See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/261470592

Experience with UHF partial discharge detection and location in power

transformers

Conference Paper · June 2011

DOI: 10.1109/EIC.2011.5996146

CITATIONS READS
22 236

1 author:

Martin David Judd

University of Strathclyde
204 PUBLICATIONS   3,306 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Special Issue "UHF and RF Sensor Technology for Partial Discharge Detection" View project

Scalable Non-invasive Radiometric Wireless Sensor Network for Partial Discharge Monitoring in the Future Smart Grid View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Martin David Judd on 22 March 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Experience with UHF partial discharge detection
and location in power transformers
Martin D. Judd
High Voltage Technologies Research Group, Institute for Energy and Environment
University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, Scotland, UK
m.judd@eee.strath.ac.uk
Abstract—Ultra-high frequency (UHF) methods for detecting and
locating partial discharges (PD) are well established for gas
insulated equipment. This paper provides an overview of their
application to power transformers, discussing practicalities,
capabilities and challenges. In recent years, UHF PD detection
has proved helpful to manufacturers as a tool for enhancing
quality control. The technique can now form a valuable addition
to the suite of on-line monitoring technologies available for power
transformers. A key aspect discussed in this paper is the
installation of sensors, which must have an electromagnetic
‘view’ into the Faraday cage of the tank. Locating PD sources by
time-of-flight methods in transformers requires accurate spatial
resolution in three dimensions in the presence of large conducting
components inside the tank that often block the line of sight
between PD source and sensor. For this reason, instead of an
‘empty box’ representation, modeling techniques are used to
account for the internal structure of the transformer so that
observed time differences among PD signals received at different
sensors can be interpreted more realistically. The PD location
procedure is illustrated by means of practical results, which
indicate that PD sources can be located typically to within 0.3 m
in a power transformer.
Keywords - transformers; partial discharge; UHF; sensors;
fault location; condition monitoring.
I. INTRODUCTION
The application of ultra-high frequency (UHF) monitoring
to gas insulated substations (GIS) was developed extensively
during the 1990s [1] [2] and is now employed on a commercial
basis at many GIS installations worldwide. Since even a small
partial discharge (PD) inside a GIS can be critical, these
systems must be able to detect PD at levels down to 5 pC [3].
UHF methods for detecting and locating PD in power
transformers have been extensively researched for more than a
decade since they were originally proposed [4] [5]. During this
time, valuable experience and scientific knowledge has been
gained [6] [7], and it is now likely that UHF techniques will
play an important role as a diagnostic tool for the future
management and operation of transformer fleets. The purpose
of this paper is to give an introduction to the technique and
provide an overview of its capabilities and limitations using
some practical examples.
Information about PD levels that are of concern for
transformers in service is scarce, since the most commonly
applied condition monitoring technique (DGA - dissolved gas
analysis) does not measure PD directly in terms of an electrical
charge. A useful staring point is CIGRE Brochure 227 [8],
This work has been supported under several EPSRC research grants and a
Knowledge Transfer Partnership with DMS Ltd (KTP 6231).
which makes the following observations on PD levels: “Poor
impregnation caused discharges of about 1,000-2,000 pC.
Large (3-5 mm in diameter) air/gas bubbles in oil resulted in
discharges ranging in magnitude from 1,000 to 10,000 pC. In
general, PD levels over 2,500 pC (in paper) and over 10,000
pC (in oil) may be considered as a destructive ionization in a
long-term action.” The following PD classifications are also
suggested [8]:
ƒ Defect free 10-50 pC
ƒ Normal deterioration <500 pC
ƒ Questionable 500-1,000 pC
ƒ Defective condition 1,000-2,500 pC
ƒ Faulty (Irreversible) >2,500 pC
ƒ Critical >100,000-1,000,000 pC
Since the standard IEC60270 method for PD measurement
is difficult to apply apart from in an HV test laboratory,
monitoring of PD for in-service transformers requires a new
approach. In 2008, CIGRE Working Group A2.27 reported
through Technical Brochure 343 [9] that, “Transformer on-line
condition monitoring has been the subject of significant
research and development over the past few years and it is
becoming increasingly important that monitoring can be easily
and safely applied to a transformer at whatever point in its
lifetime. The brochure considers the benefits of possible
standardization of the interface between monitoring systems
and the transformer with the aim to provide a guide to the
specification of a transformer intended to be ‘condition
monitoring ready.’” Reference [9] is concerned with the
interfaces to allow for installation of sensors, rather than with
specific sensors. The report recognizes that there are many
existing and emerging sensors available that could be useful for
on-line monitoring. In addition to DGA, other types of PD
sensor for which an installation facility is recommended
include:
ƒ Electrical PD sensors (conventional or new designs) that
make use of bushing tap fittings.
ƒ UHF PD sensors, either window mounted or of the probe
type. For the probe type, fitting of additional DN50 / DN80
oil valves in appropriate positions is suggested.
ƒ Acoustic PD sensors, which, as well as being fitted
externally to the tank, might also be introduced through an
oil valve probe type mechanism for improved sensitivity.
Another recent development within CIGRE has been the
formation in 2010 of Working Group D1.29 on “Partial
Discharges in Transformers”. Its remit includes surveying the
