Committee on NFPA 70E, Electrical Safety in the Workplace; a Principal Member of National Electrical Code (NFPA 70) Code Panel 11; a Principal Member of the Technical Committee on NFPA 790, Standard for Competency of Third-Party Evaluation Bodies; a Principal Member of the Technical Committee on NFPA 791, Recommended Practice and Procedures for Unlabeled Electrical Equipment Evaluation; a member of the Technical Committee on NFPA 70B, Recommended Practice for Electrical Equipment Maintenance, and Vice Chair for IEEE Std. 3007.3, Recommended Practice for Electrical Safety in Industrial and Commercial Power Systems. Ron also serves on NETA’s board of directors and Standards Review Council. He is a NETA Certified Level 4 Senior Test Technician, a State of Texas Journeyman Electrician, an IEEE Standards Association member, an Inspector Member of the International Association of Electrical Inspectors, and an NFPA Certified Electrical Safety Compliance Professional (CESCP).

16

• WINTER 2020

James (Jim) R. White, Vice President of Training Services, has worked for Shermco Industries since 2001. He is a NFPA Certified Electrical Safety Compliance Professional and a NETA Level 4 Senior Technician. Jim is NETA’s principal member on NFPA Technical Committee NFPA 70E®, Electrical Safety in the Workplace; NETA’s principal representative on National Electrical Code® Code-Making Panel (CMP) 13; and represents NETA on ASTM International Technical Committee F18, Electrical Protective Equipment for Workers. Jim is Shermco Industries’ principal member on NFPA Technical Committee for NFPA 70B, Recommended Practice for Electrical Equipment Maintenance and represents AWEA on the ANSI/ISEA Standard 203, Secondary Single-Use Flame Resistant Protective Clothing for Use Over Primary Flame Resistant Protective Clothing. An IEEE Senior Member, Jim was Chairman of the IEEE Electrical Safety Workshop in 2008 and is currently Vice Chair for the IEEE IAS/PCIC Safety Subcommittee.

LOOKING AT NFPA 70E 2021: PART 1

One Line. One Company.

The largest NETA Accredited technical group in the industry, that never compromises safety.

As North America’s largest independent electrical testing company, our most important Company core value should come as no surprise: assuring the safety of our people and our customer’s people. First and foremost.

Our service technicians are NETA-certified and trained to comply and understand electrical safety standards and regulations such as OSHA, NFPA 70E, CSA Z462, and other international guidelines. Our entire staff including technicians, engineers, administrators and management is involved and responsible for the safety of our co-workers, our customers, our contractors as well as our friends and families.

Our expertise goes well beyond that of most service companies. From new construction to maintenance services, acceptance testing and commissioning to power studies and rotating machinery service and repair, if it’s in the electrical power system, up and down the line, Shermco does it.

www.shermco.com l 888-SHERMCO

CAN’T AFFORD TO WAIT FOR

ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT?

When equipment fails, every minute spent searching for what you need is bad for the bottom line. Our massive inventory of millions of new, surplus and repurposed circuit breakers, switchgear and related products is here for you. We have the expertise to see the big picture, understand your problem and recommend the best solution. Already know exactly what you need? Our website is constantly being updated with products and the online buying process is easy.

Tap into the power of National Switchgear at nationalswitchgear.com or call us today at (800) 322-0149. performance by design sm

RELAY COLUMN

COMBUSTION TURBINE GENERATOR TRIP ANALYSIS B Y S TE V E TU R N E R , Arizona Public Service Company

Relay personnel responsible for testing protective relays are often called upon to troubleshoot and gather system data such as settings and event recordings when a major event occurs (for this example, a large generator trip). If only electromechanical relays are installed and no digital fault recorder is available, it can be difficult to determine the root cause of the trip event. This article demonstrates how to analyze a generator trip with limited information on hand.

A N A LY S IS The initial investigation determined there was a three-phase bus fault on the low side of the generator step-up transformer (GSU).

Follow-up investigation through data analysis determined there were four individual events.

Figure 1 shows the sequence of events captured by the numerical line current differential relays located at the high side of the generator GSU and switchyard breaker.

The first event occurred at 19:02:56 and was due to a three-phase bus fault. The

Figure 1: Sequence of Events Compiled from Numerical Line Current Differential Relays COMBUSTION TURBINE GENERATOR TRIP ANALYSIS

NETAWORLD

•

19

RELAY COLUMN

Figure 2: One Line Diagram

Figure 3a: Three-Phase Bus Fault on GSU Low Side

Figure 3b: Direct Transfer Trip to Switchyard Breaker via Numerical Line Current Differential Relays

Figure 3c: Disconnect on High Side of Adjacent GSU Opened

Figure 3d: Lockout Relay Reset

Figure 3e: Switchyard Breaker Closed

second and third events occurred at 19:09:17 and 19:20:32, respectively. The fourth event occurred at 19:24:56. This time, the switchyard breaker was successfully closed, energizing the adjacent GSU.

SE QUE NC E OF EVENTS Figure 2 shows the overall one-line diagram for the power system.

20

• WINTER 2020

Figure 3a through Figure 3e illustrate the sequence of events leading up to the restoration of the adjacent generator.

The adjacent generator was brought back on gear at time equal to 19:28:35.

Figure 4 shows the inrush current measured by the numerical line current differential relays following closing the switchyard breaker.

COMBUSTION TURBINE GENERATOR TRIP ANALYSIS

RELAY COLUMN

Figure 4: Inrush Current Following Closing Switchyard Breaker

C ON C L U S I ON Advantages offered by numerical protection relays include: • Event reporting • Event summary reports • Event history reports • Event reports • Sequential events recorder report This article demonstrates how the event recording taken from the numerical line current differential relays protecting the line to the faulted GSU can be used to verify that the overall system protection operated properly.

Steve Turner is in charge of system protection for the Fossil Generation Department at Arizona Public Service Company in Phoenix. After working with Beckwith Electric Company, Inc. for 10 years, Steve spent two years as a consultant in San Diego. His previous experience includes positions as an Application Engineer at GEC Alstom and in the international market for SEL focusing on transmission line protection applications. Steve also worked for Duke Energy (formerly Progress Energy), where he developed the first patent for double-ended fault location on overhead high-voltage transmission lines and was in charge of all maintenance standards in the transmission department for protective relaying. Steve has BSEE and MSEE degrees from Virginia Tech University. He has presented at numerous conferences including Georgia Tech Protective Relay Conference, Western Protective Relay Conference, ECNE, and Doble User Groups, as well as various international conferences. Steve is a senior member of IEEE and a member of the IEEE PSRC.

An extensive inventory of over 200,000 sq. ft. across the southeast means the Southland Group has the products you need most in stock and ready to ship! Our team of experienced technicians provide on-site field service support and engineering services to ensure that your products are safe, reliable and service ready.

Contact us today and let us create the solutions you need most!

NETA WINTER AD 2019 - option 1.indd 1

10/11/2019 3:19:48 PM

THE ALL -NEW JOURN AL EXPERIEN CE. WELCOME TO NETAWORLDJOURN AL.ORG

Access to NETA World just got easier.

A searchable archive of past editions

Exclusive web-only content

Industry news, trends, and updates

V I S I T NE TAW O R L D J O U R N A L . O R G TO DAY

Dedicated space for advertising

SAFETY CORNER

BASIC FALL PROTECTION B Y PA U L CH AM BERL AIN, American Electrical Testing Co. LLC

Fall protection requirements and equipment varies depending upon where the work is being performed. The regulations can be confusing for some employees, so it is up to the manager or safety professional to understand the work, the environment the work is being performed in, and the equipment needed to mitigate the hazard of falling from height.

W H E N IS P ROT ECTI ON R E QUIRE D? In general industry, which the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) defines as all industries not included in agriculture, construction, or maritime, fall protection is required anytime there is a fall of 4 feet or more from an unprotected edge or side. In summary: 1910.28(b)(1)(i) Except as provided elsewhere in this section, the employer must ensure that each employee on a walking-working surface with an unprotected side or edge that is 4 feet (1.2 m) or more above a lower level is protected from falling by one or more of the following: (a) Guardrail systems; (b) Safety net systems; or (c) Personal fall protection systems, such as personal fall arrest, travel restraint, or positioning systems.

In most cases, since general industry is NOT a construction environment, fall protection is provided using guardrails that are required as part of building code. OHSA and building codes are very specific about how these

24

• WINTER 2020

guardrails are constructed. They must consist of a top rail, mid-rail, or balusters, and a toe-board. Code requires they be a certain height, withstand a certain weight load, and be constructed in a specific manner. Since the building you are working in is not under construction, guardrails are likely in place. If there are no guardrails, then a safety net or personal fall protection system (i.e. anchorage, lanyard, or harness) is required.

In construction, which OSHA defines as construction work, alteration, and/or repair, including painting and decorating, the requirements for fall protection are slightly different.

191026.501(b)(1) Each employee on a walking/working surface (horizontal and vertical surface) with an unprotected side or edge which is 6 feet or more above a lower level shall be protected from falling by the use of guardrail systems, safety net systems, or personal fall arrest systems.

Unlike in general industry, the construction standard for OSHA requires protection of a side 6 feet or more above a lower level. The means and methods of protection have not BASIC FALL PROTECTION

SAFETY CORNER

PHOTO: © ISTOCKPHOTO.COM/PORTFOLIO/IBRAVE

changed; you can still use guardrails, personal fall protection, or safety nets. However, the height at which height protection becomes required has changed. It is worthwhile to mention that OSHA 1910.269, Power Generation, Transmission and Distribution generally follows the construction standard for fall protection (1926 Subpart M) with some slight differences. These differences usually pertain to working on transmission towers, poles, and protection from falls due to electrical shock and flash.

W H AT I S RE QU IR E D? OSHA and building codes present very specific requirements for guardrails to properly protect employees from falls. Per OSHA’s general industry standard, guardrails must adhere to the following: BASIC FALL PROTECTION

1910.29(b) (1) The top edge height of top rails, or equivalent guardrail system members, are 42 inches, plus or minus 3 inches, above the walking-working surface. The top edge height may exceed 45 inches, provided the guardrail system meets all other required criteria.

(2) Midrails, screens, mesh, intermediate vertical members, solid panels, or equivalent intermediate members are installed between the walking-working surface and the top edge of the guardrail system as follows when there is not a wall or parapet that is at least 21 inches high: (i) Midrails are installed at a height midway between the top edge of the guardrail system and the walking-working surface; (ii) Screens and mesh extend from the walking-working surface to the top rail and along the entire opening between top rails supports; NETAWORLD

•

25

SAFETY CORNER (iii) Intermediate vertical members (such as balusters) are installed no more than 19 inches apart; and (iv) Other equivalent intermediate members (such as additional midrails and architectural panels) are installed so that the openings are not more than 19 inches wide.

(3) Guardrail systems are capable of withstanding, without failure, a force of at least 200 pounds applied in a downward or outward direction within 2 inches of the top edge, at any point along the top rail.

(4) When the 200-pound test load is applied in a downward direction, the top rail of the guardrail system must not deflect to a height of less than 39 inches above the walkingworking surface; (5) Midrails, screens, mesh, intermediate vertical members, solid panels, and other equivalent intermediate members are capable of withstanding, without failure, a force of at least 150 pounds applied in any downward or outward direction at any point along the intermediate member.

(6) Guardrail systems are smooth-surfaced to protect employees from injury, such as punctures or lacerations, and to prevent catching or snagging of clothing.

(7) The ends of top rails and midrails do not overhang the terminal posts, except where the overhang does not pose a projection hazard for employees.

(8) Steel banding and plastic banding are not used for top rails or midrails.

(9) Top rails and midrails are at least 0.25 inches in diameter or in thickness.

There are a few differences for temporary guardrails in the construction standard from the requirements set forth in the general Industry standard, but they are negligible. Many of these requirements for the construction of guardrails are used as part of building codes.

If a guardrail is infeasible, personal fall protection or a safety net must be used, and OSHA has very specific requirements for guardrail use and construction.

26

• WINTER 2020

Personal fall protection must consist and adhere to the following, which is summarized from the construction standard: 1926.502(d) (1) Connectors shall be drop forged, pressed or formed steel, or made of equivalent materials.

(2) Connectors shall have a corrosion-resistant finish, and all surfaces and edges shall be smooth to prevent damage to interfacing parts of the system.

(3) Dee-rings and snaphooks shall have a minimum tensile strength of 5,000 pounds.

(4) Dee-rings and snaphooks shall be prooftested to a minimum tensile load of 3,600 pounds without cracking, breaking, or taking permanent deformation.

(5) Snaphooks shall be sized to be compatible with the member to which they are connected to prevent unintentional disengagement of the snaphook by depression of the snaphook keeper by the connected member, or shall be a locking type snaphook designed and used to prevent disengagement of the snaphook by the contact of the snaphook keeper by the connected member. Effective January 1, 1998, only locking type snaphooks shall be used.

(6) Unless the snaphook is a locking type and designed for the following connections, snaphooks shall not be engaged: (i) directly to webbing, rope or wire rope; (ii) to each other; (iii) to a dee-ring to which another snaphook or other connector is attached; (iv) to a horizontal lifeline; or (v) to any object which is incompatibly shaped or dimensioned in relation to the snaphook such that unintentional disengagement could occur by the connected object being able to depress the snaphook keeper and release itself.

(7) On suspended scaffolds or similar work platforms with horizontal lifelines which may become vertical lifelines, the devices used to connect to a horizontal lifeline shall be capable of locking in both directions on the lifeline.

BASIC FALL PROTECTION

SAFETY CORNER (8) Horizontal lifelines shall be designed, installed, and used, under the supervision of a qualified person, as part of a complete personal fall arrest system, which maintains a safety factor of at least two.

(9) Lanyards and vertical lifelines shall have a minimum breaking strength of 5,000 pounds.

(10) When vertical lifelines are used, each employee shall be attached to a separate lifeline.

(11) Lifelines shall be protected against being cut or abraded.

(12) Self-retracting lifelines and lanyards which automatically limit free fall distance to 2 feet or less shall be capable of sustaining a minimum tensile load of 3,000 pounds applied to the device with the lifeline or lanyard in the fully extended position.

(13) Self-retracting lifelines and lanyards which do not limit free fall distance to 2 feet (0.61 m) or less, ripstitch lanyards, and tearing and deforming lanyards shall be capable of sustaining a minimum tensile load of 5,000 pounds (22.2 kN) applied to the device with the lifeline or lanyard in the fully extended position.

(14) Ropes and straps (webbing) used in lanyards, lifelines, and strength components of body belts and body harnesses shall be made from synthetic fibers. (i) When work is to be performed near electrical power lines or equipment it must be Arc Rated.

(15) Anchorages used for attachment of personal fall arrest equipment shall be independent of any anchorage being used to support or suspend platforms and capable of supporting at least 5,000 pounds per employee attached, or shall be designed, installed, and used as follows: (i) as part of a complete personal fall arrest system which maintains a safety factor of at least two; and (ii) under the supervision of a qualified person.

(16) Personal fall arrest systems, when stopping a fall, shall: (i) limit maximum arresting force on an employee to 900 pounds when used with a body belt; BASIC FALL PROTECTION

(ii) limit maximum arresting force on an employee to 1,800 pounds when used with a body harness; (iii) be rigged such that an employee can neither free fall more than 6 feet, nor contact any lower level; i. This is 4 feet in the General Industry standard, as discussed previously (iv) bring an employee to a complete stop and limit maximum deceleration distance an employee travels to 3.5 feet; and, (v) have sufficient strength to withstand twice the potential impact energy of an employee free falling a distance of 6 feet, or the free fall distance permitted by the system, whichever is less.

(17) The attachment point of the body belt shall be located in the center of the wearer’s back.

The attachment point of the body harness shall be located in the center of the wearer’s back near shoulder level, or above the wearer’s head.

(18) Body belts, harnesses, and components shall be used only for employee protection (as part of a personal fall arrest system or positioning device system) and not to hoist materials.

(19) Personal fall arrest systems and components subjected to impact loading shall be immediately removed from service and shall not be used again for employee protection until inspected and determined by a competent person to be undamaged and suitable for reuse.

(20) The employer shall provide for prompt rescue of employees in the event of a fall or shall assure that employees are able to rescue themselves.

(21) Personal fall arrest systems shall be inspected prior to each use for wear, damage and other deterioration, and defective components shall be removed from service.

(22) Body belts shall be at least one and fiveeighths (1 5/8) inches (4.1 cm) wide.

(23) Personal fall arrest systems shall not be attached to guardrail systems, nor shall they be attached to hoists with few exceptions.

NETAWORLD

•

27

SAFETY CORNER (24) When a personal fall arrest system is used at hoist areas, it shall be rigged to allow the movement of the employee only as far as the edge of the walking/working surface.

C ONC LUSION Falls are the number-one cause of injury and death in industry. Understanding when it is needed and how to employ it correctly, which includes providing the right equipment to prevent an employee fall, is important to mitigate that potential injury. More information and other specifics regarding fall protection can be found under OSHA





29 CFR 1910, General Industry Standards and Regulations in Subpart D – Walking and Working Surfaces and Subpart R – Special Industries, and in OSHA 1926, Construction Industry Regulations under Subpart M – Fall Protection.

Paul Chamberlain has been the Safety Manager for American Electrical Testing Co., LLC since 2009. He has been in the safety field for the past 21 years, working for various companies and in various industries. He received a Bachelor of Science in safety and environmental protection from Massachusetts Maritime Academy.

TECH QUIZ

No. 132 James (Jim) R. White, Vice President of Training Services, has worked for Shermco Industries Inc. since 2001. He is a NFPA Certified Electrical Safety Compliance Professional and a NETA Level 4 Senior Technician. Jim is NETA’s principal member on NFPA Technical Committee NFPA 70E®, Electrical Safety in the Workplace®, NETA’s principal representative on National Electrical Code® Code-Making Panel (CMP) 13, and represents NETA on ASTM International Technical Committee F18, Electrical Protective Equipment for Workers.

Jim is Shermco Industries’ principal member on NFPA Technical Committee for NFPA 70B, Recommended Practice for Electrical Equipment Maintenance and represents AWEA on the ANSI/ISEA Standard 203 Secondary Single-Use Flame Resistant Protective Clothing for Use Over Primary Flame Resistant Protective Clothing. An IEEE Senior Member, Jim received the IEEE/IAS/PCIC Electrical Safety Excellence Award in 2011 and NETA’s Outstanding Achievement Award in 2013. Jim was Chairman of the IEEE Electrical Safety Workshop in 2008 and is currently Vice-Chair for the IEEE IAS/ PCIC Safety Subcommittee.

30

PROTECTIVE RELAYING B Y JA M E S R . W H I TE , Shermco Industries

This edition of Tech Quiz covers protective relays. Many years ago, as I was teaching a protective relay class, a student asked, “What are these things?” I replied, “Relays,” to which he answered, “No, relays are those little black plastic things that go click-click.” I made sure to call them protective relays from then on. Things in the protective relaying field have progressed rapidly over the years, and digital protective relays are now the norm as is digital test equipment.

1. One question always seen on the NETA exams is about protective relay ANSI numbering. What is the protective relay number for a synchronizing relay? a. 25 b. 32 c. 52 d. 86 2. Which protective relay looks inside a generator? a. Distance relaying b. Mho relays c. Ohm relays d. Loss-of-excitation relays

• WINTER 2020

3. What does Figure 1 illustrate? a. Mho relay characteristic b. Ohm relay characteristic c. Reactance relay characteristic d. Offset relay characteristic X nZ L

R

Figure 1: Which Relay?

TECH QUIZ

TECH QUIZ 4. Looking at the internal schematic in Figure 2, identify the following components:

b

a. _____________________________

d

_____________________________ b. _____________________________ _____________________________

S1

a

S1

c. _____________________________ _____________________________ d. _____________________________ _____________________________ c

7

5

1

2

6

8

= SHORT FINGERS

Figure 2: Internal Schematic

See answers on page 116.

Reliable Power System Solutions We deliver optimum system reliability and performance while reducing the chances of costly unplanned power outages. Whether you need acceptance testing or preventive maintenance, depend on EnerGTest to keep the power on.

ener

es

™

Accredited Company

Serving clients in Pennsylvania, Delaware, New Jersey, Maryland, Washington, DC and New England.

204 Gale Lane

Kennett Square, PA 19348

484.731.0200

enerGtest.com

TECH TIPS

GROUND TESTING PROCEDURES

BY J EFF J OW ET T, Megger

Effective ground testing is an informed combination of instrumentation and procedure. Accuracy, resolution, safety, noise suppression, graphics, clamp features, and general reliability are all critical, as they are with any electrical testing. But effective and accurate ground testing depends as much on adherence to procedure as it does on quality of instrumentation.

If the operator does not understand and diligently apply correct procedure, the highest quality instrument will be little more than a waste of money.

Some relatively common electrical tests basically amount to connecting a pair of leads and pressing a test button, but not so ground testing!

Random hookup and intuitive operation get the operator nowhere.

FA LL OF P OT E NTI AL The basis for ground testing is found in the fundamental procedure known as fall of potential (FOP). A long test lead — often as long as the operator can provide or manage — is stretched out with a metal rod or probe clipped to the end. When the tester is energized, a current circuit is established by an alternating square wave through the soil to the

32

• WINTER 2020

electrode being tested. The unique frequency of the square wave provides a test signal against which the tester can measure.

Measurement is accomplished by means of the second test circuit: potential. A long lead is similarly strung out, and a metal probe is driven into the soil. This is normally in the direction of the current probe but need not be GROUND TESTING PROCEDURES

TECH TIPS if obstructions impede. This circuit measures voltage drop caused by soil resistance, and the two measured parameters — current and potential — calculate resistance through Ohm’s Law. The tester displays resistance to the location point of the potential probe.

This may sound simple, but it isn’t. The problem lies in determining just what is being measured. Move the potential probe, and the tester will calculate a new resistance to the new location. Even if the distance to the probe is maintained constant but in a different direction, the reading may differ. This is due to local soil anomalies from one probe placement to another. This is where correct procedure defines a reliable test. Indeed, if no study is done by the operator and the leads are merely stretched out for their lengths and a reading taken, a correct measurement may be achieved.

Unfortunately, this is often done in the field, but it is pure luck.

Figure 1: Successful FOP Test with Instrument Setup

The correct procedure is to take an arbitrary number of measurements in a line and graph the distance at which the reading was taken versus resistance at that point (Figure 1).

What is hoped for is a level graph line at a satisfactorily low value. This accomplishes two things: It identifies the steadily rising graph where the measured ground resistance runs directly into the extraneous resistance of the current probe, and it reveals local soil inconsistencies that could severely distort a single reading (Figure 2).

S I M P L IF IE D FA LL OF PO T E N T IA L Fall of potential is the best overall method, but it requires considerable work and possibly too much room to stretch leads. What then?

Other methods have been derived, some for the purpose of saving time and others for dealing with difficult test conditions. The first of these, called simplified fall of potential, requires only three measurements rather than enough GROUND TESTING PROCEDURES

Figure 2: Comparison of Failed and successful FOP Graphs. The continuously rising graph line (top) may include correct resistance reading, but it is unrecognizable. The extended horizontal line in the correct test (bottom) clearly identifies ground resistance.

NETAWORLD

•

33

TECH TIPS to draw a graph line for possibly hundreds of feet. A simple and easy mathematical proof substitutes for drawing the graph. The most atypical of the readings is mathematically compared to the average and then calculated as a percentage accuracy. The operator makes a decision as to whether this is an acceptable accuracy. If so, the average is submitted as the test result. If all three readings were the same, then this would provide added assurance. But non-homogeneity of soil, especially around graded construction sites, often precludes this.

An obvious spinoff here is to dispense with any math and merely move the potential probe back and forth a few times and decide whether the readings fall reasonably well together. This could be referred to as the eyeball method.

It lacks genuine method but is probably the most widely used procedure, at least for less demanding locations. An experienced operator may indeed have sufficiently keen powers of discernment, but if third parties are involved (i.e. inspectors, clients, insurance, lawyers), it may be more practical to do the math and submit the report.

62% R ULE Finally, the 62% rule brings simplicity down to its base level. Mathematics tracing back to the ancient Greek scholars supports the 62% rule. But none of that is necessary to apply to ground testing. All the ground test operator needs to know is that the 62% position on an FOP graph is the one that will give the most accurate reading.

So why aren’t all ground test readings taken at that position and be done with it? The answer is because the mathematics is based on an ideal model, and few construction sites, industrial sites, or anywhere else are likely to conform to ideality. Grading mixes topsoils from different locations. The soil may be naturally stony.

There may be a large subterranean rock, power cable, water main, ground water, or other nonuniformity to contend with. Put simply, the

34

• WINTER 2020

reading at 62% may not be representative. It is accepted at the operator’s risk unless the site has previously been proven by more rigorous prospecting. The rule is a quick and handy backup test on sites where distances and directions have been established by rigorous testing. But a new test runs the risk of a gamble.

Slope The other reason for established test procedures is to effectively address difficult situations. The main challenge is insufficient space in which to extend test leads far enough to separate the resistance field around the current probe from that of the electrode being measured. A coherent FOP graph cannot be constructed, and the graph line continues to rise as more resistance is added with each move of the potential probe. By far the most popular means of dealing with this issue is the slope method (Figure 3).

If the graphed resistance line continues to rise, most likely the correct value is there somewhere — it just can’t be discerned from viewing the graph. Still, even a partial FOP graph can come in handy. Only three measurements are necessary for the proof. These are at 20%, 40%, and 60% of the distance to the current probe.

From these three numbers, a slope coefficient, typically referenced by the Greek letter μ, is calculated and referenced to a table commonly available in the ground testing literature. As the slope coefficient represents the distance to the potential probe over the distance to the current probe and the latter is known, the distance at which the correct ground resistance reading should be taken is calculated by solving this simple equation: dp/dc = μ for dp.

The actual ground resistance reading can then be determined by either reading the graph line or physically placing a potential probe at that distance and taking the reading. But suppose the calculated μ value cannot be found on the table? That would indicate the resistance field of the current probe is contained completely GROUND TESTING PROCEDURES

TECH TIPS within that of the test ground and cannot be successfully determined. What then?

