1

Dimensional Standards for Bushings Applied to Liquid Filled Power Transformers and Reactors and why they are Important to your Electric Power System
Keith P. Ellis, Member, IEEE/PES
Abstract:--This paper will outline the history of IEEE Standard Performance Characteristics and Dimensions for Outdoor Apparatus Bushing, C57.19.01-2000 and how the input from US utility groups brought these standards to their present form. This will include how these efforts to standardize bushing ratings and dimensions are having an impact on increasing the reliability of electrical systems in the United States. It will include comparisons between the requirements of the IEC Bushing Standard 60137 Insulated Bushings for Alternating Voltages Above 1000 V, used in Latin America, and the IEEE C57.19 bushing standards. It will offer scenarios that can be considered for harmonizing existing requirements for IEC bushings and the IEEE dimensional bushings. Recommendations will be offered to insure that your new power transformers or reactors will conform to your requirement for bushing interchangeability. In the conclusions, the impact of adding dimensional requirements to your bushing requirements will discussed in detail.

The only other alternative the Utility had was to purchase spare bushings with each new liquid filled power transformer or reactor. This action increased the purchase price of new equipment, increased their physical inventory of spare bushings, increased warehousing space and increased maintenance requirements for this inventory. After all of this extra effort many Utilities discovered that when the need for a specific spare bushing arose, locating the correct bushing style was a challenge and many times, when located, the spare bushing was not suitable for service. II. HISTORY OF DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS

The first bushing dimensional standard was developed by the American National Standards Instituted (ANSI) in the late 1950s and added these requirements to ANSI C76.1 1943. In 1968 the ANSI C76.1 Committee decided to divide the Index Terms--Bushings, Dimensions, IEC, IEEE, Power bushing standard into three parts. The ratings and dimensions standard became ANSI 76.2. In 1977 ANSI C76.2 1977 / Transformers, Reactors. IEEE Std. 24 added duel ratings (Example 1200/1600 amps) for transformer (1200 A) and circuit breakers (1600 A), By I. INTRODUCTION 1991 the bushing standards were purely IEEE Standards with ITH nearly 50 years of real life experience using the Ratings and Dimensions standards becoming IEEE Std. ANSI/IEEE bushing interchangeable standards, utilities C57.19.01 1991. in the United States have found that following these standards have reduced their spare bushing inventories, In 1991 the IEEE, PES, Transformers Committee, Bushing shortened the lead times for replacement bushings and lowered Subcommittee began work to revise the 1991 document. When the overall cost of supporting the reliability of their liquid this work began feedback from EEI (Edison Electrical filled power transformers and reactors. Institute), OEMs (original equipment manufacturers) and other users indicated that a greater degree of standardization was Those Utilities around the world that utilize the IEC needs in bushing ratings. With this mandate from the Industry, bushing standards, which do not provide dimensional the PC57.19.01 Working Group began a nine year effort to requirements, have struggled with the issue of bushing meet the goals set by this feedback. The result of this work is interchangeability. Each bushing supplier has their own unique IEEE Standard Performance Characteristics and Dimensions dimensional profiles for their bushings, preventing for Outdoor Apparatus Bushing, C57.19.01 2000. interchangeability with other brands. If the Utility adopted a unique dimensional standard for their bushings they soon found the lead-times for those bushings increasing and in many cases, the cost escalating.

Keith P. Ellis is the Bushing Product Manager, Americas for the Trench Bushing Group (e-mail: Keithcota@aol.com) 978-1-4244-2218-0/08/$25.00 IEEE