available detection systems including acoustic, UHF and
bushing tap measurements; surveying the more common types
of defect that are evidenced by PD; collating information on
time-resolved and frequency-resolved signatures from typical
defects; obtaining consensus about criteria for evaluating
severity of detected defects and investigating energy-based PD
metrics as an alternative to charge-based ones.
This paper provides a snapshot of the state-of-the-art in
UHF technology for PD monitoring of power transformers and
provides a small selection of practical examples to illustrate
some key aspects.
II. UHF PD SENSORS FOR POWER TRANSFORMERS
A. Installing UHF Sensors
UHF sensors require an electromagnetic wave ‘view’ into
the tank, so their installation presents a challenge. Whereas GIS
often have natural apertures in their metal cladding (windows,
edges of gas barriers between flanges), transformers do not.
This lack of facilities for UHF sensor installation is a problem
that could be solved easily and inexpensively at manufacture,
provided that suitable mounting points are included in the
transformer procurement specification. The main options
(summarized below) for deploying UHF sensors on the tank are
to install dielectric windows, make use of uncommitted oil
valves, or to permanently install sensors on the tank.
B. Window Sensors
The principle of a window sensor [10] is that the sensor
remains external to the tank and can be installed or removed
while the unit is in service without compromising seal integrity.
One possible embodiment is shown in Fig. 1, where the
window is shown blanked off with a steel plate. Should UHF
monitoring be required, the steel plate would be exchanged for
a sensor that could be housed in an equally robust steel body.
SENSOR CLAMPING
RING
WINDOW CLAMPING STEEL BLANKING PLATE
RING
BOSS DIELECTRIC WINDOW
HATCH COVER
TANK DISPLACEMENT BOARD
∅ 120 mm
Figure 1. Dielectric window for UHF sensor mounting.
Figure 2. A window sensor installed to locate PD during transformer testing
(courtesy of Qualitrol DMS).
The dielectric window itself remains permanently sealed to
the tank but most of the time it is ‘backed-up’ and protected
from the elements by either the blanking plate or the sensor
body. Fig. 2 shows a window sensor mounted on a transformer
tank during factory tests.
C. Probe Sensors
Oil valves offer an alternative route into the tank for a UHF
sensor. There is often at least one uncommitted valve on a
transformer tank and, provided the valve and internal plumbing
will permit insertion of a probe, this can allow a UHF sensor to
be deployed. Examples of this type of sensor are shown in Fig.
3. This is convenient for retrofitting while a unit is in service,
and will enable PD detection and monitoring to be carried out.
However, it is unlikely that there would be 3 or 4 suitably
distributed spare valves to permit PD location to be carried out
effectively.
D. Internal Sensors
Many GIS applications of UHF monitoring use internal
sensors that are manufactured and installed by the OEM. Given
the stringency of GIS equipment design and the requirement
for longevity and maintenance-free operation, it is reasonable
to claim that UHF sensors could be permanently installed on
power transformer tanks. One example of an internal sensor
designed for power transformers is shown in Fig. 4. In some
ways, the distinction between internal and window sensors is
minimal. The outer sleeve part could be regarded as a window
that is not flat. The advantage of this structure is that having the
sensor protrude slightly into the tank offers better sensitivity to
the leading edge of the UHF signal compared with an external
sensor mounted on a flat window.
GASKET
STEEL
Figure 3. Typical UHF probe sensors for deployment through oil valves.
Figure 4. Two views of a patented internal UHF sensor for power
transformers (courtesy of Qualitrol DMS).
 III. LOCATING PD USING THE UHF METHOD
A. Basic Principles
PD location in transformers requires determining 3
unknown spatial coordinates. Four sensors are usually needed,
dispersed around the tank as widely as possible. One sensor
provides a timing reference and the other 3 provide
independent variables as inputs to the PD location algorithm in
terms of differential arrival times. Conventional triangulation is
not appropriate when the search volume contains a relatively
large amount of internal metalwork through which the
electromagnetic waves (UHF signals) cannot pass. Hence an
alternative approach has been adopted, in which the basic
transformer structure (including the core and windings) is pre-
processed, taking into account signal propagation effects and
varying signal velocities [11]. By this means, a given set of
observed time differences can be associated with a cluster of
points in the tank by searching for matches to within a defined
tolerance on timing accuracy. Fig. 5 shows screenshots from a
PD location software tool [12] that employs these principles.
Intersecting surfaces can be visualized to indicate how they
result in localization of a PD source.
B. Requirements and Preparation for PD Location
In preparation for using UHF PD location a model of the
transformer must be defined, which involves:
1. Defining the origin of a three-dimensional coordinate system
(x, y, z) for a rectangular tank that will include the whole
volume of the transformer.
2. Specifying the length, width and height of the tank.
3. Defining coordinates of UHF sensors relative to the origin.
4. Estimating lengths, radii and positions of the core and yokes.
5. Estimating winding heights, radii and positions.
Depending on the internal structure, it is sometimes helpful
to model other major structural components. For example,
bushing entry points or an in-tank tap changer might be
included so that they can be seen in the model without
influencing UHF propagation. Sample data collated for
modeling a 132 / 11 kV distribution transformer is summarized
in Table I and a typical configuration of test equipment is
shown in Fig. 6.
TABLE I. SAMPLE DIMENSIONAL DATA REQUIRED FOR TRANSFORMER
MODELING. DIMENSIONS ARE IN METERS.

