Partial Discharges: Questions for Discussion

Alexander Ovsyannikov Dmitry Vodennikov Alexander Kokh

and Sergey Zhivodernikov Federal Grid Company of Novosibirsk State
Electrogridservice of UNEF Unified Energy System Technical University
Novosibirsk, Russia Moscow, Russia Novosibirsk, Russia
Email: zsv@nspb.ru

Note that researchers only based on oscillograms of

Abstract—Partial discharge measurement is now a universally
accepted method for early diagnostics of equipment isolation, electrical signals made assumptions about existence of
however, the physical aspects of the processes are still not pulseless PD.
completely clear, and the accepted assumptions of almost half a At low resolution in time or at high repetition rate, the
century ago are still used in measurements of PD. In paper signals of one another overlap, creating the PD current
practical aspects, questions frequency band selection,
repeatability, registrating scheme calibration, electrical signals
continuity illusion. Something similar happened when
interpretation and measured range partial discharge registering corona in transformer oil [5]. The authors in [6],
characteristics expansion are raised up. recording PD electromagnetic radiation in power
Index Terms—partial discharges, measurements, insulation, transformers, noted that many very short pulses are
discussion superimposed on long pulses, SHF signals of which can be
used to locate the PD source.
I. I NTRODUCTION Optical studies of PD signals clearly prove the pulsed nature
Partial discharge (PD) measurement is a recognized method of the PD [7–9], which are formed by a multi-avalanche or
to estimate insulation status worldwide at least from the end of streamer mechanism.
’90. However, still there are many discussion issues. Some
important questions of partial discharges theory that are of What carriers of PD charges are the current recorded?
interest for discussion are considered. These include the phys- The PD charge is the sum of the equal modulo electrons and
ical mechanism question, current and radiation pulses, PD ions charges. We determine the apparent charge in accordance
formation and delay time as well as the factors affecting the with national standard [1] by the calibration factor or by
detected apparent charge magnitude. integrating the pulse current. It is known from gas discharge
theory the electron drift velocity is two orders of magnitude
II. O MISSION IN PARTIAL DISCHARGE THEORY higher ions one, and, accordingly, the electronic PD current
What mechanism of gas discharge are PD formed? component is two orders of magnitude higher than the ionic
component. This is clearly seen from calculated and measured
The answer to this question affects almost all aspects, from
comparison shapes current pulses of single PD as shown in
estimates of dielectric aging to equipment requirements for
Fig. 1. Therefore, in the best case, i.e. when the apparent
recording PD. Most often, a dispute arises around two
charge is close to true, we register only half the charge
mechanisms PD formation: avalanche (or multi-avalanche)
transferred in the PD channel.
and streamer. Less common is the assumption of spark and
even arc PD forms. The first boundary in the field of view-
points was on the question of PD duration. In [1–3], pulse- free
PD form with quasi-continuous discharge development during
half-cycle voltage part is mentioned. R.Bartnikas [4] connects
the transition from quasi-continuous to pulsed form with
overvoltages relative to the PD voltage ignition, which
inevitably occur when PD delay. However, the continuous
discharge current flow (during the time when voltage is applied
to the external electrodes) cannot be for two reasons:
- after a run of electron avalanches and electrons and ions
deposition on opposite cavity walls, the electric field strength
in the cavity volume drops sharply, interrupting the processes
of impact ionization;
- the further existence of the current in the partial discharge
channel is also limited by the bias current in the dielectric, Fig. 1a. PD form in air cavity:
which at an industrial frequency has vanishingly small value. calculation for 0,5 mm cavity [10]

978-1-7281-5879-2/20/$31.00 ©2020 IEEE

Authorized licensed use limited to: Auckland University of Technology. Downloaded on November 09,2020 at 07:43:57 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.

Fig. 1b. PD form in air cavity:
experiment with 1,0 mm cavity (40 mA/div, 20 ns/div) [9].
The PD current electronic component is also supported by
the fact during synchronous recordings of radiation and the
PD current, the waveforms coincidence of photoelectronic
multipliers (PM) and current pulses shape was noted as we
can see on Fig. 2.
a)
b)
Fig. 2. Current and radiation PD pulses in the air:
a) upper trace – current, lower trace – radiation [8];
b) in disc 1 mm cavity [9].
