1978
4, OCTOBER 2009
Transformer Field Drying Procedures:
A Theoretical Analysis
José Antonio Almendros-Ibáñez, Juan Carlos Burgos, Member, IEEE, and Belén García, Member, IEEE
Abstract—Water is damaging for power transformers since it
accelerates aging processes, reduces dielectric margin, decreases
partial-discharge inception voltage, and, therefore, increases the
probability of unexpected failures. Taking into account that power
transformers are the most expensive equipment in an electrical
plant and that the electrical supply guarantee is closely related
to their reliability, it seems clear that transformer water content
is a variable that must be kept under control. Since water is a
byproduct of aging reactions in cellulosic insulation, the amount
of water contained in a transformer usually increases from levels
below 0.5% in weight, after its manufacturing, to levels of 6% in
weight at the end of its life. However, it is not unusual to find high
humidity levels in not so-old transformers, for example, in those
that have been subjected to repairs in field. These days, some
techniques are available to dry transformers in the field. Most
of these methods achieve proper drying of transformer oil, but a
great amount of water usually remains in cellulosic insulation and
water in oil rises slowly some months after finishing the process.
In these cases, drying treatments, which are very expensive, would
have limited effectiveness. In this paper, a finite-element study
is presented that analyzes different field-drying methods that
are currently widely used. The efficiency of these methods will
be studied and compared, and recommendations about drying
parameters will be given.
Index Terms—Drying times, hot-oil drying, hot-oil spray drying,
moisture in transformers, transformer field drying, transformer
life management.
I. INTRODUCTION
A HIGH percentage of power transformer failures is caused
by the deterioration of their cellulosic insulation. Mois-
ture is one of the main agents in the paper aging process since
it is a catalyst and a byproduct of these processes. Roughly
speaking, it can be said that the life of a dielectric paper is halved
if its water content is doubled. So, a transformer with a humidity
level of 4% ages in ten years as much as another transformer
with a moisture content of 2% in 20 years [1].
In addition, moisture reduces transformer insulation dielec-
tric strength and decreases partial-discharge inception voltage,
increasing transformer failure probability.
Manuscript received June 18, 2008; revised January 12, 2009. Current version
published September 23, 2009. This work was supported by the Spanish Min-
istry of Science and Technology under the projects DPI2005-09039-C02-01 and
DPI2008-01279. Paper no. TPWRD-00474-2008.
J. A. Almendros-Ibáñez is with the Department of Applied Mechanics and
Engineering Projects, Universidad de Castilla La Mancha, Albacete 02071,
Spain.
J. C. Burgos and B. García are with the Department of Electrical Engineering,
Universidad Carlos III de Madrid, Leganés 28911, Madrid, Spain.
Color versions of one or more of the figures in this paper are available online
at http://ieeexplore.ieee.org.
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/TPWRD.2009.2027515
0885-8977/$26.00 © 2009 IEEE
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER DELIVERY, VOL. 24, NO.
With all of these factors in mind, it is very desirable that mois-
ture content in transformer insulation remain within controlled
levels to extend the life of transformers.
After transformer manufacturing, some residual moisture al-
ways remains in its insulation. The humidity level in a new trans-
former is typically around 0.5% in weight. As the transformer
ages, its water content increases due to the water generated by
the degradation reactions in the insulating paper. At the end
of their life, transformers can reach humidity levels of around
5%–6% in weight.
However, other factors may give rise to high moisture levels
even in transformers that are not so old: inflow of water through
the silica gel dryer (especially after transformer disconnections)
or through leaks in the tank, ingress of moisture during field
repairs, or transformer transfers between substations (when the
displacements are made without oil in the tank).
According to the IEEE Std. 62-1995 [2], a transformer with
a water content of lower than 2% is considered dry; when water
content is between 2% and 4%, it is considered wet and above
4.5%, it is considered excessively wet.
