Risk Assessment On Defects in GIS Based On PD Diagnostics

525
Risk Assessment on Defects in GIS

based on PD Diagnostics
Working Group
D1.03
February 2013
RISK ASSESSMENT ON DEFECTS IN GIS
BASED ON PD DIAGNOSTICS
WG D1.03 (TF 09)
Members
U. Schichler, Convenor (DE), W. Koltunowicz, Secretary (AT)
F. Dorier †(FR), F. Endo (JP), K. Feser (DE), A. Giboulet (FR), A. Girodet (FR),
H. Hama (JP), B. Hampton (GB), H.‐G. Kranz (DE), J. Lopez‐Roldan (AU),
L. Lundgaard (NO), S. Meijer (NL), C. Neumann (DE), S. Okabe (JP),
J. Pearson (GB), R. Pietsch (DE), U. Riechert (CH), S. Tenbohlen (DE)

Copyright © 2012
“Ownership of a CIGRE publication, whether in paper form or on electronic support only

infers right of use for personal purposes. Are prohibited, except if explicitly agreed by
CIGRE, total or partial reproduction of the publication for use other than personal and
transfer to a third party; hence circulation on any intranet or other company network is
forbidden”.
Disclaimer notice
“CIGRE gives no warranty or assurance about the contents of this publication, nor does
it accept any responsibility, as to the accuracy or exhaustiveness of the information. All
implied warranties and conditions are excluded to the maximum extent permitted by
law”.
ISBN: 978-2-85873-218-0
Risk Assessment on Defects in GIS based on PD Diagnostics
Risk Assessment on Defects in GIS based on

PD Diagnostics
Table of Contents
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .................................................................................................... 4
Glossary.................................................................................................................................................. 5
Introduction ............................................................................................................................................. 6
1 Defect properties ......................................................................................................................... 9
1.1 Breakdown behaviour of defects in gas-insulated systems ....................................... 9
1.2 PD inception electric field strength ............................................................................... 11
2 Sensitivity of PD diagnostic methods ...................................................................................... 13
2.1 Foreign noise and background signals ........................................................................ 13
2.2 Sensitivity of PD detection during testing and in service ......................................... 14
2.2.1 PD measurement during on-site test ................................................................. 14
2.2.2 PD measurement in service ................................................................................ 14
2.3 Sensitivity of PD measurements..................................................................................... 15
3 Location and identification of PD defects .............................................................................. 16
3.1 Location of PD defects .................................................................................................... 16
3.2 Identification of PD defects ........................................................................................... 17
3.2.1 Identification based on electric measurements .............................................. 17
3.2.2 Identification based on acoustic measurements ............................................. 21
4 Assessment of critical defects ................................................................................................... 23
4.1 General aspects .............................................................................................................. 23
4.2 Mobile particles ............................................................................................................... 23
4.3 Loose and electrically floating elements ..................................................................... 24
4.4 Particles on insulation material ..................................................................................... 24
4.5 Protrusions ......................................................................................................................... 24
4.6 Voids in insulation material and cavities in spacer ................................................... 25
4.7 Contact erosion in main circuit ....................................................................................... 25
4.8 Defects in GIS components ............................................................................................ 26
4.9 Defects on interfaces ...................................................................................................... 27
5 Risk assessment............................................................................................................................ 28
5.1 General guideline ........................................................................................................... 28
5.2 Technical impact parameters of PD defects ............................................................... 28
5.3 Calculation procedure of dielectric failure probability ........................................... 29
5.4 Estimation of the consequences ..................................................................................... 31
5.5 Risk diagram .................................................................................................................... 31
5.6 Risk assessment for multiple PD defects ...................................................................... 32
Page 2
Conclusion ............................................................................................................................................ 34
References ............................................................................................................................................ 35
Annex ............................................................................................................................................ 39
Annex A: Calculation sheets of dielectric failure probability ............................................ 40
Annex B: Cluster analysis to form databases ....................................................................... 45
Annex C: Examples of risk assessment based on PD diagnostics ...................................... 47
Page 3
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The worldwide in-service dielectric performance of GIS is satisfactory up to a nominal voltage of

170 kV but the dielectric failure rate is considered to be too elevated for higher nominal voltages. In
this case, improvements are necessary to reach the target of 0.1 failures per 100 bay years, which is
the acceptable in-service failure rate indicated by utilities to get the same availability for GIS as for air-
insulated switchgear. The majority of the problems can be eliminated by improved quality assurance
measures during manufacturing and on-site assembly. The improved dielectric testing procedure and
more efficient diagnostic checks, during on-site tests and later in service, have to be adopted.
The more rigid on-site testing procedures proposed by CIGRE JWG 23/33-12 are nowadays adopted
in IEC 62271-203. The elimination of LI test during on-site tests is only possible, if the diagnostic
measurements applied during AC test are sensitive enough to detect the critical defects that lower the
insulation LI withstand level. It is not possible to detect all critical defects by flashovers at AC voltage,
as the voltage applied should be very high, more than double the routine test voltage. The use of PD
diagnostic methods is recommended.
For the sensitivity of the diagnostic measurements, the PD value of 5 pC of apparent charge caused
by mobile particle was set up for the conventional PD method (IEC 60270) or an equivalent value for
the UHF and acoustic measurements. This value is a compromise between the high sensitivity
required to detect mobile particles, which are the most common defects, and it is a reasonable PD
sensitivity value to be obtained in field conditions. For such low apparent charge values, a sensitivity
verification procedure for the UHF and acoustic method was proposed by CIGRE JTF 15/33.03.05.The
procedure ensures that defects causing an apparent charge of 5 pC are detected on site. The
comparison between different diagnostic methods was performed and the level of partial discharge
activity associated with different types of the defects was established. It was found that there is no
direct correlation between the PD level detected by any diagnostic methods and the flashover voltage
of the defects. The present TB presents the guidelines for risk assessment based on PD diagnostics.
The first step of the risk assessment procedure is to perform a sensitive PD measurement to detect
the critical defects. After the detection of a PD signal, it is necessary to obtain information about the
type of defect (chapter 2) and about its location inside the GIS (chapter 3). Taken together with other
essential information from laboratory measurements, manufacturer's experience, design aspects and
trend analysis of the PD activity, the criticality of the defects can be estimated (chapter 4). This allows
the estimation of the dielectric failure probability (chapter 5.3).
In the last step, the risk assessment is performed based on the estimated dielectric failure probability
and failure consequences (chapter 5.5). The final decision can be different in case of on-site testing or
in service activity. The annex gives examples of risk assessment based on PD diagnostics.
It is not the intention of the CIGRE WG D1.03 (TF 09) to establish a standard procedure. The
presented risk assessment procedure is based on the available information in chapters 2, 3 and 4 of
this brochure.
The proposed risk assessment procedure based on PD diagnostics combines technical and other
parameters (e.g. social and economical) and will support test engineers, engineers at condition
monitoring departments and asset managers.
Page 4
Glossary
Availability
Probability that an item is in a state to perform a required function under given conditions at a given
instant of time, assuming that the required external resources are provided [1].
Consequence
Outcome of a failure,e.g. its costs, social-economic and safety implications.
Critical defect
A defect which can reduce the insulation withstand level of the GIS below the coordination withstand
level (Ucw) and which might lead to dielectric failure.
Degradation
Partial discharges are the primary cause of degradation in (solid) parts of GIS.
Defect
Abnormality in a component that can be detected by partial discharge (PD) diagnostics.
Dielectric Failure
Failure is the flashover or breakdown of the insulation in the GIS.
Failure probability
Failure probability is the extent to which a dielectric failure is likely to occur [2]. In this document, an
estimation of failure probability is applied, based on limited information and assumptions only.
Fault
Fault is the state when a dielectric failure is followed by a power arc.
PD Monitoring
PD monitoring is the periodic or continuous activity to detect critical defects.
Risk
Risk is the combination of failure probability and the consequences of the failure [2].
Risk assessment
Risk assessment is the evaluation of identified risks to determine whether action is required
Page 5
Introduction
The number of installed GIS substations increases rapidly all over the world. The reliability of GIS is
improving as technology develops and improved designs are introduced. With increasingly reliable
equipment, the role of PD diagnostics becomes more important and the following expectations of
asset manager can be indicated [3]:
 move from time based to condition based maintenance,
 extend the operation intervals, reduce maintenance costs,
 prevent damages, decrease unplanned outages,
 enhance the availability and reliability of equipment,
 detect defects before breakdown by warning and alarm functions,
 reduce risk of expensive collateral damages (as fire in sustations),
 extend the economic life time of equipment and avoid premature retirements,
 improve safety of service personnel,
 reduce environmental risks.
The order of priorities is changing from user to user and a compromise between cost savings, risk
reduction and technical performance improvement has to be found [3].
It is known that the maximum electric field stress is a decisive factor for the withstand voltages of SF6
gaps in quasi-homogeneous fields typical for GIS. Because of that, the dielectric properties of GIS are
mainly governed by the possible defects of its insulation media that may occur inside the GIS
enclosure during production, shipment, assembling on-site and during operation.
The in-service dielectric performance of GIS is satisfactory up to a nominal voltage of 170 kV but the
dielectric failure rate is considered to be too elevated for higher nominal voltages. In this case,
improvements are necessary to reach the target of 0.1 failures per 100 bay years, which is the
acceptable in-service failure rate indicated by utilities to get the same availability for GIS as for air-
insulated switchgear [4].
The worldwide in-service return of experience for GIS is presented in [4]. Referring to that, about 30%
of the dielectric failures are related to design deficiencies. Other failures are related to quality
assurance problems. Failures caused by mobile particles represent 20% of the total. Loose shields
lead to floating element type defects while current carrying contact create galling type defects; both
are also common malfunctions. Problems related to insulators surface contamination by particles and
voids in the bulk insulation cannot be excluded (Figure 1).
The majority of the problems can be eliminated by improved quality assurance measures during
manufacturing and on-site assembly. The improved dielectric testing procedure and more efficient
diagnostic checks, during on-site tests and later in service, have to be adopted. The aim of the on-site
dielectric tests is to detect the presence of foreign bodies (mobile particles), damages at the conductor
and enclosure (protrusions), incorrect assembly (for e.g. loose contacts) and all potential defects
which may evolve and later endanger the dielectric integrity of the GIS in service.
From the insulation co-ordination point of view, all the defects that may decrease the withstand
voltages of the GIS below the required withstand levels according to IEC 60071-1 are critical defects
and should be detected and eliminated. The improved and more rigid on-site testing procedures
proposed by CIGRE JWG 23/33-12 [4] are indicated in IEC 62271-203. For AC test, the value of
.
Ut = 0.36 ULIWL is proposed based on the typical ranges of withstand voltages under standard test
Page 6
voltages for the sound GIS [5]. The procedure has been widely adopted and specified by Utilities
worldwide.
Figure 1: Mean distribution of dielectric failures in service [4]