Intersecting Curves The fallback is intersecting curves. This is a difficult and tedious procedure to be avoided if possible, but it works when nothing else will.

Two sets of graphs are constructed. One set is of three portions of FOP graphs working from an edge of the grid. These will keep rising. If they did not, they would be complete FOP graphs and intersecting curves wouldn’t be necessary. But since these are not readable FOP graphs, where is the 62% distance? For that, a second set of graphs is constructed by selecting arbitrary points for the electrical center of the grid at a distance x from the connection on the edge of the grid and then locating the 62% accordingly. The arbitrary values of x are plotted against the 62% resistances on each of the curves. These three graph lines will coincide at one point (Figure 4) for the correct distance of x from the true electrical center of the grid to the point of attachment of the test lead(s) at the edge. All other values for x are wrong (not the true electrical center), and so the resistances will scatter, with only the correct resistance being common to all three graphs.

Figure 3: Typical Slope Method Layout

Figure 4: Center of Triangle Formed by Graph Lines is Ground Resistance

Four Potential Another problem associated with applying FOP to large grids is that their shapes can become more and more asymmetrical, rendering it increasingly difficult to apply even a fair guess as to the electrical center. Since these grids can also have very low resistances, it is easy to fall into incoherent results if a proven method isn’t followed. A means of addressing this is the four potential method, but unlike slope and intersecting curves, it can require prohibitively long leads. The tester is connected to an arbitrary point on the edge of the grid. Leads are stretched in a straight line, and six critical values are taken at 0.2, 0.4, 0.5, 0.6, 0.7, and 0.8 of the distance to the current probe (Figure 5). These results are processed through four simple + and – formulae GROUND TESTING PROCEDURES

Figure 5: Typical Layout for Four Potential Method NETAWORLD

•

35

TECH TIPS switch positions, and physical shunting is not necessary. Three test probes are placed in a triangle around the ground electrode being tested, and six two-point resistance measurements are taken between each pair of probes and between each probe and the ground under test (Figure 6). Similar to four potential, these six test results are processed through four simple equations for resistance of the test ground, and agreement provides assurance.

Dead Earth

Figure 6: Star Delta Test Configuration that yield the correct ground resistance. The four results should substantially agree, imparting confidence to the calculation.

Star Delta Two methods remain for confines so tight that even minimal extension of current and potential leads is prohibitive. One of these is star delta. The tester is shunted into a two– terminal configuration, either X – PC or C1P1 – P2C2. Modern testers have selector

Figure 7: Dead Earth Test Setup

36

• WINTER 2020

Finally, under the worst of urban conditions, with virtually no room for leads or place to drive probes, the two-point star delta test becomes the only option. The second test lead is attached to any convenient low-resistance return: a metal fence post, building structure, or best of all, the water pipe system. Test current circulates through the earth to the water pipe system or other connection and back to the tester through a lead (Figure 7). A series loop is measured, and its success counts on the return element being of negligible resistance. This is commonly called the dead earth method because the return is not part of an electrical system. It’s not especially accurate or reliable, but sometimes it’s all that remains.

CONCLUSI ON A ground test performed by random hookup will likely yield some result, but it’s no more reliable than rolling dice. Because the earth is so vast, adherence to established procedure is mandatory.

Know the procedures, where and why they apply, and results will be trustworthy and effective.

Jeffrey R. Jowett is a Senior Applications Engineer for Megger in Valley Forge, Pennsylvania, serving the manufacturing lines of Biddle, Megger, and MultiAmp for electrical test and measurement instrumentation. He holds a BS in biology and chemistry from Ursinus College. He was employed for 22 years with James G. Biddle Co., which became Biddle Instruments and is now Megger.

GROUND TESTING PROCEDURES

Huge Selection of In-Stock Electrical Equipment

SPECIAL TEST EQUIPMENT FOR • Protective Relays • Transformers & Motor Analysis • Partial Discharge/Corona • Current Injection • Cable Fault Location

ADVANTAGES OF RENTING

• Switchgear/Circuit Breakers • Insulation Resistance • Tan Delta/Power Factor • Current Transformers • Ground Grid

• Cost-Savings Versus Buying • Available for Immediate Delivery • Choose From a Variety of Manufacturer’s Top-of-the-Line Products • Short-term Solutions for One-Off Tests • Always Calibrated Equipment ISO 17025 / NIST Cal / ANSI Z540

Start Saving Today! www.atecorp.com

800-404-ATEC (2832)

M

Y

HVI - The World’s Source for High Voltage Test Equipment

HIGH VOLTAGE, INC.

Cable Fault Locating & VLF Testing HVI Makes it Easy and Efficient

VLF/Thumper Combination

VLF hipot: 0 - 33 kVac @ 1 μF @ 0.1 Hz Fault locate: 0 - 13 kV @ 760 J VLF Fault Burner Radar/TDR ready Other Thumper models: 5/10/20 kV @ 1000 J 9/18/36 kV @ 3200 J

You Can Rely on HVI!

All That You Need

• Very Low Frequency AC Technology • Cable Diagnostic TD & PD Testing • Cable Fault Locating with Controlled Energy • AC & DC Hipots, Aerial Lift Testers, Oil Testers • Ω-CHECK® Concentric Neutral Testing • Custom Engineered & Fabricated Van Pkgs.

Y

Y

All HVI Products are

Made in the USA

ISO 9001 2015

50 kVac @ 3 kVA Hipot 1 piece & w/cable output

VLF 0.1 Hz @ 34 kVac Comp. control - wireless

80 kVdc Hipot/Megohmmeter 1 instrument - 2 tests

HIGH VOLTAGE, INC. 31 County Rt. 7A • Copake, NY 12516 • Tel: (518) 329-3275 • Fax: (518) 329-3271 • sales@hvinc.com • www.hvinc.com

Relay and Protective Devices Batteries and UPS Low Voltage Circuit Breakers Medium/High Voltage Circuit Breakers SF6 Analysis Transformer Testing Cable Testing

We rent equipment

Cable Fault Location Power Monitoring Data Acquisition and Recorders Online and Offline Partial Discharge Low Resistance Ohmmeters Insulation Resistance/Megohmmeters Ground Test Equipment Photovoltaic Test Infrared Cameras Ultrasound and TEV Online/Offline Motor Testing AC and DC Load Banks AC and DC Hipots VLF and Tan Delta

888.902.6111 info@intellirentco.com intellirentco.com

rental | support | logistics

COVER STORY

CHALLENGES IN TRANSFORMER PROTECTION TESTING

BY SCOT T COOP ER, OMICRON electronics

While the basic premise of transformer differential protection is straightforward, numerous features are employed in modern relay algorithms to compensate for challenges presented by the transformer differential application. As a result, developing appropriate test quantities and properly quantifying results can be challenging with traditional functional differential testing.

40

• WINTER 2020

CHALLENGES IN TRANSFORMER PROTECTION TESTING

COVER STORY frequently performed throughout the life cycle of a relay. During commissioning, this type of test can further assure whether threshold and time elements are set according to the settings specified by engineering. The following sections describe typical tests and their challenges.

Pickup Testing Even the simple differential element pickup test, when performed manually, requires the test designer to calculate the nominal operating current amplitude, or tap, for each winding.

The currents on the winding are simply increased from zero until the relay trips. The pickup current value is then converted back to per-unit and compared to the setpoint.

Slope Testing

PHOTO: © ISTOCKPHOTO.COM/PORTFOLIO/MINEMERO

CHALLENGES IN TRADITIONAL FUNCTIONAL TESTING A traditional functional test assures that all measurements and derived quantities are measured and calculated accurately, and that the overall relay hardware — including inputs and outputs — function properly. Therefore, the test quantities of a traditional functional test are defined as a sequence of steadystate or phasor values. This type of testing is CHALLENGES IN TRANSFORMER PROTECTION TESTING

For differential characteristic tests in the slope region, the proper phase shift is determined from the transformer three-line diagram. For three-phase tests, balanced quantities of a given multiple of tap and phase shift matching the application are applied to two or more current windings, which simulates a balanced load.

Currents on one side are then incrementally increased until the differential element operates. For tests of a single differential element phase, realistic through-fault current phasors must be calculated. Evaluating the results of slope characteristic tests is not straightforward as there is significant variation in the restraint current calculation between differential relay manufacturers such as the maximum per-unit phase current, minimum per-unit phase current, average per-unit phase current, sum of the per-unit phase currents, or other calculations. In addition, some differential relays incorporate a reference winding in the restraint calculation that can be fixed or calculated automatically.

If the simulation of single-phase faults is desired, calculation of test values is more complex, and the relay’s method of zerosequence elimination must be considered. To simplify this process, dedicated software tools exist that calculate the required steady state NETAWORLD

•

41

COVER STORY ldiff 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0

lop (pu) U87P

SLP2

SLP1

DIOPR O87P 1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10 11 12

lbias

DIRTR

IRT

²

lrst (pu)

Figure 1: Transformer Differential Relay Incorporating a Cubic Spline in the Differential Operating Characteristic

Figure 2: Adaptive Slope Characteristic and Supervisory Relay Word Bits Used by SEL-487E Transformer Differential Relay

quantities by using an internal transformer model. The software module can then directly inject the quantities, measure back the pickup or trip signals, and assess the steady state accuracy. These tools have limitations when the relay applies adaptive characteristics or works in the time domain instead of the frequency domain.

security mode. Of course, traditional ramping tests cannot be used in these cases. Instead, the characteristic is verified by applying a series of tests incorporating rest, pre-fault, and fault states.

To further complicate testing, modern relays incorporate several additional characteristic features. For example, some relays incorporate cubic splines to smooth the transition between slope 1 and slope 2 (Figure 1). Testing in the cubic spline region requires additional calculations.

To restrain the differential element during magnetizing inrush, most relays use both the 2nd and 4th harmonic content of the calculated phase differential currents (Figure 3).

Another feature that can complicate testing is an adaptive slope characteristic (Figure 2).

These schemes are applied to restrain operation of the differential elements for external faults that might cause current transformer (CT) saturation, unbalancing the differential, and cause a mis-operation.

When functional testing a differential characteristic incorporating an adaptive slope, the applied slope is determined by pre-fault current. To test slope 2 on these devices, prefault state duration and pre-fault current amplitude are coordinated with the relay settings, which causes the relay to shift to a high

42

87R Restrained Element

• WINTER 2020

Inrush and Overexcitation Blocking

During inrush, 2nd harmonic content of the resultant current varies with closing angle.

To prevent mis-operations of the differential

Figure 3: COMTRADE Recording of Transformer Inrush Showing Time Domain Plot (left) and Calculated Harmonic Content at the Time Indicated by the Yellow Marker (right)

CHALLENGES IN TRANSFORMER PROTECTION TESTING

A completely different inrush blocking algorithm analyses the current signals in the time domain. If the current dwells close to zero and is unipolar, it is considered an inrush condition. This method has better sensitivity on new core materials that generate very low 2nd harmonic content on inrush. This type of algorithm cannot be tested with traditional functional testing methods.

Slo pe 2

element due to closing angle, modern digital relays incorporate a variety of special schemes.

The most common uses the highest measured harmonic in any phase to restrain all phases.

However, other devices use cross-phase averaging, where the average even harmonic content in all phases is used to restrain the differential in all phases, which can substantially complicate testing. In these cases, test operators frequently use only three-phase tests, leaving these features untested. To test these elements, composite waveforms containing fundamental frequency and the harmonic under test are used. One test method consists of increasing fundamental current until the relay operates, then increasing only the harmonic content until the relay restrains, then calculating the harmonic percentage and comparing to the relay settings.

Differential/Operate Current

COVER STORY

Trip Region 5th Harmonic Pickup

pe

Slo

1

MPU

Restraint Current

Figure 4: Differential Characteristic Illustrating Operation of the 5th Harmonic Restraint in a Beckwith Transformer Relay. When the 5th harmonic threshold of the differential current is reached, the differential element pickup setting is increased to prevent mis-operation. As with inrush, testing is performed using a composite waveform consisting of the fundamental and 5th harmonic frequencies.

In addition to inrush conditions, transformer magnetizing current can also increase during transformer overexcitation, possibly resulting in an improper differential element trip. To mitigate this possibility, the 5th harmonic content of the differential current is measured, and if a preset threshold is reached, the differential element is either desensitized or completely restrained (Figure 4).

Restricted Earth Fault Restricted earth fault, or ground differential elements are gaining popularity. Related to the transformer differential element, restricted earth fault elements protect against faults occurring near the neutral end of wye-connected transformer windings. In these schemes, the calculated zero sequence current from the wye winding phase currents is compared to the measured ground current (Figure 5).

CHALLENGES IN TRANSFORMER PROTECTION TESTING

Figure 5: Restricted Earth Fault on Transformer Phase (left); Resultant Phasor Diagram (right) Functional testing of these schemes requires the test designer to properly calculate phasecurrent phasors for internal and external faults to check proper operation. Additional logic is also incorporated to create operating windows and provide protection when the transformer is energized from one side only.

NETAWORLD

•

43

COVER STORY Is This Testing Adequate?

Even after surmounting the challenges of functional testing, the fundamental question of setting adequacy remains mostly unanswered.

If the relay does not operate quickly, securely, and dependably during a power system event, the goal of the protection system has not been met. There may be a better way.

a system-based testing solution. The reliability of a simulation result depends on accurate input data. To make the testing tool practical for technicians and engineers in the field, we must find a solution that yields numerically stable and reliable results and apply heuristics where data is not available.

Transformer Model SY S T E M -B A S E D TESTI NG OF T RANSF OR MER DIF F E RE NT IA L P ROTECTI ON A system-based testing approach can reduce testing challenges and ensure the settings are adequate. The idea is simple: • To ensure the relay trips for an internal fault, simulate realistic internal faults to test the response of the relay.

• To ensure the relay is secure against tripping for through-faults, simulate realistic through-faults and verify the relay does not operate. Thus, a system-based testing solution calculates the testing quantities within a subtransient power system simulation, directly outputs the signals with an amplifier, measures the response, and assesses the result.

Transformer Simulation When defining a system-based test case, do not think about the element or algorithm under test; instead, consider the power system incidents this element is supposed to act on, for example: • Faults external to the protected zone • Faults internal to the protected zone 0 Turn-to-turn faults 0 Turn-to-ground faults • Inrush during energization • Transformer overexcitation due to overvoltage • CTs saturation and ratio errors The electromagnetic transient (EMT) simulation of these incidents is one of the cornerstones for

44

• WINTER 2020

Relevant power system scenarios include lowfrequency transient events such as faults as well as low-frequency non-linear phenomena such as inrushes and overexcitation. High-frequency phenomena in the power system are not relevant to the transformer protection relay due to internal algorithms and the cut-off frequency of anti-aliasing hardware filters. Therefore lowfrequency transformer models are suitable for system-based transformer protection testing.

The more physical, geometrically based, and detailed the transformer model is, the more accurate simulation results will be. However, parameter availability imposes the major constraint on the accuracy of the simulation results in the field. From a field technician perspective, the main source of information is the transformer nameplate. Information about core material and dimensions, number of winding turns, and geometry of the winding is not normally available. Thus, it is important that the model can be parametrized from nameplate data using reasonable heuristics that are based on guidelines provided in international standards and by expert working groups.

The mutually coupled coils model that is used in the described solution was proposed

by Brandwajn and Dommel and offers a reasonable compromise between precision and parameter detail. The same principle is utilized in various free and commercial EMT simulation tools.

External Faults The fault current contribution to an external phase fault mainly depends on the positive sequence impedance of the transformer, which CHALLENGES IN TRANSFORMER PROTECTION TESTING

COVER STORY

6a Positive-Sequence Equivalent Circuit

6b Influence of Three-Limb Core

6c Influence of Grounding Impedance

6d Influence of Wye-Winding with Isolated Neutral

6e Influence of Delta Winding

6f Influence of Compensation Winding

Figure 6: Influence of Various Factors on Two-Winding Transformer Zero-Sequence Equivalent Circuit can be derived from the short-circuit voltage on the nameplate. However, the simulation of ground faults requires reasonable zero-sequence short-circuit impedances for the transformer that are not always available on the nameplate.

The zero-sequence impedance is influenced by the core type, vector group, presence of a CHALLENGES IN TRANSFORMER PROTECTION TESTING

compensation winding, and neutral grounding.

Figure 6a – Figure 6f show how these factors affect the zero-sequence equivalent circuit of a two-winding transformer. P, S, M, N, and C in the figure subscripts denote primary, secondary, magnetizing, neutral, and compensation, respectively.

NETAWORLD

•

45

COVER STORY The effect of core type and compensation winding on transformer zero-sequence impedance can be estimated using heuristics, based on the guidelines in ISO/IEC 60076-8:1997. Accordingly, a system-based testing solution heuristically estimates unknown impedances: and based on a transformer positive-sequence, short-circuit impedance where:

Internal Faults For the simulation of internal transformer faults, the system-based testing solution relies on a widely accepted method described in Bastard et al. The method extends an original, mutually-coupled-coils transformer model, splitting the faulted coil into two sub-coils in

Figure 7: Splitting Faulted Coil of Wye Winding into Two Parts (left) and Faulted Coil of Delta Winding into Three Parts (right).

Figure 8: Switching from Series to Parallel R-L Circuit

46

• WINTER 2020

the case of turn-to-ground faults and into three sub-coils in case of turn-to-turn faults, therefore allowing a branch with a fault resistance RF to be inserted in the newly introduced terminals between the sub-coils (Figure 7).

Determining the short-circuit impedance of the split sub-coils requires knowledge of the inductive leakage factors, which again are not specified by a transformer nameplate. To estimate inductive leakage factors, detailed transformer geometrical data would be required.

Since the data is not commonly accessible for relay protection engineers, we are left to rely on heuristic estimations of inductive leakage factors.

Different heuristics were proposed in M. Kezunovic et al, Darwish et al, and PalmerBuckle et al. Keeping our use case in mind, the most challenging scenario for the sensitivity of a restricted earth fault protection function is faults close to the neutral with just a few shortcircuited turns and high fault resistance. In such a scenario, the principle of proportionality plays a higher role than the principle of leakage. In other words, a contribution of fault and winding resistance to the equivalent shortcircuit impedance is higher than a contribution of leakage inductance. Therefore, different inductive leakage factor heuristics yield similar simulation results for many test scenarios.

Saturating Core All differential relays must incorporate features to provide security during magnetizing inrush and transformer overexcitation, both sources of significant differential current during these events. To achieve realistic simulated waveforms for these phenomena, the non-linear saturation characteristic of the transformer core must be simulated. Therefore, an iterative approach for inclusion of non-linear inductors into the solution is utilized.

To simulate the non-linear transformer core, the system-based testing solution takes winding resistances and the magnetizing branch out of the mutually-coupled transformer coils model CHALLENGES IN TRANSFORMER PROTECTION TESTING

COVER STORY and transforms the magnetizing branches from series R-L circuits to parallel R-L circuits with non-linear inductor (Figure 8).

For a core-type transformer with concentric windings, Cigre Working Group 33.02 recommends placing the non-linear inductor across a coil closest to the core. The saturation of yokes and unwound limbs (for a five-limb transformer) in the transformer model are neglected, as a reasonable estimation of their saturation characteristics requires detailed knowledge of transformer design parameters or results of non-standard transformer tests.

The advantage of using only three nonlinear inductances per transformer includes a better simulation performance and simpler parametrization compared to more sophisticated non-linear transformer models.

For scenarios with residual flux (or remanence), the testing solution uses a non-linear hysteretic inductor model based on the principles of EMTP Type-96, which is widely accepted in power system simulations.

S E T T IN G UP AND EXE C U T I N G A S Y S T E M- B AS E D T E S T While all these details of the simulation are daunting, they are taken care of by the modelling in the software. Compared to functional testing, the test setup is much simpler. Starting from a standard power transformer topology (Figure 9), only the CT ratios and the transformer nameplate data must be entered: • Vector group • Rated voltages • Rated power • Short circuit voltage / impedance • No-load current • Core type The parameters for the saturating core are set automatically to typical values according to heuristic estimation of magnetization characteristic parameters outlined in Cigre and CHALLENGES IN TRANSFORMER PROTECTION TESTING

Relay

Infeed

CB A CT A

Transformer Y

CT B CB B

d5 CT-N

Y

d5

Figure 9: Single-Line Diagram and Transformer Parameterization for System-Based Testing Colombo and Santagostino and usually do not have to be adapted.

Test Cases Defining a system-based test document requires some rethinking of existing testing procedures.

For example, instead of defining a 2nd harmonic content, we simulate the energization of the power transformer at various closing angles.

Instead of defining a differential and restraining current, we simulate through faults and internal differential zone faults. All these scenarios can be defined within a single-line diagram of the transformer and the surrounding power system.

From a systematic standpoint, a test document starts with a metering check, followed by test cases for stability. The differential relay is not supposed to trip for normal load current or faults on the buses outside of the differential zone. It may happen that the overcurrent element trips with some time delay for outside faults. The fault can be dragged from a toolbar in the software and dropped on the bus.

To test the differential trip, the fault can also be dropped on the power transformer. For a turnto-ground fault close to the star-point (<5%) a differential element might not be sensitive enough; therefore, a REF element, if applied, will pick up the fault. Similarly, for turn-toturn faults with both terminals close to each NETAWORLD

•

47

COVER STORY

a) Fault incident during energization

b) Sympathetic inrush due to energization of parallel transformer

c) CT Saturation during external fault Figure 10: Time Domain Plot from a System-Based Testing Case Illustrating Inrush and Resultant CT Saturation other, the differential element might not be sensitive enough; a negative sequence element might pick up this type of fault.

To test stability during inrush, both breakers are in an open state. Within the test case, an event will close the breaker, causing an inrush condition. By changing the closing angle, the amount of inrush in each phase can be altered.

Apart from these major test cases, additional real-world scenarios can be tested, including sympathetic inrush, fault during inrush, external faults with CT saturation, and overexcitation due to overvoltage (Figure 10).

Since a system-based testing solution can control multiple test sets from one PC’s software, three-winding transformers or REF protection can be tested without rewiring the test setup. Protection schemes for phase shifting transformers can be tested the exact same way

48

• WINTER 2020

without adding complexity. Line protection systems where the transformer is within the protected zone can also be easily tested.

BENEFI TS & DRAWBAC K S The biggest benefits of the system-based test approach are simplicity and the ability to ensure the protection system is working under real-world conditions. As it is relay independent, the test document for the same type of transformer is identical, independent of the relay manufacturer. And because it only simulates realistic incidents, it will work for every relay algorithm improvement in the future.

On the downside, system-based testing requires some rethinking of existing testing procedures.

The harmonic content of the test signal during an inrush is realistic for the type of transformer, but it cannot be set exactly below or above a CHALLENGES IN TRANSFORMER PROTECTION TESTING

COVER STORY certain threshold. Therefore, functional testing still has its place.

C ON C L U S I ON So where do we invest our precious testing time and resources? If a differential relay is accurate when set to a certain threshold and has been tested several times throughout its lifecycle — for example during prequalification — functional testing is sufficient. But if the goal of commissioning is to ensure that a differential relay and its engineering adequately protect the power system and transformer, system-based testing is the right tool.

REFERENCES V. Brandwajn, H. W. Dommel, and I. I. Dommel. “Matrix Representation of Three-phase N-Winding Transformer for Steady-State and Transient Studies,” IEEE Transactions on Power Apparatus and Systems, Vols. PAS-101, No. 6, pp. 1369-1378, 1982.

ISO/IEC 60076-8:1997, Power Transformers — Application Guide.

P. Bastard, P. Bertrand, and M. Meunir. “A Transformer Model for Winding Fault Studies,” IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery, Vol. 9, No. 2, pp. 690-699, 1994.

M. Kezunovic, B. Kasztenny, and Z. Galijasevic. “A New ATP Add-On for Modeling Internal Faults in Power Transformers,” American Power Conference, Chicago, 2000.

H. A. Darwish, A. I. Taalab, and H. E. Labana. “Step-by-Step Simulation of Transformer Winding Faults for Electromagnetic Transient Programs,” 2005/2006 IEEE/PES Transmission and Distribution Conference and Exhibition, Dallas, TX, 2006.

CHALLENGES IN TRANSFORMER PROTECTION TESTING

P. Palmer-Buckle, K. Butler, N. Sarma, and A. Kopp. “Simulation of Incipient Transformer Faults,” 1998 Midwest Symposium on Circuits and Systems (Cat. No. 98CB36268), Notre Dame, IN, USA, 1998.

CIGRE Working Group 33.02 Internal Overvoltages. TB 039, Guidelines for Representation of Network Elements When Calculating Transients, https://e-cigre.org/ publication/039-guidelines-for-representationof-network-elements-when-calculatingtransients.

E. Colombo and G. Santagostino. “Results of the Enquiries on Actural Network Conditions when Switching Magnetizing and Small Inductive Currents and on Transformer and Shunt Reactor Saturation Characteristics,” Electra, Vol. 94, pp. 35-53, 1984.

J. G. Frame, N. Mohan, and T. Liu. “Hysteresis Modeling in an Electromagnetic Transient Program,” IEEE Transactions on Power Apparatus and Systems, Vols. PAS-101, No. 9, pp. 3404-3412, 1982.

George Alexander, David Costello, Brad Heilman, and Jason Young. “Testing the SEL487E Relay Differential Elements,” SEL Application Guide, Vol IV AG2010-07, p 11.

Scott Cooper is the Application and Training Engineer for OMICRON in St. Petersburg, Florida. He has thirty years of experience in a variety of roles including substation commissioning, application engineering, power plant operations, and technical training. He is active in the IEEE PSRC and has written numerous papers and magazine articles. Scott is a graduate of the United States Navy Nuclear Propulsion program.

