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

net/publication/4049911

Evaluating transformer condition using DGA oil analysis

Conference Paper · November 2003

DOI: 10.1109/CEIDP.2003.1254893 · Source: IEEE Xplore

CITATIONS READS

48 11,352

1 author:

Sayed A. Ward
Delta University for Science and Technology
82 PUBLICATIONS   463 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

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

Mitigation of transient overvoltages due to power system restoration using artificial neural network as a prediction and detection tool View project

Optimal grid size for precipitators using finite difference method based on full multi-grid method View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Sayed A. Ward on 10 March 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 2003 Annual Report Conference on Electrical Insulation and Dielectric Phenomena
Evaluating Transformer Condition Using DGA Oil Analysis
Sayed A. Ward
Faculty of Engineering (Shonbra)
Electrical Engineering Department
Cairo, Egypt

Abstract: Early detection of incipient faults in
transformers reduces costly unplanned outages. The
most sensitive and reliable technique for evaluating
the health of transformer is dissolved gas analysis
@CA). This paper uses dissolved gas analysis to
study the history of different transformers in service,
from which dissolved combustible gases (DCG) in oil
are used as a diagnostic tool for evaluating the
condition of the transformer. Oil quality and
dissolved gasses tests are comparatively used for this
purpose. The effect of transformer aging on
dissolved combustible gasses is also examined. It is
noted that the oil quality tests for transformer oil are
inconclusive and that the DGA test is then necessary
for complete evaluation of transformer condition.
Introduction
Insulating oils suffer from deterioration, which can
become fatal for transformers. Also, discharge in oil
can cause serious damage to the other insulating
materials, making the monitoring of power
transformers insulation an important task. When
insulating oils and cellulose materials in reactive
equipment are subjected to higher than normal
electrical or thermal stresses, they decompose to
produce certain combustible gases referred to as fault
gases. For incipient fault conditions (i.e. slowly
evolving fault), the gases generated will be dissolved
into the oil long before any free gas is accumulated in
the gas relay. Thus by analyzing oil sample for
dissolved gas content it is possible to asses the
condition of the equipment and detecting faults at an
early stage. If a fault is indicated, the type of fault
can be predicted using various analysis methods.
Several dissolved gas analysis (DGA) tests should he
taken over a period of time, in order to determine the
rate of increase of the fault gases, and therefore the
rate of advancement of the fault.
Presently there are several on-line monitoring
methods [I]. The most favorable tests for power
transformer insulation assessment are on-line types,
including partial discharge (PD) monitoring and
dissolved gas-in-oil analysis [2]. A more successful
technique for on-line incipient fault diagnosis is
DGA, which is based on routine oil sampling, and the
modem technology of on-line gas monitors.
Dissolved gas analysis (DGA) is widely accepted
as the most reliable tool for the earliest detection of
inception faults in transformers and other electrical
equipments using insulating oil. Gas-in-oil analysis
by gas chromatogaphy has proven to he predictive
and valuable some of the problems, which could
progress to catastrophic failures in transformers that
can be detected, are: arcing; corona; overheated oil,
and cellulose degradation. These problems result in
gas production as they start to develop and gas
production increases with increasing severity of the
problem.
This paper shows how dissolved gases in
insulating oil can be used as a diagnostic tool for
faults occurring on apparatus using insulating oil
such as transformers. This is achieved by comparing
the results of traditional testing techniques (quality
tests) with those using DGA.
Tested Oil Samples
In this study, four samples of insulating oils are taken
from transformers in service. The transformers bad
different ratings and different conditions of
operation. The four samples are: -
Sample 1: taken from a transformer in service since
1999 and is rated 230 kV and 180 MVA.
Sample 2: taken from a transformer in service since
1987 and is rated 115 kV and 30 MVA.
Sample 3 taken from a transformer in service since
1980 and is rated 66 kV and 25 MVA.
Sample 4 taken from a transformer in service since
1997 and is rated 69 kV and 40 MVA.
Diagnostic Testing of Sample 1
Two groups of tests were performed, namely oil
quality tests and DGA tests. The former includes
dielectric breakdown voltage, interfacial tension.
water content, and neutralization number tests.
Oil quality tests
When quality tests were performed on sample 1, the
following results were obtained
Dielectric breakdown voltage test (BD), DGA
laboratories typically use ASTM No. D-877 or D-
1816. The ASTM Test Method No. D-1816 was used
in this work with an oil tester of output voltage up to
100 kV.