For the sensitivity of the diagnostic measurements, the PD value of 5 pC of apparent charge caused
by mobile particle was set up for the conventional PD method (IEC 60270) or an equivalent value for
the UHF and acoustic measurements. The 5 pC value is a compromise between the high sensitivity
required to detect mobile particles, which are the most common defects, and it is a reasonable PD
sensitivity value to be obtained in field conditions. For such low apparent charge values, a sensitivity
verification procedure for the UHF and acoustic method was proposed by CIGRE JTF 15/33.03.05 [7].
The procedure ensures that defects causing an apparent charge of 5 pC are detected on site.
The comparison between different diagnostic methods was performed and the level of partial
discharge activity associated with different types of the defects was established. It was found that
there is no direct correlation between the PD level detected by any diagnostic methods and the
flashover voltage of the defects [4, 8, 9]. The present document presents the guidelines for risk
assessment based on PD diagnostics (Figure 2).
Figure 2: Principle steps for risk assessment based on PD diagnostics
The first step of the risk assessment procedure is to perform a sensitive PD measurement to detect
the critical defects. After the detection of a PD signal, it is necessary to obtain information about the
Page 7
type of defect (chapter 2) and about its location inside the GIS (chapter 3). Taken together with other
essential information from laboratory measurements, manufacturer's experience, design aspects and
trend analysis of the PD activity, the criticality of the defects can be estimated (chapter 4). This allows
the estimation of the dielectric failure probability (chapter 5.3).
In the last step, the risk assessment is performed based on the estimated dielectric failure probability
and failure consequences (chapter 5.5). The final decision can be different in case of on-site testing or
in service activity. The annex gives examples of risk assessment based on PD diagnostics.
It is not the intention of the CIGRE WG D1.03 (TF 09) to establish a standard procedure. The
presented risk assessment procedure is based on the information in chapters 2, 3 and 4 of this
brochure.
Page 8
1 Defect properties
1.1 Breakdown behaviour of defects in gas-insulated systems
The volt-time curves for different types of the defects are presented in Figure 3 [9]. A sharp protrusion
on the inner conductor is critical at lightning impulse voltages. A protrusion of 1 mm length will lead to
breakdown during lightning impulse tests whereas at AC test voltages and switching impulse voltages
even a 5 mm long particle on the inner conductor is still not a critical [10, 11]. This is well explained by
the corona stabilisation effect at AC voltage and SF6 pressure of 0.3 MPa [12].
The influence of a particle on an insulator vs. electrical withstand of GIS configuration for different
lengths of the particle and at varying SF6 pressure is shown in Figure 4a at AC voltage and in
Figure 4b at lightning impulse voltages [9]. The flashover field strength EFo is given as the mean value
of 10 tests.
The criticality of a particle on an insulation material is further demonstrated in Figure 5, where the
flashover field strength at SF6 pressure of 0.4 MPa is compared to the typical design field strength of
GIS of rated voltages from 123 kV to 420 kV for lightning impulse voltages, switching impulse voltages
and AC voltages respectively. It is shown that to detect a particle by flashover on an insulation
material, the lightning impulse is the most critical voltage type. A particle shorter than 2 mm, located in
the highest electric field regions, is critical and reduces the flashover field strength far below the
designed level. Switching impulse voltages and AC voltages are less sensitive. A 4 mm long particle
leads to breakdown during AC test and a 10 mm one at nominal AC voltage.
Mobile particles are critical under AC voltages. The critical particle length for wires is in the range from
3 mm to 5 mm [6, 10, 11]. The experimental data is shown in Figure 3 (curve 1).
Figure 3: Principle behaviour of SF6 -insulated systems to defects [9]
Page 9
a) b)
Figure 4: Flashover field strength E FO vs. pressure p, SF 6 for AC 50 Hz (a) and

lightning impulse (b) [9]
Figure 5: Flashover field strength E FO vs. voltage shape [9]
Page 10
1.2 PD inception electric field strength

In Table 1, for each defect type, the critical and detectable defect lengths are indicated. The detectable
values were obtained with conventional PD measurements (according to IEC 60270) performed at
nominal voltage. At this voltage level (nominal field strength) only critical moving particles can be
detected by PD (Figure 6 and 7). At the AC test voltage, all critical defects will show PD, but their
magnitude can be very low (less than 1 pC), depending on the length of the defect and the nominal
voltage of the GIS.
critical defect
detectable length of
type of defect
apparent charge defect at Un
length
according to IEC 60270
moving particle 3 - 5 mm 2 - 10 pC 3 - 5 mm
protrusion on HV
around 1 mm 1 - 2 pC 3 - 4 mm
conductor
protrusion on enclosure 4 - 6 mm 2 pC 10 - 15 mm
3 - 10 mm
particle on insulation 1 - 2 mm about 0.5 pC
depending on location
3 - 4 mm 2 - 3 mm
Void 1 - 2 pC
(diameter) depending on location
Table 1: Critical and detectable defects length for different defects
The PD magnitude for the same defect placed in GIS of different voltage level will decrease with the
increase of nominal voltage (Figure 8). The apparent charge value is inversely proportional to the total
width of the insulation, so the higher the voltage level of the equipment, the lower the sensitivity of the
PD measurements.
Mobile particles are the most common defects detected on-site. The difference between the PD
inception level (PDIV) and breakdown value is much higher than for other defect types indicated in
Table 1. This means that free particles can be detected with greater simplicity
Êi = on-site testing field strength

Êo = nominal field strength
Figure 6: On set field strength of particles at p = 420 kPa, SF 6 , 245…362 kV GIS
Page 11
Figure 7: PD behaviour of particles at p = 420 kPa, SF 6 , 245…362 kV GIS
Figure 8: Decreasing apparent charge with increasing nominal voltage

(for the same discharge at inner conductor, e.g. 1 pC at U m =123)
Page 12
2 Sensitivity of PD diagnostic methods

2.1 Foreign noise and background signals
The sensitivity of a PD measurement strongly depends on the ratio of PD signal-to-background noise
caused by external interference. For each of the PD methods (conventional, UHF or acoustics) the
typical noise signals which may lower the sensitivity of the PD measurement are explained in the
following sections. The chemical and optical PD detection will not be discussed due to their limited
application.
Electromagnetic interference from radio transmitters, radar, mobile telephones, thyristors and electrical
corona are the main noise sources within the relevant frequency spectra of the electrical PD diagnostic
methods. For the acoustic method, the magnetostrictive noise from inductive voltage transformers or
steel enclosures is the main background noise. Noise signals can occur as continuous or transient and
can sometimes be correlated to the phase angle of the applied test voltage. Special measures for
screening and/or noise suppression methods are necessary to get a beneficial PD measuring
sensitivity. Nowadays, pulse-shaped stochastic noise signals are the most difficult interference signals.
Conventional method (IEC 60270)
The achievable background signal for the conventional measurements (recommended frequency of
the measurement below 1 MHz) is mainly determined by the ratio between the coupling capacitance
and the GIS test section capacitance. The application of voltage test circuits with open-air bushings or
HF-transparent parts in the GIS enclosure can lead to a high noise level because external noise is
picked up. Totally encapsulated voltage test circuits are preferred and can guarantee a very low
background noise level of PD measurements. The following background noise level in pC of apparent
charge values can be reached:
 some 10 to 100 pC test circuits with open-air bushings;
 below 5 pC totally encapsulated test circuits during dielectric test on-site;
test circuits with open-air bushings and application of special filter
techniques;
 below 1 pC totally encapsulated test circuits applied.
Acoustic method
Acoustic signals from different sources have different bandwidth, both due to their initial characteristic
and due to absorption in the transmission path. Particle generated signals (impacts) have a bandwidth
from the kilohertz range and well into the megahertz range, while signals from protrusions start in the
megahertz range and fall off in the 100 kilohertz range due to sound absorption in the transmission
path (gaseous insulation).
The background noise for the acoustic method is given by:
A) Mechanical environmental noise that can originate from traffic, personnel moving in the plant, rain
etc. This noise is strongest in the low frequency range and falls off with increasing frequency. Sensors
and amplifiers with a low frequency cut off in the 10-kilohertz range suppress the external noise and
yields adequate sensitivity.
B) Magnetostrictive noise from inductive voltage transformers is a stable 100 Hz periodicity signal
being strongest close to the transformer. The occurrence of such noise does depend on the design of
the voltage transformer. Often it will occur during testing at elevated voltage when the core is
saturated.
Page 13
C) Magnetostrictive noise from enclosures made from steel, observed in bus runs with high currents.
These signals have a clear 100 Hz component in the envelope of the phase plot. These signals are
very stable and depend on the current value.
D) Heavy electric corona from bushings can impinge on enclosures. A 100 kHz high-pass filter will
remove such noise. However, in this case, the sensitivity for discharges will be strongly reduced.
A PD detection sensitivity equivalent to about 0.3 pC can be achieved for the detection of mobile
particles whereas for particles on insulation on the convex surface of a spacer cone a sensitivity
equivalent to approx. 5 pC was measured during experiments due to the fact that the spacer acts as a
barrier for the sound wave propagation to the enclosure.
UHF method
Signals from radar or mobile telephones in the frequency range between 300 MHz and 2 GHz are the
main interference for the UHF measurements. These noise signals are present at discrete frequencies
in the frequency domain. PD single resonance frequencies in the spectra (without interferences) must
be used for narrow-band UHF detection. In case of broad-band measurements the noise signals can
be removed by gating or filtering techniques. The background noise level is also influenced by the
distance between coupler and PD source: a PD magnitude equivalent to 0.3 pC can be detected for a
defect close to the coupler (test circuits in laboratory with a well-known defect position) [13]. For
complete GIS substations the detection of a defect showing a PD magnitude equivalent to 5 pC should
be fulfilled for any defect position, but often better sensitivities are obtained.
2.2 Sensitivity of PD detection during testing and in service
2.2.1 PD measurement during on-site test