Transformer field drying is becoming a common practice in
utilities since the cost of this process is much lower than the
cost of the life lost with high water content. This is especially
important in the case of high-power transformers that have high
acquisition cost.
Although transformer field drying is not a new practice, some
problems are still associated with the methods used currently
[3]–[5]:
• in order to extract the transformer moisture, the oil has to
be heated to high temperatures and/or the pressure in the
transformer has to be reduced notablyl; under these condi-
tions (under high temperature and/or vacuum), oil may be
degraded;
• The time required to dry a transformer is long, so pro-
longed outages are necessary to complete the processes; in
strategic units, these long outages are not always possible;
• properly drying the transformer oil is usually achieved, but
a great amount of water also typically remains in the cold-
thick cellulosic insulation, appearing some months after; in
this case, the effectiveness of the drying treatment, which
is very expensive, would be limited;
• the efficiency of drying processes is highly dependent on
temperature distribution; if temperature distribution is not
homogeneous, some parts of the solid insulation would re-
main wet, and water would be released after putting the
transformer into service, also wetting the dry parts.
Two different drying methods have been studied: hot oil and
hot oil spray. In both cases, a finite-element program (Comsol
Multiphysics v. 3.2) has been used to solve the diffusion equa-
ALMENDROS-IBÁÑEZ et al.: TRANSFORMER FIELD DRYING PROCEDURES
tion in the interior of paper insulations for different values of
insulation thickness and temperature. The influence of these
two parameters on the drying process and the most suitable
drying parameters have been studied for both methods. This
paper presents the main results of this study.
II. TRANSFORMER FIELD DRYING
Moisture inside a transformer is distributed between solid in-
sulation (Kraft paper, pressboard, wood) and oil. This distri-
bution is not homogeneous. Cellulosic insulation is very hy-
drophilic and it contains most of the transformer water (about
1 to 5% in weight), whereas oil is very hydrophobic and nor-
mally contains just a few parts per millon of water. Moreover,
the distribution of water inside the transformer also depends on
temperature. If transformer temperature increases, some water
migrates from paper to oil until reaching another equilibrium
point, and vice versa. These dynamic processes are governed
by very long time constants, also dependent on temperature
(e.g., moisture equilibrium at 20 takes several weeks and
at 80 just some hours), which are much longer than thermal
time constants. Some authors have studied water distribution be-
tween paper and oil in equilibrium conditions and have devel-
oped charts that allow us to know water content in paper for a
particular temperature and water content in oil [7], [8].
Transformer oil drying is relatively simple. Oil is drained
from the transformer tank and subjected to a refurbishment
process, and, if it is degraded, it may even be replaced by new
oil. In contrast, solid insulation drying is not so simple. In order
to extract water from solid insulation, it is necessary to force
a migration of water by means of temperature, pressure, or
relative humidity gradients.
Transformer solid insulation is divided into thin insulation
and thick insulation. Thin insulation is composed of several
layers of Kraft paper covering transformer winding conduc-
tors. Thick insulation is composed of barriers of pressboard
located between windings, or between windings and grounded
elements, and spacers placed between winding disks. As will
be explained later, achieving proper drying of thick insulation
is very difficult and it is one of the key aspects in transformer
drying.
Different methods can be used for transformer drying in the
field. The main ones are described in [9] as follows.
• Hot air drying: After draining the oil from the transformer
tank, a hot, dry air flow is forced through the transformer
active part. Air comes into contact with transformer solid
insulation, extracting part of its moisture. The humid air
is evacuated from the transformer and cooled in order to
condense water extracted from the transformer. Then, the
air is heated again and the process is repeated.
• Hot-oil drying (HO): This method is similar to the previous
one, but in this case, hot oil circulates instead of air. Trans-
former oil is drained from the tank and processed. Dry and
degassed oil is heated and forced to circulate through the
transformer active part. The contact between paper and hot
oil gives rise to a water migration from paper to oil al-
lowing a reduction of paper water content. Then, oil is re-
circulated through a cold trap where the absorbed water
1979
condenses and the process is repeated until the transformer
paper is dry enough.
