Internationally Comparable Test Methods

and Efficiency Class Definitions

for Distribution Transformers
Super-efficient Equipment and Appliance Deployment (SEAD) Initiative

Michael Scholand, CLASP

APEC Efficient Transformer Conference 2013

Bangkok, 13 November 2013

Project Overview
Activity
Summary

Project Overview
Objective: to develop technical resources for policy-makers responsible for
establishing distribution transformer energy-efficiency policies and programs.

12-month study, reviewed programs and standards in 12 countries

Compared the programmes and standards, worked to identify

commonalities that could be used as the basis of harmonisation

Present the results in a series of reports (summarised in this

presentation)

Analytical team:
Michael Scholand, N14 Energy Limited
Trevor Blackburn, TR & JR Blackburn Consulting
Phil Hopkinson, HVOLT Inc.
Mahesh Sampat, EMS International Consulting
2

Project Overview
Activity
Summary

Final Report in Four Parts

Part 1: Efficiency Comparison - a comparison of the similarities and

differences amongst the different distribution transformer test
methods and efficiency levels found

Part 2: Test Method Comparison - a review and discussion of key

parts of the two major test methods used for measuring transformer
efficiency

Part 3: Efficiency Level Recommendation - several recommended

internationally-comparable energy-efficiency class definitions in
both IEC and IEEE format

Part 4: Country Profiles - a report that summarises all of the country

programmes that were reviewed

Project
Overview
Background

Project Management and Funding

Project Oversight: Terry Brennan, Natural Resources Canada
Day-to-day Project Management: Jenny Corry & Steve Pantano, CLASP
Funding from the Super-efficient Equipment and Appliance Deployment
(SEAD) Initiative; and CLASP is the Operating Agent
The Super-efficient Equipment and Appliance Deployment (SEAD) Initiative, a
five-year, US$20 million initiative under the Clean Energy Ministerial (CEM)
and the International Partnership for Energy Efficiency Cooperation (IPEEC),
helps turn knowledge into action to accelerate the transition to a clean energy
future through effective appliance and equipment energy efficiency programs.
SEAD is a multilateral, voluntary effort among Australia, Brazil, Canada, the
European Commission, France, Germany, India, Japan, South Korea,
Sweden, the United Arab Emirates, the United Kingdom, and the United
States. The Collaborative Labeling and Appliance Standards Program
(CLASP), a non-profit organization with deep experience in supporting
international appliance efficiency efforts, serves as the Operation Agent for
SEAD. For more information about SEAD, please visit: www.superefficient.org
4

Project Overview
Authority

A Few Key Points

Target audience: energy-efficiency policy makers and regulators,
and their expert advisors
Draft analysis: Everything being presented here is draft analysis;
reports are currently being reviewed by SEAD Countries and are
subject to change
Final versions will be published in December 2013; CLASP will
ensure the APEC energy-efficiency email list is informed of
publication

Authority

Table of Contents
1

Comparison of Efficiency Programmes

Test Method Review Report

Energy Efficiency Class Definitions

Conclusions and Recommendations

Comparison of Programmes
Background

Types of Transformers
Transformer
Group

Voltage

Phases

Typical
Insulation

Common Use

Large Power

>245 kV
Single and
(High voltage)
Three

Liquidfilled

Stepping up to or down from higher

voltages for transmission of electricity
over distances; substation
transformers

Medium
Power

>36 kV & 230 Single and

kV (Medium
Three
voltage)

Dry-type
or liquidfilled

Stepping voltages down from a

subtransmission system to a primary
distribution system

Medium
Voltage
Distribution

36 kV
(Medium
voltage)

Single and
Three

Dry-type
or liquidfilled

Stepping voltages down within a

distribution circuit from a primary to a
secondary distribution voltage

Low Voltage
Distribution

1 kV
(Low voltage)

Single and
Three

Dry-type

Stepping voltages down within a

distribution circuit of a building or to
supply power to equipment
7

Project Overview
Authority

Countries Profiled
Country

Types

Requirement

Australia & New Zealand

Liquid and dry-type

% efficiency; IEC

Brazil

Liquid-filled

Max losses; IEC

Canada

Dry-type

% efficiency; IEEE/NEMA

China

Liquid and dry-type

Max losses; IEC

Europe

Liquid and dry-type

Max losses; IEC

India

Liquid-filled

% efficiency; IEC

Israel

Liquid-filled

Max losses; IEC

Japan

Liquid and dry-type

% efficiency; IEC

Korea

Liquid and dry-type

% efficiency; IEC

Mexico

Liquid-filled

% efficiency; IEC

United States of America

Liquid and dry-type

% efficiency; IEEE/NEMA

Vietnam

Liquid-filled

% efficiency; IEC
8

Project Overview
Authority

Efficiency Conversion Calculations

KVA Rating and Percentage Efficiency

Frequency Conversion (50Hz vs. 60Hz)
Maximum Losses or Percentage Efficiency
Annex B of Part 1 specifies which of these three conversion
calculations was applied to develop a harmonised value for
comparison

