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

net/publication/261500396

Power transformer main insulation design improvement using BEM and FEM

Conference Paper · July 2013

DOI: 10.1109/EUROCON.2013.6625185

CITATIONS READS

2 2,221

3 authors:

Mladen Marković Zeljko Stih

Končar D&ST University of Zagreb
13 PUBLICATIONS   17 CITATIONS    53 PUBLICATIONS   274 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Branimir Cucic
Koncar Distribution and Special Transformers, Croatia
8 PUBLICATIONS   10 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

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

Numeričko modeliranje složenih elektromagnetskih pojava u transformatorima View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Mladen Marković on 14 September 2019.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Power Transformer Main Insulation Design
Improvement Using BEM and FEM
Mladen Marković #1 , Željko Štih ∗2 , Branimir Ćućić #3
∗
Faculty of Electrical Engineering and Computing, University of Zagreb
Unska 3, Zagreb, Croatia
2
zeljko.stih@fer.hr

#
Končar D&ST
Josipa Mokrovića 8, Zagreb, Croatia
1
mladen.markovic@koncar-dst.hr
3
branimir.cucic@koncar-dst.hr

Abstract—Insulation system is one of the most important parts
of power transformer. Theoretical background for insulation
design is given, which includes explanation of dielectric properties
of main insulation materials, their withstand to breakdown
voltage, their verification by dielectric tests, and statistical data
based theory for breakdown probability. Two known numerical
methods (BEM and FEM) for calculation of electric field are
used and for each numerical method an appropriate model of
transformer is made. Safety factors for main insulation between
HV and LV winding are calculated after which the oil gap width
is reduced. Additional analysis of safety factors and field non-
uniformity along windings is performed.
Index Terms—numerical calculation, boundary element
method, finite element method, electric field, power transformer
I. I NTRODUCTION
Insulation system of a power transformer assures that a
transformer continuously operates during its lifetime. It is
one of the most important parts of a transformer, since its
malfunctioning makes transformer useless. Although mate-
rial improvements have enabled higher withstand voltages,
engineers tend to find new design rules to cope with ever
demanding task for cost reduction and profit increase. With the
use of modern computers, numerical calculation has become
one of the main tools for solving complicated engineering
tasks with the goal for improvement in component design and
better quality of the final product.
This paper shows how improvements in insulation design of
35/10.5 kV power transformer were made using two different
numerical methods for calculation of electric field.
II. L ITERATURE REVIEW
Liu et al. [1] investigated reduction of dimensions of a
35 kV transformer using FEM. It was based on main insulation
oil distances decrease. Main oil gap was reduced by following
maximum allowed electric field criteria. Similar work was
conducted by Gao et al. on 110 kV transformer [2]–[4], whose
work was also based on maximum electric field criteria using
FEM. Khaligh and Vakilian [5] investigated insulation design
improvements by representing 230 kV transformer windings
with lumped parameter equivalent model using FEM. Their
design criteria was also based on maximum electric field. This
paper shows how insulation distances can be decreased using
oil breakdown criteria, using FEM and BEM.
III. T HEORETICAL BACKGROUND
A. Dielectric
A dielectric is material whose special characteristic is
polarization. The term polarization is introduced to express
in which measure an electric field affects the electron cloud
of an atom in a molecule. Relation between electric field and
polarization in the molecule is expressed through a scalar value
called electric susceptibility χe :
P = ε0 χe E (1)
where P is dielectric polarization density vector and E is
electric field vector. If χe is constant in every part of material,
dielectric is homogeneous. Vectors P and E define electric
displacement field vector:
D = ε0 E + P (2)
For homogeneous and linear dielectrics, P and E are co-linear,
so (2) can be written as:
D = ε0 (1 + χe ) E = εE (3)
where ε is absolute permittivity, which is a product of relative
permittivity εr = 1 + χe and vacuum permittivity ε0 .
Dielectrics are also called insulators, since their electrical
conductivity κ is much smaller (∼ 10−15 ) than in conductors
(∼ 107 ). This is due to their atom structure: their ionization
energy is much greater than in other materials. [6]
Maximum electric field strength that insulator can with-
stand intrinsically without breaking down is called dielectric
strength. By exceeding this value, a voltage breakdown occurs,
after which dielectric properties of insulator are permanently
lost. [7]
Table I contains some dielectric properties, typical for
insulation system of a power transformer.
 TABLE I
P ROPERTIES OF SOME DIELECTRICS [7]–[9]
3
LI ∼ 50µs
Relative Dielectric strength
Dielectric
permittivity εr kV/mm
transformer oil 2,2 – 3,2 10 – 30 SI ∼ 250µs
paper (in oil) 3,0 – 3,8 15 – 25
transformerboard 3,1 – 4,0 35 – 50 2 SI ∼ 2500µs