0-7805791~1/03/$17.0002003 IEEE 463

Interfacial tension (IFT) test, this test was carried
out according to ASTM D 971-91 [31.
Water content test (WC), this study used the
standard test method for measuring water in
transformer oil is the ASTM D1533 test b o & as
the Karl Rscher reaction test.
Neutralization number (NN) test, in this study the
neutralization number test carried out according to
ASTM D-971.
The history for oil quality tests results on sample 1
are; BD is changed from 35 up to 43 kV, water
content is changed from 5 to l'lppm, IFT is 45
Dyndcm, and NN is changed from 0.005 to 0.02 mg
KHOIg. So, the quality tests for this sample show the
overall quality of the oil are acceptable and normal.
From Figla we see the concentration of Hzr C b ,
C*H, and CO is over the normal limits according to
IEEE [5]. By looldng for in these results as general
we can note that;
- As Hz and CH, are over the normal limits this
indicate that there is a corona in oil.
- Also, for CH, and C z b are over the normal limits,
these indicate that there is overheated in oil. For
CO as it is over normal limits this means that there
is overheated in cellulose.
A second type of Diagnosis concerns on the Key
gas ratios such as Domenburg and Rogers ratio
methods, which use the ratios of dissolved gas
concentrations as the basis of fault diagnosis.
Historically five ratios, which are C H m ,
CZH21C2H4, C2H2/CH4, C2H6K2H2 and
C2H4IC2H6, have been used 161.

Dissolved gas analysis test
Agilent 6890 Series Gas Chroinatograph according to
ASTM 3612 carried out this test. The results of DGA
test on the transformer oil sample -1 are shown in
Figure I . Figure l a shows the concentration of DCG
in sample in ppm, hut the percent of DCG with
respect to the total dissolved combustible gases
(TDCG) is shown in figure lh.
Interpretation of DCG results, a number of
methods are in use for the interpretation of the
dissolved gas analysis. A qualitative and quantitative
interpretation has a generally accepted list of gases
and associated conditions are found.
Domenburg ratio method, the Domenburg method
utilizes four calculated gas ratios to indicate a single
fault type from three general fault types. This
procedure requires sigruficant levels of the gases to
he present in order for the diagnosis to he valid. The
four ratios and their diagnosis values are given [61.
By using Domenburg method that used five
individual gases or four-key gas ratios, which are
(CHdH2, CzHzKzH4. CzWCH4 and CzHdCzHz), and
applying on sample 1 we have;

Key gases for interpretation. the key gas method

identities the key gas for each type of fault and uses
the percent of this gas to diagnose the fault [41. Key
gases formed by degradation of oil and paper
insulation are hydrogen (H2), methane (CHd, ethane
(CZ&), ethylene (CzH,), acetylene (CzHz). carbon
monoxide (CO), and oxygen (02). Except for carbon
monoxide and oxygen, all these gases are formed
from the degradation of the oil itself. Carbon
monoxide, carbon dioxide (COz), and oxygen are
formed from degradation of cellulose (paper)
insulation. Gas type and amounts are determined by
where the fault occurs in the transformer and the
severity and energy of the event. Events range from
low energy events such as partial discharge, which
produces hydrogen and trace amounts of methane W CHI C2H6 Qly c2K1 EO
and ethane, to very high energy sustained arcing, -*-
capable of generating all the gases including
acetylene, which requires the most energy. (b) % Concenmtion of DCG
Rgure I: DGA dam for sample I