Harmonised results were compared according to:

IEC definition of kVA rating and efficiency
50Hz operation optimised
Percentage efficiency at 50% load

Project Overview
Authority

Liquid-Filled, Three-Phase, 50% Loading

10

Project Overview
Authority

Liquid-Filled, Three-Phase, 50% Loading, 100kVA

11

Project Overview
Authority

Liquid-Filled, Three-Phase, 50% Loading

12

Project Overview
Authority

Dry-Type, Three-Phase, 50% Loading

13

Project Overview
Authority

Dry-Type, Three-Phase, 50% Loading, 100kVA

14

Project Overview
Authority

Dry-Type, Three-Phase, 50% Loading

15

Authority

Table of Contents
1

Comparison of Efficiency Programmes

Test Method Review Report

Energy Efficiency Class Definitions

Conclusions and Recommendations

16

Test Method Review

Authority

Objectives of a Transformer Test Standard

Coverage the scope must cover that of the regulated product;
Metric capable of determining energy consumption, efficiency or other
metric that constitutes the basis of the regulation;
Accurate designed to minimise random or systemic errors, establishes
maximum margins of error and avoids the use of optional approaches;
Representative - provides robust measurement of energy consumption
reflective of in-situ energy use under conditions where the product is used;
Repeatable - same result each time a product is tested in the same lab;
Reproducible - same result each time a product is tested in different labs;
Low cost is not overly expensive or time consuming to conduct, and
balances the robustness of the test and cost of testing; and
Portable (optional) designed to be applied on-site with separate energy
source generation (e.g., large transformers can be difficult to transport).

17

Test Method Review

Authority

Benefits of Harmonising the Test Standard

Governments

Lowers costs to develop

Facilitates trade having
one, consistent method
Improves compliance
through robust testing
Enables adoption of MEPS
and labelling (leveraging
analysis)
More laboratories for
MV&E testing

Manufacturers

Lowers costs by one test

accepted in several
markets
Facilitates trade, removes
import barrier
More laboratories
(accredited) can test
Plan ahead, anticipate
efficiency updates,
innovate and produce

18

Test Method Review

Authority

Test Standards
Two major standards making bodies that cover distribution
transformers
International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) 19 standards
in the IEC 60076 family of standards
Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) US
institute, has over 80 standards and guides on transformers in the
C57.12 family of standards
Most countries reviewed have their national standard based on IEC Australia, Brazil, China, Europe, India, Israel, Japan, Korea, Mexico,
New Zealand and Vietnam
The US and Canada are based on IEEE

19

Test Method Review

Authority

Test Standard Comparison

This report compares IEC 60076-1 with
IEEE C57.12.00 and C57.12.90
General Test Conditions
Measurement of No-Load Losses
Measurement of Load-Losses
Comparison of methodologies and
equations
Tables are provided in the Report; two
examples provided here

20

Test Method Review

Authority

Test Standard Comparison No Load Loss

For No-Load Loss measurement, looked at Reference Temperature,
Waveform Correction, Maximum Waveform Correction, Loss
Tolerances and Excitation Current
Example for Reference Temperature

21

Test Method Review

Authority

Test Standard Comparison Load Loss

Comparison of Reference Temperature; Temperature Correction
Equations; Loss Tolerances; Test Current; Resistance Measurement
Method; and Winding Temperature Guidelines
Example of Temperature Correction Equations below
Temperature corrected load loss is the sum of corrected load loss and
corrected stray losses

22

Test Method Review

Authority

Achieving a Globally Harmonised Test Standard

IEC and IEEE created a Dual Logo project to harmonise different
families of standards
http://standards.ieee.org/develop/intl/iec.html
Works across many products and areas motors, instrumentation,
transformers and more. Two for transformers:
IEC 60076-21 Ed. 1 (2011-12) (IEEE Std C57.15-2009 Power
Transformers - Part 21: Standard Requirements, Terminology, and Test
Code for Step-Voltage Regulators
IEC 62032 Ed.1 (2005-03) (IEEE C57.135-2001): Guide for the
Application, Specification and Testing of Phase-Shifting Transformer

Recommendation that SEAD Governments work through their IEC

and IEEE Committee members to support this initiative
And prioritise distribution transformer loss measurement
harmonisation
23

Authority

Table of Contents
1

Comparison of Efficiency Programmes

Test Method Review Report

Energy Efficiency Class Definitions

Conclusions and Recommendations

24

EE Class Definitions
Authority

The Regulatory Metric

Report discusses three topics which link the regulatory MEPS and the test standards
Metric: Percent energy-efficiency or maximum watts of loss
Equation: Definition of efficiency
Loading: Selecting a loading point for efficiency

Percent energy-efficiency or maximum watts of loss

Europe has a tradition of maximum losses, but many other economies are
moving toward % efficiency
Efficiency provides more flexibility in the market, design trade-offs and material
substitutions to arrive at required performance

Definition of efficiency is different in the US vs. Europe related to how the kVA
rating of a transformer is defined. US is output; Europe/IEC is input.
  