Time resolution 20 ns/div.
It is known that PD radiation is associated with a neutral
air molecules excitation discharge, and only electrons can
have energy corresponding to the excitation and molecules
Authorized licensed use limited to: Auckland University of Technology. Downloaded on November 09,2020 at 07:43:57 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
ionization. Thus, the coincidence of the shape of the current
and the glow serves as further evidence electronic component
dominance in the PD current.
What is the real duration of the PD?
If we finally accept that the recorded current pulses are de-
termined by the electron current, then PD duration
corresponds to the front duration, provided that the equipment
and registration scheme as a whole are sufficient for that.
According to literary sources, it is easy to see how, as the
experimental technique developed, the duration of the PD
front “decreased” from microseconds to hundredths of a
nanosecond, i.e. four orders!
If we assume that the formation of each PD occurs when the
electric field strength is equal to the breakdown field and after
the charge sedimentation, the field strength inside the cavity
drops so that the PD stops, then for cavities with (0.01 - 1) mm
diameter, the electron drift time corresponding to the recorded
signal edge duration should be approximately (0.02 - 10) ns.
However, this assumption applies to those current pulses whose
amplitude exceeds the recording equipment sensitivity
threshold.
The question of sensitivity is also not an idle one. Firstly, the
signal size is strongly influenced by the intrinsic cavity
dimensions. The calculated curves of the formation dynamics
(by the impact ionization mechanism) and PD charge transfer
in the air cavity with 5 m diameter shown in Fig. 3 show
extremely low and unavailable for registration energy and time
characteristics of the avalanche growth process.
a)
b)
Fig. 3. Number of ionization events (a) and charge transfer (b) in time
during PD in cavity with 5 μm diameter and electric field strength 270
kV/cm
 Secondly, it must be taken into consideration apparent PD
charge can be much smaller than the true one [11] if the cavity
is in the bulk of the dielectric. There are other ”subtleties”. For
example, synchronous recording of the radiation pattern and
the PD current in [7] showed the number of micro- discharges
is greater than the number of current pulses. In [9], the
chronography of PD radiation showed micro-discharges
starting almost simultaneously in different places of a flat
cavity form a current pulse with one or two maxima [9].
Where do the initial electrons come from? What is the PD
delay?
Experimenters often encountered large discrepancies be-
tween the expected and actual stresses of the occurrence of PD.
In this case, time delays until the appearance of PD even during
overvoltages reached several hours due to the “deficit” of
initial electrons. The generation of initial electrons is most
often associated with the ionization of neutral gas particles
under the influence of the radiation background of the earth,
which is formed mainly from the action of cosmic radiation.
From their exposure to 1 cm3 of atmospheric air at sea level,
4–10 ion pairs are formed every second [12]. At such ionization
rates, taking into account the small size of gas bubbles in a
liquid or cavities in a solid dielectric, the calculated retardation
times of the PD given below should be expected to be very
large [10]:
Cavity diameter, µm 5 10
Time to appear 362 20
ignition electron years years
Cavity diameter, µm 100 500
Time to appear 7,4 1,4
ignition electron days hours
In [9], another mechanism for the appearance of firing
electrons was proposed. It took into account the prehistory in
which electrons arose under the influence of external ionizing
radiation, adhered to neutral molecules, and adsorbed on the
walls of the cavity. The decay of negative ions at an electric
field strength sufficient for the breakdown of gas in the cavity
served as an explanation of the most probable mechanism of
generation of initial electrons. Later, the author of [13]
experimentally confirmed this hypothesis.
Is the name of the main PD characteristic correct?
“Apparent” charge is probably not the most suitable defi-
nition of charge from PD current flowing in external circuit.
Interestingly, in the early publications only the term
“charge” or “energy” of the PD was used [7]. Later the term
“charge, induced” on external electrodes of insulating struc-
ture, more understandable to electrical engineers and physicists
[3]. At the turn of the century, they tried to return the term
“inducted” to the literature [14] but without success. The
adjective “apparent” after its appearance in the standards is
firmly rooted in textbooks, regulatory documents, etc.