• Hot-oil spray (HOS): With the oil level lowered to the
bottom yoke, vacuum is created in the transformer tank to
a level between and . Then,
oil is injected from the top of the tank in the form of spray
in order to bathe the surface of the windings. Wet oil is
removed from the bottom of the tank, dried, and injected
again into the transformer tank until properly drying the
transformer insulation. Finally, the tank is filled with trans-
former oil under vacuum.
Some authors propose online drying as an alternative to
offline methods. Online drying is based on establishing a
recirculation loop between the transformer and a system for
extracting water from the oil with the transformer in service.
The present study is focused on offline methods. The analysis
of online drying will be tackled in the future.
When a transformer is dried by means of any of these tech-
niques, different stages take place as follows.
1) Efficient drying: In this first stage, the amount of water
extracted per hour is very high, and moisture is extracted
from the external layers of solid insulation. The duration
of the stage depends on the drying method used, on the
insulation temperature, and on the water concentration.
2) Inefficient drying: At this stage, the inner layers of the
paper are dried. Thus, humidity must pass through several
layers of oil-impregnated paper and the water flow is very
low, since water mobility into paper cavities of the paper is
much lower when it is oil impregnated than when it is not.
3) Moisture increasing: when drying treatment has finished,
thin insulation is usually much dryer than thick insulation.
When the transformer is energized, the remaining water is
redistributed among the different parts of the insulation.
This stage lasts for several months after the drying process
has concluded.
III. MODEL PRINCIPLES
During the drying process, the moisture content in this paper
diffuses to the surface of the paper in contact with the oil, where
it is absorbed by the oil. This diffusion process can be modeled
by Fick’s law
(1)
where is the moisture diffusion coefficient in the
solid insulation, is the moisture concentration, and is the
temperature.
In 1974, Guidi and Fullerton, in their paper [10], proposed an
empirical expression for the diffusion coefficient of oil-impreg-
nated Kraft paper
(2)
where s is a reference coefficient,
0.5 is an experimental constant, 7700 K is the activation
energy, and 298 K is the reference temperature.
1980
Fig. 1. Moisture in paper diffusion coefficient as a function of temperature and
moisture concentration. Values in m /s.
Equation (2) is plotted in Fig. 1 for a wide range of moisture
concentrations and temperatures. This figure shows how the dif-
fusion coefficient increases with temperature and concentration.
At the beginning of the drying process (high temperatures and
high moisture concentrations), the diffusion coefficient is of the
order of .
In order to model drying processes, some assumptions must
be made as follows.
1) Moisture diffusion is a very slow process since water must
travel through solid insulation until attaining the surface
where it is absorbed by oil. Mass transport processes
are much slower than heat transfer and fluid-dynamic
processes taking place in the transformer. In other words,
Schmidt and Lewis numbers in the oil are
(3)
(4)
where is cinematic viscosity, is the dynamic viscosity,
is the oil density, is the thermal diffusivity, and is the
specific heat of the oil. Also, the equivalent Lewis number
in the pressboard is
(5)
considering now pressboard properties.1
Therefore, the temperature in the entire transformer (insu-
lation and oil) and velocity field in the oil can be consid-
ered in steady state during the transient moisture diffusion
within the insulation.
2) The height of the transformer active part is typically more
than one meter, whereas the thickness of the insulation in a
real transformer (even thick insulation) is only a few mil-
limeters thick. From this, concentration gradients in the
1The Schmidt number and Lewis number represent, respectively, the ratio be-
tween the momentum diffusivity and the mass diffusivity and the ratio between
the thermal diffusivity and the mass diffusivity.
