IEEE/PES TRANSFORMERS COMMITTEE

Tutorial Session:
“Novel Diagnostics for Load Tap-Changer” (LTC/OLTC)
Presenter:
Hans-Ulf Schellhase
Powertech Labs Inc.
Vancouver, B.C. Canada
April 14-18, 2002
This work was sponsored by This work was sponsored by EPRI: Barry Ward, and EPRI: Barry Ward, and
BC Hydro: BC Hydro: Mike Lau Mike Lau
Copyright Information
§ © EPRI, BC Hydro, Powertech Labs Inc.
§ Unauthorized duplication prohibited.
§ This publication, in its entirety, or parts of this publication
may only be reproduced by written permission of all of the
following: EPRI, BC Hydro, Powertech Labs Inc.
! INTRODUCTION
Fundamental Differences in the Oil-Chemistry:
Transformer versus Load Tap-Changer
! BACKGROUND
Simplified Description of Essential Elements of Load
Tap-Changer
! CORE PRESENTATION
Data and graphs gathered from
" Laboratory investigations
" Field case studies
" LTC database
Algorithms to assess LTC status
TOPICS
TUTORIAL TEACHING OBJECTIVES
! GENERAL:
" To gain an appreciation of the diagnostic value of “Gas-in-Oil (DGA)”
for load tap-changer,
(a “No Respect” piece of sub-equipment)
! SPECIFIC:
" To provide an appreciation of the chemistry:
Load Tap-Changer vs Transformer
" To provide an overview of the commonalities and differences
between load tap-changers of different designs
" To introduce an interpretative approach to LTC - “Gas in Oil” data
(algorithms)
" To provide an explanation as to why LTCs do sludge up and
transformers (generally) do not
LABORATORY INVESTIGATIONS
An ARC (a Chemist’s View!)
>1000ºC
~50ºC ~50ºC
High pressure plasma &
high temperatures
High intensity of
electromagnetic
radiation (UV)
Intense local/ mechanical shock
Melting & copper evaporation
(sacrificial: cooling)
Arcing (few m sec.)
akin to explosion
Gas
expansion
Melting & copper evaporation
(sacrificial: cooling)
CONTACT: “ELKONITE”
CONTACT: “ELKONITE”
OIL HYDRO CARBON GAS
ELEMENTS
RECOMBINING
LABORATORY INVESTIGATIONS (continued)
Arc Gas Composition
26.8 4.9 0.16 4.0 64.1 IREQ, 1978
2
24.4 3.7 0.21 3.5 68.2 Kent, 1998
24.7 2.7 0.14 4.4 67.9 PLI, 1997, lab data
C
2
H
2
C
2
H
4
C
2
H
6
CH
4
H
2
10-25% 1.0-2.9% - 1.5-3.5% 60.0-80.0%
Myers et al
“A Guide to Transformer
Maintenance”
1981, p. 331
LABORATORY INVESTIGATIONS (continued)
Thermal Gases: Evolution vs Temperature
Methane
Ethylene
Ethane
Hydrogen
Alkenes:
Butene
Pentenes etc.
Cyclohexene
Cyclopentadiene
Main:
Carbon
Hydrogen
Acetylene
Methane
Severe
Pyrolysis
1000º C 0º C
Region of
Electric Arc
Beginning of
Slow Evolution of
Hydrogen
Methane
500º C 300º C 150º C 700º C
Thermal
Appearance of
Acetylene
550º C
Strong DPPH
Response
Aromatics:
Benzene
Toluene
Xylenes
(BTEX)
Polyaromatics:
(PAH)
Naphthalene
Phenenthrene
Ethylene
Ethane
Methane
Hydrogen
Major Gas
Ethylene
KENT SUBSTATION – FIELD CASE STUDY
Voltage Regulator 12VR53: Front View/Closed
KENT FIELD CASE STUDY (continued)
KENT FIELD CASE STUDY (continued)
End of Phase 2: 88,400 switch operations.
Fluoropolymer implants lead to joule heating
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
% Sum Thermal
%
S
u
m

A
r
c
Diverter switch with
fluoropolymer implants
Diverter switches w/o
fluoropolymer implants
KENT FIELD CASE STUDY (continued)
Bar graph for the previous page
1
3
5
7
9
1
1
1
3
1
5
1
7
1
9
2
1
2
3
2
5
2
7
%SumAlk
%SumTherm
%SumArc
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
KENT FIELD CASE STUDY (continued)
Gases/Switch Operation
0. 00
0. 50
1. 00
1. 50
2. 00
2. 50
m
l
/
s
w
i
t
c
h
C2 H2 C 2H4 C 2H6 CH4 H2
Av e r a g e f o r K e n t P h a s e s 1 a n d 2
To t a l G a s P r o d u c t i o n , i n o i l + h e a d s p a c e
KENT FIELD CASE STUDY (continued)
Contact Wear
Typical “bite” that develops over about 100,000 switch operations (Elkonite)
KENT FIELD CASE STUDY (continued)
Gases/Switch Operation
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
V
o
l
u
m
e