The most significant and sometimes most controversial As you review the Routine, Design and Special tests change to C57.19.01 was the reduction of the standard required for each standard you will note that they are very bushing voltage class ratings. 15, 25, 46, 115 and 161 kV close regarding the required tests. classes were removed. This left 34.5, 69, 138, 230, 345, 500 and 765 kV classes. The most controversial of these reductions TABLE II: ROUTINE TESTS REQUIREMENTS was removing the 25 and 115 kV classes. The Working Group Test IEEE IEC agreed to include the electrical characteristics of those bushing Internal Pressure Yes Yes deleted from the revised standard in the annex of C57.19.01 Capacitance Yes Yes 2000. The table A.1 in Annex A lists electrical ratings for Power Factor Yes Yes those bushing classes removed from the standard.
Tao Withstand (Test or Voltage Yes Yes Yes No No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No

CT pocket lengths were standardized with two lengths, 533 mm for bushings though 69 kV class and 584 mm for all bushings above 69 kV class This action greatly reduced the number of bushing designs, Another major change to this document was removing bushings for oil circuit breakers. In 1993 the last new oil circuit breaker was produced in the United States. Since standards are for new equipment only, there was no longer a requirement to include this type of bushing application in C57.19.01. III. BUSHING STANDARDS COMPARISON It is clear that totally adopting all IEEE bushing standards may not be a practical approach to adding standardization to your bushing requirements. However, before incorporating the dimensional requirements of the IEEE bushing standards into your liquid filled power transformers and reactors specifications it is important to compare the IEEE bushing group of standards to the IEC bushing standard you now use. The following tables will highlight the similarities and differences for your consideration:
TABLE I: MAJOR DIMENSIONS CONTROLLED Dimensions Mounting Flange Length Below the Flange CT Pocket Length Top Terminal Bottom Terminal Voltage Tap Test Tap IEEE Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No IEC No No No No No Yes No

Dry Power-Frequency Withstand Partial Discharge Measurement Tightness Test of the Flange Dry Lightning Impulse > 850 kV BIL Verify Nameplate Markings

TABLE III: DESIGN TESTS REQUIREMENTS Test Internal Pressure Draw-Lead Cap Pressure Cantilever Capacitance Power Factor Tap Withstand (test or Voltage) Full Wave Lightning Impulse Wet Withstand Voltage 230 kV & Below Wet Switching Impulse Voltage > 300 kV Temperature Thermal Stability Verify Nameplate Markings IEEE Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes IEC Yes No Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No

TABLE IV: SPECIAL TEST REQUIREMENTS Test Thermal Stability Front-of-Wave Impulse Seismic Withstand Artificial Pollution IEEE Yes Yes Yes No IEC No No Yes Yes

Special Tests are agreed on between the purchaser and manufacturer at time of order.

Optional bushing accessories are not listed as available The dimensions controlled by IEEE C57.19.01 are the within the IEEE standards. The bushing manufacturers do critical dimensions in providing bushing interchangeability. offer options such as different top terminal plating, none, silver or tin. Within the IEC standards a few optional accessories are available. Besides the accessories listed below items such as arcing horns are offered for IEC bushings. For the most part, manufacturers of either IEEE or IEC bushings can offer accessories to meet most customer requirements.

3 TABLE VII: VOLTAGE CLASSES & BIL RATINGS TABLE V: ACCESSORIES Standard Test Tap 72 kV and Below Test Tap Above 72 kV Voltage Tap Above 72 kV Optional Voltage Tap Above 72 kV No Yes IEEE Yes No Yes IEC Yes Yes No kV Class (Um) 3.6 kV 7.2 kV 12 kV 15 kV (IEEE) 17.5 kV 24 kV 25 kV (IEEE) 34.5 kV (IEEE) 36 kV 46 kV (IEEE) 52 kV 69 kV (IEEE) 72.5 kV 100 kV 115 kV (IEEE) 123 kV 138 kV (IEEE) 145 kV kV BIL 40 60 75 110 95 125 150 200 170 250 250 350 325 380 450 550 450 550 650 450 550 650 750 550 650 750 900 650 750 850 950 1050 850 950 950 1050 1175 1050 1175 1175 1300 1425 1675 1300 1425 1550 2050 1425 1550 1800 1950 2100 2400 IEEE No No No Yes No No Yes Yes No Yes No Yes Yes No No Yes No No Yes No No No Yes No No No Yes No No No No Yes No No No No Yes No No No No No Yes No No No Yes No No No No No No IEC Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes No No Yes No Yes No No Yes Yes No Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