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER DELIVERY, VOL. 24, NO. 4, OCTOBER 2009
transverse direction are much higher than those in the lon-
gitudinal direction and, thus, diffusion
in the longitudinal direction can be neglected. Therefore,
the problem will be studied by means of one dimensional
(1-D) models representing insulation sections. 2-D simu-
lations only increase the computational cost without im-
proving the final results.
Finally, the way moisture is absorbed by oil from the paper
surface must be established. The boundary condition to solve
(1) is different, depending on the drying method applied.
A. Hot-Oil Drying
In the case of HO drying, water absorption on the surface be-
haves as a convective process. Howe in [11] showed that water
interchange on paper-oil contact surface is much faster than
moisture diffusion processes within solid insulation. Therefore,
the equilibrium concentration is achieved very fast on the sur-
face and this equilibrium concentration can be assumed as the
boundary condition to solve the slow transient diffusion in the
interior of the insulation. Equilibrium moisture can be obtained
from Oommen charts [7] plotted in Fig. 2 that are properly ad-
justed to the equation
(6)
where is the moisture partial pressure that can be calculated
from oil relative humidity as
(7)
where is the moisture concentration in oil expressed in
parts per million and and are moisture concentra-
tion and partial pressure in saturation condition [12]. The partial
pressure of the saturated water was obtained by the correlation
proposed by Foss in [4] and the moisture concentration can be
obtained from the following expression:
where and are constants adjusted to experimental data [12].
The values 7.09 and 1567 have been used in this
paper.
B. HOS Drying
In HOS drying, vacuum is applied to the transformer tank.
Under these conditions, water evaporates from the solid insula-
tion surface absorbing the corresponding latent heat. The evap-
oration rate on the surface can be modeled by the following ex-
pression:
(9)
where is the moisture concentration on the surface, is
the concentration in equilibrium [obtained from (6)] and is
the coefficient of mass transfer by evaporation, that according
to [4], may be calculated as
(10)
ALMENDROS-IBÁÑEZ et al.: TRANSFORMER FIELD DRYING PROCEDURES
Fig. 2. Oommen charts.
Water concentration in the equilibrium (6) is the minimum
water concentration that can be attained in the insulation and
depends on water partial pressure and temperature. According
to [4], the partial pressure of the oil under vacuum conditions is
negligible and the partial pressure of water can be assumed to
be approximately equal to the vacuum pressure
(11)
It is important to note that the minimum water content that
can be reached in the insulation depends on the vacuum level
that can be attained. Therefore, this variable is a key factor in
the drying process efficiency.
IV. RESULTS
Two different drying processes have been studied. First,
hot-oil drying has been analyzed for different values of tem-
perature and insulation thickness. Second, the HOS drying has
been compared with the hot-oil drying. The focus in this part
is on the influence of the vacuum pressure on the drying time.
Finally, two summary tables have been included comparing the
efficiency and the time for drying for different ranges of pres-
sure, temperature, insulation thickness, and water concentration
in oil.
A. Hot-Oil Drying Simulation
1) Thickness Influence: As mentioned before, moisture dif-
fusion inside cellulosic insulation is a very slow process. When
hot oil enters into contact with paper, water interchange takes
place only on the solid insulation surface. The migration of
molecules on the surface causes moisture gradients through in-
sulation that force internal molecules to move in order to occupy
the voids on the surface left by evacuated molecules. Water dif-
fusion within oil-impregnated paper is very slow, so it seems
clear that drying thick insulation takes much longer than drying
thin insulation.
The influence of thickness on drying times has been studied
by means of finite-element simulations. The water content of
oil-impregnated paper was taken as 6% in weight, and water
1981
Fig. 3. Evolution of water content in the paper for 0.5-mm insulation.
content in oil was taken as 20 ppm. A constant temperature of
40 has been considered for the whole system during the sim-
ulations. Under these conditions, Oommen charts produce an
equilibrium moisture of 3.5%. So even in the case that equilib-
rium is attained, under these drying conditions, the insulation
will still be wet after finishing the process.