An important part of GIS testing after installation on-site are the dielectric tests on fully assembled and
gas-filled GIS. It is recommended by CIGRE and IEC to combine AC testing with PD measurements,
in order to detect all critical defects that may occur during production, shipment or assembly on site [4,
14].
The following test procedure is recommended for GIS of nominal voltage 245 kV and above: after
conditioning with AC voltage, the short-time dielectric withstand voltage test is performed followed by
PD measurements. According to CIGRE requirements, the PD pre-stress test voltage should be equal
to power frequency withstand test voltage and the measurements should be performed at 80% of the
AC test voltage level (to compare, IEC recommends PD measurement at 1.2 Um/3 resp. 1.2 Um). PD
measurements are also useful during AC voltage conditioning to prevent flashovers which can cause
unnecessary stress to the GIS [15]. If PD measurements cannot be performed with a sensitivity of at
least 5 pC or equivalent, an oscillating lightning impulse (OLI) test may be applied [14].
2.2.2 PD measurement in service

PD measurements may be carried out on old substations as well as on newly installed GIS in order to
improve the reliability of the equipment. Periodic checks or continuous on-line monitoring are
applicable solutions. Measurements have to be performed keeping in mind that PD intensity is not the
only one relevant parameter to estimate the probability of dielectric failure. The type and the location of
the defect are of high importance. Special care has to be taken when a floating electrode is detected,
as high PD signal linked to this kind of the defect can mask other critical defects [8].
Page 14
2.3 Sensitivity of PD measurements

With PD diagnostic measurements one should be able to detect all critical defects (mobile particles,
protrusions on HV conductor and particles on insulation). Moving particles can initiate a flashover
during AC voltage application. Protrusions on HV conductor and particle on insulation are critical under
lightning impulse voltage. A PD detection sensitivity of 0.5 pC to 2 pC or equivalent is necessary for
the detection of all critical defects during routine testing as well as during on-site HV testing and PD
monitoring at GIS in service (Table 1).
Floating electrodes give a high PD magnitude and they are easy to detect by PD diagnostic methods.
Insulators and partitions don’t show any critical ageing due to voids if they pass a PD measurement in
the sensitivity range of 1 pC after the manufacturing process.
Figure 9 displays the sensitivity of the different PD diagnostic methods and indicates the possibilities
to detect PD defects with critical length under various test voltages (Table 1). Sometimes even non-
critical defects can also be detected. The differences in detectability between routine tests, HV tests
on-site and in-service are caused by the voltage dependency on PD activity.
Routine test: PD measurement up to short-time AC voltage withstand test level
On-site test: PD measurement at 80% of short time AC voltage withstand voltage test level on-
site (after the test according to CIGRE proposal, [4])
Service: PD measurement at nominal voltage
Figure 9: Sensitivity of PD diagnostic methods

during routine test, on-site test and in service
Page 15
3 Location and identification of PD defects

3.1 Location of PD defects
The dielectric failure probability is strongly dependent on the type of defect and its location inside the
GIS. PD measurements are sensitive and reliable even though location and identification of the
defects is a very difficult task. Different procedures and methods can be used based on practical and
physical background. Sectionalising is the most practical procedure. Electrical time-of-flight
measurements, typical for UHF method but also applicable for acoustic measurement, is the most
frequently used method in the field.
Methods based on time delay between different propagating modes [16] and directional couplers [17],
have shown to be impractical. Other methods are under investigation [18].
Sectionalising procedure
GIS contains numerous switching equipment like circuit breakers, disconnectors, earthing switches, so
various sections of the complete GIS can be de-energised. When the presence of the defect is
detected inside the tested part of the GIS, changing the configuration by eliminating part by part the
GIS under test allows restricting the position of the defect and in many cases can be sufficient to
identify the compartment with the defect.
Location by electrical methods
 Time-of-flight measurements with the UHF method: the very fast electric pulse, of rise time below
1 ns, emitted by a PD source, propagates in all directions along the GIS duct (Figure 10). It travels
to the internal couplers located on both sides from the PD source. By the time-of-flight technique
the time difference between the wave fronts arriving at two couplers can indicate the location of
the PD source. The time difference is in general in the tens of ns range, so the measurements
have to be performed with a fast broadband digital oscilloscope. With this technique, the
discharging source can be located within several decimetres on site [19].
Conductor
Coupler 1 X1 X2 Coupler 2
X
Δt
Figure 10: Defect location by time-of-flight measurement (UHF method)
The distance X1 between coupler 1 and the PD defect can be calculated as
X  ( X 2  X 1 ) X   c t
X1   (1)
2 2
where ∆t is the difference in the arrival time of the signal at couplers 1 and 2, and vc is the
propagation velocity of the signal (0.3 m/ns).
If the electromagnetic wave passes through insulating material with permittivity εr, the propagation
Page 16
velocity of the signal is decreased by a factor proportional to the r.

 Signal reduction analysis: due to damping and resonance phenomena, the electric waves
attenuate when propagating through the GIS. If the influence of different GIS components for
signal attenuation is accurately known, this can be applied to determine the PD location [20, 21,
22]. Typical values for UHF signal attenuation are 2 dB/km in bus duct and 1 to 5 dB per spacer.
As the results of this calculation give low accuracy, this method can only be used in special cases.
Location by acoustic method
 Time-of-flight measurements: two sensors are used and the time of arrival of the signal coming
from the sensors is observed on the oscilloscope. If the source is outside the sensor pair, the
signal will come from the side it arrives at first. If the source is located between the sensors the
difference in arrival time is less than the time of flight between the sensors. One must be aware
that the speed of sound in an enclosure is frequency dependant;
 Search for highest amplitude of the signal: using only one sensor one can look for changes in
signal amplitude; the signal will be stronger as sensor approaches the source. The signal will drop
to half when crossing a flange. It should be noted that the amplitude of the acoustic signal will
decay inversely proportional to the square root of the distance from the source, as the sensor is
moving away from the source. The amplitude of the signal generated by the particles varies in time
and in this case repetitive measurements are considered to choose the maximum amplitude value.
Measuring repetitive signals from a discharge is not a problem;
 Observation of the rise time of the signal: the signal propagation in an enclosure is highly
dispersed. The propagation velocity of the bending wave, which is the most significant wave
component, increases from below 1000 m/s to about 3000 m/s in a frequency range between 10
and 100 kHz [23]. Also in the gas, the absorption increases with frequency [24]. The consequence
is that the signal front, which is very sharp close to the source, is smeared out as the signal
propagates. Therefore, the sharper the front the closer the distance to the source.
An even more accurate measurement can be made if the acoustic system is triggered by an electric
signal picked up using e.g. a UHF coupler [25].
3.2 Identification of PD defects

The following sections give examples how PD sources can be identified, but new techniques are under
constant development and further progress is expected.
Pattern recognition procedures are most successful to identify the type of the insulation defect, but
they always give only a probabilistic answer about the defect type. This pattern recognition can be
done by experts as well as by computers. The basic principles of PD diagnosis based on pattern
recognition are described in detail by several authors [26-29].
3.2.1 Identification based on electric measurements

For electrical measurements, computer based phase-resolved pulse sequence analysis (PRPSA) is
commonly adopted. Detailed information on cluster analysis techniques can be found in the appendix.
The following requirements have to be taken into account [30]:
 The feature extraction aims to reduce the complexity of the PD patterns by processing only
characteristic properties [31]. PD feature extraction have to be performed in such a way, that
feature vectors (fingerprints) of diverse PD defects have to show significant differences whereas
evaluations of the same defects have to show a clear consistence. It is a common knowledge, that
the feature extraction procedure has a major influence on diagnosis results [26, 29, 32].
 PD defect classification has to recognise the "unknown defect". Because of rejection problems of
neural networks and probabilistic characterisation of conventional classifiers, the determination of
confidence intervals for the classification reliability are necessary. The classification method has
an influence on the diagnosis potential [29];
Page 17
 PD reference data is a second key component in PD diagnosis. Using pattern recognition

principles it should be underlined that all PD diagnosis results strongly depend on the available
reference data base [33]. It should be self-evident that a test data set should not be a part of the
references. Once a database has been built, cluster analysis can be used to check whether the
database is consistent. Cluster analysis tries to recognise groups (fingerprint populations) in a
number of feature vectors without a priori knowledge, (Annex B).
Every PD activity is always a sequence of PD pulses qi (ti) with their intensity or apparent charge qi
and their time of occurrence ti. Since the PD pulse occurrence is phase resolved related to the applied
test voltage, digital PD acquisition systems record also the magnitude of the test voltage u to measure
a phase resolved PD sequence (PRPS) record. So a PD activity of k discharge pulses can be acquired
with all the information considered relevant as a sequence of pulses qi (t i ,u(t i )) , i  1,..., k over a
measuring time tm, see Figure 11 [32, 33]. Because all systems work with a certain threshold level, PD
pulses can be missed. This results in loss of information and may distort certain presentations of the
data. If such distorted representations are used for further analysis, the outcome may be less
accurate, especially if only short pulse sequences are measured and processed. Additionally it should
be underlined, that PD identification near inception is still a challenge for all identification systems.
A PRPS record with the essential information about the development of the phase resolved (PR)
discharge activity is able to perform a pulse sequence analysis, which can be realized by different
procedures, which are described in more detailed in [26, 27, 30, 32]:
 The PRPD-pattern H(q, ) is a widely spread tool for PD expert evaluation (Figure 12 and 13 left
column). This plot features the number of PD pulses N with a certain phase position  and the
apparent charge q of a PD event. It can be changed into a so called topogram where the third
dimension - the number of PD pulses N - is presented by a colour. This graph, also known as a -
q-N-Pattern, must be considered as an integrated plot where the sequential characteristic of the
PD pulses with respect to time is lost. The dominating parameter in this pattern is the calibrated
apparent charge or discharge intensity;
 The u-pattern (Figure 12 and 13) evaluates the frequency of the voltage differences of a
sequence of single PD pulses showing the voltage range necessary to evoke consecutive PD
pulses [34]. The graph is visualised by a co-occurrence matrix. The u-parameters in use can be
measured as real quantities and no calibration is needed, because the apparent charge does not
influence this pattern, but the polarity of the pulse must be taken into account;
 In the u/-pattern (Figure 12 and 13 - right column) the slope mi = [u(i+1)-u(i)]/[i+1-i]
approximates the voltage gradient which is necessary to excite a consecutive PD pulse. When the
frequency of the slopes of consecutive PD pulses mi and mi+1 are put into a co-occurrence matrix -
similar to the u-pattern - where mi is on the x-axis and mi+1 on the y-axis and the frequency N of a
(mi, mi+1) relation is on the z-axis, a pattern is created which represents - as well as the u-pattern
- a histogram of the PD activities inside the discharging area with the dominating real quantities,
phase position and voltage of occurrence [32].
The recognition behaviour of a discharging area is strongly dependent on the material of the electrode
and the space charge situation in the PD-gap. So it is common knowledge that these types of defects,
where the internal field is dominated by the applied voltage, are better identified by the u-pattern, in
contrast to the u/-pattern, which has better capabilities to identify dielectric PD-faults [35].
The major advantage of u- and u/-patterns is the independence of the representation from type
of couplers and sensors (Figure 12).
Page 18
Missed PD pulse Threshold
Figure 11: PRPS and calculation of voltage gradients and voltage differences of
consecutive pulses
PRPD u u/ PRPD u u/