NETAWORLD

•

49

Independent Electrical Testing and Preventive Maintenance

PROFESSIONAL SERVICES • Acceptance Testing • Planned Electrical Testing and Preventive Maintenance Programs

• Transformer Oil Analysis, Vacuum Degassing and Repair • Circuit Breaker Retrofit and Repair

• Power Factor Testing

• Power Generation Systems Testing

• Cable Testing

• Load and Power Quality Recording/Analysis

• Relay & Meter Calibration

• Chiller Systems Testing

• Ground Resistance Testing

• Infrared Inspections

609-890-8300 www.easternhighvoltage.com 11-A S. Gold Drive • Robbinsville, NJ 08691

THE PREMIER ELECTRICAL MAINTENANCE AND SAFETY CONFERENCE

CALL FOR

SPONSORS Promote your products and services to a valuable audience of key industry decision makers while increasing brand visibility.

MARCH 8 – 12, 2021 ROSEN SHINGLE CREEK ORLANDO, FLORIDA P OW E R T E S T. O RG 888.3 0 0 . 6 3 8 2

Take advantage of print and media exposure to your target market before, during, and after the conference by customizing your sponsorship package to suit your needs.

HOS T ED BY

View available sponsorship items at powertest.org

FEATURE

INVESTIGATING AN

ELECTROMECHANICAL DIFFERENTIAL RELAY MISOPERATION B Y A L E X R ANG EL , Saber Power Services, LLC

52

• WINTER 2020

INVESTIGATING AN ELECTROMECHANICAL DIFFERENTIAL RELAY MISOPERATION

FEATURE Transformer differential protection based on ANSI 87 is one of the most common protection methods for large power transformers due to its outstanding speed and accuracy. However, given the complexity of this method when applied on delta-wye grounded transformers, mistakes made during the design and/or installation phases might not be detected promptly and can eventually cause an undesired operation — it could take months or years! This article analyzes the transformer differential protection schemes of two 25 MVA, 138/12.47 kV transformers feeding a main– tie–main scheme and investigates how improper installation and commissioning of a tie breaker caused a full outage at an industrial facility.

PHOTO: © ISTOCKPHOTO.COM/PORTFOLIO/JANDRIELOMBARD

DIF F E RENTI AL PROTECTI ON Discussing differential protection starts with one of the most basic electrical laws: Kirchhoff’s Current Law (KCL).

The KCL law states: “The algebraic sum of the currents entering a node (or a closed boundary) is zero.” In other words, the amount of current that enters an electrical node must equal the amount of current that exits the node. If these currents are unequal, an unintended path for current flow is present.

Figure 1 shows a basic KCL representation.

Differential relays apply KCL to protect electrical equipment (e.g. bus, transformer, line) by using current transformers (CTs), which must be installed at each connection point to obtain the total current Figure 1: Kirchhoff’s summation. To perform the summation, each set Current Law of CTs must be brought into a protective device.

A more modern approach allows the current values to be transmitted between relays using fiber optics (outside of the scope of this article).

INVESTIGATING AN ELECTROMECHANICAL DIFFERENTIAL RELAY MISOPERATION

NETAWORLD

•

53

FEATURE polarity and their resulting currents into the relay are 180 degrees out of phase. For a more thorough explanation of current flow and CT polarity, refer to “What is so Negative About Negative Sequence? Part 2,” NETA World, Summer 2018. Figure 2 shows a typical bus differential protection scheme.

TRANSFORMER DI FFERENTI AL PROTECTI ON USI NG ELECTROMECHANI CAL RELAYS

Figure 2: Bus Differential Protection Scheme

Figure 3: Differential Protection Using an Electromechanical Relay (Simplified) It is important to note that CT polarity in these systems plays an important role: The CTs must be installed and wired so that the total current summation adds up to zero on load and external faults. This is only possible if the CTs at each end of the apparatus have opposite

Transformer differential protection was originally performed using electromechanical relays. Many of these devices are still in service today and are now available with digital relays as well. These electromechanical relays require a set of currents at each side of the transformer (restraint currents) to undergo physical summation (operate current) to determine the fault location (internal or external) using a percentage characteristic method. For a detailed explanation of this method, refer to the ABB Type HU and HU-1 Transformer Differential Relays Instruction Manual. Figure 3 shows the restraint and operate currents in a differential electromechanical relay.

One of the biggest challenges in transformer differential protection is the delta-wye grounded transformer configuration, which is widely applied. In this configuration, the delta-side windings connect one side of a given winding (i.e. the polarity side) to the opposite side of an adjacent winding (i.e. non-polarity

Figure 4: 30-Degree Shift on a Delta-Wye Grounded Transformer

54

• WINTER 2020

INVESTIGATING AN ELECTROMECHANICAL DIFFERENTIAL RELAY MISOPERATION

FEATURE

Figure 5: Delta-Connected Secondary CTs side). With this connection type, currents entering the delta side of the transformer are considered to be phase-to-phase, while currents exiting the wye-grounded side of the transformer are considered to be phase-toground with all three of the latter windings grounded on one side. This configuration creates a 30-degree phase shift between the low- and high-voltage currents, which must be considered to properly apply transformer differential protection. Figure 4 shows the phase-angle relationship between the deltaand wye-grounded primary currents (A phase shown only). For a more detailed analysis, refer to Amberg and Rangel’s Tutorial on Symmetrical Components.

C U R R E N T C OM P E NS AT ION A N D E L E C TROM E C H A NIC AL R E L AY S The previous section described a 30-degree phase shift between both sides of a transformer.

To cancel out the CT secondary currents (and satisfy KCL), this shift must be addressed by wye-ground connecting the CTs on the delta side while delta connecting the CTs on the wyegrounded side. This CT delta configuration creates phase-to-phase secondary currents and therefore rotates the phase angles by 30 degrees.

With this final shift, both sets of secondary currents have a phase angle difference of 180 degrees.

Note: Proper tap selection must be considered in transformer differential protection. However, in the misoperation being analyzed here, TAP1 and TAP2 were properly selected and did not contribute to the issue. Therefore, they will not be discussed further.

Figure 5 shows the proper CT configuration to be used for transformer differential protection with electromechanical relays. Due to the opposing CT polarity, the restraint currents entering the relay are 180 degrees apart.

EXI STI NG SYSTEM The system discussed in this paper consists of two incoming 138 kV transmission lines; each line feeds a 138 kV breaker. Each breaker then feeds a 25 MVA, 138 kV/12.47 kV transformer.

On the low-voltage side, each transformer feeds a 12.47 kV breaker, which then feeds a 12.47 kV bus (identified as bus A and bus B). Each bus provides power to three different feeders (identified as 1, 2, and 3 on bus A and 4, 5, and 6 on bus B). A connection between bus A and bus B exists through a tie breaker connected to both buses.

CTs on the high-voltage side of the transformer are wye-ground connected (CT ratio of 100:5), while CTs on the low-voltage side of the transformer are delta connected (CT ratio of 1200:5). Since the 12.47 kV

INVESTIGATING AN ELECTROMECHANICAL DIFFERENTIAL RELAY MISOPERATION

NETAWORLD

•

55

FEATURE Δ

Y

Δ

Δ Y

Δ

Δ

Δ Δ

Y

Δ

Δ Y

Δ

Figure 6: One-Line Diagram of Existing System (Simplified) buses are part of the differential scheme by design, the CTs at the load side of each feeder, as well as one set of CTs from the tie breaker, must be connected to the 87T relays (every set connected in delta and paralleled). Figure 6 shows a simplified one-line diagram of the system.

PHASE-TO-GROUND FA ULT On 11/29/2017, a C-phase-to-ground fault occurred downstream of feeder 5. A digital relay had recently been installed to protect feeder 5, and an event report was generated during the fault. The event report shows that the fault in the system lasted approximately three cycles and had a maximum current value of approximately 2,400 ARMS. During this fault, differential protection relays 87T1 and 87T2 tripped, and a full blackout was experienced at this facility (both 138 kV breakers opened).

Figure 7 shows the oscillography generated by the feeder 5 relay during the ground fault.

TROUBLESHOOTI NG

Figure 7: C-Phase to Ground Fault on Feeder 5

56

• WINTER 2020

Site personnel identified the ground fault downstream of feeder 5, determined that both 87 relays had misoperated, and requested assistance from a third-party testing company to investigate the reason for the misoperations.

The relay flags had been cleared, the lockout relays had been reset, the 138 kV breaker on the A side was closed (the system became

INVESTIGATING AN ELECTROMECHANICAL DIFFERENTIAL RELAY MISOPERATION

FEATURE partially energized), and loading was kept to a minimum until the root cause was determined.

The half of the system that was re-energized had a very low load; therefore, performing troubleshooting and commissioning was difficult. Additionally, because the 87T1 relay was electromechanical, it was not possible to obtain all restraint currents at once (a digital relay is able to capture these currents through a triggered event report). It was decided to troubleshoot the other half of the system that was still de-energized and isolated.

wiring exiting the breaker and b) the restraint channel at 87T2. The measured currents were a) 1.0 Amp (expected) and b) 0.6 Amps (unexpected). Figure 8 shows a simplified schematic of the current testing performed at feeder 5 and the 87T2 relay (A-phase measured values only).

To verify the restraint currents flowing into 87T2, current was injected from the feeder breaker CT terminal blocks back into the relay. Given that the CT burden is much higher than the wiring and the relay inputs, it was not necessary to lift the wires prior to testing. A single balanced Amp was injected at each polarity connection point at the feeder 5 breaker CT terminal blocks (ST2X-1, ST4X1, ST6X-1), and current measurements were taken with a digital clamp meter at a) the field

According to KCL, 0.4 Amps are flowing in an unknown path. Site personnel mentioned that the tie breaker had been replaced months ago due to aging. It was not put in service (i.e. the breaker and the isolating switches remained opened). However, connections were made to put it in service if needed. It was also mentioned that the 87T relays had nuisance tripped in the past and that these events began to happen shortly after this breaker’s installation. A visual inspection performed at the tie breaker’s wiring cabinet revealed that shorting screws had been installed at the CT shorting blocks connected to the 87T relays (Figure 9). Using a digital clamp meter verified that the missing 0.4 Amps were flowing into this unintended path. Since the

Figure 8: Current Testing at Feeder 5 Breaker (Simplified)

Figure 9: Tie Breaker CT Terminal Blocks, Shorting Screws Inserted

INVESTIGATING AN ELECTROMECHANICAL DIFFERENTIAL RELAY MISOPERATION

NETAWORLD

•

57

FEATURE CTs are delta-connected, their windings were shorted and a current path through this short was created (refer to Figure 8), which then created an outstanding operate current. This operate current would become high enough during an external fault to cause the 87T relays to erroneously declare an internal fault and trip.

LE SSONS LE A RNED Several lessons were learned from these misoperations: • When replacing substation apparatus, individual components that are part of the specific apparatus might affect the system.

In the case of outdoor breakers, current transformers must be fully tested and commissioned prior to re-energizing the system to ensure proper operation.

• The use of electromechanical differential relays on a delta-wye grounded transformer adds complexity due to the CT delta connection on the wye-grounded side of the power transformer. These deltaconnected CTs must never be shorted because the non-polarity side of one phase is always connected to the polarity side of another phase.

• Whenever CTs are introduced into a system but are not to be used, they can be connected wye-grounded and shorted out (they must never be left open).

• Protection systems (in this case, the differential relays) must be recommissioned anytime they are modified. One simple check is to meter the operate current upon loading the power transformer.

A digital clamp meter can be used for electromechanical relays; for digital relays, a meter command should suffice. The

58

• WINTER 2020

mismatch between operate and restraint currents must be low and according to relay manufacturer specifications.

CONCLUSI ON The process of replacing substation apparatus due to aging and/or limitations is very common, and all new instrumentation devices introduced into the system (i.e. CTs) must be fully tested and commissioned to ensure proper operation. Without proper testing and commissioning, mistakes can go undetected and eventually cause misoperations.

REFERENCES Alexander, C. and Sadiki, M. Fundamentals of Electric Circuits, 3rd Edition. The McGrawHill Companies, Inc., 2007.

Rangel, A. “What Is So Negative about Negative Sequence? Part 2.” NETA World, Summer 2018.

ABB, Inc. Type HU and HU-1 Transformer Differential Relays Instruction Manual, 1999.

Amberg, A. and Rangel, A. Tutorial on Symmetrical Components, 1st Edition (ebook). Schweitzer Engineering Laboratories, Inc. Accessed March 7, 2016 at https://cdn.selinc.com/assets/Literature/ Publications/White%20Papers/LWP0010-01_ TutorialSymmetrical-Pt1_AR_20130422.pdf.

Alex Rangel is a Protection and Controls Engineer for Saber Power Services, LLC. Alex is NETA Level 4 certified, has been an IEEE member for 11 years, and has been a registered Professional Engineer (PE) in the state of Texas since 2014. He received a BSEE and an MSE from the University of Texas at Austin in 2009 and 2011, respectively.

INVESTIGATING AN ELECTROMECHANICAL DIFFERENTIAL RELAY MISOPERATION

24/7 EMERGENCY RESPONSE

COVID-19 COMPLIANT ESSENTIAL BUSINESS

SPECIALTY: Large Motor, Generator & Transformer Work NCSCB Certified Cable Splicers | VLF-TD & PD Cable Testing & Analysis Annual Preventive Maintenance | Relay Testing Power Systems Repairs & Troubleshooting | Power Quality Audits Engineering Services | Commissioning Industry and Custom Safety & Technical Training Available!

TONY DEMARIA ELECTRIC, INC. (310) 816-3130

www.tdeinc.com

Greater Los Angeles Area

CBS stocks every low- and mediumvoltage circuit breaker

made in America since 1945.

With more than 5 million breakers and parts in our 200,000-square-foot warehouse — including switchgear, transformers, substations, protective relays, loadbreak switches, electrical contacts, motor controls and centers, vacuum interrupters, and more — Circuit Breaker Sales has you covered.

√ Replacement parts and equipment √ Remanufacturing, retrofits, and upgrades √ Reverse engineering, 3-D printing of obsolete parts

1315 Columbine, Gainesville, Texas 76241 | 800-232-5809 INFO @ CBSALES.COM | CircuitBreaker.com

CBStore.com Your TRUSTED online resource for authentic circuit breaker and electrical distribution equipment

new service lo catio ns CBS Florida | Lakeland, Florida | 863-646-5099 | CBS-Florida.com CBS Midwest | Crown Point, Indiana | 219-575-5420 | CBSMidwest.com For more information about Group CBS and its affiliate companies, visit GroupCBS.com.

(800) 232-5809 CircuitBreaker.com

TOLLFREE

Superior Service for Optimal Performance Whether you need startup services, ongoing maintenance, or emergency response you need a partner you can trust.

Rely on your High Voltage Maintenance team for expertise, responsiveness, and safety.

• • •

Consistent quality, service-delivery process Proactive customer communication and project management National, regional, and local service center availability

To learn more, visit HVMCorp.com or call 1-866-HVM-TEAM Experts Available Across Six Centers of Excellence: Commissioning | Electrical Engineering | DC Power Testing and Maintenance | Protection and Controls | Compliance

© 2019 HVM CORP. All rights reserved. HVM and the HVM logo are trademarks or registered trademarks of HVM Corp. All other names and logos referred to are trade names, trademarks or registered trademarks of their respective owners. While every precaution has been taken to ensure accuracy and completeness herein, HVM Corp. assumes no responsibility, and disclaims all liability, for damages resulting from use of this information or for any errors or omissions. Specifications are subject to change without notice.

HVM-COE-AD-2-EN-NA-8x5.25.indd 1

12/07/2019 8:54:28 PM

Self-Paced Technical Seminars S E L F - PAC E D T E C H N I C A L S E M I N A R

S E L F - PAC E D T E C H N I C A L S E M I N A R

Transformer Testing Theory and Case Studies

How Do They Do It? Electrical Power Measurement Methods, Practices and Standards

PRESENTED BY

PRESENTED BY

Mike Wolf and Mike Anderson, Doble Engineering Company

Ross Ignall, Dranetz

FROM POWERTEST 2020

FROM POWERTEST 2020

Online learning, on demand.

N E W LY A D D E D

EARN CREDITS

Meet recertification requirements with the latest PowerTest 2020 Self-Paced Technical Seminars.

All NETA Self-Paced Technical Seminars are eligible for Continuing Education Units (CEUs) and NETA Continuing Technical Development (CTD) credits.

Learn more at netaworld.org

1 COURSE = 4 CTD 88 CTD S

AVAILABLE

S

FEATURE

TESTING TECHNIQUES FOR

PROTECTION-CLASS CURRENT TRANSFORMERS DI N E S H CH H AJ ER an d SUG H OSH K UBER, Megger USA

Relaying current transformers serve as critical components in the design of a protection scheme. CT performance under fault conditions should be within its operating characteristics for a true representation of fault magnitudes and reliable operation of the protection scheme. To ensure proper installation and operation, CTs are often subjected to one or more tests performed in accordance with standards including IEEE C57.13.1, IEC 60044–1, and IEC 60044–6.

IEEE C57.13.1, Guide for Field Testing of Relaying Current Transformers describes field test methods that assure CTs are connected properly, are of marked ratio and polarity, and are in a condition to perform as designed both initially and after being in service for a period of time. Performing the recommended ratio, polarity, winding resistance, and excitation tests on each tap of a multiple-tap CT can be a labor- and time-intensive job. Combined with substation assets such as transformers and circuit breakers with multiple CTs per phase, it is a complex task to obtain reliable and accurate results.

An excitation test performed using the secondary voltage injection method could

62

• WINTER 2020

require high levels of AC voltage to plot the saturation characteristics and determine the knee point. Special application CTs such as TPY, TPZ, or generator CTs may require thousands of volts to perform this test. This requirement not only makes it a challenging situation in the field environment, but also poses safety concerns for operating personnel.

This conventional method of testing CTs in the field has been used for years with some limitations and drawbacks. With modern advancement in digital processing and solidstate technology, efforts have been made to perform those same tests quickly, safely, and with a high degree of accuracy and reliability.

TESTING TECHNIQUES FOR PROTECTION-CLASS CURRENT TRANSFORMERS

FEATURE

PHOTO: © ISTOCKPHOTO.COM/PORTFOLIO/DEEPBLUE4YOU

A LT E R N AT IVE T E S T ING T E C H N I QU E S An excitation test on protection class CTs utilizing nominal frequency 50/60 Hz sinusoidal voltage signal is one of the most challenging tests to perform, as it requires a high voltage/wattage source to drive the CT into saturation to measure its core characteristics. When testing a C800 class CT, test voltage can typically be around 800 V RMS, and for some special cases, 1,300 V may be required to achieve 1 A excitation current for saturation. For some IEC-class CTs, test voltage can easily reach 4,000 V RMS to achieve 1 A saturation.

Many field-portable instruments are unable to deliver that level of AC voltage and wattage.

This makes the test difficult to perform for some applications and requires significant safety precautions that must be taken before performing the test. The DC voltage technique can be employed to achieve core saturation and overcome these limitations. IEC 600446 Annex B-3 explains the alternate way to perform a CT excitation test.

The flux generated in the core can be represented by

TESTING TECHNIQUES FOR PROTECTION-CLASS CURRENT TRANSFORMERS

(1)

NETAWORLD

•

63

FEATURE ṽ

v + t

t

–

Figure 1: The area under the curve is flux generated using the AC and DC method.

The integral of voltage over a period of time would be a measure of flux (Φ) produced as shown in equation (1). It can be generated by using AC or DC excitation voltage. The area under the curve reflects the flux produced as shown in Figure 1.

Flux can be increased by utilizing either of the two methods. Either the time period can be kept constant as the voltage is increased, or the voltage can be kept constant with an increase in time. The conventional method used by the industry over the years has been to keep the time period constant (or fixed frequency at 50/60Hz) as the voltage is increased. Alternatively, the DC voltage can be kept the same and the time can be prolonged until the core is saturated. By integrating the constant DC voltage over time, the core saturation can be determined. This

saturation can then be mathematically converted back to an equivalent 50 Hz/60 Hz saturation.

This will then achieve the same result as the conventional AC excitation test technique.

Figure 2 shows an excitation test result with a knee-point voltage of around 14 kV. The advantage of the DC method is to eliminate the need for higher levels of AC voltage and achieve the same results by utilizing a DC voltage at or below the available line voltage. The technique allows testing CTs with higher knee-point voltages using the same concept with a slightly longer test duration. Additionally, lower levels of DC test voltage allow safer testing conditions and a portable, lightweight instrument ideal for field conditions.

CT demagnetization is an important step to ensure that the core has no residual magnetism.

This can be achieved by reducing the hysteresis loops starting from saturation through a series of similar DC excitation reoccurring cycles in opposite directions with progressively reduced magnitudes.

CONCURRENT TESTI N G TECHNI QUE The conventional testing method works on the concept of keeping the primary circuit open, applying an AC voltage to the secondary winding, and measuring secondary voltage/ current along with primary voltage values to obtain test parameters such as ratio, polarity, winding resistance, and excitation characteristics curve. For a multi-tap CT, these tests are repeated for each tap either through a manual operation or by utilizing an automatic switching technique.

The concurrent testing technique uses the transformer’s ampere-turn principle to obtain the recommended test results for all the taps and any inter-tap combination simultaneously.

(2)

Figure 2: Saturation Test with Knee-Point Voltage around 14 kV

64

• WINTER 2020

The turns ratio (N2/N1) of a CT is a ratio of the applied voltage on the secondary side to the

TESTING TECHNIQUES FOR PROTECTION-CLASS CURRENT TRANSFORMERS

FEATURE measured voltage on the primary side as shown in equation (2). The concurrent technique applies the test voltage across the complete secondary winding and measures the voltage across each secondary tap position in addition to the primary winding induced voltage.

Concurrent testing test connections to a multitap CT can be made as shown in Figure 3.

With those measurement values, the ratio for each tap position can be calculated simultaneously as shown in equation 3.

(3) The excitation characteristics can also be obtained for all the taps by performing an excitation test across the complete secondary winding and measuring voltages across all the taps throughout the test duration. Measured tap voltages along with calculated turns ratios and secondary current can be utilized to plot the excitation curves for all the tap combinations concurrently.

A DC winding resistance test for a CT secondary winding is performed to detect any shorted turns or high-resistance connection point(s) in the CT secondary circuit. The same concurrent technique can be employed to measure the winding resistance of each tap combination by applying a DC current through the entire secondary winding and measuring the voltage drop across each tap position.

C OM PA R AT IVE ANALYSIS This section focuses on the performance characteristics of a CT using two techniques discussed in the previous sections: the DC excitation method and the concurrent test technique. A comparative analysis of test results from excitation tests performed using the AC method and DC method is discussed.

The accuracy of testing a multi-tap CT in AC concurrent method is examined by comparing the test results obtained from testing the same CT on a tap-by-tap basis (AC method).

Figure 3: Multi-Tap CT Concurrent Testing Technique Connection Setup Furthermore, the test results from AC concurrent method are compared with the DC concurrent method for accuracy.

AC Excitation vs DC Excitation Test Four types of protection CTs (C400 and C800) with varying saturation characteristics were tested in the field using the AC and DC methods explained in the previous section.

The excitation test was conducted between the X1–X5 taps of the CT. Their characteristics are shown in Figure 4 a, b, c, and d.

From Figure 4, the saturation curves for two C400 and two C800 CTs obtained from AC and DC excitation methods provided similar excitation characteristics and knee-point values.

The difference in knee point measured using the ANSI 45 method (tangent at 45° angle) for the two methods (AC and DC) was found to be negligible.

TESTING TECHNIQUES FOR PROTECTION-CLASS CURRENT TRANSFORMERS

NETAWORLD

•

65

FEATURE

Figure 4: Comparison of AC and DC Test Method Results

Concurrent AC vs Non-concurrent AC Test Excitation Tests. Performing an excitation test using the non-concurrent method involves measuring voltage/current across individual taps. The concurrent method measures the voltage drop across all the taps simultaneously and calculates the secondary current using the

ampere-turns principle as given in equation (2). The field results from the AC excitation test across different taps using concurrent and non-concurrent measurement methods are provided in Figure 5. The field results show that the excitation curves using the concurrent measurement method follow the non-concurrent measurements. The results also confirm that the concurrent method could

Table 1: Ratio Test Comparison

66

• WINTER 2020

Non-Concurrent

Concurrent

Tap

Name Plate

Measured

Error (%)

Measured

Error (%)

X1-X2

200 : 5

200.021 : 5

0.01

200.095 : 5

0.048

X1-X4

800 : 5

799.892 : 5

-0.013

800.386 : 5

0.048

X2-X5

1000 : 5

999.99 : 5

0.00

1000.246 : 5

0.025

X3-X4

500 : 5

499.904 : 5

-0.012

500.156 : 5

0.031

TESTING TECHNIQUES FOR PROTECTION-CLASS CURRENT TRANSFORMERS

FEATURE

Figure 5: Comparison of Non-Concurrent AC and Concurrent AC Test Method Results

Figure 6: Comparison of Concurrent AC and DC Test Method Results

improve testing efficiency by reducing the test time considerably without compromising the accuracy of test results.

Concurrent DC vs Concurrent AC Test.

The concurrent DC method follows the same connection and working procedures of a concurrent AC method. DC voltage is applied across the CT secondary, and the voltage across individual taps is measured simultaneously.

The excitation characteristics of a C800-type CT using AC and DC concurrent methods is shown in Figure 6.

Ratio Test. For concurrent tests, equation (3) can be used to calculate the ratio of each tap by simultaneously measuring the voltage drop across each tap (V12, V23, V34, V45) and the voltage induced on the primary (Vh). Table 1 provides field results of both a non-concurrent and concurrent test across the same taps of a CT. From Table 1, it can be observed that the differences in results between the two methods are negligible.

Winding Resistance Test. A DC current is applied to the secondary winding of a CT and the voltage drop across each tap is measured individually. The connections for this test are the same as the ratio test. The winding resistance of different tap positions measured using nonconcurrent and concurrent methods is provided in Table 2. The field results show that the resistance values do not differ much between the two methods.

Table 2: Comparison of Winding Resistance Test Results Measured Resistance(mΩ) Tap

Non-Concurrent

Concurrent

X2-X3

53

50

X1-X4

406

405

X2-X5

504

504

X3-X5

456

454

The linear portions of the AC and DC method excitation curves are observed to be following each other closely. The knee point for CT saturation using the DC method is similar to that for the AC method. The minor differences in the lower part of the curves could be attributed to the non-linear characteristics of CT excitation response in that region and the low-voltage range selection (<5 V) of the instrument during the measurement.