The temperature considered for the simulation is low. How-
ever, some parts of the insulation (especially the internal bar-
riers) may remain at low temperatures during the drying process,
particulary if windings are not energized and no internal heating
is used and the only the heating medium comes into contact with
hot oil.2
Thickness influence has been studied by means of a 1-D
model representing one section of insulation, as was explained
before.
Three different insulation thicknesses have been studied: 0.5,
1, and 3 mm. Figs. 3–5 show moisture distribution across the
insulation section for each thickness and the evolution of mois-
ture distribution during 30 days. In the charts, each line repre-
sents one day of drying process. As can be seen, at the beginning
of the process, moisture distribution across the insulation is not
very homogeneous. As drying progresses, moisture distribution
becomes more homogeneous through the insulation thickness.
For small thicknesses (0.5 and 1 mm), the equilibrium is
reached in a few days (four and eight days, respectively). On the
contrary, much longer times are required to obtain equilibrium
in the thicker insulation. Fig. 5 shows how the equilibrium has
not been attained even at the end of the simulation, after drying
for one month.
In these figures, the effect of concentration in the diffusion
coefficient (2) can also be seen. As moisture content decreases,
the diffusion coefficient does also, and the diffusion process be-
comes lower and slower (the lines are closer to each other). This
effect is more important in the case of the thicker insulation (3
mm) as moisture should move through insulation to reach the
surface. Also, the low-moisture gradients during the last days
slows down the drying process.
2Foss in [4] measured temperature in different points of the insulation with
temperature probes during different drying processes and the temperature was
lower than 40 C in several parts of the insulation.
1982
Fig. 4. Evolution of water content in the paper for 1-mm insulation.
Fig. 5. Evolution of water content in paper for 3-mm insulation.
2) Temperature Influence: Temperature is a very important
variable that has to be considered in order to achieve proper
drying of transformer solid insulation. On the one hand, the dif-
fusion coefficient increases with temperature (Fig. 1). There-
fore, drying times will be reduced when insulation temperature
is increased. On the other hand, temperature reduces moisture
concentration in the equilibrium that is extracted from Oommen
charts (Fig. 6) and, consequently, moisture content in paper after
finishing the process.
Temperature influence has been studied by means of a 1-D
model. A piece of insulation with a thickness of 3 mm was con-
sidered with an initial moisture content of 6% and surrounded
by oil with a moisture content of 20 ppm. A four-week drying
process was simulated. The simulations were repeated for three
different temperatures, 40 , 60 , and 80 .
Fig. 6 summarizes the results of these simulations. Moisture
distribution in the insulation after one week, two weeks, three
weeks, and four weeks of process is plotted for the different tem-
peratures analyzed. It is important to note that the initial point
was the same for all of the simulations: homogeneous water con-
tent in the whole insulation was 6% of the weight.
Fig. 6 clearly shows the influence of temperature on the equi-
librium moisture concentration, which is the boundary condition
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER DELIVERY, VOL. 24, NO. 4, OCTOBER 2009
Fig. 6. Evolution of the drying process for four weeks for different drying
temperatures.
on the insulation surface. For a temperature of 40 , the equi-
librium moisture is 3.5%, whereas for 60 and 80 , they
are 1.69% and 0.89%, respectively.
The same figure also shows how as temperature increases, the
drying process is faster. After four weeks, the insulation with a
temperature of 40 C has not reached equilibrium with the oil,
and the moisture content in paper is above 3.5%. If the temper-
ature increases to 60 after two weeks of drying, the moisture
in paper is less than 2.5% and after four weeks, the paper solid
insulation is in equilibrium with oil. Increasing the temperature
to 80 , the insulation is almost dry (0.89% in weight) after
one week. Numerical results show the relevance of temperature
in drying processes, because of their influence in drying times
and its influence on equilibrium moisture. If too low tempera-
tures are applied during drying processes, low-moisture content
is impossible to achieve, even if the process is extended for sev-
eral weeks. In these cases, no water will be collected in the cold
trap although insulation is still wet.
