TRAFOTECH 2018 –Tenth International Conference on Transformers

POWER TRANSFORMER TANK RUPTURE-CAUSE, MODE AND MITIGATION

Anil Babu Boppana, Pramod Reddy

ABB India Limited, Vadodara

1. INTRODUCTION 2. CAUSE OF TANK RUPTURE

Transformer tank may rupture when a severe low
impedance fault occurs inside the transformer
tank. Generally it will be a flash over from primary
winding line end/bushing bottom to tank,
generating high fault current as the grid fault level
collapses inside the tank. Energy flow in the arc
vaporizes the oil and the gas volume generated
will be manifold. This causes a pressure rise in the
transformer tank. The location, duration, and
magnitude of the arc fault will greatly influence the
amount of the pressure rise in the transformer
tank. The dynamic pressure wave can rupture the
tank side before it reaches the pressure relief
device to vent out the excess pressure. Tank
rupture will result in considerable oil spillage to
environment. It can result in oil fire when the hot
combustible gases from oil catch fire as it comes in
contact with oxygen in atmosphere. Such fires can
completely gut the transformer and sometimes
may cause collateral damages. In future,
engineers may have to take proactive design steps
to make rupture resistant tanks and adopt steps to
mitigate tank rupture. National standards have
come out, such as IEEE C57.156-2016 “Guide for
tank rupture mitigation of liquid immersed power
transformers and reactors” to meet this
requirement. Method for estimating the pressure
rise from different types of electric arcs is
formulated and general design measures to
mitigate tank rupture under such situations are
proposed in this standard.
This paper reviews the tank rupture phenomena by
cause and mode. Mitigation and prevention
methods are presented to alleviate tank rupture by
modifying tank designs, adopting protection
practices to reduce arc energy flow and using
alternate solutions to eliminate chances for tank
rupture.
Power transformers are insulated and cooled by
mineral oil. When a fault develops in secondary
winding or part of primary winding, it is a high
impedance fault as winding reactance limits the
fault current. But when it is a direct line fault either
from the winding line end or bushing bottom tail to
ground, the only impedance stopping the fault
current is the low system impedance. The entire
system fault current is released inside tank till the
breaker clears the fault. The energy released
depends on the peak of current value, duration of
fault and the arc voltage. This energy from
electrical arc decomposes oil and the rapidly
expanding gas bubble (70-100 cc of gas /kJ of
energy at 20000 K) at high pressure and
temperature, generates a dynamic pressure rise
inside the tank, of the order of 25-5000 bar/sec
and local static pressures of the order of 14 bar.
This creates a mechanical stress on tank plates
and when it exceeds the yield strength of material,
tank ruptures.
Fig-1: Ruptured Tank
The pressure rise generates pressure waves that
propagate inside the oil and interact with the tank