The DC method can be used to test CTs with high saturation points, such as TPY and TPZ that are used in locations where high transient and sub-transient currents are expected. Figure 7 shows the result of a CT with a high kneepoint value of close to 14,000 V. Testing CTs such as TPY and TPZ is very difficult when only the AC method is employed, as the voltage required to saturate the core is high. On the other hand, the DC method only requires a voltage below

TESTING TECHNIQUES FOR PROTECTION-CLASS CURRENT TRANSFORMERS

NETAWORLD

•

67

FEATURE be utilized in place of AC excitation and individual tap-by-tap testing techniques without compromising the accuracy and reliability of the results. Demagnetization is highly recommended after a DC excitation test to minimize any residual magnetism in the core of the CT.

REFERENCES IEC 60044-6, Instrument Transformers Part 6: Requirements for Protective Current Transformers for Transient Performance.

Figure 7: Testing CT with High Knee-Point Using the DC Method

IEEE C57.13.1-2006, Guide for Field Testing of Relaying Current Transformers.

line power value to achieve core saturation characteristics for these types of CTs.

United States Patent: Concurrent Transformer Test System and Method. Patent No. US 9,128,134 B2, Date of Patent: Sep. 8, 2015.

C ONC LUSION It is vitally important to test protection class CTs during installation and periodically thereafter to ensure they work as intended for power system protection applications.

The tests recommended for CT testing in the industry standards are well established.

However, methods used to perform those tests are evolving.

Efforts are being made to create safer operating conditions, test special-application CTs, and improve the efficiency and productivity of the test system through automation, intelligent data processing, and developing smart algorithms utilizing basic principles of transformer operation and electromagnetics.

New measurement techniques proposed in this article, although unique, utilize the concepts well-described in electrical textbooks. DC excitation and the concurrent method of testing offer an alternative approach for testing CTs that provides the same measurements and results as conventional techniques recommended in various international standards. The comparative analysis between different methods indicates that DC excitation and the concurrent method of testing can

68

• WINTER 2020

Dinesh Chhajer manages Megger USA’s Technical Support Group.

His responsibilities include providing engineering consultation and recommendations in relation to testing of transformers, batteries, circuit breakers, and other substation assets. Dinesh has presented numerous white papers related to asset maintenance and testing at various conferences within power industry. Dinesh previously worked as an Application Engineer at Megger and a substation and design Engineer at Power Engineers Inc. He is an IEEE member and a licensed Professional Engineer in Texas. Dinesh received his MS in electrical engineering from the University of Texas at Arlington.

Sughosh Kuber is a Relay and Protection Applications Engineer at Megger North America, where he provides technical support to service companies and utilities responsible for reliable operation of electrical networks. Sughosh brings over 9 years of field experience and academic research in power systems from protection schemes and testing to data analysis for energy efficiency and sustainability.

Sughosh received his MS in electrical engineering from New Mexico State University.

TESTING TECHNIQUES FOR PROTECTION-CLASS CURRENT TRANSFORMERS

THE PREMIER ELECTRICAL MAINTENANCE AND SAFETY CONFERENCE

CALL FOR

EXHIBITORS Exhibit to an audience of 500+ electrical testing professionals including leading decision-makers looking for new products and services.

MARCH 8 – 12, 2021 ROSEN SHINGLE CREEK ORLANDO, FLORIDA P OW E R T E S T. O RG 888.3 0 0 . 6 3 8 2

For attendee profile and additional information, visit powertest.org

HOS T ED BY

Call Today: 610.515.8775

Looking for Obscure, Obsolete, New or Used Parts?

Belyea’s Vast Inventory Has it All!

No one has a wider range of Electrical Power Equipment and Parts. Our vast inventory has new, used and obsolete parts.

Visit www.belyeapower.com to nd the parts you need.  Electro Mechanical Relay  Substation Equipment  Grounding Resistors  Motor Controls  CT’s and PT’s

 Bushings  Arresters  Gauges  Fuses  And More....

CONTACT US TODAY: 610.515.8775 • Fax (610) 258-1230

2200 NORTHWOOD AVE, EASTON, PA 18045 USA For our complete inventory visit our website: www.belyeapower.com • sales@belyeapower.com

A Wide Range of Test Systems Available

R

PHENIX

TECHNOLOGIES

1-301-746-8118 • www.PhenixTech.com info@phenixtech.com • 75 Speicher Drive, Accident, MD 21520 USA

AC Vacuum Interrupter Tester, 60 kV

High Current Circuit Breaker Test Sets Micro-Ohm Meters

➤ Accurately measure very

low contact resistances ➤ 5 models available ➤ 10 to 200 Amp

➤ 9 models available ➤ 1,000 to 75,000 Amp Outputs ➤ Updated control system, automated

testing, data acquisition

➤ Bluetooth connection

to Android devices

➤ Bluetooth to

battery printer

➤ Android App

included

40+ Years Experience

High Voltage - High Current - High Power Test Systems and Components

FEATURE

TESTING AND COMMISSIONING A DISTRIBUTION RECLOSER IN GRID-TIE SOLAR FARMS B Y M O H I T S H A R M A , Megger, an d L UIS M ONT OYA, P E, FlexGen Power Systems, formerly ABM

Rapid photovoltaic (PV) penetration into the electric grid has mandated deeper operational and technical understanding of protection schemes in PV farms. An effective protection scheme ensures a grid-connected system functions reliably and securely, and testing and commissioning the entire protection scheme to prove its operational success is of paramount importance. This article presents a standard grid-tie photovoltaic farm architecture and discusses how to restore the system to regular operation using reclosing schemes.

72

• WINTER 2020

TESTING AND COMMISSIONING A DISTRIBUTION RECLOSER IN GRID-TIE SOLAR FARMS

FEATURE

Distributed generation (DG) is increasingly widespread across the nation’s utility landscape, but uniform policies that allow renewable energy generators to connect to the utility grid were missing until recently. This significantly complicates renewable energy installations and has likely deterred the adoption of customer-sited DG. To address these complications, IEEE introduced interconnection standard IEEE Std. 1547 in 2003 to facilitate deployment of renewables and other forms of DG by specifying technical and institutional requirements and the terms by which utilities and DG system owners must abide.

IEEE and North American Reliability Corporation (NERC) standards exist to address the reliability needs of interconnected electricity systems. These standards apply to the bulk electrical system (BES) specified by the BES definition adopted by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) in March 2014.

PHOTO: © ISTOCKPHOTO.COM/PORTFOLIO/SNVV

In some cases, norms apply to devices and needs beyond the BES. As more distributed energy resources are connected to the grid, their impact on the bulk power system is becoming substantial.

At higher penetration levels, issues may develop in transmission line loading, grid voltage, and system frequency during regular or disturbed operation.

Therefore, extensive testing and commissioning of devices that are part of distributed generation and their interconnection have gained careful consideration. This article looks at protection testing of recloser controllers that are a crucial part of many grid-tied renewable energy systems.

SYSTEM DESCRI PTI ON A typical utility-scale solar photovoltaic system is shown in Figure 1. The system is divided into three subsystems: direct current system, alternate current collector system, and distribution-level system.

• The direct current system consists of solar arrays, combiner boxes, fuses, and disconnects all operating on DC power. Each subsystem’s specific overcurrent protection needs are based NETAWORLD

•

73

FEATURE

Figure 1: One-Line Diagram for Utility-Scale Solar Farm Main Zones on the requirements of array-combiner boxes.

• The alternate current collector system is located on the AC side of the inverter and typically consists of a 480 V AC common bus.

• The distribution-level system appears at the output of the collector system. Power from the solar farm is injected via a stepup transformer, which transforms system voltage from 480 V AC to 12.5 KV AC allowing interconnection to distribution line voltages. This subsystem consists of potential transformers (PTs), current transformers (CTs), medium-voltage underground and overhead cable, a revenue meter, and a medium-voltage recloser switch equipped with an electronic relay.

Inverters in the solar farm transform energy from DC to AC. Each inverter has overcurrent and overvoltage protection. The DC protection side is isolated from the AC side, including isolated ground fault systems. Indeed, individual protection schemes apply to each subsystem. However, this paper focuses on protection requirements for the distributionlevel system.

74

• WINTER 2020

I NTERCONNECTI ON AN D PROTECTI ON IEEE Std. 1547-2018 describes the requirements for interconnecting solar PV farms. A photovoltaic solar farm classifies as a distributed energy resource (DER) and therefore must comply with operational requirements to respond to abnormal voltages and frequency events in the utility line.

Conditions for interconnection include active and reactive power capability and voltage/ power requirements. The three-phase inverters are responsible for adjusting these in the system. The inverters act as a link between the DC system and the AC collector system as shown in Figure 1.

Figure 2, a detailed view of the distribution level system, indicates the location of the recloser switch and relay.

The MV recloser and its relay system should respond to utility EPS disturbances. IEEE Std. 1547 establishes response-time requirements for mandatory disconnection due to loss of phase, area EPS fault conditions, and out of limit voltage or frequency. Table 1 and Table 2

TESTING AND COMMISSIONING A DISTRIBUTION RECLOSER IN GRID-TIE SOLAR FARMS

FEATURE Table 1: Response Requirements to Abnormal Voltages Voltage Range (% of rated voltage)

Clearing Time (seconds/cycles)

Allowable Clearing Time (seconds)

Grid Voltage > 120

0.16/10

Max 0.16

Grid Voltage > 110

2.0/125

1.0 to 13

Grid Voltage < 0.7

2.0/125

2.0 to 21

Grid Voltage < 0.45

0.16/10

0.16 to 2

SOURCE: IEEE STD. 1547-2018

Table 2: Response Requirements to Abnormal Frequency

Figure 2: Distribution Level System for Solar PV Interconnection indicate boundaries for voltage and frequency, respectively.

During fault conditions, grid voltage (line side of the recloser switch) could experience excursions outside of normal operating values resulting in power fluctuations. Therefore, the standard recommends two levels of undervoltage and overvoltage. To comply, system voltage on the utility side of the recloser must be monitored. The MV recloser switch controller chosen for this article is capable of receiving six voltage inputs. Three inputs are from the utility side, sourced from three 0.5 kVA distribution transformers; three inputs are from the generating side, sourced from three low-energy capacitive voltage sensors located in the bushings of the solid dielectric recloser.

The standard also proposes underfrequency and overfrequency levels that directly address the system’s protection stability and are indirectly responsible for unintentional islanding.

When an MV recloser switch operates and isolates a PV farm from the grid, a relay mechanism must guarantee reconnection once grid conditions are normal and healthy voltage is established. Schemes involving automatic reclosing (Figure 3) can ensure proper

Frequency (Hz)

Clearing Time (seconds)

Freq > 62

0.16

Freq > 61.2

300

Freq < 58.5

300

Freq < 57

0.16

SOURCE: IEEE STD. 1547-2018

disconnection and reconnection of the solar PV farm to maintain production while the solar PV injects the maximum power available. The recloser sequence should be coordinated with the local area EPS since automatic reclosing onto a circuit needs approval from the affected utility. Abnormal conditions should result Overvoltage (59) Undervoltage (27) Over frequency (81O) Under frequency (81U)

OR

Phase and Ground Overcurrent (51P, 51G, 50P, 50G) Single Pole Open (SPO) Anti-islanding Logic

OR

Recloser Trip

Manual Push Button Trip Yellow Handle Operation

OR Relay Sleep Mode

Battery Fail

Figure 3: MV Recloser Switch Relay Trip Conditions

TESTING AND COMMISSIONING A DISTRIBUTION RECLOSER IN GRID-TIE SOLAR FARMS

NETAWORLD

•

75

FEATURE in momentary cessation of operating mode, and restoration of connection behavior must be coordinated for proper reclosing time characteristics.

External conditions such as battery failure, manual push-button trip, yellow-handle operation, and relay sleep mode must be considered in the MV reclosing sequence.

Over Voltage Trip

100.0

No Operation Region

5.0

56.9

Pick Up (volts)

100.2 125.2 136.6

Figure 4: Voltage Element Settings Time Delay (cycle)

Under Frequency Trip

Over Frequency Trip

No Operation Region

5.0

Figure 5: Undervoltage Level-159.3 Pickup Test Setup 60.5 60

For reliable operation of an interconnected system, testing and commissioning protection elements for the MV recloser switch must be performed with satisfactory results.

Functional Tests Functional tests include testing individual protective elements that are used in the logic of the MV recloser switch controller for interconnection requirements. The microprocessor-based controller under test can accommodate two-phase voltage: one phase current and one neutral current winding. It is also capable of functioning as either a singlepole or three-pole trip and close for reclosing applications.

Time Delay (cycle)

Under Voltage Trip

TESTI NG AND COMMI SSI ONI NG

Pick Up (Hz)

• Undervoltage/Overvoltage Elements.

Two undervoltage and overvoltage elements are set in phase-to-neutral (PhN) volts secondary. Time delays are set in units of cycles (Figure 4). Any modern relay test equipment that can provide three-phase voltages can be used.

• Pickup Test. Figure 5 shows that the pickup test can be designed using stepramp decrements with nominal secondary voltage as a pre-fault condition. The start of the ramp can be set to 110% of the expected level-1 pickup (100.2 V) value and the stop can be at 90%. Users can perform a three-phase and/or a singlephase ramp to validate all fault types: ABC, AB, BC, CA, AN, BN, CN. Setting

Table 3: Undervoltage Level-1 Pickup Test Results

76

Pickup

Minimum Value

EXPECTED VALUE

Maxiumum Value

Allowed % Error

% Error

✓/✗

100.30 U

95.190

100.20

105.21

5.0

0.1

✓

Channel

Phase

Ramp

Voltage

A-N

Voltage Voltage

• WINTER 2020

Test Values Magnitude

Ø (*)

f (Hz)

Amp

100.300 V

0.00

60.00

B-N

Amp

100.300 V

120.00

60.00

C-N

Amp

100.300 V

240.00

60.00

TESTING AND COMMISSIONING A DISTRIBUTION RECLOSER IN GRID-TIE SOLAR FARMS

FEATURE performed to check whether the reclosing logic works as intended and the recloser goes to lockout state if any permanent fault exists. For the reclosing cycle to be initiated, the controller provides the ability to set logic equations as a setting. This setting is a rising-edge detect setting and is supervised by recloser status.

It is usually programmed to trigger when the trip condition goes true.

Additionally, the controller under test has independent settings for singlepole and three-pole operation mode.

Special attention is needed to set the test template to work as per the set operation mode.

the dwell time is also crucial in this application since undervoltage elements are associated with time delay. Figure 5 shows that the time delay between each increment is kept higher than 100 cycles.

• Timing Test. This timing test can be done using two state sequences. The first state can be set to simulate nominal load conditions with a specified time duration; the second state can be set as a sudden drop in voltage to simulate the undervoltage fault condition. Figure 6A and Figure 6B show the setup. Refer to Table 4 for results. Similarly, overvoltage tests can be performed.

• Reclosing Elements 0 Unsuccessful reclose test. As the name indicates, this test can be

The scheme uses a three-phase recloser capable of tripping and closing all three phases in unison. It is designed for just one reclose shot before going to the lock-out state in case of a permanent fault.

Popularly, state sequencer is used to design a test template to validate the auto-reclosing sequence in the MV recloser switch controller. Both controller and recloser on the pole can be simultaneously tested. Any modern test equipment with an interface to connect the control cable can be used. In a situation where only controller testing is desired, there is no need for special equipment with

Figure 6A: Undervoltage Level-1 Timing Test Setup: Load Condition State

Figure 6B: Undervoltage Level-1 Timing Test Setup: Fault Condition State Table 4: Undervoltage Level-1 Timing Test Result Prefault Time((cy))

Operation Time

Measured (cy)

Minimum Value (cy)

Maximum Value (cy)

✓/✗

100.8

99.65

101.6

✓

120.0 Channel

Prefault Magnitude

Ø (*)

Fault f (Hz)

Magnitude

Ø (*)

f (Hz)

Current

A-N

0.10 A

0.00 *

60.00 Hz

1.00 A

0.00 *

60.00 Hz

Current

B-N

0.10 A

120.00 *

60.00 Hz

1.00 A

120.00 *

60.00 Hz

Current

C-N

0.10 A

240.00 *

60.00 Hz

1.00 A

240.00 *

60.00 Hz

Voltage

A-N

113.83 V

0.00 *

60.00 Hz

95.00 V

0.00 *

60.00 Hz

Voltage

B-N

113.83 V

120.00 *

60.00 Hz

95.00 V

120.00 *

60.00 Hz

Voltage

C-N

113.83 V

240.00 *

60.00 Hz

95.00 V

240.00 *

60.00 Hz

TESTING AND COMMISSIONING A DISTRIBUTION RECLOSER IN GRID-TIE SOLAR FARMS

NETAWORLD

•

77

FEATURE the interface. One can use binary outputs on test equipment to simulate breaker conditions.

Depending on the number of shots, the state-sequencer file can be adjusted for the number of states.

Since one shot is programmed in the controller under test, the total number of states needed will be five.

– A pre-fault state 1 is needed to simulate load conditions with the breaker closed for the amount of time the controller takes to reset from a past lockout. If the controller is already in the reset state, there is no need to delay.

– State 2 can be programmed to simulate trip conditions that initiate a reclosing sequence.

In this state, test equipment expects to receive a trip signal; therefore, the timeout has to be long enough in case there are any timed elements in trip logic.

According to the logic diagram of the trip output described in the previous section, a single-phase undervoltage condition can be simulated as a fault.

Figure 7: Event Report of Unsuccessful Reclose Check

78

• WINTER 2020

– State 3 can be simulated similar to state 2 where the fault condition still persists. As part of an agreement with utility operators for reconnection, the controller under test is set to wait four hours before going to lockout if it doesn’t read three-phase healthy voltage.

For testing purposes, the wait can be reduced since it is just a timer.

The event report shown in Figure 7 indicates a three-phase lockout (79LO3P) trigger after the timer, which is set to 23 cycles in this particular scenario, expires.

0 Successful reclose test. As the name indicates, this test verifies that the reclosing logic works as intended and goes to reset state if any temporary fault exists. Similar to the unsuccessful reclose test, state sequencer can be used. Moreover, this test will ensure whether the set open interval timer for the reclose shot works as expected. State 1 and state 2 can be copied and pasted from the previous test. State 3 can be simulated as a recloser breaker opening condition with a timeout equal to the minimum trip duration timer set in the controller. The timer is usually set around 40 cycles for motor-operated reclosers; it is seen to be around 12 cycles for fast reclosers. This 40-cycle timer effectively adds on to any open interval time for auto-reclosing; therefore, it is better practice to have separate states for reporting purposes.

Keeping that in mind, state 4 can be designed for the test equipment waiting to receive a reclose signal with a timeout little more than the set open interval time for shot 1.

0 Yellow operating-handle test. Some reclosers are equipped with a yellow operating handle that permits manual opening of the recloser. Pulling the handle down trips and locks open

TESTING AND COMMISSIONING A DISTRIBUTION RECLOSER IN GRID-TIE SOLAR FARMS

FEATURE the main contacts and opens the low-voltage closing circuit of the recloser. The status of the handle is provided through the control cable to the controller. The contacts in the trip/close circuits open and stay open when the respective external handles on individual poles are pulled to lockopen positions. In many situations, just one of the opto-isolated wetting inputs of the controller monitors the combined status of the handle for individual recloser poles. The controller drives to three-phase lockout after sensing a time-qualified rising edge on that input.

Binary outputs on any modern test equipment can be used to mimic the handle status when the recloser breaker is not connected to the controller. Simulating a closed contact condition to that wetting voltage input indicates a normal system, whereas an open contact condition provides a handle operation state to the controller. State 1 and state 2 in the test software can be designed in the same fashion as an unsuccessful reclose test with an addition of providing closed binary output status for the yellow handle. State 3 should have open binary output.

A1

Both underfrequency and overfrequency elements must be tested for their pickup level and operation time. These elements are independent in the controller and follow a definite time operation concept where the timer starts the moment pickup is reached and stops after the set operation time irrespective of the frequency level.

It is crucial to know the unit (cycles or seconds) of the set time before advancing to all the tests.

For pickup tests, frequency ramp is done with a long sequence to control the phase angle at each step of the sequence to create a smooth waveform and not one with jumps. The formula to calculate phase shift to obtain smooth is based on the rotating phasors with different pulsation (frequency).

Vectors A1 and A2 in Figure 8 represent present and future frequency vectors. The algorithm is recursive and is based on calculating the phase angle of the phasor with higher frequency to make sure that when the frequency needs to change, the previous frequency and new frequency vectors are overlapped indicating a continuous transition.

The time from one step to another must be deterministic to calculate the phase

ϕ 1 (t) = ω1t A2

ω1t

• Frequency Elements

ω2t

ϕ2 (t) = ω2t – ϕ0 At t = t1

ϕ 1 = ϕ2

ω1t1 = ω2t1 – ϕ2

ϕ2 = (ω2 - ω1) t1 = 2π(f2 – f1) t1

Figure 8: Frequency Vectors on Time Axis TESTING AND COMMISSIONING A DISTRIBUTION RECLOSER IN GRID-TIE SOLAR FARMS

NETAWORLD

•

79

FEATURE angle of the next phasor and know exactly when the frequency changes. For that reason, test software often uses the method that employs state change on zero-crossing.

Another important concept is to

Time Delay understand the relay’s measurement (cycle)

technique. Most relays adjust processing algorithms to track the frequency, and this Over Under the operate time can make seem shorter Voltage Voltage or longer than expected. The response Trip Trip time of the frequency elements to a valid 100.0 frequency change is around three cycles in the controller under test. The testing crew No 5.0 must be cautious not to miss entering a Operation time interval of more than three cycles Region Pick Up between frequency changes in the test (volts) software.

56.9

100.2 125.2 136.6

Time Delay (cycle)

Under Frequency Trip

Over Frequency Trip

No Operation Region

5.0

59.3

60

Pick Up (Hz) 60.5

Figure 9: Frequency Element Settings

The frequency elements of the controller operate on the frequency determined from the A-phase source-side voltage terminal. An undervoltage supervision check is also programmed to ensure frequency elements do not operate for a fault condition, since faults create transients that can result in incorrect system frequency measurement.

Frequency elements are blocked until the system voltage recovers above the specified threshold, which is set to 12.5 Volts in the test example. Figure 9 shows the settings considered for this article.

Frequency elements are pretty tight on tolerances, and entering the right information is crucial. Tri-time tolerance for the controller under test is +/- 0.25 cycle plus +/- 0.1%, and pickup accuracy is +/- 0.01 Hz. Figure 10 shows a test setup screen with all the useful information.

Prefault phase-to-neutral voltage of 69 V, higher than a UV block setting of 12.5 V, is entered. Note that the software is programmed to use two binary inputs on the test equipment. Input 1 will trigger when pickup is achieved, whereas input 2 will be triggered after the operation time lapses. A start time of three cycles is typically used to account for frequency tracking purposes explained earlier.

Figure 11, Figure 12, Figure 13, and Figure 14 show the results of frequency elements. Pickup and timing tests are both necessary.

Figure 10: Frequency Elements Test Setup

80

• WINTER 2020

TESTING AND COMMISSIONING A DISTRIBUTION RECLOSER IN GRID-TIE SOLAR FARMS

FEATURE Commissioning and Interoperability Tests This group of tests includes field tests that are useful to check system operation and interoperability — that is, the dynamic response of grid-tie inverters and recloser switch at the point of common coupling (PCC).

Step 1. Verify system components. A field commissioning group must verify the engineering parameters and confirm proper programming for the inverters and recloser control settings. Test results should be documented to comply with ANSI/NETA ATS and coordination study requirements. The local SCADA system should provide the status of each inverter.

Figure 11: Underfrequency Pickup Test Results

Step 2. Verify the complete sequence: 1. The utility will intentionally drop a phase.

2. Immediately followed by the phase drop, the recloser switch must disconnect, and inverters should not produce any power.

Figure 12: Underfrequency Timing Test Results

3. The utility brings back the missing phase and restores voltage. Immediately, the recloser takes action to verify healthy voltages on the grid side.

4. Verification time is usually available as a setting in the recloser relay logic and can be tested easily.

5. After this delay, reclose occurs and voltages are restored to the grid and the line side of the inverters.

Figure 13: Overfrequency Pickup Test Results

6. Voltage is restored, and the inverters should be timed to verify the start of power production after approximately five minutes.

7. The same procedure is repeated dropping each phase.

Step 3. A final recommended step is phase sequence verification. A drop in A-phase voltage on the recloser switch side should result in the same phase drop on the recloser.

Figure 14: Overfrequency Timing Test Results

TESTING AND COMMISSIONING A DISTRIBUTION RECLOSER IN GRID-TIE SOLAR FARMS

NETAWORLD

•

81

FEATURE Similarly, other phases should be tested for a complete phase sequence.

C ONC LUSION The requirements for grid connection of distributed generation need detailed scrutiny to comply with EPS requirements. This article presents relay protection testing procedures to aid in validating the MV recloser control and operation as part of a PV solar farm system.

Strategic steps in the relay testing routines included validation of the real operation for the MV recloser at the PCC, including detailed practical scenarios where the relay protection system must respond properly for continuity of service (i.e. reconnection and coordinated verifications) as well as protection of equipment assets (i.e. coordinated disconnection and lockout.)

Even though it is not possible to subject the MV recloser protection system to all possible scenarios in a constantly changing grid, it is important to have a testing methodology to validate protection system settings and coordinated response with other parts of the solar farms, i.e. inverters.