Finally, it should be mentioned that solid insulation tempera-
ture during the drying process is not the same as the temperature
of the oil injected into the transformer tank. Oil temperature is
easy to control by means of an external heater, but paper temper-
ature depends not only on oil temperature, but also on ambient
heat losses. Moreover, the temperature inside the transformer
paper may not be homogeneous. The parts that are not in con-
tact with oil will remain cold, while other parts, which are prop-
erly surrounded by the oil, will attain temperatures closer to oil
temperature. In these cases, drying would not be homogeneous
and moisture will be redistributed after putting the transformer
into service again.
B. HOS versus Hot-Oil Circulation
Hot-oil drying has been compared to HOS drying. In order to
simulate HOS, the model described in Section III-B was used.
The models used to study both drying methods are very similar.
The only difference is the boundary condition imposed on the
surface of the paper in contact with the oil. In the HO model, the
boundary condition is the equilibrium concentration, while in
the HOS model, the boundary condition is a convective flux (9)
ALMENDROS-IBÁÑEZ et al.: TRANSFORMER FIELD DRYING PROCEDURES
Fig. 7. HOS versus HO at 40 C.
Fig. 8. HOS versus HO at 60 C.
that defines the water evaporation rate on the surface. Since the
evaporation rate is much higher than diffusion velocity, moisture
diffusion inside cellulosic insulation is the dominant factor in
drying times in both cases (HO and HOS).
Drying processes were simulated given an insulation thick-
ness of 2 mm with an initial moisture content of 6%. Different
drying temperatures (40 C, 60 C, and 80 C) were considered,
and for HOS, drying different vacuum levels (0.01 bar and 0.001
bar) were also studied. The results of simulations are shown in
Figs. 7–9.
Fig. 7 shows a comparison between HO and HOS drying at
40 C. Equilibrium moisture is about 3.5% in the case of hot-oil
drying. In the case of drying under vacuum, lower moisture con-
tent in the equilibrium may be achieved, with the equilibrium
moisture being lower for higher vacuum levels. In the case of
drying at 0.01 bar, it is possible to reach moisture levels of less
than 3% and if pressure is reduced to 0.001 bar, it is possible to
reach moisture levels below 1%.
1983
Fig. 9. HOS versus HO at 80 C.
It can also be observed that the drying process is very slow at
low temperatures, even if vacuum is applied. This result seems
logical if we take into account that the water diffusion process
in the paper is much slower than the water evaporation on the
insulation surface and that the diffusion coefficient does not de-
pend on pressure (2).
Figs. 8 and 9 show the same drying process for higher tem-
peratures (60 and 80 ). As temperature increases, mois-
ture diffusion inside the paper is faster and drying times are
cut down. For 80 , steady-state moisture concentration is at-
tained in less than a week for the three simulated cases (with
and without applying vacuum). It is also important to note how
equilibrium moisture becomes lower as higher vacuum levels
are applied (0.9%, 0.6%, and 0.2%).
Finally, if the results obtained under the same pressure are
compared, how temperature affects equilibrium moisture may
be seen. For higher temperatures, lower equilibrium moisture
levels may be achieved by making better drying possible.
In conclusion, HOS obtains lower moisture levels in compar-
ison to HO, but does not attain a significant reduction in drying
times. In both methods, the insulation has to be heated in order
to obtain proper drying in practical times.
C. Drying Times
In order to complete the study, some simulations were
conducted with hot-oil drying and HOS drying performed at
different temperatures, vacuum levels, thickness, and different
moisture contents in oil. The results of these simulations are
summarized in Tables I and II. Information about equilibrium
moisture and drying times is included in the tables. In all of
these simulations, the initial moisture was considered to be 6%
and the time required to achieve was calculated. The
results obtained are consistent with the conclusions described
in the previous sections.