IEC 60270 with coupling capacitor particle on insulation material
inductive PD sensor void in insulation material
capacitive PD sensor floating elements
Figure 12: Influence of different PD Figure 13: Patterns to distinguish three

sensors on the shape of patterns of the different PD defects
same defect
As stated before, after a PD measurement is finished, three steps have to be taken into account for
PD identification: feature extraction, classification and determination of the confidence interval.
Examples of different methods, which are commonly used, are given in Table 2.
Page 19
The aim of feature extraction is to reduce PD-data. More often the pattern itself is the first step to
reduce data, from this in computer aided systems an additional step is performed to extract more
significant features by advanced pattern recognition procedures (e.g. Fourier, Haar transformation,
Markov Models, Fractals, etc.). The dynamic confidence interval used in [36, 37] is calculated by the
conformity of the new measurement to the collection of all references. If the conformity of a
measurement to the most likely defect class is below the conformity to the collection of all references,
then the classification is doubtful. Using this algorithm the confidence in diagnosis depends on a
dynamic boundary of confidence, which is additionally influenced by the degree of the conformity to
the favoured, second and third placed defect class. The confidence interval can also be determined by
statistical procedures. However, because of the limited amount of reference measurements and their
unknown distributions, the boundary is mostly set by expert estimation.
acquisition confidence
feature extraction classification reference
procedure interval
qn Statistical analysis centour score Expert [26, 31]
PRPS Fourier-transform L2-distance Dynamic [36, 38]
PRPS Haar-transform ANN > 50% [37, 38]
PRPS Walsh Hadamard Fuzzy Dynamic [37, 38]
PRPS ∆u ANN (CPN) > 50% [39]
PRPS ∆u + Fourier L2-distance Dynamic [37]
PRPS ∆u/∆φ + Fourier L2-distance Dynamic [37]
qn Fractals human expert human expert [40]
frequency, q no ANN not described [41]
PRPS qn ANN > 50% [42]
elliptic time b q Markov Models Model distance [43]
qn wavelet transform ANN (RBF) > 60% [44]
qn 16 x 20 matrix ANN not described [45]
qn no ANN > 70% [27]
Pulse Shape Q, tr, tf, width, area ANN > 70% [46]
qn Fractals + Statistics ANN > 90% [47]
Fractal, Statistics,
qn ANN Bootstrap-t [48]
Fourier
Table 2: Overview of PD identification methods
As shown above, classification can be performed as well by an expert as by a computer system. One
of the methods to classify PD measurements by a computer is the contour score method [26, 31]. This
method uses fingerprint populations of known discharge defects in a reference database. It compares
the fingerprint of the new PD measurement with the centre of each population. The contour score is
defined as the percentile rank of the fingerprints that are further away from the centre of the known
discharge population than the fingerprint of the new PD measurement. This has been illustrated in
Figure 14 for a simplified example with the feature vector dimension of only 2. Classification problems
occur if the fingerprint populations are overlapping. This is always the case if insufficient or not enough
features are used [38].
Page 20
The distance in feature space can be calculated by any algorithm used in common pattern recognition
(e.g. manhattan distance, L2 or others) [30].
It has been shown that different identification methods can generate different outcomes especially in
the cases of unknown defects. Therefore it is a common use to apply redundant systems, i.e. to
combine the results of several independent feature extraction and classification methods [30]. But also
the optimisation of the structure of a redundant identification system gives the chance to improve
diagnosis efficiency and diagnosis reliability [37].
50% contour
90% contour
C1
C2
1% contour
* New fingerprint
Feature 1
Figure 14: Contour formation with the contour score method [31, 49]:
□ fingerprints of PD defect A, ○ fingerprints of PD defect B
One major GIS reference database in use [33, 36, 38] in more than 24 populations uses a cluster
analysis as described in Annex B. Therefore any defect identification in GIS has to face the problem,
that one physical defect (e.g. protrusion, floating potential, mobile particle or void) has more than one
representation in feature space and consequently more than one significant PD pattern. This might be
the reason that an expert system proved to be more efficient for defect identification on site than a
human expert [50]. Only if the computer decides the defect type as "unknown" the expert's knowledge
is indispensable.
3.2.2 Identification based on acoustic measurements

Discrimination between limited numbers of PD can easily be done based on some basic signal
parameters as illustrated in Figure 15. The acoustic analyser evaluates the 50/100 Hz periodicity, the
signal level (magnitude), the variation in the signal level, the PD pattern and the signal shape. All used
settings of the analyser are recorded together with the patterns for later evaluation and inclusion in
databases. For defect classification, the scheme shown in Figure 15 has been proposed in [51]. At the
moment, there is no sophisticated computer-based expert system available for this evaluation due to a
lack of correct time resolution. Moreover, pulse sequence analysis of acoustic signals is difficult
because of the long ringing time of acoustic pulses.
The acoustic method is best applicable for detection of mobile particles. Moving short particles and
particles which have rounded ends will behave quite stable over time. On the other hand, if the particle
has sharp ends, it will lose charge during each excursion and will not jump so high. Later, when the
particles ends become rounded, its jump height may increase. It is therefore of interest to characterise
particles in respect to their sharpness. This can be done based on comparison between acoustic and
conventional measurements for each half cycle of the applied voltage [52]:
 Conventional PD signals from round end particles will have a low rate (i.e. < 50 Hz). These
particles are discharging only once every period, when they hit the enclosure. When the ends are
sharp or when the particle is long, one starts to get discharges also during flight. These discharges
Page 21
can be quite big, and they can have a higher signal rate. Furthermore, the amplitude distribution
over the power cycle becomes asymmetric with respect to the positive and negative half period,
because discharging tendency is different for positive and negative polarity;
 Acoustic signals from non-discharging particles have a high degree of symmetry in a phase plot
for the two half cycles of the applied voltage. Once one starts to get discharges from the particle
ends an asymmetry will occur. Also, amplitude vs. flight time plots will show increasing (and
oscillating) amplitude with flight time. Once one starts to get discharges from the ends it will loose
charge and the amplitude level will decay with flight time [53].
The particle plots are especially sensitive to the applied threshold level for the measurements. In case
where pulses are too small and below the threshold level, the elevation time (which is the time
between successive pulses) of the detected particle is not correct. This will result in the conclusion that
the particle is jumping and can even be indicated as harmful.
Floating
Particle Protrusion
shield
50/100 Hz Weak 50 Hz 100 Hz

Periodicity
Signal Level High Low High
Level High Stable Stable

Variation
Pattern Elevation Phase Phase

plot plot plot
Signal Shape Pulsed Cont. Cont.
Figure 15: Scheme for PD defect identification using acoustic measurements [51]
Page 22
4 Assessment of critical defects

4.1 General aspects
As described in chapter 1, the dielectric strength of the GIS is influenced by the type of the defect and
type and shape of the voltage applied. Mobile particles are critical at power frequency voltage but
sharp protrusions on the HV conductor or particles on a spacer are more critical at steep front
voltages. Displaced or misaligned stress shields reduce the dielectric strength in the same way for all
type of voltages. The criticality of the defects can be estimated on the base of PD measurements
performed during on-site tests and in service.
4.2 Mobile particles

Despite all the precautions taken during the assembly of the GIS, particles may enter the
compartments of the GIS. Free metallic particles can move along the enclosure or lift-off and finally
jump towards the HV conductor, depending on their size, weight and the electrostatic forces acting on
them. The breakdown will occur when the particle is about to get in contact with the HV conductor.
During electrical conditioning AC voltage is increased step by step until the short–time withstand
voltage test level. The time of permanence at the voltage steps should be long enough to allow
particles to move to a low field area or to particle traps where they will remain innocuous. A risk
assessment is necessary, if PD activity remains after the conditioning procedure or if particles are
detected in service. Particles can be classified to ones which: a) move along the enclosure, b) jump
and may reach the HV conductor.
The discrimination between moving and jumping particles can be performed by the analysis of PD
pattern and spectrum recorded with UHF measurements [54] or time-of-flight measurements using the
acoustic method (Figure 16) [53].
AQ  ln 2l /r  - 1
l =
2 k E 2
where
AQ  Amplitude of acoustic signal variation s
  Pulsation of oscilating electric field
l  Particle length
r  Particle radius
k  sensor sensitivit y
E  Modulus of electrical field
2
1  tmax h 
Hh  g 
2  2 
where
H h  particle jump height
g  9.81m / s ²
tmax h  maximum elevation time
Figure 16: Assessment of moving particle by time-of-flight measurements

with acoustic method [53]
The criticality of a jumping particle depends on its length and mass. Acoustic measurements can
provide, with some assumption, indications about the particle mass and length [53]. From the
Page 23
amplitude of the acoustic signal versus the time of flight (Figure 16), the particle jump height as well as
the length of the particle can be estimated by the equations given along with Figure 16.
As mentioned in chapter 1, the critical size of particle leading to breakdown during on-site tests is from
3 mm to 5 mm. A moving particle has the possibility to develop into another type of defect – particle on
an insulator – if during the trajectory movement the particle can reach and stay on the surface of an
insulation material. This defect, described in chapter 4.4, will be much more sensitive to LI rather than
AC overvoltages.
Mobile particle dimensions and its location, evaluation of temporary overvoltages and estimation of the
trajectory in relation to the insulation materials in the compartment must be analysed by the GIS
manufacturer and/or the utility in order to assess the dielectric failure probability of this defect.
4.3 Loose and electrically floating elements