464

From this range we see that the transformer is
suffering from a thermal fault (Thermal
decomposition).
Rogers ratio method, it is an additional tool that
may be used to look at dissolved gases in transformer
oil. The Rogers ratio method taking into
consideration industrial experiences, laboratory tests,
and further theoretical assessment, the method was
further modified into an IEC standard b71. The
original Rogers ratio method used four gas ratios
which are C U Z , CzHdCH4, C2HdC2b and
C2H21CZH4for diagnosis [5]. The refmed Rogers
method used two tables: one defmed the code of the
ratio, and the other defined the diagnosis rule. The
ratio C2HdC& only indicated a limited temperature
range of decomposition, but did not assist in further
identification of fault. Therefore, in IEC standard
599, the further development of Rogers ratio method,
it was deleted. Rogers ratio method and IEC 599
have gained popularity in industrial practices.
However, it may give no conclusion in some cases.
This is the " no decision" problem.
The diagnosis by Rogers ratios which are; ( CZHZ
ICz&, CHdH2 and C2HdC2H6)is given the type of
general problem which the transformer is suffer
from. For this sample we have;
Thus the suggested fault detection is thermal more
than 700 c" [8].
For interpreting the severity of the problem and in
order to get more detail on this problem we using
Rogers ratio method which have four ratios which
are, (CH4/H,, C2HdCH4,CZWCIH, and C Z H Z K ~ H ~ ) . paper degradation diagnosis. Paper degadation
C H 4 - 1.367 > 1.0, ___-
-- C z H 6 - 0.1098 < 1.0,
H2 CH I
Based on Rogers ratios method, the evaluation for
the condition of the transformer is appem that the
transformer suffer from circnlaimg currents between
core and tank andlor have over-loaded joints.
From the diagnosis of sample 1, we have that this
sample suffer from thermal effect which reach to 700
C? and this may he due to circulating currents
between core and tank and/or due to overloaded
joints. So, this transformer has a fecondition in order
to remove the dissolved gases in this transformer.
After the recondition, a transformer's DGA results
are as follows;
Hz=l, Cfi=IO, CzH6=2, C2&=7, CZHFI a d C-5.
Testing Sample2
Oil quality tests
The history for quality tests results on oil transformer
are as follows, BD is in range from 33 to 46 kV,
water content is changed from 8.5 to 20.5 ppm, IFT
range is from 27 to 36.5 Dyndcm, and NN changed
between 0.005 to 0.07mg KHO/g
Dissolved gas analysis test
This sample is taken from the bottom of the
transformer in service. The DGA test results in ppm
are;
H2=59, CH4=93, C&=89, C2H4=6, CzHz=l,
C-736, and C02=1519
From the DGA on sample 2 we have the evaluation
for combustible gases and so the condition of
transformer by using the diagnostic tools such as
follows;
Key Gas Method from DGA test the key gas is CO
and so we can say that, the transformer is under the
overheated. Also, if we take into consideration that
the year of manufacture of this transformer 1987, the
all other DCG are in normal range with respect to the
age of transformer. As CO is the key gas in this case,
so we can use the ratio of CO2 I C 0 as a diagnosis for
this case.
Paper degradation diagnosis, as shown from DGA
for sample 2 the key gas is CO, so we must apply the
diagnosis is an essential part of transformer
insulation condition assessment. Conventionally this
is done using the ratio of CO2 and CO.
From the DGA of sample 2 we have CO2 is 1519
ppm and CO is 736 ppm. So, the ratio of CO2lCO is
less than 3 (2.063) and this generally considered an
indication of probable paper involvement in an
electrical fault (arcing or sparking), along with some
carbonization of paper. Normal COdCO ratios are
typically around seven [9].
465
Domenburg Method, by using Domenburg ratio as
a diagnostic tool on sample 2 we have;
CH
4:1.576 > 1.0, H Z = 0.167 < 0.75
H, CZH,
%= 0.011 < 0.3 , --
'lH6 - 89 > 0.4
CH C*H,
From -this range we see that the transformer is
suffering from a thermal fault (Thermal
decomposition).
Rogers ratio method,by using Rogers ratio we have
the following ratios,
_
CH- I - 1 . 5 7 6 < 3 . 0 , - - CzH6 - 0.957 < 1.0 ,
H, CH 4
C.H,
= 0.067 < 1.0 and
CJi. __
= 0.167 c 0.5
By using this ratios and compare it with the
suggested diagnosis from gas ratio [SI, the suggested
diagnosis is the transformer is slight overheated to
150 C'.
Testing Sample 3
Oil quality tests
By applying the quality tests on this sample we have
the breakdown test appear that the BD = 40kV, the
water content is 12 ppm, the ET is 33 Dynelcm and
the NN is 0.01 mg KOW g. From tests we can say
that this sample is satisfied the standard specification
and it is good from the point of view of oil quality
tests.
DGA Tests
The DGA test is carried out on sample 3. The data
from this test is shown in Figure 2. figure 2a shows
the concentration of DCG in sample 3 in ppm and
figure 2b shows the percentage concentration of
DCG with respect to TJXG. From this figure we see
that, the following combustible gases (Ch.c2~6.CZ&
and CzH)are within normal limits,but H2 and CO are
over normal limits.
As the most individual combustible gases have not
exceeded over the normal limits except HZ and CO.
So, the Rogers ratio method and Doerenburg method
is not valid for diagnosis in this case. For diagnostic
the case of this transformer we used IEC 60599 of
key gases, possible faults and possible findings [71.
For this sample we see that Hz and CO are the key
gases and referred to IEC 60599 of key gases we
have that,
- The possible faults on this transformer is thermal
fault less than 300 C' in an area close to paper
insulation (paper is being heated), and
- Possible fmding of fault is discoloration of paper
insulation. Overloading and lor cwling problem.
Bad connections in lead or tap changer. Stray
current path and lor stray magnetic flux.
Paper degradation diagnosis, for this sample as the
key gas CO and Hz is high not over limits according
to the age of the transformer, so we can use paper
degradation diagnosis. For this sample, as COzlCO
equal to 33W3100. This indicates that COz/CO ratio
approaches to 1 and so, the transformer is suffering
from overheating of cellulose (for instance under
arcing conditions) because arcing generates CO very
rapidly [lo].
Testing on Sample 4
oil quality tests
The oil quality tests carried out on this sample are
satisfied the following results, BD is 41 kV, water
content is 6 ppm, I F I is 35 Dyndcm, and NN is 0.05
mg KHOlg. From these tests we can concluded that,
the oil quality tests for this sample are satisfied the
ASTM specification.
DGA Tests
From the DGA test, which is carried out on sample 4,
the concentration of DCG in ppm for oil sample is
shown in Rgure 3. Figure 3a shows the concentration
of DCG in oil sample, but Figure 3b shows the
percent concentration of DCG from the TDCG.
From figure 3 we have, most of the individual
combustible gases such as H2, C h , C&, and C2&
are over normal limits. Thus in order to evaluate the
condition of this transformer we use the following
methods for interpretation.
Key Gas Method, from the DGA test on this sample
we see that most of DCG are over limits. By using
individual and total dissolved key gas concentration
in ppm as a guide to classify risks to transformers
and according to IEEE [4]. This sample indicates
excessive decomposition of cellulose insulation and
lor oil. Continued operation could result in failure of
the transformer.
The diagnosis for this sample can be satisfied by
using IEC 60599 of key gases [7]. For this sample, as
Hz, C h , C& and CO are key gases. so
~ The possible fault is thermal fault between 300 'C
and 7ooc"
466
16m, - The possible fmdings are paper insulation
nm I destroyed andor oil heavily carbonized.