length width height

Tank:
2.40 1.10 2.55
(a) Magnetic x start y start z start
radius length
circuit: point point point
core1 0.18 1.76 0.43 0.55 0.18
core2 0.18 1.76 1.18 0.55 0.18
core3 0.18 1.67 1.93 0.55 0.18
lower yoke 0.18 1.85 0.25 0.55 0.20
upper yoke 0.18 1.85 0.25 0.55 1.86
x start y start z start
Windings: radius height
point point point
winding1 0.36 1.25 0.43 0.55 0.4
winding2 0.36 1.25 1.18 0.55 0.4
winding3 0.36 1.25 1.93 0.55 0.4
HV bushing x start y start z start
radius height
entry positions: point point point
bushing1 0.11 0.05 0.58 0.27 2.45
bushing2 0.11 0.05 1.21 0.27 2.45
bushing3 0.11 0.05 1.78 0.27 2.45
Sensor
x y z
coordinates:
S1 0.74 0.00 0.25
S2 1.75 0.00 2.30
S3 1.06 0.85 2.55
(b) S4 0.00 0.96 0.12

Figure 5. (a) Intersecting surfaces corresponding to UHF time-of-flight

measurements between pairs of sensors (S1 – S4). (b) Cluster of points
satisfying the search criteria for all four sensors to a timing accuracy of 0.4 ns. Figure 6. Typical measurement arrangement for UHF PD location.
 IV. PD LOCATION RESULTS
2.0 m
A. Pulse Injection Test 3.0 m