How does the PD apparent charge depend on the defect size?
National standard [1] leaves no hope of knowing the true
PD charge and power. It is good that dangerous PDs arising in
cavities of relatively large sizes and adjacent to the electrodes
have apparent charge close to true [11]. For this
Authorized licensed use limited to: Auckland University of Technology. Downloaded on November 09,2020 at 07:43:57 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
reason, for example, factory PD tests of power transformers
are a good tool for testing insulation manufacturing
technology. Some experiments have shown direct relationship
between apparent charge and size of cavity or bubbles. So tests
of the oil channel model in the oil and gas transformer
insulation with air bubbles showed following relationships
between size of bubbles and the PD apparent charge [15]:
Bubble diameter, mm 2,1 3,9 5,8
PD apparent charge
0,2…2 0,2…5 1…20
range, nC
This means that at norm for admissible PD apparent charge
of 300 pC in the power transformers insulation we “feel”
bubbles with diameter of >2 mm, i.e. large enough. Inci-
dentally, in the same experiments the symmetry of the phase
resolved diagrams was observed with respect to the applied
voltage amplitudes, which contradicts the well-known ideas
about the phase angles PD existence for defects in solid
insulation. This feature of PD behavior can be explained by
higher relaxation rate of charges deposited on the bubble walls
in liquid dielectrics compared to solid insulation and used as
a sign of the defect type.
How to evaluate the PD intensity in a capacitor-type
insulation?
50 Uncertainty in interpreting the results of measuring PD in
59 a capacitor-type insulation is amplified many times if the PD
days
1000
source is in the insulation layer between equalizing plates.
10,6 Even if there were direct access to these plates then we would
min have to deal with the PD apparent charge. In reality current
pulses in the external circuit are controlled and therefore we
measure a small fraction of already small apparent charge
[16]. Sensitivity may not be enough to register PD since their
current closes in the layer between the plates. A similar
situation occurs when testing capacitors with parallel-series
connection of individual packages [17].
III. D ISADVANTAGES IN PD REGISTRATION PRACTICE
In what frequency band to measure the PD electrical signals?
The standard [1] requires an upper frequency range of (0.5
- 1) MHz, however, PD signals can be recorded in this
frequency band only in laboratory conditions with careful
filtering of network and airborne interference. At existing
substations RF communication channels on overhead lines
create serious problem for PD measuring. Barrier filters
reduce carrier frequency voltage on switchyard buses to a few
volts, but if the indicated frequency is hundreds of kilohertz
then it greatly complicates PD registration (Fig. 4).
In addition, there is corona and other interferences also, the
frequency range of which extends to tens of megahertz. In our
experience, one of the reliable tools for PD selecting from
interference is short (less than 40 ns) front duration, but they
can only be observed with oscilloscopes with an upper
measurement frequency about tens of MHz. Perhaps for this
reason, the standard for PD measuring in utility [18]
recommends upper recording equipment frequency of 15 MHz
and an oscilloscope with upper frequency of 60 MHz.
 Fig. 4. Noise signals generated by RF-communication in 220 kV SF6 bushing. RF-communication is on feeding overhead line on phase “C”.
On phase C signal is about 1 V, on phase “B” induced signal is 5 times less, on phase “A” - 20 times less.
What repetition rate should PD have, the charge of which must
be taken into account?
In the basic standard, it is recommended to take the appar-
ent charge magnitude of repeating discharges under the PD
intensity, their repetition rate is not indicated. According to
classical concepts, PD repletion rate should be a multiple of
network frequency. In practice, the PD sequence over time is
most often irregular.
In order to somehow normalize the parameter, in standard
[1] repetition rate has been introduced, which can vary within
Rc = 0-1. In [18], the same indicator is called “regularity, Re,”
and it is recommended to characterize the discharge activity
by PD apparent charge, repeated at least in every second
voltage period, i.e. at Re 0.5. In many publications, the
intensity is expressed by q02, i.e. PD recurring with R 0.2.
