9.1Underground Transformers and Network Protectors – Carl G. Niemann (Chair),Dan Mulkey (Vice-Chair)

Meeting Minutes – October 27, 2010

9.1.1Introduction/Attendance

The Underground Transformers and Network Protectors Subcommittee met on Wednesday, October 27, 2010, in the Jackson/Carmichael roomof the Hilton Downtown TorontoHotel in Toronto, Ontario, Canada at 11:00 AM with 8 members and 11 guests present.

9.1.2Approval of Minutes

The minutes of the March 10, 2010, meeting in Houston, Texaswere approved as submitted.

9.1.3Membership

There are 11 members, and a quorum for this meeting wasachieved.

9.1.4Chairman’s Remarks

The chair provided a summary of the Administrative activity.

9.1.5Working Group Reports

9.1.5.1Underground Single Phase Transformers (C57.12.23) – A. Traut, Chairman

The WG did not meet.The document was published in April 2009 and is valid until 12/31/2014.The WG has no new issues to address so it will be inactive until revision or reaffirmation is required.

9.1.5.2Three-Phase Underground-Type Transformers (C57.12.24) – Giuseppe Termini, Chairman

  1. The meeting was called to order by the Chairman at 8:00 a.m. on Monday, October 25, 2010 in the Varley Room of the Hilton Downtown Hotel. Brian Klaponski acted as the recording secretary.
  2. The first discussion was about the roster and membership on this WG and a quorum. There was a quorum for this meeting.
  3. An agenda was presented and introductions were made. The Chairman asked that any consultant attending who were being paid to attend by representing organizations to identify themselves during the introductions and to identify their affiliation. The meeting was attended by 9 members and 18 guests. One guest requested membership.
  4. The Chairman asked if anyone in the Working Group knew or had knowledge of any existing or pending patents that may affect the work on this standard. No one responded as having knowledge about any patents affecting this WG.
  5. The Meeting Minutes from the previous meeting in Houston on March 8, 2010 were reviewed and approved with an addendum – in the note on topics, Item 4 should read .” ...... and the possibility of 55º C rise instead of 65º C rise ...... ”.
  6. The Chairman indicated that he had reviewed the comments from the recent ballot and determined that there were no issues to carry forward in our new standard review.
  7. Marcel Fortin made a presentation on tank rupture. As a result of the presentation and follow-up discussion, it was agreed to request the Underground SC to support an “arc fault test” Task Force that will perhaps be initiated by the Distribution Transformer SC.
  8. In preparation for a new PAR a motion was made to leave the Title as is without including vault types as part of this standard. The motion was voted on and approved. The Working Group members were asked to review the Scope and Purpose and this will be discussed at our next meeting.
  9. The meeting was adjourned at 9:15 am with the next meeting set for San Diego in April 2011.

9.1.5.3Liquid Filled Secondary Network Transformers (C57.12.40) – Brian Klaponski, Chairman

  1. The WG met on Monday, October 25, 2010 at 09:30 am with 12 members and 11 guests. One guest requested member status.
  2. The chairman reviewed the patent legal issue and asked whether there were any patents or patents pending that would affect the WG or standard. None were identified. However, John Crouse of GE will check if there is a patent or pending patent on tank rupture and will update the WG at the next meeting.
  3. The minutes of the March 8, 2010 meeting in Houston, TX were reviewed and approved. Carl Niemann made a motion to approve the Meeting Minutes and Steve Schroeder seconded the motion.
  4. The meeting consisted of the review of the comments incorporated in Draft 9 of the standard dated October 15, 2010. Draft 9 now incorporated changes agreed upon at our Houston meeting plus some suggestions in regards to the flex connectors that had been submitted by email by John Rossetti a WG member.
  5. There was an extensive discussion on the third paragraph. of Section 3.1. A vote was taken to remove the words:” ……..and without exceeding a 110ºC hotspot temperature” from the last sentence of the third paragraph of Section 3.1. This change was voted on and approved.
  6. The remaining of the meeting focused on the rest of the changes in the Draft. A suggestion was made to include a picture of a typical “split block” in the standard. The Chairman will take a picture of a typical split block and circulate it to the WG prior to incorporating it into the standard.
  7. The Chairman will make the above changes and then start the ballot procedure. It is important to publish a new document because this spec has not seen a major revision in over 10 years.
  8. The meeting was adjourned at 10:50 am with the next meeting set for San Diego, CA in April 2011.
  9. Post meeting note - the ballot pool has been started.

9.1.5.4Secondary Network Protectors (C57.12.44) – Bill Wimmer, Chairman

  1. The meeting was called to order and a review was made of the members present. A quorum of the members was not present. Introductions were made of all members and guests present.
  2. A call was made of the attendees to disclose any patents that may have an impact on the activities of this working group. No patents were brought forward.
  3. Old Business - Revisions to Document:
  4. Section 6.2.1.3b: “The network relays(s) shall be tested at 1500 V at 60Hz for 1 min.” Is this left over from the electromechanical days? (Mark Faulkner).Consensus was made to leave statement in place but add “ electromechanical relays only”.
  5. Section 5.2.3.3: “At the end of the test, the network protector shall be capable of meeting its interruption rating and capable of carrying rated continuous current without exceeding the temperature rise limit.” Does this require a second heat run test? (Mark Faulkner) Consensus was made to revise the statement to as follows:

“At the end of the test, the network protector shall be capable of meeting its interruption rating and capable of carry rated continuous current without exceeding the temperature rise limit based on the micro-ohm change and the original heat run test.”

  1. New Business

None

9.1.5.5Ventilated Dry-Type Network Transformers (C57.12.57)

  1. The WG was not scheduled to meet.

9.1.6Old Business

Paten Issue from 3/10/2010 - “We need to understand if there are issues that will affect the availability of products that are parts of our specs. We need transparency to ensure proper decision making. Should not there be full disclosure (of patents).”

There continues to be zero disclosure of FR3 patents at the meetings. Identify and submit a Letter Of Assurancerequest on a patent issue. Making a statement of essentiality

Suggestion – deal this at the sign-up level so that the disclosure of any patents is dealt with prior to coming to the meeting – present system is simply wasted meeting time

9.1.7New Business

  1. Brian Klaponski: Typically one goes through the administrative process once every 5+ years, so on your own it can take several days to get through. When you can sit down with Matt Ceglia it takes 5 minutes to go through. Matt should be at every meeting to provide the valuable and needed assistance – IEEE is presently allowing Matt to attend just every other meeting. Changing headings etc. from the template at the start of the project to the current year is another example of wasted administrative time. NOTES – previous versions allowed notes below the paragraph to which they applied, which is user friendly. The current standard is to put the notes at the bottom of the page, which is not user friendly and will result in many not noticing them at all.
  2. Suggestion: Create an executive whose job is to improve the process.
  3. Brain has volunteered to run a lean process review of the system
  1. Giuseppe Termini: 123 Sign Up System does not allow you send a PDF file greater than 1 Mb. Do not think it is a good idea to post the working document on the Transformer Com page as it should not be available to all. Brian – send three items out to the group, Comes back as too big but no limit shown. Tried 12 times to send out draft. Suggetion – fix the system so that larger files can be emailed to the WG members.

9.1.8Future Meetings

  • The Spring 2011 meeting will be April 10-14, 2011 in San Diego, California