A pulse injection test will be used to illustrate operation of S2

the UHF PD location system. A 112 MVA, 118 kV auto-

transformer was fitted with four UHF sensors during factory 2.4 m
acceptance testing. A sub-nanosecond pulse was injected into
sensor S4, which is on the rear of the tank with respect to
sensors S1, S2 and S3 in Fig. 7(a). Signals captured at S1-S3
were analyzed and the resulting intersection of the surfaces is
shown in Fig. 7(b). Since one of the sensors is being used for
pulse injection, there are only 3 available for locating the S1
source and a unique point cannot be obtained. However, the
locus of possible PD locations ought to intersect with the
position of S4. The x and z coordinates of the predicted source
location at y = 2.25 m (the plane of the rear tank wall) are x =
3.25 m, z = 2.65 m. Actual coordinates of S4 were x = 3.26, z = Figure 8. Model transformer tank and windings showing two of the UHF
2.61, a difference of only 0.05 m. sensors (S1, S2). Two more sensors are located on the back wall of the tank.

B. Laboratory Trials
The model power transformer tank shown in Fig. 8 with
windings and UHF sensors has been constructed at the
University of Strathclyde. The sensors are based on a
commercial design for internal installation. A self-contained
(a)
spark unit was used as an easily moveable PD source. This
device uses a standard automotive spark plug with a gap of 1
mm, pulsed automatically from an internal battery supply.
Experimental results are summarized in Table II, which
compares the true coordinates of the spark source with the
estimated PD location obtained from the UHF signals using the
PD location software. Since the tank contains air rather than
oil, the propagation velocity of the UHF signals is higher,
meaning that timing inaccuracies translate to larger positional
errors (by 50%) than they might in oil.

TABLE II. COMPARISONS BETWEEN TRUE AND ESTIMATED

COORDINATES OF THE SPARK (IN AIR).

Coordinates of spark Estimated coordinates Difference

unit (m) using UHF (m) (m)
(0.50,0.70,1.0) (0.40,0.45,1.00) 0.27
(2.30,0.70,1.85) (2.20,0.50,1.80) 0.23
(1.50,1.30,1.00) (1.45,1.35,0.95) 0.09
(1.50,0.65,2.15) (1.50,0.80,2.15) 0.15
(2.55,1.50,0.25) (2.50,1.65,0.30) 0.17
(0.50,0.70,1.85) (0.40,0.30,2.05) 0.46
(2.30,1.30,1.85) (2.55,0.70,2.20) 0.74
(0.5,1.30,0.25) (0.50,1.60,0.1) 0.34
(b) Average: ± 0.31

Figure 7. (a) Analysis of detected UHF signals for pulse injection into S4.
The red surface denotes points which meet the timing criteria for S1:S2, the
yellow surface S1:S3, and the green surface S2:S3. The locus of their
intersection should coincide with the position of S4. (b) The trail of yellow
dots leading to S4 represent the locus of points that match observed arrival
times among S1:S2:S3 to within a tolerance of 100 ps.
C. Factory Test
The 132 / 11 kV transformer shown in Fig. 9 was tested
along with several other units on the premises of a
manufacturer. The tank (4.2×1.6×3.1 m) was equipped with 4
UHF sensors (3 internal sensors on top and a UHF probe fitted
through a spare oil cooler valve at the bottom). During testing
of the A-phase, PD levels of up to 200 pC occurred at an
overpotential of 1.3 U. Since this was within acceptable limits,
the transformer passed the test, but the opportunity was taken
locate the PD. A typical set of UHF signals is shown in Fig. 10.
When their arrival times were used in the PD location software,
the result of Fig. 11 was obtained. The location identified
corresponded to the point where the HV lead leaves the
winding, which was known to be a likely location for PD under
overpotential conditions.