DIL factor
B. Breakdown
Breakdown is instantaneous loss of insulation properties 1 AC ∼ 60 s
expressed by voltage collapse. It can occur in oil or in solid
insulation (called insulation breakdown), as well in gases ACLD ∼ 1 h
(called flashover). [7]
In order to determine the probability of a breakdown, a
large number of breakdown tests has to be performed. The 0 −5 −4 −3 −2 −1
understanding of breakdown mechanisms in solid and liquid 10 10 10 10 10 100 101 102 103 104
dielectrics is still incomplete and there is no general break- duration [sec]
down theory widely accepted. However, experiments have
shown that Weibull distribution gives good approximation of Fig. 1. Design Insulation Level (Equivalent Voltage) factors [7], [13]
breakdown probability in oil [10]–[13]:
( n  m o
1 − exp − VV63−V 0
, V ≥ V0 , numerical analysis, electric field can be easily computed, after
P (V ) = −V0 (4) which critical field lines are determined. Field lines are critical
0 , V < V0 . if the ratio between the dielectric strength of a gap and the field
where P (V ) is probability of breakdown at voltage V , V63 is stress is small. Stress profiles on selected lines are compared
voltage with 63% probability of breakdown, V0 is theoretical with the dielectric strength of oil gaps along these lines. This
withstand voltage (0 % probability of breakdown), and m allows improvement of the design and optimization of the
is Weibull exponent. If threshold value V0 is set to zero insulation system by iteration.
V0 = 0, values V63 and m are estimated empirically from Electric stress depends on dielectric constant of a material.
experimental results. To confirm low breakdown probability, For oil-board interface, electric stress in oil is twice as high
insulation system has to be tested. as in transformerboard (see table I):
Eoil εb
C. Dielectric tests = ≈2 (5)
Eb εoil
A power transformer needs to withstand certain levels of Furthermore, the electric strength of a barrier with a certain
overvoltages to be reliable during its lifetime. This can be thickness is higher than that of an oil gap with the same width.
verified through dielectric tests. According to International This phenomena is used in dividing large oil gaps with barriers
Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) standard 60076-3, there in smaller to prevent partial discharge inception. [10], [13]
are three types of dielectric tests: separate source (AC, 50 Hz), Figure 2 shows breakdown design curves for discharge
short and long duration induced (ACSD, ACLD) and light- inception in oil gaps with homogeneous electric field during
ning/switching impulse (LI, SI) withstand voltage test. For AC tests (1 min, 50 Hz) as function of gap width d under
each type of test, voltage level and duration are regulated by different conditions.
the standard. For instance, separate source AC duration is one To compare electric field of oil gap with breakdown curves
minute, impulse tests duration is 40-50 µs, and induced tests (Fig. 2), it is necessary to calculate average field Eav (x) for
may last from twenty minutes to one hour. [14], [15] complete gap interval d:
For easier insulation design, due to different duration of the
Zx
tests, a system of equivalent voltage or design insulation level 1
factors is used. It is based on the fact that dielectric strength Eav (x) = E(x)dx (6)
x
decreases with stress duration, therefore all insulation levels 0
(LI, SI, ACSD, ACLD) are related to one minute AC level Safety factor is defined as the ratio of dielectric strength
(Fig. 1). [7], [10], [13] Epd and average stress Eav for gap interval d:
D. Insulation design Epd (x)
q(x) = , x ∈ [0, d] (7)
The task of insulation design is to determine minimum Eav (x)
distance between two electrodes, or between electrode and with equation of breakdown curve (Fig. 2):
grounded part. The minimum distance highly depends on the
applied electric field. With the help of modern computers and Epd (x) = Epd (1mm) · (x)−a (8)
 102
Degassed, between barriers
Gas saturated, between barriers n1
S13
Degassed, adjacent to electrodes 1
Gas saturated, adjacent to electrodes
n3
conductor
S12
Epd [kV/mm]

S23
2 ε2 n2

101 3 ε3

Fig. 3. System consisting of a conductor and dielectrics used in the derivation

of the integral equations [19]