Domenburg method, by using Domenburg method

of four key gases ratios and applying it on this
sample we have,
_ - 2.1683
'Ha - > 1.0, --
',HZ - 0.0016 < 0.75 ,
H, C,H,
''HZ_ -- 0.000746 < 0.3 , -
_ CzH6- 170 > 0.4
CH, C,H, _ _
So, by using Ratios key gases which is above, the
diagnosis is Thermal decomposition.

Rogers ratio method, the Rogers ratio method is

applied on this sample and has the following values,

Thus the suggested fault detection is Thermal more

than 700 c".
Thus hy using four Roger ratio which determines
the severity of the problem, the suggested diagnosis
is circulating currents between core and tank; and
overloaded joints and this' ratios are given by;
_ -
CH4-2.168>1.0and<3.0 ,--
C2H6- 0.1269 < 1.0
H2 CH 4

F O this
~ sample we See that the DCG is over the
normal limits and so it is must be take more than one
sample from this transformer in order to obtain a
suitable results that will lead to a suitable decision on
this transformer. Figure 4 shows the concentration of
DCG in ppm for individual gas for sample 4, which is
taken from transformer in service for a week. From
this figure we see that, the individual gases are
increasing significantly (more than 30 ppdday), so
the fault is active and the transformer should be de-
energized.