Drying times provided in these tables can be used as guide-
lines to plan transformer drying processes in the field.
To supplement Tables I and II, some of the displayed data
have been plotted into two graphics. Fig. 10 shows the influence
1984
TABLE I
DRYING TIME ESTIMATION FOR HOT-OIL DRYING
TABLE II
DRYING TIME ESTIMATION FOR HOS DRYING
of thickness and temperature in equilibrium times when hot-oil
drying is applied. The particular case of moisture in oil 10 ppm
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER DELIVERY, VOL. 24, NO. 4, OCTOBER 2009
Fig. 10. HO drying times considering moisture in oil 10 ppm and initial mois-
ture in paper 6%.
Fig. 11. HOS drying times considering initial moisture in paper 6%.
was considered to build the graphic. Fig. 11 shows the calculated
drying times when HOS drying is applied.
Finally, additional simulations have been conducted in order
to compare the results obtained by the models with some exper-
imental data.
Moser in [13] reports an experiment performed over pieces
of 5-mm-thick transformer board with an initial moisture con-
tent of 5%. The pieces were dried under a vacuum of 0.1 Torr at
three different temperatures: 90 , 120 , and 135 . The
corresponding drying times obtained for the different tempera-
tures were 120 h for 90 , 50 h for 120 , and 25 h for 90
being the final moisture content 0.1% for the three cases (
Fig. 12).
These cases have been simulated by obtaining the results
plotted in Fig. 13. Good agreement appears between the ex-
perimental data and model results, especially if we take into
account that the analysis of pressboard samples in the lab
provides the average moisture content on the sample and not
ALMENDROS-IBÁÑEZ et al.: TRANSFORMER FIELD DRYING PROCEDURES
Fig. 12. Results of Moser’s experiment (taken from [13]).
Fig. 13. Simulation of Moser’s results.
the moisture distribution through the thickness of the piece of
pressboard.
V. CONCLUSION
A theoretical study has been performed concerning power
transformer field drying. Finite-element simulations under dif-
ferent conditions were conducted in order to compare different
drying methods and to establish the most suitable conditions to
apply them. The main conclusions of this paper are summarized
as follows.
• Transformer insulation thickness has a great influence on
drying times. Drying thick insulation requires much longer
times and if proper drying is not carried out, it may re-
main wet after the process. In this case, transformer mois-
ture content would be reestablished after some months in
service.
• In order to decrease drying times, it is necessary to increase
the temperature. Not only does oil temperature have to be
increased, but the whole transformer insulation should be
1985
heated. In order to obtain a more homogeneous tempera-
ture, transformer windings can be energized, feeding one
of the transformer windings from a low-frequency source
while the other winding is short-circuited [low-frequency
heating (LFH)]. In order to avoid heat losses to ambient,
it is also important to warm up the transformer during the
process and to schedule drying processes during warm sea-
sons.
• Temperature also has an influence on equilibrium mois-
ture. Equilibrium moisture can be obtained from Oommen
charts. Thus, lower moisture content will be achieved as
higher temperatures are attained during the process.
• The application of vacuum leads to lower equilibrium
moisture values, which means that lower values of mois-
ture may be reached in the solid insulation after the
process. Tables I and II show that equilibrium moisture
can be highly reduced with vacuum applications. How-
ever, pressure does not significantly modify drying times.
In order to obtain low moisture content in short times,
it is necessary to increase the insulation temperature. A
temperature increase in HOS will also reduce equilibrium
moisture.
• Drying times and equilibrium moisture obtained for dif-
ferent drying conditions can be found in Tables I and II.
These data can be used as a guideline to plan drying pro-
cesses.
REFERENCES
[1] J. Bosiger, “The use of low frequency heating techniques in the insula-
tion drying process for liquid filled small power transformers,” in Proc.
IEEE Power Eng. Soc. Transmission and Distribution Conf. Expo.,
Oct.–Nov. 2001, vol. 2, pp. 688–692.