An option that is very common for all bushings is the altitude rating and the creep distance on the outdoor insulator. All bushings are designed to operate at rated voltage up to 1,000 meters. For operation above 1,000 meters the bushings design must electrically de-rated or be modified by increasing the arcing distance from live part (Metal top part of the bushing) and ground (The bushings mounting flange). The actual arcing distance required to increase the altitude rating is subject to the specific characteristics of a particular design. Today, most IEEE bushing manufacturers in North America are standardizing on ratings up to 3,000 meters for new designs. The creep level is arrived at differently between the IEEE and IEC standards. IEC levels are based on the highest system voltage (Um), while IEEE levels are based on the nominal line to ground voltage of the bushing. The result of using either method is very small, usually only a few mm in favor of the IEC method. Today many new IEEE bushing designs being developed are with creep levels that comply with the Heavy level of creep listed in C57.19.100, IEEE Guide for Application of Power Apparatus Bushings. If high pollution levels are a concern consider selecting a Silicone Rubber Insulator (SRI) instead of porcelain. SRI is proven to perform much better in heavy pollution then porcelain. Table VI provides the formulas for calculating both IEEE and IEC standard creepage levels for bushings.
TABLE VI: CREEP DISTANCES Contamination Level Light Medium Heavy Extra Heavy IEEE 28 mm/kV 35 mm/kV 44 mm/kV 54 mm/kV IEC 16 mm/kV 20 mm/kV 25 mm/kV 31 mm/kV

161 kV (IEEE) 170 kV

230 kV (IEEE) 245 kV

300 kV 300/362 kV 345 kV (IEEE) 362/420 kV 420/550 kV

500 kV (IEEE) 550 kV

765 kV (IEEE) 800 kV

Basic insulation levels are one of the reasons bushing interchangeability with IEC designed bushings can be frustrating. The following table may show why this is a possible issue:

The following rules of thumb that are used in applying bushings to liquid filled power transformers and reactors may assist in reducing the number of different bushing design that will be required for each specific utility system: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. The bushings BIL must be equal to or greater than the BIL of the winding. Higher BIL bushings will not necessarily increase the altitude capability of a specific bushing. Higher creep levels will not allow bushings to operation at higher altitudes. For the best pollution abatement performance, select bushings with SRI. For the highest Seismic requirements always specify bushings with SRI.

TABLE VIII: IEEE VOLTAGE CLASSES & BIL RATINGS Max. Line to Max. Ground System 1 min. dry Voltage Class & BIL Rating kV Voltage kV rms kV 34.5 kV - 200 kV BIL 69 kV - 350 kV BIL 138 kV - 650 kV BIL 138 kV - 650 kV BIL 230 kV - 900 kV BIL 230 kV - 1050 kV BIL 345 kV - 1175 kV BIL 500 kV - 1675 kV BIL 765 kV - 2050 kV BIL 22 44 88 102* 146 156* 220 318 485 38 76 152 176 252 270 381 550 840 80 160 310 310 425 460 520 750 920

* These rating are available upon request

The information contained in this section is not intended to IEC 60137 does not standardize on nor recommend current promote the use of either IEC or IEEE standards for your ratings for bushing. IEC does provide current rating limits for bushings but rather to allow you to evaluate applying IEEE the cantilever test requirements and most IEC bushing dimensional standards to IEC standard bushings. manufacturers have designed bushings with current ratings inline with those listed in IEC 60137 for the cantilever test. . IV. HARMONIZING IEC AND IEEE BUSHING STANDARDS IEEE C57.19.01 2000 has specific standard current ratings and therefore, all the IEEE standard bushing In section III it was made clear that, for the most part, IEC manufacturers have designed their standard bushings with and IEEE standards are fairly compatible with each other. The those current ratings found in Table IX: largest difference is in the large number of available BIL levels for IEC standard bushings. This wide range of BIL TABLE IX: IEEE STANDARD CURRENT RATINGS levels is not readily available on IEEE standard bushings. Fortunately, the IEEE standard BIL ratings are generally equal to the highest BIL level for a given IEC voltage class. Voltage Class
1200 A 2000 A 3000 A 5000 A 400 A 800 A