Obviously, PD repeatability depends on many factors, for
example, on phase transitions “liquid - vapor” during PD in
liquid dielectrics. There are delays associated with the shortage
of initial electrons [10, 19]. There is also PD self-extinguishing
and, conversely, immediately before a full breakdown there are
single powerful PD. For these reasons, we consider it
advisable to provide in the measurement protocol the full
characteristic of the PD discharge activity with a detailed
description discharges nature with different apparent charges.
Why are there no norms for other PD characteristics?
In our practice, there have been cases where the most
important thing was not the maximum apparent charge, but
average current and voltage of the PD occurrence/extinction.
In one of the diagnosed autotransformers, PD charges did not
exceed 100 pC, but their quantity was very large. As it turned
out, the isolation barriers in the autotransformer were clogged
with sawdust from the collapsing oil pump impeller. In another
case, when testing the autotransformer 220/110 kV, the low
value of the PD occurrence voltage, which were identified by
the oscillograms as a series in bushing insulation, was alerted.
Despite the small charges of the PD (about 50 pC), 220 kV
Authorized licensed use limited to: Auckland University of Technology. Downloaded on November 09,2020 at 07:43:57 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
bushing dismantling confirmed the initial stage of insulation
damage in the layers of paper adjacent to the current-
conducted pipe.
Note that the PD data format recommended by CIGRE has
23 (!) mutual distributions types of PD characteristics [20].
Recently, the most common application for the analysis of
phase-resolved PD diagrams (PRPD) has become. E. Gulsky,
by the PRPD appearance, already 20 years ago created 27
images (“finger prints”) of insulation defects for bushings,
transformers and other equipment [21]. Company ”Dimrus”
published 4 types of PRPD, corresponding to different types
of the PD [22]. Great expectations are associated with the
analysis of the temporal characteristics of PD signals in the
so-called TF-plane. In the new edition of the IEC 60270-
2015 standard, the sections devoted to digital methods for
recording PD and, in particular, to amplitude-phase diagrams
are significantly expanded.
How to calibrate the registration circuit when testing
insulating structures with low capacitance between the
electrodes?
In accordance with the standards requirements with a par-
allel calibration scheme, calibration capacitor must have a
capacity much less than the object capacity. But how to do
this if object capacity is a dozen or two picofarads?! All
that remains is option with sequential switching on of the
calibration capacitor, which is impossible to realize under
field conditions. The option with the “inverted” calibration
scheme is not always convenient and it must be checked due
to the uncertainty in the value of the parasitic capacitance.
Specific problems arise when testing objects with a large
ratio of height to transverse dimensions and with a small
intrinsic capacity. Such structures include support and
suspension rod insulators, surge arresters, measuring
transformers with gas- insulated insulation, etc. The result of
PD measuring during their testing depends on the area of the
grounded electrode: the larger the area, the greater the
measured value of the apparent charge. There is dependence
on stand height. Essence of the influence of geometry lies
in electric field heterogeneity.
The more field lines of force are closed on a grounded
plane, the greater the amount of PD induced charge is
collected on it and fixed by a registration circuit. For this
reason, norms on PD intensity in such objects should be
accompanied by detailed instructions regarding the size and
arrangement of circuit elements [25].
What should one focus on when assessing the charge of the
a) experiment sketch
PD in longitudinal isolation?
For various reasons, PD can also occur in longitudinal
insulation, for example, in coil insulation of shunt reactor
windings, power transformers and in generators stator wind-
ings. It can be attributed to PD in longitudinal insulation and
sparking in autotransformers OLTC contactors. In our
practice, the signal waveforms shown in Fig. 5 were
obtained.
In one of phases in 500 kV autotransformer group, in addi-
tion to the usual PD signals, irregularly repeated oscillation b) signal transmission through capacitor to coordinated load and
packets of noticeably larger amplitude were observed. The grounding of cable shield from both ends at one point
signals had different polarity on the bushing sensors 500 and
220 kV. In this case, the signal at 220 kV bushing was ahead
of the signal at the 500 kV side by approximately 40 ns, and
its amplitude was approximately twice as large. On these
grounds, an assumption arose about sparking in the OLTC
contact system.