Mohit Sharma is currently part of the engineering team at Megger where he designs, develops, and validates testing solutions in the areas of system protection and automation. In 2015, he joined Megger as an Applications Engineer for protective relay products after receiving his MS in electrical power systems engineering from North Carolina State University, Raleigh. Mohit obtained his BTech in electrical engineering from the National Institute of Technology, Bhopal, India, and worked with India-bulls Power as an Electrical Maintenance Engineer responsible for the testing and maintenance of LV and MV switchgear. He is currently a member of IEEE-PSRC. Luis Montoya, PE, has worked in the industry in several positions in the electrical industry as an Engineering Manager in low- and medium-voltage electrical testing and design. He is currently a Senior Systems Engineer for FlexGen Power Systems and a PhD candidate in electrical engineering at North Carolina State University with a concentration in power system and power electronics, including active power harmonic filters. Luis was a senior engineer in designing and testing solutions for utility-scale project substations and solar farms. He most recently led efforts in arc flash analysis, protection coordination, MV and LV field testing, and power quality field testing and solutions. Luis graduated from the National University of Colombia with a BS in electrical engineering with a concentration in power systems and received his MSEE from the University of Wisconsin, Milwaukee with an emphasis in power electronics and renewable energy.

TESTING AND COMMISSIONING A DISTRIBUTION RECLOSER IN GRID-TIE SOLAR FARMS

POWER THROUGH WITH

CONFIDENCE

MAKE A REAL POWER MOVE...

PARTNER WITH MID-ATLANTIC’S PREMIER PROVIDER OF ELECTRICAL TESTING, ENGINEERING AND FIELD SERVICES. Since 1985

800.331.2002 | PotomacTesting.com

INDUSTRY TOPICS

IMPACT OF SFRA SETUP ISSUES ON

TRANSFORMER FREQUENCY RESPONSE B Y M ICH AEL D. W OL F, P E, Doble Engineering Co.

Sweep frequency response analysis (SFRA) is a popular test to confirm the mechanical and electrical integrity of a transformer. However, the resulting traces can be difficult for field personnel to interpret due to the visual nature of the data. It is more straightforward to compare numbers against prior data or against a stated limit than to interpret subtle differences in SFRA traces. If setup-related issues are not addressed during the testing process, return trips are often required to take additional shots to represent the transformer more accurately. These trips cost time and resources, so being able to identify a setup problem early can keep extra work to a minimum. A trained eye can focus in on a problem area quickly and identify a test setup issue promptly. Such confidence only comes at the expense of hours spent analyzing data. This article discusses common setup problems and their impacts.

84

• WINTER 2020

IMPACT OF SFRA SETUP ISSUES ON TRANSFORMER FRQUENCY RESPONSE

INDUSTRY TOPICS

PHOTO: © ISTOCKPHOTO.COM/PORTFOLIO/YOUR_PHOTO

B A S IC C ONC E P T S SFRA testing hinges on sending a signal into a transformer winding at a known frequency and measuring back the signal received at the other end of the test circuit. This process is repeated across the desired frequency range. The difference between the signal that goes into the transformer and the signal that comes out is the attenuation of the signal, which is plotted on a vertical axis for each tested frequency on the horizontal axis. The individual data points become a trace as the test progresses and sweeps through the desired frequency.

The attenuation is plotted as decibels (dB).

The trace is plotted on a graph with high attenuation (very little signal returning to the test set) at the lowest ranges of the graph’s

vertical axis, while very-low attenuation (most of the signal returning to the test set) is shown at the highest vertical ranges.

To summarize: The more negative the dB, the higher the attenuation; the closer it is to zero, the lower the attenuation.

THE TEST The transformer under test is a network of resistive, inductive, and capacitive (RLC) elements made up of the transformer’s magnetic circuit, windings, insulation, and countless other components that create power transformers as we know them. The impedance of inductive and capacitive elements, by their

IMPACT OF SFRA SETUP ISSUES ON TRANSFORMER FRQUENCY RESPONSE

NETAWORLD

•

85

INDUSTRY TOPICS

Figure 1: Drastic Example of Poor Lead Grounding nature, are dependent on physical properties — areas, lengths, distances. Therefore, changes to those physical properties will create a change in the impedance of the corresponding segment of the RLC network. Impedance is also dependent on frequency.

As the range of sweeping frequencies remains the same between different test sessions, damage, physical changes, and/or electrical changes that occur inside the transformer will change the impedance of various inductive and capacitive elements and will also change the level of attenuation of the input signal.

In addition, and perhaps even more important, these changes may yield different frequencies at which the inductive and capacitive elements resonate with each other when compared to previous tests. Observing left-right movement or the disappearance (or creation) of the various extrema points between different test sessions are key aspects to look for, as they indicate some physical or electrical changes to those capacitive and inductive elements. Extrema points are the local maximum and minimum points on the traces that resemble peaks and V-shaped valleys, to put a common visual to the term.

86

• WINTER 2020

CONCERN OVER SETU P In any electrical test, it is well understood that correct and consistent test setup is essential for repeatable, representative test results. SFRA tests are also dependent on consistent test setup between different test sessions. Changing setup may cause changes in the RLC network of the transformer by introducing varying capacitances, resistances, and inductances. This variation may mask other concerning changes in the transformer itself, or it may create false positives.

If variations between past and present traces are noted, all efforts should be made to troubleshoot possible setup errors before accepting the traces as representative of the transformer.

Poor Grounding Among the more common SFRA setup problems, poor grounding practices can massively impact the expected traces. This is not just the grounding of the transformer itself, but the entire grounding path of the measurement setup. If the grounding path introduces additional impedances due to poor connections, the signal will be measured with respect to a different reference, resulting in changes to the traces. Typically, poor tank grounding influences

IMPACT OF SFRA SETUP ISSUES ON TRANSFORMER FRQUENCY RESPONSE

INDUSTRY TOPICS

Figure 2: Example of Very Poor Test Lead Connection the entirety of the trace and may be seen across the high-voltage open circuit (HVOC), lowvoltage open circuit (LVOC), and high-voltage short circuit (HVSC) traces. The traces may appear jagged, noisy, shifted to a higher (-)dB, and may not follow an expected shape.

Poor connections on the test lead ground clamps can also produce wide-ranging changes in the response and will most likely be apparent when comparing phases in a given test session. If the test lead ground clamp is not adequately grounded, the impedance of the test lead changes, impacting the higher frequencies of the swept range. The impact can move further down the frequency range with worsening ground lead connections. These seemingly minor changes to the grounding circuit can make dramatic changes similar to that shown in Figure 1. In less significant cases, the changes may begin much higher in the frequency range.

In Figure 1, the blue trace was captured during routine testing. The tester identified something was wrong and began to troubleshoot. The connections at the test lead grounds were cleaned up with a wire brush to ensure solid metal-to-metal contact. This resolved the initial issue and resulted in the red trace.

Poor Test Lead Connections When test leads are poorly connected to the bushing terminals, extra impedances are introduced into the measurement lead circuit. These additional impedances cause the characteristic impedance of measurement cables to change, which will impact the response of the transformer. These impedance changes impact a wide range of frequencies and will yield poor comparison to prior traces with good lead connections.

In the traces shown in Figure 2, the red trace was captured initially. Noting the jagged nature of the trace, the tester determined that troubleshooting was required. Bushing terminal connections were cleaned thoroughly with a wire brush and solvent. After ensuring a robust metal-to-metal connection between the test lead clamps and the bushing terminals, the blue trace was captured. The resulting response follows an expected shape with less jagged features.

Varying Tap Changer Positions When load tap changers or deenergized tap changers (DETC) change position, the way

IMPACT OF SFRA SETUP ISSUES ON TRANSFORMER FRQUENCY RESPONSE

NETAWORLD

•

87

INDUSTRY TOPICS

Figure 3: Drastic Example of Different Tap Changer Positions

Figure 4: More Subtle Example of Different Tap Changer Positions the tapped winding interacts with the various RLC networks of the transformer will change.

This interaction will impact the response of the swept frequencies through the transformer, and different tap positions will cause different responses. The extent of the differences will depend on the specific design of the transformer and the tap positions being compared. Tap changers should always be checked to ensure

88

• WINTER 2020

they are in the same positions as previously recorded traces prior to testing to ensure no additional uncertainties are introduced into the analysis. It should be noted that changing taps on one specific winding will not only impact that winding’s response, but may also impact the responses of other windings; for example, lowvoltage open circuit traces may also change upon DETC position change on the high-voltage

IMPACT OF SFRA SETUP ISSUES ON TRANSFORMER FRQUENCY RESPONSE

Figure 5: Varying of Stabilizing Tertiary Winding Configuration winding. This is due to the changing interaction between the RLC components of the highvoltage and low- voltage windings.

In the example in Figure 3, the prior (red) trace and the present (blue) trace were tested before and after a planned DETC position change. The transformer was fully tested before the DETC was moved to ensure it was in good condition and aligned with prior results. The unit was then tested after the DETC was moved to attain new baseline results. After changing DETC positions, new SFRA baseline traces should always be captured to enable future analysis.

In Figure 4, the red trace was captured just before a DETC change; the blue trace was captured immediately after a change. Notice how the changes are far less drastic than in Figure 3, which emphasizes how important the specific design of the transformer is to the degree responses may change when changing tap positions.

Stabilizing Tertiary Winding Configuration Much like the impact varying tap positions may have on a transformer’s response, manipulating the configuration of a stabilizing tertiary winding

can cause the transformer’s response to change.

Some stabilizing tertiary windings may come out to a single bushing at one corner of the delta, which could be either grounded or ungrounded while the SFRA tests are performed on the primary and secondary windings. Some stabilizing tertiary windings have one corner of the delta brought out to two bushings, which can either be shorted and left floating, shorted and grounded, open and floating, or open and grounded. These changes will impact the interaction of the circuit elements that make up the RLC network inside the transformer and will result in variations to the response while performing SFRA tests.

The changing response will most likely be seen in traces captured on all windings within the transformer, to varying degrees on each winding.

In the example shown in Figure 5, the prior (red) HVOC trace and the present (blue) HVOC traces were found to have different characteristics upon review in the field. After troubleshooting, it was determined that the stabilizing tertiary winding was in a different configuration when tested in the factory compared to the configuration when first assembled in the field. The tertiary was manipulated to be open, open and grounded, closed, and finally closed and grounded to ensure that a matching configuration was found. After

IMPACT OF SFRA SETUP ISSUES ON TRANSFORMER FRQUENCY RESPONSE

NETAWORLD

•

89

INDUSTRY TOPICS the tested transformer will change and will show deviations between traces of different test sessions. These changes can be misleading to the tester and potentially mask other more meaningful issues. By identifying and ruling out possible setup discrepancies as the traces are being recorded, corrections can be made, and the setup can be adjusted immediately, ensuring the traces correctly and accurately represent the transformer’s condition.

testing in the exact tertiary configuration as in the initial trace, the responses lined up extremely well.

After matching with the factory results, notes describing the test setup were documented to give testers more guidance for future SFRA testing.

C ONC LUSION It is essential to remember what an SFRA trace shows: the attenuation of the output signal compared to the input signal of the test set. As frequencies are varied, the inductive and capacitive elements that make up the transformer respond differently. Those inductive and capacitive elements are also dependent on physical parameters — lengths, areas, distances, materials — so physical or electrical changes inside the transformer will influence the way the countless inductive and capacitive elements respond to varying frequency. If the test setup does not remain consistent between test sessions, the interactions between the RLC parameters of

Michael D. Wolf, PE, is a Principal Engineer in the Client Services Engineering department at Doble Engineering in Folsom, California. He has been in the power industry since 2008 in substation commissioning and maintenance support roles. Michael has a BSEE from Clarkson University, a MEPE from Worcester Polytechnic Institute, and is a licensed electrical power engineer.

TRANsFoRmER AIR-CELL

CoNsERVAToR BLADDERs

MADE IN THE U.S.A. FOR OVER 45 YEARS!

THE

®

DIFFERENCE...

ExPEDITED DELIVERY

ULTRA-FAsT TURNARoUND - 2 To 3 DAY AVERAGE!

sTANDARD TEmPLATEs

DIGITAL LIBRARY oF PoPULAR sIzEs/sTYLEs!

REVERsE ENGINEERING

ATL CAN PRECIsELY DUPLICATE ANY BLADDER!

sTANDARD & CUsTom HARDwARE mETALLIC FLANGEs, HANGER LooPs & moRE!

...LImIT DowNTImE; CHoosE ®

®

CUsTomERs INCLUDE:

ABB Inc. - G.E. / Alstom Grid - Atlantic Transformer CG Power USA - Calpine - Duke Energy - First Energy Gexpro - Jacksonville Electric Authority - NASS - PSE&G Siemens - SPX Transformer Solutions & Many More!

ULTRA-sTRoNG “oVER-LAP” sTYLE sEAms

BLADDER DEsIGN GUIDE AVAILABLE oN oUR wEBsITE

800-526-5330 +1-201-825-1400 www.atlinc.com

®

INDUSTRY TOPICS

UNDERSTANDING AND AVOIDING

BATTERY FAILURE B Y R ODRICK J . VAN WART, AVO Training Institute

Earthquakes, hurricanes, tsunamis, wildfires, and the like do not occur with any predicted great frequency. Nonetheless, we have established precautionary programs that protect people and property from the physical threats posed by such events. In recent times, however, we have witnessed all too well the impact these events can have on the quality of our lives and businesses.

Our world has become highly — in many cases, wholly — dependent upon electricity.

This energy source supports our global economy, e-commerce, and communications.

When primary AC systems fail, DC storage systems in the form of uninterruptable power supplies are required. The prime source of this backup power is batteries.

An Eaton Corporation root-cause study revealed that two-thirds of downtime events stem from preventable causes. The good news is that routine established condition and performance monitoring coupled with the IEEE-recommended preventative maintenance (PM) can appreciably reduce downtime. In fact, the same load-loss report indicated that clientele without any PM were more likely to experience a UPS failure than those who complete the IEEE recommended maintenance visits. These findings alone

92

• WINTER 2020

validate the significance of routine UPS service as a highly effective means to reduce the effects of downtime.

BATTERY MAI NTENAN C E AND TESTI NG There are several philosophies and ambition levels for maintaining and testing batteries.

1. Replace batteries when they fail or die. This option includes minimal or no maintenance and testing. Obviously, not testing batteries at all is the least costly when considering only maintenance costs, but the risks are high, and the consequences must be considered. Batteries have a limited lifetime, and they can fail earlier than expected. Time between outages is usually long, and if outages are the only occasions battery capability is confirmed, risk is high UNDERSTANDING AND AVOIDING BATTERY FAILURE

INDUSTRY TOPICS

PHOTO: © ISTOCKPHOTO.COM/PORTFOLIO/ETAJOE

that reduced — or no — back-up will be available when needed. Using batteries to back up important installations without any idea of their current health invalidates the whole concept of a reliable system.

2. Replace after a certain time with minimum or no maintenance and testing.

This can also be a risky approach. It is also a waste of capital if the batteries are replaced earlier than needed. Properly maintained batteries can and do live longer than the predetermined replacement time.

3. Implement a serious maintenance and testing program to ensure the batteries are in good condition, prolong their life, and determine the optimal time for replacement. A maintenance program including inspection and impedance and capacity testing is the way to track a battery’s state of health. Degradation and faults will be found before they become serious, and surprises can be avoided.

UNDERSTANDING AND AVOIDING BATTERY FAILURE

Maintenance costs are higher, but this is the cost for a reliable back-up system. The best testing scheme is a balance between maintenance costs and the risks of losing the battery and supported equipment.

Each company is different, and each must individually weigh the cost versus risk of battery maintenance The batteries in any UPS require routine inspection and maintenance regardless of their age or warranty status — even maintenancefree batteries are only deemed maintenance-free because they do not require adding water on an as-needed basis. Industry studies have shown that up to 20 percent of UPS failures can be attributed to bad batteries; temperature and cumulative discharges including micro-cycling are the primary culprits. When performing preventive maintenance, data is obtained from ohmic testing procedures during which impedance or conductance measurements trace battery performance and identify any batteries with potential internal failures.

NETAWORLD

•

93

INDUSTRY TOPICS B AT T E RY FA ILURE Each battery type has multiple failure modes, some of which are more prevalent than others.

Some failures manifest themselves with use and aging such as sediment build-up due to excessive cycling. Others such as positive grid growth (oxidation) occur naturally. It is just a matter of time before the battery fails. Maintenance and environmental conditions can increase or decrease the risks of premature battery failure.

• Positive grid corrosion is the expected failure mode for flooded lead-acid batteries. The grids are lead alloys (lead calcium, lead-antimony, lead-antimonyselenium) that convert to lead oxide over time. Since lead oxide is a larger crystal than lead metal alloy, the plate grows. The growth rate has been well characterized and is considered when designing batteries.

Many battery data sheets specify clearance at the bottom of the jar to allow for plate growth in accordance with its rated lifetime, e.g. 10 or 20 years.

At the designed end of life, the plates may have grown sufficiently to pop the tops off the batteries. But excessive cycling, temperature, and overcharging can also increase the speed of positive grid corrosion. Impedance will increase

over time corresponding to the increase in electrical resistance of the grids to carry the current. Impedance will also increase as capacity decreases. Sediment build-up (shedding) is a function of the amount of cycling a battery endures. Shedding is the sloughing off of active material from the plates, converting to white lead sulphates.

• Sediment build-up is the second reason battery manufacturers leave space at the bottom of the jars to allow for a certain amount of sediment before it builds up to the point of shorting across the bottom of the plates, thus rendering the battery useless. The float voltage will drop, and the amount of the voltage drop depends upon how relatively “hard” the short is. Shedding, in reasonable amounts, is normal.

• Corrosion of the top lead, which is the connection between the plates and the posts, is difficult to detect even with a visual inspection since it occurs near the top of the battery and is hidden by the cover. The battery can fail due to the high current draw during discharge. The heat build-up when discharging results in melting, causing the battery to crack open, and then the entire string drops offline, resulting in a potentially catastrophic failure.

Top Lead Corrosion

94

• WINTER 2020

UNDERSTANDING AND AVOIDING BATTERY FAILURE

INDUSTRY TOPICS

Everything looks good (left) until closer inspection reveals that sulfation has caused the plate to expand and breach the container (right).

• Plate sulphation is an electrical path problem. A thorough visual inspection in vented lead acid (VLA) batteries can sometimes find traces of plate sulphation.

Sulphation is due to low charger voltage settings or incomplete recharge after an outage. Sulphates form when the volts per cell (VPC) are not set high enough during recharge. Sulphation will lead to higher impedance and a lower capacity.

• Dry-out is a phenomenon that occurs primarily in valve regulated lead acid (VRLA) batteries due to excessive heat (lack of proper ventilation), high ambient temperatures, and overcharging, which can cause elevated internal temperatures. At elevated internal temperatures, the sealed cells will vent through the pressure relief valve (PRV). When sufficient electrolyte is vented, the glass matte is no longer in contact with the plates, thus increasing internal impedance and reducing battery capacity. This failure mode is one of the more common failure modes of VRLA batteries and is easily detected by impedance testing.

• Soft (aka dendritic) shorts and hard shorts occur for a number of reasons. Hard shorts are typically caused by paste lumps pushing through the matte and shorting out to the adjacent (opposite polarity) plate. Soft shorts, on the other hand, are caused by deep discharges. When the UNDERSTANDING AND AVOIDING BATTERY FAILURE

specific gravity of the acid gets too low, the lead dissolves into it. Since the liquid (and the dissolved lead) are immobilized by the glass matte, when the battery is recharged, the lead comes out of solution and forms threads of thin lead metal, known as dendrites, inside the matte. In some cases, the lead dendrites short through the matte to the other plate. The float voltage may drop slightly but impedance can detect this failure mode easily.

• Thermal run-away occurs when a battery’s internal components melt down in a selfsustaining reaction. The impedance and float current increase in advance of thermal run-away. Thermal run-away is relatively easy to avoid simply by using temperaturecompensated chargers and properly ventilating the battery room or cabinet.

Temperature-compensated chargers reduce the charge current as the temperature increases. Remember that heating is a function of the square of the current. Even though thermal run-away may be avoided by temperature-compensated chargers, the underlying cause is still present.

CONCLUSI ON Systematic inspections and an effective preventive maintenance plan can ensure standby battery systems are capable of supporting the critical role UPS systems play in maintaining power to critical loads.

NETAWORLD

•

95

INDUSTRY TOPICS R E F E R E NC E S Eaton Corp. “The Benefits of a Preventive Maintenance Service Plan for Your UPS SVS-WP04,” https://www.eaton.com/content/ dam/eaton/markets/healthcare/knowledgecenter/white-paper/the-benefits-of-a-preventivemaintenance-service-plan-for-your-UPS.pdf, March 22, 2009.

IEEE 450, IEEE Recommended Practice for Maintenance, Testing and Replacement of Vented Lead-acid Batteries for Stationary Applications.

IEEE 1188, IEEE Recommended Practice for Maintenance, Testing and Replacement of Valve-Regulated Lead-Acid Batteries for Stationary Applications.

Megger Battery Testing Guide 2012, Megger Corp., Dallas, Texas.

National Security Council. “The Comprehensive National Cyber-Security Initiative,” http://www. globalsecurity.org/security/library/policy/national/ cnci_2010.htm, October 29, 2010.

1945

Largest inventory of protective relays in the country Dedicated group of 8 relay specialists Upgrade support

PROTECTIVE RELAYS THROUGH THE YEARS

We are Your Protective Relay Solution

All relays are supplied in like-new condition, tested, and with a 1-year warranty

79 Main Street, Seymour CT 06483

PRESENT

sertecrelays.net

1-800-521-0197

William L. Tafoya, PhD. “FBI Report on Cyber Terror,” FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin, November 2011.

Rodrick J. Van Wart is a Senior Consultant and Instructor at AVO Training in Dallas, and an Instructor at the Omega Institute for Continuing Education. His 47 years of experience in the electrical industry includes chairing test development for the International Code Council’s inspector exams, overseeing development of Iowa’s electrical licensing and permitting programs, and providing training for the state’s Electrical Examining Board members and support staff. Rod served several municipalities as an electrical and mechanical inspector, earned Public Management certification from Drake University, and is a Certified Building Official. A subject matter expert in adult learning precepts and instruction in a classroom setting, he designed and implemented new curriculum subject matter and was awarded Top Gun status at Mike Holt’s Instructor Training Conference. During the last four years of his 18-year US Navy career, Rod certified apprentices and third-class nuclear electricians logging 336,800 hours of total student contact time. He currently serves as a member of the IEEE PES/ESSB Committee on Working Groups 450, 484 (Vice Chair), 485, 1188, 1578, and 1679.

N TE O ST W EQ RE UI NT PM IN EN G T

“SOLID STATE”

INDUSTRIAL ELECTRONICS

We Buy, Sell, Trade, Calibrate, Repair Featuring quality, reliable, on-time service and support for all brands and types of solid state power electronics.

Power electronics are our business Let us suppoort you with our quality repair, calibration and servicing of your solid state equipment. We also buy, sell and trade: • Communications devices for power equipment • Protective relays • Circuit breaker trip devices • Motor overload relays • Rating plugs

Toll Free 877-TRIP-FIX

4701 Spartan Drive • Denton, TX 76207 (877-874-7349) • Phone: 940-243-3731 • Fax: 940-387-8277 Email: info@solidstaterepair.com • Web: www.solidstaterepair.com

ADVANCEMENTS IN INDUSTRY

PF MEASUREMENTS ON COMPLETE

B Y M ATH IEU L ACH ANCE, OMICRON electronics Canada Corp.

Power factor (PF) measurement has been performed on stator windings for many decades and is a widely accepted and recommended tool to assess the insulation system of individual bars/coils and for complete stator windings. The test is known to be sensitive to several global defects such as the degree of curing of the bonding materials, moisture ingress, contamination, and thermal aging.

In addition, the power factor tip-up variation of this test is commonly used to detect the void content of insulation. The power factor tip-up test compares the results of two PF measurements performed at two different voltages. Outside of North America, the PF measurement is often referred to as dielectric dissipation factor (DDF) or the tangent delta test, where the tangent of the loss angle is instead recorded. The difference between PF and DDF is negligible for values below 10%.

Two main standards specifically cover power/ dissipation factor testing for rotating machines: 1. IEEE Std. 286, Recommended Practice for Measurement of Power Factor TipUp of Electric Machinery Stator Coil Insulation

98

• WINTER 2020

2. IEC/TS 60034-27-3, Rotating Electrical Machines – Part 27: Dielectric Dissipation Factor Measurements on Stator Winding Insulation of Rotating Electrical Machines Both offer useful information and guidance regarding the test procedure, test voltage, and data interpretation. One thing they have in common is that neither document provides absolute limits as pass/fail criteria for complete stator windings. This creates additional challenges for data assessment. Without pass/fail criteria, the test is classified as a diagnostic test, and the data must be analyzed and assessed with care. Typically, a combination of four parameters is used for the assessment: PF MEASUREMENTS ON COMPLETE STATOR WINDINGS

ADVANCEMENTS IN INDUSTRY

PHOTO: © ISTOCKPHOTO.COM/PORTFOLIO/KOPITINPHOTO

1. Variation of the PF values in time (trend evaluation) 2. Change in power factor between two prescribed voltages (tip-up values) 3. PF value at low voltage 4. PF value at high voltage This article reviews challenges that can be faced when performing an assessment of PF data on complete stator windings and will discuss the reason global absolute values should not be used. A modern approach to evaluate PD activity in stator winding from the PF data will also be discussed.

EN D - P O T E NT IA L G R A D IN G ( E P G) Rotating machines with a rated voltage of 6 kV and above usually have end-potential grading (EPG) tape or paint installed in the PF MEASUREMENTS ON COMPLETE STATOR WINDINGS

Figure 1: End-Potential Grading (EPG) end-winding area. This material can be found under various names in the literature: Semi conductive grading, end winding stress grading, or EPG are only a few names; all indicate the same area. EPG is illustrated in Figure 1.

The purpose of EPG is to distribute electric field lines over a longer portion of the bars at the exit of the stator slots. Even if insulation is applied at the end-winding area, this area is at high-voltage potential due to the capacitive coupling between the conductor and the ground. Without EPG, a high local electric NETAWORLD

•

99

ADVANCEMENTS IN INDUSTRY This behavior creates additional losses at higher voltage levels. As voltage is increased, the resistance of EPG decreases. The loss current (I2) increases, which results in an increase of resistive losses. It is important to know that this surface current is not an indication of the health of the bulk insulation (Figure 4) and will be added to the total measured test current.