Figure 9. View of factory tests with hatch-mounted internal sensors on top of
the tank and a UHF probe through an oil valve at the bottom.
Sensor 1
Sensor 2
Sensor 3
Sensor 4
Figure 10. Unamplified UHF signals for a PD of 200 pC during 1.3 U
overpotential test on A-phase. Arrival times are indicated.
Figure 11. PD at top of A-phase winding with plots of the estimated UHF
signal paths from the PD source to each of the four sensors S1-S4.
V. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS
UHF partial discharge location techniques are usually
capable of localizing PD source to an accuracy of about 0.3 m.
In relation to the tank of a large transformer (e.g., 4×9×4 m),
this represents a volumetric resolution of 0.01%. This accuracy
can potentially be obtained from the measurement of a single
PD pulse simultaneously at 4 UHF sensors and compares
favorably with other techniques which may only resolve to a
particular phase and HV/LV side of a transformer. While a
View publication stats
system with continuous on-line remote UHF PD location
capability could be implemented in principle, this would be
hard to justify except for the most critical of transformers.
Instead, equal-length cables from UHF sensors could be
brought to a common bulkhead for convenient access. One
sensor might be permanently connected to a conventional UHF
PD monitoring system, employing well-established technology
that exists for GIS. By this means, base-level continuous UHF
monitoring could be applied to give immediate warning of any
increase in PD activity. In the event of a problem requiring
deeper investigation the PD location capability could easily be
applied using a portable measurement instrument.
In future, the cost of signal acquisition at GHz sampling
rates will drop to a fraction of its present level. Coupled with
low-power processing, intelligent diagnostic software and
sensor fusion, automated PD location and diagnosis systems
can be envisaged. However, when that time comes we will
hopefully still be using the transformers being purchased today.
Therefore it may well be advisable to ‘future-proof’ these
transformers by providing facilities for the simple sensor
technology that is required to enable UHF detection of PD.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The author is grateful to Qualitrol DMS for permission to
publish some of the material contained in this article.
REFERENCES
[1] J. S. Pearson, O. Farish, B. F. Hampton, M. D. Judd, D. Templeton, B.
M. Pryor and I. M. Welch, “Partial discharge diagnostics for gas
insulated substations”, IEEE Trans. Dielectrics and Electrical Insulation,
Vol. 2, No. 5, pp. 893-905, October 1995.
[2] R. Kurrer and K. Feser, “The application of ultra-high-frequency partial
discharge measurements to gas-insulated substations”, IEEE Trans.
Power Delivery, Vol. 13, No. 3, pp. 777 – 782, July 1998.
[3] CIGRE Task Force 15/33.03.05, “Partial discharge detection system for
GIS: Sensitivity verification for the UHF method and the acoustic
method”, Electra, No. 183, pp. 74-87, April 1999.
[4] W. R. Rutgers and Y. H. Fu, “UHF PD detection in a power
transformer”, Proc. 10th Int. Symp. on High Voltage Engineering
(Montreal), Vol. 4, pp. 219-222, August 1997.
[5] M. D. Judd, B. M. Pryor, S. C. Kelly and B. F. Hampton, “Transformer
monitoring using the UHF technique”, Proc. 11th Int. Symp. on High
Voltage Engineering (London), Vol. 5, pp. 362-365, August 1999.
[6] K. Raja, F. Devaux and S. Lelaidier, “Recognition of discharge sources
using UHF PD signatures”, IEEE Electrical Insulation Magazine, Vol.
18, No. 5, pp. 8-14, Sep/Oct 2002.
[7] M. D. Judd, L. Yang and I. B. B. Hunter, “Partial discharge monitoring
for power transformers using UHF sensors Part 2: Field Experience”,
IEEE Insulation Magazine, Vol. 21, No. 3, pp. 5-13, May/June 2005.
[8] CIGRE WG A2.18, “Life Management Techniques for Power
Transformers”, CIGRE (Paris) Technical Brochure 227, 2003.
[9] CIGRE WG A2.27, “Recommendations for condition monitoring and
condition assessment facilities for transformers”, CIGRE (Paris)
Technical Brochure 343, 2008.
[10] M. D. Judd, O. Farish, J. S. Pearson, B. F. Hampton, “Dielectric
windows for UHF partial discharge detection”, IEEE Trans. Dielectrics
and Electrical Insulation, Vol. 8, pp. 953-958, December 2001.
[11] L. Yang and M. D. Judd, “Propagation characteristics of UHF signals in
transformers for locating partial discharge sources”, Proc. 13th Int.
Symp. on High Voltage Engineering (Delft), August 2003.
[12] www.youtube.com/HFDiagnostics