(
L
)
C2H2 C2H4 C2H6 CH4 H2 TCG
Amount of Combustibles in Oil vs Headspace
Litres in Oil
Litres in Headspace
Total Litres
LTC DATABASE – Algorithms
1. in % [v/v]
2. The three Rose-Ratios for LTCs:
i. Rose Ratio #1
ii. Rose Ratio #2
iii. Rose Ratio #3
NOTE (dissolved gases):
Key Gases = [methane + ethane + ethylene]
Total Gases = [Key Gases + acetylene]
TCG = Total Combustible Gases =
= [Total Gases + carbon monoxide + hydrogen]
[ ]
[ ] TCG
H H C
2 2 2
+
[ ]
[ ] Gas Total
ases G Key
[ ]
[ ] Acetylene
Gases Key
[ ]
[ ] Acetylene
Ethylene
LTC DATABASE – Gas Ratios
This and next slide show 370 distinct LTC entries ordered by the
decreasing (C
2
H
2
+ H
2
)/TCG %. LTC entries include a wide variety of gas
concentrations (TCG between 10 and 300,000 ppm).
LTC DATABASE – Gas Ratios (continued)
This and previous slide show 370 distinct LTC entries ordered by the
decreasing (C
2
H
2
+ H
2
)/TCG %. LTC entries include a wide variety of gas
concentrations (TCG between 10 and 300,000 ppm).
LTC DATABASE – Gas Composition (sorted by C
2
H
2
)
Various Manufacturers
LTC DATABASE – Gas Composition (sorted by C
2
H
2
)
One Manufacturer
Number of LTCs in Database
Averages
%
LTC DATABASE – Average Gas Ratios
Various Manufacturers (M1–M18)
0
20
40
60
80
100
1 21 41 61 81 101 121 141 161 181 201 221 241 261 281 301 321 341 361
Key Gases/TG,%
(C2H2+H2)/TCG, %
LTC DATABASE – All LTCs
(C
2
H
2
+H
2
)/TCG vs Key Gases
Unit Number (sorted)
%
LTC DATABASE – One Method to Differentiate Between Designs
Compare the (C
2
H
2
+H
2
)/TDCG and H/C ratios
H/C
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
(
C
2
H
2
+
H
2
)
/
T
G
Design “Y”
Design “X”
LTC DATABASE – Rose Ratios
EXAMPLES OF FAULT
AND FAILURE
Design #1
Problem: Loose Bolts
EXAMPLES OF FAULT AND FAILURE
Design #1: Contacts
EXAMPLES OF FAULT AND FAILURE
Design #1 - Analysis
0
50000
100000
150000
200000
Hydrogen Carbon
monoxide
Methane Acetylene Ethylene Ethane
COMBUSTIBLE GAS ANALYSIS: ASTM 'Gas in Oil'
COMPARISON 'GIO' ANALYSIS: FAULT UNIT vs. SISTER UNIT
SISTER UNIT
FAULT UNIT
CONCENTRATION:
ppm [V/V]
EXAMPLES OF FAULT AND FAILURE
DGA – Analysis of 10 distinct LTC units
EXAMPLES OF FAULT AND FAILURE
Design #2 Problem: Geneva Gear Adjustment
Coke and
damaged
contacts
Heavy internal
coke formation
Cracks
developing
as a result of
thermal
overload
EXAMPLES OF FAULT AND FAILURE
Design #2
Phase II: Field Samples/Lab Data
# FPE (1978; 130 kV; MVA)
TDCG: 187106 ppm [v/v] TDCG: 1375 ppm [v/v]
C
2
H
2
: 2790
C
2
H
4
: 101841
C
2
H
6
: 28204
CH
4
: 49327
CO: 1397
H
2
: 3546
C
2
H
2
: 840
C
2
H
4
: 300
C
2
H
6
: 33
CH
4
: 38
CO: 107
H
2
: 57
Failure (00-Jan-27) Gas Composition (98-Oct-01)
NORMAL
Topics And Status:
C
2
H
2
+ H
2
= 897 ppm C
2
H
2
+ H
2
= 6336 ppm
C
2
H
2
+ H
2
= 65% [v/v] of “TDCG” C
2
H
2
+ H
2
= 3.4% [v/v] of “TDCG”
EXAMPLES OF FAULT AND FAILURE
Design #3a (unit with filtration)
EXAMPLES OF FAULT AND FAILURE
Design #3b (sister unit without filtration)
EXAMPLES OF FAULT AND FAILURE
Design #3a vs #3b
KEY GASES OF LOAD TAP-CHANGER ANALYSIS: MISSION-SUBSTATION UNIT T1: WITH
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500
TIME [days]
C
O
N
C
E
N
T
R
A
T
I
O
N


[
p
p
m

V
/
V
]
ACETYLENE
(with filtration)
ACETYLENE
(without filtration)
KEY GASES(without filtration)
KEY GASES(with filtration)
ARCING = ACETYLENE
THERMAL = KEY GASES
FILTRATION, UNIT T2: WITHOUT FILTRATION
EXAMPLES OF FAULT AND FAILURE
T3 Tapchanger Inspection, Design #4, 122641 Operations
Thick layer of carbon covering all surfaces
EXAMPLES OF FAULT AND FAILURE
T3 Tapchanger Inspection, Design #4, 122641 Operations
Problem: Maintenance - Loose Bolts and Grounding
1251 1133 9891 1142 1749 O
2
23898 23110 29433 14014 12490 N
2
29 25 21 31 28 H
2
O
19556 19799 18279 18926 19446 H
2
2422 2324 3844 4765 4942 CO
2
312 310 134 182 190 CO
9364 8403 23161 26875 25857 CH
4
5519 4196 84489 83155 74768 C
2
H
6
35254 27982 178428 191135 174203 C
2
H
4
38806
T2
4-Jul-00
37597 825 1243 2114 C
2
H
2
T2
25-Aug-00
T3
6-Oct-00
T3
25-Aug-00
T3
4-July-00