When selecting an IEEE Standard bushing rating for your system you need to select a bushing with a maximum line to ground (phase-to-earth) rating that will meet or exceed your maximum system voltage (Um) as defined in IEC 60137, clause 4. Once this is determined you can select an IEEE standard bushing rating from Table VIII.

34.5 kV 69 kV 138 kV 230 kV 345 kV 500 kV 765 kV

X X X X X X X

X X X X X X X

X X X X X X X

X X X X X X X

Table VIII contains two ratings that are not listed in IEEE C57.19.01 2000. These are the 138 kV Class bushing with a Current ratings of 400 and 800 amps are for draw lead 102 kV line to ground rating (located in Annex A) and a 1050 cable applications. These rating can be higher if the liquid kV BIL, 230 kV bushing with a 156 kV line to ground rating. filled power transformer or reactor manufacturer insulates the These ratings are available from most IEEE standard bushing cable with Class F, high temperature insulation. Bushings with manufacturers in North America. current ratings of 1200, 2000 and 3000 amps can be supplied with removable draw lead conductors for ease of installation and removal. Consult with the bushing manufacturer for available deigns. Bushings that require current ratings higher then those listed above are available from all IEEE bushing manufacturers with a high degree of interchangeability between brands.

V. BENEFITS OF ACHIEVING INTERCHANGEABILILTY Utilities in the United States have been enjoying the benefits of bushing standardization for more than 40 years. In the early days the immediate benefit was bushing interchangeability between liquid filled power transformers and reactors and bulk oil circuit breakers. By specifying a Transformer/Breaker Interchangeable (TBI) bushing they could apply the same spare bushing inventory to support liquid filled power transformers and reactors as well as their bulk oil circuit breakers.

It is important to note that the above cost information applies when comparing standard IEEE standard designed bushings with special IEEE standard designed bushings. IEEE standard bushings have specific dimensional requirements and mandated features. These requirements dictates a higher cost then a typical IEC standard bushing, which does not mandate those specific dimensions or required features. This difference could be between 10% and 30% per bushing. When you consider that bushings represent less then 5% of the value of the liquid filled power transformers or reactors, adding 10 to 30% to price of each bushing will hardly be noticed in a competitive market when purchasing new liquid filled power With bushing standardization the overall spare bushing transformers or reactors. inventory is reduced. In the United States the bushing inventory incurs a larger tax burden from accruing bushing VI. ACHIEVING BUSHING INTERCHANGEABILITY costs in years 2 to 5. This real cost was a major reason C57.19.01 2000 reduced the number of standard bushings The easiest way to achieve bushing interchangeability being offered from 56 to 21 designs while increasing the would be to just specify IEEE C57.19.01 2000 for the current ratings from 1200 amperes to 3,000 amperes across the dimensional requirements for bushings in your liquid filled board and adding a 5,000 ampere design at 34.5 kV. If your power transformers or reactors specification. This would utility does not experience this type of taxation there are still certainly accomplish this objective. However, before you do other tangible savings from standardization. this you need to consider some of the minor items that could present issues for your operation. With fewer spare bushings in inventory the costs of warehousing these bushings is reduced. These savings extend The first item would be the bushings top terminal stud. to lowering the expense of periodic inventory testing as well The IEEE standards specify the use of a top terminal stud that as the size of the warehouse itself. utilizes threads. In most of the rest of the World threads are not used for the bushing top terminal stud, they use a smooth The real benefits come when the spare bushing is required. terminal stud. This difference may present a logistic issue in With a standardized bushings inventory, that is well obtaining line terminal in your region that utilizes threads. maintained, the outage time for your liquid filled power Most bushing manufacturers that produce IEEE standard transformers or reactors is assured to be as short as possible. bushings can easily supply the IEEE standard bushing with a Compare this with your own experience trying to locate a smooth top terminal stud. serviceable spare for many of your IEC standard bushings. Dimensionally interchangeable bushings increases system The next item would be the color of the outdoor reliability and minimize customer irritation. insulator. Since the late 1960s the United States government has required that insulators used by Utilities be sky gray. This IEEE standard bushings have the shortest standard lead- was the results of beatification efforts inspired by Lady Bird times in the World. Manufacturers of IEEE standard bushings Johnson, wife of then President Lyndon B. Johnson. Since can generally ship these bushings in eight weeks or less on then all IEEE standard bushings have been delivered with sky average. Many maintain small revolving inventories that can gray porcelain as the standard offering. Brown porcelain has ship in less then one week, even at 500 kV. This is certainly always been available but at a small added cost and a long not the case with IEC standard bushings. Considering that lead-time. Those Utilities in Latin America and Mexico that these bushings have thousands of possible dimensional the one have adopted IEEE standard dimensional requirements have you may require could take six months or more to deliver. accepted sky gray porcelain or sky gray SRI for their new liquid filled power transformers and reactors. Additional benefits include lower liquid filled power transformer and reactor costs. (Standard bushings designs cost much less then special bushing designs) The cost of spare bushings is reduced as well when replacing the spare bushing once it is used to replace an old bushing.