Incorrectly fixed or unscrewed elements of the GIS can start to vibrate under the applied voltage and
current. They can finally lose electrical contact with the HV electrode or the enclosure and remain on
floating potential.
Mechanical vibrations produce a strong acoustical signal easily detectable by acoustical measurements.
They do not produce electrical discharges so they cannot be detected by other diagnostic methods.
Acoustic signals related to this kind of the defect are continuous with the 100 Hz envelope and are
observed in relation to the zero crossing of the applied voltage.
A different situation takes place with the floating elements. When the withstand voltage between the HV
electrode and the floating shield is exceeded, an electrical discharge occurs. Such discharge is observed
at the rising flanks of the applied voltage and produces a continuous PD signal. This kind of defect is
easily identified and localised by any kind of electrical PD measurement. It produces a much higher
PD level than the others and the corresponding pattern is typical. Acoustic PD measurements give a
100 Hz envelope and an amplitude equal for both polarities.
With this type of defect, in-service spontaneous breakdown is not expected within a short period of
time. As mentioned in [55], monitoring (on line or periodic) has to be performed as a preliminary
analysis of the defect. The failure probability should take into account the PD level but also the design
of the compartment. The risk of pollution of the spacer surface by metallic dust created by discharges
can lead to a second defect classified as "particle on insulation material" and described in chapter 4.4.
4.4 Particle on insulation material

A mobile particle moves and may, under electrostatic forces, reach and stay on an insulator. This type
of defect is critical at VFT and lightning impulse voltage [56]. The criticality of such defect depends on
the position, size of the particle, its orientation with regard to the tangential electrical field, and on the
SF6 pressure. A particle of 2 mm reduces by a factor of two the dielectric strength under lightning
impulse stress compared to clean condition.
During on-site tests and particularly in service, the probability to detect such defects is reduced due to
the low level of PD activity at the respective voltage. If detected, such particles should be removed.
4.5 Protrusions
Considering quality assurance procedures in the factory (e.g. dimensional controls carried out on
metallic parts), protrusions are very seldom found in GIS. Protrusions on HV conductors are mostly
due to scratches of metallic surfaces by insufficient care during assembly. Such defects reduce the
lightning impulse dielectric strength of the equipment (Figure 3) and the PD level is very low, close to
the background noise level. The shape of the protrusions tip can change in time with voltage
Page 24
application from a sharp to a rounded one. This can influence both, the PD inception voltage and the
breakdown level (Figure 17, [53]).
Protrusions can be classified in two categories:

 Rounded protrusion; the small difference between the PD inception voltage and the breakdown
voltage makes the detection of such defects very difficult as a small increase of the test voltage
develops a leader, which rapidly causes breakdown;
 Sharp protrusion; the length of the protrusion influences the inception voltage. The corona
stabilisation process reduces locally the electrical field and the PD level remains stable as the
voltage increases. A sufficient difference exists between the inception voltage and the breakdown
voltage to make the PD detection possible.
There is no direct correlation between the length of the protrusion and the PD magnitude (Figure 17).
Detection of a critical sharp protrusion is very difficult during on-site tests and impossible in service.
Protrusions, when detected, should be removed, regardless of length.
Figure 17: PD magnitude generated by protrusions under corona stabilisation

(test in coaxial busbar with 160 kV/cm design stress at BIL)
4.6 Voids in insulation material and cavities in spacer

Manufacturers have improved the moulding techniques during the last decades and very stringent
quality assurance control procedures are applied. Defects like minute metallic inclusions, small voids
in cast resin or areas of delamination between insulation material and metallic insert can be rarely
found in a new GIS. Electrical PD measurements in the factory are able to detect most of these
defects and PD pattern and trend analysis are performed in order to estimate the criticality of such
defects. In [57], different phases of the ageing process and the PD patterns associated with this
phenomenon are described. These kinds of defect generally require a period of applied voltage to
become active. The PD activity is not stable, has the tendency to fade away in time, as the discharge
activity continuously changes its intensity and position inside the insulation material.
4.7 Contact erosion in main circuit

In service, the thermal expansion of long busbars can damage the contacts between the parts of the
HV conductor. The contact erosion might be identified by a PD measurement but the activity is not
stable, sometimes increasing with time and sometimes vanishing after welding of the contacts [58].
Page 25
4.8 Defects in GIS components

Considering dielectric failures, a rather big portion of them are caused by failures in the solid material
[4]. In the past, this was mainly due to failures in epoxy resin insulated instrument transformers, both
current transformers as well as voltage transformers. Some faults are related to failures in grading
capacitors of circuit breakers of highest rated voltages [59]. Others are caused by irregularities on
bushings [60]. All these failures occurred during service, some of them were initiated by overvoltages,
others occurred at nominal voltage.
A) Instrument transformers
Epoxy resin insulated instrument transformers were frequently used in the first design of 123 kV GIS.
The components often showed an insufficient long-term behaviour and failed after a service period of
10 to 20 years. At that time the manufacturing technology was not sufficiently mature to cope with
stresses in the long-term range. The components in question were exchanged by SF6 insulated
current transformers and SF6 impregnated film insulated voltage transformers. The mentioned defects
are detectable by PD diagnostics using the conventional or the UHF method. The acoustic method is
apparently not suited, since the PD sources are inside the epoxy resin material.
B) Grading capacitors
Failures have been experienced both in gas-impregnated and oil-impregnated capacitors. They may
originate in the insulation system of the capacitors and from mechanical wear out and fractures of
flexible contact arrangements. Probably the capacitors were not able to withstand the high frequency
stresses caused by switching operations. Normally the grading capacitors are rarely fully stressed:
either the circuit breaker is closed or a disconnector in series is open leaving only a small stress on the
grading capacitors. Discharges occurring in the insulation and sparks occurring at capacitors contacts
may be detectable by the UHF method. Also - with an expected lower sensitivity - the acoustic
techniques can be used. Audible noise has been heard from capacitors in service where the contact
connection has been broken. Nowadays improved designs of grading capacitors are in operation.
C) SF6/air-bushings
Mainly two types of SF6/air-bushing failures can be distinguished. The first one is due to deficiencies in
the internal capacitive graded insulation which can be of gas impregnated film, oil filled insulated or
RIP insulated type. The capacitive grading of these bushings was obviously not designed for high
frequency stresses created in GIS by disconnector switching. Degradation caused by these processes
finally leads to a total breakdown of the insulation system. The adequate design of bushings can be
proven by testing with VFT voltages. The above mentioned defect can be detected either by C/tan δ-
measurements or by electrical PD diagnostics.
The second failure type is related to the bushing external insulation. In case of heavy wetting of the
bushing insulator due to high rain intensity, the field distribution, mainly capacitive graded, is strongly
affected by an ohmic component. In particular, in case of a rough capacitive grading and strong impact
by the increased surface conductivity due to the more or less comprehensive water film, as it is the
case at gas insulated bushings fitted with porcelain insulators, this leads to distinct field distortion and
may cause a flashover and the subsequent outage of the bushing.
The adequate design of the SF6/air-bushings could be proven by power frequency tests under heavy
rain with uneven wetting.
4.9 Defects on interfaces

Electrical equipment like power transformers, shunt reactors, surge arrestors and HV cables are
connected to the GIS after completing the on-site tests. After the system has been energized, it is
possible to detect PD signals from the connected equipment by PD diagnostics which are applied on
the GIS (e.g. UHF PD monitoring systems).
Page 26
The return of experience is based on interfaces like SF6/oil-bushings, surge arrestors and cable
terminations which show PD activity at nominal voltage [61, 62]. The IEC standards and field
experience of the equipment under question should be considered for the assessment of the PD
measurements.
Page 27
5 RISK ASSESSMENT
5.1 General guideline
Risk assessment on defects in GIS based on PD diagnostics is a complex task. One approach to
perform risk assessment is to combine technical and non-technical (social and economical) impact
parameters to estimate the dielectric failure probability and consequences (Figure 18, [63, 64]). The
technical impact parameters in this document are related to insulation defects generating PD.
Sensitive PD measurements are necessary to detect and identify the defect type. To assess the
technical risk the diagnostic confidence of each PD identification process must be considered. Based
on the risk assessment, further actions have to be taken.
Figure 18: Flow chart of the proposed risk assessment procedure
5.2 Technical impact parameters of PD defects

As described in chapter 4, the criticality of identified insulation defects is influenced by different
technical parameters. For the estimation of the failure probability four technical impact parameters
have been defined: defect type properties, defect location, PD signal time dependencies, voltage level
and voltage wave shape.
Depending on the type of defect, different aspects for each of the impact parameter have to be
considered. Table 3 shows the technical impact parameters and the related aspects for different
defects detected by PD measurements. Some of these aspects can be defined by the PD
measurement; others are related to the service condition like e.g. occurrence of temporary AC
overvoltages.
Page 28
The behaviour of mobile particles is well known by experiments and return of experience (chapter 1
and 4). For this defect a lot of information for risk assessment can be generated by the application of
PD diagnostics and this information should be structured according the technical impact parameters
and aspects listed in Table 3.
Technical Impact Parameters

Type of
defect Defect type Time Voltage level and
Defect location
properties Dependencies wave shape
- vicinity to spacer
- particle - vibration initiating - trend of - AC voltage level
Mobile dimension movement magnitude - DC stress
Particle and mass - local field strength - activity - superimposed
- jump height - particle trap - time of flight stresses
- dielectric coating
- trend of
- movement
Floating magnitude - AC voltage level
(fixing design) - vicinity to spacer
Element - activity
- number/cycle
- phase angle
Particle on - tip shape - LI
- local field strength * - activity
Insulation - length - VFT
- tip shape - LI
Protrusion - on HV electrode **
- length - VFT
- trend of
magnitude
- intermittent
- size * - AC voltage level
activity
Void - number * - local field strength * - inception by
- phase angle
- shape * transient voltage
stabilisation
- inception /
extinction voltage
* no information is currently available from PD measurement,

** no influence to the calculation procedure for failure probability
Table 3: Aspects of technical impact parameter for different PD defects
5.3 Calculation procedure of dielectric failure probability

To estimate the dielectric failure probability for a certain defect, a calculation procedure can be defined
which is based on the availability of the following information: confidence of the diagnosis, the
technical impact parameters and related aspects, and the defect specific criticality range.
A) Confidence of the diagnosis