   =

 


 

+ 

  
   =







25

EE ClassBackground
Definitions

Tiers Presentation
Appropriate metric for establishing performance levels of distribution
transformers is per cent efficiency allows more flexibility than the maximum
losses approach
Tiers should be based on a published equation that is based on kVA rating,
much like the Japanese Top Runner scheme (avoids interpolation risk)
Disparity between the preferred kVA ratings for the countries examined
For transparency, will also provide per cent efficiency at IEC preferred
kVA ratings
Tier increments will match IEC electric motors; the least efficient / minimum
level is presented as efficiency tier 1, and then increasingly higher efficiency
levels are given higher tier numbers
Efficiency scale open at the top end, so new innovations can be
recognised and differentiated with an incrementally higher tier; and
Tracks the labelling schemes in Asia (widely understood) that more stars
means greater efficiency.
26

EE ClassBackground
Definitions

Tiers Presentation
2 
  = 1 

Where:
c
S
x
y

is a constant, that varies with the Tier level

is the kVA rating (IEC)
is a constant that is varies with transformer type
is a constant that varies with transformer type (and x + y = 1)

For example, for liquid-filled three-phase transformers:

c
0.0060 Tier 1; 0.0048 Tier 2; 0.0040 Tier 3 and 0.0032 Tier 4
x
0.78
y
0.22
Plugging these constants in the following equation for liquid-filled threephase Tier 1:
  

2 0.0060&.'(
0.0370
= 1
= 1 &.))
 &.))

27

EE ClassBackground
Definitions

Liquid-Filled, Three-Phase (IEC, 50Hz) - MEPS

Green dots = Max
Tech (US DOE)
Orange dots =
Korea MEPS
Blue dots =
Australia, China,
Europe (T1 and
T2), India, Israel,
Japan (current and
draft Top-Runner),
Korea, Mexico,
Vietnam and the
United States
(both 2010 and
2016).
28

EE ClassBackground
Definitions

Liquid-Filled, Three-Phase (IEC, 50Hz) High Efficiency

Green dots = Max
Tech (US DOE)
Blue dots =
Australia HEPS;
China Grade 1,
Europe T2 (2020),
India five-star;
Israel HEPS;
Japan Top-Runner
(new);
US MEPS 2016
Note average line
shift

29

EE ClassBackground
Definitions

Liquid-Filled, Three-Phase (IEC, 50Hz)

30

EE ClassBackground
Definitions

Dry-Type, Three-Phase (IEC, 50Hz) - MEPS

Green dots = Max
Tech (US DOE)
Orange dots =
Korea MEPS
Blue dots =
Australia, Canada,
China Grade 3,
Europe (T1),
Israel, Japan (TopRunner), Korea
and the United
States (both 2010
and 2016).

31

EE ClassBackground
Definitions

Dry-Type, Three-Phase (IEC, 50Hz) High Efficiency

Green dots = Max
Tech (US DOE)
Blue dots =
Australia HEPS;
China Grade 1,
Europe T2 (2020),
Israel HEPS;
Japan Top-Runner
(new); Korea
HEPS;
US MEPS 2016
Note average line
shift

32

EE ClassBackground
Definitions

Dry-Type, Three-Phase (IEC, 50Hz)

33

EE ClassBackground
Definitions

Distribution Transformers (IEC, 50Hz, % Eff50)

34

EE ClassBackground
Definitions

Distribution Transformers (IEEE, 60Hz, % Eff50)

35

Authority

Table of Contents
1

Comparison of Efficiency Programmes

Test Method Review Report

Energy Efficiency Class Definitions

Conclusions and Recommendations

36

Conclusions
Activity
Summary

Project Structure

12-month study, reviewing programs and standards in 12 countries

Compared the programmes and standards,

made recommendations for harmonised
efficiency levels

Presented the results in four reports:

Part 1: Efficiency Comparison

Part 2: Test Method Comparison

Part 3: Efficiency Level Recommendation

Part 4: Country Profiles

Reports and findings are currently draft, but

will publish final versions in early December

37

Conclusions
Activity
Summary

Project Outputs

Comparison of efficiency requirements around the world, including:

Comparison of key aspects relating to efficiency measurements

from the IEC and IEEE test standards; identified the Dual Logo
joint initiative between IEC and IEEE

Selected efficiency at 50% loading as the preferred metric and

developed four tiers for each of the four major classes of distribution
transformer

Liquid-filled, three-phase and single-phase

Dry-type, three-phase and single-phase

Recommend that SEAD Governments and others review this work

and use it as a basis for updating and initiating cost-effective MEPS
programmes on distribution transformers

38

Final
Slide
Activity
Summary

Thank you for your Attention.

Are there any Questions?

39