B. Another scenario that could be considered is to make it clear that it is desired that the electrical performance of the bushing shall comply with the requirements of IEC However, this author offers the following commentary on 60137 and then state the requirements in scenario number this issue for your consideration: 1. To address the 1050 kV BIL rating for the 230 kV class IEEE bushing you could state that for your 245 kV system A. At voltage levels above 345 kV class, given the high cost a BIL rating of 1050 kV is required at 156 kV line-toof these bushings and potential delays caused by a test ground. failure at the transformer OEM, it is recommended that the bushings receive a routine impulse test by the bushing C. Many Utilities in the United States are very specific manufacturer. regarding the bushings they will accept on their new B. Bushings purchased as a spare do not receive a factory liquid filled power transformers and reactors by listing the impulse test. It is recommended that when purchasing specific catalog numbers of each bushing class and brand spare bushings with BIL ratings above 850 kV BIL, that they have approved. Table X is an example of what is they receive a routine impulse test at the bushing factory. found in some specifications. C. Bushings below 900 kV BIL have an inherently high TABLE X: TYPICAL US UTILITY BUSHING SPECIFICATION reliability record, therefore paying the high cost of a routine impulse test is not justified. Nominal One item that we have not discussed yet is bushing technologies. Today, there are two major bushing technologies being utilized around the World. The oldest of these is Oil Impregnated Paper (OIP) and the newer Epoxy-Resin Impregnated Paper (ERIP). Both of these technologies are available in IEEE standard dimensions according to C57.19.01 2000. This will allow each Utility to select the technology that best meets their needs.
System Voltage kV 34.5 BIL kV 200 Current Rating Amps 1200 3000 69 350 1200 2000 138 650 800 3000 500 1675 2000 ABB 034W0412AP 034W3000BC 069W0412AN 069W2000UH 138W0800AA 138W3000UA 550W2000UT Trench 200-H015-21-AG3-01AYS 200-F030-21-AG3-01AYS 350-H014-21-AG3-01AYS 350-F020-21-AG3-01AYS 650-H014-23-AG3-01A 650-F030-23-AG3-01AEP 1675-F020-23-AG3-01AFP