10−1 100 101 102 derives from discretization of the covered region. In three-
d [mm] dimensional problems, discretization is performed over bound-
ary surfaces, while in two-dimensional problems, discretiza-
Fig. 2. Breakdown curves for oil [7], [8], [10], [13] tion is performed over boundary lines. Therefore, the problem
is reduced for one dimension. [18]
The main concept of this method is finding surface charge
where constants Epd (1mm) and a are determined empirically density distribution function σ(r) on the boundary between
[7], [13]. conductor and dielectric (S12 and S13 ) and between two
Non-uniformity is defined as the ratio of maximum field dielectrics (S23 ), shown on Figure 3. This surface charge σ
value Emax along the line and average stress Eav : is the source of potential ϕ0 , set as an initial condition on the
Emax conductor boundary. The surface charge density σ satisfies two
µ= , µ≥1 (9) basic types of integral equations.
Eav
Charge on the conductor boundary fulfills first equation:
and it depends on the electrodes distance and their radius. For
Niz Z
pure uniform field (i.e. between condenser plates) is µ ≈ 1, 1 X σi (r0 )
ϕ(r) = dSi , r ∈ S1 (11)
for slightly non-uniform field is µ ≤ 1.8 − 2.0, and for highly 4πε i=1 |r − r0 |
non-uniform field µ can be up to µ ≥ 36 [16]. Si

where r is radius vector of observation point, and r’ is radius

IV. N UMERICAL MODELING vector of field source point. The second equation is fulfilled
A. Numerical methods by charge on polarized dielectric:
Niz Z
The most common numerical methods for solving differen- 1 X (r − r0 ) · ni23 (r)
σi (r)−2λi23 σj (r0 ) dSj = 0, r ∈ Si
tial and integral equations are finite element method (FEM) 4π j=1 |r − r0 |
and boundary element method (BEM). Sj
(12)
Finite element method is widely used in many aspects
where λi23 is defined as
of engineering for solving partial differential equations. For
calculation of electrostatic field, Laplace’s equation needs to ε3 − ε2
λi23 =
be solved ε3 + ε2
∇2 ϕ = 0 (10) and ni23 is the normal vector on the surface Si , pointing from
area 3 to area 2.
In FEM, complete region of the problem is divided into subre- By finding charge distribution σi on every boundary element
gions, called finite elements (see Fig. 8(b)). After subdivision, i, it is possible to calculate potential and electric field in rest
a system of linear equations is solved to obtain field values in of space around conductor. [19], [20]
every node of an single element.
Although it results in large number of unknowns and is B. Transformer model
memory consumable, this method is proven to be suitable in The task of this paper is to determine minimal safety factor
insulation analysis with multiple dielectrics and can also be for main insulation oil gap (i.e. between low and high voltage
used in solving non-linear problems. [7], [17] winding) of a 35/10.5 kV, 12.5 MVA power transformer (Fig.
Boundary element method (also moment method) is used 4), with highest voltage of equipment Um = 36 kV. According
in solving problems which can be formulated by integral to the standard [14], testing voltages for this insulation level
equations and their boundary conditions. Origin of the name are UAC = 70 kV and ULI = 170 kV. Equivalent voltage