The result of any PD defect identification procedure is always probabilistic and the uncertainty of the
diagnosis has to be considered in the dielectric failure probability algorithm [65]. The reliable
identification of the PD defect is the key component in determining the failure probability of the
involved PD defect. If a PD diagnosis system or estimation of a human expert shows a low confidence
Page 29
in the recognition of the defect type in question, the dielectric failure probability has to be set to a high
level, which means that additional expertise is necessary. Taking this into account, the calculation of
the breakdown probability has to consider the value of the diagnosis confidence factor C (Table 4).
Diagnosis confidence Range of diagnosis confidence

expert system Engineer factor C
uncertain untrained 0 - 25 %
quite uncertain common expert 26 - 50 %
quite certain Expert 51 - 75 %
certain outstanding expert 76 - 100 %
Table 4: Diagnosis confidence factor C by an expert system or engineer
B) Technical impact parameters and related aspects

To link the different technical impact parameters and aspects described in chapter 5.2, the equations 2
to 4 can be used. Additional weighting factors can be introduced based on experience.
First of all, for each aspect (Aj) related to a certain technical impact parameter (IPi) a failure probability
value between 0 and 1 is set and the failure probability related to one IPi is calculated:
NA
A j
IP i 
j1 (2)
NANI
where NA is the number of aspects and NI is the number of technical impact parameters. Secondly,
the failure probabilities of all technical impact parameters (IPi) are added to reach the failure
probability FP:
NA
NI NI A j
FP   IP
i 1
i  
i 1
j1
NANI
(3)
C) Defect specific criticality range

The minimum (Rmin) and the maximum (Rmax) values of the dielectric failure probability for each
particular PD defect (risk range) can be estimated. For example, a protrusion can produce a
breakdown a short time after PD inception because of a lightning overvoltage influencing this defect. A
void however can only produce a breakdown after years of ageing and after changing into an electrical
tree. Therefore a void may have a criticality range up to the medium risk only, whereas the protrusion
is always on the high risk level [65]. However, insufficient information is available to define the exact
values at this moment.
The total failure probability (TFP) is calculated by the following equation:
Page 30
  NA

NI 
  Aj 
  
TFP  1   1   R min  R max  R min    (4)
j 1
 C
i 1 N A N I
  
  
  
Examples of calculation sheets to estimate the total failure breakdown TFP for the defects shown in
Table 4 can be found in Annex A. The defined settings in these calculation sheets are based on the
experience of the WG members. They are not fixed and can be adjusted according to the experience
of the user.
5.4 Estimation of the consequences

The estimation of the consequences should be done in parallel to the calculation of the dielectric
failure probability. The consequences are costs, social-economic and safety implications. A
determination of the consequences is possible by the application of several non-technical impact
parameters like for example:
 experience with defects on installed type of GIS
 PD affected component (time to repair, spare parts availability)
 outage costs:
o repair costs of the affected component or possible damages of further components
o costs of non-delivered energy (frequency of outages)
o liability costs due to third party damages
o penalties coming from customer contracts
 importance of station
 system redundancy
 public image of the company
 personal injuries in case of an outage
 environmental aspects
The different information is often available within the utilities and some of the costs are well known
from experience. Other parameters are generally not financially assessable and they depend on public
and company requirement. However, the estimation of the consequences must be done by the utility
or asset manager. Otherwise a proper risk assessment is not possible.
5.5 Risk diagram

The final risk can be estimated by an adapted Farmer diagram [64, 66, 67], whose axes are the two
independent factors “failure probability” of the identified PD defect and “consequences”, which are
both scaled in a percentage range (Figure 19). The consequences are normalized on the maximum
economical consequences in case of a major failure of the diagnosed switchgear. As an example lines
connecting different failure probability and certain level of consequences are chosen to divide the
spanned space of the diagram into three areas of three different risk levels that depend on the
individual utility strategy. In the risk diagram the low, medium and high risk areas are marked. Each
area involves different actions (Table 5).
Page 31
Figure 19: Risk diagram for PD defects in GIS
Risk area Action to be performed
Low Normal maintenance strategy is followed
Maintenance intervals are reduced, defect development remains under

Medium
observation
Immediate intervention of the human expert:
 inspection of the compartment with defect
High  replacement of the relevant component that results in GIS life
extension
 replacement of the complete switchgear as it reaches end of life
Table 5: Utility actions for different risk level
For the same dielectric failure probability (points A and B), different estimation of the consequences
can change the risk assessment area and finally actions to be performed by utility (Figure 20). In time
the failure probability can also change, e.g. a mobile particle moved to a harmless location, and for the
same estimated consequences the risk assessment area can be shifted from a yellow one (point C) to
the green one (point A).
5.6 Risk assessment for multiple PD defects