Figure 2: Electric Field Distribution: (left) without EPG, (right) with EPG I

Various compounds are used for EPG, and each of them has its own conductive behavior.

The chosen material will remarkably affect power factor values when voltage is increased above voltage breakdown (VBD), which is usually significantly lower than the rated lineto-ground (L-G) voltage of the machine.

POWER FACTOR TI P-U P VBD

V

Figure 3: Typical Current-Voltage Curve of a Given EPG Copper Wire

field would appear at the laminated (High Voltage)core as shown in Figure 2. This would result in high partial discharge (PD) activity.

I

IR Currently, silicon carbide (SiC) is the primary (Surface component of EPG and is responsible for its Currents)

VBD

grading properties. The conductive behavior of EPG is voltage-dependent and non-linear.

When voltage is increased, the SiC layer V OCP becomes more and more conductive, resulting (Outer Corona Protection) in a behavior shown in Figure 3.

Copper Wire (High Voltage)

IR (Surface Currents)

IR (Surface Currents)

OCP

(Outer Corona Protection)

Figure 4: Schematic of Surface Current Circulating around Insulation

100

• WINTER 2020

Power factor tip-up is the difference between two PF values obtained from two measurements at two different voltages. Historically, when testing complete windings in North America, measurements are performed at 0.25 x UN/√ 3 and at UN/√ 3, where UN is the rated line-toline voltage. The test is mainly used to detect voltage dependent anomalies in the winding such as those that create PD activity.

IR (Surface theory of Currents)

The partial discharges is comprehensive and is beyond the scope of this article. However, a short description is helpful from this point forward. Even though normal PD activity is present in most medium- and high-voltage stator windings, PD can result from different anomalies. When these anomalies occur, the discharges will result in a small amount of dissipated energy.

If there are several PD events, the amount of dissipated energy might be measurable during a PF measurement. PD activity only occurs above a specific inception voltage level that is dependent on the insulation system and the type of defect.

When performing a power factor tip-up test, the value obtained at 0.25 x UN/√ 3 is assumed to be exempt from PD activity, while the value at UN/√ 3 is assumed to PF MEASUREMENTS ON COMPLETE STATOR WINDINGS

ADVANCEMENTS IN INDUSTRY contain the dissipated energy from the PD activity if present in the winding. In theory, a difference between these two measured values would indicate the presence of significant PD activity. However, with only two measuring points, it can be difficult to distinguish losses caused by a voltage-dependent defect from the expected increased losses caused by the conduction behavior of EPG. It is even more difficult to establish a tip-up limit because of the wide variety of EPG used by different manufacturers.

It is not feasible to install guard electrodes on every bar of completely assembled stator windings. Therefore, tip-up values obtained in the field — even for healthy machines — are usually higher than values recorded in the factory on individual coils/bars. Some EPG can be conductive even at lower voltage. For this reason, it is not recommended to compare values from individual coils/bars with the values obtained in the field on a complete assembled winding.

PD HYSTERESI S

G U A R D IN G F OR I N D IVID U AL B A RS/C OILS The power factor tip-up test is commonly used for quality control on newly manufactured coils and bars. Depending on the manufacturer and on customer requirements, it can be performed on each coil/bar or on samples of a production lot.

To remove the influence of EPG, various guarding techniques are used in the factory that cause the test to become more sensitive to the void content within the bulk insulation and less sensitive to the conduction behavior of EPG. Figure 5 shows a schematic of one guarding technique; Figure 6 illustrates the difference between measurements on a single coil with and without guard electrodes. Guard electrodes are not perfect, and a small contribution of surface currents is usually still measurable even with some guarding techniques.

Modern power factor test instruments are now able to record as many points as necessary and take measurements during the decreasing voltage stage of the test. Instead of simply measuring the tip-up value between two points, instruments can now record many data points, enabling visualization of the power factor voltage sweep curves. These curves can be used to extract additional information and enhance diagnostic capability.

Figure 5: Stator Bar with Guard Electrodes 4,00

Tan Delta [%]

3,00 2,50

2,50

% 2,00

1,50

1,50

1,00

1,00

V

7000

4000

3000

2000

0

0,00

1000

0,50 7000

6000

4000

3000

2000

1000

5000

Without guard rings

0,50 0

With guard rings

3,00

% 2,00

0,00

Tan Delta [%]

3,50

6000

3,50

5000

4,00

V

Figure 6: PF Voltage Sweep Curves: (left) without Guard Rings, (right) with Guard Rings 3,50 3,00

Power factor (%)

PF MEASUREMENTS ON COMPLETE STATOR WINDINGS 2,50

%

2,00

NETAWORLD

•

101

ADVANCEMENTS IN INDUSTRY

Power factor (%)

0,80 0,70

1,60

0,75 % 0,65

1,40

0,70 0,60

1,20

0,65 % 0,55

% 1,00

1,80

V (%) Power factor

1,60 1,20

6000

7000

14000 7000

2.50

Power factor (%)

1,20 0,80

2.00

1,00 % 0,60 • WINTER 2020

PF MEASUREMENTS ON COMPLETE STATOR WINDINGS A-BCG

1.50

%

4,00 3,50 3,00 2,50

% 2,00 1,50 1,00 0,50 0,00

0

7000

6000

5000

5000

10000 5000

4000

8000 4000

3000

6000 3000

12000 6000

8000

0

Figure 9: PF Voltage Sweep Curve with Low Inner PD Activity

1,40 % 1,00

0,60 0,20

7000

0,00

V

Figure 8: PF Voltage Sweep Curve with Some 2.00 1,60 Power factor (%) 1,80 1,40 Inner PD Activity

0,80 0,40

A-BCG

0,20

6000

8000

0,40

8000

7000 7000

6000

6000

5000 5000

4000 4000

2000

3000 3000

V

A-BCG

0,60

5000

2.00

2000

0

0,40

1000

0,45

1000

0

0,50 0,40

0,80

A-BCG

0,55 0,45

3000

0,60 0,50

Power factor (%)

1,80

2000

0,85 0,75

4000

3000

2000

2000

4000 2000

1000

2.00

1000

0,90 0,80

102

1000

0

V

Power factor (%)

0,85

8000

Figure 7: PF Voltage Sweep Curve with High V Inner PD Activity 0,90

4000

A-BCG 12000 12000

10000 10000

8000

V

8000

6000 6000

2000

4000 4000

0

0,00

2000

0

0,00 0,50

14000 14000

A-BCG

When performing PF measurements on a clean V and healthy stator winding V that does not have an EPG area, no significant increase of losses with respect to increased voltage is expected.

0,90 Power factor (%) voltage of 6 kV A0,85 stator winding with rated and 0,80 below is an example of a machine that 0,75 not have an EPG area. However, some does 0,70 manufacturers have started to install EPG on % 0,65 machines operating at lower voltage, especially 0,60 if 0,55 they are inverter fed. Figure 10 shows the 0,50 results of a healthy and clean 4.16 kV machine A-BCG 0,45 without EPG; Figure 11 shows a retired 4 kV 0,40 machine with high PD activity and no EPG. 7000

1,50

0,50 1,00

0,00

V

6000

1,50 2,00

% 1,00

Machine construction can significantly 1,50 1,00 0,00 influence the expected PF results for traditional 1,00 0,50 tip-up values and for PF voltage sweep curves.

0,00 0,50 A-BCG

5000

2,00

% 2,50

1,50 % 0,50

4000

Power factor (%)

2,50 3,00

MACHI NE CONSTRUCTIO N 1,00 2,00

3000

Power factor (%)

3,00 3,50

2,50 1,50 2,50

% 2,00

2000

3,50

3,00

2,00 % 3,00

2000 1000

7000

7000

6000

6000

5000

5000

4000

4000

3000

3000

2000

2000

1000

1000

0

0

V

Using power factor voltage sweep curves can 4,00 the test operator visualize whether the help Tan Delta [%] V 3,50 increase in power factor, with respect to the 4,00 With guard rings 3,00 voltage, is due to partial Tan Delta [%] discharges or simply 3,50 3,50 2,50normal conduction behavior of EPG. the Power factor (%) With guard rings

1000

Tan Delta [%]

3,50

In4,00many cases, PDIV is higher than PDEV. 3,00 Tan Delta [%] 3,50 means that, for a winding with high PD This 2,50 3,00 activity, losses can be higher when the voltage % 2,00 2,50 is 1,50 decreased versus when voltage is increased. % 2,00 It is believed this behavior creates so-called 1,00 1,50 hysteresis in PF curves when performing PD 0,50 Without guard rings 1,00 an0,00 upward and a downward voltage ramp. In 0,50 guard rings was various measurements, thisWithout correlation 0,00 confirmed between PD activity and a hysteresis V of PF curves. It is important to mention that

0,00

0

4,00

Without guard rings

0,50

0

b) PD extinction voltage (PDEV): the voltage at which PD disappears when voltage is decreased.

0

a) PD inception voltage (PDIV): the voltage at which PD appears when voltage is increased

not all PD activity will exhibit this behavior.

For example, corona-type PD is known to have similar PDIV and PDEV values and therefore 4,00 will not exhibitTanthe hysteresis curve. Figure 7 Delta [%] 3,50 shows the results of a PF measurement of a 3,00 winding with high inner PD activity; Figure 8 2,50 shows the PF results of a winding with low 2,00 % inner PD activity; Figure 9 shows an example of1,50a winding with no significant inner PD 1,00 activity.

0

PD usually occurs above a certain voltage level and results in small current impulses that create additional losses. Two parameters are commonly measured during offline PD measurements:

1.50

% 0.50 1.00 0.00 0.50

3.50 4.50 3.00 4.00 2.50 % 3.50 2.00 3.00 1.50 2.50 % 1.00 2.00

%

4.00 3.00

0.00

3000

2500

2000

3000

2500

2500 2500

2000

1500

9000

5000

4000

3000

2000

10000 10000

8000

9000

7000 7000

8000

6000 6000

5000

4000

3000

2000

1000 1000

0

A-BCG

V

V

Figure 12: High Power Lossfactor Contribution from EPG (%) 2.00 2.50

7000 7000

6000 6000

5000 5000

4000 4000

2000 2000

3000

1000 1000

3000

0 0

different points in time, increased power factor Power factor (%) 1.50 is generally a sign of insulation deterioration 2.00 % or1.00aging. A comparison between phases and 1.50 between similar machines can be useful, and % 0.50 empirical limits based on measurements 1.00 performed on similar machines can also be 0.00 0.50 established. In any case, Vit is recommended to consult with the machine manufacturer or the A-BCG B-ACG C-ABG 0.00 test equipment manufacturer when PF values V display an upward trendB-ACG over time.

A-BCG C-ABG 7.00 Power factor (%)

6.00

6000

7000 7000

C-ABG

6000

V

5000

4000

3000 3000

2000

CONCLUSI ON

V

B-ACG

5000

A-BCG

4000

0.00

2000

1.00

1000

If7.00 no historical data is available, the ability 5.00 to perform an assessment Power factor (%) from one single 6.00 4.00 measurement is limited.

PD hysteresis can % 5.00 3.00 therefore be used to verify the presence of PD 4.00 2.00 within the insulation. In addition, a comparison % 3.00 between phases of the machine could also be 1.00 2.00 used if the neutral point can be isolated.

0.00

7.00 Power factor measurement provides A-BCG Power B-ACG C-ABG a general factor (%) 6.00 assessment of insulation with limited capability to7.00 detect localized weak points. Therefore, the 5.00

Power factor (%)

%

PF2.00 MEASUREMENTS ON COMPLETE STATOR WINDINGS 1.00

A-BCG

1000

Power factor values, tip-up values, and voltage 7.00 (%) sweep curves shouldPower befactor recorded and trended 6.00 over time.

When measurements are recorded 5.00 during similar environmental conditions at

Power factor (%)

2.50

0

7000

6000

5000

4000

3000

2000

1000

0

Neither IEEE 286 nor IEC 60034-27-3 currently publish limits for complete stator windings.

IEC 60034-27-3 does include limits for individual 2.50 factorelectrodes. (%) coils and bars using Power guard However, 2.00 it is important to mention that many have questioned those values; they are viewed as too 1.50 restrictive by some and overly lenient by others. % 1.00 In addition, these limits should not be applied for complete stator windings. The difficulty of 0.50 establishing global limits results from numerous variables such as various insulating materials, 0.00 different conductive behavior of installed EPG, V and the geometry of the machine itself.

A-BCG B-ACG C-ABG

0,00

0

V

10000

9000

8000

7000

6000

A S S E S S ME N T

5000

4000

3000

2000

1000

0

2500

2000

1500

1000

500

0

A-BCG

0,50

1000

0

3,50 4,50 3,00 4,00 2,50 % 3,50 2,00 3,00 1,50 2,50 % 1,00 2,00 0,50 1,50 0,00 1,00

2.50 number and length of slots can also The % 2.00 significantly impact expected values. Machines 1.50 that have many short slots will be subjected to 1.00 higher influence from the surface current caused 0.50 by0.00EPG. This is because the surface current becomes dominant in comparison with the current that goes throughV bulk insulation (refer back to Figure 4). An example can be seen in 4,50 Figure 12, where PFPower measurements of a healthy factor (%) 4,00 and clean winding show a large increase of PF 3,50 values with respect to voltage. The PF values 3,00 start at 1.50% at 1,000 V and increase to 2,50 % approximately 3.85% at 9,500 V. This is another 2,00 factor to consider if tip-up limits are applied to a 1,50 complete stator winding.

1,00

0

4,00

3.00

0,00

500

Figure 11: PF Voltage Sweep Curve of a 4,50 V High PD Activity Retired 4 kV Machine with Power factor (%)

3.50

0,50

V

0.00

Figure 10: PF Voltage Sweep Curve of a 4.50 Power factor (%) 4.00 Healthy 4 kV Machine

2000

0.50

V

1500

0.50 1.50 0.00 1.00

3000

2500

2000

1000

0

500

0.00

1500

0.50

1000

1.00

500

%

Power factor (%)

0

1.50

Power factor (%)

V

4.00

2.00

2000

500

0

4.50

Power factor (%)

1500

V

0.00 2.50

1500

0

500

ADVANCEMENTS IN INDUSTRY 1000

V

1000

8000

6000

5000

4000

3000

2000

1000

0

0,00

7000

A-BCG

0,20

%

6.00 4.00 5.00 3.00 4.00 2.00 3.00 1.00

NETAWORLD

•

103

%

0,80

1.00

0,60

A-BCG

3000

2500

2000

500

0

1500

2500

10000

9000

2000

8000

7000

1000

500

0

1500

6000

2500

2000

1500

1000

500

0

4,50

Power factor (%) The 4,00 only available historical data from 1991 is 3,50 illustrated in Table 1 and Figure 13.

5000

3.00

In2.50January 2012, power factor measurements % were 2.00 performed on a 6.4 kV, 5.6 MVA hydro 1.50 generator as part of a planned outage. The 1.00 machine was manufactured in 1981. The 0.50 neutral point was disconnected to test each 0.00 individual phase separately, and the line terminals were isolatedV from the system as recommended by relevant standards.

4000

C3.50 ASE S T UDY

0.50 Comparing the data from 2012 (Table 2 and 0.00 Figure 14) to the data of 1991 (Table 1 and Figure 13) shows significant increase of all V values for all three phases. Increased PF values could be expected due to aging since the 4,50 factor (%) years apart. After measurements were Power taken 20 4,00 all, 3,50at the time of the 2012 measurements, the 3,00 machine had been operating for a little more 2,50 30 years. However, the losses in phase A than % 2,00 were more than twice the losses measured in 1,50 the other two phases. In addition, hysteresis 1,00 A-BCG behavior was noticeable in all three phases, but 0,50 predominantly on phase A. For these reasons, 0,00 additional electrical tests were recommended to investigate the results. V 3000

Power factor (%)

4.00

1.00

2000

3000

2500

2000

1500

1000

500

0

4.50

In this specific case, it wasV necessary to increase 4.50test voltage up to U the To display the PD N. (%) Power factor 4.00 hysteresis curves with enough resolution, a 3.50 minimum of 10 data points is usually 3.00 recommended.

Therefore, the voltage was 2.50 % increased using increments of 0.1 x UN. The 2.00 results are shown in Table 2 and Figure 14.

1.50

0

V

values do not represent the most deteriorated part of the winding, as a large power factor value can be due to voids distributed all over 2.50 factor (%) the winding or a fewPower single, heavily aged bars or 2.00 coils. The impact of the latter case is potentially much more severe for the longevity of the 1.50 winding. It is, however, good practice to perform % 1.00 measurements whenever possible and to trend the values throughout the asset’s lifetime. If an 0.50 increase in power factor values or tip-up values is 0.00 observed, further investigation including visual inspection and additional electrical tests can be triggered to complete the Vassessment.

0.00

1000

0.50

8000

6000

5000

4000

3000

2000

0

1000

0,00

7000

ADVANCEMENTS IN INDUSTRY 0,20

1000

0,40

The results of a dielectric frequency response 2.50 (DFR) analysis confirmed the presence of an Power factor (%) anomaly on phase A. To locate the defect in 2.00

3,00 2,50

1.50

2,00 Table 1: PF Data from 1991

% Table 2: PF Measurements before Repairs 1.00

Phase C

0.74%

2.29%

1.55%

A-BCG

Phase C

2.50

2.29%

B-ACG

1.68%

3.08%

C-ABG

1.61%

7000

6.03% V3.12%

6000

1.51%

PF Tip-up 5000

Phase B

3.74%

PF at UN 4000

0

Phase A 0.00

3000

1.45%

10000

9000

V2.35%

1.58%

PF at 0.2 X UN

0.50

PF Tip-up

8000

0.90%

A-BCG 7000

2.33% 6000

0.75%

2000

Phase B

1000

0

Phase A

PF at UN 5000

0,00

PF at 0.2 X UN 4000

0,50

3000

1,00

2000

1,50

1000

%

1.40%

7.00

Power factor (%)

Power factor (%)

6.00

2.00

5.00 1.50

%

% 1.00

4.00 3.00 2.00

0.50

A-BCG

B-ACG

4.00 • WINTER 2020 % 3.00

B-ACG

7000

6000

5000

V

4000

3000

2000

A-BCG

C-ABG

Figure 14: PF Voltage Sweep Curves before 7.00 Power factor (%) Repairs 6.00 5.00

5.00

104

1000

0

C-ABG

Figure 13: PF Voltage Sweep Curves from 7.00 1991 Power factor (%) 6.00

0.00

7000

6000

5000

V

4000

3000

2000

0

0.00

1000

1.00

4.00 PF MEASUREMENTS ON COMPLETE STATOR WINDINGS

%

3.00 2.00

A-BCG

B-ACG

C-ABG

7.00

ADVANCEMENTS IN INDUSTRY

Power factor (%)

6.00 5.00

REFERENCES

Table 3: PF Measurements after Repairs % 4.00 3.00

Phase C

1.29%

1.81% A-BCG 2.02%

3.28%

V

1.47%

7000

3.01%

6000

1.72%

5000

Phase B

PF Tip-up

4000

0

0.00

1000

Phase A

PF at UN 3000

1.00

PF at 0.2 X UN 2000

2.00

B-ACG 3.23% C-ABG 1.21%

IEC/TS 60034-27-3, Rotating Electrical Machines – Part 27: Dielectric Dissipation Factor Measurements on Stator Winding Insulation of Rotating Electrical Machines, 2015.

7.00

Power factor (%) 6.00 5.00

%

4.00 3.00 2.00

A-BCG

B-ACG

7000

6000

5000

V

4000

3000

2000

0

1000

1.00 0.00

IEEE Std. 286-2000, Recommended Practice for Measurement of Power Factor Tip-Up of Electric Machinery Stator Coil Insulation, pp 1-29, 2001, doi: 10.1109/ IEEESTD.2001.92415.

C-ABG

Figure 15: PF Voltage Sweep after Repairs the winding, an AC dielectric withstand test at 1.5 x UN was initiated. A breakdown occurred in one coil located in the middle of the winding of phase A before reaching the final voltage level.

The failed coil was isolated from the winding, and the electrical tests were repeated. The results of the power factor measurements, after repairs, are shown in Table 3 and Figure 15.

Following the repairs, the losses of phase A were similar to losses from phase B and phase C. Figure 15 also shows that hysteresis behavior has significantly diminished. Nevertheless, the values are still significantly higher (100%) than the data from 1991 and indicate insulation deterioration on all three phases.

PF MEASUREMENTS ON COMPLETE STATOR WINDINGS

M. G. Krieg-Wezelenburg. “Dielectric Dissipation Factor Measurements on Stator Insulation — Results from a Global Survey,” 2020 IEEE Electrical Insulation Conference (EIC), Knoxville, TN, USA, 2020, pp. 269-273, doi: 10.1109/ EIC47619.2020.9158740.

R. Omranipour and S. U. Haq. “How Critical are IEC 60034-27-3 Maximum Values for Dielectric Dissipation Factor and TipUp to Determine the Reliability of Motor Stator Insulation?” 2015 IEEE Electrical Insulation Conference (EIC), Seattle, WA, USA, 2015, pp. 364-368, doi: 10.1109/ ICACACT.2014.7223474.

Mathieu Lachance joined OMICRON electronics Canada Corp. in 2019 and presently holds the position of Regional Application Specialist for rotating machines and partial discharges. He previously worked as a test engineer in the fields of partial discharges and high voltage.

Mathieu received a BS in electrical engineering from Université Laval in 2014.

NETAWORLD

•

105

Ordering your breaker upgrade has never been

EASIER

The Best Solutions in the Industry Shopping for the right Retrofit Kit is easy with our KIT ORDERING GUIDE Available on any browser KOG.UtilityRelay.com

UTILITYRELAY.COM | 888.289.2864 | URCSALES@UTILITYRELAY.COM

DIGITAL

MICRO-OHMMETERS

RELIABLE / HIGH PERFORMANCE

MODELS: 6240, 6255 & 6292

• Programmable test currents from 10mA to 200A • Accurately measures resistance down to 1µ • Accuracies to .05% • Test at higher currents without overheating • Large easy to read backlit digital displays • Automatic multipoint measurements (model 6255) • Internal data storage of results • Comprehensive analysis and reporting DataView® software

IP 54 cover closed

www.aemc.com sales@aemc.com

INSIGHTS & OBSERVATIONS — NETA CAP SPOTLIGHT

AEMC INSTRUMENTS: ®

OVER 125 YEARS OF TECHNICAL HERITAGE AND INNOVATION IN TEST INSTRUMENTATION NETA Corporate Alliance Partners (CAPs) are a group of industry-leading companies that have joined forces with NETA to work together toward a common aim: improving quality, safety, and electrical system reliability.

In our continuing CAP Spotlight series, we highlight some of their individual successes. In JOHN OLOBRI this issue, NETA World interviews John Olobri, Director of Sales and Marketing for AEMC® Instruments in Foxborough, Massachusetts.

NW: What is something NETA World

readers don’t know about AEMC? Olobri: AEMC Instruments originally started in business in the United States in Boston, Massachusetts, in 1976 as Instrumentation Corporation. It was a distribution arm of Chauvin Arnoux based in Paris, France.

As the business grew, a production facility opened in Dover, New Hampshire, in the early 1980s, and two additional business units were added. A name-change to Advanced Electrical Measurement and Control took place as it was a better fit for the company’s business model, and in the early 1990s, the name was shortened to AEMC® Instruments as it is known today.

The company is incorporated as Chauvin Arnoux® Inc., d.b.a. AEMC® Instruments.

It is still privately held and owned by the

108

• WINTER 2020

Arnoux family. AEMC was originally known as a premier supplier of current measurement probes, and we still hold that position. Today, we offer a wide range of test instruments for ground resistance testing, insulation resistance testing, power and energy monitoring, and much more. Chauvin Arnoux in France was one of the first developers of the multimeter.

NW: What recent company achievement or milestone are you particularly proud of?

Olobri: As a world-leading manufacturer of ground resistance test instrumentation, we continually look for ways to advance the technology to address the needs of the customer.

Our latest offering to test the ground resistance of towers such as electrical transmission and cellular communication has greatly improved AEMC® INSTRUMENTS: OVER 125 YEARS OF TECHNICAL HERITAGE AND INNOVATION IN TEST INSTRUMENTATION

INSIGHTS & OBSERVATIONS — NETA CAP SPOTLIGHT the safety of the technician doing the test, the quality of the test results, and the cost to get the job done. Our tower tester is capable of testing towers while they are energized or de-energized.

In the case of electrical transmission towers, we can accomplish the testing without the need for a crew to climb the tower to disconnect the overhead ground conductor that runs from tower to tower in the transmission line.

This alone saves considerable time and money for the utility company and is much safer for the personnel doing the work. The test results provided by this instrument include footing resistance of individual and total tower legs, quality of the overhead ground conductor bonding to the tower, leakage current, stray voltage, and a resistance vs frequency plot that provides valuable information of the reactive component — important to determine the effects of a lightning strike on the tower. All of this testing can be completed in 30 to 40 minutes where it would take several hours with other test methods. Today, several major electrical utility companies have standardized on our tower tester as the required instrument for their technicians and electrical contractors to use to verify that their transmission towers are within acceptable ground-resistance values.

NW: What evolution do you see on the horizon that will have a positive impact on your work?

Olobri: The cost and reliability of digital communication technology and the wide use of smart devices such as cell phones and tablets has given us the opportunity to effectively provide remote operation and access to test instrumentation. It allows the technician to remain outside hazardous areas while performing electrical measurements. It simplifies and reduces the time to properly configure the test instrument. It gives us the opportunity to provide real-time information, particularly in power and energy monitoring, to the appropriate decision makers and engineers anywhere in the world. Continued developments in this area will improve reliability of this communication and increase the transmission speed of large AEMC® INSTRUMENTS: OVER 125 YEARS OF TECHNICAL HERITAGE AND INNOVATION IN TEST INSTRUMENTATION

AEMC’s Groundflex® Field Kit amounts of data. It will also help us simplify connectivity for the user who is interested in getting the job done right without spending an excessive amount of time learning computer technology to make that data communication happen. Springboarding off the developments of battery technology for the automotive industry and others will provide us an opportunity to offer longer operation of test and measuring instrumentation particularly in the area of data logging, which inherently is mostly used in unattended operation.

