1
Evaluation of Fault Severity using NEI
(Simple Method)
James J. Dukarm, Ph.D., Life Member, IEEE
Abstract—Recent research suggests a new approach to trans-
former DGA fault detection and severity assessment. Instead
of comparing multiple fault gas concentrations and rates with
limits, the method employs an index of the energy required to
form the fault gas concentrations observed in an oil sample. That
index is responsive to all fault types and is directly related to
the probability of forced outage due to a DGA-detectable fault.
The increase in probability of failure associated with active fault
gas formation can be quantified and used as a basis for fault
detection and fault severity assessment.
Low molecular weight hydrocarbon gases (methane, ethane,
ethylene, and acetylene) dissolved in a transformer’s oil are
formed primarily when the oil is “cracked” by exposure to
intense thermal or electrical stress associated with overloading
or faults. Hydrogen is formed in the same way but can also be
formed in significant amounts in other ways. The hydrocarbon
gases, in the order listed above, are characteristically formed
at increasingly high fault temperatures because of the different
amounts of energy required to create a molecule of each gas
from oil. Methane is the primary hydrocarbon gas formed by
PD and T1 faults. Ethane and (to a slightly lesser degree)
methane are the primary gases formed by T2 faults, ethylene
is the primary gas formed by T3 faults, and acetylene is associ-
ated almost exclusively with faults involving electrical arcing
or sparking. The differential production of the hydrocarbon
gases depending on fault energy is the basis for the Duval
Triangle method of fault type identification.
Oil decomposition at or near normal operating temperatures,
caused by heat and various non-fault-related chemical and
electrochemical reactions with oxygen, dissolved water, con-
taminants, or solid materials in contact with the oil, sometimes
results in “stray gassing,” usually of hydrogen but sometimes
of methane, ethane, or ethylene.
The carbon oxides (carbon monoxide and carbon dioxide)
are formed by the gradual degradation of cellulosic insulation
by dissolved water and oxygen, catalyzed by acidic byprod-
ucts of oxidation of the oil. Arcing, partial discharge, and
overheating of conductors in proximity to cellulose insulation
can produce large amounts of carbon oxides and hydrogen by
carbonizing the cellulose (pyrolysis).
Based on the fact that the hydrocarbon gases methane,
ethane, ethylene, and acetylene are formed in oil primarily as
the result of fault energy decomposing the oil, recent research
[1] has shown that a quantity calculated from those concen-
trations – the hydrocarbon gas normalized energy intensity
(NEI-HC) – is useful for judging relative fault severity. As
J. Dukarm is the founder and Chief Technology Officer of Delta-X Research
Inc, Victoria, BC V8R 6T4, Canada, which provided financial support for this
research. (e-mail: jim@deltaxresearch.com)
indicated above, the diagnostically important gases hydrogen,
carbon monoxide, and carbon dioxide are not exclusively fault-
related and not always formed from the oil; consequently, they
are omitted from the NEI-HC calculation. The coefficients of
the gas concentrations in the formula below are the respective
standard heats of formation (kJ/mol) of the gases from a
typical oil molecule [2].
1 
NEI-HC = 77.7[CH4 ] + 93.5[C2 H6 ]
22400 (1)

+ 104.1[C2 H4 ] + 278.3[C2 H2 ]
Here, [CH4 ], [C2 H6 ], [C2 H4 ], and [C2 H2 ] are, respectively,
the concentrations (µL/L corrected to 273.15 K and 101.325
kPa) of methane, ethane, ethylene, and acetylene dissolved in
the transformer oil. The volume of one mole of an ideal gas
under these conditions is 22.4 L. The units of NEI-HC and
other NEI variants discussed below are kilojoules per kiloliter
(kJ/kL) or, equivalently, kilojoules per cubic meter.
A variant of NEI-HC called NEI-T, based on the concen-
trations of the “Duval triangle gases” methane, ethylene, and
acetylene, is useful for cases where ethane stray gassing is
suspected or when the ethane concentration is not being re-
ported, as is the case for some transformer gas-in-oil monitors.
NEI-T is calculated as in formula (1) but with the ethane
concentration [C2 H6 ] set to zero.
77.7[CH4 ] + 104.1[C2 H4 ] + 278.3[C2 H2 ]
NEI-T = (2)
22400
General remarks below about NEI-HC apply also to NEI-T.