1-5
 TRAFOTECH 2018 –Tenth International Conference on Transformers
structure. This wave and structure interaction
eventually leads to the tank rupture or even
explosion. These ruptures can result in outflow of a
large amount of oil and may also cause a fire when
the hot combustible gases come in contact with
oxygen from outside air. Oil spills will cause
environmental pollution apart from fire. It is
reported that tank rupture is seen when the arc
energy is more than 8.5MJ and possibility of oil fire
is more when energy levels exceed 20 MJ [1]. It is
also seen that chances of tank rupture is more with
Generator Transformers, for the same level of arc
energy release probably due to continued energy
feed from generator and HV side.
3. MODE OF TANK RUPTURE
Chance for tank rupture depends on the pressure
build up inside the tank. This in turn, depends on
the volume of gas generated by the arc, arc
location and the tank expansion characteristics.
Gas volume is related to energy release from arc
(which in turn is the product of arc current (I), arc
voltage (V) and duration time (T)).
Arc Energy (J) Earc = 0.9 V I t [1]
Arc Voltage (volt) = 55L √P where L= length of arc
in cm, P = Absolute pressure in the gas bubble
surrounding the arc (atm)
HV Voltage class Arc Energy (kJ)
of
Transformer(kV)
72.5 2000
145 4000
245 8000
420 20000
765 20000
Table-1: Relationship between arc energy and
voltage class [1]
With reference to above table, it is clear that higher
the voltage class, it will results in greater arc
energy which in turn generates higher pressure
2-5
build up inside the tank, subject to tank expansion
coefficient. Based on a conservative assumption of
an isothermal expansion of the gas bubble, the
tank pressure build up can be estimated from the
following formula.
Ps (calculated tank pressure k Pa above atmosphere) = F
{100 [√1/4 +√ (kE /100 C)] -50} [2]
Where F =Dynamic amplification factor (Ratio of
localized dynamic pressure to static pressure
developed from arc) =1.5-2.5 (for C/V between 20-
180)
C= tank expansion coefficient (m3/ k Pa) i.e.
flexibility of tank
V= Oil volume in main tank (m3)
k = Arc energy to gas conversion factor = 5.8 x10 -4
m3 /kJ at 2000 0 K.
Assumption: A gas generation rate of 85 cc/kJ and
24 % of arc energy is transferred in to enthalpy for
gas bubble expansion and mechanical energy to
deform tank.
E = Fault energy level (kJ)
4. TANK RUPTURE MITIGATION AND
PREVENTION METHODS
5. 4.1 Mitigation methods
● Flexible tank – absorbs part of arc energy
by the deformation process of tank.
● Bracing critical areas of tank.eg. Tank
cover joint, tank corner welds.
● Use of Fast depressurisation valve or
rupture disc.
● Use of an automatic shutter valve in
conservator to tank pipe to stop oil flow in
the event of a tank rupture
● Large expansion tank with large connecting
trunk to tank for absorbing the pressure
rise.
6. 4.1.1 Flexible Tank
By making the tank flexible, certain portion of
pressure from arc energy is absorbed by the side
panel deforming action, thereby reducing the
pressure levels below the tank rupturing levels.
Design is done for maximum tank side deflection
 TRAFOTECH 2018 –Tenth International Conference on Transformers
without causing plate or weld rupture. The example
below show a 20 MJ arc energy event. The risk of
tank rupture is mitigated by much lower tank
stresses in a flexible tank (250kPa) compared to a
rigid tank (630kPa) [4].
Fig-2a: Flexible Tank [4] Fig-2b: Rigid Tank [4]
Flexible tank solution is always better than a
pressure venting approach (traditional large-
volume expansion chambers) for reducing the
static pressures developed. Studies show that
even a large venting area of 1.0-1.5 m2 would
reduce the peak pressure by only 10 to 30 percent
during an internal arcing fault. Such level of
reduction is insufficient to mitigate tank rupture risk
under normal circumstances.
7. 4.1.1a Flexible Tank design
considerations and
bracing
Tank wall thickness shall be as thin as possible
without exceeding the yield strength of plate
between stiffeners. Optimum balance is to be
achieved between stiffener rigidity and flexibility
of un-supported side plate between stiffeners.
3-5
Fig-3: High voltage Transformer
Some typical considerations for flexible tank:
● Tank wall of round corners with weld joint
shifted from corners.
● Reinforcing tank corners and wall to bottom
base joints with inside plates / gussets
● Reinforcing the weld joints at the ends of
stiffeners by adding plates that spread the end
reaction loads and connecting the stiffeners to
adjacent walls
● Tank with flat bottom and flat cover.
● Welded Cover
● Tank wall weld joints of full penetration with
ultrasonic testing.
● Cover anchoring to active part for maximum
upward deflection.
● Steel of lower yield stress and higher
elongation to get more flexibility.
● Integral bushing turrets with extra
reinforcement at sides.
● PRD with exit pipe to guide the oil directly to
the pit.
● Reinforcing the ends of stiffeners by adding
plates that spread the end reaction loads.
● Strengthening throats (bushing turrets) and
wall penetrations using reinforcing angles or
gusset plates
8. 4.1.1b Checking tank for rupture strength
In future, customers may ask to prove the rupture
resistance of tanks. This is usually checked by non
–linear static finite element analysis. A simplified
solid (3D) model of the tank with actual thickness
and geometry of different parts, is used for getting
detailed stress analysis. Static simulation generally
gives more conservative results.
To find out the flexibility of tank, tank pressure is
increased and the volumetric flexibility is estimated
using static FEM. There are reported studies with
3D CAD model in ANSYS space creating a mid-
surface model [3] (in between shell model and
solid model with less nodes for faster calculation )
and using static pressure simulation Calculate arc
pressure for each step and use this as applied
pressure. Strain shall be less than ultimate
 TRAFOTECH 2018 –Tenth International Conference on Transformers
permissible strain for tank material. Weakest parts
are kept at the top of the tank. To determine local
pressure concentration, dynamic simulation will be
required (eg. ANSYS -LS DYNA) [6].
The rupture resistant transformer design will
mitigate the risk of tank rupture thereby avoiding
insulating fluid spills and consequent fires. For
faults, higher than the specification limits,
manufacturer should demonstrate by calculation
the first rupture point is at tank cover [1].
9. 4.1.2 Conservator shutter
valve
The conservator shutter valve is installed on the oil
pipe connecting the conservator to the tank .The
shutter valve allows oil flow in both directions. It
will close and initiate an alarm if the flow rate back
to tank exceeds a certain limit. This will prevent oil
feed from conservator to the oil spill through
ruptured tank joint
Fig-4: Conservator shutter valve
10. 4.1.3 Modern Rupture Disc
Fast acting depressurization systems have been
developed as an improvement over conventional
PRD. It is claimed that such pressure relief devices
can reduce the chances of tank rupture.
Depressurization set is activated within
milliseconds by the first dynamic pressure peak of
the shock wave, thereby releasing tank pressure
quickly and tripping the actuating relays fast there
by reducing the arc duration. The diameter of the
Depressurization Set is sized individually based on
the transformer power rating and the transformer
function (Generation, Distribution or Transmission)
[6]
4-5
11. 4.2 Prevention methods
● Alternate insulating medium to oil- SF6 gas
or esters
● Use of Generator circuit breakers with large
Generator Transformers
● Reducing chances of a low impedance fault
through better insulation clearances at
vulnerable areas (bottom tail of bushings,
line end of windings) inside tank and
insulation monitoring
● Fast acting protective relays and fast
clearing breakers reduce the duration of
arc, thereby preventing tank rupture.
12. 4.2.1 Ester Fluids
Ester fluids (natural or synthetic) when used as
alternate insulating fluid, may not reduce the
chances of tank rupture from internal arcs but will
reduce the risk of fire initiation and propagation to
a great extent[7]. Esters fluids have higher flash
point, fire point and auto ignition temperatures
compared to mineral oils (approx. 2000C higher
each). It is the inflammable gases from the
insulating fluids that act as fuel for starting fire. The
gases generated due to high temperature of arc in
different insulating fluids will have varying content
of flammable or explosive elements .There are
lower and upper concentration of these
inflammable gases in air within which range the
mixture would be considered flammable. With
esters, a higher percent volume of gases is
required before a fire can be ignited and
maintained .eg: with natural esters approx. 10
times more than with mineral oil (0.6% vs 9%) [7].
Heat release rate (amount of thermal energy
released per unit time) of ester is less than that of
mineral oil (eg: natural ester 1/8 of mineral oil)
giving better self-extinguishing properties [7].
13. 4.2.2 Gas insulated
Transformers
Use of SF6 gas as dielectric insulation, instead of
mineral oil, will eliminate the risk of transformer
tank rupture during severe faults. SF6 gas is
compressible and will result in only low pressure
rises inside the transformer tank during internal
arcing faults. SF6 gas is nonflammable and even if
tank rupture were to occur, the release of SF6 gas
will not pose an explosion or fire risk. The main
 TRAFOTECH 2018 –Tenth International Conference on Transformers