By acoustic method, the discharge activity in the OLTC
was confirmed. It was recommended and it performed tests
and ohmic resistances measurements with various OLTC
position. Deviations from the norm have not been
established. However, a year later, autotransformers group
crashed due to the OLTC gas protection in the suspected
phase. Opening OLTC tank showed flexible connection
c) the cable is coordinated, but the upper shield end is grounded with
burnout from the external contact of the withdrawn part copper tape
OLTC to the contactor. Similar damage was detected on the
flexible connection adjacent contact.
Thus, PD location issue was solved successfully, however,
the question remained how to calibrate PD registration scheme
in longitudinal isolation and what charge values to normalize?
What errors can occur in calibration?
The basic standard [1] introduced stringent requirements for
the errors of calibration generators. Recording equipment
producers should check them by comparing the output voltage
with a reference generator, which is stored in a separate room
with climate control, air purity, etc. And if you think about
what they transfer to the transformer input through a wire or
cable with indefinite length and indefinite location, grounding, d) signal conducted by wire
coordination, etc.? What is the signal up there? What does its Fig. 6. Changes of calibration signal waveform (upper trace).
amplitude and shape have to do with the signals that arise in
the registration scheme from real PDs? We received some Despite the inclusion of matching load resistance, the
answers in simple laboratory experiments, the scheme and presence of inductance in the ground circuit of the shield
results of which are shown in Fig. 6. affects. In some cases, practice PD measuring at existing
It can be seen front duration varies from the initial 40 ns to substations calibrating the registration scheme for various
120 ns when grounding the cable shield at the conditionally reasons was problematic. There was only one way out - to
“upper” end through a copper strip as recommended in [18]. integrate PD current to get an apparent charge. With digital

Authorized licensed use limited to: Auckland University of Technology. Downloaded on November 09,2020 at 07:43:57 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
data, this is quite simple. As a comparison result, we came to
conclusion that discrepancies in the apparent charge values
obtained by integration and calibration do not exceed 20%
with the correct choice of integration limits over time.
What to do with PD signals attenuation data when changing
their location?
When registering the PD in a transformer, calibration is
carried out by applying calibration charge to the winding
beginning via bushing. But PD can also occur in the winding
bulk. If possible, then PD sensors are included in different
winding places and apparent charge value can be adjusted
according to calibration coefficients matrix. But on this point
the normative documents recommendations are stopped. Is it
necessary to multiply the measured value by the attenuation
coefficient and compare it with the normalized value of PD
intensity? What to do with cables or rotating equipment? In
them, there are no intermediate points for connecting sensors
along the length and attenuation can be quite large.
CONCLUSION
For clarity in theoretical calculations, it is necessary to
achieve a better understanding what we measure from of PD
different types and what factors influence measurement
results of the PD characteristics.
Even with all the omissions and shortcomings, diagnosis
in the PD is excellent tool for technological control in factory
testing laboratories and therefore has the right to life.
To introduce the PD method into practice, it is necessary to
work on the listed disadvantages elimination. In particular,
use larger number of recorded PD characteristics in order to
produce reliable defects images that initiate them. Carry out
in-depth results analysis obtained in comparison with the
other tests data, inspections, disassembly and repair. Only
then can we expect that the registration of the PD will become
a real tool for identifying acquired of various types
equipment defects, including problematic ones.
REFERENCES
[1] GOST R 55191-2012 (IEC 60270:2000). High voltage test methods.
Partial discharge measurements.
[2] G. Kuchinskii, Partial discharges in high voltage structures. Energy,
1979.
[3] V. Vdoviko, Partial discharges in the diagnosis of high-voltage
equipment. Novosibirsk, Nauka, 2007.
[4] R. Bartnikas. Partial Discharges, Their Mechanism, Detection and
Measurement // IEEE Trans. on Dielectrics and Electr. Insul., 2002, v.9,
no. 5. C. 763 – 808.
[5] A. Ovsyannikov, A. Kolesnikov, Investigation of the spatio-temporal
characteristics of a corona discharge in air and in oil / Methods and
means of assessment comp. energ equipment. Proceed. Production
quality and reliability of oil-filled equipment, 2002.
