Geomagnetic Disturbances in Electric Power Systems and Power Transformer Protection Against Geomagnetic Induced Currents
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Geomagnetic storms (GMS) pose a real threat to electric power systems not only in the Russian Arctic zone but also in mid-latitude territories due to the long-term natural trend of the magnetic pole shifting from the territory of Canada towards the Russian sector of the Arctic. The main disadvantages of known resistive grounding systems for the neutral of a power transformer for protection against the effects of geo-induced currents (GIC) are identified, which consist of the need to use additional heterogeneous electrical equipment to protect the grounding resistor from single-phase short-circuit currents and isolate the neutral from overvoltages. Quantitative criteria are proposed that make it possible to select the resistance of the grounding resistor, ensuring the limitation of the GIC to a level that is safe for the power transformer and does not cause saturation of the magnetic system. Requirements for the resistive-thyristor grounding system of the neutral of a power transformer are formulated, considering the restrictions imposed by regulatory documents on grounding devices. A system of resistive-thyristor neutral grounding has been developed with an automatic transition to the resistive grounding mode when the magnetic system is saturated under the influence of the GIC and a return to the solidly grounded neutral mode after the termination of the GMS. The results of field tests of the GIC monitoring channel in the neutral of the 135 MVA/500 kV/13.8 kV power transformer of the Hydro Power Station (HPS) during the geomagnetic storm are presented.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".