Fig. 4. Power transformer with highest voltage of equipment Um = 36 kV
Fig. 5. Representation of a 3D axi-symmetric model in 2D geometry plane
for lightning impulse is approximately 170/2.7 ≈ 63 kV,
which makes UAC = 70 kV referent voltage for numerical
calculation.
For this purpose, two numerical models using different
solution methods are proposed. First is based on BEM, second
is based on FEM. For both numerical models, representation
of 3D axial symmetry in 2D plane was used (Fig. 5). Proposed
transformer model is equal in both methods.
Figure 6(a) shows complete axi-symmetric model in a frame
of a transformer. Boundary conditions of numerical model
corresponds to testing conditions of real transformer: testing
voltage is applied on high voltage winding (8), while other
parts, numbered (2), (6), (7), (9), (10) and (11) on Fig. 6(a),
are grounded. This enables further model simplification, shown
on Fig. 6(b), since the field of interest is between HV and LV
winding. It is presumed that this simplification isn’t affecting
the final result, since only nearest grounded parts have effect
on the electric field of HV winding.
It should also be mentioned that this model primarily
investigates probability of oil breakdown in the gap between
HV and LV winding. Hence, it is presumed that, although
paper insulation of the winding increases dielectric strength
of the insulation system, paper thickness is negligible to
cause sufficient voltage drop that would influence final result.
Therefore mechanical height of the winding is assumed to be
equal to electrical one.
z z (r2 ,z2 )
(r2 ,z2 )
R (r0 , z 0 )
(r0 , z 0 )
α2
(r1 ,z1 )
(r1 ,z1 ) α1
r (rS , zS ) r
(a) Line (b) Arc
Fig. 7. Two dimensional boundary elements [20]
C. Numerical models
For numerical calculation with BEM, code was written in
Python programming language. For 2D boundary elements,
a system of arcs and lines was used (Fig. 7). Sketch of a
transformer model in BEM is shown on Fig. 8(a).
For numerical calculation with FEM, a commercial program
was used. Figure 8(b) shows model geometry and mesh.
V. R ESULTS
Numerical integration and drawing of electric field lines,
needed for calculation of safety factors, was performed with
additional scripting and programming. Figure 9 shows electric
field lines between LV and HV winding for each numerical
method. Comparison of safety factors at UAC = 70 kV for
each field line is shown on figure 10(a). Values given by
two numerical methods differ from 1% to 4%, depending on
electric field line position. Lowest safety factor is for electric
field line number (2), and has value of q1BEM = 1.62 and
q1FEM = 1.67. Critical gap width was found to be equal
to the oil gap width (i.e. lowest safety factor value was on
the barrier itself). Safety factor values mainly depend on
production conditions of each separate factory. In this paper,
its value will be presumed to be q ≥ 1.5, which means that
present oil gaps are overdimensioned and can be reduced in
width.
Figure 10(b) shows that 12 % reduction in oil gap width has
lowered safety factor on average for 7%, with its new minimal
value of q2FEM = 1.54. The reliability of this result should yet
be verified on real transformer.
To obtain more clear view of the electric field at the top
of HV and LV windings, a dense range of field lines are
drawn near the barrier and for each line safety and non-
uniformity factors are calculated. It can be seen from Figures
11 and 12 that field non-uniformity has peak on the edge of
both windings as expected, whilst only HV winding has local
minimum of safety factor function, thus it serves as a proper
criterion in determining the oil gap width.
VI. C ONCLUSION
By knowing dielectric properties of insulating materials and
their statistical behavior under different conditions, it is pos-
sible in a certain matter to predict behavior of main insulation
system of a power transformer under normal operation.
 (2) (2)
(3) (3)
(1) (1)
(5) (4)
(11) (11)
(5) (5)
(6) (6)

(9) (7) (8) (7) (8)

(4)

(5)

(4)

(10) (10) (10)

(a) Complete model (b) Simplified model

Fig. 6. Transformer Frame: (1) Pressure plate; (2) Yoke; (3) Gap; (4) Spacer Ring; (5) Cylinder; (6) Core-Limb; (7) Low Voltage (LV) Winding; (8) High
Voltage (HV) Winding; (9) Stabilization Winding; (10) Regulation Winding; (11) Tank

LV HV LV HV

(a) BEM (b) FEM

Fig. 8. Numerical models

Although numerical programs based on FEM are more R EFERENCES

widespread in commercial use, BEM based programs are more
easily written, thus being more adjustable to end-user needs. In
this paper it is shown that one such non-commercial program
can cope with the commercial one as far as calculating safety
factors for defined geometry is concerned.
By using known values of dielectric strength as an input for
numerical calculation, oil gap between low and high voltage
winding is reduced for 12%, making the power transformer
more profitable.
Future work consists in further research of oil breakdown
mechanisms with appropriate numerical modeling, as well as
validation of the calculated results on real power transformer,
which also includes more detailed evaluation of manufacturing
methods, their precision and reliability.
[1] Y. Liu, Y. Cao, Y. Li, Y. Gao, and X. Liu, “Design for new type of
main insulation of 35kv electric power transformer based on electric
field analysis,” in Automation Congress, 2008. WAC 2008. World, 28
2008-oct. 2 2008, pp. 1 –4.
[2] Y. Gao, D. Gao, Y. Li, S. Gong, and G. Wang, “Improvement of
main insulation structure for 110kv electric power transformer based
on electric field analysis,” in Electrical Machines and Systems, 2008.
ICEMS 2008. International Conference on, oct. 2008, pp. 4427 –4430.
[3] Y. Gao, S. Wang, and D. Gao, “Influence of main insulation structure in
power transformer to electric filed distribution,” in Electrical Machines
and Systems (ICEMS), 2011 International Conference on, aug. 2011,
pp. 1 –5.
[4] Y. Gao and S. Wang, “Research of main insulation structure of power
transformer based on 3-d electric field,” in Power and Energy Engi-
neering Conference (APPEEC), 2012 Asia-Pacific, march 2012, pp. 1
–4.
[5] A. Khaligh and M. Vakilian, “Power transformers internal insulation
design improvements using electric field analysis through finite-element
 (1) (1)