The proposed procedure for risk assessment can also be applied in case of multiple PD defects which
risk factors are within the same risk area. In this case the multiple PD defects at the risk diagram can
result from the evaluation of a single GIS or from a installed base of GIS. A total risk factor ri can be
calculated based on the values of consequences and failure probability. Figure 21 shows an example
for the comparison of different risk factors where a 45-degree line is the basis for the risk factor (same
weighting for the axis of the risk diagram). The ranking of the risk for multiple PD defects is given by
the value of the risk factor.
Page 32
Figure 20: Risk diagram with different Figure 21: Risk factors for ranking results
results from risk assessment analyses of multiple PD defects
Page 33
Conclusions
PD diagnostics of GIS insulation generally aims to reduce as much as possible the failure rate.
Furthermore, it provides a significant decrease of the outage time, since a failure in GIS mostly causes
a longer outage time than the failure in air-insulated substation. Taking this into account, an
improvement of the reliability and availability of GIS can be obtained and repair works or exchange
measures, if needed, may be initiated before a breakdown or an outage occurs.
As an achievement, a better use of the equipment and an adoption of more efficient maintenance
strategies may be obtained by an advanced knowledge about the actual risk. By means of PD
diagnostics today a qualified assessment of the dielectric properties of the GIS can be achieved. In
this way a life extension of the HV assets is possible and their utilisation is accomplished leading to
considerable savings of life cycle costs. But it should be underlined, that without sensitive PD
measurements giving meaningful raw data, it is impossible to perform a proper risk assessment
analysis.
The report gives recommendations and guidelines for the application of PD measurement techniques
on site and in service. The recommendations are mainly given to utility but also to third party
consulting companies and to GIS manufacturers. It is important to underline the necessity of high PD
measurement sensitivity to detect and locate insulation defects, but the present limits of interpretation
of the results of the PD measurements, as related to the criticality of the defects, have also be noted.
Not all PD defects detected in service are critical and will lead to failure in short time. The PD
measurements have to be repeated to observe the PD signal behaviour in time. The remedial actions
can be scheduled and perform together with the regular maintenance activity.
In many cases the actions cannot be limited only to PD measurements but will request to adopt the
detailed risk assessment analysis.
Page 34
References
[1] IEC 60050-191: International Electrotechnical Vocabulary, Dependability and Quality of Service,
1990, Amendment 1: 1999, Amendment 2: 2002
[2] ISO/IEC Guide 73: Risk Management - Vocabulary - Guidelines for Use in Standards, 2002
[3] CIGRE TF D1.02.08: Instrumentation and Measurements for In-service Monitoring of High
Voltage Insulation, CIGRE, Technical Brochure No. 286, 2005
[4] CIGRE JWG 33/23.12: Insulation Co-ordination of GIS: Return of Experience, On Site Tests
and Diagnostic Techniques, Electra No. 176, 1998
[5] A. Diessner, G.F. Luxa, W. Mosca, A. Pigini: High Voltage Testing of SF6 Insulated Substations
on Site, CIGRE, 1986, Report 33-06
[6] E. Colombo, W. Koltunowicz, A. Pigini: Sensitivity of Electrical and Acoustical Methods for GIS
Diagnostics with Particular Reference to On Site Testing, CIGRE Symposium "Diagnostics and
Maintenance Techniques”, Berlin, Germany, 1993
[7] CIGRE WG 15/33.03.05: Partial Discharge Detection System for GIS: Sensitivity Verification for
the UHF Method and the Acoustic Method, ELECTRA No. 183, 1999
[8] CIGRE WG 15.03: Diagnostic Methods for GIS Insulating Systems, CIGRE, 1992, Report
15/23-01
[9] R. Schurer: Der Einfluss von Stoerstellen auf Stuetzeroberflaechen auf die elektrische
Festigkeit von Isolieranordnungen in SF6-isolierten Anlagen. Dissertation Universitaet Stuttgart,
1999
[10] CIGRE WG 15-03: Effects of Particles on GIS Insulation and Evaluation of Relevant Diagnostic
Tools, CIGRE, 1994, Report 15-103
[11] A. Bargigia, W. Koltunowicz, A. Pigini: Detection of Partial Discharges in Gas Insulated
Substations, IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery, 1992, pp. 1239 - 1249
[12] A. Haddad, D.F. Warne: Advances in High Voltage Engineering, IEE, London, United Kingdom,
2004
[13] T. Kato, F. Endo, S. Hironaka: Sensitive Partial Discharge Monitoring System by UHF Method
and Calibration Technique, CIGRE Symposium “Gas Insulated Systems”, Dubai, 2001, pp. 73 -
76
[14] IEC 62271-203: High-voltage Switchgear and Controlgear - Part 203, Gas-insulated metal-
enclosed switchgear for rated voltages above 52 kV, 2011
[15] W. Koltunowicz, M.L. Philip, Y.S. Goh, W.H. Leong, M. Sethuraman, A. Darus, S.A. Fuad:
Partial Discharges Tests on GIS Installation in Malaysia - Techniques and Experiences, CIGRE,
2000, Report 15-304
[16] M.C. Zhang, H. Li: TEM- and TE-Mode Waves Excited by Partial Discharges in GIS, 11th ISH,
London, UK, 1999
[17] G. Schöffner: A Directional Coupler System for the Direction Sensitive Measurement of UHF PD
Signals in GIS and GIL, CEIDP, 2000, pp. 634 - 638
[18] S.M. Hoek, U. Riechert, T. Strehl, S. Tenbohlen, K. Feser: A New Procedure for Partial
Discharge Localization in Gas-Insulated Switchgears in Frequency Domain, 14th ISH, Beijing,
China, 2005, Paper G-005
Page 35
[19] B. Hampton, R.J. Meats: Diagnostic Measurements at UHF in gas-insulated Substations, IEE
Proceedings, Vol. 135, No. 2, 1988, pp. 137 - 144
[20] T. Utsumi et al.: Preventive Maintenance System with a Different Gas Injecting Facility For GIS,
IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery, Vol. 8, No. 3, 1993, pp. 1107 - 1112
[21] F. Endo et al.: Insulation Diagnostic System of GIS, 8th ISH, Yokohama, Japan, 1993, Paper 66-
01
[22] M. Hanai, F. Endo, S. Okabe, T. Kato, H. Hama, M. Nagao: New Development for Detecting
Partial Discharge Using an UHF Method and Its Application to Power Apparatus in Japan,
CIGRE, 2006, Report D1-106
[23] L.E. Lundgaard, M. Runde, B. Skyberg: Acoustic Diagnosis of Gas Insulated Substations: A
Theoretical and Experimental Basis, IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery, Vol 5, No 4, 1990,
pp. 1751 - 1759
[24] L.E. Lundgaard: Partial Discharge - Part XIV: Acoustic Partial Discharge Detection - Practical
Application, IEEE Electrical Insulation Magazine, Vol. 8, No. 5, 1992, pp. 34 - 43
[25] S. Markalous, S. Tenbohlen, K. Feser: Detection and Location of Partial Discharges in Power
Transformers Using Acoustic and Electromagnetic Signals, IEEE Transactions on Dielectrics
and Electrical Insulation, Vol. 15, No. 6, 2008, pp. 1576 - 1583
[26] E. Gulski: Computer aided Recognition of Partial Discharges using Statistical Tools, PhD
Thesis, Technical University Delft, The Netherlands, 1991
[27] B.T. Phung: Computer-Based Partial Discharge Detection and Characterisation, PhD Thesis,
University of New South Wales, Australia, 1997
[28] H.-G. Kranz, A. Lapp: Neuro-Fuzzy Diagnosis System with a Rated Diagnosis Reliability and
Visual Data Analysis, IDA-97, London, UK, Springer Verlag, 1997
[29] T. Hücker: Computergestützte Teilentladungsdiagnostik unter Berücksichtigung praxisrelevanter
Randbedingungen, PhD Thesis (in German), Bergische Universität Wuppertal, 1995
[30] H.-G. Kranz: Fundamentals in Computer Aided PD Processing, PD Pattern Recognition and
Automated Diagnosis in GIS, IEEE Transactions on Dielectrics and Electrical Insulation, Vol. 7,
2000, pp. 12 - 20
[31] A. Krivda: Automated Recognition of Partial Discharges, IEEE Transactions on Dielectrics and
Electrical Insulation, Vol. 2, No. 5, 1995, pp. 796 - 821
[32] A. Lapp, H.-G. Kranz: The Use of the CIGRE Data Format for Partial Discharge Diagnosis
Applications, IEEE Transactions on Dielectrics and Electrical Insulation, Vol. 7, 2000, pp. 102 -
112
[33] H.-G. Kranz, A. Lapp: The Influence of the Quality of the Reference Data Base on PD Pattern
Recognition Results, 10th ISH, Montreal, Canada, 1997
[34] R. Patsch, F. Berton: Pulse Sequence Analysis - Development and Future Prospects, 12th ISH,
Bangalore, India, 2001, Paper 6.69
[35] D. Aschenbrenner, H.-G. Kranz: Diagnosis Potential of Different Partial Discharge Features of
diverse PD Defects in N2/SF6 Mixtures, 7th ICPADM, Nagoya, Japan, 2003, Report S3-2
[36] D. Aschenbrenner, H.-G. Kranz, U. Schichler: Hierarchical Diagnosis Systems for Partial
Discharge Identification and Risk Assessment in GIS, 12th ISH, Bangalore, India, 2001, Paper
6.70
[37] D. Aschenbrenner, H.-G. Kranz, A. Lapp: The Importance of Voltage Independent Partial
Discharge Features for Monitoring Applications and Risk Assessment, 12th ISH, Bangalore,
India, 2001, Paper 6.58
Page 36
[38] T. Huecker, J. Gorablenkow: UHF Partial Discharge Monitoring and Expert System Diagnosis,
IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery, Vol. 13, No. 4, 1998, pp. 1162 - 1167
[39] M. Hoof, B. Freisleben, R. Patsch: PD Source Identification with Novel Discharge Parameters
Using Counterpropagation Neural Networks, IEEE Transactions on Dielectrics and Electrical
Insulation, Vol. 4, No. 1, 1997, pp. 17 - 32
[40] L. Satish, W.S. Zaengl: Can Fractal Features be used for Recognizing 3D Partial Discharge
Patterns?, IEEE Transactions on Dielectrics and Electrical Insulation, Vol. 2, No. 3, 1995, pp.
352 - 359
[41] T. Kato, F. Endo, S. Hironaka: Sensitivity Calibration of UHF Partial Discharge Monitoring
System in GIS, IEE of Japan, Vol. 122-B, No. 11, 2002
[42] H. Suzuki, T. Endoh: Pattern Recognition of Partial Discharge Patterns Using a Neural Network,
IEEE Transactions on Electrical Insulation, Vol. 27, 1992, pp. 543 - 549
[43] L. Satish, B. I. Gururaj: Use of Hidden Markov Models for Partial Discharge Pattern
Classification, IEEE Transactions on Electrical Insulation, Vol. 28, 1993, pp. 172 - 182
[44] E.M. Lalitha, L. Satish: Wavelet Analysis for Classification of Multi-source PD Patterns, IEEE
Transactions on Dielectrics and Electrical Insulation, Vol. 7, No. 1, 2000, pp. 40 - 47
[45] N. Hozumi, T. Okamoto, T. Imajo: Discrimination of Partial Discharge Pattern using a Neural
Network, IEEE Transactions on Dielectrics and Electrical Insulation, Vol. 27, No. 3, 1992, pp.
550 - 556
[46] A.A. Mazroua, R. Bartnikas, M.M.A. Salma: Neural Network System using the Multi-layer-
Perceptron Technique for the Recognition of PD Pulse Shapes due to Cavities and Electrical
Trees, IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery, Vol. 10, 1995, pp. 92 - 96
[47] R. Candela, G. Mirelli, R. Schifani: PD Recognition by Means of Statistical and Fractal
Parameters and a Neural Network, IEEE Transactions on Dielectrics and Electrical Insulation,
Vol. 7, No. 1, 2000, pp. 87 - 94
[48] M. Amini, P. Gallinari, F. d’Alche-Buc: Automated Statistical Recognition of Partial Discharges in
Insulation Systems, 8th ICANN, 1998
[49] S. Meijer: Partial Discharge Diagnosis of High-Voltage Gas-Insulated Systems, PhD Thesis,
Technical University Delft, The Netherlands, 2001
[50] J. Gorablenkow, T. Hücker, U. Schichler: Application of UHF PD Monitoring and Expert System
Diagnosis, IEEE ISEI, Arlington, USA, 1998
[51] L.E. Lundgaard, B. Skyberg, A. Schei, A. Diessner: Method and Instrumentation for Acoustic
Diagnoses of GIS, CIGRE, 2000, Report 15-309
[52] H.-D. Schlemper, K. Feser: Characterization of Moving Particles in GIS by Acoustic and
Electrical Partial Discharge Detection, 10th ISH, Montreal, Canada, 1997, Paper 3109
[53] L.E. Lundgaard: Particles in GIS: Behaviour and Possibilities for Characterisation from Acoustic
Signatures, IEEE Transactions on Dielectrics and Electrical Insulation, Vol. 8, No. 6, 2001, pp.
1064 - 1074
[54] A. Girodet, S. Meijer, J. Smit: Development of a Partial Discharge Analysis Method to Assess
the Dielectric Quality of GIS, CIGRE, 2002, Report 15-106
[55] R. Zoetmulder, S. Meijer, J. Smit, A. Girodet: Risk Assessment of GIS containing Free Moving
Particles using Spectral and Partial Discharge Analysis, INSUCON, Berlin, Germany, 2002
[56] R. Schurer, K. Feser: The Effect of Conducting Particles adhering to Spacers in gas insulated
Switchgear, 10th ISH, Montreal, Canada, 1997, pp. 165 - 168.
Page 37
[57] H.-D. Schlemper, R. Kurrer, K. Feser: Sensitivity of On-site Partial Discharge Detection in GIS,
8th ISH, Yokohama, Japan, 1993, pp. 157 - 160
[58] A.R. Salinas, J.S. Pearson: Detection of Partial discharges in Gas Insulated Switchgear Using
Diagnostic Technique, Doble 2000 Conference in Boston
[59] M. Runde et al.: Service Experience with Voltage Grading Capacitors, CIGRE, 2006, Report A3-
207
[60] A.A. Ebrahim: Review of UHF Detection of Leader Discharges in SF6 and the Bahrain
Experience, CIGRE Symposium “Gas Insulated Systems”, Dubai, 2001, pp. 77 - 82
[61] U. Riechert, J. Linn, E. Winkler, R. Pietsch: Reasonable Application of UHF Partial Discharge
Measurements in Development, Production and Service of Gas Insulated Switchgear (GIS),
CIGRE Symposium “Gas Insulated Systems”, Dubai, 2001, pp. 66 - 72
[62] K.T. Yoon, G.J. Behrmann, R. Pietsch, J. Pearson: Further Results of the Partial Discharge
Monitoring System at Labrador and Ayer Rajah 400 kV GIS Substation, 13th CEPSI Conference,
Manila, 2000
[63] M. Mathis, V. Koch, P.T. Lee, G. Balzer: Reliability Centered Maintenance with CALPOS Main,
13th ISH, Delft, The Netherlands, 2003
[64] A. Meyna: Einführung in die Sicherheitstheorie, Hanser Verlag, 1982, ISBN 3-446-13581-2
[65] K. Dreisbusch, H.-G. Kranz, A. Schnettler: Determination of a Failure Probability Prognosis
based on PD-Diagnostics in GIS, IEEE Transactions on Dielectrics and Electrical Insulation,
Vol. 15, No. 6, 2008, pp. 1707 - 1714
[66] G. Balzer, K. Bakic, H.-J. Haubrich, C. Neumann, C. Schorn: Selection of an optimal
Maintenance and Replacement Strategy of HV Equipment by a Risk Assessment Process,
CIGRE, 2006, Report B3-103
[67] F.R. Farmer: Reactor Safety and Siting: A Proposed Risk Criterion, Nuclear Safety, Vol. 8, No.
6, 1967
Page 38
Annex
Page 39
Annex A: Calculation sheets of dielectric failure probability
Annex A1: Calculation sheet for PD defect “Mobile Particle”
Page 40
Annex A2: Calculation sheet for PD defect “Floating Element”
Page 41
Annex A3: Calculation sheet for PD defect “Particle on Insulation”
Page 42
Annex A4: Calculation sheet for PD defect “Protrusion”
Page 43
Annex A5: Calculation sheet for PD defect “Void”
Page 44
Annex B: Cluster analysis to form databases
Once a database has been built, cluster analysis can be used to check whether the database
is consistent. Cluster analysis tries to recognise groups in a number of feature vectors
without a priori knowledge. A feature vector consists of one or more features, extracted from
a PD measurement. A detailed description of clustering techniques can be found in [31, 67].
Figure A.1 shows a simplified example how cluster analysis works. Here five feature vectors
consisting of only one feature are analysed. The feature vectors can be analysed and
compared in different ways. In this example, simply the distance between both feature
vectors is calculated. The two vectors which are closest together (having the smallest
distance and are the most similar) are linked together and represented by one new feature
vector. In this way, the number of feature vectors is reduced by one.
As can be seen in the figure, the