NW: What challenges do you see going forward for the industry?

Olobri: A most important challenge that faces the test instrumentation industry is in configuration simplification and presentation of application-oriented measurement results.

Technicians and engineers today are pulled in many directions and are under considerable time pressures. The last thing they want to do is spend hours learning software or the layers of buttonpushing to set up instrumentation. Although great strides have been made in this area, more needs to be done to literally make instruments as close to plug-and-play as possible and provide the operator the confidence that the instrument is configured right the first time and the results will be accurate.

NETAWORLD

•

109

Industrial Electric Testing, Inc. EC13004105 • 24 Hour Emergency Service ACCEPTANCE AND MAINTENANCE TESTING AND REPAIR • Cables • LV/MV Circuit Breakers • Rotating Machinery • Meters • Automatic Transfer Switches • Switchgear and Switchboard Assemblies

• LV/MV Switches • Relays - All Types • Motor Control Centers • Grounding Systems • Transformers • Insulating Fluids • Thermographic Surveys

• Reclosers • Surge Arresters • Capacitors • Batteries • Ground Fault Systems • Equipotential Ground Testing

CoNSulTING AND ENGINEERING SERvICES • Load Studies • Transient Voltage Recording and Analysis • Electromagnetic Field (EMF) Testing

• Harmonic Investigation • Replacement of Insulating Fluids • Power Factor Studies

11321 West Distribution Avenue • Jacksonville, Florida 32256 • (904) 260-8378 201 NW 1st Avenue • Hallandale, Florida 33009 • (954) 456-7020

B B BULLOCK BREAKERS 1-763-269-2832

• Thousands of Air Circuit Breakers in Stock!

• Switchgear Line-ups you can’t find anywhere else!

• Now Available as Reconditioned with AC-Pro Trip Units!

475 Annandale Blvd • Annandale • Minnesota 55302 www.bullockbreakers.com • Email: jason@bullockbreakers.com

NEW EDITION

ORDER NOW

Visit NETAWORLD.ORG or call 888.300.6382

SPECIFICATIONS AND STANDARDS ACTIVITY

ANSI/NETA STANDARDS UPDATE 2020

SETA EC

ANSI/N

2020

S STANDARD

2020

L A C I R LECT ECIFICATIONS

ANSI/

ARD F STAND

E MISSIONING SP

NETA

RG

RD FO

STANDA

.O WORLD .NETA WWW

OR

TRICAL

R ELEC

COM

TRIC

NING

ISSIO

COMM

LEC FOR E

STEMS T & SY

IPMEN

QU WER E AL PO

ICATIO

SPECIF NS

LATEST EDITION

ANSI / NETA ATS–2017 REVI SI ON UNDERWAY

2017 ETA ATSANSI/N

ANSI/NETA ATS–2017, Standard for Acceptance Testing Specifications for Electrical Power Equipment & Systems continues an American National Standard revision process that is scheduled to be completed by the end of 2020. The new edition will be released in March 2021.

CE TA N S P E IO T C A A C SPECIFIC N

S TA N

D

R A RD FO

T ES T IN FO R EL

EC TR

G

W IC A L PO

ER EQ

U IP M EN

T & SY

S TE M

S

REVISION UNDERWAY

A project intent notification published in ANSI’s Standards Action on January 3, 2020, announced the opening of a 45day public comment period. The initial ballot was issued on January 17, 2020, and closed on February 18, 2020. A second ballot was issued July 10, 2020, and closed August 10, 2020. The administrative approval process from ANSI continues. The revised edition of ANSI/NETA ATS is scheduled to debut at PowerTest 2021 in Orlando.

ANSI/NETA ATS covers suggested field tests and inspections for assessing the suitability for initial energization of electrical power equipment and systems.

112

• WINTER 2020

ANSI/NETA STANDARDS UPDATE

SPECIFICATIONS AND STANDARDS ACTIVITY The purpose of these specifications is to assure that tested electrical equipment and systems are operational, are within applicable standards and manufacturers’ tolerances, and are installed in accordance with design specifications.

A N S I/ N E TA E T T –2018 R E VIS I ON S C H E DULE D F OR 2021 A project intent notification has been published in ANSI’s Standards Action in fall 2020, announcing the opening of a 45-day public comment period. The initial ballot is expected in summer 2021. A second ballot is scheduled for issue in fall 2021. The revised edition of ANSI/NETA ATS is scheduled to debut at PowerTest 2022.

ANSI/NETA ETT establishes minimum requirements for qualifications, certification, training, and experience for the electrical testing technician. It provides criteria for documenting qualifications for certification and details the minimum qualifications for an independent and impartial certifying body to certify electrical testing technicians.

A N S I/ N E TA E C S–2020 L AT E S T E D I T ION ANSI/NETA ECS, Standard for Electrical Commissioning of Electrical Power Equipment & Systems, 2020 Edition, completed the American National Standard revision process.

ANSI administrative approval was received on September 9, 2019. ANSI/NETA ECS–2020 supersedes the 2015 Edition.

ANSI/NETA ECS describes the systematic process of documenting and placing into service newly installed or retrofitted electrical power equipment and systems. This document shall be used in conjunction with the most recent edition of ANSI/NETA ATS, Standard for Acceptance Testing Specifications for Electrical Power Equipment & Systems.

The individual electrical components shall be subjected to factory and field tests, as required, to validate the individual components. It is not the intent of these specifications to provide comprehensive details on the commissioning of mechanical equipment, mechanical instrumentation systems, and related components.

The ANSI/NETA ECS–2020 Edition includes updates to the commissioning process, as well as inspection and commissioning procedures as it relates to low- and mediumvoltage systems.

ANSI/NETA STANDARDS UPDATE

Voltage classes addressed include: • Low-voltage systems (less than 1,000 volts) • Medium-voltage systems (greater than 1,000 volts and less than 100,000 volts) • High-voltage and extra-high-voltage systems (greater than 100 kV and less than 1,000 kV) References: • ASHRAE, ANSI/NETA ATS, NECA, NFPA 70E, OSHA, GSA Building Commissioning Guide

ANSI / NETA MTS–2019 LATEST EDI TI ON ANSI/NETA MTS, Standard for Maintenance Testing Specifications for Electrical Power Equipment & Systems, 2019 Edition, completed an American National Standard revision process and received ANSI approval on February 4, 2019.

The revised edition of ANSI/NETA MTS was released in March 2019 and supersedes the 2015 Edition.

ANSI/NETA MTS contains specifications for suggested field tests and inspections to assess the suitability for continued service and reliability of electrical power equipment and systems. The purpose of these specifications is to assure that tested electrical equipment and systems are operational and within applicable standards and manufacturers’ tolerances, and that the equipment and systems are suitable for continued service. ANSI/NETA MTS–2019 revisions include online partial discharge survey for switchgear, frequency of power systems studies, frequency of maintenance matrix, and more. ANSI/NETA MTS–2019 is available for purchase at the NETA Bookstore at www.netaworld.org.

PARTI CI PATI ON Comments and suggestions on any of the standards are always welcome and should be directed to NETA. To learn more about the NETA standards review and revision process, to purchase these standards, or to get involved, please visit www.netaworld.org or contact the NETA office at 888-300-6382.

NETAWORLD

•

113

HPC Switches?

We’ve got you covered.

•

In Stock

•

New and Obsolete

•

800A—4000A

•

Retrofit kits

•

24/7 Emergency Service

HPC

New Generation HPC

We stock new General Electric HPCII drop in replacements for the THPC 3000 & 4000 amp GFI models for same day shipping. Call anytime for immediate service.

800-421-5082 www.qualityswitchgear.com

RETROFITTED BREAKER

Acceptance and Maintenance Testing Commissioning Circuit Breaker Repair and Retrofit Infrared Scanning MV Cable Terminations and Testing Commissioning and Load Bank Testing of UPS, Generators, and ATS

6605 W. WT Harris Blvd. Suite F • Charlotte NC 28269 | 13 Jenkins Court • Mauldin, SC 29662 | 9481 Industrial Center Drive, Suite 5 • Ladson, SC 29456 704.573.0420 • 844-383-8617 • 704.573.3693 (fax) • www.powerproducts.biz

The Power of Positive Results

AET Brings Precision and Value to Electrical Testing, Commissioning and Engineering… and Positive Results to Our Customers.

AET delivers the best value in the marketplace by offering the highest quality service at competitive prices. With a workforce and offices located throughout the country, AET is an industry leader and one of the largest independent electrical testing companies in the U.S.

To learn more about AET’s full range of testing and engineering services, visit www.aetco.us A Subsidiary of

WWW.AETCO.US • 800.992.3826

AET-IBEW Full Page Ad-FINAL-8.75 X 11.25.indd 1

An

Company

10/5/17 11:44 AM

TECH QUIZ ANSWERS

No. 132

A N S W E R S Thomas D. Sandri is Training Development Manager at Shermco Industries. He has been active in the field of electrical power and telecommunications for over 30 years. During his career, he has developed numerous training aids and training guides and has conducted domestic and international seminars. Tom supports a wide range of electrical and telecommunication maintenance application disciplines. He has been directly involved in supporting test and measurement equipment for over 20 years and is considered an industry expert in application disciplines, including battery and dc systems testing and maintenance, medium- and high-voltage cables, ground testing, and partial discharge analysis. Tom holds a BSEE from Thomas Edison University in Trenton, New Jersey.

A N SW E R S

1. a. 25. Also known as a synch-check relay,

it verifies that two voltages are within the specified quantity and phase angle. These are used mostly for synchronizing a generator with an existing source to be connected to it, not for synchronizing two generators.

Auto-synchronizing relays are usually used to synchronize two generators.

2. d. Loss-of-excitation. Probably an easy

question since it has the longest answer.

A generator uses an exciter to apply a DC voltage across the field winding. The resulting current produces a magnetic flux that cuts the windings on the rotor, producing an output voltage. Figure 3 shows a simple diagram of a generator. This was the simplest one I could find on the internet.

The automatic voltage regulator (AVR), which is not shown, controls the exciter output voltage and could be one of many types. Increasing the AVR output voltage increases the generator output.

3. a. Figure 1 showed a common Mho (opposite

characteristic of an Ohm) relay characteristic where:

X = reactance, r = resistance, z = impedance

It could also show the maximum torque angle

(Figure 4) and the values for the three. Any impedance value that falls inside the circle means a contact-closed condition.

X

Maximum torque angle

nZ L

R

Figure 4: Mho Relay 4. a. Seal-In coil. This is an electro-mechanical

relay. The schematic also shows the seal-in contacts.

b. Tapped current operating coil. This is a reverse power relay.

c. Shorting bars, for the CTs

d. Potential operating coils

Figure 2 in the question is a reverse power

Figure 3: Simple Generator System COURTESY EMERSON AUTOMATION EXPERTS BLOG

116

• WINTER 2020

relay. To operate, it must see both a voltage (potential) and a current. It looks for power flow going in the wrong direction.

TECH QUIZ

TECH QUIZ

Protective relays use their own symbol system.

b d S1

a

S1

c

7

5

1

2

6

8

= SHORT FINGERS

Figure 2: Internal Schematic

It’s easy to get confused if you’re not used to them. This one is a bit quirky. The current coil (b) is normally shown as the potential coils are in Figure 2, but the potential coil (d) is shown split. Since the shorting bars (c) are on terminals 5 and 6, the current coil must be connected there. Terminals 7 and 8 are the potential coil terminals and 1 and 2 are the trip circuit with (a) being the seal-in coil.

This is an IJS Sync-Check relay.

NFPA Disclaimer: Although Jim White is a member of the NFPA Technical Committee for both NFPA 70E, Standard for Electrical Safety in the Workplace, and NFPA 70B, Recommended Practice for Electrical Equipment Maintenance, the views and opinions expressed in this column are purely the author’s and shall not be considered an official position of the NFPA or any of its technical committees and shall not be considered, nor be relied upon, as a formal interpretation or promotion of the NFPA. Readers are encouraged to refer to the entire text of all referenced documents.

ELECTRICAL TESTING on the LEADING EDGE ELEMCO SERVICES

offers a comprehensive array of state-of-the-art electrical testing services and expertise.

HIGH, MEDIUM AND LOW VOLTAGE REPAIR AND MAINTENANCE OF: Switchgear / Circuit Breakers / Transformers / ATS Switches / Cables TESTING, CALIBRATION AND REPAIR OF METERS AND RELAYS FIELD SERVICES: Acceptance Testing and Commissioning / Infrared Surveys Motor and Cable Testing Load and Power Quality Recording and Analysis Nu Heat Certified Repair Specialists

CONTACT US TODAY • 24 HOUR SERVICE 228 Merrick Road, Lynbrook, NY 11563 (631) 589-6343 601 Union Street, Brooklyn, NY 11215 (718) 786-4900 WWW.ELEMCO.COM

Licenced in New York and New Jersey

REAL WORLD LEARNING AT YOUR FINGERTIPS. Introducing NETA Series III Handbooks

We’ve got answers.

Discover page after page of comprehensive, component-specific, technical resources for training and reference purposes. Over 200 of the very best articles from NETA World Journal and technical presentations from NETA’s PowerTest conferences.

To order, please visit netaworld.org or call 888.300.6382

NETA ACCREDITED COMPANIES Setting the Standard A&F Electrical Testing, Inc. 80 Lake Ave S Ste 10 Nesconset, NY 11767-1017 (631) 584-5625 www.afelectricaltesting.com A&F Electrical Testing, Inc. 80 Broad St Fl 5 New York, NY 10004-2257 (631) 584-5625 ABM Electrical Power Services, LLC 720 S Rochester Ste A Ontario, CA 91761-8177 (301) 397-3500 abm.com/Electrical ABM Electrical Power Services, LLC 6541 Meridien Dr Suite 113 Raleigh, NC 27616 (919) 877-1008 ABM Electrical Power Services, LLC 2631 S. Roosevelt St Tempe, AZ 85282 (602) 722-2423 ABM Electrical Power Services, LLC 3600 Woodpark Blvd Ste G Charlotte, NC 28206-4210 (704) 273-6257 ABM Electrical Power Services, LLC 6940 Koll Center Pkwy Suite# 100 Pleasanton, CA 94566 (408) 466-6920 ABM Electrical Power Services, LLC 9800 E Geddes Ave Unit A-150 Englewood, CO 80112-9306 (303) 524-6560 ABM Electrical Power Services, LLC 3585 Corporate Court San Diego, CA 92123-1844 (858) 754-7963 ABM Electrical Power Services, LLC 1005 Windward Ridge Pkwy Alpharetta, GA 30005 (770) 521-7550

ABM Electrical Power Solutions 3700 Commerce Dr # 901-903 Baltimore, MD 21227-1642 (410) 247-3300

American Electrical Testing Co., LLC 91 Fulton St., Unit 4 Boonton, NJ 07005-1060 (973) 316-1180

CE Power Engineered Services, LLC 480 Cave Rd Nashville, TN 37210-2302 (615) 882-9455

ABM Electrical Power Solutions 317 Commerce Park Drive Cranberry Township, PA 16066-6407 (724) 772-4638

AMP Quality Energy Services, LLC 352 Turney Ridge Rd Somerville, AL 35670 (256) 513-8255

CE Power Engineered Services, LLC 40 Washington St Westborough, MA 01581-1088 (508) 881-3911

ABM Electrical Power Solutions 814 Greenbrier Cir Ste E Chesapeake, VA 23320-2643 (757) 364-6145

AMP Quality Energy Services, LLC 41 Peabody Street Nashville, TN 37210 (629) 213-4855

CE Power Engineered Services, LLC 9200 75th Avenue N Brooklyn Park, MN 55428 (877) 968-0281

ABM Electrical Power Solutions 1817 O’Brien Road Columbus, OH 43228 (724) 772-4638 www.abm.com

Apparatus Testing and Engineering 11300 Sanders Dr Ste 29 Rancho Cordova, CA 95742-6822 (916) 853-6280 www.apparatustesting.com

CE Power Engineered Services, LLC 72 Sanford Drive Gorham, ME 04038 (800) 649-6314

Absolute Testing Services, Inc. 8100 West Little York Houston, TX 77040 (832) 467-4446 www.absolutetesting.com

Apparatus Testing and Engineering 7083 Commerce Cir Ste H Pleasanton, CA 94588-8017 (916) 853-6280

Accessible Consulting Engineers, Inc. 1269 Pomona Rd Ste 111 Corona, CA 92882-7158 (951) 808-1040 www.acetesting.com Advanced Electrical Services 4999 - 43rd St. NE Unit 143 Calgary, AB T2B 3N4 (403) 697-3747 Advanced Testing Systems 15 Trowbridge Dr Bethel, CT 06801-2858 (203) 743-2001 www.advtest.com American Electrical Testing Co., LLC 25 Forbes Boulevard Suite 1 Foxboro, MA 02035 (781) 821-0121 www.aetco.us

ABM Electrical Power Services, LLC 4221 Freidrich Lane Suite 170 Austin, TX 78744 (210) 347-9481

American Electrical Testing Co., LLC Green Hills Commerce Center 5925 Tilghman St Ste 200 Allentown, PA 18104-9158 (484) 538-2272

ABM Electrical Power Services, LLC 11719 NE 95th St. Ste H Vancouver, WA 98682 (360) 713-9513

American Electrical Testing Co., LLC 34 Clover Dr South Windsor, CT 06074-2931 (860) 648-1013

ABM Electrical Power Solutions 4390 Parliament Place Suite S Lanham, MD 20706 (301) 967-3500

American Electrical Testing Co., LLC 76 Cain Dr Brentwood, NY 11717-1265 (631) 617-5330

NETA ACCREDITED COMPANIES

Applied Engineering Concepts 894 N Fair Oaks Ave. Pasadena, CA 91103 (626) 389-2108 www.aec-us.com Applied Engineering Concepts 8160 Miramar Road San Diego, CA 92126 (619) 822-1106 BEC Testing 50 Gazza Blvd Farmingdale, NY 11735-1402 (631) 393-6800 www.bectesting.com Burlington Electrical Testing Co., LLC 300 Cedar Ave Croydon, PA 19021-6051 (215) 826-9400 www.betest.com Burlington Electrical Testing Co., LLC 846 Waterford Drive Delran, NJ 08075 (609) 267-4126 C.E. Testing, Inc. 6148 Tim Crews Rd Macclenny, FL 32063-4036 (904) 653-1900 www.cetestinginc.com/ Capitol Area Testing, Inc. P.O. Box 259 Suite 614 Crownsville, MD 21032 (757) 650-0740 www.capitolareatesting.com CE Power Engineered Services, LLC 4040 Rev Drive Cincinnati, OH 45232 (800) 434-0415

CE Power Engineered Services, LLC 8490 Seward Rd. Fairfield, OH 45011 (800) 434-0415 CE Power Engineered Services, LLC 1803 Taylor Ave. Louisville, KY 40213 (800) 434-0415 CE Power Engineered Services, LLC 1200 W. West Maple Rd. Walled Lake, MI 48390 (810) 229-6628 www.cepower.net CE Power Engineered Services, LLC 10840 Murdock Drive Knoxville, TN 37932 (800) 434-0415 CE Power Engineered Services, LLC 3496 E. 83rd Place Merrillville, IN 46410 (219) 942-2346 CE Power Engineered Services, LLC 1260 Industrial Park Eveleth, MN 55734 (218) 744-4200 CE Power Solutions of Florida, LLC 3502 Riga Blvd., Suite C Tampa, FL 33619 (866) 439-2992 www.cepowersol.com CE Power Solutions of Florida, LLC 3801 SW 47th Avenue Suite 505 Davie, FL 33314 (866) 439-2992 Control Power Concepts 3750 Las Vegas Blvd S. Unit 3303 Las Vegas, NV 89158 (702) 448-7833 www.controlpowerconcepts.com

NETAWORLD

•

119

NETA ACCREDITED COMPANIES Setting the Standard Dude Electrical Testing, LLC 145 Tower Drive, Unit 9 Burr Ridge, IL 60527-7840 (815) 293-3388 www.dudetesting.com Eastern High Voltage, Inc. 11A S Gold Dr Robbinsville, NJ 08691-1685 (609) 890-8300 www.easternhighvoltage.com ELECT, P.C. 375 E. Third Street Wendell, NC 27591 (919) 365-9775 www.elect-pc.com Electek Power Services, Inc. 870 Confederation Street Sarnia, ON N7T2E5 (519) 383-0333 Electric Power Systems, Inc. 21 Millpark Ct Maryland Heights, MO 63043-3536 (314) 890-9999 www.epsii.com Electric Power Systems, Inc. 11211 E. Arapahoe Rd Ste 108 Centennial, CO 80112 (720) 857-7273 Electric Power Systems, Inc. 120 Turner Road Salem, VA 24153-5120 (540) 375-0084 Electric Power Systems, Inc. 1090 Montour West Ind Park Coraopolis, PA 15108-9307 (412) 276-4559 Electric Power Systems, Inc. 6141 E Connecticut Ave Kansas City, MO 64120-1346 (816) 241-9990 Electric Power Systems, Inc. 1230 N Hobson St. Suite 101 Gilbert, AZ 85233 (480) 633-1490

Electric Power Systems, Inc. 684 Melrose Avenue Nashville, TN 37211-3121 (615) 834-0999 Electric Power Systems, Inc. 2888 Nationwide Parkway 2nd Floor Brunswick, OH 44212 (330) 460-3706

Electric Power Systems, Inc. 7308 Aspen Lane North Suite 160 Brooklyn Park, MN 55428 (763) 315-3520 Electric Power Systems, Inc. 140 Lakefront Drive Cockeysville, MD 21030 (443) 689-2220

Electric Power Systems, Inc. 54 Eisenhower Lane North Lombard, IL 60148 (815) 577-9515

Electric Power Systems, Inc. 783 N. Grove Rd Suite 101 Richardson, TX 75081 (214) 821-3311

Electric Power Systems, Inc. 1330 Industrial Blvd.

Suite 300 Sugar Land, TX 77478 (713) 644-5400

Electric Power Systems, Inc. 11912 NE 95th St. Suite 306 Vancouver, WA 98682 (855) 459-4377 www.epsii.com

Electric Power Systems, Inc. 56 Bibber Pkwy # 1 Brunswick, ME 04011-7357 (207) 837-6527

Electric Power Systems, Inc. Padre Mariano 272, Of. 602 Providencia, Santiago

Electric Power Systems, Inc. 11861 Longsdorf St Riverview, MI 48193-4250 (734) 282-3311

Electrical & Electronic Controls 6149 Hunter Rd Ooltewah, TN 37363-8762 (423) 344-7666

Electric Power Systems, Inc. 8515 Calle Alameda NE Ste A Albuquerque, NM 87113 (505) 792-7761

Electrical Energy Experts, LLC W129N10818 Washington Dr Germantown, WI 53022-4446 (262) 255-5222 www.electricalenergyexperts.com

Electric Power Systems, Inc. 3209 Gresham Lake Rd. Suite 155 Raleigh, NC 27615 (919) 210-5405

Electrical Engineering & Service Co., Inc. 289 Centre St. Holbrook, MA 02343 (781) 767-9988 www.eescousa.com

Electric Power Systems, Inc. 5850 Polaris Ave., Suite 1600 Las Vegas, NV 89118 (702) 815-1342

Electrical Equipment Upgrading, Inc. 21 Telfair Pl Savannah, GA 31415-9518 (912) 232-7402 www.eeu-inc.com

Electric Power Systems, Inc. 7925 Dunbrook Rd. Suite G San Diego, CA 92126 (858) 566-6317

Electrical Reliability Services 610 Executive Campus Dr Westerville, OH 43082-8870 (877) 468-6384 www.electricalreliability.com

Electrical Reliability Services 8500 Washington St NE Ste A6 Albuquerque, NM 87113-1861 (505) 822-0237 Electrical Reliability Services 2275 Northwest Pkwy SE Ste 180 Marietta, GA 30067-9319 (770) 541-6600 Electrical Reliability Services 10606 Bloomfield Ave Santa Fe Springs, CA 90670-3912 (562) 236-9555 Electrical Reliability Services 400 NW Capital Dr Lees Summit, MO 64086-4723 (816) 525-7156 Electrical Reliability Services 7100 Broadway Ste 7E Denver, CO 80221-2900 (303) 427-8809 Electrical Reliability Services 2222 W Valley Hwy N Ste 160 Auburn, WA 98001-1655 (253) 736-6010 Electrical Reliability Services 221 E. Willis Road, Suite 3 Chandler, AZ 85286 (480) 966-4568 Electrical Reliability Services 1380 Greg St. Ste. 216 Sparks, NV 89431-6070 (775) 746-4466 Electrical Reliability Services 11000 Metro Pkwy Ste 30 Fort Myers, FL 33966-1244 (239) 693-7100 Electrical Reliability Services 245 Hood Road Sulphur, LA 70665-8747 (337) 583-2411 Electrical Reliability Services 9736 South Sandy Pkwy 500 West Sandy, UT 84070 (801) 561-0987 Electrical Reliability Services 6351 Hinson Street, Suite A Las Vegas, NV 89118-6851 (702) 597-0020

Electric Power Systems, Inc. 915 Holt Ave Unit 9 Manchester, NH 03109-5606 (603) 657-7371

Electric Power Systems, Inc. 6679 Peachtree Industrial Dr. Suite H Norcross, GA 30092 (770) 416-0684

Electric Power Systems, Inc. 3806 Caboose Place Sanford, FL 32771 (407) 578-6424

Electric Power Systems, Inc. 306 Ashcake Road suite A Ashland, VA 23005 (804) 526-6794

Electrical Reliability Services 1057 Doniphan Park Cir Ste A El Paso, TX 79922-1329 (915) 587-9440

Electrical Reliability Services 36572 Luke Drive Geismar, LA 70734 (225) 647-0732 www.electricalreliability.com

Electric Power Systems, Inc. 1129 E Highway 30 Gonzales, LA 70737-4759 (225) 644-0150

Electric Power Systems, Inc. 7169 East 87th St. Indianapolis, IN 46256 (317) 941-7502

Electrical Reliability Services 6900 Koll Center Pkwy Ste 415 Pleasanton, CA 94566-3119 (925) 485-3400

Electrical Reliability Services 9636 Saint Vincent Ave Unit A Shreveport, LA 71106-7127 (318) 869-4244

120

•

WINTER 2020

Electrical Reliability Services 5909 Sea Lion Pl Ste C Carlsbad, CA 92010-6634 (858) 695-9551

NETA ACCREDITED COMPANIES

NETA ACCREDITED COMPANIES Setting the Standard Electrical Reliability Services 1426 Sens Rd. Ste. #5 La Porte, TX 77571-9656 (281) 241-2800 Electrical Reliability Services 9753 S. 140th Street, Suite 109 Omaha, NE 68138 (402) 861-9168 Electrical Reliability Services 1402 Preston Road Ste 404. #706 Dallas, TX 75254 (972) 788-0979 Electrical Reliability Services 4833 Berewick Town Ctr Drive Ste E-207 Charlotte, NC 28278 (704) 583-4794 Electrical Reliability Services 324 S. Wilmington St. Ste 299 Raleigh, NC 27601 (919) 807-0995 Electrical Reliability Services 8983 University Blvd Ste. 104. #158 North Charleston, SC 29406 (843) 797-0514 Electrical Reliability Services 13720 Old St. Augustine Rd. Ste. 8 #310 Jacksonville, FL 32258 (904) 292-9779 Electrical Reliability Services 4099 SE International Way Ste 201 Milwaukie, OR 97222-8853 (503) 653-6781 Electrical Testing and Maintenance Corp.