For sample 4, we study the effect of place from

which we take the sample of oil from the
transformer. The sample may be taken from Bottom,
top of transformer or from the buchholz. Figure 5
shows the concentration of DCG in ppm for samples
taken from one transformer (from Bottom, top, and
buchholz). From this figure we see that the DCG
concentration is very large in bottom of transformer
C0mbeai-b- than that of top of transformer and from that of
huchbolz. So the dissolved gas concentration in
(b)
bottom of transformer is large and dangerous and so
Figme 3 Concentration of DCG for ramle 4 most samples taken for DGA are taken from the
bottom of transformer.

467

1 parameters", IEEE Electrical Insulation Conference
i.:m m/
5mD
0-
H2 CH4 C%E CaU CaiZ
-b*9..s
figme 5 : Place of sample effect on DCG io oil
conclusions
1. We have transformers that have operated safely
with abnormal concentration of individual gases
with no problem; however, they are stable and
gases are not increasing, or are increasing very
slowly. If TDCG and individual gases are
increasing sigtllficantly (more than 30 ppdday),
the fault is active and the transformer should be
de-energized such as sample 4.
2. A sodden increase in key gases and the rate of gas
production is more important in evaluating a
transformer than the amount of gas. An
increasing gas generating rate indicates a problem
of increasing severity; therefore, as the generation
rate (ppwday) increases, a shorter sampling
interval is recommended.
3. The oil quality tests are important for evaluating
the condition of the insulating oil hut it is not
sufficient for evaluating the condition for
transformer.
4. For sample 4, the year of manufacture is 1999 but
we see that this transformer is suffering from
severe overheating. This overheating make the
decision of transformer is de-energized and we
View publication stats
think that this transformer has a manufacture
problem
5. The DCG concentration is very large in bottom of
transformer than that of top of the transformer
and from that of buchholz. So the dissolved gas
concentration in bottom of transformer is large
and dangerous and so most samples for DGA are
taken from the bottom of transformer.
References
[I] H.M. Shertukde, H.Alnazjar, U. Prabhnne, '' Fault
detection device for electrical power transformera
using novel DSP schema", Roceedings, ICSPA 96,
Boston, October 1996.
[2] Donald Chu, Andre Lux, " On-line monitoring of
power transformers and components: A renew of key
& Electrical Manufactures and coil winding
Exposition, Cincinnati Ohio,Oct. 25, 1999.
[3] ANSJIMTM D971-91, Standard Test Method for
Interfacial Tension of oil agmst water by &g
Method, 1991.
[4] ANSI / IEEE Standard C 57.104-1991, Guide for the
interpretation of gases generated m oil-immersed
transformen, institute of ElecUical and Electronic
Engineering, Inc., New York, NY, 1994.
CO [5] IEEE and IEC Codes to Interpret Incipient Faults io
Transformers. using gas in oil analysis, By
R.R.Rogers C.E. G.B., Transmission Division,
Guilford, England, circa. 1995.
[6] R.D.Stebbins, J.J.Kelly. S.D.Myers, '' Power
hansformer fault diagnosis', 1997 IEEE PESWM,
Panel Session, New York, Feb.6, 1997.
[7] IEC Publication 60599, Interpretation of the analysis
of gases in (ransformen and other oil med electrical
equipment in &, Geneva, Switzerland, 1999.
[SI S.D.Myers, I.J.Kelly, R.H.Parrish,Fay years; a guide
to uansformer maintenance, Chapter 4, aansformer
. Maintenaxe Institute, Aloon, Ohio, USA, 1988.
[Y] Transformer Maintenance; Electrical Maintenance,
Facilities Instructions, Standards and Techniques,
Volume 3-30, Last Updated October 2wO.
[IO] P.J.GriEn, " Monitoring the integrity of cellulose
insulation in order to determine power transformer
life", Minutes of F&y-Eighth Intemational
Conference of Doble Clients, Section 6-16,1991.
Author address: Sayed A. Ward Faculty of
Engineering (Shoubra), Electrical Engineering
Department, 108 Shoubra Street, Cairo, Egypt,
Email: Drsayedw@yahoo.com
468