A transformer that is actively producing hydrocarbon gas
may need investigation, surveillance, or mitigation appropri-
ate to the apparent fault type (determined from recent gas
increments, not levels by means of the Duval triangle or other
fault identification method) and the amount of increase in NEI-
HC since the gassing began. Accelerating NEI-HC increase or
evolution of the fault type from lower-energy faults (PD, T1,
T2) to higher-energy faults (T3, D1, D2) may signal that the
problem is worsening, with the potential of reaching a runaway
condition and failing the transformer. Reliability modeling
based on a combination of failure data and DGA [3] suggests,
however, that NEI-HC and combustible gas concentrations
are uninformative about transformer condition when there is
no active gas production – it may be misleading to classify
transformers as “good” or “poor” based on gas or NEI-HC
levels alone.
The response of NEI-HC to all fault types has been shown
to be sufficiently representative of the increase in failure
 2

probability that consideration of individual hydrocarbon fault The DGA interpretive method described here is a simplified
gases is not necessary for fault severity assessment. The carbon approximation of a more sophisticated method based on a
oxide gases (carbon monoxide and carbon dioxide) require survival probability curve instead of the constant approxima-
separate attention, however, since they represent fault-related tions given above of the NEI change per percentage point
paper decomposition. of failure probability increase. That method, which we call
NEI-CO is normalized energy intensity based on the carbon “reliability-based DGA” (RDGA), is used by TOA4 Monitor
oxide gases, which are formed from cellulosic insulation by Watch for interpreting transformer DGA online monitor data.
pyrolysis (overheating without oxidation). The formula for It will soon be available as an optional feature of TOA4 Online
NEI-CO is as follows: for interpretation of laboratory DGA data.
Transformer norms with increment limits for NEI-HC (or
101.4[CO] + 30.2[CO2 ] alternatively NEI-T) and for NEI-CO for implementing the
NEI-CO = (3)
22400 simplified approach are available now for TOA4 Online sub-
If NEI-CO is increasing, especially if the CO2/CO ratio is scribers. Contact support@deltaxresearch.com.
also significantly decreasing, the insulating paper is probably
being affected by overheating or electrical discharge. R EFERENCES
Since acetylene production is associated primarily with [1] F. Jakob and J. J. Dukarm, “Thermodynamic estimation of transformer
sparking or arcing, which should not be ongoing in a trans- fault severity,” IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery, vol. 30, no. 4, pp.
former in good condition under normal operating circum- 1941–1948, Aug 2015.
[2] F. Jakob, P. Noble, and J. J. Dukarm, “A thermodynamic approach to
stances, it may be wise to watch for evidence of continual evaluation of the severity of transformer faults,” IEEE Transactions on
production of acetylene, especially at low levels where NEI- Power Delivery, vol. 27, no. 2, pp. 554–559, April 2012.
HC is not changing very much. [3] J. J. Dukarm and M. Duval, “Transformer reliability and dissolved-
gas analysis,” in 2016 CIGRE Canada Conference, no. CIGRE-807,
Application of reliability engineering statistics to NEI-HC, Vancouver BC, October 2016.
NEI-T, and NEI-CO in a large DGA database with related
transformer failure data [3] shows that approximately one
percentage point of increase in failure probability results from
an NEI-HC increment of 0.7, an NEI-T increment of 0.5, or an
NEI-CO increment of 12.2. Those figures,based on DGA and
failure data from two large USA electric utilities, are sufficient
for assessing NEI increases unless there are some other locally
determined criteria.
Example
A power transformer experienced an NEI-HC increase of
0.43 over 550 days, then 1.76 over 365 days, and then 3.81
over 400 days with an apparent fault type of T3 in each case,
based on gas increments plotted on the Duval Triangle. During
the last 250 days, NEI-CO increased by 14.5.
Using the failure probability information provided above,
the NEI-HC related increase in failure probability associated
with the first event is 0.43/0.7 = 0.61 percentage points. For
the second event, it is 1.76/0.7 = 2.5 percentage points, and for
the third event it is roughly 3.81/0.7 = 5.4 percentage points.
The cumulative effect based on the total increase in NEI-HC
would be (0.43 + 1.76 + 3.81)/0.7 = 6.0/0.7 = 8.6 percentage
points, a very severe increase in the probability of failure.
The increase in NEI-CO on its own represented an increase in
probability of failure due to paper deterioration of 14.5/12.2 =
1.2 percentage points. Clearly urgent investigation and possible
mitigation should be considered for this transformer.
Conclusions
The use of the NEI fault energy indices in combination
with failure probability and failure rate information derived
by reliability engineering statistics provides a new limit-free
approach to DGA interpretation that assesses gassing event
severity in a form that permits the application of cost or loss
figures to quantify risk exposure represented by active fault
gas formation.