3673 Cherry Rd Ste 101 Memphis, TN 38118-6313 (901) 566-5557 www.etmcorp.net Electrical Testing Solutions 2909 Greenhill Ct Oshkosh, WI 54904-9769 (920) 420-2986 www.electricaltestingsolutions.com Electrical Testing, Inc. 2671 Cedartown Hwy SE Rome, GA 30161-3894 (706) 234-7623 www.electricaltestinginc.com Elemco Services, Inc. 228 Merrick Rd Lynbrook, NY 11563-2622 (631) 589-6343 www.elemco.com

NETA ACCREDITED COMPANIES

EnerG Test, LLC 206 Gale Lane Kennett Square, PA 19348 (484) 731-0200 www.energtest.com Energis High Voltage Resources 1361 Glory Rd Green Bay, WI 54304-5640 (920) 632-7929 www.energisinc.com EPS Technology 37 Ozick Dr. Durham, CT 06422 (203) 679-0145 www.eps-technology.com Giga Electrical & Technical Services, Inc. 2743A N. San Fernando Road Los Angeles, CA 90065 (323) 255-5894 www.gigaelectrical-ca.com/ Grubb Engineering, Inc. 2727 North Saint Mary’s St. San Antonio, TX 78212 (210) 658-7250 www.grubbengineering.com Halco Testing Services 5773 Venice Boulevard Los Angeles, CA 90019 (323) 933-9431 www.halcotestingservices.com Hampton Tedder Technical Services 4563 State St Montclair, CA 91763-6129 (909) 628-1256 www.hamptontedder.com Hampton Tedder Technical Services 3747 W Roanoke Ave Phoenix, AZ 85009-1359 (480) 967-7765 Hampton Tedder Technical Services 4113 Wagon Trail Ave. Las Vegas, NV 89118 (702) 452-9200 Harford Electrical Testing Co., Inc. 1108 Clayton Rd Joppa, MD 21085-3409 (410) 679-4477 www.harfordtesting.com High Energy Electrical Testing, Inc. 5042 Industrial Road, Unit D Farmingdale, NJ 07727 (732) 938-2275 www.highenergyelectric.com High Voltage Maintenance Corp.

5100 Energy Dr Dayton, OH 45414-3525 (937) 278-0811 www.hvmcorp.com

High Voltage Maintenance Corp.

24 Walpole Park S Walpole, MA 02081-2541 (508) 668-9205

Hood Patterson & Dewar, Inc. 15924 Midway Road Addison, TX 75001 (214) 461-0760

High Voltage Maintenance Corp.

1052 Greenwood Springs Rd. Suite E Greenwood, IN 46143 (317) 322-2055 www.hvmcorp.com

Hood Patterson & Dewar, Inc. 4511 Daly Dr. Suite 1 Chantilly, VA 20151 (571) 299-6773

High Voltage Maintenance Corp.

355 Vista Park Dr Pittsburgh, PA 15205-1206 (412) 747-0550

Hood Patterson & Dewar, Inc. 1531 Hunt Club Blvd Ste 200 Gallatin, TN 37066 (615) 527-7084

High Voltage Maintenance Corp.

8787 Tyler Blvd.

Mentor, OH 44061 (440) 951-2706 www.hvmcorp.com

Industrial Electric Testing, Inc. 11321 Distribution Ave W Jacksonville, FL 32256-2746 (904) 260-8378 www.industrialelectrictesting.com

High Voltage Maintenance Corp.

24371 Catherine Industrial Dr Ste 207 Novi, MI 48375-2422 (248) 305-5596

Industrial Electric Testing, Inc. 201 NW 1st Ave Hallandale Beach, FL 33009-4029 (954) 456-7020

High Voltage Maintenance Corp.

3000 S Calhoun Rd New Berlin, WI 53151-3549 (262) 784-3660

Industrial Tests, Inc. 4021 Alvis Ct Ste 1 Rocklin, CA 95677-4031 (916) 296-1200 www.industrialtests.com

High Voltage Maintenance Corp.

1 Penn Plaza Suite 500 New York, NY 10119 (718) 239-0359 www.hvmcorp.com High Voltage Maintenance Corp.

29 Diana Court Cheshire, CT 06410 (203) 949-2650 www.hvmcorp.com High Voltage Maintenance Corp.

941 Busse Rd Elk Grove Village, IL 60007-2400 (847) 640-0005 High Voltage Maintenance Corp.

14300 Cherry Lane Court Suite 115 Laurel, MD 20707 (410) 279-0798 www.hvmcorp.com High Voltage Maintenance Corp.

10704 Electron Drive Louisville, KY 40299 (859) 371-5355 Hood Patterson & Dewar, Inc. 850 Center Way Norcross, GA 30071 (770) 453-1415 https://hoodpd.com/

Infra-Red Building and Power Service, Inc. 152 Centre St Holbrook, MA 02343-1011 (781) 767-0888 www.infraredbps.com J.G. Electrical Testing Corporation 3092 Shafto Road Suite 13 Tinton Falls, NJ 07753 (732) 217-1908 www.jgelectricaltesting.com M&L Power Systems, Inc. 109 White Oak Ln Ste 82 Old Bridge, NJ 08857-1980 (732) 679-1800 www.mlpower.com Magna IV Engineering 1103 Parsons Rd. SW Edmonton, AB T6X 0X2 (780) 462-3111 www.magnaiv.com Magna IV Engineering 141 Fox Cresent Fort McMurray, AB T9K 0C1 (780) 791-3122 Magna IV Engineering 3124 Millar Ave. Saskatoon, SK S7K 5Y2 (306) 713-2167

NETAWORLD

•

121

NETA ACCREDITED COMPANIES Setting the Standard Magna IV Engineering 96 Inverness Dr E Ste R Englewood, CO 80112-5311 (303) 799-1273 Magna IV Engineering Avenida del Condor sur #590 Oficina 601 Huechuraba 8580676 +(56) -2-26552600 Magna IV Engineering Unit 110, 19188 94th Avenue Surrey, BC V4N 4X8 (604) 421-8020 Magna IV Engineering Suite 200, 688 Heritage Dr. SE Calgary, AB T2H 1M6 (403) 723-0575 Magna IV Engineering 4407 Halik Street Building E Suite 300 Pearland, TX 77581 (346) 221-2165 Magna IV Engineering 10947 92 Ave Grande Prairie, AB T8V 3J3 1.800.462.3157 Midwest Engineering Consultants, Ltd. 2500 36th Ave Moline, IL 61265-6954 (309) 764-1561 www.Midwestengr.com MTA Electrical Engineers 350 Pauma Place Escondido, CA 92029 (760) 658-6098 National Field Services 651 Franklin Lewisville, TX 75057-2301 (972) 420-0157 www.natlfield.com National Field Services 1890 A South Hwy 35 Alvin, TX 77511 (800) 420-0157 National Field Services 1405 United Drive Suite 113-115 San Marcos, TX 78666 (800) 420-0157 National Field Services 3711 Regulus Ave. Las Vegas, NV 89102 (888) 296-0625 National Field Services 2900 Vassar St. #114 Reno, NV 89502 (775) 410-0430

122

•

WINTER 2020

Nationwide Electrical Testing, Inc. 6515 Bentley Ridge Drive Cumming, GA 30040 (770) 667-1875 www.n-e-t-inc.com North Central Electric, Inc. 69 Midway Ave Hulmeville, PA 19047-5827 (215) 945-7632 www.ncetest.com Northern Electrical Testing, Inc. 1991 Woodslee Dr Troy, MI 48083-2236 (248) 689-8980 www.northerntesting.com Orbis Engineering Field Services Ltd. #300, 9404 - 41st Ave. Edmonton, AB T6E 6G8 (780) 988-1455 www.orbisengineering.net Orbis Engineering Field Services Ltd. #228 - 18 Royal Vista Link NW Calgary, AB T3R 0K4 (403) 374-0051 Orbis Engineering Field Services Ltd. Badajoz #45, Piso 17 Las Condes, Santiago +56 2 29402343 Pace Technologies, Inc. 9604 - 41 Avenue NW Edmonton, AB T6E 6G9 (780) 450-0404 www.pacetechnologies.com Pace Technologies, Inc. #10, 883 McCurdy Place Kelowna, BC V1X 8C8 (250) 712-0091 Pacific Power Testing, Inc. 14280 Doolittle Dr San Leandro, CA 94577-5542 (510) 351-8811 www.pacificpowertesting.com Pacific Powertech Inc. #110, 2071 Kingsway Ave. Port Coquitlam, BC V3C 6N2 (604) 944-6697 www.pacificpowertech.ca Phasor Engineering Sabaneta Industrial Park #216 Mercedita, PR 00715 (787) 844-9366 www.phasorinc.com Potomac Testing 1610 Professional Blvd Ste A Crofton, MD 21114-2051 (301) 352-1930 www.potomactesting.com

Potomac Testing 12342 Hancock St Carmel, IN 46032-5807 (317) 853-6795 Potomac Testing 1130 MacArthur Rd. Jeffersonville, OH 43128 Power Engineering Services, Inc. 9179 Shadow Creek Ln Converse, TX 78109-2041 (210) 590-4936 www.pe-svcs.com Power Engineering Services, Inc. 1 Ellis Road, Suite 100 Friendswood, TX 77546 (210) 590-4936 Power Engineering Services, Inc. 124 S West St. Suite 200 Alexandria, VA 22314 (703) 299-3430 Power Products & Solutions, LLC 6605 W WT Harris Blvd Suite F Charlotte, NC 28269 (704) 573-0420 x12 www.powerproducts.biz Power Products & Solutions, LLC 13 Jenkins Ct Mauldin, SC 29662-2414 (800) 328-7382 Power Products & Solutions, LLC 9481 Industrial Center Dr. Unit 5 Ladson, SC 29456 (844) 383-8617 Power Solutions Group, Ltd. 425 W Kerr Rd Tipp City, OH 45371-2843 (937) 506-8444 www.powersolutionsgroup.com Power Solutions Group, Ltd. 251 Outerbelt St. Columbus, OH 43213 (614) 310-8018 Power Solutions Group, Ltd. 5115 Old Greenville Highway Liberty, SC 29657 (864) 540-8434 Power Solutions Group, Ltd. 172 B-Industrial Dr. Clarksville, TN 37040 (931) 572-8591 Power System Professionals, Inc. 429 Clinton Ave Roseville, CA 95661 (866) 642-3129

Power Systems Testing Co. 4688 W Jennifer Ave Ste 108 Fresno, CA 93722-6418 (559) 275-2171 ext 15 www.powersystemstesting.com Power Systems Testing Co. 600 S Grand Ave Ste 113 Santa Ana, CA 92705-4152 (714) 542-6089 Power Systems Testing Co. 6736 Preston Ave Ste E Livermore, CA 94551-8521 (510) 783-5096 Power Test, Inc. 2200 Highway 49 S Harrisburg, NC 28075-7506 (704) 200-8311 www.powertestinc.com PowerSouth Testing, LLC 240 Pine Pitch Road Cedartown, GA 30125 (678) 901-0205 www.powersouthtesting.com Powertech Services, Inc. 4095 Dye Rd Swartz Creek, MI 48473-1570 (810) 720-2280 www.powertechservices.com Precision Testing Group 5475 Highway 86 Unit 1 Elizabeth, CO 80107-7451 (303) 621-2776 www.precisiontestinggroup.com Premier Power Maintenance Corporation 4035 Championship Drive Indianapolis, IN 46268 (317) 879-0660 Premier Power Maintenance Corporation 2725 Jason Rd Ashland, KY 41102-7756 (606) 929-5969 Premier Power Maintenance Corporation 3066 Finley Island Cir NW Decatur, AL 35601-8800 (256) 355-1444 Premier Power Maintenance Corporation 4301 Iverson Blvd Ste H Trinity, AL 35673-6641 (256) 355-3006 Premier Power Maintenance Corporation 7301 E County Road 142 Blytheville, AR 72315-6917 (870) 762-2100 Premier Power Maintenance Corporation 7262 Kensington Rd. Brighton, MI 48116 (517) 715-9997

NETA ACCREDITED COMPANIES

NETA ACCREDITED COMPANIES Setting the Standard Premier Power Maintenance Corporation 4537 S Nucor Rd. Crawfordsville, IN 47933 (317) 879-0660

RESA Power Service #181-1999 Savage Road, Richmond, BC V6V OA5 (604) 303-9770

Shermco Industries 1711 Hawkeye Dr. Hiawatha, IA 52233 (319) 377-3377

Shermco Industries 2901 Turtle Creek Dr. Port Arthur, TX 77642 (409) 853-4316

Premier Power Maintenance Corporation 1901 Oakcrest Ave., Suite 6 Saint Paul, MN 55113 (612) 616-4236

Reuter & Hanney, Inc., a CE Power Company Northampton Industrial Park 149 Railroad Dr Ivyland, PA 18974-1448 (215) 364-5333 www.reuterhanney.com

Shermco Industries 1705 Hur Industrial Blvd Cedar Park, TX 78613-7229 (512) 267-4800

Shermco Industries 5145 NW Beaver Dr. Johnston, IA 50131 (515) 265-3377

Shermco Industries 3434 25th Street NE Calgary, AB T1Y 6C1 (403) 769-9300

Shermco Industries 998 E. Berwood Ave. Saint Paul, MN 55110 (651) 484-5533

Shermco Industries 5145 Beaver Dr Johnston, IA 50131 (515) 265-3377

Shermco Industries 12796 Currie Court Livonia, MI 48150 (734) 469-4050

Shermco Industries 4510 South 86th East Ave. Tulsa, OK 74145 (918) 234-2300

Shermco Industries 1720 S. Sonny Ave. Gonzales, LA 70737 (225) 647-9301

Shermco Industries 1375 Church Avenue Winnipeg, MB R2X 2T7 (204) 925-4022

Shermco Industries 7136 Weddington Rd #128 Concord, NC 28027 (910) 568-1053

Shermco Industries 1033 Kearns Crescent RM of Sherwood, SK S4K 0A2 (306) 949-8131

Shermco Industries 5805 Hwy 43 Satsuma, AL 36507 (251) 679-3224

Shermco Industries 33002 FM 2004 Angleton, TX 77515-8157 (979) 848-1406

Shermco Industries 5211 Linbar Dr. Suite 507 Nashville, TN 37211 (615) 928-1182

Shermco Industries 12000 Network Blvd Building D, Suite 410 San Antonio, TX 78249-3354 (210) 877-9090

Shermco Industries #307-2999 Underhill Ave Burnaby, BC V5A 3C2 (972) 793-5523

Premier Power Maintenance Corporation 119 Rochester Dr. Louisville, KY 40214 (256) 200-6833 RESA Power Service 46918 Liberty Dr Wixom, MI 48393-3600 (248) 313-6868 www.resapower.com RESA Power Service 3890 Pheasant Ridge Dr. NE Suite 170 Blaine, MN 55449 (763) 784-4040 RESA Power Service 4540 Boyce Parkway Cleveland, OH 44224 (800) 264-1549 www.resapower.com RESA Power Service 47119 Cartier Court Wixom, MI 48393-2872 (248) 896-0200 RESA Power Service 19621 Solar Circle, 101 Parker, CO 80134 (303) 781-2560

Reuter & Hanney, Inc., a CE Power Company 11620 Crossroads Cir Middle River, MD 21220-2874 (410) 344-0300 REV Engineering Ltd. 3236 - 50 Avenue SE Calgary, AB T2B 3A3 (403) 287-0156 www.reveng.ca Rondar Inc. 333 Centennial Parkway North Hamilton, ON L8E2X6 (905) 561-2808 www.rondar.com Rondar Inc. 9-160 Konrad Crescent Markham, ON L3R9T9 (905) 943-7640 Scott Testing, Inc. 245 Whitehead Rd Hamilton, NJ 08619 (609) 689-3400 www.scotttesting.com

RESA Power Service 40 Oliver Terrace Shelton, CT 06484-5336 (800) 272-7711

Sentinel Field Services, LLC 7517 E Pine St Tulsa, OK 74115-5729 (918) 359-0350 www.sentinelpowerservices.com

RESA Power Service 13837 Bettencourt Street Cerritos, CA 90703 (800) 996-9975 www.resapower.com

Shermco Industries 2425 E Pioneer Dr Irving, TX 75061-8919 (972) 793-5523 www.shermco.com

RESA Power Service 2390 Zanker Road San Jose, CA 95131 (800) 576-7372

Shermco Industries 112 Industrial Drive Minooka, IL 60447-9557 (815) 467-5577

RESA Power Service 1401 Mercantile Court Plant City, FL 33563 (813) 752-6550

Shermco Industries 233 Faithfull Cr. Saskatoon, SK S7K 8H7 (306) 955-8131

RESA Power Service 6268 Route 31 Cicero, NY 13039 (315) 699-5563

Shermco Industries 2231 E Jones Ave Ste A Phoenix, AZ 85040-1475 (602) 438-7500

NETA ACCREDITED COMPANIES

Shermco Industries 3731 - 98 Street Edmonton, AB T6E 5N2 (780) 436-8831 Shermco Industries 417 Commerce Street Tallmadge, OH 44278 (614) 836-8556

Shermco Industries 1411 Twin Oaks Street Wichita Falls, TX 76302 (972) 793-5523 Shermco Industries 11800 Jordy Rd. Midland, TX 79707 (972) 793-5523

Shermco Industries 3807 S Sam Houston Pkwy W Houston, TX 77056 (281) 835-3633

Sigma Six Solutions, Inc. 2200 W Valley Hwy N Ste 100 Auburn, WA 98001-1654 (253) 333-9730 www.sigmasix.com

Shermco Industries 7050 109th Ave La Vista, NE 68117 (402) 933-8988

Sigma Six Solutions, Inc. www.sigmasix.com Quincy, WA 98848 (253) 333-9730

Shermco Industries 1301 Hailey St. Sweetwater, TX 79556 (325) 236-9900

Southern New England Electrical Testing, LLC 3 Buel St Ste 4 Wallingford, CT 06492-2395 (203) 269-8778 www.sneet.org

NETAWORLD

•

123

NETA ACCREDITED COMPANIES Setting the Standard Star Electrical Services & General Supplies, Inc. PO Box 814 Las Piedras, PR 00771 (787) 716-0925 www.starelectricalpr.com Taurus Power & Controls, Inc. 9999 SW Avery St Tualatin, OR 97062-9517 (503) 692-9004 www.tauruspower.com Taurus Power & Controls, Inc. 19226 66th Ave S. #L102 Kent, WA 98032-2197 (425) 656-4170 Tidal Power Services, LLC 4211 Chance Ln Rosharon, TX 77583-4384 (281) 710-9150 www.tidalpowerservices.com Tidal Power Services, LLC 8184 Highway 44 Ste 105 Gonzales, LA 70737-8183 (225) 644-8170

124

•

WINTER 2020

Tidal Power Services, LLC 1056 Mosswood Dr Sulphur, LA 70665-9508 (337) 558-5457 Tidal Power Services, LLC 1806 Delmar Drive Victoria, TX 77901 (281) 710-9150 Titan Quality Power Services, LLC 1501 S Dobson Street Burleson, TX 76028 (866) 918-4826 www.titanqps.com Titan Quality Power Services, LLC 7630 Ikes Tree Drive Spring, TX 77389 (281) 826-3781 Titan Quality Power Services, LLC 7000 Meany Ave. Bakersfield, CA 93308 (661) 589-0400 Tony Demaria Electric, Inc. 131 W F St Wilmington, CA 90744-5533 (310) 816-3130 www.tdeinc.com

Utilities Instrumentation Service - Ohio, LLC 998 Dimco Way Centerville, OH 45458 (937) 439-9660 www.uiscorp.com Utilities Instrumentation Service, Inc. 2290 Bishop Cir E Dexter, MI 48130-1564 (734) 424-1200 www.uiscorp.com Utility Service Corporation PO Box 1471 Huntsville, AL 35807 (256) 837-8400 www.utilserv.com Western Electrical Services 14311 29th St E Sumner, WA 98390-9690 (253) 891-1995 www.westernelectricalservices.com Western Electrical Services 5680 S 32nd St Phoenix, AZ 85040-3832 (602) 426-1667 www.westernelectricalservices.com

Western Electrical Services 3676 W California Ave Ste C106 Salt Lake City, UT 84104-6533 (888) 395-2021 www.westernelectricalservices.com Western Electrical Services 4510 NE 68th Dr Unit 122 Vancouver, WA 98661-1261 (888) 395-2021 Western Electrical Services 5505 Daniels St. Chino, CA 91710 (602) 426-1667 Western Electrical Services 620 Meadow Ln. Los Alamos, NM 87547 (505) 469-1661 Western Electrical Services 8985 Double Diamond Pkwy, #10B Reno, NV 98521 (602) 426-1667

NETA ACCREDITED COMPANIES

Be equipped to protect critical infrastructure.

Level up with Certification.

ADVANCE YOUR KNOWLEDGE. BUILD FOR TODAY. BUILD FOR THE FUTURE. Contact your NETA Accredited Company Representative to learn more.

Certification is available only to technicians currently employed by a NETA Accredited Company.

ADVERTISERS This issue’s advertisers are identified below.

Please thank these advertisers by telling them you saw their advertisement in NETA World.

INDEPENDENT NETA ACCREDITED COMPANIES Absolute Testing Services, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 American Electrical Testing Co., LLC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115 Apparatus Testing and Engineering. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Eastern High Voltage. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 Electrical Energy Experts, Inc.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82 Electrical Reliability Services (Vertiv). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Elemco Testing Co., Inc.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117 EnerG Test. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 Harford Electrical Testing Co. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96 High Voltage Maintenance Corp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60 Industrial Electric Testing, Inc.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110 Infra-Red Building and Power Service, Inc.. . . . . . . . . . . . 28 North Central Electric, Inc.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 Orbis Engineering Field Services LTD. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117 Potomac Testing, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83 Power Products & Solutions, Inc.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114 Power Systems Testing Co.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 Scott Testing Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90 Shermco Industries. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 Sigma Six Solutions, Inc.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Taurus Power & Controls, Inc.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 Tony Demaria Electric, Inc.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59 Utilities Instrumentation Service. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38

126

•

WINTER 2020

MANUFACTURERS AND OTHER SERVICE PROVIDERS Advanced Test Equipment Rentals (ATE Corp). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 AEMC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107 Aero Tech Laboratories. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90 AVO Training Institute. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91 BCS Switchgear . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 Belyea Company. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70 Bullock Breakers. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110 ECP Solutions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71 Circuit Breaker Sales Co., Inc.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60 High Voltage Inc.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 High Voltage Electric Service, Inc.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 HV Diagnostics, Inc.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Intellirent. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 Megger . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Inside Front Cover National Switchgear. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 NETA ANSI/NETA ECS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111 NETA Certification. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125 NETA Handbook Series III . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 118 NETA PowerTest 2021 Call for Exhibitors. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69 NETA PowerTest 2021 Call for Sponsors. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51 NETA Training. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61 NETA World Journal Website. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 OMICRON electronics Corp. USA. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Back Cover Phenix Technologies, Inc.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70 Protec Equipment Resources. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Quality Switchgear. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114 Raytech. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Inside Back Cover Sertec. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96 Solid State Exchange. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97 Southland Electrical . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 Technitrol, Inc.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107 Thyritronics, Inc.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 Utility Relay Company. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106

ADVERTISERS

Reliability You Need Support You Deserve With a standard 5-YEAR warranty, you can trust that Raytech equipment is built for the harsh environments of our testing industry.

Free service evaluations and lifetime product support guarantees quality service that is fast and easy.

Offering the following easy to set up, and easy to use product lines: • Transformer Ratiometers • Winding Resistance • Contact Resistance • Current Transformer Test Sets • Power Factor Test Sets

RaytechUSA.com

Toll Free: 888 484 3779 | Phone 267 404 2676 118 South 2nd Street, Perkasie, PA 18944

Donatello Salvucci Technical Support Engineer Manager

A Global Company with Local Support: Setting a New Standard in Customer Service In a 2020 North American Customer Feedback Survey, 99.2% of our customers rated us “Excellent.” You can reach our expert engineers for all your applications, free any time – 24 hours a day, seven days a week.

For equipment support, we offer cost-effective repairs, calibration, hardware upgrades, and service contracts with turn-around time up to 24 hours. We have a fleet of loaner devices that are available from one of our service centers in your area to help reduce downtime.

Call 1-800-OMICRON or visit omicronenergy.com/support