distance between vectors a and c is the
smallest and are connected. It is
represented by a new vector f,
represented by the average value of
the features of a and c which is 1.1.
Above mentioned steps are repeated

until all feature vectors are linked. The
following feature vectors that linked are
b and f (representing the previous
vectors a and c). The new feature
vector is called g and represented by
one feature with the value 2.1
Next vectors e and g (representing the

previous vectors a, c and b) have the
smallest distance and are connected.
This results in a new feature vector,
called h.
Finally, the vectors d and h are

connected and the clusters are formed.
Figure A.1: Example of cluster analysis of fingerprints using the tree structure
as obtained from different measurements [49]
An example of such cluster analysis for frequency spectra visualized by tree structure is
shown in Figure A.2 [49]. In this cluster, four separate clusters can be recognised, each
representing one type of defect.
Page 45
Figure A.2: Cluster analysis applied to the characterizations calculated from the
frequency spectra for four different defects
Page 46
Annex C: Examples of risk assessment based on PD diagnostics
Example 1: Void in a SF6/air-bushing
During on-site testing of a 145 kV GIS, some PD signals were detected by the UHF method. The PD
coupler close to a SF6/air-bushing registered PD pattern after the high-voltage testing with
U = 220 kV, while the adjacent PD coupler located in the busbar registered no PD activity. The PRPD
patterns changes by time, but the characteristic features were always the same (Figure C.1). The PD
defect was traced to the epoxy-impregnated SF6/air-bushing by switching operations and comparison
with known PD patterns from laboratory (Figure C.2). It was suspected that transport damage was the
reason of the defect. The dismantled bushing was subjected to a further routine test by the
manufacturer. During the routine test with PD measurement according to IEC 60270 the PD
background level of 1.5 pC was not exceeded up to the full test voltage, so there had been no damage
caused during transport. The SF6/air-bushing was then refitted on-site and tested again. The PD
patterns were reproducible and thus correlated with an apparent charge of less than 1.5 pC. Due to
the low PD level and the positive service experience with the related type of SF6/air-bushing by the
manufacturer and the utility, there was no objection to put the SF6/air-bushing into operation. There
was no further objection for the last 14 years.
Figure C.1: PRPD pattern Figure C.2: PRPD chart from laboratory test
(U = 176 kV, f=97 Hz) (f = 50 Hz, type of defect: void)
Figure C.3: Calculation of dielectric failure probability
Page 47
Example 2: Floating element at insulating support / tulip contact in a 420 kV GIS
A utility heard audible noise from the GIS that not had been observed earlier. They believed the noise
came from a current transformer and wanted it to be tested to investigate the problem. Acoustic
measurements were carried out within one week. At the day of the measurements, the audible noise
was intermittent (coming and going). The audible noise resulted in acoustic signatures as shown in
Figure C.4. The acoustic amplitudes were very large, and the phase plot shows a distinct 100 Hz
phase correlation, i.e. strong indications of an electrically floating element causing large partial
discharges. When the audible noise was gone,
however, small partial discharges were still detectable
with the acoustic method. By searching around for the
location that showed the highest acoustic signal level,
it was soon realized that the signal did not originate
from the current transformer, but from the vertical
busbar (approx. 1.5 m) under the CT. By using two
acoustic emission sensors, the partial discharge was
accurately located to the area under an insulating
support where a tulip contact and a shield were
located. When the GIS the following week was opened
for inspection, the underside of the insulating support
Figure C.4: Acoustic signature
was covered with white dust (by-products from partial
due to a floating element
discharges), and burning marks due to partial
discharges were found in the interface between the
shield and the support. The calculation sheet to
estimate the dielectric failure probability is presented in
Figure C.5 and shows a result of 98,1%.
Page 48
Example 3: Mobile particle in a 275 kV busbar

The acoustic signature in Figure C.6 was recorded in 1997 at a 275 kV busbar. The acoustic signal
showed fluctuating amplitudes, a pattern in the particle plot (Figure C.6a) and weak phase correlation
as shown from the phase plot in Figure C6.b and that indicates a bouncing particle. However, both the
acoustic amplitudes and the elevation/flight times are limited, thus the particle is characterized as
small and harmless. The particle is still present in the GIS, and the busbar has been tested regularly to
observe if the particle is active/moving in service. The calculation of the dielectric failure probability for
the described defect is presented in Figure C.7.
Figure C.6: Acoustic signature for a small, harmless particle in a 275 kV busbar
Page 49
Example 4: Mobile Particle in a 150 kV GIS
A mobile particle in a 150kV substation was detected by UHF PD measurement. Measuring data and
identification are shown in Figures C.8a-d. The calculation sheet of dielectric failure probability is filled
in resulting in a value of 61%, which is rather high. At the time of the occurrence, the utility decided to
increase the measuring rate. As a result, the particle seems to be rather inactive and no maintenance
actions were taken. No failure occurred as well and after dismantling the GIS several years later, a
mobile particle of 4 mm long was found, as shown in the Figure C.8.
Figure C.8: PD pattern, defect dimensions and calculation

of dielectric failure probability
Page 50
Example 5: Void in an epoxy support insulator in a 380 kV GIS
In this example, a void in a 380 kV substation is shown. The PD pattern looks like the one shown in
the Figure C.9 below. This PD pattern is already being measured for about 10 years and has not
significantly changed over the years. Filling in the calculation sheet the dielectric failöure probability is
52.5%, which is however almost the maximum of the indicated ranges. During the exercise, a
discussion started about the voltage level and wave shape: because the defect is always active during
normal operating voltage, the transients have no influence (no effect) on the inception voltage. So it
was set to “1”. In case the correct answer is “no” it has to be set to “0”, which reduces the breakdown
probability to 37.5% which lower the risk.
Figure C.9: PD pattern and calculation of dielectric failure probability
Page 51

Risk Assessment On Defects in GIS Based On PD Diagnostics

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Risk Assessment On Defects in GIS Based On PD Diagnostics

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

525

Risk Assessment on Defects in GIS

“Ownership of a CIGRE publication, whether in paper form or on electronic support only

Risk Assessment on Defects in GIS based on

The worldwide in-service dielectric performance of GIS is satisfactory up to a nominal voltage of

Figure 1: Mean distribution of dielectric failures in service [4]

Figure 2: Principle steps for risk assessment based on PD diagnostics

Figure 3: Principle behaviour of SF6 -insulated systems to defects [9]

Figure 4: Flashover field strength E FO vs. pressure p, SF 6 for AC 50 Hz (a) and

Figure 5: Flashover field strength E FO vs. voltage shape [9]

1.2 PD inception electric field strength

Table 1: Critical and detectable defects length for different defects

Êi = on-site testing field strength

Figure 6: On set field strength of particles at p = 420 kPa, SF 6 , 245…362 kV GIS

Figure 7: PD behaviour of particles at p = 420 kPa, SF 6 , 245…362 kV GIS

Figure 8: Decreasing apparent charge with increasing nominal voltage

2 Sensitivity of PD diagnostic methods

 below 1 pC totally encapsulated test circuits applied.

2.2 Sensitivity of PD detection during testing and in service

2.2.1 PD measurement during on-site test

2.2.2 PD measurement in service

2.3 Sensitivity of PD measurements

Service: PD measurement at nominal voltage

Figure 9: Sensitivity of PD diagnostic methods

3 Location and identification of PD defects

Figure 10: Defect location by time-of-flight measurement (UHF method)

The distance X1 between coupler 1 and the PD defect can be calculated as

velocity of the signal is decreased by a factor proportional to the r.

3.2 Identification of PD defects

3.2.1 Identification based on electric measurements

 PD reference data is a second key component in PD diagnosis. Using pattern recognition

Missed PD pulse Threshold

PRPD u u/ PRPD u u/

inductive PD sensor void in insulation material

capacitive PD sensor floating elements

Figure 12: Influence of different PD Figure 13: Patterns to distinguish three

Table 2: Overview of PD identification methods

3.2.2 Identification based on acoustic measurements

50/100 Hz Weak 50 Hz 100 Hz

Signal Level High Low High

Level High Stable Stable

Pattern Elevation Phase Phase

Signal Shape Pulsed Cont. Cont.

4 Assessment of critical defects

4.2 Mobile particles

Figure 16: Assessment of moving particle by time-of-flight measurements

4.3 Loose and electrically floating elements

4.4 Particle on insulation material

Protrusions can be classified in two categories:

Figure 17: PD magnitude generated by protrusions under corona stabilisation

4.6 Voids in insulation material and cavities in spacer

4.7 Contact erosion in main circuit

4.8 Defects in GIS components

4.9 Defects on interfaces

Figure 18: Flow chart of the proposed risk assessment procedure

5.2 Technical impact parameters of PD defects

Technical Impact Parameters

* no information is currently available from PD measurement,

Table 3: Aspects of technical impact parameter for different PD defects

5.3 Calculation procedure of dielectric failure probability

A) Confidence of the diagnosis

Diagnosis confidence Range of diagnosis confidence

quite uncertain common expert 26 - 50 %