[6] Templeton, K Roberts, O Rudolph, P Kakeeto, M D Judd, “Partial
discharge detection and location in power transformers using the UHF
technique”, Proc. Int. Conf. on Condition Monitoring and Diagnostic
Engineering Management of Power Station and Substation Equipment
(Bangalore), Central Power Research Institute, January 2009
[7] J.H. Mason. The deterioration and breakdown of dielectrics resulting
from internal discharges // Proc. IEE - Pt. 1: General, 1951, v. 98 (109).
pp. 44-59.
Authorized licensed use limited to: Auckland University of Technology. Downloaded on November 09,2020 at 07:43:57 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
[8] C. Mayoux, M. Goldman. Partial discharges in solid dielectrics and
corona discharge phenomena // J. of Applied Physics, 1973, v. 44, no
9. pp. 3940-3944.
[9] A. Ovsyannikov, Spatial-temporal and energy characteristics of partial
discharges in air cavities of solid dielectrics. Procced. NSTU, 1999.
[10] Bartnikas R., A Comment Concerning the Rise Times of Partial
Discharge Pulses // IEEE Trans. on Dielectrics and Electr. Insul., 2005,
v.12, no 2. pp. 196 – 202.
[11] A. Ovsyannikov, S. Korobeinikov, D. Vagin, The relationship between
the apparent and true charges of partial discharges. Elecricity, 2014,
Vol.8.
[12] G. Reter, Electronic avalanches and breakdown in gases. Mir, Moscow,
1968.
[13] Hummel1 R. and others, Inception time delay for internal partial
discharges / Proc. 19th Int. Symp. on High Voltage Eng., 2015. Paper
473.
[14] I.V. McCalister. Electric Fields and Electric Insulation // IEEE Trans.
on Dielectrics and Electr. Insul., 2002, v.9, no 5. pp. 672 – 694.
[15] Niasar M.G., Edin H., Wang X., Clemence R. Рartial discharge
characteristics due to air and water vapor bubbles in oil / Proc. of XVII
Int. Symp. on High Volt. Eng., Hannover, 2011. Paper D – 067.
[16] A. Ovsyannikov, R. Arbuzov, S. Zhivodernikov, Estimation of the
apparent charge of partial discharges in the capacitor type insulation.
Energoexpert, 2014, Vol.6.
[17] L. Daryan, K. Zaitzev, The apparent charges of partial discharges in
sectioned capacitors / Dielectric strength of the insulation of high
voltage electrical equipment. Proceed. VEI, 1989.
[18] Organization Standard “FGK UES”. Method for measuring partial
discharges in the oil barrier insulation of power transformer equipment.
2015.
[19] S. Korobeynikov and others. Mechanism of Partial Discharges in Free
Helium Bubbles in Transformer Oil // IEEE Trans. on Dielectrics and
Electrical Insul., 2019, vol. 26, no. 5. С. 1605-1611.
[20] Lapp A., Kranz H.G. The use of the CIGRE data format for PD
diagnosis application // IEEE Trans. on Dielectrics and Electr. Insul . –
2000. – v.7, no 1. – pp.102-112.
[21] Gulsky E. Application of modern PD detection techniques to fault
recognition in the insulation of high voltage equipment / Proc. IX Int.
Symp. on High Volt. Eng., Graz, 1995. Paper 4532.
[22] V. Rusov, Partial discharge measurement in isolation of high voltage
equipment. Ekaterinburg, 2011.
[23] N. Kinsht and others, Methodological issues of evaluating multiple
partial discharges in high-voltage equipment / Methodological issues
of studying the reliability of large energy systems. In proc. Reliability
of developing energy systems, 2018.
[24] A. Ovsyannikov, S. Zhivodernikov, O. Golenko, "Inverted" calibration
scheme for the registration of partial discharges. Proc. Methods and
tools for assessing the state of power equipment, SPb, 2002.
[25] Organization Standard “FGK UES”. Guidelines for conducting
multifactor accelerated aging tests of polymeric support insulators for
voltage of 110 - 220 kV, 2014.