Transformer Overcurrent Protection

Status
Not open for further replies.
I'm a little confused by Article 450. Table 450.3(B) calls for or allows OCP 250% of the rated current of the primary side of the transformer if OCP is provided for the secondary side. Does that mean the primary side OCP should be sized as close to 250% as possible or is greater than, but close to 125% still acceptable? If the latter, why the allowance for such a large multiple? When/why would you want to allow 250% of rated current to flow to the primary side of the transformer?
 

infinity

Moderator
Staff member
Location
New Jersey
Occupation
Journeyman Electrician
Since you have secondary protection the primary can be sized up to 250% to allow for inrush current. Sound like you're asking how close to 250% do you need to be.
 

winnie

Senior Member
Location
Springfield, MA, USA
Occupation
Electric motor research
As you've already noted, when you have suitable transformer secondary protection, you are _permitted_ to have primary protection up to 250% of the transformer rating.

The reason code permits this is to prevent OCPD tripping on the initial inrush when the transformer is energized. This inrush current can easily be 10-20x the rated full load current. This inrush is also very difficult to predict, and depends upon things such as the timing of the AC cycle when the transformer gets energized, the impedance of the transformer, the impedance of the supply circuit to the transformer, etc.

I don't think that transformer OCPD oversizing has much to do with downstream connected motors, but I suppose it might apply if the motor always connected and started simultaneously with energizing the transformer.

Large motors on a supply bus are known to add to available short circuit current, and so motors on the _primary_ side of the transformer could increase inrush current by reducing supply impedance.

There is no requirement to oversize the transformer primary, simply _permission_. The closer the OCPD to the actual continuous current levels, the more protection against faults, but the greater the chance of tripping when the transformer is energized.

Keep in mind that the primary OCPD protects both the transformer _and_ the primary circuit conductors, but 'tap rules' come into play. Larger OCPD may force you to increase conductor size.

My experience with smaller transformers (30-50 kVA) is that you can generally _undersize_ the OCPD without problem; say if in an emergency you need to use an available (but oversized) transformer on an existing circuit.

-Jon
 

petersonra

Senior Member
Location
Northern illinois
Occupation
engineer
I generally take it as much advantage of the 250% allowances as I can. Nuisance tripping is a huge problem on an automated line and that's pretty much all I do. Depending on what's going on it may take hours to get the line back running after a power outage. I don't want to be the cause of the power outage because I tried to save a few bucks on using a smaller primary over current protection device and smaller conductors. The thing is you can do it a hundred times and not have a problem, but the 101st time it can get you. It is just better to not take any chances.

It is similar to the reason why I generally try to avoid fuses. Chances are whatever fuse you need you won't have at zero dark 30 on a Sunday morning when it decides to open up for some reason.
 

paulengr

Senior Member
Accurately calculating magnetizing inrush is not easy. Approximating it isn’t.



Ok fair enough for engineers that aren’t on a time crunch. What I use is the Cooper fuse sizing rules.
25 times FLC for 9.01 seconds
12 times FLC for 9.1 seconds
3 times FLC fir 10 seconds
So if you plot these on a TCC and choose your fuse/breaker above these points you won’t get nuisance tripping. Go below them and you will
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top