(2) (2)

(3) (3)

(4) (4)
LV HV LV (5) HV
(5)
(6) (6)

(a) BEM (b) FEM

Fig. 9. Electric field lines between LV and HV winding

3 3
BEM 100% oil gap width
FEM 88% oil gap width
2.5 2.5
Safety factor

Safety factor

2 2

1.5 1.5

1 1
1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6
Electric field line number Electric field line number
(a) Safety factors comparison for different numerical methods (b) Safety factors of present and reduced geometry (calculated with
FEM)

Fig. 10. Safety factor calculation for oil gap between windings

8
7
3
Non-uniformity Factor

6
Safety Factor

5
2
4
(1) (23)
3
1 2
LV HV 1
0
1 11 21 31 41 51 61
(63)
Field line number

Fig. 11. Safety factors and field non-uniformity along the end of LV winding
 8
7
3

Non-uniformity Factor
6

Safety Factor
5
2
4
3
(36) (1) 1 2
LV HV 1
0
1 11 21 31 41 51 61
(68)
Field line number

Fig. 12. Safety factors and field non-uniformity along the end of HV winding

methods,” Magnetics, IEEE Transactions on, vol. 44, no. 2, pp. 273
–278, feb. 2008.
[6] B. Kuzmanovic, Fundamentals of Electrical Engineering 1 (in Croat-
ian). Element, Zagreb, 2004.
[7] A. Mikulecky, “Electrical field and insulation systems,” Postgraduate
specialist study in transformers, Faculty of Electrical Engineering,
Zagreb.
[8] Weidmann Compendium, Weidmann Systems International AG, April
2003.
[9] “Transformerboard,” Weidmann Electrical Techology AG, Tech. Rep.,
2012. [Online]. Available: http://www.weidmann-electrical.com/
[10] V. Dahinden, K. Schultz, and A. Küchler, “Function of solid insulation
in transformers,” TRANSFORM 98, pp. 41 – 54, 1998.
[11] R. M. Vecchio, B. Poulin, P. T. Feghali, D. M.Shah, and R. Ahuja,
Transformer Design Principles,With Applications to Core-Form Power
Transformers. CRC Press, 2002.
[12] D. Martin and Z. Wang, “Statistical analysis of the ac breakdown
voltages of ester based transformer oils,” Dielectrics and Electrical
Insulation, IEEE Transactions on, vol. 15, no. 4, pp. 1044 –1050, august
2008.
[13] D. Tschudi and P. Heinzig, “State of the art solid insulation after 125
years of transformer practice,” in International Colloquium Transformer
Research and Asset Management. Cavtat: CIGRÉ, November 2009.
[14] 60076-3: Power transformers - Insulation levels, dielectric tests and
external clearances in air, International Electrotechnical Commission
Std.
[15] Åke Carlson, J. Fuhr, G. Schemel, and F. Wegscheider, Testing of Power
Transformers. ABB, 2003.
[16] V. Ushakov, Impulse Breakdown of Liquids, ser. Power Systems.
Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg, 2007.
[17] M. N. O. Sadiku, Numerical Techniques in Electromagnetics, 2nd ed.
CRC Press, 2001.
[18] R. F. Harrington, Field Computation by Moment Methods. IEEE
PRESS, 1991.
[19] J. Daffe and R. Olsen, “An integral equation technique for solving ro-
tationally symmetric electrostatic problems in conducting and dielectric
material,” Power Apparatus and Systems, IEEE Transactions on, vol.
PAS-98, no. 5, pp. 1609 –1616, rujan 1979.
[20] Z. Stih, “Electric field calculation in high voltage power transformers
with integral equations and 3rd degree polynomial functions,” Master’s
thesis, Faculty of Electrical Engineering and Computing, 1981.

View publication stats