Since there is not a great deal of difference between the between IEC and IEEE bushing testing this area should not present an issue. However, one item under tests that should be discussed is the lightning impulse testing. IEC requires that all bushings with a Basic Insulation Level (BIL) greater then 850 kV must receive a routine impulse test. This is not a requirement within IEEE. This issue has been discussed by IEEE, PES, Transformers Committee, Bushing Subcommittee and the consciences of the Group was that since the bushings would receive the impulse tests on the new liquid filled power transformer or reactor, that adding this test to the routine tests were not needed. In addition, the frequency of actual impulse test failures of the bushings at transformer OEMs was extremely rare. The conclusion was that the added cost of 100% impulse testing at the bushing factory could not be justified by the extremely low rate of failures during transformer factory testing.

The following scenarios for specifying dimensional bushing requirements for your liquid filled power transformers and reactors specification are offered: A. All bushings shall be capacitance graded and shall be designed to incorporate the dimensional requirements as stated in IEEE C57.19.01 2000 for the specific voltage class specified. The outdoor insulator shall be sky gray. The top terminal of the bushing shall be a smooth copper alloy stud of amble metric diameter to carry the full rated current as stated on the bushings nameplate. The top terminal shall be silver plated. All bushings rated above 345 kV class shall be subjected to a routine impulse test by the bushing manufacturer.

Each Utility must evaluate if other requirements are required to meet the needs of their electric power system.

X. BIOGRAPHEY VII. CONCLUSIONS Experience has proven that standardizing the dimensions and features of bushings for liquid filled power transformers and reactors has a positive impact on the performance of electric power systems. It reduces overall operating expenses, decreases system outage time and improves customer satisfaction. Dealing with fewer bushing styles increases reliability as employees rapidly gain a high degree expertise in dealing with the fewer styles of bushings with standard dimensions and features. Implementing bushing standardization within a utility will require support from Management and it is hoped that this paper will provide the support to accomplish this cost saving program for the utilities in Latin America. VIII. REFERENCES Standards
[1] IEEE Standard General Requirements and Test Procedure for Outdoor Power Apparatus Bushings, IEEE Standard C57.19.00 2004 [2] IEEE Standard Performance Characteristics and Dimensions for Outdoor Apparatus Bushings, IEEE Standard C57.19.01 2000 [3] IEEE Guide for Application of Power Apparatus Bushings, IEEE Standard C57.19.100 1995 R2000 [4] International Electrotechnical Commission, Insulated Bushings for Alternating Voltages Above 1000 V, IEC Standard 60137 Keith P. Ellis is a 16 year member of IEEE, PES, Transformers Committee, past Working Group Chairman for C57.19.00, active in all Bushing Subcommittee Tasks Forces and Working Groups and is a Working Group member of IEEE 693, Seismic Substations Standards. He graduated from Mare Island Navel Shipyard with a journeyman certificate in Machine Technology. Attended the University of California, where he majored in Mechanical Engineering. After serving with distinctions in the US Navy during the Vietnam War, he continued his education at the University of Wisconsin, Milwaukee. He joined RTE-ASEAs engineering group at the onset of this new joint venture. While with RTE-ASEA, he also worked as an application engineer in Marketing and was then promoted to field sales for RTE and RTE-ASEA in Upstate New York. After nine successful years in field sales he returned to Waukesha to start up the OEM Components sales operation for ASEA, as Sales and Marketing Manager. When the Waukesha transformer operation was sold he was promoted to Sales Manager for the new ABB Power T & D Companys Components Division. He was then hired by Trench Limited to develop a line of IEEE/ANSI Standard bushings for the US market. Once the new bushings went into production in Canada he was promoted to Bushing Product Manager, Americas, for the worldwide Trench Bushing Group. He takes particular interest in component applications to power transformers with special interest in high voltage bushings and on-load tap changers.

Papers Presented at Conferences

[5] Revision of IEEE Standard C57.19.01, Doble Paper, 2003 BIIT4, by Mark Rivers, Doble Engineering Company

IX. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I wish to thank my employer, Trench Ltd for supporting my efforts in writing this paper.