limitation for its application is due to its very high 15. CONCLUSION
cost and requirement of pressurized tanks [1]
16. Transformer tank rupture
14. 4.2.3 Generator Circuit due to internal arcing fault is
Breakers a complex problem.
Pressure rise in the
Generator circuit breakers (GCB) between
transformer is affected by
generator and transformer can prevent energy flow
both the expanding gas
from generator to a transformer internal fault
bubble generated by the
quickly. [8] This will reduce the energy flow through
arcing fault as well as the
arc and hence the internal pressure build up in
interaction of the
tank.
propagating pressure wave
4.2.4 Protection System with the transformer tank
Protective relays should sense the internal low and its internal components.
impedance faults quickly and activate the breakers Still we can minimize the
fast to reduce the arc duration time and there by severity of pressure rise by
the quantum of energy release. From the speed adopting flexible tank
and sensitivity angle, it is claimed that Restricted concepts which allows tank
Earth Fault Relay (REF) is superior to differential to absorb certain generated
relay and can clear the fault within half a cycle pressure and other
protecting up to 95 % of winding. High speed preventive measures.
protection relays with fast acting breaker (<2 Rupture resistant tank can
cycles) can limit arc energy released in to tank be considered to mitigate the
esp. at locations with high fault levels. [9] problems of oil spills and fire
hazards.

17. REFERENCES
[1] IEEE Std C 57.156-2016 –“Guide for Tank
Rupture Mitigation of Liquid Immersed Power
Transformers and Reactors”
[2] Working Group A2.33. “Guide for Transformer
Fire Safety Practices.” CIGRE 2013.
[3] M. Foata, J.B. Dastous, Power Transformer
Tank Rupture Prevention, 2010 Cigré Colloquim,
Paris.
[4] S. Brodeur, Y. Salmi, A. Collier, “A Flexible
Friend”, ABB Review, January 2016
[5] T. Kawamura et al., "Prevention of Tank
Rupture due to Internal Fault of Oil Filled
Transformers," Paper 12-02, CIGRÉ 1988
Session, Paris.
[6]Task force of IEEE Power Transformer
subcommittee, "Power Transformer Tank Rupture
and Mitigation”,IEEE PASVol24,No.4 October,2009
[7]George Frimpong, S.Page etc.; “Transformers
Transformed”, ABB Review No2, 2012

5-5
 TRAFOTECH 2018 –Tenth International Conference on Transformers

[8] Prevention of Trank Rupture by Generator

CircuitBreakers”-B.Culver,K.Frohlich, L.Widenhorn,
ETEP Vol 6, No.1 January/February 1996
[9] Tom Rosenberg, Ilija Jankovic “Transformer
Tank Rupture – A Protection Engineer’s
Challenge”, 70th Annual Conference for Protective
Relay Engineers,2017

6-5