[2] Guide for Diagnostic Field Testing of Electric Power Apparatus—Part
1: Oil Filled Power Transformers, Regulators, and Reactors, IEEE Std.
62-1995, Aug. 1995.
[3] G. Manley, “Applying on-line/on-load vacuum dehydration purifica-
tion moving forward, not sideways,” in Proc. TechCon Asia-Pacific,
Sydney, Australia, May 2007, pp. 161–176.
[4] S. D. Foss and L. Savio, “Mathematical and experimental analysis of
the field drying of power transformer insulation,” IEEE Trans. Power
Del., vol. 8, no. 4, pp. 1820–1828, Oct. 1993.
[5] P. Koestinger and T. M. Bruaroy, “Drying of power transformers in the
field, applying the LHF-technology in combination with reclamation,”
in Proc. CIGRÉ, 2006.
[6] Y. Du, A. V. Mamishev, B. C. Lesieutre, and M. Zahn, “Measurement
of moisture diffusion as a function of temperature and moisture concen-
tration in transformer pressboard,” in Proc. Conf. Electrical Insulation
and Dielectric Phenomena Annu. Rep., 1998, vol. 1, pp. 341–344.
[7] T. V. Oommen, “Moisture equilibrium in paper-oil insulation systems,”
presented at the Electrical Electronics Insulation Conf., Chicago, IL,
1983.
[8] P. J. Griffin, “Water in transformers-so what!,” presented at the Na-
tional Grid Condition Monitoring Conf., Boston, MA, May 1996.
[9] Cigre WG A2.18, Guide for Life Management Techniques for Power
Transformers, Jan. 2003.
[10] W. W. Guidi and H. P. Fullerton, “Mathematical methods for predic-
tion of moisture take-up and removal in large power transformers,” in
Proc. IEEE Winter Power Meeting, 1974, pp. 242–244.
[11] A. F. Howe, “Diffusion of moisture through power-transformer insula-
tion,” Proc. Inst. Elect. Eng., vol. 125, pp. 978–986, 1978.
[12] Y. Du, M. Zahn, B. C. Lesieutre, A. V. Mamishev, and S. R. Lindgren,
“Moisture equilibrium in transformer paper-oil systems,” IEEE Elect.
Insul. Mag., vol. 15, no. 6, pp. 11–20, Nov./Dec. 1999.
[13] H. P. Moser, “Transformerboard,” Scientia Electrica, 1979.
1986 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER DELIVERY, VOL. 24, NO. 4, OCTOBER 2009

José Antonio Almendros-Ibáñez was born in Al-
bacete, Spain, in 1979. He received the M.Sc. degree
in mechanical engineering (intensification in energy
systems) and the Ph.D. degree in mechanical engi-
neering from the Universidad Carlos III de Madrid,
Madrid, Spain, in 2003 in 2008, respectively.
Currently, he is a Teaching Assistant in the
Department of Applied Mechanics and Engineering
Projects, Universidad de Castilla La Mancha. His
main research areas are the numerical and exper-
imental study of multiphase flows and heat and
mass-transfer processes.
Belén García (M’01) was born in Madrid, Spain, in
1975. She received the M.Sc. degree in physics from
Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Madrid, in
1998 and the Ph.D. degree in electrical engineering
from Universidad Carlos III de Madrid in 2002.
Since 2004, she has been an Associate Professor
in the Department of Electrical Engineering, Univer-
sidad Carlos III de Madrid. Her main area of interest
is power transformer life management.

Juan Carlos Burgos (M’00) was born in 1955. He

received the Ph.D. degree from the Escuela Técnica
Superior de Ingenieros Industriales de Madrid,
Madrid, Spain, in 1987.
Currently, he is an Associate Professor with the
Universidad Carlos III de Madrid, Madrid, Spain,
where he has been since 1994. His main area of
interest is power transformer maintenance.